James Gandolfini was a really sweet man, who made it his job to show other guys - usually tougher guys - generally are, too:
In a 2012 interview with The Times, Gandolfini spoke about his role in the coming-of-age film “Not Fade Away” on which he collaborated once again with "Sopranos" creator David Chase. In the film about rebellious rock 'n' roll-minded teenager growing up in New Jersey in the 1960s, Gandolfini plays Pat, a father, husband and WWII vet who provides a secure home life to an ungrateful wife, son and daughter.
“This was an hommage to my old man," said the actor. "My father wasn't as antagonistic [as his character] but he was old school — Brooklyn, cement mason, bricklayer. He didn't understand me or my generation. He took care of his family, took care of his children."
"What we as children didn't realize is our father was a man who had dreams, aspirations and maybe there were things he wanted to do and places he wanted to go and he couldn't because he had a family," he continued. "When I realized that as a kid, I wished I was a better son."
How many other people, in this Father-hating society, will admit they fucked up? By misreading the previous generation's men, they created chaos from the mistake?
I still fondly recall sharing a piece of pie with my father in a diner, after we'd watched "Cooley High" together, because he wanted me to understand how it was when he came up. (He'd had a heart attack, and his side of the family - who, unbeknownst to me, knew where I was - reconnected us in an effort to raise his spirits.) We talked for hours, about everything, but when it came down to what happened to he and I, my mother - our family - his head sank, hard, and I got an inkling of life's crushing power.
He didn't explain it, in detail, to me. He couldn't. In some ways, he didn't have to.
That intimidating man's body language said it all:
There was nothing he could do - not against the world.
A lesson I, too, didn't take that seriously - until my own family went awry,...
Despite making it through yesterday in one piece, I've got so much on my mind today, it's difficult to even start typing. By now, most of you may know I end my intentional reading (which I include under the heading "blogging") with Instapundit and Althouse. That's one reason they stay so fresh on my radar. Althouse is also why I'm opening with this girl, full of pride over her ginormous funbags that no man better be looking at or else he's a sexist, and probably a misogynist:
This .GIF is truly Ann's precious feminism "in action."
That's right:
No longer will "these boots" walk all over men, but, thanks to feminist assertiveness training - and the new over-the-counter birth control - fathers can look forward to men being killed off by their daughters smothering us in gallons of teen-and-post-teen breast milk until we die off.
And, mostly, thanks to one of Ann's heroes, Madonna, making it the right thing to do.
But I digress. No, my actual point was going to be, this dancing girl (no one this stupid can be called a "woman") was acting on her feelings. You remember feelings, don't you? Althouse was going on about how influential they were yesterday. But not today. Today she's got this to say:
You know what? Nope - I can't do it. (I told you I'm frazzled,...)
Here's the post I was going to link to, but, to be honest, I'm tired of writing about stupid contradictory assholes like Ann. (James Taranto called her "contrary" yesterday - yeah, she's contrary all right, even to her own ideas, from the very day before, which means - even if the Instapundit and The Wall Street Journallinks to her - like Glenn, she's really just another nutty "professor," whatever that term means, considering the screwy context they've created for it.) Following your feelings was alright yesterday, it's not alright today, and tomorrow it'll be some man's fault women have feelings at all - should I even be trying to keep up?
Sure, despite knowing little about music - and having some of the worst taste in it I've ever seen - Ann knows the difference between Mac Daddy and Daddy Mac, but (as much as I love the imagery of Ann taking her gay son to see the only child rappers who wore their clothes backwards) like a "dissatisfied" housewife would say, that's simply not enough.
Somebody alert me when she fully comes to her senses.
After today, I'ma try to ignore her idiocy.
I admit, speaking as someone referred to often as a musical genius, it'll be hard.
Back to Mac Daddy's death. It gave me a little jolt this morning, but mostly because it's reported he died of a drug overdose. Gee, how did that happen? It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that, once Kriss Kross reached puberty, women like Ann (and her gay son) didn't find them "sexy" anymore, could it? (I think, from reading Ann's blog, I know more about what turns her on than Meade,...) I can still remember the ruthless backlash Kriss Kross faced, merely for growing up, and my thoughts on how immediate, cruel, and feckless it was.
It had nothing to do with their music, BTW, which depends on your ears, not your eyes. No, based on pimples, Kriss Kross' career was over. Don't think that's true? Where's the multi-talented, multi-instrumentalist Hanson now?
They, too, were boys who merely grew up.
