I'm thinking the key for the Cardinals against the Padres is for the Cardinals to not let it come down to who has the better bullpen. The Padres have a good bullpen and the Cardinals do not.

The Twins are really scary to me, because to me they're built for postseason games (tight, low-scoring affairs that hinge on pitching and defense). If you're an A's fan, perhaps you should consider yourself lucky to get them in a 5-game series rather than a 7-game series. If the A's can steal one at the HHH Metrodome they have a great shot. Over a 7 game series, I think the Twins beat anybody two-thirds of the time.

The Mets are weird. Yes they score a lot of runs and have a good record, but without Pedro anchoring the starting pitching I'm not so sure about them anymore. Glavine had a good year, but also had some significant stretches of lousy outings. Meanwhile, the Dodgers are on a roll, and one could plausibly argue that they were the best NL team of the second half. This series, like the Padres-Cardinals, may come down to who has the better bullpen. Overall, I think the Dodgers' bullpen has a slight edge.

I really hope the Tigers take out the Yankees, but I don't think it. The Tigers' starting staff seemed to tire down the stretch, and they'll need to be as good as they were in May and June in order to stop the Yankee offense. Still, I hope Detroit pulls it off.

My hope: Cardinals vs. Twins in the World Series. (Rematch, baby!)

My reasoned yet ill-informed prediction: Mets vs. Twins in the World Series.

GO CARDS!

JURISPRUDENCE OF PAIN, PAIN OF JURISPRUDENCE

2. The Nuremberg trials presupposed something about the normal human conscience: that moral choice doesn’t take its cues solely from legalisms and technicalities. The new bill takes the opposite stance: technicality triumphs over conscience and even over common sense. The bill introduces the possibility for a new cottage industry: the jurisprudence of pain. It distinguishes "severe pain" – the hallmark of torture – from (merely?) "serious" pain – the hallmark of cruel and degrading treatment, usually thought to denote mistreatment short of torture. But then it defines serious physical pain as "bodily injury that involves...extreme physical pain." To my untutored ears, "extreme" sounds very similar to "severe" – indeed, it sounds worse than severe. (That’s why they call it "extreme". Doh!) But in any case, it certainly sounds worse than "serious". And you thought that the Office of Legal Counsel had lost its marbles when it issued the original torture memo, with its "organ failure or death" definition of "severe pain," drawn from a Medicare statute. The OLC lawyers must be rubbing their hands together in anticipation – clearly, they have some finger-lickin’-good opinion writing ahead of them.