Liberals blame Bill O'Reilly for Tiller death

Bill O’Reilly. The name alone is enough to send some liberals screaming. Though just as often the same liberals have never heard a word the man actually has said. The most recent outbreak of liberal fever has come in the form of the death of Dr. George Tiller.

Dr. George Tiller is noted for having been one of 3 late-term abortion doctors in the entire U.S. And so as to not to confuse the question, late term means after 21 weeks - or the period of time in which virtually everyone agrees is viable for the child. However you feel about that, Dr. Tiller did this for years and reaped huge profits for it.

Bill O’Reilly was one of a large number of people that felt this type of abortion, at least, was inhumane. The fact that these fetuses could survive outside the womb made this act akin to murder in many of their eyes. There is no question that this form of abortion is the most debated, and the least common in the nation.

Dr. Tiller was killed on Sunday, in his place of worship. The killer is a maniacal fanatic. That is how I define anyone who would kill another with the only justification being their warped understanding of their religion. There is little difference in this killer’s reasoning, and that of Al Quida when they killed thousands on 9/11.

Bill O’Reilly had made Dr. Tiller the subject of his focus 29 times over 3 years. Not once in that time did he advocate violence against the man. Not once did he encourage harm against Tiller. While O’Reilly disliked the practice of the doctor, he never gave impetus for anything but the end of his ability to continue these late-term abortions.

But if you look across the major media, and definitely across the majority of the internet, you will find no end to those blaming O’Reilly and Fox news for this murder. Which is blatantly stupid.

A fanatic is not motivated by television, they follow their warped beliefs. Which is besides the fact that there was no motivation from television. Bill O’Reilly is not a religious leader. Dr. Tiller was known for years because of his profession among anti-abortion fanatics and organizations. Bill O’Reilly did not suddenly catapult him to fame.

This idiocy among the liberal media is way over the top. It is beyond reason. But when has that ever stopped them?

So the extreme liberals are hopping mad. About something only a lunatic can justify. And connections that do not exist are being drawn. Often by people that have never watched a single O’Reilly Factor telecast. Does that not sound like fools chasing greater fools?

No matter how you feel about abortion, murder is not the answer. In fact the very religion many of these fanatics advocate insists on avoiding murder. But to blame this on a person, or group, that merely voices an opinion is just as wrong in my opinion. For some it’s a cheap attempt at gaining fame and ratings.

“He [Keith Olbermann of MSNBC] called for people to ask managers to change the channel when Fox News is played in bars, restaurants or waiting rooms, and to explain why they are walking out if they don't.”

I’m not sure what is more sick. The motivations of the killer, or the grandstanding and attempt to profit of some in the media like Olbermann.

Either way, the ultimate result is the same. A man was murdered for no reason. Another man is being blamed for it. And liberals are mad.

President Obama at the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner

So over the weekend the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner took place. And the Dinner was quite interesting. The remarks made at this annual event are comical in nature, plays on the events and scandals at the time. It’s a time for the White House to get back at it’s detractors, poke fun at gaffes, and lighten the mood over controversial policy decisions. Obviously Vice-President Biden was not one of those speaking at the event.

I thought that President Obama did a decent job at the event. He got in jibes at FOX News (which you knew had to happen) and even Michael Steele. He had a few really good jokes, though I think some of the best were directed at himself and Vice President Biden. Perhaps the best joke was at the start of his speech. That was dead on.

So hear is the full speech of President Obama. What do you think was his best joke of the night?

The war of the cable news networks

When you look at the various pundits on cable news these days, you get the feeling that there is a war going on. Not the events in Afghanistan, or Iraq, but in the cable networks themselves. Not a new idea, but recently it went to a new level.

Recently Sean Hannity, of Fox News, made a statement that he would endure waterboarding for the benefit of U.S. military troops. While this was a statement made somewhat lightheartedly, Hannity is a strong supporter of waterboarding as a means of gaining information from terrorists, it was heard in every newsroom across the airwaves.

Thus Keith Olbermann, of MSNBC, took it upon himself to make that comment a reality. He has offered an $1000 to be donated for every second that Hannity endures the interrogation technique. And the far-left loved the visage of the event.

But Olbermann missed something in this. Whether it takes 5 seconds or 5 minutes, Hannity will break. That's not a victory for Olbermann or MSNBC. Nor for the far-left. Because all that proves is that waterboarding is effective.

As much as the far-left, the major media in general, and President Obama want to state that tough interrogations are ineffective the fact is that they work. Even as the President has refused to reveal any information that he has available to him that proves waterboarding has saved American lives (though he is quick to divulge that it was used among other techniques) the fact remains clear as day.

This is only a small part of the war being held in the 24-hour news networks everyday. With the lines drawn such that MSNBC is to the furthest left, and Fox News in the center and thus seeming far right. That is not to say that some people on both networks are at different points in the political spectrum, even to extreme. Hannity is hardly a centrist, just as Olbermann is not.

Still this all leaves me with a big question. Where is the real news?

When any news organization is actively taking a political position, the overall information being given is inevitably altered. When that news is political and will shape the American life, then there is a problem.

Take this minor example. MSNBC praises President Obama and the Congress. This has led them to emphasize coverage of the Obama Administration budget on the fact that it has pledged to lower the national debt by 50% in 4 years. But to cover just that portion of the impact of the budget is to lie to the American public.

The fact is, under the best scenario given by the Obama Administration, the budget will absolutely increase the national debt in 10 years. That is the ultimate outcome of his budget. In fact in the 5th year the deficit will be slightly larger than it is today. That's just 1 year after it would have been whitewashed to look lower for a year. That's polispeak.

Or how about the New York Times, questioning President Obama about how he feels as President. Not that questions about the economy (none were asked), nukes in Pakistan, the war effort in Afghanistan, or the impending release of Gitmo detainees into America are even slightly more important. Do you really care if President feels elated, if you just lost your job?

I realize that I am picking on the left in my examples. Other examples of the same kind of insanity from the right exists abundantly across the net. But the examples are real. And the net effect is damage to the public.

Were it up to me, I'd like to see all the executives at the cable news networks waterboarded. Perhaps that would remind them that the news, and honest critique of politicians (in both Parties), is their job. Not ratings or political agendas. That's what America cares about.

So if Olbermann wants to cover waterboarding, let him do an expose that covers the pros and cons of the issue. Which means admitting it worked, and explaining its failures. Anything else is just trying to grab a bigger television rating (which MSNBC needs - given). Which is not a benefit to America.

And by the way, Olbermann, why not just donate several thousand dollars to the families of the troops that are ensuring that you can get on the air and say whatever you believe. Without them you would be like Cuba or China, just reading whatever the Government tells you to.

Bill O'Reilly discusses Oscar Grant...sort of

Some might be wondering about how awful (or moderately bad) the film Notorious is, and with recent news that Lil Kim is upset about her portrayal I'm sure more will go an find out. Because nothing drives money home like a bit of controversy.

But on Friday there was little controversy in what Bill O'Reilly had to say about the Oscar Grant murder. In fact he said little about it at all.

Bill O'Reilly was the first national news commentator to speak about this murder to my knowledge. This was an opportunity to convey the outrage that has occurred. To make a plea for justice, and for it to be enacted swiftly. Instead we got more of the national media ignorance. he spoke about the riots this murder has sparked.

A Night to End Violence Against Women in Darfur

Recently I have been in contact with Cynthia Basinet, an accomplished woman of multiple talents. She might be best known to some for her 2005 cover of Eartha Kitt's Santa Baby (which was included in my tribute to Kitt after her death). But she is also a Nobel Peace Prize nominee and an advocate for women and Africa.

Cynthia Basinet sent me something that I am happy to pass on to you my readers. On February 11, 2009 there will be a nation-wide effort on behalf of the women in Darfur, as well as to end the over 5 year long suffering in that region of Africa. There has been an on-going genocide there, as acknowledged by Congress and the U.N., that too little is being done about. I have spoken about Darfur several times. And I look forward to the day I no long have a need to do so because it has ended.

But until that day I encourage all my readers to be involved, with donations and/or contacting your Congressional representatives to pass the laws we have sitting in Congress doing nothing. And part of that involvement can include A Night to End Violence Against Women in Darfur.

In communities across the nation there will be a viewing of Violence Against Women and the Darfur Genocide, a movie discussing the horrific violence that is happening right now. A terrible blight on humanity that the American news media seems to feel secure in ignoring. And afterwards there will be an online discussion with communities just like yours being involved.

You can make a difference in Darfur. You can help the hundreds of thousands that are suffering even as you read this now. I recommend that all my readers find out more about this event, learn about Darfur, and if you can host this event in your community. Because America is a great country, once we get our asses in motion. And the news media is sitting on its ass when it comes to Darfur.

But we don't need to wait for CNN, MSNBC, FOX, or any other news to have a slow day to cover this. We can act today, and on February 11th, and every other day we choose.

To find our more about how you can help the women, children, and families in Darfur on February 11th just click on this link.

We can make a difference here. And we should make a difference. I hope that you agree.

Alan Colmes - the smartest commentor on television?

I was at my weekly pool league game yesterday when the topic of the departure of Alan Colmes from Hannity & Colmes came up. Several people were surprised at the move, and a couple claimed that it’s just what they would expect from Fox News.

Putting aside the far-left promoted misconceptions of Fox News for a moment, I thought about why this might be happening right now. And I also remembered a recent Word of the day from Stephen Colbert – which was on love lost and love found (highly pro-Obama). And I came to a conclusion that was interesting.

I expect that Stephen Colbert will lose his show, and so will several liberal commentators in both television and radio. Also Sean Hannity will lose his #1 rating, and possibly his time slot. The reason is because Democrats now lead the Congress and Presidency. It’s just that simple. After years of promoting liberal issues (Colmes), and (liberals) demonizing in the most personal way President Bush, they are getting out of the way.

Comedians and political satirists on the airwaves have flourished since the 2000 election of President Bush. Besides the fact that he is as eloquent as a stroke victim (no offense meant to those that have suffered this) it was the fact that President Bush won (liberals still say stole) the election by the slimmest of margins. It was taken as a personal slam by many liberals, and they never forgot it. Most of liberal media was motivated by this to attack President Bush on every issue and front they could cover.

For those that chose comedy and were less venom filled than the extremes, there was success. That led to huge moves forward by Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert as examples. They had an easy target, and they had the support of many liberals. But the most extreme individuals were shunned.

But now there is the media promoted, near flawless (according to many liberal pundits) President Obama. The popularity of this elected official is enormous. As such he cannot do anything but fail these ridiculously high standards placed in front of him. And liberal commentators are realizing that when he fails to keep up to the lofty expectations they will have to critique him harshly. None of them wish to do that.

Add to this the fact that as an African American critique of President Obama will be seen with an eye towards race and race relations. That is an issue America has yet to come to terms with. It’s the dirty secret that everyone knows and few acknowledge. As such comments about President Obama in the negative, from those that lauded him prior to the election will be seen as especially harsh. And that can’t be good for ratings or future career prospects.

So the smartest move is to get out of the way. To let the focus fall on conservatives that oppose the liberal plans of the Democrats. That any opposition will look as if it is entirely partisan (and some of it will be). Thus they can return at a later point and look like shiny defenders of the realm. It’s an interesting political plan, if I am correct.

The problem is that some cannot get out of the way. Like Colbert. And thus he will suffer. Since his television program is meant to mock conservative views, in an Administration of liberal programs he will be hard pressed to mock the Administration and keep the support of his followers. Comedians with similar objectives will face a similar problem. Many will fail as they are too far to the extreme to balance in the new environment.

Alan Colmes may be one of the smartest political pundits the Democrats have. By leaving the #1 rated program on the #1 rated news channel BEFORE President Obama enacts any of his programs (though not before he has broken several campaign promises) he leaves on top. He will continue to support President Obama and the Democrat policies, as an occasional and maybe regular pundit, but that’s not the same.

This will make the views of Sean Hannity seem even more extreme (not to say that several of his views are not already). And it might make some room for critique of President Obama and the Democrat-led Congress to be taken only as partisan. It will definitely make his return, on a more liberal focused program, seem more fair and bi-partisan. Thus Colmes will win big.

All of this makes me see one thing. The news media is far too political and commercialized. There is no room for objective analysis anymore. We have already heard several organizations declare how they slanted their coverage to promote President Obama in the election. Going forward there will be the continuation of this, to the detriment of the public they are supposed to be serving. All in the name of ratings.

And those that critique the politicians, have equally been partisan. Whether it’s David Letterman, Jon Stewart, Chris Matthews, or whomever. But their reward will be the loss of much of these ratings. At least at first.

Television and news media coverage of politics are about to change. Many liberals won’t like what it turns out to be. Neither will conservative be thrilled by the media response. In effect, over the next 2 years the public will lose as will the media. If I am correct, Alan Colmes saw this outcome and stepped out of the way. That makes him the smartest commentator on television at the moment.

OJ Simpson trial - injustice unreported

I did not want to discuss this case. But when I listened to the glee from Sheppard Smith (news anchor for Fox News) as he spoke on the news I made up my mind to say something.

The case I am referring to is the OJ Simpson trial. You may not have heard much on this, you might even be surprised to know that his trial in Las Vegas is already underway. And the reason there has not been much media on this is likely because of what the outcome will be.

At this point I feel incredibly confident that OJ Simpson will be sentenced to jail for his life. For all those cheering that sentence realize this – OJ is being jailed based on prejudice and the bias of America.

Whether or not OJ Simpson is guilty of the charges, all 12 of them, stemming from his arrest in Las Vegas is not important. It’s the fact that after more than a decade the legal system, and most White Americans, now have the chance to convict OJ for the murder of Nicole Simpson; which he was found innocent of. The major news media has never accepted that answer. Shepard Smith has always made it clear he despised that verdict. And double jeopardy be damned White America could not live with this.

Every misstep OJ has made since the murder trial ended has been publicized. The media has maintained an onslaught of coverage aimed at 1 goal, tarnishing his image and guaranteeing every American would believe he was guilty of murder and deserved to be in jail. And this trial will be the fruition of all that work.

On the 10th of September the Las Vegas judge, Jackie Glass, decided that 2 members of the prospective jury being contacted by a reported member of the press was not a problem.

On September 12th the jury was selected. 9 women, 3 men. Not a single person on the jury is Black.

On September 16th, after being told not to take into account any of the news or rulings dealing with OJ’s murder trial, the prosecution has introduced it as part of their case.

So let’s look at this. Reportedly 4 men and OJ entered a hotel room to recover stolen goods that belonged to OJ. Questionably the meeting was set up by one of those men, who has given evidence against OJ for reduced charges. 2 men in the room that day are reported to have had guns, neither of which was OJ. Both of those suspected men have turned states evidence to get off their charges in return for being a witness against OJ.

9 women were reminded that this man is believed by the prosecutor, media and many Whites, to have brutally murdered a woman. They were reminded that for over a decade the media has hammered the thought that this man is guilty though proven innocent beyond a shadow of doubt.

Fear of racial bias for OJ prevented any person in the jury from being African American. Racial bias to convict OJ was never considered in the jury selection. And the potential jurors being contacted by the media, thus hinting at future media stardom – or at least their 15 minutes of fame and a nice check for a book or appearance – was not important.

And someone wants to tell me this is a fair trial. After the initial arrest superseded all other news for 1 week. After a decade of persecution. After acts of retribution by the police on Rodney King (that’s just a guess about the L.A. police). Yeah, a real fair trial.

OJ is going to be convicted of at least 10 of the charges against him. He will be sent to jail for at least 25 years. It was a foregone conclusion the day he was arrested in Las Vegas. That’s why there the huge media circus that week. Validation for all their efforts of over a decade. And it’s why right now there is so little coverage. It has to be fair if they aren’t covering ever second of this stacked deck.

I’m not saying OJ is innocent of the charges in Las Vegas. I’m not saying there weren’t guns present, or that OJ didn’t know they were there. But I have doubt, especially the way this was handled and organized, and prosecuted.

I am saying that OJ is innocent of the murder of his wife, a court said so. I am saying that White America lost their mind on this case, and the media has fed that hate and anger. I recall mobsters being acquitted of multiple murders and getting less coverage or dismay.

The glee of newscasters reporting on the OJ trial just makes me certain. It may be nearly impossible for a Black man to get a fair trial in much of the nation [Jena 6, Rodney King, Sean Bell, Wesley Snipes, and on]; but it’s impossible for OJ.

Some call that justice, I call it the legal system in action. And people wonder why people of color distrust the legal system.

Bill O'Reilly interviews Senator Barack Obama - Thursdsay

Well here is something that I’m sure will top the Nielsen ratings charts on Thursday. After months of waiting, Senator Barack Obama has finally come in for his interview with Bill O’Reilly. And it’s about time.

Now on the left, especially the far-left, Bill O’Reilly is seen as the fanatical face of the right. It’s an unfair accusation, based in the extremist views of those critics. That’s like saying the comments and actions of Code Pink or Moveon.org represent all Democrats, which I would say is equally unfair.

But there is no question that Fox News is the most watched news channel in the nation. It is also no question that throughout the Primaries and since Fox News has been noted as the most unbiased news agency. And it is also factual that Bill O’Reilly is the most popular commentator, reaching millions of Americans of all types of political beliefs.

So it will only be to Senator Obama’s benefit to appear on the program. His audience is so wide and politically beneficial that Senator Clinton appeared as she was regaining ground against Obama in the last few weeks of the Democratic Primaries. And while I dislike Senator Clinton and her policies, she did look good in the interview.

But how might Senator Obama fare?

