The Real Issue With the X-Men: Apocalypse Casting

Last week, Bryan Singer announced the recasting of Cyclops, Jean Grey, and Storm for X-Men: Apocalypse, and nobody really seemed to care, because who the fuck are these people?  They're like the cast of the new Fantastic Four flick, except for Michael B. Jordan. In fact, they're so anonymous that they might be the same people.  

The Storm casting did get some buzz from Storm fans, because she is once again being played by some girl who doesn't fit the Storm mold.  I get it, because everyone wants to see their favorites represented properly on screen.  It's the reason why I have decided that the Transformers movies are nothing more than a series of night terrors filled with slow-motion action shots and blurry metal shards that I can't wake up from.  Storm fans (myself included) want to see their girl shown as the powerful African leader that she is, instead of the sidekick to Jean with a white wig that she's become.  

But the really important issue with this recasting hasn't even been addressed:  We no longer have to watch Wolverine's love affair with Jean Grey that never made a lick of sense.  I assume it won't be there, because it would be really, really creepy.

See, I'm a masochist, evidently, because I've watched all of the X-Men movies.  And I watched them closely enough to realize that Wolverine knew Jean Grey for maybe a week, in total movie time.  So watching him tearfully kill Jean in the third one, and dream about her years after the fact, always made me sick.  I should have been crying, because I was the one who sat through X-Men: The Last Stand. 

That plot thread is something that is well known to folks who read the comics.  For a couple of decades, the comics teased the idea that Jean and Wolverine had a long smoldering attraction for each other, and in another world, they might have been together.  But Scott had that on lock (for reasons that continue to mystify us), so Jean would never act on it, even though Wolverine would sometimes press the issue.  

In the flicks, Wolverine met Jean, spent almost no time with her in the couple of days he tooled around the mansion, then left the X-Men for an undetermined amount of time.  He showed up back out there just in time for them to get invaded, and never saw Jean again until a few minutes before she died.  She was an evil zombie throughout the next movie, so it's not like she was in a position to further explore their relationship.  Wolverine worked hard on his chest to impress her, so her rejection forced him to kill her.  Some of this might have been made up, because that third movie was so awful, and I really don't want to watch it again.

But saying that Wolverine knew Jean for a week is being generous.  

It's kinda like in Man of Steel, where Superman and Lois have no reason throughout the movie to get together, but they still have to kiss at the end, because that's the expectation.  Wolverine is a dude who trusts no one and hasn't for decades, but he meets this girl who's already booed up, spends no time with her, but when she dies, he's suddenly so close to her that he's on the brink of tears?  And in the next movie, he struggles to kill her, even though he hasn't had a problem killing complete strangers since this trilogy started?  Even though these movies were supposed to walk their own path, Wolverine and Jean had to eye-bathe each other, because those were the times.  Even if it doesn't make sense.  

That's the kind of foolishness that this recasting gets us from up under.  Sure, Storm is still underwhelming (and probably wasn't going to be a big part of the movie, so they're just filling a roster spot), but we're just that much closer to a movie that makes sense.

#CancelWWENetwork is a thing, and I don't blame you

Please don't misunderstand, WWE.  People aren't canceling their WWE subscriptions because Roman Reigns won the Royal Rumble.  They're not canceling because Daniel Bryan lost, either.  That would be pretty stupid.  People are canceling their subscriptions because they're tired of your shit.

Your show is trash, WWE.  Raw is trash.  Smackdown is trash.  NXT is cool.  Your pay-per-views are trash.  And have been for quite sometime.

I quit watching WWE in 2007 or so, because your shows started crapping out.  They were not worth my time.  They were not entertaining.  And WWE was not missed.  The Royal Rumble and Wrestlemania came to Atlanta during that time, but I didn't care.  I wasn't watching, and I didn't, until 2011, because I heard about CM Punk and the "pipebomb" promo.  And once I saw that things hadn't changed at all, I quit watching again.  But I wanted to watch wrestling, so I watched TNA instead.  At the time, TNA still qualified as "wrestling."

I'd check in from time to time with WWE after that, right up until the present day, and it was never getting any better.  Boring angles, uninteresting wrestlers, the endless three-hour death march known as "Monday Night Raw."  Like, they named a guy "Bad News Barrett," in the tradition of "Bad News Allen/Brown," who was named such because, if you got into it with him, it was bad news for you.  The updated version of this gimmick?  He literally came out and gave people bad news.

We went from a tough guy to a guy whose gimmick was to say, "I've got some bad news. Your city sucks," or whatever he said that week.  This is the level of creativity we're dealing with here.

And all the while, ticket prices are rising and pay-per-views are getting astronomical in price.  Wrestlemania had reached $60.  The average price was $45, and there was at least one every month.  And you're getting Bad News Barrett for your money?

So then, WWE introduces the WWE Network in 2014, and for $10 a month, you can watch all of their pay-per-views, WCW's pay-per-views, ECW's pay-per-views, and all kinds of old shows and content.  Not only that, you can watch the new pay-per-views live each month, for no extra money.  It's a great deal, and eventually, I signed up for that.  Not to watch the new shit, mind you, because it's dogshit.  I signed up to watch the old shit.  But if you're gonna throw in that month's show for free, I'll check it out.  And that's what I started doing back in November.

And the three pay-per-views I've watched haven't been worth the ten bucks.  Just some of the shittiest damn wrestling shows I've ever seen.

Now, I know how disappointed I was, and I had just started watching again.  I can only imagine how folks feel when they've been watching the entire time.  Before the network, when you had to pay full price for these shows.  When you were paying all this money in ticket prices.  When you were watching their shows every week.  And the shows are just awful, but the people running the show don't care.  You're still coming, you're still watching, so why change?

But WWE has invested a lot in this network, and they want it to take off.  It's been struggling to get subscribers, even at that low price.  They can't afford to lose the subscribers they have.  That's their weak spot.  They could ignore you when they were just on TV or on pay-per-view, because there are other entities involved that are providing money to the company.  Ratings had been dropping since 2002.  They didn't care.  They had advertisers and such to keep giving them money.  But this network is all on them.  And these numbers come to them in real time.  So frustrated viewers can make their voices heard.  By canceling.

Enough was enough, and when you can't do any better for one of your big four shows than what we got last night (and Survivor Series before it), well, I don't blame folks for canceling.  I don't know where this idea comes from that people can't dislike the shows that they watch, and they can't complain when something that was good isn't good anymore.  Some people enjoyed the Royal Rumble, but a lot people didn't.  And that's not because Roman Reigns won and Daniel Bryan didn't.  It's because it was a shit show, and along the way, they seemed to take special care to keep people from enjoying the guys they like.  If you gave Daniel Bryan fans (or Dolph Ziggler or Cesaro or Dean Ambrose) a good showing before he lost, people might not have reacted the way they did.

It wasn't worth $45 for PPV, or whatever people paid for tickets, or even the three hours it took to watch it.  Here's hoping that WWE finally starts to understand that.

College players don't play any harder than pros, you fool

I get that some folks like college sports more because of this myth that college students play harder.  I don't know where it came from, but it had to have been started by someone who doesn't understand football. It's a really stupid argument that NFL players aren't playing hard all the time, because you will be killed if you play football at half-speed while everyone else isn't.  You could try to argue that teams collectively decide to slack off, but we've seen that before, too.  It's called the Pro Bowl, and the Pro Bowl sucks.

People really push this idea when it comes to basketball, though.  Personally, I don't buy the fact that pro players don't play hard, because there is no other sensible reason for Kobe Bryant to sweat that much.  If Kobe is sweating like that and not playing hard, I suggest that he see a doctor.  I mean, besides the one about to cut open his shoulder.

Now, if you told me that pro players didn't play hard every night, you might have an argument, and even then, I don't blame the players.  The players aren't slacking off because they're overpaid fat-cats that can't be bothered to entertain the fans.  The players are slacking off because they have to play the Knicks six times.

The NBA season is already an 82 game grind, and you expect these players to bring the same fire that they'd give to Chicago to the Philadelphia 76ers?  The good teams get more of a challenge playing themselves in practice.  Playing the Sixers multiple times is like the morning conference call of basketball games.  It has to be done to make the boss happy, but you're not about to pretend like it's truly necessary.

It's only an expectation because it's believed that Michael Jordan did it.  Oh, Jordan never took a game off.  And he probably didn't, because Michael Jordan is a lunatic.  You saw from his Hall of Fame speech how much trouble he's having adjusting to civilized society, where every perceived slight isn't grounds for some form of revenge.  When regular people do that, they usually need to seek some form of counseling, because making the other person keep shooting half-court shots for two hours until you win (this actually happened) isn't a realistic option.  But let's make Michael Jordan's rare psychosis the standard for NBA players.  Kobe shares this affliction, but you hate Kobe, and right now, he's trying to figure out how to tape up his rotator cuff so he can play next week.  This isn't healthy behavior.

Besides, the NBA season is four times as long as a college season.  Who can't bring it for twenty games?  True, being browbeaten by some redass college coach could be exhausting, but if you're any good, you're only gonna be there for a year or two, anyway.  When you're a 19 year old college player who has agents secretly telling him that he's going in the lottery, and girls sneaking in and out of your dorm room, you're not listening to the coach, anyway.  Play defense? Defense is for suckers.  Carmelo didn't play defense at Syracuse (and it was a zone defense, at that), and he has a $124 million dollar deal.

And that's what it's all about, anyway.  They're not doing this for some mythical love of the game.  This is their audition for the same millions that Carmelo gets.  They don't love the game any more than the pros do.  They just don't have to keep up the illusion as long.

But let these kids have to go on a six game road trip in the middle of a forty game season, through flyover country, against a bunch of schools that even Digger Phelps would struggle to recognize, and see how much effort you get.  John Calipari could offer his players cash bribes on top of their secret signing bonuses and Kentucky still wouldn't show up against Kennesaw State.  Hell, if they did show up against Kennesaw State and beat them by 70, these same folks would complain that Kentucky ran up the score.

So I don't mind if players take a few games off because who cares, they're playing Charlotte.  If Golden State really brought it for four quarters against Charlotte, Charlotte would lose by 200 points and Michael Jordan's anger would make him try to suit up again.

And you shouldn't care, either, because it's not like those games get aired by anyone except NBA TV.

CM Punk should be your hero

Seems like everyone has had a few choice words for CM Punk this year, whether it was because he left, how he left, or because he explained his reasons for leaving. Everyone seems to think he's a bitch for walking out on Vince McMahon, like doing the right thing matters in that situation.  In 2011, he was cool for saying everything we had been saying about the company, but now, he's whining. And I don't get that, because the people who are talking shit should really understand where he's coming from. I know I do.

Right now, I'm working a job that I hate. It isn't the first time, but hopefully, it'll be the last time. I get burnt out dealing with the same, easily fixable bullshit that happens around here, or being told that management is listening, but they ignore you when you show up with ideas. Or having to be the one who takes the hit when other people can't or won't do their job correctly. That shit gets tiring and stressful, and if it wasn't for the fact that I don't have millions in the bank, I'd tell that place to go fuck themselves expeditiously.

So I understand where Punk is coming from, and that's before you factor in that he had to risk his already injured body to make dangerous people like Ryback look good for six nights a week. No matter how much money you make, some days, you just lie in bed and dread the amount of shit that's coming your way.  And goddammit, you just don't want to deal with it anymore.

Maybe we don't want to understand his side because he's living our dream, and we think that's what we want. And because it looks awesome, that's what he should want, too. He ain't digging a ditch.  He travels and he's famous.  He gets to be at Comic-Con and on Talking Dead.  Plus, he's a millionaire, and stupid people think that means you lose your right to complain.  But that's part of the problem, and like Punk says, Vince is taking advantage of that.

Just because everyone wants it and thinks they're willing to put up with it or its been done this way for so long doesn't mean it's correct. Slavery was practiced in America for 400 years. Rape and dowries used to be a part of the courtship process. Drilling holes in the skull used to be a legitimate medical practice. And just because John Cena is willing to go 400 days straight with no break doesn't mean that CM Punk should have to suffer in silence. If he isn't physically or mentally capable of holding up anymore, for whatever reason, then he should go home.

And that's before we get into the petty shit that WWE does.

Yeah, WWE is petty, and we've known this since the Huckster and Scheme Gene. We've lambasted WWE for decades because Vince McMahon is a very small man when he wants to be. He was the bad guy when he did those skits and he continued to be the bad guy up until he fired Alberto del Rio for slapping a racist backstage. He lets all sorts of bigots, sexists, and bullies run rampant in his locker room. He encouraged his wrestlers to use steroids, while at the same time telling those wrestlers that they didn't really work for him.  And even though they didn't really work for him, when they left his employ, he limited their employment opportunities elsewhere (no-compete clauses). He's your best friend when he can make money off of you, and when you're all used up, ready to die, or completely hate the business, you never hear from him again. And people don't put up with it because they love fake fighting or because they're heroes. They put up with it because they've been raised to believe that this is how it's supposed to be, as long as Vince is paying you.  For one guy, the money wasn't incentive enough to keep coming back. And that's the guy you call a bitch?

Man, fuck that. You've walked away from jobs and people for way less, so miss me with this shit about how Punk should have stuck it out or that WWE was somehow in the right. If Punk's story is correct, he went home because he was hurt and burnt out, WWE didn't want to fix anything that was wrong with him (because he's an "independent contractor"), then they fired him on his wedding day (and of course they knew all about it, because fucking AJ Lee had to have that time off).  If Punk's story wasn't true, don't you think WWE would have immediately sued him for telling it?  Don't you think they would have responded online? Vince had the floor just last week on Stone Cold's podcast, and didn't refute a damn thing. 

No, I don't fault CM Punk at all. In fact, I'm jealous, because I wish I could do that shit.

Because as badly as I'd like to see him cutting promos and giving me one solid reason to watch WWE, now he's living my dream. He has the freedom, like Chris Jericho or Rob Van Dam, or John Morrison before him to go explore the other shit that they like to do. And if he ever decides he wants to wrestle again, he can. And if not, he doesn't have to.  CM Punk should be your hero, because he told the establishment to kiss his ass, and legally speaking, they did it. 

Only this time, it wasn't kayfabe.  And that's unfortunate, because I was hoping he'd demand the ice cream bars again. 

Dion Waiters doesn't have to stand for the National Anthem, and neither do you

I swear, y'all get so touchy about the wrong shit.

There's a story going around that Dion Waiters, shooting guard for the Cleveland Cavaliers, declared that he isn't standing for the National Anthem anymore, because of his religious beliefs.  He's a Muslim, and as we all know, Muslims hate America.  Well, we would all know that if we all did the right thing and watched Fox News.  

And as you'd expect, there's a whole lot of people mad at him, because reacting without knowing reasons is so commonplace in America that you'd think it was in the Constitution.  To let the folks I saw online tell it, we should all be offended that he hates America so much, and that he should go play in the Middle East if he loves Islam so much.  Only the most measured and reasonable responses go on the internet.  It's not like he'd stand for the National Anthem over there, either.

Now, as an old man, it isn't the first time I've seen this.  I remember when Chris Jackson, later known as Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf, of the Denver Nuggets (and hated Gulfport High School), did the same thing back in 1996, for the same reasons.  He eventually decided to stand and pray, as a way to, um...what's the word that means "meeting in the middle?"  Compromise.  You'll have to excuse me for forgetting the word, but it never happens in our culture anymore, so I haven't needed to remember it. 

But in the meantime, people went crazy, just like they're on the verge of doing now.  Insults, death threats, the whole nine.  And over the stupidest of reasons:  Over a song written by a slave owner who ironically didn't want his own freedom restricted.  And for a song about freedom, people out here sure are hell-bent on Dion Waiters not keeping his.

After all, it isn't a crime not to stand for the National Anthem.  It's a nationalistic custom that became codified, but no one ever goes to jail for this, and people refuse to stand for the National Anthem all the time.  Hell, I've personally refused to stand for the National Anthem before.  And it's not like there aren't things happening in America that give people reasons to feel like America isn't with them.  Dion Waiters is black and a Muslim.  Buddy's got a list.  

But he probably isn't doing it for those reasons, anyway (although he'd be justified).  It isn't some political statement that he's making.  Muslims simply believe (according to the Google research I did right before sliding into an endless vortex of Salon articles. There's one that explains why we have pubic hair. Pubic hair.) that they're not supposed to humble themselves or stand in veneration for anyone except Allah.  There's a lot I don't agree with when it comes to Islam, but I have no problem with that.  After all, they're trying to stay good with their omnipotent and eternal Creator, and you want to give them grief about a custom built up around a song written 200 years ago that'll probably be forgotten in another hundred.  When it comes to historical importance (from their perspective), you might as well be mad at them for not wanting to do the Schmoney Dance. 

And if you're a Christian (and most of you are claiming to be, because atheists really don't care that much), you probably should back up off all this anger, because your religion says something similar, all up in the Bible.  Yeah, revering this flag and song is tantamount to idolatry.  I'm an unrepentant heathen, and even I know that your God doesn't like that.  Come on now, you know that dude is jealous and angry.  You think he's gonna be reasonable about your nationalism?  I guess you could throw Romans 13:1 at me (Google it, like I did), but again, there's no authority that says you have to stand for the flag.  Just advisory rules that suggest how you observe the custom.  

Really, none of this means anything at all, because while Dion Waiters didn't stand for the National Anthem in Utah on Wednesday (he was still in the locker room), he did stand for it Friday night in Denver.  Waiters says that the story isn't true at all (might not even be a Muslim), and what's more likely is that he was pouting about being pulled from the starting lineup in Utah.  Waiters has been talking shit about how he should start from the minute LeBron said he was coming back to Cleveland, so I'm sure he wasn't happy about coming off the bench.  But I felt like I should address it, because I know how Americans like to overreact about meaningless things.  

It's what I get for insisting on reading the comments.  Never read the comments.

Blogger Can't Pull Her Head Out Of Her Own Ass: The Eric Garner Edition

It took a lot of effort to write this and not make it about trashing feminists.  I just feel like I need to you let you know that up front.

I don't need to tell anybody that the Eric Garner murder by the NYPD is all fucked up.  I think we all agree there.  And I'm not telling you that you have to go protest and hit up every rally that breaks out, because let's be totally honest:  I won't be there, either.  I am a lazy person in general, and I work ten hour days in a city whose only defining characteristic is heavy traffic.  I barely even visit my parents, let alone attend protests.

So there's no shame in not attending any of those marches, and I'm not just saying that to cover my own ass.  But if that's what you're gonna do, just don't be a self-involved dickhead like this lady, who wrote a piece over at "For Harriet," (read it here) where she declares that she won't join any protests for Eric Garner because men don't support the fight against misogyny.  I was gonna call her a "twat," but I don't want my own inherent misogyny to take this discussion off course.  I think "dickhead" is a fair compromise.

Kimberly Foster, the writer of this piece, argues that, while she will shed tears over Eric Garner (because there are no other ways to express sadness or sympathy with this family than writing that you're literally shedding tears), she will not join the fight for justice, because we men have not converted to full time feminists.  To fully drive her point home, she also says in the piece, "you're not my friend anymore," and "I'm taking my toys and going home."  It's the kind of writing that exemplifies why people make fun of thinkpieces.

It really is a childish argument to make, that she's not going to do anything for him, because all of us (penis-wielders, that is) don't do anything for her kind (feminists, I assume).

Now, to be fair, men really don't do much for women's rights, or understand how women navigate a world where there are a lot of men are trying to fuck them, regardless of their wishes.  I'm stealing this line from Louis C.K., but essentially, the number one threat to women are men.  And it's true.  Men stay raping women, killing women, beating women, insulting women, calling them names because they told them no, putting them in those ratchet ass strip club rap videos, you name it, we do it.  Generally speaking, the number one skill that men have is hurting women or breaking down their sense of self-worth.  To put it in Madden terms, we have a 99 ranking in that department.  And speaking of Madden, that's our number two skill.

It's not all men that act like this, but from a woman's perspective, she doesn't know who is or isn't going to be that asshole, and has to keep her guard up.  I get that.  While it isn't 100% of men who act like that, probably 99% percent of people who act like that towards women are men.  The remaining 1%?  Bull dykes, I guess.  Are we still calling them "bull dykes?" I don't even know if that's offensive.  Anyway, these statistics probably aren't 100% accurate, because "the inside of my ass" isn't a legitimate source.

And yet, because all men aren't on board with her crusade (which is a worthy cause), she isn't going to take up this crusade.  As if women aren't wrongly arrested, assaulted, or killed by the police.  This isn't a man/woman issue, because the cops don't give a fuck about anybody.  She must have missed that video where the cop pinned the lady down with his knees and started teeing off on her face.  I wish I could have seen the little hamster inside her head stumble on his running wheel as she was thinking this shit up.

Just because it was a man this time, that excuses her from all protesterly duties.  She'll save her bile and rage for when it's a woman being assaulted by the police, so she can charge him with a violation of her rights and misogyny.  She ain't getting out the bed for no less than misogyny.

This is the divide-and-conquer shit that prevents justice from being served.  While you're drawing your line in the sand, the police are still beating on people with impunity.  But don't worry about that, because reciprocity is the more important hill to die on.  All you're doing is showing that when the shit goes down, you're not gonna be there.  And if you're not gonna be there, that's fine.  Just don't paint yourself as someone who's taking a noble stand by leaving people hanging when they need help.  You ain't no hero. Anybody can do what you're doing.  Ignoring homeless people on the street can give you that same sense of self-satisfaction.  What you're doing is trying to position yourself as some sort of victim, when you're actually someone who can't think outside of themselves for five minutes before you have to ask, "What about me?"

But hey, it's your blog.  Whatever works for you.

Josh Gordon ain't no political prisoner (also, weed is delicious)

Rob Van Dam once talked about how all these world class athletes all smoked weed.  Can't find the quote, but he said something to the effect of, "Why is it that all of the finely tuned athletes who know so much about their bodies are choosing to smoke weed?"  Maybe it was Joe Rogan.  Anyway, they're basically saying that if there was something really wrong with it, these people would know and wouldn't use it.  I tend to believe them, because they both have (or had) shows built around smoking a lot of weed and talking about it, so I assume they'd know. 

I personally don't think there's anything wrong with weed.  I've said since I was a teenager, I'd rather my kids smoke weed than cigarettes.  And yet, it's still considered a part of the same category as heroin.  In the eyes of the law, weed and heroin are the same.  It's a ridiculous idea, because one has been killing people since it came out and the other is responsible for American weight gain.  They're not the same thing, and I think one of them should be legalized, even if it is responsible for putting Taco Bell on the map. 

Josh Gordon, wide receiver for the Cleveland Browns, obviously feels like I do, because he just failed a second drug test the other day.  He could be suspended for a year as a result. 

And like with all drug suspensions, some people are calling him stupid and other people are like, "hey, man, weed comes from the Earth, man."  Personally, I don't think it's worth an actual debate.  At least not about the rightness or wrongness of a Gordon suspension.  The debate needs to be about weed laws and how the NFL eventually will treat them, not whether or not it's fair that he could be suspended a year, while Ray Rice, who punched out his fiance in a casino (allegedly, even though we all saw the video of the aftermath), will be starting Week 1 of the season.  Or that Jim Irsay, who was arrested with pills and cash in a pillow case, got his situation swept under the rug.  It isn't.  We all know the NFL doesn't hand out punishment fairly. 

But Josh Gordon ain't no political prisoner.  He's a weed head.  And I don't even say that negatively, because weed heads are fun people to be around.  I don't know Josh Gordon, but I'm sure he isn't any different.  I don't really follow Cleveland sports, because reading about Cleveland makes dark thoughts crop up in my head, but I haven't heard anything about him being lazy or causing a problem up there.  In fact, he's a really good player, so clearly, he can handle his high.  But let's not act like this man is facing a grave injustice.  His civil rights aren't being violated.  The NFL has clear rules and testing procedures for weed.  I don't think they have one for punching your girlfriend in the face, otherwise, half the league would be actually be practice squad players, because everyone else was already suspended.

I'm not saying that to justify spousal abuse, either.  The NFL and the Players' Union need to crackdown on players who do stuff like this, unless it's good business for them to represent a gang of wifebeaters.  Even if it's just smashing their toes with a hammer, or a series of paper cuts, they need to do something to let players know that attacking their wives is not okay.  In a perfect world, they would do this and fight for a loosening of drug restrictions.  But there's no sense in that, because their only choices in this are "conform or nah?"  The NFL is never going to budge on this.  Ever. 

It was suggested (on Twitter, admittedly) that because weed helps with brain injuries and stuff like that, and because the NFL has a huge problem with brain injuries, Josh Gordon shouldn't be suspended.  And that sounds reasonable until you realize that we don't know if that's why Josh Gordon was smoking.  He might just like making smoke rings.  And we can't ask him now, because of course he's gonna say that's why he was doing it.  Hell, I'd tell you it was curing my crippling erectile dysfunction if it kept from me getting suspended.

Another thing to realize is, the NFL has proven that it doesn't give a shit about players and their stupid brain injuries.  To them, that's just a left-wing conspiracy cooked up to bleed the job creators dry.  That's why they hid information about brain injuries from the players and that's why they nickel and dime former players now.  Junior Seau shooting himself in the chest didn't mean anything to them.  They're far more concerned about the image of the league (WE GOTTA PROTECT THE SHIELD, MAN!), and while weed is still illegal, they're not going to change anything, no matter how many tests prove that it helps with brain injuries.  They won't even change if it's legalized, because after that, there will still be a lingering perception of weed as a "drug."  As far as the NFL's concerned, you better grab a fistful of somas or a cortizone shot and get back on the field. 

That's where the real debate needs to be.  Not whether or not Josh Gordon is getting screwed, because Ray Rice is living out his Mike Tyson fantasies and Jim Irsay is playing "Breaking Bad," and nothing's happening to them.  Unfortunately, the rule is the rule, and they don't have one for punching women or owners going to buy $29,000 in drugs.  Or smoking fake weed and jerking off in a parking lot (this one is absolutely true).  Or even for players causing a national security uproar at the airport.

See, that's the problem right there.  Josh Gordon isn't being as imaginative with his infractions as everyone else. 

Maybe Mark Jackson ISN'T a victim. MAYBE.

So Mark Jackson got fired from the Warriors yesterday, despite being the best coach they've had since the first time Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles came out.  Remember those days?  You could still buy a black and white TV.  Michael Jackson being white was a new thing. 

All the reports are saying that no one liked him and that's why he got fired.  Well, no one except the team.  You know, the most important people to impress.  Because there's plenty of coaches that got along great with the front office who would get outcoached at the YMCA youth league, which is why they now have a well paid job working the telestrator on ESPN.  ESPN is nature's way of removing shitty coaches from the business of winning basketball games. 

Logically speaking, though, that's probably the dumbest reason of all time to fire a coach.  The dude won 51 games, got the team into the playoffs the last two years, and has the support of the team.  You know, the guys who put asses in the seats.  He's making you money and he's winning games.  How fragile does your ego have to be to end all of that just because the coach doesn't like you, Joe Lacob?  I would say that coaches have been fired for less, but there will always be Jerry Jones and George Steinbrenner.  You have to sink to subhuman levels of pettiness to get where they are, but that's where Joe Lacob seems to be now.  Firing a coach for not getting along with the owner is like firing a coach who just won two Super Bowls for you, because the media didn't give you enough credit for putting the team together. 

Now, everyone's mad at the owner, because everyone loved Mark Jackson, and in basketball, that's important.  The media needs to like the coach, otherwise, they'll start a campaign to D'Antoni your team.  Of course the players have to like the coach.  The fans should like the coach, because they're buying tickets.  Who gives a fuck what the people working for the organization think?  No one's coming to see you.  And do you know how irrelevant the owner can be when it comes to public outreach?  Donald Sterling is a racist and has owned the Clippers for 33 years.  When he bought them, almost everyone I know was semen.  He's been a racist the whole time, and it hasn't stopped the Clippers from selling tickets. 

So as long Mark Jackson isn't messing up that cash, it really shouldn't matter.  Then again, scuttlebutt around the Bay says there's more to it than that. 

Word from the SF Gate has it that Mark Jackson, who is a pastor (I honestly had no idea until a few hours ago), and team president Rick Welts, who is "a gay (that's a quote from Donald Sterling)," were at odds about Welts's openly gay lifestyle.

Well, that changes everything.  Because if that's true, then it changes from a story about a sensitive ass owner to a guy who was openly insulting his boss.  'Cuz Mark Jackson wasn't shy about weighing in about gay issues in the NBA, and he didn't seem like the most gay-friendly guy.  On a scale from "one" to "Tim Hardaway," I would hope he was closer to "one," but he doesn't exactly sound welcoming.  When Jason Collins came out, Mark Jackson said something about having "beliefs of what’s right and what’s wrong."  He also said he was going to pray for Collins's family.  And as a guy who hasn't been to church since the last time the Warriors were good, someone saying that they're going to pray for you means that they want something about you to change.  By some accounts, Jackson really wasn't feeling "the gays."

And if this is true, it's probably going to become a thing about how a "God-fearing Christian man" lost his job because of his religious beliefs, and I'm going to start insulting people for being hypocrites again.  If it is true, Mark Jackson lost his job because he wouldn't shut the fuck up.  You can't go around insulting your boss, even if you believe your religion entitles you to shit on everyone else's lifestyle (it doesn't).  That's what this is about.  Mark Jackson isn't a victim when you put it like that.  Mark Jackson isn't even a man of conviction.  Mark Jackson is stupid.  Just because you believe something doesn't mean it needs to be said all the time. 

Besides, can you really get that mad about some religious guy getting fired by his openly gay boss?  It's actually kind of ironic, considering all of the roadblocks people are throwing up at gay people in the name of "religious freedom."  I almost hope this story is true, just so I can laugh at the people who get mad. 

But if it isn't true, then I retract all of that and I'll meet everyone at the picket line to cape up for Mark Jackson.  I'll have my trash can ready for optimal window-throwing and everything.  Promise.  

Darrell Trigg for President: Please let this happen.

We've reached that time when all manner of fringe elements have started declaring for the Presidential race.  Most of the people won't make it the distance because they don't have the resources to get onto the ballot (which is why we need electoral reform), or because they started running two years in advance and ran out of money.  And then, there are those who could have all the money they wanted and won't make it because they are just a fucking lunatic.  That's the category that Darrell Trigg falls into.

Darrell Trigg is an Engineering Consultant from Virginia, and I suspect that the only reason why this information got into his biography is because he had to prove that he wasn't some sort of drifter who killed an old widow for her money.  Aside from those four sentences, the other three pages are about how much he loves God.  Nothing wrong with that.  I just find it startling that a person who wants to be President has almost nothing to say about his employment history.  I mean, if you spend 30 years working at Target and now you want to be President, I'd like to know that, because if nothing else, I expect you to have good customer service skills. 

But Darrell is one of those kinds of people who really wants to be a pastor, but got the words mixed up and said "President" instead.  And being an old man, I see how something like that could happen.  When you see Darrell's platform, it'll all make sense, because this is a man whose only difference from the Taliban is that girls will still be able to go to school.  FOR NOW.

He wants to impose all kinds of holy restrictions upon all of us, and maybe 30 or 40 of you out there will think this is cool, but for the other 300 million, it's going to be a problem.  Well, not really, because it's not like this guy has a shot at winning, but if he did, someone would have him assassinated long before the election.  I'm not kidding.  If this man had a realistic shot at being seen on television outside of public access, he would alienate so many people that the Democrats and Republicans would forget about each other and tear this guy to pieces.  And now that I've said it, I truly hope to see something like that happen.

Thanks to The Everlasting GOP Stoppers and Joe My God for bringing this guy to my attention.  His platform is below and in italics, and I'll be chiming in here and there. 

1. Separation of Church and State will be changed to the Union of Church and State. God will be asked to be an integral part of the government of the U.S.

• The national religion of The United States of America will be the Christian religion . Those belonging to other religions, such as Islam, will be free to live and worship here as now, with their own religion;  however, the Christian religion will be the one chosen to form the basic moral principles of our nation, to give it a strong moral foundation, and a right relationship with God.

See, right away, you'd think that he'd be cool with Republicans, because this is what they claim to want.  But don't you worry; this cozy relationship won't last long. 

2.  Public Schools – all schools supported by the U.S. Federal and State tax systems: 

• The Bible will be a standard required subject in all public schools and universities, for all grades , the same as English and Math.
• Each day of school will begin with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance. 
• The salary and total compensation package of school teachers will be increased.
• The total budget for our school system will be increased.
• The school day will include one period of physical education that includes 30 minutes of exercise four days per week.

There are actually some good ideas in here that aren't really ideas, but instead empty platitudes.  The people who would support increasing teacher salaries and school budgets have already checked out, though, because there's already too much religion in this.  I'd be surprised if they haven't already burst into flames.  Personally, I wish a motherfucker would tell me that my kid had to learn the Bible.  Hell, I'd make sure I was in college during his presidency just so I could tell him "fuck you" when he tried to make me learn it.  Digging myself further into debt would be totally worth it. 

3.  Homosexuality will not be recognized legally, or in any other manner, by the United States government or any state, city, or county government.
 
4. Public - Traded Corporations :

• The income and other compensation,  received by the managers and officers of public - traded corporations will be limited to $300,000 per year. 

...and now, the Republicans have turned on him.  It was all good just a bullet point ago.  Hating gays, forcing the Bible on folks, that was cool.  But you want to limit our--I mean, corporate pay?  I hope your affairs are in order, Mr. Trigg.  And it just goes downhill from here. 

5.  The income of coaches of sports teams at universities will be limited to $300,000 per year .

Yeah fucking right.  They'd let Jerry Sandusky go back to Penn State before this ever happened.
 
6.  The legal drinking age will be increased to 25 for any alcoholic beverage. 

• Alcohol will not be allowed on university campuses.

Because alcohol is allowed there now.  Please don't think your Bible is going to keep college students from getting fucked up.  Also, you just lost their vote, too.  They weren't even listening until you said this.

7.   Marriage and the family will be protected by the following :

• Marriage will be defined as the union of one woman with one man.
• The legal age for marriage will be 22.
• A couple wishing to get married must first attend Christian marriage counseling classes.
• Divorce will only be allowed in cases of abuse, infidelity, or incarceration. 
• The penalties for abuse and infidelity will include large fines and jail time.
• Married couples who become pregnant must attend Christian parenting classes.

Uh-huh.  You got it, chief.  Especially that divorce part.  That genie isn't going back in the bottle.  Or maybe I should say "toothpaste" so you don't feel the need to tell me that genies are agents of Satan. 

8.  The rating system for movies and T.V. shows will be drastically overhauled :

• No show or movie will be allowed on T.V. systems or computer systems accessible by homes that contain nudity, strong sexual content, excessive foul language, blasphemy, or any form of homosexuality.

This is the statement of a man who doesn't understand how technology works.  I'm tickled that he specified that this stuff wouldn't be "accessible by homes," though, because I read that to mean that this is what he'll be looking at inside the Oval Office. 

9.  Abortion will only be legal in situations where the child has a small probability of living and the pregnancy is placing the life of the mother in extreme risk.

He's actually to the left of much of the Republicans here.  Go figure.  YOU SOCIALIST SCUM.
 
10.  Industries in the United States ( U.S.)  that have suffered from foreign competition with much lower labor pay rates, lower employee compensation costs, and lower environmental compliance costs will be assisted and protected. Assistance will include financial help in building or refurbishing manufacturing plants and training employees and low capital gains taxes. Protection will include tariffs on imported goods in order to establish a market fair for these U.S. industries. These tariffs will be used to help prevent inflation on these manufactured goods.

This is him begging for lobbyist money, because American industries ARE their foreign competition.  Either that or he truly doesn't understand how outsourcing works.  I'm so cynical that I really believe it's the first one.

11.  The Welfare Department will be overhauled. This overhaul will include training welfare recipients for jobs that match their abilities. The financial responsibilities of caring for children of mothers who are not married will be shared by the father .

I wonder if he realizes how socialist he sounds, except that the 30 minute video he posted to announce his candidacy suggests that he isn't self-aware at all.</a>  The first part is actually a good idea that President Obama has been trying to get in place for a while now.  The second part, is pretty random and also what is supposed to be happening already--child support.  Perhaps you've heard of it.  

12. The insurance and medical system of the U.S. will be overhauled. Employers will be required to provide insurance for their employees. The costs of medical services and pharmaceuticals will be reviewed. These will be offered at a fair price without excessive profit for the providers.

If the corporations don't get you for limiting their pay, then Big Pharma certainly will.  Sir, don't say this stuff in public, because your life will be in danger. 

 
13. Illegal immigration laws will be enforced . Laws will be passed to assist this enforcement.
14. Several laws will be reviewed, including several statute -of-limitations.
15. Marijuana will not be legal  except for medicinal purposes.

Yadda, yadda, yadda.  Look, Trigg, I just don't want to see you waste your money here.  Just stop.  I know you said that God wants you to be President, but God has met us, even if you haven't.  He's clearly playing a practical joke on you, which I think he does from time to time.  All of these people out here claiming that God told you to do something, I think he just wants to see if you'll actually do it.  There's no way he really thinks you're going to become President until all 300 million of us die first.  And if that's what actually happens, you'll just be the leader of about 40 people until Mexico claims the empty husk that was America.  

The Donald Sterl-mancipation

So I guess I'm supposed to be happy that Donald Sterling got a lifetime ban from the NBA.  Yeah, that's fantastic, considering that his days on this earth are probably in the single digits, anyway.  It's a lifetime ban for a person without much life left.  And he still owns the team, so all Adam Silver really did was tell him he can't come to the stadium.  When you buy Clippers merch or tix, you're still putting money in his pocket. And speaking of money, on a percentage basis, the amount that he got fined is about the same as you being fined around $20. 

Yeah, we got a huge win today.

But during a few checks on social media when I was supposed to be working, I see y'all out here acting like we just got emancipated.  Like it was the OJ verdict all over again.  And I gotta ask, what are you so happy about?

Now, I'm not one of these people who's gonna try to ruin your good mood by saying that there are more important things to be concerned with.  Those people are assholes, because of course there's always something to be more concerned with. It's just that there hasn't been much change on the Keystone XL Pipeline and Congress still isn't passing any bills.  And since The Walking Dead still hasn't come back, we're pretty starved for excitement.

No, I'm going to ruin your good mood by telling you that this is nothing to be happy about, because Donald Sterling didn't get banned because he's a racist.  Donald Sterling got banned because it became big news that he was a racist. 

Donald Sterling was a racist a long time before now, and there were a whole lot of incidents that he was involved in that were reported on and promptly ignored.  The only difference between this one and all of those was how you found out about it.  The other ones came out through lawsuits and court depositions and OH MY GOD THIS IS SO BORINGZZZZZZZZZZZZ. This one came out because his jump off (I refuse to call her anything else) goaded him into talking about black people so she could record it and leak it to TMZ.  Already, this story is more sexy.  Certainly, sexier than she is.  She looks like she used to be a man. 

All of a sudden, Donald Sterling is an embarrassment and needs to be removed, but wasn't he just as embarrassing, if not more so back in 2009, when he paid out the largest settlement on housing discrimination lawsuit ever?  Or what about those sexual harassment suits?  His callous nature when it came to evicting tenants?  The time that he made his wife pose as a government worker and visit the residents of his buildings to find out what race they were, so he could evict them?  Refusing to rent to Blacks or Latinos at all?  Donald Sterling has been a horrible piece of shit racist for a long time.  So really, it should insult all of you that this is what it took to bring him down. 

You mean to tell me that the NBA didn't know about any of this?  And that his racist views expressed in a private conversation is worse than the stuff listed above that the NBA certainly knows about?  The NBA doesn't care that Donald Sterling is racist.  The NBA cares that you know he's racist.  If this was about his racism, they would have banned him in 1983 when he asked Rollie Massamino, "I wanna know why you think you can coach these niggers."

The truth is, if Donald Sterling's jump off was a woman of a higher character, you wouldn't know anything that he said and they wouldn't have done anything.  Period.  Despite the fact that he's continued to make himself rich by denying living space to minorities.  Despite the fact that he's sexually harassed women in his employ.  Adam Silver can get in front of reporters and make his dramatic statements, but the truth is, it wasn't a problem for them before.  It only became a problem when it became public.

And the same goes for all of these sponsors who cut ties with the Clippers.  If y'all don't stop acting like you have morals.  Every one of you is a conglomerate of corrupt pieces of shit.  Every one of you knew who Sterling was and chose to sign deals with him anyway, because OOH LOOGIT BLAKE GRIFFIN JUMPS HIGH.  And now that everyone knows that he's a bigot, you don't want your brand associated with him.  Good thing those lawsuits got swept under the rug, otherwise, you would have been forced to leave all that money on the table.  So CarMax, State Farm, Kia, Corona, AQUAhydrate. Red Bull, Sprint, Lumber Liquidators,  LoanMart, Yokohama Tires, Samsung, Mercedes-Benz, and Virgin America, you ain't shit.  Not a single one of you.

So don't get too excited about all of this.  All that happened is that they reminded you what their real priorities are.  No progress has been made.  Unless you're Donald Sterling's jump off.  She's about to come up when she gets that spot on Basketball Wives.

I totally get your Kardashian anger, Vogue readers.

Some people wonder why you wasted all that time being upset about Kim Kardashian on the Vogue cover.  "She's just getting her money and not hurting anyone." Someone probably told you to stop hating, because they have no idea how to form a legitimate argument.  But I understand, Vogue readers.  That's right, Thad Ochocinco, sporadic blogger who knows nothing about anything outside of sports or comic books, feels your pain. 

To sum it all up, It's worlds colliding, except no one asked or wanted them to. 

See, on some level, people read shit like Vogue so they don't have to deal with lowbrow shit like the Kardashians.  It's supposed to be a safe space away from all of that.  People who like the Kardashians have the E! Network, where they can have all of the Kardashians and Chelsea Handler and Joan Rivers that they can handle.  The rest of us program our cable boxes to skip over the E! Network, because ignorance of what is on that channel is bliss.  "You keep that over there, and I'll stay over here."  "I don't bother you and you don't bother me."  It was like a storefront church in the middle of a red light district, except that in this metaphor, the Kardashians are actually the church and the red light district is the rest of the free world.  You know, come to think of it, maybe this metaphor doesn't work.

But to stick with it, say the church starts venturing out to convert the people.  Now, my ambisexual S&M Massage parlor isn't hurting anyone, but here comes this nun, trying to save souls, which kills my business.  She's making people think that there's something wrong with the sexual gratification of a massage while being whipped by a person of an unidentifiable sex.  But we had an understanding:  You keep inside the church, and I won't have your building firebombed by the mob underboss who controls this neighborhood.  Basically, this metaphor can also double as the pitch for Quentin Tarantino's Sister Act.

That's what's happening here.  Kim Kardashian is invading what was supposed to be a Kardashian-free zone, and we all deserve one of those, because without it, we're likely to devolve into whatever we call people from Tennessee.  She's breaking the terms of the agreement, and a lot of people are upset.  True, it wasn't her decision (the editor of Vogue said this would never happen, then magazine sales got low), but Vogue readers didn't want this.  Vogue readers (I guess, because I don't know any) believe that they're too high class to watch a show about two sisters smelling each other's vagina sweat (this actually happened on "Keeping Up With the Kardashians").  When the bar is that low, I'm not gonna say that they're wrong for feeling that way.

Usually, when worlds collide, something good comes out of it, like when the Justice League fought the Avengers, when Larry Bird played against Magic Johnson, when Spider-Man started selling Twinkies in the 1970s.  That was both adventurous and delicious.  This is more like what happened to Ashlee Simpson at the Orange Bowl.  Or when RoboCop showed up on WCW Capital Combat.   Yeah, worlds were colliding, but in the same way that the world of sports cars sometimes collide with the world of the underside of a truck.  There was symbolic blood everywhere that night, and it was in the form of Sting's expression when he realized that he was actually standing in front of people pretending to be saved by RoboCop.

So I understand the anger of Vogue readers, and you should, too.  For all everyone's talk of "She's just doing her thing, let her make her money," or whatever stupid shit people say to make it appear like they're above it all, you know you'd be pissed if someone tried to feature her useless ass in three episodes of The Walking Dead. 

No One Cares If You Approve Of Their Life Choices

It's pretty common these days to say, "I just don't agree with his lifestyle," as if people are sitting around waiting for your fucking approval.  You usually hear this in conversations about gay people or gay marriage, but I don't see why people even waste time thinking about it.  Gay people haven't gotten the approval of lots of people in human history, and it hasn't curbed the inherent lust for same-sex flesh even a little bit.  So clearly, they're not waiting for you to give the thumbs up. 

In fact, the more people that come out against gay activities has led to a response in the other direction:  More gay people are being openly gay.  The idea that you think your approval is needed has actually drawn more gay people out of hiding.

Back when people didn't talk about gay sex so much, because everyone was sexually repressed, gay people just kept quiet and snuck off to their bathhouses or the Blue Oyster, or wherever gay people got together.  But now that gay sex is on everyone's lips, gay people decided to fight back.  And yes, that particular phrasing was done on purpose.  

See, you don't have to approve of anything, because it's still going to happen.   For instance, I don't approve of bigotry, but it hasn't stopped you from saying stupid shit about gay people, has it?  In fact, to drive the point home, try that strategy in other scenarios to demonstrate how effective it is.  Next time a bear attacks you or a guy tries to rob your house, you should tell them, "I don't approve of this lifestyle choice," and report back here to let me know if it prevented you from getting shot or eaten.  My thinking is that I won't ever hear from you again.


That's why, despite this overt lack of approval, we still have gay people.  The arrogance needed to believe that approval matters is why we still have thickheaded people walking around worrying about cock-ravenous gay men attacking them in showers and alleyways.  I wish bigots understood how funny it is to listen to them fear the lustful urges of gay men without ever considering that:

A: Gay men might also have self control.

B: The bigot in question probably isn't even their type.  

Instead of saying that you "approve" or "agree" with something, you should really ask yourself if you do or don't care.  If you don't care, then you generally don't give a shit, and never think up stupid phrases like, "I don't agree with his lifestyle," or "What if he looks at me in the shower?" If you do care, then you probably give more thought to the activities of gay men than actual gay men do.  At this point, you have to ask yourself why you care so much what gay men are doing.  The answer is either one of those things:  You're fucking ignorant, or you're...you know, curious. 

You probably also assume that your own life is worthy of approval.  It probably isn't.  You probably cheat on your wife, or steal pens from your job, or vote Republican, or contribute to Love & Hip-Hop's ratings.  Maybe you drink too much, or let your kids sag their jeans, or cheer for John Cena.  Any number of things that deserve to be frowned upon.  By my standards, I think that saying kind words about Justin Bieber should come with a mandatory jail sentence.  And if you're thinking right now that it isn't about your standards, but the standards of your religion: I don't approve of your religion.  Odds are, it's a manmade invention designed to placate the masses so they don't attack their wealthy overlords.  It probably has a well-entrenched history of murder, genocide, racism, and misogyny, and in the modern age, does nothing but drive wedges in between people and/or hides pedophiles from justice. 

So instead of wasting all that time and energy being judgmental (because this is a game that we can all play), why not just go live your life and let everyone else live theirs?  All of that focus on manlove is time you could be spending inventing a Fruity Pebbles drink, or an iPad that does more than waste time.  We don't need another person trying to stand in the way of other people's happiness, but we can always use another person who really couldn't give two fucks what's happening in someone else's bedroom.

On Marcus Smart, Jeff Orr, and Acting An Ass At Basketball Games

If you taunt, berate, out belittle athletes in games, it says a lot about how you view them. To you, they're not people. They're chattel. Hired entertainment. Dancing monkeys. They don't become real until they come onto the stands. Like Mos Def said, "The hardheaded always gotta feel it to believe it." 

A thorough, well-earned, ass-whooping will end a lot of this. The average fan really doesn't wanna risk the possibility that security will get there before they eat that two-piece.  It's all fun and games until that ass is getting tenderized. I think we all understand that most fans are pussy, even in this shit-talking, rude, and insulting environment we call "America in 2014."  Everybody talks, but almost nobody really wants to back it up, which is part of the reason why gun sales are up.  The threat of backing up shit-talk without a gun would eliminate all but the most "bout that life" fans from getting disrespectful. The people who want to fight would just have to become the hazard of doing business, I guess.

Still, we can't have that. Letting players to go after pieces of shit in the stands is a horrible business plan, because unlicensed dentistry in a public place isn't really a selling point.  No matter how right the player may be (I still think that Dikembe should have been allowed to punch that dude for calling him a monkey), that kind of stuff has to be deterred. Otherwise, players will think that it's normal to run in the stands and people will stop coming to games.  This isn't wrestling, where the fight coming into the stands is a good thing.  Patting the participants on the back will just make you part of the fight.  And the first time a totally innocent fan gets hit by a player, that fan will suddenly own a piece of the team and start making all the stupid trades that you and your friends talk about during flag football.  So what's the solution, then?

There isn't one. I think we all understand that human beings are terrible creatures, most of which don't deserve the basic decency that they think they're entitled to. I work in a field where all I do is deal with entitled, shitty, people who think they're better than me because I have on work boots.  I see it all the time.  You're condescending, arrogant, and rude.  Just look at how you act when you go to a restaurant, or heaven forbid, Wal-Mart.  You don't deserve any kindness, especially after you answered your phone in the movie theater.  Dear People of America: Generally speaking, you're pieces of shit.  Okay, you might not set car bombs, kick puppies, or use the n-word, but those aren't the only things you can do to be considered a terrible person. 

So expecting the paying customer to improve his own behavior is a fool's errand.  The leagues still need to get something in place to deal with this, because it's gotten ridiculous. Basically, the leagues (Really, just the NBA and college basketball, because it's no coincidence that the leagues where the players have weapons also have barriers between players and fans) need to empower players to get fans ejected.

Tell the players that if someone is getting out of line, they can pull a ref to the side, point the person out, the ref will eject the fan, and security will throw him out on his ass.  It should be that simple. I doubt the players would lie on fans, because they've got out things going on, like the game happening around them.  They don't have time to pick out fans to eject so you can confirm your victimization bias.  Truth is, do you know how big of an asshole you have to be to get the attention of someone on the court, let alone make them try to come after you?  And while the players run the risk of identifying the wrong person, after throwing down $1,000 on courtside tickets, the fans standing around the right person will make sure that they stand out.  Watching everybody turn into snitches will be part of the fun of a program like this.

And to get an athlete in the middle of a game so upset that they want to put their hands on you is hard to do.  I know, because I've tried, and I assure you, it takes more than effort and a big mouth.  When I was in college, my friend Mike and I used to sit courtside at our team's basketball games and go in on people.  To us, it was all in fun, but we were assholes, plain and simple.  It got to the point where it was secondary to the game.  We just wanted to insult people.  We felt like we were creating the homecourt advantage that Jackson State desperately needed (because we weren't getting better players any time soon).  And to show how stupid our asses were, we yelled at the referees more than anyone else.  The same referees that could have put us out at any time, and here we are, making fun of their shoes and pants. To their credit, they never reacted, and I know they heard us. 

They should have put us out. I would have. If it had been me, i would have tried to get is banned from the building. What we did was uncalled for.  Fun at the time, because we were stupid 20 year olds, but uncalled for.

So I get why people do it when they're young.  I wouldn't do that now, because I'm mentally well-adjusted.  You're supposed to grow out of this kind of shit, but the people who seem to wind up in these incidents now are all 40 and 50 year old men.  I guess it's empowering to feel like you can yell at these people and they can't do shit, but how emasculated do you have to be in your personal life to think that insulting rich athletes is a healthy outlet?  Who told you your dick was small, Jeff Orr?

Because it isn't about the money that they paid for tickets that makes people feel empowered to act like that.  Hell, we got in free to our games and we were practically standing on the court.  I think that making it about the money paid just gives them an excuse.  No, they're just shitty people.  I bet they treat wait staff at restaurants the same way.  It has nothing to do with the tickets.  There are hundreds of other people in that same section who paid just as much who didn't incite a player to jeopardize his paycheck, scholarship, or legal freedom just for the chance to crack them across the jaw. 

Knowing that, I won't blame Marcus Smart for shoving that asshole, because I've been that asshole. Jeff Orr had that coming, and probably more, just like i did. We can't keep going through life thinking that, just because someone is doing something for us, be it entertaining us or working on our behalf, rich or poor, that we can just treat them with disrespect.  You might think you're above them in that instance, but a fist to the face will put you on the same level real quick.  

A Calm, Sensible Reaction to Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor

Jesse Eisenberg is Lex Luthor, because Michael Cera is already booked.

I'm sure that's the kind of reaction that DC was expecting and I'm all too happy to give it to them.  And it's not even because I'm angry about the casting. I actually kinda like it.  I, unlike so many others, have perspective.  The perspective that comes from an reading too many comic books.  I understand that there are many different versions of Lex Luthor, and that Jesse Eisenberg fits into a few of them.  Dare I say, this casting is brave...and bold.  Please, hold your applause, because that joke was awful.

Still, you're gonna have to go through the initial shock of people saying, "The fucking dude that played Mark Zuckerberg is gonna be Lex Luthor?"

I saw a guy on Facebook that said, "Is he going to invent Facebook to defeat Superman?"  Really, that's the level of discourse DC has to face, and it's not like Jesse Eisenberg has given the fans a ton of ammo to throw back at him.  This won't go much past unfunny Facebook jokes and DC will be fine with that, because they already weathered the worst of this storm with Ben Affleck.  That was an epic tantrum, and once we got past that, it's like people couldn't really get that mad anymore.  It was like the world said, "Okay, we all know this flick is gonna suck. They really can't do any worse than this." 

And after that, Gal Gadot just got questions about her physique, mostly because no one knows who she is.  Jesse Eisenberg is just getting bad jokes, like the ones I've written just now.  It's all just been diminishing nerdrage, so we'll probably be done with this story by Monday.  No one even noticed that Jeremy Irons is playing Alfred.

I saw more outrage yesterday that Fox wants Channing Tatum to play Gambit in a future X-Men movie.  It wouldn't be a surprise that Fox was thinking about doing some more bad X-Men casting, but people were legit mad at that, I guess because Channing Tatum is too sexy or can't act or something.  As if Gambit is a character filled with such pathos that only a Shakespearean actor could capture it all.  Anyway, the X-Men flicks are filled with terrible decisions. I still believe that Halle Berry was cast because she was the only black person the producers could name.

Warner Bros. is supposed to be better than that.  Or at least Christopher Nolan is and Zach Snyder are.  And I'm willing to give it a chance, because as I've said trying to talk people off the ledge today, it all depends on what kind of Lex Luthor will be in the movie.  You got your "evil businessman" Lex Luthor (who could stomp ass), and you got your "sociopath scientist" Lex Luthor (who could not).  I think the second one is something Eisenberg can work with.  As long as he's not on there talking about being the "greatest criminal mind of our time," I think we'll be fine.

Dr. King: The Hero I Never Knew

I think most young black men go through a phase where they turn against Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. I know I did.  It happened to me around the time I read The Autobiography of Malcolm X.

When I started learning about Brother Malcolm, I got excited.  Here was a guy who wasn't taking no shit off white folks.  He dared them to do something in a time when they could have done it and gotten away with it.  He wasn't concerned with racial harmony or any of that bullshit.  He wanted what was right, and he wanted it now.  He was openly dismissive of anyone who stood in the way of that message.  When you're a young black man in a country that doesn't seem to like or respect you, it's empowering to read his thoughts.  And who didn't want to be the dude telling off these white folks, and they couldn't do shit about it?  I wasn't racist or anything, but I liked to believe that, if I was alive then, I would have stood with Malcolm X. 

Compared to that, Martin Luther King was boring as hell.  Oh, he gave some speeches?  He marched on Washington?  "Man, please.  Let me know when he starts fighting back," I'd think, like there was gonna be a later chapter of his life. "Ol' weak ass Dr. King.  Malcolm X is a real nigga."  That's how young I was.  I used ignorant words like that. 

Speaking of ignorant, that's exactly where that attitude came from:  Ignorance. 

Except for four years, I went to school in the South.  I started out in Sumter, SC, and finished in Biloxi, MS.  And in all those years of school, I learned like, five things about black history.  It wasn't because I was in the South, because the American schools overseas weren't exactly opening the floodgates of black history for me, either.  I can't imagine it was different anywhere else in America.  By the time I graduated from high school, all I had learned in school about black people was "The March on Washington," "I Have A Dream," "Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad," "George Washington Carver," and "Crispus Attucks was the first person to die in the Revolutionary War."  Didn't even learn what Crispus Attucks was doing there.  And what made it sadder was that my history teachers at Biloxi High were all black. 

Point is, if you grow up thinking that's all he did, then you're gonna think he's weak.  Every year, they celebrate this man and all they say is that he created racial harmony through nonviolent resistance.  They paint him as weak willed, like he just took abuse from white people until they felt bad and signed the Civil Rights Act.  Based on what is said about him in the mainstream, Dr. King didn't win because he was determined.  The white folks just got tired of hitting him, and that's how we got our rights.

I kept that attitude about Dr. King for a long time.  After I read The Autobiography of Malcolm X, I decided to read up on other black names that I had heard about, but didn't know anything about.  I wanted to know about the revolutionaries who empowered us and fought back.  The ones that scared Whitey back in the 60s and 70s so bad that they never talk about them now.  So i bought books about Marcus Garvey, the Black Panthers, Eldridge Cleaver.  I read books of speeches from revolutionary figures of the time.  I wasn't becoming militant, but I felt like I was learning about who we were during those times that schools don't talk about.  Fighting the power, in a way.

But it never occurred to me that I didn't know enough about Dr. King.  I figured they had to be telling us all we needed to know about him, because white folks love the man.  If he had been militant or anything, they wouldn't celebrate him like they do.  The Panthers.  Brother Malcolm.  This is that real, right here.  So I never bought books about Dr. King.  Still haven't, in fact.

But I did make an effort to learn more about the man, out of respect, really.  I mean, he got shot with firehoses and had dogs sicced on him.  And he suffered the indignity of having Paul Winfield play him in a movie.  So here and there, I'd pick up little factoids or read articles about him online.  And I came to understand where he was coming from.  I also saw that he wasn't the weak-willed simp I always believed him to be.

I also understood why they only teach us two things about him, because this man was trying to bring this whole system down.  Yeah, white folks like him now, but they didn't like his ass back then.  They weren't embracing his message, J. Edgar Hoover was tapping his phones.  They thought he was a terrorist and Communist, bent on destroying America.  Yeah, nice ol' Martin Luther King.  Sure, the FBI was on Malcolm X and the Panthers, but they were just criminals to the FBI.  No one considered that they were toppling anything.  Not even with Malcolm X's plan to speak before the United Nations.  White America truly feared Dr. King. 

Some of them still do, because there are tons of websites bent on discrediting everything Dr. King stood for.  The man's been dead for almost 50 years and they're still throwing dirt on his name, as if he's gonna come back and lead the revolution again. 

And that's because he was a true revolutionary, planning to bring the poor right to rich folks' doorsteps.  He was against the war in Vietnam, because he could see that it was just another way to exploit poor people.  He wasn't just trying to help black people, he was trying to change this whole system.  His "second bill of rights" was so ambitious that this country would be unrecognizable today had it fully been implemented (it probably wouldn't have, but still).  The only reason why rich people celebrate him now is because he's dead and couldn't do all of the things he had planned.  If you hate socialism, then you should just go ahead and start hating Dr. King retroactively.  Dr. King thought so much bigger, and even though we celebrate him today, we're actually doing him a disservice by reducing the expanse of his vision.

That's what should be taught in schools.  Racial harmony is cool and kids need to learn that, because kids are assholes, but they also need to see the totality of his message.  I wish I had seen it when I was younger, and I'm ashamed to say that it took me until my late 20s and early 30s to learn what I do know.  I'm not done learning about him, though.  I've found that I identify with him more than I ever did Malcolm X.  In today's world, Dr. King resonates more than ever.  Which says a lot about where we are as a nation.

You should be ridiculed for caring about Dwyane Wade's outside kid

You people express shock at the dumbest shit. 

Dwyane Wade and Ludacris were revealed to have knocked up their side pieces in the same week.  Both are in relationships (but were on breaks at the time).  Dwyane Wade is an NBA player.  Ludacris is a rapper.  The only thing shocking here is that they didn't knock up the same woman.  I mean, we don't know that rapper and ballplayer sperm can't do that.  

If anything, it's your own fault for believing that a pro basketball player or a rapper would stay faithful to his wife.  And I don't say that because I think they're bad people.  I say it because they're constantly having random model/stripper ass thrown at them as they travel in luxury around the world.  The man who can resist that forever either has supreme will or is already gay.  The rest of us would have to have his wife standing next to him at all time, like Doug Christie did.  As freakish in the face as Doug Christie looked, the only reason why he got through his day without tripping into a pair of strange, spreadeagled thighs is because Jackie Christie was never more than 10 feet away at all times. 

True story.  Sat in on his interviews and everything. 

So, I don't see why what Wade and Cris did was anything outside of what you should expect from them.  If you want to call them out for anything, call them out for raw dogging their jump offs.  I mean, I assume they've both had enough jump offs to know better.  I also don't see why you're coming to Gabrielle Union's defense all of a sudden, because y'all know y'all hate Gabrielle Union. Gabrielle Union was this generation's Robin Givens until people stopped casting her in movies.  And the hate came solely from the fact that she was too good at her job of playing smart-mouthed shrews in every flick she'd been in.  It wasn't even based on real life.  So let's not act like you're doing this for her benefit.

And I'm sure, somewhere out there, someone's thinking about the kids, because Dwyane Wade and Ludacris (I guess) are supposed to be role models.  And if you're letting Ludacris's example raise your kids, then you're a worse parent than Siovaughn Wade.  Allegedly.  There might be an explanation for that day she sat on the corner wearing a sandwich board. 

But anyone who would look at Ludacris as a role model shouldn't be allowed to raise the kids that they're claiming to protect.  I mean, this is the same person who led off with "What's Your Fantasy," "Phat Rabbit," and "Ho," and followed up with "Area Codes," "Move Bitch," "Splash Waterfalls," and "P-Poppin."  These are probably the parents who post videos of their twerking children on YouTube.  The video would probably be set to a Ludacris song if he had any hits out right now.  As for Wade, true, he has a fatherly image that would be a good example for young boys. But so did Bill Cosby, when we were kids.  And look at how our generation turned out.  Our generation didn't follow his example.  Our generation didn't even eat the damn pudding pops. 

Also, I'm not throwing shade on Luda for those songs, because I own every last one of them.  Believe me, I ain't judging.  I'll be able to recite the words from "Ho" when I'm on my deathbed.  I'm just saying, if your kids ever knew the words to those songs, you're a horrible parent, that's all.

So what are we really talking about here?  Two men who ruined the concept of a "break" for black men everywhere, for starters (a ridiculous concept, anyway).  And a bunch of women who care more about two strangers' relationships than their own, evidently.  Also, I'm seeing that I have a far different concept of what is "shocking" than everyone else.  Magic Johnson was shocking (and scary).  Tiger Woods was shocking (and hilarious).  No one's been burnt or driven into a tree in either of these stories, which makes them quite boring.  I need to be scared or entertained, so I refuse to pay attention until we hear that one of the women is actually a man or something like that. 

Everybody can't be Eddie Guerrero. So stop holding that against Chavo.

There's no shame in not being as talented as Eddie Guerrero. 

There have been thousands of wrestlers to walk the earth in the last hundred years.  It's safe to say that many of them were not on Eddie Guerrero's level.  You're talking about a guy who was strong, athletic, super-charismatic, and able to match up with any wrestler in the world.  When he was alive, he was easily one of the five best wrestlers in the world.  Since guys like that don't grow on trees, people get that, since he was so great, there was no shame in not being able to live up to his standard.

Unless you're Chavo Guerrero, Jr.  Then, you just plain suck.

Chavo had the misfortune of being raised with Eddie Guerrero.  Had he grown up anywhere else in the world and become a wrestler, he'd be looked at respectably, and judged on what he can and can't do.  But because his last name is Guerrero, this guy has to live the rest of his life being told that he isn't Eddie.  If only his last name was Cruz.  Chavo Cruz might have been a world champion by now, or at the very least, a TNA World Champion. 

All that's ever said about Chavo on the internet is that he isn't as good as Eddie and that he's getting by based on his name.  To be fair, everything said about everyone on the internet just as negative, but when it comes to Chavo, I'm like, "You're taking it too far, internet.  You're talking about him like you're talking about President Obama."  The guy just can't do anything right. 

So he isn't charismatic as Eddie.  So he doesn't move like Eddie.  So he isn't the wrestler that Eddie was.  Who the fuck is?  You know who else wasn't Eddie Guerrero?  AJ Styles.  Or Rey Misterio, Jr.  Or Big Show.  Or Christian.  But no one's rubbing their noses in the fact that they aren't some other guy.  Except maybe Christian.  I mean, Edge was so much bigger than him. 

But folks do it to Chavo because they share the same name.  All the while overlooking the fact that he's pretty damn good himself.  No, he's not Eddie, but he's a guy that also has good, fast-paced, exciting matches.  And he's stuck next to fucking Hernandez.  The internet is so fixated on hating Chavo for not being Eddie that they're overlooking the fact that he's teaming with Hernandez and still manages to pull good matches out of his ass.  Now that is talent.  When was the last time Eddie had to carry a shit partner like that?

The internet:  "When he teamed with Chavo." 

Me:  "Well, I guess I kind of walked right into that one, didn't I?"

Except that Eddie didn't have to carry Chavo through those matches.  No one did.  It ain't like he was Erik Watts, a clear case of nepotism.  Chavo carried his weight, held his own, whatever cliche you want to use to describe someone who does their part.  Chavo was one of the "Smackdown Six," and for once, he wasn't just "Eddie's nephew" something like that, where he could be dismissed.  He was on equal ground with everyone else.  And was just as big a part of those matches as Edge or Rey Misterio, Jr. or [REDACTED] or Kurt Angle.  Or, yes, even Eddie Guerrero.  Go back and watch those matches.  World titles be damned; Chavo Guerrero, Jr. can wrestle.

It's safe to admit it to yourself, Internet.

How to Fail at Comforting Others: A True Story

One of my old co-workers died recently and I was really at a loss for words. Not because we were particularly close or anything, because we weren't. In fact, we didn't get along at all. But I was real cool with her son, whom I also worked with, and so i wanted to say something supportive to him and a couple of other people who worked there. And that's when i realized i had nothing prepared for such an occasion. 

When you're a socially awkward person like I am, you have to prepare for the moment when the world forces you to interact with others, sometimes on an emotional level.  For those who are personable and likeable, you probably won't understand, since you're able to use words to express what is in your heart.  But for those of us who spend a dangerous amount of time inside their own heads, preparation is necessary.  Usually, I have some stock phrases that i keep on call for certain situations. One of the worst feelings is to be caught out there, fumbling over your words when someone speaks to you in the hallway.  By the time you come up with something, the person who spoke to you is already around the corner, thinking what a rude asshole you are. 

So you have to prepare for that mundane interaction by coming up with a variety of responses in the event that someone does speak to you.  If you're particularly anal, you might write them down or rehearse them in the mirror, so you can get used to saying them without spitting in anyone's face.  Me, I like to imagine each scenario, where I'm able to effortlessly rattle off the response to each greeting.  My timing is always perfect, and sometimes, I even give the double point to the person walking by.  Yes, even in my imagination, I'm lame.

Anyway, you might have some go-to jokes or sarcastic comment that usually works in a variety of situations.  You might have a self-effacing comment for that person who asks how your day is going.  "I can't call it," works when you're around black people.  I don't even know what that means. 

But I got nothing for when someone dies. Nothing.  I wish I could be that person who always has the right thing to say in moments like that; the person who can console an entire room of people with just the sound of his voice.  That's the kind of person who talks people out of killing themselves, or influences people to turn their lives around.  They're like the opposite of a high school football coach. 

Me, I'm the one in the back of the room with his head down, precisely because I don't want to make eye contact and be forced to speak.  I know I don't have anything to add, so why make this gathering awkward for all of us?  Just leave me back here to draw my pictures of Spider-Man fighting the Ultimate Warrior. 

I genuinely struggle with all kinds of sad or sentimental moments. You'd think someone who wrote all the time would be better at that sort of thing, but it seems I'm only good with being critical, sports, movies, and mockery.  The worst part is, I can't even do those in spoken word form. Sadly, technology hasn't evolved to the point where I can use a keyboard to speak all of my words for me.

