That’s where your tax money is going to, Minnesotans. $379,000 during a budgetary crisis toward an inarguably failed initiative, all so the governor can accrue some goodwill from the far-right folks in an effort to score some Presidential points.

Angry yet? Just you wait.

Later, just to make it crystal clear where his priorities lie, Pawlenty then issued an executive order to all Minnesota government agencies to refuse all monetary benefits from the health care legislation. That’s $7.8 billion, in case you’re curious.

Just to sum up: rather than receiving federal money devoted to increasing care for his citizens, Governor Pawlenty would rather spend taxpayer money on a program that doesn’t work. This isn’t being a budget hawk, this is being an irresponsible, opportunistic blowhard who views his miniscule Presidential chances as more important than the welfare of his state.

In other words, a politician. Can’t believe I used to give credence to this charade.

The Los Angeles sheriff’s deputy who arrested Mel Gibson for drunken driving in 2006 sued his department on Tuesday, claiming he has since been ostracized and passed over for promotions by the agency.

************

Apparently the only difference between President Bush’s declaration of the so-called “end” of the Iraq War and President Obama’s many years later was that the latter decided to forgo the awful signage. So, hooray for progress? (Actually: no. Shame on both of you.)

************

This week’s long read: The Girl in the Window, a Pulitzer-Prize-winning article about a six-year-old “feral child” found in Florida. Insanely gripping. Not to be missed.

************

Recommended song: “Felicia” by the Constellations, a hip-hop/rock/dance-y tune in the vein of Gym Class Heroes and Atmosphere. You are basically required to add this to your next party’s playlist.

(Source)

As I argued before,  citing safety concerns as a reason for not wanting the expansion is missing the point that playing fewer games doesn’t make the game any safer. It simply minimizes risks, which is closer to ignoring the problem than solving it. Is that not obvious?

It’s frustrating to hear smart people (smarter than me, at least) take this POV, seeing as how it’s so flawed. Take Easterbrook, for example:

18 regular-season games? No thanks.

Sixteen games is plenty for players’ bodies and for spectator interest. Add more, and each individual game will mean less. That’s diluting the product — like pouring water into a bottle of scotch then claiming the taste, and the price, should still be the same.

The runaway winner for worst analogy of the week. If you want to use scotch as an example, playing 18 games would be like giving you more scotch, which you think is dumb because the amount you have now is “plenty.” Fine by me if you’re so easily satiated, but what if some sponge-tongues really love scotch and want more of it? I suggest you just admit you are against this idea because it signifies change, and as a relatively old man you are bound by law to be terrified of change.

A bit off-topic, but noteworthy:

In the current format, by the time there are six games remaining, it’s hard to care about clubs that are eliminated: In 2009, late-season Rams and Lions games were excruciating. Imagine if this point were reached with eight games remaining! Plus an 18-game season would mean either starting the NFL regular season before Labor Day or holding the Super Bowl after Valentine’s Day.

Yes, Gregg, 6+2=8. Thank you for pointing that out. And playing 18 games will take longer than playing 16. Fine points all around.

In turn, with fewer preseason games, injuries should decline, improving the quality of the product in the meaningful games, the ones that count in the standings. Trying to glut the market with 18 games would, by contrast, decrease the value of the NFL, while increasing injuries because starters will play more. At the end of an 18-game season, more well-known players are likely to be out for the postseason with injuries. That, too, will dilute the product.

Ugh. We had an asbestos problem in our home, but we solved the problem by spending less time indoors.

I submit that fall is vastly superior to spring. Fall is the best. Most disagree with me on this point, so let us review the pros and cons of each season before we all collectively decide that I was right in the first place.

Fall

By far the best season for sports, with playoff baseball and pro football both happening at the same time, in addition to college football and the related tailgating sessions. The weather is typically dry and, while a bit cooler, very amenable to outdoor activities (such as tailgating, which needs to be mentioned twice). Happy hours and golfing can be enjoyed without an abundance of ass sweat.

Plus, wedding season is mostly over, giving us young’uns free time to do whatever we damn well please. Great weather, less busy, plenty of free time activities … what is there to not love about fall? My favorite season by far.

Spring

Spring, on the other hand, while obviously less offensive than winter, is the most overrated of seasons. It’s rainy and colder than you remember, and you refuse to learn your lesson from the prior year, so you spend two months shivering in short sleeves and praying for a break in the clouds. Sports are insignificant with the exception of about six days in March, movies still suck, no bands come to Minnesota. Streets and yards are covered in brown slush for two months straight. The only good times you’ll have the entire season is leaving the state for Spring Break, which you shouldn’t really be doing at your age, you creep.

