We're having some bad weather here in central Texas. This morning, a normal one hour commute into Austin took me two hours. I left at 6:30 and rolled into the office at 8:30. That sucks and the bad weather hasn't even gotten here yet. They're expecting freezing rain by tonight. That's great - I may never make it home again.

On my drive in this morning, I saw something interesting. I found myself behind a car with a sticker on it that said,"I'm Proud to be Everything the Right Wing Hates."

That struck me as odd. I can almost appreciate someone (especially in Austin) being proud to be a left wing liberal. (Notice I said "almost.") But, this statement made me think a little bit.

Let's see. If she's proud to be everything the right wing hates. Does that mean she's a communist? Is she a socialist? How about a baby killer, or a crack addict?

Those are some things right wingers hate. Right?

Is she proud to be a welfare fraud? Maybe she's a judge who sentenced a violent rapist to probation. I'm pretty sure right wingers would hate that.

I have a theory.

Maybe she's the one filled with hate. I think she just hates right wingers. Maybe she hates anyone who doesn't see things her way or think the same way she thinks.

Usually when I see stupid things like that sticker, I just laugh and think "what a freakin' idiot." Actually, this morning after a chuckle, I kind of felt sorry for the poor woman. Either she really is an idiot, or she's so filled with hate, she can't help but exude it.

And she's trying to put a different spin on her own hate by making a stupid statement about being proud to "be everything the right wing hates." Like she's trying to imply that the right wing is evil because they hate some things.

Are people evil because they hate evil? Hmmmm. It's a paradox.

I wrote a post a long time ago about debate and arguing an issue in a civil way. I think we're on the verge of losing that. Everything is either black or white now. You're either for something or you hate it. There's no in between. And we certainly don't want to listen to the other side's argument.

Because this woman has a left wing way of thinking, she hates the right wing. I'm sure there's plenty of that sentiment on both sides. But, it seems the lefties are a lot more vocal about it. Maybe it's an Austin thing. Who knows?

I see it every day driving around. I see stickers on the backs of pickup trucks of Calvin pissing on Ford, Chevy, Dodge, take your pick. First of all, I think that's just about as immature as can be. Secondly, I think it's stupid. Why should I hate a Ford, just because I like Chevy? It just so happens that I prefer Chevy over Ford, but I don't hate Ford.

There are lots more examples of the lack of civility. These are just a couple of my recent observations. Maybe one day we'll decide to be civil toward one another. That would be nice, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

posted by Dash | 10:48 AM | |

Only my fellow college football geeks will appreciate this one, but I'm getting ready for some bowl games. There really are way too many these days. I'm not all that interested in the Gallery Furniture Bowl or the Pedro's Paint & Body Bowl, but there are some good ones out there to look forward to.

I found an article today about the Rose Bowl. It seems there are about four or five teams out there under consideration and my No. 5 Tigers have apparently become front runners.

No disrespect to Tammi's Fighting Irish, but I'm hoping to not see a rematch between Michigan and Notre Dame. We've already seen that game this year and it wasn't pretty. LSU has never been to the Rose Bowl and has never played Michigan. So, I'm hoping they choose the Tigers.

Of course, all this is assuming USC wins this week against UCLA and goes on to play Ohio State for the BCS Championship. If for some wild reason USC loses this week, Michigan would likely jump back to No. 2 and USC would go to the Rose Bowl as the No. 3 or 4 team. I wouldn't mind seeing LSU play them either.

So, I guess on Sunday, we'll find out what teams are going where. Good luck to all of your teams, wherever they may land.

Here's the article for your reading pleasure.

BATON ROUGE -- Today is day three of the seven-day run for the roses between LSU and Notre Dame, and LSU appears to be winning so far.

The BCS No. 5 Tigers (10-2) and the BCS No. 10 Fighting Irish (10-2) on Sunday started the race for the Jan. 1 BCS Rose Bowl in Pasadena, Calif., to likely play BCS No. 3 Michigan (11-1) after Notre Dame's lopsided, 44-24 loss to USC that tumbled the Irish five spots in the BCS ratings. The Rose Bowl will announce its decision on Sunday after BCS No. 2 USC (10-1) plays 14-point underdog UCLA (6-5) on Saturday.

Rose Bowl CEO Mitch Dorger seemed very interested in LSU in an interview with Gannett Louisiana on Monday and pointed out some advantages LSU has over Notre Dame without being asked.

"The BCS in general doesn't like rematches," Dorger said. "They strongly encourage against rematches."

