Harry Allen pinpricks Kirstie Alley

Over at Media Assassin, he takes the air out of the actress, but she doesn’t seem to notice.  Her balloon still floats.  (By the way — I took the “pinprick” idea right out of Allen’s post.) 

In the latest proof of Twitter the medium causing near instantaneous amazement, Alley tweeted: “I WANT every African American in the country to follow me..i was born the wrong color..should have been black Italian..lol”

Allen asked why.

Alley responded: “…becuz it is my experience and obsevation that african americans are more free and fun and light hearted, as are Italians..”

Woah.  The normal course of action when a similar set of comments comes to light in the mainstream media is for lots of type to be wasted in which essentially black people are shown to be angry and white people to be clueless, with almost no elucidation of why exactly the offensive words were offensive.  

Not the case here.   In three tweets — no more than 420 characters combined, and I haven’t even counted — Allen deftly addressed Alley’s offense in the most generous manner possible to Alley.  Condensing the three into a single quote: 

“Can’t speak for Italians.  That Black people are ‘more free and fun and light hearted’ is a crusty, 300-year-old stereotype.  Like hosts smiling through their teeth at guests who’ve overstayed their welcome, a lot of what you may perceive as free and fun is just a way of navigating the extreme discomfort we suffer under white people.  But I can’t speak for Italians.”

All this happened in a 21-minute span in view of the nearly 66,000 people following Alley and Allen on Twitter.  (I’m not one; I’m not on Twitter.  Haven’t joined Facebook, either.  But man, have I hear plenty about what happens on each!)  

OH!  I almost forgot.  Alley didn’t even deign to respond to Allen’s lucidity.  That’s why I said her balloon still floats.

Check the full post — it’s worth the read.  Whenever I think about Allen — knowing him mostly from his blog and his radio show, NONFICTION, on 99.5 FM/WBAI in New York, the phrase that comes to mind is, “With care and with purpose.”  If it’s coming from him, he’s communicating with precision and conveying exactly what he considers important.

RIP, Peter Pan of pop

Wasn’t ready for this.

“Thriller” was the first must-have album of my life. 

The man was a loon. 

The man was an incredible performer.

He never really grew up and I always had a hard time imagining him growing old.

He didn’t.

P.S.  For another less-than-common Michael Jackson video, check this out.  (Welcome back, UBM.)  Note a young Tom Joyner doing the interview, and check the devastatingly simple question he asks at the 2:10 mark:  “So who are your real friends?”  It’s devastating for the way it makes Mike squirm.

From my moving bicycle

 

My second mock NBA draft

Again, just the top 10 picks.  A recap of my predictions from last year:

1.  Derrick Rose to the Bulls.  Yup, and he had a rookie season befitting an eventual legend.

2.  Michael Beasley to the Heat.  Yup, though he didn”t go to the Bulls, and he showed promise but was inconsistent.  He put up decent numbers but played smaller than I anticipated.   Which might be fine… but the league has plenty of great 3s, not so many solid 4s.

3.  Brook Lopez to the Wolves.  Nope, fell to the Nets at 10th.  But he had a great first campaign, finishing third in Rookie of the Year voting.

4.  O.J. Mayo to the Sonics, uh, Thunder. He went third and was traded to the Grizzlies.  Was second in Rookie of the Year voting, put up 18, 4 and 3 in heavy minutes.  Solid.

5. I had the Grizzlies trading the pick to the Clippers, who’d take Jerryd Bayless.  Instead Memphis took Kevin Love and traded him and parts for Mayo and parts.  Bayless went 11th, to the Pacers, and was traded to the Blazers.  He’s probably a year or two from contributing much.  Love did well with the Wolves but probably won’t get much better.  Not a bad pick, though — better than I thought he’d be.

6.  Russell Westbrook to the Knicks.  He went fourth, to the Thunder, and is part of a promising core with Kevin Durant and Jeff Green.  Very solid pick.  The Knicks took Danilo Gallinari, who was hurt most of the year but didn’t show all that much when he was healthy.

