Never Surrender

Kathryn Jean Lopez of National Review says its a good time to play "Never Surrender" simply because it is Friday. Now we're kindred spirits, and I have no objection to that. But I've never heard the song she embedded on her site. Besides, there's too much guitar for my Gen-X New Wave tastes.

On Halloween, we get a bonus video ... the real "Never Surrender" by Corey Hart. [Long time readers may remember that I have admitted imitating Corey Hart's appearance for most of the 1980s.]

Relevant lyrics:

AAnd when the night is cold and dark
You can see, you can see light
'Cause no one can take away your right
To fight and to never surrender

With a little perseverance you can get things done
Without the blind adherence that has conquered some

Corey Hart
Never Surrender (1985)

IB Advocate Lashes Out at College Officials

WaPo education writer Jay Mathews pens an entirely unpersuasive column in favor of the International Baccalaureate (IB) Program(me). While it lacks in substance, Mr. Mathew's column makes up for with excessive amounts of vitriol. Let's check out the lack of substance first.

Here is part of Mr. Mathews' argument as to why IB exams should carry equal weight to AP exams:

IB final exams are five hours long and rarely have multiple-choice questions, whereas AP exams are three hours and about half multiple choice.

I get it. Mr. Mathews doesn't like the style of AP exams. But there is an utter lack of curiosity regarding whether AP exams and IB exams test the same material. For college officials, though, what the classes and exams cover is far more important than how much time is allotted for each exam. I've written extensively about how weak the IB program is in math and science, and I will compare AP and IB on those exams again:

MATH: While the AP Calculus BC exam covers multi-variable calculus, IB Math HL does not. Consequently, AP Calculus BC earns credit for a multi-variable calculus course while IB Math HL does not. Even though Mr. Mathews is right when he says that the IB exam is five hours long and does not have a multiple choice section, that does not mean the exams are equal. Since AP Calculus BC is a more demanding exam, students who pass it deserve more college credit.

PHYSICS: AP Physics C is calculus-based. IB Physics HL is not. College officials award credit accordingly. IB Physics HL exam takers often do not earn credit for the physics classes required of scientists and engineers. This is not due to "discrimination" as Mr. Mathews suggests. This difference is due to the fact that AP Physics C is more academically rigorous than IB Physics HL.

Mr. Mathews does not mention that the curriculum of the two programs is not the same. The Advanced Placement program covers far more complex topics. Based on his article, I'm not even sure that Mr. Mathews is aware that the IB curriculum is inferior to AP curriculum. Why else would he evaluate the two programs based on superficial characteristics such as exam format and time length? Why is there no discussion on the academic differences of the two? (I'll get around to answering that second rhetorical question later.)

==

ATTACK ON REPUTATIONS

One of the most shocking aspects of Mr. Mathews' column is the venomous attacks he makes on people that do not share his outlook. Here is a sampling:

So it dismays me to report that on one issue, the leaders of nearly every four-year college in the country have shown appalling ignorance and hypocrisy...

College officials in Maryland, Virginia and the District have proven especially dense on this subject...

U-Md. does give credit for some IB courses (including chemistry, psychology and foreign languages) on the same basis as AP. U-Md. still doesn't treat IB English, biology or history the same way as AP courses, despite evidence that they are similar. But compared with most of their peers, university officials in College Park are paragons of diligence and fairness on this issue and should get credit for that.

Get that? If, as a college administrator, you don't grant college credit the way Mr. Mathews wants you to, you are ignorant and hypocritical. You may even be "dense" if you live close enough to Mr. Mathews. Only those who act like Mr. Mathews wants are "paragons of diligence and fairness".

Again, literally no discussion on the material covered in the exams. Absolutely none. In my opinion, it appears to me that Mr. Mathews would simply like to substitute his judgment for the judgment of hundreds of independently acting college officials. Recall my previous research that 80-90% of colleges grant more credit to AP over IB.

My position is that college officials complete their responsibilities in a professional and diligent manner. The fact that 80-90% of them disagree with Mr. Mathews does not make them "dense".

Furthermore, in my opinion, the vitriol Mr. Mathews aims at college officials diminishes his argument.

==

CHEATED

Chad King, a 2007 graduate of the IB program at Mount Vernon High School in Fairfax County, told me, "I feel like we were cheated."

This quote from Mr. Mathew's article is from an IB graduate who couldn't earn credit equal to his AP peers. As with the rest of the article, there is no discussion of the AP curriculum compared to the IB curriculum. Based on what we know from math and science, it is not surprising at all that an IB student would earn less college credit.

