Monopoly Football

Arkansas college athletics are unique in the sense that its primary Division I-A program won't play its fellow in-state I-A brethren. The University of Arkansas believes that if it played in-state schools, it would be harming itself.

Apparently they feel that their program would fall to the level of Florida-Florida State-Miami, Texas-Texas A&M, UCLA-USC, and the like rather than keeping themselves at the pinnacle of NCAA sports like they are today.

The Razorback decision-makers apparently think that they would lose the excitement and revenue of the UA-New Mexico State or UA-ULM game. Everyone knows, especially the Arkansas taxpayer, that those games draw more fans than an Arkansas-Arkansas State or Arkansas-UCA game would.

The most exciting basketball game in my memory is the Arkansas State vs. Arkansas matchup in the NIT Tournament back in the late 80's. ASU went to Barnhill Arena and put a stomping on Nolan Richardson's Razorbacks for most of the game. In the second half the Razorbacks depth began to show and they crawled back to send the game into overtime. In the overtime period the Razorbacks had their way with ASU as the ASU players were totally exhausted and succumbing to leg cramps. The most intense game I have ever experienced, with high points for both sides, and an outcome that didn't leave anybody too mortally wounded. After all, its not like somebody lost to Texas.

Wouldn't it be great to pack Alltel Arena with a UA-UALR or UA-ASU matchup each year? Would it be that damaging to UA to face off with either of those teams in a packed arena? Would it be better than watching UA play Prairie View A&M or College of Timbuktu in front of a cupcake audience? Arkansans will have to decide for themselves.

However, the UA has gone father. So far as to let the University of Louisiana-Monroe make the game at War Memorial in Little Rock a home game to help that University maintain its Division I-A status. The taxpayers of Arkansas, should thank UA for helping this Louisiana university out, perhaps Arkansas taxpayers can fund University of Louisiana-Monroe instead of UCA or ASU. Maybe we should also spring for textbooks and beer for New Mexico State as well.

Of course, the Razorbacks don't really want to play at War Memorial in Little Rock anyway. Despite it being a wonderful place where they win most of the time. Little Rock is only good for handing out money and if they want to see a UA game, let them drive to Fayetteville.

Some UA apologists go so far as to suggest that ASU drop out of Division I-A, leaving Arkansas with only one Division I-A team. Most states want all of the Universities in their state to progress and would be pleased to have multiple successful I-A sports teams in their state.

Arkansans haven't woken up to that concept yet. But they will. Someday, when the regime changes in Fayetteville we will have some real, exciting, I-A in-state rivalries here. Just like in Texas, just like in California, just like in Florida, just like in Mississippi, just like in Georgia, etc. Someday, the State Legislature will do its job and insist that Arkansas universities cooperate to improve our STATE as a whole rather than operating only in their own (perceived) limited self-interest.

Dead Allies

Iraqis are lining up to join the Iraqi National Guard. Lining up to join the fight against terrorism, establish a peaceful Iraq, and feed their families. Unfortunately, they are lining up next to the street where suicidal maniacs can drive up next to them in cars loaded with explosives.

This has happened several times.

I can understand this happening once. What I cannot understand is why it has happened day after day. We have stated several times that it is imperative that we establish an effective Iraqi force to stabilize Iraq. This requires massive recruiting.

These incidents cannot have a positive effect on recruiting. How many Iraqis stay away from the recruiting lines because of the threat of car bombing?

It seems to me that it would be fairly simple to construct a simple holding area out of concrete barriers. The area could have several entrances that are two narrow for an automobile to enter. Such an area would not prevent a suicide bomber, but it would certainly reduce the capability of a massive car bomb taking out 70 or so recruits in a line.

Similarly, I continue to see incidents where buses full of Iraqis who work for coalition forces are attacked with great loss of life. The Iraqis on these buses are unarmed and apparently not well protected. I can't imagine a better target than a thin metal bus with a bunch of unarmed US sympathizers packed into it. These vehicles should be escorted, or alternate means of transportation should be considered.

