A Thoughtful Conservative on Gay Marriage

Dean Mundy, the Thoughtful Conservative, has written an interesting piece on the movement to amend the Wisconsin constitution to define marriage as one man and one woman. I have long struggled with my own views on the subject. Like Mundy, I am a Christian. Where do values end and compassion begin? Marriage brings into question many issues such as custody in case of incapacitation or visitation in the hospital. Do supporters of the amendment really want to say that the homosexual partner of a seriously ill person can be denied visitation because the parents have never accepted the relationship?

NSA Web Site Puts 'Cookies' on Computers

AP alerts us to the latest big news: web sites that put cookies on your computer! Imagine that.

What I actually found vaguely amusing about this article was the inclusion of the paragraphs

The Bush administration has come under fire recently over reports it authorized NSA to secretly spy on e-mail and phone calls without court orders.

Since The New York Times disclosed the domestic spying program earlier this month, President Bush has stressed that his executive order allowing the eavesdropping was limited to people with known links to al-Qaida.

But on its Web site Friday, the Times reported that the NSA, with help from American telecommunications companies, obtained broader access to streams of domestic and international communications.

followed immediately by the statement, "The NSA's cookie use is unrelated." If cookie use, the story being reported, is unrelated to the other NSA eavesdropping stories, why mention them in the middle of the story?

Of course, the article goes on to quote a security consultant who "questions whether persistent cookies would even be of much use to the NSA."

So, in summary, the news of the day is that the NSA web site was putting persistent cookies of little use to the NSA on visitors' computers and that this practice is unrelated to any eavesdropping operations the NSA may have participated in. All I can say is, thank God for the media, because how else would we get such important information?

NFL 2005 Week 17 Predictions

Well, another season comes to an end. I have the same mixed feelings I had at this time last year. Writing predictions for 16 games every week can be demanding, especially when there are many other things demanding of time. But it is still fun. I like what I wrote last year:

And so we come to the last week of the season, always a bittersweet time. We football fans still have an exciting month of playoff games, but then comes the great emptiness that is the offseason, a vast, barren wasteland stretching until next August.

Onto this week...

Broncos @ Chargers
This game looked to have major playoff implications, until the Chargers laid an egg in Kansas City and took themselves out of the hunt, and the Bengals laid an egg and handed the second seed to Denver. Now, it's a meaningless game. That means Denver rests its starters and San Diego goes out in style with its first string, and a win. Prediction: Chargers.

Giants @ Raiders
The Giants need a win to lock up a division title, and a visit to the lowly Raiders is a perfect matchup, and against the last quarterback to lead them to a division title to boot. The Raiders have been another disappointing team. Early in the season, they were much like the Packers: they lost way too many close games they had the chance to win. But as the season has worn on, they have faded and now lose quite comfortably. Prediction: Giants.

Cardinals @ Colts
We know the Colts will not play their starters too much in this game, though they maybe could use some time since they haven't looked quite right the last couple of weeks. But even Indy's second string is better than Arizona's first. Prediction: Colts.

Ravens @ Browns
The Browns have not won a single game this season in the AFC North. The team formerly from Cleveland is having delusions of being the team formerly from Baltimore. Well, they will wake from that dream this week, but are still better than Cleveland. Prediction: Ravens.

Bills @ Jets
I have to pick this one? Ugh. Two lousy teams. As bad as Buffalo is, their offense is better than New York's makeshift one. Prediction: Bills.

Panthers @ Falcons
I wash my hands of both teams. Carolina was my pick to win the NFC. They have, at times, looked like one of the top teams in the conference. They have taken the lead in the division multiple times, and have promptly thrown it away every time. Having squandered so many opportunities, they aren't even assured of a playoff spot right now. Amazingly, Atlanta still has not even assured itself a winning season, breaking their streak of never having back-to-back winning years. So both teams really need a win, and one team will come away disappointed. The flip side to Carolina's futility when in command is that they play very well after they've blown it. It looks like Atlanta's streak will continue. Prediction: Panthers.

Bengals @ Chiefs
The only things unclear for the Bengals is whether they will be the third or fourth seed in the playoffs. Kansas City is still alive for a wildcard spot. If both teams play their starters, this should be quite the offensive show. With Larry Johnson, the Chiefs can run all day, keep the Bengal offense on the sideline, and control the game. Cincy still needs some defensive play makers up front to really be a threat in the AFC. Prediction: Chiefs.

Lions @ Steelers
With a win, Pittsburgh secures the sixth seed in the playoffs, a long fall from last year's top seed, but still a playoff spot. The Lions just want the nightmare to be over, so they can start the preparations for next year's nightmare. Prediction: Steelers.

Dolphins @ Patriots
New England has a shot at moving up to the third seed in the playoffs, with a win and Bengal loss. Moving up a notch would pit them against Pittsburgh in the first round, but would avoid a showdown with the Colts in the second. Be that as it may, I expect Belichick to rest his starters for much of the game. With all the injuries they've had this year, and some key players (Bruschi, McGinnest) playing hurt, they need the rest and don't have the bye they've worked with the last two seasons. That opens the door for the Dolphins to steal a cheap win and finish 9-7. Prediction: Dolphins.

Saints @ Bucs
With a win, Tampa secures the NFC South title. They have certainly had quite a ride this year, a season which started with such low expectations. And with so many younger players at key positions, the future is quite bright for the Bucs, even though they share a division with the Panthers and the Falcons, who also have bright futures. The Saints are the anomaly in the division, and like the Lions they just want the nightmare to end so they can start getting ready for next year's nightmare. Prediction: Bucs.

Seahawks @ Packers
Could this be Brett Favre's last game? If so, who better to finish his career off against than Mike Holmgren, the coach who got his career going in the first place. And where better to finish but at a frosty Lambeau? Favre hasn't thrown a TD pass in over a month, though he has thrown 9 interceptions. He needs five TDs in this game to get 400 for his career. Against Seattle's backups, he will get some but not all five. Though the starters will rest most of the game, Shaun Alexander will get his chance to score a touchdown and set the record for most in a season. But after that, it's all junior varsity and the Packers should be good enough to beat them. Prediction: Packers.

Texans @ 49ers
Two more teams desperate for the nightmare to end. But San Francisco has some things to build on and I expect next year will see the beginning of a turnaround for the once proud franchise. Houston is even worse on the road than at home. Prediction: 49ers.

Titans @ Jaguars
The Jags may use this game as a tune-up for Leftwich to get back into the flow after being out with injury for a while. In a matchup of first string teams, Jacksonville is clearly the superior team. Prediction: Jaguars.

Bears @ Vikings
Another game that loomed large for a while, but now is meaningless. The Bears will be a dangerous team in the playoffs, particularly if Rex Grossman can generate more downfield passing and scoring. For that reason, I expect Chicago to play its varsity offense more than one might expect in such an empty game. Grossman needs as much work with the offense as he can get going into the playoffs. The defense should rest, though. Even with all the personnel moves last offseason and the resultant pre-season hype, the Vikings need a win to improve on last year's 8-8 record. Still, they managed to turn around a disastrous start to make a playoff run late. The hole was just too deep. If Culpepper can get his mojo back next year, these two teams will be at each other's throats. With the powerful Bear defense on ice for the week, the Vikings should salvage some pride. Prediction: Vikings.

Redskins @ Eagles
Washington has the potential to be a dangerous team in the playoffs, should they make it. They have it all: ferocious defense, power running, deep passing. Their midseason slump nearly doomed the season, but they appear to have just managed to pull it out. With a win, they secure a playoff spot. With a win and a Giant loss to Oakland, the Redskins would win the division, but that's not likely. Despite all their ability, they will be a sixth seed which means almost no chance of moving deep in the playoffs. But first things first. Prediction: Redskins.

Rams @ Cowboys
Dallas has tantalized football fans this year, looking very good at times. But it was all for naught as they appear destined for third place in the division, doomed by inconsistent play. Still they are better than the Rams. Prediction: Cowboys.

Last Week: 12-4
Season: 153-87

NFL 2005 Week 16 Predictions

Two things came out of last weekend's games.

