Hold Your Son Responsible, Sir

I've had enough of parents protecting their precious little snowflake children when the kids are obviously in the wrong.  Kids are going to make mistakes when they grow up.  Most likely, given the scope of a lot of regular teenage mistakes, they'll be fine.  Maybe not always great, but fine.  And even if they're not great, it's highly unlikely that it's because of ONE mistake that they made as a teenager.  (The exceptions to this sweeping generalization are obviously things like pregnancy and felonies.)  But the point here is that if they do something wrong and they admit to doing it wrong, what you as a parent are not supposed to do is then turn around and sue the school district because the school kicked your kid out of an honors English class because he cheated. 

And according to the San Jose Mercury News, that's exactly what happened.  It would seem that Jack Berghouse's son was caught cheating in his honors English class.  Now, at the beginning of the year, all of the students had to sign an "Academic Honesty Pledge.  Not only that, but his mother signed it as well.  Said pledge explained that if a student was caught cheating (among other offenses) that they would be removed from the honors English class and placed into a regular English class.  Berghouse's son got caught cheating.  He was expelled from the class.  That's when Berghouse sued.  


Mr. Berghouse claims to be concerned about his child's future and says that his expulsion from this particular honors English class could make it so that his son doesn't get into the college of his choice.  I'm kind of wondering at this point how many choices the kid is actually going to have once the colleges that he will apply to get wind of this fiasco.  Oh, yeah, I'm sure there are plenty of colleges out there just a-clammorin' to have a student with a lawsuit happy parent.  Sure there are!  Come on in, son!  Aside from being completely baseless, I have the feeling that this lawsuit is going to end up doing more harm than it will good. 


Mr. Berghouse, who is a lawyer, said "I'm getting a lot of hate calls at my office.  I had no freaking idea this would happen."  Really?  You had NO idea that people would be mad as hell that you were coming to the defense of your son who admitting to cheating in a class?  You had NO idea that people wouldn't take well to your suing the school district to get your son reinstated into a class that he got himself kicked out of?  You had NO idea that people would be angry that you don't teach your son to accept responsibility for stuff when he messes up?  NO idea at ALL, Mr. Berghouse?  I have a difficult time believing that.  Did he actually think that people would be on his side?  The kid signed a pledge not to cheat!  He cheated!  And Mr. Berghouse thinks that the school shouldn't follow through with the stated consequence that was outlined in the pledge?  Wow.  OK, then.  The only time I've ever been that delusional is after several bottles of wine.


Mr. Berghouse went on to explain "There is the possibility this will cause permanent harm. What university will it keep him out of? Will that have far-ranging consequences in what kind of job he can get?"  He's right.  This could cause permanent harm.  I doubt that it will, but he's right that some colleges might not want a student who is a cheater.  (Go figure!)  Regardless, that's why there are measures in place to discourage cheating.  Funny how they didn't work on his son.  Gee, with his attitude, I can't imagine why.  Hmmm....Well, he also said, "He knows it's wrong...You cannot imagine the mental and emotional penalty that has been inflicted upon him. We've offered several penalties, anything other than being kicked out of the English program."  But...but...a punishment isn't a punishment if it's something that you WANT to DO!

He signed a pledge saying (essentially) that he would not cheat.  The pledge specified that if any of the things outlined in the pledge were not adhered to that the student would be removed from the program.  The kid signed it and his mother signed in.  And now they're upset because he cheated and the school followed through?!  They want a DIFFERENT penalty?  Why would that even work?  Could you imagine if our justice system worked that way?  ("Uh, your honor...I know that my client admitted to embezzling millions of dollars and squandering the funds on an alpaca farm just outside of Toledo.  But if you send him to jail, that will really affect his ability to make any money in the future.  Therefore, we'd like to suggest a different penalty.  Perhaps picking up trash or reading to the blind.  We just don't think that jail is the right thing, even though my client knew he was committing a crime.") 

I'd like to ask Mr. Berghouse what he would say to all of the students in his son's class who did NOT cheat.  See, they didn't cheat and they're allowed to be in the program.  Doesn't it devalue the hard and honest work that the other students are doing to allow a cheater to come back to the class because of his daddy is afraid it will ruin his future?  I'd be mad as hell if a kid that had been caught cheating was allowed to be in an elite class with me when I had spent the whole time NOT cheating.  That's the thing.  The rules for staying IN the class are quite simple.  Don't cheat.  And really, if the kid couldn't grasp that concept, should he really BE in Honor's English to begin with?  He doesn't sound all that bright. 


