Exchange Bar & Grill - the stock market comes to the nightlife

There is nothing like the New York City nightlife. It's 24 hours (if you know where to go) of something always happening, with people from everywhere you can imagine. It's lively, and most of the time fun. But it is equally expensive, whether you live there or just vist.

Like every issue in NYC there is always an alternative. Often quite innovative. This next idea just struck me as one of the more unusual.

Imagine this. Let's say you like Budweisers, and Guiness, and say Becks. But you are a bit low on cash. Now imagine that you can go out, and bid on your beer. By that i mean that if everyone in the bar that night is buying say Coors Lite, your beer will be cheaper. Possibly by as much as $2. So instead of $6 it will only cost you $4. Sound like a deal?

How about bar food. You love hot wings, and chicken fingers. They too are based on market prices. So if everyone is out for cheese fries, you can be in luck and have your food at a cheaper price.

Mind you that the more popular items will be more expensive to the exact opposite of the popular items. The deal works on 2 levels, the popular stuff will cost a bit more because it's good. The cheaper stuff will cost a bit less because it to is good, but not in at the moment.

This concept is the core of a new bar called the Exchange Bar & Grill. The bar will be opening on April 1st. You can find it in Grammercy Park in Manhattan.

Will this be a great idea? Will it catch on, or even be successful? I can't say. I haven't been there yet. But considering NYC is the center of the U.S. stock markets, plus the penchant of New Yorkers for something new and innovative, I think it's worth a nite out to see how it all works.

If anyone is in the City and at the bar on the 1st, I would love to hear your thoughts and any photos/video you can provide.

The final Sean Bell act of injustice

I'm in NYC on business and I was checking the latest local news for what's going on in my old home. That's when I noticed this small item of news that hit at about 11pm. The resolution of the Sean Bell case.

A quick summary of the case. Sean Bell was having his bachelor party with 2 friends at a strip club. They had a minor argument with a man in the club and decide to leave. The man follows them and approaches their car. The men in the car attempt to leave. The man that followed was a cop. He and 4 other officers, in the strip club on a different matter, fire 50 shots into the car - killing Bell and wounding the 2 other men in the car. Bell and his friends were unarmed.

Those are facts. The debate is whether this was justified, excessive, or a crime. The coverage of the case was centralized in New York City, and was spotty from day one. The news media overlooked initial claims by officers that there was a 4th man in the car that escaped the barrage of bullets without injury with a gun in hand. An individual that was never seen by any witnesses nor verified in any manner.

So what has happened in this case that has floated slowly through the criminal justice system for 4 years? The criminal charges were dropped by judges. The Feds have decided that they won't pursue charges either.

Neither accident, mistake, fear, negligence, nor bad judgment is sufficient to establish a federal criminal civil rights violation. - Justice Department statement"

Is anyone surprised?

There seems to be 2 ways the criminal justice system reacts to African Americans (and often any person of color). IF they are a huge entertainer, like say Snoop Dogg or lil Wayne, they get mutiple chances to evade jail as they break the law over and over. Like the recent decision to allow lil Wayne to delay his jail sentence so he can get his personal dentist to take the diamond out of his mouth. Like you or I would be allowed to delay going to jail for dental surgery that any dentist can do, including those in a prison.

The other side of the coin is far less cavalier. This it the side most people of color get to see. That's where African Americans are seen a violent criminals that need to be stopped at all costs. Where people of color deserve to be shot, as often as possible, because they might rise up like the undead and raise hell with them.

It's that kind of justice that causes the kidnapping, sexual abuse, and rape of Megan Williams by 6 Whites (men and women of vartious ages) to go virtually unspoken by the media. It causes the muder of Oscar Grant at the start of a year to be discarded, even as riots unfold because of the murder - a murder of an unarmed man. It allows men like Bell, Diallo, and many others to be shot so many times as to be the human equivalent of cheese - each the murder of unarmed men.

In each case, and others like the assault by 15 officers in Philidelphia against 3 men, the person of color was assumed to be violent, deadly, and apparently impervious to bullets. In each case the trials take multiple years, plenty of time for witnesses and the media to forget what happened. In each case the reports of officers being absolved of their wrongs is announced in the dead of night, a weekend, over a holiday, or a combination of the previous.

Over the years I have recorded case after case of the warped justice system in America. I have seen police officers walk away from acts of depraved brutality, while I have seen people of color sledgehammered by the very same system for minor violations of law. I have seen the justice system bend over and kiss it's ass to make sure that whatever celebrity gets one more chance to cause a problem with drugs, violence, and/or guns.

The justice system isn't flawed. It's broken. The latest example of it with Sean Bell is just another reminder to police across the nation that as long as the person has a skin tone other than White, they can do damn near whatever they please.

For those that think President Obama ushered in an era of post-racial America, I submit this case. I submit his action to even acknowledge the Oscar Grant case that happened just before his inauguration. But for those that hold out and hope for change there is this

"Ms. Paultre Bell said she hoped to get the attention of the White House. “There is a history of black men being killed by police officers, and something needs to be done,” she said. “We’re hoping to eventually meet with President Obama, and that he’ll do something, because this is a national problem.”

I agree with Ms. Bell that this is a national problem. But I'm also sadly willing to take odds that President Obama neither responds to them, or any of the cases that I have mentioned or exist in this nation, nor will he publicly address the problem. Because America is anything but post-racial.

Will this ever change? Not until the day that news of these kinds of abuses of power and corruption of the justice system are as prominent in the news as the attention given to Paris Hilton and Stephanie Pratt wearing the same dress gets. The same attention that Burger King's business moves for the breakfast market gets. The same attention that Sarah Palin talking about Family Guy episodes gets. Are you understanding the disparity yet?

I feel bad for the Bell family, but more than that I feel afraid. Because it seems I have a bull's eye on my head, just like every other person of color in America. And that is a feeling you never get used to.

Lil Wayne gets celebrity justice

Is this another example of celebrity justice in action? Lil Wayne, who is due to go to jail on gun charges, was excused from sentencing today in New york City. The reason, he need surgery - on his teeth.

To be very clear, Lil Wayne could not be sentenced because he was supposed to get an unknown surgery on his teeth done. It was supposed to be done before today, but his dentist is out of the country doing charitible work. So his trip to prison has to be delayed.

Ok, this is a major medical emergency right? I mean it's not like NYC doesn't have hundreds of other qualified dentists he could see. And the surgery is so important that he can wait for his dentist to get back in country. Plus it's not like the prison system doesn't have dentists that could perform the surgery, like they do for any other inmate.

Yes this is exactly the way you or I would be treated. A case that has been going on since 2007. Pushing back a jail sentence, that was created by breaking the law by Lil Wayne's own admission, because of an unnamed malady so severe it is not being treated.

But it is surely the reason why his lawyer referred to him as "a strong man", because only a strong man would endure such horrible pain to avoid going to jail. Of course it may also be why he is not referred to as a smart man. A smart man wouldn't have broken the law, again, and would have just got another dentist to take care of the problem.

I hate celebrity justice. They just need to throw him in jail like they would for everyone else. Maybe some time with the jail dentist would be a motivation for him to stop breaking the law. Nothing else seems to.

NYC, the frontline of the war on...salt

California used to be know for it's sunny weather, earthquakes and hyper-health food craze. But it seems that Mayor Bloomberg is looking to take that title.

Salt is now enemy number 1 in New York City. New initiatives call for massive reductions in the salt count of foods from hamburgers to popcorn, to cereal (yep, there's salt in that). But don't go hiding your saltshakers yet, the reduction will take place of 5 years. And it's voluntary.

But there is another thing to keep in mind about this new idea. Given that there is more than enough salt in prepared foods in America. Given also is the fact that too much salt increases the chances of stroke and high blood pressure (as if life in NYC won't give you that anyway). But there is also the fact that New Yorkers are giving up their freedom at the same time.

Trans fat, salt, cigarettes, soon to be joined by prohibative taxes on soda, snacks, and pretty much everything else. While all of this is supposed to be for the best interest of the public, it feels like the government is the parent and adults are the ignorant children that don't know better. The only thing that's left, it feels like, is the ability to breathe. Of course that's if you don't worry about the government regulations that cover CO2 gas - which we all exhale when we breathe (yet another tax perhaps?).

One might consider NYC the smaller cousin of Big Brother, molded and in the shape of Mayor Michael Bloomberg himself.

It's one thing to be helpful, but as the choices get fewer and fewer the thought of what goes next seems more prominent. Perhaps Mayor Bloomberg (and/or Gov. Patterson) will seek to tax prohibatively video games, because they can't be good for anyone's eyes. Maybe it will be television, President Obama already tried to remove Fox News from the airwaves. Baseball, football, and other sports get fans far too excited. And blue is a happy color, so everyone should wear it for their mental health.

