I've read this three times and I still don't really understand what Jackson is upset about.

That he hasn't been in the news lately?

I've read this three times and I still don't really understand what Jackson is upset about.

Hard as it may be for his legion of knee-jerk detractors to believe, he's coming to the defense of southern white men.

Yeah, I like it. Jesse's saying that all racial stereotypes are bad, even "Southern whites are rabid racists." Not much to disagree with there.

Hard as it may be for his legion of knee-jerk detractors to believe, he's coming to the defense of southern white men.

That's how I read it, too. A surprising and welcome statement.

I don't see how asking that question is equating southern white men with racists. Is southern St. Louis considered "the south"?

It was Kentucky, not St Louis, and KY is definitely the South.

Wouldn't it seem to cast some aspersions on your neighbor if someone showed up on your door and asked if he was a Klansman? At least it's a little tone deaf, at least unless baseball knows something. Which seems doubtful.

EDIT: And now I see the bit about Ron Kulpa, living in St Louis, in this article...

Is southern St. Louis considered "the south"?

It certainly is.

Missouri and southern Illinois was settled in the 1800s by southerners who favored slavery. The Missouri Border War with Kansas, for example, was sparked by John Brown's radically abolitionist leanings, and the Mormons were forced out of Missouri in the 1830s partly because they supported abolition and other Missourians believed they would bring free blacks into their community.* One of my social psychology colleagues does research on southern culture, and his work classifies southern Illinois as culturally Southern because of the settlement history and lingering cultural factors there.

* Contrary to popular misconception, Mormons were considered dangerously abolitionist by their neighbors, and Joseph Smith ran on an abolition plank in the 1844 election before he was killed.

It was Kentucky, not St Louis, and KY is definitely the South.

From the article:

"In addition, Hirschbeck said similar questions had been asked to neighbors of umpire Ron Kulpa, who lives in suburban St. Louis."

I am well aware of the history of Missouri, and I still don't think anyone that currently lives in suburban St. Louis considers themselves as southern.

Look, I think its great that Jesse is defending white people, but he's still making broad snap judgments against other people without knowing all the facts. Perhaps MLB had a legit reasons to ask these questions if, as Maury Brown alluded to, there might actually be an umpire in the KKK.

Jesse needs a "jump to conclusions" mat.

Not unexpected at all. The spokesperson for the Umpires Union used to work for Jesse Jackson's son in the U.S. House of Representatives. Obviously this was a favor he called in to lend some gravitas to the statement yesterday.

Perhaps MLB had a legit reasons to ask these questions if, as Maury Brown alluded to, there might actually be an umpire in the KKK.

See, the problem with this is that it requires us to believe that the Commissioner's office knows something that other people don't and that it is being proactive about it. With MLB, I never assume proactive competence when stupidity is an option still on the table. And this isn't stereotyping, because I believe everyone in the Commissioner's office, without regard to race or creed, is capable of being stupid.

(I saw the St Louis bit in this article after I wrote #7)

With <strike>MLB</strike> anyone, I never assume proactive competence when stupidity is an option still on the table


fixed

the new kunta kinte, now dealing with something really seriousn heh Vote for Obama Husseyn!

Get lost race hustler.

Perhaps MLB had a legit reasons to ask these questions

Perhaps monkeys will fly out of your butt.

Perhaps.

Of course if an umpire was found having ties to the KKK, the press would go wild and demand to know why MLB didn't do a better background check.

Jackson "That's my Quaterback, my Quaterback, the trip to Mexico had nothing to do with My Quaterback's sucky performance. Leave him alone! We are a TEAM!"

It was Kentucky, not St Louis, and KY is definitely the South.

Kentucky fought in the Union. Not "definitely the South". But I get that culturally it fits in rather well.

A friend of mine is from Louisville and claims Southern status.

Given what they identify as strikes and balls, I'm not sure the average MLB umpire could even identify a black person.

Uber primey for 21.

For a moment there, I thought this might have been a piece from The Onion.

Kentucky fought in the Union.

If I recall correctly, every state except one--South Carolina?--sent at least one regiment to fight for the Union.

One of my social psychology colleagues does research on southern culture, and his work classifies southern Illinois as culturally Southern because of the settlement history and lingering cultural factors there.

What about southern Indiana?

Kentucky fought in the Union. Not "definitely the South". But I get that culturally it fits in rather well.

I know about half a dozen Kentuckians who all consider themselves to be southerners.

Fighting for the confederacy is not exactly the requirement for being in the "South".

Kentucky was a border state which had both Union and Confederate governments. It was a bitterly fought over state for the first year or two of the war.

Kentucky is a southern state, at one time Maryland was a southern state. I would say Maryland has gone north while Kentucky has gone south.

Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Georgia, the Carolinas, Florida, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, Louisiana, and Virginia are the south. With Texas probably being the most cosmopolitan of the bunch (either them or Florida), Louisiana the most backwards and Virginia/Missouri the closest thing to not being southern.
With West Virginia being the bumblefuk cousin of them all.

On the beagling circuit (hounds that compete in field trials) the biggest "crackers" are from Missouri a.k.a. Missourah.

Those good ole boys are a breed apart.

And I will just leave it at that....

If you're trying to define "North" versus "South" on the basis of Civil War history, my home state of Oklahoma (aka Indian Territory) is about as confused and confusing as it gets.

What about southern Indiana?

Absolutely. S.R. 40 (Richmond through Indy and beyond) serves as a surprisingly accurate dividing line between northern Indiana and southern Indiana, both geographically and culturally. Southern Indiana has far more in common with southern states than northern ones.

Are you from Indiana, SU?

I'm from the northern end of the state and my girlfriend is from the southern region.

Are you from Indiana, SU?

Not originally Pops, but I've been here since college 22 years ago. I went to school in Central Indiana, lived for three years in North Central (Monticello), 14 years in SE Indiana (Greensburg) and now live in Portage, so I've had the state covered pretty well.

Oh, you live in Portage? I get the feeling I've asked you this question before.

classifies southern Illinois as culturally Southern because of the settlement history and lingering cultural factors there.

Hell, when I was growing up in Chicago 30 years ago, anything south of the 312 area code was the south. People from Kankakee spoke funny.

Oh, you live in Portage? I get the feeling I've asked you this question before.

Perhaps. Are you from South Bend?

Yes

I know about half a dozen Kentuckians who all consider themselves to be southerners.

I was born and raised in Kentucky, living there the first 32 years of my life. Kentucky is definitely a Southern state. Louisville has more in common with Indianapolis than Nashville, but the certainly the vast majority of the non-Louisville population (and, indeed, many Louisvillians) proudly proclaim their southern heritage. Louisville is, to me, the northernmost Southern city and the southernmost Northern city. Perhaps Midwestern would be a better distinction but most Kentucky folk refer to anything above them as "north".

One of my social psychology colleagues does research on southern culture, and his work classifies southern Illinois as culturally Southern because of the settlement history and lingering cultural factors there.

What about southern Indiana?

Just looked - southern Indiana's not on the southern list, but Oklahoma, Maryland, and Delaware are, plus Illinois south of Springfield. I'll pass on the info about Indiana - it's the kind of thing he's apt to check out.

Fighting for the confederacy is not exactly the requirement for being in the "South".

Thank you, from a Texan.

Just looked - southern Indiana's not on the southern list, but Oklahoma, Maryland, and Delaware are, plus Illinois south of Springfield. I'll pass on the info about Indiana - it's the kind of thing he's apt to check out.

Maryland's got a fat little strip through the center of the state (I-83 to the Southern end and then I-95 to DC) that is pretty northern, but I'd definitely agree that the rest of the state has more of a southern vibe to it.

whats funny about this is that IF one of MLB's umpires was found out to be a member of the KKK, Jesse Jackson would be the first person screaming that MLB had to know, and should of investigated.


wonder how long till Jesse attempts to shakedown the MLB for a donation. Might as well get your digs in now Jesse, get those kicks in while the kicking is good.

Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Georgia, the Carolinas, Florida, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, Louisiana, and Virginia are the south. With Texas probably being the most cosmopolitan of the bunch (either them or Florida), Louisiana the most backwards and Virginia/Missouri the closest thing to not being southern.
With West Virginia being the bumblefuk cousin of them all.

Delaware is a southern state, historically speaking. Still is, for many, south of the immediate Philly area.

Delaware is a southern state, historically speaking. Still is, for many, south of the immediate Philly area.

