Richard Nemec, a Los Angeles writer and $2 bettor, disagrees with a Monday editorial that applauded HBO's decision to cancel "Luck." His rebuttal is below. If you would like to write a full-length response to a recent Times article, editorial or Op-Ed and would like to participate in Blowback, here are our FAQs and submission policy.

We’re on a losing streak in Southern California, if not statewide, that just got worse with the recent cancellation of the HBO television series, “Luck,” which had none. As a result, more than a new TV series with poor viewer ratings but critical acclaim has been euthanized unnecessarily.

The Times called the cancellation of “Luck” “the right ending,” but it was no ending at all. The previously planned last of the first year’s episodes will air Sunday. That’s the real ending, artistically. Politically, the show was whacked as some of its characters were -- uselessly and violently.  There will be no second season, and that’s too bad.

In today’s Internet-fed, hasty, gotta-be-quick decision-making, the show’s producers and their antagonists from the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, overreacted to a fatal barn accident to a filly used in the filming (but not during filming).

As a result, much more than a TV series died; throw in damage to the regional economy and a venerable horse racing venue and the loss of a new melding of art, sport and life that rarely is depicted with so much insight and introspection.

Predictably, the state horse racing board has promised a full investigation. It also has assured anyone who will listen that the animals involved in “Luck” were much more closely scrutinized and protected than horses and other animals used in other motion picture productions.

Trainers and jockeys alike at Santa Anita Park, an internationally recognized thoroughbred racing venue, were saddened to see the series abruptly end. They liked what it did for horse racing and for the local economy. They had friends like Hall of Fame jockey Gary Stevens who had starring roles in the series.

Veteran Hall of Fame trainer Ron McAnally, 79, who has trained five former national champions, was unabashedly critical of the decision and PETA’s indirect role in it. “Accidents happen in our business just like they do in any sport,” he said. “It is a foregone conclusion that anything can go wrong.”

The Times, other editorial pages and entertainment industry rumor sheets seem to agree the cancellation was the right move and was coming anyway due to low ratings. In addition, insiders in the horse racing game, such as the Canadian-based owner of Santa Anita, reportedly felt “Luck” was painting too negative a picture of thoroughbred racing.

I could not disagree more. As a frequent amateur handicapper and small-time bettor, particularly at Santa Anita, I warmed to the TV series and loved the realistic quality of the races and the stables at venerable Santa Anita.

Santa Anita for me is more than a horse racing or betting venue; it is a slice of my life shared with three close friends. At retirement ages all, we come to the track to bond. We have been buoyed by the larger and younger-looking crowds the track has been attracting since “Luck” began.

Putting PETA aside because it objects to almost any use of animals any time in the movies, I think the people who watched “Luck” but grew increasingly uncomfortable with it, such as Frank Stronach, the track’s owner, were having trouble with its edginess, which in this case was also its strength, portraying nearly everyone as flawed.

While it can be questioned how accurately “Luck” captured the sport of kings, it cannot be denied that the actors, writers and moviemakers captured their characters in nuanced, sensitive ways that we see too infrequently in so many of today’s celebrity-fixated motion pictures. It surely will win awards even though it has failed commercially.

Like in life itself, we are all seeking an edge, a sense of belonging, friends we can trust, and, oh, yes, a little bit of luck.

ALSO:

Romney's car problem

Sure you can go home again

Photo gallery: Ted Rall cartoons

 --Richard Nemec

Photo: Kerry Condon in a scene from HBO's series "Luck." Credit: Gusmano Cesaretti / HBO

It might be smart to take the new data against red meat -- a study links the consumption of even a small portion daily to a higher risk of dying -- with a grain of (possibly blood-pressure-raising) salt. Not that red meat should get a pass: Overconsumption has been tied, over and over again, to poor health outcomes. And the fact that your grandfather ate 12 ounces every day until his 102nd birthday is no argument against the study; lots of people who smoke cigarettes live to a ripe old age. But there is no getting around the number of people who would live to much riper ages if they abstained from tobacco.

Still, this study was correlational, meaning that we know red meat is tied statistically to higher death rates within the time range of the Harvard study. If that's even so: The study didn't examine what people ate; it asked them what they ate. The question is, did the red meat cause the deaths? Was it all of the reason for the deaths, most of it, a small part of it, or perhaps an indicator of other factors? And is it the meat itself, or perhaps substances used in the raising of cattle or in cooking? Processed meat was linked to still-higher death rates.

Maybe people who avoid red meat are more likely to live healthier altogether. Considering the warnings over the years about beef, that's entirely possible. People who heed health warnings might be more likely  to eat vegetables, exercise regularly, meditate occasionally, fasten their seatbelts and, of course, not smoke, since cigarettes are still the No. 1 cause of premature death.

That would help explain the seemingly nonsensical finding that people who partake of red meat only occasionally and sparingly are less likely to die of any cause -- not just heart attack, diabetes or other ailments associated with poor diet but, say, in accidents. The only way a hamburger is more likely to cause a fatal accident is if it's being held in one hand by a driver.

ALSO:

California, a bad bet for business

Goldberg: Obama's pump debacle

Red meat will kill you? Stick a fork in me, I'm done!

--Karin Klein

Photo: Red meat. Credit: Dave Thomson / AP Photo

You can have my steak when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.

I hate to be politically incorrect, but that's my, well, gut reaction to a study released Monday that says eating any amount of red meat increases one's risk of premature death.

Now mind you, it's not that I don't believe the study. Its lead author is a postdoctoral fellow at the Harvard School of Public Health, and only really smart people get into Harvard. And it's not as though the researchers weren't thorough: They looked at the eating habits and the health of more than 110,000 adults for more than 20 years. Which, on a scale of boring tasks, certainly tops the homework in the geology class that I took in college.

But first I read this -- "adding just one 3-ounce serving of unprocessed red meat ... to one's daily diet was associated with a 13% greater chance of dying during the course of the study" -- and I think, wow, I'm pretty sure that just two bites of that T-bone I had last month were more than 3 ounces.

Then I read this -- "Even worse, adding an extra daily serving of processed red meat, such as a hot dog or two slices of bacon, was linked to a 20% higher risk of death during the study" -- and I think, that probably means the bacon-wrapped hot dogs I had for lunch last week should've killed me by now. (To give me some credit, I skipped the onions and the fries; perhaps that's why I'm still walking around.)

Also, this part moves me not at all: "Eating a serving of nuts instead of beef or pork was associated with a 19% lower risk of dying during the study. The team said choosing poultry or whole grains as a substitute was linked with a 14% reduction in mortality risk; low-fat dairy or legumes, 10%; and fish, 7%."

Well, I had peanuts on Saturday afternoon. It didn't make me glad it wasn't steak; it made me think of being on an airliner. Then I had sushi on Saturday night. It made me think of fishing.

But here's the part of the study that has me really puzzled:

The Harvard researchers hypothesized that eating red meat would also be linked to an overall risk of death from any cause. ... And the results suggest they were right: Among the 37,698 men and 83,644 women who were tracked, as meat consumption increased, so did mortality risk.

Which means what, exactly? If I grill a nice New York strip on Sunday, that increases my chances of being hit by a bus on Monday?

Granted, I didn't go to Harvard, but that seems like a stretch. Or maybe it's just that all the red meat is killing my brain cells, in addition to clogging my arteries (and making me more likely to die in an airplane accident).

Probably a lot of people are going to have fun with this story. They may even ignore the more salient points, among them that at least cutting down on the consumption of red meat is good for your health and good for the planet.

But sorry, Harvard, my bottom line remains: As a red-blooded, red-meat-eating American, I just can't stomach a future that doesn't include a juicy rib-eye.

ALSO:

Japan's 1,000-year-old warning

The Ghent Altarpiece, as never before

Sherwood Rowland, the scientist who saved the world 

-- Paul Whitefield

Photo credit: William Thomas Cain / Getty Images

California Fish and Game Commission President Daniel W. Richards shot and ate a mountain lion in Idaho, where it's legal. Cartoonist Ted Rall wonders: Where will he go next?

