Saturday, January 29, 2011

CBS hits a new sitcom low, riots inspire and Pujols woes in St. Louis

- Could the unthinkable become reality in St. Louis? Could the consensus best player in baseball actually be traded in his prime? No. Scratch that off the list of possible outcomes for the ongoing drama between the aforementioned best in the game, Cardinals slugger Albert Pujols, and his team. Even though the two sides are entering the final days in which to negotiate a contract extension for the perennial MVP candidate before his self-imposed deadline of the beginning of spring training, Pujols has made it clear that he will not accept any trade going forward, according to sources. As a 10-and-5 player (ten years in the majors and the last five with the same team), he has the right to veto any possible trade. If the Cardinals were to become desperate as the trading deadline nears this coming season and panic, attempting to trade their star rather than risk losing him via free agency after the season, that option is not available to them - unless Pujols changes his mind. Sources sat that multiple teams have registered their interest in trading for him if he becomes available, but the Cardinals have never really pursued any of that trade discussion. That leaves only two possible outcomes for this saga: Either Pujols signs a contract extension with the Cardinals, or he will become a free agent this coming fall. For now, there is still a small window in which the two sides can operate. Pujols and the Cardinals’ other non-pitchers and catchers will report to spring training on Feb. 19, so three weeks remain in that negotiating timeframe. Pujols made it clear during the offseason that he does not want his agent, Dan Lozano, to discuss a contract with the Cardinals because he doesn't want to have any distractions. Signing him would likely mean a deal along the lines of the 10-year, $275 million deal that Alex Rodriguez signed with the Yankees in fall 2007. Allowing him to leave through free agency would mean the team would receive nothing more than a couple of compensatory draft picks in return and have to face the backlash from angry St. Louis fans, known as the best in baseball. But best fans in the game or not, losing a player who has never failed to hit at least 32 homers or drive in at least 103 runs and has posted an on-base percentage of .403 or better in nine of his 10 seasons would be an exceptionally bitter pill to swallow…………


- How did you celebrate your Martin Luther King Jr. Day? If you’re like most Americans……you didn’t. Maybe you had the day off and slept in or maybe you had to work just like any other day and didn’t give it a second thought. Both of which, by the way, are entirely appropriate and awesome ways to celebrate the life and honor the passing of one of the most important figures in American history. But if you were on the campus of the University of California-Irvine, you could have celebrated the holiday with a possible touch of racist controversy. See, the Martin Luther King Jr. Day cafeteria special at the UC Irvine student union was none other than chicken and waffles, a popular Southern meal and one that is often stereotypically tied to black culture. Predictably, some black students complained that the meal, promoted on placards in Pippin Commons, trivialized their public commemoration of the holiday. Never mind that the man responsible for the menu, a Filipino chef, who took his cue from black students "when he wanted to do something sensitive culturally" for the King holiday menu, asked black students for advice, and they suggested the chicken and waffles combo. Those black students should be the ones with whom the offended black students have a chat, but of course the controversy blew up once it went public and in sparked a complaint from Black Student Union Co-Chair Ricardo Sparks, a Facebook photo, a blog post in the OC Weekly, a story in The Times, an hourlong program forum with listeners on KPCC, and a rant by radio blowhard Rush Limbaugh. UC Irvine spokeswoman Cathy Lawhon said she has fielded more calls and e-mails on the subject than on any other she can recall. Perhaps the offended students are up in arms because they are an extremely small minority - 2 percent - on the UC Irvine campus and thus are more sensitive to any sleights, real or perceived. Rather than use the incident as a springboard to any sort of meaningful discussion on racial issues or about the significance of the holiday, it’s good to see that the black students upset with the chicken-and-waffles menu have instead managed to coax the truly valuable treasure of apologies and mea culpas from university officials. Never mind that Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs Thomas Parham, who happens to be black, absolved the chef of blame by explaining, "This is a guy who takes great pride in creating 'comfort food' for the students. Somebody who was really trying to do something nice, that was perceived differently by a small group of people. No racist intent, nothing hostile about it.” Score one for oversensitivity and overreaction……….