Exaggeration? Right now, yes. But just 10 years ago an adult in New York was more free than today. And 30 years ago more than that.

Why think about this on an entertainment blog? Because in a climate of ever reducing freedoms, the choice of what you can or cannot entertain yourself with will be the last freedom to go. Otherwise you might notice what's happening.

You may disagree, but keep an eye open. Because if I'm not wrong...

V - the 2009 television series

Last night I had the chance to watch the original V series. I remember the television miniseries from back in the 80's when it was originally shown. It was a moving work of television at its best back then, and now.

But in watching the original, which was promoting the upcoming "revisioned" television series, I thought about what we know is different now in the coming premiere on ABC on Tuesday. Sadly, I doubt the impact, message, or interest will survive this "reimagined" program.

Right off the back there are a few things that are readily seen. The first is that the city this will be highlighting is New York City instead of Los Angeles. Another is that unlike the original, and unlike NYC, the diversity of the characters has gone out the window. Add to that the fact that several of the main characters have had their race and gender changed.



In 20 years, somehow NYC has become a place where people of color are incredibly unseen (or more accurately underseen). Which is amazing since NYC is possibly the most diverse population anywhere in the world. And it is that diversity which is a major theme of the program. That ALL human beings are involved and affected. That this can happen to anyone, everywhere. But in the new version, basically if you are a person of color, you just don't matter.

The original had several major characters that were women, or people of color. They were not authorities or people invested with the way of life. Just ordinary people that had to rise to the circumstances they found themselves in. The leader of the resistance is a woman who had no aspirations of power or leadership. But she became more than she knew she could be.

The new version will have women assuming several roles of the male characters from the original. The father that is divorced yet still tries to maintain a good relationship with his ex-wife and son is gone. The image of a strong man, that can work with and support a strong female leader is gone. The thought of ordinary people being more than they ever envisioned is gone.

I can only guess if the Holocaust survivor character will remain, but I doubt it. I can only guess that the hard working factory employee Black single father is also gone. I would bet that the references to social climbing succubi - as portrayed in the original - will be gone. In fact I expect every female character to be a version of Wonder Woman, and every male character to be little more than a boy Robin at best and more often a pack of impotent Renfield's. Just to suck up to the current political correctness of the day.

In the original the change from everyday freedom to a totalitarian society takes mere weeks. The change is fast but based in the very credible fears and weaknesses we all hold. And the Visitors obviously learned a lot about us, as they took the prime example of Hitler and the Nazis to implement their plans.

The new version will forgo that idea. Instead they will focus on a post-9/11 world. Aliens are among us, and have been for years. They have infiltrated our lives and we don't know it. And the world has been prepped for a siege none of us are ready for.

But that takes away from the story. It forgets that some of the most dangerous times in the world have been not when we are under attack (even unknowingly) but when we are feeling completely safe. When the Government and laws change ever so little, but sliding away from what we grew up with.

These are things that have been changed to suck in younger viewers. Because they never saw the original. Because Hollywood executives are sure that younger viewers will not understand the impact of the Nazis or how that could happen in America. Because they believe that feeding off of the hype of recent events is more entertaining than providing a lesson about how history repeats itself when we watch with dull minds.

The fact that this will be a weekly series means that people will not have to pay attention to what is going on. That if you missed something you can just wait for reruns to get it. That watching the show out of sequence will not destroy the meaning of what is going on. And it loses a lot in that.

The original series hit people because it left no stone unturned. It happened in a real world of people from all facets of life. It involved the real issues we all face. It delved into the need for security and comfort of routine. Even with a sci-fi background, it was something everyone could relate to.

The new series proposes to substitute a false image of the world. Where a great number of people don't exist. Where the frailties of society are replaced with the hype of politics. Where some will be able to hide - even if that is just a subliminal effect of what they have done. It is a watered down, self-serving, and quite possibly useless exercise in grabbing ratings.

I will watch the show. I will be more than happy to write a post detailing exactly how wrong I was on every point I have made. I will be delighted to headline a post with my failure to see the benefit of this "revisioned" show. But I wouldn't place a bet in Las Vegas that any of that will happen. Not because I am unwilling, hell I'm hoping, but because there won't be enough substance to cause it to happen.

In addition this new V series will be a ratings whore. It will be shaped by the number of viewers it will get. It will be modified by the popularity of the stars involved. Because every television show is. And when they aren't they get canceled for low viewership.

Television has always been an escape. A way to be amused by the antics that we all can feel safe are restricted to a small screen. When it is at its best and true to the purpose of its creation, television informs and educates. And that happens best in a small dose that has no regard for weekly ratings, star power, salaries, or fickle Hollywood executives. Roots is another great example of what can be done in a miniseries that cannot in a television series.

Will this version of V be interesting? I hope so. Will it provide the same political and societal message? Not at all. Will it rise to the highest goals of television? Most likely not. Will it last? Undoubtedly only a season or 2 at best.

I hope to be wrong. I hope to see a great program that is well written. But what I know I will see is a show that panders to popular political ideals, and seeks to garner ratings over delving into real issues.

The first 100 days of President Obama

** This post is political. It covers the first 100 days of President Obama. As such I believes it deserves to be discussed. Some thigs are too important to avoid. Thank you for bearing with me.**

So we have made it thru the first 100 days under President Obama. The nation is still called America. This is still a democracy. The public, and more importantly the major media, still love President Obama. But this is no longer the nation that I grew up in.

There have been many changes under the Obama Administration, some due to the President and other due to the Democrat-led Congress. All of the changes have been based in the goals of the far-left and selected campaign promises.

Let's start with the appointees. There are many critical Cabinet positions that have yet to be filled. Several have had a revolving door of nominees, leaving some of the most critical positions that effect the economy open. Worse yet, there has been an undeniable consistency that virtually every Democratic nominee has failed to pay taxes, in some cases for multiple years, until nominated. Which is troubling in a "Do as I say, not as I do" kind of way.

But beyond the appointees are other troubles.

President Obama has failed to live up to many of his campaign promises. The Guantanamo Bay Detention will be closed, eventually, though there is mass confusion on what to do with the detainees. Will some be imprisoned in American jails. If so at what higher cost than normal. If not in America then to where? So far only France has accepted exactly 1 detainee. So much for international support and their belief in President Obama.

President Obama has failed to increase transparency on 7 of 9 major laws since taking the Oval Office. This too was a campaign promise that was broken. The most notable case of this was the $787 billion stimulus bill. A stimulus package that does not spend all the money now, that limits the income level of those that can use it, that applies only to citizens that RECEIVE a paycheck, and is primarily a tool of social change.

There are numerous examples of millions being spent on projects like artwalks, skate parks, and non-existent homeless projects in cities without homeless problems. All of these are attributable to the stimulus package, and the fact that to this date almost none of the members of any level of the Government has read the full law. In fact almost no member of Congress or the White House read the entire bill before it was voted on and approved by Democrats. Nor did the public get a chance to read it before President Obama passed it into law. The reverberations of this are still being felt now.

Moving on, President Obama has enforced the ability to gain an abortion, even in later term pregnancies. Which is in line with his long-standing political beliefs, though not exactly the beliefs of the nation at large.

President Obama has approved the use of embryonic stem cells, another issue that flies in the face of overall public opinion.

President Obama allowed Congress to break the Constitution by retro-actively penalizing American citizens. This was in the form of specific and non-grandfathered taxes to the executives at AIG. These taxes were on bonuses that the executives received as part of their contract, that the Government did not renegotiate when they had the chance, and in fact guaranteed in the stimulus package that no one read. The Congressman that guaranteed the money? Senator Chris Dodd, a Democrat and in charge of the Banking Committee.

Also, while violating the Constitution - which President Obama taught at one point - the concepts of all contracts were broken. In violating the contracts that the Government itself assured, all contracts are theoretically void. Because if the Government can break one it can break them all.

Plus the Government asserted its ability to control private business. First in taxing the AIG executive, thus stating the Government can retro-actively dictate pay. Then in forcing the removal of the CEO of a major auto company, while demanding changes to the operations of that company along lines that only the Government desired.

All this before the Government requested the expansion of power to allow the Treasury Secretary, an un-elected position, the ability to take over any company that it deems is significant to the nation based on undefined criteria. Which if passes will allow the Government to theoretically take control of any and all companies it chooses to.

But President Obama has done more. He has ended the Iraq War, by removing troops (a campaign promise) in an extended timeframe with the exception of 50,000 troops (both violations of the same campaign promise).

President Obama has also proposed his new budget. This is separate of the $410 billion continuation bill that was passed, also funding 9,000 pork-barrel projects. It was passed the same day that President Obama made a public outcry to stop wasteful spending by the Government. And it violated a campaign promise to end pork-barrel spending.

But the $3.6 trillion dollar budget of President Obama does not include the continuation bill or the stimulus package. It does include some $600 billion for a nationalized healthcare plan, that does not exist today nor have any plans of how it might be implemented. And this budget, going by President Obama's own best case figures will reduce the budget by 50% in 4 years. This part has been highly publicized. What has not been publicized is the rest of the budget plan.

President Obama's budget goes on after year 4 for a total of 10 years. By the end of that time, according to the President himself, the deficit will have increased by 250%. Few in the major media discuss this outcome, nor question how any plan that creates a larger deficit than it starts with can be called positive or effective.

But like every Administration, there have been bumps in the road. Besides the appearance that no appointee in the Obama Cabinet pays their taxes, while demanding that citizens must do so in greater numbers, there have been other gaffes. Like the recent decision to fly a plane over New York City without notification of the Mayor or any public notification - creating a panic based on the 9/11 events. There has also been the bow that President Obama bestowed - which has been described as everything but what your eyes will see in the video. There is the publicly friendly, and privately harsh, discussion with Hugo Chavez. There was the embarrassing gifts to our strongest ally's leadership and monarchy.

Yes the Obama Administration has had a hit parade. And these are only the most public and notable points. There are many other quieter, even less publicized actions affecting law and governance, and the appearance of the nation.

Like the now unspoken manner in which North Korea essentially turned it's nose up to the U.S. and fired a rocket that in one move threatened our ally Japan, and our nation itself. This cemented the fact that America has less respect and instills less fear than ever before on the world stage. An idea confirmed as our Secretary of State, and President, issued apologies for the existence of America and our actions to continue to exist.

Yet on the domestic side of the table things are even more unstable. America now fights terrorists, and the ideal of terrorism, by giving it a new name. The idea must be that there cannot be a terrorist act if the Government cannot call anyone a terrorist. That is except of Americans themselves.

Yes, because the Government - in the guise of Napalitano - has sought to isolate those that disagree with the governance of the land. Those that hold ideologies separate of the Administration, that have vowed to defend this nation with their life, and/or those that believe a religion strongly have been placed at the top of the list of dangers to America. Quietly, and without public scrutiny. The Amish and bloggers like myself be warned.

This is but the briefest coverage of the first 100 days of the Obama Administration. Likely each point will be something ignored by the major media. Yet it is these things that define where America is truly going. And doing so with smiles. President Obama's approval rating is over 60%.

So though this has been used to describe President Bush, I think it more directly applies to the America that President Obama is shaping

"So this is how Democracy ends. With thunderous applause." - Princess Amidala in Star Wars Episode 3

But if the poll on my sites are correct, Democrats had best watch the clock carefully. Because their time in the sun may well be short. My poll results state that since the inauguration the total outlook by my readers that responded are

39% feel President Obama has kept his promises and is doing a great job
38% feel President Obama has BROKEN his promises and is doing a horrible job
16% feel they need more time to decide
13% feel President Obama is the same as any other President

My poll may be small, but I believe that my readers are some of the most informed, intelligent in the blogosphere (well overwhemingly most are minus the ones that shout profanities), and those from America are real representations of America. Thus I would state that this is the real view middle America holds.

So in summary, President Obama promised change. He never clarified what that meant or what he would change. After 100 days we now have an indication. It is a change indeed. Though none I know would have voted for this.

Thankfully we will have the mid-term elections soon, and might be able to reverse or hold off the worst of that change.

How was your Monday?

Well things have been busy here. Just got back from New York City, where I met Cynthia Basinet. You may recall that I interviewed her a little while back.

Cynthia Basinet is a Nobel Peace Prize nominee, who works on improving the lives of the people of the Sahara, women worldwide, was a model and is a singer of renown. I was very happy to have had the chance to meet her in person. She is even more interesting in person than in the interview.

Cynthia is currently working on several projects, which I can't reveal right now. I believe I can say that fans of her music, and acting, should have more to enjoy soon. And of course her humanitarian work is an on-going cause that will end one day because there will no longer be a need, I hope.

I can also mention that I expect to be at the Tribeca Film Festival and will likely be meeting a few of the directors of films presented there. This will be a first for me, so I'm very excited about this.

Plus, for those that follow my writing on the financial front, I spoke with a former colleague of mine while in NYC. I believe that in the next quarter or so there will be some huge news hitting the markets. This is not a stock related matter, and I really can't say any details yet. But if all goes as planned I will have a major story to present to my readers on the subject.

All in all this was a busy and positive weekend. Now I have to catch up with some work for clients, and the news since last week.

Models, actresses, and Valerie Bertinelli on People magazine

So here is a question. What is fat? Because the answer is very different for men and women. And that answer is the motivation of tens of millions of dollars in weight loss programs, ads, diet fads, magazines and so on.

I was wondering this recently as I was looking for models for my upcoming model photo shoot for my designer clothing lines. I decided to write on it after seen the cover of People magazine with Valerie Bertinelli.



Now there is no question that Ms. Bertinelli looks good. Considering her age and being a mom, very good indeed. But it was not like she was a slobbering mass of fat previously. In fact, if you look across the nation, at 172 pounds and 5’2” just 2 years ago she was about the norm.

But such a shape won’t get you on the cover of a magazine, or in many a movie role. For a woman. Yet I have to wonder why?

I recall how the nation was ogling the shape of Jennifer Lopez. Because she was considered by Hollywood standards to be voluptuous and extremely curvy. But in fact she was just the normal size of just about any Hispanic/Latino woman of her age in New York City. Hell, in the Bronx you can walk down the street and see a dozen women with better figures every day of the summer.

I recall how I had a conversation with a friend, who informed me that Beyonce is a plus-sized woman. I still reel with amazement at that. Most Black women I know have her shape and weight – again if not better.

So why is it that women must strive to look like Gabrielle Anwar from Burn Notice. Who I equate with anorexia and would never want to touch for fear of breaking her.

This is especially true when you consider men are not held to the same standard. Jack Nicholson, which Hollywood still considers sexy, is hardly fit or trim. And there are a host of men, Will Pertersen, Sean Connery, Laurence Fishburn, ect. that have varying degrees of extra weight and yet are still considered good looking and ready to work.

Now there is nothing wrong with anyone who wants to lose weight. Or anyone losing an extra person in fat off of them. It’s great that looking and being healthy is acknowledged. But I don’t get the drama associated with it.

I have been told that some models and actresses are just too big. That they are not thin enough by industry standards. Yet I know that most men find the more realistic female models and actresses to be very attractive. In fact every model I have used or will be using in my next photo shoot is an attractive successful real woman. As opposed to the look of starvation found in say America’s Top Model.

So, I want to ask the women out there. Does it matter to you. Beyond any one woman losing weight, does it matter when you see an actress in a movie how much she weighs? Will a woman buy clothing modeled by a woman that looks anything but anorexic?

And to the guys, virtually all of whom date and marry a woman that is anything but a size 0, do you really want a woman with the shape of one of the Olsen twins – or Beyonce?

I really want to know, because I think all my models are beautiful and real examples of women. And I will not go with an anorexic looking model for my clothing lines. So I want to know if that’s shooting myself in the foot or not. I won’t change, but I want to know the battle I am facing.

Midnight Oil: the concert and the controversy

Does anyone recall a rock band from Australia called Midnight Oil? It was a good band back in the day. They had a few hits in America, fueled by MTV (back when they played music videos) and the fact that the lead singer of the band reminded many of the guy from The Hills Have Eyes (the original film).

Well I was brought back to those days on seeing the news that Midnight Oil will be doing a concert to help raise funds for victims of the recent horrendous fires that claimed 210 lives and thousands of homes in Australia. The odd thing about this charity concert is the fact that lead singer Peter Garrett is now environment minister in the government. Talk about a switch of careers.

The reason this is getting international attention is really sad though. Rather than talking up the benefit, the AP piece [Australian minister rejoins Midnight Oil rock band] discusses how some are finding it difficult to reconcile the songs of Midnight Oil and Garrett’s current political position. It seems fans believe that the songs picked for the concert are less anti-government than the band is known for. And those in the government are upset that the controversial themes of the band’s music may affect the government.

To give you an idea of what they are talking about, check out the video of one of their American hits



The theme is Aboriginal rights. In fact this song directly states that Australia should be returned to the Aboriginal natives. That would be like a band here stating that Manhattan should be returned to the Native Indians. And the lead singer was the Secretary of the Interior.

Of course the fact is that Peter Garrett stopped playing with Midnight Oil back in 2002. Plus, when he was picked for his current position (in a Government that is far less liberal in its views) his past was a well known fact. Taking these facts into account, with the thought that he is not trying to make a political point but help some of the people of Australia, I think he needs to be given some slack.

