JAZZY'S BOO HOO HOOS OF THE DAY

This wonderful brother, slip slop artist TI wants to be allowed more visitors in his house for Thanksgiving. For this reason, I say HELL NAW, BOYFRIEND, YOUR BUTT NEEDS TO BE IN DA HOUSE! Apparently you need to be off the streets for the arsenal you were trying to purchase.

Rapper T.I. wants judge to allow Thanksgiving gathering

By SAEED AHMED
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 11/06/07

Stuck inside your house, day in and day out, with nothing to do and no one but your wife and children to keep you company will make any man restless.

A jet-setting superstar who's being forced to play stay-at-home dad is no exception.

Atlanta rapper T.I., who's under house arrest awaiting trial on federal weapons charges, is asking a judge to let him host a Thanksgiving Day dinner at his Jonesboro home.

In a motion filed in federal court Tuesday, T.I — who was born Clifford Harris Jr. — requested that the judge waive the no-more-than-three visitors-at-a-time provision of his $3 million bond.

Harris, 27, wants the exception only for Turkey Day, only between the hours of 9 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., and only for a group of visitors whose names he submitted for approval.

In another motion Tuesday, Harris also asked the judge to allow access for workers who can come clean his yard, pool and home.

Harris was arrested Oct. 13 in a Midtown parking lot as he allegedly tried to illegally buy three machine guns and two silencers.

Among the strict bond conditions that U.S. Magistrate Judge Alan Baverman set, Harris can continue to live with his girlfriend and his children. However, visitors are limited to three at a time between 7 a.m. and 8 p.m., and have to be cleared with a criminal background check.

Harris' movements are monitored by a GPS system. And at least one guard lives on his property at all times, said Steve Sadow, one of three lawyers representing Harris.

If the judge grants his request, Harris will pay for additional guards for the celebration, according to the motion.

He can serve sweet tea, but his bond conditions forbid him from consuming alcohol.

Dwight Thomas, another lawyer for Harris, said he could not discuss the particulars of the motion, such as how many family members Harris was expecting.

Thomas said Harris was coping well as a prisoner in his home.

"He's doing fine. He's very upbeat," Thomas said. "He's looking forward to his day in court."

Until then, fans who want to catch a glimpse of the Atlanta rapper can catch him in the movie "American Gangster."

Among his handful of scenes is one where Harris is sitting alongside his drug overlord uncle, played by actor Denzel Washington, enjoying a Thanksgiving dinner.

Yo Clifford, sit your nappy butt down and enjoy your time out of jail, cause you need it.

JUNKET HERE, JUNKET THERE, JUNKET, JUNKET EVERYWHERE

Now mind you, this is the woman who just refused to take more money alloted by congress the better to do her job, and yet she can spend money from businesses she might have to regulate to junket around the world.

Industries Paid for Top Regulators' Travel
Two Heads of Product Safety Agency Accepted Trips From Manufacturer Groups

By Elizabeth Williamson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, November 2, 2007; A01

The chief of the Consumer Product Safety Commission and her predecessor have taken dozens of trips at the expense of the toy, appliance and children's furniture industries and others they regulate, according to internal records obtained by The Washington Post. Some of the trips were sponsored by lobbying groups and lawyers representing the makers of products linked to consumer hazards.

The records document nearly 30 trips since 2002 by the agency's acting chairman, Nancy Nord, and the previous chairman, Hal Stratton, that were paid for in full or in part by trade associations or manufacturers of products ranging from space heaters to disinfectants. The airfares, hotels and meals totaled nearly $60,000, and the destinations included China, Spain, San Francisco, New Orleans and a golf resort on Hilton Head Island, S.C.

Notable among the trips -- commonly described by officials as "gift travel" -- was an 11-day visit to China and Hong Kong in 2004 by Stratton, then chairman. The $11,000 trip was paid for by the American Fireworks Standards Laboratory, an industry group based in an office suite in Bethesda whose only laboratories are in Asia.

The CPSC says that at the time, the group had no pending regulatory requests. But since then the fireworks group has urged the commission to adopt its safety standards, an idea that is still pending, according to an organization newsletter.

Consumer groups and lawmakers intensified their criticism of the CPSC this summer after several highly publicized recalls of Chinese-made toys that contained hazardous levels of lead. Critics have long charged that the agency has become too close to regulated industries, opting for "voluntary" standards and repeatedly choosing not to take legal action against businesses that refuse to recall dangerous products.

Government-wide travel regulations state that officials from agencies such as the CPSC should not accept money for travel from nonfederal sources if the payments "would cause a reasonable person . . . to question the integrity of agency programs or operations."

But CPSC officials defend the industry-paid trips as a way for the agency to be in contact with manufacturing officials and hear their concerns despite a limited travel budget. Commission spokeswoman Julie Vallese said the agency's counsel and its ethics officers conducted "a full conflict-of-interest analysis" of the trips and stand behind their decisions.

"The mission of the agency and the benefits to consumer safety are two factors that are taken into consideration in approving gift travel," she said. Reports of the trips are submitted to the Office of Government Ethics, she added.

Several ethics experts and lawyers say the two administrators' travel records, some of which they reviewed at the request of The Post, suggest a conflict of interest.

"This is a blatant violation of the ethics code," said Craig Holman, an expert on governmental ethics law for the nonprofit consumer advocacy group Public Citizen. The rules allow nonfederal sources to pay for trips, "but not if you're a private party with business pending before the agency," he said.

The agency's travel patterns during the Bush administration, detailed in internal agency documents, differ from those of the Clinton era. Ann Brown, who served as chairman from 1994 to 2001, traveled only at the expense of the agency or of media organizations that sponsored appearances where she announced product recalls, according to the documents provided.

"We hated to have an industry pay for our staff for anything," said Pam Gilbert, a lawyer who was executive director of the agency under Brown.

The records show that Nord and Stratton repeatedly accepted gift travel for events from industries subject to CPSC enforcement. In February 2006, the Toy Industry Association provided Nord with rail fare, two nights in a hotel, meals -- and even $51 to pay her Union Station parking bill -- to attend the American International Toy Fair in New York, one of the industry's biggest product exhibitions.

Joan Lawrence, the association's vice president who oversees toy safety, said that "I have heard some enforcement officials say that they consider attending vital" because "they are able to see new products before they hit retail shelves" and suggest safety improvements. She added that "approximately 50 percent of the CPSC budget is used for children's products."

But Lawrence could not say why, given the importance of the event and the industry, the agency did not pay for its own travel. "If they came up with the money, that's okay," she said. "The educational component, of course, is our priority, and that's why we pay for the chairman."

Vallese, the CPSC spokeswoman, said Nord gave two speeches at the meeting, toured "new toy exhibits," watched "product demonstrations" and participated in "product safety discussions."

In a presentation to a trade group of product regulators and manufacturers last year, Nord said the agency was "working aggressively" to limit deaths from residential fires and carbon monoxide poisoning, according to an account published on the group's Web site. She noted that "fuel-fired heating equipment" is linked to more than 300 deaths a year.

Makers of that equipment are represented by the Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association, for which Stratton, Nord's predecessor, was a guest speaker at two annual meetings. In 2003 Stratton spoke at the group's meeting on Hilton Head Island in South Carolina. In 2005, he spoke at its annual meeting in Orlando.

The meetings drew more than 300 manufacturers' representatives and spouses for seminars, a dinner dance and golf. While the association's manufacturers are regulated by three other government agencies, its vice president, Joseph Mattingly, said he could not recall paying for any attendees from those agencies.

Stratton said: "My view was we needed to engage industries and not only tell them what we expected but also to learn what they were thinking. . . . You can't do that sitting in the ivory tower at the CPSC."

The records also detail several trips that were paid for by lawyers who represent manufacturers in product liability lawsuits.

In February, for example, Nord accepted more than $2,000 in travel and accommodations from the Defense Research Institute to attend its meeting in New Orleans on "product litigation trends," according to her report. The institute is made up of more than 20,000 corporate defense lawyers. In 2004, Stratton attended the group's meeting in Barcelona, at a cost to the group of $915 for his hotel room.

"They are the biggest government agency that would have impact on the stuff that we do," said Steve Coronado, a former chairman of the group's product liability committee, which has 3,000 members. "They've been very cordial and accommodating and gracious," he said of the agency's past three chiefs.

Coronado said that Nord was the group's main presenter in New Orleans and that she briefed 1,000 lawyers about "what their processes and procedures are, rules and regulations changes." He added: "I don't think it was a very politically oriented presentation." A CPSC spokesman did not respond to a request for direct comment by Nord on this trip and others.

Coronado said Brown, the Clinton-era agency chairman, also spoke to the group. But agency records of her non-CPSC-financed travel do not list that trip, suggesting that it was not paid for by the lawyers group. Gilbert, the former CPSC executive director, called DRI's contribution toward Stratton's hotel bill in Spain "amazing."

Stratton said the group "wanted to know where the CPSC was going on various product issues, and they wanted to know what the companies [the lawyers represented] could expect, what the government was thinking in regard to their issues." He said lawyers who sue companies over product-related injuries never invited him to speak.

Stratton gave a general defense of his more than 25 trips, which included a trip to China that the Toy Industry Association paid $8,000 to help finance. "Everybody wants to see the chairman," he said. The fireworks group that paid for a separate China trip did not respond to an e-mailed request for comment about its contacts with the CPSC.

Some say the commission's approach to gift travel points to a Bush administration philosophy that favors engaging corporations in policymaking that affects them. "This administration apparently has taken the position that speaking and appearing before the regulated community, even where there are enforcement matters pending, does not create the appearance of a conflict," said Kenneth Gross, an ethics lawyer at Skadden, Arps.

"These are difficult and subjective lines to be drawn," he said. "Prior administrations have drawn that line in a different place."

Nord was a corporate lawyer at Eastman Kodak before her appointment. Stratton led Lawyers for Bush in his home state of New Mexico during the president's 2000 campaign and co-founded the Rio Grande Foundation, which advocates limited government and supports free-market economic principles.

The CPSC did not immediately agree to a request to review copies of internal documents related to several trips or its internal gift-travel regulations. But the records document a pattern of travel that varies from the stated habits of top officials at four other regulatory agencies.

The Securities and Exchange Commission, for example, "does not accept host-paid travel reimbursements or in-kind payments from any organization regulated by the agency," said spokesman John Heine. Food and Drug Administration rules likewise do not permit outside travel payments from regulated companies, organizations "engaged in any lobbying activities" or those that receive "more than ten percent of their income from a corporate source," among other restrictions.

The Federal Communications Commission bans travel paid for by regulated companies or others with business before the agency, for officials from division heads upward, according to spokesman Clyde Ensslin.

F. Gary Davis, who helped establish the Office of Government Ethics in 1978 and served as its general counsel and deputy director until 2000, said the government-wide regulations were imposed "to ensure that there is no appearance of impropriety when you're dealing with a prohibited source." He said that it is conceivable that some of the CPSC's industry-sponsored trips were justified but that in those cases, the agency should be prepared to make its decision-making records available.

WTF!@#$%&*

O.K. So now I don't need my voting rights because I'm more likely to die before completely using them?@#$%&* What the hell kind of sense does that make? Fire the fool, please.

Justice Official Apologizes for Remarks on Minorities

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 30, 2007; 11:00 AM

The head of the Justice Department's voting section apologized today for saying that racial minorities are more likely to die before becoming elderly and therefore are not hurt as much as whites by voter identification laws.

In prepared testimony for an appearance in front of a House Judiciary subcommittee this morning, John K. Tanner said his remarks earlier this month at the National Latino Congreso in Los Angeles "do not in any way accurately reflect my career of devotion" to upholding federal voting rights laws.

"I want to apologize for the comments," Tanner said in his testimony. " . . . I understand that my explanation of the data came across in a hurtful way, which I deeply regret."

The apology follows a series of remarks by Tanner this month that have caused a political uproar and led to calls from some Democrats, including presidential hopeful Barack Obama, that Tanner resign or be fired.

Tanner, a 31-year career Justice Department employee, has previously come under fire for his stewardship at the voting section, including his approval of a controversial voter identification law for the state of Georgia and his handling of an investigation into alleged voting irregularities in Ohio during the 2004 elections.

At the Los Angeles conference earlier this month, Tanner said that voter identification laws primarily affect elderly people because they are less likely to have photo IDs, and are less likely to impact minorities who tend to die earlier.

