When Manny Ramirez got caught using a banned substance, baseball purists said he should never get admission into the shrine of baseball.

I was one of these baseball purists. Not anymore.

Not only Manny, but also Alex Rodriguez, Sammy Sosa, Mark McGwire, Roger Clemens, Rafael Palmeiro and all the other players who either have admitted or have allegedly used performance enhancing drugs (PEDs).

But then I read an exerpt of Zev Chafets’ book, Cooperstown Confidential: Heroes, Rogues and the Inside Story of the Baseball Hall of Fame, coming out next month.

I am now convinced that Manny, A-Rod, Clemens, McGwire are all no worse than who else is in the Baseball Hall of Fame.

Let’s start with a simple tutorial on how a player gets voted into the HOF. Player A is not eligible until seven years have passed since his retirement from playing. Once amount of time passes, Player A’s name gets on a list that goes to the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA). If Player A gets 75% or more of the votes from the writers, he gets enshrinement. Sounds simple, right?

Let’s move on to the next point Chafets makes.

“Not every immortal is a gentleman.”

Let’s look at some of the players currently in the HOF. Tris Speaker?  Rogers Hornsby? Joe DiMaggio? Ty Cobb? Grover Cleveland Alexander? Mickey Mantle? Sandy Koufax? Even the last “pure” home run king, Hank Aaron?

Chances are you’ve heard of a few of these names and then some. Here’s why Chafets mentioned these names.

Ty Cobb was an avowed racist. He hated Jews and Blacks. He was known to raise his spikes when sliding if that opposing player was a Jew.

Tris Speaker and Rogers Hornsby were members of the Ku Klux Klan.  Joe DiMaggio was a member of the mafia.

Grover Cleveland Alexander pitched a game drunk when alcohol was a federally banned substance.

Mickey Mantle was once forced out of the 1961 pennant race with an infection in his buttocks that he got from a quack doctor while shooting up a concoction of steroids and amphetamine.

Sandy Koufax took so much nonanabolic steroids for his pitching arm that on the mound he was sometimes “half-high.”

Finally — Hank Aaron? He has admitted to taking amphetamines.

All of the names above are in the HOF.

Of course, what did the voting members of the BBWAA do? Turn a blind eye. That is, until Jose Canseco wrote his book, spilling the beans about PED use in baseball. Since then, the BBWAA has gone with a vengeance against these cheaters.

What does that say about Manny Ramirez, Roger Clemens, or even A-Rod?

That means they should be compared against their contemporaries. Pretty much everyone, from the hitters to the pitchers, were doing PEDs in the late 1990s to early 2000s. Different eras, different stats. If A-Rod had more homers over a span of time than other players, then he was the better player — whether he did steroids or not.

Case in point: Before Babe Ruth came along, Home Run Baker was the leading home run hitter of his day. His highest single-season total? 12 home runs. That was in 1913.

In 1927, Babe Ruth hit a then-record 60 home runs in one season. See? Different eras, different stats.

You can bet I’ll run over to the book store and buy Chafets’ book and change my views of who should be in the Baseball Hall of Fame, and I suggest you do the same.

In 1932, Franklin Delano Roosevelt launched the world’s biggest federal relief program, creating millions of jobs and funding these by the millions of dollars.

His program, known as the New Deal, was instrumental in helping the United States recover from the Great Depression. I have taught to my high school American history students that while this program gave the federal government immeasurable power and control, this also prevented total collapse of American society.

This morning, before going to work (yes, I had to work today), I saw this link on CNN and curiously clicked on it.

Obamanamia has not reached Wyoming. Here’s why.

These are back-to-basic Republicans. They want small government, strong national defense and an emphasis on individual liberties and accountability.

These Republicans in Wyoming and elsewhere feel that the government is bailing out companies for their mistakes. This is something I agree with. However, this is also something we all are in together. Let me share something else with you:

In the United States, as in some other countries, we often argue over the appropriate size and authority of national government, and usually we argue from principle: a big government is better because it can provide security; a small government is better because it can allow freedom…. as if government were some uniform product of which you can have too much or too little, but which is always the same thing. If we look at how government grew in the first place, we might remember that it is a set of solutions to a set of problems—not theoretical problems, but practical problems….

Now, I didn’t say this. It came from this book.  But, I agree with it.

Now, these people in Wyoming and other states that voted Republican, they’re the ones who prefer small government. The people like myself, who believe government is supposed to provide, want a more involved government.

But the line needs to be drawn somewhere.

Funny, cause in his inauguration address, President Obama mentioned the very same thing. In the transcript of his address, Obama said:

 The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works, whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified.

Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end.

Obama has a point here.

Based on recent movie and television shows, there is an inclination that Hollywood prefers deaf actors and actresses who speak.

Regardless of talent or experience, there is an obvious preference for actors who can vocalize. Ever since the deaf acting profession lost equal ground in 1929 with the first talkie The Jazz Singer, there has been a clear preference for actors who can speak (and of course, sign).

Aside from Marlee Matlin’s portrayal of Sarah in Children of a Lesser God in 1986, there has been very few scenes with deaf actors who don’t speak throughout their appearance. I’ll give you a good example: Mr. Holland’s Opus. Anthony Natale, who acted as the adult version of Cole Holland in the aforementioned film did not speak in his role. From looking at his filmography, he has had only cameo appearances throughout his career.

Tyrone Giordano burst onto the Hollywood scene three years ago in A Lot Like Love and The Family Stone. In both films, Giordano has signed and used his voice.

Sho Stern has also been a regular on television shows such as Threat Matrix, Weeds, and Jericho. I’ve only seen her in Weeds. In her role as Megan, she signed and spoke.

Is all of this fair? No.

We have talented actors and actresses who could blossom in the movie and television industry. Russell Harvard did an excellent job portraying Cole Rowan in Law & Order: CI last year. So did Alexandria Wailes in her role as Malia on that same episode. Even Darren Frazier as Larry did an outstanding job. To the best of my recollection, none of these actors spoke throughout their appearances. However, I have to argue that up to this point, this episode of Law & Order was the most “deaf-friendly” episode ever made, with deaf extras, a strong deaf supporting cast, and full camera-view of the actors signing their lines (for the post part).

While writing this piece, I spoke with Ty Giordano on AIM, and he had this to say about the whole perspective into deaf actors:

As far as preferring to hire actors who are able to use speech, I cannot speak for the entertainment industry and its hiring practices. What I have noticed is that the deaf characters that Hollywood uses in their films and television shows tend to have some command of speech, so naturally, it makes sense to hire actors with the same ability. If there are to be more stories with actors who choose not to use their voice, then there must be more support of this idea with the writers of these shows.

So, after my conversation with Ty, I was left thinking about a multitude of things.

Whether this is something we, as a deaf community, should address, it is definitely food for thought.

In an announcement today, the University of North Carolina-Asheville has named Dr. Jane K. Fernandes as the new Provost/Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, effective upon approval of the University’s Board of Trustees.

Fernandes, who most recently served as the president-designate of Gallaudet University and the Provost for six years, beat out more than 160 applicants for the UNC-Asheville job, according to the press release from the University.

UNC Asheville Chancellor Anne Ponder explained that Fernandes’ goals and academic credentials best suits her for the job.

Jane Fernandes is an exceptionally talented and experienced individual whose achievements and expertise ideally suit our University’s goals and mission.

Ponder goes on to state that Fernandes is “…skilled in strategic planning, curriculum and faculty development and has directed university programs that improve K-12 education.”

Fernandes is currently still under contract at Gallaudet as a tenured faculty member in the ASL/Deaf Studies department and is currently scheduled to teach several courses this coming spring semester. Whether this new job will prevent her from resuming her duties at Gallaudet remains to be seen.

Fernandes was largely the source of the October 2006 Gallaudet Protests that returned national attention to Gallaudet University, 19 years after the Deaf President Now movement.

She was accused of mismanagement, unwillingness to work with constituents on campus, and was seen as too much in the mold of retiring President I. King Jordan. Her appointment sparked a protest in May of 2006 that was resumed that following October.

During the October protests, information surfaced regarding how Fernandes was ineffective as a leader, including the Clerc Center letter written by faculty and staff at the Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center, accusing her of ineffective leadership as the Vice President of Pre-College National Mission Programs before she became the Provost at Gallaudet.

Fernandes mentioned that she is “looking forward to working with Chancellor Ponder.”

Fernandes becomes the second presidential candidate from Gallaudet University to work in the University of North Carolina system. Dr. Elisabeth Zinser, the 7th president of Gallaudet University, was the vice chancellor of UNC-Greensboro.

