You probably can't solve this dilemma.

I went bowling earlier tonight. (223, 178, and 202, in case you were wondering.) While I was at the bowling alley, I got a text message from one of my cousins. I had done some technical work on her behalf recently, but this text message was of a social nature. Long story short → sure, I'll stop by the local redneck pool hall and have a beer.

After a short time, she and her crew were ready to leave the pool hall. Predictably, of course, she asked if I wanted her to stop by my house and take a look at the aforementioned technical work. This was obviously the underlying basis for the original social invite. It was 1am, so having a few visitors seemed perfectly logical to me. Let's do it.

She reviewed my work, handed me some cash, and then hung around to talk for a little while. By the time she left, the re-airing of the new bible show on the History Channel was wrapping up. From what I saw of that show, it was pretty lousy. Just a halfassed attempt to brush across a few key biblical stories and then skip hundreds of years before brushing across the next key biblical story. I was unimpressed.

Then, at 2am, there was the viking show. That one was also new. As tends to be the case where television is involved, I again found myself unimpressed. I'm just not a TV guy, I guess. I may check out another episode at some point in time, since Ragnar Lodbrok is an interesting historical/mythological figure, but that first episode was shitty.

Then, as tends to be the case after a 2am show has concluded, it was 3am. What to do at 3am... what to do? I could go to bed, but that's not my cup of tea. I could read something, but it was 3am, so... I could flip through the channels and see if anything was worth watching.

I found live baseball on the MLB Network. I like baseball - a lot. In early March, I especially like baseball that counts for something, unlike the typical spring training game. The World Baseball Classic was the perfect fit. And did I mention that it was live - at 3am?

But here's the dilemma. The game was being played between China and Cuba. If you wonder how I feel about communists, then you clearly don't know me. Visit the navigation links at the right of the page and do some reading. If you already know how I feel about communists, then you're starting to get an idea of my problem. For whom should I cheer? There's no easy answer. The ChiComs are probably the world's biggest offenders right now, but the Cubans damned near caused WWIII back in the 60's. Personally, I take a somewhat forgiving view toward the Chinese, since I buy a lot of cheap shit that was made in China. But then again, the Cubans make good cigars. And I do enjoy a good cigar.

Based on the few people that I've met from the respective countries, I find the Chinese to be more likable. Then again, I recently took a class that taught me about my cultural predisposition to hate people with dark skin. It hardly seems fair to the Cubans that they should suffer as a result of my latent racism. I mean, clearly I'm racist toward everybody other than pasty white males, but the Cubans are darker. So I'm more racist toward them. Studies say so. Studies conducted by people with PhD's and shit. Who could argue with that?

So, do I root for Cuba in order to compensate for my hatred of dark people? Or do I root for China in order to compensate for my hatred of those who pursue "progress" by killing millions of innocent people? It's a tough call. And we haven't even gotten to the part where both teams wear uniforms that would look cheap on your local beer league softball team. As a white heterosexual male, clearly I hate the gays. So it's no surprise that I fail to appreciate fabulous uniforms like these.

So there you have it. Which team should I support? And why?

(Spoiler alert: I hope an asteroid hits the stadium and takes out both teams. You know, because I'm white... meaning I'm racist.) But let me know. Anything else I should support?

I don't watch a lot of hockey, but wow.

It's my understanding that the Wings are in a transition phase and, as a result, they're not very good this year. As I was having dinner with some friends tonight, I saw that they dropped eight goals on Vancouver. Wow. We're told that Detroit is the most miserable city in America. For today at least, I'm pretty sure Roberto Luongo was the most miserable person in Detroit.

I've watched a handful of games this year. I don't think I've seen the Wings score eight goals in total. And one goal was even taken off the board after Datsyuk touched the puck ever-so-slightly above the crossbar before it went in the net. Wow.

Take this one for what it's worth.

I'm on record telling you fine folks, right from the start, that Manti Te'o was innocent of everything other than misleading his father.  You sure as shit won't see me backing down from that assertion now.  Every bit of evidence - EVERY BIT OF EVIDENCE - has backed up Manti's claim that he was just a gullible nerd who fell in love and didn't know any better.

So, as I so very astutely informed you blog reading folks, the narrative began to crumble.  You were first told that he was the world's greatest con artist.  That held up for a day or two.  Then you were told that he kept lying about "Lennay" after he knew she didn't exist.  That one still has some tentacles in certain circles.  It's false, for what it's worth.  He got a call on December 6th.  He had an interview on December 8th.  The notion that the December 6th call cracked the case is incongruous with everything else that we've learned.  Common sense would dictate that this phone call would send the poor kid into a state of confusion.

But screw it.  People will always want to assume the worst about people who appear to have exceptional character.  Even if you accept the false notion that the December 8th interview was a lie (and I don't), you would generally have to agree that it's understandable given the circumstances.  Unless you're a hater, that is.

In that case, you need to move right on to the next narrative - "Nobody could possibly be that gullible."  As someone who knows nothing about Manti Te'o other than what I've seen on television since he committed to Notre Dame, I'm no expert.  And, as such, I know far more than 99% of you out there.  This guy is different.  He has been different from the start and this has been obvious to anyone who paid attention.  But some people just can't accept that a guy could have the heart to become closer and closer to a woman that he never met, even as she became more and more distressed.

