I just got this from MoveOn.org via email.
Dear MoveOn member,
This evening, the Associated Press released secret transcripts and video footage showing President Bush being personally briefed the day before Hurricane Katrina hit land. The predictions he heard were shockingly precise and accurate -- including the failure of the levees. He knew exactly what was coming.
The article is a smoking gun on Bush's unpardonable failure to keep us safe. In just a few hours, the White House will be filling the airwaves with spin, so it's important to reach out right now to pass on the straight story to family and friends. If each of us acts, we can directly reach millions of people before morning.
The full AP article is attached below. Can you help get the word out to at least 5 friends? You can forward on this note or follow the link below:
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1508_video
At the August 28th briefing, the president was told exactly what to expect:
- The chief scientist of the National Hurricane Center warned that a major levee breach was "obviously a very, very grave concern.
- Bush lied to the entire nation about this point just 5 days later.
- Michael Brown told the president that if New Orleans flooded the Superdome emergency shelter would likely be under water and short on supplies, creating a "catastrophe within a catastrophe."
- Experts and officials implored the President to prepare for, as the AP described it, "devastation of historic proportions."
President Bush didn't ask a single question during the briefing. In the next two days he campaigned, attended birthday parties and played guitar while the worst natural disaster in American history killed over 1,300 people and displaced hundreds of thousands.
There can now be no mistake: President Bush had a chance to lead, and he failed to keep us safe.
In the next few days, we'll be tracking this story carefully and coordinating our response with partners in New Orleans and around the nation.
The survivors of Katrina deserve to know why the president left them to suffer the storm. And the people of the United States deserve leadership we can trust to keep our families safe. We'll work hard together until we have both.
Tonight, let's start by spreading the word:
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1508_video
Thanks for all that you do,
-- Ben, Nita, Tom, Jen, Adam R, Justin, Adam G, Eli and the whole MoveOn.org Political Action Team - Wednesday, March 01, 2006
Here's the full article from the Associated Press.
March 1, 2006
Video Shows Bush Was Warned Before Katrina
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) -- In dramatic and sometimes agonizing terms, federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, put lives at risk in New Orleans' Superdome and overwhelm rescuers, according to confidential video footage.
Bush didn't ask a single question during the final briefing before Katrina struck on Aug. 29, but he assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: "We are fully prepared."
The footage -- along with seven days of transcripts of briefings obtained by The Associated Press—show in excruciating detail that while federal officials anticipated the tragedy that unfolded in New Orleans and elsewhere along the Gulf Coast, they were fatally slow to realize they had not mustered enough resources to deal with the unprecedented disaster.
Linked by secure video, Bush's confidence on Aug. 28 starkly contrasts with the dire warnings his disaster chief and a cacophony of federal, state and local officials provided during the four days before the storm.
A top hurricane expert voiced "grave concerns" about the levees and then-Federal Emergency Management Agency chief Michael Brown told the president and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff that he feared there weren't enough disaster teams to help evacuees at the Superdome.
"I'm concerned about ... their ability to respond to a catastrophe within a catastrophe," Brown told his bosses the afternoon before Katrina made landfall.
Some of the footage and transcripts from briefings Aug. 25-31 conflicts with the defenses that federal, state and local officials have made in trying to deflect blame and minimize the political fallout from the failed Katrina response:
-- Homeland Security officials have said the "fog of war" blinded them early on to the magnitude of the disaster. But the video and transcripts show federal and local officials discussed threats clearly, reviewed long-made plans and understood Katrina would wreak devastation of historic proportions. "I'm sure it will be the top 10 or 15 when all is said and done," National Hurricane Center's Max Mayfield warned the day Katrina lashed the Gulf Coast.
"I don't buy the `fog of war' defense," Brown told the AP in an interview Wednesday. "It was a fog of bureaucracy."
-- Bush declared four days after the storm, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees" that gushed deadly flood waters into New Orleans. But the transcripts and video show there was plenty of talk about that possibility—and Bush was worried too.
White House deputy chief of staff Joe Hagin, Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco and Brown discussed fears of a levee breach the day the storm hit.
"I talked to the president twice today, once in Crawford and then again on Air Force One," Brown said. "He's obviously watching the television a lot, and he had some questions about the Dome, he's asking questions about reports of breaches."
-- Louisiana officials angrily blamed the federal government for not being prepared but the transcripts shows they were still praising FEMA as the storm roared toward the Gulf Coast and even two days afterward. "I think a lot of the planning FEMA has done with us the past year has really paid off," Col. Jeff Smith, Louisiana's emergency preparedness deputy director, said during the Aug. 28 briefing.
It wasn't long before Smith and other state officials sounded overwhelmed.
"We appreciate everything that you all are doing for us, and all I would ask is that you realize that what's going on and the sense of urgency needs to be ratcheted up," Smith said Aug. 30.
Mississippi begged for more attention in that same briefing.
"We know that there are tens or hundreds of thousands of people in Louisiana that need to be rescued, but we would just ask you, we desperately need to get our share of assets because we'll have people dying—not because of water coming up, but because we can't get them medical treatment in our affected counties," said a Mississippi state official whose name was not mentioned on the tape.
Video footage of the Aug. 28 briefing, the final one before Katrina struck, showed an intense Brown voicing concerns from the government's disaster operation center and imploring colleagues to do whatever was necessary to help victims.
"We're going to need everything that we can possibly muster, not only in this state and in the region, but the nation, to respond to this event," Brown warned. He called the storm "a bad one, a big one" and implored federal agencies to cut through red tape to help people, bending rules if necessary.
"Go ahead and do it," Brown said. "I'll figure out some way to justify it. ... Just let them yell at me."
Bush appeared from a narrow, windowless room at his vacation ranch in Texas, with his elbows on a table. Hagin was sitting alongside him. Neither asked questions in the Aug. 28 briefing.
"I want to assure the folks at the state level that we are fully prepared to not only help you during the storm, but we will move in whatever resources and assets we have at our disposal after the storm," the president said.
A relaxed Chertoff, sporting a polo shirt, weighed in from Washington at Homeland Security's operations center. He would later fly to Atlanta, outside of Katrina's reach, for a bird flu event.