"Our society is such that minorities don't become elderly the way white people do," Tanner said. "They die first . . . And so anything that disproportionately impacts the elderly has the opposite impact on minorities--just the math is such as that."

A few days earlier, Tanner also suggested to the Georgia NAACP that poor people are likely to have photo IDs because check-cashing businesses require them.

Tanner, who is white, also asked the group: "You think you get asked for ID more than I do? I've never heard anyone talk about driving while white."

The remarks prompted widespread criticism from Democrats, who said Tanner's analysis of demographic patterns was flawed and amateurish and indicated a lack of concern for minority rights. In a letter to acting Attorney General Peter D. Keisler, Obama wrote that Tanner "possesses neither the character nor the judgment" to keep his job.

In separate testimony to be delivered later today, a former voting section analyst says that Tanner's remarks about minority voters "are actually a fair example of his approach to truth, facts and the law."

"Broad generalizations, deliberate misuse of statistics, and casual supposition, in my experience, were preferred over the analytical rigor, impartiality and scrupulous attention to detail that had marked the work of the section prior to Tanner taking control in 2005," Toby Moore, a former Justice Department political geographer, said in his prepared testimony.

Today's hearing by the House Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties is an outgrowth of an ongoing investigation by congressional Democrats into the firings of nine U.S. attorneys and allegations that the Bush administration has overtly politicized the Justice Department.

The House session also comes as Democrats in the Senate have delayed a vote on the confirmation of attorney general nominee Michael B. Mukasey, who raised concerns among some lawmakers by refusing to say whether a type of simulated drowning amounts to torture under U.S. laws.

WHITE LIES AND THE MEANING OF THE NOOSE

I don't want to call anyone a liar. But I will. White people who claim that there are some in this country who don't understand what the noose means are liars. Try as I might, I couldn't find the article on Huffpo which convinced me of this. The gentleman stated that he lived in Jena and thought that the truth should be told. We had it all backwards. Those white youths who hung the noose from the tree didn't understand, he said, what that noose meant to black people. Liar. Those boys knew every bit of history behind the hanging of a noose. They have computers don't they? More to the point they have white male relatives, grandfathers, who were only too well aware of what a noose hanging from a tree meant. And you mean to tell me that some old men sitting around with a group of their young male relatives wouldn't tell them the story behind the noose? Might not have even shared a story or two of at least witnessing a lynching? You mean to tell me that those good ol' boys never sat around, recounting the days of when whites reigned supreme and the noose was king? You and I both know damned well that they did.

I am 53 years of age, and grew up not 20 minutes from Washington, D.C., and for all the world you would have thought it was the backwoods of Deliverance. I never really understood how southern Maryland really was until I got older. You would have thought the danged state was somewhere between Georgia and Mississippi. It was that bad. In 1965, at the age of 11 I witnessed something I will never forget. A cross burning. Have you ever seen how those things glow, horribly? It's like nothing you've ever seen. I have never seen a hanging. The pictures are enough to sear the soul. I knew what lynchings were though. I had heard all about them, understood them in all their heart wrenching hideousness. I knew they were used to keep black men in line, understanding where their "place" was.

A lynching is a thing of pure hatred. Don't believe otherwise. A noose hung from a tree, on a door, anywhere, is a symbol of hatred and control. It is a threat. It's statement is a snarled hiss of "I hate you, I hate who you are, and I am using this noose to tell you so." No one who sees a noose should ever believe otherwise, because those of us who are black know its' meaning. We know what those who leave the noose are saying. We know the hatred directed at us for whatever reason. There is no such thing as the noose is a joke. What kind of a joke? A very sick joke? Having hung the noose, knowing its' meaning, knowing what was meant when it was hung, how do you then declare, "oh, it was only a joke, a boyish prank, played by some children." Oh, really? Well black children, yes, they hung those nooses from the tree, they said I hate you, might even like to see you swinging from that noose but hey, they were only playing, why get so upset?

Should the young white boys who hung the noose from the tree charged and punished with a hate crime? Think about this; when black men where lynched no one wanted to see those who did the lynching punished, at least not other whites. Perhaps justice would have been served if those kids had been made to study the history of lynchings in this country, made to put together a packet which could then be shown throughout the school system in Louisiana, and they could also have been made to study the justice system in this country as it pertains to young black men and their incarceration rates. They should not have gone unpunished, and at the very least they should have been made to understand why their "prank" was not a "joke". At least not to black people who have seen such things.

