Friday, July 29, 2005

Movies: Who's the Better Director- Tarentino, Scorsese, or Spielberg?


Music: What Are The Best 5 Albums Of The 2000's?

Sports: Who Is Considered an NBA Superstar?

Politics: Where Does Bush Rank With The Worst Presidents Of All Time?







Commentary: What The Fuck?

Fashion: Who's Sexier- Mike "Holla" Hellis (Left) or Petrovich (Right)?


Thursday, July 28, 2005

Getting The Blog Out Of Here


Wow, well's it's been a fun and strange 3 weeks of blogging. I can't decide if it's helped me feel like I have accomplished something this summer or just the opposite. Either way, I have arrived at my first blogging crossroads. For Sunday I am leaving for a month to Guatemala. The plan is to go to a Spanish school on my own for two weeks, then my wife will join me to travel for two weeks.

Now, I realize that this gives me a chance to write interesting blogs about traveling. But seeing as how obsessive I've been during these past three weeks, I think it would be best if I focused on enjoying the trip and not refreshing my blogs window to see if anyone new has commented. Additionally, I'm going to try to immerse myself as much as possible. In the past I was never the uber-backpacker type who refused to talk to other Americans, but I really want to learn the language. So during the 2 week Spanish immersion class I am planning to do no socializing whatsoever in English. We'll see... I wouldn't be surprised to see myself running for an internet cafe on the second day, but I am going to try. Besides, with 5 hours of tutoring and 3 meals with a family, I'm not really sure how I'll have time to do anything else.

I considered doing the blog in Spanish. Unfortunately, that would have resulted in such controversial topics as "Me gusta helado!" or "Mi camisa es agua." But don't freak out. It's going to be okay. The Chuckdaddy Xpress will not be completely closed down for the summer. Tomorrow, I'm going to post 6 topics with very little of my own commentary. Hopefully some good discussions will come from them. Since the comment battles have seemed much more fun than my entries, this might actually be better.

Lastly, I know this is late notice, but does anyone have any advice about Guatemala? I'm doing the program in Quetzaltenango (fortunately nicknamed Shayla) and our plan was to stay in the cooler highlands for our traveling 2 weeks. But we haven't planned anything in particular. Any advice/suggestions will be much appreciated. Oh and since the Academy Awards blog was by far the most fun and controversial, I've moved it to right after this one. That's it for now. Have a great rest of your all summers.

Academy Award Recheck

I just went to the an Oscar's link and found that I could find all the nominees and Academy Award winners ever. This brought up an idea to me- did the Academy usually get it right? This is of course opinionated, but it seems that some movies have been more important than others. For instance, it would be hard to argue that in 1994 the Academy was correct in giving the best picture nod to Forest Gump over Pulp Fiction. Besides being a much better movie, Pulp Fictionn changed the whole tone of movie making for the rest of the decade. Forest Gump made more money, but was a lesser movie in every other regard (although you could argue for Shawshank Redemption since this seems to be every boring person I know's favorite movie).

The above mistake was made by erring to the commercial over the artsy, but sometimes the opposite problem happens. In 1996 The English Patient won. I remember liking it, but my only memories are of deserts and Ralph Fiennes' face. On retrospect, shouldn't Fargo have been the big winner that night? Who can forget the police first discovering the body, Frances McDormand's accent, William Macy chipping away at his car, the chipper...

An interesting battle at the time was Titanic versus LA Confidential in 1997. The art house crowd could not fathom rewarding the idiotic Titanic and pushed hard for the crime noir. Since I hated Titanic (when the boat had already started sinking and their were still 2 hours to go, I turned it off), I definitely aligned myself against it. But I think the Academy was right in this one. Titanic might not have been a great piece of art, but it certainly hit a chord. In that case, one of the best selling movies definitely trumps a good, but not great or original, art house hit.

1993 is a year I'd be curious what others think. The nominees were The Fugitive, In The Name of the Father, The Piano, The Remains of the Day, and Schindler's List. Also that year, Altman's Short Cuts came out. Now I am hugely biased, since Short Cuts is my favorite movie, but I would lean towards that being the best movie of the year. Besides it being well done, think of how many movies have followed that used the whole ensemble multiple plots interacting style. Already this year I've heard Short Cuts brought up twice when discussing the new movies Me and You and Everyone We Know and Happy Endings. Meanwhile, was Schindler's List really that great? It is always hard to be critical when dealing with a holocaust movie, but I don't remember the movie itself standing out. Maybe I should see it again, but my memory was that Spielberg was being rewarded for finally getting serious.
Anyway, I'd be curious what others think. And by the way, giving the stupid Million Dollar Baby this year's Oscar will be later hugely regretted. But I better stop before this blog reaches monstrous proportions.


Wednesday, July 27, 2005

Listen To Your Heart

Do any of my readers also listen to bad radio and hear the Roxette cover song? How utterly bizarre. I mean, if you're going to cover this fab Swedish combo, don't you do "The Look" or the timeless "Joyride"? I guess I have no musical leg to stand on though. In the same car ride this song came on that I was totally into. It's sort of alternative rockish and the chorus is, "It's gonna be a great great day." Then it starts talking about cold-filtered and suddenly I realized I was rocking out to a Budweiser commercial. Muy embarasado!

Central Division Predictions

Eastern Conference: Atlantic Division Preview
The Central Division has become much stronger after this summer. I agree with craigeoke that it isn't as strong as the Southwest, but, from top to bottom, has solid teams.
These are listed in the order I think they will finish.

1. Indiana Pacers

What They've Done: Signed the hot shooting Lithuanian Jasikevicius, got a draft steal with Granger, Miller retired
Questions: Will they amnestize Austin Croshere? How will Artest deal with being asked 5 million times about the fight? Will Bender's potential ever come to fruition?
Where They'll Rank: I have them first in a close battle with Detroit. I can't say exactly why I think they'll do better. But they are deep at every position, have an excellent coach, and are hungry.

2. Detroit Pistons

What They've Done: Drafted Maxiel (who played well in Summer League), replaced Larry Brown with Flip Saunders
Questions: Can they do as well without Brown? Can Rasheed keep it together? Will Darko produce?
Where They'll Rank: I'm dropping Detroit to second in the division, and I would even if Brown was staying. I think Flip will do a great job. They are a very good team and will be particularly dangerous in the playoffs, but I do see a small drop-off coming. I also have a bad feeling that Rasheed won't be able to maintain his decent (for him) behavior and might return to his incessant complaining, towel-at-teammate throwing, referee stalking ways.

