Fun father-son activities, thoughts for Pittsburgh Steelers fans and the U.N. Security Council gangs up on Iran

- There are a lot of fun father-son activities to do, especially this time of year if you live in a cold-weather climate. You can build a snowman, have a snowball fight, go ice skating or ice fishing, have a sled ride or……steal someone else’s snowmobile, drive like a reckless idiot and get arrested with your 7-year-old son in tow. John Williams of Laconia, N.H. elected for the last of those options, poaching a snowmobile from someone else’s yard and taking in for a joy ride during a major winter storm. A conservation officer spotted Williams driving a snowmobile on a closed trail alongside Route 11 in Gilford, N.H., on Wednesday afternoon during the storm. The officer attempted to stop Williams, but he was having none of it. This idiot, once again with a 7-year-old boy as a passenger, left the trail and veered onto busy Route 11, weaving in and out of traffic with the officer pursuing in his cruiser. Factoring in the weather and his own idiocy, it was only a matter of time before Williams crashed the snowmobile and sure enough, he did just that. At one point in his wild ride, the snowmobile went out of control and crashed into a snow bank, but Williams was able to pull it free. Rather than call it quits and accept his fate, he kept going and continued to show his son how to run from the law. The chase ended when Williams pulled into a driveway off Lake Street in Laconia. He was taken into custody and charged with reckless conduct and disobeying a conservation officer. A state trooper who joined the pursuit during its stint on the highway later determined that the snowmobile was one of two stolen in Goffstown in January. I’m not sure whether Williams was the one who stole this particular snowmobile or if it had been in his possession since January, but given this guy’s act while on the snowmobile, I’m guessing no on both counts. Not only that, dude is seemingly not much better with standard, wheeled vehicles. His driver’s license had been suspended and he had been deemed a habitual offender by the Department of Motor Vehicles prior to the snowmobile chase. He has since been arraigned and released on bail, while his poor, unfortunate son was released into the custody of a family member. Just a thought, but this is one father-son activity that everyone else out there may want to avoid this winter……….

- Allow the bitching, whining and complaining to begin. Any site change to Facebook, everyone’s favorite social-networking site, inevitably prompts a chorus of whining, complaining and discontent. Groups are formed to protest the changes and people vow to stop using Facebook altogether unless things go back to the way they were. The latest change came Thursday, with users logging on to the site hit with a large pop-up box asking them to modify their privacy settings. Facebook says the changes will help streamline privacy controls that have confused many of its 350 million users and were sprawled over six separate pages. Oddly enough, I’ve never had a problem with that setup and based on the complaints coming in, neither have most users. The new setup is pushing users to one of two extremes in regards to the area of "publicly available information." Under the new security policy, the following are considered to fall under that heading: your name, profile picture, current city, gender and networks, and the pages you're a fan of. Users could restrict much of that information previously, but now you are forced to either prevent everyone from seeing it or allowing everyone to see it, with nothing in between. If you want to hide your participation in a Facebook group from a certain group of people, you can’t do so. In other words, you can’t block a small group of people from seeing something like your Facebook friend list while allowing others to view it. Facebook counters that a user's friends list can be made non-viewable, but it is either viewable by all or by no one. Another idiotic change relates to Facebook apps, such as the quizzes developed by third parties that are extremely popular on the site. Before now, you could dictate if your information was shared if you allowed access to an app one of your friends developed. Now, using such an app means that your "publicly available information" becomes accessible to the developer. It’s a terrible idea and shows that the yahoos running Facebook still don’t have a clue. Unless a user changes the "Everyone" option, their information is accessible by the Web at large. The one aspect of the new setup that users do seem to like is the ability to micromanage who can access every bit of information on the site. The best way to do this is to separate your friends into lists and grant those lists varying levels of accessibility. In addition, a user can specify accessibility post by post, although this is a bit annoying from where I sit, as I don’t want to stipulate access every time I do something on my page. It is important to note that the default privacy settings are the more permissible, “Everyone” rules. If you want to keep out unwanted visitors, go to your settings page and change everything to “Only friends.” Hope that was helpful…………

- Two words for the Pittsburgh Steelers and their fans: Uh-oh! That was my first thought after your team dropped an overtime game in Kansas City four weeks ago, it was my thought when you lost a home game to the lowly Oakland Raiders on Sunday and it was screaming through my mind Thursday night when you did the seemingly impossible by losing to the Cleveland Browns. That loss came before a national television audience on a night when yours was the only NFL game being played. It came after a stunning last-minute loss to Oakland that dropped Pittsburgh to 6-6 and placed them on the fringes of the playoff races. How would the defending Super Bowl champions react to that sort of predicament? Would they rally with their backs against the wall, come out firing against their most bitter rivals and heat up the night in a game where the temperatures were barely above zero? Nope. The Steelers failed to protect quarterback Ben Roethlisberger against a Browns defense missing its three top playmakers, surrendering a whopping eight sacks. They could not run the ball effectively against a defense that entered the game as one of the worst in the league against the run. They could not score points against a defense that is one of the absolute worst in the NFL at keeping opponents off the scoreboard. Oh, and they surrendered 171 rushing yards and 13 points to an offense for which those totals typically take three or four games to accumulate. All of this happened in a game that the Steelers absolutely had to win to have any hopes for a playoff berth. The Browns, winners of this game or not, are still one of the three worst teams in the NFL. Their coach is a tyrannical imbecile who should be fired after just one year at the helm and who is largely hated by his own players, even if they won't admit it publicly. So many experts looked at the Steelers’ remaining schedule, their history of toughness and excellence under pressure and their roster full of experienced, talented veterans and figured that there was no way a defending champion doesn’t show up ready to play and win a game like this. The Steelers managed to prove everyone wrong in that regard and in the process, show that it’s a good thing they won't be in the playoffs because they simply don’t belong there. Had they managed to eke out 10 wins and earn a wild-card berth, they would have been absolutely trucked in the first round by New England, Cincinnati or San Diego and that’s something no one needs to see. Give me a good team that wins the games it should win, one that will show up in a big way when its season is on the line, and allow the Steelers to regroup and try again next season……….

- It was “Gang up on Iran” day at the United Nations on Thursday. The United States and other envoys at the United Nations took turns pot-shotting Iran for transporting arms and ammunition to Syria and warned that the clock is ticking for the Islamic republic in terms of impending sanctions over its nuclear program. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice led the charge, delivering a statement to the U.N. Security Council that focused on three reported incidents over the last year regarding the munitions transfer, all involving the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines. "Iran has now been caught breaking the rules -- repeatedly," Rice said. "The illicit smuggling of weapons from Iran to Syria is not just a sanctions violation; it is also an important factor in the destabilization of an already fragile Middle East." I would like to see the proof of these supposed incidents, but when virtually every nation in the Western Hemisphere and many outside of it believe that a country is intent on developing nuclear weapons, it does make you wonder. No matter how many times Tehran denies these claims, their insistence on doing things to perpetuate the belief isn't helping. Of course, I’m not sure that the threat of tougher U.N. sanctions on Iran is helping either; it seems to only piss off dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad more. To Iran, it must feel like the entire world is lining up against it – mostly because the world is. The recent International Atomic Energy Agency report underscoring the country's refusal to cooperate with the nuclear agency exacerbated the problem, especially its claims about Iran's expansion of enrichment and heavy-water-related activities and the construction of a secret enrichment facility near the city of Qom. A key component of Rice’s claims is the stopping of two ships -- the Francop and Hansa India -- over a 90-day period, both for allegedly smuggling arms to Hamas and Hezbollah. "The scope of these violations is alarming," Rice said. "On board the Francop were found 36 containers of arms and related materiel, including 690 122mm rockets, around 12,000 anti-tank and mortar shells, more than 20,000 fragmentation grenades, and more than half a million rounds of ammunition. Tons of bullet casings were found on board the Hansa India." See, I don’t know about all of that. Sounds mighty coincidental to me. After all, who among us hasn’t traveled with 12,000 anti-tank and mortar shells or 690 122mm rockets at one time or another? Personally, I keep that much weaponry in the trunk of my car just in case. In spite of Rice’s blatant attacks on Iran and the rest of the council following suit, the U.S. claims it is willing to remain engaged with Iran and work toward a diplomatic solution to the nuclear issue before tougher sanctions are considered. Right, because those talks are going to be verrrrry productive………

- Papa Bear is angry and he’s taking aim at "Law & Order" franchise creator/executive producer Dick Wolf. Of course, Bill O'Reilly being pissed isn't new. Heck, him being pissed at anyone who doesn’t strictly adhere to his own rigid, strict, über- conservative rulebook for life is nothing new, so Wolf was bound to become one of the Fox News talking head's targets sooner or later. What did everyone’s least-favorite cable news blowhard have to say? Well, O’Reilly lashed out at Wolf Thursday night over how he was recently characterized on the long-running NBC drama. The scene that set O’Reilly off came in an episode of "Law and Order: Special Victims Unit" that aired earlier in the week. The plot featured a crazed anti-immigration activist who which set out to murder the children of illegal immigrants. The offending scene featured Randall Carver, a character played by veteran actor John Larroquette, is sitting on a park bench talking to Fin, the detective played by Ice-T. , In defending the actions of the man who killed the immigrants’ children, Larroquette's character says, "Limbaugh, Beck, O'Reilly, all of 'em, they are like a cancer spreading ignorance and hate...They've convinced folks that immigrants are the problem, not corporations that fail to pay a living wage or a broken health care system..."

Aside from those comments having a certain degree (at or near 100 percent) accuracy – sorry B.O. – has O’Reilly never heard of creative license? Wolf isn't slandering his character with specific, untrue accusations. A (fictional) character merely stated an observation from a lien written on his script. But leave it to O’Reilly to take himself so seriously that he feels the needs to strike out at the "far left" Wolf and call him a "despicable human being" whose show is "out of control." Good thing you didn’t totally overreact there, B.O. At least you didn’t call this a "defamatory and outrageous" scene and denounce Dick Wolf as a "coward" and a "liar" – oh wait, that’ys exactly what you did. And only O’Reilly would then have the kahones to attempt to clarify his anti-immigrant viewpoints as if anyone took him all that seriously after his unnecessary anti-Wolf rant. Stick to profanity-laced tirades against camera guys and teleprompter operators when you think the camera is no longer rolling, B………