Donal: Is Occupy Over?
Ramona's Piece de la Resistance (Including Pics of Obama, Romney, FDR)
dagblog To Give Away Logoed Hairshirt To Most Effective Lamenter Of Left's Ineptitude
|
Donal: Is Occupy Over? Ramona's Piece de la Resistance (Including Pics of Obama, Romney, FDR) dagblog To Give Away Logoed Hairshirt To Most Effective Lamenter Of Left's Ineptitude |
Read |
When I was a junior at the University of Illinois, there was a furor not to be resolved for twenty years about the appropriateness of using the Indian tribe nickname Illini in sports competition. Mocking both the controversy and Illinois' student body at once, a columnist for the Daily Illini sarcastically set the matter to rest by saying the nickname could stay, because University anthropologists had discovered that the Illini were really a tribe composed almost entirely of white residents of suburban Chicago. While the University has become more diverse over the years, its alumni and students remain Chicago-centered. Taking advantage of this Chicago-centrism, the basketball program had the bright idea in the mid-'90s of having the Illini play in Michael Jordan's United Center, originally to the same Bulls-style introductions. Happily, today's Illini include scrappy backup point guard Jeff Jordan, son of the one and only. As they get set to drub a weak Georgia team that -- late in a home game -- trailed the mighty Presbyterian Blue Hose of the Big South 36-34, I'm remembering some of the most exciting UC experiences I've had with the Illini. There have been many, from Frank Williams' Illini handling Kirk Hinrich's Jayhawks, to Illinois beating Shareef Abdur-Rahim's Golden Bears of Cal, to the foul-shot driven December 2005 comeback over a good Xavier team. But here are three that stand out for me.
1. Illinois 81, Arizona 73 (December 16, 2000). Lute Olson's team was more loaded than half of today's NBA teams. The Wildcats featured NBA All-Star Gilbert Arenas on the wing. NBA All-Star Richard Jefferson at forward -- backing up NBA vet Luke Walton. A seven foot, high school All American center (Loren Woods). One of the best college point guards of this decade (Jason Gardner). A beastly power forward in Farragut's Michael Wright. After losing in Maui to the Cats 79-76, the Illini played a physical game behind the banging and midrange jump-shooting of center Marcus Griffin and the in-your-shirt Rodmanesque flair of Lucas Johnson. The difference was probably the six threes that Sean Harrington and Frank Williams made. But my best memory of that game was Olson leaping off the bench and berating Johnson on the floor after Johnson went chest to chest with Arizona's good-natured, big-haired Gene Edgerson (now a Globetrotter, and a good one). In this one, Illinois made nine more free throws than did Arizona -- quite unlike the Elite Eight game three months later between these teams when an NCAA record number of free throws carried Arizona over top-seeded Illinois 87-81. The UC, not the loudest building ever, was filled, rocking, and loud. Lute lost his stuff. Self's boys were banging, and shirt-grabbing. And winning.
2. Illinois 72, Indiana 69 (March 10, 2000). Bobby Knight never won a game in the Big 10 tournament. That's memory enough, eh? I was lucky to be there (well, I always found tickets from someone in my firm during the many UC Big 10 tourneys) when unranked Illinois toppled number 13 Indiana to keep Bobby's oh-fer intact. The win was very dramatic, both as a close-fought affair that would put one team in the conference semifinals, and secondarily, as Cory Bradford sought to keep alive his streak of 59 consecutive games in which he'd hit a three-pointer. With seconds remaining, Bradford had no threes, and Illinois and Indiana were locked up at 69. With 1.3 seconds left, Sergio McClain penetrated, found Bradford deep in the left corner, and Cory took care of both of those problems. The UC was up for grabs. Knight, already T'ed up in the first half, was a picture of impotent disgust. One choked player later, Bobby was off to Texas Tech, and would never again darken the courtside of this rivalry (though I'd rather see him than Eric Gordon.) Bye bye, Bob.
