I haven't seen anyone point this out, but I thought I would toss it out there.
I know many of you think Hunter is a drug-addled mutant, but he is also one of the most astute political minds of our time. His book about the '72 race is probably the best Presidential election journalism ever, and he was the first journalist to say that the little peanut farmer from Georgia would win (In early 1975, no less).
He also understood Clinton right from the start. (He felt Clinton was a cop-crazy humor-less thug, but was also, sadly necessary.
Hunter understands that politics is "the art of changing your own environment," and also the sports-like aspect to it. He has also proven that political addiction is the most dangerous drug ever devised. (And he would know)
Anyway, here is the end of his most recent column:
"The Colts have been good to me against Denver and Kansas City, so I am not about to dump them now. That would generate bad mojo and worse karma. So I will bet them again on Sunday, along with five or six points -- and nevermind what I said yesterday about the folly of betting your heart instead of your head. Somebody's hot streak is going to end Sunday. The winners will go on to the Super Bowl, and the losers will feel suicidal, as always. Hell, I might even lose, myself, but why worry? Not even a super-gambler can win all the time.
My own W-L figures are about 70 percent for the season. I can live with that anytime, so why not bet the underdogs on Sunday? It is not entirely smart, but I am doing it anyway, gambling that both Indy and Carolina will at least beat the spread.
I am also betting that Howard Dean will win both Iowa and New Hampshire, and that Pete Rose will NEVER be voted into baseball's Hall of Fame. That truthless swine should have been put to sleep a long time ago."