Big News Stories

When the screenwriters went on strike, I really didn't care. To begin with, I really don't watch much scripted television or first run movies. Having the Golden Globes canceled was actually pretty nice because they could have aired something better, like a test pattern. Plus, there are some really lousy TV shows out there. Consider the fact that Cavemen got on the air this year. How bad could the shows that didn't get green-lit be? There's been a lot of concern about movies making less money every year and Hollywood types wondering why. Here's why - people pay to have garbage taken away. They don't like paying to watch it. So, I think it's obvious that too many people are stealing money with their writing.

However, something happened that made me take sides. The writer's guild came off like a bunch of douchebags when they made a separate deal with David Letterman so that his writers went back to work. Seems a bit strange to me that you would stop striking one person while continuing to strike another. When a coal mine strikes, I don't hear that one section gets to go back to work because they are such fine fellows. This whole interim deal is completely bogus. The argument is that Letterman could make the deal because unlike Jay Leno or Jimmy Kimmel, Letterman's production company owns the show. However, the interim deal says they'll agree to the writer's guild's demands, but (and this is a major but) this deal will be supplanted by whatever agreement the guild makes with the studios because CBS actually owns the rebroadcast rights to Letterman's show. So, essentially, Letterman's writers get to go back to drawing a paycheck even though their eventual agreement will be the exact same one the others will get.

Now, why would this tick me off? The writer's guild is shafting their own members. First, Letterman's writers will get the benefit of the strike without having to suffer the same financial consequences as other writers. So, why is the guild so willing to do this even though the interim agreement is a fraud? Apparently, CBS isn't a big player in the negotiations, but NBC is. Helping Letterman would hurt NBC if he takes away Leno's audience. Not only would Letterman have his own writers, but people from the other douchebag group, the Screen Actors Guild, won't cross the lines to go on shows with striking writers. Now, the writer's guild is bitching about Leno writing his own monologues. Why? Leno (and Kimmel and Colbert and Stewart) is a member of the writer's guild. That is what is pissing me off the most. The people signed a garbage agreement with Letterman to kill Leno's ratings to force NBC's hand in their negotiations. So, basically, the WGA is stabbing certain members of their guild in the back by trying to destroy their shows, but it wants to sanction Leno for trying to save it? What a bunch of douchebags.

Speaking of douchebags, I was hoping that Roger Clemens would just fade away after his name came out on baseball's steroid report with the accusation from his former trainer, Brian McNamee (I hate spelling his name so he will be known only as The Trainer), that he was injected with HG and steroids.. But he's decided to make the whole thing even more bizarre. First, his only defense was a Youtube video that claimed The Trainer never injected him with anything. By the time he did a 60 Minutes interview, he was only injected with Lidocaine (a local painkiller that would not be injected into your ass for an arm problem) and vitamin B12 (which is what Jose Conseco claimed in his book was baseball players' code for steroids). Finally, Clemens had a follow-up press conference where he played a taped phone call between The Trainer and himself where Clemens denied using steroids. Then Clemens filed a defamation lawsuit against The Trainer (which conveniently may give him an out from testifying before Congress under oath).

So, did he convince me? Hell no. The taped call played at the press conference was useless. It was made after the report came out, and Clemens was making the tape so of course he was going to deny steroid use on the tape. However, The Trainer never said he lied about giving Clemens steroids, and when he asked Clemens what he wanted him to do, Clemens told him to tell the truth. But Clemens never said that the truth he wanted him to tell was that Clemens didn't do steroids. The feds don't really like it when you suborn perjury of their witnesses. The 60 Minutes interview was a joke as CBS News was so intent on getting the interview that they capitulated to every demand. It was done at Clemens' home and by a 90 year old Mike Wallace who considers Clemens a personal friend which explains the less than hard hitting interview. Wallace pretty much let Clemens get away with some fairly ludicrous stuff.

Let's take a close look at what Clemens said in the interview. I knew he was full of crap when he used a straw man argument as proof that he couldn't have been injected with steroids. He said he would have grown a third ear and had injury problems. Well, since no one has ever claimed steroids lead you to grow extra body parts, saying the lack of an extra ear is proof you aren't roided up is garbage. As for injuries, steroids do cause some players to have some injury problems, but it's almost irrelevant for Clemens because he's not an every day player (36 starts in one season was a career high) and the past two years, he showed up at midseason. His argument that he wouldn't use something bad for him is undercut by his admission that he popped painkillers like candy. Oh, and no reason to take a lie detector test because no one would believe him anyway.

And the logic just keeps getting better. The fact that Andy Pettite admitted to using HGH is separate from Clemens situation. Just because Pettite was Clemens' close friend and workout partner who was accused by the same person of doing the same thing as Clemens is no reason to think that they are in any way related. And I loved Clemens' argument that The Trainer was lying about Clemens' steroid use to stay out of jail. Let's see. The Trainer has rolled to the feds about his steroid dealing. They tell him that he can talk to the baseball investigators on the condition that his testimony matches what he told them because if it doesn't, he perjured himself. So, either the feds are out to get Clemens (that's the follow-up question that a non-senile, competent interviewer would have asked) or they reward perjury by reducing prison time. Now, how can I possibly believe Clemens is lying?

I've mentioned before how meaningless the Iowa caucus is. Yet, people began reading a bunch into Barak Obama's win there. Sure, it showed he was a viable candidate (but that should have been common sense), but people got so stupid to the point there was real speculation (by people who should know better) that Hillary Clinton was going to drop out and predictions of a double digit win in New Hampshire for Obama although that was based on polling. That double digit loss actually became a three point win for Clinton when votes there were actually counted. I'm not real clear why polls are still taken as gospel since they've had a tendency to be horribly inaccurate in several recent elections. My theory is that a lot of people now use cell phones exclusively which cannot be cold called by pollsters.

But I digress. Thinking any of the early votes mean much is foolish. It's not even a small state thing. Michigan's a big state, but it just had one of the most pointless primaries of all. To begin with, the Republicans have an open primary which means anyone can vote in it. Democrats have a tendency to muck things up by crossing over for laughs. More could do that this year since most of the Democratic candidates dropped out because the Michigan delegates won't count due to a snit with the party. In fact, Florida was stripped of their delegates, too. That means the Democrats will not be seating delegates from the 4th and 8th largest states out of deference to Iowa and New Hampshire. Friggin' brilliant. Wait for Super Tuesday when lots of delegates are at stake.

Now, that's not to say the primaries aren't interesting. On the Republican side, you wonder if Mike Huckabee will ever come out with a policy position that he actually thought about for more than 30 seconds or will John McCain began to take a giant cross on the road to hang from when he begins to feel especially persecuted. Then the Democratic race got cute when race became a factor. You know it wasn't that long ago that THE BLACK LEADERSHIP was questioning whether Barak Obama was "black enough" due to not having risen through the ranks of the mainstream civil rights movement and probably because he was raised by his white grandparents. Now, they've apparently noticed that's still blacker than a white woman from an affluent Chicago suburb. Supposedly race wasn't going to matter after Obama won the very white Iowa Caucus, but then accusations flew that he lost New Hampshire because voters there had the anonymity of the voting booth so they could let their inner racism flow and pull the lever for the white candidate. In Iowa, you vote by standing under your candidate's sign. On the flip side, that could mean Obama's Iowa numbers were inflated because in a fit of White Guilt, many caucus goers were afraid they would be considered racists if they stood under someone else's sign. After all, it is the Democratic caucus. Of course, Hillary's surge of support came almost exclusively from single women, so that must mean single women are inherently racist.

NFL Divisional Round - Sunday Picks

San Diego @ Indianapolis
The Chargers did beat the Colts in week 8. They still have LaDanian Tomlinson. That's about all I see in their favor. The win certainly wasn't tainted, but it wasn't something that gives me confidence they'll do it again. The Colts were on the road in San Diego a week after their loss to New England. They also were without several players who were hurt. Almost all will be back for this one and it will be in Indianapolis. In that game, Peyton Manning threw six interceptions. Yet, the Chargers still needed the Colts to miss a field goal with a minute and a half left to hold them off.

That's not the only reason I'm not picking the Chargers. They looked like crap against a Tennessee Titans team that was playing without a quarterback. Technically, Vince Young is a quarterback, but he doesn't act like one on the field. That Titans team barely squeaked by the Colts' backups in week 17 even though they needed to win to make the playoffs. Frankly, last week's performance by San Diego was slightly uninspiring. And how happy would you be if your team was in the playoffs and Norv Turner was your coach? While I'm not a big Tony Dungy fan, he's better than Turner. Plus, rumor on the street is Dungy could very well be retiring at the end of the season. I'm sure his players have heard and will probably have a little extra motivation. So, do I think the Chargers can win? Sure, if Manning throws six interceptions. Since he does that very infrequently, I'm taking the Colts.

New York Giants @ Dallas
Some big controversy going on. Dallas quarterback Tony Romo spent the bye week in Mexico with Jessica Simpson. This was after he completely crapped himself while playing the Eagles in front of her. What exactly is there about her that is supposed to screw up his game? Is she Kryptonite? Did she break his junk or something? I do understand the criticism of him being in Mexico even though it's a bye week. This is the playoffs. Don't lose focus especially when you finished the season rather poorly. Kind of like not losing focus when a ball is hiked to you for a game winning field goal.

