Finding the Tootsie Rolls Among the Cat Turds

I've really only been listening to "white music" for like ten years.

When I was an adolescent and then teenager, I listened to nothing but rap. In fact, I would say that from 1989 to 1996 I bought and/or "dubbed" (remember that word? doesn't high-speed dubbing sound like such a relic of the past?) hundreds and hundreds of rap tapes (sigh...I know), and I would say that ten of those or less were non-rap albums. (I'm using term rap here because that's what we used to call it back then and it's easier to type than hip-hop over and over again.) And of the non-rap tapes that I did buy, so many of them were albums that inspired rap albums. In other words, they were not rock albums. They were albums like Zapp V by Roger Troutman, Pickin' Up the Pieces: The Best of the Average White Band and even those were usually picked up out of the $0.99 bin.

But when it came to rap I was on the cutting edge. I knew more buzz and had more insight as to what albums and MC's were good than any acne-ridden Rochesterian had a right to. I bought L.L. Cool J's Mama Said Knock You Out long before it was popular, before "Around the Way Girl" and the title track were released. My album cover has white lettering; after "Mama Said ..." was put out as a single and video, they changed the lettering on the album to red. That's how you know I was down.

I bought A Tribe Called Quest's Midnight Marauders the day it came out and Wu-Tang Clan's Enter the Wu Tang: 36 Chambers 6 months before anyone had ever heard of them. I couldn't sleep the night before Kool G Rap and Polo's Live and Let Die came out, and I told everyone I knew that Raekwon's Only Built for Cuban Linx... would be the best of the Wu-Tang solo albums. (I still think it is, tied with GZA's Liquid Swords.) Everyone laughed at me. I bought Coolio's first album before "Fantastic Voyage" came out, because I knew that he had been a member of W.C. and the Maad Circle -- who I didn't even particularly like! --and read somewhere that it was going to be a classic album. Well, I was wrong about that one I suppose. Of course rap started to suck in 1997 and afterward and that's a topic for a whole 'nother blog.

The point is this: by the time I came around to non-rap, I had a whole helluva lot of catching up to do. I started by listening to jazz, since it was close to some rap and my dad had a bunch of old jazz albums. But eventually, I gravitated toward rock, which we all know was invented by caucasians like Pat Boone and Elvis.

I really hated what I thought was all that modern rock music had to offer (your Limp Bizkit, your Nickelback, what have you), so I went back to older stuff, some of which I still think is incredible to this day. I went fairly mainstream, but got into a diverse collection of older stuff (and by older I mean older than ten years) like Tom Waits, They Might Be Giants, Cream, Traffic, Jethro Tull, Todd Rundgren, 10cc, Gordon Lightfoot and a bunch of other stuff.

My subconscious rationale at the time was this: my understanding of the rock music of "today" (meaning anything after the year 1990) was that it was messy. Lots of noise, screaming, out of tune guitars, feedback, etc. It didn't seem to be very harmonic or melodic. Whereas the older stuff, the more pop-oriented rock, was much smoother-sounding and melodious. Even the harder stuff from that era, like Cream and Led Zeppelin, seemed much more "musical" than the newer stuff.

I felt that the world of modern music was not for me. It was kind of a sad feeling really, to think that all the music that I could possibly like had already been made. I know this was a pretty naive viewpoint, but I had not had any exposure to anything that would make me feel otherwise.

The turning point was in late 2003 when my friend Tony made me a CD chock-full of MP3 from various things he was listening to at that time. He still makes these CDs for me from time to time and they are very valuable. But I remember putting the disc in the computer drive and deciding to check out all the songs from the band Pavement, and for the first time, I discovered a rock band from the modern era that I really liked. That I loved.

(Note: One of my biggest pet peeves is when people try to force music on me. Like when someone gets in my car and takes out one of my CDs and puts in one of their own without asking and says, "You have to listen to this!" and then proceeds to go through each and every song on the disc and say, "Do you like this one? What do you think of this one? Did you like that one?" Just give me the CD and let me listen to it on my own. I like to be surprised by discovering great music, not have someone tell me "this song we are listening to right now is great." I guarantee there have been at least a dozen bands that were ruined for me because someone forced them on me and I wouldn't even give them a chance. Tony, wisely, never did this and for that I am forever gay for him.)

Pavement, while noisy, had beautiful melodies, versatility, a variety of movements and changes in time signatures within songs. They may not have been the first band to do all this, but they were pretty much the first I had ever heard at length.

As a brief digression, this is why I think file-sharing sites like Napster are so beautiful. I am not the kind of guy to gamble on a band I have never heard or have heard little of when I have been burned so many times in the past. With Tony acting as my own personal musical guru, I have been exposed to bands that I never would have even thought of exploring. Exposure to lots and lots of music -- not the same songs over and over again -- is the way to get the record industry back on its feet again.

So many people are just not going to explore or search for new, great music. And it's not being fed to them on cable or terrestrial radio. So what better way to build a following of a lesser-known band than by allowing better access. Again, a totally different blog topic lurks here somewhere.

This exposure to Pavement and other various bands and opened me up to a brand new world of music. And now I realize that there is unbelievable music being made everywhere. In the last two years alone, I have discovered some of my favorite bands, like Rogue Wave, The Shins, Iron and Wine, Elliott Smith, just to name a couple.

And also, I have been re-discovering older albums that I had never heard before and love, like Grace by Jeff Buckley and Loaded by the Velvet Underground.

It's sort of a wonderful and frustrating paradox: knowing that there are so many great albums out there, albums that could very well change my life in the musical sense, that I haven't even heard of. There they are, just sitting on shelves of record stores, practically taunting me each of the hundreds of times I have passed by them. How was I supposed to know how much I would love Marquee Moon by Television or The Three E.P.'s by the Beta Band? It's like walking by the great love of your life and never realizing it.

But what a beautiful feeling to know that even if it was made 20 or 30 years ago, there is -- like a musical Galapagos Islands -- so much left to discover.

All Footballed Out

Editor's Note: Now that football season is over I feel like I got my brain back finally. Thurman Thomas not making the Hall of Fame really wore me down and made me a bit disillusioned with football and with all the crap the NFL does. So no more football posts until April. That's a Bill Shannon Promise.

Although I do have to mention this one thing. The day of the Conference Championship games, we opened up the envelopes that Willie, Phelps, Toast and I created on the first day of the season with all our picks. My NFC picks were not good. The only playoff team out of the National that I got right was Carolina. Go figure. I picked Arizona for godsake. BUT, I did predict that Pittsburgh would win the AFC, losing to Philadelphia in the Super Bowl. Again, sweet pick there. I had Mike Mularkey as Coach of the Year for the Love of Pete. I tried to pencil in "Worst" before that Mularkey pick but thought I'd stay honest.

Anyway, just because I'm all footballed out doesn't mean I give a shit when pitchers and catchers report so you can all save it (I'm talking to you, Salami!) Bring on the hockey!

Not Doubting Thomas

Some facts:

• Thurman Thomas is #12 on the all-time rushing list, with 12,470 yards
  
• Thurman Thomas is #2 in total postseason yards from scrimmage with 2,114, behind only Jerry Rice.
  