3. Cleveland Cavaliers

What They've Done: Resigned the Big Z, signed Larry Hughes, signed Donyell Marshall
Questions: Will they pick up another point guard (Jaric? Damon Stoudamire?) How will Mike Brown do as coach? Will Hughes and Lebron mesh well? Are they going to trade Drew Gooden?
Where They'll Rank: Great off-season for the Cavs. I don't think they're are contenders for the finals just yet, but they are close. For the Eastern Conference, I'd rank them just below the Net, Pacers, Pistons, and Miami. It will be very exciting to see how this team performs. They might have spent a bit too much money resigning Hughes and Z, but they've still managed to save moolah for some smaller moves. I really like the Donyell Marshall signing, his outside shooting will be a nice compliment to Hughes and Lebron's slashes. I also think Damon would be a great fit coming off the bench for them. He's got his limitations, but he's a gamer with lots of play-off experience who can just go off some nights.

4. Chicago Bulls

What They've Done: Not a whole lot. But they will probably resign Duhon and Chandler.
Questions: Will they resign Eddy Curry? Will they sign and trade Eddy Curry for Harrington? Will the players burn out on Skiles?
Where They'll Rank: I have the Bulls dropping from second to fourth in the Central, and a lot of this has to do with Artest returning and the Cavs reloading. But I also predict a Sophomore slump for this surprising (last year) fourth seed, and think they could even miss the playoffs. The East, overall, looks a lot stronger and these Bulls might not be able to play out of their ass for another year. Also, Curry is a big question mark. Kind of a damned if you, damned if you don't decision. How often do you let young centers with post moves walk away? But he's just got so many question marks: his attitude, his weight, his (lack of) rebounding, his (missing) defense, and, now, his heart. Trouble just always seems to follow him around, but he will definitely be missed if he leaves.

5. Milwaukee Bucks

What They've Done: Drafted Bogut, resigned Redd, signed Simmons, TJ Ford returns
Questions: Can Bogut have an impact? Can Ford stay healthy? Can Stotts erase his Hawk's performance?
Where They'll Rank: If everything goes right, the Bucks could make the playoffs. And Bogut does look fairly polished, (before Atlanta) Stotts was considered the best assistant not to have a head job, TJ Ford was electrifying his first season, and Simmon did all the little things last year. But most likely, at least one of the above situations will not happen and Milwaukee will be lottery-bound. There are some questions about Bogut. So far this summer he was mouthy about his skills before the draft, insulted all the (incredible) Aussie b-ball players before him, and got kicked out of summer league game. But still, they made some nice solid moves that have them going in the right direction.

Monday, July 25, 2005

Best Beatles' Album Ever

In the Music Issue blog, Petrovich made the very controversial statement that the most perfect Beatles album was not Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, but was in fact Abbey Road. Now Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, is not only usually considered the Beatles best album, but is widely considered the best album ever. Is it though?

My favorite Beatles albums are Revolver and Rubber Soul; the middle albums combining the young Beatles with the later experimental Beatles. But Petrovich is correct that they aren't perfect. Rubber Soul has 3 of my all time favorite Beatles songs with "In My Life", "Norwegian Wood", and "I'm Looking Through You." But baby you can "Drive Me Car" is unforgivable and eliminated Rubber Soul from perfect status immediately. Revolver, likewise, can't be in the running after the annoying "Tax Man", vapid "Yellow Submarine," and pointless "Good Day Sunshine."

But I don't agree with Petrovich about Abbey Road. It is hard to find a bad song (although "Mean Mr. Mustard" is pretty stupid) but I was never blown away by it. To me, it seems like a very good solid album, but not ground breaking. And maybe here is where the conversation shifts to, what makes a perfect album? In my opinion, every song does not need to be incredible, but none should be so bad you have to skip it. It also needs to work together as an album, not as a collection of different good songs. Finally, it should be considered greatly influential and this is where Sgt Pepper's pulls away from Abbey Road.

I think Sgt. Pepper's accomplishes all of the requirements. Every song is good, they work together as a whole (I love that even though it's considered their best album, not a single song from it made The Beatles: 20 Greatest Hits), and it had an astronomical impact on the music world. I'm sure someone with more musical knowledge than me will find an obscurer one, but to my knowledge Sgt. Pepper's was the first concept album (even if that concept does not seem all that revolutionary now- the Beatles as a different band! Crazy!) . From the cover art to the theme to the music, this album transcended the border between music and art. And let's not forget that it ends with their best song ever, "A Day In The Life."

Questioning Sgt. Pepper's #1 status is sacreligious in some music circles. And it is important that we relisten and question what critics and the generation before us tell us. But with Sgt. Pepper's the critics were right. It seems the first modern-day Album was also the best album.

Saturday, July 23, 2005

Being Seconds

"Some people are just better at being seconds."

Paulie from the Sopranos

Friday, July 22, 2005

The Life and Times of My Illegal Alien Dog Jack Part 2: The Transformation

Part 1

So Jack had made it. He had escaped a life of begging for food and fending himself off from disease and bigger meaner strays and was now welcomed into the freedom of glorious Oregon. Well not exactly glorious. Jack arrived in early January and his very first walk occurred after a recent ice storm. Jack was not exactly fit for our weather and shivered the whole time. Marsha attempted to solve the problem by getting him a Freddy Krueger-like sweater (but in green) which I found greatly embarrassing. Jack had some other things to get used to. He had some major issues with grass for about the first month he was here. He would literally jump over any patch that got in his way.

The biggest change in Jack was his looks. He went from being a scrawny, rat-tailed, mangy mutt to a healthy, curly-haired mutt. Also, upon taking him to the vet, we discovered he wasn't a puppy, but a full grown 3-year old dog. Muy interasante! I don't mean to gush, but Jack has become quite a looker. I was reminded of this change by a conversation I had with my mom. My parents were coming to town and I was telling her how cute Jack had become. She kept on responding with, "Uh huh. Oh yah sure. Anyway..." And I kept on going, "No no, really. He's the talk of the dog park." And my mom continued trying to change the subject, acting like I was just a crazed deluded parent. But when they saw him, they were awestruck at the handsome devil he'd turned into.

I think my favorite thing about Jack is how he acts at the dog park. He's a small dog, a terrier mutt of many kinds, and he prances when he runs. Nevertheless, his terrier and stray dog roots make him totally ferocious. A common scene at the dog park is little Jack daintily growling and chasing around dogs twice his size. It totally cracks people up.

Anyway, I can't seem to figure out how to get a picture from my phone to the computer, so I will leave you with a picture of a dog that looks like Jack, but is not, unfortunately, the real thing. Well that's it for now. I hope everyone has a great weekend. Thanks to everyone who has checked this here blog out.

Thursday, July 21, 2005

Diaperless Babies


You haven't heard? No. Oh My God. You are so out of it.

Well anyone who is anyone must have heard of the hottest new trend- diaperless babies. In Monday's Oregonian they wrote a great article about a growing group of people with a new (old) way of dealing with their children's excrement. Instead of having their babies saute in their own feces, they hold their babies over potties whenever it is time to go. How do they know when they're going to go, you might be wondering. Well, practitioners of this style pick times in the day when the baby is most likely (like after a nap) and read their facial expressions. But aren't there still some accidents, the incredulous out there are probably asking. Yes, but way fewer than you would think.

The devoted almost seem cultish, but they make some good points. It's cheap and uber-environmentalist (no plastic diapers AND no excessive detergents). This is how millions of babies in Africa and Asia are raised, not to mention our babies pre-fifties. And isn't it a little strange to have a child just expel their waste whenever they want? The anti-diaper crew claim that their babies are potty trained between 6 months and a year. Now what about that?

I ran this fabulous idea by Marsha when she got home from work. You see, Marsha is the ultimate in international multi-culturalness, being a social worker for a refugee center and all(shout out to Irco!). I brought up that this would be a very progressive way for us to raise our hypothetical baby. Oddly, Marsha looked at me like I was crazy and wouldn't even entertain my multitude of arguments.

I can't believe she is being so backward! Doesn't she want to keep up with the future? I realize the Chuckdaddy Xpress is often a few stations ahead of the masses, but she can still jump on and enjoy the ride. Freud would be so into this! Come on people, we need to rise up. The revolution is coming and the revolution does not wear diapers!!!

July Basketball Predictions

I thought something that might be interesting (at least to me) was to take a basketball division, summarize what the teams in it have done, and say where I think they will rank next year. Let's start with the East Coast...

These are listed in the order they finished last year

1. Boston Celtics
What They've Done: They drafted well - getting high school prodigy Gerald Green and second round steal of Ryan Gomes. Oh, and they agreed to terms with Brian "The Scab"a Scalabrine
Questions: Will they resign Payton and Walker? Are they going to trade Pierce?
Where They'll Rank: It seems Ainge has some tricky decisions to make. He has managed the impossible in his first 2 years, piling up young talent, while still having enough veterans to make the play-offs. Do they go all young or bring back the veterans for another play-off push? It seems, to me, silly to trade a solid all-star in Pierce who's still young when a lot of their guys still have years until they can be effective. But at the same time, Al Jefferson seems to be the real deal, so I'm not sure if they really want Antoine Walker, even if it for cheap. For now I'll assume they don't resign Payton or Walker, but keep Pierce. I'll drop them to 4th in a division that should have 3 teams (NY, PHIL, and BOS) that are neck and neck and neck.

2. Philadelphia 76ers
What They've Done: Just trying to hold onto free agents Korver, Willy G, and Dalembert
Questions: Will they resign Dalembert? Will Webber return to all-star form? How will Mo Cheeks do?
Where They'll Rank: They need another star to become contenders again. Webber has risen up from the ashes before (see early Wizards and Sacramento years), but he just seems like a shell of the player he once was. And I don't think Dalembert is ready yet for star status. Maybe just not having a coach they all hate will improve morale, but it seems more likley that they will have about the same record as last year. I'll keep them at second.

3. New Jersey Nets
What They've Done: Drafted shooter Antoine Wright and a tall Serbian. Signing of Abdur-Rahim appears imminent.
Questions: Will they sign Kenyon Dooling? Will Rahim be a good fit in their running offence?
Where They'll Rank:
I think they'll will easily win their division. Rahim is a great player (still young as well) and a steal for the money they will pay. The only concern is injuries, in that Jefferson and Rahim missed about 1/2 of last season, Carter often gets hurt, and Kidd is coming off last season's serious knee surgury. Still, as long as 3 of those 4 can stay healthy (with one having to be Kidd), I see them coming in first in this division.

4. New York Knicks
What They've Done:
Drafted Channing Fry and Nate Robinson. Traded Thomas for Quentin. Signed Jerome James.
Questions: Will Larry Brown coach them?
Where They'll Rank: If Brown agrees to coach them, in this division I push them up to 2nd and overall I'd guarantee them a play-off spot. For now I'll move them up to 3rd in their division. As much as Thomas has made terrible moves, he still has constructed a deep talented roster. I especially think they could excel in a Sun's run and gun style. It wouldn't surprise me if even without Brown they are able to be a decent team.

5. Toronto Raptors
What They've Done: Drafted the enigmatic (and derided pick of the draft) Villanueva and Joey Graham.
Questions: Will they cut Jalen Rose? Will Villanueva prove his critics wrong? Will Sam Mitchell beat someone up???
Where They'll Rank:
It's not looking good in Toronto. Thanks to Jalen Rose's max deal, this bad team has little room to sign people. A once solid franchise last year had a bad draft (Araujo), made a terrible trade (Carter when his stock could not be any lower), and a dumb non-trade (letting a wanted Marshall leave for nothing). Bosh is skilled, but does not appear to be a transcendent superstar. It looks like he'll get to wallow around with a bad team learning bad losing habits. I see them coming in dead last in their division.

Wednesday, July 20, 2005

The Music Issue


White Stripes: "Get Behind Me Satan"
My opinion on the White Strips has always been extreme. The songs I like, I LOVE. But their albums always contain so many songs I dislike that I can't ever listen to the album all the way through. It almost makes me want to wait for their Greatest Hits Album. Their new album is my favorite of their's thus far. For the first half I actually considered that they might have put together a perfect album. Unfortunately, after the midway point, a few songs get into that overdone Black Sabbath sound that always forces me to skip a song or two. It makes me wonder. I know Jack White prides himself on spending no time in the studio, but maybe a little more editing would help iron out some of each album's issues. I know I know... They would lose some of their raw rock authenticity. But it also sort of reminds me of those kids who showed off about how they didn't study for a test and still passed it. As if they're supposed to get extra points for their potential genious. I'm probably in the minority with this view, but maybe with a little more studying, Jack White could finally pull off an A+.

