I will keeping a running blog of the debate as I watch it. If nothing interesting happens, this post disappears into the ether never to be read. But if you're reading this, something wild and wacky must have happened...or I got lazy and posted it anyway.

8:00 PM: So the candidates don't get to ask each other questions? That's no fun. Instead, Mr. Lehrer gets to lob softballs at G-Dub where he can talk about the war in Iraq like a rattlesnake roundup.

8:04 PM: "Do you think you could do a better job than Bush at..." what did they think he would say, no?

8:07 PM: I still can't hear anyone referring to Libya without thinking of Back to the Future. I'd like to see Christopher Lloyd up on stage with wild hair and that manic look in his eyes screaming "1 point twenty one jigawatts!"

8:11 PM: Kerry just referred to Bush outsourcing the job of catching bin Laden to warlords. I'm surprised he didn't have them do some of our software engineering while he was at it.

8:17 PM: "The main reason we will succeed [in Iraq] is because the Iraqi people want to be free" What? That doesn't mean anything.

8:19 PM: And we've had our first "if you don't support the war, our troops will lose morale and fall into deep depression and then everyone will be sad" argument. For some reason, this one really resonates with Republicans, despite the fact that it's patently ridiculous.

8:23 PM: "We're modernizing our borders" Awesome! Let's see all those Canadian terrorists get in now...

8:34 PM: I'm getting bored. Bush is parroting his "wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time" line like a broken Teddy Ruxpin. Kerry needs to pull of his mask and show the world that he's Clinton in disguise, something to jazz things up a bit.

8:42 PM: If I've learned anything from our ill-spoken president tonight it's that once I make a statement on something I should never, ever change my mind. Using his logic, humans should still stubbornly think we're at the center of the universe and that the Earth is flat. But that's our story and we're sticking to it.

8:45 PM: Isn't it about time for a commercial break or halftime or something? It's been so long since I've seen a commercial that I'm starting to forget which beer is cold brewed and transported in cold trucks.

8:48 PM: OK, Bush is seriously repeating the same "point" over and over and over and over again rather than actually responding to anything Kerry has said. At least Rush Limbaugh will have a sound bite tomorrow.

9:02 PM: It's amusing that Bush laughs and grins like an idiot but has not made a single fact-based or plan-based argument yet. He loves to refer to vague ideas like "fighting against freedom" (Yooooooo Joe!), but doesn't like actually saying anything of substance. It's a Saturday-morning-cartoon mentality from someone whose mental capacity isn't too much higher.

9:11 PM: Oh boy, a question about character, here comes the real trash...

9:12 PM: And surprise surprise, instead of talking about character, Bush goes right back to his party line of "changing positions". Somebody needs to flip over the tape, I think he's starting to skip.

9:18 PM: Bush just pulled a statistic out of his ass about spending to stop nuclear proliferation. If anyone bothers to research it, I'm sure they'll find it's completely false, but it sure sounds good on TV!

9:22 PM: Hahahaha. Bush plays the follower and claims that his #1 priority is also preventing nuclear proliferation, but if you do a search on his website under Safety and Security for "nuclear proliferation" it finds 1 document. He has an entire section about "compassion and values", doesn't that seem more like a #1 priority to him? Even if you search the main page, it finds 50 documents but the vast majority of them are ridiculing Kerry's nuclear proliferation policies. A similar search on John Kerry's website finds 140 documents. Hmm...which one considers it more of a priority?

9:30 PM: OK, I draw the line at watching the talking heads discuss the outcome. Kornheiser and Wilbon they ain't...

A few weeks ago I posted about my foiled attempt to read more about the backstory behind the DaVinci Code. In their efforts to assure everyone that the fictional novel is not real and apparently divert a serious threat to their 2000-year-old religion, the authors resorted to absurd vignettes and childish name-calling.

It got so bad, that after reading this I figured that if they were so absurdly adamant about the DaVinci Code being a load of hooey, then it must really be a threat, i.e. there must be some facts in the background. So I picked up another shameless attempt to profit off the success of the Dan "There's That Plot Twist Again" Brown, Secrets of the Code by Dan Burstein.

For those of you who were wondering about an actual, balanced look at the history behind DVC (I've been typing all day, ok), this would be it. Sources old and new from both sides of the issue make up this collection, which is a little dry at times but mostly quite interesting. And the funny thing is, reading this book did more to convince me that DVC was a complete work of fiction (imagine that, in the fiction section is a work of fiction...) than the book that tried to beat me over the head with its proselytizing. I hope you're paying attention, political pundits...

There was an art fair on the Plaza today, and since it's right next door to my apartment complex I figured I'd swing over and check it out. Although the artwork was well, well out of my price range, it was a cool atmosphere with all the Plaza restaurants selling food in booths and live musicians playing and such.