3. Michigan State 67, Illinois 50 (March 7, 1999). In one of the most improbable runs in the history of conference tournaments, Lon Kruger's point-guardless and young 1999 Illini -- dead last in the conference, 11th at 3-13 -- defeated three teams ranked in the top twenty-five to get to the finals. Of course, it didn't hurt that the tournament was played at, you guessed it, the UC, in Chicago, in front of so much of the loyal Illinois fan base. After Illinois edged sixth seeded Minnesota 67-64, trounced 3 seed Indiana 82-66, and shockingly held off top ten ranked and 2 seed Ohio State 79-77 behind loads of timely shooting, my mission was clear. I found good scalped tickets (15th row above a bench) and took my Illinois fan Dad to the Big 10 Championship at the UC, where we watched the fourth-game-in-four-days kiddie corps run out of gas. Illinois was as close as 27-22, but you could see the lack of lift in Bradford's legs, the fatigue in Sergio McClain, and most importantly, the Final Four excellence of a great MSU team. But it was great to be there to clap at the game's end for the heroism of that team's effort. I saw someone from the NCAA say on CBS that day that had Illinois won (with four wins over ranked teams on consecutive days), it would have drawn an 8 seed -- with a 15-17 record. Amazing stuff.
Today's Georgia game, with its weak opponent and understandably subdued crowd, reminded me of the December 1998 Bradley-Illinois UC affair: another dull, poorly attended UC game that Illinois won early in a year that ended eventfully. That game ten years ago featured a bunch of kids who showed flashes -- Krupalija passing, Johnson rebounding, Bradford shooting -- of what they would become. Today's flash was another fast start for Demetri McCamey: at the 12:20 mark, McCamey 13, Georgia 6, Other Illinois Players 6. Just as importantly, the stifling defense from the Tulsa game was in the house, holding listless Georgia to eight points at the 9:00 mark, and carrying the Illini during some spotty shooting of their own. The second half was marked by crisper, more efficient ball movement and tough D, culminating with a smothering, dunk-and-three laden game-closing 22-0 run. For critics, there were some causes for concern, here and there: this Illinois team is susceptible to its own lazy passing, and to aggressive, athletic big men. But the generally crisp ball movement, greatly improved offensive efficiency, and solid defense outweigh those flaws. Without adding a single special memory, this one adds an RPI neutral site win the Illini were supposed to get to a campaign that looks a little more promising with each game.
Check out my recurring Illini hoops column here at dagblog, beginning with Tuesday night's column arguing that despite the Clemson loss, Illinois is back.
Perceptive Dagblog readers know the difference between Obama, Romney and Bush:
Obama NYT today: .how President Obama’s thinking about what he once called “a war of necessity” began to radically change less than a year after he took up residency in the White House....The aide told Mr. Obama that he believed military leaders had agreed to the tight schedule to begin withdrawing those troops just 18 months later only because they thought they could persuade an inexperienced president to grant more time if they demanded it. “Well,” Mr. Obama responded that day, “I’m not going to give them more time.”...Mr. Obama concluded in his first year that the Bush-era dream of remaking Afghanistan was a fantasy...
Mitt Romney, Feb. 2012 : LAS VEGAS -- LAS VEGAS -- Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Wednesday night blasted President Obama and his administration for “putting in jeopardy” the nation’s military mission by signaling it hopes to end its combat mission in Afghanistan by the middle of 2013.
Appearing at a campaign rally here shortly after landing in Nevada, Romney said Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta’s statement Wednesday that U.S. forces would transition from a combat mission in Afghanistan next year “makes absolutely no sense.”....
George W. Bush, from May, 2003: BBC - "We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide... Free nations will press on to victory,"
Bush Afghanistan strategy : Gen. Douglas E. Lute, who had spent the last two years of the Bush administration trying to manage the many trade-offs necessary as the Iraq war consumed troop and intelligence resources needed in Afghanistan, arrived with a PowerPoint presentation. The first slide that General Lute threw onto the screen caught the eye of Thomas E. Donilon, later President Obama’s national security adviser. “It said we do not have a strategy in Afghanistan that you can articulate or achieve,” Mr. Donilon recalled three years later. “We had been at war for eight years, and no one could explain the strategy.”
