Pitino vs. the Louisville Media: Where We're Shocked By How Little We Care

GM,

With four NFL divisions to go in what I still contend should be called The Smarter Than Y'all Late-August Preview Madness (Damn, the NFL Starts Later and Later Each Year) Fortnight, it looks like we can have a Rick Pitino conversation and still squeeze everything in. Some say Pitino has handled a big mistake and a horrible situation nobly. I say he's reacted about as favorably as Tim Duncan when he doesn't get a call.

Consider these quotes, the first of which seems to be some sort of attempt to defend his affair.

"I came here at a very difficult time. When 9/11 hit, you needed a community to get you over it. . . . I needed this community to help me get over it."

Now there's some reasoning any wife could accept! Note to Pitino, Chad Ochocinco, and anyone else stupid enough to make a questionable 9/11 reference: It's often frowned upon. How insensitive could you be?!

This second quote came Wednesday:

"On a day where Ted Kennedy died, we broke in the news here in Louisville with Karen Sypher audio-ing the tapes to the detective when it's already been put out. That's a pretty sad commentary on us." No, no. This is pretty sad commentary. Also see Dan Le Batard's "MVP voters are racist for choosing Nash" column and any Tim McCarver broadcast.

I used to cover sports for a newspaper, and nothing disturbs me more than people telling media how to do their jobs. It's called local news, Rick. Proximity is one of the main things that carries a story to the front page, and I'm pretty sure Ted Kennedy didn't die in Kentucky. If you want editorial control, I'm sure any newspaper editor would gladly swap jobs with you. Look, man... women are crazy, especially when they know you're rich. Bite the bullet, pay for your mistake, don't think the media will leave you alone just because they give you courtesy laughs at pressers, and step as far away from your high horse as figuratively possible. You screwed up, and the terrorists and media have nothing to do with it.

-JW

JW,

When did 9/11 join skin color, sexual orientation, and Barack Obama's birth certificate in the great American gallery of Things We're Not Allowed To Mention? Pitino's brother-in-law died in the towers. If anyone is allowed to reference the attacks, it's him.

A closer glance at Pitino's remarks in context, by the way, reveals even less to get upset about (unless you get upset for a living). Here's the pertinent paragraph:

Besides my apology to the university . . . I also apologize to my extended family, which is all of the fans. I came here at a very difficult time. When 9/11 hit, you needed a community to get you over it. In New York City, it was easy because everybody knew the devastation of that and they got each other over it. In Louisville, the impact wasn't felt like New York City, but I needed this community to get me over it. The university and my friends and lvoed ones have helped me through this very difficult time.

Call me an easy mark, but it's pretty clear to me that Pitino's invocation of 9/11 was not, as some have suggested, an attempt to excuse the affair--a Seinfeldian "Our female fans were there for me, and after a while they were just there." Indeed, the man is quite obviously apologizing not just for betraying the trust of a fan base (as if fan bases can "trust" college coaches) but for betraying the trust of a fan base that saw him through a tough time. What's the problem!?

If anyone needs to get off a high horse, it's the sports media, whose desperation to fill the 24-hour news cycle for an ever-fragmenting viewership has led to a self-righteousness that would make Al Gore blush. You're sports reporters, guy. Report sports. A big-time coach's affair might fall into that category. Your uninformed, sound byte-driven take on his etiquette doesn't.

-GM

NFC North Preview: Leading the League (In Picks)

JW,

While the AFC South and NFC East may produce more wins over the coming season, no division in professional football promises to be as compulsively watchable as the NFC North. And it's not just Favre (who we've written about here and here). Indeed, a whole host of plotlines are waiting to fill my Sunday Ticket. Let's take them one at a time.

Can the Bears compete for a Superbowl now that Cutler's on board?

At first glance, the answer has to be yes. After all, conventional wisdom suggests that the Bears have been a decent quarterback away from victory for several decades. Kyle Orton clearly sucks, and Cutler clearly doesn't. Now that #6 has arrived, the Bears' stellar defense will get a break for more than four plays at a time, and an offense that includes Matt Forte and Devin Hester as well as Cutler will carry its share of the load.

Sadly (and this may shock you), Chicago's defense isn't that stellar, ranking 21st in yards allowed last season and 30th (!) against the pass. Furthermore, Cutler had a ton of yards last season because he threw a ton of passes--only Drew Brees threw more. And while Cutler might seem less likely than Orton to choke games away, keep in mind that Orton threw approximately one interception in every 39 passing attempts. Cutler threw one in every 34, and only Favre had more picks over the course of the season. Throw in the fact that Forte has proven nothing in the way of long-term viability, and you've got a team that's seemingly perfect for underachieving. Will I be watching this Bears team constantly? You better believe it. Will I be gambling on them? Not bloody likely.

Will Vikings at Packers on November 1st live up to expectations?

I'll be honest: Nothing but Brett Favre's decapitated head replacing the football would satisfy me at this point. After all, you have to go back a number of years to find this level of betrayal, and if ever an ass-kicking were richly deserved, it's now.

Sadly, unless I've completely misjudged the Aaron Rodgers-era Pack, they're not up to the task of delivering it. Favre, I fully expect you to ceremonially retire as a Packer, but don't be fooled. You may not have your country back.

Will Detroit go 0-32?

It's entirely, joyously possible! A quick glance at their 2009 schedule reveals 16 very losable games, and given the fact that they're almost certain to have a bad bye-week of practice, I say we count that as a loss, too.

Their best chance for a win is almost certainly their November 1st hosting of St. Louis, a franchise almost (but not quite) as po-faced and insignificant. Lose here and a second 0-16 is very much within reach. Let's hope this game's not airing simultaneously with Vikes vs. Pack. I might have to add a second television!

-GM

GM,

If you didn't have to look up Jay Cutler's jersey number, I'm impressed or ashamed--but nowhere in-between. Speaking of shame, it's the feeling I got when clicking that second Sergeant Slaughter link. The first one had me in tears. The second had me praying that I wasn't one of those children. Before I get to the NFC North, I'd like to touch on Michael Vick's first game back last night. No one I've heard from seems to be admitting it, but Vick's option run showed me that he's lost a step and can only be used as a decoy or shovel passer. And McNabb clearly doesn't care for him. That's a feud waiting to happen. Now to the matter at hand, I have my own questions.

Will Favre's teammates continue to resent him throughout the season as he spoils gorgeous Adrian Peterson drives with ill-advised passes and selfishness, only to deny such reports until the Vikings' season ends in a tough-to-swallow playoff loss?

You better believe it. The locker room issues in Minnesota shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. When Favre decided in July to stay retired, several Vikings went on record to say they would no longer welcome him as a teammate. The general consensus was, "Once we start training camp, that's the team." He comes back three weeks later, and everyone expects things to be rosy? I'd be madder than I was this morning when I saw that NFL.com had changed its longstanding game recap format!

Will the NFC North lead the NFL in interceptions thrown this season?

Do I even have to ask? As you mentioned, Cutler and Favre are INT-happy, and Matthew Stafford is a rookie on a horrible team. This leads me to my next question...

Is A-Rod the best QB in the division despite being regarded as the third-best?

Definitely. His competition is an old guy, a new guy, and a guy who hasn't won since high school. A-Rod (yes, I'm sticking with it) threw for 4,038 yards, 28 touchdowns, and only 13 interceptions in his first year as a starter. Compare those numbers to Peyton Manning's (the MVP!) season of 4,002 yards, 27 TDs, and 12 INTs. His 93.8 QB rating was higher than first-year ratings for Manning, Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Phillip Rivers, Donovan McNabb, Calson Palmer, and, well, any quarterback in the NFL. Hell, I've convinced myself! I think the Packers have an exceptional chance of stealing the division.

-JW

AFC North Preview: Big Ben! (and 211 other guys)

GM,

If ever a division should be identified by its quarterbacks, it's the AFC North this year. Four youngsters with four distinct stories and pedigrees will try to guide their respective teams to the glory of a 10-6, division-winning season. Come mid-season, these signal callers will be writing letters home all the way from an AFC West city.

Mom,

Can't wait to come home for Thanksgiving. Oakland is rough, and I'm ready to get back to the Midwest, where my passer rating still exceeds the temperature. The 2-7 start was bad enough, but losing to the Raiders tomorrow will embarrass me to no end. I can hear Chad tweeting, and we're not even roommates! Kiss my Heisman for me.

Carson (Nov. 21)


Mom,

I got to meet Brett Favre last week! Don't worry; we'll do better against the Broncos tomorrow. Braylon's seven Week-1 drops mean he's due for a big game! With Denver's defense, I should be able to keep my job until next week. If I get cut, Jamal said he's willing to place the drug orders as long as I get the business. I'm in good hands.

Brady (Sept. 19)


Mom,

For the last time, I did pay the hush money! She had no right to go to the authorities! Don't put the rings on ebay just yet.

Benjamin (Nov. 21)


Dad,

Can I borrow your tweezers? Ed and Ray are giving me more s--t about the uni-brow. Johnny Damon grows his beard out for an entire season, and they expect me to have two distinct eyebrows in January?! I'm not allowed to play against Oakland tomorrow. Who would have thought we'd have clinched with a week to spare?! Can't wait to host the wildcard team that has two more wins than us!

Joe (Jan. 2)


-JW

JW,

Here, presented as they occurred, are the thoughts that came to me as I pondered this season's AFC North:

Omar Epps, Big Ben, Flacco will suck, Big Ben, Cleveland will suck, Ray Lewis killed a guy, Ray Lewis will suck, Big Ben, Cincinnati shouldn't have a team, Cincinnati will suck, Big Ben.

As you can see, I'm quite excited. Also, the phrase "Big Ben" has been uttered a lot on football broadcasts. But that's a complaint for another day.

Today, I'm happy to complain about the fact that you have the Ravens winning the division at 10-6. After all, doesn't Pittsburgh get some benefit of the doubt for going 12-4 last year, winning the Super Bowl, and bringing everyone back? I know they're one of those annoying, San Antonio Spurs-style everything-done-right franchises, but isn't that the point? Can't we pencil them in for a boring division win now?

Personally, I'm more intrigued by the possibility of Cleveland and Cincinnati joining forces with the Big Ten's BCS chances to put the final nail in the state of Ohio's football coffin. We're unlikely to see more than four combined wins for the Browns and Bengals this season, and given the fact that neighboring Pennsylvania is in many ways the epicenter of the NFL universe right now, I'm anticipating some mass suicides in the Buckeye State.

My other prediction is a #2 seed for the Steelers going into the playoffs and a narrow wild card miss for the Ravens. And good riddance. After last year's travesty of a win over the Titans, I'm ready for this team to go away for a while.

-GM

NFC East Preview: Slightly Worse Than Anticipated

JW,

After yesterday's stinker--as always, the AFC East forgot its courtesy flush--I'm ready to head across town to the NFC. Here's an interesting question, by the way. Which region will have the biggest win-total discrepancy, AFC vs. NFC? A quick glance at schedules reveals that the East might well take it this year.

After all, this is a gritty, tough, hard-football division. Mind you, I hate all of these teams, but even I've got to admit that there are three Super Bowl contenders here.

Take the New York Giants, for example, who somehow managed to parlay sticking with a quarterback too long into winning it all. (Note to Chiefs fans still holding on to Brodie Croyle: This rarely works.) The Giants have a terrific red-zone running game, an obnoxious fan base making life miserable for their opponents, and lingering karma from the damnedest piece of luck I've seen since O. J. Simpson was born black. What's not to like?

Or consider the Dallas Cowboys, whose dismissal of Terrell Owens ranks with Hillary Clinton's move from dresses to pantsuits as one of the great decisions in history. I see the Cowboys firing Wade Phillips after a 3-4 start, reeling off 9 straight wins with Mike Shanahan at the helm, and scaring the hell out of everyone in the first round of the playoffs. In fact, lock it down. It's definitely happening.

And what about the Philadelphia Eagles, whose signing of Michael Vick immediately vaulted them to villain status unseen since the 1972 Soviet basketball team? Can't you just see Michael Vick making a clutch play or two in January, followed by Donovan McNabb murdering him in cold blood? I know I can! Throw in the fact that teams I hate always do well, and they're practically a lock for a deep postseason run.

Which leaves us with the Washington Redskins, further proof that our founding fathers were geniuses to deny the District of Columbia congressional representation. Like the Houston Texans, the Chicago Cubs, and the American summer movie lineup, the Skins are always supposed to be good this year. I don't know about you, but I'm sick and tired of waiting.

-GM

GM,

Did you see Mark Sanchez solidify his role as Jets starter? His first two passes--one of which was intercepted for a touchdown while the other should have been--made this look like acceptable quarterback play. That said, I see the NFC East--ESPN's long-proclaimed "best division in sports, life, and the cosmic realm forever and ever no matter what you say, period"--shaping out like this.

Washington Redskins (last place): I don't know who's been in your ear this season, GM, but no one outside of D.C. expects the 'skins to make any noise. Sure, they make a playoff appearance every now and then and often have a roster full of talent, but you can't trust them any more than Chief Zee should have trusted Andrew Jackson.

Dallas Cowboys (third place): When spending $1.15 billion on a new stadium, one should hire a crew with research capabilities thorough enough to account for the height of a punt. Some folks say Jerry Jones is no longer concerned with winning, only with ticket sales, but the release of a certain Hall of Fame lock at receiver has me wondering if either is a priority. I could see the Week 6 injury report including "Jason Witten (chronic fatigue syndrome)" because being Tony Romo's main squeeze can really take its toll. I can't think of a reason this team should be any better this year. As much as teams hate T.O., they don't get any better when he leaves.

New York Giants (second place): With a top-15 receiver locked up and a decent QB not having to play for a big contract anymore, the only question is, "How many guys can Brandon Jacobs run through before he's out of gas?" Answer: not enough.

Philadelphia Eagles (division champs): The Vick acquisition aside, this team should be able to keep some of the momentum it gathered at the end of last year. A fierce defense, an established quarterback, a gifted running back, an underrated wide receiving corps, and an experienced head coach will be enough to go 11-5 in what I think will just be an average division this season. Please don't tell Trey Wingo I said that.

-JW

AFC East Preview: Coke Money in the Bank

GM,

I, for one, have never been so excited about an upcoming NFL season in which my team will definitely not make the playoffs. I'm going to gamble relentlessly. I'm going to frequent that site you introduced me to that allows you to watch any live game for free. I love my fantasy team, which is also tied into gambling. I have some legitimate hope that Tom Brady will never be the same. I get to cling to my youth a little more by watching Brett Favre play in the NFC North. Finally, I'll be faithfully watching Terrell Owens play with the worst starting quarterback in pro football. Life is good. Time for a preview--the first of many.

AFC East

Buffalo Bills: Meet Trent Edwards. He's not what you'd call an NFL-caliber quarterback. Meet Terrell Owens. He's not what you'd call a stable individual. How much more can I say? This should be interesting. T.O. has made every quarterback he's played with look good, at least for a while. If Edwards goes to the Pro Bowl, I'm willing to label Owens the greatest receiver of all time. Side story: I recently met a guy from T.O.'s hometown of Alexander City, Ala. He said nobody there likes him either.

Miami Dolphins: There was really no reason the Dolphins should have won 11 games last year except for an amazingly easy schedule. They played the AFC West and the NFC West, plus they got the Patriots in Matt Cassell's second start and managed to clinch the division against a free-falling Jets team in Week 17. Now, these are my Dolphins, so I'm not about to bet the under on the seven-game win total that Vegas predicts. Let's just say I wouldn't encourage anyone to bet the over, though.

New York Jets: New coach. New quarterback. Old running back. Old story. These Jets will lose twice to the Patriots, once to each of the other divisional opponents, and six times to the rest of the league--assuming they overachieve.

