Firefox 1.5 Released

The new version of the Firefox web browser is available. It's a great alternative to Internet Explorer. Everyone should use it.

Undefeated Colts

It seems like everyone who follows the NFL is opining on whether or not the Colts should make a concerted effort at a perfect season. Tim Dahlberg writes, "Dungy owes it to the Colts and the fans to try and win them all." Coach Dungy, while repeatedly saying it is too early to think about 16-0, has hinted that he will rest his starters and play primarily with backups once homefield advantage is secured for the playoffs.

In a normal season, that would be the prudent thing to do. But this is not a normal season. The Colts face a once in a career opportunity. Since the '72 Dolphins, only four teams (now five with the 2005 Colts) have gone 11-0 to start the season: 1984 Dolphins, 1998 Broncos, 1985 Bears, 1991 Redskins. Not only are there few teams on this list, notice that no team has done it twice. A team will have more shots at a Super Bowl victory than a perfect season. Coach Dungy can be assured that he will almost certainly never be in this position again, nor will his players. For this reason, I have to agree with Dahlberg. He owes it to his players to go out there every week, until they lose, with his A-team and make a serious run at perfection. They will likely never have that chance again.

Now, I agree it's too soon to really talk about these decisions. There are still five games to go and the Colts still have to wrap up their division. Dungy's hand may be forced anyway. The Colts, for all their wins, only have a 2 game edge on the Broncos in the race for the top seed. So, if Denver keeps winning, and the Broncos' schedule is not all that hard, it might not be until the 15th game that the Colts wrap up home field advantage. At that point, at 15-0, only the lowly Cardinals would stand in their way. If Dungy backed off then, even if he won the Super Bowl, he would always be remembered as the coach who threw away perfection for no good reason.

Beyond that, I've always felt the one flaw in the Schottenheimer tree of coaches (Dungy, Cowher, Edwards, Marty himself) is they are too conservative. As an "idiot kicker" once said, they don't have the killer instinct. This is why, for all those coaches' success in the regular season, only one has made a Super Bowl appearance, and that only once. Rather than play to his conservative side, Dungy, should he end up close, should go for the gusto.

Bush Lied

Badger Blues writes of the administration argument for war in Iraq:

I don’t think the lies were deliberate. I think the Bush Administration were so blinded by ideology that facts and warnings which disagreed with their pre-conceived idea that Iraq was a threat that required an immediate war were ignored or not acknowledged. Insufficient skepticism was employed when looking at claims made by Iraqi defectors and third parties who had a huge stake in getting us to depose Saddam.

I agree with all of this, except the use of the word "lies." Maybe I'm just playing semantics, but the above is why I don't accept the "Bush Lied" argument. Lying implies intent, i.e. the administration deliberately mislead the American people into supporting the war, based on information they knew was bogus. I have seen nothing to indicate that. Everything suggests they were so convinced of their conclusions that their reading of intelligence information was warped and distorted, as Badger Blues writes. Whatever supported their conclusions was right, whatever contradicted their conclusions was wrong. That's not lying, that's stupidity. So, the mantra should be "Bush was an Incompetent Fool", not "Bush Lied."

And to the administration defense that Clinton had the same beliefs about Hussein, I point out that Clinton did not go to war on those beliefs, Bush did. Therefore, it is appropriate to hold the latter to a higher standard.

Heraldblog: When left is right, right is left

Heraldblog has a good post on the outdated notions of conservative and liberal. The labels really don't apply well anymore. Look at abortion, as a simple example. The "liberal" view, pro-choice, is basically that of a restricted government letting people make their own choices, a traditionally small government conservative viewpoint. On the other hand, the "conservative" view, pro-life, is one in which the government imposes its moral view on everyone, which is really big government liberalism. So the labels are meaningless, but so much of the political discourse in the country revolves around them. Meanwhile, while the politicians smear each other with empty labels of "conservative" and "liberal", nothing gets done and the country stagnates, with very real problems unaddressed.

Heraldblog's conclusion?

I know there is a third way between the GOP's corrupt, laissez faire approach on one hand, and the Democrat's group think on the other. It is to abandon notions that there is a right and left, and that everything is either or.

Exactly.

Packers' Future

This may be the last post I make on this blog. After it is published, I expect a crazed mob of cheeseheads with pitchforks to hunt me down. But I will be brave. (And if you don't like the opinions expressed on this site, feel free to click that Make a Donatation button on the left. I will gladly consider adopting your opinion as mine, for the proper price of course. Harleys welcomed in place of cash, with idea preference given to donors of Road King and Heritage Springer models.)

At 2-9, the Packer season is over. Even a miracle finish will leave them with a losing record and without a division title. With two games against Chicago and another against Seattle, that miracle finish is little more than a fantasy. It is time to look toward the future. Ready? It is time to bench Brett Favre and hand the reigns over to Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers is the future of the franchise, not Brett. Sooner rather than later, #4 will be gone and all will be in his young hands. The last five games of the season provide a perfect opportunity to evaluate Rodgers and to get him valuable experience on the field, experience that will give him a headstart on next season. It worked out well for Eli Manning.

Brett Favre is the Packers. I understand that. I've never seen a player become so much the face of a franchise as I have Favre. His face and name are everywhere here in Wisconsin. But, as hard as it is to imagine my cheesey friends, the franchise will live on after Favre. Sooner or later, another quarterback will supplant him in the minds of the fans, just as Brett supplanted Starr. The end of an era, like the death of a loved one, is always hard to accept. But life moves on, and so should the Packers.

Maybe Brett can continue to start, to keep his streak alive and to get a shot at 5 more touchdown throws for an even 400 in his career, but Rodgers should be, at the least, getting the bulk of the playing time.

Now, if you need me, I'll be in a foxhole waiting for witness protection.

WHO Report on Domestic Violence

The WHO has published a report on domestic violence against women around the world, and it is not a pretty picture.

"Women are more at risk from violence involving people they know at home than from strangers in the street. There is a feeling that the home is a safe haven and that pregnancy is a very protected period, but that is not the case," WHO's director-general Lee Jong-Wook told a news conference.

"Domestic violence remains largely hidden."

...

"Every 18 seconds, somewhere, a woman suffers violence or maltreatment ... We must put an end to this shameful practice," said Spain's health minister Elena Salgado, current president of WHO's annual health assembly.

Domestic violence can be sparked by dinner being late, not finishing the housework on time, disobeying or refusing to have sex, the report said. In many cases women agree that a man is justified in beating his wife under certain circumstances.

I remember reading several years ago that more women, in this country, will visit the emergency room because they were beaten or abused than to have a baby.

