The Experience of Ron EdwardsA Renaissance Black Man in a White Man's WorldA Beacon for Freedom in the City
|
|
|
Home | 2005 Columns » | All Columns » | 2005 Blogs »
2/28/05/#21: Who’s Dreams? All or Just Some? Reggie Fowler
is Qualified to be the Owner of the Minnesota Vikings
Follow-up to Columns #4 and 32, in order to make the case for Fowler’s
application
Who’s Dream? All Americans or Just Some?
Who’s Property Rights? Owners or Nonowners?
Whose Welcome: The NFL’s Blacks May Apply
Or Minnesota’s “Black’s Need Not Apply”
Posted 2-28-05, the day after the Oscars
“Let’s Live the African American Dream”—Jamie Foxx, 2-27-05
Acceptance speech for Best Actor Oscar
“Fairness
and Justice”:
”The
American Dream”
For more, see Chapter 15 of The Minneapolis Story, Through
My Eyes, by Ron Edwards as told to Peter Jessen
Also see columns: 2005/#2: I Told You So. Now Let’s Save
the Vikings! and 2005/#4: (2) Black men need not apply for
membership in the NFL?
Also see 2005 web log entries
#17 (2/12/05): Strib & the Bosses Play the Race Card: Put Fowler
in his place.
#16 (2-212-05): It looks like the Vikings will remain in Minnesota
under Fowler. [2-12-05, 10:30 pm: I may have spoken too soon].
#12 (2-7-05): Reading the Vikings tea leaves as served up by Red, the
NFL, and Sid Hartman.
#9 (2-6-05) : We can solve the NFL’s lack of depth in their
managerial Black bench. Sell to Black Fowler.
At the Super Bowl 2005, Commissioner Paul Tagliabue admitted
that the NFL had not done enough in terms of hiring Black executives. He promised
to move forward. We know that the NFL wants to do the right thing: not deny
a qualified bidder, not deny the property rights of Red McCombs.
The Strib issued a “what
Reggie needs to know about the Vikings” piece. So we wish
to respond in kind and issue this “What the NFL and the NFL owners need
to know about Minnesota.”
We know Reggie Fowler Is qualified to own the Vikings. We also know of the obstacles
being tossed into his path by Minnesotans, especially those of the Twin City
variety, obstacles due to his color, hiding behind false statements and innuendoes
regarding his finances, qualifications, and stadium building abilities.
As discussed below, there is a new elephant in the Minnesota living room: Red
McComb’s acceptance of Reggie Fowler’s bid for the Vikings. Minnesota
wants to get ride of this new elephant. It prefers its rhinoceros in its Minnesota
living room: the rhinoceros of racism. We have dealt with this before on our
2002 web page, Citizens
for Fairness and Justice. And we have dealt with it in our book
The Minneapolis Story, Through My Eyes. Chapter 15 dealt with the preference
of Minnesota to kick the Vikings out of town, a thesis that is also in the book
by Strib reporter Jay Weiner, Stadium
Games: Fifty Years of Big League Greed and bush League Boondoggles.
We have also developed a “roll call” of those trying to get rid
of the team or threatening to.
Red and Reggie are on the right track. Numerous owners have stated the deal
is good. But Minnesotans are trying to sabotage it. We write in defense of the
bid, not because Reggie is Black but because he is qualified, and that despite
his being qualified, he is being sabotaged just because he is Black. Certain
Minnesotans are trying to discredit his qualifications because they don’t
want a Black owner EVEN THOUGH FOR THREE YEARS they have had a chance to make
an acceptable bid and have not. Now that a Black has made a bid they are rushing
to anoint Glen Taylor instead. This piece, then, is about what the NFL needs
to know about Minnesota.
Let’s review.
Spring 2002: Red McCombs of San Antonio, Texas, Spring 2002,
put his NFL football team, The Minnesota Vikings, up for sale. For nearly three
years no one was willing to meet his fair
market price.
February 2005: Reggie Fowler of Phoenix, Arizona bid the fair
market price Red wanted, proved to Red that he and his partners could complete
the sale, and had his bid accepted by Red.
Reggie Fowler becomes the first Black owner of an NFL team. And therein lies
the rub.
And even though USA Today printed a story declaring that
“League owners optimistic Vikings sale will go through, we
are seeing evidence that there are those behind the scenes who are hiding behind
contrived technicalities to make sure that the NFL and the Vikings ownership
remains Whites
only: Blacks need not apply. In other words, Glen
campaigned against Reggie, with Sid Hartman serving as Glen’s mouthpiece.
The major “carrot” held out to the NFL is a bribe: deny Reggie,
accept Glen, and Glen will get the league a new stadium. This is a contemptible
straw man: the new stadium will be built, but in Minnesota’s time frame.
No one but Reggie has declared a willingness to abide by that time frame (NLT
2011) except Reggie IF he is unable to get movement before that (now in order
to effect a new stadium opening to dove tail with the St. Cloud corrido: 2008).
Bottom line, with media based evidence listed below and from
40 years of community activist work and experience such that “we have
practically seen it all,” it is our contention that Reggie Fowler can
make the application because he is qualified to be the Vikings owner, as:
Four sets of “signals” give us pause:
The Glen Signal is first seen in two articles even before
the press conference announcing the deal is held, one by Reusse and the other
by Weiner, on the 13th, as Glen
foretells the future as he sees it:
Red will accept Reggie’s bid to put a floor under his price;
Reggie will fail; and Glen will pick up the Vikings ball, and, as he is the
only one who do so, will can get a stadium out of the legislature (but if they
don’t give him a tax subsidized stadium Glen said he would move the team,
so the only hope the NFL and the state have to keep the team, according to Glen,
is through a deal with the legislature that Glen’s past experience in
that body ensures). And in case anyone misses this point, in the Weiner article,
Glen
made it clear he is has accepted his anointed one
to buy the team, or, as would put it, as the Great
White Hope saving the locals, saving Red, and saving the NFL from the Black
buyer. And how does the “official” sports voice of Minnesota put it,
the day after the announcement of Reggie buying the team? He sets the stage
for the later resume flap by flat out sayng in his headline that
Franchise could be moved, which sets up his later pieces saying
that only Glen can be a stadium out of the legislatuare, which is his signal
to to the NFL to turn Reggie down so Glen can have the team and get them a stadium.
It is also a thinly veiled statement not to believe anything Reggie says.
The Strib signals came before and after the press conference in which Red said
he accepted Reggie’s bid. The Strib really piled it on, publishing numerous
innuendoes, making the flat out statement before hand that “Clancy
didn’t buy the Vikings, and neither will Fowler”.
The Strib has constantly declared in numerous articles that Reggie doesn’t
have the money, following Glen’s statement that Reggie didn’t have
the money, and says “There
isn’t any doubt that the league will do all it can to make sure Taylor owns
the team, if there is going to be a change in ownership.”
