Christian Schneider

Author, Columnist

Month: February 2010

Your Self-Defense Tip of the Day

I honestly thought my Dad would be the last person to catch on to the internet.  He is your prototypical late adapter – he drove our family van (purchased 1985) until about three years ago – it got so bad, he had to start the ignition with a flat head screwdriver he kept in the glove compartment. (That is not a joke.)  I’m pretty sure for the last four years, it only had three wheels. (That was kind of a  joke.)

Anyway, much as we take away driver\’s licenses from the elderly who can’t drive, I propose revoking internet privileges from old people that think they need to forward on EVERY piece of junk mail they get.  Every day, I get a new chain e-mail from my Dad – obviously, none of them say “Send this to 10 people and your son won’t despise you.”  Because he does, and I do.  (Okay, not really.)

I thought the one he sent me yesterday about the inventor of the Tootsie Roll was the last straw.  But then, he passed along a new “hot tip” for personal safety. (My safety tip for him would be to stop sending me this junk, so I don’t smack him in the head next time I see him.)

This new tip goes as follows: If you don’t feel like carrying a gun, and if you can’t get your hands on pepper spray, then you should carry the next best thing – WASP SPRAY.  To quote directly from the e-mail:

The wasp spray, they told her, can shoot up to twenty feet away and is a lot more accurate, while with the pepper spray, they have to get too close to you and could overpower you. The wasp spray temporarily blinds an attacker until they get to the hospital for an antidote.

(SIDE NOTE: An “antidote?”  Doesn’t this only work if you’re being attacked by Lex Luthor?)

So you heard it here first – carry around a can of wasp spray if you want to avoid being attacked by sexual predators.  And wasps.

One small thing, though – aren’t those cans of wasp spray pretty big?  How am I supposed to stick a giant can of insect spray in my pants without getting some kind of indecency ticket?  If you have to carry around something that big, you might as well just put your own sexual predator in your pocket, so he can molest the other sexual predator before he gets to you.

A final point – each city should have at least one store that carries all the products that people still think are legal, but have for some reason been banned for no good reason.  It’ll be a giant store of pepper spray, laser pointers, and plug-in hot pots.  (Each of which I have tried to buy in the past year, remembering they were once commonly accepted, only to be told they are not sold anymore.)  Soon, tube-shaped sausages will be on the list.  And once people start spraying wasp killer in each others’ faces, Raid will be on the shelves at the contraband store, too.  I give it until 2013, tops.

An Evening With Wilco. And Stuff.

OK, first thing’s first – here’s our podcast for this week, where we discuss Saturday night’s Wilco show here in Madison, and review the album “Teen Dream” from the band Beach House.

[audio:http://media.libsyn.com/media/willsband/Beach_House.mp3]

Or download directly here.

The Wilco show was at the Overture Center, the fancy arts center here in Madison that went from “cultural center” to “taxpayer boondoggle” with breakneck speed.  But it’s good to see them booking shows that sell out – they seem to be turning the place around by offering more high-demand artists.  Anyway:

We thought we got downtown in time to have dinner at Cooper’s, the new place on Capitol square.  But naturally, it was packed, with an hour wait.  People inside were jammed up against the window.  As we stood outside to plan our next move, I got a call that I saw was from an old fraternity buddy of mine.  We were still haggling on where to go eat, so I hit “ignore” on the phone, and saw that he left a message.  I put the phone back in my pocket, and felt it buzz again.  It was him again, so again, I hit “ignore.”  Again, he left a voice mail.  (I checked the voice mails, and it cut in and out, so I couldn’t tell what he wanted.)

Of course, two minutes later, I feel a tap on my shoulder – and it’s him.  He was a foot away from me, but inside and pressed up against the glass.  He was trying to call me to get me to turn around, where he was watching me ignore his calls.  Awesome.  I told him I really was going to call him back, but I think he wasn’t buying it.  So my bad, Pete.

