Hot dog!

Might not matter to half of SFTC readers, but it's Opening Day (capital letters intentional) for Major League Baseball.

This really should be a national holiday. Of course, part of the appeal in most places I've lived is that it's a sign that spring is here (or, in the case of Chicago, that it would be coming sometime in the next eight to 10 weeks). Sadly, it's a little less monumental in Southern California, where the weather is this nice all year round.

And unfortunately, baseball has kind of diluted the excitement the last few years by having the first two games of the season a week early in Japan and by adding another "opening" game on the eve of the first Monday of the season. So on second thought, I guess this is more like just the fourth day of the 2008 baseball season. Yippee.

Might have to get myself a hot dog and throw some peanut shells on the ground to celebrate.

Don't believe the snipe

Hillary and Barack were doing so well, coming up with all of the clever ways to explain mistakes they or their staffers have made thus far during the campaign.

At least for Senator Clinton, I think the streak is over.

I personally have never been caught in sniper fire, but I'm guessing that if I were, I'd remember it pretty clearly for approximately the rest of my life.

So Hill's inane ... what, exactly? ... apology? -- suggesting that she merely misspoke when she said that she faced grave danger (Nicholson: Is there any other kind?) during a 1996 visit to Bosnia -- was pretty ridiculous.

I'd disagree with her assertion that a "mistake" like this proves she's human. Seems like it proves she's a B.S. artist who'll say anything to get elected. That's probably true for all three and a half candidates, but I think this will stand as the stupidest misspeak of the 2008 primary season.

Editor geeks, rejoice

The New York Times' director of copy desks answers readers' questions about the aracana of copyediting in a feature that'll probably seem incredibly boring to non-writers, but makes me superhappy.

Always wanted to know why a copy desk chief was called the "slot," and Merrill Perlman comes through. Just wish someone would ask her where the -30- at the end of articles came from.

Matter of the house

Interesting to juxtapose the two New York Times articles I read today about responses to the mortgage crisis.

There's John McCain basically saying, to lenders and borrowers: Too bad. Your mistake. Not the government's problem.

And there's a local agency in Baltimore that's actively finding homeowners who might be having trouble making their payments and helping them stay out of foreclosure.

These aren't necessarily opposing views, of course. The agency isn't a government body, and so it might even be the kind of solution McCain would favor. But meantime, he comes off sounding like he'd be happy to sit in the White House burning $100 bills while the nation plunged into Great Depression II, if that's what it came to.

Lie hard

Clearly, lying is bad.

But doesn't it seem like a terrible idea for Congress to make it illegal to lie -- just lie to other people, not to government officials, mind you? That's right: Illegal. As in punishable by a major fine and a trip to the big house.

Yes, I get that the nitwit covered in this New York Times article is lying about something profoundly important to some very important people. But this is probably something a few military types could take care of on their own, without the law getting involved, ifyaknowwhatImean.

On the other hand, maybe this is just a sneaky way for Congress to punish people for being complete and utter morons -- this guy would obviously meet the requirement -- but they just didn't want to phrase the law that way. Now, that's something I could get behind.

For a good time, call

If the cops had killed this asshat instead of just wounding him, I'd call it natural selection.

So, for our purposes, it's just a story about an unbeliveably stupid would-be criminal. He was apparently too stupid to be an actual criminal.

I swear the reporters have to be inventing this stuff. People can't really be this moronic, can they?

Endorse mint

People shouldn't be allowed to say they're endorsing a presidential candidate unless there's another clear option.

In other words, I still sort of care who's endorsing Clinton and who's endorsing Obama. Presumably the Democrats backing them aren't really considering McCain -- they're choosing which candidate from their party best suits their taste.

Which is why -- although I'm writing about it -- I really don't care that Nancy Reagan is "endorsing" John McCain. Did that end any amount of suspense for anyone?

I think anyone who's endorsing McCain at this point -- especially any die-hard Republican who has no other Republican choice left, and double-especially someone who was married to the Gipper -- missed the chance to endorse anyone. They may be backing him or they may have decided to vote for him, but I don't think they get to "endorse" him anymore.

It's like choosing teams for kickball and "endorsing" that unathletic kid who's the last one to get picked because, well, he's the only one left.