Once approved by the Board of Trustees, Fernandes’ position starts July 1, 2008.

A couple of weeks ago, it was in the news that China celebrated the one year countdown to the Beijing 2008 Olympics. I looked at my wife and told her: “I can’t wait!” Then I caught myself.

Do I really want to root for the USA team as they compete in a country where reports and allegations of human rights violations have occurred? I’m stuck between a rock and a hard place. On one hand, I want to root for my country, but not at the expense of rooting for the Olympics in a country with a track record of oppressing human rights.

Just over the past several decades, China has done the following:

• Enacted religious repression of Uighurs in Xinjiang.
• Demolished buildings or private dwellings owned by people who were living in the areas where the government wanted to build public structures.
• Secretly hid behind “closed doors” people suffering from HIV/AIDS.
• Unlawfully occupied Tibet since 1950.
• Negligence of orphans in state orphanages.
• Repression of democracy movements (Tiananmen Square).
• Refused to publicize how many executions the government does every year. (Data speculates nearly 10,000 people are executed for minor crimes)

This doesn’t include what China has done over the recent years as they prepare for the Olympics. Amnesty International reports that in its efforts to “clean up,” China has actually gotten worse.

Beijing police have used China’s hosting of the Games as a pretext to extend abusive detention practices such as RTL and ‘Enforced Drug Rehabilitation’, in the name of ‘cleaning up’ the city.

“Efforts to ‘clean up’ the city ahead of the Games through extending detention without trial raise serious questions about the commitment Chinese officials have made to improve their human rights record at the awarding of the Games to China,” said Catherine Baber, Head of the Asia-Pacific Programme at Amnesty International.

The International Olympic Committee had hoped that by awarding the Games to China, China would step up their efforts to improve human rights. Jacques Rogge, the IOC chairman, said in an interview in 2002 that “We [the IOC] are convinced that the Olympic Games will improve human rights in China.”

Amnesty International has asked China to remove the death penalty, make sure all forms of detention are in accordance to international human rights laws and standards, allow for human rights defenders to continue their peaceful activities, and end unwarranted censorship of the Internet. (PDF media kit can be viewed here.)

Not to go off tangent too much here, but while we’re on the topic of China and their human rights violations, we need to take a good look at our own. We have:

• denied rights to detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
• ignored the Tutsis in the Rwanda genocide in 1994.
• not pushed for other countries to enforce an embargo of Sudan due to the Darfur genocide.

Another even more shocking thing is that many people don’t know that eugenics laws in place in the 1920’s prohibiting interracial marriage became models for the policies of the Third Reich and Germany’s “racial hygienists.”

So, where’s the line here? Where do I, as a citizen and a fan of sporting events, find a common ground in supporting my country during the Olympics at a place known for its human rights violations when we have our own?

Meet Heather and Dana Arazi.

They just biked across America.

And I met them last Saturday at our monthly dVELO ride. I remembered Heather from our undergraduate days at Gallaudet. We both majored in education. After I graduated, we lost touch. I didn’t know where they both had gone. Until Saturday.

Heather and Dana (who’s an interpreter) both fundraised over $2,500 for their trip across America, to benefit Gallaudet University’s Personal Discovery Program.

In between breaks and rest stops while biking 32 miles to Bethesda via the Capital Crescent Trail and the Rock Creek Park trail, I had a chance to talk to Heather and Dana about their experiences.

Over a mid-morning smoothie, Dana explained to me how he had proposed the idea to his wife, Heather, about biking across America. Heather was at first skeptical, but gave her husband her support, and even joined forces with him. Both Dana and Heather have first-hand experience working for the Personal Discovery program (run by Jean Berube) and it is always an annual obligation for the program to raise its own funds to support staff payroll and the ropes course on the Gallaudet campus. For those of you who are not familiar with the Discovery course, it is right next to the Washburn Arts Building, among the trees, supported by several telephone poles suspended with several miles of ropes and steel cables. The Personal Discovery program is a popular program among Gallaudet students (particularly freshmen), summer camps, and team building activities for groups on and off campus.

Dana told me he had quit his job and with Heather, they started their trip on April 8, at the Bolsa Chica Beach State Park on the Pacific coast of California. They arrived to Washington, D.C., nine weeks later, on June 11.

