…the end of man is to know

10. Sarah Palin has named her kids Bristol, Piper, Track, Willow, and Trig.

9. She has taken on corrupt Alaskan bureaucrats. She has angered Senator Ted Stevens and strongly supported her Lieutenant Governor’s bid to unseat 18-term congressman Don Young in the Republican Primary.

8. In light of McCain’s health problems: Sarah Palin runs marathons.

7. She is a moose hunter. Not a Bull-Moose hunter, but actual Moose. (Mooses? Meese? Moosen?)

6. Palin’s husband works as a commerical fisherman and is in a labor union…can’t much more blue-collar than that.

5. Palin’s husband is a champion snowmobile racer, winning the Tesoro Iron Dog, billed as the world’s longest snowmobile race, four times.

4. Her eldest son, Track, will be going to Iraq with the US Army next month, not unlike the other VP candidate

3. In 1984, Palin was named Miss Wasilla and runner-up as Miss Alaska.

2. Her youngest son, Trig, was born in April with Down’s Syndrome. Palin has made a point to talk about her son and her decision to not have an abortion despite knowing about Trig’s condition during pregnancy.

And….the best thing about Sarah Palin is:

Her parents were called this morning by their son-in-law to listen to the radio for a special announcement. They almost missed hearing about their daughter’s VP nomination because they were *drumroll* CARIBOU HUNTING.

Lest there be no doubt: the GOP has returned to the party of small government, increased transparency, and support the working-class!

McCAIN-PALIN 2008!

YES HE CAN! YES SHE CAN! YES THEY CAN!

In what is the most “No ‘Effing Way” of every “No ‘Effing Way” I have written, McCain has pulled a rabbit out of his hat. Everyone had Romney, Pawlenty, or Lieberman as the top 3 with Condi, Cantor, and Kay Bailey Hutchinson in the second tier. Instead, he completely hoodwinks the entire country and launches Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate.

I always thought she was a great pick, but her lack of media coverage and speculation made me think it wasn’t going to happen. Serious props to The Midnight Ride, who called Palin as a VP pick in late June. Also, Madison Classical Liberal talked about her in early July. Finally, Extremism in Defense of Liberty also called it in late June. I privately talked to Extremism, Midnight Ride, and The Silent Majority about it, but I didn’t have the onions. I was weak and didn’t want to the risk in formally endorsing her. I was wrong.

Palin is a TREMENDOUS pick for a ton of reasons, increasing in legitimacy:

1. She is a woman. There is no bigger middle finger to Obama’s “post-racial” campaign than putting a woman on the ticket. It’s hard to argue you have a monopoly on change when Palin is the first woman with a serious shot to be in the White House (no, Geraldine Ferraro does not count).

1A. Moreover, this could get the Hillary supporters. Clintonites have long argued that Obama and the media were sexist and unfairly cruel to Hillary. Now that Clinton is out of the race, female voters who want to fight sexism will be drawn to Palin. She has a son with Down’s Syndrome and is a former beauty queen. Palin is feminine and has definite appeal to disgruntled female voters looking for a role model.

1B. Palin is tough to beat in a debate. As someone who spent 5 years in speech and debate, I would dread going toe-to-toe with a female, especially an accomplished and intelligent one. It is hard to be a male and go offensive against a female. The fact of the matter is that anytime a guy gets aggressive, he runs the risk of being perceived as a know-it-all sexist pig. While Palin has to face the prospect of being seen as an icy bitch if she gets aggressive, this puts a huge burden on Biden in the VP debate.

1 C. Palin is EXTREMELY attractive. This is a stupid reason. Okay, it’s a really stupid reason. At the end of the day, thousands upon thousands of males will vote for “The Hot Chick”. I think it is exceedingly shallow to vote based on aesthetics, but if it means helping out the conservative movement, I won’t resist. Behold, the new White House Hottie:

2. Palin has real conservative credentials. Any Evangelicals who didn’t trust McCain, must vote GOP. Any small-government libertarians don’t have to waste a vote on Bob Barr. Palin took on the most corrupt state in the country, Alaska, at a time that what was really hard. Ted Stevens is terribly corrupt. The Murkowski family is a dynasty of corrupt, incompetent leaders. Palin has gotten rid of superfluous government expenditures and slashed the budget. She has sound energy policy and is the ultimate on how to reduce oil prices.