New England Patriots: Replace one system quarterback with another, and your team should be just fine. This team is an obvious lock. I know, I know. After Cassell put up better numbers in his first year as a starter than Tom Brady put up in his, everyone started panicking when they decided to trade him. "Oh no! What are we going to do without our franchise QB?! He was amazing last year!" Don't worry, folks. It's called a system. This Brady guy, whoever he is, should also be able to succeed in it.

-JW

JW,

A recent study found that 90% of American money has been rolled up and used to snort cocaine. What does this have to do with the AFC East, you ask? Well, let's just say that if the New England Patriots represent the American drug trade, then Buffalo, Miami, and New York represent the war on drugs. Yes, the Bills, Fins, and Jets may occasionally annoy the Patriots, but they're not stopping them. Frankly, they're not coming close.

To that drug metaphor, let me add this one. Considering the fact that not only ones and fives but hundreds have been used to do coke, according to the above story, we're clearly living in a world of haves and have nots. With that in mind, here's my "Coke-Snorting AFC East Preview" (all rights reserved):

The One Hundred Dollar Bill Coke Snorter

The New England Patriots, whose "system" has resulted in one of the most successful runs in the history of professional football. Sure, Brady may take a step back this year, but it's a Montana to Young step, nothing more. I mean, check out the guy's schedule! Other than Peyton Manning in week ten and Drew Brees in week twelve, he'd be the best quarterback on the field every time out if he were Damon Huard! Talk about a rogues' gallery. Honestly, I haven't seen a collection of losers this pitiful since the 2000-2007 Miami Dolphins.

Speaking of which . . .

The Twenty Dollar Bill Coke Snorter

The Dolphins aren't going to make the playoffs this year, but they're not going to be terrible, either. In fact, I'm pencilling them in for 8-8 for the rest of my life. As you know, I blame the Dolphins for introducing the term "wildcat" into what was until then a pretty good life for me. Now? I've decided that hell consists of a never-ending sound-loop of "Brett Favre" and "wildcat" repeated over and over in Ron Jaworski's voice. In all seriousness, look for Pennington to have another underrated season, followed by Bill Parcells jettisoning him for the freshly-available Alex Smith. And then look for the pieces of your exploded head.

The Five Dollar Bill Coke Snorter

The Buffalo Bills, though only because Terrell Owens' corpse is more liability than blessing at this point. I like this team a lot, but I'll sum up my feelings about Owens' remaining football abilities by saying this: If a fire has you trapped in an upstairs room and Terrell Owens invites you to toss down your baby, DO NOT TOSS HIM THE BABY.

The One Dollar Bill Coke Snorter

The New York Jets, though only because you can't snort coke through a fifty-cent piece. Wow, this team is going to be terrible. I've got the DirecTV NFL Sunday Ticket this season, and if the Jets make an appearance in my home, feel free to kill me. I'll watch the Russian ballet first.

-GM

A Rigged Game

GM,

ESPN reported yesterday that Plaxico Burress was sentenced to two years in prison for shooting himself in the leg. Was that part of the plea bargain?! "Plax, they've just got too much on us. We can go to court, and you will be found guilty of carrying an unlicensed concealed weapon. You could, however, shave off a few years in jail by admitting that your idiocy, not your criminality, has brought on this punishment." I thought two years was too much for packing heat without a license, but apparently New York won't even let you shoot yourself!

Enough dwelling on poorly worded reporting. Two hammers were dropped yesterday, and neither served justice. Plaxico, like every other NFL thug who can't wait to hang out in bars where people want to exploit him or extort from him, took a firearm into a bar. In his case, however, he must have thought his Florida permit was universally accepted (or was just too careless to apply in New York), and he happened to shoot himself. Wouldn't a prolonged period of probation accompanied by a forced forfeiture of all weapons be more appropriate? Legal cases often have rulings that clearly aren't fair. Sure, they may fit in with rules and precedents, but anyone with common sense recognizes a shockingly unfair decision. Plax was certainly irresponsible, but it's a shame that a guy who probably wasn't any threat to society will have to spend two of his playing years in prison.

As for the NCAA's rulling on the University of Memphis basketball program, they failed to catch the two biggest criminals. Derrick Rose, who was living in Chicago, let some kid in Detroit (!) take the SAT for him. Based on his past, we can assume John Calipari's level of involvement ranges from having prior knowledge to actually filling in the bubbles in the test booklet. Both of these guys are doing extremely well financially, and one is still in the NCAA! I can understand having no authority to punish Rose, but how is it possible that the NCAA continues to allow coaches to benefit from their infractions simply because they were able to whore themselves out in time? Memphis has to give back a lot of money; the culprits continue to rake it in. I know two guys who the Tiger athletic department should instantly hit up for donations.

-JW

JW,

If nothing else, recent history shows us that justice in this country is a matter of extremes. Sure, fame can buy an acquittal, but it leads just as easily to example-making, certainly the most feared of all celebrity side-effects.

Such was the case yesterday, when Plaxico Burress pleaded guilty to a weapons charge that a fifty-year-old white guy would have laughed at. While I'm not particularly sad to see Plax behind bars, there's something disturbing about a justice system in which punishment is allotted based on factors so far removed from the crime itself. Consider Michael Vick, whose prison time would almost certainly have been shortened had his fame not engendered a political firestorm. Or Donte Stallworth, who essentially bought himself a 30-day sentence for killing a guy--paying the family to approve his plea bargain.

Part of the problem, I know, is that while Stallworth looks like a normal person, Plaxico Burress and Michael Vick look crazy-eyed and malevolent. In punishing them, we're throwing in all the s--t we know they've gotten away with. Perhaps just as problematic, though, is the wide latitude of prosecutors, whose political ambitions are generally no secret. In the case of Plax, Manhattan district attorney Robert Morgenthau's public promise of jail time is merely the political equivalent of the shivving that Burress can expect next week at Riker's Island--just a guy trying to buy some cred.

Meanwhile, the NCAA's search for perfect justice remains similarly flawed. You make an interesting case about Rose and Calipari, but I'll argue, as I have before, that, money aside, Memphis is receiving no punishment. Yes, the national media will have their (at least partly racially-motivated) field day at the Tigers' expense, but recruiting will go on and the fans' memories will remain largely unscathed. We won those games, and everybody knows it.

A final note: Striking the record books is not just stupid but counterproductive. I've heard Memphis' expunged 1985 Final Four appearance mentioned dozens of times over the past month or so; I've heard about St. John's legitimate appearance exactly zero times. And I don't expect that ratio to change.

-GM

A "Whole" Betrayal

JW,

In the hallowed halls of The Wall Street Journal, an unlikely hero has emerged. If you do nothing else today--and let's face it, there's a good chance you won't--do yourself a favor and read John Mackey's take on "health" "care" "reform." And yes, all three words now require their own sarcastic quotation marks.

In case you're wondering, John Mackey is the co-founder and CEO of Whole Foods, and here's where the unlikeliness of his conservatism comes in. Whole Foods, as you know, is beloved by liberals (it's #48 at Stuff White People Like) and is one of the very few national chains where the hipster set feels good about giving its green tithe. Frankly, I'm not sure what Mackey's thinking by publicly opposing Obama on an issue so dear to his customers. Either he's trying to expand his business to you and me ("Wink and nod, everyone--I'm trying to persuade Republicans to shop here.") or he has woefully understimated the humorlessness of his existing base. Like moths to a flame, like pedophiles to the Little League World Series, liberals will sniff out political betrayal, and they will put your Margaret Thatcher-quoting ass out of business.

Especially when, as Mackey's is, your departure from socialist orthodoxy is so thoroughly smart. In addition to the aforementioned Thatcher citation ("The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."), Mackey lands solid punches against the Obama plan's financial excesses, its inevitable use of rationing, and its promise to make us less free. Most importantly, he hits upon the philosophical point ungirding the right wing's opposition to "reform":

Health care isn't a right. It can't be.

As Bill Whittle wrote last year in The National Review, a right is that which cannot be taken away from us by the government, not that which must be given to us. After all, Whittle writes, "There’s a word for someone who has their food, housing and care provided for them… for people who owe their existence to someone else. That word is slave."

Yet here's the Democratic Party, chasing the permanent, Karl Rove-style majority that they reviled when Republicans were in charge. Give enough loot to enough people, they realize, and they'll forget how to provide for themselves. They'll be dependant on you for everything. And then you've got them. A less cautious man would point to the generational trap of public housing as evidence, or the fact that FEMA trailers are still housing New Orleans refugees. I'll simply close by inviting our readers to drive through those areas of town that receive greatest government assistance. See how the experiment's working.

A word of advice before you go. Lock your doors.

-GM

GM,

OhhhHHHHhhh! So Whole Foods wasn't founded as another avenue for liberal snobbishness; that was just an inevitable side effect. They just want us to pay a little more to lead healthier lives. You're not kidding when you use the word "hero," either. Mackey's article boldy advocates self discipline, personal accountability, and a unanimous acceptance of the Constitution and Declaration--three concepts liberals despise. Strategically, you'd have to question his open stance, which could lead to a serious stock-price plunge if the boycotting libs advance their efforts to a short-selling conspiracy. That would take a significant increase in general market awareness in such circles, but only one of them has to figure it out before the rest get in line. If I were Mackey, I'd be scared.

A girl I dated once took me to a local organic-food store to buy us something to make for lunch. The idea of (her) spending $24 for one grocery-store meal displeased me in principle, but if I ever feel like doing it myself, I'm definitely going to Whole Foods. If you read the article, you can tell that Mackey isn't just sort of conservative on the issue; he captures and embraces every aspect of the right (right) point of view. I read it once for information and a second time for pleasure!

It may seem like we've reached a point at which we can collectively afford to take care of everyone. That's because we have. And I even believe it is a moral failure if a person dies because he cannot afford a certain procedure, but who has failed? Certainly not the government! After all, what would they be guilty of, giving us one more freedom?!

The whole idea of freedom not being free is wrong. If you believe in fundamental American ideals, you have to believe that freedom is inherently free. There is, however, a cost to defending it. We have to take measures like funding a strong military and voting Republican no matter how incapable of public speaking and independent thought our candidates may be. NOTE TO GOP: If you select your nominations wisely, you might have a shot at returning to the White House. If you don't, we'll soon be deciding between a Democrat who's secretly socialist and a Socialist who's secretly the Antichrist.

-JW

Favre Signs! Sage Rosenfels Found Dead.

JW,

Like Facebook (whose use, new research indicates, leads to increased time on Facebook), the Brett Favre saga has so far outpaced the will of its creators that it literally cannot be stopped. Once an intriguing plot to carry us through the summer, Favre's retirement decision has devolved into a vicious circle (jerk) of competing rumors and speculation, a media fantasia in the key of who gives a s--t. There was a time when Favre's career would have made a great movie due to his humble origins, human struggles, and on-field triumphs. Now? It's the built-in sequels.

As you will have heard if you own a television, unnamed Vikings (the best kind) have conveyed their certainty that Favre will play the 2009 season despite previous reports to the contrary. Though I couldn't be less curious about the whole affair, a part of me is tempted to take notes on how to be rewarded for laziness. After all, Favre clearly spent the offseason figuring out how to trade his legacy and reputation for weekdays off. Now that the Vikings have allegedly come through with the right contract (codename: "Sundays Only"), well, let's just say that slackers and ne'er-do-wells worldwide have a lot to live up to.

Mind you, I'm not blaming Favre for wanting to skip camp (where photogenic faces go to be broken). My beef is with the NFL and the Clemens-esque, rent-a-win mentality at work here.

Think about it. Favre's too old to be built upon. Regardless of his promises, he's not in anybody's long-term plans. Thus, even the best case scenario--another ring for the gunslinger turned hired gun--is nothing but a one-year abberation. A pause button for the real Vikings, and one that may well end the careers of Sage Rosenfels, Tarvaris Jackson, and the inevitably underachieving 2010 coaching staff.

There's a chance, of course, that all the latest talk is nothing--that Favre is knocking back Vicodin shakes poolside, laughing his head off. If so, God bless the man for sticking to his most recent guns. As we know, not everyone has the required fortitude.

-GM

GM,

We clearly have vastly different levels of appreciation for the Favre saga. Almost as logically puzzling as his consecutive-start streak is the fact that he's a joke that gets better with repetition! Now, I don't think we'll have to (rather, get to) go through the whole charade in 2010, but I never imagined we would in 2009 either. I'm sure there will be a few rumors next spring, but this is probably the end of the line, which saddens me.

What I find strange is that the media--or, at least, the medium (ESPN)--lost heart in this matter at some point this offseason. Rachel Nichols spent a few days in Hattiesburg, the TV talk shows discussed it briefly, and a few key people wound up on camera with some vague answers to some non-pressing questions. But where was the effort to hold Favre accountable for saying right after the season that he was absolutely done with football? Why hasn't he taken any criticism for forcing Sage Rosenfels and Tavaris Jackson to worry about the whims of a middle-aged, gray-haired, Wrangler jean-wearing Mississippian? What about all the players, whose trust and confidence he'll demand, who heard a few weeks ago that he was "really" done this time and then psychologically prepared for a season without him? Shouldn't he have to answer for these things?!

It's like ESPN decided for me that I was sick of hearing about Favre, and nothing could be farther from the truth. I thought the trade-off for Favre's fickleness was supposed to be a media barrage so fierce and nosy it would make the paparazzi blush. Instead, an entire chapter of the Hall of Famer's brutal indecisiveness has been abridged, and I want answers--or at least hearsay. It's August, ESPN. I assure you the juice is worth the squeeze.

-JW

Shocking InvASIAN: A Tiger's Tale

GM,

Still traumatized from hearing John Kruk try to analyze golf on Baseball Tonight, I'll do my best to assess not only the situation of the first major win by an Asian-born player but the assessment of it as well. About the time my boy, Padraig, quintupled to drop out of contention, I fell into a state of deep concern. A patriot through and through, how could I possibly route against Tiger, a figure who represents American dominance as well as Lance Armstrong or Michael Jordan? Then again, where's the fun in pulling for the favorite? Beating Tiger for a major will change Y.E. Yang's life!

I'll admit that he won me over, along with much of the gallery. Not since I browsed the web for a Takeru Kobayashi poster have I been so charmed by a foreign athlete. The eagle chip-in may be viewed as the shot that won it for Yang, but it was his approach on 18 that should impress most golf fans. Didn't he get a translated version of the memo?! You're supposed to cave under pressure just by seeing Tiger shave a stroke on the leaderboard. If you're in the final pairing with him and leading by one stroke on the 72nd hole of what has been taken for granted as his 15th major victory, you're probably supposed to wet yourself in the fairway.

Yang's victory alone is enough for anyone to completely dismiss the idea that Tiger is the most intimidating athlete in the world. Yang had every possible reason to collapse--he led by one stroke while Tiger's ball sat in the fairway--and he hit one of the most clutch shots I've ever seen. Quit being surprised, Tiger Nation. Your guy is human, even in majors. Just ask Rich Beem and Zach Johnson. "Who?" Exactly.

I'll leave you with two anonymous quotes from CBS.com's message board on the Michael Vick piece last night. Really, any message board reminds me that most people who type on them are semi-literate at best, but the points of view (assuming you can make heads or tails of them) are fascinating in this piece. Several people thought Vick deserves the death penalty! These were my two favorite, though.

"Lets be honest. If this killing field wasn't discovered and business as usual continued, unabated, I dare say Vick would have gone on to become one of, if not the greatest quarterback of our time." -Anonymous 1

"If you'd lost millions of dollars,because you were caught fighting dogs,the majority of you would probably commit suicide. And then 60 Minutes had the ordacity to have Mr. Brown interview Mr. Vick." -Anonymous 2

Brett Favre tomorrow.

-JW

JW,

If this post reads poorly, feel free to blame my excessive glee at Tiger's collapse yesterday in Minnesota, one of the top two or three most satisfying sports experiences of my life. Actually, let's strike that language. I watched Y. E. Yang's victory, not Tiger's loss. It's an important distinction, and one that few people will make correctly.

Take NBC Sports, for example, whose current poll asks if Y.E. Yang's victory over Tiger Woods is the greatest sports upset of all time! Yes, that's right. The Tiger mystique is such that the sports world literally can't believe it when he loses.

Or at least that's their story.

After all, who doesn't profit from the perception that Woods is not just a very good golfer in an extraordinarily weak era but The Greatest Player Of All Time? Sportswriters get dozens of centralized stories in a sport that's nearly impossible to write about given its decentralized storylines; television networks get a hook for casual fans; and advertisers get one of the few sure things in sports. Thus the narrative we'll spend the next week hearing: Tiger's still the same guy, he just choked one away. Choking, after all, is a one-time deal. Getting beat is forever.

At least I hope it is. As previously mentioned in this space, Woods is surely the most boring, childish big-time athlete ever to hog the American stage. Furthermore, lingering at the threshold of every Tiger story--hell, every Tiger conversation--is what I'll call the Steve Nash Effect. "Look what a great golfer Tiger is," we think to ourselves. "And he's black!" Like Barack Obama's, Tiger Woods' (partial) blackness has become uncomfortably involved with his branding, regardless of the fact that it has nothing to do with anything. Yet there was Yang, celebrating his place in history as the first Asian winner of a major while the half-Asian-but-marketed-as-just-black Woods looked on dejectedly. Like him or not, there's something unwholesome there. Something decidedly un-"post-racial."

In any case, Tiger lost the Wanamaker, and that lovely fact deserves to be celebrated. Sure, he'll end his season with another Player of the Year award, another FedEx Cup championship, and another billion in sponsorship coin, but I'll console myself with the one fact that almost makes me like him. The majors squandered, he doesn't care about any of those things.

-GM

A Dead Dog, A Dying Planet

JW,

Now that Michael Vick has stymied both our predictions by signing in Philadelphia (Eagles fans: "The dogs had it coming to them"), let's take a moment to reflect on crime and punishment in America. Like many people, I've been shocked by the level of outrage surrounding Vick's misdeeds. Since his departure from Leavenworth, NFL teams have fallen all over themselves issuing statements of disinterest. Coming to terms with Vick, ESPN reported last night, the Eagles felt the need to secure the permission of both local animal rights activists (!) and the Philadelphia mayor (!!). Yes, Vick behaved very badly, but given some of the reaction to his conviction, release, and reinstatement, you would think he had killed an actual person.

In fact, recent history suggests that he would have fared better if he had. While several NFL players and recent retirees have at least tried to kill a guy, perhaps the best counterpoint to Vick is Donte Stallworth, whose DUI Manslaughter plea and one-year suspension from the league will almost certainly be followed by an open-armed return in 2010. If he's good enough, Stallworth will play again, and no one will think a thing about it. People, the NFL and the justice system inform us, are worth significantly less than dogs.

One of the problems, of course, is that humans don't have the powerful lobby that animals enjoy. What we've got, in fact, are a number of organizations lobbying against us: NARAL Pro-Choice, Planned Parenthood, and the Democratic Party. And, of course, the New York Times, which earlier this week released a headline I've been anticipating for years: "Having Children Brings High Carbon Impact." While the story itself reads like a parody of left-wing secularism, it's the reader comments that truly quicken the soul:

Susan: "Instead of offering incentives to have more children, we should offer incentives to NOT have more children."

Kinnakeet: "Once again, people intelligent and literate enough to grasp the importance of [global warming] limit their reproduction."

Akira: "I get so tired of seeing children in Africa, or even in my own Queens nabe (sic), who are born into already less-than-favorable situations, when this all could have been avoided with a simple condom."

Goodness! Given these comments, it's no wonder that Vick is reviled while Stallworth is immediately forgiven. After all, Stallworth helped control the population. Bro is green! I've said it for years: The ultimate liberal fantasy is the suicide of the human race followed by the return of earth to the animals. Seriously, check out the History Channel program Life After People. It's left-wing porn.

-GM

GM,

I was wondering when you were going to bring up that Times piece, but I had no idea you'd manage to tie it in with Michael Vick. I'm not particularly troubled by either ruling, Vick's or Stallworth's. Vick ran an illegal ring for years that, through his own recklessness (I won't say "malice"), resulted in the suffering of many animals. Stallworth made one mistake that had a horrible consequence, but I'm sure he gave the victim's family a handsome sum of money, plus there's the whole issue of his infraction occurring in Florida, which seems to be much more criminal-friendly than Georgia or Virginia.

The moral of the story in the Times is the most ironic I've seen in a while. The environmentalist position was always more forgivable than other left-wing institutions such as diet socialism, abortion made easy, and "equal opportunity" employment. After all, "Leave a healthy planet to the next generation" is a pretty good message--one I can't argue with. But now, "Leave a healthy planet to the next generation by reducing the size of the next generation" just isn't quite as catchy.

I can just imagine the liberal convention where they brainstormed this concept. Bono, the Dixie Chicks, Keith Olbermann, Jon Stewart, Al Gore, and New York Times editor Bill Keller engage in a round-table discussion. Gore: All right, folks, we seem to be winning these days. Let's bring in our anti-religion consultant, who has a fabulous idea.

Enter Bill Maher

Maher: Thank you, everyone. You know what I can't stand? Responsible, diligent, devout Catholics who have multiple children with similar values and send them to great private schools so that they can also be successful. I'm not crazy about welfare babies either, but at least their conception is strategical and not religiously motivated. How can we convince educated people to stop having children even if they can afford to?

And so it began. I'm sure human reproduction does, in some way, increase the species' carbon footprint, but damn... isn't the preservation of mankind something we can all agree on?!

-JW

The PGA (Please Get Appealing!) Championship

GM,

As I was walking into work this morning, I passed a gentleman, Joe, who rents some office space from my boss. We generally exchange pleasantries every morning, but this morning--perhaps because my boss is out of town--he asked me how I was enjoying the job. "Well, it's not really what I was looking for," I answered, "but I think I've accomplished enough to impress somebody else one day." He responded to me with the typical "You're gonna be fine," adding that I was a "self-starter." Allow me to reiterate that he doesn't know me too well. But the term "self-starter"--which I think may have won the 2008 Business Cliche of the Year award--served to remind me that the PGA Championship began today. Thanks, Joe.

As I usually do before a golf major, I got to thinking about what I wanted to see this weekend. Do I want to see Tiger and Phil in contention on Sunday? How about an unknown take a three-round lead but with several established, better players nipping at his heals? What about a Sergio Garcia choke job? Do I want John Daly's game and wardrobe to be embarrassing? Would it be fun if we had a streaker? To these, I answer, "Yes, yes, yes, YES, and HELL YES!" Let's face it: Golf is inherently boring, and if it weren't for the fact that these guys look a lot like we do and seem to have real human emotions despite their cushy lives, we would lose interest in a hurry. This is coming from a guy who either wakes up or stays up to watch the British Open's early rounds! The amount of analysis that has surrounded Tiger's fist pumps would be unimaginable in any other sport. In fact, the Tiger fist pump and the Phil head-nod-with-smile-accompaniment have become the gold and silver standards of giving the fans what they want! The Padraig fist pump, as displayed at last year's PGA Championship, is neither. After that maneuver, he only could have redeemed himself by breaking into a river dance from his native land.

Four majors in a year is the perfect number. Any fewer, I wouldn't get my fill. Any more, we'd start to catch on that the so-called stories that shape every event are just worn-out plots from events past. I'm still a huge sucker for it, though.

-JW

JW,

Like you, I really like the majors set-up in professional golf, possibly the fan-friendliest of all sports structures. Everyone agrees to care about these four events and only these four; all the players try their hardest; and the television networks air even the early rounds. Personally, I've added the Players' Championship and the FedEx Cup events to my diet, but I fully support the golf fan who watches only the big four.

What I can't abide, however, is the guy who's a fan not of golf but of Tiger Woods. You know the type: He tunes in on Sunday just long enough to check the leaderboard. If it's Tiger-free, he's out of there faster than Steve Williams can assault a fan. The attraction to Woods is easily explained, of course. Like Barack Obama, Tiger is the perfect specimen for 21st century America: He wins a lot, he makes his opponents look like buffoons, and he's not white. Sure, he's a petulant, joyless crybaby, but he's the greatest golfer ever! We get to tell our grandchildren that we [slept through] him in his prime!

All that said, he's clearly going to win this championship, and I don't see it being particularly close. As I write this, he's a stroke ahead of the field and on the fairway at his eighteenth. Furthermore, he's playing at Hazeltine, a terrible major course whose obsessive, ridiculous length (7,674 yards) has the dual effect of eliminating all but about ten guys from the field and not challenging Tiger at all. I put him at 15-under for the championship--a winner by six strokes.

Of course, the argument can be made that Tiger's the only thing keeping golf in business. Ratings are terrible when he's not playing, and in many ways he really is bigger than the game. Given golf's other obstacles--Hugo Chavez recently denounced it as "a bourgeois sport"; Barack Obama can't be far behind--perhaps we should be grateful that someone's keeping the Lucas Glovers of the world from ruining more than one major per season. I just wish it were someone a little more likable, a little less of a jerk. Let's be honest. I wish it were Colin Montgomerie.

-GM

The Preseason of Our Discontent

JW,

With Summer 2009 stretching into its eighth month, the sports world has grown desperate. Tennis and golf are sporadic at best, basketball's in hibernation, and baseball couldn't matter less if the games were played by nine-year-old girls. As you can imagine, ESPN's attempts to fill up its programming schedule have not fared well. Baseball Tonight spent forty-five seconds describing Lou Piniella's nose hairs last week, and I caught a 2006 World Series of Poker episode on Classic the other night . . . and it wasn't the main event! Let's face it: If it weren't for the PGA Championship this weekend, I'd be seriously considering doing myself harm.

You can imagine my pleasure, then, when I flipped through my guide on Sunday and came across the Hall of Fame Game, the first sign that football season is upon us and we can finally stop talking about politics. The Titans were decked out in their old Houston Oilers jerseys. The Bills were wearing giant Canadian flags. Whistles were blowing, fans were cheering, and a grand time was had by all.

Until the second quarter, that is.

Look, it's a familiar problem that the NFL in August is nothing but a tease. We get fifteen minutes of the real guys followed by forty-five minutes with scrubs who aren't worthy to serve on Vince Young suicide watch. We get more shots of the sidelines than the field. Come to think of it, watching preseason football is a bit like getting a boyfriend in prison. You're scratching an itch, yes, but you don't feel good about it.

So what can be done to fix these endless months of summer? Seriously, what? Other than turning off the television, I'm drawing a blank.

-GM

GM,

The only reason those guys aren't worthy to serve on Vince Young suicide watch is because they're all a threat to pass him on the depth chart, and that would just be counterproductive. Is it possible that Young's comment about making the Hall of Fame sprung from some sort of confusion about playing in the HOF Game? I was actually waiting for an "I told you so" after the game. Enough with the silliness; I'll do my best to answer your question about how to fill the time--not necessarily productively. Here are my suggestions in reverse order of when I actually tried them out:

2009: Gamble a lot. I just deposited enough money into a poker site that I'll have to play three million hands to earn my 100-percent deposit bonus. I'll also be keeping an eye out for intriguing futures bets, like over-under win totals (my specialty).

2006-2009: Follow the Brett Favre retirement decision, particularly by watching ESPN2's First Take, which makes for amazing television if you're familiar enough with TV to laugh when it's horrible.

2008: Set a physical goal and stick to it. I ran almost every day last July, curiously drawing a multitude of honks from black men.

2007: Work in minor league baseball. You will want to kill yourself by May, but you won't notice the difference in the dead months.

2004: Apply hours upon hours to fantasy football research. That year, I actually researched my stats and formulated player rankings weeks before Yahoo! released its! I probably spent 70 hours (mostly at work) preparing for our draft. Result: taking Kevin Barlow with my second pick and being eliminated from playoff contention by Week 9.

1995: Take a vacation. This is the last summer vacation I recall taking in my life. Years of extreme poverty (at least for someone born to the American upper-middle class) has made the idea of vacationing unrealistic. Even back then, I wouldn't recommend doing what I did, though, which was taking the trip with my family.

-JW

A Conflict of "Interests"

JW,

As you know, there are two types of voters in this country. The first is grounded in a defined political philosophy and votes according to how closely a particular candidate matches it. The second type, a stupider segment of the population, is carried on the wind, led to the polls by media-driven caricatures and slogans. These are the people for whom political advertising is constructed and for whose sake political narratives ("First Black President!") are finely tuned.

Sadly, it's this second group that decides most elections. Vaguely convinced of one thing or another, these voters are little more than the sum of their television watching. Infinitely credulous, they're infinitely malleable, and it's because of them that media bias is not just a curiosity but a legitimate political concern.

Enter the Associated Press, which over the weekend submitted a doozie so bold-faced, I almost wonder if it's a misprint. Recent cooperation between drugmakers and the White House, the AP writes, is "a somewhat surprising political alliance, given the drug industry's recent history of siding with Republicans and the Democrats' disdain for special interests."

Really? Don't make me laugh.

I mean, seriously. Democrats dislike special interests about as much as Wilt Chamberlain dislikes p---y. About as much as Bill Clinton dislikes Lane Bryant models. Yet the Associated Press seems never to have heard of such Democrat-friendly special interest groups as trial lawyers, the teachers' unions, or the UAW. They've never heard of the United Mine Workers or the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. Hell, they've never heard of black people!

After all, what's a special interest but a minority group that votes as one? Come to think of it, what isn't a special interest? Pharmaceutical companies have long been recognized (and belittled) as such, but what about the AFL-CIO, a body whose entire membership is only 11 million, less than 4 percent of the population. Certainly their political contributions and prowess are as significant as PhRMA's. At what population threshold do you leave your specialness behind?

Regardless, the problem is not in the definition of terms but in their demonization. Even as we speak, some fool has wandered onto MSN.com and is now internalizing the completely fraudulent claim that Democrats [good] dislike special interests [bad]. Will he stop to consider what any of those words mean? I don't know about you, but I seriously doubt it.

-GM

GM,

Yes, Wilt "The Stilt" sure did like to "party," although rumor has it that the number he attended was greatly exaggerated. I actually collected paychecks from the Associated Press at one point in my life. Fortunately, as a sports stringer, I didn't really get a political sense one way or the other. Naturally, though, we may assume that America's leading wire service, the source from which all those liberal media outlets get their "information," is at least a tad left of center. "Information" gets quotation marks because it is factual by definition. But tack on a convenient little phrase like "given . . . the democrats' disdain for special interests" to the end of a factual sentence--which, by the way, is not part of a commentary piece--and you have people, well, accepting it as a given. Does the article go on to justify such an intriguing generalization with examples as strict journalism suggests? Not at all; the "take our word for it" approach is much easier.

I'm not saying that the unnamed author of the story had any intention to manipulate the "stupider segment of the population," as you so callously called them. He may have a liberal bias that he can't completely shake when writing a story, meaning he never thought that there could be an argument against his claim. He may even be conservative or moderate and have just messed up. I'm even willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt. However, the mere fact that we can legitimately speculate that he may have had an agenda is a shame unto itself.

Take it from a former journalist; there's an old saying in news: "We don't tell people what to think, just what to think about." As I said, it's an old saying. We now know that some prominent members of the American media want us not just to view certain issues, but to view certain issues in certain ways. I have a few favorite things in life: friends, sports, ice cream, and the First Ammendment. The first three are in good hands, but the people with whom we've left the most responsibility for the fourth aren't all fulfilling their duties. I'm not talking about Jon Stewart; I'm talking about writers and reporters who make an effort to appear as moderate as possible while subtly making one side look more appealing.

