There are a Number of Reason to not Live Off the Grid

Until this gets better, we need to stay on the good old grid.

Many parts of the US are getting destroyed by bad, windy storms recently. I know that they hit the North very hard a few weeks back, and yesterday, at least in the Midwest, we got crushed. I live in Saint Louis, and we were absolutely hammered by a very bad storm yesterday. It got very, very dark during the late afternoon, and then the wind started. At first, I thought, this will be a quick, passing storm, boy was I wrong. This storm lasted for a good 2 to 3 hours and it was brutal. The rain was pouring. The wind was intense. The sky stayed dark.

The absolute worst part about this storm, the power went out in our home. I have not been in a storm when the power has gone out in almost a decade. Usually when it rains hard, the power stays on and the rain passes. That was not the case yesterday. Our power went out at about 3:15pm central time, and it did not come back on until 9:30pm. We didn't even have it the worst. I know people that live in neighboring towns that power went out the same time ours did, but they didn't get their power back until 2 or 3 in the morning.

I am not here to complain about rainstorms today. I actually want to take my time to talk about how, in this day and age, miserable it would be to be "off the grid". Many people know what this term means, but if you don't, a simple explanation of being "off the grid", you don't use TV, cell phones, computers, basically no electronic devices. It's almost like living Amish. In fact, I bet the Amish thrive in rain storms and being "off the grid". But, I always thought it would be interesting and kind of cool to see what it would be like to be "off the grid" myself for a few months. Well, I can say, with authority, after only 6 and a half hours, being off the grid would be the worst.

I always feel nervous when a bad storm hits, so add on the fact that my cell phone was about to die, and I had no way to charge it. That meant, if my phone died, I would have no way to contact my wife, my in laws or my folks. That was frightening.

Secondly, the storm hit when my kids where resting. My daughter, who is nine months old, slept through it all, but my son, who is 4, was very, very scared. So, not only was I frightened by the fact that I may have no way of communicating with my wife and family, but my son's fear added to mine. He did not care for the lights being out. He is kind of afraid of the dark to begin with, and with it being as dark as it was during the day, he was terrified. He snuggled like to me like he had never before, that's how scared he was, he never snuggles up with me.

Third, this is where it will start to get trivial, but it bears referencing, we had no television or radio to listen to. Having no TV, at that time of day, totally threw us off our routine. When my son gets out of "quiet time", he gets to watch a TV show. That is what we do everyday. But, with the power out, that was off the table. My son, much like my wife and myself, thrive on consistency. When he realized he would not be watching a show, he grew even more upset. Then, the radio thing, we don't have a boom box in our house anymore because it is 2016. We haven't had a stereo in the house for about 5 years now. It's pointless because we listen to everything on our phones or our iPods. And I wasn't going to get in the car to listen to the radio because it was so terrible outside. So, another lack of communication outside.

Fourth, the fridge and the freezer were shut down. We had ice cream and frozen pizza in the freezer that could have easily thawed and been rendered useless. In the fridge, we had meat, milk, cream and a bunch of other perishable items. I was very nervous that these would all go bad and that would be like throwing cash into the trash can. We have some good pork chops and chicken breast that could have very easily gone bad had our power not come back on. I was so looking forward to my pork chop last night, but that was a no go since our fridge and stove didn't work. Fifth, we had to go out for dinner, but a bunch of places closed or had an hour wait. We spent over an hour just trying to find a place to eat when my wife got home. That's just annoying.

We got home from dinner and the power was on, but only for about 5 minutes. That was a tease. They hadn't fully fixed the problem yet, and they shut us down again at about 8:15pm. I was about to give my son a shower, but now we had to do that by candlelight. That was tough and not fun. My son was scared. I couldn't see what was going on. I was frustrated. He was scared and started to cry. It was a disaster. I also had to shower myself by candlelight, and that is a pain. It's like taking a shower with a mini strobe light. It was not ideal.

My wife and I finally got the kids to sleep right around 9pm in our very warm house. That was another problem, it was steamy in the house. We had no relief, even with the windows open. It was hot and I was sweaty, another deal breaker. But, we got the kids asleep, I showered, was getting ready for bed, then the power came back on. I felt a relief like I had never before. It was so nice to hear the AC click on, the lights power up and turn the TV back on.

That little 6 and a half hour departure from the grid was more than enough for me to not want to do more than that ever again. It all sounds nice and peachy to say that you want to live "off the grid", but I think it is just that, just a nice thought. The people that actually do it, more power to you, but it is not for me and I think it is highly overrated and kind of gone the way of the "hipster".

"Hipsters" want to do everything old school, but the problem with old school, like vinyl records, unicycles, VHS tapes and being "off the grid", everything has been updated to make it better. We have CD's and MP3 players, we have mountain bikes, we have DVD's and Blu-Ray's and we have electronics that make our lives so much easier and better.

The storm from yesterday erased any thoughts I had of trying to be "off the grid" at some point, and I think being "off the grid" is an old fashioned idea that sounds good, but is pointless and worthless. People who live "off the grid" are just as lame as "hipsters". The grid is our friend.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. His views on hipsters are very, very, clear. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Brexit, Democracy, and the Ash Heap of History

The first on the fire?

Have you heard about how the Brexit referendum has destroyed democracy? It definately ended Prime Minister David Cameron's political career. Since the British people voted 52%-48% to leave the European Union, almost everyone with an opinion has decided that Britain made the wrong decision. The "Leave" voters have been called racist, children, and ignorant. People are trying to make the referendum vote as proof that there is a divide between people living in urban areas and those living in rural parts. Those of two different generations have views that are diametrically opposed. The young urban intelligentsia have compassion, and the old uneducated hick is an idiot. The war between the future and the past was fought during the Brexit referendum, the old barely won, and the rest of the world has lost. Democracy has failed to secure our future.

Almost everything written, or televised, about Brexit is insulting and wrong. The coverage is focusing on a small group of angry remain voters, and discounting the 17 million plus majority voters who want to leave the European Union. Let's take a closer look at how the British people actually voted.

A big deal is being made out of the urban "Remain" voters against the rural "Leave" voters. The majority of the urban centers did vote for "Remain", along with all of Scotland and Northern Ireland. It was not just the far out, lowly populated, rural areas that carried "Leave to victory. The majority of England and Whales voted "Leave". Once you exit the center of the urban areas, nearly all of the suburban parts voted "Leave". Almost all of the blue collar, highly populated, areas pushed "Leave" over "Remain". 

The higher educated were also applauded for wanting to remain in the European Union. Nearly three quarters of UK citizens with a college degree voted "Remain". The problem here is that less than one third of UK citizens have a college degree. The media tries to make it look like half the country is college educated and the other half is not. The fact is that by using this group in one's analysis, the whole truth cannot be seen. A minority this small is insignificant in swinging an election.

Another interesting piece of the Brexit vote is party affiliation. Predictable the "Leave" voters mostly identified with the conservative party and the UK Independence Party (UKIP). The conservatives are currently the majority party in the Parliament, and had won a hard fought election just over a year ago. Even if the former Prime Minister David Cameron was backing "Remain", many of the voters stuck to their conservative principles and voted with their nationalistic hearts.

The most telling voter data can be easily described by the BBC.

"Younger people voted Remain

According to polling by Lord Ashcroft, younger voters were much more likely to vote Remain than older voters.

But turnout in areas with a higher proportion of younger residents tended to be lower."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36616028

The millennials who are being championed in the media as the sensible losers in Brexit, most of them did not even vote. Lack of interest in voting is not being discussed in the Brexit vote because the media would rather paint the millennial generation as victims of baby boomer excess. Once again voter turnout is a problem.

Why do we swallow the media narrative of the disappointed electoral minority and immediately discount the majority votes of an entire nation? More than seventeen million people voted to leave the European Union, and the global narrative is focused on the exact opposite. The answer is quite simply. It's all about the money.

Every single post Brexit story focused on the fall in the global stock market and the devaluing of the British Pound. The concern for a few peoples wealth was way more important than the humanitarian consequences of Brexit. President Obama and Speaker Ryan supported Britain staying the EU because of how it would effect US trade policy and what an exit would mean to the business owners in the United States. That is exactly what the elected leaders of the United States should do. It was the same thing around all the industrialized economies of the world. The world's economy was going to suffer if Britain left the EU. Quietly, Vladimir Putin supported Great Britain leaving the European Union, but that has more to do with consolidating power than it does for global economic stability. If Putin supports something, it usually means the rest of the global economic powers will be against it.

If the economic consequences are so dire, why would 52% of the voters want to bring about the chaos? The answer is that the majority of Britain's citizen's, and the citizen's around the world, have been exploited and held down by the politicians and business leaders of the twenty first century economy. When David Cameron took the keys to 10 Downing Street, he immediately enacted programs that drained the social programs of needed funds. These so called austerity measures were supposed to restore the economy to pre-2008 levels. The Prime Minister's family was named in the Panama Papers as someone who was avoiding taxes. He has no idea how important the government funded social services are to people that cannot afford to hide their money and dodge taxes. Cameron did not have anything to lose by demanding that the working people pay more, and sacrifice much more. He did not care how much the majority would suffer.

The non-college educated working class suffered the most from Cameron's austerity plan, and the rich got even richer through tax cuts/incentives. London Mayor, and fellow conservative, Boris Johnson enthusiastically blamed immigrants for the city's economic troubles. The people who could not afford to live in downtown London saw their social safety net being cut to shreds by Parliament, and had immigrants to blame through the mayors racist rhetoric. Nigel Farage, the head of the UKIP, was even running advertisements in the suburbs telling people that the money saved by leaving the EU was going to help strengthen the drained National Health Service. The day after the vote, Farage sort of rescinded that promise on national television. When the majority of your voters are non-college educated, struggling to get by, and looking for a way out, leaving the European Union was their only viable choice. That is why leave carried the day.

The myth of democracy is what caused the Brexit vote. David Cameron could not find anymore of the people's money to give away to his rich business donors, so he approved the Brexit referendum. Boris Johnson had a small period of time to maintain the immigrant hatred, so he pushed hard for Brexit. Nigel Farage is another demagogue he wants to justify his hate through the will of the people. Brexit was formed out of fear and economic hardship. The rightfully elected majority party in Parliament created and fed this flame of discontent. The will of the people was created by these leaders of government. Modern democracy created the majority leave voters.

Today we are questioning the will of the people. It has been weeks since Brexit, and our global economy is begging for a do over. David Cameron has resigned, and new Prime Minister Theresa May has promised to carry out with Great Britain's exit from the European Union. Democracy must be respected. The people have spoken, even if their voice said the wrong thing.