Well in England we have these headlines on the subject –
Obama agrees to Murdoch's Fox News grilling

Rupert Murdoch broked 'truce' between Fox and Barack Obama

In the U.S. the headline tones are:
The secret Obama-Fox News meeting

OBAMA AND FOX MAKE UP, PHELPS LENDS A HAND, RICH PEOPLE READ

Fox News' Obama Power Play

According to those titles, which I think is a fair and popular representation of the way this is being presented to the world via most news media, Fox News has been seen as an enemy of Senator Obama, and involved in a feud. And Fox is supposed to be biased.

There is no question that some of the commentators on Fox are right-wing. There is no question that I have disagreed with the presentation of various events by Fox News in general. I firmly believe that Fox is prone to presenting African Americans in negative stereotypical tones. Shepard Smith is unquestionably biased in the manner in which he covers cases like OJ Simpson, or the Duke Rape case. Sean Hannity is unquestionably far-right.

But Bill O’Reilly isn’t the above people. In watching his program for years now I see that he is one of the least biased commentators on cable television today. There are issues where he is way off, like anyone, but in general these are subjects where he is as hostile to Whites as Blacks. Child safety is one such example. You just can’t question that O’Reilly is an advocate of all children.

But he is fair. His interview with Rev. Jesse Jackson was fair. His interview with Senator Clinton was informative and fair. His discussions with Rev. Al Sharpton are fair. And he has often covered news stories that I have highlighted that no other major news media, including the hard news of Fox, touch.

On the other hand it does seem obvious that he has a problem with the people Senator Obama knows. Which is not entirely wrong.

So I expect these questions to be asked:

• The association with Bill Ayers
  
  
• The association with Rev. Wright
  
  
• The association with Tony Rezco
  
  
• Senator Obama’s exact views on domestic drilling and alternative energy
  
  
• Senator Obama’s plans for taxing business, his definition of rich, and the economy
  
  
• If Senator Obama will finally admit that the Surge has worked
  
  
• How Senator Obama plans to pay for his nationalized healthcare and how it would be implemented
  
  
• Why a timetable for retreat would be in America’s best interest
  
  
• Whether Senator Obama will or will not speak with Iran and other anti-American governments without conditions
  
  
• The reversal Obama took when he selected a standard of ‘old’ politics – Sen. Joe Biden – as his Vice President
  

Each of the above items are questions that have existed since the Democratic Primaries and each has failed to be resolved fully.

If Senator Obama can answer these questions well, he should have a huge boost in his polling. If he fails to answer them, or does so poorly I expect to see him drop quickly.

NASCAR, Mauricia Grant, and my opinion

In the 1920’s the Old South was renown for its relaxed pace of life, good weather, Jim Crow laws, and criminal moonshine bootlegger races. Inbetween the massacre of Rosewood and unknown numbers of lynchings southerners of the time would rally together under the confederate flag to watch the intermittent Sunday races of these speedy criminals. The popularity of these races grew over the decades until in 1947 NASCAR was born.

But the South was unable to captivate the nation with this new sports league as it was busy segregating it’s schools, diners, buses, and life in general. With the Confederate Flag never far the late 50’s and 60’s were filled with Civil Rights protests and marches – and police and firemen using fire hoses and dogs to attack these peaceful demonstrations. And even more lynchings, with an occasional murder of northern White activists.

Then in 1979, after the attention of the nation had been focused on Viet Nam and assumed all the ills of discrimination were absolved by the end of segregation (but not prejudice or discrimination), broadcast television presented the nation a new image of the Old South. In that year the Dukes of Hazzard aired on television.

The Dukes of Hazzard was a mix of old ideas about the South in a more modern package. As I recall the show was as segregated as most all television shows (including the majority of those on-air today) without a single Black character ever crossing the screen. The focus of the show was a family of criminals, moonshine runners, their conflicts with the corrupt but exceptionally familiar authorities, and a NASCAR-esque car featuring the confederate flag. In fact the show was so focused on the car, and the short cutoff jeans of the only female character, that NASCAR grew in attention and prominence.

Jumping forward 3 decades we reach today. A majority of television shows still lack any non-White characters [or present just one so they can claim they are being fair – though I think most cities these shows are based in have more than just the handful of non-Whites the programs insinuate] the Confederate Flag still flies across the South and on government buildings, and NASCAR is more popular than ever. While NASCAR is not directly segregated (there has been African American drivers, and there are non-Whites in the pit crews and support staff) it is blatantly worse than television in its diversity.

Of course many in the South and across the nation would not believe this single northern Black Puerto Rican when I point all this out. God knows they have sent me the letters and comments to tell me so. But then the New York Times, Associated Press, San Jose Mercury News, Fox News and many others presented a news story that goes right to my points.

They all are reporting on a lawsuit by a Black woman that was a former NASCAR official. I say former because when she complained about the sexual and racial and gender abuse and discrimination she was receiving she was fired. Which is against the law and NASCAR rules as I understand.

Mauricia Grant was hired in 2005 to work as a technical inspector on the Nationwide series. In the 22 months that she was employed she was called “Queen Sheba” “Nappy head Mo”, told to hide from the crowds of spectators, called a lesbian, asked to perform sex acts, told she works on “colored people time”, and provided multiple disturbing references to the Klu Klux Klan. That’s just a few of the things she had to deal with. When she filed a complaint, to Nationwide Series director Joe Balash he joined in on the merriment.

Ms. Grant is suing for $225 million.

Of course she will not get that amount. But that is not the issue. Nor is my obvious disdain for the Old South and the romanticized selective rememberances of its past and present. The issue is that in 50 years parts of America have successfully refused to alter their views on human beings. And the nation as a whole willfully accepts this with our collective heads in the sand.

I would like to believe that NASCAR as a whole is not like the allegations that have been leveled against them. I would like to believe that the fans of NASCAR do not share such beliefs. But I am hard pressed to believe that.

Were NASCAR to present the various trophies swaddled in a confederate flag, I would not be surprised. Nor would multitudes of the fans who carry their own flags, cars adorned ala the General Lee (name of the Dukes of Hazzard car), and robed in confederate flags made into shirts, shorts, pants and more. Were NASCAR to have a KKK night, handing out white robes to fans and lighting the track with burning torches, I would be mildly shocked. Not because they did it, but that inevitiably it would be televised. I’m sure some of the NASCAR fans dream of such a night.

I don’t find NASCAR interesting. Because it is a symbol of the Old South and what that factually represents. But fans should wonder about what NASCAR represents today, because the allegations leveled speak to an attitude that is more backward and brain-adled than virtually any stereotype or mockery of the South.

Fox News lied about Tuskegee Experiment

Considering the massive attention being given to Rev. Wright today after his comments to the National Press Club, I wanted to make a comment. But before I could get to that I saw on Fox News at 6:02pm a report where Rev. Wright’s response about the American government creating AIDS and inflicting it on the Black community was addressed. Rev. Wright mentioned

“As I said to my members, if you haven’t read things, then you can’t — based on this Tuskegee experiment and based on what has happened to Africans in this country, I believe our government is capable of doing anything.”

The Fox news reporter then goes on to mention that the Tuskegee Experiment was where “syphilis infected Black men were observed for years.”

LIE!

The Tuskegee Experiment was when the United States Government watched (purposefully?? It’s not clear) 400 infected African American men with syphilis, without their knowledge, and then watched what happened over the next 40 years without ever providing a bit of treatment to them. The Tuskegee Experiment ended in 1972, just long ago enough to have affected some of my readers fathers, uncles, brothers, and grand-fathers. That is what our Government did, and when you consider they were willing to do this you can understand why some would think they could create AIDS and infect the Black population again.

Fox News in wording the actions of the government in a softer, and less viscious manner than actually occurred not only lied to the American public, they have attempted to change history and influence the public perception of current events.

Look up the Tuskegee Experiment. Learn the facts. Understand why some have the views they have. Learn what our Government has done and is capable of doing.

It’s moments like this that I get inflamed and angered. The news media has an obligation to report the truth, and when that vow is broken, we must respond quickly and directly.

As for Rev. Wright, you can view VASS and see the full transcript of what he said, word for word. Then you can make up your own mind, just as you should with his full sermons and video.

2008 Olympic Games: What I hope to see

The 2008 Olympics. The once every 4 year event that circles the globe and features the greatest athletes in the world. The pinnacle of healthy fit human bodies. Supposedly representing the best of every nation, and with little polispeak of those nations.

But that’s not exactly true.

China is a prime example of that, and needs to be addressed before, and during this years games. China is a key supporter of the Sudan, and in this manner supporting the genocide of Darfur. China is the Sword of Damocles over Taiwan. China is the iron fist against Tibet. And while it’s not as commonly discussed as it has been in the past, for all the economic innovations made in the past decade, they are very communist.

On Wednesday many Americans got their first glimpse of the problems that China promotes. The students that crossed the Atlantic Ocean and our country to scale that bridge, at serious risk to themselves, made a statement. The protests, which were far more peaceful than similar events in England and France, got significant attention. But the major news media missed the big boat.

Well let me rephrase that, they missed the big boat of issues that I care about. While much was said of the protesters supporting Tibet, little was said about the other problems of China that have been ongoing for decades. Not to belittle the desire of the Tibetan people to be free. But I have yet to hear more than a polispeak soundbite discussing the continued efforts of China to encourage the Darfur genocide.

But it’s not because some with the major medias eye have not made statements. Stephen Spielberg quit as artistic advisor to the Olympics because of all the issues. French President Nicolas Sarkozy seems ready to boycott the Games. Last night Dennis Miller made perhaps the best statement and idea I have heard on the matter during his time on the Bill O’Reilly show – that every athlete, of every nation, appear at the opening ceremonies dressed like this



Some might say that a bit of clothing is just not enough. That this is not a strong enough statement. That more is required. I agree that more needs to be done. That Darfur needs to be ended, and those supporting the genocide punished in some manner.

“The Chinese have had their way over Tibet. They have openly intimidated those countries who want to have diplomatic relations with Taiwan. And from their point of view, the Tibetans are an ungrateful bunch of peasants who have been dragged from the Dark Age of a Buddhist theocracy to the modern era of paved roads, city plumbing and light bulbs.”

Does that sound familiar? Does it remind you of the European desire to help the African people find civilization? Or the comments of some recently trying to justify the slavery of Africans in America and the current condition of Black Americans. Those kinds of thoughts and comments were not always unaccepted or considered the utterances of minds filled with compost. And even recent Olympics have been the stage for criticisms of American acceptance of those similar thoughts. Many of my readers may be too young to recall the international attention that this one scene created, deservedly so.



The Olympic Games are about the nations that host, as much as they are about the athletes that are competing. Nations are connected to the Games and each other. To accept the Olympic Games without calling attention to the murder of children and the subjugation of countries is an insult to what is on-going.

Thus I agree with Dennis Miller’s thought. I support his idea and add one minor point – every visitor to the Olympic Games’ opening ceremonies, including the political representatives of all the nations, should join the athletes in wearing the robes of the Tibetan monks. Such a display, viewed around the world, would shame China and hopefully be the cause of starting to address these horrible actions in a peaceful non-paranoid realistic manner.

Do you agree?

Beware the Clinton wrath

If you have something negative to say about Senator Clinton or her supporters, especially the female supporters, expect to fear for your job. Such is the reaction found on even the most conservative of news cable networks. Fox has been covering the comments of Randi Rhodes for 3 days now, and they continue to be surprised by the failure of Air America to fire Ms. Rhodes.

You may be wondering, what could a liberal radio personality say that would be so horrible? She called Senator Clinton a Wh***. Add to that the fact that she said the same of Geraldine Ferraro.

Now if you think this was bad keep in mind a few facts. This was not on the radio. It was not in a public forum. It was not open to the public. In fact the video of the event, of which excerpt have been running on Fox News for days, seems to be taken on a cell phone. This is still not enough for some considering what was said. But the last fact is perhaps the most important fact, Randi Rhodes was doing a stand-up comedy act.

That last fact is the most important of all the facts. That is comedic expression. Poor taste perhaps, but far from worthy of the indefinite suspension that she received. And dissimilar to other events with celebrities with horrendous humors.

Unlike the infamous words of Don Imus, this was not on public airwaves. This was not an attack on private citizens. The comments were made in reference to the public political actions of Senator Clinton and Ms. Ferraro. I don’t approve of what was said, but I note the difference.

Like the comments of Opie and Anthony, this was a private venue. It was not available to the general public, and if it was not taped would never have been an issue. The crowd, in general, seemed to agree and enjoy the comedy skit.

Like Michael Richards it was intended to be humorous. It was supposed to amuse and entertain the crowd. In this case it was exactly what was happening. The women in the crowd seem to enjoy the comments as much as the men. There was no expression disapproval or anger. So unlike the Michael Richards event, Rhodes did not cross the line. Actually Richards didn’t just cross the line, he lost his mind.

But the power of the Clinton machine is immense. The major news media has leapt to her defense, wording the event (and manipulating the video) to seem as if this were a public venue or part of her daily work responsibilities. It’s presumed by the media as if Air America had created this event and solicitate these comments.

The real problem of this is the effect it has on Free Speech. By trying to minimize these kinds of events, and by trying to get every instance of such actions punished to a manner beyond appropriate and environment of stifled speech occurs. That is unfair and dangerous. Even for speech that many might find objectionable.

As I defended Duane ‘Dog’ Chapman, in so far as he should not have lost his job for the private racist conversation he had with his son, I say the same of this event with Rhodes. Private conversations and events that are closed to the public should not be held to the same standards and punishment as public ones. Jobs and lives cannot be regulated by politically correct polispeak standards.

I wanted Don Imus fired because he attack private citizens, without provocation, in a manner demeaning to women and racially prejudiced. I wanted Michael Richards to never work again because he crossed the line of humor and made a racial attack based on his own anger and inner demons in a public venue (which he himself acknowledged). I opposed the call to have Opie & Anthony being fired as they were on a radio station that requires paid subscribers, and allows those subscribers to change the channel if they don’t like what they hear. I opposed Dog Chapman being fired because it was a private conversation, even though he acknowledged his constant and racist charged use of derogatory terms.

Based on that I must support Randi Rhodes. She should not be suspended, and definitely not fired. This in fact should have no affect on her day job at all. The media needs to stay out of this issue – which only exists because they created it.

And for the record I don’t listen to Air America, I’m far from a liberal, a Republican, and have no love for Senator Clinton or Geraldine Ferraro.

Eugene Oregon can't speak to African Americans - 3.27.2008.1

If anyone from Eugene Oregon is reading my blogs, I hope that you have a dictionary handy. If not I suppose you can ask a White person from at least 110 countries around the world what my blogs say. I mention this because I just learned that for some reason the city does not seem to know how to speak to Black people.

Seriously. On Fox News at approximately 6:35pm, Dan Springer made a report about the City mandating training to be able to speak with African Americans. Somehow the less than 2% of the population that is Black seems to speak some language that the Americans in Eugene Oregon cannot comprehend.

Ok, I can’t hold it back. You dumb bas****s.

I can believe the insult. Somehow officials there think that English is not enough to allow for communication between Americans in America? Is it because the White Americans in Eugene failed to get an education of any kind? I doubt that. To my knowledge there was no transplanting of an African nation into the town. I am unaware of a Zulu tribe doing a mass immigration into the area. So what is the problem?

I am left with the thought that some White elitist pseudo-intellectual liberal with more money than brains decided that African Americans in the town were being treated unfairly, and the cause was that the White population didn’t know how to speak to them. Were some person to come up to me, and ask ‘How should I speak to you. Do you understand English?’ I would hit them.

I have to believe that the same liberal mentioned above has watched too much BET (Black Entertainment Television) – the music videos, saw Soul Plane once to often, and recently saw Birth of a Nation. Somehow that same person came to understand that Snoop Dogg was the representative of all Black people. I would guess that the same person also probably has never lived in a bigger city nor ever actually been around Black people.

If Savannah Georgia, or Houston Texas, or New York City decided to create a program to teach non-Whites to speak to Whites there would be a riot. The concept is ludicrous it would be claimed. It would be called insulting and stupid. The fact that everyone speaks (or should at least passingly understand) English makes the thought incomprehensible. Equally the converse is true. Except in Eugene.

Somehow my writing, which is actually less evocative than my speaking, is an alien language in Eugene Oregon. Or so their program indicates.

I have to wonder what happened when Senator Obama was speaking in the town. When he spoke about

“The Oregon election is a chance to make change a reality, Obama says. A police officer with a shaved head nearby me nods his head in approval. Come to mention it, there are a lot of cops standing around.”

Did the rest of those at McAuthur court understand? Was the officer nodding his head to stay awake, did he think he was watching some kind of new rap group?

When Senator Obama said

“Obama says he wants a head of the Environmental Agency to actually protect the environment, including Oregon rivers, oceans, forests and skies.”

Did the reportedly massive crowd know he wasn’t speaking about EPMD or did his White heritage somehow provide a encryption key for their ears?

Well let me tell those that find this program neccesary a little secret that only the entire nation should know, and the rest of the world (at least those from the 110 countries that view this blog each month) seems to understand, and every English speaking human being I have ever met understands – even those that I spoke Russian with. You speak to African Americans like a person with respect and you will get respect and a conversation. Speak to us like some dimwitted creature that can’t understand it’s native language and I assure you that you won’t like the results. Especially if you are in arms reach of me.

Duane ‘Dog’ Chapman to return to cable television - 2.20.2008.1

Ok, time to re-focus. As is obvious I have been spending a huge amount of time on the Presidential election of late. From my I Love America That’s Why I Vote! campaign to the multiple posts on all the candidates and vote results [all found at VASS] I have expressed by belief that this election will critically impact all Americans. To that end I am promoting voter registration, and following everything about the candidates.

