Several weeks ago, I decided I would run Norman's Brookhaven 5K event on Sept. 1, which also happens to be opening weekend for the 2007 Oklahoma Sooners football team.

Where to start. I mean, I'm basically a couch potato pig, really more of a computer potato pig. However, as a teenager and a young man, I was actually surprisingly athletic.

Not talented. I mean "athletic," meaning I could, say, play full-court basketball for like three hours straight without too much of a collapse.

Not that anybody would want me on their team, but alas.

So, according to some preliminary research, it seems a good, no, make that a great pair of shoes was where an aspiring runner should start.

Find out what style of runner you are. Learn a little bit about your feet.

With the help of a running-store directory, I located a specialty store here in Norman. It's called OK Runner, and it turns out they sponsor the Brookhaven Run.

Gus Thompson, who I think is the owner of this li'l store, watched me walk and noted quickly that I was an over-pronator It essentially means that I have flat feet but that, when I walk or run, there is a certain beating I give them that causes conventional running shoes to do more harm than good.

In the past, I told him, I would start a running program and quit because of pain. Could be the shoes, he said.

I noted my loyalty to New Balance, and he found me a pair that fit perfectly. Now, I did try on another brand, but I'm here to tell you that NB and my feet were made for each other.

One of the things that has encouraged me so far in this process, which has only gone on for a month now, mind you, is that -- Gus told me -- starting in late May to train for a Sept. 1 5K, when one is a couch potato, is plenty of time. In fact, he said that I would be surprised.

I would beat some people in the Brookhaven event.

The thrill of the competition, even at an amateur level, would get me hooked on the sport.

Well, I know I need to lose about 40 pounds, so anything that makes this process fun is cool with me. Besides, I'm 36, and really I'd like something that keeps me on top of my game both physically and mentally, and I think people who don't run don't understand just how mentally pleasing the sport is.

Like I'm a pro.

Nope, I'm just a tubby beginner. But there I was with my New Balance shoes, ready to hit Norman's roads, or at least my treadmill should it be raining. My thought was that if I could be running 3 miles by the first of August, man, I'd have a whole month to prepare for the Brookhaven event.

My goal is to be able to run the entire race without stopping once to catch my breath or to rest. My goal is to not embarrass myself.

So, I had heard about this program from CoolRunning.com, this couch-to-5K program that takes fatsoes like me and turns them into runners in X number of weeks.

I followed their program religiously for about three weeks, but I started to realize by listening to my body that I could actually do a bit more than this program. One of the things I am trying to become good at is listening to my body. I don't want to do too much, but I want to challenge myself.

It's a balance.

Where I'm super lucky is that I live about 1.25 miles from the University of Oklahoma campus, which means I have a beautiful landscape to run through. Not exactly a trail, but it's an area of Norman that's as beautiful as any part of any place you could imagine.

Long story short, I worked my way up to this 2-mile route from my house to Dale Hall and back. Got to where I could do this with ease six days a week with only one or two stops, and those were basically to cross the street properly, without getting myself killed.

Given that we've had 17 days straight of rain here in central Oklahoma and given that it wasn't raining this morning, I decided to try out this 3-mile route I had mapped out. Actually, it's a 3.2-mile route, and for the purpose of training for this 5K, it's basically how long my run on Sept. 1 will be.

It takes me from my house to campus through fraternity and sorority row and all the way back up to Chautauqua to the homestead.

I nailed it and only managed three or four "walk breaks," again, primarily to dodge traffic. So, suffice to say, that as of June 30, I'm feeling great about my progress toward Sept. 1.

My plan is to spend weekday mornings trying to get better at the 2-mile run and weekend days nailing the 3-mile run, which I'll do again tomorrow barring a monsoon.

It's a process that even in its early stages is as satisfying mentally as it is physically, and even if I'm not 170 pounds yet, which I won't be for a long while, I know at least that I'm enjoying the journey as much as I think I will the result.

Please. Quit raining. I'm tired.

On the 16th consecutive day of rain in Oklahoma, a few tidbits from the land of Sooners:

I am officially addicted to sunflower seeds. I am a seeder. With a big wad of seeds between my cheek and gum and a spit cup by my side, it's like I have a dip in but without the carcinogen.

***

The story of the missing polka DJ in El Campo, Texas, has taken a turn for the worse, something I think everyone expected. Sonar has detected Bobby Jones' license plate, and according to KHOU.com, it also detected his 1993 Chevrolet Lumina.

***

If the Seattle Sonics are headed to Oklahoma City, eventually, as many expect, then BOY did we hit the jackpot tonight. The Sonics drafted Kevin Durant and then traded for one of my favorite players in the draft, Jeff Green, getting Delonte West and Wally Sczerbiak in a deal with Boston for Ray Allen.

Now, I'm really hoping the Sonics come to Oklahoma because that team is headed for greatness. Durant's a no-brainer, but everything I saw of Jeff Green in the NCAA tourney suggest he's a flat-out winner.

***

So, I'm listening to the Rusty Humphries Show on the way home tonight because I wasn't in the mood for music or baseball, and I hear Rusty in the middle of an interview with a professor.

First, like most everybody else on talk radio, Rusty is super far-right wing. He's a demagogue. He's a shameless self-promoter. He's predictable. He aligns himself with Michael Weiner (Savage). Alas, I will spend a little time listening to Rusty and Savage and Laura Ingraham just to hear how the other half is living.

Anyhoo, he's in the middle of an interview with a professor, a "scholar" who talks as if he's in the 1930s, ending every sentence with "don't you see" as if he's W.C. Fields or Jimmy Cagney, a "scholar" who keeps touting talk radio and being an education of the utmost importance, a "scholar" who said that attempts to revive the fairness doctrine (a quest I do NOT support for reasons I'll detail soon) was the result of liberal politicians becoming fearful that traditional Americans were hearing the truth.

He went on and on.

He's J. Rufus Fears, and he's a distinguished University of Oklahoma professor.

Sorry, I think he's a complete, total embarrassment, based on what I heard tonight. He spoke not like a scholar but like an experiment, a man with obvious scholastic credentials in the middle of what must have been some test to see if he could pass himself off as a talk radio clone.

Not that one has to be liberal to be a university professor. That's ridiculous and flies against what I believe a classic education should entail.

However, the illogic and trash this guy was spewing on Humphries' show, seriously, caused me to be embarrassed for my university.

***

Finally, looks like the devil is not only having a baby ... she's having twins.

This news concerning the vile Nancy Grace begs a couple of questions.

First, whose seed did she lure into the pits of hell?

Second, will these children be born with souls?

I thought about it the other day: who I would have to dinner if forced to pick between Ann Coulter and Grace?

And then I quickly kicked myself in the face.

So 73-year-old Larry King is asking 26-year-old Paris Hilton if it was "gross" to be strip-searched in jail, to which the socialite replies, "Yeah, if it's in front of somebody you don't know."

I've seen the video, Paris Whitney. I know exactly what you mean.

After Paris' father reportedly shopped an interview to the networks for a cool million and they rejected after some mild pressure, Hilton talked with the world's easiest question-asker on Wednesday night to what I'm sure will be poor reviews.

Paris seemed aloof. She's not genuine. She hasn't learned her lesson. We'll hear it all over the next 24 hours, and I'm hear to preach the gospel: Cut this woman a break already!

What stood out to me about the hour Paris spent with Larry, a clause I'm pained to write in recognition of the fact that I just wasted an hour of my life, was what a good soul the heiress seems to be.

No, I don't think she's an intellectual. No, I don't think she will go on to save the world. No, I don't think I can identify a specific talent she has, even having watched the aforementioned movie ... but, no, I don't think she's a bad person, even if the only reason she's famous is because her family is rich and photographers started following her around at some point after her 16th birthday.

I think she's likely a genuinely nice person, probably in fact a nicer, better person than half the folks in Hollywood. The sense I get is that there is an innocence about her, a dipsy, giggly girliness if you will, that has kept her all these years off hard substances and out of real trouble.