I don't claim to have all the answers. But it sure seems like we need to adjust our tactics in order to protect our friends a little better.

Wiki, wiki, wow

About a year and a half ago I discovered Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that, theoretically, anybody can edit. People from all over add or edit articles and perform a variety of tasks to build the content. I jumped into it quite happily and started writing some articles about areas I knew something about.

Of course, when you have thousands of people working on something you are going to run into idiots. There are a lot on Wikipedia. Since my tolerance for obnoxious idiots is low, I didn't last too long. And now I must rant.

My first conflict came when I was looking over the article on Senator J. William Fulbright. Fulbright was a powerful liberal Senator from Arkansas. While I don't agree with Senator Fulbright's positions, there is a policy on Wikipedia about position neutrality. In other words, it is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a political screed.

The latest editor of the article had inserted several paragraphs that essentially gave Senator Fulbright's position on George W. Bush and the Iraq war. This is an amazing feat since Senator Fulbright has been dead for many years. Seeing this as a bit of a violation of the overall concept I proceeded to reword the paragraphs. I created a more generic description of Senator Fulbright's positions on war and foreign relations in a neutral voice. I imagined that a thoughtful reader could apply his 1967 views to the current conflict if they chose to do so. Of course, the original author blew his stack. I fully expected that my more neutral version would naturally be supported by the "Wikipedia community". Naive aren't I? I viewed it just as I would if I went to a Theodore Roosevelt article and found his quotes being used to deride Bill Clinton. An anachronism. The "Wikipedia community" didn't exactly see that.

For a while, there was an effort by some users to insert something about George Bush and the Iraq war into a ton of articles no matter how tenuous the linkage. But as long as you keep a neutral voice, the content is neutral right?

A second conflict came in regard to a Civil War article. The article had the obligatory statement that the war was caused by slavery. I really have no problem with that since slavery was THE major cultural and moral obstacle between the two regions. However, there were an assortment of economic, cultural, religious, and geographic differences that caused friction as well on a more minor level. It was my opinion that a thorough encyclopedia article would at least make mention of these briefly and in proper context. Naive aren't I? My few sentences added to the article were viewed as a dilution of the slavery issue and removed forthwith. Avoiding an imagined dilution of the slavery issue was more important than some facts.

The final straw for me was a host of "articles" which were really political attacks disguised as articles. One of these was an article about the so-called word "Santorum". This "word" was coined by a disc jockey to refer to a substance which is the result of anal sex. It was coined specifically as an attack against Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania. Now I'm not a big supporter of the Senator from Pennsylvania, but it was my opinion that the "article" was pretty much unworthy of something purporting to be an encyclopedia. Obscure morning shock jockeys do things like this every day and all of their pronouncements and giggly anal-sex references do not deserve to be referenced in encyclopedias. The "Wikipedia community" agonized over this little gem for a great length of time arguing its relative merits. Frankly, there are no merits to it. The fact that it had to be debated for an extended period of time and go through various incarnations says a lot about the "Wikipedia community".

Similarly, someone decided that there needed to be a list of derogatory nicknames for George Bush. You know, Chimpy, Shrub, Moron, Bushitler, and the like. This did raise eyebrows somewhat and a lengthy debate was entered into whether it was "encyclopedic". Some conservative wag decided to enter a list of bad nicknames for Hillary Clinton in retribution. It was not as well received of course. The fact that such entries are not quickly recognized as trash says a lot about the "Wikipedia community".

At one point a user chose the screen name "JesusIsLord". Granted, its a pitiful screen name. But to the Wikipedia community it violated their "Offensive Screen Name Policy" and the user was forced to change. The user "AllahIsGreat" had a similar experience. Its interesting that one can have a username like "DruidWitch" or "Zen-master" but "MightyLordAndKing" is deemed offensive. Frankly, anybody who pitches a fit over a username "AllahIsGreat" or "JesusIsLord" is an intolerant ass. This says something about the "Wikipedia community".