Nevertheless, young Mr. King feels "cheated". Just who cheated him? Colleges do not hide their AP and IB credit schedules. Didn't Fairfax County Public Schools tell Mr. King that IB exams earned less college credit than AP exams? In my opinion, it would be a form of educational malpractice if an IB coordinator or high school counselor failed to advise a student that most universities grant less college credit for IB exams.

[In case someone is reading my archives wondering if Pearland ISD knew or should have known that IB students would earn less valuable college credit, I have evidence that Pearland ISD actually knew of this deficiency of the IB Program. I also have evidence that other school districts such as Humble ISD, like Pearland ISD, are aware that public universities in Texas offer inferior credit for IB exams.]

On the same subject, I found this comment on the Washington Post article to be interesting. From user foreoki12 :

I went to Mount Vernon High School when it was one of the pilot IB schools of Fairfax County in the mid-90s. Mount Vernon was so chosen because of our terrible SAT scores and very high number of students born in other countries. It was presented as not only superior to AP as far as curriculum, but also MORE WIDELY ACCEPTED AND CREDITED by colleges. We were told by Betsy Calhoun, Mount Vernon's IB Coordinator and Chief Propagandist, that Full Diploma recipients would place out of two full years at colleges throughout the US and would actually be accepted to such renown institutions as the Sorbonne. And of course because of all this the County was removing all AP courses and exams from the school, and all students interested in upper-level classes HAD to take IB.

What has been the result for Mount Vernon and its students? Well, it turned out that IB classes and exams were not, as Mr. Mathews notes, accepted and credited by all colleges. Indeed, not only was the work more-or-less for naught for most kids going to college around the country, it wasn't accepted by European schools either! One classmate of mine, a Dutch native, wanted to return to the Netherlands for college and had transferred from St. Agnes to Mount Vernon for IB. She learned too late that schools in the Netherlands were as dismissive of her schoolwork as the schools Mr. Mathews complains about around here. Though her exams had been graded in Cardiff, Wales, and elsewhere throughout the world, that internationalism didn't change the fact that her IB French (HL), English (HL), Calculus (HL), History (HL), Chemistry(HL), and Social Anthropology (SL) weren't accepted by _any_ European schools.

IB is a scam, pure and simple. It costs a ton for schools to implement, but offers its students no improved prospects.

Mr. Mathews, wouldn't a better choice be to encourage AP to implement more IB tactics, like more writing-heavy exams, as opposed to pushing for colleges and secondary schools to wastes their students' time with this fringe program?

foreoki12 seems to feel cheated, too. If foreoki12's high school IB Coordinator actually did represent the IB program in the manner he says, foreoki12 is right to blame her. School district representatives should be honest with their students with respect to the amount and quality of college credit that can be earned in the IB Program. (I have been to IB presentations by Pearland ISD representatives where there is no discussion of the inferior quality credit earned by the IB Program.)

What I find most interesting about foreoki12's post is that his bad experience with the IB Program occured at Fairfax County's Mt. Vernon High School. Read on to see the irony.


==

CONFLICT OF INTEREST?

There's no denying that Mr. Mathews is an unquestioning supporter of the International Baccalaureate Program. As I hinted above, I'm going to take a stab at explaining why that might be.

In 2006, Mr. Mathews co-wrote a book called Supertest with the deputy director general of the International Baccalaureate Organization, Ian Hill. Supertest promotes the IB Program, specifically highlighting the experience at Mt. Vernon H.S. in Fairfax County (Va.). Not surprisingly, as the link in this paragraph demonstrates, the IBO itself promotes this book. Mr. Mathews has a financial interest in promoting the International Baccalaureate Program. Readers of the Washington Post newspaper are not advised of this apparent conflict of interest. I wonder why the WaPo doesn't have policies requiring disclosure of such apparent conflicts. Most media organizations do have such policies.

[For the record, although I advocate the more rigorous Advanced Placement Program offered by the College Board, I have no links to the College Board whatsoever, financial or otherwise. The last time I had any communication at all with the College Board is when I took AP exams myself in the late 1980s.]

