Back to the top

Last Chocolate City

Bill Clinton, Barry Sanders and the Future of the NAACP

Originally posted by Nadir at LastChocolateCity.com

Billed as the biggest sit down dinner in the world, the 52nd Annual NAACP Fight for Freedom Fund Dinner attracted 10,000 to Detroit’€™s Cobo Hall on April 29. Dinner itself was unremarkable. (Reports confirm that each entree – cajun beef, some unidentified fish or a mushroom pasta – was equally mediocre.)

What was most important about this dinner though was the guest list. The governor, both of Michigan’€™s US senators, several congress members, the mayor and other public officials, business and union leaders, entrepreneurs and preachers all joined grassroots activists to honor and support the nation’€™s oldest and largest civil rights organization.

During the three and a half hour event, Lifetime Achievement awards were given to Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, attorney and politician Joel Ferguson and former NAACP head Ernest Lofton. But the main attraction was the keynote address from the man described by several of the night’€™s speakers as “€œour president”€, William Jefferson Clinton. Continue reading

Bush, Gonzales Attorney Firings Suppressed the Black Vote

Originally posted by Nadir at LastChocolateCity.com

Embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales refuses to step down over the politically motivated firing of eight US attorneys. His boss, President George W. Bush, continues to support Gonzo despite bipartisan calls for his ouster. However, new information about the attorney firings may take on greater relevance in a post-Don Imus world.

Reports have surfaced that at least two attorneys in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division were fired because they failed to file charges that would have helped disenfranchise Black voters. Continue reading

Bush, Gonzales Attorney Firings Suppressed the Black Vote

Originally posted by Nadir at LastChocolateCity.com

Embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales refuses to step down over the politically motivated firing of eight US attorneys. His boss, President George W. Bush, continues to support Gonzo despite bipartisan calls for his ouster. However, new information about the attorney firings may take on greater relevance in a post-Don Imus world.

Reports have surfaced that at least two attorneys in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division were fired because they failed to file charges that would have helped disenfranchise Black voters. Continue reading

Pistons Give Magic Bitter Pill

Originally Posted by Nadir at LastChocolateCity.com

Former Detroit Pistons Grant Hill and Darko Milicic sound a little bitter.

Both Orlando Magic players recalled bad memories of Detroit upon their return for the first round of the Eastern Conference playoffs. Going back to Florida down two games to none certainly won’€™t help their dispositions.

Hill was a superstar in his six seasons with the Pistons, but seems to place some blame on the team, its medical staff and Piston fans for aggravating the ankle injury that has hobbled his career since the 2000 playoffs. As the Detroit News reports the forward was tired of being called “€œsoft” so he played on a bad ankle.

Hill had grown weary of people in Detroit perceiving him as a silver-spoon softie. He had grown weary of not getting his team out of the first round of the playoffs. He was determined to play. Continue reading

Pistons Give Magic Bitter Pill

Originally Posted by Nadir at LastChocolateCity.com

Former Detroit Pistons Grant Hill and Darko Milicic sound a little bitter.

Both Orlando Magic players recalled bad memories of Detroit upon their return for the first round of the Eastern Conference playoffs. Going back to Florida down two games to none certainly won’€™t help their dispositions.

Hill was a superstar in his six seasons with the Pistons, but seems to place some blame on the team, its medical staff and Piston fans for aggravating the ankle injury that has hobbled his career since the 2000 playoffs. As the Detroit News reports the forward was tired of being called “€œsoft” so he played on a bad ankle.

Hill had grown weary of people in Detroit perceiving him as a silver-spoon softie. He had grown weary of not getting his team out of the first round of the playoffs. He was determined to play. Continue reading

And Now a Message from My Sell Phone?

Originally posted by Nadir at LastChocolateCity.com

I don’t use my mobile phone to access the Internet, so that may be why I haven’t become inundated with mobile ads yet.

But according to Business Week, if you are surfing on your cellular, you may begin seeing more commercials on your phone. Advertisers are gearing up to use targeted mobile ads in a big way.

Let’€™s face it. Your phone knows a lot about you – your name, your location, who your friends are. And if you use the web on your phone, it knows even more.

Advertising is about to get very personal. Marketers are taking tools that they already use to track your Internet surfing and are preparing to combine that information with cell-phone customer data that include not just the area where you live but also the street you’re standing on. The aim is to target the exact person who is most likely to buy a product at the precise moment they’€™re most likely to buy it. It’s the ad industry’€™s dream come true: a perfect personalized pitch. For privacy advocates, though, this combination of behavioral and geographic targeting is an Orwellian nightmare.

So don’€™t be surprised if your cell phone pops up with an ad for a carmel machiato right when you walk past a Starbucks.

Business Week

The Ramifications of Racial Remarks

Originally posted by Nadir at LastChocolateCity.com

The Imus/Rutgers insult and the furor that followed illustrate both the power of words, and the volatility of race as an issue in America and the world.

The remarks that he made have struck nerves on so many levels. The term “nappy headed” invokes Black hair politics; the reference to women as “hoes” is degradation; darker skinned Blacks are pitted against fairer skinned Blacks with the “jiggaboos vs. wannabes” comment; and all of it raises questions like Who has the right to call people names? Why is it okay that Blacks can use certain language while others can’t? How responsibile are Black people for the words that are used against us when we perpetuate the issue by continuing the use of those words?

On April 10 after the Rutgers Women’s Basketball team’s press conference, I submited a post titled, “Not a Nappy Head in the Bunch” on Last Chocolate City. The post pointed out that those beautiful women had responded to Don Imus’s comments with poise and grace. The title implied, though the article did not clarify, that none of the women had what most Black folks would consider, “nappy” hair. Unfortunately, some people were offended by my reference to the women’s hair.

I didn’t mean to offend anyone with that statement. I apologize personally, and on behalf of LastChocolateCity.com and The Michigan Citizen, Inc., I apologize as well.

Imus and his team had attacked the women for their physical appearance, and the women of Rutgers obviously did not fit the description of “nappy headed hoes” by any stretch of the imagination. My intention with my post was to emphasize the fact that Imus’s comments were not only hateful, but inaccurate. However, by stating that there wasn’t a nappy head in the bunch, I stirred up some deep seated animosities within the Black community.

For the record, I am a brother with waist length locs. My hair is nothing if not nappy. The comment I made was intended to be a humorous remark directed with love for my sisters on that team and for my people. But by making comments that were offensive to someone else, my intentions (and my hair) were not scrutinized. What mattered was the perception and that another human being was hurt by my words.

The politics of hair is still a sticky subject especially among Black women. I have heard sisters criticized for having natural hair and for having perms, for having weaves and for being bald headed.

Blacks have been struggling with the language we use to describe ourselves and our people for many years now. Our choice to continue using the derogoatory terms that are used to insult us is coming back to bite us.

African culture has always been adapted by the dominant culture in the US. Why would we not believe that as Black culture becomes mainstream, that others would not mimic our speech? They always do. This has been the case from “goobers” and “yams” to “cool” and “chillin’”. So when Imus uses our own language to demean our women, we shouldn’t be surprised.

But the question is also, are we not offended when Blacks refer to each other using words that start with the letter “N”, the letter “H” or the letter “B”? Maybe all this talk of banishing “the N-word” is working. I cringe every time I hear someone use it. I get a knot in my stomach when I reflexively use it myself.

Natural African hair is still viewed by some as a curse or as a negative aspect of our appearance. Yet white kids work very hard to lock their hair. Japanese kids pay hundreds of dollars to have their hair “dreaded”. The frequent sightings of afros, cornrows and locs in public let us know that nappiness no longer has the negative conotations that it once did.

But when a white man calls a group of sisters “nappy headed hoes”, and then a Black man says, “No, they aren’t nappy,” emotions flair.

Is it time to remove all racially identifiable language from our speech altogether?

The Ramifications of Racial Remarks

Originally posted by Nadir at LastChocolateCity.com

The Imus/Rutgers insult and the furor that followed illustrate both the power of words, and the volatility of race as an issue in America and the world.

The remarks that he made have struck nerves on so many levels. The term “nappy headed” invokes Black hair politics; the reference to women as “hoes” is degradation; darker skinned Blacks are pitted against fairer skinned Blacks with the “jiggaboos vs. wannabes” comment; and all of it raises questions like Who has the right to call people names? Why is it okay that Blacks can use certain language while others can’t? How responsibile are Black people for the words that are used against us when we perpetuate the issue by continuing the use of those words?

On April 10 after the Rutgers Women’s Basketball team’s press conference, I submited a post titled, “Not a Nappy Head in the Bunch” on Last Chocolate City. The post pointed out that those beautiful women had responded to Don Imus’s comments with poise and grace. The title implied, though the article did not clarify, that none of the women had what most Black folks would consider, “nappy” hair. Unfortunately, some people were offended by my reference to the women’s hair.

I didn’t mean to offend anyone with that statement. I apologize personally, and on behalf of LastChocolateCity.com and The Michigan Citizen, Inc., I apologize as well.

Imus and his team had attacked the women for their physical appearance, and the women of Rutgers obviously did not fit the description of “nappy headed hoes” by any stretch of the imagination. My intention with my post was to emphasize the fact that Imus’s comments were not only hateful, but inaccurate. However, by stating that there wasn’t a nappy head in the bunch, I stirred up some deep seated animosities within the Black community.

