Friday, September 21, 2007

A Seattle Mariner goes bush league, Survivor gets started and Dan Rather is a bitter old dude

- It’s over for you, Floyd Landis, so how about you just admit that you’re a cheater and we’ll all move on? Everyone with more than two working brain cells has already reached that conclusion while Landis has been busy protesting his innocence, so even that admission of guilt won't carry as much weight now as it would have if he’d ‘fessed up to what he did before basically being forced to after exhausting every other option. People are funny that way, they don’t feel as good about your apology if you’ve tried every possible way to get out of being guilty and having to come clean and apologize only as a last resort when you’re screwed anyhow. Landis fought his positive drug test after winning the 2006 Tour, but he’s been shot down at ever stop as he’s tried to prove his innocence. Tests on backup samples have confirmed that he had illegally high levels of testosterone, including synthetic testosterone, in his blood during the race. He’s done interview after interview claiming he is clean, but his words have been the only thing declaring him innocent thus far. An arbiter ruled Thursday that Landis’ positive test result will stand and that he must forfeit his Tour de France win. There is still one place left to appeal – the Court of Arbitration for Sport – but if Floyd is smart, he won't go there. Having said that, you know he’s going to appeal because he doesn’t want to give up his title and to be labeled with a scarlet “S” on his chest, but it’s too late for that. By now, he IS a cheater to most everyone and nothing is going to change that because we know the facts and he’s been found guilty, so to speak, so many times throughout this process. As I have all along, I plead with you once again, Floyd, stop fighting this, go away and pray that everyone forgets about you because as long as you keep waging this battle, you’re in the spotlight and you in that spotlight as a cheater.

- I’m not a big fan of Survivor. It’s not that I don’t enjoy the show; it’s just that for most of its time on TV, Survivor has been slotted in the same time slot as some of my favorite shows, such as its recent Thursday night spot where it goes up against Smallville, which is one of my top-five faves. However, this season Survivor kicked off a week ahead of Smallville, and with slim pickings on the other networks, I figured I would watch the season premiere of the world’s most famous reality show. Boy, am I glad I did. The choice to watch was validated within the first five minutes, as each of the contestants was introduced and we got to meet Denise, a school lunch lady from Massachusetts who is rocking a hall-of-fame mullet that is reason enough to watch the show all by itself. This thing is an A+ Mississippi Mudflap/Tennessee Top Hat/Wisconsin Waterfall. This year’s edition of Survivor is set in China, which means lots of rain, some amazing views of a breathtaking landscape and lots of large Buddhas. I also noticed something that seems to be a Survivor theme, although because I don’t watch the show regularly I can't say for sure. It hails back to an episode of Seinfeld where Elaine notices that all of the waitresses at the restaurant that she, Jerry, George and Kramer frequent share similar physical attributes, most notably big racks. For some reason (I just can’t put my finger on it, hmmm…..), Survivor has an inordinate number of women with that same physical characteristic and those women end up spending much of their time on camera in a) bathing suits, b) their bras or c) nothing more than a bandana covering their upper half. Now this couldn’t possibly be because CBS is trying to pander to the lowest common denominator among male viewers, could it? On the topic of liking or disliking certain contestants and rooting for them, I don’t have any that I really am rooting for other than Denise and her mullet, although I’d like to see professional wrestler Ashley Massaro do well because 1) She’s hot and the better she does, the longer she’s on the show, and 2) As a wrasslin’ fan, I’d like to see a wrestler do well. On the dislike side…..only Courtney, a waitress from NYC, stood out, because she’s far too bitter, cynical and crabby to last long, especially when she’s thin enough to make Kate Moss look obese and has the thorniest personality on TV this side of Rosie O’Donnell. Of course, when Smallville returns next week, I’ll be watching it and will lose touch with Survivor, but it looks like it could be a good season for outwitting, outplaying and outlasting.

- You won't believe it, but 50 Cent wasn’t being serious and literal when he promised to retire from recording music as a solo artist if Kanye West’s new album, Graduation, outsold 50’s new album Curtis, during their opening week on shelves after both dropped on Sept. 11. Kanye’s album hammered 50’s, 957,000 to 691,000, in their first week according to Sound Scan. Predictably, the egotistical and self-promoting West celebrated his victory in style at GQ’s 50th anniversary party as a featured performer and then he had some words of self-congratulation afterward. “To be a champion, you’ve got to take out a champion,” West quipped, channeling his inner-Rick Flair. However, it doesn’t appear that 50 Cent is actually going to retire, because the week of the competition, I listened as he did a radio interview on Jim Rome’s radio show and 50 was in full spin mode. First, he reiterated that he didn’t promise to retire completely, just from being a solo rap artist. Then, he explained that he already had a new album in the can and mostly done as a follow-up to Curtis. Finally, he added that after this next new album, he’s done with his current recording contract and will be a free agent, so to speak, so he can just make music “organically.” Oh, and he also admitted, when asked directly about his promise to retire, that it was something he said to stir up interest in his album and create a buzz. In other words, he’s not retiring and everyone who bought into his words about that topic was just naïve and gullible. Imagine that, a celebrity lying or misleading people with their words in order to create more attention for themselves, shocking…..

