Some of the things I failed to cover this week:
Another Bush Aide releases book. - So this week, Scott McClellan set the whole cable news and Washington on fire by a "scathing memoir." I want to know why do these folks wait till after they leave their position before taking a courageous stand. McClellan joins a growing list of Richard Clarke, George Tenet, Gen. Wesley, etc.
Will Smith says Divorce is not an option. Another buzz-worthy news from Big Willy giving marriage advice. Well, I understand where he's coming from but as one single friend told me a few months ago, when a guy starts saying he doesn't believe in divorce, it's time for you or him to hit the road.
NBA to Fine Floppers: Boy, God surely answers prayers. So note to you Manu Ginobili of the Spurs
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Friday, May 30, 2008
Father Pflegler Joins The List
I'll be honest, at first I found the embeded video funny but then the logical side of my brain kicked in and it was: NOT AGAIN? Not another Pastor joining this election season's fray. Seriously!!!
What is it about this year's election with religion? We've had Rev. Wright - who is not a suprising preacher to most black folks but became a revelation (for lack of a better word) to the rest of America. Then you have the John Hagee and Rod Parsley? Oh boy! I'm still waiting on not seeing the videos over and over again on my TV like the Rev Wright's greatest hits.
Now, Father Michael Pfleger joins a growing list of Pastor problems. He is a friend of Sen. Barack Obama's Trinity Church in Chicago. Oh did you notice he's white? The Father must have spent a lot of time with some black preachers with all the contrived dictions associated with the black preacher. I'm just saying.
So now the hoopla is about what Father Pfleger said about Sen. Clinton's "crying." I'm not saying his perception is unfounded but come on! We are in a YouTube, Internet driving political charged atmosphere. Obama doesn't need the headache of trying to explain what happened in his church. Too late! He had to speak out against this latest Pastor Problem. Obama's statement was that he was "deeply disappointed" in Father Pfleger. Also, Father Pfleger released a statement of apology.
The apology reads: ''I regret the words I chose on Sunday. These words are inconsistent with Senator Obama's life and message, and I am deeply sorry if they offended Senator Clinton or anyone else who saw them," he said. Really Father! The tape doesn't lie. You were laughing on the tape before you said the words knowing it will get people talking.
Again, I would like for all this preacher fiasco to stop so we can get to the real issues. But my hope might be wearing thin, knowing that's not really sexy for the political pundits. Isn't that a shame?
Tag: Michael Pfleger
Labels:
Pastor Problems
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Murdoch Loves Obama
Talk about "Fair and Balanced," owner of Fox News and new owner of Wall Street Journal (as a former business student who was mandated to read WSJ, I hated that move), Rupert Murdoch love Obama over McCain. Who would have thunk it?
On Obama,Murdoch says: "He is a rock star. It's fantastic" "I love what he is saying about education." "I don't think he will win Florida.....but he will win in Ohio and the election". "I am anxious to meet him." "I want to see if he will walk the walk."
How about McCain? Murdoch says: "McCain is a friend of mine. He's a patriot. But he's unpredicatble. Doesn't seem to know much about the economy. He has been in Congress a long time, and you have to make a lot of compromises. So what's he really stand for?... I think he has a lot of problems."
I may just start changing my tune about Murdoch; this guy is cool (hope I'm not speaking too soon).
Tags: Rupert Murdoch
Labels:
Barack Obama,
Election 2008,
John McCain
Sex And The City Movie

Hello Lover! You’ve been four years coming. I’ll put a brake on the puns of Sex And The City. Most SATC fans know the “hello lover” was Carrie’s greeting to some to-die-for-shoes and I, like many women was hooked. Yes SATC was a revelation to men and a revolution to their opposite sex.
Four women navigating their thirties and forties on having great careers and great or grim personal (yet public) lives. Carrie, Charlotte, Miranda, and Samantha became household names; at least to the female households and males who dared to ask or were secret fans. They showed men how women really talk among themselves; let me let you in on a little secret guys, it’s even worse in real life.
Through Carrie’s keystrokes, the world learned the secret lives of her dear friends and her missteps in love with Mr. Big and others. Charlotte was the forever romantic (couldn’t stand her), Miranda was the realist (could hang with her), and Samantha was the unapologetic (LOVE her).
Here’s a side note: I don’t approve Samantha’s lifestyle but I love the notion of not caring what people thought of her and giving her friends straight up advice of how not to short-change themselves. Samantha literally stole the show. Ladies watched SATC for what Carrie was going to wear but Monday morning, they talked about what Samantha said.
So for four years, women have been subjected to SATC reruns and this weekend and others to come, they will be like birds free from their cages barging into movie theatres to catch up on the lives of their fictitious girl friends.
My advice to guys: don’t try to make sense of it. Schedule your own me time or some time with your boys. You’ve been trying to do so for a while anyway. Let your girl have her four to five hours girls night out. Don’t assume anything when she’s dressed to the nines just to see a movie. This is not just a movie; it is an EVENT.
Tags: Sex And the City
Labels:
Entertainment
Rachel Ray's Scarf Fiasco