Yes, Mac Daddy's dead, but I think his "fans" killed him a long time ago.
That last link brings me to the guy who offered his "lollipop" to all these "smart, intelligent, and independent women" in his video. (I do like that he shows 200 lb. black women as attractive when women in the white world look like they're auditioning for a concentration camp stay,...) Not that anybody cares unless a Rapper dies, but the ultra-prolific Lil Wayne just had another epileptic seizure. I don't really know what to say - should Weezy take some time off? Work as much as he can until he can't? What? I don't know. My heart goes out to him, though, because - whether he makes stupid shit or not - he's certainly talented, and can be a LOT of fun, so the idea of losing him, too, is heartbreaking-in-advance.
My heart also breaks when I remember Glenn's clique is made up of teachers - and then looking at the results. How do you stop gun violence? Gun Control. So what's the college-educated answer when terrorists make bombs out of pressure cookers?
Stupidity, of course. College-educated stupidity. The kind I didn't get:
I still think most women are insane and feel for the men who don't/can't act accordingly.
"Thank God" for Too $hort.
Which brings us to the God portion of our show. (There's always a God portion of our show.) Here, a preacher is making some very good points - Hey, it can happen:
1) Right under the noses of parents, teachers, and everyone else, artists are doing their jobs and playing with every possible concept under the sun - and the kids are eating it up because those same parents, teachers, and everyone else, aren't doing theirs. (Being hippies, they don't even know how to do it anymore, I think.)
2) When the forces of cultural subversion, manipulation, misinformation, and exploitation (Ann? Glenn? Hello!) get caught with their pants down, their "sincere" apologies don't mean shit. If they actually cared about anyone, or anything, they would've drawn the line between fantasy and reality in BOLD. But they don't - they'll push any bad idea, to be (as Ann said) "provocative," since getting your money is all that matters - because, to them, there is no "America" we adults should be protecting. Hell, as the so-called "parenting" out there proves, these Toys 'R' Us kids don't even think there's such a thing as growing up. Even Snoop Dogg agrees: "When you're buying Snoop Dogg you're buying all that that come with it. When you're buying Rozay, you're buying all that come with it. You know what his lifestyle is about, you know what his music is about, so you have to engulf all of that. If you're not willing to take all that on, then step out of the way and stop playing and acting like he's bringing harm to your company."
3) I can hear Ann Althouse telling me I'm no "fun" again.
Growing up in the ghetto - where I've see the results of all Ann's "fun" flying around - I have no idea how anyone can get the impression kids and parents are on the same footing. Funny thought:
Picture this as Ann and her sons.
Am I the only one who remembers when Ann got herself on FOX News for claiming she was "attacked" after some guy tried to grab her camera, with Meade by her side, in Wisconsin? Meanwhile - all over the country - this is going on, on a daily basis, and FOX and Ann are nowhere to be seen. But there's no difference in America's treatment of blacks and whites. Or a wealthy white lady being lunged at, for her camera, and a mob physically attacking a black woman and her children - in their own home - while it's being filmed.
One is newsworthy, and the other? Meh. Not even bloggable.
Thank goodness black people have blogs now, and I read them, huh? (Ann and Glenn think, by reading "The Root," they're getting the real nitty-gritty on blackness - when they've got me. I rarely touch that middle class black stuff, for the same reason I don't bother with Ebony and Jet magazines - they're stupid Civil Rights-era propaganda, having no bearing on the lives of average black people what-so-ever.) You wouldn't know anything happens, in anything but the middle class world, relying on these so-called "teachers."
Here's another situation I'd like to see Ann handle - that she doesn't cover - because who cares?
I care:
If I was this teacher, not only would I have clocked-the-fuck out of this "child," but I would've demanded the rest of the faculty backed me up in doing so (watching this, I can easily see him weighing his options under the current stupidity) and they'd had better do it, or else I'd attack them, too.
Which is why I'll never be seen as a teacher, I guess.
Speaking of good teachers, remember when I said to call me when Althouse comes to her senses? The greatest pimp who ever lived, "Magic" Don Juan, has a few suggestions on how Meade can speed up the process - and Magic's got the credentials (and his women in-line) to prove it.
Hey - we're only trying to help.
