« December 26, 2007 | Main | December 28, 2007 »
By Kristy LaPlante
By David K.
Up 21-0 it looked like Texas was about to put the nail in the coffin with a recovery of a backwards lateral and return by the Longhorns, until, that is, the instant replay showed that as the ball was bouncing backwards towards the Texas sideline, a Texas coach/ballboy reached out for the ball and tipped it with his thumb before he drew back his hand*. The result? A unsporstmanlke conduct penalty that resulted in the ball being given back to ASU plus half the distance to the goal, 4 and 3 on the 7 yard line. Carpenter tossed a short pass for a touchdown on the ensuing play, and proceeded to hold texas to a 3 and out on the next drive to get the ball back on the Texas side of the field. WIth 10 minutes remaining in the first half, plenty of time for the Sun Devil's to make a comeback.
* Some may dispute whether the ball touched the young man's hand or not, it was tough to tell from some of the angles, however there were clearly Texas players and coaches on the field which would also have been an unsportsmanlike penalty anyway.
UPDATE BY BRENDAN: Aaaand Arizona State lays a massive egg for the Pac-10, committing five turnovers en route to a 52-34 Texas win. Dammit, Sun Devils!
In the Irish Trojan Bowl Pick 'em Contest, it's now a six-way tie for first place among Gerry deSimas, Hal Strickland, Mark Gardner, Chris Healey, Anthony H. and D. Brooks. Updated standings here and after the jump.
Continue reading "Holiday Bowl continues crazy 2007 football season" ยป
By Brendan Loy
Anonymous Liberal makes an interesting analogy that rings true to me:
If you believe, as I do, that it is imperative that a Democrat be elected president in 2008, you have to consider how media coverage will shape the election. If Hillary Clinton is the nominee, I suspect that the dominant media narrative will be the dynastic element of the election (Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton). I suspect the media dynamic will be very similar to campaign 2000, where press coverage was overwhelming tilted in favor of the Republican candidate. If Obama is the nominee, however, I suspect that the dominant media narrative will be the historic nature of the election. Coverage will revolve around America's willingness to take a giant leap forward as a country and elect its first black president. And I think the mainstream press corps--who are political junkies at heart--will be rooting for that outcome, in much the same way sports fans rooted for the Red Sox in 2004. They wanted to see history being made. The Republican candidate, whoever it turns out to be, will have to try very hard not to be seen a merely a footnote to history.
I realize that many of my readers will respond that the "mainstream press corps" will "root" for the Democratic candidate anyway, as they always "root" for the Democrats. And there's some truth in that. It is an undeniable fact that journalists overwhelmingly tilt to the left, and it is similarly undeniable that, because journalists are human beings, their personal biases impact their work product. However, I have long believed, and continue to believe, that, conspiracy theories aside, the effect of the MSM's liberal bias on elections, especially national ones, is -- for the most part -- far less pronounced than its impact on the coverage of issues, particularly issues where there is a strong belief among liberals that their belief is the only moral one (immigration, gay rights, the environment, etc.). The MSM bias in covering those issues, as issues, is barely concealed at all. But when it comes to covering elections -- and indeed, in general, to covering individuals -- most journalists make an effort (somewhere between concerted and cursory, depending on the journalist) to keep their biases out of the picture, and play it down the middle. (I said "most," not all. I'd venture to say the percentage is declining. But I think it's still "most.") Sometimes this results in overcompensation, and thus reverse bias; sometimes it fails utterly, and the liberal worldview still shines through; often times, and worst of all, it results in the elimination of all nuance from a discussion (because everything must be either "left" or "right," which must be kept in perfect "balance") and/or the dumbing-down of politics into what Mickey Kaus calls "Neutral Story Lines" (or "NSLs"), which may or may not have anything to do with the issues that actually matter (usually not), but which are convenient for lazy journalists to focus on.
The dynamics of political journalism are, admittedly, changing drastically and rapidly in this New Media age. But for at least this cycle, the old MSM dynamics still have a good bit of life left in 'em -- and those dynamics are such that, IMHO, liberal bias matters much less than is commonly supposed, and Neutral Story Lines matter much more. And that's why I find the Obama-Red Sox analogy so compelling. Although the "first black president" meme seems obviously nonneutral on its face, as it focuses specifically on the (hypothetical) Democratic nominee, it qualifies as a NSL because there's nothing overtly ideological or even really issue-related about asking, "Will America elect its first black president?" (just as there's nothing ideological about asking, "Will America perpetuate the Bush-Clinton dynastic cycle?"). I absolutely agree that the MSM would eat that storyline up, and focus on it a great deal -- much moreso than the "first woman president" issue, because the media is far more race-obsessed than it is gender-obsessed. And it would certainly help Obama and hurt the Republican candidate.
