House of Random

An end

2011-05-02T14:31:00.002-04:00

And so, HE IS DEAD. Killed not as a guerilla fighter, or by "natural causes," but in a mansion by US Navy SEALS Team Six. The jihadi dead-enders (of which, there are decreasing #'s- bin Laden had discredited himself in the Muslim world) may call him a "martyr," but this is the poshest martyrdom ever seen.

Is this "The End?" No, but so what? It is AN end. The Osama bin Laden era is over, and it will be missed by virtually no one (including-esp.?-the Muslim world) His demise is both a symbolic and tangible triumph. Oh yes, there will be those who will fill bin Laden's shoes, and so the assymetric battle goes on.

But as the Founder and "thinker" of Al Qaeda, his death IS meaningful. A man responsible for thousands of deaths all over the world has received what was due. Congrats and THANK YOU to the SEALS, our intel services, Pres. Obama and all those who made it happen.

Finally, THIS seems appropriate, perhaps for the final time.

Way late on this

2010-10-05T19:38:00.002-04:00

But I wanted to second THIS POST on the Ryder Cup. I'm no golf nut, but international, match play team competition really works every two yrs. (The Presidents Cup sucks) And yes, NBC's theme music is spectacular.

And while the '10 version went against the US, it was dramatic.

Reflections on a day+

2010-09-09T16:00:00.001-04:00

I'd save this for the day itself, but come Saturday, I'll be focused on other things. So, I do this now.

The title of Fareed Zakaria's piece in Newsweek is no doubt provocative. but it did get me to thinking about that day.

I left home to go to classes at Lakeland Community College, literally 3 minutes from home at, oh, 8:40 that morning. By the time my nurse and I arrived, the events of the day were well underway. Thing is, we didn't know about it.

I went up to the third floor, preparing for a 9:30 English course. Once you're on campus at a community college, you're fairly isolated from the rest of the world. Given the need to study, etc., this is normally a good thing. You can focus if you need to, or, better yet sometimes, just relax for a few minutes, not worried about anything else.

I'm not 100% sure how I spent those few moments before class was supposed to begin on that Tuesday, but I think it was a little bit of reading and talking with classmates. Given that it was still early on in the year, before the hopeless causes dropped the class, I liked to get in the classroom fairly early (9:20 or so) b/c I was limited in terms of seating due to my wheelchair*.

The next 10+ minutes were normal, though by the end, given that the prof. was usually early, I thought it seemed slightly off. When she entered the room, we all found out why.

"I assume you all heard about the planes crashing into the World Trade Center."

"Huh? No, what?"

We literally had no idea. Needless to say, she said, class was cancelled.

Upon leaving the room, two thoughts entered my head. One, a search for information. The place to go was the first-floor cafeteria, complete with a television set. Not surprisingly the area around the TV was packed, but folks were good enough to let me get close enough to see it. Seeing the replays of, I think, the first tower crumble were shocking, esp. since I didn't know it was a replay. Watching the same for the second tower was shocking and horrifying too.

From there, rumor took over. Had the White House been hit? No, but the Pentagon had been. But was a plane targeting it? Was it the plane that crashed in PA? Maybe, as it turned out, but we all had no factual idea. There were other planes out there too, right? It wasn't over yet, was it? As it turns out, there were no more planes and it was over, but at 10 am, the worst seemed possible, if not likely.

As I said, I'd had two thoughts upon leaving the classroom. The second thought was who was responsible? Bin Laden was becoming a big name in America, but, speciously, the first thought was Saddam Hussein, only because that was the highest-profile name out there. Given his actual secular leanings, this was a ridiculous thought. But it's what I thought at the time.

Why? Because, for a few hours, logic was almost put on the backburner. Fear and shock were the order of the day. Logic and reason would slowly come back, but not that day.

By 11:00, err, nature was calling. Lakeland had been good enough to set aside an old, but spacious storage area for me to use for such purpose (a padded table was also provided) on the second floor. While up there, next to the crosswalk bridge to, IIRC, the T Building, I tried calling loved ones, only to discover what others had or would: Sketchy, if any, cell phone service. That would, unnervingly, have to wait until later.

In truth, that wasn't going to be a problem, until rumors started spreading that, come 12-12:30, the campus was going to close. By 11:20, or so, this was confirmed. In hindsight, to close a local CC seems like an overreaction, but I don't think it was. Sure, the idea that Al Qaeda might attack community colleges on the same day they targeted NYC and DC was silly. But the larger point was that people needed to be together, with friends and family, not in a classroom. The national trauma was too great on that day for any other response.

Still, how was I getting home? Would our public transportation system (LAKETRAN) pick up those who used the service or had no other way home? How long would we actually be stuck there?

In the meantime, the quest for information went on. By now, a TV had been set up in a second floor conference room. I decided to go in there, while foolishly placing my lunch and other bags on my tray. As a result, my vision was obstructed, and I bumped my right in arm into a table, leaving a nice black-and-blue mark for days.

It's trivial, but I remember that so clearly and, in a way, likely always will. Nothing was mundane that day. Nothing.

About 15-20 of us kept watching CNN in that conference room. We watched Bush's initial statement from a Nebraska air base, to which an obviously committed liberal Democrat, though in my view, uninformed, spoke mockingly. I am, today, a proud liberal Democrat (though, I hope, informed), but I thought that mocking was inappropriate, a thought I kept to myself.

By 11:45, the national air space, it was confirmed, was shut down, a startling development. By 12:00, I'd made my way down to the Laketran pickup area. We waited outside for a few minutes (it was, ironically, a beautiful day outside) before Laketran did indeed pick us up.

Such as it was, the ride home was routine. Less routine was staying outside for a few minutes and hearing... very little. I live near a small, very local airport. So, hearing nothing in the skies was chilling and brought home what had transpired.

The rest was a fog, as everyone marvelled at the rescuers who risked (and many lost) their lives saving others and tried to figure it out what had happened. Like many, I felt almost compelled to watch television that week, even though no new info was discovered. It seemed like a solemn duty.

That Saturday, only one significant sporting event took place, the CART race at Lausitz, Germany. No one wanted to be there, but the flights to Europe had, mostly, occurred before the attacks, so they were stuck. The whole thing (untelevised) was a sober, almost surreal affair, culminating in awful fashion:

And so, the week ended in morbidly appropriate fashion (Alex survived, but lost his legs. He did not, thankfully, lose his spirit).

That Saturday had something of a "no-man's-land" feel to it. It was a Saturday in Fall, with no football to speak of. I knew there was a race in Europe (CART), but it also seemed like there couldn't be a race. ESPN had decided not to show it live, so it seemed totally distant. Then came the ESPNNEWS flash about the horrific Zanardi crash.

Was this real? Yes, it all was. Tuesday had been very real, and so was this day. And yet, in it's reality, it seemed a bit unreal. In a way, it still does.

*I note this just as a factual matter, NOT to indulge in self-pity. Making small adjustments like just seems smart to me and makes things easier for everyone, myself included.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This marks the first time I've ever written, in full, about how I, just an average American, experienced Sept. 11, 2001. For one thing, it all seemed so trivial to write about. I lost no one even remotely close to me that day, and my life went on as normal.

But, at another level, part of me just didn't want to write this because doing so means, in some way, living it all over again. Frankly, I have no desire to live it over and over again. This might sound like mental weakness, and maybe that is a small element, but it's not that I plan to forget about it. That likely won't happen for anyone.

But that's different, in my view, than when conservatives say "Never Forget!" Their tone and tenor has always suggested something darker to me: That we should relive that day (or, they might say, 9/12) anew everyday, at least in the political sense. In a sense, some would like us to feel as if those towers were coming down again everyday, thinking that if we don't, we'll no longer aggressively pursue Jihadists out of "complacency."

This is dangerous thinking to apply to an entire nation. For the victims' families, it is completely understandable. "Moving on" might be impossible for some.

But, for the nation as a whole, we must realize that, no matter how traumatic that day was, it was ONE attack nine years ago. To behave as if it were yesterday is asking for a nationwide mental breakdown.

Because, like it, or not, the world HAS changed. For most the issue of the day is economic insecurity, along with America's role in the world today. If we let one horrific day DEFINE our national character and policy, we are surely worse off for it.

Yes, let us remember the day, those who were killed by a few fanatics falsely claiming the mantle of Islam as justification. Let us learn a variety of lessons from that day as we continue to move forward.

But, and most importantly, let us never lose ourselves and what we stand for in the process. Partially out of deference to the "9/11 families," the Park51/Cordoba House project has been opposed by around 70% of Americans. Unfortunately, some of this opposition is also rooted in anti-Islamic bigotry. Protests against other mosques in TN, CA, and elsewhere verifies this.

Are we losing ourselves, our values? If so, I plead with everyone: 9/11 DID NOT happen yesterday. It was nine years ago. To scapegoat all Muslims is to break the civil contract that binds us together, that makes us American. It violates our reverence for Jefferson, Washington, Adams and all the Founders. In short, it would be to destroy ourselves.

I hope this is just an ugly moment, fueled mainly by economic anxiety. If it is not, then our future is dark indeed, precisely because we remain stuck on one tragic day.

Been awhile, huh?

2010-07-10T14:43:00.002-04:00

Why, yes, yes it has. So what prompts this respite from blogosphere hibernation? Lebron, of course. So, my thoughts...

As a Clevelander, the 24-36 hr. period, from waking up Thurs. to the Miami reports thru Fri. and the aftermath was hell. Understand the tortured history of Cleveland sports. The Drive, The Fumble, The Shot, Jose Mesa '97, Colavito, etc.

Oh, those hurt, believe me, and created the fatalism that exists about our teams today. But they can be chalked up to the "sporting gods" and miserable luck. In the end, we haven't had the right combination of luck and skill since 1964 to pull it off. But we're used to that.

Art Modell ripping the Browns was a cruel act that ripped our hearts out. That was a decision to LEAVE the town, a great football town. It will never, ever be forgiven.

Odd as it seems, the way James handled this was even worse than Modell. At least the old man wasn't a native of NE Ohio, couldn't fully appreciate our psyche. James was acutely aware of everything, of our tortured sports history AND of our utterly unfair reputation of being a second-rate horribly boring city.

Leaving is one thing. Not fun, but not unreasonable. But starting with the way the Celtics series ended (Yes, he ABSOLUTELY quit), it went downhill. Clearly, this move was the plan for awhile, and it's likely why he gave up against the C's; why did he care anymore? Fine, but stringing us (and others) along like we had a legit chance to keep him, just to create an ESPN-inspired media hysteria around him was unfair.

Then the 1-hr. show. Would he really be heartless enough to embarass his home area so brutally, so publicly? Many national pundits thought not, as did many locals. He would know better than that, right? Wouldn't kill us so publicly, right?

If we're being totally honest, Thurs. morning's reports should have resigned us to the inevitable: Yes, he IS that gutless. But deep down, we still couldn't imagine he'd do us like that.

The special itself was the moment American culture "Jumped the shark," an hour+ farce with a host paid directly by LRMR asking idiotic questions, before, after 27 mins., the nuke was dropped. Mind you, he first noted that he was going to "South Beach," not the Heat, as if to say, "Thank God I'm leaving for somewhere 'fun.'" There was no real emotion towards home; it was all a (failed) exercise in national/global branding, with ESPN as his lapdogs. And we in Cleveland were the poor sap victims, anguishing for all the country to see.

For LeBron, maybe history will see him as an all-timer. His crew likely figures that winning, oh, 4-5 titles in a row, will speak for itself. That being part of the most heralded team ever, even if it will never be "his team" will be so great that he will still be an ESPN-hyped/pimped "icon" when it's all said and done. And maybe they're right; American culture is touchy and can turn back on a dime.

Still, he can never be Jordan, Bird, Magic or even Kobe. Did those guys WANT to join their friend superstars? H=ll no, they want(ed) to beat them. Every single time. James admitted he's not good enough to get it done when the chips are down. He wants to HELP "The Man," not be "The Man." I think this will start a trend: Friends arranging to play with each other, not competing against each other. I think this is a bad trend.

Cleveland WILL survive. Our city is far more vibrant and interesting than even we give it credit for. Great restaurant scene, emerging areas like Tremont, world-class museums, etc. Doesn't feel like it now, but we'll be fine.

Our sports will also survive, but honestly, they won't be fine for awhile. The Indians are a joke, the Browns are on "Rebuild v. 50.0", and the Cavs have been crippled; crippled by a guy who couldn't just be honest with us or his team, who couldn't speak with his now pissed-off owner before the show; a guy who said, last night in Miami, that winning 7 titles will be "easy" b/c they're so good. B/c winning should always be easy. But fans are used to this now, unfortunately, creating a fatalism that is profound and not as charming as what Red Sox fans once had.

Two articles: Ironically, Mike Florio. And a local POV.

The Great IndyCar Implosion of 2009

2009-07-02T20:26:00.000-04:00

THIS should have been the biggest disaster this week for IndyCar (really, Richmond might have been the WORST oval race ever).

But then, the tumultuous reign of Tony George ended. George was always the wrong man at the wrong time. Still, this shakeup does not say "stability," does it?