After dinner, I split off and met some friends at Paul’s Club for a couple pre-show drinks.  While lounging on the couches there, we met some wildly entertaining gay dudes who were down from the Twin Cities for some kind of bar crawl.  They were a riot – so I slipped some money to my neighbor to go buy them some drinks.  Of course, she announces to them that it was me that purchased their stoli and cranberries.  So one guy complimented me on my Doc Martens – which I thought he was being sarcastic.  (I’m a little touchy ever since a girl at a concert a couple months ago called me “90’s Guy” – and she didn’t mean it as a compliment.  I was so mad, I threw my beeper at her.)

So this guy playfully told me I was cute – which I thought was awesome – I don’t get many compliments, so why not take the ones I can get, right?  But then later, I found out he said the same thing about another guy that was in our group.  And in a weird way, I kind of got mad – I thought I WAS THE SPECIAL ONE.  I felt like I had been cheated on.  Anyway.

We got to the show, and bought the child proof sippy cups of beer they make you use at the Overture center.  It didn’t take long for us to realize that we were sitting in front of the world’s biggest Wilco fan.  He knew every word to every song and was singing them at the top of his lungs.  Finally, I got up the nerve (a couple sippy cups later) to turn around and ask him to stop.  I said “I’m sure you’re a wonderful singer, but I didn’t pay $40 to hear you sing.”  He then reached toward me, stuck up his fingers and gave me the “talk to the hand” dismissive wave.  And I’d like to say there was more to it, but that was about it.  I shook my head and rolled my eyes, and went back to focusing on the show.  Oddly, he disappeared a few songs later.

All in all, a good night out for the old folks.  Nothing a few Advil and about four Eggo Waffles couldn’t cure.

Why Running Shorts Need to be Better Labeled

I was at a store the other day looking for some running shorts.  Ones that you can actually wear in public, not those gross short little ones.  But I was distressed that a lot of running shorts aren’t more clearly labeled as such, since you need the… ahem… little built in liner in them.  So here’s what happens:

You walk around to each rack of shorts, then you open the shorts up and look inside to see if they have the liner.

By doing so, you look like a gross pervert that goes to stores to sniff the inside of men’s running shorts; or

By insisting the shorts have a liner in them, people think something is wrong with your balls.

Then other customers look at you, and give you the “what’s wrong with your balls?” look. (You know the one.)

Then a voice comes over the loudspeaker and says “CUSTOMER NEEDS HELP WITH HIS BALLS IN THE MEN’S SECTION.”

So basically, what I’m trying to say is:

I wish running shorts were better labeled.

Are All “Special Interests” Created Equal?

“There are no political phenomena except group phenomena.”

-Arthur F. Bentley, 1908

Americans all agree – there is no more vulgar term in politics than the label “special interest.” “Special interests” are blamed for all the worst government failures – the economy, health care costs, rising fuel prices, Joe Biden’s hair plugs.

So what is a “special interest?” Generally speaking, it’s a group of people to which we don’t belong, lobbying government to do something that we don’t like. (Groups that we are members of and with which we are aligned are generally glowingly referred to as “grassroots organizations,” or “advocacy groups.”)

As it turns out, it appears Americans have a constitutional right to form groups to lobby their government. It’s not like one of the phony “rights” people claim these days (like the right to be told that Froot Loops doesn’t actually contain fruit) – it’s actually right there in the First Amendment, which grants the “right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

This is essentially the U.S. Government’s customer service policy – if you don’t like what they’re doing, you have a right to convince them to change it. (This is far superior to the customer service policy at Sears, where you will not be allowed to redress your grievances if you try to return an opened pack of men’s underwear.)

In fact, special interests are vital to democracy. Government has gotten so large and expansive, individuals simply can’t affect change on their own. Many of the most important political movements of the past century have been led by groups such as the NAACP, anti-war interests, and groups representing the disabled. Political scientist James Q. Wilson once compared government to a human body – where individuals are the atoms that form organs (special interests) that allow the body to function. (In this metaphor, Congress is most likely the colon.)

So special interests are necessary to secure the interests of their members – without them, the only power would be that of the government. Elected officials could run roughshod over the public, without any checks and balances. But are all special interests created equal?