One snippet captures a missed opportunity on Aug. 28 for the government to have dispatched active-duty military troops to the region to augment the National Guard.
Chertoff: "Are there any DOD assets that might be available? Have we reached out to them?"
Brown: "We have DOD assets over here at EOC (emergency operations center). They are fully engaged. And we are having those discussions with them now."
Chertoff: "Good job."
In fact, active duty troops weren't dispatched until days after the storm. And many states' National Guards had yet to be deployed to the region despite offers of assistance, and it took days before the Pentagon deployed active-duty personnel to help overwhelmed Guardsmen.
The National Hurricane Center's Mayfield told the final briefing before Katrina struck that storm models predicted minimal flooding inside New Orleans during the hurricane but he expressed concerns that counterclockwise winds and storm surges afterward could cause the levees at Lake Pontchartrain to be overrun.
"I don't think any model can tell you with any confidence right now whether the levees will be topped or not but that is obviously a very, very grave concern," Mayfield told the briefing.
Other officials expressed concerns about the large number of New Orleans residents who had not evacuated.
"They're not taking patients out of hospitals, taking prisoners out of prisons and they're leaving hotels open in downtown New Orleans. So I'm very concerned about that," Brown said.
Despite the concerns, it ultimately took days for search and rescue teams to reach some hospitals and nursing homes.
Brown also told colleagues one of his top concerns was whether evacuees who went to the New Orleans Superdome—which became a symbol of the failed Katrina response—would be safe and have adequate medical care.
"The Superdome is about 12 feet below sea level.... I don't know whether the roof is designed to stand, withstand a Category Five hurricane," he said.
Brown also wanted to know whether there were enough federal medical teams in place to treat evacuees and the dead in the Superdome.
"Not to be (missing) kind of gross here," Brown interjected, "but I'm concerned" about the medical and mortuary resources "and their ability to respond to a catastrophe within a catastrophe."
Support our member-driven organization: MoveOn.org Political Action is entirely funded by our 3.3 million members. We have no corporate contributors, no foundation grants, no money from unions. Our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. If you'd like to support our work, you can give now at:
http://political.moveon.org/donate/email.html?id=6956-4269211-fZcsaFVSyQEU9WKwEQwSWQ&t=1
PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://political.moveon.org/?id=6956-4269211-fZcsaFVSyQEU9WKwEQwSWQ&t=2
Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
Northern California Earthquake Just Happened - 3.4 on the Richter Scale - Centered just out of Orinda, CA
I found this information at California Earthquake after feeling the apartment shake a bit:
Magnitude 3.4 - local magnitude (ML)
Time Wednesday, March 1, 2006 at 11:34:52 AM (PST)
Wednesday, March 1, 2006 at 19:34:52 (UTC)
Distance from Orinda, CA - 3 km (2 miles) SW (226 degrees)
Piedmont, CA - 5 km (3 miles) NNE (30 degrees)
Berkeley, CA - 6 km (4 miles) E (101 degrees)
Moraga, CA - 7 km (4 miles) WNW (285 degrees)
San Francisco City Hall, CA - 21 km (13 miles) ENE (63 degrees)
Coordinates 37 deg. 51.6 min. N (37.861N), 122 deg. 12.2 min. W (122.204W)
Depth 8.8 km (5.5 miles)
Location Quality Excellent
Location Quality Parameters Nst=150, Nph=150, Dmin=3 km, Rmss=0.1 sec, Erho=0.1 km, Erzz=0.2 km, Gp=21.6 degrees
Event ID# nc40183688
Additional Information 2-degree map
Topo map centered at earthquake (This link takes you offsite).
Waveforms
Magnitude 3.4 - local magnitude (ML)
Time Wednesday, March 1, 2006 at 11:34:52 AM (PST)
Wednesday, March 1, 2006 at 19:34:52 (UTC)
Distance from Orinda, CA - 3 km (2 miles) SW (226 degrees)
Piedmont, CA - 5 km (3 miles) NNE (30 degrees)
Berkeley, CA - 6 km (4 miles) E (101 degrees)
Moraga, CA - 7 km (4 miles) WNW (285 degrees)
San Francisco City Hall, CA - 21 km (13 miles) ENE (63 degrees)
Coordinates 37 deg. 51.6 min. N (37.861N), 122 deg. 12.2 min. W (122.204W)
Depth 8.8 km (5.5 miles)
Location Quality Excellent
Location Quality Parameters Nst=150, Nph=150, Dmin=3 km, Rmss=0.1 sec, Erho=0.1 km, Erzz=0.2 km, Gp=21.6 degrees
Event ID# nc40183688
Additional Information 2-degree map
Topo map centered at earthquake (This link takes you offsite).
Waveforms
James Bond Fans Taking Out "License To Kill" Daniel Craig's Job As The New 007
Is Daniel Craig "The Riddler" in the Batman Begins sequal?
Well, as I thought, many James Bond fans -- including me -- are underwhelmed with the new James Bond Daniel Craig. He -- well, doesn't look like "James Bond." In picking him it's like saying "We can get any old Welch bloke to play 007." There's even a new website to try and get Craig bounced from the role, www.craignotbond.com. It's a serious, yet funny creation that has great information. For example:
Would you cut off your nose to spite your face? It appears that Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson, the sister and brother producer team behind James Bond have done that and more! Pierce Brosnan was the most beloved actor to play Bond since Sean Connery, and his Bond films were among the most successful, and yet he is gone.
Although EON and CR Director Martin Campbell have made repeated remarks about Craig being their first choice all along, there is much information to make us believe otherwise. The truth may be that after they let Brosnan go for fear of being made to pay too much for him to reprise the role of 007, with the expectation that popular and attractive actors like Hugh Jackman or Clive Owen would accept the role. In reality, after EON lost out on both Jackman and Owen because they were
too cheap to pay them what they were already getting from other producers, EON was forced to consider actors of a lessor box office pedigree. The fact that they went with Craig just points to how lost and desperate they were once they walked
away from a sure thing like Pierce Brosnan.
Now, without a single known actor in their film, mainly because the most sought after Hollywood actresses wisely turned down the opportunity to be in this disaster in the making, EON is trying desperately to make the film more appealing
by developing Casino Royale as Bond's origin story. Given that Bond was not from the planet Krypton, nor did he ever develop arachnid powers after being bitten by a radioactive spider, his origin story is hardly appealing to the average moviegoer.
The fact is that both Bond fans and popular moviegoers alike would have been more than happy to see a Bond film that was nothing more than another entertaining outing with the highly charismatic Pierce Brosnan. They could have even made an attempt to add some more of the drama and depth which hard core Bond fans have craved since the days of Sean Connery. Instead we Bond fans are offered an insulting stupid reboot, that takes place not in the 1960's of Dr. No, but in the present.
Facing such an insipid offering, any Bond fan or movie lover should answer EON with a resounding "thanks but not thanks."
Stay tuned.
Muhammad Cartoons Rile UC Irvine "Conference"
If this were at Cal it would have gone a lot better and not been a Republican hate speech meeting. This is not going to solve the problem of a lack of culturally aware communication.
By GILLIAN FLACCUS, Associated Press Writer Wed Mar 1, 7:54 AM ET
IRVINE, Calif. - A student panel discussion that included a display of the Prophet Muhammad cartoons descended into chaos, with one speaker calling Islam an "evil religion" and audience members nearly coming to blows.
ADVERTISEMENT
Organizers of Tuesday night's forum at the University of California, Irvine said they showed the cartoons as part of a larger debate on Islamic extremism.
But several hundred protesters, including members of the Muslim Student Union, argued the event was the equivalent of hate speech disguised as freedom of expression.
Although there were numerous heated exchanges, no violence was reported.
The panel, which included one Muslim speaker, was sponsored by the College Republicans and the United American Committee, a group that says it promotes awareness of internal threats facing America.
During the discussion in a nearly packed 424-seat campus auditorium, six cartoons were displayed: three depicting Muhammad and three anti-Semitic cartoons.
The discussion got off to a contentious start with the Council on American-Islamic Relations — an invited guest — boycotting the event and calling the United American Committee a "fringe group."
Tensions quickly escalated when the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, founder of the conservative Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny, said that Islam was an "evil religion" and that all Muslims hate America.
People repeatedly interrupted the talk and, at one point, campus police removed two men, one of them a Muslim, after they nearly came to blows.
Later, panelists were cheered when they referred to Muslims as fascists and accused mainstream Muslim-American civil rights groups of being "cheerleaders for terror."
"I put out a call to Muslims in America: Put out a fatwa on (Osama) bin Laden, put out a fatwa on (Abu Musab) al-Zarqawi," said panelist Lee Kaplan, a UAC spokesman. "Support America in the war on terror."
Thousands of Muslims worldwide have protested, sometimes violently, after the cartoons were published in a Danish newspaper and in other European newspapers. Islam widely holds that representations of Muhammad are banned for fear they could lead to idolatry.
Osman Umarji, former president of the Muslim Student Union, equated the decision by the student panel to display the prophet drawings to the debasement of Jews in Germany before the Holocaust.
"The agenda is to spread Islamophobia and create hysteria against Muslims similar to what happened to the Jews in Nazi Germany," said Umarji, an electrical engineer who graduated from Irvine last spring. "Freedom of speech has its limits."
Brock Hill, vice president of the College Republicans, said his group had a First Amendment right to display the cartoons.
"We're not going against Islam whatsoever," he said. "This is about free speech and the free marketplace of ideas."
Mohamed Eldessouky, 20, a criminology student who attended the discussion, said he was disappointed because he felt the panel and the audience were biased against Islam.
"I entered it with an open mind, but I thought it was totally biased. I thought the panelists would be more balanced. I think it did more harm than good," he said.
Lauren Chramosta, 18, a freshman, said she didn't know much about Islam and attended hoping to learn more.
"It was helpful to listen to different views," she said. "But I think (the Muslim panelist) was shut down so many times that he didn't get a fair shake."
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Jenny McCarthy Wants To Taunt Paris Hilton in the Afterlife
This Hubba-Hubba moment was brought to you by hollywood_online@yahoo.com
Model/actress Jenny McCarthy would love to haunt socialite Paris Hilton if she becomes a spirit after death. The actress wants to offer the hotel heiress moral lessons and drive her mad with insults.
She says, "I'd try and give her (Hilton) some really good spiritual direction in her life. I'd also love to f**k with her, whispering in her ear things like, 'Your clothes are dirty! You're totally out of style! Eat something!'"
Meanwhile, McCarthy is amazed she's still alive and well because she's had numerous brushes with death. As a child the blonde beauty suffered a barrage of accidents including being hit by a car, and a near-fatal choking seizure.
She says, "I've had so many near-death experiences. When I was six I choked on a piece of candy and was in a room on my own but no one could hear me. In my head I was calling for my mom and then suddenly she appeared and did the Heimlich manoeuvre. Then, when I was seven, I was hit by a car, flew up in the air and landed on my feet. I have no idea why I am still here, actually. It really is unbelievable."
And she is convinced she is invincible: "I think when I do finally go, people will be saying, 'Thank god she's finally dead.'"
President Bush's Approval Rating Reaches New Low
According to several sources, President George W. Bush's approval rating is at a new low: 34 percent overall, 43 percent for his handling of the War on Irag, and 24 percent for his response to the Kartina matter. About 66 percent of those polled feel the country is on the wrong track.
And that's not alll, as Vice President Dick Cheney's approval rating is at a dramatically low 18 percent. "Lower than at Nixonian levels," to quote a line used by Dana Milbank, a guest on Keith Olbermann's show tonight.
At this point, and considering that his poll numbers have been sickly low after The Katrina Disaster and is taking a massive hit with the Dubai Port Scandal, it's hard to see how he can engineeer a dramatic improvement.
And that's not alll, as Vice President Dick Cheney's approval rating is at a dramatically low 18 percent. "Lower than at Nixonian levels," to quote a line used by Dana Milbank, a guest on Keith Olbermann's show tonight.
At this point, and considering that his poll numbers have been sickly low after The Katrina Disaster and is taking a massive hit with the Dubai Port Scandal, it's hard to see how he can engineeer a dramatic improvement.
Monday, February 27, 2006
Vince Young and The Wonderlic Test: What Does the Test Really Prove? That America's Still Racist - Dan Marino Scored a 16
There has been much press about Texas QB Vince Young scoring only six of 50 questions correct on something called The Wonderlic Test, and that the test was incorrectly scored. Aside from the character assasination that has taken place against Young, and by some who don't want to see him succeed and are acting in a boarderline illegal and prosecutable fashion, I doubt the Wonderlic itself is being used properly. It's supposed to test an employees ability to solve problems related to a job.
I'm going to throw this bomb: The Wonderlic Test -- as it's applied -- has nothing to do with football and given the fact that the questions aren't directly related to the game, an athlete could sue an NFL team or the NFL itself for damages related to the improper use of the test.
I'm not kidding.
According to legal scholar Daniel L. Wong, the case of Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 considered and invalidated the use of the "Wonderlic Personnel Test," which purported to measure general intelligence, and the Bennett Mechanical Comprehension Test.
Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 431 (1975) also considered the Wonderlic test as well as the Beta Examination, which purported to test non-verbal intelligence. The key in these and subsequent federal decisions, is the extent to which employers are able to demonstrate that tests are truly related to job performance.
Jason Chung wrote an 18-page paper reporting in part how the Wonderlic is used as a way to block the assention of black college quarterbacks into the NFL. Chung writes:
The "Wonderlic" Argumentation
Another major barrier that African-American quarterbacks face stems from the increased use of the Wonderlic intelligence test through 1968 to 1999. Michael Callans, President of Wonderlic Consulting, advances the popular argument that:
[Quarterbacks] need to lead, think on their feet, evaluate all of their
options and understand the impact their actions will have on the
outcome of the game. Wonderlic helps team owners make the best
selections by identifying which players have the mental strength to
lead their team to victory.
This belief has been prevalent since at least the 1970s when Tom Landry of the Dallas Cowboys became the first NFL head coach to screen for players using a generic aptitude test - the Wonderlic Personnel Test.25 Landry was looking for a tool to quantify intelligence and draw a correlation between that and performance. In the subsequent 30 years upon its introduction the Wonderlic has become a key performance prognosticator for many NFL franchises. Though most prospective NFL players are put through the test, those players in strategic (read white) positions are scrutinized more closely. NFL scouts believe that the test will help them identify quarterbacks that will assimilate NFL playbooks quicker and identify quarterbacks that make better decisions.
Generally speaking, a score in the mid-twenties is considered acceptable for a prospective NFL quarterback. In 1994, the Cleveland Browns were looking for a quarterback that scored at least a 24 on the Wonderlic. These high expectations have acted as an imposing intellect barrier for African-American quarterbacks who, as an ethnic group, have historically had a tough time meeting this benchmark and thus were discounted from consideration by some NFL teams due to a deficiency of intellect. There were but few black quarterbacks, the argument went, that had the mental capacity to succeed on the test and therefore on the field. An examination of relatively reliable Wonderlic scores shows that black quarterbacks, more commonly than white quarterbacks, score lower than 20: Jeff Blake in 1992, Kordell Stewart in 1995 and Steve McNair in 1995 all scored 17 or lower.
The failure of African-American quarterbacks to meet the lofty mid-twenties standard has spawned criticism of the whole procedure. The traditional argument against the Wonderlic has been that it, like all aptitude tests, was culturally biased and therefore systemically set up to ensure that black athletes receive lower scores. This charge, until recently, was the primary accusation levelled against the Wonderlic.
However, more recent studies have exposed a more illuminating fact. A study by David Chan et al. noted that African-Americans adults in general have a lower regard in general for aptitude tests than their Caucasian counterparts which caused them to score lower on the tests. After motivation was given to black test-takers their scores improved until there was no
discernible difference between black test scores and white test scores.
Critics point to additional flaws with the Wonderlic system other than race-related lower test scores. It has been pointed out that there are some "Wonderlic smart" players that are "football dumb". Numerous NFL coaches, including Tony Dungy and Denny Green, note that good Wonderlic scores do not necessarily equate success in decision-making prowess on the
field.
Indeed, the converse is also true, low Wonderlic scores do not necessarily signify weak quarterback play. For instance, Dan Marino, the NFL's all-time leading passer, only scored a 16 but by all accounts he was very intelligent football-wise.
Still, because it remains the only quantifiable method of measuring intelligence the Wonderlic continues to be used by NFL teams. As a consequence, because of the reasons stated above, it seems black quarterbacks will generally continue to score lower on the Wonderlic than their white counterparts. If the period from 1968 to 1999 is any indication, many black quarterbacks will be shunned due to a low score and "low intelligence".
That is what's happening today. But since it's true that the Wonderlic does not actually measure football related aptitude, then the NFL itself is wide open for a class action lawsuit if this problem is not cleared up -- a legal battle the league would surely lose.
It would lose on the very basis that its own coaches can't defend the claim that it tests "football intelligence" yet that's the image being communicated by much of the media and some NFL teams. If a player scores poorly on it, they, like Vince Young, are branded as not football smart, an observation anyone would have to be a total fool to accept in the case of Texas' National Champion QB.
And with that, someone must explain how Miami's NFL Hall of Fame Quarterback Dan Marino -- who scored a 16 on the Wonderlic -- became one of the league's best signal callers in its history? A 16 on the Wonderlic means that Marino had an IQ of less than 100. Do you believe that? I didn't think so.
Someone out there better appologize to Vince Young.
I'm going to throw this bomb: The Wonderlic Test -- as it's applied -- has nothing to do with football and given the fact that the questions aren't directly related to the game, an athlete could sue an NFL team or the NFL itself for damages related to the improper use of the test.
I'm not kidding.
According to legal scholar Daniel L. Wong, the case of Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 considered and invalidated the use of the "Wonderlic Personnel Test," which purported to measure general intelligence, and the Bennett Mechanical Comprehension Test.
Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 431 (1975) also considered the Wonderlic test as well as the Beta Examination, which purported to test non-verbal intelligence. The key in these and subsequent federal decisions, is the extent to which employers are able to demonstrate that tests are truly related to job performance.
Jason Chung wrote an 18-page paper reporting in part how the Wonderlic is used as a way to block the assention of black college quarterbacks into the NFL. Chung writes:
The "Wonderlic" Argumentation
Another major barrier that African-American quarterbacks face stems from the increased use of the Wonderlic intelligence test through 1968 to 1999. Michael Callans, President of Wonderlic Consulting, advances the popular argument that:
[Quarterbacks] need to lead, think on their feet, evaluate all of their
options and understand the impact their actions will have on the
outcome of the game. Wonderlic helps team owners make the best
selections by identifying which players have the mental strength to
lead their team to victory.
This belief has been prevalent since at least the 1970s when Tom Landry of the Dallas Cowboys became the first NFL head coach to screen for players using a generic aptitude test - the Wonderlic Personnel Test.25 Landry was looking for a tool to quantify intelligence and draw a correlation between that and performance. In the subsequent 30 years upon its introduction the Wonderlic has become a key performance prognosticator for many NFL franchises. Though most prospective NFL players are put through the test, those players in strategic (read white) positions are scrutinized more closely. NFL scouts believe that the test will help them identify quarterbacks that will assimilate NFL playbooks quicker and identify quarterbacks that make better decisions.
Generally speaking, a score in the mid-twenties is considered acceptable for a prospective NFL quarterback. In 1994, the Cleveland Browns were looking for a quarterback that scored at least a 24 on the Wonderlic. These high expectations have acted as an imposing intellect barrier for African-American quarterbacks who, as an ethnic group, have historically had a tough time meeting this benchmark and thus were discounted from consideration by some NFL teams due to a deficiency of intellect. There were but few black quarterbacks, the argument went, that had the mental capacity to succeed on the test and therefore on the field. An examination of relatively reliable Wonderlic scores shows that black quarterbacks, more commonly than white quarterbacks, score lower than 20: Jeff Blake in 1992, Kordell Stewart in 1995 and Steve McNair in 1995 all scored 17 or lower.
The failure of African-American quarterbacks to meet the lofty mid-twenties standard has spawned criticism of the whole procedure. The traditional argument against the Wonderlic has been that it, like all aptitude tests, was culturally biased and therefore systemically set up to ensure that black athletes receive lower scores. This charge, until recently, was the primary accusation levelled against the Wonderlic.
However, more recent studies have exposed a more illuminating fact. A study by David Chan et al. noted that African-Americans adults in general have a lower regard in general for aptitude tests than their Caucasian counterparts which caused them to score lower on the tests. After motivation was given to black test-takers their scores improved until there was no
discernible difference between black test scores and white test scores.
Critics point to additional flaws with the Wonderlic system other than race-related lower test scores. It has been pointed out that there are some "Wonderlic smart" players that are "football dumb". Numerous NFL coaches, including Tony Dungy and Denny Green, note that good Wonderlic scores do not necessarily equate success in decision-making prowess on the
field.
Indeed, the converse is also true, low Wonderlic scores do not necessarily signify weak quarterback play. For instance, Dan Marino, the NFL's all-time leading passer, only scored a 16 but by all accounts he was very intelligent football-wise.
Still, because it remains the only quantifiable method of measuring intelligence the Wonderlic continues to be used by NFL teams. As a consequence, because of the reasons stated above, it seems black quarterbacks will generally continue to score lower on the Wonderlic than their white counterparts. If the period from 1968 to 1999 is any indication, many black quarterbacks will be shunned due to a low score and "low intelligence".
That is what's happening today. But since it's true that the Wonderlic does not actually measure football related aptitude, then the NFL itself is wide open for a class action lawsuit if this problem is not cleared up -- a legal battle the league would surely lose.
It would lose on the very basis that its own coaches can't defend the claim that it tests "football intelligence" yet that's the image being communicated by much of the media and some NFL teams. If a player scores poorly on it, they, like Vince Young, are branded as not football smart, an observation anyone would have to be a total fool to accept in the case of Texas' National Champion QB.
And with that, someone must explain how Miami's NFL Hall of Fame Quarterback Dan Marino -- who scored a 16 on the Wonderlic -- became one of the league's best signal callers in its history? A 16 on the Wonderlic means that Marino had an IQ of less than 100. Do you believe that? I didn't think so.
Someone out there better appologize to Vince Young.
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Tom O'Neil: Is secret homophobia fueling a possible 'Crash' upset?
Tom O'Neil of the LA Times penned this column which I just read. It's not designed to be directly linked to, so here it is:
"I don't think he's right, but there's some of it. I think Brokeback will win because it's got too many mainstream A-List Hollywood people behind it. But we'll see.
Is secret homophobia fueling a possible 'Crash' upset?
Something weird is going on among Oscar voters — and it's also going unspoken. "Crash" and "Good Night, and Good Luck" have their passionate supporters who gush with their honest love of those best picture nominees, but most non-"Brokeback" votes I hear from Oscar voters are really anti-"Brokeback."
Scads of academy members fume to me when they tattle on how they're inking their ballots, "I'm not voting for 'Brokeback'!" Then they calm down a bit and add, "I'm voting for (fill in the blank)" and give a positive reason to justify their decision for picking an alternative. In most cases I hear contrary votes for "Crash," but there's also surprising strength for "Good Night, and Good Luck." So far I've heard equal numbers of votes for "Brokeback" as "Crash," with "Good Night" not far behind. The best picture race is really thisclose.
It's the fury that voters express when mentioning "Brokeback" that's so odd and suspicious. In some cases I believe they're people who think the film is overrated. Or they're just weary of gay cowboy jokes. But in the majority of cases I suspect it's something else and something bad that they feel they can't utter out loud, so they're holding it in. You can see it on their faces.
Could it be secret homophobia? Perhaps. The academy is comprised mostly of straight white guys with white hair who know it's intolerable to bash gays in lavender-friendly, liberal Hollywood. But I really don't think it's that in any large way. Instead, I think it's the same frustration non-Jews feel when there's a glut of Holocaust films leading the Oscar pack in Jewish-friendly Hollywood. They want to exclaim, "Enough already with the Holocaust films!" This time I suspect many straight Hollywooders — who are totally cool with gay people in general — are fighting the urge to shriek, "Enough already with the gay persecution films!"
This Oscar year there really is a glut of them and, if I'm right in my predictions, we'll see the all-gay Oscars on March 5 with victories in the top categories by "Brokeback Mountain," "Capote" and "Transamerica."
How widespread is this anti-"Brokeback" tide? It's hard to say because it's mostly unspoken, but it's very real and it makes predicting the best picture race a crapshoot. It's quite possible that we could see another one of those best picture/director splits that used to be so rare, but are now commonplace with "Chicago," "Shakespeare in Love" and "Gladiator" winning best picture while the director laurels went to, respectively, Roman Polanski ("The Pianist"), Steven Spielberg ("Saving Private Ryan") and Steven Soderbergh ("Traffic"). Whatever happens this year, it's clear that Ang Lee has the best director trophy in the bag.
In the end, I believe "Brokeback" will win because there's a clear voting pattern in the top category recently: academy members want to be on the winning team. Front-runners tend to win even when there's a growing surge against them. Backlash against "The English Patient" was so widespread that "Seinfeld" did a whole episode about it, but it still won. Even though "A Beautiful Mind" was under attack on all fronts a few years ago, it nonetheless prevailed. "Chicago" pulled off its best picture victory even though late-breaking momentum for "The Pianist" was so strong that it won the top prizes for director, actor and screenplay. That bodes well for the gay cowboys remaining tall in the saddle on Oscar night.
"I don't think he's right, but there's some of it. I think Brokeback will win because it's got too many mainstream A-List Hollywood people behind it. But we'll see.
Is secret homophobia fueling a possible 'Crash' upset?
Something weird is going on among Oscar voters — and it's also going unspoken. "Crash" and "Good Night, and Good Luck" have their passionate supporters who gush with their honest love of those best picture nominees, but most non-"Brokeback" votes I hear from Oscar voters are really anti-"Brokeback."
Scads of academy members fume to me when they tattle on how they're inking their ballots, "I'm not voting for 'Brokeback'!" Then they calm down a bit and add, "I'm voting for (fill in the blank)" and give a positive reason to justify their decision for picking an alternative. In most cases I hear contrary votes for "Crash," but there's also surprising strength for "Good Night, and Good Luck." So far I've heard equal numbers of votes for "Brokeback" as "Crash," with "Good Night" not far behind. The best picture race is really thisclose.
It's the fury that voters express when mentioning "Brokeback" that's so odd and suspicious. In some cases I believe they're people who think the film is overrated. Or they're just weary of gay cowboy jokes. But in the majority of cases I suspect it's something else and something bad that they feel they can't utter out loud, so they're holding it in. You can see it on their faces.
Could it be secret homophobia? Perhaps. The academy is comprised mostly of straight white guys with white hair who know it's intolerable to bash gays in lavender-friendly, liberal Hollywood. But I really don't think it's that in any large way. Instead, I think it's the same frustration non-Jews feel when there's a glut of Holocaust films leading the Oscar pack in Jewish-friendly Hollywood. They want to exclaim, "Enough already with the Holocaust films!" This time I suspect many straight Hollywooders — who are totally cool with gay people in general — are fighting the urge to shriek, "Enough already with the gay persecution films!"
This Oscar year there really is a glut of them and, if I'm right in my predictions, we'll see the all-gay Oscars on March 5 with victories in the top categories by "Brokeback Mountain," "Capote" and "Transamerica."
How widespread is this anti-"Brokeback" tide? It's hard to say because it's mostly unspoken, but it's very real and it makes predicting the best picture race a crapshoot. It's quite possible that we could see another one of those best picture/director splits that used to be so rare, but are now commonplace with "Chicago," "Shakespeare in Love" and "Gladiator" winning best picture while the director laurels went to, respectively, Roman Polanski ("The Pianist"), Steven Spielberg ("Saving Private Ryan") and Steven Soderbergh ("Traffic"). Whatever happens this year, it's clear that Ang Lee has the best director trophy in the bag.
In the end, I believe "Brokeback" will win because there's a clear voting pattern in the top category recently: academy members want to be on the winning team. Front-runners tend to win even when there's a growing surge against them. Backlash against "The English Patient" was so widespread that "Seinfeld" did a whole episode about it, but it still won. Even though "A Beautiful Mind" was under attack on all fronts a few years ago, it nonetheless prevailed. "Chicago" pulled off its best picture victory even though late-breaking momentum for "The Pianist" was so strong that it won the top prizes for director, actor and screenplay. That bodes well for the gay cowboys remaining tall in the saddle on Oscar night.
Arkansas Governor Huckabee Refers to Legislators as "Puppets." - Live on C-SPAN Today
I just heard Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee gain a problem of running off at the mouth when at the National Governors Association and after a skit with Sesame Street puppets, he said "I never thought in my time as Governor I'd spend part of it talking to puppets. Kind of reminds you of the legislature." To which the crowd said "Ooo," as if to say "He just blew that one."
Gov. Arnold Schwartzenegger at the National Governors Association Conference live on C-SPAN - Now
Arnold is the talking about health care and physical fitness -- "Communicating Heath Messages" -- to the nations governors right now. I'm listening for any news. Right now he's poking fun at Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee's much-reported fitness habits.
(By the way, Arnold's once swollen lip is just fine.)
The California Governor says that lack of excersize has a terrible impact on kids, including depression. He also stresses that the Department of Heath Human Services was not (and still it not) communicating with the Department of Education. There's no coordination. "On the one side, they're giving them fast foods, and on the other, they're taking physical fitness away," he said.
What's interesting is he's talking to the group of our countries governors, and C-SPAN gets this crowd shot full of -- overweight double-chinned people.
Arnold said he signed into law a bill that prohibits junk food in the schools. "We want to make sure that we're giving kids the chance to excersize 45 minutes." He's not trying to make athletes -- they turn to a shot of Maria wearing a nice leather jacket -- he said. Just healthy people.
