mrSingleton | No Chaser

my baby!

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 03:47:00 +0000

The Nekesa Moody Report:

My boy is a Superpowered Mailman

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 13:02:00 +0000

Hey watch my boy Kiko star in the online version of HEROES. The NBC show is giving fans spin-off storylines by producing these short webisodes. Kiko has been cast as the lead in "Going Postal" -- a three-part spin-off about a brother named Echo De Mille who they describe as "a seemingly ordinary mailman with an extraordinary ability." If this is well received then he might appear on the main show so comment on the little board there if you dig it:

So since Kiko and I grew up together, that's my boy for life, I can play publicist for a bit and show you a few more links and a video clip. So here's his own site, I Am Kiko

Here's IMDB's list of his work

Here are clips from an episode of Strong Medicine on Lifetime:

Here are two upcoming indie films:

I Am
Staunton Hill

Here's a really long phone interview aired Blog Talk Radio. It's an hour of him making the girls giggle.

Mallie's reply

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 23:35:00 +0000

If 17 girls popped up pregnant in Irvington High School.
The reason they were susceptible to such an agreement would be the story.
The void they were trying to fill, their hopeless ghetto lives, lack of role models, etc. would be the reason for the local baby boom.

I doubt the pact would even be considered as the "Reason".

This whole "Pact" component makes these girls seem more like victims than young girls making bad decisions.
When our girls do the same thing, they seem like fresh little hoochie mamas exercising bad judgement due to poor circumstances.

What about the baby daddies?

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:52:00 +0000

Hmm -- the four most popular stories on Time.com last week were about teen sex, elder sex, gay sex, and iPhone sex -- interesting (any marketers or advertisers out there who want to target Time.com's readers, well, now you know what they like to read).

Regarding this story, "Pregnancy Boom at Gloucester High" about the teens in Gloucester, Mass. -- if you hadn't heard, 17 school girls made a pact to all get pregnant at the same time -- why does the story hardly make mention of the young men involved? It'd be a different story if the girls were artificially inseminated but they weren't inseminated, they were done the old fashioned way by willing high school boys or in other cases perhaps by local young men. They certainly have a role in this pact as well -- especially if any of the men are legal adults who did this with these underaged girls. Why is it really going missed by the media coverage? Getting pregnant is not an independent decision any more than it is an independent act. So who are the baby daddies?

If this wasn't this small fishing town of Gloucester, Mass., if this was maybe Newark, NJ or Compton, CA, then would the focus change? Would the blame game change? How do I address that without playing victim? I just think this story is odd for more reasons than what the reporters are describing.

George Carlin said it best

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:05:00 +0000

I thought he was pretty funny and my uncle really, really thought so. We sat up and watched Carlin's comedy specials a number of times and he put him right up there with Richard Pryor when it came to making people confront uncomfortable issues through laughter. He hit the nail on the head often with his commentary on race and class and gender and I could point you toward one of his more politically or socially enlightening routines but I think I'll share a funny dose of the real George Carlin at his most lewd and crude because that's a badge he wore with pride. Listener discretion advised - here's a quote from a bit titled "Feminist Blowjob" followed by the extended audio on YouTube:

I do not understand why prostitution is illegal. Why should prostitution be illegal? Selling is legal. F---ing is legal. Why isn't selling f---ing legal? Y'know, why should it be illegal to sell something that's perfectly legal to give away? I can't follow the logic on that at all. Of all the things you can do to a person, giving them an orgasm is hardly the worst thing in the world. In the army they give you a medal for spraying napalm on people. Civilian life you go to jail for giving someone an orgasm. Maybe I'm no supposed to understand it.

Big Big News Day

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 19:37:00 +0000

First, R. Kelly found not guilty on all counts. Moments later, NBC's Tim Russert has fatal tragic heart attack (totally unrelated).

When she says veep, I say [bleep]

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 02:30:00 +0000

She's been so hesitant to respect the rules or to show regard for his achievement that she exposes how she's not even a person of her word. Veep can't be an option.

There's been another matter of character looming and Hunter on DailyKos put it like this:

I thought the Clinton campaign was just as historic as the Obama campaign, but every time her own supporters reject the premise of perfect equality between the candidates and demand she be treated differently because she is a woman or because her supporters are women, they tarnish both victories.

Read his full post: Tarnishing The Victory

"Why'd He" is starting rumors

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 19:21:00 +0000

Let's quell and dispell a cheapshot rumor before it even begins to get traction. A handful of anti-Michelle Obama types are actually accusing the would-be First Lady of saying "Whitey" over and over in a stump speech. She actually asked repeatedly "Why'd he..." in regards to a host of poor decisions made by President Bush during in his two terms in office.

So, perfectly fair questions such as:

Why'd he cut folks off medicaid?
Why'd he let New Orleans drown?
Why'd he do nothing about Jena?
Why'd he put us in Iraq for no reason?

...to an already biased ear might start to sound like:

Whitey cut folks off medicaid?
Whitey let New Orleans drown?
Whitey do nothing about Jena?
Whitey put us in Iraq for no reason?

...which would be completely perposterous speech for a political hopeful (and even as incorrect grammatically as they'd be politically). Michelle Obama is smarter than some are ready to believe, or may ever believe, so the only ones making damaging remarks in this matter are idiot instigators who can't use a lick of common sense when listening to a smart person make a basic campaign speech.

The Rise of Kimbo Slice

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Fri, 30 May 2008 19:53:00 +0000

CBS Sports, the program that showed us the world's most unforgettable wardrobe malfunction, now brings us the spectacle of what "might be the first Internet-generated athlete to reach mainstream superstardom" according to TIME Magazine's sports writer Sean Gregory.

This Saturday, CBS will air EliteXC (extreme combat) Saturday Night Fights, the new ultimate fighting league, now referred to as mixed martial arts (MMA, and also written about by TIME). The fighter already being heavily heavily promoted is Kimbo Slice (government name: Kevin Ferguson of Miami).

He's the cover of ESPN Magazine's June 2 issue and story writer Dan Le Batard says Slice is "a very scary guy. He is also a thoughtful friend, loving dad and budding entrepreneur." You may recognize him from an infamous YouTube video where he gives new meaning to pugilism. I watched that video and recognized him in another sense, he was, "that dude" y'know, that dude in the neighborhood who nobody messed with. Every neighborhood has a version of that dude and now the Miami version is a world sensation. The story goes — he'd been a high school football player in Miami (I'm asuming somewhere between 1986 and 1992 because he's 34), later dropped out of college and was even homeless for a period but worked odd jobs like strip-club bouncer, porn company bodyguard till he took up street fighting, which apparently is as lucrative a street hustle as any, people will bet more than a little bit of change on neighborhood matchups between big gorilla bucks — this used to happen for free on plantations. You ever read Ralph Ellison's Invible Man? Literary critic Richard Thorman describes one of the most memorable themes in the book:

The man telling the story says that as a boy, white men covered his eyes with a cloth. The white men tell the boy to blindly fight other black boys. The blacks are forced to fight each other to please whites. At the end of the novel the story has moved from the American South to the North. There are riots in Harlem, the black area of New York City. Instead of ten black children fighting each other blindly, grown black men are battling each other to the death. Blacks still are having their strength turned upon themselves.

Make your own call:

[click here if embed doesn't display]

In this weekend's main event, sposored by Burger King, Slice will fight James "Colossus"Thompson, giving the mayhem an equal opportunity angle. The story on Time.com quotes Slice responding to critics of the sport "It kept me away from dealing drugs, and breaking into people's houses. All that thug s---." He says, "I would rather have my son watch MMA and learn to defend himself from a bully than have him watch the hunting channel and see some guy blow a deer's head off." Good point and clear reference to Stephon Marbury's defense of Michael Vick as if this ish didn't have enough controversy already.

Stephen Colbert and David Gregory danceoff

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:04:00 +0000

This ish is only 2% political, 98% Friday goofiness. In fact, these videos are kind of old but I'm still laughing at them so join in and laugh as well:

Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert does his best Prince dance

NBC's David Gregory spins and slides to Mary J. Blige

The candidates on Darfur

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Wed, 28 May 2008 21:41:00 +0000

Today on Time.com's political diary The Page I read that U.S. senators Barack Obama, John McCain, and Hillary Clinton are all supporting the cause pushed by the Save Darfur charity (savedarfur.org). The Times also gives this press today. In a rare joint statement titled "We Stand United On Sudan" the three major White House hopefuls call the crisis in Darfur "genocide" and say "it would be a huge mistake for the Khartoum regime to think that it will benefit by running out the clock on the Bush Administration." Here is a big chunk of the letter:

We deplore all violence against the people of Darfur. There can be no doubt that the Sudanese government is chiefly responsible for the violence and is able to end it. We condemn the Sudanese government's consistent efforts to undermine peace and security, including its repeated attacks against its own people and the multiple barriers it has put up to the swift and effective deployment of the United Nations-African Union peacekeeping force. We further condemn the Sudanese government's refusal to adhere to the terms of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) that ended the conflict in southern Sudan.

Today, we wish to make clear to the Sudanese government that on this moral issue of tremendous importance, there is no divide between us. We stand united and demand that the genocide and violence in Darfur be brought to an end and that the CPA be fully implemented. Even as we campaign for the presidency, we will use our standing as Senators to press for the steps needed to ensure that the United States honors, in practice and in deed, its commitment to the cause of peace and protection of Darfur's innocent citizenry. We will continue to keep a close watch on events in Sudan and speak out for its marginalized peoples.

The charity also released a video featuring snippets they'd filmed of the candidates explaining their positions on the Sudan crisis:

These clips were taken from sit downs that the organization did with the candidates back in November 2007 so the extended samples include John Edwards
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYWGLbgIy2s

McCain calls the Janjaweed militia the "Janjaweeds"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZcDOOnvUA8

Clinton opts to read a statement from a teleprompter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyEYtHIOGhI

Like Edwards, Obama speaks comfortably off the cuff
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEd583-fA8M

Keith Olbermann for White House Press Secretary!

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Sat, 24 May 2008 18:04:00 +0000

Just as Fox TV commentator Tony Snow was handpicked by the Bush administration to be White House Press Secretary because of his support for Bush's policies and record of communicating them, perhaps MSNBC's Keith Olbermann is well on his way to getting that same gig if Obama is elected. Olbermann takes the words right out of my mouth, here he is, my spokesperson regarding Clinton's May 23 'assassination' gaffe:

And for old times sake let's revisit the March 12 special comment, 'Olbermann on Ferraro uproar.' Once again, my spokesperson:

In the event you should miss a live broadcast, here's where you can always find Keith Olbermann's Special Comments

Friday Funnies

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Fri, 09 May 2008 22:36:00 +0000

These skits from Funny or Die are funny indeed, but before we jump into these crazy videos, let me be big and state that if Obama is to be the party's nominee then I really want to see Clinton handle that with class and grace, I want to be a good sport about all this myself. I think the public will learn to appreciate her again someday and possibly even forgive some of her behavior on the campaign trail if she shows herself to be a big person. We need to move beyond all this Hillary bashing and move on to what I hope will be a slightly more respectful general election against McCain. That's what I want to see. But unfortunatley this is American politics and she's not even out of the race yet. She's hanging on and going out there making comments about 'hard working Americans' being synonymous with 'white Americans,' really. So before we move on, I think it's fair to get in a couple more giggles because she's practically insisting that we do. Please check out these videos, they are hilarious and perfect fun for a Friday:

HITLERY CLINTON

THE EMPIRE STRIKES BARACK

Gas Tax Debate: Watch This Ad

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 22:46:00 +0000

Also in the news this week: the economy, specifically the gas tax debate. No I'm not going to return my economic stimulus check to sender (Bush) but I definitely agree whole heartedly with Obama's argument that dropping the gas tax would be an ineffective attempt at a quick fix, an insulting appeasement, a 3 inch band aid on a 12 inch gash. So I hope the Indiana and North Carolina voters see his smart thinking on this issue, and possibly see this ad. Check it out:

My Q&A with Russell Simmons

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 23:40:00 +0000

I interviewed Russell Simmons the other day(s) and we just published the Q&A on Time.com.

