Area Codes

Whenever I think of Tiger Woods, I think of that Public Enemy line about Elvis. Tiger was a hero to most...y'all know the rest. Tiger, except for his historic win at the Master's in '97, has never really meant much to me. As a matter of fact, Tiger is one of the most boring public figures in recent memory. Say it loud, I am Tiger Woods, devoid of funk!

Well, at least he was boring. Once the news hit the fan that Tiger, like Luda, has a gang of 'em "in different area codes," it seems that the fun just won't stop. Tiger Woods is what my Dad would call a "hoemonger." This would all be his own business were it not for the fact that he has willingly played the role of the good guy all the way to the bank. Mr. Squeaky Clean has been gettin' his dirty freak on something fierce it seems. Tiger Tiger Woods y'all!

Again, I have no love for Tiger. He dominated his sport, for sure. He has made a mockery of that sport's racially restrictive past, no doubt. But what else has he done other than make boatloads of money endorsing products? Not a damn thing! When will people stop thinking that just because someone excels at a sport and can speak in complete sentences that they are somehow above reproach? I guess Kobe's Eagle, Colorado problems weren't proof enough for ya?

Every since American sports started becoming more and more racially diverse, the issue of image has become more pronounced. Much of the sports media and many of the sport's loving public has clamored for non-threatening figures who comfort their own sense of identity. In perhaps the most extreme case, OJ Simpson, a hustler if ever there was one, sensed this back in the 70s and literally ran with it. OJ was always thug life personified, but like most hustlers, he could shape shift and conform to whatever the situation called for. Naive, simple-minded fools believed OJ's hype and the next thing you know the man who proudly said "I'm not black, I'm OJ" had become Willie Horton, literally.

Michael Jordan once stated that "Republicans buy Nikes too," yet when he gave his HOF acceptance speech earlier this year, the true Michael Jordan showed up and no one wanted to hear what he had to say. The truth was too hard to reconcile. For a long time, Michael played his role to perfection, but now that other younger figures like LBJ and Tiger have come to fill his shoes, he probably felt tired of wearing that costume. Once you put that costume on though, people don't want you to take it off.

Tiger has been wearing this costume for most of his celebrated career. The self-proclaimed "Cablanasian" had the Midas touch for a long time. Now he is paying the price for perpetrating a fraud of immense proportions. Yet I feel that the public played a role in all of this. If people didn't want an unrealistic image from their sports celebrities there would be no need for public figures to cater to such an expectation.

Just because Tiger is a "curly-head" Cablanasian who can hit a golf ball doesn't mean that he's perfect or even decent, for that matter. It just means that he can hit a golf ball. Just because he had the benefit of a good education and has the ability to speak in an articulate manner doesn't mean that he's a saint, it just means that he's had a good education and can speak in an articulate manner.

Let me clear, I could care less how many women Tiger has on the side. That's his business. Well it was his business, now it's the world's business. The problem here is that the media and the public often elevate people beyond where they should be and then when these elevated people demonstrate that they are indeed human, the negative response is unrelenting.

Tiger was never a saint. Most men in his position have more woman than they can fully account for, while many other men who aren't in that position, wish that they were. The spouses and partners of these uber athletes often know about their exploits too, and they implicitly accept this as part of the deal. Yes infidelity is generally what it means to be married to someone so rich and so famous. It's like these other women are an occupational hazard, but a hazard to be tolerated relative to the financial incentives to be had. It's when squares like Tiger behave in such a raggedy, irresponsible fashion, exposing themselves and embarrassing their significant other that drama starts to arise.

Tiger is now in a prison of his own making. If there is a crime here, it is the fact that Tiger would be so square as to leave his name on home girl's voicemail. Square as a pool table and twice as green! It's probably redundant for me to say that ain't pimpin', but it most certainly ain't.

Tiger, if you're gonna do dirt, step your game up Dog. Leave them underachievers alone. Please. Nothing good can come of it. And while you're at it, stop trying to be something that you're not. At least now you've might have a sliver of street cred. Don't spend it all in one place.

And to all those out there who want their heroes to be perfect, stick to the holy books. Because as long as you seek perfection in others, you deny the reality within yourself.

The Buddy Flick

Americans have had a long lasting love affair with stories involving the black and white "buddy" scenario. From Huck Finn and Nigger Jim to Sidney Poitier and Tony Curtis in The Defiant Ones or Sidney Poitier and Rod Stieger from In the Heat of the Night, take your pick. From Jack Benny and Rochester to Sonny Crockett and Rico Tubbs, this buddy narrative cuts across decades. Why Stevie Wonder and Paul McCartney even went so far as to pen the black-white buddy national anthem. Yes indeed, ebony and ivory live together in perfect harmony, just like the keys on a piano, or so we're told.

The buddy story, as it were, has served to simplify incredibly complex race relations by reducing everything to a series of cultural misunderstandings. Of course once the two seeming opposites spend enough time with each other, they both realize that they have more in common than was previously known. By the end, the two are usually so close that they're practically finishing each others sentences.

Well the most recent version of this tired old story revolves around Erving "Magic" Johnson and Larry Bird, two former rivals on the basketball court, who never seem to go away. Between repeated broadcasts of their legendary battles from times past on cable networks like ESPN Classic and NBA TV, and their new book, When The Game Was Ours, its almost like the 80s never ended. We have reached a point where you cannot call Magic's name without Bird's name lurking somewhere in the vicinity. It's more like Magic and Bird, or, Bird and Magic, if you prefer, than it is either Magic or Bird. Like old vaudeville, they have become an act, a performance team. You can't have one without the other anymore.

But just like all those other faulty pairings already listed, the Magic/Bird connection doesn't past the smell test, at least not for me. Sure, some people love such a pairing as it speaks to a fictional racial harmony that has never really existed. Such a fairy tale is certainly much easier to digest than the historical reality of racial conflict that not even our current President is free to discuss.

Let's look at the facts. Magic and Bird faced each other four times with a championship on the line; once in the famed 1979 NCAA Championship Game and three times in the NBA Finals, 1984, '85, and '87. Magic was victorious three of those times in convincing fashion. The NCAA Championship was a blow out win for Magic and his Michigan State Spartans, while the Lakers beat the Celtics in six games in both '85 and '87. With the exception of the Celtics seven game series victory in '84, Bird came up short every time he went against Magic in championship competition.

So, where is the rivalry, I ask? Generally true rivals are much closer than a 4 to 1 margin of victory would suggest. Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier fought each other 3 times, with Ali winning 2 of the 3. Joe Frazier is clearly seen as the lesser of the two men, necessary only to the extent that the Ali narrative needs a consistent opponent in order to make the story work properly. In other words, Ali/Frazier is really more about Ali, with Frazier serving as his literary foil.

Magic and the Lakers faced Dr. J and the Philadelphia 76ers 3 times in the Finals as well. The Lakers won 2 championships to the 76ers 1, but no on talks about the Magic/Dr. J rivalry. The Lakers/Celtics produced the same results as the Lakers/76ers, but this LA/Philly rivalry gets next to no attention by contrast.

I understand that the '79 NCAA championship game is one of the most celebrated basketball games in history. I also realize how a college rivalry that developed into a professional rivalry makes the story that much more intriguing. And I do know that the history of the Celtics/Lakers rivalry even before Magic/Bird factored into this as well. However, my point is that when one looks closer at all the facts, as opposed to simply rolling with all the hype, things start to look a bit different than perception might lead us to believe.

The truth of the matter is that based on the outcome of their competition, Magic/Bird should really be more a movie about Magic, with Bird playing the sidekick role, as opposed to the equal billing Bird has always received. The way in which this story has been revised is similar to the Sugar Ray Robinson/Jake LaMotta rivalry. Sugar Ray Robinson beat Jake LaMotta 5 out of 6 times, yet LaMotta is the one who gets immortalized in Raging Bull, leaving the impression that the two fighters were far more equal, if indeed LaMotta is not made superior in the public mind by this cinematic gesture.

Bird may have won 2 other titles in the '80s, both times playing against Houston, but no one talks about the fact that Joe Frazier beat Jimmy Ellis when discussing Frazier's rivalry with Ali. By the way, the Houston team that Boston beat in 1981 finished the regular season with a losing 40-42 record. I recognize that its Boston's job to beat whoever they play against, in spite of their record, but it is important to point out that when compared to Magic, Bird comes up short repeatedly.

During the so-called rivalry, Bird was named MVP three straight years, 1984-86. Magic would himself have three MVP awards when all was said and done, winning those awards later on in 1987, '89, and '90. As the legendary Kareem Abdul Jabber--a player whose career accomplishments clearly trump Bird's--was slowing easing out of the league, Magic could now step fully into his role as "The Man," without stepping on any toes, so that his leadership and excellence could now be fully recognized.

This should all lay to rest the idea that Magic and Bird are equals among competitors. They are not and never have been. So, you ask, if they are not, nor have they ever been real equals, why does Bird keep getting billed as a co-star when the reality is that he is truly a supporting actor?

To answer this question, one needs to go back to the days when this questionable rivalry was developed in the first place. In 1979 when Magic and Bird first met up as competitors, basketball was undergoing a racial revolution. The game was becoming blacker by the day, though great white American players like Bird were still very much a reality in the game. By the time Magic and Bird started playing each other in the NBA Finals, it was clear that, with the exception of the Celtics, the league was pretty much a black league, at least in terms of the players.

Where things were not so black was in the broadcast booth and in the newsrooms of the nation's newspapers. The discourse surrounding the game was a conversation controlled almost exclusively by white men in a sport where the presence of white men was decreasing rapidly on the court. The media conversation about NBA basketball was not an inclusive conversation the way it is now. This was before Sir Charles and Kenny Smith had a spot on TNT, before NBA TV existed to hire so many former black players to comment on the game. This was before ESPN had a Page 2 or a host of black basketball analysts to give the game a broader perspective. The 80s was a time when black voices tended to be confined to the margins.

So much of what was said in the '80s has influenced the way we think about things now. Yet if the conversation at that time had been more inclusive then things might come across differently today. Instead, because many people are so intellectually lazy they accept whatever they've already been told, no one questions the way in which this narrative about Magic and Bird has been constructed to favor Bird, in spite of the historical circumstances that certainly suggest something different.

What makes this even more troubling is the fact that Magic has willing signed on to this revisionist history. Magic has willingly allowed Bird to take part of his own shine, so that he can remain in the good graces of mainstream America. This reminds me of actor Ving Rhames during the 1998 Golden Globe Awards, when he, with tears streaming down his face, called "Mr. Jack Lemon" up on stage so that he could give "Mr. Lemon" the award that Rhames himself had just received. The only thing missing was for Rhames to say "Yesssir, Boss."




Well, Magic, always a grinning fool, even back in the day, has been doing his own version of the Ving Rhames. Part of this involves recently throwing Isiah Thomas under the bus, as Magic does in the new book and has been doing in recent interviews. Isiah is an easy target though, who is being slighted by Magic so as to curry more favor with his adoring white public.

Every since Isiah openly agreed with Dennis Rodman's 1987 comment that Bird was receiving favorable commentary because he was white, Isiah has been on the black list, no pun intended. Isiah will never be able to live down that '87 incident. But what did he say that was so wrong? What he said was that a predominantly white media had elevated one of their own to a place beyond that of his basketball peers for purely racial reasons.

Isiah was simply adding to the conversation that started way back in 1908 when powerful white Americans sought a "great white hope" to bring down that black menace otherwise known as Jack Johnson. Bird, like Jim Jeffries, the fictional character Rocky, and most recently rapper Marshall Mathers, was simply another in a long line of "white hopes." As the NBA's population demographics changed, Bird was seen as the last remaining white player capable of truly competing on the same stage as the new black majority.

It's not surprising that there would be this need to overcompensate for the increasing lack of white American players by elevating the last great white basketball hope beyond his actual status. The desire for a great white hope lives on to this day in other areas as well, most recently though, in the age of Obama, this desire is circulating around Sarah Palin.

If the newspapers and airwaves in the 80s were as inclusive as they are now, then it wouldn't have been a surprise to so many people that what Isiah said was a major topic of conversation among many black people, it's just that those black people didn't have a way to have their concerns heard in public due to this lack of access at the time. Trust me, Isiah wasn't the only black person who thought Bird was overrated, Isiah was just one of the few famous enough to be able to have what he said played out in public.

This is not to diminish Bird, as he was undoubtedly a great player, but it is to say that he was constantly being celebrated in ways that had more to do with this larger racial and political agenda than simply with his basketball skills.

Magic has fallen under scrutiny lately for his business associations with casinos and the kind of rip-off rental furniture companies that exploit poor minorities like those that he insists he's helping. For a man who has confused the ability to sell his own name for profit with actually running successful businesses we shouldn't be surprised. Magic has always been an opportunist, trying to grin his way into the hearts of those who will always have more love for Larry Bird anyway.

Tyler Perry, Drug Dealer

Tyler Perry is a drug dealer. That's right, I said it! Dude's been slangin' dope every since he got started. How you think he built that studio? Drug profits, plain and simple. Meet me in the trap, it's goin' down!

Now, let me be clear, before TP and his unruly fans get their hackles up. I'm not saying Tyler is selling narcotics, at least not those of the chemical variety. What I am saying is that the movies he makes are the cultural equivalent of dope, and I don't mean 'dope' in the hip hop sense either. I mean mind numbing, mood altering, life destroying, dope. Bad dope, at that. Shake, swag, stress. Dude's pushin' some straight bullshit. Ain't no blue magic where Tyler is concerned. TP's dope has been cut so many times, that it might not even be fair to call it dope anymore. Maybe we should just call it cut?

There are chemical drugs that alter the mind and and then there are drugs like those ignorant-ass, handkerchief head movies and television programs that TP releases under his banner. Movies and television shows that paint black people as a bunch of overly religious, jive-talkin' clowns, in bad clothes.

Yet, in spite of the demeaning stereotypes and utter disregard for black humanity, TP's dope has some people reluctant to criticize him. Many point to TP's money and success and in turn use this to justify their support of his nefarious enterprise. No one is crazy enough to actually try and defend the garbage that he puts out, so praising his business success allows them to shift the focus away from the amateurish flicks that he makes.

Yes, TP has made a lot of money, and so have a lot of real dope dealers too. Yet when these real dope dealers started making money and rapping about their lives, attempts to silence their voices were non-stop. Cries about gangsta rappers and their lyrics destroying the community have been going on for 20 years now. TP makes an empire by reviving some of the same stereotypes that were once used to justify the subjugation of black people and his fans act like he invented the wheel.

The bottom line is, some people like seeing themselves represented as a bunch of buffoons. They like seeing black men wear dresses and be emasculated before the whole world. They like seeing black women portrayed as sassy, cantankerous Sapphires, who sleep with their fists balled up and who can't wait to 'cuss' somebody out.

Oh that's right, Precious, the film Perry and Oprah have now latched themselves onto, was written by someone named Sapphire. Well, the Sapphire I'm talking about is the one from Amos and Andy; though anything written by someone named Sapphire is something I KNOW I don't need to see. Not to go off on a tangent here, but Lee Daniels, the director of Precious, was the producer of that Klansman's wet dream disguised as a movie called Monster's Ball. TP and Daniels are a match made in pork chop heaven.

Anyway, back to the lecture at hand. TP embraces the fact that he has worked the chitlin' circuit for his riches, like many of the legendary black performers of the past. The difference is that those old school black performers had no choice. It's not like Broadway was beating down their door. The old school performers were forced to exist in segregated conditions. TP chooses to create culture in a fashion reminiscent of the chitlin' circuit. He purposely foregrounds images of black people from times gone by, not to critique these images, but to embrace their lack of dignity.

Tyler Perry is a drug dealer. His work alters people's sense of reality, it distorts their perception, it eats away at their mind. This is your brain on Tyler Perry, or should I say, a mind is a terrible thing to waste.

I don't care how much money he makes. Dude is exploiting his own people. Not only is he subjecting his workers to exploitative conditions, but he is also exploiting his church-lovin' audience, and in turn he is exploiting black culture. I thought there was supposed to be a war on drugs? Well, you missed one!

TP, let me pull your coat. Wipe the grease paint off your face, stop buggin' your eyes, take off the dress, stop scratching when you don't itch, put away the jazz hands, and get your mind right. Oh yeah, save your money too, Dog. That gravy train of yours is running out of gas. I know some of you are saying that he's made too much money to ever be broke again, that he's too big to fail. That's what Antonie Walker thought too. Look at him now.

One day soon people will rise up and say no more, TP. No more jeffin', no more coonin', no more bojanglin'. No mas, baby!

Where is the Drop Squad when you need 'em?

Peace

Like everyone else, when I first heard the announcement that President Barack Obama had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize I too was surprised. I immediately began to wonder what thinking went into awarding such a distinction so early in his presidency? But as I began hearing and reading more and more about the history of the panel's various selections for the award over time, Barack Obama's name started to make more sense. If nothing else, and this is no small thing, he is perceived on the world stage as the anti-Bush. Considering all the dirt that Four-Trey and his boy Dark Side did while in office, awarding the person who signaled regime change, that being Obama, was both symbolic and substantive.

Those who award the Nobel Prize use the prize as a way of making a political statement; their own political statement. The award reflects the views of those on the selection committee and the historical time period during which they make their selection. The prize is awarded based on their own subjective criteria. There are no hard and fast rules really; no objective set of clearly defined standards. The selections are at the whim of those sitting on the committee at the time and their choices reflect their thoughts. Thus, if the Nobel committee decides to give out their award to the person they select then all else is really just conjecture. In other words, this is not Olympic figure skating.

If the Nobel committee feels as though Barack Obama is reflective of their value system, in spite of his relatively short tenure as President at this time, then so be it. It's their award and they can do what they want to. Once again, Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, but his vast legion of haters are acting like he blocked the phone lines, cut off the internet, rigged the votes, and stole the top spot on American Idol.

My point in all of this is ultimately that it's not about "earning" anything. But this is where everything gets twisted. Obama's critics have always felt that he has been given everything and earned nothing. The current criticism of the Nobel award is but an extension of an argument that goes back to the days of the 2008 campaign as far as Obama is concerned, and further back than that when you get down to what is really going on here.

It was the Hilary Clinton campaign where these charges originated. Clinton ran on a platform of experience and inevitability. She campaigned as though the Democratic Presidential nomination process was her coronation, but when it turned out that more voters favored Obama, Clinton and her camp began suggesting that Obama was somehow receiving votes that he didn't really deserve. In Clinton's mind it was clear, she was the one with all the experience and political gravitas, so why was Obama getting what were supposed to be her votes? Therein lies the rub.

By the time Obama had dominated the much more experienced and entitled Clinton, he found himself facing John McCain. McCain's campaign team had watched Obama defeat the heavily favored Clinton and they were well aware of his popular appeal by this point, so they attempted to turn Obama's positive popularity into a negative. Yes, of course, Obama is popular, but so is Paris Hilton. Let us not confuse popularity with ability here, so the line of argumentation went. Obama is famous for being famous, while McCain was a POW who befriended Joe the Plumber. Case closed, suitcase filled with clothes!

Why even have an election, let's just give the presidency to McCain and be done with it. Yeah, the majority of the voters want Obama, but they don't know what's good for them. They're just caught up in his celebrity. He doesn't deserve all this love. What has he done to earn it? And then the next thing you know, Obama's rockin' Grant Park with his victory speech, while McCain is left hoping that Sarah Palin doesn't pull a Kanye and grab the mic during his own concession speech.

In the minds of his critics Obama has never earned a damn thing, other than their derision and disdain. This is the affirmative action argument at work once again. For years the haters have argued that affirmative action rewarded undeserving minorities at the expense of more deserving white men. We heard this again as recently as this summer during Justice Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation hearings. But Alan Bakke put the phrase "reverse discrimination" on the map all the way back in 1977. Over time, this perverted way of thinking came to equate any potential minority gain with a subsequent white loss. As Mos Def once said, "if you start doin' it well it's success/if I start doin' it well it's suspect." With this racist logic having now become unquestioned gospel, it would be impossible for any minority to achieve anything going forward without the taint of preferential treatment clouding their success.

The criticism of Obama's Nobel Prize comes straight out of this same play book. If Obama doesn't realize it by now, he should. He is continually subjected to a different set of rules, which can be changed at any given time, on a whim. The goalposts will be moved at the referee's discretion. The patriotic triumph that should have accompanied the Nobel announcement is for Barack Obama an albatross around his neck.

In other words, a black man will never be said to truly "earn" anything. All one need do is consider that in spite of the fact that the slaves did all the work, their white masters, who were ones sitting on their asses, still managed to stereotype black people as lazy and shiftless.

Some say that Obama is in a no-win situation. His critics would rather run through hell in gasoline draws than give him his due. They're still pissed that he won the election. But the other thing is this, no matter how much the haters try to shit on Obama's Nobel Prize, not one of them had a vote. It's not their committee and it's not their award to give out or take away.

They can hate all they want to, but no amount of hatin' can change the fact that Barack Obama is not only the President of the Unites States, but now he's a Nobel Prize recipient as well. Obama's reach is global, while his critics remain small town local.

Get over it already, haters. In a few weeks it will have been a year since you've lost. Tuck your tail, drop your head, bite your tongue, now go sit down somewhere. Jeezy told you a year ago that the president was black, so this simple truth deserves repeating, Obama's the man and you ain't! Deal with it, while he prepares his Nobel acceptance speech.

A Weekend We Won't Soon Forget

After a rather uneventful summer, the multiple incidents of this past weekend suggest that the fall could potentially be off the chain. On Friday night the greatest basketball player of all time, Michael Jordan, gave a Hall of Fame induction speech that sounded more like a rapper going through a list of all his personal beefs with other rappers than a typical induction speech. Then on Saturday Serena Williams got her Suge Knight on, threatening to stuff a tennis ball down the throat of a line judge. Not to be outdone, Kanye West decided to channel the late Old Dirty Bastard and upstage a VMA award recipient by declaring that someone else truly deserved the award.

Many have expressed disgust at the way that Jordan used his speech to settle old scores as opposed to giving the customary acceptance speech, full of platitudes, inspirational thank yous, and the obligatory tears. But people should not have been surprised. Not at all. Jordan was always praised for being so competitive as a player. So what did you think, that he would turn it off once he was no longer on the court?

The media long ago created a monster with Jordan and that monster came back to bite them the other night. Jordan willingly embraced that monster for so long that he was eventually consumed by it himself as well.

The person you heard speaking at the HOF induction ceremony was the real Jordan. The media-created, Nike-fueled machine had been replaced by an aging former player who seemed reluctant to give up his throne. The real Jordan was too much for those who have gotten accustomed to the corporate Jordan, a man who always tended to say and do the right thing.

Some people don't want to see what is directly in front of their faces. They would rather project some diluted fantasy onto the target in question than see the real for what it is. Jordan was compensated handsomely for his services, but now that he is no longer playing his former role has become a burden. He basically shed that burden on Friday night. I could appreciate the realness myself.

Now that Jordan is retired, people can't wait to crown LeBron. He needs to win some titles before that happens, but, trust me, the crown has already be fitted for his head. What this means is that Jordan's legacy, which was tied almost exclusively to his excellence as a basketball player and endorser of products, is no longer that viable considering that he is no longer playing. This is unlike Muhammad Ali whose conflicted legacy is often misunderstood, but nonetheless continually significant because his legacy did transcend his sport.

Perhaps, given the chance, Jordan might reconsider his refusal to endorse Harvey Gantt as the former mayor of Charlotte tried unsuccessfully to defeat the arch conservative Jesse Helms during the 1990 senatorial contest in Jordan's home state of North Carolina? If Gantt had been victorious, Jordan would be able to say that he helped kick a racist senator out of office and his legacy today might not be confined to basketball. However when your greatness is limited to your athletic endeavors and you only use it to otherwise sell products it is inevitable that once you can no longer play that your image will suffer. It is the reality of all this that informed Jordan's less than gracious remarks the other night. Again, I found the real Jordan refreshing and only wish that he had visited with us sooner.

As for Serena, let's just say that you can take the girl out of Compton...

One of the reasons that Serena and her sister Venus have enjoyed so much success on the tennis court is because their father taught them to play tennis the same way that dudes play basketball in the 'hood. That edge works both ways though. There are times when this edge wins tennis matches and then there are other times when this edge can lead to frustration and angry displays of emotion.

Serena flipped, lost the match because of it and also has to reach in her ample pockets to pay for her verbal transgressions. Like Jordan, her desire to compete got the best of her, at least for one night. And if the world is fair maybe she'll get the opportunity to cash in on her angry antics like John McEnroe has been able to do. Don't hold your breath for that one though.

Finally I arrive at the actions of Mr. West. Kanye has been doing this sort of thing every since he's been in the spotlight so I'm not sure why anyone is surprised anymore. Besides, it's an awards show, the MTV Video Music Awards at that, not tea and crumpets with the Queen. The reason people watch shows like this is to see something outrageous, because the VMAs are certainly not something to be taken seriously. Yet there seems to be a backlash against Kanye this time that threatens to eclipse the reaction to his infamous "George Bush don't like black people" comment after Hurricane Katrina.

Some, like Ann Powers, music critic for the Los Angeles Times, have attempted to make links across these recent events. Powers' states "it's been a banner week for widely broadcast outbursts, from Congressman Joe Wilson hectoring Obama during his healthcare speech to Serena Williams seriously losing her cool at the U.S. Open to this latest kerfuffle, and in every case, racial conflict has been an undercurrent." Powers goes on to speculate on whether Kanye's diss of the young, white Taylor Swift might have been racially motivated.

Let's get this straight. The rules that govern a presidential speech in the halls of congress are quite different than the rules that apply to tennis matches and music video awards shows. While pop culture has certainly invaded all aspects of our lives, the Joe Wilson situation has nothing to do with pop culture. It has everything to do with a old school southerner who refuses to accept a black man in a position of power. Joe Wilson must answer for Joe Wilson. To try and link Wilson's outburst with the especially minor actions of Serena and Kanye is to dismiss the utterly disrespectful and contemptuous act of a man who has a long history of racially questionable associations and actions to begin with.

Enough with the sleight of hand here. We've seen this before. Don Imus uses racist and sexist language to describe young black women basketball players and the next thing I know we're talking about hip hop and before you can blink Imus is back on the air. Say what you will about Serena and Kanye, but whatever you say, recognize that their actions should not be used as subterfuge to let Joe Wilson and the rest of those yelling yahoos off the hook. The three incidents should not even be conflated, as what has happened is most certainly not a tit for tat exchange. Besides, the line judge who Serena yelled at was an Asian American woman, so I'm not sure how this fits into Powers neat lil' package of racial conflict anyway?

Let's compare apples to apples here. And for Joe Wilson's actions, there are no comparable apples. Serena lost her temper, lost the match, and lost some cheese. Justice served. Kanye was booted from the VMAs for his actions. Joe Wilson, on the other hand, refuses to issue any more apologies and has already been cashing in, drawing large donations from supporters who regard him as a hero. Powers is right to suggest that there are real racial tensions in the country right now, but these tensions have absolutely nothing to do with Serena or Kanye.

R.E.S.P.E.C.T.

Joe "You Lie" Wilson (R-South Cackalacky)


Respect. A novel concept these days, at least as it pertains to the President. Or perhaps lack of respect would be more appropriate. When South Carolina congressman Joe Wilson--a former staffer for the late senator and Dixiecrat Presidential candidate Strom Thurmond and a man who voted to continue flying the Confederate flag in his home state--uttered his disrespectful outburst during President Obama's recent address it was but the latest in a series of acts purposely designed to undermine every aspect of authority that comes with the highest political office in the land.

We should not be surprised though. The momentum has been building up for this all summer. I'm certain that there is more to come. Yes indeed, the haters all got the same memo. It's on! Disrespect the President at every turn. In spite of his authority, in spite of showing class or exhibiting decorum, it's on. Act like he's not the President, even though he is. Come up with every possible diss that you can think of. Question his citizenship, his political affiliation, his motives, his true religion, and his very being. Call him a hater of white people, even though he was raised by white people. Call him a socialist even though he is bending over backwards to show you that he is really just a remixed Reagan Democrat. That's right, do everything possible to ignore the fact that the majority of voters last November elected him to the office of President. And in all your efforts don't forget what Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Roger Taney said during the infamous Dred Scott decision of 1857, that a black person has "no rights which the white man was bound to respect."

Again there is nothing necessarily surprising about this. When the grass is cut the snakes will show. As population and demographic changes point to a new day in America, rest assured that the old guard won't go away without a fight. The haters are emboldened. And now they smell blood. That's right, to paraphrase Jay-Z, the haters wanna test you when your gun goes warm!

That being said, respect is something that one must demand, not assume or expect. If people think they can disrespect you and get away with it, they will. I have grown real tired now of waiting for the President to respond in kind to his many disrespectful critics. At this point his overly conciliatory response to such disrespect is becoming as frustrating as the disrespect itself.

What kind of leader allows someone to call him a "lie" and then turns around and thanks the offending party for offering a forced, insincere apology? Sir, you are disrespecting yourself with this naive, nice guy act. There is a time for bipartisanship and a time to stand up for yourself on "GP," as they say. We elected Barack Obama to the presidency on a platform of hope and change, yet it's starting to look like we elected Rodney King and the "can't we all get along" campaign.

I have tried to give this man the benefit of the doubt, but the grace period is over. I cannot stand to watch these people diss the President and then watch him repeatedly absolve them of their crimes, however egregious. What next, is Joe Wilson going to get an invitation to the White House to have a beer?