The Arazis took the southern route through the United States, going through California and Arizona, then up to Utah and Colorado to where they met Heather’s parents in Kansas. Up to that point, Heather and Dana had no support and gear (cycling acronym “SAG” for a car crew that follows a biking group), opting to lug along nearly 150 pounds of equipment daily, including their clothes, meals, sleeping bags, and tents.

Dana even set up a contraption that hooked up his Treo, GPS, and other electronic accessories to a solar panel he had set up on the back of the packs.

While biking across the country, both of them encountered the elements to the extreme. From rain to blazing sun, and even snow!

Heather and Dana are currently working at the Personal Discovery summer program, assisting Berube and her staff in teaching team building skills, interpersonal and intrapersonal skills, and just having fun. During our mid-morning smoothie, Dana exclaimed to me that he never knew the Grand Canyon was right in the middle of the mountains. “I always thought it was “FLAT-LAND, STEEP-CLIFF, RIVER. NO ME WRONG. MOUNTAINS-TO-CLIFF.”

(Heather at the Canyon.)

Dana, who lost 30 pounds during the ride, admitted that he wants to do the whole experience again. Heather isn’t so sure. “I’m willing to be SAG, but I don’t know yet if I want to ride again,” she said.

However, both of them aren’t done fundraising. They set their goal for $10,000 and they will continue to fundraise and travel across America to meet with people and host events to explain their experiences with the trip.

If you are interested in finding out about their experiences through their blog, viewing their photos (that’s where I got these photos), or just donating to their cause, go to their website at Bike for Discovery.

They can definitely count on me as one of their donors soon!

The Gallaudet protests of 2006 had a profound impact on deaf education in general. While many people knew about the presence of the huge elephant in the corner, we chose not to discuss it or acknowledge it for the long term.

The elephant I am talking about is a three-headed Cerberus: academic standards, academic culture, and academic rigor in deaf education. Deaf education administrators need to do something, and fast.

Gallaudet struggles with the students it gets because grade school deaf education is sorely in need of reform. The University needs to make what seems like a difficult choice, but a choice I view as an easy one: should Gallaudet become a preparatory University with remedial courses, re-establish a preparatory program similar to the one previously established, or become a full-fledged University serving students with the academic qualifications truly befitting a typical American university?

The next several months will tell.

I must note that while it is not the University’s fault a large percentage of undergraduate students have a low reading level, once the University accepts these students as undergraduates, faculty unfairly have the burden put on them to educate these students, when it is ultimately the student’s own responsibility to further their education.

Many residential schools and deaf/hard-of-hearing programs have a tendency to impose lower academic standards on deaf students. I was subject to that myself at my old mainstream high school in New York. I remember two of my English teachers shushing me and telling me not to worry about something I didn’t understand while they focused on my hearing classmates. Back then I didn’t understand it and it wasn’t until I entered college (at Gallaudet) that was able to contextualize my own marginalization. As an educator, I promised myself I would never do that to my own students.

The critical window of learning language ends approximately around thirteen years of age, which is probably the age before which a child must have full access and comprehension of language. Family and school environments are the two arenas where these goals must be met.

As an educator at a residential school for the deaf, I have encountered students with varying reading levels and cognitive abilities. I currently teach students who read at or above grade level and I have previously taught students who read at the second or third grade level. Many of these students express their frustration, perceiving that their reading levels aren’t up to par. When they subsequently describe their backgrounds, it’s clear where the family and school responsibility enters in the picture.

Since more than 83% (according to demographics published by the Gallaudet Research Institute) of deaf and hard of hearing children are born to hearing parents, many of these parents are clueless on what to do with their “silent” child and often don’t learn how to communicate with their child. When that happens, the burden on the school increases. When a child does not have communication or even language access at home, what they learn is not reinforced. This further diminishes a child’s chances of ever being on grade level once they graduate from grade school and enter an institute of higher education.

Deaf and hard of hearing programs look to Gallaudet as a model and a measure of a deaf student’s academic abilities. The admissions criteria the University accepts is usually the indicator of the “lowest” possible expectations of a deaf student, and that is just plain wrong.

There are three non-profit organizations in the United States that could, and should be taking a stronger lead in working to improve the academic standards, academic rigor, and academic culture at residential and day programs for the deaf and hard of hearing. One is the National Association for the Deaf.

The other two are Conference of Educational Administrators of Schools and Programs for the Deaf (CEASD) and the Council of American Instructors of the Deaf (CAID). CEASD just recently wrapped up a weekend-long series of meetings and dialogues and CAID will host a planned conference in June. All three organizations need to work together in establishing higher standards and benchmarks for deaf and hard of hearing students at every level of the primary and secondary education spectrums.

