Random Human Neural Firings

The Bestest Top 100 Games Ever List Ever In The Whole Wide World

2005-09-23T10:56:00.000-05:00

Okay, let's do this. You know the rules, you know the guidelines, you know what got snubbed, so here's your list. Counting down from 100:

100: Gunstar Heroes, Sega Genesis
99: Halo: Combat Evolved, Xbox (bite me, fanboys)
98: Sam and Max Hit the Road, PC (at least it made the list, people)
97: Sonic 2, Sega Genesis (epitome of the Sonic franchise. If you disagree, replace with your preferred Genesis Sonic title. Originally Sonic 3 until I remembered that goddamn drum in Carnival Night Zone Act 2.)
96: Soul Reaver, PS1
95: Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, Multiplatform
94: NIGHTS Into Dreams, Sega Saturn
93: Rome: Total War, PC (had it looked like Civilization, it wouldn't have been listed)
92: Myst, PC (too passive to climb any higher)
91: Marble Madness, Multiplatform (how it misses every Top 100 list I see is beyond me)
90: Final Fantasy X, PS2
89: Castlevania 3: Dracula's Curse, NES
88: Grim Fandango, PC
87: Final Fantasy 2/IV, SNES
86: NHL '94, Multiplatform (sports simulation at its peak)
85: Golden Axe, Sega Master System (it was either this or some random Dynasty Warriors game; Golden Axe won on chronological consideration)
84: Grand Theft Auto: Vice City, PS2
83: Panzer Dragoon Saga, Sega Saturn
82: Lumines, Sony PSP (I figure in five years you'll be thinking this as well, maybe higher)
81: F-Zero GX, Gamecube (would have gone higher except for the unholy difficulty level; too high of a barrier of entry)
80: Capcom vs. SNK, Sega Dreamcast
79: Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island, SNES
78: Defender, Arcade
77: Mortal Kombat 2, Sega Genesis (what MK1 should have been)
76: Ms. Pac-Man, Arcade (the map variety and increased difficulty pushed it in over Pac-Man Original)
75: Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, PS1
74: Super Baseball Simulator 1.000, SNES (why don't more sports games act like this?)
73: Contra, NES (up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, Start= 30 extra spots on the list)
72: Rez, PS1
71: Soul Calibur, Sega Dreamcast
70: X-COM: UFO Defense, PC
69: Psychonauts, Multiplatform
68: Secret of Mana, SNES
67: Asteroids, Atari 2600
66: Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem, Gamecube
65: Plamescape: Torment, PC (I think I gave this one a bit too much credit)
64: Super Dodge Ball, NES (should maybe even go a few spots higher)
63: Legend of Zelda, NES
62: Centipede, Arcade
61: Ico, PS2
60: Beyond Good and Evil, Multiplatform (may be high, but when a game is your all-time favorite, it's getting on the list whether anyone else likes it or not)
59: Super Mario 64, N64
58: R-Type, Sega Master System
57: Half-Life 2, PC
56: Space Invaders, Arcade
55: Star Wars: TIE Fighter Collector's CD-ROM, PC (you knew it was on here somewhere, but too fanboyish to get any higher)
54: Kirby Super Star, SNES (you knew Kirby was making this list somewhere too)
53: Burnout 3: Takedown, Multiplatform (I like boom)
52: Bionic Commando, NES (don't know anything about it, but from what I hear...)
51: Frogger, Multiplatform
50: Jet Grind Radio, Sega Dreamcast
49: God of War, PS2
48: Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution, PS2 (may have lowballed this one)
47: Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, Multiplatform
46: Pole Position, Arcade
45: Unreal Tournament, PC
44: Prince of Persia, Multiplatform
43: Dr. Mario, NES
42: River City Ransom, NES
41: Starsiege: Tribes, PC (64 people in one match= good times)
40: SSX3, Multiplatform (when EA Big got the music, attitude, graphics and gameplay fused together perfectly)
39: The Secret of Monkey Island, PC
38: Final Fantasy VII, PS1 (included as required by law)
37: Diablo 2, PC (I'm just not feeling Diablo as much as everyone)
36: Pitfall, Atari 2600
35: Super Mario Bros., NES (brought us the speed run)
34: Resident Evil 4, Multiplatform (watch out for those cutscenes)
33: Super Mario Kart, SNES
32: Katamari Damacy, PS2 (kept from higher positions by the 'roll up exactly one of this' levels)
31: Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn, PC
30: Super Ghouls 'N Ghosts, SNES
29: Civilization 2, PC (doesn't every non-space RTS look like Civilization when you get right down to it?)
28: Ratchet and Clank: Going Commando, PS2
27: Goldeneye 007, N64 (didn't age well, but we're not worried about that)
26: Super Metroid, SNES
25: Halo 2, Xbox (Only 25. You heard me, fanboys. It's great, but not as great as you all think.)
24: Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars, SNES (the casual gamer's RPG)
23: Breakout, Multiplatform (you disagree? Then why all the Breakout clones?)
22: Chrono Trigger, SNES
21: SimCity 2000, Multiplatform
20: World of Warcraft, PC (got the clone-heavy MMORPG right)
19: Tetris Attack, SNES
18: Silent Hill, PS1 (scariest game ever, tops the survival-horror genre)
17: Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, N64
16: Bejeweled, PC (Internet Tetris)
15: Starcraft, PC (iffy on this one, may have put it too far down)
14: Metal Gear Solid, PS1
13: Age of Empires 2: The Age of Kings, PC (it's this, Civilization, and then everybody else in the RTS genre)
12: WarioWare Inc.: Mega MicroGame$, GBA (who needs a plot?)
11: Super Mario World, SNES
10: Final Fantasy 3/VI, SNES (some FF was getting top 10, and I was originally going to say VII because I don't know any better, but evidently the fanboys like this one more)
9: Mega Man 2, NES
8: Legend of Zelda: A Link To the Past, SNES
7: Counter-Strike, PC
6: Super Smash Bros. Melee, Gamecube (gaming's All-Star Game)
5: Dance Dance Revolution, Arcade (I stress ARCADE; not nearly as fun on consoles)
4: Grand Theft Auto 3, Multiplatform (linearity's for suckers)
3: The Sims, PC
2: Tetris, Multiplatform (timeless)
1: Super Mario Bros. 3, NES (how could you not put SMB3 at the top?)

And there you have it. My list may be wrong, but it's less wrong than usual.

Best Games Ever List #9324246- Specifically, What's Not On It

2005-09-22T16:32:00.000-05:00

As I said, 100 means 100. Games had to get bounced. Unlike all the other Top 100 Games lists, I'm actually going to tell you what I considered but didn't include. We're going to do this in order, from Last Game Out at the top to Barely A Second Thought at the bottom. The games that DIDN'T make the list, with some games getting explanations as to why...

*Half-Life, PC (last game out)
*Mega Man 3, NES (too derivative of MM2, like all NES Mega Man titles)
*Galaga, Arcade
*Dune 2: The Building of a Dynasty, PC (oops, didn't pay my spice this month- holy moley, I got killed?! Screw this)
*Yar's Revenge, Atari 2600
*Ultima 7: The Black Gate, PC (geeky PC games only get so far; only hardcore gamers would be interested)
*Marathon, PC (ran out of room; would possibly win the Gaming NIT)
*Donkey Kong Country, SNES (badly-spaced save points- for example, three, four levels in the Mountains of Oh My God This Is Hard without an airport or save house)
*Tecmo Super Bowl, NES (no Bo)
*Bomberman, NES
*Combat, Atari 2600 (one more map and it'd have made it)
*Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec, PS2 (yes, there's a Top 100 list without Gran Turismo. Simulation isn't everything, gang. The License Tests had to go and the game needed to at least show how to find the best line- if not show them, show how to spot them yourself)
*Paper Mario, N64
*Mortal Kombat, Sega Genesis (MK2 was much better)
*Maniac Mansion: Day of the Tentacle, PC (was originally on, but as I plugged in more games it slid off the bottom)
*Kaboom!, Atari 2600 (you have no idea how much I hoped this one would survive the cut)
*Star Wars Episode 1: Racer, Multiplatform
*Samurai Showdown, Multiplatform (SNK got some serious lobbying from my subconsious, but I could only place a couple when I got right down to it, and it PAINED me)
*Nintendo World Cup, Multiplatform
*NBA Live '95, Multiplatform
*Homeworld, PC
*Deus Ex, PC (I know this one gets some mention, but I can't get it on the list)
*Pong, Atari 2600 (did get considered seriously, but at some point technology just catches up with you)
*Rayman 2: The Great Escape, Multiplatform
*Street Fighter 2, Multiplatform (the word for today is 'overrated')
*Black and White, PC
*Doom, PC
*WarioWare: Twisted!, GBA (distilled fun like its daddy, but not distilled enough)
*Crash Bandicoot, PS1
*Outrun, Arcade (one track, albeit a large, branching one, just isn't going to do it)
*Star Wars, Arcade
*Command & Conquer: Red Alert, PC
*Mike Tyson's Punch-Out!, NES (had Tyson been, you know, beatable...)
*Tony Hawk's Underground, Multiplatform
*Battletoads, NES (too hard for its own good)
*Syndicate, PC
*Thief 2: The Metal Age, PC
*Rampage, Arcade (a versus mode might have been enough)
*Advance Wars, GBA
*Metroid Prime, Gamecube
*Madden NFL 2004, Multiplatform (I had to consider A Madden game)
*Bust-A-Move, SNES
*Dragon Warrior, NES (thou art dead)
*Pokemon Red/Blue, Game Boy (though if I were going solely on my opinion, Pokemon Snap would be in this space instead)
*Sid Meier's Pirates, PC (meh)
*MechWarrior 2: 31st Century Combat, PC
*Crimson Skies, PC
*Wasteland, Multiplatform
*Baseball Stars, NES (another SNK casualty- they made GOOD games, fun ones, but never really had the huge breakout)
*Populous, Multiplatform
*M.U.L.E., Multiplatform (sorry, guys, just nowhere to put it)
*Base Wars, NES (the fielding killed it)
*Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six, PC
*Quake 2, PC
*Duke Nukem 3D, PC
*Shining Force 2, Sega Genesis
*Blackthorne, Sega 32X (only really considered because I wanted to take in as many consoles as I could)
*Fallout, PC

And that takes care of the stuff that didn't make it. Soon I'll get to what did.

Another Damn Greatest Games Ever List- Prelude

2005-09-21T19:55:00.000-05:00

Every so often, some gaming publication or another puts together a 'Top 100 Games Of All-Time' list. And every time, they screw it up. And not just the kind of screw-up where you have a cluster of games near the bottom replacing some deserving games that would go near the bottom. And there are several games that could legitimately lay claim to the #1 spot.

The thing is, games like Mega Man 2 or Marble Madness, get left out. Games like Halo 2 and Resident Evil 4 take top honors. And the lists tend to skew towards the last few years. And there's never any mention of the also-rans. No way to tell who got considered but dropped.

So I'll take a shot at it. There's really no way to tell how our Random Humans Running for President will come out of the Rita/Katrina thing, so we'll hold off for now on that. Here are my ground rules:

1. Older games have been given the appropriate amount of chronological leeway. It's not fair to rank GTA: Vice City above GTA3 just because advanced technical capability allows GTA:VC to be a bigger and better title. In a vaccum, if you were to play them both today, Vice City wins. But this is not a vaccum. (San Andreas fell out of consideration entirely after the Hot Coffee thing. Don't bother looking for it.)
2. Hype is thrown out the window. Halo 2 is not making the top 20 just because the Xbox fanboys like it. They may have overrun G-Phoria, but they're not overrunning me. They are where they are. (And you're going to have a shit hemmhorage when you see where Halo 1 winds up.)
3. I know that some people can't compare genres because the games are so functionally different. Well, if ESPN can compare Jordan to Ruth in Sportscentury, we can compare Mario to Mortal Kombat to Metal Gear. It's a gamer's equivalent of a barroom argument- ultimately pretty pointless, but lively debate, no one right answer, and ultimately a worthwhile exercise.
4. 'Multiplatform' includes any two platforms. PC is a platform. Neo Geo is a platform. Arcade is a platform. If you only see one platform, it either means it was only available on one, or the other platform versions were really bad and not even in the same league.
5. It's 100. Games have to be left out. I've seen these lists before and if you were to take all the games that deserve spots and are on, and add in all the games that got 'snubbed', you're going to wind up way beyond capacity. Understand that eventually there's got to be a cutoff. For that reason, in addition to the top 100, I'll also name the games that I considered but placed below the cutoff.
6. Importance sometimes intersects with quality. (This is not the same as hype.) If a decent game is innovative or influential, it might get a boost from people. This is reflected in my rankings and helps explain the absence of several titles such as Ultima 7, Thief 2, MechWarrior 2, Syndicate and Dune 2. Those are titles that the hardcore gamers would rank highly, but really, how many non-hardcore gamers even know of those titles?
7. My notes are more afterthoughts than anything else and not given for all titles. You're lucky to get any at all.
8. I don't know all the titles offhand; had to do a little looking to find out about some of them. So give me a break here.