All of this led me to abandon Wikipedia a while back. But recently I got the itch again and went back to try again. This time I vowed to stay out controversial topics, not bother trying to keep political articles neutral, and stay out of the way in an obscure area. My chosen area was Arkansas historical figures. Sure enough, nobody gave a darn about that category since it really didn't exist at all anyway. I was able to edit for a few weeks before running into.......the encyclopedia police.

Yes, I got a ticket from the category police. It seems that I had put my articles into TOO MANY categories. The policeman reverted my categorizations because I had placed the articles into "redundant" categories. My intent was to place the articles in as many categories as applied. But that was too many. You see, the "community" has decided that there is no need for a broad category of "People from Arkansas" in alphabetical order. Instead, if you go to that category you will see a list of lists of types of people from Arkansas. I didn't know. Okay, thats fine I said, just create an alphabetical list then and change the categorization. But thats not how it works. Creating a new alphabetical list to replace my social faux-pas would be too much like work and not enough Barney Deputy Encyclopedia Sheriff fun...so the categorization gets changed and the alphabetical list is just not available any more.

They used to have a page titled "Why Wikipedia Sucks". It was an irreverent look at themselves that included the points I have made here and many more. It made the statement that Wikipedia did not take itself so seriously and that it could look at itself without flinching. Any frustrated user could add their complaint to the page. It said a lot about what Wikipedia was.

Recently they changed the name of the page to "Replies to Common Objections" and reworked the page to become more of an official defense of themselves. Today it reads more like something put together by a corporate lawyer. That says a lot about what Wikipedia has become and where it is heading.

Now don't get me wrong, there are some good people writing some good articles on Wikipedia. But there are many more people who spend a vast amount of time picking at others, lording it over their fiefdoms, and trying to insert propaganda into the encyclopedia under cover of a neutral voice.

The encyclopedia itself is growing quickly, has a lot of useful articles. It is still a very interesting experiment. But don't be naive, and be ready to battle various bureaucrats, little tin-gods, trolls, and masquerading partisans.

Catchup and Catchall

Well, I'm back. My excuse is laziness and politics. Lazy is self-explanatory. Politics is another matter. Frankly, I spent the last few months infuriated at my television and the people on it. I get this way every four years. It takes over my life.

Too much has been said about this election cycle already, and frankly, I am wrung out by the process. So I will just make a few brief points. I will have more to say about Arkansas politics later, but this is it for the national election.

1) They called Abraham Lincoln a baboon, a gorilla, and an imbecile. They called George W. Bush a chimp and a moron. The hyperbole of the anti-war element during both elections was over the top. That puts George Bush in good company. It also provides two proven cases where mindless name-calling of the simian variety failed to sway the electorate. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to win fewer electoral votes.

2) How many times will the Democratic party spit out a Massachusetts liberal? The evidence is mounting that this does not work. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to win fewer electoral votes.

3) In an effort to increase the bigotry against non-liberal Christians, the punditry announced within minutes that Kerry lost the election due to right-wing fundamentalist born-again Christian zealots flocking to the polls. Liberals want to believe this because they do not wish to even contemplate that 60,000,000 or so voters maintain some level of traditional conservative values. Yes, voters responding to exit polls indicated that they voted on moral issues. This does not mean that they are Christian "fundies". Liberals just don't want to accept that millions of non-churchgoing "normal" people aren't in favor of gay marriage and other extreme liberal positions. Millions of these people would have had no problem with some sort of civil unions. I personally hate it when I hear that somebody is prohibited from visiting a terminally ill "life-partner" because they don't have legal standing. It makes me sad. But liberals cannot compromise. They insist on associating the term "marriage" with their efforts. They refuse to acknowledge that in addition to secular meaning, the word "marriage" has a separate religious meaning. Rather than accept this as a semantic obstacle and going around it, they insist on banging their head into it. It cost them. But they are zealots, and will trade the legal protections they seek to be "in your face".