And finally, it all seems to come down to how we can't rely on the current enforcers (all self-appointed, BTW) to be reasonable - or even good Americans - under the circumstances. That goes for our leading political bloggers, as well. We're living in the real world:
We just read your Salon.com post "Why I Called Herman Cain's CPAC Speech a Minstrel Show" and, while we have a lot to say about it, race in America, liberalism, conservatism, and many other things (including answering your question of black conservatives, "Where is the love?") what we want to know most is why you explained the "Minstrel Show" jab but didn't submit one word - not one word - about this one:
We always need a monkey in the window, for he/she reminds us of our humanity while simultaneously reinforcing a sense of our own superiority. Sadly, there are always folks who are willing to play that role because it pays so well.
We think that is revealing. We mean, Chauncey, saying a black professional has put on a "Minstrel Show" is pretty bad, but to call him a "monkey" could be seen as far worse - especially when delivered by another black person. Don't get us wrong:
We're not suggesting either charge might be troubling to someone of Herman Cain's stature and achievement, but - when delivered by you about any other black person - such a charge could be said to reveal a deep-seated self-hatred of "your own people".
Thankfully for you, we wouldn't suggest such a thing because TMR doesn't engage in the kind of bogus psychologically-oriented racial BS political analysis your original column sprang from. You're welcome.
Now, to answer your question for black conservatives - "Where is the love?" - Dude, we don't know. As readers of TMR are aware, we were once married to a woman who left us for a quack doctor and the two of them went on to kill three people - and they're not even in prison! (Forget love, where is the justice?)
But, to answer your question more specifically, where is the love even in the so-called black "community"?
We put "community" in scare quotes because, recently, we were reminiscing with an old friend we hadn't talked to in a while about the whereabouts of the brothers we grew up with, and, out of twenty (20) men, only four of us are still alive. Most of the others died from a gunshot wound to the head and - we guarantee you - not one of those bullets got there because a white man pulled the trigger.
Where is the love, Chauncey?
For the reasons stated above, we think love is pretty important, so we don't go throwing it around too freely - and race is the least important criteria for who receives it from us.
You might even say, also for the reasons stated above, these days we find it much more reasonable to fall into the "We hate everyone equally" category, until someone shows us a reason to think otherwise.
We also don't think it's a coincidence that most NewAge cultists are Democrats, since the Democratic Party was the party of the KKK, and - while they've abandoned the overt white-on-black racism of the past - they're still obsessed with issues of race and blood, and content to play the angles of those issues to gain political advantage.
However clumsily.
First the Democrats were for whites, and now it's blacks, and next it's predicted to be hispanics, and then it'll be asians if they can figure out a way to win power by using them.
It's unending.
The truth is, we came to our conservatism through Bush, so out of all the subjects we blog about, race is the one we touch on the least because A) it's the one we like the least B) as a reflection of the United States, it's the stupidest C) there are never any "winners" and D) we sincerely agree with Morgan Freeman that everyone ought to just stop talking about it:
But, occasionally, something happens that gets the chattering classes to chattering, and, if we feel we have something to say on the subject, we'll allow ourselves to be drawn into the discussion enough to, hopefully, shed some light instead of bringing more heat.
Unfortunately, because of your original post, this is just such a time, so, without further ado - as we see it - here goes nothing:
Right now many of our fellow conservatives are all aflutter over your original blog post, and that by Alexander Burns, which both took aim at black Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain. Yours came in for the harshest criticism because you referred to Cain as a "monkey" and said Cain's excellent CPAC speech was actually a well-rehearsed "minstrel show". We'll let others decide if that's true here:
Pardon us if we don't don't join with our fellows in getting whipped into a fury, but compared to, say, techies raising money for Jenny McCarthy's child-killing group - which is the kind of serious NewAge life-and-death issue none of our conservative brethren will join us in condemning - we just can't get too upset over simple-minded name-calling,...an activity we gladly engage in, in case no one's noticed. We've got several reasons for our stance on this, starting with a couple of specifics:
First, it's pretty obvious that Herman Cain - radio host, former CEO of Godfather's Pizza, and national chairman for The Business & Media Institute - is not a monkey.
Second - we being experts at this name-calling thing - it should've been obvious to you that, if you were going to call Cain a monkey, then - rather than saying he's putting on a minstrel show - you should've said Cain's employer, the conservative Media Research Center, was his organ grinder. Face it, Chauncey:
If you're so ignorant you can't even get your metaphors correct - why should we consider what you write a threat?
Your very lack of power brings us to our more general reasons for not joining in the conservative pile-on - which, we're sure, not even our fellow conservatives are going to like:
As we mentioned before, with our Jenny McCarthy example, the more popular bloggers have what appears, to us, to be a strange set of priorities. A well-known liberal woman leading a fruitcake movement that's killed kids (and whose members voted for Obama, we might add) gets hardly a peep out of any of them, but let a nobody from Alternet call a successful businessman a "monkey" and all hell breaks loose - even to the point he feels it necessary to do a follow up.
