I obtained this directly from the National Football League
NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE
280 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10017
(212) 450-2000 * FAX (212) 681-7573
WWW.NFLMedia.com
Joe Browne, Executive Vice President--Communications
Greg Aiello, Vice President-Public Relations
January 16, 2006
"The definition of a catch -- or in this case an interception -- states that in
the process of making the catch a player must maintain possession of the ball
after he contacts the ground. The initial call on the field was that Troy Polamalu
intercepted the pass because he maintained possession of the ball after hitting
the ground. The replay showed that Polamalu had rolled over and was rising to
his feet when the ball came loose. He maintained possession long enough to
establish a catch. Therefore, the replay review should have upheld the call on the
field that it was a catch and fumble.
"The rule regarding the performing of an act common to the game applies
when there is contact with a defensive player and the ball comes loose, which did
not happen here."
Monday, January 16, 2006
Indy Coach Tony Dungy on NFL Network's "CoachSpeak" Today
I just watched "CoachSpeak" on The NFL Network about 15 minutes ago. Host Darren Horton and Coach Jim Mora Sr. interviewed Indianapolis Head Coach Tony Dungy.
Always the class person, Dungy did back his quarterback and explain that Peyton Manning didn't mean to point fingers, but he was referring to a problem that, from listening to Coach Dungy, was part of the team's conversation during the ebb-and-flow of the Steelers game.
Dungy also said that he would take these next two to three weeks and reflect on his family and the passing of his eldest son, but for now, he was enthusiastic about returning to the Colts and being with the organization for a long time.
As a person who lost his father October 13th of 2005 and his stepfather on March 17th of the same year, I can totally understand what he's going through. I only hope Colts fans can be supportive and encourage him to stay the course. I also wish that sports fans would be more mature and reflective in their evaluation of Dungy this year.
The Colts will be back. But for a very clear set of spritual reasons, I don't think this matter of a Super Bowl win was suppose to happen this time.
But it will.
Saturday, January 14, 2006
Mother Jones' Editor Clara Jeffrey shows how far women still have to go (sigh!)
I saw this in the now-current Mother Jones mag and fortunately it was online. I'm going to reprint it below. It's said to note that for all of our "progress" much has not changed. I wonder how much of this is because we as a society-- men and women -- just can't seem to embrace real equality, and so the nation slows progress in this area. I think there have been advances, but we really need to start a national dialog on this issue. We need to review where we are, and why.
Limited Ambitions
News: Why Women Can't Win for Trying
By Clara Jeffery (editor)
January/February 2006 Issue of Mother Jones
Women make 80¢ on the male dollar, even accounting for time off to raise kids. If that factor is not accounted for, women make 56¢.
Over her career, the average working woman loses $1.2 million to wage inequity.
Since 1963, when the Equal Pay Act was signed, the wage gap has closed by less than half a cent per year.
In 1963, RFK withdrew his nomination to a club that had spurned a black official and formed a club that did not admit women.
3 board members of Catalyst--a workplace-equity advocacy group--belong to Augusta National Golf Club, which bans women.
One is the CEO of GE, which won a 2004 Catalyst Award, although the company has a below-average rate of female executives.
Companies with women in top jobs see 35 percent higher returns than those without.
74 percent of female executives have a spouse who’s employed full time. 75 percent of male execs have a spouse who is not employed.
42 percent of female execs over 40 don't have kids.
For full-time working fathers, each child correlates to a 2.1 percent earnings increase. For working moms, it is a 2.5 percent loss.
Every industrialized country except the U.S. and Australia has paid parental leave with a guaranteed job on return to work.
86 percent of guests on Sunday-morning political talk shows are men. So are 80 percent of the guests on The Daily Show.
Only 5 of 20-odd "thought-leader" magazines have ever had a woman as editor-in-chief. Two of those jobs were held by Tina Brown.
Only 24 percent of recent works in The New Yorker, the Atlantic Monthly, Harper's, Vanity Fair, and the New York Times Magazine were written by women, according to WomenTK.com.
1/3 of those were articles on gender or family or were short stories or memoirs.
41 percent of Mother Jones' writers during the same period were women. This issue only 11 percent are.
Magazines that run lists of the best firms for women to work for often accept pay-to-play advertising or use self-reported data. Working Mother lists firms facing class-action suits for sex harassment and pregnancy discrimination. (Wow. This means most PR on this matter may be fixed!)
Working Mother recently found Allstate, American Express, and General Mills among the 8 best firms for women of color. At each, 30% of new hourly hires are women of color, but 0% of newly hired executives are.
Women over 65 are almost twice as likely to be poor as men.
Actresses over 40 account for 9 percent of movie roles. Actors over 40 account for 30 percent.
Anne Bancroft was 36 when she played Mrs. Robinson in The Graduate. Dustin Hoffman was 30.
Chances that a Best Actress winner portrayed a prostitute, a nun, or a mute: 1 in 8.
Since orchestras started requiring musicians to audition behind screens, the number of women hired has increased 20%.
40% of married professional women feel their husbands do less work around the house than they create.
Each teenage girl increases a mom's weekly housework by 1.5 hours, but leaves a dad's unchanged. A teenage boy adds 3 hours to mom's chores, and an hour to dad's.
Heavyset women get fewer promotions and face more job discrimination. Heavyset men do not.
Models weigh 23% less than average women. In 1986 it was only 8 percent less.
The above statistics were quoted in a press release for a Dove product whose adcampaign uses full-figured models but the use of which is claimed to reduce cellulite.
Asked to pick a partner for a relationship, college men tend to choose women in subordinate jobs. College women show no preference, nor, for a one-night stand, do men.
Men only earn 3/4 as many B.A.s as women. Some colleges now admit to practicing affirmative action for male applicants.
