Random Rants And Thoughts: September 29, 2018

• This Brett Kavanaugh situation is tiring. No, actually people's refusal or disingenuousness in not placing proper context on the situation is tiring. I'm so tired of hearing about due process. One, it's laughable the people demanding due process demanded Al Franken be thrown out of the Senate and John Conyers out of the House of Representatives. Neither of whom received due process. Also, this is a job interview; so, Kavanaugh is not inherently afforded due process. By the way I am sure the mothers of Trayvon Martin, Tamir Rice and Philande Castile are wondering where these proponents of due process were when their sons were unjustly murdered.


• I love how Republicans just can't leggo of the Clintons. Then, they lie and mislead about aspects of Bill Clinton's nonsense. I mean to suggest Bill Clinton's depravity and fuckery hasn't been litigated is abject silliness and lying. The man was impeached for lying under oath about getting his donut stick glazed. And, ironically the dude who went after him the hardest and asked the most pervasive sexually explicit questions about it was none other than "Mr. Virgin" himself, Brett Kavanaugh. Also, this bullshit I've seen on social media suggesting Democrats are defending Clinton while ruining Kavs' life is side splitting hilarious. Nobody is defending Bill Clinton. Most of the Democratic base wishes the Clintons would just go away.


• I have said my piece about Bill Cosby. I have people upset or disappointed with me because I'm not jumping on the "Cosby is a martyr" train. Sorry. I don't think he's a sympathetic figure. However, as I said in my blog I completely understand why some folks are livid Cosby is going to spend 3 to 10 in the crisper while other sexual predators who are white go free. I just think you can be angry about that and still acknowledge Cosby is a sexual predator. These allegations arose to the surface a few years ago but they've been hovering around the surface for decades. It was rumored and in some cases known of Cosby's shenanigans. It's partly the reason other famous black celebrities never embraced him. They thought he was a fraud. One more thing anyone who thinks I am some type of train rider or the male version of Candace Owens because I am not defending Bill Cosby at all costs simply hasn't been following this blog or my social media. I would say I'm offended and insulted but the insinuation is so ludicrous and devoid of intellectual honesty it's not worth my being offended. As I said in the blog, we have plenty of positive black male role models in the public eye that I don't feel we have to settle for wholesale defending sexual predators Oh, and it is certainly not lost on me how some people say they have no problem believing Cosby or O.J. are guilty but think Kavanaugh and Trump are innocent. I see them. I see them.


• I hope the #DumbDumbLeft and Dems in general have learned a lesson from this Kavanaugh shitshow. The judiciary matters. The Left has to start caring as much about the courts as the Right. Because Democrats acted like punk bitches regarding the Republicans dick move about Merrick Garland Neil Gorsuch was confirmed to the Supreme Court which is making this Kavanaugh confirmation so vitally important. People like Jimmy Dore telling Progressives the Supreme Court doesn't really matter is political commentary malpractice. Apart of the reason Republicans despite being the minority in the country always have power is because they get the bigger picture. Yes, gerrymandering and voter suppression are significant causes too; but, they also understand what power brings and affords them. They are well aware on every major and vital issue in the country except maybe military spending the country is decidedly left of center. So, they intricately understand controlling the judiciary is vital to implementing their agenda.


•Democratic leadership is so woefully inadequate and out of touch with the Democratic base and the country. #ThatIsAll


•Dabo Sweeney may live to regret shafting Kelly Bryant


• Anyone who thinks the New England Patriots are in trouble haven't been paying attention the last 17 years.


• The Atlanta Braves are back in the playoffs! I've been a fan for 40 years and will be a fan for 40 more.


•Ronal Accuna should be the unanimous National League Rookie of the Year!


• And, Big Brother...Smh. It's a shame Tyler didn't win. He played the best game. I am truly indifferent about Kaycee winning. I didn't particularly care for her. Honestly, I didn't care for the cast as a whole. I know some people felt this was the best season in years. Meh. I don't know about that. Bring on Celebrity Big Brother 2!

I Get It, But Bill Cosby Is Not Desrving Of Martyrdom

I fully understand the frustration over Bill Cosby receiving jail time for sexual assault. I really do.


It seems unfair and blatantly transparent something nefarious is taking place. The Cos, an ill 81 year old black man, is going to the clink while a plethora of white men accused of sexual assault seemingly are skating free. Sure, they have, perhaps, lost their livelihoods and reputation but they still have their freedom. Matt Lauer, Charlie Sheen, Charlie Ross and Kevin Spacey to name a few. Noticeably, I left out Harvey Weinstein because Harv has been charged with sexual assault. Indictment is inevitable and I think conviction even in this fucked up judicial system is all but certain.


Of course, it would be journalistic malpractice of me not to mention the President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, whom 19 women have credibly accused of sexual assault. It would certainly appear Trump will face no legally punitive repercussions for his alleged crimes. Although Summer Zervos seems destined to ensure he faces civil and financial consequences for his misdeeds.


So, I get it. I comprehend why many black and brown folks along with some white brothas and sistas are saying, "Wayment! Wait! A! Damb! Minute! Why is Bill Cosby going to be anticipating "mystery meat Tuesdays" while the likes of Bill O'Reilly is free making shitty YouTube videos?"




It is a beyond legitimate question. However...


Bill Cosby is guilty! Forget he was found guilty in a court of law. Anyone who listened to evidence and to Cosby let alone watched his demeanor knows he's guilty as sin.


Cosby has never acted like an innocent man. He has never sincerely advocated his innocence. Instead he attacked his accuser's credibility. He attacked the prosecutors for having the audacity to put him on trial but never staunchly proclaimed he is innocent.


This is partly why I am stunned to see the voracity which many are defending him. I am shocked to see the degree many are going to cite the perceived unfairness he is supposedly being subjected.


People are floating Alex Jones level conspiracy theories to propagate their defense. Some people are claiming this is an elaborate scheme to bring Cosby down. I ask why not do this 25 years ago when he was relevant. But, this like most conspiracy theories lack any intellectual thought or facts or commonsense.


I realize I might be in the minority here but I am not just getting this "black unity for Cosby no matter what".


William Cosby is not a martyr nor is he deserving of martyrdom.


Yes, Cosby broke glass ceilings for African-Americans in comedy and television. Without question Cosby has been a prominent figure in African-American history. Certainly, the Cos has been a role model (of sorts).


But, Cosby's relationship with the black community is complicated and strained to say the least.


Many of the people defending him today were rolling their eyes about him before the sexual assault allegations came to the surface.


Cosby was a beloved figure whom most of us didn't want at the summer picnic. He was that uncle we loved because he did do some wonderful things from time to time but we didn't want around because he was an asshole. All he did was put you down, rip on your clothes, talk shit about your music, nitpicked every word you said and had a "holier than thou" aurora. Then, if you displayed being fed up with his shit, he would remind you what he's done for you and how much better he is than you.


Cosby was a terrific philanthropist but that philanthropy always came with strings attached and at a certain level was cursory and pretentious.


Cosby gave what seemed tirelessly to historically black colleges and universities. He used the Cosby Show to honor black art and jazz. But, Cosby always stiff armed important aspects of black culture.