Without question, interests exist to further agendas that benefit their own agendas (hence the term “interest.”) But the actual interests of these groups vary wildly. At their most basic level, special interests can be broken down into two categories: interests who want government to recede, and interests that want government to expand.

When you hear “good government” groups denouncing special interests, they are virtually always criticizing groups that represent business interests. Business groups almost universally want government to recede. They want lower taxes, so people can keep more of their hard earned money – then spend that money on all the junk they sell, like the preposterous “Hoodie Footie.” (The hug you can wear.)

Several major groups in Wisconsin fall into this category. At the forefront is Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, which is constantly vilified for their advocacy on behalf of the business community. But they are not alone – the Wisconsin Realtors Association and Wisconsin Builders Association both love lower property taxes, as it makes it cheaper for people to own homes. The Wisconsin Restaurant Association recognizes that more money in peoples’ pockets equals more trips to Qdoba.

On the other hand, there are special interests that seek to expand government’s influence. To these groups, higher taxes and more government regulation is in their members’ interest, as they feel the services they provide are meaningful and necessary.

At the forefront of these groups is WEAC, the state’s teachers’ union. Any attempt to scale back education funding increases is portrayed by the teachers’ union as akin to poisoning children with arsenic, then setting them on fire, then taking a “meat axe” to them, then poisoning them with arsenic again. They lobby for higher taxes in the name of funding “adequacy” and “fairness.”

Right behind WEAC are other government-related unions, which advocate for things like “prevailing wage” laws, which funnel more money to their members. Trial lawyer organizations seek government action allowing them to reap greater amounts via lawsuit. Native American tribes need new laws granting them expanded gaming at their casinos, and lobby to make it happen.

(If there is anything positive to be said about environmental special interests, it is that their members appear to be motivated by things other than financial interests. They just want to be able to listen to Fairport Convention on their iPods while minnows swim through their toes. However, this doesn’t make them any less annoying.)

So here we have two distinct types of “special interests:” one type that advocates lower taxes and less regulation so citizens can keep more of their income, and one type that advocates higher taxes and more regulation so they can divert more of that income to their members. They are as ideologically as different as can be – and yet they are both always derided by the broad “special interest” tag.

In fact, as mentioned, it is almost always businesses – who are the ones lobbying for lower taxes and more liberty – that bear the brunt of anti-special interest sentiment (see addendum below.) And sure, businesses are looking out for their own interests – but only because it benefits them to let me make my own decisions with my income. Somehow, business interests that want me to keep my own income are “greedy,” while the teachers’ union’s attempts to pad their own nest egg at my expense are just “looking out for the kids.”

(SIDE NOTE: Of course, WPRI is often derided as being a shill for big business and what not. In order to disprove this charge, I have waited until the very end of this column to mention that this commentary is brought to you by EGGO WAFFLES.)

MMMMM, EGGOS!

EggoWaffles

ADDENDUM

In 2003, the anti-business government “watchdog” Wisconsin Democracy Campaign thought they had found evidence of corruption in state government that “cost” Wisconsin taxpayers $4.6 billion. Sounds pretty serious.

To prove all this corruption, the WDC looked at business tax receipts from 1979 – when they were at an all time high – and saw that business taxes comprised 11.3 percent of general fund revenues. Then they compared those revenues to 2002 – when the U.S. was in the midst of a recession – and found that taxes accounted for 4.2 percent of general fund taxes. They then calculated what business tax receipts would have been in 2002 had they been at the same level in 1979, and deduced that “corruption” was costing taxpayers $1.34 billion per year.

This is like saying that since Prince Fielder hit 50 home runs for the Milwaukee Brewers in 2007, he should be expected to do it every year. And since he only hit 34 in 2008, “costing” Brewers fans 16 home runs, he must be taking bribes from the Cincinnati Reds.

Let’s look at corporate taxes as a percentage of the general fund according to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau:

Year

Corporate Taxes

1997-98

6.58%

1998-99

6.38

1999-00

5.89

2000-01

5.34

2001-02

5.02

2002-03

5.16

2003-04

6.06

2004-05

6.7

2005-06

6.49

2006-07

7.05

2007-08

6.42

As you can see, corporate taxes in 2001-02 comprised 5.02% of the general fund in 2001-02, not 4.2%, as the WDC claimed. Then, lo and behold, the percentage began to climb – until it reached 7.05% in 2007. But aren’t businesses corrupt? Did they decide to start paying more in taxes because they decided to somehow be less corrupt? Where was that WDC press release?