Dorger said Michigan is a lock for the Rose Bowl should USC beat UCLA and thus advance to the national championship game on Jan. 8 in Phoenix, Ariz., against BCS No. 1 Ohio State. Michigan and Notre Dame already played this season, and Michigan won 47-21 at Notre Dame on Sept. 16.

"We are mindful of the outcome of that game, and that will be considered in our discussions," Dorger said.

He was less diplomatic concerning a possible USC-Notre Dame rematch in the Rose Bowl should USC lose to rival UCLA on Saturday.

"The USC-Notre Dame game was not very close," he said. "Why would you do that again?"

In an interview with Baton Rouge radio station WSKR (1210 AM) later Monday, Dorger added that Michigan and Notre Dame also play every year and that one reason the Rose Bowl matched up Texas and Michigan after the 2004 season was because those two schools had never played.

LSU and Michigan have never played, and there are no plans for the two teams to play in the future.

Dorger, when asked by Gannett if the way Notre Dame lost at USC Saturday hurt its chances at a return to the Los Angeles area for the Rose Bowl, answered, "What I would say is if they had finished closer it would have strengthened their candidacy."

Notre Dame fell behind 21-3 and was never close the rest of the way. In its last four games against elite competition "" USC the last two seasons, Ohio State in the Fiesta Bowl last season and Michigan this season "" the Irish lost by 63 points. And incidentally, Notre Dame has lost eight straight bowls, not winning one since the Cotton in 1993.

It has not been closer than two touchdowns in the last four.

Without being asked specifically about LSU, Dorger added, "A No. 5 LSU with its capabilities is a very strong candidate for consideration."

Asked at the end of the interview if he had anything to add, Dorger said, "We are getting a lot of interest from LSU, and LSU is clearly a very strong team and deserving of every consideration."

LSU athletic director Skip Bertman has been busy getting information to the Rose Bowl about LSU fans' large attendance at recent bowls and the fact that LSU's pre-sold bowl tickets this season are approaching 20,000. The Rose Bowl allots a minimum of 20,000 tickets to each school but will give more if needed.

"We come early and stay late," Bertman said. "People know that about us now."

Dorger at first said the Rose Bowl is considering only four teams "" Michigan, USC, Notre Dame and LSU, not necessarily in that order. Later in the conversation, he added BCS No. 4 Florida (11-1) as a candidate, should the Gators lose the Southeastern Conference championship game on Saturday to Arkansas. If Florida beats Arkansas, it must go to the BCS Sugar Bowl. Dorger said the Rose Bowl was not interested in BCS No. 9 Arkansas (10-2) should it lose the SEC championship game. Should Arkansas beat Florida, LSU would likely replace the Gators at No. 4 in the BCS standings. This would give the Rose Bowl a No. 3 vs. No. 4 BCS matchup if it selects LSU to play Michigan.

Asked by WSKR talk show host Jimmy Ott if he would like such a match-up, Dorger said laughingly, "I'll let you answer that."

Dorger, who has been with the Rose Bowl for seven years, spelled out the criteria for making his bowl.

"Number one, getting the best game on the field," he said. "Number two, getting a game that is attractive to our television partner on a national basis. And number three, attracting fans to come to Pasadena to see the game," he said. "Notre Dame would fare pretty well when all of those are considered."

The Rose Bowl's television partner is ABC, which is aligned with ESPN. The Notre Dame national fan base is well documented. It is the only college football program that has its home games televised by a national network "" NBC. Notre Dame is a huge brand name that guarantees ratings. The 1993 Notre Dame-Florida State game drew a television rating of 16, which is one of the largest in history for sports. The Michigan-Ohio State game on Nov. 18 drew a 13.

"Notre Dame has a very large amount of alumni and a very large national fan base," ABC Sports/ESPN spokesman Mike Humes said.

The love and hate of Notre Dame works together on TV.

"A lot of people want a chance to see them win or to see them lose," Humes said.

Dorger pointed out that the television lobby is only part of the equation in bowl selection.

"We want the teams we invite to fit all three criteria, not just one or two," he said.

ABC announcers Brent Musburger and Kirk Herbstreit seemed to be lobbying for a Notre Dame-Michigan Rose Bowl during their coverage of the USC-Notre Dame game Saturday, but Humes downplayed that.

"The bowls decide who they want to have," Humes said. "We trust their judgment and expertise. We discuss things with them, but we don't tell them who they should or shouldn't get in their game."