Now, teammate Jason Witten came to Romo's defense because he was actually down in Mexico with them and ...............wait a second. I see what's going on. Romo and Witten are homos. This Jessica Simpson thing is just a scam to cover their flaming affair. Sure, she's still hot, but her last movie went straight to video and I'm not sure she sings anymore. Actually, I'm not really sure what she sang before, but my guess is that it qualifies as music. So, it's not surprising that she could be looking for a little publicity by hooking up with a potential NFL Super Bowl quarterback. And she was married to some dude in a boy band so she's used to being around guys with ambiguous sexuality. It's a win-win for everyone. She gets some face time on a national broadcast. Romo gets to hide his love of buggery.

Anyway, back to the game. I think at full strength the Cowboys are clearly superior to the Giants. That's why they won twice during the regular season. There's been talk that Terrell Owens will be a game time decision due to a sore ankle, but I think everyone knows that the biggest media pimp won't take a chance on missing a playoff game. I think quarterback is the key. Everyone should know by now that I have a healthy disrespect for Eli Manning's big game play, but I don't hold Romo's any higher. As the season went on, he didn't play well. His only previous playoff experience ended with the fumbled snap, but he really hadn't done anything up to that point. So, whichever quarterback doesn't screw up in the fourth quarter will win. I'll go with the Cowboys.

NFL Divisional Round - Saturday Picks

Seattle @ Green Bay
This the game with all the subplots (which we see so much of the time). The West Coast offense isn't used that much anymore, but here's a matchup of two of them. Brett Favre is facing Mike Holmgren who coached Favre to his only Super Bowl appearances. Matt Hasselbeck playing against the team that he started with. Seattle thinks they have better polka dancing than Green Bay. Okay, I made one of those up. There's been a lot made of the fact that the last time Hasselbeck was in a playoff game in Green Bay, the Seahawks won the overtime coin toss leading to Hasselbeck's proclamation (via the ref's microphone) that "we want the ball and we're going to score." Then the Packers won on an interception returned for a touchdown. To be honest, I thought Hasselbeck got a bad rap for making the statement. If you're a fan of a team, would you prefer that your quarterback announce he wants the ball, but expects to lose?

Actually, I don't think Seattle will lose because Hasselbeck will say something stupid. I think they'll lose for various other reasons. For one, I think Green Bay's defense is a bit better (although not much). I also think Seattle's running game is flat atrocious. It's ironic because they have the big name (and do-nothing) back in Shaun Alexander, and Green Bay was once seen as a long shot Super Bowl contender due to a lack of running game. However, Ryan Grant has given them a solid option there. However, the main reason that I'm picking Green Bay is because Seattle sucks on the road. They're 3-5 with wins over non-playoff teams San Francisco, St. Louis and Philly. They've also got losses on the road to non-playoff teams Arizona, Cleveland, Carolina and Atlanta. The only playoff team they faced on the road was Pittsburgh with a 21-0 loss. I don't see them suddenly being better in Green Bay.

Jacksonville @ New England
A lot of people don't seem to be giving Jacksonville a chance. They're a 13 point underdog (huge for a playoff game). I think I saw Merrill Hoge predict a 44-17 score. Now, I'm not saying the Patriots can't blow out Jacksonville. I've seen too many teams this year play scared against New England and let the game get out of control (see Washington in week 8). One area of weakness for the Jaguars has been pass defense where they were mid-pack all season. That isn't a good weakness against a team that throws a ton. Plus, there is the fact that in two games against the Steelers, the Jags got a big lead and let Pittsburgh back into it. While David Garrard has played mostly error free football this year for Jacksonville, he had two crucial interceptions last week. New England is good at exploiting those.

Now, on the other hand, I think Jacksonville has a good shot. Defensively, the Jags may not be that great against the pass, but they do get a lot of sacks. They also like to knock the Hell out of you. Physical teams have given the Patriots problems in the past. On offense, Garrard isn't a gunslinger type of quarterback, but that isn't bad thing. Game managers (think AJ Feeley ), even lousy ones (thing Kyle Boller) had some success against the Patriots. Plus, Garrard can take off and run which is the key for them. New England's rush defense was ranked 10th in the league, but that's average yards per game which is skewed by how many teams abandoned the run against the Patriots because they were down early. Only four teams gave up more yards per carry than the Patriots. The Patriots can be run on. I think Jacksonville will cover the 13 point spread, but am I willing to pick a Jaguar win? Sure. Why not? I think the Jags do it.

The Week In Review

Perfect night to write this week's review up. I can drink and watch the BCS Championship Game while I'm doing it at my leisure. Hey, Chris Wells just busted a 65 yard touchdown run to put Ohio State up 7-0. In the process, he outran safety Craig Steltz who I'm convinced is the worst All-American I have ever seen. I wonder who thought Chris Wells could be a key?

The political season certainly brings out the........well, let's call them the semi-retarded candidates. One in particular, who I will forever call The Pride Of Georgia (non-Jimmy Carter Division), decided to live on a 300 foot scaffold "for days" to call attention to something-or-other. I wasn't really paying that much attention. Let me go back and check. Right, he's saying "that politicians should pay more attention to the concerns of working people and less to those of wealthy corporate interests." In this case, their concern could be that some idiot is close to falling off a tower. Actually, what I find humorous is that he's supporting working people by not actually working and opposing corporate interests by climbing a tower named after a billboard company which sounds pretty corporate to me.

Now, here's a candidate who interests me. The mayor (female of course) of some podunk town in Oregon is catching heat for posting a lingerie shot of herself on her Myspace page. Actually, she's not too bright since she's claiming that the picture was from before she was mayor and "personal". Except it was taken at the fire department where her regular job as secretary is. I'm not real sure that taking risque photos on a fire truck is normal policy.

A Star Trek fan is suing Christie's auction house for fraud. He bought a poker visor used by some android on the Next Generation show (that I never watched) for 6 grand and was apparently told by the guy playing the android (who apparently has nothing else to do) that it's a fake. He also paid $16,000 more for a table from the set and a uniform. The Trekkie says he's humiliated. He should be. Not because an auction house gypped him. He should be embarrassed for spending $22K for a poker visor, table and cheesy Star Trek uniform.

Just for the record, I have not been on a plane in about a year.

Oh, Ladies. Marilyn Manson is back on the market. That is if you're interested in a crappy musical "artist" who has to be "shocking" in order to sell albums and look like a carnival sideshow freak so people aren't aware how really unattractive he is. Now, if he's not your cup of tea, Bud from Married With Children is also available.

Game note. LSU is pulling away. Ohio State needs to open things up again. Their QB is making some good passes. Give him a chance.

Now, here's a really crap story. Some idiot woman decided to "help" her daughter win Hannah Montana tickets by writing an essay detailing how the poor child's father died in Iraq. When it was discovered that her father had not died in Iraq (or at all), this bitch went on The Today Show to "apologize" (and freak me out with her eyebrows). Apparently her original position, "We wrote whatever we could to win", wasn't going over well. Her "apology" probably isn't going to do too well either since it seems to follow the "I'm sorry I got caught" agenda. Oh, and she didn't mean to "mislead" because a flat out lie isn't in any way misleading. Oh, and she didn't have the tickets taken away from her. She refused them. Roger Clemens is more believable. Even better, the dumbass is playing victim. She had to take down her MySpace page. OH, THE HORROR. NO MYSPACE FOR HER. She's just a stupid, callous, conniving bitch who took what is a tragedy for other people and exploited it. Personally, I find it a good case for waterboarding.

Here's a story that should be about young girls, but it's not. Hello Kitty is now marketing clothing to young men in Japan. Nice quote in the article. "That generation feels no embarrassment about wearing Hello Kitty." Well, if they're dudes, they should.

Considering how stupid the media can be about anthrax, I'm surprised the death of several Afghanis from it wasn't trumpeted as a major news story. Some people are unaware that anthrax is naturally occurring. Now, when I read this story, I was originally struck by the level of stupidity. If your camel is so sick that no one will buy it, why the Hell would you eat it yourself? Then came my next thought. What does camel taste like?

England. Where criminals aren't really criminals. There have been countless stories about how citizens aren't supposed to fight back against robbers or attackers. Well, now the cops are actually telling a woman that if she improves her home security, they'll arrest her if someone breaking in gets hurt. Really. It's true. I guess in a warped namby pamby European way it makes sense. It's probably easier to catch the home owner than the burglar. Why waste time doing the hard work? It's not like the English police aren't proficient at arresting middle age women.

Which wreck is worse? Driving onto a railroad track because you're listening to your GPS system or wrecking because you're trying to avoid a pterodactyl? I don't have a GPS system, but my guess is that when it tells you to turn right, you turn right at the next road. Not immediately turn right, especially if that turn puts you on a railroad track. Still, I'm leaning towards the pterodactyl story because they've been extinct for quite some time.

I saw in the paper that higher education in Kentucky are concerned about budget cuts. Well, if they are like other colleges and universities, they could cut some of the stupidity out and save a ton of money. I recently read about a column by a Philosophy professor who wants a ban (I'm assuming government) on certain hedge trimmers and Hummers (the driving kind). Not to keep people like me who aren't environmentally conscious from having them. No, he doesn't have the self-control to keep from buying them himself, so he wants them banned. At least he was expressing his personal opinion in a non-university funded forum. Unlike a researcher-slash-dumbass at Hebrew University who did a study on why the Israeli Defense Force didn't have organized rape of Arab women. Her conclusion? Israeli men don't rape Arab women because they have a conscious political objective not to enlarge the Arab population (contrary to historical precedent of many invaders raping women as a way of establishing a foothold among a population). It certainly couldn't be that Israeli society frowns upon rape. I don't know for certain, but my guess is that it's illegal there. Maybe they should institute laws like other countries. Where women who are rape victims might be sentenced to jail and lashings. Maybe then Israeli soldiers will feel compelled to rape Arab women.