Personally I have met Garrett. It was back in 1998 as I recall, on 43rd and Lexington in New York City. I was a stockbroker at the time, out for lunch, and saw him crossing the street. My best friend and I waited for him to cross and said hello. He was polite enough to stop and speak with us for a couple of minutes. He is really tall, the video does not make it clear how tall. And I’m 5’ 10”.

Suffice to say that I enjoy his music. I am impressed with the band’s stance on Aboriginal rights. I respect the intention of helping Australians with a charitable concert.

Politics and music may often clash, but when compared to the suffering that music can help relieve it is unimportant. I hope that Midnight Oil plays their most controversial songs, with Garrett up front and in the crosshairs of television cameras worldwide – if it helps to raise more money. Because that’s really the only important thing about the concert.

Police, murder, African Americans. Never Again. Stop The Game

In 1946, in Georgia, a mob lynched 4 Black men. That event led to the desegregation of the military, and arguably set the stage for the Civil Rights Movement.

In 1981, in Alabama, Michael McDonald was randomly selected and lynched.

In 1998 James Byrd Jr. was dragged to death in Texas.

These were horrible acts of violence. Thankfully in each case some degree of justice was enacted. But these are not isolated events. And they are reinforced by actions of a group in America that should never be tolerated. Police officers.

There is a pattern in America that has been accepted and hidden by the news media for far too long. In each occurrence it is passed off as an individual act and unrelated. I disagree. I believe we need to bring these connected events to light.



In 1991 Rodney King was beaten by 4 officers with excessive force. This was one of the first times such an action by police was seen by the public, as the event had been videotaped by a bystander. Even with this evidence a jury essentially slapped the wrists of the officers involved. This lead to riots in 1992.

Since that time several other events have been video taped with the media less willing to give it public attention. One of the most recent was the execution-style murder of Oscar Grant, in Oakland California on New Years Day 2009.

The killing of Grant was witnessed by at least a dozen witnesses. Grant was unarmed, on the ground face down, with an officer on his back, and was not resisting arrest. He was shot 1 time in the back at point blank range, killing him. The entire incident, some 4 minutes long, was caught on multiple cameras. It took 14 days for the officer firing the shot to be charged with a crime. The incident reached the national media 2x (an ABC news 30 second video clip and the opening memo on the O’Reilly Factor), both focused on the riots that occurred a week after the event.

On that same day, Robbie Tolan was shot in his driveway, while on the ground, in Texas. Robbie Tolan has been a minor league baseball player, was unarmed, and coming home from getting fast food when he was confronted by police. He currently has a bullet lodged in his liver. The officer in question has not been charged to date, though an investigation appears to still be underway.

Again on that same day, in New Orleans, Adolph Grimes was shot at 48 times, and struck 14, by 9 police officers. 12 of the 14 shots struck Grimes in the back. There is no clear explanation of why Grimes was shot at, or how he was struck so many times in the back. At this time no charges are pending any officer involved, though an investigation is said to be underway.

In 2008, Philadelphia, 19 police officers surround and beat 3 men. The officers believed the men might have been suspects from a shooting earlier that night. The men, not resisting arrest and unarmed, are kicked and beaten while lying on the ground. The result of this unquestionable act of police brutality enacted on African Americans is 4 officers fired, 3 suspended, and 1 demotion. No charges were brought.

Sean Bell, and 2 other passengers in his car, were shot at 51 times in NYC in 2006 by 5 police officers. None of the men were armed. Sean Bell died, the other surviving men were critically wounded at the time. None of the police officers were found guilty of wrong-doing.

Also in 2006, in Atlanta, Kathryn Johnston (age 92) was shot by 3 officers and killed. The officers entered the home with a no-knock warrant – prying off burglar alarms and breaking down the door - Johnston fired a shotgun once in the ceiling. No officer was injured by Johnston. Police fired 39 shots and hit Johnston 6 times. A failed cover-up of the incident included false claims of Johnston being a drug dealer. It was later proven that the Atlanta police routinely lied to get warrants All 3 officers that shot Johnston have been found guilty.

In 2005, in New Orleans, Robert Davis was beaten by 4 officers (2 of which were in fact federal agents). This incident was videotaped by the Associated Press, during which one of the newsmen was physically assaulted for videotaping the event. The federal agents were never charged. 2 officers were fired and 1 received a 120 suspension. 1 officer was cleared of all charges by a judge.

In 2004, NYC, Timothy Stansbury Jr. opened a rooftop door and was shot and killed by a police officer. He was unarmed. The shooting violated police procedure. The officer was never charged.

In 2001, in Ohio, Timothy Thomas was shot and killed by a police officer. The initial statement by the officer was that his gun accidentally went off. He then later stated that Thomas, wanted on non-violent charges, had a gun. He later revised the statement that he believed Thomas was reaching for a gun. Thomas in fact was unarmed, and is believed to have been holding up his baggy pants. The officer was not charged.

In 1999, in NYC, Amadou Diallo was shot 41 times by 4 police officers outside of his home. He was unarmed. At least one of the shots to Diallo was fired through the bottom of his foot, meaning he was lying on the ground when the shot was fired. None of the police officers involved were found to have committed a crime.

1998, in New Jersey, State police officers fired 11 shots at Danny Reyes and 3 passengers in the van. 3 of the men in the van, including Reyes, were shot. Reyes was hit 4 times, and was unarmed, as were all the men in the vehicle. All the men were on the way to professional basketball tryouts in North Carolina. The State troopers were charged with attempted murder after having initial charges dropped by lower court. I am unaware of any trial date having been set or occurring to date.

In 1997, in New York City, 4 officers arrested Abner Louima on questionable charges at an incident not originally involving him. When Louima was brought to the police station the officers proceeded to beat Louima with fists, nightsticks, police radios, and then sodomized him with a plunger. The entire event was attempted to be covered up by multiple police officers in the police station. 2 officers received time in jail, 3 other officers had convictions overturned and never served time.



I mention all of these events for 1 reason. They are not separate. They are all related. This is a pattern that has been occurring since before the 20th century started. It happens across the nation. And it could happen to your brother, sister, mother, father, children or yourself.

Police officers are routinely given carte blanche to violently act against African Americans without cause. Even when that action results in death, or extreme unjustifiable violence and torture, police are routinely excused.

The media almost invariably ignores these events. Even when presented with evidence from independent sources. Right this second more people in America know of the Florida Caylee Anthony case than all of the above cases (with the exception of perhaps the Rodney King event). While the Anthony case is horrendous, it is an individual act – reported on for a year – whereas we have a pattern of systemic abuse of power allowed by the legal system that remains virtually unseen. And it is anyone’s guess how many other cases of a similar nature occur and are not reported on.

This is unacceptable. This is wrong. We cannot allow this to continue.





The news media must live to its obligation to report on patterns that violate the rights and lives of American citizens. The news media is not an entertainment program, nor does it have the right to ignore facts that affect a huge segment of the nation while trying to garner ad revenue.

The police are employed to protect the rights of all the people. While many do this every day successfully, there are more than enough officers that do not. For every case resulting in the unwarranted death of an unarmed African American how many more cases of lesser violence slip thru the cracks? For every case of violence that catches the local (almost never national) attention how many are unreported, or successfully covered up?

We may never know. Especially if this is allowed to be viewed as individual events that are unrelated. Especially if we cloud our eyes to the fact that officers in these events are routinely placed back on the street, and inevitably train future officers the tactics and mentality they employ.

We need to wake up America. We need to shed light on this subject. We need to make people aware of the danger that exists. Because if 1 Black man can be shot at 51 times without question or repercussion, any man woman or child in the nation could be next.

I present this clothing line, found at www.cafepress.com/nova68, with one thought in mind. Attention to the wrong that is happening right now, in this “post-racial” America. Police cannot murder innocents without concern if they know they will be punished for it. Police departments will not abide criminals wearing a badge if they know that they have the support of the public.

I cannot say that the Never Again, or Stop The Game, clothing lines will prevent another Abner Louima, Kathryn Johnston, or Oscar Grant – but if enough of us have this, wear this in public, open the debate and thus increase awareness it just might. If enough of us can wear this, and it starts people noticing the obvious connected pattern of abuse and death things can be changed. And that change could save the life of a child, a father, a family. This change could save you.

Isn’t that worth it?

Tiger Woods and GM, Citigroup and the Mets

Today all eyes are pointing towards Citigroup and what they have been doing, or failing to do. Thousands have lost their jobs, tens of billions of dollars are being poured into the company. And unlike AIG, Citigroup is not sending their employees to luxury spas for a breather. Nor are they giving up on celebrity endorsements like GM with Tiger Woods. No, they are putting their name on the Mets baseball stadium for $400 million of your tax dollars.

Wow.

I mean what else can be said here. Citigroup is going forward with putting their name on a stadium (a policy I dislike in all stadiums) with your money as 401k’s and taxes are used to fund it. No wonder they ran through the intial $25 billion the Government gave them. And Congress is asking AIG and the auto industry for reforms and guarantees. For over a year now, no one thought this expenditure was worth noting? Hey Barney Frank, you didn’t get a memo on this – Mr. Head of the Banking Committee.

I mean GM has bailed out of their deal with Tiger Woods. They bought themselves out of their deal a year early. I’m sure it cost them more than a bit to do so, but at least they did something to save a few bucks. And I’m sure Tiger was more than happy to let them do it.

Tiger Woods is too big a brand to be tied to the failure of the auto industry. The last thing he needs is the media tying him to a huge payout funded by an auto bailout. That would be bad for his image, bad for PGA golf, and America. Nobody wins in that scenario. And I doubt he is hurting for the money.

Of course GM is losing the worst. Tiger looks like a hero for saving the company money. He can easily say that he does not want to be paid at the price of workers jobs, or taxpayer debt increases. And that would be true. But GM looks like an idiot for not moving forward sooner. And losing Tiger, the Super Bowl ads, and who knows what other advertising means fewer cars sold.

But at least this looks a little bit better for them after their luxury corporate jet trip to ask Congress for billions of dollars.

Citigroup on the other hand could care less. At least that’s what it looks like. They are spending more useless money than Tiger’s endorsement (the full 5 year deal), buying a new corporate jet, all the Super Bowl ads, and the AIG spa trips put together and multiplied by 10. At the very least will shareholders get a discount to go to Mets’ games in 2009. Even 1 game in the baseball season? I doubt it.

The big question is will this reflect badly on the Mets. They are getting paid a stupid amount of money, as is New York City, to have the field given this dumb name. There are thousands of employees of Citigroup that work in the corporate headquarters in NYC. How will they feel watching the Mets play, knowing that the field’s name cost them their job. Or anyone who invested in Citigroup. They might have lost the ability to go to games, or even to live in their home, because of the stock devaluation due to the mismanagement and they have to watch this team play in a place that sucked their money away.

Mets fans always have had it rough, being in the same city as the Yankees. But this is a new thing that really doesn’t have anything to do with baseball, yet it may well have a massive impact on the game.

And if you are wondering why Citigroup didn’t do something back in January (at the latest) when they knew things were getting bad? Its because they were sure of one thing. They are too big to fail. They can waste money like a drunk pissing on the side of a building. It is wrong, but they don’t care. And the Government knows it.

But let me ask you which you think is worse. Is it worse to lose Tiger Woods’ endorsement, and ads during the Super Bowl and ask for money, or to spend money on the name of a baseball field and demand the public pay for it? Then let me know why you think Congress (especially Chris Dodd and Barney Frank) seems to think GM is the bigger bad guy.

Couple Links: adult game launch and review

If you watch the news in recent weeks you might believe that the economy is singing a death knell. You might think that every small business in America is on the verge of failing. And if you happen to be Black or a woman, the major media would have you believe that you have no chance beyond whatever elected officials provide you with.

I’m happy to say that this is all false. In fact I was able to attend the launch party for a new product that I can recommend to my readers. And the owner is a fellow high school alumni, Black and a woman.

Now I want to interject a bit of information. While I know Barbara Jenkins from my high school reunion, my review is not based on favoritism. In addition I received no payment, in any form, for the review. Nor has anyone read over this review prior to it being on my blogs.

Barbara Jenkins is a fellow Evander-ite. She is also the owner of Couple Links, a new board games that is for adults. Mrs. Jenkins is the owner, corporate head, and the inventor Couple Links; and proof that even in the worst of environments innovation can take shape.

The launch party for the game took place at Latitude Bar in Manhattan, near W48th on 8th Ave. The top most private room was used for the occasion and I commend the choice. It’s clean, modern, spacious, and had decent music. It’s not too loud, and you really didn’t notice the sounds of immense crowd downstairs in the main bar. Well stocked, and they cook too.

The staff of the establishment were all very personable, late-20 somethings. They were social, good conversationalists, and efficient at handling a crowd. They could pour a decent drink, and made a point of paying attention to names. You have to love a well-staffed bar. And in choosing a location with such facilities and staffing, you have to be impressed with Mrs. Jenkins.

The first clue to a successful business can often be their choice and manner of presentation. This choice spoke of class and sophistication without being stuffy or pretentious. That was a major plus in my book. Oh, and the chocolate fountanin, with fresh strawberries, and other dippable finger foods was a unique bonus too. Another plus.

The crowd came in at about 8pm on Saturday, and continued to stream in throughout the night. While I don’t have any exact numbers, I was told that of the RSVP’s some 80% showed up to the event. For NYC on a Saturday night, that’s very good. Especially as there were some people that had traveled from Pennsylvania and Chicago, beating me in distance traveled to this event.

After about an hour or so Barbara Jenkins and her husband were able to pull themselves from the huge crowd of well-wishers and other interested groups trying to get a heads-up on the game, and began the nights program.

The introduction of key people that had helped Mrs. Jenkins design, build, and initially market Couple Links were all introduced without dragging the buoyant mood of the evening down. The speeches about Mrs. Jenkins going from normal average American worker to entrprenuer and owner of her own company was inspirational and short. Again another sign of a sharp mind, economy of words while conveying your thoughts completely.

But the big test of the night was about to start. Virtually all the people at the launch party had never seen the game. Even fewer were familiar with the style of the game. Basically all they knew was that the game was created with adult couples in mind, can be played with 2 or more couples, and took somewhere around a hour to play. So interest was high.

3 couples were selected randomly out of a large crowd with interest in trying the game. The following video is a very abridged account of the gameplay, which took roughly 25 minutes in total. All sprits were high at the time, and my editing skills are not the greatest in the world, so any blame about the video is all mine.



Of the couples in the video, the still picture is Mr. and Mrs Jenkins. Of the couples playing the game, 2 are married – 1 couple are newlyweds I believe, and one couple is dating. I mention that because the game need not only be for married couples, or those dating, exclusively.

The game kept the attention of all of the dozens of couples attending the launch party with ease. As you heard in the video several of the questions were risqué, and the crowd quieted a bit to hear those answers. So as a game of entertainment and adult relaxation, it succeeded not only with those playing, but those observing as well. And in an age of digital everything, that is saying quite a bit.

Sales were brisk that night, and from what I understand word of mouth is spreading well. I have no doubt that those that have not heard of the game yet, likely will hear something of it over the holiday season.

I have not gone into more detail about the nature of the game, or the multitude of questions available to be asked, because I think that is a big part of the fun of the game. Suffice to say that the rules are simple, logical, and built on the premise of fun. Every couple that played the game laughed and giggled as they played, and had nothing but smiles at the finish. I can name few things that can accomplish the same results in a large crowd of diverse people.

I recommend this game to any couple among my readers. I think this is a great gift, and just as good to own for yourself. I personally own a copy of the game.

If you would like to know more about Couple Links go to their website (http://www.couplelinksgame.com). Mention Mr. Vass sent you – because every owner likes to know where their clients come from.

Have fun above all else. And let me know what you think of the game, review and video.

September 11 - seven years ago and now

In less than 8 hours America will be observing the 7th anniversary of 9/11. The attacks that day were the worst in American history, and many of us can still recall where we were as the planes hit the Pentagon and the Twin Towers.

Politicians have used 9/11 as a weapon and shield since that day. Some have used it to create political influence. Others have used it to increase the power of aspects of the Government. And still others have used it to express their own fears and dislike of laws and Government. All are fair to an extent, and virtually all are wrong to use this despicable act for their self-interest.

Tomorrow, both Presidential candidates will inevitably use the day to promote some aspect of their Presidential campaigns.

On September 11, 2001 I was at my brokerage office in midtown Manhattan. I saw live television as the 2nd plane struck, and watched the Towers fall. I was among the millions that feared for their lives, and those of loved ones and friends on that day. I walked among the millions that were stunned and dazed on the streets of Manhattan. I had several colleagues and friends that were hurt, killed, or otherwise immediately impacted by the Towers that day.

In the wake of this horrific act of fanatical religious rage, I was sure that New York City would be struck again by the mindless uncaring evil that terrorism is within days if not months. Considering that London, Paris, Tel Aviv, Tokyo, and most any other major city across the world has to deal with this kind of insanity on a repeated basis such a thought was not (and is not) unreasonable.