Here's an article from someone who claims to have insight into the subject.  I make no claims about the author's qualifications.  If you people are so convinced that Te'o should have vetted Lennay, then you can go ahead and vet the author of the linked post.  I don't need to.  I was convinced that Te'o was telling the truth from the start.  Nobody has come close to convincing me otherwise.

So read the brief article of you like.  And take it for what it's worth.

(Then, if you're really in the mood for some self-reflection, compare this story to the Benghazi story.  Four dead Americans as a result of administrative incompetence, followed by non-stop lies - nobody gives a shit.  Manti got tricked by a fake internet chick - national scandal.  This country is seriously fucked.)

The narrative is falling apart.

Face it. The kid got tricked. He lied to his father about his internet girlfriend, which he shouldn't have done. Beyond that, the media firestorm has been dead wrong. Being a sucker who was drawn to a suffering woman is not nearly the same as purpotrating an elaborate hoax to prop up a nonexistent Heisman campaign.

Speaking of the Heisman thing, some of you fucking people are awfully stupid.  Take ten seconds and think shit through before you fill the internet with it.  Before the Michigan State game, Notre Dame had just squeaked by Purdue.  The quarterback had been benched.  The coach was being questioned from every angle.  Optimistic fans thought a 9-3 record might be attainable.  Self-described realists were thinking probably 8-4 or 7-5.  Te'o was not on a single major Heisman watch list.  Not one.  Nada.  He was not a Heisman candidate.  Oh, and he's a fucking linebacker.

Here's the Heismanpundit watch list - probably the most well rounded and respected of the bunch.  Where's Te'o?  Much like Lennay Kekua, he's not there.  Here's the SI list.  Te'o?  Not there, even though they have a specific category for defense.  They went with Jarvis Jones.  Next up we have Yahoo Sports, an organization that has been doing pretty solid reporting for a number of years now, in case people haven't noticed.  No Te'o to be found.  The Fox Sports list is a slideshow, but Te'o isn't on any of the slides.  And, even though you get my point by now, we can't move on without mentioning the World Wide Leader.  Again - twelve players listed, none of them named Te'o.

So, according to the genius of internet wisdom, this guy faked a girlfriend's death on the same day that his grandmother actually died in order to bolster a Heisman campaign that didn't exist.  Nevermind the fact that the ESPN cameras would have been there to discuss him playing on the day that his grandmother died anyway.  He's the star of the Notre Dame football team.  I get a chuckle out of all the butthurt hatred directed at the Irish, but I can certainly agree that they get a little too much media exposure at times.  You honestly think that people would have been saying, "Well, it's too bad that his grandma died, but that's not really a story.  Now, if he had a girlfriend who died on the same day we might have something to talk about."  Do people have any idea how fucking stupid this sounds?  Playing to honor his grandmother would have been the story of the week.

Now, after spewing venom and hatred at this kid for a few days, people are entering the rationalization phase.  Watch it happen before your eyes, if you're not already enlightened enough to accept that I'm right and just move along.  Here's Deadspin, the purveyor of the original hit piece, when it looked like Jeremy Schaap wouldn't get his interview with Te'o.

It's not clear whether ESPN landed and lost the interview, or if they never had it in the first place. But there are two decent reasons for Te'o to look elsewhere when he wants to tell his version of events. First, Jeremy Schaap fancies himself a hard-hitting interviewer, and wouldn't let this sit-down go by without asking specific, pointed questions that leave no wiggle room for non-answers. Te'o's statement contains facts that don't mesh with what's been reported, so it would be very easy for Schaap, if he wanted to, to pin Te'o down on a lie. Much better for Te'o to find another, softer interviewer. Like, say, Oprah.

So they were pretty sure that Schaap is a good reporter and that he would nail Te'o.  Then, after the interview happened, the narrative switched to one where Schaap didn't get any information and his whole interview was just a waste of time.  Why?  Te'o told the truth, had evidence to back him up, and Schaap believes him.

The overriding lesson here... I guess there are two.

1. Jumping to conclusions - yeah, you already know about that lesson.  But this is a good reminder.  It was pretty over-the-top.
2. This widespread eagerness to "bring down" somebody that we perceive as too good is a sign that we need to sort some shit out in our own lives.  Seriously.

Now for a prediction:  We'll see evidence trickling out over the next few days and weeks.  Maybe we'll even see the perpetrator give a tearful confession and beg for forgiveness.  The dug-in elements of our society, consumed by their venomous hatred of Te'o and/or Notre Dame, will find ways to explain away the evidence that shows they were wrong.  Those who were slightly less dug-in will simply shift their storylines.  A couple of days ago it was that Te'o was in on the hoax.  Now it will be that Notre Dame should have gone public sooner.  Even though their investigation showed that the situation didn't involve the university and Te'o had already graduated, they should have come forward and discussed a former student's private life publicly.  Why?  Well... just because.  That's why.

Journalism 101: When your narrative falls apart, it's not time to seek the correct narrative.  It's time to save face.