Houston Chronicle's John McClain does Pravda proud

For those of you who do not read the Houston Chronicle, congratulations. It is, overall, an embarrassment to the fourth-largest city in the nation. One of the biggest (in terms of girth and notoriety) embarrassments is their resident football guru, John McClain. McClain went to Baylor, so you know he's not smart. He sucks off the nipple of the Dallas Cowboys in a town that hates Dallas, which shows he's really not smart. But he does play the role of company man well, and bends over to take whatever the Texans give him. The most flagrant offense in recent memory appeared this morning, when he claimed that Jacques Reeves, who may be the worst cornerback in the NFL, DOES NOT SUCK AT ALL.

"Before I put in a call to general manager Rick Smith on Tuesday to see how his pulse was beating after the Texans’ victory at Cleveland, I wanted to find out from STATS Inc. how cornerback Jacques Reeves is playing this season.

By now, you know the Cowboys couldn’t wait to get rid of Reeves after last season. Since the preseason, he’s been getting ripped by fans and media. I was stunned when I discovered how his performance compares to that of a lot of other cornerbacks’.

Smith signed Reeves as a mid-level free agent to be the second cornerback. Reeves has started every game, leads the team with three interceptions and earns the wrath of the fans more than any other defensive player.

I’m not saying Reeves has been terrific or terrible. I’m merely showing you how he stacks up against other players at his position.

Looking at statistics through 10 games, Reeves had been thrown at 55 times (ranking 33rd). He had allowed 29 completions (44th). He’d given up 468 yards (25th). He has surrendered two TDs (61st).

I don’t have the space in this column to list all of those who ranked ahead of Reeves in those four statistics, but when they’re updated this week to include the 11th game, I’ll post them on chron.com.

List long with easy prey

Today, I’ll provide some of the bigger names who’ve allowed more completions, yards and touchdowns than Reeves.

For instance, Washington’s Carlos Rogers (87), Chicago’s Charles Tillman (84), Carolina’s Chris Gamble (80), San Francisco’s Nate Clements (71), the Giants’ Aaron Ross (71), Washington’s DeAngelo Hall (69), Philadelphia’s Asante Samuel (66), Seattle’s Marcus Trufant (61) and Green Bay’s Charles Woodson (57) had all been thrown at more than Reeves.

Some who’d allowed more yards than Reeves were San Francisco’s Walt Harris (626), Ross (592), San Diego’s Antonio Cromartie (586), Hall (558), Pittsburgh’s Ike Taylor (504), Rogers (499), Trufant (495), Tampa Bay’s Ronde Barber (491), Miami’s Will Allen (477) and Dallas’ Anthony Henry (473).

Some who gave up more completions than Reeves were Tillman (55), Cromartie (49), the Jets’ Dwight Lowery (49), Ross (47), Harris (44), Taylor (43), San Diego’s Quentin Jammer (41), Rogers (41), Hall (41), Clements (38), Trufant (38), Samuel (34) and Barber (34).

And, finally, some who surrendered more touchdowns than Reeves were Lowery with six; Ellis Hobbs, Antrell Rolle and Trufant with five; Barber, Cromartie, Jammer and Ross with four; and Gamble, Samuel and Allen with three.

In other words, there are a lot of big-time corners giving up more catches, yards and touchdowns than Reeves.

Anyway, I ran some of these numbers by Smith, who pointed out how hard Reeves has worked, how much he’s improved and how much better they expect him to be next season.

Wins trump stats any day

At this time of year, though, Smith isn’t interested in individual numbers. The only numbers he’s concerned with are 4 and 7.

“Obviously, the season hasn’t gone the way we hoped it would,” Smith said, “but we’re still confident in what we’re doing. I think it’s premature to reflect on the season because we’ve got five games left, and that’s where our focus is.”

Smith oversees the draft and free agency. During the season, he scouts some college games but spends much of his time watching tape of college and pro players. He meets with his pro scouts and has conference calls with his college scouts.

When the season ends, Smith will focus on the draft as well as free agency. He’ll have more cap dollars available than anytime in recent years. He plans to use a big portion of that cap space to re-sign some of his best players, beginning with cornerback Dunta Robinson.

“Right now, though, I’m going to continue to do everything I can to support our players and coaches,” Smith said. “The most important thing is trying to find some more wins over these last five games.”

My thoughts: Pure bullshit. McClain doesn't bother to discuss the systems in which the other players are in, and I will mention Carlos Rogers specifically because he plays for a team I'm very familiar with. Rogers is the Redskins #1 corner, which means he gets the likes of Terrell Owens, Plaxico Burress, Anquan Boldin, Torry Holt, Hines Ward and whoever the Eagles will peddle out there on a given Sunday. In other words, he gets the best the other team has. The Redskins also have outstanding defensive backs in Shawn Springs and Fred Smoot, and have recently added DeAngelo Hall. In other words, he's got a tough assignment, every week.

Jacques Reeves is the #2 corner on a team with a horribly bad secondary. In other words, Rick Smith threw $5 million a year at Reeves to do nothing to upgrade his defensive backfield. He should have known Reeves blew when the Cowboys, who were and remain desperate for DBs, let him go without a second glance.

That's sort of what wideouts have done this year to Reeves. Guys that are NOT stars on their respective teams have made Reeves their personal 60-minute bitch. McClain doesn't bother to mention the plays where Reeves has been beaten on deep balls where he hasn't bothered to turn around, long penalties that have resulted from him interfering with a receiver when he's been beaten badly, or the touchdowns allowed when he has FLAT BLOWN HIS ASSIGNMENT.

This takes in-depth research, the ability to analyze a game and the nerve to be honest. John McClain can do precisely zero of these things, which is why he's just known as the fat bastard wheezing on Sip 610 twice a week about Anna-Megan Raley.

Another reason to hate the University of Texas

It's no secret I despise the state school in Austin. I think that it's home to a bunch of self-important leftist gasbags who don't know their ass from their elbow. But they've hit an all-time low this Thanksgiving, if the information I'm hearing is right.

Tomorrow, A&M will play and lose to t.u. But, if you look at their jerseys, they will be wearing patches honoring military units deployed overseas with Texas ties. The commander of Fort Hood, which is just 80 miles from Austin, asked both teams to do this in recognition of those men and women putting their lives on the line so we can do something as simple as play a football game.

A&M immediately accepted. t.u. declined, refusing to make a "political statement."

Let me make a statement to the university administration, then: go to hell.

Best Buy can kiss my ass

Dear Home Depot:

I'm writing to inform you that you're off the shit list, at least temporarily. I'm sure that will be music to the ears of the Home Depot employees who have been monitoring this site (yes, I know you have been, so don't act all shocked that you've been caught). Maybe it has something to do with the fact you got new employees at the Pearland/Silverlake location who have a clue and want to help; maybe it has something to do with actually having the supplies in stock that people need.

Or, more likely, it has more to do with the fact that Best Buy has, with hard work and dedication, stolen the mantle of "Shittiest Store in Town."

It saddens me to write this, but it's true. I'm actually typing this on a computer bought at a Best Buy (which I have brought back from the dead) and have another computer purchased at Best Buy (which is currently dead). I've overlooked the fact that their stuff is routinely overpriced, possibly because I'm in that precious 25-44 demographic that TV networks and certain businesses pop woodies over and Best Buy has cool electronics shit that I like.

Best Buy still does have stuff I like, but its lousy service and Geek Squad have placed it on the shit list.

The other day, I realized that it was time to pay our Best Buy credit card. We usually don't use it, but we needed some stuff after Ike when money was tight and put about $200 on it. I was going to pay it off, but realized that if I tried to send the money electronically through our bank, it would be late. So I went to the store.

Ok, every major store I know of allows you to pay your bill right then and there. A long time ago, I worked at a department store and that was one of the first things you learned to do.

Not at Best Buy. YOU CAN'T PAY YOUR BILL AT A STORE!

What the hell?

No, I was told, that was an impossibility (a very bad thing for a store that makes its living off of being "hi-tech" to admit). I had to call their bank. The girl gave me a number and shooed me away.

I went home nonplussed, but figured I'd get it out of the way. I called the number, only to find it was for EMPLOYEES TO OPEN CREDIT ACCOUNTS ONLY! So then I called Best Buy's direct number. The lady there acted like I was a moron and told me I'd have to call the bank again. I said that I had, but the number from a clueless--ERR, helpful -- BB team member had only allowed me to open a charge account for Amos D. Smuckerpants. She gave me another number.

So I called it. And got a person. Who told me, sure, I could make a payment...

FOR A $15 CONVENIENCE CHARGE!

WHAT THE F**K?

At this point, I was about as happy as a Klansman at Obama's inauguration. Instead of paying off the bill, I just paid the minimum and had them put the $15 on next month's bill -- at which time, I will pay the whole damned thing off and close the account.

See, the thing that pisses me off most with Best Buy is the fact that they find new and inventive ways to gouge you. The reason that I had to repair this computer is the fact that, if I had taken it to Best Buy, it would have cost $200 the instant I brought it in the door (for convenience, I'm sure). The laptop is kaput and, even though we had a warranty, the Geek Squad told us the last time we went in there that the problem wasn't covered. And, since we had tried to remove Vista (which blows) and replace it with XP, the warranty was void.

Not that the problem had anything to do with the OS, mind you. Then the little acne-scarred shithead tried to grab my laptop out of my hands so he could "work" on it (starting at $200). I grabbed it back and walked out of the store.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me a second time on another method and I think you're a bunch of lousy cheapskates more than happy to rip people off.

I took the laptop to a mom-and-pop down the road. He figured out the problem and should have it fixed by the end of the week, data intact.

For $149.

Now, that's convenience, wouldn't you say, Home Depot? I thought so too. Oh, and when you're in line at the overrated monolith cafeteria, will you give Best Buy a wedgie?

Love and Kisses,
Me

The Weather Channel nukes "Forecast Earth" during "Green Week"

For the past few years, the Weather Channel--which built its reputation on the bra sizes of its on-air talent and Jim Cantore's riding out every hurricane to hit America--has tried to take itself seriously. In the process, it has become the leading advocate of the concept of man-made global warming, which has made it a punchline instead of a favorite of serious intellectuals. They were driven to the ranks of scorn when they allowed their idiotic propagandist...ERR, "climate expert,"

"Dr." Heidi Cullen state publicly that any meteorologist who has the nerve to say they don't believe in man-made global warming should lose their American Meteorologist Association seal of approval. That's right, you soulless bastard--the Weather Channel has decreed that global warming exists and YOU caused it.

Continuing to push their agenda, the network started a program called "Forecast Earth," which detailed the effects of the global warming that YOU, you soulless bastard, caused.

(Hi, I'm a fear-mongering, closed-minded leftist. Want a granola bar?)

Then two things happened: the Earth cooled and NBC-Universal bought TWC. Results: TWC becomes punchline and loses ratings. This causes NBC-Universal to make changes.

On Saturday, "Forecast Earth" was cancelled and nearly its entire staff fired.

During "GREEN WEEK."

Classic. I guess that NBC-Universal doesn't have to say that they've figured out that man-made global warming is bunk and that nobody buys into that BS anymore anyway; they can say they're reducing CFCs and cutting down on electricity by not using that set anymore.

Sadly, "Dr." Cullen and her enviro-fascist ideas remain at TWC. Perhaps NBC-Universal hasn't made the complete connection between advocacy and loss of ratings.

Note to NBC-Universal: Here's how you get TWC's ratings back. Let this guy here do whatever he wants:

(Hi, I'm Jim Cantore. I'm a certified badass.)

Give these ladies more airtime:

Hire ladies like these, no matter the cost:

(Houston's Casey Curry)

(L.A.'s Jackie Johnson)

(Amy Murphy, also of L.A.)

What, you're worried about credibility? You're the FREAKING WEATHER CHANNEL! You never HAD credibility! Give us the damned forecast, do it with hotties and go on with life! You don't want cred, you want ratings!

(BTW, the author is saddened by Kristina Abernathy's sudden weight gain. Otherwise, he would have given her the entire network to herself.)

Drowning in the estrogen ocean at the Nutcracker Market

Sometimes, you have stupid ideas. Don't feel bad, it happens to everyone. In fact, I had one last Saturday.

I decided that my wife and I should go to the Nutcracker Market over at the Reliant Center. For those unfamiliar with the Nutcracker Market, it is the annual Christmas-related sales festival hosted by the Houston Ballet. And it draws women like moths to a flame, flies to honey, ACORN to fake voting applications, pigs to...well, you get the idea.