Sufjan Stevens: "Illinoise"

Sufjan Stevens is supposedly going to make an album for all the fifty states. Good luck there buddy... So far he's gotten to two: Michigan and, on his new album, Illinois. I highly recommend it. I have a hard time describing music, but I guess I would say his songs are soft, mellow, ballads(?). Anyway, not that there seems to be a distinct difference between his two state albums, but I have instantly gotten way more into Illinoise. Of course I might be biased by being from there and greatly appreciating his Abe Lincoln and Sear's Tower references. Or there might be a subtler reason. Music afficianado M-Bomb Ferrigno said Illinoise had more "instrumentation". I'm not sure exactly what that means, maybe more instruments? A fuller sound? But the result is, at least for me, a slightly better album. And I can't wait for the District of Columbia release.


M.I.A.: "Arular"
M.I.A.'s album is very cool, maybe a bit too cool for me. M.I.A.'s music is kind of what you'd get if Missy Elliot was a Tamil Tiger: a dancy, rappish, conglometerate, with major Indian influences. I love that she has been getting a lot of press, but I'm not sure it's the album for me. It definitely is unique, but also a little irritating. I think if I was more into electronic music I would really like it. Buy it anyway, if for nothing else, because all proceeds go to the Tamil Freedom Fighters.

If interested, you can read her biography

Tuesday, July 19, 2005

Barbarians

"In private I observed that once in every generation, without fail, there is an episode of hysteria about the barbarians. There is no woman living along the frontier who has not dreamed of a dark barbarian hand coming from under the bed to grip her ankle, no man who has not frightened himself with visions of the barbarians carousing in his home, breaking the plates, setting fire to the curtains, raping his daughters. These dreams are the consequence of too much ease. Show me a barbarian army and I will believe."

"My occasional hunting and hawking, my desultory womanizing, exercises of manhood, have concealed how soft my body has grown."

From Waiting For The Barbarians by J.M. Coetzee

America: The Land of Opportunity

This weeks Economist did a survey on America. I thought the most interesting article was on the decrease in economic mobility. Here are some stats from the article.

1. 80% of American think the poor can become rich by working hard (which is an increase since the 80's)

2. If you are in the bottom 5% income bracket, your chances of one day having an average income is 1 in 6.

3. From 1945 - 1970 the poorest fifth of society increased as much as the top fifth (actually all fifths increased in, more or less, equal amounts). Since 1979, the rich have done much better. For instance, the median income has increased by 18% while the top 1% increased by 200%

4. There was also an interesting trend with the top .1%. In Britain, France and the US the top .1% got about 10% of all income in 1913. In all countries, this continued to drop, getting to a low of 2% of total income in the 60's. Since the 80's though, the US's top .1% has started to increase. Presently, the top .1% gets 6% of total income in the US. It is between 2 and 3 % in Britain and France

5. As society is getting more information based, a college degree is getting even more important. Between 1979 and 1997, the income gap between college graduates and non-graduates doubled.

6. A student from the top 25% income bracket is 6 times more likely than a student from the bottom 25% to get a Bachelor's degree.

7. The richest 25% make up 50% of elite colleges (up from 39% in 1976).

8. The median income of Harvard families is $150,000

What scares me, is that the effects from the Bush tax cuts have only just begun to be felt. I assume these discrepancies between the poor and rich are only getting larger.

Monday, July 18, 2005

PERS are the Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiite!

All right. Sir-Blog-A-Lot is back. Just choppin' at the bit to update y'all.

So I read this article in The (nationally reknowned) Oregonian and it's been bothering me. I tried to complain about it to Marsha, but her eyes started to glaze over. So I told her I would just have to blog about it because THEY always listen to me and THEY want to know about how retirement benefits effect Oregon school funding.

Anway, I guess right now Oregon spends a little under the national average per student, slightly above the national average for salaries (around $40,000), and double the national average on P.E.R.S. Now, to be honest, I don't exactly understand the notorious P.E.R.S. because they have to do with retirement benefits and, like insurance, this middle school math teacher somehow can't get his head around them. But, the key idea, is that a certain group of teachers are getting incredible retirement benefits, while our students are entering ever-more crowded classrooms.

To my knowledge (and I'm getting a little over my head in terms of expertise so look for the big picture ideas), what happened was during the stock market explosion, instead of raising salaries, teachers could be guaranteed the ridiculously high going rates on their P.E.R.S. The teacher's union jumped at the deal, and then, subsequently, the stock market dropped and now the government is having to make up the difference. This has now been eliminated, but until the teachers who got that deal die, Oregon tax payers will be footing the bill.

I can see why people would be pissed off about this, but I'm a little annoyed at how the finger seems to be pointing towards the teachers. Adorning the article was a picture of a teacher drinking a Margarita on a beach. Maybe I'm being a little sensitive, but I felt like the implication was, "How ironic that you guys complain about school funding when it's you who are bankrupting the system."

I mean, not that teachers expect to be paid a lot, but they're not saints. Were they supposed to turn down a good deal? Are they supposed to go into negotiations and talk down the offers? Unions are always in the position that the more they get, the less the business gets. But with teachers, the business is, in a way, the students. So we get a raise and the students lose art.

Or does it have to be looked at that way? I wish we could see teacher's salaries as a separate issues. I know they are logically connected, but the state also fund roads, jails, firemen... You don't hear people linking the repaving of I-5 with dropping a reading program. So when the state screws up and overpays teacher, maybe who is effected is future teachers, but not the students we teach- who had nothing to do with it.

The fact of the matter is Oregon schools still have funding issues. We've gone from being one of the country's higher funders to below average, meaning huge cuts in how schools were run. Even worse, is that funding has been inconsistent. I've only taught for 5 years, but during that time, every year funding was an issue. We've gone from cuts to gains to cuts. This has caused us to start programs, lose them, and then get the chance to get them back (but who knows if we should take the risk). It's not as if we as a state are ignorant to the fact that each year we'll need to pay for schools.

To sum-up - We need stable adequate funding. And just because your high school English teacher is sipping margaritias on the beach doesn't mean my classes should be between 30-34 students.

People Who Ride Sit-Down Bikes Are Weird

Have you seen those bikes where people are in like a bucket seat that is about an inch up from the ground? What's up with that?

My first thought was that those people were just lazy, and that annoyed me cuz if you're lazy, maybe you should drive your car. But I think I was wrong, because they have to pedal just like us up-right bikers. If anything it kind of looks harder, going against gravity and all.

So my next thought was maybe they're just doing it for attention. So people will look at them and think they're all that because they're riding the newest thing. Like, look at the seated royalty over there, they must be fresh.

