Today in 1965, the Beatles replaced themselves atop the British single charts:
Today in 1973, the BBC banned all teen acts from “Top of the Pops” after a riot that followed a performance by … David Cassidy.
The number one single today in 1981:
Today in 1965, the Beatles replaced themselves atop the British single charts:
Today in 1973, the BBC banned all teen acts from “Top of the Pops” after a riot that followed a performance by … David Cassidy.
The number one single today in 1981:
The number one single today in 1961 was based on the Italian song “Return to Sorrento”:
Today in 1964, the Beatles appeared on the BBC’s “Ready Steady Go!”
During the show, Billboard magazine presented an award for the Beatles’ having the top three singles of that week.
Today in 1968, Eric Clapton, Neil Young, Richie Furay and Jim Messina were all arrested by Los Angeles police not for possession of …
… but for being at a place where marijuana use was suspected.
It is now Earth Hour, where people who worship Gaia over God are supposed to turn off their lights and sit in the dark for one hour.
Which accurately describes the environmentalist movement. Human progress has been the large result of technology and not the Luddites, unless you don’t believe this Facebook post:
I grew up in perpetual earth hour due to crumbling infrastructure. We also had no heating oil in winter, and extremely polluted air. All thanks to central planning in a statist economy. I do not wish that on anyone, but Democrats deserve it.
The Republican Security Council makes a related point:
Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders disagree on several key issues but they both agree with President Obama on climate change. They consider it to be our greatest national security threat.
We have been hearing this for a decade. In 2009, former Vice President Al Gore predicted the entire northern polar ice caps would very likely be ice free in 5-7 years.
The reverse has happened and they set a record in 2015 for maximum ice coverage.
Gore predicts sea levels will rise 20 feet over a century, but his Nobel partner, the UN IPCC, is saying it will be 8 inches. The fact is that when it comes to predicting the actual results of climate change, the uncertainty is extremely high.
Nobody has any idea whether any of the policy proposals would have any effect, much less any sizable effect, on the problems predicted by many regarding climate change.
Talking about climate change as a security threat, makes it appear that an unsafe world is safe.
The Democrats need to realize that the real problems are the Islamic State, North Korea, Russia, Iran, China and elsewhere. Wishing these real threats away in favor of climate change doesn’t make them go away.

Today in 1965, Britain’s Tailor and Cutter Magazine ran a column asking the Rolling Stones to start wearing ties. The magazine claimed that their male fans’ emulating the Stones’ refusal to wear ties was threatening financial ruin for tiemakers.
To that, Mick Jagger replied:
“The trouble with a tie is that it could dangle in the soup. It is also something extra to which a fan can hang when you are trying to get in and out of a theater.”
Jagger is a graduate of the London School of Economics. Smart guy.
Today in 1974, Jefferson Airplane …
Those of us who are old enough to remember when Wisconsin played in neither football bowl games nor NCAA basketball tournaments may find this hard to believe:

The streak continues today against Pittsburgh in St. Louis at 5:50 p.m. on TNT.
Badgers radio announcer Matt Lepay has called every single NCAA tournament game dating back to 1994. So is this just another game for him?
It never comes close to getting old.
It’s March, and once again, the Badgers are headed to the NCAA tournament. For the 18th-straight year.
In other words, the streak began the same year your average college freshman was born.
For the record, this is the fourth-longest active tournament run in major college basketball, and it is the fifth-longest stretch in history.
Not bad for a program that once went 47 years between trips.
For someone a little older, yours truly, I will always have a soft spot for a couple of Badgers teams. The 1988-89 group that made the NIT (which was the school’s first postseason bid since 1947), and the 1993-94 squad that earned the long-awaited invite to the Big Dance.
Howard Moore could tell you all you need to know about the ’94 Badgers. The current assistant was a member of that Stu Jackson-coached squad. We actually had a casual chat about it the other day. That team had an 8-10 Big Ten record, which was good for seventh place in a very tough league. An 11-0 start to the season was huge, as was an early March victory against third-ranked Michigan at the UW Field House.
It was heck of a year to be a Badgers fan. For the first time in school history, the football team won the Rose Bowl. A couple of months later, the basketball boys were dancing.
At the time, it was very fresh material.