Depressing, Not-so Depressing

2009-06-23T15:04:00.002-04:00

Yglesias brings the depressing. I suspect he's right.

Al Giordano with the not-so depressing.

So Sad, So Inspiring

2009-06-19T19:52:00.002-04:00

Translation of the woman's thoughts (via):

Tomorrow is Saturday. Tomorrow is a day of destiny.

Tonight, the cries of Allah-o Akbar are heard louder and louder than the nights before.

Where is this place? Where is this place where every door is closed? Where is this place where people are simply calling God? Where is this place where the sound of Allah-o Akbar gets louder and louder?

I wait every night to see if the sounds will get louder and whether the number increases. It shakes me. I wonder if God is shaken.

Where is this place that where so many innocent people are entrapped? Where is this place where no one comes to our aid? Where is this place that only with our silence we are sending our voices to the world? Where is this place that the young shed blood and then people go and pray -- standing on that same blood and pray. Where is this place where the citizens are called vagrants?

Where is this place? You want me to tell you? This place is Iran. The homeland of you and me.
This place is Iran.

Dawn approaches. The world watches, and prays.

Showdown coming

2009-06-17T19:44:00.002-04:00

Watching NBC News tonight, that's the distinct impression one gets. Tomorrow, Mousavi has called for demonstrations and a national day of mourning for those who have already been martyred (yes, martyred). There should be a ton of people on the streets.

Then, Friday prayers, given by Khamenei himself, with more huge opposition protests planned (bigger than tomorrow even). And so, that might be the day of destiny.

But maybe not. Maybe a compromise will be reached, though the longer this goes, the more unlikely it becomes. Or, perhaps, in a tale out of Shakespeare, Rafsanjani ousts Khamenei in Qom.

Whatever happens, I have two thoughts: One, this is NOT about us (in the West); it is about Iranians and their future. But that doesn't mean that we as citizens cannot morally sympathize w/ our Iranian brothers and sisters who are rallying (and dying) for those most basic and universal principles of free votes, dissent, and freedom to make one's own destiny in life. These are human principles, that do not differentiate between geography or religion.

Second, as Djerejian is the latest to note, the Islamic Republic, whatever happens, will never be the same.

Solidarity

2009-06-15T17:19:00.000-04:00

Until this is over in Iran, this tiny blog will go green. We are with you. Stay safe, stay strong.

Choices, choices

2009-06-13T14:51:00.000-04:00

In brutal fashion, the mullahs have made their choice. As Juan Cole notes, it is laughable that Ahmadinejad "won" in the fashion the mullahs claim. Seriously fellas, you expect us to buy that Ahmad won Tehran by any margin, let alone 50%? Really?

The violence by the IRGC and the Basij militias is very real. More troubling? Reports like THIS and THIS. Put this together with speculation from Trita Parsi at the end of Laura Rozen's report, and we may be seeing a full-on crack-up of the regime of epic proportions, in which hard-liners are determined to destroy ALL opposition, brutality included (though the demonstrations are also inspiring).

We've not heard the last of this. Either we will end up w/ at least a partially liberated Iran governed by moderates or a fully oppressed, subjugated populace governed by hard-line Khomenist Islamists.

The populace faces an impossible choice: Revolt and (possibly) die, or acquiesce to disaster. Unfortunately, the same choice might already have been taken from Mousavi and Rafsanjani.

Stirrings in Persia?

2009-06-11T13:45:00.002-04:00

Iranian politics in the Islamic Republic aren't supposed to be interesting. Presidential candidates are vetted by the clerical Guardians Council, a rather hard-line body (some call it a "Clerical Senate"). All candidates are supposed to support the Islamic state, and the ultimate authority of the Supreme Leader. Theo-democracies are not terribly dramatic.

Except when they are. At worst, we're seeing a rather nasty internal debate in the regime, between Rafsanjani, now with reformist alliances, and Khamenei. Fortunately, for the rest of us, those spats have become very public, leading to massive rallies and a surprising, if temporary openness. The youth have rallied to Mousavi, whose wife has become a surprising asset, and the energy is in his camp.

Which might not matter, if hard-liners rig the vote. The Revolutionary Guards are warning against any "Velvet Revolutions," a clear shot at Mousavi, Karroubi, and their supporters. This strikes me as a most unwise path for the mullahs.

Fellas, let's play this out. You've seen the same rallies we have and have no doubt watched in horror the public debates. Now, you want to put it to rest and quash. Problem is y'all let it happen. Putting that genie back in the bottle now? Yeah, good luck with that.

After all, guys, revolutions can start over much less. And unlike Chinese authorities in 1989, I'm wondering if you have the ability to quash a movement, should it start, divided as you are. Think about it fellas. Sure, the nature of your theocratic regime may need to be tweaked slightly in response to a Mousavi win, but from your perspective, it's better than blowing the whole thing up, right?

Oh yeah, the world would appreciate it too.

About Those "Actions"

2009-06-09T18:59:00.003-04:00

See, ultimately, Cairo's effect depends on future actions by all sides. On our side, THIS decision is almost impossible to defend. Maybe the propaganda angle works, but I don't buy it.

In the global realm, small thing. But it just makes you wonder about future choices.

Cairo

2009-06-09T15:33:00.002-04:00

Yes, yes, it's well past Sunday. Sue me.

But while I don't think it can be really attributed to Obama, March 14's victory in Lebanon allows us (me) to refocus on the speech.

It must be said that the full impact of Cairo a) won't be understood for years and b) is utterly dependent on events and actions. Great thoughts with no action mean nothing.

Still, I think this has the potential to be remembered as the start of a transformational moment. Why? It's not b/c of the State Of The Union-like list as the President laid out, though that matters. In fact, some of that dragged on a bit.

Instead, 3 things stick out. His thoughts on Israel-Palestine were great. There was an absolute defense of the State of Israel, with an acknowledgment of Palestinian grievances. 2nd, the line:

It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true.

Indeed, it is. Throughout the Middle East, it is time to act in a positive way, looking forward, not back. A call for all, governments and citizens alike, to act. Good.

Finally, that idealistic ending, with an explicit call to the youth. If 20 yrs. from now, the Middle East has changed for the better, people will rightly point to this. In my mind, it was a Kennedy-esque call to my generation worldwide. I'm reminded once again that, in many ways, it will be up to us to change the world. Whether we live in Washington, Tehran, Jerusalem, or Cairo, it is now up to us. The time to act is now.

Full text.

Perspectives on Cairo

2009-06-05T20:15:00.002-04:00

Ebullient Sully.

Pleased Clive Crook

Cautiously Optimistic Djerejian

But what if... Hezbollah wins? (Sorta)

Or should we calm the hell down?

My view? Wait till Sunday.

In Which I Argue With (and agree with) Myself

2009-06-05T20:11:00.002-04:00

Gordon Kirby's piece this week, centered on N/H/L racing, is a must-read. Most interesting is the discussion on the future nature of IndyCar racing.

Almost everyone wants to abandon the pure spec-nature we have today. Indy 2009 showed why that doesn't work. But Brian Lisles takes it a step further:

"Today, we know how to go fast and how to be reliable and a lot of people feel racing should be about efficient use of energy. Quite how you make that into something that's appealing to the public is a difficult question. The perception is that the public will only get interested in an event where there's wheel-to-wheel, man-on-man combat, which if you look back historically is not how motor racing has ever been.

"Certainly Indianapolis used to be filled with some of the world's most boring races but the fans still came. Part of the excitement was not the man-to-man, wheel-to-wheel racing but the fact that somebody was leading in this powerful or different car that might not make it to the end. Some of the excitement was, is it going to hang together and make it to the end? But today I think everybody's got locked into the thought that you have to have wheel-to-wheel racing."

Undoubtedly true. Given that I was more sympathetic to the CART side during the split, I ought to be in full agreement. In a sense, I am. The current cars, IMHO, produce artificially close superspeedway racing and they look... less than ideal. But...

But relying on "history" here is a tricky proposition. His characterization of what Indy was is accurate, but two things stick out for me. One, it was a different time in many ways. Indianapolis had dominated the American racing scene (outside of the Southeast) since, well, the 1910's. Through the early 90's, it was, in some ways, coasting on it's history. It could do that as long as there were big name drivers all over the field. The thinning out of these drivers started in the early 90's (buh-bye Mears, Unser Sr., Mario, AJ, etc), but the big factor was the split. Today, even with Marco, Graham Rahal and Danica, Americans no longer identify with the sport. During the split wilderness, NASCAR filled the void, and the drivers of today are there (at least in terms of cultural resonance).

Which brings me to point two. The rise of NASCAR also shifted perceptions in this country as to what motorsports IS. Lisles is spot on when he notes that racing was once all about the ultimate pursuit of record speeds. That's why, in many ways, Pole Day at Indianapolis was considered by many the 2nd biggest day in motorsports (the 500 being #1).

As NASCAR rose in importance and popularity, speed and technology necessarily had to diminish in importance. Cup cars are NOT slow, but compared to the days of records at Indianapolis, speed will never be the top selling point. In terms of technology, really now, come on. If the COT is the result of all NASCAR has learned, then yes, their use of technology is impressive... for 1969.

This is not to bash NASCAR. By nature, the speeds will be slower than an IndyCar, but they're two different machines with, somewhat, different goals. As for tech, NASCAR has always felt comfortable philosophically with their technology.

No, the point is this: Is mainstream American racing (hell, racing anywhere) really about the ultimate pursuit of speed, technology, AND victory, or has NASCAR reduced or otherwise cut out the 1st two factors? I'm tempted to argue it's the latter, with driver personalities taking on more import along with close racing.

I both want, in many ways, the racing Lisles wants, yet I don't. The current spec low(er)-tech machines must go. They look lousy and, at times race that way too.

Butttt... do we want to return to the era of one car, potentially, dominating, while running speeds? I wonder if our racing culture will tolerate it. Would I tolerate it?

On the other hand, I do NOT want to simply become an OW NASCAR. Speed & technology MUST play a role.

But getting right will be tough. Unfortunately (though maybe not?), the future of the sport rests on them getting it right.

I Love Me Some Irony

2009-06-01T14:07:00.002-04:00

Especially when it's as delicious as this: Car owners publicly backing Tony George.

But it's the right angle. IF this drama results in IMS cutting the $$ to the IRL, then the series, in this environment, is in trouble. It's also madness. IMS gains control over the sport (what it had wanted), only to throw it all away now? Huh?

Indy Wrap IV: Final Wrap and Remainders

2009-05-30T19:12:00.003-04:00

Yes, this is late, given that Milwaukee is well underway (Briscoe, Rahal front row). Better late than never.

First, I endorse most of what Miller wrote before TG-Gate, esp. on the foolishness that is Brian Barnhart. Things will never greatly improve with him in charge. That said, I don't think the race was QUITE as awful as he thought.

Vitor Meira's horrific wreck leads to teh best pairing ever.

Tomas Scheckter lives for one more race.

Ultimately, the 500 and it's soap opera aftermath was disappointing. The ratings were HORRIBLE. The race itself was no "game-changer." And now, the fate of the sport is uncertain, according to RM's response.

To some extent, this moment was inevitable. Unification was merely the 1st step. But now, we arrive (or we will) at the "sink or swim" moment. There will be an Indy 500. Will there be an IndyCar? That is what the next few years will settle.

The field at Milwaukee (post-Stanton Barrett wreck) is not encouraging.

So, WTF REALLY Happened Today?

2009-05-27T19:32:00.002-04:00

I think THIS AP piece sums it up. Read here, listen here (2nd link) for RM's response.

In short, I THINK, given the careful IMS wording, that Robin Miller got a lot right. Big changes are coming, butttttt he jumped the gun a little.

Developing...

2009-05-27T11:01:00.004-04:00

We interrupt the 2009 Indy 500 wrap for a bombshell: Tony George OUT at IMS! Wow. It's hard to know what to say. Yes, Miller says George will still run the IRL, given the symbiotic relationship between the IRL and IMS, I wonder how much power he'll truly have.

Personally, I wish he'd NEVER ran the place to begin with, but just in terms of IMS, he modernized the place greatly. In the process, he dealt a serious blow to the sport by forming the IRL. My only concern is that all aspects of IMS will return to utter provincialism. That would kill the sport for good.

UPDATE: Or not???????

UPDATE2- 3:15: From IMS:

INDIANAPOLIS MOTOR SPEEDWAY STATEMENT
Wednesday, May 27, 2009

At a regular meeting of the board of directors of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway on Tuesday, May 26, board members asked Tony George, chief executive officer of the IMS companies, to devise a plan for management of Hulman and Company, the Indy Racing League, Clabber Girl and the Indianapolis Motor Speedway that would allow him to focus on the business which requires the greatest attention. This plan is to be presented to the board at a meeting later this year.

IMS Chairman of the Board Mari Hulman George said: "There was a general discussion about the challenges and opportunities facing all of our companies and where most of our energies need to be spent. All of our properties are doing well, given the challenges of the current economy. The Indy Racing League represents our greatest growth opportunity and therefore deserves the most attention at this point."