Some people just need to get a life.

Thursday, July 14, 2005

The Life and Times of My Illegal Alien Dog Jack Part 1: The Departure

Well at the top of my page, I claim this site is about sports, politics, culture, and Jack. Well I've certainly written about the first 3 (maybe a bit too extensively on sports), but Jack, has thus far, gotten the shaft.

First, a little introduction about how Marsha and I got Jack. We were near Puerto Vallerta, Mexico in a small fishing town called Huanacaxtle de la Cruz (or something like that). Jack was a scrawny black puppy who was dirty and diseased and followed us everywhere (which might have has something to do with Marsha feeding him within the firt 2 seconds of him following us). We grew quickly attached, but decided we wouldn't really be doing anything about the stray dog population in Mexico by taking one home from us.

At the last minute though, we had a change of heart. Marsha had fallen in love with him and I had fallen in love with his story. So we got him some shots and brought him on the plane with us (and yes, you really can bring dogs home from Mexico with only a Mexican Vet's note (or in our case his 12 year-old daughter's). They do not require a quarrantine)

The plane ride home was defintively the worst plane ride either us have ever endured. It's one of those stories that is great, but has so many levels of badness that you constantly have to interrupt your audience's segues with, "And then..." Suffice it to say we spent the whole day with a stray dog we knew very little about at the time. Some highlights include him barking loudly at strangers, refusing to go into his dog carrier, snapping at me when I attempted to force him into the dog carrier, and us being literally kicked off a plane because his carrier wouldn't fit under the seat (even though it was the measurements they fucking gave us!).

Jack is now happily at home with us in Portland, Oregon. My cousin at one point was over and watched Jack happily chewing away on one of his 700 chew toys. David observed, "Damn, that dog has gotta be the luckiest dog ever." But, you know, he was wrong. BECAUSE IT WAS MARSHA AND I WHO HIT THE JACK(HA!)POT BY GETTING HIM!!! AHHHHHH

Meta-Blogging

Ahh.... Blogging about blogging. Is this the true post-modern moment?

Anyway, so I have now finished my first week as an intergalactic blogger. And I have to say, the experience has been interesting. The ability to be published immediately combined with people's potential comments was much more exciting than I expected. I mean, while I was taking Jack for a walk, who knows what could be happening. Perhaps a dynamic argument about Che is underway or a fight has broken out over where the best Caesar salad is. WHO KNOWS? Unfortunately, what I've learned quickly this week, by checking 4 or 5 times a day, is just because people could be responding, it doesn't mean they are. And, in general, the discussions have been limited to Petrovich and I, when we could be just using the old fashioned phone.

The question remains, even if I was getting more readers and comments, would a blog be a good place for a discussion? Going through random blogs, I found most of the comments being nice but kind of pointless. Examples : "Good job keep it," or, "That was funny." Not that I'm in the position to be picky about my comments (and wouldn't love those), but was that the point in doing this? I guess, those comments and looking at other blogs have made me think blogging might be more about presenting your opinion than having discussions. But perhaps I just haven't seen enough or haven't given it enough time.

Still, there's something about the process I've really liked. For instance I'm really glad I wrote the (now infamous in blog circles, let me tell you) Che blog. The night before I had told Marsha about this article and when she asked me for the specifics, I could barely remember any. By writing it, I think I'll both remember it better and can now go back and check it myself when I forget stuff. I read a lot, but maybe I need to spend more time processing what I've read if I really want to get anything out of it. (there's of course the reality though that as I've blogged, I've read less. If I continue blogging at this pace, will I even have time to read anything to blog about?)

Also, even though the discussions I've had have erred on the ridiculous, as they've been limited to the Notorious P.E.T.E. and I . Still, there is something kind of good about writing an argument rather than saying it. You have to think about it more, which I like.

Well anyway. I want to thank everyone who has come to read this thus far, it has helped make my summer seem more relevant. I'm going to keep it up until the end of the month and see where it all goes...

Kwame Traded To The Lakers

Or at least it looks like that's going to happen.

The specifics: It's being reported that Washington will sign and trade Kwame Brown to the Lakers for Caron Butler and either Chucky Atkins or Devean George.

How This Looks For Washington: Great. They needed a shooting guard and they got a pretty good one in Caron Butler. He's not as skilled as Larry Hughes, but he's about one-fifth the price and is still young. Also, considering they cut him from their playoff roster, Kwame didn't really have a future with them.

How This Looks For The Lakers: Pretty good. They desperately needed a post player and they had no money to spend. For Caron, Kwame is just about the best they could do. They also aren't paying Kwame that much, 6 or 7 million. Even better, the contract looks like it'll be guaranteed for only 2 years so if he's a malcontent bust, they aren't hamstrung with a big long contract. On the other hand, Kwame's play had been inconsistent through his 4 years. And in the playoffs, Washington chose to have nothing rather than his mere presence. Not exactly a ringing endorsement. But I still think it is a worth risk taking. Kwame's got a chance for a fresh start with a coach he has to respect. And, if they hate him, some team would probably jump at his potential and trade for him.

Overall a win-win situation

Wednesday, July 13, 2005

Chicks Dig Dominant BO

Who would've thunk?

Some scientists (who must be a bunch of freaks!) decided to research whether women are more attracted to the smell of a dominant man. Previous studies had already found that women like an attractive man's smell and that other animals prefer a dominant's smell (the smell was always introduced independent of the subjects).

The way they went about the study was interesting. They first defined a man's level of dominance by having subjects rate themselves on questions like how often they correct others, how much they control conversations, how motivated are they to accomplish more than others... Next, they had the guys wear cotton pads under their armpits for 24 hours while they refrained from beer, cigarettes, and curries (women love the smell of the curry man). They collected the cotton swabs and let the women subjects sniff away.

What they found was that some women were more attracted to dominant man. But, they're had to be two key variables. First, the women needed to be in a relationship. AND, the women needed to be at a fertile stage of her cycle. What does this all mean? Maybe, since dominant men are more likely to leave, women want the dominant man to father their child, but the less dominant man to raise their child. So the ideal evolutionary situation, is for a women to wait until they are in a committed relationship, have an affair with a dominant man, have a child with his dominant genes, then have the less dominant guy think he's the father.

Just like a woman...

Random World News

Just got this week's Economist and thought I'd share a few things I gleaned.

1. New York Times columnist Judith Miller is going to jail for researching an article about a CIA agent. She is refusing to give up her source (for the story she never wrote) to a federal prosecutor. Robert Novack, the conservative who broke the story and thus the identity of the agent, is not in trouble, presumably because he cooperated with the prosecutor.

