Ta-Nehisi Coates

« August 2009 | Main | October 2009 »

September 2009 Archives

September 30, 2009

Open Thread At Noon

Have fun, kids.

I Woke Up Early On My Born-Day...

Heh. Except I'm 34, not 20. And happy for it. I wasn't very good at being 20. But I was a decent 33. I think I'll do alright at 34.

Folks I'm going to take off today. I am going to go out and watch the people. Next year, I'm throwing a party. They are going to play Passion Pit, Parliament and Outkast.

I'm setting up an open thread for this afternoon.

Apologies To The French

A good point from comments about generalizing:

Marc Laffineur, the vice-president of the French assembly and a member of President Nicolas Sarkozy's ruling center-right party, the UMP, took issue with the French culture and foreign minister's remarks supporting Mr. Polanski, saying "the charge of raping a child 13 years old is not something trivial, whoever the suspect is."

Within the Green party, Daniel Cohn-Bendit -- a French deputy in the European parliament whose popularity is rising -- also criticized Sarkozy administration officials for leaping too quickly to Mr. Polanski's side despite the serious nature of his crime. On the extreme right, the father and daughter politicians Jean-Marie and Marine Le Pen also attacked the ministers, saying they were supporting "a criminal pedophile in the name of the rights of the political-artistic class..."

The mood was even more hostile in blogs and e-mails to newspapers and news magazines. Of the 30,000 participants in an online poll by the French daily Le Figaro, more than 70 percent said Mr. Polanski, 76, should face justice. And in the magazine Le Point, more than 400 letter writers were almost universal in their disdain for Mr. Polanski.

That contempt was not only directed at Mr. Polanski, but at the French class of celebrities -- nicknamed Les People -- who are part of Mr. Polanski's rarefied Parisian world. Letter writers to Le Point scorned Les People as the "crypto-intelligentsia of our country" who deliver "eloquent phrases that defy common sense."

I seem to have mistaken "Les People" for "the people." My bad.
In other news Woody Allen has signed a petition claiming Polanski's arrest is an outrage. These fools are lacking the self-awareness gene. The press is going to ask Barack about this. It's a Sista Souljah move waiting to happen.

September 29, 2009

TNC Pick Em League Standings

Read em and weep. Especially if you're me. Damn the Steelers...

Continue reading "TNC Pick Em League Standings" »

The Limits Of Compassion

We talked some last month about how violence happens in black communities, and the rather search for meaning. I don't think there's much meaning in this:

The Agape Community Center in Roseland has long been a sanctuary, a refuge for students who want to finish their homework, take Bible study courses or simply escape the chaotic streets in their Far South Side community.

But this place of refuge became the scene of a deadly melee Thursday when dozens of teenage boys converged in a vacant lot next to the community center, beating one another with fists, feet and 2-by-4s.

When it was all over, 16-year-old Derrion Albert lay on the gravel, his body dented and damaged from the pummeling. A youth worker at the center dragged Derrion's slight frame into the center, but it was too late. He died a short time later.

Witnesses and police said Friday that the Fenger High School junior was not a target but simply passed by the community center and was swept into the violent altercation. Walking from school, he fell victim to the violence plaguing some of Chicago's most dangerous neighborhoods.

The honor roll student known for his love of computers became the third Chicago teenager killed this month. At least seven more have been shot.
I am aware of all the socio-economic forces at work they make black communities more subject to violence. I'm in all for trying to ameliorate those forces. In the meantime, I'm all for doing whatever it takes to protect the rest of us--particularly young black kids--from hooliganism.

I can't ever say this enough--there's nothing inconsistent about trying to understand the broad societal forces, and still holding people responsible for individual action. Being black and poor sucks. But most poor black kids aren't out smacking innocent bystanders with 2x4s.

If all is as it appears for these kids who were arrested, then heaven help them, because we can not. Compassion--like all resources--has limits.  It's worth spending some time on what makes young boys do these sorts of things. It's worth at least as much time to try and protect young boys who are just trying to live right. I know from personal experience that there are more of the latter than the former. Don't ever forget that.

Chad Pennington Down

Man, I feel bad for this dude. He was always underrated. But he just couldn't stay healthy. I thought the Jets made a bad move by swapping him for Favre.

Open Thread At Noon

Go for it...

Taylor Branch On Fresh Air

The eminent historian discusses the Clinton tapes. All I have to say is--Food. We need food.

Am I Missing Something Here?

Did Roman Polanski rape a 13-year old child or not? Kate Harding tells it straight:

Roman Polanski raped a child. Let's just start right there, because that's the detail that tends to get neglected when we start discussing whether it was fair for the bail-jumping director to be arrested at age 76, after 32 years in "exile" (which in this case means owning multiple homes in Europe, continuing to work as a director, marrying and fathering two children, even winning an Oscar, but never -- poor baby -- being able to return to the U.S.). Let's keep in mind that Roman Polanski gave a 13-year-old girl a Quaalude and champagne, then raped her, before we start discussing whether the victim looked older than her 13 years, or that she now says she'd rather not see him prosecuted because she can't stand the media attention. Before we discuss how awesome his movies are or what the now-deceased judge did wrong at his trial, let's take a moment to recall that according to the victim's grand jury testimony, Roman Polanski instructed her to get into a jacuzzi naked, refused to take her home when she begged to go, began kissing her even though she said no and asked him to stop; performed cunnilingus on her as she said no and asked him to stop; put his penis in her vagina as she said no and asked him to stop; asked if he could penetrate her anally, to which she replied, "No," then went ahead and did it anyway, until he had an orgasm.
We live in a country where, during a death row case, a judge and a prosecutor neglected to inform anyone that they'd been screwing for years. We live in a country where an innocent man was murdered by the state on the basis of hoodoo science. And people are obsessing over some dude who raped a kid?

I really don't want to hear anymore lecturing from the French about the hijab. You're defending a child rapist.

Live From "Take Back America"

Dave Weigel reports:

In the halls and from the stages of the conference, there were constant warnings of fascist, anti-Christian campaigns to break down American morals and sovereignty. Rev. Rick Scarborough, a pastor who advised Mike Huckabee's presidential campaign, pounded the podium at his Friday afternoon speech, warning that the president's pro-gay agenda was endangering Christians who spoke out against gay rights.

"The day the president put his hand on the bible," said Scarborough, "his minions were changing official White House Website to reflect a whole new understanding of civil rights, to refer to homosexuals." The Bible, said Scarborough, called these people "sodomites, which no one wants to talk about because it reminds them of their behavior."

Some activists followed this up with a breakout session on "How to Counter the Homosexual Extremist Movement," where they learned about transgender awareness days at public schools. And some went to "How to Stop Feminist and Gay Attacks on the Military," where they were informed that upwards of 200,000 active duty members of the military might quit if "Don't Ask Don't Tell" is repealed.

When I was young and kids would gather to jump someone, they'd always make up a story to conceal the cowardly act. In other words, instead of just beating you down, they'd say something like, "I heard you were messing with my cousin." Or they wouldn't just walk up to you and take your walkman, they'd say, "Hey shortie, lemme see that." The idea was to create a just narrative for an unjust act. If you'd been messing with the dude's cousin, if you'd let him "see" your walkman, then were no longer an innocent.

I thought of that old custom reading this. The notion of being besieged--the idea that Obama is a threat to gun-owners, that the gays somehow want something more than to just live out their lives in peace--is essential to justifying the fear-mongering. Much like no one says "Me and my friends are going to kick your ass, because we feel like it," no one ever comes out and says, "I hate fags" or "I hate niggers." What they say is that the feminist are attacking our military, or the president "hates white people," or the president is giving out reparations disguised as health-care.

September 28, 2009

From West Baltimore To Wall Street

Fallows has a series of really interesting posts up on obesity and class. This one contains an anecdote which I don't doubt for a minute:

"I had a friend from my paramedic job come visit me in the city a couple months back and bring his brother and a few of his brother's friends, who all work physically demanding construction jobs.  The construction guys, who are all stocky but in various stages of growing beer guts, somehow got into a fight with this group of guys who were built like lumberjacks.  It was a draw.  I later found out that the lumberjack guys were all "Big 4" accountants - CPAs who somehow had better arms and fitness levels than those who actually used their bodies for a living."
I've done my share of time at bars here in New York, and I'm clear on this--You don't really want it with them Wall Street niggers. Part of the problem is sheer power of being young, paid and having an Equinox membership. But the other part is that they are the other side of straight hood. Project niggers think they have nothing lose. Wall Street niggers think they aren't capable of losing. Either way, it's a problem.

I'm telling you, if I gotta mix it up with some of them fools, I'm breaking beer bottles, gouging eyes, kicking shins, and kneeing groins. It won't be gangsta. But it will leave a mark.

To Many Mics, Not Enough MCs

I've avoided saying anything about the murder of  Bill Sparkman, mostly because I don't know anything. People should assume too much about "Fed" being scrawled on Sparkman's chest. On the other hand, they also probably shouldn't imply that Sparkman was killed for being a child-molester because "someone may as well say it." Just saying...

Again On Spoilers

Again, as I said a month ago, don't read this site if you're worried about spoilers. I'm not really interested in hedging a conversation for people who don't want spoilers, but still want to read a thread entitled Last Night's Mad Men. Don't want spoilers? Don't read the thread. There's no gun to anyone's head.

UPDATE: Mad Men posts will now take place below the break. I dislike the compromise--I just don't share the concern over spoilers. But I dislike the fight even more. I can't expect everyone to see things, as I do.

Open Thread At Noon

It's yours...

Last Night's Mad Men

I imagine that there is some consternation of Peggy sleeping with Duck. Not in these parts--at least not yet. I need to see where all of this goes. I think there's a deep point they're making with Peggy's trysts, but one I can't articulate.

One thing I love about the show is that they've widened the lens of infidelity. Don is obviously profligate, but there's something stultifying (and likely dishonest) about these reveling in their conquest, while the women stew and take it. There are a lot of dudes on Mad Men. But, from Betty masturbating on a dryer to banging some dude she just met (after being told she was pregnant), I think the show does a decent job of not making women into objects who are simply acted upon.

But then, I'm not the one who will ultimately judge that.

For Goldfish Funerals

A few folks e-mailed me on my appearance on The Takeaway to talk about the Cosby Show. And a couple posters wondered why I didn't put it up:

Mr. Coates (I decided to show you much respect after your New Yorker article), you did not seem to have much to add to the discussion. You almost seemed disengaged, or perhaps, tired.

Moreover, it struck me as interesting that for the first two questions, your answer was "I don't know...." It was almost as if you did not want to give the questions any thought or analysis. I was surprised since you are such a deep thinker and offer such prolific opinions on so many other issues.

Overall, my take-a-away was that you truly do not view the Cosby Show as the cultural or sociological touchstone that so many others -- in the MSM and academia -- consider it to be.

Growing up in a low-income family in public housing, raised by my grandmother, the Cosby Show had a strong impact on me when I watched it. Up the that point, TV had never had a show about an upper-middle class black family. And one where neither of the parents (both professionals), nor the children (all in school) were dysfunctional (ok..Densie, the Lisa Bonet character, was a bit flaky. But nothing too extreme, like drug use, etc.).

Yeah, well, here's the thing. I didn't put it up because I was ashamed. I promised myself, when I came here, that I'd only talk publicly when I had something to contribute. I've done a decent job at keeping that promise, but sometimes I fuck up.

The fact is that I'm a pretty bad pick to split a eight minute segment. My thoughts tend to stretch a little bit, and at times, I ramble. More than that, I'm a pretty bad pick to assess the sociological impact of television, and particularly the Cosby Show.I never expected television executives in Los Angeles to accurately depict black life and all of it's complexity. (They barely get it right with white people.)

I didn't have a TV for the earliest part of my life. When we got one, it was used, and we had to turn the channels with a pair of pliers. Which isn't to say I didn't love the Cosby Show. I thought it was hilarious, in fact, and still do. But I'm not really qualified to assess its sociological implications.

Anyway, here's the link. I should have thrown it up last week. My bad. It's a good lesson, if an old one--Talk less. Listen more.

On Big-Footing

Caught David Paterson on Meet The Press yesterday, and it was immediately clear why Barack Obama wants him out--not that it hasn't been for months. I don't think Paterson is a very good politician, at least not for the level he's playing on.

Still, the more I think on this, the more I think that it wasn't very smart to leak the story to the Times. No one likes to be embarrassed. Everyone likes to save face. I don't know why they needed to put Paterson on blast.

UPDATE: Video fixt. NBC changed their embedding. It's actually quite cool.

September 27, 2009

NFL Open Thread

Really looking forward to Atlanta vs New England. Should tell us a lot.

September 25, 2009

The Doctor Is Out

Off on Atlantic business. Mind your manner's folks. See you Monday. This post is yours

September 24, 2009

Yoke The Joker

There's something super-villainous and anarchical about Glenn Beck's style. The randomness, the corny humor, the fitful range of emotion, it all reminds me so much of the Joker. Someone needs to make a mash-up image of Beck in the joker mask, with "Paranoia" underneath it.

Know When To Fold Them

ACORN is suing the conservative activists who secretly filmed their workers. I think ACORN needs to fall back. Discretion is the better part of cobbling back together your credibility. From Kevin Drum:

At this point, ACORN needs to take their lumps, finish their internal investigation, and clean up their act.  In the meantime, the least they can do is avoid handing the Glenn Beck crowd free additional ammunition.  Fair or not, shooting the messenger isn't helping their cause.
They lost one. Let it go.

The Irrepressible Traficant

Uhh, wow...And rocking the grey vest and sideburns, no less.

Open Thread At Noon

And...Go..

E.L. Doctorow--Badass M.C.

E.L. Doctorow has a new book out. I haven't read it yet, but I wanted to take a moment to salute one of the great story-tellers, and sentence-crafters of our time. Here's Doctorow bracing recreation of Harry Houdini from Ragtime:

His life was absurd. He went all over the world accepting all kinds of bondage and escaping. He was roped to a chair. He escaped. He was chained to a ladder. He escaped. He was handcuffed, his legs were put in irons, he was tied up in a strait jacket and put in a locked cabinet. He escaped. He escaped from bank vaults, nailed-up barrels, sewn mailbags; he escaped from a zinc-lined Knabe piano case, a giant football, a galvanized iron boiler, a rolltop desk, a sausage skin.

His escapes were mystifying because he never damaged or appeared to unlock what he escaped from. The screen was pulled away and there he stood disheveled but triumphant beside the inviolate container that was supposed to have contained him. He waved to the crowd. He escaped from a sealed milk can filled with water. He escaped from a Siberian exile van. From a Chinese torture crucifix. From a Hamburg penitentiary. From an English prison ship. From a Boston jail. He was chained to automobile tires, water wheels, cannon, and he escaped. He dove manacled from a bridge into the Mississippi, the Seine, the Mersey, and came up waving. He hung upside down and strait-jacketed from cranes, biplanes and the tops of buildings.

He was dropped into the ocean padlocked in a diving suit fully weighted and not connected to an air supply, and he escaped. He was buried alive in a grave and could not escape, and had to be rescued. Hurriedly, they dug him out. The earth is too heavy, he said gasping. His nails bled. Soil fell from his eyes. He was drained of color and couldn't stand. His assistant threw up. Houdini wheezed and sputtered. He coughed blood. They cleaned him off and took him back to the hotel. Today, nearly fifty years since his death, the audience for escapes is even larger.
When I talk about hip-hop giving me an aesthetic, I think about how I felt when I read that passage. Now Ragtime is a great story, but on a basic beautiful sound level, it's incredible. Hip-Hop told me that, when writing, you should try to assemble words in a beautiful fashion. That sounds basic, but it really isn't. There are plenty of highly-touted writers with a tin-ear.

When I read Doctorow, I always felt like I was listening to a great M.C--the greatest M.C. I'd ever heard. That riff of escapes is just gorgeous, and then ending with a line like The Earth is too heavy. And calling Houdini "absurd." It was how I wanted to sound in my prose, and it heavily influenced the way I looked at sentences.

Civility My Ass


One reason I always worry about Washington doyens lamenting the lack of "civility" in our politics, lay in the fact that they are liable to conflate a lack of "civility," with people who they do not like.  Thus we have the likes of Lanny Davis arguing that, by highlighting racism,  Jimmy Carter "has shamefully contributed to what we would call in in-civil dialogue."

Here are Jimmy Carter's words:

"I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African-American," Carter told "NBC Nightly News."

"I live in the South, and I've seen the South come a long way, and I've seen the rest of the country that shares the South's attitude toward minority groups at that time, particularly African-Americans."

I obviously disagree with that contention, and have said as much. But it isn't lacking in civility--it's simply lacking in agreement with Lanny Davis. Seriously, I'll take Hitler signs at Tea Parties, Joe Wilson shouting from the floor, over Davis sanctimonious hectoring.

Give Bipartisanship A Chance--Again

Via Steve Benen, Chuck Grassley argues for another Gang of Six:

"I've had discussions with senators that aren't on the committee that could possibly work with us to try to get back into a bipartisan mold," Grassley said. "I think, though, that it'd be very helpful for people who aren't on the Finance committee or even the HELP committee...would kind of take the bull by the horns themselves and try to coalesce around something that could eventually become more bipartisan."

I'd love to know who these senators are. It's hard to imagine any Democrat thinking they could negotiate in good faith with Grassley. From Steve:

There are two relevant angles here. The first is why anyone in the Senate would be prepared to negotiate in good faith with Chuck Grassley at this point. Max Baucus bent over backwards to give Grassley an insurance-industry-friendly bill, filled with concessions and ideas that Grassley had already embraced, but he still walked away. Worse, he refused to take a serious, honorable approach to the talks as they dragged on for months.

The second is why Grassley would even bother. He obviously doesn't support health care reform, and has made a series of efforts to kill it. Why go through the motions again, immediately after spiking the Gang of Six talks?


September 23, 2009

Football As Shakespeare

Fans and non-NFL fans, alike. Do yourself a favor and cough up two bucks and watch this rather incredible documentary on the 1983 World Champion Raiders. There are some great characters in there--Marcus Allen, Howie Long, Todd Christensen. Here's a snippet from the NFL's site. I don't think I'd really appreciate the intelligence and heart required to play football, as well as the sheer beauty of the game, if not for NFL Films. The doc is one in a series--apparently they're now doing one on great teams that lost the Super Bowl.

The thing about the 1983 Raiders is that I have deep memories of that game. The Cowboys lost in the playoffs that year, and I was about to root for the Skins in the Super Bowl, out of NFC East loyalty. But I couldn't do it. My Mom bought me all this Redskins stuff a few days before the game. But when she gave it to me, I just looked at her and said, "Ma. The Redskins are gonna get killed."

The Raiders destroyed them, and it was capped by this Marcus Allen run below. I can remember leaping and yelling while I was watching it (I was only eight.) Every time I see this clip, it's like going back to that moment. The documentary  talks about how the Raiders experienced the run. Todd Christensen (who was a beast in his time) actually starts crying while recalling the run, and years later seeing seeing the NFL Films' rendition of it where Jon Facenda says, "On came Marcus Allen, Running with the night..." What great poetry.

I watch this run and it captures what I mean about football actually being an art. A truly great football play, is a great story. It has a narrative arc--the hero begins his journey, (the Raiders hike the ball) encounters a seemingly insurmountable obstacle (surrounded in the backfield by Redskins,) appears to be done for (Allen reversing field,) and then somehow defeats them (Allen breaks out.) It's a beautiful thing to see, play out.

Watch the documentary. Out of the ones I've seen in the series, it's the best.


Open Thread At Noon

Go for it...

That's Texas Justice

The State-Sponsored Murder Capitol wants to execute someone. This is not news. The prosecutor and judge were sleeping together. In Texas, this isn't news either:

If anyone had any doubt that the Texas justice system operates in a parallel universe, look no further than the latest decision by the state's highest court in the case of death-row inmate Charles Dean Hood. On Wednesday the Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) said it wasn't interested in examining whether there was a conflict of interest in Hood's 1990 trial simply because District Attorney Thomas S. O'Connell Jr., Hood's prosecutor, had had a long-term sexual relationship with presiding Judge Verla Sue Holland, an affair the two tried to hide for 20 years.

In 1989, Hood was convicted of murdering Ronald Williamson and Tracie Lynn Wallace. The Holland-O'Connell affair was first reported by Salon in 2005, quoting anonymous sources. Judge Holland refused to either confirm or deny the affair at the time. A year ago this month, Holland and D.A. O'Connell, both since retired, acknowledged under oath that they had had a long-term sexual relationship, which was never revealed during more than a decade of appeals by Hood's lawyers. In her defense, Judge Holland said the affair ended more than two years before Hood's trial. But O'Connell also testified that the two had discussed marriage, and recalled that the affair continued as late as mid-1989 -- just before Hood's trial. He said the two continued to have a "good relationship," sans sex, during and after the trial. He said the two took a trip together in 1991.

The mind. Fucking. Reels. Look, Hood may be guilty as sin. But you see something like this--in a death row case--and you wonder how many innocent people the state of Texas has killed.

H/T to the Agitator. It's funny how regularly Radley Balko comes up with these stories. Except it really isn't.

The Banhammer Pt. 2

On further review, and after some private convo, I rescinded one of my orders. I don't mean to waste a post. But I thought the commenting community, and those who read comments, should know that.

The Last Temptation

I was basically raised agnostic. I think I've said this before, but I'm saying it again because of something I saw in the Michael Jackson thread. For people who are really religious, their beliefs seem to shape so much of their outlook on the world, right down to what happens in the bedroom. I guess, in large measure, religion is about what happens in the bedroom. But given that I didn't grow up that way, I'm always shocked (in a good, enlightening way) when I read something like this:

Some commenters here have labeled Prince "sex" and Michael Jackson "dance," but I have to say MJ's music makes me think of sex, just in a different way than Prince's. Prince is openly and unabashedly sexual, and MJ presents a much more repressed sexuality. It's the twisted relationship to human sexuality that often results from the interference of religion in the matter. (Not that religion is the only thing that can cause such twisting, but it's a major offender, and likely had a big influence on MJ's relationship to sex.)

I relate to this aspect of his music because of my Catholic upbringing and my honest attempts, during my formative years, to actually be a "good" Catholic girl. I'm happy to say I'm not a good Catholic girl anymore, but my sexuality has been forever affected by the experience of trying to be one. So when I listen to Prince's lyrics, I hear a portrayal of what I wish I could be. It's like a form of entertainment that lets you temporarily imagine you are what you are not. And MJ's music comes closer to representing what I actually am. And for that reason I find the sexual aspects of his music more uncomfortable but also more affecting than Prince's.
That really expounds on some of what I was trying to say, but does it in a way that I could not. I don't know if this is good or bad, but I've never connected God and sex, except in that TV On The Radio way--"My mind has changed, my body's frame and God, I like it," or "Baby-doll I recognize, you're a hideous thing inside..."

Be The Change

Mike Bloomberg has launched an offensive against junk food here in New York, and yet:

He dumps salt on almost everything, even saltine crackers. He devours burnt bacon and peanut butter sandwiches. He has a weakness for hot dogs, cheeseburgers, and fried chicken, washing them down with a glass of merlot.

Dumping salt on saltines aside, the real question isn't what Bloomberg  eats, but how much. This is one of the subtle things I've noticed in my time moving amongst people of various class backgrounds. I'm trying not to generalize here, but I think people of a more "upper-class"  background really eat differently.

I'm sure exceptions to this abound. But it's only been in the last, say, five years of my life (and really since I've come to New York) that I've seen people who routinely only eat half their entree, then split dessert, and still don't finish. I think it has a lot to do with the stress of being broke. I know that's been the case for me.

UPDATE: From comments:

"Stress of being broke"? That may be true, but it's counterintuitive: since you pay for a meal, whether you eat all of it or not, one would think that pressing financial woes would encourage one to finish up everything on the plate, and as much free bread as you can get.

But you're right: in this society (and in this City, particularly), it's usually the upper-income classes that tend to eat less (and FWIW, generally healthier) than the less-affluent. Weird.

Yeah, I meant "stress of being broke" in relation to people without funds. In other words, the stress of being broke, I think, can lead to overeating. That is obviously highly speculative, and I'm speaking anecdotally, and autobiographically. But food can be used as a drug, sugar makes you feel good. And it can be acquired at a cheap price. Of course losing 30 pounds can make you feel good too, but it's generally not cheap, in terms of time or effort. Again, speaking autobiographically and anecdotally.

UPDATE #2: Also, I should add that a lot of this is influenced by the fact that I am almost 60 pounds lighter now, than I was when I arrived in New York. I'm going to write about that experience soon. (it's really common for people, who move here) It's just not time yet.

September 22, 2009

Big-Footing David Paterson

I've been meaning to write something about Obama trying to ease incumbent David Paterson out of the governor's race. More interesting, to me at least, is the role of Al Sharpton:

Like Obama, Sharpton also very much wants to prevent the return of his old nemesis, former Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

The reverend, who didn't see eye-to-eye with Obama early in the 2008 campaign, has long since become an ally and player - particularly on education.

He now appears to be very much part of the White House strategy to convince Paterson that remaining in the 2010 race is not only bad for him, but for the party and the president.

As Sharpton Tweeted early this morning:

"I hope that leaders put the agenda for the people ahead of personal agendas. We cannot let reactionary forces win back seats of power."


"I have been on the phone the last 24 hours talking with the White House, NY Governor Paterson and other leaders around whether he should run."

Sharpton has been an outspoken supporter of the governor's and a close friend, too. He came up with Paterson, along with Rep. Greg Meeks, as a wave of new black leaders in the city.

It's really amazing to see how Sharpton has retrofitted himself for the Obama era. Is it me, or are we hearing a lot less from him? I don't mean to suggest a reduction in influence, so much as it looks like a shift in how he's trying to exercise influence.

I think Sharpton saw, relatively early, that Obama was going to be overwhelmingly popular among black people. He didn't end up like Jesse. And, from what I can tell, he's stayed away from the Smiley/West position, even though it seemed a natural fit.

Official TNC Consolidated Pick Em Rankings

Mad props to D-Sel for pulling this together. The rankings are after the jump. Also, the gas-face for me for using the phrase "mad props" in 2009.

For all who are wondering, my team is "At Least We Got Herschel." Commenters, feel free to call out your team. Unless you're embarrassed.

Continue reading "Official TNC Consolidated Pick Em Rankings" »

Open Thread At Noon

Peyton Manning is incredible. I love watching a great player, when his team is on the downward slope. It's really then that you get to see their greatness.

Anyway, go ahead guys. I just needed to say that.

Connecting The Dots

For those who aren't regular readers of this blog, it's worth restating a couple things. 1.) There is principled opposition to health care reform, that has nothing to do with race. 2.) It's not clear to me to what extent race motivates Tea Party leaders. I believe it to certainly be a factor, but I don't have a grievance-meter to tell you precisely how much or how little. 3.) African-Americans, whom I obviously care a great deal about, would benefit more from health care reform, than any sort of game which seeks to divine the precise calibrations of Joe Wilson heart.

Having said all of that, I think Adam makes an important observation here. Media is very interested in Jimmy Carter's assertion that racism is at play in the town hall meetings. It isn't very interested in Glenn Beck calling health reform "reparations" and claiming "medical schools will get more medical dollars if they've proven they've put minorities ahead." He did this back in July. It isn't very interested in Senate leader Jon Cornyn insinuating that health care reform will create a "quota system which will determine who would get treated on the basis of age and race."

There's a lot at work here: 1.) Race-baiters have, for the past few decades, repeatedly outfoxed anti-racists. Beck and Cornyn know how to walk up to the line. Carter is from a generation of liberals who never understood why people didn't agree them about Willie Horton. Thus Carter doesn't insinuate, he doesn't calibrate, he just speaks, political effects be damned. 2.) The dominant school of journalism holds that it's safer to talk about the effect of talking about race on Obama, rather than actually talking about its effects, period. That's true for most things though--reporters are generally more interested in gamesmanship, than issues. 3.) A lot of reporters take Beck and Cornyn's race-baiting is taken as a given. I'll be shocked if anyone asks Cornyn about this. I don't think they much care.

I think it's important for African-Americans to understand that.There's a part in The Audacity Of Hope, where writing about race, Obama notes that, rightly or wrongly, a significant swath of white people are exhausted, and repeatedly scolding them (even if you're right) is unlikely to alter the poverty stats. What we need, Obama argued, is a different strategy, one that connects our practical interests with the practical interests of the broader country--less energy on Don Imus and more on Harlem hospital. This sounds like a surrender, but it's really a re-affirmation of strategy that goes back to Douglass. The point was never to wash white people, (an arrogant pursuit, at any rate) but to free ourselves. My interest in anti-racism is passing. My interest in black people is essential.