Balkin on Padilla

Jack Balkin on the timely (from the administration's point of view) indictment of Jose Padilla:

The Padilla case is a sobering lesson in how much leeway the President has to imprison and detain people for long periods of time in violation of the Constitution. The fact that the government's story about why Padilla was a threat has changed so frequently should give us pause the next time the government asserts that we should trust it when it rounds up U.S. citizens and claims the right to hold them indefinitely for our protection. Padilla may well be a very bad fellow, but we have a method of dealing with such bad fellows. It is called the rule of law, and we should not surrender it so readily merely because the President desires it.

It never ceases to amaze me that more people were not bothered by the Padilla case. It was a such a blatant abuse of power by the president. Essentially, he claimed the authority to imprison any American citizen for any desired duration without having to justify the imprisonment or bring charges against that citizen. Just slap the magic "enemy combatant" tag on someone and away they go. Apparently, this was OK with many Americans. The fact that what the government finally accused Padilla of has nothing to do with why he was supposedly arrested in the first place just shows how this claimed power can be abused. Imagine if Richard Nixon had had that power.

NFL 2005 Week 12 Predictions

Oh well. My streak of good, double digit performances came to a crashing end last week. (Thanks a lot Steelers and Panthers.) With the short week, I have to rush through predictions yet again.

Onto this week...

Falcons @ Lions
The Falcons have dropped two straight whereas the Lions have lost three out of the last four. Detroit typically raises its play a notch or two on Thanksgiving. With so many questions surrounding Atlanta (where's the defense? where's the running? why is Vick trying to beat you with his arm?) it is quite tempting to go for an upset. What the heck. Prediction: Lions.

Broncos @ Cowboys
This should be a pretty good game. Two division leaders, two good offenses, two good defenses. I like Dallas' defense over Denver's, and that should make the difference. Prediction: Cowboys.

Ravens @ Bengals
The only thing standing in the way of a comfortable Bengal win here is fatigue from last week's track meet in Indy. That offense is just too good, something no one can say about the Ravens' version. Prediction: Bengals.

Panthers @ Bills
The Panthers melted down in the face of a relentless Bear pass rush, something Buffalo will try to emulate but not succeed. Carolina is still the class of the NFC, do you hear me? Prediction: Panthers.

Bears @ Bucs
Both teams are on top of their divisions. Quelle surprise. Both teams have good defenses. Actually they are quite similar all around: strong defense, strong running game, young QBs. The Bucs have more options in the passing game. Of course the Bears handled the very good Panther defense quite well. I like the Buc offense a little better. Prediction: Bucs.

Browns @ Vikings
Crennel is doing a very good job in Cleveland, coaxing wins out of a lackluster roster. The Vikings are winning again with Johnson. But I have to go with the Vikings at home. Prediction: Vikings.

Patriots @ Chiefs
This should be a shootout. The Chiefs have the better running game, the Patriots the better passing game. I like the Pats to find some way to play defense more than the Chiefs to find a way. Prediction: Patriots.

Chargers @ Redskins
Well, the 'Skins are falling back again. Oh brother. San Diego is surging. This is the second week in a row Washington has had to face a former coach. Prediction: Chargers.

39ers @ Titans
A good performance against the Seahawks earns the San Fran team a week's reprieve. I'm gonig to go for another surprise (not sure if it's an upset given that both teams stink) and pick San Fran. Prediction: 39ers.

Rams @ Texans
St. Louis is struggling, but the Texans are dead in the water. Prediction: Rams.

Jaguars @ Cardinals
Arizona finally learned to score touchdowns last week, and people are raving about Kurt Warner again. The Jags will prove a tougher opponent, so expect a return to the high yardage, low scoring offense we've seen all year. Prediction: Jaguars.

Dolphins @ Raiders
Miami is falling apart. Prediction: Raiders.

Packers @ Eagles
Please, no 4th and 26 situations in this game! Those days are seem so long ago with both teams losing and going nowhere. The Packer offense isn't that bad, at least in the passing game, and certainly better than the Eagles'. Prediction: Packers.

Giants @ Seahawks
Yet another matchup of division leading teams. This will be a good test for the Seahawks who have suddenly become a chic pick to win the conference. In particular, it will be a test for their defense. I'm sorry, but I just can't go with Seattle. Barely beating the 39ers? Plus they have too much history of folding. They have to prove themselves a little more. Prediction: Giants.

Saints @ Jets
There has to be a few stinkers every week, even one with so many top teams facing off. The Jets are a shambles. The Saints should be able to put enough together to win this one. Prediction: Saints.

Steelers @ Colts
Finally, the Monday night game really is the premier game of the week. Wish I had time to talk about it. The Steeler defense is one of the best, so don't expect the track meet the Bengals and Colts put up last week. But they are more about brute force than disguises and deception, like New England in its better days. That's what gets to Manning. The Steelers have a pretty good offense too, but don't expect a top performance from Roethlisberger, coming off several weeks injury. Prediction: Colts.

Last Week: 9-7
Season: 96-64

Krauthammer: Phony Theory, False Conflict

Charles Krauthammer (via Heraldblog) has a good piece on intelligent design.

The [Kansas] school board thinks it is indicting evolution by branding it an "unguided process" with no "discernible direction or goal." This is as ridiculous as indicting Newtonian mechanics for positing an "unguided process" by which Earth is pulled around the sun every year without discernible purpose. What is chemistry if not an "unguided process" of molecular interactions without "purpose"? Or are we to teach children that God is behind every hydrogen atom in electrolysis?

He may be, of course. But that discussion is the province of religion, not science. The relentless attempt to confuse the two by teaching warmed-over creationism as science can only bring ridicule to religion, gratuitously discrediting a great human endeavor and our deepest source of wisdom precisely about those questions -- arguably, the most important questions in life -- that lie beyond the material.

...

How ridiculous to make evolution the enemy of God. What could be more elegant, more simple, more brilliant, more economical, more creative, indeed more divine than a planet with millions of life forms, distinct and yet interactive, all ultimately derived from accumulated variations in a single double-stranded molecule, pliable and fecund enough to give us mollusks and mice, Newton and Einstein? Even if it did give us the Kansas State Board of Education, too.

On a tangential note, Krauthammer writes of Isaac Newton, "Newton's religion was traditional. He was a staunch believer in Christianity and a member of the Church of England." Not that it matters, but just last week I watched a Nova program on Newton and learned a lot about the man behind the theories. One point is that, while he was a member of the Church of England as required for anyone trying to get ahead in England in those days, he held theological views that would be considered heretical both then and now in traditional Christian thought. He was an anti-Trinitarian among other things. He had to keep this thoughts to himself as they could have gotten him fired and even imprisoned. It is irrelevant to Newton's greatness as a thinker and his towering stature in the history of physics. Just something interesting I recently learned.