I want to think about that now. Why? Because seeing your favorite teams win at such a high level is anything but a guarantee. Seeing those teams become annual participants in bowl games and postseason tournaments is something most of the rest of the world can just dream about.
Be proud. This is really good stuff. If you are in my age bracket, feel free to inform the young bucks that it wasn’t always this way. Some very good players never had the opportunity to experience performing on big stages. Some very loyal fans never had the chance to witness all of the fun.
But we get to see it. Again.
On Jan. 12, the Badgers lost at Northwestern. On the way back to Madison, I thought maybe it just wasn’t in the cards for this team, this year. Frankly, I was OK with it. I mean, 17 straight years in the NCAAs is one heck of a stretch. This group was going through a lot. Players from the Final Four years who moved on. A coach who retired in mid-December. A young team that split its first 18 games and dropped four of its first five in the Big Ten. We have been a bit spoiled, so maybe it was time for some harsh reality — that a season might conclude in the conference tournament.
It had to end sometime, right?
Just not this time. This team would have none of it. Simply put, the culture is too strong. This year’s Badgers had no intention of being that team. You know, the team that fell short of making the field.
The players and coaches deserve all the credit in the world. The streak is alive and well.
I will always remember the excitement of walking into the Dee Events Center in Ogden, Utah, for the Badgers’ first-round game with Cincinnati.
This week, your friendly broadcaster and part-time columnist is fortunate enough to experience his 20th NCAA tournament following the Badgers. When the travelling party walks into the Scottrade Center in St. Louis, that feeling of excitement will return.
It will return because this March Madness thing never comes close to getting old.
It might be getting old for some UW archrivals, which have not experienced anything close to the Badgers’ current success. Jason Gonzalez must have found this hard to write for the Minneapolis Star Tribune:
March has become a month when Wisconsin celebrates the muscle of its athletic department. The last 14 years the Badgers have played in a college football bowl game and then qualified for the NCAA men’s basketball tournament. It is the longest streak in NCAA history.
The Wisconsin athletic department posted a graphic highlighting the streak to its Facebook page on Monday. The post recorded nearly 20,000 likes and received over 400 comments.
The run started in 2002-2003 and continued this year when Wisconsin football played in the Holiday Bowl followed by the men’s basketball team’s 18th straight NCAA tournament berth. The Badgers play Pittsburgh in the Round of 64 on Friday.
Since the start of the 1996 season, Wisconsin’s men’s basketball and football teams have combined for more bowl and NCAA tournament appearances than any other school. Each team has 19 postseason appearances for a total of 38.
Wisconsin passed Texas for longest streak, last season. Texas qualified for 12 straight bowls/NCAA tournaments from 1998-1999 to 2009-2010. Michigan State holds an active streak of nine consecutive years (2007-2008 to present). Florida also did it nine straight years (1998-1999 to 2006-2007). …
The last time the Gophers played in a bowl game and NCAA tournament in the same season was 2012-2013. The football team lost to Texas Tech 34-31 in the Car Care Bowl and the men’s basketball lost in the round of 32 before head coach Tubby Smith was fired.
The programs have qualified for a bowl and the NCAA tournament in back-to-back seasons (2008-2009 and 2009-2010) only once in school history.
The Badgers have fared much better. And we haven’t even mentioned the Green Bay Packers stretch of success over the past decade.
Today in 1965, the members of the Rolling Stones were fined £5 for urinating in a public place, specifically a gas station after a concert in Romford, England.
Today in 1967, Britain’s New Musical Express magazine announced that Steve Winwood, formerly of the Spencer Davis Group, was forming a group with Jim Capaldi, Chris Wood and Dave Mason, to be called Traffic …
… which made rock fans glad.
Go ahead and laugh at my 2016 CBSSports.com/Infiniti Bracket Challenge March Madness bracket:
In the past I have tried to figure out a system for March Madness. One year I spent valuable time figuring out Net Efficiency — efficiency on offense and defense. That system worked as well as throwing darts on a dartboard, putting two bowls of food (each representing a team) for your dog to choose, etc. For one thing, the most offensively efficient team is St. Mary’s of California, which is not in the tournament. The second most offensively efficient team is Indiana, but Indiana is coached by Tom Crean, and you should never pick a Tom Crean-coached team.
