No Midas Touch at the Winter Olympics, Eh?

Is it my imagination or does this session of the Winter Olympics seem to have more than the usual share of ill will, finger pointing and a lack of grace? There's so much complaining from the U.S. hockey teams, the Davis-Hedrick feud, remarks from the ever-so-gracious and humble Sasha Cohen, grandstanding, and just in general such bad manners that we should consider sending Kobe Bryant over there to join in the festivities. Let's face it, excuses or not, the winners won and the losers lost and that's just the way it is.

And how about those Austrians and the doping scandal? I can imagine the unions in California are positively salivating over this because they can now somehow associate the illegal activity with Arnold Schwarzenneger and use it against him when he runs for reelection. Something like the following, delivered in a smug manner by some teacher-of-the-year recipient: "The Austrian Olympians were caught cheating. That's very very bad for school children, just like your governor is. Do they both hate education? We'll let you decide that one. Tch tch."

Moving on to other things, it seems the latest Bush administration debacle is over whether or not to allow an Arab-owned company to manage a significant number of our domestic sea ports. This has caused quite an uproar across the nation, both democrats and republicans alike questioning Bush's support of the deal. I wanted to learn more about this and on the way home today I listened to the John and Ken show on KFI 640 as they conducted a phone interview with congressman Dana Rorabacher.

The problem is, after listening to the show I still don't know what to think about it because every time the congressman tried to say why he agreed with Bush on the issue, John and Ken (John, in particular) kept shouting him down and wouldn't let him speak. While I agree with John and Ken on most issues, I find it irritating that they don't let their guests say more than a few words before interrupting them and yelling so loud you can't really get an idea of the other person's point of view. If you don't know what the other side has to say, how can you argue against them? An old adage says, "know thy enemy." If we are going to form valid and effective arguments against someone then we need to know what that someone believes in; otherwise, how can we prepare ourselves? I wish they would let their guests say what they have to say so that the radio audience can form an intelligent opinion; if the guest is really that stupid or wrong, don't you think the audience is smart enough to figure that out? So while initially the idea of having an Arab-owned country manage our own ports seems like a dumb idea, I'd like to know why Bush is so much in favor of it rather than just dismissing it without hearing the reasons.

Finally, I made a horrifying discovery today. I had a Swanson's Hungry Man Mexican-style dinner tonight and in the nutritional information box on the back saw that the contents of the plastic tray held 870 calories! Not only that, but it gave me a full 93% of my recommended daily sodium requirement. The other stats were also eye-openers. Hungry Man dinners are no health foods, but this particular one came out about twice as bad as the norm. That got me to thinking, what the heck are the nutritional stats like at a typical Mexican restaurant where the portions are a lot bigger? That's scary. On the other hand, maybe this is my chance to get rich by jumping on the sue-happy bandwagon with all the other lowlife and their lowlife attorneys, filing a claim against Swanson for, horrors of all horrors, my getting fat because I ate too many of their Hungry Man dinners!! Maybe the Americans can't find gold at the Olympics, but I just found a gold mine in that blue cardboard box tonight! Har har har!