But, I have not forgotten the core purpose of this blog. So let me get back to those basics.

The first thing I want to touch on is Duane ‘Dog’ Chapman. He is getting back on cable television. Roughly 4 months after his tirade of the N-word and his, in my opinion, pathetic ‘save my job’ apology he will be going back to work.

The A&E cable network has stated

"Since the premise of "Dog The Bounty Hunter" is about second chances - we have decided to give him one."

That’s a load of crap. Lest I misunderstand the program, which I admit to having never seen more than 30 seconds of, it is the reality-styled coverage of a bounty hunter capturing fugitives from the law and forcing them to face the legal system. There is no second chance but forced responsibility. A responsibility that I feel ‘Dog’ Chapman has sought to avoid. And A&E is going to reward that evasion.

When the story first broke I stated

“The mindset that allows the use of the N-word and other disparaging terms against people of color is the issue. It’s that mindset that is angering. He isn’t upset with the words he uses, he is angry if others find out he uses these words. He knows he’s wrong, and doesn’t care.

That is racist. To cowardly use terms to disparage and degrade people, but not be willing to let anyone of the race in question to hear it is racist. Add to this that in the presence of his minister of 7 years, who is Black, he would not use this term but has no problem saying other curses in front of him adds to his deception. He is more than just racist; he is the hidden racist that acts in secret, in a way similar to the KKK.”

Obviously I did not accept the apology made to gain public sympathy. I did not accept his faulty reasoning. I did not excuse his actions. I still don’t to this day.

But I also stated that he should not lose his job. My reason for this has nothing to do with Duane ‘Dog’ Chapman and everything to do with the First Amendment and the fact that it was a private conversation that was made public without his knowledge. It is those factors alone that prevent me from decrying the actions of A&E.

But that does not mean I will support his return.

I hope this program fails miserably. In fact I would suggest that if you did watch this program you discontinue to do so. A message needs to be made, and diminutive ratings would be a nice step in that direction.

I will say it again, I think Duane ‘Dog’ Chapman is a racist. He is the sort of racist of the worst type. One that would smile in the face of an African American – like his preacher of 7 years – and them stab them in the back when no one is looking (and Mexicans and women as well). He is a cowardly racist that deserves no sympathy for his actions.

Let him go back to work. He was duped into being recorded without knowledge. That is a low blow. But his own admissions on national television (speaking with Hannity of the Fox News program Hannity & Colmes) were that this word and other defamitory demeaning comments were used by his cast and co-workers regularly. Thus the failure of his program would be apt justice.

The N-word is not a common plesantry. It’s not a term that is positive for any group of people to use. It promotes the perception that far to many in America are ready to support, that African Americans are lazy, ignorant, repugnant less than human creatures. That is the impression that the N-word has meant for centuries, and it has not changed as ‘Dog’ Chapan so clearly proved.

A&E is counting on the fact that Americans, of all colors, have short memeories. ‘Dog’ Chapman is counting on the same thing. This blog, and I, do not forget easily the use of a word that is meant to equate my family, friends and myself as less than feces.

So the question is do you?

Donate for breast implants or school books, NAACP, and Jerry's kids

Ok, it’s official. America is screwed up in a massive way. I can only come to that conclusion after finding out about a site that I just can’t believe exists. But it does, and it’s real. Not only that, it was a featured as a story on Fox News earlier today. What is the site? MyFreeImplants.com [No I will not link directly to the site – if you need to see it you can get there easily enough]

Only in America is it possible for such a site to not only exist, but to relatively flourish. The goal of this site is that flat-chested women (18 and over) place their pictures and bio on the site. Men (or women I suppose) who find a particular woman interesting, contact that woman and speak with them via email, as I understand. Based on the looks of the woman, and conversations – possibly with reward of “sexy photos” (at the discretion of the ladies involved) – the ‘benefactors’ donate money towards the ladies gaining cosmetic surgery that will augment their breasts.

That’s the basis of the site. Simple direct and legal. Based on the 4 successes listed on the homepage of the site right now this site has raised at least $23,345. Do the women look different? Yes. Better? That’s dependant on your personal opinions.

But the thing that I am amazed by is what I just mentioned. This site raises money for basically nothing. I won’t equate it with porn, nor an internet somewhat interactive version of Playboy, but I don’t think it’s far from it either.

I’m sure the women involved are quite happy with the results of the site. I’m sure that women that want the cosmetic surgery, without the means to afford it, and willing to undergo this process feel justified. I don’t question them at all. But I must say I’m annoyed by it.

Call it a bit of jealousy. I request donations of .50 cents to $1 (more if you want) for the virtually daily efforts I provide on my blogs and sites. I provide t-shirts, mugs, poetry and more, updated several times a year. I use those donations to help fund the cost of the various sites, and my give away contests (like the $1,100 I gave away for Christmas) and efforts to improve the quality of life – like the I Love America That’s Why I Vote! campaign. Effectively I give back a tangible something for the precious and generous donations that I receive from you my readers. And I thank each and every one of you that do this for me.

But this website seems to just receive money for nothing. I don’t get it. I don’t see the value in it. Hell, even going to a strip club has more value and return in it. And why do the male benefactors waste their money in such a manner? Forget my donations, the $23,000 mentioned above is discretionary money that could have gone to AIDS prevention and cure efforts. It could buy new school books for a local public elementary school, or help feed kids in those schools. It can give the homeless meals, clothing, and shelter. It could go to organizations that support the improvement of African Americans, Hispanics/Latinos, and other people of color in every aspect of our lives. Each of those things is far more worthy of a donation than me, and definitely the breast implant site.

So maybe I’m a bit jealous. Maybe I want to get .50 cents per reader so that I can do a huge campaign to help register votes so that the President elected in November realizes that they need to make substantive changes to improve America for Blacks and Hispanics/Latinos. Maybe I want $1 a reader to be able to give a high school student their first year in college free. Maybe I want to give multiple families across the nation money so they can enjoy a feast on the holiday, have gifts for the kids, and/or pay off a few bills. And yes, having a few extra dollars for myself if possible would be nice.

At least I’m honest. And I strive to give a somewhat tangible return for that, even if I don’t get anything. Hell, if the choice is between me and the Jerry Lewis MDA telethon, give it to Jerry’s kids. But $5,000 to look at pictures of a woman with bigger boobs?

I suggest this to those that would spend their money so frivolously. Buy a DVD for $20, take the remaining $4,980 and split it among a few of the organizations I’ve just mentioned. And if you have .50 cents, or a $1 or 2 extra, I’m happy to receive that as well.

The point is you can do far better, for far more people, than an optional self-respect boost for a single person.

And if you think I’m wrong, I’d love to know why.

Update on Sean Taylor of the Redskins Football team - 1.24.2008.1

I decided to do a search on Sean Taylor, the Redskin’s football player that was killed in his home at the end of November 2007. The reason for the search is because of the media attention to Heath Ledger's death. I am sorry that he is dead, but I am noticing the amount of time that is being dedicated to his death.

Similar to the months of coverage of Anna Nicole Smith’s death (or Stacy Peterson), there is no end to the rumors, minor insignificant facts, and minutiae that is being uncovered about the man. This is fine for TMZ and other institutions that waste your time. I can even see how Greta Van Susteren, of Fox News, would cover it [I find her program to be the equivalent of ambulance chasing news coverage]. But without outside factors (like a hint that this was a murder and not a suicide or accidental overdose – which often is the same thing), the time spent on this sad event is troubling to me.

Thus I wanted to go back and compare the on-going coverage to a recent death. Sean Taylor’s death was covered by all the major news media. It did get a few hours of news coverage over roughly 3 days. By news coverage standards that is huge. Of course the follow-up of the case has been sporadic and less well done. Like the fact, reported on Canadian Press that,

“Sean Taylor, the first player voted posthumously to the Pro Bowl, will have his jersey number worn at the game by two of his former Washington Redskins teammates.

The NFL announced Wednesday tight end Chris Cooley and tackle Chris Samuels will both wear No. 21 at the game Feb. 10 in Honolulu.”

Another fact that has been less covered is the Fund that has been created to take care of Taylor’s daughter.

“Cooley and Samuels will each wear his own name on the back of the jersey, above the No. 21. The jerseys will be auctioned after the game, with the proceeds benefiting the Sean Taylor Memorial Trust Fund that was established for Taylor's daughter, Jackie.”

The difference is this:

• Taylor was murdered, Ledger has been reported as not.
  
• Taylor’s murder seems to have been done by 4 individuals that have been arrested. Coverage has not fully confirmed this fact, thus his killers may be at large (though this is unlikely).
  
• Ledger has received sympathetic commentary by pundits. Many have explained his past drug use on various reasons, and drawn correlations to this being involved with his sudden death. None of the coverage has been accusatory or negative.
  
• Taylor was maligned constantly. Pundits gave as much time to rumors and past facts that indicated a negative view of Taylor, as actual facts in the case.
  
• Ledgers is portrayed as had having a positive growing future prior to his death.
  
• Taylor was portrayed as having a negative past, a complicated future, and minimalization of his achievements.
  

Why am I mentioning this, and why now?

I realize that Heath Ledger has just died. I can imagine how his family and friends are taking this sudden and shocking news. I do not intend to be insensitive.

But the fact remains that the media is unjust and biased in its coverage. And that pisses me off. I’m tired of reading about the death of an African American celebrity/entertainer a week after the event. Or that their life is minimized, and coverage short and sporadic. Then a White celebrity/entertainer dies and up to a week, or even months of coverage ensue.

I’m tired of hearing all the wonderful things about drunken drug addicted ignorant White entertainers (a la Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, ect) that need our sympathy. Then I get to hear all the negative mean items about African American entertainers that survived and overcame gangs, poverty, inadequate education systems, social bias, racism, and sometimes more.

But to say this in retrospect does not have the same impact as watching the news today and seeing the impact. Pay attention to the news, and note what is being said. See how much is said about the tribute to Sean Taylor. See how they describe Sean Taylor’s life. Then wait a few months and watch how Heath Ledger will be discussed in what I expect will be a grand scale when the next Batman movie comes out. Watch how much time will be given to remember the positive aspects of Heath, several months from now.

Is this the perfect time? No. But there never is in such matters. But if we cannot celebrate the past of our heroes and entertainers equally, then how can we expect anything else to be equal? If we are not the same in death, how can we be the same in life?

If the major news media can’t be colorblind in death, then I don’t need to know about that death. James Brown was not buried for a month and the major media never noticed. But Anna Nicole Smith, who’s body was a matter of legal debate – exactly the same as James Brown’s was and at the same tme, received multiple days of live coverage.

I don’t want to insult the dead. But I do want to criticize the living. Because the little things matter, a lot. And I’m tired of the lopsided commentary that only exists to subtly and directly stereotype and minimize the existence of any person of color.

Wesley Snipes news coverage minimizes Dr. Martin Luther King's birthday Part 2 - 1.15.2008.3

Concluding from Wesley Snipes news coverage minimizes Dr. Martin Luther King's birthday Part 1...

The next part of the story takes place in June of 2007. The major media virtually ignores and then spins the allegation that this entire event is racially based. They take the claims of set up and racial motivation on the part of the government to be a playing of the race card and a distraction by Mr. Snipes. Again no mention is made of a few odd facts like

“In piecing together the facts as they appear to be I gather that Mr. Rosile and Mr. Khan have not been charged, though they have 2000 clients that have allegedly made false claims with the IRS, exactly the same as Mr. Snipes though for less money. Yet only Mr. Snipes has been singled out as a ‘co-conspirator’.”

Finally in December of 2007 there was a near total major media news blackout on the comments of Mr. Snipes in this case. I noted that minor news, of no importance or worth has been covered ad nauseum by the media, but the defense of Mr. Snipes wasn’t worth 30 seconds.

“When Ellen DeGeneres cried about a puppy, it was news for 2+ days. When Rosie O’Donnell got into a battle of name calling with Donald Trump, it was news for over a month. When Anna Nicole Smith died, 3 months. And Paris Hilton has been a week each incident. And that’s just off the top of my head.”

But let Mr. Snipes defend himself, and call a list of character witnesses and the meida goes into a frenzy. They claim he is ‘most obviously guilty’, and ‘insulting potential jurors with his actions and defense claims’. Not one mentioned that Mr. Snipes tried to work out this entire matter with the IRS and the government failed to be amicable. They alluded that Mr. Snipes was passing out bad checks, which I have never heard confired or stated anywhere.

And I have yet to hear an answer to 1 key question, how do you ammend a tax filing claiming 0 and get a refund of $7 million without a single red flag appearing and no comments from the government for 6 years?

In fact the government is doing everything to hinder the case. To place as much fault, blame , and inference of guilt on Wesley snipes as possible.

“They [Snipes lawyers] have tried, unsuccessfully, to separate the three defendants at trial….

Snipes had tried unsuccessfully to get his trial moved from this central Florida town, arguing it was racist and he couldn't get a fair hearing….

Most had heard of the case, but not extensively.”

I simply have this to say. Today is Dr. Martin Luther King’s birthday. A day that was ignored and denied for most of my life. A day that is barely celebrated by the nation. It’s a day in memory of a man who fought to remove bias based on the color of skin in America. And for the last 15 months the American government has been working hard to apparently keep that bias alive.

Does that deserve a bit more attention? Don’t you think so? Sadly, it seems that as we go forward the only attention will be to further demonize Mr. Snipes, regardless of his actual guilt or innocence. That just seems to defeat the whole purpose of celebrating Dr. King in the first place.

Wesley Snipes news coverage minimizes Dr. Martin Luther King's birthday - 1.15.2008.2

You know that if you only listened to the major news media you would have a very limited and derogatory image of African Americans. Perhaps one of the better examples of this is how Wesley Snipes has been portrayed by the major media. If you were listening to various pundits and talking heads on Fox News as an example you would get the impression that Mr. Snipes flagrantly defrauded the IRS and expects to get away without paying taxes simply because he is arrogant.

This isn’t exactly the case though from what I have been able to follow.

In October of 2006 the initial event starting this entire case unfolded. The IRS issued an indictment against Wesley Snipes, who was no where to be found. My thoughts at the time were,

“As a celebrity it would not be unusual for him to be on vacation, or on a trip, outside the country or in seclusion. It would not be strange for Mr. Snipes to be working on a film somewhere in the world, and not immediately aware of what is going on here in the United States. To hear the talking heads speak, it sounds as if Mr. Snipes is actively avoiding contact, which may well be inaccurate.”

There was not one major news media outlet that stated the same thing I did. Every single one took the position that Mr. Snipes was evading the law. The virtually stated that his lack of response and absence was a sign of guilt.

They also glossed over the odd facts of the case. In quick summarry they were,

“First is the fact that the government accepted an amended claim of 0 income and made a refund of $7,000,000 without a red flag popping up is not Mr. Snipes fault….

…the fact that the business preparing the taxes is considered a “tax protest organization” should have drawn some interest….

It was claimed, as reports say so far, that the funds are not available for taxation as the funds were from overseas. I do not think that funds paid out in a foreign nation, for services in a foreign land, should be taxed by the government….”

These facts of the case have been roundly ignored in all the major news media.

Then came the news that Mr. Snipes was in Nambia.

“I’ve seen anchors defend and minimize actions of dozens of entertainers. I’ve heard them brush off gun charges and violence by rappers, barely mention potential criminal actions of actors, and breeze past arrests of musicians and singers on drug charges. Yet, there has been a direct implication of Mr. Snipes being guilty and hiding. Why the difference?”

I would ammend that statement made 2 days after the first. I would include the sympathy and outpouring of emotion to the utter devestation that is Britney Spears. This woman has endangered the lives of her children, indulged in drunken and intoxicated binges, blatantly violated the law, and acted in a manner that few would call rational. Yet with all that, there are constant cries for her to get another chance, that compassion should be shown, and the need of the children to be with their mother declared. Yet a crackhead mother, or a working single parent for that matter, can have their kids removed in a heartbeat. And Mr. Snipes is demonized.

A month later, on news of comments by Mr. Snipes I was able to find I stated,

“Well I’m not sure if Mr. Snipes is exactly innocent, but I do agree that he is being railroaded. The media has worked hard to portray him negatively…”

In December of 2006 Mr. Snipes returned from Africa and peacefully surrendered to authorities as he had previously arranged via his lawyers. The media and law enforcement swoped down on this event as if it were David Koresh exiting his compound in Texas. The media played it out as if this was the government standing up against a vile wrong-doer who was evading them and presenting danger to the public.

“Mr. Snipes has not evaded arrest, has not resisted, nor hindered the authorities. Mr. Snipes was doing his job when authorities indicted him, and his work happened to place him overseas at the time. I have no doubt that the Government knew this fact, or could have known it if they chose to. To create a media event by claiming to be unaware of Mr. Snipe whereabouts, to structure this matter as if there was negative intent, is almost conspiratory.”

Concluded in part 2...

All are equal under the law. Really?

**This can also be seen at All American Blog, where I am a contributing author.**

I just have to wonder. The legal system in America is skewed. If you are rich, you are set. You can get away with almost any crime. From Ted Kennedy to Robert Blake, it’s happened time after time. But that is not the only problem.

If you happen to not be a White American you can expect even more problems. As I noted in a recent post

“But young White males are dangerous. High school shootings? White males. Most petty crimes, the same. Nooses hung from trees and various other places? White males. ‘Redneck row’ and other whites’ only places enforced by White males. Bensonhurst, and so on and so on.”

But that danger is only a start. Because if you are non-White and on trial for a crime, the chances are you will be convicted (most assuredly if the victim was White) and the penalty will be more severe than a White person under the same circumstances.

Take Mr. Genarlow Wilson, a teen that had sex with another, though younger, teen on a consensual basis. In fact the female was the aggressor. Yet due to her age Mr. Wilson was convicted of rape, and sentenced to 10 years in prison. After 2 years, the courts finally overturned the sentence as extreme cruelty versus the crime, and the underlying law has been changed.

In the Jena 6 case, the boys involved were charged with attempted murder. The White male involved had previously provoked the altercation in a fight the day prior (allegedly hitting one of the Black males with a bottle), was knocked unconscious in the case in question, and went to a dance the day of the incident. That does not sound like attempted murder. That’s a lopsided fight and the White teen lost. Bails in this case were set so high as to guarantee the incarcerations of the Black teens. There are more issues with the case but I think the point is made.

And of course there is the case of Ms. Megan Williams. She is the woman from West Virginia that was raped, tortured, stabbed, hair pulled out, boiling water poured on, choked with a noose and more by 6 Whites (3 men, 3 women of various ages). That entire story, and the subsequent arrest, the denial of Hate crime status, and a recent march to draw attention to the injustice have received 2 minutes of attention and have been buried by the major media.

My point is that there is a fascination, and a need for the legal system to prove, that non-Whites are dangerous. It’s a troubling fact that most of the roughly 200 million White Americans never have to question as it never applies to them. But the media feeds this fear daily.

The Jena case was ignored for months. The Wilson case was unheard of by major media for years. But the OJ Simpson case has never stopped being discussed since the trial started. For 2 days now, the leading story (at least at Fox News) virtually every hour has been some aspect of the OJ Simpson case. Virtually every reporter I’ve heard has referred to the prior trial and has tactfully alleged (though not crossing the legal line of making a direct statement) that OJ was guilty of the original murder trial. They forget to state that he was found innocent, and thus IS innocent. Under the same nature of coverage, Senator Ted Kennedy should be referred to as the ‘the alleged murderer Senator Kennedy.’ That of course does not happen. Every time there is a murder of a married woman, references to Robert Blake are not drawn.

Right now OJ is in pre-trial. There is no question he will go to trial. There is a small chance he will win the trial. Small because though he has a very high priced defense (which is uncommon for an African American to start with) which should allow him to win under the skewed nature of the legal system, the media has been trying him for over a decade.

If this were a White man, and he was arguably set up by a less than credible Black male (who illegally taped entrapping conversations prior to the event) in an event organized by the Black male – most would say he would walk. If every other person involved was given immunity from prosecution or deals on their crimes, most would say this was prosecutorial bias, and an attempt to railroad the White male. If it were stated that the intended crime was told to the FBI with plenty of time before hand, and they did nothing, many would demand the White male be released from this set-up.

But OJ is Black, and he got his lucky win against the legal system already.

I want criminals prosecuted for their crimes, regardless of skin color or income level. I want justice for victims without thought of race or where they live. But more than that, I want a legal system that is balanced. If that means that the rich have an advantage, then all rich people have that advantage without race being a factor. I’m no idealist. If the system is flawed, as all systems are, I at least want it flawed equally. If violent crimes get overly-harsh penalties all convicted should get that.

But we cannot trumpet how wonderful our system is, and I do think it is the greatest in the world, when we enact inequality on a daily basis. We are the greatest, but we can be greater. Don’t you think so?

Dog Chapman apologies on Hannity and Colmes Part 3 - 11.7.2007.2

Concluded from Dog Chapman apologies on Hannity and Colmes Part 2...

And lastly the interview ends with his written public apology, and his claim he would rather die than inflict pain on the Black community. Some how I doubt that. Had that been true he would not use, nor allow use around him, of the n-word. He would not have spit out the bile and malicious wording that is now the testament of his thoughts. Again I say his apology sounds hollow and as false as a poorly tuned piano.

But that is not the end of his annoying attempt to get back his lucrative television show and audience. The last thing he mentions is his efforts to get in touch with God and to go to a gravesite of African Slaves and to place a gravestone for each of them buried there.

I’m sorry but my anger cannot be bought so cheaply. My anger that has grown immensely as I hear him continue to speak. Now he thinks that telling me he is going to get in touch with God, and that this should excuses his intent and actions? That his taking the out that all entertainers and celebrities are using now, treatment for deplorable actions, is going to gain sympathy? Not with me.

And to even mention the graves of those Africans that were taken from their homes to become less than furniture enrages me. How dare him. Placing grave markers will not buy my anger off. Providing due respect for the lives of human beings is something everyone should do. America didn’t for over a century, and the paltry hollow actions of one White man who has compounded that insensitivity will not make up for it.

I mentioned that I expected Dog to seek some kind of ‘aid’ for his words. He has done so. I expected that he would apologize in public. And now he has. I did not expect him to lose his cable television show for the private phone call, but having heard his apology I am glad at A&E’s decision.

As I said to a friend about this whole incident,

“He may not be a racist, but he does a damn good job of acting like one.”

Dog Chapman apologies on Hannity and Colmes Part 2 - 11.7.2007.1

Continued from Dog Chapman apologies on Hannity and Colmes Part 1...

Has this guy grown up in America?! Has he not lived enough years to recall the 70’s and know of the 60’s? Has he been in a coma? Of course he knew it caused pain. I have no doubt that while he was in prison on his murder conviction he heard someone use the word, and knew it was used to create pain. I’m sure he was aware enough of the vile nature of the n-word that he never used it in front of his Black reverend, Rev. Storey. Had he a real separate meaning, or thought it had no effect I’m sure he would have had no problem using it in front of the reverend. But he hid that aspect of himself, meaning he knew.

The interview then jumps away from his words, and his hollow apology (I felt), to discuss his son’s birth. What the Hell did that have to do with anything? It was an attempt to gain sympathy. It was an attempt to show his humanity. Nice try, to bad that humanity seems reserved to people of his own color.

But that was not enough for Dog Chapman. He goes on to blame the Enquirer for offering money for recordings or video of his actions. It was their fault for enticing his son to get this recording. And it was the fault of the girlfriend for being around his son and possibly being a bad influence on him. That is he thought she was encouraging his son to behave badly, according to rumors he heard of his son acting badly. Notice that the rumors did not say she did that, but he assumed it. Again this is distraction and an attempt to gain sympathy.

Something that is important to note. If Duane ‘Dog’ Chapman was so sorry, why did he wait to apologize? The conversation was from March of this year. I realize this was a private conversation, so I can understand the lack of public apology. But why not apologize to Rev. Storey? Why not seek atonement for God, or within his religion? Because if he had, Rev. Storey would never have had to say “I’ve never heard him use that word.”

Perhaps the most insulting part of the interview is when Duane ‘Dog’ Chapman announces that he ‘now knows that he is not Black.’ That he had thought he was Black, and accepted by African Americans as one of our own. That bull is the worst attempt at sympathy I have heard in maybe decades. “Now I know I’m not Black”, like looking in a mirror for his entire life never gave him a clue. Like being Black is something you can purchase in the store and wear like a pair of jeans. Like the daily strife, injustice and inequality I and others have lived is a commodity that he can pick up and gain sympathy for when he acts badly.

‘Hey I’m sorry for shooting that guy, but I had my ‘African American’ jeans on. My Bad.’

Concluded in part 3...

Dog Chapman apologies on Hannity and Colmes - 11.6.2007.2

So I was watching Hannity & Colmes tonight and listened as Duane ‘Dog' Chapman tried to apologize and explain his phone conversation with his son. I can sum up my thoughts of his interview in a few words. Dodging blame, lame, and insufficient.

To start with, Dog starts the conversation with the comments that he was sorry for using the N-word and that he knew it was wrong. But nearly in the same breath he admits that he uses the word. This at least is consistent with his phone comment. But he tries to excuse this use of the n-word by stating 5 times in the first segment that he has a different definition of the word than the general public.

Now take that in for a moment. He tries to lessen what he said by using an excuse that the n-word has a separate meaning than the one that is acknowledged as the potentially most insulting word in the English language. He emphasizes this 5 times in 10 minutes. But not once does he offer what his meaning might be. Not once does he attempt to explain that he has ever used the word in any way other than to degrade, belittle and insult African Americans.

Towards the end of the show he does mention that he has used it as a form of common greeting. Yet that does not mean, nor does it seem to be implied, that this is how he uses the term all the time. It does not seem to be the way that he feared being taped using the word. That does not seem to imply the way that the others working with him use the word. And it still does not give the type of definition he wants to claim his use of this word conveys.

Plus there is the admission that when he did use the word as a greeting, or at other time, he would not say it out loud. He would not do this because

“I’d get beat up for it.”

Again he confirms that his meaning is the meaning we think it to be. That he knew exactly how his words would be understood and that he wanted that.

To the detriment of Sean Hannity’s interview, he was never asked to explain that meaning he supposedly had. In fact it was accepted that he could have a meaning separate of the historical, or the one used by youth today. But I interject that his use of the term in that phone conversation held a single meaning, and it was the historical and only meaning that the n-word has. And it was that meaning that he admittedly knew he was using both in the phone conversation and with his colleagues, in my opinion.

But the next thing Dog Chapman says in the interview really ticked me off. He says that he thought he could use the n-word. That he could say it as some African Americans do. That he had no idea that using the word, as he did in the phone call, could inflict pain to Blacks.

Continued in part 2...

Discussing 50 cent interview on Fox News

It’s amazing what money will make some people do. Some have sex for it; others sell poison (drugs) to children. The prisons are filled with thieves and petty robbers, and sometimes there are those willing to prostitute themselves just for a buck. In this case I’m referring to 50 cent (Curtis Jackson) appearing on Fox News with Neil Cavuto at 4:50pm Monday, to market a new line of Pontiac cars that he was involved in creating (in other words he put his name on it).

Considering the broad net cast upon Fox News, and the general mood in the gangsta rap industry for the channel I found it amusing that Jackson would appear. But then again, trying to sell the new Pontiac on BET wouldn’t really be possible.

1. There is no news program for him to be on
2. Gangsta rap targets young poorer African Americans
3. The rating suck as few really watch the channel compared to most other cable network programs (though I think they exceed CNN)

So I find it interesting that Jackson went on the channel to pitch the new car essentially to a more conservative, generally White, predominantly Republican, basically older audience. But since he is getting paid (no doubt a licensing deal and or record company perks I imagine) he goes where he is told. But don’t confuse gangsta rappers with sell-outs! That’s just not fair or Black, so I’ve been told.

For those that missed the interview, it was no hatchet job. It was fair and generally stayed on point about this promotion. I found it interesting that for a guy ranking #2 on the Forbes list of top rapper incomes, he only has 3 cars (he never mentioned if any were the car he was pitching). The modesty seems far from the persona he markets on stage, video games and that movie flop.

Which lead to a question about his film coming out next year, April 12th. Sadly I will find something more interesting to do than see him in the film, like take a nap, but I was shocked to hear that Mr. Robert DeNiro and Mr. Al Pacino are in the film. How did he pull that? It’s not like he has talent, nor is he having sex with the director (I presume) so I don’t know what got him the role. I am going to guess it’s a very minor role that will be marketed and hyped as if he were the lead in a $100 million film. No matter what you think of the guy, the fact is he is no Will Smith, or even an Ice Cube.

While this was ongoing, Neil Cavuto referred to a conversation he had with Mr. Sean Combs. They showed a brief clip and the difference in the style between Mr. Combs and Jackson was stark. Mr. Combs looked professional, sharp, casual and wealthy in his suit. Jackson looked like he was just at the gym and paid too much for the quality he had on.

But I digress. Neil Cavuto asked a question of interest about how gangsta rappers are all trying to go mainstream, getting into movies and pretending to be actors. The question was, and I paraphrase both the question and answer,

“I notice that there seems to be a move away from the violence and more to the mainstream. Are you moving away from the violence?

[50 cent] It’s not a move away from aggressive content. Success removes us from the environment, we aren’t writing about those things as much. That doesn’t mean they aren’t there or that someone isn’t writing about it. We’re just not around it.”

Again, I am paraphrasing. If anyone can show me an official transcript I will gladly correct the wording, but the essence has not been changed. And “aggressive content” was exactly the term Jackson used. He was coached very well by his PR people. I was almost impressed by the ex-convict. The subtle change in terminology changing violence, which is what, is advocated and accurately describing the actions described in gangsta rap, to aggressive content implies that his lyrics are no worse than a game of touch football. Talk about spinning a scenario in your favor.

And it’s interesting to note that for the most successful rappers, the ones most in favor of the n-word, being ghetto fabulous, and living the thug-life, (in general) are the ones that have left the ghetto, and lead lives mostly without any connection to the actions they continue to promote. From what I interpreted from Jackson’s words, he believes that essentially the top and longest running rappers are fakes since they have no connection to the events they proclaim rap is meant to ‘keep real’.

[Why do people keep saying that? What does it mean? Keep it real. Like you can fake life. Like there is a choice in being alive. This isn’t the Matrix, when stuff happens it happens. The statement is ignorant, a result of minds refusing to stretch to find the words that actually convey the thought in their head.]

Now add to all this the fact that Jackson likes Senator Hillary Clinton, because he liked her husband. What President Clinton has to do with her holding the Presidency makes no sense to me. She did not gain experience in running the government by osmosis, nor did she have a real power or position when she was First Lady. And her policies, if you can figure out what they are, seem to not match his.

Of course, like most I’ve noticed in support of Senator Clinton, Jackson is strongly against President Bush. When you call the sitting President “without compassion” you clearly state your reasoning. This is not a good reason to pick the next President though. President Bush is not going to run again. He is not going to be elected again. The logic runs false.

And how dare he call any sitting President “without compassion”. I may not agree with all the actions of President Bush, but that is not the same thing as to insult the leader of our nation. I can respect that Jackson may want to bring the troops home, but I also realize that this ex-convict is hardly the most astute political thinker.

While President Bush may be slightly more articulate than 50 cent, he is advised by far greater minds, and has always acted in a manner that seems to be guided by a belief that his actions are in the best interest of the nation. Disagree if you wish, but there has not been a successful terrorist attack in this nation to date, several attempts have been made but all were thwarted. And the economy, while not perfect is good.

All in all I found the interview interesting. Curtis Jackson left me unimpressed, his efforts to sell whatever increases his personal wealth left me unfazed. I was amazed that he found himself in a film with quality actors, and learning his political beliefs just makes me hope he keeps them to himself in the future. But it was a fair and mild interview.

Nas insults every Black American with one word Part 2 - 10.16.2007.3

Continued from Nas insults every Black American with one word Part 1...

Recent Congressional hearings have gone virtually unreported, with entertainers, media corporations, and radio stations all denying any culpability for the content that is made or any negative effects it my encourage/create. With no one to blame, and pressure from the media seeking to blame someone, individuals like Nas are perfect targets. I can’t say I’m sorry when he chooses to adorn album covers with language depicting the worst insult known in the English language.

Nor can I feel pity for a genre of individuals that appear virtually incapable of avoiding legal difficulties. Take the most recent act of idiocy, the arrest of TI (Clifford Harris Jr) for illegal gun possession. Now that may not be a big deal, virtually every rapper has been arrested on a similar charge, Mr. Harris took it to the next level with an attempt to buy machine guns and ownership of multiple assault rifles and handguns. Can anyone explain why he would need this? And how many other rappers have been arrested this year alone? 2 dozen or so? And how many repeatedly, perhaps a dozen? Or am I low-balling the numbers?

The lack of discipline and personal responsibility displayed by the gangsta rap genre is bewildering. The use of the N-word, multiple arrests for crimes ranging from assault to drugs and more are just too much. Some may disagree on whether my argument of their being sell-outs is accurate, but I cannot see how any might dispute that in the current form and the exclusion of any other format, rap is hurting the Black community.

Mr. Creekmur is correct that 1 bad act does not invalidate 1 or 2 good acts. But when we look at the balance, I see dozens of bad acts and barely a handful of good.

We need change. Not by Congress, or from some corporation. We need to take action ourselves; because that is the only way we will see things improve in a meaningful way. If not, I fear that in 15 or 20 years we will wish for the respective charm of what we have today.

So when Nas releases his new album with a title that blatantly insults every living and dead African American, I would suggest not buying it or getting the bootleg or download. Or is that too much to ask?

Nas insults every Black American with one word - 10.16.2007.2

Oh the joy I feel in knowing that Nas will be shortly debuting a new album. I have no idea what his album will contain, but if the title is any indication of the content I have no doubt that this will be an insult to every African American. How can I say that unheard? Because the title is reported to be the N-word.

[If you play the following video, be aware it states the N-word multiple times, but I feel it makes my point.]



But going beyond this. I felt bad when Mr. Chuck Creekmur, was brought onto Fox News for the Big Story and was asked to defend Nas and this blatant use of the N-word. One point that I think needs to be paraphrased

“Many of our elected officials have done bad things, that does not invalidate the good that they have done.” – in reference to the positive songs by Nas as opposed to the more media targeted negative songs

[When you read this Mr. Creekmur, you can contact me for any correction if needed.]

But the problem I see is not just Nas and the low quality songs that he performs. As I’ve noted before

“I’ve long said that executives are laughing as they go to the bank to deposit the money accumulated from the work of Ja Rule and other rappers. They are making boatloads of money (literally) for words they would never use in public (as Don Imus learned) by having rappers say it for them. And all it costs them are pennies paid out to the performers. That by definition sounds like a sell-out to me.”

I understand and respect the fact that the First Amendment allows the artists to say words like this. At the same time I realize that the courts noted that certain words are inciteful and incendiary. I realize that there are consequences of words and they are not always what one might expect.

Gangsta rap and rappers are not the cause of all the ills of the Black community. But they are part of those ills. They condone and actually promote the worst problems our children face everyday. Unprotected sex, drug use, illegal activities, and a general aversion to education. Not one of these things is good for the Black community, yet they continue.

Continued in part 2...

Reaction to Rev. Jesse Jackson and Bill O'Reilly Part 3 - 9.27.2007.3

Continued from Reaction to Rev. Jesse Jackson and Bill O'Reilly Part 2...

I must admit my annoyance with Whites that presume to understand Black America’s issues and present answers with a sense of moral authority. Yes, Mr. O’Reilly is correct that fathers in the community are a major issue, but it is not the only one. Rev. Jackson presented several others that are equally important.

The rant by Bernie (I forget his last name, and honestly have lost massive respect for him after attacking Rev. Jackson) presuming to understand what ails African Americans smacks of the classic ‘White Savior and Protector’ image that portrayed, and continues to, Blacks as jungle savages. Bernie needs to be reminded that Africans created the number system the world uses today. Africans made the pyramids that cannot be duplicated today. Africans have helped create the world that exists today, in virtually every field of endeavor that Man is aware of at this time, and the slave descendants of those Africans continue to be important in America today.

We are as diverse in our culture, though major media ignores this, as much as any group in America today. To say that there is just a simple answer and that he UNDERSTANDS what I have gone through in this life is preposterous. At the best he may comprehend, but it is impossible for him to understand, much in the way I could not understand what it is to be White or female in America.

I can continue to go on. The issues are far flung and deep-rooted in American culture. Fear is a major factor; I have live through many aspects of it. The problems are multiple and come from within and without the Black community. [As I have noted before, having books older than myself while in high school, being denied word and training as a stockbroker because of my looks, being prodded to get into a fight because my manner of dress is upscale and mashed an obviously weak and tiny ego, and far more]

The point is that this is a discussion that needs to be continued. I hope that Mr. O’Reilly is incorrect. Whites need to speak up. Debate, especially passionate debate, must occur. Fear can only be defeated by action.

I will close with this though, but when I get more composed and when I get to read some of the responses from you my readers. I will come back to this.

The only thing you have to fear is fear itself. Franklin D. Roosevelt

**I am posting this here and at Black & White Blog. That is a site where discussion on racial issues are exchanged between myself and the other co-contributor, who happens to be White. For those uncomfortable commenting here for whatever reason, I suggest commenting there as an option.**

Reaction to Rev. Jesse Jackson and Bill O'Reilly Part 2 - 9.27.2007.2

Continued from Reaction to Rev. Jesse Jackson and Bill O'Reilly Part 1...

I do not deny that I have criticized Rev. Jackson and Sharpton for their actions in recent years. I still question why they have not lent their considerably publicly accessible voices to the tragedy in West Virginia, or the absence of reporting on Jonathan Riches, or why the major media seems to have completely forgotten the Congressional hearings on the music industry, specifically dealing with gangsta rap. I feel they can make far more noise than most, gaining attention to these matters that demand attention.

Am I glad they are raising the bar on what is being reported on Jena 6? Definitely. Should this have happened months ago? Without question. Do I feel that the major news media is seeking any means possible to avoid the subject and their abysmal responses? Do you even need to question that?

Even so, this does not mean that the media can round up any figure they can get a hold of and allow vile personal attacks on people that are reporting facts they were first person witnesses to. The attacks on Mr. Juan Williams are not out of context. How dare he call any Black American a ‘Happy Negro’. Being Black does not justify such a comment, nor does it automatically allow news commentator at CNN the ability to not challenge such offensive actions. They would not allow a White interviewee to get away with such a comment, nor should a Black one.

I feel insulted that the implication made by CNN is, via their acceptance and lack of action on the insulting attack on Mr. Juan Williams, that any African American (or Latino/Hispanic, Asian and so forth) that agrees in part or whole with views of Mr. O’Reilly is an Uncle Tom, mindless, foolish, minstrel. Would they let someone call a Spanish public figure a spic? Or an Irish one a ‘Happy Mick’? How about an Italian as a ‘Happy Wop’? Is my point made?

Since when have African American been relegated to a singular viewpoint? Since when did anyone get to be the singular voice of African Americans determining what is or is not permissible Blacks? How dare CNN allow such an image to be created, without question or challenge!

I know I have long said that I do not feel that Rev. Jackson or Sharpton are Black ‘leaders’, but that does not mean they are not important figures. I do not believe that this means that any person chosen by major news media can spout any kind of commentary and it be taken as gospel. Being Black does not mean you can say anything you please about other Blacks, nor does it excuse Whites from standing up and correcting such vicious and unwarranted attacks.

Continued in Part 3...

Compare White and Black news coverage Part 2 - 9.25.2007.2

Continued from Compare White and Black news coverage Part 1...

Beyond the fact that the Jena 6 just got a lot of coverage over the inequality and unfairness of the punishment, there is no difference on the face of it. Now what if it’s proven the police that the White teenager did something to provoke this, like beating on a younger Black kid or selling drugs to someone? Will the media still follow this case? Will they still feature the video tape? What if this was an arranged fight that was meant to go on YouTube? Will the media still be implying the boy’s innocence?

Let’s go to an even bigger issue. In West Virginia there were 6 Whites that tortured, sexually abused and violated in the worst ways, a Black woman. Ms. Megan Williams had boiling water poured on her, stabbed, and raped. This lasted for DAYS. Sadly for the news media there is no video of this vile torture, but there is of Ms. Williams in the hospital. Where is the sympathy for this woman and her SEVERE injuries?

This boy has gotten 2 days of coverage so far. In day 2 he has gotten more than twice the coverage of Ms. Williams of West Virginia. In fact the coverage, in day 2 has been maybe 5x that of the West Virginia case in total to date.

Where is the local police interview? Where are the city council members denouncing this repeated and aggravated attack? Why has the federal government not filed hate crime charges?

The bias sickens me. If a boy being beaten with minor wounds is worthy of news (and I don’t doubt that) then why is the rape, kidnapping and torture of a woman not?

I want to know from CNN, Fox News and all the other major news media why they don’t care about Ms. Megan Williams of West Virginia. I want to know why it takes MONTHS before the injustice of the Jena 6 is acknowledged though bloggers were aware and constantly speaking on it. I want to know why this one situation deserves more attention and investigation while these others do not. I demand to know why Jonathan Riches can evade prosecution and gain local legal authority protection for DECADES, and when he is finally brought to justice there is no coverage for his double murders.

Can anyone explain why I can have found and investigated information about these issues, and discussed them, but the major news media with dozens, if not hundreds, of employees and reporters cannot. Why is it that bloggers can see bias and inequality but major news media can’t?

What agenda is being promoted by the major news media? There must be one as I cannot see another reason why one case is followed and others are ignored. Corporate policy is dictating that one is a higher priority than the other. Does that bias benefit or detract from America?

This isn’t some loony extremist vision. This is what major news media is doing. This is the coverage they are presenting to America and the world. What messages are they providing and why? That is an issue that I feel must be addressed.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Compare White and Black news coverage - 9.25.2007.1

I find it interesting what has been reported yesterday and today. The news has made a big deal on an issue that you probably have seen. It’s the beating of the 13 year old boy in Norfolk, Virginia.

First things first, I do not advocate the violence this case is about. There is no reason that 6 people should beat upon one person. I don’t understand why kids today feel the need for such kinds of fights, if they must fight at all. If it takes so many to beat on one person, either that person is a real badass (a la Bruce Lee) or the attackers are punks. My opinion, like it or not, group/mob attacks are mindless and cowardly.

But there is an issue here beyond the fight. Actually several. The major news media and I will use Fox News again as I watch them predominantly, jumped on this story Monday. That was the first I saw anything on this case. Today I have noted that there is further follow up. 6 minutes of coverage occurred at 2:54pm alone.

I’ve seen the video tape and an interview with the boy several times by the point of this post. The media is being very generous in providing the view (which the boy and family promote) that this was a racial attack.

Yet it seems that this is incorrect. But before I go there, here are the apparent facts. The boy, who is white, was going to a basketball game on Saturday with his friend (who happens to be Black it was reported). Somewhere along this route they ran into the 6 boys, who range from 13-17 as reported, who then ‘suddenly’ started beating the kid. Luckily there was a friend of the boy being attacked who stood there and videotaped the altercation. Portions of that videotape are what are seen on Fox News.

So, we have a portion of a fight, showing several kids fighting one kid. The attackers are Black. And the media is making a lot of noise on this. But why is the supposed friend of the kid taping this and not helping his friend? Is this another Youtube fight that went too far? The kid was beaten, but seems to walk away from the fight without serious harm, and seemed fine when interviewed Monday. I’m not excusing the actions, just investigating the facts as the news should have done.

Why would the 6 ‘suddenly’ do this? Was it racial? Well, today the police of Norfolk have stated, on air, that this was not racial. It seems there is something that the White teenager did previously that motivated the attack. So much for the racial claims major news media jump on at first. And the presumed innocence that they implied in the coverage. That doesn’t make it right, it just points out a bias.

Now I ask this, why was the major news media so quick to cover this story and totally ignore the Jena 6 situation? Both had a white kid being beaten by several Black kids. Both were allegedly over racial issues. Both were in the South. What is the difference? Think about that, what is the difference?

Continued in part 2...

Letter to Sheppard Smith of Fox News Part 2 - 9.19.2007.2

Continued from Letter to Sheppard Smith of Fox News Part 1...

I noted that in your Studio B program of that same Friday, you spent approximately 40 minutes covering the aspects of the OJ case. Roughly half of that time was review of coverage that had been expressed consistently on Fox News since at least 10am that day. Other items of news, particularly a storm warning as I recall, received barely 30 seconds of coverage. Why did you focus so much time to this one story?

Over the past year and a half, you have consistently referred to OJ Simpson’s prior case when referring to any questionable murder involving family members or interlinked persons. I believe that you have made such references roughly 7 times a month over the last year and a half on average. In each case your usage of the OJ murder trial inferred, or outright declared as I recall, guilt on the part of OJ. But as you are aware from the coverage you did of the trial, 12 peers found Mr. Simpson innocent of the charges. What justifies your tacit implication of Mr. Simpson as a murderer?

Do you feel that your negative commentary about Mr. Simpson and the outcome of his case on national television has had a negative impact on African Americans in the nation? If not, how do you justify that belief?

On September 13th, you were the only individual in national televised news media, that I am aware of, to cover the then breaking news on the torture, rape, and abuse of Ms. Megan Williams of West Virginia. To my knowledge your roughly 3 minutes of time on television was the only televised coverage to date. Why has this story not been covered?

In your coverage, and that of Fox News and other major news media, of the Bobby Cutts case, you were able to learn of every job Mr. Cutts had ever had. You were able to report on every child and relationship he had, within the first 3 days of the breaking news as I recall. You also presumed, apparently from your words and tone, his guilt from the first day of coverage. That same presumption of guilt, in depth fact finding, and emotional responses were not provided to coverage of Mr. Christopher Vaughn who murdered his wife and 2 children at the same time. Why is that?

Do you believe that there is a bias in the media against African Americans?

Why was there no coverage, that I am aware of, on the conviction of Mr. Jonathan Riches, who murdered 2 Black men 42 years ago and has only just been brought to justice, although authorities knew at the time of the murders of his guilt?

I want to note that while I have asked hard questions here, I realize that some answers can only be your speculation and that you have no control over what is done at the corporate level. I also want to commend you on much of your reporting.

As I mentioned, only Studio B covered the news about Ms. Megan Williams, to my knowledge. I share your love of this country, and those in the Armed Forces that protect us. I agreed with your anger that you received more emails about an injured dog as opposed to homeless vets being dumped on the streets instead of receiving medical treatment. And I continue to watch Fox News and your coverage daily.

Again, my purpose is to provide you an opportunity to respond to my questions and to allow my readers and myself the chance to understand how the news is covered. Perhaps more importantly this is a chance for my readers and I to learn what determines coverage and degree of depth we see on televised national cable news.

Mr. Smith I look forward to your response, in part or in whole, and I will publish it verbatim as I stated previously. If you and/or the staff of Fox News would like to reach me directly on this matter or any post I have made, you may contact me at info@vassconsult.com or 718-344-6921.

Sincerely,

Michael Vass
President – M V Consulting, Inc.
718-344-6921
info@vassconsult.com

Letter to Sheppard Smith of Fox News - 9.19.2007.1

As my daily readers are aware, I have been commenting on aspects of the current OJ Simpson allegations for several days. Some of the more consistent items I have mentioned about this has been the presumption of guilt expressed by the media, the implied and stated expressions of joy by news commentators, and the lack of attention on items I have felt were more deserving of at least part of the time that has and continues to be dedicated to coverage of OJ. Several of these items are far more expansive than merely the OJ case, and are factors I believe have been consistently biased in the media for some time.

One individual I have directly quoted several times and discussed the emotional expressiveness about is Mr. Sheppard Smith of Fox News. His apparent glee has stuck out among most in the major news media and I have noted it. I will say that this is not the first time I have taken umbrage with the reporting of Mr. Smith, or others at Fox News. I must also note that there have been several news stories that only Mr. Smith has covered, and his emotional outrage, or joy, has been a mirror of my own feelings.

Given these facts, on reflection I felt it is only fair that I provide Mr. Sheppard Smith an opportunity to respond to some of my comments about his responses and choices, both recently and in the past. I am including a verbatim copy of my email letter to Mr. Smith, and will provide a verbatim response from him, or Fox News, when received.

My letter is as follows:

Mr. Sheppard Smith,

I am a daily viewer of Fox News and am familiar with your reporting on Studio B and in the evening report. I am also a blogger for several blogs including several that deal directly with entertainment, the news media, and current events. It is because of these blogs and my most recent comments on your reporting that I am writing this letter.

I want to make you aware that this letter will be reproduced verbatim on my Black Entertainment USA (blackentertainmentblog.com) site. My corporation, websites and blogs, and I have no affiliation with any political party or political organization. Any response from you and/or Fox News will also be published verbatim.

My purpose is to give you the opportunity to respond to the comments I have made in reference to the coverage of the OJ Simpson allegations and the lack of coverage on several other recent news events. I understand that you are not solely responsible for the news that you cover, but your apparent choices and actions have led me to quote you on several occasions and see you as a surrogate for most news media coverage of late.

I have noted that on Friday, September 15th – the first day of news about trouble for OJ in Las Vegas – you were what I would describe as gleeful, bubbly and pleased by this news. On Monday and Tuesday since, you have made several comments indicating your pleasure at the distress of OJ. I would like to understand why your reaction to that breaking news was such?

Continued in part 2...

The news today is not about OJ Simpson, but African Americans Part 2 - 9.14.2007.4

Continued from The news today is not about OJ Simpson, but African Americans Part 1...

On September 12th the major news media spent 5 minutes in 24 hours to discuss the repeated rape, torture and abuse of a Black woman by 4 White males and 2 white women in West Virginia, which occurred 5 days earlier. To date, there has been no further mention of this case. There is no information on the Brewster family, the mother and son that owned the shack the victim was held in for days. We know nothing of the motive, where these people worked, their relationship to the victim, or anything else. It was mentioned, once, that there may have been racial slurs used in the commission of these acts; and it is a FACT that the federal government will not pursue hate crime charges on this case. I cannot tell you why as there has been no reporting to tell me about it.

On August 14th at 3:30pm Sheppard Smith on Fox News stated

Pop some popcorn, its OJ time

As he continues to discuss the allegations against OJ for over 34 minutes now. What is going on?

The major media is so obsessed with punishing a Black man, that was lucky enough to afford the legal representation that members of the Kennedy family, and so many others have done before him. One Black man was not convicted of a crime, and it has resulted in a decade of pursuit waiting for him to get into trouble.

Yet, a woman is abused in the most horrible ways and there isn’t a whisper made. I’ve said it before, if 6 Black people raped, cut, beat, fed rat and dog feces, tortured, kidnapped and God knows what else to a White woman the Blacks involved would be lynched and the media would discuss every instant of their lives. We would know everything down to the spelling of their kindergarten teacher’s names.

Do I care if OJ is innocent? NO, not then and not now. He paid enough money to win his case in the past, and that’s what it takes to win trials. Especially if you are African American. Do I care if he did what he is accused now? It doesn’t matter, as the constant decrees by Sheppard Smith of

It’s Fantastic Friday; we’ll have more coverage on OJ in a moment

implies. He has spent 2 ½ minutes discussing anything but OJ. What is wrong with America?

I’ve lived 4 decades, and I understand quite well the discrimination I’ve had to fight to gain what I have today. I realize that I have more today because of what happened before I was born. I know that it could be far worse.

But 4 ½ hours of news coverage on a Black man, sheerly for the glee and thirst for revenge this nation has, out of 6 hours scares me. It feels like I am being told that I am worthless. That my life is worth nothing but an afterthought and that persecution against me will follow me for life. If I am even suspected of a crime, it means that I MUST be guilty and WILL be treated as such.

There is a crime being committed today, and it has nothing to do with OJ Simpson but it does affect every African American, Latino, Hispanic, Asian and every other person of color in this nation.

This is what I think, what do you think?

The news today is not about OJ Simpson, but African Americans - 9.14.2007.3

Oh the jubilation in America today. I have been watching the news (Fox News channel) since 10am. The worst or best depending on your point of view, news out all day has been OJ Simpson. You might think nothing else has happened in the country or world with all the coverage this has gotten.