Can this lady kill us or is her scarf giving us a secret message about a future terrorist threat? Some folks have really lost their ever-loving minds to see a terrorist threat on a scarf. SERIOUSLY!!! That’s what we get for living in a post 9-11 world. Any little thing could be used to invoke fear. Also, it shows how ignorant some Americans (specifically conservative blogger Michelle Malkin) really are.
In case you haven’t heard, the lovable (albeit annoying) host of one of Oprah’s empire, Rachel Ray and a few other shows on the Food Network got in trouble for wearing a scarf in a Dunkin Donuts ad. According to Malkin, Ray was trying to be “jihadi chic.” Malkin must be smoking some joint; now terrorist wear are considered high fashion. Also, she wrote “I hope her hate couture choice was spurred more by ignorance than by ideolology.” Hmm, Malkin, I could say the same of you with your writing.
The sad thing is Malkin generated enough buzz that Dunkin Donuts had to take down the ad. See folks, you REALLY can make a difference. However, it is a shame when you have zeal without knowledge. Such is the case with this scarf-gate.
How is Ray going to foster a terrorist attack? Pour some EVOO (for those of you who don’t know that term, that’s Rachel’s speak for Extra Virgin Olive Oil) on some fire? To all those folks up in arms about Rachel Ray’s scarf . . . GET A LIFE! And to Dunkin Donuts shivering under pressure even when they knew this criticism was unjustified, I say, GROW SOME (you know what).
Tags: Rachel Ray Michelle Malkin Dunkin Donuts
Labels:
In The News
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Did The Refs Help the Lakers?
Anyone who knows me know I REALLY don't want to see the Spurs in the Finals. They are BORING!!! In fact, the most watchable person on that team isn't even playing; that will be Eva Longoria Parker. Be honest guys! I've been pulling against the Spurs since the first round when they played the Suns. But after watching one of the best games I've ever seen in Game 1 of that series with two (almost three) overtimes, I knew the Suns were toast. That was just a heart-wrenching loss most teams don't get over.
So on the next round and I was pulling against the Spurs again but they prevailed and you know who I'm pulling against now in the third round; you're right, the Spurs. According to ratings, I'm not alone. The ratings of last finals were absymal and so was 2005 finals; both featuring the Spurs.
But watching last night's game especially in the waning minutes, I couldn't help but form some conspiracy theory if the Zebras (I mean the Refs) weren't helping the Lakers in some form. There was a moment Kobe got entangled that I thought the Zebras should have called foul against him, but no call.
Then the most controversial non-call that's got every basketball talking today; the Derek Fisher of the Lakers and Brent Barry of the Spurs in the final seconds with Lakers leading by two. Barry is one of the deadliest three-point shooter I know, and it seems Fisher got a piece of him but the Zebras let it go and he missed the shot and the Lakers are just one game away from the Finals.
The "No Spurs in the Finals" part of me is happy but the logical and fairness part of me is wondering should the Zebras have made that call; I don't know . . . what say you?
So on the next round and I was pulling against the Spurs again but they prevailed and you know who I'm pulling against now in the third round; you're right, the Spurs. According to ratings, I'm not alone. The ratings of last finals were absymal and so was 2005 finals; both featuring the Spurs.
But watching last night's game especially in the waning minutes, I couldn't help but form some conspiracy theory if the Zebras (I mean the Refs) weren't helping the Lakers in some form. There was a moment Kobe got entangled that I thought the Zebras should have called foul against him, but no call.
Then the most controversial non-call that's got every basketball talking today; the Derek Fisher of the Lakers and Brent Barry of the Spurs in the final seconds with Lakers leading by two. Barry is one of the deadliest three-point shooter I know, and it seems Fisher got a piece of him but the Zebras let it go and he missed the shot and the Lakers are just one game away from the Finals.
The "No Spurs in the Finals" part of me is happy but the logical and fairness part of me is wondering should the Zebras have made that call; I don't know . . . what say you?
Roland Martin Gets Some Loving

I have a confession to make: Roland Martin was not my favorite TV pundit; that accolade goes to Donna Brazille. I always felt Martin was just too hyper for me. And don't get me started on Jamal Simmons, who I feel is vying for a position in the cabinet if Barack Obama gets elected.
But about Martin, I've said in other conversations with friends, I needed a couple cups of coffee to listen to him. But over the past few weeks, he grew on me and now I actually look forward to hear his take on some ridiculous assessments his fellow conservative or white liberal colleagues might make.
Such was the case last night (I'm still searching YouTube for the Video) when the issue of the flag pin with the perception of patriotism (I can't believe we have such conversations). And the white guy I don't know was just going off on why Obama finally wore the flag pin on his lapel and you could almost feel Martin about to jump out of his skin about this B.S. from this guy.
When it got to Martin's turn via satellite, he called the white guy out on the stupidity of his comments. He reminded him that some folks were called unpatriotic a few years ago just because they questioned the iraq war. Martin was almost pleading for the American people to use their brains in this election. Wow, a pundit who actually believes Americans have brains; now that's a person I can give a second look.
Tags: Roland Martin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