Arnold ended his speach with his famous line: "I'll be back," and was followed by Sesame Street's Elmo and Rosita.
Secret Service agents say Cheney was drunk when he shot lawyer
I got this item from my friend Richard Liberman, who got it from....You'll see. If it's true -- and it bears no image of being false -- it was a classic case of irresponsibility that the VP should thank god didn't end in Mr. Whittington's death.
The Rant
Secret Service agents say Cheney was drunk when he shot lawyer
By DOUG THOMPSON
Feb 22, 2006, 07:35
Secret Service agents guarding Vice President Dick Cheney when he shot Texas lawyer Harry Whittington on a hunting outing two weeks ago say Cheney was "clearly inebriated" at the time of the shooting.
Agents observed several members of the hunting party, including the Vice President, consuming alcohol before and during the hunting expedition, the report notes, and Cheney exhibited "visible signs" of impairment, including slurred speech and erratic actions.
According to those who have talked with the agents and others present at the outing, Cheney was drunk when he gunned down his friend and the day-and-a-half delay in allowing Texas law enforcement officials on the ranch where the shooting occurred gave all members of the hunting party time to sober up.
We talked with a number of administration officials who are privy to inside information on the Vice President's shooting "accident" and all admit Secret Service agents and others say they saw Cheney consume far more than the "one beer' he claimed he drank at lunch earlier that day.
"This was a South Texas hunt," says one White House aide. "Of course there was drinking. There's always drinking. Lots of it."
One agent at the scene has been placed on administrative leave and another requested reassignment this week. A memo reportedly written by one agent has been destroyed, sources said Wednesday afternoon.
Cheney has a long history of alcohol abuse, including two convictions of driving under the influence when he was younger. Doctors tell me that someone like Cheney, who is taking blood thinners because of his history of heart attacks, could get legally drunk now after consuming just one drink.
If Cheney was legally drunk at the time of the shooting, he could be guilty of a felony under Texas law and the shooting, ruled an accident by a compliant Kenedy County Sheriff, would be a prosecutable offense.
But we will never know for sure because the owners of the Armstrong Ranch, where the shooting occurred, barred the sheriff's department from the property on the day of the shooting and Kenedy County Sheriff Ramon Salinas III agreed to wait until the next day to send deputies in to talk to those involved.
Sheriff's Captain Charles Kirk says he went to the Armstrong Ranch immediately after the shooting was reported on Saturday, February 11 but both he and a game warden were not allowed on the 50,000-acre property. He called Salinas who told him to forget about it and return to the station.
"I told him don't worry about it. I'll make a call," Salinas said. The sheriff claims he called another deputy who moonlights at the Armstrong ranch, said he was told it was "just an accident" and made the decision to wait until Sunday to investigate.
"We've known these people for years. They are honest and wouldn't call us, telling us a lie," Salinas said.
Like all elected officials in Kenedy County, Salinas owes his job to the backing and financial support of Katherine Armstrong, owner of the ranch and the county's largest employer.
"The Armstrongs rule Kenedy County like a fiefdom," says a former employee.
Secret Service officials also took possession of all tests on Whittington's blood at the hospitals where he was treated for his wounds. When asked if a blood alcohol test had been performed on Whittington, the doctors who treated him at Christus Spohn Hospital Memorial in Corpus Christi or the hospital in Kingsville refused to answer. One admits privately he was ordered by the Secret Service to "never discuss the case with the press."
It's a sure bet that is a private doctor who treated the victim of Cheney's reckless and drunken actions can't talk to the public then any evidence that shows the Vice President drunk as a skunk will never see the light of day.
The Rant
Secret Service agents say Cheney was drunk when he shot lawyer
By DOUG THOMPSON
Feb 22, 2006, 07:35
Secret Service agents guarding Vice President Dick Cheney when he shot Texas lawyer Harry Whittington on a hunting outing two weeks ago say Cheney was "clearly inebriated" at the time of the shooting.
Agents observed several members of the hunting party, including the Vice President, consuming alcohol before and during the hunting expedition, the report notes, and Cheney exhibited "visible signs" of impairment, including slurred speech and erratic actions.
According to those who have talked with the agents and others present at the outing, Cheney was drunk when he gunned down his friend and the day-and-a-half delay in allowing Texas law enforcement officials on the ranch where the shooting occurred gave all members of the hunting party time to sober up.
We talked with a number of administration officials who are privy to inside information on the Vice President's shooting "accident" and all admit Secret Service agents and others say they saw Cheney consume far more than the "one beer' he claimed he drank at lunch earlier that day.
"This was a South Texas hunt," says one White House aide. "Of course there was drinking. There's always drinking. Lots of it."
One agent at the scene has been placed on administrative leave and another requested reassignment this week. A memo reportedly written by one agent has been destroyed, sources said Wednesday afternoon.
Cheney has a long history of alcohol abuse, including two convictions of driving under the influence when he was younger. Doctors tell me that someone like Cheney, who is taking blood thinners because of his history of heart attacks, could get legally drunk now after consuming just one drink.
If Cheney was legally drunk at the time of the shooting, he could be guilty of a felony under Texas law and the shooting, ruled an accident by a compliant Kenedy County Sheriff, would be a prosecutable offense.
But we will never know for sure because the owners of the Armstrong Ranch, where the shooting occurred, barred the sheriff's department from the property on the day of the shooting and Kenedy County Sheriff Ramon Salinas III agreed to wait until the next day to send deputies in to talk to those involved.
Sheriff's Captain Charles Kirk says he went to the Armstrong Ranch immediately after the shooting was reported on Saturday, February 11 but both he and a game warden were not allowed on the 50,000-acre property. He called Salinas who told him to forget about it and return to the station.
"I told him don't worry about it. I'll make a call," Salinas said. The sheriff claims he called another deputy who moonlights at the Armstrong ranch, said he was told it was "just an accident" and made the decision to wait until Sunday to investigate.
"We've known these people for years. They are honest and wouldn't call us, telling us a lie," Salinas said.