Indeed, Weiner admits, the day after Red announced he accepted Reggie’s
bid, that “during a round of media interviews last week,” Glen “aggressively
questioned Fowler’s ability to gain approval from the NFL because he wanted
to give McCombs time to respond before going public.” In other words,
he was trying to sabotage Reggie’s deal and at the same time sabotage
Red by trying to force him to take his offer which Red has already told him
numerous times that he would not accept. With friends like Glen, you certainly
don’t need enemies.
The NFL needs to stand up to that damning statement of the Strib. The Strib
is signaling to the NFL that it is “OK” to deny Reggie as Glen will
pick up the ball and all will be well. And for those who maybe didn’t
get it, they published a condescending editorial called “A
few things Fowler needs to know, in which the Strib hides behind
the anonymity of being an “editorial,” offering all that it hates
about the Vikings going back to 1970. And who are most of the villains of their
piece? Black men, singling out a Black player, Brent McClanahan, and a Black
Coach, Dennis Green, as if all that is wrong with the team is summed under the
color Black. The inference is clear: steer clear of trouble by steering clear
of this Black owner. How contemptible. The low regard in which the team is held
by the Strib is seen in the Nick
Coleman negative piece that manages to attempt to discredit not
only Reggie, but the Vikings, Red, and Dennis Green.
What shocks about the Strib that they have allowed their hatred and bigotry
to dump all over the Minnesota Vikings fan as if they are dumb and stupid. What
a love hate relationship the Strib has, calling the team “an irreplaceable
asset to the region” and yet calling it a team that people want to love
but really don’t, and then bolster’s Glen’s stadium claim
by saying Minnesotans are against public monies for a stadium but constantly
providing space for the notion that only Glen Taylor can get a tax payer subsidized
stadium out of the legislature. The Strib also provided a gratuitous advice
on PR to Fowler that goes beyond advice: it
attempts to discredit Fowler. Through all of these it is almost
as if is preparing the way for the eventual announcement that Fowler has been
denied and they can say I told you so. The Strib even tries to discredit Reggie
in their piece that would seem, from the title, to be positive, Fowler
proves he can tackle big challenges. When Reggie’s PR firm
put out a company bio without checking with him (company bios are different
from job hunting bios) the Strib released a hurricane of articles about it using
them to “prove” that Reggie is not qualified. They tried to make
it a Notre Dame moment, as if this was an “O’Leary Affair.” But it clearly was
not. Was it bad PR? Most certainly: when they can’t “get you” on the big issues
that count they go after you on the little ones that are irrelevant. Does it
discredit Reggie? Most certainly not. But it is used to “justify” questioning
everything and tar him with a very broad brush suggesting questions where none
really exist. It gives those who want to the excuse
to say “This kind of thing casts doubt on everythingb about him and everything
he says from now on.” That’s about as broad a brush as you can
use. And please note: it kept O’Leary out of Notre Dame, but most assume something
else was involved. Note it had absolutely no impact in terms of his joining
the staff of the Vikings. Does it teach Reggie a lesson about Minneapolis media?
How could it not?
The Randy signal came in the form of the Strib article of 2-17-05
reporting Reggie
saying he would not trade Randy Moss,
only to be followed up six Strib articles on February 24 by the Vikings
announcing a trade of Randy to Oakland (see also here,
here,
here, and here).
This is way too much detailed information in so short a time: they were obviously
working on this, meaning that the old “leak machine” from inside
Winter Park to the Strib is alive and well. And even though it is Red’s
machine, and even if it is acting in “rogue” fashion, it ultimately
required his decision, which raises the interesting question in the Collins
bylined article, “Who the heck signed off on this?” No one is taking
credit. And Fowler remains quiet. In the Scoggins and Zulgad piece the Packers
take this as a great gift to them. Surely Viking executives facing a new owner
would not go against what they read he wanted. This suggests that a behind the
scenes “deal” has been concluded that will enable them to deny Reggie
what is now legally and rightfully his.
This episode (actually a continuation of others) also suggests that no matter
who the new owner is, they may well have to fire many of the old “veterans.”
If the Strib stories are true, Winter Park employees can’t be trusted
with company information. They knew Glen kept getting turned down. They knew
Reggie was working on a bid that was designed to meet Red’s price, and
yet they continued to provide “inside information” to Glenn and
his people. As Weiner reported February 11, 2005, “Taylor
said that employees of the Vikings who had been working with him in sharing
financial information told him they could no longer ‘helps us because
they’re working with the other group,’ Taylor said.”
The Winter Park crowd obviously got cold feet as they learned Red was going
to accept Reggie’s bid. The question now is, who’s side will be they on
with the new owner?
This all adds up to why we say the finances are easy but the color is hard.
Red has one of the smartest financial men in Gary Woods. Red
is shrewd businessman (San Antonio Express-News, August 5, 2002, p. 1A; requires
registration and payment to see article, entitled “Is stadium McCombs’
goal?”) who has owned professional teams before. Red and Gary wouldn’t
make a deal if they didn’t think it could be done. Reggie is a fellow
businessman and millionaire. His millionaire partners would not have joined
him if they didn’t think it could be done. Red and Gary and Reggie’s
partners are not in the business of making themselves look either stupid or
foolish. But there are those who would do so (try to make them look silly and
stupid) to block the sale. So “whither goest thou, NFL?” Like everyone
else, we’ll stay tuned to see what flag they run up the flagpole: the
NFL claims they will display the U.S. flag. Minnesota wants them to display
the “Blacks need not apply” flag. What the Minneapolis anti-Reggie
group is left with is “the stadium defense” for denying Fowler:
only Glen can get the money out of the legislature, which is stuff and nonsense.
Our clear response: Reggie has made the deal. Turn the keys
over to him. He meets the financial requirements. “Overcome”
and “overcoming“
(as in “we shall overcome”) are words that again come into
play. Reggie must overcome those trying to block him from owning
the team. Red must overcome those who would try to control
what he does with his private property. The NFL must overcome
“Minnesota ice” and play by the “fairness and justice rules.”
As we do with any racist blocks we see thrown at any Black American in Minneapolis,
we “pull the covers” off to expose it as we continue our battle
against any who would deny qualified others equal access and equal opportunity.
Any thing we can do to encourage all involved to do the right thing we will
do.
Be very clear: we do not take up this challenge because Reggie
is Black but rather because although Reggie is a qualified buyer, the obstacles
thrown in his path are because he is Black. We fight red lining (the practice
of denying service to any living within a given areas) in all its forms, whether
the banking redlining related to denying mortgages to those with their map’s
redline circles or blocks, or whether related to viewing those within the color
red line of “not the same” or “dumber” and thus deny
quality education, jobs, housing, and public safety, or, in the Minnesota case
of Reggie, defining a Black person as a walking red line. We see signs that
Reggie is being redlined by racist innuendoes and shadow remarks and different
rules, just as Blacks were given different rules for qualifying to vote during
the jim crow days. This book, column, and web log fight racism and for any who
are under siege, White or Black, male or female, rich or poor, as continue to
stand up for equal opportunity against any who would deny it, be it the White
owners of the NFL or the Black officer of the NAACP.