Sure, she went to jail for 23 days, but it was more than five times the time most people spend in the pokey for the same thing. Furthermore, the DUS she got on top of her DUI was relative to a DUI in which she blew only a .08.

That's one, stiff drink at her weight. Not wise, but not the worst DUI offense in the world. In fact, it's the lightest one could have.

Nevertheless, Paris says she's learned a lesson and wants to start contributing something to society. She read notes to Larry, notes she had written in jail, and they were writings that, in my opinion, were purposeful time filler.

At one point, Larry asked Paris if she had any other notes she wanted to read, and the time-kill in his voice, to me, was about to hit the extreme.

Want to read any more notes? Want a sandwich? Do you like puppies?

Seriously, Larry asked her at one point if she wanted to get married, and I swear it sounded like he was proposing. However, in Larry's defense, he did ask some of the mundane questions I wanted to know about in the beginning of their hour together.

What was your cell like? What did you eat? Where did you go to the bathroom?

But, after 20 minutes, it was clear this duo was going to be ad-libbing their way into Thursday's social and entertainment headlines.

"Does Lindsey Lohan have problems?" Larry asked.

"You think?" Paris asked, followed by other words that made me think she didn't mean to utter those two words together. It was still quite the serendipitous answer.

Having lived in Dallas for a decade, I socialized with people not of Paris' wealth but of her kind of ditzy mentality. These were not stupid women by any means; some of them owned companies. However, they had a big don't-get-it cloud above them, following them around, with regard to what's important in life.

My buddy Danny and I used to joke that this type of person was "starring in their own movie."

To a certain extent, Paris Hilton has spent her entire adulthood thus far starring in her own feature film. However, although I'm slightly dumber for having watched the Larry King-Paris Hilton interview, I came away with what I believe is an absolute fact.

Paris Hilton, stunningly enough, is a good soul.

I've written several pieces detailing what I loved about South Texas, where I lived for a couple of years in El Campo. First and foremost, I loved the culture -- one part Mexican, one part Czech, one part Danish, one part German, one part country.

Great food, great drink, great people, great music.

Now, one of their most beloved ambassadors has gone missing. Bobby Jones, the Wharton County Polka King, hasn't been seen for nearly a week, and locals fear the worst.

I never knew Bobby while down in El Campo. I was far too busy drinking beer to actually *meet* anybody; however, I was quite familiar with his band and with the tie of polka music to the area.

Oddly, I scoffed at polka when I moved there, but then it grew on me.

The story I linked to really makes it sound like Jones was depressed, which means he might have been looking to commit suicide. Who knows. Maybe he was having a nervous breakdown or a midlife crisis. Nevertheless, in case his travels took him to Oklahoma, I wanted to post this just in case you see a Lumina with Texas plates rolling around Oklahoma City.

Unfortunately, I suspect this story won't end well. However, for everybody who might scoff at seeing the headlines associated with a "missing polka king," I'm here to tell you, this is a big, big deal in those parts -- and, as I noted from my experience there, with very good reason.

It has rained for 14 consecutive days in the Oklahoma City metro area, and I am completely over it -- the weather, the puddles, the low temps, the high grass -- all of it.

In fact, this rainy spell combined with the winter we had have made for one of the worst weather years in Oklahoma history, in my opinion. Heck, somebody out there might like this dreary, wet Seattle mess.

Not me. I like warm, sunny and dry.

Sure, I like severe weather, but only for a day at a time, perhaps once a week. I think it might be one of those as-I-get-older things, but a city's climate really is important to me.

In news, we're not supposed to care. You work where the best job is, and often that's in Washington or New York or Chicago. Heck, in 2007, most of those places have had better weather than in Oklahoma.

Heck, my company's headquartered in St. Paul, Minn., and it was less wintry there than here this year (really) and warmer so far this summer (really). So, really, we get what Mother Nature dishes up, and we're forced to take it.

But, if a boy can dream, here are my 10 ideal cities other than Oklahoma City (Norman) or Dallas (where I lived for 10 years), a selection I base primarily on climate and secondarily on my probably uninformed perceptions.

This is in no particular order of preference but organized from most populous to least:

Los Angeles -- Honestly, give me a nice, clean suburban neighborhood, and I'm all about it. Seriously, They average like 25 wet days per year, max, and the temps are perfect. Bonus that L.A. is an entertainment city; like I've always said, when you move to the City of Angels, you're merely "joining the cast".

Given the right opportunity, I'd be in L.A. in an instant.

Houston -- Lots of folks don't like Houston. Too industrial. Too humid. Too many gangs. I've always loved Space City, Love the culture down there. The weather is sticky at times, but being close to water means you'll get some cooler nights during the summer, which is excellent.

Given my druthers and the same type of opportunity, I'd probably opt for Galveston or Corpus Christi, but if there were a nice hut in Clear Lake for me, that would work, too.

Phoenix -- It's hot, dry and pretty much just like Dallas -- lots of business, plenty of expatriates from other locales, four major pro sports teams. Honestly, the heat would get old, but I strongly prefer it over cold, and the city as a whole has a slew of other benefits that would make a summer of 120 degrees doable.

San Diego -- Are you kidding me? Carlsbad? La Jolla? Wherever. I love this city, and I've only been once. The downside is that I am pretty sure I'd be homeless there given the cost of living, but what the heck. I'd be a happy bum. In terms of climate, it gets no better.

Austin -- It's a city full of Longhorns, which would be tough for a Sooner to take. However, there are OU fans in Austin, believe it or not. In terms of climate, it's pretty perfect -- all the benefits of living in a moderate tornado zone without any real winter, maybe an ice storm per year. Also, if you haven't experienced the Hill Country, you seriously haven't lived.

Las Vegas -- It's a city full of gamblers and toupee-wearers, but the weather is hot and dry, and from what I understand, it's a city on the rise in terms of business. Plus, I think it could be a very fun town to live in if you're not a gambler, and I am absolutely not. Don't enjoy it at all, but I love cheap entertainment and great people watching.

Atlanta -- My buddy Chaka told me he's been to many cities, lived in many, too, and says the hottest women, by far, overall, are in Atlanta. Based on what I have seen, Atlanta is Dallas with more greenery. Plus, Atlanta is a media hub, which is good in my line of work. They do get some winter and plenty of summer, but their climate is no worse than it is here, really, and it's likely a bit kinder during the winter.

Miami -- Almost perfect weather, but probably a bit more humid than I'd like. It does seem to be a bit isolated from the rest of the world, like maybe a Honolulu in the 48 contiguous. However, it would be worth a go for me although maybe not my first choice.

Somewhere in North or South Carolina -- Perhaps Greenville? I've seen some great photos of that area, and I believe it's quite comfortable there.

Somewhere in Northern California -- Lots of tech industries there, plenty of chances to make money. There is a risk of earthquakes, but that doesn't really bother me at all. Nevertheless, it doesn't get very cold in most places there, which is what would interest me.

Not right now, mind you. I'm just now getting to where I feel settled in Norman, Oklahoma. I'm just now beginning to enjoy the perks of living in a university town. However, considering we're about to have our 15th and 16th consecutive days of rain Wednesday and Thursday, I thought I'd ponder the possibilities.

A pair of free-speech cases on Monday had us discussing and disagreeing but without the conventional separation usually associated with left-right American politics.

In one, the Supreme Court dealt a blow to presidential candidate Sen. John McCain's campaign reform law, as justices voted 5-4 to not overturn an appellate ruling from a few years ago that loosened restrictions on the content of ads in the last month of a campaign.

The far-right and the ACLU applauded the court's decision. Yikes.

Conservatives loved the ruling because it loosened restrictions on corporate ads, while the ACLU supported it in defense of our freedom, no matter the cost, man. And, I say that if we want to reform political campaigns in this country, we have to make it way easier for candidates to get on ballots.

All this discussion about an ad not being fair or concern about billionaire candidates hijacking our elections can be trumped by offering Americans a wider variety from which to pick in the buffet line. I read somewhere that it might cost Michael Bloomberg $250M or some such just to get on the ballot in all 50 states, if it's even possible.

