I hate the SID (Sports Information Director) at Auburn University

Last Saturday, Cam Newton a junior at Auburn University won the most prestigious award in collegiate football the Heisman Trophy. He won this award under the shadow of allegations that his father Cecil Newton was less than ethical during his son’s recruitment process last year.

Collegiate athletes amateur eligibility can be threatened if the NCAA can prove that the student or someone representing the student receives unfair benefits for playing college athletics. Cecil Newton was accused, by a school recruiting Cam, of soliciting cash payments for Cam’s commitment (pay for play) to Mississippi State University.

The charges were dropped by the NCAA, because there was no proof that the Newton’s received any money, and more importantly that Cam was aware of his fathers solicitation(s).

Cam Newton was the front-runner to win the Heisman Trophy for over 2 months. His play this year has been astounding and lead many to say he had the greatest year in college football history. In most experts eyes it was a forgone conclusion that Newton was going to win the award. So last Saturday felt more like a coronation than an awards show. Everyone who gathered at the Touchdown Club in New York knew who was going to take home the hardware.

So imagine my chagrin when Cam Newton got up to accept his award and he sounded as if he was trying to chew on a mouthful of golf ball. His speech was all of 7 paragraphs and he stumbled through each and every paragraph horribly. They, he and Auburn, had 2 months to come up with a suitable speech and they put this dreg out there for public consumption.

Moreover the content of the speech left much to be desired. I quote “My parents do a lot of things behind the scenes that go unnoticed” His dad is being accused of pimping his son out to the highest bidder and he uses the phrase “behind the scenes.” Are you kidding me? Who at Auburn proof read this? How on earth does that sentence see the light of day? This is a very delicate situation. You don’t let a young man do this to himself. Auburns SID should be fired.

Then Cam takes it to another level, speaking to his mother who was in attendance, and I quote “this award is not an award, in my opinion has been won by my play this year. This is an award that was won when I came out your WOMB.”

Now I may be old fashioned, but I don’t think it is appropriate to mention your mother’s private parts during an acceptance speech. These are the only times I would consider it reasonable to speak of your mother private parts in an acceptance speech.

1.You are winning an award for “Pimp of the Year” and your mom’s WOMB is your primary money- maker. You couldn’t have won the award without her WOMB!

2.Your mom lost her WOMB in a terrible accident when you were young, and you decided to become a doctor so that one day you would master a WOMB transplant. You successfully fix your mom’s WOMB and win the Nobel Prize for Medicine.

3.During your speech for winning any award your moms WOMB becomes combustible and you yell out for someone to put the fire out that started in your mom’s WOMB.

Outside of these 3 instances the word WOMB should never be uttered during an acceptance speech. The Newton family should sue the Auburn SID for negligence. At the very least he/she should be looking for a new job today.

I Hate Drama Junkies

“Taking ownership of something that doesn’t belong to you”

Introduction

One of the things I’ve notice over the last few years is mankind’s love affair with drama. You see it everywhere. It’s infected everyone. I’m no sexist, but this drama thing used to be reserved for women and children (throwing tantrums to get their way). Now it’s Men, women, and children. No one is immune to it.

I’m not sure if this is a product of an increased desire to be relevant in a society where people’s attention spans are the size of a knats; or if it’s just the expansion of the pussy-fication of the human species as a whole. But it’s getting increasingly more difficult to sit through the never-ending barrage of woe is me that is being slung on a daily basis. We live in a society where people would rather you feel bad for them then have you respect them.

I have a friend who’s Mom has cancer. Having this person as a friend, I frequently have conversations with her about her mom’s health and state of mind. Cancer is serious. Cancer is a very destructive disease, as we all know, and the treatments sometimes are just as destructive. I wish we could locate a cure for it especially for this ladies mom. Truly she is a jewel and if anyone deserves a cure it’s her.

Having said this, I use this experience as a way to highlight the dramatic behavior that some take on when their loved ones are faced with illness. As aforementioned, my friend and I have frequent discussions about her mother’s condition. She, on many occasions has expressed that it’s a trial for her (my friend) to see her mom in the condition that she is in.

She mentions the hardship that it takes on her (my friend) physically and mentally. She is taking ownership of something that doesn’t belong to her. As a human being I understand what she is saying, however the way she is saying it make me feel hate.

What is wrong with the statement?

Of course we have emotional ups and downs when we see our loved ones in pain. If we are connected to them on any level we “feel” their pain, but lets not lose sight of the ball here.

Her Mom is the one going through the trial. Her mom is the principle in the story. Her mom is the one we should feel for, and pray for. My friend is only a supporting character in the drama, but speaks as if she is the lead character. She is in her mom’s life for support, if she confuses that then she can’t be much good for her mom when the harder times come.

I liken this to men and their sports. It’s like having a favorite team and when you refer to them in conversation you say “we”. “We” almost won last night. Or I can’t believe “we” drafted him. What do you mean “we”? You don’t own that team, you don’t play on that team, and you are not a decision-maker for that team. You only support. And, the sooner you get that through your thick skull, the sooner, I can stop hating you.

Best Practice

Always have the proper perspective when speaking. Please make sure that everyone is aware that the loved ones suffering the illness is paramount. Attempt to refrain from mentioning yourself and what you are going through until asked. If you don’t it may seem as if you are consumed with self and looking at things from the wrong point of view.

I hate that it took me 7 weeks to experience “The Social Network”

I guess it would be apropos that I would be at the end of the sloped curve of persons experiencing this movie. I just opened a facebook account this summer, which puts me about 5 years behind that curve as well.

Intellectually there is no solid reason why I waited so long. I saw the trailer in August and loved it. While on the computer that same night I researched the movie and found that one of my favorite writers, Aaron Sorkin, penned the screenplay adaptation from Ben Mezrich book entitled “ The Accidental Billionaires.” So there is no logical reason why it took so long.

An aside, Aaron Sorkin is a brilliant writer. If you’re unaware, he was the creator of “The West Wing” which ran on NBC from 1999-2006. This show is amazing and really gives you an inside look at how political sausage is made on a daily basis. There are 156 episode of classic TV out there just waiting for you. If you haven’t had a chance to experience this show I highly recommend it.

My favorite episode is entitled “Two Cathedrals”. The writing is stellar and the story culminates with the President asking to be left along in the National Cathedral where he questions aloud; life, randomness, death, and the existence of God (in English, and Latin), as he grapples with the senseless death of his close friend and personal secretary Mrs. Landingham.

Sorkin also created “Sports Night” a behind the scenes ESPN style show, and “Studio 60” a dramatic behind the scenes Saturday Night Live style show, both have a cult following but never approached mainstream popularity. These shows are superb and worth a look.

OKAY, getting back to the point here. The Social Network opens in a bar with Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook Founder), and his girlfriend Erica Albright (Muse). They are having a typical conversation that suddenly turns ugly when a shortcoming of Zuckerberg’s is exposed. Feeling threatened he falls back on the one thing that gives him supreme confidence, his superior intellect.

The conversation becomes sharp and frenetic, and evolves into basically a verbal shoot-out at the OK Coral where Albright is carrying a six-shooter, and Zuckerberg an AK-47. This conversation is beautiful because it gives us distinct insight into a genius mind; how it processes words, how it identifies queues, how it interprets syntax, how it parcels context, and unfortunately how it misses humanity.

The six-shooter surrenders and decides to end the relationship with Zuckerberg, which sends him into a dark fertile place where he conceives the facebook idea, as an act of revenge and therapy all at once.

All in all very cool flick. I wish I had seen it when it first came out so I could have had 7 extra weeks with it. Finally….

The story of the movie is told through a narrative of the 2 lawsuits that Zuckerberg is a defendant in. This movie is not for the intellectually squeamish. In fact, at odds, for most of the films is ownership of intellectual property. WHO OWNS IDEAS?
Very interesting concept!

I hate people who refuse to answer hypothetical questions

Just got done reading "The Shallows" by Nicholas Carr and it reminded me of something I wrote last year. Critical thinking is becoming extinct in our society.

Introduction
I wasn’t there when the first hypothetical question was asked. However, I don’t think I’m taking a logic leap when I say an intellectual person in search of truth probably constructed it. This smart fellow probably was, more than likely, born with an insatiable need to know what people logically thought about things. He probably was blessed with the ability to separate thought from feeling, but encountered people along his journey that, for whatever reason, could not. I’m convinced he sought to know true unadulterated opinion. And of course he wanted to get it before an individuals personal belief system, political correctness reflex, or illogical emotions, hijacked their perfect thought. So he was forced to devise this genius detour “the hypothetical question”.

Let me start by saying, hypothetical questions should be used rarely; only when absolutely necessary. If overused they are liable to destroy the natural flow of conversation. I strongly suggest avoiding them when ever possible because it takes a very skilled person to introduce the question, and then facilitate the answer.

However in our current society: where people pride themselves on personal belief systems, political correctness, and illogical emotions what are we to do? The intellectually curious among us are compelled to ask these questions. We value knowledge and information above everything. We have to know things.



I’ve noticed recently that I’m forced to use too many hypothetical questions during conversations, because people can’t separate their thoughts from their emotions. I can’t get a straight answer because people are too cautious or haven’t dug deep enough to know who they really are. This trend is unsettling. Rational thought is becoming extinct. And society forces me to use hypotheticals so much that I have to use a hypothetical to explain my use of so many hypotheticals. It's exhausting.     


What’s wrong with it?
I have to over-use hypotheticals because people are becoming incestuously intimate with their emotions. It’s gotten to the point that when something happens (anything) the first thing a person thinks of is how it will affect their personal psyche. They can’t see the entire situation because they are wrapped up in how they feel about it. This micro thinking doesn’t lend itself to perfect thought.

The bigger problem however is that people who know better, people that know that this is immature, aren’t standing up and admonishing these freaks. They aren’t holding these people accountable for having to use their perfectly useful rational minds. Many of them have acquiesced, some have jumped ship, while others have committed the most heinous act of treason, and have abandoned logical thought altogether themselves, having joined the Axis of Evil of micro thinkers.

Moreover the macro thinking muscle that we all were born with, that we, once upon a time, used to answer hypothetical questions has atrophied, into this useless mass of nothingness.

At first we dislike hypothetical questions.

Then we refuse to answer hypothetical questions.

And then we finally, sadly, wake up one day and we don’t even have the wherewithal to answer hypothetical questions.

Tell me if this sounds familiar. You’re in the middle of an engaging conversation. You’re about to introduce controversial subject matter. You anticipate resistance, so you enlist the service of a hypothetical, in hopes of circumventing the emotional wall you’re about to run head first into. You craft the perfectly suited hypothetical; that removes word triggers, and conversational speed-bumps, giving your conversation partner the freedom to go in whatever direction he or she chooses. You’re actually proud of yourself. You’ve created the perfect bed to consummate this fantastic mental intercourse. And then, you pause to let your partner take the lead, and they look at you as if you’re the anti-Christ.

Damn!

They become confused.

Discombobulated.






The conversation, all of a sudden, starts to feel like an interrogation. You start to hear responses like:

“I would never do that!”

“ That could never happen!”

And my personal favorite “Why are you trying to make me say something I don’t want to say?”

Conversation over!

Best Practice
We all have to get better at separating emotion from thought. Yes, I know I’m asking a lot but this can be done. We have to first allow ourselves to be uncomfortable for more than 30 seconds. We have to really listen to what others have to say even if it moves us out of our “happy place”. We can’t sterilize everything. We have to throw that security blanket away that our mommies gave us, and take intellectual risks on occasion. Test our boundaries; explore our horizons.

Humans have dominion over the animal kingdom because of our superior intellect. Let’s not lose sight of that? We must not become a people; that is ruled by feeling and emotion. Don’t get me wrong; they both have their place, just not in the realm of perfect thought.

In order for us to reach our true potential, we have to press on to the higher ground of perfect thought; everyday striving to get a little closer to our final destination.



For those that are living in perfect thought already, we must reach back and help our brothers. We can’t stand idle, as our brothers fall in the valley of idiocraty. The great society will settle at the top of the mountain, not at the base. The future of all mankind is riding on our shoulders.

The question “am I my brothers keeper” must be met with a resounding YES!

In a perfect world we would never have to use hypothetical questions. The hypothetical question, although genius, should have never had to come to be. A straightforward question should not be seen as evil. If we ‘d been better stewards of our feelings, hypothetical questions would have never become necessary. But we, of course, live in a very imperfect world. So the next time a hypothetical question is introduced in your conversation don’t run scared. Use it as a path less traveled that will bring you closer to the promise land of perfect thought.

I hate the NFL 100 Greatest Player List

Let me start by saying I LOVE LISTS. Ask my friends they’ll all tell you. I’m always asking them to rank experiences, to rank likes, and dislikes. I’m always asking them to put a numbers on everything. How much did that hurt? Put a number on it. How cool was that movie? Put a number on it. How much do you like me? Put a number on it. Also I love football. I’ve been in love with it ever since I saw the blue star on the side of the Cowboys silver helmets when I was 3 years old.

February is the worst month of the year for me; because I’m going through Football withdraw then. That's how much I love football.

So it’s hard for me to juxtapose hating a list about football history. I applaud the concept of the list. I appreciate the congregation of “blue ribbon” panelist that the NFL Network put together to work through the list. I love the show and I TIVO it every Thursday. I’m sure a lot of work went into it, and I must admit 95% of the list works for me. . The remainder however has my proverbial boxers in a bunch. Let me start with a minor omission.




Warren Sapp was the best interior defensive tackle of his generation. He was the leader of a Tampa Bay team thats entire identity was defense. His defense, on the road, held the “greatest show on turf” to 11 points in an NFC Championship game. He should be somewhere on this list with his partner in crime Derrick Brooks. My best guess would be somewhere between 90-100 on the list. He should definitely be above number 100 on the list, and the person who is the MOST overrated football player ever!

Joe Namath; how long can this man live off of his “Broadway Joe” reputation. Okay he banged a lot of women. Okay he quietly guaranteed a Super Bowl III victory over the highly favored Colts, but come on! This man threw more interceptions in his career than touchdowns. He had one extraordinary season. Look he got his reward. He somehow got inducted into the Hall of Fame. Let it rest now. No way he should be on this list.

Now on to the biggest omission, Terrell Owens, this one is just pure dislike for an individual overshadowing his career. Yes, he is a quarterback killer. Yes, he wants the ball on every play. Yes, he thinks a lot of himself. Most of the time he says the things that most are afraid to say. Look I’m just going to put pure numbers out there. I’m going to compare his numbers to another wide receiver from his era that is on the list.


Terrell Owens
Catches 1046
Total Yards 15515
Yards Per Catch 14.8
Total Touchdowns 150

WR (X)
Catches 947
Total Yards 14770
Yards Per Catch 15.6
Total Touchdowns 153

The stats are remarkably similar. They look like twins actually. WR (X) was 65th on the top 100 list. His name is Randy Moss. There were three other receivers on the list after Randy Moss at 65, and Terrell Owens wasn’t one of them. To pad Owens’s case, he runs routes over the entire field not just outside the harsh-marks, and he never quit on his team. He was selected first team All Pro 5 times, and Randy Moss was only selected 4 times. This means in 5 NFL seasons Terrell Owens was considered one of the top 2 receivers in the league, while Randy Moss was only considered top 2 in 4 seasons. Sports writers vote upon this honor. Terrell Owens omission from this list is borderline criminal.

Okay this next part is tricky because it’s mostly subjective, and I have to use my Biggie vs. Jay-Z argument for this to make sense.

In my opinion, Biggie Smalls is the BEST Rapper of all time. If my life depended on someone delivering a sick rap that is lyrically superior, and becomes an instant classic I would choose Biggie. Hands down. No contest. But if you ask me who is the GREATEST rapper of all time? I have to say Jay-Z because his body of work is vastly superior. He’s been at the pinnacle the longest. He has more classics. He has sustained a level of excellence over a substantially longer period of time.

Having said that, Tom Brady has had a terrific career but in no way should he be ahead of John Elway and Dan Marion on this list. John Elway single handedly took 3 inferior Denver Broncos teams to the Super Bowl. Dan Marino obliterated all the passing records. He destroyed them. Tom Brady being ahead of these guys is a little premature. I’m not saying he won’t eventually pass them but not in the fall of 2010. Sidebar: How the hell can a Guard albeit a terrific Guard be ahead of Dan Marino? John Hannah was great but come on son! That is nucking futs! Which leads us to the final atrocity on the list.

Full disclosure I’m a huge Cowboys fans, which some will use to disqualify the following statement. Emmitt Smith should be way higher than 28th on this list.
He is the all time leading rusher in NFL history. At the time this is being posted the top 20 haven’t been revealed, however if my assumption is correct the "blue ribbon" panel has Smith as the 5th best running back behind; Jim Brown, Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, and Gale Sayers. So let's look at each of these comparisons indvidually.

Sayers v Smith

Sayers had 5 fantastic seasons. He was an excellent running back and return man. And if this were the list of 100 most electrifying players, or the 100 best players, or the 100 players that got cut down in their prime, he’d be at the top of the list. However he is not one of the top 25 greatest and should not be ahead of Emmitt Smith. Sayers numbers are comparable to Terrell Davis’ numbers. He too had his career cut short due to injury. He has never and will never be seriously considered for the Hall of Fame, and Sayers probably shouldn't have been either.

Sayers ran for 4, 956 yards and had a total of 48 touchdowns in his career. Smith ran for 18,355 yards in and 175 touchdowns in his career. That’s 3(x) as much on both count. Look, life dealt Sayers 2-7 off-suit but don’t discredit Smith because he got dealt Aces.

Advantage Smith...


Sanders v Smith

I don’t kid myself with this one. If Sanders had not retired early he would be the all time rushing leader. He would have run for 20,000 yards and put the record out of reach forever. The only thing I can say here is he didn’t care about being the greatest so why should we make him the greatest. The record meant nothing to him. He had another 3-4 years in the tank and he walked away. Smith loved the game had passion for the records, and from day 1 of his NFL career wanted to own them all. He wasn't as fast as Sander, didn’t have the moves like Sanders, wasn’t as explosive as Sanders but he wanted it more than Sanders.

Advantage Smith...

Payton v Smith

We all loved the man they called “Sweetness”. We feel for him because he was a great playing on a bad team, much like his Bears brother Gale Sayers. He was taken from the world far too soon, and we have a romantic place is our heart for Walter Payton, but if you look at the numbers He retired at 33 years old with 16, 726 yards, that was the rushing record at the time. Smith broke the record at age 33 and in the same number of seasons, and played an addition 2 seasons. Also Smith was the driving force on a team that played in 4 consecutive NFC championship games, and won 3 out of 4 Super Bowls.

Advantage Smith...


Brown v Smith

Brown is the GOAT. No contest.
Browns numbers are absurd. If they had played 16 game seasons in his time, and barring injury, he would have ran for 15, 030 yards in 9 seasons. That’s an average of 1,670 per season. He would have had (2) 2000 yards seasons. Amazing! He played 9 seasons was a pro-bowlers in all 9 and was All-pro in 8 of them. Enough said!

No one is in Browns class but Smith should be right behind him as the #2 greatest running back of all time, and that should have been good enough to place him in the top 10 of the NFL’s greatest players of all time.

I hate that I don't feel the same way I did at the Obama Inauguration

Winter Wonderment

Although I hadn’t celebrated Christmas in over 25 years, Tuesday January 20, 2009 felt romantically similar. Restlessness dominated the Eve. Thoughts and visions hold hostage my mind with no ability to overthrow them. Even if I had the strength to re-take control, I wouldn’t. This feels too damn good. Reality peeks in around midnight and tells me “sleep is necessary. You have a long day ahead of you.”

Four hours later my soul is tapped and I awake feeling refreshed as if I had slept a fortnight. Morning was filled with great anticipation, not knowing what I would experience but looking forward to every second of it. I was coaching all of my senses to be on high alert. I turned my mind on slow motion. I wanted to savor every moment of this day.

Spring smells fresh, I wish. I basked in the beauty of a waterfall, and feel refreshed. I’ve done this millions of times, but this felt new. I opened my mouth and felt renewed. I wrap myself. I set aside my nap-sack. My mind thinks ahead to tomorrow. No. I must re-set. I completed the morning ritual, and then….

On my way down to the tree I reminisced, and recalled when I was introduced to this day. It was the summer of 2004. I mostly remember the voice; it was strong, authoritative, and full of hope. The voice spoke to my best self, and for the 1st time I thought this present was within our reach. The courtship quietly started two years later. It felt premature, but we got through the incubation, and were made stronger.

The hill got rough, and right sometimes felt wrong, but we met in Philadelphia and talked about it. At this moment I decided to check in with you everyday. I couldn’t help but notice that Tuesdays were beginning to stand out. I became devoted. In fall, on the 4th you were promised.

At present, engaged, and determined, I drove down MLK to new heights. In reverse, I took the underground- railroad, I parked, and I marched.

A sea of red; change coming; leaving slavery; past chasing; stand still; see salvation; God shows; to day.

Bitter cold, but warm inside. I part the people, and settle in a land promised. I wait. I’m by myself, but not alone.

From the winter, I hear a familiar voice from summers past. It’s the same and yet so very different. Ambition yielded to responsibility. Personal strength yielded to the collective strength. Ideology yielded to pragmatism. And toward the end of the word, strength was quoted. The seed of a nation was hidden in the winter. Those that were discontent had no excuse. Labor would deliver us.

