The Detroit Lions Aren’t Meant To Win


Click the sound clip to listen to my explanation why the Detroit Lions are forever to be lovable losers. The text is below the clip.


The Detroit Lions found another way to lose a game, and for the second time in a calendar year, the NFL decided to lend a hand!

The Lions appeared poised (there’s a strange word to describe the Lions) to score a go-ahead touchdown against the defending NFC Champion Seattle Seahawks. Detroit quarterback Matthew Stafford found his best receiver, Calvin Johnson, who caught the ball and began his quest for the endzone.

Just as Johnson approached the goal-line, safety for the Seahawks, Cam Chancellor, made a remarkable play by jarring the ball free from Johnson at the two-foot line. As the ball bounced around in the Seattle endzone, Seahawk linebacker K.J. Wright intentionally batted the ball out of the back of the endzone. The officials ruled the play a touchback, and rewarded the Seahawks with the ball at the Detroit 20 yard line.

The Seahawks were able to milk away the final 1:40 of the game to escape with a 13-10 victory.

Just as I was about to shutdown the TV, ESPN started reporting that the officials got the play wrong. According to the NFL rule book, if the defending team intentionally bats a ball through the back of the endzone, that’s a penalty. So, with Calvin Johnson fumbling just past the one yard line, the Lions should’ve had the ball at the half yard line! They probably would’ve scored. I say probably because, well, it’s the Lions. Maybe they would’ve found a way to still lose.

Regardless, the NFL screwed the Lions for the second time in 2015.

If you recall, the Lions were on the wrong end of a controversial call in their Wild Card Playoff Game against the Dallas Cowboys. After throwing a flag for a flagrant pass interference by the Cowboys late in the fourth quarter, the officials picked-up the flag even though replays showed the play was indeed a pass interference! Naturally, the Cowboys got the ball back, drove down the field, and scored the game-winning touchdown.

The referees from last night’s game obviously forgot about the rule…during a Lions game, of course.

But when the New England Patriots were involved with a similar play, the referees were well aware of the rule.

Zac Jackson from published this tidbit that won’t sooth Lions’ fans anger:

The Patriots defeated the Dolphins, 27-17, on Oct. 27, 2013. With the Patriots leading 20-17 in the fourth quarter and facing a second and seven at the Miami 23, quarterback Tom Brady fumbled after getting hit by Dolphins defensive back Jimmy Wilson.

Patriots tackle Nate Solder recovered, way back at the Miami 48. The ball moved that far down the field because Dolphins defensive end Olivier Vernon hit the ball while it was loose, and the officials ruled that Vernon had committed an illegal batting of the ball, applying a 10-yard penalty from the line of scrimmage.

Such a play, as we were reminded late Monday night in the aftermath of the Seahawks-Lions ending, is not reviewable.

The Patriots ended up with a first down at the Dolphins’ 13 after the penalty and scored four plays later to make it 27-17.

It figures that a similar play worked-out, correctly, in New England’s favor.

You know, I’m not one to hail the so-called wisdom of New England head coach Bill Belichick and his cheating ways. That being said, I wonder if he’s got a point that all calls should be subject to a review? Sure, the games would last a little longer, but something’s got to be done to counter the weekly incompetence we’re seeing from the professional officials!

And I can’t believe I agree with former Baltimore Raven linebacker Ray Lewis, but he’s correct when he says referees should be punished for screwing up calls!

Look, the Detroit Lions are in shambles. They’ve looked unprepared, slow, confused, and downright awful this year. The Lions will most likely start the year 0-5, and should just fire Jim Caldwell right now so that they can hire their fantastic defensive coordinator Terry Austin as the team’s next head coach. I also think Drew Sharp of The Detroit Free Press has a point when he writes that despite the blown call, the Lions aren’t a very good team.

Still, the Lions had a great chance to win, and they plainly got screwed by the NFL–again!

The Lions are so inept by themselves that they don’t need any help at sucking!