Only 1/3 of female Ph.D.s who get on the tenure track before having a baby ever do so.
31.5 percent of Iraq's parliament are women. Only 15 percent of the U.S. Congress are women.
15 African nations have a higher percentage of female legislators than does the U.S.
69 percent of men believe America would be better off if women occupied more top political jobs. Only 61 percent of women agree.
Among Republicans, that split is 52 percent to 34 percent.
Under Bush , the Labor Dept. has eliminated 25 publications on pay inequity and child care.
After a woman filed a sexual-harassment complaint against her Merrill Lynch superior, she circulated an article titled "Stop Whining," which warned that "constant complaining can cost you your job."
Limited Ambitions
News: Why Women Can't Win for Trying
By Clara Jeffery (editor)
January/February 2006 Issue of Mother Jones
Women make 80¢ on the male dollar, even accounting for time off to raise kids. If that factor is not accounted for, women make 56¢.
Over her career, the average working woman loses $1.2 million to wage inequity.
Since 1963, when the Equal Pay Act was signed, the wage gap has closed by less than half a cent per year.
In 1963, RFK withdrew his nomination to a club that had spurned a black official and formed a club that did not admit women.
3 board members of Catalyst--a workplace-equity advocacy group--belong to Augusta National Golf Club, which bans women.
One is the CEO of GE, which won a 2004 Catalyst Award, although the company has a below-average rate of female executives.
Companies with women in top jobs see 35 percent higher returns than those without.
74 percent of female executives have a spouse who’s employed full time. 75 percent of male execs have a spouse who is not employed.
42 percent of female execs over 40 don't have kids.
For full-time working fathers, each child correlates to a 2.1 percent earnings increase. For working moms, it is a 2.5 percent loss.
Every industrialized country except the U.S. and Australia has paid parental leave with a guaranteed job on return to work.
86 percent of guests on Sunday-morning political talk shows are men. So are 80 percent of the guests on The Daily Show.
Only 5 of 20-odd "thought-leader" magazines have ever had a woman as editor-in-chief. Two of those jobs were held by Tina Brown.
Only 24 percent of recent works in The New Yorker, the Atlantic Monthly, Harper's, Vanity Fair, and the New York Times Magazine were written by women, according to WomenTK.com.
1/3 of those were articles on gender or family or were short stories or memoirs.
41 percent of Mother Jones' writers during the same period were women. This issue only 11 percent are.
Magazines that run lists of the best firms for women to work for often accept pay-to-play advertising or use self-reported data. Working Mother lists firms facing class-action suits for sex harassment and pregnancy discrimination. (Wow. This means most PR on this matter may be fixed!)
Working Mother recently found Allstate, American Express, and General Mills among the 8 best firms for women of color. At each, 30% of new hourly hires are women of color, but 0% of newly hired executives are.
Women over 65 are almost twice as likely to be poor as men.
Actresses over 40 account for 9 percent of movie roles. Actors over 40 account for 30 percent.
Anne Bancroft was 36 when she played Mrs. Robinson in The Graduate. Dustin Hoffman was 30.
Chances that a Best Actress winner portrayed a prostitute, a nun, or a mute: 1 in 8.
Since orchestras started requiring musicians to audition behind screens, the number of women hired has increased 20%.
40% of married professional women feel their husbands do less work around the house than they create.
Each teenage girl increases a mom's weekly housework by 1.5 hours, but leaves a dad's unchanged. A teenage boy adds 3 hours to mom's chores, and an hour to dad's.
Heavyset women get fewer promotions and face more job discrimination. Heavyset men do not.
Models weigh 23% less than average women. In 1986 it was only 8 percent less.
The above statistics were quoted in a press release for a Dove product whose adcampaign uses full-figured models but the use of which is claimed to reduce cellulite.
Asked to pick a partner for a relationship, college men tend to choose women in subordinate jobs. College women show no preference, nor, for a one-night stand, do men.
Men only earn 3/4 as many B.A.s as women. Some colleges now admit to practicing affirmative action for male applicants.
Only 1/3 of female Ph.D.s who get on the tenure track before having a baby ever do so.
31.5 percent of Iraq's parliament are women. Only 15 percent of the U.S. Congress are women.
15 African nations have a higher percentage of female legislators than does the U.S.
69 percent of men believe America would be better off if women occupied more top political jobs. Only 61 percent of women agree.
Among Republicans, that split is 52 percent to 34 percent.
Under Bush , the Labor Dept. has eliminated 25 publications on pay inequity and child care.
After a woman filed a sexual-harassment complaint against her Merrill Lynch superior, she circulated an article titled "Stop Whining," which warned that "constant complaining can cost you your job."
Wednesday, January 11, 2006
Packers Hire 49ers' Mike McCarthy - The Alarming Pattern of Avoidance of "The Rooney Rule" by some NFL Organizations
The "Rooney Rule" was established to cause NFL organizations to at least interview and in more cases hire minority -- and more specfically black, coaches. After a review of the current pattern of hiring by many NFL teams over the course of the last month, I must sadly report that the Rooney Rule has failed.
What spurred me to write this entry -- as I attempt to hold back the tears that come from the news that The Green Bay Packers have hired San Francisco 49ers Offensive Coordinator Mike McCarthy as their new head coach -- is a wonderful trip I had to Seattle to visit a friend and attend the Seattle Seahawks game against the San Francisco 49ers last November. I really enjoyed the experience,and as a momentary aside, Qwest Field is an excellent place to watch a football game.
There was one thing -- and just one -- that was disturbing to me. The way San Francisco 49ers Offensive Coordinator Mike McCarthy called the plays during that contest.