And finally, there's the Spears family. America's answer to .........well, they're actually pretty unique. I didn't feel like mentioning the Jamie Lynn Spears story because I wasn't really aware who she was or what the Hell Zoey 101 was. Besides, whats one more pregnant 16 year old from Clodkicker, Louisiana. Sure, she's a complete moron. You're getting paid good money to star in some stupid teenager show. What would be the worst thing that could harm that job. Maybe getting pregnant? Short of crystal meth face, you can hide a drug addiction offscreen, but the baby gut might be a giveaway. Still, wasn't that interested. Then two things were reported (that may or may not be true due to the fact it comes from tabloids, but are certainly funny). First, sister Britney was hospitalized as bi-polar/serial nutsack after the SWAT team had to be called when she wigged out and held her children hostage. A report says her jealousy about the coverage her little sister's pregnancy was a major factor in the meltdown. Then came the report that her somewhat-legal-to-knock-up-a-16-year-old boyfriend isn't really the father. It's some executive of her TV show. Is this not the biggest white trash family ever? William Faulkner couldn't come up with this story. Why do I get the feeling that Kevin Federline will eventually get custody of Jamie Lynn's baby too just so it has a chance at a normal life?

BCS Title Game

Before getting into why I'm picking who I'm picking, I left out the most fun that came from watching the Music City Bowl at Phil's house. Florida State has a wide receiver named De' Cody Fagg. Nothing brings out the juvenile humor like a funny name. I'm surprised he hasn't thought about changing it. But I guess he likes the name De' Cody.

On to the BCS Championship Game between Ohio State and LSU. Ohio State is number one in the BCS rankings and pretty much every poll. Which is obviously why LSU is about a 4 point favorite. This is based on a couple of things. One is the belief that the SEC is much better than the Big 10. Another is the fact that Ohio State was absolutely destroyed by Florida in the BCS Championship Game last year. I pretty much was feeling the same way when the bowl season started, but some things are making me rethink those assumptions.

Let's start with the second assumption that Ohio State found out last year that they can't compete with a top SEC team. Well, that was last year. Ohio State got drubbed 41-14 by Florida, but the game just got out of hand late, and we have two different teams. To begin with, LSU isn't as good as last year's Florida team. There's been a lot of talk about LSU's defense, but Florida 2006 was better. The most points scored against that team was 28 by #11 Arkansas. LSU is doing things like giving up 34 to a piss poor Alabama and 24 to a really weak Ole Miss. I don't see the domination that we were supposed to have out of LSU this year. Plus, LSU isn't remotely as good at quarterback as Florida was. Tim Tebow won the Heisman this year, but he was second string last year behind Chris Leak who had a big game against Ohio State.

It's not just the SEC team that's different. Ohio State is. I didn't think Troy Smith was all that good (giving him the Heisman was a joke) last year, and he proved it against Florida as he completed 4 out of 14 passes. I think this year's starter, Todd Boeckman, is better than Smith was. But that's not the only change on offense. Last year, the Buckeyes had Antonio Pittman as their lead runner. He was very good. Chris Wells is even better. I thought he should have played more last year. And it's not just offensively. Ohio State's defense is better. Still, is it enough for a 27 point swing?

Now, onto the other assumption that the SEC is so much better than the Big 10. I certainly thought so. And I still think it's better, but is it that much better? I'm not so sure after watching the bowl games. The SEC has won, but the reality is they haven't dominated anything. Two wins against mid-major teams (three if you consider Colorado a mid-major). Even against other BCS teams, most were squeakers even if the other team was missing half its team. If the lower level teams weren't dominating lower level teams from other conferences, the assumption is the best of the SEC won't dominate the best of another conference. The two bowl games that made me completely rethink this were the Capital One Bowl (MICH 41 F:A 35) and Cotton Bowl (Missou 38 ARK 7). The Capital One Bowl was the lower level version of the BCS Title Game with SEC speed versus Big 10 Brawn. Brawn won and more convincingly than the score indicated. The Cotton Bowl had Arkansas in their first game since running all over LSU, and they were completely shut down by Missouri (I don't want to hear about them having an interim coach; see Fiesta Bowl).

So, I have to say I don't see the SEC dominance being what it was originally thought which means we have to look at motivation. Which team wants it more. LSU does have some motivation. They were hot at the start of the season and were supposed to dominate the rest of the season, but they really stumbled late. A big win changes the perception about them. On the other hand, I think Ohio State definitely wants to prove last year's title game was a fluke. In BCS title games, it began with the clear favorite winning. Then came 2003 when defending champion Miami was expected to dominate Ohio State, but lost (on a really bad pass interference call). Then Oklahoma was favored over LSU and lost. Southern Cal re-established the favorite winning the next year, but then got beat the next year by clear underdog Texas. Then last year, Ohio State was a big favorite and lost. So, in recent years, when a team is expected to lose, they don't. That certainly favors Ohio State.

Is all that enough to make me think Ohio State can pull out a win? Tough call. The problem is that coach Jim Tressel may not loosen up enough and throw caution to the wind (that's what Michigan did) which I think would help. A conservative gameplan is asking for trouble. What is making me lean towards Ohio State is the bowl records. LSU looked shaky all year against SEC teams who didn't look that good against teams on the same level or below. Obviously with several weeks off to prepare, LSU could focus enough to take down anyone. However, I'm going out on a limb (not really since I'm not putting money on the game) and taking Ohio State in an upset.

Best of the Bowls

Third quarter of a tight Orange Bowl between Kansas and Virginia Tech. At this point, I'm 17-11 on my previous picks. And I'm pissed while watching the halftime of the Orange Bowl. The musical act was ZZ Top. When I was there last year, we got Gladys Knight. She wasn't too bad (although I would much prefer ZZ Top), but the real problem was that American Idol nutsack, Taylor Hicks, also performed. Showing his staying power, he's dropped from doing Orange Bowls to a much lower tiered Liberty Bowl.

The SEC was doing well early, and still is I guess at 6-2. However, they took a couple of shots on the 1st. I figured Arkansas would lose to Missouri, but they were dominated so bad that they only scored one touchdown. Then Florida was smacked around by Michigan. They needed Michigan to fumble twice inside Florida's five yard line just to stay within a touchdown. This one hurt because this was the classic "SEC Speed" against "Big 10 Brawny But Slothy" that the SEC is supposed to dominate in. I thought it was a killer matchup for Michigan, but they pulled it out. Because of that, I don't really see a marquee win for the SEC. The best win was Auburn (who I didn't like) needing overtime to beat Clemson (who I didn't like either). Tennessee was the SEC East champion, but won a squeaker over Wisconsin (4th in Big 10). Miss. St. beat a CUSA team. Alabama beat Colorado, but neither deserved to be there. Kentucky looked real good barely beating a Florida State team missing half its players. Georgia over Hawaii? Told you it could be a laugher.

Yet, in the SEC's defense, no other looks too dominant either. The Big 12 had potential until Oklahoma lost to West Virginia in the Fiesta Bowl. Until then, they were looking pretty good with their only losses being pretty. Texas A&M lost to Penn State (losing to Penn State in a bowl is never bad), and Colorado lost to Bama (in a bowl that never should have happened). They had two of the better wins with Texas over Arizona State and Missou over Arkansas. Now, that Arizona State beatdown to Texas is why I can't really put the PAC-10 over anyone. Take that away and they look good at 4-2 (smaller conference, fewer bowl teams) with two big margin wins by Southern Cal over Illinois and Oregon over South Florida. Their other loss (UCLA to BYU) wasn't too bad, but Arizona State was hammered.

The fact that Southern Cal and Georgia both absolutely destroyed their opponents once again shows how stupid the Rose Bowl was. I hope they're happy with a snoozer of a game by putting Illinois against Southern Cal. This could have been one of the best games of the year, but we didn't get it.

I've been kind of curious who the Sugar Bowl would have picked if the Rose Bowl had taken Georgia. The BCS rules state that no more than two teams from one conference can play in the five BCS bowls. Plus, at large teams have to be in the top 14 of the BCS standings. With Kansas and Georgia taken as an at large, that means no more Big 12 (Missouri) or SEC (Florida) teams could go. I doubt they would have taken Illinois (not everyone is that stupid), but the only other choice was Arizona State or Boston College. The Sugar Bowl was probably lucky to get Georgia who would bring a good fanbase.

Not that the Sugar Bowl was a good game. I didn't think it would be. Hawaii just wasn't good enough to play in a BCS game. That's not looking at strength of schedule or statistics. That's from watching them play this season. Obviously Hawaii was better off monetarily by playing in the Sugar Bowl with the huge payouts. However, I think it was bad overall for them. Getting dominated that much isn't going to help small conference teams in voting in coming years which may or may not be fair (the Big 10 wasn't penalized for Ohio State's thumping last year nor will they be for Illinois' beatdown this year). It wasn't just the team. Colt Brennan's draft status has to be devastated by this performance. The knock on Brennan was his big numbers were the result of being a "system quarterback", and his performance reinforced that knock. In the Hawaii system, he usually makes a quick pass to an open receiver. That's a lot easier against a WAC defense than it is against a top BCS conference team. When his first option was shut down, he looked lost. He also struggled greatly to figure out where the pass rush was coming from. I think he drops in the draft based on this game.