The altitude had changed forever. Brown had never been this high. Today felt religious. I’ve always been proud to be me, but today my flesh rejoiced. The gift. The promise. The new. The present, were all wrapped up in this glorious day. Inauguration.


Signed,

DH, Changed forever.

I hate that public service and politics are not mutually exclusive

It’s that time of the year again; the final two weeks before Election Day; the political machine is at full throttle. Every politician and pundit is out there stumping for votes. Pick me, I’m the smartest, pick me, I’m the prettiest, pick me, I care more about you than the other guy; its pathetic, and all done in the name of public service.

Educated guess probably 1 out of every 10 politicians are motivated by the public service angle of politics. Think about it. Most of the people who run for national elections are lawyers. So these are smart people who have means, and they choose to throw their name in the hat of basically a “glorified beauty contest”. Why? The reward for winning must be much greater than the humiliation of losing.

Listen these people are motivated by greed for the most part. Holding high public office in a state is the equivalent to being at the top of the primo networking pyramid. The connections made are invaluable, the winner will be able to write his/her own ticket. This is not public service. It’s personal service.

The people who run in these elections are unstable. All of them! Who would choose to have an “open to the public” job interview? Who would choose to have their family members lives turned up side down, have their finances scrutinized, have everything they’ve ever said, done, wrote examined under a microscope? No one, save a narcissist, would want all of that attention brought to them.

There are so many options for a person seeking public service, and politics is by far the least attractive option. But every year they throw their names in the ring, because they need to fill that void of public acceptance. Smart men and women don’t have to choose this. They can choose the path of Bill Gates, Henry Ford, Mother Teresa, Gandhi, Gloria Steinem, and Martin Luther King; philanthropist, spiritualist, activist. Public service can be done better outside of the political arena.

Our political system is so gridlocked in America. Democracy is the best template; God knows we don’t need a theocracy, or a monarchy for that matter. Democracy feels right, and I can’t think of anything better. But I can’t help but feel sadness each year when election time rolls around. The constant finger pointing, name-calling, personal attacks, scandals, overt begging, broken promises, lip service, have all left me very cynical.

Full disclosure, I’m a republican. A few weeks back President Obama was floating ideas about different way the government could reduces taxes to help small businesses. Tax cutting is on the top tier of my party’s platform. It’s our wet dream, our holy grail, it’s our religion, but because this is an election year we found a cute way of saying NO to Mr. Obama’s ideas.

I throw up my hands. I surrender. The two party system has made me give up.
This has got to stop. Democracy is good, but the two party system as currently constructed is evil. Nothing can get done. This is not public service; it’s public disservice. I say blow the whole system up. Registered voters should not have to select party affiliation. To take it a step further there should be no parties. We should be made to vote for individuals and not parties. We should have two resumes in the voting booth, and have to vote the resume without seeing name or party affiliation. Also we need term limits. If it’s good for the president then it’s good for the congress.

A career politician is the equivalent of a career prostitute, or even worse a career beauty pageant contestant. I don’t want any one of the three representing my best interest, do you?

I hate the word "WOMANIZER"

Introduction

I often hear this word bandied about. The word womanizer has become the quick and easy way to call a man “no good”. Calling a man a "womanizer" is a general statement that warns women to stay away; cautioning them to guard their most valuable of possessions.  

Although I disagree with the use of the word, I usually accept the word and overlook its content because I understand context, (what the person using the word is attempting to convey), and I don’t find it necessary to interrupt the conversation just to interject my personal feelings in the proceedings. However, there are some very disturbing connotations in this word. 


What’s Wrong With It?

The interesting thing about this word is that the user reinforces a stereotype that women have worked centuries to distance themselves from. Women have been objectified from inception of time. There have been numerous groups organized for the sole purpose of identifying when women are being objectified and then punishing the people who perform those objectifications. But no one pays attention to the very casual way we use this word in our everyday lexicon especially when stagnates the very movement that it attempts to advance.

Men and women both use the word womanizer liberally, but I can’t figure out, for the life of me, why any self-respecting woman would do so. The word implies that a woman is merely an object and has no voice to resist, and to that end, she is rendered defenseless against the irresistible womanizer. I just don’t understand it! This word says significantly more about a woman that it does about a man. SIGNIFICANTLY!!!

If someone wants to warn a woman about a man who leans, predominately on his base primal characteristics, the word philanderer is more appropriate because it expresses how the man feels about women. This word choice says more about the man than it does the woman. Philanderer is based in mans desire to have the women and so the philanderer will treat a woman badly because he actually sees her as a conquest. I understand this. This makes sense to me.

The word womanizer implies that the man has unbridled passion for women and can’t stop himself from pursing and subsequently conquering her. He loves them and then leaves them, not because he hates, but because he needs more. He has found a soft weak spot in all women and exploits it for his personal gain. The women that he pursues are rendered helpless to his advances, and can’t do anything but bend to his strength. Women are mere objects to a womanizer and her only chance to avoid being taken advantage of is to hope and pray that her path never crosses his. This thinking is disturbing and should be hated!


Best Practice

Women are not objects. So the word womanizer should be removed from our lexicon. In our society men pursue woman, and women pursue men. No gender has dominion. I know this doesn’t sound sexy, but the next time you decide to describe an amorous male looking to love and leave just say “he’s a man not apt to get involved in a relationship” and then the woman can decide for herself if she wants to engage.

I hate Jason Garrett

For those of you who don't know, Jason Garrett is the Offensive Coordinator for the Dallas Cowboys. I usually choose not to spew hate towards individual but today, at this momemt, the way I feel, I am more than compelled to do so.