I once heard this statistic at the end of an otherwise well-balanced national news piece on the Boy Scouts/public funding issue: "Studies show that molestation of young males is three times more likely to be committed by a man who purports to be straight."

What they wanted you to believe: Straight men are three times more likely to molest young boys. (Provably, through mathematics, this is false.)

What this actually shows if you think about it: Gay men, who make up 10 percent of the male population at most, are committing 25 percent of the molestations of young boys! (Provably, through mathematics, this is true.)

NOTE: This entry is not intended to be anti-homosexual, as I have no political opinion about sexual orientation, nor should any employer or university, which is why the idea of making a protected class out of bedroom habits is quite non-progressive in actuality. Another topic for another day, I suppose.

-JW

Technology: Fattening Us for the Slaughter

JW,

To see yet another reason why the terrorists hate us, spend an afternoon jogging the trails alongside the river where I live. In addition to the staggering obesity, the lack of basic movement skills, and the tendency of middle-aged men to go shirtless (while walking), you're likely to encounter a new kind of American parent: the To-Hell-With-Conventional-Wisdom-My-Kid-Will-Only-Shut-Up-When-He's-Watching-Television guy. This new breed, buoyed by technological advances that will soon have flatscreens on plies of toilet paper, has pretty much given up on interaction. Reading with their children? Not bloody likely! Helping with homework? I think not. Attaching a television monitor and earphones to their six-year-old's stroller so he'll be quiet long enough for Mom and Dad to squeeze in a walk? Hell yes!

I'm bringing this up, by the way, because it's a great example of a sub-law of the Law of Unintended Consequences--the Law That Each New Convenience Makes Us Slightly Stupider. Consider, for example, the Internet, which, according to studies, is already shaping [read: erasing] the human capacity for memory. Or the GPS device, whose achievements include leading an overconfident driver into a lake, guiding a demolition crew to the wrong house, and directing drivers to turn onto train tracks. Ten years from now, when the television-in-the-stroller generation heads to the workforce, we can pretty much forget about an honest day's work. They literally won't have the capacity to think.

What they will have, however, is the perfect set of skills to vote Democratic: sloth, an overreliance on media (or the media), and an inability to imagine themselves in any but their current circumstances. Just as the almost total domestication of this country--the end of "westering," as Steinbeck called it--took our sense of adventure, just as the welfare state took our self-sufficiency, so our obsession with glowing rectangles will take our intellects. At the rate they're going, the next generation will be even lazier and stupider than ours. And friend, that's saying something.

-GM

GM,

I've always thought that many companies need to hire contract workers for oversight rather than actually having a department for it. Why? Because the stupidity that is built in to some of the world's most amazing technology can only be explained by employees' inability to take an outsider's perspective. Take, for instance, the Garmin GPS that my company provides for me when I'm on the road. It's a true delight roughly 60 percent of the time. The other 40 percent of the time I need it, it can't pick up a satellite signal because of clouds, can't find a business or the address it's been located at for 20 years, leads me to a vacant lot about a mile away from my true desination, or tells me to turn right on "Hamric Doctor."

Think about all that goes into the production of a high-end (Garmin is supposedly one of the best brands) GPS. The technology is beyond my imagination. Garmin spent $206 million on research and development last year. The least they've ever spent in a year is $64 million in 2004. Apparently, though, in whatever year they made mine, their research fell just short of discovering that "Dr," in English-speaking countries with roads, is short for "Drive." Should I remind you this is a GPS--a device whose sole function is to guide people along roads?! Yet somehow no one caught the mistake. You should watch the movie Idiocracy. On second thought, it was dreadful, but it had a novel concept, one I've often envisioned. The world becomes amazingly stupid and ignorant because all the brilliant technology leads to a complete lack of mental activity. Again, don't watch it, please--unless you think Luke Wilson and Dax Shepard can make you laugh while actually trying to do so.

-JW

Our Poor Health

GM,

I want to know your thoughts on health care. Obviously, I expect them to fall into the conservative camp, but an experience from yesterday has left me thinking that we could use just a little reform. My health insurance, which I'm completely paying for on my own, is terrible. It's beyond terrible. If I even call a doctor's office, I have a $400 co-pay, and they actually come cut off my arm if I need any non-generic drugs. So I have this cyst on the back of my neck that goes away for more than a year if I just take one sample pack of a common antibiotic. More than a year! I know the drug I want and the dosage, which wouldn't even be enough to harm a gerbil, much less distribute. I've been prescribed it twice--at times when I had decent insurance. Of course, under our system, I must go see a doctor, have him tell me what I already know, and prescribe me a drug for which there is no generic, which means my insurance won't pay for it...

OR...

I could visit one of the dozens of semi-reputable online pharmacies that operate out of India and have help centers set up in the Caribbean, resulting in an 83-percent discount. According to a few hours of research, the legal lines here are blurred. The drug I need is not a controlled substance, so it's completely legal for me to possess even without a prescription. Essentially, I may be aiding in the illegal process of shipping prescription drugs into the U.S., but consumers don't get prosecuted for that unless the amount indicates intention to distribute. This is how many senior citizens get their medicine. An extensive conversation with Victor, one of the online chat guys for the site I went to, gave me little faith that I could fully trust these people. To be honest, though, part of me wants to go this route just so the greedy doctors and drug manufacturers don't win! That sounds liberal, doesn't it?

-JW

JW,

Very. Like cynical and unilateral, "greedy" is one of those words that liberals throw at conservatives from time to time because they've been instructed by focus groups to do so. It's a meaningless slur, a wholly political attack whose power derives from class resentments and the electorate's incomplete grasp of the English language.

After all, what does "greedy" really mean in this case? Desiring profit? Unwilling to be socialized? You're a free market guy, right? Why is it wrong for doctors and drug companies to charge whatever the market will bear for their services? Unless you're ready to suggest that healthcare is somehow different from other economic products, you can't get mad at those who get rich providing it. And once you do make that suggestion . . . well, you've just let go of your last, best reason why healthcare shouldn't be socialized. Simply put, it's a human right or it's not.

All this is not to say that the current system works, of course, and your dilemma illustrates its flaws. As it stands, the medical industry charges what it likes, while the government (in the name of a ridiculous, counter-productive "war" on drugs) criminalizes the act of going outside the system. It's a legal monopoly--an artificial tariff--and its construction is due to that most basic of liberal assumptions: In the end, our lives are in their hands. The government doesn't have the stomach to watch us die from our own stupidity, so they must protect us from it.

Undergirding the healthcare debate is a truth that governs all life on this planet: The quality of _____ is directly proportional to its cost. Socialize medicine and doctors will make less. Pay doctors less and fewer people will submit to the time and expense of becoming one. Lower standards to increase enrollment and stupider people will become doctors. For every action a reaction.

Frankly, I'm tempted by the solution lingering at the extreme flank of Libertarianism. Unhinge medicine from government totally. Throw out the "D" in FDA; get rid of all licensing oversight. You say you're a doctor? Fine. Kill a few folks and prices will fall. Cure a few and they'll rise. It's unthinkable, I know, but it wasn't too long ago that the same could be said of much of today's "progress."

-GM

Shaking Things Up

JW,

I've always been suspicious of the restaurant chain Steak 'n Shake, a flawless recreation of 1950s diners if 1950s diners had only existed in hell. A marketing gimmick with no proper sense of itself--too slow to be fast-food; too fast to be casual dining--Steak is one of those in-between places that gets my order wrong while charging me two bucks more than the joints you'd expect it from. And while the story I'm about to tell you isn't based entirely in this country's educational problems or the lapse in its basic etiquette, it's certainly illustrative of both.