Hawaii had the worst performance by a non-BCS team. The worst performance by a BCS team was Oklahoma. Sure, Illinois and Arkansas looked worse, but they didn't have as much to lose. And I didn't think either would show up anyway. Besides, Illinois won two games last year. The Rose Bowl was just a nice capper to the season. Oklahoma lost a lot. They were number three in the AP poll before the end of the season which means if they spanked West Virginia and LSU barely squeaked by Ohio State in an ugly game, AP voters may put Oklahoma number one (Point of Fact: I have always argued since the conferences have agreed on the BCS system, a conference member cannot claim a national title if they finish first in the AP poll but don't win the BCS Championship game). Yet, Oklahoma crapped on themselves. Coach Bob Stoops' rep also took a hit because he's lost he past four BCS bowl games. Which is silly because in that time he's also won the Holiday Bowl, and before the streak began he had won the Orange and Rose Bowls (including a national title).

The best performance by a BCS squad was the West Virginia beating Oklahoma. To begin with, Brokeback Mountaineer fans were in a state of depression. First, they lost to Pitt in their final game when a win would have put them in the title game. Then, their coach left and pissed off the entire fan base. Beating Oklahoma decisively has to be the best Christmas present that team could have given to their toothless, inbred fans. Not only did it give them a good finish to the year, but it gave them hope for the future. Interim coach Bill Stewart was given the permanent position the very next day. Talk about your crash audition. He wasn't even being talked about as a possible candidate before the game (although I wondered when they didn't hire anyone before the bowl whether they were waiting to see what he could do). Frankly, he deserved it. It wasn't the highest scoring game by the Mountainqueers this year, but it was highest against a good defense. And only giving up 28 points to a good offense like Oklahoma was pretty nice too.

God, I missed going to a bowl game this year. Not that it wasn't huge fun to watch the UK bowl game at Phil's and have the following:
1. Jon screaming at Micah Johnson to fall down after a late interception (something about those UK players fumbling game-sealing interceptions
2. Dickie telling about his past suicidal thoughts over peeing too much when all he needed was Flomax
3. Brett getting drunk before I did and making monkey noises. That's not a racist remark. It was about a Richard Pryor show. Brett, if you're reading, the DVD is simply Richard Pryor Live In Concert
4. Phil doing Phil things. Actually, I wasn't paying too much attention to Phil, but I'm sure he did something that I should be making fun of.

Kansas just won the Orange Bowl. That makes me 18-11 overall. I've still got two BS bowls (Rutgers in the International and Tulsa in the GMAC) and the BCS title game (pick coming this weekend). It also gives the Big 12 three good wins. Still, I'll have to crunch some numbers before deciding which conference did best.

NFL Wildcard Games

As I wait for the end of the New Year's Day college games, I'll switch gears and look at the NFL Wildcard games this weekend.

Redskins @ Seahawks
I'm taking the Redskins in an upset. It's a Todd Collins' world. We're just living in it. It's not really Collins, but the way the team has played since he came in. They have gutted out a lot of games that were "must-win". They've done it by running well, playing really good defense and not having mistakes at the quarterback position. If the game comes down to toughness, Seattle won't win. Sure, they went 10-6, but looking at their schedule, they only played two eventual playoff teams - beat Tampa 20-6 and were shut out by Pittsburgh 21-0. Matt Hasselbeck has had a great passing season for them, but he still has some consistency problems. The defense is pretty good, but mostly against bad competition, and their running game is horrible (as the person who wasted a first round pick on Shaun Alexander, I know this well). Maybe I just can't get over them losing 13-10 to Carolina while facing a rookie no-name quarterback making his first start.

Jaguars @ Steelers
As much as it pains me to say it, I think Jacksonville beats Pittsburgh. The Steelers have lost their best running back, Willie Parker, to injury and don't have another with his game breaking ability. They had already lost their starting left tackle, and now they've lost his backup. They lost to Jacksonville at home with those guys a few weeks ago. I don't think the Jags have gotten worse since then. Plus, I don't trust the Pittsburgh coaching staff to come up with a brilliant game plan. After all, they had a shot at the three seed in the final week of the season, but sat several starters which pretty much guaranteed they'd lose to Baltimore. As a three seed, they'd be facing a weaker Tennessee team in the first round, but they didn't even try. Real friggin' smart.

Giants @ Buccaneers
The Giants certainly showed up to play against New England in week 17 even though they had nothing to play for. I think they did it because they wanted to go into the playoffs on a high note which they probably got from a close loss to the Patriots. Still, I'm picking Tampa to take this one. There are things I can say to justify it. Tampa plays really good defense at home. Bucs QB Jeff Garcia is an ultimate "game manager" quarterback who knocked the Giants out of the playoffs last year when he was with Philly. Those don't matter since the Giants actually play better on the road (7-1), and Garcia had more talent on his Eagles' team last year than he does with Tampa this year. No, the reason I'm picking Tampa is personal prejudice. I think Giants' quarterback Eli Manning sucks. Look at the talent on the Giants. They've had a strong defense for years, a solid running game, one of the best tight ends and quality receivers. Yet, no playoff wins with Eli at QB. Eli is one of those quarterbacks who can put up some numbers and make you think he's getting there, but I would never put any money on him to win at crunch time. He's also shockingly inaccurate. A lot of quarterbacks throw interceptions because of bad decisions (ie trying to force the ball to a covered receiver), but a lot of Eli's interceptions are due to him missing the receiver completely. The New England game is a perfect example of the Eli Manning game. He played good early on when all the pressure was on the Patriots. Then the Patriots take the lead and the pressure is on Eli to respond. He missed his receiver so badly that it was intercepted by a defensive back not even covering the receiver. He'll find a way to screw this one up.

Titans @ Chargers
After a slow start to their season, the Chargers are rolling. After a slow start to their season, the Titans have squeaked into the playoffs. Their offense is horrible. The Titans faced a must-win game in week 17 against the Colts who took their starters out in the first half. Yet, Tennessee needed three second half field goals to win 16-10. And they did better (although not much) with backup Kerry Collins in the game. Not the type of play that normally inspires me to think they can go into San Diego and win. Take the Chargers.

Preliminary BCS Games

Rose Bowl (Jan 1): Southern Cal vs. Illinois - Let me just say for the record that the Rose Bowl is run by a bunch of moron. Many analysts think Southern Cal and Georgia were playing as well or better than anyone at the end of the year (I would include Oklahoma in that group). The Rose Bowl gets Southern Cal as the PAC 10 winner, but instead of picking top 5 BCS team Georgia to give us one of the better bowl games of the season, they take Illinois who barely made the cut as a BCS eligible team. Why? They wanted to keep that foolish tradition of Big 10/Pac 10 in the Rose Bowl. That's stupid. They can continue calling the Rose Bowl "The Granddaddy of Them All", but the reality is that in my lifetime, the Rose Bowl has hardly been a game that I pay that much attention to. It's rarely been a factor in the title picture, and when it has, it's been a bad matchup to watch. Ironically, the best Rose Bowl I ever saw was the 2006 game when Texas beat Southern Cal for the national title. This was a matchup that never would have happened until the BCS system came into being. As for this game, I'm not saying Illinois can't win. They did beat Ohio State. Both teams have a bad loss - USC to Stanford, Illinois to Iowa. Illinois could actually have a better chance in this game than other Big 10 teams since they are built more for speed than your typical Big 10 squad. However, I think Southern Cal is better on both sides of the ball and should win this one.

Sugar Bowl (Jan 1): Georgia vs. Hawaii - In all honesty, this could be a laugher. The only chance Hawaii has is to turn this game into a shootout because they've got an offense that can score. Which is why a Hawaiian win isn't impossible. Any team that can score 554 points in a season can be dangerous. And Georgia has been known to throw in clunker this year. However, they just aren't on the level of a Georgia that can actually play defense. Some believe that Boise State's win over Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl last year is why Hawaii could be competitive. However, last year's Boise State team was much better than this year's Hawaii. Hawaii needed overtime to beat Louisiana Tech and San Jose State - two teams that had losing records. So, I think Georgia's got this one.

Fiesta Bowl (Jan 2): West Virginia vs. Oklahoma - I was leaning towards Oklahoma in this one from the beginning. I think with a healthy Pat White, West Virginia can beat anyone. However, I would take Oklahoma over anyone right now. They were rolling at the end of the year with their only late loss coming against Texas Tech when quarterback Sam Bradford was out hurt. But now there's a change in the situation with West Virginia coach Rich Rodriguez leaving for Michigan. The easy school of thought is that the team will certainly be hurt with a smaller staff and flux at the head coaching position. On the other hand, you never know how players will react to stuff like this. Michigan basketball fired their head coach at the beginning of the 1989 NCAA tournament for accepting a job at AZ St. for the next year. As a 3 seed, they weren't a favorite to win it all, but they did just that under an interim coach. It's tough to tell how the Mountaineer players will react. The fans are angry (see yesterday's posting), but the players don't seem to be all that bent out of shape (but who knows about the locker room). I don't know if that is good or bad. Are they resigned to fate and going to come out flat? Or are they confident in themselves and wanting to prove they can win without him? I don't know, so I'm sticking with my original gut pick of Oklahoma.

Orange Bowl (Jan 3): Virginia Tech vs. Kansas - I'm not a big ACC fan this year. Or last year for that matter. The question for Virginia Tech is: are they better than when they got beat 48-7 at LSU? I'm sure they are. Their only other loss on the season was to Boston College. Kansas' only loss period was to Missouri by 8. I'm going with Kansas for the simple reason that they were second in points scored this year to Virginia Tech's 51st. Now, the perception is that Virginia Tech has a more powerful defense, but Kansas actually gave up fewer points this year. Even worse for Tech is that the top 25 in scoring offenses is full of Big 12 teams, but only one ACC team. That means Kansas faced higher scoring teams than Virginia Tech, but still held their opponents to fewer points.

