ONE NBA PLAYOFF PREDICTION COMPLETELY BLOWN BY ME: Kings dispose of Mavs in five.

NBA WRAPUP: The Nets and Spurs had close wins over the Knicks and Grizz to go up 3-0. The Grizz were one of the better stories this season; the new-look Knicks were yet another tabloid-flamed soap opera. Both are about to get swept.

LATEST ADDITION TO THE MANNING HATE FILE: Archie tells Bolts no dice re: Eli. Via SportsFrog. Hey you Spanoses! Just draft Roethlisberger and damn the pedigree. Note the lack of rings on Peyton's fingers as a reason to feel confident about doing that.

"APPARENTLY IT IS POSSIBLE TO BE A POSER AND A WANKER AT THE SAME TIME": The Bruce 'n' Tac show.

CHICKEN SOUP FOR THE BUSH-HATER'S SOUL: Max Sawicky takes out the conservabloggers with one post:

YOU CAN'T BE SERIOUS:
THE FIVE WORST ARGUMENTS IN BLOGISTAN

MaxSpeak is troubled. We see arguments offered by otherwise civil, rational people that strike us as patently absurd. These argurments force us to choose among unappealing explanations. One is that the arguments are offered in bad faith, the better to gull the more dull-witted among us. Two is that we are so ideologically blind that we are incapable of seeing the internal logic of the other side's position. Three is that the issue is too complicated for us to rough out a straight-forward reaction. Examples?

1. The comparison of Thurmond/Lott to Byrd/Dodd. I know Dodd apologized, but for what? Saying something harmless that provoked a stupid reaction? Giving Armstrong Williams, a certifiable fool, something to talk about? I really don't get it. Dodd said Byrd would have been an asset to the nation at any time in its history. The reference was obviously to Byrd at his modern best, not the Byrd who took a leading role opposing civil rights legislation, much less the youthful Klan member over half a century ago.

2. The Memo of Mass Destruction. As Assistant-something-or-other in Clinton's DoJ, Jamie Gorelick writes a memo alleged by the R's to have crippled the Bush Administration's ability to combat terrorism. A f*cking memo. A MEMO. Not even a regulation, much less a statute. Couldn't John Ashcroft, as one of his first official acts, have written a memo of his own entitled, "Jamie's memo sucks"? What kind of excuse is that?

3. The Politicized 9-11 Commission. Judgements of criminal culpability or civil liability aside, politics is the way decisions are made in a democracy. We like that because it's better than, say, dictatorship. Decision-making is more costly, but the results command greater legitimacy and support. The beef with commissioners should not be that they are political, but that their points are not well-founded, if they aren't.

4. The Plame Game. The Bushies were caught dead to rights on this. Determining the perpetrators would be elementary for the president, were he so inclined. Where is the justification in bloviating about the hubbie's political allegiance, in light of that indubitable fact?

5. Musical job surveys. When one survey showed no job growth, an assortment of people demanded we consider the other survey, which came off better. More lately, the bad numbers on the first survey turned around, while the numbers on the other went south. The reaction of the White House's defenders was to hype the good numbers and ignore the bad ones.

One post!

I note with satisfaction that, currently, the term Blogistan seems to refer to the community of politically interested blogs, partisan or otherwise. Though I don't think there are any non-partisan politically interested blogs yet, at least in terms of Bush Luv or Bush Hate. It's an election year, as the great and glorious Blow Hard has reminded me.

THE PSYCHOPATHOLOGY OF THE PSYCHOPATH: Jason Malloy leads us all to Dave Cullen's article on Slate about the post-mortem psychiatric diagnosis of the Columbine killers. It appears that Klebold was your garden-variety depressive-suicidal type, while Harris was an actual high-functioning psychopath. Together, they were trouble:

The diagnosis transformed their understanding of the partnership. Despite earlier reports about Harris and Klebold being equal partners, the psychiatrists now believe firmly that Harris was the mastermind and driving force. The partnership did enable Harris to stray from typical psychopathic behavior in one way. He restrained himself. Usually psychopathic killers crave the stimulation of violence. That is why they are often serial killers—murdering regularly to feed their addiction. But Harris managed to stay (mostly) out of trouble for the year that he and Klebold planned the attack. Ochberg theorizes that the two killers complemented each other. Cool, calculating Harris calmed down Klebold when he got hot-tempered. At the same time, Klebold's fits of rage served as the stimulation Harris needed.

Jason points out the limits of this theorizing:

I should note that despite the conclusive language of the article, it still doesn't really explain what it purports to. For instance psychopaths are about 1% of the population (or 3 million people!), and the article admits that most psychopaths aren't killers. So we have the necessary raw psychological materials, and a plausible interaction effect and that's good but . . .

Right--it still isn't enough to explain Columbine. It does lend substantial detail to the killings, and dismisses the Trench Coat Mafia/jocks vs. geeks analyses that were so common at the time, but it doesn't prove that mixing your depressives with your psychopaths is a sure way to mass murder.

Here's this great Ian Pitchford review of theories of psychopathy that Jason linked to, which is full of interesting stuff:

It is difficult to appreciate just how different the functioning of psychopaths is compared to that of the non-psychopath. After killing a waiter who had asked him to leave a restaurant Jack Abbott denied any remorse because he hadn't done anything wrong, and after all 'there was no pain, it was a clean wound' and the victim was 'not worth a dime' (Hare, 1993, pp. 42-3). The psychopathic serial killer John Wayne Gacy murdered thirty-three young men and boys, but described himself as the victim because he had been robbed of his childhood. Kenneth Taylor battered his wife to death and then couldn't understand why no one sympathized with his tragic loss. One woman allowed her boyfriend to sexually abuse her five-year-old daughter because she was too tired for sex, but then was outraged that social services should have the right to take the child into care. Diane Downs murdered her three children, wounding herself in the process in order to provide evidence for story of an attack by a stranger. Asked about her feelings regarding the incident Downs replied 'I couldn't tie my damned shoes for about two months… The scar is going to be there forever… I think my kids were lucky' (Hare, 1993, p. 53 quoted from The Oprah Winfrey Show, September 26, 1988). Clinicians refer to the emotions of psychopaths as proto-emotions, that is, primitive responses to immediate needs. Hare remarks:

Another psychopath in our research said that he did not really understand what others meant by "fear". However, "When I rob a bank," he said, "I notice that the teller shakes or becomes tongue tied. One barfed all over the money. She must have been pretty messed up inside, but I don't know why. If someone pointed a gun at me I guess I'd be afraid, but I wouldn't throw up." When asked to describe how he would feel in such a situation, his reply contained no reference to bodily sensations. He said things such as, "I'd give you the money"; "I'd think of ways to get the drop on you"; "I'd try and get my ass out of there." When asked how he would feel, not what he would think or do, he seemed perplexed. Asked if he ever felt his heart pound or his stomach churn, he replied, "Of course! I'm not a robot. I really get pumped up when I have sex or when I get into a fight" (Hare, 1993, pp. 53-4).

The Cullen article, by the way, did not deserve the sneering dismissal it got from Brian Doherty, which seemed an excuse just to put REASON's general Szasz-driven anti-psychiatry on display.

YOUR SUBTLE LITTLE HINT OF WHAT COULD GO WRONG WITH THE WOLVES THIS POSTSEASON: From the AP report of their win over the Nuggets last night:

Sprewell was shooting so well that he shook his head in disbelief when Saunders took him out with 1:11 remaining in the first half with just two fouls.

"I'm on fire," Sprewell pleaded.

Garnett wasn't happy, either, shouting toward the bench, "Where's HE going?"

Didn't Flip do something like that with Troy Hudson against the Lakers last year? This tendency towards micromanagement could be the Wolves' undoing.

YESTERDAY: I saw a lady walking her ferret through the streets of Camden. At first I thought she was walking her dead squirrel. I'm glad it was a ferret.

NBA PLAYOFF WRAPUP: On Monday Kobe took over vs. the Rockets (or else the Rockets went into self-destruct mode--I missed the second half) and the Spurs smushed the Grizz again. Last night Nets whupped Knicks, the Pacers pulled away from the Celtics and the Kings edged out the Mavs again. I may have been hasty in proclaiming them done in the first round--there's still plenty of opportunity for them to lose.

Tonight: We can enjoy a Pistons throttling of the Bucks. We can enjoy what will be an entertaining though somewhat meaningless Heat-Hornets game. And we can continue to witness the Wolves climbing into the second round.

A KEEPER: Is this exchange between Scott McLellan and The Press on the "Bandar promises low oil prices in November to help brother Dubya in November":

QUESTION: Can you describe conversations between the White House and Prince Bandar about his essential promise to lower oil prices before the election?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think you heard from Prince Bandar a few weeks ago about --

QUESTION: He didn’t talk specifically about the election.

MR. McCLELLAN: -- the most recent conversation that we had with him regarding oil prices. And he expressed his views out at the stakeout to you all that Saudi Arabia is committed to making sure prices remained in a range, I believe it’s $22 to $28 price per barrel of oil, and that they don’t want to do anything that would harm our consumers or harm our economy. So he made those comments at the stakeout and we’ve made our views very clear that prices should be determined by market forces, and that we are always in close contact with producers around the world on these issues to make sure that actions aren’t taken that harm our consumers or harm our economy.

QUESTION: There were no conversations specifically about the President’s reelection?

MR. McCLELLAN: You can ask Prince Bandar to --

QUESTION: But from the point -- I mean, conversations are obviously two ways.

MR. McCLELLAN: -- what his comments were. But the conversations we have are related to our long-held views that we have stated repeatedly publicly, that market forces should determine prices.

QUESTION: To follow up on that then, I would gather that the White House view is one of expectation that the Saudis would increase oil production between now and November.

MR. McCLELLAN: Our views are very well-known to Saudi Arabia. Prince Bandar made a commitment at the stakeout that I will let speak for itself. You all should look back to those remarks.

QUESTION: We’re missing the allegation here, which is that Prince Bandar and the Saudis have made a commitment to lower oil prices to help the President politically. Is that your --

MR. McCLELLAN: I’m not going to speak for Prince Bandar. You can direct those comments to him. I can tell you that what our views are and what he said at the stakeout is what we know his views are, as well.

QUESTION: Does the White House have any knowledge of such a commitment?

MR. McCLELLAN: I’m sorry?

QUESTION: Does the White House have any knowledge of such a commitment?

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, I’m not going to speak for Prince Bandar. You can direct those questions --

QUESTION: Is there a deal?

MR. McCLELLAN: -- I wouldn’t speculate one way or the other. You can direct those questions to him, but I’m telling you --

QUESTION: I’m not asking you to speculate either. Do you have knowledge of such a commitment?

MR. McCLELLAN: I’m telling you what our views are and what we've stated, and I'm telling you what I do know, which is that our position is very clear when it comes to oil prices and what our views are. And Prince Bandar spoke to you all just a few weeks ago out at the stakeout after meeting with some White House officials and expressed --

QUESTION: So you have no knowledge of such a commitment?

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and expressed their view. I'm not going to try to speak for Prince Bandar. You can direct those questions to him.

QUESTION: The President is confident that the American elections are not being manipulated by the world's largest oil producer?

MR. McCLELLAN: Our view is that the markets should determine --

QUESTION: The market doesn't. It's a cartel.

MR. McCLELLAN: But our view is that that's what -- that the markets should determine prices. And that's the view we make very clear to producers around the world, including our friends in OPEC.

Josh Marshall via Matt Welch. "The market doesn't. It's a cartel." Tee hee.

AGAIN I ASK: Why is Virginia Postrel making with the links to David Frum? Tacitly approvingly, even. Virginia--sweet blogmother--what madness has ensnared ye?

MARK CUBAN WATCH: I am the last person in the world to link to Mark Cuban's blog, which is a quite good. Not a lot of links; it's basically a personal journal from a uniquely self-employed person.

YOUR "CHICKEN SOUP FOR THE LAKER-HATER'S SOUL" QUOTE OF THE DAY: More precisely, of the yesterday

"I don't even have to look at the calendar to know that it's spring coming on summer, with Phil complaining about the officiating," Van Gundy said. "It happens like a rite of passage every spring. And it's interesting. His team shoots more free throws (than opponents), I'm going to guess probably 80 percent in his career. But it's those ... Lakers always getting screwed.