Brexit should represents the end of our love affair with democracy. The fact remains that 52% of Britons voted for the wrong thing. The leave supporters were fed a bunch of lies, and voted on baseless fear. The voters were used as pawns by rich men who were trying to hold onto the little bit of power they can still embrace. Austerity did not work, it only made things worse. With the failures of austerity, the leaders turned to racism. That will also one day fail. Great Britain has shown that an up or down popular vote is not the answer. The conservatives gained power by standing on top of the majority. The weight of the conservative party's greed has crushed their nation. Leaving the European Union was politically their only way to hold onto ill gotten power. The fallout from Brexit will hurt all of Britain, and leave the conservatives with no avenue forward in their quest for wealth and influence. 

Democracy has exposed the mob as not fit to govern. Brexit is the most glaring example popular voting's failure. More than 17 million people believed that leaving the European Union would improve their rapidly declining economic conditions. They never thought the people they supported in previous elections were the ones who were causing the economic decline. Once democracy relies on racism and fear to gain power, it is time to find a new way. Leave won because the supporters relied on lies and fear, while the opponents were met with low voter turnout and disorganization. Is this the best way to govern an entire nation, or a global economy? Democracy has failed, and Brexit is one of many examples to come. The fires of history has produced a lot of ash. Democracy will be next. What do we do know?

RD

RD Kulik is the Head Editor for SeedSing and the host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. What is our new way forward? Tell us by writing for SeedSing. 

The Greatest Television Ever: The Series Finale of "Maron" brings a Great Show to an Untimely End

Tonight marks the series finale of the IFC show, "Maron". Depending on who you ask, this was either IFC's choice to cancel the show, or it was Marc Maron's choice to end it after 4 seasons. Either way, this is an upsetting end for me. I really, really like this show. "Maron" centers around the life of comedian/writer/actor/podcaster, Marc Maron. It is a heightened version, but nonetheless, it was pretty much autobiographical. From the series premiere to tonight's finale, the show has been very funny, but also more realistic than any reality show on TV right now.

The first season was pretty much about how Maron and his podcast, "WTF" was blowing up. People were recognizing him and, in typical Marc Maron fashion, this made him uncomfortable. He did not like the spotlight being on him. Even more so though, he didn't feel that he deserved the spotlight. It was a great way to start a series about his life because his podcast was really blowing up at that time. Sure, he didn't have President Obama on yet, but he was getting some pretty famous people to appear on the show. The first season also talked about how his friends, the great Dave Anthony and Andy Kindler, were either jealous or didn't think Marc Maron deserved all the attention. There were funny and real moments during that first season that were just fantastic.

Season two found Marc with a new, very young girlfriend. She was controlling and wanted a baby. While this may sound like a big departure, it was still a very good through line for the season. Season 2 found Maron trying, and failing, to relate to his girlfriend's very young group of friends. Maron was trying to be hip and cool, but he also knew that he was older and he didn't want to do young adult things anymore. He wanted to play his guitar, do his podcast, play with his cats and listen to records. Maron's parents were more involved in this season as well. This really showed how the person Marc Maron came to be. His dad was a crazy man that lived in an RV that never showed any real love towards his son. His mom, retired and living in Florida, was a tough, no nonsense women who always told Marc that he was fat. This was also very good stuff. We also got to meet Marc's brother this season and more of the characters in his life. Season 2 was a big step up from season one, and I loved season one. The second season ended with him and his girlfriend splitting up, but it was definitely for the best.

In season three Marc Maron really starts to explode. His podcast is bigger than ever. He is getting deals done and doing some of the best work of his career. Friends and family even respected the fact that he was getting the acclaim he deserved. This all came to a head wonderfully and tragically in the season 3 finale. Maron finally got his own talk show, but he had previously hurt his back trying to stay in TV shape, thus leading him to a pill addiction. If you don't already know, Marc Maron, both the person and the character, is a recovering addict. Some shady doctor decides to give him oxycotin for his back, and being the addict he was, he got hooked right away. During the taping of his pilot episode, he was so high, he passed out. This was a harrowing season finale to a comedic show. It was dark, but funny, as only Maron and his writing team could do.

The start of this fourth season found Maron living in a storage unit and fully addicted to all pain pills. He looked rough. He had an unkempt beard that was shaggier than mine. He was sleeping with a nurse, who was keeping a cancer patient alive, so he could get pain pills from her. Dave Anthony, who I cannot stress enough how great he was on this show, finally gets him to go to rehab. Maron had screwed enough people over, and he needed help. The scenes that took place in the rehab were funny, poignant and terrifying. He was put in a rehab with a bunch of young, rich white kids and that seems to be one of Maron's biggest pet peeves. He hated this, but he did what he needed to do to get better. We, the audience, also come to see that Dave Anthony has become a big time guy in Hollywood, but it was all due to him stealing Marc's life. It was, much like the whole series, very funny and very weird. The scenes between Dave Anthony, Marc Maron and Amy Smart, who played Anthony's wife, were so bizarre, but I couldn't look away. While going through recovery, Maron is doing his apologies to the people he had wronged, and we come to realize that he fathered a kid as a sperm donor. In the penultimate episode, Maron leaves town to find this kid. He ends up in the hometown of the child, is about to leave, but changes his mind and stays.

Tonight we get the conclusion to this whole series. I'm excited, but also sad to watch the finale. I truly hope it was Maron's decision to end this show. I know it's going to be great, but I could have watched so much more of this. Well, at least we will always have "WTF" to listen to. Thank you for four great seasons of television. "Maron" will be missed.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. Like "WTF" Ty hopes his podcasting career takes off in season two. Catch the first episode of our second season where The X Millennial Man talks about great dogs. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

"Bar Rescue" is Back to Reclaim our Joy and Disgust

This bar is just right when it comes to my standards for trash

This past Sunday, July 10th, the new season of "Bar Rescue" premiered. I have written once before about this show, which I adore, but the episode I wrote about was rather disgusting. "Bar Rescue" is almost always about some dingy bar that is in dire need of a "rescue", so hall of famer in the nightclub industry, Jon Taffer, comes in with two experts and they fix the bar up.

The episode I wrote about previously was the first, and possibly, only time they "rescued" a strip club. Everything about that episode was gross. Jon Taffer is always gross, but he was extra disgusting. The experts looked scared and like they needed a shower afterwards. The strip club, which was called Chix on Dix(ewwwwwwwww), changed it's name to The Landing Strip, but that was the only change. It was still extra gross and downright sad.

Well, after that episode, I kind of lost a little interest in "Bar Rescue". They had crossed a line, in my opinion. I'm not a fan of strip clubs and the fact that they tried to "rescue" one, it all seemed way too weird and icky for my personal taste. But, my brother and head editor and owner of the site, RD, said I should watch this season premiere because they were doing a bar in my home city, Saint Louis. I thought, why not, let's give it another try. 

Man am I glad that I watched "Bar Rescue" again. When the episode opened, they did their patented thing of talking to the owner and having them explain why their bar is failing. This particular bar, called City Bistro, was losing money because the bartenders were getting drunk on the job, giving out free drinks and flashing their bare chests to patrons in hopes of getting big tips, they did not get those tips. The fact that these bartenders kept exposing themselves kind of gave me that icky feeling again, but it wasn't because it was a strip club, this was a legitimate bar. People should never be topless or bottomless in a place of business, unless it is a strip club. These bartenders were being gross because they were drunk and lost any inhibitions they once had. Tami, the main bartender, was constantly drinking and flashing anyone in the bar. Taffer, who was watching everything from his car, as he does on every episode, was growing more angry by the second. He was literally yelling at his two experts about this bartender drinking and exposing herself. There was even a shot of Tami, aka Tam Tam, taking her shoes off behind the bar. At that moment, Taffer walked in and went directly to the owner Tiffany. He spoke to her about what he was seeing and told her, this is his trademark, that she needed to fire Tami immediately. I swear, Taffer gets some weird pleasure from telling owners to fire people. It's disturbing how his face lights up when they go through with it and fire said employee. Tami was fired, obviously, and in typical fashion of the bad bartenders shown on "Bar Rescue", she walked off, swearing and slurring all her words on the way out.

Then, the experts had their turn to slam City Bistro. Taffer's drink expert showed the remaining bartenders all the fruit flies in the liquor bottles and how dirty the bar top had become. It was very straight forward "Bar Rescue" stuff. Then, the food expert went to check out the kitchen, and to his and Taffer's surprise, the kitchen was not even open. Apparently, they shut it down awhile ago because they couldn't afford to buy the inventory needed to run a kitchen. The kitchen was filthy, but the topper, and perhaps one of the most disgusting things I have ever seen on any TV show, there was a dead mouse floating in the fryer. It was just as gross as anything I saw on the strip club episode. What made it worse, the camera crew kept going back and staying on the shot of the dead mouse. My stomach is upset thinking about it now, and it's been two days. They cleaned that kitchen better than I had ever seen any kitchen cleaned on "Bar Rescue". I still wouldn't eat there, but they cleaned the hell out of that kitchen. They eventually got it up and running and hired a cook, Sam. Sam was the best part of the whole episode. He was funny, a hard worker and seemed more involved than any other employee there. Sam was great. The owner and the bartenders got to go on the Busch Brewery tour so they could "reconnect" with the local beer company. This was all pointless, wasted TV time. It felt shoe horned in the episode.

After retraining and cleaning up the bar, they changed the name to Beechwood, because Busch beer is "beechwood aged". I thought City Bistro was a better name, but Taffer always picks stupid new names. They seemed to be doing okay after Taffer and his people left, as is the case with every episode, but after reading some local stuff, I guess Beechwood isn't as great as "Bar Rescue" and Jon Taffer hoped it could be.

The good thing about this episode, one, they didn't go to some gross strip club and they fired the main person that was exposing themselves, but secondly, and most importantly, it was like any other episode. If you've ever seen an episode of "Bar Rescue", you could figure out what was going to happen, beat for beat. There is some kind of comfort in the familiarity. I'm actually excited to watch more episodes now. I'm back on the "Bar Rescue" bandwagon, as long as they stay away from strip clubs.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. Being the youngest of four brothers, Ty has been going to bars since he was 10 years old. He knows a disgusting bar when he sees one. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik. 

Tim Duncan had the Career Every NBA Player can only Dream of

Sit and rest Tim. You have earned a happy retirement

After an incredible 19 year NBA career, Tim Duncan has decided to retire. Duncan's retirement has seemed like it was coming for the past two or three seasons, but it is still a shock to see an all time great hang it up. Tim Duncan is the greatest power forward to ever play basketball, hands down. It's not even close. Some people will throw out Karl Malone, Charles Barkley, Daryl Dawkins, Moses Malone, anyone big time hall of famer, but Duncan has surpassed them all, and it's not even close. Duncan was the consummate pro. He was THE pro's pro. Every player should strive to have a career like Duncan had. His longevity, his ability to play highly competitive basketball all the way to the end, being the greatest teammate, being humble, not having any crazy off the court issues, I mean, everything about his career was almost perfect. He was so durable and so reliable and just flat out awesome.

Duncan was the first pick in the 1997 draft. He went to the Spurs the year after they tanked out after David Robinson got hurt. Going into the 97 draft, Duncan was a can't miss player. The fact that he got to play with David Robinson his first two years in the NBA is a highly overlooked aspect of him getting accustomed to the NBA life with another humble pro. He and David Robinson were great teammates as well. Duncan's second year, they won the championship, giving David Robinson his much coveted title.

After winning rookie of the year in his first season, then the title his second season, Duncan really took off. That's not to say he wasn't great in his first two years, he was exceptional. But, after Robinson retired, Duncan took over as the team leader and thrived. He won four more titles as a player. He won the NBA finals MVP in three of his five titles. He was a 15 time all star. He was a regular on all NBA and all NBA defensive teams. He was a double double machine, averaging 20 points and 10 rebounds with regularity. Even as his career wore on, he adjusted to the new pace of the game. This also has a lot to do with the one coach he played his entire NBA career for, Gregg Poppovich. These two were as perfect for each other as Robinson and Duncan were the perfect teammates. How many players, in the entire history of the NBA, can say that they played for one team and one coach for a very, very long career. I'd venture to say that list is less than 5 players. And, I'd venture even further and say that Duncan is the best of all those players.

Getting back to adjusting to changing his style of play to the changes of play in the NBA, Duncan did it best. When he was first in the league, centers were the man on offense. The ball and the plays ran through them. Duncan excelled as a back to the basket center and was one of the better scorers in the low post of all time. Then, as a defender, he was a world class rim protector and a very capable rebounder. He stood at 6'10, but his arms were so long, it made him unguardable and dominant as a defender. Then, as the NBA has kind of evolved from centers being the focal point to this new "pace and space" and shooters being the first option and the "point forward" position being invented, Duncan still found a niche. He became a great passer. He developed a mid range jumper. He still protected the rim when guards would drive and he was one of the better rebounders still in the league. Even in the last couple of seasons, with his knees going and his legs not as strong or as fast and his jumping ability non existent, he was still a threat. He could still hit the mid range jumper. He still made hook shots. He still was a beast on put backs. He still played all NBA defense. He was still a very capable rebounder. He was still great.

I will miss watching Tim Duncan play basketball. There will be no other player like him, probably ever. He was such a great player on the court and he was very famous, but he carried himself with a humbleness and a humility that is unmatched. Like I said, there is no scandals that involve Tim Duncan. He was never boastful of arrogant on or off the court. He keeps to himself and is a very quiet, non assuming person. He never raised his voice and he rarely complained to officials. He never seemed to foul out of games or get kicked out of games. I said it before and I will say it again, he IS the pro that everyone should strive to be.

The time has come for Duncan to hang it up, but what a way to go and what a great, all time career. Tim Duncan is, and always will be, the greatest power forward of all time and he is a top five player of all time, no doubt about it.  Enjoy your retirement.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He thinks you can be the greatest person of all time by supporting SeedSing. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Michigan and Notre Dame will Play Football Again, and that is Awesome

Does Michigan have a rival in Paris?

Yesterday Michigan and Notre Dame both agreed to renew their rivalry for the 2018 and 2019 season, at least. I couldn't be happier about this. Notre Dame-Michigan is a classic, must watch rivalry game. I looked forward to it every season when I was a child, a teen and now, an adult. It makes sense for these two teams to play each other for many reasons.

First off, they are the number 1 and number 2 winningest programs in college football history. Second, geographically, they are very close to one another, so they recruit high school teammate and kids that have played against each other since they were young teens. Third, alongside teams like USC, Alabama, Texas and Oklahoma, amongst a few others, they are both blue blood college football programs. They have fans all over the country, regardless of where they are from, or where they went to school. Fourth, both teams are perennial top 25 programs, save for a few seasons.

Look, there are about a million more reasons that these two teams need to play each other at least every two seasons. With the new playoff system now, it makes even more sense for them to play each other as opposed to Notre Dame playing some also ran from the ACC or Michigan playing another MAC team that is little to no competition. The playoff committee claims to value quality wins more so now, so which ever team wins, it looks so much better in the long run in a push to the playoff. Notre Dame also lost nothing from bringing this game back, they actually gain from doing this. Like I said, instead of playing Boston College or Syracuse early in the season, they get a marquee matchup in week 2 or 3.

Michigan had to pay a massive payout to Arkansas to reschedule the Notre Dame game, but it was totally worth it. I know that Arkansas' AD and their coach, Bret Bielama, are not too happy, but they need to get over it. I'm a huge Michigan fan, and the thought of them playing a home and home with Arkansas in 2018 and 2019 was very ho hum. I wasn't excited or thrilled that Michigan was going to be playing a mediocre to mid level SEC school. If they were going to schedule an SEC team during that time, I'd rather it be Alabama, Auburn or Tennessee. Arkansas was way, way down on my list. I'd have been happier if they scheduled Missouri over Arkansas. The University of Missouri is closer and it would have been easier for me to go to the game. So, the AD and Bielama need to keep their stupid comments to themselves. Arkansas is not Notre Dame, plain and simple. And also, if I were Bielama, I'd be thrilled that I didn't have to coach at the Big house again. When Michigan was being coached by Rich Rodriguez, and playing terribly, do you know which Big Ten team they beat that first season besides Minnesota? It was the Bret Bielama led Wisconsin Badgers. The Badgers should have trounced Michigan that day. In fact, they were crushing them going into halftime to the tune of 19-0. But, as Bielama has done his whole coaching career, he let Michigan stay in the game. The Wolverines scored a defensive touchdown, came back and won. This was a Michigan team led by Steven Threet and Sam MacGuffie. This was a Michigan team that finished 3-9. This was, statistically, the worst Michigan team ever. But, they still beat Bret Bielama. He shouldn't be throwing shade, he should be thanking his lucky stars, because this current Michigan team is a whole hell of a lot better than anything Rich Rodriguez threw out there.

I digress.

I love that this game is coming back in 2 years. It will be great to see Brian Kelly, whom I despise, and Jim Harbaugh matching wits. Michigan will have 4 full years under Harbaugh by then, so it will be a team full of his type of players. Brian Kelly, if he doesn't bolt for the NFL in the next 2 years, will be one of the longer tenured coaches at Notre Dame, and with consistency comes continuity, which leads to a good program. Also, these two programs have the best uniforms in all of college football, and it is always great to see the uniforms on game day. You have the solid gold helmet for Notre Dame with the navy or white jersey and gold pants and the classic winged helmet, navy or white jersey and maize, navy or white pants of Michigan. It doesn't get much better than that. This is also just good in general for all of college football, to have major programs play each other so early in the season.

What it all comes down to is that I am happy that I will get to watch a meaningful game in the early weeks of the season. I'm also happy that I will get to root against Notre Dame. I'll be even happier if Michigan wins the games, because all of Michigan's victories are great, but they are even better when they beat rivals. This is a good move by both schools and I'm glad it's coming back. I cannot wait.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He once ran out of gas in South Bend and decided to just leave the car on the road. None of his money was going to that community. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Dwayne Wade to the Bulls is more Free Agency Nonsense from the Teams in the East

The moves of the East confuse me greatly

Dwayne Wade shocked the NBA world yesterday when he agreed to a 2 year deal with the Bulls. I assumed that if he left the Heat, he'd go play with LeBron and for the Cavs. Those 2 are the best of friends and they've achieved the highest success you can in the NBA. That seemed to make the most sense. I figured the other reports, places like Denver for example, where pipe dreams. But, the Chicago signing was just as shocking, at least to me.

The Bulls have made some interesting moves this off season. Some I've liked, trading Derrick Rose, but others are head scratchers, letting E'twaun Moore walk and signing Rajon Rondo. This Dwayne Wade signing is a head scratcher to me. I thought they'd be giving the keys to the team to Jimmy Butler, as they should, but Wade and Rondo are ball dominant players that can't consistently make jumpers, so there will be little to no spacing for Butler. It's all very weird.

This leads me to my main point today, why does the East think signing players well past their prime will give them any shot at beating the Warriors? The Warriors, by signing Kevin Durant not only stayed young, but they've got much, much better shooting than any team ever. The "big" acquisitions in East are laughable if they think they will even compete with the Warriors in the finals, and yes, the Warriors will be in the finals, mark it in pen. Do teams like the Knicks really think acquiring Derrick Rose, Joakim Noah and Courtney Lee really makes them title contenders? Rose is old and coming off a slew of injuries. Noah can barely jump or run because his feet are damaged. And Courtney Lee, he wasn't the top option in Memphis or Charlotte last year. I already mentioned all the problems the Bulls are going to face. I mean, they finally traded Rose, but the guys they are bringing in now, they'll be a 6 or 7 seed, at the very best. I feel so bad for Jimmy Butler. He deserves so much better. Now, the Cavs are, reportedly, acquiring Mike Dunleavy Jr in a trade from the Bulls. Is Mike Dunleavy Jr really any threat to anyone? Is he really going to help the Cavs repeat as champs? I don't think so.

The moves in the West have been so much better and trending towards athletes in, or nearing, their primes. There's the much talked about Durant to Warriors move. The Mavericks are bringing in Harrison Barnes. I know he didn't show up in the finals, but right now, I'd much rather have him than Joakim Noah. The Spurs got their Tim Duncan replacement by signing Pau Gasol. The Grizzlies re upped Mike Conley Jr and signed Chandler Parsons. Hell, even the Timberwolves went out and signed Cole Aldrich and Brandon Rush to small, easy to manage contracts. The West is going to be so much better than the East for awhile. I know the Cavs won the title, but that will just be a small blip in the radar in the long run.

What it all really comes down to, the NBA has two really, really good teams, the Warriors and the Cavs. And they will continue to face each other in the finals until LeBron leaves Cleveland, or the Warriors suffer some catastrophic injuries. The moves the teams in the East are making are bizarre, and no threat at all to the Cavs or Warriors. The finals, for the third year in a row, will be a rematch.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. Hear all about his heartburn over NBA free agency on this weeks mini edition of the X Millennial Man Podcast. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

The Avett Brothers get Back on Track with "True Sadness"

Reward your needle with some good new music

One week ago the Avett Brothers, one of the Greatest American Bands, released their new album, "True Sadness". This is their first new record since they released "Magpie and the Dandelion" a few years ago. "Magpie and the Dandelion" was a fine record. It showed the band taking more chances and trying some new sounds. They played a lot more electric guitar on that album. They used a full drum kit a bit more as well. It was different from everything they'd done before. I liked the new sound, but it didn't seem as polished as their older, more folksy stuff did. They also kind of abandoned the folk on "Magpie and the Dandelion". As I stated, it's a fine record, but it could've been better.

Well, with "True Sadness", I think they found a way to blend their older folk sound with the newer chances they have been taking. "True Sadness" finds the band trying out synthesizers, more electric guitar, effects driven vocals and bigger, louder drums. But, they also went back to their roots and played some straight forward folk songs. I'm a big, big fan of this new album. I waited with bated breath to see how they'd follow up what some deemed a disappointing effort from them in "Magpie and the Dandelion". "True Sadness" is an absolute home run.

If you want some examples of songs that find them taking new, good chances, check out tunes like, "You Are Mine", where they have a synthesizer as the main instrument. Another good song, with distorted vocals and guitar is, "Satan Pulls the Strings". It's a straight up rock and roll song. Then, the opener to the record, "Ain't No Man" is a great blend of folk and rock. The band yell sings the lyrics, almost in a call and response, and there is an infectious hand clap rhythm. I love that song. For more traditional Avett Brothers songs, check out the title track, "True Sadness". It starts slow with just guitar, and it builds like an older Avett Brothers song, and ends tremendously. There are also other good, old school Avett Brothers stuff like, "I Wish I Was" and "Divorce Seperation Blues". "I Wish I Was" is slow, acoustic and reminiscent of something on "Emotionalism" or "I And Love And You". It's a very sweet, nice song. "Divorce Seperation Blues" is a great, countryish song. It has a blues rhythm, but it is sung like a country tune. It's also sad, but the way the band plays it, it sounds upbeat.

I really enjoy this new record. I don't think it's a coincidence that the Avett Brothers teamed up with Rick Rubin on this record and they made great music together again. When they get together, they make very good, listenable stuff. Rick Rubin is a genius and the greatest producer of all time. His work with the Avett Brothers proves how versatile and how good of an ear he has for all genres of music. If you're a fan of the Avett Brothers, and like when they take chances, I highly recommend "True Sadness", I bet you will like it as much as I do.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. Even when he is on vacation, Ty still likes to keep up on his articles. Reward his good work ethic by following Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Love it or Hate it, Cincinnati does have some Interesting Chili

Baby, if you ever wondered what became of the most interesting chili. It is in Cincinnati.

I just spent the last 3 and a half days visiting my brother and his family in Cincinnati over the 4th of July. We go there occasionally on the fourth for our family vacation. Cincinnati, in my opinion, is kind of a dull town. But, there is some good food and some cool things to do.

For one, if you go there, check out Findlay Market. It's a very cool farmers market with great shops and equally great food. Reds games are cheap and they have a cool playground for young kids inside the stadium. Cincinnati is the home of Grater's Ice Cream, which may be the best ice cream in the whole United States. Loveland, the town my brother lives in, is very cool and hip with some neat downtown stuff to check out.

The thing I look most forward too, besides seeing family, is Skyline. Skyline is just like any other fast food restaurant, but it has a very special niche. Skyline is famous for their chili. I think it has chocolate or cinnamon, or both, and it's very interesting. I know that a lot of people do not care for their take on chili. My brother, RD, will not eat it when we go there. I believe Drew Magary,of Deadspin, called it "prison chili". Then, there is just a lot of random people that just don't enjoy the taste. I am not one of these people. Skyline is one of my highlights and must hit spots when my family visits.

Now, I don't eat the chili just plain, in a bowl. I am not a big fan of soups, stews, anything like that, so chili in a bowl is not my thing. But, put that chili on a hot dog with some cheese, or put it on fries with cheese, I'm in. What sets Skyline apart, aside from the sweet chili, is the hot dog and the bun. The hot dogs are very tiny and they appear to be steamed. This steaming technique gives the hot dog a very juicy taste. It's very tasty. The buns, also small, are steamed as well. The whole chili dog experience has a juiciness to it that is exquisite. The icing on the chili dog cake is the finely shredded cheddar cheese they they load on top of the dog. It is so god damn good. This is the best part of the whole eating experience. When you take that first bite and get a bit of sweet chili, steamed hot dog and bun, and finish it off with a big bite of cheese, man, my mouth is watering just thinking about it, and I ate three of them no less than an hour ago. I LOVE these chili dogs. The sweetness of the chili offsets the saltiness of the rest of the food perfectly. The same thing with the chili fries, instead the salt portion is the fry. These are almost as good as the dogs, almost. The best part of the fries is, once again, the heaping portion of cheese on top. I think the cheese at Skyline may be the best shredded cheese on Earth. It's dynamite.

I know that outside of, and even inside, Cincinnati, the chili can get a bad rap, but I think it's great. If you have never been to Cincinnati and are planning a trip there, you have to go to Skyline, get some chili dogs and chili cheese fries. You will thank me later. And thank you Skyline for always coming through every time I visit Cincinnati. You guys are the best.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He wishes Skyline had breakfast, then he would only have to visit one restaurant in the Queen City. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

NBA Free Agency Separates the Man from the Role Player

No matter the number of superstars, there is still only one ball

With the news that Kevin Durant has signed with the Golden State Warriors, that sound you are hearing is the NBA, and their super stars dying a slow, painful death. This all started back in 2008 when the Celtics signed Kevin Garnett and traded for Ray Allen to pair the two of them with Paul Pierce. Sure, it seemed cool and they had their "big three", but something about that whole deal irked me. I didn't like that Garnett, who is one of my all time favorite players, basically threw in the towel and decided that it would be best to team up with two all stars so he could win a title. They did just that, in 2008, and went to another finals the next season.

But, this whole idea of "super teams" and having a "big three", really took off in 2010 with LeBron James and his decision to join Dwayne Wade and Chris Bosh and go play for the Heat. This was a cop out in every sense of the word. LeBron knew that he wasn't going to win a title on his first go around with the Cavs. Their roster was too old, or they weren't playoff ready. He knew, if he wanted to win the title, he would have to team up with some other star players. When LeBron, Wade and Bosh played together, they played great, but my distaste for where the NBA was headed really came to a head. I mean, of course the Heat were going to contend every year because they had 3 of the 15 best players in the NBA in their starting 5. This took all the drama out of the games. We all knew that the Heat would be the 1 or the 2 seed and cruise through the east and make the finals, it was a foregone conclusion. There was no need to watch the regular season or the first couple of rounds in the playoffs, we knew the outcome. The Heat were great with their "big three". They made the finals four times, and won 2 of them, but I was growing weary of all the "power" teams. After LeBron's decision, every big time free agent or team was looking to get their own "big three", thus watering down the game even more.

The super team did not always have immediate success like the Celtics or Heat. While Kobe was still playing, the Lakers went out and traded for Dwight Howard and Steve Nash. That blew up in their face, but they still made the playoffs with their "big three". When Chris Paul got traded to the Clippers, they had him, Blake Griffin and an emerging player in DeAndre Jordan. They haven't panned out like they hoped, but they still contend every year. Two years ago when LeBron returned to Cleveland, it was under the stipulation that they would trade Andrew Wiggins for Kevin Love, thus giving LeBron another "big three" in him, Love and Kyrie Irving. Last off season, the Spurs went out and fooled everyone when they were able to land LaMarcus Aldridge. The Spurs have never star chased, but they needed an apparent to Tim Duncan, who I think I read that he is going to retire, so instead of drafting his replacement, they went out and got a proven commodity. The Spurs had their version of a "big four", with Duncan, Aldridge, Tony Parker and Kawhi Leonard. Cleveland did win the title in their second year, and we are still waiting to see where the Spurs go.

You may have noticed, I have only mentioned 5 total teams so far. That's because these are the only title contending teams that have been around since the idea of teaming up stars started 8 years ago. Well, now with Kevin Durant's decision to leave the Thunder, make that 6 teams I will mention. The Warriors, who won 73 games last season, made the finals for a second straight year, would have won if not for LeBron's complaining, have Steph Curry and Klay Thompson, also have Draymond Green, they now have Kevin Durant, for at least one season. This feels like a weak, cop out move from the guy that was my favorite player in the NBA. Durant was the first option, for the most part, on a very good Thunder team. He played with Russell Westbrook, a top guard in the league. He played with one of the better centers in the NBA in Steven Adams. They went out and got Victor Oladipo, who I think will thrive in their offense. The Thunder were/could still be a very competitive team. But, Durant decided that wasn't good enough for him. He chose to be the third, sometimes fourth option on the Warriors. Durant will not be the guy with the ball in his hands when it comes to the final seconds of the important games. The Warriors will go with Curry first, Thompson second, and Draymond Green, in certain situations, will be their third option. Then, it will be Durant's turn. I hope he is okay with that. Hell, maybe that's what he wants at this point in his career. I don't mind him chasing rings, but he will not be the most important, or the second most important player on the Warriors. The fans will not be cheering loudest for him either. Those fans in the Bay Area will always love Steph way more than they will ever love Durant.

This move just stinks of what the NBA is becoming. None of the star players want a challenge anymore. These guys get beat by someone, but instead of getting better in the off season, so they can beat them, they just figure, I'll just join them. There is no competitive spirit in the NBA anymore. And that is because the new stars have been told how great they are their whole life. They've never had to face adversity, and at the first sign of it, they get scared and get out of the situation. The NBA is dying a slow and painful death with these "super teams", and I never thought that Durant would join one. I guess he is not the killer he tries to appear to be on the court. Also, if the Warriors don't win at least 70 games and the finals, with ease, this season, it should deemed a failed season. It would be preposterous if they don't breeze their way to a title.

Finally, I have changed my allegiance from the Thunder and Kevin Durant to the Timberwolves and Andrew Wiggins, maybe Karl Anthony-Towns. The Timberwolves and those two young players have gained a new fan today. Go T'Wolves!

Ty  

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He has been a longtime Timberwolves fan, dating all the way back to the summer of 2016. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik. 

Having More Time Makes any Book Better than the Movie

Make sure your book has charged batteries before you take the time to read

So, for all of my posts this week, I wanted to try something a bit different. My wife and I were talking the other day and she told me that I should argue a point that I don't necessarily agree with. All five posts this week will be topics given to me that I have expressed a dislike for to, either my wife or everyone who reads my blog, but I have to give the opposite view. I have to explain why these things are actually true, or that they at least have some good qualities. This is going to be a weird, but also very fun, and maybe even a bit difficult, but I'm up to the task.

My fifth, and final, topic sentence of the week from my wife, "books are always better than their TV/movie adaptation. This sounds like it should be an easy one, but I'm the type of person that will watch a show, or see the movie first, before I read the book. Case and point, I saw the movie "Friday Night Lights", then read the book, then watched the TV show. I will say, the book was the best, but I enjoyed the movie a hell of a lot more than the show, but the show was great. An example that is contrary to my wife's belief, I adore both "One Flew Over the Cuckoo Nest" and "A Clockwork Orange", but I find the books almost unreadable. I also loved what Spike Jonze did with "Where the Wild Things Are". I thought that book would be nearly impossible to bring to the big screen, but he achieved that very task. But, I do see why my wife, and a lot of other people, feel that books are better than their adaptations.

Here goes with my answer to why books are better.

First off, movies and TV shows have a time limit, unless you are Richard Linklater or Judd Apatow, and you make your movies a million hours long. The directors and writers usually get 2, sometimes 2 and a half hours to tell a story. When the writer writes their book, they can use as many pages as they want. They can make their book 100 to 1,000 pages, if they choose. My first example is "The Hobbit". I believe that there is one book and three movies. The book is about 200 to 250 pages long, but it is filled with some of the best imagery in writing. That book took my mind to a world that I did not think was possible. I never thought of trolls, giants, any of the stuff in "The Hobbit", but after reading it, I had this whole world dreamed up in my head. Then, Peter Jackson, who I think is a very capable director, made three of the most boring, over long movies ever when he adapted "The Hobbit". He made three movies, each well over 2 hours, and that just did not have to happen. He could have done one 3 hour long movie that encompassed the entire book, but he chose to divide the short story into three  2 plus hour movies and they were not very good, in my opinion. The world I dreamed in my head was not Peter Jackson's vision for the movie. And that is okay, everyone has different ideas. But, why did each movie have to be so damn long? That was unnecessary. J R R Tolkien created a much better world in one short book. Peter Jackson got a little too big for his britches after the "Lord of the Rings" success and made the "Hobbit" movies entirely too long. This is one case where I completely agree that the book is so much better than the movie.

Now, my second example is going to make me sound pretentious, but this topic is pretentious, and where else can I be pretentious than on the internet, but every Bret Easton Ellis book is so, so much better than their movie adaptation. For those that don't know, Ellis wrote, among things, "American Psycho", "The Rules of Attraction" and "Less Than Zero". Let's first look at "American Psycho". That book is about as disturbing and violent as it gets. The imagery in that book is frighteningly real. I could not read that book before bed for fear of having nightmares. The description of the heinous acts still haunts me, and I haven't read that book in well over a year. But, the movie left a lot to be desired. I get that they couldn't make the movie nearly as brutal as the book, but therein lies the problem with adapting a book. The book has more time and can paint a realistic picture. Movies, 2 hours and out. While the book "American Psycho" terrified me, the movie was kind of blah. Then, I read "Less Than Zero". That book is a brutal look into the life of wealthy Californian kids that suffer with real problems, like drug addiction, divorce and having too much wealth way too young. The way Ellis described this stuff in the book made it seem real to me. I could picture these kids. Hell, I knew some of these kids. But, the movie, save for Robert Downey Jr, almost played like an after school special. The movie didn't take the chances that the book did. But, I'm sure that the agents of the young actors didn't want their clients to do some of the stuff in the book because it could have tarnished their image. That's a bummer because that movie could have been great. And, "The Rules of Attraction" book was so much better than the garbage movie they made. The book focused, again, on rich, white college students with problems. But, the book had a little humor to it that made it very enjoyable. I would read some stuff and laugh out loud, but then I'd be brought back down immediately by something heart breaking. The movie, on the other hand, was trash. The director and casting agents picked young "stars" like James Van Der Beek and Jessica Biel, and tried to make them look angsty and tough. Well, no matter how much fake cocaine Jessica Biel does, or how many fights Van Der Beek got in, I couldn't help but laugh, and not in a good way, at the performances in the movie. It was terrible. Ellis himself proved to be a bad movie writer himself when he made that god awful movie with Lindsay Lohan and a porn star, but he is a novelist, not a movie writer.

One final example I have is "James and the Giant Peach". I loved this book as a kid. This was one of the first chapter books I read in elementary school. Roald Dahl was, and still is, a genius in my opinion. The book is so imaginative and so beautifully written. Again, the imagery in my mind is wonderous. But, the movie just couldn't compare. They even tried with an animated movie, but it was not the same. This time, at least, the movie was halfway decent, but it was nowhere near as cool as the book.

I'm sure there are thousands of other examples, but these are the ones that came to my mind immediately. Tell me and my wife about some other ones in the comment section. But, I do have to agree, once again, with my wife. Books are usually much, much better than their adaptations.

Ty with a little help from his wife

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He is already upset the movie version of his life will leave out the part where he spun the world backwards and saved Lois Lane. Movies need to run on time. You should follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

The Lakers will Continue to Go Nowhere with the Mozgov Signing

The Lakers continue on the road to nowhere

NBA free agency started this morning at midnight. Some big names have supposedly already signed contracts. Guys like DeMar DeRozan is, reportedly, staying in Toronto on a 5 year, 130 million dollar plus contract. Nic Batum is supposedly staying in Charlotte on a near max deal. Hassan Whiteside has supposedly signed a max deal to stay in Miami. Joakim Noah is probably going to sign with the Knicks on an absurd 4 year, 70 plus million dollar deal. Like I said, some big names have already signed, or are going to sign.

There are the big names on the market, LeBron James and Kevin Durant. LeBron isn't going anywhere. He will continue to do this every season until he retires in Cleveland. He will keep signing these 1 year deals, opt out, get more money and come back. That is what he does, and he can do that because he is the best player in the game. So, don't believe any garbage that he is going to LA or Miami again. He is staying in Cleveland.

Then there is Durant. Most people think, me included, that he will sign a 1 plus 1 and stay in OKC one more year and wait for Westbrook to become a free agent. It makes the most sense, both professionally and financially. I fully believe he will do this, and all the meetings are just a formality so he doesn't have to do it again next season when he inevitably opts out. He is just getting a feel for next season, when the cap will skyrocket.

The one contract that I want to single outtoday is the supposed 4 year, 64 million dollar deal the Lakers are giving Timofey Mozgov. I know I said the Noah deal with the Knicks is absurd, but, if this deal is legit, this will be the worst move in all of free agency. I'm calling it right now. This shows how far the once proud Lakers have fallen. They aren't even getting a meeting with Durant. They missed out on LaMarcus Aldridge last year because the Buss kids don't know what in the hell they are doing. They couldn't come close to landing Whiteside. Kevin Love, who is from LA, seems like a pipe dream now. This Mozgov signing is the icing on the shit cake though. Earlier in the day they re upped Jordan Clarkson, which I really liked, but they destroyed any good will I had for them with this horrid Mozgov deal. What good is Timofey Mozgov anymore? He was non existent for the Cavs in their title run this season. I barely saw him play at all throughout the whole playoffs in fact. Also, didn't the Lakers do almost this exact same thing last year when they signed Roy Hibbert? Why do they think these out of their prime big men are worth all this money? The league is going away from big centers and moving more towards a fast paced offense with bigs that can run and shoot. Mozgov cannot do either of those things. Also, how is going to keep up with Clarkson, D'Angelo Russell, Julius Randle and Brandon Ingram? Why did Luke Walton agree to this deal? He coached Andrew Bogut, but Timofey Mozgov is no Andrew Bogut.

This is a quagmire signing for the Lakers. They will immediately regret this when Mozgov is only playing 5 minutes a game and netting a plus minus in the negative. What a horrible, god awful move by the Lakers. Mozgov does not deserve, or fit in, with what the Lakers plan as a team will be. This is a fleeting move by a fleeting franchise.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He wants the Lakers to know that he can be signed for 10% of Mozgov's contract and Ty will give equal production. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Is Wolverine Really the Best Member of the X-Men?

You better not badmouth my favorite hero

So, for all of my posts this week, I wanted to try something a bit different. My wife and I were talking the other day and she told me that I should argue a point that I don't necessarily agree with. All five posts this week will be topics given to me that I have expressed a dislike for to, either my wife or everyone who reads my blog, but I have to give the opposite view. I have to explain why these things are actually true, or that they at least have some good qualities. This is going to be a weird, but also very fun, and maybe even a bit difficult, but I'm up to the task.

Topic sentence number four from my wife, "having Wolverine's powers wouldn't be all that great". This is incredibly tough for me. I'm a huge X-Men fan and my favorite superhero, by an incredibly wide margin, is Wolverine. He has the coolest suit, attitude and, quite frankly, the best powers. At least, that's the way that I see it. This topic has been brought up a few times just in casual conversation in my home, but I have never had to argue against Wolverine. This will be tougher than yesterday's topic, but I'm going to do my absolute best.

Here it goes.

We all know that Wolverine has an adamantium skeleton and claws. The claws come out when Wolverine is angry, frightened, or a big fight is about to happen. He also has the ability to regenerate. This means, if he is stabbed, shot, basically maimed in any way, his body will heal it self. Adamantium is the strongest metal in the world, even more so than vibranium, which Captain America's shield is made of. The fact that Wolverine can regenerate makes it pretty much impossible for him to die. He has lived through wars, gunshot wounds, stab wounds, sword fights, fights with other mutants, everything that has come his way, he has survived. Those powers sound so kick ass to me, but I do see why some people may not like them, and why they aren't all they are cracked up to be.

First off, when Wolverine gets his adamantium skeleton, it is blindingly painful. They replace his bones with metal. That would not be a good time at all. To be a guinea pig for some insane scientist or war general, that would stink. To be given a new skeletal structure, against your will, would be very hard to deal with. Then, this makes his claws turn to metal. His claws were originally bone protrusions, but when his skeleton was replaced, that made the claws adamantium as well. It had to have been painful enough when the claws were made of bone. Imagine how hurtful that would be. One minute you are cool and calm, then BAM! bone claws come shooting out of your hand. Now, imagine that happening with metal claws. That would hurt like a son of a bitch. I bet he'd, if he couldn't regenerate, have to get stiches all the time. Also, metal shooting out of your hands is flat out insane. That would also be very hard to cope with as well.

The biggest, possibly most brutal part of Wolverine's existence is the fact that he can regenerate and never die. Sure, it would be nice to have a wound heal on its own, but you still have to deal with the pain of getting brutally injured. At least with Deadpool, he can just laugh it off. Wolverine, he deals with the pain. That is a bummer. I can't imagine having to fight in wars, fight ninjas, fight mutants, fight bad guys and be a test subject in a lab. Just think of all the horrific injuries that he has suffered through. I've never been shot or stabbed or even really been in a legit fight, but I bet all those things hurt. I have broken bones before, and that hurt like hell. I don't even want to think about what a stab wound or a gunshot would feel like. Wolverine has had to endure all of these things, and he always comes back at full health.

Which leads me to what may be the hardest thing that Wolverine has to deal with. He can never die. Think about that for a second. Wolverine has to see all his family, friends, lovers and well wishers die. He lives through all of it because he is a mutant and because he has a metal skeletal system that can heal itself. When Jean Grey dies in "X-Men 3", spoiler alert, I felt the anguish and pain that Wolverine felt, but he had to move on. He has to have lost all of his family by now. That's a bummer. In fact, I think his only "sibling" is Sabertooth, and he became a bad guy that Wolverine has to fight. Wolverine cannot, and probably doesn't want, to make long term friendships or find a lifelong partner because his life will never end. He let himself get too close to Jean Grey, and he paid the price when she went nuts and eventually perished. This has the be the worst thing for Wolverine. In my mind it sounds great to live forever, but I never think about all the people that I would see pass away. When I sit back and think about it, it's a total bring down. Wolverine did not choose to have this power, it was given to him, which makes it even worse. This is why he is a loner. This is why he is so gruff and doesn't particularly like working with a team. This is why he barely says anything. He does not want anyone to get to close to him and he doesn't want to get too close to anyone. Living forever sure sounds great, but it definitely is not.

Look, I LOVE LOVE LOVE Wolverine, but my wife has a good point. It would be kind of a drag to be Wolverine. He has a very solitude life and he doesn't let people in. That would be very disheartening to live that way. Wolverine is still, and will always be, my favorite superhero, but there is a definite downside to his powers and they aren't as great as I may think they are. You win again wife.

Ty with a little help from his wife

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. If he can't be Wolverine, his next favorite X-Man is Dazzler. He may not live forever, but his tweets will. You should follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

The Bad Songs Constantly on the Radio are Actually Pretty Good

Leave the dial be and give into joy

So, for all of my posts this week, I wanted to try something a bit different. My wife and I were talking the other day and she told me that I should argue a point that I don't necessarily agree with. All five posts this week will be topics given to me that I have expressed a dislike for to, either my wife or everyone who reads my blog, but I have to give the opposite view. I have to explain why these things are actually true, or that they at least have some good qualities. This is going to be a weird, but also very fun, and maybe even a bit difficult, but I'm up to the task.

Topic number three from my wife, "the only songs worth listening to are the ones on the radio that you can sing along with in the car".

This is going to be tough. I am not a fan of the music played on the radio, for the most part. It's bubble gum garbage music that is just one earworm after another. I've made it clear that I don't like pop music on the site, but, I do see what my wife is getting at, and I'm pretty sure I can make a compelling argument. So, let's do it.

When a "hit" song comes on the radio, it is put there for many reasons. The artist or the band had a stroke of genius and wrote a very, very catchy song. The band or artist label makes sure that this one song is the first song that will be heard by the masses. The radio stations then pick it up and play it on repeat until pretty much everyone at least knows the chorus. Let's look at a song from a few years ago as an example.

By now, a lot of people have already forgotten about an artist named Gotye. But, he had a massive hit song, that I can still sing along with if it comes on the radio. That song was called "Somebody That I Used to Know". Everyone knows this song. The song was odd, but catchy. The video made the song even better, but you should not watch videos in your car if you are driving - safety first, so the music video gets left out of the debate. But, when Gotye and Kimbra wail that chorus, "but you didn't have to cut me off" and "you didn't have to stoop so low", if I am by myself, or with my wife and kids, I wail just as much as they do. I may not have liked the song when I first heard it, but after hearing it hundreds of times, not only did I love it, I knew almost every single word to that song. Gotye hasn't had a hit since, but I will forever remember him.

Then, there's the first time I heard Carly Rae Jepsen. There is not one single thing I should like about her music. It is everything I dislike about music, but "Call Me Maybe" is a very fun song to yell sing when I am in my car. Again, that chorus is so god damn catchy. I mean, "hey, I just met you/and this is crazy/but here's my number/so call me maybe" is pretty fun to sing along with. Then, when I saw it on the video game Just Dance, I liked it even more. I could dance and sing along with this song?! What a treat. I know that she has made some newer, halfway decent music since "Call Me Maybe", but that is all the Carly Rae Jepsen I will ever need.

No matter how much I dislike and am sick and tired of hearing Ed Sheeran, when his song "Thinking Out Loud" comes on, I can't help but sing along in the car. The song, for what it is, is a pretty beautiful song with very nice lyrics. It is a perfect wedding song, or a song to put on a mix tape for your partner. The chorus is the winner, of course. It's catchy, sweet and even a little moving. "Thinking Out Loud" is not a terrible song. It's definitely a fun song to sing along to in the car, that's undebateable.

I know that I have only mentioned solo acts, but even some bands get into this conversation. I'm not a Maroon 5 fan at all, but "Payphone" is an almost impossible song to not sing along to. The moment Adam Levine comes in with, "I'm at a payphone/trying to call home/all my change I spent on you", I'm singing it as high pitched as I can, trying my best to sound like Mr. Levine. Then, we get, "all these fairy tales are full of shit/one more stupid love song I'll be sick", the band is trying to be funny, but it is too catchy. Everyone I know, knows those lyrics and can sing along with them. Maroon 5 may be trying to make fun of love songs, but "Payphone" is one hundred percent a love song that is very enjoyable to sing along.

The band A Great Big World falls into the Gotye category of, a very great singable song, but hasn't done anything since that song, "Say Something". This song is absolutely heartbreaking, but, it is also great to wail when it came on the radio. When the singers would yell sing the chorus, I was right there with them. That song is brutal, but it is also wildly singable. That's the one thing that A Great Big World will always be remembered for. They had this huge hit, that was about tragedy, but damn if that isn't one catchy tune.

Even rappers are falling into this. Sure, they are all pop rappers, but some of the stuff that Wiz Khalifa has done with Charlie Puth and Maroon 5 is very singable. He was featured on "Payphone" and his verse is decent, but, and I'm going to use my buzz word for the day, catchy as hell. Then, he does those "One Call Away" and "See You Again" songs with Charlie Puth. Damn, are those songs so very easy to sing along too, and Khalifa's verses are very easy to get and rap along with. There is also this new Flo Rida, which is the worst rap name ever, song called "My House", that is played so much, my son, who is 4, can sing along with. I guarantee that everybody has heard "My House" at least once. It is always on the radio and TV shows are using it in their ad campaigns now.

While I may not care for these particular artists or bands, I cannot deny the fact that these songs are popular, catchy and a whole hell of a lot of fun to sing along to in my car. I bet most of you out there would agree with my wife on this one.

Ty with a little help from his wife

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. Sometimes on the podcast the editor has to yell/sing "you didn't have to cut me off". Hey this is crazy, but you should follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Brady and Gronk - The Dynamic Duo Making the NFL Fabulous

These flowers represent how beautiful Brady and Gronk are together

So, for all of my posts this week, I wanted to try something a bit different. My wife and I were talking the other day and she told me that I should argue a point that I don't necessarily agree with. All five posts this week will be topics given to me that I have expressed a dislike for to, either my wife or everyone who reads my blog, but I have to give the opposite view. I have to explain why these things are actually true, or that they at least have some good qualities. This is going to be a weird, but also very fun, and maybe even a bit difficult, but I'm up to the task.

Now for my second day of topic sentences from my wife, "the NFL would be a little less fabulous without the dynamic duo: Tom Brady and Rob Gronkowski".

Now, first things first, I'm not going to say anything about "deflategate", that has been covered more than enough on the site. Okay, here goes.

First off, let's look at Tom Brady. While I don't think he is necessarily a "dynamic" person, I think his playing is dynamic. He is one of the top three quarterbacks of all time. Love him or hate him, you cannot say that he isn't one of the greatest QB's of all time. He has 4 Super Bowl rings, and if not for two lucky catches he would have six. He has humongous touchdown and yardage numbers. He has a very low interception number. He has been deep in the playoffs the whole time he has been a starter in the NFL. He has come up huge in the biggest moments. The dude is a straight up winner. The way he fits passes into the smallest of windows is absolutely incredible. The receivers and running backs that he has won with is incredible because of how average they are/were. The best receiver he has ever had is Randy Moss, and yes he is a sure fire hall of famer, but other than him, it's slim pickings at receiver. He has won with guys like Deion Branch, Troy Brown, David Givens and Brandon Lloyd as his number one target. Those guys are/were good, but they are nowhere near hall of famers, let alone all pros. The running backs he's had are guys like Fred Taylor, Steven Jackson, Corey Dillon, Kevin Faulk and Laurence Maroney. Again, some good players, but no hall of famers. Brady has won with all of these guys, He helped their game as much as they helped his game. He turned these running backs into some of the best receivers out of the backfield. He also turned those receivers into clutch receivers. But, the one constant, dynamic player for the Patriots, who I believe, along with the San Antonio Spurs, are the best run franchises in all of pro sports, has been Tom Brady. He has been the starting QB, save for one injured season, in New England since 2001. And he has been consistently great. There is no denying his incredible play. He is the epitome of a winner. He is a maniac when it comes to film study, practice and staying in shape. He takes multiple pay cuts to make his team better. He will gladly take less money if it means that the Patriots can bring in a big time player. The fact that he was a sixth round draft pick, an afterthought by the "experts" and not even the primary starter while at Michigan makes his amazing NFL career that much more dynamic. We cannot deny his greatness anymore. Tom Brady is an all timer, no ifs ands or buts about it.

A few years ago the Patriots got this little known tight end from the University of Arizona named Rob Gronkowski. This is where the "dynamic" applies to both, his game and his personality. The first time I saw Gronk play, I couldn't believe how big he was. He was so much taller and stronger than the poor defensive backs and linebackers trying to guard them. Not only was he taller, but he was stronger and faster than them too. He runs like a gazelle and he is as strong as JJ Watt. He also has incredible hands. If the ball is anywhere near him, he will catch it. The ball can be a little high or low or to his back side, if he gets a hand on it, it is a catch. He is also, possibly, the greatest redzone weapon of all time. As I already stated, he is bigger, stronger and faster than anyone guarding him, and he can leap and get open in the redzone with an ease that seems unfair. People are literally trying to injure him to get him out of games. No one ever tackles him fairly. Everyone goes after his knees or ankles, intent on hurting him to get him out of the game. Gronk was a godsend to Tom Brady and the Patriots. No matter what mid level receivers or running backs they have, they still have Gronk. He, much like Brady, is a first ballot hall of famer and an all timer at his position.

Then, look at his personal life. This dude just has a great time living his glamorous life. He has his own yacht party with live music and beer pong tournaments. He is super close with his family, that seem just as crazy as he is. He knows his limits when it comes to partying, and he goes right to the edge, but never over it. In season, he is the consummate professional. Out of season, he's a party animal, in every som Brady and Rob GroTense of the word. He is who Johnny Manziel wishes he could be. Manziel doesn't know when to stop where Gronk knows when and how to stop. I usually don't like "bros" like Gronk, but he is almost impossible not to like, both as a football player and a person. He loves his life and he knows that his time in the NFL will be short, so he is living it up both on the field and off. Gronk is just an all around fun dude.

I know that my wife and I will get heat about this because a lot of people hate the Patriots, but I don't think you can read this and tell me that I'm wrong. These two are dynamic, all time great football players and Gronk has a very dynamic personality. It's true, and even the haters can't deny that. Try as they might.