Rest Of The Non-BCS Bowl Picks

Well, Mississippi State finally scored again in the Liberty Bowl (it was still the worst bowl game so far) so I'm 10-3 right now. Here are the picks for all the non-BCS bowls that I didn't get the first time around.

Armed Forces Bowl (Dec 31): California vs. Air Force - At one point Cal was 5-0 and ranked second in the country. They only won one game after that. I can't imagine they feel all that great being there. Air Force is playing well and probably up for this. On the other hand, Cal has responded well in previous bowl games. Then again, the Mountain West Conference is undefeated in bowl games, so I'm going with my brother's alma mater.
Humanitarian (Dec 31): Fresno St. vs. Georgia Tech - Tech just fired their coach after another less than great season. Fresno St. loves to take down the BCS teams. Trouble is Fresno isn't as good as past teams. Still, I think they take this one.
Sun (Dec 31): South Florida vs. Oregon - Easy call. With Dennis Dixon, Oregon was good. Without him, they were really bad. They won't have him.
Music City (Dec 31): Florida State vs. Kentucky - As I said before, FSU is missing 36 players. If UK loses this game, they should take up permanent residence in Nashville.
Chick-fil-A (Dec 31): Clemson vs. Auburn - My first thought was that Clemson barely beat a non-bowl SEC team in South Carolina so how can they beat Auburn. Then I remembered how bad Auburn looked in some games this year. This is a tough call because I wasn't impressed with either of them. I'll take Clemson.
Insight (Dec 31): Indiana vs. Oklahoma St. - Indiana had the feel good story of the year as the Hoosiers fulfilled the bowl dream of coach Terry Hoeppner who died in the offseason. Oklahoma State is led by national punchline Mike Gundy. The irony is that Oklahoma State has played better since Gundy benched the player he was giving such a spirited defense of. Still Ok. State gives up too many points.
Outback (Jan 1): Wisconsin vs. Tennessee - I don't think much of the Big 10, but I also don't think much of Tennessee when they play bowl games against teams from the Big 10.

NFL Break: I just watched another defensive back watch as Randy Moss runs right by him on a deep route. It's amazing how well receivers do when they aren't covered.

Cotton (Jan 1): Missouri vs. Arkansas - Arkansas got in this bowl solely by beating LSU to finish their regular season. Missouri was shafted into this bowl. Even though both Missouri's losses came to Big 12 champ Oklahoma, they still fell out of the BCS bowls. Two teams they beat, Kansas and Illinois, are in BCS bowls. Missouri belonged in a much better bowl and they'll take it out on Arkansas whether or not Darren McFadden plays.

Another NFL break: Eli Manning reverted to his national form as he destroyed any chance the Giants had of beating the Patriots with a horribly inaccurate pass that was intercepted 10 yards behind the receiver.

Gator (Jan 1): Virginia vs. Texas Tech - Virginia has a great defense. Texas Tech has a great offense. The question is whether or not Virginia's defense can slow Texas Tech's offense enough. I think they can do better than most, but the big problem is whether or not Virginia can score enough even if they do hold them. I'm thinking not. Tech's defense isn't that good, but Virginia only scored more than 23 points three times. If Duke and North Carolina can stop them, so can Tech.
Capital One (Jan 1): Michigan vs. Florida - Defending champ Florida had a disappointing season as they finished third in the SEC East. Michigan rebounded from their losses to Appalachian State and Oregon to do OK in the Big 10. Until they lost their last two. So, they are slumping, their two worst losses were to teams running the spread option and Florida runs the spread option. Gee, I wonder if I'm going with Michigan. Unlikely.

Last NFL break: This is how inept an Eli Manning offense is. The Giants had the ball at the Patriots 17 at the two minute warning stoppage with a 10 point deficit. They ran a play for 13 yards, and then dicked around enough that there next snap was with 1:20 on the clock. They ran one play in 40 seconds. Pee-wee teams can run a better hurry up offense.

International (Jan 5): Rutgers vs. Ball State - A bowl game in Toronto. Rutgers is so bad they lost to Louisville. Ball State hasn't beaten anybody. Still, I can't see Ball State beating Rutgers. Ball State can't run the ball, and Rutgers is good at stopping the pass. I think Ray Rice runs all over them.
GMAC (Jan 6): Tulsa vs. Bowling Green - Ah, the GMAC Bowl in Mobile, Alabama. Been there twice. Nice city. Should be a good game with plenty of offense. Neither team has much of a defense. I think Tulsa has a better offense. Maybe UL should have taken that Tulsa coach.

Penn State beat Texas A&M which makes me 11-3 in my bowl picks. Stay tuned in a couple of days for my five BCS Bowl picks.

Early Bowl and College Football Thoughts

Before doing my next group of picks, I thought I would take a look back at some previous games and other things of interest in the college game. At this point, I'm 10-2 in my previous bowl picks with the Liberty Bowl on now and the Alamo and Independence still to come.

Best game: I didn't get to watch the Hawaii Bowl which could be it. However, Central Michigan's comeback from being down 21 at the half to only losing by 3 was pretty exciting. Too bad they lost their chance by bloop kicking (short and high but returnable) after tying the score with just over a minute left. Not really too smart to let a team only needing a field goal start near midfield.

Worst game: This Liberty Bowl that I'm watching. It's 3-3 early in the second half. It's brutal. I'm not sure if either team will score again.

It was kind of ironic to hear some UK supporters say that Florida State shouldn't be in a bowl game because of some cheating. UK plays their basketball games in an arena named after a coach who cheated so much that the 1952 season was suspended. However, it should be embarrassing for FSU players because they were getting the answers to a test for an online music class. Even worse, it was an open book exam.

However, the fact that FSU will only have 43 scholarship players pretty much gives the Music City Bowl to UK which is a boon to UK fans. For a few more days, they can forget that they have a basketball team. Actually, John Clay of the local rag had a stupid column a few days ago saying the bowl game was lose-lose for UK. If they lose the game, UK looks like a bunch of schmoes for losing to a team minus 36 players. Even if they win, everyone says it's because FSU was shorthanded. That's BS. This is the Music City Bowl. Two years from now, only UK and FSU fans will remember anything from it. Tennessee barely beat FSU for the 1998 national title in the Fiesta Bowl, but no one remembers that the quarterback who got FSU to the Fiesta Bowl, Chris Weinke, was out for that game.

Rick Neuheisel was hired as the new UCLA football coach (hopefully his specialty is blocking on field goal attempts). I think it's nice that he's back in the college game because him being fired at Washington four years ago was bogus. He broke the NCAA rule against gambling by being in a NCAA basketball tournament pool. You know, the tournament that depends on pools for ratings which means more money for the NCAA.

West Virginia has filed suit against former coach Rich Rodriguez because his buddies have been publicly stating that Rodriguez wasn't going to pay the $4 million buyout that was in his contract if he left the Mountaineers (which he did for Michigan). One of Rod's good friends said that he was basically coerced into signing a new contract that included the buyout. Riiiiight. Yeah, WVU certainly twisted his arm with that 70% raise they gave him in the same contract. A contract is a contract. If it gives Rodriguez the opportunity to break it, he can leave. If it says he has to pay to do so, he has to pay.

Some people wonder why coaches are allowed to leave while under contract. It's because it's in their contract that they can. They just generally have to pay to do it. Some wonder why colleges don't put language in that forces them to stay the length of the contract. Easy. They know they may have to go grab someone else's coach if they get rid of the one they have. As part of their search, WVU has interviewed Central Michigan's head coach.

It's been pretty humorous to see how badly West Virginia fans have been taking Rodriguez leaving. The fact that WVU is going to fight so hard for the buyout (in most cases, it's negotiated down)is only one indication. He was heckled at an airport, his hometown removed a sign saying he was from there (to protect from vandals) and pretty much a total disowning. It's obvious why. When Bobby Petrino left UL, I wasn't that bent out of shape about it. I knew he was a mercenary (who could win which is why I liked him), but he didn't have any real connection to Louisville before taking an assistant position and later the head job. Rodriguez was a native West Virginian who played at WVU. It took me one game as a visitor to Morgantown to see West Virginians fans are to their football team what UK fans are to their basketball team. So, Rodriguez was idolized. Then he left. He didn't just leave. He proclaimed Michigan to be a dream job which pretty much stated that West Virginia sucked. For Mountaineer fans, he didn't just insult the school, he insulted the entire state. Then he threw salt on that wound by trying to steal recruits from WVU (before telling his former players he was leaving) and screwing up their future recruiting. To put it in a way many of my friends can understand, imagine Billy Gillipsie flopping and being replaced by John Pelphrey who eventually takes them to two Final Fours in three years. Then leaves to take the North Carolina job because it's a special situation there. Oh, and he takes a top five prospect with him. How do you think UK fans would view Pelphrey?

A report out there says Darren McFadden may have had a car (OK, a brand new Escalade) bought for him by a potential agent. That means he could be ineligible for the Cotton Bowl. Who cares? Sure, Arkansas can beat Missouri (they did beat LSU), but I didn't think they would with McFadden. And he's not coming back next year.

Week In Review

I guess the biggest story of the week might be the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan. What I found shocking was how many people found it shocking. Let's look at the situation. Pakistan is a backwards-ass country with the hinterlands (and a good chunk of the state intelligence apparatus) pretty much out of control of the central government. Radical Islam has moved out of said hinterlands to the point that half the country gives Osama Bin Laden a big thumbs up. Bhutto was more pro-western than President Pervez Musharraf who has been targeted for assassination several times by extremist groups. Add to that the fact that she's a woman and the people who didn't like her followed an extreme misogynistic form of a religion that is pretty misogynistic to begin with. She didn't have a chance the moment she made it back to Pakistan.