Tolerance

I’m in a mood to shake things up a bit. Much of what I post on this blog could well qualify me as a liberal. I understand that. I criticize the Iraq war, the Bush administration, and the Christian Right. One of my posts about Alito, which was actually somewhat supportive, ended up in a roundup under the category of liberal points of view.

But my views are not so easily categorized. One of the things I really hate about liberal ideology is the tolerance movement. First of all, what is tolerance? I know the dictionary meaning. But when I think of tolerating something, I think of putting up with something you don’t really like, usually with the expectation that it will eventually go away. Think of having a difficult poop. You haven’t had your fiber for a few days and are having a hard time. It’s painful, but you put up with the pain and discomfort knowing that in time it will come out and the pain and discomfort will go away. That’s tolerance. So, the liberal view is, “When you see a black man, think of poop.” Great moral standard, that.

More seriously, what does it actually mean? The dictionary meaning is, “The capacity for or the practice of recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others.” But do the so-called tolerant people actually respect the beliefs of others? Not really. Look at my recent slew of postings about liberals justifying racist language and actions against a Republican black man running for governor and an Asian woman expressing conservative views. Justifying racism and using racial epithets is “respecting the beliefs of others?” Uh, no.

I’m reminded of something Jesus said. “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same.” (Luke 6:32-33) Even Klansmen tolerate those who agree with them. What is the value of only respecting those who agree with you? That is not tolerance. I conclude that the so-called tolerant people are only tolerant of those who agree with them. Again, great moral standard.

This leads to totally absurd contradictions. Liberals hate racism but then use it against blacks who are deemed disloyal to their race, echoing the notions and even language of white supremacy. Liberals respect the beliefs of others, unless an Asian woman holds views contrary to liberal orthodoxy, in which case she must be a mindless whore manipulated by her husband.

When I was in college, I took a class I called the –ism class, studying racism, sexism, etc. The theme of the class was, basically, I am a white, Christian, male: I am the root of all evil. No, it was actually a good class. It was tough, but there’s nothing wrong with being challenged. But I still remember the most surreal conversation in one class on racism. The question was whether or not a student many of us knew counted as a black man. His skin was darker than most black men and women I’ve ever known, but he didn’t act “black” so it wasn’t clear if we were allowed to consider him as such. I went to college in Maryland, where Lt. Governor Steele is having a similar problem justifying his claim to be black. All in the name of tolerance.

I will make a bold prediction. If a black person or a woman is to become President in the near future, it will be a Republican, not a Democrat. A black Democrat is totally beholden to the civil rights wing of the Democratic Party. Cross them and you’ll get the Steele treatment. But those views are stuck in the 1960’s and out of step with mainstream America. A Democratic woman is beholden to the feminist wing of the party, whose views again are out of step with mainstream America. Republicans, on the other hand, do not demand that skin color or gender dictate one’s views. One is free to think for one’s self. (Hillary could prove me wrong in just a couple of years, I know, so I will add a qualification. I am assuming the black or female Democrat faces a respectable opponent, not a Dole or Kerry caliber candidate. Put a Dole or Kerry up, and all bets are off.)

Michelle Malkin: JUST A YELLOW WOMAN DOING A WHITE MAN'S JOB

Michelle Malkin:

During one of countless book-related radio interviews this week, a liberal radio host insultingly asked me whether I write my own column. His question was prompted by vicious anonymous bloggers who portray me as a greedy Asian whore/dupe/brainwashing victim who simply parrots what my white slavemasters program into my empty little head. These critics have stepped up attacks on my husband Jesse as a fanatical right-wing puppeteer orchestrating all I do and say.

All part of the culture of tolerance, obviously.

Hotline On Call: Harkin Teaches Brad Pitt A Lesson

Hollywood actors can get a really big head, sometimes. I'm a big movie fan, and I really like Brad Pitt, but pretending to be someone else for a living and smooching with Angelina Jolie only confers a limited amount of importance. Hotline On Call (via Political Wire) reports on the actor's visit to Senator Tom Harkin's office.

When Pitt's team first requested the meeting with the Iowa senator, they laid down some conditions: clear the office. Don't introduce Pitt to anyone. Don't talk about the visit ahead of time.

But we're told the senator didn't take kindly to being told what to do in the confines of his own office.

So when Pitt, sporting black hair and a bushy beard, showed up around 2:00 pm, every available member of the Harkin staff -- even if they were busy -- was arrayed around the office. Harkin proceeded to introduce them to Pitt, one by one. "He got the personal introduction, along with their function and everthing else," says someone who was there.

Smack! As the old saying goes, you must know your limitations.

NFL 2005 Week 11 Predictions

It's been yet another crazy week for me, so blogging has been non-existent. So once again this will be an abbreviated prediction post. (If anyone actually enjoys my more involved explanations, I apologize for not doing it these last two weeks. I enjoy doing it, but it takes a lot of time and I just haven't had it.)

Onto this week...

Cardinals @ Rams
The Warner revenge rematch. The first one didn't go well for Kurt. The Ram defense will allow Kurt to put up his usual high yardage. He might even get a TD or two. But the Rams are at home. Prediction: Rams.

Lions @ Cowboys
With Harrington starting, against a good defense? I see my starting fantasy defense. Prediction: Cowboys.

Jaguars @ Titans
The Jags are in the hunt for a playoff spot. Good all around, but great nowhere. Still better than Tennessee. Prediction: Jaguars.

Saints @ Patriots
Even numbered game for New England, which means loss. But we're talking the Saints here. The champs finally get a winning streak. Prediction: Patriots.

Eagles @ Giants
No T.O. No McNabb. No chance. Prediction: Giants.

Panthers @ Bears
Two division leaders in this one. Carolina is looking more and more Super Bowl worthy. Prediction: Panthers.

Dolphins @ Browns
The Battle of the Belichick Flunkies. Former Belichick defensive coordinator Nick Saban (back in Cleveland) against former Belichick defensive coordinator Romeo Crennel (back in New England). Miami brings more with its defense and two headed running game. Prediction: Dolphins.

Raiders @ Redskins
Washington is still a good team, I think. The defense is very good, even if they did make Chris Simms look like Phil Simms. (By the way, that's an interesting little irrelevancy. Joe Gibbs has been around so long he plotted against Phil in the 80's and against son Chris last week.) Prediction: Redskins.

