Adam J. Choit

Surely you’ve seen in person or on TV, images of the Hollywood Walk of Fame, which are basically engraved stars on the ground in Hollywood.  Engraved inside each individual star is the name one famous person.  This is supposed to be some sort of honor when someone gets his/her own star, marking a significant achievement(s) in the person’s career.

The same goes for really all halls of fames, whether it be baseball, football, or even a hall of fame that isn’t related to sports.  Speaking of sports, one shred of credibility that sports halls of fames have that the Hollywood Walk of Fame doesn’t, is that at least with sports, they don’t induct the athletes until after they retire.  Sports will actually wait until the body of work is complete and can be assessed before giving the distinct honor of induction.  The Hollywood Walk of Fame is always giving away stars to relatively young people, such as actors who are seemingly in their 30′s.

Now, if you remember a few years back, the NCAA passed down heavy sanctions on the USC football program, for improper benefits that former running back Reggie Bush received during his college days.  Technically, the Heisman wasn’t taken away, but amidst outside pressures, Bush opted to return the award.  I say he shoulda kept it.  I mean, despite breaking the rules, it’s not as if he was busted for performance-enhancing drugs.  In other words, whatever benefits Bush received, those benefits didn’t give him an obvious unfair advantage on the field.  He didn’t cheat in that regard.

So anyway, in a world where we can take away Heisman Trophies, why can’t we take away people’s stars on the Hollywood Walk of Fame?  How come once someone is inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame, why must his induction be permanent?  Whether it’s a post-induction discovery that the person was guilty of highly immoral/illegal behaviors, or a realization that the person just really wasn’t deserving of the honor, why can’t we take away these honors?

Whatever.  Besides the incredibly long list of people we’ve never heard of having stars on the Walk of Fame, it’s worth noting that Ryan Seacrest and Ricky Martin have stars as well. I mean, how much of an honor could it really be if those two guys get stars?  While Hollywood has it’s Ricky Martins and Ryan Seacrests, baseball has it’s own Don Suttons and Bert Blylevens (guys that should not be in the Hall of Fame).

I say there’s nothing that says these honors should be permanent, forever.  Sure, it shouldn’t be easy to get someone kicked out of any hall of fame.  But there could be a process.  Signatures to nominate someone to get removed.  Once the magic number of signatures is obtained, then a voting process could come shortly thereafter.  To make things tougher, just make the number high — like it takes at least an 85% vote to kick someone out of a hall of fame.

While I was waiting on the line to vote, I was texting Bozzz, and mentioned how some of girls there voting were deece.  In fact, I was considering just hanging out outside the voting place all day.  This way I could really find out just how many hot girls live in my neighborhood. PURE GENIUS.

Anyway, here’s what Bozzzy suggested:
“You say the lever for Obama is in your pants, come pull it”

He also later mentioned something about forgetting “exit polls”, and that he has an “entry pole.”

With the upcoming California ballot having an important measure on it related to gay rights, I have some thoughts.  Voting yes on measure 8 basically means you support overturning the right for same-sex couples to get married.  Personally, I could care so little who marries who.

However, I think people have sort of lost sight that even though the right should exist, NOT EVERY GAY COUPLE WANTS TO GET MARRIED.  In fact/in addition, NOT EVERY GAY COUPLE WANTS TO HAVE KIDS, either.  That’s old school.

Some gays actually feel that’s what makes them unique, and different from heteros — their lack of desire to get married and their hatred for children — which is a position I can respect.

Of course, I haven’t done any research, but I assume that anybody over the age of 18 is eligible to vote in elections.  But if you’re over 18, and have the mental capacity of a 3 year old, I don’t really think you should be allowed to.  Toddlers can’t vote, so I would assume that adult toddlers can’t either.

I mean, I have no problem with the dude from LA Law voting, but Wendy the Retard from the Howard Stern Show should stay away from the voting booth.  But who knows?  We let blacks, women, and gays vote, so I guess everyone should be allowed.