"And I'm really surprised at some of you guys that are probing journalists. If he was a fisherman, he'd have you guys mounted on his wall. He throws the bait out there and then you guys scurry over there and throw your mouths on there, so he can hook you with this whole idea of physical play, Eastern Conference, Jeff Van Gundy mentality.

"Yeah, really. Shaq is a finesse player compared to Yao. And Karl Malone and Kelvin Cato, who's more physical? And you have the Patron Saint, Rick Fox, who never touches anybody. And then you've got Bryant who is bigger and stronger than Mobley. You've got a guy nicknamed `Glove' for a reason. And then you've got the flopper, Fisher, bumping and grinding. So who's the more physical team?

"If you guys would probe a little bit, we're the ones trying to run a little bit. We're the one who scored more than 100 points when we played in the regular season. The only physical team in this series is them.

"Basically, what he's trying to say in his own way is, `You have no right to compete against us. The fans and the media and TV want the Lakers in the Finals, and I expect the league to accommodate us.'

"We were thankful that they sent three men of integrity to referee the game (Saturday), and now we will see who the league sends in here tonight. When Phil asks the league to jump, we'll see how high they jump. And that's all I've got to say."

Stoopid Rockets lost anyway, but it's a nice quote.

UPDATE: Oh, here's a better quote from Jeff:

"If you think O'Neal's fouling out, you haven't been watching the NBA very long," Van Gundy said. "He's not fouling out. One, he's a smart player. And two, he's not fouling out. Yao may foul out, but O'Neal is not fouling out.""If you think O'Neal's fouling out, you haven't been watching the NBA very long," Van Gundy said. "He's not fouling out. One, he's a smart player. And two, he's not fouling out. Yao may foul out, but O'Neal is not fouling out."

THE GAME ONES OF THE FIRST ROUND OF THE NBA PLAYOFFS: Finished over the weekend. 8 home teams won, 8 higher seeds won.

Indiana over Boston: Probably will be a sweep. The scandal du Boston Celtics playoff series this year is that Jermaine O'Neal got dragged down by a Celtic who looked like he was sent out to git Jermaine. Eh, it's pathetic if true--the Celtics need to hurry up and lose, not drag out their losing.

Nets over Knicks: No contest. The story here was Jason Collins flagrant fouling Tim Thomas. Isiah swears revenge.

Spurs over Grizz: Another no contest. I don't think the Grizz are pulling off too many wins in their initial playoff series, as is to be expected.

Lakers over Rockets: A chaotic, enjoyable game, despite the low score (72-71). The Lakers look pretty discomboobalated at this point, and this crazy Van Gundian defensive intensity cannot be helping. But I can't imagine Cat Mobley holding back Kobe again. Pray for seven games with these teams. Tonight:Yao-Shaq X.

Pistons over Bucks: Gawd, the Wallace brothers look good together. And is Larry Brown encouraging Ben to dunk a lot more? It seems that way. When the Pistons smother a team like they did the Bucks yesterday, 'tis a thing of beauty.

Oh, and Darko made two unforced errors when he came in the game--two turnovers, I think. I should track this throughout the playoffs.

Sacto over Dallas: Bobby Jackson said he's definitely done for the playoffs today, so even if they get by the Mavs they have about as much chance of winning the title as the Heat do. There was a time when I would've really looked forward to this series, but at this point team both teams have really worn out their welcomes.

Miami over Hornets: Dwayne Wade is the Heat's go-to guy? Golly. Even more golly--he made the clutch shot in the end there, unlike his more heralded fellow rookies. This and Lakers-Rockets were the two really quality games this weekend in terms of an even level of competition.

Minny over Denver: Those cute li'l Nuggets will be taking their lumps in this series, it seems. Especially if Sam Cassell keeps pouring in the points. The acquisitions of Sam and Spree are looking really good right now, aren't they? I mean, even better than they had been, as I don't think those two are going to let the Wolves choke their way into first-round oblivion yet again.

