Benster and D Pick Your Playoff Games -- Wild Card Round

We're in the playoffs already? Playoffs? Playoffs! Can you feel the HYYYYYYYYPPPPPPE!

I guess I'm feeling the hype more than Jim Mora was.

Maybe that's what you would look like if you were an NFL coach, Decrepit! Of course, you're pretty much stuck coaching in-house youth sports.

In the words of this guy, it's what I do, and I do it well.

No, actually your picks are bankrupt, old dude! But enough of that, let's get down to bidness!

New York J-E-T-S JETS JETS JETS! (+2 1/2) vs. Cincinnati Ochocincos. When you're a Jet you're a Jet all the way. I know this song because my strange old father made me watch this strange old movie once. It won't help us pick the game very much, but it seems likes a good idea and an example of the services we provide to at-risk youth. Anyway, back to the game, if I can stop laughing at my own jokes long enough to make a pick. There will be a very good matchup to watch as Darrelle Revis matches up with Chad Ochenta y Cinco. He may not know how to pronounce his name, but I do. Everybody thinks the Bengals are just that good, but I'm calling the upset. Gang Green 30, Linguistically Challenged 19.

I can see why you think this will happen, Grasshopper. The Jets pretty much kicked the stuffing out of the Bengals last week in New Jersey, but this game is in Cincinnati. I suspect the Bengals will play much better this time. But I also think that much better won't be good enough. I like the Jets, too. Jets 16, Bengals 13.

Philadelphia Cheesesteaks (+4) vs. Dallas How 'Bout Them Cowboahs? There is going to be some blood tomorrow night. Last week Dallas put the donut on Andy Reid's boys, 24-0. The theory says that the team at home during the playoffs is probably going to win, but a couple of factors fall in favor of the Eagles. First of all, Dallas constantly chokes in the playoffs, especially since Tony Romo arrived. There's been the holder incident, the Jessica Simpson incident and other unfortunate events. There is also the revenge factor. DUH DUH DUH DUHHHHH. Feel the revenge, Tony Romo? Hey Roy Williams -- you don't have enough talent to win on talent alone! Look for the Cheesesteaks to give the Cowboys more than they can eat. Philly 50, Dallas 42.

So let me see if I understand what you're saying, Seabiscuit. The same team that couldn't score last week will put up 50 points this week? That's bold. Actually, I think this could be a shootout. The Cowboy defense has been very good lately but they can be had, especially if the Eagles hit a shot early on. And Benster has a good point -- Romo hasn't proven anything in the playoffs, while Eagle quarterback Donovan McNabb is quite battle-tested. And that's why I once again have to agree with the young fella. Eagles 24, Cowboys 20.

Baltimore Edgar Allan Poes (+3 1/2) vs. New England Belicheks. On a fashion note, Bill Belichek wears ugly sweatshirts with the sleeves cut off, which is kinda creepy. New England will be shorthanded without Wes Welker, but Bill Belichek has proven that he not only makes bad fashion choices, but he is intelligent. Baltimore does not really have a dynamic offense but they are able to play ball control. And Baltimore might be on to something -- it's tough for Tom Brady to complete passes when he's planted on the sideline. We'll see if the game will slow down or if the Patriots will be able to play fast break. Charm City Birds 31, Belicheks 28.

I like your theory on this one too, whippersnapper. I think the Patriots are getting old in a hurry, actually, and they are ripe to be knocked off. It won't be this week, though. Patriots 27, Ravens 17.

Glorious Green Bay Packers (+1) vs. Arizona House of Cards. All right -- I want a word with you Aaron Rodgers doubters. Aaron Rodgers is in the Pro Bowl. He's led the Packers on a 7-1 hot streak ever since that bad incident with the frightening Creamsicles. On paper, this game looks very scary for Green Bay without Al Harris. Charles Woodson will have to cover Holy Angels alum Larry Fitzgerald, leaving Tramon Williams to deal with Anquan Boldin and potentially Jarrett "Toast" Bush to deal with Steve Breaston. However, Boldin did not practice this week and odds are that he'll either go and be very limited or he'll be watching the game from the sidelines. Also, Arizona's best cornerback, Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie, is also hobbling around. That means that the Cardinals will have to put their number 2 cornerback on Greg Jennings and backups on Donald Driver and Jermichael Finley. That's just asking for trouble. The key to stopping Arizona is to disrupt Kurt Warner's rhythm. Maybe a little dose of Clay Matthews will do the trick. Packers 63, House of Cards 10.

Excellent analysis, but I don't see that score happening, young fella. The thing to me that's been most interesting about the run-up to this game is how much yapping the Cardinal players have been doing. It's almost as if they're using bravado to try to convince themselves that they can handle the Packers. The Cardinals are very strange, of course -- they can be almost unstoppable one week and terrible the next. Last week, they were terrible. Does that mean this week they'll be unstoppable? Probably not. Look for a wild, entertaining game, but if my theory holds true, the Packers will be coming to Minneapolis next week. Green Bay 38, Arizona 28.

Do not give Aaron Rodgers any more motivation. Vikings fans, remember well the words of Satchel Paige -- don't look back. Something might be gaining on you. Ben out!