So, who killed her? She had been receiving lots of threats from Islamists. Al Qaeda has claimed credit because chaos in Pakistan is in their best interests. While assistance in the murder by Pakistani intelligence isn't out of the question (as I said, they've been heavily infiltrated by Islamists), it seems pretty ludicrous to accuse, as some are doing, Musharraf of being behind it. The uproar that came from it doesn't help him at all. He may not have liked her or wanted her back in the country, but he traded immunity for her (her last time in elected office was very corrupt) in exchange for her (and her party's) support for his re-election bid. Musharraf was better off with her alive. So, obviously her supporters showed the rationality inherent to that region by blaming Musharraf. Which happens to be the same rationality of some presidential candidates here. I've got to love the responses from Barak Obama and Bill Richardson who want to withhold aid to Pakistan until Musharraf quits and "full democracy is restored." Brilliant. Let's get rid of one of our few allies in an Islamist heavy country with nuclear weapons and hope an election leads to something better.

I'm not really surprised that those two said something like that. As much as I hate to agree with John Edwards, his belief that Obama was ridiculous was spot on. I've found a lot of pronouncements from Obama to be rather silly. On the other hand, Richardson just wants some attention. Any attention. That guy is such a panderer that he told a bunch of pig farmers (commonly referred to as Iowans) that having the first caucus in Iowa is the will of God. Now, I don't claim to be a biblical scholar, but I did take Bible history in junior high (it was in the deep south) and in college. I don't remember a specific passage mentioning Iowa, but maybe it was one of the Songs of Solomon.

Unfortunately, the Iowa Caucus brings out a lot of stupidity in people. I've said it before. There is no way that a caucus in a podunk state like Iowa should get this much attention when it comes to nominating a presidential candidate. To begin with, a caucus is stupid. Unlike a primary election, voters have to register and sit through all day meetings before voting. Gee, I wonder if that depresses turnout? Plus, contrary to popular belief, Iowa doesn't tell you crap. Look at the winners since the caucus began in 1972 (1976 for Republicans). It looks like it picks a bunch of eventual nominees, but compare the years when it's competitive. By competitive, I mean there isn't an incumbent (ie Reagan, Clinton), a reigning VP trying to replace a President (ie Bush 1, Gore) or a party ordained nominee (Dole). That leaves three years (80,88,2000) that were competitive for Republicans and six for Democrats (72,76,84,88,92,04). Only once (2000) for Republicans and twice for Democrats (84,04) did the eventual nominee win Iowa. That means in a competitive year (like this year for both parties), there's a 66% chance the eventual nominee won't win Iowa. In fact, out of nine total competitive races for both parties, four eventual nominees (44% of the time) finished third or worse there. Tell me again why this friggin' state is so important?

However, there are still concerns about this election. Some people are so concerned that Obama will be assassinated (presumably because he's black) that they won't support him. Interesting. Wasn't Bill Clinton the first black president? No one took a shot at him. Well, outside of Hillary (and the rumor was she just used a lamp). Actually, if anyone shoots Obama, it will probably be Hillary if it looks like Obama is going to get the nomination.

On a lighter note, I've found out why women don't like the Three Stooges. A new study found that humor is a product of testosterone.

I mentioned in an earlier post that I give really crappy Christmas presents. I've found someone who does worse than me. A customer at a hot dog stand gave the proprietor a lottery ticket as a Christmas gift (or a tip) which showed she won $25,000 when she scratched it off. It was a fake.

Speaking of Christmas presents, a man in Tennessee is claiming that an MP3 player he bought for his daughter at Walmart was preloaded with porn. Now, when I saw he was waiting to talk to a lawyer, I figured it might be a scam. But, then I realized this is probably a common problem. My computer came preloaded with tons of porn on it. So much that I decided against trying to erase all of it.

Some may have read how a tiger escaped from it's enclosure at the San Francisco Zoo to get some payback at some taunters (maybe). It killed one person and seriously injured a couple more. Then the cops shot it because that probably seemed like a good way to stop the tiger from finishing off the other two. So, how does one of the moronic locals react? She protests that the cops should have waited for tranq guns before shooting the tiger. Strangely enough, my guess is her opinion may have been a bit different if she was the one being eaten.

Merry Christmas

Ah, the wonders of Christmas. To be honest, I was less tired at Christmas when I worked the night shift at Toys R Us than I am these days. Probably the travel. Leave on Thursday for Missouri, leave there for Madisonville, KY on Sunday, leave there on Monday for Louisville and back to Lexington on Tuesday night for work Wednesday. And yet I'm the lucky one since my brother left Madisonville for Alabama on Monday with three kids under the age of eight in tow. There's plenty to like about Christmas - tons of food, seeing the family, repetitive showings of A Christmas Story, listening to carols..........



but there are drawbacks. Mainly gift giving. I don't have a problem spending money on gifts, but I hate picking them out for other people. To begin with, I suck at buying presents. If no one tells me exactly what they want, there's going to be massive disappointment. Sure it's the thought that counts, but if it's a gift from me, the thought becomes "why the Hell did he give me this?". Secondly, it involves shopping which is one of my least favorite activities under normal circumstances. Add Christmas crowds to stores that routinely hire semi-retarded cretins and you have my vision of Hell on Earth. Well, that and a Dennis Kucinich administration. I'm perfectly willing to forgo presents to me in exchange for not having to buy them myself. Of course, there's not much altruism there. There is simply not much that I want for Christmas. If it's in a bottle or possibly wearing tacky, fishnet stockings, I might be OK with that kind of present. Otherwise, I'm unconcerned. And it's not that I have some hostility towards the commercialization of Christmas. After all, it is a birthday celebration (the commercialization of Easter is a completely different matter). I would just leave it mainly for the kids. Nothing says Christmas like watching your niece and nephews attacking a stack of presents like ravenous wolverines.

College Bowl Picks Part I

It's the bowl season. I'm not doing my picks based on point spreads, because I think it's nuts to bet on most bowl games. Too many variables screw up how they play out. Some teams have been off a month or more. Some teams are pumped to just be in a bowl, while others thought they would be in a better bowl and just may not be into it.

Instead of doing my bowl game picks all at once, I'm breaking it down into at least two sections. It might seem that I'm just being prudent by waiting until closer to game time to make selections. After all, the Fiesta Bowl has certainly changed with West Virginia's coach leaving for Michigan, and some Florida State players may end up suspended for the Music City Bowl. However, the fact is I don't have a lot of time at the moment, and bowl games start in two days. So, here are my picks for bowls between through December 30 (winners in italics):

Poinsetta Bowl (Dec 20): Utah vs. Navy - Navy lost their head coach to Ga. Tech, but kept their offensive coordinator who also specializes in the option. So offense should still be good. Utah's offense got a lot better as the season went on, but it still isn't in the same league as Navy's. Still, I'm picking Utah because their defense is a lot better than Navy's
New Orleans (Dec 21): Fla. Atlantic vs. Memphis - Memphis is hot after winning five of their last six games. Four of FAU's losses were to BCS conference teams. Their one conference loss was to LA-Monroe who also beat Alabama. Being the sentimental type, I'll go with former UL coach Howard Schnelleberger's FAU team.
Papajohns.com (Dec 22): Cincinnati vs. Southern Miss - I don't believe in karma, but Southern Miss deserves to lose for forcing out coach Jeff Bowers who has made them one of the most successful mid-major football programs in the country while spurning bigger name schools attempts to get him to leave. But I think they lose anyway because Cincinnati is a better team.
New Mexico (Dec 22): New Mexico vs. Nevada - This is a home game for New Mexico which is an edge. Nevada has a very potent offense which is an edge. I think the Mountain West Conference is better than the WAC. Add to that the fact that Nevada has a lousy defense and I'm taking New Mexico.
Las Vegas (Dec 22): BYU vs. UCLA - UCLA beat BYU in week 2, but they swooned after that, while BYU went on a roll. Outcome will be different this time.
Hawaii (Dec 23): East Carolina vs. Boise State - Odd to see the Hawaii Bowl without Hawaii. The bowl committee likes having them because most schools have trouble sending fans. I would like to pick East Carolina in this game because they knew they weren't taking any fans, so they set up a system for their fans to buy a ticket, get a commemorative souvenir ticket and have their seat given to a serviceman stationed in Hawaii. Still, I can't see them beating Boise State.
Motor City (Dec 26): Central Michigan vs. Purdue: Much like the Las Vegas Bowl, this is a rematch from earlier in the season. While Purdue thumped CMU then, there's evidence that the rematch could be different. Purdue's slumping, CMU is surging and it's a neutral site. I'm going with different.
Holiday (Dec 27): Arizona St. vs. Texas: While I think Texas is overrated, I think Arizona State has struggled in big games this year. Take Texas.
Champ Sports (Dec 28): Boston College vs. Michigan State - I'm not big on the ACC this year, but I don't think much of the Big 10 either, so in theory, the second best ACC team should be better than a mid-pack Big 10 team. However, this is the classic Happy To Be Here (Michigan St hasn't been to any bowl in 4 years) vs. Sucks To Be Here (BC was planning for the Orange Bowl). Still, I think BC has the talent to win this and will.
Texas (Dec 28): Houston vs. TCU - Truly is the Texas Bowl. Fortunately, I'll be back in town on the 28th so I can watch it (the folks don't have NFL Network). Houston can score, but not play defense. TCU can play defense, but can't score like Houston. Houston lost their coach. TCU underachieved this year. Still, it's an easy call. It's a de facto TCU home game, and they are tough at home.
Emerald (Dec 28): Maryland vs. Oregon St. - Oregon State finished third in the PAC-10, while Maryland was 6-6 in a weak ACC. Still, with wins over Rutgers and BC, Maryland is Jekyll and Hyde, so I'm not sure I would pick against them. On the other hand, it's a west coast game, so I think Hyde will show up. Take Oregon St.
Meineke Car Care (Dec 29): UCONN vs. Wake Forrest - Another de facto home game for one team - Wake. UCONN only beats weak teams on the road. However, Wake doesn't beat ranked teams this year, and UCONN is ranked 25. UCONN is kind of a fraud. They had no quality road wins. Going with Wake.
Liberty (Dec 29): Miss St vs. Central Florida - Yeah, Sylvester Croom...first black football coach in SEC.....coach of the year.....yadayadayada. Croom got coach of the year for exceeding expectations. Watch this for one guy - Kevin Smith. He can flat out run. Go with Central Florida.
Alamo (Dec 29): Penn State vs. Texas A&M - Penn State is usually tough in bowl games. Texas A&M finished the regular season by beating Texas. And firing their coach. Of course, they beat Texas to finish last season before getting spanked in their bowl. I don't think either team is very good, but I'll take Joe Paterno.
Independence (Dec 30): Colorado vs. Alabama - This would be a good game....if we were still in the early 90s. We're not. We've got two mediocre 6-6 teams. Colorado lost two of their last four. Alabama lost their last four including to Louisiana-Monroe. Bama isn't very good.

