Random Shuffle

How Many Children Did Jesus Beat?

2011-11-04T10:28:00.002-04:00

This story is all over the intertubes. Amanda has the best takedown.

The only Biblical justification for such child abuse is in Proverbs. Even if you take these versus as literally as possible - i.e., that it's okay to use a "rod" to "chastize" your child, as opposed to "rod" being a metaphor for less cruel disciplines - none of them endorse the level of violence and cruelty depicted in this video or in some of the publications Amanda references. It takes a sick interpretation by a sick mind to conclude that the Bible supports severe beatings.

Stuck Up in the South

2011-11-01T19:12:00.001-04:00

As someone who has lived in just about all the major cultural regions of the US, including the South, I can assure you that people in the South are no more or less civil on the whole than anywhere else. Most of what passes for old-fashioned Southern "civility" has nothing to do with manners. It's about reinforcing caste, race and gender roles. It's also about allowing racists, sexists, anti-Semites, homophobes, Islamophobes, immigrant bashers, etc. to pretend that they're not such bad people after all because they know how to say please, thank you, sir and ma'am. And it's also a deliberately exaggerated and phony civility that allows the sort of southerner who engages in it to continue to buy into the Myth of Southern Superiority - i.e., "We have better manners than you, so we're better than you."

In my experience, most southerners (just as most people everywhere) are nice people with normally polite manners. And I'm talking about born-and-bred southerners, not the snowbirds. The ones who bitch about the decline in "civility" and the influx of "outsiders" are a minority and, not surprisingly, mostly a bunch of snobby, racist, Yankee-hating assholes.

Jesus Wept

2011-10-30T17:45:00.002-04:00

His Chosen Quarterback is, as of the half, 4/13 for 37.

I'd Rather Be Stupid Than Right

2011-10-30T14:16:00.000-04:00

I really do not get global warming deniers. What do they gain by sounding like complete fucking idiots?

American Exceptionalism: Our Internet Sucks

2011-10-30T14:03:00.000-04:00

I'm paying $60/mo for broadband internet. I'd say about 10% of the sites I visit fail to load properly on the first try.

Here We Are Now, Entertain Us

2011-10-30T13:29:00.002-04:00

It has occurred to me, as I find myself tuning into the only 1pm NFL game available in western Florida - Miami vs NYG, two teams I could not possibly care less about unless they were the Texas Rangers and St Louis Cardinals - that one reason we watch so many boring, mediocre professional sporting competitions on TV in this country is because everything else that's on the gazillion or so endless-rerun cable channels we get is even more boring.

Distinguishing Shit from Shinola

2011-10-29T16:23:00.002-04:00

This is great.

St Ronnie of Apartheid

2011-10-29T16:13:00.001-04:00

But Lincoln freed some of the slaves, so that proves Republicans aren't really racists.

My Daily Why-I-Hate-Cops Rant

2011-10-29T16:08:00.000-04:00

It's hard to say which is more appalling - the widespread corruption, or the behavior of the off-duty officers who showed up for the arraignments.

Update: See also.

The G is for Grifters

2011-10-29T13:23:00.001-04:00

The GOP goes all Bank-of-America on Tampa area hoteliers and tells them they have to pay for the previous RNC chairman's fuckups by reducing their rates and handing over a much bigger chunk of the haul.

Actually, Most of Them ARE Stupid

2011-10-29T12:07:00.000-04:00

And corrupt, and afraid Fox News and the Beltway press corps will say mean things about them.

Regardless of what our elected (big-D) Democratic officials believe to be best for the rest of us, it's (little-d) undemocratic to impose policies that are contrary to what the public wants.

But in any case, the vast majority of Washington politicians are lawyers, and almost all the rest are businessmen or doctors. They're not economists or experts on investing and finance. They don't think these policies through. They've adopted a fundamentally conservative economic ideology that sounds logical to them ("deficits bad! taxes bad! regulation bad!" etc) but which both historical fact and economic models tell us is bullshit.

They may not be stupid in the IQ sense, but on these matters, they are gullible, ignorant, and too easily bought.

Update: See also.

A Small Victory for Kenyan Islamosocialism

2011-10-27T15:42:00.001-04:00

Yes, government can do many things right, and it can do those things for a much lower cost, and with greater consistency, fairness and accountability, than the private sector.

The problem is not government. It's not even "big" government. The problem is bad government, which is fixable as long as you don't keep electing government-hating jackasses determined to prove themselves "right".

The Pride of Texas

2011-10-27T15:13:00.001-04:00

Shorter Prick Erry:

Swearing at your wife is sufficient grounds for judicial murder.

Why I Hate Cops 2

2011-10-26T18:37:00.000-04:00

Yeah, it's a great fucking country we live in.

At Least He Can't Accuse Us of Anti-Semitism

2011-10-26T16:19:00.001-04:00

No way Brian Moynihan is Jewish.

But he's definitely a kucker.

h/t

Why I Hate Cops

2011-10-26T16:06:00.002-04:00

This pretty much sums it up.

Cheating is Winning Except When You're Losing, in Which Case It's Bad Luck

2011-10-26T15:54:00.000-04:00

As I believe I've said before on this blog (too lazy to look up my own links), cheaters almost always regard themselves as smarter than their victims, and see successful cheating as prima facie evidence of how smart they are and how stupid their marks are for letting themselves get cheated. In other words, they see it as "winning", even if Matt Taibbi and the rest of us don't.

Of course, it doesn't occur to them that if they were really all that smart, they should be able to win without cheating.

Netflix Again

2011-10-25T14:21:00.003-04:00

Also, too: Red Box and Blockbuster Express kiosks are now everywhere - in my neighborhood, you can't spit without hitting one. At $1 a night, if you rent only 2-3 movies a month and are only interested in relatively recent releases - which is basically what Atrios means by Netflix's "best", i.e. most profitable, customers - then you're probably gong to see the rental kiosks as a viable alternative. They aren't quite as convenient, because you have to go pick and return the DVD instead of fishing it out of your mailbox and putting the return envelope back in it when you're done. But since these kiosks are located in places you probably go to or drive by frequently anyway (grocery and convenience stores), it's not that big an inconvenience.

Companies That Don't Understand Their Own Markets

2011-10-25T13:26:00.001-04:00

DVDs will eventually be an obsolete technology, and Netflix's DVD-by-mail business will die. But the key word here is eventually. We're a long, long way from a workable internet streaming model that can compete with the DVD rental business.

The obstacles to streaming aren't technological, but political - if they were technological, we could fix them. Political obstacles are much harder to get rid of. By "political", I don't just mean policies enacted or supported by politicians, such as the morons who want to eliminate net neutrality. I ~~almost~~ also mean the politics of the film and TV industry, which has various real and imagined incentives to keep streaming from becoming the predominant delivery technology.

On-demand streaming will eventually become how pretty much all content except live events will be delivered, but because of the politics, we're at least a couple of decades from that. Part of Netflix's mistake was seeing streaming as a more immediate threat to its DVD business than is actually the case.