1. The Colts are human. No real surprise there. The play calling was questionable at key moments of the game, and against a good team like San Diego, those mistakes will kill. Indy is still the best team in the AFC, and now, with the pressure of perfection off, they can focus on winning the Super Bowl without distraction.
2. The Patriots were totally and absolutely dominant, shutting out a top NFC team. Are the Patriots back? Is the team that struggled so much earlier in the season back to being the most dangerous team around, the team that's won three of the last four Super Bowls? I wouldn't go too crazy yet. In some facets of the game, the Patriots now are as good or better than they were in the glory days of the last four years. The offense is the best they've had since they started winning Lombardi trophies, and the defensive front is as good as ever. Against a team like Tampa, that spells domination. Against any run-oriented team that can't take it deep in the passing game, New England will kick butt. With Seymour and Bruschi back, that front is aggressive, puts lots of pressure on the QB, and swarms to the ball carrier. But the secondary is still a far cry from what it was just last year. A team that can attack that secondary will make New England look far less menacing. Unfortunately for the Patriots, there are three teams in the AFC playoffs that can hit them hard: Indy, Denver, and Cincinnati. The Bengals are vulnerable because, while Palmer can attack their secondary, the Cincy defense isn't up to the challenge of the Patriot offense, so New England can take that one, with some difficulty. The Colts and the Broncos? I don't think so. On the other hand, the Chargers showed that maybe the Colt offensive line isn't as good as some thought, and the pressure Bruschi and company can bring might compensate for weakness in the secondary. I wrote earlier in the year that the Patriots would win one playoff game, but go down in the divisionals. I still see that. I'll give them maybe a 30% chance of making the Super Bowl, but that's about it.

If I hear one more thing about Reggie Bush, I'm going to scream. Vinnie Iyer, in predicting the 49er game this week, first writes of San Fran's "exciting talent such as rookie running back Frank Gore" and then immediately brings up the "Reggie Bush Bowl with Houston next week." If the 49ers already have an "exciting" rookie running back, why in Holiday's name would they take Reggie Bush in the draft? I would be somewhat surprised (not totally, because I've realized most NFL GM's, at least those not named Pioli, aren't all that much smarter than the rest of us) if Bush went as high as some are predicting. At a time when established veterans like Edgerrin James, i.e. guys where you know what you're getting, cannot get even a nibble in free agency, why would team pour tens of millions into a player at the same position where you don't know what you are getting. And, please, there are no sure things.

Breaking news: Tony Dungy's 18 year old son was just found dead.

Onto this week....

Falcons @ Bucs
Both teams are fighting for playoff spots. The Bucs are one of those teams against whom the Falcons do not matchup well. That fast, aggressive defense will slow down the Falcon running game while Cadillac Williams will have another good day. Prediction: Bucs.

Bills @ Bengals
The Cincy juggernaut rolls on. Prediction: Bengals.

Cowboys @ Panthers
Carolina is back on top in the division, again. Can they actually play well from that position this time? It's been their division to lose most of the season, and they play like they are trying to lose it, at least when they are on top. Dallas has run hot and cold this year, and right now they are cold. The offensive line isn't blocking well for Bledsoe, and that's bad. He's always been a QB who needs protection and strong running, neither of which he has been getting of late. The strong Panther defensive front should dominate the trenches and put pressure on Bledsoe all day, resulting in turnovers and Panther points. Prediction: Panthers.

Lions @ Saints
New Orleans has been the NFC North savior all season. Need a win? Wait for the Saints to come marchin' in. Both the Packers and the Vikings found their first wins of the season at the expense of New Orleans. Of course, the Lions have played the role of savior to many teams, too. Let's face it, both teams stink. Games like this remind me of my early years in New England where the rest of the country would watch the Bills-Chiefs or Bills-Steelers or some other matchup to settle the top seed in the AFC, but we Bostonians got Patriots-Jets in the battle for top pick in the draft. Very frustrating. (And as soon as I left New England, which was at the beginning of the 1996 season, they suddenly get good and start going to Super Bowls.) Anyway, that's a lot of writing about a terrible game. Who is the better team? I don't know. Flip a coin. I like the Lion quarterbacks over Todd Bouman. Prediction: Lions.

Jaguars @ Texans
Jacksonville looks to me to be the least interesting playoff team of them all. Even the Bears are more exciting. I certainly don't see them going far in the playoffs, with Leftwich still on the sidelines, and a likely first round pairing with New England. But that's getting ahead of things. They are a playoff team, and Houston is not. Prediction: Jaguars.

Giants @ Redskins
Washington is back, again. After nearly fumbling away the season, the 'Skins have put together a three game winning streak, culminating with last week's shellacking of the Cowboys, which have given them control of the sixth seed in the playoffs. Can they extend the winning to four straight? They started the season 3-0, followed by the 2-6 run that nearly ended their season. They are winning at the hands of a stifling defense, strong running from Clinton Portis, and aggressive passing from Brunell. The Giants are playing quite well, too, and are coming off their own three game winning streak. A win this week gives them the division. They win at the hands of strong defense, and strong running from Tiki Barber. Eli Manning has had a good season, but is showing the consistency expected of a second year player. That inconsistency should translate to turnovers for the Redskin defense, and that should be the difference. Prediction: Redskins.

Steelers @ Browns
This is rarely an easy matchup, even though Pittsburgh is almost always the better team. The rivalry is on par with Washington-Dallas and Green Bay-Minnesota, but it has been so long since the Browns were a consistently good team that it doesn't get the attention the other rivalries do, and has been dwarfed by the Pittsburgh-Baltimore rivalry, which is, of course, derived from Pittsburgh-Cleveland. Romeo Crennel has done a good job in Cleveland, and the future looks bright with rookie Charlie Frye at quarterback and Reuben Droughns at running back. But, for now, the Steelers are the better team on all sides, and the weather will not bother them. Prediction: Steelers.

Chargers @ Chiefs
Both teams are very good and playing for their playoff lives. At least one of these two teams will finish with a good record and not make the playoffs. The Chiefs are very good at home, and I almost always like the cold weather team against a warm weather team, when playing in the cold. The game should be a shootout, since the Chief defense isn't all that good, again. But give the edge to the Chiefs, on the legs of Larry Johnson and the temperature. Prediction: Chiefs.

49ers @ Rams
Neither team has acquitted itself well this year. Nolan has done a good job in San Fran in at least providing some respectability to the team, and raising hopes for the future. The Rams, despite their myriad problems, can still play some offense. And they play well at home. Prediction: Rams.

Titans @ Dolphins
I have been impressed by Miami this year. Nick Saban has gotten a lot more out of this team than I would have thought. Though, as I wrote last week, it should be kept in mind that this team was 10-6 just two seasons ago. While the Titans can be counted on to bring a load every week, they cannot be expected to win very often. Prediction: Dolphins.

Eagles @ Cardinals
While I am disappointed at how the Cardinal season has turned out (recall that I picked them to win the division), I have been validated in one area. They have the top passing game in the NFL, with two receivers over 1000 yards. But Warner is gone for the season. My GM advice would be to sign Kurt to a reasonable contract (he's old and does not command the money he used to, so four years or so at a decent salary buys Arizona a solid QB to running a strong passing game, a good deal) and use the draft and free agency to pick up offensive lineman and defensive playmakers. I do think the Cardinals have made more progress than some people think. The Eagles aren't all that good anymore, especially with so many injuries. Given that Josh McCown can throw the ball well, and that the Cardinals play well at home, I will go for the upset pick here and take Arizona. Prediction: Cardinals.

Colts @ Seahawks
If both teams could be counted on to play their starters the whole game, this could well be a preview of the Super Bowl. Both teams are in control of the top seeds in their respective conferences, with the Colts having already locked it up and the Seahawks just needing a win or a couple losses by their competitors for the position. So the game is meaningless for Indy but not for Seattle. For part of the game, both teams will play their starters because Dungy won't want to let any rust build up, and because they need to re-establish themselves after last week's debacle. I still believe no one stops the Colts, except the Colts. They showed that last week when they beat themselves. They will show it again this week when they start out on top but lose the game late as the Seahawk varsity squad beats up the Colt second stringers. Recall that the 1998 Broncos, the last team to start 13-0, lost their next two as well, and then won the Super Bowl in easy fashion. Prediction: Seahawks.