Mitt Romney isn’t very far into the vice presidential selection process. But according to a dedicated band of conspiracy theorists, the pick is all but a lock: Sen. Marco Rubio.
That’s the current thinking among a worldwide collection of activists who are obsessed with the secretive Bilderberg Group, an alternating roster of global power players who loom as large — if not larger — in the online fever swamps of the fringe as the Trilateral Commission or the Council on Foreign Relations.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76518.html#ixzz1vN5egowz
Aristotle and Plato didn’t agree on much, but they were united in identifying wonder as the origin of their profession. As Aristotle said, “It is owing to their wonder that men . . . first began to philosophise.” This idea appeals to scientists, who frequently enlist wonder as a goad to inquiry. “I think everyone in every culture has felt a sense of awe and wonder looking at the sky,” wrote Carl Sagan in 1985, locating in this response the stirrings of a Copernican desire to know who and where we are.
Yet that is not the only direction in which wonder may take us. To Thomas Carlyle, wonder sits at the beginning not of science, but of religion. That is the central tension in forging an alliance of wonder with science: will it make us curious, or induce us to prostrate ourselves in pitiful ignorance? We had better get to grips with this question before we too hastily appropriate wonder to sell science. That is surely what is going on when pictures from the Hubble Space Telescope are (unconsciously?) cropped and coloured to recall the sublime iconography of Romantic landscape painting, or the Human Genome Project is wrapped in biblical rhetoric, or the Large Hadron Collider’s proton-smashing is depicted as “replaying the moment of creation”. The point is not that such things are deceitful or improper, but that if we want to take that path, we should first consider the complex evolution of the relation between science and wonder.
[....]
Pretending that science is performed by people who have undergone a Baconian purification of the emotions only deepens the danger that it will seem alien and odd to outsiders, something carried out by people who do not think as they do. Daston believes that we have inherited a “view of intelligence as neatly detached from emotional, moral and aesthetic impulses, and a related and coeval view of scientific objectivity that brand[s] such impulses as contaminants”. It is easy to understand the historical origins of this attitude: the need to distinguish science from credulous “enthusiasm”, to develop an authoritative voice, to strip away the pretensions of the mystical Renaissance magus who acquired knowledge through personal revelation. We no longer need these defences, however; worse, they become a defensive reflex that exposes scientists to the caricature of the emotionally constipated boffin, hiding within thickets of jargon.
... We’re trying to harness photosynthesis. A key part of photosynthesis is what happens when the sun goes down. Cells convert CO2 into sugar and fat molecules. And they store the fat to burn as energy to get them through the night ... We’re trying to coax our synthetic cells to ... store far more fat than they actually were designed to do, so that we can harness it all as an energy source and use it to create gasoline, diesel fuel, and jet fuel straight from carbon dioxide and sunlight. This would shift the carbon equation so we’re recycling CO2 instead of taking new carbon out of the ground and creating still more CO2. But it has to be done on a massive scale to have any real impact on the amount of CO2 we’re putting into the atmosphere, let alone recovering from the atmosphere.
... We envision facilities the size of San Francisco. And 10 or 15 of those in this country. We need sunlight, seawater, and non-agricultural land, but you need a lot of photons to drive this. You need a lot of surface area of sunlight to do that. It’s a great use for Arizona. Lots of sunlight there.
... If we can’t get some key scientific breakthroughs within the next couple of years, it probably won’t happen in 10 years. So it’s something that’s really dependent on fundamental science. But we’re already able to do things that were once seen as impossible.
... I think the new anti-intellectualism that’s showing up in politics today is a symptom of our not discussing these issues enough. We don’t discuss how our society is now 100 percent dependent on science for its future. We need new scientific breakthroughs—sometimes to overcome the scientific breakthroughs of the past. A hundred years ago oil sounded like a great discovery. You could burn it and run engines off it. I don’t think anybody anticipated that it would actually change the atmosphere of our planet. Because of that we have to come up with new approaches. We just passed the 7 billion population mark. In 12 years, we’re going to reach 8 billion. If we let things run their natural course, we’ll have massive pandemics, people starving. Without science I don’t see much hope for humanity.