Lincolnite

That's it, my work day is ruined. There's no way in hell I'm going to be even the least bit productive now that DHL called to tell me that my new Canon PowerShot A620 has arrived. It's a good thing I already finished all my important tasks for the day.

Matt Hayes of the Sporting News wants Harrison Beck to play.

Whose idea was it to make a dog shampoo that smells like apples? Who in the world wants to eat apples that have a distinct wet dog undertone? I'm not sure which is worse, a dog that needs a bath, or a bathed dog that smells like rotten apples. It's a tough call.

I'm going to chat with Scrumpy Jacks owner Jeff Crandon on Monday morning. Lincolnite is seeing a ton of hits from people searching for information about Scrumpy Jacks, so I've offered him a couple options for spreading information about his restaurant until their website goes online. Stay tuned.

Lincoln is in the early stages of a serious discussion about the rights of individuals convicted of sex crimes (aka "sex offenders"). Please humor me while I engage in a bit of a lunchtime stream-of-consciousness monologue. Lincoln is in the midst of what is known as a "policy window." The opportunity is ripe for modifying sex offender-related ordinances in Lincoln for several reasons. First is the fear that sex offenders will move to Nebraska from Iowa because communities there have enacted restrictions on where convicted sex offenders can live. Many individuals have effectively been forced from their communities. Second is the recent sexual assault at Arnold Elementary School. Those two events, among other factors, have increased paranoia among the general population, and especially among parents and grandparents of young children. Lincolnites are ready to kick all sex offenders out of the city, with Police Chief Tom Casady leading the way. The comparisons to post-9/11 Americans' willingness to sacrifice liberty for perceived security are difficult to ignore. Indeed, it's the "perception" thing that gets to me. Do these No Sex Offender zones actually work? Do they protect anyone? Are repeat sex offenders more likely to commit their crimes within 2,000 feet of their homes than outside of that zone? I suspect there's a short-term drop in sex crimes after these laws pass -- that's just a hunch, not based on facts -- but does the drop hold over time? Do buffer zone laws cause sex offender registration to drop, thereby pushing more people under the radar? Those aren't rhetorical questions. I really want to know the answers. Does anybody have them? Can we as a society enact this sort of legislation in good conscience without knowing the answers to these questions? And what of the rights of the individuals being punished? Like it or not, they do have rights, and most of them aren't monst ers. Most are willing and able to be rehabilitated. Some of them already have been rehabilitated and want nothing more than to become productive members of society. They should be punished, sure. When one commits a crime against an individual one forfeits some rights in proportion to the crime committed. But punishments, except in very rare circumstances, should not be perpetual. They should be limited and well-defined. And punishments should be meted out by the criminal justice system, not by municipalities, and certainly not by the reactionary public. I have no problem with a judge telling a particular criminal that he cannot live within certain boundaries or engage in certain acts during the course of his probationary period. I don't support the type of restrictions Mayor Seng and others are proposing. I can't. They're too shallow, too reactionary. They are bad policy. I know I'm nowhere near the majority on this topic. Some people have genuinely thought through the matter and have come to different conclusions than me. I'm fine with that. But I fear most people never get beyond the superficial notions that "It's for the children!" or "Sex offenders are icky!" Those are the people I have a problem with. The proposed ordinance deserves a long, difficult community discussion. I hope it gets one.

Dell has given my order over to DHL for shipping, so I should get my new camera and accessories sometime next week. Maybe more than once, in fact. Why's that? Well, I ordered four items: a camera, a camera bag, batteries and charger, and a memory card. Dell decided to ship those four items in four separate shipments from three opposite corners of the country. So I'll be getting one package from California, one from Texas, and two from New Jersey. Anybody want to take a guess on which package arrives first? Place your bets in the comments.

Wouldn't it be cool of New York City's mysterious odor turned out to be some sort of art project?

Wondering where to eat? In my latest Front Porch column I give you tips on where to eat When You Care Enough to Eat the Very Best. (Comments on this blog post are closed. Leave your comments with the article.)

I haven't commented yet on the death of the 2,000th American soldier in Iraq. In fact, I haven't written much at all about the Iraq War. I'm not going to say much now, except: am I the only one who found it a little macabre how so many anti-war (and anti-this war) types awaited the 2,000th death with giddy anticipation? It seemed that many individuals -- you know the type -- were thinking "C'mon and die already so we can have our protests and pick on Bushitler!" Ugh. Then there's the folks on the flip side. The folks who say things like "Hey, it's only 2,000 dead. We figured there'd be a lot more than that by now. So really, 2,000 is good!" Double ugh.

