It's time to fix our crumbling country

I don't have the skills to patch a street. I definitely don't have the equipment or money in my usually barren checking account to repair a street but with the steadily crumbling state of our country's infrastructure it isn't exactly a far off nightmare that soon residents will be responsible for maintaining and improving our roadways -- and that doesn't mean paying money to have a big time construction company to do the work. It means that we'll be dragging a shovel and a bucket out in front of our respective houses and fixing our roads, highways and streets the old school way.

But why is that?

It's mainly because states have less funding available to maintain and improve our infrastructure.

But why do the states have less money to pay for upkeep and improvements to our highways and other infrastructure items?

Because the states along with certain local governments are busy trying to scrape together funding for billion dollar stadiums used ten days per year (think Minnesota Vikings and billionaire owner Zygi Wilf) and they have been given less funding by the federal government.

But why doesn't the federal government have enough money to provide money to the states to distribute to individual cities to maintain local infrastructure?

Skyrocketing unemployment. A decade fighting two wars. Wasteful military spending. Money shipped overseas to save aspects of other countries who may not exactly deserve saving. Take your pick.

I'm not advocating that we cut off all foreign aide. Natural disasters happen and those people are merely victims of their surroundings. Nobody deserves to die after their country has deen decimated by a tsunami, earthquake or drought but, while it seems selfish to say, it may be time to take a second look at how we are spending money overseas. It is definitely time to examine military spending. Shut down top-secret programs because if I don't know what the money is being spent on it probably isn't necessary spending. Yeah, we still need to defend our country against real or perceived evils which may threaten our friends and neighbors either directly or indirectly. However, it needs to be done on a budget. Shit, I'd like to have new siding on my house but a coat of paint will give the exterior a nice facelift. I'm choosing that route because it saves money and I have to live within my means. I'd like a Mac Mini to set up as a home media center but, again, I have a budget. Money is not infinite. And the money that our country can spend is not infinite either.

It's time to look inward and start taking care of the country that took over 200 years to build up to its current point. It's either that or let it go to shit and sell it to China. There are ways to get these jobs done. There's always prison labor...

The Minnesota government shutdown & a response from a senator

Last night, before I shuffled off to bed, I took the time to write my state senator regarding the looming government shutdown right here in Minnesota. When I wrote the letter, I had my typical attitude that our elected officials -- at every level -- are just there for the extra paycheck. Hell, they earn full-time money for a part-time job so who wouldn't want to try their hand at running for elected office?

My letter, edited for some identifying content, follows below:

Dear Senator DeKruif,

I am taking time tonight to write you regarding the budget impasse and looming state government shutdown. The petty, partisan bickering and divisiveness has gone on too long. As a constituent in your district, I am appalled that in the time since your election to the office of state senator that you and your peers have continued to further divide an already strongly divided state. After running on a platform of job growth, you have done absolutely nothing to create jobs. By refusing to compromise with Governor Dayton and meet in the middle, you will actually be causing hardships as people face layoffs while the state government shuts down. Even more appalling is that having the government shut down will actually cost more than keeping all services running as-is.

I am disgusted to think that you supposedly speak for the middle class when it is those very people who will face hardships, inconveniences and potential job losses. Why is it so revolting for the current majority party to face the facts and realize that the logical thing to do is raise taxes on the top two percent of wage earners in the state of Minnesota? In the county where I reside, that boils down to a mere 300 people -- people who can afford a somewhat increased tax burden to turn our state in the correct direction.

While I don't expect a response or you, Mr DeKruif, to even bother reading the opinion of one citizen in your district, I hope that you would do the right thing and work with your peers on the other side of the political aisle. It is bullheaded divisiveness and political posturing that has caused the current state of economic stagnation in our state and country and a governmental shutdown which costs more than keeping services running does absolutely nothing to improve anyone's economic status. I hope that you, Mr DeKruif, at least have the decency to return your wages paid to you as state senator because nobody voted for state senators and representatives who would willingly shut down the numerous services and oust tens of thousands of hard-working Minnesotans from their jobs.

Do the decent thing and either present a budget bill which consists of both spending cuts and tax increases for the top two percent of wage earners in the state or return your ill-gotten wages as state senator. After all, I wouldn't expect to receive a paycheck for accomplishing nothing and neither should you.

Sincerely,

[Mr. Sorenson]

Obviously I was less than pleased in how this has played out. It's not a party affiliation thing for me in the least bit -- I'd verbally rip a Democratic member of the state legislature in the same fashion if I was represented by one. Surprisingly, my state senator (or some aide in his office) actually did take the time to respond to my letter. While I don't agree with his stance 100%, I am at least surprised that someone took the time to reply in a timely manner to my thoughtful and strongly worded letter. While I still feel that government should be about compromise and working together and stand by my stance about our state's elected officials forfeiting their paychecks due to accomplishing absolutely nothing, I feel slightly better. Senator Al DeKruif's response follows below:

Dear [Mr. Sorenson],

Thank you for taking the time to contact me, I truly appreciate the input of citizens. I understand that the possibility of a government shutdown is a difficult issue for many, especially workers that face layoffs because of a shutdown.

All people think differently; some are analytical thinkers, some are critical thinkers, some are abstract thinkers. The way we think and is influenced by both genetics and the environment in which we are raised.

Governor Dayton once made a comment about the freshmen legislators not knowing how government works and not being willing to learn; I think that he may be partially right. The freshmen members of the legislature come from a business background we are business owners and entrepreneurs. We are a group of people that have had to make difficult decisions to move our businesses and families forward. We have had to take risks; often with those risks we ran the chance of losing not only our business, but homes as well. We have been through times of struggle; struggle to pay bills, employees, suppliers. We have been able to succeed through the challenges and risks, and know how to make those difficult decisions.

The governor comes from a different background, and has a different mindset; he has never had to be financially responsible for a business and has never had to worry about the struggle that comes from taking a financial risk. Having a trust fund, the governor has never had to worry that a decision that he has made could cost him his home or business. I do not begrudge him that, but I know that his view of the world is different than mine because of that. I cannot see things as the governor does, and I know that he does not see things as I do. Who’s mindset do you most relate to, the governor or those of us that have had to struggle and make difficult decisions?

The issue of the state budget is critical not just for the immediate biennium, but for the future of our state as well. When I was elected I came into office with a resolve to get our state government under control. For too long the role of government has grown unchecked; this needs to be corrected. I want to make sure that this is done right the first time and not leave the problem for a future legislature to deal with.

The governor and the leadership of the unions representing state workers have been teaming up to spread a message of fear and misinformation about the budget. Make no mistake, I am not anti-worker, and I value the hard work and important roles each and every state employee contributes. The workers are the ones that will be hurt by a government shutdown, not the union bosses or the governor. It is wrong that the lives of so many workers and their families are being used as pawns in this game by the governor and the union bosses. The only person in Minnesota right now that can prevent the shutdown is Governor Dayton; only he can call a special session and get a budget in place. At a debate during the campaign, Governor Dayton said he would not shutdown the government for a tax increase. You can see the video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGrxP3cea1c&feature=youtu.be

But yet he is willing to risk thousands of state workers livelihoods and break that campaign promise.

The Governor and Democrats in the Legislature have a shutdown plan for Minnesota: Inflict maximum pain for political gain.

There is no reason for a shutdown: The legislature presented the governor with a balanced budget that increased spending by 6% without raising taxes. We know from recent polls that only 8% of Minnesota residents want an increase in government spending. We want the Minnesota government to live within its means, just as every family in Minnesota has to do with their household budgets. The budget increases education spending by over $400 million and the Health and Human Services budget by over $500 million. The governor wants to make Minnesota one of the highest taxed states in the nation, yet he has not specified what the additional revenue would be used for, so essentially it is a tax increase for the sake of a tax increase. I do not think that is a good reason to gamble with any state employee’s job! Make no mistake, if we allow government to grow at the rate our Governor wants, while the economy remains stagnant, the next tax increase will be on you. Controlling the spending now helps us into the future.

I also want to share with you a link that shows the time line of budget negotiations so far. This link shows that the legislature has made multiple concessions to the governor, and each time he has rejected them. http://www.scribd.com/doc/58308265/Timeline-of-Action-in-Last-90-Days-GOP-Legislature-Has-Released-3-Detailed-Budget-Offers-0-from-Gov-Dayton

To say that we have not compromised is simply not true.

The Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council’s “Business Tax Index 2011” http://www.sbecouncil.org/businesstaxindex2011/report.pdf ranks the states from best to worst in terms of the costs of their tax systems on entrepreneurship and small business. The Index pulls together 18 different tax measures, and combines those into one tax score that allows the 50 states and District of Columbia to be compared and ranked. Would you guess Minnesota is ranked somewhere in the middle? Hardly, Minnesota is ranked 50th out of 50 states with only the District of Columbia ranked 51st. This is unacceptable and raising our taxes higher makes us even less competitive. We have to turn this around for Minnesota businesses to grow, prosper and again hire our citizens who are out of work.

I ask you to reach out to the governor as well and urge him to work with us to end this budget stalemate. Ask him to live up to his promise to not shutdown the government over a tax increase, especially one that does not have a good purpose! Contact the governor and tell him to stop holding state employees jobs hostage. You can call him at (651) 201-3400; you can email him through his web contact form at http://mn.gov/governor/contact-us/form/.

Thank you again for contacting me.

Sincerely,

Senator Al DeKruif





Al DeKruif
State Senator
District 25
G 24 Capitol Building
75 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55155
651 296-1279 (phone)
sen.al.dekruif@senate.mn

Let's get rid of the casino monopoly

Everyone is entitled to an opinion and when it comes to the topic of gambling and whether casinos in Minnesota should be a tribal-only affair or if private or state ownership should be allowed it seems that everyone does have an opinion on the matter.

When I saw that a "Staff Council" (spokesperson) from the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community had written a response to a story appearing in some southwest metro newspapers, I kind of knew what to expect. I figured that the stance would be "Where's the SMSC side of the argument?" "That story was very anti-tribal." "We don't have a monopoly in the casino business." Blah, blah, blah.

Of course the SMSC spokesperson is going to be against any additional casinos in the state. They are, by a long shot, the richest tribe in the country. Chalk it up to proximity to the 16th largest metro area in the country and you can see why. With a population base of nearly 3 million within a hour's drive, the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community has built a damn empire on Scott County Highway 83. With their original convenience store, another purchased from Kwik Trip, their organic foods market (Mazopiya) a health clinic for their tribal residents, a fire department that serves their community as well as surrounding areas their high-rise hotel and two casinos (Mystic Lake & Little Six); their reservation -- to me at least -- qualifies as an empire, at least when compared to the businesses and wealth held by other Native American tribes around the country. But it seems that the SMSC is still not happy with the Native American monopoly on casino gambling in Minnesota and remains staunchly opposed to any expansions by other businesses.

The story is full of the same misleading messages used for many years now by the Canterbury shill machine. First, the addition of slot machines at Canterbury is a qualitative expansion of gambling. It would dramatically alter the make-up of who provides what types of games. Simply ask the question: how would Canterbury feel if the SMSC commenced operations of numerous poker rooms and pari-mutuel horse racing at Mystic Lake Casino?

I'm guessing that Canterbury Park would find a way to co-exist. They have managed to carve out their own niche even just two miles away from the state's largest casino. Yes, they added their card room to become a true year-around destination and while I'm sure they wouldn't be overly joyous if Mystic Lake Casino opened a card room of their own, they probably wouldn't cry foul like SMSC spokespersons who feel that their gambling monopoly is justified.

Second, the tribal governments do not have a “monopoly” on gaming in Minnesota. The gaming market is already divided in a way that brings revenue to the various operators. Canterbury has horse racing and a multitude of card games. The state government operates a diverse array of lottery games. The charities and bars sell pull tabs and can offer poker. Bingo halls are easy to locate throughout the state. And the tribal governments operate video slots and blackjack pursuant to the tribal-state compacts. There are plenty of gambling options in Minnesota today. No one has a monopoly on gaming.

Correct. To a point. Nobody has a monopoly on "gaming" in Minnesota. Gaming is a rather broad term. However, Native American tribes do have a monopoly on Casino-style gambling in Minnesota. None of the state's dozen or so casinos are owned by any other group than Native American tribes. While casino ownership lifted many tribes out of deep poverty and they have repaid their neighbors by funding infrastructure improvements, donated funds to worthy causes and improved their own fortunes (no pun intended) they have also done so due to their monopoly on Casino-style gambling. Nowhere else, outside of tribal-owned casinos will you find slot machines, keno, roulette or high stakes bingo. WHen something isn't available elsewhere, that comes off as a monopoly to me.

The tribal spokesperson also goes on to tout job loss at the casino that keeps him employed.

For every job created at a racino, there will be at least four or five jobs killed at a tribal facility.

That tells me that, unlike privately run businesses, tribal casinos are vastly overstaffed. I understand why, too. Mystic Lake Casino is practically overflowing with cash. To not be overstaffed would put the profits they make front and center. It all boils down to competition. Would Mystic Lake Casino in Prior Lake close its doors if Canterbury Park in Shakopee installed a few dozen slot machines? No. Would they have to try harder to pull potential customers a couple miles further down the road? Maybe. But Mystic Lake Casino has them beat hands down with the fact that they have a plush concert hall, bingo halls, huge prizes and giveaways, an attached hotel, three or four restaurants of different styles and a world-class golf course as well. If SMSC is so overly concerned about their future, why don't they do a show of good will and get in on the stadium game because even though William J. Hardacker mentions how little gambling revenues will do to balance the state's vast budget deficit, the big push for additional casinos in the state boils down to getting a Vikings stadium built.