==

FORDHAM INSTITUTE

Mr. Mathews put forth an argument that "many experts say IB is more challenging". A logical student wanting to avoid an appeal to authority may ask, "Who thinks IB is more challenging?" After all, college officials don't reflect that premise in their credit schedules. If Mr. Mathews can't produce well-respected expert opinion to support his claims that IB is superior, his whole argument goes "poof" and disappears. Here is what Mr. Mathews cites:

St. Mary's College of Maryland seemed at the time to be the only one interested in doing something. They said they were reviewing the data, including an analysis by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. The experts at that think tank, grading by content, rigor and clarity, concluded that one-year IB courses were equal to AP English and history courses, somewhat better in biology and somewhat worse in calculus.

The Fordham Institute. Hmm. What do we know about the Fordham Institute analysis? Consider this: Mr. Mathews' column appeared on page B2 of the Washington Post and cites the Fordham Institute as an authority. In an article that only appears on the website of the Washington Post, we learn more about the Fordham Institute evaluation from none other than Washington Post education writer Jay Mathews. It turns out that it is true! The Fordham Institute did evaluate IB and AP and came up with a conclusion in conflict with the conclusions of hundreds of college administrators!

And now ... the rest of the story ...

From the web-only article about the Fordham Institute analysis:

David Klein, a mathematics professor at California State University at Northridge, says he was pleased to review Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate math courses for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. He respects institute President Chester E. "Checker" Finn Jr., a longtime leader in the movement to improve U.S. schools. Among the views Klein shares with Finn is that overuse of calculators can interfere with students' mastery of analytical skills.

But their collaboration on Fordham's analysis of AP and IB did not turn out the way either of them hoped.

On June 4, Klein submitted his report on two courses, AP Calculus AB and IB Mathematics SL. Klein's analysis of AP and IB math was more negative and his grades lower than what the experts on AP and IB English, history and biology courses submitted to Fordham. He would have given the AP math course a C-plus and the IB math course a C-minus. The other reviewers thought none of the courses they looked at deserved anything less than a B-minus.

Still, Klein says, he got no indication from the Fordham staff of any problems until the edited version of his material came back to him for review on Sept. 28, a week before the deadline for completing the report. Many of what he considered his strongest points, he discovered, had been deleted. He had Fordham remove his name as a co-author of the report, "Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate: Do They Deserve Gold Star Status?" which was released Nov. 14.

After agreeing to the name removal, Finn told Klein in an e-mail: "I imagine we'll also reduce your overemphasis on calculator use and probably change the grades (upward). Thanks, tho, for your help." Klein's grade of C-plus for AP was not changed, but his grade of C-minus for IB got a big jump to a B-minus, meaning the report was saying that IB math was better than AP math, the opposite of what Klein had said.

Emphasis added

Wowzer! The Fordham Institute actually changed the opinions of the person who reviewed the math curricula! I honestly have a real problem with what the Fordham Institute did here, but not as big of a problem as Prof. Klein must have. It is truly my opinion that the results of the Fordham Institute analysis were predetermined. They wanted to show IB is better than AP. If a little dishonesty is needed, so be it. And if your conclusion is that AP is better than IB, we'll change your conclusion.

This single episode is enough for me to question the entire Fordham process. Readers of the Washington Post newspaper know nothing of this situation since it appears to me that this information is only available on the website. Although readers of the WaPo don't know of this controversy, Mr. Mathews has no problem publicizing the Fordham report. Unbelievable. Mr. Mathews should let his dead tree readers know of the serious irregularities of the Fordham report.

I *AM* Joe the Plumber

Confidential to CBS News: In the interests of full disclosure, my name is not Joe and I am not a plumber. I know that your intrepid news gatherers have identified people claiming to be "Joe the Plumber" who, in fact, are not named Joe and/or are not plumbers. My claim of being "Joe the Plumber" is meant to be symbolic of my opposition to confiscatory tax rates.

An Old Road Map

OK, so I'm rooting around in the archives of the Boston Globe today. Here is an old AP article that caught my eye:

May 4, 2000

House Democrats, citing civil racketeering laws, filed a lawsuit yesterday against the House Republican whip, Tom DeLay. The suit alleged that he oversees a network that extorts contributions and that evades federal disclosure requirements.

Representative Patrick J. Kennedy, the Rhode Island Democrat who is chairman of the Democratic campaign committee, said DeLay heads an operation ''hammering contributors for money, threatening to punish those who decline, and setting up a shadow party structure outside public view and our laws.''

Hey! I remember that! I've long suspected that Tom DeLay was a shady character, and the allegations in the racketeering lawsuit fit that narrative. But I was asleep in 2000. I didn't pay attention to the case back then.

