The Diamondbacks have lost 14 in a row. They just finished an 11-game homestand in which they went 0-11. Wow, dude. Wow.

But who cares, because the Red Sox beat the Yankees again today! And John Kerry was there!

A slow-speed crash yesterday is adding more uncertainty to our power crunch. And when I say slow, I mean sloooooow:

The 400,000-pound transformer on its way to rescue the Valley from a nearly monthlong power crunch toppled off its tractor-trailer onto a California highway Saturday.

The $2 million transformer listed on its side in the middle of state Route 18 in Victorville, Calif., after it slipped off the trailer that was hauling it from Long Beach, Calif., about 100 miles away.

“There’s no reason to believe the transformer has been damaged,” said Arizona Public Service spokesman Damon Gross. “We still expect it to arrive early next week, and to have it up and running by mid-August is still our goal.” …

The transformer, which was acquired from the Bonneville Power Administration in Washington state, is set to replace one of five transformers damaged in a fire at a West Valley substation July 4.

The transformer from Tacoma, Wash., traveled by barge to Long Beach, where it was loaded Tuesday onto the tractor-trailer to begin its road trip to the Westwing substation in Phoenix.

The rig, which stretched almost as long as a football field, was moving at less than 3 mph as it approached the turn on a 6-percent grade when the load slipped and embedded 8 to 12 inches of steel into the pavement, said California Department of Transportation spokeswoman Terri Kasinga.

Are the Democrats actually smart enough to avoid the nightmare of a liberal version of the 1992 GOP convention? They seem to be on the right track:

In a windowless room beneath the podium, a team of speechwriters is imposing John Kerry’s will on the words of the other speakers at the Democratic National Convention. Their orders: Go easy on the Bush-bashing.

Each speech is read and re-read, heavily edited and rehearsed as part of a tightly controlled process designed to impress independent voters who are tired of negative politics. Mindful of polls showing voters say they need more information about Kerry, the team also is ensuring that speeches are laced with the candidate’s biography and policies. …

One speaker submitted a text that accused Bush of “failing to fund No Child Left Behind,” his education initiative. The line was softened by the speechwriting staff to say, “We can do better. We need to fund No Child Left Behind.”

A congressman’s claim that Bush has “deceived Americans” about Iraq was watered down in a revised draft to promise that Kerry will never go to war without ample reason.

It will be interesting to see whether this strategy works. Tomorrow should give us a good idea, with Hillary Clinton, Jimmy Carter and Al “Gulag” Gore all speaking.

(Hat tip: my dad.)

UPDATE: Drudge reports:

DNC chair Terry McAuliffe has expressed concern that nonstop Bush bashing from the podium could quickly spiral out of control and backfire.

DNC staffers have also been told to be on the lookout for “unreasonable” Bush bashing signs held by delegates on the convention floor which could be highlighted on television.

“We are not Michael Moore,” McAuliffe has told his top staffers, according to a well-placed source. “Let’s tell the voters what we stand for, not only what we stand against.” …

“Of course there will be a fair amount of pointing out the president’s record,” a top party source explained from Boston. …

Kerry operatives are editing convention speeches, sources say, with only Al Gore and Ted Kennedy believed to be off-limits.

Gore and Teddy, but not Bill and Jimmuh?

P.S. What was it I said about Teresa “please don’t say anything stupid” Heinz Kerry?

It’s enough to make you want to Ralph:

Consumer advocate Ralph Nader’s quixotic presidential campaign says it submitted about 5,400 signatures to get on the Michigan ballot, far short of the required number of 30,000. Luckily for him, approximately 43,000 signatures were filed by Michigan Republicans on his behalf, more than meeting the requirement.

Nader, of course, insists that he is not a spoiler candidate. But it seems his “supporters” know better.

Took ‘em long enough:

Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper?

Of course it is. …

[F]or now my concern is the flammable stuff that ignites the right. These are the social issues: gay rights, gun control, abortion and environmental regulation, among others. And if you think The Times plays it down the middle on any of them, you’ve been reading the paper with your eyes closed.

But if you’re examining the paper’s coverage of these subjects from a perspective that is neither urban nor Northeastern nor culturally seen-it-all; if you are among the groups The Times treats as strange objects to be examined on a laboratory slide (devout Catholics, gun owners, Orthodox Jews, Texans); if your value system wouldn’t wear well on a composite New York Times journalist, then a walk through this paper can make you feel you’re traveling in a strange and forbidding world.

Before our resident liberal-media deniers get all up in arms, check out the byline on the above prose: Daniel Okrent, New York Times Public Editor (a.k.a. ombudsman) — himself an avowed Democrat, in case you were wondering — in this morning’s Sunday Times.

Read the whole thing.

The New York Times: Admitting the obvious since 2004.