I said this to my friend there, I've said it before, and now I'm putting it in writing. I can't see how he got his job considering that his game plans are 1) inflexible and 2) illogical. Let me provide some examples:
1) Against the Indianapolis Colts, Mc Carthy devises plays based on the Utah Spread Offense that then-head coach Urban Meyer developed and Alex Smith played in. The trouble is that McCarthy installed running plays and not passing plays for Smith. One play gained 2 yards; the other lost 2 yards, and I was flabergasted -- Smith isn't Michael Vick. It was as if he had installed a gimic rather than actually using plays that could help Smith.
2) Creating rollout pass plays that don't call for the quarterback to roll to a point and set his feet. This is really bothersome to watch. The most successful rollout plays were devised by Bill Walsh, and Al Davis before him; they call for the quarterback to rollout to a spot, then pass the football. The idea is to move the launch point of the pass first, not make the QB run. This is a common error in rollout design, even with run-pass options. It's no wonder Smith's success here is spotty, even though his ability to throw on the run makes up for terrible play design.
3) Not providing his quarterbacks with even a simple audible to take advantage of the most obvious defensive weakness. This was completely evident in the Seattle game, where the Seahawks called defenses stacked against the run on first down, what did the 49ers do? They ran. Seattle cornerbacks were lined up "bump and run" against the Niners Flanker and Split End. What did the 49ers do? Call a pass with "up" patterns to get a quick gain? No. What did they do? They ran.
On second down, the Seahawks defense "loosened" -- the cornerbacks were yards off the receivers, the safeties were back in obvious "two deep" positions, and the defensive line posised to rush the passer. What did the 49ers do? Pass.
It was enough to make me yell at McCarthy through the glass wall of the club section. I know someone got what I was saying -- it wasn't McCarthy.
4) Calling 30 runs against Seattle when they were giving the 49ers the pass. Especially on first down.
5) Calling four-wide receiver plays where there are three receivers on one side, and one pass catcher on the other, and then having the QB throw to the strong side where the three catchers are and ignoring the lone, single-covered receiver on the other side. This has happened way too often.
I could go on and on. McCarthy's early success with the Niners came because he was new to the team, and thus there was no "book" on what he would do with the 49ers offensive personel. Once NFL teams developed an analysis, they quickly bottled his offense during the year.
So all year long I'm stewing about McCarthy as the weak coaching link on the Niners, and what happens? The Green Bay Packers make this guy their coach -- without even seriously considering a black candidate. They talked to two, but selected someone not even as accomplished as Tim Lewis and Maurice Carthon.
What the heck is going on?
You can't tell me that out of over 100 black assistant coaches there aren't 20 that can be considered for head coaching positions. Look, I'm not a coach. But I'll tell you that I could take any NFL team's third string offense and develop schames to consistently beat that organization's first string defense. And I'm itching for some one to challenge me.
Why? Simple. Because -- more so that college and even high school coaches -- NFL coaches think in a consistent "box" of offensive approaches. Only once in every other decade does one person -- like Coach Walsh -- come along and get the chance to install an offensive system that really is a true shift in thinking. But with the Internet, offensive revolutions are starting at the high school and college level and not at the NFL.
Many of the people who know these are not white; they're black. Hue Jackson's a good example. Jackson has been an offensive coordinator at Cal, USC, and with the Washington Redskins. He's learned the most successful and advanced offensive concepts from Steve Spurrier and Steve Marriucci, to name some of them. Yet, he's litterally been banished to the place of receivers coach with the Bengals, forced to work with the tempermental personality of wide receiver Chad Johnson, while Offensive Coordinator Bob Bratkowski calls a set of predictable pass plays devoid of rollouts or sprint out passes, leaving his quarterbacks as sitting ducks when the pass is needed the most.
Meanwhile, the Houston Texans talk to Gary Kubiak, hire Dan Reeves as a consultant, and make a list of coaches that has contained no African American names until recently and if I'm a betting man and on this (and I am) that person will be "the token one."
Why? And why McCarthy? What is the deal? It seems that to some teams having white coaches is more important that winning. Black coaches? Just window dressing for "The Rooney Rule."
Yesterday at MacWorld San Francisco
I had the pleasure of attending my first Steve Jobs keynote speech at MacWorld, San Francisco yesterday. Well, it went like this: two plus hours of standing in line within Moscone Convention Center only to be ushered into an "overflow" crowd room to see his presentation on a couple of large screens.
I must admit to some disappointment. Especially since the dude next to me couldn't seem to keep to his own personal space, causing me to lean away from him and partway into the next seat, which was to my good fortune, empty. After a time, I got up and stood at the back of the room. That was better.
Once at my place at the back of this large room, I was able to comfortably enjoy Jobs' introduction of some hot new Apple products: the Intel-based IMacs, the new GarageBand for Podcasting, and other new devices.
This is not my first MacWorld, but it was my first Keynote speech. I'm going back for the Podcast seminars and lectures, but my advice for the future is this: skip the keynote unless you know you're going to get a front row seat and don't have to wake up at 4 AM to do it.
I must admit to some disappointment. Especially since the dude next to me couldn't seem to keep to his own personal space, causing me to lean away from him and partway into the next seat, which was to my good fortune, empty. After a time, I got up and stood at the back of the room. That was better.
Once at my place at the back of this large room, I was able to comfortably enjoy Jobs' introduction of some hot new Apple products: the Intel-based IMacs, the new GarageBand for Podcasting, and other new devices.
This is not my first MacWorld, but it was my first Keynote speech. I'm going back for the Podcast seminars and lectures, but my advice for the future is this: skip the keynote unless you know you're going to get a front row seat and don't have to wake up at 4 AM to do it.
Monday, January 09, 2006
"King Kong" Director Peter Jackson Snubbed by Directors Guild of America (DGA)'s Awards -- Jackson Battled to Have Collegues Recognized
The DGA -- Director's Guild of America's -- awards nominations were annouced. They are:
George Clooney (Good Night and Good Luck), Paul Haggis (Crash), Ang Lee (Brokeback Mountain), Bennett Miller (Capote) and Steven Spielberg (Munich).
