Toyah

It's education time on Toyah. This year we look at one of the finer terms to emerge from the world of online gaming. The word is "pwn" and it is pronounced pown (rhymes with own).

Pwn is short for "pistol own" or "pistol ownage." It means, literally, that you killed somebody in a first-person shooter game with a pistol (a relatively weak weapon). However, pwn can be used in many other situations. Whenever somebody is getting owned you can say "pwn!" Other forms of the word include pwned (The Lions got pwned by the Bears in overtime.), pwning (I'm pwning Dallas in foosball.), and pwnage (There was mass pwnage at the battle of Bull Run.).

It's a versatile word and a lot of fun. Try introducing "pwn" into your vocabulary!!!

If you believe, as I do, in baptism-by-immersion---don't grab the microphone while standing in the baptistry!

I can see myself doing that, as microphones don't seem electric and baptistry don't seem like "normal" water (don't ask me why not). And the microphone shouldn't have electrocuted the poor guy: something wasn't grounded right.

Baptism is necessary---and so is good electrical grounding!

President Bush must be trying to time his nomination announcements for the morning news time, as I've watched both the Miers nomination and the Alito nomination while eating breakfast.

First impression: I'm impressed. To be sure, I'm pre-disposed to like him, inasmuch as it would be hard to be as poor a nominee as Harriet Miers. But I heard his name quite a bit in the last few days, and I have yet to hear a bad thing about him. I found it interesting---though not necessarily telling---that while Bush was speaking, Miers was watching Bush, but in the same place later, Alito was looking straight ahead at the press corp. I don't remember what Miers said in her nomination acceptance speech, so it was apparently forgettable. I doubt I'll remember Alito's speech for long either, but I do know I liked what I heard.

I think it was Tony Snow on Fox News who pointed out that some conservatives may not entirely like Alito, as he will (or may) refuse to be as activist as they would like him to be, on conservative issues. That's fine with me: I don't want activist judges, period. It's the legislature who should be activist.

I'm sure we'll be inundated with every jot and tittle that Alito has ever written, and my opinion is subject to change, but for now, I think he's a good pick.

This is interesting. According to the Tax Foundation, there have only been three years since 1977 in which the oil companies made more in profits than the federal and state governments gained in taxes.

I heard this morning that people in Congress are calling for hearings into the high profits that the oil companies have posted over the last quarter. Personally, I say let the market handle it: if they are indeed charging too much, the market will respond by developing alternatives and/or by finding ways to buy less gas. Of course, Congress can't bear to leave anything alone, so they'll have their hearings. But I highly doubt anything will be said about how much the governments got, while the oil companies were profiting.

I'm sure most readers of Toyah know by now, but Harriet Miers is no longer a candidate for the U.S. Supreme Court. I respect her for making that decision, which I think was the right one for herself, for the President, for the country, and (lastly) for the conservative movement, of which the President is the temporary head.

It's the right decision for herself because it was becoming clear that her talents and abilities did not lie in the area of constitutional jurisprudence, which (I suspect) would have become clear during the Senate confirmation hearings. And that would have been extremely embarrassing to her.

It's the right decision for the President, who has a number of PR problems right now and can't afford another one. More seriously, the Miers nomination seriously threatened to create a break within his own party, which he can still less afford.

It's the right decision for the country because, rightly or wrongly, Supreme Court justices serve for decades and impact the law sometimes for centuries, and the evidence so far has not shown that Miers could have been a good justice, merely in terms of making clear, solidly-reasoned legal decisions.

Finally, it's good for the conservative movement, which has worked for decades to put good justices who will make sound legal judgements on the Supreme Court. It's my opinion that conservatives as a whole don't so much want justices who will vote conservatively, but rather want justices who will vote in a way that is clearly consistent with the Constitution (rather than referencing "penumbras and emanations", for example, as Justice Douglas did in Griswold). And yes, I know that's a gross generalization.

