This is an excerpt from her press release:

"The 10th amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that the powers not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states … or to the people. But the Constitution gives Congress broad power to regulate activities that have an effect on interstate commerce. Congress has used this authority to regulate many aspects of American life, from labor relations to education to health care to agricultural production. Since virtually every aspect of the heath care system has an effect on interstate commerce, the power of Congress to regulate health care is essentially unlimited."

The commerce clause states that:

[The Congress shall have power] To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes

That this has been turned into "the power of Congress to regulate health care is essentially unlimited," is utterly disgusting to the spirit of this nation. I understand that this clause had already been warped by decades of Supreme Court decisions. But, her comment still makes me want to vomit.

Incredible athlete. Probably one of the top physical specimens in history.

However, I am amazed that this one detail doesn't get more attention. Bolt is 6'5". In racing terms, he's a giant. Michael Johnson (6'1") and Tyson Gay (5'11") - two others past and present whose times Bolt's are often compared to - are considerably shorter. Although I was not able to find any specific measurements, it visually appears that Bolt's legs are even disproportionately longer than his competition's.

The net effect is that when Bolt set his current world record of 9.58 in the 100M, I counted him at 41 steps. By comparison, Gay was at 46.5 steps when he crossed the finish line second. Being able to take more than 10 percent fewer steps is a HUGE advantage, likely insurmountable. Comparatively, Gay finished 40 steps well before Bolt ever crossed the finish line. In Bolt's 14.36 run at 150M, which I consider to be his most impressive performance, I counted him at roughly 60 steps for the entire race. Given that his strides per unit of time still trails that of many of his competitors, it is very likely that he will continue to shave time off his records.

Another consideration that is that Michael Johnson set his world record time in the 400M at the age of 32. Bolt will have nearly a decade of good running to best 19 seconds at the 200M, which I expect him to do.

Did not attend Origins 2008, wasn't in the mood at the time (which is saying something since Origins is my idea of heaven on earth).



Six qualifying categories this year:
US
1910
Mega
Europe
Marklin
Nordic/Swiss

Finished first in US, 1910, and Mega on first attempt, didn't finish first in any other of the three maps at first, spawning the "Jerry can only win on US map" mantra that lasts throughout the con. Second in Europe first attempt, 1st on second attempt. Second in Marklin first time (lost to Teagan), dead last with a score of 26 (-34 net in tickets) second time. Amazingly, this beats my train wreck of a Marklin game from two years ago. Three years after being one of the first to purchase Marklin, I still can't figure out how to win the damn thing.** Later, when I ask what board the playoffs will be, Cheryl jokes that they decided to make the semi-finals Marklin. Haha, nice try. Second in Nordic my first two attempts, read up on it later that night, finished 1st on third attempt but versus two newbies. Qualified first overall with five 1sts and a 2nd. Dan is 2nd (I believe on only four or five qualifying games, an impressive accomplishment), I believe Colleen 3rd.

One qualifying game on the US map was against David Platnick, who starts with an early "so you have to take him (pointing at me) down because of blah, blah, blah" comment, which drives me nuts. Dude, this ain't Puerto Rico. I get some degree of satisfaction when near the end; he plays his random six (purple) on Winnipeg-Sault St Marie. This forces me to play my random six (black) on Los Angeles-El Paso. This conveniently blocks the six black he is holding in his hand as well as two of his tickets, knocking him out of first and way into last. In hindsight, I probably WOULD have played LA-EP anyway had he put his purple on Duluth-Toronto, but he literally forced me into it. Turns out he could have played LA-EP one turn earlier...but then I could have as well still beating him by a turn. So, it all turned out to be a wash.

A high qualifying position turns out to be useful as the top five seeds automatically get to go first in the first round of playoff games. Five tables, regular US map, 4er. Cheryl, Jeanette, Zach fill my table. Zach is sitting to my right, so I do not ask for random seating as the other two are mighty experienced (Cheryl won last year and has frequently been in the finals, Jeanette was in the finals last year as well). This is a tough, tough game, by far the hardest of con for me. I use my trains to keep track of colors as they go by, Jeanette jokes that I’m making gang signs. Heh. I end up 1st, Zach 2nd. I don't recall my exact tickets, but LA to Miami via the green-black-red path is what I built (then up to Seattle). Grabbed Houston-NO early and locked those three colors the rest of the game. I ended the game, 140ish, large lead. But, one or two things fall apart and I would have been in big trouble.