Tony George said: "Contrary to published reports, I continue to serve as CEO of IMS. Our board of directors met yesterday, and we did discuss how to best confront challenges and exploit opportunities facing our businesses. This is nothing new and is something that we continually do as a board. But no changes in leadership or responsibility have been made. We don't normally comment on board deliberations concerning our family business. However, the widespread, inaccurate reports and rumors caused my mother and me to conclude that it was necessary to set the record straight. If changes are made in the management of the company that are newsworthy, we will announce them when they are made."

Indy Wrap III: Dan, Danica, and Townsend

2009-05-26T19:59:00.003-04:00

Ultimately, the 2nd-place (and so on) finisher of a race is "first loser," the driver we talk to about why they didn't pull it off. This is esp. true of a race like the Indy 500. But some words about Dan Wheldon, Danica Patrick, and Townsend Bell.

Prior to Carb Day, Dan Wheldon had a sub-par month of May. He crashed on Pole Day and struggled to find "balance." Evidently, Panther found it in time. Thanks in part to phenomenal stops, the National Guard car finished 2nd for the second straight year, besting 2 Penskes and 2 Ganassis. Hell of a job.

As for Danica, I realized what struck me most. Four yrs. ago, when she finished 4th, she had NO idea how it happened. Her knowledge of the car was non-existent. Today, she's become a racer, with s much, much better understanding of what her car needs and is doing at the time. Her 3rd place run was well and truly earned.

Unfortunately for Townsend Bell, his stunning 4th-place at Indy may be his only ride of the yr. The economics of the sport just prevent some talented guys from partaking. Still, if that was his only race, wow, what a drive! More remarkably, he did it on a 2nd-week program w/ limited practice. If his pit crew had been a regular, more experienced one, he could have finished 2nd.

Indy Wrap II: WHY ABC Sucks

2009-05-26T15:21:00.002-04:00

Versus might get a tiny audience, but we were reminded on Sunday why ABC sucks.

The (only) Good:

A decent intro honoring the 100th anniversary of IMS. Vanilla, in my view, but not bad.

Pre-race was acceptable.

Jamie Little and Vince Welch

The Bad:

Everything else. Goodyear and Cheever? Horrible and BORING. Marty Reid? Utter tool. Arute? Go away. NOW!!!

The race wasn't great certainly, but ABC made it worse by obsessing ONLY on the lead, Danica, and a touch of PT. In so doing, they missed action in the pack.

And that's the problem: ABC tries to make the racing fit their pre-conceived coverage, not the other way around. So, Townsend Bell runs in the top 10 most of the day, finishing 4th, after starting 24th. How did he get there? We don't care and none of your business anyway!

ABC has tried to manufacture stories in this sport for yrs. As a result, they will always miss the REAL stories.

Indy Wrap I: HelioX3

2009-05-26T10:41:00.002-04:00

Let's get this out of the way: This is a different era from that of Unser, Mears, Rutherford, Foyt, Andretti, etc. Arguably, the fields aren't quite as deep with star power as those years, and the month seems diluted in comparison. We need not review the reasons for this.

Still, at about 4:30 on Sunday afternoon, Helio Castroneves joined elite company by winning his 3rd Indianapolis 500. In the final 18-lap stint, he showed the speed he had all month long by pulling away from Dan Wheldon and Danica Patrick to win by 2.0 seconds. He made no mistakes all month, unlike ALL of his main rivals. To be sure, his Ganassi rivals helped him on pit road, but that's what will happen during 500 miles at Indy.

6 weeks ago, Helio was facing serious jail time, maybe deportation. Today, he's now a 3-time champion of the Indy 500, with a true chance at more. A phenomenal achievement in overcoming adversity.

Given his hyper and emotional persona, given "Dancing With The Stars," we forget, or overlook, how talented a driver he really is. I hope that ended on Sunday.

Quick thoughts

2009-05-24T18:49:00.002-04:00

Helio wins his 3rd 500.

Congrats to Helio and Penske! Redemption.

Great, gutty run by Dan Wheldon in 2nd. In trouble for most of the month, but found it when it mattered.

Townsend Bell in P4?! Wow. Great run. Ditto for Tagliani in 11th.

Wayyyyyyyy too hard to overtake. Too spec, too even, too much dirty air.

Oh, and, um, Danica, yeah, sorry about giving you no shot. Great job to finish 3rd.

Oh, ABC sucks.

Thoughts and Predictions

2009-05-22T19:53:00.002-04:00

So, it's, oh, 41 hrs. until the green flag flies for the 93rd Indianapolis 500. Let's answer some questions:

Who has any chance of winning? Helio, Briscoe, Franchitti, Dixon, Power, Kanaan, Ma. Andretti, Moraes (!), Wheldon (based on Carb Day), Rahal, and, maybe, PT. Based on speed, I'll throw Townsend Bell in as a super darkhorse.

Wh.. Where's Danica? I dunno, probably in Indy getting ready for Sunday. Ohhhh, you meant on my list. Look, rain at the right time could throw this thing wide open, so I shouldn't 100% keep her off my list. Assuming weather isn't THE factor, she's shown NO race speed, and really, all of AGR looks lost.

What kind of race will we see? See, the spec nature (Dallara-Honda) of the series means parity. Good in theory, but it's tough to pass people. Also, the Dallara's aerodynamics suck, making it difficult to stay close to anyone.

Who wins? The man/woman who finishes 500 miles the quickest. Oh fine, I'll go with, after changing my mind this week, Helio Castroneves for the 3rd time.

Outside of the winner, driver to watch? Definitely Moraes. The kid is incredibly fast and very much "on the edge." His high line could be genius, or suicide.

Better ratings: Indy 500 or Coca-Snooza 600? Sadly, the 600. And it won't be close.

In Which I Cautiously Praise ICS Thinking

2009-05-18T19:53:00.002-04:00

It's shockingly rare that I can say this, but the IRL might be showing some innovative thinking. Though just an idea at this point, Cleveland (my home track) might return in 2010 as... an oval and road event. Wow! If they can logistically do this, I see zero downside here.

Also, an interesting note from TF on the media appearances for 5/18. As "NDFIVEFAN" points out, No Danica. Sure, that'll change during the week, but it's good that "DanicaMania" MIGHT be wearing off. The Series has needed to move beyond just marketing one gimmick for yrs. If they're learning this, well, better late than never.

Hello (again) To All That

2009-05-13T15:30:00.003-04:00

A series of decisions and non-decisions show one thing: Barack Obama is simply another pol.

Covering up a known torture? Check.

Hiding photos of abuse, 19 days after pledging to release them? Check.

Slow-walking (so far) gay rights? Check.

Disappointing. Sadly, the alternative really is worse, by far.

First Weekend Wrap

2009-05-12T19:17:00.002-04:00

I'm just as stunned as you that Penske's on the pole. Scroll down for full results.

Saturday's conditions were brutal. Cool and, most of all, windy, thus keeping speeds down. Even the best, like Dario were on the edge.

It's amazing what the Speedway can do mentally to a team. On Thursday, AGR seemed compettitive, though tow-enhanced. By Saturday, they seemed totally lost. Kanaan using a cobbled-together Mutoh backup was stunning. Kanaan should be a factor on the 24th, but maybe not on raw speed.

Revelations of the weekend? Well, Justin Wilson and Coyne impressed me with their speed. Mid-pack is really good for them. Rafa Matos was great on Sunday, earning the 12th spot. But KV's drivers are a huge surprise. We knew PT would be quick, but what impact would his limited budget have? Small. He starts 13th and seems confident.

But teammate Mario Moraes starting 7th?! Never would have predicted that. But if he runs the same line on the 24th, he'll kill someone.

Moment of the weekend? What else:

More on Graham... later ;).

Pole Day Predictions

2009-05-08T19:34:00.003-04:00

Pole Day at Indy is tomorrow. First, today's speeds. Yep, the "red cars." Shocking!

Tomorrow's supposed to be verrrrrry windy at IMS, so I expect pole speed just at 225, no more.

Front row:
Dixon, Helio, Briscoe.

Does Graham make it in on Day 1? Likely. PT? 25% chance.

Requiem 2013?

2009-05-05T13:53:00.002-04:00

Perhaps, if one buys this IBJ article. Curt Cavin calls it a "non-story." Maybe, but I'm not so sure. If the goal is profitability by '13, then uh-oh! 70% seems... optimistic to me.

The IBJ quotes others basically saying the 500 won't go anywhere. Really? This is not the 500 of 15 yrs. ago. If it was, well, this conversation would be moot, and I would agree that it will always be here.

Really, though, the Kentucky Derby (another cluster of a sport) still has more resonance than the Indianapolis 500. Others will disagree, but did you see the fallout from Mine That Bird's upset win? It was still water-cooler talk Monday, two days after the race. You think that would happen with the 500? Really? Not today, folks, not today.

In short, if the Indianapolis 500 (and all of IndyCar racing) died tomorrow, would it be missed in anything other than a passing ("Hey, remember the Indy 500? Yeah, shame what happened to it. Hey, how's Jr. doin'?") sense? I think the sporting world would mourn it's demise for all of... a day, then completely move on. The same applies to the entire sport.

The sport's biggest personality is nationally discussed... in the context of her jumping to NASCAR (awful idea, BTW). Nice, huh? But I'm hard-pressed, in this case, to pummel the MSM for reporting the angles that people are interested in.

This sport is no longer relevant, pure-and-simple.

I used to have some hope for a unified sport. I fear it all came too late. The world passed it by. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see it coming back.

Please remember this on (or around) May 25th, when I, inevitably, get enthused post-Indy. In the end, it's likely all for naught.

Another "F&%* You!"

2009-04-29T15:35:00.002-04:00

To the IRL, for this boneheaded idea:

The scuttlebutt is that IndyCar has told Cleveland promoter Mike Lanigan he could have a race again next year but maybe it needed to be an oval. Lanigan declined to discuss it last weekend at Kansas City.

This was going to be tried in 2000. It was utterly laughed out of town. Hey TGeorge, don't screw up my home race! The stupidity of ruining one of the best road races in America is... astounding.

Enough!

2009-04-28T19:45:00.003-04:00

From ESPN, on the 'Dega wreck:

Johnson's right, and the other TWO "big ones" prove it. Bring the banking down to, oh, 20-24 degrees, and make it a true test of man and machine.

John Darby's response?

"The most exciting races that we have today are both at Daytona and Talladega," Sprint Cup Series director John Darby said, according to The Associated Press. "I think there's more value in continuing the [safety] efforts ... than turning those two very historical, very exciting racetracks into flat parking lots."

Hey John, how should I say this? I dunno, how about "Fuck You!"?

"Flat parking lots?" Hey asshole, no one's suggesting anything like that. We don't want a new Pocono (not that there's anything bad about that). But hey, you tool (and the NASCAR braintrust), what could possibly go wrong w/ this insanity? Yeah, nothing big.

Sadly, too many seem to enjoy this manufactured game of Russian Roulette (just look at the comments on YouTube), so NASCAR idiots like Darby will do nothing useful and keep babbling about "excitement." They ignore the fact that 90% of the drivers loathe plate racing (Junior, who'd be nothing w/o them, excepted) b/c it's "exciting. Well, when multiple spectators are killed b/c of this madness someday, thus potentially crippling the sport, you'll need to look in the mirror for blame.

State of Play: IndyCar

2009-04-14T19:54:00.005-04:00

First, the micro analysis:

As noted previously, St. Pete was an entertaining, if sloppy, race. But, as it turns out, a mere 233,000 households watched on VERSUS. Sure, the coverage was quite good. But when you're on a minor-league network,...

More uplifting news from Curt Cavin: Indy car count could reach 40. Even Robin Miller, who was quite gloomy weeks ago, seemed optimistic on WindTunnel. In this economy, 40 entries would be, yes, quite astounding.

That said, some notes of caution: The Rahal stuff is pure speculation at this point, and the 3rd (?!) KV is really wild. I fully expect a 2nd Coyne car and the 2nd KV entry (w/ PT!) will be announced Friday. As for the rest, just guessing, but we WON'T see a 5th AGR car (though from a quality POV, they could use it), a Herta entry or another Vision machine. I'm dubious on a 2nd Conquest entry, though I won't rule it out. Despite my above comment, I think Rahal WILL run a car. Foyt obviously will too, along w/ a couple others.

But was some of this optimism based on hopes the economy had bottomed? If so, the numbers the last few days are mixed, at best. That, and as a TF member posited, the atrocious ratings on Vs. might be scaring sponsors and $$$ away. One wonders if THIS depressing news is a result.

Now, to the macro, which started, in my mind anyhow, with the following Cavin Tweet

Note the irony: As Helio waits for jurors, national tax day looms and Paul Tracy lands an Indy 500 ride.

Indeed, it is. '02 was a critical year in the split. Honda jumping to the IRL effectively ended CART as we knew it. In theory, the split should have ended then. But the aftermath of that 500, and articles like THIS, stirred even more anymosity, esp. between the fans, and, more importantly, exacerbated fundamental differences in the visions of the sport.

On one side, we had the Indy-centric IRL, founded, in truth, to preserve the 500 and IMS dominance of the sport. The other side, road/street course-heavy CART/Champ Car, began to feel that breaking from Indy was the way to go. The end of the split speaks to the efficacy of such thinking.

But the issue remains: Does Indy dominate the sport to a detrimental end? Look, we have TWO full races before the Month of May, and what's the talk? Car count for the 500!

I found THIS thread interesting for many reasons, but for now, we'll focus on Malone's commentary. To which most IRL fans would respond, not without merit, "Without Indy, you have no sport." That overstates it (Milwaukee is OLDER than IMS), but only by a little. Beyond the obvious, like "It's called 'IndyCar!'", this sport IS different, in history, than NASCAR. The latter always had an important presence in Daytona Beach, but it was also based in the Carolinas, Virginia (Martinsville) and all over the Southeast.

Perhaps because it has been around since 1909, and the fact that the first 500 really was something revolutionary, IMS became THE center of what evolved into American open-wheel racing. It became the thing that animated the sport (for a time, most of American racing) and utterly dominated it.

CART's formation was meant to put a dent into this. To an extent (a small one), it did. Prior to it's formation, the other races on the USAC Trail were just that: "other races." Part of this was the usual USAC incompetence, but another part was mindset: The 500 is the center upon which all other races revolve. Dan Gurney and crew fundamentally disagreed with that (as they would have seen it) "extreme" notion.

Events like Long Beach, Michigan and others seemed to prove their point. They became important, well-attended events, moving beyond, seemingly, a "just Indy" mentality. Or did they?

If the split taught us one thing, it's that within the shrinking world that is open-wheel racing, Indianapolis is the Alpha Dog of the sport. CART had the teams, drivers, and most of the tracks. It did not have the Indianapolis 500. You know the end result, but let's break it down.

Despite numerous efforts, CART never found a signature event to hang it's hat on. W/o that, it's hard to gain real traction. Why did they fail? Several reasons come to mind. For one, it's true, as many Champ Car fans allege, that Penske, Ganassi, and others ALWAYS had "Indyitis," a desire to return to the 500. Initially, they all thought they'd quickly dispatch Tony George and the IRL. Mistake #1 in an endless litany of post-split CART fuck-ups.

One wonders what would have happened had 1996 gone differently. What if that U.S. 500 had not started w/ a massive pileup?

What if it had been a classic, or at least a solid show? Would that have, eventually, challenged the supremacy of IMS? We'll never know, so it IS moot, but I'm not sure how much different things would have been.

It goes back to historical connections. The sports history, for good or ill, has been interwoven with Indianapolis. During the 80's and early 90's, CART managed to build up other events, but whether subtly or explicitly, it did so in part on the back of the 500. The "Cars and Stars" of Indy, if you will.

But once Indy was taken away, CART's identity, whether they knew it or not, was gone. They tried Michigan, Long Beach, and a couple others, but no event ever caught fire. Even in the case of Long Beach, which started as an F1 race, the history of the events lacked the depth of the 500 and the meaning they had once Indy was gone.

Yes, Long Beach was always well-attended, but like many street races, slowly lost its national resonance.

Then, of course, began the trickle of CART teams back to Indy and, eventually, the IRL. CART, as we knew it, was finished. Champ Car, some will say, could still have survived w/o Indy. Those who believe this will, essentially, argue that CC should have ignored Indy and the IRL and stopped competing with them. Instead, chart out a new, road/street-oriented path.

Indeed, that WOULD have been truly revolutionary. A vision of the sport totally independent of IMS had never been tried. And, on the surface, they did just that. By '07, the series raced on no ovals and used radically different (from the IRL) machines. But the hearts of the new management never seemed fully devoted to... well, much of anything (Witness the on-again, off-again talks with the IRL).

It's hard to judge whether this could really have worked due to the litany of..., er, fuck-ups by management (the presence of Paul Gentilozzi speaks to this). Could a more devoted management team have made it work?

That's the fundamental question, still unsettled, that hangs over the sport today. I, myself, go back-and-forth on this. Which brings me back to Sean Malone.

Should the rest of the season be promotedly more independently of Indy? Though regretably incomplete, history suggests to tread carefully. I submit that you CAN promote the events themselves, but eliminating the ties to the 500 and not mentioning the 500 is a mistaken strategy. Finding that balance, esp. w/ IMS in charge, is the trick. The sport's future hinges, in part, on just that balance.

It's all the more complicated because the 500 is not, nationally, what it once was. Can you/should focus primarily on building that up, in the hopes it will carry everything else with it? Or does that have it backwards? Is there a middle ground?

Good questions.

Am-Can Analogies, Ctd.

2009-04-09T20:02:00.002-04:00

Following up on my brilliant post yesterday, some clarifying thoughts:

Arguably, the most analogous moment between Bush & Harper was... Terri Schiavo. That was never about governing. It was a cynical pander to fundies.

Finally, Obama must be careful. I fear, esp. like Harper, the party/Admin. will be "all about him." That's dangerous.

American-Canadian Analogies

2009-04-08T20:02:00.002-04:00

OK, I'll admit to my fetish: Canadian politics. Westminster/parliamentary systems utterly fascinate me and, frankly, I'm amazed how little attention we pay to our friends up north.

Anyway, some similarities struck me between Tory PM Stephen Harper and our previous GOP administration. For years, both were seen as political pitbulls who were savvy tacticians. Governing for both, however, proved tricky, mostly because neither was truly interested in doing so. Gaining/retaining power? Now THAT motivated them.

And it worked... for awhile. For George W. Bush, the reckoning came in the floods of New Orleans and bombs of Iraq. Now, well the GOP is what it is.

History might show Nov. 26, 2008 as the beginning of the end for Harper. This Maclean's piece is really well-written and a great chronicling of events. He threw aside governance for pol. gain.

Funny thing though. Harper's standing today? Been better.

Governing matters. The North American right must learn this. Now.

A "Smashing" start to the '09 season

2009-04-07T20:12:00.002-04:00

Literally. Congrats to Ryan Briscoe & Team Penske. It was a wreck-fest at times (apparently watched by no one on VERSUS*), but it was still an interesting, entertaining race. Maybe THIS and RHR's 2nd (!) helped.

*That said, the coverage was 10,000% better than ABC/ESPN.

So it begins

2009-04-03T20:01:00.003-04:00

The IndyCar season, that is, at St. Petersburg, FL. With 22 cars.

This is down, of course, from last year's non-Indy 500 range of 25-28. Furthermore, names like Buddy Rice, PT, Bruno Junquiera, and Oriol Servia are MIA.

Still, given the recession, 22 cars (23 at Long Beach) is NOT awful. So, the predictions:

Series champ: My heart says young Rahal. N/H/L is more familiar with the cars, and he is too. But he's still 20. Instead, I'm picking... Ryan Briscoe. Post-Indy, Ryan found his groove in IndyCar. Expect that to continue.

Indy: We'll know more in 5 weeks, but my hunch? Briscoe again.

Most out-of-their-depth: Stanton Barrett. Just watch him.

Enjoy the season!

The Most Destructive Man In American History

2009-03-24T15:12:00.002-04:00

Richard B. Cheney. That's the only conclusion one gathers from reading that opinion from Sully and THIS.

I pray history does not sugar-coat this era.

It all looks so familiar...

2009-03-10T13:39:00.002-04:00

Over the years, I've been a big fan of Robin Miller and his work (going back to his time at the Indy Star). During a period full of nothing but laughable spin from everywhere, Miller cut through the bullshit from both sides. Yes, he ended up being quite negative much of the time, but guess what, there was little to praise.

With that said, I bring you Robin's 3/4 Mailbag. Look familiar? How about the 2/17 edition? Or the 2/11 version? You could practically cut & paste every week. It's the same thoughts.

It's not that I disagree, but jeebus, we get it already! Write something new already.

And furthermore, sorry, there's a contradiction between wanting USACers and a 50/50 oval/road split. If you hit everything juuuuuuuusssssssst right, maybe you can create a car that accomodates both. But I doubt it.

Year 8(?) of Pook's genius plan to save CART

2009-02-28T20:05:00.002-05:00

Ahhhh, memories. Remember when the possibility of CART becoming a top feeder to F1 was just a dream? Only brave interweb warriors like Mark "No really, a race in China!" Cipolloni boldly predicted the truth. TGeorge never stood a chance!

Remember this when you hear those Prancing Horses in CART this year.

Mark C. and Chris Pook: Genius beyond worldly (well, our world, anyhow) understanding!

Genuine surprise

2009-02-21T19:55:00.002-05:00

Really, this is a multi-pronged surprise. According to Robin Miller, Justin Wilson is the newest Dale Coyne Racing driver. Beyond that shocker, which I scoffed at days ago, there's this:

"I met Bill (Pappas) yesterday and Dale seems very intent on being competitive so I intend to make the most it." Coyne admitted some new sponsor opportunities were on the horizon but soundedlike he was prepared to spend his own money to get to the front.

If you follow the sport, you know that DCR is the king of shoestring, ridebuyer-financed operations. If he's really going for it, then the sport will truly benefit. Good for all involved

Vigilance

2009-02-21T16:59:00.002-05:00

I think it's vital for liberals to challenge Obama when needed.

To wit, two disturbing decisions. The Bagram decision is indefensible. Try these 4 men, please.

Random Notes/Thoughts

2009-02-20T14:44:00.002-05:00

First off, ICS silly-season. We can now, finally, confirm Robert Doornbos for N/H/L. Many of us had begun to question whether this was real or not, given multiple delays in the announcement. Thankfully, it is real. Interestingly, as I'll elaborate on shortly, Milka Duno might NOT be in at N/H/L. That's not necessarily a bad thing.

More info/specualtion is courtesy of a post at TrackForum. That's the 2nd place where I've read the Duno rumor. As for the rest, look, I'm sure some of it is optimism on Cavin's part. I hope RHR really does end up at HVM and that Rubicon ends up running, but really, I'm not counting on stuff like that. The Rahal stuff reads like wishful thinking, no? Oh, and DRR a 3-car team? Uh, no. But I really hope PT somehow, someway gets that KV ride.

I watched in a combination of bemusement and horror this Rick Santelli rant. Bemusement b/c as a trader, this is not exactly Main Street USA. Horror b/c I fear too many folks will buy into it.

I must say I find the grassroots conservative opposition/protest, noted HERE, interesting. On the one hand, it IS very American. Folks peacefully expressing their political views is healthy. On the other hand, it's one month in, and we're seeing protests?

One story we can rightfully dismiss

2009-02-17T14:22:00.002-05:00

With his outstanding 3rd place run in the Daytona 500, I think (hope?) that THIS story is now moot. I'll put it this way, it would be a travesty if he does not run the whole year.

Another note: AJ got a ton of heat from former Champ Car fans, who accused him of being a traifor to the sport that "made him," in pursuit of money. They mocked everytime he missed a show (which, let's be clear, was a frequent occurrence thru the 1st 1/2 of '08) and assumed he'd never amount to anything in NASCAR. Long-term, maybe they're right. For this week, though, silence, and nothing more

Why, Mr. President?

2009-02-10T15:05:00.002-05:00

Why did you needlessly protect the indefensible? Why did you, in this act anyway, break faith with those who value the Constitution? Maybe you have a reason, sir, but I'd like to hear it.

Oh yeah, why did Tim Geithner speak and say nothing?

Things that impressed me

2009-02-07T13:03:00.002-05:00

Pres. Obama: He's no George Bush. That's certain. See what happens when you attempt to treat people like humans.

Claire McCaskill has a genuine Twitter.

Lebron James.

N/H/L visits the sublime and ridiculous

2009-02-04T14:19:00.002-05:00

By signing Robert Doornbos.... and Milka Duno!

To which I can only laugh. That, and sigh.

I'm thrilled Bobby D. has a good ride, paired with Graham Rahal. But Milky Doughnuts? To N/H/L? Well, I guess it's money that will make the other two more compettitive, but still.

The Inevitable Happens

2009-01-23T19:41:00.002-05:00

So, the "Mexico City" policy has been reversed. This is not, in anyway, surprising, but unfortunate, IMHO, nonetheless.

Still, contra Patrick Appel (subbing for Sully), I think Amy Sullivan made an important and valuable point. Methinks it is not coincidence that the President chose to do this quietly and the day AFTER the Roe anniversary. Doing it yesterday would indeed have demoralized those pro-life Americans on a tough day for them anyhow. In other words, he DID NOT rub it in anyone's face. On policy, it makes no difference, but the symbolism is much more reassuring.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On to different matters, please identify the difference in the following two stories on Obama's "I won" remark. First, Politico; now, the Wall Street Journal. One tells us what the comment was in regard to (ideas that were thoroughly debated this election) and also notes that aides say it was NOT as partisan as it looks. Normally, I'd think the WSJ was lacking this info, but not this time. Nope, Politico gets the award for most incomplete journalism of the day. Congratulations!

To be fair, Politico also notes, importantly, that the President was indeed receptive to several ideas put forth by Cantor and the House GOP. So, it wasn't a meeting derailed w/ partisanship.

At any rate, memo to the House and (not as bad) Senate GOP: You did lose! Sorry. Now, that doesn't mean the President should never try to bring you guys in. Besides, that's not his style. But, umm, this won't be the bill you'd write. Nor should it be.

This is separate from the Congressional leadership, buy only to a point. I think they SHOULD be a bit more bipartisan, but there are reasons you guys (GOP) are the minority. My point is this: Push when needed; do NOT push your luck.

America's Back!

2009-01-22T19:56:00.002-05:00

That's my reaction to THIS.

Meanwhile, today is an awkward day for us pro-life Democrats. Slightly heartening that the "gag rule" was not reversed immediately.

From Peak to Pathetic- March 14, 2005

2009-01-15T20:05:00.002-05:00

March 14, 2005. It was only a little under four years ago, but it must seem to many, especially the Republican Party, like an entire world away.

Recall, if you will, that George W. Bush had been reelected in Nov., with a slightly strengthened GOP majority in Congress. Weeks later, the “Orange Revolution” in the Ukraine had seemingly, and stirringly, ended Russian influence in that country. Iraq had just gone through “successful” elections. These events, combined with Bush’s second Inaugural Address which stressed the pursuit of freedom in almost radical ways, seemed to be proof of the ultimate wisdom of Bush’s “Freedom Agenda.” March 14th seemed to be the final nail in the realist/anti-Bush movement.

You’ll recall that over 1,000,000 Lebanese jammed Beirut on that day. Syria’s occupation/presence would soon end. History was on an inevitable march to freedom.

But it wasn’t. Four years on, Lebanon is a mess, having gone through one war and seeing Hezbollah gain much power. The Ukrainian Orange Revolution is pure dysfunction. In the Palestinian Territories, freedom led to… Hamas. In short, the world is a mess.

We couldn’t have known that 4 yrs. ago. But then came Terri Schiavo, Katrina, and the ultimate mess of Iraq. March 14th was the Bush Presidency’s peak. It’s fall was swift, sudden, but warranted.

Rick Santorum

2009-01-15T14:56:00.002-05:00

TOTAL FAIL.

Read it all. Remember, GOPers working with Dems.=BAD. LOL.

More "Silly" Thoughts

2009-01-14T13:17:00.004-05:00

Following yesterday's post, some additional thoughts:

Paul Tracy to KV Racing? It might happen. To which I say F#%*ing Awesome. If Bourdais AND PT are in, that's 2 villains (not counting Danica) in the series. And PT in a good car can still be fun as hell.

But there are some unfortunate downsides to the recent news. If Tracy gets that ride, then that leaves Oriol Servia, Justin Wilson, and Ryan Hunter-Reay all without rides. That is downright criminal.

Servia was the most consistent of the drivers that came over from Champ Car, Wilson WON a race (Belle Isle) and RHR was great all year (one win-The Glen- and ROY at Indy). But in the economy of IndyCar racing, none of them might have an ICS ride (ALMS and Grand-Am may benefit, though).

So where does that leave us? Well, if even 2 out of those 3 get rides, combined with everything else (Reminder: Some of this is bound to be vaporware), this will all end up being a considerable net gain. If not, it might just be a push, at best.

UPDATE: Also remember that McNulty's reliability can be spotty.

UPDATE2: Read THIS RM piece on Power's actual status at Penske. My guess? He runs the full year.

But it does remind me that simply losing Helio (though he annoys me) will really hurt.

In Which We Discuss Silly Season

2009-01-13T13:31:00.002-05:00

Ahh, "Silly Season." For years, it has been nothing short of farcical in IndyCar/Champ Car racing. Why?

In short, due to the "troubles" facing the sport the last decade-plus, it has become, outside of the already funded teams (few and far between), an exercise in ride-buying. Talent is a secondary (if that) consideration. If you have money/bring money, you'll have a ride.

Given the dire economic conditions, this isn't changing. Example? Mario Moraes. Is Moraes on the Dennis Vitolo level? No, he does have some talent. But, really. he's only getting the ride for one reason: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. All of which means no ride for Will Power.

Wait, hang on! Nevermind! Will, with the best name in all of racing, is Penske's new hire. Justin Wilson and RHR were also contenders and, sadly, both are likely out of rides altogether in 2009. As for Power replacing Helio, 1) it has to be done; RP can't count on someone facing possible deportation, and 2) Power's an interesting pick. He's plenty fast, but he must learn to harness it, particularly on the ovals. Of course, having Rick Mears as your tutor won't hurt.

A day earlier, Robin Miller gave us other interesting newsbits. The possibility of BOTH Doornbos AND Bourdais joining N/H/L is, great, but to novices, also curious. After all, they couldn't afford Justin Wilson, but CAN take on both Doornbos and Seabass? Well, Bobby D is supposedly bringing along $$ (ING) and given his connections, Seabass might too. In this case, there are two ride-buyers I'd heartily support.

The "Team France" tidbit is... interesting. I was one of many who mocked Nelson in his 1st year. Mea culpa. He's damn good and SHOULD be in this series. Still, like others, this smells of "vaporware," i.e. something that won't really happen. I'd love to be wrong.

Finally, this interesting news. Let's be honest, ever since the 60's (Winning, Grand Prix, and Le Mans), racing-oriented films have, ummm, what's the word, SUCKED. Seriously, you need to watch Driven to appreciate how awful it is.

This film, should it really happen, could, could be different. For one, the film will deal explicitly with the Indy 500, and it's origins. Interest in the modern 500 might be at an all-time low, but it still resonates (well, it's past) in the American sports world. Portraying, in dramatic fashion, the first Indy 500 in 1911 starts with compelling possibilities. Furthermore, period films, like Cinderella Man, can be far more compelling to a larger audience. It goes without saying that Ray Harroun is no Jim Braddock, and despite Escue's hopes, you won't be seeing a Russell Crowe anywhere near this film.

Still, if done well (and Pizzo's presence gives me some hope), it could, at worst, be an interesting "sports movie." The fact that racing in 1911 was an altogether different, more dangerous venture that had no idea what boundaries it could break gives filmmakers the potential to create an almost mythological air. I wish them well.

Bonus funny note: While looking at pages discussing racing films, Super Speedway. It remains a truly stellar look at the sport (though given the timing of it's production, it depresses me whenever I watch it. The crowds! :sigh:). Anyway, after some exploring, I found... A Teacher's Guide to the film. Really? I know there is tremendous science involved in the sport, but LOL, a teacher's guide? OK.

So long 2008!

2008-12-31T20:08:00.001-05:00

Let’s get this out of the way: Those who believe they can, definitively, speak to how 2008 (or any year) will be thought of in 50 years is a self-righteous fool. Harry S. Truman (and to an extent John F. Kennedy) proves otherwise.
Time has a way of clarifying history’s true judgments. Right now, 2008 seems like the year of Barack Obama. History may very well judge that assessment accurate, but it could just as easily be an ironic, negative assessment. Or perhaps the global economic implosion will, ultimately, come to define 2008 and an entire generation. We simply cannot know.
With that said, these reflections are given w/o the benefit of time and are quite likely to be seen as utterly foolish in years to come.
We begin with the trivial: Sports.

January once again gave the Ohio State Buckeyes a thumping, with LSU reaping the benefits. That game annoyed me far more than the year before (with Florida). Why? Stunningly, Jim Tressel seemed to learn nothing from the year before, with an awful gameplan on both sides of the football. A loss to Texas in the upcoming Fiesta Bowl won’t help the cause.

After a big trade in Feb., involving Ben Wallace, Delonte West, and Wally Sczerbiak, the Cavaliers played eventual champs Boston tough, but not tough enough. Looking ahead, that’s OK. As of the afternoon of Dec. 23, the Cavaliers, now with Mo Williams, are 23-4 and, unlike last year’s “LeBron and some other guys” unit, this team CAN truly win an NBA Championship.

The Indians, meanwhile, had huge expectations. They went on to fall flat on their faces. Joe Borowski, and the bullpen as a whole, should be fingered in this, but c’mon, you had platoons all over the place (1B, C, OF). No championship org. should be pinning their hopes on platoons w/ mostly average players (Delucci, for one). And yet, given the Cleveland market and Larry Dolan, this is the reality for the franchise: An extreme dose of good luck (Kerry Wood staying healthy) and good fortune (Shin-Soo Choo playing well) is the only way we’ll ever win.

The year in racing deserves it’s own post, which I probably won’t get to ;), but it ends with the end of an era.

So, Barack Obama will be President in 20 days. I think the night of, and the day after, the Iowa Caucuses were when the awe and gravity of what would possibly happen really hit me. As an abstract, it sounded great. But then, the abstract became reality. Obama, and ALL of us, made it happen.
What kind of POTUS will he be? Again, who knows? I hope he surprises me with, for instance, how he handles the UAW in the next month. But I’m not holding my breath.
Nonetheless, despite the turmoil and difficulty, for me, 2008 was the year we reengaged: with ourselves, each other, and our country.

Happy New Year!

A long, maddening, weird, and... inspirational 2 years

2008-11-04T15:58:00.002-05:00

Ends tonight.

Two years ago (25 months, really), I wrote THIS. I didn't really know what would happen if he did run. By my nature, I'm a pessimist, so I doubted his ability to truly pull this off. And yet...

Yet, here we are. Unless we are surprised tonight, Barack Obama is going to be the 44th President of the United States. Democrats will be the clear majority party in Washington and the country.

Know this, race shouldn't be a pro OR a con in determining a vote. If so inclined, you shouldn't support Obama just b/c he will indeed become our first black president (though, if you are African-American, I certainly get it).

Make no mistake, though, it IS important. 160 years ago, Barack Obama, had he lived in the South, would have been property. 50 years ago, the South (and some Northern enclaves) was segregated. Now, Barack Obama is likely to become the next President of these United States.

As to what kind of POTUS he'll be, no one ever knows for sure. I disagree with him fairly strongly on trade, though I suspect he'll be less protectionist in office. In truth, what the right never understood about Obama is his pragmatism and caution. I was attracted to his candidacy for two reasons: His respect for political ideas with which he disagrees and his un-radical approach. We've had enough radicalism the last eight years. How about a political detox?

I think Alex Massie best explains the Obama phenomenon. In short, the right moment met the right man. He makes no sense as a candidate in 2000, 2004, or perhaps even 2012. But he does in 2008.

For me, outside of that remarkable day in January when Obama won Iowa, the most important day of the campaign was March 18th in Philadelphia. Jeremiah Wright had exploded like a bomb onto the scene, threatening Obama's entire political future. Was he REALLY just a black radical himself who agreed with Wright? Even if not, how could he have gone to Trinity all those years? Would he permanently turn off white voters?

Then came "A More Perfect Union," a stunningly thoughtful, eloquent, and American speech on race. No other politician, of any color, could have truly given that address. Yes, he went on to lose Pennsylvania to Hillary Clinton (along with other parts Appalachia), but it was that day that he not only saved his campaign but also allowed us to have a thoughtful dialogue on race.

Barack Obama is no messiah, as I wrote before. He'll never live up to the enormous, utterly unrealistic expectations set for him. He will fail. All Presidents will. But will he be a failure? I doubt it, but you never know.

Some thoughts on conservatism in America. It is a true shame that the movement started by Goldwater and mainstreamed by Reagan has degenerated into Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber. By the end of the night, the Republican Party might be virtually reduced to a Southern-led rump. It needs to come back, and with some thought and work, it will.

For now, though, an era comes to an end.

Yes and No

2008-10-06T20:01:00.002-04:00

Overall, I think I agree with Sullivan on the Keating strategy. I had hoped Keating would not get mentioned at all, and I think you could have let the increasingly bizarre McCain camp bury itself in bombthrowing.

On the other hand, if as Scheiber suggests (see Sully's links), the Keating connection is used, in part to discuss policy differences, like regulatory policy, I'm less troubled by it.

Not to mention, it's, you know, TRUE.

I'll Let Robin Miller Say What Needs to be Said...

2008-09-28T19:04:00.003-04:00

...about Paul Newman.

R.I.P. PLN. You are missed.

Joe Biden!

2008-09-23T20:15:00.002-04:00

Uhh, :sigh:. At the rate he's going, maybe Joe Biden will be sick of... Joe Biden!

And yet, STILL a much better pick than Palin.

What they said

2008-09-18T19:49:00.003-04:00

Obama's Spanish-language ad... SUCKS and is "shitty." McCain may be many things*, but anti-Hispanic he ain't. Has he muddled his position? You bet. That SHOULD be pointed out.

But this is dumb and false, though, I suspect, not a huge buy.

*In unrelated news, McCain adds Spain to "Axis of Evil."

UPDATE (8:15 pm): See, THIS ad (based much more on facts) is more like it:

I go back-and-forth on it, though right now, I'm more inclined towards Obama's view, but it IS a legit ad.

Bad Obama, Good (very good) Obama

2008-09-17T13:13:00.002-04:00

First, the bad. From Dave Weigel:

David Freddoso is the author of the lone decent anti-Obama book, The Case Against Barack Obama. (It's the Myth of a Maverick of anti-Barackology!) It was researched on the scene in Chicago. It doesn't traffic in birth certificate-style kookery.