The coolest part, though, was that I noticed a new store next door to the swanky Z Gallerie (with a spelling like that, you know it's too cool for me and you to ever shop in): a Segway Store! If you signed a waiver (which I'm sure also put you on their mailing list), you could test drive one around the sidewalk outside the store, so there were about 4 or 5 untrained users zooming around and almost running into people. There were also various Segway owners driving their own vehicles in the store to buy accessories, a la Petsmart. It was too crowded for me to drive one (not to mention quite warm outside today), but it's yet another reason to come visit me.

And now for the NFL picks, hopefully Lucas will remember to pick a team for each game this week no matter how little he cares about the teams involved:

HOU at KC: It's interesting to notice that while the national media is flabbergasted at the Chiefs' inability to score points, the local fanbase proceeds under the delusion that "it just takes a few weeks for our team to jel". I fall into neither of these camps, however. The Chiefs were just plain overrated, although not so much that they can't beat the Texans. KC

PHI at DET: I've picked both Detroit wins this season, despite Lucas' mockery. This one has all the makings: letdown for the Eagles on 6 days of rest on the road. What the hell... DET

BAL at CIN: Traditionally the Bengals don't do well against the Ravens, and they looked quite bad against the horrid Dolphins last week. BAL

AZ at ATL: I don't think the Falcons are this good, but I do think the Cardinals are this bad. ATL

JAX at TEN: The Jaguars are 2-0 despite scoring only 20 points. This can't last, can it? TEN

NO at STL: With every loss, Mike Martz looks like a worse and worse coach, which makes me quite happy. But the Saints almost lost to San Francisco last week. STL

CLE at NYG: I feel bad for everyone for whom this is the only televised game. Citizens of Cleveland, you have my condolensces. New York, you deserve it. NYG

CHI at MIN: Last week was an aberration for both teams. MIN

PIT at MIA: Thanks to the hurricane, this has become a Sunday night game. Thanks to the hurricane, the Dolphins will be much too preoccupied to care about this one. PIT

SD at DEN: Due to the "East coast bias" of this blog, I have nothing to say about this game. DEN

SF at SEA: Seattle is probably overrated, but there's a good chance the Niners are too, and that's scary. SEA

GB at IND: Lucas, you and the Packers lost all of my respect in losing at home to the Bears last week. I will hereby never pick them again (unless they win this game). IND

TB at OAK: Jerry Rice didn't catch a pass last week and the Raiders won, Ewing Theory anyone? OAK

DAL at WAS: I'm making this pick as more of a wish than an actual prediction, as the worse the Cowboys do the less I'll have to hear about Bill Parcells. WAS

Much like Bill Simmons' running blogs of NBA drafts and award shows, I'm going to do a running diary while I watch Monday's season premiere of CSI: Miami...

-And the show starts off as they usually do, with a crime occurring and "H" putting on his sunglasses and staring off into the distance. What is he looking for? A closer for the Red Sox maybe?

-The summer hype was that one of the main characters dies in this episode, and there's already been some meaningless dialogue between "Speed" and the blonde that posed in Playboy. My guess is that it's one of them, and the real question is will the ME talk to their corpse like she usually does?

-And we've had our first ridiculous computer scene involving a dynamic flyby of an overhead street map of Florida while doing a location search. Why doesn't Google have a snazzy animated interface?

-Once again, "H" is working hand in hand with his dead brother's ex-wife, who he not-so-secretly wants to hook up with. Are there any other police officers in the entire city of Miami?

-Zing! H continues to badger suspects and rip off one-liners left and right. And Speed makes a cryptic remark, meaning he will be the unlucky corpse.

-And down he goes in a sudden burst of gunfire. You'd think having one of their own killed by the suspect would require a new team of CSI's, but you'd apparently be quite wrong.

-Note to self: if I'm ever rich, don't talk to any floozies.

-Showdown in the Everglades! Sharks! Gators! Ninjas! (or at least people who do karate) It's a good thing the Miami government spent eleventy billion dollars on a gigantic Hummer for them to drive around in so they can get out there on 4-wheel drive.

-If H gets eaten by a shark, will it put on his sunglasses and stare pensively into the distance?

-And H stares off into the...wait, the episode isn't over yet! Musical montage over Speed's funeral, followed by...H staring pensively. It's the wide range of David Caruso's acting talents.

I was planning on posting item 3 of 3 in my gun series last night, but the Sox-Yankees game took most of my attention and will probably do so again today. In the meantime, here are my NFL picks for week 2. It's good to see that Lucas's site is back up, although that means I won't be able to edit his picks if he starts doing too well.

