By the way, this is the real Tyler Perry. And sir, until you come up with something 10% as brilliant as Walk this Way, Back in the Saddle, or Draw the Line, take their name out of your mouth.

“John McCain likes to say that he’ll follow bin Laden to the Gates of Hell – but he won’t even go to the cave where he lives.”

That has to be one of the most slimy things ever said in politics. First, if Obama wants to get autobiographies out and start comparing cajones with John McCain, he’s going to come out severely wanting. Second, last time I read the Constitution it didn’t say anything about senators from Arizona having the power to send troops anywhere, but Obama’s the scholar in that area, not me.

Also, lest we forget, while McCain himself might not get bin Laden, maybe someday his son will. But McCain’s too classy to talk about that.

Too bad there’s not more of that going around.

And for what? A contributing editor’s position at New York magazine.

I can’t say I understand that guy. Don’t get me wrong–I absolutely have nothing bad to say about Will Leitch whatsoever. I’m hardly a frequent blogger and even less important than I am frequent.  That said, Deadspin opened my eyes to the blogosphere. Along with Bill Simmons (and Glenn Reynolds), he opened my eyes to the fact that regular people frequently have something to say that’s more insightful than anything the intelligentsia would ever come up with. Not only that, he was gracious enough to link here twice–once for my piece on John Bunting and the other on Lance Armstrong. Both of those posts were the kind of information I wanted to know but the mainstream media never added up, so I did it and Will gave me an audience by linking to it on Deadspin. Power to the people!

So what does he do? He leaves his new media empire, chief of the most important sports blog gateway around, for an old media publication named after the world’s most over-exposed town. I don’t get it. (Maybe it’s the money.)

Earlier this year I read Will’s book Life as a Loser. It’s a compendium of essays he wrote pre-Deadspin. It’s okay, hampered by the fact that his life hasn’t been all that crazy and that he’s just not as good at that type of thing as Chuck Klosterman. (Then again, Klosterman is the king.) But what struck me from reading that book is that Leitch is a huge movie buff, a devotee of Woody Allen, and given a choice would probably like to live life as a movie critic. I thought that was shocking–a midwestern, straight, sports nut who gets shaky knees over Woody Allen? Plus, that kind of thing never seems to invade Leitch’s writing. With Bill Simmons, he reviews movies all the time and it’s obvious that, given the chance, he’d love to take his hand at writing comedy in Hollywood. But until I read Leitch’s memoir I’d have never guessed that. How do you reconcile the guy who edits Deadspin with a guy who wets his shorts over Annie Hall?

I don’t know, and I don’t know any other sports fans who dig Woody Allen. Maybe that’s part of the special mix that makes Will Leitch special.

I wish him well and his voice will be missed. And if he doesn’t name Kige Ramsey the new editor he doesn’t have a hair on his ass.

Personally, I don’t go much for those kinds of identity politics, but obviously there are a tremendous amount of people that do. (And to be candid, as a white male, I guess I haven’t had to worry about that kind of thing very much.)

But when the dust settles after Barack Obama’s triumph last night, where he completely stopped what little momentum Hillary had managed to build, one of the little stories that people won’t talk about all that much is that there will be a lot of women frustrated about this result. Sure, most Democrats will come back together. The polls where Hillary supporters say they will not support Obama are overblown although it would be a mistake to deem them insignificant. 

But it’s not just that some Hillary supporters will find Obama too elitist or too inexperienced or too black. Sure, some will, and the media will focus on that angle.

However, there’s also a significant amount of white women who are just going to be frustrated (if not angry) about losing this shot at history. Women of color couldn’t lose with either Obama or Clinton, but white women really came up empty… unless John McCain gives them another chance at history in November.

So what if there was a wildly popular female governor somewhere with a record as a spending-cutter? Someone who could bolster McCain’s right flank on gay marriage and abortion? And it may be perverse to say, but as she recently gave birth to a son with Down’s Syndrome, her pro-life stance is all the more bona-fide. And, like McCain, her eldest son is in the military, thus giving her a personal connection to the war on terror that other candidates won’t have? And while we’re throwing stuff out there, let’s make her a former beauty queen who Wonkette likes to call the GILF. (You should be able to figure that one out.)

If I were John McCain, I think I’d love for Sarah Palin to be my Vice Presidential nominee.

Oscar is still a world-class, championship-class fighter.  Steve Forbes is borderline world-class but does have an excellent chin and survival instincts and never appeared to be in any danger. This is one of the troubling aspects of Oscar’s career–while he has scored the occasional knockout, for the most part he lacks the power that would provide him with a wildcard in these kinds of fights. Everyone still likes to talk about his left hook and him being better at 147-150, and that may be true, but even against naturally smaller men his power barely seems to be a factor, much less any significant advantage.

So to beat Mayweather, Oscar will have to outduel him on points, and there’s little evidence that he’ll be able to do that better now than he did a year ago. Oscar was slightly more relaxed tonight I suppose but I would lean toward Larry Merchant’s suggestion that his comfort was significantly influenced by the caliber of opposition he faced. Oscar looked tired and/or tight versus guys like Mayweather, Felix Trinidad, Shane Mosley, etc. To the contrary, he was gunning for Julio Caesar Chavez late in their rematch and he desperately wanted to knockout Hector Camacho. He was probably somewhere in the middle tonight, but there was nothing to suggest he’s found the secret to taking out Mayweather in September.

He also got hit way too much. Maybe he didn’t respect the feather-fisted Forbes but Oscar took his share of clean shots and postfight photographs will prove that Forbes repeatedly got to him, even if he never was in any distress. Mayweather probably can’t hurt him either but he’ll hit him even more. At his age, Oscar doesn’t have the stamina or the speed to deal out the same quantity of punches so he’s going to have to find a way to better deflect some of those. It appeared to me that in the early rounds Forbes was content to stay just out of both fighters’ range–even though Oscar had a significant reach advantage, Forbes was quick enough to close the distance when he wanted.  (Of course, in the mid-to-late rounds Forbes gave up on winning and just wanted to show that he was competent.)

Kudos to Golden Boy for giving us a free fight on HBO. Kudos to Jeff Mayweather for being the sole likable Mayweather. Kudos to the judges and referee for not embarrassing anybody.

Kudos to Larry Merchant for a good night. Say what you will about Larry, but one thing he’s always done well in my opinion was walk the fine line between saying his piece and being a HBO company man. Read between the lines and he said basically exactly what I feel: Oscar’s great for the sport and a truly terrific, dedicated fighter, all the more impressive considering his tremendous success, but other than the money, there’s nothing to suggest the world needs another Oscar/Floyd showdown.

Mayweather by decision seems as safe a bet as ever.

A few thoughts:

First, King Kaufman over at Salon wrote a wonderful rebuttal to Bissinger. It’s full of links and everything! You know, the exact kind of thing you can’t do on your old-fashioned typewriter. In any event, it’s much better than anything I could write so if you want to read it, I highly recommend it.

Second, from the above-linked clip of the show, at about the 4:41 mark Bob Costas says:

“A.J. Daulerio [Deadspin contributor]… said ‘you can’t brutally criticize athletes and expect them to give you any access.’

Two parts to this question: Isn’t that a false choice? Brutally criticize them or kiss their ass? What about responsibly criticizing them and responsibly praising them when they deserve it? Why would access preclude that?”

Is Bob Costas serious? That’s not a false choice but it is a false question. Rather than focus on the actual point Costas tries to create a straw-man and focus on the descriptive word “brutally”. When writing about politics, does a guy like George Will “responsibly” criticize some liberal political position or does he “brutally” criticize it? Peter Travers is the film critic for Rolling Stone magazine. In his review of the Matthew McConaughey/Kate Hudson movie Fool’s Gold, he began: “It’s early in the year but I defy any 2008 comedy to be as stupid, slack and sexless as Fool’s Gold.”

Okay Mr. Costas. Now is that “responsible” or is it “brutal” criticism? Isn’t it a matter of perspective? (Or perhaps it is “responsible” since Travers writes for a print publication.) Of course Costas can’t answer that because it’s all semantics and he’d rather get bogged down in the idea that “brutal” must necessarily be synonymous with “unfair”.