2. Iowa is giving all ex-felons the right to vote, without any hoops to jump through

3. Peru's desert is rocking the agricultural world by blooming out major supplies of asparagus, artichokes, olives, and some tropical fruit. A big factor is that the US and EU eliminated tariffs so that the Andean countries would have an alternative to drugs. This deal expires in 2006.

4. The Philippines president is mired in scandal, but no one really cares. Gloria Arroyo was taped asking someone about the vote count in a particular province. The man told her, "What they did to raise yours- it was done well." Oops. Also, her husband, son, and brother-in-law (but not her?) are all implicated in a pocketing bribes scheme. Still, only 18% of Filipinos want her to resign and 20% want the country to forget about it (at least her part). It appears they like how she is handling the economy and country in general.

5. China, Russia, and some Stans (Kazakhstan, Kirgizstan, Tajikastan, and Uzbekistan) all had a big pow wow. Basically, China wants their oil, and the Stans and Russia want China's money. Additionally, the 6 are greatly in support of each other's suppression of any dissidents (oops, I mean "terrorists"). This could get interesting though. China and Russia are both trying to get the US out of this region (we have troops there) while trying to get the upper hand over each other simultaneously.

6. Selling cell phones to developing countries for cheap might be a win-win situation. Cell phones have been found to help business innumerably in poorer countries that lack basic infrastructure (worse roads, bad postal systems, limited land lines). Right now, in some countries, a village might share one phone between themselves. Companies producing cheaper phones might result in some high sales since most of the world is poor (but who wants a phone without a video camera or one that can't play Snoop Doggy Dogg every time my mom calls?).

7. A science article I went into more detail below...

Monday, July 11, 2005

Jack Johnson: Bad Motha Fo

I've always really liked the boxer Jack Johnson's story, so I thought, since I have nothing better to do with my life (other than the gutters, the broken window, the lawn...), I would do a short bio of his life.

Jack Johnson was born in in Galveston, Texas in 1878. His parents had been slaves, but Johnson believed he deserved a life equal to whites, and proceeded to carve that out for himself through his skills at boxing.

Up until 1908, the white heavyweight champions refused to fight blacks. This is unsurprising, consider that Jackie Robinson didn't enter baseball until 1947. But boxing's interest was waning in the public eye. The last great champion, Jim Jeffries, retired in 1904 and was replaced by the unimpressive Tommy Burns. Boxing needed to draw fans and Jack Johnson was considered the best fighter of the time.

So Tommy Burns made the fateful error of agreeing to fight Johnson, who proceeded to kick his Lilly-white ass (1908). The country was aghast. The toughest man in the country was now a black man. And to make matters much worse, Johnson proceeded to piss everyone off as much as possible by openly having sex and marrying white women. He was also cocky. In the ring he was known to heckle his white opponents, even at times asking the crowd what round he should knock them out in.

The white world responded by starting the search for a"Great White Hope" (the movie/play was based on this) to return the belt to its rightful pale owners. They decided on the retired ex-champion Jim Jeffries, who was clear he was only coming out of retirement to fix the mistake that Johnson had become. Unfortunately for Jeffries, he was no match for Johnson, who played around with him before knocking him out in the 15th round.

Since he couldn't be beaten in the ring, the authorities decided to arrest him. First in 1912 for the "kidnapping" of Lucille Cameron, a white prostitute and sometime stenographer. The case was impossible to prove because she was in love with Johnson (he'd had an affair with her) and she refused to testify against him. In 1913 they were able get him for violating the Mann Act, which forbade transporting women across state lines for "immoral" activities. It was basically a morality law to try to curb prostitution and was rarely prosecuted. Johnson was convicted under it though and was given the unheard of, for such a minor offence, conviction of 1 year and a day in prison.

Well Johnson wasn't going to have any of that, so he fled the authorities who were watching him (probably bribed them) and fled to Europe, where he continued to be champion even though he was now a convicted felon. Although the boxing commission considered it, they did not strip him of his title; they still wanted a white man to do that.

That chance came against the big clumsy Kansas farmer Jess Willard, who ended Johnson's reign of terror on white society in Havana in 1915. Johnson later claimed the fight had been fixed and that he had purposely lost. But watchers of the fight said Johnson was just overmatched as age and not keeping in good shape had caught up to him. Willard knocked Johnson out in the 26th round of the fight.

There are so many things to like about Johnson's story: him being the first black champion, him doing what he wanted, him sticking it to the man... But what I find most interesting is that he is this total historical anomaly. The United States was not even close to being ready for a black champion. And he did not start a trend. Jack Dempsey (who quickly grab the title form Willard) refused to fight black fighters, and we wouldn't have another black champ until Joe Louis in 1937 (who, consequently, assured the public constantly he wouldn't be another Jack Johnson). And, again, the huge story of Jackie Robinson happened 39 years after Johnson was champion. Johnson should not have ever been champion. But since he did, we get to see just how much he was able to shake up America.

No Rules Just Rock

Yesterday, I was driving home from the grocery store listening to the local Classic Rock station. On came a promo for the station showing off about how they don't talk to consultants when they pick they're songs and they don't work with focus groups; they just pick good music. The promo finished with the slogan, "105.9: No rules, just rock.

The whole thing struck me as kind of funny. I mean, who is their demographic? Isn't it like 50-something fathers? Aren't these guys probably very rule abiding folk? I imagine the majority have kids, decent jobs, and are against law-breaking. So why would the station be appealing to their "anti-rule" side?

I assume it's because we've defined music for the past 50 years as "counter-culture". For some reason, whether it's rap today, heavy metal in the 80's, or Classic Rock in 60's/70's, we want to feel rebelious when we listen to music. So even though a teenager might find it odd, his dad still does feel anti-establishment when he listens to the Eagles. And this station seemed to be centering its Ad campaign on maintaining that feeling. But why do we find it necessary only with music? And will we ever get to an age where we don't want to feel a little "bad" when we jam out in our cars?

Caesar Salad Rankings #1

This is the first in a reoccurring series. My wife (shout out to Marsha!) and I have been searching to find the ultimate Caesar Salad, and although I have forgotten much of our data, here are some preliminary findings.

1. Blue Monk - Jazz bar on Belmont. The food was fine, but the Caesar salad there was the best we've ever had. Sharp, tasty, spicy - the holy grail thus far

2. Fusion - An electic restaurant near our house on Division where you can also buy antiques. I have to admit, I don't exactly remember what the salad was exactly like, but we both remember it was good.

