Ft. Hood - Maj. Hasan: 12 dead, 31 injured, no answers yet

I know that some of my readers may be wondering why I have not covered the news of the Ft. Hood shooting before now on VASS or Black Entertainment USA. The only reason I can give is that I was confused.

For hours there has been swirling reports, rumours, and imprecise information. Even at this late hour information is just being learned. So I will mention what is clear at this time.

There appears to be a single shooter. Early reports of multiple shooters seem to be incorrect. The main suspect is a Major Hasan, an American who has served in the military for 20 years. It is unclear exactly what role Maj. Hasan had, though he was a psychiatrist and may have been called to serve in Iraq/Afghanistan.

Maj. Hasan is believed to have killed 12 people, and wounded 31 others, mostly military personnel. Early reports of his suicide and/or death via shots from police are also incorrect. Additionally, a police officer initially believed to have been killed while shooting Maj. Hasan is in fact alive and out of surgery.

At this time no other names have been officially released, though Ft. Hood is no longer under lockdown.

Those are all facts, as is best understood at this time. But in no way do they answer the many questions that have plagued me and so many others all day.

I cannot fathom why an officer, especially of high rank, would strike out in such a manner. There is nothing that makes sense about this.

I have heard the rumours that Maj. Hasan was a sleeper agent. I do not agree. In 20 years of service Hasan would have had ample opportunity to act out before this. In addition, religious radicals tend to seek situations with the potential for far greater bodycounts than this. Plus the fact that being a military officer Hasan had the chance to potentially acquire far greater firepower to inflict higher casualties if he was simply a religious nut.

I have heard Maj. Hasan was suffering from PTSD. Again I refute that. He, to the best knowledge available now, has never served in combat. His duties seem to have kept him stateside his entire career. As a psychologist he heard stories from those that actually suffer PTSD, but that is not the same. Of all those I have known that have suffered PTSD not one has ever suffered this because of something they heard others experience.

Lastly, the other major cause has been rumoured to be discrimination and harrassment. Which I think is absurd. First because as a Major the number of people even capable of doing this are very few, and the repercussions of them doing so is extreme. Second, while I know there is some discrimination/prejudice in the military I can say firsthand that such is not on the level to cause this kind of outburst. I can understand a fistfight due to such a cause, but not a mass murder. In addition, the level of discrimination some may experience today is no where near the levels from back in the 40's, 50's, 60's and so on. And even then, with a national bias in place, such actions as those of Maj. Hasan never occured.

Seperate of all this I have heard Maj. Hasan called a "good American". This was meant to prevent blanket accusations and hate filled actions against Muslims. Which I can understand, but 2 things need to be clear.

1) The insane and terrible acts of any individual are NOT representative of a group of similar people. All Whites are not represented by the KKK or neo-Nazis. All African Americans are NOT Snoop Dogg. All Asians are not the Virginia Tech killer. And so on.

No Muslim should ever be judged by the acts of some other person, or a fanatical group. And no responsible American should ever act against someone due to such a false and bigoted reason.

2) There is no way anyone can be described as a "good American" at the same time they are the key suspect in a mass murder. I also have a problem with such a label being applied to a soldier, who volunteered to join the military, served 20 years, and who then balks at being stationed in or near a war zone (if that is accurate). They joined the military, with full understanding of its purpose, and took an oath that leaves no questions. If there were any disputes with the responsibility that goes with such service, they could have resigned and or gone to jail as a concientious objector. The murder of innocents is never something to be confused with or even mentioned along with the words American or U.S. military.

I am glad that Maj. Hasan is still alive. That means the questions we all have can be answered. If in fact he did do this, and acted alone or with others, I look forward to his death by firing squad. If there are others involved I believe they deserve the same fate.

But the biggest thing that I have in my mind right now is my fear that this is the Columbine of the military. I fear that far too many, merely seeking a quick way to earn money for college might follow this twisted path. I hope that Maj. Hasan can be used as an example of why such actions should never be undertaken.

As more becomes clear I will speak about it further at VASS

President Obama vs. Fox News - bias or not?

So the White House is upset with Fox News. The President just doesn't like the coverage he gets there. Because they must be less than legitamite since they criticize his Administration. Are they serious?

Now I have no problem with anyone that wants to critique the major news media. There are multiple issues I have, ranging from the disproportionate representation of people of color in television shows to the subliminal reinforcement of stereotypes in news coverage and advertisements. I write about it often. But to be realistic, there is no one major media outlet that is far and away worse than all the others.

Of course when we focus only on the news media I begin to see the situation. Considering that virtually all the news media fawns over President Obama, Fox News actually doing there jobs must be a pain in the ass. They are the one place that reality sinks in, and rockstars prefer groupies to critics.

Think about it. ACORN has abused the system, promoting criminal activities and corrupting votes across the country. It took over a week and a preponderance of evidence before the rest of the media even noticed there was a story there. Hmm, political corruption on a national level. Sounds like a job that the news media is supposed to do.

What about officials in the Government. Besides telling the public about people in positions of power that have less than reputable backgrounds (Van Jones is a great and obvious choice) isn't it the job of the news media to mention the problems (like failing to pay taxes - which almost everyone in or proposed to be in the Obama Administration has failed to do) in our Government? Isn't that what most of the media did non-stop against President Bush?

And those are just 2 examples of many. The fact that a President is a rockstar does not mean they are above critique or observation. It's part of the job. And President Obama has had many things to critique, just check my political blog VASS to see what I mean.

When President Bush was in office, didn't he get hammered with tough questions every time he spoke to the press? Wasn't MSNBC treating President Bush even worse than Fox is accused of treating President Obama?

The media is not perfect. They all have agendas and preferences. But for the White House to attack one organization for doing its job - that smacks of abuse of power. How dare anyone question President Obama. How dare anyone question obvious flaws in policy. They have to be solely stooges for political adversaries and racists. Except that would be a lie to say.

Notice that the White House has not stated any materially important facts that were wrongly reported or commented (ie correcting the name of the city of an upcoming Olympics is not materially important). Notice that there is nothing that wasn't true. They didn't like it, but that does not mean it was false.

No, the White House would prefer that the public either drools with excitement (like some at MSNBC seem to do) if President Obama speaks, or completely ignores the news of the day. It's much easier to pass legislation that no one has read if no one pays attention.

Fox News is not perfect. I have had issue with some of the statements and coverage it has presented over the years. I have disagreed, strongly at times, with the opinions of Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Sheppard Smith. Yet I watch the channel every day because even when I disagree, the quality of the news and commentary is consistently far superior to other channels. And it is because I watch everyday that the silly internet bashers that misquote, and the bullying of the White House stand out for what they are.

Simply put, if an Administration is hell bent to make sure you don't see something it stands to reason that you should pay attention. Put another way, if this was President Bush telling you not to watch a news channel many would flock to see what he disliked and why. The fact that President Obama is Black and a rockstar politician doesn't change that reasoning.

The war of the cable news networks

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Phil Specter is convicted and America yawns

Phil Specter was convicted of murder today. And basically no one cares.

Think about it, an entertainer from decades ago, with an odd lifestyle, brutally murdered his girlfriend, and was engaged in a long-running court battle with high paid lawyers pulling every trick they could manage. Does this sound familiar?

It should since these are the very things that were used to describe the OJ Simpson trial. A trial that kept the nation on its tiptoes. A trial that created the largest outburst of rage since Jack Johnson won the Heavyweight title.

But Phil Specter is guilty, and no one cares. In fact few television stations or cable networks covered the story on a regular basis. And everyone should ask why.

Why is it that the brutal murder of a woman should be so unimportant? Why is there such a difference in the coverage one celebrity trial received as opposed to another? Why is there no cries of national joy with this conviction?

Because Phil Specter is not Black. It’s just that obvious and blatant. And I am disgusted by it.

I’m not defending either crime, nor whomever did it. I’m just sickened by the reaction of the nation. Because a Black man accused of a crime must be guilty. And if he escapes justice, the nation must find a way to make him pay. For the rest of his life. I mean that has been the reaction at least among the majority of White America for over a decade with OJ.

And I can only come to this conclusion by the facts at hand. No 24/7 coverage of the Specter trial. No analysis on cable news networks of the judge, the lawyers, and every piece of evidence. No national outrage as the first trial ended in a mistrial. Yes, that’s right, there have been 2 trials for this same murder. How many knew that before reading this?

Americans should be disgusted with themselves right now. Our legal system, or more accurately our manipulation of the legal system via the media, is beyond fractured and racially biased. It’s so bad that there is no way to hide it. Instead the media just ignores it, and people assume that it must be right since that’s what TV says.

There isn’t one good reason that the Phil Specter case did not get 1/10 the coverage of the OJ Simpson case, beyond race. And it’s hardly the only one. The Robert Blake case has come and gone as well, without a whisper. As have other high profile cases.

The difference is abundantly clear when you think about it. Virtually every Black entertainer and celebrity that has had a problem with the law has been lambasted by the media, and those that are White have been forgiven.

Lindsey Lohan is apparently a drunk drug addict, but she needs help. Paris Hilton is a forgetful kid going thru a phase to figure out who she is. Britney Spears is under enormous pressure and needs our support. Blake wasn’t discussed.

Yet Lil Wayne needs to be locked up. TI is going to jail where he will pay for his crimes. And so on. It’s not about the crimes, but the legal system and the media – and the bias they have.

That’s what the legal system says every day. Ex-Officer Mehserle kills an unarmed, defenseless, co-operating Oscar Grant, and he is without charges for a month (even evading investigation when he resigned from the police). Were it not for the video tape and riots, and more than just a few bloggers spreading the story, Oakland authorities likely would never have pursued the case.

But the media bent backwards to highlight only some video that made the case questionable. In fact they tried to deny the existence of evidence of the cold-blooded murder, other extended raw video, even though it was simultaneously available on Youtube.

So is the legal system biased? Oh Yeah. And is the media a willful and decisive tool in ensuring that racial bias is embedded in potential juror’s minds long before any trial? Every day.

The examples are numerous. I could keep going and going. But just go back to where I started. Phil Specter. And try to recall any detail of the case covered over the past couple of years (yep it’s been going on that long) by the media. Then compare that to your memory of the OJ trial (actually any trial of OJ will do as they all got massive media coverage).

If you don’t see the bias, I have to believe you don’t want to. Perhaps that’s the only thing worse.

Expecting the worst of MSNBC and Matthews is reaching too high

You know, it’s not like anyone watching MSNBC (few as they are) believes there is any shred of impartiality on the channel. The bias of this cable news network is obvious, insulting, and questions the descriptor “news”. But what happened yesterday was even worse.

Chris Matthews not so quietly let out “Oh God” just as Republican Gov. Jindal was about to provide the Republican response to President Obama’s speech. Now it does not matter if you are political or not. The on-mike comment was an insult to the American system of Government. It was bias in the news. It was a slap in the face to millions of Americans that did not vote for President Obama or feel that the current fiscal response is being run by Democrats like a Roman toga party.

We all know that Chris Matthews is without self-control when it comes to President Obama. He has said as much on air. So there is no doubt that he has the inability to do his job with regard to our nation’s leadership. But to tarnish the comments, before a single word is uttered is even worse. Just imagine the outrage that Matthews, MSNBC, and most of the rest of liberal news media would have had if such an utterance was made just prior to a Democrat response to any Republican Presidential address. They’d lose their minds and plaster the airwaves with the news.

But nothing will happen to Matthews. And the liberal media will ignore his contemptible bias. Because they share it. Thus living up to the ever more increasing thought that I have said before:

“Liberals and Democrats love freedom of speech and thought. As long as it matches exactly what they think. Otherwise they will try to remove it completely.”

The Huffington Post made a poll about the event, asking who the voice (at first unacknowledged as to whom it was) making the utterance was. 32% went with Matthews, 35% went with Keith Olbermann, 18% thought it was a producer. So clearly the visitors at the Huffington Post acknowledge that the on-screen and behind-the-scenes hierarchy of MSNBC, and likely NBC, are corrupt in their reporting. Which means the cable network is incapable of doing its job.

But the question I really would like to have heard Huffington Post ask was

Can America be served by a “news” network that has sold-out, effectively blocking free speech and thought?

Philadelphia: Justice for 1 in 5 fair for police

So here is a key thing to consider when it comes to how law enforcement in America reacts to a blatant and violent reaction caught on tape. In Philadelphia there were 19 police officers involved in an attack against 3 Black men. I spoke about this here Police overkill: not a movie, Philadelphia

Now I have long said that this is more than an isolated event. I have mentioned that this is a national policy, in at least that under duress the rules are bendable. And I noted that the offenders tend to be forgiven or barely touched by their actions. That is exactly what I perceive to be happening now.

Of all the officers involved, 4 will get fired. Additionally 1 will be demoted and 3 will be suspended. That’s it.

Look at the video in my previous post. Of all the officers involved I see none that are trying to stop any of the police brutality that occurred. Not a single police officer is being stopped as they kick and beat on the 3 men lying on the ground and surrounded by multiple officers each. In what way are they not complicit?

If I were to stand by and watch several African Americans beat a White American and it was video taped, I would be charged with conspiracy to commit a crime. I would be attacked by the media for not doing something to stop the obvious violence and overkill occurring. Yet officers of the law are not held to that same standard. Why?

But there is something else that is happening, and it is as critical as the actions of the police. It’s the reporting and words’ being used to describe what has happened.

On Yahoo you can read this statement right now

“The beating occurred at the same time police were conducting an intense manhunt for a suspect in the slaying two days earlier of Sgt. Stephen Liczbinski, but Ramsey said Monday that there was no indication that any of the officers thought the suspect was among the three men in the car.”

That sentence, the last in the article, is powerful. It implies that the manhunt for the criminal that killed an officer involved these men. That their actions were motivated by the belief these men were involved in that shooting in some way. That is the only purpose of this sentence. Especially since earlier in the article is clearly states that the police alleged these men were suspects in an unrelated shooting, which occurred the same night as the video.

That last statement, that I have heard cable news reporter repeat in some form, is the beginning of a defense of any potential charges on the officers. It is the seed of a subliminal excuse for all that read this. And it will become more prominent as the case moves forward. This always happens.

Is it a big deal? Yes, because a potential jury will hear this defense of the officers perhaps dozens of times. The fact that credible authorities, major media of multiple formats, have said this over and over means it must be true. Because anything the media says is thought to always be true. And this is the thought process being embedded. This is one reason that a jury could find Rodney King’s assailants innocent of any charge. It’s why the Sean Bell murderers were found innocent, thought the official police story on events changed dramatically.

Add to that the fact that the major media is trying very hard to prevent the average person from connecting how law enforcement acts on a regular basis. At least once every year the national media reports on an event where police officers use unwarranted extreme violence against African Americans – usually males. That’s at least once a year for probably decades now. But they are unconnected. And it’s never racial.

I feel that is a lie. It’s racial because it’s something that happens to only people of color. You have never heard of, nor has it ever happened that, a White male was shot 20, 30, 40, 50+ times in front of their home. You have never heard, or seen 5 or 10 or 15 officers beating on subdued White suspects. Because of this it is racial. And it’s connected.

We need to break this mindset in the law enforcement of this nation. We need to remove the permissive environment that exists allowing people of color to be victims of acts that would never be tolerated if done to White Americans. The statue of Justice is said to be blindfolded because Justice has no bias, But the more I pay attention I tend to believe she is blindfolded to not see the abuse and injustice being enacted in this nation – just as she remained blind to slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, and the various disparities found in inner cities as opposed to everywhere else.

Who the Oscar Awards didn't honor - 2.26.2008.1

So the Oscar Awards are over, and most of America neither cared nor knew the films that won. I was going to mention how irrelevant the Oscars were this year. That there is often no connection between what is nominated or wins and what the world actually thinks is a good film. But something far more important has come up.

Yes there was Daniel Day Lewis winning best actor in a film you didn’t see, Javier Bardem (a guy you don’t know) won best supporting actor in a film you didn’t see. Marion Cotillard (don’t know her either) won in a film you probably didn’t know existed, and Tilda Swinton won in Michael Clayton – which you probably know because George Clooney was in it, but few actually saw. And No Country For Old Men won best picture.

Now it’s important to realize that between these films that have no commercial importance and the fact that the Writer’s Guild strike lowered expectations, that there were things that slipped through the fingers of the Awards show. A major mistake, that I feel was a deliberate and obvious slap in the face. And this has been completely glossed over by the major media.

Whoopi Goldberg was slapped by the Oscar Awards. And Hollywood counted on the fact no one was watching to do it.

In a montage highlighting the Oscar Award hosts every host was shown, except Whoopi Goldberg and Steve Martin. What makes it so much worse, in regard to Whoopi Goldberg, is the fact that besides being the second Black woman to win an Oscar since Haddie McDaniels (back in 1939), she is one of 10 people to have ever won an Emmy, Grammy, Oscar and Tony Award. Whoopi Goldberg has been in 150 films, was the highest paid actress in the 1990’s, is a founding member of Comic Relief that raised money for the homeless, and was host of the Oscar Awards 4 times.

Now you might wonder how I learned this. Well it’s not from YouTube. You won’t find anything on it there. It wasn’t the major cable news media, they were busy discussing how Gary Busey gave a hug that surprised an actress who last starred in a film as Elektra – a box office bomb. Luckily it showed up on yahoo, and after a good deal of searching I found 2 sites that have the news of this slap in the face. One is an Asian site, the other in English. Here is the video clip.



So why did Hollywood make an obvious and intentional affront of one of the most famous, talented, successful, and respected Black female actress and comedienne? I don’t know why exactly, but I am sure they thought no one would notice because no one was watching.

But now that you know, what do you think?

Wesley Snipes is innocent! - 2.1.2008.1

Wesley Snipes is innocent! That is what the headlines in the news should say, but I bet you will find few that will follow my lead.

After a year of spotty reporting by the major news media, and highly questionable charges, in my opinion, a jury has found Wesley Snipes innocent of fraud, conspiracy and three other counts of not filing a tax return. The 2 felony charges were the big issues that the government, as well as the few pundits and news organizations that discussed this case, were focused on. And Wesley Snipes won, without calling a single witness and a single day of defense.

Mr. Snipes was found guilty of 3 counts of not filing a tax return. Those were misdemeanor counts. He was up for 16 years in prison, that pundits were sure he would be convicted for, and based on the misdemeanors he will almost assuredly spend no time in prison.

This is one of the few cases against a famous African American that I agree with the decision. From the first sudden declaration of a warrant for Mr. Snipes I have consistently stated I thought this was a made up case. I have repeatedly brought up issues that not a single pundit I am aware of would speak about. And I am one of the few that kept up with the case while the major news dropped the case the second they lost the chance to sensationalize the negative aspects.

I’m happy the jury saw the truth of the matter. And I have to believe that it is the obvious truth. Because while major news media and pundits won’t say it, when a jury watches a defendant, that is African Americans thus meaning already walking in guilty, call no witnesses and end their defense in one day and then still finds them innocent of the real charges of the case – the innocence is apparent to the blind.

Let the media claim that Wesley Snipes is guilty, let them try to proclaim he was wrong. The fact is that from day one this case was questionable and wrong-minded. And Wesley Snipes is innocent.

**Just click on the Wesley Snipes label below to see all the posts I’m made on this case for the history of it.**

Letter to Sheppard Smith of Fox News Part 2 - 9.19.2007.2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

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

Letter to Sheppard Smith of Fox News - 9.19.2007.1

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

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

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

My letter is as follows:

Mr. Sheppard Smith,

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

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

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

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

Continued in part 2...

6 abuse and torture Black woman in West Virginia - 9.12.2007.2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This is what I think, what do you think?

News media and murderers Part 2 - 6.25.2007.2

Continued from News media and murderers Part 1 ...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This is what I think, what do you think?

Have you heard about Wesley Snipes? Why not? - 6.18.2007.2

Sometimes you need to look back to see a full picture. As we live our lives going from point A to B we sometimes lose track of events around us. It’s human nature. The news media in this nation are no less human, but considering the nature of their profession they are supposed to be more reliable. So when I looked back on an item I wrote about Mr. Wesley Snipes, I found it interesting how the media has reacted.

For those that may have forgotten,

“I have some issues with this whole thing. First is the fact that the government accepted an amended claim of 0 income and made a refund of $7,000,000 without a red flag popping up is not Mr. Snipes fault. I would think someone would have noticed before now. And to suddenly issue a warrant without contacting an individual that has international travel as a normal course of business seems extreme. So far as has been reported no attempt to contact Mr. Snipes has been done.”

That was on day one. Things progressed as follows,

“I’m speaking about comments that I have heard in regards to Mr. Wesley Snipes. While Mr. Snipes has been indited by the government, the hoopla that has been brewing seems to be misplaced. You may have seem comments like ‘where is Welsely Snipes’ or comments like ‘no one can find Mr. Snipes’… I speculated that Mr. Snipes might just be out of the country. Like many entertainers in the movie acting industry, Mr. Snipes does travel out of the country to film projects on location… I wonder though why not one news agency that I saw, and not one article I read, mentioned this possibility. Rather they just inferred that Mr. Snipes was in hiding. Why?”

Then in November

“It is his claim that “I'm to be the scapegoat, because there's more public interest in `celebrities gone bad' than `rich people being taken advantage of”.

Which lead to

“In current news, why is it that news media agencies are molding the voluntary surrender to authorities of Mr. Wesley Snipes as the cops actively moving in and arresting him? Mr. Snipes has returned from his work in Namibia, and as worked out surrendered to authorities peaceably. Yet if you listen to the soundbites on the news stations it sounds as if Mr. Snipes came back, got off a plane and authorities swooped in…”

So what was the outcome of all this activity? Well according to TheSmokingGun.com Mr. Snipes has unfairly claimed that race was a factor in the ongoing case. They went on to say

“Douglas Rosile and Eddie Kahn, have not been charged with failure to file tax returns, though investigators are aware that Kahn did not file returns for six years and that it was "possible" Rosile did not file for two years”

Stay with me here, Continued in part 2...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

This is what I think, what do you think?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Concluded in Part 3...

David Hasselhoff tape can inspire - 5.14.2007.2

Well now on to some serious thoughts. Last week there was a lot of noise made about the video tape of Mr. David Hasselhoff during a drunken binge. Many criticized him about his actions and the supposed potential danger he posed to his children.

Who are these people to make such statements? I sometimes have to wonder what the motivations of the various pundits and cable news networks are when items like this are released. The point being that while Mr. Hasselhoff was drunk, the tape was made for a purpose. It’s no secret that Mr. Hasselhoff is an alcoholic, and has tried to stay sober on and off for years. Like any other addict he has moments of relapse. Like any other addict he cannot see fully how he is behaving, or it’s affect on his family, while he is under the influence.

Knowing this and understanding that he is no less human and prone to weakness, than anyone else Mr. Hasselhoff asked his kids to make the video tape if he ever fell of the wagon. Unlike the laughable Public Service Announcements that often fill the airwaves, this tape provides a real look at what alcoholism can be. It’s a personal motivation for Mr. Hasselhoff, helping him see the effect he has on those most close to him. One more reason to stay sober for one more day.

The reaction by the media at large was not filled with intent to educate the public or to motivate others about the demons alcoholism can pose. The media just showcased a story of the moment, highlighting a low point in the life of a public figure. It was a cheap grab at ratings, and it could have been far more.

I’m sure that some where helped by seeing the tape. Mr. Hasselhoff has said it was eye-opening for him to see how he was acting. Presented in the light of inspiration, this personal moment could have helped millions. I feel that it was maybe one of the best PSA’s in years, perhaps decades. It’s rare when we get to see the honest downside of alcohol abuse especially in the form of entertainers and celebrities. Far too often the various news media instead present us stories of drunken celebrities and entertainers as fun ‘who saw who’ soundbite clips. How many times have you seen a news clip talking about this famous person seen in a nightclub drunken, or an actress/singer/public figure seen kissing a woman or without underwear on?

The media showers these moments of loss of self-control at us like they were eye candy, and mostly it’s framed as a joke. Yet the fact is there is a significant dark tunnel that many, famous or not, travel through often. Yes we all have had a bit much to drink on an occasion or 2. Yes it can be funny when a star is caught acting like our friends on a rare Saturday night. But beating up on someone using the means available to them to inspire their sobriety is not beneficial to anyone.

News media have a responsibility to present us facts, not to interpret them for us. They have a responsibility that when an item of news is found that can help or hinder millions, they should err towards the greatest good. Picking on the self-admitted failures of a man with a problem may get ratings for a night or 2, but how does that help the greater good?

I’m no fan of Mr. Hasselhoff; Baywatch was only good because of how the women’s bikinis were being filled. Still I feel he deserved a fair shake on the videotape. It had a purpose, which reportedly has helped him get perspective and strength. I just can’t forget that it probably could have done the same for so many more.

I feel Mr. Hasselhoff’s words apply equally as well to the various media that used this tape for their own profit, as to the person that released it to the public.

“The tape was never meant to become public, but got into the hands of individuals who are not worthy of mentioning, who maliciously released the tape for their own self purpose. I hope that someone else will learn from the tape, as I have.”

This is what I think, what do you think?

Fox News turns a blind eye - 3.21.2007.1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This is what I think, what do you think?

Musings based on Mr. Bill Cosby's words

While many people are paying attention to the questionable mothering activities of Mrs. Britney Spears, or the alleged media driven divorce of Sir Paul McCartney, Many in the Back community may have missed something important. While not directly focused on entertainment comments from Mr. Bill Cosby have been overlooked I believe. Perhaps it’s the fact that what is being said is not particularly favorable to hip hop and rap, the current cultural emphasis on ‘thug life’, or the simple fact that it places attention on the accepted shortcomings of the Black African American youth of today. I for one not only agree, but am happy to have noticed the news.


I am specifically referring to the speech by Mr. Bill Cosby to Spellman College graduates recently. This is part of several comments made in recent years that address various aspects of Black culture and its failings. There is no reason to be tactful, in my opinion, as such attempts serve only to coddle the feelings of those that most need the harsh light of direct honest. Mr. Cosby correctly states that it is becoming more important for Black African American women to take the lead in fixing the current situation. While I feel that leading the family requires a strong father figure (yes I am somewhat old-fashioned), there is no debate that growing numbers of Black males are incarcerated, uneducated, unemployed, on drugs or killed in their youth. It’s estimated that 75% of the 500,00 incarcerated in 2000 were black (on non-violent drug offenses), and the number of this group being Black men is high. Why is this? I think the better question is why do we allow this.

I can cite many of my posts where an entertainer has been arrested on violent charges, or drugs. Many times the offender has gotten off quite lightly, and it is also apparent that disproportionately the news media emphasizes the Black African American offenders. The reaction of these offenses has been played by the media and various entertainment industries as an endorsement or marketing campaign for the offender. Too often this is focused on rap hip hop artists, or sports athletes. Within my last several posts [Harper Hill - success vs. dmx - airport arrest, Breaking the law entertainer-style] there are several incidents I have spoken about. How can we not penalize these repeat offenders, and why are these individuals rewarded for their actions with increases of record sales and sporting event tickets?

As Mr. Cosby mentions, how can we allow these men to

“... know how to send their sperm cells out and then walk away from the responsibility of something called fatherhood.”

When did that become acceptable? I mean specifically when did it become a bragging point for a Black man to say that he has 5 children, each from a different mother, and that he supports none of them? At what point did women (Black African American in particular) find pride in bearing children with random men, without the expectation of support or the intent of a relationship, and knowing that they lack the means to provide those children with basic needs. How could grandparents stand by or permit their children to pass on their obligation to raise their children, either to the grandparents or to the state, or worse yet to no one.

Too often we have seen many entertainers brought into courts on charges of failing to live up to child support, or abandoning their children completely (how many rappers and basketball players fall into this group that you can name as an example?). Yet we continue to ensure their continued activities, and disrespect, with censure to those that mention how badly these entertainers have behaved.

Mr. Cosby also poses another series of questions,

“Why are we the only race of people who use that stupid word, a word you learned from your mother? Why do our girls dress up like prostitutes? Why do our young men wear clothes designed like the clothes people in prison wear?”

I can’t understand how we can permit forms of entertainment that promote disrespect and ignorance. Look at a music video, not for the entertainment but what is being sent as a message. What do you see? How many women are performing in a manner that would get them arrested were they in public. And in comparison even the women in rock videos, long known for skimpy attire, behave and receive more respect than in the average rap video. Listen to a rap song, and/or many of the entertainers in various industries. Do you notice the on-air time spent on those that cannot speak English as well as 3rd grade children. Name a performer in country music, an actor for movies or television, rock music, or sports that isn’t in rap hip hop or the ‘thug life’ that speaks badly. Not badly, virtually incomprehensibly. Other than the noted mis-spoken usage of Mr. Don King, there are virtually no others. At least Kid Rock has the excuse he is illiterate, as I recall. I’d suggest you recall how many speak well and are in the ‘thug life’ but I think that would take too long and may not exist.

Continued in part 2 ...