Just think what kind of good will that the SMSC could display if they partially funded a Vikings stadium? Think how well they'd make out if they built, owned and operated a stadium? If they want to protect their slot machine (really, that's what their argument boils down to) monopoly then they need to play ball with the needs of the Twin Cities and Minnesota in general.

Tax the rich to balance the budget?

That's the majority of the plan put forth today by Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton. While taxes are never popular -- and judging by the comments following the original article you'd think that each and every bickering and illiterate jackal commenting was in that new top income tax bracket -- they seem to be one of only a handful of ways out of the state's $6.2 billion deficit.

Any plan which Dayton proposes will be unpopular. He was left this mess thanks to Tim Pawlenty who opposed raising taxes in any way and by doing so created this huge deficit. But he remained popular because everyone hates taxes. I hate taxes, my neighbors hate taxes and my co-workers hate taxes but they are an inevitable part of living in the society we have built for ourselves.

But Mark Dayton's budget proposal only raises income taxes on the wealthiest 5% of Minnesotans. If $150,000 is the cutoff for the wealthiest 5%, we obviously live in a rather middle-class state. But the majority of the remaining 95% below that magical $150,000 income threshhold are scared. Their thinking is probably along the lines of "well, if Dayton raises the taxes on them, he'll get us next". But that would be political suicide for a man who won the election by a less than 10,000 vote margin.

"But it's redistribution of wealth!"

To those 5% whose taxes are poised to increase (a mere $1,000-$2,000 per person per some reports) and those who didn't vote for Dayton that's how they see it. To me it's a few who can afford to pay their share who will now pay their share. Oh sure, call me a communist but if you have an income of $150,000 and can't afford to pay an additional $2,000 per year, you are obviously living far beyond your means. For all the yelling about people living beyond their means causing the huge collapse of nearly everything in the past three or four years, they need to take a look in the mirrors and realize that those who help their neighbors will be rewarded in the end.

And best of all, Dayton is calling the tax hikes temporary. If it balances the budget in the end, then it's a job well done.

We don't actually need 3D movies

Just when Hollywood was seemingly running out of ideas for movies, an idea that seemed to originate in the 1950s came back around and it felt like the perfect time to the movie executives to take a second look at a technology which was a joke, used only in cheesy monster flicks, from the black and white age.

I don't pretend to know shit about 3D movies but I do know that because of their so-called premium experience they also demand a premium price. That's why tickets run about $13.00 for the experience of seeing such quality films as "Grown Ups" and "Jackass 3" in "eye-popping, jaw-dropping 3D!"

It's bullshit. The only films that benefit from being in 3D are scary horror flicks. There's nothing like the added dimension of someone jumping out from behind a bush wielding a machete and slashing someone's throat, spraying blood everywhere being experienced in 3D. That's the only genre that benefits and thusly justifies its added cost.

But in a world where profits ae all that matter, it's only a matter of time before every "Step Up 3D" and "Gulliver's Travels" movie is needlessly shot in 3D. It's a great scam that, even in the leanest times in my generation, people are buying into.

So keep those movie studios running and don't forget to buy a couple tickets to the next Tyler Perry movie... in ass-blasting 3D!

Why Black Friday is bad

If you caught any news at all from the middle of last week until today you likely heard something about Black Friday. It traditionally marks that magical day when retailers finally sell us stupid Americans enough crap to finally have their finances for the year in the black (they have finally turned a profit). Every year poll results are posted tallying what the average American family plans on spending on Christmas shopping and how those numbers relate to previous years and every year you're likely to find a wide variance of results. One TV network says spending will be up slightly, another network says Americans won't take the clamps off their wallets for any reason whatsoever.

But what does Black Friday mean for Joe and Susy American? Do we ever see the benefits from rabid spending for 1/12th of the calendar year? I suppose that if you work in retail you'll likely see longer hours which would result in a couple of bigger paychecks but for the other 11/12ths of the year -- especially January -- those paychecks are far smaller than for the month of December. That's because people are spending like normal humans, they aren't buying crap for every member of their extended family. The month of January is particularly lackluster because the majority of overspending Americans are receiving those credit card bills form their spending orgy a month earlier.

Sure, the uptick in retail sales helps manufacturers but does it benefit Americans? Do yourself a favor and check out where a few of those bigger Christmas gifts you are giving are made. If you bought a TV or Blu-Ray player I'd assume it was manufactured in China. I'd be utterly flabbergasted if it were actually manufactered in America but stranger things have happened.

It's even worse if you're buying Christmas-related goods. All of those Christmas ornaments lining the aisles of your local Target or Walmart were probably made in China. I learned this as I pulled what seemed like hundreds of ornaments from boxes Saturday evening and hung them on the old Christmas tree. Nearly every ornament with a sticker attached said "Made in China". There's the first problem. The companies, at the very top, are probably based in America but our country definitely does not benefit from those potential manufacturing jobs because we've instead paid the wages of a sweat shop full of indentured workers somewhere in China. I fail to see how that benefits anyone but the CEOs who shipped those jobs overseas to line their own pcokets.

Lastly, Black Friday does little to further the giving spirit. Honestly folks, are you really going to give your big sister that 46" 3D LED TV you hulked in to your shopping cart inside Best Buy at 4 AM last Friday as you kicked your fellow shoppers in the shins because you saw it first? Probably not. I am not going to claim to be all high and mighty either because I'd buy the TV for myself just like you but in the end I have no use for that particular TV so I wouldn't be buying it anyhow. Sure, I'd love to have it but I already have a perfectly useable HDTV in my living room that will outlast half of the crap lining store shelves today. Black Friday essentially cons us in to buying big ticket items -- mainly electronics -- under the guise of giving to others but we all know that this stuff, all charged to our credit cards, is really going to end up in our entertainment centers as we throw the previous generation of TV or DVD player out on the curb because newer is always better -- regardless of how long it takes us to pay off.

It's time to abolish the TSA

After last weekend's relative freak out by one man about body scanners and molestation-level "pat-downs" by TSA agents, it's become clear -- if it wasn't already -- that the TSA has overstepped their bounds and has accomplished little to nothing in the process.

It all began simply enough at the initial wave of post-9/11 paranoia. People had to stand in long lines and remove everything from their pockets, start up electronic devices to prove that they were, in fact, electronic devices and pass through metal detectors.

