Facebook and the "25 Random Things About Me" Epidemic

Or as Robie Childers calls it, "Myface"

Like the Hong Kong Flu or Bill Clinton, Facebook seems to have come from out of nowhere to infect America. Then-Harvard student Mark Zuckerberg launched Facebook in 2004 as a specialized social networking site for Harvard students, then expanded it to other Ivy League institutions, then other universities, then high schools, then employees of certain companies such as Apple and Microsoft, then in 2006 to anyone over age 13. Its like creeping socialism. About 18 months ago, the company reported 30 million users; presently it reports 150 million users. That's a five-fold increase. By comparison, the US Government reports that the population of the United States was 303 million in 2008. What other business can report such growth rates? Maybe Starbucks in the 1990s, or crack dealers.

For those of you who aren't down (or on, I guess), Facebook is like a huge internet chat room, but any one person's access is restricted to "friends," who are other registered users that have agreed to interact with the person. "Interaction" can take several forms. Each user has a "wall" on which they can leave messages for their friends, post photos or other information, and on which their friends can leave messages. These are generally accessible to each user's friends (although some ability exists to restrict access to the wall). Friends may also send messages directly to one another outside the wall, and this is similar to e-mail in that only the sender and recipient may see the messages. Like chat rooms, users may create "groups" devoted to particular interests and issues, such as "LSU Fans." Users may join and in that manner connect with others who share that interest. Numerous businesses use Facebook as a marketing tool, in which you "friend" a business or vice versa (for example, I was asked to and did friend "Little Steven's Underground Garage" radio show). Finally, and to me, bizarrely, Facebook offers the opportunity to contact individual friends through odd non-communicative ways such as "poking" someone, or asking them to take quizzes, or giving them virtual "gifts" or asking them to "fight crime" or "throwing an octopus" at someone. If that seems difficult to follow, its because its either ridiculous or I'm just not getting it. I guess the march of human progress includes using computers and the internet to hurl an octopus at someone. Actually talking to your friends is so 2005.

Facebook the company makes money through selling advertising on each page. So every Facebook page you see has multiple advertisements. To demonstrate its value to prospective advertisers, Facebook keeps meticulous statistics on user activities. For example, it charts user status updates, photo and video uploads, minutes spent on Facebook, and "events" created. These statistics ostensibly show advertisers the value of a Facebook ad, much like TV and radio ratings or newspaper/periodical subscription numbers do the same for those media. The salient point here is that the Facebook company strives to develop more applications to keep you using Facebook, so it can sell ads. (I have seen it referred to as "Facecrack").

Even though I have semi-plunged in to Facebook world, even now I have difficulty figuring out exactly how it makes anyone's life better. Just about anything you can do on Facebook you could do through other media, and other computer media. Businesses can advertise on internet sites, friends can e-mail each other or contact one another through special interest web sites or chat rooms. True, you can't "send a vampire" after someone on most other media, but really, is that such a bad thing?

As near as I can tell from my own Facebook experience, it appears to serve three real functions. First, it gives the stay-at-homes, particularly moms, a more efficient means of staying in touch with friends (and even developing new ones). Second, its a way for "long lost" friends and acquaintances to find one another. Google and Yahoo are not well suited for this task (or for stalking ex-girlfriends either, I'm told). I've had people come out of the proverbial woodwork, people I haven't seen or thought of in years, leap out of my past (where many were comfortably in residence, I might add) through Facebook. Finally, its a timewaster. I guess downloading porn and playing fantasy football at work only goes so far. Many employers have blocked access to Facebook (and the rival myspace) on the grounds that its diverting work time. All this flinging of fish and visiting your friends' pages takes a lot of time. Time that could be better spent working (or checking out the Maxim or Houston Texans cheerleaders web pages). For many, Facebook can become extremely addictive, to the point where they get sucked into "Facebook World."

