So I had some problems with my hosting service (forgot to renew my subscription - whoops!) and so that messed with password cookies (why are they called cookies anyway?) or some such.  I’m no tech whiz so I don’t know.  But I’m back now and this should be up and running again in no time.

I’ll start again with the observation I had after watching some NBA games over the past few weeks: Nate Robinson was right when he said something along the lines of “no one boxes out.”  Seriously, no one in the NBA, especially guards, boxes out.  I can understand this somewhat, as not a lot of teams crash the boards in order to prevent fast breaks, but seriously, I saw no one boxing out.  A lot of players would just turn and watch the shot, exactly what they teach you not to do.  Then again if you’re 6′6″ and freakishly athletic, I’m sure the fundamentals mean a little bit less.  Again, just something I noticed.

Okay, after checking the news this morning, my planned (wait, these are planned?) blog entry has a little bit of a different twist on it, but I’m going to go ahead with it anyway. Yesterday, the New York Sun reported on a conservative Princeton student who was beaten for his views and sent death threats and the likes. It has come out now that he faked the entire thing and had been sending himself the emails and apparently beat himself senseless (the insanity of this is beyond me). But my point isn’t so much about the beating itself, but the fact that after the initial incident, the New York Sun ran the story of the student’s beating on the front page while the New York Times didn’t carry it anywhere in its paper (in hindsight now this seems like a smart thing).

At the time, my boss (a fairly conservative man himself) scoffed at this and blamed it on the Times liberal ways. While the Times certainly has more leftish tidings than the Sun, I wouldn’t necessarily call it a liberal paper especially in the media environment of today. Or at least not leftish enough to completely ignore an attack on a student just because of his conservative view point. Apparently, that is what happened (or maybe they had inside information that it was a hoax - who knows), but this got me thinking about where liberals actually get their news. Sure, plenty read the Times, but the Times is also one of the papers largely responsible for blowing up the Wen Ho Lee case and that was not very liberal of them at all. (I suppose I should note here that I’m using the terms “liberal” and “conservative” very loosely here.)

This is where comedic news sources like The Onion and the Daily Show come in. There have been all sorts of studies done on the amount of people who get their news via the Daily Show and their relative knowledge leve, as well as figures pointing to the fact that the Daily Show has more viewers than most “real” news shows (interesting and perhaps disconcerting). Point being though, these shows (Colbert Report, Daily Show) and The Onion definitely pander to the liberal audiences though they are somewhat unbiased in their bashing of political parties and policies. This is perhaps where the liberals are going for their news in a media environment where people sometimes ask “What Liberal Media?”. (SO MANY LINKS!!)

Perhaps this all links back to post modern theory (Ha! You knew this was coming didn’t you?). News shows themselves have become shows. It’s meant to give the illusion of reporting and unbiased news (WE REPORT YOU DECIDE, YOU GIVE US TEN MINUTES WE’LL GIVE YOU THE WORLD) and all that mumbo jumbo, but it’s all, pardon the Italian, merda di cavallo. So in a world that is entirely an illusion, is the illusion that admits its an illusion more real? Is reporting that admits its a farce and a comedy of errors more full of truthiness? Well that is the question. (I am unsure whether I actually fully addressed my liberal news angle on this, but Phuket).

On the subway ride to work toady, I saw a woman reading the New York Times and on the front page was an article concerning the recent peace talks between Israel and Palastine with an accompanying picture of Bush and the Israeli and Palastinian leaders. And this got me thinking (not about the peace talks, which are all well and good, but in some sense as futile as they’ve ever been - always good to talk though) about how hard it must be to translate what President Bush is saying into another language. I mean I have a hard enough time understanding what he says in English. How do you possibly translate it?

There’s been a bit of a dry spell here what with the holidays and my own slight freaking about grad apps (WE GOT APPS! - Beautiful Girls, anyone?), but I seem to be finally through the storm. I sent out a couple of the apps yesterday and am working on sending out a few more by the end of the week. Then it’s in the hands of a bunch of random strangers who’ll judge me based on stories and personal statements that I’ve gone over some many times by now that I’m not sure if they’re actually good or if I just got tired of reading them.

In sadder news, I’m sure you heard of the death of Sean Taylor, a Washington Redskins’ safety. Or maybe you didn’t hear about it, but either way he got shot in his home and bled to death last night. Terrible incident. Interestingly though, Michael Wilbon didn’t seem to have too much sympathy for Taylor saying,

Whether this incident is or isn’t random, Taylor grew up in a violent world, embraced it, claimed it, loved to run in it and refused to divorce himself from it. He ain’t the first and won’t be the last. We have no idea what happened, or if what we know now will be revised later. It’s sad, yes, but hardly surprising.