ALSO:

Fish and Game's lion hunter

Photo gallery: Ted Rall cartoons

Mountain lions like their fast food in the forest

Controlling wolves: War on wildlife or basic necessity?

Florida's Burmese pythons: Will they make a meal out of (gulp) us?

Cartoon: Ted Rall / For The Times

Via LA Observed and the Department of Fish and Game:

"After drawing much public attention for his historic trek into California, the gray wolf designated as OR7 has turned north and crossed back into Oregon."

Please pick a response.

1. Is everyone leaving California?

2. He must have read about Daniel Richards. Better stay away from Idaho too.

3. Didn't the Supreme Court say the cops couldn't track anyone by GPS?

4. Self-deportation.

5. Your response, which you can leave below in the comments.

--Robert Greene

Photo: This Nov. 14, 2011, photo from a trail camera appears to show OR7, the young male wolf that has wandered hundreds of miles across Oregon and Northern California. Credit: Allen Daniels via the Medford Mail Tribune / Associated Press 

Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney has critics in all corners, and his furry ones came out -- accompanied by their people -- to protest Tuesday. About a dozen humans and a few dogs turned out at a demonstration, organized by supporters of the Dogs Against Romney website, outside the Madison Square Garden site of the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show in New York. The demonstration had nothing to do with the show and everything to do with the now infamous story of Romney's 1983 summer family vacation. 

Romney and his wife loaded their sons and luggage in their Chevy station wagon for a 12-hour drive from Boston to Romney's parents' cottage on Lake Huron in Canada. They took the family dog, an Irish setter named Seamus, in a dog carrier, attached to the roof of the car. According to the Boston Globe, where this incident was reported in a 2007 series on the candidate, Romney did build a windshield for the carrier. At one point, when it was obvious the dog had gone to the bathroom in the carrier, Romney stopped the car at a gas station and hosed off the dog.

The story, which became known among dog lovers as Crate-Gate, has drawn howls of criticism since it was first reported and spawned a website, a Facebook page and the slogans "Dogs are not luggage"  and "I Ride Inside." No doubt the pampered show dogs inside the Garden would have given the protesters outside a paws-up on those sentiments.

In California, it's against the law to tether a dog unless its owner is doing "a temporary task," or to keep a dog unsecured in an open pickup or to let it die of heat stroke in an overheated car. It's difficult to find a law spelling out whether your dog can travel in a kennel on top of a car, maybe because it's so obviously a bad idea for the dog.

The American Kennel Club has a long list of tips for transporting a dog safely by car. All involve crating or securing the dog. AKC spokesperson Lisa Peterson tells us, "We believe the safest place is inside the car in a crate." The operative word here is inside the car. We pass this tip along to Romney in case he decides to take a dog on the campaign trail.

 ALSO:

Banning battery cages for egg-laying hens

PETA against cairn terrier as Kansas state dog

Malibu wire fox terrier goes for the double-crown

--Carla Hall

Photo: Dogs (that wouldn't deign to travel on top of a car) wait to be escorted into a van from their hotel near the site of the Westminister Kennel Club dog show in 2001. Credit: Suzanne Plunkett / Associated Press 

Anyone who has survived a high school Valentine's Day dance, a prom, New Year's Eve and the alleged Mr. or Ms. Right (Nos. 1 through 5) knows that celebrating Feb. 14 is an exercise in futility.  Restaurants are overcrowded, no one wants to fall off a diet with a giant box of chocolates, and I don't know where all those bushels of red roses that florists are jacking up the prices on are going, but they're not showing up at my place or any of my girlfriends' doors.   The only institutions I know of where people will be reveling in Valentine's Day festivities are elementary schools and my mother's elderly living community.

