A Perspective From Booker Rising On Rose-Michigan-Duke-Uncle Tom Issue

Here is the anatomy of a mischaracterization of a statement made by Jalen Rose from his time as a basketball star at the University of Michigan.

I found this on Booker Rising, which also took a personal shot at Rose early in the blog entry.

Joe Hicks: "Uncle Tom's College Basketball: Racial Madness & Angry Victim Politics"

Jalen Rose recently questioned the blackness of college basketball players coming from two parent, middle class backgrounds. The conservative Pajamas TV host gives his thoughts on NCAA basketball and asks: does wealth or education make one an "Uncle Tom"? Does poverty and single parenthood define race? There is no embeddable video, but you can view Mr. Hicks' commentary here.

First of all, Rose did not recently question the blackness of college basketball players.

The documentary was produced and broadcast recently, however Rose was talking about his impressions (as a teenager) of the Duke program and some of its players.

Booker Rising:
http://www.bookerrising.net/2011/03/jalen-rose-uncle-tom-bookerista.html

Breaking Down Mike Krzyzewski's Response To Jalen Rose

Fab Five: Chris Webber, Jalen Rose, Jimmy King, Ray Jackson and Juwan Howard

At long last, Duke University men's basketball head coach Mike Krzyzewski has made his comment to former University of Michigan star Jalen Rose's comments regarding the program he has built.

From an article published on the ESPN website: Rose, as part of an ESPN Films documentary "The Fab Five" that aired March 13 (Rose was an executive producer), said black Blue Devils basketball players recruited in the early 1990s were "Uncle Toms."

"I hated Duke and I hated everything Duke stood for. Schools like Duke didn't recruit players like me. I felt like they only recruited black players that were Uncle Toms," Rose said in the documentary.

Rose's comments, obviously, have touched off a firestorm of controversy that just continues to boil over in the media and in the world of blogs.

Krzyzewski has finally decided to respond.

"Obviously, that was a poor choice of words and very insulting to everyone here at Duke but especially, not just our African-American players, but any African-American students," Krzyzewski said on "The Waddle & Silvy Show" on ESPN 1000 in Chicago Tuesday. "When you judge within a race, you start judging, like you put categories as to who you are. I think that's just the wrong thing to do."

Krzyzewski said one of the Fab Five could have ended up at Duke.

"We were very successful against them and, to be quite frank with you, we recruited Chris Webber," he said. "I didn't recruit Jalen Rose because we had Grant Hill and I'm happy with that. We didn't look at the other, Juwan Howard [because] we knew he wasn't going to come to Duke. The other two kids we didn't think were the caliber that could play as well as Thomas Hill and Brian Davis and Billy McCaffery. They're good kids. They were good kids."

Some of what Krzyzewski says is probably fair. I still don't think there is any way he would have recruited a player like Jalen, but Krzyzewski seems to suggest that he would have (if not for Hill already being on the roster). Krzyzewski also suggests Juwan Howard might have been an option, but he would not have chosen to go to Duke. He also seems to indicate that he didn't think Jimmy King and Ray Jackson were of the caliber of the players he already had in his program.

If Krzyzewski doesn't recruit players then doesn't help perpetuate the stereotype of Duke ignoring certain types of black players?

Webber was from Detroit, but he was attending the exclusive Detroit Country Day School.

Here is a little shot Coach K takes at the Fab Five:

"They had a heck of a run but, they didn't leave anything, they didn't establish anything there," Krzyzewski said. "The guys that I had established something that Jay Williams continued to do 10 years later -- the standards of what it meant to be a Duke basketball player."

I bet more people remember that Chris Webber and Jalen Rose played at Michigan than remember Brian Davis, Thomas Hill and Billy McCaffery (who went on to blossom as a player after he left Duke). Like so many people, Mike hates (to some extent) on the legacy left by the Fab Five.

There may be some truth to that, but only because of the sanctions and scandals. Krzyzewski got his shot in and he definitely has a lot to brag about with the success he has had as a head coach. But, the defensive nature of his comments still suggests some validity to the statements.

The dislike of Duke is not all about winning. North Carolina, Kansas, Connecticut and Kentucky are other programs with histories of success. None of those programs are as disliked as Duke.

ESPN:
http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/ncb/news/story?id=6270285&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines

Fox News ... Fair And Balanced ... Yeah Right

Typical Fox News. Finishes an interview with flip-flopping right-winger Newt Gingrich, bashes the Obama Administration for not coming on its network and then teases a segment with right-winger John McCain and Joe Lieberman, who has essentially become a right-wing politician.

Fox News showing how fair and balanced it is once again.

Paris Hilton: I Can’t Stand Black Guys, They’re Gross

Paris Hilton

I found it interesting to read this little comment allegedly made by famous (some might say infamous) Paris Hilton as documented on the Newsone website. When you read enough things in different places related to different people it becomes less and less possible to feel surprised by what's out there. Thus, I hardly feel surprised by the words of Hilton.

HILTON: I went out with that guy last night.

STRAUSS: Which guy?

HILTON: (points to an actor in Saving Private Ryan): We were making out, but then we went somewhere where it was bright and I saw that he was black and made an excuse and left. I can’t stand black guys. I would never touch one. It’s gross. (pauses). Does that guy look black to you?

STRAUSS: How black does a guy have to be?

HILTON: One percent is enough for me.

I find interesting that he said "it's gross" when talking about black men. It could just be her way of talking, but it could be something more.

Actually, I find it interesting she would say something about someone else is gross, but ... yeah.

At any rate, I would say there's no big loss here.

People Would Actually Vote For Donald Chump?

It's chilling to think that millions of people would actually vote for this man, Donald Trump, to be president of the United States of America.

That should send a chill up and down your spine.

Glenn Beck; President Obama Is Sympathetic To (Terrorists) Cause

Glenn Beck

Normally, I tend to avoid writing much about Glenn Beck because I see him as one of two things: a con man using racial politics and nutty extremism to get an audience of crazies or a freak.

I suppose he could be a little of both.

Anyway, here is the latest craziness coming from Beck that I found particularly disturbing even by his pitiful standards of human decency.

From Media Matters for America:

GLENN BECK: The Japanese government has no plans to expand the 12 mile evacuation zone. Meanwhile, we're loading up all of the diplomats from the State Department and getting out of there. Also something that I'm going to do tonight, I'm going to give the speech that the President should give in the Oval Office that he hasn't, and I don't know why. Our donations are way, way down for Japan. I don't see Hollywood mobilizing. So, we will. The speech from my Oval Office, tonight. It's amazing what's going on, and I don't really understand why yet I haven't figured it out yet.

There's another story that is very disturbing. And this just came in, it's an alert from the Wall Street Journal. The Obama Administration is seeking an United Nations security resolution that would authorize a wide range of possible military strikes against the forces of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi. It is aimed at preventing them from overrunning the rebels and civilians in the country's east. In discussions with other Security Council members, the Obama administration is making the case that a no-fly zone is not enough. It would be insufficient to save the rebel capital in Eastern Libya. So the U.S. is seeking a broad UN authorization for strikes aimed at holding back Libyan ground and air forces with the aim of protecting the rebel capital and avoiding a humanitarian crisis there. Military operations could include a no-fly zone but wouldn't be limited to that.

Holy cow. What does this mean? You know we've been saying that - where is the President on Libya? Tonight, I lay out the case, and it's not a smoking gun, and it's not an open and shut case, but it is something that I haven't found the right people yet, or the right evidence to link it all together, but I can feel it, that there's something wrong with this Libyan thing. We were talking about it this morning, Pat. That the time to have a no-fly zone is not now.

PAT GRAY: Yeah, right at the beginning. Right at the beginning. Seriously, I mean, it's progressed way too far just to do a no-fly zone.

BECK: Now it's going to be a civil war. Now, now, this would be - think of this America, this would be the third country that America has ground forces or air forces or sea, that is in battle and engaged in a Muslim country. That's insanity.