Most jubilant of all the commentators (news anchors these days comment and interpret the news far too much to call them newscasters) is Sheppard Smith, on the air since 3pm. The man is fairly glowing with joy announcing that OJ Simpson is potentially in trouble. He spent the first 11 minutes 30 seconds of his program discussing nothing else. He even preempted news on a hurricane report. At 3:15, after a commercial break, he his back at it on the same subject.

So far today every 3rd news story has been about OJ Simpson. Whether it’s about the alleged robbery in Vegas, or the book that was initially considered completely vile and insulting and is now being published to make the Goldman family money.

Honestly, I could care less about OJ. He is no superstar since he left football. His life is anything but astounding. But he does not deserve the attention and media focus he receives. Jack the Ripper got less attention.

But here is the point I want to make. Some may say, ‘Michael, you go on and on about the imbalance of the media. You claim there is bias in news stories and racism in the nation. But it’s really not that bad.’ And I agree it’s not that bad, compared to the 1920’s when Rosewood was destroyed, or the 1960’s when fire hoses and police dogs (not to mention an uncounted number of murders) were unleashed on African Americans. That doesn’t mean it’s good.

On August 24th the major news media ignored the news that a murderer was finally going to be brought to justice. The fact that it took over 40 years to do so was never mentioned. The fact that local police knew who killed to Black teens and did nothing was not mentioned. It was just glossed over.

Continued in part 2...

6 abuse and torture Black woman in West Virginia - 9.12.2007.2

Where the hell is the outrage! I mean it. I am constantly upset with the major news media for what they do and do not refer to in reference to African-Americans. I have mentioned how the major news media glosses over events such as the Sean Bell shooting, or the Michael Richards explosion of bile. On the other side is how the media seeks out any and every bit of information to condemn an African American long before the question of guilt or innocence can be determined, such as in reference to the Bobby Cutts case. And of course, there is always the immediate assumption of innocence that tends to go along to any White American accused of crime, especially when it involves African Americans or in comparison to coverage given to African-Americans with a similar accusation. Just look back at the coverage from day one on the Duke Rape case. It's infuriating.

But right now I'm just pissed off! It was just announced that something happened on Saturday and is just hitting the airwaves. This crime is heinous, deplorable, and maddening to say the least. It seems that Saturday in West Virginia six people have been arrested for sexually abusing, beating, and terrorizing a Black woman for no reason (as if there could be some justification) other than the color of her skin. Read that sentence again, I don't want to have to say it again.

This horrible and vile act has taken five days to be reported by the media. So far I've seen roughly 5 minutes of coverage in total, over the last hour. Let me be clear, I watch the news for roughly 10 hours every day. Its part of my search for news and items to speak about on this blog and the others I write for. When I say five minutes, that means since 9:30 a.m., and the first announcement on this news story occurred at roughly 3:30 p.m. today. This is not the lead story on Fox News, or CNN. The coverage is still being developed, five days after the arrest occurred.

So where has the major news media been. I understand that the earthquake in Indonesia is important, but I think that having a little bit less news on that and a bit more attention on this matter is justified. I really want to hear from the major news media, in particular, the cable news networks, why this was not discussed sooner or why there is no more information. In this same five-day period in the past these news networks were able to determine the entire work history and family for Bobby Cutts. In this same amount of time they were able to criticize the work and life of the woman who alleged rape at Duke. In the same amount of time, five days, I was told more about the life of Anna Nicole Smith than I could've cared about, if I actually cared. Major news media spent more than five days in discussing the crime and punishment of a seemingly drunken, disorderly, talent less, and possibly brainless rich brat - Paris Hilton.

At 4:00 p.m. CNN is leading off with the Democratic response to the report about Iraq. On Fox News we’re being told about tropical storm Abbas and then onto the lawsuit against Countrywide by its employees. CNN went on to discuss the departure of Tony Snow, and how the President will present the news that the surge in Iraq is reportedly working.

Displeased is not the word. Anger touches on it just a bit.

If this were, six Black men and women who had committed the same crimes against a White woman, I guarantee it would be the leading news story shortly after the arrest in West Virginia on Saturday. I don't think anyone in this nation would argue that fact. Where the hell are the facts about Frankie Brewster, her son and all the rest of the people involved in this case? Where is the history about where they work, whether they were arrested, whether they take drugs, and everything else about these people? Where are the cries from the announcers denouncing this act, and the moral outrage that it could occur! Where's the news coverage!

Why can't the news media present this story in the same manner and with the same attention to detail that they provide to other cases, where African-Americans are assumed to be the aggressor, and/or criminal.

I would love to hear the argument from the media or any other organization or individual that can justify why this case does not have more national attention than it has received to date. But I honestly do not expect to hear a response from the media or anyone else with that justification, because it does not exist. It was an injustice that was done to this woman. It's an injustice that the federal government will not pursue this as a hate crime when any sane person hearing the facts of this case, as has been presented understands that it is a hate crime, by definition. It is an injustice that the news media has, can, and will persecute African-Americans, Latinos, Hispanics, Asians, and every other minority solely because they have been accused of a crime. And when an atrocity occurs, committed by a White American they are excused, apologize for, and glossed over.

Some may not think racism still exists in America; among other things the six people in West Virginia, arrested on Saturday, including Frankie Brewster and her son, prove it does exist. The coverage by the major news media, prove that such racism is not only pervasive but a blind eye is turned toward it. I don't want to speak more about this right now, it angers me. But I will be back to this.

This is what I think, what do you think?

How do you feel about what Jerry Lewis said? - 9.5.2007.1

What a unique world we live in today. There are just some things I would never expect to see happen and just leave me with mixed emotions when they do. And the best part is the special moments that the news media and the general media provide every day. Or perhaps I should say, the items they forget to provide us everyday.

Obviously, there was a recent news that Mr. Jonathan Riches finally was brought to justice after 43 years without law enforcement harassment or attention for his murder of two teenage Black men in Mississippi. Aren't we lucky that those in charge of the major media news felt we needed to be protected from the news that our justice system, moving at a pace so slow as to make snails look like jet engines, only works in the most abysmal manner sometimes.

Of course, that is not to say that the legal system is always accurate. There is of course the 41 years that it took for Mr. William Barnes to be convicted of shooting a police officer. Mind you that the police officer in question did not die those many years ago. I know this because Fox News took the opportunity to tell me about this case five times today. Now I'm quite happy about that, especially in retrospect, that Fox News took the opportunity to spend 30 seconds in discussing the incarceration of Jonathan Riches.

I know some may say that "well, at least it covered the story." While that fact is true I find an inherent imbalance in their actions. In 24 hours to spend only 30 seconds on an injustice done to people on the basis of an example for an entire race, that's a slap in the face. Compounding that slap would be taking a similar story and spending 15 minutes in another 24-hour period. Essentially, it's just saying, one group of people aren't worth remembering and another group are. It's just that simple.

But that actually is not what I want to speak about. What I had not expected to happen and what did happen involves Mr. Jerry Lewis. For those who are not familiar with Mr. Jerry Lewis, he's a comedian. And he's 81 years old. He's made at huge number of movies and special programming. That does not include the advances in television programming and equipment he's developed over the years. Focusing on his comedic career he has made movies such as Cinderfella, the Nutty Professor (I'm talking about the original film. Not the one's Mr. Eddie Murphy made), the Geisha Boy, the King of Comedy, and many others. His comedic genius is regarded so highly that in France his last film premiere was made a national holiday so people could see it.

On a more personal level, from what I can tell about it as I don't know the man, there is one thing that stands out above everything else. He is absolutely committed to the muscular dystrophy telethon. He was one of the first celebrities to lend their name to cause and to seek out donations from the public for that cause. In 46 years, Mr. Lewis has never missed a telethon, and during each telethon he spends virtually the entire time awake. It honestly is an amazing display of absolute dedication. The reason why Mr. Lewis does this is completely unknown. It has been said that Mr. Lewis will only reveal the reason why he does this every year after he is dead in a document read during a telethon so that it can raise even more money for this cause.

Given this ability and looking at the dedication to such a worthy cause I was very upset to learn of comments made by Mr. Lewis. 18 hours into this year's marathon he told a joke, actually he started to tell a joke. To call it off-color would be marginalization on a grand scale. Essentially he started to insult gay people. He has since apologized for his comment. He hasn't gone to a rehab, or some other ultraliberal pro-PC excuse. He took the blame, and all he has asked for is for this to not affect the telethon.

So I'm stuck. On one hand, I find it deplorable for anyone to use any group as the butt of the joke. That is especially true when the joke is based on race, ethnicity, or some other factor solely used to distinguish one group from another. On the other hand, is the fact that on a regular basis we all have made those jokes and found them quite funny. Comedians such as Mr. Carlos Mencia say jokes based on exactly that same thought every day.

So which one is right? Should Jerry Lewis be condemned for making a gay joke, or forgiven? Does this one statement justify the end of the muscular dystrophy telethon, and all the positives it has provided? Does the fact that a significant good is happening out way and negative? If the earth were filled with utilitarians, the answer would be easy, but the reality is far from that. I don't know, what is the right answer and honestly that troubles me.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Major news media cowardly ignores the past - 8.24.2007.1

What an interesting day so far. There is a lot of news on the floods in the mid-West, Michael Vick’s admission of holding dogfighting at his property (though he won’t admit he gambled on the outcome or gruesomely killed dogs that lost), the 82 minutes that Nicole Ritchie spent in jail (real punishment there), and the minor charges placed against Lindsey Lohan (6 felony drug charges were dropped – you can bet neither you or I would get off that easy in the same position). A lot of news indeed, yet a rather large miscarriage of justice has gone unspoken.

Have you heard anything about James Ford Seale? No idea who he is? No idea what I’m alluding to? Perhaps you heard about a murder of 2 Black teenagers in Mississippi in 1964. The case went ‘unsolved’ for over 40 years, and I say ‘unsolved’ because local authorities knew exactly who did it as I understand.

In May 1964, the 2 men were abducted their bodies found 2 months later in the Mississippi River. James Seale was arrested for the murders and the charges were dropped. The case went cold and nothing was done about it for decades. Why? Because Seale was part of the Ku Klux Klan (allegdedly), and so were the local police and law enforcement officers. They just let him get away with murder.

Today, 43 years later, Seale has been convicted and sentenced to 3 life prison terms. Big deal. Wait for it. I say big deal because Seale is 72 years old, has cancer, bone spurs and other health issues. Basically this killer is about to kick the bucket and take his place in Hell next to Hitler and other self-glorified murdering scum, in my opinion. The few years or months that Seale will spend in prison will hardly impact him harshly enough to begin to account for what he did.

Seale kidnapped 2 men, in the prime of their lives, and drowned them in the Mississippi River. Because they were Black and wanted to be treated with the respect the Constitution and life provides. Such a crime and its motivation turns my stomach.

Even worse is the fact Seale will be receiving treatment for his ailments, and imprisoned, on my tax dollars. Were it up to me, Seale would receive a quick and public hanging. Nothing more, Seale would be lucky to get bread and water until that time.

James Seale has lived for 43 years, working, laughing, playing with every freedom we all hold dear without a thought for the lives he took. Seale earned a living, dated (I assume though I would hope that any woman would reject a person I can only think of as refuse), basically lived and now, at the end of his life he is expected to reflect on what he did. Had he been convicted and still in jail 40 years later, I would say he could reflect, but not now.

To say this is a miscarriage of justice is to say that Lindsey Lohan has a problem. It’s obvious and leaves a taste of bile in the mouth.

But, I have yet to see a single news brief on Fox News or CNN. Since 10 am, nothing has been said. There hasn’t been a whisper. Somehow I cannot see the justification that says this is not news. I think the 5 minutes used to discuss whether or not Camilla (the wife of Prince Charles) will show up at some event for Princess Diana, could have been used to discuss this case. This is far more relevant to most Americans. It makes a statement about where we were and where we may go. It highlights how screwed up the legal (not justice) system was, and continues to be. It shows how far irrational and illogical hate can go. It reminds us that as a nation we must always be aware that fear and fanatical beliefs are not just the property of terrorists and lunatics halfway around the world.

After 43 years of shadows, lies and looks the other way a semblance of justice has been enacted. This is not something that we as a nation need to avert our eyes from, but look towards. Like slavery (and reparations) we must address the fact that horrible crimes against humanity and these 2 men, Charles Moore and Henry Hezekiah Dee, went unaddressed for decades with no reason better than law officers, the public, and the government in general did not want to think about it. How much further have we really come when justice finally is enacted and the major news media are too timid to shine a light on the dark corner of the recent past that is this nation’s history.

5 minutes. About as long as it takes to read this post. Yet even that is too much to honor the 2 lives lost one night 43 years ago. Perhaps the news isn’t that James Seale will die in prison, finally, but that the cowardice that allowed him to commit these crimes and remain free still pervades this nation.

This is what I think, what do you think?

The news you haven't seen on news television - 8.10.2007.1

I find it interesting how much time was spent today on the various news media discussing the local vote to repeal a 40 year old ban on tattoo shops in Key West, Florida. Picking on Fox News, this story was on every hour today from roughly 11 til the writing of this post. Each time the story included a piece by a reporter on the scene, making it a total length of approximately 3 minutes. That may not sound like a lot, but for a 24/7 news channel it is substantial for such a fluff piece. Let just think of what might have been able to fill that time slot today.

There is the news that the Black Family Channel has been forced to leave cable television and will only be found online. Though the channel reached 16 million households, many cable and satellite providers refused to carry the channel. It seems they thought BET, and sometimes TV One as well, was more than enough African American programming. So much for the 500 channels of diversity that HD television was proclaimed to provide.

Looking at the Presidential race, a question posed to Senator Clinton that I would believe could catch anyone’s attention was

"Are you black enough?" asked Malveaux, echoing a question often asked of rival Democratic candidate Barack Obama, who is biracial. "What makes you a better candidate over a black man representing issues confronting African-Americans?"

Wouldn’t you have loved to hear that answer?

Well maybe those 2 stories are too serious. Maybe something less important to the nation. How about being able to have virtual sex on Second Life? For those unfamiliar Second Life is a MMO similar to the popular and famous The Sims.

"Eros LLC decided people would pay to equip their online selves — which start out with the smooth anatomy of a Barbie or Ken doll — with realistic genitalia and even more to add some sexy moves."

There’s a bit of sauce to start the weekend with.

Let’s get even less relevant. How about the fact that 50 cent has stated he will quit his solo rap career if his next album does not outsell artist Kayne West. Both have upcoming releases on the same day. [Just this once I'm hoping Kanye West does really well.]

Actually several of these stories could have each been presented in the time allotted to talking about the tattoo ban. Seriously. There are too many things that deserve more time. I particularly believe the first 2 deserve the national attention, but I have to believe even the bit about 50 cent (I really hate that name) is more of interest to the nation.

21 minutes is barely a lunch break in most lives, but in television it’s a hit prime time show, breaking news, a peace treaty or a war starting. It’s the time a family may gather; it’s where some gather their grasp of the world.

Maybe it’s me, but I’d still love to see Senator Clinton’s face as she tried to answer the above question. (oh, her response didn’t answer the question but rather deflected it to a totally different direction.)

This is what I think, what do you think?

OJ is an example, but not the root, of a problem Part 2 - 8.1.2007.2

Continued from OJ is an example, but not the root, of a problem Part 1...

Why is it that the major news media spent two days discussing the fact that Sean Bell was shot by police and have yet to mention significantly that the police have been indicted of the crime? Why is it that the media spent four days discussing how Mr. Wesley Snipes “was hiding” from the IRS when he was accused of tax fraud and not one news institution could even hint during that entire time that he might be working overseas? Yet I, with out their resources, came to that conclusion the first day. Why is it that when it was found to be true that Mr. Snipes was working and volunteered to give himself up to the authorities, there was huge press implying that he was being arrested against his will the second he walked off the plane on US soil. Yet today they have not followed upon the story once while I, with my far more limited resources, know that he is fighting this case. Why is it that I’ve reported that out of roughly 2000 potential fraud cases committed by his tax accountants he is the only one accused of plotting, as the mastermind, to commit fraud? The media is biased and of course I’ve said this many times.

The fact that OJ has also mentioned this does not lessen nor take away from the fact that he is right. The bias is so extreme as to be the keys sitting on the desk while you search the house for them.

Let me ask something different, obviously the Goldman family, the Brown family, the major news media and most of America - that is not African American - hates OJ Simpson. In particular the families of the murder victims have actively pursued Mr. Simpson for over a decade, which I can understand. They believed his guilt even though a court has proved his innocence. Generally in America that is supposed to be the end of the story but OJ is black so it isn’t. The Brown and Goldman families stated clearly that before the book If I Did It came out their only desire was to insure that this book would never see the light of day. They stated that this was an insult to the memory of their loved ones. And that did stop the book from being published. Now they have acquired the rights to the book. What are they doing with those rights? They are actively seeking to publish the book under a new title. I have to ask why?

If the book was so horrendous and in their view an admission of guilt, that it did not deserve to be published, then why are they looking for money? I am surprised that their position on this book has turned now that they can profit from it. I’m not saying they don’t deserve to profit or that they are not still suffering a loss. Yet it seems obvious their motivation is profit. That seems a bit insincere to me.

