Basketball and other stuff

Due to the Elliot Spitzer stuff, I've got a backlog of stuff to get on here. Plus I have a Filipino girl coming in on Monday, so who knows how much time I'll have after that.

First, I've always liked Championship Week in college basketball, mainly for the small conferences where it's win or don't get in. So, they fight damned near to the death to win their title. Plus, you get some big conference team with no shot of making the tournament suddenly making a run for their conference's automatic bid. Sure, some conferences have a 1 versus 2 seed matchup (like boring ass Big 12 and PAC-10), but others add excitement. Then there is the SEC. Who expected Arkansas to be playing Georgia in the SEC finals? Georgia wins four SEC games all year, and now they've won three in the SEC tournament. Two of which they won on the same day due to some weather thing going on in Atlanta. Which brings me to the main point. I blame the whole SEC tournament fiasco on Atlanta. If Atlanta wants to host a major tournament, figure out how to keep the tornadoes out of downtown. Maybe they should have asked Obama, because I'm sure he can control weather.

Oh, and before anyone asks, I don't think UK got jobbed at the end of the Georgia game. And it has nothing to do with whether or not I like UK. It's the fact that I hate that bush league play that Gillispie tried to run at the end where your inbounder runs the baseline to get the opposing player to follow so another guy can jump in front of him for a cheap charging foul. It's the basketball equivalent of sticking your arm over the plate in baseball to get hit by a pitch. Hell, Gillispie didn't even give himself a plausible argument that the second player was setting a screen to free up the inbounder, because there is no way that one of his best shooters, Ramel Bradley, would be the one to do it. Whenever I see that play run, I think the coach is unimaginative and unable to come up with a real play to run. Considering the next play was a pass thrown out of bound, I'm not surprised Gillispie tried the BS charge first. And before UK fans start screaming they got cheated, I'd like an explanation why someone was passing out tickets to random UK fans even though the venue was restricted to family and people affiliated with the school and each team got the same allotment, but UK fans seemed to have about 3 times as many fans (and well above the allotment).

Ironically, UK would have been better off if the SEC had canceled the rest of the tournament on Friday night and declared Tennessee the automatic bid for winning the regular season. I thought a couple of weeks ago that UK needed to take two of their last three (did it) games and win at least one in the tournament to make the NCAA tournament. Then I realized just how many mediocre teams are out there and figured they were probably in before the SEC tourney started. However, the local media and SEC commentators may think UK is a lock, but nationally the feeling is mixed. In fact, in most years, I would say UK doesn't deserve to get in. They did have a good SEC record, but that's as much a product of a down SEC as anything. Otherwise, UK had a horrible out-of-conference. Seven losses including some really bad ones. Their best OOC win was Tennessee State (a 6 seed in the OVC). Their best road win was either LSU or Alabama.

So, if the tournament was canceled, UK probably would have gotten in for sure on the basis that it wasn't their fault they didn't have a chance to beat Georgia. Then they lose to Georgia who make it worse by winning again. If Georgia can overcome the storm, the move to another arena and the stench Bobby Cremins Court gives off to win 3 games (2 in OT) in about 48 hours, how can UK say they were too inconvenienced (although I'm sure the claim is being made on CatsPause.com)? Plus, what if Georgia wins the SEC tournament? Arkansas was probably in even before they knocked off Tennessee. Tennessee, Vandy and Miss St (only because they won the SEC West) were also locks. As I said, the SEC was down. Could Georgia take UK's at large bid? My guess is no, but if I was a UK fan, I would be rooting for Arkansas to beat Georgia and probably Wisconsin to take out Illinois. Plus, I would be living in a trailer with goats running in the yard.

On to other stories. I think it's pretty obvious that I have no problem with commenting on a woman's breasts, no matter how crude that may seem. However, if I was a teacher in a middle school, I think I could refrain from telling a 13 year old girl that she had "nice perky tits." She's 13. How perky could they be...........I mean, that's entirely inappropriate behavior.

