Keepin' it Real Goes Awry

Continuing on an earlier theme, Bokolis takes a slightly more than passing interest in tennis. The draw for me, aside from the bodies on these birds, is that you're on the clock, alone; no coach and, the cunt moves notwithstanding, no strategy session timeouts.

So, I've written about Williams Brother Serena being the pimp of women's tennis. This past evening, she tried to pimp-slap someone with a trust fund, so to speak. Of course, her target is not part of the game, so she effectively got herself DQed, sending Clijsters to the final.

Aside - Clijsters is a personal favorite of Bokolis. Her old man was a footballer and she was built like the proverbial brick shithouse, albeit less so nowadays. She actually seems to be in better shape than before she gave birth. Big up yourself Kim, I'm happy to see you back, but this isn't about you.

While there was no crip walk, I'm pretty sure I saw Serena flash the Wu-Tang sign at some point. Bokolis will break it down worthy of Serena's pimp hand.

The high-brow world (READ: mainstream media) will overdramatize this tirade as a "meltdown." They will show the clip and bleep out the bombs so as to make it appear bestial, as if she lost control and was really on the brink of shoving that ball in the official's mouth. It's being called an "ugly" display.

This is because we're slowly turning into the English that are turning into the French. And, we are NEVER supposed to question authority, much less ream them the occasional new one.

Jehovah couldn't have been too happy with her vernacular (check the handbook; I'm not up on how they take to cuss words and swearing to God), but, of course, that's all bullshit. What's ugly, apart from that troll (and Serena, for that matter), is that, on the grandest stage, this is who is officiating.

Tangent Alert!
This isn't the first time Bokolis has seen a Black person use this tactic when a call goes against them. I'm not saying that this is unique to Blacks (White people probably do it too; they're probably more cunty about it) and I'm not saying it's done just because of one inopportune event. I AM saying though, that they got that shit down good. Having grown up in the 'hood, I've seen it done enough times to know it's a contrived tactic, good old-fashioned intimidation. Until I figured out the gimmick, it worked on me a few times. Both before and after, I've seen it work on many other people.

End of Tangent Alert

How do most people act when they have to take shit from people who don't know what it is? More to the point, if you were a professional athlete, and you had to take shit from someone like that troll...hold on. Whether Serena stepped on the baseline is debatable at best. You can't tell me that the troll could even count her own fingers in front of her face, let alone make line calls at a Grand Slam event. And you can't tell me that she is capable of critical thought. This was disproved when she made that phantom foot fault call on a second serve at 5-6, 15-30. In that situation, the server would have to be stepping just about at the service line for you to make that call.

We may selectively bite our tongues with our bosses but, depending on our capacity for confrontation, will set it on some chump that is either, fucking with us or too stupid to be out there. Because, rightly so, if someone is at the pinnacle of their profession, why should they expect to be around people at anything less than the pinnacle of theirs? So, is Serena supposed to sit idly by while some troll interjects herself into the match?

The prevailing sentiment is that the tirade cost her the match. The tirade didn't cost Serena the match. Clijsters whupped her. The tirade happened to come on match point. We are the victims here. We were robbed out of seeing Serena try to battle out of that pickle...and, you just know she would have fought like hell to save that match. In the end, Bokolis has to give Serena credit for taking the ruling in stride.

While Serena dials it up for the majors, tennis is just another thing in her life. As such, she may not have qualms about pissing away a major to stomp someone the fuck out. Whether it was that, or Serena merely standing up for herself, this was a tactic, not a meltdown.

Kicking a Dead Horse's Ass

Lifted this from Barry Ritholtz' site, complete with symbolic posting time. 9/11 is as good as time as any to point out how Dubya crashed the Bus. In my view, it's symbolic because Bokolis sees Obama as the second plane.


Baby Bush: The Worst President in History?
By Doug Casey

I recognize that I’ve antagonized many subscribers over the years with “Bush Bashing.” In the January TCR, just after OBAMA!’s election, I said I wouldn’t mention Bush again, his departure having made him irrelevant. I only feel bad that he and his minions will apparently get away scot-free with their crimes; better they had all been brought up before a tribunal and tried for crimes against humanity in general and the U.S. Constitution in particular. But that is objectively true of almost all presidents since at least Lincoln.

Most of our subscribers appear to be libertarians or classical liberals — i.e., people who believe in a maximum of both social and economic freedom for the individual. The next largest group are “conservatives.” It’s a bit harder to define a conservative. Is it someone who atavistically just wants to conserve the existing order of things (either now, or perhaps as they perceived them 50, or 100, or 200, or however many years ago)? Or is a conservative someone who believes in limiting social freedoms (generally that means suppressing things like sex, drugs, outré clothing and customs, and bad- mouthing the government) while claiming to support economic freedoms (although with considerable caveats and exceptions)? It’s unclear to me what, if any, philosophical foundation conservatism, by whatever definition, rests on.

Which leads me to the question: Why do conservatives seem to have this warm and fuzzy feeling for George W. Bush? I can only speculate it’s because Bush liked to talk a lot about freedom and traditional American values, and did so in such an ungrammatical way that it made him seem sincere. Bush’s tendency to fumble words and concepts contrasted to Clinton’s eloquence, which made him look “slick.”

I’m forced to the conclusion that what “conservatives” like about Bush is his style, such as it was. Because the only good thing I can recall that Bush ever did was to shepherd through some tax cuts. But even these were targeted and piecemeal, tossing bones to favored interests, rather than any principled abolition of any levies or a wholesale cut in rates.
Is it possible that Bush was actually the worst president ever? I’d say he’s a strong contender. He started out with a gigantic lie — that he would cut the size of government, reduce taxes, and stay out of foreign wars — and things got much worse from there.

Let’s look at just some of the highpoints in the catalog of disasters the Bush regime created:

• No Child Left Behind. Forget about abolishing the Department of Education. Bush made the federal government a much more intrusive and costly part of local schools. Project Safe Neighborhood

• Project Safe Neighborhoods. A draconian law that further guts the 2nd Amendment, like 20,000 other unconstitutional gun laws before it.

• Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit. This the largest expansion of the welfare state since LBJ and will cost the already bankrupt Medicare system trillions more.

• Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Possibly the most expensive and restrictive change to the securities laws since the ‘30s. A major reason why companies will either stay private or go public outside the U.S.

• Katrina. A total disaster of bureaucratic mismanagement, featuring martial law.

• Ownership Society. The immediate root of the current financial crisis lies in Bush’s encouragement of easy credit to everybody and inflating the housing market.

• Nationalizations and Bailouts. In response to the crisis he created, he nationalized Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and passed by far the largest bailouts in U.S. history (until OBAMA!).

• Free-Speech Zones. Originally a device for keeping war protesters away when Bush appeared on camera, they’re now used to herd.

• The Patriot Act. This 132-page bill, presented for passage only 45 days after 9/11 (how is it possible to write something of that size and complexity in only 45 days?) basically allows the government to do whatever it wishes with its subjects. Warrantless searches. All kinds of communications monitoring. Greatly expanded asset forfeiture provisions.

• The War on Terror. The scope of the War on Drugs (which Bush also expanded) is exceeded only by the war on nobody in particular but on a tactic. It’s become a cause of mass hysteria and an excuse for the government doing anything.

• Invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Bush started two completely pointless, counterproductive, and immensely expensive wars, neither of which has any prospect of ending anytime soon.

• Dept. of Homeland Security. This is the largest and most dangerous of all agencies, now with its own gigantic campus in Washington, DC. It will never go away and centralizes the functions of a police state.

• Guantanamo. Hundreds of individuals, most of them (like the Uighurs recently in the news) guilty only of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, are incarcerated for years. A precedent is set for anyone who is accused of being an “enemy combatant” to be completely deprived of any rights at all.

• Abu Ghraib and Torture. After imprisoning scores of thousands of foreign nationals, Bush made it a U.S. policy to use torture to extract information, based on a suspicion or nothing but a guard’s whim. This is certainly one of the most damaging things to the reputation of the U.S. ever. It says to the world, “We stand for nothing.”

• The No-Fly List. His administration has placed the names of over a million people on this list, and it’s still growing at about 20,000 a month. I promise it will be used for other purposes in the future…

• The TSA. Somehow the Bush cabal found 50,000 middle-aged people who were willing to go through their fellow citizens’ dirty laundry and take themselves quite seriously. God forbid you’re not polite to them…

• Farm Subsidies. Farm subsidies are the antithesis of the free market. Rather than trying to abolish or cut them back, Bush signed a record $190 billion farm bill.

• Legislative Free Ride. And he vetoed less of what Congress did than any other president in history. The only reason I can imagine why a person who is not “evil” (to use a word he favored), completely uninformed, or thoughtless would favor Bush is because he wasn’t a Democrat. Not that there’s any real difference between the two parties anymore…

As disastrous as he was, I rather hate to put him in competition for “worst president” in the company of Lincoln, McKinley, Wilson, the two Roosevelts, Truman, Johnson, and Nixon. He is simply too small a character — psychologically aberrant, ignorant, unintelligent, shallow, duplicitous, small-minded — to merit inclusion in any list.

