Lance's Friends Are Looking For A Few Good Women

Okay... this is one of the funniest damn things I've seen in a long time. Check out the link above.

I'll wait.

Go ahead.

Done? Did you watch the "Lance's reaction" video? (You can get to it from the FAQ)

I can't believe that his friends actually went to the trouble of doing something like this for this guy... I mean, he seems like a nice enough guy, but a BILLBOARD?

Good lord... well, good luck to Lance. I hope he finds... what his friends are looking for... or something.

Side note: few things are more disturbing than listening to a yuppie white guy try to pull off a Flavor Flav "Yeah Boy!" So don't try.

MLS All-Star Game

A lot of people think that major league all-star games are useless and a waste of time. And you know what? These folks are absolutely right. They don't mean anything in the standings and they're just a showcase for a bunch of showy goals, homers, touchdowns, etc.

But you know what?

WHO CARES!

I love the MLS All-Star game. It's a great opportunity for the communities of soccer fans and players to come together and just have a good time, celebrating what the game of soccer is all about! And that's all it's supposed to be.

Back when I was covering the Columbus Crew for the official team website, I did an article about the MLS All-Star game from the fan perspective. And in talking to fans from all over the country, from all walks of life, I came to the following conclusion: no matter where they were from, or how much they made, or what their cultural heritage/identity was, that soccer was the true universal language.

I met Hispanic-Americans from Colorado, Asian-Americans from California, African-Americans from Columbus, Europeans from Chicago, and the consensus is: THIS GAME ROCKS.

Sure, soccer has its problems around the world. Take the Old Firm rivalry in Glasgow - the religion-based fight going on between the Catholics and Protestants in Scotland is displayed every time Celtic and Rangers play. But to blame soccer for that is ridiculous. It's just the outlet that these two factions have chosen. And to be sure, any time a referee or a player is attacked because of heated emotions following a match, that's a crime. People take it way too seriously. But that's indicative of something else, usually - perhaps people are so downtrodden in their societies that soccer is all they have and they put their hearts and souls into it.

Those are just some theories on my part, I am no sociologist or anthropologist. But the fact remains that billions of people love this sport. And to create an opportunity for the fans of the sport to get to see their favorite stars in action on a day that is all about fun? Forget about it!

Thank you, Major League Soccer, for giving the fans of the greatest game on earth this fantastic chance to show their love of the sport of soccer.

And fans - if you can make it to the game, do so. You won't regret it. You'll have a great time.

Crew Rennaissance?

Game two of the Robert Warzycha era of Columbus Crew history has come and gone. And so far, the interim coach of the Crew is showing that he may just have the right stuff to become the next head man of America's Hardest Working Team.

I can't remember if I've said so here, but I was never a huge fan of the Robert Warzycha style of play. I recognize his excellent free kick ability and the danger he poses on dead-ball situations, but his tendency to go for the long-ball play has too often left me cold. I'm much more of a fan of teams that work the ball through the midfield and show good posession, rather than teams who loft it into the penalty area and hope for the best.

But given our coaching situation over the past ten years, that's what we've seen, more often that not. The Crew has had defensive-minded coaches who relied on individual skill in the forwards to put balls in. When you have forwards like Brian McBride, Stern John, and Jeff Cunningham, who work hard and have good foot and air skills, this sometimes pays dividends. But when your forwards are lazy and look for the easy ball too often, as Edson Buddle has been known to do, then long-ball does not work.

However, in Warzycha, the Crew has gone with a whole new outlook - an offensive/midfield minded coach. And it's already paying dividends. Kyle Martino has looked excellent in the past two games, and the forwards are moving off the ball like we've never seen them in Crewville. Part of the reason for this may be the benching of Buddle, whose lack of hustle has done more to piss off the fans than anything else.

And movement off the ball may be one of the best indications of how coaching changes can bring about change on the field. In the past, we've seen lots of back-passing and floundering around in midfield as the midfielders make ill-advised runs, the forwards flop back and forth across the offside line as they try to make attacks that are unrewarded, and the defenders show confusion as to where they're supposed to pass other than to the guy next to them on the back line. Now, we're seeing Eric Vasquez and Simon Elliot making moves and Martino pushing around the field to make things happen. We're seeing good runs and overlaps and such from Chris Henderson and David Testo on the outside, and most importantly Knox Cameron and Cornell Glen moving around and forward to create openings for passes. It's fun to watch, and almost even more than a win as we saw last night, it's giving Crew fans hope that things have changed.

From the sounds of it, based on a Steve Sirk report from the previous game in Chicago (the Polish Rifle's first as interim head coach), Warzycha has turned up the pressure in practice to ensure that his players react as they are supposed to come gametime. Chris Henderson gave his impressions before Saturday's match:

Henderson has noticed a difference in practices under Warzycha. "When people make mistakes in practice...if you make a bad pass, you are going to hear about it. It's like 'You are a professional player. How could you make a pass like that? You are a better player than that pass.' In a way, it kind of reminds me of playing Germany. When I played there, it wasn't just coaches. If you did something wrong in practice, your own teammates would be screaming at you to get it right. There were a lot of expectations and it was very demanding. The intensity in practice has been very good the past few days. I know American players aren't necessarily used to that approach, but it has been going well and I think the guys are responding."

This is something that Crewville has needed for a long time. It seems that for too long, the former college coaches that we've had (Fitzgerald and Andrulis) haven't pushed hard enough to emphasize proper gamesmanship - they've pushed too hard to play HARD. Warzycha, as a former pro himself, has seen what a professional practice is supposed to be and is pushing the players as professionals - to play smarter. And that's what we've been missing here. Yes, the Crew is America's Hardest Working Team by moniker, but when hard work takes the place of smart work, you're going to fail. But the combination of hard and smart work that we saw on Saturday and particular last night are what is going to drive a team to better results. So far so good.

I'm not going to completely jump on the Bob bandwagon. This was only game #2 out of the 16 that were left at the beginning of Bob's tenure. There's a lot of season left to evaluate our new interim coach and the changes he's making. And with the crowded portion of the season we're entering right now, it's going to be hard for him to really put his stamp on the team. Hopefully during the All-Star break he'll have a chance to put his mark on things more - he reportedly (according to the Dispatch's Craig Merz) has some changes he wants to make but simply doesn't have time given the game schedule.

One change I'd particularly like to see is trying to adjust the game of forward Knox Cameron. Long-time fans of MLS will remember the power and strength of Tampa Bay forward Mamadou Diallo, who led MLS in scoring in 2000 and was nearly unstoppable due to his sheer size and strength. His injuring of a couple of players left him somewhat hated in the league, but few players would deny that he was a powerful force. I think that, with some training, Cameron could become just that sort of a player. He's big and strong, and has good speed. He just needs a little bit of aggressiveness. Cameron had a fairly good game last night, helping to set up the only goal of the match, but he could use his size to more effect and create more chances for the Crew with just a little bit of testosterone.

So far, though, I'm pleased with the Robert Warzycha era. Columbus Crew fans are a surly lot, but there was very little surliness last night as the Crew dominated the game and got the late goal instead of giving it up. It feels REALLY good to be excited about our team again, and I can't wait for Saturday to see how we do against our division rivals from Kansas City.

GO CREW!!

RIP James Doohan

I used to be a big Star Trek fan. No, not the new, touchy feely ones... I'm talking about the old ones, with Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock, Bones McCoy, Scotty, Chekhov, Sulu, Uhura, etc.

Well, one of the originals is no longer with us. James Doohan, who played Lieutenant Commander Montgomery Scott, passed away today. He was 85.

It's sad to think of someone who was so full of life being saddled with Alzheimer's Disease. My grandmother has it now, and it's a similar situation. But I hope that Doohan will always be remembered for the fiery personality he portrayed on the screen, and for his heroism off the screen. He was a Canadian war veteran (World War II) and fought and was wounded at D-Day.

Sláinte, James. You will be missed.

My Kid, the Super-Hero

Just got a call from my wife, Jennifer, who was out shopping with Duncan, our son. Apparently she was in the baby section of Target and looks down to see Duncan chewing on something he grabbed off one of the racks. She pulls it away from him, thinking that "oh, now we're going to have to buy this" (my wife has morals and didn't just put it back). She looks at it - and it's a Superman shirt, in his size.

My son is a freaking GENIUS.

Leave the Hoops Name to the Team that Started It

Read an article on Matchnight.com today that referred to the Dallas MLS team as "The Hoops." And this caused me great consternation. Okay, it pissed me off.

First, notice I refuse to call the Dallas team by their "team name" - see my post on the Englishization of U.S. Soccer for that.

Second, there is only ONE team that can rightly be called the Hoops - and that is Celtic. No other team, especially one that sold out their original name for a goofy-ass English-type name, should be able to use it. And most especially one that doesn't even HAVE complete hoops on their uniforms!

No, I'm not bitter.

Tour de France and Patriotism

My latest sports addiction, which usually manifests itself into my Tivo-hogging attempts to catch every possible moment of the Olympics, is the Tour de France. And why not? Everyone loves Lance Armstrong (unless your jersey reads "T-Mobile" or "CSC") and he's putting the record for most Tour wins so far out of reach of the rest of the world that NO ONE may ever catch him. Plus, he's an American, winning in a French athletic event, and of course the French suck (please, read this with an entire salt lick).

But just as much as the fascinating nature of the Tour, and pro cycling in general, with its strategy, psychology, and sheer power and endurance; I love the pageantry of the Tour. International sports have a spirit and flair that domestic sports just can't beat, in my opinion. To me, being able to fly your national flag as a moment of pure patriotism in a sporting event is tops.

And to watch such a thing in a European event is even more interesting to me, as you see not only national flags, but also the regional flags of such "nationalities" as Brittany, the Basques, Flanders, etc. The fact that those people hold on to their regional identities is fascinating to me.

I think that has something to do with the "melting pot" attitude of Americans - "you may have been something else before, but you're an American now." I generally disagree with that attitude, I've discovered; I say hold on to where you came from and celebrate it. Don't deny your citizenship as based on modern boundaries, but don't forget your heritage either.

I think that's part of the reason I've adopted the kilt as normal wear - I love to recall my ancestry in the Scottish/Irish arena by wearing a garment that harkens back to my forefathers of the Celtic persuasion. I certainly identify with them more than some of my other heritage.

So as I watch the Tour, I've been picking out flags I don't identify (and thanks to my love of flags, that's not many) and looking them up online. I have found most of them - I'll keep looking and see exactly where these folks are from, and what land it is that they truly love.

Triumph The Insult Comic Dog Nails Star Wars Fans

Sweet mother of pancakes... this has to be one of the funniest damn things I've ever seen in my life.

Triumph the Insult Comic Dog takes on a bunch of dorks out waiting for the last Star Wars movie to open. I'm not sure when it was filmed, but suffice to say he's really grabbed the ins and outs of the Star Wars fans.

Energy Debate Misses the Point in the Senate

An article from the Planet Ark website talks about the Senate putting off a vote on stricter fuel-consumption laws for vehicles sold in the U.S., and rejecting a bill by Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) to raise the minimum fuel economy of automobiles to 40 miles per gallon and SUVS to 27.5 mpg by 2016.

My question is... why?

Toward the bottom of the article, there's a quote by Senator Christopher Bond (R-MO) regarding the reason for voting against Durbin's bill:

Bond said stricter CAFE rules will bring further woes upon hard-pressed US automakers and impose "Soviet-style mandates" for them to build lighter, flimsier models.

Durbin's plan "costs lives, costs jobs and deprives consumers of their basic free will," Bond said.

So many things are going on in just this one quote that I have to address them all. The rest of the article speaks for itself - it's typical Republican fear-mongering about losing jobs and affecting corporations' bottoms lines, etc.

But look at what Bond said here: "stricter CAFE (corporate average fuel economy) rules will bring further woes upon hard-pressed US automakers." Look at the language he uses. Woes, hard-pressed, etc. The effort is to make these companies sound like they're downtrodden and fighting for their lives. The reality is that THEY are the ones who have gotten themselves into these jams by not producing vehicles that thought beyond the next five years or so.