To date we have not seen another attack on U.S. soil. We have seen several individuals enter the nation from the Canadian border with the intent to harm innocent civilians. They all have been intercepted without their plans being enacted. None have ever been identified coming from the Mexican border.

Today we hear some act as if America can never again be touched. They believe that America need not protect itself. They believe that vigilance is unwarranted, and pro-active steps for protection useless or provocative. I find such thoughts naïve and potentially deadly.

Today we also hear some that seek to restrict ever more freedoms under an umbrella of protection from a never ending war on fanatical ideas. They would strike at any foreign thought or belief. They would dominate for fear of any weakness becoming a new point of attack. They would give up individuality for the comfort of safety.

Both of these extremes of thought are wrong. They are extreme views that fail to see the reality of the world, which lies far closer to the center than where they stand.

The reality is that at some point America will be struck again. No nation is immune or impenetrable. Fanatics have no time limits, nor can they be negotiated or bribed from their views. Their ideals cannot be killed, or corrupted, or beaten by force. The best any nation can do is to hold back the beast for a time and minimize its effectiveness.

Every year, every day that America goes without an attack on our population is only one day. And one day, hopefully far far in the future, we will have to start the clock over and count up again. I don‘t say this to be a sensationalist, or to be a fear monger. Its reality, and straightforward. And I pray that when that day comes it is minimized to the least extent possible.

To those that think America can just hide in our nation and the world will leave us alone I say wake up. For those that think that mere force will eliminate any potential threat I say calm down and think. America is always a target of fanatics because we are free, rich, and powerful all at once. And you cannot kill an idea (especially when that idea is a religion – no matter how twisted that idea is made to be).

I suppose I don’t have a direct point of this post. I’m not trying to make a conclusion, or place blame. Neither benefits the nation. Rather I am reflecting on a moment that struck me to my core. A day that will never leave me in a way that many in the nation never will feel, I hope.

Over the next hour, and through the next day I want my readers to reflect on a few thoughts. We have a great nation, flaws and all. We can believe in whatever God we wish, or none at all if we chose. We can voice our thoughts even if others disagree. We can travel as we chose, even if it costs more or takes longer than we like. We can live where we please, work as we are capable, and earn most of what we are worth.

Millions serve our nation everyday. They protect us, and defend us from laws, individuals and nations that can cause us harm. The service is born of a desire for the nation to always improve and become greater for our children than what we have lived. At times that service is flawed due to imperfect decisions or temporary political desire; flawed in how the execution is made not in the service provided. And we should honor that service.

9/11 is a remembrance that we all serve our nation in our own way. That our nation is great, filled with great people. That when we act the sum of our actions tend to be the right one. And that every American life is as important as our own.

Perhaps I’m rambling, but sometimes that’s just what we need. No point, no decisive goal to achieve. Just thoughts based on an act of evil, 7 years ago.

Levi's 501 jeans - promoting HIV and AIDS?

Have you seen this television commercial?



It’s goal is to sell the Levi’s 501 jeans. Given. And it’s using sex as the medium to make the jeans sell. Normal.

But should it be aired?

I’m not talking about violating the Freedom of Speech. I support and understand their right to make the commercial. They did noting wrong in that arena. And I would argue if they were prevented from being allowed to air it, because of that right.

Perhaps the question I need to be asking is should they have made it in the first place.

The ad is based on the thought of ambiguous anonymous sex, and more than hints at unprotected sex at that. The kind of sex that promotes and spreads Sexually Transmitted Diseases – especially AIDS and HIV. And it’s targeting this thought on teenagers and 20-somethings.

The thought behind the ad is simple. If you wear these jeans, you will spontaneously be picked to have sex in the most unusual, and therefore potentially unprepared, places you can imagine. Wearing these jeans will get you to not wear them because of the multitude of random sexual encounters you will engage in.

If that sounds irresponsible it is. If it sounds like I got the message wrong, please look at the commercial again and tell me what else it might mean.

At no moment do we see the 2 in this video pause to ask if there is protection available. Or if they have been tested for HIV. Or any STD. Or even a hint of a condom on a pocket, wallet, or anywhere. They may not want to market another product (though co-branding couldn’t hurt either company) but just having the image can’t hurt them.

But why is there no mention of any responsible action or question?

Because it’s too sexual. Because that would be explicit. Because some mother or preacher out there would freak out that their child heard or saw something relating to sex.

Yes, an outline of a condom in the jean pants pocket is too sexual. But stripping each other and the glimpse of a woman’s bra and panties plus the jeans on the floor is NOT sexual.

People please. What the hell.

If we as a society are going to promote random, wanton sex especially among the youth of the nation, the least we can do is hint at the fact that some thought to protection from STD’s and HIV/AIDS has happened.

This commercial takes place in New York City - Manhattan specifically. There are at least some 14,400 known cases of HIV in New York City alone – 4,800 of them were new infections as of 2006. There is no way to accurately gauge the number of unreported cases. People that have not gotten tested to find out.

According to 2006 statistics Syphilis is up 60% not to mention other STD’s. That was 2 years ago.

So yes the commercial has the right to be made and shown. But it’s not responsible, and potentially it’s a deadly message that could affect you and/or your kids.

Be smart, be protected. Get tested. It’s your life after all.

And down will come Spitzer, craddle and all - 3.11.2008.1

Well there is no end to the buzz about Eliot Spitzer. I was in New York City yesterday as the news about his involvement in the prostitution ring was announced. The Dow Jones Index dropped an extra 40 points on the news before rebounding a bit. And there were several mixed emotions circling the city.

Essentially, the overwhelming thought was ‘what a shame, couldn’t happen to a nicer guy’. I did not hear from a single person that believes he will not resign. In fact one individual, at Conway’s next to Grand Central, guaranteed that Spitzer will resign. He was already told that by someone in the administration, and they are just biding time now. For whatever positive moment they expect I don’t know.

Personally I can’t see how he can’t resign. He is a lawyer, an officer of the court. And he admitted breaking the law, thus he must be disbarred. He also has lost all ability to avoid claiming his innocence, thus he will be punished by the law. A Governor cannot be in jail, and disbarred and maintain office. He has to go.

What I have not seen so far are reactions of people throughout the City and state. What I have noted are the following:

Support and a hope for him to recover from this by a Hispanic professional.
Glee from White financial professionals.
Good riddance from a White guard.
Jumping for joy (not literal) from a Black delivery man.
Anger from an Irish bartender.

Sorry I didn’t get a reaction from any women. These were all reactions that I observed or heard within the first half-hour of the breaking news.

One thing I did not hear or see was the question of how this might affect the political machinations of Senator Clinton. She has long allied herself with the Governor, and his 2nd in command was preparing to take on her seat in the Senate if she attained the Presidency. Both were involved in the fiasco that was Senator Hillary Clinton’s answer about supporting Spitzer’s proposed Driver’s liscences for illegal aliens.



Yet so far there is no connection at this moment.

What do you think about this? Will it affect Hillary, should he resign, are Republicans wrong for holding him to the oath of office and laws he has long ago committed to?

Venus Williams joins the Starbury trend - 11.14.2007.1

I love it when I can revisit a post I made in the past to update the news and events, especially when the news is positive. I don’t get to do this as often as I would like, but today I can. What is the good news? Well it involves Mr. Stephon Marbury, Ms. Venus Williams and Mr. Ben Wallace.

For those that have not seen the original post in May of this year [Starbury sneakers from Stephon Marbury - 5.1.2007.1] I discussed the benefit of the Starbury sneaker line, sold by Steve & Barry exclusively. For $15 dollars a celebrity entertainer endorsed sneaker can be bought, and according to comments by B-Esq (from the original post)

“The new Starbury line of sneakers are much better and more comfortable than my nikes, reeboks, filas and sauconys.”

While there was some news on this story, major media didn’t focus on the positive news, or the other positive actions by Mr. Marbury. Even now there is more attention to is sex life and initial comments about Michael Vick. But that takes away for the real story I think deserves attention.

There is the massive, NBA leading donations to Hurricane Katrina relief, the gift of sneakers to New York City high school varsity basketball players, and free haircuts to youth at Coney Island. Yes, negative news grabs headlines, but only when that is the focus of the news. The positives may be less sensational, but have far deeper impact.

And that impact in terms of the Starbury sneakers has grown. As I mentioned in the beginning, Mr. Marbury is now being joined by Ms. Williams and Mr. Wallace. Both of these star athletes are coming out with their own $15 endorsed sneakers. In fact Ms. Venus Williams will also be coming out with an entire line of clothing, each piece of which is priced at or below $20. And I think it’s about time.

I said before,

“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.”