Rolling through the drive-thru of my local franchise (yes, I eat at places I hate; everyone does), I arrive at the window and receive my bag of food. Now, at most places, I'd allow the car to drift slowly forward while I check my order for precision, but I know that at Steak 'n Shake, it's fifteen minutes if I have to go back through the line, twenty if I go inside. Sitting in place and pulling open the sack, windows down, I hear commotion coming from the kitchen. There's been a mix-up, it seems, and I've been given the wrong bag. Just as I'm about to discover this fact for myself, a booming voice from inside the window shouts a question that most drive-thru workers only dream about: "What the f--k you ohhh-dah?" Stunned, I turn to find myself face to face with a very close relative of Thea Vidale, from the long-defunct TV series that bore her name. And she's pissed. And she snatches the bag out of my hand. She even announces it: "Gimme that bag!" Terrified, I hand it over.

In the end, I finally got my food--a large chili and a cherry coke. It wasn't bad, actually. What's bad is that I've come to expect incompetence and meanness in 75% of my public transactions. As I've said many times before, thank God I'm a blogger.

-GM

GM,

You know, you've told me the "gimme that bag" story a few times in person, and I've always mistaken the lady's impatience for urban amiability. Perhaps you need to work on your impressions. Yes, fast-food joints displease me with great regularity--while still managing to reduce my regularity. With whom should we be more comfortable, though? A McDonald's worker who satisfies every realistic expectation by not smiling, not making eye contact, and not arriving to the cash register within three minutes of my own arrival, or an overzealous Chick-Fil-A employee who seems to care way too much about how I'm doing that day?! I prefer the latter, but some people are overwhelmed by the unexpected friendliness, and it seems like they up their game every time I come in!

Can't we just acknowledge that the ordering, eating, and digesting of any fast-food meal will be a neutral experience at best and then mold the structure of social interaction accordingly? In McDonald's's case, vending machines would do nicely. Don't tell me the technology's not there. Then only one person in the whole operation would have to know how to read and speak English. If they're out of double cheeseburgers, the process is simple. I press the button anyway, and the genius of the bunch translates the order to the automatons. Next thing I know--assuming I don't know anything for 12 minutes--my burgers come sliding down a shoot into a vending machine that sits next to the Redbox outside the store. With that system, I wouldn't have to talk to, look at, feel sorry for, or be annoyed by any of the employees.

As for Steak 'n Shake, I haven't been there in years, but it seems like the drive-thru would be the worst way to capture the experience. I thought the whole purpose of '50s diners was to hang out for three hours after you ate. Think about that next time you're placing an "ohhh-dah."

-JW

People! They're the Worst!

GM,

Today's edition is just about people--people who are very different from myself, mind you. There is no greater feeling of accomplishment than knowing you've pegged a person. On the rare occasions that I accurately understand the mentality of another person, I consider it an enormous moral victory. Let the stories begin.

STORY 1: On the road yesterday for work, I stopped at a gas station to use the bathroom. As I was walking from my car to the building, I noticed that a mildly obese woman was heading toward it from a different angle. I quickly realized I was moving much faster than she was and that I had a decision to make: "Should I hold the door open for this stranger who is clearly in no hurry to get there?" I decided to be a gentleman and hold it, but when I looked back to see how close she was, she was taking a breather! Again, this woman was mildly obese, not gargantuan. To me, the sight of a 200-pound woman bent over, struggling to breathe, in the middle of a 50-feet walk was perplexing.

STORY 2: I saw an Alabama McDonald's advertise an "Eg McMuffin" on the marquee. Did they lose the letter, or is that a subtle clue that what they're serving didn't come from a chicken at all?

STORY 3: For the second time this year, someone cut me off in traffic to the point of almost causing a wreck, and they promptly gave me the finger! I didn't even react poorly. I didn't have time to! Was this a preemptive maneuver? "Yeah, you're not gonna like that, bitch! And don't bother getting upset, 'cause here's what I got for ya!" Strangely enough, I told a friend about it, and he said the same thing has happened to him! Are they picking on us for driving Hondas???

-JW

JW,

Don't get me started on slow walkers. I lived for a few years in New York City, and while Chinatown was one of my favorite neighborhoods, I learned very quickly that extra time had to be allotted when visiting. Why? Because Chinese people have entered into a pact with one another to do the following things:

1) walk at less than half the speed of other races;

2) move in whatever the exact opposite of single file is.

As you know, the politics of passing people (your cutter-offer and finger-giver notwithstanding) are delicate at best. Hesitant to leave the sidewalk in favor of the busy street but unwilling to bust through the three inches of space between the walkers, I found myself enacting a parody of slow-walking just behind them, practically raising my knees to my chin at each step! Did I get some funny looks? Sure, but nothing compared the guy in the Kim Jong-Il T-shirt.

Sadly, walking too quickly has its consequences, as well. Like you, I sometimes hold doors for members of the opposite sex. I was doing so once at the top of a stairwell when the senior citizen to whom I was extending the courtesy ran to catch up with me. I suppose she didn't want to slow me down--after all, I'd already been standing there for two seconds. As she bounded forth, her feet abandoned her, and she fell to the stairs beneath. Hard. And then she slid halfway to the next landing.

The lesson, I think, is that politeness is passive-agressive at best, downright harmful at worst. Your guy on the road had the right idea.

-GM

Erasing the Games

JW,

I read with dismay your claim in Friday's post that "as far as the NCAA and [the University of Michigan] itself is concerned, those Final Four appearances in 1992 and 1993 didn't happen." Seriously, enough with the jokes.

After all, you can't possibly be arguing for the punitive value of the most ridiculous "discipline" in all of sports. You can't possibly believe that Michigan fans stopped celebrating their Final Fours when the verdict came down, or that Webber, Howard, and Rose felt any less proud of what they'd achieved. Yeah, the program took some hits several years later. Sure, they wiped away some records and took down a banner or two. But isn't it true in the end that the Internet is the real record book? That the banners hang in our hearts?

A stupid line, maybe, but not a false one. Consider, for example, the fate of my beloved Memphis Tigers, whose close call in 2008 remains the most vexing, intolerable moment of my sports-watching life. Take away Mario Chalmers' three and we're national champions, and I'm here to tell you that the NCAA could dismantle the program piece by piece (and they might) without altering my happiness one bit. A Final Four banner? A scholarship or two seven years from now? A season of postseason ineligibility? All would pale in comparison to that win.

Of course, my position is based on the assumption that college sports are hopelessly corrupt, and that college athletes are amateurs only to the extent that they aren't directly paid by the NCAA. Change that and I might sing a different tune.

-GM

GM,

I admit that I view the Fab Five differently than steroid pushers, and almost anyone would have to admit as much. On the court, Chris Webber, Juan Howard, Jalen Rose, Jimmy King, and that other guy (I never remember the other guy) were good enough to get to the Final Four two straight years. Maybe they wouldn't have been at Michigan were it not for the corruption, but it takes a greater mental stretch to deny them their accomplishments than it takes to deny David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez theirs.

I did mention Ben Johnson and Floyd Landis, and those are completely valid comparisons. Those guys probably won because they cheated, and they cheated. So the respective governing bodies thought it over and, without hesitation, stripped the sprinter and cycler of their awards. All of a sudden, though, because baseball doesn't operate with a clock and because nobody knows for sure which home runs were the result of the juice, some folks are willing to just ignore the offense altogether. I refuse to be in that camp, though. Can we safely assume that steroids provide unfair advantages for those who cheat and at the expense (in this case, a literal expense) of those who play by the rules? Yes. The penalties should logically follow. "Oh, you cheated? Yoink! I guess that trophy isn't yours after all."

When I watch baseball, I can usually manage to look past the fact that many of the players are cheating on their wives. I can briefly forget that they're making staggering, undeserved sums of money because fans don't know when to say no to absurd ticket prices and corporations get a kick out of see their names on ballparks. I want each swing to be real, though. I want to know which players are great, which teams are better, and who really is capable of amazing physical feats. Without that small assurance, we're just watching overpaid circus freaks run around a square.

-JW