Raiders @ Broncos
Denver controls the second seed in the AFC playoffs because they own the tie breaker edge over the Bengals. Given that and the easy schedule Cincy has to close out the season, the Broncos need to keep winning. The Raiders shouldn't be too much of a challenge, given their disappointing season. They started out the best losing team around, but have fallen to just being another losing team. Prediction: Broncos.

Bears @ Packers
A Bear win locks up the NFC North for Chicago. Whatever life the Packers may have had is probably gone now, after the embarrassment of last week. Even without that, the Bears are clearly the best team in the division. I will reserve judgment on Grossman, but with that defense and running game, they should make mincemeat of the Packers. Prediction: Bears.

Vikings @ Ravens
Baltimore, offensive machine. What business do they have putting up 48 points on anyone? I bet Minnesota saw this as an easy game, before last week. The Vikings need to win out the season to have a shot at the playoffs. They need help both to get a wildcard and to get the division. If Baltimore can play even half the game they played last week, that will be very hard. Kyle Boller, written off by most observers, had a career day against Green Bay, and may have earned himself another year in Baltimore. Another solid outing against the Vikings should seal the deal. I'm not one to read too much into a single game. Excepting the outburst against the Packers, the Ravens have not done much this year. The offense is barely existent and the defense is a shell of its former self. The Vikings should be able to handle Baltimore on both sides. Prediction: Vikings.

Patriots @ Jets
This should be an easy game to pick. The fly in the ointment is resting starters. The Patriots have nothing to play for here. (I guess it is not totally outside the realm of possibility that they could move up to the third slot in the playoffs, if either the Bengals or the Broncos totally collapse and lose out the season. But, I think tiebreakers will prevent even that.) I've read that Belichick isn't going to rest, so the Jets don't have much of a chance. Prediction: Patriots.

Last Week: 11-5
Season: 141-83

TCS Daily: Throwing the Book At Video Games

Glenn Reynolds, the InstaPundit, argues that laws to regulate videogames is a bad idea politically and constitutionally. As a gamer myself, I've never really understood this whole argument, that somehow playing violent video games makes one more violent. Violence and entertainment have been interwoven for as long as there has been entertainment. Some of the earliest story telling on record is from Homer, describing the Trojan War and then Odysseus' dangerous journey home from that war. Many of these extremely violent stories are required reading in American high schools.

Do we really need a government agency whose job it is to assign ratings to video games? While that might be a great job for gamers like myself, aren't there one or two more important things our government should be paying attention to? Sorry, we can't address the looming crisis of healthcare because we have to rate the latest Doom game.

And what are the legal criteria for deciding a game is AO (adults only) or M (mature)? Look at the movie ratings system, which of course is voluntary, not legally mandated and regulated. There are movies that get R ratings that are fine, in my opinion, for middle teens, but PG-13's that should be only for adults. Imagine a movie in which all the women walk around the entire time in thongs and bikini tops, full of sexually suggestive (but not crude) dialog. Technically, there's no nudity and nothing sexually explicit, so PG-13 is fine, even though it could well be one of the most sexual films of the year. Or language? The movie Be Cool, which I totally disliked, nicely mocks the rules which say the F-word can only be said once in a PG-13 movie. So, one F-word is fine for middle teens, but two F-words needs parental supervision. It's ludicrous. The only saving grace is that it is a voluntary system by the movie industry, and is only intended as a guide. We don't actually have government employees counting the number of F-words in a film.

Any time there are legal definitions, court cases and law suits follow in short order. So, imagine that thong movie got a PG-13 because it was decided showing cheek in such a way does not constitute nudity. Well, someone will immediately sue for emotional and psychological distress over seeing a pair of cheeks, so the courts will then have to decide the legal status--nudity or not nudity--of butt cheeks bared by a thong.

These points would all come up in any regulation of video games. What exactly constitutes violence? In the classic arcade game Pac-Man, the title character eats ghosts. Is that child friendly? The Pokemon games are built on duels, so are they child-friendly? Are all first person shooter games for adults only? Does the amount of blood make a difference, so that killing an enemy without any blood is OK for teens but accompanying that killing with some blood is just for a mature audience? Sex, of course, has to factor in, too. So the same bared butt cheek question comes up for video games, leading to the even more absurd possibility that the movie industry's take on butt cheeks and the government's view for games is different, i.e. showing real cheeks on film is OK for teens, so long as they are bared by a thong and not something else, but showing simulated cheeks in a game is for mature audiences.

Regulation of games means having an agency of the federal government contemplating these questions, and the federal courts seeing their resources tied up in evaluating that agency's decisions. Is this something we really want to allocate federal resources for? Pretty stupid, if you ask me.

Lessons of History

A few years ago, I read a biography of Julius Caesar. While nominally about Caesar, it was really a look at the fall of the Roman Republic and the rise of the emperors. (The author, whose name eludes me at the moment, is a German history professor whose specialty was the Roman Republic.) One of the big flaws in the Republic, according to the author, was that the Romans granted powers to the different offices within the government, but failed to address limits and scope of those powers. For example (and this may not be historically correct as it is from memory, but it illustrates the point), tribunes of the people were given the authority to veto legislation passed by the Senate. No limits on this power were defined. It was assumed in the aristocratic ranks that whoever would hold this office would be honorable enough to understand the implied limits and respect the rules. So abuse of power was to be prevented by appeals to personal honor.

Of course, eventually people did abuse the powers of their office. This created paralysis in the Republic and individuals began to hold power over the Senate. Thus was the precedent of elevating an individual over the elected officials established, and this led to men like Sulla, Pompeii, and eventually the Caesars.

Similar stories are told throughout history. The German Weimar Republic gave way to the Third Reich by granting extraordinary authority to the Chancellor without addressing limits or scope, thus paving the way for dictatorship. While obviously fiction, the first three episodes of the Star Wars saga demonstrate this point as well. And Orwell's 1984 was the story of how perpetual war was used to transform a democracy into the prototypical Big Brother.

There is a lesson to be learned from this history. Part of the genius of the US constitution is that it defined not only the powers and authorities of the three branches of government, but also the limits on those powers. But we must always be on guard that we do not hastily grant, either in fact or by convention, authority to one branch of government without considering the limits on those authorities.

The current administration has pushed the Patriot Act, which is nominally meant to address terrorism, but whose provisions are by no means limited to it. As shown by the Padilla case, the president has claimed the authority to detain indefinitely, without justification or right of appeal, American citizens, so long as he simply claims they are suspected of terrorism. But without having to justify the detention, there is nothing to limit that power. Now we learn that the government has claimed the authority to spy on American citizens' conversations, again without the obligation to justify this action in order to get a warrant. And need we mention the administration's claim to the right to torture captives?

I am not going to adopt the hysterical view that we now live in some fascist state. To espouse such a view is to evince total ignorance of what a fascist state actually looks like. But, as John Henke writes, the path of freedom to fascism is walked one step at a time, steps driven by fear resulting in hastily concocted changes in the name of security. While this is certainly not fascism, the nation has taken a couple of steps down that path.

Many will defend the administration's actions. Reminiscent of the Roman artistocrats, Attorney General Ashcroft effectively used the "trust us" argument, that the government would not abuse its new powers, to support the original Patriot Act. But we need only imagine what could have happened if precedents like these had been around when Nixon was president. Henke puts it,

Naturally, many people will jump to defend the administration, pointing out that, you know, terrorists and evildoers and national security and what're you, some kind of traitor who wants another 9/11? They'll continue making that argument until, say, Hillary Clinton ascends to the White House and it occurs to them that, hey, maybe giving the Executive Branch near-unlimited power to reinterpret and/or flaunt the laws might not be such a great idea after all.

One need only consider one's worst fear on who would become president to realize that this path is folly.

In the nation's fear after 9/11, we have given the government far reaching powers, such as the Patriot Act, and we have given tacit approval to presidential power plays like the Padilla case. More far reaching, we have given approval and support for a so-called war on terror, which has neither a well defined enemy (who exactly are we fighting?), nor well defined success criteria (how exactly do we know when the war is over and we have won?). This is the recipe for war without end.