I have mixed feelings about Facebook. On the one hand, I welcome anything that allows me to keep up with my friends and others, and for me to update them about what I'm doing, without actually having to talk to them or, God forbid, having someone come to my house. That's not entirely facetious either. Its often much easier to catch up just with the few clicks of my mouse than to find the time to engage in a lengthy "get caught up" phone call or lunch meeting. On the other hand, I don't particularly like the idea of potentially hundreds of people seeing my comments on something a friend put on their wall. In fact, one friend's urban girl survival posse started trashing me for a comment I put on their "girl's" wall, which they totally misunderstood. Most people aren't friends with all their friends on the same terms, nor do they have the same style or sort of give and take with everyone with whom they are friends. I know I can kid some of my friends, and I know there's others that I can't. Some have certain "off limits" issues, and some have no boundaries at all. I would never invite all of my friends to the same dinner party (actually I wouldn't invite any of my friends to a dinner party, unless it was at someone else's house and I got to select the menu). Facebook tends to put together people who shouldn't be put together, which can cause confusion and hurt feelings. One of my "friends" is a pretty hardline conservative individual, who constantly gets into flame wars with liberal friends. The scuds they hurl back and forth often border on personal, are difficult to read, and wind up taking an inordinate amount of space to follow. So I've tried to avoid making comments others can see, except if I'm absolutely sure no one will find anything remotely negative about it. And where's the fun in that?

Like ultimate fighting, reality TV, or celebrity poker shows, a trend sweeping the nation through Facebook has been the "25 Random Things About Me" phenomenon. This apparently is the Facebook version of the beginning of a Sunday School class, an AA meeting, or the first day of school. Its a lengthier version of the typical interview question, "Can you tell me something interesting about yourself." The scenario involves you listing 25 random things about yourself, like "I like cheese," I guess, then listing off friends you want to do the same (and whom you want to read your 25 random things). But some people turn it into "25 extremely serious and profound things about me" and it turns into Chicken Soup for the Soul on Facebook. Oy, I have a headache just typing this. If it sounds like the instructions to Monopoly, its because it is. I suppose the point, other than to inflate Facebook's user numbers, is to enable friends to get to know one another better. That's supposed to be the point of Facebook generally, and each person's profile page offers unlimited space to list things about themselves. So I'm not sure exactly what this 25 things exercise adds but who am I to stand in the way of progress? It shouldn't bother me, but it kind of does. Please don't take this the wrong way, but I kind of like all of us having a little mystery between us. Seven random things might have been more acceptable; 25 is like having a party guest that won't leave, or your ex-girlfriend who you stayed friends with years later confessing over her third through fifth margatinis all the terrible things she did behind your back while you were still dating. It is kind of flattering in some way that someone wants to know 25 things about me, but I generally have this sneaking suspicion I've been "tagged" just to fill a quota. Like the kid who's always the last person picked for dodgeball. Besides, it would be more interesting if it were "25 random things about you" and friends picked one of their friends and listed 25 things about them. Think of the drama.

But as I've often stated, I never go anywhere without a purpose, so today that purpose is to tell you 25 random things about me. Feel free to ignore, respond in kind, report me to the Better Business Bureau, whatever.

1. In high school, my friend Melinda named the fetal pig she was dissecting in biology class after me. Kind of hurtful, but I give her points for creativity and it did suit me. At least she was thinking of me.

2. As an attorney, I have represented both Enron and a Mexican national indicted for transporting women across state lines for prostitution. The Mexican pimp was by far easier to work with.

3. I have dated a stripper, but she was nowhere near the trashiest woman I've ever dated.

4. I've dated a Hooters Girl, and she was among the classiest women I've dated.

5. The trashiest woman I ever dated was a Baylor University graduate.

6. I attended the 1968 NCAA Final Four, and the Oilers-Raiders Monday Night Football game where a fan shot the finger at the camera (prompting Don Meredith to state, "there's one fan who still thinks his team is number one").

7. I saw Cary Grant. He was touring college campuses in a question and answer session format. I (along with Kimberly, Cheryl and Darrell) sat in the middle of the 10th row for the two hour performance.

8. I rode in an elevator at the Loews Anatole Hotel in Dallas with a close to passing out drunk Gary Busey and his "handler". Busey glared at me the whole ride up to the bar at the top floor, but never said a word. Neither did I. I was expecting him to lunge at me and rip my still-beating heart out of my chest Indiana Jones style.

9. Only one person has ever hit me, and in my defense, she was a complete nut job.

10. The wildest party I've ever attended was a Baylor frat party after the 1982 Baylor-UT game in Waco. I had sat in the Baylor flash card section with the free tickets I got from Jackie or Kathy somebody I knew from Clear Lake who was going to Baylor. She later dropped out of Baylor, moved to Austin and opened an adult video store with her boyfriend. She's not the girl from item 5 either.

11. I went to "deckhand school" at Hollywood Marine in Channelview before starting my first job as an associate at a law firm. I learned how to tie together barges for towboats. I think I was the only guy there that didn't have a prison record.

12. Someone in a passing car shot me in the back of the head with a BB gun while I was jogging one night on the Seawall in Galveston.

13. Women who have dated me have called me such names as "cupcake," "papi," and "wild thing." To my face. I imagine lots of other things behind my back.

14. A witness once got sick after I cross-examined him during a hearing.

15. I've been to eight Grateful Dead concerts, and four Frank Zappa concerts.

16. I've been mistaken for a preacher, Charlie Sheen, and the Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

17. I was on the Kitirik show in Houston when I was a child. Meow.

18. The sponsor of the National Honor Society at my high school blackballed me from becoming a member because I used to cut up, quietly, with Marshall Schott and David Sewell in her class the year before. I have been bitter about it ever since.

19. My first car was supposed to be a sweet 1980 Camaro that the niece of my parents' friends owned, but a tree fell on it and destroyed it during Hurricane Alicia. So I had to settle for a 1977 Cutlass with a 350 V-8 that broke down every other time I drove it.

20. David Duke hit on my date at an LSU football game once when I went to the concession stand.

21. I can do four impressions very well: Edna from the Incredibles, Elvis Presley, the Wild and Crazy Guys from the old Saturday Night Live, and Marvin the Martian.

22. I've had as many near-death experiences as times I've been in love. Seems like an appropriate symmetry.

23. My closest friend recently told me I walk like I think I'm Elvis. She's wrong. I actually walk like I think I'm Mel from the Dick Van Dyke show.

24. My first real job was working at the Humble ISD's un-air conditioned warehouse the summer after my sophomore year in high school. My boss was an extremely bitter dwarf with a hunched back, who hated me intensely and yelled at me every day. That was the summer I grew a beard. He got fired a few years later for numerous sexual harassment allegations involving the district's secretaries.

25. I miss my mother every day. The anchor is gone from my life.

New Links

I guess the economic intricacies of the BCS weren't everyone's cup of tea.

Rather than do my 25 Random Things next...oy...I want to let everyone know about a blog I've added to my links on the right. Fraser From Iraq is written by my friend Ashley's friend, who I believe is an Army helicopter pilot deployed to Iraq. I've never met him, but have heard some interesting stories about him, and he seems like an interesting person. Anyway, his insights and stories also seem pretty interesting, and I think I'm going to enjoy following his first hand account of military life in Iraq, which is sprinkled with humor and political insight. Maybe some of you will too.

Also I'm adding another link, which I thought long and hard about before doing (that's what she said). Its "Hot Chicks With Douchebags." Let me explain for those of you who aren't down. How many times have you seen some ridiculous character, sporting a faux-hawk, overly tight or thin Ed Hardy shirt, flashing excessive tattoos or piercings, and flexing or preening for no apparent purpose? These guys are idiots, right, or as the kids call them these days, "douchebags." Sadly, we all know that these guys get an offensively large share of the hot chicks. There's some odd exception to evolution that draws women to these cretins, instead of to sarcastic middle age lawyers with cool cars who incessently make Top Gun and Pee Wee Herman references. I've heard. Anyway, the guy who writes this blog has way too much time on his hands. People send him pictures of "hot chicks" posing with "douchebags," which he publishes and mocks with added commentary. The mocking is often brilliant. As an expert in the art of sarcasm and insults, I give it an A+. This site is always good for several quick laughs, and although its sometimes borderline, generally its not vulgar or offensive. Unless you're a douche, of course. Enjoy.

Next-25 Mundane, err, Random Things about...[falls asleep at keyboard]

Winner and 2009 BCS Champion: Not Oklahoma

The first photo is of the 1979 Cotton Bowl (UH vs Notre Dame), the second is from the famous Texas goal line stand against Alabama (led by Joe Namath) at the end of the 1965 Orange Bowl. Kids, these were two of the greatest games of all time...ah, forget it. I'm old and my hip hurts.

Thankfully, an ill-gotten OU national championship was averted due to a now-familiar Sooner BCS collapse ("Boomer Swooner"). Those mouth-breathers north of the Red River annually have either the best or second best Texas football program. The OU roster typically features a sizable number of the best Texas high school players. Because, really, Oklahoma high school teams just aren’t that good. So they have to import their players from Texas. Without Texans, OU would be competing with Tech every year to go to the Cotton Bowl.

But that’s for a different day. Today I want to talk about a cutting edge subject. Did you know that the Bowl Championship Series is an inefficient means to determine the college football national champion? No, really. You heard it here first.

I know this is tired-1998 is sick of arguing over the BCS. But this thing is so broken down, leaking oil, rusting and slipping out of gear that its beginning to resemble a Reeder family car. The time has long come and gone to take it out back and put it out of its misery. The thing has lost virtually all public acceptance. Even our new President has found time in his busy schedule of saving the world from America and walking on water to support blowing it up. Now that would be “stimulus” I could support. Even those school-jumping, swag grabbing coaches now want a playoff. Up to now, they had opposed playoffs because playoffs would hold them to a higher standard. Now most of them can claim success just by reaching one of the 243 bowl games-with a playoff they used to fear being measured by whether they qualified for the tournament. But the BCS has been around long enough to screw multiple coaches in each conference. Because most coaches now realize a sizable bonus by qualifying for a BCS game, even the coaches want to change the system.

But the real reason to get rid of the BCS has nothing to do with whether its “champion” truly is a “national champion” or whether a playoff should determine the national champion, or whether the BCS rankings essentially use the same criteria to rank football teams as are used in figure skating contests. The real reason is that it’s a monopoly that stifles college football, and ultimately all sporting programs, at non-BCS institutions.

Division I (now the Football Bowl Subdivision) college football is the only NCAA sport that does not recognize a national champion. Instead, schools are ranked by two polls (one by coaches who don’t watch any of the games, and the other by largely anonymous individuals nominated by the schools themselves) and several computer services no one knows anything about (for all we know, e-Harmony runs one of the BCS computer ranking services), and the top tier schools go to the top bowls. Why does any of this matter? Money. Bowls with BCS tie-ins have significantly higher payouts than other bowls. This year, each BCS bowl paid out a total of $17.5 million to the participating teams, which were split among their respective conferences. Rather than a playoff system that would need to admit all 120 Division I/FBS schools, the 66 BCS schools have managed to restrict entry into these top bowls. And that has real meaning. Now, the BCS does give about $9.5 million to all the non-BCS schools (combined), but that pales in comparison to the money the BCS schools share.

Football is by far the leading collegiate money-making sport, to a degree that football (and in some cases men’s basketball) revenues typically fund all other university sports programs. Lets face it-this is really about women’s sports, which federal law requires to be offered on an equal footing with men’s programs, and non-revenue men’s sports like swimming, hockey, lacrosse, and the like. Universities fund their entire sporting program (and thereby comply with Title IX) through successful football programs. Yet, Division I football is split into the “haves” and “have-nots,” whereby the lesser schools (e.g Baylor, Vanderbilt, Purdue, Mississippi State) depend on revenues shared, through conference affiliations, with the leading programs (USC, Texas, Michigan, Ohio State, Florida, LSU, etc.) that annually appear in the top bowl games. “Top,” of course, being measured in payout amounts. Appearance in a top bowl game can go a long way toward funding an entire conference’s non-revenue sporting programs.

The BCS is merely the latest incarnation of what was first known as the College Football Alliance. This was a reaction by the larger schools with more wherewithal to relatively confining NCAA restrictions that inhibited them from realizing natural revenue sources and using their inherent ability to outspend smaller schools to their advantage. Since then, the BCS has solidified a schism in Division I football: members of six conferences obtain preferential access to the bowls with the biggest payouts, making it much more difficult for the non-BCS schools to reach these games and obtain these payouts for themselves and their non-BCS conference affiliate schools. By any other name and in any other industry, this would be known as “monopolization,” but because it involves so-called “academic institutions” (the concept is itself a fraud, as the administrators of nearly every major university have absolutely no control over the football program or its budget) it somehow escapes (or has so far escaped) these usual restrictions.

What was life like just a few short years ago, back before this all started? College football teams could appear on national television once per (regular) season, and twice on “regional” telecasts. Freshmen were not eligible to play varsity ball until the early 1970s. Notre Dame would not even play in bowl games until the 1969 season (they played Texas in the 1970 Cotton Bowl-they lost). Ties were possible. Independents like Houston, Miami, or Florida State routinely appeared in New Year’s Day bowls and competed on a relatively level field with the majors. But the Texases, Penn States, USCs, Alabamas and the like, with far greater fan bases and funding sources than the New Mexicos and the Central Michigans, chafed for greater exposure and to start an arms race that would leave behind the smaller schools. The CFA was the result. Although it did not include the Big 10 or Pac 10, it began to negotiate television deals directly, around NCAA rules, affording greater exposure and higher revenues. Eventually, the bowls, ever desperate for money, allied themselves and agreed to restrict access to only the then “Bowl Coalition” member schools, thereby roping off this major funding source to the participating institutions.

The end result has been to create a BCS brand, with the traditional New Year’s Day bowls (less the Cotton) and a newly contrived “Championship” game as the centerpiece. With the cartel controlling these games and protecting its brand, ESPN just paid a record $125 million per year for the rights to televise the games through 2014. Along with the BCS brand and preferential access to the BCS games comes other largesse, such as shoe company deals, corporate sponsorships, luxury suite deals, stadium expansions, marketing deals. The days of letterman sweaters and malt shops, as Jeff Ward puts it, are gone and dead forever. Think Barry Switzer and his Uzi-toting wide receiver.

Now, the non-BCS schools had their shot at taking down the BCS, but they settled for a bone. In a 2003 settlement that averted a planned antitrust suit, the non-BCS schools settled for a limited right of access to the BCS games, in which they are guaranteed that one of them may go to such a bowl if they are in the top 6 of the BCS rankings. But, only one non-BCS school can go at most. That may have been somewhat acceptable when the settlement was made, but the non-BCS schools have clearly stepped up their game since then. Who can forget Boise State beating the Sooners in the 2006 Fiesta Bowl, or Utah crushing Pittsburgh in the 2003 Fiesta Bowl. This year, TCU and Boise State were clearly better than Cincinnati and West Virginia (who played perhaps the lamest Orange Bowl of all time, quite a feat given the previous year’s Wake Forest-Louisville matchup), and Utah ripped Alabama in the Sugar Bowl. The “quality of play” figleaf no longer holds water as a means to keep out the non-BCS schools. Now, you may say, how did that happen if the BCS is so damaging to the other schools’ finances and keeps them from reaching the same levels as the BCS schools. The difference is not at the top of these conferences, but in the middle and bottom. That is, the middle to lower quality schools in the Mountain West, Conference USA and the like don’t get the revenue sharing that their analogous BCS brethren obtain just by being in a BCS conference. Pitiful Baylor is in the money, while less pitiful but still unspectacular Wyoming is not.