This man, Jason Garrett, has been given the keys to a Rolls Royce, and he chooses to use is as a paper weight. My God. The Cowboys are stacked at every position. They have a great defense, and yet this Super Team, for lack of a better term, is 0-2, and are the bottom dwellers of the NFC East Division.

Why? Because Jason Garrett's parents decided to have intercourse one day and conceived this idiot. Why? Because they liked sex. Why? Because it feels good. And because sex feels good. My life has become a bloody nightmare.

I have to watch this crap week-in and week-out. Last year the Cowboys had a top 3 offense (yardage wise) but as far as putting points on the board they were middle of the pack. I'd watch games and predict the plays that were going to be called with 80% accuracy. And If I can predict @ an 80% clip, then you know Defensive Coordinator had that crap figured out.

Some blame has to be sent the owners way on this. Jerry Jones hired the man as the Offensive Coordinator, and the man had no experience in that position. Which means if Jerry Jones had interviewed a homeless man on the streets, and that homeless man cleaned himself up and made a connection with Jerry Jones, then "Ned the Wino" could be leading the offense right now. I digress.

Last weeks game against the Redskins was a debacle. :03 seconds on the clock in the 1st half. Cowboys haven't moved the ball all night. Tight game. They should just take a knee, run out the clock, go to the locker room, make some adjustments, come out better in the second half. Instead they call a Hail Mary, get a penalty. Keep the already dumb play, Romo throws a lateral, running back fumbles, Redskins return fumble for a touchdown, and that ends up being the difference in the game. The winning score.

Professionals, in my opinion, have an expertise superior in their field to the average joe on the street. There are only 32 Offensive Coordinators in the NFL. Jason Garrett should not be one of them. Mr Jones please do something about this. Swallow your pride. Give this man the Trump Treatment. I'm not sure my heart will make it through this year.

I hate that I don't miss Tim Russert anymore!

In the summer of 2008 we lost Tim Russert. Mr. Russert was the best interviewer I'd ever seen. He made "Meet the Press" appointment television for me at a very young age. Even when I was too young to know all the subject matter, and the nuance of each political discussion, I always felt like Mr. Russert would ask the tough questions and he'd ask them in a way that would make the truth more clear to me.

I remember him being so fare. I could never tell what political side he fell on. He was an equal opportunity "griller". No one was safe. He was persistent. If a subject tried to dodge a question he'd ask it again, his second questions always better than the first, and his third was more brilliant than the second. He was masterful. You had to shoot straight with him because, if you didn't, he'd disrobe you right there on national television for the world to see. I always felt smarter after watching Meet the Press, and I attributed that to him.

In late 2008 David Gregory name moderator of Meet the Press. I continued to watch because it's by far the best Sunday morning political show, but I always felt like something was missing. There was a huge hole, and I didn't know if Mr. Gregory would ever be able to fill it.

Fast forward to Sunday August 22, 2010. I sat down in front of the TV to continue my lifelong ritual. "If it's Sunday Morning it's Meet the Press"

The topic of the day was the "New York City Mosque @ Ground Zero". Not a very easy topic to navigate. The passions of 9/11 run so high, and this debate gets ramped up with the turning of every news cycle. The guest and panel of pundits were superb. They made superior arguments pro and con, and Mr. Gregory commanded the debate. He was there and not there all in the same space. It was a beautiful thing to watch.

I got through the entire show and hadn't once thought about Mr. Russert. What would "little" Russ have asked? How would he have handled the guest? The moment was so bitter-sweet for me. Mr. Russert, RIP.

In my eyes, at that moment, Mr Gregory had arrived. He like his predecessor before him was masterful. The true winner at a good debate is always the on-looker. I felt like a winner on Sunday.

Hate the Game, Not the Player - Haynesworth is Right

Amid all the criticism of Albert Haynesworth from the media, fans, and his very own peers, no clear analytical argument has been formed to prove to me that he is wrong for taking that stance of not wanting to switch his playing position.

The media has labeled him lazy. The fans has labeled him ungrateful, and his peers have called him disloyal, but allow me to put you in his shoes for a few moments. Every story has two sides to it.

First and foremost you don't become and All Pro NFL player by being lazy. Haynesworth prior to becoming a free agent in the spring of 2009 dominated opponents for the better part of three years a the DEFENSIVE TACKLE position. He was so dominant that the Redskins signed him to a 100M contract, and had a press conference to announce to the world that they were happy to pay him.

100M with 41M guaranteed is quarterback money. He was making much more than the QB at the time (Jason Campbell) was making. Which would lead a rational person to believe that he was the most important player on the team.

YOU DON'T ASK YOUR MOST IMPORTANT PLAYER TO CHANGE POSITIONS THROUGH THE MEDIA!

Can you imagine being in Chicago one morning, and Brian Urlacher wakes up and reads in the Tribune that Lovey Smith is quoted as saying that the Bears are unilaterally moving Urlacher to safety?

Football purest will say that a move from DT to NT is not that big of deal since both are considered interior line positions. But tell that to a players body on Mondays after a grueling day of double-teams, or tell it to a players Hall of Fame aspirations when his stat lines and resumes are compared at the highest level.

In my opinion asking a DT to move to NT is the equivalent of asking your Tom Brady's or Peyton Manning's of the world to abandon the drop back passing games, that they excel at, to run the wishbone or spread options. It's utterly ridiculous.

Haynesworth is not lazy, ungrateful, or disloyal, he's just right. Take the money, fanaticism, and propaganda out of the narrative and you'll see it that way too.