• Thurman Thomas is the only player in NFL history to lead the NFL in total yards from Scrimmage four consecutive years. In year number five of that streak, he was second in the league.
  
• Thurman Thomas is #8 all-time in total yards from scrimmage, with 16,532 yards.
  
• Thurman Thomas was selected to five consecutive Pro Bowls from 1989-1993, and was All-Pro in 1990 and 1991.
  
• Thurman Thomas led the AFC in rushing in 1990, 1991 and 1993. He was in the top six in the NFL in rushing from 1989 to 1994.
  
• Thurman Thomas was named NFL Offensive Player of the Year in 1991.
  
• Thurman Thomas gained 190 total yards in Super Bowl XXV, and should have been named the game's MVP, even though the Bills lost.
  
• In his first nine seasons in the league, Thurman Thomas averaged 1,176 yards rushing before his role was diminished in his tenth season.
  
• Thurman Thomas is one of only four running backs to have rushed for 1,000 yards in eight consecutive seasons (the only other three are Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith and Curtis Martin).
  
• Thurman Thomas was not one of the final six players to make the Pro Football Hall of Fame this year.
  

Check the stats and the bio.

Doesn't matter. He is my all-time favorite football player and the greatest Buffalo Bill I ever saw. He should be in the Hall of Fame and anyone who ever saw him play in his prime knows it.

Loathsome People

Buffalo Beast presents The 50 Most Loathsome People in America, 2005.



What a great list, with everyone from Karl Rove ("decidedly not a genius; he is simply missing the part of his soul that prevents the rest of us from kicking elderly women in the face") to Johnny Damon ("Going from the Red Sox to the Yankees is like fucking the guy that murdered your husband") to Oprah Winfrey ("[her] entire life is an exercise in self-aggrandizement") to Larry the Cable Guy ("makes Jeff Foxworthy look like Chris Rock") to George Lucas ("an awful writer and a shitty, shitty director").

I think I hate every single person on this list (except #37). Outstanding! I can only assume Tedi Bruschi was #51. Great job, Beast!

The Word "Cinephile" Sounds So Dirty

Okay, we established long ago that my opinion is of little consequence to anyone (see: title of blog). But I feel the need to explain myself a little here.

In the never-ending pursuit of eliminating negative space and adding clutter to my already cluttered blog, I have added a new list down the right-hand side (my left, your right) of the last 40 movies I've seen. I know that you don't care what I have recently seen because you, a) would hate the foreign-slash-indie crap that I watch, b) hate movies (I'm talking to you Javen and E.C. Paul) or c) don't give a crap what I think about anything and why the hell would the fact that I put a stupid list of stupid movies on the stupid sidebar change that?

Point taken.

But here's why I feel the need to explain myself. If you look at the list itself, I have included the movie title (helpful), the year it came out (to distinguish, for example, the new The Longest Yard with Adam Sandler from the old The Longest Yard with Burt Reynolds) and a rating of my own. Yes, folks, I have taken it upon myself to list my ratings for the last 40 movies I have seen. Let me give you a quick breakdown of what these ratings mean:

• A - One of the best movies ever made or one of my favorite movies (eg. Lord of the Rings, The Right Stuff, GoodFellas)
  
• A- - Maybe not quite at the apex of movie making, but much much better than average; a special movie (The Big Lebowski, sex, lies & videotape, All the President's Men)
  
• B+ - Very solid, very entertaining movie. Better than average. (Dodgeball, In the Line of Fire, Back to the Future)
  
• B - Worth seeing. Meets expectations. Basically not a waste of time. (Shakespeare in Love, Traffic, Gladiator)
  
• B- - Underwhelming. Does not meet expectations in some way, slightly disappointing. (Magnolia, Ray, Good Will Hunting)
  
• C+ - Not horrible, but disappointing. Unfocused usually, with a major flaw in either acting or plot. (Elf, In & Out, Jackie Brown, The Phantom Menace)
  
• C - Severely disappointing and/or overrated. (Titanic, Chasing Amy, The Wedding Singer, The Blair Witch Project)
  
• C- - Incompetent, usually a movie that is trying to be important but comes off as just plain stupid (Grand Canyon, Natural Born Killers, Gerry, Higher Learning)
  
• D+ - Supremely incompetent -- yet sometimes perversely entertaining in a campy sort of way (Cellular, Freddy Got Fingered, Showgirls)
  
• D - Supremely incompetent in a way that is not at all entertaining (Time Out, Any Given Sunday, Dogma, The Contender)
  
• D- - Stupid and lazy beyond comprehension. (Deuce Bigelow: Male Gigolo, Scary Movie)
  
• F - Utterly worthless and/or Vomit-inducing. (Heavy Traffic, Master P's I'm Bout It)
  

Okay, the reason I'm addressing this seemingly (okay, definitely) non-crucial issue is that if you look at the list, you will notice a lot of B+ grades. Lest you think I was one of those people who just defaulted to B+ because I have no guts, or because (GASP!) I haven't watched the movie, and this was my phony "book report" of sorts, fear not.

The reason I give out so many B+'s is that I read a lot about movies before I actually rent them. I used to joke that I would read 2 hours worth of online reviews before deciding whether to see a 90-minute film. (Yes, I know, my wit is boundless.) So when I decide to rent a DVD, or venture out into the anarchy that is the movie theater, I usually know what I'm getting into and know what to expect. Therefore, it is rare that I see something I don't like, because I am so selective in what I watch. So the B+'s listed represent the times that the movie has been just good enough for me to recommend it.

I don't want you to think I'm getting lazy, or being too lax on subpar films. No, you can always count on me to force my dull but honest opinions on you at every turn.

God bless.

Get Off Your Knees, Vanderjagt...

Many of you who know me know my intense, white-hot hatred for that overrated, arrogant Mike Vanderjagt. If you don't, please read this post from September 10, 2004.

I will reiterate a paragraph I wrote back then. I think you will find it eerily prescient:

...If you couple this arrogance with Vanderjagt's complete ineptitude in any kind of clutch situation, you get a man who is more gabber than game-winner. Off the top of my head I can name games he has blown: Against the Dolphins in the 2000 playoffs, in that...playoff game against the Jets in 2002. He even missed one against Tampa Bay on Monday Night Football in 2003 that was luckily (and questionably) called back on a Tampa "leaping" penalty....Bottom line: if an important game is on the line, Vanderjagt is not the one you want. - Me, September 10, 2004

I was rooting for the Colts in this game, but nothing in this world is more satisfying than watching a self-serving, shit-talking kicker miss so badly when not only a game, but the fortunes of an entire season are on the line. I can now add this, the worst field goal attempt I have ever seen, to the list above.

To Mike Vanderjagt: You are a disgrace. You are an embarassment. You should be ashamed of yourself. And I should hope to never hear a single cocky word out of your mouth again. I hope this event has humbled you. I have predicted for many years that you would miss a clutch field goal in a key game, and today my prophecy has come true. I hope that you realize now that you are but a field goal kicker, and one that has never made a truly important field goal in your entire career. So the next time I hear you making comments that you don't get enough credit for having the highest field goal percentage, and for making that one field goal against Denver in the regular season, I hope you will remember this day and that it will shame you.

Scott Norwood only missed his notorious field goal by about three yards in the Super Bowl, on the road, in an outdoor stadium, on grass. He was under far more pressure than you were, and he came far closer. Your kick was humiliating, and I hope you are humilated. I know you will likely never read this, but I hope somehow it gets to you. No matter what you do for the rest of your career, you will always be remembered for the time you destroyed a "Season of Destiny," wide to the right.

Dis. Respect.

Praise the Lord. The Champs are Dead.

The three B's of the New England Patriots are denied a third ring.

Belichick


Bruschi (with Vrabel)


Brady

Overrated

Well now I'm gonna go on and do it. Something I've been meaning to do for about 10 years now. I'm gonna piss off both coasts.

I listen to a lot of rap music. Not as much as I used to, but still more than you, probably. Anyway, whenever some music critic from Spin or Rolling Stone or some other ignorant music rag comes up with one of their stupid lists or articles about the best rappers ever, the list usually looks like this (in no particular order):

• Rakim
  
• Jay-Z
  
• Nas
  
• Biggie Smalls
  
• Tupac
  

It's a ridiculous list, first of all, because it only counts rappers non-connoisseurs have heard of. (I mean, would you come up with a list of greatest guitarists of all time and only include Nickelback and Linkin Park, etc?) Secondly, the only person on that list you could make a legitimate case for is Rakim, because he actually did something to revolutionize rapping, with a unusual-for-the-time flow and abstract, conceptual lyrics. The fact that the other four rappers listed have usurped the other four spots is ridiculous at best.

I mean, Jay-Z is fine, but he's only really been around since 1995 or so. And though he is a very skilled rapper, most of his beats are so lame that he hasn't really put out a really really good song since his first album. (Which is why The Grey Album by DJ Danger Mouse is so great, since it's Jigga's lyrics with superior production.)

Nas? Don't even get me started about Nas. Nas had a great first album, then a mediocre second album, then a bunch of really mediocre shit after that. One great album does not make you a legendary rapper; it makes you a one-hit wonder.

But the ones I'm offended by most are Biggie and Tupac. Because not only are they not two of the best five rappers ever, they weren't even really that good. First Tupac...

Tupac's first album was not good. Tupac was a dancer for Digital Underground. (You may remember them from the "Humpty Dance.") His original name was MC New York, which should give you a glimpse into his creativity. His first album had a bunch of lame-ass songs like "Brenda's Got a Baby," "If My Homie Calls" (and by the way, that word is spelled "h-o-m-e-y") and "Trapped." I remember when the videos were released that these were some boring-ass songs.

Then Tupac got a part in the movie Juice and got a higher profile, leading to his second album, Strictly 4 My N.I.G.G.A.Z., which was better than the first one, but still unremarkable. You may notice by the title of this album that Tupac was starting to try his hand at controversy to give himself some publicity, and the media ate it up.

Tupac really started getting famous from 1993 - 1995, when he got shot (the first time), went to jail for rape (including the embarrassing time he kept yelling "Thug Life" after an arrest to promote his proteges... named "Thug Life", who released "Volume 1" in 1994. Predictably, there was no Volume 2.) and started trading on his mother Afeni Shakur's name, being that she was a high-profile member of the Black Panthers.

This is the point where Tupac transcended mere gangster rapdom and became an icon. He was seen as a brash revolutionary who wasn't scared to break the law or say things that were controversial. (I remember reading an article in The Source or something where Tupac said if he was walking down the street and a woman pulled her purse close to her, he would snatch it from her just for clutching it. Now that's the enlightened thinking we need to uplift urban youth!) But don't confuse this notoriety for being a good rapper. Because Tupac was really not a good rapper. In fact he sucked.

A good modern parallel is Snoop Dogg. Snoop used to be a good rapper, for about 2 songs. Then he became famous for all sorts of other reasons (attempted murder, smoking pot, making adult movies, playing himself in several movies, doing versions of "Nuthin' But a G Thang" and "Gin N Juice" even 12 years after they were originally popular). But for the most part, no one would call Snoop a good rapper. In fact, the reason Snoop has to continue to perform old songs is that he hasn't put out anything of any significance whatsoever since 1993. That's the cold truth, brotha.

Tupac was the same way. He was famous, for sure. He was actually a solid actor, if you ever saw Juice or Gridlock'd. But as a rapper, he was (at worst) shit, or (at best) nothing special. And the reason was that his flow was so simplistic. Yes, Tupac yelled a lot, and he said things that were inflammatory, but his delivery was about as basic and simplistic as you could get. He rapped in the same 4/4 delivery that Run DMC did, and even the fact that his vocals were all doubled over (so it sounded like there were Two-Pac's rapping at the same time) could not hide this. He is a clear example of style over substance. I remember that some college in California several years ago started a class that would study Tupac's lyrics as poetry. I was really disgusted, not that they would study rap lyrics as poetry, but that they would not pick somebody better.

Now, there are a ton of Tupac disciples out there, but my guess is that there is something about his charisma and/or material that makes him so popular. In my opinion -- and in the mind of many non-biased people from the East Coast -- Tupac was never really a great rapper at face value.



Now Biggie took a different path. He was a nobody who worked his way up the ranks and earned his stripes selling crack and battling on street corners. Biggie was actually a ferocious battle-rhymer in his early days, and many underground recordings can attest to this fact.

But this is not the era that Biggie fans remember. Rather, they remember the era after his debut album came out. I remember when it first came out, it got 4 1/2 "Mics" in the Source, so I knew it must have been good, and I remember it being one of the most disappointing albums of my young life. Most critics consider this a masterpiece, but I am not one of them. Because for every excellent hip hop song like "Unbelievable" or "Machine Gun Funk", there are two lackluster sell-out pop tracks, like "Juicy" (which, by the way, is a blatant ripoff of a 1989 "Wrecks N Effect" song of the same name), "Big Poppa," "One More Chance." I mean, any album that can make a duet with Method Man ("The What") sound boring can't be good.

So what we get is a rapper who eschewed the rapping that made him an underground legend, only to make pop-rap songs that would make him a mainstream legend. When people think of Biggie, they do not think of the slightly fat kid in a t-shirt rapping in front of a post office somewhere in Brooklyn. They think of the far less-compelling B.I.G. (he had to change his name because some white boy had already taken the name Biggy Smallz), a really really really fat guy in a white suit sunglasses sitting on a yacht or in the corner of a fancy club drinking Cristal and surrounded by a troop of sluts. You can practically trace the rampant materialism of mainstream rap and rap lyrics to the "Big Poppa" video.

Biggie had been a good rapper, but once he became a mainstream celebrity, his voice was gone. Instead, he became the image he felt people wanted him to be: big, rich fat guy who got a lot of women. He was no longer an interesting figure in music, not to me anyway. He was playing the role of the smooth kingpin, but all I wanted was the kid with the chip on his shoulder ready to battle.

I guess my point is this (wasn't sure if I had one or not): we live in such a knee-jerk society, especially when it comes to white people talking about rap music. Whenever superlatives are mentioned, people who don't know better and shouldn't talk go back to the same stock examples. People always mention MC Hammer and Vanilla Ice when they talk about pop-rap, or always mention Dr. Dre and Easy-E when talking about "gangsta rap," or always Lauren Hill and Common when discussing "conscious" or "positive rap." And when it comes to "best of all time," the five listed above tend to fall on the list. But have people who created these categories really given a listen to the product? Or are they rattling off the usual suspects?

Great, now I'm not safe on either coast.

Oh, and by the way, the greatest rappers of all time are (off the top of my head and in no particular order):

• Big Daddy Kane
  
• Kool G Rap
  
• El-P
  
• Aesop Rock
  
• Lord Finesse
  
• MF Doom
  
• KRS-ONE
  
• Rakim
  
• Redman
  
• Pharaoh Monch
  
• Eyedea
  
• Ras Kass
  

Please God Kill Pat Robertson

Dear Lord, please take this evil, Satanic, self-serving hypocrite from the comfortable confines of earth and cast him down to the hoary netherworld where demons may sodomize him and feast upon his innards. Oh please oh please oh please...



Some of his better quotes:

• "You say you're supposed to be nice to the Episcopalians and the Presbyterians and the Methodists and this, that, and the other thing. Nonsense. I don't have to be nice to the spirit of the Antichrist." - Showing he doesn't like other Protestant religions, January 14, 1991, on The 700 Club.
  
  
• "[Feminism is a] socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians."
  
  
• In a 2001 interview with Wolf Blitzer, he said of that the Chinese were "doing what they have to do," with regards to China's one child policy, sometimes enforced with forced abortions.
  
  
• "If you look over the course of a hundred years, I think the gradual erosion of the consensus that’s held our country together is probably more serious than a few bearded terrorists who fly into buildings." - April 30, 2005, on ABC's This Week.
  
  
• Of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, "I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war, and I don’t think any oil shipments will stop." - August 22, 2005 broadcast of The 700 Club.
  
  
• "I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: if there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city.... And don't wonder why He hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin....just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for His help because he might not be there." - to the citizens of Dover, PA, for voting out members of their school board who believe in Intelligent Design, November 10, 2005 broadcast of The 700 Club.
  
  
• "...One of the fundamental principles we have in America is that the president is the commander in chief of the armed forces and attempts to undermine the commander in chief during time of war amounts to treason." - December 7, 2005 on The 700 Club
  
  
• "He was dividing God's land, and I would say, 'Woe unto any prime minister of Israel who takes a similar course to appease the [European Union], the United Nations or the United States of America....God says, 'This land belongs to me, and you'd better leave it alone.'" - Referring to the health problems of Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
  

Rise up against these megalomanical charlatans who operate from a position of false moral superiority. These are not Christian people, they are purveyors of hatred and divisiveness, wrapping themselves in the cloak of misinterpreted fundamentalist scripture and intolerance falsely masked in the supposed "word of God."

If you call yourself a Christian and you agree with people like this, you are in for a big, hot surprise after you die. This is not Christianity, it is hatred and evil. Die you God-damned evil pig, DIE.

Another Bush That (Probably) Shouldn't Have Won

After the huge second half USC's Reggie Bush had against Fresno State back in November, everyone has been touting him as the next dominant player in the NFL. He won the Heisman Trophy and is likely to be the number one pick in the 2006 NFL Draft.



That's all fine. But it may be another case of the sports media jumping on the hot topic or hot player and running away with it without stepping back and thinking, Hey, maybe Reggie Bush isn't the second coming of Eric Dickerson just yet.

But I'll tell you one thing, in the Rose Bowl this evening, the best player on the field was Vince Young.



It was one of the most entertaining college football games -- hell, one of the most entertaining pure football games, period -- that I've seen in years. And Vince Young had that glow about him. He carried the Texas Longhorns on his back and willed them to victory. You can see a certain halo around some players when they are in that zone, where you know, even if for just one game, they are just not going to be stopped. I saw John Elway do it in Super Bowl XXXII. I saw Tom Brady do it in the "Tuck Rule" game. I saw Byron Leftwich do it against Akron in 2002 where he literally had to be carried to the line. And Vince Young had it today.



It's the first game I've seen Young play where I was actually paying attention, and he sure elevated his game against an excellent USC team. He can throw, and he can run. He ran for 200 yards. This season he passed for 2,500 yards and ran for 1,000 yards. That's just not right.

The guy is a dude, no doubt about it.

A Football Rant in Two Parts - Part Two

Professional football is one of my true loves in this world. Next to Scientology and the music of John Tesh, it goes right up on the mantle as one of the genuine joys of my life. I have two personal "holidays" per year: The NFL Draft (my Thanksgiving) and the first Sunday of the NFL season (Christmas). And I have been using that term long before a certain Mister Chris Berman, thank you very much. (Note: personal holidays are separate from personal post uber-weekend "de-railment days," but I don't have to work on those either.)

But in the last three or four seasons, my enjoyment of this most splendid of games, run by the most savvy of sports minds, has been diminished. (And no, smart-guy, it's not just because the Bills suck, though that doesn't help.)

I used to be able to watch any game at any time with a zeal usually reserved for birthdays. I would live for Saturday NFL games in December, since it was like getting 2 games for free. Now? I find myself being mildly interested. The 1999 season may go down as the greatest overall football season I've ever witnessed. And in 2000 there was a string of so many unforgettable Monday Night Football games (the famous Dolphins-Jets "comeback game" being the crown-jewel that season). So why in a scant five seasons do I find myself becoming more and more indifferent to the glut of games being shown at least two nights a week?

For the longest time, I tried to put my finger on it. What is wrong? Why doesn't anything feel right anymore? I racked my brain about this for a while trying to figure it out.

Is it the league? I don't think so. The league itself does a good job of marketing itself and bettering its product every year with rule changes and technological advancements.

Is it the quality of play? Not that I can see. There have been some very exciting teams since 2000 (the 2001 Rams, 2003 Chiefs, 2004 Colts) that I would put up against the most exciting of the 1980s.

And finally it hit me: it's not the leagues or the teams; it's the networks. Simply put, television networks have no clue what the f**k they're doing.

There are many reasons that network broadcasting and coverage of NFL Football runs the gamut from piss-poor to godawful, and as is my custom, I will outline them in my patented, easy-to-read numerically ordered outlining system.

1. Bad Football: Okay, so I lied, this actually is one of the problems with the league, but not for the reason you might think. It's not that there are less good teams than at any other time. Though we may not be in the "parity-league" days of the late 1990s, there are still some solid football teams. The problem is that many of the teams, though successful, play a dull -- nay, nearly unwatchable -- brand of football. Whether it's the dink-n-dunk (my favorite), or the 2 runs up the middle / 6-yard pass / punt gameplan, offensive football has been quite atrocious. For every Manning-to-Harrison combination, there are ten Charlie Batch-to-Peerless Prices (or somesuch equivalent). Offensive football has been on a downswing since Mike Martz stupidly gave the 2000 Rams the bye week off. (I know that's a pretty obscure reference right there, but that's how much I used to follow all this stuff.)
   
   
2. Poor Scheduling: This is not the league's fault, as you might think. The league's scheduling is pre-determined and decided completely autonomously, based on all the teams' records from the previous year. What I'm referring to is the way that the prime time games are chosen. Networks are woefully short-sighted in this regard. People wonder why the matchups are so bad on Monday Night Football, and they usually blame it on bad luck. But it's not bad luck, it's picking games without thinking about it. Somewhere, some TV exec says, "Say, this game has Michael Vick playing against Ray Lewis. What a great game! Put it on the board!" Or "Giants? Eagles? What a great matchup!" No, these are not great ideas. They lack any sort of insight into what would make a good matchup. For example, for 2005, instead of taking the up and coming teams of last year (Bengals, Vikings, Panthers), they chose the same lame-o teams they assume will be good (Eagles, Falcons, Packers) who end up putting on boring displays of football. These make for crap games, but if someone at one of the networks would really look at the matchups, the time of year, or anything that is actually related to football (rather than related to what players sell the most jerseys), they might stumble upon a game.
   
   Does anybody remember how many memorable Monday Night Football games there used to be? There were at least five really good games every season. Now, other than the Bucs-Colts 2003 game where Indy scored 28 points in the fourth quarter, I can't even thing of a good game, let alone a memorable one.
   
   
3. Too Many Damn Commercials: Football has always had commercials, and I'm thinking that they probably don't have any more than usual, but here is the difference now: flow. I remember the days when the broadcast would start off with the kickoff, then a couple possessions by each team (at least one each) before going to commercial. Now, there is the pregame, then a shot of the stadium with someone saying, "We'll be right back to FedEx Field after this," then eight minutes of commercials, then the kickoff, a punt, and a commercial.
   
   Not only do they try to sandwich as many breaks as they can -- such as before and after an after-touchdown kickoff, which is reprehensible -- but during every free second, they show graphics on the screen exhorting the new episode of C.S.I. or Prison Break or Lost. Know what TV executives? I know your shitty show is gonna be on TV! I get it! You can pretty much tell me once and if I'm interested I'll set the old DVR for it. I am offended not only by the number of interruptions, but because they don't even have the decency to show me different commercials. So I have to sit through the same shitty Coors Light "AND TWINS!" commercials, and then even more shitty "World Series of Poker" or "Walker, Texas Ranger" promos over and over again. You only have to tell me once, bitch!
   
   And not only do you show so many commercials for your own crappy shows during the commercials (over and over again no less) but now you're throwing it in the middle of the game too??? During, for example, a penalty or stoppage in play? If the appeal of sports is the drama, then why are you interrupting this supposed drama by throwing a bunch of commercials in the middle? Imagine you are watching the big ending scene at the end of, say "The 40 Year Old Virgin" (or literally any movie or TV show for that matter), and during the climax, when you are caught up in the drama of the moment, and someone pops up on screen in the bottom corner and says "Don't forget that the new Harry Potter movie is coming out next April!" and then goes right back into the scene. This is the equivalent of shattering the intensity of the game.
   
   These interruptions have always occurred, but it used to be only once per half or so. Now it seems that the game has become secondary to making sure we get as much advertising thrown in our collective face as possible. But what the network execs don't get is that they are making the product less palatable to people like me, and therefore making us less apt to watch, and generate their precious ratings-revenue.
   
   
4. Bad Pregame Coverage: ESPN's Sunday NFL Countdown used to be THE best pregame show in the business. They had a combination of a then-not-annoying, pre-caricature Chris Berman (who some may remember used to have quite a quick wit) and football men like Pete Axthelm, Tom Jackson and Chris Mortensen (who are still there, thank God because they are the only watchable thing on it right now). Now, they have "names," like Steve Young, Michael Irvin, Mike Ditka, etc., who offer little-to-nothing in the way of actual insight and are just there to blow hot air. I remember a time that you could get an explanation or examination of football that was neither a Ron Jaworski-like dissection of game film or a noise-heavy harangue by Michael Irvin. It was something in the middle; it was intelligent discussion of football, high on facts and insight, low on bombast.
   
   Likewise, the NFL Today on CBS (with Brent Musberger and Irv Cross) and the NFL on NBC (with Bob Costas, Will McDonough and Frank Deford) were equally excellent. Today it's, Who's More Outrageous?! Who's More Opinionated?? Who can speak the loudest???
   
   There have been a few strides made toward improving pre-game shows, such as ESPN replacing Sterling Sharpe, CBS moving their pre-game show indoors (for the love of God), and Fox actually showing information about the AFC once in a while. But for each of these, we still get Stuart Scott using urban slang of the late 1980s (Note to Stu: no one says "phat" anymore) and Terry Bradshaw asking Jake Plummer if he says "couch" or "sofa." So much utter crap.
   
   For some reason, many pre-game shows thing that we as football fans give a shit about some players' actual life. They will ask Carson Palmer if he thinks the iPod or TiVo is a more important invention. Or follow Torry Holt on a day shopping and playing video games. I personally only care about these people in a football context. I have a life of my own (well, technically anyway), and I don't need to follow some millionaire around to a quasi-hip hop soundtrack, unless he's doing something truly interesting. Keep it on the field, people!+
   
   
5. Horrible Announcers: I am one of the six people in America who actually liked the move of putting Dennis Miller on Monday Night Football. I'm not saying it worked out that well, but I liked the move. At least it seemed to be an attempt to try something that actually resembles an entertaining broadcast. There are probably a half-dozen decent --DECENT -- football announcers in the country: Marv Albert, Jim Nantz, Al Michaels (sorry, Jav, I know you disagree), Mike Tirico, Dick Enberg. I am seriously struggling to think of more. But there are almost no good color commentators.
   
   John Madden is, I'm sorry kids, a terrible terrible color man. He hasn't been good since 1987. He coasted on his telestrator and his "boom" shtick briefly, but now he doesn't even have that. Now all I has is his name slapped on the cover of a popular video game. I have not heard him make one insightful comment since he started broadcasting Monday Night Football. Not a single one. He actually said this: ready? "The ball is slippery because it's wet, and it's wet because it's raining." I have pets that have made keener observations.
   
   And don't get me started on that heaping steaming pile of obsequious excrement known as ESPN Sunday Night Football. I used to like Mike Patrick, honestly. He always took the bluster out of Joe Theismann's pomposity, but when you add the waste of valuable blood platelets known as Paul Maguire to the mix, you have a recipe for knob-washery that would make Ed McMahon vomit. According to this crew, there is not a single normal or good player in the league. Instead, every player is magnificent, gifted beyond all possible comprehension. A player doesn't make a nice play, he makes a sensational play!
   

It's painful for me to say this about football. For years and years I have maintained football's superiority over all other sports, not only in gameplay, but in watchability. But lately, coverage of playoff baseball has actually been more compelling than regular season football (for the first time in my life).