I had a roommate from Delaware in college. Definitely a Southern type of guy in terms of the cordiality and suppressed response to any irritation. He also said he was a surfer back home, which was the strangest fact of all.

"
I am well aware of the history of Missouri, and I still don't think anyone that currently lives in suburban St. Louis considers themselves as southern.
"

Well, sure. But thats because it's SUBURBAN St. Louis. Hell there are a few hundred thousand people in suburban Atlanta who don't consider themselves southern, even if they were born there.

But go OUTSIDE of St. Louis, especially east in Egypt Illinois and you will definitely see some Southern culture. And I DON'T mean that in a bad way. I love the South (and the Midwest), even when I hate it.

If you're trying to define "North" versus "South" on the basis of Civil War history, my home state of Oklahoma (aka Indian Territory) is about as confused and confusing as it gets.

That's true, but I always found that there was a line, running roughly north/south through Henrietta that divides "southern" OK from "not southern" OK. West of that line and the culture and geography is much more southwestern. East of that line, you're essentially in Arkansas and the people (including my mother and her family) are southern. That line isn't perfect, but it works reasonably well, at least for the WWII generation.

And, of course, Oklahoma's black towns (Grant, Boynton, Earlsboro etc.) are almost all in the eastern part of the state. Likewise, the worst of OK's race riots were in the east. I don't mean to sound like I'm acting all superior (being a western Oklahoman). It's just that out in the western part of the state we spent our time killing Indians rather than blacks. It's an important distinction in state history and culture.

Anyhow, where are you from?

He also said he was a surfer back home, which was the strangest fact of all.

Not so strange, Delaware does border the Atlantic in the southern part. Some swanky towns down there. You go south of Wilmington it starts feeling southern, go past Dover and it is very southern. South Delaware is very agricultural.

From 5 years of living within 2 miles of Missouri on the KS side of the KC area, I learned that there was a divide between KS and MO oriented people. MO people were hicks to the KS people while KS people were stuck up to MO people. It was like the KS people had an urban/suburban mentality and the MO had a rural mentality. It really threw me as to how different they were. Now that's just around the KC area from what little I got around the rest of the state, the rest of KS looked at the people in NE KS and just shook their heads. The MO people that I met seemed Midwest/rural oriented rather than Southern.

Whenever Jesse Jackson speaks, my mind shuts down. He wants to be so important but he has nothing to offer.

MLB should hire one of Jesse Jackson's assistants to give the investigators sensitivity training about historical suppression of southern whites.
It shouldn't cost more than $500,000 or so. A pittance compared to a backup catcher's salary.

Hard as it may be for his legion of knee-jerk detractors to believe, he's coming to the defense of southern white men.

Whenever Jesse Jackson speaks, my mind shuts down. He wants to be so important but he has nothing to offer.

MLB should hire one of Jesse Jackson's assistants to give the investigators sensitivity training about historical suppression of southern whites.
It shouldn't cost more than $500,000 or so. A pittance compared to a backup catcher's salary.

whats funny about this is that IF one of MLB's umpires was found out to be a member of the KKK, Jesse Jackson would be the first person screaming that MLB had to know, and should of investigated.


wonder how long till Jesse attempts to shakedown the MLB for a donation. Might as well get your digs in now Jesse, get those kicks in while the kicking is good.

There should be a rule that every time someone rips a African American Civil Rights leader, they should write articulately about an African American Civil Rights leader they respect. Each one can be used only once per thread.

That's not to say there aren't reasons to criticize Jesse Jackson.

There should be a rule that every time someone rips a African American Civil Rights leader, they should write articulately about an African American Civil Rights leader they respect.

Do we also need to do this when we rip, say, a sportswriter like Plaschke?

Absolutely. S.R. 40 (Richmond through Indy and beyond) serves as a surprisingly accurate dividing line between northern Indiana and southern Indiana, both geographically and culturally.

Do you mean U.S. 40? At least that's what my map says.

MLB should hire one of Jesse Jackson's assistants to give the investigators sensitivity training about historical suppression of southern whites.
It shouldn't cost more than $500,000 or so. A pittance compared to a backup catcher's salary.

Given how much MLB paid for the Mitchell Report, which consisted mainly of photocopies of stuff a few witnesses that the government already found, I don't think MLB would even be able to send an intern to the post office for stamps for any cost less than a million or so.

