It finally happened. NashvillePost.com has learned that after weeks of circling the Nashville Predators, a local investor group landed on Craig Leipold's doorstep yesterday morning and made him a formal offer for the team. Multiple sources have confirmed this news on the condition of anonymity.

There are no details yet on the size of the offer, as no one publicly associated directly with the deal is talking. David Freeman, former chief executive officer of Commodore Medical Services and now CEO of 36 Venture Capital, is putting the group together. Herb Fritch, CEO of insurer HealthSpring, is also among the group.

Chase Cole, an attorney with Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis who has been working with the group, declined comment. Freeman offered a "no comment." But he reissued the following statement via e-mail:

"A group of Nashvillians continues to pursue a purchase of the Predators on behalf of the Nashville community. While we recognize the intense interest of the local community in the future of the team, we ask for your patience and understanding as we go through this confidential negotiation process. In deference to the club's request, we will be unable to offer any further public information or comment regarding our bid until a binding agreement is in place."

Confidentiality agreements are likely in place, and nobody wants to make the same mistake as Canadian billionaire Jim Balsillie in having a lot of information made public before a binding agreement is in place.

Predators fans have been rooting for the local ownership group to step forward, and NashvillePost.com has reported that Leipold wanted to see the local group step up, even being open to offer something of a Nashville discount. That may mean the price the group would pay is somewhere below the $220 million or more Balsillie offered.

Meanwhile, William "Boots" Del Biaggio, who has a minority investment in the San Jose Sharks, may still be in the picture as a potential bidder.

Thank you!

Local group makes bid on Preds

The Scooter Libby case has triggered some very weird commentary around the blogosphere; perhaps the weirdest claim is that the case against Libby was "purely political."

I find this argument seriously bizarre. As I understand it, Bush political appointee James Comey named Bush political appointee and career prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald to investigate the Plame leak. Bush political appointee and career prosecutor Fitzgerald filed an indictment and went to trial before Bush political appointee Reggie Walton. A jury convicted Libby, and Bush political appointee Walton sentenced him. At sentencing, Bush political appointee Judge Walton described the evidence against Libby as "overwhelming" and concluded that a 30-month sentence was appropriate. And yet the claim, as I understand it, is that the Libby prosecution was the work of political enemies who were just trying to hurt the Bush Administration.

In the end, frankly, I have no idea what happened, and I have nearly everyone screaming partisan talking points at me and absolutely none of it is credible. There is no simple summary of facts and I do not know who to beleive. Everyone is equally insistent that they understand the truth and their version of events must be believed and they are the ones who should be trusted and its the other guys who are the crooks. Perhaps if I devoted months to reading all of the court filings and press reports I could come to an understanding that I was comfortable with, but I don't have time for it. Basically, as far as issues upon which to form political views, I'll stick to things that are a lot more clear than this.

The Volokh Conspiracy - Was the Libby case political?

Tom Perkins had done it all. He'd made a fortune, conquered Silicon Valley, even been Danielle Steel's fifth husband for a time. His venture capital firm, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, was an early backer of Genentech, Netscape, and Google. But when he turned 70 a few years ago, Perkins decided to do something even grander and a bit crazier: He would build the biggest, riskiest, fastest, most technologically advanced, single-hulled sailing mega yacht in the world. The 289-foot Maltese Falcon, launched in spring 2006, is that engineering dream come to life.

If the 1,367-ton Falcon were anchored in New York Harbor, its masts would nearly reach the tablet in the arm of the Statue of Liberty. The exterior has teak decks, a varnished cap rail, and exquisitely finished surfaces — all attributes of a classic ship — yet the overall look is sleek, metallic, and ultramodern, almost foreboding. When Darth Vader builds his own intergalactic yacht, it will look like this.

Wow. Tom Perkins wins..

More pictures here. Apparently you can charter it for the low, low price of $330,000 Euros a week.

Tom Perkins, Silicon Valley Pirate

7-11 has turned a bunch of their stores into Kwik-E-Marts. Unfortunately none of them are anywhere near me.

Boing Boing: Awesomest movie promo ever: 7-11 stores now 'Simpsons' Kwik-E-Marts

Yawning is not something we usually aim to provoke among our readers, but have a yawn now. Does your brain feel cooler? Do you feel more attentive? According to psychologists Andrew Gallup and Gordon Gallup of the State University of New York at Albany, that is why we yawn: to boost blood flow and chill the brain.

Not only that, brain-cooling explains why you can "catch" a yawn, says Gordon Gallup. "We think contagious yawning is triggered by empathic mechanisms which function to maintain group vigilance." In other words, yawn-catching evolved to help raise the attentiveness of the whole group.

Sounds about right.