The world has known forever that oil is not a renewable resource. At some point, it's going to run out. And despite that, corporations are acting like there's nothing going on at all, as if oil will always be our number one form of energy and we'll be able to go on forever sucking it out of the ground and running our big behemoth cars with it.

Well, that's obviously not the case. Fuel prices in the US have skyrocketed over the past couple years. We're actually approaching European standards for fuel prices, which I personally think is a good thing - it'll force people to seek other forms of transportation and hopefully condense some of the sprawl that we're undergoing in our major cities. And that'll curtail the need to for so many cars - more people will have the opportunity to take public transportation and hopefully massive highways full of cars will become a thing of the past.

But the automakers obviously don't want this. Their existence is the antithesis of what we NEED as manufacturers in this country. They claim it's too expensive to force better fuel consumption standards and will cause cars to become more dangerous. Again, I call foul.

The technology has existed for years to make cars more economical to own and operate. The engineers at the various companies have had such technology for a long time. Example: Hydraulic Launch Assist technology was displayed at the 2002 North American Auto Show in Detroit. Yet it's not being used anywhere yet. It's been displayed in neat little concept cars at other auto shows, but on a production vehicle? NO! And there are other examples of this as well.

The one example of this technology that has made it out of the engineers' booths and into production is hybrid technology - and the cars are so popular that Ford, Toyota, and Honda can't keep them in stock. So why not make MORE of these models? And why aren't companies like GM doing it as well?

The answer you're always going to hear is COST. Well, no innovation ever was ever created for free. You have to put money into technology to get it to market. But at the rate these vehicles are leaving the lots, the potential for profit on these models is certainly there!

To move on with the Bond quotes: the second thing that jumped out at me was his use of the term "Soviet-style mandates." Senator Bond is trying to use old Cold War paranoia to scare everyone away from doing what needs to be done. And this has been a memetic tactic of the conservatives for a couple decades now.

Instead of doing what needs to be done, conservatives claim that they don't want to turn us into a totalitarian state like the old Soviet Union. It's very interesting how that applies when it comes to economic issues, but as soon as the debate turns to social issues, they're more than happy to put us all under the yoke of their "moral" tyranny.

Using fear tactics like this is something the GOP used to great effect in the last election - fear of terrorists and "immoral" policies like those that the Democrats want to put into place (supposedly, anyway) scared many voters into voting for Bush, Delay, and their cronies. The Democrats need to figure out a way to make this look as ridiculous as it really is.

The final sentence in Bond's comments are that "Durbin's plan 'costs lives, costs jobs and deprives consumers of their basic free will,' Bond said."

Again, the fear-mongering is apparent in the first two sound bits - "costs lives, costs jobs." The lives thing is again ridiculous. SUVs and their ilk are much more dangerous than smaller, lighter cars - it's been proven time and time again. Costing jobs is ridiculous as well - the reason American jobs are being lost is that foreign products are becoming BETTER. Again, look at the hybrid car example. American corporations are afraid to change because it looks bad for the short-term bottom line.

The last line is the most preposterous of all, however: "deprives consumers of their basic free will." Fear-mongering aside, the notion that American consumers deserve the free will to drive big, gas-guzzling automobiles simply shows how out of touch the conservatives are with the rest of the world. Oil use (around 40% of which comes from the operation of automobiles) needs to go down. I've already addressed that. But how about the free will of the rest of the planet? How about the free will of people in other countries, who are facing the onset of massive global climate change because of the use of petroleum-based energy production? What about their basic free will?

More and more, I want to trumpet the words of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. In an essay written in Dec. 2003, he stated that the environmental degradation of the world isn't just an economic or weather issue: it's a civil rights issue. The rich and affluent of the world think they have a basic human right to do whatever they want to the environment, while the poor are the ones who bear the brunt of the effects of it. Read the essay, it goes into detail that I don't have room to here.

Until this country realizes that it has a responsibility to the rest of the world, we're never going to get better. And the insular policies of the conservatives aren't helping. Comments like Bond's only make the point clearer.

