The Denver Broncos' Tim Tebow went to Tampa, Fla., Friday to appear at a fundraiser and meet with wounded Afghanistan hero Romy Camargo, My Fox Tampa Bay reports.

Vet has surprise meeting with Tebow: MyFoxTAMPABAY.com

This was hilarious and definitely made me laugh out loud. Enjoy.

I'm excited for the Redskins trade with the Rams so they can select Robert Griffin III. Question is, is Robert Griffin III a smart quarterback? Steve Mariucci recently found this out when he tried to stump the Baylor QB at the NFL combine.

(Video via Sports Grid)

That is unless Indianpolis selects him first. That said, this is way too much to pay for the second pick. I would have dome a first and second this year and a first and third next year. Not, three first round picks. Here's hoping RGIII is more like Eli & not Herschel Walker. Pro Football Talk:

The Washington Redskins like Robert Griffin III so much that they gave up far more for the right to draft him than teams have typically had to trade away to secure franchise quarterbacks in the NFL draft. Washington will send St. Louis its first- and second-round picks this year and first-round picks for 2013 and 2014, all to get the second overall pick this year from the Rams. That’s a huge haul for the Rams and a huge sign that the Redskins think very, very highly of Griffin. Consider this: The Redskins just agreed to give up far more for Griffin than the Giants gave up to acquire first overall pick Eli Manning in 2004, or the Falcons traded to move up to take Michael Vick first overall in 2001. In 2004 the price for Manning was two first-round picks, a third-round pick and a fifth-round pick. In 2001, the price for Vick was one first-round pick, one second-round pick, one third-round pick and Tim Dwight. Although a team trading away three first-round picks is not unprecedented, it is extremely rare: It hasn’t happened since the famous Cowboys-Vikings Herschel Walker trade in 1989.

Read more about the trade at this link.

Davis Guggenheim told Piers Morgan the other night that the only negative in the 17 minute love letter/documentary on Barack Obama that Guggenheim directed was that there were too many positives about Obama. Via Breitbart, Jake Tapper at ABC News points out a few negatives Davis Guggenheim missed.

Via CBS News, the new HBO movie 'Game Change,' based on the John Heileman/Mark Halperin book Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime, includes this fascinating 60 minutes interview of Steve Schmidt, McCain's former campaign strategist, by Anderson Cooper.

CNN Money is out with a report cheerleading the fact that the latest jobs report showing an unemployment rate of 8.3% is something good.

Jim Pethokoukis, at the American Enterprise Institute, shows why the 8.3% number is wrong. Is the Administration playing with the numbers?

Jim writes the 8.3% number does not reflect reality:

But, unfortunately, the true measure of U.S. unemployment is much, much worse.

1. If the size of the U.S. labor force as a share of the total population was the same as it was when Barack Obama took office—65.7% then vs. 63.9% today—the U-3 unemployment rate would be 10.8%.

2. But what if you take into the account the aging of the Baby Boomers, which means the labor force participation (LFP) rate should be trending lower. Indeed, it has been doing just that since 2000. Before the Great Recession, the Congressional Budget Office predicted what the LFP would be in 2012, assuming such demographic changes. Using that number, the real unemployment rate would be 10.4%.

3. Of course, the LFP rate usually falls during recessions. Yet even if you discount for that and the aging issue, the real unemployment rate would be 9.5%.

4. Then there’s the broader, U-6 measure of unemployment which includes the discouraged plus part-timers who wish they had full time work. That unemployment rate, perhaps the truest measure of the labor market’s health, is still a sky-high 14.9%.

5. Recall that back in 2009, White House economists Jared Bernstein and Christina Romer used their old-fashioned Keynesian model to predict how the $800 billion stimulus would affect employment. According to their model – as displayed in the above chart, updated – unemployment should be around 6% today. 6. As Ed Carson of Investor’s Business Daily points out, it’s been a whopping 49 months since the U.S. hit peak employment in January 2008. The average job recovery time since 1980 is 29 months, not including the current slump. 7. And how long might it take to get back to the 4.4% unemployment rate that existed under President George. W. Bush? Well, let’s say the goal was to get back to that rate in 5 years. And let’s assume the LFP rate returns to the CBO trend. According to a jobs calculator created by the Atlanta Fed, the U.S. economy would have to generate about 225,000 jobs a month, every month, for the next 60 months to hit that target. But few economist think we’ll see sustained job growth like that, especially since it assumes the economy would avoid recession during that span.

Read more of Jim's analysis at this link where you can also view more charts.