He's cool but it was a minor ordeal trying to deal with him. In response to one question he can fly off into a dozen tangents so that became interesting. But the real headache happened because this interview wound up being a phoner, and although I was on a landline, he was on his cell doing five other thngs at once including riding in a car, speaking with the driver, hollaring out the car window (at a cop). My luck would have it that his cell phone signal would drop out and it took me over a week to lock down another good time to rap with him. I wound up getting enough from him to impress the entertainment editor so check it out: Russell Simmons: Reality TV Good for My Kids

Bruce for Barack!

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:47:00 +0000

Man I've been so disgusted with politics lately that I haven't had the stomach to post anything, but this news today makes it all a little worthwhile again. A little backstory: In the past few weeks I've been on this random classic rock kick and I've had typical stuff like the Stones, Hendrix, Beatles and Dylan on heavy rotation on my iPod. But even more than those acts, a brother like me has had the works of Bruce Springsteen playing over and over, mostly his ballads, and I can't seem to tire of the stuff. I've been playing familiar tracks like Streets of Philadelphia from the Philadelphia movie which won him a Grammy, and also tracks that I only just now learned about like The Ghost of Tom Joad which I'm now completely addicted to. Of course there's one of my absolute favorite live tracks American Skin (41 Shots) inspired by the NYPD's Amadou Diallo disgrace, which really showed his conscience and won me over a few years ago (and made me finally realize why my Jr. high school algebra teacher Mr. Baker used to wax on and on about Springsteen and sometimes not even teach us any dang math so he could teach about 'the Bruce'). Years later I can appreciate him as an enduring artist and small piece of the whole culture.

So what a pleasant surprise it is to hear this news from the man himself, especially during this insane week in the presidential campaign -- Springsteen endorses Obama! That's what's up. Later for all that crap about Clinton representing the blue collar crowd, Springsteen reps that harder than anybody in the public eye and now he's on board with brother Barack. My faith is slightly restored, perhaps I'll watch that last debate tonight afterall.

Here is an all-Springsteen YouTube page.

Here is Bruce's statement from his website, April 16, 2008.

Dear Friends and Fans:

LIke most of you, I've been following the campaign and I have now seen and heard enough to know where I stand. Senator Obama, in my view, is head and shoulders above the rest.

He has the depth, the reflectiveness, and the resilience to be our next President. He speaks to the America I've envisioned in my music for the past 35 years, a generous nation with a citizenry willing to tackle nuanced and complex problems, a country that's interested in its collective destiny and in the potential of its gathered spirit. A place where "...nobody crowds you, and nobody goes it alone."

At the moment, critics have tried to diminish Senator Obama through the exaggeration of certain of his comments and relationships. While these matters are worthy of some discussion, they have been ripped out of the context and fabric of the man's life and vision, so well described in his excellent book, Dreams of My Father, often in order to distract us from discussing the real issues: war and peace, the fight for economic and racial justice, reaffirming our Constitution, and the protection and enhancement of our environment.

After the terrible damage done over the past eight years, a great American reclamation project needs to be undertaken. I believe that Senator Obama is the best candidate to lead that project and to lead us into the 21st Century with a renewed sense of moral purpose and of ourselves as Americans.

Over here on E Street, we're proud to support Obama for President.

Bruce Springsteen

Bet.

UPDATE: Hey, wouldn't it be cool if Springsteen wrote the next catchy Obama song just like will.i.am did earlier in the campaign?