Meanwhile, in South Bend, Ind., there is some feeling that Notre Dame does not deserve a Rose Bowl game against Michigan.

Eric Hansen of the South Bend Tribune wrote, "Notre Dame did nothing Saturday night to convince the college football world that it would be a competitive game. An SEC team "" either LSU or possibly Florida "" would seem to be palatable."

©Gannett Louisiana Newspapers
November 28, 2006

posted by Dash | 10:07 AM | |

Def: An honor code or honor system is a set of rules or principles governing a community based on a set of rules or ideals that define what constitutes honorable behavior within that community. The use of an honor code depends on the idea that people (at least within the community) can be trusted to act honorably. Those who are in violation of the honor code can be subject to various sanctions, including expulsion from the institution.

Because I'm an avid hunter and outdoorsman, I am a member of a hunting club. Our club leases 1000 acres of land in the Texas hill country upon which we members hunt and enjoy being in the outdoors.

When I first joined this group about six years ago I was excited. Not only would I have a place to hunt, but I'd also be able to hunt with a group that shared my passion as well as some of my ideals regarding hunting.

There were six members in our little club. We were a good group.

After about a year or so, we agreed that it would be a good idea to create some by-laws for the club. We thought it would be wise to put down on paper a set of rules and regulations that we all could agree to. After some meetings and several drafts, we came up with a very clear and comprehensive set of club rules.

These by-laws cover everything from deer management policies to visitor/guest policies. At the end of every winter, we all elect new club officers, make any needed changes and sign the by-laws to show our continued commitment.

This past year we lost one of our charter members. He lives kind of far away and he decided the investment was a little more than his family could handle at the time. Sometimes real life gets in the way of things we want to do for fun. We were sorry to lose him, but we understood his reasons for getting out. He remains a close friend and hopefully he'll be able to join our group again someday.

Consequently our club was in need of a new member. One of the guys had a friend he thought would be a good fit. He brought him out to the camp to meet us and we all agreed that we liked him and wanted him to join our club. He was an experienced hunter, loved the outdoors, was a hard worker, and seemed like he shared our ideals and goals for the club.

So, after we voted to extend an invitation to join, he paid his portion of the lease payment and became a member. He was given a set of by-laws, asked to read them carefully, and sign them to confirm his commitment to the club. He did.

Everything seemed fine for a good while. He lived close to the lease and was often out there working on stuff. When you have a camp, it seems like there is always something to work on. So, we liked having a member who was so interested and able to work around the place.

One of our main rules is that no one is allowed to bring guests until after December 1st. We all pay a lot of money for this place and the December 1st rule gives the members at least four weekends to hunt before others are allowed to come in and hunt. We all agreed to it and made it law. After the 12/1 date, the rule is, if a member wants to take a guest to hunt, he must notify the other five members at least 24 hours before the weekend. Up to this year, that rule has worked well and there haven't been any problems.

We love to take guests out to our lease to hunt, but we have limited accommodations and you can imagine the problems we could have if everyone decided to bring a couple of guests on the same weekend. Also, we have rules about where guests should hunt and what happens if a guest takes a deer, etc. Most of the rules are based on safety and common sense. If we didn't have these rules, it could get ugly.

Even though we have these by-laws, we still depend on the honor system. We depend on each other to comply with the rules even when no one else is around. It's a matter of integrity and trust. Even with the laws we have in place, there has to be an honor system.

Well, unfortunately we discovered that our new member can't be trusted to follow the rules when he thinks no one will find out what he's doing. He was caught bringing some of his friends from work out to the lease to hunt during the week when he thought no one else would be there.

Our by-laws are very clear about the penalty for willfully breaking the rules. The club has the option to place the member on probation or go ahead and terminate the member.

In this case, the club was prepared to give him another chance. Unfortunately, instead of being contrite and apologetic, he chose to be very defensive and even belligerent about the situation. In fact, he even had the temerity to call us chicken shit for calling him to the carpet for the infractions.

At that point, it was unanimous that we had made a mistake and his membership was terminated. Two of our members met him at the lease the next morning where they helped him load up his belongings and escorted him off the property. Then the locks to the gates were changed and the landowner was informed. If he is seen on the property in the future, he will be considered to be tresspassing and will be arrested.

The sad part about this whole situation was that we all genuinely liked the guy. But, when he broke our trust, and then was an ass about it, we had no choice but to let him go.

We've all invested too much blood, sweat, tears and money in this place to let someone come in and take advantage of what we've built. If we had decided to look the other way, our by-laws and honor system would have been rendered useless.

