I love how this whole enterprise is blowing up in the Yankees faces. They can't fill their precious new stadium. And while teams really don't make the majority of their money off ball park attendance (its in the merchandising and TV contracts), the fact that they have priced their team outside of the range of the middle class means that they're fan base will slowly dwindle in the long term- nobody wants to root for the team that tells them they're too poor to be a real fan.

This will hurt their merchandising and TV revenues when everyone in NY switches to the Mets. I bet it'll only take ten years or so before the Yankees are the second team in the city, with an income worse than the Pirates.

They could turn it around of course, if they would cut their ticket prices to something that isn't absolutely crazy. That would be the rational move. And I'm talking way more than half. A seat along first base line in any stadium, for any regular season game, should NEVER, NEVER have a face value of more than $150, and that's for the seat where you can smell Arod's bengay you're so close.

I admit, I was initially worried when this new stadium came along, that this would mark the end of competitive baseball in the AL for decades. But thankfully the son of Steinbrenner is just as scummy as his father, and a total buffoon to boot, and is totally screwing this up big time. He may have actually supplanted Peter Angelos as the dumbest owners in MLB.

Absolutely the worst network on TV. It used to be Fox, cancelling good shows after they move them around so much on the schedule that the audience couldn't find them, so naturally the ratings died. But NBC doesn't even do that and still kills good shows in lieu of bad.

Cancelling Earl? Really? Jay Leno at 10, cockblocking Conan? That whole network should be given the pink slip so they can start over. If I was developing a new show I wouldn't even bother going to NBC with it. They just don't seem to want to make television any more.

P.S. -Can someone please explain how they can get over the mind numbing absurdity of Dollhouse's premise enough to take the show seriously? There hasn't been a show so implausible since The Beverly Hillbillies.

Anyone else get the machiavellian notion that perhaps Markus dismissed her because Meghan McCain is a rational Republican, and it benefits liberals to diminish rational conservatives, in favor of the radical, lunatic right wingers like Cheney, Limbaugh, et. al? If you have the opportunity to pick your adversaries, wouldn't you pick the twit with the aluminum hat?

I don't see anyone ever getting in an uproar when some male figure's looks or personal life is mocked by a comedian or other public figure. Yet the same treatment gets everyone all in a bind whenever its a public female figure. And here goes Palin yet again exploiting the double standard that you all allow.

Pick on Palin's looks? Why not? Letterman picks on McCain's age, Obama's ears, Limbaugh's weight, O'Reilly's personal issues, Bill Clinton's personal life, etc. I didn't see any of you up in arms over that stuff. Make one joke about Palin's naughty librarian look or Hillary's shrill laugh and all of a sudden its out of bounds.

This is what is wrong with feminism: many feminists talk a good game about equality, but have such a idealized and romantic concept of it that actual equality seems mean and they reject it. How can anyone take you seriously?

P.S. -No, Sarah, Letterman was not talking about your 14 year old, he was talking about Bristol. That was clearly obvious to anyone not trying to exploit this for political gain. Most people don't even know you had a 14 year old. And won't until your bad parenting ruins her life too.

And as bad as some think the joke was, Palin's the one who put her in the public spotlight. Bristol is the one staying there on this abstinence tour of hers. Which is obscene coming from someone who abstinence only education utterly failed.

As in, a great way to be able to tell a real feminist from the phony ones.

If, on the one hand, you think the joke might have been in poor taste, not something you would have laughed at, but otherwise not really that important, congratulations, you might be an actual feminist. There are of course other criteria, equal pay for equal work, etc., but you have at least not disqualified yourself.

However, if you actually think that Letterman treated Palin any different than he has treated Bill Clinton, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, John McCain, John Kerry, Gary Hart, or any of the simply thousands of public male figures he has mocked or insulted over personal matters in the last thirty plus years, then I'm sorry, you cannot truly believe in equality when you think women should be treated any different than men. Unless of course you strenuously objected to Bill Clinton dick jokes or Limbaugh weight jokes. Then you could possibly still be a feminist. But otherwise, you do not really believe in equal treatment unless its to your advantage, or you simply have no spine. And you should get off the stage

Anyone who actually thinks that Ahmadenijad actually won 2/3 of the vote overall is naive. Anyone who thinks that his rivals lost their home turf by almost that much is delusional.

This election was stolen. Pure and simple. And it wasn't even stolen well- rigging a five point margin is plausible. But thirty points? Only the utterly brazen or the completely retarded would try to steal an election so foolishly.