No, the noose as a symbol is not a joke. The author of that piece knew it, and so did those young white boys in Jena, which is why they hung the noose. Why would you hang a noose and not know the meaning? And if they didn't know the meaning then surely this says that they created the same meaning as did their forefathers, doesn't it? I consider that a horrifying thought, don't you? No matter how you look at it, the noose still means hatred and death to black men.

PS:I did find this article again, and it was posted on Huffpo. Apparently, Media Myths About The Jena 6, by Craig Franklin, has been flying around the wed since it was written. Jack and Jill has an article here, taking the myth apart finely.

O.K. IT'S OFFICIAL NOW:THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS DEAD

In November of 2006, the people, republicans and democrats alike, went to the poles and did what congress asked us to do. We handed them a mandate to end the war. We voted overwhelmingly to oust many republicans and replace them with democrats, to the tune of regaining congress by one. There is nothing to be said about Joe Lieberman. He is a democrat, turned independent, who is a republican in sheep's clothing. Nancy Pelosi was voted first female speaker of the house for nothing. She came in riding her white horse, assuring us that she was going to issue a stinging defeat to Notpreznitbush, and she caved. She gave into the republicans because she feared that the would paint her with their brush or hatred, she hates America, she hates the soldiers, she's soft on the war on terror. The democrats couldn't stand not to go about their business and make Notpreznitbush blink first. They had nerves, no back bone, no heroicism, they just couldn't bring themselves to do it. We waited and waited in vain, hoping that their spines would come back, but alas, no. A spine doesn't want to be yours if you can't use it properly, and most spines want to be known for standing up to anything, including presidents who were never elected.

Today it is official. The democratic party is dead. Pete Stark, rep. from California, had this to say of Notpreznitbush's veto of the schip program; "You're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement." Of course, the right jumped on him right away, crying foul, calling for him to apologize. Many of the spineless left also called for him to apologize, and for a few days he didn't. They finally got to boyfriend over the weekend, threatening him with censure. Poor baby, I guess not even knowing ho many of us approved of what he said didn't help. He, like so many others before him, couldn't stand the whinny baby crying of either party, or the vast and vicious hatred of the right. Damn. Just listening to him and that sad, pathetic apology is nauseating.

This is just too much for me. Al Gore should be finishing up his second illustrious term. Instead, he has gone on to win an Emmy, and Oscar, and now the Nobel Peace Prize, and any other award which can be heaped on the man. Our country would know peace now, and probably the prosperity of the evil Clenis, who left us with a surplus in the coffers. Imagine the amount of money that would be in there now with Gore at the helm. Our industries would not have pulled up steaks and moved to foreign countries, forcing the former workers to pack the crates for the move. Katrina would never have happened as it did. Look what's happening [to] for the victims of the San Diego fires. Instead, we have war(s), a recession looming, rampant foreclosures on sub prime rates that never should have happened, the tossing of the middle class into the lower middle class, on and on and on. Our justice system is not our justice system but the right's justice system.

Yes, the dems long national nightmare is over and they no longer have to pretend to have a spine at all, if ever they did have one. They did give it a valiant try though, I have to admit that. It took Nancy Pelosi a few weeks to turn into a bona fide Chicken Head. With Pete Stark's forced apology, it's official now. Nancy Pelosi is a Chicken Head. She swept into office of Speaker of the House and quickly turned it into a barnyard. Everybody is bucking and clucking and doing nothing at all. She promised the war would quickly be ended and here we are, about to end the year, and not the war. All she had to do was send a bill to Notpreeznitbush and let him veto it. That's all. But she couldn't even do that. Just let him veto the damned bill which would have made him look like the idiot that he is. Nooooooooooo. Nancy Chicken Head Pelosi couldn't do that. They listened to the whisperings of the republicans, got their asses kicked and handed to them again, and sat down like whipped dogs.