But never mind that. Consider also that he asks why access would preclude responsible criticism or responsible praise. I wish at that point Leitch would have turned to the athlete on the panel, Braylon Edwards of the Cleveland Browns, and just rattled a bunch of questions right at him: Have you ever experienced a writer shading a story or situation in the favor of an athlete he has a good relationship with? How about one where the writer and athlete (or coach or general manager or owner or whatever) didn’t have a good relationship? Have you ever had a teammate who intentionally tried to gain favor with any member of the media? How about a teammate or opponent who leaked information to a member of the media in the attempt to create a controversy of some sort?

And so on. And the answer is: of course! Geezus, Costas. Off the top of my head: what about Bob Hammel and Bob Knight? Do you really think Hammel, who’s close friendship with Knight was in part chronicled in John Feinstein’s excellent book A Season on the Brink, could be totally objective about The General? Hammel went on to help Knight with his autobiography for crissakes. Jim Rome obviously has different standards of criticism for people who come on his show and those who don’t. Just this year Doug Gottlieb suggested that perhaps Ty Lawson’s injury was a result of “karma” because Roy Williams would not come on his radio show.

You don’t think access has anything to do with that Costas? That’s just stupid, and it’s absolutely one of the advantages those of us wearing pajamas in our mother’s basements have over people like you, Buzz Bissinger, and everyone else who thinks that journalism is something you are, not something you do.

Finally, a while back I reviewed Friday Night Lights(the book, not the show). Until this controversy broke I had never seen Buzz Bissinger before but I’m somewhat comforted–I feel more justified in my reaction to that hit-piece than ever.

As for the “drug-free” label…well, Steven Tyler said in Blender: [Sobriety] made Aerosmith make bad records: We had just gotten sober for [1985's] Done With Mirrors, and nobody had the balls to say, ‘Dude, that song ain’t finished!’

Interesting quote, but like I said, it isn’t wholly accurate. Tom Hamilton wrote on page 430 of Aerosmith’s autobiography that he was the last person in the band to get sober; that he was “still smoking a couple bowls of pot” every day until the disapproval of the rest of the band made him give it up. He calls Permanent Vacation the band’s first “basically” drug-free album and maybe he’s right.

This post isn’t really about that. I just wish Aerosmith would write more records.

As Steven says, sobriety may have made Aerosmith make bad records, but even a bad record now and then is better than nothing. If you include DWM, since 1985 Aerosmith has made 6 studio records of original material in 23 years: DWM, Permanent Vacation, Pump, Get a Grip, Nine Lives, and 2001′s Just Push Play. That’s 6 records in 23 years and only 3 since 1993′s Get a Grip. There’s been multiple compilations, live records, and the pretty decent blooze album Honkin’ On Bobo,  but that’s it. Even the most recent cash-grab compilation contained two “new” songs that were really only leftovers from the Pump sessions!

Steven Tyler said to Berklee students in 2002: “You can’t be a dreamer and not smoke pot. But that’s not to say it’s any good, because it’s going to wind up stealing your creativity and your spirit.” He told Rolling Stone in 2003: “Drugs get you out of your own way and help you get to another side of yourself. You just don’t want to get caught up doing them all the time, because then you lose the original force of creativity.” When asked last year if he had worried that giving up drugs would impair his creativity, he replied “Of course…but I tried it and found I was wrong.” And over the years he and the rest of the band have made other similar statements.

I’m not saying he’s lying. I’m not saying he’s wrong. And I certainly want to be clear that I’m not advocating Tyler or anybody else to go back to using drugs. They’re probably the main reason that I don’t use them personally–I actually listened to their stories when I was growing up, and I’m proud that they’ve been able to stay clean and help others to get clean.

That said, Aerosmith’s output is depressing. I mean, they’ve never put out a ton of records–for a band that’s been around as long as they have they really don’t have a huge catalog, especially when compared to Alice Cooper or the Rolling Stones. Even a band like Black Sabbath that has gone through all sorts of personnel changes and turmoil (and who hasn’t put out a studio record since 1995) has been more prolific than Aerosmith.

So what’s the deal? If not drugs, then what? Money? Fame? Age? Chasing pop rock success? All would be reasonable, I suppose.

But it’s time to put this old chestnut about drugs having sapped their creativity to rest. In recent years the band has increasingly relied on outside writers and song doctors, and the names Kramer, Whitford, and Hamilton don’t appear on the credits at all anymore. While the Pump sessions with Bruce Fairbairn were truly amazing, eventually the band will run out of material from there that they can rework.