Supreme Court Screws Up

The Supreme Court put out a decision today that strikes me as being rife with the possibility for abuse and corruption all over the place. I'd be interested in hearing more about why the liberals were mostly for this and the conservatives were against it. It seems to me to be the exact opposite of what the voting should have been. Here's the text of the article:

Supreme Court Rules Cities May Seize Homes

By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer 4 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses — even against their will — for private economic development.

It was a decision fraught with huge implications for a country with many areas, particularly the rapidly growing urban and suburban areas, facing countervailing pressures of development and property ownership rights.

The 5-4 ruling represented a defeat for some Connecticut residents whose homes are slated for destruction to make room for an office complex. They argued that cities have no right to take their land except for projects with a clear public use, such as roads or schools, or to revitalize blighted areas.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue.

Local officials, not federal judges, know best in deciding whether a development project will benefit the community, justices said.

"The city has carefully formulated an economic development that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including — but by no means limited to — new jobs and increased tax revenue," Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority.

He was joined by Justice Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.

At issue was the scope of the Fifth Amendment, which allows governments to take private property through eminent domain if the land is for "public use."

Susette Kelo and several other homeowners in a working-class neighborhood in New London, Conn., filed suit after city officials announced plans to raze their homes for a riverfront hotel, health club and offices.

New London officials countered that the private development plans served a public purpose of boosting economic growth that outweighed the homeowners' property rights, even if the area wasn't blighted.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who has been a key swing vote on many cases before the court, issued a stinging dissent. She argued that cities should not have unlimited authority to uproot families, even if they are provided compensation, simply to accommodate wealthy developers.

The lower courts had been divided on the issue, with many allowing a taking only if it eliminates blight.

"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random," O'Connor wrote. "The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms."

She was joined in her opinion by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, as well as Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

There is so much wrong with this decision I barely know where to start. First, allowing the creation of tax revenue for a city as "public use" that would justify uprooting people from their homes sets a VERY dangerous precedent. Justice Stevens' assumption that cities will have a careful economic plan borders on lunacy. What if cities grab land like this and give it to corporations based on some handout from the corporation to a public official? That's just inviting more lobbying and corporate/government corruption.

Second, this decision will increase sprawl as businesses push out into the suburbs even more, and displace homeowners to do so. It wasn't bad enough that corporations are able to buy up family farms and build Walgreens and Wal-Marts, now they can do it to family homes, too.

Third, supposing that the land that is being handed out to the corporations is "inner-city" land, and that the residents of homes on that land are compensated: are they going to be compensated enough? If the land is poorly valued in the first place, are the displaced people going to be able to afford to rebuild their lives elsewhere?

Fourth, the destruction of communities is not what this nation needs to be concerning itself in. People grow attached to their neighborhoods and a sense of responsibility to others can only be created over time. Forcibly removing people from their homes not only removes the sense of responsibility but creates more feelings of "watch your own ass" that will make trust in one's neighbors even harder later on.

I'm extraordinarily disappointed that the Supreme Court, particularly liberals like Justices Ginsberg, Souter, and Kennedy, made this decision. It seems like it should have been a no brainer, but apparently it's not.

Father's Day

I celebrated my first Fathers' Day this past weekend, and while it wasn't odd for me or any such thing, the hardest thing for me to get used to was just sitting and thinking "Fathers' Day.... wait, that's me now!"

Duncan has just become such a wonderful part of my life that I can't imagine being without him. My morning ritual is generally wake up, work out, take the dog for a walk (his name is Guinness), and then come home to help Jenn get Duncan ready for the day, whether he is headed to day care or whether he's staying home on her days off.

And I swear, every day I come home from walking Guinness, I hear Duncan babbling at Jenn while he gets dressed and has his diaper changed, and it always brings a smile to my face.

I have a great picture of him that Jenn got done secretly for a Father's Day gift - just a picture of him sitting and waving at the camera with a big smile on his face, but I think it may be one of the greatest gifts I've ever gotten. Because now, when I'm sitting in the office and the office life is getting to me too much, I can just take a look at my little guy and it all makes sense again.

