We sat right above the tunnel where the players come out (this is also where the cheerleaders sit and undulate pseudo-sexually). The whole goal of going to a Timberwolves game, of course, is to touch or in some way attract Kevin Garnett’s attention as he walks on and off the court. Unfortunately the man is very intense and either didn’t notice or ignored my hoarse screaming.

I suppose if I were him I wouldn’t be that interested in making brief personal connections with random people I’ll never see again.

At the end of the game (we won) he walked into the tunnel with his head down and didn’t even flinch when people reached out and brushed their hands on his shoulders. How many times did this happen before it became unexciting for him? And when did it stop being weird as hell?

If I walked down the hallway at work and people reached out and put their germy, unwashed hands all over me, I’d probably collapse into the fetal position and cover my head with my hands.

Other players, either because of their relative un-stardom or because they were in better moods, seemed a lot more interested in this whole fan-player tunnel-touching ritual. Ricky Davis high-fived every kid who lined the entrance. Eddie Griffin pretended to remember this (crazy?) trashy lady who claimed she met him at “the club” (is there only one?). This acknowledgment caused her to declare, definitively, that he wasn’t an asshole.

Mark Madsen was the best, because he looked right at me and pointed when I yelled “Mad Dawg!” in that suburban-high-school-jock-voice I sometimes do. Maddy (sorry, that’s what my friends and I call you), if you read this, could you please put a link up on your always-entertaining-and-adorably-sincere-blog? Or, even better (and I know this is asking a lot) could you maybe come out a little early before the next game, turn to the stands and yell “B-DAWG!”?

I can assure you I will not find it weird or off-putting.

As long as you don’t try to touch me.

“What’s the threshold for igniting this kind of outrage in the Muslim world? These cartoons were first published five months ago in a Danish newspaper with a circulation of 150,000. What if they had first been published on my blog, circulation 17? Is there a magic number of people a cartoon has to reach before it sets off a violent reaction?”

Today, we get the answer: the cartoons were published in an Egyptian newspaper in October 2005, and no one made a peep.

No boycotts, no protests, no rioting, no deaths. And this was in October, only a month after they were originally published in Denmark and months before all the outrage.
So what’s the answer to my question?

If a western newspaper publishes offensive cartoons of Mohamed, it’s sacriligeous and merits an ugly, violent response across the Muslim world. If an Egyptian paper does it: no big deal.

Meanwhile, the vast majority of newspaper in the United States (land of free speech) declined to print the images even after the story became worldwide news. They continued reporting on the violence, the protests, and the boycotts without showing readers the images that incited such a response, citing lame excuses about editorial discretion.

Cool. Glad we got this all straightened out.

Freedom of speech: 0

Violence, intimidation and hypocrisy: 1

Well, at least we can try to get some of those laid-off Danish workers their jobs back:

1. How many people would have ever seen the cartoons if there hadn’t been any protests? How many people have seen them precisely because of the protests? Was this the intended effect? (here are some of the offending cartoons, if you haven’t seen them)

2. What’s the threshold for igniting this kind of outrage in the Muslim world? These cartoons were first published five months ago in a Danish newspaper with a circulation of 150,000. What if they had first been published on my blog, circulation 17? Is there a magic number of people a cartoon has to reach before it sets off a violent reaction?

3. According to NPR, Danish companies affected by the boycotts in Saudi Arabia and Iran have had to lay off hundreds of workers. What degree of culpability to those workers have in the publishing of these cartoons? Could they have done anyting about it?

4. When Muslims protesting the publication of the cartoons turn violent (attacking the Danish embassy in Iran, for example), doesn’t that reinforce the stereotypes depicted in the cartoons? Counterproductive, perhaps?

5. How have half a dozen cartoons turned into a Global Crisis? Is it a slow week for global crises? Is this all because there was no SuperBowl wardrobe malfunction to distract people?

6. Of course, the Zionists must be behind this somehow, says the leader of a country of 68 million people. That’s about 5 times the number of Jewish people there are in the whole world (I think it’s right to assume Mr. Khameni means Jews when he says “Zionists”).

Then, just for kicks, make it play on every page of the site, even if the user has already watched the whole thing and muted it. That way they’ll have to scroll down to the bottom and stop the ad every time they load a page.

Or you could just have a big header at the top of every page that says “GO AWAY!” Whatever’s easier.

I watched the Super Bowl tonight despite the fact that I hate the Super Bowl. It’s an overhyped excuse for comercials between two teams that aren’t necessarily the best in the NFL. But the other networks seemed to concede the night to ABC so there wan’t really anything else on.

This ad for the new Toyota Camry hybrid really stood out.

Because it was so terrible. It features a bilingual dad explaining to his son why they bought a hybrid:

Son: Papá, why do we have a hybrid?

Father: For your future!

Son: Why?

Father: It’s better for the air, and we spend less because it runs on gas and electrical power. (Points to dashboard display.) Mira, mira aquí. It uses both.

Son: Like you, with English and Spanish!

Father: Sí!

Son: Why did you learn English?

Father: (Pauses.) For your future!

Both my parents are immigrants from Argentina, and I grew up speaking English and Spanish. I wouldn’t go so far as to say I was offended, but I was definitely put off. The commercial is a blatant, moronic attempt to reach out to the Spanish speaking audience, and the association between hybrid cars and “hybrid” families is forced and unnatural.

When I was growing up, my bilingual parents were working hard on their graduate degrees (for my future!) and saving every penny they could (for my future!). We drove a broken-down 1979 Chevy Monza they bought at the Goodwill for $400. For my parents in 1986, buying a new car to ensure my sucess in the future would have been as ridiculous an idea as signing me up for polo lessons.

But even more than that, the ad just smacks of condescension and false-multiculturalism. I find it annoying, and I’m probably one of the people they were trying to reach out to.

For a more subtl (and probably more objective) analysis, check here.

And hey, if I can wear it, maybe you want to wear it too. So here you go (click the shirt to buy):

Commenting on Microsoft’s (and others’) practice of screening job applicants by IQ scores:

I can save Microsoft a pile of time and money by reporting a fact no school wants to admit, one that will flatten the world far more than any other factor: pretty much everybody is smart.

And, quoting an article by education guru John Gatto:

After a long life, and thirty years in the public school trenches, I’ve concluded that genius is as common as dirt. We suppress our genius only because we haven’t yet figured out how to manage a population of educated men and women. The solution, I think, is simple and glorious. Let them manage themselves.

The whole article is in response to Tom Friedman’s new book (and the accompanying article in the NYT) “The World Is Flat”. I think Searls’ essay is just as valuable as the writing that inspired it.

That means I have to move lots of files and databases to a new server. So posting may be light for a few days while I get everything sorted out.

I’m sorry to see them go.

Besides the election (which happily seems to be floating along quite non-violently), nothing I could write would have a chance of getting much attention this post-election day. There is something about a new puppy; soggy piles of leaves in the back yard; The Lion King. Any of these would make a perfect sacrifice to the election news cycle. But so would a blank page. Even better would be a post about not writing a post, which is what this thing appears to be turning into.

So I leave you to ponder Dan Rather’s incoherencies. My favorite was when he said something about how Missouri would “swing count Bassie.” Just try to imagine what it’s like inside his head. Must be like standing on the half-line of a dodge ball game that’s being played with wet kittens.

See you tomorrow.