Isaiah Webster

Dreading Super Bowl LI

It’s happening. We’re just a few short weeks away from the Super Bowl match-up that most NFL fans are dreading: Dallas v. New England. If the Cowboys and Patriots meet in Super Bowl LI on February 5, it would be their first meeting in the championship game. However, they have 9 Super Bowl titles between them, and two of the most loyal (and obnoxious) fan bases in all of the NFL.

Entering the final week of the regular season, both teams are projected to be the #1 seed in their respective conferences — that means first-round playoff byes and home-field advantage. Dallas is already a lock for the top seed in the NFC, while New England needs a win, a tie or an Oakland loss to lock up the top seed in the AFC.

Looking forward to the playoffs, Dallas will have the toughest road to the Super Bowl. The New York Giants and the Green Bay Packers look like serious threats. In fact, the Giants swept their season series with the Cowboys. It’s a very open question as to whether Dallas’s young team could beat both the Giants and the Packers in the same postseason — even if they have the home-field advantage. As for the New England Patriots, they are truly without peer in the AFC. The Raiders looked like a threat right up until starting quarterback Derek Carr broke his leg in Week 16. Now the Patriots will be favored to beat any of the remaining AFC playoff teams. And in many cases, their opponents might struggle to keep the games from becoming routs.

Though the NFL has struggled with TV ratings at points throughout this season, recent games have drawn record audiences. In fact, last week’s Monday Night Football telecast saw its highest rating in two years. If Dallas and New England were to meet in a Super Bowl, it could draw an audience of epic proportions. Very few NFL teams have the world-wide following and championship success that the Cowboys and Patriots enjoy. In terms of Super Bowl glory, only the Pittsburgh Steelers and the San Francisco 49ers would even be in the conversation. (The Cowboys, Patriots, Steelers and Niners have won 20 of the 50 previous Super Bowls. The other 30 are divided among the NFL’s remaining 28 teams.)

As far as the NFL is concerned, a Dallas-New England match-up would be a gold mine.

As far as football fans who root for a team other than Dallas or New England, it would be Hell. Generally when your team is not competing in the Super Bowl, you simply root for a team based on other aspects of the game. Such as Peyton Manning’s last ride or Luke Kuechly’s improbable, yet magical season. For the most part, the game’s participants don’t make you want to claw your own eyes out with hot forks.

And yet, it looks increasingly likely that the football gods won’t spare us from a Dallas-New England Super Bowl. The list of aggravation is long: Stars on helmets; Jerry Jones; Tom Brady; Bob Kraft’s smug face; Michael Irvin on TV; Zeke Elliott’s belly; Cowboys fans; Pats fans; clueless wannabe fans jumping on the winner’s bandwagon. These teams aren’t just annoying because they have a history of dominance, they are additionally annoying in that almost everything about them pisses off other teams’ fans. The Patriots have been caught cheating multiple times; the Cowboys project an arrogance so grand that words can’t fully capture it. AT&T Stadium has been called “Jerry Jones’s palace” — and they say this with a straight face!

This year, we won’t even have Pats tight end Rob Gronkowski as a funny, sexy aside to it all. He’s on Injured Reserve, and won’t play again until next season. It’s just all a shallow shit-show that we can see coming, yet are powerless to prevent.

If the Universe wants to atone for a horrible 2016, beginning 2017 with a Chiefs-Falcons Super Bowl would be a great start. Why the hell not?

The case of Timothy Kaine as vice president

KAINE

Earlier today I authored a diary at Daily Kos, arguing the case for Tim Kaine’s selection as Hillary Clinton’s running mate. Here’s an excerpt:

Giving great speeches, commanding great crowds, and landing zingers on Donald Trump is all great fun — but it isn’t the requisite set of skills needed to serve as Hillary Clinton’s governing partner. We know that Clinton is a serious policy wonk. We know that she values preparation, due diligence and networking — even building partnerships across the political aisle. Her campaign has all but acknowledged that, if elected, the administration will forego big wins in favor of smaller victories that could have a cumulative effect. This is the absolute right way to approach a presidency in succession to Barack Obama — and it will require a vice president of varied experience, temperament and political leanings. That vice president is Tim Kaine.

Read the full diary here.

Hillary Clinton makes history as the first-ever female presidential nominee

Bernie’s a liar. There will be no contested convention. Here’s why…

Bernie Sanders

Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders made news yesterday, when he asserted that next month’s Democratic National Convention would be “contested.” According to Sanders, neither he nor Hillary Clinton will have enough pledged delegates to secure the nomination — and since unpledged delegates (aka super-delegates) do not vote until the convention — the entire event will be “contested.”

That’s a lie.

To be fair, I don’t think Sanders lied intentionally, I just think he misunderstands what a contested convention actually is. The purpose of a political convention is to pick the leader (nominee) of said political party. Generally speaking, whoever receives a majority of all delegates gets the nomination. On the initial ballot, if any candidate gets a majority of all delegates, the process is over and the nominee is established. If no candidate gets a majority on the first ballot, then the convention is said to be “contested” — meaning that a candidate needs to build a coalition of delegates to reach a majority. Contested conventions are only likely when three or more candidates have a significant number of delegates.

Hillary Clinton will end the primary process with more popular votes, more pledged delegates, more super-delegates, and more states won. On the first ballot, all of her delegates will cast their vote for her. Because of this certain fact, there is zero chance that the convention will be contested.

Finally, there is another reason why we know the convention won’t be contested. Sanders and Clinton are the only two candidates with any delegates to the 2016 Democratic National Convention. With only two people on the ballot, it’s mathematically impossible that someone won’t get a majority on the first ballot. Think about it: The overall number of delegates is an odd number; so with only two options, someone will have a majority once all delegates vote.

Bernie Sanders has a lot great qualities, but math and logic aren’t among them.

Tom Brady’s misguided pout-fest

BRADYFor more than a year, New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady has been locked in an epic pissing contest with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. The commissioner says that Brady lied about what he knew regarding the deflating of footballs during the 2015 AFC Championship Game. Brady denied any wrongdoing, but destroyed his cellphone anyway just as the NFL asked to see it to confirm his story. Whatever.

Eventually, Goodell handed down a four-game suspension against Brady, along with harsh penalties against the entire team. The Patriots had to surrender their first round pick in the 2016 NFL Draft, and pay a fine of $1 Million. After his punishment was handed down, Brady refused to acknowledge any wrongdoing whatsoever — an admission that would have probably cut his suspension down to two games. Again, his choice — so whatever.

Brady took the NFL to federal court last year and won, meaning his suspension was voided and he was allowed to play in every game of the 2015 season. But the NFL promptly filed an appeal with the Second Circuit Court, which today reinstated Brady’s four game suspension.

In a nutshell, the appeals court concluded that the entire matter is a labor dispute, and that the collective bargaining agreement is clear that Goodell was within his rights to suspend Brady, for… whatever:

“Here, the parties contracted in the CBA to specifically allow the Commissioner to sit as the arbitrator. They did so knowing full well that the Commissioner had the sole power of determining what constitutes ‘conduct detrimental,’ and thus knowing that the Commissioner would have a stake both in the underlying discipline and in every arbitration [falling within his jurisdiction]. Had the parties wished to restrict the Commissioner’s authority, they could have fashioned a different agreement.”

It was Brady’s decision to take this matter to federal court in the first place, and that was an epic mistake. It was a foolish decision because it removed any incentive for the commissioner to cave on the four-game suspension. It is noteworthy that Patriots owner Robert Kraft accepted what he deemed an unfair penalty against the team, rather than sue the NFL in court. Kraft knew then, what Brady is learning now — Roger Goodell is eventually going to win this dispute.

Tom Brady should have just swallowed his pride and accepted some responsibility. His claims of total innocence aren’t believable — even if you throw out the flawed Wells Report. The bottom line is that Brady has been pouting for more than a year; pouting because, in this one instance, he didn’t get his way. Golden boys hate it when their halos get dinged, but Brady truly brought this on himself. Had he simply agreed to meet the commissioner — one-on-one — and admit what he knew, he probably could have gotten off with a 1 or 2-game suspension. But that course of action would have forced him to admit some small degree of fault — a deal-breaker for Perfect Tom.

Brady may very well continue to press his case to the U.S. Supreme Court, but it’s unlikely the court will waste its time on this nonsense. This entire saga has been blown out of proportion, and now it’s just plain silly. Brady should stop pouting, and just serve the suspension and move on.

Beware the real Donald Trump

Bitter bitches need to back off on Hillary’s hot sauce

HIllary ClintonOver the weekend, Hillary Clinton mentioned that she carries hot sauce in her purse, and the Twitter trolls pounced, claiming that she simply said such to pander to Black voters in New York. The accusation is that since Beyoncé popularized carrying hot sauce with her hit single, “Formation,” that Clinton must be co-opting it just to score political points.

But here’s the gag…Hillary’s been saying this since the 1990s. Since before Beyoncé’s career began!

Hillary has talked at length about how she loves red peppers and hot sauce, and usually carries both — as she believes they help keep her healthy. Here’s a New York Times article on the subject in 2008. Here’s another article on the subject from Traveler in 2012. Here’s a Slate article on the subject in 2015.

It takes about two minutes on Google to determine that Hillary’s recent comments aren’t pandering, but rather a continuation of something she has discussed publicly for many years. Unfortunately, when it comes to smearing Hillary Clinton, even basic facts are tossed aside in favor of snide comments and insults.

Every bitter bitch bashing Hillary Clinton over this should SHUT THE FUCK UP.