The answer, of course, is that this is a flawed measurement of businesses’ tax effort. For instance, if businesses leave the state or if their tax receipts are down, it makes it look like they’re paying less in taxes. If individual taxes go up, or the number of citizens paying taxes increases, it looks like businesses are paying less in taxes. There are literally dozens of reasons these numbers could fluctuate – and none of them can be attributed to “corruption.” (It is also obvious how ridiculous it is to compare tax receipts to the 11.3% of 1979, as the number has hovered around 6% for over a decade.)

So there you have it – any time the Legislature passes a bill creating an expensive new prescription drug benefit for seniors, it’s not “corruption.” When a school district grants new health insurance benefits to retired employees, which they don’t know how to pay for and will one day swallow up half their payroll, there’s no special favors to be found there. It’s only bogus manufactured business numbers that demonstrate “corruption.”

Lending Sheridan a Hand

So it seems the entirety of Wisconsin’s press corps (pronounced “core” for aspiring presidential candidates) is interested in where Assembly Speaker Mike Sheridan has been privately introducing his motions.  When initially asked by reporters whether he was dating a lobbyist with pending interests before the Legislature, Sheridan denied it, saying the two were just “friends.”  A day later, Sheridan conceded that, in fact, the two were dating – but the damage had been done.  He lied to the media – and once you do that, you’re like a mouse dropped into a snake pit.  Reporters around the state are now digging around Sheridan’s campaign finance reports to see whether he was wining and dining his ladyfriend with his campaign funds.  Had he come clean at the time, this would be a two day story – instead, he’s hemorrhaging political capital.

I haven’t written anything about this yet, because I just figured Sheridan’s dating habits weren’t really my business.  Generally, these workplace rules about who two grown adults can or can’t date are nonsense.  They essentially just mean “don’t get caught.”  (Incidentally, there could have been a state law mandating someone from my workplace date me, and I wouldn’t have been able to find someone to go out with.)

Furthermore, I guess I was just willing to give the Legislature the benefit of the doubt and say they weren’t passing this payday loan bill because it’s a terrible bill.  (After all, Shanna Wycoff’s love couldn’t have been so powerful that it kept the Democrat-controlled Senate from passing a bill, too?  OR COULD IT?)

But it is interesting how the issue has been portrayed in the press since Sheridan came clean about the relationship.  Here there was a bill to regulate businesses – that actually occasionally throw a lifeline to people with credit so bad they can’t even get a checking account.  (Full disclosure: I actually used one of these payday loan places during college, when my credit was abysmal. Banks would actually send goons out front to tackle me before I even walked in the front door.)

But, of course, here comes a bill to stop people from freely engaging in contracts to which they happily agreed.  And because the bill was stopped cold, reporters and good government groups immediately blamed it on Sheridan’s conflict of interest.  Our favorite good government lefty immediately chimed in:

“There’s no way the public will ever buy his argument that his relationship will have no effect on his handling of the payday loan legislation,” said Mike McCabe, executive director of government watchdog Wisconsin Democracy Campaign.

Now, however, because of Sheridan’s conflict of interest, the Assembly feels like they have to pass the bill, to counter allegations that they’re corrupt.  Assembly Democrats claim that it’s pure coincidence that this bill is now moving like a cheetah on ice skates, after being a corpse two weeks ago.  (Again, pronounced “corpse.”)  Now, suddenly, the will of the people is being served – and forget about why that may be.  Nothing to see here.

So in case you’re keeping track at home: Holding up a liberal bill because the Speaker of the Assembly has a girlfriend is corruption.  Passing the same liberal bill because the Speaker of the Assembly has a girlfriend is just GOOD GOVERNMENT.