It is time we learned the lessons of history and changed the direction we are headed as a nation.

NFL 2005 Week 15 Predictions

Getting into the home stretch now. The last few weeks of a season are nearly as hard to pick as the first few. Then you don't know what each team is going to be like, so picking is little more than guessing based on expectations. At the end, most of your better teams are resting their A-list players and going with the backups, so you can't really pick well then either. The only team with a playoff seed locked up is the Colts, and I think they will play their starters this week.

Onto this week...

Bucs @ Patriots
The two teams who have won the last four Super Bowls face off. Both teams lead their divisions this year. As we all know, the Patriots have not been their dominant selves this season, particularly with a secondary decimated by injuries. But against a more run-oriented offense like Tampa, the Patriot defense should be pretty good, forcing the Bucs to rely on the passing of young Chris Simms. I still have to think Belichick and the Patriots can confuse quarterbacks, at least younger ones. The Buc defense is having a fantastic season too, of course. But Brady will find a way to move the ball, as he always does. Prediction: Patriots.

Chiefs @ Giants
This one is a bit tough to pick. If it had been earlier in the season, I would have written that both teams have similar, high powered offenses, but the Giants can also play defense whereas the Chiefs really don't. It would have been easy to pick the Giants. But the Giant offense has struggled a bit lately, particularly in the passing game. Still, the Giants are just two missed field goals away from an eight game winning streak and have a good run defense, which should help neutralize the Chief offensive attack. Prediction: Giants.

Broncos @ Bills
The Bills cannot stop the run, and the Bronco running game cannot be stopped. Run Forrest, Run. Prediction: Broncos.

Cardinals @ Texans
The Cardinals have something going on offense. The Texans have nothing anywhere. Prediction: Cardinals.

Steelers @ Vikings
The Vikings are just a game out of the NFC North lead, after starting 1-3. (Taking a page from the hated Packers, eh? As George Harrison said on the Simpsons, it's been done.) The Steelers are basically out of the AFC North division race but still very much alive for a wildcard. The two keys to Minnesota's turnaround are, (a) a defense that's playing closer to its potential than they did at the beginning of the season, and (b) an offense that has gone very conservative with the loss of Culpepper, a move which masks the weakness of the Viking offensive line. Ultimately, that was the problem on the offense when Daunte was in: poor offensive line play that didn't allow the Vikings to set up their usual vertical passing attack. It looks to me like the matchups favor Pittsburgh. The Viking defensive strength is the secondary, but the Steeler offensive strength is running the ball. The Steeler defensive strength is the defensive front, and the Viking offensive weakness is the offensive line. The Steeler defensive weakness is the secondary, but the Vikings favor a short passing game rather than the deep ball. This is a statement game for the Vikings. In their winning streak, they have not played high caliber opposition. The only team of note they have beaten is New York, and that was a fluke game won due to a couple of breakdowns in the Giant special team coverages; the Giant defense stifled the Viking offense. The Steeler defense is better. If the Vikings are going to take down Chicago, they have to be able to beat good defenses like Pittsburgh. I don't see it happening. Prediction: Steelers.

Seahawks @ Titans
Seattle is cruising to the top seed in the NFC playoffs, and they would have quite a home field advantage. A win here and I believe they have it locked. The Titans won't provide too much resistance. Prediction: Seahawks.

Panthers @ Saints
I'm getting very frustrated with Carolina. Every time they have the chance to finally put the division away and assert themselves as a top NFC team, they blow it. On the other hand, having blown it, they usually come back strong. And these are the Saints we're talking about them facing. Prediction: Panthers.

Jets @ Dolphins
Give Nick Saban credit for getting the Dolphins further along than people expected. Technically they are still alive in the playoff hunt as they could win the division. To be fair, though, remember that just two years ago, Miami was 10-6. Wannstedt had one bad season last year, so bad that people forgot the winning seasons that preceded it. So Saban's achievement is not exactly on par with what Marvin Lewis has done. The Jets are just done. Prediction: Dolphins.

Chargers @ Colts
This could be the last intense game the Colts face until the divisional round of the playoffs. The Chargers need to win out the season to keep their playoff hopes alive, so they will definitely bring their A game. Unfortunately for them, the playoffs are so far in the future that Dungy will treat this like any other regular season game, and the Colts will bring their A game too, and their best is far better than everyone else's. Prediction: Colts.

49ers @ Jaguars
Mike Nolan has also done a good job, but unlike Saban, he did it with a disaster of a roster. To acknowledge that he has had his team playing hard and competing in every game, I have restored San Fran to their full team name. The Jaguars are good enough to win at least one division in the AFC, and several in the NFC. Unfortunately, the division they are in also has the team from Indianapolis. Even with a backup quarterback, they will win this game. I said the 49ers were competitive, I did not say they were good. Prediction: Jaguars.

Eagles @ Rams
Oh how the mighty have fallen. These two teams represent three of the last six NFC champions. This matchup was the 2001 NFC title game. Today, they are just two injury riddled, losing teams. The Ram defense is terrible, so the Eagle offense under McMahon should have some success. The Ram offense isn't all that great anymore, and the Eagle defense should be able to shut them down nicely. Prediction: Eagles.

Bengals @ Lions
That's just not fair. The Bengals, with the second best record in the AFC and one of the top offenses in the whole league, against the Lions, who just stink. They are so bad, they are the new Bengals. Prediction: Bengals.

Browns @ Raiders
Games between bad teams are always tough. Neither team has a good defense. The Browns have a rookie QB whereas Kerry Collins is back in the driver's seat for Oakland. And the Raiders have a good running game. But then so do the Browns. Collins' passing will be the difference. Prediction: Raiders.

Cowboys @ Redskins
This should be a good game. Both teams have strong defenses and offenses capable of putting up some points. The 'Skins haven't done it as much recently. Both have recently had losing streaks that have damaged their playoff chances. Washington is all but out of it now. Dallas is still right in it, both for a wildcard and the division. The first matchup between this rivals was exciting, with the Redskins pulling out a squeaker of a win at the end. Dallas' offense is more aggressive now, with Drew Bledsoe playing better than he has in years, reminding everyone why he was given what amounted to a lifetime contract with the Patriots, until they discovered some guy named Brady. This is the best unit Drew has had to play with since the 1996 Patriots, who went to the Super Bowl. I can't go against them. Prediction: Cowboys.

Falcons @ Bears
The Falcon offense is still primarily about running, despite Vick's attempts to throw more, and the Bear defense should be able to handle that with a very good front seven. Atlanta really hasn't looked great lately, only beating teams like Detroit and New Orleans. The Falcon defense is vulnerable to the run, and the Bears have a good running game. So long as the game is not on Orton's shoulders, and the Falcons don't have the high scoring offense that would put Chicago in a hole, the Bears can control both sides of the ball and churn out the win. Prediction: Bears.

Packers @ Ravens
Another game that illustrates why the league needs flexibility in scheduling late season Monday night games. (Not that it will happen. If nothing else, too many fans who have bought tickets and planned on attending a late season Monday night or Sunday afternoon game for months would be put out if, at the last minute, the scheduling was changed.) But Monday night loses its prestige next year anyway. Don't look now but Green Bay has a defense. They also have an offense, which Baltimore doesn't. Prediction: Packers.

Last Week: 13-3
Season: 130-78

Update: I have discovered that somewhere along the line, the season totals listed on the blog have gotten out of synch with the actual values. Pro Pick'em gives me 130 wins whereas the running total week to week on the blog has 129 wins. I have corrected this week's totals to reflect Pro Pick'em's tracking, but this week's numbers will not jibe with last week's for that reason. Assuming anyone actually cares....

Congressman Ryan on the Patriot Act

I am on an email distribution list for Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI). Yesterday, his office sent out a mail about the Patriot Act renewal the House just passed.