I don't blame Rep. Pete Stark, really I don't. I imagine that I could hold out against whatever was said to me, because really, why should I care? What could they do to me other than send me home? If I held to my principles wouldn't that be all that mattered? As for Notpreznitbush, hasn't he had enough names hurled at him that he inured to it all? Isn't he man enough to take the names even if he isn't man enough to go to war? Not man enough to not send others to war when he's never been himself? You see, nopreznitbush is a chicken, too. To chicken to go to war. A chicken hawk. Nancy's in good company. No, I don't blame Pete at all, not in the current atmosphere of democratic spinelessness. I know that many of us tried to send him a message of courage, tried to tell him that we appreciated his standing up to those schip vetoing bullies, but I guess when you have all those chickens wildly bucking and clucking at you it's hard.

It's been a long, slow, death for the democratic party. Where did it all start? With the Nixon debacle? Fueled by Carter? Cemented by Regan? Built into a true funeral pyre by Clinton? All of the above probably, but also added to that is the vicious hatred of the republican party. of course, everything about the Clintons whipped the republicans into hate of which I have never seen the likes. Their hatred led them to impeach Bill Clinton for lying about a sex act. Which all men lie about at some time in their lives. It's just that this was Bill Most Hated Man Clinton, and he had to be punished. By Ken I have no life Starr. Al Gore, now one of America's most decorated citizens, having recently won the Nobel Peace prize for his work on global warming. He, or course, would not demand a recount of the 2000 vote. And who could forget that Frenchified John Kerry? How could he compete against a man who does nothing on his ranch but clear brush? Wind surfing! What the hell kind of Frenchified sport is that? Only the French would do it! And of course, once again, there was disenfranchisement in Florida, those damned pregnant chads. The republicans only respect the sanctity of life, not the right of life to vote.

Perhaps the democratic party is only on life support, and not really dead yet. Perhaps if the dems can win the 2008 election, the party can be resuscitated, just maybe. I'll have to take a wait and see attitude, but with things the way they are, I don't hold out much hope. But I won't pull the plug just yet.



----------------
Now playing: Louis Jordan And His Tympany Five - Ain't Nobody Here But Us Chickens
via FoxyTunes

TALKING GIBBERISH

O.K. I admit that I'm still angry and upset with what digby had to say about Cosby, and madder still that when I checked out the video it was nothing like she said, and not only that, but both he and Dr. Toussaint appeared on Ophra today, something I just happened across accidentally. At least I've calmed down enough not to write a post concerning who and what a Ms. Ann is, lol. She got lucky on that one. For now. Since this fool was still going on about gibberish, I posted again on her blog that she needed to do her research before stating that anyone was talking gibberish. Before I state anything that I've seen, heard or read, I want to make sure that I fact check what I'm saying, and while it may be her belief that Cosby was talking gibberish, he was not. I did a search and found the video of the interview on another site, and I saw nothing of the kind. I also read some of the responses to that video, and they were the usual. There were some pros and some cons for what Cosby had to say, and of course some people felt that we should not be airing our dirty laundry, which is par for the course. But not one person stated that they thought Cosby was talking gibberish.

The interview that Cosby did with Ophra is up on her site here. I watched a whole hour of Ophra and I want you to know that's saying something. I am not a fan of much of commercial television, but for that hour I actually watched. Bill Cosby did not speak gibberish. He spoke about the same subjects he has for the past six or seven years; our kids and education; their discipline; that we should know what's going on in their lives. He also had a brother and sister, who's boyfriend had shot their mother before their eyes, with the brother begging for his life. The sister spiraled into drug use and sale and had a baby at the age of 16. Both were there to tell the audience that in spite of what they went through, with the help of their grandmother and other members of the community, they were able to survive their tragedy and go on to lead productive lives.

If you're going to babble on inanely about someone as digby does about Bill Cosby, why not make sure of what you're babbling about? Why not make sure that what you're giving ignorant views about are true, by making sure that you've carefully listened to what you're watching, and understood it at the same time, instead of running off inanely at the mouth before those who read you and believe every word you print. Perhaps digby thinks she is defending blacks against the undeserved jabs she feels Cosby is issuing to people who can't defend themselves, which he is not. Cosby is not, as I and so many other blacks know, leveling judgment against that segment of our population who honestly cannot do any better, but he is leveling it against those who know they can do better but aren't even trying. We know he is talking to those of us who know we must do better, for themselves and for their children, or we as a culture will slip further and further behind. He does it because he knows that there is no leader out there doing what needs to be done, and he does it because he loves his people. He does it because if he doesn't, no one will.

