Michael Vick vs. the Black Sporting Press
August 18, 2009 by dwil
I detest it when Black columnists jump out in front of their White columnist cohorts to get hit by the oncoming speeding bus of public opinion. It is a sad occurrence and goes far to elucidating the sorry state of journalism today; it is also darkly comical Step N’ Fetchit, Man-Tan, buffoonery.
Of the recent seeming Black-White divide concerning Vick, a well-known black columnist said it is their feeling that “we” – ahhh, yes, the monolithic we – Black people are more willing to give Michael Vick a second chance because “we” know someone who has been in prison. Now I know that on the surface, statistics would indicate that might be true, but if you look at the economic status of imprisoned Black people and where the Black people who are imprisoned largely live, you’ll find that incarcerated Blacks usually live in underprivileged areas where their are a large population of poor people who are mostly minorities.
That leaves the rest of the Black population for this columnist to fail to consider when making a statement that, if a White person made it, would have most Black people up in arms correctly assessing the statement as racist.
But back to the buffoon. I mean the first buffoon. Here’s a quote from his incendiary commentary:
When Vick would return from Virginia, he would speak about everything he did while there: The women he was sleeping with, the friends he hung with, the clubs he went to, almost everything except the one activity that would lead to his demise. Not even a hint of dogfighting, not a mention, to anyone in the Falcons. Ever.
When team officials repeatedly warned Vick about some of his friends — there were several the Falcons thought were terrible influences on Vick — the quarterback vowed to cut the troublemakers loose. That didn’t happen.
When the dogfighting charges came to light, Vick was asked by owner Arthur Blank if the accusations were true. Vick swore they weren’t. Commissioner Roger Goodell asked the same question. Vick said nope, not me. Wrong guy. No way.
“Trust but verify” quickly became don’t trust him at all.
One Falcons coach eventually referred to the quarterback as “Mike Slick.” To this day, there are members of the Falcons organization who, while wishing Vick well, still consider him to be the greatest con man they’ve ever known.
Whew! He couldn’t have blown Vick up anymore than Ray Lewis could on a blindside blitz.
Fortunately for Michael Vick, and every person on Earth relative to every event they experience, context is everything. Unless, of course, you’re too busy trying to stay in “the game” to recognize when game is being run on you.
And perhaps that’s the problem.
——————————————-
Reading the opinions of Black columnists and journalists regarding Vick, in general, and the reactions to them, is a difficult chore.
Words that were written a year ago before the Michael Vick verdict came down is now repackaged, rehashed, and rewritten, and people stand and clap and pretend the redo is brand new.
Here we are TODAY with Michael Vick. Folks it is today. Not 21 months ago. Not 18 months ago. Not 12 months ago.
It’s ——————– T-O-D-A-Y.
We have the opportunity to make real connections through the Vick saga.
Instead, the “progressive” people write the same tired shit about how the meat on our plate comes from animals treated worse than — whatever, that there are still dog and horse races and no one says boo about it —- and whatever, that humans are devalued while dogs are exalted —— and whatever, that domesticating animals is actually cruelty… and whatever…
…and blah blah blah.
That was a Vick-related commentary better written a year ago.
It’s today, folks.
And today “brothers” and “sisters” are running as fast as they can to jump ahead of their White peers to get on the, “Shit on Mike Vick Train.” Just like they did with Sean Taylor.
“Oh no,” you exclaim! The two are separate incidents. Sean Taylor was protecting his family and Michael Vick was dog fighting and, and, and — and get your knees out of your mouth.
You can’t see that we’re being put into a nice little set of Disney boxes where the conversations concerning Vick can only take place in context with his interview with CBS’s James Brown, his future in the NFL, and his treatment by fans in Philadelphia and around the league.
And what do we do to break out of those boxes? Make connections that were made a year ago but were dismissed or forgotten, and run ahead of Massa to let Massa know that we good house slaves and we warnin’ Massa about that vicious lying con man negro named Vick.
What buffoonery.
And how disappointing….
It is disappointing when the only pull you got is the wool over your eyes when in your midst there lies the devil in disguise.
And the devil’s face is Black.
Monday, on Jim Rome’s Rome is Burning afternoon ESPN network show, Drew Sharp, columnist for the Detroit (Not)Free Press spit the following venom Michael Vick’s way:
“He’s speaking from the script. This is a man who’s a habitual liar. He has lied to the feds. He has lied to Arthur blank. He has lied to the commissioner. He lied to the judge, who told him that if he stayed clean while your on bail and he flunks a drug test (sic). Are we supposed to believe him now? Because he seemed quote, unquote, sincere? I didn’t buy that for one second.”
Aren’t you brave and cutting edge, Step? Just like Fetchit, your column-writing bosom buddy at CBS Sports.com. How’d those pats on the back feel from all those people otherwise known as racists? Did ya get a raise for saying that shit?
Or did you just get to finally sit next to your White cohort after a hearty lunch while the two of you got your shoes shined like you’ve wanted to all these years?
See, the thing that’s so funny about negroes who jump in front of the bus just to get their critique out first or contextualize around Michael Vick way after the fact like a tree-hugging progressive is that, in their attempt to mimic White, Western culture, they are viewed as caricatures of that which they attempt to mimic. They see what’s fed to them: to be a strong journalist, you must be able to critique your own people, and, to be a strong journalist you must be able to cast a wide net and drag in flowery, disparate pieces of the world and place them in one basket for all to read.
What these writers miss about Western culture, though, is the essential: there are always people willing to give someone like a White Michael Vick a First Chance. These people always view the accused as a microcosmic element in an overreaching series of events, some related to him, some unrelated. Sometimes the result is justification for what would otherwise be considered to be negative acts; just look at Ben Roethlisberger; just look at Rick Ankiel; just look at Josh Hamilton. Each of these White men have been the subject holistic treatments by a group of people who look like, or identify with them.
You don’t hear or read about people calling Ben Roethlisberger a liar, do you? Though he said he still would ride his motorcycle without a helmet, he swore he would be more careful and more aware of his surroundings. Would you call the sexual assault charges against him the result of Roethilsberger being more careful?
You don’t hear Rick Ankiel’s name being brought up when there is talk of PEDs in baseball, do you? As soon as it was known that Ankiel was on the HGH train, apologists for the Cardinals’ outfielder rushed to the fore and told the public that Ankiel was the feel good story of the summer and placed his HGH use in the context of his want to make an almost impossible transition from pitcher to everyday player.
If Josh Hamilton was a black football player, Roger Goodell would have suspended him for at least four games, and probably more for “staining the shield” and everyone under the shield. But Hamilton was instead shielded by sports columnists who made certain we knew Hamilton actually acted responsibly by immediately informing the MLB league office, his wife, his team and anyone else after his falling off the wagon; they also constantly reminded us that the incident occurred in January, not during the season, so Hamilton’s act harmed no one outside of himself and his immediate family.
And in each case, even now with Roethlisberger, we barely equate the athletes with their transgressions (with Roethlisberger, we are told repeatedly that the charges against him only serve to create a tighter Pittsburgh Steelers locker room and that if anyone can put aside the charges and continue to perform at a high level, it is the Super Bowl Champion quarterback).
Where are those Black people advocating for Michael Vick? Where are those people pointing out how odd it was that ESPN’s Kelly Naqi’s shadowy figure she interviewed in her “investigative report” noted that, though caring for fighting dogs requires thousands of dollars per dog, his pit bull allegedly fought Michael Vick’s pitbull in 2000, the year before Vick was drafted by the Atlanta Falcons? Has one Black mainstream or independent writer or columnist ever questioned how Michael Vick underwent five hours of intense interrogation by federal investigators – after which he “confessed” to dog fighting – with his lawyer sitting outside the room but without any intervention by his lawyer? Or how Vick was subjected to a polygraph test during that time without his lawyer’s consent?
Did anyone ever ask how this case, a drug distribution case against Vick’s cousin, Davon Boddie, was able to turn into a dog fighting case in the first place? Or how Boddie was able to disappear from view so completely that his name cannot be found in relation to dog fighting though he was Vick’s tenant in the Surry County home? Did anyone ever ask how Michael Vick was even connected to a home in which he did not live?
Did anyone ask why Vick took the pains to register a kennel and advertise his kennel on a website that explicitly stated his pitbulls were for families and were not raised to be watch or attack dogs if his goal was to use them for fighting?
Did any Black writers or columnists ever ask Wayne Pacelle (Italian; pronounced Pa-cel’-ly) what happened to the million dollars or so the HSUS raised to care for Vick’s dogs when the judge in the quarterback’s case had already frozen nearly one million dollars of Vick’s money ($928,073.04) and designated it for care of the dogs?
Did any of these journalists ever ask how Chris Mortensen could receive word from both the NFL League office and the Atlanta Falcons management that Vick would not be indicted and nine days later an indictment against Vick is handed down? Did they ever stop to think that Arthur Blank was so sure the case was done and he could move on with Vick as his quarterback that he took his wife and journeyed to Africa for a vacation to relax after the trying times of the investigation?
In this light (and much, much more), did these writers or columnists ever place the Vick investigation in the context of a Presidential administration known for lying and known for a rampant disregard for the laws that govern the country?
The answer is no.
Each instance in their writing or spoken verbiage where Black sports writers or columnists refuse to provide the public with any more than diversity through skin color rather than diversity in worldview, and each instance these same people refuse to advocate for the same treatment of Black athletes that White writers and columnists and radio show hosts demand for White athletes, it is further license for their White cohorts would are of that bent, to engage in racist behavior without the thought of recrimination; just as Dan Schwartzman told his Philadelphia ESPN radio 950-AM show audience to “Keep the Boogieman away from your children,” when speaking of Michael Vick – and no Black mainstream journalist uttered a word in protest .
And none of this precludes a journalist from feeling Vick is guilty. However, the lack of overreaching context relative to the Vick case from any corner of the Black mainstream sporting press has acted to make Michael Vick’s path to public approval infinitely more difficult. And the paucity of meaningful ongoing analyses of the Vick case from the independent Black progressive press – Internet and print – is utterly unforgivable.
Do I feel Michael Vick deserves a second chance?
No.
Not until he receives a first chance.
Sigh, what do we do, what do we do?
Know what I dislike? How the same columnists that speak for “black people” on certain issues, will run from the mantle of “speaking for black people” on other issues. That’s a problem. Either you’re qualified to speak for all black people or you’re not. If you’re not, then don’t do it. Ever.
Yeup!
@Big Man: sorry to threadjack but i responded to your e-mail.
dwil, it is a sad testament to the struggle of our people in this country to live free that we have always been burdened with those who have selfishly betrayed us to our oppressors for some small short-term gain and petty status. It’s not about being fair and objective, it’s about piling on an “skinnin’-n-grinnin’ “, to show massa that “dey be good ‘mericans” by beating up on the least of us in society. Like Malcolm X said, “…look who signs their paychecks…”. And they speak of Roger Goodell as if the man was Jesus-The-Second-Coming!
And you absolutely right about Big Ben. When he settles out of court before he is forced to testify, will Jesus Goodell suspend him for a year, because as we’ve been taught by the corporate media in the Kobe Bryant civil case, if he settles then he must have been guilty! And what will those Uncle Tom writers choose to scribe then! I predict they will be as silent as a dead man on Sunday…
Big Man:
You can’t derive your primary source of income from white people and speak FOR black people in the same business. Now, if these writers were also very good fishermen or hunters and derived their income from that, then it might work, but otherwise, it’s not happening. There are precisely ZERO black people who are paid by whites to authentically represent the interests of our group. There are millions who have been paid to steer us in a particular direction and keep us off message and off focus, but not a single solitary one has ever been paid to do right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Askari
Mike Freeman, just like Terence Moore are flawed opportunists and it is exponentially disappointing that they are African-American as well.
Their credibility takes a hit every time the mainstream media ask them to ‘step and fetch’…
(I am trying to find the link(s) about Freeman, but it has been five years.)
Mike Freeman should be emphatic about second chances, PLEASE READ HIS PERSONAL PROFESSIONAL JOURNEY…
It makes me think he is the sports version of Clarence Thomas..
Puffed-Up Resume Costs Sportswriter a New Job
By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, January 10, 2004; Page C04
A longtime New York Times sportswriter who left to join the Indianapolis Star has resigned from his new job after admitting that he falsified his résumé.
Mike Freeman, who covered professional football and basketball and did investigative reporting at the Times, apologized for telling the Star that he was a graduate of the University of Delaware. He said he attended the school for four years but did not graduate.
“These were lies,” Freeman, 37, said in a statement posted on the Web site SportsPages.com. He added: “This was a terrible and unforgivable manipulation of the facts. . . . It was the only time I have told such falsehoods and no other deceptions have ever appeared in any of my newspaper stories or two books at any time in my 16 years of practicing journalism. Nevertheless, the information I gave the Star was wrong and I will be punished with the loss of my newspaper career.”
Star Editor Dennis Ryerson said in an interview yesterday that he had accepted the resignation, although this was “a bit awkward” because Freeman had not yet started his job as a columnist.
“The message is, he will not be working at the Star,” he said. “I’m very sorry about the way it turned out.” Ryerson added that a college degree is not required to work at the Star, and in fact, he does not have one.
Ryerson disclosed the news to readers through the paper’s Web site yesterday afternoon.
Freeman worked for The Washington Post in 1988 and again from 1990 to 1992, covering pro football. He has also written for the Dallas Morning News and Boston Globe. Freeman is the author of “Bloody Sundays: Inside the Dazzling, Rough-and-Tumble World of the NFL,” published last year, and the 2000 book “ESPN: The Uncensored History.”
In July, he reported for the Times on allegations of academic misconduct involving Ohio State running back Maurice Clarett.
In his statement, Freeman said “there are no excuses or alibis” for misrepresenting his résumé. “This is my fault and my fault alone. Most of all, I have hurt and disappointed close friends and family, particularly my wife, and for this I am truly sorry. I also want to apologize to the Star.”
Patrick-
That’s right! Ahhhh, yes, it all comes flooding back. Thank you for that timely reminder.
Mike Vick, “con man?”….. Hmmmm.
This was Mike Freeman’s most recent CBS Sportsline headline:
The con is still on: ‘Mike Slick’ has fooled us before
Now the following is a passage from 2004 of Freeman describing himself when confronted with his past indiscretions:
“These were lies,” Freeman, 37, said in a statement posted on the Web site SportsPages.com. He added: “This was a terrible and unforgivable manipulation of the facts. . . .
It is safe to say, Mike Freeman has ‘fooled us before’….
Temple
You saying you can’t think of a single black person who speaks honestly while being employed by white people?
That can’t be true. What about old boy at the Times, Rhoden? And Ralph Wiley back in the day? That’s a bleak picture you’re painting.
Thanks Patrick! I tried to post this earlier but my comment must be floating in cyberspace. For some reason at work my comments just don’t show up. Anywho, this Freeman character may actually be the one to JUDGE a liar, seeing as he’s an expert on the matter.
We may have to add Sports Illustrated’s Phil Taylor to the list along with Freeman, Terence Moore, Whitlock, Drew Sharp and a few others:
Apparently, he may asked for a raise from SI… so he trotted out this column… with the ‘mainstream pleasing’ headline:
…” Michael Vick says he’s sorry, but he hasn’t shown remorse…”
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/phil_taylor/08/18/vick/
Phil’s column begins like this:
…..”I don’t believe Michael Vick. In fact, while watching his 60 Minutes interview on Sunday, I pretty much thought he was full of it. But I also have no problem with his being allowed to return to the NFL, where he will no doubt juke plenty of tacklers and throw just as many inaccurate passes at the feet of his receivers. That may seem contradictory — not buying his mea culpas and yet not objecting to his reinstatement ….”
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/phil_taylor/08/18/vick/
We may have to add Sports Illustrated’s Phil Taylor to the list along with Freeman, Terence Moore, Whitlock, Drew Sharp and a few others:
Apparently, he may asked for a raise from SI… so he trotted out this column… with the ‘mainstream pleasing’ headline:
…” Michael Vick says he’s sorry, but he hasn’t shown remorse…”
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/phil_taylor/08/18/vick/
Phil’s column begins like this:
…..”I don’t believe Michael Vick. In fact, while watching his 60 Minutes interview on Sunday, I pretty much thought he was full of it. But I also have no problem with his being allowed to return to the NFL, where he will no doubt juke plenty of tacklers and throw just as many inaccurate passes at the feet of his receivers. That may seem contradictory — not buying his mea culpas and yet not objecting to his reinstatement ….”
Phil starts out saying he may sound contradictory… there is no doubt –he is! and if one asks who is Tony Taylor or Wink Harris or Whoop Harris, he may draw a blank…
It seems Phil is more interested in ‘piling on’ and piggy-backing on the Vick-hate train rather providing any type of informative, though-provoking, relevant commentary.
Patrick-
Yeah, Tylor was late to the game for this piece and Moore was just milquetoast. Moore’s damage to Vick while he was at the AJC has been well-documented here. And Sharp’s on-air contribution to Vick-bashing is already up in the piece.
Big Man, Temple 3-
What I am talking abut is beyond just speaking honestly. Speaking honestly isn’t enough. Lots of these people, male female, mainstream, Internet, and indy, speak honestly.
You can take one part of the Vick case and speak honestly about that part and say nothing. You can write something really nice and honest and cool appearing but if it’s late to the party (like the piece I was referring to in the article) it doesn’t mean anything.
I’m talking about seeing the picture for what it’s worth and exposing the shell game played by the perceived “dominant” culture (how can you be dominant when you don’t bring anything to the table except that which you stole from another culture? Oh! That’s the secret to it. By bringing your shit to the table and showing your shit to you and calling it theirs!).
There isn’t a trick in their playbook that isn’t taken from some other culture. People of other cultures should be able to always peep their game and tell it to the world.
If the Vick case was the Roethlisberger case what would be the first thing they would do? ADVOCATE for his ass, that’s what! and they do it coarsely, if needed. Look at how they’re doing Andrea McNulty —— she’s White, too, y’know. But don’t be White and stand in the way of someone important to furthering their cause; they’ll run you over, too.
Black and other darker-skinned people need, and I mean need to understand this, flip it and do the same ——- but to them.
Hell, if enough people did this, there would exist a parallel collective unconscious that only we could access, and by dipping into it, we could regularly predict what they had coming down the road. We need to advocate for us, contextualize events and incidents that are reported about Black athletes, and let them know that the game was originally ours.
i have no problem with the black columnists voicing trashing vick.
the outrage was over blown but justified in that many saw this coming. vick had a bunch of cancerous hanger-ons that were constantly getting into trouble. (ie. the whole scandal would have never occured if his cousins werent pulled over for speeding in vick’s car.)
my problems with black columnists in general, i am tired of the media assuming all black people act, talk, and think the same. we all are not poor ghetto kids with kids trying not to get arrested on a daily basis. i never liked vick because of his thug image. he does deserve a 2nd chance.
Dwil – I completely agree. For these guys to ring out these tired arguments that they don’t believe Vick is remorseful is just sad. For Freeman, it is out and out hypocritical. The only thing that upset me more than this was listening to Eagles guy Lurie go on and on about how he needed to see “a lot of self hatred” in Vick. I really wanted to throw up. But I think that was a window into what all these people want to see. They are not interested in animals or a person being fairly punished for a crime. They just want to see a completely broken and defeated black guy who “hates himself.” Its sad these journalists can’t see that.
Esq-
The arguments are tired. and “rey” “thug image” is tired. Michael Vick, like most pro athletes is immature as a person. but thug image? No more than Jason Williams. No ore than Allen Iverson. No more than Charles Rogers and plenty of other athletes who carry themselves in the way of the image perpetuated by the rap game.
See, part of that advocating for athletes is that it brings trust and it brings placing athletes in their proper context as athletes and not role models or spokespeople for anything, unless they choose to do so.
No White writer asks a White athlete to stop or change his redneck image, do they?…. So why is it necessary for Michael Vick or any other Black athlete to change the way they carry themselves? For the rest of ————- that monolithic us?…. people need to view this entire enterprise and all its facets and then ask themselves if their perceptions act to feed into perceptions generated by something not of them.
–F Lurie and his “self-hatred” comment. The word “change” would have sufficed.
–The funny thing about interpreting “sincerity” is that people often reveal more about themselves than the other person. People who are con men will almost ALWAYS interpret a con. Because THEY can’t conceive of sincerity. The fact is that no type of apology exists that would have satisfied Mike Freeman. And if none exists — then the problem is yours. I mean a 5-year old could see that AROD was bullshitting, but I’m not sure what else Vick could have done? Would Freeman have to see him balling while in fetal position on the floor? Whatever one suspects, Vick apology should have earned — at worst — a “let’s wait and see” approach.
– The Josh Hamilton coverage was simply mind-blowing. In particular, the Tim Cowlishaw and his commenters were ridiculous.
— Temple: waiting for your take on Rhoden and Wiley as i had the same Q.
— Rey, does that sentiment still apply if those same columnists don’t attack white misbehaving athletes in similar ways?
D
Its about damn time somebody said it! These damn Uncle Toms are a disgrace. The sad part about it all is that after they have done their master’s bidding they will be tossed aside like newspaper that was used to wrap fish. Case in point, remember last year when Donovan McNabb said that African-American quarterbacks had to be better than their White counter-parts. The MSM ran to Vince Young and Jason Campbell to get their take and just like good coons they talked about how Black and White quarterbacks were treated the same and they didn’t agree with Donovan. Now look at them, Young is backing up a damn near 40 year old and the Redskins would take damn near anyone not named Michael Vick to replace Campbell. They served their purpose now they can be tossed aside.
Lets keep it real, the only time Moore, Freeman, Sharp or any of the other minstrels that populate the airwaves are asked what they think is when it comes to an African-American. They don’t run to those buck-dancers when an opinion is needed on Lance Armstrong or Jason Varitek. They don’t care what they think about Michael Phelps. They only time they need their opinion on any thing related to White people is when they talk about the Duke lacrosse team and they need a pick-a-ninny to dog out Jesse or Rev. Al.
I can’t think of one African-American on ESPN that isn’t a house nigga. Marcellus Wiley and Stephen A. have one step in the house and one on the back porch and thats as good as it gets for the colored help. They even have a resident Aunt Jemima, the one and only mammy Jemele Hill. I bet each and every one of them try to hold it down when they come around real people. Like we don’t know that they are man-tanners!
I take big time offense to the way Vick, T.O., Barry, Manny and a lot of other cats get dogged out. Not because they are brothers or Latino’s but because they give White boys passes. Look no further than the softball questions they tossed Brett Favre.
One more thing. WTF is a “thug image”???? Braids? Sagging jeans & Jordans? One’s and some cargo shorts while rocking a Yankees’ cap? A grill? Having your crew around you? Now is all of that ok if you don’t break the law? I mean a lot of kids dress the same way over at Morehouse. Most of them don’t have a “thug” bone in their body.
Also, is a thug image worse than a good ole boy redneck image? You know, dirty ball cap with International Harvester on the front. Dirty jeans? Cut off sweat-shirt? Unshaved? Kind of like a guy that just signed a $10 million dollar contract with the Vikings that had a press conference today. Or a cat like Dale Jr? Instead of having a grill in his mouth he has a pinch of snuff or tobacco. Instead of having a “crew” he has a bunch of “good ole boys”!
For my money one is no worse than the other. As a matter of fact look no further than Florida where a bunch of “good ole boys” and “thugs” robbed and killed a husband and wife that dedicated their lives to caring for developmentally disabled kids. Or look at Bernie Madoff, now thats a thug!
mac, stop pussy-footing and speak freely!
Great article as always D.
Modi how is it going man? On point as always.
@Mactown…………….thank you so much man……….. I am so sick of folks calling black kids thug due to how they dress.
I am 34 years old and rock yankee caps, Tims and baggy pants outside of work.
Yet I guess my educated, corporate america @ss is a thug huh???
Even though I wear slacks and dress shirts to work everyday.
O-
You thug,
Because of your admission to wearing thug clothing I must, acting as The Blond Ghost of SOMM, suspend you from reading this website for at least eight articles. Additionally, your commenting privileges here are suspended an additional four articles.
After eight articles you may email me and reapply for readership privileges – and I stress that it is a privilege, not a right – at SOMM. At that time should you exhibit the proper remorse for wearing thug clothing, I will consider reinstatement of your commenting privileges, as well.
The Blond Ghost cannot stress enough the importance of protecting the SOMM shield through setting an example in your community by restraining yourself from donning any piece of single clothing or footwear that can be construed as “thug clothes.”
You must take your SOMM privileges as seriously as I, as commissioner, do. When The Blond Ghost walks down a street, common street folk can readily see that the SOMM shield is what The blond Ghost protects with his life. The Blond Ghost’s carriage, upright and military in cadence, is the polar opposite of and can never be associated with, thuggishness.
Remember, in all your endeavors, public and private, you are a representative of the SOMM shield.
Very Sincerely and with the Proper Gravity,
The Blond Ghost
Mike Freeman and Drew Sharp probably had a high concentration of white commenters that agreed with them and fellated them after those columns. The same neanderthals will comment that those same guys are “racist” if they bring up a situation where a black player was discriminated against in one of their columns. So Freeman and Sharp are neither free nor sharp to express an unpopular opinion with the majority.
Mike Freeman = Richard Wrong
Drew Sharp = Langston Snooze
And I’d bang Shelby from the movie “The Best Man” five days a week, twice on Saturday night and once before church on Sunday. The booty, I mean, body is looking tight.
ROFLMBAO at ‘The Blond Ghost’ !!
Hilarious.
For the record, I concur that this isn’t so much about speaking honestly as it is about recognizing the larger game. That’s why I didn’t use that word. Rhoden and Wiley spoke honestly; however, there is another level and I don’t know someone does that while working in the belly of the beast. There is no incentive to retain a black writer who flatly cuts through all the bullshit and begins at the level of money and power politics before discussing much of anything else.
It has always been my position that fire must be fought with fire (AND WATER). It was precisely the reason why I had no problem attacking Bill Belichick when he was under fire. You can’t play fair with folks who do not have rules. If you think these folks have rules, you’re kidding yourself.
They don’t even know who they are. They say their “white,” but they’re clearly not. They say they’re Caucasian, but clearly they don’t all come from there. They say they’re European. They don’t come from there either. They just LIVE there. If you play their game, you can only be confused at the end of the day. Day is night and night is day. This is no time for honesty — honestly.
thanks Temple. Will read three more times and digest!
And you are right… even the great ones have boundaries.
MODI:
I thought I might need to clarify some of that — but holla anytime. Apologies for the cryptic nature of the post.
no apologies, it makes you sound real Confucius-like!
I get what you are saying Temple. And I agree. There are boundaries, and if you’re working for a paper you learn what is an is not acceptable.
It also should be noted that all writers working for corporate entities have boundaries. If say Mike Fish wanted to dig much deeper into the Tim Donaghy case and how far-reaching it was, ESPN would never let him. Having said that, there are extra boundaries specific to race that are not applied equally (cue Professor Bell?…)