The House of Representatives today approved the final version (Conference Report) of H.R. 3199, the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 by a vote of 251-174. First District Congressman Paul Ryan voted in favor of the measure, which reauthorizes expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act (and two provisions of the Intelligence Reform Act) most of which were scheduled to sunset this month. The legislation ensures our law enforcement officials will retain the tools they need to protect our homeland and fight terrorism, while at the same time carefully preserving citizens' constitutional rights and civil liberties.

"By tearing down unnecessary bureaucratic barriers that prevented law enforcement and intelligence officers from sharing information, the Patriot Act has made our nation more secure. It is an absolutely critical tool in fighting - and winning - the war on terror," Ryan said. "It also achieves the essential balance between improving our government's ability to detect and counter terrorist plots and preserving citizens' rights and privacy."

"This legislation includes safeguards that will enhance the law's civil liberties protections and prompt continued oversight by Congress and the courts. Protecting citizens' constitutional rights remains our highest priority. That's why I believe it is critical that we keep monitoring and reviewing the application of this law to ensure that Americans' rights and freedoms are upheld," Ryan said.

Among its provisions, the PATRIOT Act, which passed in 2001 after the September 11 terrorist attacks, did the following:

* Removed major legal barriers that prevented the law enforcement, intelligence, and national defense communities from coordinating their work and sharing information;
* Gave law enforcement the ability to use many of the same tools for terrorist
investigations that it already used to fight organized crime;
* Modernized wiretapping and surveillance laws that apply to terrorist investigations in order to keep up with changing technologies such as cell phones and e-mail.

The legislation makes permanent 14 of 16 expiring PATRIOT Act provisions, but subjects two provisions to a four-year sunset. Congressman Ryan approves of these sunsets because they necessitate continued congressional oversight that will help ensure the protection of Americans' civil liberties. The provisions that are scheduled to sunset in four years are:

* Section 206, which authorizes "roving" wiretaps for terrorist investigations, which attach to a particular target rather than a particular phone. Advances in technology such as cell phones made this update to surveillance law important, which is why criminal cases have had the ability to use roving wiretaps for years. Before the PATRIOT Act, every time a suspected terrorist changed cell phones, investigators
had to return to court for a new order.

* Section 215, which gives the government the ability to get business records and other tangible things with an order from a federal court in a terrorist investigation. For years, ordinary grand juries have issued subpoenas to businesses for records relevant to criminal inquiries. Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act contains safeguards that protect civil liberties, and it is actually more protective of privacy than the law for ordinary grand-jury subpoenas. Section 215 has a narrow scope, requires a court order,and provides for continued congressional oversight.

In addition, the conference report permanently extends one of two expiring provisions in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act, and subjects the other provision (the so-called "lone wolf" provision that amended the definition of an agent of a foreign power to include a foreign national who is preparing for or engaging in international terrorism) to a four-year sunset.

Among the details included in the Conference Report on H.R. 3199 that enhance protections for citizens' privacy and constitutional rights are the following:

Multi-point or "roving"wiretaps (Section 206)

* Requires a description of a specific target in both the application and the court order, if the target's true identity is unknown.
* Requires specific facts in the application showing that the target's actions may thwart surveillance efforts.
* Requires the FBI to notify the court within ten days after beginning surveillance of any new phone. This notice must include the facts and circumstances that justify the FBI's belief that each new phone is being used, or is about to be used, by the target.

Obtaining business records with a court order (Section 215)

* Requires applications for orders for business records to include a statement of facts showing "reasonable grounds to believe" that the records sought are relevant to an authorized investigation to protect against terrorism or espionage.
* Includes additional procedural protections for Section 215 orders:
- the explicit right for recipients to consult legal counsel and to seek judicial review;
- the requirement that a senior FBI official approve requests for certain sensitive documents, such as library records;
- the use of minimization procedures to limit "the retention, and prohibit the dissemination" of information concerning U.S. persons;
- audits by the Department of Justice Inspector General;
- enhanced reporting to Congress; and
- public reporting.

Delayed-notice search warrants (Section 213)

* This provision authorizes delayed-notice search warrants which allow the government to wait a number of days after executing a search warrant before notifying the target of the search.
* Requires notice of the search to be given within 30 days of execution, unless the facts justify a later date certain.
* Permits extensions of the delay period, but only "upon an updated showing of the need for further delay." It also limits any extensions to 90 days or less, unless the facts of the case justify a longer delay.
* Adds new public reporting on the use of delayed-notice warrants.

National Security Letters (NSLs)

* NSLs allow the FBI to obtain limited third-party materials in intelligence cases.
* Conference report permits (a) disclosure of National Security Letters to legal counsel, (b) an explicit right to judicial review of such requests for records, and (c) a reviewing court to "modify or set aside" the NSL "if compliance would be unreasonable, oppressive, or otherwise unlawful."
* Permits judicial review of the nondisclosure requirement that attaches with NSLs.
* Requires the Department of Justice Inspector General to conduct two audits of the FBI's use of NSLs.
* Adds annual public reporting on NSLs.

The Conference Report on H.R. 3199 also contains a comprehensive measure to help law enforcement address the national methamphetamine abuse epidemic.

Notice two things. First the Patriot Act is always described as necessary to fight terrorism. The last line mentions measures to address a drug abuse epidemic. More importantly, note that Congressman Ryan is always sure to describe how a provision would apply to investigating suspected terrorists. Yet, so far as I know, there is no language in the Patriot Act to restrict these new powers to just terrorism investigations. Hence the problems I've noted before.

Faint Praise for Rumsfeld

The president yesterday declared that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld has been doing a "heck of a job." The last guy to get this kind of praise was Mike Brown, infamous head of FEMA during the fiasco that was Hurricane Katrina. He was gone pretty soon afterward. I don't think the Don should sleep well with this kind of support.

Rex Grossman as Bears Starter

I do have to comment on this phenomenon. Kyle Orton has led the Chicago Bears this season, and they are in first place. Orton's in because pre-season starter Rex Grossman got hurt in training camp. Now that he's healthy, and the Bear lead in the division is shrinking, the calls are going up to put Grossman back in. Charles Robinson writes

Enough is enough. You can't wait until the division is tied up to move Rex Grossman into the starting lineup.

Um, need I point out that Grossman, though a third year player, has appeared in a grand total of six games in his career, half of those being in the 2003 season? Orton has appeared in 13 games, all this season. Let's compare some key career stats:

Stat	Orton	Grossman
QB Rating	60.9	71.1
Comp. Percentage	52.9	54.5
Yard per Game	138.3	174.0
TD Passes	9	3

Obvious conclusion: neither QB has very good stats. So the idea that Grossman will magically make the Bear offense better is kind of silly. If anything, put 3rd stringer Jeff Blake in. He's a grizzled veteran in his 13th year, with nearly 22,000 yards passing and 133 touchdowns.

Personally, I like Orton. I've seen a few Bear games. He makes mistakes, but then again he is a rookie. What I like about him is that he throws a really nice ball, especially on deep routes. I think he can develop into a pretty good QB in this league. The one time in the Steeler game they took the leash off the offense, they moved right down the field with some nice pass plays and scored a touchdown.

So, let's keep the Grossman watch in perspective. It's not like bringing in Dan Marino to replace Damon Huard or something (which the Dolphins should not have done that year, in my opinion, but that's a different story). It's one effective rookie, playing with a lot of rust and a gimpy ankle that's just healed, to replace a true rookie.

Instapundit on Patriot Act

Instapundit notes a basic problem with the Patriot Act:

Okay, see, the problem with this is that it has nothing to do with terrorism. Putting it in the Patriot Act just reinforces my fears -- present since the beginning -- that this had more to do with finding an excuse to enact bureaucratic wishlists into law than with protecting us from terrorism. And Feinstein's presence, alas, indicates that the Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans on this. Nonetheless, this is a dumb idea, it undercuts the entire rationale for the Patriot Act, and it's a reason to be suspicious of the whole renewal enterprise.

This has been a flaw from the beginning. Most of the provisions in the Patriot Act had been sought for years by conservatives. The 9/11 attacks simply provided an unchallengable backdrop to argue for these new powers. Of course the legislation never imposed the restriction that the expanded powers were only for anti-terrorism cases, and they were promptly applied to all kinds of other investigations, such as getting evidence against a corrupt strip club owner. (Stripper terrorists? Were they that ugly?)