I did some research and learned that King Kong Director Peter Jackon had requested two of his co-workers to be honored as "Assistant Directors" along with him, something the DGA has never done. He did this back in November of 2005. So, it seems his film's being "locked out" of the lower awards for reasons having nothing to do with how good it is.
Since King Kong is picked as an Oscar "Best Picture" candidate, Jackson should be nominated for Best Director as well. It's not as if Jackson was acting out of hubris, but the pure recognition that the movie's production was not "all about him." That's rare and should be rewarded.
Go to www.oscar.com and tell them how you feel about that, before this political game is allowed to continue.
George Clooney (Good Night and Good Luck), Paul Haggis (Crash), Ang Lee (Brokeback Mountain), Bennett Miller (Capote) and Steven Spielberg (Munich).
I did some research and learned that King Kong Director Peter Jackon had requested two of his co-workers to be honored as "Assistant Directors" along with him, something the DGA has never done. He did this back in November of 2005. So, it seems his film's being "locked out" of the lower awards for reasons having nothing to do with how good it is.
Since King Kong is picked as an Oscar "Best Picture" candidate, Jackson should be nominated for Best Director as well. It's not as if Jackson was acting out of hubris, but the pure recognition that the movie's production was not "all about him." That's rare and should be rewarded.
Go to www.oscar.com and tell them how you feel about that, before this political game is allowed to continue.
NFL Playoff Tickets Exchange
With a click on the title post link above, you can either sell your NFL Playoff tickets (don't scalp, please), or buy them and for any game.
Vince Young Enters The NFL Draft - Young's Stats at Texas
Texas Longhorns' Junior QB Vince Young's annouced his intention to enter the NFL Draft. I think he should be the first round pick of the Houston Texans; they can offer Dave Carr for trade for more draft picks, and use backup QB Tony Banks as the "trainee" for Young.
You can read more about Young and his statistics and records at Texas with a click on this sentence.
A Gestapo Administration by Paul Craig Roberts
This is another column comparing the Bush Administration to the Nixon Administration and unfavorably. Will impeachment trails ever occur, or is President Bush protected by a Republican majority in both House and Senate?
Caught in gratuitous and illegal spying on American citizens, the Bush administration has defended its illegal activity and set the Justice (sic) Department on the trail of the person or persons who informed the New York Times of Bush's violation of law. Note the astounding paradox: The Bush administration is caught red-handed in blatant illegality and responds by trying to arrest the patriot who exposed the administration’s illegal behavior.
Bush has actually declared it treasonous to reveal his illegal behavior! His propagandists, who masquerade as news organizations, have taken up the line: To reveal wrong-doing by the Bush administration is to give aid and comfort to the enemy.
Compared to Spygate, Watergate was a kindergarten picnic. The Bush administration's lies, felonies, and illegalities have revealed it to be a criminal administration with a police state mentality and police state methods. Now Bush and his attorney general have gone the final step and declared Bush to be above the law. Bush aggressively mimics Hitler’s claim that defense of the realm entitles him to ignore the rule of law.
Bush's acts of illegal domestic spying are gratuitous because there are no valid reasons for Bush to illegally spy. The Foreign Intelligence Services Act gives Bush all the power he needs to spy on terrorist suspects. All the administration is required to do is to apply to a secret FISA court for warrants. The Act permits the administration to spy first and then apply for a warrant, should time be of the essence. The problem is that Bush has totally ignored the law and the court.
Why would President Bush ignore the law and the FISA court? It is certainly not because the court in its three decades of existence was uncooperative. According to attorney Martin Garbus (New York Observer, 12/28/05), the secret court has issued more warrants than all federal district judges combined, only once denying a warrant.
Why, then, has the administration created another scandal for itself on top of the WMD, torture, hurricane, and illegal detention scandals?
There are two possible reasons.
One reason is that the Bush administration is being used to concentrate power in the executive. The old conservative movement, which honors the separation of powers, has been swept away. Its place has been taken by a neoconservative movement that worships executive power.
The other reason is that the Bush administration could not go to the FISA secret court for warrants because it was not spying for legitimate reasons and, therefore, had to keep the court in the dark about its activities.
What might these illegitimate reasons be? Could it be that the Bush administration used the spy apparatus of the US government in order to influence the outcome of the presidential election?
Could we attribute the feebleness of the Democrats as an opposition party to information obtained through illegal spying that would subject them to blackmail?
These possible reasons for bypassing the law and the court need to be fully investigated and debated. No administration in my lifetime has given so many strong reasons to oppose and condemn it as has the Bush administration. Nixon was driven from office because of a minor burglary of no consequence in itself. Clinton was impeached because he did not want the embarrassment of publicly acknowledging that he engaged in adulterous sex acts in the Oval Office. In contrast, Bush has deceived the public and Congress in order to invade Iraq, illegally detained Americans, illegally tortured detainees, and illegally spied on Americans. Bush has upheld neither the Constitution nor the law of the land. A majority of Americans disapprove of what Bush has done; yet, the Democratic Party remains a muted spectator.
Why is the Justice (sic) Department investigating the leak of Bush's illegal activity instead of the illegal activity committed by Bush? Is the purpose to stonewall Congress' investigation of Bush's illegal spying? By announcing a Justice (sic) Department investigation, the Bush administration positions itself to decline to respond to Congress on the grounds that it would compromise its own investigation into national security matters.
What will the federal courts do? When Hitler challenged the German judicial system, it collapsed and accepted that Hitler was the law. Hitler's claims were based on nothing but his claims, just as the claim for extra-legal power for Bush is based on nothing but memos written by his political appointees.