In sum, I think Anonymous Liberal is right: entirely aside from the liberal bias issue, journalists will be "neutrally" rooting for Obama, if he's the nominee, because of the first-black-president NSL, and that "neutral" rooting will probably impact the dynamic of the race a lot more than any ideological rooting ever could. A brilliant observation. (Hat tip: Andrew Sullivan.)
P.S. By the way, in case anyone was wondering, I find myself, in terms of the Democratic race, increasingly souring on Hillary and leaning grudgingly in Obama's direction. I don't trust him on national security, at least not yet, but I think he might be able to win me over, especially if he picks the right running mate (Biden!!). With Hillary, I increasingly feel like the upside just isn't as big as I thought it was, and the downside -- well, the downside is obvious, starting with the dynastic thing. But I can't fully articulate the logic behind this change of heart; I'm just reporting that it's happening. It's by no means fully crystallized yet.
I'm very much an undecided voter, both among the parties' choices and between the parties, but if you put a gun to my head and made me rank them right now, I think the outcome would be something like: Biden, McCain, Obama, Clinton, Giuliani, Romney. (Don't ask me to defend those rankings intellectually; I can't. That's just my vague sense of things right now.) I don't know where to rank Thompson; haven't really formed an opinion of his candidacy. Same goes for Dodd and Gravel, though they're far less consequential, obviously. Edwards, Richardson, Huckabee, Kucinich, Hunter and Paul are non-options. Is that everyone? Oh, and Keyes. Heh. Yeah, also a non-option.
By Brendan Loy
No, the baby's not here yet, and yes, I did deliberately choose that headline in order to momentarily startle my readers into thinking this is the announcement. :)
In fact, this is a comparatively minor announcement. It concerns the issue of the baby's blog nickname. In spite of her initial objections, I have managed to convince Becky to go along with the super-cute moniker suggested by Nadine. Thus, Baby Loy will henceforth be known on the blog as "Loyette."
Er, that's assuming she's a girl, as expected. If not, a) we're going to be severely annoyed at our ultrasound techs; b) we're going to have to figure out what to do with all these pink clothes; and c) the baby will need a new blog nickname. :)
In other news, Becky's bored, and wants some advice from other mothers who have gone through the "waiting game." You know: you've gotta get everything ready for the baby by Week 37, so you do, and then Week 38 comes, and Week 39, and even though you're not even technically due yet, nevermind overdue, you feel like the baby oughta be here by now -- and you don't know what to do with yourself in the meantime. Any suggestions for how to pass the time? We're both a little sick, and she's a lot pregnant, so we're not in any particular mood to go out... we've watched about a zillion Law & Order reruns on our TiVo... the entire house is clean and organized... Becky's read like ten thousand baby books... and, well, we need ideas. Specifically, she needs ideas. I've got some work-related stuff I need to do, but Becky's going increasingly nuts with boredom. Thoughts, anyone?
By Brendan Loy
Getting the hang of the car seat...
By CNN
Ex-Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto has died, according to media reports.
UPDATE BY BRENDAN: To be more specific, she was assassinated by terrorists in a suicide bombing that also killed at least 20 others.
UPDATE 2: According to the BBC, Bhutto was "shot in the neck by a gunman who then set off a bomb." Blog roundup here.
UPDATE 3: Andrew Sullivan:
It seems to me to be hard to understand the implications of the Bhutto assassination until we know who actually murdered her. Al Qaeda is taking responsibility and they have every reason to hate her, but a little skepticism is always in order, when it comes to their pronouncements. The assassin was a suicide bomber, but he shot her first, and shot her in the neck. If you were part of the military or ISI, it would be in your interest to shoot Bhutto to ensure she was killed and then blow yourself up both to associate the murder with Jihadists outside the military and to destroy the evidence.Until we know more, it seems to me that al Qaeda's responsibility is actually the more optimistic scenario. If Islamists within the military or ISI did this, then we have the possibility that this is the beginning of something more ominous than the surface event. The collapse of Pakistan into a Jihadist nuclear power is the great nightmare. Here's hoping that however grim this news, the worst isn't yet to come.
My other sites