That's crazy. Sure, there has to be some control as to who gets on a ballot, and that's why a signature-based system should do the trick. How about a requirement that a candidate get at least 2.5M valid signatures before being allowed onto a ballot?

Any candidate who can convince 2.5M people to sign anything, to me, is at least worthy of ballot consideration. Heck, if the process becomes such that hundreds of candidates hit the mark, why not have an initial election weeding the list down to the Final 12 -- yeah, like American Idol!

Do that in November of the year before the actual election, and it makes all this pre-election year campaigning worthwhile. It gives guys like Tom Tancredo and Dennis Kucinich a fighting change. If nothing else, it keeps their message and effort viable for six to eight extra months, and that hurts nobody.

In the other big free-speech case, the Supreme Court sided 5-3 with a school authority in Alaska who suspended a student for displaying a "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner during a parade at which the Olympic flame passed.

The student, who is now 23, said his was a free-speech experiment. The principal said she didn't like the connection made between a bong and Jesus. Oddly enough, again, religious conservatives (not sure I understand why) and the ACLU came to the student's defense.

Odd mates, indeed, but it happens more than you'd think.

I slightly disagree with both parties. First and foremost, I think this student was out of line. However, unlike the principal, I don't believe his offense was in linking marijuana to Jesus. The student's offense was in representing his school and his community poorly.

In the real world, what we do in the community, at lunch, on the weekend, within reason, affects our professional lives. I could not get drunk, kill three people in a crash and expect to keep my job. Duh. Likewise, I couldn't hold up a "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" sign when a big executive comes to the office.

The location of the offense is relevant. Students, kids, etc. are the domain of both their parents and the community, specifically teachers and school officials when near or on school grounds. His behavior was deemed to be reflective of the community, the school and its leadership.

In the real world. his butt would have been fired.

So, I think it was a good opportunity for the young man to learn a lesson without cost. More than anything else, educators have a responsibility to prepare children for adulthood -- real adulthood, where we don't use algebra or diagram sentences, but where our judgment and decision-making abilities determine our path.

The court's reasoning wasn't in line with mine, and I would have liked them to reaffirm their position that students, basically, don't have rights. As long as they're under the guidance of reasonably sane and responsible adults, they should have very few legal rights, outside of those protecting their health and safety, until they're 18.

At that point, if we adults haven't taught them the basics of sound judgment, then God help us all. Usually, that's the case.

British movies or movies with a cast primarily comprised of British actors are typically a mixed bag for me. I'm not a big fan of British humor, and if the accents are thick, I won't carry an interest in deciphering them. No patience, I'm the typical ADD-saddled American.

However, Notes on a Scandal was one movie that makes me want to see more British drama. The Richard Eyre film from 2006 featured Judi Dench, Cate Blanchett and Bill Nighy, who is absolutely one of my favorite actors. "Love Actually" still represents, to me, the most undervalued holiday movie of all time. It should be shown every year in place of you-know-what as a means of making a brilliant secular holiday story seem fresh.

However, I digress. This movie is essentially a psychological thriller, featuring Blanchett and Dench as school teachers. Blanchett is the new kid on the block, and Dench is the old vet.

Personally, Blanchett has an emptiness in her life that causes her character to get involved with a teenage student, and Dench's has an emptiness in her life that causes her to obsess over Blanchett. Not only does Dench (Barbara Covett) suffer from extreme loneliness, there is a heavy lesbian undertone to her obsession.

While Nighy's character was a supporting one, he played Blanchett's husband with a ton of restraint given the fact that his wife is doodling a kid.

As I write these synopses, I want to be careful not to divulge too much. This is sort of a what-you-need-to-know-to-make-an-informed-decision process.

The best I can muster is that Dench's obsession with Blanchett in this movie is creepy, darkly comic without causing a single belly-laugh, all the while making one not cringe too much at the fact that Blanchett is committing what would be, here in the States, national news on a daily basis for like a month.

It's smart: The dialogue is excellent. The acting is one of a kind.

The music: Phillip Glass. Need I say more? If you've never seen the documentary "The Thin Blue Line," please do so for the music above all else.

This was and is, hands down, the best new-ish movie I've seen all year. I can't recommend it enough.

Grade: A+

Watch the trailer, embedded below:

TMZ.com is reporting Friday night that Paris Hilton will be freed from jail on Tuesday. This means, of course, that war in Iraq will end and global hunger will be alleviated.

The world will again be right.

However, before we collectively vomit in our pop culture mouths again at the thought of mass news coverage of a non-news event, allow me to suggest the possibility that we should be pulling for Paris, in general.

First, legal experts confirmed that the socialite actually spent more time in jail for her offense than the average offender, given the same circumstance. Way more. I'm not going to bat for the woman, really, but she did get the bad end of the deal from another zealous prosecutor, Rocky Delgadillo, who has some ethics troubles of his own.

I don't think we can get all worked up that Paris might have faced an injustice. It happens to people of color and to people in poverty all the time.

Nevertheless, Paris did speak up from jail. She wondered, "Why all the fuss?"

She suggested a newfound appreciation for what she has and even for basic things, like a good meal. She even told the press, albeit probably through her p.r. people, that she was a changed woman, one who would end the dumb act and devote her life to something meaningful.

I'm not sure that I believe it; I have a healthy dose of cynicism.

However, we should give her the benefit of the doubt until the next idiot moment or porn tape. At the MTV movie awards, the night she surrendered to authorities, I noticed a different tone to her voice, a different attitude, something weird that made me later believe that there possibly was some truth to Paris' suggestion that her behavior is all an act.

For me, there's one way to prove it.

Get out of the spotlight. Buy your way out of "The Simple Life," and disappear for like a year.

The truth is that Paris Hilton was always a celebrity born of pop culture, without any individual ability or skill outside of being rich and ditzy. She actually has a big opportunity at this point.

And, should she execute it accordingly, with a bit of dignity and sans the fanfare, dare I say that Paris Hilton might finally be justified in her fame.

This is a wonderfully smart-alecky video poking fun at Microsoft Surface.

Last week, I embedded a video from one of my many brilliant television appearances.

This week, I am embedding a video -- an actual music video -- featuring my cousin's daughter, Rachel. This would make Rachel my second cousin, and she's just a tad bit easier on the eyes than I am, and I am admittedly quite the specimen. For those of you who hate country music, skip to the second verse. She's the young woman who decides to do good and not get an abortion or give the baby up for adoption or whatever.

No, not in real life. In the video.

But at least Rachel's suitor in this country music video from Jamie O'Neal is the captain of the football team, which means of course that he's a model citizen.

Actually, kidding aside, this song should be a smash. Great hook. Great message ...

Give it a look.

One of my many YouTube subscriptions, this guy named Michael Buckley does a bit of a "The Soup" routine on topics of entertainment, pop culture and -- in this case -- sports. It's quite funny. Enjoy.

Two crimes. Two tragedies. Two judgments.

Unfortunately, sometimes, we Americans don't get it. We allow ourselves to be diverted into thinking we know the point, thinking we know what's important, but we allow the emotion of an issue to obscure logic completely.

In the first case, a Tennessee State athlete was killed by a suspected drunken driver, who also happens to be a suspected illegal immigrant.

Metro police said 24-year-old Victor Benitez was drunk as he ran a red light at the intersection of Old Hickory Boulevard and Nolensville Road, killing 22-year-old Joycelyn Gardiner.

Right-wing pundits have labeled this another example of why illegal aliens are the embodiment of evil. Look what an illegal gets you. Just another example of a death that could have been undone if we would just get our borders under control.

Fair enough for the moment. On to the next tragedy.

In Austin, during and near a Juneteenth celebration, a 40-year-old Hispanic man (no word as to his 'legitimacy') was beaten and killed by a mob of black people after the driver of the car he was in hit a 4-year-old girl in an apartment complex. The man tried to intervene as the mob beat the driver, so the mob turned on him. Killed him.