Tonight: Spurs-Grizz at 8, Lakers-Rockets at 10:30. Both on TNT.

IT'S THAT MOST WONDERFUL TIME OF THE YEAR: The NBA playoffs! Let's break it down a little bit.

EASTERN CONFERENCE
Indiana (1) vs. Boston (8): The Celts are your 8th seed in the craptacular Eastern Conference. There'll be the inevitable Pierce-fueled home win by the Celtics, and then reality will resume. Pacers in 5.

New Jersey (2) vs. New York (7): The goofy incestuous media matchup we all wanted to see. Will the New York Post remember their Nets love? Of course not. This'll be the talk of the town and the pathetic Knicks fans will be all a-talking again and Stephomania will run wild. The Knicks may even win, or drag it out to 7. I'm thinking Nets in 6.

Detroit (3) vs. Milwaukee (6): I am ashamed to admit that I have not watched nearly enough post-Rasheed Pistons basketball this year. Pistons in 5.

Miami (4) vs. New Orleans (5): Welcome your, as Lang Whitaker said, team full of people who want to play in the NBA back to the playoffs--the Miami Heat! The Hornets are below the radar as usual--maybe because they're unwatchable. Miami in 7.

WESTERN CONFERENCE
Minnesota (1) vs. Denver (8): This HAS to be the year Minny gets out of the first round, right? Wolves in 6.

And how come out of the Minnesota Vikings, Minnesota Wild, and Minnesota Twins, the Minnesota Timberwolves are the only ones you can refer to as "Minny"? Is that, like, street or something?

Lakers (2) vs. Houston (7): My probable favorite first round matchup, just to see how well Yao responds to the playoffs. He's always brought his A-game vs. Shaq--and now we have at least four more bouts (rounds IX through XII) of Yao-Shaq. But the Rockets are incredibly inconsistent, and Steve Francis appears to be as uncoachable as ever. And Yao's talking about being tired all the time. Lakers in 7, I'm guessing.

San Antonio (3) vs. Memphis (6): Poor li'l Grizzlies. To have made the playoffs after so many years of futility--and now to get squashed like bugs. The last two Grizz games have not filled me with confidence, unless gettng blown out by two playoff teams is some arcane part of Hubieball. Spurs in 5.

Sacramento (4) vs. Dallas (5): Sacto blew the number two seed last night and now has to face the Mavs. Mark Kreidler in that link is saying the Kings are done and his reasons are valid: Webber isn't that good, Bobby Jackson isn't there, and that they did not win when the choice was as simple as winning the Pacific and not winning it, facing the Rockets or facing the Mavs. Are the Kings thinking to themselves, "Well, we lost to the Mavs last year, but that was without C-Webb. We're sure to win this year." As if it was going to be easy to win against the team that scores more than they do while playing marginally less defense than they do. I think Kreidler's nay-saying has convinced me. Mavs in 7.

MOMENT OF THE BUSH PRESS CONFERENCE I THINK EVEN HIS BIGGEST DEFENDERS WOULD FIND HARD DEFENDING: The complete and utter d-u-c-k-i-n-g of the question about why he and Cheney have to face the 9/11 commission together. There is no explanation other than Bush is completely lost without his advisors, right? No Condi-like argument about presidential privilege being violated--nothing. His ducking was completely blatant too; I think he was thinking, "Yes, you know I'm lost when I have to face any line of questioning not involving baseball I'm not prepared for. Cantcha just give me a pass on this?"

PORNOGRAPHY: Is a prison for narcissists, where they can be put to work and kept from inflicting themselves on the rest of us. There is your random thought of the day.

"Prison" in the sense of that old issue of Miracleman where in Mike Moran's utopia the only people who could not fit in were the former secret agents who had to be caged in their own city where they would spy on each other to their heart's content.

AND I WISH TO AMEND MY EASTERN CONFERENCE PLAYOFFS COMMENTS SLIGHTLY: A Heat-Bucks first-round series would be fun to watch. The Heat are the overachieving Jazz of the East.