Ty with a little help from his wife

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. Like Gronk, Ty is known to walk around shirtless and has had softcore fan fiction written about him. Learn all about it by following Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Buddy Ryan and Pat Summitt - Legends who Defined their Sport

RIP both Pat Summit and Buddy Ryan. Both were phenomenal coaches in their respective sports. Buddy Ryan was one of the fiercest, most competitive defensive coaches that the NFL has ever seen. He was the guy behind the vaunted 85 Bears defense. Ryan may have been the greatest defensive minded coach of all time. He would get into it on the sidelines as well. He would yell and scream and even get into fist fights if he believed he was right. Buddy Ryan was a legend.

Then there's Pat Summit. Talk about a winner who's life was cut way too short. Summit had almost 1100 wins as a head coach. That is jaw dropping. Tennessee women's basketball was dominant for the majority of Summit's career. She is the John Wooden of women's basketball. She had one of the greatest basketball minds to ever grace the Earth. She was fiery as well. She was also flat out great at her job. Summit is one of the greatest basketball coaches ever, men's or women's. Summit is a true legend.

RIP to these two great sports minds. You'll both be missed.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture Editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.
 

The Merits and Virtue of "16 and Pregnant" and "Teen Mom"

MTV is the model of highlighting kids having kids

So, for all of my posts this week, I wanted to try something a bit different. My wife and I were talking the other day and she told me that I should argue a point that I don't necessarily agree with. All five posts this week will be topics given to me that I have expressed a dislike for to, either my wife or everyone who reads my blog, but I have to give the opposite view. I have to explain why these things are actually true, or that they at least have some good qualities. This is going to be a weird, but also very fun, and maybe even a bit difficult, but I'm up to the task.

Let's get started with the first topic. The topic sentence my wife gave me today was, "explain why shows like "Teen Mom" and "16 and Pregnant" are, in fact, not garbage reality TV, but that they have had a positive impact on society".

Here we go.

I first saw "16 and Pregnant" about 6 or 7 years ago. My wife has a very deep love for reality TV, and I enjoy spending time with her, so I watch a lot of the shows with her. "16 and Pregnant" immediately held my attention. It was fascinating to see these children pregnant. They were literally babies having babies. It was unreal to hear these 16 year olds complain about always being hungry, tired and "feeling fat". I would say to my TV, "that's what happens when you get pregnant. You should have waited like 90 percent of the country does".

As the episodes wore on, I found myself seeing some good coming from "16 and Pregnant". I was happy that MTV was letting these girls be as real as they wanted to be about their not so good situation. I have 2 kids, one is 4 and the other is almost 9 months, and it is very hard. But, I'm a 33 year old adult. I lived my childhood and had a pretty much carefree teenage experience. The same cannot be said about the girls on this show. They had to deal with people saying things behind their back, calling them names and making fun of them. High school is hard enough, most people are going through puberty and almost everything is awkward, but throw being pregnant on top of that, that had to be brutal. So, the fact that the people behind "16 and Pregnant" had the thinking to let this reality show be an actual reality show, I give them big, big kudos.

The producers show you all the hard parts. They show the stretch marks, the clothes not fitting, the snickers, the loss of friendships, the pain of going into labor and delivering a baby, and then, to top it all off, they showed how hard it is to have an infant. You have to feed, clothe and diaper that baby when that baby needs those things. You are not the most important person anymore, your child is, and "16 and Pregnant" did an excellent job of portraying this. They also showed how terrible teenage boys are at being fathers. These kids, for the most part, had no interest in being involved after their child was born. They all still wanted to go play basketball, ride their bikes or continue to party. Well, all that ends when you have a kid. Some of the couples, while the girlfriend was still pregnant, were going to get married. None of them did, or if they did, I'm sure they are now divorced. "16 and Pregnant" definitely showed how real it is to have a baby. It is tough. Tack on the fact that the kids are teenagers, "16 and Pregnant" did an excellent job of not glorifying having a baby. I will always give them kudos for this. They let the viewing audience know how insanely hard, unforgiving and flat outbrutal it is to raise infants when you are still a child yourself.

A few years after I saw my first episode of "16 and Pregnant", another show came on called "Teen Mom". This show followed the girls from the first season of "16 and Pregnant". They waited a few months, even some a year, after their kids were born to see where they were. This was also an interesting wrinkle inside the life of a teen parent. For the most part, the couples that were still couples in "16 and Pregnant" had broken up. They were all inevitably stuck in some kind of custody battle. This seemed odd and selfish to me. Now, the parent that was absent when the baby was an infant, wanted to be involved because the hard part was over. They didn't have to get up in the middle of the night for feedings or diaper changes, most of the babies were sleeping through the night. That is so selfish to all of the sudden want to be involved in a child's life when the tough part is over. You cannot pick and choose when you want to care for your kid. You made that kid, so you should have been there all along, not when it is convenient for you.

Once again, MTV and "Teen Mom" did a very good job of showing how tough it is to be a teen parent. They show the kids going to court, or meeting with child protective services, or getting divorced, all before they turned 21. This was fascinating to me because, when I was 21, I was still living at home with my folks and had a dead end job and was going to concerts every weekend. I didn't have a kid to care for. Had I seen "Teen Mom" back then, it would have made me even more secure in my life decisions.

"Teen Mom" did not sugar coat how hard all this stuff is to do. But, what "Teen Mom" did that "16 and Pregnant" couldn't do, they showed all the joy that comes from having kids. These teen parents got to see their child walk, talk and smile for the first time, and so did we as an audience. We got to see many triumphs from the parents. Things like potty training be successful, families reuniting, and so on and so forth.

Look, I'm not one to watch reality TV, it just isn't my thing. But, I will say that shows like "16 and Pregnant" or "Teen Mom" are so much better and they actually show consequences to actions than any piece of garbage that the TLC Network puts on TV. "16 and Pregnant" and "Teen Mom" can also be given a huge thanks to the decreased number in teen pregnancy, so there is a real life correlation that these shows do work. If you are a teen, and you think you can be made famous by getting pregnant, I'd suggest watching "16 and Pregnant" or "Teen Mom", because it is not the quick and easy way to make money. It will alter your entire life.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. After reading Ty's thoughts, it seems like he is not pretending to like the MTV teen mom genre. He will be here all week folks. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Stop Waiting for Congress to Pass Gun Laws

The Congress could not regulate this over 200 years ago. Why trust them now?

This week the Democrats in the United States House of Representatives, led by Georgia Congressman and civil rights hero John Lewis, did something amazing. They took a seat for the American people. On Wednesday, June 22nd, Representative Lewis gave a fiery speech lamenting the inaction of Congress on doing anything to help curb the epidemic of gun violence in the United States. After his speech, Lewis was joined by other Democratic party members of the House and they all took a seat. The sat right down on the floor of the US House of Representatives. The Republicans, led by Speaker Paul Ryan, ended the session and cut off the live video feed provided by the cameras of the Cable-Satellite Public Access Network (C-SPAN). The Republican party wanted to block the images of the Democratic sit in from the American people. Unfortunate for Speaker Ryan, 21st century technology allowed the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution to live on. Many House members used Twitter's Periscope live video app and started to stream the images out to the internet. C-SPAN started to air these Periscope streams out through their airwaves. Many more Democrats, including Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and current Presidential candidate (as of this writing he has not conceded) Bernie Sanders, joined their colleagues on the floor of the House of Representatives. The Democrats were finally fed up with Republican inaction on any meaningful firearm regulation, and all of America was able to see the spectacle going on in the nation's capital. Things were about to change in Washington DC.

Twenty five hours after Representative John Lewis's sit in started, it was over. The US House of Representatives adjourned for an extended break, and the American people were promised by the Democratic party that the fight for gun regulation would resume when everyone got back to Washington DC. Once again America had another gun massacre answered with anger, spectacle, and inaction. Our elected representatives, who make around $174,000 plus expenses paid by the taxpayers each year, left the nation's capitol to take another mandated break. Over the next two weeks there will be no chance of any reasonable firearms legislation. The current batch of firearm regulations will be forgotten. Inaction will once again rule the day.

The next time the nation will see something like the Great Sit-In of June 2016 will be after the next horrible firearm massacre. Unfortunately the next massacre is more likely to occur within the next few months. The bodies will be dead, and the nation will once again cry out for answers to an all too common occurrence. The Republicans, backed by their NRA handlers, will ask for a moment of silence and not want to "politicize" the issue. The Democrats will look at the recent shooting, and try to build conversation about what could have prevented that one singular incident. Once a week has passed, the NRA will have helped sell thousands of more firearms, the Democrats will have forgotten about any meaningful legislation, and the dead will be forgotten. We will be witness to the whole process again once the next firearm massacre occurs. 

Why do we look to Washington DC to solve our gun violence problem? As more people die needlessly, the inept process never changes. Twelve dead at Columbine High School, no action. Thirty two dead at Virginia Tech, no action. Nine dead in Charleston South Carolina, no action. Twelve killed at the Navy yard in Washington DC, no action. Thirteen dead at Ft. Hood, no action. Three dead at a Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs, no action. Twelve dead in Aurora Colorado, no action. Nine dead at Umpqua Community College, no action. Fourteen dead in San Bernardino California, no action. Twenty-six dead, twenty of them children, at Sandy Hook Elementary, no action. Forty-nine people dead in Orlando, no action. (ed note: these are the shootings I remembered off the top of my head. There are many, many more Here is an excellent look at the recent history of US mass shootings from the LA Times.) The killings continue, and the government does nothing.

In the aftermath of the Orlando shooting we are experiencing one of the rare instances when the national government does try to pass meaningful gun regulations. The law being proposed is so flawed it would be better if it never passed. The Great Sit-In was centered on two laws the Democrats were championing. One was to make all gun sales subject to a background check. There is currently no requirement to perform a back ground check on a private gun sale. That  type of law has never passed in the history of the United States. The other law would ban the sale of guns to anyone on the United States government's no fly list. This bit of new gun regulations was first brought to the nation's attention by presumptive Republican Party Presidential Candidate Donald Trump. The NRA at first seemed to be behind the law. A bill was introduced in the US Senate, one written by Republican Senator Susan Collins from Maine, that would ban people on the no fly list from purchasing firearms. The bill received 52 votes in the Senate, but since every controversial bill is threatened with a filibuster, the bill needed sixty to pass. The US House had yet to take up debate, or voted, on the no fly no buy bill. The Great Sit-In happened, and ended. Representative John Lewis has vowed that the House will take up the legislation when Congress gets back from their well deserved vacation.