Home Truth

We are at war. We are at war against Al Qaida, a far-reaching network of violence and hatred that attacked us on 9/11, that killed nearly 3,000 innocent people, and that is plotting to strike us again. And we will do whatever it takes to defeat them.

So said President Obama yesterday. Go get 'em, Mr. President.

What We Have Here is a Failure to Communicate

Last month, we received notice about a change at the elementary school that one of our children attends. Soon, the school will not be sending home a paper copy of the weekly newsletter. Instead, families will have to go to the school district's website and sign up to receive an electronic copy of the newsletter, or families will need to go to the school's website to read a copy of the newsletter. The newsletter contains information such as a calendar of upcoming events, PTA projects, and an occasional column written by the principal. The school has been thinking about doing this for awhile because it will save the school quite a bit of money.



These days, Mr. D and I receive a lot of information from our trusty laptop. We receive general information via email about most of our children's activities. It is a great way to get a lot of information out to a large group of people in a timely manner.



We are fortunate to have a computer at home and the entire family is computer savvy enough to be able to do what we need to do and want to do on the computer.



Not everyone is so fortunate. I work in the public sector. I work in a suburb that has many blue collar workers, retired people and people who are English language learners. Many do not have a computer at home. If they do have a computer, they often need help with basic things like setting up an email account, searching for a job on the internet, or applying for unemployment.



Some organizations realize that computer access can be an issue and have done a good job of getting information to everyone. For example, our family can receive a paper copy and an electronic copy of the weekly religious education newsletter from our church. The middle school that one of our children attends sends out most information electronically but the school does keep their computer lab open on some evenings and provides a staff person in the lab to help parents.



Unfortunately, the elementary school has not indicated if or how it will get the weekly newsletter to parents who cannot readily access the internet. I hope that a young student will never be dropped off at the school in the morning and his parents go off to work, never realizing that the day is a scheduled teacher workday and a day off for students, all because the family could not access the school's weekly newsletter.



Communication becomes difficult when not everyone has the tools to receive the information that is being communicated. Maybe someone ought to communicate that to the communicators?

Inconvenient, Part Two

Well, it's only money, right?

New York City projects it will cost more than $400 million to provide security if the pre-trial preparation and trial of the suspects in the Sept. 11 terror attacks takes two years, which insiders say is virtually certain, according to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

And Chuck Schumer ain't picking up the tab, either:

Schumer released a statement today saying, "Not a nickel of these costs should be borne by New York taxpayers, because terrorism is a federal responsibility and this is a federal trial. I will do everything I can to see that the federal government fully owns up to its responsibility."

Tell you what: I bet we could come up with a much cheaper solution.

Inconvenient

Gotta shut down that Gitmo. What could go wrong?

The U.S. Marshals Service is searching for three escaped federal prisoners, including a man from Chicago, who fled from the Tri-County Detention Center in Ullin in Southern Illinois.

Oh, there's this, too.

Hawk to the Hall

Congratulations to Andre Dawson for finally earning selection to the Baseball Hall of Fame today. Dawson was one of the best players in the 1980s and was the complete package as a player: great speed (314 steals), tremendous power (438 home runs in the pre-steroid era) and probably the most feared outfield arm in the major leagues.

I remember Dawson best from his years in Chicago as member of the Cubs. He was especially magnificent in his first year in Chicago in 1987, a superstar on a team that had Ryne Sandberg and not much else. He hit 49 home runs that summer and drove in 137, which were highly impressive numbers for that era. In my mind, Dawson should have gone into the Hall before Jim Rice, who wasn't nearly as versatile a player. The biggest knock on Dawson was that his career batting average (.279) wasn't outstanding. It's tough to argue that should disqualify him when you consider that Rabbit Maranville (.258) is in the Hall, though.

We also must note the near miss of Bert Blyleven, who came up just a few votes short of gaining election this year. Blyleven was a very good pitcher with a very long career and I suspect his overall numbers would have been much better if he hadn't played for so many bad teams -- he spent most of his career toiling in places like Cleveland, Texas and here in Minnesota during the dark 1970s. Bert will almost certainly get in next year, as will Roberto Alomar, who also fell just a few votes short.

The Hall of Fame is a peculiar institution and the baseball writers are a peculiar bunch. While it's certainly a more exclusive club than other professional halls of fame, the standards are pretty hard to suss out. You can argue stats and make all manner of assumptions about how to rank the various players, but I can tell you this -- Dawson is clearly a Hall of Fame guy. So is Bert Blyleven, and so are Roberto Alomar, Barry Larkin, Jack Morris and Tim Raines. These guys were dominant players and all proved their value over the long haul. I would hope that all get to stand at the podium in Cooperstown before very long.

Old School Football

So has anyone else noticed that the oft-criticized Big Ten has a winning record in this year's bowl games? If one were to listen to the claims of ESPN, or the incessant baying of SEC fans (and devotees of the Southern variant of football generally), this would seem impossible.

What's most interesting is the teams that won their games, along with the pattern involved. Let's look back:

Wisconsin beats Miami

Penn State beats LSU

Ohio State beats Oregon

Iowa beats Georgia Tech

Other than being the four best teams in the Big Ten this year (sorry, Northwestern), what else do we know about the winning schools?