7.  Joe Alexander to the Clippers.  He went eighth, to the Bucks, and was a bust.  He wasn’t too hot when he started at West Virginia, though, and he’s apparently working hard to make a big leap in his second year.  The Clippers took Eric Gordon, who’s an explosive guard like Jerryd Bayless, except Gordon had a very nice rookie year.  His main weakness is that he plays for the Clippers.

8.  Eric Gordon to the Bucks.  See above.  I’m sure Milwaukee would rather have taken Gordon.

9.  Donté Greene to the Bobcats.  Instead, it was D.J. Augustine, who I thought wouldn’t go so high.  Greene went at #28 and ended up with the  Kings, for whom he had little impact.  But  he did prevent a potential drowning on Memorial Day.  Augustine, meanwhile, was decent  in his rookie year, averaging 12 points per game in 26 minutes.  Props to Michael Jordan, who seems to have an affinity for small point guards (Felton, Raymond; Singletary, Sean).

10.  Danilo Gallinari to the Nets.  See above.  This was the Brook Lopez pick, probably the best value of the Top 10 other than Rose.

For 2009:

1. Los Angeles Clippers — Blake Griffin, Oklahoma, forward.  It’s already been said, so this isn’t much of a prediction.  I have no idea how Griffin will do as a pro.  The only skill I’m sure will show is rebounding, which isn’t a bad one.  And he’ll have more than his share of dunks.  The questions are whether his low-post game will be beyond rudimentary, whether he’ll have any kind of jump shot, and whether he’ll play defense. 

2.  Memphis Grizzlies — Hasheem Thabeet, Connecticut, center.  Really, the Clippers should be after Thabeet.  I have the same uncertainty about his development as with Griffin, but Thabeet is a legit 7′3″, 270.  I don’t think you turn down that kind of size with Thabeet’s upside.  He might not impress in year one but he’ll be a cornerstone for a decade.  Mark my words.

3.  Oklahoma City Thunder — Jonny Flynn, Syracuse, guard.  This may seem high for Flynn, but I think he’s a good fit for the Thunder, a young team that can play fast AND that doesn’t need him to be steady right away.  He’s probably a year or two from having an ideal outside shot and game-management ability.  But I’m more sold on his development than, say, Tyreke Evans’.

4.  Sacramento Kings — Brandon Jennings, Italy, guard.  I’m not sold on Ricky Rubio, the Spaniard who’s been getting all kinds of hype.  Meantime Jennings, IMHO, would be challenging for the #1 pick if he waited another year before returning from Europe.

5.  Washington Wizards — Jordan Hill, Arizona, forward.  They should take DeJuan Blair, out of Pitt.  But they’ll take Hill.  They need a young big man who can rebound.  So why do I think Blair will eat up more space and be more productive than Hill?  ‘Cause he’s a beast.  Hill is an athlete with potential.  Reminds me of Michael Olowokandi.  I wouldn’t mind if the Wizards considered James Johnson, from Wake Forest.

6.  Minnesota Timberwolves — Stephen Curry, Davidson, guard.  I think Curry’s a bit overrated as a high draft pick, though he’ll last a long time ’cause he’s got a great shot.  But the Wolves are actually a great fit for him.

7.  Golden State Warriors — Ricky Rubio, Spain, guard.  Dude plays with flair and has some legit skills.  And he’s still young.  But he’s got a weak body and he’s slow.  He will put fannies in seats, though, at least for a year or so. 

8.  New York Knicks — James Harden, Arizona State, guard.  I’ve never seen him play.  But he’s touted as crafty and productive, which is good for any team.

9.  Toronto Raptors — DeMar DeRozan, Southern Cal, guard.  Potential, athleticism.  Won’t help much in the first year.

10.  Milwaukee Bucks — Jeff Teague, Wake Forest, guard.  He brings some swagger but he’s a bit erratic too.  The Bucks have an ugly roster and could use a point who can push.

Equivalent to stupid

Pete Hoekstra got himself served when he compared Twitter use by Iranian street protestors now to that by U.S. House Republicans last fall.  My favorite line:

“My neighbor stopped me to talk today. Now I know what it is like to be questioned by the Basij!”

Iran so far away

Kudos to my clearinghouse, here, for coverage of protests that follow the elections stolen last week.

Face of a terrorist

Why wasn’t James Von Brunn in Guantanamo?

Enough already about Michael Vick

This guy was simply electrifying on a football field.  He may be again.

He hadn’t developed as a quarterback as well as I’d anticipated.  But he was a winner — the Atlanta Falcons were 38-28-1 with him as a starter, 9-20 without.

So whether he makes it back after two years in prison… we’ll see.   Theoretically he’s still young enough and he hasn’t added NFL mileage to his legs or arm in the past two years.  But his muscles and muscle memory may have atrophied just enough in the joint for him to lose the edge he used to have. 

As for the rest of it?  I’ll leave it for Amadeo to spell out.

Sonia Sotomayor

 

Seemed to me she was always the front-runner to become the next United States Supreme Court Justice once David Souter stepped aside.  I’m not surprised, then, but I’m thrilled at the actual moment of her nomination.   I feel like I’m looking at my aunt, the one who kept advancing professionally and was always cool but who never seemed to have much else going on.  Kind of like David Souter was.

Some other thoughts: 

1) She’s not “far left” as some would claim, including Mike “Maria Sotomayor” Huckabee. 

2) I wonder how much the meme of underqualified minority would have developed if her last name was Noonan.  That’s the name of dude she married and divorced in her 20s.  (Mind you, “underqualified woman” would still likely have developed.)

3) Barack Obama, David Axelrod and Co. played this well.  It looks like the politics of the confirmation work for Obama and Sotomayor and the only drama will come from irrelevant sources.  Obama doesn’t even cut you with your own knife — he has you do the cutting.

This is not satire

I will simply quote from Sam Schulman’s piece in the upcoming Weekly Standard, in which he argues that gay marriage is the beginning of the end of “kinship”:

The archetypal gay wedding portrait–a pair of middle-aged women or paunchy men looking uncomfortable in rented outfits worn at the wrong time of day–is destined to be hung in the same gallery of dated images of social progress alongside snapshots of flappers defiantly puffing cigarettes and Kodachromes of African Americans wearing dashikis.  

What, you don’t know a flapper?  Does this guy have a problem with dashikis, or Kodachromes?

Can gay men and women be as generous as we straight men are?

No comment.

The commonality of incest prohibitions and marriage rules from one community to another is a sign that we have moved from unselfconscious instinct-obedience (which works well enough to avoid parent-child incest in other species) to the elaboration of human kinship relationships in all their mutations and varieties–all of which have the same core (the organization of female sexuality, the avoidance of incest) but exist in glorious variety. Like the other great human determinant, language, kinship is infinitely variable in form but exists in some form everywhere.

Huh?

Even in modern romantic marriages, a groom becomes the hunting or business partner of his father-in-law and a member of his clubs; a bride becomes an ally of her mother-in-law in controlling her husband. There can, of course, be warm relations between families and their children’s same-sex partners, but these come about because of liking, sympathy, and the inherent kindness of many people. A wedding between same-sex lovers does not create the fact (or even the feeling) of kinship between a man and his husband’s family; a woman and her wife’s kin.

I just want to know what materials made the bubble this guy lives in.

Marriage is also an initiation rite. Before World War II, high school graduation was accompanied by a burst of engagements; nowadays college graduation begins a season of weddings that go on every weekend for some years. In contrast, gay weddings are rather middle-aged affairs. My impression is borne out by the one available statistic, from the province of British Columbia, showing that the participants in first-time same-sex weddings are 13 years older, on average, then first-time brides-and-grooms. This feels about right.

Keen observer, this fellow.  Of course a small sample size coupled with changing conditions will produce reliable data.  He’s right on top of marriage as “initiation rite,” too; I don’t see any middle-aged straight people getting married for the first time.  That feels about right.