Following a significant number of incidents at last weekend's Nextel Cup race in New Hampshire, NASCAR has decided to "get tough". Following the usual ritual pronouncements containing ringing phrases such as "unacceptable behaviour" and threats of dire consequences, NASCAR has finally cracked down, by issuing....fines of up to $25,000, and loss of 25 car points.
Wow.
My conclusion: NASCAR is not serious about stamping out this kind of behaviour, because it generates headlines. If they were serious, both Robby Gordon and Kasey Kahne would have been suspended for starters. Attempting to ram another competitor is childish, petulant and dangerous in about equal measure.
NASCAR race drivers are (usually) well-paid competitors. Fines are chump change to them. What they really live for is competition. The most effective punishment is therefore to deprive them of the opportunity to compete. This is true of most professional sports.
Every time I see a sanctioning body administering stern-sounding reprimands, accompanied by fines that amount to less than a week's salary, I know that sanctioning body is not serious about eliminating dysfunctional behaviour by competitors.

Link: http://www.dallasobserver.com/Issues/2005-09-15/news/schutze.html

Here's another article from the Dallas Observer on one of the long-running dysfunctionalities in Dallas city politics. At one time, I wanted to live in the city of Dallas. These days I'm glad not to be living there. The whole governance process of the city is about as close to broken as you can get and still have some semblance of functionality. The schools system is broken, the police system is broken, the Mayor and the African-American community can barely agree on where the Sun rises...the list goes on and on.
However, the cure really starts with the electors. They are the ones ultimately responsible for the mess, since they have elected the council, many of whose members are at loggerheads with Mayor Laura Miller, who they also elected. However, when given the choice of voting for a "strong mayor" initiative, which would have given Miller additional powers to re-organize key aspects of the City's governance, the electors declined to vote for that proposition. Big mistake. Dallas has been hobbled by poor leadership as long as I have been living in the area.
The electors of Dallas need to start setting a direction by voting for a different set of people to send to City Hall. Business as usual is crippling the city.

Link: http://www.txjf.org/parental.html

Every so often I come across stuff on the Internet that boggles the mind...here is another example. The Texas Justice Foundation, which appears to be in the process of changing its name to the Justice Foundation (a great example of a swell-sounding name that could mean anything in practice), appears to be a pressure group promoting fundamentally reactionary solutions to contemporary issues.
It is always interesting to note that many people who spend a lot of energy promulgating rights conveniently ignore the reality that with rights come responsibilities. This document appears to be a blatant attempt to create a framework which allows parents total control over the lives of their children at all times. I guess that if you want to have your children grow up to be like you, this may be appealing. Personally, I want my children to be like themselves, not a clone of myself or my spouse. For this reason alone, I find the thinking behind this document to be fundamentally defective.

Link: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/8841434

A think-tank funded by energy companies has already published an article blaming the Sierra Club for objecting to levees around NO.
The public should not allow themselves to be fooled by any debate on this topic. This is an attempt to box discussion into the classic frame that environmentalists (insert "tree-hugger", "enviro-wackos" or a dozen other perjorative epithets) are indirectly responsible for the destruction of people and property. The proper response to this is:

"Who were the budget-holders, decision-makers and executors of strategies and tactics for coastal and waterway protection for southern Louisiana?".

The right answer is that it was not the environmental issue groups. The Sierra Club does not make laws, or execute on levee construction or maintenance. It is a lobbying organization, just like the Cato Institute or dozens of other lobbying organizations. If the government bodies that are responsible for not executing on required flood protection measures listened to the Sierra Club, and the SC were wrong, that is interesting, but ultimately irrelevant to addressing a more fundamental question: where does accountability lie for the appalling consequences of Hurricane Katrina?

The attempt to blame environmental pressure groups is simply an attempt to deflect accountability, and needs to be called out as such. We need to politely but firmly return all discussion back to the issue of accountability.

We live in turbulent and trying times...we have an unstable economic situation, an incompetent administration, my home state (Texas) has a brain-damaged legislature, education is a mess, and the US is currently fighting a war based on a faulty understanding of all sorts of geopolitical realities.
I often find myself asking "What would Frank Zappa have done?". Those of you who may have only heard of Frank Zappa the musician may not be aware that at one time, FZ seriously contemplated running for President in 1992. He decided not to mainly because he was already sick at the time (he passed away from prostate cancer in December 1993). In addition to being a gifted musician and composer, Zappa had a keen interest in politics, was extremely well-read, and was a news junkie (visitors to his UMRK studio in the late 80's would notice the direct satellite feeds that Zappa used to watch at all hours as he devoured information about world events.
Zappa's opinions about all sorts of issues were remarkably prescient. He correctly forecast the rise of oligarchic corruption in Eastern Europe following the collapse of Communism in the late 1980's while a lot of people in the West were blithely assuming that the countries of Eastern Europe would miraculously wake up one morning and discover the virtues of Western European democracy. He also was warning about the decline in US educational standards in the late 1980's and even home-schooled his children for a while in California. Many of his opinions were also contentious, and he sometimes was way too blunt for him to have ever been likely to make it to elective office. Put simply, FZ called a shovel a shovel, and was unable to dissemble or circumlocute his language just to avoid offending people. His evisceration of the Congressional hearings in 1986 concerning obscene lyrics in rock music (said lyrics were discovered, amid much shock-and-horror posturing, by Tipper Gore and Marilyn Baker) is worth reading just for the efficient, blunt way in which he cuts off the Congressional posturing at the knees.
Here is a link to most of the interviews that Frank Zappa did with print media.

Link: http://www.thinkprogress.org/katrina-timeline

A link that lays out the significant events as the horrors of Hurricane Katrina unfolded.

Because suddenly politicians and pundits, instead of talking vaguely plausible nonsense, suddenly seem unable to prevent themselves from disengaging their brains and then uttering utter nonsense...

Part 1

Part 2

Watched most of this game, up until about 5:20 left in the 4th quarter, by which time it was all over bar the shouting.
A few quick observations:

1. This was a game of two completely different halves. The first half was open, with lots of yardage being put up by both teams. The second half seemed to be an almost continuous collection of three-and-outs, with the emphasis on defense and pressuring the quarterbacks. Both punters were consistently good last night.
2. If you have a star wideout who is going to attract double coverage anywhere near the end zone (step forward Randy Moss), then your offensive game plan needs to be looking to throw the ball to other wide receivers who are open because the opposition is focussing on the star. All I saw in most of the second half of last night's game, when Oakland had possession, was Kerry Collins desperately trying to get the ball out to Moss (shades of Mike Tice's infamous "Randy Ratio"), which led to several near-interceptions as he heaved the ball into double coverage, often under pressure from the Patriots defense swarming him. This is not a good recipe for a successful passing game.
3. note #1 to Oakland - giving up 120+ yards in penalties makes it difficult to consistently move the ball and gain first downs. A tad more discipline is required.
4. note #2 to Oakland - you don't have to throw the ball on every down, especially when you have a good outside running back in Lamont Jordan and a good change-of-pace tailback in Zach Crockett (who was criminally under-used; when he did take to the field and was handed the ball, he had no trouble gaining significant yardage in a straight line, looking much more effective than Jordan in that respect). Throwing on every down is hard on your offense, since they are engaged in non-stop pass protection. In the 4th quarter, it looked like Oakland were desperately trying to prove to themselves (and Al Davis?) that they could make the vertical passing game work, at the expense of offensive balance.

Link: http://politicalwire.com/archives/2005/09/09/quote_of_the_day.html

...clearly a politician whose definition of "cleaning up public housing" is rather more, er, dramatic than the norm...