The only thing that comes to mind out of this bracket is that my Final Four picks accidentally fit the Blue Rule — that is, picking blue teams, because the biggest historic NCAA powers — Duke, Kansas, North Carolina, UCLA, etc. — wear blue. I also routinely refuse to pick Big Ten teams to go far, and indeed I have picked three Atlantic Coast Conference teams to go to the Final Four, because the ACC is to basketball what the Southeastern Conference is to football.
Frankly, it’s a boring field, with three number one seeds going to the Final Four. Since I’ve been busy with sports of my own, I have not really followed NCAA basketball that much except for Wisconsin …

… and apparently I have them going to the Sweet 16, largely because of my feeling that when you have a non-traditional power with a high seed, that is a ripe situation for an upset. But it’s only a feeling.
Having dumped on Donald Trump yesterday, Facebook Friend Ron Fournier widens his field:
If you had asked me four years ago to concoct the most dispiriting and debilitating 2016 presidential campaign, I might have said, “Start with a political family; find a scandal-scarred creature of Washington addicted to 20th-century identity politics.”
“Now find a vacuous outsider; somebody who reflects the worst of modern politics and culture. A celebrity would be perfect. Better yet, a reality star who is famous for being famous, a social media whore, a boor, a bully who traffics in old hates via new technologies.”
I might have picked Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump. What could be worse for a creaky, cancerous political system than what the Democratic and Republican parties are brewing up? Nothing really. This is as bad as it gets.
In contests Tuesday that put Clinton and Trump on the verge of a general-election face-off, voters across the spectrum signaled displeasure with the duopoly’s work. Among GOP voters, 37 percent said they would consider a third-party candidate if faced with a Trump vs. Clinton matchup. Democratic voters found socialist Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont to be more trustworthy than their likely nominee.
More broadly, 53 percent of Americans disapprove of Clinton, according to Gallup, and 63 percent have a negative opinion of Trump. Most voters don’t find either candidate to be particularly honest.
As Michael Barbaro wrote for TheNew York Times, “Should they clinch the nomination, it would represent the first time in at least a quarter-century that majorities of Americans held negative views of both the Democratic and Republican candidates at the same time.”
Both major parties must now confront the depth of skepticism, resistance and distaste for their front-runners, a sentiment that would profoundly shape a potential general election showdown between Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton.
They are devising appeals that are as much arguments that their all-but-certain opponent would be disastrous for the nation as they are messages trumpeting their own virtues or character.
Aides to both predict that a Clinton-Trump contest would be an ugly and unrelenting slugfest, as she pounces on his business practices and personal integrity, portraying him as unscrupulous robber baron, and he lacerates her over ethical lapses and sudden riches, painting her as a conniving abuser of power certain to be indicted in a federal investigation.
There is, both sides concede, plenty of material to mine, stretching back to 1980s Arkansas (for her) and 1970s New York (for him).
This is not to suggest equivalence: The candidates are not equally revolting. But for millions of voters, today begins a process driven by their aspersions toward one candidate rather than their aspirations for another—the acceleration of a grim trend that political scientists call “negative partisanship.”
“Come November,” voter Ed O’Malley tweeted me in response to Barbaro’s story, “I’ll vote for one or the other then go outside and throw up.”
What about people like him who claim to hate their choices and yet consistently vote Democrat or Republican? Imagine a doctor telling you that because of some gnarly disease, he had to cut off one of your arms. You get to choose which one. While your decision would be easy—“I’m right-handed, Doc. Cut off my left arm”—you wouldn’t be happy with your choices.
My friend Matthew Dowd, a former political consultant who now works for ABC News, said Tuesday’s results show just how “corrupt and broken” the political system has become. Even if the most experienced and, arguably, most qualified candidate wins in November, Dowd said via email: “Hillary won’t be able to govern, and the GOP is past its expiration date. Democrats are closing in on theirs.”
A column like this will trigger torrents of manufactured outrage and exaggerations. From the left: How dare you compare Clinton to that bigoted, bullying empty suit of a man? And from the right: ARE YOU NUTS? She’s not qualified! She’d destroy America!
Together, blindly loyal and satisfied partisans represent a fraction of the electorate. Millions of other Americans will suffer through another ugly campaign before making two decisions.
