blog

right before the game starts, the network will put up a stat like "when a best of 7 series is tied 2-2, the team that wins game 5 wins the series 84 percent of the time." well, what do they expect the teams and the fans to do with this? perhaps the team that loses game 5 should just quit. they can rationalize it by saying "it's not worth flying half way around the country for a game 6 when we only have a 16 percent chance to win." and as a fan, why should i watch..."why this series is basically decided now. better to catch a seinfeld rerun." and dig, it's selective. when a hitter comes up in a baseball game, they don't berate us with the fact that "there is a 70 percent chance that the batter will make an out. with those odds, you might as well unload that dump you have been holding in since the 3rd inning." imagine if we lived our lives according to percentages..."well, there is only a two percent chance that i will get sex tonight, so i might as well go get a half gallon of milk."

johnny most once exclaimed "boston wins the all important 4th game!" i have a hunch he said this because boston one that particular 4th game, but i have never been able to prove it. furthermore, yesterday, eg picked the celtics to beat the pistons in 6 games, to which i replied "the only reason you say that is that detroit has already won 2 games." i think even giving them the two games they have already won pains him.

manny hit number 499 yesterday, when for millions of virgins on record, love was not such an easy game to play. he will soon become only the 24th man (pardon the sexist language, but the last time i checked, no woman has hit 500 homers in the majors) to hit 500. by the way, for all you numerology people out there, 24 is his uniform number.

funny, but they still talk about the 21 point comeback the celtics made against the nets in game 3 of the 02 playoffs. what is never mentioned is that the nets won the next 3 games of the series and went on to beat the c's 4-2. even more obscure, at least to the faithful townies and the national media, is the series the following year, when the nets swept the celtics 4-0. game 4 was culminated by kidd hitting a 3 at the buzzer right next to the celtic bench. put that in your "great moments in nba history."

can somebody please close revere beach? even calling it a beach is a crime. i don't revere revere beach, i'll tell you that much.

hillary is sticking around because "hey, you never know, my opponent could be killed. between his muslim sounding name and black features, i've practically got the nomination." the more this goes on, the more i think george clinton would be a better candidate than hillary clinton, though he would certainly be killed by june, jordan. the point is, hillary, get the funk out of the race. maybe you can run for parliment. all i know is that these bootsies were made for walking, so get up and move. long live john africa.

imagine if we all based our career plans on co-workers, bosses, or competitors being killed. "i really want to quit this job, but i think there is a good chance my supervisor could be killed by a cia conspiracy, and i want to be here when it happens." or, "i was gonna divorce my husband, but i'm pretty sure he will be killed shortly by his mistress. so if i can, i would like to avoid all the needless paperwork and legal fees."

the truth is, hillary has been a stiff from the beginning. at least she hasn't called him osama yet. must be saving that.

viva nader!

obama has said that he would meet with raul castro, but that "opposition leaders" must also have a seat at the table. what if castro said "i will meet with obama, but socialists, anarchists, and communists, must also have a seat at the table." what arrogance! raul is the leader of cuba; you either meet him or you don't. you don't make demands that you know no self respecting head of state will agree to, unless you don't really want to meet them. this is the kind of statement you make if your goal is to show that you will be "tough on cuba," (meaning you will continue the bipartisan war crime known as the cuban embargo) hence catering to the right wing and the cuban exiles. he has done the same recently with chavez, calling him a "demagogue," and saying that hamas is a "terrorist" organization. for all you mindless liberal robots out there, where in these statements does there exist even a whiff of change and progress from previous bipartisan reactionism?

and he is the best of the three.

wow.