The Bush administration, backed by the neoconservative Federalist Society, has brought the separation of powers, the foundation of our political system, to crisis. The Federalist Society, an organization of Republican lawyers, favors more "energy in the executive." Distrustful of Congress and the American people, the Federalist Society never fails to support rulings that concentrate power in the executive branch of government. It is a paradox that conservative foundations and individuals have poured money for 23 years into an organization that is inimical to the separation of powers, the foundation of our constitutional system.
September 11, 2001, played into neoconservative hands exactly as the 1933 Reichstag fire played into Hitler's hands. Fear, hysteria, and national emergency are proven tools of political power grabs. Now that the federal courts are beginning to show some resistance to Bush's claims of power, will another terrorist attack allow the Bush administration to complete its coup?
January 2, 2006
Dr. Roberts [send him mail] is John M. Olin Fellow at the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. He is a former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, former contributing editor for National Review, and a former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury. He is the co-author of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.
You may email him at paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com
Caught in gratuitous and illegal spying on American citizens, the Bush administration has defended its illegal activity and set the Justice (sic) Department on the trail of the person or persons who informed the New York Times of Bush's violation of law. Note the astounding paradox: The Bush administration is caught red-handed in blatant illegality and responds by trying to arrest the patriot who exposed the administration’s illegal behavior.
Bush has actually declared it treasonous to reveal his illegal behavior! His propagandists, who masquerade as news organizations, have taken up the line: To reveal wrong-doing by the Bush administration is to give aid and comfort to the enemy.
Compared to Spygate, Watergate was a kindergarten picnic. The Bush administration's lies, felonies, and illegalities have revealed it to be a criminal administration with a police state mentality and police state methods. Now Bush and his attorney general have gone the final step and declared Bush to be above the law. Bush aggressively mimics Hitler’s claim that defense of the realm entitles him to ignore the rule of law.
Bush's acts of illegal domestic spying are gratuitous because there are no valid reasons for Bush to illegally spy. The Foreign Intelligence Services Act gives Bush all the power he needs to spy on terrorist suspects. All the administration is required to do is to apply to a secret FISA court for warrants. The Act permits the administration to spy first and then apply for a warrant, should time be of the essence. The problem is that Bush has totally ignored the law and the court.
Why would President Bush ignore the law and the FISA court? It is certainly not because the court in its three decades of existence was uncooperative. According to attorney Martin Garbus (New York Observer, 12/28/05), the secret court has issued more warrants than all federal district judges combined, only once denying a warrant.
Why, then, has the administration created another scandal for itself on top of the WMD, torture, hurricane, and illegal detention scandals?
There are two possible reasons.
One reason is that the Bush administration is being used to concentrate power in the executive. The old conservative movement, which honors the separation of powers, has been swept away. Its place has been taken by a neoconservative movement that worships executive power.
The other reason is that the Bush administration could not go to the FISA secret court for warrants because it was not spying for legitimate reasons and, therefore, had to keep the court in the dark about its activities.
What might these illegitimate reasons be? Could it be that the Bush administration used the spy apparatus of the US government in order to influence the outcome of the presidential election?
Could we attribute the feebleness of the Democrats as an opposition party to information obtained through illegal spying that would subject them to blackmail?
These possible reasons for bypassing the law and the court need to be fully investigated and debated. No administration in my lifetime has given so many strong reasons to oppose and condemn it as has the Bush administration. Nixon was driven from office because of a minor burglary of no consequence in itself. Clinton was impeached because he did not want the embarrassment of publicly acknowledging that he engaged in adulterous sex acts in the Oval Office. In contrast, Bush has deceived the public and Congress in order to invade Iraq, illegally detained Americans, illegally tortured detainees, and illegally spied on Americans. Bush has upheld neither the Constitution nor the law of the land. A majority of Americans disapprove of what Bush has done; yet, the Democratic Party remains a muted spectator.
Why is the Justice (sic) Department investigating the leak of Bush's illegal activity instead of the illegal activity committed by Bush? Is the purpose to stonewall Congress' investigation of Bush's illegal spying? By announcing a Justice (sic) Department investigation, the Bush administration positions itself to decline to respond to Congress on the grounds that it would compromise its own investigation into national security matters.
What will the federal courts do? When Hitler challenged the German judicial system, it collapsed and accepted that Hitler was the law. Hitler's claims were based on nothing but his claims, just as the claim for extra-legal power for Bush is based on nothing but memos written by his political appointees.
The Bush administration, backed by the neoconservative Federalist Society, has brought the separation of powers, the foundation of our political system, to crisis. The Federalist Society, an organization of Republican lawyers, favors more "energy in the executive." Distrustful of Congress and the American people, the Federalist Society never fails to support rulings that concentrate power in the executive branch of government. It is a paradox that conservative foundations and individuals have poured money for 23 years into an organization that is inimical to the separation of powers, the foundation of our constitutional system.
September 11, 2001, played into neoconservative hands exactly as the 1933 Reichstag fire played into Hitler's hands. Fear, hysteria, and national emergency are proven tools of political power grabs. Now that the federal courts are beginning to show some resistance to Bush's claims of power, will another terrorist attack allow the Bush administration to complete its coup?
January 2, 2006
Dr. Roberts [send him mail] is John M. Olin Fellow at the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. He is a former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, former contributing editor for National Review, and a former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury. He is the co-author of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.
You may email him at paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com
Saturday, January 07, 2006
NFL "SUPER SEASON" KICKS OFF
The NFL playoffs begin on Saturday and Sunday, January 7-8, with Wild Card Weekend. On Saturday, the Washington Redskins play at the Tampa Bay Buccaneers (ABC, 4:30 PM ET) and the Jacksonville Jaguars visit the New England Patriots (ABC, 8:00 PM ET). Wild Card Weekend continues Sunday with the Carolina Panthers at the New York Giants
(FOX, 1:00 PM ET) and the Pittsburgh Steelers traveling to face the Cincinnati Bengals (CBS, 4:30 PM ET).
The following week, the Denver Broncos and Indianapolis Colts in the AFC and Chicago Bears and Seattle Seahawks in the NFC host the Divisional Playoffs. The Colts and Seahawks own homefield advantage for the Conference Championship Games (January 22) if they win their Divisional games. The conference champions advance to Super Bowl XL at Ford Field in Detroit, Michigan on February 5.
A CONSISTENTLY GOOD PLAYOFF FIELD
Six of the past eight Super Bowl champions have returned to the playoffs this year and are among the 12 clubs vying to hoist the Vince Lombardi Trophy on February 5. Those teams are: Denver (twice), New England (thrice) and Tampa Bay.
Each of the 12 teams vying for a trip to Super Bowl XL has won at least 10 games – only the third time (2000, 2003) since the current playoff format was instituted in 1990 that the entire playoff field accomplished the feat.
The 2005 playoff participants own a combined record of 138-54 (.719), the best winning percentage since the 1977 postseason field posted a .732 mark (82-30).
ALL-TIME PLAYOFFS
The New York Giants will participate in the playoffs for the 27th time, tying the Dallas Cowboys and St. Louis Rams for the most playoff seasons in NFL history.
The Pittsburgh Steelers will play in their 43rd playoff game Sunday afternoon, tying the Oakland Raiders and St. Louis Rams for the second most postseason games ever. Only the Cowboys (54) have played more than the Steelers.
The New England Patriots are one win away from the longest playoff winning streak in NFL history. New England has won nine consecutive playoff games, tied with the VINCE LOMBARDI-led Green Bay Packers (1961-62, 1965-67).
Following is a list of this year’s 12 playoff teams and their postseason records:
TEAM WINS LOSSES PCT.
Carolina Panthers 4 2 .667
New England Patriots 16 10 .615
Washington Redskins 22 15 .595
Pittsburgh Steelers 24 18 .571
Denver Broncos 16 14 .533
Jacksonville Jaguars 4 4 .500
Chicago Bears 14 15 .483
Indianapolis Colts 13 15 .464
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 6 7 .462
New York Giants 16 21 .432
Cincinnati Bengals 5 7 .417
Seattle Seahawks 3 7 .300
WILD CARD RECORDS
TEAM WINS LOSSES PCT.
Washington Redskins 5 0 1.000
Carolina Panthers 1 0 1.000
Cincinnati Bengals 1 0 1.000
New York Giants 4 2 .667
Jacksonville Jaguars 2 1 .667
Pittsburgh Steelers 3 2 .600
New England Patriots 2 2 .500
Tampa Bay
Buccaneers 1 3 .250
DIVISIONAL RECORDS
TEAM WINS LOSSES PCT.
Denver Broncos 7 3 .700
Indianapolis Colts 4 6 .400
Chicago Bears 3 6 .333
Seattle Seahawks 1 2 .333
- NFL PLAYOFFS -
HOME SWEET HOME -- MAYBE: While homefield advantage throughout the playoffs is a coveted prize, it has been no guarantee of a trip to the Super Bowl. And like so much about the NFL, an unpredictable result is seemingly the only predictable outcome.
Since the NFL adopted the 12-team playoff format in 1990, only 15 of 30 (50 percent) No. 1 seeds have advanced to the Super Bowl with eight No. 1s being crowned NFL champions (27 percent).
A look at how the No. 1 seeds have fared since 1990:
1990 Buffalo Lost Super Bowl XXV San Francisco Lost NFC
Championship
1991 Buffalo Lost Super Bowl XXVI Washington Won Super Bowl XXVI
1992 Pittsburgh Lost Divisional San Francisco Lost NFC
Championship
1993 Buffalo Lost Super Bowl XXVIII Dallas Won Super Bowl XXVIII
1994 Pittsburgh Lost AFC Championship San Francisco Won Super Bowl XXIX
1995 Kansas City Lost Divisional Dallas Won Super Bowl XXX
196 Denver Lost Divisional Green Bay Won Super Bowl XXXI
1997 Kansas City Lost Divisional San Francisco Lost NFC
Championship
1998 Denver Won Super Bowl XXXIII Minnesota Lost NFC
Championship
1999 Jacksonville Lost AFC Championship St. Louis Won Super Bowl XXXIV
2000 Tennessee Lost Divisional New York
Giants
Lost Super Bowl XXXV
2001 Pittsburgh Lost AFC Championship St. Louis Lost Super Bowl XXXVI
2002 Oakland Lost Super Bowl XXXVII Philadelphia Lost NFC
Championship
2003 New England Won Super Bowl XXXVIII Philadelphia Lost NFC
Championship
2004 Pittsburgh Lost AFC Championship Philadelphia Lost Super Bowl XXXIX
UNDEFEATED AT HOME: The Denver Broncos and Seattle Seahawks are the only two NFL teams to finish the 2005 season with undefeated home records.
Since 1995, 21 clubs have sent their fans home happy throughout the season, finishing with 8-0 records at home.
However, only nine of those clubs have earned a trip to the Super Bowl, further proving that in the NFL, you just never know.