I've been to the Ballbuster, I mean Nutcracker, twice before this year. I knew it was popular. But I had forgotten two things: men are outnumbered at this thing by about 20 to 1 and there is nothing, and I mean NOTHING, for guys.

Ever forgotten something absolutely critical? Yeah? Well, happened to me.

To her everlasting credit, my wife really didn't want to go to this thing. As opposed to previous years, we're doing real well on our Christmas shopping and didn't need anything at the Ballbuster. But I figured that, if we didn't go, she would be consumed by regret.

I started to recognize the magnitude of my error when we parked. We got there at about 10, which I figured was early, and we were still forced to park a half-mile away. When we got on the courtesy tram, I noticed that I was the only guy on the whole thing (driver not counted).

Oh boy.

So I went and got in line to get tickets, and noticed that, once again, I was the only guy in line. Had I not inadvertantly cut in line (it was so long that it bent back to the left; we came in directly in front of the ticket window), I would have been at the end of a line of 5000 women. That's enough to time a cycle I don't have!

We walk in and I get reminder that, yes, there is not a damned thing here for me. Unless you count the chocolate places, there was ONE place a guy could go, and he was selling t.u. and Tech crap. So here I am, in a sea of women, looking like I should be wearing a sandwich board was says, "Dumbass who came here voluntarily".

Now, if you're thinking, "Hey, what's wrong with you? There had to be hot chicks at this thing! You had your pick!" let me remind you of a few things. If I did anything close to gawking, much less flirt, my wife would rip out my eyes and dismember the girl in question, even if she did nothing wrong--you can never be too sure. Further, while there were indeed many good looking ladies there, they were there with their moms. This requires no further elaboration.

So I'm walking through this joint, looking at hundreds of "glamour jewelry" stands, pearl places, stands selling clothes for American Girl dolls, you name it.

(An aside here for a moment: What the fuck is an American Girl doll? I would have thought that was Barbie, but I am apparently mistaken. These fucking things go for $100? What the hell? Unless these things do your damned homework, who needs a doll that damned bad? And they have CLOTHES THAT COST $35? WHAT? Of course, now that I've had this venting, I will be
blessed with all girls--all of whom will want American Girl dolls.)

I'm walking by this one place and the woman shoves this stinking slip of paper into my face. "Gajorbaba, exclusively at Saks Fifth Avenue."

I looked at this lady like she had three eyes and a hook nose (well, she did have a hook nose). "Do I look like someone who has a fucking need for Gajorbaba?"

"Oh, I'm sorry, sir, I wasn't expecting a man."

Yes, it was that bad.

There were other guys there; I eventually found them at this place called the "beverage concession stand." That's code for bar. You've never seen a group of guys with more disgusted and disdainful look on their faces, unless you've been to an A&M football game at Kyle Field the last few years. Old guys holding bags, wondering why the FUCK they married that woman back in 1960; younger guys with the purchases of their wife, their wife's mom AND their teenage daughters and, finally, one fella my age.

"What brings you here?" I asked.

"My wife's a great lay," he said.

I looked at him blankly (didn't get much sleep the night before).

"I'd like to get laid again sometime before next Labor Day," he said.

Ah.

The Ballbuster is crack for chicks. For guys, it's hell. I'll remember that next year.

And I will not volunteer to go.

Mike Mussina is not a hall of famer (and thoughts on other candidacies)

Former Orioles and Yankees pitcher Mike Mussina unofficially announced his retirement yesterday, closing the books on a very good career at the age of 40.

Note that I said very good, not great.

For the sake of posterity, let it be known that I am a big Mike Mussina fan. I really liked how he handled himself and I loved his pitching style. I was a big enough fan that I even liked him once he went to the Yankees, no mean feat. But still, how can anyone seriously consider him worthy of being in the same pantheon as Cy Young, Walter Johnson, Sandy Koufax and Nolan Ryan? He's not--but he IS in the same arena as Jack Morris, Jim Kaat and Bert Blyleven, none of whom are in the hall.

Here's the Moose's resume:

• 270 wins, 153 losses over 18 years
• 3.68 career ERA
• 7 gold gloves
• Sixth best winn ing percentage in history, .638 (behind Lefty Grove, Christy Mathewson, Randy Johnson, Roger Clemens and Pete Alexander)
• One of 20 pitchers to end their careers 100 games over .500. 16 of the 20 are already in the hall and only one other (roider Roger) is in jeopardy of NOT going in (Tom Glavine, Greg Maddux and Randy Johnson being the other three).
  
• 19th on the all-time strikeout list

Not bad. Not bad at all. Here's why he should NOT make it into the hall:

• He won 20 games ONCE, in his final season. He would have won 20 in 1995, but that season was shortened by the strike. He won 19 that year and in 1996, but never won that many again.
• He posted season ERAs of 4.46, 4.81, 4.49, 4.56 and 5.15. Add in another season where he had an ERA of 4.05 and he had season surpassing the unofficial "no-go" line of 4.00 for HOF pitchers. Also, several of those seasons were ABOVE the AVERAGE league ERA. Not a good thing for a pitcher trying to get to Cooperstown.
• He never led the league in any major statistical category.
• He never won a Cy Young award. Only came in second once.
  
• He benefitted for playing for some very good teams (1995-97 Orioles, 2001-08 Yankees).

But here's the thing that sinks Mussina, in my opinion: It's the "Domination Test." Lots of people like to say that 300 wins means you're in the HOF. I don't think it takes that; I do think, however, that you had to be one of the guys that was immediately thought of as "the best in the game" whenever the conversation was had. I don't think Mussina, with the exception of maybe 1995, was ever in that discussion. He certainly wasn't in New York. When you thought "uh oh" when a pitcher was mentioned in the 1990s and early 2000s, you thought of Pedro Martinez, Clemens, Maddux, John Smoltz, Johnson and later, Roy Halladay and maybe even Roy Oswalt. If you can go to an era and immediately tick off FIVE GUYS better, without a doubt, than you, you're not a hall of famer. Period. The truly great guys win ERA titles, strikeout crowns, win 20 games multiple times, start All-star games and win Cy Young awards. Moose did none of those things. He doesn't deserve consideration.