Insde the Wingnut Mind

2011-10-25T10:49:00.002-04:00

This isn't really aimed at anyone. It's just a standard form of wingnut whining. The logic, if it can be called that, goes like this:

X a member of group G [e.g., women]
X is being criticized for her position on Subject S [e.g., I'm a raving homophobe]
Ergo, any criticism of X's position on S is ___ist [e.g., sexist]

Or, in the case of Kristol:

The financial industry elite are disproportionately Jewish.
OWS want some accountability for the people who lined their pockets while wrecking the world economy, and they want regulations to prevent it from happening again.
Ergo, OWS is anti-Semitic.

And There Was Much Rejoicing

2011-10-07T00:24:00.003-04:00

Two wonderful things happened today in the world of sports - the NHL regular season opened, and the Yankees' post-season ended at the hands of the Detroit Tigers.

All-a-Gaga

2011-10-06T23:19:00.002-04:00

I'm not sure which surprised me more - that Lady Gaga can actually sing, or that Tony Bennett is so short.

Scott Brown's Clothes

2011-10-06T23:16:00.000-04:00

Scott Brown was probably never going to get re-elected, no matter what. His Democratic opponent the last time out made the mistake of assuming she was entitled to win because she was a Democrat. She didn't campaign, didn't raise funds, and didn't run ads until the polls started going Brown's way. The Curt Schilling flap was less about Coakley's knowledge of baseball than her "what's the big deal?" attitude when she was called out on it. In short, she was a terrible candidate.

Elizabeth Warren is the anti-Coakley. She is already out there pounding the pavement and saying all the right things to get elected from a liberal state. Although the latest polls show Warren and Brown in a dead heat, that won't last. Brown is already polling as high as he's going to. Warren will pick up undecideds as they learn more about her.

Brown's remarks about Warren aren't going to be the death knell some think. The commentswill be forgotten by next November and won't be a factor. Brown is going to lose because there's simply no scenario where he can beat a competent, hard-working, Kennedy-style liberal like Warren in a state like Massachusetts, even if he does everything right.

If You Do'nt Want to Be Seen as the Personification of Evil, Don't Be the Personification of Evil

2011-08-11T11:39:00.004-04:00

Reading between the lines, it sounds as if this asshole thinks it was all about the bribes. If it had been just about the bribes, he wouldn't have gotten 28 years. No one does 28 years for taking a bribe. Three to five with time off for good behavior is more like it.

The evil here was putting kids in prison for being kids. For doing things just about every kid does. And for consciously and systematically denying these kids their legal and constitutional rights to fight this injustice.

Why he did it - whether it was for the money, or because he's one of those twisted religious fucks who thinks all kids are the spawn of satan and must be punished brutally for every minor misdeed, or because of some other crap going on in his head - is beside the point.

The point is, he did it. And yes, it was evil, and he deserves 28 years for it.

Super Sam!

2011-08-11T10:16:00.002-04:00

The best part of the Rays' wild bottom-of-the-9th comeback against the Royals was that it was the little guy who won the game.

We're big on little guys here in the Tampa Bay area. The Lightning have Marty St Louis and the Rays have Super Sam Fuld.

The second best part was that the throw to home was wide enough that it was any easy call by the home plate umpire. I have no faith in MLB umpiring any more.

Not a New Flash: Having Money Gives You More Food Choices

2011-08-04T13:19:00.003-04:00

It says something about how stupid, out-of-touch and uninformed, to say nothing of bigoted, so many affluent white Americans are that we even need a study to be done to make these self-absorbed assholes aware of self-evident stuff like this.

If It Walks Like a Duck...

2011-08-02T09:30:00.003-04:00

Here's a thought: if you don't want people to think you act like terrorists, don't act like terrorists.

Bradlee Dean's Feefees are Hurt

2011-07-28T23:46:00.002-04:00

Another unhinged chickenshit bigot who can dish it but can't take it.

The complaint is a hoot.

Unlike Being Gay, Being Republican is Something You Can Change

2011-07-27T15:36:00.004-04:00

There's a way out for non-insane Republican politicians, which is to simply declare, "the GOP has been taken over by lunatics," then switch parties or go independent. The few who have already done that have fared okay, except notably Arlen Specter, who was unelectable anyway. Lisa Murkowski got re-elected with a write-in, and she's from the state that brought us the Snowbillies of Wasilla.

NFL CBA: Glazered Over

2011-07-25T20:43:00.004-04:00

It's hard to find anything not to like in the new NFL CBA, but the part I like best is that cheap-ass owners like the Glazers (Tampa Bay) will be forced to spend their cap money on player payroll. The Bucs were $40 million under cap in 2010. I can't imagine that the Glazers are happy about this, but neither could they afford a season-shortening lockout. With luck, maybe losing that $40 million a year in extra revenue will force them to sell to owners who give a shit.

Just Because Some Other Deranged Wingnut Acted Out Our Secret Fantasy Doesn't Mean We Would

2011-07-25T20:02:00.004-04:00

Watching the wingnuts try to find some nuanced way to disavow Breivik's actions without also disavowing his ideology, which is utterly indistinguishable from their own, is much like watching my dogs trying to catch the frog in the swimming pool.

Also, too.

Confidence Fairies Still MIA

2011-07-25T19:51:00.003-04:00

The markets did not crash today. The major indexes and T-bills were all down a bit but not enough to be scary. Predictions that failure to reach a debt ceiling deal by Monday would tank the market are hereby declared silly.

Why the Nutters Keep Winning

2011-07-25T10:37:00.005-04:00

The inherently anti-democratic nature of our current political system could be remedied to some extent if congresscritters were elected by a single-ballot open primary with the two top vote-getters facing each other in the general. By open primary, I mean one which any candidate can enter by gathering enough signatures. This makes it much more difficult, though not impossible, for special interests, party establishments and the extreme wings of either party to get an otherwise unpopular candidate to the general election.

Which, of course, is exactly why the party establishments, special interests, and respective party "bases" hate the idea.

The teahadists who are currently committing economic terrorism against their own country in the House would in most cases never have made it to the general election runoff if they'd had to make the top two in an open primary.

It's Like Killing Cockroaches

2011-07-23T22:08:00.005-04:00

Murdoch' s influence may be on the wane, but some other right-wing moneybags will rush in to fill the vacuum. And I certainly wouldn't count on the Tories to stop going after the BBC. They've always hated it, facts having a known liberal bias.

Rays: Jennings Up, Brignac Down, Upton ???

2011-07-23T20:58:00.005-04:00

This move makes more sense if the Rays are trying to deal Upton, which everyone thinks they are. Jennings is nominally a left-fielder but he could be moved into center if Upton goes - we have a perfectly good left-field platoon in Fuld and Ruggiano. Fuld is also a decent CF. The point is, the OF doesn't need shoring up. Defensively, it's not where our issues are, except when BJ has a brain-fart.

I'm not entirely buying the story that this is all about Reid Brignac's .197 batting average, although it would certainly be great if Reid could get his bat back. I think they wanted Jennings up and playing in case they do move Upton, and Joe looked around and asked who could benefit most from a stint downstairs. Brignac's batting average made him the obvious candidate.