4) Dan Rather. Need I say more? Much of the media doesn't even try to hide their efforts to influence elections in favor of liberals any more. A comparison of the news stories about the candidates during the election cycle shows that there is a clear bias.

5) The Swift Boat Vets. All I can say is that there were a lot of them. Most of them just plain folks. Some of them were awarded Medals of Honor or were held as POWs in horrific conditions. They were dismissed by the media offhand, raked over the coals for speaking what they thought, and called all sorts of names. Bush's National Guard service was fair game and any story about it was fit to broadcast, even with forged documents. Medal of Honor winners however, were just bastards whose charges were not worth even mentioning.

Thats pretty much all that matters out of the last couple of years of politicing.

In an earlier post, I mentioned my friend in Baghdad. He is at home right now for a well-deserved 15-day leave. Its been a hard deployment, but he is proud of it. He still believes its worthwhile. He says that Iraq is a place of poverty and filth, but that it does not have to be that. His purpose there is to try and make it something other than that. No matter what you think of the war, I hope you can respect that view.

Now that the election is over my four year cycle is over. But my laziness is a different story. I hope to contribute a bit more to this than I have in the last few months. We shall see.

Cicada Update

Oh....My....God. I've just read a report that one of our northern friends has gotten himself quite ill by gorging himself on sauteed Cicadas. When I wrote my little essay last night I had no idea that things would go this far.

Cicadas of Doom

I've been reading in the press that there is a bit of a distress and fear regarding the upcoming Cicada emergence in yankeeland. It seems that there is great concern that the emerging brood (love that word) could potentially cause harm to yankee youth, pets, and sensitive flora.

The Cicada of course is an ungainly winged insect that lives primarily underground. Cicada broods emerge into the sunlight for a short time on regular 13 or 17 year cycles depending on which brood you are talking about.

The primary fear appears to be that emerging Cicadas will fling themselves onto unsuspecting northern youngsters causing the child to spasmodically flee into brick walls or throw themselves over the handlebars of their bicycles onto the asphalt. Given these circumstances a Cicada could conceivably cause a severe concussion or even a broken collarbone.

I must admit that I have not personally witnessed the particular variety of Cicada that inhabit the northern lands and am perhaps prejudiced by my experiences with the colonies native to the South. I have to assume that either our broods are particularly docile or they just grow 'em meaner up there.

My personal experience with the Cicada goes back to my childhood. They were, and are, called "locusts" or "June Bugs" here despite the protestations of more scholarly types. I recall being "hit" by out of control Cicadas on many occasions, particularly when we used to play out under the street light. On many a night a wild southern Cicada would come barreling in toward the light at a crazy angle, richochet off the street, and slam into one of us with a skittery buzzing sound. We're lucky we weren't all killed.

In most instances the Cicada seemingly had more to fear from us than we did from them. A favorite summer pastime was capturing some poor confused Cicada and tying a string around it. The poor insect would struggle into the air and generate intense amusement as it flew hither and yon tugging on its leash. Much more entertaining than flying a kite. Usually the poor bug would eventually escape from our badly tied knots and rejoin its brethren in the trees.

The media seems to indicate that there is also some concern up there about the Cicada noise levels. The Cicada join together in the trees in the millions and emit a rhythmic keening (love that word) drone. A veritable Mormon Tabernacle Choir of buggery. The noise itself is not harmful and the only ill effects are a mild irritation after several hours of exposure. A brief respite can be had with a sharp shout or clap of the hands which will startle the poor creatures into a momentary, but delicious, silence.