During a Town Hall meeting last Monday, Dr. Davila announced the University’s mandate to address the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE) non-compliances by the deadline of November 2008. It was an official invitation for the deaf education community to openly discuss the elephant.

In the course of a lively discussion on my daily commute home on the MARC train, one of my fellow commuters mentioned how she was “disgusted” at an acquaintance’s blunt and public question about whether she practices her religion regularly. Her response was: “Deaf is my religion.” Of course, my eyes widened a bit at that remark. I could probably guess what she was referring to, but wanted to know more. Another commuter sitting across the aisle from me mentioned that there appears to be many parallel similarities between religion as a whole and Deaf (deaf community, deaf culture, and deafness) as a whole.

Throughout that discussion, several parallels were explained, and while I feel some of them may be stretching it a bit, I can see where she (and others who claim Deaf as a religion) was coming from.

In the mid to later part of the 20th century, the deaf club was a popular venue for congregating on a weekly basis, where Deaf people would get together to do activities together, socialize, and be there for a common purpose — because they were deaf. People gather at places of worship for the same purposes.

In the religious community, most of your typical volunteering and fundraising efforts can be found in local churches, temples, and mosques, which is relatively similar in the Deaf community. We find ourselves volunteering our time for deaf-related events, fundraising for deaf-related purposes (i.e. sports, drama productions), and I nodded at that similarity.

There is another parallel: varying beliefs. Just like different dieties have different beliefs, different communities have different values.

Also mentioned in the ride home were the similarities with traditions and customs. Religions have rituals, celebrations, holidays, and other observances while the Deaf community has similar celebrations, rituals, and observances.

“But what about prayer?” another commuter asked the second woman. “For me, it’s hope.” While I didn’t ask her to elaborate, I suspect she was referring to hope for ourselves, hope for accomplishment, and hope for the future. “We have faith in our abilities [as a Deaf person],” she added afterwards.

There is also a common underlying bond within the Deaf community: our embrace of ASL and understanding what it means to be Deaf. This is also same in any particular religion.

I had to hop off at my stop before I could ask for more discussion, but this whole thing got me thinking…can the Deaf community be considered similar to a religion?

America is addicted to meat.

Anyone driving down an ordinary American road will see fast food joints, all with their primary ingredients being meat. Burger King. McDonald’s. Wendy’s. Arby’s. Roy Rogers. Hardee’s. You name it. They all serve meat. If you look at a sample school cafeteria, you will find nearly every product comes from the cow. Milk and meat. Thanks to the huge financial substay from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which gives out nearly $400 million a year to provide farms with a steady income, while fruits and vegetables only get approximately $175 million a year. Just how much America was addicted to meat didn’t strike me until a few months ago when I made a change in my lifestyle. I became a vegetarian.

If you had told me a year ago that I’d be a vegetarian  around this time, I’d have laughed and told you to stop pulling my leg. But, hey, anything happens in a year.

In a move that was more for the healthy benefits than anything else, my wife wanted to go back to the vegetarian lifestyle that she had enjoyed for most of her childhood. If you must know, she only turned towards meat after her mother married her stepfather. As for me, you’re looking at someone who was raised on meat. Heck, I even saw the meat being killed and served on my dinner table.

Last summer, my wife asked me how I would feel if I turned vegetarian. Of course, my first reaction was I wouldn’t mind (or care). I didn’t know whether to take her seriously. Several weeks later, she asked me again, and this time mentioned our daughter in the same sentence. The first reaction I had was to take her seriously, and to wonder what it would be like in our household with one carnivore and two herbivores. I’d seen too many dining experiences at my wife’s family house the last several years with two or three carnivores and three herbivores eating different meals at dinner. I didn’t want us to be like this either.

I ended up agreeing to this, mainly because I felt it was practical to do this together as a family, and I felt that my diet could improve. I could use less (eventually, no) meat and focus on more leafy greens and other earth-based foods. On August 31, I ate my last piece of meat. Since then, I’ve been eating purely vegetarian. The first few months, I got quite a few “what, are you crazy” looks, and a few “you’ve got to be kidding me…you???” expressions, only to get more looks when I said I was being sincere. People told me I wouldn’t last through Thanksgiving and all the meat and trimmings. Well, guess what? I did. That American holiday tradition is often considered the make or break for most carnivore-turned-herbivores, and I made it through both Thanksgiving and Christmas just fine.