So, naturally, the Obama campaign is siccing the bloodhounds on Freddoso.

A bit hyperbolic (along with the "brownshirt" meme on the right)? Yeah, but the fact is this is not necessary and beneath the Obama campaign. Freddoso is conservative, but not a TOTAL hack. I'm all for vigorously challenge his ideas, almost none of which I agree with, but he has a right to be heard and WGN has a right to air his ideas. Any implied threat is wrong.*

Oh, but the Good, the Good is excellent and very risky (ballsy). We all know the markets are, umm, having issues right now. Economic distress/anxiety is THE issue right now. So, in a surreal two-three weeks of Palinmania, e-mails** and bacon (well, where it comes from ;)), what does Obama do?

Pay for a TWO-MINUTE ad on the issue:

A two-minute ad on policy? Refreshing, no? Might it bore people? Perhaps, but this is what we need the campaign to be. In other words, file this under "One man is serious, the other is not."

*It should be noted that the Obama "Call to Action" included this: "Be honest, be civil." Not exactly brownshirt.

** I'm referring to the following, which I initially thought was OK, but is just dumb:

BTW: Sullivan on Freddoso.

Clarification

2008-09-10T19:13:00.002-04:00

So, it must seem that I really dislike Sarah Palin. While I like her less and less with the passage of time, and am disturbed by the "Us vs. Them" culture wars she now represents, there STILL remains something about her to admire: Trig.

As a pro-life Democrat, who also has a serious genetic disorder, her actions here and her words about her son (Paraphrasing: "He just has one extra chromosone. But what is normal anyway?") are incredibly moving and loving to me. As a human being, I have no argument with her. Which is why THIS comment (though steeped in some truth) bothers me.

On politics, I hate what she represents: a cultural resentment that seeks to divide, while helping no one. Been there, done that.

Which brings me to "Acceptance." No, I'm not particularly thrilled with what (likely) will happen, but at some point, a)reality must set in and b) you need to live a life outside of politics. Accept what is so.

Acceptance (And Bill O'Reilly's a Moron)

2008-09-09T19:46:00.003-04:00

So, the polls look bad:

The Palin effect is not about Hillary...it is about cultural conservatism. Palin connected with many Republicans and swing voters on cultural issues. This reinforces something we have been saying for months: presidential elections are about people and "trust," not about issues. Yes, policy positions matter but personae (voter perceptions of the candidates' values) trumps issues every time.

If you wonder why GW Bush got elected TWICE, there's your answer. If historians, say, 3-400 yrs. from today, wonder "What the h=ll happened to that United States?", there's your answer folks. Vague cultural persona means more than... issues.

Onr of the most disturbing rationalizations/explanations for "SarahMania" is the "She's one of us!" argument. What? We're talking about, potentially (eventually?) the most powerful, prestigious, and, dare I say it, elite position in the world, and we WANT "Average Joes" or "Hockey Moms!" in that office b/c they seem like us?

Apparently. So be it. This is America, circa 2008.

Meanwhile, O'Reilly blames wage deflation on... illegal immigrants:

Heh.

The Kinder, Gentler, New Richard Nixon

2008-09-04T15:16:00.002-04:00

Sarah Palin.

Nixonland lives.

Gov. Palin was verrrrrrry good last night, playing, as only she could, on cultural resentments. But she did so in a seemingly easy(ish)-going way with confidence.

And it might work.

Obama: Good and Not-so-Good

2008-09-03T14:17:00.002-04:00

First, the "Not-so-Good." Look, I'm a pro-life (nominally, anyhow) Democrat, so I'm obviously disappointed in the verbatim pro-choice talk, with a touch of fear-mongering. Politically, I get it. Women (esp. Hillary folks) considering voting for McCain will likely think again. Doesn't mean I like it though.

But that is outweighed by a ton by the "Good." I hope Barack cleans up over that pompous, nutjob asshole O'Reilly, not by playing O'Reilly's trash game, but by being himself. I kinda think he will.

More Palin II

2008-09-02T20:06:00.003-04:00

As time goes on, and more info trickles out, it's clear this was a wreckless, atrocious pick, based on... IMPULSE.

It is remarkably unthoughtful in a time requiring prudent, serious leaders. What it says, shockingly, is John McCain can't be trusted.

But do NOT mistakenly believe it won't work. As my right-wing uncle proves, the base loves her and is ready to go. Pat Buchanan articulates my doomsday scenario:

In choosing Palin, McCain may also have changed the course of history as much as Ike did with his choice of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan did with his choice of George H.W. Bush. For should this ticket win, Palin will eclipse every other Republican as heir apparent to the presidency and will have her own power base among lifers, evangelicals, gun folks and conservatives – wholly independent of President McCain.

A traditional conservative on social issues, Palin has become, overnight, the most priceless political asset the movement has. Look for the neocons to move with all deliberate speed to take her into their camp by pressing upon her advisers and staff, and steering her into the AEI-Weekly Standard-War Party orbit.

Indeed, if McCain defeats Barack, 2012 could see women on both national tickets, and given McCain's age and the possibility he intends to serve a single term, women at the top of both – Sarah vs. Hillary.

And thus the end of the Democratic Party for years.

Look, I still kinda like her. But this isn't fair to her: She's not ready.

In the end, we'll find out something. If John McCain wins, then let there be no doubt: We live in a conservative nation.

More Palin

2008-08-30T20:00:00.002-04:00

The more one thinks about it, the more astonishing it becomes. No, actually, CYNICAL is the true word that comes to mind.

If you think McCain did this out of principle, well, I have property in the Everglades to sell you. Prior to last week, he'd met her... ONCE!

Look, despite some creationist tendencies and anti-climate change views (not to mention I'm a liberal, she's a conservative), I'm not dis-inclined toward her as a person, like I was Romney. In fact, if the Obama-Biden ticket wins and Dems. overreach (inevitable), I could, if only out of protest or as a corrective, see myself considering voting for her... in 8 yrs.

Which is why Gov. Palin should also be concerned. In time, she could become an important conservative voice and a national force to be reckoned with. Right now, she is a TOKEN, greatly diminishing her current and future stature.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But it MIGHT WORK, folks! Early polling suggests the effect it will have on women is not all that significant. Men seem to like it though. Being an NRA member, hunter, former high school athlete helps here. In time, her personal story COULD resonate with more women. And if she doesn't make a huge mistake (BIG "If"), well it could work. And if it does...

If it does, the Democratic Party won't see power for an entire generation. If McCain serves 2 terms, and does reasonably well, Sarah Palin will be 52. But she'll also have 8 yrs. as VP, eliminating "readiness" worries, the perfect combination of youth (52 is still young) and experience. Think the Dems. could defeat that? Me either.

So this is it. Obama really needs to win this. Otherwise...

Sarah Palin: High Risk, High Reward

2008-08-29T20:04:00.002-04:00

McCain-Palin.

Surely, it must suggest that the McCain folks think they're in trouble, recent polling aside. It is an enormous gamble and reach, and after reading Sully all day (seriously, too much good stuff to link to), utterly unserious in terms of governance. THIS is precious. Deep thoughts on foreign policy.

READY ON DAY ONE, BABY!!

More political thoughts (some not so good for Dems.) tomorrow.

The acceptance speech

2008-08-29T19:51:00.002-04:00

More or less, I agree with Sullivan's take. What we saw was a serious man, ready to lead the nation, and, FINALLY, unashamed of his liberalism.

Most conservatives (other than Pat Buchanan, who gushed over it last night, and Bill Kristol.) panned it, but that's the thing. Obama has been trying, throughout the campaign, to utterly reframe the purpose and reasoning behind liberalism, turning it into a very patriotic, American ideal. If last night did not prove it, nothing will.

Was it his best ever? No, but it was very good and watched by 38,000,00 on TV.

Oh, and the set worked just fine.

On Columns and Other Reflections

2008-08-28T18:54:00.002-04:00

On the Greek Temple thing, Ben Smith helpfully reminds us that the Bush '04 set also had columns. I admit my premature freakout.

Awhile back, I posted THIS George Packer essay on what he hoped was the fall of modern American Conservatism. These lines struck me:

Yet the polarization of America, which we now call the “culture wars,” has been dissipating for a long time. Because we can’t anticipate what ideas and language will dominate the next cycle of American politics, the previous era’s key words—“élite,” “mainstream,” “real,” “values,” “patriotic,” “snob,” “liberal”—seem as potent as ever. Indeed, they have shown up in the current campaign: North Carolina and Mississippi Republicans have produced ads linking local Democrats to Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama’s controversial former pastor. The right-wing group Citizens United has said that it will run ads portraying Obama as yet another “limousine liberal.” But these are the spasms of nerve endings in an organism that’s brain-dead.

But are ALL the nerve endings dead? John McCain has been determined to prove Packer wrong.

To be fair, his ad tonight IS all class:

That said, he's run a post-Nixon conservative campaign: define your opponent as someone you cannot trust and who's "not like you and me." To an extent, it's worked.

All of which makes me ponder if this is another case of pundits declaring the "end of an era" prematurely. They no doubt declared Goldwater conservatism stillborn in '64. We now know it wasn't. Let's just wait folks.

Finally, Day 3 in Denver was MUCH better. Sen. Obama speaks in 2 hrs.

Focus, people!

2008-08-27T15:13:00.002-04:00

Interesting piece the other day by Joe Klein on a Frank Luntz focus group.

I think he misinterprets one thing, though: the "'Change' is over" meme. See, what we're missing is the legacy of McCain 2000. Despite the fact that he's reverted to a Bush '04-like campaign, with similar policies (on steroids?) and campaign methods.

BUTTTTT, the goodwill McCain built up 8 yrs. ago is helping. Many are convinced, whether we choose Obama or McCain, that we'll GET CHANGE. Now, it's a matter of degree and, crucially, what type we're most comfortable. Of course, if Obama can erode McCain's "Maverick" image...

Also from Klein: (And as for McCain's Paris/Britney ad--the key wasn't the charge that Obama was a celebrity, but the sight of him speaking to that vast crowd in Germany, which at least one member of the focus group compared to a Nazi rally.)

Gee, didn't see that coming. Oh, wait...

Well, at least the Obama folks have learned from it. Oh, OOOOOOOOPS! Ya know, I'll wait and see how it actually turns out, but Jeebus, it looks way too grandiose right now. It reinforces the McCain meme and isn't needed.

The Biden pick

2008-08-23T13:43:00.002-04:00

Now we know. Sen. Barack Obama selects Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) for his VP choice.

Two perspectives: First, Marc Ambinder. Second, Ron Fournier.

You know, early in the week, I hated the pick, thus putting me closer to Fournier. Not only does Biden, umm, like to hear himself talk, but the whole plagiarism thing will no doubt come back in discussion.

As time goes on though, I kinda like it. Love it? No. But, overall, I agree with Sullivan's take. Fears that an Obama Admin. will be a bunch of young, naive punks making policy should be partially negated.

Take a month off

2008-08-20T19:48:00.003-04:00

And everything changes! Obama's lead evaporates. Russia goes all Tsarist* on us. And, the IndyCar Series flirts with irrelevance.

As for why Obama's in trouble, THIS Sullivan post goes a long way to explaining it, along with my theory that folks didn't object to Bush on ideas; they did so on competence. Liberals missed this.

*Just a note. Putin's Russia is many bad things; Communist, it ain't.

More on the IRL later.

The seeds of Orthogonian revolt

2008-07-21T19:14:00.003-04:00

So, The New York Times rejected a McCain op-ed. On the same day, the McCain camp comes out with this:

Obama, meanwhile, is on his great trip abroad. On said trip, as many as one million Germans may turn out to see his speech. Furthermore, per the Yahoo! link, we have the Iraqi PM basically endorsing Sen. Obama's withdrawal plans.

The McCain ad is silly. Oil prices are high? Blame the guy who has only been there for 3.5 years! Really, nonsense. But...

But from another perspective, the McCain ad works beautifully. Notice, in particular, the "chanting" of "Obama! Obama" during the ad. It reminds Orthogonians, the folks that Rick Perlstein chronicles in Nixonland as increasingly resentful of liberal elites, that Obama's campaign is "new", with "young supporters." By their traditional nature, Orthogonians aren't worried about long-term climate and energy policies. If you can drill, DRILL, they say. Those who get in the way don't "get it."

The Times' decision to reject the McCain op-ed might be right on the merits (It was little more than "Obama would have lost Iraq), but horrible politics. Orthogonians already see the media as elitist liberals, with the NYT at the top of that list. They'll resent what they see as the NYT's censorship of McCain.

As for the great Obama trip, well, Orthogonians might be reassured..., or the reception of "elitist Europeans" will only make them suspicious of Obama ("Is he one of us?"). While they simultaneously seek elite approval, they also revel in not getting it. Will this tell these folks that Obama is just like those who, supposedly, look down on them?

I have no idea, but I post this to remind pundits not to assume too much here. The above scenario could be the winning one.

In this battle,

2008-07-21T15:19:00.002-04:00

There are no winners.

Danica has no class, Milka has no talent. Given how Danica proved her "talent" by qualifying... 20th, advantage Milkers, I guess.

Oh yeah, congrats to Ryan Briscoe.