Talk show diva (and now OWN Network CEO) Oprah Winfrey actually campaigned for Obama while promoting NewAge rip-offs like The Secret, charlatans like sweatlodge killer James Arthur Ray, and enough medical quackery to fill a pseudoscience museum, and our fellow bloggers say hardly anything - even if it's to conservatism's political advantage to take out this powerful liberal force in the media. But let Alexander Burns (to us, just "some guy") say he thought a black speaker at CPACwas boring and even Glenn Reynolds will get down in the racial gutter to attack him.
There is no "love" - from anyone, Chauncey - and it makes no sense. Well, actually, it does. A little. Racially.
You see, from where we sit, it looks like (contrary to what we, or Morgan Freeman, want) everyone's determined to play The Race Game™ - including The Special Conservative/Libertarian Edition. You know The Race Game™, don't you, Chauncey? That's the one where everyone gets to pretend they're not playing the race card while getting congratulations, and (most importantly) patting themselves on the back, for being so damned good at it? It's really popular with every political type except true post-racialists. This president's a pro.
What's really annoying about The Race Game™ ( especially The Special Conservative/Libertarian Edition) is that - while the players act like they're making this big contribution to civil rights in 2011 - in truth, they're risking absolutely nothing. Sure, it was stupid for you to call Herman Cain a "monkey" but, really, who's going to come to your defense? No one but you. And, once you got called on it, do you seriously see your reply - minus the most offending comment and apologizing for nothing - as fighting back? Of course not. There's nothing at stake - because there's no threat. There's no threat because - unless they're a street-level black conservative, and not a liberal, or a successful, and thus insulated CEO, or even a white conservative pundit - nobody's out to get you or trying to physically stop you in any way.
It's we rank-and-file black conservatives, like Kenneth Gladney, who have the most unique form of "skin in the game".
The increased bias against black conservatives, including black-on-black anti-conservative bias, is a real threat - and a dangerous one - everyone else is generally spared. There is no love. Death threats, physical altercations, charges of disloyalty to the race (and the country) and subversive attempts to undermine one's convictions - by friend and foe alike - are all par for the course for the black conservative. Here's an emailed message we received from a friend earlier this month for defending conservative ideals:
"You are a Black ass nigger born in South Central. Stop playing politics in [an] arena where you're not welcomed but used."
We bet your friends, or Glenn Reynolds', don't send many emails like that. (And, by the way, that friend was discussing a post we sent them by Glenn Reynolds.) According to our friend, people like the Instapundit are our puppeteers because it's impossible for a black conservative to think for himself. And if we insist we can, or are in a position where no one can stop us, well, we all heard the recent threats against Clarence Thomas at the Common Cause rally. It seemed like everyone was surprised by that - except for Clarence Thomas and other black conservatives. That's because few have to endure such racially-charged hatred as par for the course.
Black conservatives confront this type of danger all-the-time - and few acknowledge what we're up against, beyond stating we're hated more than other conservatives.
As a matter of fact, black conservative's increased passion (as a result of being under more pressure) can (and many times will) be used against us - by everyone, including white conservatives and libertarians - to marginalize us as crazy (which, needless to say, can also be twisted into a possibly racist tactic to help certain individuals maintain their sphere of influence without outside interference). Where is the love, Chauncey? Where is the love,...anybody?
Alphonso Rachel (AKA "Macho Sauce") of Pajamas Media, above, addressed black anti-conservative bias early in his career and we find it ironic that, like us, what he seemed to be acknowledging - even more than race - are assumptions about what black people can think. You, Chauncey, seem to assume that, if we don't join with the Democrats, we have no love for other blacks - like all other blacks are Democrats when (by our own example) that's clearly not that case. Democrat Senator Barbara Boxer gave us a pretty definitive illustration of this erroneous mindset in this infamous clip:
Please, Chauncey, explain to us how you - a black man looking for "love" from black conservatives - have come to agree with this white woman, so completely, on the idea a free American can't think independently of others he or she merely shares a skin color with.
Are Americans a free people or are we not? And, if we are, why aren't you fighting for that?
Where is the love, Chauncey?