He was notorious for constantly putting down black youth. He offered (what I would say were fair) critiques of the way many black people talked and presented themselves; but those critiques were hollow because they never had any substance behind them encouraging blacks to be better. So, the criticisms came across as elitist and demeaning.


Cosby never embraced the black youth and the evolving culture. He criticized music and fashion. He constantly bemoaned "pants being worn showing crack" but never actually contributed meaningful actions that helped the black community.


We all know teenage pregnancy was and is a prevalent issue within the black community. He never offered solutions. He just continuously called young black girls "whores" and "immoral tramps". Never did he actually use his influence and power to address the issues and seek solution.


Bill Cosby was the prototypical "I got out of the hood so it should be easy for you to do" guy. He acted and talked as if he didn't endure struggle, racial pushback and racial resentment.


What blows my mind is so much of Cosby's attitude toward the black community is strikingly similar to what people like Candace Owens, David Clarke, Ray Lewis and Jason Whitlock propagate. And, the majority of Cosby's ardent defenders refer to those people as "coons".




Now, I am not disagreeing but I am perplexed. Why go to the mat for someone who over the years evidence has indicated wouldn't do the same for you?


Honestly, some of the shit Cosby has said is straight out of the White Nationalist talking point playbook. Don't get me wrong. I don't think Cosby is Paris Denard before Paris Denard, but he certainly gave cretins like that fodder.


I just don't see where Cos is worthy of this persecution status black folks seem to be way too eager to give him.


This actually may sum up my feelings about Cosby. The Cosby Show was a great, if somewhat unrelatable, show. It certainly put African-Americans in a positive light.




But, I always felt his greatest gift to black television was "A Different World". While the gift was certainly accidental it was nonetheless awesome.


"A Different World" was originally designed to be a way of giving Lisa Bonet her own vehicle while actually keeping her in line. But, Bonet was a wild free spirit and effed up her chance by "going behind Mr. Cosby's back" making that disturbing movie with Mickey Rourke.


That movie got her kicked off A Different World but put Cosby and NBC in a situation. A Different World because of The Cosby Show lead-in had become a top 10 show in its inaugural season but now was without it's star. Debbie Allen convinced Cosby to let her run the show and build the storyline around Dwayne Wayne (Kadeem Harrison) and Whitley Gilbert (Jasmine Guy).


Cosby remained executive producer but gave full creative control to Allen and stayed out of the way. The result was what is arguably the most influential and successful shows that was designed to directly appeal to black youth and young adults. But, it not only attracted black viewers but white viewers as well.


A Different Word took head on social and racial issues. It was one of the first shows that addressed nuanced issues within the black community that solely affect and center around black people. The show engaged discussion about taboo issues like skin color within the black community and the role of mammie and other slavery and Jim Crow imagery and characters.


The show dug deep into HBCU cultures along with addressing white integration into HBCUs


A Different World actually depicted the diversity within black communities in a way that was relatable to all black folks and white folks. Everybody knows a Whitley, a Dwayne, a Ron Johnson, a Kimberly Reese, a Freddie Brooks, a Lena James, a Shazza, ect.


But, suddenly NBC executives began getting nervous with the social and political issues A Different World addressed without fear. NBC began exerting creative control. Cosby, who was always uncomfortable with the show's storylines did little to misdirect NBC. When Allen and A Different World cast members asked Cosby to interject and allow the show to continue what made it successful and a pop icon he refused and essentially allowed NBC to kill the show.


To me that sums much of Bill Cosby up.


Look, I really do get the angst, frustration and anger over what is arguably more bullshit systematic racism. I understand that there is (at times) what seems to be an nefarious intentional assault on black men in this country especially any that are doing positive things for communities of color. Look no further than LeBron James and Colin Kaepernick.


But, hoping aboard the persecution train for the likes of Bill Cosby, R. Kelly and Chris Brown seems misguided. They're not worth the energy.


Bill Cosby's contributions to society and the black community in particular are undeniable. Cosby is most definitely a trailblazer.


However, what he has detracted seems to be outweighing what he contributed.


I have read tweets and posts of people saying the allegations against Cosby have been proven false. That simply is not true. Cosby hasn't even ardently denied the claims nor proclaimed his innocence. That should tell you something.


We have plenty of black role models to look up to without having to settle for defending sexual predators. The well is not that dry.


I appreciate what Bill Cosby has done and given us.


I think it is bullshit that Cosby is serving three to ten as an 80 something year old man while a predator like Trump is president.


But, Bill Cosby is not deserving of martyrdom. It is simply not a hill worth dying for.

Victim Blaming, Victim Shaming

"All lives matter!"


"All victims should be heard and respected."


Folks love to say the two previous sentences, but they seem to have trouble putting those statements into actual practice.


The former statement is one of the most cringe worthy statements ever because it drips with cynicism, condescension and disingenuousness. It is a rebuff to "black lives matter". However, it is not meant literally because it's usually uttered after someone laments the unnecessary and often unjustified deaths of black people. And, way too often these deaths come at the hands of law enforcement.


The latter statement of "victims should be heard and respected" is much too frequently a statement that is soaked in patronage and dismissiveness. The words sound empathetic on their face but it is really just specious and condescending.


It's no secret over the last couple of weeks two of the stories dominating the headlines are Bret Kavanagh's nomination and impending confirmation to the Supreme Court along with the killing of Dallas, Texas resident Botham Jean at the hands of Dallas police officer Amber Guygur.


Both of these stories have illuminated some very real and very pervasive issues within our society. What has stood out to me, however, is the penchant many people have to blame the alleged victim and then shame said victim.


Now, this is blaming and shaming is not unilateral. It often appears to be quite subjective depending on what the crime is, who the victim is and who the alleged perpetrator is.


Victims of sexual assault, for example, often face ridicule, besmirching and not being believed. This is why sexual assault and abuse are atop the list of the least reported crimes and have been forever. Especially if the alleged assaulter is someone well known, influential or has a exemplary reputation the victim is presumed to be lying and must go well above and beyond to prove they have been violated. And, even then...


We see what happens when a person of color is the victim of police brutality or worse murdered. It is always assumed the person of color is a criminal or did something to precipitate the "unfortunate" incident. For some people the attitude always is regardless of facts law enforcement is beyond reproach and the black/brown person did something causing them a deserved death.


The most disturbing trend and pattern of behavior beyond the victim blaming is the victim shaming.


We see this happen all the time.


People always say about assault and abuse victims, "Why didn't they report it?" It's a specious question because people know why victims don't report. They are scared and likely have been threatened of consequences if they say anything. Victims often feel shame and turn guilt inward. They are afraid of not being believed and name called which is like being assaulted all over again. So, there is no mystery why people don't report. You have to be pretty damn dense or just callous to not comprehend that.


And, what I hear is, "If it was me, I'd tell." Ok. That is you. That is not the standard procedure and feelings of most sexual assault victims. And, what I always say to those folks who say that, "Are you a victim? If not, you don't really know what you would do. It's always easy to flap your gums about hypotheticals you don't think will happen nor can imagine happening."


Then, the worst to me are people who are victims but degrade and demonize other victims for not saying anything or waiting for a long period of time because they themselves said something or went to authorities.


People cannot be this un-empathetic and simple-minded. Can they?


It is wonderful you were able to have the strength to go to the authorities and fight back. It's awesome you felt you had a strong enough support system to stand up to your assaulter. But, you're an anomaly. Not everyone is strong like that. Not everyone has a solid support system. Not everyone has faith in their support system. And, far too often that lack of faith has been proven to be justified for many victims.


I would be remised if I didn't mention the people who call sexual assault, sexual abuse and rape victims "sluts, "whores" "skanks" and "loose". Ya know the folks whose first words to an assault victim is, "What were you wearing? Were you drinking? Why were you there? Did you lead him on?"


It is astounding to me how people like that live with themselves. Never does the idea of displaying empathy occur to them. Let alone does the concept of holding the assaulter to account cross their mind. It is inconceivable to say about the perp they should not take advantage of someone or attack someone regardless of their mental or emotional state or what they were wearing.


For that matter what their sexual history is. I don't give a shit if a woman bangs every dude in a 50 mile radius. It's HER CHOICE! Her perceived sexual promiscuity does not give license some piece of shit to rape her! If you think it does, YOU NEED JESUS AND AN INFUSION OF HUMANITY!


Now, regarding just about every time an unarmed person of color is assaulted or murdered by those sworn to protect them the same type of heinous shaming takes place.


It almost never fails immediately after the death an intense scrubbing of the victim's background takes place. If the brotha so much as stole a piece of Bubblicious, it is leaked to media as if it serves as some sort of justification.


Take the Botham Jean case. Amber Guygur ILLEGALLY entered his apartment. She says she was disoriented after working a 15 hour shift and mistakenly entered his apartment because the "door was ajar". I'll ignore the bullshit about a 15 hour shift as an excuse. But, I won't ignore multiple witnesses saying they heard banging on the door and shouting from Officer Guyguy before two gunshots were fired.


Guygur said Jean didn't adhere to verbal commands. Uh, excuse me, heffa but why did he have to adhere to your commands? You weren't on the clock. And yo ass was in his house uninvited and ILLEGALLY!


For the record no weapon nor sign of a weapon was found. No struggle appeared to take place.


However, a warrant was requested and granted to search Botham Jean's apartment for drugs but no such warrant was sought for Amber Guygur's dwelling.


Subsequently, a small amount of weed was "discovered" in Jean's apartment. This info was leaked to the press who took no time in making it public without any context.


After public outrage the police made it clear they do not know if the chron was Jean's. Of course, it really doesn't matter because the desired narrative had been set and the victim shaming was in full swing.


This happens all the time. Some innocuous infraction from the victim's past is found to distract from what happened in the present. Even if the infractions are more than innocuous they never have any bearing on the incident that took place but if they can make the obvious victim look like bad the desired effect is successful.


It is despicable!


The practice of victim blaming and then victim shaming is a tried and true method. It's simple. Shift the attention away from the actual crime. If racism or sexism has to be employed, so be it.


The reason for this could be as plain as folks holding onto archaic principles or misguided attempts to hold onto certain folks' supremacy. Or, it may be to protect a political ideology or an individual for a number of reasons, most of which are usually self-serving.


#WhyIDontReport began trending Friday. It's a very real thing. I have stated several times I know a couple of women who were sexually assaulted and I know a couple of more who were physically abused. It is so easy to say the victims should talk. However, it's never easy for those victims to talk or take actions.


Their fears and concerns are real and justified.


It should be noted abusers and assaulters don't just inflict physical damage on their victims but emotional and mental damage. The emotional damage does not only stem from the act of depravity itself. Almost always threats, victim shaming, intimidation and emotional manipulation is employed by the perpetrators.


These are just facts.


People are afraid of not being believed. In the vast majority of cases proof nor witnesses are readily available. Sexual assaulters are cowards, so it's not as if they are doing this shit in the open for all to see.


Proving these things are hard. So, most victims decide to say nothing because why would they want to be doubted and called names and assaulted all over again?


Why don't they report? Because their lives don't really matter.


Why do people of color say, black lives matter? Because it doesn't really seem to many they do matter.

Hey, Tucker Carlson, Diversity Is Great!

Allow me to state the obvious which is Tucker Carlson is an insufferable douchebag!






In recent weeks Carlson along with the likes of Laura Ingram and NRA TV "eye candy" (we really need a healthcare system overhaul especially the vision care) Dana Loesch have ranted and lamented diversity.


Last week Tucker did a segment "asking" how is diversity our strength. It was a rhetorical question obviously because he literally demonized the idea of diversity.


Like Ingram, Loesch and a host of others the primary root of Carlson's rant is immigration. The other root of dissent is having a society that embraces all ethnicities, religions and lifestyles. You know like what is detailed in that pesky United States Constitution.


Cloaking his true point in a guise of "merely asking a question" Tucker inquired how is society improved being constituted of people who are different from you? How is it good to have neighbors "you can't understand or don't share the same values with"? How is the "military better off filled with people who you have nothing in common? "Diversity isn't good in a marriage."


These people have literally said eff the dog whistle and picked up a megaphone. They are not even hiding it anymore. Tucker's little rant, just like Laura Ingram's a couple of weeks ago, is laughably transparent and apparent.


I will give Tucker this. He framed his white nationalist talking points in a manner which gives him the perception of plausible deniability. Whereas Ingram isn't smart or savvy enough to soft pedal the bigotry. Her "Ingram Angle" was more of a blunt object over the head.


Now, Loesch, who is in totality the most loathsome of the three people I've mentioned which is saying something for me since Tucker is the poster boy for someone with a punchable face. She went on this bizarre rant about some kids cartoon, Thomas The Tank Engine.


She bemoaned the cartoon adding two "female trains"-one of whom is apparently from Kenya. She proceeded with this diatribe, "Nobody knew the original trains were white so why did they feel the need to have diversity?"


Then, presumably so upset over the addition of these trains, she digitally imposed Ku Klux Klan hoods over the front of them. Seriously! She did. I am not joking. She actually had Klan hoods superimposed over a kids' cartoon character.


Uh, whose wine soaked most likely to be on a Dr. Phil episode titled "My Mom Is Always Hammered And Hitting On My Friends" soccer mom is this? Whomever she belongs to come get her ass right now! She's drooling on my good couch.


Seriously, these hacks aren't even making a cursory attempt any longer to hide their bigotry.


Regardless of the musings of these idiots diversity is and always has been great. This country was built on diversity, was it not? We are a country that is supposed to embrace diverse ideas, religions, opinions and people.


While people like Carlson and Ingram sleep better at night by believing white men are responsible for everything good that has ever happened in the country it's simply not factual. Multiple races, nationalities and ethnicities contributed and still contribute to this country. Where would we be without the contributions of the Chinese, Irish, Italian, Mexicans, Latin Americans, women and African-Americans?


Diversity allows people to grow and learn. For instance, take something like music. Having a diverse taste in music allows one to appreciate music as a whole and their preferred genre. All music is a subsidiary of other genres.


Diversity among people is even better. When someone has a diverse circle of friends and acquaintances it provides them two things. The first is the ability to appreciate other folks' cultures and life stories. It also provides them depth and understanding. When one embraces diversity they not only learn to appreciate that which is different they also realize despite our differences we have innumerable commonalities. Why? Because at the end of the day we're all human and all equal.


When Tucker says diversity is bad for the military and marriage he displays how ignorant he truly is. The military is similar to a sports team. People have to put aside their petty prejudices and bigotry because they all presumably have the same end goal, victory.


Of course, I suspect Tucker's mentioning of the military has to do with LGBTQ service members, so he would say the military would be better off without the "distraction". I say embracing those different from you helps you grow as a person. It doesn't mean you have to unilaterally agree with their lifestyle but it also doesn't mean you can't learn from them and understand why they are the person they are. Not to mention, if someone is able bodied and wants to serve this country they should be able to do so.


As far as Tucker's not so veiled comment about marriage. Marriages featuring people of different backgrounds, ethnicities and cultures are just as successful as marriages of people with similarly shared traits. People who are different from one another compliment each other. If both people are hotheads, for instance, that is likely a recipe for disaster. But, Tucker wasn't speaking about personality traits. He was revealing his disapproval of diverse marriages.


And, this disturbing absurdity Dana Loesch displayed on NRA TV tho....My first question is why are so enthralled with what a cartoon (most people don't know nor care anything about) is doing? Secondly, why does the cartoon adding female trains and a black train trigger you so? Hey, Dana, you do realize you just dropped all pretense about your racism, right? Why does the topic of diversity bother you?


Again, the dog whistles have been chunked into the ocean. These clowns are regurgitating their hateful vitriol through a megaphone.


Predictably, they clutched their pearls when people rightfully said their ramblings were racist with twinges of White Nationalism. They feigned the act of victimhood. In Tucker's case he was "merely asking a question". Loesch said she was simply speaking about political correctness run amok.


Whatevs. They are lying. They are overtly utilizing racism and fear of the other as political currency. They are giving a wink and a nod to the Alt-Right.


Truth is there is a significant segment of our society who wholly reject diversity. They want the country to go back to a time everyone "knew their place". They long for the time society had a hierarchy and equality was a value we sanctimoniously preached to other nations and pretended to embrace while not employing it in any meaningful fashion.


These are the folks Tucker, Dana, Laura and their ilk are signaling. And, these aren't all people wearing hoods and covered in Aryian tattoos. In fact, most of them aren't. They are people who embrace a White Nationalist message while pretending they don't. They are neighbors, co-workers, fellow church goers, pastors, community leaders, friends and family. It is the truth. Full stop!


And, when Tucker Carlson mentions an unshared value system he's virtue signaling. It is an asinine statement, but it works with people who see black and brown people as alien and different.


Of course, regardless of race or religion or national origin all people believe in protecting their loved ones and a desire to be prosperous and an orderly society. However, these virtue signalers feed the atrocious and amoral narrative that people from south of the border, the majority of people of color within the country and folks on the left don't believe in family, rule of law or basic morality. They imply (often not so subtly) that all of these different people are animals and immoral. Thus, diversity is bad and evil. Incorporating these types of people are detrimental to society. These type of people are destructive to the fabric of society.


It really is disgusting. It is abominable, honestly.


I have never had much use for Tucker Carlson or Dana Loesch. I have always thought Tucker was a racist going all the way back to his days on MSNBC. Loesch has always said insane and bigoted things but does it with a smile and a sultry appearance so she gets away with it.


What they are doing with their rhetoric is so blatantly obvious. As I keep saying, they have just abandoned the dog whistle.


Diversity is our strength whether certain segments of the country like it or accept it.


And, I do agree some aspects of diversity are counterproductive. Since we're a country that embraces diverse thought and opinion, it means we even embrace thought that is void of depth and opinion is void of facts, logic and intelligence.

The Fraudulency Of Black Right-Wing Punditry

"Oh, because I'm a black Conservative I'm an uncle tom or a sellout. I'm an uppity Negro."


If I had a dime for every time I have heard such insincere bullshit vomited out of the mouths of boogie disingenuous hucksters.


It is patently ridiculous to believe because an African-American is conservative they're a sellout. Most black folks hold some conservative principles. And, of course, there are many principled black Conservatives.


But, the type of people who are quick to utter the statement in the first paragraph of this piece aren't black Conservatives. They are black right-wingers and most of them are fraudulent.


People such as Candace Owens, David Clarke, Darrell Scott, Stacey Dash, Jason Whitlock, Paris Denard and Mark Burns are among the type of frauds I am talking about. I call them the faces of the YMCA. No, not the place of kids' summer camps and basketball courts. This YMCA, the Yassa Massa Coalition of America, is a place of sadnes, self-hate and shameless grifting.


These people aren't principled. They don't hold traditional conservative principles while valuing who and what they are. This coalition is riddled with tap dancing and Buckwheat style grinning if that's what it takes to get ahead.


These people and their ilk have willingly debased themselves for "Mr. Charlie". They go on television smiling from ear to ear while trashing black people and regurgitating White Nationalists talking points. They address issues of race intentionally not providing any context or subtext. They gleefully and erroneously imply if not outright say black people in general are lazy, uneducated and criminal.


They go on Fox News and spout right-wing taking points about various subjects aside from race but provide little to no substance to backup their positions.


They attack anyone who challenges them with claims of racism. They immediately play the victim. It's funny that they do this since they routinely accuse blacks and other people of color along with the left of doing the same thing.


These people often defend racism said or done by those on right. They employ strawmans and/or red herrings, if they simply don't offer point blank denials.


The YMCA willfully misleads and lies about things, specifically about African-Americans. These people knowingly play a role that some like to see and always have in this country. It's essentially them fulfilling a fetish. Because some people on the far right and Alt-Right thoroughly enjoy seeing black people run down their own and sell them out.


So, why do they do this? Of course, it's about money. Being a black right-winger is a particular niche or clique. It can be a lucrative business.


See, being a black conservative like Condeleeza Rice, Tim Scott, Tara Setmeyer or Shermichael Singleton is "ok" to certain media outlets and a particular swath of the electorate. They will always espouse conservative ideas because they are actual Conservatives. But, they don't participate in cartoonish bashing of their communities, denying racism's existence, being apologists for racists/racism, being partisan political hacks and making outlandish foolish ignorant statements.


The YMCA, on the other hand lives to do all of those things because their bosses love it.


I say being a black right-winger is lucrative because it is. Right-wing think tanks, political action committees like Turning Point USA and ultra wealthy donors like the Koch brothers employ and richly pay the likes of Candace Owens and Paris Denard to make speeches and appearances around the country. Others like David Clarke and Mark Burns go on cable news schilling for President Trump while simultaneously re-enforcing preconceived negative beliefs about the black community. Then, someone like Jason Whitlock who has his own platform on Fox Sports 1 continuously degrades and demonizes popular black athletes like LeBron James while railing against the "far left".


Almost all of these folks all but go full Uncle Ruckus and say the equivalent of, "These ungrateful Negros. They are too stupid to see how fortunate they are that the White man has allowed them to have what they have. They should be grateful and obedient. Look at me, Sir, I know my place and know who is putting money in my pocket."


And, the reason I say they are fraudulent is because they are not moored to any principles or convictions. They are paid shills and fetish performers. They're barely above minstrels. It's obvious most of them don't believe what they're proclaiming or they are too lazy to put substantive thought into their positions.