• All four schools are known for being power teams with strong running attacks


• All four schools have stout defenses


• All four schools can play ball control and keep the other team's high-powered offense off the field; indeed, that is how all four schools won their bowl games


• All four schools figure to be among the teams to beat in the conference for 2010

It's telling that those schools that stay with the basic game plan are the ones that had the greatest success this year. Especially in the case of the Badgers, Buckeyes and the Hawkeyes, all the pre-game prognostication said the same thing: the opponent was too fast, too talented and had a huge advantage in the offensive skill positions. There was no way that the bulky Badgers could stop the talented Jacory Harris and his arsenal of top-shelf Miami Hurricane receivers. Those Oregon Ducks had way too many weapons for the boring old Buckeyes and Jeremiah Masoli was going to run rings around them. There was no way that the plodding Hawkeyes could contain the vaunted triple option of Georgia Tech. Turns out there was a way. It's the old way, tried and true.

There's another message here, especially to the Michigan Wolverines, who were home for the holidays this year. The Wolverines have been perennial contenders for the conference championship for as long as there has been a Big Ten conference. Under both Bo Schembechler and Lloyd Carr, they were largely a vanilla team but were always fundamentally sound on offense and stout on defense. Yes, the Wolverines have had some tremendously talented skill players come through their program -- Tom Brady, we're looking at you -- but since Rich Rodriguez has come to Ann Arbor things have fallen away. I don't see the Wolverines returning to glory any time soon if they persist in playing a style of football that goes against what works in their conference. But fans of the other schools would be delighted if they persist in their current course.

Congratulations to the Badgers, Nittany Lions, Buckeyes and Hawkeyes. And to the fans of Southern football: at least for this year, y'all can be quiet now.

Radio Free Dilettante — 010510

It would appear that iTunes is in a very bad mood:

Last Five:
Use Me, Bill Withers
Guns Guns Guns, the Guess Who
Here Comes President Kill Again, XTC
Disappear, INXS
Mean to Me, Crowded House

Next Five:
The Goodbye Look, Donald Fagen
Half a Boy & Half a Man, Nick Lowe
A Most Peculiar Man, Simon & Garfunkel
The Black Angel's Death Song, Velvet Underground
I Feel So Good, Richard Thompson

Gino's Observation

I made reference yesterday to some comments from Willie Brown, the one-time majordomo of the California legislature, which prompted this typically pithy response from our friend Gino, who has the pleasure of being a Californian:

willie brown, though correct, has left out some of the stuff. CA pays out more money to those who are not working than those who are working.

with retirement at 50 for many workers, they recieve almost the same as their last salary(80-90%), plus the primo health benefits the private sector could never bargain for, and they're living til their 80's.

for some, their death would be a public service.

And right on schedule, someone else has noticed this problem. Kenneth Anderson at the Volokh Conspiracy blog notes the following from the Financial Times:

Estimates of aggregate funding requirement of the US pension system have ranged between $400bn and $500bn, but Mr Kramer’s analysis concluded that public funds would need to find more than $2,000bn to meet future pension obligations.

That's $2 trillion, folks. With a "T." A 2 with a vapor trail of zeroes following it. Gulp.

So who's going to pay that? Anderson wonders if anyone will:

Two trillion dollars? One question about these obligations is whether taxpayers will stick around to pay them, or instead will vote with their feet. (“Vote with their feet” is something that has been discussed in various ways at VC — as an aspect of a federal system and states with their own laws.) Many of these pension obligations have been incurred by municipalities and others by states, and in some cases the obligations are intertwined. But what happens if voters-taxpayers move out?

The assumption has long been that taxpayers are stuck, on account of jobs and other circumstance. But query whether that is necessarily true as the baby boom generation retires. In that case, it might find itself far more mobile, in circumstances where rising taxes at every level make relocation a more valuable decision at the margin. For that matter, if otherwise desirable locales manage to tax their businesses away, will the baby boomers’ kids and grandkids have reason ever to locate in places that lack jobs? They might have been raised there — but would they go back?

Anderson is describing California today. And as he notes later on, people are moving with their feet and have been. Ask a Coloradan if they've seen some new California neighbors in recent years.

The day of reckoning is coming, sooner than most of us might realize.

Lightning Round - 010410

It's a rare lunchtime edition of this popular feature!

• This is one of the better examples of counter-intuitive thinking that I've come across in a long time. Norway is having remarkable success treating staph infections, especially the horribly nasty version known as MRSA, by cutting down greatly on the amount of antibiotics that are used in hospitals.
• Speaking of counter-intuitive thinking, check out this column from Willie Brown, best known for his tenure at the helm of the profligate California legislature. He touches on a number of topics, but has a real Nixon-goes-to-China moment when he tells his Bay Area audience the following about the intractable budget crisis in California: "But at some point, someone is going to have to get honest about the fact that 80 percent of the state, county and city budget deficits are due to employee costs." That is a problem, and not just in California, I might add.
• Allahpundit over at Hot Air noticed that top Obama advisors no longer believe the 2007 NIE regarding Iran's nuclear program. They are about 2 1/2 years late to the party, but I'm glad they've finally arrived. Stop by the bar, we'll pour you a drink and there won't be any Kool-Aid in it.
• This probably deserves a separate post, but I'll include it here for now. Our portside friend Rich called to our attention the deep thoughts of John Brennan, who has the often-thankless task of manning the Homeland Security and counterterrorism desk for the Obama administration. Brennan was making the rounds of the talk shows and visited with Chris Wallace of evil Faux News yesterday, where he had this fascinating exchange about the notion of why the Obama administration has decided to use the criminal justice system in dealing with Umar Abdulmullatab, better known these days as the Eunuchbomber:

WALLACE: Perhaps the most controversial step that President Obama took after the Christmas day terror attack was to charge Abdulmutallab as a criminal defendant.

He was cooperating with authorities. He was giving information about his links to Al Qaida. But after he got a criminal lawyer, he reportedly stopped cooperating, stopped talking.

Why not treat him as an enemy combatant, put him in a secret prison, use the interrogation techniques that President Obama has specifically approved, and try to get more information out of him?

BRENNAN: Well, we have an array of tools that we will use, and we want to make sure we maintain flexibility as far as how we deal with these individuals.

Now, let's get the facts on the table. He was arrested on U.S. soil on a plane on -- in the Detroit airplane. He was, in fact, talking to people who were detaining him.

There were people who were arrested during the previous administration -- Richard Reid, the shoe bomber; Zacarias Moussaoui; Padilla; Iyman Faris; others -- all were charged and tried in criminal court and sentenced, some cases to life imprisonment.

Just because somebody is going to be put into the criminal legal process does not mean that they're -- we don't have other opportunities to get information from them.

WALLACE: But wait, wait. Let me ask you specifically. After Abdulmutallab got lawyered up, did he stop cooperating with authorities? Did he stop talking?

BRENNAN: I'm not going to address exactly what he did before or after he was -- talked with his lawyer. We got information. We continue to have opportunities to do that.

As you talk with the lawyers and you talk with the individuals, as they recognize what they're facing as far as the charges, conviction and possible sentence, there are opportunities to continue to talk about it.

FBI has some of the best interrogators and debriefers in the world, and so I'm confident that we're going to continue to be able to work this system and see whether or not...

WALLACE: But once he gets his Miranda rights, he doesn't have to speak at all.

BRENNAN: He doesn't have to, but he knows that there are certain things that are on the table, and if he wants to, in fact, engage with us in a productive manner, there are ways that he can do that.

WALLACE: But why not treat him -- you certainly had the right -- have -- had -- still have the right to treat him as an enemy combatant. Why not do that?

If he has more actionable intelligence about future attacks, and you say there's a real possibility of that, doesn't the president have a responsibility to do everything legal he can to get that information?

BRENNAN: And the president has that responsibility, and the Department of Justice makes these determinations about what's the best tool to use. And in this instance, we felt as though it was the best way to address Mr. Abdulmutallab's case.

We'll continue to look at each of the cases individually and proceed accordingly.

WALLACE: Just briefly, what's the downside of treating him as an enemy combatant?

BRENNAN: There's -- there are no downsides or upsides in particular cases. What we're trying to do is to make sure we apply the right tool in the right instance. In this case, we made a determination that he should be tried in U.S. criminal court.

Emphasis mine. That's called explaining without explaining. There is a reason that the decision was made, but Brennan isn't telling us. Would you like to know the reason? I would. I wish Wallace would have pressed the matter further, but as the transcript indicates, they moved on. The entire transcript is worth reading and it does include the language excoriating Dick Cheney that our Chicago-based correspondent likes so much.

Congratulations to the Packers (and the Purple, I suppose)

The playoffs should be a lot of fun this year.

Stop Picking on the President!

You meanies.

The real message was conveyed by Fouad Ajami, discussing the new administration’s foreign policy in the Wall Street Journal: “No despot fears Mr. Obama, and no blogger in Cairo or Damascus or Tehran, no demonstrator in those cruel Iranian streets, expects Mr. Obama to ride to the rescue.” True. Another Iranian deadline passed on New Year’s Eve, but the United States will set a new one for Groundhog Day or whenever.

And, just as the thug states understand they now have the run of the planet, so do the terror cells. A thwarted terror attack at Christmas is bad enough. Spending the following week making yourself a global joke is worse. Every A-list despot and dimestore jihadist got that message loud and clear — and so did American allies already feeling semi-abandoned by this most parochial of presidents. Expect a bumpy twelve months ahead. Happy New Year.

Cut it out, you meanies!

It speaks eloquently to the Obama administration’s priorities that it took the White House four days to acknowledge the “catastrophic breach of security” that led to the failed bombing of a US-bound jet on Christmas Day — but a scant four hours to accuse Dick Cheney of coddling terrorists.

The former vice president Wednesday harshly criticized the administration’s efforts — or non-efforts — against terrorism. Whereupon, Team Obama went ballistic.

It's so mean. It's so wrong. Just knock it off.

Benster and D Pick Your Games -- Week 17

It's Week 17 and some teams are looking to get into the playoffs! Can you feel the HYYYYYYPPPPE!!!!