In other words, as Fowler is qualified, we’ll now find out the
true hand of the NFL: will it take this long overdue step of no longer
blocking Blacks from being owners or it will it show its own segregationist
colors and hide behind the false and and inaccurate racist statement that they
have no bench depth in terms of Black executives?
In saying this we recognize that we will be accused of “playing the race
card.” Of course. You can’t win a card game without playing all the cards.
It is due to an obsession with political correctness that brings the blindness
to racism to the table. As we should have no racism and as we are good people
we can’t be racist. I pull the covers off this in my book in regards to education,
jobs, housing, etc. The contnued bottling up in our inner cities of a population
provide poor education, poor jobs (or none), and poor housing, is either out
of cruelty or out of a racist belief that they are not of any value above these
levels. So let us reword this: we are playing the “observe the racism”
card. The Strib itself published a series on racism in 1990 about the rampant
racism in the Twin Cities and Minnesota, as did the Mpls.St. Paul Magazine (see
my book’s Interludes 2 and 10). In a 2000 cover story on Dennis Green
the magazine noted the racism of Minneapolis was still well and very much alive.
Indeed, we made he case in our Column 2004/#25, December 2, 2004, discussing
the racist skin head company known as Panzerfaust records in S. Paul, the state
capital, makes and distributes racist CDs to middle and high school kids, bragging
proudly that “we don’t just entertain racist kids. We create them.”
So far, in the local White media: mum’s the word, although Panzerfaust
was covered by national TV news. Think about that: “we don’t just
entertain racist kids. We create them.” And the Twin Cities remain silent.
We believe the NFL will not be held to the racist blackmail offered by the so-called “leaders” trying to discredit Reggie Fowler.
MORE: This Blog entry is the summary of our piece. Read our
full statement, fourteen pages total, by clicking here
Posted 2-28-05, 11:59 p.m.
2/24/05/#20: Column #4 Follow-up: Major Incident at Franklin
Middle School yesterday. See Today’s column, 2005/#4
The violence at Franklin Middle School discussed in today’s column
is still ignored by the Star Tribune which continues to refuse to report it,
despite my giving the information to the Star Tribune reporter early last. The
problem boiled over again Wednesday, 2-23-05, when a major incident took place,
in which a number of students were fighting, a counselor was injured, and several
squad cars had to be called to help restore order. The Strib continues its ethically
challenged response of silence as it ignores our own Berlin Wall of lousy schools,
jobs, and housing for inner city minorities.
Posted 2-24-05, 9:55 p.m.
2/24/05/#19: Column #3 Follow-up: Berlin Wall Falls in
Beirut. When will the wall fall in Minneapolis?
Those caught up in “anti-war vs. pro-war” rhetoric miss the
point. No one is for the war. Most of us wich the Iraq war could have been avoided.
We all wish the UN had followed through on the many resolutions ignored that
led to it. And we wish the bribery and other scandals that caused the UN to
look the other way regarding the war as well as other matters had not happened
as well. But to those of us for whom Black History Month means something, we
cannot but pause to ponder the significance of the Lebonese leader who up until
now suppored Syrian occupation, to stand up against it and call for the liberation
of his people. In his Washington Post column Wednesday, 2-23-05, David Ignatius
writes of ”Beirut’s
Berllin Wall”. He quotes one of the anti-Syrian leaders, Walid Jumblatt,
who the Strib acknowledges exists but treats as routine rather than as stunningly
significant. Here is what Jumblatt said that the Strib ignores: “It’s strange
for me to say it, but this process of change has started because of the American
invasion of Iraq. I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people
voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, it was the
start of a new Arab world. The Syrian people, the Egyptian
people, all say that something is changing. The
Berlin Wall has fallen. We can see it.” The Strib
didn’t even get the importance of this in its own story, and especialy missed
the significance of its own statement that ”some
protesters held a copy of the Quran in one hand and a cross in another.”
Just as the Strib remains silent about the violence in Minneapolis it keeps
silent about the violence of the Syranians in Lebanon. When will the Strib bring
judgment about the tyranny of Syria and stop writing as if Syria represents
stability? Why the support of a country that holds another in tyranny? Why can’t
the Strib recognize what the Lebanese and Egyptians are saying? When will the
racism that Arabs can’t handle democracy end? When will the racism that Blacks
can’t handle large enterprizes or live free without needing government direction
end? With Iran poised to have missiles that will reach Berlin, it may be that
this democracy thing just might be a great help to world peace and stability.
Don’t we all agree that 11 million dying in Nazi concentration camps (6 million
Jews, 5 million other “undesirables”) was too high a price to pay
as the only way to ethically ignore genocide? The Berlin Wall fell in Berlin.
It has now fallen in Beirut. David Schraub,
graduate student at Carleton Collgege in Northfield, suggests the excellent
question of why the world is not, to use our phrase, pounding on the Berlin
Wall of Genocide in Darfur and the Sudan? Ethics is our “issue #7.”
We agree with David when he says whoever in “the US, the UN, the EU, and
the Arab League” doesn’t respond to Darfur and the Sudan “permanently
forfeits any claims to moral leadership in the world.” We’ll address later
our thoughts regarding Minneapolis’ Belin Wall of lousy inner city education,
jobs and housing in a later post within the next week.
Posted 2-24-05,9:55 pm.
2/24/05/#18: Columns 2004/#24&23 Followup: Local branch
2 votes from closing, holds fake meetings, still has $1 million “lost”
In New York n Friday, 2-18-05, the NAACP came within 2 votes of closing
down the Minneapolis branch. How did their Black Knight, Carl Breeding, sent
to guard the locall NAACP Hen House become the Black Fox dining on the Hen House?
It turns out that Carl Breedng, send by the NAACP to oversee the local branch
who caught one of the “virusses” of the local branch, double dipping.
Meetings are cancelled, meeting called for one purpose are used for something
else. Even the NAACP’s fox won’t see that the auditing that is supposed to be
done gets done. And up to $1 million still remains unaccounted for.
Posted 2-24-05, 9:55 p.m.
2/12/2005/#17: Strib & the Bosses Play the Race Card: Put Fowler in his place.
Bottom line: only Fowler promises to keep the Vikings in Minnesota, regardless of who pays for a new stadium. Taylor, the Great White Hope, in conjunction with the Strib, intimidates and threatens Vikings fans by saying if they don’t pay for a new stadium the team leaves. Their response to Fowler: smears and sneers. So ask yourself, Minnesota, what’s more important: keeping the team in Minnesota or having a potential White owner who is threatening to move the team even before he buys it? Is Minnesota so racist it is willing to risk cutting off its Vikings nose to spite Black faces? Taylor says he’ll play Fagan and send out his legislative kids to pick the taxpayers’ pockets. Fowler promises to run the team like a business and will make it work either way, with or without legislative participation. Do you appreciate the irony of the White guy Fagan asking for government welfare pick pocketing the taxpayer and the Black guy saying he can make it on his own?
