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 will