This Week's Update

Have I ever mentioned how much I hate sportswriters? Well, I've never liked Stephen A. Smith. Just because you scream a lot doesn't mean you are making a good point. He's now moved to the top of my list of most disliked sportswriter. Why? He launched a diatribe against people who write about sports on the internet. People like me. He says, "someone with no training should not be allowed to have any kind of format whatsoever to disseminate to the masses to the level which they can." Let me repeat part of it - "should not be allowed". I guess if Smith ever gets elected emperor then I'll have to go underground as I will be forbidden to write about sports. It's always nice when a reporter decides that the First Amendment only applies to him. So, I think I'll just tell Smith to go perform an obscene act on himself.

Besides, what training is Smith talking about? He mentions ethics, but there's been quite a run of unethical journalists in recent years. I remember when Pat Forde was suspended for six months from his Louisville Courier-Journal sports column for an ethical violation, but that didn't stop ESPN.com (Stephen A. Smith's employer) from hiring him. Does Smith think you have to have a Journalism degree to write about sports? Yeah, right. That just means he can compose a better sentence than me. That doesn't mean he knows what he's talking about. It is Stephen A. Smith who was being paid to cover the NBA draft, but was completely unprepared for some of the picks.

I think one of the best things about "untrained" people writing about sports on the internet is that they don't fall prey to the group mindset that reporters often fall into. How many stories seem to make "common knowledge" assumptions? Before the 2006 draft, everybody (and I mean everybody) in the press assumed Reggie Bush was the can't miss player and Houston was a bunch of idiots for passing on him. Well, some are now changing their tune. Actually, I know of one "untrained" person who questioned whether or not Reggie Bush would be anointed one. There also seems to be a lemming effect about who or what reporters mention. For years, they avoided all mention of the possibility of steroids in baseball. Then when it finally came out that there could be a story there, there were a lot of names mentioned in speculation, but some names (like Roger Clemens) never seemed to come up even if an "untrained" person wondered why. Strangely enough, the name Roger Clemens has now come up. Of course, I'm willing to bet that he denies it. I'm also willing to bet a lot of baseball writers will still believe him.

Should I be happy that a teacher from England was sentenced to 15 days in a Sudanese prison (since pardoned) for allowing her elementary schools students to name the class teddy bear "Muhammad" which some thought was an insult to Islam? I guess since she could have been sentenced to the lash and a lot of people (in and out of the Sudanese government) thought she should have been executed for it. Truthfully, I think she was an idiot. Not for letting the class name the bear, but for thinking she was involved with rational people in the Sudan. People like her and the politicians who went down there from England are enablers to the whole radical Islamic mindset. Look at the statements they made after she left the country. She apologized for causing "distress" and she didn't intend to offend anyone. WTF? The member of Parliament was concerned it would hurt relations between the countries (I'm always concerned with the relations between my country and psycopathic, murderous backwater regimes). I half expect Britain to apologize for this. Let me make my position crystal clear. I don't care if she did intentionally try to insult Islam by naming the bear Muhammad. Civilized societies don't threaten death on people for that. Name me the last time a "Christian" country put someone on trial for blasphemy against Christ? Or had thousands of people taking to the streets screaming for that person's death? We constantly condone this behavior from Muslims (well, I don't), but then act surprised when they continue to do crap like this (once again, I don't).

Let's face it. It has become routine for Muslims around the world to whip themselves into a lather over something trivial. It has gotten to the point that it's almost impossible to parody it. Sure, they'll ignore or justify antisocial behavior by their fellow adherents. Murder your daughter for the way she dresses. Hang children. Blow up a schoolbus. No reason to take to the streets over that. Now, a soccer uniform with a red cross on it. That's going to bring a lawsuit. And once again the press takes these people's complaints seriously. And so do their enablers. Instead of trying to come up with some excuse why this guy shouldn't be offended, how about using the truth to tell this guy why he shouldn't be offended? I'm tired of this PC revisionist history crap about the Crusades. Islam was spread throughout the Middle East by the sword. It began on the Arabian peninsula. Jerusalem is not on the Arabian peninsula. Muslims did not show up with Mayflower moving vans and buy houses in the Holy Lands. They invaded. The Crusades were a response to the invasion, and an attempt to keep Muslims from invading farther into Europe. Muslim hands were not clean during the Crusades (or prior to the Crusades). But if they want to claim offense about events from centuries ago, let's let others do the same. I think the Israelis should begin killing all Muslims in their territories as payback for Banu Qurayza. Sounds fair.

"Serial Killer Fed Prostitutes To Pigs". Normally, that title should tell it all. Man was convicted of killing six hookers or junkies (suspected of many more) he picked up and feeding them to his pig. I don't see why the "feeding to pigs" part of the story is such a big deal. He's probably an environmentalist who is just into recycling. Plus, they think he killed over 60 women, so you have to figure he doesn't have a lot of time to go pig feed shopping. I think it just shows the violent nature of Canadians. Actually, I'm not sure I'm as disturbed over his actions (hey, there are crazies everywhere) as by the jurors who should be somewhat normal. They convicted him for killing the six, but it was for "second degree murder, which means they did not believe the killings were planned." WTF? I might buy that if it was one dead hooker. I mean, who among hasn't accidentally killed a prostitute and fed her to livestock to hide the evidence? But once you have to use your off hand to count the victims, I think it's safe to assume some planning was going on.

Ah, another global warming conference. In a resort in Southeast Asia. Probably attended by a lot of people not in Southeast Asia. In fact, my guess is most came from Europe and the United States which is pretty far away. Wonder how much pollution they generated flying over? Oh, don't have to wonder anymore. I'll let you in on a little secret. There's this thing called web-conferencing where people can meet and discuss things without leaving their office. Oh well, at least it gives Al Gore a chance to make another speech blaming the U.S. for everything even if it's something he could have just put on Youtube. But Gore has to do this because the science is settled and all the scientists are in agreement. Even if it isn't, and they aren't. Hey, Al Gore can't worry about that. He's got to make some cash to keep up the lavish lifestyle he's become accustomed to.

Nice to see the Dutch are becoming big on disposable products. Too bad this case was about an adopted daughter. A diplomat and his wife adopted a baby Korean girl, and then decided she didn't fit their "lifestyle" when she became 7 years old, so they dumped her on the Korean community of Hong Kong even though she doesn't speak Korean. I'll let you in on a little secret. Just because you are born of a certain heritage doesn't mean you inherently know the language. At least these clods recognize the trauma involved. Well, their own trauma which I'm is much worse than that of a young girl abandoned by the only family she's ever known. I hope his next duty station is in New Guinea and he gets eaten by cannibals. How's that fit in your lifestyle, jerkass?

Will Smith says he wants to run for president. He's black and a Hollywood star. I wonder which party's nomination he'll go for? I see he's saying that George Bush hasn't created universal health care or ended homelessness. I guess he forgot neither happened in the previous eight years before George Bush became president. Or that since federal law forbids emergency rooms from evicting sick people, there is technically universal health care. Just not universal health insurance. But either way, a line from the article shows that Smith wouldn't be able to get through the primaries to gain the nomination. He says he doesn't believe Bush is evil. The Democratic base will not stand for someone who doesn't believe such a basic tenet of their party.

Rather bizarre story here. A Japanese man was going around spitting coffee on uniformed schoolgirls. He was apparently nicknamed "Coffee Bukake Man". If you don't know what bukake is, I'm not going to tell you. I will warn you not to do an internet search on the word from work. Interestingly enough, the last incident before he was caught took place on Pearl Harbor Day. Frankly, I'm shocked at this guy. Coffee is pretty expensive and shouldn't be wasted in such a way. When I'm with Japanese schoolgirls, I shower them with........well, let's move on to the next report.

