I've never read a Cosmo magazine before. My only interaction with them is when standing in the line at the grocery store. But, their headlines have always confused me.

The idea of women being so fanatical about sexually pleasing their unsatisfied husbands that they need to learn 30 new tips a month to keep the spark alive just seemed incredulous to me?

But, then I wondered if I was assuming an incorrect demographic for this magazine's readership. And after looking it up, I was. Cosmo's biggest readership age (double any other group) was 18-24.

These are single women. Trying to get a guy. Under the delusion that by utilizing these 30 tips, they'll convince their boyfriend or date that they're worth the commitment.

Last year, Michael Vick was sitting in jail. And I rationalized it by telling my friends he was never that great of a quarterback anyway. Sure, he had unreal mobility and a killer arm, but he made really bad decisions on the field (and off, obviously).

I gave up on him. Today, he is on the cusp of becoming one of the elite quarterbacks in the NFL.

My friend Justin and I have been talking about this lately. The idea of choosing who to get behind. This year, Justin is privileged to work in one of the best school districts in the nation. The kids are exceptional. And it makes him wonder if he's really needed there.

So, our discussion became...what's better? Teaching a kid to read who might not read otherwise, so that he can go to high school, get a good job, and have a family. Or mentoring the kids with the absolute best potential in the world, and turning guys who host dogfights for fun into an apparently redeemed man with matchless potential.

That's why there's more than one kind of person, I guess. I think Justin still feels that the better service opportunity for him is working with the underprivileged. And they need him.

I want to work with people who have disproportional expectations compared to their abilities. Think of how many Michael Vicks are probably in prison right now.