I guess.

C'mon, Decrepit! Where's your enthusiasm? Did it go south for the winter? Or do you keep it in a glass on the counter with your teeth?

Hey now.

Okay, enough cheapshots directed at the old dude. Let's get down to bidness!

New York Football Giants (+9) vs. Minnesota Vikings. The Vikings come into this game needing a win and help to get a first round bye, which seemed like an absolute lock a few weeks ago before they started playing games in cold weather on the road. I wonder if Fav-ray is wearing out, because he can't get any rest tomorrow, or he'll have to play in the first round, which is something that Chilly really doesn't want to do. Especially if they have to play the Packers, which would start the Favre circus up again and lead to enormous quantities of HYYYYYYPPPPPE!!!!! Look for the Giants to be like the Poles in September, 1939. Vikes 84, New York Football Giants 13.

84-13? I believe that was the score that the Gophers lost to Nebraska about 25 years ago. We won't see that again on Sunday. I suspect the Vikings will play well and win the game, but my suspicion is that the Giants may make it interesting, mostly because they can and they feel like they owe the Vikings a few. Vikings 27, Giants 20.

Glorious Green Bay Packers (+3 1/2) vs. Arizona House of Cards. This game reads like a classified document. Green Bay really has nothing to gain from this game and chances are they will end up staying in Glendale for the Wild Card game next week, so they might not want to show any of their tactics to the Cardinals. However, the Cardinals have an outside chance of getting a first round bye, but then again they might still be playing the Packers. I'm thinking that for a lot of the game, it could be a battle between backup quarterbacks named Matt. Who do you like, Flynn or Leinart? They both won national championships in college, so they both know how to win. But Mr. Leinart is also a Heisman winner. While the fan in me says no to this, the reason in me says yes. Cardinals 28, Packers 22.

Actually, I see the game about the same. The Cardinals should know by kickoff if they'll have a chance at the first round bye -- if they do (by virtue of a Vikings loss), they'll play hard. If they don't, probably not so much. The Packers? They'll play to win for as long as it makes sense to do so. It will be an odd game, though, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's a blowout either way. For now, I'll agree with Seabiscuit, though. Cardinals 31, Packers 27.

Bear Down Chicago da Bearz (-3) vs. Motor City Common House Pets. Well, unlike the Packer-Cardinal game, there's no playoff implications in this one. The Lions have won only 2 games all year, which was an improvement over last year, even though the fans in Detroit are still wearing bags over their heads. This game does feature two of my favorite whipping boys, Jay Cutler, who actually showed some integrity last week, and the Detroit Lions as a team that, much like the local economy in Michigan, is going down faster than a hambone in a starving wolf convention. Detroit fans, keep those bags handy! Bears 73, Lions 0.

Did you say something, Ben? I must have dozed off thinking about this game. Cutler played well last week and that was somewhat amusing. The question here is this -- what will happen to Lovie Smith after the game? Will da Bearz play hard to save Lovie, or are they going to lie down, get Lovie fired and usher in the Mike Leach regime? Bears 21, Lions 14.

Okay, let's switch gears here and bring on the BCS National Championship Game (sort of). I am not going to engage in HYYYYYYPPPPPPE! for this one, because I think that Boise and TCU are getting robbed here. At least they should do a national semi-finals or "plus one" or something this time, that actually can rid of the mythical part of the mythical national championship. I'm not even sure that the University of Texas is the best college team in Texas!

Texas Longhorns (+4) vs. Alabama Crimson Tide, at Pasadena, CA. Okay, like I said earlier, I question why two power conference schools got into this game when two other just as good schools were sent off to Arizona. It's like saying you're good enough when all 4 teams went undefeated. But I'll leave that to the TCU and Boise fans. As for the game, I see that Alabama played the much better championship game, beating Florida pretty handily, while Colt McCoy got chased around a lot by Ndamukong Suh, who plays like this guy but whose name sounds like this guy. Anyway, Texas will have to beat Mark "I Struck the Heisman Pose" Ingram and Nick Saban will have to figure out a way to stop Colt "Texas Sheriff" McCoy and Jordan "Texas Deputy" Shipley. Roll Tide 31, We're Texas (And You're Not) 30.

I never knew you were a fan of Hong Kong Phooey, young fella. Glad to see you're upping your 70s quotient! As for the game, my usual rule of thumb is this -- in these games, the team with the better defense usually wins. That would be Alabama. So I'll pick them. Watch for the Tide to play ball control, keep McCoy off the field and win it Ohio State-style. Boring but effective. Alabama 24, Texas 16.

So you say that the next coach in Chicago is going to be Mike Leach? He'll be coming with a little baggage, but maybe he can keep the baggage in the closet where he stores wide receivers. Of course, Craig James probably won't like this joke much, but he probably won't understand it because he went to SMU. Ben out!

The Residue of Design

So do you know why terrorists are now coming from Yemen? Let the President explain:

"We're learning more about the suspect," Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address that the White House released on Saturday as the president vacationed in Hawaii.

"We know that he traveled to Yemen, a country grappling with crushing poverty and deadly insurgencies. It appears that he joined an affiliate of al-Qaida, and that this group — al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula — trained him, equipped him with those explosives and directed him to attack that plane headed for America," the president said.

