Why We Should Give Bravo's Celebrity Poker Showdown a Shot at Solving the Steroid Scandal

Alright, So Bud Selig didn't contact me with any praise anout my idea to enforce mandatory steroid usage in Major League Baseball. Come to think of it, he didn't call me back at all! What about the roses Bud? And the candlelit dinner. My God, the candlelit dinner, Bud!

My original plan would have made it a requirement for every athlete, in every sport's league, to stick a needle in their butt. If we can't test them to uncover the truth, and we can't get them to admit that they're taking steroids (even though we know they are), then it only makes sense to require everyone to take them. This way, everyone is elevates his performance to the level of those who are taking them. I call it the 'Athletic Communist Steroid' plan. Then it becomes a crime for those who aren't taking steroids.

But fine. If no one is taking to this brilliant plan, I've got another that I'm positive will work. This plan incorporates a way of unveiling who really takes steroids or not. Want to know if Floyd Landis doped his way to a Tour de France victory? Then pay attention, because the answer is all in the cards.

Poker. Many feel that the game involves too much chance and luck. However, professionals, like ten-time World Series of Poker champion, Vijay Dhoorasoo, says "Sure luck has a hand in it, but how you play the cards and your opponents is crucial. It's, like, you know, 99% of the game or something. Now go away, I'm trying to take a shower."

And since lying, or 'bluffing,' has so much to do with the game of poker, it makes sense that the best liar, or 'bluffer,' will come out a winner. Now, how to use that to our advantage concerning steroids. First, we enlist the services of Bravo's Celebrity Poker Showdown, but tell Dave Foley he has to kill himself before he can host and that Gordon fella has to actually win something for any of us to respect his opinions. Next we invite one suspected steroid user that has adamantly denies he ever used steroids - let's just choose a name at random, ohhhh, Barry Bonds, for instance - and four wild cards that can't have ever possibly taken steroids (some suggestions: Kate Moss, Topher Grace, Manute Bol, the Olsen Sisters, Calista Flockhart, Lara Flynn Boyle, or any other person with anorexia). Sit them all down at a table and "Shuffle up and deal your lies!"

It follows that if the person that is allegedly taking steroids wins, then it's probable they 'bluffed' their way out of admitting their guilt over having using the roids. See that? Suspected steroid users are good liars. Good liars win poker games. If you're a suspected steroid user who wins a poker game, you're guilty as far as I'm concerned.

Other ways to identify denying, suspected steroid users using the "Bluff Model":

• Let them work as a used car salesman. Those guys are skeezy and would lie about anything to sell a car. Hence, if you're a good car salesman, you're a good liar and that equals - a steroid user.
• See how they fare with politics. See how long it takes for a suspect (of steroids) to climb the political hierarchy. Chairman? Could be using. Senator? Most likely using. President? You have to be roided out of your mind.
• How are they as a boyfriend - a sleazy boyfriend. If they can cheat on their girlfriends, but still maintain the relationship, because the chick never finds out, then the dude is using.

Starv-nation and Obe-city

There is an entry from my previous blog that I feel garners some attention. It dealt with me mistakingly pointing fingers and insulting national governments. However, I managed to rectify my mistakes by immediately issuing an informal apology and publishing a correction on my next blog entry. The topic was Niger, Africa, and starvation. I am going to once again attempt to tackle the starvation issue from the same viewpoint as before. Let it be known that insertions from my previous blog may be necessary - don't worry, I've contacted the owner and he said, "Go for it dude."

Let's turn back the pages of history: I incorrectly made a statement on Thursday, July 21, 2005, that for 3.6 million people in Niger, Africa to face starvation was a crime. I admit - it was wrong. I also wished certain countries and organizations to "eat shit." I crossed a boundary and it was foolish. However, I managed to salvage some dignity two days later when I issued a redressal for this impetuous behavior.

The fact remains that "852 million people across the world are hungry, up from 842 million a year ago" (Bread for the World). You know what I say to that? That's it? Hell, I'm hungry for a Pop-Tart right now, but you don't hear me complaining. So why are we making such a big deal out of this? This is a good thing people! People who starve have it ten times better than those with food. And here's why:

• Everyone always makes fun of the fat kid. More than 60 million people in the United States alone, ages 20+, are considered to be obese, and more than nine million 6-19 yr. olds are fatties (CDC - Overweight and Obesity: Home). Just imagine the harsh insults a person would have to endure if he were not starving. Whereas, when your undernourished, the other kids don't even notice you - you can "slip through the cracks," if I may be so blunt. And if you're not chowing down, you don't have to worry about things that other regularly eating people do like: diabetes, heart failure, cancer, diets, allergic reactions, choking and dying, botulism, tasting something icky, and any other food-related risks.
• A friend is a man's best friend. Friends are what get us through our daily lives. They're there for us when we fall and scrape a knee, break up with a significant other, or shoot someone with a gun (unless you're Dick Cheney, in which case the Secret Service is there for you). Friends are also what get starving people through their lives. I cannot begin to fathom the amount of friends I would have if I were starving. And without these friends, starving people wouldn't be emaciated, they'd be dead. Gosh, I wish I had as many friends as a starving person . . .
• "Honey, what's for dinner?" Chew on this: How much time do you spend on preparing meals, figuring out what to eat, and shopping and paying for food? Impoverished, starving people don't have to worry about these things. They don't have to sit in front of an open refrigerator pondering whether or not to make the roast duck or grilled salmon leftovers. They don't need to plan ahead and wonder what's for dinner, because more than likely, they're not eating anything. And famished people don't even think about fiduciary concerns - their bank account is the change in your front pocket.
• Daddy's my hero. Perhaps the best part about starving and having children is that your kids don't expect much from you. But when you do bring home a flattened skunk from Route-90 to Cardboard Mansion, your children will adore you, because you put food on the table. Just, uh, tell them that you killed it yourself - that's what heroes do.

Yeah, but our governments should do something to abet these peoples misfortunes both domestically and abroad, you say. Well, think of it this way. I can't give my entire wallet with seven different department store credit cards, $10,000 cash from selling drugs, a coupon for a free falafel (after you buy 11, of course), and that ham sandwich to hungry people. So why should we expect our government be any different?

Starving people are just fine. And just remember this: at least they're starving and not dead. Now, if you'll excuse me, all this typing in an air conditioned room has made me hungry. Where'd I put that hot fudge sundae . . .