For example, I'll use Candace Owens. Recently she was on Joe Rogan's podcast. The subject of climate change came up. Owens vehemently denied it was real. She called it a "hoax". Rogan asked her why she believes that. She responded she just does. After Rogan questioned her some more he said, "You don't seem very informed about this." Owens said to him she doesn't know anything about the subject and she's never read about it nor intends to. Rogan said, "Isn't it close-minded to make a definitive statement about something you don't know anything about." She responded, "Yeah, probably." Rogan then asked, "So, how can you say you don't believe in it?" She replied, "I just don't. It's a hoax."


Candace has no clue about global warming nor does she intend to get one. Why? Her big money donors don't believe in climate change so neither does she. She can't even explain her position. I suspect because she doesn't believe in it. If that doesn't scream "hack", I don't know what does.


I saw Pastor Mark Burns get embarrassed by MSNBC's Joy Reid months ago. He was defending Trump's hurricane response to Puerto Rico and blasted Reid for "caring more about foreigners than Americans". After Reid explained to him Puerto Ricans are Americans she asked him even if they were foreigners don't they deserve help and how does he reconcile his Christianity with his answer. Predictably Burns started spinning and misquoting scripture. Reid called him out and corrected his misrepresenting scripture which caused him to double down and become pissed. Hack!


Lastly, I'll use Jason Whitlock. I have read and watched Jason Whitlock almost 20 years. He has always been an advocate for equality and calling out racism in sports. But, in recent years he's become hacky and lazy. After a brief departure from ESPN he was rehired only to be fired in less than a year because his columns weren't getting read.


Then, he gets hired by Fox Sports 1 and all of a sudden he's the sports equipment of Armstrong Williams. He goes from being LeBron's number number one fan to constantly hating on him. That hating intensified after Bron called out Trump last year.  Suddenly, Whitlock becomes the anti-black athlete. He takes relentless shots at Colin Kaepernick when previous to three years ago Kapernick is someone he would tirelessly defend.


So, why the change? Whitlock realized he could be the black right-winger of sports. One really doesn't exist so he filled the vacuum.


He loves to say, "I'm not political." But, he makes frequent appearances on Fox News and makes frequent political statements.




I would be inclined to believe he just had a shift in ideology, but he incessantly insists on Twitter he hasn't changed at all. In fact, he's always been this way and he's apolitical.


I could go on and on but I can't keep throwing up in my mouth.


Being a black Conservative isn't selling out . Selling out is selling out. Telling outright lies, speaking disingenuously and spewing racist talking points all to get a check is selling out. Abandoning any principles or ethics just to become rich or well known is selling out. The willingness to be the token black is selling out.


When your Stacey Dash and black owned companies such as BET are the only reason you've been getting a pay check; yet, you take your trifilin ass on Fox News calling BET racist and saying it should be taken off the air is selling out.


Pastor Darell Scott saying Trump is "the most pro-black president of our lifetime" when he knows on its face that is asinine statement is selling out.


Shuckin and jivin pays. It always has. There has always been those folks willing to debase themselves for peanuts and phony admiration. The attitude, "I wanna 'em to like me and see I'm not like the others", has been around forever and a day.


But, it's sad and pathetic.


What's even sadder and more pathetic is that these people are frauds, grifters and charlatans. And, the people they're shilling for know it as well as the rest of us do. They just find it entertaining and profitable while the rest of us find it loathsome and piteous.


Bluntly, it's ratchet and basic! And, when yo ass finally gains a conscience nobody will care. Yo ass is NOT going to be invited to the cookout.

A White House #Resistance From Within: Let's Pump The Brakes

Washington D.C. and the entire country is enthralled with this New York Times op-ed written by a "senior administration official".


The administration official says they are apart of the #Resistance. This person says they along with a bevy of other administration officials are actively thwarting parts of President Trump's agenda and are blocking policies and actions that are a product of his worst impulses, inclinations and a general lack of knowledge and intelligence.


This person mentioned Trump is impetuous, petty and childish. They said his inability to learn causes him to make ill-informed, half-baked and reckless decisions.


The op-ed lamented his amorality and tendency to flip flop on decisions. Sometimes he does it within minutes.


The author also wrote that Trump's inherent inclinations are anti-trade and anti-democratic. He or she bemoaned his overt affinity for dictators and despots while alienating our closest and most longstanding allies.


And, the writer said discussions took place early on in the administration's tenure regarding evoking the 25th Amendment but "nobody wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis.


The op-ed wasn't completely negative. The author noted the administration had many successes "in spite of" the President's chaotic, bombastic and confrontational leadership style. They pointed to the enormous "deregulation, tax cuts and a robust military". The author said many of the administration's policies have made America "safer and more prosperous".


The op-ed insisted the American people not worry because there is a plethora of people inside the administration who are placing country ahead of an allegiance to Trump. They vow to steer the country in the right direction "until-one way or another- it's over."


Naturally, Trump has responded in his normal measured manner-by calling the author "gutless" and demanding Attorney General Jeff Sessions investigate this. Trump has said the author is treasonous. *Sigh* Way to disprove the allegation you're ignorant of American democracy there, Donnie.


Some have concurred with the President this person is gutless while others have labeled this person a "patriot and hero". Many have said this person is complicit and simply assuaging their guilt by being "resistant" when they should be coming forth with detailed information and alerting the public.


I fall into the latter category.


Allow me to unpack this op-ed a little.



I am not quick to extend an invite to this person so they can attend the #Resistance pancake breakfast. The question must be asked how resistant is this person?


When I first saw the headline my initial thought was, "Oh, hell naw! Somebody inside that shitshow has been #woke!" But, then I read the op-ed. It seemed more like a decaffeinated resistance than a Starbucks venti latte with a double espresso shot resistance.


The writer appeared to be in-line with the vast majority of Trump's agenda while displaying disdain for his ignorance, pettiness, bombast and recklessness.


Pointing to deregulation, tax cuts and gratuitous military spending isn't exactly "resistance like". That's not policy stances that are going to garner you a second interview for entry into the club. All of those policies benefit the extremely wealthy. They do jackshit for the average American.


Saying America is safer and more prosperous because of Trump's policies is just not true.


Where was the mentioning about the separation of migrant children from their parents at the southern border? That is the quintessential example of his amorality.


What about his unmoored affinity for pissing on the rule of law? That is as authoritarian as anything.


While his penchant for dividing the country was mentioned where was the repudiation of his insulting the intelligence of intelligent successful people of color and his blatant shameless use of dog whistles? What about his foreplay with White Supremacists and refusal to flatly disavow them; thus by proxy emboldening them? Are these not blatant displays illuminating his recklessness and worst impulses?


However, none of those things were mentioned or even intimated. Again, this piece seemed to bemoan who Trump is as a person but not his policies.


Yes, Trump is a repugnant human being-an amoral shallow "empty barrel" if you will. But, his policies are equally repugnant and abhorrent; however, this author neglects to address it.


So, the questions pervading the American political landscape and societal discourse the last few days are...who wrote this op-ed and why.


The latter I believe I have a pretty solid answer for, at least partially. But, the former is something I have given much thought, likely way more than I should have or it deserves. Most of y'all know me well enough to know I love a good hot mess and a mystery.


Regarding this hot mess and mystery I am truthfully stumped. I have no concrete possibilities. Because virtually everyone in this dumpster fire presidency (and I mean everyone) is a legitimate candidate, it is almost impossible to narrow down a list of suspects.


The even money in Vegas says it is Vice President Mike Pence. He was in my first two or three suspects. As George Will said, he's oleaginous. (I admit I never knew that word existed before reading it in Will's column but it's now one of my new favorite words. And, it describes Pence perfectly.) The word "lodestar" was used and it is a word Pence uses a lot. All of that along with the fact an article came out last week saying Pence believes "God wants him to be president" makes him a comprehensive choice.


It could be Kellyanne Conway whom actually the word "oleaginous" succinctly describes.


Sarah Huckabee Sanders is a possibility. Maybe her despicable sycophantic show at the White House press podium is a rouse. Maybe she thinks she's sacrificing her dignity for the greater good.


General John Kelly is a certain possibility. His contempt for Trump seems to be quite evident now. The man said, "this is the worst job I've ever had", and he's been in multiple wars.


Shit, let's be real! Trump is a detestable human being and an ineffective leader who is gleefully proud of his ignorance, illiteracy, non-existent moral compass and unadulterated stupidity. I would like to think most serious people, especially those aiding in the running of our country, would find someone like this objectionable and repulsive. It could be any number of folks.


That is why I tend to believe this was a group effort. The author said several times that a group of people were circumventing the President when they felt it was necessary and placing the safety of the country first.


Much of the phrasing of this op-ed has the hallmarks of Pence's speech pattern. However, it also has sprinkles of language someone like a Kelly or Dan Coates (DNI Director) or General James Mattis would use. I see some Kellyanne in the article. Hell, I even see a smidge of Stephen Miller.


Regardless who wrote the op-ed, it raises legit concerns.


There seems to be something inherently unnerving about unelected administration and White House officials undermining the President of the United States' authority. For better or worse Trump was elected president. These officials were not.


This behavior actually lends credence to Trump's inane "Deep State" ramblings. It is evident a faction within Trump's orbit is actively undermining his presidency, at least intermittently.


But, that leads to the other issues raised. What in the fuck is going on inside the White House-the peoples house?!


This op-ed doesn't lay out some hostile coup d'état being performed by a group of insurgents. The op-ed writer praises many elements of the administration. They never issue a call for the President to be removed other than a brief 25th Amendment discussion.


However, this group of people seem to believe they have to conduct this intermittent insurgence to protect us from the President. They feel his erratic nature, loose grasp of the truth and reality and fragile ego will get the country involved in a devastating conflict or perilous situation.


Bob Woodward described in his forthcoming book, "Fear", one such example. Trump decided he wanted Syrian leader, Bashar Al-Assad, assassinated. Trump called Secretary of Defense, James Mattis, and demanded it be done despite Mattis' objection. Trump kept insisting so Mattis "gave in". Immediately after the call ended Mattis (understanding the grave implications such actions would induce) told his aide, "We're not doing any of that."


While we should all be thankful Mattis did that, we should be even more terrified that he had to.


How many times has such insanity taken place? How many conflicts have been avoided because aides, officials and cabinet secretaries have disobeyed orders? And, what did Trump do? According to nuanced examples in Woodward's book the President likely forgot about it. As the op-ed author stated another official said to them, "It's useless talking to him because he changes his mind from one minute to the next."


Look, whoever this op-ed writer is they need to actually do more than write an article. They need to go to Congress. I understand this is the most limp dicked Congress in history, but provide detailed information. Demand they do something or go public. That would be actual resistance.


Members of the Senate Bob Corker, Jeff Flake and Ben Sasse  all said this op-ed stated everything multiple people inside the White House has been telling them since "day one". Well, then why the hell aren't you doing something?


I will tell you why. Their resistance is decaffeinated weak, feckless. They are resisting against Trump, the man, because he is an amoral odious repulsive loathsome person. He was has no guiding principles and they find that to be unpalatable.


However, they wanted tax cuts, deregulation, ungodly increases in military spending, repeal of the Affordable Care Act and although they find the methods distasteful increased enforcement of illegal immigration.




This is not the #Resistance!


The op-ed provided a clear view into a, if not the, motivation for writing this piece. The line, "We will continue to steer this country into the right direction until-one way or another- this ends.


That line stood out to me the first time I read it and has every subsequent time I've read it.


Whoever this author is letting you know shit is about to get real. They know whether it's the Mueller investigation, Michael Cohen, Stormy Daniels, Summer Zervos, something we don't even know yet or likely a combination of all is going to bring this president down.


Trump has lived a life of wealth and privilege and that wealth and privilege has allowed him to live a life of crime. That wealth and privilege and an extraordinary amount of good luck has insulated him from being held accountable. He has spent his entire adult life being irresponsible, reckless, cruel and unaccountable. It is finally catching up to him. His time is about up.


The composer(s) of this op-ed seem to be aware of this. My assumption is they have some pretty concrete reasons why they feel this way. I'm not bathing in conjecture here. You don't make a statement like "until one way or another this ends" unless you have an idea it is ending.


So, I believe, at least in part, this op-ed is attempting to assuage its author(s) of any complicity and culpability. When (not if) this shitshow implodes they want to be insulated from the nuclear fallout. They want to be able to say, "It wasn't us! See, we were saving the country from the imbecilic insane man-child king!"


Yeah, let me know how that works out for ya.


Every single person who has been inside the administration and has firsthand knowledge of Trump's mental instability and unfathomable ignorance and autocratic tendencies and desires yet did nothing of substance will be judged harshly by history.


That assclown isn't the president just for his fanatical base. Don't forget almost three million more citizens didn't vote him than did.


This is a government of the people. We have a right to know when shit goes sideways. We, also, have a reasonable expectation the democratically elected president isn't having his power usurped or worse yet it must be usurped because he is literally an insane madman.


www.facebook.com/robbase2110


www.twitter.com/robbase2110


www.patreon.com/robeasley

The Truth Regarding Outrage Over Colin Kaepernick And The Anthem Protest

Right off the bat I know I'm going to piss off some folks. Whatevs. Your tears and saltiness I can use for a splendid margarita. Sorry. Not sorry.


This "outrage" over Nike featuring Colin Kaepernick in its newest ad campaign is all but three days old and it is tired as hell.


The outrage over the NFL anthem protest is so contrived and so disingenuous Kardashian melodrama thinks people need to check themselves.


Labor Day night Nike announced Kaepernick was going to be the feature of a new ad campaign and many Trumpsters on Twitter and Facebook nearly lost they damb minds! These people had meltdowns that made the Real Housewives say, "Please! Get ahold of yourselves."


From the way these folks were reacting you would've thought Netflix announced they made a deal with Barack Obama to produce some documentaries or something...


My Twitter feed was lighting up with people stating how "disgusted" and "sickened" they were with Nike. Then, people started demanding boycotts.