UPDATE: InstaPundit has lots of commentary and links, including two incisive criticisms of Okrent’s description of the Times as “an unashamed product of the city whose name it bears”:

Eric Muller: Since when is the paper called “The Manhattan South of About 120th Street Times?” The notion that the Times’s coverage…reflects the interests of most of the people who live in Northern Manhattan, Queens, the Bronx, and Brooklyn, and damned near all of the people who live in Staten Island, is laughable. The truth is that the New York Times (in its cultural, fashion, and social coverage) is a newspaper that is an unashamed product of a segment of the city whose name it bears.

Ed Morrissey: If the Times merely represented itself as a city newspaper, I’d buy that. But the Times holds itself out as “The Paper of Record,” a national newspaper with national coverage and impact. If the Times truly wants to be that, then the editors need to quit relying on The Big Apple as The Big Excuse and position the paper to reflect its market. Otherwise, with Okrent’s admission, it can no longer claim to be the Paper of Record, but the Paper of the Liberal Mindset, analogous to the fine but overtly slanted London Guardian.

Glenn thinks the latter may be exactly what’s happening: “Okrent’s column may actually mark the first step toward such a move, perhaps as part of a downsizing and re-branding effort dictated by market forces. The New York Times as a paper that serves a niche market? It’s already become that. They’re just recognizing it.”

In a few minutes, I’m off to Becky’s parents’ house for our weekly visit. So, please talk amongst yourselves. I’ll give you a topic:

There are two types of people in this world: those with a mental illness, and those who haven’t been properly diagnosed yet. Everything else is just a matter of degree.

I’m not sure if that’s an original thought, or if I unknowingly picked it up somewhere. I’m also not sure if I literally believe it, though I think there’s something to it. But anyway, I thought it would make potentialy interesting fodder for discussion.

@messaging.sprintpcs.comAww… it’s Robbie cuddling with Fatty Diego (the hippo stuffie). :)

From a new comment on my June 23 post about my nightmare of being kicked out of class on the first day of law school because I hadn’t done a homework assignment that I had no knowledge of:

Actually, as a ND law grad, I can tell you that there is one 1L class in which your dream may very well become a reality on the first day. It’s a tradition at ND to sacrifice someone to the 1L gods on the first day. Maybe it will be you.

Good luck in South Bend.

Well, that’s reassuring.

UPDATE: Then there this, from the commenter’s blog:

I think just about everyone in a 1L class knows a fellow student who went throug a divorce, or engagement broken off, or serious relationship problems because of law school. During my first year our class saw:

1 divorce.
2 serious threats of divorce (students didn’t come back Spring term).
4 broken engagements (at least, I lost count).

I’m not too concerned about that, though. Just get me through the first day without being thrown out of class, and I think I’ll be fine. :)

Well, dammit, now I have to post again before going to bed, so that Andrew’s “announcement” that I’m gay won’t be the top post on my homepage. :)

Not that there’s anything wrong with that…

So anyway, yeah, I’m thinking about the possibility of giving out guest-blogging privileges to a select group of regular readers and commenters, so that when I get into the daily grind of law school, the blog won’t fall miserably out of date (especially with the presidential campaign going on and all). Not that I intend to stop blogging altogether (!!!), but clearly I won’t have nearly as much time for it, and I need to make sure I keep my priorities straight, putting studying ahead of blogging — and I think it will help me resist the blogging-urge if I know that others will be helping me continue the conversation and keep the blog fresh.

That said, this concept drives me crazy at some level, because I’m a control freak about my homepage; I want to control how it looks at any given time. But I think the tradeoff in this case argues for doing the group-blog thing, at least for a while. I’m still thinking about it, though. Andrew’s post was just a test, as he said.

I already have a mental list of people I intend to invite to be guest-bloggers, but if you’re interested, please feel free to say so in a comment. Likewise if you have any comments on the wisdom of this idea, pro or con.

Oh, and by the way, Andrew was totally the one making eyes at me on Thursday. You heard him: “trust me, I know all about cover stories!” Are you listening, Bea? :)

Yes folks, Brendan has come out of the closet. You knew this day was coming. We all had our suspicions and had seen the hints–the goofy grins, the obsession with gay marriage, the girly-boy voice he uses when he’s in trouble with Becky–but now it’s official. The more recent signs pointing to this event were the Boi From Troy interview, the double entendre about boinking when talking about Boi, and finally, the rainbow that will “be on the top of the homepage for a while”–presumably in celebration of Brendan’s newfound openness about his gayness.

Brendan confirmed this to me on Thursday when I was visiting him while I was in Phoenix for business, and he even tried to come on to me, but I resisted. Nevertheless, he begged me to withhold the news “which has been known to Boi and me [Andrew], but kept secret from our audiences, for over a week.” I agreed, but only on the condition that he let me TEST HIS NEW GUEST BLOGGING FEATURE.

I repeat, this is JUST A TEST.

And no, Brendan’s not really gay; the engagement was real and not just a cover story (and trust me, I know all about cover stories!).