Sure, it’s nice to crack a window for the first time in months, and I love the sound of melting snow falling into storm drains as much as the next person, but that isn’t enough to make the rest of spring enjoyable. Let’s face it: spring is only fun in our minds.

Even in the face of all this rock-solid evidence, many people I’ve interviewed for this story (by “interviewed” I mean “drunkenly accosted”) still chose spring. Their reasoning was uniform: because spring signifies that summer is on its way. During the fall, people just think of winter lurking ’round the corner. Ergo, spring is a happier time.

Here is what I suggest we keep in mind: winter is not fall’s fault. We all agree that winter is a ruthless bitch that exists solely to teach us how to collectively question the existence and/or intentions of god. No argument there. We agree, summer > winter. But that is not the issue.

Let’s try to look past that, to ignore the two other seasons and focus solely on the issue at hand. And if we can do that, I predict we can agree that fall wins in a landslide.

Oh, forgot to mention at the start of this post: this is a boring, pointless observation that no one cares about. Sorry ’bout that.

************

{+} I love this idea: a 21-year-old tried to fake his identity to play on the junior high football team. I mean, I understand trying to sneak back into junior high on account of the chicks, but just for a dumb sport? Some people make no sense.

************

{+} You’ve seen it everywhere else today, but Arcade Fire’s video for “We Used to Wait” that uses Google technology to personalize the experience for each user’s hometown is damn impressive.

************

{+} Current favorite song: Donkeyboy’s “Ambition,” a synthy pop tune that sounds like it belongs on the soundtrack of a Molly Ringwald-fronted 80s teen flick. Listen up:

I wish serious bad karma and professional misfortune upon this man.

************

Ignorance edition. Do yourself a favor and check out this kick-ass, angry political screed.

Money quote: “Truth is being tossed aside for ratings and the end result is a slow legitimization of the idiotic.” (Nothing new, but well stated.) Not sure if it’s possible to both call out the willfully ignorant while simultaneously not paying them any attention, but it’s a great article.

Either way, my new mantra: policy disagreements are OK, ignorance is not.

Oh, by “fun” I mean “boring,” and by “party” I mean “formal gathering with pseudo-intellectuals providing there is absolutely nothing else to talk about.” Anyway, YOU’RE WELCOME.

One perfect recent example is the proposed 18-game NFL schedule, which has near-uniform support from the owners and will be broached in the upcoming labor discussions with the players union. The reason is obvious. More games = more money.

The players, on the other hand, are staunchly opposed to the idea, claiming it will make a long season even more arduous and drastically increase the chances of injury.

To me, this makes no sense. If there is an argument to be made about the NFL being too violent — which it definitely is, and anyone who claims otherwise is cruel, delusional or just not paying attention — it should be made separate to the discussion of the longer schedule. Length of the season and safety of a sport are related, obviously, but not so intertwined that they should be discussed simultaneously. To do so is practicing some short-sighted flawed logic.

Put simpler: if safety is an issue, it should be an issue no matter the number of games.

Here’s the thing: a longer season makes sense business-wise, not to mention increasing entertainment value, which means it will probably happen. Instead of opposing that specific aspect, the players union needs to start looking at solutions to the actual issue. Changing special teams rules (I actually favor removing kickoffs/punts altogether), improving the equipment, larger fines for unnecessary hits … these are all ideas that broach the actual issue at hand. Asking to please not add more games to the schedule is not.

Yes, this appears legit.

Allow me to paste and respond to two quotes, and after that I’ll leave you alone to continue chuckling and/or fantasizing, depending on your gender and maturity level.

#1: “It’s a matter of fairness. We want equal topless rights for all or none.”

OK! Sounds OK to me. However, in the interest of quality of life and the supposition that all humans value at least some semblance of personal attraction, might I propose a cross-gender limit on those allowed to go topless? Say, 210 pounds or so?

#2: “Guys are great. They understand this issue, and we get lots of cooperation from males.”

No shit.

************

{+} NY Mag’s Edith Zimmerman was spot on when she suggested you grab a tissue before watching this amazing video from an old NPR segment. Even someone with a heart as black as mine enjoyed it, which makes me reasonably certain you will as well.

************

{+} As mentioned last week, I’ve been working my way through this list of classic magazine articles. Today’s recommendation: “Trouble in Paradise,” a 2008 Vanity Fair feature about Pitcairn Island.

Have you heard of Pitcairn Island? Good god. I tried to recap this story to a couple friends last weekend and it turned into like a 45-minute story complete with yelling and Costanza-as-Coco-the-Monkey animated motions. (Pro-tip: never discuss Pitcairn whilst drunk.)

But right now, at this moment, there is no better song on the planet. Don’t think I’m exaggerating when I tell you I’ve listened to it at least 40 times the past few days. It’s my new anthem.

Dibs on the karaoke version.

(For mp3s, go here.)