They did an interesting thing this year with the format. The five who finished 1st in the opening round faced off in one table, the five who finished 2nd faced off at the other semifinal. Three players from the first table and two players from the second table advance to the final table. Requiring a first place finish to advance promotes risky play (the "I either finish first or last" strategy) so this is a better gauge of skill.

Semifinal is 5er Europe. Uh oh. Opening ticket is Edinburgh to Athina, so my plan is to just connect it and two more of my small tickets (Brest, Paris, and Wein were some of my cities), build a lot of the four and six routes to end fast and finish 2nd. I go first again, Michael, (forgot), Bruce, Katie sit around me. Locomotives are thin in my draw, and I eventually have to give up on the six-route ferry. Bruce gets up there in tickets, so I take the green Sochi route at the Eastern end to mess with him (turns out to be my only pure reactive block of the entire weekend). Michael blocks me at one point to break up my longest train, but I think that hurt him more than helped him. I end the game, Bruce 1st (lots of completed tickets), me 2nd, Katie 3rd with 106 to Michael's 104. Next morning, Michael mentions that he can finish 3rd if he changed a play. I love opponents who are still thinking about the game after it finishes. His three kids are well trained and can have a massive presence in future game cons if they wish. Hope to see his family next time.

Final table is Mega, 5er, one of my favorites. (I mention to Jeff and Trella afterwards that Big Cities is the most skill-dependent variation and encourage them to incorporate it next year.) Bruce, Katie, and I are joined by Dan and Lynn. I ask for random seating. I figure Dan's a ringer because he's been so quiet the whole time and finished 1st in nearly all his games. I get to go first again by virtue of my top qualifying position. This pretty much guarantees I will be the one to end the game again, based on my play style. Lynn, Dan, Bruce, Katie is the turn order.

Opening hand is:
(20) Vancouver - Montreal
(19) Los Angeles - Miami
(11) Portland - Phoenix
(11) Salt Lake City - Chicago
(09) Chicago - Santa Fe

The two Chicago tickets have strong synergy (just 10.5 turns to complete both for 40 points), thus they form the base of my position. Extending to Portland and Phoenix is attractive after that at 5.5 turns for an additional 30 points. After that, keeping both long tickets is not wise, so I toss out LA-Miami since Miami is just too far from anything else I have. Vancouver-Montreal was an aggressive keep at 8.5 turns for 33 points. But, I made a judgment call that it is superior to trying to draw more tickets (only LA-Chi, Portland-Pitts, or Denver-Pitts would have been materially better than Vancouver-Montreal).

After keeping four tickets, my initial vital paths are:
Montreal - Toronto
Toronto - Chicago
Chicago - Omaha
Omaha - Denver
Santa Fe - Phoenix
Seattle - Portland
Vancouver - Seattle

These vital paths contain four blues, four purples, four whites, and eight colorless. So, one attractive thing about my position is that I have no vital colors. However, I have a strong interest in playing Portland-Salt Lake City (otherwise I would be forced to play from Seattle-Helena, which is a much more popular path), so I key on blues. [*Denver-Santa Fe and Denver-Salt Lake City are not vital paths because I only need one or the other. Since I also wanted to keep a continuous train and cut through LA, Denver-Phoenix could have sufficed as well.] Blue was a bitch to get all game. Bruce and Katie drop Montreal-NY and Atlanta-Miami early, soaking up eight blues. I think I have just ONE blue by the time the deck shuffles first time. Uh oh. Fortunately, no one else takes any of my paths (though Lynn and I do a little dance with the Van-Sea-Port connections). Bruce cuts through the north, Katie the far south, and Dan via the StL-KC line. Second time through the deck though, people lay off the blue and I am able to build up a hand of them.

In the end, I take all of my vital paths, Denver-Santa Fe, cut through LA then up to SLC, and put my extra six at Seattle-Helena (using four wilds), end the game, and conclude with Montreal-Boston for a train of 43, winning longest train. I think I finish at 136 to Lynn's 124, so it was close. I win the 2009 title, adding it to the 2005 title, and decide to retire from this game on top. [Ha, take that Brett Favre!]

Dan said my path was predictable and easy to block. I agreed with him at the time as I didn’t want to make a fuss. While it was certainly predictable, it is harder to block than it looks. I was able to complete six of my vital paths very early. And most of my paths in the west were optional; I could just as easily have used other routes. About the only thing anyone could have done to mess with me was take blues. In my experience, ‘color blocking’ is not a strategy I see employed by many other players at cons. [Cheryl does it, which is why I avoid sitting to her left.]

I'll be at the Board Game room upstairs for next year, but I'll drop down to visit once in a while during the 2010 con. Thanks to the Puffing Billy group for running yet another fantastic tournament!

**At one point in the 'bad' Marklin game, Child Orsatz (children under 10 are not given names on their badges so that strangers will not be able to call them by name), looks at one of my plays and says (loudly) "Why'd you do THAT? That guy has nowhere to go!" Joe & Cheryl's six-year-old daughter. Analyzed/criticized my play. Correctly. Bad me.

Four qualifying categories (regular US, Europe, 1910, Marklin). Four firsts (218 on Marklin), one dead last (35 on Marklin after accruing -57 in tickets). First to run out of trains in all five games.

I have no idea what it takes to win Marklin consistently. Seems random to me.

I keep myself reasonably updated on scientific news. I watched, and thoroughly enjoyed, An Inconvenient Truth (2006). At the very least, it greatly increased my level of respect for Al Gore.

However, something about the movie always bugged me. Basically, I came away from the movie thinking that his most important chart (the one of carbon dioxide levels and temperature over the last several millenniums) DISPROVED global warming. That chart mostly illustrated two things. First, the level of CO2 is highly correlated to average surface temperature. Fine. But, there was no definitive proof in the movie that it was a causal relationship rather than just mere correlation. Second, and this is the part I don't get, why does no one seem to point out that the Earth was much, much warmer during several periods on the chart?? We're still here. Polar bears are still here (though they are very tired). It also appeared that there were other times when the temperature was RISING faster as well. The bottom line is that I came away from the movie thinking that man's influence on Earth's temperature was negligible. And, even if it were not, the Earth will survive our influence relatively unscathed. [Whether or not WE survive might be another matter.]

www.petitionproject.org. 30K Scientists (9K with PhDs) have signed a petition asking our government not to enter the U.S. into any international emissions treaties and more or less debunking global warming.

In any event, we have much, much more serious environmental problems. For one thing, many fish stocks have been fished to less than 10 percent of their original biomass.

For another, (I saw in a black & white photo that) elephant seals were once so large that a dead one lying on its side was TALLER THAN the big dudes that shot it and the big hats on top of their heads. By my very rough estimates, the largest elephant seals alive today are about a third the size of those in the pictures I saw. Think about that. An analogous situation would be for aliens to come to Earth and slaughter the largest humans they find for sport until, 50 years later, the largest 'healthy' humans were about 90 pounds. Not cool.

Seriously, what the hell is wrong with this country (and the people in it)? One and a half BILLION???

The regular flu kills about 4,000 'healthy' people PER YEAR. I'm willing to bet $10,000 right here that swine flu doesn't kill 4,000 in the US (with or without intervention) in the next ten years. Heck, I'm willing to bet it doesn't kill 400.

The last major flu panic was in 1976. The flu killed like two people. Twenty five people died from the vaccine that the government came out with to combat that 'epidemic.' Yes, I understand that presumes that the vaccine didn't in fact save hundreds or thousands of lives that might otherwise have been lost without the vaccine. But, it doesn't look like most people thought the vaccine was responsible for saving many lives. Oh, and the only two senators in Congress that voted against the vaccination program in 1976 were (drum roll) doctors. Why, oh why, are we listening to politicians rather than doctors on national health issues??