First: Do I even bother to vote?
For those who do cast a ballot, there is the even sadder choice: Which candidate do I loathe the least?
I have never missed a presidential election in my life, so of course I will vote. Of course I will not vote for Clinton or Comrade Sanders, under any circumstances. I am almost as unlikely to vote for Trump, for reasons including the fact that he is not remotely conservative:

A related observation comes from former Birmingham (Ala.) Post–Herald reporter Jim Bennett:
Although one a New York millionaire and the other a former golden glove boxer from Clio, Alabama, there are similarities in their races for president.
Each appeared on the political scene as unlikely candidates for the leader of the free world, both appealed to voters who felt they were being ignored by an out-of-touch political leadership and each brought cheering crowds to their feet with fiery bombast.
Donald Trump and George Wallace turned the political world on its proverbial ear. In doing so, they perplexed the pundits and confounded the media, some of which blamed them for political divisiveness. Populists upset the status quo.
Gov. Wallace, if you might recall, not only called for state’s rights, he also declared he was a self-proclaimed champion of the working class against big government; same as Trump. Both were tough on crime and critical of people in Washington “who don’t know what they are doing.”
Wallace said they reminded him of people who “can’t park their bicycles straight.”
Both were capable of packing Madison Square Garden or the Cleveland Convention Center to the consternation of their more liberal opponents. Both have been critical of the U.S. Supreme Court, although not the same decisions.
As a reporter, I was assigned to cover Wallace in his presidential bids both in 1964 and 1968. In Democratic primaries in Wisconsin, Indiana, and Maryland in 1964, Wallace got a third of the vote running against three surrogates backed by President Johnson. Trump is expected to do well in these three states as well, having already carried 18 states including Alabama and most of the South.
Trump, like Wallace, has attracted large numbers of demonstrators along the way who protest his campaign positions, some unpopular with students, minorities and immigrants.
I remember in Maryland, Wallace commenting about demonstrators trying to block his car, “If they lie down in front of my car, that’s the last car they will ever lie down in front of,” he told me.
When they would try to shout him down during his rallies, he would, say “Look at those pinkos. Get a haircut.” The crowd would roar in approval.
Like Trump, Wallace could stir crowds with his oratory. The Huntsville Times interviewed Bill Jones, Wallace’s first press secretary, who recounted “a particularly fiery speech in Cincinnati in 1964 that scared even Wallace.” “Wallace angrily shouted to a crowd of 1,000 that ‘little pinkos’ were ‘running around outside’ protesting his visit, and continued, after thunderous applause, saying, “When you and I start marching and demonstrating and carrying signs, we will close every highway in the country.” The audience leaped to its feet “and headed for the exit.” Jones said, “It shook Wallace who quickly moved to calm them down.”
Trump has had his share of noisy protestors too. He usually says, “Get them out of here. Good bye.” He once said he would like to sock some guy who was yelling invectives. “When they have organized professionally-staged wise guys, we have to fight back.”
Last Friday Trump postponed a rally in Chicago amid clashes between supporters and demonstrators, protests in the streets and concerns by the police that the environment at the event was no longer considered safe.
The announcement, which came amid protests both inside and outside the event at the University of Illinois at Chicago, followed heightened concerns about violence at campaign appearances. Hundreds of demonstrators packed into an arena, broke out into protest even before Trump had shown up. At least five sections were filled with dissenters.
It is a hard choice for any candidate. They can’t just ignore someone disrupting their campaign stops. Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have had them as well. Usually, building security or the local police will escort the protestors outside. Some supporters, more passionate than others, may, themselves, throw an unlawful punch without the candidate being aware of anything other than the commotion it brings. Certainly, they should encourage civility.
Wallace was a U.S. presidential candidate for four consecutive elections, in which he sought the Democratic Party nomination in 1964, 1972 and 1976, and was the American Independent Party candidate in the 1968 presidential election. He remains the last third party candidate to receive a state’s Electoral College votes. Wallace carried five Southern states and won almost 10 million popular votes in the race won by Richard Nixon that year.
I remember one campaign stop Wallace made in Portland, Oregon in 1964 where protestors and counter protestors circled the hotel where he was speaking; some carrying “God is Love” signs, one of which whacked the head of one of the governor’s supporters.