TWO NBA ERAS OVER: The Utah Jazz's post-season run ends at 20 and the Portland Trailblazers' ends at 21. Neither won an NBA title in that time. Both ran up against the Bulls buzzsaw in the 90s, and the Blazers had a collapse for the ages against the Lakers. I don't know what else to add--both were consistently really good teams, but never quite good enough.

THE NBA PLAYOFFS: No matter how it shakes out, every Western conference matchup feels like it's going to be epic. Even Nuggets-Spurs, if it happens that way--I don't give the Nuggets much of a chance of winning, but I'd be shocked if they got swept. And we should all be praying for a Lakers-Rockets first round series and the accompanying Yao-Shaq hype of the past two years magnified to the nth degree. This will all be must see, grade point average-destroying television. I cannot afford to watch, yet I cannot turn away....

Meanwhile avoiding the Eastern conference playoffs will not be difficult. Every first-round matchup will be a chore to watch. There's at least two teams with losing records going in; there's the possibility of three .500 teams going in. We'll probably have to wait for the conference finals to get something decent out of this stinkburger of a conference, though comedy value is probably pretty high in the first few rounds. I expect the Knicks to go on some kind of run, leading to the usual incoherency from the pathetic Knicks fans--Steph is our LATEST SAVIOR! Isiah is a GREAT GM! We can trade Houston for Kobe STRAIGHT UP!--before cruel reality sets in. I would love a Knicks-Nets series, one which the Knicks could conceivably win, just for the goofy media posturing.

IT MUST BE NICE: To be able to hire an intern to work on your blog. Betcha that looks great on a resume. "Yes, I interned on a blog for a summer." I mean--I know blogs are like the fifth wheel on the fourth estate or whatever, but they can't be that legit yet. Hey kid! Just start your own blog!

I HEART BILL SIMMONS: Especially where the NBA is concerned, but these celebrations of the aging whiteboy lifestyle have got to stop.

JUSTICE SCALIA: The Thomas Pynchon of Supreme Court justices. Hey Scalia, it's just as weird when you refuse to be recorded!

YOUR GREATEST SEARCH THAT FINDS MY WEBLOG POST OF THE DAY: Google search: "fragile person" agnostic. Never mind those looking for the Teen Titans Bowl Championship Series....

LET ME JUST TACK THIS UP HERE SO I WON'T FORGET WHERE I SAID IT: My contribution to the great DVDVR porn debate:

"I really think there is at least a structural relationship between porn and wrestling. The sleaze content in both industries is displayed pretty openly. Wrestler and pornstars have similar weaknesses at traditional dramatic skills--i.e., expressing a character through the reading of lines--while both have evolved unique ways of establishing character: wrestling's oratory, porn's vocalizations (to put it neutrally). For every barbed-wire brass-tacks match there is a hour-long gangbang, where one marvels at the endurance of the participants but shudders at what they are putting themselves through. For every double anal there is a head-first bump to the floor; for every highspotty match there is two girls pleasuring themselves with glass dildos, shot through a gauzy filter. They are our two great physical spectacles, what opera was to the Renaissance and the saints on their poles were to the Levant.....

Remember that one famous definition of wrestling that Irving Muchnick had? Where homoeroticism meets homophobia? There has to be something similar for porn. Like, where misogyny meets feminism except only Pags thinks feminism explains porn's rise. Where hatred of women meets the sexual power of women. Something like that.

I'm just blue-skying here.I really think there is at least a structural relationship between porn and wrestling. The sleaze content in both industries is displayed pretty openly. Wrestler and pornstars have similar weaknesses at traditional dramatic skills--i.e., expressing a character through the reading of lines--while both have evolved unique ways of establishing character: wrestling's oratory, porn's vocalizations (to put it neutrally). For every barbed-wire brass-tacks match there is a hour-long gangbang, where one marvels at the endurance of the participants but shudders at what they are putting themselves through. For every double anal there is a head-first bump to the floor; for every highspotty match there is two girls pleasuring themselves with glass dildos, shot through a gauzy filter. They are our two great physical spectacles, what opera was to the Renaissance and the saints on their poles were to the Levant.....

Remember that one famous definition of wrestling that Irving Muchnick had? Where homoeroticism meets homophobia? There has to be something similar for porn. Like, where misogyny meets feminism except only Pags thinks feminism explains porn's rise. Where hatred of women meets the sexual power of women. Something like that.