Maybe it's the fact that I feel I could run a network better than almost anyone doing it now. (For example, I had been saying that NBC should drop The Apprentice go back to a 2-hour comedy block on Thursday nights for over a year now. And what did they just announce? I should get a bonus from NBC for this.) But it shouldn't take a frustrated would-be network exec to fix the problems. Let's stop trying to marry sports and entertainment. Because good sports should be all the entertainment one would need.

HappyMerryChristmakwanzaakkah!

Ok there is a lot of debate right now about the whole Merry Christmas vs. Happy Holidays phenomenon. And I think it's starting to get a little ridiculous. If you see me, say "Happy Holidays" or "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Hanukkah" (spelling optional) or "Enjoy your day off" or whatever the hell you want to say. I am not going to get offended.

But there are two very distinct parts to this, one which I think is very serious, the other which I think is inane beyond belief. The difference is between 1) religious repression and 2) simple politeness.

Religious Repression

Now I was raised Roman Catholic. You may have heard of it. If you haven't you're probably going to hell. Just kidding, of course. But while I'm not technically "practicing" lately, I do tend to still gravitate toward a lot of the things I grew up on, what with Popes and Narthexes and Tabernacles and the Stations of the Cross and whatnot. I'm certainly not one of these asshole self-proclaimed "recovering Catholics" who couldn't take the fact that Church doesn't want you to bang every girl in your neighborhood and has at least some moral compass. (Well, that's the Church's official position anyway.)

Now, being that as it may, I may have a skewed perspective on this, but I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with religious symbolism and pride in one's religion. I have no less a problem with a manger scene in the mall than I do with a Star of David on Max Baer's boxing tights or the Star and Crescent on the Tunisian flag. I think the attempt to suppress things like this truly is a suppression of religious freedom. And while I know America does not (and should not) have an official religion, let's not forget that the reason those pilgrims hopped the Mayflower to come here was to get away from religious persecution, for any religious affiliation.

See, while I do absolutely believe in the separation of Church and State, because no state should ever tell someone what they should be believing in, I personally think that anyone that would take the "under God" part of the Pledge of Allegiance to the Supreme Court either has far far far too much time on his hands, or is so bitter against all things religious that he will nickel-and-dime anything he can to piss off those idiots who believe in this "God" character. If you don't want to say the "under God" part, don't say it. Some people want to say it, shouldn't they be able to if that's what they truly believe? I know that religious zealots are scary, but let's not be so anti-religion that we don't even want to hear the words.

I am somewhat more offended that we even have a Pledge of Allegiance in the first place. And why every morning? Isn't that very first time we pledge it enough? Does the Pledge hold up in a court of law? "Mr. John Walker Lindh, you defied the United States by joining the Taliban? And this was after you had repeatedly stated that you pledged allegiance??? Have you no morals, sir?" There are so many religious idiots out there that they are making people take the atheist idiots (and yes there are a lot of them too) seriously. Granted, there is no way on God's/Big Bang's green earth we should be teaching intelligent design in science classes, but people are so hellbent (rightfully) to keep it out of science classes that they don't see the very intriguing philosophical questions about it. Too bad the Intelligent Design Movement has hijacked it into a political issue. But I have already digressed waaayyyy too much to get into all that silly business.

But this all brings us to the second, idiotic part of this argument. That somehow, saying "happy holidays" is an actual affront to and attack on Christianity. Saying "happy holidays" is not saying, "I hate Christianity." It's saying: I have...

Simple Politeness

No less a great mind than Bill O'Reilly said just a few nights ago -- and I'm paraphrasing, obviously, since there are no quotation marks around what's coming up -- Christians are offended by the greeting "happy holidays." O'Reilly has said a lot of ludicrous shit. He said if the City of San Francisco gets attacked, that the U.S. Military should not defend it. He lied that he won two Peabody Awards. He said he wanted to cover a woman with falafel. But this is beneath even his feeble attempts to comprehend quasi-nuanced issues.

The man, after all, has the mind of a class bully-turned-debate team third-stringer. He tries to intimidate people, usually by yelling at them to SHUT UP, and then thinks he won the debate because he talked louder on his own TV show. He's the worst kind of Republican, but again, back to the topic.

I cannot think of one single Christian person who would get offended if you told them "happy holidays." Do you know why? Because when you wish them "happy holidays," you are including Christmas and New Year's! That's why it's happy holidays, not happy holiday! And that is a scientific fact!

If Yom Kippur fell on a Friday (can it? I'm not sure), and you said to a Jewish co-worker "Thank God It's Friday!", do you think he/she would get offended and say, "It's not Friday! It's Yom Kippur!" and then boycott you? This is the same argument. It's not Christmas to everyone, you know. To some people it's just another Sunday.

Would a Christian be happy about everyone going around saying "Happy Hannukah" to every single person, friend or stranger, around this time of year? (Most rational people of any religious denomination probably wouldn't care, but you get the point.) It's just as much a Jewish holiday as it is a Christian one. Why do Christians have the exclusive right to it? Just because it's a more significant holiday on the Christian calendar than it is the Jewish one?

It is simply common courtesy to say "happy holidays" if you don't know with 100% certainty that the person you are addressing celebrates Christmas. If you are talking to your best friend or a co-worker or nun or mom or someone that you know celebrates Christmas, go ahead and say "Merry Christmas." You'll feel good about it. But if you are holding the door open for someone at the mall, and you can't quite tell, don't you think it's just more polite to say "happy holidays"?

Anyway, to EVERYONE in the whole world, have a Merry Christmas!

Minor Housecleaning

No no no, you silly bastard, I'm not picking up after myself. Good stuff though. Compelling...and...rich.

No, but rather I am adding two new sites to my blogroll. Well, one new, one old returner.

The new one is by my good friend John "Jack" Johnson, who just started his "Cold-Draft" blog. I know it's early, but my boy is already thinking about the NFL draft. Yeah, I know, it's amazing. He's just starting it out, but come April, you better bring your bib... cuz it's gonna get messy! (Johnny is expecting his second child soon, so congrats to Johnny.)

Mike C.

The old one is from my former friend Mike "Don" Cialini. (His middle name is not really Don, it's Jerome.) Jerome, errrr, Mike was on my blogroll about a year ago, and then he went ahead and didn't touch a computer for 13 months, so I removed him posthaste. But the son of a bitch is back, cranking out 2 1/2 posts in the last 10 days. That warrants a probationary return to the blogroll.

He's changed the name from "I Plead the Fifth" to "Leave the Gun. Take the Cannoli," which is, of course, from Mike's favorite movie To Wong Foo, Thanks for Everything, Julie Newmar. If he doesn't keep it up, he's going back to the realm of the unknown. It's up to you, Michael. Mike just got hitched so I'll allow a little leeway on him too.

Other than their conservative points of view, there is little that relates these two gentlemen, but I figure it's only fair to give the tens of millions that peruse my little scribblin' pad fair notice. Enjoy kids!

-------------

After I finished this I nearly slapped my own forehead off with a mighty "schwack" having forgotten about my boy Electric City Paul, who's blog, Electric City Paul, is a whimsical mix of popular culture, baseball and Scott Stapp. I think you'll really enjoy it.