Murder At The Ivies

Jack Shafer notes the discrepancies:

The New York Times, one of several Ivy League house organs, has already published five articles about Le's disappearance and murder and the apprehension of suspect Raymond Clark III. The Boston Globe has published at least six stories about the case, and the Washington Post has run at least three briefs from the Associated Press. The Times of London, published five time zones away, can't seem to sate its appetite for Annie Le news. Even the proletarian New York tabloids--the Post and the Daily News--have gone ape for the story.
And the logic:

The elite press and the tabloid press (in which I include cable populists such as Greta Van Susteren) approach Ivy murder from different angles.* Members of the elite press identify with Harvard and Yale--even if they didn't go there. They may work for someone who went, or wish they'd gone, or hope their children go. The same applies to many Times readers, pre-selling the story on both the supply and demand sides. The murder-happy tabloid press, on the other hand, has always taken special joy in showcasing the pain of the high-and-mighty.

The gap between elite and tabloid narrows every time bad things happen to privileged people. The difference is that tabloids never stop to justify or explain their prurient interest. If this how-the-mighty-fall stuff is your sort of story--and I'm thinking it is, since you've read to the end of this piece--don't bother with the Times. The emotional ride you seek is hawking tickets right now at the Daily News and Post.

Yeah basically. But there's also the "I can't believe this happened at Harvard" effect which Shafer notes. There's a cheap counterintuitivity that I think editors go for. And maybe consumers, also.

September 21, 2009

I'm Gonna Thrill Ya Tonight...

The general rule of generation is that you can't talk about Prince without comparing him to Mike. So from comments:

Prince always could play in many different styles and would out play just about anybody of that era. I saw Prince almost every time he came to Detroit, which is saying a lot because the D was his early home away from home. His expert showmanship and stage presence are worthy of several pages as are his musicianship and songwriting craftsmanship. Yeah his lyrics had many of us reaching for the softer sides of our personality- got us plenty of pussy-. Prince helped break open the door to diverse sexual escapades more than Michael Jackson. Mike was afraid of the pussy but Prince wallowed in it.
This is mostly (if profanely) true. But I think people underrate Mike's ability to sing about the sacred arts.  When I hear Mike on "P.Y.T." or "Way Your Make Me Feel" or the woefully underrated "Baby Be Mine," (something about that "Come on, girl") I know he's short of Prince, but I'm not sure that says much.

Prince aside , I think Mike deserves credit for one of the greatest acts of double-entendre ever achieved in pop music. Thriller is at once a homily to scary movies, and a kind of bubble-gum pop tune. But there's also a more sinister aspect to its lyrics--a kind thinly coded ode to the power of sex, and particularly, to male sexuality. There is the repeated invocation of Wilson Pickett ("The midnight hour is close at hand.") The awing, terrifying, physical power of desire ("a sight that stops your heart" "you're paralyzed" "they will possess you" "no mere mortal can resist.") The sense of being under the sway of great evil ("demons closing in on every side" "night creatures calling" "the jaws of the alien.")

And then of course, in that third verse, the very literal notion that the only escape is surrender. But the surrender isn't an escape, it's descent:

Now is the time,
For you and I to cuddle close together
All through the night,
I'll save you from the terror on the screen.
I'll make you see.
I'll make you see. Not, "I'll help you get away," or "I'll save you," but "I'll make you see" and then "I can thrill you more than any ghoul who'd ever dare strike," and then the promise "I'm gonna thrill ya tonight." Even "the funk of forty thousand years" references, not justthe stench of death, but in a George Clinton way, that ancient, overpowering desire.

When I was driving through VA we banged this constantly. I kept laughing as my son and nephew sang this. It was like listening to someone recite a very dirty joke, without knowing it. Kenyatta says I've destroyed a precious childhood memory. Meh. She knew what I was when we met.

Cosbyology

Dayo Olopade considers the politics of Bill:

Is Cosby a conservative? Poussaint says absolutely not. "I would definitely consider him a progressive liberal," he says. "He's just always been demanding of people educationally." The Atlantic's Coates and Manhattan Institute scholar John McWhorter think otherwise. "Cosby's rhetoric played well in black barbershops, churches and backyard barbecues, where a unique brand of conservatism still runs strong," Coates wrote, adding recently "he's much closer to the conservatism of black nationalism than to the conservatism of Shelby Steele." Comparing Cosby's feel-good brand of lecturing to the churchy hucksterism of Tyler Perry's comedies and dramas, McWhorter wrote: "Cosby is too grouchy in his presentation to reach the unconverted; the message is more effective from a woman filtered through the warmth of the maternal rather than the admonishment of the paternal." (Cosby has stated emphatically that he doesn't watch Perry's shows.)
I think with black folks in general, and with Cosby in particular, words fail. I've tried to attach ideological labels to Cosby, but it's like translating from a foreign language. Again, that has more to do with political shorthand than people's actual beliefs.

Open Thread At Noon

It's yours...

The Fight Against Gayness...

...begins with the fight against pornography:

"Pornography is a blight," Schwartz told an audience in a crowded room of the Omni Shoreham hotel. "It is a disaster. It is one of those silent diseases in our society that we haven't been able to overcome very well. Now, I may be getting politically incorrect here. And it's been a few years, but not that many, since I was closely associated with pre-adolescent boys, boys around 10 years of age. But it is my observation that boys of that age have less tolerance for homosexuality than just about any other class of people. They speak badly about homosexuality. And that's because they don't want to be that way. They don't want to fall into it."

Schwartz told the crowd about Jim Johnson, a friend of his who turned an old hotel into a hospice for gay men dying of AIDS. "One of the things he said to me," said Schwartz, "that I think is an astonishingly insightful remark... he said 'All pornography is homosexual pornography, because all pornography turns your sexual drive inwards."

That comment gives says a lot more about the speaker, than it does about Heather Hunter. Talk about a fear of sex...

Mad Men Open Thread

Good call on Conrad Hilton a couple weeks back. Not sure where this is going. I generally don't find the Brits very interesting. 

Save Health Care Reform?

Ezra quibbles with my label-mates:

The Atlantic Politics team asks the question on somebody's mind: "Can President Obama's media blitz - appearances on five Sunday talk shows this weekend - save health reform?"

Save health reform from what? Consider the recent developments: Two weeks ago, four of five committees had passed their bills, and one committee was tangled in an interminable and opaque process. Last week, that committee produced a bill that, though not perfect, is pretty close to the other bills on the table. On Friday, the committee chairman and the crucial Republican have both announced that the subsidies need to be raised, which addresses the main problem liberals have with the legislation. Later this week, the Massachusetts Senate is expected to allow an interim replacement for Sen. Ted Kennedy, giving Democrats their 60th vote.

Obama's weekend blitz wasn't meant to save health-care reform. It was meant to push it those final 10 yards. He could fail in that effort, but that's where we sit: incredibly, incredibly close to the finish line. Closer, by far, than we have ever been before.

Meanwhile, Megan starts (glumly) referring to a health care reform as "established fact"--though she argues that it'll cost the Dems the House. Predictably, I disagree with the latter. But more to the point, I think this is the danger in "up to the minute" media, and why Obama is wise to ignore a lot of it. There was a lot of sound and fury this Summer, and a lot of banter about race this Fall. And despite the pile-up of bodies, and the play-action, I'm not sure that the GOP has really moved the ball. It just doesn't look like much had changed.


September 20, 2009

NFL Open Thread

Take it away, folks.

September 18, 2009

The Ban-Hammer

The thread a few paces down went off the rails. I don't want that to happen again. I don't like the ban-hammer--it is an imperfect tool--I can't know what's in people's hearts. But if I catch a whiff of disingenuous arguments, I'll err on the side of the blog. There are tons of other blogs out there. People can take their pick, or start their own.

For Friday

Hope some of you are going to a party like this. Me? Meh, Dad duty. Walk-through for the boy's football team tonight. Housecleaning tomorrow. And then game on Sunday. There goes the weekend.

I think this is my single of the year. Love this joint.

Passion Pit - The Reeling from phantomcolor on Vimeo.

This Week In The NFL

Let's go ballers. Did we post the scores from the first week in Pick Em yet? I guess there in the league window, over at Yahoo. What games are we really looking out for this week? The New Orleans vs. Philly joint looks hot.

All Of My Purple Life

I missed out on too much Prince, when I was kid. Weirdly enough, I thought of Prince as my mother's music. I think all black kid's who came up in the 80s had mothers who loved Prince. Much of my favorite Prince stuff, not from me rocking it, but from my Moms. She loved Kiss and the video. I remember she thought the line "You don't have to watch Dynasty, to have an attitude," was great.

One thing I've appreciated about Prince, as I've aged, is that he knows how to sing about sex, like a man honestly singing about sex. Much of the misogyny in hip-hop (and I suspect in other art forms too) comes from, forgive my profanity, a deep-seated fear of ass. Men--and especially young men--fear what they will do to be physically involved with a woman with whom they're infatuated. They compensate by turning this fear on its head and projecting. They make women into temptresses, gold-diggers, and villains, and make themselves into conquering heroes. Pussy don't rule me, they'll say--even though pussy ain't thinking about them. Which is the problem, or rather their problem.

But Prince was never afraid of himself, or what he'd do. On the contrary, he embraced it. In a song like "Erotic City" he earns the right to say "We can fuck (funk) until the dawn," by first saying,"Every time I comb my hair\Thoughts of you get in my eyes," or "All of my hang-ups are gone\How I wish you felt the same." He revels in the wanting, in the potential for rejection, he does not fear it. And having done that, he goes out and makes his own demands,

Women, not girls, they rule my world
I said they rule my world
Act your age, not your shoe-size, Mama
And maybe we can do the twirl.
That is just great. It's all there, and so confident--a mixture of his own power ("Act your age, not your shoe-size.") and vulnerability ("they rule my world.") I think that mix of vulnerability, confidence and honesty was why our mothers loved him. I think that was the sort of alchemy we missed in hip-hop. We got close a few times--notably De La Soul on "Buddy" or "Eye Know," or The Roots on "Silent Treatment" or "You Got Me." Also, there are a few Outkast joints. But we never achieved that sort of confidence--that sort of true manhood.

But hey, that's why he's arguably the greatest pop musician of our time. Know if he can just get off the homophobia tip.

Open Thread At Noon

Go for it. Keep NFL talk to minimum, please. I'll have another thread in a couple hours for the pick 'em leagues, and general NFL trash talk.

Smoking Silliness

Courtesy of Andrew, Will Saletan notes the foolishness of trying to ban smoking in public parks:

Let's step back and recall how we got here. When tobacco fighters began to outlaw smoking in elevators, buses, restaurants, bars, and public buildings, their stated rationale was to protect nonsmokers trapped inside. Then the crusade moved on to apartment buildings, extending the same theory: You can't smoke in your apartment, because the smoke seeps under your door into hallways and other people's apartments.

Now this rationale has moved outdoors. Way outdoors. David Kessler, the former FDA commissioner who led the anti-smoking fight in the 1990s, says New York City is doing the right thing, because "the majority of the population today doesn't want to be breathing in tobacco smoke, whether indoors or outdoors."

That's true. I hate tobacco smoke. I don't want to breathe it anywhere. I don't want the tiniest particle of it to touch my lungs, even if my nose doesn't notice it.

But do I have the right to that standard of purity? If so, doesn't that justify a ban on smoking absolutely anywhere? Forget parks and beaches. If you smoke in your backyard, aren't you violating my airspace? In fact, aren't you violating my airspace by lighting your grill or driving your car down my street? How far does my right to clean air extend?

But think of the children!

"We don't think children, parents, when they're standing at soccer games, should have to be breathing in smoke from the person next to them," Farley said after unveiling the city's 10-point plan alongside Mayor Bloomberg. "We don't think our children should have to be watching someone smoke."

Man, if you live in New York, and the worst your kid sees is someone smoking a cigarette, you're doing really good. Seriously, if this is your top concern, maybe you should live in Utah.

The NFL And Conservatives

Anyone who's followed the sport isn't surprised by this. At least Norv Turner is a Republican. Makes me feel a bit better. H/T to the Politico.

"This Is How We Lost To The White Man..."

I don't think anyone who's paid close attention to Bill Cosby over the years should be the least bit surprised by this:

I agree with President Carter that racism is playing a role in recent outbursts against President Obama.
Or this:

During President Obama's speech on the status of health care reform, some members of congress engaged in a public display of disrespect. While one Representative hurled the now infamous "you lie" insult at the President, others made their lack of interest known by exhibiting rude behavior such as deliberately yawning and sending text messages.

Various polls prior to the election indicated that between five and ten percent of Americans would never vote for an African American president. That number, of course, only includes those who actually admitted to their prejudice. How many others harbored such feelings but did not respond honestly when asked the question? And how many people oppose Obama's plan because the President is African American?

In "Birth of a Nation," D.W. Griffith used white actors in black face to portray black legislators as having low intelligence and acting like fools. Today, we have a band of real life congressional fools seemingly bent on blocking any meaningful reform of the health care system. But if we allow even one American to die simply because he or she cannot afford treatment, we are creating a shameful scenario that could aptly be called "Death of a Nation."
People like to forget that this is the dude that rolls with Randall Robinson, protested against apartheid, gave a gazillion dollars to Spelman, supported Jesse Jackson for president, and quotes the rhetoric of the Nation of Islam (to be fair, with caveats.) I think it goes too far to call Cosby a nationalist.--but he's much closer to the conservatism of black nationalism, than to the conservatism of Shelby Steele. But don't take my word for it. Actually, please take my word for it.

UPDATE:
Heh. From Comments over at The Hill:

BILL BILL BILL PLEASE AND TO THINK I ADMIRED YOU, WELL YOU ARE DEAD WRONG! HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE, BUT TO DO WITH HIM JUST BEING AN IDIOT AND A LIER!
And:

I am so disappointed Bill Cosby is following this line of thinking. I thought he was above this.

We have this construct of "black people,"--or maybe liberalism--which holds that people who cite racism, must go home and tell their kids that it's fine to drop out of school. They can always say it was The White Man. They should do some crack while they're at it.

September 17, 2009

Off Reporting

Seems like a bad day for light posting, but it's going to be one. Trying to knock out a piece for the magazine that should make the Civil War nerds happy. It's the long-form that makes the short-form go. Be back tomorrow.

This thread now belongs to you. Behave yourselves.

September 16, 2009

Fantasy Football Pick Em

Commenter D-Sel was kind enough to organize a league. For those that missed it, here's the info. For those who are already in, consider this your space to trash talk. For those who have no interest, but still love the game, here's your space to trash talk about football.

One final reminder for anyone interested in participating in the fans of TNC football pick 'em league. About 35-40 people have already joined. The sign up information is here:

http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com/pickem
Group ID#: 61825
Password: tanehisi

To reiterate a few things, scoring starts in Week 2, so you have not missed out on anything if you didn't sign up last week. Just get your picks in by Sunday and you'll be fine (you can always join after that, but you'll be at a disadvantage compared to teams that have already earned points). The rules are simple -- just pick the winner of every NFL game each week -- and a full rules explanation is posted on the message board on the pick 'em league homepage. Finally, just a reminder, the Yahoo ID you use to sign up will be visible to other league members, and you'll have a choice as to whether you want your email to be displayed. If you want to keep these things private, it's easy to create a free Yahoo account just for the league and be sure to choose to hide your email account when you're setting up your team (or anytime after that by editing your team settings).

Time To Talk Music

Let's lighten it up a bit. I'm rocking The Most Serene Republic's new record, but I love the Wild Beasts joint--Two Lovers. It took a moment to grow on me. But I'm in. And yeah, I've gone over to the dark-side. The joint below is pretty cool---a little two bouncy for me. I'm more into the two title tracks. Meh, who am I kidding. I like this one too.

Somebody said I need to check the new Rae, too. I said I wouldn't, but I think I kind of have to. Cuban Linx changed my life ("I'm high power, put Adina Howard to sleep..") I owe the God his due.

What are you rocking?

Flip And Pop My Collar Like The Fonz

Andrew on Malkin and Limbaugh's dishonest white fear-mongering:

These people are going off the deep end entirely: open panic at a black president is morphing into the conscious fanning of racial polarization, via Gates or ACORN or Van Jones or a schoolbus in Saint Louis. What we're seeing is the Jeremiah Wright moment repeated and repeated. The far right is seizing any racial story to fan white fears of black power in order to destroy Obama. And the far right now controls the entire right. 

Do they understand how irresponsible this is? How recklessly dangerous to a society's cohesion and calm? Or is that what they need and thrive on?

Yes. Yes. And yes.

I got a note from a good friend yesterday expressing shock, and anger, about Drudge and Malkin's usage of that alleged racial beat-down on a school-bus. On some level, I wonder if something's wrong with me. I'm neither shocked, nor angry. This is exactly how I expected these fools to respond to a black president.

If anything, I'm a little giddy. For black people, the clear benefit of Obama is that he is quietly exposing an ancient hatred that has simmered in this country for decades.  Rightly or wrongly, a lot of us grew tired of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, mostly because they presented easy foils for Limbaugh-land. Moreover, again rightly or wrongly, they were used to define all of us.

It's intensely grating to live say, in Atlanta, and have some dude in Harlem crowned as your unelected leader. It's even more grating if said dude's agenda seems, in large measure, come down to standing in front of cameras and tweaking his opponents. It's no mistake that O'Reilly and Sharpton would break bread together at Sylvia's--they feed each other.

But Barack Obama, bourgeois in every way that bourgeois is right and just, will not dance.He tells kids to study--and they seethe. He accepts an apology for an immature act of rudeness--and they go hysterical. He takes his wife out for a date--and their veins bulge. His humanity, his ordinary blackness, is killing them. Dig the audio of his response to Kanye West--the way he says, "He's a jackass." He sounds like one of my brothers. And that's the point, because that's what he is. Barack Obama refuses to be their nigger. And it's driving them crazy.

It's about time.

Open Thread At Noon

It's yours...

The Fight We Want To Have

Is Joe Wilson a racist?

Responding to an audience question at a town hall at his presidential center in Atlanta, Carter said Tuesday that Wilson's outburst was also rooted in fears of a black president.

"I think it's based on racism," Carter said. "There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president."

But Wilson's son disputed that.

"There is not a racist bone in my dad's body," said Alan Wilson, an Iraq veteran who is running for state attorney general in South Carolina. "He doesn't even laugh at distasteful jokes. I won't comment on former President Carter, because I don't know President Carter. But I know my dad, and it's just not in him."

"It's unfortunate people make that jump. People can disagree - and appropriately disagree - on issues of substance, but when they make the jump to race it's absolutely ludicrous. My brothers and I were raised by our parents to respect everyone regardless of background or race."

Carter, a Democrat, said Joe Wilson's outburst was a part of a disturbing trend directed at the president that has included demonstrators equating Obama to Nazi leaders.

I don't think Carter called Joe Wilson a racist. Tha said, one reason some of us try to avoid this discussion is because of its enormous potential for distraction. From a black perspective, I care about the disproportionate number of black people who are sick and dying, not the contents of Joe Wilson's heart. 

Still, there's an element of this society that enjoys this debate. It really has nothing to do with health-care, or any other issue, as much as has to do with being confirmed. Some of us desperately want black people to acknowledgethat we are not our forefathers. Some of us desperately want white people to acknowledge that the spirit of those forefathers still haunts the land. We enjoy having this fight. We get something out of it--just not a  health care bill.

Get Your Weight Up. Not Your Hate Up.

In one of the recent open threads, someone was noting  the difficulty of getting good help for community activism, in defense of ACORN. I think if we can't request that our allies not employ people who would aid and abet a prostitution scheme, if that's too onerous, than we are in trouble. I think it's very hard to defend, not simply the criminality of the ACORN workers in Baltimore (le sigh) and Washington, but their rank stupidity.

Conservative activists have been after ACORN for over a year now. Bertha Lewis notes that activists tried the same stunt several times before they got a bite. In some people's eyes this is exonerating. In my eyes it's more damning. Lewis admits ACORN was aware of the setup, and yet her people still got caught. Twice.

I am willing to be wrong on this one, but it's very hard to see how that sort of sloppiness aids poor people or progressives. It's equally hard for me to be mad at James O'Keefe. Dude is doing his job. We must do ours. Pointing out the dastardly tactics employed by our adversaries doesn't alter that reality.

Impressed

I generally think admonishing Joe Wilson is a distraction and a waste, but I was really  impressed by Donna Edwards. Progressives love her, but I've never heard her interviewed. Chris Matthews has this clever jujitsu move he uses in which employs the politicians instinct to equivocate against him. He asks the politician to answer a hard question, and when the pol tries to shift out Matthews hammers him, making clear to the public that the person is refusing to answer. Edwards generally avoided that, and stayed on ground that she could defend.

Technical Difficulties

Commenters have probably noticed that they're having some problems. I'd like to apologize for that. Moreover there weren't many posts from me yesterday. I'd like to apologize for that too. We're having some software issues, it seems, and I have had issues posting.

I'm in New York, and I'm also all-thumbs when it comes to the technical side of things, so I'm not able to precisely explain what's wrong. I'm hoping today goes better. If it doesn't, try not to get too pissed off with us. A little is fine, we probably deserve it. But do come back.

September 15, 2009

It's Kanye's Fault

David Brooks on the decline of the West:

When you look from today back to 1945, you are looking into a different cultural epoch, across a sort of narcissism line. Humility, the sense that nobody is that different from anybody else, was a large part of the culture then.

But that humility came under attack in the ensuing decades. Self-effacement became identified with conformity and self-repression. A different ethos came to the fore, which the sociologists call "expressive individualism." Instead of being humble before God and history, moral salvation could be found through intimate contact with oneself and by exposing the beauty, the power and the divinity within.

Everything that starts out as a cultural revolution ends up as capitalist routine. Before long, self-exposure and self-love became ways to win shares in the competition for attention. Muhammad Ali would tell all cameras that he was the greatest of all time. Norman Mailer wrote a book called "Advertisements for Myself."

Today, immodesty is as ubiquitous as advertising, and for the same reasons. To scoop up just a few examples of self-indulgent expression from the past few days, there is Joe Wilson using the House floor as his own private "Crossfire"; there is Kanye West grabbing the microphone from Taylor Swift at the MTV Video Music Awards to give us his opinion that the wrong person won; there is Michael Jordan's egomaniacal and self-indulgent Hall of Fame speech. Baseball and football games are now so routinely interrupted by self-celebration, you don't even notice it anymore.

This isn't the death of civilization. It's just the culture in which we live. And from this vantage point, a display of mass modesty, like the kind represented on the V-J Day "Command Performance," comes as something of a refreshing shock, a glimpse into another world. It's funny how the nation's mood was at its most humble when its actual achievements were at their most extraordinary.
Part of this is Brooks critique of the past half-century, or rather half-critique. From Brooks' perspective,  the problem is that Sonia Sotomayor didn't go to school in 50s or early 60s, not that her chosen school didn't admit women in the 50s and 60s. Likewise Brooks doesn't cite the immodesty of George Wallace declaring eternal segregation "in the name of the greatest people to trod this earth," he cites the immodesty of Muhammad Ali. The response offends Brooks. The conditions that produce the response, less so.

That's because the conditions are, themselves, built on American immodesty. I'm thinking of Jack Johnson winning the championship, and modest Americans launching  pogroms against their fellow immodest Americans. I'm thinking about Birth of a Nation's  defense of treason, and a sitting president offering his immodest endorsement. I'm thinking about a country, circa 1850, whose politicians lorded over one of the last slave societies in the known world, and immodestly argued that it was a gift from God.

Even Brooks view of the "Greatest Generation" is myopic. In 1948 Strom Thurmond authored the segregationist Dixiecrat charter, while immodestly fathering a daughter with a black women.  In 1946, Isaac Woodward, a veteran of World War II, was beaten and blinded--while in uniform--by South Carolina police. The police were prosecuted, but the jury acquitted them, and a court-room full of Americans broke out in immodest applause.

This is history through the veil, again. It's virtually impossible to be a black person and believe that Americans were somehow more humble in the past. Our very existence springs from an act of immodesty. I can't even begin to imagine the Native American read on this one.

Open Thread At Noon

Over to you guys...

How To Represent

Andrew is grappling with what Neil Patrick Harris and Ellen Degeneres say about America. This part, for autobiographical reasons, caught my eye:

It isn't easy always being out. You don't want to deny something but you also don't want to be entirely defined by it. It was a lot harder in 1991 when I was suddenly turned into a poster-gay for a few minutes. Suddenly I had to be a spokesman; suddenly I was the gay pundit; suddenly my own writing on these issues seemed to be political acts requiring political resistance (mainly from fellow gays), simply because I was out and in public - and so few others were. People project all sorts of stuff onto you, good and bad, when that happens; and the handful of us in the public eye had to just carry on, hoping that the full scope of our work would eventually overshadow one aspect of our lives, but that our gayness could be celebrated as well. Anything but lies. And as more and more people are openly gay, and as more and more of them seem completely like your next door neighbor, it becomes easier.
I think anyone who's ever been in an "Only" can understand that sentiment. Back at Howard, I'd say a portion of the students were kids who came from prosperous black families, another portion were kids who (like me) came from the decaying cities but whose family was more or less in tact.

But the portion that always amazed were the black kids (a significant number of them biracial) who hailed from these nice suburbs (River Forest, Walnut Creek etc.), excelled in school, but came to Howard, almost out of a kind of fatigue. The fatigue is exactly what Andrew describes here--the pressure to be a representative, to explain your groups "position," the stifling inability to, say, be an asshole and not have it say something about your folks.

They came to Howard to disappear, to not have to represent anything more than themselves,. I've often wondered (and I guess I'll ask) whether this is why Andrew goes to Provincetown, whether it allows him to disappear.  Anyway, after Howard, I swore I'd never end up like those kids, that I'd never put myself in position where I was interpreting anything for white people.

Oh, wait...

All kidding aside, I think this is where the gay/black metaphor breaks down. Gays live around straight people in the most intimate ways. Their parents are likely straight. They likely have straight brothers and sisters. They go to school with straight kids. It's true that black people are forced to know more about white people than the reverse, but at least in my case, there's a lot we don't know, because of proximity.

I say this to say, in being one of those kids, as an adult, it's an incredible learning experience. After spending all of my education in a sea of black folks, I've spent almost my entire journalism career as an "Only" or one of, literally, a couple. You learn things as an "Only." I mean, white people give things to each other.

The Apology

Kanye tries to walk it back. Jozen Cummings notes that Kanye picked his target. One thing that strikes me about the whole deal is the shocking immaturity of it all. Call me judgmental--it just seems like at 32 you should be past upstaging people who are barely out high school.

<

September 14, 2009

I'll Show You How To Race-Bait Properly

From Memphis:

The black candidate, former Mayor Willie W. Herenton of Memphis, has argued that Tennessee needs a black voice in its currently all-white delegation. He is running a blistering campaign against Representative Steve Cohen, a fellow Democrat with a precarious hold on the majority black district.

"To know Steve Cohen is to know that he really does not think very much of African-Americans," Mr. Herenton said in a recent radio interview on KWAM. "He's played the black community well."

Matt correctly notes that this sort of deliberate race-baiting often fails, not because of ideals, but because of its hamfisted appeal; The key is to give the voters a reason to justify their racism, not enroll them in your racism. That said, I hate this sentiment:

"This seat was set aside for people who look like me," said Mr. Herenton's campaign manager, Sidney Chism, a black county commissioner. "It wasn't set aside for a Jew or a Christian. It was set aside so that blacks could have representation."
This is a disreputable feature of a certain kind of politician who came of age in the 60s. The key to the critique lay in conflating black people who vote with black people who are looking for votes. The district was created so that people who look Herenton would be well-represented, not so that people who look like Herenton would have a job for life. The argument is insulting to the actual voter because it says that he/she shouldn't have the right to choose, but should have his/her choices dictated by politicians.

It's A Just A Dude With A Blog...

From comments:

You think Doom will be the last hip hop artist you'll write about? Because Kanye is a dick? Did you flip and quit the game when ODB said Puffy's good but Wu Tang's the best and for the children?

I love what you have to say about hip hop and think your voice is an important and necessary one, but if you just give up on the art, when there is so much out there, even if it's outside the mainstream...? Well, it's just disappointing, TNC. And I'd really love to see you backtrack on that retirement, Favre-style, and come back and play the game again.

But I guess from the writing on the blog it just seems like you don't feel hip hop anymore, or that you've outgrown it...is that it, outgrown? Because I don't see how, if you really loved it, you wouldn't be able to find stuff out there that speaks to you. You just have to hunt, you won't find it on the radio. Yet here you are writing about Doom, so obviously you get that...

Anyway, your post saying you were done with hip hop sort of pissed me off, and I wish you would take it back.

This has been an ongoing process for me, as readers of this blog know. But the process isn't a statement or recommendation. I haven't been to the movies in over a year. That says a lot about me, and maybe something about the movies. From that perspective, I'm not sure why there's such a strong reaction to a personal opinion. People love things all the time, and then move on to other things--I don't collect comics or play Madden anymore, either.

My reaction Kanye was really a kind of fatigue with ego and the "I'm the best thing out" pose which hip-hop is built on, which hip-hop has always been built on. As younger man, that pose meant something to me--I needed it. As an old-head, not so much. I'm half-curious about the Rae album, but I just don't know, at this stage in my life, that I want to hear more about the crack trade. Cuban Linx changed my life ("And when I slept I dreamed Gs son/I need some..") I'm fine with letting that be. Hip-Hop will always be foundation. That's enough for me.

This is a deeply personal choice. It is not a declaration about the state of hip-hop. This is a blog written by a guy who lives in a small Harlem apartment, with his spouse and kid. It should never be taken as anything more than that. 

UPDATE: It's important to add how much I appreciate the compliment, also. It means a lot. I hope I don't undermine it by saying the following. I'd hope that people who like what they see here, but wish I did more of XXXXX, would be inspired to do it themselves. Writing has never been more democratic than it is right now. If you're looking for a particular analysis of hip-hop, which you aren't seeing right now, grab the pad and go knock it out. Now's the time.

Open Thread At Noon

Take it away...

Mr. Campbell...

Emphasis on that "Mr." I'm gonna call this the Latoya Peterson effect. I won't say much more. Have at it in comments. If you haven't seen it, don't read.

Doom Sing Soprano...

A lot of Doom fans have been asking what I thought of the now not-so-new album, Born Like This. I couldn't really say much, because I was working on a feature. Unfortunately, it's behind the curtain. Pick it up if you get the chance.

I think Doom is the last hip-hop artists I'll be following. Something about that Kanye West outburst yesterday said so much. That was really sad to see. She looked like she was genuinely happy.

Race Is A Factor But...

Glenn Greenwald argues that Obama-hatred is largely unprecedented--if you don't consider the last Democrat to occupy the White House:

To see that, just look at what that movement's leading figures said and did during the Clinton years.  In 1994, Jesse Helms, then-Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, claimed that "just about every military man" believes Clinton is unqualified to be Commander-in-Chief and then warned/threatened him not to venture onto military bases in the South:  "Mr. Clinton better watch out if he comes down here. He better have a bodyguard."  The Wall St. Journal called for a Special Prosecutor to investigate the possible "murder" of Vince Foster.  Clinton was relentlessly accused by leading right-wing voices of being a murderer, a serial rapist, and a drug trafficker.  Tens of millions of dollars and barrels of media ink were expended investigating "Whitewater," a "scandal" which, to this day, virtually nobody can even define.  When Clinton tried to kill Osama bin Laden, they accused him of "wagging the dog" -- trying to distract the country from the truly important matters at hand (his sex scandal).  And, of course, the GOP ultimately impeached him over that sex scandal -- in the process issuing a lengthy legal brief with footnotes detailing his sex acts (cigars and sex talk), publicly speculating about (and demanding examinations of) the unique "distinguishing" spots on his penis, and using leading right-wing organs to disseminate innuendo that he had an abandoned, out-of-wedlock child.  More intense and constant attacks on a President's "legitimacy" are difficult to imagine...

Other than the fact that Obama's race intensifies the hatred in some precincts, nothing that the Right is doing now is new.  This is who they are and what they do -- and that's been true for many years, for decades.  Even the allegedly "unprecedented" behavior at Obama's speech isn't really unprecedented; although nobody yelled "you lie," Republicans routinely booed and heckled Clinton when he spoke to Congress because they didn't think he was legitimately the President (only for Ted Koppel to claim that it was something "no one at this table has ever heard before" when Democrats, in 2005, booed Bush's Social Security privatization proposal during a speech to Congress). 
For the most part, this is my view. As I've said, I'm not convinced that Joe Wilson wouldn't have yelled "You lie!" at President Hillary Clinton, or President John Edwards. I'm also not sure that "Birther-ism" is more sinister than alleging that Clinton murdered Vince Foster. For the most part, think that Obama is facing what any Democrat would face at this point in history--which if you're black, is the problem.

It's worth noting that a lot of Clinton's troubles, and a lot of any generic national Democratic troubles post-1968, are inextricably tied to race. Clinton was a Southerner, and as such, there was some hope that could help reclaim white Southern votes that had left the Democrats after 1968. Why did these white Southerners leave, in the first place? What was the exact nature of the shoals Clinton had to navigate?  It's worth thinking about the efficacy of the Sista Souljah move, and who that tactic was targeting. It's worth thinking about Ricky Ray Rector. It's worth thinking about the growth of the militia movement during Clinton's presidency, and exactly what sort of person these groups were enlisting. It's worth remembering Randy Weaver, and exactly what he stood for.

Let me not be reductive--Clinton stood at the center of a cultural conflict stretching back to the 60s and involving everything from gay rights to the nature of the military. I don't have any means of apportioning how much of that hostility had to do with race, and how much of it had to do with all the issues brought forth by the 60s. But much of what looks to just be vanilla issues (crime, welfare, taxes etc.) were suffused with the politics of race. I think Obama benefited by the passage of time, and the fact that crime and welfare, aren't national issues, at the moment. But as Glenn notes, the standard craziness has been intensified by Obama's race.

There's a danger in making that last point too casually--"Yes race is a factor, but..." The crazy-tax is intensified by Obama's blackness--that his blackness didn't invent the crazy-tax doesn't mitigate the point. We all have to visit the dentist every six months, not because of racial discrimination, but because we're human. But if the dentist charges black people five dollars more per-visit, pointing out that twenty years ago I couldn't even go to the dentist, or that "Racism doesn't cause tooth decay," won't make me feel much better. And it shouldn't--I'm still getting ripped off.

If we concede, as most reasonable people do, that racism is a factor--not the factor but a factor--in resistance to Obama, then in fact, what we've seen this year is, by the very nature of an Obama presidency, nprecedented. Put simply, we've seen the crazy-tax, of which race is a portion, before. But we've never seen the crazy-tax intensified by race. We have not seen it accompanied by watermelon jokes, by Congressmen referring to him as boy, by clucking heads claiming that the president "has exposed himself as someone with a deep-seated hated of white people." We've never seen the whitey tape, before.

There's a tendency to lump anti-black racism in with all the serious problems presented when you try to make a democracy work. There is always a danger of becoming single-minded, of bringing to bear a myopic analysis which sees one thing in everything. Moreover, watermelon jokes are a long way from red-lining, and in seeing how far we've come, the temptation is to dismiss how far we have to go.But from a black perspective, it's a temptation you can ill-afford. Racism cost us dollars a half-century ago. Today it costs us quarters--but it still costs.

Don't let the grinding familiarity of Obama blind you to the profound times we live in, and the work that's still left to do. We've never had a black president before. This is without precedent. We've also never had anti-Semitic white supremacists shooting up the Holocaust Museum. This, too, is unprecedented.

Continue reading "Race Is A Factor But..." »

September 13, 2009

NFL Open Thread

Sorry, I'm late guys. Here it is. Cowboys looking good.

September 11, 2009

And South Carolina Shall Rise Again

There are some really great takes on South Carolina politics over at the Times, Room For Debate. This one by Thomas Schaller is really rich on the history:

Thomas Jefferson removed condemnations of slavery from the Declaration of Independence to appease South Carolinian slaveholders. State loyalists helped the British recapture the state in 1780 from the patriots. By 1828, state icon and Vice President John C. Calhoun was advocating state "nullification" of federal powers.

In 1860, South Carolina became the first state to secede -- and even threatened to secede from the Confederacy because the other southern states refused to re-open the slave trade. In 1856, on the Senate floor Congressman Preston Brooks bloodied an abolitionist senator with a cane.

Well into the 20th century, South Carolina's black citizens observed the Fourth of July mostly alone; the vast majority of whites preferred instead to celebrate Confederate Memorial Day. In 1920, the state legislature rejected the women's suffrage amendment, finally ratifying it a half century later.
Lots of meat in there (like ratifying women's suffrage in 1970.) But I am thinking about that Fourth of July point. It reminds me of some of the research David Blight has done which argues that the first Memorial Day was actually celebrated by blacks in South Carolina.

One of the great tragedies of the past half century or so, is how patriotism has been coopted by people who claim the Confederate flag, while black leaders, from King to Obama, are dismissed as communists/socialists and now Hitlerite. These are people whose heroes routinely flouted the federal government and assaulted black troops carrying the Union flag.

Open Thread At Noon

Take it away...

It Begins...

So it started last night, consider this our thread to chop it about all things pro football. I wanted to throw up some video, and I got to watching this piece on Eric Dickerson which (somewhat inadequately) tries to answer why, or whether, he's underrated. For the record, I'm not convinced he is. Dickerson is definitely in my top 10, and likely my top 5. Still, he doesn't stick in the memory the way Barry/Emmitt/Walter/Earl/Gale/Jim do.

I think it has something to do with his style. I was watching the highlights and he just seems to be running away from people. That isn't a knock, but part of thrill of watching a running back is the escape artist factor, to see someone surrounded by five guys and then elude them all, is thrilling. Of course, there's Dickerson's attitude, and the fact that he never won anything. But I'm not sure that's it. Everyone loves Barry.

Anyway, just wanted to throw that out there. We don't have to talk about Dickerson. Anything NFL related will work. My people are going to kill me, but I have Tony Romo having a great year, but the Cowboys going 9-7.

Balancing The White Man's Check Book

Some interesting response over at Kos to my piece yesterday, and this piece from Eugene Robinson. Here's mk193 objecting to Robinson first:

You can almost hear Robinson fighting with himself as he typed these words.  He was already envisioning his appearance on Morning Joe the next day where Mika would suggest that "playing the race card" has no place in the debate.  Then Robinson would be cowed and have to spend the next 10 minutes reassuring the good white folks on Morning Joe that he really wasn't suggesting that Wilson was a "racist" but that he was saying that race "had played a role" in the whole episode.  One can see why Robinson just doesn't want to go "there."

But poor Eugene is not the only black person in media who doesn't want to go there.
That would be me:

Coates has his "suspicions" but is "not prepared to go there."  He suggests that we cannot prove that Wilson is a racist because we are not "mind-readers."  I believe that this is a true cop-out on the part of Coates.  In private company among other Black people, I am certain that his "suspicions" would have been expressed less timidly.  I anticipate that Jonathan Capehart will be on the tevee tomorrow tip-toeing and tap dancing around reality too.
Before boring into this I want to address this charge of being "timid," as this is the second time I've seen it come up. Expect that if I'm sitting at the table with friends, beer in hand, I will be a lot less reflective and a lot more emotional. But I don't confuse my bull sessions with friends, with cogent, coherent argument. Again, there's a reason that barbershop talk stays in the barbershop.  I have no problem calling people out for racist statements, and calling it exactly that.  I'm not Eugene Robinson, and I'm not Jonathan Capehart, though I respect them both. I'm Ta-Nehisi Coates, and my name is on every word. Forgive my biting tone, but the the pseudonymous writer inveighing against timidity, is the arsonist inveighing against fire.
 
More to the point, I think that this gets at the heart of my difference with mk193:

So this is why Black Folks Tend to Shout... It just gets to be too much.  Yesterday unbelievably Joe Wilson took to Youtube to suggest that he "would not be muzzled."  No indeed.  The people who will remain muzzled (at least in mixed company) are going to be us Black Folks who really want to SHOUT.

I think there's a place for shouting, but it isn't a place I'm interested in. My thoughts on the Confederate flag, and Lost Causers, are out there. But, I've basically had enough of trying to get white people to see race, the wayI see race. I don't see how shouting, "JOE WILSON IS RACIST!! DON'T YOU SEE!!!" gets us any closer to shrinking the ranks of the (disproportionately black) uninsured.

I think back to Obama's first debate with McCain, and how some of us felt that McCain's dismissive attitude was evidence of racism. Maybe, so, But it really didn't matter, and ultimately McCain paid for it. I think the same thing applies here. Angry about what Joe Wilson said? Send some money to Robert Miller, and then get to organizing. We need to focus on policy. I am tired of shouting at white people. Shouting don't cover those pediatrician bills.

September 10, 2009

Again, With The Racism...

Lots of push-back, over e-mail, on not sussing out the race factor with Joe Wilson. First this:


Joe Wilson's outburst should not be swept under the rug as just rude discourse....I don't think the burden is on African-Americans to prove that the "Lie" outburst is tinged with racism...As you know, we have history on our side...From the Birthers movement to the uproar over Obama talking to school children 9that's just the recent shit..) sometimes a duck is a duck...

You are a thorough cat when it comes to research...The fact that you had the insight to show that political particism once meant fools physically assaulting each other in Washington, showed there is a bigger picture...But let's talk about such conduct over the last 40 years...The truth is, in my lifetime, I've never heard any person holding political heckle a sitting President in that manner, on national TV....To say that race is the only reason Wilson shot his mouth off is too simplistic...But it is certainly part of the equation......No one has to bait me into that thinking...It is what it is...

And then this:

I am disappointed with your statement of "not going there" in considering race. It seems to me to be a cavalier dismissal of a valid factor. When did it become so scary for people not to be able to at least consider the possibility? Give us credit as your readers to know that everything is not about race but also to know that opinions can be tinged by race. We know as well as you that it doesn't have to be "either-or". I also understand that we cannot get into people thoughts but we have to be able to at least prescribe and discuss possible motives for disrespectfulness.

This is the same "your not the boss of me" attitude that many professionals get when they assume leadership positions. Resistance can often be traced to gender, age, sexual orientation and yes-race. I clearly understand that race is not the only factor but it is a factor. (I also think that this mentality came into play in the Skip Gates affair.) My frustration is that we, as black Americans, are censuring our own thoughts. We have become so sensitive to attacks of "playing the race card", being Farrakhan or Sharpton apologists, being paranoid, being racist, etc. We no longer want to raise the question when it is perfectly valid for fear of getting our teeth kicked in. This lack of deference to the POTUS was surprising to me at the town meetings but from a member of Congress just boggles my mind. Race is not the only factor but it is still a factor in this hyped "post-racial" age. You can argue that the Clintons saw similar malice but not this early in the term and they are a much more contentious couple.

I enjoy you column and blog because you are willing to question your views but also the comments from your readers do seem to have a diverse discourse that gives me plenty to think about. I have followed you for a while and hope that your youth, your increasing popularity with centrists and your friendship with Andrew Sullivan is not dissuading you from calling it as you see it. To paraphrase Chris Rock when Bill Maher tried to bait him to absolve Michael Richards of racist charges after Richard's tirade, "What does it take to be called a racist nowadays? Do you have to be caught shooting Medgar Evars?"
I think I wrote something like that, too. In all seriousness, I'm not sure how you resolve this one. I understand skepticism of the GOP, and skepticism of Wilson in particular. But I don't really know how you demonstrate that race was a factor, and more importantly, how it played out. I think if you read the body of this blog, I've never really been dismissive of racism. I'm not starting now. But I have work in the world of facts. I just don't have many specific ones, in this case.

The Civilized World

For those who are following along with my Civil War reading, I just finished Weevils In The Wheat the other day. I'm backtracking some to read The Glorious Cause,  Robert Middlekauf's history of the American Revolution. Early in the first chapter Middlekauf points out that much of continental Europe saw the English as uncultured barbarians. I found that fascinating given that the English thought that the same of the Americans, and white Americans thought the same of blacks. I guess someone has to be in need of civilizing. Could be the swarthy Italians, or the simian Irish.

Open Thread At Noon

Go for it, folks.

You Lie Pt. 3

I generally greet complaints about a "decline in civility" in American politics with eye-rolling skepticism. Civility doesn't mean much when you're ignoring state-sponsored terrorism in your own country. More to the point, I'd be really shocked if Barack Obama were the first president to be heckled from the floor. I haven't looked, but given the history of Congress, I would be really surprised. Joe Wilson may be a gas-bag, he really doesn't measure up to the giants of South Carolina. Preston Brooks, for instance, was caning fools, back in the day:

At first intending to challenge Sumner to a duel, Brooks consulted with fellow South Carolina Rep. Laurence M. Keitt on dueling etiquette. Keitt instructed him that dueling was for gentlemen of equal social standing, and suggested that Sumner occupied a lower social status comparable to a drunkard due to the supposedly coarse language he had used during his speech. Brooks thus decided to attack Sumner with a cane...

Brooks survived an expulsion vote in the House but resigned his seat, claiming both that he "meant no disrespect to the Senate of the United States" by attacking Sumner and that he did not intend to kill him, for he would have used a different weapon if he had. His constituents thought of him as a hero and returned him to Congress. However, Brooks's attack on Sumner was regarded in the north as the act of a cowardly barbarian. One of the bitterest critics of the attack was Sumner's fellow New Englander, Congressman Anson Burlingame.

When Burlingame denounced Brooks as a coward on the floor of the House, Brooks challenged him to a duel, and Burlingame accepted the challenge. Burlingame, as the challenged party, specified rifles as the weapons, and to get around American anti-dueling laws he named the Navy Yard on the Canadian side of Niagara Falls as the site. Brooks backed out of the challenge, claiming that he would be murdered on his way north. Burlingame's reputation as a deer hunter and a deadly shot with a rifle could also have been a factor.
Now, Sumner wasn't president, but this was time when the phrase "partisan politics" could have been taken literally. I can't believe Obama's the first president to catch a few choice words from the peanut gallery.

You Lie Pt. 2

I think a lot of us see a racial angle in a white South Carolina congressman yelling at the President and interrupting his speech to the nation. I'm not prepared to go there. Knowing this country, it's history, and some of South Carolina's particular history, I have my suspicions. But I hate these arguments in which we try to go back and forth over a contention, that's basically unprovable.

What would have happened if Obama was white? The truth is, I don't know. I think we get baited into these debates by people who speak about the black/white divide in a manner that shows a basic ignorance of American history. History chastens us all. And when you see people speaking as if problems integral to the very origins of this country, problems which we compounded over the course of two centuries, should basically be solved in a half of a century, it leads you to speculate.

But the fact is that we aren't mind-readers. Let's stick with what we know, and say the dude did something incredibly stupid. His motivations are between him and his God. He has to sleep with himself at night--not us. He must pay his own debts.

You Lie

I think what you saw yesterday was very predictable. Again, big media sets up this narrative of the "Make or break" speech. Again, Obama shoots the lights out. Again, Obama says something innocuous, "no illegal immigrants will be covered." Again, a Republican overplays his hand. The temptation is to say that Obama planned for August to happen, that he baited his adversaries, the way Deion Sanders used to bait quarterbacks. Probably not. Still, the catch-up speed is incredible.

We (liberals) have spent so much of our time on the losing end of the past 30 years, that the impulse is to fight every battle, and challenge every press release. Moreover, media has uncovered our inner crazy. HuffPo blasts every utterance from Jon Kyl in bold font. Politico reports every feint and jab, like it's the whole fight. I'm not blaming them, they're doing well because they've figured out something about our inner animal.

It's fine for us laymen to indulge that, but I don't want to be led by people who think that outlets (including this one) which weigh in on who "won the week" are some kind of gauge of their actual progress. I don't want to be led by people who think that "getting angry" is a actual political strategy. I want to be led by a killer. A cold, unemotional, professional killer.

I keep meeting lefties who tell me Obama's "too soft" with these guys, and I keep looking at them like they're crazy. I am going to go out on a limb and say that there is something deeper at work here, something beyond the policy fights. I think a lot of us don't just want Obama to be effective, we want him to exact some measure of revenge. It's smart to understand the difference between the two, and moreover, how the desire for one can undermine the other. A section of conservatives love Sarah Palin because she drives liberals crazy. That she drives a lot of other people crazy too, and hence undermines herself, is beside the point.

Let's not make that mistake. Besides. If it's blood on the walls you want, the GOP is doing fine by itself.

September 9, 2009

The Public Option

Open thread on the speech. I may live blog some, but I think I'll mostly listen. Live streaming here.

UPDATE: Also, live streaming from MSNBC...

Echoes Of The Golden Age

I think people, including me, often overthink hip-hop. It's (mostly) music inspired by the id of very young men. Like most things, some times it's great and some times, not so much. These days, I'm removed from the aggression of my youth and so I find relating to the music a little harder.

I'm not convinced that that's a catastrophe, though. I don't think I want to be at a Black Moon concert, when I'm 50, yelling "Killing Every Nigga In Sight." I think I'd rather be on a mountain, somewhere.

That said, sophomore year at Howard was a good time. And Black Moon is classic. Don't front...


I Guess I'm A Conservative, Too

Andrew highlights this post from Lee Seigel on Obama's school speech:

It is one of the most astounding projections in public life that the conservatives should have, with great success, turned Obama's speech to schoolchildren into an example of the conservatives' own Kulturkampf. They have convinced great numbers of people that Obama is out to sway the minds of the young with some subtle political agenda: i.e. they have convinced great numbers of people that Obama is William Bennett's heir.

It could be that, in their eyes, Obama poses a greater threat to their cultural domination than handwringing liberal pundits, so strangely eager to declare Obama ineffectual, would have us believe. After all, the most potent part of Obama's campaign strategy was to attempt to make a pragmatic synthesis of conservative emphasis on personal responsibility with liberal faith in a benevolently activist government. Fusing those two world-views together was exactly what Obama did in his speech to the schoolchildren, as he promised better educational environments in exchange for students' commitment to their own lives.

The obvious thing that separates Obama from many conservatives, is marrying a belief in individual responsibility with the notion that government should do more that just get out of the way. No disrespect to Obama, but this kind of "conservatism" is unoriginal, and is as old as black American political thought, itself. It's likely as old as American political thought, but I'm talking here about what I know.

Frederick Douglass didn't simply believe that Union forces should march through the South freeing slaves, he believed that the slave, themselves, had a responsibility to fight for their freedom. Harriet Tubman did not need to read "Self-Reliance," to understand that her freedom, and the freedom of black people, would ultimately be in their own hands. Indeed Tubman and Douglass believed (correctly) that unless the slaves fought, in some form, they wouldn't be free. Ida B. Wells was hard on the broader country for allowing lynching, but she could be particularly viscous toward black men whom she thought had allowed it to happen.

That sort of thinking extends all the way up through Malcolm X's "Ballot Or The Bullet" speech (promoting power through electoral politics, and entrepreneurship.) You can find traces of it Farrakhan and Jesse Jackson also. Of course, Bill Cosby has all of it. I don't know when it became taboo for black people to say "Do your homework," to their kids and "Reform health-care" to their government. A lot of this is about the cheap way we report stories and the need for an obvious conflict. Again, it's very hard for me to object to a guy like Barack Obama, given his own story, saying to kids, in essence, "Go kick some ass." I think most parents, profanity aside, feel the same way.

Get Retarded

Or not. Here's an NPR story, quoting yours truly, on whether we should use the word retard. I always wonder whether if, in high school, I could have seen my present self, I would have been pleased. And then today, I listened to this piece in which I say, in no uncertain terms, "I think nigger is a fine word," and I knew that high school me would have approved.

As for "retard," I don't really get the big deal. If you're a member of a particular group, and I use a word, which references your group, and you, in good faith, tell me you find it offensive, then I'll stop using it. I don't understand people who are out waging war over their right say things like "That's so gay" or "Stop acting retarded." My question is always, why is it so important to you? Why do you need to say it?

I think there's a case for clumsiness. "Intellectual Disabilities," for instance, is cumbersome. But I actually prefer "disabled" to "handicapped." And I like "black" better than "African-American" because black, sounds bad-ass. But then I like "Negro," because it's funny. And, of course, "nigger," when said by the right people, because of it's variety. I don't know what I'd do without "Nigger, please" or "Nigger, what?" or of course my favorite absurd Raekwon line, "All my Spanish niggers love us..."

Anyway, cue the Chris Rock...I generally agree, it's got to be in the song...

Open Thread At Noon

Only, not quite...

"Reasonable Republicans"

Interesting video from GMA. Obama, again, maintains that there are conservatives who he can work with, and who he hopes to work this. I think when you've got Obama shouting out Chuck Grassley and then Grassley turning around and running against health care reform, that sort of sentiment drives liberals crazy. I think Obama should have taken, and should take, the hysteria a lot more seriously. Stupid is seductive--and it kills.

That said, I think the "reasonable Republicans" line is a smart one--as long as legislation gets done. If you do get bipartisan support, great. If not, when time comes to run again, you get to cite all the times you tried, and decry your opponents obstructionism.

In other news, Sarah Palin doubles down on death panels.

Tyler Perry Goes High Brow

Two perspectives on the news that Tyler Perry is doing For Colored Girls Who've Considered Suicide When The Rainbow is Enuff. From Latoya Peterson:

It's a complex, nuanced piece, and seeing Tyler Perry getting a writing credit gives me serious pause.

Directing? Fine.

Producing? Cool.

But writing and adapting it? From someone who writes flat, two-dimensional woman characters in all of his work? Even under the best of circumstances, I would be skeptical of a black man tackling a project like this. To bring Shange's vision to light would take an understanding of why this work of art is so deeply intertwined with black women's articulation of their own struggles under racist, patriarchal oppression - something that unfortunately, many still deny to this day. Black women's voices are often lost in discussions of race (because all the blacks are men) and discussions of gender (because all women are white) and Ntozake Shange was beyond brave to put down all of these ideas and present them for public consumption even in the face of heavy criticism from black men when the play was released.

From Alyssa Rosenberg:

This seems like an obvious project for which Perry could recruit talented African-American female writers and directors, throw a lot of commercial weight behind the project, and prove not only that he can make commercially successful movies but that he can help other people make commercially successful movies. It's not like there are no options out there. Perry could have tapped Kasi Lemmons, or Gina Prince-Bythewood, or Angela Robinson, to name just a couple of options. Perry could, by helping any one of those women make and market a terrific project, give them an enormous career boost.

But he's not going to do it. And since he launched 34th Street Films, an arm of Tyler Perry Studios meant explicitly to promote the work of other filmmakers, almost exactly a year ago, IMDb lists just three projects the studio has under development: For Colored Girls..., Hot Tub Time Machine, a dudely comedy with some high-profile white stars written and directed by four men, and Georgia Sky. (He probably also deserves some credit for helping to produce Precious, which looks like it could be absolutely extraordinary.) It's the company's first year, and maybe things will be different. But until Perry turns over a high-profile project that he could do, but could be better done by another writer or director, to someone else, I'm not really going to believe that he's interested in developing the work of other directors.
Colored Girls is an important play, and holds a special place in the hearts of lot of black women. Along with "Still I Rise," "Phenomenal Woman," and Nina Simone's Four Women, it forms a kind of hood canon for black girls. It seemed especially appropriate during the 80s when fools would openly say things like "Sexy young ladies of the light skin breed..." What I wonder is how you adapt it for this era. It's not that those issues have dissappeared, but things have changed. Despite Alyssa's skepticism, I hope Perry taps someone who can see that.

One More Word On The Willingham Case

The more I think about the defense offered last week by Willingham's prosecutor, the worse I feel. As a lot of commenters pointed out, it basically boiled down to "he was a bad guy." The fact that this dude is now judge boggles the mind. As if you really need to see it, here's David Grann's response.

September 8, 2009

On Van Jones

John McWhorter doesn't see much sense in dismissing Van Jones. I'm not crying over this one, nor am I surprised. I think some of us want Obama to fight every single fight, to be a George Bush for liberals, as someone put it. That strikes me as a bad idea. It's not clear to me that Dubya was "good" for the future of the right. Anyway, this caught my eye:

Jones was wrong, actually, in disavowing his support for 9/11 conspiracy theory. He signed the document, which can only mean that he supports the idea that 9/11 was planned, or that the Bushies knew something more than they have said, or at least that the charge is plausible enough to require investigation.

 

But support for that idea is hardly unknown among people of the left - and often gestural in its own way; look one of these types in the eye and ask "Do you really think George Bush and his cabinet engineered the murder of thousands and have kept the secret for eight years?" and watch the nervous pause and the look off into the distance. Speculations in this vein hardly meant that Jones was not sincerely committed to working within the government to do good.

I don't have much sense of "the left," sinceI mostly experience my fellow lefties in cyberspace. But, speaking for myself, when I hear "9/11 was an inside job," I start thinking that debates about Area 51 aren't far behind.


Open Thread At Noon

Go for it...

This Week's Mad Men Thread

I don't really know what to say anymore. It's a beautiful show, beautifully shot, and beautifully told. I loved Peggy's knowing look to Don, after they rejected the "Bye, Bye Birdie" ad. Man, I hate that song.

The Proper Response To The Bumrush

One regrettable feature of political dialogue is the tendency of some of us to conflate an attempt to understand, with an attempt to condone. Hence the following comment from last week's discussion around John Conroy's account of being attacked by a black teen:

Why is everybody so intent on making excuses for this behavior? Yfantis says he "earned" a beatdown. Odub says it's about the violence that permeates our society. Socioprof gives us psychobabble about gender noncomformity. Mr. Coates acts as if the violence in the "hood" is something that just happens, like the weather.

Somebody might just want to point out that Larry, the actual perpetrator of this crime, is a moral agent with the ability to make choices. He chose to commit this savage attack, and I for one am sickened by the propensity to make excuses for this sort of behavior. Conroy suffered a permanent knee injury which will be with him forever. He could have died.

Everybody is missing one rather glaring point: Larry suffered no serious consequences from his behavior. He's being told that this sort of behavior is basically OK. His family certainly seems to think so, and the criminal justice system apparently agrees. So he gets away with it -- and his friends, relatives and neighbors see him get away with it, which of course encourages others to follow in his footsteps.

Until, that is, he goes too far, somebody dies, and he ends up in prison for life. Or maybe he gets killed in another act of senseless violence. Who knows what will happen to Larry.

But let me suggest that the concepts of "punishment" and "deterrence" ought to have some role in this discussion.

It's always telling when you see someone disagreeing with paraphrase or demeanor, instead of disagreeing with a fully formed quote. You guys can check out the thread and weigh for yourself the accuracy of the charge.

That said, I do tend to write like everyone who's reading this blog, has been reading it since its inception. So, if you generally hold stereotypes about liberals, I guess you could fairly assume that I was interested in "making excuses" for thuggery. Of course, my feelings about violent crime are on the record.  It is always tricky to say what one would do, were they in someone else's shoes, but I think if I'm walking down Lennox and some kid knocks me out cold, I will understand that he was just testing his limits. I will understand that kids like to explore their boundaries. I will know that young men aren't always great about regulating their aggressive impulses. I will also do anything, within reason and ethics, I can to aid the justice system in prosecuting said young man.

Understanding why people do dumb shit, isn't the same as thinking they have the right to do dumb shit. I say this as someone whose been on both ends of assault and battery. I say this as someone whose spouse was mugged on her way home, a few years back, and a dude whose lived in neighborhoods with a relatively high rate of violent crime, all his life.

Here is the thing--while a disproportionate number of black boys may be standing out on the street cold-cocking dudes, a larger disproportionate number of black boys are living in fear of getting cold-cocked, and reacting accordingly. The worst part of going to an inner-city school, for me, wasn't the teachers, or the schools themselves, but the way violence hung in the air, and made people crazy. The atmosphere of violence, the sense that it can always happen, that there are no safe places, even in school, alters everything. It changes how you walk home,  who you hang out with, how you dress, where you sit at lunch, to, ultimately, how focused you are on your studies.

I could be wrong, but my sense from reading Conroy's story, and the lack of responsibility shown by the kid's family, is that the kid will likely be in court again. And for all the talk about race and hate-crime, the next time out, there won't be any debate about a hate-crime, because the victim will likely look like the perp. Contrary to popular belief, in the black community, in general, there isn't much sympathy for people who decide to batter other people for kicks.

Obama's Socialist Agenda

Heh, from commenter GAPeach7:

A few excerpts from the President's socialist agenda:

And that's what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself.
And no matter what you want to do with your life - I guarantee that you'll need an education to do it.
We need every single one of you to develop your talents, skills and intellect so you can help solve our most difficult problems. If you don't do that - if you quit on school - you're not just quitting on yourself, you're quitting on your country.
But at the end of the day, the circumstances of your life - what you look like, where you come from, how much money you have, what you've got going on at home - that's no excuse for neglecting your homework or having a bad attitude. That's no excuse for talking back to your teacher, or cutting class, or dropping out of school. That's no excuse for not trying.


How dare he encourage the children of this country to stay in school and not allow the circumstances of their birth or environment dictate their future. How dare he encourage love and respect of family and country. We've got to keep an eye on this scoundrel.

Full text of the speech (or Phase 1 of Indoctrinate Our Children) go here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/MediaResources/PreparedSchoolRemarks/

That Obama is a tricky one.

From Last Week

Great quote from Josh Marshall:

Barack Obama definitely the first black man to get attacked by the right for telling kids to study hard and stay in school.
As beautiful as this sounds, regrettably, this isn't quite true. The extreme right has been attacking black men, and women, for over a century for saying exactly that--albeit in much more violent terms.

September 7, 2009

It's A Beautiful Day

At least here in New York. Go outside. Plenty to talk about tomorrow. Happy Labor Day, folks.

September 4, 2009

Where You From?

Commenter Peep writes:

I had a similar experience about 25 years ago in the South Side of Chicago, and I recall that the group of kids that attacked me when they first started to cluster around me, asked something like, "Who do you know?" -- which sounds like they were thinking along the lines TNC is saying here. Of course, I had the street savvy of Little Lord Fauntleroy, so I just shrugged my shoulders and walked along until they pulled out chains and clocked me in the head a few times...and then they ran away....
This reminded me of something I left out of my post--the ancient idea of "turf." I think this is as old as American cities, or maybe even cities, period. I remember interviewing my Dad for the book, and everything he said about Philly, when he was coming up in the 50s, sounded so much like Baltimore in the 80s--if more intense.

There was a point where he was trying to explain why he felt like he had to leave, and he talked about how, at 16, his acquaintances started dying off. And then he talked about, beyond death, just the general sense of violence which hung everywhere. I don't have the quote handy but he basically said that every where he walked the word was, "Hey Motherfucker, where you from?" That really resonated with me. In my time it was like all you were was the block you represented. And if that block had a rep as bad-asses, that rep bled on to you. And if they didn't, that bled on to you also.

Eventually you tire of the whole dynamic. At least those of us who aren't built like that, do. And make no mistake, most of us aren't.

The Mile-Low Club

The Broncos are about to be in a world of hurt:

Everything the Broncos have touched in the last five months has turned to crap. Even in the lead-up to this most interesting of practice games there was another slap in McDaniels' face: Star wide receiver Brandon Marshall had to be suspended for two weeks for insubordination, and there's no telling if this 6-year-old football player will show up more mature when the suspension ends.

As if the 27-17 home loss didn't hurt enough, Denver is faced with another bit of wonderful news: Orton suffered what appeared to be a wound to the index finger on his right (throwing) hand. That's only the most important finger to throw the football. The wound would have to heal, and the finger would have to be flexible enough to throw a football 13 days from now, in the season opener at Cincinnati. If Orton's finger can't heal in time, then backup Chris Simms would get the nod ... assuming Simms' high-ankle sprain is healed in time, and there's no telling if it will be.

Uh-oh. Now there's something new for the Broncos: Storm clouds, the kind that roll in over the Rockies many afternoons and drench the plains. I found the vanquished more interesting. From his car early this morning, McDaniels sounded a little edgy. Almost angry, but not quite. Defiant might be a better way to put it. I can see what Pat Bowlen saw in him, and still sees in him. Bowlen shows no signs of wavering on McDaniels, no matter how many things keep going maddeningly wrong, and I think the owner would have loved to have heard his coach as the nightmare of the loss sank in.

I don't understand how they blew it with Jay Cutler.

The Logic Of The Bumrush

I'm hesitant to say much about John Conroy's account of getting beaten up by a group of  thugs, and his attempt to figure out why. It's worth stating, at the outset, that my opinions on hate-crime laws are on the record (I'm not a fan.) It's also worth stating that I've spent my share of time on the bruised end of a few beat-downs. I've only been to the West Side of Chicago, twice in my life. But there is a hazy body of wisdom which, I think, extends from West Baltimore to West Chicago to West Harlem (though the neighborhood is changing.)

I was struck by Conroy's quest to find a deeper meaning in what happened to him. This may be more about me than him--but my sense of what always makes the hood so dangerous is the actual lack of real meaning, the random nature of violence, and how it pervades everything. The first time I got jumped, it was by some fools from Murphey Homes, who caught me and my older brother, downtown, at night. They ran his pockets--but robbery wasn't the motive.  Through violence the kids who jumped me and my brother were able to say, "We are kings. And your skin is our doormat."  There are a large number of boys who want to be kings, and those with either no other outlet to express that, or with a propensity to express it through violence regardless of outlets, are responsible of a lot of senseless crime. 

Conroy thinks he was picked out for his whiteness. I would not be shocked at all if this were true, but not for the reasons he thinks. It's possible his assailants were laying in wait for the next white person who crossed their path. That's a lengthy wait, though. More likely they were looking for an easy target--someone who was alone, someone who didn't "know the rules," and someone who wasn't from the neighborhood, and thus unlikely to have local recourse. I'd argue that Conroy's whiteness, and his bike, probably accomplished the last two.  But I'd also argue that every day, black boys get marked in almost exactly the same way--for looking like they "don't know the rules," and for not "being from the neighborhood."

When I was coming up, I quickly learned not to, say, roll through Walbrook Junction if I didn't know anyone down there. And if I were going to do that, I'd better roll deep, and be prepared to knuckle up. You certainly better not ride through there solo on your bike. I think this, if anything, is what Conroy is missing--the fact that exactly what happened to him, happens to black people with shocking regularity. He concedes that there isn't any proof that he was the victim of a racist attack. But he suspects that his whiteness was significant. I'd suggest that its actual insignificance is what's really interesting.

Put bluntly, it's not that they treated him like a honky--it's that they treated him like one of their own, like a nigger.

A Primary Challenge For Obama...

...is insane. Concern-trolling, yes. But people shouldn't even speculate like that.

I Don't Know What Van Jones Was Thinking

I really don't:

....The petition had called for "immediate inquiry into evidence that suggests high-level government officials may have deliberately allowed the September 11th attacks to occur" and demanded "an immediate investigation by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, Congressional hearings, media analysis, and the formation of a truly independent citizens-based inquiry." (Other signatories included Ralph Nader, environmentalist and author Paul Hawken, Rainforest Action Network founder Randy Hayes, and John Gray, author of Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus.)
I don't really know what any of these dudes were thinking, actually. Perhaps this is silly to ask at this point, but what the hell happened to Ralph Nader?

It seems fair to ask what I'd think of, say, an official in some future GOP administration who'd signed a petition demanding an investigation into the details of Barack Obama's birth. I understand that it isn't a perfect one-to-one, but it's as close I can get.

H/T Patrick.

Open Thread At Noon

It's yours...

Liberals Moving Right On Crime Policy

And other things. Just saw this over at Matt's place. Good stuff.

And Put Him Under My Padlock...

I don't really agree with this Caitlin Flanagan piece on Helen Gurley Brown (it feels weirdly gender-nationalist to me) but I enjoyed it a lot. I'm a fan of ambition, and my favorite nonfiction uses everything at the writer's disposal--secondary sources, personal experience, reporting. It also tends to draw from a wide-range of sources, in this case, Brown, Cosmopolitan, the John Edwards affair, and Flanagan's own experience:

A long time ago, I attended the funeral of a teenage boy who died the way Wade Edwards did, in a car that flipped badly and killed him quickly. I remember standing at the burial site, under a hot Los Angeles sun, a large crowd of us waiting for the parents to arrive. The cortege turned in through the gates, snaked up the winding road, and pulled up to where we were gathered. For a long time nothing happened, the car doors all stayed closed, and you realized--in a misery of embarrassed voyeurism that occluded even the sadness--that a drama was going on inside the car containing the mother, that getting her to stand out in the sunshine with us was going to involve someone persuading her to allow her son to be dead.

At last the car doors opened, and you felt you should look away, but that wasn't right either, and so you watched, and it was a bad thing. At first, the procession faltered forward. The family made it down to the graveside, and a rabbi spoke. The pine box was lowered into the ground and the time came for the boy's brother to spade the first shovel of dirt onto the coffin, and that's when things fell apart. I'd known the boy well--he had been a student at the school where I taught English--but I hadn't loved him. In fact, I had never loved anyone yet, because I was years away from having a child of my own, and until you've done that you're just guessing about love, gesturing toward it, assuming that it's the right name for a feeling you've had.

Things fell apart when they tried to spade in the earth, and there was screaming and titanic grief, and you were in the position of watching someone being forced--physically forced--to bear the unbearable. At last it was done, and the family stumbled back up the hill to the air-conditioned cars with the liveried drivers, and the mother collapsed into one car, and the door was shut solidly behind her, sealing her into her shadowed madness.

"You are so hot," Rielle Hunter said to John Edwards 10 years after he and his wife buried their first boy, and after they had started a new family, and after they had given their all to a presidential campaign--with the personal losses and long separations that come with it--and after Elizabeth had been diagnosed with cancer and undergone a disfiguring surgery and chemotherapy and lost her hair and been handed a recalculated set of odds about her life expectancy with two very small children who needed their mother. "You are so hot," Rielle Hunter said, because she turned out to be another woman with a cavalier attitude toward wives.

Ultimately, John Edwards had a cavalier attitude about his own wife, too. That said, read the piece. I can't stand the "thumbs up/thumbs down" style of reviewing. Flanagan is never that.

Uhhh...Michael...

Mahnola Dargis on the new Mike Judge flick:

Fitfully funny with a low joke-to-minute ratio, "Extract" plays like two irreconcilable and unfinished sketches, neither particularly fertile comedic terrain. The first revolves around Joel's beef that his wife has sexually closed for business by the time he comes home from work, a weak bit that Mr. Judge tries to exploit with repeated close-ups of Suzie cinching her sweat pants. At the urging of his friend Dean (Ben Affleck, delivering a real performance), Joel hires a part-time pool cleaner and full-time moron, Brad (Dustin Milligan), to service her. The second sketch involves the attempts of a vamping con artist, Cindy (Mila Kunis), to scam Joel by cozying up to a dim factory worker, Step (Clifton Collins Jr.), who's suffered an-on-the-job injury.

What's most striking about "Extract," beyond the scarcity of jokes and absence of actual filmmaking, is its deep well of sourness, which at times borders on misanthropy. In his first live-action feature, "Office Space," a comedy about the indignities of that modern hell we call a desk job, Mr. Judge took aim at the dehumanization of organizational life. In "Idiocracy" he expanded his sightlines to include corporations and consumer culture. The received wisdom remains that 20th Century Fox, which backed the movie, dumped "Idiocracy" into the marketplace because of its anti-corporatism: it mocks Fox News along with brand-name companies that run ads on media outlets belonging to Fox's parent company, the News Corporation. What was often left unsaid amid the ruckus is that the movie conceives of its own audience as cultural dopes.

Judge has always been hit or miss for me--though I love his hits. Satire's a hard business. I think King Of The Hill is brilliant, but The Goode Family not so much. I'm on pretty familiar terms with the species of liberals Judge was trying to satirize, so I was all in for it. But the show felt dated--like a collage of jokes you'd make about liberals circa 1995.

The thing I loved about King Of The Hill, even more than the Simpsons, was its warmth, was Judge's affection for Hank Hill and his family, even as he ribbed them. It's tough to walk that line. You have to have a certain amount of respect for the objects of your comedy.

Also, I should add that Judge is partly responsible for Daria, which I love.

September 3, 2009

Echoes Of The Sushi Age

Somehow I'd misplaced my RJD2. Got it back yesterday off emusic. Been rocking it ever since. Don't know I said this before, but I love emusic. Consuming records today is weird, the whole social context of community is gone. Part of that is my age. Part of that is the tech. Emusic helps with that a little. But it's weird to be digging, say, Felix Da Housecat and not know anyone else who's into it.

Roger Keith Coleman

Roger_Coleman_Time_Cover.jpg

I've done some reporting on the Innocence Projects around the country, though it's never turned into a story. One thing that needs to said is that there are criminals in jail who who will go so far as taking a DNA test, knowing full well that they are guilty. Moreover, it would not surprise to me if it were found that most people who beseech the Innocence Projects around, the country, are guilty.

I feel the need to highlight the case of Roger Keith Coleman, a man claimed innocence to the end, and whose case was murky enough that it garnered this cover story from TIME back in the 1992. Coleman was executed anyway. As luck would have it, I ended working at TIME almost ten years later, when Mark Warner allowed posthumous DNA testing to confirm Coleman's guilt.

In the run up, I was working on a follow-up story, and talked to some of the people who worked on his case. They were sure he would be found innocent. And frankly, so was I. I was wrong. The DNA test came back and proved the state was right. Coleman had done it. You must understand what this meant. There were people who had devoted their lives to proving Coleman's innocence, and they almost did. They were played by Coleman while he was alive, and he continued to play them from the grave.

I bring this out to make something clear. I don't have any doubts, first and foremost, about what, exactly, lies behind prison walls. There are evil people in this world. And there are, even more so, reckless people in this world who don't much care about human life.

I think there's this presumption that people who are anti-death penalty get their out of some sympathy for criminals, or some wide-eye naivete. Maybe some people get there that way. I came up in an era where young boys thought nothing of killing each other over cheap Starter jackets. I don't have any illusions about the criminal mind. I don't believe in the essential goodness of man--which is exactly why I oppose the death penalty.

Open Thread At Noon

Take it away...

Chuck Grassley's Turn

If there ever was one. Still, nice piece on Grassley by Karen Tumulty. I think this quote from Jon Kyl tells the story:

Yet Grassley is not immune to the pressures from his party. Iowa Republicans have been trending rightward; socially conservative Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee won last year's presidential caucuses there. Opposition groups have been running ads in the state criticizing Grassley for his role in the health-care negotiations, and back in Washington, Senate GOP leaders have made no secret of their anxiety about it. "Senator Grassley has been given no authority to negotiate anything by all of us Republicans on that committee," said Jon Kyl of Arizona, the Senate GOP whip. What's more, Grassley's term as ranking Republican on the powerful tax-writing panel will expire at the end of 2010; he stands to assume that spot on the Judiciary Committee, but the Republican leadership could block him from getting it.

About That Roxanne Shante PhD Story

Yeah. It never happened. Can't believe the Daily News reporters didn't even bother to check this one. It would have taken them ten minutes to call Cornell. We'll always have Sparky Dee. Meh, Nikki D was better. Old Girl had skills.

In Defense Of Hitler

Pat Buchanan is, of course, making the case that Hitler didn't really want war--or much war:

If Hitler wanted the world, why did he not build strategic bombers, instead of two-engine Dorniers and Heinkels that could not even reach Britain from Germany?

Why did he let the British army go at Dunkirk?

Why did he offer the British peace, twice, after Poland fell, and again after France fell?

Why, when Paris fell, did Hitler not demand the French fleet, as the Allies demanded and got the Kaiser's fleet? Why did he not demand bases in French-controlled Syria to attack Suez? Why did he beg Benito Mussolini not to attack Greece?

Because Hitler wanted to end the war in 1940, almost two years before the trains began to roll to the camps...

Winston Churchill was right when he called it "The Unnecessary War" -- the war that may yet prove the mortal blow to our civilization.

It's amazing to see Buchanan still fighting this one. Dude is a fossil. Yglesias has more.

September 2, 2009

From Willingham's Prosecutor

It's worth reading this defense of Willingham's execution penned by the man who pushed for it:

Always omitted from any examination of the actual trial are the following facts:

1. The event which caused the three childrens' deaths was the third attempt by Todd Willingham to kill his children established by the evidence. He had attempted to abort both pregnancies by vicious attacks on his wife in which he beat and kicked his wife with the specific intent to trigger miscarriages;

2. The "well-established burns" suffered by Willingham were so superficial as to suggest that the same were self-inflicted in an attempt to divert suspicion from himself;

3. Blood-gas analysis at Navarro Regional Hospital shortly after the homicide revealed that Willingham had not inhaled any smoke, contrary to his statement which detailed "rescue attempts;"

4. Consistent with typical Navarro County death penalty practice, Willingham was offered the opportunity to eliminate himself as a suspect by polygraph examination. Such opportunity was rejected in the most vulgar and insulting manner;

5. Willingham was a serial wife abuser, both physically and emotionally. His violent nature was further established by evidence of his vicious attacks on animals which is common to violent sociopaths;

6. Witness statements established that Willingham was overheard whispering to his deceased older daughter at the funeral home, "You're not the one who was supposed to die." (The origin of the fire occurred in the infant twins bedroom) and;

7. Any escape or rescue route from the burning house was blocked by a refrigerator which had been pushed against the back door, requiring any person attempting escape to run through the conflagration at the front of the house.
Not one bit of this addresses the actual science put forth about WIllingham's defense. Judge for yourself what it means they would kill man off this set of "facts."

Open Thread At Noon

Go to it...

Sickening

I just finished David Grann's piece on Texas and its state-sanctioned death-mill. It is the most emotionally-affecting piece of journalism I have ever read. The cavalier manner in which we dispense death says so much about our politicians--it's hard to escape the sense that Rick Perry, for instance, is a truly contemptible human being. But I think that sense is wrong. Our politicians didn't create "Tough On Crime," any more than Obama created "Change." They respond to our demands.

It is worth noting that Obama, himself, is pro-death penalty. Apparently in 1996 he was anti, but over the course of decade something happened that made him pro. I really doubt that it was a sense that application of the death penalty became fairer. His switch is, to my mind, unconscionable and barbaric. Here's Obama in 2004. After reading that story, there's something Orwellian about watching Obama call for a "fair" death penalty, like we can somehow civilize murder.

Publishing Other People's E-Mail

From comments:

I'm a huge fan, but, I think Dan W and tlc got it right. Just what was wrong with GG's behavior here? You're acting as if the email in question was sent to GG from JK in a clearly off-the-record exchange.

What journalism school did you go to, that teaches the precept that information that you receive is unpublishable merely because it came from a source that the emailer thought was off-the-record? And, a listserv email? Please.

"The problems inherent in a list like journolist (confidentiality, chief among them), is another discussion, in and of itself."

WTF. In the context of your complaint against GG, that is THE context. I must admit, the merits of each one's arguments aside, you really blew this one.

Part of the problem here is that I didn't go to a journalism school. In fact, I barely went to any school. But that said, I think this sentiment is expressed quite a bit in the thread on Klein and Greenwald. As always, it's worth revisiting what I've written:

I can't really think of an instance where I'd publish someone's off the record e-mail. I'm a Greenwald fan, obviously, but I don't see much difference between what he did and what Mickey Kaus did a few months ago. The problems inherent in a list like journolist (confidentiality, chief among them), is another discussion, in and of itself.
It's worth noting that I did not claim that Greenwald was "wrong" for publishing Klein's e-mail--I said that I wouldn't do it. This isn't merely parsing. I said it because I can't find anything objectively "wrong" with it. Bearing that in mind, it's worth explaining why I wouldn't do it.

First, some context. I was on journolist for a while, but left. I didn't leave because any particular beef with anyone, as much as I left because I was uncomfortable being in a virtual club, where the discussion often turned pointedly personal. This is true of all clubs, virtual or not, so I don't think it's specific to journolist. Moreover, the vast majority of the people on the list did not do that, or rather, (like me) tended to lurk. Still, I didn't like being "in the room" when the personal stuff was going on. I didn't want to be party to it, in any shape.

My technique, rightly or wrongly, is pretty old school--if someone forwards me an e-mail recording something nasty you've said about me, and if it really bothers me, I will speak with you directly. If it's not about me, or it doesn't bother me, then I don't think I really care. That's between you and whoever you're talking to, and I hope I'd treat it as such. I just don't know why I'd go public with it.

These aren't rules of journalism, they're rules of Ta-Nehisi. I don't want to be in business of printing people's various musings, which they expected (rightly or wrongly), to remain private. It just isn't what I would do. Simple as that.

For me, nothing good comes from rummaging through other people's closets. This very discussion is evidence of that. My first impulse was to let it be. That was probably the correct one.

Executing The Innocent

I just started reading David Grann's New Yorker piece, which everyone is talking about. I was delaying because I'm an old fogey, who actually enjoys holding print products, like books and magazines. I'm not even that far in and I'm horrified. The worst part about this is that, like a lot of reporters who've sniffed around death row cases, I knew this was coming. You do the math on the death penalty, especially in a place like Texas, and it's clear that the state is almost certainly in the business of killing innocent people.

Don't take that the wrong way--this piece is beautifully reported, and I'm not taking anything away from Grann. It's just that a lot of us knew a story like this would one day hit. Knowing it, of course, doesn't make you any less horrified as you behold the details.

I want to circle back to our conversation on media, and why I reject the notion that sinister forces are manipulating people into consuming McNews. This piece is on the web, and free to anyone who'd like to see it. I'm sure the New Yorker is doing everything in their power to promote it. Andrew's blog, one of the most read on the net, has pinged it several times. Furthermore, the New Yorker is owned by a company that is synonymous with the MSM.

If people really wanted to know what was going on Texas, what's been going on in Texas for years, it really isn't that hard, especially in this era, to find out. But we pick our priorities. We make decisions about which of our notions we're going to challenge, and which ones we're going to let stand.

Again, it's not because we're evil--there are real reasons why people make these choices. But people have to be responsible for what their government does. It isn't wrong to say that the citizens of this country are responsible for every innocent person who is executed. The people have to be responsible for the government they elect, and the media they support. More to the point, the people ultimately will be held responsible. There is no way around that.

Mixing It Up With Your Readers

As a blogger, this fracas between Joe Klein, Glenn Greenwald and Klein's readers has been pretty amazing. I can't really think of an instance where I'd publish someone's off the record e-mail. I'm a Greenwald fan, obviously, but I don't see much difference between what he did and what Mickey Kaus did a few months ago. The problems inherent in a list like journolist (confidentiality, chief among them), is another discussion, in and of itself.

That said, I think if you came up in a time where only a select group (mainly other writers) can take shots at you, writing in this age, is probably a little maddening. In general, I think the proliferation of voices is a good thing--writing isn't an elite endeavor, it's a democratic one, and its essence, to my mind, originates among people, not among editors and publishers.

Still, I know I lose my cool from time to time in comments here. I try to walk it back, when I do. I think I benefited from having editors in my younger years who said the sort of things to me, that I would never allow one commenter to say to another. And these were people who could fire you, or kill your stories.

Anyway, hopefully watching this will make me a little more self-aware. Writing publicly in an era when anyone can take a shot at you is rough business, but not wrong business. The writer still has the bigger gun, and its worth acting accordingly. When wading into comments, I try to remember that. I think it might be worth trying a little harder from here on out.

September 1, 2009

Racist Gender Testing

Helena Andrews argues for a racial angle in forcing Caster Semenya:

OK, but what are we looking at, or for, exactly? The thick thighs, the muscular arms, the broad shoulders, the wide jaw line, bushy eyebrows and faint mustache? Are these the physical attributes that define Semenya as inherently male, just plain unattractive or a record breaker?

The issue seems to directly question race, beauty and who gets to set the standards. White and western is more female and more beautiful, black and African is less so.

"As a beauty editor, I looked at her face and thought it's a beautiful and very interesting face," said Tai Beauchamp, 31, a beauty and lifestyle expert. "[It's] not a face that is so different from some of the African models that we love." But even that small pinch (definitely not even a handful) of women--Alek Wek, Liya Kebede--are still the exception rather than the norm to our ideas of female beauty, despite two Vogue Italia issues dedicated to black models the most recent being the "Black Barbie" issue.

I think there is a case to be made about beauty standards and black women, and this country's nasty history trying to de-feminize black women. It's also fair to say that, in some respects, our beauty standards differ along race/class axis. I suspect if you polled men on whether they thought Serena Williams was beautiful, you'd see a race/class variable at work.

But as deplorable as it may well have been to submit Semenya to gender testing, I don't really see the race angle. I think part of the problem is most of Andrews quotes come from people who work in the world of fashion. But the aesthetics of fashion aren't the same as the aesthetics of men, or even women (that said Liye Kebede is just murderous.) Maybe other dudes are different, but I don't exactly look to fashion week for a parade of the world's most beautiful women.

It's possible that I'm just an over-westernized African-American, whose lost touch with the mother country's sense of beauty. I'm sure there's some of that. But I don't think so. I think I'm just not into the kind of androgynous East European models, Andrews is calling out.

We are getting into tricky terrain here, I know. I'm trying to be respectful. If you're going to hit "submit" on your comment I'd ask you to do the same. And yeah, you're right. I'm PC as a mutherfucka.

Reporting

Things will be a little slower than usual this week guys. I'm off chasing a story for the magazine. I wish I could tell you about what. If I do though, I think they might kill me.

Open Thread At Noon

Or somewhat later...

So...The Real Housewives Of New Jersey...

We watched the first episode on Sunday. Kenyatta was thrilled, loved it more than the Atlanta ones. But I don't think I'll be watching any more.

All of these shows boil down to watching people make bad choices. It's generally unwise to hold an "exclusive" fundraiser at your house, and pass out fliers. It's generally unwise to put your financial fate, as well as the financial fate of your children, in the hands of the dude you happen to be dating. It's generally unwise to go and camera and accuse someone of being ghetto when your name is Ne-Ne.

RHoNJ generally displays the same sort of wisdom deficit, but for some reason, it's a lot harder to take. I think the breaking point came for me when the matriarch says something like, "Street smarts can get you a lot further than book smarts." On one level I hate that sentiment for its rank anti-intellectualism. On another level, I hate it because I've seen the results of it first hand.

From what I can tell, each Real Housewives iteration has gotten a little trashier, and the New Jersey one seems that way. I guess Negroes should be happy--at least on Bravo we beat out the Italians. Now if we can only get those "No dogs or Irish allowed" signs back...

An Al Jolson Riff

I rewatched Sunday's episode again, and I think that that blackface stunt pointed to something powerful (if unoriginal) about racism--how it reflects on its bearers. Roger looked ridiculous. In part this was because he is ridiculous, blackface aside. But it's also because blackface--seen in full color like that--looks ridiculous. I may be off on this, but I've just never thought blackface was funny--not just offensive, unfunny. I have no idea why people, decide to show up to parties in the stuff. And yet they do.

I think it's a waste of energy getting offended about this sort of thing--mostly because it says so much more about the person in black-face, than anyone else. It's like the Confederate flag, and "heritage not hate." Why get upset? These people are walking around with signs that say, "I'm ignorant of the basic facts of American history, and I'm proud of this." Why be angry at that? It's on them.
<-- /safecount -->