Because I still can't believe digby said what she did, that she portrays herself as honestly not knowing what kind of "gibberish" Cosby is speaking, I will give her the benefit of the doubt and not accuse her of racism, but state that she does need to examine the video again and visit Ophra's site for the video of her show, then rethink her statements. Otherwise, I'll just go on believing she's a drunken old fool who needs to get her head examined and hearing aid tested.

DEAR MS. ANN; SIT YOUR DUMB ASS DOWN

I am so indredibly angry I hope I don't burn my machine up. Digby, at Hullabaloo, has written one of the most irresponsible pieces I have ever seen. Apparently, Bill Cosby was on Meet the Press this weekend and caused a stir in the white world, setting digby off. She posted a transcript of his comments and none of the questions he was asked, claiming that Cosby rambled on and spoke mostly gibberish, and did not give Dr. Alvin Toussaint any chance to speak whatsoever. Before I even began posting I checked out the video and my anger mounted. The video quite clearly shows that Cosby is speaking clearly, intelligently, and knows exactly what he is saying. He isn't saying anything that he hasn't been saying for the last five or six years, and he isn't saying anything that isn't the truth. Not only did she not do her homework, she misrepresented everything that Cosby was saying, and did a lazyassed hit job.

I am so sick and tired of white people telling black people what to say about their own situations and anything else for that matter. I refuse to link to her site because she ain't worth all that, but I did do a response to her.


Dear Ms. Ann;
I am not going to wear you the brand new ass you deserve because you're so sorry and pitiful. I understood what Bill Cosby was saying perfectly and I wholeheartedly agree with him. What happened to the questions he was asked? Might that have helped your readers to understand what he was saying instead of assigning it as so much gibberish spoken by an "elderly black man?" Perhaps if you jut stuck to trying to interpret the meanings of your own ugly racist culture then all would be well for you. Just stick what you know, white people, and you will be all right. I've grown weary of white people telling black people how to think, what to say, when to say it, when it is proper for blacks to speak, always to wait on whites to give us the signal. Please Ms. Ann, may I speak a word Ms. Ann, ain't meanin' no harm ya understands, but I'se got apiece to speak, iffn' you don't mind. Yessem, I'mma sit down now, sorry to bother you, Ms. Ann. I have no idea what your politics, and could care less really. I don't trust whites as far I can throw em, repugs or dummycrats, because as you can see, racism still exist, on either side. Republicans hate the hell out of us and we know it; democrats, similar to you, think we should just sit at the back of the room and hesh our mouths, and just listen to what the white man has to say, and then vote for them. I'm beginning to believe that we don't owe our allegiance to anyone, right or left, and that you need to work harder to earn our attention. I never read you because you, like many other white bloggers, aren't worth the print or my attention, but since my attention was called to your post, here I am. You might remember me from back in 2003 when I said you were white. At the time I had no idea that anyone wanted to do you harm. Perhaps instead of that white man's pic you would have been better off putting up the pic of a lawn jockey, then no one would have guessed you were a Ms. Ann white woman. I would suggest you look up the term Ms. Ann. Now, you take care, and please, stay on the white side of the tracks and stop venturing into the black world. I wouldn't want you to tarred. I'm also going to post this on my own blog, and try to look up that interview with Bill Cosby.

I have since viewed the video of what Bill had to say, and I got even angrier. digby's post was even shallower and more racist than I thought, and was highly irresponsible. That video of the interview he did with Tim Russert is just as lucid an intelligent as Bill Cosby has ever been, and he isn't saying anything he hasn't already said before. For her to have posted his comments in such a manner, with no questions, and just saying that his statements were the ravings of a senile old man are just beyond irresponsible to just plain racist. The video is available on Youtube, and it shows that Cosby is speaking just as lucidly and eloquently as he has all the years of his long and wonderful career. I would suggest to digby that if she isn't going to do anything but a lazyassed, halfassed job, then as far as black people are concerned- don't do us any damned favors, please.

The video of the conversation with Russert can be seen at msnbc in the video section, and comes right up at this time. Just totally unbelievable.