So why am I bringing this up now? Read the last few paragraphs of the AP article:

The Democrats' suit alleges that as whip, DeLay has ''threatened to withhold favorable action on'' bills unless an affected party increased contributions to Republicans and cut them to Democrats.

DeLay and his agents ''have engaged in a scheme to extort political contributions from individuals and entities with interests before Congress and to avoid otherwise applicable reporting requirements relating to donors and political contributions,'' the suit says.

It alleges that DeLay has established a network of political organizations, independent from traditional GOP groups, that is not registered under federal election law and that does not report on donors. The suit says DeLay's operation directs GOP donors to contribute to these organizations, thus evading reporting requirements.

These groups were identified as the US Family Network [USFN], the Republican Majority Issues Committee [RMIC], and Americans for Economic Growth. The DeLay aides involved were named as Ed Buckham, his former chief of staff, Karl Gallant, and Jim Ellis.

Edwin Buckham, Karl Gallant and Jim Ellis. All three of those guys were employees of Alexander Strategy Group. Coincidence? I doubt it. I found a copy of the original complaint filed by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). There's a lot of good stuff in there about the Edwin A. Buckham's US Family Network and the other groups. Also, I contemplated making an entry about the Republican Majority Issues Committee about a month ago. I know I should have done it long ago, but I'm going to have to review the DCCC lawsuit. I think the Democrats left clues on how this case would develop over eight years ago.

Eventually, the DCCC case was settled. I never figured out what the Democrats got in return for settling. At the time, I probably thought of this as politics as usual since I'm not a political guy. But let's look at how the Los Angeles Times reported on the settlement back in April 2001:

A civil racketeering lawsuit brought by Democrats against House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Texas) over fund-raising was closed Thursday under an agreement between the two sides.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and DeLay reached a deal two weeks before the case was to have gone to trial before U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson. However, they argued over whether it was a settlement or a dismissal, and both claimed victory.

The agreement cited as reasons to conclude the case a new law that tightened financial disclosure rules for certain political groups organized under Section 527 of the tax code and DeLay’s own moves to distance himself from some of the groups’ activities.

"HillBuzz" Connects Dots

A couple of weeks ago, I made a post called Attorneys: Tony Rezko is "Talking". Basically, all I did was link to an AP article substantiating the title of the post. But then, I added this:

Does anyone know of a principled lefty blogger who is taking a serious look at Sen. Obama's role in this matter. If Mr. Rezko is indeed "talking", we may hear more of this in the future.

Anyway, I've found my principled lefty blogger. Several Chicagoland Democrats have banded together to create HillBuzz. As the name suggests, these Democrats are Hillary Clinton supporters and exemplify the definition of a PUMA.

HillBuzz reads this snippet from Michael Sneed of the Chicago Sun-Times:

Sneed hears rumbles political fund-raiser/fixer Tony Rezko, who is now singing sweetly to the feds from his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center, has been talking about his "dealings" with a Chicago bank, which has political connections.

Emphasis in original

HillBuzz identifies the bank as Broadway Bank and proceeds to lay out the case as to how this connects Barack Obama to Tony Rezko. Read it for yourself -- it is good stuff. Facts and informed speculation -- I already like HillBuzz. Some of what they write may be over the top, but I'll keep checking in just to see if HillBuzz finds more connections.

October 6, 2008: USA vs. Kevin Ring -- Protective Order

I often mention that I'm not a lawyer. Since I have no experience in such matters, I don't know if the most recent filing in the United States of America v. Kevin Ring is out of the ordinary or not. But I sure found it interesting.

The government requested and the defense did not object to a protective order (.pdf). Just what is being protected? Documents disclosed to the defense through discovery:

[I]n light of the confidential and sensitve information contained in those materials, the Court orders that any and all discovery materials the government produces to Ring shall be reviewed by only (1) him, (2) his attorneys of record, (3) employees of those attorneys, (4) a photocopying or dataprocessing service to whom it is necessary that Ring show the materials for the purposes of preparation, trial, and direct appeal of this matter, (5) witnesses or potential witnesses, and (6) experts assisting in the preparation, trial and direct appeal of this matter. Nor shall Ring disclose the contents of any discovery material to any individual or entity except as provided above ...

My first thought was this was boilerplate language, but a couple of searches of key phrases indicate that this order is far from tboilerplate. My conclusion is that this kind of order is unique.

More from the Protective Order:

Ring may include discovery materials or their contents in a public filing only with the government's prior approval.

