A human brain at work (in case you forget)

Alright, let's get right to this.

BEST DRESSED:
Ellen Page. Simple, lovely, and sparkly! I know I'd impregnate her if I had the chance. A-plus, Juno.
Sean Combs. Classy and sophisticated. So surprising from a black man.

WORST:
Cate Blanchett. Academy Award nominee or German barmaid? Yuck!

Ok, done with the silly ruse. Actually, what brought me on here was this teaser for an upcoming SportsCenter segment (paraphrased):

"How dominant has Tiger Woods become? Who's dominated more--Tiger or Michael Jordan? Michael Wilbon weighs in!"

Wow, creative. Controversial subject. Very important. Worth a thoughtful answer. I missed Wilbon's answer, but I'm guessing it went something like this:

"It depends what you mean by 'dominate.' If you're asking which player is, or was, better at his sport relative to his contemporaries, I'm not sure anyone can answer that. After all, basketball is a team sport where a player's individual contributions are inseparable from those of his teammates, whereas golf is a sport where one's accomplishments are dictated, almost entirely, by his own limitations. Even if we were able to accurately evaluate an NBA player's accomplishments independent of the team dynamic, the question of "dominance" is complicated by the fact that NBA players offer varied skill sets, each rendering a different role--and therefore, different objectives--within the team dynamic. On the other hand, every golfer has an identical objective: get the ball in the hole with the least amount of strokes. And we still haven't addressed the issue of the two sports' talent curves and how they compare with one another at various points within the two men's careers. With all this in mind, shouldn't we spend our time on a resolvable debate? Or at least one that can better our understanding of sports? Or better our understanding of something more important than sports? Or for God's sake, at least something that doesn't seem so cliched? Working at this network has made it harder and harder for me to respect myself."

No, wait. His answer would be nothing like that. More like:

"I'm from Chicago, so it's hard to say anyone is better than MJ at anything because I'm from Chicago. But--and I can't believe I'm saying this because I'm from Chicago and grew up worshiping MJ--I think Tiger is more dominant! He has 63 career tournament wins! MJ had just six championships! Those numbers have a huge arithmetic difference--the only fair way to compare any two numbers in sports, by the way--so I don't see how you could argue against, which is so hard for me to say because I'm from Chicago and love MJ. I love having these debates, though, because they're fun and get my face on TV, and like any good American would do, I willingly trade my journalistic integrity for celebrity on a daily basis. So... Tiger! Now you know the answer."

Honestly... What kind of society do we live in that people earn money, respect, and huge stage for hashing out nonsense questions and where people like me have the time and a forum to critique it? It makes me sick. I make me sick. We need a good plague or famine--not like the kind government aid can cover but the kind that brought civilaztions to their knees--to get back some semblance of sanity. Thank God for these diversions. Thank God for the reassurance of a resolute voice rich in testosterone telling us that these trivial things matter and that everything is hunky dory as long as we work hard and play hard. And we believe him because subconsciously, we see him as a protector and a rock of strength when the truth is, they'll be the first to cannibalize the weak when that famine does hit.