A bit later, we'll get into the games that didn't make the cut.

Tom Tancredo Revisited

2005-09-08T20:37:00.000-05:00

Back in July, I blogged what I thought of Tom Tancredo's chances as our first Random Human Running For President. To save you the click, I basically said he's a single-issue wackjob who has no chance whatsoever.

He now has even less chance of winning. The Rocky Mountain News reports that Tancredo has asked that Louisiana not be sent federal aid for Hurricane Katrina because he figures the state and local officials are too corrupt to handle it. In response, I offer this:

AN OPEN LETTER TO TOM TANCREDO (R-CO)

Dear Congressman Tancredo:

Fuck off.

Sincerely,

Aaron Allermann

They Are The News, They Are The Pundits

2005-09-03T23:57:00.000-05:00

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, George W. Bush is facing one of the largest crises in American history. And with Chief Justice of the Supreme Court William Rehnquist now dead, that only make matters worse. What to do? How much attention to focus on each? It's a very tragic sight.

...Yes, the Katrina survivors are a sad sight right now too, but I didn't mean them. I meant the news media. With Katrina and now Rehnquist, they'll be pulling all-nighters for days, maybe weeks. What gets the lead? How much to focus on each? What about John Roberts and gas prices, and anything else that may come down the pike?

That's why I'm announcing the creation of the Journalist Relief Fund. Yes, for just $80 a day, you can help give our brave reporters the hair care products they require every day, access to the AP and Reuters newswires, and a shelter (okay, a 4-star hotel) to keep them warm at night.

Look at this tragic figure...
He's on a major news outlet, in the huge, unforgiving city portrayed in that fake skyline behind him, and he can't afford the shave, laser eye surgery, and lobotomy he so desperately needs. Just $80 a day can help with the down payments.

Yes, it will be a trying time for these poor sleepless reporters. But with enough help, maybe someday they can settle down and get back to their normal existence, and maybe, just maybe, they'll find Natalie Holloway.

And The Babies He Doesn't Eat, Skip Bayless Ritually Slaughters

2005-09-01T19:38:00.000-05:00

This morning on Cold Pizza:

*Miles Brand, NCAA President, has said that the NCAA would be lenient in its rules when dealing with aid to students affected by Katrina.
*Skip Bayless used, among other things, the term "Pandora's Box", because of COURSE you have to be hardassed. The costliest hurricane in American history, ha! Like that's any excuse.
*Woody Paige audibly groaned and buried his face in his hands, like, did this guy get born to someone or did he spawn somewhere?

Just... wow. There are no words.

Random Human Running For President #6: Bill Richardson (D-NM)

2005-08-26T16:35:00.000-05:00

"Representing the Democrats, from Santa Fe, New Mexico, number 47, Billlllllll Richardsoooooonnnnnnn!"

WHY BILL WILL BE ELECTED: He's the only Hispanic Governor, so he's got that vote all to himself. He's also a former ambassador to the U.N. under Clinton, serving in 1997-1998, after which he became the Secretary of Energy. So this wouldn't be his first trip to Capitol Hill.

WHY HE WON'T: He's fairly bull-headed- when the camera's off, he's likely to ignore dissent and just go ahead with whatever it is he's planning. He's also got a VERY bad reputation in New Mexico, so he might just lose his home state.

LEGACY SO FAR: UN Ambassador. Secretary of Energy. Declared state of emergency at the New Mexico/Mexico border to combat immigration. That should give you enough of an idea: foreign policy, energy, immigration.

CAMPAIGN SKELETON IN CLOSET: From Wikipedia: "The Albuquerque Journal reported on June 12 2005, that a New Mexico State Auditor concluded the Governor used Enron type accounting after his adminstration "circumvented the Legislature and proper accounting procedures when it opened the office in 2004 because it used money intended for the Taxation and Revenue Department to pay for the governor's Albuquerque digs." The Governor had allegedly opened an office in Albuquerque five minutes from the airport to meet with potential out of state donors for his 2008 Presidential campaign without inconveniencing them with the two hour round trip to Santa Fe." Oh, that is gonna smart. (And he personally shook Saddam Hussein's hand in 1995, which you just KNOW is going to pop up in an attack ad.)

AND WHAT WILL RICHARDSON POINT TO?: He'll be running ads flaunting the fact that he cut taxes in New Mexico, and that he made New Mexico the first state to give active National Guardsmen life insurance. He supports the troops! (Like, you know, everyone else in Washington. Just once I'd like to see a Congressperson say that they DON'T support the troops. Just come out and say "You know what? F*** the troops. They're cannon fodder. Hell, we can always recruit more." Because I always like to see someone's political career implode right before my very eyes.)

PRESIDENT RICHARDSON?: He's never gone up against a serious opponent as an incumbent (he acted as a Sacrificial Lamb in the 70's against a longtime incumbent and former Dept. of Interior Secretary), so the road to Washington will be a pretty rude awakening for Bill. He's a dark horse to get out of the primaries, but I wouldn't bet on it. And even if he does, his opponents will simply have too much ammunition to use on him.

Skip Bayless Eats Babies

2005-08-26T14:43:00.000-05:00

Over the past few weeks, the Road from Bristol (http://www.bravesbeat.com/bravesjournal/bristol/) has been trying to determine the worst personality on ESPN through a March Madness-style bracket. They've just cut it down to two, Skip Bayless and Stuart Scott. You can tell who I've been voting for. Scott easily handled Tony Reali (AKA 'Stat Boy'), who benefited from a weak schedule and Dan LeBatard shooting himself in the foot, while Bayless barely sneaked past Stephen A. Smith after demolishing the rest of his schedule. So head on over and vote when they get the finals up and running.

As for here, expect another Random Human Running for President in the near future.

Random Human Running For President #5: Rebecca Rotzler (G-NY)

2005-08-19T00:42:00.000-05:00

In the spirit of previewing everyone in the interest of voter awareness, we're doing third parties in this space as well as the Dems and Reps. You run, you get a once-over. Simple as that.

"Representing the Green Party, from New Paltz, New York, number 11, Rebeccaaaaaaaa Rotzleeeerrrrrrr!"

WHY REBECCA WILL BE ELECTED: At a time when THE main complaint among Americans is oil and gas prices, a candidate whose party platform favors alternative energy is going to get some serious looks. In addition, she's of Native American descent- gold in the red states- and she's firey at the mike, a common trait among third parties.

WHY SHE WON'T: She's in the Green Party. Thus, money is going to be nonexistent. Also a common trait among third parties. That's why they're called "third parties".

LEGACY SO FAR: Well, it's the Green Party, so... think green. Simple enough. Specifically, Rebecca has mentioned solar and wind power as getting some play, but generally think the whole range of renewable energy.

AND WHEN SHE'S NOT A HIPPIE TREE-HUGGER, WHAT OTHER POSITIONS DOES SHE HAVE?: Now, now, none of that talk. Turns out they were on to something. Rotzler- a co-chair of the Green Party (there are 7)- is naturally going to be a hard-line Greenie. For example, Rotzler supports- and has helped conduct- same-sex marriages in New Paltz. Since she's the only Greenie currently running, you can get a pretty good idea of her positions by simply checking the Green Party Platform at http://www.gp.org/platform.shtml. (It's big, so you may want to pick and choose your own issues.)

CAMPAIGN SKELETON IN CLOSET: Those gay marriages? Illegal when she did them. Hilarity ensued.

PRESIDENT ROTZLER?: Dude. Are you serious? No, really. Are you really unsure whether Rebecca Rotzler, who's currently a local deputy mayor- not the mayor, but a DEPUTY mayor- from the Green Party, will become President? Just in her own STATE, she will get steamrolled by Hilary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani. She'll get steamrolled by PATAKI. Yes. She will come in fourth place among national candidates from the state of New York. Failing to medal among candidates from your own state... usually that's not even possible.

Random Human Running For President #4: Evan Bayh (D-IN)

2005-08-18T00:34:00.000-05:00

"First up for the Democrats, from Indianapolis, Indiana, number 20, Evaaaaaannnnn Baaaaaaayyyhhhhh!"

WHY EVAN WILL BE ELECTED: In his stint as former governor of Indiana, the state enjoyed a stellar economy, including the biggest budget surplus in Indiana history.

WHY HE WON'T: He's been called cautious, which could also be called 'indecisive' and used against him. He's also got a tendency to be lukewarm at the mike, which isn't exactly going to energize anyone. The gun folks hate him, too, so expect that.

LEGACY SO FAR: Money and how to spend it. As Indiana Governor, he went eight years without raising taxes. At the same time, according to Wikipedia, "He passed the 21st Century Scholars in 1992, which says that to every child growing up in Indiana that is eligible for the free lunch program in a public school, if they graduate from high school with passing grades, and sign a pledge not to experiment with illegal drugs, everyone of them is entitled a full college scholarship to a public university of their choice."

CAMPAIGN SKELETON IN CLOSET: His special-interest ratings on Project Vote Smart show him as big-government, so despite his fiscal-history, he'll be painted as "tax-and-spend". Which the special interest groups also show him as. He's been good with money, but he also spends a lot of it.

OTHER NOTES: This would be Bayh's second attempt at the Presidency- he took a run at the 1976 nomination, which he lost to Jimmy Carter.

PRESIDENT BAYH?: If he was better known, he'd have a shot as he has wide bipartisan appeal. There's actually not much anti-Bayh literature out there- the Campaign Skeleton was extremely hard to come up with. There is the odd guy out there who hates Bayh, you'll find opposition to anything in the world including puppies, but they're not very loud. And he's got a lot of money lined up to make a run. But at the moment, he's too unknown and he's not exciting anyone. He'll need to fix that. In addition, he'll have to contend with the heavy hitters of the Democrats, Hilary Clinton chief among them. It'll be a rocky road out of the primaries, but he'll have an excellent shot at victory if he survives.

Future Super Bowl Champions (your name here)

2005-08-12T14:20:00.000-05:00

The NFL is back. How do I know? The team yearbooks have come back to roost in the ESPN nest. Every year, as the preseason starts, the NFL releases half-hour recaps of the previous season for each team. Normally, you'd just be interested in the one with your respective team (in my case, the Packers), and tune out of the other 31, right?

Not exactly. See, the premise of an NFL Yearbook is that every single one clearly implies that the depicted team is on the verge of winning the Super Bowl. When the team is, say, the Patriots or the Eagles, this is fine. But when the team is the Bears or the 49ers, it gets a little more interesting to see just what NFL Films has come up with to make the fans optimistic.

A main feature of a Yearbook is that only wins are recapped. Losses are glossed over without so much as a final score. 5-game losing streaks are mentioned in passing. If you lose in the playoffs, the recap cuts off at the last win you had and plays up the fact that you made the playoffs. When you have 13 wins and made the conference championship, that will pretty much cover things. But it leaves the producers with a lot of time to fill if the team finished 4-12. So the next thing they normally go to is key players putting up big numbers. Don't have enough of those to fill a half hour? Then they go to off-season pickups and draft picks. Those normally only plug small gaps, so if that doesn't do it (and it sometimes doesn't), that's when things get interesting.

For example, take the Arizona Cardinals, aka "NFL Siberia". They turned in a 6-10 record, maybe 1 Pro Bowler, and had Kurt Warner and two draft picks worth mentioning in the offseason. There's still a lot of time left after that. Now what? Um... hey, did they get new uniforms? Ooh, cover that! That's cause for optimism! What else, we still have time... oh, yeah, that new stadium they're building! ...2006? Look, does it matter if it's not going to be ready until next season? Arizona doesn't exactly have packed crowds we can show off! Do you want to pan across a half-empty stadium that more fans of the opposition than the Cardinals? No? Then give the people a stadium, dammit!

He Had The Drug Pulled Out From Under Him

2005-08-04T22:54:00.000-05:00

So Rafael Palmeiro, while I was debating the Presidential prospects of a guy who advocated nuking Mecca, got busted for steroid use after getting 3,000 hits and 500 home runs. I'm not here to debate his Hall of Fame credentials after the positive test (severely diminished, though still possible), or to dump on him for using steroids in the first place (though, bad Palmeiro! Bad!).