SAVE OUR BLUTHS!

It was announced last week that the Fox television "network" was reducing the order on episodes of Arrested Development from 18 to only 13. It doesn't take a genius or television insider to see the writing on the wall here. The show is clearly going to be cancelled.

This is a ridiculous move on the part of Fox, who have only themselves to blame for a) failing to market the show adequately, b) continually moving its time slot, making it hard for people to follow it, c) going weeks on end without showing any episodes, thereby slowing down its momentum, and d) setting it up for failure by putting it up against ratings juggernauts (Desperate Housewives) or established shows with loyal followings (King of Queens).



Let me say this: I am not passionate about a lot of television shows (though I do think we are going through a tv-comedy renaissance of sorts, with excellent shows like Curb Your Enthusiasm, The Daily Show, Scrubs, King of Queens, and recent shows with a lot of potential like My Name is Earl and The Office). But I am severely passionate about Arrested because it is one of the few truly intelligent shows on TV.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that it may be as brilliant as The Simpsons, and anyone who knows my affinity for that show knows that's a claim I wouldn't make lightly. The difference is that while The Simpsons makes brilliant use of satire of all of American culture, Arrested is equally satirical, but mostly contained within its own story lines. Both shows reward you for paying attention, but in my opinion, the payoff is better over the course of several episodes with Arrested. It's one of those shows of which you could easily watch 5 or 6 episodes in a row without wanting to watch something else.

Maybe the show doesn't get a lot of ratings, but it's not that far behind other shows overall. Besides, here is a brief list of shows that Fox will keep on the air, all of which I am willing to bet are inferior to Arrested:

• That '70s Show
  
• Stacked
  
• Trading Spouses
  
• Reunion
  
• Cops (ok, well Cops actually is pretty awesome)
  
• The War at Home
  
• American Dad (I would actually put Family Guy on this list, though I know I'd get a beating for it, but yes, Family Guy is severely overrated, IMHO)
  

I'm sure there are others I'm not even thinking of. The best I can hope for is that Mitchell Hurwitz (Arrested's creator) shops it around to other networks that know how to market a daring comedy. (NBC perhaps? They've had luck in the past.)

If you've ever seen the show and love it, or even if you just find it midly amusing, click here to petition this travesty. Don't let Arrested become one of those "brilliant-but-cancelled" shows. American culture is very much a breeding ground for mediocrity when it comes to the arts. Look at the top movies and best-selling music in our country right now. We need to foster the few good, creative enterprises that actually mean something. I think a decade from now, people will rediscover the Arrested Development DVDs and will realize how ingenious it is. It's already a cult favorite, let's just hope it's not one of those cults where everybody has to die.

Pinko Commie Leftist

Your Political Profile

Overall: 20% Conservative, 80% Liberal

Social Issues: 0% Conservative, 100% Liberal

Personal Responsibility: 0% Conservative, 100% Liberal

Fiscal Issues: 0% Conservative, 100% Liberal

Ethics: 25% Conservative, 75% Liberal

Defense and Crime: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal

How Liberal / Conservative Are You?

A Football Rant in Two Parts - Part One

I knew from the second I read it on ESPN's The Bottom Line Saturday night: Tedy Bruschi was going to play, and it was going to be the only thing I was going to hear about for the next 24 hours.


An American Hero

No matter what Bruschi did -- he could intercept a pass, he could make no tackles, he could make one tackle on a kickoff, he could rescuscitate a dying child on the sideline, he could murder a member of the clergy in cold blood at halftime -- one thing was for certain: Bruschi was going to be a hero.

A little background for those that don't know. Bruschi has been a linebacker for the Patriots for about 8 or 9 years. He has always rightfully been seen as a role player, not a superstar. But suddenly, due to the inordinate amount of Patriot hype, he was vaulted into superstar status after last season. There were people saying that he was a hall-of-famer, despite the fact that he had only made his first Pro Bowl last year.

Then, shortly after the Super Bowl, Bruschi had a stroke. I don't think he had a real stroke, like the kind that makes one side of your face droopy. He probably had heatstroke or something. But anyway, he was declared out for the season. But somehow, miraculously, heroically, he got the clearance, checking with no less than 20 doctors, to finally play! Of course, he had to pick the primetime Buffalo game to do this. No amount of maniuplation here.

I will give full disclosure about this subject: I hate Tedy Bruschi. Yes, I am a Buffalo Bills diehard, which doesn't help, because the Patriots, for which Bruschi plays are one of our rivals. But even if he played with the Arizona Cardinals or the Kansas City Chiefs, I would detest this self-aggrandizing, fake-smiling, faux-inspiring, overrated, grandstanding asshole. Every time I see him, he's got that fake "look at me and what a great guy I am" look on his face. He's always carrying his kids around, which says, "hey, aren't I a great dad?" And don't think this is some sort of revisionist anti-Boston bias; I have always always hated this prick, nearly going back to his days at Arizona.

This is a byproduct of the Patriots being the most overhyped sports entity since the Chicago Bulls of the 1990s. Since he is a Patriot, he must be classy. Classy like the Patriots waving Terrible Towels at Pittsburgh fans in the AFC Championship game last year. Or classy like Bill Belichick letting Gillette Stadium's field go to shit so the Colts wouldn't be able to run as fast. Or classy like Belichick saying after the Eagles-Patriots Super Bowl that (the admittedly subpar) Freddie Mitchell was "terrible" and "we were glad when he was out there."

Yes, all class. And Bruschi is one of the classiest. The Patriots are treated with a sort of reverence usually reserved for great Americans like Tom Cruise and Martha Stewart. So it's clear that every accolade he gets is fully deserved.

But -- seriously now -- I could not believe the amount of knob-slobbing ESPN and the national sports media gave Bruschi for his comeback.

Here's what the boxscore says:

"Bruschi made two tackles and assisted on five."(London Fletcher usually has this many in one quarter, but never mind that.)

"Bruschi was involved in a tackle on Buffalo's second play from scrimmage and then slowed down Roscoe Parrish on a reverse that resulted in a 6-yard loss. After that, he made few noteworthy plays."
(link)

Some comments made about him after this truly truly unbelievable performance:

"...Tedy Bruschi has to be a shoo-in for Comeback Player of the Year, right?"
"Unbelievable. You're just not supposed to be able to do that.
Right? Wrong.
Bruschi believed the unbelievable" (Says Michael Smith)

"Just getting back on the field again was enough for New England inside linebacker Tedy Bruschi to win a game ball."
"Bruschi had seven tackles while participating in 64 defensive snaps." (Note: when is the last time someone noted how many defensive snaps any player participated in?)
"It's hard to recall even one spectacular, game-alterting play that Bruschi authored..."
(Says the usually excellent Len Pasquarelli.)

"Instead of immediately showing a replay of Tedy Bruschi's first play back ... and, remarkably, a play on which Bruschi made a tackle -- we saw the graphic of the Bills' starting defense. Pfffft. There goes the moment." (Quoth the getting ever-worse Peter King)

But this praise and universal applause was nothing, absolutely nothing, compared to the vomit-inducing coverage ESPN gave him. Honesly, Mike Patrick, Joe Theismann and Paul Maguire should be ashamed of themselves for the fawning, hyperbolic coverage they gave Bruschi. A few of my favorite moments:

• Theismann saying, (paraphrasing) "How can you not root for Tedy Bruschi? The Buffalo Bills are rooting for Tedy Bruschi."
  