Not so strange, Delaware does border the Atlantic in the southern part. Some swanky towns down there. You go south of Wilmington it starts feeling southern, go past Dover and it is very southern. South Delaware is very agricultural.

The Delaware Beaches are effectively summer suburbs of Washington, Baltimore and Philadelphia. Outside the beach towns proper are communities of huge beach houses owned by incredibly rich people from those cities who have to spend their money somewhere.

Do you mean U.S. 40? At least that's what my map says.

Yeah, I thought about that later and remembered it was a U.S. highway.

There should be a rule that every time someone rips a African American Civil Rights leader, they should write articulately about an African American Civil Rights leader they respect. Each one can be used only once per thread.

Don't lump my statement in with the rest of those. I gave Jackson respect.

With Texas probably being the most cosmopolitan of the bunch (either them or Florida), Louisiana the most backwards and Virginia/Missouri the closest thing to not being southern.

I note with interest the ranking of states identified as 'Southern' with their 'cosmopolitan' nature; is this an implication that the South is 'less cosmopolitan' overall than other parts of the country? Would one feel compelled to rank the 'cosmopolitan standing' of the Midwest, Southwest, or Northwest? Just curious.

As far as Virginia being one of the states 'closest to not being Southern'...that only goes for Northern Virginia. Everything south of Fredericksburg is quite Southern. Even though there aren't any decent hush puppies, iced tea, or pulled pork BBQ in Richmond, it's still very Southern (for better and worse) in it's attitudes and culture.

"We did not anticipate that they would approach neighbors posing as a close colleague and friend of the umpire's and asking them questions such as: Do you know if umpire 'X' is a member of the Ku Klux Klan? Does he grow marijuana plants? Does he beat his wife? Have you seen the police at his home? Does he throw wild parties?"

Jesse Jackson is right. I'm tired of people assuming that just because you live in Kentucky, or some other southern state, you grow marijuana plants and throw wild parties. How many times do we have to hear that stereotype?

"
I am well aware of the history of Missouri, and I still don't think anyone that currently lives in suburban St. Louis considers themselves as southern.
"

Well, sure. But thats because it's SUBURBAN St. Louis. Hell there are a few hundred thousand people in suburban Atlanta who don't consider themselves southern, even if they were born there.

But go OUTSIDE of St. Louis, especially east in Egypt Illinois and you will definitely see some Southern culture. And I DON'T mean that in a bad way. I love the South (and the Midwest), even when I hate it.

That's all well and good, but like I said, I don't think someone from suburban St. Louis would be worried that they are being stereotyped as a southern white man if they were asked about the KKK. That's what this story is about.

Anyhow, where are you from?

To answer bunyon's question: Bartlesville. Eastern half of the state, but also 20 miles from Kansas and with a population that includes a lot of chemists and chemical engineers recruited from all over the midwest to move there post WWII. The bottom line is that I speak with a midwestern accent and don't identify myself as southern - not a value judgment, just a question of who I am.

To answer bunyon's question: Bartlesville. Eastern half of the state, but also 20 miles from Kansas and with a population that includes a lot of chemists and chemical engineers recruited from all over the midwest to move there post WWII. The bottom line is that I speak with a midwestern accent and don't identify myself as southern - not a value judgment, just a question of who I am.

Yeah, I should probably amend my east/west line for north/south status. My mom's family comes from the Muskogee area and they - and all their friends/acquaintances I've met - remind me a lot of the folks living around me here in North Carolina. However, I've known a few people from Bartlesville (and even Tulsa) who quite definitely don't fit with my idea of the south. FWIW, Bartlesville HS is (or was when I was in the state) one of the best high schools in OK. I'd guess that is due to Phillips. As you say, the oil industry brought a lot of folks in. Likewise, I'd say around many southern cities today with significant industry, the feel is much less southern due to folks moving in. Get out in the rural areas and you'll get back to the old southern feel quickly.

In fact, I think there is a much greater difference in rural/urban people than northerner/southerner. YMMV.

And, BTW, I grew up in Hydro - a small farm town about an hour west of OKC. My college roommate was from Bartlesville. I'd ask if you're him, but he hated baseball. We got along otherwise.

With Texas probably being the most cosmopolitan of the bunch (either them or Florida), Louisiana the most backwards and Virginia/Missouri the closest thing to not being southern.

Anyone who thinks LA is most backward has obviously never set foot in MS.

Full disclosure: I'm native Louisianan.

There should be a rule that every time someone rips a African American Civil Rights leader, they should write articulately about an African American Civil Rights leader they respect. Each one can be used only once per thread.

I agree!

In the same vein, every time someone rips a racist leader, they should write articulately about a racist leader they respect.

Wait.

That's not right.

In fact, I think there is a much greater difference in rural/urban people than northerner/southerner. YMMV.
Sure - I doubt you'd find many who would disagree.

From 5 years of living within 2 miles of Missouri on the KS side of the KC area, I learned that there was a divide between KS and MO oriented people. MO people were hicks to the KS people while KS people were stuck up to MO people.

Well, to be accurate.. most of the Kansans in Johnson County are really candyland rich folks who fled KCMO. Plus, they can't drive worth a damn.

Plus, Missourians tend to like MU basketball/football, Kansans tend to like KU basketball/football. Nobody really likes K-State other than me and some people in the Little Apple.

Don't lump my statement in with the rest of those. I gave Jackson respect.

Fair enough. Sorry about that.

Getting back to Bunyon's post #44: he drew a north-south line and said that east of that line, you're "essentially in Arkansas." But there's a big chunk of history that that part of the state does not share with Arkansas.

If you look at the years 1889-1907, Bunyon's line is a crude approximation of the border between Indian Territory (in the east) and Oklahoma Territory (in the west). Indian Territory was still under the control of the "Five Civilized Tribes" - Cherokee, Creek, Chickasaw, Choctaw, and Seminole. Oklahoma Territory belonged to the whites who came in during the land runs and land lotteries that started in 1889. As for that name - "Five Civilized Tribes' - it may sound weird, but I'm pretty sure that those Indians embraced the title. And I don't doubt that Cherokees and Creeks looked down on those who had been in Oklahoma before the Trail of Tears - Osage, Kiowa, and so on - as uncivilized.

The white land-runners (and cheaters - "Sooner" is a name for a cheater) came from all directions, but the stereotype has them lined up on the Kansas border, and I'm guessing the larger crowds came from that direction. So call them "Westerners," in the same sense that Walter Johnson and Pete Alexander were Westerners.

The Indians had owned almost all of that territory before the Civil War. And some of them bought and held African slaves. Indians from Indian Territory fought on both sides of the Civil War (and some among them tried in vain to keep their tribes out if it, figuring - correctly - that it was a loser's game either way.) The renegotiations and punishments that followed the Civil War cost these tribes much of their lands, setting up the eventual land runs. I had thought that as part of the post-Civil War actions, the slaves of Indians were granted tribal membership. I have read that the Cherokee have been denying this recently - denying tribal membership to the descendants of Cherokee slaves.

The eastern Oklahoma Indians let whites come in if they had an Indian spouse, or a business relationship, or this, or that, until eventually they couldn't keep them out and were culturally overrun. The whites who came into I.T. did largely come from Arkansas and East Texas and other parts of the South. The oil boom started when it was still I.T. The first oil well in Bartlesville was drilled in 1897 or 1898; Tulsa and Glenpool not long afterwards. The oil industry in I.T. was the work of white entrepreneurs, none of whom would have hesitated to exploit an Indian if there was a buck to be made.

I don't doubt that Muskogee is essentially Southern, complete with a history of de jure segregation. (See Muskogee Manual HS.) Tahlequah, which isn't all that far away, is still so Cherokee that it's got to feel a little different. (The very word "Muskogee" is a transliteration of the tribal confederation name usually translated as "Creek," which tells you whose lands it was founded on.)

But one grows up without ever really knowing some things. I had never heard of the 1921 Tulsa race riot until a few years ago. That's an awfully big thing to blot out of collective memory.

Also: I am certainly not Bunyon's college roommate.

Extra notes - The best counties in Missouri for George Wallace in 1968 were..

In the Boothill: Pemiscot (38% Wallace plurality), New Madrid (31%), Mississippi (30%), Dunklin (24%), Scott (23%), Butler (20%), and Stoddard (20%)

And in the STL TV market: Jefferson (20%), St. Charles (19%), and Lincoln (17%).

So that adds a dimension to some parts of the STL area.