I'm here to bust on him for being a bad shopper. If you MUST use a steroid, the one Rafael used, Stanozolol, is just about the worst one you could choose. Rafael chose a steroid that:

A) Is not available in the United States.
B) He in fact would have had to go to Japan to get.
C) Thus, is probably expensive as hell.
D) Isn't in any medication, so the 'I didn't know' excuse holds no water.
E) You have to take for 6-8 weeks to benefit from.
F) Takes up to a month to dissipate as a pill, and several months to dissipate as an injection.
G) Is so easily detected that you can't mask it.

So, hard to find, expensive, takes a long time to work, stays in your body for a long time, and unmaskable. To put this in more real-world terms, say you had a job in the outskirts of Chicago proper. Ideally, you'd want a house in a nearby suburb, maybe with an extra bedroom or two and close to schools and hospitals. Rafael Palmeiro bought a gold-plated one-room yurt in Mongolia.

Random Human Running For President #3: Bill Frist (R-TN)

2005-08-04T12:04:00.000-05:00

"Representing the Republicans, from Nashville, Tennessee, number 17, 'Dr. B', Billllllll Frist!"

WHY BILL WILL BE ELECTED: He holds a very high position in the Senate, so campaign funding will be no problem. He's one of those politicians who, if they really wanted to, could bully their way into the White House with enough work. Also, should get solid Democratic support if only because he broke with Bush on a hot-button issue.

WHY HE WON'T: If you don't think this stem-cell thing is going to be thrown in his face from beginning to end, killing pro-life support, you've got another thing coming. Also, he's leaving the Senate after this term to position himself for 2008, putting him out of the spotlight for two years.

LEGACY SO FAR: He's a doctor, so naturally Frist is and always has been most concerned with medical issues, dating back to the mid-90's when he entered politics. If elected, expect a lot of money to be funneled into the health care industry.

ISSUE POSITIONS: Unlike a lot of elected officials, Frist has filled out a Congressional National Political Awareness Test. Anytime I see someone taking it, it's going up here. He was last up for election in 2000, so that's when it's from, meaning you won't find much on the issue of terrorism. His reponses are at http://www.vote-smart.org/npat.php?can_id=CNIP7879, but highlights include:
*Seems to want to increase funding for everything except welfare (greatly decrease), international aid (slightly decrease), the arts and NASA (maintain). Everything else got an increase. In fact, many of his responses seem to indicate that he'd increase spending for pretty much everything while reducing taxes. In a perfect world, that works. This isn't a perfect world. He'll find out fast that, much as we run up the deficit, money isn't infinite.
*Would prohibit PAC's- the groups that exist solely to run attack ads- from contributing to candidates.
*Supports a lot of anti-crime measures. In a Frist America, you screw up, you're going down hard. Would not decriminalize marijuana.
*Would encourage development of alternative fuels.
*Would at least partially privative Social Security.
*Supports a Constitutional amendment placing term limits on Congress. (Which he's adhered to; this is only his second term in the Senate.)

OKAY, GREAT, HE SAID THAT, BUT DOES IT MATCH WITH WHAT HE'S DONE?: Mostly, but there are some spots. Concerning alternative-energy, Frist voted no to S AMDT 784 to HR 6, which came up on June 16. The amendment would set a goal to reduce usage of foreign oil by 40% over the next 20 years. (It was party line- the only GOP Senators to vote yes were Olympia Snowe (ME), Arlen Specter (PA) and Lincoln Chafee (RI). Debbie Ann Stabenow (D-MI) was the only Democrat to vote no.) On the other hand, he voted yes in 2003 to reduce overall oil usage by about a million barrels by 2013 (which passed 99-1, Jon Kyl (R-AZ) being the only no vote.)
As for campaign reform, Frist voted against the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2001, which wasn't as bipartisan as the name indicates. Only 1 Democrat and 9 Republicans jumped ship- otherwise it was Dems Yes, GOP No. Frist stayed with his party. (As the Senate Majority Leader, you're expected to stay with your party, though, so take this with the appropriate amount of salt.)

CAMPAIGN SKELETON IN CLOSET: Two words: Terry. Schiavo. You think you'd had enough of her after two weeks? Try two months. Or more.

PRESIDENT FRIST?: Frist has a good chance at the Republican nomination, but the pro-life crowd is going to make his life a living hell in the general election. I'm giving him 'dark horse' status- might get elected, probably won't. He's at least got a shot unlike Pataki and Tancredo.

Next time I'm going to get a Democrat in here.

Random Human Running For President #2: George Pataki (R-NY)

2005-07-28T23:40:00.000-05:00

"Representing the Republicans, from Garrison, New York, number 11, Geooooorrrrrge Patakiiiiii!"

WHY GEORGE WILL BE ELECTED: Any New York candidate will get an instant boost from two simple words: 'Nine-eleven'. At this point, Pataki would not be the only one cashing in- Hillary Clinton's also shown interest, and Rudy Guliani was the mayor of New York on 9/11 and has been used to INVOKE 9/11 in order to assist Republican candidates in 2004's campaign ads (he's been winning head-to-head Election Day polls left and right).

WHY HE WON'T: 2004 showed Pataki as weak in running an election campaign, as Republicans blamed him for aimlessness after the Democrats made huge gains in New York. That was just one state. Could he handle 50? And could he even carry his own state (he's not popular in New York)?

LEGACY SO FAR: 9/11, just like any New York politician who's been around since the 2000 elections. It's all you're going to hear about from the GOP. Every time a poll shows a New York politician dipping, I guarantee you'll end up seeing planes slamming into the Twin Towers, waving flags, and headshots of bald eagles. Also, that one picture of the NYFD raising the flag on Ground Zero. They're gonna have a dump truck full of those ads and every time Pataki, Clinton or Giuliani goes down in the polls, the respective party'll pull one out.

BUT WHAT'S HE ACTUALLY DONE?: A bit difficult to figure since as governor, you have no yes/no vote on bills- all you can do is sign or veto them. That's a big reason governors have an advantage over Senators or House Reps. But you can figure out some things from his prior positions in the New York state senate and assembly. He's been an advocate of spending limits, instituted the death penalty in New York when he entered- but then more or less killed it off. He also wanted the EPA made into a Cabinet department. Past that, can't get a good read on him.

CAMPAIGN SKELETON IN CLOSET: On May 15, 2003, the New York State Legislature overrode 115 vetos Pataki had made. This would be spun into something like "Pataki couldn't gain the respect of his home state... so how could he gain yours?"

OTHER NOTES: One reason Pataki's decided recently to run and abandon the New York governorship could be that... he didn't want to straight-up lose the governorship and therefore torpedo his Presidential campaign. His likely 2006 opponent would have been Eliot Spitzer, who in a May 4 poll wiped the floor with Pataki by a 53-32% margin.

PRESIDENT PATAKI?: Polls show he'll have a hard time in the primaries- the open-field polls taken by the various polling places generally tend to show Pataki getting 1-2% of the Republican primary vote (the leader normally gets about 30%). If he wants a shot, he'd better get moving in order to make up that much ground.

Couple changes

2005-07-28T22:59:00.000-05:00

Apparently you had to be registered with Blogspot to post a comment under the format of the blog. I took care of that, so now you don't have to be registered with jack. (And I do welcome comments.)

Also, found a counter. It may generate pop-up ads and the first 10 or so hits on it are from me unsuccessfully looking for at least a GOOD pop-up like the Orbitz ones, but at least I have one now.

And finally, that's some blog stock exchange I'm apparently listed on. To be a high-value stock you have to be something of a linkwhore, which I'm not, so you can just ignore it.

Those threats to humanity taken care of, you may now go about your business.

Random Human Running For President #1: Tom Tancredo (R-CO)

2005-07-26T22:13:00.000-05:00

Before each candidate's bio, we'll introduce him or her as if they were a basketball player, using the order their state was admitted as a jersey number. Why? Because we can.

"Introducing first for the Republicans, from Golden, Colorado, number 38, Tom Tannnncredoooooooo!"

WHY TOM WILL BE ELECTED: Willing to speak his mind, which in moderation is a plus among many voters. That and he's pissed off Karl Rove, which would gain Democratic support.

WHY HE WON'T: It's not in moderation. He could come down with Howard Dean syndrome. He will also be getting no support from the Bush Administration during his campaign for reasons I'll get into here...

LEGACY SO FAR: Immigration. Tom is pretty much a single-issue candidate; he's even on record as saying in February that he'll be running for President on that issue if other candidates don't. Other than this issue, he's basically your garden-variety Republican.
Note that I simply said "immigration". Not "illegal immigration", just "immigration". He's so against it that even Bush, who's not exactly we-are-all-one-people himself, said he wasn't welcome in the White House. According to Wikipedia:
"The act, if passed, would impose an indefinite moratorium on immigration to the United States. Only 30,000 total legal immigrants would be allowed into the country annually for at least the first five years of the act and, after that, until such time as there are fewer than 10,000 illegal immigrants entering per year. When those conditions are met immigration could only be allowed at whatever level the president and both houses of Congress agree will have no adverse impact on wages, housing, the environment, or schools."
AKA: "The act, if passed, would pretty much shut America's doors to the rest of the world until we get a good enough border patrol to stop them from streaming in. Then after we do that, we might- MIGHT- let immigrants in again. ...No, I've never heard that term. What DOES 'melting pot' mean?" And then there's this statement he made on February 1 on the House floor:

"Bishop Gomez said to me, I do not see why you are so concerned about this, Congressman. He said, For instance, the Mexicans coming in, I can tell you right now, they do not want to be American. And I said, Well, Bishop, of course that is the problem. That is exactly the problem. Mr. Speaker, they do not want to be American, and we are telling them they should not be. We are telling them to keep their own language, to keep their own culture and their own political affiliations to a country other than the United States; and this will not accrue to our benefit, and it will not help us as a Nation."

CAMPAIGN SKELETON IN CLOSET: He advocated on an Orlando talk radio program that, if Al-Qaeda nuked the United States, "what if you said something like, 'If this happens in the United States and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you could take out their holy sites.'" The host clarified "You're talking about bombing Mecca?" Tom: Yeah. What if you said, we recognize that this is the ultimate threat to the United States, therefore this is the ultimate response." In short, he advocated nuking Mecca. Did someone say "Daisy ad"?

OTHER NOTES: I repeat again; Tancredo's burned one hell of a lot of bridges. Bush doesn't like him, Rove hates his guts, the PAC's won't give him squat to campign with (a winning House candidate is about 2/5ths financed by PAC's. Tom got 0.9%, just $1,000, from PAC's in his election.). He'll have a hard time raising money to put out ads.

PRESIDENT TANCREDO?: There is no way Tancredo's getting elected. At all. Even if his runaway mouth doesn't sink him, especially in Iowa and New Hampshire, two states that could care less about immigration, the complete lack of support from the Republican Party will ensure he never survives the primaries. In fact, after that happens and he has to concentrate on winning his district, I'm going out on a limb and saying that if a suitable opponent can be found (suitable defined as 'not your basic sacrificial lamb going up against a 7-term incumbent'), he'll have his hands full just staying in the House.

Annnnnnddddd They'reoff!

2005-07-26T00:26:00.000-05:00

So apparently there's an election in 2008. You might have heard about it. A lot. And so has Washington. Never mind that Bush is only six months into his second term (it started January 20, remember, and it's July 26 now), we have a presidency to decide, apparently, already.

Well, who am I to get in the way of what has got to be the most blatant gun-jumping since Yosemite Sam made Bugs Bunny dance? Wikipedia lists 22 candidates or likely candidates. So when I get around to doing so, every so often I'll be covering one of those candidates in this space, either when one of them enters the spotlight or I become particularly bored. We'll get to why they will and will not be elected, where they stand on things, what one thing a particularly nasty campaign might dredge up about the person (so we can take care of its merits before the attack ads do), whatever else I feel is necccesary.

I hope to eventually get to everyone, from Hilary Clinton to John McCain to Sam Brownback all the way down to Jesse Ventura. 'Eventually', considering this blogger, could mean 'takes me until Election Day', but we'll see what we (I) can do.

In the next post, we'll get to candidate number 1, House Representative Tom Tancredo (R-CO).