And today, when I was dropping him off at his day care center (the Wee Care Children's Center in Columbus - EXCELLENT facility for anyone looking), I waved goodbye to him and he lifted his hand and opened and closed it a couple times, just like we've been doing with him at home. Priceless moment, let me tell you! I can't WAIT to go pick him up today.

So, a belated happy Fathers' Day to everyone and I hope that your experiences are similar to mine.

What's Up There?

I love this picture...

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

The Senate Republicans used underhanded techniques to get the opening of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to corrupt oil and gas interests, by putting the issue into the federal budget. The budget can't be filibustered, apparently, per Senate rules, so after passing the flawed budget the ANWR is apparently open for drilling.

PLEASE click the link above to sign a petition to keep this pristine piece of America's natural heritage free of the pollution of the corrupt oil industry. You can also view a webcam set up by Drexel University that highlights the natural beauty and amazing wildlife that this refuge protects.

There is so little of our natural world that is protected from the stomping of unsustainable energy practices, so please - draw the line in the sand (or snow, in this case) to stop the oil, mining, and timber interests from raping our land more than they already do.

"Are You Scottish?"

Got to thinking more about the people who ask me if I'm Scottish or if I play the bagpipes when I'm wearing my kilt. Why is it that they ask that?

Here are some possibilities I've come up with:

• They want to show off how savvy they are about kilt-wearing.


• They're trying to make sense of why I'd wear it, other than it's just a comfortable item of clothing. Since it doesn't fit into their bifurcated male world view, they have to categorize me.


• Related to the above - they assume that I wouldn't be wearing it IF I wasn't Scottish or didn't play the bagpipes.

I'm sure I'll come up with more.

Also funny to me is how just because I'm wearing a kilt, that these folks think I'm interested in their friend who was in a pipe band, or went to Scotland, or what have you. Folks, it's just another item of clothing. It doesn't have to mean anything other than that. I may not fit into your category of clothing options, but why do you have to categorize at all?

Kilted Reactions

Since donning the kilt for the first time, I've gotten a lot of varied reactions to it. I've never gotten a negative one - it seems that, at least in Columbus, people who don't approve just keep their mouths shut. At least for the most part. I've had one friend who gave me a hard time and then said "Now go home, and put on some pants."

Primarily, the comments I get are either "Are you Scottish?" or "Do you play the bagpipes?" It seems to me that people think I need a reason for wearing the kilt other than "it's just comfortable." Now, granted, I do have some Scots blood in me, but for the most part it's just the most comfortable garment I own.

Another reaction has, strangely, been from people who try to reassure me that it's okay to wear it. Um... I'm the one wearing it pretty much everywhere... I think I'm okay with it. One lady actually went out of her way to tell me it looked nice, and VERY MASCULINE. Okay... um, thanks? I guess?

In a weird couple of days, I had two Columbus Police Officers ask me about it. I think the tryouts for the Police/Fire Pipe Band were going on or something, that's what I picked up from one of them. But suffice to say, being stopped by the cops to have them get a Utilikilts card from you was weird.

When Duncan was born, the pediatrician on staff asked me if it was a Game Day thing - I suppose in reference to college football (it was Nov. 6, a Saturday, when I wore it to the hospital, and he was born at Ohio State University Medical Center).

Some folks have simply just asked me if it is a kilt. That's fair... I have no problem with that one.

I had one lady nearly hitting on me when I wore it to a barbecue place in Worthington. The looks I got there (think blue-collar conservative types as patrons) were priceless, and then having this waitress telling me that the real men all wear kilts was absolutely great. My dad and brother were with me and I think they didn't know what to make of it.

At my sister's wedding, the first time I've gone out kilted but not regimental (as required by my sister, apparently) I actually got it lifted, so naturally I was disappointed that I was wearing underwear as I didn't like being revealed as a poseur. :)

Most of my relatives don't know what to make of it at all. My one cousin just shrieked "Oh my god, he's wearing a skirt" and "Why are you wearing that?" when she first saw it.

I'm looking forward to more fun reactions as I go on about my business as a kilted man.