Fowler as a hitching post. In their piece today, 2-12-05, Taylor hopes to hook Vikes, the Star Tribune acts as if Reggie Fowler, the Black bidder for the Vikings, is but a hitching post at the river’s edge to which Glenn Taylor can tie his Vikings ship. The article makes clear that between Taylor and the NFL, Taylor can confidently state that after the NFL slaps down any Fowler deal with McCombs, “he anticipates he eventually will be the next owner of the Vikings.”
Minneapolis: Fagan’s school for thieves. In Oliver Twist, Fagan teaches young boys how to be great pickpockets and keep society in its place. In my book I write about how Minneapolis is out to teach America how to raise taxes to enrich the powers while at the same time how to keep the powerless minorities in their place “in terms of education, housing, jobs and the war on young Black men,” determined to show America “how to control a city.” Now it is going to put the Vikings fans in their place: Taylor says when he buys the team and fans don’t pay new taxes for a new stadium he’ll move the team out of town.
Minnesota nice or Minnesota racism? I write this to again bell the racist cat, and create awareness for Minnesotans that if they allow Minnesota racism to rule, they could lose their team. Taylor has an out of state investor axis. This leaves the team in peril. Fowler is using local investors in his group, all of whom have pledged to keep the team in Minnesota. The Strib has again stooped to propagandizing and smearing.
Taylor suggests that the fix is in. But we can fight the fix. What is galling is the bragging that the “fix” is already in. No subtlety, no euphemism. The Strib is showing how the “powers” run the place the way they want. They are so sure no one can stop them that they announce what they have planned in advance. Note that Taylor says he has already met with the NFL, that the upcoming Fowler deal with Red will be slapped down by the NFL “when it gets to the league office,” and thus the article triumphantly announces that Taylor “anticipates he eventually will be the next owner of the Vikings.”
Taylor: Twins lover says taxpayers pay or the Vikings leave. Taylor admits his preference is to buy the Twins. So why the switch? We see three reasons: to block, to Augusta, to greed.
Stadium intimidation and the greed factor. Fowler says he can get a stadium built even if there are no new taxes raised. Taylor says raise taxes for his new stadium or the team leaves town. Fowler says he can work it out (and certainly the models are available to enable that). Taylor suggests work is too hard, and instead finds threats and intimidation easier: if the taxpayers don’t foot the bill for a new stadium, the team moves (he is not interested in the models that would enable building a new stadium without new taxes). And how “poor” is Taylor? He admits he has more than the $1.9 billion estimated by Forbes. Imagine: the 118th wealthiest guy in America and he already is threatening to move the team if the legislature doesn’t provide tax payer dollars to build him a new stadium for a team that has been in existence for over 40 years that he has had nothing to do with. And the Strib sits by and raises no moral or ethical question about a guy buying and immediately threatening to move the peoples’ team. Fowler says he can build a new stadium without needing new taxes. This tells me that Taylor is a fair weather fan and is willing to sacrifice Minnesota’s beloved Vikings if he has to put up a nickel. Fowler will fight for the fan. This also tells me that Fowler is the Vikings fans hope: he’ll find a way because he wants to and because he is willing to follow models that already exist that will enable it to be done that Taylor won’t look at.
Why have the Vikings, the Twins, the Strib, and the legislature ignored models that provide for stadium construction without new taxes? In my Column of January 26 (2005/#2) I point out the legislature and the teams in 2000 received models for how to build new stadiums without new taxes. None were interested. They don’t want to run it like a business but as a welfare entitlement. I trust the reader is aware of the irony here: the White guy says he needs a government handout, the Black guy says he doesn’t.
The intimidation and threat to leave is seamlessly woven together with the collusion of the NFL to put in the fix. Some people feel I was being too harsh in my earlier column (January 26, 2005/#2). Read the “roll call” of threats at the end of the column in my online version (in the column to the left) and ask yourself: was I too harsh or not harsh enough? Taylor says “The NFL will make it clear that Minnesota will have to make a commitment to a new stadium if we we’re going to keep our team.” Thus, says Taylor, without such a commitment, “The NFL would insist the team be moved, or the franchise would be dissolved.” Does Taylor stand up to that? No. He agrees: no taxpayer paid stadium means no team. Fowler stands up? Why? Because he is bold enough to do so, because he has vision, and because he knows there are models and other resources to enable him to be successful.
Why LA. Over Minnesota? How can the NFL offer $500 million to build a new L.A. stadium and not do so for Minnesota? Is the team to move anyway? Taylor says he is OK with that. Fowler says no: the team stays, as he can make a stadium happen. I believe Fowler. Any Black man in America who becomes a millionaire can probably achieve whatever it is he wants regardless of the roadblocks thrown up to try to stop him. I understand that Fowler is also a pilot with two planes. Obviously Fowler is no cotton picker. Note that Taylor doesn’t take Fowler on one-on-one, mano a mano. Rather Taylor gangs up on Fowler with NFL help. That is not sportsmanlike. That tells me Taylor wont’ be a sportsman with the fans either.
The NFL does not have the power Taylor says it does. Fowler is being a gentleman. Why can’t Taylor be? Fowler sounds like the kind of guy you’d like to do business with. I used to think that of Taylor but now I’m having my doubts. Anyone who will not stand up for the team is not to be trusted. Do you want to do business with a guy who says if he can’t get his way he’ll take his team and leave? I don’t. Taylor wants to be part of an old boys’ club that tells others what to do. Fowler says it is the fans who are the most important. Fowler stands up for the fans and says he’ll keep the team here regardless of what the legislature does. Fowler knows that the NFL can’t make an owner sell or dissolve his team if it is being profitable or if the owner wants to absorb the losses. To do otherwise would mean that the NFL would be breaking anti-trust laws. Why does Taylor paint the NFL as all-powerful? Because by doing their bidding he gets what he wants, the Vikings and membership in an all White, all male exclusive club. Why does the NFL say nothing when Taylor talks that way? Because they are in on it. It is theit new taxes. Yet Taylor, worth over $2 billion, and the league want the fans to pay. Have Taylor and the NFL no shame? Why do they want to play Fagan? And why do they think the legr wink to the insiders acknowledging that even though they are like the Wizard of Oz behind the curtain, they can still make people believe they are all powerful. Here we see that the true NFL man is Fowler, not the NFL heads who would let the team go or Taylor who would join them. Fowler stands for the league and the fans. Fowler knows there are models available for building new stadiums withouislature will play pickpockets when they have steadfastly refused so far to do so? And why do they think the legislators don’t want to get re-elected?
The Strib smears Fowler and propagandizes for Taylor all the while knowing they are purposefully skewing the truth. They know everything I have written here and in my columns is true. Why does The Star Tribune want to join the biased journalism slanted reporting that has been the hallmark of CBS (think Dan Rather) and CNN (think Eason Jordan)?
Innuendo, smears, sneers. The Strib presents Fowler as just a little Black “boy” out of his depth. Taylor makes it clear he feels he is better than the Black man when he makes it clear he kept Fowler in his place. Rather than meet in Taylor’s office, the Strib reporter, sitting in Taylor office with Taylor, reports that “Taylor said Fowler had been in the conference room next door …to discuss….” And Taylor makes it clear he won’t participate if a Black man is the General (in control) Partner. And Taylor smears Fowler by saying that as he, Taylor, wasn’t as willing to pay as much as Fowler, that he, Taylor, “suggested that Fowler take the first shot at making a deal with McCombs,” so confident is Taylor in the fix. And he admits that the fix involves the NFL as he admits he “will now go to the high 500s after discussing the situation with the NFL.”
If the NFL helped Red financially, why won’t it help Fowler? The NFL loaned McCombs $100 million so he could outbid our local bidder. The NFL is going to put up the $500 million needed for a new stadium in L.A. Why not for Minnesota? So why can’t it help Fowler in this historic moment? Is it because the NFL doesn’t want history to happen? The rumors are that the NFL also helped Arthur Blank in Atlanta. Why? Because, as Taylor says, “the league wants franchise prices to be as high as possible.” So what other owners have they helped and, thus, again, why can’t they help Fowler as they helped the others. What can be the only independent variable here? That Fowler is Black.
The wild card: Red. The Strib has reported Red is eager to sell. Red’s wife Charline has said that the Vikings belong to Minnesota. Will Red go against this? This is America. Red is a proud American. If someone can pay Red’s price, that is between he and Red. Why wouldn’t Red want to be part of a historic deal that would ensure that his beloved Vikings would stay with their beloved fans? Can others just step in to tell Red he can’t sell his property? In America? They want us to think so. But Black men know that is usually just for Black men. Which is why we have to work harder to succeed. That is why Reggie Fowler will be good for the NFL even if they can’t see it yet. To block Reggie the NFL would have to block Red. Is Red going to roll over and play dead for the NFL and leave money on the table simply because the NFL doesn’t want a Black owner? The NFL would be interfering with interstate commerce and breaking anti-trust law. Does the NFL really want all its internal workings behind its curtain exposed for all to see their collusion with Taylor against Fowler? Are they so against a Black owner that they are willing to break the law as well as the ethics of business to block the Black guy and threaten Minnesota fans with moving their team if they don’t pony up more taxes for a rich owner?
Where are Minnesota’s leaders in all of this? Taylor admits that ALL of his investor partners are from outside Minneapolis. Answer this: why have no other Minnesotans, in two years, stepped forward to put together a buying group for the team unless the plan is still to send them out of town? Why has it taken Fowler to involve locals? It would seem that if he can do that and others cannot that Fowler would also have greater success with getting a stadium than Taylor. Note that Fowler has uttered no threats. Indeed, Fowler has been very clear that he can make it happen. He is acting like a gentleman. Taylor is acting like a bully. Taylor says he can’t make it happen unless the legislature plays Fagan and sends the legislators out to pick the pockets of the Minnesotan taxpayer.
Stay tuned.
Posted 2-12-05, 10:32 .m.
2/12/2005/#16: It looks like the Vikings will remain in Minnesota under Fowler. [2-12-05, 10:30 pm: I may have spoken too soon. See #17 above]
Those familiar with Chapter 15 of my book, this year’s Column #2 of January
16, and the Blog entry #12 below of 2-7-05, know that my concern has been the
“powers” wanting the Vikings to leave town. My goal in writing about it was
in the hopes of creating a self-defeating prophecy: report the possibility of
something bad so someone would come along and prevent it. WCCO’s Mark Rosen
and the Strib’s Sid Hartman have all of a sudden begun to worry not about the
Vikings leaving (which until now has not been a problem for them) but about
Reggie Fowler buying the Vikings. It is ironic that despite the evidence of
even the Strib and the book “Stadium Games,” in two years no White man has come
forth to save the Vikings. The Great Saving Hope for the Vikings fans is the
Black man, Reggie Fowler. It has come to our attention that since our Column
#2 of January 26, things have started to change. Coincidence? We don’t know.
Doesn’t matter. All we know is that we now feel we can for the first time, state
believably that the NFL does not want the Vikings to leave town and move to
L.A. (not that it could stop them, as they could not). And instead of the “wish
world” fantasy of WCCO’s Rosen and the Strib’s Hartman that Fowler get knocked
out of the box, it now looks as if the new “is world” is that the Fowler deal
just might happen. That would be great. Time for the NFL to move into the 21st
century. Minnesota too. It is also time to lay to rest the question of whether
the team stays or moves. We know with Fowler the team will stay.
Posted 2-12-05, 1:22 a.m.
2/12/2005/#15: Are cuts in Communty Development Block Grants good or
bad for the Inner City? It all depends on whose ox gets gored, that of residents
or developers. Those who have read my book and columns know that, as
the liberal blog “Kausfile
stated on 2-9-05, that the CDBG program is too often an ineffective antipoverty
program” because CDBGs are basically slush funds for local politicians, who
too often sluice the federal money to their developer friends to build ugly
downtown hotels.” What we need are grants or corporate partnerships for both
the training of inner city Black males and for entrepreneurial incubator programs
to help them and the qualified/qualifiable unemployed set up with real jobs
and legitimate income producing possibilities.
Posted 2-12-2005, 1:22 a.m.
Those familiar with Chapter 15 of my book, this year’s Column #2 of January
16, and the Blog entry #12 below of 2-7-05, know that my concern has been the
“powers” wanting the Vikings to leave town. My goal in writing about it was
in the hopes of creating a self-defeating prophecy: report the possibility of
something bad so someone would come along and prevent it. WCCO’s Mark Rosen
and the Strib’s Sid Hartman have all of a sudden begun to worry not about the
Vikings leaving (which until now has not been a problem for them) but about
Reggie Fowler buying the Vikings. It is ironic that despite the evidence of
even the Strib and the book “Stadium Games,” in two years no White man has come
forth to save the Vikings. The Great Saving Hope for the Vikings fans is the
Black man, Reggie Fowler. It has come to our attention that since our Column
#2 of January 26, things have started to change. Coincidence? We don’t know.
Doesn’t matter. All we know is that we now feel we can for the first time, state
believably that the NFL does not want the Vikings to leave town and move to
L.A. (not that it could stop them, as they could not). And instead of the “wish
world” fantasy of WCCO’s Rosen and the Strib’s Hartman that Fowler get knocked
out of the box, it now looks as if the new “is world” is that the Fowler deal
just might happen. That would be great. Time for the NFL to move into the 21st
century. Minnesota too. It is also time to lay to rest the question of whether
the team stays or moves. We know with Fowler the team will stay.
Posted 2-12-05, 1:22 a.m.
2/12/2005/#14: Blog induced accountability in journalism.
In Blog #10 (2-6-05) and #8 (2-4-05) below, we wrote of CNN News head Eason
slander of the US military. Read an excellent summary here.
Even though he has now quit,
due to the heat received from the “blogsophere,” both liberal and
conservative blogs, main stream media is still covering it up. Jordon still
denies it and still refuses to allow a release of the video tape. Why are you
hiding Eason? Is this an isolated incident or will we soon get accountability
from the Strib as well?
Posted 2-12-05, 12:17 a.m.
2/8/2005/#13: Truth a Star Tribune casualty again. It doesn’t believe in the morning. With “There is No Tomorrow” it slanders for ideology.
Bill Moyers made a slanderous statement. The Star Tribune & Washington Post, among others, printed it as truth. The blogosphere (incuding Powerline of Minneapolis) exposed it. The Washington Post printed a “correction” 7 days after the slander. The next day Bill Moyers “apologized profusely.” 9 days later The Star Tribune remains mute. Why?
Those who have followed our columns dealing with the poor environmental quality of low income housing sites such as our Heritage Park/Hollman (see Chapter 8 of our book) know clean ground, clean water, and clean air are high on our list of priorities, as we believe it is for most Americans. Indeed, it is a common ground place of most Americans, regardless of party. So we pause to congratulate Bill Moyers, who called Reagan’s EPA Secretary James Watt today (Tuesday) and “apologized profusely” for having slandered Watt, claiming he hadsaid it was OK to destroy the environment because of the pending end of the world was near. That Watt never said it was not important to Moyers nor did Moyers feel he should “fact check” before making his claim. We don’t want to seem churlish but feel it important to point out that Moyers’ apology didn’t come until after the Washington Post, on Monday, the day before, printed a correction indicating Moyers was wrong.
This is the kind of ideological divisiveness sung as a Robin Hood troubadour regaling the people about the Sheriff of Nottingham, except Watt was not from Nottingham. This has no place in public policy debates, and divides, not unites us in an area where we have great agreement (how well our elected officials follow through to meet our shared ideal is another question, which we address in chapter 8 of or book). So why does the Star Tribune play the role of a troubadour making ups songs about people they don’t like?
On January 30th, the Star Tribune printed Moyer’s piece,
There
is no tomorrow.
Did no fact checking. Accepted it as gospel because it was from
a fellow liberal. As we have pointed out throughout our book, neither liberals
nor conservatives have a monopoly on truth. Both, in our messy democracy, are
duty bound to search for the truth not for false negatives to use as a club
rather than trying to solve a public policy problem. Powerline
(our Minineapolis based Time Magazine blog of the year) gives a moving account
of this episode and provides a detailed analysis of why Moyers was slanderous
and a perveyor of falsehoods.
So why, 9 days after printing the article and 2 days after the Post printed
its correction hasn’t the Star Tribune published its correction? Powerline offers
an explanation
as to why the Strib has not that rings true to us: “the Minneapolis Star
… has kept its readers in a cloud of unknowing—ignorance being conducive
to the Star Tribune’s liberal rapture.” We have felt that sense many times
as we have commented in our columns and blog entries. Because we all have common
cause in having the best for Minneapolis, we need to have all parties speaking
from the standpoint of objective reporting, not ideological celebrations that
condemn fellow citizens and cause them to be divided rather than united.
This raises the question of how many other people has the Strib slandered or falsely reported about simply because they don’t agree with them. Why doesn’t the Strib care about and protect its credibility? Why does truth continue to be a casualty at the Strib?
We will continue to urge the Star Tribune to be accurate in its
reporting, and not slant every analysis and solution to a liberal only agenda,
as if our conservative friends and fellow citizens have nothing to offer. We
wonder if any circulation delines are due to this purposeful creation of a credibility
gap with its readers, even among its own liberal readers.
Posted 2-9-05, 2:35 a.m.
2/7/2005/#12: Reading the Vikings tea leaves as served up by Red, the NFL, and Sid Hartman.
Something is brewing? What? Sid Hartman describes some of the tea leaves brewing in the bottom of our Vikings tea cup. Let’s see what they really say. Sid, in his column of Sunday, Febraury 6, 2005. Let’s see what they really say.
Sid again raises the image for a Great White Hope. Nothing he says changes anything we wrote in our last column (posted on this site as 2005/#2: “I Told You So. Now Let’s Save the Vikings!”) or in our recent Blog entry (2005/#9: “We can solve the NFL’s lack of depth in their managerial Black bench. Sell to Black Fowler.”)
It is clear that Reggie Fowler really has Sid and the NFL worried. Imagine: a Black man owning the team. About time, says I. Sid describes 7 tea leaves brewing in the sale cup, to which we comment (Cmt):
(1) Fowler is close to making an offer. Cmt:
you can just hear them circling the wagons. Our response: excellent: we wish
Fowler well.
(2) The NFL Finance committee Chairman (New Orleans Saints
owner Tom Benson) says, “we are not going to admit owners who are not
100 percent qualified like some other professional leagues have done.”
Cmt: Really? Then why did the NFL loan Red McCombs $100 million
to buy the Vikings so he could outbid our local guy, a fact that was kept secret
and did not emerge for four years? And what about the rumors of other sweet
heart deals for other recent buyers? Why them and not Fowler?
(3) Benson says the general partner must own 30% of the purchase
amount. Sid quotes Benson as saying, “he can’t use the team as a
collateral to borrow more than $125 million of the purchase price. Cmt:
Really? Again, what about the $100 million the NFL loaned Red on top of his
collateralization? It sounds like the NFL is using Benson to “stiff arm”
Fowler. So lets look at the numbers: $100 million is NFL money; that leaves
$500 million of the $600 million asking price; $125 million can be used to collaterlize;
so that leaves $375 million; 30% of that is $102,500,000. But wait. Finance
is a game the White boys have played. Why not Black guys? Banks often use a
factor of 10 for enabling debt multiples. This suggests that all Fowler needs
is $10.2 million to factor to get his $102 million to close the deal (leaving
$162,500,000 for the limited partners to put up). So why is the NFL “stiff
arming” Fowler, “crack blocking” him, “interfering”
with and “holding” him? That’s four yellow flags that should
be on the field against Red and the NFL for the way they are treating Fowler.
And Fowler needs to throw out the red flag to challenge the “call”
Benson is making against him.
(4) Sid reports that the actual cash figure is $475 million
to meet the $600 million asking price. Cmt: This fits what
we said in our January 26th column and as we just discussed above.
(5) About Glenn Taylor, Sid writes, “there is no doubt
that the league wants him to own the Vikings” Cmt: Really?
Why would the NFL all of a sudden want a guy who has refused to cooperate with
their asking price unless it is an underhanded attempt to block Fowler? Or is
there a “fix” in already to block Fowler?
(6) Sid claims that Cris Carter says that the McCombs family
may not want to sell. Cmt: Say what? The team has been on the
market for two years; Red needs money for his Colorado development. So why are
Sid, the NFL, Taylor and who ever else to block Fowler? This looks to us like
another “holding” penalty to commit in case Fowler makes a bid so
Red can say no for now to avoid selling to a Black man. Sounds like Fowler needs
to toss out another red flag. We always thought Red was his own man. Is he a
puppet of the NFL? Isn’t that against the monopoly rules?
(7) The most preposterous claim of Sid is this, that “The
NFL knows that Taylor has the best chance of getting a new stadium built for
the team.” Cmt: Why Sid? If the 10 rich White Minnesotans
before Red couldn’t get it done, and the White Red can’t get it
done, then maybe the problem is that it is White guys trying. If rich White
guys can’t figure it out, can’t manage the hurdles, lets change
the common denominator from White to Black. Who better in America know how to
overcome hurdles and obstacles if not Black millionaires, guys who have overcome
hurdles and obstacles that would make the White guys collapse in a heap?
And as the Strib has reported that Fowler has stadium funding plans, which is more than White Red or his White 10 predecessors had, why not sell to the guy who isn’t holding his hand out for a tax payer hand out, Fowler? As Fowler’s development plans don’t rely on new taxes, what’s not to like? So, as the past and current team owners have threatened to move the team unless tax payers pony up for a stadium (backed by NFL saying the same: no stadium no stay), and as Fowler has pledged to not only keep the team here but move here personally and not be an absentee landlord, shouldn’t he be the one both the NFL and Minnesota should be bending over backwards to make his bid happen, given that all the White guys have failed?
Let’s get “real world”: we’d like to know how much the NFL has loaned other recent buyers, (all White guys) And we’d like to know which White boys will benefit from the fact that the NFL, as reported on ESPN radio last May, is going to put up $400-500 million for a new L.A.Coliseum. And if, as Sid reports, it will be an expansion team (which, by the way, we are not yet ready to believe), what White guy will be given that gold mine? And why is it that if the NFL can loan Red money to buy the Vikings and it can front the money for the new stadium in L.A., it can’t front (that is, finance, not fund) a new stadium for Minnesota?
The NFL lame blamed (during Super Bowl week in Jacksonville) their lack of Black executives (NFL and teams) on the colleges and universities for not providing them (as if the colleges and universities were their managerial farm club just as they are for player). See our Blog #9. Now we ask you, isn’t the NFL a big boy, able to train its own? Why must we ask the oh so obvious of why hasn’t the NFL stepped in to do so? As it obviously doesn’t want to, what could be better than having a Black owner of a team, in this case the Vikings, and have him jump start the process of developing them? Or is the NFL of the mind that it can somehow hide behind the skirts of history, as so many do, blaming the victims, claiming their past makes them unqualified.
As Martin Luther King used to say, we may not be qualified but we are definitely qualifyable. See this at work in the upcoming PBS special “Slavery and the Making of America” (see Blog #11 below).
The NFL is obviously trotting out the old and lame excuse that “they are not ready” (“they” meaning Blacks). Really? Martin Luther King, Jr. who wrote a book entitled “Why We Can’t Wait.” In his letter from the Birmingham jail, April 16, 1963, he wrote, “Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, ‘Wait.’ But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and father at will and drowned your sisters and brothers at whim…” etc., why wait more? As King then went on to say, “when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of ‘nobodiness’…then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait.” Remember, that was 1963. 40 years ago. This is 2004. 40 years later. 140 years after the Emancipation Proclamation. What possible excuse can the NFL still entertain other than covert, defacto racism?
The modern NFL has been constructed on the backs of the Black players on the field. And they are wonderfully delighted at that and at being paid handsomely, so they are delighted to fulfill this role. But what about ownership? Management?
Emancipation was 140 years. As the kids say on long drives, “Are we there yet?” We say to the NFL: its time. We are there. No more waiting. Time to move Blacks into the ownership circle. The NFL is beginning to sound like the good old White golfer guys of Augusta. But Augusta is private. The NFL lives off tax payers and TV revenue money that sells commercials to ordinary Americans not outfitted in bling. American cities need to stand up to the NFL’s “Augusta syndrome.”
NFL football is the American game. It belongs to all Americans, not just owners and players. The owners have a stewardship to exercise, not a right, an obligation and duty to perform, not an entitlement. Its time for a Black owned team. We know it. They know it. Not out of “affirmative action” and a “hand out,” but because it is right and way over due. What message is the NFL sending its Black players by keeping Blacks out of ownership and management? Aren’t they aware how this could impact their union negoatiations? Even more astounding: why doesn’t the NFL care?
The Strib says Reggie is a millionaire. No other Black has come forward. That
must be just how White the block seems to be in the perceptions of wealthy Black
Americans. But Reggie Fowler has a vision, is bold, and is a Black millionaire.
From Strib reports appearently he and his associates all have some kind of NFL
experience. Again, what’s not to like? White millionaires have obviously been
allowed to leverage financially to purchase their NFL teams. Time to stop blocking
a Black millionaire from doing so.
Posted 2-7-05, 5:33 a.m.
2/7/2005/#11: “Slavery and the Making of America,”
PBS, Feb 9 & 18.
Most take for granted that slavery was bad, unjust, and brutal. Too many think that because fire hoses and dogs and lynching are no longer a part of the taken for granted landscape, that the racism that enabled slavery is over. As the Strib wrote in its 1990 series and as outlined in “the Minneapolis Story, Through My Eyes,” racism is still with us. We haven’t seen this program yet. But we like the title of the four parts of this practice that moved from a piecemeal practice to a highly codified structured system, “1: The Downward Spiral,” “2: Liberty is in the Air,” “3: Seeds of Destruction,” and “4: The Challenge of Freedom.”
As terrible as it was, and it was terrible, it is all the more remarkable to consider that for a system, slavery, that was a world wide phenomenon, that it was the “least” dangerous and “least” oppressive in the modern world of its day, in that here we reproduced ourselves whereas in South American and the Caribbean, slaves were routinely worked to death, replaced by more worker males imported from Africa (many more were sent to South America and the Caribbean than to the US).
We will watch with interest and look for parallels to our inner city Minneapolis
situation and the lack of opportunity for our worker males. We haven’t
forgotten that both political parties participated in 1876 to break the promise
of Reconstruction, which began with freed Black slaves elected to Congress only
to devolve into the Democrats action, with Republcan acquiescence, to unleash
Ku Klux Klan terrorism in the South and Middle West. We will comment after each
show. For more on the economic consequences see The Economics
of Racism on this site.
Posted 2-7-05, 5:33 a.m.
2/7/2005/#10: Re truth being the first casualty of MSM journalism (Follow-up to Blog #8 below).
We are interested solely in Minneapolis, and so we get involved in topics outside
Mineapolis only as we see them having an impact on Minneapolis or as they reflect
on issues we are covering regarding the gaps caused by racism in education,
jobs, and housing, as well as our concerns about the future in general and,
in particular, as it will be impacted by how we respond to the emergency regarding
our inner City Black Youth. For those who will want to follow-up on the Eason
Story (Blog 200/#8 below),
Powerline, the Minneapolis based Time Blog of the year
notes that there is now a weblog devoted to the topic. You can thus follow the
story at the Easongate
Blog. Compare the coverage by mainstream journalism of stories
and think of parallels to that of The Minneapolis Star Tribune. We will publish
any emails that report similarities to Strib type journalism.
Posted 2-7-05, 5:33 a.m.
2/6/2005/#9: We can solve the NFL’s lack of depth in their managerial Black bench. Sell to Black Fowler.
NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue said the Rooney Rule (including Blacks in the hiring interview) doesnt apply to the NFL office nor to team front offices. He blames the lack of Blacks in executive positions due to the stranglehold of White men on the top spots on the colleges and universities.
Hey Paul: we offer a solution here in Minnesots. Instead of
conspiring to move the Vikings (See our Column #2 of January 26, 2005), help
Red sell the vikings to Reggie Fowler, a Black man, who will have no problem
finding and hiring Black talent and begin to develop the Black managerial bench
of the NFL. Then we will know you are serious.
Posted 2-6-05, 5:00 a.m.
2/4/2005/#8. Why does truth continue to be a casualty of journalism?
CNN at Davos
It is said that there are two type of lies: lies of commission (purposefully,
intentionally) and the lies of omission (purposefully, intentionally). We would
add lies of selectivity, so that rather than get the truth, the whole truth
and nothing but the truth, we get perception masking truth. The great tragedy
is that most journalists of the “truth is my perception” school
of reporting, like the Star Tribune, actually believe what they say, and actually
can’t see the damage they cause with their “my perception is truth”
approach.
Followers of our columns, papers, and web log know that we always provide proof
of our statements, documents behind what we report. Even when we give the documents
to the Star Tribune, of which we have written before, they still often ignore
it because it doesn’t fit into their perception of truth.
Now we come to CNN and their news head, Eason Jordan. Over a week ago in Davos
Switzerland, at the World Economic Forum attended by major corporate leaders
(Bill Gates) and current and past heads of state (Bill Clinton), Eason said
that there were 12 journalists that were not only killed in Iraq by the U.S.
military, but were actually targeted for death. It has been over a week and
still we hear nothing about what should be the biggest story of the year. As
one blogger (www.hughhewitt.com) put it, CNN’s Eason Jordan slandered
the American military as journalist killers, and Main Stream Media doesn’t
care.” He answers the “why?” question with what is becoming
more and more obvious: that “this is a completely groundless and utterly
false slander,” meaning on purpose.
The official World Economic Forum blogger report
is responded to by other bloggers. As blogger Instapundit
wrote “HAVING KEPT HIS MOUTH SHUT on things he knew were true, it would
behoove Eason Jordan not to blather about things that he doesn’t know are true.
Really.” Also the Mineapolis based Powerline
also commented.
Jordan
himself stated in 2003 that he didn’t report everything because of how
bad Saddam was and he felt journalists wouldn’t be safe if they reported
the truth. He also made a statement that he was waging peace and didn’t
want war and was afraid if he reported the truth Americans would want to invade.
Why won’t CNN report on Eason Jordan’s comments at Davos? Why won’t the
Star Tribune? When will CNN really wage peace rather than an Anti-American war
against ourselves? How many more will die and how many more will have to live
under tyranny because of the reporting like CNN’s? The absolute racism of CNN
and the so-called Main Stream Media means its OK for Arabs to live in tyranny
(and by the way, pay us a lot so we can live in luxury and enjoy the travel,
etc., to be voyeurs to report on murder and mayhem). Truth knows no ideology,
no party. Truth is not the servant of any news organization, newspaper, or blog.
It is ironic that as America tried to prevent war it gets sucked into it by
the likes of CNN. We are at war in Iraq for one other reason: the UN is so corrupt
that 3 of the 5 security council members could be bribed by the man who created
so many mass graves as CNN stood silently by, and prevented having the UN follow
its own resolutions, so Saddam thought he could do as he wanted.
No wonder America is confused by the war. After 9/11, what we all heard on CNN
differed from what we saw/read/heard in the world as the global war against
the terrorism unleashed by radical Islam struck places unrelated to the US,
as in Bali and Beslan. Ever since we heard Eason Jordan say CNN didn’t report
all it knew as America would then immediately want to invade, we have had this
lingering, sick feeling about CNN. We know some who no longer watch CNN for
this reason. Why does CNN continue to forfeit the truth and, in the process,
contribute to forfeiting of the lives of Ameican soldiers? And why does the
Star Tribune stay silent. Is the hatred of Bush so strong that it is allowed
to cause the deaths of more soldiers by encouraging the insurgent terrorist
to think that if they continue the US will leave and the country will be theirs
as key Americans are working so hard to restore Iraq to the terrorists? There
is no greater lie and conceit than to say you oppose the war but support the
troops. We lived through that lie in the 60s and watched how that lie extended
the war and resulted in thousands more killed. Our soldiers were a band of brothers.
The protesters and their journalist comrades were a band of widow makers.
We have written of seven areas in which we have serious problems that need dealing
with: the tremendous gaps in the inner city between Blacks and Whites in the
quality and value offered in education, jobs, housing, public safety, public
environment, governing, and ethics. Our book deals with all of these. The Star
Tribune ignores them. We have even offered solutions. None get traction. Why?
Because, as we also report in our book and in our web log, there is a higher “truth” involved: the racist lie that Blacks can’t make it on
their own as they are different (1968 liberal Kerner Commission Report) and
because they are not intelligent enough (1998 conservative The Bell Curve).
This is racism.
We see the same racism in the reporting of the global war with the terrorism
of radical Islam: that Arabs can’t handle democracy and freedom, that
they are not ready, that it won’t fit in with Islam, etc. Are these not
the same racist reasons that were given to condone slavery in the 18th century
and leave it as a legal institution in the Constitution? Isn’t this the
same racist reasoning behind the jim crow laws and the murders of young Blacks
like Emmit Till because “he should have known better” and known
“his place”, as White juries frequently let off men who admitted
their killings of Blacks?
We continue to club our Black kids in the inner city schools (Chapter 7, continue
non-compliance with employment rules inside Minineapolis (Chapter 9), and continue
to provide less procedures and financial instruments and places to live for
inner city Blacks than for Whites (Chapter 8). Policies make it much harder
for minorities to acquire assets, generate wealth. The Strib won’t report these
truths either. CNN or Strib, it doesn’t make much difference. They print their
perception of truth.
Racism is still powerful in this country. As Condaleeza Rice stated in 2003,
slavery was “America’s birth defect.” She lived through what
she has called “the home-grown terrorism” in Birmingham, Alabama.
In his Senegal Goree Island speech, President Bush stated that “many of
the issues that still trouble America have roots in the bitter experience”
of slavery.” Why did CNN’s Jordan countenance Saddam Hussein’s
slavery, and why did CNN’s Ted Turner and other senior executives countenance
it also? And why to the editors of the Star Tribune exercise the same lies of
omission in their reporting on education, jobs, and housing in the inner city
of Minneapolis that result in keeping young Black males “in their place”?
How much longer will truth continue to be a casualty and the only news fit to
print be their own blind perceptions?
Posted 2-4-05, 11:59 p.m.
Ron hosts “Black Focus” on Channel 17, MTN-TV, Sundays, 5-6 pm. Formerly head of the Minneapolis Civil Rights Commission and the Urban League, he continues his “watchdog” role for Minneapolis. Order his book, hear his voice, read his solution papers, and read his between columns “web log” at www.TheMinneapolisStory.com.
Permission is granted to reproduce The Minneapolis Story columns, blog entires and solution papers. Please cite the Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder and www.TheMinneapolisStory.com for the columns. Please cite www.TheMinneapolisStory.com for blog entries and solution papers.