There are definitely many pros and cons to this whole experience for me. The biggest confession right now is I still have some temptations when driving past a Burger King or sitting in a restaurant smelling the chargrilled steak. These things do smell good! It is also hard to find restaurants with a good variety of meals that are not so dependent on meat. Even the popular ones like Applebee’s, Ruby Tuesday, and Bertucci’s all have a lot of selections with meat and few vegetable-based choices. I’ve even become more self-conscious about what is fed to these meat products that we ingest by the millions every year. What kind of hormones are cage-fed chickens being fed? What steroids are cows ingesting to produce more milk and produce calves faster? Everywhere you go, you will see results of our nation’s addiction to meat.

It even shows up in Congress. You will see the meat and dairy lobbyists stick together. An article in the January 2003 issue of Mother Jones states how the federal government does its part in supporting the livestock industry. I agree, livestock farmers need all the financial assistance to continue their livelihoods. But consider this: reducing America’s addiction to meat would immediately help solve four problems: world hunger, deforestation, soil erosion, and disease. If you are an avid traveler, you will see that America is purely the only nation in the world who “relies” on meat for its daily diet.

Indians in India consider the cow sacred. So do the Maasai of eastern Africa. A lot of the countries, either third world or modern, do not depend on meat as much as America does. And, do you see any nutritional problems there? No.

But, as I later learned, being a vegetarian does have its positive effects. I opened my eyes to more varied cuisine, noticed myself eating more diverse foods, making healthier choices, and even saw myself lose some pounds off. I do need to make sure I eat enough protein, but I get enough of that eating legumes, nuts, and soy-based products.

Even my own five-year-old daughter, who used to get off of seeing McDonald’s chicken McNuggets, doesn’t like them anymore. She has started eating pasta and other meals we prepare at home. While people out there may think we don’t have enough variety, you don’t need to look further before finding there are plenty of restaurants in the D.C. area that provide vegan or vegetarian-based menus. On an anniversary date last month, my wife found this awesome place called Great Sage in Clarksville, Maryland. What was cool about this place was at every table there was a sign listing some famous vegetarian eaters. Did you know Albert Einstein was a vegetarian? A simple Google search will give you choices of where to eat.

For those of you preferring to stay home, Mollie Katzen’s Moosewood cookbooks, based on her popular restaurant, Moosewood Restaurant in Ithaca, New York, is a good guide to starting vegetarian cuisine at home. I would also recommend Good Housekeeping’s Vegetarian Meals cookbook, of which we’ve made several delicious meat-less meals for our evening dinners at home.

So, while there are some meat products I miss, especially my fraternity’s famous bratwursts, I know I’m not missing much by being a vegetarian.

Several weeks ago, I heard about the engagement proposal that was supposed to air on national television during the Super Bowl. I thought it was supposed to be a joke, but found out it was serious.

 The guy, “JP” had gotten more than $75,000 in donations, but still lacked the $2.5 million he needed. Fortunately, he was able to get the rest he needed for a 30-second commercial from an advertising company.

Last Sunday, the first, second, third, and fourth quarters came and went and nothing. I got pissed off, thinking it was a spam. Then this morning, I found out it did occur! But not on Super Bowl Sunday. It occurred last Tuesday, during the Veronica Mars TV show (his fiancee’s favorite show). Turns out the advertising agency backed out of the $2.425 million offer and JP had to drop his chance of having a commercial shown during the Super Bowl.

While I am unable to understand what he (JP, who is later identified as Rand Fishkin) says on the tape, I did catch “will you marry me?” 23 seconds into the tape. Then the subsequent reaction from his fiancee, Geraldine, who was taped watching the commercial.

And Geraldine’s reaction…

I got goosebumps, especially at how Geraldine reacted. Her shaking hands, her “What?!” screams, their embrace and finally, what looked like a “YES!” answer. I think poor Rand was so nervous/excited he put the ring on the wrong hand at first.

Touching, isn’t it? Rand’s entire story about the proposal, the whole shebang and the first 20 hours afterwards can be found on his blog here!

That guy has some creative lobes up there! I wish I had thought of something like this, and I’d even consent to doing something with the Redskins! That would beat the nosebleed I gave my wife that night I proposed to her!