I go on Facebook and I see pics featuring knobs cutting swooshes off Nike apparel. But, the best was saved for last. Out of nowhere timelines are inundated with clowns burning shoes, clothes, bags, hats. One dumbass set his damn lawn on fire because he set his shoes on fire.


Effin snowflakes!


What did these assclowns think they were accomplishing? Showing Nike what "real Americans" do to protest and display their anger?


These fucktards do realize Nike doesn't really care, right? They very likely weighed the potential outrage and said it was worth it. I mean these people are burning their $150 shoes that they already bought which means Nike already got paid. Do I even need to address the stupid bastards who went out and purchased Nike shit just to burn it?


No child left behind is a damb lie!!!


The anger over Kap and the entire NFL protest is so disingenuous.


The protest antagonists say kneeling during the national anthem is "disrespectful to the flag, the anthem, the military and the vets". Kaepernick and the players among others have repeatedly said kneeling has absolutely nothing to do with any of those things.


Kap was explicitly clear from the jump what the protest is about. The players are kneeling to bring attention to the disproportionate killing of unarmed men of color by law enforcement, the unnecessary killing of black men in general regardless whose doing the killing and the systematic racial inequality that, yes, still exists in America.


Now, what I am about to say I said in my initial Facebook post about this topic and in subsequent Facebook and Twitter post and comments. Before I say this I am preemptively imploring some people to read the forthcoming statement slowly and repeatedly if necessary, which it will be, because I have been in enough arguments about this. Some folks are hardheaded and want to gloss over shit and strawman. It ain't that kind of day.


I would have not chosen kneeling for the anthem as my form of protest because of exactly what has transpired and because I would stand for the anthem. HOWEVER, these players have every right to protest via this expressive form. It is their First Amendment right. This choice of protest makes some uncomfortable. Guess what, buttercup, protest is supposed to make people uncomfortable. That's the freakin point. It's how attention is drawn. And, this particular form of protest is as peaceful and silent as protest can be.


Most importantly, the players cause is noble, just and right.


What the anthem protest opponents will say and have said is that, of course, it's the players' First Amendment right but "they are at work when they're playing and the job isn't the place for protest". Well, that is not true. There is a long history in this country of people protesting at their place of employment.


Then, the counter argument is, "Well, their employees and their bosses say they can't kneel. I can't go to my job and kneel or protest."


First of all, their bosses didn't say a word about the protests until a certain person stuck his nose into a situation he had no business getting involved in. Secondly, citing they can't go into their job and kneel or protest is a strawman. It also at the very least shows an inexplicable ignorance or is just blatantly disingenuous.


Someone doing a 6 to 3 shift at the tool and die shop is not anywhere near the same as a professional athlete. It is an insanely stupid comparison. While the tool and die job is perhaps more tangibly contributive to society nobody is seeing then work. Professional athletes, on the other hand, have a huge platform they can use for good. And, whether it is right or not, the athlete has more visibility and celebrity; thus, it almost inherently gives them a larger civic responsibility. How often do you hear folks bitch about athletes not living up to their responsibility to the youth and society because they are famous?


I will wholeheartedly concede the players are employees and the owners are private business owners who can run their business as they please. But, I contend they shouldn't silence these players. Yes, it's not infringing upon their free  speech rights legally, but it certainly is violating the spirit of free speech. Much like the social media platforms with Alex Jones.


The owners are always expecting players to be "ambassadors for the game" and be civically involved with the community. Well, that is what they're doing.


But, then we get to the heart of the situation. The antagonists say the players should protest on their own time. They ask why do these guys care so much because they are rich. Then, the true core of the anger pokes its head out, "These players need to shut up and play. Nobody cares. They wouldn't even be playing if it weren't for us."


The chick who headed the Republican Party for Beaver County, Pennsylvania let the cat out of the bag. I don't remember her name. I don't really give a shit too.


When she repeatedly called the players "baboons" in her Facebook posts and flat out said it was white people who pay their salaries, as if people of color don't attend football game, she wasn't just speaking for herself. She was speaking for a large contingency.


I have argued with these people on Facebook, Twitter and in person. They make an attempt to cloak their anger about the anthem protest in patriotism, but it's really not about patriotism at all. If it were, they would be appalled the numerous violations of the flag according to the U.S. flag code that take place week in and week out at college and professional sporting events. People wouldn't wear flag thened bikinis, speedos and tacky ass shirts .


This entire anthem protest "outrage" is about "spoiled rich black men" having the audacity to speak out against social injustice. They should be happy their making money instead of being in prison because obviously that is where they would be if not for charitable white men allowing them to a play game and hard working white people attending the game. This is the attitude even though I know there are people shaking their heads "no" right now.


I don't know if people don't realize it or they really believe they can pull the wool over our eyes. It usually takes less than three minutes into a discussion about the anthem protests before how much money the players make comes up.


If this was really about the flag and the vets, people would've been livid when the current president repeatedly didn't hold his hand over his heart during the presidential debates.


If this was really about the flag and vets, these people would demand adequate funding for the VA.


If this was about the flag and the vets, they would understand the vets fought for these dudes' right to protest including not standing for the national anthem.


If this was about the flag and vets, these practitioners of fuckery and dumbassery who were burning Nike gear would've donated those things to homeless vets. Or, they would've sold that shit and gave the proceeds to any number of veterans organizations.


Instead, they chose to pick up their phone, hit record and put their unmitigated unfathomable remedial intellect on display for all to see. The real intellectual giants really showed Nike because they went out and purchased Nike gear just to burn on YouTube, Facebook and Instagram. I'm sure the executives at Nike watched in horror as their merchandise burned and wondered, "What kind of fucking tool buys $60 pair shoes just set on fire?"


I'll tell you what kind. Snowflakes who are all in their feelings because Colin Kaepernick is featured in a Nike ad.


And, what's really amusing is they assholes love to gloat about Kap being blackballed from the league but their bigotry which is cloaked in their incessant fake ass bitching and pretentious patriotism has made Kap more famous than he ever would've been if they'd left him alone so he could be the backup quarterback in Seattle or Cleveland or wherever.


www facebook.com/robbase2110


www.twitter.com/robbase2110

The Media's Job Is To Be Objective, Not "Fair And Balanced"

Today's media has lost sight of what its primary function in our democracy is.


The mainstream media has become obsessed with this false philosophy of being "fair and balanced". The role of a free press is not to be fair but objective.


The Founding Fathers believed in the essential need of an unmoored free press, which is why it is listed in the First Amendment of the Constitution. But, they didn't believe the press should be free but adversarial. They steadfastly believed that a truly free democratic republic could not be maintained without a free press.


The press is supposed to be the link between the people and its government. The press is to be the truth teller to the public and be a check on power whether it be government or the private sector.


But, above all the press is to be the arbiters of truth. The media job is to present objective facts.


Somewhere along the line the media and the public have forgotten that.


We live in a time where our society is polarized. We are polarized because we live in bubbles that make us feel safe. We are not interested in reading or hearing truth unless it is "our" truth.


Facts have become subjective. Yelling and whining have become the methods of choice to manipulate reality.


Unfortunately, the mainstream media has succumbed to the complaining.


For the last 30 plus years the press has been bombarded with claims of being "biased" and "left wing". To be fair the accusation of being biased have persisted since the press' inception. However, in the last 30 years the political class (especially the right) have weaponized the assertions.