Then came the "shoe bomber". This lead to airline passengers kicking off their shoes and walking through the checkpoints barefoot. It was at this level of pure terrorism paranoia that, while in a TSA line in Aruba, I commented to the older gentleman in front of me that their next step of bullshit would be having passengers walk through security checkpoints fully naked. Of course the TSA's installation of thousands of "body scanners" is essentially that but the police wanna-bes at the TSA will insist that everything they're doing is "for the safety of the traveling public". If that's true, why in the hell are we now limited to three ounces of liquids or gels in our carry-ons? Why can't we bring a fucking bottle of water past the security checkpoint? Why are grandmas and seven year old gils being subjected to molestation-level patdowns and "body scans"? Why is anyone being subjected to this? Isn't it bad enough that we initially had to arrive a couple hours early to make our flights? How much earlier do the TSA brain wizards recommend now that they are x-raying every last person (in certain airports) who board a flight? How much longer does this latest bullshit security safeguard add to the hassle that is flying?

In short, the TSA has done nothing than force would-be terrorists to come up with new, more undetectable ways of attempting to blow things up. The terrorists haven't been successful and the TSA is far too focused on humans being the carrier of the explosives -- the whole toner cartridge issue in the cargo area shows that the TSA is nothing but a bunch of perverts who want to see everyone, regardless of their body shape, buck naked in the name of security.

It all boils down to the TSA being yet another colossal waste of our tax money in the name of keeping fear alive. In the process they've decimated the airline industry and made Americans fearful of a nameless, faceless form of terror that could be lurking beneath the clothes of the guy behind you or in the toothpaste tube of the lady in front of you. They want you to be afraid of everything. Fear is their greatest strength and they keep getting more money for accomplishing nothing. They've never thwarted a would-be terrorist and always seem to discover the newest way of blowing up a plane after that newest way has made it aboard a flight. Eliminate the TSA entirely and we're one step closer to balancing the budget.

The best argument ever for gay marriage

After last week's elections across the country, rumors are swirling that the new Republican majority's number one priority is the move forward on a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. That's their number one priority? Never mind that millions of people are losing their homes. Forget that the nation's infrastructure is falling apart. Let's not even mention that America is teetering on the brink of lising its superpower status because we've shipped all of our manufacturing and technical jobs overseas but let's ban that gay marriage because it makes a few old white guys uncomfortable -- possibly uncomfortable about their own closeted homosexual feelings. But, hey, let's take away something from a few that's widely accepted for the majority. Let's make an unfortunately discriminated few feel even less accepted. Yeah, that's the ticket.

The dumbasses who want to ban gay marriage are forgetting one vastly important thing. Weddings are a huge expenditure and the more you encourage weddings of any sort, the more the economy as a whole benefits. Think of weddings as the best for of economic stimulus ever. It all starts with the wedding license. That expenditure -- in the grand scheme of things -- is minimal but it lines the goverment coffers and keeps government employees working. That's about $35. The next step is lining up a venue for the ceremony. Some of thsoe venues are free but some cost money. More money in to the economy there. Then you need to clothe the wedding party. Should it be guys or gals, those clothes cost money. A cheap tux costs just over a hundred dollars to rent and a cheap bridesmaid dress runs a minimum of $150. Multiply that by the number in the wedding party and you've got even more economic stimulus happening. But it doesn't stop there. You may employ a wedding planner, you'll need those little bottles of bubbles to blow as the happy couple runs to their vehicle of choice which, if it's a limousine or horse-drawn carriage, is another expenditure which keeps businesses running and people employed. And don't forget about the releasing of doves. Another excellent economic stimulus.

Then, of course, is the wedding reception. Some people go small but others go big. You have to rent a venue, feed the sometimes hundreds of guests and provide entertainment. The reception can run from $5000-$10000 dollars on the low end. That amount of spending is nothing to sneeze at.

You'll also want to chronicle the events of the day so you'll need aphotographer and a decent photographer can run $1000-$10000. But the future is video and the future is now. Better get a videographer to remember the day. Look at that -- even more money paid out.

It's not just the happy couple spending money, guests at the wedding traditionally bring gifts. Figure that each couple attending the wedding will spend $50-$100 on a gift for the happy couple. Many of these guests are also from out of town so they'll need a hotel for a night or two. That's easily $100 per night.

But we aren't done yet. Nobody gets married without planning a honeymoon. Plane tickets to someplace fun or romantic, a hotel for about a week and dining and activities could run about $3000 on the low end.

All told, by my rudimentary math, a wedding stimulates the economy to the tune of $85,000. My math may not be exactly accurate but you get the picture. Weddings are big money and banning gay marriage or whatever you politically correct folks want to call it is flat out stupid. Weddings = economic stimulus and if the new Republican majority of elected representatives wants to ban gay marriage they obviously hate America and want our country to fail.

What a surprise - Brett Favre has returned

I guess that my earlier thinking about Brett Favre hang gliding in to Airlake airport in Lakeville was about as far off as a guy can get when it comes to guessing games involving NFL athletes. I had pictured Favre dressed in his typical ensemble of Wranglers and a Hanes t-shirt gliding in to the metro area to save the Vikings from a 3-13 season. Instead he landed at the posh and tony Flying Cloud Airport in Eden Prairie mere minutes from the Vikes' practice facility alongside Interstate 494 in the aforementioned suburb.

The media circus surrounding the return of a 40 year-old quarterback who was already under contract for this season is mind-boggling. The Vikings seem to be a desperate team. Why else would they send a contingency of three players to a nothing town in Mississippi (Hattiesburg) to woo the graying QB to the frozen tundra of the Northstar State? And what's with the team's near obsession with quarterbacks who are old enough to be the father of half of the team's players? Warren Moon, Randall Cunningham and now Brett Favre. Have the Vikes ever groomed a QB from a college-aged draft pick to a successful superstar or are they too damn lazy to invest in someone for the long haul?

No, let's go out and woo a fucking redneck diva from Mississippi and put up with his shenanigans of being too good to attend training camp while using an injury as an excuse. And if that fails, make a play for more money because we all know that's exactly what transpired. He's the Michael Jordan of the NFL – the guy will never entirely fade away from the game because he needs the attention. When he does eventually retire, he'll probably buy an NFL team or maybe start his own league so he can own that and play as quarterback because that's just how much he needs attention. And here I was thinking that my almost-two year-old daughter was the neediest person alive when it came to attention.

Now that I have the latest Favre drama off my chest, you can visit MinnPics. Click to find out just how cool it is because I, like a certain quarterback who wears the number 4, yearn for your attention.

My problem with soda prices

I am an unabashed fan of soda. I don't overconsume the crap - and yes it is crap - but I do love the sugary treat on a daily basis. I typically limit myself to one 12 oz. can per day and I'm happy after that. I don't know whether it's the sugary goodness of it or that I am a caffeine addict. Whatever the case, I do spend a certain amount of our household grocery budget on the worthless sugary crap. Lately, though, the prices have come to piss me off.

I remember when I was a new full-time employee at my first job. Nearly every day as I returned to the office after lunch I would stop at a friendly convenience store and plop down a cool dollar and even with tax I'd be the temporary owner of a 20 oz. bottle of sugary, delicious soda.

I reluctantly accepted a price hike from 94 cents to 99 cents per bottle. That left the plus-tax price at $1.05 for a 20 oz. bottle.

Fast forward a decade and a 20 oz. bottle of soda at a convenience store can now cost upwards of $1.59! Did production costs of the sugary crap truly increase over 50% in a mere ten years? I doubt that because a less-than-portable two liter bottle of soda (more than three-times the size of its 20 oz. counterpart) can easily be found for one dollar.

Is the convenience and portability of the 20 oz. bottles in our rush-rush world of today the reason for the rather insane price hikes of soda or is there something more going on here? Would we be better off making our own soda from some bizarre online recipe or should we resort to drinking nothing but water? And what price is the breaking point? At what price will you say "no thanks" to 20 oz. bottles of soda?

Check out MinnPics - it's full of photos from across the great state of Minnesota.

Just say no to the stadium

It's a day that ends in "Y" during a state legislative session in Minnesota so that must mean that it's time once again for the Minnesota Vikings to piss and moan about their hard luck and their financial disadvantages compared to other NFL teams with big, shiny, new billion dollar stadiums. Yep, yet another plan for a new Vikings stadium. And this one has a price tag of only $791 million dollars.

The irony here is that the Vikings franchise is willing to pony up a whopping $200 and some odd million dollars - not quite a third of the cost. Really? Not even a third of the price for a playground they'll use for ten days each autumn? But the rest will come from "user fees". In Governor Tim Pawlenty-speak those are really taxes but because the legislature will need his support they use his terminology and because he's a good Republican he doesn't raise taxes, he just supports new "user fees". Some of those new user fees will come from a tax on sports jerseys. So Twins, Wild and Vikings fans would each potentially pay for a part of the new Vikings stadium. So would people renting cars and hotel rooms because those people are obviously Vikings fans and nobody comes to Minneapolis or anywhere in Hennepin County or the Twin Cities except to see a Vikings game.

But the good news is that some lawmakers with common sense are calling the possibility of financing a new Vikings stadium a "non-starter". Though even bad news like that isn't souring the hopes of rabid (and hateful) Vikings fans. @molliepriesmeyer can attest to that. I watched both Friday and today as Tweets from the Minneapolis-based journalist chronicled the shit-storm which erupted after she voiced her disapproval of a publicly financed stadium. And, yes, I also feel that a stadium financed even with the bullshitology that is "user fees" is publicly financed. I just wish that people could have a civil debate - even those on opposite sides of the debate - and realize that name-calling doesn't solve anything and those slinging the names are only hurting the very cause they champion (yes, feel free to call me a hypocrite).

Nobody, regardless of what they said (especially in a civil tone) deserves to be called a cunt but Priesmeyer had that hurled at her Friday after launching an online petition against a publicly funded stadium. Hey, if this is the face that grassroots stadium supporters want to hitch their wagon to, then may the Vikings fare well in the greater Los Angeles area but I truly hope that the Vikings can find a way to secure a stadium here in Minnesota without sticking fans who will never be able to afford to see a game with the bill.

If you read all the way through that rambling screed then you deserve a break - head to MinnPics and scope out the awesome photos from around Minnesota.

Can deals sink a business?

Giving credit where credit is due for this post, I have to admit that I've grown rather despondent about dining out. Sure, it's easy as shit because there are plenty of days where the last thing I want to do after having my nose to the grindstone for a solid eight hours and spending 90 minutes commuting is to cook. The logical choice - because, let's face it, the 16 month-old ain't gonna cook - is to get back in the car and go out somewhere to grab a bite.

In my world full of harsh realities, though, that isn't really logical. The baby lacks my oh-so sophisticated palate (really, I scheduled a work meeting at Pizza Hut this week) so that means either planning ahead and feeding her before we run out the door or buying something that she'll eat a third of and throw the rest on the floor. Hey, at least it's not my floor but it's a huge waste. It's not like I grew up during the Great Depression but I don't balk at wasting food.

That's where coupons and the like enter the fold. My old lady and I do like to exit our dungeon for special occasions and because we're basically elderly shut-ins that means dinner and a movie (could we get any more cliched?). Our favorite choice for a top-notch suburban dining excursion as of late is Santorini in Eden Prairie, MN. To this day I've never paid full price for a meal there. It began with a few gift cards but being I'm totally cheap I bought a half-price deal-type gift certificate around Valentine's Day. Call me cheap and unromantic but it's a great way to spring for a damn good meal without emptying the wallet.

I have to wonder, though, if restaurants who participate in these half-price deals which seem to be offered by every damn radio station in the Twin Cities ever gain any repeat customers beyond that initial visit. There is a bit of a moral dilemma for me on a personal level - a certain number of coupons - not just for restaurants - pay at least a portion of my salary. I feel somewhat obligated to patronize these business if at all possible but it has to be for a service or product which I'm truly interested in or cannot find elsewhere for less.

The dilemma reared its head just the other day as I knew that my car desperately needed brakes (I had slammed on them when some jackass came to a sudden stop in front of me and that was their final hurrah). I called some of the places which are kind enough to pay my salary via their advertising dollars. Then I called my brother-in-law who is a mechanic. In the end he got the job done for half price - and yes he charged me $40 labor for an hour's work.

So do you feel it's good practice to patronize local businesses or do you the cheapest route possible without ever having to pay full price regardless of what it does to the owner's finances?

If you'd rather steer clear of my rambling topics, check out some truly amazing photos of Minnesota at MinnPics!

My hairstylist could do without prom

As I was getting my hair did yesterday, the conversation turned to prom season. It's just around the corner and it signals Spring and the approach of Summer. It also means one terror-filled day for hairdressers everywhere.

Her main gripe was with the snippy little bitches who tear a page out of a magazine of a dolled up teen starlet and demand that very same hairstyle. All for 50 bucks. I can relate because I have clients demand a certain look and based on what I'm being paid, they get what I give them. It's a lot like a counterfeit Rolex. It's close but anyone who sees it knows that it's just not the same.

From hairstyles and the bitchy girls who demand that this curl go the opposite direction, we moved towards the excesses of the modern prom. From stretch limos to dresses that A.) cost what my wife's wedding dress did to B.) the skanky, too-short dresses girls wear to formal dances.

Now before you call me a codger or an angry old coot, I'm only 30 years old but just twelve or fourteen years ago when I went to my junior and senior prom, the girls weren't wearing ultra-short, hey, look at my panties-type dresses (and that's if the girls today are even bothering to wear underthings...) or at least my dates weren't.

So what has changed? Has fifteen or so years seen changes so drastic that I should just give up and admit that I am hopelessly disconnected from all things younger? And since when does prom have to be the teenage equivalent of a wedding? I know one thing, my daughter's going to pay her own way if she sees the need for a stretch limo, hundred dollar hairdo and a barely-there dress because the one difference between a wedding and prom is that very few couples have sex in the back seat of their parents' car on their wedding night. The same can not be said for prom night.

Check out MinnPics if you give a damn about the rising river levels across all part sof Minnesota. New photos just posted...

Are malls yesterday's news?

The Twin Cities are littered with malls. Off the top of my head I can think of Rosedale, Southdale, Ridgedale, Brookdale, Burnsville Center, Mall of America, Eden Prairie Center and a whole host of lesser malls including Knollwood, Northtown Mall and newer outdoor retail complexes like those in Maple Grove and Coon Rapids. Of course there are even worse attempts at shopping malls in the Twin Cities like the former Priordale in Prior Lake which has been redeveloped nicely as a strip mall and a still delapidated but somehow alive Shakopee Town Square. Hell, most every suburb probably has something billed as a mall somewhere in the city and chances are that it is hurting.

Even in Minnesota, the trend seems to be to take it outside. A forced sense of urbanism with outdoor sidewalks and barely navigable streets is what is currently cool. It's supposed to be the rebirth of the downtown but I know better. To me it's still a shopping center because we've been trained to think what downtowns are. They feature a lack of parking but these new "downtowns" have sprawling parking lots much like the malls of old. But these new lifestyle centers, as developers call them, work. It makes sense because they seem to have damn near every name in retail one could think of.

The one in Coon Rapids is particularly troubling to me. It spans multiple blocks and while I avoided entering its tangle of so-called streets, it was a madhouse of spending - even late on a Thursday afternoon. I'm not familiar with that area of the Twin Cities but I'm betting that its construction left more than a few vacant storefronts elsewhere in town.

And if you think this is just a metro problem you are dead wrong. Back in my old hometown, good ole' drug-ridden, illegal immigrant-filled Austin, MN, the mall which at one time I'm told was actually prosperous now contains two anchor stores and probably less than a dozen smaller stores. I remember at one time the freeway-facing signage advertised over 60 stores but I don't ever remember seeing it full. Even its "food court" - containing only two restaurants - sucks. It, too, fell victim to big box development and lifestyle centers but on a smaller scale. With a K-Mart built across the street in the 1990s and a Target built across the highway later that same decade, the nails were positioned, all somebony needed to do was pound them in to the coffin.

Then came a Super Walmart a couple years ago. Even from nearly 100 miles away I could hear the pounding of those nails. The coffin was closed and it took K-Mart with it this year. Last year they lost a Cash Wise Foods grocery store. A Rainbow Foods store, circa late 1990s So, much like Brookdale Center and other now-doomed malls, hundreds of thousands of square feet of retail space stand vacant. Grass slowly growing through the cracking pavement as a couple vehicles sit parked marked for sale by the owners.

So maybe the American love affair with malls is done. They had a nice fifty year run. And maybe it's finally been realized that we, as a country, are simply over-retailed. Redundant businesses are shuttered all the time - take note of Snyders Drug Stores - they are gone but CVS is building in every other city now. Maybe its all cyclical and these malls will again be bustling in ten years as someone thinks up a new use. Or maybe the owners, failing to look forward, will end up with millions of square feet of once viable retail space on the auction block as cities deal with massive, neglected eyesores on prominent highways for all travelers to see. What to do, what to do?

Join in a discussion of the recent foreclosure sale of Brookdale Center and read up on Brookdale's checkered past.

While you're at it, check out the photos of Minnesota at MinnPics.

A penny for my thoughts about the penny

If it wasn't for the radio - yes the radio - I wouldn't have known about the redesign of the penny - or the one cent piece if you're all old-timey. If it weren't for the internet, though, I wouldn't have known just how terrible its new design was.

Which leads me to an actual point. Where do most people get their news? It's been studied and rehashed on an almost daily basis. Newspapers offer up a text and photo-based approach but once a day but to get that particular breed of news in a format you can hold in your hands costs a quarter or two each and every day. Sure, you can get basically the same news as you'd get in print for free on most every newspaper's website but newspaper websites are a pain in the ass to navigate through without using their lousy search functions.

The internet is available, if you don't mind looking over your shoulder, while at work to plenty of office workers. The most accessed time for many news websites in this particular corner of Minnesota is between 11 AM and 1 PM which correlates with lunch time across the different timezones of the United States. But what do you do if you don't want to or can't access the internet for news while at work?

If you're like me, you have a crappy, barely together radio sitting at your desk. My trusty $5.99 earbuds from Menards attached to either it, my iPod or the headphone jack of my computer I keep myself not only entertained/distracted from the outside noise of the office but informed, too. Getting that information/entertainment mix is a bit of work here in the Twin Cities. I can't find a radio station I could tolerate for the course of a workday so I mix it up. I have appointments with certain stations on various parts of the dial but I actually seek out the 4:20-ish news update with Bob Collins on 89.3 The Current. Maybe it's because he has an attitude about the world that matches mine (we're all doomed) or maybe it's because his banter with Mary Lucia is genuine but whatever the case the news he mentions during those few minutes - while not always the biggest headlines - seems almost tailored to my tastes.

And without that newscast and his daily mention - via Lucia's asking - about what's on the News Cut blog, I would have never known about the morons in government with nothing better to do messing with the U.S penny. Screwing with the design of a coin which nobody already gave a damn about is equal to tax forms using a font size 1/2 point smaller than they did previously. Nobody's going to notice! Way to waste money, geniuses! And thank you Bob Collins because without your blog post mentioned on The Current, I would have never known about something most would see as trivial but something I see as wildly maddening.

The only thing more maddening that a new design for the penny is missing an update of MinnPics. Don't miss the kick-ass photos from all over Minnesota including recent name-dropping of Olympic sports. Go now and check it out and subscribe to the RSS feed or I'll write another blog post about curling.

The crap peddled on cable TV

It's bad enough that a good chunk of the population shells out hard-earned cash each month - about 60 bucks - for the luxury of cable television. We do so because at the end of the day we're too exhausted to do much of anything because we stayed up too late the night before watching cable television and didn't get enough sleep. So that reason is rather cyclical. Some of us pay for cable television because we've forgotten how to read a book after so many years of cable television and then there are those of us who have it because it gets the children out of our hair long enough to go out in the back yard and pound back some vodka from a plastic jug and forget how sad our lives are.