I know most people don't even have to think about this sort of thing in sad situations like death, because they have religion to lean on.  They can regurgitate any number of Bible quotes at a moment's notice, and all of them are the right thing to say, because they're almost identical.  "Trust God, it's His will, I'm praying for you (almost always a lie), He's right on time," and much, much, more.  It's like Time-Life's "Most Pious Greatest Hits Collection."

Not to say that they don't mean it or it isn't heartfelt, but no real thought is going into that.  They're just saying something they heard someone else say.  People have been saying those exact things to each other for literally the last 1500 years.  But that's the goal, I think.  You want something that will resonate with people, but no one has the time to think up something that good every single time something tragic happens.  So, plagiarism works, too.  The Bible is a large book with tiny words, and the majority of people who claim that they've read it haven't actually read it.  So you're in the clear, even if you decide to make up something that sounds Bible-ish.  Really, just say that the Lord has been there for you like he was for Methuselah, and people will just nod and say "Amen," never realizing that God killed Methuselah before the Great Flood so he wouldn't have to die with everyone else.  So uplifting. 

Sadly, I'm not religious, so I have to think up my own material.  And there's my problem.  What do you say to someone who's lost their mother?  I mean, I care, and I hurt for him, even if we haven't spoken in years.  I don't want to lie and tell him I'm praying for him (because I'm not), but he and his family are in my thoughts.  How do I get that across in one or two sentences that will hopefully help him through a trying time?

Because I don't think Kardashian jokes are going to go over well in that circumstance.

Some guy named Kevin Jackson is a partisan hack

Thanks to Twitter, this blog entry came to my attention, and I just couldn't resist.  It was attributed to Joe the Plumber, because most people who saw it came across it on his blog.  But there's no way a boob like that could be this articulate.  This wrong, yes, but not this articulate.  So I responded to the blog, FJM-style.  The unedited article can be found here.  The original post is in bold.  My comments are in regular text. 

Admit it. You want a white Republican president again. 

This is gonna go well.

Now before you start feeling like you’re a racist, understand you are not. Wanting a white Republican president doesn’t make you racist, it just makes you American. 

Naturally.  Everyone knows that this is the natural order of things.  Only wanting a black President makes you racist, which is why all of us black people voted for him.  We're all so racist.

In the pre-black president era, criticizing the president was simply the American thing to do. An exercise of one’s First Amendment right. Criticism had nothing to do with color, because there had never been a black president, or at least one whom people recognized as black. So to criticize the president meant that you didn’t like his policies. 

Yeah, all of those signs of President Obama as a witchdoctor or a monkey that Teabaggers held up were just the extra gravy to drive home the point of their valid criticism.  Definitely not racist.
 

The election of a recognized black president was not supposed to change anything. In fact, it was supposed to (1) ease any perceived racial tensions, and (2) allow the government to focus on legislating without race. So America would be more free than ever to discuss the issues. 

And yet, that damn Obama let his blackness get in the way.  Making all of these good white folks mad that he's black and President by being black AND President.  So racist.  How dare he?


Not the case. And that is why having a white Republican president is best for the country. Consider that nobody is ever accused of being racist for disagreeing with white presidents.

Unless you're Rev. Al Sharpton, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Cynthia McKinney, Dr. Cornel West, Tavis Smiley, Roland Martin, Tupac, all of the Black Panthers, Malcolm X, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., or any black commentator who isn't a Republican.  But go on. 

Mexicans disagreed with most white Republican presidents over America’s immigration policy. Many deranged Mexicans believe we should open the country up to them, some saying that much of America belongs to Mexico anyway. They are not called racists. 

Probably because they didn't say anything racist.  


Liberal blacks have disagreed with most Republican presidents since Eisenhower, yet these blacks are not considered racists. 

Clearly, you're not familiar with #WhiteTwitter. 
 
In fact, when blacks had sanity and disagreed with the policies of racist white Democrat presidents, nobody accused black people of being racists. 

Probably because, back then, people still knew what the word "racist" meant.
 
Fighting for one’s civil rights was not racist then, nor is it racist now. Blacks (and Republicans) were on the side of righteousness, when they disagreed with the racist policies of Andrew Johnson, and adopted by every Democrat president since. 

This is that part where Republicans forget what happened to their party in the 1960s.  Just willingly oblivious to the reasons why black people vote Democrat these days.  Always bringing up history until this decade. Then, they're all MARTIN LUTHER KING AND THE ABOLITIONISTS WERE REPUBLICANS WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE????

Never has a black person been called racist, because they didn’t like one of the white presidents’ policies. Blacks were just exercising their First Amendment rights to speak freely. Blacks have disagreed with policy positions of about every Republican president in the modern era, including those who have helped them. 

See?  They just can't figure out why black people have been against Republicans since the 60s.  COINTELPRO was in your best interests, black people!
 
Take Reagan for example.

SAINT Reagan.  #fixed

Reagan ushered in a veritable Renaissance for blacks, as Fox News showcased. And the Reagan record? African-American columnist Joseph Perkins has studied the effects of Reaganomics on black America. He found that, after the Reagan tax cuts gained traction, African-American unemployment fell from 19.5 percent in 1983 to 11.4 percent in 1989. Black-owned businesses saw income rise from $12.4 billion in 1982 to $18.1 billion in 1987—an annual average growth rate of 7.9 percent. The black middle class expanded by one-third during the Reagan years, from 3.6 million to 4.8 million. 

Feel free to discount any impartiality in that block of text just because Fox News was cited as the source.

But, I would ask, what were the unemployment and income numbers for white people during the same time?  Because unless theirs were stagnant during the same period, I would just call that "general economic improvement," and not something he did specifically for black folks.  Just something we happened to benefit from.  Like welfare.  But please, continue giving Reagan this verbal handjob.      
 
Real Politics reports Obama’s statistics as follows: Median family income for black Americans has declined a whopping 10.9 percent during the Obama administration…This decline does not include losses suffered during the financial crisis and the recession that followed, but it instead measures declines since June 2009, when the recession officially ended. That’s not the only bad news for African-Americans. The poverty rate for blacks is now 25.8 percent. The black labor force participation rate, which rose throughout the 1980s and 1990s, has declined for the past decade and quite sharply under Obama to 61.4 percent. The black unemployment rate, according to Pew Research, stands at 13.4 percent. Among black, male, high school dropouts, PBS’ Paul Salmon reports, the unemployment rate is a staggering 95 percent. That report was from 2011, and it’s gotten worse since then. Facts don’t lie. 

Yes, like the fact that you're suggesting President Obama did this on purpose.


Yet blacks want to put Obama on Mt. Rushmore and hang Reagan in effigy. The only way you can argue with those stats is if you are a racist. 

He's the first black President.  That is pretty historic.  All he had to do was not fling his own poop at foreign dignitaries to lock down a Rushmore spot. 

And I argued with those stats, but I already knew I was a racist, because #WhiteTwitter told me so.  You know, that bastion of racial harmony. 


Truth be told, most Liberal blacks are racists. Nobody wants to discuss it, because racism by black Liberals has been sanctioned by the Left, even encouraged. 

I don't even know where this bullshit comes from.  So much wrong here, and yet, all of it remains a Republican talking point.

For instance, just because damn near all black people vote Democrat doesn't mean they're "liberals."  And almost all the black people I know vote Democrat, but they don't hate white people.  They might get angry with them, and truthfully, sometimes it's hard not to, but they don't hate white people.  
 
Black racists get a pass, as black race-baiters are unchallenged on the most idiotic ideas and statements. MSNBC’s Touré said that using the word “angry” to describe Obama is racist. Juan Williams of Fox News said that mentioning the Constitution is racist, and the list goes on. But it gets worse. These Lefty racists do a far bigger disservice to blacks and America in general, as they rationalize Obama’s (and the Left’s) inability to create opportunity. 

And there it is.  "Voting for Democrats only hurts black people."  If only we were smart enough to look past all of the racist comments and behavior that come from Republicans to see that they're what's best for us. And I'm not even a Democrat.  I'm just anti-Republican. 

When their policies wreak havoc, they pose insane arguments. They say that Republicans are trying to starve people by reducing the welfare rolls that Liberals have happily increased by 16M Americans. Race-baiting, poverty-pimp Al Sharpton argued recently to keep 3M known deadbeats on welfare. 

Not like there's any particular reason why 16 million people needed to hop on food stamps.  No, the "liberals" just wanted them there.  You know, to bribe them into voting for Democrats.  Of course. 



Black racists don’t complain when black people are marginalized and insulted with policies that dumb down black America, like the lessening of academic standards. They are fine telling black youths that those youths are less smart than all other ethnic groups. 

I've never heard of a black kid saying that they were told that they weren't as smart as other ethnic groups.  Not unless that black kid was reading a report from the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank that swears that black people are dumber than white people.  I know you know who they are, because Fox News cites their research all the time. 

Certainly no future ramifications from that policy, said nobody ever. These same racists allow for black children to be cheated in education and ultimately, opportunity, as their enablers—guilty white Liberal racists—turn a blind eye. 

Yeah, Republicans haven't played a part in the reduction of education standards at all, what with their desire to get everyone into private schools, fire public school teachers, bust unions, cut funding, add religion to science classes, rewrite history books to remove references to slavery and Civil Rights, as well as the horrific disaster called "No Child Left Behind," that has continued to ruin education for the last decade.  But keep telling us how "liberals" are so bad for education.

I long for the days of a white president, because under white presidents, at least black people had pride. Liberals have stolen pride from blacks, and they have no intention of giving it back. At least if we had a white president, black people might have a shot of regaining a modicum of respect. 

Yeah, we had so much pride under those first 40 Presidents.  Slavery and Jim Crow just helped us build character, right?


© 2013 Kevin Jackson – The Black Sphere, LLC – All Rights Reserved

Giving him all the credit for his bullshit, because I couldn't be this blind if I tried.