Pat’s Perfect Picks–Week 12 Edition

You can listen to my Week 12 edition of “Pat’s Perfect NFL Picks as you heard it on WSGW’s First Day show earlier today. The transcript is below the sound cut.


It’s now time for the most exciting two-plus minutes in Sunday news-talk radio. That’s right, it’s time for the Week 12 edition of “Pat’s Perfect NFL Picks on WSGW’s First Day.

It was another struggle for your esteemed host as I experienced another pitiful 1-2 week, giving me a ho-hum 17-16 overall record.

I said the Vikings would beat an already beat-up Green Bay Packers team, and of course, the Packers showed up to beat the Vikings. Naturally, the Packers would go-on to lose to the Chicago Bears four days later. I did call the Arizona Cardinals victory over the Cincinnati Bungles, although it was much closer than I thought it would be. But the Detroit Lions decided this winning thing is actually kind of cool, and defeated the Oakland Raiders! Can you believe it, but thanks to their 45-14 rout over the Philadelphia Eagles on Thanksgiving Day, the Lions are still mathematically in the NFC Playoff race?

It’s time for me to start taking these picks more seriously.

Here are my Week 12 picks!

We begin in Kansas City where the suddenly unstoppable Chiefs host the Buffalo Bills. The Bills played a pretty strong game against New England last week. The KansasCityChiefsdefense got physical with Tom Brady’s offense, holding them to 20 points. Unfortunately, the Bills offense couldn’t produce and keep-up with the Pats. And now, the Bills are facing a tougher defense in Kansas City, which has allowed just an average of 12 points during their last six games. The Chiefs offense is putting-up some decent numbers led by quarterback Alex Smith, who hasn’t thrown a pick in his last 253 attempts. The Chiefs have those factors working with them, plus the game is in K.C.

Give me the Chiefs OVER the Bills–23-12?

The undefeated New England Patriots, and their quarterback Tom Brady, visit the Denver Broncos, and their quarterback, Peyton Manning. Wait. Manning is still broncossidelined with an injury. The match-up of the year is now looking like a yawner. Denver has to send Brock Osweiler under center for the second straight game. Osweiler did win his first game, but this is going to be entirely different. Tom Brady is playing stellar football despite the fact that his offensive weapons are dropping like flies. Regardless, Brady still wins. That’s why I’m picking…Brady to lose?

Give me the Broncos OVER the Patriots–27-21!!

Since the Lions played on Thanksgiving, I have to come-up with another game to prognosticate. Let’s go with the Proud Pittsburgh Steelers taking-on the Seattle SteelersSeahawks in the Great Northwest. The Seahawks reached the .500 mark with a victory over San Francisco last week. They look poised to make a run. There’s only one thing: The Steelers aren’t the 49ers! It will be a classic showdown between Pittsburgh’s prolific offense and Seattle’s “Legion Of Doom” defense. I look for a tough, down-to-the-wire contest with Big Ben Roethlisberger leading his Steelers down the field for the game-winning field goal as time expires.

Give me the Steelers OVER the Seahawks–27-24!!!

That’s the Week 12 edition of “Pat’s Perfect NFL Picks” on WSGW’s First Day.

Sticking To Our Principles


Here’s yesterday’s “Pat Political Point” from WSGW’s First Day show.

I discuss how last week may have been President Obama’s finest moment as the leader of the free world. The President defended America’s image of being the “shining city on a hill” for Syrians trying to escape war and upheaval, while a majority of Americans are standing against him on this issue.

Below, you’ll see I’ve included the Shepherd Smith commentary for you to watch.

Here’s Shep from Fox News:

[email protected]

Pat’s Perfect Picks–Week 11 Edition


Click below to hear my “Pat’s Perfect NFL Picks–Week 11 edition–which aired on this morning’s First Day on WSGW. The transcript is below the fold:


It’s now time for the most exciting two-plus minutes in Sunday news-talk radio. That’s right, it’s time for the Week 11 edition of “Pat’s Perfect NFL Picks on WSGW’s First Day.

After my first perfect record of the year, I regained my mediocrity by going 1-2 last week.

I correctly called the Cardinals victory over the Seahawks. However, I erred in believing the Oakland Raiders were a legitimate playoff team. They fell flat against the NFC North leading…Minnesota Vikings? And I couldn’t even rely on an expected Lions disappointment, as the Lions delivered a completely unexpected victory at Green Bay. It was the first time the Lions left Lambeau Field with a victory since 1991!

My overall record is now 16-14.

Can I get lucky and go perfect for the second time in three week?

Here are my Week 11 picks.

Let’s start in Arizona as the Cardinals host the Cincinnati Bungles. The Bungles showed during last week’s Monday Night loss to the ArizonaCardinalsHouston Texans that they are who I thought they are. Sure, they started 8-0, but I was never sold. Andy Dalton remains and will always be a second-tier quarterback. Carson Palmer, on the other hand, is a better quarterback, and the Cardinals are the more complete team. Cincy won’t be able to keep up with the Cardinals high-scoring offense, and that’s because Arizona boasts perhaps the best secondary in the game.

Give me the Cardinals OVER the Bungles–34-17!

We’ve got an NFC showdown in Minneapolis as the surprising Vikings look to make a statement against the reeling Green Bay MinnesotaVikesPackers. The Vikes are 7-2, and are beginning to look like a legitimate team. Led by running back Adrian Peterson and a tough defense, the Vikings are poised to take control of the NFC Central. That’s due in-part to this mid-season implosion by the Packers. They’ve dropped three-straight, including last week’s loss to Detroit. Opposing defenses no longer fear the Packers offense. Neither do I.