Commander Harold Piatt of the Austin police homicide unit swears up and down this wasn't a hate crime, although by definition, regardless of intent, it really was. We don't have the ability to know for sure that the mob would have beaten somebody of the same color for the same thing; however, the viciousness of such an act should absolutely point prosecutors in the direction of hate-crime law.

However, would we really deduce publicly in this case that Juneteenth celebrations should be eliminated? See what Juneteenth gets you! If we would just get better control of our secondary holidays, David Morales would still be alive.

That's what the far-right would tell you if you just follow their logic.

However, like Geraldo Rivera tried to explain to Bill O'Reilly in this clip regarding a similar case, the problem in the death of Joycelyn Gardiner absolutely, first and foremost, was that Victor Benitez was drunk, if he in fact was. If he doesn't drink, he almost certainly doesn't run that red light and definitely doesn't kill this woman.

Drunken driving is totally not the exclusive domain of illegal immigrants. It's the exclusive domain of people who drink and drive, as ridiculously simplistic as that sounds. However, drunken driving is the problem in this case, and no amount of emotion, no amount of furor, no amount of pleading for a fence along the Texas border changes that fact.

It's basic problem solving. Basic reading comprehension, and it's like I've gone to wacko world when I hear people suggest otherwise. It's sixth-grade logic.

If on the other hand, one wants to reason that illegal immigration is bad, I can hang with that reasoning. If one wants to suggest that an illegal immigrant should be deported on first offense, again I have no problem with that. If one wants to try to convince me we should build a fence, I don't have that big a problem with it as long as I don't have to see it.

However, don't insult my intelligence; I can handle multiple but different concepts and arguments at once. Don't make me wonder whether public funding for public education has been a colossal waste of time these past 40 years or so.

The problem in the tragic death of this 22-year-old woman in Tennessee centers on drunken driving.

Everything else is a diversion, an insult to other families who have lost loved ones in similar drunken-driving incidents and an insult to the intelligence of millions of Americans who are able to comprehend that drunken driving and illegal immigration are both significant issues without requiring right-wing pundits to tell us that absolutely everything bad has something to do with illegal immigration when it involves an illegal immigrant.

We get it that the person is here illegally and that isn't necessarily good. Frankly, that is totally debatable, no matter how much the far-right would have you believe otherwise. However, that young woman lives if he doesn't drink and drive. Hell, using the logic of the Bill O'Reillys of the world, I can go get hammered right now, hit the road and not cause any problems because I'm here in America legally.

We're not that dumb. I hope.

In 1992, Bill Clinton had Baby Boomers and young folks alike captivated with the freshness of a campaign founded upon a song 15 years old at the time.

"Don't Stop Thinkin' About Tomorrow ... "

In all seriousness, that ought to be etched in stone on the former president's grave one day. When I hear that Fleetwood Mac song, I think of the best president of my lifetime. It's a song with an edifying message and a hall-of-fame spot in pop culture history.

So, when it came time for Hillary Clinton to pick a campaign theme, she opened it up to suggestion, which is always a terrible idea, if you asked me. In the end, she picked Celine Dion's "You and I," which I am still hoping is a joke.

First, from a practical perspective, Celine is from Canada, which opens Hillary up to all sorts of jabs.

Second, there is nothing the blue-collar American can identify with in a Celine Dion song.

I mean, if Hillary wanted to make us all cringe and/or laugh, why didn't she pick Carrie Underwood's "Before He Cheats," which she could have used as a theme separating herself from her husband.

No, she realizes as much as I do, as much as any savvy political watcher does, that she needs Bill Clinton to win. In fact, with Bill Clinton by her side, she can win and, frankly, should win. I mean, as much as I think Rudy Giuliani looks presidential, I'm not willing to support a pro-choice Republican.

If the best candidate is going to be pro-choice, I'm picking the Democrat. In this case, I suspect Hillary is the smartest among these candidates, both Democrat and Republican, with or without Bill. Truly though, with Bill, she's a superstar or at least she can be.

However, today, she screwed up big time. The campaign has gotten off on the wrong note.

In a video spoof of a Sopranos finale that nobody seemed to like (although I kind of liked it in a poetic sense, but admittedly, I wasn't a fan of the show), the Clintons sit at a table and discuss campaign song choice.

In the background, the staccato piano strikes from Journey's "Don't Stop Believin,'" a song that personally gets me fired up in its first three seconds.

It's arguably the greatest opening keyboard riff in modern music history. It's right there with the horns from "Rocky," in my book.

So inspirational is this song that the Chicago White Sox used it in the team's 2005 World Series run, even though the tune references "South Detroit."

The reason is simple. Verses aside, the message of the chorus is universal: Don't Stop Believin'.

So, when I hear this song in the YouTube spoof, and I see Hillary and Bill, and I'm watching this, I am thinking to myself, "Glory, Hallelujah, a brilliant move by the Dems."

But, no. She's going with a Celine Dion song. Please. Watch the spoof, embedded at the bottom of this post. Listen to the music, and then think about her decision to pick a Celine Dion song and then contrast that to the greatness of "Don't Stop Believin'".

I surely hope this doesn't foretell things to come for the Dems.

At the morning editorial meeting, our news director sports a magazine article about Jon Stewart and the face of journalism. She noted that in the article, real journalists questioned Stewart's credentials when many others suggested he's probably the most pure journalist left.

He asks the questions nobody else will.

Sure, it's typically in the name of comedy, but he's clearly bright, definitely witty, and he's without the need to schmooze or pacify. If I'm not mistaken, the article did lean toward the notion that Stewart and his Daily Show are actually more legitimate in terms of hard news than most would give credit.

Nevertheless, some two hours later, we get word via this generation's most significant journalist (like him or hate him), Matt Drudge, that Stewart is in talks with NBC to do work.

What could that work mean?

I said this when it happened: NBC made a mistake when it promised The Tonight Show to Conan O'Brien. They made a big mistake, one that is likely to ruin the relationship between the peacock and the redhead.

Popularity on late-night cannot merely be determined by ratings. There is more of a pop-culture element to it, and while Jimmy Kimmel's ratings blow, he's clearly the fresher act these days, and Conan's audience has, frankly, grown up.

I don't think Conan would fare well as Jay Leno's replacement, and truly, even though Leno will have served as The Tonight Show host for nearly 20 years when the transition is made to whomever, his reign will have been kind of a transitional one -- between Johnny Carson and whoever the next great host is.

Even though he gets spanked in the ratings, David Letterman IS this generation's Johnny Carson -- a class act, a good interview, culturally relevant still despite the self-righteous angst of thirtysomethings who feel uncool at the sound of this proclamation.

Letterman would never go back to NBC.

So, what do you think Jon Stewart and NBC are discussing? I will lay money down that they're discussing Leno's spot, and I believe they might try to work out a deal whereby Leno leaves sooner than 2009 to get Stewart in that seat for the meat of the 2008 campaign.

Think of it. Jon Stewart interviewing Obama, Clinton, Thompson, Romney, Giuliani, asking them the tough questions you won't hear on the Big 3 cable networks.

Think of it. Somebody hosting The Tonight Show with a dry, smart-alecky, often brilliant wit.

Think of it. Jon Stewart carries much of David Letterman's spirit from the 1980s with Letterman's propensity to be serious and nice from the 2000s, frankly a potentially potent late-night specimen.

Conan should watch his back, and the other networks should stand prepared.

As I've always said, I've never been a big fan of Hallmark holidays. My theory has always been that we should honor our parents every day, not just one day a year. Besides, doesn't Dad have enough ties already?

However, on this Father's Day -- a holiday I presume I shouldn't be celebrating -- I had lunch at Norman's Souper Salad. It's by far the worst Souper Salad I have ever visited. The service is subpar, although it was OK today. They don't chop their veggies right -- julienne instead of conventional.

Nevertheless, I lucked out and sat right next to a couple with a pair of well-behaved kids. The reason I say I lucked out is because I could hear their conversation, and what I soon discovered was that the man at the table was not the father of the two kiddos.

He was on a get-to-know-you date with the woman and what seemed to be her two kids. So, I'm not thinking a thing about it; to the contrary, I was overly impressed with the hoochie-mama outfit one of the waitresses had on. It was like going to Hooters but with healthful food.

I noticed our waiter, Brad, kept wishing every adult male "Happy Father's Day," as if every adult man there had created a child at some point in his life. In my darkest heart of hearts, I hoped he would go over and wish this man with the woman he barely knows but wants to know better, presumedly, and the two kids, Happy Father's Day.

Brad comes over to me to wish me the obligatory well wishes, and I matter of factly note that I don't have kids but that perhaps his greeting would be better spent on the guy whose conversation I have been eavesdropping all this time.

So, Brad walks over and tells the man HFD and notes what lovely children he has. I would agree; they were lovely because they were well behaved and not the evil spawn of the god of the underworld like 80 percent of kids.

I could sense this man's cringe, the awkwardness of the comment and felt good in having had a small part of this tense moment. He couldn't just say, "Oh, these aren't MY kids," with an inflection on the MY. The woman could retort, "Oh, you mean you don't like kids, or is it that you just don't like MY kids?"

This could have gone many places. My work was done.

Notes from the weekend:

* Have you ever worked out so hard that you literally passed out afterward? I went running today and then showered, watched The Soup, ate at Souper Salad and then came home only to be zonked in 10 minutes. I awakened to a massive headache, which was promptly cured by a venti cup of some organic Starbucks coffee. Caffeine headaches are a bitch.

* I made a large purchase on Saturday, which must be my last large purchase for like the next three years. It's a Sony Handycam, and the only reason I mention it is because I realized just how incompetent most sales people are.

Best Buy -- idiots working there. Target -- even worse.

No, not everybody there is an idiot, but none of the people who happened to work the camera aisle on Saturday knew thing one about video cameras.

But then I got to Sears and a young man nammed Jarrod. We discussed what I was looking for, which was a camera with better ambient sound. I told him I had no plans nor any urge to plug a mic into a video camera. Maybe one day I'll borrow a lavalier from work or something for the sake of experimentation.

Jarrod's suggestion: Have you read C-NET yet?

As a matter of fact, I had, not that any of the brands and models I had reviewed on that site matched with anything he had. However, his mention of C-NET, combined later with some mention of white balancing or some such, made me realize that I had a smart kid on my hands.

He sold me the camera, and I'll spend the next year learning how to use it. I did it because I really need to and want to learn more about video. Sometimes, I don't think people in my line of work realize how pervasive and important YouTube is in terms not only of pop culture but in terms of information dissemination.

I laughed and scoffed and Time's decision to make You (as in us, or as in the people who YouTube) its Man of the Year in 2006, but they were right on. Sure, I'm addicted to it; however, even in the early stages of the presidential race, we've seen its influence in the 1984 Hillary ad and the new "Crush on Obama" ad.

Not that the latter is really, really influential in terms of issues; however, it's been viewed more than a million times. It positions Obama accidentally, considering I doubt his people put this out, as hip and cool -- and, frankly, the chick singing is smokin' hot.

Last but not least, the damned song is catchy.

Bottom line: Those who know how to produce and edit video, I am convinced, have an edge on everybody -- and I mean everybody -- in the new digital age. So, that's my rationale for buying the camera.

Plus, maybe I can consider it a Happy Father's Day present to myself ... in advance.

Another video, believe it or not ... Regularly scheduled blogging shall return very soon. Until then, check out this vid.

I'll be sending head shots to producers soon enough ...

I'm not into children's music, but I can appreciate genius when I see it -- and this song and video, the entire thing, is brilliant. Brilliant.

Days after Hillary and Barack made Dems take notice in New Hampshire, who did the same on the Republican side of the 2008 presidential race?

Truth is, both the Dems and the Republicans have to face shadow candidates. The left has Al Gore, who likely won't run as long as Hillary is dominating the field -- and she is.

The Republicans have former Sen. Fred Thompson, who in recent polls has pulled even with former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Thompson likely will run, and his candidacy is formidable, although the insiders I've read suggest he's not nearly as Reaganesque as they'd like, and the concern among many is that he would make a lazy candidate.

As there were in the Democratic debate, fringe candidates failed to produce for the Right in Manchester. U.S. Rep. Ron Paul came off sounding liberal, and Colorado's Tom Tancredo is a one-note puppy -- immigration. Even if Tancredo's assessment of popular opinion on that subject is right, he really doesn't have any other tricks up his sleeve.

Tommy Thompson issued a major announcement on Wednesday, which turned out to be a subtle reminder to those who care that he's still running for president.

I literally don't remember Duncan Hunter, and Kansas' Sam Brownback is a one-note candidate, like Tancredo, except that Brownback's note is everything-Evangelical.

Among the candidates who are in the race right now, only former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Sen. John McCain and Giuliani stand a real chance. However, if there is one wildcard among the lot of them, I'd say it's former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

He's from Hope, Ark., like Bill Clinton, and although the two men come from polar opposites from within the political spectrum, they are both charismatic with a great sense of humor. Huckabee has a presence, much like Clinton has. My concern with Huckabee is that, really, because of his role as an ordained minister, he's really, potentially more of a theocrat than a bureaucrat.

Many would say the Republican Party has drifted that way anyway, but I don't see anything wrong with wearing your religion on the proverbial sleeve if you're a candidate. My concern is that Americans are interested in electing a pastor instead of a president every four years.

Still, I like Huckabee. Good guy. Bright. Charming -- and, I think he'll be a likely veep candidate for the nominee, possibly the former Law & Order actor, if he runs. As he did in the debate, Huckabee should focus on charm. He should highlight his downhome approach to issues. He should joke and make people feel at ease.

That's his only shot, but I think he's the one longshot with any shot, in either party.

Of the contenders, I truly think Romney stands no shot. It's the Mormon issue. The South. Evangelicals. They won't have it; I promise you. It's not what I think. Personally, I think Romney is a likeable guy but without much up top, like John Edwards. He's a Ken doll, as Ben Affleck called him.

On the other hand, it's not like McCain has done anything to make anybody think his candidacy stands a real shot. First, he clearly doesn't understand that the Republican base is adamantly against "amnesty" for illegal immigrants. Second, he was already to the Right as Joe Lieberman is to the Left -- a political traitor.

Rumblings mount that McCain's candidacy is losing steam, and much like Edwards lost the most ground among the Dems, McCain lost the most among the Republicans. McCain stepped out and defended not making English the official language of the country. McCain stumbled over the immigration bill portion of the debate, inviting others to offer better ideas, a suggestion they all took.

So, there in the middle stood Rudy, much like Hillary stood in the middle of the Dems on Sunday night. Giuliani was the first to stand up and walk toward the crowd when asked questions, a strategy everybody else soon followed. Having followed Giuliani for a few weeks, I thought his message was more conservative in Tuesday's debate than what he's used to considering his moderate position on most issues. He's basically to the left of them all, which combined with his stature as a good leader in crisis, I think, makes him the overwhelming favorite right now barring a run from Fred Thompson.

And, the debate changed none of that. Giuliani was sharp.

So, after watching the two debates, how would I rank each candidate's performance? I'd give Rudy the nod over Hillary, but it's a close 1-2 combo. I'd give Barack an edge over Mike Huckabee, who I think was the surprise of them all -- not that he has a chance.

But I'll bet you a crisp $5 he's the veep candidate for whoever wins the Republican nomination.

For those of you with Tulsa ties, you likely know about this buried Plymouth Belvedere that was to be razed this Friday.

Well, prepare to be disappointed.

KTUL.com is reporting and we've confirmed that the 1957 classic, which was supposedly in a watertight tomb of sorts, is up to its top in water. Not water from recent rains but water from a half-century of weather.

We're told Hazmat will make a trip out there to make sure everything is OK, and then who knows what. However, a very interesting and somewhat disappointing result to a story several Tulsans and Tulsa expatriates had been anticipating for a while.

Who knows though? Maybe we will have invented a new disease from all that sitting water that's been down there for 50 years.

According to The Star, The National Enquirer, and this Web site (among many others), Whoopi Goldberg will be the new host of ABC's The View.

Good move? Well, Goldberg is super smart. She can be funny at times, but I think it would clearly be a conservative step backward for the show. No, not politically -- Whoopi is definitely liberal. However, Goldberg isn't as controversial as Rosie O'Donnell was, and heck will even surprise you at times by going conservative on a topic or two.

Nevertheless, in my opinion, the show needs more crazy.

The reason Rosie was a hit, the reason why The View's numbers went up had nothing to do with O'Donnell's anti-war message or politics or charm. It had everything to do with the fact that she was a time-bomb on television, and people want to be watching when it explodes.

Kathy Griffin would be an excellent choice as host. She's funny, damned smart, liberal but I don't think she and Barbara Walters would last more than two months on the same set together.

Wanda Sykes is a fashionable pick by some, but I find her to be abrasive and often unfunny. I really think she would turn off viewers pretty quickly.

Nobody has mentioned Chelsea Handler, an up-and-comer who is smart, funny and unknown. No ax to grind. No preconceived notions. She's 31 (or so she says ... my friends think she's 45), so she'd be a good antidote to Elisabeth, and Chelsea has the potential for crazy.

My wildcard candidate though is Janice Dickinson. She's funny as hell without meaning to be, and she's certifiable. Only problem with the veteran supermodel is that she would likely have the network fined by the FCC within the first three weeks.

Not like you'll be stunned by this, but this story deigns to suggest that Fox News covers the Iraq War not only less but much less than its competition.

No.

There is a bit in the article where the conservative source notes that while he doesn't dispute the research, he does assert that Fox News does a ton more packages on the good that's happening in Iraq, which I also suspect is true. Frankly, it's a fair point on his part.

When the conservative guy basically says, "Uh, well, you got me," you know there's something to the report. It's a good read.

A new feature to the Web site: If you'll look down the right-hand margin of the site, you'll see a new feature called "scores".

Because I don't always have time to review the movies I watch or the music I listen to right when I consume, I'll pop a grade up in this area. If there is a review, I'll link to it. Typically when I assign a grade to a movie, it will stick; however, music grades can vary.

Sometimes it takes a bit for a new album to sink in. Take Paul McCartney's latest, "Memory Almost Full." Upon first listen, I noticed a tone of musical allusions to The Beatles as well as a mix of what I'd call throwaway music.

However, it was pretty good overall. Still, I'm not convinced that I won't love it, so I gave it a B+ to start. In general, I recommend highly anything that gets any variation of an A.

In fact, if I give something an A+, I am practically pleading with you to watch it or listen to it.

Anything in the B range is a recommendation, but I acknowledge imperfections in both the work as well as, possibly, my assessment of it.

Depending on the movie, for example, anything that gets a C is likely a thumbs-down. However, it depends on the expectations I had for the film. "The Queen" was hyped. It was nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. Helen Mirren won an Academy Award.

Yet, when I watched it, I wasn't impressed.

It looked and felt like a TV movie. Seriously. Mirren was very good as QEII, but the rest of the movie was quite pedestrian. In truth, it was really a B, but -- man -- it was just so disappointing given all the high praise I had heard about it. Therefore, it got a C+.

Anything that gets a D is definitely a thumbs-down, but in that mark is an acknowledgment that it wasn't all bad or that there were a couple of funny moments.

I haven't seen many F movies, actually, so it likely won't be used all that often. I have a very impatient habit of turning off movies the minute I know I'll hate it, the minute I know it sucks or not watching them at all.

On tap for this week -- "The World According to Garp" and "Jesus Camp."

I'm convinced that when people move to Los Angeles, they aren't merely moving to another locale, they are joining "the cast."

The entire city is like this on-parade news event where its local celebs are in fact national celebs, and nothing proves this better than the Paris Hilton event this week. I call it an event because, essentially, her incarceration, removal and reincarceration had nothing to do with justice or a lack thereof.

It had everything to do with pop culture.

At the center of pop culture in 2007 is the 24/7 news cycle, particularly the cable news cycle. When Hilton was made to appear in court after her initial release, there was an O.J. Simpson-like spectacle to the story. It was covered non-stop by CNN, MSNBC and FOX, while it garnered only a mention on ABC World News Tonight with Charles Gibson.

In the Tulsa World, it only drew a 18-inch story on the last page of Section A.

Cable news coverage, especially FOX, but really everyone, is less about newsy-news and more about infotainment. I'm forthputting the obvious, I suspect. However, for those of us who enjoy newsy-news, to look down on infotainment without a closer look at our own habits is disingenuous at best.

Truth is, Washington politics is every bit as scandalous, igniting the same types of gossiping that stories on TMZ.com produce. We presume the political news of the day is important because it's politics and it presumably affects lives.

That's not entirely true. Truth is, the War in Iraq doesn't affect me, personally, one iota in the here-and-now. None. You can make deductions about the price of gas, the stability of the world, etc., and I can tell you that I still ate on Friday, still watched some TV, still went to work, still drove my car, still slept like a baby, still consumed like almost nobody on Earth consumes.

So, we see the divide between cable news and network news. There was a time when news organizations took pride in acting as a gatekeeper of what's important and what isn't; however, somewhere along the way, business dictated that news organizations report on what people care about, what they're interested in.

Heck, this even took Ms. Hilton by surprise. She said, "I must also say that I was shocked to see all of the attention devoted to the amount of time I would spend in jail for what I had done by the media, public and city officials. I would hope going forward that the public and the media will focus on more important things, like the men and women serving our country in Iraq, Afghanistan and other places around the world."

Either that sentence was written by a PR person, or Hilton is much smarter than we've suspected. I know what my hunch is.

However, that doesn't mean we won't cover such events with the fervor we devoted to Paris on Friday. Why? People are interested. It's the same reason people like car wrecks, car chases and severe weather. They're diversions.

Frankly, the government would be foolish ever to discourage cable networks from peddling such trash because, again, they're diversions. I've said for months now that the immigration issue isn't really an issue; it's a mere diversion planted by the federal government through it's television voice -- Fox News -- to induce the public's eyes off the ball, which is the War in Iraq and our general policies and actions throughout the Middle East.

Get everybody riled up, excited, diverted, and we won't give a crap about what really is important. Sure, the war doesn't affect me today, nor did it affect me yesterday, nor will it affect me tomorrow. However, we as Americans really, really have to get some perspective.

What happens in the world, er, what's reported as "hard news," absolutely affects us indirectly and long-term, which if applied over the course of four scores, or the average lifetime of a human, is actually very significant.

Nevertheless, the Paris Hilton story had us all going on Friday, and frankly the only one whose opinion I agreed with was, yikes, Ann Coulter. Coulter said Paris' sentence was bogus and that the maneuvering between the Sheriff's department and the judge was all about the spectacle.

Truth is, and I draw from my years of writing stories about such things, the typical sentence for such an offense, even with the DUI on the back-end of this, is about 20 days suspended. That's not a scientific measurement on my part; it's a guesstimate.

However, letting her out after about four days was probably about right. I mean, I think that would have been the release point for almost anybody else. Of course, Al Sharpton opens his idiot hole to protest, raising populist ire by saying that it was an injustice that Paris didn't have to fulfill her entire term. Blah, blah, blah.

Of course, I'm convinced at this point that Mr. Sharpton works for the Bush administration because he works hand in hand with perpetuating nonsensical, unimportant causes for the purpose of diverting us all from bigger issues.

Nevertheless, he raised a stink. The judge blew off some steam. Paris freaked out, and we watched. Bottom line, to the television news industry, only one measurement there means squat. Like it or not, we the consumer told the news business that coverage of Paris Hilton's court date on Friday and her jail escapade all week was important.

You can't blame news organizations, gatekeepers or not, for listening to their customers. It's still a business.

A quick aside from the previous debate discussion, which I'll pick up soon, when I have a tad more time ...

While the Texas Rangers have never been perennially great, they have probably never been as bad as they are this season. At 21-38, they're on pace for more than 100 losses, and I suspect they could be even worse.

It's not like they don't have the position players. Mark Teixeira, Michael Young, Ian Kinsler and Hank Blalock, I think, comprise the most promising infield in baseball. However, Texas is woefully inconsistent offensively, and pitching is and has traditionally been a weakness. That is an understatement.

It's leadership. Tom Hicks is a dreadful owner, having tried to merge his baseball and hockey businesses into one front-office. Firing Doug Melvin. Hiring that kid to be GM. Killing Johnny Oates. Where does it end?

I jest, but truth is my ballclub needs some creative destruction. I stand by my proposal: Trade every position player for pitching. Trade Teixeira. Young. Blalock. Kinsler. Cruz. Laird. Trade them all for young pitching, and then promote the Oklahoma Redhawks position players.

That should be your team for 2007. That is the foundation upon which winning can be done. A drastic move to communicate to the organization, to the public, to everyone that pitching is not just paramount -- it's everything -- has to be done. Oh, I'll be a fan no matter what, but life is too short to be listening to or watching incompetent teams for the sake of loyalty.

So, as of tonight, I'm spending the rest of my 2007 baseball season with the World Champs. The St. Louis Cardinals. I need to see how a real club does things, a club with mega-history. It's a team I've traditionally loathed as much as the New York Yankees.

However, in Oklahoma, the Cardinals are basically the local boys, even moreso than the nearby Rangers or the Royals. Norman's KREF plays the Cardinals every night with Mike Shannon and John Rooney at the mic. The former is not just a Cardinals icon as a player, he's one of the best voices in the sport.

The fans are knowledgable. The city is wonderful. I am drinking the Kool-Aid merely because I want a team to follow this year. Listening to your team night after night getting drummed isn't a test of loyalty, it's a test of sanity.

Duty called this weekend and again on Tuesday night as I was part of a team that brought online Republican and Democrat debate coverage to the masses. So, I watched both debates closely.

Full disclosure: I am a Democrat, but a moderate one. I'd call myself a classic liberal; however, not the type that the talk show pundits rail against. Perhaps I am more libertarian, although I am pro-life.

I'm a Southern Democrat, but more like Bill Clinton and Lyndon Johnson and less like Al Gore or John Edwards. I like thinkers. I like progressives. I like candidates who aren't afraid to blur party lines on principle. I strongly prefer candidates steeped in legitimate faith instead of some for-show nonsense.

I don't like bureaucrats. I don't like pseudo-intellectuals. I don't like bullies, but I am even less fond of wimps.

I am more apt to vote Democrat than Republican, but there are Republican candidates I like. Even conservative candidates.

Personally, come Nov. 2008, I think I'm the type of voter the nominees will be courting. The swing voter. Of course, this presumes I live in another state considering it's a certainty the Republican nominee will win short of it being former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

Romney is a Mormon, which to me means the man has zero shot to win the presidency. None. He won't even sniff the nomination no matter how infatuated Republicans might be with him right now. Second, he is a Yank, a Massachusetts Yank.

Candidates must win the South, and Romney has no shot. I'm really not sure why he's wasting his pennies and seconds.

Sure, there are other candidates who have no shot. Most of them don't, but starting with the Democratic debate, I'll offer my thoughts on each candidate's performance. I'll offer my thoughts on the Republican debate tomorrow, but I'm getting tired, so I'll split this up.

Democratic Debate

1. Hillary Clinton - Unusally polished Sunday night, as if she had a lesson from Bill. Pretty assuredly, she had done a little Botox before the session; she looked excellent. If she can inject some spirit-of-the-Bill into her candidacy, she is a lock to win the nomination and probably will be our next president. Seriously. There's a lack of competition happening right now that makes me think Hillary is the frontrunner for the whole shootin-match.

2. Barack Obama - Strong job Sunday night. Better than other recent appearances, in fact. However, he sounded less like a politician and more like an orator. Turning himself into Jesse Jackson or even Martin Luther King Jr. though is not a good thing long-term. All these candidates should invoke Bill when possible and if possible.

3. John Edwards - Took some steps back Sunday night. Sounds like a bureaucrat. Sounds like the ineffectual, pseudo-intellectual candidate who got his rump handed to him by Dick Cheney in the vice-presidential debates four years ago.

Those are the three frontrunners for sure among the Dems. Were there any surprises?

I thought former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel would mix it up more. He was less like Howard Dean and more like Admiral Stockdale. It was a disappointment.

If Dennis Kucinich weren't so squirrely looking, he might be a guy I could get behind. He has the populist attitude that really drew me to Ralph Nader eight years ago. However, he doesn't have the intellect or the strength to do much for anybody in this race. He's not even a viable Jerry Brown type of candidate.

Nothing stood out to me about Biden, Dodd or Richardson, and unfortunately, I really like Bill Richardson. Having a guy with a Clinton background, like he has, with his Hispanic descent, which I think is important right now, and his gubernatorial experience -- one would think -- should make him a solid darkhorse.

Not the case. He just has zero charisma. He reminds me of Michael Dukakis if the former Democratic candidate were to go on an eating binge.

Bottom line: This is so Hillary's nomination to lose unless Al Gore gets in the race. Then, it gets good fast.

So, are any of these turkeys a possible VP candidate for Hillary?

Personally, I think she has to keep it in the South given that she is technically coming from the North. Richardson is solid for the reasons I mentioned, and he sure wouldn't overshadow Hillary.

However, if you want to get people excited, how about Elizabeth Dole? Throw her out there as a possible bi-partisan veep choice? Clinton-Dole would be one powerful, politically femiperfect ticket.

I'm rambling. There will be many more debates, but for this first one, there were no surprises. Obama gained the most ground, but Hillary strengthened her position. The candidate who I thought lost the most was John Edwards, while the guy who could have disrupted the festivities most, Mike Gravel, came off as threatening as the "Year 2000 problem."

Tomorrow ... Republicans

And, if you watched the debate, please chime in below.

Like any savvy shopper, I look for ways to save a bit or two on generics. However, rarely do I find a generic that is actually better than the real deal, and for me, Wal-Mart's off-brand of diet soda is actually better than the real thing.

Yep. Better than Diet Coke, and I work with a guy who agrees with me. I'm not alone in this world of Diet Sam's Cola enjoyment.

During the typical week, I go through about 1.25 12-packs, and I drink them warm. Don't even bother to refrigerate, which combined with my taste for this generic likely makes me quite odd on the soda front.

It's been 20 years since pop music has had somebody with both the pop and rock chops of Pat Benatar, who in her prime was absolutely one of my favorite musical artists in existence.

Benatar had this butch, screechy look and sound that was sexy to both men and women, if you catch my drift, and was listenable on the radio, in the arena, by tweens, teens and adults.

Well, Pat Benatar ... meet Kelly Clarkson.

She's got the same vibe, the same ability, and she wrote everything on her forthcoming album, including this bitter gem, "Never Again," which she performed on Jimmy Kimmel recently. Enjoy.

I can't profess to be the best driver in the world (and won't), but I've written probably 2,000 news stories on people who have died in traffic accidents.

Seriously, since I was at the Oklahoma Daily in the early 1990s to the Hugo Daily News in the mid-1990s to koco.com, where I am now, I have typed up thousands of stories that start like this:

A man was killed when ...

Three people were killed and two others injured when ...

They're car wreck stories, and I always stop and think, even if subconsciously, about the affected family, how that crash has destroyed their world.

Then it's a story about somebody you know, maybe not too terribly closely, and that sympathy turns to empathy. That happened for me this week when a good man and his wife from Houston, by way of my hometown -- Henryetta, Okla., were killed in a head-on crash outside of Tyler, Texas. My sister-in-law's sister was critically hurt in the crash and will be in the hospital for months.

And, the deceased couple's two kids ... to me, it is impossible to step into their shoes unless you've been there, and I haven't. I cannot imagine much of anything worse. It's absolutely heartbreaking for their children and, really, for everybody who knew the couple.

Perhaps you could tell I was a bit off my normal game this week, if you're a regular reader. I posted some crap yesterday just to have something fresh on the site, wondering how I might approach this forthcoming topic with some level of objectivity, with a level of detachedness from this tragic crash because, really, I've thought about addressing this many times before.

Over the years, I have realized that I pretty much use a generalized driving guide for my own habits, particularly because -- as I noted before -- I'm not the best driver in the world, and I've written so many news stories about traffic deaths. These are a few things, based on all the stories I've written that I honestly believe, if followed, would save lives.

Car crashes are going to happen, and a lot of the time, one can't do a damned thing about them, at least in one vehicle or the other. Sometimes there's nothing anybody can do, such as when the bridge collapsed near Webbers Falls, Okla., in 2002.

What I have for you here isn't science. These are merely my observations and opinions, based upon only the stories I've written over the years. I absolutely follow them if at all possible because I know of my own imperfections as a driver, and I'm quite aware of everybody else's.

This is also not about stating the obvious. Yes, one should wear a seat belt. No s***. Yes, talking on a mobile phone is dangerous while driving, whether it's in your hand or on your ear. Anything that distracts the driver -- even a conversation with the passenger -- should be limited. Furthermore, driving drunk is just stupid beyond belief, but this post isn't about throwing stones at anybody.

No, these are patterns I've noticed from all the stories I've written. You might have others; if so, shoot me a comment or an e-mail.

1. Avoid the unprotected left turn. This means left turns into parking lots. This means U-turns. If there ain't an arrow, find another way to get to your destination unless traffic is really manageable (e.g., not in Dallas). Most every deadly intersection crash I've reported on over the years involves one car turning, and it's almost always left. I've touched on this topic before.

2. Avoid two-lane highways. First, the vast majority of fatality wrecks I have written about have happened on small, generally low-traffic highways. There is so little room for error when you have one car heading in one direction right next to another car moving in the other, mixed in with somebody trying to pass, it really is advisable -- unless you live in the country or are explicitly going for a scenic drive -- to stick with interstates and large highways.

3. Avoid driving between 11 p.m. and 8 a.m. if at all possible. This is prime-time for drunks and sleepy drivers, so go get a motel room or wait until the next day to head out. Remember when Mom said nothin' good happens after 11 or midnight or whenever? Well, she was right. In my experience, the vast majority of fatal wrecks happen in this time period or at dawn, the result of exhausted drivers mostly, I'd suppose, as opposed to drunks exclusively.

A quick aside about drunk drivers. They don't typically take Main Street or the interstate. They take the backroads and the state highways. Now, the really experienced, emboldened drunk drivers will take the interstate, but I have a tip for you.

You are absolutely encouraged to call 911 to report suspected drunk drivers. Get their license plate number and dial 911. I know this means you'd need to use a mobile phone while driving if you're by yourself, but I honestly believe it's a responsibility to rat 'em out.

4. Don't drive in weather. My brother Charles, who followed the couple who was killed and his sister-in-law out of town from Henryetta on Monday, called me at a truck-stop in Vinita on his way down from St. Louis to ask me when the heavy rain was going to end.

This was an extremely wise thing to do on two counts -- a) stopping for 20 minutes instead of driving in heavy weather and b) calling to get some direction as to what the weather is going to do and where it's happening.

The biggest problem about driving in severe weather, aside from standing water, hail and tornadoes, is that most drivers either navigate too quickly or too slowly in it. It is always best to just wait until it clears, if you can.

I can't tell you how many times I've written, "Police said weather might have played a role in the crash."

5. Never drive behind any vehicle with a load, a camper or trailer. True story out of Grand Prairie, Texas, a few years back had a couple about to get married driving down I-20 following one of those trucks with pipes on the back of it. A pipe came loose, crashed through the window and killed the driver.

Last week, somebody was killed when a windboard of some sort came through a camper into another vehicle.

On July 4, 1998, I literally cheated death when I swerved to miss a camper that had flown off the truck in front of me. Some woman reached back into a cooler, and the camper came flying off. I had no choice but to miss this 300-pound or more projectile. It absolutely would have killed me on the spot.

Bottom line. Don't follow people closely, and never follow anybody whose vehicle has anything that could become loose or detached.

6. Don't swerve. After all that, I say not to swerve? Well, the great Hunter S. Thompson was renown for saying that it wasn't the hittin' that would kill you, it was the swervin'.

Depends on what you hit. However, if a dog or a cat runs out into the street, you should never, ever, ever swerve to miss it if you're going at a speed that could cause your swerve to result in a significant accident.

You hit the animal. Sorry. It's way better than taking out a family of seven when your car goes flying across the median.

This one is hard to do, but if you're going the appropriate speed and can see far enough ahead of you, this shouldn't be an issue. The other day, I saw a car almost lose it on I-35 when it swerved to miss a piece of rubber that had come off a tractor-trailer.

That piece of rubber wasn't going to hurt anybody, but that swerve could have killed us all.

7. Have your tires rotated every 6,000 miles. If you're not driving on good tires, properly inflated, properly rotated, you're driving a death machine. Really. I can't stress this one enough.

The other day, this poor motorcyclist from California was killed in Oklahoma City when a woman in a Chevy Blazer lost control on I-40, came across the median and hit him. I commented to our chief photographer, who had just noted how tragic this was, and said, "I bet she had a blowout."

Yep.

There is no excuse for driving on worn tires. The ex-husband of the current wife of a buddy of mine used to take pride in saving money by driving on cheap-ass discount tires. It's almost as foolish as driving drunk, and it's almost as preventable.

Hibdon Discount Tires here in Norman rotates those tires for free, whether you bought them there or not, just like Discount Tires did for me in Dallas. It is a community service, really, if you asked me, that those folks do, beyond the marketing benefit they receive from consumers who eventually buy their tires.

Some folks can't afford new tires or even good ones, and I merely hope I'm not on the highway with them when their back piece of rubber causes them to skid into oncoming traffic at 70 mph.

People forget that driving isn't a right. It's a privilege, and for all the headaches and stress a mere fender-bender causes everybody involved, I'm not so sure stiffer penalties aren't warranted in those cases, even a little jail time, in hopes of enforcing and encouraging a condition more hospitable to defensive driving.

I've been in four wrecks in my life, which I suspect is more than average. The first was when I was 16, and my buddy Jerm flipped a car on 9th Street in Henryetta right in front of Dr. Sellers' house. We got out of the old beater and chuckled because neither of us was hurt badly. Besides, I think the car had belonged to his brother.

The second was when I was 23 in Paris, Texas, and it was a mere fender-bender, which frankly should have resulted in both of us getting a hefty ticket for just stupid driving.

The third was a fender-bender in Dallas when a 22-year-old chick, late to wedding rehearsal, ran a red light at Lemmon and 75, slamming into the front of my 2001 Mitsubishi Galant.

The fourth was just two weeks later, in Highland Park, days after my dad had died (so I was in a fog) and the day after I got the car back from the shop. I was turning left from a parking lot onto Preston Road, and going about 10 mph, I touched this pregnant woman's SUV. It tipped over, and she started bleeding, and I thought, "Holy mother of Mary, I've killed this woman's unborn babies."

Truth is, she was fine, and the babies were fine. But it should scare the heck out of any SUV driver that their vehicle tips over so easy. On the other hand, being able to see over everybody is actually quite the benefit, so there's some give and take there.

Bottom line: I'm not a perfect driver by any means. But, I'm here to tell you. You don't want to be in a fatality wreck, nor do you want to cause it, nor do you want to be close to somebody who was in it. I'm not saying this to state the obvious but to state a point based on my general observation that the majority of people must really believe this sort of tragedy could never happen to them because they drive like idiots.

Here's what's even scarier. If you have never been in a serious wreck or known somebody who has been in one, you're probably due just by the law of probability. Just imagine how you'd feel if that was your parent. Or your brother. Or your child.

It's devastating for them, and there are so many little things each of us can do to prevent it. They don't even cost money. They cost only a bit of time and thoughtfulness.