- Riots as a source of hope? I say yes and for once, I’m not the only one blowing that political trumped. Joining me on the stage for the riot movement is Iranian opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi, who scanned the landscape of billowing smoke, orange flames and angry chants in Egypt and saw hope that those protests could spark the kind of change that has so far evaded his own country. Mousavi compared the uprisings in Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen with the protest movement that followed the 2009 disputed presidential election in Iran. Now, he may have an ax to grind because he still believes that he was the real winner of that election, but I don’t think he’s out of line in what he’s saying. Mousavi characterized Iran's protest movement as a starting point but nonetheless, one aimed at ending the "oppression of the rulers." To jog your memory, a ginormous wave of protests and riots erupted after the (bogus) re-election of President/dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and gave Iran’s clerical leadership its biggest challenge since it came to power in the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Some of those powerful clerics sided with the opposition, but Ahmadinejad’s iron grip on the country could not be loosed. A massive military crackdown suppressed the protests in an outpouring of blood and violence. Scores of opposition members — from midlevel political figures to street activists, journalists and human rights workers — were arrested and all protests have been stifled in Iran since December 2009. I give Mousavi an immense amount of credit for not being bitter because he had an election stolen from him and his own wave of protests fell short of their desired impact. Instead, he is rooting for the protestors in Egypt to bring change to their country and hoping that their efforts will inspire his people. "Our nation respects and salutes the huge revolution by the brave Tunisian people and the rightful uprising of the Egyptian and Yemeni people," Mousavi said in an interview with an Arab-language Web site. "We demand that God bestow on them victory in their truthful struggle." Not able to leave well enough alone, Iran’s ass-hatted hard-line rulers have attempted to hijack credit for the riots in Egypt, likening them to the 1979 Islamic Revolution that toppled the pro-U.S. shah and brought hardline clerics to power. Ironically, Iran and Egypt broke diplomatic relations in 1979 after Tehran condemned Egyptian President Anwar Sadat for signing the Camp David peace treaty with Israel and despite resuming contact in the late 1980s, they now have interest sections, not embassies, in each other's capitals. The lesson, as always: Never underestimate the power of riots to bring people together………


- Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t we already have technology that keeps a car from starting if the driver is drunk? Courts regularly order breath-test-based ignition locks on vehicles of convicted drunk drivers so they can’t get behind the wheel while hammered (unless a sober friend wants to help them out by breathing into the little tube for them), but that hasn’t stopped researchers in Massachusetts from working on creating the Driver Alcohol Detection Systems for Safety, which would keep impaired drivers off the road by detecting their blood alcohol content through two potential methods. The system would work by analyzing the driver's breath or the driver's skin through touch-based sensors on places like the steering wheel or door locks. If the system detected blood alcohol content above the legal limit of .08, the vehicle would not start. Again, the concept is a near-carbon copy of the alcohol ignition interlock systems that are often court-ordered for convicted drunk drivers, but researchers at QinetiQ North America claim it would be sleeker and less obtrusive. The Massachusetts-based lab, which is developing the technology, said these would be the best methods because they would not add extra steps. The company managed to hook U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood into visiting the lab for a demonstration on Friday. He said afterward that the technology would be " another arrow in our automotive safety quiver" but added that it would not be mandated. In the demonstration, researchers had a woman weighing about 120 pounds tried to start a vehicle after drinking two, 1 1/2 ounce glasses of vodka and orange juice about 30 minutes apart, also eating some cheese and crackers in between. Because he blood alcohol content registered .06, the system allowed her to start the car. Still, including such systems in all new cars would be completely ridiculous and intrusive because people who don’t drink shouldn’t be subjected to having to blow into a tube every time they want to start their vehicle. Big ups to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety, which jointly donated $10 million to fund the project that duplicates technology that already exists, but the cynical part of me wonders how much good this new idea will do……….


- Because it just wasn’t scraping the bottom of the sitcom barrel enough with its current slate of crap-tacular half-hour “comedies” (How I Met Your Mother, Rules of Engagement, Two and a Half Men, etc.), CBS has decided to come up with a new, even worse idea for a sitcom and base it on one of the most arrogant and detestable voices in the world of broadcasting: ESPN talk show host Colin Cowherd. Cowherd, who typically takes incredibly asinine positions on issues just to generate controversy so people will listen to his horrible show and whose attempts at comedy are forced and artificial, has apparently inspired a comedy project at CBS. The network has inexplicably ordered a pilot that focuses Cowherd’s life and work as an obnoxious sports talk show host. As if hosting a terrible radio show wasn’t enough, Cowherd will also produce this sure-to-be-train-wreck of a sitcom, although that may not be much of an issue because once it debuts to horrible ratings he won't have to devote any additional effort to the canceled show. The show’s writing and producing team also includes Bill Martin and Mike Schiff (Grounded for Life), as well as the non-writing producing team of Eric and Kim Tannenbaum. Hope you all enjoy being part of what could the worst sitcoms ever to hit the air. But hey, some of the other new comedy pilots CBS has ordered for next season could be as bad or worse, including one about a man who opts to take a more candid approach to life following a life-changing experience, and a workplace ensemble centered around the young people who work at a high-powered venture capital firm. See, even in the darkest of times, there always remains a glimmer of hope……….

No comments: