Delicious...

You can find this at Manuel's Tavern on the corner of North Highland and North Ave. in Atlanta.

Not a Murderer

The feeling I have right now is betrayal. Confusion. This must be what it feels like to be sat down by the two people you've known as "Mom" and "Dad" your whole life and be told that you are not actually their child. But through the fog of anger, there is a beam of hope. Sure, I can wallow in resentment of the secret that has been unearthed, or I can make up for lost time the best I can.

In my mind, I am recounting the hundreds of times it happened. A road trip. A hungover Sunday. Or just one of those days where having Wendy's for the third time in one week doesn't have any appeal. And every time it started with these words: "Alright, I'm going to Chick-fil-A." Let's reach far back. I can remember the last time I had a chicken sandwich from Chick-fil-A. I was in second grade at Calvary, when all of the sudden I bit into one, and out came a tooth. So not only did that put a false notion in my head that eating their sandwiches would make me lose all my teeth, but it happened right around the same time that I had my first allergy test, wherein I learned that I am allergic to all nuts. I am informed that Chick-fil-A cooks all of its food in peanut oil, so that's where it ends.

I don't remember when it began, but somehow the waffle fries became a consolation prize for me. I never technically forgot that they too were cooked in peanut oil, but it just became convenient to ignore after I had no bad reaction after eating them. Stupid? I guess, but it's kind of like "forgetting" to wash your hands after going poo - it's just time to move on to something else, you know? Well, it hit me as I was driving that it's kind of strange that I can eat waffle fries with no consequences, yet it's cooked in peanut oil like everything else they have. I Googled the subject this morning, and there's a reason I've never had a reaction...

I can eat anything at Chick-fil-A. I can be a real person now. Turns out that when peanut oil is heated, it removes the protein from peanuts that causes the allergic reaction. I don't know where to begin. What should I order first? What isn't that great? Teach me to live.

Best Songs of the 90's

If there's one thing our generation will be remembered for it will probably be the terrible music we've had to endure for most of our lives.

The only real exceptions to this have been:

1) The 80's (Michael Jackson, Huey Lewis, Genesis, Tears for Fears, The Police, Wham, Culture Club, etc.), and

2) That short period in the mid 90's that peaked right around 6th grade (1994-1995). For whatever reason, you had lots of good bands from across the spectrum that were putting out good music. Rock music was actually cool to listen to and didn't involve excessive yelling, grunting, spiked hair, tattoos, goatees, and white trash. In short, rock music was something you'd hear on college campuses and on MTV, not in Strip Clubs or GoArmy.com commercials.

By late 7th grade, things started to turn sour (think No Doubt, the Goo Goo Dolls, and the Macarena), and I'm sorry to say that things still have yet to turn back around since.

So here's my top 15 songs from that 5th - 7th grade period, and they might as well be the best songs of the whole decade because it never got any better after this.

P.S. - There are clearly some strange bedfellows here. I'm sure if Silverchair knew they were being lumped in the same category as Hootie and the Blowfish they would collectively commit suicide, but I don't really care. It all felt the same to me at the time. Also, I thought this list up in about 10 minutes so I'm sure I've left some good stuff off, but hey too bad.

15. "Run Around" - Blues Traveler
14. "Self Esteem" - The Offspring
13. "Loser" - Beck
12. "Today" - Smashing Pumpkins
11. "I'll Stick Around" - Foo Fighters
10. "Tomorrow" - Silverchair
9. "Big Empty" - Stone Temple Pilots
8. "Basket Case" - Green Day
7. "Good" - Better than Ezra
6. "Interstate Love Song" - Stone Temple Pilots
5. "Mr. Jones" - Counting Crows
4. "When I Come Around" - Green Day
3. "Ants Marching" - Dave Matthews Band
2. "Let Her Cry" - Hootie and the Blowfish
1. "What's the Frequency Kenneth?" - REM

Honorable Mentions: "Better Man" - Pearl Jam, "1979" - Smashing Pumpkins, "Mmmm...mmmm...mmmm...mmmm" - Crash Test Dummies, anything off Live's Throwing Copper album.

Speaking of...

I just ran across this article on the Drudge Report. Apparently, Bill Clinton thinks that Al Gore will end up running for president before all is said and done.

I read a book by the brilliant political strategist Dick Morris a few years back (Power Plays). In it, he outlines 6 or so "plays" that world leaders throughout history have used to achieve political success. One of them involved owning an issue and standing on principle. He spent an entire chapter explaining that Al Gore lost the 2000 election because he allowed moderates to pull him off of his environmental high-horse. He said back then (2002, I think), that if Fat Albert ever regained ownership of the issue that originally thrust him into the national spotlight, he would emerge from the politcal wilderness. He has done that. Good call, Dick.

Here is how this will play out: Gore will hold out as long as possible, then he "will be forced" to run because no other candidates take the environment seriously enough. Like Mother Nature's Martyr, he will hesitantly throw his hat back into the ring. And, with the support of Hollywood and all the George Clooninites, he will make an interesting run of it. Clinton's negatives are too high, Obama's inexperience will lead to an implosion, Gore will be a contender, and Evan Bayh will hate his life for dropping out so early.

Ted Nugent Makes Sense!?!

Article written for CNN by the one and only Ted Nugent in response to the outcry for more gun control after the VT tragedy. Cat Scratch Fever indeed..

Harry Reid and "Low Carb" Food: The Enemies Amongst Us

First of all, I would like to thank Pat for the invite to join BMBS. It is an honor and a privilege and I will work zealously to advance our common causes.
Now, here is what is gnawing at my brain this week:

1. Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and the new Democratic oligarchy - one that has decided to conduct it's own foreign policy separate from the legitimately elected, constitutionally entitled Bush Administration. As though Squeaker Pelosi's self-appointed diplomatic mission to Syria was not enough (which ended in disaster, by the way), we now have Harry Reid proudly declaring defeat in Iraq.
This should surprise no one. The Democrats gave up on this war before it even began. As it stands now, the troop surge has only been halfway implemented. Let's see what happens and craft a meaningful strategy before we snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
The Left loves to compare Iraq to Vietnam. The only viable comparison between the two conflicts is their defeatist attitude. We can only lose this war if we allow ourselves to do so. By allowing Iraq to become an unstable haven for fundamentalists we would essentially be undermining the sacrfices of 3,000 of our finest. Thanks for speaking for us, Harry.

2. There is a new, revolting spin on the recent Low Carb diet craze. As though Al Gore's Oscar buzz, "carbon footprints", hybrid cars, and Earth Day aren't enough to make me lose my lunch, now my actual lunch might make me lose my lunch. There is a new movement among the green Left to reduce your Carbon "Food"print. That's right. This new "Low Carb" diet is not necessarily low in carbohydrates - it has a low "carbon footprint". The Greenie Weenies now want us to consider the amount of greenhouse gasses emitted by the production and distribution of various foods that we eat.

a) Upside: The new diet is largely centered around reducing transatlantic flights and so forth, which actually promotes domestically produced and distributed foods. Good for farmers and the American food industry.

b) Downside: It is exceptionally gay. And it has serious health implications. Imagine taking a date to Applebee's or some fine American dining establishment like that, and she asks the waitress which meal has the lowest carbon footprint. Not only would you immediately regurgitate your basket of onion peels, but you would quite literally suffocate in the ensuing cloud of Smug that drifts across the table.

That's enough for one day. I Democrat.

PS Harry Reid could learn something:
-To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the crocodile, hoping he will eat you last - but eat you he will. Ronald Reagan

Welcome Chris Lane to BMBS

Finally a true original of the human race has joined our ranks at Beach Music and Boat Shoes. There have been other attempts in the past to get Chris Lane to join this blog, but none have stuck. When asked about these invites, Mr. Lane responded, "Was it in email? Because I signed in one day to my email and had 275 messages in my inbox. So I just deleted them all without looking." This, friends, is a nice analogy for Mr. Lane's approach to life and life's approach to him.

Usually this is where someone like Pat recites the member's accomplishments at BC and other notable details in the honoree's life, but I can barely recall which classes I took senior year, so I won't be doing that (feel free to try in the comments). What I do know is this: On what was supposed to be his last day at the Publix in Atlanta, Chris called in sick so he could go to a Braves game that night. Problem: Unaware that he was choosing to get blackout drunk at a baseball game, his co-workers had passed around a card to sign and had a cake made. Of course, someone caught him having a good old time on the TV broadcast that night and told everyone else.

Welcome, Chris.

____ is a Cool Guy

I was just over at a certain person's blog that covers a certain school's athletics, and I've gotta say - he's doing a damn fine job of keeping it up to date with good information. As I was reading the most recent post's comments (all "anonymous," of course) I realized that he may have a decently sized amount of alumni checking his site on a regular basis. And that's what it's all about. Keep up the good work, _____.

Also, you Savannah folks should be at Grayson Stadium tonight. Yeah, you were at Thirsty Thursday last night, but tonight actually has relevance to the sport you'll be watching. The opposing pitcher is Jon Lester, who had a great rookie season with the Red Sox last year. Unfortunately he had to be treated for cancer, but he's already making his way back. Need more reason to care? He was one of the guys John Schuerholz was trying to get in exchange for Andruw before the trade deadline last year.

Why This Blog is So Sparse

I know why production has slacked off on this blog:

I am miserable because I will never make more than $30,000 a year, and I never do anything.

Joe is miserable because he works at a bank and doesn't go to a keg party every night like he used to.

TC is miserable because he's in real estate. And he's married.

Pat is miserable because he's in law school and is still Pat Holland.

Stephen is miserable because he's no longer bogged down by school, so he doesn't get to play the martyr card anymore.

Will is miserable because he's 24 and has already gotten all he wants. Now it's just downhill from here.

Michael is miserable because he still takes college football too seriously, and Tech has lost to UGA six years in a row.

Tim is miserable because he's in med school and lives in Augusta.

Hypocrites

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton: You constantly lead the charge against racism and degradation. You incited the masses and demanded retribution for Don Imus for his admittedly rude and uncalled-for remark. Mr. Imus has subsequently been fired.

Will you now, you champions of civil liberty, swallow your pride and give the Duke lacrosse team their DESERVED apology for the witchhunt you perpetrated against them?

Tragedy

Most of ya'll know I normally don't cover dramatic, sensationalized current events (trials, murders, shootings) on here. I think there are plenty of newspaper and cable news websites that can do a far better job of that than I could ever hope to. Plus I do a piss-poor job of talking about emotional stuff as it is.

I bring today's tragic event up only because 1) it seems heartless to not stop and mention it apart from the inconsequential, day-to-day shenanigans that constitute this blog, and also because 2) it will without doubt negatively affect people's views of the Second Amendment and give rise to countless debates on whether or not the federal government should enact stricter gun laws.

I will certainly reserve the political stuff for a later date, because to discuss it now would seem brash and presumptuous: it is simply too early to talk about what exactly happened and how or why. So I bring this up for now because it demonstrates how, as (former) college students, everything else we squabble over (i.e. final exams, jobs, etc.) can instantly become meaningless when you realize your life and others can be taken so quickly and in the least likely of places.

Alright, I'm done with the emotional grandstanding, soapbox stuff.

Not cutting it.

Apparently, Mr. Nifong has apologized to the Duke lacrosse players he so furiously went after, with no evidence, and tried to send to prison for 50 years, just to make a strong bid for reelection. The players are having a hard time taking this, as would I.

I think the best possible ending to this story would be Nifong getting convicted of criminal wrongful prosecution, getting raped in prison, and having no one believe him.

The State of Music, R&B Edition: 1967 v. 2007

Peaked at #19 in May of '67.


Has held the #1 spot for the last 2 months.

Global Warming Quiz

I am copying this from Cafe Hayek:

Suppose we discovered that the earth was cooling rather than warming due to a natural cycle. Would you encourage people to drive more and use more carbon-based energy as a way of warming the earth?

You don't have to answer, but I'm curious what Al Gore would say.

Run Fred, Run

I am having a severe case of buyer's remorse after endorsing Giuliani for president a while back. Not only did I not know he was going to come flat out last week and say he'd support taxpayer-funded abortions as president, but I also didn't think Fred Thompson would seriously be considering a presidential run.

If Thompson throws his hat in the ring, I'm much more likely to support him than Rudy. Without Thompson, we have without a doubt the worst Republican field since God knows when. McCain called Bush's tax cuts a giveaway to the wealthy and wanted to be John Kerry's running mate in 2004. Romney can't go an election cycle without changing his position on something. And Giuliani constantly denies that unborn children have a right to live.

Thompson strikes me as someone who can successfully and honestly articulate a conservative response to everything the left tries to throw at us. But he needs to step up soon and make a decision before it's too late. Newt needs to do the same.

The State of Music: 2005 vs. 1965

You be the judge.

Answer: April Pop Quiz

Our question was: When the Federal Government is running a budget surplus, how should Congress spend the extra money?

Just to give a short background, budget surpluses are an extreme rarity in American politics. They occur during those exceptional times when increasing tax revenues are coming in so fast that even Congress can’t find new ways to spend them quickly enough. The last time this happened was in the mid to late 90s, when Republicans controlled the House and the Senate and the Democrats controlled the White House. At first, partisan gridlock made it tougher for either branch to binge too much on spending. This was short-lived, however, because by the late 90s Republicans stopped caring and the binge-spending reemerged.