Should Ring, his attorneys of record, or any of the other individuals or entities listed above find any material inadvertently produced by the government that appears to be classified or is marked as such, they shall immediately double-seal the material and all copies of the material, mark them as classified, and inform the government. By returning any such materials, Ring does not waive his right to use the materials at trial or on direct appeal.

Since Mr. Ring's legal counsel did not oppose this motion, it seems to me that Mr. Ring's lawyers understand the purpose and importance of this Protective Order. I, on the other hand, can only speculate.

Two reasons for this Protective Order come to mind. First, classified material must be protected, and this order attempts to do just that. However, this order covers all discovery materials disclosed to Mr. Ring and his counsel. My wild speculation is that some of the discovery materials may also be used in the prosecution of individuals other than Mr. Ring. The government wants to hold those documents close to the vest as the investigation into the other unnamed individuals proceeds. In the end, the government gets what it wants -- holding the defense accountable for protecting the disclosed materials. At the same time, Mr. Ring and his attorneys are not hampered in their defense because they have the authority to show the materials to any witnesses who can help the defense.

I may be over-analyzing a simple court order, but I just have to wonder whom prosecutors want to keep the discovery materials from.

Elliot Berke, Dan Flynn and Tom DeLay's "War Room"

Follow-up to Who is Elliot Berke?

==

In Plaintiff Disclosures in the pending lawsuit Corwin Teltschik vs. Williams & Jensen PLLC et. al., we learned that Elliot Berke and Dan Flynn were potential witnesses in the case involving Tom DeLay's political action committee, ARMPAC.

Mr. Teltschik claims that Messrs. Berke and Flynn have discoverable information. Of Mr. Berke, the disclosure says he is "Former general counsel for Tom DeLay and may have knowledge regarding ARMPAC." Of Mr. Flynn, we learn that he is "Former deputy Consultant to Tom DeLay and may have knowledge regarding ARMPAC."

According to an April 2005 issue of The Hill newspaper, both Mr. Berke and Mr. Flynn worked in Mr. DeLay's "War Room":

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) has assembled a “formal structure” to counter news stories about his perceived ethical improprieties and ensure the support of Republican lawmakers, GOP sources say.

The team — which includes DeLay Chief of Staff Tim Berry, Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Flynn, Communications Director Dan Allen, general counsel Elliot Berkes (sic) and policy adviser Brett Shogren — holds a 7:30 a.m. conference call with aides from the Speaker’s office, the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) and the Republican National Committee (RNC) to discuss daily media coverage of DeLay. His aides then hold their own meeting in DeLay’s first-floor Capitol office to discuss message strategy for the day.

The group, which is tracking media stories on a day-to-day basis, will then meet as needed throughout the day informally as stories break and new developments occur.

Emphasis added

The Hill indicates that the "War Room" was created about April 2005. What was going on during that time that would necessitate a "War Room"? Well, quite a bit ...

April 6, 2005
ABC News
ABC News reports that Tom DeLay and daughter Dani DeLay Ferro went on a "lavish" trip to the Commonwealth of Mariana Islands. The trip, according to ABC, was funded by Jack Abramoff.


April 24, 2005
Washington Post
The Washington Post discloses that Jack Abramoff and Edwin Buckham paid for DeLay and many of his staff members to go to Scotland in 2000. The WaPo also reports that Christine DeLay "worked" for Ed Buckham.


April 28, 2005
New York Times
Due to ethical questions whirling around Tom DeLay and the potential that Travis County DA Ronnie Earle may file a politically inspired indictment against Rep. DeLay, House Republicans change rules to eviscerate the House Ethics Committee.

Hmm. Things looked bad for Mr. DeLay in April 2005, and the "War Room" certainly had a lot to respond to. (Judging from the April 28 article, it looks like the "War Room" was effective, too.) Nevertheless, I don't see anything there that would be of interest to Mr. Teltschik in his lawsuit against Williams & Jensen.

Maybe I'm making too much of April 2005. What else was going on in 2005 that the "War Room" may have dealt with?

On August 12, 2005, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed an FEC Complaint against ARMPAC (.pdf). It was this complaint by CREW that led to an official investigation (MUR 5675) into ARMPAC. Eventually, this complaint led to the Conciliation Agreement (.pdf) that is central to Teltschik vs. Williams & Jensen, PLLC et. al.. The Conciliation Agreement, which claimed that Mr. Teltschik had violated election laws, was finally signed in the summer of 2006.