Such is American politics.
This being St. Patrick’s Day, we should have a bit o’ the Irish, including a video I first watched while eating corned beef at an Irish bar in Cuba City today in 1993 …
… plus Van Morrison …
I did not know what Politico reports about Ohio Gov. John Kasich:
The Republican nomination can sometimes seem like a contest to see which candidate is most religious. Ted Cruz touts his born-again faith, and he recalls how he “surrendered his heart to Jesus” as an 8-year-old at summer camp. Marco Rubio, who has at different times embraced Catholicism, Mormonism and evangelicalism, says his faith is the “single greatest influence in my life.” Donald Trump, by all appearances, has never attended church regularly and claims that he has never even asked God for forgiveness, but he nonetheless speaksabout American Christians as though they’re a persecuted minority and has earned the widespread support of evangelicals.
There’s good reason to believe, however, that the most religiously driven candidate of all is a man who is remarkably un-theatrical about his beliefs—who even vows, “I don’t go out and try to win a vote by using God. I think that cheapens God.” That would be John Kasich.
There is no easy way to measure how deeply a person believes, of course, or to what degree a politician is driven by faith. But the Ohio governor has gone to Bible study with the same group of men every other week for the past 20 years. He has attended an Anglican church in Ohio for decades because, as he wrote in his book, Every Other Monday: Twenty Years of Life, Lunch, Faith, and Friendship, he likes receiving Communion every week, a practice uncommon in other Christian denominations. When Vice President Joe Biden’s son Beau died last year after a battle with brain cancer, Kasich quickly expressed sympathy, offering a prayer on Meet the Press: “I’m going to pray for [Joe] because he’s had a lifetime of tears. God bless you, Joe.” (Cruz, in contrast, trotted out an old joke about the vice president just days after Beau’s death.)
The irony here is not just that the most pious Republican candidate has been largely overshadowed in a campaign for which Christianity is a major calling card. As Kasich makes what could be his last big campaign push to win Ohio’s primary on Tuesday, his devout faith might actually be hurting him. The governor’s faith appears to drive his politically moderate stances on immigration, climate change and gay marriage—positions that alienate him from mainstream conservatives whose support Kasich needs to have a chance at the nomination.
***
If the role of religion in Kasich’s life isn’t well-understood, that’s in part because his complex faith journey led him to a denomination that most Americans have never heard of. He was raised Catholic with ambitions to be the best altar boy in his parish, earning him the nickname “Pope” among his friends. But around the time he left for college at Ohio State, Kasich’s belief began to wane. He “drifted away from religion as a young adult,” he wrote in his book. It wasn’t until a drunk driver killed his parents in 1987 that Kasich returned to church. But this time, he entered the Episcopal Church, which his parents had joined later in life.
This is where things get a little tricky: He stayed with his church as it broke off with the mainstream Episcopal Church in the United States in protest over the denomination’s embrace of openly gay priests and bishops. In 2011, Kasich’s home church, Saint Augustine’s Anglican Church in Westerville, Ohio, is one of those that split off under a new, more conservative denomination called the Anglican Church in North America. In departure from mainstream Episcopalians, the ACNA gives local churches the autonomy to decide whether to ordain women, and it politically opposes abortion and euthanasia, while the Episcopal church acknowledges “there may be cases that stand beyond judgment.”
It also supports the traditional view of marriage as being between a man and a woman, and called the Supreme Court’s decision on same-sex marriage last year a “stark departure from God’s revealed order.”
At face value, those issues don’t diverge much from a typical conservative family-values platform. But in other ways, Kasich’s religious beliefs appear to have put him at odds with Republican Party dogma. Over the years, he has spoken enough about his faith and quoted Scripture often enough, that it is possible to tie many of his political decisions to tenets of his faith—especially the ones that deviate from GOP orthodoxy. …
That Kasich would link the expansion of health care benefits so explicitly to the Bible upset the conservative establishment, and it wasn’t long before columnists began criticizing Kasich’s betrayal of conservative ideals. Some of his 2016 rivals chimed in too, saying the Medicaid expansion would make “more and more people dependent upon government” (Jeb Bush) and would add to the federal debt (Rick Perry). Kasich, for his part, has brushed aside his critics, and continues to cite his faith as the reason.“When you die and get to the meeting with St. Peter, he’s probably not going to ask you much about what you did about keeping government small,” he said in 2013. “But he is going to ask you what you did for the poor. You better have a good answer.”