Worst argument against Obama yet

2008-07-18T19:56:00.002-04:00

Courtesy (sadly, as I like his work) James Joyner.

Nor do I have any reason to believe Obama would be less prone than McCain to overreach in his use of executive power to advance what he believes to be legitimate and necessary goals. Indeed, Obama’s seeming lack of sense of humor and condemnation of any and all criticism as beyond the pale worries me greatly on that front.

Really? You know, point to FISA, point out that his domestic agenda could, one can argue, require greater executive power. Just don't argue that thin skin and an alleged lack of humor has something to do with it. After all, George Bush was certainly funnier than Al Gore in 2000. How'd that work out for the Constitution?

Indy Racing Revolution

2008-07-18T18:48:00.002-04:00

I wanted to introduce my newest link (Random Favorites), Indy Racing Revolution by Chris Estrada. Via Chris, two interesting pieces.

The first provides us with real news: New Hampshire and Las Vegas on the '09 IRL schedule. The FOXSPORTS.com story includes lukewarm denials, so I'd say it will happen. Also interesting is that LVMS, which has been reconfigured (more banking, sadly) since the IRL last raced there, would be the season finale.

This is both a great opportunity and major risk for the IRL. The opportunity comes from the growing closeness with Speedway Motorsports Inc. (SMI), as opposed to International Speedway Corporation (ISC), owned by the France Family. SMI and ISC are in compettition. Years ago, TGeorge and ISC were BFF's. Now, ISC venues are sparse on the IndyCar schedule. If you want some ovals, (tracks in general), you might need SMI.

It's risky, though, since the IRL left both tracks due to piss poor attendance. Loudon, for instance, featured some the worst crowds I've EVER seen. If the attendance is not much better, this will not end well for anyone.

THIS by Estrada is just full of goodness. Enjoy!

Awesomeness

2008-07-16T13:22:00.003-04:00

A picture I thought I'd never see. The same PT who said, "I'm not gonna drive one of those crapwagons!" will do just that. The same PT who, some say, got screwed out of a win in the '02 500 by Tony George is, obviously, going to drive for, uhh, Tony George. Ahh, the ironies of mergification, enough to make Harry Turtledove pause!

More awesomeness: Crazy man Forsythe to Indy Lights! Rumor has it that Forsythe might run a 500 program in '09 and full IndyCar program for 2010, though given the new car in 2011, that makes no sense.

A Meme That Must Die

2008-07-15T19:25:00.002-04:00

As Nate Silver points out HERE, the "pundit class" in America truly has no new ideas and is intellectually bankrupting itself. How about this, idiots? "Barack Obama is... Barack Obama, a politician with some unique traits who can also be utterly conventional." He will chart his own legacy (good or bad) in his time.

Still, one of the memes he cites is "He's the new Carter!!!" I always thought it was nonsensical, but it remains a powerful meme on the right. Just two problems.

1. You can make that argument as often and as loudly as you'd like. Fine by me, though I disagree with it. What you CANNOT do is then argue, as many righties have, that he's a "ruthless, Chicago pol." who will throw anyone "under the bus," ala Charles Krauthammer. Sorry folks, but in this case, the two descriptions ARE mutually exclusive, at least at the degrees you on the right have taken them.

See, one CANNOT simultaneously be a "weak, naive twit," like Carter, and a "cynical, calculating pol." Doesn't work. One or the other folks.

2. To the substance of the question, Ryan Lizza's piece in the New Yorker (what about the cartoon????!! Move on, already) paints a pretty balanced picture of someone perfectly comfortable with working in the system as is. He may not like it (or maybe he does), but he's not naive about it. The profile might upset some starry-eyed supporters, but it is balanced and shows he's most concerned with results, purity or not.

On foreign policy, Eli Lake gives the meme a nice smackdown. Unfortunately, we get another "comparison" (to Reagan!) in return, but clearly, Jimmy Carter he is not.

Finally, Obama's foreign policy speech today is not one of a clueless twit. As Andrew suggests, Bush 41-esque.

Saving Sullivan (and myself?), Part 2

2008-07-13T13:01:00.003-04:00

So, as Andrew writes HERE, Iraq, once seemingly lost for good, has seen tremendous progress. Even as one who opposed the "Surge" when announced and for months after, I'll admit that it made a difference. I should note that, by itself, I doubt the surge would have done much if not for the Iraqis (esp. Sunnis in Anbar) finally rejecting Al Qaeda and it's ideology. Still, it certainly helped.

Which is why it defies logic (mine anyway) that Sullivan sees this as being advantageous for BOTH POTUS candidates, esp., he suggests, OBAMA. Huh, come again? Even more than Bush, it was McCain who was out in front of the whole "surge" idea. While Andrew acknowledges that, sort of, he says it STILL gives credence to Obama's overall judgment. Curious, considering he (Andrew) was once one of the blogosphere's biggest cheerleaders for the war. By '06, he had indeed (to his credit) changed his mind, but I think some (most?) of this was a lack of faith in the Administration to win/not totally **** everything up. He's been open to success even since that point ("Victory" is a silly term here, since no one knows how that translates, or if, by definition, it's possible).

Well, I think we have some successes here (short-term anyway; I fear we've armed too many groups, so that, in a few yrs., we'll have a nice Lebanon repeat), so shouldn't the part of Andrew that believed in the underlying rationales for this, be rejecting the one candidate who consistently said this was a terrible idea?

For that matter, if it turns out Iraq ends up in a good spot, shouldn't I reconsider? I opposed the war from the start, never seeing the need or justification. While that still holds, if some good that I had not foreseen does come of this, whither my judgment? And how could I support a party that would have been so wrong on the most important foreign policy issue?

In the end, I still vastly prefer Obama to McCain, and whatever happens in Iraq, I believe that McCain's foreign policy is dangerously hawkish (when coherent). But I'm liberal; Andrew is not.

It is Sullivan's contention that Burkean conservatism is about humility, and not getting caught up in one's (or another's) greatness. Clearly, the Bush Right understands none of this, so Andrew's rejection of it makes perfect sense. His indecision on McCain does not, since domestically, we know a McCain administration will be much more in line with his conservatism (less government, entitlements, etc., not to mention, he doesn't have the in-your-face faith of Bush).

Instead, Andrew seems to have put quite a bit of faith in Barack Obama as a person who is right for the job at this moment. I share this view, but would Burke? Given his prescient rejection of the French Revolution, guided by wreckless men who believed in their own greatness, I doubt he would support ANYONE, however noble they might be, who actually disagreed with him on the issues. No man is that great to put your faith in him purely for who he is, I think Burke might say. Yet, Andrew does just this.

I read Andrew Sullivan everyday. His might be the best blog touching on politics out there. He can believe what he wants. I just think he'll come to regret supporting Obama over McCain, should Obama become POTUS.

Saving Sullivan's (Political) Soul

2008-07-07T19:58:00.000-04:00

And now, dear readers, we come to the case of one Andrew Sullivan (WIKI profile). As his Wiki indicates, he HAS BEEN an Obama supporter. This is the same person who still admires Margaret Thatcher (NOTE: Not judging that, here). Regular Dish readers know that he favors entitlement reform, smaller government, and something of a flat tax, not exactly liberal ideas.

Now, given my support for Obama, I should welcome his potential support. In a sense, I do, but I tend to feel folks should vote for the person who most closely follows their views. Now, a quick comparison:

John McCain On The Issues

Barack Obama On The Issues

Now, who do you think most closely resembles Andrew Sullivan (other than gay rights)? NOT Obama.

Recently, Sullivan went thru some mental jujitsu to justify his lack of an endorsement (now) for McCain. THIS on fiscal conservatism. He likes what McCain says, but doesn't believe him? By that standard, vote for no one!

On Iraq, where Andrew repudiated his fervent, neo-conish support for the war, but now admits that, on some level, the surge worked, we find THIS. Elsewhere (can't find it), he says that differences on Iraq between are decreasing.

On most of domestic policy, he ought to favor McCain (wishful thinking, notwithstanding*). Foreign policy is a tougher call, given how Iraq sobered many, like Andrew. In theory, McCain should be different from Bush (Climate Change, for one**) in this arena. Of course, different might mean "crazier than Bush," ala Abe Greenwald. If we assume he won't be a total neo-con idiot (to be fair, there's a case to be made that he WILL), then, for his own good, I suggest Andrew look at everything and... Endorse McCain.

Why do I say this? In my mind, if you end up not supporting the candidate with whom you are in agreement more because of the traits of the other person, you'll regret it. Because while I'm convinced Barack Obama can be a great president, I'm a liberal. For Andrew's conservatism, however, McCain is his best bet.

One more note. If the GOP nominee were Romney or Giuliani, I'd skip this post altogether. Why? Well, Romney's a dishonest hack and Rudy, uhh, SCARES THE BEJEEBUS out of me, and others. Within the GOP at least, McCain is neither (though his foreign policy makes this liberal nervous).

Postscript. Earlier today, I thought he was coming around to his more natural place with these two*** posts. Later on, though, that seemed not to be the case.

*I'm agnostic on Soc. Security myself.

**Effing Hilarious.

RNC on climate change: Man, we suck!

***Andrew clarified his (seeming) support for the ad HERE.

Book Review

2008-06-30T20:06:00.000-04:00

Well, given this blog's name, this seems appropriate. Anyway, today's topic: Thunder at Sunrise, by John M. Burns.

Let me start with this: The writing by Mr. Burns won't blow you away. From a pure prose/literary perspective, if you read one chapter, you've read 90% of the book. The Preface, first chapter, and Epilogue are unique however.

A chapter begins with worldly historical events, trying to create an atmosphere in which the racing events occur. A lead-up summary of the event (Vanderbilt Cup, Grand Prize, and Indy) and a summary of the event itself contains the balance of the chapter. Pretty utilitarian.

I don't really begrudge Burns for this, though, since the nature of the topic kind of necessitated this style. I suppose he could have written this more like a novel, but then the racing could get lost. Conversely, he could have narrowed his focus to the Vanderbilt Cup, America's first great racing event, but the drivers and automakers of the era competed in all three events, and the emergence of each event had an impact on the prestige of the previous event. How do you narrow it down?

At any rate, the 257 pages are loaded with great photos from the events, though a majority of them are from IMS. Still, comparing pictures from the 1904 Vanderbilt Cup and, oh, the Peugeots driven by Jules Goux (1913-14) and Dario Resta (1915-16) at Indianapolis, it is striking even then to see the aesthetic changes. Frankly, the 1904 machines look like little more than boxes with wheels (small wheels, with hideously thin tires). The Peugeots show semblance of streamlining, esp. at the back, with a better understanding of engine technology. By 1914, speeds were just a shade under 100 mph at Indy.

The most compelling part of the book might be the first two chapters, describing the first Vanderbilt Cup on Long Island, and the events surrounding it's formation. Burns is at his best describing the atmosphere of excitement and uncertainty for the first race. The crowds simply swamped organizers, making crowd control laughably, though disastrously, impossible. I was struck by the fact these racers, organizers, and fans were truly embarking on uncharted territory; to those at the time, it must all have seemed like something of a fantasy world out of science fiction. They had little understanding of the consequences of what they were attempting. Little thought was put into safety; they simply didn't know what could happen, or what to do about it.

Despite crowd control issues, the race was a smashing success. And Burns wants us to believe that had it gone badly (or never started in the first place), American motorsports would have been stillborn. I don't know about that, but the fact that all 3 events attracted the same caliber of manufacturers (foreign and domestic), gives some credence to the point, in that, had there been no Vanderbilt Cup (in many ways, the first U.S. Grand Prix), would anything else of equal prestige have ever emerged?

Perhaps the best part of the book is getting introduced (or reintroduced) to the great drivers of the day. From Harry Grant, to George Robertson, George Heath to Eddie Hearne and Ralph Mulford to Ralph DePalma, drivers who were otherwise lost to history (other than DePalma, a true legend) are brought back to life.

So too are car makers like Mercer, Stutz, Alco, Locomobile, National, and Pope, marques that most of today's readers (like myself) had never heard of. Burns helps chronicle not just the early racing scene, but the overall automotive scene of the era.

Needless to say, Burns, despite his faults, details an automotive and sporting era far more interesting and colorful than many would otherwise imagine. In that, Thunder at Sunrise is a success and must-read for those interested in the sport's history.

It Isn't Easy Being a Total Hack

2008-06-29T11:53:00.000-04:00

Sean Hannity descends into self-parody. Heh.

Then again,

2008-06-29T11:14:00.000-04:00

There are times when the product sucks. Last nights ICS race in Richmond was virtually unwatchable as it degenerated into an amateur-hour wreckfest followed by a single-file parade. One of the worst I've seen in years.

Oh, and Marty Reid, please STFU. There were NOT 60k there last night. Try 35k, maybe.

IndyCar's future

2008-06-25T14:20:00.000-04:00

Forgive me, this will be long and might even mix in some politics.

First, some lousy news: No new formula until 2011. On some levels, I get it. To do it right will require time, and $ is tight right now. Some would also say its understandable, desirable even, to launch it in conjunction with the 100th anniversary of the Indianapolis 500.