Wouldn't it be great if the consequences from this are EXACTLY what they should be?  I mean that sincerely.  Wouldn't it be extremely just if some kid who did not cheat ended up with the spot at college where Mr. Berghouse's son would have been if he didn't cheat?  I think that would be perfect.  Granted, I don't think that's going to happen because I think that Mr. Berghouse is overreacting and that his son's entire academic future does not hinge on this one SOPHOMORE Honor's English class.  I'm pretty sure that he'll be OK in spite of the asshattery that he displayed by cheating.  It's not like he killed someone.  Though if he had, I'm sure Mr. Berghouse would come up with a reason why he shouldn't be punished.

I hope that Mr. Berghouse continues to get angry phone calls at his office.  They don't need to be hateful.  They don't need to be mean or threatening.  But people like Jack Berghouse are responsible for the dumbing down of America.  They're also responsible (as ironic as this is going to sound) for people not taking responsibility for anything that they've done!  Your child is not a precious little snowflake that should be exempt from all consequences for his poor choices!  And you don't get to choose your punishment, either!  Is that becoming a thing?  I think I remember writing about that recently.  Something about someone else who got caught doing something illegal and was upset because they were being charged even though they offered to right the wrong that they had been accused of.  That's not how this works!  And if things go the way that they should go, that's not the way that it will ever work! 

Sphere: Related Content

How To Handle A Cheating Spouse

You know what you do when you catch your spouse cheating on you...in your house...in your bed? You do what this marvelous guy did. Yep. This is exactly how you handle this sort of a situation.

Sphere: Related Content

You Don't Say?

So, just a couple of ridiculous and not so shocking things that I ran across today. (And don't worry. My "vacation" is almost over. Expect daily posts to resume shortly.)

According to Huffington Post, Jesse James and Kat Von D have broken up. Shocking, I know. Who would have thought that the guy who would be so freaking stupid as to cheat on the extremely lovely Sandra Bullock would be unable to have a committed relationship. I'm not saying that it was his fault. I'm saying that he's a jackass.

Also in the news, the lawyer for lunatic Norwegian shooter Anders Behring Breivik says that his client is possibly insane. Possibly? Really? A guy starts shooting anyone and everyone that he can find in an attack that he planned for at least nine years because he sees himself as some sort of a warrior and some sort of Western world savior and he's only possibly insane? Jesus, what do you have to do over there in order to be probably insane?!
And by the way, you're not going to pretend that when you first heard of this horrific ordeal and when you first saw a picture of the obviously insane lunatic that you didn't think that Julian Assange had gone off the deep end, are you? Behold!




Yeah, they're the same. Maybe not Val Kilmer/Chaz Bono the same, but still the same. And finally, I had been doing some reading about all of the human-animal hybrids that are being created in labs all over. First thing I thought of was this guy. Behold!

But then I realized that it was former Congressman David Wu (Oregon, D-umbass) who has just resigned because of some sex scandal. Word on the street is that he had sex with an 18-year old. She seems to be implying that it was not all that consensual, whereas he (of course) is insisting that it was. Right. Because if I were an 18-year old girl and I saw Simba there, I would naturally want to hit that immediately. Uh, yeah, I don't think so.

Sphere: Related Content

But It's The Truth

It was probably only a matter of time before we began to hear from the relatives of the chick that slept with Arnold Schwarzenegger and bore his illegitimate miniature bodybuilder offspring with a seemingly inherited giant head. Yesterday, we got to hear from the daughter of ex-Schwarzenegger maid Mildred Baena. That would be a one Jackie Roso. Let's see what drivel she spewed so that people could pretend that they're interested.

She apparently told "Entertainment Tonight" in regard to her mother that "She's like a superwoman, pretty much...She's always been there for us, for me and my brothers. And that's why me and my brothers will always be there for her, no matter what." Yeah, I'd say that she's a superwoman. Anyone who could keep the secret that they're sleeping with their boss (who happens to be the governor of California) WHILE still working in the family home is somewhat of a superwoman. Somewhat of a superwhore as well, but I'm OK with the superwoman moniker.

The best part though, was this: "It doesn't matter what any newspaper says... I know my mom, and her friends and her family, we all know her. The Mildred that they put out there...it's just like...gossip, rumors." Well, I don't know what exactly she's referring to, but pretty much all I've heard is not really as much gossip and rumors as it is the truth. And those "rumors" didn't so much come from the media as much as they actually came from Arnold himself when he admitted to being a lying and cheating scumbag and fathering your child. It's hard to imagine any reason for him to say those things unless they were true. So it's really not so much gossip and rumors as much as it is your mom is a homewrecker.

I'm not quite sure why this chick feels the need to say anything considering that her mom hasn't spoken up yet at all. She also, apparently, hasn't spoken to her mom since all of this came out. She might want to wait just a little bit longer next time she decides to speak out about things that are totally true. Just a thought.