Bucs @ Falcons
Tampa comes off a surprising win, the Falcons off an upset loss. This will be a defensive struggle. I'm tempted to go with an upset, thinking the Buc defense can handle Vick and Dunn, but the Buc offense just isn't good enough against the Falcon defense. Prediction: Falcons.

Steelers @ Ravens
Pittsburgh continues its drive for a first round bye, the Ravens for an early draft pick. Prediction: Steelers.

Seahawks @ 39ers
Another matchup of top against bottom. And I think it's about time for the 29ers next week. Prediction: Seahawks.

Colts @ Bengals
Game of the week. Will the Colts go undefeated this year? No way. If for no other reason, if they keep winning they will clinch the top seed with a few weeks to spare in the season, and will sit their key players to rest up for the playoffs. I am really impressed with the Bengals this year, but you need a very good defense to deal with the Colt offense. Cincy is improving there, but not enough. It will be a high scoring game, a real test of the Colt defense. Prediction: Colts.

Jets @ Broncos
And another matchup of top against bottom, though in different divisions this time. Denver continues its bid for a playoff bye. Prediction: Broncos.

Bills @ Chargers
Buffalo comes off an impressive win last week over the favored Chargers, with J.P. Losman coming off the bench and looking very good. Maybe there's some light on their horizon. But San Diego is a better team than KC with a defense that can better handle the Bill running game. Prediction: Chargers.

Chiefs @ Texans
At least the Houston offensive line won't have to worry about a pass rush as much as they usually do. With fewer sacks, Carr and Andre Johnson have a chance to make some hookups and show more of their potential. But the Texan defense is no better than the Chiefs'. In fact they are slightly worse. And the Chiefs do have a good offense. This is another game where I'm tempted to go with an upset pick. But I won't. Prediction: Chiefs.

Vikings @ Packers
A perfect example of why some want more flexible scheduling for the Monday night games. The Colts and Bengals face off on Sunday afternoon while the marquee matchup of the weekend is a battle for the basement of the league's worst division. Both teams were impressive in wins last week. The Viking defense played more up to its potential than they have all season. But still, it came down to some great special teams play to win, which have to always be considered flukes. The difference here is that the Vikings are showing life on both sides of the ball whereas the Packer defense is still crap. Prediction: Vikings.

Last Week: 10-4
Season: 87-57

NFL 2005 Mid-Season Report

Long before the season started, I gave my analysis of the NFL and my expectations for the 2005 season.  With the season half over, it’s time to revisit that analysis and make any necessary revisions for the 2nd half of the season.

AFC East
As expected, the Patriots have struggled.  In particular the defense has struggled, particularly due to injury to key players.  But even those who are still around—Bruschi, McGinness, etc.—have not made the impact they have in the past.  The Patriot passing game is doing very well, but the running game is struggling.  Corey Dillon is on pace for the worst season of his career.

I expected the Jets to challenge in the division, but they are in the basement thanks to the loss of Pennington.  I have concerns about Chad’s future.  Coming off surgery to his throwing shoulder last year, he had lost some oomph on his passes.  With another injury to the same shoulder, the Jets have to be concerned that their franchise QB may end up with a premature exit from the elite, maybe even from a career.

The only surprise in the division is that Miami has been competitive.  

The Patriots have an easier second half schedule, with lots of division games.  They will take the division with about a 10-6 record.  I’m not sure anyone else will even have a winning record.

AFC North
I pretty much nailed this division.  “So, the North comes down to Pittsburgh and Cincinnati. I have to go with the Steelers in that one, but the Bengals will make it interesting.”  The first sentence is right on the money, the second remains to be seen.  I even nailed Cleveland and Baltimore.  So there’s not really much to report in this division.

I still like the Steelers to take the division.  They have beaten the Bengals once already.  Cincinnati is still young and inexperienced in the ways of winning.  As the season goes on and the pressure mounts, they will not rise to the challenge as well as the Steelers will.  Pittsburgh will take it by a game or so, but the Bengals will break 10 wins and should get a wildcard spot in the playoffs.  Way to go, Marvin Lewis.

AFC West
Back in June I didn’t know what to make of this division, and I still don’t.  Denver is playing great and leads the division by a game.  QB Jake Plummer is playing the best football of his career, not making the mental mistakes that have so undermined his career thus far.

San Diego is playing well too.  They are hampered in the standings by an 0-2 start.  But their biggest loss has been by 4 points.  With so many close games, conservative play calling has hurt them.  Witness the Jet game in Week 9.  Given the opportunity late to score a touchdown and go up by 15, Schottenheimer instead settled for a field goal and an 11 point lead.  This lead to the nail biting as the Jets came down and scored a touchdown and then came close to getting the go-ahead touchdown.  This in the same week when Chiefs coach Dick Vermeil went for it on 4th down, last play of the game, down by 3 to nail the win.  In a tough division like the AFC West, coaching must be a little bolder.

Kansas City has done better than expected.  But I don’t see them being a player in the post-season.  The passing game is not what it has been in recent years, and now with Priest Holmes out, the running game falls squarely on the less experienced Larry Johnson.  They will do well, but it won’t be enough.

Denver is playing the best it has since Elway left.  They will hold on to take the division and the Chargers will get the other wildcard spot.

AFC South
The Colts are rocking with the best record in football.  The offense is more flexible than ever.  Peyton is not dominating as he has in past seasons, but that’s because he’s handing off to James, who is.  Manning just takes what he’s given, and if he has to hand off to win, he does.  They still face the Bengals and the Steelers this year, but no one in this division is going to catch the Colts.

The one bit of egg on my face is Houston.  I said they would finally have a winning season this year.  Barring an outbreak of dominance and a 7-1 second half, it ain’t going to happen.  If they don’t draft an offensive lineman in the first round in next year’s draft (and some more in the next couple of rounds) the whole management and coaching staff should be fired.  It’s unbelievable that after all these years, the problems that plagued them in their inaugural season still do.

NFC East
I took Washington to win the division, but because Patrick Ramsey would prove himself a capable QB.  He still might someday, but Brunell has taken his job back and is playing his tail off.

I totally underestimated the Cowboys.  I thought with so many older players, the offense wouldn’t do much, and that the transition from 4-3 to 3-4 on defense would hamper that unit.  Both sides have been quite effective, particularly the defense.

I also totally underestimated the Giants.  I thought little of the defense, but they have been pretty good.  The offense has proven to be explosive, with the acquisition of Plaxico Burress being one of the great moves of last offseason.

Philly is about where I thought they would be.  Struggling.  Winning some, but struggling.