3. Caesar Salad Kit - Can be bought at Fred Meyer's and put together in a jiffy. A little on the creamy side, but not bad. This is sort of the watermark ranking. All restaurants below this should feel bad (or should start buying the Salad kits).

4. Hedge House - Nice Mcmenaminsesque place on Division. They are dog-friendly (shout out to Jack!). Good for a Reuben and a beer. Not so good for a Caesar Salad. It didn't taste bad, but it didn't taste like much either.

Shooting Guard Bonanza

Oddly, whereas being 7 feet tall is the usual suspect in getting teams to shell out millions during free agency, this year being a shooting guard seems to be in vogue. The following signings should happen when the free agent moratorium is lifted: Ray Allen to the Sonics (5 years - 80 million), Michael Redd to the Bucks (6 years - 90 million), Larry Hughes to the Cavs (5 years - 70 million), Bobby Simmons to the Bucks (5 years - 47 million), and Joe Johnson possibly to the Hawks (5 years - 70 million: but this can be matched by Phoenix). Meanwhile, big men Eddy Curry, Tyson Chandler, Samuel Dalembert, Jerome James, Stromile Swift, and The Big Z have agreed to no offers.

Although I'm happy to see skilled player getting more love than 7-footers with potential, I predict many of these signings will be rued about later. Since, due to salary caps, a team winning free agency is more complicated than getting the players they want. The following are 4 ways of scoring a signing then my prediction of where the following shooting guard pick-ups will rank.

The Coup - A player signs a medium contract and then breaks out. Fairly rare. Examples: Chauncey Billups ( paid about 6 million a year), Ben Wallace (6 million a year), and Manu Ginobli (just got a raise to 9 million a year. Think if he had been free agent this summer)?

A lot, but worth it - A great player gets paid the max. Examples: Nowitzki, Duncan, Iverson, McGrady.

Slightly Rueful
- This happens a lot. Either through competition or the powers of potential, a good player gets paid as a superstar. In some situations, teams sucking it up and paying more is fine for team chemistry (think Kenyon Martin- he's only been an all-star once, so it's hard to justify giving him max money. But the Nets fell apart without his inside presence). Sometimes, the pay checks continue to grow while production drops and the last few years of the contract are an albatross (think Eddie Jones and Michael Finley). Often, these players fill up future cap space and lose trade value because other teams don't want their contracts (think Antawn Jamison, Baron Davis (who would be worth the max if he could stay healthy), and Steve Francis).

Totally ruing - Oops. These are salary cap bombs. These can be the result of unforeseen injuries (Grant Hill), overrated talent (Shawn Kemp, Jalen Rose, Antonio Davis), or a combination of both (Allan Houston was the second highest paid player in the league last year at 19 million). These players kill your cap and are virtually untradable, except for each other.

Of the recent signings...

A lot, but worth it - I think Ray Allen is the only shooting guard who deserved max money. He can carry a team, has been good for many years, and played well in the playoffs. The only knock on him is age, and so it was good to see that they signed him for 5 years instead of the max length 6 years. I would also put Bobby Simmons here since his contract is much more reasonable than the other wing players.

Slightly Rueful - I think Joe Johnson, Michael Redd, and Larry Hughes have all been overpaid. Both Joe Johnson and Larry Hughes have been inconsistent throughout their careers and only last year played well (although not good enough to go to the all star game). And although Redd has been an All Star and has sustained a high level of play for 2 years, he seems limited as a good shooter. It is doubtful he'll ever be a superstar. Maybe these players will end up being worth being overpaid for the sake of creating a good team. Or maybe they will be on the trading block in 3 years as these teams try to find cap space. Time will tell....

Sunday, July 10, 2005

Drinking's Funny

"Drinking's funny. When I look back on it, all of our important decisions have been figured out when we were drinking. Even when we talked about having to cut back on our drinking, we'd be sitting at the kitchen table or out at the picnic table with a six-pack or whiskey."

Raymond Carver - Gazebo (Short Story In What We Talk About When We Talk About Love)

Friday, July 08, 2005

Che Was a Meanie

Every leftist loves Che Guevara. Was there ever a purer revolutionary? As immortalized in the (very good) movie Motorcycle Diaries, Che was a young idealistic doctor on a road trip through South America. After seeing the inequities of wealth he was so moved, that he eventually led a revolution to overthrow Cuba's American supported dictator, Batista. Talk about putting your money where your mouth is...

But our beloved Che is not so loved by Alvaro Vargas Llosa, the author of an interesting article I read in The New Republic. Llosa's article, titled The Killing Machine, attempts to derail the icon that is brandished on so many T-shirts. He begins by describing the brutality of the self proclaimed "cold-blooded killing machine," during the Cuban Revolution. Of course war is bloody by definition, but Che was particularly harsh. Any of his men who were suspected of treachery, were executed. He describes in his diary how he treated a man accused of passing on information. "I ended the problem with a .32 caliber pistol, in the right side of his brain... His belongings were now mine."

After the revolution Che continued to be brutal. Castro put him in charge of La Cabana prison, where accused "counter revolutionaries" were incarcerated. Anyone against the regime could be sent there, and the author mentions a man who went for the sole sin of being Christian. Che held daily executions under his watch, with no trial of course. The total amount killed was estimated at 500, earning Che the nickname, "The Butcher."

Similarly, Che was also involved with forced work camps. There "unfit" Cubans were sent to build schools and other state projects while living in concentration camps. The definition of "unfit"? Oh just dissidents, homosexuals, Aids victims, Catholics, Jehovah's Witnesses, Afro-Cuban priests, etc.. It was a traumatizing experience in where they were often raped, beaten and many never returned.

Che also may have changed the world even more had Cuba gotten to keep Russia's nukes during the Cuban Missile Crisis. He was quoted in a British communities paper saying, "If the rockets had remained, we would have used them all and directed them against the very heart of the United States, including New York, in our defense against aggression."

Che's actions after the revolution made me think about the eternal Cuban contradiction. Many leftists support the concept of the revolution, but deplore the undemocratic tyrannical regime that replaced it. To deal with this dichotomy, we've placed Che as the figure head of the former, Castro the latter. In reality, Che had much to do with what the regime quickly became than people want to admit.

At the end of the article, Llosa goes a little too far by detailing Che's failures as an Economic Minister and even questioning Che's guerrilla skills. It's as if to say, Che is bad at everything. It feels off the point and a little vindictive. I mean, people aren't wearing Che shirts because they are under the impression that he was a wonderful economist. And guerrilla skillz, don't go there Llosa!