Sphere: Related Content

I Don't Know What Not To Like

I'm not quite sure why I'm going to take this time to talk about Newt Gingrich because he will never be President. But it does seem like he might be positioning himself for a run at something, so I thought that I'd just get my dislike of him out of the way.

While I know that intellectually, a candidate's personal life shouldn't factor into whether or not the position that they're running for can be performed, I have a hard time getting to that point emotionally. Newt's a cheater. No one likes a cheater. And he didn't just cheat on one of his wives. He cheated on both of them. No one likes a serial cheater. Not even a little bit. Does his being a cheater impact how he would do his job if elected? Intellectually, I wouldn't think that it would. Emotionally? It seems like whatever he said would not be able to be trusted. Especially when he gives lame excuses for why he cheated.

Let's go over to New York Magazine for an explanation of his cheating. "There's no question at times of my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate." That's right. He was passionate about 'Merika, so that's why he cheated. Intellectually, should that matter? Considering that it's a dumbass excuse and is not very intellectual? Maybe it should!

Then there's the latest dust up that he's answering for. According to Politico, he had "...a “revolving charge account” at Tiffany and Company" with a liability somewhere in between $250,001 and $500,000. At freaking Tiffany's. Tiffany's, known equally for their breakfast as well as their jewelry, is about as uppity as you can get. Now, it could be that he has this account because he buys his wedding rings in bulk. But regardless, does anyone really need over $250 grand in jewelry? I don't think that they do! Should that disqualify someone from being a legitimate candidate for office? I want to say yes, but why does that feel wrong?!

He kind of made a good point on Sunday when he said that "...the spending was his "private decision." He does have a point. He can do whatever he wants with his money, no matter how idiotic I think it may be. (Or no matter how idiotic it just is. And come on! Who needs $250,000 in jewelry? No one! There are SO many other things that one could purchase with that kind of cash! So many BETTER things!) He also claims to be debt free. Should it make a difference if he is able to manage his money to where he incurs a debt and then pays it off? That's sort of the point of having good credit, isn't it? I'm so confused!

Let's review: I can't decide if people who are despicable individuals should be automatically discounted from running for or fulfilling a public office. Emotionally, I say screw 'em. Intellectually, I say it maybe shouldn't matter. Why is emotional me winning?! Why isn't intellectual me dominating this issue?! What is wrong with me? Am I missing something?

Sphere: Related Content

Oh, No They Don't

I've gotta say that I'm kind of surprised at the restraint that almost all of the news and tabloid outlets have shown by not publishing a photo of Arnold's newly announced illegitimate child that he fathered with his maid at his house when he was cheating on his wife and the mother of his four legitimate children, the lovely Maria Shriver. If only some of the media could refrain from making idiotic comparisons and/or analogies, then we might very well be on our way toward some responsible reporting of an issue that really kind of doesn't matter. But no. Leave it to ABC to ruin the very, very short streak that we were on. I present to you THEIR way of framing the story. Behold! Utter crap!

Good Lord. Really? Who thought that was a good idea? Well, over at ABC, it would be the director of Yale University's Parenting Center and Child Conduct Clinic, a one Dr. Alan E. Kazdin, as he is actually quoted using the phrase "This event is like a personal 9/11." I know that 9/11 was almost ten years ago, so I'm guessing that he WAS, in fact, around for the events that took place on that day. That's why I'm so perplexed as to why anyone would make such an idiotic statement. ( was about to say "And he's a doctor!" Then I realized that might actually shed some light on his thinking patterns as opposed to confusing me even more. He should step out of his ivory tower once in a while and see how the real world thinks of 9/11. Because while it's thought of in a lot of ways, one of those ways is not when your husband/father turns out to be a lying, cheating, seed-spreading scumbag. It sucks, but it doesn't 9/11 suck.

Sphere: Related Content

The Sperminator

By now, I'm sure that you've been made aware of the extramarital dalliances of the ex-Governator, Arnold Schwarzenegger. Not only did he screw around on his wife, but he fathered a child with this other woman (who was a member of his household staff, otherwise known as a maid) about TEN YEARS ago. Holy cow. And he managed to make it through an election not once, but twice and not have this discovered? Amazing.

That's really the most amazing thing out of all of this. Well, and that Maria didn't just castrate him on the spot after she found out. She went out on a limb as she vouched for his character during the election in which he became the Governor of California. Little did she know that as she was telling everyone what a great guy he was and how well she knew him that he had an illegitimate child (with his maid) that would have been about three or four years old. Sure, he's a great guy.

See, it's one thing to cheat on your wife. It's a completely different thing to be spawning children with the hired help. And it's in a totally different league when you wife is humiliated in the public eye when all of this finally comes out. It still hasn't come out exactly why he told her, either. Considering that he was able to keep this under wraps for ten years, I can't imagine what happened at this point. He must have been paying off his mistress-maid quite well in order for her to have not even said a peep.

Cheating on your wife is just a scumbag thing to do. Not being a responsible and involved parent once you've fathered a child is an even more scumbag thing to do. Translation: Arnold is a scumbag. I hope Maria takes him for everything that he is worth and then some.

Sphere: Related Content

Ridiculous Things I Read About Today

Wow. I read a bunch of ridiculous things today and now I must share.

I was reading about Barry Bonds' upcoming trial for perjury. The perjury charges (and there are ten of them) stem from his telling a grand jury back in December of 2003 that "he never knowingly took steroids." Yeah, right. Did you see Barry Bonds back then? He was a mammoth. Of course he took steroids. Everyone in baseball took steroids and he was no exception. His arms were gigantic. His trained testified that at one point, he had to order new hats for Barry because his head was bigger. I don't know about you, but I don't know of many adult males whose head suddenly starts to grow if they are not on steroids.

But all of that isn't my point. My point is what I read in an article over at the Huffington Post. The article was talking about the hearing on Friday and it said, "Dressed in a dark suit and slimmed down from his San Francisco Giants playing days...." That's all you need to know. Gee, I wonder WHY he was all slimmed down? Could it be that there isn't any reason for him to take steroids any more? Yeah, that's a tough one to noodle through. Man, I hope they find him guilty. I know that there were a lot of players that roided up during the 1990s. But Barry is so smug about it. AND he did a lot of damage to the game by going on the juice. Guilty, guilty, guilty. Can't wait to see how that one turns out.

And then there's Nadya Suleman. Man, I have had about enough of her to last a lifetime. She was on Oprah the other day along with Suze Orman. You know who Suze Orman is, right? She's that attractive lesbian woman who gives sound financial advice in a rather obnoxious manner. She was on there to go through Octomom's finances. I don't know why they needed Suze Orman for that. I could have told you that she's broke. But in the discussion of her finances, Suze Orman asked Octomom if, back before she had herself impregnated with enough embryos to fill a gumball machine, she knew then what she knows now, would she have had the extra eight children. (Please remember that at the time that she pulled this completely inexcusable and utterly insane stunt, she already had six kids which she had no means of supporting. Oh, and of course there has never been a father in the picture.) It took her forever to answer the question, but she finally came out and said that if she had known then what she knew now that she would not have gone ahead with trying to have a litter of children. OK, what now?

What, exactly, is it that she knows now that she didn't know then? Let's see....she didn't have a husband then and she certainly wasn't going to get one in the near future. She didn't have a way to support herself and her six kids back then and she certainly wasn't going to be able to in the near future. How could she have not foreseen that this was going to turn out badly?! She now has fourteen children. What does it cost the taxpayer to pay for those fourteen children? And how much is it going to cost the taxpayer when they're over eighteen and end up in jail or, for the girls, knocked up themselves? Oh, come on! You think that those kids are going to grow up and be just fine? I doubt it. I'd love to be wrong, but I doubt it.

And finally, let's just wrap this up with the guy who is quickly shaping up to be the D-Bag of the year, Jesse James. As you may or may not care to recall, Mr. James was married to the ridiculously attractive Sandra Bullock and decided that it would be a good idea to cheat on her with at least one (but more like six) heavily tattooed skank(s). Mr. James has recently become engaged to another be-tatted woman, Kat Von D. In regard to this new found bliss, he says, " 2010 was actually the best year of my life because I fell in love with my best friend. An amazing woman who stood behind me when the world turned their backs." Yeah, the world can be a fickle bitch when you cheat on a beloved (and super hot) public figure like the delicious Ms. Bullock. What a maroon. I'm guessing that Sandra Bullock would probably express different sentiments about how her 2010 went. Oh, but that wasn't the best thing that he said. This serial cheater actually had the stones to say "Growing old with her is going to be a f****** blast!"

Right. Like the two of you are going to stay married long enough to grow old together. You guys won't even be married long enough to buy a new couch, let alone to grow old together. I'm pretty sure that a gallon of milk could last longer than your eternal bond is going to. And while I find his statements absolutely vacuous, I'm almost more amused at Kat Von D for agreeing to marry this dirtbag. You think that you're different, do you, cupcake? You think that y'all were meant for each other? You think that he isn't currently cheating on you? You must have answered yes to all of those semi-rhetorical questions, as you're actually going to marry him. Wow. Good luck with that.

And those are the ridiculous going-ons that I read about today. What about you? Got anything good for me?

Sphere: Related Content

The Fiery Unit

Sure, you're going to be a little bit upset when you find out that your husband is having an affair. You might even contemplate some sort of revenge upon him and, perhaps, his straying unit. But if that's going to be the case, you're really going to need to think about what you're ultimately hoping to accomplish, here. Because while you might only set out to simply burn your husband's penis out of rage, should you end up burning down the entire house and killing him in the process, you're going to have a lot of explaining to do.

Let's go to the land down under to a suburb of Adelaide, South Australia called Unley. There we'll find a one 46-year old Rajini Narayan. We'll find her to find her husband has been having an affair. According to news.com.au, for some reason, in December of 2008, Ms. Narayan's husband was lying in the couple's bed and gave Ms. Narayan "...his email password and she found emails detailing the affair." Well. That's one way to do it. Needless to say, his wife was less than thrilled.

After learning of his affair, she allegedly said to him, "You say you loved her. I'm going to burn your penis. I'm going to tell your family what you have done." Shouldn't she have just chosen one? Tell his family OR burn the penis? And did she really say it like that? I mean, that seems rather matter-of-fact. Why would she say that? It really ruins the surprise of all of the penis burning that would take place later if you're asking me.

Now, her attorney claims that "...the words were "spoken from Narayan's heart" because of a "genuine, if wildly misguided" belief she would keep her husband." Hmm. Do you really want a husband with a burned penis? I don't know that you do. I certainly don't know why you would. Granted, it would probably stop him from having affairs, but that doesn't mean that Ms. Narayan, as the one doing all of the burning, is going to be benefiting sexually from such a deed either. But Mr. Narayan apparently didn't seem to care about his wife's plans/threats, as he allegedly "...rolled away from her, turning his back on her. He said: `No you won't, you fat, dumb bitch'." And she wants this guy...why? Burn his weenie off. That's how I feel about the situation right about now.

And that's apparently how Ms. Narayan felt as well, as she doused her husband in petrol and proceeded to have herself quite the weenie roast. However, her act of revenge wasn't just limited to the man's unit. No, she managed to burn him over 75 percent of his body at the same time she burned down the family home. The crispy cheater died a few days later. Whoops.

Ms. Narayan is, of course, on trial for killing her husband. She doesn't appear to be denying that she acted the way that she did. And while one can sympathize with someone who finds out that their spouse is cheating on them, can they really sympathize to the point where they're OK with them burning them to death? Perhaps. Perhaps if, like the prosecutor says, "Ms. Narayan had told a tarot card reader, who she had visited just days before the attack on her husband, that her husband would not let her reduce her working hours because she was paying for the other woman." No pun intended here, but what a dick.

I'm not so sure why Ms. Narayan couldn't just up and leave. There's no way in hell I'm staying with some guy who tells me that my paycheck is helping pay for some other woman that he's having an affair with. Yeah, I know that burning his penis off sounds really great and all. But the thing about fire is that it's pretty hard to contain to just one bodily organ, especially when the whole body is doused in fuel. I can't imagine that she won't be found guilty. Then again, I couldn't imagine that Lorena Bobbitt was going to get off either. Stay tuned!

Sphere: Related Content

The Sad Cheater

Tiger Woods is just completely void of any human emotions, isn't he? Well, wait. Is horny an emotion? What about jackassery? OK, if those two count, then he has two human emotions. But if they don't, then he's just a freaking robot. A lying, cheating, home-wrecking, whore-loving, freaking robot.

Elin's divorce from Tiger was finalized a couple of days ago. Immediately afterward, People magazine announced that she had done an interview with them. There don't seem to be any huge revelations in the interview, just more of what we had all pretty much surmised. After all, how many ways are there to feel when you find out that your husband is a scumbag who has cheated on you with every porn star he could find? Not many ways that people aren't going to be familiar with, that's what I'm guessing.

And naturally, Tiger felt the need to address the issue in the only way that he seems to know how. That is, without any sort of feeling or emotion being expressed and by completely minimizing the entire situation. Here's what he had to say at a press conference at The Barclays golf tournament in New Jersey, according to People Magazine:

"It's a sad time in our lives. And we're looking forward to how we can help our kids the best way we possibly can. And that's the most important thing." Um, are you kidding me? It's a sad time? SAD? I don't know if sad is the word that I would choose. It's so minimal, considering that he slept with every whore out there (and even a few whores in there). I'm also taking issue with how the most important thing is his kids. Hey, Tiger! If the most important things were your kids while you were still married, perhaps you would have been such a man-whore and been doing the Perkins waitress! What a buffoon.

He didn't stop there with his hollow statements. "Asked if he was "relieved" with the split, Woods paused. "I don't think that's the word...I think it's just more sadness. Because I don't think you ever – you don't ever go into a marriage looking to get divorced. That's the thing. That's why it is sad." Good Lord, sir. Does he not understand that this isn't something that has happened to him?! It's not like you just suddenly found yourself divorced, you cheater! And you're right! No one expects what you bestowed upon your completely clueless and rather hot Swedish wife! Did you go into the marriage expecting to never get caught, cheater? He's so in love with himself, he probably did.

He did semi-allude to this possibly being his fault when he said, "My actions certainly led us to this decision...And I've certainly made a lot of errors in my life and that's something I'm going to have to live with." Once again, it's all about him. You know who else has to live with your "errors", you cheater? Your now ex-wife AND your children! And I don't know that they're going to grow up thinking that their father made some simple "errors" and that's why mom and dad divorced before they had even entered kindergarten. Cheater.

And in his final statement (for now) of completely not accepting responsibility OR reality, he said, "I certainly understand that she is sad...And I feel the same way." Oh, my God. Really? Really, cheater? I don't know that sad is a completely accurate description of how she is feeling. Betrayed? Lied to? Cheated on? Humiliated? Embarrassed? Duped? Deceived? I think she feels all of those in addition to being sad! And if Tiger does feel sad, it's simply because he got caught. Cheater. Are you going to dig up your dad's ol' bones again to ease some of your pain? Cheater.

Sphere: Related Content

Some Apology

And the Tiger Woods apology has happened! It was pretty much like I expected it would be. (Did I call it that there would be a podium in front of a curtain or what?!) The man yammered on for about 12 minutes. That is, if you can call talking in a robotic voice and reading from a script "yammering".

Naturally, there were several things about this that bothered me. Bothered. Annoyed. Tomato. Tomahto. Whatever. First of all, he wasn't taking any questions. I understand that. But I also understand that I don't like a "press conference" when the "press" can't actually do what their name implies, namely "press" the individual to elaborate. Well, according to the folks over at 10Connect.com the PGA Tour commissioner, a one Tim Finchem said that Tiger "...had interacted with reporters some 1,100 times during his pro golf career. When Tiger is ready to return to golf, he will return to the habit of talking with journalists." Um, yeah. That's not the same as talking to journalists who want to know more about your duping the public into believing that you were some squeaky clean family guy who could do no wrong. If you're not going to be taking any questions, then why have the reporters there in the first place? The whole thing was streamed live to the world as it was. It's not like the reporters were getting anything that we, the gawking public, were not.

That leads into my second annoyance with this process. Why did all major networks break into this event and use their "something terrible has happened" voice as if this was a serious matter? Sure, we're interested. I won't deny that. But did they really need to use the "Breaking News" screen and act as if we're all waiting for President Barry to step out and announce that we just annihilated Iran? I don't think we need to do that for a scumbag golfer who cheated on his wife with every cocktail waitress within arms length. (I'm assuming it was arms length. It could have been something else.)

Third, I can't stand things that are scripted. I mean, really scripted. Not only was he reading from two separate sheets of paper, he was moving his hand down the paper as he talked, presumedly as to not lose his place. I don't know that it takes two pages of fluff to say "I'm a dirtbag and I'm sorry I got caught."

I don't think that he was sincere. He was way too robotic and he used way too many scripted phrases that are supposed to indicate being sorry. If he had stood up there and just said, "I suck", that would have been better. The video is below. Judge for yourself.

Watch CBS News Videos Online

Sphere: Related Content

Sorry, Sorry Tiger Woods

Rumor has it that Tiger Woods is set to come out of his self imposed exile from the world (and from all cocktail waitresses, apparently) and issue a "public apology". This won't be a statement read by someone else, though I have to believe that it will be a statement which has been crafted by someone else. My assumption is that Tiger wants to return to playing golf and there is no way that he is going to be able to do so without saying something more about his "transgressions" (ie, screwing everything in a Waffle House with two legs and a skirt, though the two legs didn't seem like a requirement that was set in stone or anything).

There are very few things that I like about the public apology. First of all, we all know that you didn't write it. We all know that you're just reading words that someone else crafted. Expecting us to believe that those are real words from deep within whatever amount of a heart that you actually possess is rather insulting. We're not idiots. Granted, overall, there aren't a whole lot of shining bulbs on the tree. But we're far from dim.

Second, I don't like how these public apologies are always one way. The wrongdoer comes out, blathers on about something, doesn't take questions, and then departs, usually through some large curtain. (Where do they get those apology curtains anyway? I'm guessing the same place they get the apology podiums and the apology lecterns.) I don't know that public apologies, if they're intended to be sincere, should be any different than private apologies.

Let's really use our imaginations here and assume that I am married to some guy. (I realize that is quite a stretch, but making crap up is half of the fun here, so stick with me!) And let's say that I find out that the guy I married has a seemingly insatiable thirst for dalliances with cocktail waitresses and porn stars (Internet or otherwise). After I crack him in the face with a 9-iron and cause him to attempt to flee from our Florida compound in his SUV, we separate to let things cool off for a while. Then he wants to apologize. Now, I realize that any sane person would tell this guy to go do to himself what he has been doing to all of those bimbos. But, let's say that I decide I'll listen to his apology. He apologizes and then right as I'm getting ready to ask him some questions about what he's just said, he stands up and says, "Sorry, babe. No questions." And then he walks off.

Um, no. That's not how it works. And that is why I hate the public apology. I am a firm believer that an apology is not on the terms of the one who is apologizing. The apology is on the terms of the one who has been screwed over. And for this particular sort of apology, the one who has been screwed over is the public. Granted, the public was rather gullible and allowed itself to be screwed over, but that doesn't really give someone else the go ahead to start the screwing.

See, this whole thing wouldn't be that big of a deal if Tiger hadn't promoted himself as being someone completely different than he was. That's why the Charlie Sheen ordeal isn't getting a lot of press like this Tiger thing is. I mean, seriously, Charlie Sheen gets arrested on Christmas Day for allegedly holding a knife to his wife's throat and then she subsequently checks herself into a rehab clinic for a crack addiction. Holy crap. That makes the fracas over at Tiger Woods's place seem like Thanksgiving at my place (during which no one was arrested, on drugs, holding others at knifepoint or cracked over the head with a 3-wood). But Charlie Sheen has never (to my knowledge) promoted himself as a squeaky clean guy with a squeaky clean image. That's why there is the uproar (pardon the pun) with Tiger. He made us all believe that he was squeaky clean. And now we're supposed to accept his apology, no questions asked? Screw you. Oh, wait. Someone already did. Never mind. Poor choice of words. You know what I meant.

I'd really like it if one of these public apologies would be on the same terms as private apologies are. You know, with all of the questions by the apolgizee for the apologizer at the end of said apology, because I'd really appreciate someone being asked "Why are you apologizing?" Frankly, I'd rather have someone be sorry than say sorry. I also wouldn't mind hearing the answer to "Why did you lie to us? Couldn't you have just done the right thing instead?" But I'd also really like to have them be asked, "Why should we believe that you're sorry?" Because I'm guessing that the majority of the time, if not every time, they're not sorry for what they did. They're sorry that they got caught. They're sorry that their carefully crafted life which they had previously enjoyed so much is no more. They're sorry that they have to deal with stuff. But I think that they're rarely sorry they did what they did.

If someone comes out on their own before being outed by a tabloid or a newspaper (that is, provided that there's a newspaper out there that still does reporting and stuff like that) and admits their own screwups before anyone had ever found out about them, that might indicate sorry. Then again, I don't foresee that happening because why admit something that no one knows about? Well, if you're sorry about what you've done, you do. I guess.

If Tiger doesn't like the public scrutiny, you know what? He doesn't have to deal with it. There is not one thing in this entire world that is making him be a pro golfer. I'd hazard a guess that he has more money than he can spend in this lifetime. (And he's going to have a heck of a lot more money now that he isn't paying off Perkins waitresses to keep quiet about their torrid affairs.) If he doesn't like it, if any of these public figures don't like it, there's a very simple solution. Stop being a public figure. Then you'll have all of the privacy you want and you can be as big of a pig and as big of an a-hole as you want. Enjoy.

Sphere: Related Content

The Mark of a Liar

If anyone out there is shocked, simply shocked, that Mark McGwire took steroids when he broke all of the home runs records, then I'd like to direct your attention toward the Brooklyn Bridge which I am currently offering for sale. If there's anything to be shocked at, it's probably just that he finally admitted it. For some reason, being hired as a hitting coach for a major league baseball team warrants owning up to what everyone already knew that you did.

I've said for a long time that if you have done something that is so incredibly obvious to everyone, it doesn't matter what you say or what you don't say because everyone knows the truth. No one is being fooled. (We all know that OJ did it, regardless as to what he says. We all know that Richard Heene knew his kid wasn't in the balloon, regardless as to what he says. We know these things to be self evident.) No one is misled. The only thing missing from the equation is having it down in print somewhere. That's it. Just because Mark McGwire had never said (up until a couple of days ago) that he took steroids doesn't mean that we all had a looming question in our minds as to whether he did or not.

I'm sure that it says something about us (the collective "us", "us" as a people) that we didn't question how abnormally freaking large McGwire was during his fake run at the home run record. I totally remember watching him hit the record breaking home run. (I remember it because I remember what I was doing at the time and it's nothing that can be repeated here of all places.) And I also totally remember watching him stand there at the plate and thinking to myself, "My God. His biceps are the size of my thighs." Behold!

Yeah, that's not normal. I guess we thought that it was possibly something that was normal back then, but now that we know that there was steroid use involved (and even before we knew, but after we had heard rumors of), we think it's absolutely ludicrous that someone could look like that normally. Let's look at Mark McGwire when he was a rookie. Behold!