Who takes the division, one of the best in the league?  As of now, the Giants have a one game edge on Washington and Dallas.  I still don’t particularly like the Giant defense.  They held Washington scoreless, so one has to take New York over Washington.  In the end, I guess I have to go with Dallas to win it.  They’ve beaten New York once, have a pretty good defense, and one of the best offenses.  I still give Washington a shot.  Let’s just say one of those two will win the division, the other will the wildcard.

NFC North
This division stinks.  I actually swallowed my pride and predicted the Vikings to take the division.  How could I have ever believed in Minnesota?  I don’t care who they have on their roster.  I really don’t understand why they lose so much, but they are pretty bad.

Green Bay is doing worse than I would have expected.  On the other hand, I never would have expected so many injuries.  They are playing their 5th string running back, for crying out loud.

The Bears lead the division and are the only team with anything approaching respectability.  With a very good defense, a strong running game, and a QB who doesn’t screw up too often, they should easily win the division, though not with the best record ever.

NFC West
I will pause here for the laughter to subside.  Done?  OK.  Yes, I did actually pick the Cardinals to win the division.  I haven’t seen them play, so I can’t really nail why they lose.  Warner is being called a flop again, but he’s putting up very good yardage.  The Cardinal offense is certainly moving the ball, but not scoring.  I throw my arms up, but you do have to score to win, and Warner isn’t scoring.

What did I write when I said I gave up on Seattle?  “[That] probably means they will go to the Super Bowl.”  Well, they sit atop the division and many observers are now picking them as one of the teams to beat in the NFC.  They have one of the top offenses, particularly deadly on the run, and a respectable defense.  Can anyone in this weak division take them?  Nope.

NFC South
I was a little worried to start the season when the Panthers got off to a sluggish start.  But they are rocking now playing every bit the Super Bowl contender they were picked to be.  With Tampa fading and Atlanta stuck in a one-dimensional offense, Carolina should take the division as expected.  Atlanta will be right on their heels, but a little behind because of inadequate offensive diversity.  The Falcons get the wildcard.

Tampa did better than expected to start the season, but with injury to Griese and Cadillac Williams fading fast, after a furious start, the Buc season is going down.  They probably won’t have the losing season I predicted for them, not with so many wins to start the season.  But they will not be players in the post-season.

Playoff Predictions - AFC
Unlike the preseason predictions, I will now go on record with my playoff expectations and Super Bowl matchup.

1. Indianapolis.  Perfect through the first half of the season, featuring a well-balanced and deadly offense, and an improving defense with a very good line, it’s hard to see these guys at much less than 13 wins.  Tests will come against the Bengals, Steelers, Seahawks, and Chargers, but the rest are all winnable.  It is true they have had a soft schedule so far, but they really are that good.


2. Pittsburgh.  They have a well-balanced offense, particularly when Roethlisberger is healthy and playing.  They throw well and run well.  And need we point out they have a very good defense?


3. Denver.  They are also a very good team, but play in a tough division and have a lot of road games in the second half.  That will drop them a game or so back of the Steelers and give them the 3rd seed.


4. New England.  They are saved by playing in such a weak division.


5. Cincinnati.  They have a fantastic offense.  They have an advantage in record over the rest of the wild-card contenders and don’t have an overly difficult schedule to finish off the season.


6. San Diego.  Their standing is hurt by a slow start, some close losses, and a tough division.

Last year the AFC playoffs came down to two teams:  New England and Pittsburgh.  This year, there really are four teams in the mix:  Indy, Pittsburgh, Denver, and Cincy.  Yes, I said the Bengals.  San Diego is too conservative and New England is too hurt.

In the end, I will go with Indy and Pittsburgh to meet in the AFC title game.  They are just a bit better than the other two teams, though give Denver a real shot.  The Bengals will be overwhelmed by the pressure of a playoff run.  This would be a matchup of the last two AFC title game losers.  Both are lead by coaches who win a lot in the regular season, but have had frustration in conference title games.  Given that the only real weakness in Pittsburgh is their secondary, I have to give the edge to the Colts in that game.  Prediction:  Colts.

Playoff Predictions – NFC
This one is tougher to layout because the best teams are in competitive divisions.  But here goes.

1. Carolina.  Seattle’s schedule is a bit tougher in the second half, so I’ll give the edge to Carolina to get the better schedule.


2. Seattle.  Playing in a weaker division helps, but they still have to face the Giants, Eagles, and Colts, not mention a tough game in St. Louis.  They will win most of those, but will fall a game or so behind the Panthers.


3. Dallas.  They are already behind both Carolina and Seattle by a game and have a tough schedule.


4. Chicago.  Not all that good to begin with so one cannot expect them to gain on the other division winners.


5. Atlanta.


6. Washington.  Playing in such a tough division will cost them a game or so and drop them down to the bottom seed.

It’s easier to see the teams that won’t make it than those that will.  Chicago just doesn’t have the offensive power to stay up with the rest of the playoff cast.  Atlanta may make a splash, but until they develop a passing game, they will not get to the big game.  Besides, there are too many good defenses in the NFC playoff picture for the Falcons to go far.  Dallas, for all its strengths, is young on defense and Bledsoe can still be made to make mistakes against good defenses, which, again, dominate the NFC playoff picture.  The Redskins, as good as they are, are down to 6th seed and cannot be expected to go too far.  I guess I’ll hang onto my skepticism of Mark Brunell a bit.

So then it comes down to Carolina and Seattle.  The Panthers are the more mature and seasoned team.  They’ve been here before.  The one good thing about what happened last year is they are bound more tightly than most teams.  Seattle still has its tendency to fold under pressure.  Prediction:  Carolina.

Super Bowl Prediction
Carolina against Indy.  That should be a good game.  The Panthers are more balanced, not quite as good on offense as the Colts, but better on defense.  They have the experience edge, having been to a Super Bowl before.  I think they have the defense to confound the Colt offense enough to take the game.

NFL 2005 Week 10 Predictions

13-1 last week! Hoowah! Who's your daddy! I guess I've been so busy enjoying such a great week I don't have much time this week to write up my predictions. So I'll just give my picks without much in the way of explanation.

Onto this week..

Cardinals @ Lions
Two disappointing teams. Prediction: Lions.

Texans @ Colts
Another of those unfair matchups. Indy faces the possibility of an emotional letdown after finally getting over the hump and beating New England. Houston is just what they need. Prediction: Colts.

Vikings @ Giants
Minnesota played well last week and Brad Johnson looked good, against the Lions. Now come the Giants, one of the top teams in the NFC, a team that can actually play football. Prediction: Giants.

39ers @ Bears
Chicago may be the least impressive division leader out there, but they are a division leader. Prediction: Bears.

Ravens @ Jaguars
Prediction: Jaguars.