This doesn't mean Upton will get traded, but if Jennings works out it will certainly make Joe and the Ray's FO more comfortable about losing their star CF'er.

Yankees 1 - Rays 2

2011-07-22T12:04:00.003-04:00

Before the game, the Rays announcers put up some graphic showing the CC Sabathia has a losing record on his birthday. Well, it was his birthday, and he lost, but primarily due to the inability of the Wankees to score.

The main thing to take away from the four-game series is that the Yankees are dangerous on the base paths. Their hitting has been less than spectacular this year - their team average is only sixth in the AL, but they nevertheless find ways to score - they're in a virtual tie for second in the AL for runs scored.

I don't see the AL East finishing any different than it stands now. The Red Sox should have won last year but were bit by the injury bug.

Uh, yes

2011-07-22T11:48:00.003-04:00

Over at Balloon Juice, Anne Laurie asks

Lying is a protected form of free speech now?

Yes it is. I'm often surprised at the number of people who think it shouldn't be. They're clearly not thinking the consequences of this through. If you think lying shouldn't be protected, ask yourself, "What exactly is a lie?" and "Who decides it's a lie?"

What's the difference between a lie and an unsupported belief or opinion? What about cases where the same data can support different interpretations?

Most important of all, do you really want the government to decide what is "truth"?

You seriously do not want to go down that road.

The legal definition of defamation (in the US) requires considerably more than evidence that the statement was false. It must also have been done with intent to harm (i.e, malice), it has to have caused demonstrable harm , and it has to have been presented as fact, not opinion.

Breitbart's doctored video of Sherrod's speech clearly meets the legal definition of defamation. His lawyers certainly know this but are trying the standard legal maneuvers to get the case thrown out or moved to a jurisdiction where they have a better chance of getting an all-white jury so they can play the race card. They wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't make these efforts on behalf of their client. You can rail on about the ethics of lawyers, but even assholes like Breitbart are entitled to a vigorous defense.

November 9

2011-07-20T21:25:00.002-04:00

Who?

Women in Poker vs Women In Physics: Not Much Difference

2011-07-20T21:14:00.003-04:00

Read this.

There are a lot of reasons why more women don't play poker, especially higher-stakes poker. But those who do run into this crap all the time.

It's not always from the players, either. Poker room managers need to instruct their male dealers to stop saying things like, "Ladies first" and "Keep it clean guys, there's a lady present."

On the latter point, If your room has a moronic f-bomb rule, just enforce the fucking thing already. Don't use women as the excuse for your language prudery, because that's not the real reason you have that rule, and we all know it.

Anyway, go read the article.

Tell Me Again Why You're a Catholic?

2011-07-20T15:30:00.001-04:00

Seriously.

Crazy Michele's Headaches

2011-07-20T14:14:00.005-04:00

The main reasons why Michele Bachmann should not be President of the United States are (a) she's crazy, (b) she's at the very least ignorant, if not just plain stupid, (c) she and her husband are raving bigots, (d) she has a history of panicking for no reason at all, and most of all, (e) she's a political extremist whose positions are far out of the mainstream and whose election, therefore, would make it impossible to enact shit the majority of the public actually wants.

None of this has anything to do with Crazy Michele's headaches.

However, the headaches issue matters, and I'm getting a little fed up with lefty bloggers who think it doesn't. There are many physical conditions and impairments that do not interfere with cognitive and reasoning abilities, but migraine headaches are not one of them. Depending on the type and severity of migraine, it may literally be impossible for Bachmann to "think straight" (which of course she doesn't anyway, but that's beside the point) when she's having an attack. The medications can cause functional impairment also.

I can only conclude that those who think too much is being made of this just don't know crap about migraine headaches.

Now it's possible that Bachmann's headaches are under control and that they do not cause any significant mental impairment. Most people who get migraines (including some members of my own family) are not particularly debilitated by them. But that's not true of everyone. And so far, Bachmann's response to this matter has been largely to avoid addressing those rather key points. Instead, we're told that one in four Americans suffer migraines.

True, but they're not running for President. They're not going to have their hands on the nuclear football.

Vague reassurances from her handlers that everything is under control and we have nothing to worry about just don't fly. She needs to get some proof out there, in the form of medical records and a list of medications she takes. So far, the Bachmann camp is acting as if they have something to hide. If they don't, they need to stop hiding it.

Raising the Debt Ceiling Awareness

2011-07-20T14:06:00.003-04:00

The tide would be turning much faster if the fucking Democrats in DC, most especially Obama, would just get out there in front of the microphones and say, "This is what will happen if the US defaults," and then keep saying it. You can't counteract the poison of the right wing noise machine if you keep your mouth shut.

A Working Definition of Crazy

2011-07-20T13:53:00.002-04:00

Benen:

So, to review, the White House wants the wealthy to pay a little more; most the Senate wants the wealthy to pay a little more; the Gang of Six expects the wealthy to pay a little more; polls show the vast majority of the American public wants the wealthy to pay a little more; economists believe having the wealthy pay a little more won’t hurt the economy; and the wealthy themselves are comfortable with paying a little more.
But Eric Cantor and House Republicans still consider the very idea outrageous.

That's because they really are nuts.

Westminster Pony Show

2011-07-19T23:49:00.004-04:00

I'm not sure what the MPs thought the Murdochs would say other than what they said, especially as they were not under oath.

I imagine the point of the session was to give the government some cover for having been so far in the tank with News Corp in the first place. Like Congressional hearings on this side of the pond, these things often serve no purpose other than to allow politicians to act as if they are On Top of the Situation and Making Sure Nothing Like This Ever Happens Again.

If the Murdochs did anything criminal, the only way they're going to go down is if a memo, email or phone recording shows up somewhere. Any such evidence is long gone by now.

Yankees 2 - Rays 3

2011-07-19T23:43:00.002-04:00

Colon was pitching, so we must have been stealing their signs.

In all fairness, the Yankees defense failed to take the field for a couple of innings. Otherwise, this might have been another extra-innings marathon.

Rays Bullpen Blues and Other Thoughts

2011-07-19T01:05:00.005-04:00

As the season winds on, a few things are becoming obvious about the Rays.

(a) The bullpen is a big problem. We can't get a reliable close out of them. I'm sure Joe and the front office are quite aware of this and don't need me to process the statistics for them, but it's maddening that they don't seem to be making any moves. Have we no one in the minors?

Bring someone up. Try 'em out. The team we have isn't getting the job done.

(b) We're weak in the middle infield. I realize 2B and SS are tough spots to fill with someone who can both defend and hit, and quality middle infielders go for prices the Rays can't afford. We're paying the price for trying to field a major league team on a minor league budget.

(c) Because of (a) and (b), we're nowhere near as good as the Yankees or Red Sox this year. And despite all the complaining from the Ray's conections about the consistently good Rays getting screwed by being in the same division, the fact is, we're nowhere near as good as Cleveland, Detroit, Texas or L.A. this year, either. Realignment is not going to fix the problem.

(d) The Rays' record looks better than it is because so far they haven't played a lot of games against the Sox or Wankees, and the Rays got some soft draws in the interleagues.