Like all elected officials in Kenedy County, Salinas owes his job to the backing and financial support of Katherine Armstrong, owner of the ranch and the county's largest employer.
"The Armstrongs rule Kenedy County like a fiefdom," says a former employee.
Secret Service officials also took possession of all tests on Whittington's blood at the hospitals where he was treated for his wounds. When asked if a blood alcohol test had been performed on Whittington, the doctors who treated him at Christus Spohn Hospital Memorial in Corpus Christi or the hospital in Kingsville refused to answer. One admits privately he was ordered by the Secret Service to "never discuss the case with the press."
It's a sure bet that is a private doctor who treated the victim of Cheney's reckless and drunken actions can't talk to the public then any evidence that shows the Vice President drunk as a skunk will never see the light of day.
A follow up to "Misunderstandings, Race, and Ass Holes in San Francisco"
The next day, Friday, after my Aqua horror, I went to a nice place called Americano to enjoy the Friday sun and a glass of wine in a place crowded with nice-looking women, and where I always see people I know. In this case, the person was Kevin Shannon.
Kevin's a friendly bespectacled real estate lawyer of Irish decent who lives and practices in San Francisco. Over the years, we've always had great -- and some times heated -- conversations about politics, race, and society.
See, I've noticed from talking with people I know that I'm one of the few African Americans who openly talks about a race-based problem with anyone who may be the cause of it, or with someone white. Most blacks I have talked with and observed don't do this. It's a total shame, but a pattern. I contend that you can't know if someone's your true friend if you can't be yourself around them. Plus, they can't say they really know you.
Anyway, I told Kevin about the Aqua horror, as I will call it, and he said that though I may have been correct, sometimes it's not necessary to counsel the person. He used the example of our mutual friend, Bill Patton, who passed away two years ago. Bill was a very energetic African American man who had a smile and a kind word for everyone. He always went to the bars in SF, but only drank water.
With all of the people Bill knew, you'd think that there would be thousands of people at his funeral. There were about 50. I was really hurt by that. It opened my eyes.
Kevin said that Bill had a great way of dealing with ass holes and apparently racist people. He used a humble approach. For example, some woman -- white -- bumped into him and spilled her drink and his too. But instead of appologizing, she blamed him and started yelling. He said "I'm just a poor black man from the South" and that disarmed her.
At one point a long time ago, I was a little like that, but it was before my heart problem in 1991, where I thought I had a heart attack. After medication, and seeing a therapist on the advice of the doctors, the psychologist realized that many of the encounters I had in society bothered me, and yet I could have changed things by mentioning my hurt or desire on the spot.
That observation opeened me up. It caused me to write, and shortly after that became a columnist for The Motclarion, and generally far more expressive. Plus, I felt better.
Now, Bill passed of a heart attack at 70 years old. I think Kevin's right about Bill's approach and my need to "pull back" a little bit. But the other side of the coin is that loosing two parents and buring them, as I did last year, has an impact on how you view life. I don't want to waste my time on earth not expressing what I see, for better or worse.
As much as I love Bill Patton, I have to be myself. I have a fear of being subordinated by the society around me. I'll never let that happen. Perhaps that's the wrong way to look at things. But Kevin's point is that I should take a look at a situation before I point an accusatory finger.
I try to. But in the retrospect of the Aqua Horror, I really did do that.
Bill had a formula that did work for him. But what got me was that only 50 people came to his funeral. That was insulting, and when I think about what Kevin said, I keep coming back to the thought that maybe his heart couldn't take all of the pounding of society with no real outlet, and so after a time it just gave up. That almost happened to me and I'm fearful of another episode.
Kevin's a friendly bespectacled real estate lawyer of Irish decent who lives and practices in San Francisco. Over the years, we've always had great -- and some times heated -- conversations about politics, race, and society.
See, I've noticed from talking with people I know that I'm one of the few African Americans who openly talks about a race-based problem with anyone who may be the cause of it, or with someone white. Most blacks I have talked with and observed don't do this. It's a total shame, but a pattern. I contend that you can't know if someone's your true friend if you can't be yourself around them. Plus, they can't say they really know you.
Anyway, I told Kevin about the Aqua horror, as I will call it, and he said that though I may have been correct, sometimes it's not necessary to counsel the person. He used the example of our mutual friend, Bill Patton, who passed away two years ago. Bill was a very energetic African American man who had a smile and a kind word for everyone. He always went to the bars in SF, but only drank water.
With all of the people Bill knew, you'd think that there would be thousands of people at his funeral. There were about 50. I was really hurt by that. It opened my eyes.
Kevin said that Bill had a great way of dealing with ass holes and apparently racist people. He used a humble approach. For example, some woman -- white -- bumped into him and spilled her drink and his too. But instead of appologizing, she blamed him and started yelling. He said "I'm just a poor black man from the South" and that disarmed her.
At one point a long time ago, I was a little like that, but it was before my heart problem in 1991, where I thought I had a heart attack. After medication, and seeing a therapist on the advice of the doctors, the psychologist realized that many of the encounters I had in society bothered me, and yet I could have changed things by mentioning my hurt or desire on the spot.
That observation opeened me up. It caused me to write, and shortly after that became a columnist for The Motclarion, and generally far more expressive. Plus, I felt better.
Now, Bill passed of a heart attack at 70 years old. I think Kevin's right about Bill's approach and my need to "pull back" a little bit. But the other side of the coin is that loosing two parents and buring them, as I did last year, has an impact on how you view life. I don't want to waste my time on earth not expressing what I see, for better or worse.
As much as I love Bill Patton, I have to be myself. I have a fear of being subordinated by the society around me. I'll never let that happen. Perhaps that's the wrong way to look at things. But Kevin's point is that I should take a look at a situation before I point an accusatory finger.
I try to. But in the retrospect of the Aqua Horror, I really did do that.
Bill had a formula that did work for him. But what got me was that only 50 people came to his funeral. That was insulting, and when I think about what Kevin said, I keep coming back to the thought that maybe his heart couldn't take all of the pounding of society with no real outlet, and so after a time it just gave up. That almost happened to me and I'm fearful of another episode.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)