Chiefs @ Bills
KC needs to keep winning to stay up with Denver. Buffalo needs to keep winning to stay up with New England. KC's chances are better. The Bill run defense isn't very good this year. Prediction: Chiefs.

Patriots @ Miami
It's an odd numbered game for New England, their 9th, which means it's a win week. As bad as their secondary is, the Dolphin offense doesn't have what it takes to take advantage. Prediction: Patriots.

Broncos @ Raiders
Denver has quietly established itself as one of the top teams in the AFC. Plummer is playing great as are the running backs. Prediction: Broncos.

Jets @ Panthers
After a sluggish start, the Panthers have delivered on the pre-season hype, emerging as one of the top teams in the NFC. After a sluggish start, the Jets have continued to play sluggishly and now have yet another QB change. Prediction: Panthers.

Packers @ Falcons
I criticize the hype surrounding Vick frequently. What you cannot criticize is his record as a starter, which is great. The Packers need to play perfect football every week to have a chance. Most losses come down to just a couple of plays. Last week, Longwell misses a field goal and the Packers fumble on 1st and goal early in the game, a fumble returned for a touchdown. There's your 10 point differential. No one plays perfectly, so the losing continues. Prediction: Falcons.

Redskins @ Bucs
Tampa is folding very quickly. Prediction: Redskins.

Rams @ Seahawks
Are the Seahawks for real? Can the Rams keep a coach without causing heart problems? Prediction: Seahawks.

Browns @ Steelers
Even without Big Ben, the Steeler running game and defense should be more than enough against Cleveland. Prediction: Steelers.

Cowboys @ Eagles
The Eagle season is pretty much on the line. Dallas killed them once. The Eagles are in last place in a good division. They have to win their division games. Don't they have some sort of off the field distraction this week? Some idiot player mouthing off. That's not good. Prediction: Cowboys.

Last Week: 13-1 (once again, who's your daddy!)
Season: 77-53

Will the Hype Never Stop?

Michael Vick is easily the most over-hyped quarterback in the league. As a QB, his primary task is to throw the ball, something at which he has never excelled. But he is hyped to the stars and back. I've commented before on writers who speak of Vick's "untold greatness." There is a reason it is untold.

The latest comes from AP writer Paul Newberry who writes

Besides, No. 7 already has provided a resounding response to those who criticize his passing numbers and deride him as nothing more than a freak of an athlete masquerading as a quarterback.

This "resounding" response is a game where he threw for 228 yards and 1 touchdown. One game. 228 yards. 1 touchdown. This is resounding? Trent Dilfer, Joey Harrington, and Chris Simms threw for more yards, Brad Johnson and Brooks Bollinger for more touchdowns. In fact, Vick's resounding performance ranks 13th in yards for the week. So, Vick's "resounding response" is to achieve a week where he broke into the top half of the league's QB's in terms of yardage. And that was his best week of the season.

Obviously, any quarterback who can throw for more yards than 50% of the quarterbacks in the league for a week is destined for the Hall of Fame. It's just a question of whether Joey Harrington, who surpasses the legendary Vick in nearly every passing stat, will get in first.

Give me a resounding break!

Media Coverage of Dover against Kansas

Regular readers will know that I have posted several times on the debates throughout the country over teaching intelligent design in science class. The big battle grounds of late have been in Kansas and Dover, Pennsylvania. Both localities have been in the news this week. Elections this week resulted in the Dover school board being essentially outsted, with eight of the nine members replaced. At the same time, the Kansas school board voted 6-4 to approve teaching intelligent design in the science classes.

I have a bone to pick with the media coverage of these two stories. Press coverage of the two debates tends to equate them. They are not the same at all. For example, CNN writes

The Kansas board's action is part of a national debate. In Pennsylvania, a judge is expected to rule soon in a lawsuit against the Dover school board's policy of requiring high school students to learn about intelligent design in biology class.

MSNBC's coverage of the Dover election results makes several references to Dover schools teaching intelligent design. The Dover policy in question does not require students to study intelligent design, nor teachers to teach it. It required teachers to read a brief statement one time that I have commented on in detail before, before continuing on to teach evolution as they should. This is a far cry from redefining science, as the Kansas school board did, so as to actually teach intelligent design. Whether one agrees with the Dover policy or not, surely the difference from Kansas' board is obvious.

Why can the media not understand the difference between the two cases? The media are being very sloppy in their coverage if they cannot convey the essential differences in the two cases. This sloppy coverage is misleading to readers. Bloggers can be just as bad, of course. Badger Blues characterizes the Dover case as "a weird, Scopes-like trial over teaching science in science class" when the case had nothing to do with not teaching evolution.

If we are going to have intelligent discourse in this country, the news media (and bloggers) needs to be a little more diligent in their coverage, so as to provide accurate information to readers.

Update (11/11/2005): Fixed the link to my previous look at the Dover policy.

Hurting Kansas Kids

Andrew Kantor writes in response to the Kansas school board decision on evolution and intelligent design:

Let's set aside the fact that the Kansas school board voted to teach creationism in schools. There's something more important in the board's decision. Per CNN:

In addition, the board rewrote the definition of science, so that it is no longer limited to the search for natural explanations of phenomena.

So now, in Kansas, science isn't science anymore. Astrology, witchcraft, miracles, angry gods, voodoo curses -- these are all legitimate explanations for what we see in the world.

Does no one see that this is going to hurt kids in Kansas schools if they want to go to college? Like it or not, agree with it or not, universities are going to discount these kids' science grades when they see 'KS' on the application.

Good job, school board. Way to go.

One Thought on Colts-Patriots

Because of the history between the two teams, last night's big matchup between the Colts and the Patriots got nearly all the hype of a Super Bowl. But, with the Patriots deeply flawed and struggling, I have to point out the real big games of the season in the AFC are later this month:

• Indy/Cincinnati on Nov. 20. With the Bengals holding the second best record in the AFC, this could have tie-breaker ramifications.
• Indy/Pittsburgh on 11/28. Same thing. Arguably the two best and most balanced teams in the AFC square off in what I expect to be a preview of the AFC title game.
• Pittsburgh/Cincinnati on 12/4. The game to decide the AFC North and with it the bye? Could be.

So three weeks in a row with big AFC matchups.

Insightful Headline

You have to love the insight the mainstream media has into the news and the inter-relationship between events. This football article is headlined "Chiefs' Green won't have his dad in the stands." You see, Trent Green's dad died a couple of weeks ago, so Doug Tucker realized that, being dead, he would not be in the stands for his son's game this week. Thanks for the insight. I wouldn't have made the connection otherwise. I would have been thinking, "Where's the dead guy? Why isn't he in his usual seat?" Let me guess, he's not at his breakfast table anymore either.