Like any other cartel that reduces access, quality has suffered as well. In the “old days” plenty of now non-BCS schools played in major bowls and gave the bigs outstanding games. I’m thinking of the 1979 UH-Notre Dame Cotton Bowl, or the 1980 BYU-SMU Holiday Bowl. But the BCS guarantees each conference winner a berth in a BCS game, so each BCS conference is guaranteed a payday. This means that some clearly non-deserving teams (are you listening, Big East Conference?) have gotten in the big games to the exclusion of more deserving BCS conference teams or non-BCS teams. The BCS has featured some really stinker games these last few years. The bowls always strain to select teams that have large fan bases that will buy the most tickets, not the teams that will produce the best games. Aside from this year’s Orange Bowl, how about the last few times Notre Dame was in the BCS (e.g. 2006 Sugar Bowl, LSU 41, Notre Dame 14, or the 2000 Fiesta Bowl, Oregon State (!) 41, Notre Dame 9), or the ridiculous 2007 Rose Bowl (USC 49, Illinois 17) that should have paired USC against Georgia that year. There have been some good games of course, but on balance the quality has suffered by restricting access to the conference champions and so-called “at large” teams. Why the ACC champion should automatically be admitted to one of these bowls, other than monopolization reasons, is beyond comprehension. We'd be far better off with a third SEC team in these games than watching Louisville or Boston College or West Virginia or whatever garbage conference winner the Big East or ACC throws up in a given year.

And with the new ESPN deal, these bowls will now leave the free public airwaves and be accessible only to cable or satellite subscribers. While most people have one or the other, not everyone does, and in particular, I would think a higher proportion of the families whose sons grow up to play major college football lack cable or satellite. That may ultimately be a self-defeating move.

Get rid of the BCS, let all the Division I teams compete on an equal footing, and go back to the polls. In the end, that system probably wasn’t much better or worse than what we have now, but at least it gives the smaller schools a better shot at being in the money.

One last little shot. Some guy called John and Lance on 1560 radio in Houston the week before the Texas Tech-UT game this last year. This is the game everyone was saying was the biggest game in Tech history. This guy said something like "this is the biggest game in Tech history, but its just the next game in Texas' schedule." Well played, sir. We are the Joneses.

Next-OK, I give up. I’ll do my 25 random things about me. Will that make you happy?

Singing AND Dancing, At the Same Time

Ok the BCS post is on its way, just in the nick of time (two weeks after the BCS games).

But in the meantime, let's consider something really important. That I thought about while running tonight.

Why is it impossible for today's pop stars to be able to sing and dance...simultaneously? Now, there's lots of reasons to detest today's popular music. Its not actually music, just loud beats and electronic dissonance. The "musicians" don't actually play any musical instruments, write songs, or read music. The lyrics are banal, and in some cases abusive or degrading. But, hey, that's what they said about the Stones when they first started.

The real reason to hate on Britney, Ashlee, Miley, 50 Cent, and such other Emperor's clothes-wearing artists? Lip synching. Faking on stage is breaking out faster than [insert Tommy Lee joke here]. 50 Cent, Madonna, Ashlee, Miley, Kanye West, Britney...no one seems to be able to sing their songs while shaking their groove thing on stage. So? Why should anyone pay the beaucoup dinero that these people charge for concert tickets, if they're not even singing? Its like the musical equivalent of wrestling.

Don't have enough breath to dance around on stage and sing? Elvis thinks that's ridiculous. Try that excuse on James Brown, Otis Redding, Jackie Wilson, Sam and Dave, the Pips, Mick, Tina Turner...It is, in fact, actually possible to dance around the stage and sing at the same time. How shuddering is it to think that one day these masters may have to share their Hall of Fame with the likes of Britney Federline? Someone please kill me first. But just right before that happens. Don't do it, like, tomorrow or anything just to make sure. That wouldn't be cool.

Cut out the death sticks, take some music lessons, practice your singing, and work on something in addition to looking good.

Next-the BCS. Yesterday's news, today.

Lots of Pictures

I have finally begun to make good on my threat, errrr, promise to post more photos from the dim and distant past. You will find some new old photos on my flickr site (see link to the right). The main highlight will be my pictures from Mary and Robie's wedding (which I wrote was in 1986, but someone please correct me if my date is off). Others include a trip with my parents and my friend Terri to Breaux Bridge to the Crawfish Festival, a trip to Seattle, more photos from Kimberly and Terry's wedding, and a trip Kimberly took to Austin in roughly 1996 or so (I can't remember exactly when, but I still had the Miata lovemobile, so it was pre-1999), and my brother Ron's wedding (I have only one word for this: "ventriloquist"). When reviewing Mary's and Robie's wedding pictures, just keep reminding yourself, "it was the '80s, it was the '80s," and it will all be good. There will be some more pictures in the next few days or so, and some of you may star in them.

As usual, if you see yourself in a picture and would prefer that it not be on the web, let me know and I'll be happy to pull it down.

2008-It Was A Very Good Year

I know that one of the things they teach you at J-School (right after how to scam free nachos and before "the internet is evil" lessons) is that you're supposed to publish your "End of the Year" wrapup piece before the next year. January 1-3 should be reserved for dieting tips, health club reviews, and the latest on Britney and LiLo. But, just like Spinal Tap, who had to release its Christmas album in June because it couldn't get studio time until spring, I decided not to let my busy football-watching and party-planning schedule keep me from sharing my otherwise valuable thoughts on the year that was. That plus working on this may be the only way I can stay awake while watching the Sugar Bowl.

Needless to say, in many respects, 2008 has been a down year. Recessions, financial system meltdown, natural disasters, terrorist attacks, war, drought, the Olympics, Barack Obama, Britney Spears still being a celebrity...sometimes it just seems like the bad news never ends. Our country's media is suffering from plummeting ratings and revenues, and therefore has resorted to "sky is falling" stories at every turn to cling to life by its cracking fingernails. But like Steve Martin in My Blue Heaven, where some people see problems, I see possibilities. Tonight I'd like to review some of last year's silver linings.

Lets begin with the hurricanes. Gustav, and especially Ike, wreaked havoc throughout the south. Ike hit Houston and Galveston especially hard, leaving people without water for days, and power for weeks. Yet, this did not turn into Katrina II. People's basic needs were addressed, civil order was never threatened, people were cooperative and understanding for the most part and worked together in the most difficult circumstances, and power, water and phones were restored pretty quickly considering the degree of damage. Government seems to have learned some lessons from Katrina, and the storms showed that lots of people are still decent, caring, and reasonable toward their fellow man.