But I do appreciate that he ends by giving a brief bio of a man he thinks should be immortalized. Juan Bautista Alberdi was highly influential in writing the Argentinian Constitution that limited government, opened trade, and encouraged immigration. Argentina subsequently rose to being the 12 richest nation in the world by 1928. Bautista did this without killing anyone.

Still, in giving us this example, Llosa almost hurts his overall point. Who is more inspirational? A man who led Cuba's revolution, and subsequent campaigns in Nicaragua, the Dominican Republic, Panama, Haiti, the Congo, and, where he lost his life, Bolivia. Or the man who detailed the specifics of how government should work? I think I already forgot the other guy's name. And even though I guess the point of Llosa's article is to shame Che-shirt wearing leftists into realizing their man may be more Pol Pot than a purist, I think people wear the shirt for a different reason. Che has become an icon and his image represents, "fighting the power." Even if he was a "cold-blooded killing machine" it is hard to begrudge him that his life truly was one of being a constant revolutionary.

Thursday, July 07, 2005

Worst Restaurant In Portland

Yes, this post for all my foodie fans. AVOID THE MUMMY AT ALL COSTS! Actually, I take that back. I mean, how often do you get to experience anything so wholly misery producing?

The Mummy is an Egyptian Restaurant near PSU. For drinks it would be great since it is in a basement (always a plus for a bar) and has lots of tacky gold Egyptian statues (unique!).

But the food was really something else. I got lamb kabobs. They came with oily rice and cooked vegetables that looked like they came out of a can. And it was cold. Like really cold. Since I have very few taste buds, I have little trouble eating anything. But I was barely able to eat half. The kicker was that it cost $16.50. I mean, I could have gone out to a nice dinner for that much or had 8 meals at Taco Bell (which is infinitely better than The Mummy).

The Mummy got me wondering though if there was a worse place to eat than it in Portland. If so, please comment. I really haven't found anything close. I remember a mediocre-small portioned meal at Garbonzo's, but that was at least cheap and not so bad. And my wife and I had a cold weird meal at the Nueva Latin eatery that replaced the first site of La Calacalaca (near The Jolly Roger), but that place only lasted about 6 months. I have my doubts that any restaurant could serve cold, bad, and overpriced food and not go out of business. My friend thought The Mummy might be a front for drug ring. I think she's probably right.

What was sad was that I wanted to love The Mummy. I love Egyptian mythology and the Egyptian food market is totally untapped. But Mummy, you let me down.

Me and You and Everyone We Know

To appease my non-sports addicted fans, I will always try to do a non-basketball blog as well. It'll probably be about movies or music or some shit like that

This one will be short since I am amazed at how much time I just spent with my last blog. The basic message is, well, see the movie Me and You and Everyone We Know. It's one of those Short Cutsesque (best movie ever) movies where a large seemingly random collection of people interact with the world, and occasionally with each other. How it differs from Short Cuts, and other similar movies, is it was directed by a performance artist. Normally, I would find this a recipe for disaster, but instead, she has used her off-beat sensibilities to create very weird interesting scenarios that might not happen, but ring true nevertheless. There's also this whole underlying theme about people using new technologies to connect (a la blogging) which made it feel timely. (It certainly didn't hurt my opinion of the movie that the director used to live in Portland and uses Portland street names even though it's shot in LA)

The movie was not perfect, but interesting, funny, and unique. I highly recommend it.

Nate McMillan Is The Blazer's Coach!

Ahhhh... After a long lunch I have decided that I will try out this blogging thang. I really don't have much else to do with my time (my wife would probably disagree with that statement).

So the question then becomes, what do I blog about? Will this be a totally unprivate diary? A forum to rant about my opinions? A place to foment revolution?

Maybe I should look for some unexcavated niche and make it to the big time. Like every blog could be about how Rushmore was the best movie ever and why. That would be kind of funny... or not.

A bigger question is, of course, why bother. I have a feeling my only reader is my friend Pete. Why don't I just call him and tell him that the Detroit Pistons are overrated or that I like the White Stripes CD, but not quite as much as he does. But this all sort of reminds me of when I had a radio show at my high school station and the only person who listened was my mom. It was still worth it for some reason.

So without further ado.... I'd like to begin by writing about just how excited I am that the Blazers hired Nate McMillan to be their coach. Marc Stein writes an interesting article (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&id=2102121) about why this might not be a great move. His basic point is that one 50 win season does not make a man. And that Nate probably isn't worthy of being the second-highest paid coach in the NBA.

What he fails to mention though is that the Blazer's owner is one of the richest men in the world so it really doesn't matter what he pays him. This spend-thrift attitude has hurt the Blazers in the past because they've overpaid their players- and that was a mistake. They lost flexibility by doubling the salary cap. And they got stuck with decent players who had huge salaries and, thus, were untradable (no one really wanted Damon Stoudamire's max contract for instance). But overpaying coaches? Who gives a fuck? Like it matters if Paul Allen makes money from the Blazers.

So in deciding whether this was a good move or not, the only real requirement is will he be a good fit- and I think he will be great fit.. Nate has always had mediocre talent in Seattle and his teams have been competitive. He used a creative offensive system this year and won't give players minutes if they don't play defence. His reputation is as a likable disciplinarian. No great expert on character then sex-offender Ruben Patterson was coached by him and loved him, saying in today's Oregonian that, "He's a great guy,"and, "he doesn't take anything from anyone, and that's what we need here in Portland."

Ruben is right (for once). Maurice Cheeks was a nice guy, but had his hands full trying to maintain discipline on a team where players were almost run over at strip clubs and holding illegal dog fights. That's why I think Nate might even be a better than Phil Jackson would have been. Although Jackson would have felt very at home in the Northwest sipping coffee and wandering through the aisles of Powell's, he's always been more about fitting talent together than developing players. And with a team who's average age is 23.5 and whose summer-league's starting line-up won't be all that different than their opening day's line-up, I can't see Phil working his championship magic.

Yes, this really is a great move. It's always pissed me off that the Blazer's have not had great coaches (PJ, Dunleavy, Mo) when they could afford one. Marc Stein might be right that Nate's not a great coach yet. But, at worst, he'll be great fit here.

The Chuckdaddy Train Is Leaving The Station

I was trying to post a comment on someone else's blog and, it seems, I have started my own. Has it always been my fate to be an intergalactic blogger? Time will tell...