Race Loyalty

Interesting comment on Michael Steele's campaign in Maryland:

A blogger's depiction of Lt. Gov. Michael Steele in minstrel makeup has brought to the surface issues of race — and fidelity to one's race — as the Republican seeks to become Maryland's first black senator.

(emphasis mine) So the liberal view of race relations is all about being faithful and loyal to one's own race. Hardly a new concept. Other groups have similar views. The White Supremacist group World Church of the Creator has "a Ceremony of Pledging to Raise the Child Loyal to the White Race" and includes as a basic belief that "racial loyalty is the greatest of all honors and racial treason the worst of all crimes." So, what, the white supremacists are right that loyalty to one's race is important?

NFL 2005 Week 9 Predictions

Ah, sweet victory. If I were poetically inclined, I could probably run off a stanza on the joy of victory, but I am not so I cannot. It's good.

Onto this week...

Falcons @ Dolphins
To a great extent, these two teams are well matched. Both have good defenses and both have offenses focused on the run. The Falcons do the run better than anyone, so they will take this low scoring game. Prediction: Falcons.

Lions @ Vikings
This is a crucial game for the Vikings. Their season is at a crossroads, with all the struggles they've had this year, losing their star quarterback for the year (which maybe forcibly achieves what Mike Tice wouldn't do, namely benching Culpepper after such a bad season) gives them a choice. They can either just fold and mail in the rest of the season, or they can rise to the challenge. Which Minnesota team will we see? The underachievers we've seen all year and who now have the excuse of losing Daunte to just give up what little motivation was left, or a team with a chip on its shoulders that wants to put the doubters in their place? The mental aspect is one area I've commented on before as being a weakness for Minnesota, so I'm expecting the former but we'll see. It's not like Brad Johnson has never played a decent game in his career. He was the star in Minnesota a while back. Detroit comes off a disappointing loss to Chicago that cost them an opportunity to take the lead in the division. They are still a decent team, especially with Garcia at the helm. But Harrington is back, for some bizarre reason. That will give the Vikings who care hope. Prediction: Lions.

Raiders @ Chiefs
The Chief defense has folded again, leaving this game a showcase for offense. KC has the better offense, and is tough to beat at home. Prediction: Chiefs.

Titans @ Browns
Don't really know how to pick this one. I think Cleveland should be better than their record, whereas Tennessee is right about where they should be. If Dilfer can get a few good drives in, that should be enough. Prediction: Browns.

Panthers @ Bucs
Carolina, after a stumbling start, is rolling whereas the Bucs, after a rolling start, are stumbling. Having lost Griese for the season, the Buc offense is not as good as it had been wen they were winning. Cadillac Williams, after a strong start, has popped a tire, averaging under 1.5 yards per carry his last two games (one before, one after injury). Pittman is injured. Williams is not getting much done, and has only scored 2 TDs this year anyway. Simms is new and not exactly a scoring machine. Just how will the Bucs score? You know the Panthers will. Prediction: Panthers.

Bengals @ Ravens
The Bengals roll on over a dispirited Baltimore team. Prediction: Bengals.

Texans @ Jaguars
The race is on for the top pick in the draft. With their win last week, and the Packers loss, the Texans now move into a tie for worst record in the league, so they have a chance to avoid the top pick. The biggest problem in Houston since they rejoined the league is a shaky offensive line that gives up far too many sacks. Jacksonville has a strong defensive front to exploit this mercilessly. Prediction: Jaguars.

Chargers @ Jets
This rematch of last year's wildcard playoff game is hardly the opportunity for revenge. The Jets pulled off the upset last year, but this year's team is in pretty bad shape. San Diego will get revenge, but it will be empty against such a lousy team. Prediction: Chargers.

Bears @ Saints
What can I say? I knew I should have gone with the Bears last week over Detroit. I've been impressed with them, but I got carried away with the expectations for Garcia. My momentary delirium has passed. The Bears are the best team in the NFC North, for whatever that's worth. What impressed me most last week was Kyle Orton. He made some pretty good looking throws. He is shaping up to be something of a surprise. It might be hard to go back to Grossman, their first round pick in 2003, when he's healthy. The Saints just go marching on. There's not really all that much to say about them. Prediction: Bears.

Seahawks @ Cardinals
Warner is back for Arizona, one week after I wrote that Coach Green wouldn't bench McCown for a second year in a row. It's not like Warner didn't run the offense well his first stint as the starter. The passing offense was ranked #9 at one time with him at QB. But, he did not put up touchdowns. McCown, on the other hand, did. This matchup between Mike Holmgren and Dennis Green lacks the impact of their regular matchups when Holmgren led the Packers and Green the Vikings. Seattle is getting it all together right now. Arizona plays tough at home so it is tempting to go for the upset, but I don't think Holmgren will let that happen. Prediction: Seahawks.

Giants @ 39ers
OK, I was very sarcastic about San Fran last week, and they go out and win. I'll take my lumps on that one. But this is San Fran we're talking about. Any win is a fluke. The Giants are looking to be a pretty stinkin' good team. Put up 36 points against a very good Washington defense? 200 yards rushing? Shutout an offense that had been doing the things Washington had been doing. It's only one game--and as the 39er-Buc game shows, you can't read too much into one game--but if the Giants can keep playing that well, they could be one of the top teams in the NFC. Prediction: Giants.

Steelers @ Packers
I can still remember when I became a fan of Brett Favre, and with him the Packers. I was raised a Steeler fan and lived the first part of the 90s in Boston. So I knew about the AFC, but not too much about the NFC. In 1994 or 1995, the Packers played the Steelers, in Pittsburgh as I recall. This was early in Brett's career. He was just starting to make a name for himself, but he already had a reputation. This was a brief glory era in Pittsburgh, with a defense littered with Hall of Fame material. In particular, their outside linebackers, Kevin Greene and Greg Lloyd, were the best tandem in the league. (Greene should be a first ballot Hall of Famer, having led the league many times in sacks and finishing just behind Reggie White in career sacks. Lloyd was on his way, but injuries derailed his career, so he ends up in the Terrell Davis category of phenomenal players who just didn't play long enough to make it to the Hall.) Anyway, on one play Favre drops back and Lloyd comes on the rush. Favre gets the pass away, but Lloyd gets a hand on him and pushes him down. He got fined for the hit, but what I remember is Favre's reaction: appreciation of a good hit by an opposing defensive player. Nowadays, everyone is so quick to call for flags. Watch receivers who miss a pass. Their first reaction is to call for an interference flag. Get a hand on the QB? He calls for a roughing the passer flag. Not Favre. He's been one of the few who can really appreciate good defense, even if it's at his expense. Witness his friendship with Warren Sapp over the years when they were in the same division. Anyway, I still remember that story and this week's game is a good time to recount it. Times have changed. The Steelers are yet again a top team in the AFC, but the Packers have the worst record in the league and a tough schedule ahead. I do have to say this. Some are saying Mike Sherman is on the hot seat. The man gets his team, a team in the gutter of the league, out there playing hard every week. Contrast this with the Saints or, maybe now, the Vikings, teams whose players have given up and are just going through the motions. Some of the best coaching comes when a team is losing. I think Sherman is doing a fine job. He's got his team out there competing every week. So many of those losses could have been wins. What about this week? Expect more of the same. The Packers will play tough, and lose. The Steelers are just too good in all facets of the game. They could be better on defense, but they are pretty good. Charlie Batch gets the start at QB, and the Steelers are notably lacking in talent in the backup QB position. But they will compensate with a heavy dose of Willie Parker and Jerome Bettis (does anyone remember Staley?). Prediction: Steelers.