Just a few days ago Tom Hamilton insisted that everyone in the band was saving up riffs they could take into the studio at some undetermined time in the near future. Let’s hope he’s right and the material is worthy of a 7-year (and counting) wait.

If the only job you can get is calling and harrassing people then just get a noose and get it over with. You have failed at life. 

Almost as bad–anyone who buys anything from a telemarketer. My guess is they have their most success with older people just happy to have someone to talk to, but still–be a good citizen and hang the dang phone up so we can stomp out these critters just like we did the dodo.

That said…well, screw Scott Weiland. Stone Temple Pilots may have been very successful once upon a time, but they aren’t timeless and as he returns to that gig I think he’ll find that fanbase has long since moved on. And even if they haven’t, Weiland’s a hack–not an original bone in his body. Having the opportunity to essentially join Guns n’ Roses was a tremendous coup for him and an honor he never deserved. Worse, his flat delivery ruined what was lyrically a pretty interesting first VR album and a sonic powerhouse of a second one in “Libertad”. I always got the impression from interviews and news reports that, while he’d never admit it, Weiland was threatened by the spectre of Axl Rose, so rather than meet it head on he reverted into a monotone completely lacking in charisma.

Maybe he’ll be better off.

That said, where does VR go from here?

One popular name popping up is Sebastian Bach. Even Weiland drops that name in the press release, although I’m fairly certain it’s in a back-handed kind of way. (Again, screw Scott Weiland.) To me, that’s an intriguing idea. Bach’s got an interesting voice and has long surrounded himself with “metal” guys–maybe playing dirty rock ‘n’ roll with VR would bring out the best in him. Apparently Bach was one of the finalists last time VR was in the hunt for a singer but was perhaps considered “too 80s” by the rest of the band. Since then he’s really been nurtured by Axl Rose and if the VR gig were offered you’d have to think that would put him in a very awkward position–Axl took him out on a world tour and even sang three songs on his album. And they may not offer as Bach has a well-earned reputation for being difficult.

I was ahead of the curve on Buckcherry (doesn’t happen often) and was hopeful Josh Todd would get the gig after auditioning the first time. Now with Buckcherry enjoying significant success for a sleaze-rock group I doubt there’s any way VR could tear him away. That’s a real lost opportunity and should be a lesson that this time VR need not go for the biggest “name”.

Speaking of big names, Billy Idol’s is floating around out there. I don’t get that. In fact, I’ve never really gotten Billy Idol at all. Is he supposed to be punk? If so, then what’s “Flesh for Fantasy” all about? I dunno–he’s had lots of success and many fans but his influence seems exceptionally narrow. Plus… he’s not exactly a young gun at this point.

Neither is John Corabi I suppose, but that’s an exciting idea. Best known as the guy who sang on the one Motley Crue album without Vince Neil, he’s really rock’s best-kept secret. That album is truly outstanding–I remember in college when the “Daily Tar Heel” reviewed it that it made me so mad that when they next had open applications I made the staff by submitting my own review of the record. (The DTH review was one of those clever college gimmicks where they spent about six column inches not talking about the record at all and going on and on about how the new Crue album made the writer think about some social issue or the other and then the last line was something like, “Oh yeah, the album? It sucks.”) The primetime seemed to have passed Corabi by, but this might be his best shot–he’s got great pipes and can really create a lot of different voices to suit whatever song he’s working with. He’s a no-name, and like Gary Cherone in Van Halen has to carry a legacy of utterly failing the replacement of a popular lead singer, but Corabi might be worth the risk.

Chris Cornell’s name will almost surely come up but I don’t think he’d be a great fit. This may sound stupid, but that dude just isn’t “fun” enough, although maybe after two years with socialist revolutionaries in Audioslave perhaps he’d be up for some songs about, you know, pretty girls.

What about Dave Wyndorf? Monster Magnet released 4-Way Diablo last year and it’s pretty good but the band seems basically comatose in terms of promotion and touring. Wyndorf’s a star and it’s scary to think about how great he could be with that kind of band around him. It’d be said to see Monster Magnet officially killed off but for Slash, Duff, and company, it’d be worth it.

Want a real wildcard? What about Biff Malibu, singer from Norway’s now-defunt band Gluecifer? I think he’d be a great fit.

Better yet, there’s always this guy…