Bush as Nixon

It seems the pressure is getting to the president, and he's taking on some Nixonian traits. Capitol Hill Blue reports

GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the [Patriot A]ct could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

“I don’t give a goddamn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.”

“Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”

“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”

I’ve talked to three people present for the meeting that day and they all confirm that the President of the United States called the Constitution “a goddamned piece of paper.”

(via Andrew Kantor)

Yahoo Mail & Firefox

Last year, I complained about the quality of customer service at Yahoo. My issue at the time was the mail editor in Yahoo Mail. It was a nice WYSIWYG HTML editor for IE, but a dumb, plain text editor for firefox. This was the one fly in the ointment of using firefox. A few weeks before the release of 1.5, I discovered Yahoo had finally fixed this. Imagine my surprise when, after upgrading to Firefox 1.5, the dumb editor was back. That's now been resolved too.

So I can now finally say there is absolutely no reason people shouldn't use the firefox browser. (And for users of the web interface to Yahoo Mail, I recommend the Viamatic WebMail++ extension to firefox. It makes reading email easier, though it too only has a dumb, plain text editor in the Instant Reply button.)

Blogger & Firefox

Everyone concerned may have already discovered this, but I just did recently. Ever since Blogger added the autosave function in their post editor, writing posts using the Firefox browser has been nearly impossible. The CPU usage on my PC would getted maxed, making it frustratingly slow to even move the cursor or page down. So, I had to use IE (shudder) to compose any long post. More typically, I just used the BlogThis window and just didn't worry about spell checking. This was true for months. I complained a couple of times to the folks at Blogger. It's apparently been fixed now. I can edit with Firefox, at least with 1.5. I don't know that autosave is working. I keep getting little messages popping up down below the editor, which I assume has something to do with autosave. But it does work now.

Dave Barry on the Democrats and Republicans

An emailer to Andrew Sullivan quotes Dave Barry (no link):

The Democrats seem to be basically nicer people, but they have demonstrated time and again that they have the management skills of celery. They're the kind of people who'd stop to help you change a flat, but would somehow manage to set your car on fire. I would be reluctant to entrust them with a Cuisinart, let alone the economy. The Republicans, on the other hand, would know how to fix your tire, but they wouldn't bother to stop because they'd want to be on time for Ugly Pants Night at the country club.

As InstaPundit would write, Heh.

NFL 2005 Week 14 Predictions

See. I take the time to think about my predictions for a week and get right back in the saddle with a solid 12-4 performance. Not too shabby.

Onto this week....

Bears @ Steelers
Get ready for some old-time football. Gritty defense, smashmouth running, and the occasional passing play. A game straight out of the leather helmet days. The weakness in Pittsburgh's defense is the secondary, but Kyle Orton is not primed to exploit that with a diverse passing attack. Chicago's defense has no weaknesses that I see. The game comes down simply to who has the better offense, and that is Pittsburgh, though they haven't necessarily played like it recently. Prediction: Steelers.

Browns @ Bengals
Don't look now, but the Bengals have the second best record in the AFC and a pretty strong grip on the division. And their schedule to close out the season is not too demanding, with only the Chiefs presenting much of a challenge. Could Cincy end their run of futility in grand style by getting the #2 seed in the playoffs? It's possible, though Denver looks to hold the tiebreaker advantage due to a better conference record, and their schedule doesn't look that much tougher than the Bengals'. But first things first. The Browns are going nowhere but down, particularly with a rookie quarterback. Prediction: Bengals.

Texans @ Titans
Neither team has much to play for. Some will say Houston will play to lose to grab the top pick in the draft and get Reggie Bush. That would be stupid. They have a running back. They desperately need offensive linemen. That's one of the many things I don't get about the draft, and its analysts. Why would Houston pour a mountain of cash into a running back, when they already have a good one and have serious needs elsewhere? Yet that doesn't seem to factor into anyone's analysis. Personally, I would never want the top pick in the draft. Far too much money to sign the player, when there are plenty of other players in the draft just as likely to become stars. The whole thing is backwards and upside down. I've written on it before, and won't say any more. In this game, neither team has much in the way of defense. The Titans have more potency on offense, though Houston has shown some spark and when Carr isn't trying to avoid five guys in his face thanks to his offensive line, he can do things. But I have to go with McNair over Carr. Prediction: Titans.

Colts @ Jaguars
With a win, the Colts will lock up the division and the top seed in the playoffs. The Jags are fighting for a playoff spot too, but no one stops the Colts but the Colts themselves. Prediction: Colts.

Patriots @ Bills
Can Corey Dillon finally have a productive running game for New England? Buffalo's run defense is pretty bad. New England has its problems on defense, but primarily in the secondary which won't matter against a poor passing team as the Bills. Prediction: Patriots.

Raiders @ Jets
How does one pick this game? Neither team is any good and both are starting young quarterbacks still getting their feet wet. The only differentiator I can see is the running game, where former Jet LaMont Jordan gives the advantage to Oakland. Prediction: Raiders.

Rams @ Vikings
Another "don't look now" moment. The Vikings are very much in the thick of the playoff hunt. Dallas, Minnesota, and Atlanta are all at 7-5 battling for a wild-card spot, with Tampa one game ahead and in control of the other spot. Two of those four should make the playoffs. The Viking defense, as I've written before, is playing more like many expected them to all season. Under Johnson, the more conservative offense is getting the job done. The Rams field their rookie QB, which should allow many points, for the Viking defense. Prediction: Vikings.

Bucs @ Panthers
Tampa has been quite a surprise this season. They control the top wildcard spot right now. But they are young at key positions, particularly on offense. The Panther defense is playing pretty well, and that should slow Cadillac and bring pressure on young Simms. The Bucs have a pretty good defense too, of course, but their offense is much better than the Buc offense. Prediction: Panthers.

Giants @ Eagles
Philly's misery continues with yet another tough matchup. The Giants bring a stronger than expected defense and an offense that has been inconsistent lately, but can be deadly. Can the Eagles be shut out two weeks in a row? Quite possibly. Prediction: Giants.

39ers @ Seahawks
San Fran has not been an embarrassment this year, but they still aren't very good. The 'Hawks are making their bid for team-to-beat status. This could be a trap game for Seattle, but I don't think so.
Prediction: Seahawks.

Redskins @ Cardinals
A matchup of division leaders. Oh wait, that was just my pre-season prediction. Reality is somewhat less. The Redskins are still alive in the playoff hunt, but falling back. They need to keep winning to have any chance. The offense hasn't done well of late. The Cardinals are playing better on offense, but still have no running game. In the last month, they've gone 2-2 but have been competitive in every game. The Redskin defense can bring a lot of pressure against Warner, which could lead to interceptions. Arizona plays well at home, and Washington has to travel across the country, from snow and freezing temperatures to the desert. It is tempting to pick the Cardinals here. But I have to think that Redskin defense can handle the Warner passing attack, especially when there's no running game to worry about. And Washington can be productive on offense, and should be able to do so against a not so good Cardinal defense. Prediction: Redskins.

Ravens @ Broncos
Top team against bottom team? Not much analysis needed. Prediction: Broncos.

Chiefs @ Cowboys
Both teams are right in the thick of the wild-card chase in their conferences. Both need to keep winning to stay alive. Dallas faces a tough schedule to close out the season. Every game is must-win because of the standings, and they have to face at least 2 playoff-contending teams, three if you include Washington in that mix. On the other hand KC has an even tougher schedule, all four games against playoff-caliber opposition. The Chiefs are all about offense, and the Cowboys primarily about defense. Dallas is more balanced as a team because its offense isn't too bad. The Cowboy defense ought to be able to slow the Chief attack. So long as Bledsoe doesn't follow in his successor's footsteps (remember Brady's four interceptions against the Chiefs?), Dallas should come out on top. Prediction: Cowboys.

Dolphins @ Chargers
San Diego is another team hunting for a wild-card spot, and a visit from the struggling Dolphins is just what they need. Prediction: Chargers.