Naturally, now that the bill is moving, you won’t hear a word from any of these co-called “corruption watchdogs,” despite the bill only seeing action for the same reason it didn’t see any action before.  Their level of outrage is directly commensurate to the amount they agree with the legislation being held up.  Today’s Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article on the bill passing through a committee is curiously lacking any good government group quotes.

So while I generally give Sheridan a pass, it is worth noting that he tends to be the kiss of death wherever he goes.  He was a union leader at the General Motors plant in Janesville, which is now defunct.  Then he took over the speakership of the Assembly, which immediately took a bad budget and made it worse.  And if he stays on as Speaker, it almost seems likely that the Assembly will flip back into Republican hands under his watch.  So while this “scandal” may not be that big of a deal to some, it could end up costing him his political career if reporters start to come back with actionable intelligence on his nationwide trysts.

Prevailing Wage Laws: Good for the Public Interest, or Special Interests?

Former Wisconsinite George Leef has written an excellent article for the Cato Institute that discusses “prevailing wage” laws for public projects.  (Wisconsin is a prevailing wage state.)  Prevailing wage laws essentially set the wages workers may earn on public projects, usually ones in which the labor not subject to a public bidding process.

In the article, Leef argues that rather than promoting the public interest, prevailing wage laws serve only to further the interests of labor.  He concludes:

The purpose and effect of prevailing wage laws is to eliminate competition on labor costs on government construction projects.

Bidders may search for the least-cost combination of other factors, but labor costs are fixed by decree. This suppression of competition is a substantial benefit to a small segment of the population, chiefly construction unions and workers, at the expense of the rest of society, which must pay more than would otherwise be necessary for projects subject to prevailing wage mandates.

Efforts by prevailing wage proponents to depict the laws as having some social benefit fail. Fixing the price of labor does nothing to increase safety, train new workers, promote quality or any other desirable objective. Nor is there any social benefit in “protecting” union wage standards and work rules from competitive pressure.

Prevailing wage laws are special interest legislation trying to masquerade as wise public policy. People prefer to minimize or eliminate competition in markets where they sell, while enjoying the benefits of competition in markets where they buy. Prevailing wage laws are one of the various approaches organized labor uses to shut down competition in labor markets. Adam Smith was correct: It is bad public policy for government to assist any group of sellers in their desire to fix prices and stifle competition. That is why all prevailing wage laws should be repealed.

Read the whole thing here.

Podcast: Surfer Blood and Neon Indian

On this week\’s podcast we discuss the new album from the Florida band Surfer Blood, \”Astro Coast.\”  We agree that they sound like a combination of Journey, Pavement, .38 Special, Band of Horses, R.E.O. Speedwagon, My Morning Jacket, the Shins, Paul Simon and Vampire Weekend.  We also discuss Neon Indian, a hippie electronic band that I was much less enthusiastic about.

Listen to it here:

[audio:http://media.libsyn.com/media/willsband/Surfer_Blood_and_Neon_Indian.mp3]

Download directly here.

Here\’s a video clip of Surfer Blood that makes me feel 143 years old.

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

Party Identification in Wisconsin?

Over the past few years, we’ve had plenty of discussion in Wisconsin about how we should vote – should we require photo ID?  Should we use electronic voting machines?  Allow early voting?  And despite all this discussion, it seems difficult to change anything, as these laws are so ingrained in our tradition.

But with all of this information floating around, it’s easy to lose track of the fact that there are other states out there that have completely different voting systems.  A friend of mine pointed out this website from North Carolina, where you actually have to declare yourself a member of a party.  You can go to that website, search for any registered voter in North Carolina, and you’ll get their name, address, how often they vote, and what party they belong to.

Naturally, there are plenty of states that require voters to register with a political party.  But can you imagine the heads exploding in Wisconsin if the state proposed to make voters’ party preferences public?  There’d be a riot.  Wisconsin is, after all a state where lawmakers even object to having individuals’ criminal records posted online.  It seems that in our state, people are more reticent about disclosing something as private as their party identification.  (And if you’re a Republican living in Madison, or Democrat living in Waukesha County, keeping your party preference on the DL may be mere survival.)