In this story, a couple left their child in the truck for a couple of hours while they were drinking in a bar. I'm not going to excuse their behavior. They certainly could have brought some chicken strips out for her. What gets me is that the story insists that she "was locked in the truck." Granted, her parents seem to be low IQ, so the girl may not be very smart, but she's 8 years old. I think she could unlock a truck from the inside.

Lisa Marie Presley is suing some British newspaper for calling her fat when in fact she is pregnant. Which makes her fat. Not sure where this case is going. As a fat person, I'm not sure you can sue for being called fat when you are actually fat. Plus, most suits like this are because your reputation has been defamed. Considering her marriage to Michael Jackson, that horse is already out of the barn.

It's always sad when a family-owned business has to close its doors because it can no longer compete. Of course, if this whorehouse had been in New York instead of Germany, Elliot Spitzer may have kept it open by himself.

In Spitzer's defense, at least his sex scandal hasn't involved someone dead. I don't know about you, but I've always expected better government out of Detroit than what they are getting.

This story was apparently about abortion rights in England, but I couldn't get past the beginning where a deaf couple is bound and determined to have deaf children because they "are proud, not of the medical aspect of deafness, but of the language we use and the community we live in." These people aren't just deaf. They're retarded. What kind of sick bastards would intentionally want children who are deaf? Let's get past the PC crap. Being deaf is not differently-abled. It's disabled. It's a handicap. You can't hear. Do you know anyone who can hear that thinks losing that ability would be just fine? Does anyone go to their doctor asking them to make them deaf so they will have a different ability? Someone needs to let these morons in on a little secret. Even if their child can hear, it can still use sign language with its parents. Good God. How can someone become so identified with their handicap that they would wish it upon their kids? Are amputees going to start hacking off their children's limbs? Here's an idea. Let's remove the eyes of these dumbdicks so that they can be differently-abled with blindness. Friggin' morons.

The question posed in the deaf retard article was whether the state should try to stop them from having deaf children. I think their level of stupidity means they should be stopped from having any kids. However, in Germany, some guy keeps going to jail because he won't stop nailing his sister. I won't dwell too much on the fact that he keeps going to jail, but she doesn't. The question here is whether we are open minded enough to allow someone to bump nasties with their sister. I say sure if their sister is hot. Granted, I don't have a sister, so the mere thought of sibling sex leads to indifference rather than repugnance (plus I'm a degenerate). Actually, the point of anti-incest laws isn't based on squeamishness over family sex. It's because it can lead to birth defects in any children they have. Not sure if it's valid in this case. Two of the kids had developmental disability, but so did their mother. Yet, if laws are passed to stop two siblings from getting freaky out of the fear of messed up kids, why not stop idiots from intentionally having deaf children?

Normally, I fear chicks with guns. I figure at some point I may give them a reason to use the guns on me. However, when it comes to hot chicks in bikinis with automatic weapons, I'm willing to give it a shot. Not because I'm some kind of pervert, but because......okay, I'm some kind of pervert.

I didn't say it.

I don't watch reality shows. Most seem to be quite stupid, and I'm not sure how some of these people get their own reality show. I do know they exist because I watch The Soup which makes fun of them. Now, I was vaguely aware that OJ Simpson's dead lawyer Robert Kardashian had a daughter with a large ass. I was also aware a sex tape with her and some rapper had gotten out. I've seen it and as far as celebrity sex tapes go, it was one of the worst. I don't know if that big ass was weighing her down, but a little movement would have been nice. But I digress. I was vaguely aware that some channel decided that a reality show revolving around the daughter and her family would be a good idea. However, it wasn't until I saw a clip of the show on The Soup did I realize that Bruce Jenner is on Keeping Up With The Kardashians (through marriage to someone). WTF? Bruce, you were an American hero after winning gold in the 1976 Olympic Decathlon. Now you're doing a reality show based around your step-daughter who became famous for her big ass and sex tape?