So it seems fitting that Valentine's Day would be going to the dogs -- and cats and rabbits and lions and tigers.  In the last few years, rescue groups, municipal animal shelters and the L.A. Zoo have cleverly turned Valentine's Day or the weekend near it into an occasion for events for lovers of furry creatures, wild and domestic.  Shelters and rescue groups plan adoption events and reduce fees to draw people looking for pets.

The Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control and the Los Angeles Animal Alliance are hosting a "FURever Yours" event from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Saturday at two of the county shelters, the Carson Animal Care Center, 216 W. Victoria St., Gardena; and the Downey Animal Care Center, 11258 S. Garfield Ave. in Downey.  Adoption fees will be 50% off.

The nonprofit Pet Care Foundation is hosting adoption events  at all of the L.A. city shelters on Sunday, Feb. 12, from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. ("Adopt a Shelter Sweetheart!" cries the online announcement.)  It promises refreshments, Valentine card making, pet matchmaking and discounted fees.

And although you can't take home wild animals, you can learn about their romantic rituals and mating habits  at the Los Angeles Zoo's "Sex and the City Zoo"  lecture the evening of Feb. 12,  given by Jason Jacobs, the zoo's director of marketing and public relations. The zoo is selling tickets online to the adults-only event, which starts at 5 p.m. with a pre-lecture champagne-and-wine reception.

Most shelters and rescue groups discourage giving pets as surprise gifts to people for holidays,  and some  outright ban the adoption of black cats at Halloween and rabbits at Easter.  Caring for  a pet is a  years-long obligation, and adopting an animal should not be done impulsively for yourself or anyone else without the adopter having thought through the commitment.   Of course,  shelters are advertising their animals on Valentine's Day as that special love-ball-of-fur, and that could certainly prompt someone feeling down on Valentine's Day to get a dog or cat on a whim.  "I'll be your Valentine every day of the year," one independent website offers as a marketing tip for shelters.   

But as animal welfare advocates urge people to adopt from shelters,  Valentine's Day does seem to be the perfect day to emphasize how much unconditional love you get from a pet year-round.  Just remember: You can't break up with your cat or dog.

And keep whatever roses you do get from your human honey out of reach of your furry love.  On those occasions when I have had roses in my apartment, my cat always assumed they were there for his chewing pleasure.

ALSO:

Microchipping pets to save lives

Animal welfare moments that would make Gandhi proud

Smithsonian researcher convicted of trying to poison cats

--Carla Hall

Photo: Kittens up for adoption in 2007 at the North Central animal shelter in Los Angeles. Credit: Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times

I was reading the top news stories of the day -- violence in Egypt after a deadly soccer riot, the U.S. jobless rate falling again, the Susan G. Komen group reversing course on funding for Planned Parenthood -- when I ran across this item: "Toto as state dog of Kansas? Bad idea, PETA says."

OK, enough about whether Israel will bomb Iran. Let's get to the tornado-in-a-teapot stuff.

Seems that state Rep. Ed Trimmer wants to make Dorothy's cairn terrier from "The Wizard of Oz" the state dog of Kansas. Harmless enough, right?

Not so, says PETA, which fears that the designation would mean that there would be more puppy mills churning out cairn terriers for folks who just have to have the official state dog.

Now normally, I find PETA a bit, well, strident.  But I also agree with its stance on puppy mills. So I checked out the "state animal" listings, to see if Kansas has company.

California, as you may know, does not have a state dog.  It does have a state animal -- the grizzly bear. Yes, the same one that's on the state flag -- the one we killed off, shooting the last one in 1922. (Should we ever decide to designate a state dog, I would think the breed might want to decline the honor.)

And we have a state mammal -- the gray whale.  Which, of course, we also tried to kill off, though thankfully its numbers have rebounded.  Also, it doesn't actually live in California, though it does visit the state's waters on its way to and from the places it does live. Which in some ways makes it the perfect metaphor for a state filled with transients, both legal and otherwise.

It also seems that California trails its nemesis, Texas, in the animal recognition race.  The Lone Star State has an official flying mammal (Mexican free-tailed bat), a large state mammal (Texas longhorn), a small state animal (the armadillo, naturally),  a state horse (American quarter horse, of course), and, yes, a dog (Texas Blue Lacy).