Tony Parker and Eva What'shername have come out denying the claims of a French model (probable part time prostitute) that said she's been having an affair with Parker. Now, I don't really care (a pro athlete cheating on his wife isn't exactly news), but I'm angry with the alleged mistress. The who....er, model claims that Parker said "Eva, sexually speaking, does not want to do certain things." What certain things? Let him go backdoor? Invite a homeless woman in for a threesome? Wear Tim Duncan's jersey while they have sex? If you're going to mention that part of it, you have to give us details.

Since it's Christmas, I think a mention of toys would be appropriate. The Atari 2600 was recently inducted into the Toy Hall of Fame. I think it was well deserved. The graphics look like crap now, but at the time, they were stellar, especially since the previous game system, Pong, was two lines and a square ball. Actually, I played games on an even older system one summer when my mom brought home a PET computer from her school. It was before floppy disks which meant your games were stored on a cassette tape. Made it hard to find that Moonlander game.

Probably a good thing that the book showing how to make weaponized Lego toys wasn't around when I was working at Toys R Us. Probably would have been a lot of Lego Mindstorms crap in the RGD bins.

College Football Travesty

Unfortunately, I can't talk about UL getting a lesser bowl game as the travesty. UL didn't get a bowl game period and certainly didn't earn one. Weird feeling for the end of the year. It's the first time in eight years that I haven't been planning a trip somewhere for late December/early January. Whether Mobile, Memphis, Jacksonville or Miami, I was always going somewhere. Amazing what one wrong hire can do to you. From 12-1 with an Orange Bowl win to 6-6 even though the team had returned just about all of their offensive stars and a good chunk of the defense. Sad. I remember when UL had a really good football team. It was January. Oh well, at least I have my memories.



Now, the travesty is the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) that was supposed to decide a national champion. It routinely fails and this year was no exception. A couple of weeks ago Ohio State finished their season, and most thought they had no chance at the BCS Championship Game. Then Kansas, LSU, Missouri, and West Virginia all lost. Suddenly, Ohio State was back in because they only had one loss. Since the only undefeated team is Hawaii who played a really poor schedule (and didn't really look good in a lot of wins), most would assume Ohio State deserves a place in the BCS title game. I don't think they are that good, but I guess that's the system.

The interesting thing was the question of who they would play. Going into the last week, the BCS standings were headed by Missouri, WVU, Ohio St and Georgia. Missouri and WVU lost, and Georgia didn't play. So, did Georgia get the other spot? No way in Hell. Surprisingly voters actually put LSU ahead of Georgia. Makes sense. LSU also has two losses, and as a bonus, they actually won the SEC title game. Over Tennessee. Which means if voters had stuck with their usual inertia, Georgia would have stayed ahead of LSU and been in the BCS title game even though they didn't even win their division, let alone the conference. I was actually hoping Georgia would get in just to help bring down this stupid system.

However, does this mean they got it right? Well, not exactly. Why LSU? Kansas only has one loss. Of course, they didn't win their division or conference either, so no. There are several other two loss teams. Missouri and Arizona State didn't win their conference so toss them out with Georgia and Kansas. Virginia Tech won the ACC and has only two losses, but they lost to LSU earlier this year, so can't jump them. USC, West Virginia and Okahoma all won their conference with two losses. Heck, WVU and Oklahoma both lost their second game when their starting quarterback got hurt early in a close loss (WVU also lost QB Pat White in their first loss). Why should LSU get in ahead of them? LSU may have lost both their games in multiple overtimes, but they have looked shaky in just about all their games since September and were lucky to pull some of them out.

This is the big problem with the BCS versus a playoff. Too much of a snapshot at certain points in the season. Two years ago, the Steelers won the Super Bowl. They entered the playoffs as a 6 seed because they lost some games during the middle of the season. They lost those games when Ben Roethlisberger was hurt. By the end of the season, it was a totally different team. I think WVU can beat anybody with Pat White on the field, and he would be back for a playoff. Plus, I actually think Georgia would have beaten LSU in the SEC title game if they had played them. I think Georgia is a better team right now than LSU and would go farther in a playoff. The regular season has to count for something, but with so many possible teams, it's a joke to pluck just one out.

There's another problem that could result from the BCS system which has been alluded to at times, but doesn't get enough press - officiating. College officials are hired by the conferences. Conferences have a vested interest in getting their team into the BCS title game or as an at large in one of the other big money BCS bowls. As employees of the league, officials may make "judgement calls" in late season games to make sure the conference gets what it wants. Kansas coach Mike Mangino flat accused Big 12 referees of thinking about Texas' BCS chances when a very suspect late game pass interference call went against the Jayhawks. In the West Virginia/Pitt game, there were some very suspect holding calls against Pitt as WVU was trying to mount a comeback. I'm not saying the referees were consciously making those calls (Big East officials are notoriously incompetent), but as long as this system is in place, it's a distinct possibility.

Happy Thanksgiving

Start off with a turkey story. In New Hampshire, a turkey farmer has his birds drink beer to give them some weight. I don't really have a problem with that except it shows him giving the turkeys Coors. They're friggin' turkeys. Give them Milwaukee's Best. Actually, it's not that great of a story. It just gives me an excuse to again link to the greatest turkey moment in sitcom history.

On to other news. I'm sure all lawyers dream of getting appointed to their state supreme court so they can get cases just like this one. Who wouldn't want the power to decide if trying to hump a store mannequin is indecent exposure if he isn't trying to do it in front of other people? Now, I've been drunk and horny. In fact, I'm drunk and horny right now. However, I'm positive (well, mostly positive) that I've never reached the point of trying to get a little from a mannequin.

Down in Florida, some people reported seeing an orangutan running around in their woods. Wildlife officials got involved. They concluded it was a fox squirrel. Might think about bringing the DEA to that neighborhood. Here is a fox squirrel. And here is an orangutan. I can see where the confusion came from. Whenever I scratch myself in public, I inadvertently grope 16 year old girls. I get confused easily while doing that.

But at least I don't wear a nun's habit.

While I was wishing everyone a Happy Thanksgiving, it's actually the day after which is when everyone goes shopping. Except me. The thought of fighting crowds like that drove me to the couch today. Well, that and laziness. Still, it means Christmas is here. Well, the fact that some stores were putting Christmas stuff up around Halloween should have already clued people in. And what comes with Christmas. Stories about political correct stupidity regarding Christmas. First was Australia where department store Santas were told to use Ha,Ha,Ha instead of Ho,Ho,Ho because a ho could be frightening to children (especially if she has herpes). Oh, and ho is a demeaning term for women in America. I'm sure those Santas were only a short step away from greeting children with a "Yo, bitch".

Then in England, a local school has decided to put Santa in green because the students might think of Coca-Cola. Let me repeat that. A school has decided not to put Santa in his normal red and throw away 200 years of history and tradition because students might think of a soft drink. WTF? How retarded are the people running this school? Why not ban the playing of soccer at the school because students might think of Umbros? When I think of commercialization at Christmas, Coke falls pretty low on the list. Oh, and it doesn't say much for the history department that the school really believes Santa in a red suit is the result of product marketing. Or say much for them that nobody bothered to check and find out they are full of crap.

I'll admit I don't really know too much about the music of Amy Winehouse. With my constant reading of news websites, I am well aware that she is English white trash. An unrepentant junkie who sings songs about not getting her junkieness fixed and has nervous breakdowns about her unrepentant junkie husband getting locked up. Oh, and her big ass hair freaks me out. Yet, I still can't bring myself to agree with the UN that her drug use is leading to instability in Africa.

In fact, I blame Africa's problems on Africa, especially after I read the story of the witchdoctor and the diesel fuel in Zimbabwe. Well, she is "spirit medium" which doesn't sound as backwards-ass as witchdoctor. But the backwards-ass is still there. This woman claimed she to be able to get diesel fuel from a rock which she did by hitting the rock with a stick. She just so happened to do it in front of a bunch of government ministers who turned around and gave her a bunch of money and took a year to figure out they had been fooled. The fact that these morons are running a country (into the ground) is why many parts of Africa are a basket case. There wasn't one skeptic in the bunch to actually take a closer look at the rockand notice a pipe? This wasn't a Jed Clampett story where oil was struck on the surface of the ground. These dumbasses actually believed refined fuel was coming out of the ground because she hit it with a stick.

Several men convicted of Madrid train bombings in 2004 have gone on a hunger strike. Frankly, I don't see the problem here.

I mentioned previously a man who was arrested for trying to get 911 to pick up some beer for him. Well, everyone had a good chuckle over that one, but this story out of Wisconsin shows the tragic results that can come about when a man doesn't get his emergency supply of beer. The guy was mad because his wife wouldn't bring him some more beer. So, he shoots one of their pet goats. I don't know why he's being charged with it. Goats are livestock (except in parts of the Middle East where they are sex objects). He should have just eaten it.

How sweet. Paul McCartney's gimpy soon-to-be ex-wife is forcing her way into the news by ripping into rich people. You know. Like her estranged husband, and herself if she gets the amount of money she's going after in the divorce. My first thought was surely she couldn't be so stupid that she thinks no one will recognize the hypocrisy in her position that five years of sex with an aging rock star should be worth $100 million. Then you read further and find that she thinks she's on par with great humanitarians from the past who were punished for their beliefs. And what are her beliefs? Well, she is a vegetarian, and everyone knows they face incredible persecution. Oh, and she seems to think that a mediocre model/soft core pornster/high priced call girl turned gold digger has some kind of moral authority. Exactly what did she ever do besides marry a former Beatle that would endear her to any segment of the population outside of fellow amputees in need of inspiration (if their aspirations are to marry someone very wealthy)?