For the record, I am a brother with waist length locs. My hair is nothing if not nappy. The comment I made was intended to be a humorous remark directed with love for my sisters on that team and for my people. But by making comments that were offensive to someone else, my intentions (and my hair) were not scrutinized. What mattered was the perception and that another human being was hurt by my words.

The politics of hair is still a sticky subject especially among Black women. I have heard sisters criticized for having natural hair and for having perms, for having weaves and for being bald headed.

Blacks have been struggling with the language we use to describe ourselves and our people for many years now. Our choice to continue using the derogoatory terms that are used to insult us is coming back to bite us.

African culture has always been adapted by the dominant culture in the US. Why would we not believe that as Black culture becomes mainstream, that others would not mimic our speech? They always do. This has been the case from “goobers” and “yams” to “cool” and “chillin’”. So when Imus uses our own language to demean our women, we shouldn’t be surprised.

But the question is also, are we not offended when Blacks refer to each other using words that start with the letter “N”, the letter “H” or the letter “B”? Maybe all this talk of banishing “the N-word” is working. I cringe every time I hear someone use it. I get a knot in my stomach when I reflexively use it myself.

Natural African hair is still viewed by some as a curse or as a negative aspect of our appearance. Yet white kids work very hard to lock their hair. Japanese kids pay hundreds of dollars to have their hair “dreaded”. The frequent sightings of afros, cornrows and locs in public let us know that nappiness no longer has the negative conotations that it once did.

But when a white man calls a group of sisters “nappy headed hoes”, and then a Black man says, “No, they aren’t nappy,” emotions flair.

Is it time to remove all racially identifiable language from our speech altogether?

Not a Nappy Head in the Bunch

Originally posted by Nadir at LastChocolateCity.com

The Rutgers Women’s Basketball team responded with class and poise to racist comments from Don Imus’s Imus in the Morning show at a press conference on Tuesday.

The radio/television host and his producer, Bernard McGuirk, referred to the Big East champions as “nappy-headed hoes” and “jiggaboos” last week after their loss to Tennessee in the NCAA Women’s National Championship game. Imus will serve a two-week suspension beginning on Monday, April 16.

Rutgers team members refused to comment on the severity of the punishment or on whether they thought it was just. The university used the opportunity to highlight the accomplishments of the group this season and to focus on their intellectual prowess. Rutgers has tough academic standards, and according to Coach C. Vivian Stringer

“These young ladies before you are valedictorians, future doctors, musical prodigies… these young ladies are the best this nation has to offer and we are so very fortunate to have them at Rutgers. They are young ladies of class, distinction. They are articulate. They are gifted.”

The team has agreed to meet with Imus to discuss his comments at an undisclosed location.

According to a transcript of the segment (from MediaBistro), Imus and McGuirk compared the game between Rutgers and Tennessee to “the Jigaboos vs. the Wannabes” from Spike Lee’s School Daze (misidentified by the show’s co-host as Do The Right Thing).

DON IMUS: So, I watched the basketball game last night between — a little bit of Rutgers and Tennessee, the women’s final.

SID ROSENBERG: Yeah, Tennessee won last night — seventh championship for [Tennessee coach] Pat Summitt, I-Man. They beat Rutgers by 13 points.

IMUS: That’s some rough girls from Rutgers. Man, they got tattoos and –

BERNARD McGUIRK: Some hard-core hos.

IMUS: That’s some nappy-headed hos there. I’m gonna tell you that now, man, that’s some — woo. And the girls from Tennessee, they all look cute, you know, so, like — kinda like — I don’t know.

McGUIRK: A Spike Lee thing.

IMUS: Yeah.

McGUIRK: The Jigaboos vs. the Wannabes — that movie that he had.

IMUS: Yeah, it was a tough –

CHARLES McCORD: Do The Right Thing.

McGUIRK: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

IMUS: I don’t know if I’d have wanted to beat Rutgers or not, but they did, right?

ROSENBERG: It was a tough watch. The more I look at Rutgers, they look exactly like the Toronto Raptors.

This isn’t the first time Imus’s crew has been guilty of “racially insensitive remarks”. In 2001, sports guy Rosenburg said Venus and Serena Williams would have a better chance at appearing in National Geographic than in Playboy. And Imus called the New York Knicks a bunch of “chest-thumping pimps.”

Many, including Rev. Al Sharpton, who hosted Imus’s formal apology to the African American community on his talk show, believe Imus should be fired for his remarks. Sharpton told Matt Lauer on Tuesday’s Today Show that suspension was, “not nearly enough. I think it is too little, too late.”

There is a chance that Imus will emerge from his suspension unscathed. Perhaps these comments aren’t as incendiary as Michael Richards’ racist tirade or Mel Gibson’s Jew-hating rant, but the Imus show is simulcast on national radio and television. He must adhere to a higher standard than Richards in a comedy club or a drunken Gibson in a bar.