(d) The Trop should be nuked.

God's Own Governor

2011-07-18T21:55:00.006-04:00

Speaking of undermining democracy...

It's just another example of what I'm talking about. These nutcases can't win in an open and honest debate, let alone an unrigged election, but in their minds, this is because Americans have gone astray and need to be forcibly herded back into the sheep pen. They're unapologetic in their absolute authoritarianism.

[h/t]

Democracy is Messy

2011-07-18T21:18:00.003-04:00

I think Duncan is right. True democracy tends to produce outcomes that are perceived by the extremes of society as being counter to their own interests or ideological agenda. I don't mean just political extremes, although that's obvious in the case of the "tea party" types. It also applies to the wealthy and ruling elites, who comprise only a tiny fraction of society and are therefore extreme in their social and/or financial status.

As the extremes cannot win, at least in the long run, by running on principle, they work to sabotage democracy. They will all deny this of course, and many who engage in fundamentally anti-democratic activities, such as voter suppression or pushing balanced budget amendments, or simply buying politicians like the Koch brothers do, have no doubt persuaded themselves that they are the One True Defenders of Freedom and that the real threat is from the people who would expand democratic participation to people the True Defenders regard as Unworthy.

This is most obvious on the right, which from the moment Obama was sworn in sought to delegitimize him with all the birther/secret-Muslim nonsense. But there's a quasi-liberal (what some people call neo-liberal) element of the ruling class who would also prefer to not have to answer to the people. These faux liberals are opposed, either ideologically or out of perceived self-interest, to basic liberal goals such as a single payer health care system, stronger environmental regulations, strengthening of workers' rights, and so on. A functioning democracy would likely produce all those outcomes sooner or later. Unlike the teabaggers, however, the quasi-liberals are not a bunch of dumbshit crazies, so their form of attack on democracy tends to be less obvious, in the form of bemoaning "partisanship", creating groups like Third Way, and otherwise trying to position themselves as the only civilized and reasoned voices. However, their ultimate objective is the same, which is to enact their own agenda, regardless of what the people want.

In Case You Need Another Reason Not to Support the American Red Cross

2011-07-18T16:43:00.004-04:00

Aside from the refusal of many chapters and the national organization to disclose how much their managers and fund raisers get paid, and the fact that the money you thought you donated for, say, tornado disaster relief will often go somewhere else, there's also shit like this that almost certainly happens far more often than gets reported.

Every municipality of any size has blood donation centers run by entities not affiliated with the Red Cross. Just look them up in the phone book or online (e.g., "donate blood ".) Some are commercial and will actually pay you a few bucks for your precious bodily fluid.

Generally speaking, the bigger the charity, the more likely it is to be corrupt and ineffective. You'll get more bang for your compassion buck donating to local charities that are well-connected to their communities and operate mainly with volunteers. Organizations like the Red Cross, while they admittedly do some good work and are better-suited than smaller outfits for handling major disasters, exist first and foremost to provide employment for their professional managers and fund-raisers.

Oh the Irony

2011-07-18T16:37:00.004-04:00

The felling blow was apparently delivered with a left hook.

WSJ Defends Cheaters

2011-07-18T15:43:00.005-04:00

The unfortunately-named "phone hacking" scandal - which really should be called the Police and Parliament Corruption and Complicity Scandal - is a textbook if exaggerated example of how cheaters behave when they're caught cheating. We're hearing all the usual defenses and excuses - other people were doing it, other people were doing things that compelled us to do it, other people were doing things that gave us the right to do it, it wasn't really all that bad because some people do much worse things, the real assholes are the people who exposed us, etc etc etc.

The WSJ op-ed that is getting rightfully trashed all over the internet manages to distill just about all of the cheater's laments into one short article.

British Open - Final Thoughts

2011-07-18T09:09:00.005-04:00

So much for my predictive powers.

I will say, Clarke deserved to win, having put in the least mediocre performance. It says something, however, about the current state of professional golf that Clarke added three strokes to his lead by shooting par in the final round. Par.

Dustin Johnson shot two over on Sunday, and finished tied for second.

Three of the top four finishers were officially old farts - Clarke, Mickelson, and Bjorn. Chad Campbell, in a three-way tie for fifth, is 37. Forty-something Jimenez was in there for a while. It was like watching a sneak preview of a future Seniors Tour event.

I'm not sure what all this means, except it's probably not good for golf.

British Open Day 3

2011-07-16T15:35:00.004-04:00

Some of the old guys are proving me wrong, at least so far. I must say, Clarke looked like he knew exactly what he was doing today. But I still maintain that 43 is old for a course like that.

Jimenez (46) also looked solid, and Bjorn (40) dropped only one stroke today. But Dustin Johnson (27) and Rickie Fowler (22) played as well as Clarke without getting quite the breaks. At this point, I'm picking Fowler to win. Links play rewards thinkers, and Rickie strikes me as having a few more bulbs in his string than Dustin.

From the Give It But Can't Take It Dep't

2011-07-16T15:26:00.004-04:00

Also re Clemens: it's hard for me to support trying people for lying to Congress when so many members of Congress are themselves pathological liars.

Clemens Mistrial

2011-07-16T15:05:00.003-04:00

One of the whines I've been hearing about the Clemens mistrial is that the whole investigation, including the Congressional hearings was a big waste of money. That's probably true.

In cases of non-violent crimes, there probably ought to be a cost-benefits analysis when deciding what cases to prosecute. Unfortunately, the cost is usually a function of how big a fight the defense is capable of putting up, and that in turn is all too often a function of how wealthy the defendant is.

More Wankees Whining

2011-07-16T14:46:00.003-04:00

Shorter Joe Girardi:

The only possible explanation for our failure to win a game where we scored just one run is that the opposition must be stealing our signs.

The crying never stops.

[h/t]

Rays vs Red Sox

2011-07-16T00:49:00.002-04:00

It was refreshing, for once, not to see the umpiring crew hand the game to the Yankees and/or Red Sox. No complaints about the officiating tonight. Ball/strike calls were good enough.

I understand umpires missing close calls. It's the totally blown calls that piss me off and should get repeat offenders fired.

British Open

2011-07-16T00:30:00.003-04:00

Is Royal St George's a butt-ugly course, or what? And the three reactor cooling towers in the distance really add to the scenery.

The pin placements were a lot tougher today (Friday), which I think has become commonplace in big events to try to avoid a big bottom group making the cut. I guess it worked, because only 71 of the 156 starters will be playing tomorrow, and there were only 13 players in the +3 group in what is otherwise a tightly bunched field.

I always root for the old guys, but I expect the older players who haven't already missed the cut to start fading tomorrow. As the crow flies, it's a 7200-yard walk, but there's a lot of up-and-down, and that really takes it out of the legs, which in turn takes it out of the swing. I'd like to see Lefty do well, but he's too old for this shit and he pretty much sucks at links play anyway.

My guys Ernie and Angel didn't even come close to the cut. Steve Stricker's still in and of the Old Farts Brigade probably has the best chance.

Murdoch's Enablers

2011-07-16T00:21:00.005-04:00

Apparently included Scotland Yard.