I'm relieved, more than anything. And somewhat apprehensive about the next pick. The Miers nomination was a disaster in pretty much every possible sense, and I'd say it's about 50-50 as to whether the President will do better with what will now be his third pick to replace Sanda Day O'Conner.

I've just now come across this Flickr collection of WWI photos, taken by a German soldier (probably an officer, I would guess) on the Eastern Front. I'm not sure how big the collection of photos from WWI is, but surely smaller than what we have for WWII, and supposedly many of these photos have never been published before. I can't verify the authenticity of them, of course, but I don't see any glaring fakes. If you're into WWI or just into old photos, check 'em out!

on 10/14 i put in my 2-week notice at 5/3. at that point the staff included a branch manager, 2 personal bankers (me being 1), 1 full time teller, and 2 part time tellers. my leaving causes quite a bit of issues, because the staff is rather new, and everyone leans/leaned heavily on me to get things done right. the branch was already looking to replace an office manager (the job that i evidently wasn't good enough for)...friday is my last day, but since i put in my notice 1 of the part time tellers quit, and the full time teller was fired for misleading on her resume. that leaves 2 full time employees and a part time guy...the new office manager will start the monday after i leave, but he won't know how everything works yet, so the branch manager is getting screwed...he will work for almost 60 hours a week until the staff issues are resolved. i bet keeping the doors open will be a bigger deal than "sales" for a while, eh? meanwhile, in cincinnati, rumors are swirling that 5/3 is being sold to usbank or wells fargo. i find all of this amusing. this especially: when they decided not to promote me to office manager my mom said that she thought that this was all very unfair, and so she said she would pray that 5/3 wouldn't be successful any longer if they were going to treat people (me) unfairly. i told this to my boss, and he whined that he wanted to talk to my mom....he has a family to feed.

The Washington Times reports rumors that the White House is looking at the possibility of plans to withdraw Miers. It's just rumor at this point, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was true.

I found this part most intriguing though... (bold parts emphasized by me)

Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove no longer appears to fill the role as chief political strategist in the White House, a role he has filled from the start of the first Bush term. Mr. Rove's clear leadership hand went missing some time ago, Republican insiders say, when speculation grew that he might face indictment in the CIA leak investigation led by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.
The eruption of conservative disapproval over the choice of Miss Miers surprised the president and others in the White House but not Mr. Rove, the insiders say. They say he has shown, in most instances, a keen sensitivity to the complex concerns of various interests on the political right that, until the Miers nomination, had been pretty much in lock step with Mr. Bush, even when they privately disagreed with him.

Is that why a) Miers was selected (i.e., Rove wasn't there to say that conservative activists wouldn't like Miers) and b) why the nomination has generally been handled poorly by the administration?

I like listening to it, but if I have it on for any length of time, invariably I end up being annoyed by the whiney-ness of the songs. Somehow, apparently the only way you can praise or appeal to God in contemporary song is with a whiny tempo. I'm switching my work radio to country now. Some country songs are God-praising songs too, but they manage not to sound whiny. I wonder why that is?

Or maybe I'm the only one for whom modern Christian music sounds whiny?

His experience was very similar to mine, except that I was with a group of friends. I walked through the same gate, saw the same buildings, and have the same pictures of the creatorium (except mine aren't as good). One thing that is at odds with his experience and mine is that when I was there, we were told the crematorium and gas chamber at Dachau were never used. The picture taken by the prisoner seems at odds with that statement.

I don't remember the Crematorium memorial garden, nor the barbed-wire memorial, but Dauchau is certainly full of memorials now. It's a quiet place for thinking and reflection, which seems so at odds with what happened there decades ago.

After seeing a tv exposition this evening on Indian music, I was reminded of our old friend Tunak Tunak. A quick Google search found Daler Mehndi's web site and, of course, the Tunak video (four stars). Daler's got some great moves, but the vertical-diagonal finger wagging move holds a special place in my heart.

According to the Asian Variety Show (Sunday nights, 9:00 p.m. CDST, Dish 9407), Ballywood is putting out a large number of quality musicals this November, most with maharaja meets harem girl themes. It might be time to look up your local Indian/pan-Asian cinema!