The most appealing aspect of the Cicada lifecycle, at least to children, is their molting process. The Cicada all find a nice barky tree to lock their toesies onto and then jump out of their skin. The discarded skin then hardens into a crispy translucent brown husk on the side of the tree. Southern children tend to think of these remnants as a fascinating gift toy from the "June Bugs". In my elementary school days I, and my friends, would make a great game of attempting to collect more of these husks than our compatriots. This was, after all, before the Nintendo GameBoy was invented.

I've thought about tying a string around a Cicada in recent years when they appeared, but have thought better of it. A creature that spends 17 years underground anticipating just a few weeks in the sun before dying deserves to live those weeks without a leash I think. And as far as their irritating noise levels....well, perhaps they have a right to sing loudly in the trees about the sunshine that we see as as "just another day".

And you northerners, be careful out there.

The Arkansas Brigade

Speaking of fighting on, the 39th Infantry Brigade (Light) (Separate/Enhanced) has finished its first month in Iraq attached to the US 1st Cavalry Division. The 39th is also known as "The Arkansas Brigade" because it is made up almost entirely of Arkansans and is the largest National Guard unit in the state. The 39th makes up the bulk of the Arkansas Army National Guard.

While they are deployed with the 1st Cav they are known as the 39th Brigade Combat Team, or 39th BCT. They have voluntarily changed their nickname from "The Arkansas Brigade" to "The Bowie Brigade" for this deployment because they have been assigned some yankees to accompany them and wish to show some southern hospitality to their northern tentmates.

But make no mistake, the 39th is an Arkansas outfit, as witnessed by the big old Razorback Hog flag flying over their camp while they were in Kuwait. Their insignia is made up of a Bowie knife ("Arkansas Toothpick") and a diamond (our state symbol) in the colors of the Arkansas state flag.

In their first month they have lost 8 good men. The loss of fellow soldiers is harder for a National Guard unit because the fallen are neighbors, co-workers, and sometimes relatives. This is especially true in a small state like Arkansas.

I've been keeping up with the 39th in the news. In this first month I have seen photos of them building bridges, passing out t-shirts to Iraqi kids, visiting orphanages, and providing medical care. They have been involved in combat of course, but they seem to prefer talking about the other things.

Its going to be a long deployment. My best friend is in Baghdad and a co-worker is up north. When we hear of some new outbreak of violence we have to hold our breath till we hear from them.

After losing 5 on the worst day in Arkansas military history since Korea I had to ask my friend if it was worth it. Even though he had lost a friend that day he said, without hesitation, "It is, you should see the children here."

If he thinks its worth it, I can do no less.

Lip from Arkinsaw

Greetings from The Bear State, The Wonder State, The Natural State, The Land of Opportunity, The Land of Bad Government.

For 150 years the Arkansas legislature has been dominated by the Democratic Party and we have moved from 50th to 49th in just about every measurable category. This giant leap forward is a definite reason to keep doing what we are doing in my opinion. No need to change the horse in midstream!

Arkansas, the land of contradiction, home of the greatest retailing monolith in the history of the world yet too broke to fix its highways. The land that votes Republican for President and Democrat for everything else. The land that has to have a special income tax exemption for Texarkana to keep people on its side of the border but can't understand why the rest of the state (that doesn't have the exemption) keeps losing business deals to Texas.

Arkansas, my beloved home, land of the inferiority complex. Where our biggest sports rivalry is against a team that doesn't know we exist and where the catch-phrase is "Thank God for Mississippi".

Our great poet laureate, and only real poet of note, John Gould Fletcher summed it all up perfectly when he wrote about his home state's role in the Civil War..."It was the people of the State who had to make this war, abandoned and betrayed and alone. And they fought with a grin of pain on their faces, as if to say to all beholders: 'We know we are nothing but backwoods trash, inferior to everybody, It does not matter to anyone. We will still fight on.'"

That's the people of Arkansas even today. We don't care who loves us, we don't care who understands us, and we don't even care if we are internally inconsistent. We will still fight on.