(nope)

The most absurd argument supporting Mussina is that he pitched in a DH league during the steroid era, which gives him a pass for his inflated ERA numbers. What a bunch of crap. Ok, maybe that wipes Clemens out, because he was a cheat too, but how does that explain Pedro's incredible run? Maddux, Smoltz and Glavine all pitched in the same era (granted, in the NL), as did the Unit, and their numbers were far suprior to Mussina's. Here are the ERAs and win totals of two guys, from 2001 to 2006 --the alleged height of steroid use--who top Mussina easily:
Wins: (14,19,10,20,20, 15; 5, 19, 22, 8, 12, 16)
ERA: (2.73, 3.01, 2.97, 3.49, 2.94, 2.98; 3.16, 2.93, 3.25, 4.20, 2.41, 3.19)

Mussina's numbers for the same time: 17,18,17,12,13 and 15 wins, ERAs of 3.15, 4.05, 3.40, 4.59 4.41 and 3.51.

The two masked men? The two Roys, Oswalt and Halladay. Granted, this span happens at an earlier point in their respective careers than it did for Moose, but you can't take ANY five or six year period in Mussina's career, point to it and say, "yeah, he's better than those guys." And he played on superior teams. Anyone pimping the Roys yet for the HOF (though I'm suddenly ready to take up Oswalt's case if he keeps it up)? Nope, but they're more dominating that Mussina ever was.

(MY BOY FOR HOF!)

Sorry, Moose. No HOF for you.

Other pitchers getting HOF discussion:
Bert Blyleven (287-250, 3.31 career ERA) -- this is tough, but the only reason Blyleven is in the mix is because he pitched FOREVER (22 years), had a legendary curveball and is a really nice guy. Only won 20 games once, no Cy Young. He also gave up 50 HOMERS IN A SEASON! No. Sorry, but no.

Pedro Martinez: (214-99, 2.91 ERA, Still active after 17 seasons): The most dominating pitcher for seven years (1997-2004), even though he was limited by injuries. Winner of multiple Cy Young awards, strikeout titles, ERA crowns. Career ERA nearly TWO POINTS lower than the average ERA for his time. Owned the AL at the height of the steroid era; WON A CY YOUNG WITH THE EXPOS, for God's sake! He was not simply dominant, he owned the game. He's in. If I had a ballot, he's in first time he's eligible.

(si)

John Smoltz: (210-146, 3.26 ERA, 154 saves; still active after 20 years). Cy Young winner, though he got to 20 wins only once. He has 3000 strikeouts and would have a higher win total if he hadn't closed for three years (his 55 saves in one of those seasons, however, was an NL record). He is also 15-4 with an ERA around 2.50 in the postseason. One of baseball's ultimate money pitchers, a dominant power pitcher and untouchable closer--a very rare hybrid of greatness. He's in.

(Mark supports me for the hall? YES!)

Curt Schilling: If Smoltz has a competitor for the money pitcher designation for the past 30 years, it's from this guy and his 11-2 postseason record and the bloody sock and all that. But his regular season numbers compare to Smoltz WITHOUT the bullpen years taken into account (216-146. 3.46 ERA, 3000 + strikeouts). But here's the thing with Schilling: a large majority of his wins come in nine of his 20 seasons (23, 22, 21, 17, 16 and three 15s). He also has a lot of 8 win seasons, 6 wins seasons, even a 2-8 mark. He does have a Cy Young, but he doesn't have consistency, enough wins or something that makes him unique. He WAS very good in the postseason; so was Jack Morris. So was Dave McNally. Neither are in, nor should they be.

(Schilling will now blog about how I'm an asshole)

Andy Pettitte and Jamie Moyer: For the love of God, get serious. No.

Something only a devoted husband can say to his loving wife

"If you waste my money stash on blow and I can't buy my porn whore, I'll kick your ass."

Advice to any conservative considering journalism

The ombudsman for the Washington Post wrote something that falls firmly in the "duh" category today: there aren't enough conservatives in the media, especially print journalism.

Even though she said the paper's coverage of the election was unbiased (*cough cough* BULLSHIT *cough cough*), Deborah Howell writes that "the conservatives I know here feel so outnumbered that they don’t even want to be quoted by name in a memo.”

Holeee smokes, we got ourselves a scoop here!

She goes on to say that those poor little conservatives should be the target of specific recruitment efforts to bring "balance" to the newsroom.

My response to this is pretty simple: shove your pandering crap, Deborah. Conservatives have better things to do than write obituaries and get spat on by your liberal brethren.

I was a print journalist and I am a conservative, and I have come to the conclusion that the two are, in this day and age, mutually exclusive. There are reasons for this, which I would pass along to anyone considering a future in the press:

• Differing mindsets. Liberals like to think, and Howell admits this in her column, that they can change the world. The problem with that is massive, but we'll keep it at the very basic level--they can't fix what they don't understand. Liberals, by their very nature, are naive and are driven by emotion. They don't want to fix ONE thing, they want to fix EVERYTHING RIGHT NOW. A more conservative approach, and a thought-out approach to issues, will make you as evil as Hitler (or Cheney).
  
• Arrogance. Don't kid yourself; members of the media really do think they're smarter than you and know what's right for not only you, but everyone. They are so certain of this that they have no compunction about attempting to manipulate events and opinions through their work. You, the conservative, will be so outnumbered and so disdained for your views that it will be an unbearable situation for you personally.
• It's an echo chamber. One of the reasons that journalists are so self-righteous, arrogant and certain they're right is because there's nobody there to tell them they're wrong. This, of course, is what Howell wants to see changed. But there's a problem; the situation is so far gone and print media has already nuked the fridge to the point it wouldn't matter if there was a token Republican in the newsroom. They'd just be treated like a leper and business as usual would continue as the conservative was shunned and given unimportant assignments. That way, they "couldn't cause any trouble."
  
• The pay sucks, the hours suck worse, the facilities are horrible and it's a dying industry. Pretty straightforward stuff here.
• Journalists tend to be nasty, narcissistic jerks. I used to be one.
  

So, if you've got the urge to go into the news biz, I would do a few things: educate yourself on a major issue. Learn ALL there is to know about it. Then find out what the media says. Odds are you'll find the person writing isn't very knowledgeable and their work skews left. Then, if you can, tour a newsroom. Act VERY excited about the prospect of joining up, act like you're politically involved (DON'T let them know you're conservative) and see what they have to say. You'll probably find they're snarky and cynical, not to mention really liberal.

Then go out and get drunk with your friends. You will have experienced the best of journalism without having to deal with all the crap that goes with it.

Donovan McNabb's intellectual prowess is now listed as non-existent

Donovan McNabb has been a quarterback in the National Football League for, I believe, eight years now. If anyone should know the rules of the game, it should be the quarterback, the leader of the offense.