Yep, I was right. That's not normal. One more time....rookie year....

And in comparison to the 'roided up years...


Again, so not normal.

Here's the thing: Mark McGwire admitted he did steroids...and he should have just left it at that. At least then we could have gone about our ways thinking (if we actually cared to think about this loser ever again) that he had finally owned up to what we had all figured out. (I mean, seriously....after he was testifying before Congress back in 2005 and was essentially asked about his steroid use and he replied that he wasn't there to "talk about the past", was there any question after that point? I don't think that there was. And if I'm wrong and there was, please see my earlier reference to that bridge I'm currently offering for sale.) But then he went off and talked to Bob Costas.

Over there at MLB.com is an interview that McGwire did with Bob Costas, seemingly immediately just making the steroid admission. Let me just say right now that he should have quit when he was ahead. Rather than just letting it lie (he seems good at lying) he had to "explain" and "elaborate". He had to blather on and on about how he just took steroids "...for health purposes" and that "...At that time I was using steroids thinking it was going to help me. It was brought to my attention that it was going to help me heal faster, make my body feel back to normal." Really?

Tell me something, sir...when your body was "healing faster" and you started hitting home runs like crazy, moreso than you did before, did you really think that was "normal"? Really? Because we're not stupid here. (Well, those folks lined up to buy my bridge aren't exactly geniuses, I'll give you that. But I'm talking about the rest of us. Do we look that stupid?) And once your body was "healed", it's my understanding that you continued to take the miraculous, all healing steroids, is that correct? Of course it is. Oh, but you were just taking them because you were healing faster. Right. So, if you were all healed, what were you taking them for? Oh, that's right. Because you were a cheater.

Here's my favorite part of his tearful and crying interview with the revered Mr. Costas. (Yes. Crying. I thought there was no crying in baseball!) Bob (I call him Bob) "Asked repeatedly...if he believed that his statistics and records were legitimate in light of the disclosure" and when he did "...McGwire did not budge." Wait. What now?

That's right. He had the audacity to say "Absolutely. I truly believe so. I was given this gift by the man upstairs." And sooooo....because you were given that....(gift, was it?) that gift and instead of accepting the gift, you decided to do steroids because the gift wasn't good enough? Am I understanding you correctly? Am I also understanding that you're really going to try and drag God into all of this? Puh-lease. Please just spare us any references to God, got it? It doesn't help. It only makes you look like more of an ass than you already do.

He also said that "The steroids that I did were on a very, very low dosage. I didn't want to take a lot of that. I didn't want to look like an Arnold Schwarzenegger or Lou Ferrigno...I took very, very low dosages just because I wanted my body to feel normal." Huh. He wanted it to feel normal. He apparently wasn't too worried about it looking normal, though. Clearly, he did not look normal. He looked massive. And while I find that statement semi- interesting, I'm still left with the feeling of "whatever". See, at this point, it doesn't matter what you're claiming the doses were because we don't care. So just please stop talking. Please stop talking now.

Mark McGwire is a liar and he wasted everyone's time by having us all interested in whether or not he was going to be able to do something that no one (since Roger Maris in 1961) else had been able to do. And by being a liar and a cheater, he opened the door to other a-holes to do the same thing. (Hello? Barry Bonds? Hell-ooooo?) And I guess he didn't realize that by admitting that he did steroids, that people would suddenly realize (as if we didn't before now) he really didn't hit all of those home runs on his own merit and that they would subsequently discredit him for what he had appeared to do (the record breaking and all). So it must have been at that point that he decided to throw in all of the obvious crap about how he knows, he knows he would have been able to do everything he did even without the steroids. Uh-huh. Pipe down, Mark. We're done with you.

See, whether it's true or not, you cheating liar, we're never going to know. There's no way for us to know and you know what that means, you cheating liar? That means that there is no way for you to know. I find it hard to believe that if you felt that you could have hit all of those home runs without using steroids that you would not have done so. If you honestly believed that you could have done it without the steroids, then you must be dumber than a box of hair to have gone ahead with the steroid use even after you were "healed" and continued to use them. Any respect that you might have garnered from your long overdue admission is completely gone. You're never getting into the Hall of Fame, which seems rather appropriate considering you haven't done anything legitimate in order to get there. Your name will be asterisked whenever and wherever your stats appear. You haven't done anything in your professional career other than cheat and lie. And you're now nothing more than a hitting coach for the St. Louis Cardinals, and that seems about right. Good luck with that. Oh, and please stop talking about this. You're making yourself look worse now than when you were testifying before Congress. And that is a feat that I would have thought to have been difficult to top.

Sphere: Related Content