At $140 the new LeBron James’ Nike sneaker is exploitative, to me. It’s not worth the price. It’s taking advantage or the status and celebrity youth see in Mr. James. I again say I don’t fault him for getting paid, I just think he and others can do it more affordably for the very targeted African American community consumer.

I support the efforts of Steve & Barry, Ms. Williams, Mr. Wallace, and Mr. Marbury. I hope that their efforts make an impact with other companies, and gain massive popularity among African American kids. I suggest that on Nov. 15, everyone goes out and checks out the EleVen debut, which is the clothing line from tennis star and celebrity Venus Williams.

There are things in life that we want that cost a lot of money, like an education. A basic and essential item, clothing and footwear, should not be one of them. And I’m happy to say that a trend appears to be growing that agrees with this thought.

Fine dining in New York City for less

**this can also be seen at Food & Wine Blog, where I am a contributing author**

Lunch in New York City is a hard thing to have. It’s expensive (relative to most any other city), often crowded, and usually consists of something done fast. But there are times when you want to slow down and really enjoy the meal.

So where do you go, and what can you get without spending far more than what you get? Well how does this sound?

• Appetizer - Double Beef-Chicken Consommé with Poached Egg, Bacon and Chanterelles


• Entrée - Sautéed Breast of Duckling and Braised Leg with Lime Sauce


• Dessert - Crème Brûlée

Tell me that doesn’t just get your mouth watering. It makes me hungry just writing this. Best of all you can have this or several other options for just $26.50 between 12:30 and 2:00, Monday thru Friday.

Perhaps you can’t get away from the office, or the out-of-town meeting will keep you busy during this time range. You’ve finished the day of work, meetings are no longer a question, or you are in town for a visit and you want to enjoy a finer meal without spending the equivalent of having a meal at Ben Bensons, or Sparks. What do you do?

Well does this dinner catch your attention?

• Appetizer - Tuna Tartare & Seared Tuna Loin with Grilled Pineapple & Tropical Fruit Salad


• Entre - Sautéed Lamb Chops and Merguez with Goat Cheese Stuffed Baby Bell Pepper, Tomato Provençal & Cucumber Mint Sauce


• Dessert - Chocolate Ganache Cake with Mocha Sauce

And the price? $39.95, served between 5:30 to 7:00 Monday thru Saturday. Tell me you aren’t interested.

So where can you get this and other wonderful meals at these unheard of prices? The French Culinary Institute. Yes this is where up and coming chefs learn their trade and you can experience a sumptuous meal as they refine their skills, and entertain your taste buds.

I would suggest reservations, but now you know. You can thank me after the meal.

Feeling bad for Lindsey Lohan

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

How much is 7 million dollars worth? For some it’s a lifetime of relaxing under a sun, a sign of corporate success, the advertising cost of a product line, 2 commercials during the Super Bowl, or a host of other things. And for at least one woman it was a waste of time.

There is a report out that states Lindsey Lohan has spent at least $7,000,000 solely on drugs, rehab and hotels. Oh, I nearly forgot the lawyers. They got a bit of that roll of bills too. The sum net gain for Lindsey Lohan after spending this relatively huge sum of money? A reputation in shreds, few job prospects, and the honor of being slightly more responsible than Britney Spears, but not quite as good as Paris Hilton. There is a dubious honor indeed.

Honestly, the money is not what gets me. Lot’s of people with wealth waste it on frivolous items. Whether its yet another world record yacht, a birthday party that spans 2 continents and includes dozens of wanna-be’s and associates, or platinum and diamonds adorned in the most illogical and unattractive places one could imagine that are legal to be shown. Far too many celebrities, entertainers and successful people run through cash almost as fast as a New York City broker drinks the morning coffee. The real shame is everything else.

This young woman has failed herself in the worst way possible. She has failed 2x this year in rehab. She has failed in obeying the law. She has failed to support her career. And at this pace she will inevitably fail to continue to live.

Will it make a difference in my life if Lohan dies? No. She wouldn’t even make it to a footnote in my mind of entertainers and celebrities that died far before they should have. But it will make a difference to millions of women. Because of the example she has set before them.

How many young actresses will not be able to get a job for fear of their melting down like Lohan, Spears and Hilton? How many young girls will believe that success demands the excesses these women have displayed? How many will believe that lack of discipline and drug use are acceptable?

Too long the media has enjoyed the tragic vortex that is these women’s lives. Too many have seen the adoration (as some might call it) that they have received. Too little has been done to say there won’t be more examples exactly like these in the near future.

What should have happened is that the Hollywood executives should have refused to employ Lohan without daily drug tests. That Spears should have been prevented from going on stage. That Hilton was thrown in jail a long time ago. But that didn’t happen. Nothing did, except that all those groups and many many other organizations made a lot of money displaying the downfall of these women.

You know, at one time pictures of a star without undergarments would have never been published. There is no benefit to the public for such photos. At one time older stars would have reprimanded the celebrities and set them straight. At one time companies would have fired the irresponsible for acts that are morally questionable. But that seems like a far off time indeed.

So what will happen to the next young star? What happens when one of these ladies, or some other famous figure in trouble is found dead of an overdose or some other act of idiocy? Will anything change?

I think one thing will. It will cost more money to get the same kind of exposure. And someone will come along and pay for it. $7 million (or any amount like it) just isn’t worth what it used to be, I think.

Response to 'Average American' comment on comparing news coverage - 9.28.2007.1

This is in response to a comment from Average American on my post Compare White and Black news coverage Part 2 - 9.25.2007.2. My response was so long I felt it was better as a post of it's own. Please refer to the link to see the comment that lead to this post.


Thank you for responding Average American.

I too feel I am an Average American. I’m 39, of Black Puerto Rican decent and grew up in the Bronx going to public schools. As I state in my bio, I did not grow up in any special way and wealth was never a factor in my young life.

Given that, I do recall how the N-word was used back in the 70’s and throughout my life, including recently. I can recite multiple events, in New York City and the Northeast, where race and law enforcement directly collided against me. Oh, let me add another fact of my life. I’ve never been arrested nor involved in any crime. Yet off the top of my head I can recall several incidents where I have had police draw guns on me, while at college or driving on the parkway, or driving down Hollywood Blvd with friends (White and Asian). I have lived with the knowledge first-hand and through observation that race is a MAJOR factor in how the law and justice are applied in America.

I also have spoken with friends of mine of other races and found that consistently White Americans are not faced with these same events and outcomes. To deny the fact of how race affects issues in my decades of life is to ignore facts that exist. You may not have experienced them, or not recognized when they happened, but that does not change that they happen.

While I agree that if, in the Jena 6 case, race is not considered there is no question that there was an attack made. There is no question that there were 6 against 1. There is some dispute, as stated by Rev. Jesse Jackson and others, whether or not the victim was kicked and/or when he became unconscious. That makes this a crime and prosecution is justified. No one has questioned that.

The question is the application of the law. The victim was not seriously injured. He attended a dance, or some other social event, later that same day. If murder was the intent, 6 people are more than enough to accomplish this, especially if he were unconscious. This was a fight, lopsided but a fight all the same. To charge attempted murder is over the top.

In comparison, days earlier a White student brought a shotgun to school to intimidate one or several Black students. That student, in a nation that has endured Columbine and college shootings, was not charged or reprimanded. Is not a firearm attempted murder when used in this manner? Where is the justice and equal treatment under the law?

While you might say this is a hate crime, I disagree. Were this a random White male selected you might be right. But this student was part of a group of White males that attacked one of the Jena 6; I believe it was Mr. Bell, the day prior striking him allegedly with a bottle. The attack by the 6 Black males was an opportunistic attack in retribution. If the first attack the day earlier, and the shotgun being brought to school, are not hate crimes, then neither is the Black males fight. In fact because this was retaliation on other violence it can be easily argued that race was never a factor.

Continued in part 2...

A conversation on the Jena 6 Part 2 - 9.21.2007.3

Continued from A conversation on the Jena 6 Part 1...

When that segregation was acknowledged and challenged, the response was to place nooses on the tree. That is a powerful message, especially in the South. When my friend thinks about a noose he thinks of a hanging, but I informed him that for an African American it evokes an image of a BLACK person being hung – a lynching. And when that happens in the South you get the image of KKK and slavery. It’s very different for me to see that and for my friend. I wanted him to comprehend that. I know he cannot understand it as I do, but the comprehension that those nooses are a death threat. It makes the difference of how the reactions unfolded. It provoked anger, and that is not an excuse. Violence is a bad response to provocations, but it is one response when death is the message.

As I recall, back in the 1970’s a court (I believe the Supreme Court) held that incendiary words exist, and their use could provoke actions. These actions could be crimes, but due to the incendiary words the punishment could be minimized or removed. I’m not a lawyer but I recall that well [any lawyers that know better or the exact case, feel free to correct/support me here]. Thus, back then, if an African American were called the N-word, and he beat the crap out of a White man that said it to him, the incendiary clause could be used as a defense.