Never forget that the number one killer of people under 45 (by an ENORMOUS margin) is car-related accidents. If you don't die or suffer a serious injury from a car accident during your lifetime, the overwhelming probability is that you'll be old when you die.

Now everyone just chill and stop telling me to wear those ridiculous (and thoroughly ineffective unless you are already sick and want to keep from spreading it to someone else) face masks. Just don't run me over with your car and I'll be fine.

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/11637107

This story talks about how the debut game for the new Yankees stadium had an unusually silent crowd. I commented last May that Ohio State had effectively priced out its rowdiest fans (the students) and games are now attended by a far older, and subdued, crowd.

The ESPN article from a year ago mentioned that this does not happen as much in LA (where lots of people are rich). And you wouldn't have thought that this could happen in NY either. But, I guess that's the downturn in the financial sector taking its toll.

This new attempt at the 'god of love exiled to earth' dramady is better cast [Bobby Cannavale (37) and the comedically underrated Sarah Paulson (34)] than the short-lived 1998 attempt with Jeremy Piven and Paula Marshall. However, I still liked Miss Match (2003) better.

How is our foreign policy so inept that North Korea (a country with an estimated per-capita nominal GDP of about $1,115 and dropping) is laughing at us militarily? Utterly embarrassing.

I've never seen a year with quite so little talent at the top. None of these guys would have been a top 5 pick (normalizing for age) in any other recent year.

I've raved about Michael Crabtree before, but I don't grade him nearly as high as a Randy Moss or even Larry Fitzgerald. He'll be a great player, just not a sure-fire all pro.

I'm surprised by Matt Ryan's success, he didn't look exceptional to me in college. I thought Joe Flacco would be the top QB of the 2008 class. I don't see any of this year's QBs doing anything meaningful in the near future.

I rate Malcolm Jenkins as an eventual regular starter; Beanie Wells, Marcus Freeman, and James Laurinaitis as backup caliber.

First, I never expected the show to last beyond this season, so I'm pleasantly surprised that it's on the air. Kudos to FOX for being the least annoying of the networks in terms of cutting shows.

TSCC is the most inconsistent show I follow. While many episodes are pretty weak, some episodes (more like some scenes) are absolutely riveting and brilliant. Overall, it is only an ok show. I still expect it cannot post the kind of ratings on Friday night to keep it alive.

But when TSCC hits the mark, it really brings it home. If it could do that consistently, it'd be one of the best series of all time. The settings of man versus machine, present versus future, good versus evil, right versus wrong, faith versus science, sacrifice versus the greater good, etc. have given the show a rich environment from which to tackle dramatic issues that range from the touching to the disturbing.

The latest episode, titled Last Voyage of the Jimmy Carter (name of a sub on the show), was phenomenal, the kind I replay immediately upon finishing the first viewing. While I don't recommend the show (it's not for everyone), I pray it stays long enough to give me more moments like the ones in this ep. Moments like these are why we watch TV.

The national debt has now hit $11 trillion, about $36,000 per person. It is projected to be $16.2 trillion by the end of the current presidential cycle, about $52,000 per person. I'm just curious, what happens when/if this figure hits, say, $520,000 per person? This figure might get close to the average lifetime productivity per person. Does this mean we are all slaves to whoever owns our nation's debt? In any event, I have a hard time believing that the correct answer to the question is 'nothing.'

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/03/16/mosquito.laser.weapon/index.html

Some dude who used to work for Bill Gates designed a laser that detects the beating wings of a mosquito and burns it on the spot. In theory, it could do a sweep and kill millions of mosquitoes in minutes. My favorite excerpt is:

'Responding to questions about any potential harm the laser could pose to the eco-system, Dr. Jordin Kare (lead scientist) said: "There is no such thing as a good mosquito, there's nothing that feeds exclusively on them. No one would miss mosquitoes," he said.'

Really? If we zapped all the mosquitoes off the face of the earth we don't think there would be any meaningful negative effect on the overall ecosystem? Anyone wanna bet?