3. She balances out this ticket in a way that no other candidate could. Male-female. Old-young. Experienced-fresh. Senator-Governor. There is nothing “missing” from this ticket. There is no weak link that applies to both candidates. They have strengths which back up the other’s weaknesses. Even if Obama wants to hammer Palin on experience, it’s tough-sledding. Obama has 3.5 years of experience in the Senate and Palin as 1.5 years experience as Governor. That difference is relatively small. Also, Palin has been in the City Council from ‘92-’96 and served on Alaska’s Oil & Gas Commission, before resigning in protest of the lack of ethics. She is on the young side, but has achieved great things.

Perhaps Palin’s (and McCain’s) greatest achievement? Taking ALL of the wind out of Obama’s sails, bumping him from the top of the headlines and making this race even more competitive.

It’s baaaaack.

Useless News & World Distort has released its annual college rankings today. From the very top to the very bottom, all schools deeply care about how they are ranked. A simple move of 2 or 3 spots brings tears of pain or tears of joy. It has become the measuring stick for comparing schools. High-achieving students will decide which schools to apply to, and attend, based largely on the rankings. Without further ado, the top 25:

1. Harvard

2. Princeton

3. Yale

4. MIT & Stanford

6. Cal Tech & UPenn

8. Columbia, Duke, & UChicago

11. Dartmouth

12. Northwestern (w00t w00t!) & Wash U in St. Louis

14. Cornell

15. Johns Hopkins

16. Brown

17. Rice

18. Emory, Notre Dame, & Vanderbilt

21. UC-Berkeley

22. Carnegie Mellon

23. Georgetown & University of Virginia

25. UCLA

Here’s the USNWR formula (and my assessment of the quality of each factor):

25%: Peer Assessment

P.A. is the most weighted factor and asks universities officials to rank other schools on a scale from 1 to 5. How fitting that the dumbest metric has the most importance. If you ask Northwestern what it thinks about Wash U, it is in its best interest to give a very low score. There is no reason to help out the competition, right? Worse, since the schools are distributed randomly, Northwestern is more likely to judge Purdue, SW Missouri State, Bowdoin, and Berea. How in the world can anyone intelligently grade those schools? University officials deal with their own university and the immediate competition. Worse, scoring from 1 to 5 makes each point needlessly important. At what point does a a 3 become a 4? Small scales only serve to accentuate and exacerbate the most minute of differences. Small differences turn out huge on the assessment, but big differences can be muted if one school is a 3.6 and the other is a 4.4. I won’t even touch the hypocrisy of objectively rating schools with a measure as subjective as this. Is there a bell curve? Doubtful.

20% Retention

16% goes to 6-year graduation rate and 4% to freshman retention rate. I like the idea of schools graduating their students. However, 6 years is far too high. The issue is not how soon I can get out of school (students often co-op and take 5 years minimum), the issue is if I graduate with a good degree and great memories. Therefore, I reluctantly accept this metric, but would like to see more emphasis on freshman retention and less on graduation.

20% Faculty Resources (6% is percentage of classes with less than 20 students, 2% is pecentage of classes with more than 50 students, 7% is faculty pay, 3% is percentage of faculty with highest degree, 1% is student:faculty ratio, 1% is percent of faculty who are fulltime)

Again, this is a well-intended portion of the formula. Students to learn better in smaller class environments. Professors generally are better when they are well-paid, have the highest degree, and are fulltime. However, there are loads of exceptions. First, some classes shouldn’t be small. Intro to Microeconomics need not be a 15 person seminar. Intro to Sociology does not require constant class discussion. Moreover, most universities have discussion sections, which allow students to meet in 15-20 people groups to discuss course material with a Teacher’s Assistant.

Also, professors’ success is not always based on money, tenure, and degrees held. Good professors get paid more, not the other way around. Throwing money at faculty helps the rankings, but might build complacency. Some of the best professors I have had are not full-time. Some professors are visiting from another university or simply a guest lecturer. Spending a career in academia makes you an academic. Sometimes having a professor with very different life experiences and interpretation of course material can be extremely gratifying. That said, I again accept the USNWR’s need for uniformity.