• Showing a montage of Bruschi throwing his hands in the air (after not making a play) to the tune of that "Hero" song from the first Spider-Man movie.
  
• Cutting to Bruschi's wife no less than a dozen times for no reason whatsoever. She wasn't crying or worried, just laughing it up in the stands.
  
• The constant camerawork showing Bruschi after every Patriots' defensive play, even ones where he had absolutely no bearing on the outcome.
  
• Failing to call Bruschi out on getting caught on blown coverage on a key Bills touchdown.
  

It was, in a word, sickening. Sports journalism -- and ESPN in particular -- are at their nadir. Something needs to happen sports fans. Rise up and revolt...

Kay Bailey's Short-Term Memory

I know I'm not even close to the first person to bring this up, but...



Kay Bailey Hutchinson on her vote to remove then-president Bill Clinton from office for perjury, February 12, 1999:

"The reason that I voted to remove him from office is because I think the overridding issue here is that truth will remain the standard for perjury and obstruction of justice in our criminal justice system and it must not be gray. It must not be muddy."

Bill Clinton was a Democrat.

Kay Bailey Hutchinson on the Valerie Plame case, which may bring indictments for Karl Rove and "Scooter" Libby for perjury, October 23, 2005:

"[I hope] that if there is going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime and so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste of time and taxpayer dollars."

Karl Rove is a Republican. "Scooter" Libby is a Republican.

Kay Bailey Hutchinson is a Republican. Has she gone through a fundamental change in her interpretation of the law? Why was the "technicality" argument okay in 1999, but not now? Has she experienced some sort of post-Millennial epiphany about the nature of United States law? Knowing what she knows now, would she change her vote from the Clinton hearings? Call her up at 202-224-5922 and ask her. Or contact one of her many offices.

Have all of you who voted for Bush a year ago gotten what you wanted? Knowing what you know now, would you change your vote? Did you really think things were gonna get better with this think-tank running the show?

Go Fitz go!

Sabre-rrific! (So Far Anyway)

Okay, I know it's early, but my Buffalo Sabres are 2-0 and looking very good after two games. It's taking the sting away from three straight Bills losses.


Rory Fitzpatrick - Defenseman (Rochester's own)



Ryan Miller - Goalie



Chris Drury - Center



Maxim Afinogenov - Right Wing



Daniel Briere - Center

Stupid Things I've Done - Steffie

This one goes out to my boy Slim Colt, a true gentleman, and the only person I've ever seen wear 4 sports jerseys at one time. He was in town the other night and we recounted this story for the 900th time. It's a short one, but a good one.

When I think back on college, the images that usually come into my head are the nights in the dorm and in the bars. Other than the occasional dormitory party, I always think of the weeknights, where we'd just be in a lounge watching TV or doing homework or playing Tecmo Super Bowl and those kinds of things. And Thursday nights at the Shire, especially my senior year, were also especially memorable, though I have forgotten the details of nearly every single Thursday night I spent there. When I think of college, these are the things I think of and the things I miss the most.

But some events came out of the mundane events of a regular sober night, sometimes even occuring in the midst of studying.

One such evening, my buddy Mike "Slim Colt" Short and I were in the academic buildings, probably using a computer lab. Well, he was probably using the computer lab, I was probably searching for pictures of nude women or something. But that was way back then when such things interested me and the details are hazy at best.

So Mike and I, burly men that we were, got a bit of a hankerin' for some grub. So we headed down to the Dolphin Den, a small cafe-type area in the basement of Grewen Hall. (Note: Some of you may remember the Dolphin Den as the site of another stupid-ass thing I did with mayonnaise.) Then was usually empty or close to it on most weeknights, because classes were out and no one was in the building except for schoolnerds.

Wednesdays, however, were an exception. For you see, every Wednesday night, the college held classes for people with "special needs." (Don't worry, this is not going to turn into me making fun of people with special needs.) So around the same time every week, these groups of differently-abled teenagers and people in their early twenties would converge upon the Den to get food, or perhaps even a lovely beverage.

This particular day, Mike and I were waiting for some curly fries or some such item, and they were taking a bit longer than normal. As we waited, I made eye contact with one of the special needs girls. I waited a moment longer, and before I knew it, she had sidled up to me. She began to make a bit of small talk: "Those fries look good. Do you usually get them? Is this your first time here?" etc. She was very affable.

Suddenly, the conversation -- clearly going somewhere in this young lady's mind -- took an unexpected turn...

She said the following:

"So I have a question to ask you. (quietly, to herself) I can't believe I'm doing this... (normal volume again) Okay, so my friend Steffie has had a really bad week. So I was wondering, do you wanna go out with her?"

My brain began working overtime. I had no idea how to respond to this most unanticipated query. I had a couple options. I could have taken the easy, rude way out and simply said, "No." But my mama raised me better than that. I didn't want it to look like I was being insensitive to the girl just because she was in a special class.

I briefly (like, nanosecond briefly) bandied about the idea of humoring her, and saying, "Sure I will!" This would have allowed the young lady to save face. But this would have been disatrous. Though I was single at the time, I had my doubts that -- sight unseen -- Steffie would have been a viable counterpart for me, romantically. Okay sure, in theory, maybe Steffie was this young lady's hot nymphomaniac sister. Maybe this was some sort of unlikely oddball romantic comedy in the making. But the odds were against it. And assuming that Steffie was not compatible with my particular situation, all this would have done was get poor Steffie's hopes up.

What if I had been the "funny guy," and played along. It would only have been for Slim's benefit if that was the case. I could have said, struggling to contain my laughter, "Oh yeah, you tell Steffie to be here one week from tonight and I'll take her out for a steak dinner." I had a feeling this girl did not have a nose for my sarcasm and would not have detected the intended irony. Yeah, I'm a real cut up and next thing I know, I come to the Den in a few Wednesdays and have an armada of pissed off special needs folks ready to beat the shit out of me for jilting poor Steffie. I've had dreams about that kind of thing, so thank you, no. (Clearly, she would have been similarly disappointed had I actually shown up anyway, so either way this was a wash.)

There was only one way to solve this very delicate conundrum, and luckily, my subconscious was thinking faster than my conscious. The words came flowing out of me, completely independent of my actual working brain. The perfect two-word phrase escaped my lips so fast and involuntarily, that I was actually surprised after they had been uttered:

"I'm gay."

Steffie's friend suddenly broke eye-contact, nodded her head sympathetically, and wordlessly backed away, terminating any further conversation with me. I looked back at Slim and he was silently laughing. I wasn't sure if he was laughing at me because he found it funny, or if he found me pathetic. But I did know one thing...

Steffie's friend is a goddamn homophobe.

Billy Backs Down

Little Billy O'Reilly folds like a cheap suit in the presence of a talk-show heavyweight.