If a Democratic congressman from an urban city--as opposed to a Republican congressman from the rural south--had yelled out that GWB was lying during a joint session of congress, though the urban congressman would have been telling the truth, he might have been charged with treason, sent to Gitmo, been waterboarded, and eventually forgotten about. There would be no acceptance of an apology because Dude would have been cuffed before the words were out of his mouth. He would have never had a chance to apologize.

The tactics that the haters have used to disrespect the President are deplorable. Post-racial my ass! But until Mr. President stands up for himself and his party by directly confronting this vile rhetoric then it will only continue to gain steam. At this point, it's fair game on Obama. As Charles Dutton famously said in Menace II Society, "the hunt is on and the black man is the prey!" While Obama's election has served to expose some of the latent racism still vibrant in this country, his lack of a proper response is serving to enable its malicious spread.

Yes, we know you're a nice guy by now. We know that you don't like partisan bickering. We know that you favor a level headed approach to problem solving. But there comes a time when it is necessary to put people in check. There is a time when in spite of the political argument of the day that one must demand respect. That time is now. And that's not partisan, that's real!

Hollywood Squares

I recently had a wonderful experience that I'd like to share. Such an experience used to be commonplace in my life, but as of late this type of thing has been quite rare. Hold on now, the experience that I'm referring to isn't explicit or illegal, and not necessarily that interesting really. It is however quite telling. Ok, here it is, I went to see a film and actually enjoyed it. What?! That's my rare experience; seeing a good flick.

As someone whose place of business just so happens to be the #1 film school in the world, you would think that seeing good flicks is a regular part of my professional routine. And it is, it's just that the good flicks seem to have already been made; many years ago, in most cases.

I was thoroughly captivated by the German film The Baader-Meinhof Complex.

This is a film about historical subject matter rendered in captivating detail. Baader-Meinhof takes up some serious issues and gives the issues at hand the best cinematic treatment, making the events themselves seem larger than life, as they were for the Germans living through this era in the 1970s. Yes indeed, what for one person might be considered left wing terrorists are for another person considered to be revolutionaries. The activities of the Baader-Meinhof group in the 1970s might be thought of as one of the early examples of what would come to be known as terrorism in the West. So watching this film in a post 9/11 world adds another layer to the film's significance.

This was not a film based on a comic book or an old television show. Nor was it based on aliens or robots. It was not fantasy, nor was it an animated morality tale. The film was not meant to be seen by "the whole family." It was an adult film about real people and real events, done in an intelligent and highly cinematic way. The Baader-Meinhof Complex is the kind of film that I was raised on in the 70s; political, artistic, and most importantly, relevant. It is cinema; a film, as opposed to simply being a movie. And there is a difference.

Hollywood has most recently being selling its soul to the devil of trendiness. As the economics of the industry have changed, the suits have been green-lighting child's fare and expecting adults to go along for the ride. I refuse.

Such an issue is confounded by the Academy's recent decision to expand the field of Best Picture nominees to 10, from its previous limit of 5. Such a decision is based on the sagging rating numbers of the yearly Oscar broadcast. It seems a bit curious that the Academy would rely on television rating numbers to determine how they decide what constitutes the best film offerings of the year. It's not like there were always 5 reliable choices up for Best Picture anyway. Now that the field has been expanded to 10, you can expect an even more diluted competition, with even less worthy contenders than ever before.

As we all go through the changes rocking our individual and collective worlds lately, Hollywood should take stock of itself. Old habits die hard, but the days of everyone watching the Oscars simply because it was pretty much the only thing on have longed passed. As box office numbers decline, so too do television ratings as it pertains to the Hollywood product. Don't panic and throw the proverbial baby out with the bath water. This is not the answer. The answer is not to expand the Best Picture offerings. The answer is fairly simple actually, make better pictures!

I know I'm fighting a losing battle. The forces of mediocrity have long dominated the world of Hollywood. At least in the past though, you could count on something good coming out between Thanksgiving and the end of the year. Not any more. You have to take the good ones when you can get them. That being said, I'll wait for the occasional substantive offering from Hollywood, but won't hold my breath. I'll be on the lookout for other foreign gems like Baader-Meinhof while keeping my Netflix queue stocked with classics and engaging documentaries. In the meantime, I'll leave the cartoons, aliens, superheros, and the robots to the kids, 'cause I'm a grown-ass man!