TMQ Watch: January 28, 2014 (part 2).

Where were we? Oh, yes: cheerleaders.

Are cheerleaders being exploited?

The NFL’s attitude seems to be that cheerleaders are just frilly little things flouncing around, let their boyfriends look after them. Whether that attitude is paternalism or exploitation, take your choice of words. The basic premise of labor law is that because persons seeking employment can be pressured to agree to bad deals, there must be floors beneath which employers may not go.

Ah, yes. Because they are delicate flowers who can’t recognize a bad deal when they see one. Who’s being paternalistic now, TMQ?

Of course cheerleaders make eyes-open agreements to accept low-paid work, but that does not rationalize mistreatment.

What constitutes “mistreatment” here? Are they being beaten? Exposed to toxic chemicals? No, apparently, they’re being asked to cheer for NFL teams and being paid less than $5 an hour – and, in the process, also getting tons of public exposure which may translate into other opportunities. Perhaps, if this is such an exploitive job, NFL teams should just do away with cheerleaders.

What to look for in the Pot Bowl: “high-tech fast-forward versus traditionalism”, ” the Broncos simply have not yet seen an elite defense”, the Seahawks ” have not seen an elite offense on the road”, and the game is a contrast of pass-whacky offense vs. run-happy offense. So: “The Broncos must throw deep”, Seattle needs an aggressive game plan (which includes passing), and Seattle is missing fewer key players than Denver. TMQ picks Seattle by a field goal. Get your bets down: that seems to be pretty close to the Vegas line. (Our compromise with our religious upbringing is to be pro-gambling, pro-full frontal nudity, pro drinking, pro dancing, and generally pro every type of behavior between consenting adults that doesn’t harm other people.)

Quoted without comment:

Most sports websites do not provide adequate coverage of the migratory patterns of North American owls.

The best conditions for kicking a football are actually humid, warm days at higher altitudes, contrary to TMQ’s belief that humidity is bad for kickers.

Bad predictions time. (We admit, we kind of miss this. We don’t miss it as an entire column, but as a once-a-year item, sure, why not?) Is it just us, or does TMQ seem to really have it in for this Nouriel Roubini guy? We hate to admit it, but we’ve never heard of him.

(We’re also not sure the Pat Haden and Rick Spielman items count as “predictions”.)

In 2011, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta predicted Israel would bomb Iran by spring of 2012.

Bad prediction, or example of good diplomacy in action?

Your columnist backs same-sex marriage, with the caveats that gay unions will produce just as many fights, therapy sessions and divorces as straight ones; and that while marriage offers benefits to the wedded, it also offers burdens.

In this case, the burden is: taxes. Same-sex married couples now have to pay the marriage penalty. “As of 2014, married high-income gays also will pay the ObamaCare tax increases embedded in new rates for Medicare, capital gains and dividends…” But: the surviving half of a married gay couple doesn’t have to pay estate tax.

“Wacky Food Card of the Week”. What? “Ten digits are needed to assign a unique number to each person on the Earth; 16 digits should assign a unique number to every sentient being in the galaxy; yet there’s a 16-digit number on the Tex-Mex card.” TMQ appears to be unaware of concepts like “check digits”. “It’s just a card that issues a burrito discount.” We’re actually just a little appalled that TMQ is eating Tex-Mex in Bethesda, Maryland. It’s possible that he’s found a good burrito place that far north, but the odds are against it. Shouldn’t he be eating crabs?

TMQ won’t be watching the Superb Owl from the press box. But don’t worry: “I ordered fleece-lined jeans from L.L. Bean.” We were prepared to snark on how much L.L. Bean fleece-lined jeans must cost, but surprise! They’re actually pretty reasonable. We might get a pair for next winter in Austin, right after we get some fire hose pants. (We’ve blown out a lot of pairs of cheap pants, so we’re always looking for something tough. Our official brother swears by those fire hose pants; we haven’t tried them yet, but we swear by 5.11 Tactical pants.)

Hot news flash: the tweets of politicians often lack substance.

Modern cruise ships are big. Can a 4/5ths of a second difference in throwing speed make a difference? Well, if you can do a ten second 100 yard dash, that’s 10 yards in one second, or eight yards in 4/5ths of a second. Could 8 yards be the difference between a completed pass and a sack?

And that wraps things up for this week. Tune in next week; we think this will be the final TMQ of the season.

4 Responses to “TMQ Watch: January 28, 2014 (part 2).”

  1. lelnet says:

    If he wants owl migration coverage in the sports pages (??!!??), he should agitate to legalize hunting them. In the words of Neal Stephenson: “Sports. As in hunting and fishing. Which take place outdoors. Which is where the environment is. Which is why environmental news ends up on the sports page.”

  2. stainles says:

    And hunting owls may be the best way to conserve them, too.

    Owls Unlimited, anyone?

  3. What, no mention of autonomous heroin-vending robots?

  4. stainles says:

    That’s “autonomous Glock and heroin-vending robots”, and I think TJIC has that phrase trademarked.