So let’s take this thing for a spin.  Think of famous North Carolinians:

It appears Ralph Dale Earnhart, Jr. is a REPUBLICAN.

Not surprisingly, John and Elizabeth Edwards are DEMOCRATS.

Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue cover model Brooklyn Decker is a REPUBLICAN.

There are too many Michael Jordans to know which one is the real one.

Julius Peppers of the Carolina Panthers is a DEMOCRAT.

Anyway, you get the idea.  Feel free to go look up your favorite North Carolinian.

Stumbling Upon Disaster

Some of you may remember a column I wrote for SportsBubbler back in December in which I urged Milwaukee Bucks rookie guard Brandon Jennings to stop tweeting. (After falling victim to a hoax, he has since done so – at least publicly.)  As a result of that article, I got the chance to speak with writer Davy Rothbart, who just happened to be writing a feature on Jennings for GQ Magazine.  (He mentioned that it will be in the April edition of GQ.  I have yet to ask him when my photo shoot will take place – I imagine it’s in the works.)

What I didn’t realize at the time is that Davy Rothbart is the editor of FOUND Magazine, a publication that collects various letters, postcards, pictures, shopping lists, and other items that people just randomly find on the street, then compiles them.  I admit I\’m really late to this party – by the time I had heard of FOUND, two “best of” books had been printed and become bestsellers, and other people I knew had all heard of the phenomenon that is the magazine.  (I even ended up talking with my local librarians about it, as I overheard them talking about all the crazy notes and things they find in books when people return them.)

I went out and bought both books, and I was stunned at some of the items people had found and turned in to the magazine.  Some of the most moving entries are heartfelt notes people had written to others – some are merely comical in that they completely lack context. (Such as the note left on someone’s car that urges someone to “Please Do Not Put Crab on my Car.  Just cut it out!”)

Aside from just the prurient thrill of being able to gaze into someone’s life for a brief moment, some of the entries really serve as a mental exercise in time and space.  When people think about the problems in their lives, usually they can analyze them in terms of: 1) how they got into the predicament, 2) what all the relevant information to the problem is, and 3) what they need to do to get out of it.

And yet reading these letters allows for none of these three analytic tools.  You’re dropped right into the middle of a problem in someone’s life – you don’t know how that person got into trouble, you only know the information they have scrawled (inevitably, misspelled) onto a piece of paper, and you will never know if they got out of it.  Whether it’s a love note or a plea for a loved one to send money, or a threat to beat someone’s ass, there’s always a beginning, middle and an end – and you’re only getting one person’s interpretation of the middle.

There’s one entry that\’s so perfect, though, I had to share it here.  It’s called “Dear Lyle,” and it’s clearly a letter written by a confused, pregnant young girl to her boyfriend. (It was found by Sam Costello, of Ithaca, New York.)  I’ll just wait here in my slippers and smoking jacket while you read it….

\"\"

OK, I just read it again, too.  And it’s almost too perfect – too heartbreaking – to be real.

First, the fact that it’s on half a ripped piece of paper is so representative of the content of the letter itself, it\’s almost eerie.  Reading only half of what this young woman is saying makes your brain jerk frantically around from topic to topic, much as hers probably was when she was writing it.  The fact that half her plea is missing almost makes you feel as hurried and confused as she was while she was making her decision to keep the child.  (For me, it recalls Tom Wolfe’s “Electric Kool Aid Acid Test,” in which Wolfe writes in such a way to make your mind careen around as if it were on LSD – which is what the book is all about.  It is also my favorite book.)

Furthermore, the ripped paper is also symbolic of this relationship as it moves forward.  It’s pretty clear the young mother is telling Lyle to stay away, so “we can go on with our lives.”  So, in effect, this child is going to have half a family – much as the note itself has been torn in half.  It’s almost too perfect.

And so here you are, immediately dropped into the life of a scared young girl trying to tell her child’s father that she’s going to go it alone.  And doing so with a disjointed, poorly spelled, crumpled up letter, that apparently Lyle didn’t think enough of to keep in one piece and/or keep in his possession.

Surely, one could sit for a while and think about possible scenarios that led up to this pregnancy, and what occurred afterward.  In fact, Rothbart published a book where people of note write about their favorite found items, and build stories around the details of what they imagine to be the genesis of such items. (It includes an essay by Chuck Klosterman, who I’m pretty sure would write something for Legless Nun Magazine at this point.  The guy is everywhere.)

In case I’m not doing justice to the whole FOUND phenomenon, here’s a video of one of Rothbart’s appearances on Letterman.  Good stuff.

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

The WDC Circus Rolls Back Into Town

Today, Professor of Nothing Mike McCabe of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign bemoans how the University of Wisconsin System is losing its “Progressive” tradition.  Having already demonstrated his lack of understanding of campaigns, law, and the U.S. Constitution, McCabe is now determined to embarrass himself in another venue – higher education.  One would think that McCabe would lay low after being completely obliterated in public by Wisconsin Supreme Court justice David Prosser, but he seems hell bent on further discrediting himself.

This is actually the first time we’ve heard from McCabe since he declared the U.S. Supreme Court’s campaign finance decision (in Citizens United vs. FEC) to be as bad as the famous Dred Scott decision, which codified segregation in the U.S. for the next 100 years.  Certainly, blacks who were attacked with fire hoses and police dogs during desegregation share a kinship with McCabe, since having to watch a few extra campaign commercials seems to be just as oppressive.  (It is likely that McCabe’s legal expertise led him to invoke Dred Scott merely because it was a case that he had heard of.)

But now, McCabe is chafing because a professor at the UW (Ken Goldstein) has dared to do the unthinkable – he actually has been conducting research that conflicts with the storyline the WDC has been trying to sell to its contributors.  Goldstein has demonstrated that in cases where negative advertising occurs, voters not only know more about the candidates, they actually show up at the polls in greater numbers.  Naturally, McCabe sees this as a threat, since it would mean he’s for less informed voters that vote more infrequently.  (Which, as it turns out, he is.)

Rather than defending his own indefensible positions, McCabe lashes out the only way he knows how – by saying the UW is “as owned as our politicians.”  He says:

But instead of challenging the status quo and engineering new reforms and working with public officials to make those reforms a reality, most of the political scientists on campus are missing in action. Some of the most prominent among them are apologists for the way things are and throw their weight around on behalf of the very forces that have corrupted our politics and sullied Wisconsin’s once-proud reputation.

The UW System has 6,032 professors.  ONE PROFESSOR conducts a study that conflicts with McCabe’s fairy tale, and suddenly the whole system is corrupt?  (Goldstein is likely thankful people think he single-handedly has enough influence to undo 150 years of Progressive tradition at the UW.) Perhaps all the other faculty members should run their rigorous scientific studies by scholar Mike McCabe to determine whether they’re corrupt or not.  (Of course, how “corrupt” you are is 100% proportional to how much you stray from the “Progressive” tradition of the UW – i.e., how conservative you are.  If the UW keeps cranking out liberal studies, then there’s nothing to see, keep moving.  That’s academic rigor for which the UW should strive.)

Of course, nobody knows research like McCabe, whose bogus “reports” would be laughed out of any community college in America.  Maybe next, McCabe can poke his nose into the UW Medical School to start telling them which of their medical research methods are acceptable in the “Progressive” tradition.

Since it’s always fun to take a trip down memory lane, let’s take a look at some of McCabe’s greatest hits:

  • He bemoans the influence of lobbyists, yet he himself is a registered lobbyist.
  • He complains about how organizations that don’t disclose their funding sources attempt to change state law, yet he doesn’t disclose his own donors, and travels around the state in favor of things like single payer health care.
  • He complains about the negativity in campaign advertising, yet openly dreams about poisoning Wisconsin Supreme Court justices.
  • He believes there’s too much money in campaigns, until there’s not enough money, since nobody will know who the candidates are.

This is just a small sampling of the WDC’s incomprehensible recent history.  I’m sure UW professors, who mostly have Ph.Ds, enjoy being lectured on research ethics by a failed former Assembly candidate who will take any position that fits his storyline at any given time.

So You Want to Make a Sex Tape?