I used to be the exception to the cable television rule. I grew up on the family farm far removed (5 miles) from the "big" city and thus did not have cable television. We had five channels - two of which were PBS (one from Iowa!) and didn't have FOX on our home's two televisions until late in the 1990s. Somehow - even if it did suck when the president was giving a speech carried on every network - I survived. Having all that time not spent glued to a TV probably got me to appreciate various types of music and had it not been for that relative "lack" of TV I probably would not have had the initiative to explore graphic design and would probably be even less employable than I am today.

But once I got married and we bought a house, rather than cut expenses we sprung for cable television. I had lived in my suburban bachelor apartment for two years with only the local channels and cable internet but my old lady insisted on 80 channels of mindless drivel. Sure, there are tidbits of entertainment and useful content there from time to time but in the end I could probably do without about 75% of the shit passed off as programming. I'd miss the Discovery channel but crap like WEtv and Animal Planet makes me want to smash my 231 lb. Sony and vomit in disgust over the fact that I pay for crap I have no interest in.

But what really pisses me off are the ads. At least one day on the weekend I get up when the toddler wants to get up and that's often around 7 AM. When I drag myself downstairs at 7 AM on a Saturday morning I flip on the TV because that's about all I have energy for at that ungodly time of the weekend. I expect to find at least one mildly entertaining program but after flipping through 70-plus channels I find little more than local news programs and paid advertisements for colon cleansing and exercise machines. And the actual commercials look like videos for crap from the Lillian Vernon catalog...

So the cable channels get money from me for basically not watching their channels but paying because out of the 60 channel package I want 3 or 4 of these channels but they get more money for airing 8 or so hours of program length commercials - not to mention the standard 16 minutes per hour (or more) during their regular programming which costs substantially less than that aired on the big networks. With my disgust building and hating the fact that my kid could very well be raised by a TV if I don't intervene, what do I do? Should I dump all but the most basic channels and buy earplugs for when my old lady complains about being bored? Or should I finally move deep in to the woods and swear off society and technology once and for all?

My best advice is to avoid it all and check out the photos at MinnPics. It's quickly skyrocketing towards being the best Minnesota photo blog hosted on Blogger showcasing the awesome photography of others - quite the feat.

Jails vs. Schools: which one benefits society?

Back in my old hometown of Austin, MN the school levy referendum failed. It would have raised taxes $84/yr on a $100,000 home. To many, any additional money paid in taxes is too much but this is the same city that approved the construction of a $30,000,000 jail/justice center shared by the city and county. In contrast, the school levy referendum would have provided the school district with just over $1,000,000/yr. in additional operating funds.

Which of the two - schools or a jail - benefits society more in the long run? Schools prepare the next generation for jobs. Those buildings need to be stocked with equipment and teachers who are at the top of their game - they need to be of the highest quality and the best of the best. Schools serve the children of everyone and everyone who has ever reached the age of five has benefitted from schools - the majority benefitting from public schools which are taxpayer funded.

Then there are jails. They are filled with people who didn't see the value or need to abide by our city, state or nation's laws. They are arrested, booked and placed in jail. Some go to trial while many serve their time and consider it their debt to society for doing wrong. In either case, they stay in these buildings on the taxpayer's dime. I see no reason why a jail needs to provide anything beyond the most basic of necessities. The simple fact that jails have televisions anywhere inside them is nothing short of excessive to me. I don't care if the televisions are for employees, visitors, stray cats or those who are locked up - a television is a luxury and is unnecessary if you are being punished for a crime. And housing law breakers in a $30,000,000 building is so far beyond excessive that I can't even think of words for it.

Why do we feel the need to spend $30,000,000 on a building to house criminals when there are millions and millions of square feet of warehouse and commercial space sitting vacant? Is our government so spend happy that even those who many see as the bottom rung of society need a special building to live in at the expense of others? How many cities and counties require their inmates to actually work doing something while they serve their time? I know for certain that in Scott County (Minnesota) the inmates spend every waking hour indoors at the jail. To some the simple fact that they are not allowed outdoors adds to the punishment but I feel that working to pay your debt to society builds more character and could actually lead to a better place for them down the road than sitting around for days on end doing little to nothing.

Yes, inmates, prisoners, criminals - whatever you choose to call them - sit in relative luxury doing nothing while our schools who are asking for far, far less in the way of operating funds have to do without. They do without modern computers and they do without the best teachers because the best teachers realize that they can make more money in private schools.

So, which one - jails or schools - would you rather have your tax dollars spent on?

After you ponder that question, check out the equally compelling MinnPics and take a photographic journey through Minnesota.

Fitness clubs as a status symbol

Everyone has some awareness about status symbols. We see the douchebag sporting personalized license plates driving a Mercedes Benz fast enough to both get noticed and pulled over. We see someone wearing a $300 t-shirt but only because they casually mention its cost in conversation at a louder-than-normal volume. Then there are less obvious status symbols. Take gyms and fitness centers for example.

In the past five years the Twin Cities area has experienced a huge boom in fitness clubs. The original full-service gym - Northwest Athletic Club - is a piece of history. It's been replaced by the far more prestigious Lifetime Fitness Club. Around these parts Lifetime is sort of the gold standard for full-service gyms. Older stalwarts such as Gold's Gym are trying to make inroads but they are facing the Rainbow Foods situation - it's difficult to change habits of Minnesotans and Gold's Gym has that image of roided up weightlifters thanks to t-shirts from the 1980s - Lifetime Fitness is the status symbol (to me). Any place with monthly dues over $100 for one person is considered as a luxury and a status symbol by your's truly.

Of course there are a ton of other options like Anytime Fitness and Snap Fitness. A membership there is $30-$40/mo. It's not lofty but it's still not the cheapest. However, I'm willing to bet that the equipment at these strip mall fitness clubs is at least similar to the equipment found by the status symbol seekers who populate Lifetime Fitness. The cheapest that I've seen in the fitness club game is a strip mall outlet in Excelsior or Shorewood - somewhere along Highway 7 on the south shore - advertising $9/month memberships. That, for me, is the price where it negates having your own elliptical trainer taking up precious space in your basement or home office.

The final piece of the fitness game puzzle is the community aspect. Most cities have a community center or YMCA. The community centers are generally rather cheap for monthly memberships. The thing they lack is exclusivity. The memberships are affordable enough that Joe and Jane Average can afford a family membership. Their 2.5 kids are busy with swimming lessons and they are going to ride home together in their 2002 Dodge Caravan minivan. The only difference is that they live just a block away from Doug Douchebag and his 2009 Mercedes Benz. So who's the one living life with a bunch of status symbols?