Lions @ Packers
Who is the worst team in the NFC North. This game will help decide. I do think Green Bay is better than their record indicates. They play well, but also make too many mistakes that give the game away, at least when they play weaker teams. The Lions look like they're just mailing it in now, with the coach already fired. If Brett can keep his interception numbers down to one or two, the Packers shouldn't have too bad a time of it. Prediction: Packers.

Saints @ Falcons
How did New Orleans ever end up on a Monday night game? The Falcons are fighting for their playoff lives, and the Saints shouldn't be much of a barrier. Prediction: Falcons.

Last Week: 12-4
Season: 116-76

Christmas

Oh brother. The latest skirmish in the so-called War on Christmas is coming from the White House of all places. The Bush family Christmas card wishes readers "Season's Greetings" rather than "Merry Christmas." (By the way, they've done this for the whole of his presidency, to no complaint.) Some Christians are quite put out by this. Um, did anyone actually read the card? I saw a picture of it on the news. It begins with a Scripture citation. I didn't get the reference, but the first line is "The Lord is my strength." Some possible references: Exodus 15:2 ("The LORD is my strength and song, And He has become my salvation; This is my God, and I will praise Him; My father's God, and I will extol Him."), Psalm 28:7 ("The LORD is my strength and my shield; My heart trusts in Him, and I am helped; Therefore my heart exults, And with my song I shall thank Him."), and Psalm 118:4 ("The LORD is my strength and song, And He has become my salvation.") For such quotations, the president gets comments like

Bush "claims to be a born-again, evangelical Christian. But he sure doesn't act like one," said Joseph Farah, editor of the conservative Web site WorldNetDaily.com. "I threw out my White House card as soon as I got it."

Declaring the Lord is his strength and salvation, that he trust in God, that he will praise his God? My goodness, how un-Christian is that! I can see why Mr. Farah would throw that out. Imagine if other Christians started doing the same as the president.

On a less sarcastic note, I do find the War on Christmas thing kind of funny. First of all, in practice it really is not a religious holiday. The fact that even Christians have to be reminded that the "reason for the season" is Jesus' birth should tell you that. But even historically, there's not too much Christian-ness about it. The holiday began as a pagan celebration of the winter solstice, to honor both the god Sol Invictus and the Persian god Mithra (god of light, hence the association of Christmas and lights?). When Christianity came along, these people wanted to keep their celebration so they gave it a face lift and decided it was about Jesus. The Christmas tree is descended from the pagan idea that the evergreen tree represents the renewal of life. Most of the customs and symbols of Christmas are derived from the Germanic pagan holiday Yule at the time of the winter solstice. Part of the pagan Yule was human and animal sacrifices, which were then hung from the branches of the tree (hence tree ornaments?).

UPDATE: Apparently the citation in the president's card is from Psalm 28.

Movie Review: Cinderella Man

Cinderella Man is the second collaboration between director Ron Howard and actor Russell Crowe, the first being the superb A Beautiful Mind. It tells the true story of boxer James Braddock. In the waning years of the Roaring 20's, Braddock is a confident young fighter rapidly ascending the ladder for a shot at the title. His winnings earn him and his family a comfortable life. Braddock rises high enough to earn a title bout, which he loses.

After the loss, his career falls apart, primarily due to injuries. A few years into the Great Depression, Braddock is an embarrassment in the ring and can barely hold on against vastly inferior opposition. His boxing license is revoked and his career appears over. Braddock joins the lines at the docks in a desperate attempt to get some small day's wage to pay the overdue heat and electricity bill and to provide food for his family. When faced with the prospect of having to ship his kids away to live with relatives, Braddock humbles himself by going on public assistance and passing the hat among the boxing bigwigs.

In a fluke reminiscent of the first Rocky, Braddock's second shot comes when the challenger in a highly touted fight drops out and an opponent must be found on short notice. Expected to be little more than a punching bag, Braddock surprises everyone, including himself, by winning in a knockout. There follows a series of fights against more and more highly ranked opponents, in all of which he is the underdog, and all of which he wins.

These victories earn him a totally unexpected second shot at the title, against the fearsome Max Baer. Baer is so brutal that he has killed two men in the ring, and taunts Braddock's wife that he will make her a widow. The final section of the film is, of course, the big battle between the two, which Braddock ultimately wins in a unanimous decision, thereby completing the riches-to-rags-to-riches storyline.

If I was a movie producer, there are three actors I would sell body parts to work with: Denzel Washington, Tom Hanks, and Russell Crowe. Crowe does not disappoint here. The character of Braddock could have easily been shallow and simple: a good man with a good punch. As with so many performances, Crowe digs deeper and finds the dignity of the man and creates a rich portrait. As always with Crowe, greatness is in the nuances he brings to the performance: how he walks, how he carries himself, facial expressions, the look in his eye.

Amusing side note that only I may find amusing. In A Beautiful Mind, Crowe gave an absolutely brilliant performance, a workshop on acting. That he got robbed of the Oscar is ridiculous. (I'm not knocking Washington. The reverse holds true for the previous year, when Denzel's Hurricane performance got robbed by Crowe's Gladiator.) There is one flaw, though. There are scenes in the film where Nash takes off his shirt and walks around in a tight, sleeveless undershirt revealing his physique. His is a body more in line with that of a gladiator than a mentally ill academic who spends most of his waking hours in his office or library. In this movie, playing a heavyweight boxer, he sports a pretty scrawny physique. I've read that he got down to a mere 176 pounds for the role, not exactly powerful looking. (Compare that to the 220 or so that Will Smith was at for Ali.) Maybe it's accurate, it just doesn't look right. So, in A Beautiful Mind, he had the body of a boxer, and in Cinderella Man, he has the body of an academic.

Anyway, the rest of the cast gives top notch performances as well, particularly Paul Giamatti who continues to prove he is the most overlooked actor in the business. Renée Zellwegger's role really isn't all that well written. She has a good scene or two, but is otherwise the typical wife who stands by her man and loves him. Technically the film is excellent. Great photography, great sets and costumes. The film doesn't flow smoothly. It drags in places and probably could do with another round of editing.

There is one area where Howard and his team do a very good job with the editing. Braddock's comeback is driven primarily by a need to make money to support his family. But, unlike so many lesser directors, Howard does not beat us over the head with that. In one fight, at a pivotal moment, Howard brings up images of Braddock's kids and past due notices to remind the viewer that's what he's all about. With that, he makes his point and moves on. Lesser directors would have had Braddock rallying in every fight; just when it looked like he was going to fall, he thought of his kids and unleashed a barrage that brought victory. Howard shows his maturity as a director by avoiding that trap.

Another side note, this time about the writing. Max Baer comes off in the film as a brutal, arrogant fighter. He taunts Braddock in and out of the ring through his wife. He is comfortable with having killed two men in the ring, and threatens to make the Braddock the third. (This makes his behavior after the fight, when he graciously congratulates Braddock on the win and just leaves the ring, incongruous.) The real Max Baer was quite a different man. He only killed one man in the ring, and was haunted by it for the rest of his life. He gave money to the wife of the man he killed, Frankie Campbell, and helped put his kids through college. Though a Catholic, he became a hero to American Jews by wearing a star of David on his trunks when he fought the German Max Schmeling, who was misleadingly portrayed as a Nazi hero. I don't watch films based on true stories expecting a history lesson, so I don't have a problem with the writers reinventing Max for the film. It certainly makes for better drama, and Craig Bierko did a fine job portraying him. It's just something that viewer should keep in mind.

If the film is so good, and it really is, why did it flop so badly? First off, who came up with the brilliant strategy of releasing a character-driven, adult drama up at the beginning of the summer movie season where it will complete with myriad mindless action flicks, not to mention Star Wars? Can I get that job? Get paid millions to make stupid decisions like that?

It also hurts that in recent years, we have seen several boxing related films. Hurricane, Ali, Million Dollar Baby stand out. Boxing lends itself well to movies, both because of the action and because it allows filmmakers to tell the type of story they love to tell, that of the underdog who finds it in himself to rise above his or her circumstances and make something of themselves. But that story can only be told a certain number of times. As well acted and produced as the film is, Cinderella Man comes off as Rocky (underdog rises above all expectations, finding something deeper in himself) meets Million Dollar Baby (boxing to feed oneself, underdog rises above all expectations, finding something deeper in herself), with photographic nod to Raging Bull (fight scenes), and never really rises above them. It is a better acted and directed version of Rocky, a less emotionally manipulative version of Million Dollar Baby.

