So, I was looking at how I could submit an application to get randomly accepted to buy Final Four tickets for 2008. I know it’s early for next year’s season already, but the deadline to enter is in May. While going through the process, I found something very odd and disturbing.

The process for the application works like this: You can submit an application for up to two tickets, 10 times. For each time you submit an application you pay a $5 non-refundable fee. You can select seats at either $170 or $140 per ticket for all three games (not a bad price at about $55 per game). So, when you get to the page to enter in your seat choice, number of tickets, and the number of applications you want to submit, a total price is calculated real-time for you.

Now, the site says that they will charge you up front for the amount calculated for the total amount and refund you the difference (if you are not selected or get selected for the lower valued seats) after the drawing in July.

So, in my mind I was thinking I would put in 10 applications (at $5 each), for 2 tickets of the best seats (at $170 each) for a total of $390. But, when I filled out the form the total price came to be $3450. I thought it might just be an incorrect calculation, but when I looked into it, they would really charge that amount and then refund $3060 if I won the two tickets in July.

Wondering why they would do it this way, I finally found this explanation:

Why am I required to pay for all entries at the time of application?

The NCAA’s experience with the drawing suggests that if applicants were not required to pay for each entry, nearly everyone would enter the drawing the maximum number of times, thereby reducing the advantage one might gain by entering multiple times. The alternative would be to eliminate the current opportunity that provides for an applicant to enter the drawing more than once. Although the NCAA has considered the latter option, the general sense is that the public appreciates the opportunity to increase their chances by entering multiple times on one application.

Does this make any sense? I am not a lawyer, but this seems like some sort of discrimination. They are basically saying that they believe everyone who has a few thousand dollars extra to spare for a few months deserve more of a chance than those who don’t. I don’t buy the argument that this is to fight scalpers either. Real scalping operations have large budgets, with multiple identities and credit cards to facilitate purchases like this.

By the way, they also state that they keep the interest they make by holding your money.

What do you think?

CNN just ran a graphic (I’m at work, no screenshot) that showed that Clinton had an approval rating of 42% in Feb 2001 compared to 60% now. What poll were they looking at? First, he was out of office in January of 2001, so it can’t be job approval ratings. Second, his job approval ratings were in the mid 50s to mid-60s in January. Heck, they were that high at the height of the Lewinsky scandal.

CNN must’ve been comparing his personal approval ratings, as in “Do you like Bill Clinton?” sort of thing so they could compare it to his current rating.

Haven’t we learned anything from the Bush presidency? Don’t elect the person you’d want to have a beer with, elect the person who’ll do a good job. If they’re the same person, great. If they’re not, like George Bush, pass on them.

I’m not really sure what the CNN point was? Voters sure didn’t forgive him for the scandal. They looked back at the job he was doing. And, quite frankly, that’s all that matters.

Update: I found the transcript:

SCHNEIDER: We call it voter’s remorse. It happens a lot. When Bill Clinton left office in 2001, only 42 percent of Americans had a favorable opinion of him. That number has climbed to 60 percent.

The more people turn against President Bush, the better they remember his predecessor. The economy was booming; the rest of the world liked us. So what if he got impeached?

…

SCHNEIDER: Voter’s remorse also benefited George W. Bush in 2000. Forty-nine percent of voters held a favorable opinion of the first President Bush just before they fired him in 1992. By 2000, that number had climbed to 73 percent. So what if the economy was a disaster when he left office? People remembered the first President Bush as a man of good character, who didn’t carry on like his successor.

I think this goes straight back to my point above. Approval ratings for the President are interesting, I guess, in the sense of “Will he hurt Hillary’s chances” or not, so I’m not crying foul exactly. It just seems as important to mention the job approval ratings for both as well. Bush will likely never get above the mid-40s without something dramatic happening.

The fact of the matter is that Clinton was a good President. While his personal approval ratings were low, his job approvals were in the 60’s. He has the highest approval ratings at the end of his time in office of all the recent presidents (yes, higher than Reagan). The fact that his personal approval ratings were low go to the fact that many Americans could look past his personal problems to understand that he was doing a decent job as a President. Maybe (wow!) they realized his problems were personal and not affecting or part of his job. Shocking, that…

So, after the few music related posts over the last few nights, I spent my late night tonight building a mix CD of music I have (or just found) that is influenced by Indian musical traditions. From Thievery Corporation to Jay-Z to Cornershop, at least in my limited collection. Anyway, I was googling something related and ran across this series of posts that led me to Rupa & the April Fishes (iTunes link).

I hope my sister can be inspired by this amazing woman, musician, and doctor. I know you think we’re not sure if this fellowship is right for you. Just do what you think is right and go for it. Wonderful things only happy when you follow your heart. Besides, what you’re doing isn’t anywhere near as crazy or intense as this woman.