15% Student Selectivity (7.5% ACT/SAT score of enrollees, 6% is the amount of students who graduated in the top 10% of their class, 1.5% is the acceptance rate)

This is the best metric in the whole damn rankings. Students with good grades and high standardized test scores make a university more challenging. A key part of college is learning from fellow classmates. Therefore, your potential classmates should be as hard-working, tracked by grades, and innately intelligent, tracked by test scores, as possible. Also, a low acceptance rate suggests that the college is highly sought after. Yes, SAT scores aren’t the be-all-and-end-all, top 10% of the class requires different levels of intellect depending on the high school attended, and some schools have high acceptance rates because they self-select (think: BYU only attracts mormon applicants). However, the biggest flaw in this part of the equation is that weighs too little. Smart kids create smart universities. Simple.

10% Financial Resources

This counts university spending per student on academic resources. It intentionally does not count sports and dorms. However, I think it should. A university that drops millions on the football team is offering a great service to the student body. During the fall, I have the opportunity and privilege of seeing my Northwestern Wildcats play Big 10 football. We aren’t the best, but we frequently get on television, draw big crowds, and play the best teams in the country. This is a tremendous asset, as it builds school spirit and provides great on-campus events. Homecoming just means a bit more when it is followed by a football game. Tailgates, pregame activities, postgame activities, and sports all have left an indellible mark on my college experience. Dorms also are important. I want to live in a well-maintained dorm with good facilities and large living space. Those who live in small quarters with leaky faucets struggle. College is a LIVING-learning environment. It’s unfortunate that USNWR forgets that most students live on the university.

5% Graduation rate performance

This one is by far the weirdest. It looks at the proportion of students receiving Pell grants and their test scores and predicts what the graduation rate should be. Whether or not, and by how much, a university outperforms/underperforms the “expectation” is this variable. It’s way complicated and I don’t like statistics with variables I don’t have access to. I like the thought process, because universities that take low-income, low-achievers and help them graduate should be rewarded. However, the low-income student who gets a Pell grant to go to Harvard is probably self-motivated enough to graduate, regardless of what the stats say.

5% Alumni giving rate

This one is by far the dumbest stat. The percentage of living alumni that give to the university is too manipulable. For example, Northwestern offers free events to graduating seniors in the week preceding commencement. However, you must donate $20.08 (creative, no?) to the alumni fund to get access. Formals, free beer, and trips to Six Flags cost well more than the donation, but it is NU’s way of gaming the system. It sets up the events at a huge loss to boost alumni giving rates and, maybe, to send seniors out on a high note. And I seriously doubt that the folks up in Evanston are the first ones to figure out how to game the system.

So there it all is. That’s the big, scary US News and World Report College ranking methodology. Let me lament on how sad of all of this. As a Northwestern Tour Guide, I waited on pins and needles for the rankings to come out. I desperately wanted to know how we stacked up and if we improved. I shouldn’t care, though. I should sell prospective students and their bankrolling parents on strong academics, numerous extra-curriculars, and a great living-learning environment. Unfortunately, I know that many on the tour are only visiting because they want to go to a top __ school. It’s horribly sad and reflects poorly on us. We are so status-driven that we are willing to let our college decisions be based on a shoddy formula. What university you attend can be one of the most important life decisions. It sets up your academic perspective, offers a wealth of experiences, fosters great friendships, and is the setting for countless mistakes that can only be made on a college campus.

To the fact that high school seniors will let a crappy news magazine dictate how they spend 4 years of the life, I respond, “NO ‘EFFING WAY”.

To the fact that USNWR has built a monopoly on understanding American universities, I find it to be Pragmatically Political (or Economic…but I’m not changing my user name for those bastards)

Mid-August is here. For most people that means enjoying the last few weeks of summer by hanging out at the beach. For those college students who aren’t on the trimester schedule, they are excited to get back to campus. For me, it means something very different.

FANTASY. SPORTS. OVERLOAD!!!!

For those who aren’t familiar, fantasy sports involve leagues of “teams” (usually 8-12 per league) which “draft” real-life players onto their rosters. How players perform in real-life is then super-imposed onto the fantasy teams. Fantasy teams face each other throughout that particular sport’s season, with playoffs at the end to determine the league champion. You can make trades with other teams to swap players, set a starting lineup (players not in your starting lineup don’t help your team’s performance), and add/drop players. In many ways, joining a fantasy league is very similar to being a general manager of a real-life team.

Mid-August is the best because the two biggest fantasy sports collide: baseball and football. Some play fantasy hockey, basketball, golf, auto racing etc. But baseball and football are far and away the most popular.  I currently have 3 baseball teams and all are in first or second place as the season winds down. The trading deadline (at which no point I can no longer swap players with other teams in the league) either just passed or will in the next few days. This is my last chance to make final roster moves to ready my time for the playoffs.

Fantasy football is also on the horizon. With the “real” season starting in 2 weeks, I am in the midst of the annual draft (where teams pick the players they want on their team) season. I have spent hours thinking, researching, and analyzing which players will overachieve and who will disappoint.

So my hunch is that people who read this are thinking, “So this supposed political junkie is talking about fantasy sports? How unrelated! This kid must have really needed a topic and went to his last resort”. You would largely be correct. However, fantasy sports does give a unique look at how we think and interact.

One of my baseball leagues is with a group of friends back from New Jersey. We cycle some new people in every year, but we have had 6 people stick together for 6 years. From my freshman year in high school to what will be my junior year in college, we have stuck together. With team owners in Virginia, Delaware, Maryland, Illinois, and New Jersey, we all stick together through fantasy sports. Though I have lost contact with many of my high school friends, my fantasy competition remains close. When we all get together, we still talk about who won what league in 2004 and what dumb moves we have made in years past. But there is that bond. It’s a common experience that isn’t based on anything real. Barry Bonds never cared that he was on my fantasy team and that I needed him to perform. Tom Brady never knew that I was facing him in the playoffs and I was praying he would have a bad game. Fantasy gamers create their own reality out of reality.

On the flip side, I care about the athletes to the extent that they can help my team win. I have spent many Thursday nights rooting like hell for a little-known pitcher on an otherwise irrelevant team. I track player’s careers and obsess over any trends I can pick up. But if they are off my roster, I don’t care. Some poor 24 year old has a career-ending injury and I curse him for ruining my team.  I don’t care about him for his well-being. It doesn’t matter that his livelihood and passion have been taken away. It matters that now I have to scramble for a substitute. It’s a brutish, calculated worldview. But is it any different than how we treat most strangers? I don’t pretend to own Derrick the barista, but if he misses his shift at Starbucks to attend his mother’s funeral, I still am frustrated by the long line. Most people in this world serves us somehow. Fantasy sports simply codify that fact.

But I know that isn’t true. With the exception of unusually loud football stadiums and expert hecklers, fans don’t impact the game. There’s nothing I can do in Evanston, Illinois to support the New York Giants if they are playing in Buffalo. But I watch and I root. In some ways, fantasy sports forge a stronger bond than regular fandom. I selected my fantasy players and believe(d) in them. I root for the Giants, Giants, and Knicks because my dad told me to. I now casually support the Cubs because they happen to be the baseball team near my university. The only problem with fantasy is time. Fantasy sports leagues last one season. So while this year I beg and plead Chase Utley to dominate, but hope he breaks his leg next year if he is on another roster. Long-term bonds rarely exist. It’s fleeting greatness. Winning a league this year doesn’t mean a thing next year because the teams will be all scrambled.

But that’s life. Sometimes you do things because your father told you that the guys in blue shirts are good and the guys in gray shirts are evil (this was how my father first explained the Giants-Cowboys rivalry). Sometimes you want people to succeed for wholly selfish reasons. Sometimes you don’t know why you do it. And when you find yourself staying up until 2 AM to wait for that damn Seattle-Los Angeles game to end so you can record all the stats, you understand it. You do it because you want to win. You want to have your knowledge, skill, and effort rewarded, even in the most intangible of way. And if Chase Utley can hit enough home runs in the next 6 weeks, I will gain my fantasy sports immortality…until next season.

We are counting down to the Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado here at blogivists. The coronation of Barack Obama as the savior of humanity is nearly complete. I’m not a huge fan of the Democrats, but I don’t wrecklessly bash them, either. However, I will put some fun facts up.

1. Kwame Kilpatrick will be attending the convention. In case you were curious, Mr. Kilpatrick is the disgraced mayor of Detroit. Aside from facing previous scandals, he most recently was thrown in jail for violating his probation after assaulting a policeman. The cop’s offense? He was serving a subpoena to one of Kilpatrick’s “friends”.

I know you think Kwame’s mother must be very proud of her baby boy, right? Well, the voters in the Detroit area thought so highly of her as to re-nominate her as the Democratic nominee for Michigan’s 13th congressional district.

Even the Democratic Wizard of Oz, the Daily Kos, has asked Kilpatrick not to attend.

If you were concerned about Democrats doing the Larry Craig tap dance, just do the Kilpatrick shove, find an attractive mater and tell him/her that John Edwards says “help is on the way”.

2. The Democrats have no idea what to do with Hillary Clinton. The woman whose husband has been the face of the party for almost two decades and nearly won the nomination is stuck in purgatory. The party needs to satisfy Clintonites and win them over. However, this convention must be about Barack Obama. They have settled on letting her speak on Tuesday night. Traditionally, Monday goes to someone cool, Tuesday goes to a rising star, Wednesday to the VP, and Thursday to the candidate. The Dems made the wise move of giving Hillary her time in the sun on Tuesday night. One small hitch: SHE WILL NOT BE KEYNOTING! Hillary is being upstaged by *drum roll* Mark Warner. Way to go, DNC. You found a way to make a compromise that ticks off both sides.

3. While Hillary will be speaking Tuesday night, Monday night’s keynote will be Michelle Obama. I may be opposed to Michelle more than most, but this is an unfathomably bad idea. Her favorable-unfavorable is 30-35! When more people think negatively than positively about you, it’s unfortunate. When you are married to a presidential candidate and speaking in front of tens of millions, it’s a trainwreck.

Some of the things I hope Michelle brings up during her DNC speech:

A.

B. Her senior thesis at Princeton ranges from scary to racist. Some of the highlights (and these are quotes)

i. “…I find myself striving for many of the same goals as my White classmates - acceptance to a prestigious graduate school or a high-paying position in a successful corporation” - since when is being successful a “White” goal?

ii. “Predominately White universities like Princeton are socially and academically designed to cater to the needs of the White students comprising the bulk of their enrollments,” - aside from capitalizing “white”, why is offering unparalleled opportunities a “White” thing and why is it bad? Princeton doesn’t force anyone to take racist jobs as capitalist pigs.

iii. “My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my ‘Blackness’ than ever before” - this coming from the wife of the first post-racial candidate? Are you ‘effing kidding me? NO. ‘EFFING. WAY.

C. “The truth is most Americans don’t want much. Folks don’t want the whole pie. Most Americans feel blessed to thrive a little bit — but that’s out of reach for them.” - Michelle Obama advocates austerity, even when it isn’t necessary. Way to boost morale. I have HOPE that Barack can bring CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN. I BELIEVE that he will only give me a little bit, but won’t let me get the whole pie.

Michelle Obama is so scary that Democrats have created the… Michelle Obama Truth Squad. Funny, I don’t remember Laura Bush ever getting a Truth Squad.

4. The actual convention itself redefines what it means to be liberal. Here are some facts:

A. The convention will have 800 people in a trash brigade to make sure all garbage is disposed of properly (no word on whether or not Obama’s speeches count as “recyclable trash”)

B. The host committee lamented its inability to find 15,000 fanny packs for volunteers. And the packs have to be made in the USA. By unionized labor. And out of organic cotton.

C. All food served is highly regulated. Fried food will not be allowed. Each meal must include at least three of these colors: red, green, yellow, blue/purple, and white. 70% of ingredients must be grown organically and/or locally.

D. Those sinning, conservative, greedy capitalists at Coors finally have come to reason - and will donate biofuel made from beer waste. This one ticks me off the most, because every college student knows: there’s no such thing as “beer waste”. Wasting beer is downright un-American!

Beer waste? Republicans don’t believe in beer waste. They believe in beer-amids!

E. The DNC is actually proud of their insanity and showcases its arrogance here.

So there it is. The Democratic National Convention is simply unbelievable. It is over-the-top liberal and oppressive in its inner-workings.

The only way it will win voters is if this country is farther to the left than I can possibly imagine. Please let it NOT be pragmatically political.

No ‘Effing Way is back. Considering it took last week off, it’s hungry. But it isn’t any hungrier than 33 year-old Tremayne Durham was!

Mr. Durham is a New Yorker who traveled to Oregon to settle a matter. Durham purchased an ice cream truck for $18,000, and then decided he didn’t want to be an ice cream man. So the BadHumor Man was denied his request to return the truck for a refund. He then killed a former employee of the truck company.

In exchange for a guilty plea, yielding a life sentence with a chance for parole after 30 years, Durham wanted a break from jail food. So he got KFC fried chicken, Popeye’s fried chicken, mashed potatoes, cole slaw, carrot cake, and ice cream last month. He now receives his second (and final) feast, with an Italian theme: calzones, lasagna, pizza, and ice cream.

As with every N.E.G., here are some thoughts:

1. How crappy is your lawyer that this is the best you can do? You bypass a trial, ensuring at minimum 30 years in the slammer, to get two dinners? Hell, the dinners aren’t even all that nice. Fast food fried chicken and sides are not exactly the classiest options. Hell, I’d sooner have a chipotle burrito with chips and guacamole. Whatever happened to the good ol’ days of Prime Rib or Surf and Turf?

2. Plea bargaining:good politics and bad policy. The obvious benefits are a guarenteed conviction and it saves the time and money of a trial (and the inevitable appeal). The clear cost is that it doesn’t provide a “fair” trial or allow prosecutors to seek maximum punishments. I won’t pretend to offer any groundbreaking analysis, but I will pose this question: can you put a price tag on justice?

We refuse to negotiate with terrorists under any circumstances, but gladly cave to any alleged criminal who is willing to take a lesser sentence. Can a country which claims to have the moral highground on everything legitimately not pursue justice?

I say yes. I put my faith in District Attorneys to determine if a plea bargain is appropriate. Also, I’m relatively at peace with putting convicts in the Witness Protection Program if they testify against other criminals. It’s more important that kingpins are behind bars than it is that their mid-level henchmen get their just desserts.

That’s just me being Pragmatically Political.

Have a good weekend and be sure to check out Telemundo, MSNBC, CNBC, NBC, and possibly C-SPAN for all your Olympic coverage!

As someone who legally cannot consume alcohol, this post is a bit of my league (or age-bracket). Regardless, I found this morning’s Red Eye cover story to unusually shocking. Apparently, some are cracking down on mixed drinks that contain more than the “standard 1.5 oz” of liquor. Critics, also known as bar owners and prohibitionists, say that bartenders too frequently don’t use jiggers to measure out alcohol. Instead, they “free pour” and use their own experience and intuition. This trend decentralizes the drink-making process, letting bartenders pour customers more than the allotted amount. The concerns of over-pouring are two-fold: money and well-being. Bar owners are terrified that bartenders who top you off are rapidly depleting inventory. Social welfare experts are more concerned that those who receive strong drinks are getting too drunk.

To this, I have three responses/thoughts:

1. Bar owners are frightened that they can’t keep track of inventory? Bartenders work for tips, not for the measly wages they get from the bar. So it is in their best interest to keep customers happy. That’s why frequent, high-tipping customers often get a little extra or will sneak a drink on the house. So are they surprised by this? No, it’s part of the business. When you stop charging $10 for some soda and cheap gin, I (or my legal counterpart) will sympathize. Clubs and bars put huge markup on alcohol, so don’t expect public support that you are running out of Skol faster than you thought.

2. Prohibitionists are not-so-cleverly masking their actual argument. By pretending to be concerned about drinkers’ welfare, they hide their bold opposition to the notion of drinking. People don’t go into a night saying, “I must have 8 drinks tonight or my life will be incomplete”. They say, “I want to get a little intoxicated and enjoy myself”. If I (read: legal counterpart) am 3 drinks in and feel drunk, then I will stop. If I am 9 drinks in and hardly feel the effects, I might go in for another. All things (such as sleep, food, and tolerance) held equal, upping alcohol content will decrease total consumption. That’s why beer is served in 12 oz. bottles and liquor is served in 1.5 oz shots. Surely people of all sobrieties can recognize the difference.To simplify the social reasons for drinking down to alcohol per glass completely misses the point. Reactionaries have turned the ideological and rhetorical equivalent of Malibu into Everclear.

3. Do we have nothing better to do with our time than study this nonsense? People get all dressed up, wait on line for hours, and go to bars/clubs for the experience, NOT because they like dropping $15 to buy the cute girl in the black dress a cosmopolitan. I’m all for pragmatism, but the whole point of a bar is to not appear pragmatic. Bar goers enjoy not worrying about things like how exact the jigger’s measurements are. A crackdown on free-pouring dehumanizes the process and destroys what it means to go to a bar. Bars would generate more attendance (and profits) if they let this crap go.

Honestly, the social police is seriously killing my buzz.

Given this post’s title, I expect lots of PragmaticallyPolitical “virgins” who are disappointed to see such a bland blog. Please forgive my shameless attempt to fuse fun and web traffic, economics with pornography.

This post is mainly to carry the message from an article on wired.com: Sex isn’t selling! Sales are down .3% and rentals are down 10-15%. Conventional wisdom always held that in a down-trodden economy, invest in illicit smokables, drinkables, and watchables.  From 2000-2002, the Standard & Poor’s Casinos and Gaming index grew 115% and the S&P 500-stock index fell 47%.  The reason is that people who are struggling, will continue to spend money on booze, cigarettes, and pornography. No way to kill the pain of unemployment like lighting up, knocking back a couple, and …well, you know. Also, these industries are so highly regulated that entry is nearly impossible. While regulation is the reason alcohol is so damn expensive, it also insulates brewers and distillers from competition. With artificial protection, there is no wonder why these companies do so well while everyone else struggles.

Charles Norton famously developed the Vice Fund in late 2002, which solely invests in gaming, alcohol, tobacco, and brewer/vintner companies. The fund has fallen almost 9% YTD, but otherwise has had good returns over the past few years. I say let hippies and philanthropists invest in “Green” and “Humanitarian” funds, I’d have much more fun knowing that buying some 6-packs and playing slots is boosting my portfolio.

Yet, there is this odd case of pornography, which hasn’t benefited from our economic woes. My hunch is that sales and rentals are falling off because the government can no longer protect the industry. If a company goes online, and especially if it isn’t attempting to turn a profit,  there are no barriers to entry. As myriad celebrities have proven, any idiot with a video tape and a computer can distribute a sex tape. The government is, thankfully, powerless to stop the free market.

The other cause of hard times for the adult film industry is pirating. Even those movies which are professionally produced and distributed can be had for free. Various torrent websites allow for illegal downloading of anything from Tommy Lee’s new CD to Tommy Lee’s sex tape. Therefore, there is little reason for anyone with high-speed internet access and a desire for law-breaking to go to a store and buy a DVD.

While the internet has made nearly every industry (except for USPS) harder, better, faster, stronger, adult films have seen a skyrocket in supply and a decreased demand. All of this spells doom for our video vixens.

Though I adamantly and truthfully deny any illegal behavior, I don’t think it is immoral, unimportant, or even childish to worry that the formal viewing of the world’s oldest profession may be going out of style.

I spent the weekend down at Americans for Prosperity’s Defending the American Dream conference down in Austin, TX. The weekend served as a high-quality sounding board for free-marketeers. Some of the highlights:

The Ron Paul people are intensely angry with the Republican Party. Apparently, delegates for Rep. Paul at the TX GOP Convention were shouted down, insulted, and treated like second-class Republicans. They insist that they did not leave the Republican Party. Instead, the GOP left them. This argument certainly carries a great deal of weight, given that spending has greatly increased and our foreign policy has become more interventionist. In any event, the divide between libertarian conservatives and the party-line was noticeable and tense.

Bob Novak spoke very well and intelligently described the political landscape. When I met him, he looked disheveled and had a sizable stain on the vest of his 3-piece suit. After telling him that I attend Northwestern University, he semi-seriously sneered and told that he is an Illini (University of Illinois alum). Good guy, though.

Barry Goldwater Jr. gave a solid speech. He keynoted and delivered surprisingly funny jokes. I got a chance to meet him and he didn’t disappoint. He was the only speaker I met who wanted to shake my hand for the photo. He also was having problems with his glasses during an interview. One of the staffers ran and grabbed him an extra pair. By fate (or intent), the new pair was identical to the classic black, thick glasses of Goldwater’s more famous father. Unfortunately, I lacked the onions to ask Mr. Goldwater Jr. to wear the black glasses in my photo-op.

Can you tell the difference?

I also had the opportunity to track down Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr as he checked into the hotel. After chasing him to the elevator, I was able to talk to him briefly. He was dressed in cowboy boots, stylish acid-washed jeans, and a white button-down shirt with black embroidery over the left-breast. Barr also felt it necessary to have roughly 4 of his buttons undone, to show off his plain white t underneath. AFter taking photos, he got very solemn and said, “Now I want to you boys something (I was with fellow Sam Adams Alliance interns at the time) that Charlton Heston told me…” At this point, I was really excited. Bob Barr was going to impart wisdom from Mr. NRA! “Never take photos with two cameras at the same time. Because the flash. The flash. The flash can alter the photos.” So that was Bob Barr. He gave us some b.s. advice about photo-taking. On the bright side, he shook all of our hands and thanked us for our support.

For those who haven’t forgotten that I doubt I will vote for Barr in November, take solace in knowing that I didn’t lie. I said “Representative Barr! Rep. Barr. I’m a big fan and wish you the best of luck in November”. Both of those things are true. I like most of his policies and do hope he does well. I just hope that he doesn’t hijack the Libertarian/libertarian movement and/or deliver Obama the White House.

However, if McCain appears even more unelectable and continues to prove his economic ignorance, I might end up voting for the hippest 59 year-old guy I will ever meet. And then fly in the face of a past blog post.

Is it pragmatic? I’d like to think so.

Readers, I have a secret. A deep, dark secret. One that is so telling, it could ruin my legitimacy as a politico. I, Pragmatically Political, am a huge sports fan. I will watch and analyze virtually any competitive activity. I specialize in baseball, basketball, football, and college. I’d be lying if I didn’t say Northwestern’s Big 10 membership was a monster draw for me. Yesterday was to be the sports fans’ dream. And so begins today’s tale.

I had the best laid plans. After work, I was to buy the PS2 version of NCAA ‘09 and watch the all-Star game while testing out the new game. Instead, what ensued was a 7 hour marathon of stress, disappointment, and frustration.

I’m reasonably sure that I’m the only video gamer who still plays on a PlayStation2. I’m too cheap, lazy, and indecisive to decide if I want a PS3 or an XBOX360 (suggestions welcome!). The prices keep falling, the bugs are being removed, and I have to assume that eventually (read: by Christmas 2013) one system will reign supreme. Until then, I’m playing a game with limited graphics and fewer features without online capability and on a 17 inch used TV that I bought off a guy for $20. The game itself is good, but not great. The gameplay is still smooth, but EA Sports added very few new features/options to the PS2 version. I think I’m finally becoming tired with the series that has defined my childhood/adolescence/young adulthood.

I started my Dynasty mode as my beloved Northwestern Wildcats and haven’t won my first 3 matchups, losing to the likes of football lightweights Syracuse, Duke, and Southern Illinois. In short, EA made this year’s version ridiculously difficult. Any pass that isn’t directed to a receiver who is WIDE open is an interception. I threw 8 interceptions on my first 11 pass attempts against Syracuse. Since I prefer to play on Heisman (the hardest difficulty setting), I will pretend that last night never happened and start a new dynasty tonight on All-American (the 2nd hardest setting). In short, I feel emasculated, embarrassed, and humbled. Machine: 1, Man: 0.

When I wasn’t embarrassing myself and my revered Northwestern Wildcats, I figured I could enjoy the All-Star game. Being on Central time, the game started an hour earlier than I’m used to, so I hoped to catch up on some sleep. Somehow the sports deities thought it would be funny to have the game last until nearly 2 AM EST. Each team blew huge opportunities to take the lead/win it outright. Timely defense, base-running blunders, and clutch pitching were the order of the night (and early morning). The clear dud was Florida 2nd baseman Dan Uggla. This all-star grounded into an inning-ending double play with runners at 1st and 3rd in the top of the 10th inning. He then made two consecutive errors to put runners at 1st and 3rd for the AL in the bottom of the inning…he was saved by solid defense and timely pitching from Aaron Cook. In the top of the 12th, Uggla struck out with the bases loaded and one out. A simple sacrifice fly would have given the NL the lead, but Uggla failed again.

When all was said and done, this was Dan Uggla’s night: 0 for 4 with 3 strikeouts and 6 men left on base. He also had THREE errors. Congratulations Dan Uggla, you have now become the focus of a witch hunt for fans of every NL team which thinks it has a chance to get to the World Series. Dan Uggla, meet Steve Bartman.

So that was my night. I sucked at playing an inferior game on an inferior system. Then I cost myself 2-3 hours of sleep staying up all night to watch the NL suck it up.

In case you were curious, the only player on an all-Star roster to not play was Tim Lincecum of my beloved San Francisco Giants. This stud pitcher was not available because he was hospitalized with flu-like symptoms. In a game which showcases the best of the best, I didn’t get a chance to see my favorite baseball player. Awesome. As bad as my day was, I can’t imagine it being much worse than having the undignified title as the only player to not appear in what might be the best all-star game of all-time.

I’ll try to keep up my blogging for the remainder of the week, but I leave for Austin, TX tomorrow. I’ll be at the Americans for Prosperity Conference. In the meantime, Go U Northwestern and Hook ‘Em Horns!