I, for one, am happy with the occasional run through town and time training on my Wii Fit and driving one of our two Toyotas.

I'm also happy curating MinnPics. The amount of amazing photography from Minnesotans is shocking and deserving of your attention. Check it out today.

The myth of low grocery prices

Every big metro area has that one local grocery store chain that claims to be the low price leader. Their weekly newspaper inserts are loaded with coupons which price conscious shoppers feverishly clip out because a coupon is always a good price. Around the Twin Cities our "low price" grocery chain is Cub Foods. They've been around for about 40 years and from what I can tell began as a warehouse-type store where boxes of products were displayed with one side cut off for access when placed on store shelves. It's a logical way to keep prices low.

However, they aren't the low price leader any more. Sure, their image - using the American Typewriter font - would seem to instantly convey low prices but they just aren't consistently cheap any more. Their ads are still littered with coupons but their new low price model seems to be that of raising the regular price and then marking it down for the sale. The buy one, get one free coupon this week for a 20 oz. package of Gold 'n' Plump boneless, skinless chicken breasts comes to mind. They claim savings of a whopping $6.99! That not only seems artificially inflated but downright insanely high for 1.25 lbs. of chicken. I am fairly confident that, if it weren't for that BOGO special, I could pick up two packages for at least a dollar each less at the local Super Target store.

The puzzling fact is that people still shop at the area Cub Foods store in hordes. They did so after a very nice Rainbow Foods Fresh Store opened across the street. Rainbow's prices were equal to or lower than on most products than at the neighboring Cub Foods store. That just goes to show that either Cub Foods has totally nailed their marketing and branding image or that Minnesotans are very loyal to certain brands.

But how, in the face of decades of successful branding and imaging, does a competitor succeed in winning over new customers? Rainbow Foods is really the only legitimate grocery-only competitor to Cub Foods in the Twin Cities. The services they offer are comparable and so are the prices but Rainbow Foods has fallen flat on their face countless times since entering the market. Their image has been all over the map and they have failed to gain footing on a community organization level (Boy Scouts, youth hockey, etc.) like Cub Foods has done so well. Rainbow has bombed, I think, because their radio ads are flat out pointless and needlessly gimmicky. The Cub radio ads feature real people and mention the specials of the week. This is one case where Rainbow would be better for imitating rather than trying to be original and unique. Grocery customers do not give a damn about unique, they want low prices and Cub Foods mentions their seemingly low prices and those numbers, voiced by a female "interviewing" Cub customers, stick with people far more than a male doing the same because women buy the bulk of a family's groceries.

But you don't have to look cheap to grab customers. Target has a simple, even classy image. They are so successful that years ago Dayton changed the corporate name to Target Corp. Which one of those two names is still around? Target has succeeded by offering not only low prices but a customer experience. The prices are comparable to competitors, the brands are recognizable but they stick out because of their customer service and image. They are the classy discount department store and, I'm guessing, are more successful in the grocery field in the Twin Cities than Rainbow Foods is or ever will be. Still, it pays to shop around so do it and find out for yourself which store gets you the best deal and listen to those radio ads - which ones grab your attention?

If you want something more entertaining, may I suggest the photos of Minnesota at MinnPics. Something fresh and engaging to look at every day.

A stadium conundrum

I don't normally write about sports here because my audience, for whatever reason, is mainly females and the remainder are drive-bys searching for nipples, boobs and camel toe photos. But despite my rather obvious obsession with the female form I do at least casually follow sports and find myself almost infatuated with the role that stadiums play in professional and collegiate sports in America. Most every major metropolitan area has one huge stadium. It could be for college football, an NFL team or Major League Baseball but they are definitely a cornerstone of sorts in their respective city.

What amazes me is the cost of these stadiums. Locally, the Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome (The Dome) was built in the first years of the 1980s for what is now the paltry sum of $30 million. It has been the home of major league baseball's Minnesota Twins, the NFL's Minnesota Vikings and, up until last year, was also the home of the University of Minnesota's Golden Gopher football team. Yep, three teams occupied The Dome for the bulk of dates for eight months every year. It was also host to monster truck rallies, concerts, trade shows, the Super Bowl, the NBA's Minnesota Timberwolves for a year and the NCAA Final Four college basketball tournament. This ass-ugly but functional stadium has stood for nearly thirty years and could still very well be used for many more years with a substantial overhaul.

And that's about the only way I see The Metrodome as being functional beyond the next couple of years. It is hopelessly outdated. The concourses are dark and can become very crowded. The concession stands are set up poorly which leads to insanely long lines and the restrooms (the the troughs guys have to piss in) are too small and there are too few to serve the crowds during a Vikings game.

But the pricetag, coupled with a rather shitty location (eastern downtown Minneapolis) of the Metrodome, to remodel the domed stadium is lofty at best but a complete overhaul is still cheaper than building a completely new, single tenant stadium for $900 million which could sit on the same spot as The Metrodome or as far out as Blaine. The Vikes want amenities like luxury suites, parking revenue and money from concessions. As it stands right now they are merely tenants at The Dome. They lease the place and are now the sole tenant in the rat infested Dome.

But why do they need their own stadium? If The Dome won't suit your needs and you want amenities and the money from those the Vikings should have been forced a few years ago to team up with the Gophers when they built their new open air football stadium on the University of Minnesota campus. But the shortsighted fools begging for cash never though that two football teams could share a stadium - especially one where one team plays on Saturday and the other on Sunday. No, that kind of shared solution would have actually made sense and when it comes to politics and money that just doesn't register.

So now we're stuck with a college football stadium that was built to suit a college team. It isn't chock full of the amenities that an NFL team wants and needs and retrofitting a brand new stadium is actually stupid. So we're back to remodeling The Metrodome and unless hell freezes over shortly that will never happen and I don't see tax payers willing to pony up any more in the way of additional sales tax to fund another playground for millionaires. So the two unlikely scenarios remain - the Vikings owner Zygi Wilf performs a drastic overhaul of The Metrodome and builds the surrounding area into a year around venue as MinnPost suggests or the Vikings pay for some crazy-spendy overhauls to the new Gophers stadium and still compromise alot in the process.

Or the Vikings move to that eventual stadium in Los Angeles. It is designed with purple seats and it wouldn't be the first time a Minnesota team relocated to Los Angeles. Oh well, I've never been to a Vikings game anyway but I do hear that the nearly vacant Brookdale Center could be had on the cheap. Think it over Zygi.

Or Zygi Wilf could check out MinnPics. Hey, if Zygi is loving the stunning photos of Minnesota you should check them out too!