Politics and the banking collapse were big stories too. Even though the bank bailout eventually was viewed as necessary, the whole fiasco, and the related proposed auto bailout showed that most Americans still have some basic distrust of and opposition to government subsidies of inefficient businesses. Most people still seem to have a basic idea that if you run your business poorly, you shouldn't hit up the taxpayers for a handout. On the political front, even though I think Obama is Tommy (an empty vessel to whom people ascribe their own beliefs) and millions are likely to be disappointed when the rhetoric turns into specifics, no one could fail to notice that for the first time in a generation, a huge mass of people mobilized to support a candidate because they believed in the candidate, not just because he's not "the other guy." Even young people managed to stop playing Wii and delivering pizzas long enough to vote, or volunteer to work on the Obama campaign. Good things happened on other political fronts. New Orleans took care of its William Jefferson problem, the legal system caught up with Ted Stevens, Rod Blagojevich, Rick Renzi, the Governor of Puerto Rico, and other corrupt politicians. On the other hand, Texas courts protected all our liberties by telling the government it cannot trump up child abuse charges against people it regards as odd or weird, and seize an entire community's children without any real proof or any real danger. And, finally, this was the year that the Clintons were finally put down like rabid dogs, kicking, screaming, sputtering, accusing, and dragging down everyone around them just like you knew it would play out if they were ever to lose. Not a model of "losing with grace."

Oil prices proved that, once again, market mechanisms work better at relieving high prices than government intervention. A massive government program was not necessary to bring gas prices from over $4/gallon down to the $1.50 level. Instead, consumers decided to buy less gas. Amazing how that works. In 2008, we relearned Adam Smith was right after all.

On the world front, the "surge" continued to work in Iraq, and peace (or at least a reduction in violence) continued breaking out throughout the country. Americans who stuck with the President on the surge should be proud they did not succumb to those urging that we concede defeat and abandon the new Iraq either to civil war or Syrian or Iranian domination. The Brits and other nations appear to continue willing to combat the Taliban in Afghanistan, and some modicum of Western nations still seems willing to oppose Iranian imperialism. One silver lining of the oil price collapse is that it has slowed Russian expansion, and virtually brought that Venezuelan windbag Chavez to his knees. Our "athletes" (beach volleyball and synchronized swimming? really?) won the overall medal count at Beijing, despite being outspent by the Chinese government by record levels.

The media collapse continued. Fewer and fewer people relied on the news cartel (ABC, NBC, CBS, New York Times, Washington Post, TimeWarner, CNN) for their news, and more relied on internet and other decentralized sources not dependent on corporate goodwill for their continued existence.

In New Orleans, the city continued to rebuild and people continued to return. The population is now at roughly 75% of its pre-Katrina population. Shops, restaurants, hotels, and other businesses continue to open (or reopen). Jazz Festival held its first Thursday shows since the storm, and even the Neville Brothers returned to Jazz Fest. Better still, the recession apparently has not hit New Orleans and other parts of Southeast Louisiana.

In sports, the idiocy of the Bowl Championship Series has been further exposed with its treatment of Texas, and for that matter, USC too. Roger Clemens, apparently thinking he could get away with anything, saw that he could not fool all the people all the time. Brett Favre and Steve Smith were exposed as the divas they are. The Texans played strong and have an actual NFL-caliber offense for the first time since ever, and the Jonesboys managed to snare defeat from the jaws of victory yet again. Texas had an unexpectedly great year, and although LSU underachieved, at least it had the courage and character to kick that punk Ryan Perilloux off the team even though they knew it would hurt the team's chances at defending its national championship. Finally, another year of the Yankees outspending every other team, another year of not winning at all (in fact, this year they didn't even make the playoffs, while their perennial nemesis the Tampa "Rays" won the AL Pennant-how did that taste Hank Steinbrenner?).

Perhaps the cherry on the cake of 2008 is this is the year the Juice finally stopped running. We all owe a collective debt of gratitude to the good people of Clark County, Nevada for putting away Heisman Trophy winner and double murderer OJ Simpson. I guess there won't be any more running through airports for awhile.

All in all, even in the midst of a down year, I saw lots of things that allowed me to keep my faith in America and Americans. Although our country continues to change, in many ways our essential character as a nation and a civilization does not change. We can all thank God for that.

Next-more bad things 'bout the BCS

P.S. LSU throttles Georgia Tech, while Satan loses his bowl game to the Mountain West conference. Gotta love it!