Hinson "resigns." Yeah, right.

Buck Off

2011-07-13T16:36:00.003-04:00

I watched about three innings of the All Star game last night and gave up.

Maybe it's just me, but I can't stand Joe Buck and Tim McCarver. I'm speaking of them as broadcasters, not human beings. For all I know, they're the nicest guys on the planet. But I don't like the way they call games, and Buck's droning monotone was painful to my ears even before he started having problems with it.

Then there were all the infomercials for Fox entertainment products, and the clumsy announcer-leads into them.

So I turned off the game and watched a rented DVD, The American. It's a shitty movie, but it was less painful than listening to the game.

I Missed It

2011-07-13T15:51:00.004-04:00

I found I missed blogging after not doing it for so long, so I'm back. I'm probably not going to do much poker because I don't play much now that Obama's DOJ has decided to crack down on the offshore poker sites. I'm not especially miffed by this, because at least in the case of FullTilt and AP/UB/Cereus/Whateverthefuckitscalled, the DOJ might have been doing us all a favor before those incompetent asswipes lost any more of our money. If only Obama and Holder would show as much determination to prosecute the banksters and go after Bush administration torture enablers.

Oh well, sigh, and all that.

Playing Cards for Gun Nuts

2011-03-21T20:00:00.002-04:00

Check this out.

I Agree, You're Not an Idiot - You're a Deranged Bigot

2011-03-17T13:08:00.005-04:00

The Donald is a birther.

I operate on the assumption that anyone who subscribes to this birther nonsense is a racist wingnut until proven otherwise. There's no reason to even care where Obama was born. This is trying to use a minor technicality in the Constitution to try to overturn the results of a legitimate election the outcome of which made racist whities lose their shit.

The same assholes would be fine with making The Arnold president, if it weren't for that damned technicality.

The Real Problem with Nuclear Power

2011-03-16T09:36:00.003-04:00

Clearly the biggest technical problems with nuclear power right now are (a) reprocessing and storing spent fuel; and (b) the difficulty of determining what's going on inside the reactor vessel during a crisis.

Alas, our media and the general public are obsessing over whether reactors can be made earthquake- and tsunami-safe. Yes they can. The problems in that area are not technical, but the result of "value engineering" and insufficient regulatory oversight.

The focus needs to be on the two real problems. The industry's attitude towards (a) has been, "Let's just stuff it into casks and bury it somewhere." We need to find a better solution than that. If there are any human beings still alive 50,000 years from now, they shouldn't have to live with our nuclear power turds.

Fixing (b) probably requires more than just installing more webcams in the building. The conditions inside a reactor are not electronics-friendly. I don't have an answer for that, but as with (a) it's something that needs to be addressed if nuclear power is to receive widespread public acceptance.

Liberal Anti-Nuke Freakout

2011-03-15T13:25:00.002-04:00

Apparently when it comes to nuclear power, some liberals are determined to take positions based on fear, ignorance and general craziness - i.e., to act like wingnuts.

It's embarrassing.

Gun Nuts

2011-03-15T13:00:00.003-04:00

This has also been my experience.

Many of them dwell on paranoid fantasies of getting robbed or finding themselves in the middle of a public shootout so they have an excuse to blow someone away. The language they use when describing what they would do in such a situation is not that of someone who would reluctantly take a human life in defense of self or others, but that of someone itching to commit legalized murder. They also, like the politician in question, frequently put no value on human life except their own and that of members of the "tribe" they self-identify with.

Quack Quack

2011-03-15T12:55:00.004-04:00

Apparently the most important news of the day is that the Gilbert Gottfried Got Freed from his Aflac gig for tweeting a dumb joke about the Japan tragedy. It's been dominating CNN's coverage for the last hour or so.

Simple Answer to a Simple Question

2011-03-15T11:14:00.003-04:00

Because they cost more, and higher costs = lower profits.

The profit that Tokyo Electric Power skimmed off selling electricity could have paid for a higher seawall and a more earthquake-resistant facility many times over.

I Don't Think That Word Means What You Think It Means

2011-03-14T15:41:00.003-04:00

Chyron on CNN: "Scores have lost everything."

Well, Hey, He's a Famous Scientist, Right?

2011-03-14T12:45:00.003-04:00

CNN has celebrity zoologist Jeff Corwin on explaining plate tectonics and nuclear reactor technology.

Nuclear Physics 101

2011-03-13T23:41:00.004-04:00

I strongly recommend not trying to learn anything about nuclear reactors from watching the talking heads on TV.

For example, I just saw an ABC News video that characterized the situation in Japan as an "out of control" reactor.

The reactors are not "out of control". They are, in fact, slowing down - that is, the rate at which nuclear fission is occurring in the reactors is decreasing.

All of the reactors were automatically "scrammed" when they lost power. A scram is an emergency shutdown in which all of the control rods are automatically inserted and possibly other fission-dampening procedures invoked, such as flooding the core with neutron absorbing chemicals.

The term "shutdown" is a bit misleading. A scram does not instantly stop fission. It causes fission to start slowing down and to keep slowing down. Once you start slowing a fission reaction in this way, it keeps getting slower, because there are fewer and fewer neutrons available to split more atoms into more neutrons.

So the reactors themselves are anything but "out of control."

The problem is that even though the rate of fission is slowing down, fission still produces tremendous heat, and the cooling systems have failed.

The explosions that have occurred at two plants were the result of technicians deliberately venting some of the boiled off coolant to prevent a steam explosion (not a nuclear explosion, which can't happen) inside the reactor containment vessel. One of the byproducts of fission is hydrogen, and hydrogen is extremely flammable (c.f. the Hindenberg). If it comes into contact with any ignition source - poof. These were hydrogen explosions.

That's not good, but it's better than blowing up the main reactor containment vessel. Way better. By like a power of a million or so.

The situation is quite serious, of course, and there's still the real possibility of a catastrophe. But it's irresponsible of the media to use language that suggests there's a runaway nuclear reaction going on.

It's also irresponsible to suggest, as most have, that every day that passes without a smiley-face butt-slapping high-fiving resolution means things are getting worse. The reality is, because there's less fission going on with each passing second, the passage of time is a Good Thing. A Very Good Thing. This is now a matter of Hanging In There until the rate at which the reactor is producing heat is slower than the rate at which the makeshift seawater cooling system can remove said heat. Sooner or later, the two curves will intersect on the chart, and at that point we're out of the woods.

Another Teatard Superpatriot With a Firm Grasp of American History

2011-03-13T23:23:00.005-04:00

I can tell you exactly what happened. The capital of New Hampshire is Concord. You can guess the rest.

It's All About New York

2011-02-25T23:07:00.003-05:00

It always has been, but usually MLB isn't quite so obvious about it.

Chicken Pot Pie Recipe

2011-02-25T12:23:00.002-05:00

Makes 2 pies.

Ingredients:

3 large or 4 medium boneless, skinless chicken breasts, cut into small pieces
4-5 medium-sized russet potatoes, diced into small cubes
1 cup frozen peas or mixed vegetables
32 oz package or can of chicken broth (preferably low-sodium)
1 can condensed cream of celery soup
1 cup milk
roux (see below)
2 packages of refrigerated pie crusts (the type you unroll)

Prepare the roux ahead of time and refrigerate. (See below).

Take the pie crusts out of the box and give them a half hour or so to warm up to room temperature. They will be easier to handle if you do.

Place the chicken, potatoes, and frozen veggies in a large sauce pan. Pour in a enough broth to cover. Bring to a boil. Reduce heat to medium-low and cover. Cook about 15 minutes or until the chicken looks cooked through and the potatoes are done but not soft. (They're going to cook some more, so don't overdo them).

While the filling mixture is cooking, preheat the oven to 425 degrees. Place a pie crust in the bottom of each of two 9-inch pie dishes (glass is best).

Drain the mixture through a colander, saving the broth. Put the mixture back into the pot and add two cups (16oz) of the broth. Stir in the soup and milk. Bring up to a bubbly simmer.

Add roux, about a teaspoon at a time, to thicken the mixture. Typically 2 to 3 rounded teaspoons is enough. Keep in mind that it will keep thickening as it cooks, so don't panic if the mixture isn't thick enough right away.

Cook over medium-low heat for about 10-15 minutes.

Pour mixture into the pie dishes. Put the top crusts on the pies, pinching and trimming the edges. Poke a few holes in the crusts to allow steam to escape.

Bake pies for 20-25 minutes, or until the crust looks done. Because the mixture is already cooked, you're really only cooking the crust, so don't overdo it.

Roux

Every serious cook should have a container of roux in the refrigerator, to use as a thickener. It's much easier and less time consuming in the long run to make it up a large batch and store it than to make a small batch every time you need it.

Ingredients (you can double this if you use a lot of roux):

One stick unsalted butter*
Four ounces (by weight, not volumn!) all-purpose flour**

Melt the butter in a small saucepan over medium-low heat.

Using a wooden or plastic spoon, stir the flour in. It will quickly turn into a thick paste. If it gets too dry (it crumbles instead of making a paste), add a little bit of corn or canola oil (not olive oil) until it forms a paste.

Keep stirring and cooking over medium-low to medium heat until the mixture no longer obviously smells like flour. This typically takes 15-20 minutes for "white" roux (which is really a beige-yellow color). Keep stirring, or you will burn the roux and have to start over.

Pour the roux into a sealable container. Let it cool for a bit, give it one more stir to prevent it from separating, then cover and put in the refrigerator. It will keep for about a month.

Using Roux

When using roux, you want it to be the opposite temperature of the liquid you want to thicken. That is, if the liquid is warm or hot, you want the roux to be cold. If the liquid is cold, you want the roux to be hot.

Add small amounts of roux, stirring to blend it well before adding more. Bear in mind that it continues to thicken the sauce after you add it, so err on the side of adding too little. You can always add more later.

*Clarified butter is better if you can easily get it or are in the mood to make your own; I can't be bothered.

**Once you get used to making roux, and know what the consistency should be, you don't have to measure the flour. Just keep adding the flour to the butter a little at a time until it looks right.

Fear of Bots

2011-02-23T11:53:00.004-05:00

The online poker community's obsession with bots is a dangerous distraction. The real threat is and has always been collusion. You don't need a bot to cheat effectively by playing two or more seats at the same table. The cheats know that. Why almost everyone else seems to not get it remains a mystery to me.

The poker sites invest far too much energy into trying to prevent the use of automated software aids, and far too little into catching - or even better, preventing - plain old-fashioned collusion. I don't stay up nights worrying that someone has written some outlaw code to calculate ICM sit-and-go equity on the fly. I do worry that some asshole is playing two or more seats in the same sit-and-go from different IP addresses.

Driving Me Crazy

2011-02-23T11:34:00.005-05:00

Basically the lesson of this is that when you put dangerous weapons (e.g., guns, cars) in the hands of stupid or careless people, sooner or alter they will do something stupid or careless with them. It's not a question of whether, but when.

Stupid and careless drivers trying to beat trains at railroad crossings is nothing new. That they try to do so is primarily a function of their stupidity and/or carelessness. Other factors - cell phones, GPS, the fact that it's slow-moving light rail and not a speeding freight train - may in some way contribute to the frequency or severity of these incidents, but the root problem is that our society has decided to set the bar for getting a driver's license so low that a lot of people who shouldn't be allowed to drive are doing so legally.

Did Eliminating the Red Line Increase Concussions?

2011-02-07T16:40:00.002-05:00

I imagine there's no one reason why the number of concussions, especially serious ones, appears to be on the rise in the NHL. Better diagnosis, stricter league rules about reporting, and bigger, stronger, faster players are all contributing factors.

I'm beginning to wonder, however, if eliminating the two-line rule sped the game up too much. Players are now flying at top speed through center ice, and these are resulting in some pretty hard open-ice hits. it might be something the NHL should be looking at.

Super Awful

2011-02-07T00:52:00.004-05:00

Thank jeebus the game was pretty good (for once) because everything else stunk up the place. The pregame performances sucked, the half-time show really sooper-dooper sucked, almost all of the ads ran the gamut from incomprehensibly stupid to incomprehensibly offensive, and listening to that monotonic idiot Joe "son of Jack" Buck always makes my head hurt.

Plus, no Bud Bowl. WTF was with that?

Not Cricket

2011-02-05T13:14:00.004-05:00

I don't know enough about cricket to have an informed opinion on how fixable it is, but these violations must have been pretty serious to warrant such lengthy bans.

I'm baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack

2011-02-05T13:13:00.002-05:00

Now that I have some family issues resolved, I'm going to try to get this blog going again. I don't have much else to do anyway.

PLO: Don't Draw to Ties

2010-09-18T11:15:00.003-04:00

This comes up more often in Pot Limit Omaha than I think most players realize. And because they're not looking for it, they get their money in bad with a big draw that, it turns out, wasn't such a big draw after all.

Here's an example from a .50/1 game I was playing yesterday. I'm in the cutoff with A876 double-suited. UTG limps in and I raise to $4. The BB and UTG call. Pot is $12.50.

The flop is Q54 rainbow with one of my ace suit. BB bets the pot, and UTG raises the pot. My turn.

If I ignore the action, it looks like I have a classic 13-out nut wrap, plus a backdoor nut flush draw. 13 outs twice is almost exactly 50% to get there (although you won't always have the nuts by the river even if you make your straight). So in a lot of situations, you should be happy to get all your money in on the flop in a three-way pot when you have this type of wrap.

This is not one of them, however. The villains are freely betting and raising the pot into a preflop raiser. 90% of the time, one of them has top set and the other has something like 876x or 765x, if not the same wrap you have. This cuts your equity to somewhere between 22-27% depending on things. Unless you are getting at least three-to-one pot odds to call and will be all-in if you do, you cannot show a profit by continuing with this hand. Folding is best.

Once in a while, they both have sets without straight draws, or one has two pair and the other has a set without any other draws. This doesn't happen often enough, however, to make up for the times when you're drawing for a tie.