What message does this send if Imus gets a two-week slap on the wrist for yet another racist joke?

And why doesn’t the suspension begin immediately? Imus is supposed to host a telethon for Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and his networks don’t want the charity to lose money because of Imus’s absence. His very presence may have the same unfortunate effect.

The most frustrating aspect of this incident is that rednecks like Imus and his team can steal thunder from these powerful, intelligent and yes, beautiful women with racist remarks and bad jokes. This was their time to celebrate a magnificent season, not defend their womanhood, beauty and race from idiots like the Imus crew.

As additional pennance, Imus and his entire team should each donate a month’s salary to the Rutgers general scholarship fund and Imus’s radio station WFAN and MSNBC should match the number. That might start to undo the damage they have done.

Not a Nappy Head in the Bunch

Originally posted by Nadir at LastChocolateCity.com

The Rutgers Women’s Basketball team responded with class and poise to racist comments from Don Imus’s Imus in the Morning show at a press conference on Tuesday.

The radio/television host and his producer, Bernard McGuirk, referred to the Big East champions as “nappy-headed hoes” and “jiggaboos” last week after their loss to Tennessee in the NCAA Women’s National Championship game. Imus will serve a two-week suspension beginning on Monday, April 16.

Rutgers team members refused to comment on the severity of the punishment or on whether they thought it was just. The university used the opportunity to highlight the accomplishments of the group this season and to focus on their intellectual prowess. Rutgers has tough academic standards, and according to Coach C. Vivian Stringer

“These young ladies before you are valedictorians, future doctors, musical prodigies… these young ladies are the best this nation has to offer and we are so very fortunate to have them at Rutgers. They are young ladies of class, distinction. They are articulate. They are gifted.”

The team has agreed to meet with Imus to discuss his comments at an undisclosed location.

According to a transcript of the segment (from MediaBistro), Imus and McGuirk compared the game between Rutgers and Tennessee to “the Jigaboos vs. the Wannabes” from Spike Lee’s School Daze (misidentified by the show’s co-host as Do The Right Thing).

DON IMUS: So, I watched the basketball game last night between — a little bit of Rutgers and Tennessee, the women’s final.

SID ROSENBERG: Yeah, Tennessee won last night — seventh championship for [Tennessee coach] Pat Summitt, I-Man. They beat Rutgers by 13 points.

IMUS: That’s some rough girls from Rutgers. Man, they got tattoos and –

BERNARD McGUIRK: Some hard-core hos.

IMUS: That’s some nappy-headed hos there. I’m gonna tell you that now, man, that’s some — woo. And the girls from Tennessee, they all look cute, you know, so, like — kinda like — I don’t know.

McGUIRK: A Spike Lee thing.

IMUS: Yeah.

McGUIRK: The Jigaboos vs. the Wannabes — that movie that he had.

IMUS: Yeah, it was a tough –

CHARLES McCORD: Do The Right Thing.

McGUIRK: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

IMUS: I don’t know if I’d have wanted to beat Rutgers or not, but they did, right?

ROSENBERG: It was a tough watch. The more I look at Rutgers, they look exactly like the Toronto Raptors.

This isn’t the first time Imus’s crew has been guilty of “racially insensitive remarks”. In 2001, sports guy Rosenburg said Venus and Serena Williams would have a better chance at appearing in National Geographic than in Playboy. And Imus called the New York Knicks a bunch of “chest-thumping pimps.”

Many, including Rev. Al Sharpton, who hosted Imus’s formal apology to the African American community on his talk show, believe Imus should be fired for his remarks. Sharpton told Matt Lauer on Tuesday’s Today Show that suspension was, “not nearly enough. I think it is too little, too late.”

There is a chance that Imus will emerge from his suspension unscathed. Perhaps these comments aren’t as incendiary as Michael Richards’ racist tirade or Mel Gibson’s Jew-hating rant, but the Imus show is simulcast on national radio and television. He must adhere to a higher standard than Richards in a comedy club or a drunken Gibson in a bar.

What message does this send if Imus gets a two-week slap on the wrist for yet another racist joke?

And why doesn’t the suspension begin immediately? Imus is supposed to host a telethon for Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and his networks don’t want the charity to lose money because of Imus’s absence. His very presence may have the same unfortunate effect.

The most frustrating aspect of this incident is that rednecks like Imus and his team can steal thunder from these powerful, intelligent and yes, beautiful women with racist remarks and bad jokes. This was their time to celebrate a magnificent season, not defend their womanhood, beauty and race from idiots like the Imus crew.

As additional pennance, Imus and his entire team should each donate a month’s salary to the Rutgers general scholarship fund and Imus’s radio station WFAN and MSNBC should match the number. That might start to undo the damage they have done.

Load More
© Nadir Omowale