On second thought, looking over that list of his personal characteristics, he’s probably most like FDR, except he lacked FDR’s polish and rhetorical skills. I suspect he’ll just fade away as a non-entity, recognized as an embarrassment. Not even worth the trouble of hanging by his heels from a lamp post, although Americans aren’t (yet) accustomed to doing that to their leaders.

Those who once supported him will, at least if they have any circumspection and intellectual honesty, feel shame at how dim they were to have been duped by a nobody.

The worst shame of Bush — worse than the spending, the new agencies, the torture, or the wars — is that he used so much pro-liberty and pro-free-market rhetoric in the very process of destroying those institutions. That makes his actions ten times worse than if an avowed socialist had done the same thing. People will blame the full suite of disasters Bush caused on the free market simply because Bush constantly said he believed in it.

And he’s left OBAMA! with a fantastic starting point for what I expect to be even greater intrusions into your life and finances. Eventually, the Bush era will look like The Good Old Days. But only in the way that the Romans looked back with nostalgia on Tiberius and Claudius And then Nero. And then the first of many imperial coups and civil wars.

Adebayor, Adebayyooorr...

Because I wouldn't go near the site on my own, here's some shit a friend sent me from Fox Sports.

"Manchester City are reportedly planning to raise their concern with (fmc)
officials about a racist Emmanuel Adebayor chant...City are aware of an Adebayor
chant circulating on the internet."

That would be this one- there are others- sure to be taken down any minute. Before we get to the racist aspect, "...circulating on the internet..." Uhhh, like the Internet just hatched up this chant. Like, because everybody learned it on the Internet because, like, nobody was watching the match that day when a whole section of the stadium serenaded him whilst he was stretchered off.

Give me a break; this was all down to a bunch of possibly liquored-up Yids looking to flip the script on the Gooners. If the "Internet" had thought it up, it would have been far more creative.

I wonder if this is typical high-brow cunt semantics.  

Only the targets get to decide on the racist nature of the slung mud...apart from Bokolis, of course. Certainly not some cunt club official, not the FA, or Sepp Blatter or Platini.  Well, they can, but who gives a fuck.

So, just how racist is this?  This aught to be fun.  Maybe, not as much fun as Chris Rock delineating the acceptable use of the word "nigger" by White people, but he mailed in Kill the Messenger, so you never know.

Here's the deal.  One of the characteristics of racism is that the shit is slung down the social ladder (I would use the term "human hierarchy," but that would acknowledge the existence of a hierarchy and "social ladder" makes for a better metaphor).  That's why, when Black people say that White people can't dance, jump, etc., nobody considers it racism.  People that blanket the term on any shit thing that happens are implying that Adebayor is not only further down the social ladder from the slingers, but that he is further down the social ladder from the blanketers themselves, admitting (without acknowledging) their own racism.

Adebayor, in a football shirt, is in no way down the social ladder from the patrons, who are marks.  Adebayor is the bigger man, so the marks' taunting means nothing unless Adebayor makes it more.  To do so, he would have to sink to the marks' level.  

Before anyone runs off thinking they have license to sing, consider the point about the target.  Good luck convincing your Black neighbor, co-worker, etc., that they shouldn't take it as racist.

Now, if that song is sung to Adebayor while he's in jeans and gators, you lose the luxury of slinging insults without accountability.  Besides, if you go around doing shit like that, you have other shit going on that you need to address.

But, leaving aside all the qualifications, is it racist?  Here's the text:

Adebayor, Adebayor, his dad washes elephants and his mum's a whore.

Nope.  Hey, this a lot of things- which I'm not going to discuss, but calling it racism is lazy.  I presume we're on the same rung of the social latter these days, so you'd have to be kicking someone down the social ladder.  Unless you're implying that he has no choice but to wash elephants, telling an African immigrant that his dad washes elephants (presumably in Africa) does not do that.

That said,  if you're a descendant of people that used to trade humans (or accepted it), understand that you don't get to say shit like this. Granted, it's easy for me to say because it wasn't none of my ancestors.  If you go around slinging shit like this or the Sol Campbell song (Sol, wherever he may be, doesn't realize that, as long as he shows that it gets under his skin, it's never going to stop), there's a pretty good chance that, for many other reasons, you're racist.