The teams (since 1995) to finish with 8-0 records at home and their final season result:
1995 Kansas City Chiefs 13-3 Lost Divisional Playoffs
1996 Carolina Panthers 12-4 Lost NFC Championship
1996 Denver Broncos 13-3 Lost Divisional Playoffs
1996 Green Bay Packers 13-3 Won Super Bowl XXXI
1997 Denver Broncos 12-4 Won Super Bowl XXXII
1997 Green Bay Packers 13-3 Lost Super Bowl XXXII
1997 Kansas City Chiefs 13-3 Lost Divisional Playoffs
1997 San Francisco 49ers 13-3 Lost NFC Championship
1998 Atlanta Falcons 14-2 Lost Super Bowl XXXIII
1998 Denver Broncos 14-2 Won Super Bowl XXXIII
1998 Minnesota Vikings 15-1 Lost NFC Championship
1998 San Francisco 49ers 12-4 Lost Divisional Playoffs
1999 Tennessee Titans 13-3 Lost Super Bowl XXXIV
1999 St. Louis Rams 13-3 Won Super Bowl XXXIV
2002 Green Bay Packers 12-4 Lost Wild Card Playoffs
2003 Kansas City Chiefs 13-3 Lost Divisional Playoffs
2003 New England Patriots 14-2 Won Super Bowl XXXVIII
2003 St. Louis Rams 12-4 Lost Divisional Playoffs
2003 Seattle Seahawks 10-6 Lost Wild Card Playoffs
2004 New England Patriots 14-2 Won Super Bowl XXXIX
2004 Pittsburgh Steelers 15-1 Lost AFC Championship
Wifi for NYC: A Temporary Advisory Committee on Broadband for New York
I received this on Thursday from New York City. It's an attempt by New York's elected officials to eventually establish a citywide Wifi program. Reportedly, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has dragged his feet on the issue, setting it up such that if a private sector company does not step forward to initiate meetings, design, and build the system, it will not be established. The City of New York wants to take the initiative -- but not it's mayor. This is an effort to change that.
Proposed Int. No. 625-A
By Council Members Brewer, Boyland, Comrie, Fidler, Gerson, Gonzalez, James, Liu, Nelson, Palma, Recchia Jr., Sears, Weprin, Jackson, DeBlasio and The Public Advocate (Ms. Gotbaum)
A Local Law
To establish a temporary advisory committee to advise the mayor and the speaker of the council on issues pertaining to access to broadband technologies within the city of New York.
Be it enacted by the Council as follows:
Section 1. Legislative findings and intent. Access to broadband, a high-speed connection to the Internet, is becoming increasingly essential to New York City's residents, not-for-profit organizations, and businesses. Such high-speed connections enable the fast relay of voice and data that many have come to expect. Additionally, broadband connections are necessary for conveying images, sounds and video, all of which require large amounts of bandwidth.
Broadband connections are improving the quality of life across all ages and sectors. Schoolchildren can communicate with their teachers quickly and easily, as well as complete homework projects that involve on-line multi-media educational resources. Home-bound seniors may use broadband to connect with doctors who can relay test results in real time. Broadband also benefits businesses and not-for-profit organizations.
Due to the important role of broadband in the city, the council of the city of New York deems it useful to create a broadband advisory committee to advise the mayor and the speaker of the council on issues pertaining to access to broadband technologies and to gather information and data regarding the needs of residents that access to broadband might be able to address. This local law is in support of the mayor’s telecommunications plan and seeks to supplement and not duplicate the findings in the mayor's telecommunications plan or the work of the mayor's telecommunications policy advisory group. The findings of this committee shall be used to inform the agencies implementing the recommendations of the mayor's telecommunications plan and the mayor’s telecommunications policy advisory group.
2. Broadband Advisory Committee. a. There shall be an advisory committee, to be known as the Broadband Advisory Committee, which shall review the ways and methods of using municipal resources to accelerate the build-out of current, emerging and any newly developed broadband technologies and other advanced telecommunications and information services, such as cable, digital subscriber line (“DSL”), broadband over power lines (“BPL”), any other wire-based methods, Wi-Fi, WiMAX, and any other wireless technologies, within the city of New York.
b. The broadband advisory committee shall be comprised of fifteen members, seven of whom shall be appointed by the speaker of the council, and eight of whom shall be appointed by the mayor. The committee shall select a chairperson from among the members of the committee. The members shall be appointed within thirty days of the enactment of this local law and shall serve without compensation. Each member may be removed for cause at any time by the original appointing authority and any vacancy shall be filled in the same manner as the appointment of the departing member was made.
c. The committee shall be deemed established upon the appointment of seven of its members and shall continue until December 31, 2008.
d. The committee shall meet as many times as it deems necessary but in no event shall it meet less often than two times in the first calendar year. The committee shall also hold at least one public hearing in the first year in each borough to educate the public on new technologies and policies and to accept public comment. The committee shall also accept comments received through email and regular mail. Any comments accepted by the committee shall also be made available to the general public by being posted on the city’s website. Thereafter, the committee shall meet as many times as it deems necessary but in no event shall it meet less often than two times in the next two years. The committee shall hold at least one public hearing in each borough in the next two years to educate the public on new technologies and policies and to accept public comment. The committee shall continue to accept comments received through email or regular mail, and comments accepted by the committee shall also be made available to the general public by being posted on the city’s website.
e. For the purposes of this local law, the presence of seven members shall be deemed a quorum. In the presence of a quorum, any act taken by a majority of those present shall be deemed an act of the committee.
f. The committee shall be comprised of, but not limited to, persons with expertise in the following areas:
1. Business, technology, industrial organization, and economics;
2. The not-for-profit and philanthropic communities;
3. Technology, telecommunications, privacy, antitrust, and information law and regulation; and
4. Such other areas as the appointing authorities deem appropriate.
g. The committee shall report its findings and recommendations to the mayor and the speaker of the council at least once a year. Such findings shall be used to inform the agencies implementing the recommendations of the mayor's telecommunications plan and the mayor's telecommunications policy advisory group. The findings and recommendations shall also be made available to the general public by being posted on the city’s website. Such report shall contain, but not be limited to:
1. An identification of the geographic areas of the city where the committee deems broadband technologies and telecommunications and information services are needed and which technologies will best serve these areas;
2. An analysis of the current broadband and other advanced telecommunications and information services market, including, but not limited to, an assessment of current providers’ and intermodal competitors’ offerings, levels of competition, pricing, innovation, customer service and overall responsiveness to consumer demand; and
3. Recommendations that the mayor and the speaker of the council may implement regarding the mandate set forth in subdivision a of section two of this local law, including, but not limited to, possible incentives for telecommunications companies and broadband service providers to deploy affordable access to broadband technologies and other advanced telecommunications and information services in areas of the city where such technologies are needed.
h. The department of information technology and telecommunications and any other city agency may make available to the committee any relevant information concerning broadband technologies and telecommunications and information services.