Last night’s fiasco just proves no matter what, the Lions aren’t meant to be winners. No matter what happens, they lose, and will continue to lose throughout this year.

Get ready for another rebuilding project next year while the referee system remains in-tact.

[email protected]

Another Mass Shooting. America Yawns–reaction

Here’s part of a listener response I received after talking about the recent mass shooting in Oregon, and how America will do nothing:

Why not just be honest?  The Democrat’s gun laws have one goal, to disarm law abiding citizens.  So now you call for us to “Do Something” shouldn’t it be do something that would actually have a positive effect?  All of these spree killers have had history of mental illness, how about we simply go back to locking up the mentally ill for their own safety and the safety of others?  But no doubt that would hit the Democrat’s voter base too hard to ever be done.  Can’t we at least reverse the horrible decision you liberals made with the “Gun Free Zones”?  How about we start there?

Here’s a part of my response:

As for your whole “Gun Free Zone” comment, I have to say that you’re right. Just because some building my be “gun-free” doesn’t mean absolute safety. Just because you have a gun doesn’t mean you’re safe, either. As we saw with the police officers killed in NYC, Las Vegas, and Houston, guns don’t really help you if someone else has the drop on you. And because of these lax gun laws, nut-jobs are allowed to get guns and fire away.

After I replied to the email, I found this interview of Dr. Jonathon Metzl in Vox, and he highlights a misnomer when it comes to mass shooters:

Jonathon Metzl, a professor of psychiatry, sociology, and medicine, health, and society at Vanderbilt University, argues that mental illness is often a scapegoat that lets policymakers and the public ignore bigger, more complicated contributors to gun violence. Metzl, who reviewed the research on mass shootings and mental illness in a paper for theAmerican Journal of Public Health, points to studies that show people with mental illness are more likely to be victims — not perpetrators — of violence, and that very few violent acts — about 3 to 5 percent — are carried out by the mentally ill. And while mental illness can be a contributor to some violent behaviors, other factors — such as substance abuse, poverty, history of violence, and access to guns — are much stronger predictors of violence and shootings.

It’s a fascinating interview, and it could change your perceptions around mass shooters and their psyche. Perhaps we shouldn’t be focusing on just mental illness when it comes to gun violence.

Metzl concludes:

Let me be clear. I think mental illness is a factor, clearly, in many mass shootings. But I think there is no one diagnosis that’s linked to mass shootings, so there’s no psychiatric test that can prevent a mass shooting.

Mass shootings, as traumatic and horrible as they are, are statistically very rare, so they’re very hard to predict. So I think we’re far better off as a society trying to prevent everyday shootings — and when you look at everyday shootings, there really is no strong correlation between mental illness and shootings.

[email protected]

Another Mass Shooting. America Yawns.


Here’s my “Pat Political Point” from WSGW’s First Day show from last Sunday. The topic: The mass shooting at the community college in Oregon last week, and how America yawns. Below the fold, I’ve provided links to the Stephen Colbert monologue, and some of the stats I shared during my rant.


Here’s the Stephen Colbert clip–the first 90 seconds is what I featured. Here are some statistics regarding gun deaths in America. Here’s is the Gallup poll I cited where 90% of Americans supported strengthening background checks for guns. However, that 90% was before the U.S. Senate blocked the measure from ever passing. That being said, in 2013, about two-thirds of Americans supported stronger background checks.

What did you think?

[email protected]

Conservatives…The Pope Is With You!


During last Sunday’s First Day show on WSGW, I cited this write-up from University of Michigan Professor Juan Cole detailing how, despite everything being said, the Pope is a traditional conservative pontiff:

Pope Francis opposes contraception, including the homely condom, as well as abortion and same-sex marriage. If he has asked who he is to judge gays, he was doing so as an individual, not as a church administrator. The stance of the church he leads is that homosexuality is a sin and gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry. (Jorge) Bergoglio has called adoption within gay marriage wrong and criticized the leftist Kirchner governments of Argentia as “demagoguery, totalitarianism, corruption and efforts to secure unlimited power.” [- sorry, this passage was garbled by omission of some phrases in the original publication and corrected 9/25 -ed.]