We think part of the reason there's no love is the lack of outreach to blacks such as ourselves, from conservatives and libertarians - a goal we've been campaigning, for some time, to achieve. But the black experience can be so different, even when sharing the same country with whites, outreach can be difficult. (We recently got an email from a popular blogger that read: "Hey, I've got nothing against you, Crack. But I really don't get your blog, and God knows I've tried. Sorry." Yea, a triple murder, coupled with an artistic outlook honed in the ghetto can make it tough - but, as we wrote back, not even asking how to bridge that gap gets us nowhere,...) Seriously, aside from Macho Sauce (and a few others) on Pajamas Media, we haven't seen one dime going toward achieving the conservative's black outreach goals or toward changing the culture, artistically, to a conservative platform. We've heard a lot about the desire for it, though, like these statements from Andrew Klavan:
And, Chauncey, before you think "Aha! See - conservatives won't even help you when you're down with them!" we'd like to remind you that your determined race mongering is no more welcome. As we said at the beginning, we can't stand talk of race, for a variety of reasons, but the worst one is having to face all the assumptions everyone seems to have about what a modern black person should be. Like we said, we're with Morgan Freeman, and we can define ourselves:
All this particular black conservative wants - whether you're on the Right or the Left - is assistance in expressing that (as, for instance, we're getting from iOwnTheWorld.com) because we don't feel any "love" when being told who or what we should be.
The only way to get enlightenment is to speak with someone who is truly enlightened,...but, unfortunately, since we Mr. Know-It-Alls will probably not be P.C. about dissing the imbecilic cultural ideas, and institutions, the majority (including the questioner) holds dear - like thinking jawing about race will eliminate race, or NewAge nonsense can make sense - the response will probably be that which I receive daily on TMR:
Anger and/or sarcasm.
So, simply put, just like the only way to get enlightenment is to speak with someone who is truly enlightened, the only way to stay stupid is to insist on staying stupid - because of how the answers are handed to you. Are you listening Mr. President? Professor Gates? Anybody?
Dear Chauncey,
We're not suggesting either charge might be troubling to someone of Herman Cain's stature and achievement, but - when delivered by you about any other black person - such a charge could be said to reveal a deep-seated self-hatred of "your own people". 
Thankfully for you, we wouldn't suggest such a thing because TMR doesn't engage in the kind of bogus psychologically-oriented racial BS political analysis your original column sprang from. You're welcome.
But, to answer your question more specifically, where is the love even in the so-called black "community"? 
We put "community" in scare quotes because, recently, we were reminiscing with an old friend we hadn't talked to in a while about the whereabouts of the brothers we grew up with, and, out of twenty (20) men, only four of us are still alive. Most of the others died from a gunshot wound to the head and - we guarantee you - not one of those bullets got there because a white man pulled the trigger. 
Where is the love, Chauncey?
For the reasons stated above, we think love is pretty important, so we don't go throwing it around too freely - and race is the least important criteria for who receives it from us. 
You might even say, also for the reasons stated above, these days we find it much more reasonable to fall into the "We hate everyone equally" category, until someone shows us a reason to think otherwise. 
Hey - it works for us.
You see, unlike most conservative blogs, TMR is dedicated to anti-cultism and run by a black conservative atheist, so we're unique in a lot of ways, including our extremely-politically-incorrect willingness to throw the words NewAge and Nazi around pretty freely, because we see the two subjects as intimately related despite many other's unwillingness to acknowledge or investigate it.
We also don't think it's a coincidence that most NewAge cultists are Democrats, since the Democratic Party was the party of the KKK, and - while they've abandoned the overt white-on-black racism of the past - they're still obsessed with issues of race and blood, and content to play the angles of those issues to gain political advantage.
However clumsily.
First the Democrats were for whites, and now it's blacks, and next it's predicted to be hispanics, and then it'll be asians if they can figure out a way to win power by using them.
It's unending.
The truth is, we came to our conservatism through Bush, so out of all the subjects we blog about, race is the one we touch on the least because A) it's the one we like the least B) as a reflection of the United States, it's the stupidest C) there are never any "winners" and D) we sincerely agree with Morgan Freeman that everyone ought to just stop talking about it:
Unfortunately, because of your original post, this is just such a time, so, without further ado - as we see it - here goes nothing: 
Right now many of our fellow conservatives are all aflutter over your original blog post, and that by Alexander Burns, which both took aim at black Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain. Yours came in for the harshest criticism because you referred to Cain as a "monkey" and said Cain's excellent CPAC speech was actually a well-rehearsed "minstrel show". We'll let others decide if that's true here:
First, it's pretty obvious that Herman Cain - radio host, former CEO of Godfather's Pizza, and national chairman for The Business & Media Institute - is not a monkey. 
