Galley Friend B.W. sends along this link to a three-sided die.

Surely The Pig needs one.

Reading through the money shots of the Andrew Young book, only one thought crosses my mind: Hillary Clinton must be pissed.

Galley Brother B.J. sends along this excellent story about a 7th Circuit ruling on a Wisconsin prison’s rule prohibiting Dungeons & Dragons play by inmates:

The prison’s rationale for the ban is that playing D&D might stimulate “gang activity” by inmates. But the government conceded that there is no evidence that Dungeons and Dragons actually had stimulated gang activity in the past, either in this prison or elsewhere. The only evidence for the supposedly harmful effects of Dungeons and Dragons were a few cases from other states where playing the game supposedly led inmates to indulge in “escapism” and become divorced from reality, one case where two non-inmates committed a crime in which they “acted out” a D&D story-line, and one where a longtime D&D player (not an inmate) committed suicide. Obviously, almost any hobby or reading material might lead people to become divorced from reality, or in rare cases commit suicide. And disturbed individuals could potentially “act out” a crime based on a scenario in almost any film or literary work. Should prisons ban The Count of Monte Cristo on the grounds that it might encourage escape attempts? Moreover, the “escapism” rationale conflicts with the gang argument. People who become engrossed in escapism and retreat from society are presumably less likely to become active gang members.

That said, the Seventh Circuit decision may well be legally correct. It is based on the highly deferential standard under which most prison regulations are to be upheld against constitutional challenge so long as they are “rationally related” to some legitimate goal of prison administration. And, as lawyers know, when courts apply such a “rational basis” test, that usually means that almost anything goes. The test is mandated by Supreme Court precedent, and the Seventh Circuit judges had little choice but to follow it.

Plus, as we all know, a 50-sided die can easily be used as a weapon.

Santino has the greatest conspiracy theory ever: It theorizes that the moon landing was faked; that Stanley Kubrick filmed the fakery at the behest of the U.S. government; and that The Shining was Kubrick’s secret confession.

Fire up the awesome.

Now that health care reform seems mostly dead, I wonder whether or not–as a political matter–it ultimately helps President Obama. One suspects that legislation of the type which Congress almost sent to the president might have done the broader economy some measure of harm. At least that was one of the main arguments against it. So what happens if, in the medium-term future, America enters a period of economic recovery?

On the face of it, that would be very good news for Obama. Hard to imagine him winning reelection if the economy–in particular employment–hasn’t gone a good deal of the way toward 2007 levels by 2012.

But on the other hand, what does it say about the president if the economy enters a period of broad recovery without his healthcare reform having been passed? You’ll recall that in his big February 2009 address he claimed that passing three giant legislative re-orderings of the American economy, in healthcare, energy, and education, was critical to recovery, and that without these initiatives, America would be crippled. If none of these initiatives pass, and yet the economy recovers anyway, surely that says something about the president.

Confused about exactly what went down on NBC over the last couple of weeks? Here’s a Chinese news, CGI video explaining the whole thing.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ9m1an-pQ8&hl=en_US&fs=1&]

So what if someone shot a full-length, stop-motion movie about Vietnam, using G.I. Joe figures?

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5t8pl0QXTY&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1]

And there it is: “I can make a sissy hard, but the only thing I can make a Commie is dead!”

Jonathan Cohn at TNR knows just how to pass health care reform:

For all of the panic in Democratic ranks right now, the reality of the situation is stunningly simple. In the span of twenty-four hours, the House of Representatives–the House in which Democrats command a huge majority, in which liberals actually have some sway, and in which leadership actually has power–could put health care reform on the president’s desk for signing.

One lousy vote. One lousy, stinking roll call vote. That’s the only hurdle in the way of health care reform.

Put the merits aside for a moment. As a political matter, it’s awfully easy for Cohn to say. After all, he isn’t going to lose his job in November if it turns out that voters are more inclined to vote against a member who supported a package that passed as opposed to a member who supported a package that failed.