Yep, no doubt about it -- Yemen is a problem. Like Somalia, its neighbor across the Gulf of Aden, it is a failed state where al-Qaida and other similarly situated terrorist organizations operate with impunity.

But did you catch the part about "crushing poverty?" Unless I'm not parsing the President's words correctly, the implication seems to be that "crushing poverty" is one of the keys to producing terrorists. So what do we know about Umar Farouk Abdulmullatab, the guy who tried to blow up the plane? Take it away, Ed Morrissey:

Abdulmutallab lived a life of privilege. His father ran Nigeria’s Central Bank, and he had access to the best education money could buy. Instead, he got sucked into radical Islam and decided to dedicate his life to murdering others, and not out of any sense of hunger for food, but from the hunger of deadly malice that ate at his soul.

Abdulmutallab fits the typical profile of the modern al-Qaida terrorist: scion of a wealthy family, with access to education and financial resources far beyond most of his countrymen. He is a child of privilege. Kinda like Osama bin Laden, actually. Or this guy, another unsuccessful bomber of a different era.

So here are a few questions for the President to consider:

• If "crushing poverty" is a source of grievance, how does blowing up a plane alleviate the suffering of the average Yemeni or Nigerian? Or is it possible that something else is driving the behavior these terrorists?
• Have you read this book? If not, may I recommend it? Or this book, for that matter?

We got lucky with NW Flight 253. But it's worth remembering the words of Branch Rickey: luck is the residue of design. If we want to maximize our luck in the future, we need to stop believing foolishness.

New Year's Dilettante

Happy New Year! I couldn't be happier that 2009 is in the rearview mirror. While 2009 wasn't especially terrible for me personally, far too many people I know suffered a lot in the past year. I am hopeful that this coming year will be better.

What do I envision for this feature in 2010? Here are a few guesses:

• I am hoping to feature more writing by people other than myself. I've had a lot of fun helping Benster and Fearless Maria record their thoughts on the passing scene. For the most part we've limited their contributions to outlandish football picks and cultural critiques of very old music, but they have ideas on many other topics and I would like to feature their ideas more in 2010. Our friend the Night Writer has provided us with an excellent example of how this can work. You can get an excellent read on Tiger Lilly, Mall Diva, the Reverend Mother and the Man With a Thousand Blog Names over there. Oh, and you might learn some exciting news, too!


• I'm also hoping that I can convince Mrs. D to post more often. As I think you'll agree, she's very good. And maybe I can convince Stinger to start posting again. I'll try, but his life as a dazzling urbanite man-about-town seems to be pretty time consuming.


• Will we talk about politics here? Yes, of course. Every year I vow to write less about politics, but like Michael Corleone when I think I'm out, events pull me back in. This is an election year and there are a lot of events to cover. It's especially important in Minnesota, as the entire legislative branch is up for re-election and we will elect a new governor. It's crucial we get this right.


• I want to do more in-depth writing. I seem to manage a multi-part series at least once or twice a year and the results are usually pretty good. A worthwhile blog cannot live on snark alone.

Thank you for your continuing support of our efforts to make sense of the world here in the Neighborhood. One last thought -- when I was a kid I always thought Fred Rogers was a sap, but my opinion of him has changed completely. Now, I admire Fred Rogers greatly. The reason he was successful was simple: he was always respectful of his audience and genuinely cared about the people who crossed his path. That's a pretty good way to go through life, I think.

Lightning Round -- 123109

This year is almost gone. Good riddance.

• If you read one thing today, make sure it's this piece from Peter Wallison in the Wall Street Journal. If you thought the housing bubble was a bad thing, consider this money quote: New research by Edward Pinto, a former chief credit officer for Fannie Mae and a housing expert, has found that from the time Fannie and Freddie began buying risky loans as early as 1993, they routinely misrepresented the mortgages they were acquiring, reporting them as prime when they had characteristics that made them clearly subprime or Alt-A. Alt-A loans, just so you know, are loans that lack sufficient documentation to use standard underwriting or have a very low down payment, or both. They are usually the leading candidates to default. There's a lot of them still out there. And we're on the hook for a lot of money, kids.
• The new meme we're seeing is that President Obama is being held to much greater scrutiny than his predecessor Chimpy McHitlerburton over homeland security issues. And it's not fair, doncha know. Funny, I thought Barack Obama wanted this job.
• Rush Limbaugh is in the hospital in Hawaii after suffering chest pains yesterday. As you can see from the comment section of the article, he has the well wishes of America. Well, at least some of America.

Benster and D Pick Your Bowl Games -- Big Ten and More, Baby!

We now return to our regularly scheduled HYYYYYYPPPPPE! So far, we did pretty good, picking those nasty Badgers over the Miami Candy Canes. Dad, I thought those Miami uniforms looked like candy canes! And they played like candy--

Watch your mouth, son. I hear ya knockin', though.

Now that most of the dumb bowl games, like the Stalingrad Bowl, are just a dim, pointless memory, let's actually pick some bowl games that people might care about. We'll save the BCS Championship Game for next week, though. Oh, one other thing: even though we promised to only pay attention to bowl games that people care about, we'll pick the Insight Bowl, too.