SF at NO: The Saints lost last week to the consistently-overrated Seahawks, but the good news is that Aaron Brooks had 0 fumbles. Assuming the Superdome isn't underwater after the storm, they should get the W here. NO

WAS at NYG: Last week the 'Skins looked good but not great against a bad Tampa team, and the Giants looked bad but not horrible against a good Eagles team. Kurt Warner's pounding continues this week. WAS

DEN at JAX: Quentin Griffin sure looked good last week, but in the preseason the Chiefs defense made even Ron Dayne look good. Jacksonville seems to be the chic pick for this game, but I think the Denver defense will ensure that even if Plummer throws a few lefty passes they'll still win. DEN

PIT at BAL: This has all the makings of one of those 6-3 games that won't be televised anywhere except Pennsylvania and Maryland. BAL

STL at ATL: After barely beating the Cardinals at home last week, the Rams get a lucky schedule break and get to play another dome game against another crappy team. Mike Martz will do his best to give it away, but the Falcons are still a year or two away. STL

HOU at DET: The Lions, having finally won a road game albeit against the Bears, will surprise some people this year. And in losing to Drew Brees it looks like the Texans have regressed. DET

CHI at GB: If the Packers lose at home against the Bears, they (and by transitivity, Lucas) will lose all of my respect. GB

IND at TEN: The Colts had a 10 day break and the Titans have no healthy, quality running backs. IND

CAR at KC: If it's possible, the Chiefs defense is worse than last year's ugly unit, although the Panthers are without Steve Smith and Stephen Davis. Will another Steve step up? KC

SEA at TB: It looks like Tampa has gone full circle, back to the old 1-15 team they used to be. Can they bring the winking homosexual pirate logo back? SEA

CLE at DAL: Defying all odds, the Browns won last week, but this week they face a QB who, although old, can throw the ball down the field. DAL

BUF at OAK: Neither of these teams is very good, but since the game takes place on Talk Like a Pirate Day, it's only fair to give the nod to the pirate-themed squad. OAK

NE at AZ: This game scares me, and what's the deal with the Pats having a bye already next week? Hopefully they can focus on playing hard and not on 2 weeks of early vacation. NE

NYJ at SD: Last week was a fluke, both for the Chargers winning and the aged Curtis Martin gaining 196 yards rushing. NYJ

MIA at CIN: Oh what a matchup this looked to be in about June, when the Dolphins had David Boston and Smokin' Ricky Williams. If the Bengals lose this one, the bandwagon empties in a hurry. CIN

MIN at PHI: In a battle of two unstoppable wide receivers against two suspect defenses, it might come down to who has the better touchdown dance. Give the edge to the road team if they get a lead and the Philly Phaithful start booing and throwing batteries. MIN

For the 2nd in my series of 3 posts about guns, I once again solve the world's problems. As Nick pointed out in his comments of my post below, the assault weapons ban was not all that effective and incredibly confusing. The average American (never mind the average gun owner...) doesn't want to measure their barrel length or magazine capacity, they want to do some major fragging! So with this in mind I present....

Chris' Video Game Weapons Ban

The criteria are simple, if a particular gun is the gun you start with or pick up without killing anything in the first level of a first-person shooter, that gun is legal. Therefore, the following weapons are legal:

-fists
-swords
-pistols

If you have to kill bad guys to get a weapon, however, it is illegal. The following weapons are illegal:

-Uzis
-Shotguns
-Rocket Launchers
-Shrinking Rays
-Freezing Rays
-Lasers
-Handheld guided missile launchers
-Sticky Bombs
-Golden Guns
-Sticks of dynamite
-Flamethrowers

I think using these simple rules we can all coexist without accidentally blowing each other up. Unless Blofeld or Scaramanga show up, then all bets are off.

As you probably know, the ban on assault weapons ran out and now we have the "right" to buy military-issue submachine guns for hunting, self-protection, or escaping from Castle Wolfenstein.

The usual arguments for gun ownership seem especially silly here. If someone mugs you in Central Park, the likelihood of you carrying around your assault rifle to defend yourself are pretty slim. And the deer and squirrels still aren't wearing bulletproof vests or driving tanks, so the extra firepower is kind of pointless. You can't exactly stuff a charred pile of ash and hang it on your wall, after all.

But the funniest part is that the people who are loving their newfound weaponry rights are the same conservatives who voted for the ban on homosexual marriage. So let me get this straight, gay people getting married is dangerous, but every drunk redneck and stupid asshole owning weapons powerful enough to take over small countries isn't? Gay marriage is a threat to their children, but their kids going to a friend's house and playing real-life Doom 3 with their dad's armory isn't? This is why dumb people shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Football commercials tend to be a bit repetitive. Coors Light beer is cold. This idea has been pounded into my head for the last two hours. But the silliest thing I've heard so far is the notion of a "certified pre-owned" car. What exactly does this mean? They're basically saying, "we promise, it's a used car. We aren't trying to sneak a new car to you for a low price, it really was driven into the ground by a teenager who thought he was Vin Diesel. We swear."