Second - we being experts at this name-calling thing - it should've been obvious to you that, if you were going to call Cain a monkey, then - rather than saying he's putting on a minstrel show - you should've said Cain's employer, the conservative Media Research Center, was his organ grinder. Face it, Chauncey:
If you're so ignorant you can't even get your metaphors correct - why should we consider what you write a threat?
Your very lack of power brings us to our more general reasons for not joining in the conservative pile-on - which, we're sure, not even our fellow conservatives are going to like:
As we mentioned before, with our Jenny McCarthy example, the more popular bloggers have what appears, to us, to be a strange set of priorities. A well-known liberal woman leading a fruitcake movement that's killed kids (and whose members voted for Obama, we might add) gets hardly a peep out of any of them, but let a nobody from Alternet call a successful businessman a "monkey" and all hell breaks loose - even to the point he feels it necessary to do a follow up.
Talk show diva (and now OWN Network CEO) Oprah Winfrey actually campaigned for Obama while promoting NewAge rip-offs like The Secret, charlatans like sweatlodge killer James Arthur Ray, and enough medical quackery to fill a pseudoscience museum, and our fellow bloggers say hardly anything - even if it's to conservatism's political advantage to take out this powerful liberal force in the media. But let Alexander Burns (to us, just "some guy") say he thought a black speaker at CPAC was boring and even Glenn Reynolds will get down in the racial gutter to attack him.
There is no "love" - from anyone, Chauncey - and it makes no sense. Well, actually, it does. A little. Racially.
You see, from where we sit, it looks like (contrary to what we, or Morgan Freeman, want) everyone's determined to play The Race Game™ - including The Special Conservative/Libertarian Edition. You know The Race Game™, don't you, Chauncey? That's the one where everyone gets to pretend they're not playing the race card while getting congratulations, and (most importantly) patting themselves on the back, for being so damned good at it? It's really popular with every political type except true post-racialists. This president's a pro.
What's really annoying about The Race Game™ ( especially The Special Conservative/Libertarian Edition) is that - while the players act like they're making this big contribution to civil rights in 2011 - in truth, they're risking absolutely nothing. Sure, it was stupid for you to call Herman Cain a "monkey" but, really, who's going to come to your defense? No one but you. And, once you got called on it, do you seriously see your reply - minus the most offending comment and apologizing for nothing - as fighting back? Of course not. There's nothing at stake - because there's no threat. There's no threat because - unless they're a street-level black conservative, and not a liberal, or a successful, and thus insulated CEO, or even a white conservative pundit - nobody's out to get you or trying to physically stop you in any way. 
It's we rank-and-file black conservatives, like Kenneth Gladney, who have the most unique form of "skin in the game".
The increased bias against black conservatives, including black-on-black anti-conservative bias, is a real threat - and a dangerous one - everyone else is generally spared. There is no love. Death threats, physical altercations, charges of disloyalty to the race (and the country) and subversive attempts to undermine one's convictions - by friend and foe alike - are all par for the course for the black conservative. Here's an emailed message we received from a friend earlier this month for defending conservative ideals:
As a matter of fact, black conservative's increased passion (as a result of being under more pressure) can (and many times will) be used against us - by everyone, including white conservatives and libertarians - to marginalize us as crazy (which, needless to say, can also be twisted into a possibly racist tactic to help certain individuals maintain their sphere of influence without outside interference). Where is the love, Chauncey? Where is the love,...anybody?
Are Americans a free people or are we not? And, if we are, why aren't you fighting for that? 
Where is the love, Chauncey?
We think part of the reason there's no love is the lack of outreach to blacks such as ourselves, from conservatives and libertarians - a goal we've been campaigning, for some time, to achieve. But the black experience can be so different, even when sharing the same country with whites, outreach can be difficult. (We recently got an email from a popular blogger that read: "Hey, I've got nothing against you, Crack. But I really don't get your blog, and God knows I've tried. Sorry." Yea, a triple murder, coupled with an artistic outlook honed in the ghetto can make it tough - but, as we wrote back, not even asking how to bridge that gap gets us nowhere,...) Seriously, aside from Macho Sauce (and a few others) on Pajamas Media, we haven't seen one dime going toward achieving the conservative's black outreach goals or toward changing the culture, artistically, to a conservative platform. We've heard a lot about the desire for it, though, like these statements from Andrew Klavan:
That, we know already.
Take care,
