Good for him.

But these Friedgen-Lost-Weight stories are threatening to be like the Michael-Westbrook-Is-Finally-Focused articles that used to run around here every year at this time. Friedgen, remember, got just as much notice for dropping weight in 2002.

Friedgen had announced he was losing 100 pounds, and coerced Terp boosters to donate $1,000 per pound toward the building fund for the Gossett Team House, a facility for athletes. Whatever lbs. he lost while fundraising he got back real quick, with interest.

I always wondered if Friedgen gave the money back.

***

The Washington Post won't run Tank McNamara's Michael Vick story line.

Michael Cavna, on the Post's Comic Riffs blog, says Managing Editor Raju Narisetti decided the panels were "inappropriate."

The Post didn't censor McNamara during the 2000 football season, when the strip ripped Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder repeatedly, and honored him with its annual "Sports Jerk of the Year" award.

In a 2004  Q&A on washingtonpost.com, "Tank McNamara" creator Jeff Millar explained how and why Snyder got the nod:

(AFTER THE JUMP: Why's Snyder a jerk? In local sports radio, Ed Bradley lives on? Tom Boswell jinxes the Nats, too?)

"The contest is we invite readers at the beginning of each year to nominate someone as "Sports Jerk of the Year." This is someone who has distinguised him or herself as doing something that make him/her exceedingly unpopular. For example, Dan Snyder, the owner of the Washington Redskins won one year, likely due to the participation of the Washington Post readers. He bought the Washington Redskins from the estate of a longtime, much beloved owner and, according to all accounts, starting kicking people out of windows and starting such unprecedented revenue streams as charging admission to training camp."

***

Everybody's asking if there's enough of an audience to support two sports radio stations.

The bigger question: Is there enough local talent? Last night's evening host on WJFK was Holden Kushner, who identified himself as a satellite radio jock. He spent the earlier portions of the show railing about Michael Vick's upcoming "60 Minutes" appearance.

Kushner railed that James Brown, the DeMatha grad and longtime WTOP sportscaster back in his pre-national days, will only lob softballs. We'd find out what kind of man Vick really was, Kushner railed, if "60 Minutes" gave the assignment to Ed Bradley.

Kushner came back after the next break and, not railing, apologized for not knowing Ed Bradley was dead.

Bradley died in 2006.

Then again, it all made for some great radio. And Kushner's right about James Brown.

***

The Nationals get bombed.  Yesterday, the Washington Post had a piece summarizing the turnaround. That story said that it all started on July 24, when Jim Riggleman yelled at his team, with its then-.292 winning percentage, and the Nats went on to win 12 of the next 16 games.

To which we say: Looks like a lot of revisionist history is going on! Around here we know that the turnaround started four games earlier, with the Nats winning at just a .290 clip, when Cheap Seats Daily unilaterally declared "Thunderation" as the Nats unofficial official fight song and offered up the first of two consecutive Guaranteed Win Nights. The team won 14 of its next 20!

Sorry, Washington Post and Riggleman, but: We think we launched the turnaround!

But, while historians may one day quibble about when the 2009 Nats' turnaround actually started and who started it, there will no such quibbling about when the 2009 Nats' turnaround turned around, or who started it.

The when: Last night, with the 8-1 pounding by Atlanta.

The who: Tom Boswell, the anti-Midas who returned from a vacation after missing all the baseball gayety around here, just in time to jinx it all!

But, Boswell does do Cheap Seats Daily a solid: He uses the 20-game sample we favor, not the 16-game sample used in yesterday's  Washington Post story, to prove the Nats turnaround, thereby validating Thunderation's role.

But, whatever. All the fun's over now. Thanks, Boz!

Good thing it's football season!

***

Story tips? Wanna Play the Feud? Tube amps for sale? Send to: cheapseats@washingtoncitypaper.com

The mention came in response to a question directed at Michelle Obama by Steve Kroft about how she would conduct herself as first lady. He followed up with a question about whether the Obamas were "seriously" considering a public school for their girls Sasha and Malia. Michelle Obama punted on that one.

Here's what she had to say:

The primary focus for the first year will be making sure the kids make it through the transition. But there are many issues that I care deeply about. I care about military families and the work-family balance issue. I care about education. Both Barack and I believe that we can have an impact in the D.C. area...you know, in terms of making sure we're contributing to the community that we immediately live in. That's always been something that we try to do, whether its in our own neighborhoods, or in the schools that we've attended. So there's plenty to do.

[Kroft] Did you seriously consider sending the girls to public school?

You know, we're still in the process of figuring out that transition and what we have asked people to understand is that the decision that we make will be based on the best interests of the girls. We haven't made that decision yet. We want that to be a personal process, and people have been really good about respecting that.