This is my favorite line of the news story:

"The most important issue is not what the automakers are going to do to cut costs, but rather what the government is going to do to stimulate car sales," stated Jeremy Anwyl, CEO of car sales tracker Edmunds.com.

When did this country no longer care how well companies run? How can we still claim to be the world's capitalistic leader? When was the last time you've looked around the country and thought 'what this country needs is a bunch more cars??' I'm guessing, if anything, most people think this country needs FEWER cars.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: though it may take five years for the entire marketplace to figure it out, Ford has materially won this round of the US auto wars.

This 'letter' posted by Bretigne Shaffer on Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty site, http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=5, captures almost perfectly my thoughts about the election, state of the country, and expectations for the following four years.

One area I disagree with is that I do not think the economy will be much worse in four years. Recessions typically run their course after a few years and I expect this one to be no different.

This March, I went back to Columbus, OH to attend a friend's wedding. I rented a Ford Focus because, well, it was the cheapest thing available. That weekend got get hit by one of the worst one-day freak snowstorms in history, one that dumped several feet of snow all over Ohio. (Pictures can be found on my Facebook page.) That Focus I was driving around town was a complete champ: great visibility, very roomy feel for a small car, great gas mileage, fantastic handling and control in some of the worst driving conditions I had ever seen. On top of that, I have been driving much less these last four years and have seen my driving skill materially diminish. That I was able to get around so easily is nothing short of amazing. I have not seen anything to suggest that the Focus is in any way Ford's "best" car, so I have to assume all of their cars are now of a quality not seen in the 80s and 90s.

However, a good reputation is hard to gain and easy to lose. Whenever someone asked me for an opinion on a car purchase and I brought up Ford, they pretty much laughed in my face. I'm here to say (as an owner of a Toyota, Toyota, and Mitsubishi) that the days of Japanese auto dominance (in the area of quality) are over. Ford, at least, has caught up. Anyone looking for a new car should give it a try. Right now, the quality of its cars are high while the prices are low because of the poor reputation it has built up.

ESPN's Gregg Easterbrook agrees, as evidenced by this snippet from his weekly football article:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/081125
Sympathy for Detroit -- and a Fabulous Idea: The core reason the Big Three have lost so much market share in the past quarter-century is because they conceded the quality issue to Toyota, Honda and other international carmakers. In the 1980s and 1990s, a Honda Accord was so much better built than anything from Detroit, it wasn't funny. Today that has changed -- General Motors, Ford and Chrysler cars of the past five years have improved substantially in quality, to the point that many Detroit models are just as well-made as those produced by Japanese- or German-based marques. But reputation is hard to gain and easy to lose: Many consumers now take as given that Detroit builds shoddy products, and may not even test-drive the improved recent models. If you need a car, head to a General Motors, Ford or Chrysler showroom. Chances are you will be pleasantly surprised.

CBS Sports' Dennis Dodd mentioned that Rich Rodriguez told prospect Terelle Pryor about his move to Michigan before he told his West Virginia players about it. That officially earns him the title of scum of the earth.

Whoa. I just found a French blogger (http://www.marc-aragon.net/article-20278554.html) who had a post a few months ago that referenced my options research from nearly ten years ago. I haven't worked in the industry for four years so I have no idea how he found that research. But WOW. This. Changes. Everything.

I told a friend after Michigan's loss to Notre Dame that Michigan was a 3- or 4-win team this season, 4- or 5-win team next season, and an 8-win team at best in RichRod's third year. I was asking whether he thought that would be enough to get him fired after three years. My friend said that he thought RR would be cut after year three unless he won at least 10 games that year. I think that's a bit too high of a hurdle, I can't see them cutting ties quite THAT easily. The man did cost a bundle. In any event, I say there is no way they win 10 in 2010. His system just doesn't work without the right kind of QB. And that kind of QB has NEVER gone to Michigan before. Chad Henne, John Navarre, Drew Henson, Tom Brady, Brian Griese, Todd Collins, Elvis Grbac, Jim Harbaugh, etc. With all due respect to how good some of these guys were overall, they have the collective mobility of a Galapagos turtle. RR has two dual-threat QBs incoming but with disappointing initial measurables (180lb, 4.55 40) compared to Terelle Pryor (235lb, 4.40 40).