Today the folk musician said, "I always look at my work as trying to measure the distance between American promise and American reality," in comments to the media after his endorsement. Then he added, "And I think he's inspired a lot of people with that idea: How do you make that distance shorter?" (I saw it on Time.com/quotes).

Mallie's reply

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 03:08:00 +0000

I'm with you Seezie,
I think the official position was that Bush and crew went to war with Afghanistan for harboring Al Qaeda.
Although I don't recall an official position from the Afghan leadership that confirmed any such claim.
Makes me wonder about all the unsavory individuals who, for "Intelligence" purposes, remain protected within U.S. borders. When exactly does the West support terror?

Fact Check

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 23:20:00 +0000

I'm watching Obama on MTV's 'Choose or Loose' special and I caught a pretty significant error stated by him. He said that we need to refocus our milirary attention on Afghanistan -- and that much of his position is fine, I agree. But the reason he gave to support why we should do so is because the Afghanis were the ones who attacked us on September 11th. Actually, 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden himself is Saudi and al-Qa'eda is a multi-celled terrorist organization not tied to one single country. I know the senator knows this so he needs to be careful about semantics when talking about it. Granted, Bin Laden is hiding in Afghanistan and allied forces will argue that the country's government is harboring him by default if they aren't actively seeking him. But I think that the senator needs to finetune his talking point, especially since he slammed McCain this week for his gaffe misstating details about opposing factions in Iraq and Iran. I totally get Obama's broader point about where we need to focus our military attention, but as his supporter I really don't want him to get stumped unnecessarily on a point like this somewhere down the line and be made to look uninformed.

Mallie's reply

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:05:00 +0000

Son...

Obama delivered this as if he had spent his entire life preparing it.
50 years from now some kid will be writing an essay on the day Obama delivered his "Race" speech.

This was Obama's "Where I'm From (Marcy son)"

Obama's Speech on Race in America

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:50:00 +0000

Brilliant, emotional, commanding and very presidential address today from Barack Obama. He spoke about race in the United States in the wake of the Rev. Wright firestorm.

I was totally moved by his analysis and I think he put out the fire that was threatening to burn his campaign. What I really liked and what I think made him appear most presidential was how he called the black/white problem in America a stalemate which to me sounds similar to the red/blue state divide or the 50/50 congressional divide which each prevent us from getting things done. That comparison brings Obama's talk back into a political context for me and it drives home precicely why I want Obama in office more than I'd want Clinton or McCain. Obama repeatedly demonstrates that he is running to be a coalition builder, a uniter, not a fighter. Clinton and McCain brand themselves as fighers, and respectfully they have each fought important fights that needed to be fought. But now I'm ready for diplomacy. I think American voters are ready for the make up after the fight, and that is what Obama's candidacy represents to me.

Here is the full transcript of the speech.

Here is the video:

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 22:09:00 +0000

coolness: posting this via dashboard widget at work, best to be low key

Obama's Senate achievements

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 04:13:00 +0000

Following last night's Texas/Ohio showdown I don't even want to play too much Wednesday morning quarterback. The show just goes on. But more importantly, tonight I found tons of info about Obama's track record in the Senate. I've narrowed it all down to 10 must-reads, but of course most of these web pages link out to dozens and dozens more useful references. So whether you support Obama's presidential campaign or you dismiss it, it's in your interest to know your stuff before debating someone about him. Check it out...

10 informative links that examine Obama's Senate achievements:

1. OnTheIssues.org: Detailed voting record
Barack Obama

2. Charles Peters on washingtonpost.com: "Judge Him by His Laws"
An examination of bills championed by Barack Obama uncovers impressive evidence of his character and ability.

3. The Candid Blogger: "Experience? Hillary's Legislative Record Exposed"
Since entering the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096.

4. Helenann on Daily Kos: I found the BEEF - Obama's Senate Record"
Next time someone asks you 'where's the beef' in Senator Obama's Senate record, please feel free to send the link to this diary."

