Tiger Woods Interview VIDEO: ESPN, Golf Channel Talk With Golfer

How can we be mad at you when you don't even tell us specifically what you've done?

Tiger has taken the middle road, in the sense that he's told only parts of his story but not all of it. His reason for doing so is that those a 'private' matters. However, it seems that without being overly specific, Tiger has made clear about his infidelity, and has shown genuine remorse for it.

Alright, well I know as a golf fan I have forgiven you. You will be back to and more popular than ever, Tiger. Just look at Bill Clinton!

Tiger also provides another example of my skepticism of marriage. If he was being sincere when he said that he loved Elin with all his heart when he married her, what prompted him to cheat? Most would discuss this in relation to him being Tiger Woods, a man of immense popularity and influence. His infidelity can be compared to the likes of John Edwards, Marc Sanford, and Eliot Spitzer, all of whom believed they could get away with cheating likely because they held positions of power.

But why cheat? And why are there such high divorce rates? Are human beings NOT genetically programmed to spend the rest of their lives with one companion, or maybe only a portion of us do?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

What's In, What's Out in Health Care Reform Bill

JUST PASS THE DAMN BILL ALREADY!

As outlined by the guys at Huff, this 'final' bill holds provision expanding Medicaid as well as providing extra aid towards specific states. It also spends money on nation-wide policies.

Also in the bill are education reforms, most notably the proposal to make Student Loan a Federal jurisdiction. I personally cannot believe this has not been implemented long ago; tons of money can be saved if students were to deal directly (through one bank) with the government, rather than through the state governments, and multiple banks, if anything, because of convenience and a reduction in procedural matters.

By the way, the final bill came to 153 pages. I can read that in a few hours. Weren't the Republicans complaining that it's too long?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama On Fox News: Accuses Bret Baier Of Interrupting, Two 'Going At Each Other'

I'm not entirely sure why Bret Baier believed he had the right to repeatedly interrupt the President of the United States. Even if your (personal) political beliefs are different from his, he nevertheless holds one of the most respected political positions in the entire world. Sure, you want him to answer your questions, but why not let him finish, and then ask him again?

And if he thought that Obama was just going to repeat himself, shouldn't he have been trying to frame the question another way in order to get more answers out of him? What Baier did was just rude.

And, remember, because of this little stint on Baier interrupting the President, the content of the rest of the interview was drowned out and flushed down the toilet. Who's fault is this? Baier's? Obama's? FOX's?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Jon Stewart-Glenn Beck Parody: Daily Show Host Goes After Fox News Host (VIDEO)

In the midst of all this hilarity, Jon Stewart implicitly calls out the dangerously ignorant populace that watches Glenn Beck's show. The regular viewers of Beck repeatedly buys into his nonsense, elevated Beck's status to one of the most popular television figures on television and a strong voice amongst 'Conservatives'.

I suspect the reason that Jon Stewart has not risen to the popularity level of Beck is primarily because of the channel through which his show is televised. After all, many more people have access to Fox News than they do Comedy Central.

But if it just so happens that humor (not cynicism) is the best way to fight these outrageous so-called Conservative movements, I advocate the moving of the Daily Show to a network TV station or at least a cable news channel.

With Jon Stewart AND Stephen Colbert opening fire on Beck on the same night, I guess they've both just about had it enough with Beck's antics. I expects more to come from them, much to my liking.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Ahmadinejad the 'Truther'

Who knew that this movement still exists? Well, it does, and recently we are reminded by none other than the President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has claimed that the 9/11 attacks were a lie:

"
"September 11 was a big lie and a pretext for the war on terror and a prelude to invading Afghanistan," Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying by state TV. He called the attacks a "complicated intelligence scenario and act."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/06/ahmadinejad-911-attacks-a_0_n_488789.html

Okay, I get it. There are still skeptics out there who believed that the 9/11 attacks were fabricated by the Bush administration so that they could put their military to work by going to Afghanistan, and then Iraq.

I mean, granted that these 'Truthers' have found scientific 'proof' that this happened, the implications of this would be so devastating that it is inconceivable that any substantial amount of the population would buy the theory. It would shake the foundation of American government to the core, to the point where the country will fall apart.

So, having said that, we have Ahmadinejad, joining these nutcase conspiracy theorists, in that claiming 9/11 was a big lie.

Remember that Mahmoud only controversially re-elected. By the way, do we still really know for sure that he won with the majority of the votes? Why is he even bringing this unwanted attention onto himself? And he is disrespecting Americans in the process; not that he's never done this before, but does he really need this?

Hurt Locker justice: Oscar 2010 Recap

So "The Hurt Locker", the war thriller praised for its non-preachy style and intense action sequences, has won Best Picture at the 82nd Academy Awards. Its director, Kathryn Bigelow, also takes the honors of Best Director.

Despite the fact that the film won film of the year in almost every film review board and major film festivals (BAFTA, Director's Guild of America, Chicago Film Critics Association, LA Film Critics Association, just to name a few), I sensed that there was still an air of inevitability that "Avatar" would take the Best Picture honors, being the winner at the Golden Globes.

So I breathed a huge sigh of relief, and then scream in exuberance, when Tom Hanks, in perhaps the fastest coming-on-stage-and-reading-out-the-winner routine ever, announces that "The Hurt Locker" has won.

Having only caught the last 45 minutes of the show, beginning at the point of the long interpretive dance to the songs nominated for best original score, I have to say i didn't miss much in terms of (however rare we find it) 'Oscar Charm'. One of the best speech was given by the winner of Original Score, Michael Giacchino ("Up").

It seems like the funniest moment of the show came again in the form of Ben Stiller, dressing in full Navi gear.

As for the Best Picture... I have not seen "Precious", "Up in the Air", "A Serious Man", "The Blind Side", or "An Education." And while "Up" and "Inglorious Bastards" are brilliant films and certain deserve to be on the list, I doubted that they were serious contenders to win. A real sleeper for me was "District 9", its message more subtle than "Avatar", its special effects quietly compliments a strong plot, and very emotionally engaging performances.

But I suspect every one of the nominated films are better than "Avatar".

Not that I dislike "Avatar"; I think it's a brilliantly made film and an absolute delight to watch. But James Cameron's sci-fi epic is no award winner. It has a plot that is beyond formulaic. I mean, even people who watches less than 10 films a year would find the storyline familiar.

To those people who say that with a visual effects spectacle like this, that the plot does not matter, I say: No, it doesn't, for a decent film, that is. But if a film were to win an award for best movie of the year, I don't care what kind of special effects it offers, the storyline matters.

As for best actor, I am ashamed to say that for a film goer, I have not had the pleasure of marveling at the performances of Colin Firth, George Clooney, Morgan Freeman, or the winner Jeff Bridges. I shall have an Oscar-nominee night and watch "A Single Man", "Invictus", "Up in the Air", and "Crazy Heart", all in one day.

Congratulations to Sandra Bullock. I have not seen "The Blind Side", but prior to this film, Bullock has never impressed me as a brilliant actress who would be mentioned in the same award category as Meryl Streep and Helen Mirren. I have tons of respect for Carey Mulligan, though.

One category that often confuses me is Best Film Editing. How is an Academy member supposed to weight how one film is better than another in how a film is edited? Are there standards or guidelines, or is it completely subjective to the member?

All in all, a good Oscars for me, and for women too. My favorite film of last year won Best Picture and Best Director. Congratulations to Kathryn Bigelow, and "The Hurt Locker."

I hope people will be flocking to the store (or clicking Netflix, or whatever way) to rent / buy this film.