I've been gone a couple days so it's time to get caught up. Sports stories have been leading the news the past few days. First there was the ouster of Flip Saunders as the coach of the Timberwolves, then the big news that the Vikings appear to have been sold to Arizona businessman Reggie Fowler for $625 million. The Vikings story of course has revived stadium talk. MPR's Michael Khoo had some of that:

Republican House Speaker Steve Sviggum says if that's the case, someone could come to regret it.

"I just hope that somebody isn't making a market decision to buy the team for a significant amount of money based on the idea or the fact that the Legislature's going to pass a stadium funding bill. That wouldn't be a very wise market decision," House speaker Steve Sviggum said.

The Vikings, the Minnesota Twins and the University of Minnesota Gopher football team are all seeking new stadiums, arguing the Metrodome doesn't provide the amenities or revenues necessary to survive. Sviggum has said he expects a Twins bill to pass this year, and the Gopher project has fairly broad bipartisan support. But Sviggum says a Vikings deal is unlikely due to the higher costs of an NFL stadium.

Rep. Andy Westerberg, R-Blaine, who represents the leading host city for a Vikings stadium, says despite legislative reluctance, he'll introduce legislation in the House to split the facility's cost three ways between Anoka County, the team and the state. And he says it's unfortunate that some lawmakers are giving priority to the Twins and the Gophers.

"Unfortunately that's the way they're stacking up and the Vikings are put at the end because they're on the lease to 2011. But it's extremely imperative that we get them to consider all three teams at the same time and get a deal done. And we're going to be trying to do that," he said.

Gov. Tim Pawlenty tried to downplay expectations for a new football stadium Tuesday. "I don't think it is a breakthrough from a stadium standpoint," he told KQAD-AM of Luverne. "The same old political concerns or challenges are going to be there."

Meanwhile the developers of the Mall of America have taken Pawlenty's casino idea and run with it. Patrick Condon of the Associated Press had this story:

The owners of the Mall of America raised the ante Tuesday on the state's casino debate, rolling out a $1 billion expansion plan they said would make the Twin Cities one of the top tourist attractions in the world.

The catch? The Phase II expansion would have to include a new casino in order to subsidize other amenities, including a concert hall, an ice skating arena, an indoor golf course, public gardens and high-end retail, according to Nader Ghermezian, president of the family business that developed and controls the mall.

The expansion on the site of the old Met Center would double the mall in size, surpassing the Ghermezians' West Edmonton Mall in Canada as the world's largest.

"When the Mall of America becomes doubled, it becomes a New York or an L.A. by itself," Ghermezian said. "You won't have to fly to Rodeo Drive or New York or Paris - it's all under one roof."

But you may not want to cancel your trip to Paris right away. The Bloomington legislative delegation remains unanimously opposed to a casino at the mall. Some local office holders say they may warm to the idea of gambling at the mall, but only if Bloomington gets most of the money. That would seem to disrupt both the Ghermezian's financing plan and the governor's idea to split gambling profits between the state and northern tribes.

Finally, given the ongoing demand for state health care programs and problems paying for them, some lawmakers took the bold step Tuesday of defending your right to chow down on junk food. (I swear, you can't make up stuff this good) Yes, when those evil food police threaten to strike, your lawmakers will stand up for truth, justice and cholesterol. This is from Conrad Defiebre's story in the Star Tribune:

"It's true that no such lawsuits have been filed yet in Minnesota," chief sponsor Dean Urdahl, R-Grove City, said at a news conference staged in front of tables laden with cheeseburgers, French fries and milk shakes at a St. Paul burger joint. "It's only a matter of time."

Urdahl's bill, co-sponsored by 31 Republicans and three DFLers, would prohibit legal claims against food businesses based on weight gain, obesity or related health problems. Exceptions would be allowed in cases of tainted food or false claims of health benefits, such as if fattening victuals were labeled "zero calories," he said.

The measure is one of dozens like it introduced throughout the United States at the urging of the National Restaurant Association and other food trade groups. So far, 14 states have enacted them, while Wisconsin's Democratic governor, Jim Doyle, vetoed a version passed by that state's Republican-controlled Legislature.

All this legislative activity followed the filing of about 10 suits around the nation, the most notable in New York against the McDonald's fast-food chain. None of the plaintiffs has won in court yet and some of the suits have been dismissed, but Urdahl said that even the litigation piles unfair costs on an industry that employs 12 million people nationwide.

"When this kind of lawsuit succeeds, the ultimate victim is the small-business owner who gets forced out of business by having to pay for someone else's poor decision-making," he said. "The state must send a signal to attorneys who would take on these frivolous lawsuits that they are not welcome here."

So eat up...while you still can!