Yawning may boost brain's alertness - being-human - 02 July 2007 - New Scientist

A message appeared on one of the most widely used jihadist Internet forums, saying: "Today I say: Rejoice, by Allah, London shall be bombed."

CBS News found the posting, which went on for nearly 300 words, on the "al Hesbah" chat room. It was left by a person who goes by the name abu Osama al-Hazeen, who appears regularly on the forum.

Was London Bomb Plot Heralded On Web?

Those who are concerned about the Bong Hits ruling should note this cert denial, in which the Supreme Court says images of drugs are fine if they occur in a political context:

Putting its recent ruling on student speech into practice, the Supreme Court on Friday rejected a school district's appeal of a ruling that it violated a student's rights by censoring his anti-Bush T-shirt.

A seventh-grader from Vermont was suspended for wearing a shirt that bore images of cocaine and a martini glass—but also had messages calling President Bush a lying drunk driver who abused cocaine and marijuana, and the

Footnote on Bong Hits for Jesus

Full Committee Hearing on "Assessing the Impact of the Copyright Royalty Board Decision to Increase Royalty Rates on Recording Artists and Webcasters.

Yesterday the House held a hearing in response to the Day of Silence. But BusinessWeek says:

Small Webcasters intent on keeping Internet radio stations from going out of business best not look to Congress for help. That's the message from a June 28 House of Representatives hearing aimed at resolving a dispute over efforts to increase the royalties paid by Web radio stations to musicians and record labels for spinning their songs.

House Small Business Committee Chairwoman Nydia Velazquez said she'd prefer Webcasters and the music industry come up with their own compromise. "I really don't think Congress would be the best type of vehicle to resolve this type of issue," she said after the testimony of seven witnesses, including independent record-label owners, musicians, and Webcasters. "July 15 is just around the corner, and I hope the two parties can come together and resolve this issue."

Congress created the rule system, at the behest of the music industry, that has been used to constrain the development of internet radio. Already that rule system has resulted in small webcasters going off the air completely for a 6 month period of time. That shutdown was not resolved until threats emerged from Congress. Today we stand at such a precipice again. Congress is responsible, and Congress will take responsibility. Unfortunately it appears they will only take responsibility after another shutdown. I think this time the volume of the response after a shutdown is apt to be much, much louder than it was last time. I think Congress is in for a surprise

Impact of Royalty Increases on Internet Radio

This is a really great article. Maybe the history and conclusions are already familiar to people who read MemeStreams but it wraps them up very clearly.

Today's global liberal democratic order faces two challenges. The first is radical Islam -- and it is the lesser of the two challenges. Although the proponents of radical Islam find liberal democracy repugnant, and the movement is often described as the new fascist threat, the societies from which it arises are generally poor and stagnant. They represent no viable alternative to modernity and pose no significant military threat to the developed world. It is mainly the potential use of weapons of mass destruction -- particularly by nonstate actors -- that makes militant Islam a menace.

The second, and more significant, challenge emanates from the rise of nondemocratic great powers: the West's old Cold War rivals China and Russia, now operating under authoritarian capitalist, rather than communist, regimes. Authoritarian capitalist great powers played a leading role in the international system up until 1945. They have been absent since then. But today, they seem poised for a comeback.

Noteworthy says: "I am skeptical of the idea that Russia is poised for a comeback. Putin and his government may be poised, but the people are not. Russia will have a political role, due to its Security Council seat, but economically, what does it have to offer?"

I don't agree. I think the article's analysis is right on. Admitedly, Russia and China have a long way to go before they rival the United States economically. There may be certain energy constraints that make a rivalry difficult to acheive. The core question is at what point does their economy enable them to challenge the US militarily. I don't think military challenge requires economic parity.

I would go one further than this article. I think that China and Russia are already challenging the US, and that Islamic militancy is in some respects part of that challenge. Who backs Hezbollah? Syria? Well, who backs Iran? Who is responsible for Darfur? China and Russia enable Iran to create instability in Iraq and Israel. China is the problem, and the solution can only come through China. I think its quite possible that we're not really at war with militant Islam. We're in a proxy war with China. Things are actually not that different than they were decades ago.

I also think this article underscores why what happens here is so important... Why battles over government surveillance, habeas corpus, checks and balances and the like really matter. They matter because the United States is the great liberal democratic power. There are a large number of people in this country who don't like the liberal part of liberal democracy. People who hate the constraints that the Constitution places on the exercise of majoritarian power and are eager to tear those constraints apart ... [ Read More (0.2k in body) ]

The Return of Authoritarian Great Powers | Foreign Affairs

These dudes are fucking keeping it real.

YouTube - SCRAPER BIKE