“As a doctor by day and a singer by night, third-year UCSF internal medicine resident Rupa Marya, MD, is living her dream.” – Sharon Brock, UCSF Today

I basically read this post, Rupa and the April Fishes @ Temple Bar!, at losanjalis.com which I found from this blog (check out Anjali’s bio on the right) which my sister might find interesting as well. All of this started from a post over here, which I include for completeness.

The music is pretty cool, by the way. It’s a weird and cool mix of songs in French, Spanish (I really like Poder), and English. I’m kinda bummed that she’s not coming out east anytime soon.

This is a minor spoiler, so if you’re a Battlestar Galactica fan and haven’t seen the season finale for Season 3, stop reading this now. I got turned onto Battlestar Gallactica after friends kept saying it was a good show. I’ve been hooked after seeing season 1 and have been keeping up with the latest season.

Last night’s episode featured a tight, awesome cover of Dylan’s All Along the Watchtower which had a cool Indian/Middle Eastern feel. I can’t find the recording online right now, but I have the episode on iTunes and keep skipping to the end so I can listen to it.

In an effort to track down who covered it, I hit Google and found out that the cover was written specifically for Battlestar. It will be on the Season 3 soundtrack according to the artist who arranged this version. If you read his blog post, he goes through how he went about building the arrangement. It makes for great reading.

I’m looking forward to getting a copy of this track when it’s available.

Here’s a clip from YouTube that shows the end. The music plays over most of the clip, though it skips the best parts with the electric sitar. Be warned! The clip contains spoilers, in fact it pretty much gives away the climax of Season 3. Do not watch if you haven’t see the whole episode!

That’s pretty sweet, and amazing that it was written for a show. BTW, I really want that guys studio setup…

The first is a followup to Amb. John Bolton’s appearance on the Daily Show the night before.

Reality means nothing to these guys, and John Bolton is example number one. Wikipedia has more on Lincoln’s cabinet as does The University of Illinois at Springfield.

The second clip is John Oliver providing commentary about the White House’s “offer” to have Harriet Miers and Karl Rove testify only if there are no transcripts and they are not under oath.

I thought that was hilarious but then I became a little annoyed. When the Bush administration says F you to Congress in cases like this, they’re saying F You to all of us. Transparency and accountability aren’t simply important between Congress and the Executive but important to help us keep our representatives in government honest.

I just finished watching V for Vendetta on HD-DVD. I read the graphic novel a while ago, right around when the movie came out and enjoyed it. The political overtones and the almost surreal storyline make for a great graphic novel. Clearly influenced by 1980’s British (and American) politics, the book sets up an interesting world in a post-nuclear holocaust Britain that succumbs to fascism. That world was set in the near future then, which I guess would be right now. The story and the society in the novel have some eerie parallels in our modern world. It’s not hard to pull some symbolism out of the novel to our modern world shaped by terrorism.

Unfortunately, the movie takes this idea and kicks it way, way over the top. In general, I’m sympathetic to the idea that societies must be vigilant against those that would offer safety in conformity. The government’s motto in the novel/movie is “Strength through Unity, Unity through Faith”), and I definitely bristle at that. Unfortunately, the film takes the novel, introduces the vocabulary of our modern battle with terrorism, and bludgeons the viewer over the head several times during the movie. It’s almost as if they took a smart novel and tried to dumb it down so that everyone would get the point. It’s especially bad as the style of V for Vendetta is over the top. V, the protagonist, is over-the-top, a theatrical person who speaks in monologues to explain his purpose to a populace that has forgotten it’s own purpose in society. He isn’t written subtly.

Thankfully these moments are relatively few and, assuming you like stylized novels/films like Sin City, the movie ends up being pretty good. A lot of things are different in the film, so if you’ve read the novel, be prepared to reacquaint yourself with a number of the minor characters. The “Fate” computer is gone, as is the entire development of the Chancellor’s character.

The soundtrack to the film is solid, by the way. The closing credits feature a song by Ethan Stoller called BKAB. The version used in the movie had clips of Malcolm X and Gloria Steinem speeches playing over BKAB’s Bollywood influenced beats and samples. Cool piece, especially since I’m a fan of artists that fuse Indian and Western beats/music. Karsh Kale, Cornershop, Nitin Sawhney, etc. are all interesting artists if you’re into that. BKAB is only available from the artist directly, FYI. I also can’t find a version with the speeches overlay. It’s not on the soundtrack and the artist’s web site says that he’s still working on getting rights to those recordings so he can remix the track with them in there. Interestingly enough, the name of the song comes from a Malcolm X speech. Check out the artist’s site for an explanation.