He opposes ending the practice of celibacy for priests. He is committed to patriarchy and opposes progressive nuns’ demand for recognizing them as autonomous actors in the church. To get an American politician with these views you’d have to go to Rick Santorum.

Well, many on the Left are outraged over the news that Francis met with cultural conservative heroine Kim Davis during his Washington, D.C. visit last week. Davis, of course, is the county clerk from Kentucky who chose to champion discrimination by refusing to grant marriage licenses to gay couples. The Supreme Court last summer decided the Constitution protected the civil rights of gay people to marry.

According to her lawyers, Davis and Pope Francis had quite the meeting:

Mat Staver, Davis’s attorney and the founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, told The Post that Davis and her husband, Joe, met privately with Francis at the Apostolic Nunciature in Washington last Thursday afternoon. The meeting was brief, lasting less than 15 minutes, Staver said.

The pair chatted about bravery, then hugged and exchanged promises of prayer, according to the Liberty Counsel.

“He held out his hand and she clasped his hands and held them,” said Staver, who did not attend the meeting between Davis and the pope.

Davis, Staver said, told Francis “she would pray for him. She asked the pope to pray for her, and he said he would pray. He said to ‘stay strong.’”

The pope “spoke in English the entire time,” Staver said. A Liberty Counsel news release said Francis thanked Davis for her “courage.”

Liberals were outraged:

It doesn’t surprise me that Pope Francis would give his support to someone like Kim Davis because he and Davis are on the same wavelength. That’s what I tried to argue last week. The Pope is conservative because Catholic Church doctrine is socially conservative!

As for his economic criticisms, Professor Cole is correct in saying the pope isn’t advocating major governmental programs to aid the poor. On the contrary, Pope Francis is advocating for old-fashioned philanthropy.

His conservative philosophy is prevalent even with his environmental concerns. The pope sees human beings acting as stewards of the environment. That’s a very conservative edict, according to Cole.

In conclusion, I will submit that if Pope Francis truly cared about the poor, he would try to change his Church’s stance against contraception. The less unintended pregnancies, the less poor children needing help. But that’s apparently a liberal philosophy.

Instead of shaming him, conservatives should be lauding him.

[email protected]

Industry-Wide Cheating Will Continue Unless Someone Pays

Volkswagen Environment CarsThe Volkswagen clean diesel scandal gives more ammunition to those calling on stiffer governmental oversight on industries to protect the environment.

The German automaker used computer software to hide the fact that its cars were violating pollution standards by pumping nitrogen oxide into the atmosphere. Some 11 million VW cars worldwide sent nitrogen oxide some “15-35 times above” the EPA limit! VW’s cheating could have led to somewhere around 5-27 premature deaths in the U.S.

When I hear arguments how “regressive” government regulations prevent businesses from being successful, please remember this:

Beyond emissions, the industry has long been contemptuous of regulation. Henry Ford II called airbags “a lot of baloney,” and executives have bristled at rules requiring higher mileage per gallon. Robert A. Lutz, the former General Motors vice chairman and Chrysler president, often said the rules were like “trying to cure obesity by requiring clothing manufacturers to make smaller sizes.”

The universe of automotive scandals has been a broad and often tragic one, including Ford’s 1978 recalls of 1.5 million Pintos after evidence emerged that its gas tanks were prone to catch fire during impacts. The Chrysler Corporation was indicted in 1987 on charges of disconnecting the odometers of 60,000 cars used by executives and then selling them as new. The Ford-Firestone scandal that started in the late 1990s was linked to 271 deaths. And more than 23 million cars have been recalled by 11 automakers over airbags made by Takata that could violently rupture in an accident.