Bandaid Fixes for Bad Umpiring

2010-09-18T10:59:00.002-04:00

Here in the greater Tampa Bay area, the locals are still grousing about Jetergate. I have little to add, except to point out that this was a call the umpires could have and should have gotten right without having to resort to video review. Having a bench-challenge system like the NFL's would have forced Maddon to use his challenge to fix a call that competent umpires would have gotten right in the first place.

I"m call for video review in baseball, but people need to see it as a way to help good umpires get close calls right, not as a fix for bad umpiring.

This Will Keep the Poker Wingnuts Happy

2010-08-31T23:46:00.001-04:00

I've decided to resurrect Angry White Female and start posting the political stuff there. So Radio Babylon can safely read Random Shuffle without having his misconceptions challenged.

What To Do With This Blog

2010-08-30T10:42:00.003-04:00

I haven't been posting because I haven't felt like posting. Now and then, I get the urge to write something, but then I get thinking, "What the fuck - no one cares what I think."

Pretty much all I've managed to accomplish is to get myself blacklisted from Brother Ed's site.

The problem with blogs is if you want people to read them, you have to make an effort to post at least somewhat regularly. And there's not much point in writing a blog that no one reads. If you're just talking to yourself, you might as well keep a private journal.

So I'm debating what to do with this blog. I'll probably have more time later in the year than I do right now to get back to regular posting. The question is whether it's worth it.

Because Preferring Man-on-Man Sex is Just Like Getting Fired for Being Pregnant

2010-06-23T11:15:00.003-04:00

Shorter crAAKKer:

I'm a gay man so I know what it's like to be a woman, and you girls are just being silly for thinking a females-only event might be sexist and offensive.

Men, gay or otherwise, really need to get over the idea that if it's not offensive to them, it shouldn't be offensive to women. That itself is a sexist attitude which implies that women are not capable of making such determinations for themselves and need a wise and paternalistic male authority to do it for them.

Gay men are still men. They're not women with a different equipment option. While there are general similarities in the way society treats both groups, the specifics are quite different, and much of the female experience is alien to gay men (as is much of the gay male experience to women).

Limit Hold'em: Bluffing is Easy

2010-06-20T22:36:00.004-04:00

This is a high-percentage bluff that, in some form or another, comes up often enough in Limit Hold'em that serious players should be aware of it:

Six-handed. I'm in the BB with Kd Ts.

Preflop: Three folds, button calls, SB calls, I check.

Flop: 9s 2h 6c

All check.

Turn: [9s 2h 6c] Ac

SB checks, I bet, all fold.

The key here is that just about everyone in these games will open-raise on the button with any Ax.

If the ace had fallen on the flop instead of the turn, I would have bet the flop if SB checked.

Is It Over Yet?

2010-06-20T00:36:00.002-04:00

I've already forgotten who won the $50K Kitchen Table Poker event, and we haven't even started the two-week super snoozer.

Some Additional Thoughts About the WSOP Ladies' Events

2010-06-19T01:00:00.003-04:00

First, I agree with pretty much everything BWoP says. I think trying to swarm a selected WSOP event is kind of a silly idea, but otherwise she nails it.

Second, someone just needs to come right out and say it: neither Harrah's nor ESPN gives a fuck about promoting poker among women, and even if they were, a microgram of common sense should tell you that a $1000 buy-in event is pretty obviously not the way to do it. The event exists for the wives/ girlfriends/mothers/sisters/daughters of the whales and for the few Hollywood celebrities it attracts. It's about giving the whale's girlfriends something fun to do when he's playing - preferably craps, not poker. It's about hoping Tiffany Michelle and Jeniffer Tilly suck as bad at blackjack as they do at poker.

The rest of the field is made up of pros and serious amateurs who smell an overlay. So let's stop kidding ourselves that this is about promoting poker among women. It's about making more money for Harrah's, pure and simple.

Third. Someone once asked me during an otherwise all-male game at the Venetian if I was going to play in the WSOP Ladies' event. I answered, "No, I'm not a lesbian." They thought that was hysterical, a lot funnier than I intended it to be. The response tells you something else about attitudes towards the women who play in these things - a lot of the guys think the women who play in them are not at all scared little girls who think pink diamonds look pretty in their bracelets. I think it's mostly a female perception (albeit a correct one) that the Ladies' Event is patriarchal and condescending. I think most guys - the younger ones, anyway - don't think women need their own events to ease them into poker, and they see these things as experienced and often very good female poker players getting special treatment. I mean seriously - it's a $1000 fucking buy-in. If I were a guy and I saw a field full of female pros, high-stakes amateurs, Hollywood starlets and some whale's surgically-enhanced girlfriends, I'd think it was a set-up, too.

Fourth. There are tons and tons of women playing the small- and medium-stakes cash games and small buy-in tournaments. I've played at a lot of cash tables where the women outnumber the men. I played in a limit hold'em game once where the ratio was 9:1 (it was such a tough game, I requested a table change).

The problem is not getting women into poker. The "problem" - scare quotes deliberate - is getting women into high stakes poker.

But is that really a problem? As I've said before, here and here, there's a cultural bias towards assuming that what men do is "normal" and that if women's behavior deviates from the male standard, it's "abnormal" and needs to be corrected. There's plenty of reason to believe that in the case of high stakes poker, we have this backwards - that the men who play at these stakes are the ones engaging in abnormal, even idiotic, behavior, and the women who don't play at these stakes are not.

The question no one can seem to answer is, exactly what do women gain by engaging in a financially risky and usually unprofitable behavior that they can do for a lot less money at lower stakes? Until you can answer that, please stop telling me we need to get more women (or anyone else, for that matter) to play high stakes poker. Because we don't.

Finally, there are some other under-represented groups in high-stakes poker. African-Americans and latinos, for example. Where are the blacks-only and latinos-only events? If you seriously believe that we have some moral responsibility to promote diversity in poker, why don't such events exist?

Aside from the howls of outrage that would ensue from blacks and latinos, the answer is that no one has any responsibility in poker to rectify demographic imbalances in the game, and that includes gender imbalances. We're not talking about hiring police officers, where there's a compelling case for having a force that looks something like the community it supposedly represents. There's no perceivable benefit to the larger community to promote diversity in poker. None. It might benefit poker in some way to stop looking like an whites-and-Asians-only frat house, but diversifying poker is not going to make the larger world a better place to live in. And we really need to get over the conceit that it somehow will.

Thank Jeebus It Wasn't Hold'em

2010-06-19T00:27:00.005-04:00

PLO.

My hand: 8754.

Board: AAQQ8.

I won the pot after it got checked down four wide after the flop.

They Don't Have Respirators, But They've Got Hookers

2010-06-16T15:44:00.003-04:00

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why BP is in charge of the cleanup operation.

World Snooze of Poker

2010-06-15T01:28:00.001-04:00

Bill Rini often says things better than I ever could.

Bring Back Spread Limit

2010-06-14T23:18:00.005-04:00

I've said before that I don't understand what PokerStars is trying to accomplish here.

PL-preflop/NL-postflop is silly.

Anyway, it did get me thinking...if I were going to host a poker show where I stake a contestant with a $100,000 buy-in and let her keep anything she wins above that, what game would I spread?

Well, it wouldn't be NLHE, because the right strategy for most amateurs would be to play a Kill Phil kind of system rather than try to outplay five of the best players in the world.

And it wouldn't be PLHE, because pot-limit betting is too fucking complicated for the masses. Shit - most poker dealers can't keep it straight.

It wouldn't be FLHE, because there are no big moves to make the game exciting for the viewers at home.

So what about spread limit? It's easy to explain to the audience. With the proper structure, it allows for big late-street action, while putting a throttle on early-street shoving. It also takes away the big preflop three-bet that is ruining NLHE games.

For example, if the blinds are 200/400, you could make it a 4000/8000/16000/32000 spread-limit game (400 min on each street).

The dig against spread limit is that it often turns into a de facto limit game, where everyone bets and raises the max. But that happens because the spread is too small. When the spread is large enough, you'll see bet selection, at least from the more thoughtful players.

Beast of Bourdain

2010-06-13T03:21:00.004-04:00

I was browsing through the celebrity-picked playlists on Rhapsody and ran across one from the Travel Channel's enfant terrible Anthony Bourdain. I really don't know what to make of a playlist that includes The Cult's "She Sells Sanctuary", Manu Dibango's "Soul Makossa", Public Enemy's "Fight the Power", and William S. Burroughs' "The Last Words of Dutch Schultz (This is Insane)".

This isn't eclectic - this is all over the fucking map.

Limit Hold'em: When You're Dead, You're Dead

2010-06-13T02:24:00.008-04:00

Usually you shouldn't try to make good laydowns in Limit Hold'em.

Usually.

Six-handed. I'm on the button with 7c 5c.

Preflop: UTG and hijack limp in, cutoff folds, I call, SB raises, all call. Five see the flop.

Flop: As 7h 7d

SB (preflop raiser) bets, BB raises, UTG folds, hijack calls, I three-bet, SB calls, BB calls, hijack calls.

Turn: 6c

Checked to me, I bet, SB calls, BB check-raises, hijack folds, I fold, SB calls.

River: Qc

SB check, BB bets, SB calls.

BB shows 7s 6d. Hand history shows SB had Ad Qd.

I think this is a pretty easy laydown on the turn. SB has AA and/or BB has 76 or A7. There's no reason to hope that I'm not drawing stone cold dead.

More Stupid Stuff I Wonder About

2010-06-13T02:17:00.003-04:00

I'm sitting here listening to Jane Addiction's "Three Days" and wondering why it never seems to get on anyone's list of Greatest Rock Anthems or Greatest Rock Guitar Solos Of All Time.

Send Them the Bill

2010-06-12T18:35:00.003-04:00

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why BP is running the cleanup operation.

Obama's got his head up his ass. Or BP's ass. I'm not sure which at this point.

Stupid Things I Wonder About

2010-06-12T17:19:00.002-04:00

One of them is how the original Star Trek would have turned out if Jack Lord, who was reportedly offered the role, had wound up as Captain Kirk instead of William Shatner. Keeping in mind that we're talking about scores of 2 and 3.5 out of a possible 10, I think Shatner was the better actor, in part because he has a fine comedic touch that Lord lacked. Much of the attraction of the show came from those moments when Kirk, with a mischievous twinkle in his eye, would yank Spock's chain, or stir up something between Spock and McCoy. I don't think those kinds of moments could have happened with Lord.

Lord, however, might have made a terrific Spock, had his ego allowed him to take a supporting role.

Fortunately for all involved, Lord turned the offer down and went on two years later to start a 12-year run on Hawaii Five-O, a show that has held up remarkably well. Our local ABC affiliate shows it every morning at 9am.

Limit Hold'em: Total Domination

2010-06-12T01:02:00.003-04:00

I was railbirding a six-max $30/$60 when this came up:

Preflop: UTG [Kc Jd] raises, 2 folds, Button 3-bets, SB folds, BB calls, UTG calls.

Flop: 8s As Kd

BB checks, UTG checks, Button bets, BB calls, UTG calls.

Turn: 5d

BB checks, UTG checks, Button bets, BB folds, UTG calls.

River: Js

UTG checks, button bets, UTG check-raises, button calls.

Button shows Ah Ks.

UTG did pretty much everything wrong on this hand:

1. He shouldn't be playing KJo three off the button in a loose-aggressive game.

2. Versus a three-bet and a cold call preflop, he should consider releasing the hand right there.

3. He should check-fold this flop. Against two opponents willing to put in bonus bets preflop, he has to figure at least one of them as him dominated, if not totally crushed. He doesn't even have a spade.

4. It wasn't any more right to check-call the turn than the flop. It was, however, twice as expensive.

5. Despite making two pair on the river, there's no reason to think it will be best often enough to justify a check-raise, and certainly no reason to think button will fold a better hand at this point. It's limit - people don't lay down on the river just because a straight or flush is possible.

KJ is a really ugly hand in Limit Hold'em because so many playable hands dominate it (AK, AJ, KQ, plus AA-JJ). If you get action, before or on the flop, you're probably in trouble. KJ is the mother of all reverse implied odds nightmares - especially against better players, it tends to win small pots and lose big ones, and it's just about impossible to play out of position even if you flop top pair.

I also want to comment on BB's preflop cold call in the big blind. Terrible play in a four-bet game. If your hand is good enough to play for three bets out of position, it's good enough to play for four. So either four-bet or fold. As a bonus, four-betting will sometimes knock out the original raiser, especially in a six-max game where the opening raiser is often wandering in on light values.

Limit Hold'em: Don't Bluff Into Strength

2010-06-11T16:18:00.002-04:00

I think maybe this player was on tilt because of a previous hand, but you see bad, aggressive online players do this sort of thing all the time - i.e., try to bluff off an opponent who is playing her hand very strongly:

Six players. I'm SB with Ks 9h.

Preflop: four folds, I raise, BB calls.

Flop: Jh 7h Ts

I bet, BB calls.

Turn: [Jh 7h Ts] 8c

I bet, BB raises, I 3-bet, BB caps, I call.

River: [Jh 7h Ts 8c] Qc

I check, BB bets, I raise, BB 3-bets, I cap, BB calls.

BB mucks Kc 2h.

He should have given up when I get the flop, but it's inexcusable for him to continue after I three-bet the turn.

Limit Hold'em: Don't Make Good Laydowns

2010-06-10T22:49:00.004-04:00

Five players. I'm in the cutoff with Ks Kd.

Preflop: fold, I raise, button calls, SB calls, BB folds.

Flop: Ac Kc 2s

SB checks, I bet, both call.

Turn: [Ac Kc 2s] 6c.

SB checks, I bet, both call.

River: [Ac Kc 2s 6c] As.

SB checks, I bet, button raises, SB 3-bets, I call 2 bets, button caps, SB calls, I call.

Of course I'm beat. Surely someone has A6 or A2, maybe even AK. I must be an idiot to have called the three-bet on the river.

Or not.

Button shows 9c 7c, SB shows Qc 4c.

Whew.