Give me the Vikings OVER the Packers–27-20!!

And finally, your Detroit Lions–fresh-off one of their more surprising victories in the organization’s history–host the enigmatic Raiders

Just Win, Baby!

Just Win, Baby!

of Oakland. The Lions defense played exceptional football against Green Bay, but can they follow-it-up today? Matthew Stafford didn’t get beaten-up for a change, and made some clutch throws late in that victory. Can he give a repeat performance? The Lions special teams had a great day, too, thanks to Ameer Abdullah. Can the special teams do that again? Can the Lions put-together 60-minutes of good football to beat a Raider team that scores points, and has one of the best kickers in football? Can the Lions actually win two in a row?


Give me the Raiders OVER the Lions–34-16!!!

That’s the Week 11 edition of “Pat’s Perfect NFL Picks” on WSGW’s First Day!

[email protected]

The Already Selective Refugee Process

My old First Day co-host, Hilary Farrell, has posted a story at her current public radio job about the painstaking process refugees must endure to reach the U.S.:

Chris Cavanaugh is the refugee program manager at Lutheran Social Services of Michigan, an agency directly providing state and local resettlement services.

“It’s really hard to get into the U.S. refugee program,” he says. “It’s a very, very selective – almost handpicked process.”

Cavanaugh says it takes up to two years and sometimes longer before a case reaches his desk. That’s before the refugee or family arrives.

“It’s quite a contrast to the European model, or present situation. That’s more of an asylum situation, where people are intentionally coming into the country and then seeking protection at that point,” he says. “The U.S. program takes much longer – you can’t come into the U.S. and then become a refugee. You’re a refugee overseas and then you have to be vetted and cleared.”

Click on the story to hear Hilary’s story. It’s well-done, as usual.

How much slower must an already slow process be? Why are we allowing Trump to scare us? Better yet, why are we allowing European nationals (who made up most, if not all, of the Paris terrorists) to scare us from allowing Syrians refugees to begin this process?

[email protected]

That’s Not What We’re About

The U.S. House is passing legislation to slow-down an already slow refugee process for Syrians:

The House will vote Thursday afternoon on the first of what could be many legislative moves geared to curb President Obama’s Syrian refugee resettlement program. The legislation, called the America SAFE Act, would require that the heads of federal security agencies personally approve of the background investigations of each refugee admitted and certify that the refugee poses no security threat.


The President will veto this joke of a bill.

I’ll let Marcy Wheeler have the last word:

[email protected]

Because That Will Change Everything?

ObamaFlagTomi Lahren is becoming a fast-rising star in Conservative Land, and she provided The Blaze readers with a two-minute attack on how President Obama’s not all that much into “winning.” I must address her argument because it’s being echoed by many on her side, and it’s a complaint that doesn’t make sense to me. I apologize that I couldn’t post The Blaze video on the blog:

“One thing I still haven’t heard come out of his mouth: Islamic Terrorists. He calls them “foreign fighter,” he calls the “ISIL,” he calls them “ISIS,” but he can’t just can’t quite bring himself to mention the religion they are fighting in the name of. Now, I’m no national security expert, I know that. But I do have enough common sense to know that you can’t defeat an enemy you refuse to name. He is not interested in the notion of American leadership or America winning. And that pretty much sums up Barack Obama’s foreign policy…

“You don’t want to send America’s sons and daughters to fight another pointless war. I can tell you from experience, your military sons and daughters, mothers and fathers, husbands and wives are ready to stand up, use their training and protect the nation and the people they love. They are not scared.”

That’s just a snippet. Please, click on her two minute exhortation for President Obama. It’s a real treat.

First, Lahren probably shouldn’t assume that “America’s sons and daughters” are prepared to fight in another stupid Middle Eastern war. Every time, and I mean, Every Time, we have engaged ourselves in a Middle Eastern conflict, it’s turned-out for the worst. And on top of that, we don’t have a draft. So, we keep sending the same people overseas countless times, and then we’re shocked to learn their dealing with PTSD!

Secondly, and this is the argument that baffles me, why is it important for President Obama to say, “Islamic Terrorism?” The right has been saying that for years, and it doesn’t appear like it’s stopped loner losers, who claim to follow the Koran, from committing acts of violence across the world. If Donald Trump repeats “Islamic Terrorism” ad nauseum, guess what? There’s still going to be some nut-job devoted to killing people…somewhere.

It’s not like the move Beatlejuice! If you say it three straight times, terrorism isn’t going to vanish.


Groups like ISIS live on fear and notoriety. They want their violent views to dominate the Western airwaves, and force us to treat all Muslims with suspicion. They’re already winning by having our politicians turn-away Syrian refugees, and having a clown like Bo Deitl pop-off that Americans should stop complaining about having rights and just let the government spy on us at will!

President Obama’s not going to give these deranged individuals the benefit of calling them “Islamic Terrorist.” That’s what they want, and they’re not going to get it.

I’m also not sure if Lahren is aware, but America has been bombing ISIS targets for the past year, but why present facts?

There was a time during the Bush administration years that criticizing the administration was called “unpatriotic.” Just ask what happened to The Dixie Chicks.

I’m glad we’ve apparently abandoned that practice.

Next up? Telling the truth!

[email protected]

NOTE: Politifact gave the President a “True” rating when he claimed ISIS was contained on one of the Sunday shows, just days before the Paris attacks. You understand why Obama said what he said when put into the context of the question.