GRAY: Mmhmm.

BECK: And the time to support the rebels was at the very beginning when the momentum was there. There's no momentum now. The momentum is the other way. I'm not saying we don't do something to protect these people, but I'll tell you, it's very disturbing to me that our military could be engaged in yet another war in the Middle East.

GRAY: I think if you would have done this at the beginning, you would have been far less likely to have any kind of confrontation. You remember 1989 when we had that little run-in with the MiGs, the Libyan MiGs? And our -

BECK: - our guys

GRAY: Our F-14 tomcats took 'em down.

BECK: Yeah.

GRAY: And there was not a peep out of Libya for the next 20 years. Libya didn't make a sound. Well -

BECK: Yeah. [unintelligible]

GRAY: I mean, they had the couple terrorist activities. But, for the most part, Moammar Gadhafi was pretty quiet after that point.

BECK: Oh yeah. We were bombing his tent.

GRAY: Yeah.

BECK: There's no - there's, I mean, now, this is the problem with this president, it's the same thing. Look at his pattern, the BP oil spill. This is the thing that bothers me. And it's always patterns. The BP oil spill - we all know he used that to his advantage - never let a good crisis go to waste. And so what did he do? He wasn't there - he was engaged, of course he talked about it, but he wasn't engaged. Until it started getting out of control, and all of us were saying, where is the government?

GRAY: Mmhmm.

BECK: Where is the president on this? And he was strangely absent.

GRAY: Hasn't it been like that with every crisis -

BECK: Everything. Every crisis.

GRAY: The Fort Hood - the Fort Hood shooting. He wasn't really out front with that, and that was, you know, 13 U.S. soldiers being killed on their base. And then when he finally did make the statement, he comes out and talks about the - the Indian medicine man first -

BECK: Right. OK.

GRAY: - for two minutes before he even got around to the mention.

BECK: But here is - here is the point on that. I believe that's because he just sees us as the oppressor nation. He just sees us as a nation who is and has oppressed the Native Americans and, and the Muslim communities around the world. And so he's - he's - he's not with the terrorists, I'm not saying that, but he is sympathetic to their cause, which slows people down. You know what I mean?

GRAY: Mm.

BECK: You agree with that or disagree with that?

GRAY: Well, I don't know if sympathetic to the cause is the right -

BECK: Sym -

GRAY: - phrase.

BECK: Sym - oh, uh - wait a minute, I'm not saying that he's sympathetic with people blowing people up.

GRAY: Yeah.

BECK: I'm saying -

GRAY: I just wanted to make sure -

BECK: Yeah, yeah.

GRAY: - that people know that you're not saying that.

BECK: He's sympathetic, he's sympathetic [unintelligible]

GRAY: Well I think he sympathizes that America has done some bad things -

BECK: Yeah.

GRAY: And, and so - [unintelligible]

BECK: The Palestinian plight.

GRAY: Yes.

BECK: The Palestinian plight - only like 23 percent of Americans agree with the Palestinians. But he is, I believe, he's probably one of the 23 percent.

GRAY: Well, his pastor said it best, didn't he, when he said America's chickens have come home to roost.

BECK: Yes.

GRAY: Maybe he has a little of that sentiment -

BECK: Yes.

GRAY: - I don't know.

BECK: Yes, yes. I'm not saying that he's in league with the terrorists, I'm not saying that he agrees with bombings like that. But he is slower to react because he is a guy who is sympathetic to something that most Americans are not. We don't - he has said it himself over and over, I'm tired of Muslim-Americans being rounded up in the middle of the night. That's never happened. And if it has, show it to me, Mr. President because I will be with you on that. I agree with you that that shouldn't happen. So show me the evidence, and I will stand with you.

But what's disturbing about the BP oil crisis is it worked to his favor, it worked to his advantage by leaving it go for a while and not capping it, he had to have a massive disaster to be able to do what he did. Now is this what's happening in Libya? Because the time for that, I mean, even France is leading this. Nobody, is - and the people are crying out, America. And everybody knows we're the only one that can do it. We have the carriers right there. I've been on the aircraft carriers in the fifth fleet - 90 miles off the coast of Libya. We have them. We can do it. But the time to do it was when we had momentum and now, what're we gonna - we have more troops going someplace? The possibility of it? We're going to engage people with our military? What're - what - we're going to get involved in another war? What are you, out of your mind? It doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense.

And here's the other thing that I just want to share with those who think that the workers of the world can unite. What is happening in the world right now is exactly what happened in the 1920s and early 1930s in Europe, and it is the communists, and the socialists, and the Marxists that believe in one global order, and they believe that if the workers will unite - I mean, the people who took out the permit for the unions for the American Dream Act in Washington D.C., they say it clearly on their own website, the International Socialist Organization, that they believe that only the workers uniting will actually cause the revolution to happen.

Well here's where they go wrong. If you look at what's happening in Japan right now and you look at the spike of the yen, that is because people love their country and they are selling their stuff, and they are getting out of gold or whatever it is, and they are buying their own dollar, their yen, and they are going to invest it in their own country. When the whole world melts down, when America begins to fall on real hard times - and I mean, I - I hope I'm discredited on this, but I believe it's coming. And when we fall on real hard times, they will say workers of the world unite, and they will unite all of the workers, but at some point the unions - the union workers will say, wait a minute, how are you going to balance the world, you're giving our jobs to India, or Mexico, or whatever. And people become nationalists, that's what's happening in Japan. There's no - I'm not saying it's communist or anything else, I'm just talking about the yen - they're becoming nationalists. We did it after 9/11. We protect our own countries.

And that's what the Soviet Union, that's where Lenin and Marx and Stalin all went wrong - is they think they can unite the whole world with the workers. But the first step where it starts to go wrong is people start to protect themselves and their own communities that they understand as communities. And the world does not accept this global order, it doesn't, and when things get better in India or jobs go to India instead of here, they will not listen to a socialist saying, "workers of the world, unite" what they will listen to is a national socialist, somebody who says take care of America first, workers, you're already unionized, you're already together right? It's them that is the problem, and they become national socialists, not international socialists. International socialism will not work, and it will turn the world to national socialism, which is the Nazi regime.

I don't know how people don't understand the logic of this, but it is true, and it happens the same way every time, and governments, and they, the, governments, or the people, that the radicals, they use the youth - which is happening, and they also use giant corporations. And they get giant corporations, some of them willingly, and some of them just acquiesce because they say, I'll just get, 'cause they'll let me survive, and I'll be part of the survivors. You do not want to be part of those survivors, because in the end, they do not survive, because they always end the same way, always. Whether it's Mao, Stalin, Hitler, or Mussolini, they always end the same way.

Beck, no one knows what you mean because you're a freak.

One expects insane rants from Beck, but some of the stuff in here, with regards to terrorism and President Obama is disgraceful.

Source: Media Matters for America

Whitlock's Anti-Fab Five Column Proves One Thing ... He Is A Bitter Buffoon

I've never been much of a fan of controversial columnist Jason Whitlock, who has positioned himself in the national spotlight by taking contrary positions on race ... I believe strictly for the purpose of notoriety.

Whitlock, who shows his narrow-minded prejudice in the very beginning of this column, is back at it with a column taking shots at the Fab Five ESPN documentary (this is not at all unexpected considering his past connections to the Fab Five of Chris Webber, Jalen Rose, Ray Jackson, Juwan Howard and Jimmy King, and my comments above).

So, I will lay out some of the points Whitlock has made and make rebuttals.

Whitlock point:

With the help of the Worldwide Leader, Rose took baggy shorts, black socks, bald heads and trash talk and created the illusion the Fab Five were some sort of transcendent, revolutionary freedom fighters cut from the same cloth as Jackie Robinson, Jim Brown, Arthur Ashe and Muhammad Ali.

Rebuttal:

This is a classic case of gross overstatement to set the stage to tear down the product. By insanely invoking Jackie Robinson, Jim Brown, Arthur Ashe and Muhammad Ali, Whitlock reveals himself as more of an irrational buffoon. This is less of a commentary on Jalen Rose (executive producer of Fab Five) and more of a statement about the lack of credibility coming from Jason Whitlock.

Whitlock point:

The legacy of the Fab Five is that they were on the cutting edge of America’s unashamed embrace of style over substance.

When Rose ended the documentary waxing about how no one knows the names of the starters on North Carolina’s 1993 national championship team and everyone remembers Rose, Webber, Howard, King and Jackson, it dawned on me the Fab Five were the original Charlie Sheen.

Let me make this clear: I do not dislike the Fab Five. I made my bones as a journalist covering the Fab Five for the Ann Arbor News.

Rebuttal:

The last part is akin to "I'm not racist ... I have black friends." Whitlock's entire column reveals a dislike for the Fab Five or some aspect of the Fab Five he never truly reveals (either by ignorance or cowardice). By the way, Whitlock never challenges the truth of the point about the naming of the starters.

Whitlock point:

The Fab Five are taking credit for the real accomplishments of John Thompson’s and Patrick Ewing’s Georgetown Hoyas.

It was Thompson’s all-black, Ewing-led teams a decade before the Fab Five that shook the foundation of college basketball, changed the complexion of starting lineups across the country, opened coaching doors that had previously been closed to blacks and paved the way for black sportswriters at major newspapers.

It’s easy to forgive Rose for his lack of self-awareness. It’s America. In this country, self-awareness and common sense are our most rare commodities.

Rebuttal:

Whitlock thinks it's all about race. It's not all about race, Jason. This was as much about culture, hip-hop, rap music, etc. It's not all about race, Whitlock. It's not easy to forgive Jason for his lack of self-awareness. It seems that Whitlock is stuck on the race aspect of it and misses the point of the influence the Fab Five had ... stunning considering he was actually there, supposedly.

Whitlock point:

Five super-talented black kids enrolled at a prestigious, white university to play for an inexperienced, piss-poor-at-the-time white coach and, 20 years later, had the audacity to embark on a media tour preaching about black Duke players being Uncle Toms.

Are you kidding me?

Are we really this lost as a people?

Let’s end the facade that Rose’s words about the Duke players are being taken out of context.

Rebuttal:

Here's Whitlock playing the so-called race card. He takes a shot at Steve Fisher who took the Fab Five to two Final Fours and won a national championship. All that and the guy was a "piss-poor-at-the-time white coach. Sounds racist, huh? I guess I will have to watch the documentary again because I thought the Uncle Tom thing (not that I condone it) was in reference to how they perceived Duke when they were college freshmen.

Whitlock point:

The Fab Five clearly believe Coach K and Duke didn’t and don’t recruit inner-city black kids, and they believe race/racism/elitism are the driving forces behind the philosophy.

Rebuttal:

I believe this is a micharacterization of what the Fab Five guys were talking about in the documentary. It wasn't about race or racism ... maybe elitism. I think it was more about classism and trying to project a certain kind of image that appealed to the kind of audience that likes Duke ... an elitist largely white audience (truth be told). People felt this way when the Blue Devils played against UNLV.

Whitlock point:

During the three-year run of the Fab Five (one season without Webber), Duke beat Michigan all four times the schools met while winning two ACC titles and one NCAA title. During the same span, Michigan won zero conference or national titles. In addition, Webber’s interactions with booster Ed Martin put the program on probation and caused Michigan to forfeit all its games.

Rebuttal:

True, but Duke should have beaten the Fab Five. Duke had more experienced teams with about as much talent. The Fab Five were freshmen and sophomores. The Webber-Ed Martin thing is well-documented for the harm it caused Michigan and Webber.

Whitlock point:

Coach K probably thought the same thing I thought watching the Fab Five play: They’re immature, arrogant, interested in playing for a coach they could ignore and incapable of putting together the consistent focus and effort necessary to win a conference championship.

Two teams consistently beat the Fab Five — Duke (4-0) and Indiana (4-2).

Let me translate that for you: Structured, disciplined, well-coached teams beat Michigan.

Rebuttal:

If Coach K thought that then he was an idiot like you. He would have been disrespectful of how good Ohio State and Indiana were at the time. He also would have been too ignorant to realize how amazing it was for five freshman to accomplish what these guys accomplished. Two teams consistently beat Michigan, Whitlock writes. He cites structure, discipline and coaching. What this moron doesn't cite is experience. Is that an accident? If it is then he is a complete tool. If not then he is corrupt as a journalist.

Whitlock point:

While making money for their white university and allowing their incompetent, white coach to learn on the job, the Fab Five were not man enough to harness the courage and focus to outduel — in their minds — inferior, racist teams.

Rebuttal:

Steve Fisher was a lot of things, but he has proven over the long haul that he is a pretty damn good coach. His accomplishments stack up nicely against a lot of other coaches. Is Whitlock to stupid to realize that these guys were freshmen and sophomores? This last comment from Whitlock shows how much of an idiot he is as a writer and analyst.

Greater Respect For Christian Laettner

While my level of respect for Bobby Hurley plummeted (after his weak comments challenging the words of the University of Michigan players following the airing of the Fab Five documentary on ESPN), my respect level for Christian Laettner increased tremendously.

While I didn't always like Laettner as a player for Duke University (admit it ... unless you were a diehard Blue Devil you hated Laettner in college), I did come to like him much more as a professional player. Full disclosure: I respected the hell out of his game as a college player though. He earned all of the accolades he got in college (although some question his spot on the 1992 Dream Team over Shaquille O'Neal).

While Hurley whined and tried to act like Jalen Rose and the Michigan guys could not have played for Duke or would not have played much for Duke, Laettner took the high road and seemed to understand the greater context and bigger picture of what was being said in the documentary (either that or he figured it was not worth being a Scottie Pippen).

Here is some of what Laettner had to say from the Bay City Times (Mich.):

Referred to by members of the Fab Five as "soft, overrated, pretty boy" — and far worse — Laettner said he found it all "kind of funny."

“When you’re competing against people, trying to cut their heads off and beat them, you can’t expect them to love you — or even like you," Laettner said. "All you can ask is they respect you after the game and say the game was decided fair and square.

“Jalen Rose has always been a good guy to me. Chris Webber has always been a good to me... But I don’t expect them to love me. I can’t even get Grant Hill to love me all the time.”

Laettner and the Blue Devils defeated Michigan during the regular season and again in the national championship game when the Fab Five were in their freshman year in 1992.

In the Fab Five documentary, former Michigan center Juwan Howard said "Duke was America's team and Christian Laettner was like God. And I did not like him."

Laettner took the high road and realized that, in the end, it was all about respect and the comments were more about initial impressions and honesty. In the end, Laettner and Duke earned the respect, victories and championships.

Laettner earned more respect. Too bad Hurley stopped learning when he left Duke.

No Respect For Bobby Hurley At All

I can totally understand former Duke University guard Bobby Hurley have his feelings hurt and ego bruised a bit by some strong words uttered by members of the University of Michigan's Fab Five during the highly-publicized documentary that aired on ESPN.

But, Hurley obviously has his panties in a bunch (and he has virtually no true basketball cred) if these words attributed to him have even a shred of truth to them.

In fact, Hurley lost major stripes for these comments:

On the Dan Patrick Radio Show on March 14, former Duke guard Bobby Hurley had strong words for "Fab Five" ringleader Jalen Rose.

Rose had been critical of Duke while promoting his ESPN documentary "The Fab Five."

"Jalen, on the other hand, I can understand why we didn't recruit him. He might have had a hard time hitting the floor, because he wouldn’t have taken my spot," Hurley said to Patrick.

Hurley, come on, now. Duke not recruiting Jalen Rose had nothing to do with whether or not he could have taken your spot. Besides, Jalen can play three spots on the floor. Hurley's little ass could only play one. Duke recruited Cherokee Parks and Christian Laettner was ahead of him.