I hate people who think "Kobe is better than Jordan"

“The Copycat Killer”
Bean v MJ

The Basketball Media’s job is to sell basketball at all cost. They must sell basketball because their livelihood depends on it. If we don’t watch, they don’t have an audience to write and talk to. So when they make provocative, ridiculous statements, bordering on the absurd, just know that they are doing this as part of a thing I like to call “self preservation” and please, please whatever you do, do NOT take them seriously.

Less than three weeks ago the entire basketball world was anointing Lebron James as the best basketball player in the world. The MVP voting was virtually unanimous.
Even Magic Johnson proclaimed that King James was the holder of the proverbial “torch” owned by the best in the game.

So imagine my chagrin when 21 days later, after Kobe has a great close out game against the Phoenix Suns in the Western Conference Finals, I start to here the propaganda machine crank up and spit out this one.

“Kobe Bryant is as good if not better than Michael Jordan”

WTF. This is a marketing ploy, something to get fannies in the seat, and eyes on the TV. Period. Move along people. There is nothing to see here, and I mean NOTHING.

Michael Jordan is the G.O.A.T., the original serial killer of basketball. He was diabolical, ruthless, relentless, and once he perfected the kill, there was nothing like him. He was a true force of nature, and at his best was unbeatable. Before him there were killers, Russell, the Big O, and Bird, but MJ took killing to a whole different level.

Jordan loved the kill. He loved removing his opponents heart, and seeing the frightened look in their eyes as it was pounding in his hand. He kept score like a megalomaniac. He enjoyed destroying his opponents just as much as he enjoyed winning.

Kobe Bryant is a great player. He’s the most elegant basketball player of his time. His footwork is impeccable; his jump shot is art, and his basketball IQ is Mensa worthy. When it’s all said and done he will go down as the most accomplished basketball player ever. Somewhere around 2017 he’ll retire with;

At least 1 MVP
1-3 Finals MVP’s
4-7 Championships
40K points (All time NBA scoring leader)





A very impressive resume, but he doesn’t eclipse MJ. Why? Because Bean is the copycat of the true killer. He’s is following the MJ blueprint. He has patterned his kills after his idol. He walks like MJ, talks like MJ, celebrates like MJ. He’s the greatest mimic of all time. You can’t be better than someone when you are channeling him, to perform at your best; when you need his very existence to be your best you.

We recognize MJ as the original. He was raw determination and gifted athleticism all wrapped up in a nice bundle of F you. We appreciate him because we never saw anything like him. He was merciless and unrelenting. The reason Bean can’t be better is because we’ve seen him before. He’s a Xerox copy of MJ, a two dimensional killer. We can only see him through the MJ lense and that’s why he logically can’t be better.

Kobe is the obsessed guy you see on the crime flicks that idolizes the serial killer, writes him, make friends with him, and then is manipulated to carry out the original killer’s cruel intentions. Duplicating the master’s work, basically an extension of the true killer. He can’t stand alone, and is nothing without his master.

All these new guys have no shot of surpassing MJ because they don’t have the killer instinct. Can you imagine MJ being best friends with rivals? NO! Can you imagine him going to a Free Agent Summit, and playing nice with people that he wanted to destroy? NO! Are you kidding me? When the Bulls were looking at the best European player at the time (Tony Kukoc) to help the Bulls, the killer inside of MJ wanted to rip out Kukoc’s intestines and feed them to him and the GM for suggesting that he needed help. This was a perspective teammate for Christ sake. The man was an animal.

Like most serial killers he was born with a thirst for the kill, he just didn’t know it yet. MJ needed a stressor in order to be unleashed on the world. He got it in High School. This killer was conceived when he didn’t make the varsity basketball team. It was a dark day, and the world was never the same after that. His first kill was in 1982, when on a team that had the likes of James Worthy and Sam Perkins; he #23 in Carolina Blue sank the jumper that gave Dean Smith his 1st National Championship. He developed his signature when Isiah and the boys froze him out at the All Star Game. And then he went on a killing spree the like no one has seen before or sense. He left so many hall of fame players in his wake; Ewing, Barkley, Miller, Payton, Stockton, and Malone all were sacrificed to feed his insatiable need for blood.

He killed the best of the best, and he got away scott-free. But in 2009 he did something that only the greatest could do. In a virtuoso move, like Keyser Soze had whispered in his ear, he confessed. Everyone was there to celebrate him, but he needed to feed the killer just one last time. At his Hall of Fame speech he told us where all the bodies were buried, how he killed each and everyone one of them, and most importantly why he had to do it. Why those poor innocents had to die. Why he had to have all the titles and leave them with nothing but broken hearts and gaping holes in their resumes. It was beautiful. It was fitting. It was brilliant. Some thought he should shown remorse for his crimes. But there he was the hero wearing the black hat, smirking as he took us to that dark place. No remorse at all, and we loved him for it.

We love Kobe (no homo) but Enjoy Kobe for what he is; the next killer in a line of killers. But know and understand there is only one Jack the Ripper, and his name is Michael Jeffrey Jordan. The Prosecution rests.

I hate people who say "call me when you get home"

INTRODUCTION:


Have you ever been out with a friend? It’s getting late. You decide to call it an evening. You drive your friend home. There is some small talk. You arrive at your destination. Your friend exits the car, and then right before he/she closes the door they say “Hey, call me when you get in OK.”

You’ve heard the statement a thousands times before. It’s nothing new. If you didn’t hear it, you probably would have thought something was wrong. It’s the natural thing to say in that situation.