5. Grassroots Mom on Daily Kos: "I looked up Obama and looked up Clinton"
Clinton is a frequent co-sponsor on many of Obama's bills. So is Ted Kennedy. So are a number of Republicans.

6. Tom Curry on MSNBC.com: "What Obama's Senate votes reveal"
The list of 'yeas' and 'nays' offer some clues to an Obama presidency

7. Andrew Sullivan on TheAtlantic.com: "Dear Chris Matthews: Please Do Your Job"
fallout after Kirk Watson gets stumped

8. Obsidian Wings: "Barack Obama"
While Obama has not proposed his Cosmic Plan for World Peace, he has proposed a lot of interesting legislation on important but undercovered topics.

9. Wikipedia Wikipedia: Barack Obama
Although a newcomer to Washington, he recruited a team of established, high-level advisers devoted to broad themes that exceeded the usual requirements of an incoming first-term senator.

10. Barack Obama: United States Senator for Illinois
Press Releases

into the night

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 01:39:00 +0000

I said I wasn't going to watch tonight, but here I am, glued to the tube as usual and I'm already wrong about Vermont, thankfully. Earlier I worried that Clinton would win it but I'm glad I'm wrong once again. At the moment Obama has Vermont, so if Obama and Clinton split Texas and Ohio respectively, and early results indicate that they could, then Rhode Island might actually play a slightly more significant role, even if in a symbolic sense. If RI goes to Clinton then she'll spin it, spin it, spin it saying that she earned an even split on Super Tuesday 2 so we're back to things being equal. If Rhode Island goes to Obama then he'll come out of the night with 3 of 4 which should be considered huge, but of course spin and momentum are a mother. So I was wrong about Vermont but my nerves still aren't settled.

As usual, I'm nervous about the primaries

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 23:13:00 +0000

I'm not in the political predictions business but since my friends and family always privately ask me for pregame analysis I figured I could go out on a limb and share my thoughts for a change. Here's an email I just sent in response to the question, "you excited for tonight?"

I might not even watch all that annoying coverage tonight. I don't think that Clinton even has to win huge, if she wins anything at all even by a tiny amount, her campaign will spin, spin, spin as though it represents a huge momentum changing victory and they'll feed that to the pundits and those parrots will repeat it all night.

The timeline works in her favor. She could win Vermont and Rhode Island and since those states are out here in the east, those polls will close first so the news will announce that she has two new victories under her belt. They'll start to throw out the idea that she has ended her losing streak and then the polls in Ohio will close. If she wins that the talking heads will be going crazy, focused less on the actual numbers than on the fact that Clinton finally won something. Whatever she might win tonight she won't win by large margins, she'll only win in the way she won New Hampshire which was only by two or three percentage points. But momentum is a weird thing. I think Obama will win Texas, but that won't be till much later in the night after everyone has gotten all reenergized about Hillary again and Obama's victory will be far less of a headline. Even if he wins Texas by a larger margin than she wins anything he won't be the talk of the night. The talking heads have already become so accustomed to his wins that they'll just want a fresh new headline for tonight, something to break their own streak of boring primary reporting because it has been the same headline each time for a month. If he takes Texas, which we know in reality will be a huge victory, the talking heads will actually treat that headline like a simple dog bites man, so what. But whatever she wins they'll treat like man bites dog and go nuts.

That's my expectation for tonight. Perhaps I'm over-bracing myself for disappointment, and I've certainly been wrong plenty of times before -- I made conservative guesses going into the Virginia and Wisconsin contests -- but even at those times Obama hadn't been the undisputed frontrunner. He owes a degree of his early successes to his underdog status which seems to sway rebellious voters. That factor could work in her favor this time but what do I know? Read the experts instead. This is still making me feel good amidst all this, it's a report from a Newsweek columnist who says even with a momentum upswing, Clinton can't mathematically retake Obama. Read these:

Hillary�s Math Problem

Slate's Delegate Calculator

And then watch Tom Brokaw's assessment which should provide a little more solace:

My 'responsible journalism' complaint letters to TV talking heads this political season

noreply@blogger.com (mrSingleton) — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:52:00 +0000

Why would I even waste my time and breath with such letters? Because on principle I can't let statements like these fly on TV without speaking up just as I couldn't if the so-called 'expert' were standing right in front of me speaking so loose and unchecked. So I check -- mouths, eyes, gestures, and even TV politicos. They can be sooo irresponsible, way out on live national television, and I just hope that these letters reach them. Here are my responses to MSNBC's Tucker Carlson (today) and CNN's Jeffrey Toobin (Feb. 9):

Hello Tucker,

I'm watching your show, I know you're a fairly smart guy, but I have to say that I think your perspective on John Lewis' superdelegate switch is unfair, as evidenced by your word choices.

Your question for the segment was, 'Will other African American superdelegates make the same move?'

Well it's pretty obvious that you're assuming that Lewis made his choice somehow because he is African American himself, or perhaps because he believes that because his constituency is largely African American he has to somehow vote 'African American' now (if that's even a technically possible thing to do). Well Mr. Carlson that is biased and unfair. African American-ism doesn't have anything to do with this and your interjecting that notion is journalistically irresponsible and politically divisive.

Lewis has clearly stated that he is basing his decision based on the voting results of his bloc, the districts that he represents -- which is a philosophical approach to his superdelegate responsibility. And even if his districts are largely African American, you, Tucker, are hardly in position to make the giant leap that presumes that those voters in Georgia voted for Barack Obama simply because they too are African American. Who are you? Voters vote on issues. Again. Voters vote on issues! Sure some other factors play small parts but none are as great as the serious political issues they face and here's why:

Democrats are energized and all certainly deserve a jolly pat on the back for pushing these historically significant candidates this far, but take a deep breath and be serious, at the end of the day real people's lives are affected by real life -- the economy, education, healthcare, the war, the environment, taxes, their freedoms -- not nearly as much by their candidate's ethnicity or gender. If that were so then far more African Americans would've voted for Al Sharpton, but they didn't. These primaries are about unified Democrats, not divided demographics. Catch up to 2008.

Have a little more faith in voters, African American voters especially if you assume that they'd treat their vote so cheap. That's a very serious distinction to keep in mind so please post this up on your fridge or something. Otherwise, keep up the work and stay on issue.

Malik Singleton
Brooklyn, NY

And my email letter to Jeffrey Toobin written while watching CNN's coverage on the night of the Lousiana, Nebraska, Washington State primary and caucuses:

CNN,

While watching tonight I took extreme exception to analyst Jeffrey Toobin saying "I don't mean to ghettoize Obama's success in these states," talking about the senator's wins in largely black South Carolina and Louisiana. I know that he was in fact speaking in favor of Obama's success in the primaries but what a backhanded compliment. Even if his offense was unintentional it was still a completely ignorant and insensitive remark for a 2008 journalist speaking for such a widereaching news network.

How could he so easily let something roll off his tongue that equates African Americans with the ghetto without considering the images that brings to mind? Deep down does Toobin think that most African Americans reside in ghettos? Even if he did believe that, has he given a thought to the fact that in an election night discussion about how people vote, we're not talking about all people, we're only talking about actual voting people, active registered voters, and in this case African American voters, not the general population of people (who he clearly told on himself over).

If Toobin were to equate the ghetto with poverty that wouldn't be more responsible but it might've been a little easier to let slide. But he clearly equated ghetto with the African American voters who are enthusiastically participating in the political process, supporting multiple candidates, and trying to watch your so called 'best political team' for analysis, only to be slapped in the face in a huge moment of bad commentary from a very uninformed professional, Jeffrey Toobin.

I also wasn't too happy with corresponent John King co-signing Toonin's take in their back-and-forth. Please rewind the DVR and send your commentators to sensitivity training sessions.

Malik Singleton
Brooklyn, NY