Dear Adam Corolla,

Do me a favor and fire Danny Bonaduce. I tune into your show everyday on my way into work, but everything about Bonaduce annoys the hell out of me. Nothing he says is funny. I hate how he one-ups everyone else's stories on your show. I don't care if he's been married, divorced, homeless, in and out of rehab a dozen times, or how he's so rich now that he shits quarters.

Do you keep this guy on your show to contrast how funny and intelligent you and Teresa Strosser are in comparison? Trust me, that's not necessary. I knew from your days on Loveline and various MTV and Comedy Central Shows that you are The Man (Show).

At least consider a replacement. I laugh for days when David Allen Grier makes his occasional appearances. His Maya Angelou voice is magical. Or bring back Dave Dameshek. His humor contrasted yours and Teresa's well and his groundbreaking "Jerk List" exposed a segment of this society that had never been so deservedly recognized and emasculated.

C'mon Adam, fire Bonaduce. He shames your show and is a total jerk!

Regards,
Paolo

Friends,

Today this blog reached the 30,000 hit milestone. For all the attention you've given me, I feel like I should give something back.

Whereas I rarely divulge into any personal information here, I give you this: I'm broadening my horizon and will explore online dating -- this generation's social phenomenon. Congrats to all those who have been hasseling me about this for months. You win.

Top 10 Reasons Why I'm Taking the Plunge:

1. Like with politics, statistics can be used as compelling evidence. I did the math and realized that I haven't dated in approximately two years and haven't pursued a girl for approximately six years. Enough said.
2. My wingmen are dropping like flies.
3. I know a lot of really cool women who are online dating, so if that's where the kind of women I'd like to meet are going, I'm logging in. It's logical.
4. I know lots of people who have met their significant others, spouses, psychos, etc., online. I'm aiming to avoid the psychos, for the record.
5. I'm in really, really good shape right now.
6. Hell, it's safer than meeting women out and about. I'm not talking like physical safety. I'm talking about the circumstance that women are saying openly online, "Date me." It's tough trying to read who's single and straight at the bars sometimes. This is so much easier. And God bless hot lesbians, to that point.
7. I'd like to expand the focuspoint fanbase.
8. This is totally on a whim. This blog post is on a whim. It's more fun that way.
9. I'm online-oriented, can't you tell?
10. Lastly, I've realized that I've been doing a great disservice to the women of Seattle by not being more social. The fact is, there are a lot of douche bag, idiot guys out there that are wasting women's time. I hear you ladies. I'm answering your call.

So, like one of my heroes, Tucker Max, I am opening myself to the online dating game. I don't know how aggressively I'll pursue this, but I'm no longer closing myself to the possibility of meeting someone online. It's a baby step.

I'm putting a profile up on The Stranger's Lovelab, like a friend of mine has, and I'll see what happens. I like Lovelab because the questions are interesting and because I like reading The Stranger and like people who read The Stranger. If you're one of the many girls who reads this blog (and The Stranger) and is seriously thinking this is your chance to make a move, check out my profile there, but I warn you. You have to meet the following criteria:

1. You must have confidence. You must have a job you like and know your interests. I have a low tolerance for 20-somethings who don't know what they want to do in life. I figured it out. So should you.
2. You must have dark features and look something like a Kate Beckinsale, Evangeline Lilly or Rachel McAdams (in "Wedding Crashers," not "Mean Girls"). No exaggeration here. I stay fit and have good genes. I'm looking for the same. Why shouldn't I?
3. You must have high standards and goals for yourself. Obviously I do.
4. You must want to travel, as often as possible, and bake me cookies. Those activities can happen seperately.
5. You must be compatible with an arrogant narcissist because that's who I am.

Now, if you're a girl who's ready to comment on this post and write, "Good luck with that, you idealistic, heartless bastard. You're the reason women have body image issues. No wonder you haven't dated for awhile," you lack the final and most important quality I'm looking for: a sense of humor. If you take half the shit I say seriously, especially on this blog, then you will not pass Go and not collect $200. Capiche?

Wish me luck.

- Paolo

I play on my company's Jack and Jill softball team in a league full of communications companies -- PR agencies, TV stations, radio stations, etc. It's a lot of fun, mostly because we focus more on drinking beer in the dugout more than the game itself. We're a serious bunch.

Today we played against KOMO. No Dan Lewis, Kathy Goertzen or Dan Lewis to be found on this team. No, these guys were pricks. They chewed, wore real baseball pants and didn't bring beer (a sure sign of pricks).

They could hit and deservedly got 10 runs up on his in the first four innings. But then they started showing their ugly side...

They started intentionally walking our guys so they could pitch to our women for easy outs.

With that, I've decided to commit myself to tuning to KING for my local news.

For those of you who were questioning the legitimacy or value of YouTube, check this out.

I read on Lost Remote that CNN announced today it will host two debates that will feature video questions submitted by users through YouTube. Select YouTube users will also be part of the audience. After the debate, the questions will be edited together with the answers and posted on YouTube.

“YouTube enables voters and candidates to communicate in a way that simply was not possible during the last election,” said Chad Hurley, CEO and co-founder of YouTube. “For the first time in the history of presidential debates, voters from around the country will be able to ask the future president of the United States a question in video form and hear the answer.”

Users can submit questions to the candidates here.

Question: Did you read Bridget Johnson's column suggesting that Americans care more about candidates' "cool factor" than political issues, and are you contributing to this idea by appearing on YouTube?

While this seems to be a departure for the company that made video communications mainstream, YouTube actually has made past attempts to improve its credibility by hosting high quality, educational videos, like this one.

Yet another reason why I really should be a journalist: so that people don't have to read the editorial diarrehea synicated columnist Bridget Johnson turns out week after week.

In her column, "Forget issues -- presidential candidates will have to be hip, funky and fly for '08," Johnson suggests that voters care more about how cool presidential candidates than their positions on political issues.

This column:

• Demeans the intelligence of average Americans.
• Is based upon the notion that Americans shape their political priorities by the same criteria demanded to choose high school Homecoming royalty.
• Is utter bullshit.

While Johnson does cite legitimate examples of candidates reaching out to be cool (appearances on 'The Daily Show,' swanky Web sites and MySpace pages, and staking celebritity endorsements), Johnson fails to connect the synapses and point out how these are just altered tactics of the same, decades-old strategy: connecting to the average American.

"I Like Ike" buttons, national tours by train, televised debates -- all of these marketing methods were meant to connect candidates to average Americans. Now that Average Joe has a MySpace page and trusts Jon Stewart more than Brian Williams, candidates must adapt to remain visible. I actually don't think this makes candidates any more "cool," per say (I'm not suddenly taking style lessons from John McCain), but it does make them more accessible and relatable.

Johnson seems to be distracted by the 24-hour news cycle she contributes to and doesn't step off her hamster wheel to realize that the issues she dismisses in her column, ("Iraq war, gay rights, immigration, Iran, stem cells, yadda yadda") do matter to people who are especially affected by them.

Healthcare matters to people who don't have it. Jessica Simpson appearing at a fundraiser matters to people who don't have the capacity to understand that her endorsement means absolutely nothing to the political landscape of this country. As Matt Wood would say, "Shoot them all and let God sort them out."

Perhaps Johnson should realize that mainstream Americans aren't as dense and celebritized as she is, and have enough stamina to filter through the media blitz to learn about candidates' values and align them with their own to make educated voting decisions.

And if I'm wrong, thank God we have an Electoral College.