Insight Bowl: Minnesota Golden Brewsters (-2 1/2) vs. Iowa State Cyclones. Auntie Em! It's a twista! It's a twista! Dorothy! Come into the house and watch a couple of really bad teams play in a meaningless bowl game! It's twisted! But do you know what's really twisted? Tim Brewster. In his very first press conference, he proved he was a world-class blowhard. I was only 11 at the time and I could figure that one out! Anyway, I think the Brew Crew should pull this one out, just to prove how pointless it is. Gopher Nation 60, It's a Twista 10.

Wow, if you're that cynical when you're 14, I hate to imagine what we'll be seeing in a few years, Seabiscuit. But you're right -- this game is pretty much a joke. The Gophers are profoundly mediocre and Iowa State is, too. But at least the Gopher alums get a trip down to the desert. That's something. I'll pick the Gophers, too. Minnesota 24, Iowa State 21.

Outback Bowl: Au-barn War Eagle!!! (-7 1/2) vs. Northwestern Wildcat Offense. The only time I saw Au-barn was against the Crimson Tide, where they almost beat the Tide and showed Mark "I Struck the Heisman Pose" Ingram a thing or two. Northwestern's best win was when they beat the Badgers in Evanston. This ain't Evanston -- this is Tampa Bay, a noted shipping port, and the Cats will find out that their ship has sailed. War Eagle!!! 90, Northwestern 7.

Uh, no. In fact, I don't even think that Auburn is going to win the game. They are a pretty ordinary SEC team and while that usually is recommendation enough, it won't be this time. I really like the way Northwestern spreads the field and makes teams defend them. I would remind Grasshopper that the Wildcats also went into Iowa City and won. They won't be afraid of Auburn. Northwestern 31, Auburn 24.

Capital One Bowl: Penn State Paternos (-2 1/2) vs. LSU Bayou Bengals. Penn State. Joe Paterno. Got beat by Iowa. In Happy Valley. Going to play a team that gave the Tebows a run for their money. Sorry, JoePa. You won't be happy in this Valley. LSU 40, Penn State 0.

No one believes me, but I don't think the SEC is that good this year. LSU looked pretty ordinary in the games that I saw them play. Penn State probably has the best talent in the Big Ten this year. They definitely have the oldest coach. That may not be enough to win, but I suspect the Nittany Lions will give a good accounting. LSU 24, Penn State 19.

Alamo Bowl: Texas Tech Red Leach-Free Raiders (-7 1/2) vs. Sparty the Spartan. Mike Leach, this is your mother speaking! What I have told you about respect? You don't lock a kid in the closet, especially when the kid's dad has an ESPN microphone available to him 24/7. And he's probably going to sue your butt! Anyway, after that rant, it looks like the Red Raiders might be in a little bit of flux, because of the aforementioned coach, who I am happy to say is back to Middle Ages! Anyway, look for Sparty to play the Santa Anna role in this game. Sparty the Spartan 30, Texas Tech 19.

Ordinarily, I would have picked Texas Tech to win this easily. But this game is now just about impossible to figure. I don't know if the Texas Tech players will be happy to be rid of the Broom Closet Torquemada or if they'll fold up without their, ahem, colorful leader. Here's the thing -- the rest of the TTU coaching staff are Leach's henchmen. I think Sparty got a big gift and will have the wit to use it. Michigan State 31, Texas Tech 24.

Rose Bowl: Oregon Ducks (-4) vs. The Ohio State University Buckeyes. It's going to be strength against strength. The Ducks have a serious running game with LaGarrette (Manny Pacquiao) Blount and LaMichael (No, I haven't punched anybody) James. And I almost forgot to mention Jeremiah (Usain Bolt) Masoli, the fastest quarterback you will ever see. But, even though Jim Tressel usually dresses like a middle school science teacher (and I'm in middle school so I'm an authority on that subject), he always makes Ohio State competitive. But the Ducks are too fast for the Bucks. Quack Quack 100, Oh No 2.

How do you show someone shaking their head on a blog? That's what I'm doing right now. I agree, Oregon is the better team and should win. But a 98 point spread seems a bit much. Let's be a tad more conservative and figure that the Ducks won't score on every single play. Oregon 34, Ohio State 16.

Sugar Bowl: Florida Tebows (-13) vs. Cincinnati Bearcats. Hey, guess what? It's the Missing Coach Bowl! Urban Meyer is taking a leave of absence and Brian Kelly is simply absent entirely, having headed out to South Bend to get fed to the alums. Both teams feature good quarterbacks, with Tim Tebow highlighting the Gators and Tony Pike leading the Bearcats. Sing it with me, Decrepit: Oh where, oh where have our coaches gone, oh where or where can they be? One is taking pills and the other is getting killed, oh where oh where can they be! Florida 50, Cincy 49.

Huh. I'm not sure Florida has given up 49 points all season. They play pretty good defense, and they have their man Tebow. I suspect they'll win, but Cincinnati is a pretty good outfit and this one will be close. Florida 24, Cincinnati 20.