I'm not a student any more, dagnabbit. I shouldn't be having these stupid dreams! And yet I had one of my school-related dreams last night. I used to get them all of the time. Typically they involve procrastinating too long before beginning a project, sleeping in on the day of the final exam, or similar anxiety-invoking disasters. Last night's dream involved me not being able to figure out my class schedule. I was never sure if I was in the correct classroom; most of the time I was not. For some reason these dreams always take place in a completely fictional school. Whether it's a dream about high school or college (last night's dream put me back in high school), the classrooms and buildings are unlike any classrooms or buildings I've ever gone to school in. I hate those stupid dreams. Back when I was a student they made sense. They usually reflected some sort of school-related anxiety I was already feeling. But now, all these years later, they serve only to stress me out and rob me of restful sleep. Oh well, I suppose I can't complain too much. I haven't had a true nightmare in years, so if that is as bad as my dreams get, I count myself lucky.

From my inbox:

Hey y'all, The folks at the Lied Center have decided that it would be better if I played the big house on Tuesday, November 15th, at 6 pm (hence the series name, FREE AT SIX). Now, I had originally asked that the performance be in the Carson Theatre (smaller, more conducive to the blues), but the crowds have been larger than they had expected. This is a concern. Filling a 200-300 seat theatre less than full is not exactly great, but it is easier on the psyche than a much, much, much larger room filled with that same number of faithful. SO, please spread the word that CA WALLER is playing the Lied on the above date. Support live & local talent (or, in this case, me). Thanks. Craig Lowe, aka CA Waller

Consider the word spread.

I'm beginning to notice more and more chatter comparing the 2006 elections to the 1994 elections. One distinction I notice right off the bat is that in 1994 Republicans had a mission -- smaller government. (Stop that snickering! Stop it!) Do today's Democrats have a similar unifying theme? Let me rephrase that: What the hell do Democrats stand for these days? Do they have any big names carrying the Democrat banner? There's Barack Obama, I suppose, but so far the Democrats have done a terrible job marketing him ("He's young, he's black, and he's not nearly as annoying as our other black guys like Jackson and Sharpton!"). The Republicans are practically begging the Democrats to take over Congress in 2006. Are the Democrats going to screw up again, like they have the past three elections?

In case you missed it, the City Council voted unanimously yesterday to declare 1,800 acres of land in north Lincoln blighted. It's really just a financing trick, so it's not nearly as big of a deal as the messier Samurai Sam's and 48th & O blight designation boondoggles. And yet, I'm concerned. I see a pattern of behavior where Lincoln is tossing around blight designations rather flippantly. Need we fear a slippery slope, I wonder? Consider:

• In The Grand case, the City used a blight designation to help buy out property owners who were willing to sell anyway. The move kept Douglas Theater Company's costs down significantly.
• In the so-called Samurai Sam's case, a developer said "I want that land." The City said "OK, here you go!" Public outcry halted the property theft, but just barely.
• At 48th & O, the City has a general redevelopment plan in mind. Rather than build upon the success of the businesses already there, the City wants to bulldoze the entire area and start from scratch.
• All of West O has been declared blighted (opening the door to land-takings and other shenanigans), when the City really means merely to encourage investment and development in the area.
• And now a huge swath of mostly-empty land in north Lincoln has been declared blighted.

Does blight actually have any meaning any more? Is a blight designation becoming an unnecessary show of force the City will use in less and less appropriate situations?

The bidding process for the proposed police substation in University Place may or may not have been fair. But the fact is, a whole bunch of people perceive the process to have been unfair. Urban Development Manager Wynn Hjermstad said there is no problem because "the project has been handled the same way all other redevelopment projects have been" handled. That's hardly a sufficient explanation; the mere fact that something has always been done a certain way does not make that way correct. Governments -- local, state, and national -- seem to continuously get themselves in trouble over insufficient contract bidding competitions. Wouldn't a wide-open, competitive bidding process better serve the interests of the people than a closed or semi-closed process?

There is good soccer weather, and there is bad soccer weather. Yesterday's weather definitely fell into the latter category. Yesterday I reffed two soccer games up at Midland, in Fremont. Our friendly, ever-so-competent weather dudes here in Nebraska promised me a tiny chance of light showers in the morning and late afternoon. They didn't mention anything about a steady rain all stinking day. One game in the cold rain would have been bad, but tolerable. Two games -- over four hours worth, because of overtime in the women's match -- was a bit much. On the plus side, I managed not to wipe out in the mud even once. Both the men's and women's matches were relatively interesting. And a mere ten minutes after the games we got pelted with sleet while changing into dry clothes; at least the sleet held off until after the game. Overall, the weather goes into my top-five list for worst weather I've ever refereed in. But it wasn't #1 on that list. Not even close. It was too "warm" (40 degrees) and not nearly windy enough to make it to #1. Now, please excuse me while I try to do something about the sore throat I seem to have developed.