Hurley knows why Duke didn't recruit Jalen Rose and it has nothing to do with talent. It's clear that Rose's comments struck a nerve. Go back and look at the Duke roster and the guys who played and ask yourself if Jalen Rose could have played. Hurley has no credibility on the topic and looks like a bitter guy ducking the truth on a sensitive racial topic that is a tough one for him to handle considering he wants to also defend his legacy.

Lets be honest, Duke didn't have too many (have they had any?) brothas from the hood.

Scottie Pippen = Bitchassness

To all my friends from Chicago or fans of Scottie Pippen ... turn away right now.

Quite frankly, I've never been much of a fan of former National Basketball Association player ... ho ass Scottie Pippen.

Yeah, he was a pretty good basketball player and he enjoyed a lot of success ... riding the coattails of Michael Jordan's greatness.

Pippen was one of those guys who always talked big game, but did so on the strength of success he achieved thanks largely to Jordan's greatness.

This all brings me to some current bitchassness coming from Pippen who, 20 years later, is still hating on the Detroit Pistons.

In the truest sense of what it means to be a hater, Scottie just can't let it go ... two decades after Jordan (you too Scottie) finally beat Detroit and ultimately started a string of NBA championship success.

Here is some of the bullshit Scottie had to say recently about the Pistons:

‘‘The Pistons were a nasty team,’’ he said. ‘‘You always had to expect them to play dirty because, remember, they were the Bad Boys of Motown. They’d go out of their way to be mean and try to hurt you. And because we had better athletes, coach Chuck Daly just let them play the way they had to play to win.

"Bill Laimbeer was no real athlete. The same for Rick Mahorn and Joe Dumars and James Edwards. We were faster, quicker, more competitive and smarter."

So, Scottie (who was known to take his shots at people ... see right) ... if you were so much smarter, quicker and faster ... how did the Pistons keep getting to the NBA Finals, win two championships and keep beating that ass all those times?

You couldn't have been that much quicker, faster, smarter and more competitive if you couldn't beat them. You should have been killing them if that was really the case.

Secondly, how can you take a shot like that at Joe Dumars, who is about the most sportsman-like guy in all of sports?

Dumars discarded more class the last time he clipped his toenails than Scottie Pippen ever had as a basketball player.

Greg Gutfeld Is A Tool In The Fox News Toolbox

Checking out this little nugget from Media Matters for America reminds me of just how much of a tool Greg Gutfeld is and just how much he must feel at home in the toolbox known as Fox News.

Red Eye's Gutfeld Calls Women's History Month One Of Obama's "Childish Distractions." From Fox News' Red Eye:

GREG GUTFELD: While the world wrestles with sadness he finds joy in March Madness. So on Tuesday President Obama taped a segment for ESPN, announcing his picks for the NCAA, or n-ca tournament. With uprisings in the Mideast and catastrophe in Japan and critics say his priorities are screwy. But there is more, there's more-ers.

On Saturday Obama hade his 873rd outing to the golf course as president. On Friday he took time out to honor last year's Stanley cup's champion. He then celebrated Women's History Month on his radio show, and then, of course, he built the giant sandcastle. And then there was the ice sculpture he built for the Delaware beach ice sculpture contest. Check it out. And then on Monday he participated in a hot dog eating contest. I guess he is in the back there. He won handily.

Yeah, you can say it has been a busy week for Captain Perfect. I didn't even mention the bear wrestling, but I guess I just did. So should Obama leave behind these childish distractions as one blogger put it? Or is Commander Awesome allowed to have a life when there is so much strife? [Fox News, Red Eye, 3/16/11]

Only a moron like Gutfeld would refer to Women's History Month as a "distraction."

Rush Limbaugh Says He Will Not Be Intimidated, But ...

This has to be something of a Freudian slip coming from Rush Limbaugh (or so I thought as I read the headline on Media Matters for America):

Limbaugh: Jesse Jackson, Michael Moore "Better Remember ... Their Fire Hoses Not Gonna Intimidate Us"

It's not good when I hear Limbaugh talking about the hoses of Jesse Jackson and Michael Moore, but maybe he is interested in what they're shooting.