Fiesta Bowl: TCU Horned Frogs (-7 1/2) vs. Boise State Smurfs in Glendale, AZ. Two undefeated teams not playing for the national title? In the immortal words of Jim Mora, Playoffs? Playoffs? It's about time that the BCS went away and we had some playoffs! And as for the corrupt executives who run the BCS, they are who we thought they were! A good rant, won't you say, Dad?

Yes, very nice. Now aren't you supposed to pick the game, Seabiscuit?

Oh yeah. Good point. Blue Field Smurfs 84, Horned Frogs 83.

You seem a little unclear on the concept. That's a basketball score. Anyway, this is actually a good game and yet probably the most shameful thing that the BCS has done. They've essentially turned this game into the Island of Misfit Toys Bowl and segregated the upstarts from the big boys. I get the distinct impression that the big boys don't want to be embarrassed. I'm picking TCU, but it will be very close. TCU 31, Boise State 24.

Orange Bowl: Georgia Tech Ramblin' Wrecks (-4) vs. Iowa Hawkeyes. Guess who's back! It's my favorite whipping boy, Ricky Stanzi! He's returned from injury to face my insults! That's right, Ricky -- you better run, pally, the Big Bad Benster is after you! If you ask me, if Iowa had a better quarterback they could be playing the BCS Championship Game, or at least the Rose Bowl. Instead, they have to go to Miami and face the Ramblin' Wreck, which is most famous for beating Cumberland College 222-0. Oddly enough, I wasn't born then so I couldn't have predicted that score, although I would have. I'll actually be generous to Iowa. Iowa 222, Cumberland 0.

Ben, I think that Iowa is playing Georgia Tech, not Cumberland. Care to try again?

If you insist. Iowa 30, Georgia Tech 6.

I'll admit -- the Big Ten gets no respect and hasn't earned much lately, to be honest. But I can't figure out why Georgia Tech is favored in this game. Iowa is what they always are: resourceful, tough and a very good defensive squad. Georgia Tech is a good ACC team, but frankly that doesn't mean as much as people think. I suspect that Iowa will win and that Ricky Stanzi will play well, despite my son's misgivings. Iowa 24, Georgia Tech 13.

That's probably enough HYYYYYPPPPPE! for now. Of course, I'm probably going to have to ask Obama to investigate the BCS. Four undefeated teams, only two get the chance. It's not right, baby! Ben out!

Too Big, Too Slow, Too Good

Congratulations to the Wisconsin Badgers. And so much for the "U."

Radio Free Dilettante — 122909

iTunes spins the color wheel:

Last Five:
Black Country Woman, Led Zeppelin
Fair, Ben Folds Five
Red Barchetta, Rush
Paint it Black, Rolling Stones
Should I Stay or Should I Go, The Clash

Next Five:
Inner City Blues (Make Me Wanna Holler), Marvin Gaye
Everything Merges With the Night, Brian Eno
Same Old Scene, Roxy Music
Sapphire Bullets of Pure Love, They Might Be Giants
Jesus Just Left Chicago, ZZ Top

Bear Down

What a great football game last night. If you ever wondered why the NFL remains so wildly popular, despite all the foolishness, yesterday's game is a great explanation. Just a few quick thoughts:

• All over Chicagoland and elsewhere, Bears fans are wondering where this #6 guy was all year. My son the prognosticator has given Jay Cutler much grief this year, but you have to give Cutler a lot of credit; he played a beautiful game.
• I don't know if this game is enough to save Lovie Smith's job in Chicago, but I would say this: I don't know that da Bearz would find a better coach than the one they have now. If the Bears ownership wants to know where the problems lie in the organization, I'd suggest they consult a mirror.
• The old saw goes that it doesn't matter who you play as much as when you play them. The Vikings are circling the bowl now because they are finally getting hit with the injuries that other teams faced earlier in the year. It's quite clear that Antoine Winfield has not recovered from his earlier foot injury; he got beat badly on the last touchdown and on a few other plays, which is something I've not seen happen before. I don't know why Pat Williams didn't play, but without his presence in the middle the Viking pash rush wasn't much of a factor. Much commentary will be made about Adrian Peterson's fumble or other offensive failings early on, but the bottom line is that the Vikings defense was the problem last night.
• Having said that, the Vikings are in a bad spot because they no longer have the advantage on either line. Bryant McKinnie looks like a shadow of himself and Anthony Herrera was pretty much awful last night. Every team left in the NFC playoffs has at least one top-notch pass rusher on the team. If the Vikings don't get things fixed on the offensive line, they won't win.
• So the Saints get beat in their own house by Tampa Freaking Bay and the Vikings can't close the deal. So we can't figure much of anything, can we? Which leads to the question --who do you like in the playoffs? Based on the way the teams are playing now, you could make a case for or against any of the six NFC teams that will be in the playoffs getting to the Super Bowl. Based on what I've seen, the best team right now is probably the Eagles, but I think they could be beaten by any of the other teams. One thing for sure -- I'm glad that I don't work at one of the Vegas sports books, because it's awfully hard to rank these teams.
• One other scenario that now is open: the Vikings could end up hosting my beloved Packers in the first round. That could be a festival of hype, doncha think?