The nooses were the incendiary. The tree is the segregation. Essentially what happened and was said is, in my opinion, ‘Hey N*****, you don’t belong here. Go away.’ When that was challenged with the thought that segregation doesn’t have a place in 21st century America the response was ‘Uppity N***** I will KILL you.’ Which lead to the violence.

Perhaps it’s the fact that African Americans still feel the weight of the past of America on them, or that America has never apologized for slavery (nor willing to provide reparations as the nation has for other groups that were wronged in the past) because America is not beyond the thoughts of that time, but this is the sentiment that still pervades the nation.

It goes both ways. As my friend correctly mentioned, there are places that he cannot go in New York City. There are places that any race or ethnicity cannot go in America, to this day. We have not gone as far as most of us wish we have. And as long as we don’t address the root of the problem, we never will.

America has its head in the sand when it comes to race relations and segregation and prejudice. Slavery is a subject no one wants to speak about. Reparations is so terrifying a concept, because of what it addresses, every Presidential candidate except one (not Senator Barack Obama) refused to even speak about it in a debate. And these events, like Jena 6, continue to happen.

Continued in Part 3...

The trouble with Isiah Thomas - 9.18.2007.3

So let me take a break on the growing appearance of a set up on the OJ Simpson case. There are other bits of news that are of interest and I want to touch on a few of them.

One of the more odd things is the lawsuit facing the New York Knicks. I’m not a big fan of basketball, so when I ran across this news today, I was surprised. Perhaps it’s old news, or completely covered by the OJ saga and the Britney Spears drama. (Ms. Spears seems to have been busted on using drugs in front of her kids. If it’s true, then I’m glad she does not have her kids.) It seems that Mrs. Anucha Browne-Sanders felt sexually harassed by Mr. Isiah Thomas during her time at the Knicks. She further alleges that she was fired as a consequence of this harassment.

Now I’m unfamiliar with the allegations and details. I have no idea how she believes that this is worth $10 million. Sexual harassment cases are difficult to understand and often way over priced at trials. I’m not saying she wasn’t harassed, nor that she doesn’t deserve compensation. I just don’t get to $10 million.

But the part of the case that does trouble me has nothing to do with that. It’s the video tape interview with Mr. Thomas. One part of the video has Mr. Thomas asked if he thinks it’s bad that a White guy calls a Black woman a b****. His answer is yes, very. The next question is the troubling part. He is asked if it’s bad for a Black man to say the same thing to a Black woman. His answer was, and I paraphrase,

‘I’m sorry to say this but it’s not the same. I just don’t think it’s as bad. Though I do think it shouldn’t be said to any woman.’

[Just found the video after writing this. I will not alter what I said. I feel it still applies. Oh, the quote is only 1:08 long, the rest is a commercial]

Now what the hell is that about?

This derogatory term does not improve in any manner based on the color of the skin of who spoke the term or who they said it to. The only way that it could be considered ok, or better, is if one accepts the mentality (or lack thereof) found in gangsta rap music.

Now some will say, ‘There it goes. Attacking rap again.’ Actually in this case yes I am. It’s fitting. Because only in that form of music and the lifestyle it directly promotes, is such derogatory terms considered acceptable. The pollution of minds that it creates seems to be quite pervasive as it has reached into the American culture affecting the perceptions of a 46 year old man that is college educated and basically otherwise professional to my knowledge. That’s sad.

I understand the argument that derogatory words used by Whites against Blacks harkens back to Slavery and the entitlements White have still 400 years later. I do not argue that aspect of the statements. I have great concern over the perceived allowance of this kind of speech when directed at people of the same race.

Now I say this is gangsta rap’s fault, let me define why. Men of my age or older were not raised speaking to women, of any race, with such disrespect. In fact many men, were raised with strong mothers that would never stand for such a comment directed towards them, or uttered by their children (grown or not). Men were look upon harshly when mistreating women, whether they were from uptown, downtown, or the ghetto of any city I am aware of.

It was not until the recent 1990’s when such language entered the public in a consistent manner. It was not until the advent of corporate sponsored gangsta rap that such language was allowed on the airwaves. Prior to that time, rap never referred to women negatively, and even those songs targeting a specific woman such language was not used. It wasn’t until the small minds that spout gangsta rap were promoted did such drivel become part of the mainstream. It’s become so common that those born into gansta rap (roughly 30 or younger) have been programmed to accept these comments, like N***** and B****, as compliments not unlike a slave being called the same terms, or a Black man being called a ‘boy’ up until the late 1970’s. [Yes, it was common in many places to call a Black man ‘boy’ that recently. It’s not ancient history and I guarantee it still happens, because I have been addressed as such in my adult life. Not that that went over well.]

Since Mr. Thomas is older and knows better, and I would guess was raised to be better, my only conclusion on why it is any degree of ok for any man to call any woman a b**** is gangsta rap and its forced exposure in every medium.

If anyone can give me a logical, thought-out reason why gangsta rap is not the root of this evil, I would be happy to hear it.

Until then, I again say we need to do something about this vicious downward vortex that gangsta rap is, as I see it.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Reviewing the nightclub Instinct Part 2 - 9.11.2007.4

Continue from Reviewing the nightclub Instinct Part 1...

The next major item is of course the bartending at the bar. The bar is fully stocked with a wide selection of vodkas including Grey Goose, multiple rums, including Captain Morgan's, and most every other popular liquor you can think of. If you prefer beer there are multiple selections going from the domestic to the imported, each at a reasonable price. The bar is so well stocked that most any liquor choice most would have can be found, including a personal favorite, scotches such as the 18 year old Glenlivet Scotch. And if wine is your thing, the cellar goes from Napa Valley to Romania. There are several Merlots that I've had that I think are excellent choices. You will also find drink specials that change depending on which night you arrive.

The other component for the bar is the bartenders. You might expect that an upscale nightclub, similar to those found in New York City would have bartenders that might have an attitude similar to the ones in New York. And you would be wrong. The staff is fun, young, affable people that have a great deal of knowledge on various types of drinks. Many have come from some of the top bars, restaurants and nightclubs to be found in Binghamton area. As for guys, you'll be happy to be served as much is that what you're being served. For the ladies, several of the male bartenders should make you feel the same (sorry ladies, I have to guess at this because I'm a guy and I really don't know). Both way, there are many good conversations to be had and happy smiles that are genuine, because you can tell they truly enjoy working at this establishment.

And not nearly last or least is a security. Security can be found both outside and inside the nightclub. Expect IDs to be asked for and checked with some of the latest technology to verify IDs. While those 18 and older will be allowed in, be assured you will not be drinking. For those that try to engage in underage drinking expect to be escorted out and ask never to return. In terms of safety and keeping the peace and security staff is right on the mark. They are both polite and resolute in defusing situations and maintaining a positive atmosphere within the club.

When you take each of these elements that I've just described you get an idea of what you might expect, but it's not quite complete. The parts that are missing are the people. This may be one of the most interesting parts of the entire night club, because you can find a wide assortment of people at Instinct. I've been to club several times on several different days and I've noted that you can find Whites, Blacks, Hispanics and Asians all in the club at the same time. I've never noticed an issue among the crowd on who's there and who isn't. That's something that really makes a statement about how well run, and how enjoyable an experience this nightclub can be.

Not only is the clientele diverse, but so is the styles clothing. Patrons can range from suit and ties, to hip-hop. At this point, there is no dress code, though there may be a change of that in the future. But otherwise most any way that you describe dressing to impress you can find it here.

One thing I should note is that the age range in the crowd tends to be older earlier in the evening, and getting somewhat younger towards the end of the night. In a similar manner, the music can range from top 40 with some Latin songs to progressively more nightclub hip-hop as the hours pass. It's not uncommon to see a changing of the guard as the night goes on from business people or those parents out for a night, to college students and 20 something’s by 3a.m. I for one have spent several evenings from the open of the club to a close dressed in suits (which I feel comfortable in) without a strange look all night.

Overall, I have to say that I find Instinct. The nightclub to be an enjoyable experience and well worth the time. The prices are roughly equivalent to every other nightclub in Binghamton and easily cheaper than those found in New York City. The look and feel is straight out of the City. The people, whether they work there or a patron, have always made me feel comfortable and helped make a great evening.

If you haven't been to club Instinct yet I suggest you go. Whether it’s Ladies Night or over the weekend there is something for everyone to enjoy. Considering the other choices in Binghamton, I can’t imagine where else you’d want to be. You can reach Instinct at 607-757-9977 or www.instinctnightclub.com to ask about drink specials, or various activities at the nightclub.

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?