In each interview that I have observed on Fox News with the Goldman’s the questions been asked, will you add your commentary (the Goldman’s commentary) to the book. Shouldn’t the question be, why are you trying to profit off of a book you claimed was an insult and should never see the light of day? How can news reporters say, like Sheppard Smith of Fox News who at 3:31pm August 1, 2007 stated his, belief of guilt on OJ’s part when the fact is OJ was proven innocent in a court of law by his peers (which included White Americans in the jury)? The bias is immense.

Continued in Part 3...

News media and murderers Part 2 - 6.25.2007.2

Continued from News media and murderers Part 1 ...

Either issue is reprehensible. Neither victim deserved their fate, and the guilty should be punished. But I wonder why the media chose the Davis case to smother the airwaves. I agree that when there is the chance of finding Jessie Davis, attention is due. But the media was focused equally during that time to question Mr. Cutts. I know about every child of Mr. Cutts, his relationships, why he was fired, allegations of abuse, and allegations of improper actions as an officer of law. Right now, at 1:46, pundits on Fox News are declaring how they always knew there was guilt but had to maintain the pretense of innocence until proven guilty.

Conversely I ask, what do you know about Mr. Christopher Vaughn?
This man has allegedly killed his wife and 3 children in cold blood. He is in police custody and has been charged with 8 counts. Do you know where he lived? What he does for a living? His past? If you can’t answer those questions you have to ask why.

Both acts, I say again, are evil. I would never stick up for anyone capable of this. But I am questioning why the media picked one case over the other, which is what has been done. Why can anyone watching the news tell me more about Mr. Cutts, but can barely recall the name of Mr. Vaughn?

The differences are this, Mr. Vaughn was the father of 3 children, none toddlers. He is White, married to one wife (to my knowledge), a computer forensics advisor, that moved to the Chicago area about a year ago. Mr. Cutts I described in part above, but he has been cover enough that I don’t feel the need to repeat.

So far today I have heard Mr. Cutts compared to Mr. Scott Peterson and Mr.OJ Simpson. Mrs. E.D. Hill on Fox News spent about 3 minutes or so re-evaluating photos of Mr. Cutts, inferring that his guilt should have been apparent immediately. I’ve seen one photo of Mr. Vaughn, that could have been a mugshot, with no commentary on it.

If either of these men is guilty of the charges placed against them, I have no problem seeing them sped quickly to the hell they would deserve. But my point is not about guilt. I am speaking about the media, and the preferences they pose to the public. The ramifications go much farther than these alleged killers.

Stepping away from the emotion of the cases, you have to wonder why. I do at least.

This is what I think, what do you think?

News media and murderers - 6.25.2007.1

It’s a sad day when a pregnant mother is found dead, murdered, leaving a child without their mom. I give my condolences to the family and friends of Ms. Jessie Davis. Such things should never happen, and whomever is guilty should be punished harshly in this life and the next.

I want to make this abundantly clear, this post is not about whether Mr. Bobby Cutts Jr did anything. I, like most observers, don’t know nearly enough to know if he is guilty. I do not presume to know anything. Given that this post will address some aspects of that case, no offense is intended.


There has been a huge media surge on the case of Ms. Jessie Davis. From the first moments of reports that she was missing, the news media have been all over this case. While reporting this case several other items of news have been virtually ignored. My question is why?

It’s not an insipid question. I understand that a, then, missing pregnant woman whose birthing was imminent missing from her home and her 2 year old son being apparently abandoned is shocking. I’m glad the news was able to get enough attention that hundreds of volunteers came out to help search for her. Yet, virtually from the first announcement there was a bias in the news (at least according to the programs and information I observed).

During the last 10 days all media has focused on this case, and Mr. Cutts directly. But on June 14th a mother and 3 children were found dead in a SUV, reported at the time as a murder-suicide. Much like the Jessie Davis case, Mr. Christopher Vaughn (the husband and father) was not considered a suspect. Though he had been wounded, and reported that his wife shot him then he ran for help and then the police found the bodies of his family.

Let’s compare a few things, in the Vaughn case the media attention was large but not intense. Questions were in the air, but there was an assumption that the father’s story was true. There was no report or question I am aware of to the statements made by Mr. Vaughn. It was considered a tragedy and covered for a day and a half, then dropped. There was minor interest from the news media when the police became suspicious on the nature of the murders, and links to an episode of a popular television show (Law&Order: SVU I believe) seemed to appear. Again this was short lived and dropped. The arrest of Mr. Vaughn popped up on the national radar, but just barely registering as the overwhelming news was on the Jessie Davis case.

In terms of media time there was about 1-5 ratio at best on the coverage of the Vaughn case versus the Davis case. So far today I have noticed about 5 minutes of news on the Vaughn murders, versus 1 ½ hours (at least) on Mr. Cutts. This was over a 2 hour 45 minute time period. Roughly every 3rd item on cable news is referring in some aspect the Davis case. In comparison there has been 1 item on the Vaughn case in that same time.

Continued in Part 2...

Why OJ Simpson won't talk about Paris Hilton Part 3 - 6.12.2007.3

Continued from Why OJ Simpson won't talk about Paris Hilton Part 2...

The media may be afraid of taking on an accurate representation of the Paris Hilton saga. The media may wish to minimize other newsworthy facts of the day. They are reducing the importance of news and leaving the public little to consider on matters of national importance, from the up coming Presidential election to our justice sytem. I mentioned how off-balance the media can be,

“… I want to see the media put this kind of pressure and influence behind a Black defendant the next time there is a questionable case. I want to hear the media declarations of innocence for a poor black kid. ...

And I’d love to see the outrage when, let just say as an example, 2 teenage white girls rob a bank in the south … and the charges are dropped from a felony charge to misdemeanors even though they were caught on tape…

… Fox News is going to reveal the name of the accusing rape victim?? Even without the charges, this is a wrong thing. … And her PHOTO!!! So this is fair? What a nice first. And her age and family background. Might as well give away her address. And her past history!!! This is so wrong.”

Don’t think this is only Fox News doing this. I’ve seen similar actions on national broadcast news, cable e-zine channels, and local news stations. It happens across the nation.

But I won’t accept this at face value. Entertainers and celebrities need to be treated no different than everyone else. Justice, especially, must work from the top down to work at all. News agencies need to report the facts and not slanted biases who’s purpose is to confuse the issues at hand. When the media allow political candidates to respond to questions of national importance in soundbites, or they bring entertainers and celebrities into matters of law we the public lose.


Am I a nuetral voice of the nation? No, I’m an opinionated African American Puerto Rican man, that owns and writes blogs. I don’t pretend to be more than that. In that I am honest and direct. In reading this blog you get to see where I stand, and you can comment in ascent or descent. The media does not allow this. It’s not their job.

So I say to the media, stop using Black entertainers and celebrities to promote an agenda that has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Stop using the OJ Simpson case as a reference to every trial and criminal case you disagree with. Stop injecting racial overtones to issues that do not have them. Most of all stop insulting my intelligence and my race. I am not amused, entertained, nor informed when you do.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Why OJ Simpson won't talk about Paris Hilton Part 2 - 6.12.2007.2

Continued from Why OJ Simpson won't talk about Paris Hilton - part 1...

Given that both men inspire mixed emotions for me, I still do not condone the media using them to mire the inequality and lopsided justice being given to Ms. Hilton.
To the credit of Mr. Simpson I must state that he too feels the media is failing in its purpose. In a recent interview Mr. Simposn states,

”In this day and age, when someone not serving me in Kentucky, with no argument, is a story and we don't know that someone is going up in space and we know more about Paris Hilton going to jail, something is wrong”>

Mr. Simpson is right. This is a farce, made worse by the media whether or not it is something the Hilton family desires or promotes. Seriously what does Mr. Simpson or Rev. Al Sharpton have to do with the legal system? What possible connection could they have to this case? There is none.

While Rev. Sharpton has taken this case to promote his cause in highlighting the injustice in the jailing policies of this nation and California in particular, he is not part of the issue at hand. Whether Rev. Sharpton succeeds or not, the fact remains that Ms. Hilton has been treated preferentially and there is no question that ANY other woman would not be treated in a similar manner. This is obvious and to involve him beyond this point is not reporting the news but molding it. When the media molds news we get ‘yellow journalism’ and false reporting.

That is part of the reason Mr. Simpson has held back from discussing this case. It has nothing to do with him. He just happens to be the favorite ‘whipping boy’ of the media. Since the start of the overly-publicized trial, in which he received representation equal to that of many notable celebrities, entertainers and rich individuals, the media has been beating up on him. To this day, cable news (I will single out Fox News as I watch it predominantly) often finds ways of mentioning the OJ Simpson trial on virtually every trial from Phil Spector to this case with Paris Hilton. It makes no sense.

Beyond the fact that many in this nation cannot accept the verdict in the OJ case, virtually a decade later, there is no cause for this. Mr. Simpson had a case where the benefit of high priced lawyers worked for African Americans, something that rarely occurs in our legal system. All the benefits that the price-tag of such lawyers provide were bestowed upon Mr. Simpson and he prevailed. How often has that happened before? Too many to count, just not for Black defendants.

But I digress. Why do the media want to focus this case on Mr. Simpson? To bring his name into a discussion of injustice? Odd since his trial is a clear example of justice on a fair and level playing field. I would again state that it is a manner in which to obfuscate what is happening with Ms. Hilton. It is an example of soundbite news that has proliferated every aspect of the news. Here is an example of what I mean,

“I have friends all over the country, none of them heard a word about the latest events in the Sean Bell Case. I’m in New York State, barely any comment in the last 24 hours. I do watch a lot of cable news, but I’m not glued to it so there may have been somewhat more coverage. But I can say that in 4 hours I saw 2 mentions of the case for 45 seconds each. In the same time I saw 5 minutes of Anna Nicole Smith, and 6 mentions and 12 minutes on the woman shot by unknown individuals in her bed. There was no less than a half hour of information about the Boy Scout that was in the woods. Seem fair?

Concluded in Part 3...

Starbury sneakers from Stephon Marbury - 5.1.2007.1

I must say I am impressed. There are few basketball players I am aware of that are really worth talking about these days. I admit I am not a fan of basketball; I liken it to tennis with 12 players a side. That does not mean I don’t think they have more skill than average at the professional level. Given my lack of knowledge, I am aware of certain players. One that has recently caught my attention, Mr. Stephon Marbury, as I mentioned impressed me.

What I am impressed about has nothing to do with his ability to bounce a ball (or the more controversial aspects of his sports career), but what he is doing about his responsibility to present a positive image to children. I cannot speak about his everyday actions, but his new line of sneakers demands conversation.

I saw Mr. Marbury being interviewed by Mr. Neil Cavuto yesterday on Fox News. The reason was the conversation on his new line of sneakers, Starbury. They cost $15. I did not forget the 0 in the number. Imagine that, a line of sneakers promoted by a star athlete,
that costs what they are worth. I thought the day would never come.

Finally someone is waking up and realizing that children, often from inner cities where money can be tight, cannot and should not need to afford ridiculously overpriced goods. Every sneaker on the market costs maybe $5 to make at the most, I’d guess, and parents have long been gouged to provide their kids the latest brand at retail costs in the $100+ range. When you consider that most products that can make a 20% profit are considered goldmines by corporations across the world you start to see the rip-off.

Mr. Marbury is giving back to the Black Community, and moreso to kids in NYC high schools that play varsity basketball. That is an act of kindness and responsibility. It’s a reminder that “bling” [truly a term of absolute ignorance] is just a way to stay poor and make someone else rich for no reason. It’s a lesson in fiscal responsibility, which I hope could lead to personal responsibility. It’s an entertainer doing something for the fans and not for their bank account. And it’s about time.

I don’t fault anyone for making or endorsing a product and getting paid for it. Even better if they actually support and/or believe in the product. But ripping-off kids is wrong no matter what the reason. And it’s insulting when a multi-millionaire exploits fans, especially those in the least economically capable communities, to make another buck. Even the worst stockbrokers I worked with or knew of in the market would NEVER take money from kids and orphans. To make it blunt, profits in excess of 200% for a piece of sporting equipment that can’t survive the wear and tear of daily use beyond 6 months or so, and targeted to children and young adults, is exploitive.

I also laud Mr. Marbury for being one of the NBA leading donations for Hurricane Katrina victims and the several barbers he has at Coney Island to provide free haircuts to the youth. Are all these actions the biggest things that can be done to help the community? No. Do they make a statement? I feel they do. What might that statement be?

I feel that unlike most athletes Mr. Marbury is stating that money is not the be all of life. That his personal prosperity is not more important than those that provide him the prosperity. He seems to realize that the fans are the reason for his success, ultimately. And he presents an image that is severely lacking among entertainers and celebrities today, especially if those entertainers are African American. That image is class, pride, perhaps humility. That is what I have been able to gather.

I don’t know a lot about Mr. Marbury, and even less about his profession of choice. Yet what I have been able to divine seems worthwhile, even though there are missteps which is part of being human. That is worth talking about, more to the point it’s worth having our children emulate to an extent.

This is what I think, what do you think?

The secret anti-gansta rap movement Part 3 - 4.30.2007.5

Continued from The secret anti-gansta rap movement Part 2 - 4.30.2007.4 Part 2...

On March 7th Mr. John Gibson of Fox News discussed the issue of rap and it’s images and words with Mr. Chuck Creekmur. I point out Fox News directly as I watch this cable news network often and they have had multiple members of the staff do pieces on the lack of attention on the words and images used in rap since Mr. Imus was fired. “Entertainers are responsible for their actions, both on stage and in the world. They are made to be role models, and how they present themselves is their own fault. But to blame the thoughtless actions of random people to these entertainers, on the sole basis that they are African American and there are drugs involved in this situation is wrong and insulting – to me. As Mr. Creekmur mentioned, where is the outcry about the virtual elimination of any form of rap or hip-hop that conveys a positive message? Where are the investigations why record studio executives consistently stereotype the Black community, or why there is active censorship of the formats availablke to the public?”

These are just a few recent items on the point. There has long been controversy and discussion of gansta rap. The commentary started long before this one-time sub-genre became the prevelant form in the industry. Many entertainers, celebrities, educators and commentators have spoken about this for years. The news media just turned a blind eye to it. Obviously their lack of attention led to the lack of knowledge among many Americans. Even the voice of Mr. Bill Cosby had no affect on news organizations in drawing attention to this subject.

“Recently Mr. Cosby has gone to Los Angeles and took to task the educators and parents of young African American students. As well he should, because it is the responsibility of both these groups to do more than just provide the minimum to children. It is not enough to expect rote memorization to provide the knowledge needed to do well in life. It is not enough to promote a dream of athletic prowess, without any thought of a back-up plan. It is far too little to believe that stardom in a mostly talentless industry will be the cure to all ills. Worse yet, acceptance of underperforming and allowance of a lifestyle that involves drug-use and misogyny and lack of self-responsibility are a plague in my view.”

So when the news media ask why nothing has been done I have to ask, “why didn’t you open your eyes?”

This is what I think, what do you think?

Don Imus vs Rap music - 4.11.2007.1

As I expected the debate over the comments by Mr. Don Imus continues to expand. Inevitably the question of rappers use of similar terms as those used by Mr. Imus has been broached. It’s a subject I have long targeted, but now comments are being made by Fatman Scoop and Snoop Dogg, in addition to Rev. Sharpton and Jackson. The comparison is not only fair, it is necessary.

As we watch Mr. Imus fight for his career, as sponsors abandon his show which may be the key to his dismissal, attention is moving to rap music. While the hypocrisy of the corporations that fund and promote the current version of rap have remained untouched questions are being asked of the artists and entertainers in this field. And in the case of Mr. Calvin Broadus (Snoop) he has graciously offered his ill-worded and obscenity-laced position. I will discuss the failures of his argument in a moment.

Rap is about to face the biggest challenge to its existence ever. Let me correct that, gansta rap is challenged. There is a blatant difference. While there has been no other form of rap music promoted since roughly 1992 other than gansta rap, it is not what the music genre is comprised of. Public Ememy, Grandmaster Flash, KRS-1 and may others are not the same as 50 cent, Snoop Dogg, or the others in the current crop of ‘street prophets.’ Given this distinction, this form of rap is being asked to justify its existence and I personally don’t think it can be done.

The current trend in rap is similar to the trend in movies; copy what others did well and just pump out volumes of it and see what sticks. Originality is widely missing in this sub-genre. To my knowledge [which I will state is somewhat limited as I do not actively listen to, and never buy, the current gansta rap music offerings] the sum total of virtually every entertainer today is to state that they are some form of criminal (pimp, drug dealer, thief are the most common) that is an addict (smoking marijuana, possibly also using other drugs in combination with, or instead of) and uses women in a manner similar to tissue paper. They seem to state that they are the best at these 3 actions, as opposed to their counterparts who are less than men since they don’t match up. I think that sums up 85% of all the rap songs made in the last decade or so. In my opinion that is so pitiful that I do not have the words for it.

Given the limited mental expenditure used to create these less than expansive ‘social’ comments, the question is what is the difference between anyone using the same corrupted terminology as these predominately Black ‘artists?’ During the Big Story on Fox News at 5:35 today, Fatman Scoop tried to justify that there is a difference. His argument was perhaps one of the weakest ones I have heard. Mr. Chuck Creemur tried to help shore up Fatman Scoop’s argument but it still fell flat. In essence the argument made by Scoop was that the meaning of the words used by rappers and the youth of the nation today [I believe he means specifically African American youth but that is a guess] is separate of the meaning that has endured for centuries of use and is still maintained today. This logic is dizzying in its fallacy. In effect Fatman Scoop is saying that if kids start calling cellphones pineapples, then the meaning of the word pineapple is now changed. Does that make sense? He further clarified that the “old people” just need to get used to this as we are the ones most offended by these words.