Kasich also diverges from the GOP base in that he believes people have contributed to climate change, citing religion on that front too. “I happen to believe there is a problem with climate change,” he said in 2012. “I don’t want to overreact to it, I can’t measure it all, but I respect the creation that the Lord has given us, and I want to make sure we protect it.” Compare this with Rubio’s claim that “for all we know, God wants the Earth to get warmer.” Here, again, Kasich’s faith seems to be a factor. His denomination recently acknowledged a “serious global ecological crisis” and “the fragility of our earthly existence,” in contrast to the many evangelical churches that do not address the issue of the environment at all.
While his competitors talk about building walls and sending migrants back across the border, Kasich supports a path to legalization. He also has expressed his reluctance to enforce deportation, saying he couldn’t imagine “how we would even begin to think about taking a mom or a dad out of a house when they have not committed a crime since they’ve been here.” That could be a line right out of the ACNA’s Immigrant Initiative—an effort to help immigrants navigate the complicated American legal system—and it’s earned Kasich his fair share of criticism from the far right. After the governor said that undocumented immigrants are “made in the image of the Lord,” Breitbart fired back: “If being ‘made in the image of the Lord’ provides an exemption to America’s immigration law, then that would mean that all of the world’s 7 billion people would be free to violate America’s immigration laws.”
On gay marriage, most of the Republican field has called for the Supreme Court’s decision to be overturned, and indeed, only 32 percent of Republicans report supporting gay marriage. Kasich doesn’t personally favor same-sex marriage, in line with ACNA teaching, but he is refreshingly gracious and tolerant on the issue, citing religious influences. During the recent GOP debate in Houston, he said, “I’ve always favored traditional marriage, but, look, the court has ruled and I’ve moved on. … If you’re in the business of commerce, conduct commerce. That’s my view. And if you don’t agree with their lifestyle, say a prayer for them when they leave and hope they change their behavior.” At an earlier debate in August, he told Fox’s Megyn Kelly, “We’ll accept [gay marriage]. And guess what, I just went to the wedding of a friend of mine who happens to be gay. Because somebody doesn’t think the way I do, doesn’t mean I can’t care about them or love them.” You could call this political pragmatism, but it is underpinned by faith. “God gives me unconditional love,” Kasich told Kelly, by way of explaining his stance on gay marriage. “I’m going to give it to my family and my friends and the people around me.”
***
If you listen closely to what Kasich has said over the years about religion, you start to see a particular theme: He seems less motivated by specific strictures and “values” than by the broader conviction that eternal life changes our perspective on the temporal. Kasich cites the late University of Southern California philosophy professor Dallas Willard as one of his theological inspirations—an unusual choice because Willard was not always accepted by the Christian establishment. His teaching that the Kingdom of God is available here and now—“eternity is already in session,” he was known to say—follows a school of thought known as spiritual formation, or the idea that with discipline and spiritual development, ordinary Christians can grow to become more like Jesus. “I love to envision the potential impact on society if more and more people in government began to live lives of other-centered love,” Kasich wrote in a tribute book to Willard. “I have hope that I can put practices in my life today that can help me not only now but also in the world yet to come.” Kasich, with his unique mix of left- and right-leaning views, seems to have adopted Willard’s focus on the Kingdom of God as far more important than the Republic of the United States.
Focusing on the world to come makes sense for any Christian believer. But in 2016—an unusually freewheeling, insult-filled race—it might be exactly the wrong belief for a presidential candidate to embrace. At a time when voters are demanding immediate solutions to perceived wrongs, patience and the promise of heaven might not mean much at the voting booth.
That hasn’t stopped Kasich. Recently, a voter at a Georgia town hall asked the governor when would he “live out [his] purpose” by finally punching back at Trump and Rubio. Kasich’s response—perhaps not surprisingly—was a study in temperance: “I don’t know if my purpose is to be president,” he said. “Whether I’m president or whether I am not president, OK, I’m carrying out my mission. Don’t you think?”