Texas, though, doesn't lead the nation in this particular form of silliness. That would be, of all places, South Carolina, which not only has a state dog (Boykin spaniel)  but five other official animals  (including dolphins, whales and mules).

But I digress.

Here's PETA's advice to Kansas:

PETA vice president Daphna Nachminovitch said in a news release announcing the group's opposition to Trimmer's plan. "If Kansas is set on naming an official state dog, PETA suggests the humble, healthy, and 100 percent lovable all-American mutt."

And here's the other side:

Brenda Moore of the South Central Kansas Kennel Club as among those in favor of elevating Toto's status.

"We've got to find little bits of happiness along the way," she said. "To me, the cairn terrier is as much of Kansas as sunflowers are."

And here are the facts on the ground:

In December 2010, 1,200 dogs at a large-scale breeding operation in Kansas were put to death after an outbreak of distemper. An internal government report that year said dogs were dying and living in poor conditions because of lax enforcement of puppy mills nationwide.

States vary in their laws governing puppy mills, and according to the Humane Society of the United States, Kansas requires them to be licensed and subject to inspections. But the state didn't fare well in the Humane Society's latest survey of states' treatment of animals, scoring 23 of 66 possible points and ranking 33 out of the 50 states. California topped the list; South Dakota was at the bottom.

(That would be the same South Dakota whose official state animal is the coyote.)

So, after extensive research, here's my bottom line:   

"The Wizard of Oz" was, and is, a scary movie for kids.  The dog is cute. I didn't know sunflowers were a big deal in Kansas.  Nor do I identify the state with the cairn terrier. Actually, when I think of Kansas, I think of flat.

So I'm with PETA on this one.  Want a cute dog to make you happy?  Go to the pound.

It may not have been in a movie, but the one with the wagging tail is the one for you.

ALSO:

Super Bowl: The right way to combat big-game pirates

It's Groundhog Day, for Ben Bernanke and Punxsutawney Phil

Florida's Burmese pythons: Will they make a meal out of (gulp) us? 

--Paul Whitefield

Photo: Dorothy and her cairn terrier Toto in "The Wizard of Oz." Credit: Turner Entertainment / Warner Bros.

What do Ben Bernanke and Punxsutawney Phil have in common?

Simple:  Both are forecasters, paid to see the future.

OK, maybe that's a bit too simple. As Fed chairman, Bernanke is paid not only to see the future but to shape that future. While Punxsutawney Phil, the famous groundhog (or woodchuck, if you prefer), is paid just to tell us how much longer winter will last (and to draw tourists to Punxsutawney, Pa., but let's not be cynical on such a nice day).

So, recapping Thursday's events for the overstressed news consumer:

Punxsutawney Phil came out (OK, was lifted out by handlers) and saw his shadow, presaging six more weeks of winter. Or, in the colorful language of one of the Inner Circle of handlers:

After casting an appreciative glance to the thousands of faithful followers in attendance, Phil proclaimed, "As I look at the crowd on Gobbler's Knob, many shadows do I see. Six more weeks of winter it must be."

Naturally, there were some boo birds in the crowd.

Bernanke came to a different knob -- Capitol Hill -- (presumably on his own, though given the Republican sentiment in Congress, perhaps he too was dragged there by handlers) and told the House Budget Committee that the economic recovery is "frustratingly slow" and that there are  "significant head winds" facing consumers and the broader economy.

Not exactly "six more weeks of winter," but we get the picture.

No booing was reported, though.

By this time, Bernanke must be starting to feel another kind of kinship with Punxsutawney Phil: the movie "Groundhog Day." Just as Bill Murray's character in the movie is forced to relive Groundhog Day day after day, Bernanke must periodically go before Congress and say pretty much the same things.

As The Times reported:

Bernanke repeated that it was important for policymakers not to make spending and tax policies that would hurt the current economic recovery. And he urged lawmakers to get past the political divisions to solve the long-term debt problems.

"I realize politics is a tough game," he said, but it's important to show "cooperation and collaboration" in addressing the nation's large debts.

So, in the spirit of the day, here's a little forecast of my own: That will happen -- when hell freezes over.

ALSO

Mitt Romney: The Max Headroom candidate

The delayed gratification of the Facebook IPO

Florida's Burmese pythons: Will they make a meal out of (gulp) us?

--Paul Whitefield

Photo: Handler Ron Ploucha holds Punxsutawney Phil on Gobbler's Knob in Punxsutawney, Pa. Credit: Gene J. Puskar / Associated Press

Darn those illegal immigrants. Enough is enough.  They have to go.

They're wiping out Florida's bunnies!

Of course you know what I'm talking about: Burmese pythons.

As The Times reported this week:

In a study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, researchers report that the giant snakes have put a serious dent in the Everglades’ usual ecosystem, devouring the wide array of animals that live there….

The latest report is based on nocturnal field surveys. Before 2000, mammals were frequently encountered, but in the newer surveys, covering 2003 to 2011, the number of observed mammals  dropped significantly. There was a 99.3% decrease in raccoon observations; opossum observations were down 98.9%; and bobcat observations were off by 87.5%. Scientists said they failed to detect rabbits at all.

That's right.  No more Bugs, no more Thumper.

Burp!

And that's not all. Florida's problem may be snakes the size of fire hoses, but California is not immune from intrepid interlopers.

Take this story Tuesday:

A man was driving down a Los Angeles street Friday when onlookers flagged him down, alerting him to an enormous bird that had hitched a ride in the back of his pickup truck.

With its white body, dark wings and curved yellow beak, it might have been mistaken for an oversized seagull.

But the bird, it turns out, was thousands of miles from home. It was an Laysan Albatross, a seabird with a 7-foot wingspan that normally nests on remote islands and atolls in the North Pacific Ocean.

That's right. Apparently Hawaii and environs had lost their allure for Jonathan Livingston uh, Albatross. So, like thousands of other undocumented types, it apparently stowed away on a ship and headed for the Golden State.

But, just like the Obama administration's tough line on deportations, officials took a tough-love approach.

International Bird Rescue took custody of the bird after the driver handed it over to lifeguards at Cabrillo Beach. The group held the albatross for four days at its wildlife rescue center in San Pedro and gave it a clean bill of health.

On Tuesday they released the bird from a boat off San Pedro to let it set off on a flight back home to Hawaii or beyond.

Aloha, albatross!

Of course, the bird came here, in its own odd way, naturally.  The Burmese pythons that are using the Everglades as an all-you-can-eat buffet are apparently descended from pets that were either lost or released into the wild.

And personally, I don't think officials are taking the problem seriously enough. 

For example, here's what the scientists are saying:

"Whether mammal populations will remain suppressed or will rebound remains to be seen. The magnitude of these declines underscores the apparent incredible density of pythons in [Everglades National Park] and justifies intensive investigation into how the addition of novel apex predators affects overall ecosystem processes."

Run that by me again: "intensive investigation into how the addition of novel apex predators affects overall ecosystem processes"?

How about: "How are we going to stop these snakes from eating people?"

Because isn't that bound to happen?  A snake that's willing to make a meal out of an alligator probably wouldn't be shy about latching onto Junior, now would it?

Lots of folks in the West are freaked out these days about wolves.  Shouldn't we be equally concerned about these pythons, which aren't even native to the United States?

A few wayward seabirds turning up on the West Coast, no big deal. A snake that will eat just about anything? 

To borrow from the astronauts:  "Florida, we have a problem."

ALSO:

Feasting on junk info

Are college students learning?

Food stamps and the right to make unhealthy decisions

--Paul Whitefield

Photos, from top: A Burmese python is wrapped around an American alligator in Everglades National Park, Fla. (Credit:  Lori Oberhofer / National Park Service); a Laysan albatross is released back to the wild. (Bob Chamberlin / Los Angeles Times)