Misleading gas mileage claims have disturbed regulators and consumers who find that cars often use more gas than promised on the window sticker. Last year, the Korean automakers Hyundai Motor and Kia Motors paid $300 million in a settlement with the Justice Department and the E.P.A. for overstating the mileage of 1.2 million vehicles. Ford also cut the mileage rating of one of its hybrid electric vehicles in 2013 after complaints, and the E.P.A. has imposed stiffer fines for overstating mileage claims.

No matter the offense, penalties have often been fleeting. Executives are not jailed; fines are manageable.

A lonely bank robber who steals a $1000 will go to jail for years.

What happens to corporate execs who are found cheating, or participating in a cover-up?


That’s not to say there aren’t instances of government overreach. Certainly, there are such instances. This is not one of those cases. The environment and public health suffered due to VW’s actions.

Libertarian writer Shikha Dalmia correctly points-out that VW’s cheating did help the environment in some ways, in that VW’s diesel engines helped reduce greenhouse gasses by increasing fuel economy standards 30 times better than gas engines.

Dalmia says VW’s now former CEO Martin Winterkorn could’ve tried making trade-off deals with lawmakers, so that the auto company didn’t have to feel the need to cheat. But it chose to cheat, and it lost.

Actually, greed lost.

As much as Dalmia and her ilk want to blame the EPA for poor VW, the above passage shows it’s not the first time a car maker chose to cheat the rules rather than find solutions. That’s not to say the EPA isn’t to blame for being too lax on auto makers through the years, as Bloomberg News reports.

Still, I doubt one individual associated with VW will face criminal prosecution for their blatant disregard of the law, and public health.

[email protected]

None Of Your Business

Family Work

Emily Bingham from Ann Arbor, MI, recently posted this Facebook rant, complaining about people who needle women and their procreative plans. Here’s a part of it:

Hey everyone!!! Now that I got your attention with this RANDOM ULTRASOUND PHOTO I grabbed from a Google image search, this is just a friendly P.S.A. that people’s reproductive and procreative plans and decisions are none of your business. NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. Before you ask the young married couple that has been together for seemingly forever when they are finally gonna start a family … before you ask the parents of an only-child toddler when a Little Brother or Little Sister will be in the works … before you ask a single 30-something if/when s/he plans on having children because, you know, clock’s ticking … just stop. Please stop. You don’t know who is struggling with infertility or grieving a miscarriage or dealing with health issues. You don’t know who is having relationship problems or is under a lot of stress or the timing just isn’t right. You don’t know who is on the fence about having kids or having more kids. You don’t know who has decided it’s not for them right now, or not for them ever. You don’t know how your seemingly innocent question might cause someone grief, pain, stress or frustration. Sure, for some people those questions may not cause any fraught feelings — but I can tell you, from my own experiences and hearing about many friends’ experiences — it more than likely does.

Her rant has caused a ripple in social media land, and has gained coverage from the mainstream press.

I have only one slight disagreement with Emily: this phenomena isn’t strictly for women. No, men can get these same questions, too. “When are you guys going to have children?” “Why don’t you have children?”

I introduced myself to a neighbor a few weeks ago. After some small talk, I was asked where my children attended school. I responded that we didn’t have children, except for our dogs and cat. The person reacted–and I’m not kidding, here–with a grimace! I expect people to grimace if I told them I had a terminal illness, or that I lock my wife away in the basement freezer at night, or that I’m a liberal. I never expected a person to grimace over the fact that I don’t have kids!

It’s against the societal norm, I understand, but why is a person’s decision to be childless frowned upon in our society? I don’t begrudge my fellow man and woman for wanting/having children. Please, procreate to your heart’s desire! But don’t treat me like I’m less of a man for not having a kid because that will only cause me to…grimace right back!

On the contrary, treat me less of a man for asking my wife to catch a bat in the middle of the night while I’m hiding under the covers.

That’s fair game!

[email protected]