Ye gads, Washington St!? How bad to you have to be to be an eight-point underdog to a 0-10 team?! At home!


Predicted top 5 (pre bowls):
1) Texas/Texas Tech
2) Oklahoma
3) Florida
4) USC
5) Alabama

Many have Florida in the top two by season end. I dunno about that. I DO think they are the best team. But, neither the voters nor the computers have been punishing the Big 12 South guys very much for losing to each other. If Oklahoma beats TT, then whoever wins the conference championship (Texas or TT) can easily stay in the top 2. So, once again it is very likely that the championship game will not pair the strongest two teams. This is yet another classic case of the small but concentrated benefits (for the BCS) outweighing the large but widespread harms (to the viewing public). Let's face it, last year we were THIS close to having West Virginia versus Ohio State. Ugh. I wonder if ESPN would have liked to pay $125 million for that matchup.

No way Alabama beats Florida.

My conference rankings:
1) SEC
2) Big 12
3) ACC (I missed BC dismantling Notre Dame last week)
**small gap**
4) Big 10
5) Big East
**big gap**
6) PAC 10

There has been a lot of talk about the success and proliferation of spread offenses in college football. You can do more with lesser athletes. It's harder to tackle in space. Etc, Etc. I've never heard these discussions mention what I think might be the dominant factor, the proliferation of the new-style artificial surfaces over natural grass. Most schools have given up on natural grass because it is costlier to maintain in the long term. Better traction helps the wide receivers and the defensive linemen, which in turn makes the quarterback have to go to quicker throws, which forces the receivers to start spread out. When I started watching football, the three dominant dropback passes were the 3-step, 5-step, and 7-step drops. I don't recall the last time I saw a formal 7-step dropback pass.

Florida just missed out on probably being the first SEC team in history to win five straight SEC games by 30 or more. They would have pulled it off if they hadn't pulled Tim Tebow after the first drive in the third quarter gave them a 42-0 lead.

Since their loss to Texas, Oklahoma has had 33 first-half drives not interruped by halftime: 21 TDs, 2 FG, 3 missed FG, 6 punts, 1 turnover on downs, no fumbles/interceptions. [That doesn't count the scores by their defense.] That's some monster offense. That works out to a pace of just under 80 points a game.

After watching them play Oklahoma State, I'm changing my mind on Texas Tech. They're damn good. They were never stopped by OKSt even once: Harrell lost two fumbles himself but scored a TD on every single other drive with success on every third (or fourth) down. And it's not like OKSt has a bad defense or anything. Even after getting shellacked by TT, OKSt is STILL nearly the top scoring defense in the Big 12. TT's offense is just that good. Oregon State's success against the defensive line of USC looked "gimmicky" to me, USC just seemed out of place a lot of times, but they rarely budged. TT's offensive line was manhandling OKSt's defense. Harrell's pocket presense is superb and he's my prediction for the most successful QB to come out of this year's draft. He could have gone out last year after getting some gaudy passing stats. But, the additional year of work at the college level has clearly paid off for him. He's a much more complete QB now. Michael Crabtree's not as good as Randy Moss, but he's the kind of receiver that you only see about once every four years or so.

The game between Oklahoma and TT in two weeks will be THE game of the year for my money. I know there has been a 'game of the year' practically each week, but trust me, this one's the right one. A likely Heisman winner and championship team will be determined there. I just don't know which of these monster offenses is going to win. Oklahoma seems to have some very key injuries to their defense, which will likely cost them.

Predicted top 5 (pre bowls):
1) Oklahoma/Texas/Texas Tech
2) Oklahoma/Texas/Texas Tech (I dunno how the Big 12's tiebreak works)
3) Florida
4) USC
5) Alabama


My conference rankings:
1) SEC
2) Big 12
**small gap**
3) ACC
4) Big 10
5) Big East
**big gap**
6) PAC 10

Regarding the ACC, I've never seen a conference start the year so badly then slowly creep back in the standings.