Bill O'Reilly's Version Of Black History Is Predictably Ignorant

Bill O'Reilly's arrogance and ignorance know no bounds.

The right-wing Fox News host was at his head-scratching worst with comments he made during this ridiculous exchange with Charles Krauthammer (a fellow right-winger who was forced to call out the Fox News show host for his stunning ignorance).

This from Crooks and Liars (along with the video):

Krauthammer: It's not a strong field. Not being known now is not dispositive -- nobody had ever heard of Barack Obama at this time in the cycle.

O'Reilly; That's what they always said, but let me challenge you. Barack Obama, a black man. OK, I mean he's half black and half white, but his appearance is black. The first black to ever run, OK? Huge, huge advantage in a campaign. Enormous. The press loved him. LOVED HIM, alright? Promoted him, actively promoted him. NBC News actively promoted his candidacy and so did their parent company General Electric. HUGE advantages Nobody on that list has anything.

Krauthammer: All of that is true, although Jesse Jackson actually was the first who ran.

I could go way back in history and point out all of the black men and women who have run for president, but O'Reilly's ignorance ignores even the last 30 years. Jesse Jackson running in 1984 and 1988 is so obvious it makes O'Reilly look appear ignorant on a scape to epic to believe.

Enough of that, however.

Lets get to another point in O'Reilly's puzzling rant: His implication that Barack Obama was essentially elected president because he was black and he was loved by the media. This is an insult to Barack Obama and implies that Obama is some kind of affirmative action candidate elected president just because he is black.

Even Krauthammer later gave Obama credit for running a good campaign even as O'Reilly tried to portray the president as an affirmative action candidate.

Wikipedia:

In 1888 Frederick Douglass was invited to speak at the Republican National Convention. Afterward during the roll call vote, he received one vote, so was nominally a candidate for the presidency. In those years, the candidates for the presidency and vice-presidency were chosen by state representatives voting at the nominating convention. Many decisions were made by negotiations of state and party leaders "behind closed doors." Douglass was not a serious candidate in contemporary terms.

In 1972, Shirley Chisholm was the first African-American major party candidate for president. She was a candidate for the Democratic Party nomination and participated in the Democratic primaries in numerous states.[1] She campaigned in 12 states and won 28 delegates.[2] In 1984 and 1988, Jesse Jackson was the first major party black candidate to run nationwide primary campaigns. He also ran as a Democratic Party candidate.[3]

In 1992 Alan Keyes was the first African-American candidate to run in the Republican presidential primaries.[citation needed] Keyes ran again, unsuccessfully, in 1996, 2000, and 2008. In 2004, Carol Moseley Braun and Al Sharpton ran as unsuccessful candidates in the Democratic primaries.

O'Reilly's comment was absolutely pathetic.

Fox News Commentator Megyn Kelly Pwned by Anthony Weiner

Mike Huckabee Proves He Really Is No Different Than A Glenn Beck When It Comes To Use Race To Incite Anti-Obama Hate

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This is an excellent discussion on MSNBC that gets to the roots of the racially charged comments being spewed by Mike Huckabee.

This shows a darker and more sinister side to Mike Huckabee than I ever thought existed. This is incredibly disappointing. I always knew he was a far-right guy, but this is a sad turn of events that exposes him as someone who is willing to use race to stir up his far-right base.

Mike Huckabee is now clearly in the category of an Andrew Breitbart and a Glenn Beck (maybe not to that extreme, but certainly comfortable on that wing of the political spectrum).

The Term 'Obamacare'

Pay close attention to people in the media who use the term "Obamacare" when they talk about health care reform.

This, generally speaking, is the tip off of right-wing bias. The right wingers (check out Fox News pretty much any time there is a discussion on health care reform) use this term as their way of trying to damage the effort by tagging the president's name to it.

Those in the mainstream media (and outside of the mainstream media and to the far right as is the case with Fox News) use it quite often.

"Obamacare" usage is a sign of their bias.