The No Fly No Buy Bill has the best chance at being the first meaningfully firearm regulation to be enacted into law in over twenty years. Unfortunately it is a very bad law. Many Democrats just want a political victory, and they have rallied behind a bill that at best is ineffective and at worst is racist. The bill is one of the few laws in history to be opposed by both the NRA and the ACLU. The NRA just wants to sell guns, the ACLU is worried about people's actual freedom. The No Fly list is a secret list administered by unknown persons. The list became part of US policy after the attacks of September 11th, 2001. Many non-terrorists, like children, former Senator Ted Kennedy, and sit-in leader Representative John Lewis, have had their names appear on the federal no fly list. No reason is given if one's name appears on the list, and there are no standards in place to have your name removed. The government claims that over 98% of the names on the no fly list are not American citizens. If you are a non-citizen, you cannot buy a guy already. Legal visa holders with proof of state residence (i.e. students) can purchase a firearm, with a background check. The No Fly No Buy bill is not only potentially racial profiling, it is utterly useless. There is no possibility for preventing any future massacre with the No Fly No Buy law. It is political theater being used to try and convince the American people that Congress is compassionate. It is worse than doing nothing.

The United States government has proven absolutely incapable, and unwilling, of protecting the American people from firearm massacres. Decades of inaction has led to political stunts being carried out for the passage of ineffective and racist laws. We must accept that there will not be the passage of any meaningful gun laws by the US government. The faith of the American citizen needs to be put elsewhere. Congress is filled with failure, America should not continue to look towards failure. There needs to be a new way.

The state of Hawaii just recently became the first state to have gun owners registered in a federal database. The Aloha state is doing something to keep its 1.4 million residents a bit safer. The rest of the country does not have politicians with a will to protect their citizens like Hawaii does. What can be done by the American who is not represented by the thoughtful politicians of the Hawaiian Islands?

Only 1/3 of American households and 1/4 of individuals even own guns. Regardless of what the NRA, or the government says, gun ownership is not very popular in the United States. The number of smokers in the US is close to the number of gun owners. The large majority of non-smokers were able to make smoking an anomaly. The same can happen to gun ownership. Privately the nation sees owning a gun as an odd thing, publicly we can do the same. Having a firearm is not a normal thing, and gun owners should know that. If we want gun owners to responsible, the non-gun owners should demand it. There are plenty of non-smoking areas, there should be areas where we do not accept guns. Many public places have designated spots for the smokers to gather and poison each other. The same should happen for guns. Let all the gun owners gather in the spots designated for guns, and our society will know who these gun lovers are. Hunters are already well known as gun owners due to the season and attire required for their hobby. If one has a gun that is an antique, is unusable, and has no ammunition, they do not have to gather in the designated live gun zone. The professionals who require guns for their employment, i.e. police officers and military personal, they are already known by society as carrying a live firearm. A non-government registry of gun owners would quickly be created when everyone in their neighborhood knows whose house has all the guns. Knowing that one's guns are acknowledged by the public will make these gun owners a lot more responsible. It may even cause these gun owners to give up their mythical need to protect themselves with weapons designed for mass killing. The very small minority of gun owners would shrink to a much smaller, and manageable number. Owning firearms designed for killing a whole lot of people would not be an NRA marketing campaign, it would be a source of shame.

The Democrats who sat down this week deserve our admiration. They were trying to bring attention to the inaction that has plagued our nation for decades. Their intentions were good, their law is bad. The NRA has used the government to create a sense of gun ownership being vital and normal. It is not. Since the NRA has used money to buy most of Congress, the American people can not rely on the elected representatives to protect us. We must rely on ourselves. Stop waiting for Congress to act, they will not. Start creating a safer world in your neighborhood. Our actions will be stronger than the money, and ineptness, of Washington DC. We can stop gun violence today. Yes we can.

RD

RD Kulik is the Head Editor for SeedSing and the host of the X Millennial Man Podcast.He wants to hear the counter opinion on owning guns. Write for us.  

The Law does not Apply to Sweaty Alabama Football Players

Justice is not always blind. Sometimes it is bought.

A few weeks back I wrote about 2 Alabama football players, Cam Robinson and Hootie Jones, that were caught with marijuana and a stolen firearm. The question I posed was what would Nick Saban do about this because these two guys, especially Robinson, are integral parts to an Alabama team that will once again be a title favorite. Would Saban suspend them, I asked. Would Saban kick them off the team, I asked. Would the NCAA have to step in and do something about it, I asked. But, when I thought more about it, I figured he would kick Hootie Jones off the team because he is a spot starter and key back up, but I assumed Robinson would see nothing but a slap on the wrist because he is the left tackle. He is the blind side protector. He is the preseason all American. He will be a future first round draft choice.

Nick Saban didn't have to do anything, or maybe he was a critical person involved because the high ups involved dropped all charges against the two football players. Their reasoning was, and I quote, "who are we to take this sport away from these kids that have to play in the hot sun, while we sit in the air conditioning". What a bull shit response that was. First off, these kids are playing a game, you are supposed to sweat, and be in the heat. That doesn't excuse the fact that they had a stolen firearm. As I stated in my previous blog, I don't care one bit about the marijuana. Marijuana should be legal everywhere, RD has made that point already on the site. It is the firearm that truly terrifies me. They had a stolen firearm. I don't care how hot and sweaty they are playing football on a full scholarship, that should not excuse the fact that they stole a weapon. That is dangerous and the DA's response is utterly ridiculous.

Another thing, what the hell do they mean, "while we sit in the air conditioning". I was in the air conditioning at my house a few hours ago, but I was cleaning the house and now I'm sweaty, does that mean it would be okay if I went and stole a firearm? Well, probably not, because I don't live in Alabama and I don't play football for the university. The way adults treat college sports now, with way, way too much at stake, has become sickening. these football players, if they are good, can get away with almost anything. I'm sure the person who made this final decision is a big time Alabama fan, and they didn't want to see a chance at another title go to waste, but I'm just as sure that boosters and the devil himself, Nick Saban, were in these people's ears, trying to get the charges dropped. The boosters give big money and they do not want to see an inferior product go out on that field on Saturday's. Boosters are the scum of the earth and they need to be pushed to the side so they stop infecting these kids brains. They are good for nothing wannabe's that figure, if we give enough money, we feel as if we are part of the team. You are not part of the team, and you never will be. You are lower than dirt.

Then there's Nick Saban. He doesn't have to do any dirty work now. The DA took care of his hard work for him. What a punk and a chump. He can just tell the media that the people in charge handled it. Screw you Nick Saban. I 1000 percent am sure that you had something to do with this final decision you piece of garbage. Now ESPN can push this story to the side and continue to praise you and call you a shaper of young men. What a crock.

This is a big, big problem in college sports today. No one has the guts to do anything big to a big time talent. These kids think, and for the most part do, get away with whatever they want because they are good at a sport. That is wrong on so many levels. I guarantee that if these were just two random students, say one a business major and the other a communications major, they'd be kicked out of school without a second thought. The way these athletes get treated is disgusting and it cheapens my favorite sport, college football.

Get your shit together, adults that are so heavily involved in these kids lives. Giving them a free pass is only going to hurt them in the long run. Yes, you may have to suffer through a 6-6 or 7-5 season, but kids that do something wrong need to be punished, not given chance after chance after chance. It's not fair to the rest of the student body that doesn't play sports.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture Editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. Hear him talk about his 160 gig iPod on tomorrows new X Millennial Man. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Bill Simmons is Back with "Any Given Wednesday"

There is some new TV in the air

Last night, Bill Simmons new show, "Any Given Wednesday" premiered on HBO. This show was a long time coming for me. I'm a very big Bill Simmons fan. I like his takes. He is one of the most knowledgeable NBA writers on the planet. He isn't afraid to attack morons like Roger Goodell. And he seems like a pretty genuine, cool person.

I watched the show this afternoon, and it was just fine. I don't know why I was expecting it to be like "Real Sports", which is a great show, but I thought it as going to be more like that. "Any Given Wednesday" is the opposite of a show like "Real Sports". "Any Given Wednesday" is sports and pop culture, mixed with elements of comedy. There is no panel on this show. Simmons has people come on and talk, but it is more interview and less talking head type stuff. What the show all boils down to is, it is a live taping of his podcast. The show is very free flowing. There is a looseness to the show that I found refreshing. Simmons looked totally calm and in his element. The show is a perfect way to get his view across.

Last night, he had Charles Barkley come on to talk about LeBron James. Simmons asked, after doing a great opening monologue about why he now thought James belonged in the conversation as the best NBA player ever, and Barkley shut that notion down immediately. Barkley is definitely stuck in his old view of the NBA, but that is one of the many things that makes Charles Barkley so great. I personally agree with Simmons. I think LeBron is a top 5 all time player, but I liked hearing Barkley say he had to win a couple of more championships before he would put him past Kobe Bryant and Tim Duncan. I also enjoyed Barkley letting Simmons, the studio audience and everyone watching know that his top five all time players will never change. He is set in his way. Barkley seemed just as comfortable as Simmons was, even when Simmons pushed him on stuff like Barkley holding Larry Bird's arms back so Dr. J could punch him in the face, or Barkley's many past gambling stories. After the Barkley interview, Simmons did a kind of funny spoof on the Under Armor and Steph Curry commercials. There was some decent humor in it, but it was just okay. The commercial Simmons and his writers created was a very funny closing bit to the joke.

Then, Simmons had another one on one interview with Ben Affleck. They talked about the Batman stuff and what drove Affleck to becoming a director, but when Simmons brought up the Patriots and Tom Brady and "deflategate", Affleck went off. This was at times funny and very revealing. Affleck is a true sports fan and a true Boston fan. This dude loves Tom Brady and thinks, like most of the sports watching public, that "deflategate" is so dumb and so unimportant. His speech was impassioned. I recommend people seeking it out on the internet to watch, it is bizarre and telling. I know that I was enthralled.

Once Affleck has done speaking the truth, Simmons did his first of what I'm sure will be a weekly segment, where he gave the "championship belt" to the best thing of the week. This week was the year 2016 and how it has become so unpredictable. He mentioned the Cavs winning the title, the fact that the Cubs have the best record in baseball and that he now has his own show on HBO, among other things. I very much enjoyed this part of the show. Like I said, it was basically a live taping of his podcast, and that is a good thing, in my opinion.

I will be curious to see how future episodes attack sports and pop culture news. I also hope, at some point, he goes off on ESPN. I know he did that recently in a magazine interview, but I want to see him do it live on his TV show, curse words and all, since it is on HBO. I also hope he brings on some of his recurring guests from his podcast for face to face interviews. I don't think it will happen, but I'd love to see Jalen Rose and Zach Lowe on his show, but they both work for ESPN. He can have his buddy Joe House on, or Chuck Klosterman or even more famous NBA players, like Charles Barkley. Anyway, it was a decent premiere of a show that I will watch every week because I am a Bill Simmons fan. Don't go into "Any Given Wednesday" expecting "Real Sports", it is a totally different show.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He may not have the slurred passion of Ben Affleck, but Ty is also not a fan of "deflategate". Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.