Making A Statement- In The Literal Sense Only

2005-07-11T15:48:00.000-05:00

I likely don't have many readers who follow the WWE. Heck, I don't have many readers, period. So let me give you some backstory:

*WWE has two main shows, Raw and Smackdown. Raw tapes on Monday, sometimes live. Smackdown tapes sometimes on Monday immediately following Raw and sometimes on Tuesday, and airs on Thursday.
*As the WWE has a large roster, they split it between the two shows, with just about everyone under contract only doing one program.
*Two of the wrestlers on Smackdown are Mohammed Hassan and his hanger-on, Daivari. Their gimmick is, basically, Arab-Americans who think they're being mistreated, prejudiced, and buried on the card just because they're Arab, when in reality they're simply jerks. Needless to say, they're 'heels', or bad guys.
*On an episode of Smackdown taped on Monday, July 4th- immediately after Raw- Hassan, currently in a feud with 'face' or good guy, the Undertaker, was watching Daivari in a match with said Undertaker. Before their match, Hassan was reassuring Daivari by telling him: that he was going to get his ass handed to him. (Soothing man, that Mohammed Hassan.) However, it would be for the "greater good". You know where this is headed, right?
*So when Daivari comes out for his match. After Daivari of course loses, Hassan- did we mention that he's Arab?- gets on his knees and prays, at which point five masked goons proceed to go after the Undertaker with what looked like piano wire. They then carry Daivari off like a martyr.
*Three days later, on July 7th, terrorists attack London.
*Later that day, Smackdown airs, showing the entire segment.

Naturally, there's been some flak. I've been in the camp that says the characters Hassan and Daivari shouldn't have even been created, because eventually something like this was going to happen. But not to worry, the WWE made a statement before Smackdown aired!... right?

"As many you may know, the characters Muhammad Hassan and Khosrow Daivari are U.S. citizens of Arab descent who have grown up in America. Hassan and Daivari have spoken out about the challenges and poor treatment they have faced being Arab-Americans in a post 9/11 America. They have taken these complaints, and the way they express them, to the extreme, insulting their country, their fellow Americans and the U.S. troops to the point where they have drawn the resentment of their fellow Superstars and WWE fans. Hassan now dresses in Arab garb as a way to express his dissatisfaction with America.
Hassan has grown increasingly frustrated in the WWE, believing that the powers that be are unfairly preventing him from getting a fair opportunity to challenge for a WWE title. He now uses his Arab heritage as an excuse for why he is not getting more opportunities to compete for a title. Hassan now believes that he deserves an opportunity to compete for the World Heavyweight Championship. Tonight, Hassan intensifies his quest to get that opportunity.
Parents may want to watch this segment tonight with their children.
In the real world, WWE believes that no matter what our race, religious creed or ethnic background in America, we all share the common bond of being Americans. We should all be open to the beliefs of individual Americans, recognizing that it is this diversity upon which America is based."

...huh? What the hell was that? All they did was give backstory, advise parental discretion, and say "The WWE loves us some tolerance!" That wasn't even an apology! Or anything! That was... I don't know what that was!

And You Wagered... 'Ann Coulter Sucks'

2005-07-09T11:00:00.000-05:00

Oh, how I hate this woman. You know how Sandra Day O'Connor retired, correct? Upon O'Connor's announcement, people were climbing over each other on both sides of the aisle to praise her for 24 years of service, how she was the swing vote, how everyone loved her for being a moderate, and oh yeah, first woman on the Supreme Court. Can't find anyone willing to bad-mouth her... oh, I'm sorry, Ann Coulter, you had something to say?

"REAGAN'S BIGGEST MISTAKE FINALLY RETIRES- By Ann Coulter"

Hoo boy. Here we go. Against my better judgment, let's go on...

"The fundamental goal of the next Supreme Court justice should be to create a record that would not inspire Sen. Chuck Schumer to say, as he did of Justice O'Connor last week: "We hope the president chooses someone thoughtful, mainstream, pragmatic -- someone just like Sandra Day O'Connor." That's our litmus test: We will accept only judicial nominees violently opposed by Chuck Schumer."

"Showing what a tough job it is to be president, when Bush announced O'Connor's resignation, he called her "a discerning and conscientious judge and a public servant of complete integrity." I assume he was reading from the script originally drafted for Justice Rehnquist's anticipated resignation, but still, he said it."

So so far, all she's done is badmouth anyone praising O'Connor. Let's keep going and see if Coulter raises an actual argument in the foreseeable future:

"In a quarter-century on the highest court in the land, O'Connor will have left no discernible mark on the law, other than littering the U.S. Reports with a lot of long-winded versions of the legal proposition: "It depends."

Um... yeah, and that's a bad thing? It depends whether you're fit for the death penalty. It depends whether you're eligible to vote. It depends whether you can legally drink. A lot of things "depend", and for good reason.

Then Ann goes on about tines and prongs and spikes for a while- I think she was trying to make the point that O'Connor always added nuances to laws, which again... this is bad how? Even when she makes her only real actual argument, that O'Connor overruled a case outlawing sodomy, Lawrence v. Texas, but didn't overturn Roe v. Wade (which, seriously, I haven't cared for years), she kept going on about whatever it was she was on about:

"Mercifully, O'Connor was concurring only in Lawrence, so there is no multipronged test for sodomy under the Constitution."

Someone get this woman a debate coach. And a humor writer. And someone to tell her that the they-lobotomize-the-baby imagery will get you banned on most Internet message boards. And Internet message boards will accept a lot of things.

Vote Learnin' Am Good

2005-07-06T11:12:00.000-05:00

One thing that's crucial to a democracy is an informed populace. People need to know what their elected officials are up to- which is why you hear so much about the Valerie Plame case. Most specifically, they need to know how these same elected officials are voting. Do they really represent you, or are they representing someone else, or are they just there to soak up special-interest money?

That said, the voters need to do their homework. It's tougher if they're not supplied the information in the first place, but votes, special-interest endorsements, public statements, committee seats and who's financing whom is out there for everyone to see. That said, Project Vote Smart hands you that information on a silver platter- from President Bush all the way down to state assemblymen whose entire campaign consists of signs on the lawn and 'Hey, I run into him at Target!' (County and some city officials are also included, but just their addresses- you have to draw the line SOMEWHERE, people.) Voting records are stripped down to 'key votes'- votes you hear about in the media (the flag-burning amendment), votes that are easy to understand (so none of this 'Bill to increase tax on rutabagas by 3%' stuff), votes that make it clear where someone stands on an issue, that kind of thing.

Now, granted, it's not going to help in actual voting matters for a year and a half yet, but it's good for if, some day, you feel like yelling at an elected official or you get into a Fark flamewar.

Random Supreme Court Rants

2005-07-01T17:15:00.000-05:00

So you've probably heard by now that Sandra Day O'Connor will step down from the Supreme Court as soon as a replacement can be found. Time for Random Rants:

*THE STEPDOWN: This is the LAST justice I would have wanted to step down. The first words out of my mouth were-- well, actually, my first words were 'Aw, dammit. Well, no more Price is Right for me today.' Then when I heard O'Connor was stepping down, that changed to '(bleep)! Not the moderate!' A solid Republican like Rhenquist, fine. A solid Democrat, say, Ginsburg, we'd still have a fight, but the Democrats would have to realize there's no way they're getting that seat to stay Democrat without winning a Presidential election. It's like in baseball- the President's party is up to bat, and you can't score runs when you're in the field. But the moderate- the Democrats see the possibility to keep the seat moderate, the Republicans will want it to shift right, so we go to...

*THE NOMINATION: This battle's already begun weeks ago. Some of you may have seen ads saying the Democrats will attack anyone Bush nominates, just because they can. Now, what the hell good would that do? If they attack every single nomination, we're just going to stay at eight seats forever. But hopefully the Democrats won't prove the Republicans right- pick some prospects you like, make them public, VERY public, and then try and get Bush to nominate someone off that list. Say 'Here are the potential nominees we like, here are the ones we're going to put through the wringer but might still accept- nominate at your own risk- and here are the ones we'll fight tooth and nail to reject.' But the most likely nomination is...

*ALBERTO GONZALES: AKA, Bush's Lifelong Rubber Stamp. From what I've heard, he likely falls in the 'wringer' category, maybe even 'accept'. I just cannot see why. As Bush has risen in the political world throught his life, he's moved Gonzales to progressively better positions to where Gonzales can easily implement Bush's agenda- counsel to Bush in Texas, Texas Secretary of State, Texas Supreme Court, White House Counsel, and most recently, Attorney General. All promotions were made by Bush. And seeing as he was already fought hard against for the Attorney General nomination, I can't see why it would be any different for the Supreme Court, especially if everyone knows going in exactly what kind of judge Gonzales is going to be. Which means we're going to see...

*THE MUCH-ANTICIPATED PISSING CONTEST: You know the script by now: Bush nominates flaming Republican jackass, Democrats call extraordinary circumstances and filibuster and fight and claw and scratch. Republicans chant 'up-or-down vote, up-or-down vote' like zombies (who came up with that phrase, anyway?) and say these aren't extraordinary circumstances (which means they don't exist, because... Supreme Court). Democrats brush it off. Republicans invoke nuclear option, ram through nominee. Democrats engage in procedural shutdown of Congress. Us voters all get disgusted and vote for as few incumbents as humanly possible. Which brings me to...

*THE IDIOTS: You know the ones. People whose political knowledge consists of reading bumper stickers, making them sheep to the majority. And still they manage to find their way to the polling place. People that make you wonder why they got rid of the poll test back in the Civil War era. For example, on C-SPAN today, they were taking calls about this issue. A guy from Gainesville, FL called in and said (I'm paraphrasing because who in their right mind tapes C-SPAN?): "We need to put in a judge that will legislate from the Bible because that's what this country was founded on." At which point Canada seemed tantalizingly close. No, Gainesville. Judges are not supposed to leave judicial decisions up to the Bible. The United States was not founded on the Bible. It was founded on the freaking CONSTITUTION, YOU MORON! GOOD GOD! Where did you learn this?!

Bill O'Reilly Sucks, Volume 8,390,245

2005-06-15T19:17:00.000-05:00

For those of you who missed The O'Reilly Factor tonight, let me recap the Talking Points segment in, well, talking points:

*The New York Times is reporting Al Franken as a contender for a U.S. Senate seat.
*Thus, the NYT can be compared to the Mafia.
*Pop. (No, wait, I'm sorry; that was my brain's rebuttal.)
*Al Franken is a smear merchant. (This, I will agree with. He does extremely good fact-checking, but he's a flaming Democrat. )
*Al Franken whined like a little baby last week. He must have some sort of emotional problems.
*Al Franken works for Air America, which is this silly little radio thingamadoobie.
*Air America only exists because it's propped up by liberal billionaires. Their ratings suck.
*The New York Times supports Al Franken.
*Thus, the New York Times reports propaganda.
*Boom. (That's the remainder of my head.)

Okay, You Won, We Get It

2005-06-10T21:15:00.000-05:00

I took a day trip with my parents to the general Baraboo/Wisconsin Dells region today. Fine day- I slaughtered Dad so badly on a go-kart track that I lapped him (and no, it wasn't one of those little dinky ovals), except for the part where:

A. There were some nasty storm clouds coming.
B. Mom and Dad wanted to do this thing where you travel 12 miles through the Dells on a jet boat going 45 mph.
C. Said jet boat was roofless.
D. I reasoned this to mean that maybe we shouldn't do the jet boat now; maybe wait until the storm passes.
E. But noooooooooo, I'm going to get splashed anyway, so what's the difference? (The difference is the boat's going to splash me a couple isolated times as opposed to constantly for an hour.)
F. So, outvoted 2-1, off we go to the jet boat, where...
G. The guy who wound up being the boat's driver told us the boat's going to be a lightning rod, so you'll have to wait on it.
H. I spend the next five minutes repeating various forms of "What did I TELL you?"

But there was one other thing that got me. Near the city of Poynette, WI- a swing state, remember- I saw a huge sign out in someone's lawn. It was a Bush/Cheney '04 sign.

Now, if you still have an election bumper sticker on your car, that's one thing. Bumper stickers aren't coming off anytime soon. (Although I suggest the next one you get should go over the election sticker, like I plan to do with my Kerry/Edwards one.) But LAWN BANNERS? Six months after the election? Take the damn thing down already- you're either being a sore loser or a sore winner. Or you are lazy to the point where you need to be checked for moss. If you still have one on your lawn, Bush, Kerry, Chuck Bednarik, whoever- I want you to go out right now and take it inside.

Never Mind, Nothing To See Here

2005-06-07T22:19:00.000-05:00

Disregard that last post. Nintendo will, in fact, be charging for old games. So that's the smart business thinking they all went to school for.