Right?

The phrase has become the punctuation that ends every night out.

When you hear it you feel good for some reason. You reset yourself and then you head home. And when you arrive you pull out your phone and either call or text your friend. Let him/her know you arrived safely and you retire for the evening. Job well done!

Have you ever once taken a second to evaluate this ritual? What does it mean to you? Why is it so socially accepted? Why does is make you feel good when you hear it?



I’ve taken a second and even a third look at it, and I still don’t know why the statement is used so much. It makes absolutely no sense. Just taking a cursory examination of it I’ve come up with the following;

This is by far the most arrogant statement I’ve ever heard. It reeks of self-importance, stupidity, and laziness. The problem is no one can see the arrogance because it’s wrapped in an sweet package. Hearing this statement will make the non-astute feel loved and cared for. They’ll say to themselves “ Wow, this person sounds concerned about my well being”.

This statement is the “Trojan Horse” of all cliché statements. It’s a pleasantry placed in an attractive package that has something ominous inside. The only difference between this and the “Trojan Horse” is that the country giving the horse as the gift purposely concealed it’s cruel intent, while stupid people use this cliché because it sounds like an awesome thing to say to someone.

The person making the statement paints the illusion that they are sensitive and humane. The Prestige of it all is that the statement almost sounds altruistic. Listen to it again. “Call me when you in”. This statement appears so gentile, so obviously nice, and sweet, and at the same time so very empty to me.






WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE STATEMENT:


The statement is self-important because you only say it when someone is leaving your presence. You don’t ask the individual to call you every time they get in, only when they are leaving your presence. The statement could make some sense aesthetically if you used it when you were not the person being departed from.

Also the statement is lazy. If you really cared about my safety you would be sure to call me when you thought I would get in. Why are you making the person leaving do the work and remember to telephone you? Don’t they have enough on their plate? Remember their agenda is already full with getting home safely, now they have to remember to call your lazy ass because you won’t pick up the phone and call them. Amazing!

BEST PRACTICE:

If you are really concerned ask the party leaving “What time do you plan to get in?” Then tell them that you will call them to make sure they get in safely. This sends the correct message that you are concerned and that you will be responsible for making the phone call to assure the safety of the person you care for.

Hate Manifesto

I’m a despicable human being.

I am.

I have no reservation in acknowledging this.

I’m at ease with my assertion because I believe wholeheartedly that I’m not alone in this.

You are a despicable human being as well.

You just haven’t realized it yet.
Human beings are dark, depraved, animals at our cores.
We hate everything!
We are a society full of HATE!
We are Haters!
Hate fuels us. It keeps us up at night. It overwhelms, and consumes us.
Love is OK but hate feels GREAT!
Love exists in our hearts but hate dwells in our bellys.

When it is clear that love heals and that our homes, our communities, our country, and our world, would be in a lot better shape if we loved more, why is it that we so often chose hate as our bedfellow?

Well…. Hate, simply put, is delightful. We are at our happiest when we hate. We love to hate. Hate allows us to tap into places that we didn’t know existed. It’s the catalyst that allows us to explore virgin territory within us.

My favorite movie is “Pulp Fiction”. I love this movie. The dialogue, the disjointed chronology, the acting are all genius. My least favorite move is “Eyes Wide Shut.” I hate this movie. It’s the worst. It’s so bad I have to recruit others to hate it as much as I do. When engaged in conversation about modern cinema I am always primarily compelled to share my hate for this movie. You would think that I would be quick to mention my favorites, but I’m not. Although I love “Pulp Fiction”, I’m more passionate about my hate for this overrated, poorly acted, thinly plotted, piece of dung that Stanley Kubrick created.

Why is this?

Hate taps into the passion within us. And passion feels fantastic! Passion is intense and immediate. Ever heard someone say “I love her with a passion?” Nope: because love is simple. But we all have heard “ I hate him with a passion.” Passion is complex, and hate is diverse. It can take the form of so many things.

Hate is addictive. It’s better than any drug ever created. We love to hate because it feels good. Hate feels right. Admit it. You know it does! Hate makes us feel better about ourselves. Hate is therapeutic.

I’ve avoided therapy because I’ve tapped into my hate. I’ve attempted to uncover and understand the darker side of myself. I’ve become comfortable with it. Hate has become my wonderful lifelong companion.

The first rule of hate is to understand what you should and should not hate. Hating people is elementary. I don’t believe in it, it’s a big waste of time, and counterproductive to personal growth. Additionally, and more importantly, hatred of people is limited. Why hate individuals when you can multiply your hate by all the stupid things they do and say.

I’m a voyeur. People watcher if you will. I pay close attention to personal behavior and attempt to understand it in an analytical way. Like any good scientist I question everything. And, in deference to Einstein, not to just see things the way they are but rather how they should be.
In an attempt at full disclosure, I’m no PHD; I’m just a regular guy who pays attention. So this book is the result of my many observations about the annoying and dumb things people perpetuate, but more importantly why we should hate their stupid contributions to our already compromised society?

I ‘d like to show you a few things if you don’t mind; things that you do, and probably don’t even know why you do them. You know…dumb shit! I’ve kept a journal of all the dumb shit that people do. I’d like to invite you to my personal darkness.

My concentration will be mostly on dumb things people say, and why it’s utterly ridiculous for some behavior to still exist in our advanced civilization. Some of the sayings are so embedded in our human fabric that an extra heavy dose of Tide probably couldn’t get the stain out. But, we’re going to have fun trying. ENJOY!