At least, if you've been in the NFL for more than 100 games, you would think you would know that REGULAR SEASON GAMES CAN END IN A FREAKING TIE.

Well, McNabb didn't. And it may have cost his team a shot at the playoffs.

Yesterday, the Eagles were tied with the horrifically bad Cincinnati Bengals at 13 in overtime. McNabb apparently did not play with much of a sense of urgency, which, along with his three interceptions, did not help the Philly cause. Then, after the game, he blurted out why he was so chill in the OT.

HE DIDN'T KNOW THE GAME WOULD BE A TIE UNTIL THE VERY LAST PLAY!

"They don't have ties in college, and in high school," he said.

Special. So what? You're in the NF-freaking-L! HOW CAN YOU NOT KNOW THAT THERE'S THE CHANCE OF A TIE? After all, when you go out for the coin toss to start OT, the referee says, "We will play one 15 minute period. Both teams will have two timeouts. First team to score wins, if there is no scoring, the game ENDS IN A TIE."

Last time I checked, McNabb has served as an offensive captain before.

Some people want to blame the Eagle coaching staff for not emparting this little nugget of wisdom to McNabb at some point before there were seven seconds left in the game. I disagree; you've got more important things to worry about than whether or not your QB knows one of the basic rules of the game.

After that idiotic admission, Philly fan has to be wondering just how stupid their quarterback is and how his stupidity is going to cost them.

Prepare to get pissed off, Obama fans

Hey leftists,

You were all up in arms when President Bush supported the warrantless wiretapping, since it was going to put at risk the freedom of terrorist scum...ERR, law-abiding citizens hated by Bushitler. And your hero, Barack Obama, was going to get rid of that first thing, right?

On Friday, I said you were going to be pissed when you find out you got sold a bill of goods. You may commence being pissed off. The wiretapping isn't going anywhere under the Obama administration -- his people say he "needs" that to keep the nation safe.

Uh, DIDN'T BUSH?

I eagerly await your meltdown.

NASA's full of hot air

It's been a long time since NASA's done anything that would constitute "good." Their ineptitude in developing a replacement for the shuttle has been embarrassing and their efforts to get back to the moon, something we did successfully 40 years ago, has been a joke. Their repeated cost overruns and claims that they just can't get things done with the budget they have has been mocked by the efforts of private industry working with less money.

Then there's the ultimate disgrace: their advocating of the travesty that is the theory of man-made global warming.

In the late 80s, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, located in Greenbelt, Maryland (just outside of D.C.), became one of the biggest screamers about global warming. The GISS's leader, Dr. James Hansen, is a crony of one Albert Gore, Jr., who has made a fortune off the global warming racket.

In October, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said that temperatures around the world were dropping and that the month was the 70th warmest in the past 110-plus years. GISS came out and screamed that was a LIE, that October had been the warmest ten month of the year EVER.

Their support for this allegation was that temperatures from Siberia were 10 degrees above average. Instead of questioning this plainly extraordinary (and questionable) data, they ignored more concrete information from this nation, Western Europe and Asia. It turns out that the information from Siberia, not everything else, was wrong. In fact, they had used the same data from a couple of months before, and the GISS hadn't caught it.

This means either GISS is incredibly sloppy or was more than happy to used this skewed information to try to prove their theory, which is rapidly losing credibility. Considering the source, either is a rational explanation. Their refusal to investigate it, however, is weak.

The data from the GISS is one of four used by the U.N. Commission on Climate Change. Guess which one is consistently the highest? Amazing!

Dr. Hansen has been proven to be a partisan hack, not to mention completely incompetent. He should be gone gone gone, but we all know he'll stay. And that will just continue to erode NASA's overall credibility.

I know my Star Wars, thank you very damn much

The other day, I wrote a blog about our trip to the Renaissance Festival up in Plantersville. In it, I referred to the guy who dressed up as a Imperial Stormtrooper as TX-1138.

I was promptly mocked, in the comments section, by one of my favorite people in the world. After reading her comments (you know who you are), I was tempted to pull off a limb and smack her on the ass with it. I was accused of screwing up two things, the TX (which was supposed to be TK) and the 1138 (which was supposed to be 421, as Chewbacca's prisoner transfer was supposedly from cell block 1138).

My response is thus: I KNOW THE DAMNED DIFFERENCE. I WAS MAKING SOMETHING UP.

To explain: "TX" is for Texas, as in the Texas Renaissance Festival. "1138" was making fun of George Lucas, who throws 1138 into EVERYTHING in honor of his first shitty film, THX-1138.

I know that TK-421 was not at his post after Han Solo shot his ass and I know that the prisoner transfer was from cell block 1138. I was being original, which I forgot was verboten in the Star Wars universe (too bad Lucas didn't stick to that rule, as we wouldn't have had Jar Jar Fucking Binks).

To say you were mistaken in thinking I knew the ways of the Force is a good way to get you smashed in the Spice Mines of Kessel, certain someone (and whoever else was thinking the same way).

A CHANGE you can believe in

Before the election and for the past week since, supporters of Barack Obama and the press have fawned all over the believe that Obama was going to be the biggest bringer of CHANGE to this nation since Abraham Lincoln.

Man, are those people going to be pissed off when (if?) they realize they've been had and Obama's just another guy trying (successfully) to get elected. If they need evidence that the CHANGE in their beloved Barack is underway, they'd better go check his Web site.

From Congressional Quarterly:

"Here’s some change that supporters of President-elect Obama may not want to see: all of the policy commitments on specific issues have been removed from his transition Web site.
On Nov. 7, global health advocates noticed that some of the details of Obama’s “fight global poverty” statement had been removed. Specifically, the site no longer promised to fully fund debt cancellation for the world’s poorest countries or provide the full U.S. contribution to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. Activists already were concerned, since boosting foreign aid was the one thing Obama mentioned during the campaign when asked what proposals he’d have to scale back due to the faltering economy...
By this morning, all of the issue-specific pages on the transition site had been removed from the agenda section. In its place, a statement that mentioned details but provided none at all: “The Obama Administration has a comprehensive and detailed agenda to carry out its policies.”"

Step 1: lie
Step 2: Sucker people into voting for the big lie
Step 3: Ignore lies and go about business as usual

CHANGE you can believe in!

Obama's so smooth Bill Clinton's getting a woodrow.