I'm just blue-skying here."

Here too! David Smith added:

"Make it fear of women instead of actual hatred of women and I think you have the beginnings of a graduate thesis there.Make it fear of women instead of actual hatred of women and I think you have the beginnings of a graduate thesis there."

That would be a good little thesis, wouldn't it? Even if it did contribute to the perception that there's a whole lot of rot coming out of humanities departments these days. It could even be considered part of that general rot. Ach, what to do? My heart is clearly in the humanities, yet my wallet craves biodollars. If I was less craven I could just do what I wanted. AND live at home the rest of my life. Dang it.

AND SINCE WE'RE ON THE SUBJECT OF COLLECTIBLES: I realized that I hadn't read one single piece of fiction in 2004 that wasn't a comic book, so I returned to Philip K. Dick, something I'm familiar with, to sort of get me started so I could say to myself that I read something. Dick is great in a lot of ways, but something I always found interesting was that Dick got a lot of things about the future right, not technological things but socioeconomic things. I mean--the obsession of the colonists in a bleak Martian landscape with their Barbie doll-like Perky Pat layouts in The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch> arguably prefigures the entire adult collectible market in our own bleak--or to put it more charitably, frontier-like--American cultural landscape. Well, there's a lot of those little inversions in Dick and in science fiction is general (psychiatrists who make you crazier, but on purpose, firemen who burn books, adults obsessing with toys) so maybe it's just coincidental.

TURNING TO COLLECTIBLES THAT ARE ACTUALLY WORTH MONEY: 21 1930s comics found in insulation of house. Including Detective Comics #2 and New Comics #1, which (the article states) eventually became DC's semi-beloved Adventure Comics. I don't know if it was standard practice to insulate one's home with periodicals or not--so I wouldn't go tearing up your walls yet. I still believe there's a Honus Wagner rookie card buried in a coffee can somewhere waiting for me to find it.

YOUR "WHO'S BUYING THIS, ANYWAY?" COLLECTIBLE OF THE DAY: The Leia-in-bikini-from-Jedi statue. Is there any really tasteful way to display this? Is there any tasteful way to purchase this? This is such the art from the decadent American period that the prudes of the North American Collective circa 2124 A.D. are going to make fun of us for.

DOUBLE UCONNS: And I was thinking as I did my women's bracket that those duel ESPN Mag/Sports Illustrated covers with Taurasi and Okafor on the cover from the beginning of the season were just the usual pathetic attempts to drive up sales by putting the "cute" story on the cover. How often do the teams on the covers of both magazines' college preview issues win the titles? Well, never, just like one school capturing both titles never happens. Crikey.

YOUR AS-IT-HAPPENS POST FROM IRAQ OF THE DAY: Raed in the Middle with a post you should read.

UPDATE: You should read this from Raed's mom (I think) as well. This part I found particulary interesting:

When did all of this tension start?
Maybe two week ago…
After the assassination of Sheikh Yassin of Hamas.
I think that was the spark that started everything…
People went out in the streets protesting and demonstrating againd Israel and The United States.
Some days after that, Muqtada AsSadr declared that he is the attacking arm of Hamas and Hizb Allah, and that he can take this responsibility.
And people applauded and clapped!
Then the American forces closed his journal, and surrounded his office.
There I think the crisis started.

UPDATE UPDATE: Still more you should read, this from zeyad. All thanks to MaxSpeak.

MISERY: Is a general physiology test you study three days straight for and still don't finish in enough time to do the last problem. Plus the gorgeous black-clad girl who sits in front of you, who seems sweet yet self-possessed, finishes after 45 minutes, which only pushes you further into the zone of inadequacy. The sweet, self-possessed girls who are blatantly smarter than me are the one who really get under my skin, for whatever reasons.

On the plus side, I think I may have already won my office NCAA pool, which involves real money. For educational purposes only, of course.

LONG NATIONAL NIGHTMARE OVER: Duke loses.

THE BEST APRIL FOOL'S BLOG POSTS: Are the ones that sound half-way reasonable until you, you know, start thinking about them.