And now, the part of the show that 99% of you probably don't read, the NFL picks. I'll update the sidebar at some point this weekend. (Note, Lucas' picks are in the comments of yesterday's post)

IND at NE: The Patriots didn't look too good this preseason, but everyone stayed healthy. Belichick owns Peyton Manning in New England, but in under the artificial lights of the dome it'll be much closer. Fortunately, the awful strains of Toby Keith will drown out Manning's wacky audibles. NE

AZ at STL: As much as I think the Rams will just tank this year, there's just no reason I can come up with for the Cardinals to beat them in the TWA/American Dome. STL

BAL at CLE: Jamal Lewis gets his first chance to break his own individual rushing record. BAL

CIN at NYJ: The Jets may give New England a run for their money this year, even if Curtis Martin needs to one of those walkers with the tennis balls on it. NYJ

DET at CHI: Detroit will play a lot of those wild games this year where they score 35 and give up 38. Just not against the Bears. DET

JAX at BUF: Travis Henry will be rushing for his life, but the Jags are just better. JAX

OAK at PIT: Oakland's big offseason pickups were 2 old guys, Ted Washington and Warren Sapp. I guess they're afraid Jerry Rice will retire soon. PIT

SD at HOU: San Diego had a typically pathetic offseason to go along with their typically pathetic regular seasons. HOU

SEA at NO: The Saints aren't due to choke, nor the Seahawks due to win a road game, for another couple of months. NO

TB at WAS: Can Joe Gibbs play offensive line? Can Joe Gibbs throw the ball? Can Joe Gibbs cover a wide receiver? Well, perhaps he can better than the guys he's got in there. But Tampa is taking a dive this year. WAS

TEN at MIA: The first in a series of "laugh at the Dolphins' misfortunes" games. Somewhere, Ricky is smiling and toking. TEN

ATL at SF: I'm not sold on the Falcons yet, but the Niners are in the proverbial "rebuilding year". ATL

DAL at MIN: I dislike Parcells and his pants. And I watched Eddie George run in the preseason and he's d-u-n done. MIN

NYG at PHI: The over/under on Warner fumbles in this game is 3. The over/under on angry phone calls by Brenda to the New York media after the game is 2. PHI

KC at DEN: KC still can't play defense, and they still have Eddie Kennison as their #1 wide receiver. Denver in a nailbiter. DEN

GB at CAR: The Panthers won't feel the heat of being a defending Super Bowl team for another couple of weeks. CAR

Lucas beat me again last year, but this year he only posts about once a month. At that rate, I think I can accumulate enough wins to defeat him. To make things interesting, I'm offering an invitation to Brian to join us in doing a poor job of predicting who will win every week. Let's see if your picks are as bad as your fantasy football skills.

I had originally wanted to make a longer, more thought-out post about this, but I'm heading to St. Louis this weekend and I didn't want to leave you without content for so long since the site has been down for the past few days.

Unless you've been living under a rock without a TV or access to Google, you'll know that the Olympics ended on Sunday (despite Google's inexplicable olympic header image today) with our men's basketball team getting a bronze medal and embarassing themselves by losing 3 games. Based on an ESPN.com internet poll (the most reliable means of divining public opinion since flipping a coin), the majority of internet-savvy Americans were rooting against the men's team.

Kansas City Star columnist Jason Whitlock wrote a scathing attack on everyone who voted "yes" in this poll, calling them racist and unpatriotic. Apparently the reason people didn't support these olympians had nothing to do with the fact that they were arrogant (refusing to live in the Olympic Village with the other athletes), pompous (skipping practice) millionaires who played without heart. Instead, it's because they were successful and black.

I don't know how to put this, but Whitlock is a dope. Put a white guy on the team and they still would have lost. They still would have lived in their own little mini-mansions, reverted to trying ridiculous alley-oops the minute they had a 1 point lead, and gotten pounded by teams who actually cared about playing. I still would have rooted against them because they didn't deserve to win.

It may surprise the oodles of sports columnists who keep trying to drag this into a black vs. white thing, but most sports fans don't really care about skin color as long as they help their team win. Pokey Reese is black and plays baseball in a city that, according to another dope Barry Bonds, is "still racist", yet he gets standing ovations for his defense even though he hits .240. Chiefs receiver/runback specialist Dante Hall is black, yet countless white programmers at work have his picture as their computer background.

And the "unpatriotic" part is just ludicrous, a product of Bush's America, where if you don't drape your pickup truck in American flags and decals of Calvin peeing on Saddam Hussein you're not "supporting our troops". Apparently as Americans we should support arrogant millionaires because to the rest of the world we are a bunch of arrogant millionaires.