As a result, the media has began kowtowing to pushback against the narrative. Also, corporations buying media outlets have somewhat compromised journalistic practices.


The media is obsessed with the notion of being "fair and balanced". However, this notion is unrealistic and contradictory to journalism ethics.


Good reporters simply relay the facts. Facts are tangible and objective. They are not fair. In fact, they are often unfair.


Now, I am going to make this crystal clear. The vast majority of reporters and news hosts convey facts. They tell an objective truth. But, in their misguided attempt to be fair they step all over the truth leading to doubts about their credibility.


This is what drives me crazy about the mainstream press regardless if it's print or television.


I believe the New York Times and the Washington Post along with the majority of the other large newspapers produce good work. But, they crap on it by not staying objective.


The Times and the Post are the worst at this. They will produce a well written, well sourced article about a politician or political figure that its constitution is tangible facts. They will seek out a response from the article's subject . That subject will answer questions but the answers are provably false.


Here is what drives me insane. They will just leave let the answers lie there without pushback or context all in the name of being balanced. No, it's the journalist's job to pushback on the answers and demand forthrightness.


Cable news, in particular, CNN is even worse.


What amuses me to no end is the way the President and his supporters constantly rail against CNN for being "fake news" and being "biased". It is such an asinine assertion. Nobody goes out of their way more to be "fair" than CNN.


I have seen innumerable times a Trump supporter go on a CNN show telling boldface lies. They make disingenuous or misleading statements. More often than not the anchor whether it be Brooke Baldwin, Erin Burnett, Anderson Cooper will just allow the Trump pundit to say tangible falsehoods without any substantial pushback.


That is awful journalism. Their job is not be equitable. Their job is to uphold the truth. So, when someone whether they be liberal or conservative is lying or misleading it's the duty of the reporter to fact check them.


Why does this nonsense take place? Well, it's because of money.


Republicans are always crying about the media being liberal, but they aren't. I'll concede the majority of reporters are left leaning. Not as much as you may think though. And, although the majority of reporters may be liberal, their bosses are not.


Most mainstream media is owned by corporations; thus, the media is corporatists.


The desire for truth has been replaced by the desire for access and sponsors.


A time existed in America the press sought the truth regardless of whom may be exposed or whose careers may be damaged. Journalists weren't swayed by conglomerates or the military complex. But, times have changed.


Like with most things in our society, profit margin dictates the manner in which things are done. Journalists straddle the line of being purveyors of truth while not pissing off their bosses or those in power.


It is the reason Devin Nunes can go on Fox News lying out his ass and Bret Baier nor Brit Hume provide any real resistance. It is the reason Nancy Pelosi can go on MSNBC blatantly lying and even take uncalled for dishonest cheap shots at NBC News while a great journalist like Jonathan Capehart just nods and smiles. All of the aforementioned are excellent journalists but they know if they display any actual contradiction they could feel management's wrath because management will feel the wrath of viewers and sponsors. Also, they may lose access to that particular politician.


This ideal the press holds that it must live up to this impossible and antithetical standard of being balanced is asinine. This fear of being stigmatized "liberal" is simply illogical.


First of all, it's an effort made in vain. Right-wingers will always label the press "far-left" when they receive negative coverage. Left-wingers will always label the press "biased" when they receive negative coverage. So, the press should just stick to its principles and be objective.


The reality is not only is it fruitless for the media to play it down the middle it will always backfire. They come across as disingenuous which in some folks' view is the same as being dishonest and biased.


Here is an example. Recently, CNN's Chris Cuomo and Don Lemon did commentaries on Antifa. Their commentaries left an impression with some that they're Antifa sympathizers. They are not but the impression they gave was because of their inane affinity for fairness.


Both men's argument was that Antifa's stated purpose is to fight fascism, racism and bigotry. That is objectively true.


They contended Antifa's ideology in principle is not morally equivalent to that of White Nationalists, Klansmen or Neo-Nazis. Again, that is objectively true.


But, where they ran into trouble was their neglect or at least soft-peddling of Antifa's methods. Antifa believes in violence (at least to some extent) as a means of achieving their goals. Antifa has at various times performed violence in the acts of destroying property and harassment.


In both cases when people from the right (justifiably so) pointed out the failure to mention this they defended themselves by saying they are not being apologists for Antifa. Then, as right-wingers are inclined to do they directly associated Antifa with Democrats. Instead of fact checking these people they gave mealy-mouthed responses which seemed to be making more excuses for Antifa and allowing a false narrative to exist.


Now, I want to stress I think both men are exceptional journalists but in their unavailing efforts to be fair they looked ridiculous and pissed off everyone in the process and failed miserably at being objective.


What they should've done is make the valid point what Antifa stands for is empirically more morally palatable than what the Alt-Right stands for, but also make the point Antifa's methods are violent which is almost always counterproductive. They should have also stringently stressed that Antifa has been not been endorsed or supported by any Democratic officials or liberal leaders. These are objective truths.


Now, I want to emphasize I am not saying there isn't a place for conjecture, opinion and analysis because there certainly is. But, it must be made clear that is what's being presented.


There is a place for the Sean Hannitys and Lawrence O'Donnells of the world. When I watch them I am not expecting objectivity because they are not bound to it. They don't refer to themselves as journalists.


People don't trust the media. There are plenty of reasons why that is. But, one of the biggest is because people don't believe them.


They don't believe them, in part, because they are not consistently objective in their reporting. As I said earlier, they will list a litany of facts and then refuse to hold people accountable when they lie about those facts. Because, they don't want to appear biased.


What the media doesn't seem to understand or simply don't care is that when they do not contradict falsehoods they're undermining their own reporting. They are giving the impression they don't believe in their work.


If I report Billy Bob is hitting the pipe twice a day and declare it fact because I have credible sourcing, but I refuse to contradict Billy Bob when he denies it then that would give the impression either I don't have faith in my story or I am lying. Truth is neither are true; I am just trying to be "fair and balanced". But, what I am actually doing is undermining my own story because I don't want to seem biased. Doesn't that sound silly?


For our democracy to thrive we need an adversarial free objective press. We can have sycophants and "advocate journalists" which is the bullshit Sean Hannity calls himself.


However, the rank and file press corps has a responsibility to the truth. They should not be beholden to corporate interests or folks' irrational need to be right and feel vindicated in their own feelings, beliefs and prejudices.


The media's job is to inform the masses and keep a check on power whether the masses or the power wants them to or not.


I want to touch on one more thing which somewhat has to do with this topic, the media being "liberal".


The media is not liberal. The media is corporatist which means they're establishment.


For my conservative friends who think the media is some arm of the left-wing you might be shocked to know what the actual left-wing thinks about that. I implore you to go on YouTube and watch multiple videos of The Young Turks, Secular Talk, The Majority Report, The Humanist Report and The Rational National and see what they think of the mainstream media. They're distrust of the media is about the same level as yours. Y'all think MSNBC is the "liberal" channel? Tell me if you still think that after watching some of these videos.


Anyway, the media has to stop caring what people and politicians think. They need to do their jobs. Report the facts-not your facts or my facts but the objective tangible truth!