Random Thoughts

• Props to Newt Gingrich for infusing his stance on illegal immigration with some common sense.  At last night's debate, Gingrich said (and I'm paraphrasing) that while he'd deport those illegal immigrants who had recently arrived in the Land of Opportunity, he'd allow those who had put down roots (e.g., starting a family in America) to stay.  Newt has taken some dumb positions in the past, but he showed some courage in straying from the party line--especially as he's currently leading the polls and therefore had less incentive to rock the boat.
• I'm disappointed the Bears didn't land Kyle Orton.  He would have been valuable in a variety of ways: he could've provided some insight into the Broncos' offense (the Bears play the Fightin' Tebows in a few weeks), he would be great insurance in case Hanie went down, and, by signing Orton, the Bears would have prevented the Chiefs--another upcoming opponent--from upgrading their quarterback situation.  Let's not blame the Bears for Orton winding up in KC instead of Chi-Town, though.  After all, the Chiefs have waiver priority; consequently, when both teams claimed Orton, Kansas City won out.
• I'm predicting that the Bears will make the playoffs, even despite Cutler's injury.  This isn't a tremendously bold statement, considering the relative softness of their schedule when compared to other NFC wild-card contenders, but I wanted to put it in (virtual) print anyways.  I had been predicting playoffs for my hometown heroes for a while now, but you'd have to search my gchats to find any corroborating evidence.  (Do take my word for it, though.)
• Sticking with the forecasting, I'm here to tell you that my Northwestern Wildcats will snap their 62 year bowl-victory drought this year.  Unlike the typical Wildcat team of the last decade or so, which has overachieved in the regular season and received a tough postseason opponent as a result, this year's squad struggled early and have more talent than their record would indicate.
• I think Robert Griffin III is a better college football player than Andrew Luck, but I'd put Luck over RG3 on my Heisman ballot.  I am one of those guys who thinks that a team's record should be considered by voters.  I took this stance a few years back when I railed against Toby Gerhart's Heisman credentials--with so many players playing so many positions on so many college football teams, it's impossible to determine the best college football player in all the land.  (If it were possible, surely a lineman would have won more often.)  Therefore, some component of the Heisman should instead be geared towards voting for the most valuable player on a very successful team.  (Note: getting to bowl eligibility is not "very successful.")  Even though the 2011 Cardinal have been described as a team "that seemed good enough to play in the national title game until it ran into a team that really is good enough to play in a national title game," reaching a BCS game is certainly a very successful campaign.
• All that said, does Luck deserve a Heisman over Trent Richardson, Bama's star running back?  Impossible to say with regular season games left to be played, but if both shades of red* win out, well, it's still damned tough to say.  (I'm sure Luck will end up winning, but will it be a deserved victory?)

*If I got too cute there, I'm referring to the Cardinal and the Crimson Tide.

Irrefutable Proof that the Republicans will win Ohio (and thus the White House) in 2012

ESPN.com always has a poll question featured prominently on its home page.  The results of the poll are displayed on a state-by-state basis.  This morning's poll question asks, "Which side should receive a larger share of the revenue in the NBA?" and gives us three options from which to choose: Owners, Players, or Let's Split the Baby and Divide Things 50-50.

You probably didn't realize it (seeing as how I'm reading into this for comedic effect), but in more generic terms, ESPN has just asked you, "are you on the side of the employer or the employees?"  If you're a fan of the Captains of Industry, you vote for the owners; if you're a champion of the working man, you vote for the players or--since the players just rejected a deal and you're kinda mad at them for depriving you of basketball but not mad enough to side with those parasitic billionaires--the 50-50 chop.

The map, which is pictured below and likely has already caught your eye with its vibrant colors and distracted you from reading these paragraphs of text, shows a fairly even divide between owners and 50-50 loyalty.  (Again, I'm assuming--sort of unfairly--that the 50-50 option is a pro-player stance.)  Look at the individual states.  The classic GOP strongholds (Texas, Utah, the Deep South) are pro-owner, whereas the traditionally Democratic states (California, Illinois, the Northeast) stand with the players.  In fact, this map comes pretty close to mirroring the 2008 electoral college results, except for the obnoxious fact that ESPN inverted the colors.

Ohio, however, has failed to cooperate.  Obama captured the state in 2008, so we'd expect it to be pro-union, pro-employee, etc, but it's aligned with the owners!  Clearly, we can fairly extrapolate from this sports poll that Obama has already lost Ohio and, as Ohio goes, so goes the nation, or something.  Long story short: the real election for our nation's next leader comes in the GOP primary.  The general election has already been decided.  You heard it here first.