- Tonight’s top story…..an excessive, petty, ludicrous lawsuit by a famous retired nightly news anchor that makes him look like a bitter, sniveling, egotistical b*tch. Yes, I’m looking right at you, Dan Rather, you and your $70 million lawsuit against CBS because you claim the network made you a scapegoat about a discredited story about W.’s National Guard service. Rather fingers CBS for “intentional mishandling” of the incident, which did major damage to his reputation. I’m not here to dispute those facts, because only the people involved in the case know for sure what happened and why. However, I am here to call out Rather for seeking a whopping $20 million in compensatory damages and $50 million in punitive damages. Hey you greedy old bastard, I’m sure you have enough money for the rest of your life and the lives of your kids and grandkids. So quit being such a money-grubbing whore and asking for amounts that are totally ridiculous for an incident that wouldn’t be worth that much money no matter what the facts were. Unless all of that $70 million is going to help the needy people in Darfur or to hurricane or flooding victims of some massive tragedy in the U.S. or aboard, then you’re every bit the greedy piece of crap you appear to be. Heck, even if you intend to give all $70 million to charity, it’s still impossible to defend attaching that financial figure to this lawsuit. You’re not dead or inflicted with some terminal illness because of it, nor are you physically disabled as a result of what you allege happened. You got your rep dented and you bore at least some culpability in the incident, so own it and at least knock the amount you’re asking for down to a more realistic figure, say $5 million. Otherwise, you just look like a very small and bitter person, one who isn't going to get anywhere near what he’s asking for anyhow.

- Bank robbers traditionally aren’t strong on the ethics front, but even those willing to use force and threats of violence to thieve thousands of dollars can't stoop this low, or at least they shouldn’t. A bank robber in Allentown, Pa. not only chose a sort of human shield to help carry out his crime, he picked up a toddler who was near him and threatened to shoot the boy unless the teller gave him thousands of dollars. The robber got his cash and released the infant, then left the bank with several thousand dollars and not one shred of integrity or humanity. This isn't to defend other bank robbers, but at least they don’t threaten to shoot defenseless toddlers if they don’t get what they want. Heck, I can even make more of a case for a robber who grabs an adult and takes them hostage while making demands for money more than I can defend this loser. Yes, people tend to be more compassionate and defensive of babies and toddlers, but that doesn’t mean you should capitalize on those emotions for your gain. What, you didn’t feel like pointing a gun at the teller would cut it? I realize that no one actually got shot in this heist, but whenever this a-hole is caught and brought to trial, neither the judge nor the jury should have any problem slapping him with the maximum sentence allowable under the law.

- I’m no baseball purist. I don’t take objection to parts of the game that rankle old school baseball guys, things like player styling after home runs, wearing their pants long and not sporting the traditional stirrup socks, showing excessive emotion on the field, etc. I also think it’s idiotic that teams engage in beanball wars, with teams throwing at an opposing player for a perceived sleight and that player’s team responding in kind. What exactly do you prove by doing that? You’re pissed off, we get it. However, getting hit with a pitch doesn’t usually injure a guy and you are putting a runner on base, so I don’t think it accomplishes much. Having said all of that, it’s clear why I so much enjoyed Vladimir Guerrero’s act last night in a game against the Seattle Mariners. The Mariners took umbrage when Guerrero’s team, the Anaheim Angels (yes, I’m still calling them Anaheim, that is where they play their games) hit Mariners catcher Kenji Johjima with a pitch. Seattle pitcher Jorge Campillo retaliated by sailing a fastball up near Guerrero’s head. On a side note, even purists who subscribe to the theory of hitting a batter to defend your own guy think it’s bush league to throw at a guy’s head, you just don’t do it. Guys get hurt that way and it’s not necessary. But after Campillo’s high, hard pitch, Guerrero fired back in a big way. He teed off on the very next pitch, sending it soaring into the night, some 400-plus feet over the center field wall for a home run. Vlad wasn’t done, though; he stood and admired his effort, then mixed in a nice bat flip to top off the metaphorical middle finger to Campillo and the Mariners. It was flat-out awesome, seeing a guy bounce right back from such a dirty, bush-league play to blast a ginormous home run and then stand there to watch it go, with a sweet bat flip to cap it off. Predictably, a low-class pitcher like Campillo threw at Guerrero’s head again the next time Vlad came to the plate, but this time the umpire did the right thing and ejected Campillo. Good for Vlad, firing back at a guy who was so far out of line that even the most hardcore baseball purist couldn’t defend him. This definitely has the appearance of sour grapes from a Mariners team that has fallen out of the playoff race in spectacular fashion and is bitter at the team that’s about to clinch their division title. Stop throwing at dudes’ heads, Jorge, because if you continue to do so, every team in the league is going to be coming after you with bad, bad intentions.

No comments: