The latest victim of the current anti-worker/pro-big business atmosphere is none other than the beloved Kermit the Frog. If you don't think this is a big news story, you're wrong. The New York Times put it on Page 1 of its business section (that Russian oil company controversy was on Page 4). It turns out Steve Whitmire, the puppeteer who brought Kermit to life for 27 years was recently fired by Disney, the company that owns the Muppets. When we look at this case in the proper context, we cannot ignore the fact that Kermit is a Muppet of color. Years ago, he touched millions of people with his somewhat anguished view of his hue in the classic song, "It's Not Easy Being Green." So now one of the big questions is, will Disney hire someone else to keep Kermit as part of the Muppets or will they replace him with a new Muppet who will just happen to be a white, male piece of felt?

Disney has never had a reputation for being worker-friendly, and it hasn't made a secret of its attitude towards labor. In "Snow White," "Whistle While You Work" conveys Disney's feeling that workers shouldn't worry about fair pay, they should just be happy that they have a job. In the same anti-labor movie, the seven dwarfs work in one of the most dangerous occupations, mining. And will the brave workers get the rewards they dig for day after day? Of course not, as the chorus makes clear:

 "We dig up diamonds by the score
A thousand rubies, sometimes more
But we don't know what we dig 'em for
We dig dig dig a-dig dig."

 And after spending all day, robbing the earth of its natural resources, do these dwarfs come home exhausted and just grateful that they have survived another day? Nope. They sing their cheery,  "Heigh Ho, Heigh Ho, it's home from work we go" song as if that would be the attitude of miners after a ten hour day underground.

 So this most recent firing of a worker shouldn't shock any of us. There have been several versions of why the dismissal took place. Personally, I don't think there is any credibility to the smear that Kermit had sexually harassed Miss Piggy. Studio executives said that Steve Whitmire had a bad attitude. They also took a shot at his talent, saying that his Kermit was "sometimes excellent, and always pretty good." "Pretty good?" He portrayed Kermit for 27 years on television and films, and made personal appearances all over the world. But suddenly they find him "sometimes excellent, and always pretty good?"

 This kind of dismissal is happening in all kinds of businesses today. Respect for many workers is at an all-time low as huge corporations are more concerned about their bottom line than about the letter J or the Number 7. Puppeteer Whitmire feels that he and Disney could have worked out their problems. He said they could have simply talked to each other and compromised on things. You know, the way the Muppets have taught generations of children to do.

I imagine that Kermit getting the axe has made the other Muppets nervous about their job security. And if he was really fired because of a "bad attitude," watch for those iconic characters to fear that their attitudes will be judged, too. Who knows? By next season, one of the lead characters might change his name to "Oscar the Nice Guy."

There has been a great deal of fake news mixed up with real news lately. Some people have a hard time telling the difference. The way it works is, a person puts something on the internet that they claim is true, then other people pick that item up and put it on more sites, and pretty soon millions of people believe that Hillary Clinton was involved in a child pornography ring run from the back rooms of a pizza joint.

 To be fair, Donald Trump has also been the victim of fake news. The bulk of the untrue statements about him have come in the weeks after he was elected. And there have been plenty of them. Sometimes it's hard to tell what's real and what's fake. However, it's probably fake news if it sounds like it's meant to discredit the person, and if it just sounds completely crazy.

Let's turn to Trump's alleged cabinet appointments. Several news outlets report that Mr. Trump plans on appointing Rex Tillerson as his Secretary of State. Tillerson is the CEO of Exxon Mobil and has such close ties to Russia that Vladimir Putin gave him an award. I'm not kidding. Yet some internet wackos actually want us to believe that Trump would choose somebody like that as Secretary of State!

 And are we really supposed to believe that Donald Trump wants as his Secretary of Labor someone who is against raising the minimum wage for … labor? And do they think we will fall for the "news" that he wants as his Secretary of Interior someone who gets a 3% score from conservation groups? How stupid do they think we are?

 His pick for Treasury Secretary is alleged to be somebody who worked at Goldman Sachs for 17 years. This can't be true, because he blasted Hillary Clinton's relationship with Goldman Sachs countless times as he cheered on the chants of "lock her up."

 I won't even get into the absence of believability when it comes to Ben Carson being part of his cabinet, or that woman from the World Wrestling Federation.

 Sleazy rumors about Trump are not restricted to his alleged cabinet appointments. Just the other day, I read that he doesn't want to get the national security briefing every day. The story said that he finds them boring and repetitious. Come on, no President would be that irresponsible. I also heard that he no longer plans on building a wall and making Mexico pay for it. That was such a key part of his campaign that Trump going back on that would be almost as ludicrous as if he were to go back on his promise to prosecute Hillary Clinton on his first day in office.

 Perhaps the most ridiculous fake news about him is the story that during his Presidency, he will remain involved with NBC's "Apprentice" show and even have his name still on the credits as Executive Producer. Think for a moment about the lofty position that he will soon hold. Does anyone really think that the President of the United States would actually care about having his name on a television reality show? Nobody could really have that kind of need for attention, right?

I think that the winner of tonight’s game will be the team that plays smarter.  Fewer tunrovers and other mistakes, and clever plays will put more points on the board. To find out which is the smarter team, I turned to “Time” magazine. According to “Time,” Villanova basketball has a higher graduation rate than Carolina’s. Since education appears to be more important at Villanova, I look for one of the smart Wildcats to be holding the trophy tonight – and to be holding a diploma in June.

YESTERDAY—SEMIFINAL DAY

PRE-GAME

On Final Four weekend, no matter what city it’s held in, one is surrounded by tall people. Basketball players, former basketball players, and other basketball people are just about everywhere. However, this was not the case at the breakfast I attended Saturday morning. It was a meeting of Jewish Coaches. To complete the stereotype, the Jewish Coaches Association breakfast was held at Katz’ delicatessen.

I was there with my friend, Joe Landon, whose son Aaron is the head basketball coach at South Puget Sound Community College. The M.C. was Bobby Schwartz, the National Director of the Association. Schwartz isn’t only a basketball coach. He also happens to be a Rabbi. In fact, he officiated at the wedding of one of the guys at our table. Not yesterday, but when they got married.

The Red Auerbach Coach of the Year award went to Eron Ganot, head basketball coach for the University of Hawaii. In his acceptance speech, Eron spoke of his family, starting with his grandparents who were Holocaust survivors. He talked about his being embraced by the multiethnic, multicultural people of Hawaii, and expressed his amazement that he was getting an award from this organization.

The breakfast was truly an extraordinary event. And it was an obvious basketball omen to eat at a place called, “Katz’” just hours before the Villanova ‘Cats would play. To complete the foreshadowing, I guess I should have ordered the Nova lox.

THE SEMIFINAL GAMES

FIRST GAME: Villanova 95, Oklahoma 51

I’m a stupid gambler. I was smart enough to bet on Villanova, but I gave 45 points. Just kidding. Everyone knows there is no betting in college sports.

The only thing I have to say about the Villanova-Oklahoma game is a plea to the NCAA: please abolish the mandatory press conferences with the losing players of an embarrassing blowout. In fact, why must there be interviews with losing players regardless of the score? What could those Oklahoma players who were forced to be on the podium say that could possibly be news? “We stunk worse than I thought we’d stink?” “It was all the idiotic coach’s fault?” “My mom told me that sports were bad for me?” It’s sadistic to make these teary-eyed, deflated kids answer questions from bleary-eyed, inflated adults. And while we’re at it, NCAA, stop making everyone refer to players as “student-athletes.” Half of that term destroys all credibility.

SECOND GAME: North Carolina 83, Syracuse 66

This game seemed close for a while, but that was only because it followed the Saturday Night Massacre. These two teams were completely different in every way – even the way the coaches dressed. Williams always looks like he’s wearing clothes that his wife bought him to wear at a country club for very white people. Boeheim obviously buys his own clothes, but he denies having “direct knowledge,” of what store they were purchased from.

Syracuse employed its excellent full-court press in the middle of the second half and seemed to be making yet another exciting comeback. However, North Carolina is not Virginia. (Every school kid knows that). The Tar Heels did not panic.

So Monday night, it’s Villanova vs. North Carolina. Neither of those teams is going to panic. It should be a great game, and probably closer than 44 points. I just hope that people tune in to watch it, considering the other important sports event going on at that time: The Cubs open the season against the Angels.

It’s time to settle down to business and talk about tonight’s games—and I’m not talking about the beer hockey tournament at the Sheraton.

Let's look at the second game first.  Basketball blueblood North Carolina takes on Syracuse which just might be the hottest team of the Final Four. The defense of Syracuse, that swarming press for those few minutes, is what got them here when they bedazzled and befuddled Virginia. However, North Carolina demonstrated a defense so amazing that it will definitely go down in history. In August, just four days before UNC was to formally answer the NCAA’s charges against them, they pulled a defensive switch for the ages: they said that the school’s own internal investigation had turned up some new possible violations in women’s basketball. That mean the NCAA had to amend its charges and start the investigative clock all over again. They turned Dean Smith’s four-corner offensive stall into a brilliant defense, and here they are in the Final Four. Sorry, Syracuse. ADVANTAGE: NORTH CAROLINA.

The opening game – Oklahoma vs. Villanova -- shapes up as an up-tempo sharp shooting match. OK’s Buddy Hield won the Oscar Robertson Award as the nation’s top college player. Villanova’s gritty guard, four-year captain Ryan Arcidiacono is their obvious leader and … wait a minute. I can’t do this. I know I’m supposed to be impartial, but with full disclosure, I must admit that I have a rooting interest in this one. Throw out the stats, even the important one that shows Villanova’s average player weight of 214.1 pounds outweighs Oklahoma by a full two pounds. I confess. I want Villanova to win. I want them to win for one reason and one reason only: I desperately want to hear the on-air guys – including Kenny and Charles – to continue to struggle to pronounce Arcidiacono for two more games. ADVANTAGE:VILLANOVA.

The flight to Houston was fairly pleasant except for one strange incident. While we were in our descent, a flight attendant made an announcement that we weren’t going to land in Houston, but had to land in San Antonio. After many of the passengers gasped, she uttered words you don’t really want to hear from a flight attendant: “April fool.”

The weather here is overcast and a little windy, or what those from Houston call, “a beautiful day.” There are signs announcing the Final Four everywhere, and the whole town is abuzz. The favored attire is “mob casual”— warm ups or track suits. They dress like this everywhere, even in the nicest restaurants. I assume they own swimsuit outfits with Under Armor long pants.   

People are talking louder than they do at home as they grab some food and down some drinks. In a few hours, the food portion of their diet will be dropped for the rest of the weekend. In their collective stupor, they will become completely consumed by the games. Their sense of happiness or sadness, their very self-worth will be determined by the actions of a few kids who are barely old enough to drive. And before you know it, they’ll be back home and one day soon, they’ll be reprimanding their kids, “Stop goofing around. Act like a grownup and take life seriously.”

MARCH 28, 2016

THE EXCITEMENT IS BUILDING

Now that we are getting closer and closer to having a final winner, there are some things that I don't think any of us wants to see:

It would be great if opponents didn't taunt or make fun of each other. It would be nice if those in charge were completely honest and not the least bit hypocritical. It's probably too much to hope for, but I think we all deserve watching opponents who check their egos at the door. And I really don't want to see the crowd going crazy, actually putting some people in physical danger.

So how do we avoid seeing all these things this year? It's easy.

Just stop watching the Presidential campaign, and turn your attention to the Final Four. Let the games begin!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

MARCH 30, 2016

POLITICS AND SPORTS

I'm trying just to focus on the games and ignore the Presidential Campaign, but politics is invading every facet of our lives, even the sacred Final Four. Rumor has it that Hillary Clinton has leaked all of the candidates' feelings about the Final Four through her private server. Not surprisingly, Ted Cruz has picked North Carolina. Ted is against the government getting involved in people's business, except, as with North Carolina, when it comes to telling people which bathroom they should use. Bernie Sanders has the radical position that the NCAA is rigged in favor of the largest and richest schools. He refuses to choose a winner, but dreams of a revolution in which the financial winner and eventual champion is a school like Herbert's Wide Shoes and Horticultural College. Hillary is picking Pennsylvania's Villanova, New York's Syracuse, and Oklahoma, since she claims to be a resident of all three states. Trump is boycotting the Final Four, claiming that the NCAA has always treated him horribly by never inviting Trump University to the tournament. As for the women's tournament, Trump doesn't approve of women playing intercollegiate sports, but says he will watch the Women's Final Four, because "those girls look really cute in their little uniforms." A capacity crowd is expected for the Final Four, and John Kasich says that out of the 70,000 people who will be there, he'll be the only grownup in the room.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MARCH 31, 2016

BRUSSELS AND BASKETBALL

Like many sports fans I spent too many hours after the terrorists struck last week, watching TV and guiltily switching back and forth from Brussels to basketball. And then those two worlds magically came together. Suddenly, I heard a reporter mention that Hall of Fame basketball star Dikembe Mutombo was one of the people at the Brussels airport when the tragedy occurred. The reporter said that Mutombo was not injured. He had been on his way back to the United States after one of his many humanitarian trips to his beloved homeland, the Democratic Republic of the Congo. That's what Mutombo is known for off the court-- not drugs, not domestic violence, not the outrageous demands of a celebrity. Some athletes are proud of the mansions that they build. Mutombo is proud of the hospital that he built.

When he was a player, Mutombo was known for – among other things – as a great defensive player who blocked the shots of opponents and then playfully wagged his finger at them for even trying to make a basket. He is also known for a deep yet lighthearted voice. After the reporter said that he was all right, Mutombo's voice came on the air. However, it was not the familiar, deep, laughing voice that sports fans know. This voice was holding back tears as it described the horror and his terror. This giant of a man, haltingly describing what happened, made that attack seem more real and more devastating than any of the news reports had.

 In a later interview, Mutombo talked of running out of the terminal with the panicked crowd. Then, two American men came up to him and said they would take him to safety. Mutomobo said that they walked for "a couple of miles," and then they drove to a place where survivors of the blast could call home, eat, and sleep. In the morning, they drove him all the way to Amsterdam to fly home to the U.S.

Mutombo described those Americans as "angels," and expressed amazement that they would be so helpful to someone they didn't know. There must be thousands of people who have been amazed that Mutombo would be so kind to people he hasn't known. It was a fine bit of karma.

He said that terrorism would not stop him from continuing with his important work. But he wasn't embarrassed to admit that he might be fearful and would definitely be watchful in the future. He mentioned in the interview that he does some work for the NBA as a Global Ambassador. What a perfect title for that man with the deep voice, wagging finger, and big heart.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MARCH 31, 2016

Tomorrow, I'll be heading to Houston for the games. Watch for me on TV.  I'll be the one in the blue sweater.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The current Presidential primary campaign has been the most lackluster, most predictable, and most civil campaign in history. So it was refreshing last Tuesday when Sarah Palin took the stage with Donald Trump and shook things up a bit. There she was, fresh off a flight on Trump's golden jet, the airplane of the real Americans, standing before microphones and cameras, gushing as no one else can gush. Although decried by the mainstream media, the speech was brilliant. 

The liberal press only saw a woman babbling at a speed that would normally indicate someone who had just done business with her dealer. But that was all an act. It was an intentional way of shining a light on the lack of progress the Obama administration has made on the war on drugs. The pundits mocked her wardrobe, but they didn't see the cleverness in choosing an outfit that could only make the electorate think of Hillary Clinton's infamous use of the words, "Tammy Wynette."

Trump is nobody's fool, either. Getting Palin to rise from the dead like this forced Bernie Sanders to cancel the endorsement announcement he had planned to make with Kato Kaelin.

Sarah and Trump are among the many people who denounce blaming the government for everything, and they urge people to take personal responsibility. So it is appropriate that she placed the responsibility for her son's domestic abuse arrest and his sadly disturbed state squarely where that personal responsibility belongs: with President Obama. Everyone has to agree that it was awful that Obama forced Palin's son to do what he did and it is disgusting that the President insisted on having that pesky little automatic weapon lying around the Palin house. But what's even worse is that somehow Obama made Sarah leave her son's side at this crucial moment of his life to rush off to begin her selfless return to the political arena. Shame on you, Mr. President.

Some of the criticism that Mr. Trump has faced involves the assertion that he is not prepared for the highest office in the land. I look forward to Sarah putting this canard to rest. She is the kind of person whose intelligence and mastery of language can get this done in one swell swoop. I can just hear her now, simultaneously defending her boy Donald while appropriately skewering the Senator from Texas: "Let's stop pussyfooting around here. Is anyone else tired of people attacking poor, defenseless Donald Trump? How is Cruz any better prepared to be Commander in Chief than Donald? The only things Cruz is famous for are jumping up and down on Oprah's couch and being in those 'Mission Impossible' movies."

It might be a little expensive, but the new Apple Watch sure is pretty. And judging from the hype, it is the Invention of the Century. The Watch is the next logical product after the success of the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad. My guess is the only reason that Apple didn't call it an "iWatch" is that they didn't want it to sound like an app for voyeurs. All of these devices have some important things in common: they look really cool, they're fun, and they're not something that anyone actually needs. The Apple Watch looks great and that's a good enough reason to buy one. But don't try convincing me that it will save you time and help you get fit.

The only way a watch is going to get you in better shape is by looking at it three times a day instead of eating. These watches won't be timesavers. People are going to spend their time staring at their watches instead of their phones. Of course, these are just my opinions. New York Times writer Farhad Manjoo seemed very excited about the Apple Watch in his review. He loves the fact that he no longer has to waste all that time, fumbling for his phone and taking it out of his pocket before checking for a "digital event." How much time does that take? Three seconds? (Of course, the New York Times is also the paper that recently devoted half a page to reporting the happy news that America is finally starting to embrace the electronic bidet).

The Watch notifies you of things by giving you little electronic taps on your wrist. Incoming phone calls and alarms "feel throbbing and insistent," and a text feels like a "gentle massage from a friendly bumblebee." Very poetic, but do you really want a massage from a bee? And when I'm out in public, I don't think I want any part of my body to "feel throbbing and insistent."

Let's face it. Most of what we do on our cell phones is not exactly essential to our lives. (Almost every day, I check the weather in Paris. I have no idea why, but it's fun). It's hard enough to resist a vibration from our phones now when we get a text, email, or notification. Are we really going to be able to ignore electronic zaps on our wrists? We're already at the point that many people sneak peeks at their phones when they're at an important business meeting. Couples even keep their phones at the ready when they're having a romantic dinner. And when that romantic couple rushes home, they won't need any mood lighting. Their cell phones emit just the right light.

There is a downside to taking your phone with you no matter where you go and what you do. Apparently, the more we turn on our phones, the less we turn on our partners. The birth rate in the United States has dropped about 7% since the advent of the cell phone in 1973. And it's happening all over the world. Japan – the home of electronic devices – is one of the nations that now have a negative birthrate. Coincidence? Who are we kidding? The cell phone may be the most effective form of birth control since the invention of the chili dog.

I'm no expert in statistics, but to me, these numbers suggest that many couples practice "phone-is interruptus." No matter how much fun the couple is having, they put on the brakes if their phone rings, buzzes, or plays their favorite song. And this behavior is only going to increase with inventions like the Apple Watch. Soon when you sneak a peek at your watch when he or she isn't looking, you won't be just checking the time. You'll be checking your texts. I'm not judging. I completely understand. After all, it's important to get that message from your friend who is sending you yet another photo of his dog.

Listen to Audio Version

We all remember how important Valentine's Day was to us when we were little kids. Don't worry. The "50 Shaders" have not forgotten the kiddies. There are even onesies that say, "Nine Months Ago Mommy Read 50 Shades of Grey." These darling items don't just announce to the world the mother's literary preferences, but they also hint at the circumstances under which that cute little baby was conceived.

No longer will you have to feel embarrassed sneaking into your sleazy neighborhood sex store in between the dry cleaners and the nail salon to buy some titillating toy. You don't even have to leave your house to get "50 Shades" items. You can order them from Amazon. The handcuff bracelets are a natural, and so are keychains with that special key, neckties that can be tied as tightly as you'd like, and charm bracelets with "charms" such as a blindfold and a riding crop. There is even a "50 Shades of Grey" board game, obviously ideal for rainy day family play when grandma and grandpa come to visit. At Amazon, with just a single click, you can buy the Beach Boys' "Good Vibrations" and your own personal good vibrations.

There are also unofficial tie-ins with "50 Shades." Surf laundry detergent actually has come up with a Limited Edition "Flirty Shades of Surf." Their customers are encouraged to try Surf's "naughtiest fragrance yet." It's amazing that in the right hands and minds, even soap can be dirty.

For people who like to take care of all their errands in one place, you can get your "50 Shades" needs met at your local Target while you do your regular shopping. In at least one Target store, some of "50 Shades'" most intimate toys were right next to the children's toothbrushes. Leave it to Target to make the shopping experience as convenient as possible for the busy mom or dad.

Target does seem to be the perfect place to do your "50 Shades" Valentine's Day shopping, with just a slight change from previous years. The store's logo is, of course, that red circular target. Traditionally, on Valentine's Day, Cupid shoots his arrow into the target which is the human heart. For this Valentine's Day, that love target is just somewhat lower than the heart.

We are accustomed to many children's movies making some extra box to commercial tie-ins or merchandising. So it's not surprising that just as the current "Sponge Bob" movie was released, Little SpongeBob fans began begging for all kinds of SpongeBob toys. Some of these are just silly, but I admit that others are clearly destined to become cultural icons such as a classic Pants-Droppin' SpongeBob. When it comes to regular mainstream grown-up movies, it's not all that common for them to have merchandising tie-ins. I don't think were going to see a "Boyhood" doll that will amaze everyone when it ages over the next 12 years. Yet, there is no reason for us grown-ups to despair, thanks to "50 Shades of Grey" and the release of its tie-ins (puns intended).

Since "50 Shades" involves a relationship of punishment, dominance, and pain, it is obviously fitting that the movie will be released on Valentine's Day. Forget about that bouquet of flowers this year. Now it's time to "Say It With Leather."

Someday in the not-too-distant future, many of us will startle our grandchildren by telling them that once upon a time, friends would meet for lunch, shake hands, and then eat without washing those hands after the shake. They'll be amazed that in the past, some people were insulted if someone didn't want to shake hands with them. We'll shock those grandkids by telling them that there was a time when folks would go to cocktail parties, meet new people and shake their hands without secretly thinking, "How am I going to sneak off to the bathroom to wash my hands before they serve the finger food?"

There's no doubt about it. Very soon, the handshake will be a thing of the past. It will go the way of the dinosaur, the lamplighter, and customer service. I will miss it. I already do.

The Center for Disease Control says that good hand hygiene is the best way to prevent colds from spreading. I place the beginning of major handshaking avoidance with the Swine Flu Panic of 2009. That's when hands officially went from mere appendages to virulent petri dishes. That's when we were encouraged to keep our hand hygiene up to par. That's also when the handshake started to disappear.

There's some faulty logic there. Just because the best way to stop germs from spreading is by having clean hands doesn't mean that the best way to avoid germs is to avoid handshakes. No, the best way is for everybody to have clean hands. Your reluctance to shake your friends' hands before eating lunch presumes they don't wash their hands when they should. What kind of friends are you hanging out with anyway? 

I came rather late to germaphobia. I had thought my neuroses plate was full, but I guess there's always room for one more.  Now I'm thinking I made a mistake when I started worrying so much about the shake. I'm still not against using common sense. I don't advocate shaking hands with someone who has been sick or has been around sick people or who is bleeding profusely from the palm. However, don't you think we've taken this whole thing a little too far?

A handshake is more than a social nicety. It is actual human contact, something we experience less and less of in these digital days. It's believed that the handshake began as a way to show that a person was not carrying a weapon and wanted peace. Deals are sealed with a handshake. Someone with a good, firm handshake is thought to be a person of good character. So two questions arise. Does all of this handshake avoidance really work? Even if it does, is it worth it? 

Do you know anyone who is vigilant about avoiding handshakes who gets fewer colds or flus than anyone else? I don't. Even if they get fewer colds now than before they became shakeless, it's not like they used to get 50 colds a year and now they get only five. The average adult gets between two and four colds a year. If avoiding handshaking really does reduce colds, maybe that vigilant non-shaker can eliminate one of the colds per year. Is it worth missing out on all that human contact for an entire year to maybe avoid one cold? 

I'm not saying a cold is anything to sneeze at. When I get one, I go crazy. I don't understand how others can go on with their lives knowing how much I'm suffering, and I spend most of my time in bed wondering what it will be like having a cold for the rest of my days. 

However, I think we're getting mixed messages from health experts. In recent years, we've been told that physical touching is important to our health, especially our mental and emotional health. Just being touched by another person can help reduce stress and depression. So do you want to be sniffle-free but depressed? 

You know it's going to be a slippery slope. Today, handshakes are out, next it's hugs and kisses. After that, some medical journal will recommend that we just not touch anyone else anymore. As much as I hate colds, I have decided to try to worry less and shake more. I'm a friendly guy. Physical contact is just too important to me. It's important to everybody. I don't think there has ever been a prisoner in solitary confinement who has shouted joyfully, "I love it here! There's no chance of catching a cold from shaking hands with anybody. Please let me stay here alone forever."

This isn't going to be easy for me, either. But can't we at least try to be less hysterical when it comes to worrying about catching germs from other people? In fact, let's shake on it.

What a great championship game! What a great Final Four! What a great prediction I made that Uconn would win based on the system that I revealed here last Friday.  (Link: How to pick a final four winner)

But this column is not about my being right. Well, not completely. It's about what it was like to be in the Stadium for the games.

Except for the long shorts, everything that's great about college basketball has been great for generations. It's played by kids who sometimes are poised and sometimes make mistakes that kids make. Many fans actually know the players on the teams. Anyone who has even a remote connection with the school and team is allowed to go crazy for a little while. The cheerleaders do the same cheers they've always done in the same outfits they've always worn. The games are close. You can see the players shout with joy and cry with despair. 

Unfortunately, a great many people who were at the games this weekend didn't get to see many of these things that are such an important part of college basketball. They were too far away. The place was just way too big. The AT&T Stadium (formerly Cowboy Stadium) isn't a typical basketball gym. About 79,000 people were there for each of the three games. 79,000 for a basketball game!  It's not exactly Hinkle Fieldhouse. Gene Hackman would have had a hell of a time convincing his team that it's no different from their gym at home.

In other words, every single resident of Storrs, Connecticut – the home of UConn – could have brought four friends along, and they all could have fit into the Stadium. And there still would have been room for Yukon Jack's Hilltop Grill and the Storrs Museum of Puppetry.

Do you like flat screen TVs? They've got one in the Stadium that is 160 by 72 feet. If you go to Best Buy to purchase one of these, remember that the size is measured diagonally. 

They sold the seats at the very top of the arena. You didn't need an usher to help you to those seats. You needed a Sherpa. What could those fans possibly see from up there? They couldn't see the dunks, the blocks, or the steals. They couldn't see the expressions on the faces of the players and coaches. Furthermore, there should be an NCAA rule that states no seats may be sold that are so far away from the court that fans can't distinguish between the cheerleaders and the players. Presidents Bush and Clinton were there, but I doubt if those with bad seats could even see them on the Giant TV. So thousands of fans missed the very things that are great about college basketball. 

If they hadn't read and believed my correct prediction, (which once again, you may verify: How to pick a final four winner), they might not have found out who won the game until they got home.

Before Wisconsin's semifinal (but after practicing at AT&T), Wisconsin's Frank Kaminsky said, "It's an insane venue. It kind of feels like you're outside…"

Why do they hold these games in such a cavernous place with so many awful seats? For the same reason that they charge five bucks for a bottle of water. Greed.

There's an old saying that goes, "Everything is bigger in Texas." However, it would've been much bigger of the NCAA if they had played these games in a smaller place.

Just as a postscript, one of the times that they cut to the two former Presidents on the oversized screen, I'm pretty sure I read Bush's lips asking Clinton, "Where is Lloyd sitting?" I could be wrong about that. Then again, I could be right. It's happened before.

Okay, you didn't win a billion dollars. You're not alone. Not one person in the Billion Dollars Warren Buffett Quicken Loans Pick All The Winners contest won. So Warren didn't have to pay out. Finally, something worked out for that guy. I have a feeling that many statisticians and math whizzes entered the contest and lost. They had all kinds of systems, using algorithms and even understanding what algorithms are. They still lost. Why? Because they didn't feed their machines the right information.

Maybe they should have looked at a different set of statistics.

I'm going to use the "point system" of picking Monday night's winner:

It always seems like the winner's colors are either red and white or blue and white. So give Wisconsin, Kentucky, and UCONN one point each.

I hate to pick on the Gators, but deduct one point from Florida for having a coach whose son plays on the team. It gets too complicated and unpleasant to watch. (Do the words "Bob Knight" mean anything to you)? While we're at it, I'm going to deduct another point from Florida for Billy Donovan naming his son Billy Donovan. So far, Florida is at -2.

In the recruitment battle, as a demonstration of how far coaches go to get kids to play for their team, I award two points for every player who doesn't come from the United States. The University of Connecticut wins this one because of the players that it has attracted from Connecticut's close neighbors, Jamaica, Ghana, and Germany. (Nice try, Wisconsin, but Germantown doesn't count).

I have to award five points to the coach who is hated more than any other coach every year – John Calipari. They wouldn't hate him if he were a loser.

As everyone knows, sentimentality is worth 12 to 16 points in big games. It seems that everyone is excited for Wisconsin coach Bo Ryan for finally getting to the Final Four. He teared up after beating Arizona, saying the game was dedicated to his late father, Butch. I'm tempted to deduct points because of people who have names like Bo and Butch, but I can't let my emotions get in the way of science. Wisconsin gets the sentimentality bonus of five points.

Experience counts. Therefore, the "They've Done It Before" points go to Calipari and Donovan. Two each. College coaching is a killer profession, so I have to award Billy Donovan 5 big points for being the coach who looks like he's in the best shape. Donovan and Ryan tie for Haircut That Is Only Seen On Coaches, earning their teams three points. UCONN gets one point for having the shortest player in the tournament whose name is Long.

So according to these calculations, UCONN should be cutting down the net Monday night.

Unless, of course, I should have awarded points for having the most players who are 6-8, having the heaviest player in the Final Four, having the best shooting seven footer, or for a coach having a wife named Ellen.

Enjoy the games.

Lately, the news has been full of stories about "automatic cars." Supposedly, these are the cars of the not so distant future. Basically, they will be able to drive themselves, freeing us humans to do other things. On the way to work, car owners will be able to make phone calls, go over the presentations that they are going to give that afternoon, send emails, or even take a nap. Actually, it doesn't sound all that different from the way some people drive today.

To me, the most amazing thing about these cars is that the predicted release date for them is not that far away. "Forbes" predicts that these cars will go on sale by the end of this decade. In other words, if you order one of these cars now, it will probably show up at your house before the cable guyyou called this morning.

"Do we really need more technology and less human involvement?" Apparently, car manufactures would say, "Yes." The way these vehicles work is that you program the computer in the car to go where you want it to go and when. If you go shopping at a busy time, you could have your car drop you off at the store's front door and then go find a parking space by itself. When you're finished shopping, the car will pick you up in front of the store. 

The automatic or "autonomous" car will also have some of the other new gadgets and technologies that are due soon. Volvo says that it wants to have a fleet of cars by 2020 that are impossible to crash. Some cars already beep or stop when there is an obstacle in the way. The autonomous car of the future with "anti-crash technology," will not just react to emergency situations, it will predict them.

Automatic or "driverless" technology will get rid of road rage – unless the cars will be programmed to flip off other cars. (Memo to car manufacturers: the cars flipping each other off was my idea). Soon after they are on the road, it can't be that far off when cars will make up their own "minds" about things. I know a little bit about Artificial Intelligence. I actually stayed awake during parts of the movie, "Her." So I won't be surprised if someday soon, an automatic car decides to play pranks on its owner, like switching garages with another car. On a hot, romantic summer night, one of these cars is bound to sneak off with another car down to the charging station to get a few extra jolts of electricity. They'll probably stay out till all hours of the night, and won't even call their owners to tell them that they're okay.

There will be no reason to have minimum ages for drivers. If the car can drive just as safely regardless of who is in it, why couldn't kids "drive" them, too? Preschoolers wouldn't need parents to drive the car pools. They could do it themselves. Think of how much time that would free up for parents. What a great idea, right? Well, I know it would probably be just as safe, but there's something weird about people being allowed to drive a car before they can spell "car."

Those who are excited about these vehicles point out how much safer the driving experience would be. After all, they will have eliminated the "human factor." They will be guided by computers who don't get tired, angry, or drunk. These new vehicles will be commanded by algorithms rather than emotional beings. What could possibly go wrong? It's a computer.

I went to a Major League baseball game recently, and it wasn't what I was used to. Pitchers didn't try to hit batters in the head with a 90 mile per hour pitch. Fans didn't fight in the stands or pummel each other for wearing the other team's hats in front of the stadium. Players didn't play selfishly. Amazingly, all they seemed to care about was the team. Was everybody on good behavior because it was a playoff game? No. Was it a Little League game? Of course not. I said nobody fought in the stands. No, the game was in Tokyo, Japan.

The stadium was different from every Major League stadium that I've ever been to. There was absolutely no litter.

Before walking into the Men's Room, I didn't feel the need for wearing surgeons' booties, latex gloves, and a gas mask.

The game was between the Yomiuri Giants and the visiting Chunichi Dragons. I had heard of the Giants, primarily because of its most famous player:

Sadaharu Oh. He played Major League baseball from 1959 to 1980 and hit more home runs than any Major Leaguer in the world – 868. You can be sure that there was never an allegation that Oh used any performance enhancing drugs. He was never even accused of using too much dipping sauce with his noodles.

There is basically no street crime in Japan, and the ballpark was no different. The only theft during the game was when someone stole second base. When a woman who sat in my row got up to get something to eat, she just left her purse on her chair. Nobody blinked. Except for me.

Fans cheered wildly for their team, but nobody ever booed the opposing team. The idea of a fight breaking out among fans was as unlikely as Wrigley Field selling eel sushi. Players also had a completely different relationship with the umpires. A Dragon made a mistake, and was called "out" at first. He looked confused, so an umpire walked over to him, put his arm around him and explained the situation. In America, if an umpire ever touched a player, it would probably start a riot. 

There was one big similarity between Japanese and American baseball. Beer. Beer was sold by attractive, young female vendors who walked around the stadium with a keg-like device on their backs. These young women were dressed in very short shorts. I had read in my guidebook that while cleavage was almost never seen in Japan, women's' legs were seen in public as much as ramen shops. The Japanese take the term "neckline" literally, as they do the term "shorts." 

The Giants won the game 8 to 6. I walked out without getting shoved once. My shoes weren't any stickier after the game than they were before. As I headed back to the hotel, I realized that I had just seen a Major League baseball game where there was not one gratuitous crotch scratch. No spitting. Nobody in the bleachers hurled insults or batteries at the players. No drunken fans threw up on the people in front of them. And they had the nerve to call that, "baseball?"

About ten days ago, a coalition of various gun enthusiast organizations announced that Saturday, January 10th would be a holiday:   Gun Appreciation Day. I'm not kidding. I guess the next logical step will be Hallmark issuing a card for the occasion saying something like, "Have More Fun. GetA Gun."

This column is not a typical liberal gun-owner bashing. I'm not calling for a repeal of the Second Amendment. I'm barely going to mention that there are 300 million guns in America, making it easily the most heavily armed nation in the world. Others can discuss the fact that America has the highest homicide rate caused by gunshot than any "developed" nation. The main reason I was horrified when I heard about this new holiday was not because of my position on gun control. My dismay about Gun Appreciation Day has to do with bad taste and insensitivity.

It's only been a month since the horrific shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, and some people decided it would be appropriate to have a Gun Appreciation Day. One month! How thrilled all those parents of the murdered children must be. Can you imagine someone calling for a Hurricane and Flood Appreciation Day a month after Sandy hit New Jersey? I don't think they'd get a bear hug from Governor Christie, do you? October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month. How do you think it would've gone over in November for people to celebrate "the positive things about cancer?"

HHH celebrating floods a month after

The NRA and other pro-gun groups wisely were silent immediately after the Sandy Hook School shootings. However, they just couldn't control themselves for more than a few days. Larry Ward, one of the organizers of their new holiday, explained the reason for getting back to vocally opposing gun control soon after the tragedy. "We had a week when it was just one side," those who want gun control. "People need to understand there's another side." After one week? Is that the length they feel the mourning period for murdered children should be?

As usual, there were declarations from some gun enthusiasts that there would have been no mass killing if only the teachers had been armed with guns. When I heard this, I thought about when I was in elementary school. I was a loudmouth kid who often got on my teachers' nerves. If they had been armed, I might never have made it to high school.

Guns are as American as apple pie. In fact, you can buy guns and apple pie at the same place. Walmart is the largest seller of firearms and ammunition in the nation. There's just a bit of inconsistency when it comes to their philosophy. Don't you think that if Walmart sold a new crib that ended up causing injuries to babies that they'd stop selling that crib immediately? However, guns and ammo are just too important to Walmart's profits for them to stop selling weapons for even a little while. On Tuesday, protestors demonstrated at a Walmart near Newtown, Connecticut, objecting to the assault weapons that Walmart sells. In response, a spokesman said the demonstrators were misinformed. Kory Lundberg said that Walmart sells assault-style weapons in less than a third of their stores. Oh, just a third. That comes to only about 1300 stores. No wonder we didn't find any Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. They're all in Walmart.

Gun Appreciation Day isn't the only inappropriate response to Sandy Hook. A month to the day after the shooting, a new app from the NRA was released for use on the iPhone and iPad. It's called the "NRA: Practice Range." It allows players to shoot at targets with a variety of guns. One of these weapons is the Bushmaster AR-15, the gun used by the shooter in Newtown. But what am I complaining about? It's been a whole month since the shooting.

2012 was the year of "The Huh?" – as in "What? You've got to be kidding."

It was the year that many people thought would be the last year of the world. They based this prediction on the fact that one Mayan calendar would come to an end before the new Mayan calendar would start. "Huh?"

Movie icon and philanthropist Elizabeth Taylor passed away in 2011. It took until 2012 for the release of a television movie about her life. Since she was heralded as a fine actress and received countless awards, including two Oscars, raised millions of dollars for AIDS research, and received the Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award, the obvious choice to portray her in the movie was Lindsay Lohan. Huh?

The Iowa Supreme Court ruled that you can be fired from a job for being "too attractive" to your boss. Huh?

Actor/writer/director Ben Affleck announced that he was not running for the Senate. Huh?

President Obama won both the popular and electoral elections. Some Republicans responded by calling the election, "A tie." Huh?

Hockey team owners, concerned that the sport has had more trouble attracting television viewers, responded by locking out the players which ensured that no fans could be excited about watching hockey. Huh?

Some countries have more mobile phones than toilets. Does this mean that they're using their smart phones to find out where the nearest bathroom is? Huh?

Mitt Romney's son Tagg recently said that his father never really had any interest in being President. Huh?

Chin lifts were the hottest form of cosmetic surgery this year. Huh?

There are still people who believe that climate change is just as silly of an idea as evolution. Huh?

Finally, the big one. Former CIA head David Petraeus, the keeper of the country's most important secrets, couldn't keep his illicit affair a secret. Obviously a great judge of character, President Obama had chosen Petraeus to command the U.S. forces in Afghanistan before picking him to head the CIA. Petraeus' affair was uncovered because his mistress, Paula Broadwell sent disturbing emails to someone she thought was too interested in Petraeus -- Jill Kelley. Broadwell is an Army intelligence officer, but in this case, "intelligence" is just a military title. Kelley, the target of the emails, as well as her husband were friends with Petraeus and his wife, Holly. Jill Kelley told another friend of hers, Frederick Humphries II about the emails, and since Humphries was an FBI agent, he turned the information over to the FBI and continuously urged them to pursue the case vigorously. He also sent shirtless photos of himself to Jill Kelley, but not to Paula Broadwell. Obviously a very social person, Jill was also friends with Four Star General John R. Allen who received cyber stalking messages from Paula Broadwell, too. Natalie Khawam, Jill Kelley's twin sister, was friends with both David Petraeus and General Allen. Earlier, Jill convinced both Petraeus and Allen to try to help her twin in a child custody case in which the judge found that Natalie had "misrepresented everything." Huh? Huh? Huh?

Here's to 2013, a year that I guarantee will have us saying, "Huh?"

Happy New Year.

I know it's been about a week, but I still feel the same elation I felt on Election Night. Not just President Obama's supporters, but every American should still feel that thrill. Why? … Because the campaign is finally over! No more speeches, no more commercials, and best of all – no more of those annoying phone calls. I also assumed that the emails would stop. Unfortunately, the day after the election, I received an email from President Obama's campaign manager. At the end of it was the word, "Donate." He's still asking for money? Does Obama plan on running for a third term?

This $2 billion dollar campaign -- that's "Billion" with a "B" -- was a nasty campaign. Based on the commercials they endorsed, neither of the candidates seemed particularly nice. After each debate and major commercial, independent groups told us how untruthful many of their statements were. I propose that for the next election, there should be an independent commission set up to evaluate each commercial. If it's found to be untruthful, the candidate who endorsed that commercial will have to pay an amount equal to what that commercial cost to his or her opponent's campaign. Good-bye untruthful commercials.

While most of us are thrilled that the campaign is over, there are those politicos who are dreamily thinking, "Only about 1,460 days until the next Presidential election." -- or right after they finish counting this election's votes in Florida. What's with Florida and elections? How hard can it be? A few high school kids with a Mac could probably have handled it. 

If you were the Governor of Florida and you had more political aspirations, wouldn't you have made sure that your state at least moved into the 20th Century on Election Day this time? In some Miami precincts, voters were still casting their ballots while Obama was making his victory speech. They must've felt great about how meaningful their votes were.

It's easy to pick on Florida – boy is it easy – but it's not the only state that is goofy at election time. Here in California, on Election Day, we don't just vote for people. As you know, we vote for laws. Lots of them. These are laws that even experts who study the issues for years have trouble deciding on and evaluating their economic impact. They deal with taxation, education, the rights of public employees, and everything else they can squeeze onto the ballot. When I first moved here years ago, I didn't get it. I asked anyone who would listen that if we decide all these issues, what do the state legislators do? Nobody could ever answer that. 

I had a favorite ballot measure this year. It was the one that asked us to decide if male porn actors should be required to wear condoms while making their films. In other words, on that night we had to settle both election and erection issues.

In case you missed the big news, the measure passed. I'm happy to say that I voted on the winning side on this one. Regardless of the practicality of the proposition, I felt that if I could do a little something to possibly help save someone's life, I should. However, there was another motivation behind my vote. When I thought about how they could possibly enforce this law, I figured that before any porn movie could be released, either there would have to be a state official who watched a screening of the porn flick, or they'd have to have an official on the set of every porn movie checking to make sure there were no naked penises. "Finally," I thought, "there's going to be something for those legislators to do."

If you happened to turn on the Republican convention the other night in the middle of Ann Romney's speech, you might've been surprised to hear what sounded like the wife of the Republican Presidential candidate coming out of the closet. She screamed," I love you women!" And the crowd of presumably conservative Republicans applauded! You may have concluded that the Republican Party has come a long way towards tolerance and respect for all women.

Of course, that was not the case. Her speech, an effort to court women voters, seemed like something from the "Leave It To Beaver" era. She was clearly alluding to the "wife who stays at home with the children, the husband who goes to work and is not very involved with the kids" kind of family. She told us that it's the mothers who hold the family – and the country – together. "It's the moms who always have to work a little harder, to make everything right."

What about the dads? Nobody at the convention seemed to care about fathers not being viewed as particularly necessary. To them, the important thing was to get the message out that Republicans think that women are just great.

It didn't matter to the people there that she didn't talk much about working mothers, or specifically about families in which the husband stays home and the wife goes to work. No, her comments were about what I'm sure many conservatives embrace as the "traditional" roles of men and women. Perhaps that was an accurate reflection of American families – in 1957.

This attitude is quite consistent with the Republican platform and positions on gender issues. Republicans can be against things like paying for birth control for women and legislation that would ensure equal pay in the workplace because those positions come from values from that bygone era that they want to revert to.

The convention may have avoided tropical storm Isaac, but the storm that they can't get away from is the one caused by Missouri Congressman Todd Akin. When he talked about "legitimate rape" and a woman being able to avoid getting pregnant just by "shutting down" if she wants to, even most conservative Republicans thought he went too far.

The goofy concept that women can just will themselves to avoid pregnancy is a pretty appealing theory. Not only would this render abortions unnecessary, but women wouldn't need to use birth control, either. They could just let their bodies decide if they want to get pregnant or not. And if this works for pregnancy, what about the common cold? If women just concentrated a little harder, you'd never see them sniffle again.

Akin was pressured into an apology, and he gave one. Sort of. He said, "The mistake I made was in the words I said, not in the heart I hold." I wonder what the proper words would have been for "legitimate rape" and a woman's body "shutting down" to avoid pregnancy.

I guess it was the wording, not his sentiments that outraged so many Republicans, because a great number of his Republican brothers and sisters share his opinions. The Vice Presidential nominee, Paul Ryan and many Republicans agree with Akin that rape does not justify abortion. They are entitled to this opinion. However, I don't understand why they think it's okay to get the government involved in making their opinion the law.

Because of the reaction to Akin and to Mitt Romney's low polling numbers among women, there has been a great effort to show the country that Republicans really do like "the ladies." However, they've also created some confusion. Since Akin's comments, Republicans have gone out of their way to say how wonderful women are. They are extraordinary human beings capable of far more things than their male counterparts. Yet, if they are so special to the point that, as Ann Romney said, "Women hold the country together," why can't they be trusted to make their own decisions about their bodies? 

"Hot enough for you?" Americans have used that jovial and ironic greeting for decades. Yet, for the last several years, Left Wing-nuts have been crying "Global Warming" every time the earth sets a few preposterous heat records or a couple of dozen glaciers melt. Keep in mind that those who believe in Global Warming are the same morons who believe in evolution and gravity.

They tell me that the warmest twelve-month periods in the original 48 states since 1895 have all been in the last 17 years. The warmest in 117 years was from July of 2011 to June of this year. The bleeding hearts say this is a bad thing. I see it as an opportunity. The hotter it is, the more swimming pools and air-conditioners are needed. The more that are needed, the more workers are required to build and install them. That's right. Global Warming is a job creator.

Some Lefto pointed out to me that it was hotter in Omaha last week than it was in Tehran. Omaha is a wonderful city in a great state. Those who hate America may want to compare it to the capital of Iran, but I think it's a heck of a lot better place to raise kids.

We are willing to concede that the Arctic is warming up at twice the rate of the rest of the earth, but shouldn't we be celebrating this? After all, the place needs to warm up more than anywhere else. It's freezing there. 

Sadly, temperatures this summer have created an awful drought in America's farmland. The farm is the backbone of America, and some of our greatest Americans were farmers before they got regular jobs. We've figured out something that should please everybody. You know all that ice that is melting and turning into water up in the Arctic? If we just leave Mother Nature alone, that water will keep heading down until it gets where it's needed the most – to those bone dry farms. That's what I call trickle-down in action.

Usually at this point of the argument, somebody brings up the topic of polar bears. Those of us on the Right Side of the issue think polar bears are cute, too. However, they just might have to adapt to changing times. In fact, I think they are doing this already. Here's an example. The Libs say that a female polar bear recently swam nonstop for nine days before finally reaching an ice floe to rest. They see this as a tragedy. I see this as probably the greatest example of polar bear endurance swimming in history. Get out your Guinness Book. 

Some say that we are out of touch with poor people. Of course, they also say that the lack of regulations and the crimes of a few bad apples in finance are responsible for more of our economic problems than greedy teachers and firefighters. Anyway, if poor and elderly people in big cities don't want to get sick or die from the extreme heat, they should use their heads. Get out of the city. All they have to do is hitch their boats to their cars and head to their beach houses.