Our club pulled together and made a hard decision. It's not easy to tell someone that he's not welcome, but that's what we felt like we needed to do to preserve the integrity of the club. I'm proud of that.

posted by Dash | 10:57 AM | |

Since this week at work has been something akin to "Hell Week" in my college fraternity days, this article caught my eye.

First let me say that, yes, I was in a fraternity while matriculating at LSU (more than a few moons ago), but I was not a Deke (DKE).

It was widely accepted as legend and lore that in order to pass from pledge to active member of the Dekes, sometime during Hell Week, one had to "make whoopie" with a goat.

The bad boys of Deke had that "Animal House" rep and were only too eager to make sure everyone else thought that's what they were doing. Of course, they were schooled well in the arena of deniability, and you could never get one of the actives to come out and admit it.

The big joke in my fraternity was that those guys were some sick mofos. We lovingly called them "the goat fuckers."

They were always on "double secret probation" for one thing or another. Food fights in the house were common nearly every night and their parties were legendary. They were some wild and crazy guys. During home football games they would put banners up on their house that said things like: "Tuck Fulane" or "Linda Lovelace Hopes Florida Chokes on the Big One." During Christmas season, they would put up a Christmas tree in their front yard and decorate it with used tampons and condoms.

Irreverent was their middle name. I remember one time during rush week, they put up a sign that said, "If you call your fraternity a frat, what do you call your country?

So, when I saw this article, I thought: Why is this a big story? So they raided the Deke house the night after initiation and found a real live goat. So what?

And now there's this big nasty investigation. The frat is on suspension until the Dean of Students gets to the bottom of why there was a goat in their house. Oooooooh! I'm sure they're all worked up over that. If the Dekes have the same attitude they did when I was there, they'll wear the suspension as a badge of honor.

posted by Dash | 3:05 PM | |

You never know when you're going to need to be able to do this.

posted by Dash | 10:41 AM | |

Once upon a time, on a farm in Texas, there was a little red hen who scratched about the barnyard until she uncovered quite a few grains of wheat.

She called all of her neighbors together and said, "If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?"

"Not I," said the cow.

"Not I," said the duck.

"Not I," said the pig.

"Not I," said the goose.

"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen And so she did. The wheat grew very tall and ripened into golden grain.

"Who will help me reap my wheat?" asked the little red hen.

"Not I," said the duck.

"Out of my classification," said the pig.

"I'd lose my seniority," said the cow.

"I'd lose my unemployment compensation," said the goose.

"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen, and so she did. At last it came time to bake the bread.

"Who will help me bake the bread?" asked the little red hen.

"That would be overtime for me," said the cow.

"I'd lose my welfare benefits," said the duck.

"I'm a dropout and never learned how," said the pig.

"If I'm to be the only helper, that's discrimination," said the goose.

"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen. She baked five loaves and held them up for all of her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share. But the little red hen said, "No, I shall eat all five loaves."

"Excess profits!" cried the cow.

"Capitalist leech!" screamed the duck.

"I demand equal rights!" yelled the goose.

The pig just grunted in disdain.

And they all painted "Unfair!" picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities.

Then a government agent came, he said to the little red hen, "You must not be so greedy."

"But I earned the bread," said the little red hen.

"Exactly," said the agent. "That is what makes our free enterprise system so wonderful. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide the fruits of their labor with those who are lazy and idle."

And they all lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, "I am grateful, for now I truly understand,"

But her neighbors became quite disappointed in her. She never again baked bread because she joined the "party" and got her bread free.

And all the Democrats smiled. 'Fairness' had been established. Individual initiative had died, but nobody noticed; perhaps no one cared... as long as there was free bread that "the rich" were paying for.

IS THIS A GREAT COUNTRY OR WHAT?

H/T to the daily e-mailbag.

posted by Dash | 5:00 PM | |

We've all heard about people having guts or balls. But do you really know the difference between them?

In an effort to keep you informed, the definition for each is listed below...

GUTS - arriving home late after a night out with the guys, being met by your wife with a broom, and having the guts to ask: "Are you still cleaning or are you flying somewhere?"

BALLS - coming home late after a night out with the guys, smelling of perfume and beer, lipstick on your collar, slapping your wife on the butt and having the balls to say: "You're next."

I hope this clears up any confusion on the subject. In reality there isn't much difference since either one will ultimately result in painful death.

posted by Dash | 3:08 PM | |