Will the film get a boatload of nominations? Sure, and it should. Crowe, Giamatti, maybe even Bierko for acting, Howard for directing, plus cinematography and best picture.

Congress Votes Database

For the political junkies out there, the Washington Post has created a database that tracks every vote held in the Congress back to 1991. (Via Political Wire)

NFL 2005 Week 13 Predictions

Bad week last week for me. Not taking the time to think more about each game is costing me, so I have to take the time this week.

Before we start, a few weeks ago I gave my predictions for playoff seedings. Time for a few corrections. In the AFC, I don't see Denver falling out of the second spot now. Their schedule is not too demanding. I still take the Steelers to win their division, but drop them to 3rd seed. I'll keep San Diego in there at 6th seed, but Jacksonville cannot be dismissed. In the NFC, I have to drop Washington out of the picture. (Yes, I'm off their bandwagon again.) I'm still not sold on the Seahawks, who barely won against San Francisco and only beat the Giants thanks to numerous missed field goals. Not exactly impressive. So, I'll keep the Panthers at #1 and the Seahawks at #2. I officially like the Bears. Dominant defense, strong running, and I think Orton looks to have quite a bit of potential as a QB. I'll bump them ahead of Dallas since they are already ahead. I'm seriously tempted to even bump them ahead of Seattle.

So, revised seeding predictions:

AFC

1. Indianapolis.
2. Denver
3. Pittsburgh
4. New England
5. Cincinnati
6. San Diego

NFC

1. Carolina
2. Seattle
3. Chicago
4. Dallas
5. Atlanta
6. New York Giants

Oh, and the Super Bowl will still be the Colts and the Panthers, but I'm now convinced no one can stop the Colts. Having watched them totally destroy the Steelers, with both offense and defense, I think they go all the way. The Panthers will give them a run, and the Colt defense can be beaten, as the Bengals showed, but still the Colts can just keep ratcheting up their game.

Onto this week...

Falcons @ Panthers
The Panthers have never beaten a Falcon team lead by a healthy Michael Vick. If they are going to do everything I predict they will, they have to end that streak this week. A win and they open a two game lead on the Falcons in the division with four to go, including the rematch to close out the season. This week and next (against the Bucs) are crucial for the Panthers as they have the opportunity to basically put away their main division rivals and all but lock up the division title. The Falcon defense has been suspect this year against the run, which the Panthers will exploit with their two headed running attack. The strong Panther defensive front will shut down the Falcon running game, which is their offense, allowing the secondary to tee off on Atlanta's receivers and to blitz Vick. Prediction: Panthers.

Bills @ Dolphins
Two disappointing teams battling for second place in the AFC East. The Dolphin running game is coming together nicely, and that should be enough to take the weak Bills. Prediction: Dolphins.

Bengals @ Steelers
One of the big games of the week. The Bengals have a one game lead on the Steelers in the division, but Pittsburgh won the first matchup between the two so a win will bring them even and give the Steelers the tie-breaker edge. The Bengals are much like the Colts of recent years: all about offense and trying to not look too foolish on defense. The future is bright in Cincy, but Marvin Lewis needs to develop his defense more, which is his forté. But for now, the Steelers have the defense, and a good offense to go with it. (Though it didn't look that way against the Colts.) Prediction: Steelers.

Cowboys @ Giants
A game for the division lead. Both sit at 7-4 tied for first. This is a tough game to pick. Both teams have very good offenses. The difference will be in the defense, and the Cowboys look better. Prediction: Cowboys.

Packers @ Bears
Will Mike Sherman listen to me? Doubtful. But with the Bear defense, look for more Favre interceptions and numerous sacks. The misery continues in the land of cheese. Prediction: Bears.

Texans @ Ravens
Last week, one team blew a huge lead to lose a game they had no business losing, the other attempted to come back from a huge deficit. Houston showed it can play offense, at least for part of a game. The Ravens showed they can play offense, when the other team has already started the victory celebration with a lot of time left on the clock. The Raven offense just plain stinks, and the defense really isn't all that good either. Prediction: Texans.

Jaguars @ Browns
Jacksonville, even without Leftwich, should take Cleveland easily. Prediction: Jaguars.

Vikings @ Lions
The Vikings have surprisingly won 4 straight and are on the outside fringes of playoff contention. The defense has started playing like many expected them to, and the more conservative offense around Brad Johnson has started to look decent. But it must be noted they have been beating lesser teams, the exception being the Giants in a game that took several really fluky plays to win (that's two such losses for New York this year). The Lions, of course, have lost their head coach and are yet again a lousy team. The Lion defense isn't all that bad, and expect them to raise their level of play with their coordinator now taking the head coaching job. Also expect the Lions to run a more conservative, run-oriented offense. That will keep the score low. With everything else being roughly equal, this is a tale of two quarterbacks, one good the other not. Good wins. Prediction: Vikings.

Bucs @ Saints
The Bucs couldn't ask for a better matchup. OK, maybe Houston. Prediction: Bucs.

Titans @ Colts
This used to be a top-flight matchup in the AFC. Now, it is just a small speed bump on the Colt drive to perfection. Prediction: Colts.

Cardinals @ 39ers
Those 39ers are hanging in there. They are still not a good team, but they aren't embarassing themselves like they did last year. They've beaten Tampa, and held their own in losing efforts against the Bears and Seahawks. For the Cardinals, they have rediscovered the joy of scoring touchdowns. Kurt Warner is looking better, throwing 6 touchdowns (against 1 interception) the last three games, along with averaging more than 300 yards passing. In their last matchup, the Cardinal passing game was all over the field (385 yards passing). Expect more of the same against a terrible San Fran defense. Prediction: Cardinals.

Redskins @ Rams
The Rams are down to their third string QB, facing what should be one of the top defenses in the league. The 'Skin defense hasn't looked all that great lately in a three game losing streak that appears to have pretty much ended their playoff hopes. But the offense has been worse, with Brunell only throwing 3 TD passes the last four games. Portis has run well, but with no touchdowns since Week 10. Against a poor Ram defense, I expect the Redskin offense to start putting it together again. In particular, I expect Portis to run all over the Rams and to score a couple of touchdowns. Prediction: Redskins.

Broncos @ Chiefs
The Chiefs need this win to stay realistically alive in the division race. A loss would drop them three games back of Denver, with the Broncos having the tie-breaker edge. They should be brimming with confidence coming off a dismantling of the Patriots. And need anyone mention that they play well at home? Denver is looking Super Bowl worthy. Their only loss apart from a Week 1 meltdown against the Dolphins, was a 1 point loss to the Giants. Earlier in the season, they struggled putting games away, opening big leads only to see the opponents come back. That seems to have been fixed, with only one game (last week against Dallas) since that loss even being close. The Bronco defensive line is playing particularly well and should be able to slow Larry Johnson down. Despite four interceptions of Brady last week, I don't particularly like the Chief secondary, so Plummer should be able to make some big passes and the running game should be as strong as ever. Too much for KC. Prediction: Broncos.

Jets @ Patriots
Just what New England needed after an embarassing performance against the Chiefs. Prediction: Patriots.

Raiders @ Chargers
Like the Chiefs, San Diego needs a win to stay alive in the AFC West race, and in the wildcard hunt. The Chargers are much better than their record indicates, hampered as it is by a slow start. The Raiders probably are too, but no where near as good as San Diego. Prediction: Chargers.

Seahawks @ Eagles
Seattle's run to the top of the NFC makes a stop against the team that has had that position for the last several seasons. Philly isn't there anymore, and will likely finish in the basement of the NFC East. Between the cross-country trip and their reputation for folding late in the season, this is still a challenging game for Seattle. I've already said that I'm not overwhelmed by the Seahawks. This could well end up an upset, but the Seahawk offense should be able to dominate the game, as should their defense against young Mr. McMahon. Prediction: Seahawks.

Last Week: 8-8
Season: 104-72