My speculation is that Mr. Teltschik has reason to believe that Mr. Berke and Mr. Flynn responded very early on CREW's complaint in 2005 as part of their "War Room" responsibilities. Furthermore, I speculate that Messrs. Berke and Flynn have knowledge of the events surrounding the hiring of Don McGahn to represent ARMPAC in MUR 5675. Sure, I'm guessing about all of this, but at least it is a plausible explanation on how Mr. Berke and Mr. Flynn are connected to this case.

Vanderbilt 5-0!

Best signs seen on ESPN's College GameDay:

1. ... and the GEEKS shall inherit the TURF!
2. Best on the SAT; Best in the SEC
3. 4-0 -- Not just our GPA anymore!

The play of the game was a downed punt (first play on video). I knew the defense would hold. Everything else was the denouement.

Part II -- Kevin Ring Indictment: MASHPEE WAMPANOAG

Part I -- Kevin Ring Indictment: ED BUCKHAM!

==

Like Part I, this installment is intended to look at parts of the Kevin Ring indictment (.pdf) not covered by the MSM. Today, we look at paragraphs 141-143:

141. On or about October 2, 2003, defendant RING arranged a meeting between himself, a Massachusetts tribal client, and Representative [John Doolittle] in [Doolittle]'s congressional office.

142. On or about October 7, 2003, defendant RING sent an email to Representative [Doolittle]'s Legislative Director in which he stated, "Assuming [Doolittle] never called [a high level DOI official] after our meeting last week, I thought the attached letter would be okay to send to [Interior Secretary Gale Norton]. Pretty non-controversial -- says he doesn't take position on their petition for recognition, but thinks they deserve an answer. Assuming this is fine, please fax signed copy to me at [deleted]. Thanks. You the man."

143. On or about October 7, 2003, [Doolittle] caused a letter to be sent under his signature to the Secretary of the DOI in which he asked that the DOI respond to the Massachusetts tribal client's request for recognition expeditiously.

[Bolded proper nouns are my identification of less specific terms such as "Representative #5"]

It is obvious to me that the "Massachusetts tribal client" is the Mashpee Wampanoag, a tribe I originally mentioned a year and a half ago.

Rep. Doolittle had claimed a long standing opposition to gambling. The Mashpee Wampanoag, a client of Jack Abramoff, desperately wanted federal recognition in hopes of opening a casino. Why would Rep. Doolittle abandon his principles to prod the Bush Administration to help an Abramoff client earn federal recognition and open a casino?

Given what we read in the Mr. Ring's indictment, it is clear that federal prosecutors think there is something wrong with the Mashpee episode. If Mr. Ring bribed someone in this case, is it reasonable to believe that Rep. Doolittle was the one on the receiving end of the bribe?

Earlier this year, I sensed some movement on the Kevin Ring/Mashpee Wampanoag front. At the time, I wrote of my speculation:

"If I'm right, I don't know if Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.) or former Rep. Richard Pombo (R-Calif.) should be more worried."

Seeing as Rep. Doolittle was mentioned in Kevin Ring's indictment and Rep. Pombo earned no ink that I can detect, I know the answer to that now. Rep. Doolittle's lawyers should be preparing to defend their client's actions regarding the federal recognition of the Mashpee Wampanoag.

All Alone in First Place

Don't look now, but there's a new name on top of the SEC football standings. And in October, my alma mater is alone in first place!

 southeastern conference Standings

	Conference		Overall
east Division	W	L	W	L
Vanderbilt	2	0	4	0
Georgia	1	1	4	1
Florida	1	1	3	1
Kentucky	0	0	4	0
South Carolina	0	2	3	2
Tennessee	0	2	1	3

I know this won't last for long, but I'm going to enjoy it while it does! I've mentioned that I went to Texas A&M for undergrad. I'm not very smart, so I had to go to Vanderbilt for grad school. You see, I can't keep too terribly many facts in my head. When I learned that my bitter rival is an orange UT, I couldn't unlearn that. To this day, if it is orange and it is UT, I want it to lose.

The school in Nashville will have an event it has never hosted before. ESPN's College Gameday will broadcast from Vanderbilt on Saturday. College Gameday is typically held on the campus with the best college football match-up of the week. This week, the best game in the country will be Vanderbilt (19) vs. Auburn (13). (Will College Gameday be back on November 8 when Vandy hosts Florida with the SEC East title on the line?)

Go 'Dores! Beat Auburn!