Continued in Part 2...

Fox News turns a blind eye - 3.21.2007.1

I am pissed at Fox News. I watch this channel daily, while I am at work. I find their views close to my own on various issues, especially politics. I have often referred to them when I am commenting on a current event or breaking news. Generally it’s a decent 24 hour cable news network. Then there are the exceptions.

Let me first commend the channel on their attention to missing children. I feel the channel takes a lot of time to announce and follow Amber Alerts, broadcasts of missing children. I feel the news organization has a real desire to protect and make the public aware of issues with children. That is a positive that shouldn’t be taken away from the cable news channel.

Beyond this compliment I have noticed an issue with them. I’ve mentioned it before and I believe I will need to again in the future. Fox News seems to have difficulty providing equal coverage to African American and minority children. There are many examples of this, but today it just hit the top.

I’m referring to news about the Boy Scout that was lost, and 2 girls that were abducted in Texas, I may have gotten the location wrong, on Saturday. The Boy Scout has been a featured item for the last 3 days. It’s known now that the boy was attempting to hitchhike home and got lost in the woods. There was roughly 10 minutes of coverage per hour for at least 2 days, with about 2-3 minutes of coverage per hour today after the boy has been found and has been with his family for 24 hours. That is a good thing to know. I’m glad the boy was found alive and relatively well. I’m sure his family is rejoicing.

But on Saturday there were to teen girls that were abducted. We know that this happened because there was a call from a cell at 4 (I am unsure if that is am or pm) were they were screaming which was the last time they were heard from. This information never hit the air, that I am aware of. The first I heard about this was today, for 45 seconds. Thankfully this was because the 2 girls were found 200 miles from where they lived, injured but alive. The police stated that they felt this was a serious abduction and not a prank.

So what makes the boy lost in the woods so much more newsworthy? Why was the fact that an apparent kidnapping of teens in an urban environment, with a cryptic message less important than all other news? Why is the news of their being found alive and a police investigation into their situation only worth 1 scant announcement lasting barely a minute? Why is the news of the Boy Scout already with his family, lost due to his own bad decisions, worthy of at least 5 announcements of roughly 2 minutes a piece in the last 4 hours?

I don’t expect Fox News, or any cable news network, to follow every single abduction of children and Amber Alert in the nation. Perhaps there should be a cable channel just for that; but that is a separate issue. Since the New Year started I recall 2 missing children features that had children of color. I recall about 7 or more for non-minority children. I have seen coverage of white teens committing crimes that are brushed aside, and others getting an hour or more coverage for things like demonstrations at schools. Yet African American children seem to only be referred to when a violent or drug laden action has happened.

There was plenty of time to cover the Long Island girls that had the Youtube broadcast fight, maybe 2 hours of coverage. The white girls that had a similar taped fight got maybe 15 minutes of coverage. The toddlers given marijuana by teens got roughly 3 hours of attention, yet I’ve seen nothing that was mentioned about this being something that happens across the nation to families of all colors. I know it’s not just a minority thing as I’ve heard locally of such acts, by white parents – who were then disciplined by the police.

There is plenty of time to talk about the various issues of Anna Nicole Smith, who contributed nothing to the sum total of the planet (I’m not being cruel, it’s just honest), or women’s basketball, or Britney Spears coming out of rehab. There is no lack of air-time to discuss why the Boy Scout wanted to hitchhike home, or that the family does not want to release any information about which hospital he may now be in, if any. Yet there is no space to get into any depth on 2 Black American girls that were taken against their will, injured, found 200 miles from home, and are now thankfully being reunited with their families.

So the thought is why has Fox News taken what seems to be this active prioritization on news events? What is fair and balanced on this current reporting? Which event seems more news worthy to you, finding out what the Boy Scout looks like now that he is home after trying to hitchhike home or finding out who essentially kidnapped and possibly assaulted two girls for several days and is still loose to attack your daughter, sister or mother? Does the race of these 2 girls matter to you if your family member is the next victim, loose because color of skin seemed to matter to an executive at Fox News.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Do you see a media bias? - 3.20.2007.1

Did anyone hear the news about the Sean Bell case? I doubt if most did. 51 shots fired at 3 men in a car leading to a death, all those men unarmed and fired upon by 5 police officers, and I only noticed 7 minutes of coverage all day yesterday between CNN and Fox News. 3 of the officers were indicted; charges included reckless endangerment of the public as shots hit buildings and other structures where other innocent people were. Anyone surprised?

I have friends all over the country, none of them heard a word about the latest events in the Sean Bell Case. I’m in New York State, barely any comment in the last 24 hours. I do watch a lot of cable news, but I’m not glued to it so there may have been somewhat more coverage. But I can say that in 4 hours I saw 2 mentions of the case for 45 seconds each. In the same time I saw 5 minutes of Anna Nicole Smith, and 6 mentions and 12 minutes on the woman shot by unknown individuals in her bed. There was no less than a half hour of information about the Boy Scout that was in the woods. Seem fair?

I recall that back when the Duke rape case started, there was hours of information. Most of that information was instantly in defense of the lacrosse team, there were questions on the defendant immediately. The fact that some of those questions came to be found as true is immaterial to the way the media reacted. Anna Nicole Smith and news relating to her death and paternity of her child has had more coverage than the death of President Ford, the death (and 2 month non-burial) of James Brown, The Sean Bell Shooting, and the Michael Richards Laugh Factory incident; even if you doubled all of them and combined the times you would still have more coverage on Anna Nicole Smith. Honestly the case is worth almost no time.

And now I see that Mr. Bill O’Reilly is going to do a segment on despicable villains and their body language. One of the featured individuals appears to be Mr. O.J. Simpson along with Kim il Jong and Saddam Hussein. The O.J. trial remains the most commented and reported item in the last decade. At every turn the media takes a moment to reflect on how similar, or impacting, or some other vague connection a current event has to that case. Mr. Simpson has not helped himself, but the nation and the media cannot get over the fact that the Justice system found him innocent of the charges placed against him just as dozens (perhaps hundreds) of other rich, famous, non-minorities have done for decades before and after him.

So in each case there seems to be a disparity. Lead by the media there is an emphasis. Black American men shot to death, in a style of overkill usually only found in action movies, minor news. Black man with contribution to the arts for decades, unburied for 2+ months, not important. African American wins a trial by using high priced lawyers and reasonable doubt, bad charges, and evidence planted by the police is unforgettable. Cute blonde gets daily coverage. An argument between celebrities, daily coverage. Offensive, demeaning comments by a celebrity against a religious or ethnic group, minor coverage. Defensive coverage of accused rapists, prior to a trial or Grand Jury, prior to any actual facts being found – daily coverage. As facts are found, huge recaps of the case, furthering the defense especially if anything leads to defending the accused. Coverage of a bank robbery by ‘cute teens’ huge coverage, the fact that the charges were lessened from federal offenses? 2 minutes.

Do you see a trend? I do. If I or my friends were to commit any of the above acts I’d be in jail and barely get noticed. I’d get no defense by the media. I’d never be referred to as ‘cute’ or innocent. My attackers would have the presumption of innocence or cause. Were I to win, I’d be hounded for life.

Is it racist? Well you tell me. When was the last time you saw a non-minority shot more than 10 times? Did you know that James Brown wasn’t buried for 2 months, and when did you learn about it? A week later, a month, just now? If I were to rant racial or ethnic slurs in a public forum or on tape, would it be forgotten in a week? If there was video of the event would it be discarded in a few hours of the event, or even make it to the news? Would there be newscasters and news consultants defending me on accusations of rape, robbery, assault, defamation or other events? If you think I would get a treatment different than some of the above cases, what makes the difference? Is that racist?

I leave you with this thought. Right now there is as much news on a hockey player that high-sticked another player as all the news on the Sean Bell shooting combined.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Chuck Creekmur and Rap on Fox News - 3.7.2007.2

But in the real world, I want to commend Mr. Chuck Creekmur. On The Big Story at 5:15pm, Fox News, Mr. Creekmur was interviewed on the issue of the influence of hip-hop on teens, specifically the kids that gave blunts to the toddlers. Mr. Creekmur correctly mentioned that there has been nothing that connects rap or hip hop with the actions of those teens. He asserted that the real issue was what the parents of those kids failed to do, teach those kids that such actions at the least are reprehensible. He reminded the audience that the images portrayed by hip hop today is one that has been approved by corporate boardroom executives, funded and advertised to have the image that is so common today.

While the interview was trying to be driven towards blaming rap and hip-hop, which do have problems – something that Mr. Creekmur did not deny – the connection does not exist and the conclusion is unfair. [My comments on the obviously stupid teens can be seen at Where are the complaints, drugs and smoking - 3.6.2007.1] The issue is bigger than such a simple and one-sided accusation. The faults of rap and hip hop lie as much with the executives as the fan base, which is driven primarily by White patrons.

Entertainers are responsible for their actions, both on stage and in the world. They are made to be role models, and how they present themselves is their own fault. But to blame the thoughtless actions of random people to these entertainers, on the sole basis that they are African American and there are drugs involved in this situation is wrong and insulting – to me. As Mr. Creekmur mentioned, where is the outcry about the virtual elimination of any form of rap or hip-hop that conveys a positive message? Where are the investigations why record studio executives consistently stereotype the Black community, or why there is active censorship of the formats availablke to the public?

I can’t agree that this is a ‘chicken before the egg’ argument. As I’ve mentioned many times before, rap and hip hop was not always the current simplistic, redundant, refuse we see today. In virtually 2 years any format that was not ‘gansta’ was removed from public access. Why has no comment come about that? Critisim of what is the music genre today must have that question in it.

But I’m glad that Mr. Creekmur, owner of www.allhiphop.com, was above the bait laid before him and made the credible arguments he did. That’s worthy of respect and comment in my eyes.

This is what I think, what do you think?

The 3 articles in AsianWeek - 2.28.2007.1

OK, I had the unmitigated displeasure to hear about kenneth eng on Fox News this evening. It took some time but I have found his articles, the latest of which was removed from the AsianWeek site. If you have not heard about this be prepared to be angered. On the 23rd of this month eng [not a typo, I have no respect for this individual and will not address him as Mr. or capitalize his name again] wrote an article titled Why I Hate Blacks which was published.

To call eng insane is to belittle his hate and absurdity. I will not dismiss him as those that could agree with him would find that a rallying call to defend him. I will rather address the issue at hand. Racism. It’s blatant and in this case seemingly universal. When I hear, or read, such ravings I am sorry that such small minds cannot comprehend the obvious attributes and abilities of people in front of them. It is even worse when such an individual has had the opportunity to educate themselves and failed to take the fruit of the tree.

What may be worse than the comments of eng, is the fact that editors, including editor-at-large Mr. Ted Fang, allowed these comments to reach print. This is not the first racial assault that eng has made in AsianWeek. On November 24th Proof That Whites Inherently Hate Us was run, and then the apparently self-loathing Why I Hate Asians was run on Jan 12, 2007. I have difficulty accepting that no editor was able to see this material before it was published, or that after seeing it published a retraction could not be made. It seemed inevitable that Blacks would follow and I have no doubt that Latino/Hispanics would be next.

Why would any editor allow such hate to be printed in a relatively mainstream publication (as I understand AsianWeek to be, though I am not a reader)? Why was there not a retraction after the first article? Perhaps the first could have been seen as humor, of a very ill-conceived nature, but I doubt it. Even now both of the prior articles are still online as the links show at this time. What explanation is there for this?

If it is the opinion of Mr. Fang that comments I feel are small-minded are the stuff of comedy then he should stand by it and say that. IF Mr. Fang is actually as remorseful as he claims, then all the publications of offense should be removed and appropriate retractions made. To do less is to imply that the articles have substance and that Mr. Fang and AsianWeek support the views written. I single out Mr. Fang because as editor-at-large he is directly responsible for everything that is in the publication.

I have heard from time to time, notably in Ice Cube’s exceptional program Black.White. via Nick and Bruno, that racism is dead. That it was a thing of the past. That society has grown beyond such things. Sadly it is moments like this, that despicable and reprehensible comments are not only made but allowed to flourish, that directly state racism, discrimination, and other ills born of, I believe, small-mindedness, exist today. Perhaps they won’t tomorrow but that takes active involvement.

I call on Mr. Ted Fang to remove the other 2 articles by eng, to make a retraction in AsianWeek as well as a national media outlet (as this has gotten national attention) for all 3 articles, to fire the editors that approved the publication of each of the articles, and lastly that Mr. Fang donate the equivalent of his pay for each of the months that an article appeared in AsianWeek to an appropriate charity.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Booty augmentation, what's next - 1.20.2007.1

There was some news yesterday that caught my attention. It was reported on Mr. Neil Cavuto’s show on Fox News at 4:50pm that there is a new trend in plastic surgery. The trend, which is like wildfire now, is for augmentation of the buttocks. Bigger and firmer butts are the rage, and plastic or cosmetic surgery is the answer that many are using to fill out those designer jeans.

Now this is kind of sad. Spending $25,000 dollars to make your bottom emulate Beyonce or Mrs. Jennifer Lopez is just a waste of money. Sure there are millions of women that could use the improvement, but it just seems like a waste of money. It also makes me feel a little ill thinking of what that could feel like. There’s no silicon in this process, they use body fat from the stomach it seems. According to the experts discussion of the process and the number of procedures a week he is doing (3) I am led to believe that this is being done for ‘larger’ people. I say people because men are getting this done as well, though in far fewer numbers, I say larger because of the liposuction that is involved. Of course the age range on this is like breast augmentation going from young women to those in their 60’s.

Listening to this bit of news I could not help but think that this is yet another example of White America trying to be Black, but not admitting it. Seriously, it’s just one more example. Madonna never inspired anyone to get a butt like hers. Cher may have helped promote cosmetic surgery (debatable) but no one is out trying to emulate her. Yet ‘J-Lo’ and Beyonce definitely have as has the desire to be called ‘bootylicious.’ How many billions are spent each year to get a tan, whether it’s real or from a bottle? How far do people travel to get to a beach or other tropical locations just to get a touch of deeper color to the skin.

Think of the language used sometimes. How many women speak of wanting a “tall dark handsome” man? Or the compliment for having a “healthy glow” because they have a tan. These are just a few.

Then I must ponder how there are so many kids today that want to, safely, live the “thug” “ghettofabulous” life proffered by rappers. I think of the fact that rap, hip hop and hip hop clothing could never make as much money as they do without the cross-cultural buying makes a statement. Listening to the slang and quasi-uneducated eubonics of non-African Americans highlights the undercurrent of admiration.

Still with all these various statements, actions and emulation there is the fear of Black Americans. Perhaps fear is too strong, but I think its accurate. I know it’s a generalized statement. Many do not isolate or discriminate. Yet the American culture does find that having too much color is bad. You can have Beyonce’s butt, wear Apple Bottom Jeans, listen to Jay – Z and Snoop Dogg on your Ipod and speak like you have a third grade education if you do it when you’re not on duty at work as a doctor (for example) if you are White and there is no consequence. But I can be in a suit, speak perfect English, prefer to listen to Rock and Roll, don’t own an Ipod, and own my own businesses and people think I’m a drug dealer, or walk up to me and speak to me about how wearing a suit must “help me pick up hoes.”
It’s just an observation. Some of you may have seen the same things, wondered the same thoughts. What does it mean? I don’t know. But I do find it ironic that there is this dichotomy in the society. I wonder what cosmetic surgery will be next?

This is what I think, what do you think?

Michael Richards - 11.21.2006.2

I wanted to wait a while before speaking about the Mr. Michael Richards incident at the Laugh Factory last Friday. There were a few things I wanted to hear about and understand before forming a comment. Obviously when I heard via the media that Mr. Richards had made a tirade, using the n-word and other equally derogatory words, I was incensed. But I wanted to hear more, to get a full understanding, because we all know the media is hardly above sensationalizing a story, and slow to admit a mistake or retract a commentary. [See my comments about a Fox News comment at Letter to Fox News on Duke rape case news - 10.30.2006.1]

So as I worked today, I had the news on (like usual) and heard as things developed. I did not see the apology on the David Letterman Show last night. I have not heard Mr. Jerry Seinfeld’s comments. But I have heard the comments of Mr. Richards, and portions of his apology.

The news of this came out Monday, the show it happened on was Friday, and Mr. Richards performed another show on Saturday. I have not heard of him apologizing on stage Saturday for the previous meltdown. Mr. Richards was being heckled harshly while doing a stand-up routine. He is not a professional stand-up comedian, nor is he seasoned at it. In trying to go after the hecklers Mr. Richards lost it and hurled racial epitaphs including the N-word and a reference to being a klansman lynching a Black American. As he continued this barrage, the crowd which included many Latinos/Hispanics and African Americans became insulted and walked out. The owner of the Laugh Factory gave everyone a refund of their money, which was the first time he has done so in 20 years (according to his comments on Fox News with Mr. Neil Cavuto A 5:00 pm). According to the owner, speaking with Mr. Richards afterwards Mr. Richards wanted to go on-stage and apologize, he had tears and felt badly on what happened, and was told not to go out as right then it an apology would not be received well.

Those are the facts that I have been able to discern in various media so far.

I do not condone the actions of Mr. Michael Richards. I do not accept the excuse that Mr. Richards is inexperienced at stand-up comedy and had little practice dealing with hecklers. While Mr. Seinfeld’s belief of Mr. Richards not being a racist may be true, it is no excuse. I agree with Mr. Paul Rodriguez and many others in denouncing the manner in which Mr. Richards acted.

To be continued in part 2....