3. This local law shall take effect immediately upon its enactment.
Proposed Int. No. 625-A
By Council Members Brewer, Boyland, Comrie, Fidler, Gerson, Gonzalez, James, Liu, Nelson, Palma, Recchia Jr., Sears, Weprin, Jackson, DeBlasio and The Public Advocate (Ms. Gotbaum)
A Local Law
To establish a temporary advisory committee to advise the mayor and the speaker of the council on issues pertaining to access to broadband technologies within the city of New York.
Be it enacted by the Council as follows:
Section 1. Legislative findings and intent. Access to broadband, a high-speed connection to the Internet, is becoming increasingly essential to New York City's residents, not-for-profit organizations, and businesses. Such high-speed connections enable the fast relay of voice and data that many have come to expect. Additionally, broadband connections are necessary for conveying images, sounds and video, all of which require large amounts of bandwidth.
Broadband connections are improving the quality of life across all ages and sectors. Schoolchildren can communicate with their teachers quickly and easily, as well as complete homework projects that involve on-line multi-media educational resources. Home-bound seniors may use broadband to connect with doctors who can relay test results in real time. Broadband also benefits businesses and not-for-profit organizations.
Due to the important role of broadband in the city, the council of the city of New York deems it useful to create a broadband advisory committee to advise the mayor and the speaker of the council on issues pertaining to access to broadband technologies and to gather information and data regarding the needs of residents that access to broadband might be able to address. This local law is in support of the mayor’s telecommunications plan and seeks to supplement and not duplicate the findings in the mayor's telecommunications plan or the work of the mayor's telecommunications policy advisory group. The findings of this committee shall be used to inform the agencies implementing the recommendations of the mayor's telecommunications plan and the mayor’s telecommunications policy advisory group.
2. Broadband Advisory Committee. a. There shall be an advisory committee, to be known as the Broadband Advisory Committee, which shall review the ways and methods of using municipal resources to accelerate the build-out of current, emerging and any newly developed broadband technologies and other advanced telecommunications and information services, such as cable, digital subscriber line (“DSL”), broadband over power lines (“BPL”), any other wire-based methods, Wi-Fi, WiMAX, and any other wireless technologies, within the city of New York.
b. The broadband advisory committee shall be comprised of fifteen members, seven of whom shall be appointed by the speaker of the council, and eight of whom shall be appointed by the mayor. The committee shall select a chairperson from among the members of the committee. The members shall be appointed within thirty days of the enactment of this local law and shall serve without compensation. Each member may be removed for cause at any time by the original appointing authority and any vacancy shall be filled in the same manner as the appointment of the departing member was made.
c. The committee shall be deemed established upon the appointment of seven of its members and shall continue until December 31, 2008.
d. The committee shall meet as many times as it deems necessary but in no event shall it meet less often than two times in the first calendar year. The committee shall also hold at least one public hearing in the first year in each borough to educate the public on new technologies and policies and to accept public comment. The committee shall also accept comments received through email and regular mail. Any comments accepted by the committee shall also be made available to the general public by being posted on the city’s website. Thereafter, the committee shall meet as many times as it deems necessary but in no event shall it meet less often than two times in the next two years. The committee shall hold at least one public hearing in each borough in the next two years to educate the public on new technologies and policies and to accept public comment. The committee shall continue to accept comments received through email or regular mail, and comments accepted by the committee shall also be made available to the general public by being posted on the city’s website.
e. For the purposes of this local law, the presence of seven members shall be deemed a quorum. In the presence of a quorum, any act taken by a majority of those present shall be deemed an act of the committee.
f. The committee shall be comprised of, but not limited to, persons with expertise in the following areas:
1. Business, technology, industrial organization, and economics;
2. The not-for-profit and philanthropic communities;
3. Technology, telecommunications, privacy, antitrust, and information law and regulation; and
4. Such other areas as the appointing authorities deem appropriate.
g. The committee shall report its findings and recommendations to the mayor and the speaker of the council at least once a year. Such findings shall be used to inform the agencies implementing the recommendations of the mayor's telecommunications plan and the mayor's telecommunications policy advisory group. The findings and recommendations shall also be made available to the general public by being posted on the city’s website. Such report shall contain, but not be limited to:
1. An identification of the geographic areas of the city where the committee deems broadband technologies and telecommunications and information services are needed and which technologies will best serve these areas;
2. An analysis of the current broadband and other advanced telecommunications and information services market, including, but not limited to, an assessment of current providers’ and intermodal competitors’ offerings, levels of competition, pricing, innovation, customer service and overall responsiveness to consumer demand; and
3. Recommendations that the mayor and the speaker of the council may implement regarding the mandate set forth in subdivision a of section two of this local law, including, but not limited to, possible incentives for telecommunications companies and broadband service providers to deploy affordable access to broadband technologies and other advanced telecommunications and information services in areas of the city where such technologies are needed.
h. The department of information technology and telecommunications and any other city agency may make available to the committee any relevant information concerning broadband technologies and telecommunications and information services.
3. This local law shall take effect immediately upon its enactment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)