I think I owe a certain someone for making her watch.

I put in my 2-week notice as of today, so starting at the first of Novemeber I will be working at Merrill Lynch. This new job is set up to be 9am to 3pm mon-fri. I do have to travel farther to work, as the office is on the north side of Indianapolis, but the hours are fewer and the money is more.
It was somewhat amusing today, since one of my coworkers gave her notice today as well.

I think this headline is a little over-the-top: I suspect the media didn't lie so much as just report rumors without checking them out. In other words, relied on poor intelligence. I find that extremely disappointing. In the week or two immediately after Katrina, I found the best source of news was from a citizen who was there and had Internet access, not from the reporters or New Orleans city officials, neither of whom really seemed to be speaking from a position of authority.

Stephen Bainbridge thinks it'll be in business law.

I hope so. I still wish the White House was making arguments like this, instead of "Shut up," "Trust me," and "she's such a good Christian!"

Ideas from Peggy Noonan.

I can see it going either way. If the White House wants to fight, it can probably get Miers approved, but at the risk of losing and/or alienating much of its conservative support. That probably doesn't mean losing that support to the Democrats, it just means that those conservatives will show only half-hearted support for the President for a while.

I can also see the White House climbing down, if it can find a not-humiliating way for Bush and for Miers. And that's the way it should be. It was a mistake by Bush, I think, but Miers shouldn't be hung out to dry, nor do I expect that she will be.

To a large degree, I think this comes down to how stubborn does George Bush want to be? We know he can be very stubborn.

This is cool!

A U.S. military-sponsored competition finishes successfully in Nevada.

The robotic SUV finished first in a 132-mile trek across the rugged and twisting Nevada desert, in what may be an early step toward getting vehicles to do their own driving for everything from war-zone supply missions to morning commutes.

What an idea, huh?

BeldarBlog examines Harriet Mier's experience with case law, with particular emphasis on cases which went to appellate level, including a couple that were appealed to SCOTUS but were denied certiorari. Some good stuff on her legal experience and standing before the Supreme Court.

At the beginning of the day, I said I didn't know much about Harriet Miers. I still don't know much, but I do know not many conservatives are happy about her.

Responses seem to boil down to:

1) What the HECK was Bush thinking???
2) Bush doesn't want to fight
3) This is deep strategery

While I share the skepticism of my conservative friends, some things aren’t quite adding up here. We know that President Bush is not an intellectual genius, but that he does surround himself with genuinely smart people (whether smart people necessarily mean smart decisions is another question). We know that loyalty is extremely important to him. We know that George Bush isn’t shy about doing what he thinks is right and damning the torpedoes. We also know that the Bush team has accomplished an extraordinary amount of efforts in the last five years, and that they, and specifically Bush, have been frequently underestimated by pretty much everyone. Remember all the stories and rumors about how dumb he was, when he was first running and first elected? I can’t remember what the conventional wisdom was about his tax cut proposals, but I know I didn’t expect him to get those passed, and I certainly didn’t think he’d get Congress to approve the use of force against Iraq. In other words, this president is smarter and politically more astute than most people think, and he (or his team) have a tendency to surprise.

Such as with John Roberts. It wasn’t a complete surprise, but the conventional wisdom said that Bush wanted to nominate Alberto Gonzales, and liberals and conservatives alike were geared up to oppose him. Roberts, on the other hand, turned out to have a relatively small paper trail, which made him hard to oppose on his past record, and he also proved to be extremely intelligent, likeable, and gifted in people skills (I consider dealing with the Senate Judiciary Committee to be one of the most demanding tests of people skills, if not the most demanding).

We’re five years into the Bush presidency, therefore, and we should have a pretty good handle on what to expect from him. We should expect intelligent decisions (note for people who want to argue about Iraq: intelligent doesn’t mean right, it just means a conclusion that can be solidly argued), we should expect the unexpected, and we should expect that the President has a better-than-even chance of succeeding.