The question itself, like most of the choices, is flawed in that makes a key false assumption: that Congress should spend the money at all. And 3 of the choices are flawed because they assume that Congress would choose to spend the money wisely on either A, B, C.

We saw poll questions like this countless times during the 2000 campaign, when Gore pledged to use the surplus to create a Social Security lockbox, while Bush said it made more sense to give it back to the people by reducing income tax rates, arguing that Congress' relentless appetite for increased spending could only be kept in check by cutting its diet. Below I've critiqued/explained each choice.

Choice A: Use it to invest in education. It's the 21st century and we need to compete with China and India for the math and science jobs of tomorrow. INCORRECT: We spend thousands more per pupil than any other country in the world. The problem with our schools isn’t lack of funds, there’s more than plenty of money to go around. Instead, the reason for public education decline is lack of competition and choice. We'll "compete" (this term is flawed too, because in a positive-sum world of voluntary exchanges where everyone benefits from the resulting increase in the size of the capital stock, countries don't really "compete" with each other) just fine with China and India by keeping our labor markets deregulated and keeping tax rates low.

Choice B: Use it to save Social Security. We need to protect our seniors first and foremost. INCORRECT: The problem with this answer is three-fold: 1) It scares people into thinking Senior citizens are in danger of losing their Social Security checks, which is totally untrue; 2) Congress simply wouldn’t use the money to do this. Instead they’d waste it on pet projects to ensure they get re-elected; and 3) Because, like everything else, Congress constantly mismanages Social Security, it should be privatized so that you yourself can manage it. Why further feed this broken system in the first place?

Choice C: Use it to pay down the interest on the national debt. We should be committed to keeping our fiscal house in order. INCORRECT: This choice is tempting for fiscal conservatives, but again, the problem with this answer is that Congress would never actually use the money to do this. Anyone who honestly thinks 535 egocentric sleazeballs obsessed only with winning re-election would actually use the money to pay down the national debt is living in a dream world.

Choice D: Return it to the the taxpayers. It's not the government's money in the first place; it's the people's money. CORRECT! The only way to ensure the money doesn’t get wasted on broken entitlement programs or extravagant pork projects is to give it back to the people who earned it. Plus, lower tax rates give people more incentives to save, to work, and to invest, thus raising living standards and making America a better to place for business and voluntary exchange to thrive.

Choice E: Give the money to BC. SOMEWHAT CORRECT. We'd have to see if it would go towards the fine arts department or athletic improvements/public school recruits/hiring Urban Meyer. If it's for the latter instead of the former, I'm all for it.

Thanks to those who participated, all 2 of you. Will's answer came in a close second to Stephen's.

April Pop Quiz

So yea, I just won $100 on Florida, so you know what that means. K-Bob tomorrow. Anyway, I'd like to start a new feature here each month. In reality, this probably will only happen once because I'll forget to do it next time. But hey, enjoy it while you can.

So what I will do is pose a multiple-choice question, usually pertaining to economics, but rather than state the choices in their "true" form as I see them, I instead will present them as their advocates would (you'll see what I mean). Thus, I'm "hiding the ball" a little bit to make it more interesting by offering a few distracting choices that are inherently flawed but still might sound good on their face to some readers.

I'll let our readers offer their own responses, then put up the "correct" answer in a few days. Even if no one responds, I couldn't care less. I will still post and explain why one answer is right and why the other 3 are wrong, because I feel like it.

So anyway, here's our question for the month of April:

When the Federal Government is running a budget surplus, how should Congress spend the extra money?

A) Use it to invest in education. It's the 21st century and we need to compete with China and India for the math and science jobs of tomorrow.

B) Use it to save Social Security. We need to protect our seniors first and foremost.

C) Use it to pay down the interest on the national debt. We should be committed to keeping our fiscal house in order.

D) Return it to the the taxpayers. It's not the government's money in the first place; it's the people's money.

If your answer doesn't conform to any of those 4, feel free to provide your own. Be forewarned, however, that it won't be right.

Opening Day 2007

It's a beautiful day, folks. The Braves open their season today with John Smoltz facing the Phillies at 1:00. With the improved bullpen, potentially great rotation, and solid lineup, the Braves are pretty damn likely to make the playoffs this year. Enjoy.