I understand where Wilbon is coming from (and in fact, this quote is taken a little out of context - read more of the link), but he really expresses no sympathy for the guy. He constantly says he’s not surprised and even seems to be a little snide to people who ask questions that suggest Taylor may have changed since the birth of his daughter. Look, I don’t know Sean Taylor and I don’t have as much access as Wilbon obviously, but some modicum of well-wishes wouldn’t be out of line. He’s even snide to people who ask where to send flowers or cards. Bizarre to me, but like I said, I suppose I see where Wilbon’s coming from (given his own explanation), I just think he could have been a little bit nicer given this was moments after the news broke.

At least as much as a cell can do such a thing. The New York Times reports today that stem cell researches have found a way to create the cells without needing an embryo, a find that renders the majority of ethical questions moot (don’t I sound like a lawyer now). While I was not one who had a real ethical problem with using stem cells from embryos, I recognize that this discovery is a big one because it will allow researches to most likely get more funding, go ahead with more research, and generally be able to find the true power contained in the stem cells. Stem cells seem to hold the power to be an incredible health tool, but as the article mentions, research has been held back. Whether this is because of scientific limitations or ethical dilemas and a conservative government and populace worried about such a thing (probably the latter), research has been stagnant. Hopefully now that it seems that ethical questions are out the window so to speak, research can go forward in an orderly manner.

On TrueHoop this morning, I saw an interesting little bit on an apparent feud between Mark Cuban and Bill O’Reilly over Cuban’s financing of the film Redacted (which I don’t know a lot about). I suppose there isn’t much new here. O’Reilly is over the top, unfounded, and all that type of stuff, but I thought there was a good breakdown of it all on the blog and also on Cuban’s blog and Olbermann or however you spell his name (fact check be damned!) does a good job ripping it too. Like I said, nothing really new, but its nice to see Cuban’s response because he understands media and advertising so well that he’s able to thank O’Reilly essentially because he knows that O’Reilly ripping it will probably prompt more people to go see it. Fun.

By now, Stephon Marbury has rejoined the Knicks and came off the bunch last night in the Knicks losing effort against the Clippers (Where’s that 2-1 start now?!?!), but before that there was all sorts of speculation going on about what was happening and people were already putting together trade scenarios (I liked the Marbury trade to bring him here - I honestly did - but now with the team we’ve got I’m not sure where he fits, we need more of a disher than a swisher to use Clyde Fraiser’s dictionary). Now, it seems that the fences are mended and the cows are all in place (for now - is Marbury going to stay on the bench?), and it also seems that Marbury may have had a pretty good reason for bolting from the team. I think people were quick to jump on Marbury because of a lot of the insanity that went on during the off-season with his non-sensical interviews, his finding of Christ (that happened or did i dream it?) and of course his testimony, but this absence seems fairly legitimate. 195K worth of legitimate, it seems.

Bad news for the NYPD. Another accidental killing of a young kid who was holding nothing but a non-lethal weapon - in this case a hairbrush. There are some complications, as there always are, in this situation and some indication that firing on the kid may have been warranted, but warranted or not there is such a thing as a warning shot or a non-lethal shot, and from what I can tell, there was no need for 20 (read it, TWENTY) rounds fired. Fire one. Fire one at his knee. Fire two at his knee. I just don’t see the need for 20 shots, 13 which hit him. Again, as I said, its not cut and dry that they shouldn’t have fired, but 20 times? It seems that the rules of engagement are a little off.

Oh, and not to make light, but one of the witnesses’ names is “Precious Blood.” Yes.

Okay, now this is just weird and somewhat insulting. The NASDAQ Times Square clock has not been set back for day light savings. I can understand it running a minute or two fast because as I’ve said before, New York City is just ahead of the rest of the world, but this is just throwing dirt in the face of the time honored tradition of daily light savings.

Funny thing is, I personally don’t see why we do it. Basically this means that we get more sun in the morning, but when we leave work its dark. I mean besides the oddity of setting clocks forward and backward, it seems to me that I’d rather have a little light to come home from work in than have the sun shine through my window.

But hey, if this gets you down, at least the surgery on that girl wit height limbs went okay. 8 limbs?? COOL!

For those of you politically inclined, there is this gem offered up by Dennis Kucinich from the debates last week. Seriously, how does this man continually run? I don’t get it. More importantly, why? I mean, I guess its the best way to get your insane views out there in a serious forum. But seriously, how does this man get a seat at the debates and Nader (as little as I like him) not? How does this stuff work? Isn’t it something like he has to get 5% of the vote to be on debates? Or is that just presidential debates? I think that’s just presidential. So that means anyone who runs in the primaries gets on? I guess that’s how all those people in Cali got on for the Gubernatorial race back when the Gubernator won. All I have to say is: Yikes.

Though props to Obama for the little reversal at the end there. Good times.