The nomination of Harriet Miers does not seem to be particularly intelligent, given that her legal credentials are quite weak by comparison to Roberts. It is true that many other justices in the past had likewise not served on the bench, but I think Roberts is the correct standard here simply because that is who Bush picked first. Miers’ nomination is also weak because there is little about her that will excite conservative activists. On the other hand, it is unexpected and contrary to the conventional wisdom. On two of three points, Miers is an out-of-the-ordinary choice by President Bush.

Is it cronyism? Is the president so impressed by Miers’ loyalty that he wants to reward her with a seat on the Supreme Court, a reward that will likely last for decades? Or is the president playing into the tendency of people to underestimate him before?

It doesn’t seem likely that the President, after making a highly controversial nomination in John Bolton and a strong nomination in John Roberts (not to mention all the previous controversial nominees of Janice Rogers Brown, Miguel Estrada, Priscilla Owens, etc etc.) has suddenly caved and decided to appoint a mild, colorless, offensive-to-no-one nobody to the Supreme Court of the United States. That isn’t his style. It’s also not his style to decide that he needs to save his ammunition for other issues, and avoid a fight over this nomination. He certainly wasn’t trying to do that when he originally nominated John Roberts.

Which leads me to conclude that something else is going on. Perhaps he expects the Democrats (especially the MoveOn.org types) to shoot at anything, and Miers is the hat-on-a-stick (incidentally, you’d need someone very loyal to you to be a hat that’s about to get shot full of holes). Perhaps he expects the Democrats (and some conservatives too) to badly discredit themselves in the eyes of the public during the nomination fight. Perhaps he wants them to play into his hands, and then he’ll withdraw Miers’ nomination (or she will quit, as Estrada did) and put up a strong conservative of the Scalia/Thomas/Roberts type. Having made fools of themselves, they won’t be able to mount an effective attack on that nominee.

My theory (which was not original to me; a former professor suggested it) hasn’t convinced me, yet, but the other alternative explanations make even less sense. Something else is going on, behind the scenes, of that I’m sure.

Interesting commentary on the dynamics of two-party politics. Not sure whether I agree or not, but I think it's at least plausible. See what you think: Why Is Government Getting So Big?

Key Facts on Harriet Miers

I didn't blog much of anything (did I say anything?) about John Roberts, although for the record I was generally impressed with his performance before the Senate (and extremely disappointed in the performance of the Senators, who generally made stupid statements thinly disguised as questions). Perhaps I'll say more about Harriet Miers.

So far I have no opinion on her, except that her mother was fairly uncreative with names (Harriet has a brother named Harris, according to Fox News). I watched President Bush's announcement this morning. It disturbs me a little that he picked one of his own, simply because it seems unlikely that out of the whole pool of good choices, the one already working for him was the best. George Bush does have a tendency (with some exceptions, of course) to surround himself with smart people, however.

I'm curious whether Alberto Gonzales was ever actually a top choice for a SCOTUS seat, or if he was just a distraction. It's impossible to know if the rumors about him were an intentional red herring or if the strong conservative opposition was the reason he was not nominated.

Bush's first nomination was smart, well-spoken and had a good judicial record. Roberts handled himself extremely well in getting through the Senate hearings, and I give the Bush team credit for finding such a good nominee. Whether he will also make a good justice, and chief justice, can only be clear years from now. With Bush's track record in nominees, I'm cautiously optimistic that Miers will be a good pick.

EDIT: While it appears that most of the vocal conservatives are disappointed today, Hugh Hewitt is defending Miers and the president.

AND I AM NOT HAPPY WITH FOX SPORTS TV, NOR AM I HAPPY WITH THE POOR PERFORMANCE OF THE CLEVELAND INDIANS IN THE PAST WEEK.

I AM SOOO PISSED OFF RIGHT NOW....SERIOUSLY!!!!

NOW I HAVE TO ROOT FOR THE YANKEES TOMORROW! THAT HURTS MY FEELINGS.