What we don't know- you know, like everything else about the console- is how they'll charge. Price, methodology, other little format things. Here's how I play it:

PRICE: The ideal setup would be, look around the Internet, see how popular all the old titles are, charge accordingly. So your Punchouts, Mega Man 2's and Super Mario Worlds carry higher prices (I would think no higher than $15). Lesser titles such as Where's Waldo, Side Pocket and Ultraman: Fight the Future would go for next to nothing ($1-$2 for that level of game and they'd still have trouble getting downloads).
METHODOLOGY: Obvious. You want to go download-once-and-it's-yours as opposed to a monthly charge. That's a big complaint with some MMORPG's- monthly charges. Remove them and you're golden.
OTHER QUIRKS: Nintendo's tossed out some ideas, among them:
*Offering bonus downloads with game purchases. This one sounds good, and they could do it a couple ways- you could register games after purchase (have the rental places withhold registration material until they sell the game off) and then either make it a free game download of Nintendo's choosing, or a certain dollar amount worth of downloads of the player's choice- a gift certificate, if you will.
*Offer downloads for a limited time during promotional periods. This one's trickier. My guess is, you register your Revolution and get, say, a week of free downloads. The rationale would be, you test out a lot of games in that period and after the week, you have a good idea of which ones you want to buy. Kind of like an uber-rental. The problem is, after that week some gamers are going to forget that they only had a week and get steamed.

Other things Nintendo could do:
*Bundle a certain amount of gift-certificate money built into a newly-purchased Gamecube (if you buy it used, the money's used up by the last guy).
*Alternately, a new Revolution could come bundled with, say, five free games picked at random by the CPU. Could get Contra, Super Dodge Ball, Super Mario 64, Street Fighter 2 and River City Ransom (though you'd have to get really really lucky), or you could get California Games, Platoon, Hal's Hole In One Golf, Pirates of Dark Water, and Superman 64. Luck of the draw.
*Buy a Gamecube during, say, the first month of release and get some really good, desirable games (Super Metroid, Kirby Super Star, NBA Live 95) for download free.

Bombing the Gold Mine

2005-06-04T10:47:00.000-05:00

Nintendo, why you gotta make me hit you? You have tons of old titles for the NES, SNES, and N64. Titles that will show up on the Nintendo Revolution. Titles that people will GLADLY pay good money for. You can gouge to a certain degree and people will pay it.

So why are you charging nothing?

Don't get me wrong; I'm not complaining that I won't have to pay for any of them; that you're just going to HAND me my old favorites. It's just bad business. You have money staring you in the face, screaming 'Take me! Take me!' And you're not taking it? Did you just get sick of money?

Well, THAT'S A Relief

2005-06-03T17:42:00.000-05:00

If you haven't been in a coma lately, you've heard of Deep Throat, the famous anonymous source that broke Watergate wide open, was revealed to be Mark Felt, whom you know as nothing except 'that guy who said he was Deep Throat'. Well, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez decided today that Felt probably won't be prosecuted for giving confidential info to Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein.

Well, good. I'm glad the White House won't be prosecuting people for something the statute of limitations ran out on 28 years ago. The statute for this kind of thing is five years, meaning if anyone was going to nail Deep Throat, it was either going to be Gerald Ford, who was in a pardoning sort of mood, or Richard Nixon, who was a little busy being prosecuted himself because of what Deep Throat revealed.

As for the TV people, can we stop giving sounding boards to people who got screwed over by Watergate? G.Gordon Liddy, Pat Buchanan, those people? They're not going to say anything except biased "Deep Throat is a traitor to his government" crap and you know it.

Invest in Valium

2005-05-25T23:56:00.000-05:00

So I'm watching CNBC right now and I run into something called 'Mad Money', hosted by one Jim Cramer. After five minutes, I'm convinced he's beyond help. After 30, he's beyond beyond help. If help was in Pittsburgh, Cramer's out cruising with Captain Kirk somewhere.

First and foremost, the man screams. A lot. He is never NOT screaming. I literally haven't seen him use a normal tone of voice yet. He will scream about selling oil stock. He'll scream at a guest. He'll scream that he has a caller. He'll scream that he's back from commercial. He'll scream that the caller is from a specific state. Seriously. In what he termed the 'Lightning Round', where he spent a good 10 minutes in Mach Eighty Overdrive going through 40 million different stocks in as many callers (one stock to a caller). And he was passionate about every single one, even the ones where he admitted he was wavering.

I was reminded of Saturday Night Live's 'Hardball' skits, where Will Forte plays the part of Zell Miller. Forte does Zell in such a fashion that his face goes from Flesh to Beet in about 10 seconds, which can't be healthy. (I really hope Lorne's got a medic backstage, because Forte should get a blood pressure reading after doing Zell.) Cramer's entire head (he's bald) gets raw-ham pink by the end of the Lightning Round. Towards the end, he was wiping his nose and his voice was cracking.

To remind you, this person gives stock tips for a living.

I don't plan to watch very much after tonight, but if the guy drops dead, someone let me know. And send me a tape; I don't want to miss it.

Apparently I Have Readers

2005-05-24T19:57:00.000-05:00

Hi, readers! I apparently have you! But enough about you. E3 was last week and the annual Parade of Gamer Orgasms that went along with it. Here's how I see the next round shaping up:

1st Place: Sony Playstation 3. From what I saw on the G4 E3 shows, that is serious horsepower the PS3's got. It just plain blew everybody else out of the water. I know it's not really going to matter in the long run since it'll be the games that matter, but damn. You could see the difference between them and the Xbox 360. The sticking point I've got is the price point. I've heard that all the stuff under the hood will require a price point of about $500. It's a gaming Ferrari. The best materials available, but it's gonna cost you.

2nd Place: Nintendo Revolution. Granted, they didn't say much except they were headed online. But I noted one thing that will speak volumes: backwards compatibility all the way back to the NES. You'll be able to download old Nintendo cartridge games and play them on the Revolution. This is why I'm going to get a Revolution- I've always sold off old consoles before getting new ones, or at leas tthis house has. So to get all my old favorites back- Super Dodge Ball, Super Buster Bros., Wildsnake, Base Wars, Kirby Super Star, Aerobiz Supersonic, Destruction Derby 64... I don't know if I'll even be buying an actual Revolution title for a while, unless they sequel up Beyond Good and Evil. They didn't say much, though, so that might kill them as the other two are going to be out before they even spill the beans.

DNF: Microsoft Xbox 360. I don't like where they're headed. At all. At their G4 press conference, they decided that:
A) Their target audience was people who've never picked up a controller. Seriously. They're playing up Xbox Live, their rationale being that someone who's never played a game would get Tony Hawk's Underground 2, build skate parks, and sell them online. It makes about as much sense as it sounds.
B) They weren't going to display any games really worth getting a 360 for, with the possible exception of Gears of War.
In addition, with Sony's huge library and Nintendo's sudden infusion of classics, all of a sudden Microsoft's the one with the small library, not Nintendo. Also, they have few franchises- Halo, Project Gotham Racing, and maybe DOA. Sony has Final Fantasy, Jak/Daxter, Ratchet/Clank, GTA, Devil May Cry and Sly Cooper. Nintendo has Mario, Donkey Kong, Metroid, F-Zero, Pokemon, Kirby, and oh yeah, Legend of Zelda. Plus the amalgamation of above into Super Smash Bros., which was just about the smartest move Nintendo ever made. Microsoft lost graphics to Sony. They lost library size to Nintendo. They don't have the franchises the others do. They won't have the cheapest system, even- that's usually Nintendo and is likely to be again. All they have is Bill Gates' account, and unless he's packaging a $100 bill with every 360, that won't help.

Nokia N-Gage: What, you bought that thing? I pity and mock you.

And Now, Back to Gaming

2005-04-18T20:39:00.000-05:00

Another gaming takeover. And no, it doesn't involve EA this time. Seems Gamestop and EB Games, the two major video game stores, have 'merged', according to Gamestop. Though it looks like a takeover from here: EB shareholders are having their shares bought out, but not Gamestop shareholders. In addition, the merged company will take the Gamestop name.

Personally, I'm a Gamestopper, so having been on the TechTV side of the G4TechTV merger, it's nice to be on the winning side this time. However, having been on the losing side last time, I feel for those who firmly favor EB. Hopefully you guys aren't going to get put out too much. And speaking of G4, they were on the EB side, judging from all the EB plugs they've done. So it'll be interesting to see how they react.

Buy My Book! Buy My Book! Buy My... (click) I'll Be Good

2005-03-26T21:42:00.000-06:00

So I haven't updated in about a month and a half. Why not? Because my life is dangerously boring. Also, see that post just below this one? I'm tacking 50-some thousand words onto it and turning it into a book. Turns out I really don't like Bill O'Reilly, Michael Moore and Ann Coulter, among others. What you see down there is the basic outline of said book.

But with no real journalism experience past high school humor columns, I need some sort of way to get my foot in the door with a publisher. So I decided to focus on the almighty dollar: get a list together of people who'd buy the book given the chance. To that end, we'll use the comments page attached to this post. You get to the blog, post a comment, I point the publisher to said comments page, they (hopefully) accept, I get interviews on The Daily Show, some Hollywood director notices that beautiful face of mine, I win Oscar, and wind up dating supermodels. Eat a Snickers and date supermodels. ...or maybe I'll just have some really disjointed form of a petition. So if you'd buy a book with the kind of premise you see below, by all means post a comment and help me out. If not, don't.

The Journalism Manifesto

2005-02-09T20:18:00.000-06:00

I hope one day to get into the journalism industry. Which is why I’m angry, to put it mildly. Here I am, trying to hone my writing skills so that one day I can possibly follow in the footsteps of Woodward, Bernstein, and Cronkite. And what do I see from the people that get to do just that?
*I see them taking money from the White House to pimp some program or another. Armstrong Williams, looking at you. Mike McManus, Maggie Gallagher, you too. You three disgust.
*I see Dan Rather and his staff not bothering to fact-check a Presidential candidate’s military record, and only one person actually lost her job over it. It took people working on their own, for free, to unearth the truth.
*I see two sitting heads of state die (in the countries of Georgia and Togo), an associate of the Georgia prime minister commit suicide two days later, and the king of Nepal sacking the government, placing said government under house arrest, and cutting Nepal off from the outside world. Or actually, I don’t, because the American media (I stress American here; other countries- the United Kingdom and India in particular- are much better) thought that Ben Affleck and Jennifer Anniston breaking up was more important news. (The timeframes here differ by a few weeks, but the point remains.)
*I see people continuing to trust Bill O’Reilly and Michael Moore, who are famous for just making things up and using as the crux of their arguments “Why do you hate America?,” which is just the most infuriating question I know and one that is only used when a pundit has been cornered and has no other way to win an argument.
So here I sit. I’ve taken to relying largely on Google News, an amalgamation of sources which, when combined, can actually tell me what I want to know. That and Fark.com for whatever didn’t headline Google. Fark, who’s tagline is “It’s not news, it’s Fark”. And a lot of America relies on Comedy Central’s ‘The Daily Show’, which is famous for not being real news. This should not have had to happen. I guess it’s time for someone to vent and give their opinion on how things ought to be done. And since nobody else has raised their hand, I’ll take the floor.
(Before I go on, I’d like to exonerate some journalists, ones I personally respect: Keith Olbermann, Anderson Cooper, Woody Paige, Jim Lehrer, Tim Russert, and Ted Koppel. Jon Stewart, though not technically a journalist, also gets my admiration for single-handedly dismantling Crossfire, one of the more prominent centers of partisan hackery. I’m not familiar enough with the identities of newspaper writers or local anchors to name anyone in those fields, but I know there are some good ones out there. The people in those areas know who they are.) (Also, before anyone asks, and some will despite it having absolutely nothing to do with the rest of this piece, I voted a split ticket on Election Day. There were four races in which people weren’t running unopposed. I took two Democrats and two Republicans.)

1. The most important thing is, be right. Don’t worry about being first. This should seem obvious, but it clearly isn’t. When people rush to be first, bad things happen. We all remember what happened with the 2000 election. All the networks wanted to be first to declare a winner, which is how we got that Florida mess. Geraldo Rivera gets two strikes here. Remember that he was first into Al Capone’s vault, and look how that turned out. But that wasn’t his only offense. Early on in the second Iraq war, he was first to report on various military movements. Problem is, the military didn’t WANT these movements reported- it tipped off the other side. So they kicked him out of Iraq. Yes, even if you are right, it’s still not always a good idea to report it in the first place. So slow down, make sure it’s something you can safely report, make sure it’s right, THEN go ahead and report it.
You know what it is? It’s ratings. People want it first so they can say they had it first. I’ve got news for you, media: Nobody remembers who got there first, nor do they care. The only ‘got there first’ anyone remembers is Woodward and Bernstein. That’s it. I personally can name only one more: Aaron Brown and 9/11. Yes, someone did get to 9/11 first. He happened to be in a building a safe distance from the World Trade Center at the time and could make it to the rooftop, cameraman in tow. (He wound up with his own show on CNN.) And even if everybody gets there first (aka, a simulcast), it still doesn’t stop. Just 5 minutes before I wrote this, I caught an ad on MSNBC claiming that they beat CNN in the ratings for the State of the Union. My God, it’s the exact same thing no matter who’s got it. You’re all broadcasting the same thing. It doesn’t matter if you’re watching the State of the Union on MSNBC or CNN or CBS or Spike TV or Cartoon Network or the Spice Channel. It’s still the State of the Union. And all too often, you see, in the rush to be first, that the story is proven to be wrong. Just take the extra time to get it right. Nobody’s going to notice. I promise.

2. Pick the right news items. This needs a bit more elaboration than I previously gave it in item 1. And the intro. The method I use here is, take all the news items, then strip away all the qualifiers (location of the story, the names, that kind of thing). When you’re done, the news items worthy of reporting will reveal themselves, and the unworthy news will as well. In addition, the order the stories should be reported in will flesh itself out for you.
“Sitting world leader dies” is news, top-story news, and it should not matter that it happened in Togo or Russian Breakoff #833. “Associate of dead prime minister commits suicide two days after PM dies” is definitely news, and a signal that the news item is worthy of further investigation. (That’s from the Georgia story.) “Man sacks government and cuts off country from outside world” is big news, and it shouldn’t matter that it happened in Nepal. On the flip side, “Boyfriend and girlfriend break up” is not news, and it shouldn’t matter that it was Ben Affleck and Jennifer Anniston. “Jury selection for trial”, that I don’t consider to be very big news. Maybe if it’s a really important trial, fine, report it, but stick it near the back. If we’re talking the Michael Jackson trial, or anything else involving a celebrity, here’s what you report. You report the start date for the trial. Then you leave it alone until the trial actually starts. You are free to report important developments in the trial- testimony, evidence, that kind of thing. Then when that’s done, all that’s left to report is the verdict and, if applicable, sentencing. That’s all one needs to know. (I do allow for some time set aside for weird news. Don’t devote half the broadcast to it, but go ahead and give a minute or two to the toilet-trained elephants and the stupid criminals.) The BBC seems to understand. Reuters understands. There’s a news service in India, New Kerala, they get it. Even a Chinese outlet, Xinhua, manages to do it right. They report the correct stories, almost without fail. The closest the United States can manage is MSNBC, and they screw up the hierarchy a lot.

3. Journalists, pundits, you’re not robots. You’re human beings. I’ve never understood the credo saying that you’re only supposed to report the news. You have opinions and emotions, too. If a story gets you worked up enough to give your opinion on the matter, or if it moves you to tears, go right ahead and vent. That’s right, right there on the air. I don’t mind. After all, Walter Cronkite broke down when JFK got shot. He also editorialized that Vietnam was unwinnable after a report on the Tet Offensive, and said “Go, baby, go” when Apollo 11 launched. I figure if it’s good enough for him, it’s good enough for you. I only ask that you do two things: Clearly flag when you’re about to give your opinion (a lot of you do this already), and allow others their opinion without shouting them down. That seems to be a bit harder. I’m not saying you have to all have viewer mail and call-ins. Just if you’re debating something with a guest or someone you’re interviewing, allow them to speak their mind. Otherwise, what’s the point of doing the piece? You listening, Bill O’Reilly, He of the Cut His Mikes and Shut Ups?
The example to follow? C-SPAN, assuming people haven’t deleted it from their dials. They have a sort of talk show on occasion, by itself and during some votes, they take calls, they get a debate going, sometimes the callers debate previous callers, they’re great at this sort of thing. They even have at least two lines to call, one for each side of an issue, or just ‘Support Republicans’, ‘Support Democrats’, and ‘Other’, and they make sure to get equal calls from each line, though nobody ever calls the ‘Other’ line. And very rarely does a caller turn out to be a troublemaking idiot, and even then, you can’t immediately tell, and it’s a simple “Anyone who disagrees with me on this issue is stupid”. Not too bad.

4. There are two parts to every report, and they’re equally important. There’s the news item- see point 2- and then there’s the story. If you’ve followed point 2, you’ve got the news item half down. Now work on the story. I’ve only caught bits and pieces of the movie ‘Hotel Rwanda’, but one of the lines I did catch really resonated with me. A journalist on assignment n Rwanda was lamenting the fact that people would see the atrocities he was reporting on, say ‘My God, that’s horrible’, and then go back to eating dinner. Well, it doesn’t have to be like that.
The best kind of story is the story that will cause some of the audience to get up and take some sort of action. To vote, to give blood, to write a congressman. (Not every news item will allow that. Don’t sweat it if there’s no action to take.) Remember what I just said about Cronkite editorializing that Vietnam was unwinnable? That story did cause someone to take action. That someone happened to be President Lyndon Johnson, and the story played a large part in convincing him to not run for a second term. Johnson even said, “If I've lost Cronkite, I've lost Middle America.” And you never know what part of the story’s going to cause people to take action. It could be the news item itself. It might be the soundbites you pick out, or the pictures you show, or you. (Just remember that if people do take action and the story’s later shown to be wrong, you’re in deeeeeeeep trouble. All the more reason to get the story right.) You don’t want to get preachy or anything, but the occasional personal opinion never hurts.
However, at the same time, keep opinion and news separate. The American media’s full of people who can’t draw the distinction between fact and opinion. Bill O’Reilly. Michael Moore. Sean Hannity. Joe Scarborough. Al Franken to a lesser degree (he gives a lot of stats, but he peppers them with a lot of opinion- they’re not separate). Just generally, if an entire political half of the country wants to smack the person, they’re probably on this list. Report the news first. FIRST. Then if time allows, feel free to go ahead with an opinion. (In other words, the O’Reilly Factor’s ‘Talking Points’ segment needs to go. Bill gives one snippet of news and launches into a tirade. No use for it.)

5. Maybe I haven’t hammered this home enough. GET. IT. RIGHT. (Actually, no,
don’t think I have. Item 1 was more about not worrying about being first.) Look at how many reports you’ve screwed up since just this past election season. Among the benefits of a correct report: It makes you look like quite the smart cookie, you won’t have to report it again to correct yourself, meaning less work for you, and most importantly, you are one of, if not the only source an average person will get their news from. People rely on you to tell them what’s going on. There’s an extremely high level of trust. That’s why you’re a journalist in the first place: someone trusts you to tell them the news. I don’t have to tell you that trust is the most important thing a journalist can have. Once that trust is lost, the journalist’s credibility goes with it. People don’t like to employ journalists who have lost their credibility. You can connect the dots. You see Armstrong Williams? Don’t do that.

6. If you’re not sure whether a story’s right, or if you see something that might look like a story, go investigate. Nobody’s gonna do it for you, and if you’re right, hey look! You’re first! Just like you want! Don’t mindlessly parrot another news source if you can help it, because just like in a school test, the person you’re copying off of might have gotten the answers wrong. Go grab a camera, a notepad, and take a gander yourself if at all possible. (Example to follow: Anderson Cooper.) The target’s probably not going to reveal the story of their own free will. I mean, do you think Washington reveals everything they know? Course not. No administration does. But before you overcompensate and go shutter-happy, remember some things:
a. Some things aren’t supposed to be reported. I already stated how Geraldo learned that the hard way. Troop movements- if the Pentagon’s not saying anything, consider them off-limits. You might be endangering soldiers. That’s the most obvious. I know there’s more on the list, but it’s not coming to me at the moment. It’s mostly judgment-call stuff. Just be careful.
b. In the event that your hunch is wrong and there’s nothing more to the story, don’t get desperate and report on it anyway. Nothing good will come of it. Sometimes you just hit a dead-end. Shake it off and move on.
c. A rule I tend to subscribe to is this: If the subject of a story did something good, like save the mayor from something, and he/she tells you not to report something, follow his/her advice. The rationale here is, the subject’s earned right of veto. (Journalism schools across the country debate this one, citing an example involving one Oliver Sipple. Sipple saved the life of then-President Ford by tackling a would-be assassin just before the assassin could fire. When the media naturally came calling, reporters happened to find out he was openly gay. Problem was, Sipple didn’t want his parents in Detroit to know. He pleaded with the journalists not to report it, but they went ahead anyway, even putting it in the headlines, and that pretty much destroyed his life. His mother wouldn’t speak to him, and when she died, Sipple’s dad wouldn’t allow him into the funeral. He started drinking and was found dead in his apartment of “natural causes” only months after that funeral. Under my ruling, Sipple would have gotten his wish. He did save the President, he’s earned the right to keep a secret or two.) However, if the subject did something wrong, such as shot a cop, I would feel free to go ahead and start digging- mainly to find out if the subject’s had any sort of a history. Consider it part of their punishment.

7. All news has a shelf life- that is, a period of time you may safely report the news item before you need to move on to something else. Every single news item, from 9/11 to the Iraqi elections to Man Staples Self In Crotch. The general rule is, the bigger the news item as determined in point 2 (pick the right news items), the longer the shelf life it will have. However, unless it’s at the approximate level of news as 9/11 (in which case by all means, report on it as long as you feel is necessary) figure on a maximum shelf life of three days. (The lead stories get three days; some stories become stale as soon as noise stops coming out of your mouth.) Once the shelf life expires, stop reporting on it unless there are further developments. You cannot possibly fathom how much it bugs me to see legitimate news go unreported so that Day 18 of Kobe Bryant Trial Speculation (only 32 to go until the trial starts!) may continue unabated. ‘5,000 more tsunami victims found in Indonesia’ is a new development. ‘The Iraqis are almost done counting ballots’ doesn’t work for me. That’s not a new development. However, when they are in fact done, and you have a winner or winners to report, by all means tell me. That’s a new development.

8. Blogs are news outlets too. The only differences are that an individual blog has a much smaller audience, and the writers usually aren’t getting paid. In fact, people sometimes hand money the other way to get a website. And while most blogs are just personal little things and some only update once a year (I plead guilty on that one), that still leaves some blogs run by people who are dead serious about that whole ‘responsible journalism’ thing. They do their research, they write, they edit, all by their lonesome. They were the ones who flagged discrepancies in the Dan Rather National Guard story. And some of those blogs aren’t even partisan garbage! Yes! People still do go down the ideological middle!

9. If you’re going to do an interview with somebody, and they’re doing the rounds because they have something to answer to, for the love of all that’s holy, don’t lob softballs. Barbara Walters drives me absolutely insane with this. She gets exclusives so as to have this person who just released an inflammatory book/took bribes/killed somebody all to herself, and then all you hear is “How do you feel?” and “Did you do it?” And when I see these ads for the interview, I want to scream, “MY DOG COULD ASK BETTER QUESTIONS, AND HE’S BEEN DEAD FOR 10 YEARS!” You pin that sucker to the wall with questions designed to knock them on their butt, the hardest stuff you can think up (ask around the office for questions if you need to; maybe a co-worker can think up a really good question that you normally wouldn’t have come up with) and you don’t let up until you’ve either got satisfactory answers, you’ve got the subject in the fetal position, or you’ve got an empty tank of questions. Russert, Koppel, Lehrer, you’re fine. ABC prime-timers, get with the program. It’s like ABC took all the interviewing talent on the entire network and put it into Ted Koppel. And who’s this Gannon guy, who managed to get himself into the White House day after day and become Bush’s lapdog? The man watches all the legitimate news sources roast Bush over an open fire, and then in comes Gannon to ask something hilariously softball.
However, don’t be so hard as to make the questions pointed. You need to be tough, but fair. Something like “How do you explain these documents?” is a good question. Something like “When did you start releasing fraudulent documents?” is not (unless of course there’s irrevocable proof of a history of releasing those false documents; then it’s valid). And anyone who asks “Why do you hate America?” earns my eternal scorn.

I think I’ve covered all the items I wanted to. For the journalists, anyway. Some responsibility has to fall on the public. Remember, people: the journalists can report all they want, but it’s up to you to decide who to trust. And if it’s being repeatedly proven that one of your news sources is getting things wrong, not reporting the things you want reported, not asking the questions you want asked, it’s time to pick another news source. (See item 4 for most of the candidates here.) And if you can’t find anyone that’s reporting to your satisfaction, do something about it. Grab a blog. Grab a camera. Grab a pen and paper. You’ve got a voice. Use it.

I Tell You How To Spend Your Money

2005-01-08T10:04:00.000-06:00

So, I'm watching Sportscenter, as I do. They trot out Hank Goldberg to make playoff predictions. I would pay attention to those had they not flashed his record for the regular season- eight games below .500. I immediately stop listening. I'm sorry, but if you can't outpredict a coin flip, you're not worthy of telling people how to bet their money. So who is worth listening to? For a couple seasons, it was Jimmy Kimmel, who, while on FOX's pregame show, had three consecutive seasons where he beat out everybody else on TV. They never showed his actual record, but if you're the best one out there, I'd venture a guess that he was somewhere above .500. Now that he's gone from FOX, though, your best bet seems to be Page 2's Bill Simmons, who does display his record, is over .500, and has put out several columns detailing what not to do while betting. In particular, this one.

As for me. I don't plan to do more than one more of these (that being prior to the Super Bowl), so for now, I'll just list off my predictions straight-up (I've never been one for point spreads):

Wild-Card Round: Seahawks over Rams, Chargers over Jets, Packers over Vikings, Colts over Broncos.
Divisional Round: Steelers over Chargers, Colts over Patriots (you heard me), Packers over Falcons, Eagles over Seahawks.
Confrence Championships: Steelers over Colts, Eagles over Packers.
Super Bowl: Steelers over Eagles.

EA: Evil? Or Malicious?

2005-01-05T15:45:00.000-06:00

Hey, if I don't have anything to say for this long, I don't say anything. Well, now I do. You may have noticed, if you follow gaming news, that Electronic Arts- EA- has become basically the George Steinbrenner of the industry. Why Steinbrenner? As of late, they've been buying up everything in their sight, their new releases can't get it done and demand higher prices than competing games that are just as good, they demand way too much from the employees, and everyone now hates them. The NFL exclusitivity thing is what you've most likely heard about, but then EA went and bought a 19.9% share in French developer Ubisoft. Ubisoft considers the purchase 'hostile', reasoning that EA's planning to get more later and try and take over.

Well, now it's hit the fan. Not only is the French government taking Ubisoft's side in the matter, but fellow French developers Vivendi and Infogrames have decided to take steps to protect Ubisoft from EA, both looking at a possible friendly merger. The reason for that is, Europe's not all that powerful in the gaming industry, and those three companies are pretty much it as far as industry pull is concerned, with Ubisoft by far the biggest name. If Ubisoft goes, Europe, and France in particular, are more or less taken out of the gaming culture.

Personally, I'm rooting for France in this one. I've already explained why I prefer Ubisoft to EA right now, but I add that if EA's doing all this crap to take over the industry, they're not spending time making their OWN games good. They're lowering the quality of their titles, and eliminating anyone making games that can compete with them. And I think that with this much support for Ubisoft, EA is in over their head. And I haven't even brought up the fact that EA game sales are going to inevitably plummet as a sort of gamer boycott. It's not going to be pretty.

Random Gaming Rants

2004-12-22T16:45:00.000-06:00

A more focused Random Human Rants. As I've said before, I'm a gamer (the apparent 'insider' term for 'one who plays video games'.)

*Best Game Ever. Beyond Good and Evil, all current consoles and the PC. It swiped the title from Super Dodge Ball from the NES- about 3 and a half console rounds ago. You can find it now for $15. I'm going to link you to a full review from gamerankings.com. Second is still Super Dodge Ball- in which you smack people upside the head with the Dodgeball O'Doom until they make hilarious faces and fall down. Third is Kirby Super Star- here's another review.
*Worst Game Ever. On the flip side, two games I despise. First is Platoon for the NES. I never got more than three screens into it. Not stages. SCREENS. I never saw the deadly trip wires (the third one finished me off). And even when I knew where they were, couldn't avoid them. I never even saw an enemy soldier. But the worst is Survivor: The Ultimate Game. (Linking is so much easier than re-posting the review.)
*Game Developers. The people who make the games. Not to be confused with publishers, who print up the copies and ship them out. Way back when, I had a hard-on for anything Technos. They made the aforementioned Super Dodge Ball, as well as Nintendo World Cup and River City Ransom. More recently, Ubisoft's been the one on fire, making not only Beyond Good and Evil but also The Political Machine, Far Cry, the Tom Clancy games, and the recent Prince of Persia titles. Both companies have also made their fair share of garbage (Technos was responsible for Block Out, and Ubisoft for XIII, which was pretty but not much else), but usually even then, they try and put an original spin on the games. The stuff they get right is pure gold. (As for EA, they've always struck me as the people who will make what sells over what will be original and compelling. If originality is what it takes, fine, but the money comes first.)
*The Console Wars. As anyone following gaming knows, Sony leads the war with the Playstation 2, then is Microsoft with the Xbox, and in third is Nintendo's Gamecube. The main reason is that Sony's got two console rounds worth of games to draw on, as the PS2 was made backwards-compatible to PS1 games. Nintendo's in third because they're not online. The Xbox trades mainly on its stellar graphics.
The next console round will likely see everyone doing so well graphics-wise that nobody will ever really have the lead again. We'll call that the point of indistinguishability (POI). I see Nintendo definately getting online. They know they have to. As soon as they do that, I figure they're back in the ballgame. I also think that the POI will help Sony solidify its lead, as well as expose Microsoft. That's all the Xbox really has- they don't have nearly enough franchises to compete otherwise (Halo, Project Gotham Racing and Dead or Alive aren't really going to carry a console by themselves), and without their graphics lead, they won't have much to trade on. As such, Nintendo will climb into second and Microsoft will drop to third.

So You Know

2004-12-17T23:00:00.000-06:00

I like Doritos.

Hey, you knew the deal when you saw the title.

Okay, fine. I also like Mountain Dew.

Skip Bayless Is A Big Fat Idiot

2004-12-13T23:32:00.000-06:00

Yes, I know. I just got done whapping this guy upside the head. But everyone's got a journalist they personally want to throttle daily. Philip Michaels of Idiots Write About Sports has Jim Caple. Most people in blue states have Bill O'Reilly. Most people in red states have Michael Moore. I've got Skip Bayless. It's not that Skip is irresponsible in his reporting or anything. It's just that he's the biggest dumbass on ESPN's staff I've ever seen. He's got the facts, he knows everything we know, he makes it clear that he does... and somehow he draws the wackiest possible conclusion. Say you're in your car. You hear an explosion coming from under the hood, followed by the car breaking down. You open up the hood and note that the engine is not, technically, there anymore. Instead you see a smoking crater. You would be inclined to believe the engine exploded and vaporized. Skip Bayless, however, would conclude that the engine was depressed, smuggled in a bazooka, and committed suicide.

So in Page 2's weekly quarterback questionnaire asked of several analysts, Skip included, he was asked to pick an NFL quarterback to build a team around in 2006. From scratch. Pick any QB you want. The others went with quarterbacks such as Tom Brady, Ben Rothliesberger, or Michael Vick (who I personally am not sold on, but okay). You could also go with Donovan McNabb or Peyton Manning or a couple others.

Skip went with Carson Palmer. Unproven Carson Palmer, purely on potential.

Secondly, a rapid-fire question: Luke McCown, Josh McCown, or Cade McNown? What you have here is really a two-man question: the McCowns aren't exactly the picture of quality QB'ing, but Cade's a proven bust.

One guess who Skip takes.

Finally, a question about the overall picture: the McNabbs and Culpeppers, but also the A.J. Feeleys and Chris Chandlers. Everyone else responding took the side that, hey, there have never been enough good QB's to go around, and that's just how it is. Skip? "Oh, we have plenty of good QB's. They just have their feelings hurt too much for them to reach their potential. They have fragile psyches." Well, too damn bad. This is the NFL, not etiquette school.

Random Human Journalism Rants

2004-12-09T15:55:00.000-06:00

Because I've got a lot on my mind and so little to write per topic. Or depending on how worked up I get, maybe so much. We'll play it by ear.

*Skip Bayless- Whadda dumbass. Seriously. If you have the ESPN networks, you can see Skip debating sports with the much more competent Woody Paige on Cold Pizza, ESPN's sorry excuse for a morning show. A topic will be given, Woody will make a good point, and then I can count on Skip to wake me right up with a mesmerizing display of stupidity. And it's not that he takes a stupid stance on issues, which he does. It's the reasons he gives. For example, just this week, he's unloaded these gems:
1. The BCS is fine as is. That's an unpopular stance, but enough people do think that so that he doesn't sound like a complete idiot. He slides... until he gives his reason. See, Woody was introducing a 16-team bracket (never got to see the teams in the bracket as I had to go to school), and said that USC and Oklahoma were the top two seeds and would probably get to the finals. Skip leapt all over Woody's ass, shouting him down and saying that since Woody's bracket and the BCS came up with the same result, the BCS is fine. My jaw dropped. First, assuming that there were three teams likely to get to the finals in Woody's bracket (we include Auburn, though I'd give Utah and Boise state, the other undefeateds, their fair shot as nobody's proven that they can be beaten either), there's statistically a 1 in 3 shot of the BCS and bracket agreeing. Those are decent blind-luck odds. Secondly, as much as the BCS has messed up, I attribute it to the "blind squirrel" theory- even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.
2. Shaq is the greatest center of all time. Woody had him 5th; Wilt was first according to him. Woody unloaded stat after stat- the 50 point average for a season, 100 point game, etc. Skip's argument? Wilt never played anybody. Let's never mind the fact that Shaq was playing horrible centers until Yao came along and all Shaq really had to do was bulldoze his way to the hoop and dunk. Who did Wilt play? Only Bill Russell and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, plus some guys that were good but you and I don't remember. And remember all the Hack-a-Shaq jokes until Shaq improved his free throwing. And again, we're not even bringing up Kareem or Russell. Or Hakeem Olajuwon, for that matter.
3. Mike Tyson times his arrests to up the buy rate for his pay-per-view fights. He unleashed that beauty just this morning. Yes, Skip, he made sure to rape someone just before a fight. Tyson's nuts, but he's not THAT nuts. And then he lays into Woody for believing that Tyson's acting nuts because he actually IS nuts. ...huh?

*Bill O'Reilly. While we're on the subject of stupid journalism, O'Reilly. Hate him, and before you call me a flaming Democrat, even though the second word is correct, know that I also hate the shit out of Michael Moore, and that in November, in the four races that didn't have someone running unopposed, I took 2 Democrats and 2 Republicans. I simply can't stand irresponsible journalism. The entirety of FOX News fits into that category, but I'm focusing on Bill here. I've never gotten further into an episode of The O'Reilly Factor than his opening segment, 'Talking Points'. Last night, I watched because there was nothing else on, and I felt like seeing how flaming Bill could get that night. I was not disappointed. The target: AARP. The gist of Talking Points was this:
*I, Bill O'Reilly, tried to sell my book, 'The O'Reilly Factor For Kids', to AARP. They declined. I will decline to bring up the fact that trying to sell a book aimed at kids to an old-people organization is a bad idea.
*So our researchers looked at AARP, and wouldn't you know it, we thought they were independent, but they're liberal! Why did we do research on them? Never mind that! (whispering) they wouldn't buy my book.
*AARP has these liberal positions on old-people issues that are way over my head (I speak for both Bill and myself).
*AARP should come out and say that they're liberal. Why? Let's not get into that. (whispering) they wouldn't buy my book.
*AARP wants to raise your taxes. Because they're liberal (whispering) and they wouldn't buy my book.
*Click.

And getting off of the soapbox:
*The words 'notion' and 'commotion'. Who even uses these words anymore except in songs to rhyme with each other?

I'm A Loser, Baby

2004-12-06T21:29:00.000-06:00

Today our house couldn't find our proverbial asses with both hands and a flashlight. (In reality, I did find my ass, needing only the flashlight and one hand.) Today I had due an accounting project we've been working on for a month. I had two copies, a paper one and a more preferential disk. Seen it everywhere I carried my backpack all month, except for the two times I lost it and had to go get it in the MATC library. Turns out that the disk was merely firing warning shots. Today, the day it was due, I lost it completely. Checked home, checked the school, checked my car. Gone.

Then my brother Erik loses his remote control. He never takes it past half of our room, so it should be easy to locate, right?

Ha. Ha ha ha. Ha ha. Ha.

We tear apart the entire house in a frantic search for it. I look for a spare universal remote that we have to program for Erik's TV- can't find that either. When I do locate one and have completely given up, Mom immediately finds it. Uncle Murphy, I presume. Where was it? Just out of eyesight, behind the computer I'm typing on right now.

In gaming news, Erik rented NCAA Football 2005 for the PS2. Aside from some significant realism-related graphical upgrades (make things focus a bit more dirtier and grittier than shiny happy football players; things like the Pontiac Drive Summary), and the equivalent of a graphical font change (similar to Sportscenter changing its set and opening credits) not much has really changed from 2004 besides some further deepening into the college atmosphere (crowd getting into the game, discipline problems such as staying out past curfew and bad grades, that kind of thing). That and the addition of the rest of Division 1-AA. What I'd have liked to see is simple: An option to change the BCS system in Dynasty mode to a playoff. Simple as that. (Speaking of, the BCS formula was not altered to its current form.) So know that.

Halls a Poppin'

2004-11-29T18:19:00.000-06:00

It's almost December, and you know what that means!

No, not that. ...Well, yea, the presents... That wasn't what I meant either... Yes, Buffalo, I know it means you get buried once again in dump trucks full of snow... I meant the Baseball Hall of Fame ballot gets released. And the annual discussion on what the hell Pete Rose is thinking. (My ruling: Let him in after he's dead, as it's a lifetime ban. Meaning: Let Shoeless Joe in. It's not his lifetime anymore.) As you may know, players have to be retired for 5 years to be eligible, and can stay on the ballot for up to 15 years, after which the Veterans Committee gets a hold of them. If in a year you don't get 5% of the vote, you're done. 75% puts you in the Hall. So, for lack of anything better to do, let's go over the 2006 ballot, and see who might get in this year:

Wade Boggs: Oh, heck yea. 3,000 hits, 5 time batting champ, an absolute magician at the plate. 12 consecutive All-Star appearances. No question he gets in, especially in this year's weak field.
Jim Rice: Well, maybe. There's been a lot of griping that he's not in, and this or next year, expect him to take a good run at it. I say it'll be a coin flip.
Bruce Sutter: Closer, so he's got that working against him. Probably why it's his 12th year on the ballot. He more or less popularized the split-finger fastball. Maybe.
Dave Concepion: 12th year on the ballot, and as usual, nothing's gonna come of it.
Steve Garvey: 13th year. Writers are going to feel a bit of pressure to either cut bait or get off the pot at about year 13. So he'll get more votes than usual, but not this year. Next year will be his last realistic shot, as 2007 is going to be loaded.
Tommy John: The surgery guy, yea. He had 288 wins- 12 more and he'd be in. As it stands, not happening.
Andre Dawson: My brother's all-time favorite player. 8 Gold Gloves, 8 All-Stars, 1987 NL MVP. I figure he gets around 50% of the vote.
Don Mattingly: Will get sizable vote because he's a Yankee. Won't make it. I'd give him a vote, but he won't get in.
Jack Morris, Bert Blyleven, Dale Murphy, Dave Parker, Willie McGee, Alan Trammell: Nope. See you guys next year.
Ryne Sandberg: Will make a run at election. Retired with the all-time homer record for second basemen, later broken by Jeff Kent. He's got the best 2nd base fielding percentage ever, and set a position record for most consecutive errorless games. Could very easily get in.
Lee Smith: Most career saves, so eventually voters will pretty much HAVE to put him in. But it's not eventually yet.
Darryl Strawberry: He had a straw, but it wasn't for berries. His career went up his nose. Had that not happened, he might have put up the stats to get in. But it isn't going to happen.
Jim Abbott, Tom Candiotti, Chili Davis, Rich Gossage, Mark Langston, Jack McDowell, Jeff Montgomery, Otis Nixon, Tony Phillips, Terry Steinbach: Don't be silly.

So my votes here would go to Boggs, Sandberg, Mattingly, Sutter and Rice. Boggs and Sandberg will probably be the ones to go in, with Rice getting close. The other three will likely make it eventually along with Smith.

As for the next couple years, we have first-timers known going up until 2009 and a few 2010ers. What about them?
2006: Nobody new worth considering in the massive glut of first-timers. Of them, the best names seem to be Will Clark and Orel Hershiser, both of which will be on the ballot for double-digit years. Dwight Gooden is also added to the ballot, though he faces the same problem as Strawberry. This will be the time to strike for Smith, Sutter, Mattingly and Rice. It'll probably be the best chance any of them get as long as any of them are on the ballot. And again, this is Garvey's last realistic chance because...
2007: Hello Cal Ripken Jr. Hello Tony Gwynn. Hello Mr. McGwire. They're all getting in. This year. Garvey will be completely overshadowed in this, his 15th and final year. So he better make it before then. Also added to the mix: Harold Baines, Jay Buhner, Jose Canseco, Dante Bichette, Wally Joyner. All will have a lot of votes come their way, and expect an eventual election for Baines, and possibly Joyner and Buhner.
2008: Sutter and Concepion's last years, if they haven't gotten in by now. Baines, Joyner and Buhner will sop up most of the vote here. Otherwise, David Justice, Tim Raines and Travis Fryman join the ballot. Raines should get in eventually.
2009: Rice and John's last years. If Rice still isn't in, I have to believe the writers will cave in to enormous fan pressure. In any case, newcomer Rickey Henderson will absolutely get in. Mark Grace also is added to the ballot, and should make a serious bid.
2010: We only know two names so far, but one of them is Edgar Martinez. You gotta think he'll make a serious run at 75%, and will eventually get there. The other's Robin Ventura, who will get some votes, but nothing spectacular.

Take, read, worship when it turns out I'm exactly right. Or stone when I somehow miss the election of Kevin Tapani.

Random Human Rants

2004-11-25T15:43:00.000-06:00

I guess I should start with the obligatory Thanksgiving comments. It's nothing different than what happens every year:
I watch the Macy's Parade on CBS, suddenly remember NBC's the station I want, but by then CBS, posted several miles uproute, has half-assedly gone through about a third of the parade, so I wait on NBC for it to start again. Eventually they waddle Santa down the street. I personally have always thought of millions of soccer moms in a three-point stance pointed at the front door, and they treat the Santa float as the starter's pistol. Which is how you explain what the retail business refers to as "Black Friday". Mom gets really possessive in the kitchen, to the point where Dad will go in for a glass of water and Mom will scream "GETOUTOFMYKITCHEN!". Food portions will be sufficient to last until about Easter. The football games, despite one staple team, the Detroit Lions, being in the same division as my Green Bay Packers, are both usually pretty boring. (As I write this, Peyton Manning just lit up on Detroit. Dallas games are unwatchable as they have that half-roof thing screwing with way too many shots.)

Christmas shopping? Won't hear any more of it from me; I'm done.

So onto my main topic. Random Human Rants. This'll probably be a regular feature. It's pretty self-explanatory.

*Hi Hi Puffy Ami Yumi. You can see a mini-rant on the right side. I'll expand. HHPAY is a J-Pop band that's apparently fairly huge over there and they took the show stateside. First off, how Japanese can this name get? You've got both random cutesy words and a doubled-up word. The show's commercial tagline? "Super Happy Fun Band Cartoon Invasion". (And what would an Engrish term be without the phrase "Super Happy Fun"?) For some reason, Cartoon Network looked at how they sang the theme to Teen Titans and figured "These people need a show of their own! Quick! Clear out any remaining airtime dedicated to Looney Tunes!" The show basically is about the two singers, Ami and Yumi (who you can easily tell apart in the cartoon but are indistinguishable in real life), and basically how super happy fun their J-Pop star life is and how much they have a super happy fun friendship. And if the cartoon weren't so drop-dead insane, it'd be insipid. But the insanity makes it entertaining. At any given moment, any character could lose all logic and go nuts over, say, cereal toys. It makes me laugh, and I don't know why.
*The N-Gage. Why does Nokia keep trying to push this thing? The first one, well, was laughable. If you bought one, I'm sorry. It was supposed to be a video game system/phone. The phone part looked like you were talking into a taco. The video game system part made you take out the batteries in order to change games. The games are horrible. And all this for only $300! Seeing as a Game Boy Advance cost about $100 at the time (since dropped to $80), didn't go over well. So instead of slinking away from the video game arena in shame, Nokia tries again. This fixed some of the problems (but not the horrible-game problem, noticeably), but the N-Gage was already a laughingstock. Nobody buys. And Nokia, looking at what is now already a two-time loser in the N-Gage... makes a THIRD version! Do they not get it?! (Meanwhile, a brand-new Nintendo DS costs $150.) Could someone tell Nokia to just give it up?
*Sports Fan Bible Bangers. You see these guys every so often. (I am not talking about unruly fans like the beer-cup guy in the Indiana-Detroit thing, or Tom Gamboa, or the guy who dove into the penalty box during an NHL game a few years ago. That's a different category of stupid fan. Nor do I refer to those who have Golden Palace.com written on themselves and run around naked.) The game or event will be going on as normal, when all of a sudden some guy in a completely off-the-wall costume leaps out and starts screaming about Jesus and saved souls and stuff for a few seconds before security jumps him. (Note it's never a her.) Examples? The rainbow wig guy. The dude who pushed the Brazilian marathoner into the stands during the Olympics. Who is also the guy that took a lawn chair and a sign and sat on the track in Formula 1's British Grand Prix. In traffic. I'm sure you can locate some others. They claim- and seem to honestly believe- that they're simply there to tout the Bible. But at a sports event, nobody could care less about any sort of religion. A guy that comes out touting the Bible is just going to get his ass handed to him twice. First by security, and then by the athletes. Maybe a third time by fans. Because he's interrupting the game, a cardinal sin at a stadium. Nobody's gonna go pick up a Bible after that.

Christmas Shopping, or: Tales From the Whipped

2004-11-21T20:32:00.000-06:00

Today's lesson for guys: Never go Christmas shopping into a city of over 600,000 with your mother, your aunt and your brother's girlfriend. I tried this in Milwaukee, and have nothing to show for it because none of them dare shop for me while I'm there right next to them. I think we went through 7 different stores and two restaurants. We went to two different Best Buys. Apparently the salespeople at Best Buy One were insufficient.

The basic stop went like this: Go in, walk around, realize there's nothing there that I'm going to buy anyone, wonder why nobody's shown me a list yet, stand, get blank stare on face, sweat because I'm wearing a leather jacket and Packers jersey (dark green is not a color to wear inside a well-heated store), go outside, freeze because it's in the 40's. Repeat. At the Best Buys I tracked down a few demos- Mario Kart: Double Dash (did well because I've rented it before), X-Men Legends (got my Wolverine claw rammed down my throat within seconds), and Tony Hawk's Underground 2 (left half my blood supply scattered around the streets of Boston, as well as several landfills worth of broken boards). Eventually we hit Gamestop, a video game store and, thus, my domain. My brother, Erik, has four games on his list. We bought one, won't say which because a) Erik might read this and b) you don't care anyway. Why only one? Mom thought we'd get them cheaper at Wal-Mart. Turns out any discount would be due to her discount card gained from working there. (See, what Wal-Mart seems to like to do is, they do in fact offer cheaper prices. But usually it's only pennies cheaper than the lowest price. Not even a nickel. Pennies. And that's no matter what the product, be it ketchup or a video game or a TV. If Gamestop has Viewtiful Joe 2 for $49.99, Wal-Mart will have it for $49.96. If you go out of your way to get to Wal-Mart, you'll spend the difference and more in gas.)

So by the time we head home, I'm absolutely beat. And yet I get dragged through our local Wal-Mart, where Erik's currently working. He congratulates me for still being on my feet. And guess what? Soon I'll get to go back into the fray, only this time in the OFFICIAL Christmas season, because I still have to shop for more than half the people on my list. They'll never take me alive.

Oh, they'll take me. Just not alive.

The Obligatory "I Made A Blog" Post

2004-11-20T22:32:00.000-06:00

So here I am, the latest person who made a blog in 5 minutes by just figuring "You know what I need? A blog." This after I spent 3 years figuring out Geocities, needing 10 minutes to get into it so I could update, and finally saying "Screw it." But my brother went and got his blog, seemed easy, so here I am making one between websites.

Some background:
*Name's Aaron Allermann, currently alive (19 years old), from Watertown, Wisconsin.
*I am a second-year student at MATC. You've never heard of it. It's one of those technical schools.
*I am a pop-culture junkie, specializing in TV and video games. You'll be hearing a lot on those subjects.
*Back in high school, I had a humor column for the school paper, and I called it 'Random Human Neural Firings', because, why not? Thus the name.
*I just got a bruise on my arm from whipping myself vigorously with a computer cord which has no discernible purpose.

More on me as things happen. They have a habit of doing that, those things.