Fox propagandist commentator Tony Snow will accept the position of White House press secretary, finally ending the era of the laughably ineffective Scott McClellan. Now the nation can be lied to in a less awkward and staccato voice. Other than the change of venue, this probably won’t seem like much of a change in job duties to Snow, however.

According to CNN, “before agreeing to take on the post, Snow had sought and received assurances from Bolten and other senior White House officials that he would be an active participant in major policy debates and would have a significant say in hiring in the press and communications operations.” While it may be understandable that he be involved in “press and communications operations”, it seems a bit bold for him to ask to be involved in major policy debates; is this a move by Fox News to set the agenda for the White House? :)

A 2.1 magnitude earthquake last night triggered a rockfall at the Beaconsfield Gold mine, in Tasmania, Australia. Three miners, from Launceston, are trapped approximately 1km underground. A machine is currently being rigged up with a camera to assess the damage, as it is too dangerous to send men in. No attempt will be made to enter the mine until seismic tests show the site is stable.

The mine was equipped with radio facilities but these were damaged in the rockfall and no contact has been made with the trapped miners. The miners were 925m underground when they lost contact and were known to be in the vicinity of the rockfall. The area doesnt have rescue chambers.

Update: A remote-controlled front-end loader fitted with a camera is being used to excavate the fallen rocks. Rescue teams have been unable to make contact with the men and fallen rocks have prevented rescuers from reaching them.

Update 2: According to University of Tasmania geophysics lecturer Michael Roach, it appears the mine’s own operations were responsible for the quake. “The event is of magnitude 2.1, it’s located fairly close to the Beaconsfield mine and it’s almost certainly related to mining activities at Beaconsfield,” Dr Roach told ABC radio. Mine manager, Matthew Gill, had earlier said it was not known what caused the “large seismic event”. The mine blasted on a 24-hourly basis but was not doing so at the time. The rescue attempt is still underway.

Update 3: The body of one of the three miners has been found.

Update 4: Rescuers will try a new method in their bid to reach the two still missing miners. They are now planning to bypass the unsafe area where the rock falls occurred via a horizontal tunnel. 48 hours have now passed and there is little hope there will be any survivors.

So says US Weekly.

My resident Buffalonian readers — especially those who have followed the city’s beloved Sabres for as long as Becky has — will doubtless appreciate (as she did) these clips of Rick Jeanneret’s radio calls on what WGR 550 calls two of the four greatest moments in Sabres playoff history.

The first clip is from the April 24, 1993 contest that’s known simply as the “May Day” game, in which Brad May’s overtime goal gave Buffalo — playing at home — a playoff sweep of the rival Boston Bruins:

source file

The second clip is from a game that Becky has told me about countless times since we met: the April 27, 1994 quadruple-overtime win over New Jersey in Game 6, also on Buffalo’s home ice. The Sabres and Devils had essentially played two full games plus an extra 5:43 without either team scoring a goal — Dominik Hasek had 70 saves, 39 of them in overtime — before Buffalo’s Dave Hannan finally scored in the fourth overtime (a.k.a. the seventh period) to send the series to a seventh and deciding game (which, alas, the Devils won). It was a Wednesday-evening game that ultimately ended at 1:52 AM on a Thursday morning, and as Becky tells it, some folks in attendance just went out to breakfast afterward (probably after making a pilgrimage to Chippewa Street) rather than bothering to try to get any sleep before work the next day. Anyway, here’s Jeanneret’s call… you gotta love how his voice is cracking after calling a six-hour hockey game:

The clips are from Jeanneret’s CD, Roll the Highlight Film, which you can supposedly buy here. (Hat tip: Random Thoughts 101.)

For those anxious for a bit more Sabres nostalgia, click the “more…” link below to read a couple of Buffalo News articles about the 1994 game. (Thank you, Lexis-Nexis!)

(more…)

With rising gas prices emerging as a major political liability for shaking-in-their-boots Republicans as the November elections approach — and also emerging as Matt Drudge’s new favorite topic — President Bush today heeded Bill Frist’s and Dennis Hastert’s call for political grandstanding an investigation. AFP reports:

President George W. Bush has ordered an investigation into possible manipulation of prices at gasoline stations and suspended deposits into America’s strategic oil reserves, as the US government tried to rein in record-high fuel costs. …

“By deferring deposits until the fall, we’ll leave a little more oil on the market. Every little bit helps,” the US president said. …

In addition, the president called on oil companies to give up billions of dollars’ worth of tax breaks.

Bush acknowledged that the spike in gasoline prices has been felt clear across American society, hurting consumers and putting a damper on business.

“Gasoline price increases are like a hidden tax on the working people. They’re like a tax on our farmers. They’re like a tax on small businesses,” Bush said.

“Energy experts predict gas prices are going to remain high throughout the summer. And that’s going to be a continued strain on the American people.”

Bush vowed that, with the measures announced Tuesday, he would “make sure that the American consumers are treated fairly at the gas pump.”

That story is Drudge’s top headline right now. It’s right underneath the following breaking-news bulletin: “On way to speech, Bush motorcade passed the EXXON station next to the Watergate, where gas prices were $3.29, $3.39 and $3.49 a gallon…” Heh.

Drudge is also linking to a cool map of nationwide gas prices, broken down by county. Oh, to live in Idaho, Utah, Wyoming or Montana! :)

P.S. Did I say “political grandstanding”? Yes, I did… and this is what I meant:

If history is any guide, these investigations will end with no conclusive evidence of oil-industry price-gouging. The Nexis database of newspaper articles contains hundreds of stories that capture seemingly endless repetitions of this time-tested Washington version of the hokey pokey where there’s a lot of spinning and gyrating but no forward motion.

Gas prices rise. Politicians demand answers from the oil-industry. Then lawmakers order up probes. Those investigations basically determine that market factors were behind the price hikes at the pump. Gas prices eventually fall and the issue goes away. The closer an election, the quicker and louder the calls for probes.

I asked John Felmy, a spokesman of the American Petroleum Institute how many federal investigations there’ve been. “There’ve been dozens,� he said. And how many had found gouging or collusion by the large, integrated oil companies. “None. Nothing has ever been found and we’ve been exonerated every time.�

On occasion, some small operators or service-station owners have been found guilty of gouging by state attorneys general. But not Big Oil, the people the lawmakers are concerned about.

Lawmakers no doubt know this history just as well as the petroleum institute. But many irate constituents don’t. So lawmakers call for these investigations to at least look like they’re doing something on behalf of those they represent.

I think we could formulate a broader rule of politics based on that last sentence. It relates to everything from this silly “investigation” to President Bush’s immediate post-Katrina actions to former Connecticut governor Thomas Meskill’s infamous ski trip during an ice storm. The rule is that one of the most important political skills, at all levels, is the ability to “at least look like [you’re] doing something” when people are ticked off. The Republicans know that, and that’s why President Bush suddenly cares about gas prices.

In case anyone is wondering, as Becky and I were, why flags are at half-staff in South Bend today… this is why. R.I.P., Corporal Severns.

the Wrap-up: actually they Did. :) Garbledly; but they Said it.

the Prediction: on May 20 they Say it in One voice, not Twenty-one. Ray’s Watch is ending soon. Change of Shift: the weary Mayor is scheduled to be Relieved. The Mitch Watch begins: 53% - 47%.

Sadly :( but Predictably, it’s all along Racial Lines. (But on second, more Hopeful, thought: No. Not “all.” Lt. Gov. Landrieu, as in his past candidacies, demonstrated considerable appeal to African-American voters. / Excellent.)

(more…)

Several people have sent me this story, which raises the spectre that USC football, like Michigan basketball a few years back, could have to retroactively forfeit its last three seasons — including the entire 35-game winning streak and the 2003 and 2004 championships — because of allegations of NCAA rules violations by Reggie Bush. [CORRECTION: On second thought, if this real-estate arrangement only existed since the spring of 2005, I guess Bush would only have been potentially ineligible for the 2005 season, in which case no national championships would be at risk. My bad.] Excerpt:

SPRING VALLEY, Calif. – In this sprawling hilltop community with a breathtaking view of Sweetwater Lake, it was no secret who lived in the 3,000-square-foot house at the corner of Apple Street and Luther Avenue.

That home, residents would tell you, was where Reggie Bush’s family lived.

That is, until this weekend, when the family abruptly packed up and vacated the residence – less than 24 hours after Yahoo! Sports approached Bush’s mother about information linking the property to Michael Michaels, a man who is alleged to have tried to play a role in steering Bush toward an agent and who also has ties to a sports marketing company.

Days before Bush is expected to be the No. 1 pick in the NFL draft, unanswered questions about the residence and how his mother, stepfather and brother came to live in it within the last year have prompted the University of Southern California to refer the matter to the Pacific-10 Conference for an investigation.

NCAA statutes prohibit student-athletes or their families from receiving extra benefits from professional sports agents, marketing companies or their representatives. A breach of these statutes could result in an athlete being ruled ineligible, and games in which they played could be forfeited.

USC finished 12-1 last season, its 35-game winning streak and national championship bid both ending with a loss in the Rose Bowl to Texas. Bush, a junior running back, won the Heisman Trophy and elected to skip his senior season and turn pro in January.

In response to reporters’ questions about the matter late last week, USC athletic department officials said they would look into it.

“Rather than jumping to conclusions, we need to determine the facts before commenting on this report,” Trojans athletic director Mike Garrett said in a statement released by the school on Friday. “We have asked the Pac-10 to look into this.”

State records show the Apple Street home was built in late 2004 and early 2005, then purchased by Michaels on March 29, 2005 for $757,500. Around that time, neighbors say Bush’s family moved in. Whether they had visited the house while it was being built is unknown, but there is an inscription in one of the cement slabs in the driveway reading “The Griffins ‘05.”

This story broke several days ago, but I haven’t blogged about it till now — not because I’m trying to ignore it, but because I’ve been out-of-town and/or busy. But clearly, this is a blogworthy story. The latest news is that Reggie Bush says he and his family did nothing wrong.

Every Day Should Be Saturday thinks the story is not quite as big a deal as it’s being made out to be:

OMIGOD USC IS GOING TO HAVE TO LIKE FORFEIT LIFE, RIGHT? Of course this is what you were thinking when you first read the story. Like us, you’re the one who, upon hearing of a planet-sized asteroid several million light years away that might be edging into the earth’s neighborhood, makes your scheme for spending your last minutes on earth in detail. (Hint: orgy in a liquor store would just be the start.) This story is like program AIDS for USC, right?

Not quite–if Bush had an alternate residence, which he supposedly did, then there’s no specific link that Bush used his family as a proxy to live in a house during his senior year while the rest of the world spent their senior year dreading elephantine student loans and tripping over the XBox cords snaking across the floor of their undoubtedly crappy apartment. Furthermore, a sketchy, Lionel Hutch-style agent’s scheme to woo Reggie Bush into a marketing/agent marriage doesn’t constitute the deadly “lack of institutional control� factor that gets the NCAA all heeby-jeeby and sometimes results in whole seasons getting forfeited. In fact, no direct links to USC exist at this point, so UCLA fans, please put down the gris-gris and stop lighting votives–there’s no institutional connection here.

Trojan Wire thinks “NCAA statutes are a little silly, and so is this ‘deepthroat’ investigation. Boi From Troy is less dismissive: “If USC coaches or staff knew about the arrangement, it could spell serious trouble for the Men of Troy…and in either case, this just underscores one of my few criticisms of Coach Pete Carroll–that his program lacks discipline.” And USC Trojans Football writes:

If the Griffins were paying “fair market value” rent, this will become a non-issue, but the Griffins certainly made themselves look guilty by moving out of the house right away. This is the kind of thing that drives coaches and fans nuts. It’s a part of big time college football whether we like it or not. The craziest part of the story is that it appears Reggie never even considered doing business with Caravantes or Michaels. Hopefully the investigation will reveal that USC had no knowledge of this transaction and no NCAA sanctions will be necessary.

(Hat tip: Mr. Irrelevant.)

Me? I don’t know enough yet to make a definitive judgment, and to the gloating Domers who will no doubt pile on in the comment section, I would suggest that neither do you. I will say this, though: I hate the idea of retroactive forfeits. I think they’re dumb, dumb, dumb. We all know that UMass was in the 1996 Final Four; we all know that the Fab Five played in two national championship games. Removing the banners and altering the record books doesn’t change history, and pretending it does has always seemed rather Orwellian to me. I can see the logic behind the idea of forfeiting games that involved a player who is ruled ineligible after the fact, but at the same time, altering the results of games that were played three years ago flies in the face of common sense, doesn’t it?

And with something like this, it seems like such a punishment wouldn’t fit the crime. If an entire program were found to be fundamentally “dirty,” with stuff like this happening all around — or if, say, it turned out Reggie Bush was on steroids or something — that’d be one thing. But “forfeiting” two national championships because of a possibly somewhat shady real-estate deal involving one player’s family? As happy as it would doubtless make some LSU fans (whose Tigers would magically become 2003’s only, undisputed national champs), I really hope it doesn’t come to that. And I’d say that regardless of whether it affects USC or not. If, say, these allegations concerned Vince Young instead of Reggie Bush, I’d be saying the same thing. The Trojans earned those wins on the field, and if they get taken away because of some off-the-field shenanigans that don’t really have much of a logical connection to anything, that’d be a damn shame.

UPDATE: Patrick says “Boi from Troy and Every Day Should Be Saturday get an important detail wrong”:

Knowledge of the infractions by the USC program is not necessary for the leveling of sanctions. All that is necessary, here, is a declaration that Bush was an ineligible player. Whether Bush was ineligible depends on the rent paid by Bush parents for the house. If they paid fair market rent for the place, no infraction. If they did not pay fair market rent, there is an infraction.

It’s not a certainty that an infraction would result in Bush being declared ineligible, but it is certainly possible. Regardless, the USC program’s knowledge of the incident is irrelevant in determining whether Bush was, in fact, ineligible.

I don’t know the rules, but perhaps Patrick is right. If so, however, it seems like it would be not only a shame, but monumentally unjust, to retroactively penalize USC in such a severe manner for infractions that it wasn’t even aware of (without even a showing a negligence!).

Also, as I said in my correction above, I don’t believe the 2003 or 2004 seasons are actually in jeopardy here… but if they somehow are, Ed makes an excellent point: neither the Associated Press, which awarded USC the national championship in 2003 and 2004, nor the Bowl Championship Series, which awarded USC the national championship in 2004, are controlled by the NCAA. Nor does the NCAA have anything to do with the awarding of the Heisman Trophy. As such, presumably the NCAA cannot strip USC or Reggie Bush of these honors. In Ed’s words, “The NCAA and Pac 10 may wish to say USC went 0-12, but all that would mean is that USC would be the first 0-12 national champion!” Heh. Of course, USC could do what (if I understand and remember correctly) Michigan’s basketball team did, and voluntarily forfeit its games and championships, in order to stave off prospective NCAA sanctions. Indeed, I suppose the NCAA could pressure USC to do this, in a sort of legalized blackmail. But, barring that roundabout route, I don’t see how the NCAA can literally strip USC of honors which the NCAA did not bestow upon USC.

UPDATE 2: The ProFootballTalk Rumor Mill has more allegations. (Hat tip: Nebraska.)

Mike Wiser sends along this story about a rather raucous protest at Stanford, which forced President Bush to change his plans. I have to admire the protesters’ pluck, even if I disagree with substantial parts of their message (er, if a “message” can even be detected; more on that later). But the self-righteousness of at least some of the protesters drives me crazy, as usual:

[T]he Sheriff’s Department attempted to clear the street to provide the president’s motorcade a safe entrance into the complex. [Those fascist bastards! How dare they do something so oppressive! Gestapo! Gestapo!! -ed.] When the students refused to obey these verbal commands, more than 50 police officers in full riot gear were called to the scene. Dressed in protective helmets, the officers used their batons to push individuals back from the Tower.

In response to the use of physical force, students directed their chants at the perceived infringement of their rights. [Their “rights” to… do what, exactly? Block the street so cars can’t get through? I must have missed that unit in ConLaw. -ed.]

“Whose campus — Our campus. Whose streets — our streets,â€? they yelled. “Tell me what democracy looks like — this is what democracy looks like.â€? [Oh… that’s original. -ed.]

The struggle between the Sheriff’s Department and protesters reached its climax when a fire truck attempted to drive down the street and was blocked by the crowd. Security personnel were attempting to move those blocking the truck when three Stanford students sat down and refused to move.

Officers dragged them out of the road and bound their hands with plastic ties. Though others demanded that their peers be released [because it was wrong to arrest them for breaking the law??? -ed.], after 15 minutes, the three students were placed into a Sheriff’s Department vehicle and taken away. [Gee… ya think? -ed.] The fire truck then reversed and did not proceed down the street. [Well, its purpose was to clear the street, and it had accomplished that purpose. Why would it proceed? -ed.]

Sophomore Nicole Wires described the fire truck as a ploy used by the police.

“They brought a fire truck here because they wanted to move us out of the streets, and they knew that they could arrest us if we didn’t move,� she said. “We didn’t hear any sirens anywhere after the truck reversed. It didn’t take another route. It’s absurd.�

Ah yes, it’s absurd that the police wanted protesters to get out of the street so the president’s motorcade could drive through. Absurd!!

Look, I’ve complained about this before. Civil disobedience is all well and good, and I’m willing to concede that blocking a street so the president can’t get through might be a legitimate act of civil disobedience (even though the law against blocking streets obviously isn’t an inherently unjust law) if you feel strongly enough that an appearance by President Bush on your campus is somehow morally wrong — but even conceding that (perhaps somewhat dubious) point, there’s still a problem. Modern protesters often seem not to understand that when you break the law, you will be arrested, and it’s just downright stupid — and not at all in line with the tradition of true civil disobedience, a la Martin Luther King Jr. — to whine about police “violating” your “rights” by arresting you for breaking the law. It’s the police’s job to enforce the law! If you think a law is unjust (or its application to a particular situation is unjust), and your conscience requires you to disobey the law, fine… but you can’t expect the police to simply ignore your disobedience! That’s not protest, that’s anarchy!

This should go without saying, but: contrary to any delusions of grandeur that these protesters might have, this is not like Tiananmen Square, where the Chinese military used tanks to force protesters out of a public square in order to squelch their freedoms. This is a simple case of police trying to maintain public order and allow traffic to get through! The protesters were free to keep protesting so long as they were physically out of the way. So… if the police fabricated the reasons for arresting you, or if they were unnecessarily rough with you, then by all means complain about that — but don’t manufacture fake outrage by deliberately violating obviously just laws (like the one that says “don’t block a public thoroughfare”) and then complaining when you get arrested! If keeping President Bush off your campus is important enough that you’re willing to sit down in front of a firetruck, fine… but you have to be willing to freely accept the natural consequences of your actions, and those include being arrested for breaking the law!

Anyway… I mentioned earlier that it is somewhat difficult to discern the protesters’ overriding message. This goes along with another pet peeve of mine: the tendency of liberal protests these days to devolve into incoherent condemnations of “stuff and things,” with no apparent connection between the various issues addressed. This was actually Mike’s point in sending me the article. Excerpt:

[O]utside the Hoover Institution, the crowd chanted, “Hey-Hey-Ho-Ho-Bush is here, he’s got to go.â€? Another popular slogan targeted the conflict in Iraq, as students yelled, “1-2-3-4-We don’t want your f*ckin’ war-5-6-7-8-Stop the killing, Stop the hate.â€? …

A number of protesters cited specific complaints with the current administration, calling attention to these issues with colorful signs and popular slogans. Some wore stickers with the message “We all deserve the freedom to marry,� while others held signs stating “No one died when Clinton lied,� “Show me freedom! Protect my rights to my body� and “Save Darfur.�

Heh.

Let’s see… so they were protesting Bush generally (I agree, though I’m way less fervent than these folks), protesting his presence on campus (I would most likely disagree), protesting the Iraq war (I disagree), demanding gay rights (I agree), protesting the Iraq war again (I still disagree), implying that Clinton’s lies weren’t a big deal (I disagree), demanding abortion rights (I agree… though if we really got into an in-depth conversation about the issue, I’d probably disagree with a lot of what they’d say), and calling for humanitarian aid for Darfur (I agree… though if Bush ever actually did anything substantial re: Darfur, it would probably involve the military, and in all likelihood I’d keep agreeing but they’d start disagreeing). You see why it’s so hard to make sense out of these protests? If you throw in enough unrelated issues, almost no one is going to be able to agree with you about them all! You end up preaching only to the far-left choir, and just annoying everyone else.

Well, not so fast. But a top cardinal has reported that Pope Benedict XVI has asked the Church to look into OKing condom use to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS.

Just an update from the resident Jewish poster to the ND community ;-)

The new 17-inch MacBook Pro is out. [drool]