I can understand the logistical arguments (time and $), and while there's sense in the 100th anniversary angle (Those of us who were more loyal to CART/CC should acknowledge this: Indy is, currently, the only value in the sport), it comes from the wrong perspective: IMS-centricity. While Indy is indeed vital to the sport, you cannot make every decision based solely, seemingly, on the fortune of one place.

While it might not fit IMS symmetry, we needed a new formula sooner. The current machines are simply tired, loud, too slow, and not aesthetically pleasing.

Furthermore, ONE CHASSIS? Again, a money thing, but doesn't that mean that teams will inevitable flock to the mark that has the most hp (provided its reliable, an important note)?

At any rate, Miller seems positive on the whole thing, and HOORAY! to turbos. For former CC folks, though, waiting until 2011 is a bridge too far. I'm still game, but waiting until 2011 is... unfortunate, in my view.

It's too bad, also, given that Iowa was surprisingly good, with a great 35-40k sellout. A fair amount of passing, knowledgeable fans, and differing strategies were all involved.

But will it matter?

I suppose that THIS POST at TrackForum started this train of thought. Now, I don't totally agree with premise that IndyCar, as it is today and will become in the future, is doomed to lousy ratings, but any empirical look at the evidence suggests it's very possible. Why? Time for some politics (and the way-back machine)!

This 1987 article (found in The Atlantic archives) by Bill Schneider (now of CNN) analyzed how the Goldwater-Reagan movement fundamentally changed American politics. Combined with THIS New Yorker piece by George Packer on the (electoral) end of the Conservative Era, I think we may have an answer.

In the last 40 yrs., it has become something of a badge of honor in this country to compete in athletic events that are unique from other international compettitions. Not only do we not get soccer (myself included), but we're PROUD of that. It's not an American/North American game, so our lack of interest. The Conservative Revolution detailed in the Schneider and Packer articles ushered a different sense of nationalism/national pride. Where we were once content to judge ourselves based on international (largely European) opinion, now we choose to pursue our own path in sports.

So it is in racing. I'm finishing Thunder at Sunrise, a book that details the early American racing scene, including the first 6 Indianapolis 500's (Seriously, Ralph Mulford got screwed in 1911). One of the (many) interesting things with the book was the sense of international prestige our three major events, the Vanderbilt Cup, Grand Prize (anglicized grand prix), and Indianapolis held. These early great events saw a huge number of foreign makes (FIAT, Mercedes, Benz, and Peugeot, to name a few) competing against a developing American market. International racers like Jules Goux (1913 Indy winner) dominated on more than a few occasions.

While such a state of affairs did not please the public, it also created drama and a measuring stick. The other makes were better; we improved. And their presence gave the events a remarkable and curious prestige.

As time drew on, stock car racing developed as a unique sport, separate from Indianapolis-style racing. Unfortunately, even during the first 30+ years of NASCAR, it was seen as utterly regional, unsophisticated, and niche sport. IndyCar racing dominated.

Thanks to many factors (The Split among them), that has reversed. Americans have embraced this uniquely American form of racing, but, like conservatism in 1980, only after it's image changed to something juuuuuuuust sophisticated enough (but not too sophisticated, ala Europe) for the mainstream. Americans have embraced oval-track racing with machines that look like normal cars (Biggest canard in Motorsports- they're NOTHING like street cars. They're just ugly as hell-seriously the COT sucks- and use '60's technology), with American heroes. IndyCar racing is seen as a) poorly run, but b) a foreign-based sport with foreign drivers. Many say, "Why do we need this?"

To those reading, I place NO value judgment on this nationalism/pride. Many other nations are similar in this regard, but it IS something that has changed. We don't need anyone else to justify any of our sports or actions. Clearly, this is not favorable to IndyCar.

Many who supported the original formation of the IRL seemed, in my view, to advocate an open-wheel version of NASCAR. But I don't want that, and what's the point of it? Just give it to NASCAR.

And maybe that's where we're headed. In some sense, wouldn't it do the 500 a service to return it to a sport that people care about? Maybe that would truly honor the Speedway.

But I hope it doesn't happen. For years, IndyCar has been a bridge between F1 and pure "American" racing. In that, it is utterly unique. Moreover, I hate to think that American racing is going to be boiled down to NASCAR, a low-tech form of racing.

Most of all, I love the speed, and I'll say it again, on it's best day, open-wheel racing smokes NASCAR. I just hope it will still be around for me to enjoy.

Better than this

2008-06-24T17:53:00.000-04:00

I think John Cole has a point here. Obama and his campaign should be above playing into stupid stereotypes. After all, there's NOTHING WRONG with being Muslim. There are hundreds of millions of good Muslims; they're not all terrorists.

I understand the smears, and the damage they've caused. But there are better ways to handle them.

Pandering, flip-flops, and everything in-between

2008-06-19T19:52:00.000-04:00

So, Barack Obama opted out of public financing. Is it a flip-flop? Sure, but really, he'd be an idiot not to do this, given his fundraising skills. The idealist in my does not like it; the realist knows it makes sense.

James Joyner writes thoughtfully on Obama's inconsistencies. In short, he did indeed pander on NAFTA, which he's now, wisely, backing away from. On foreign affairs, though, flexibility and learning are GOOD traits, while trying to honor, if possible, basic principles. Obama, I think, can do this. I'm not convinced with McCain.

So, a good leader, then, doesn't just follow polls. But flexibility, even reversing yourself, is a must, as well.

Tim Russert: 1950-2008

2008-06-13T19:24:00.000-04:00

RIP to a TV news icon.

I was watching the US Open on NBC and was stunned as I watched Tom Brokaw announce it on air.

Stunned and saddened.

Teh Awesome- Racing Edition

2008-06-10T19:35:00.000-04:00

Kubica Freaking Mania! As a descendent of Polish immigrants on my mother's side of the family, I am needless to say a big Kubica fan. This has been coming for awhile, but to see it happen was still great. He's got a ton of talent, and while he won't be WDC this year, his time is coming.

12-year-old Emma from Oklahoma created a stir on WindTunnel. While I don't hate NASCAR, I still smiled reading about it. Fact is, many NASCAR races are too damn long (seriously, the world won't miss 100 miles at Pocono. Make 'em 400 milers).

Whom To Blame?

2008-06-08T16:29:00.000-04:00

From last night:

Video link.

I think both are to blame, to varying degrees. While I don't BELIEVE RHR had to go to the apron, Marco deserves most of the blame for coming down as hard as he did on the backstretch.

SPEED's race rap. Tough, but not unexpected, night for the CC guys.

Thanks Marc Ambinder!

2008-06-06T19:55:00.000-04:00

For scaring the crap out of me. IFFFF Obama wins Ohio, it's likely a moot point, but a 2000 multiplied, with Obama CLEARLY (at least 1-1.5 mil, though, under this scenario, perhaps 3-4 mil) winning the PV but McCain getting the Presidency is... frightening. I know you'd see activism. Beyond that...

The Difference

2008-06-05T14:34:00.000-04:00

From Tuesday:

Obama-

McCain-

Obama and Trinity

2008-06-05T13:20:00.000-04:00

As we all know, Barack Obama's membership in Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago and his relationship with Jeremiah Wright has been a significant issue in this campaign.

Why, many ask, would the Senator join a church that, even when the pastor doesn't carry on about "G-D America" and the like still has "black nationalist" leaning.

Writing, online, for the WSJ, Steve Waldman gives a very insightful piece.

In that sense, neither Obama-the-candidate nor his critics have fully articulated the real reason Sen. Obama stayed with the church as long as he did. It was not because he’s a secret Black Panther (he’s not), and if anything he gravitated to Trinity because of his own fears that he was too white. It’s also not because he was shocked – shocked! – to learn of the church’s radicalism (he wasn’t). It’s that Sen. Obama treasures unity above other values, and marveled at Trinity’s capacity to tie together disparate, often hostile groups into a single community.

What has changed is that Sen. Obama is now focused on a different, larger community. Whereas Mr. Wright was a unifying figure in one community, he and Trinity Church are powerfully divisive in the much larger community.

Sen. Obama’s racial journey – landing him as it did in Trinity Church — has surely caused him problems politically this year and will in the general election. But at the end of the day, Sen. Obama’s multiracial family is at the heart of his continual emphasis on unity – and his formidable skill as a politician

Read the whole thing. I'll simply say that Obama's complex racial journey is, in the end, quite moving, but, perhaps too complex for some voters to understand.

So many thoughts

2008-06-04T14:32:00.000-04:00

One day after the inevitable happened, there still is a lot to chew on. One, OK, I DID watch Obama last night, and echo Sullivan's thoughts. Win or lose come November, I know I made the right decision, oh, 18 months ago to support Sen. Obama.

Clinton refusing to concede isn't just typical. Its also remarkably comical. The jig is up, Senator. Time to admit that.

Finally, one of the more astonishing aspects of Obama's speech was the lack of reference to the historical nature of what this means. Obama just doesn't think along those lines. But, others have (and should). 150 years ago, Americans with Obama's skin color would have been held in bondage. Fifty years ago, Jim Crow ruled the South.

Now, history has been made, and the future awaits.

Because Others Are Smarter than I Am

2008-06-03T20:03:00.000-04:00

I'll let them speak for me.

Sully:

Since I was among those who raised the option of an Obama-Clinton ticket, and aired the debate for a while, I should say that I hope at this point that Obama has the strength to turn her down - gently. He should bring in former rivals into his cabinet and should offer Clinton a cabinet post, on the Lincoln model. But to have endured the kind of campaign the Clintons ran and concede to her wishes now would be an act of weakness that the Clintons would exploit were he to become president.

Obama needs to regain the momentum and clarity of his early insurrection. He would not do that by adding Clinton to his ticket.

Yes, right on.

I'll simply add that I will NOT be watching the victory speech tonight, given the praise, while politically necessary, of Sen. Clinton we'll hear tonight.

Goodbye to all That

2008-06-03T14:57:00.000-04:00

And say Hello to your Democratic nominee: Barack Obama. Say hello to the future, whatever it may hold.*

*Unless crap like this actually isn't crap.

Milwaukee Redux

2008-06-03T13:53:00.000-04:00

It was a day of redemption for Ryan Briscoe at The Milwaukee Mile, in front of a larger crowd than recent years.

Understand, it isn't just his coming-together with Danica Patrick at Indy that has given him a reputation for poor driving. In truth, since coming to IndyCars in '05, Briscoe had earned a reputation for being quick, with an uncanny knack of crashing.

On Sunday, Briscoe showed solid speed (he started 11th) and poise. In so doing, he put to rest, for now, all of the speculation on his future. Make no mistake, it was a deserving win.

It was also pretty entertaining. 26 cars at The Mile just felt right, and while some say there wasn't enough action for the lead, the battles for every other position throughout the field was great to watch. Also encouraging were the solid runs from Champ Car "transition" drivers Oriol Servia, Justin Wilson, and EJ Viso, finishing 6th, 7th, and 8th respectively.

Graham Rahal crashed out for the second week in a row, and whined about it in the process. Still, he's 19 and has shown himself to be quick.

Texas coming up this Saturday.

Milwaukee TV ratings

2008-06-02T20:06:00.000-04:00

Actually slipped a bit. Even though it was a decent-good race, with a nice front row, no one still cares. I'll go big picture on this... tomorrow ;). I'll also go in-depth on the race.

Fire Ryan Briscoe!!!!

2008-06-01T18:51:00.000-04:00

Uh, OOOOOOOOOOOPS!

So, how do you deal with internet calls for your job? Do what Ryan Briscoe did: Win.

I'll say more tomorrow, but it was a compettitive, compelling race, with a good crowd.

The Difference

2008-06-01T13:36:00.001-04:00

On ESPN, and in NASCAR generally, young phenom Joey Logano is being celebrated. Fomer American F1 driver Scott Speed won his first NASCAR Truck race on Friday.

Meanwhile, Marco Andretti and Graham Rahal qualify 1-2 in Milwaukee and :crickets: on SportsCenter. NASCAR has captured the public's imagination. Can IndyCar ever make a dent?

Batshit Crazy

2008-06-01T12:41:00.000-04:00

How else to describe the Clintons and their supporters?

From the TNR piece:

Of the eight Hillary supporters I quiz at the protest (six of them women), only one says she'd even consider voting for Obama in the fall. "It's sad. I'm a lifelong Democrat and the party's been taken over by these Obama people who say they want 'change,'" gripes Linda of Horseheads, New York, outside the Marriott as a honking car decorated with a painting of Hillary, a glued-on bust of Cleopatra, and a tampon drives by. Linda, she says, has already gone to the state Board of Elections to learn how to write Hillary's name in in November. "So much has been stolen from her."

Hey Linda, you're damn right we're taking over! We want no more of these corrupt sociopaths.

If y'all (Hillary fanatics) give us Pres. McCain, so be it. Don't look at us Obama folks when we go into Iran in a McCain Administration.

Milwaukee starting grid

2008-06-01T12:17:00.000-04:00

In PDF. Andretti-Rahal front row. Back to the future, minus the fans, ratings and interest.