Eagles @ Redskins
The Eagles are just reeling. Two blowout losses in the last three games, and the lone victory coming off a fluke play that's one in a thousand. The offense is the antithesis of balance: top of the league in passing, last in the league in rushing. That said, they are still only a game out of first place in their division. So are the Redskins, and they are a much better team. Excepting the bizarrely bad performance last week, this is a pretty good team. Yes, I did notice that the week I jump back on their bandwagon they get their butts kicked. What can I say? My timing is impeccable. If the Eagles were at full strength, I would have to go with Washington. They are the better team, they are playing at home, and they have the defense to deal with the Eagle passing game. With Owens and McNabb both hurting, it's an even easier pick. Prediction: Redskins.

Colts @ Patriots
Speaking of teams getting revenge for playoff defeats last year, the Colts make another attempt to get that big ol' monkey named Bellichick off their backs. The last two years, Indy has lit up the league and beaten all in their path, except New England. Last year, the Colts began their season failing to avenge their loss in the 2003 AFC title game, and ended the season by falling to New England yet again in the divisional playoffs. There is, of course, a rather significant difference between this game and the previous several: the Patriot secondary is a shadow of its former self. On the other hand, the Colts have become much more of a rushing team, with Peyton Manning not putting up numbers in anywhere near the abundance he has in the past. But against New England, expect the Colts to light it up with an unrelenting aerial attack to exploit the weakness of the Patriot secondary. New England has a pretty good offense of its own, facing a better Colt defense. Actually, I'm not so impressed with the Colt defense of late. Not that they are not good, it's just that the impression left by their overwhelming dominance early in the season has faded. They are looking more like a very good defense, rather than one for the ages. In the end, the Colt defense is better than New England's, and the Colt offense is better than New England's. One cannot discount the psychological element, specifically all those Indy memories of seasons going up in smoke in Foxboro, but I think the Colts are professional enough to not let those get to them. Prediction: Colts.

Last Week: 10-4
Season: 64-52

Blacks are Just Different, I guess

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel writes

In losing a woman, the court with Alito would feature seven white men, one white woman and a black man, who deserves an asterisk because he arguably does not represent the views of mainstream black America.

So, is it the Journal Sentinel's position that black men cannot read the law, or that they lack the ability to understand the law? Why else would there be a black view of the Constitution? They are just different than us, or something, and their brains just reason differently? This is the supposedly enlightened view of the Sentinel? Hmmm.

All Part of a Color Blind Society

It's good to see that, even in post-Katrina New Orleans, our drive for a color blind utopia continues.

Case in point, this evening on ABC news, they showed Mayor Nagin (who by the way happens to be black) talking about all the “Mexican’s taking jobs” in New Orleans. A construction company owner was interviewed, he also happened to be black, stating on national television that he will only hire black workers, he “gives preference in hiring to blacks”.

Reminds me of something I heard back in college. Spike Lee had a policy that he would only hire blacks to design his movies' publicity posters, as I recall. Now, if Spielberg's policy was to only hire whites to make his posters, the civil rights world would be in a total uproar. A black director applies the same race-based selection, and is met with silence. Liberalism gone amok, as I've said before.

Leftist Racism

I guess the only good black is a liberal black. Michelle Malkin writes on leftist racism, and its apparently acceptability. Tolerance here, unless you disagree with us of course.

Between Two Worlds: Abortion in America

Justin Taylor reports on a very interesting study of the facts of abortion, rather than the rhetoric.

More on Fighting Alito

Blue Mass. Group talks with Kate Pringle, a liberal lawyer who once clerked for Alito. Her view?

Pringle's bottom line is a pragmatic one. Of course, Alito would not have been on John Kerry's or any other Democrat's short list for the Supreme Court. But, as we all know, John Kerry didn't win in 2004, nor did the Democrats capture a majority in the Senate. Given that reality, Pringle said, "I'd rather have someone who has real intellectual ability, who has experience, who has a history of making these kinds of difficult decisions, and who has demonstrated respect for the Court as an institution, than a stealth candidate." And given the other candidates on the "conservative short list," Pringle is optimistic about Alito. She says that he will treat every case fairly, and that "we'll be proud to have him on the Court."

(emphasis mine) Democrats planning strategy in response to Alito's nomination would be wise to take Ms. Pringle's counsel.

Fighting Alito

Michael Barone argues the Democrats should and will not fight too hard against Alito. I think they would be stupid to fight. From what I've read, Alito seems a classic, conventional conservative judge. This means he applies and interprets the law rather than creating it. Take his rulings on abortion cases. Many will point to Casey and his dissent there, yet on several other cases he voted contrary to how one would expect a pro-lifer to vote. For example, he voted to strike down bans on partial birth abortion. Why? Because the Supreme Court's rulings were clear on the subject, and the ban in question did not comply with the rules. So, regardless of what his personal feelings might be, he applied the law.

This is in contrast to even more conservative judges the president could have chosen, who would be much more activist, disregarding the law and making it the way they feel it should be.

If they choose to fight Alito, they risk resorting to the filibuster which will trigger the nuclear option, which ultimately is a bad move for both parties. The president could get the opportunity before he leaves office to appoint a third justice, and Democrats would not be happy if they were impotent to fight it. If, by some miracle, they chose to fight and avoided the nuclear option and somehow actually won, Bush would likely come back with an even more conservative judge, like Jance Rogers Brown, who would be more activist than Alito is.

In the end, Alito is really the best they can hope for. A well-qualified judge who is not a judicial activist, but will respect and apply the law. In this way, he is really much more like Roberts.