Tuesday, May 10, 2005


I always thought Jim Lampley was just pompous. Now that Arianna has inexplicably given him a soapbox, I learn that he has much deeper problems.
At 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on Election Day, I checked the sportsbook odds in Las Vegas and via the offshore bookmakers to see the odds as of that moment on the Presidential election. John Kerry was a two-to-one favorite. You can look it up.
No, man, I trust you. Shoot, you're Jim Lampley!
People who have lived in the sports world as I have, bettors in particular, have a feel for what I am about to say about this: these people are extremely scientific in their assessments. These people understand which information to trust and which indicators to consult in determining where to place a dividing line to influence bets, and they are not in the business of being completely wrong.
Yeah, I know what you mean, Jim. For instance, a 50-1 longshot couldn't possibly win a race like the Kentucky Derby.
Oddsmakers consulted exit polling and knew what it meant and acknowledged in their oddsmaking at that moment that John Kerry was winning the election.

And he most certainly was, at least if the votes had been fairly and legally counted. What happened instead was the biggest crime in the history of the nation, and the collective media silence which has followed is the greatest fourth-estate failure ever on our soil.
Uh, Jim, you're kinda weirding me out here . . . .
Many of the participants in this blog have graduate school educations. It is damned near impossible to go to graduate school in any but the most artistic disciplines without having to learn about the basics of social research and its uncanny accuracy and validity.
The "uncanny accuracy and validity" of "social research"? OK, Jim, now you are seriously weirding me out. Are you, like, drunk or something?
We know that professionally conceived samples simply do not yield results which vary six, eight, ten points from eventual data returns, thaty's why there are identifiable margins for error. We know that margins for error are valid, and that results have fallen within the error range for every Presidential election for the past fifty years prior to last fall. NEVER have exit polls varied by beyond-error margins in a single state, not since 1948 when this kind of polling began. In this past election it happened in ten states, all of them swing states, all of them in Bush's favor. Coincidence? Of course not.
Jeepers, Jim, get a grip! This is almost as cockamamie as blaming the whole thing on Karl Rove.
Karl Rove isn't capable of conceiving and executing such a grandiose crime? Wake up. They did it.
"They"? Psst, Jim. Karl Rove is a he. As in "a." Meaning "one." Karl has remarkable powers over matter, space, and time, but he can't clone himself (yet). Plus, the Tired Lefty Trope Style Guide clearly states that the proper antecedent for the plural third-person pronoun in this situation is "vast right-wing conspiracy."
The silence of traditional media on this subject is enough to establish their newfound bankruptcy. The revolution will have to start here. I challenge every other thinker at the Huffington Post: is there any greater imperative than to reverse this crime and reestablish democracy in America? Why the mass silence? Let's go to work with the circumstantial evidence, begin to narrow from the outside in, and find some witnesses who will turn. That's how they cracked Watergate. This is bigger, and I never dreamed I would say that in my baby boomer lifetime.
Jim, you're slurring now. According to your time stamp it's 2:32 a.m.--just put down that drink and get some sleep. In the morning after you've finished throwing up and you've had some coffee and some aspirin and maybe a bloody mary (just one, Jim, just one), you're really going to laugh about this whole thing. "Damn," you'll say, "is that what I did last night? I don't remember any of it. Man, I haven't been that drunk since that night back in '85 with Chris Schenkel and the goat!" And we'll go talk to Arianna, and you'll explain what happened, and you'll promise never to do it again, and she'll give you a tongue-lashing with that weird accent of hers so you won't understand half of what she's saying anyway, but in the end she'll agree to take down the post, and nobody but you and me and her will ever know.

And Jim . . . Jim? Sweet dreams, Jim. Sweet dreams.

UPDATE: Geez, I guess he was even drunker than I thought: King Banaian at SCSU Scholars notes that all the evidence indicates that the late money was on Bush, not Kerry.


"Many of the participants in this blog have graduate school educations. It is damned near impossible to go to graduate school in any but the most artistic disciplines without having to learn about the basics of social research and its uncanny accuracy and validity"

[SNORT] Who knew that electrical engineering is one of the "most artistic discipline[s]?"

Then again, I have a feeling most of the posters at HuffnPuff have no idea that technology and science are taught at colleges, too.

By Blogger Steve G., at 10:41 AM  

If Lampley is any indication (and I haven't plumbed much deeper), the posters at HuffnPuff have no idea about anything.

Plus -- Jim Lampley? Jim effin' Lampley? I saw his name linked on the front page and thought "Jim Lampley? The blow-dried blowhard sports guy? It couldn't be THAT Jim Lampley, could it?" I clicked through and, sure enough, it was. All that money and all that hype and 280+ million Americans to choose from and they give us ... Jim Lampley?

By Blogger THE WARRIOR MONK, at 11:26 AM  

I should add that I'm inferring that it's THAT Jim Lampley from the sports context and from the absence of any affirmative indication from the post or anything else (there's no bio or picture that I can find) that it's not him. So I suppose it's possible that we're dealing with a Jim Lampley impersonator--which would only make it that much more bizarre.

By Blogger THE WARRIOR MONK, at 11:37 AM  


Giving some guys space to expose what goes on under the hairline is like turning over a rock.

By Anonymous Bob Kunz, at 1:38 PM  

Why do I read the words from Lampley and picture "Bluto" from his speech stirring the frat troops to hold a toga party? The content and organization of thought is quite similar!

Duke of DeLand

By Blogger Duke of DeLand, at 11:30 AM  

Post a Comment