So the world can stop worrying: John Edwards has a sex tape.  (Side note: Are they even “tapes” anymore? This already seems dated.)  It seems everyone has a sex tape these days – soon, potential employers won’t be judging applicants on whether they have a sex tape, but how good the tape actually is.  (“I like what you did there at the 3:46 mark, Chris.  I never would have considered wearing a Seattle Seahawks helmet and arm floaties to be so effective.  Welcome to the team here at Smith Barney.”)

I’ve given this some thought (although not specifically about the contents of Edwards’ video.)  And I have to admit – I just don’t understand the whole concept of the “sex tape.”  I mean, what could possibly be the upside in recording yourself having sex with someone else?  If I put together a list of “pros” and “cons,” they’d look like this:

CON:

The tape could fall into the wrong hands and my life could be ruined;

Suggesting taping this could cause these tentative sex negotiations to fall apart, forcing this woman to leave;

Upon viewing the tape, I could realize I am not the unstoppable stallion of love which I had envisioned;

This other person could use this tape to blackmail me for the remainder of my life.

PRO:

I’d only need about 45 seconds of tape, leaving my “Seinfeld” reruns intact.

Seems a little skewed, huh? Plus, it all just seems to be too much trouble.  As I tweeted, it never really appealed to me to join the “mile high club.”  Isn’t it difficult enough to join the “sea level club?” Why add a degree of difficulty?  I mean, I’m not exactly Paris Hilton or a Kardashian – leaking this tape isn’t going to propel me into superstardom or get me visits to the White House.*

I’m also fascinated by the mechanics of how this all goes down.  So, presumably, you bring a girl back to your place, and one thing leads to another.  Then, you casually mention… you want to pull out your video camera?  Has any woman in America ever said “yes” to this proposition? (Obviously, some have.  But none I’ve ever met.  I presume.)

Let’s say she says “yes.”  Then you spend the next fifteen minutes setting up the camera and tripod.  Maybe the battery isn’t charged all the way.  Maybe you have to fast forward through all the tape you’ve taken of your golf swing.  Awkward silence ensues.  In the meantime, she is starting to come to her senses and realize this could be a terrible idea.  (Unless you always have a video camera set up in your room, ready to go if this occasion arises – which is super creepy to begin with.)

After all this, let’s say this 300-to-1 pony comes in and she agrees to do it.  A week later, you decide to pop the tape in and have a look.  It would seem that this is where it gets really dicey.

See, when you finally trick some girl back to your house, and “stuff” happens, it gives the typical guy a big confidence boost.  You start to imagine yourself the way you presume she sees you – thin, attractive, and desirable.  This all occurs in a haze of lust, and presumably after a few Jose Cuervo-based drinks.

But after you watch the video, reality sets in.  You are not the Love God you remember – the starkness of the video shows that, in fact, you are pretty gross.  Furthermore, in the throes of passion, you didn’t notice that your companion had bullet holes in her ass and that she took out her dentures and put them on the side table.  She looks more like Popeye Jones than January Jones.

Is this the lingering memory you want of this encounter?  Of course not.  Why not stick with the alcohol-enhanced hazy bliss you remembered?

On second thought, given how much parents document their children these days, wouldn\’t it make sense to have a record of their conception on file?  Seems like it would make a good family movie night – unless your wife accidentally pulls out the tape with the pizza delivery guy on it.  Awkward.

* – With the New Orleans Saints winning the Super Bowl, Reggie Bush’s girlfriend, Kim Kardashian, will certainly accompany him on his White House visit.  Just two weeks ago, Khloe Kardashian accompanied her husband, Lamar Odom of the Los Angeles Lakers, to his White House visit.  Upon seeing Khloe, President Obama is said to have gone up to her and said “I like your TV show.”

Set aside the fact that Barack Obama says he watches “Keeping Up With the Kardashians.” The mere fact that he knows the show exists is an impeachable offense.  It’s actually slightly worse than if Obama was secretly e-mailing U.S. nuclear reactor blueprints to Kim Jong Il.

UPDATE: Dee Dubs sends along this video of Louis CK contemplating his next career move.  It’s definitely NSFW.