There's dumb, there's real dumb, and there's LaVar Arrington

A long, long time ago, my daddy told me to avoid anything having to do with Penn State because he'd never met anyone from there that was worth a shiznit. Ok, he didn't say "shiznit," but you get the idea.

This may be an overstatement, but former Nittany Lion and Washington Redskins linebacker LaVar Arrington is doing one hell of a job of making my dad look like a genius.

For those of you who don't know, Arrington was the second overall pick in the 2000 NFL draft. He was supposedly a freak of nature, a player who could dominate like Lawrence Taylor did. In fact, he wore the number 56 for that very purpose.

With the exception of ending Troy Aikman's career with a concussion-causing hit to the head, Arrington didn't do a whole lot in the NFL of notice. He did make three pro bowls and a hell of a lot of money, but he also earned a reputation for being a freelancer (not doing what the defense scheme called for) and being either too lazy or stupid to know exactly what defense the Redskins were running, anyway (to say nothing of what OFFENSE the opponent was running from week to week).

When the great Coach Joe Gibbs returned to the NFL in 2004, he brought defensive coordinator Gregg Williams with him. Both men agreed that Arrington was overpaid, lazy and had no interest in learning the team's new scheme. On all counts, they were right -- he whined to the point that he lost his job for most of the 2005 season, when the Redskins made the playoffs.

Two years, two releases and a motorcycle accident later, Arrington was out of football. But, two years further down the road, the all-intelligent Arrington thinks he is in a position to piss on one of the best coaches in NFL history.

"I called Joe Gibbs a coward for leaving," Arrington said in a story in the Washington Times this past weekend. "You came in, you made some money for your NASCAR team. No one else is going to say that. I'm sure more people thought I was a [jerk] for saying that. Joe wouldn't call me because he knows. There are a lot of people who know the truth about what went down with me and the Redskins."

(Background: Joe Gibbs retired after this past season, four years and two playoff appearances into his second stint as head coach. He retired as the oldest coach in the league and a diabetic with a seriously ill grandson. He also retired after guiding the Redskins to a 5-0 record down the stretch and a playoff berth after his best defensive player, Sean Taylor, was murdered and starting quarterback Jason Campbell was lost for the year.)

Well, LaVar, you got one thing right: you are a jerk. You're also a first-class moron. I'm not a real big NASCAR guy, but I do know enough to know that Joe Gibbs racing is in perfectly good financial shape and, if I'm correct, won two Winston/Nextel/Spint/Whateverthehellitis Cup titles while Coach Joe was resurrecting the Redskins. You know, the Washington Redskins--the team that sucked while you were there, LaVar, but suddenly became respectable again after Coach Joe arrived and stopped holding your hand?

Anyway, time moves on. Arrington is now a TV commentator, doing the Redskins postgame show on Comcast Sports Net in D.C., and a businessman (he just opened or is opening a new restaurant in the Washington area). Well all know that rule number one for a broadcaster is "Know thine audience" and rule number one for a businessman is "Know thy customer." It appears Arrington isn't real good at either of these ventures, because he just pissed off both.

There is one person that is universally revered by everyone in the Washington area, black or white, and it ain't Barack Obama. It's Coach Joe. Even though Coach Joe is a Southern Baptist, I'm quite sure some Catholic 'Skins fans have checked into the requirements for sainthood for him. By taking shots at Joe Gibbs, Arrington probably just ensured that his TV career will be short and his restaurant won't be around too long.

I'm not saying that such a stupid move was a result of Penn State "education," but someone sure fed LaVar Arrington a serious case of the stupids.

How the geekdom that twas the Renaissance Fair wouth conquered

Gather round, ye gentle readers, and behold: The largest Renaissance Fair in all the land. 'Tis is an place known as Plantersville, a tiny shire in the county known as Grimes, a place where the Aggie once didst travail (for a not a lot of scratch, mind thee).

Truly, I say, the Aggie is a fan of the Renaissance Fair. He is a fan for he may go and drinketh fine spirits, known as lite beer, and ogle the buxom females, known in the current vernacular as "babes," as they wear little clothing.

Why art the citizens of the fair wearing little clothing, thou doth ask? 'Tis simple: many people come to said fair dressed in garb of the period. The Aggie considereth such ilk "geeks."

To the eye of the Texas Aggie, there are but few on this blessed planet that are geekier than the Ren Fair geek. In the current vernacular, some of these folks are seriously screwed up. Taketh, for example, the gentle man who, by the week, is a tax preparer. On the weekend, for the festival, nay! He doth wear a skirt (ok, kilt) and toteth a broadsword on his back.

In the current vernacular, no shit. There were lots of dudes like that.

Thou didst also have the wood nympth wanna-bes, who were wearing nothing but leaves. Again, no shit. Twas an interesting assembly of individuals, some wearing pirate garb, some wearing togas, some wearing...well, not a whole frickin' lot.

Many people known to the Aggie have dressed up for the fair or have discussed it. The fair maiden known as Tree has dressethed up, not as a wood-related product but in period garb. The missus and Madge promiseth to dress up next year, at which time the Aggie will go to the shire known as College Station and watcheth his beloved Aggies get their teeth kickedeth in upon the field of battle known as Kyle Field.

Twould be noted that the Aggie wouldst not dress up in said garb if you attempted to remove his testicles. Unless he doth dress in colonial American garb, as one George Washington. The Aggie would doeth this for two reasons: George Washington was, truly, "the man," and it would pisseth off die-hard Ren Fair geek (who may stll show up dressed as a pirate. In the current, figure that shit out).

Yea, we didst go to the fair this weekend. And yea, the geeketh quotient, I assure thee, was quite high. Many men, married but still virgins, were dressed as if they were in the 15th century. Many women, who are demure by their nature, were dressed, as we say in the period, as "sluts."

It didst striketh me that many of these people beliveth the fair to be, in the current, "the shit." In fact, they do spend many months preparing with their fellow geeks so they can go and be geeks together in the kingdom of geekdom.

'Tis not a bad thing; nay, it gives the "regular dude" something to laugh at.

But, a thought didst strike me at this time--is there anyone geekier then Ren Fair geek? Then, lo, the answer didst come to me--yea! For there he was--the geekier geek than the Ren Fair geek.

The man in full Imperial Stormtrooper garb, including the weapon known as the blaster, traipsing through the shire. And lo, the Ren Fair geek didst say, "What the fuck is up with that guy?"

I knoweth not, fair reader, but it did not stop me from hailing TX-1138 as being the geekiest geek of all the geeks. He did a service for all.

Want to know why McCain lost? Because he hired morons.

We are now four days out from the election of CHANGE (brought to you by the media) and John McCain remains a smoking political ruin, as well he should. But that hasn't stopped some of his former minders from coming out and insulting Sarah Palin, claiming she's the reason he lost the election.

You've probably heard it by now--the $150,000 clothing budget, that Palin didn't know Africa was a continent, that she didn't know who was in NAFTA, that she was "rogue," yadda yadda yadda.

Palin has labeled the people who have spread this stuff "jerks," which is an understatement. They're also complete morons. Why? Because 1) they can't admit they (and their candidate) are the reason they lost and 2) they have committed career suicide.

Let's get this out there: Sarah Plain is NOT why John McCain lost on Tuesday. In fact, now that we see the numbers and know that they were almost identical, in terms of turnout, we know that McCain didn't lose in a groundswell of new voters, either. In other words, had he kept the Bush '04 voters, he wins. He didn't, because a large portion of those voters did not like John McCain.

John McCain lost because he and his people ran a campaign that would look longingly at those of Bush 41 in 1992 and Bob Dole in 1996. It was incompetent, naive, inconsistent and brought nothing new or insipring to the table. The only thing exciting and fresh McCain did offer was Sarah Palin. And, if you'll remember, her arrival on the scene gave McCain a lead for a couple of weeks.

Then the market crashed, McCain dithered, was going to skip the debate and then didn't, screwed up his involvement in the bailout and blew the election -- all by himself. Sarah Palin had nothing to do with it.

But that's not stopping his idiot minders from blasting her. Which, in a way, I'm quite happy about.

John McCain, politically, is dead. He should have been kaput after the 2000 election, when he tried to win the Republican nomination by fellating the media, and CERTAINLY should have been toast after flirting with John Kerry about taking his VP slot in 2004. He brings nothing to the table that's valid or worthwhile, and his panderings about a bi-partisan approach will help the Democrats get near their blessed supermajority in the Senate.

Thanks for nothing, John-boy.

Palin, on the other hand, has a future. She energized the Republican base and brought out more regular GOP voters to the polls than McCain would have gotten otherwise. In other words, the rout would have been worse had it not been for Palin. Republicans like her; liberals loathe her. The last three successful GOP presidential candidates (Reagan and two Bushes, one more so than the other) share those characteristics.

It is highly unlikely that the largest slanders Palin's suffering are true. They're likely the bitter spewings of a bunch of morons who were simply outclassed when it came time to show what they were made of. They're showing their stupidity agian by attacking Palin, because she has a future -- McCain does not. They've basically spit on someone whose star is on the rise while basking in the glow of a supernova they helped create.

Dumb.

Whoever said all this stuff about Palin has damned all the McCain campaign people. Try going into a Republican campaign with a prominent role in this debacle, followed with the amatuerish insults on a running mate, on your resume.

Good luck finding a job, gang. You'll never have the chance to screw up another campaign again--which, incidentally, is what I'm quite happy about.

One uh, press conference, um, one, uh, SNAFU for Obama

Our president-elect won, in part, because he was the harbinger of change. Well, if one change you're looking for is a smooth, coherent press conference, it looks like you'd better look somewhere else. From the looks of his first post-election press conference, Obama isn't exactly, um, er, you know, smooth, uh, without his teleprompter.

Not that the media will mock him on it, like they have President Bush. They also didn't call him out when he took a cheap shot at Nancy Reagan, saying he wasn't going to have "seances in the White House."

I'm not pointing this out to defend Nancy Reagan or to get all huffy because my candidate lost and the Obamination won. I'm pointing it out because if you say it, you'd better make damn sure your facts are right. Nancy Reagan did NOT hold seances in the White House; she had astrology readings. Mary Todd Lincoln was the one who held the seances.

Barack, I know you're still getting the, uh, hang of the, um, press conferences, but, ah, can you do us, like, a favor? If you're gonna be off on something, be forewarned that being off by 123 years is a bit of bad form. It will also prevent you from having to call a 92-year-old lady with a broken pelvis and tell her you're sorry for being a dumbass.

Students attack Jonesboro, Ark., police election night. AP: Whitey racistly beats poor innocent Obama fans

The following Associated Press story made the Drudge Report Wednesday.

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) - Police arrested seven people after a melee at an impromptu Barack Obama victory celebration near the campus of Arkansas State University. Three police officers suffered minor injuries.

A female officer's nose was broken when a man jumped on top of her and punched her without provocation, Jonesboro police Capt. Lynn Waterworth said. Waterworth declined to name those arrested until after a court hearing Wednesday afternoon.

About 200 people gathered at an apartment complex about a block away from campus in northeast Arkansas after Obama was declared the winner of the presidential election Tuesday night, Waterworth said. An off-duty officer moonlighting as a security guard for the apartment complex asked those who had gathered to go home, then called for help, she said.

Two on-duty officers arrived at the apartment complex, with the female officer calling to the crowd over her cruiser's public-address system, Waterworth said. The crowd responded by throwing rocks and beer bottles at police, with one man attacking the female officer, Waterworth said.

A distress call summoned more than 40 police officers from surrounding departments and the Arkansas State Police, Waterworth said. One officer suffered a cut to the forehead and another fell to the ground during the scuffle, she said.

"What should have been a happy, celebratory time turned into a bad experience for a lot of folks out there at the hands of a few," Waterworth said.

Julian Smith, 17, a freshman majoring in computer science, said the fight started as officers attempted to break up the celebration, which was already winding down.

A good friend of this page was on the scene and told me what REALLY happened. I promised him that I would not divulge his name, but it would suffice to say that his credibility is unimpeachable.

The comment about the "celebration winding down" is garbage. The students were out of control and were showing no indication of dispersing. In fact, MORE people were showing up when police arrived.

The female officer in question didn't just have beer bottles thrown at her, she was KNOCKED TO THE GROUND by an assailant and then stomped on the head. Seventeen people, not seven, were arrested; police dogs were used to separate the peace-loving Obama supporters from the evil, imperious cops, who were being pelted by rocks and other debris.

Was the AP there? No. They called the local newspaper after hearing about a "riot" that had been "forcibly suppressed." The reporters and photographer at the local newspaper told them that it wasn't a riot, it was a bunch of dumbass students fighting with police officers, but the AP had heard from the local TV station that it was a "riot" and that's what they were going with.

They were also going to go with the idea that the Obama supporters, backers of change, had been unfairly attacked by the majority conservative white police in a majority conservative white (read: RACIST) town.

"They had their story written before they even called," my friend said.

Yep, sounds like the AP at their finest. Never there, not fully informed, but more than ready to make accusations behind subtle innuendo.

UPDATE: The AP says there were only seven arrests, yet eight people have been charged with felonies in connection with the incident. The guy who stomped on the female cop's face? A RECEIVER ON ARKANSAS STATE'S FOOTBALL TEAM. If Mr. Kevin Jones is on the field tomorrow after (ahem) allegedly being involved with this mess, Arkie State should be ashamed.

Chris Matthews, keeping it fair and balanced

If you had any question about the fairness of the media in the past election, let it be put to rest right here:

(From MSNBC's "Morning Joe" program, 11/6/08)

Scarborough’s exchange with Matthews Thursday morning:

Matthews: “I want to do everything I can to make this thing work, this new presidency work.”

Scarborough: “Is that your job? You just talked about your being a journalist.”

Matthews: “Yeah, that’s my job. My job is to help this country.”

Scarborough: “So your job as a journalist is to make this presidency work?”

Matthews: “To make this work successfully, because this country needs a successful presidency, more than anything right now.”

This is the same Chris Matthews that has screamed at the Bush Administration for eight years and skewered the McCain campaign with slanderous accusations for that past five months. And, if you're interested, a journalist is supposed to "help their country" by requiring accountability through fair and accurate assessments of the individuals in power. Chris Matthews, however, has decided that helping America would be best done by blowing smoke up Barack Obama's ass.

Fair! Balanced!

(Note: Though I loathe my former profession and most of the people in it, Chris Matthews is NOT a journalist. He's a talking head/moron. He used to work for the late Tip O'Neill when O'Neill, a Massachussetts liberal, was speaker of the house.)

This will be a day long remembered...as the death knell for the media

Barack Obama is going to be elected president today. I don't see any way of getting around that. And, for the third time in my life, the media will have elected a liberal democrat president. You'll see it tonight, in the knowing grins and smirks on the faces of the talking heads on TV (except Fox News) and in the glowing ledes in the news stories. And the fabulous "MANDATE FOR CHANGE" headlines that will come in the papers and Time and Newsweek.

But get a good look. That ends tonight. The media, as we know it, is about to die. And a well-deserved death it is.

There is no question that the press, at all levels, is in the tank for Obama. Just as they were for Clinton and for Carter, and in losing causes for Kerry, Gore and Mondale. But there's a difference today -- people not only recognize it, there are alternatives gaining strength on a daily basis: the Internet and talk radio.

For decades, the CBSs, NBCs, ABCs, CNNs and now MSNBCs of the world have been able to control the discussion (and information) delivered to the public on television. Fox News has punctured that bubble and, as you can see from the fury with which that network is attacked, it has done a very good job of showing the blatant bias exhibited by the others. Is Fox News right-leaning? Maybe a little bit, but here's why they are so drastically different -- they're not slanted so far to the left that they're off the table in the pocket of the Democratic Party.

There is no question that the print media is 100 percent liberal. I know from experience. The media, and the print media in particular, is an echo chamber of foolish liberalism. The farther up the ladder you go, the worse it gets. By the time you reach the "pantheon" of print, the New York Times, Washington Posts and the like, you're dealing with the worst kind of libeals -- ones who have no idea how the real world functions, but know exactly how it should. They all think the same way, possessing neo-socialist ideals and the arrogance to think they not only know better than the masses but are intent on saving them from themselves (i.e. conservatism).

The current print media is as disgraceful and partisan as it has been at any point in American history, going back to Benjamin Franklin Bache's Aurora, which unfairly skewered President Washington. Back in the 1790s, however, this was expected; there was no hiding the partisanism of the press.

The current print media will never admit that they're biased; instead, they'll mock you as a fool for insinuating that they, the high-minded elites, are attempting to manipulate the public (which, of course, is exactly what they're doing). And there is no print counterpoint today. But they're doesn't need to be--there's the Internet and talk radio.

The Internet is remarkable for the variety of discourse that can be found on it. While the media likes to scorn those who do online reporting as amateurs, I can say without reservation that many people, like those who run Redstate.com, Captain's Quarters or Powerline (powerlineblog.com) do a far better job checking their sources and doing legitimate research than the idiots in newspaperland. It has taken some time for people to figure out that the established sentinels of truth in our society, the TV and newspaper reporters, are frauds. But the change in public opinion towards these entities show that the change is happening.

Everyone knows the effect of talk radio. What Rush has started has been continued by Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Hugh Hewitt and thousands of local broadcasters nationwide. They are partisan and make no bones about it--but they are also reporting information that our "friends" who know better than us in TV and print are trying to squelch. The result is a better informed public.

You can see this better-informed public turning away from the traditional liars--I mean, sources of information. The New York Times has hemmorhaged readers to the point that their stock is considered junk. Every major newspaper in America, save the Hotel Floor (I mean USA) Today and the Wall Street Journal lost readers at a significant rate last year, as they did the year before that. And the year before that. Print media is dying, and its death cannot come too soon. They'll have to go to the Internet to survive, and competition will be fierce. It will require honesty, fairness and complete reporting to survive, or they'll just have to try to steal readers from the Daily Kos or Huffington Post. One way makes money; the other will just start a leftist pissing contest.

TV ratings are also down. Nobody takes the talking heads seriously, as the masses have figured out that they've been lied to. The only two stations seeing an increase in viewers are Fox and MSNBC, who has gone rabid leftist. And, considering that the only place you can go from zero is up, it's no shock they've added a few hundred idiots.

The Obama phenomenon is a one-time perfect storm. The media has gone all in to get the man elected, thinking he'll stomp out the Fox Newses, the talk radio hosts and the Internet reporters. But he can't, and the public will be disappointed to find out that he's not much more than hot air. He'll be a one-termer, like Carter, and will be easy pickings for some fortunate Republican who has yet to make themselves known.

The traditional media, of course, will try their damndest to get Obama re-elected in 2012. They will fail. At that point, perhaps, they'll realize that their century of manipulation is up and the game belongs to someone else.