During the actual Civil War, STL County did vote for Lincoln in 1860 and they were pretty loyal.

The Boothill is definately more Southern than Midwestern.

Thanks, OCF. Other than knowing that there was a land rush and that the Trail of Tears ended there, I knew nothing about OK history. Your little primer is very interesting.

And I don't doubt that Cherokees and Creeks looked down on those who had been in Oklahoma before the Trail of Tears - Osage, Kiowa, and so on - as uncivilized.

They certainly did. The Five Civilized Tribes were, to a man of western civilization, definitely civilized. Written language, laws, philosophy - all of it was recognizable to those of European heritage. And clash they did with the more "savage" Plains Indians. You're dead on about Tahlequah (have you been?). I find it interesting because I grew up visiting that area and now live fairly close to a lot of Cherokee that managed to stay back east. Driving in the mountains here you can find Cherokee language radio, just as you can around Tahlequah.

The Tulsa riots must be the most well covered up race riots in American history. My grandfather was a professor of Oklahoma history. My father was a high school history teacher. I learned about the Tulsa riots only recently myself - as did my dad. My grandfather grew up in Okay, OK, about 25 miles from Tulsa. He was born in 1920. I'm not clear if he knew about them or not. I do remember him talking about the shame of how blacks were treated in eastern OK (and Indians generally in OK).

Oh, and Sooner still stands for cheater.

As someone who came of age in the great state of West Virginia, I feel the need to step up and defend her!

. . .um, or not. Hey, I love it there and consider it my home state, but "bumblef*ck cousin" is about right.

Oklahoma county formation map for anybody who wants to see how this all developed.

Fair enough. Sorry about that.

N.p.

I even have sympathy for Farrakhan. The FBI never firebombed <u>my</u> house.

Maryland's got a fat little strip through the center of the state (I-83 to the Southern end and then I-95 to DC) that is pretty northern, but I'd definitely agree that the rest of the state has more of a southern vibe to it.

Yeah, Dan, but you described about 90% of the actual population of Maryland in that "fat little strip." Maybe most of the topsoil in Maryland is "southern," but the people are not.

The Oklahoma of my youth had one-party politics, Dixiecrat politics. The Democratic primary (or primary runoff) for governor was the deciding election. Occasional stray Republicans lurked in the far north of the state, including Bartlesville. If there were any liberals anywhere, you didn't hear much about them.

I know someone, a generation older than me, whose politics has these as the main points: fiscal conservatism (including clean government), equal rights and racial equality, economic feminism, belief in education, and an aversion for war (not quite pacifism - WWII was justified - but a strong tendency). Back then, she was a Republican. After all, the Democrats of the state harbored both the corrupt and the racist, and national Republicans voted for civil rights bills. She doesn't live in the state any more, and I rather think that W. has just about convinced her to give up Republicanism.

The Republicans started out winning an election or two because of divisive Democratic primary meltdowns - then came Nixon and Reagan and the whole breakup of the "solid South" and resulting party realignment, turning Oklahoma into a solidly "red" state. Most of this happened long after I moved away. Whether I could stand being around a public discourse so dominated by Bible-thumping social conservatives now is just something that will go unexplored.

"bumblef*ck cousin" is about right.

Is it true that in West Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that even if a man and woman get divorced, they are still brother and sister?

Maybe most of the topsoil in Maryland is "southern," but the people are not.

David, you obviously don't spend any time south of Annapolis. Check out Galesville or Chesapeake Beach or Waldorf sometime.

Maryland's Eastern Shore had strong support for George Wallace too

Belfry: I repeat: Dan described about 90% of the actual population of Maryland in that fat little strip. Galesville has a population of, what, 12 people? 15 or 20 in Chesapeake Beach? Waldorf is the closest thing to a town in that list, and it's got maybe 15k-20k people in it?

The 90% is a slight exaggeration; 75% might have been about right. The Eastern Shore is very southern in parts, but the whole thing is less than 10% of the population of Maryland. Charles, Cecil, St. Mary's -- nobody lives there. Even if you count Western Maryland as "Southern," which isn't really right, you still only get about 25% of the population combined on the Eastern Shore/Western Maryland/Southern Maryland.

Is it true that in West Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that even if a man and woman get divorced, they are still brother and sister?

True. We view it as a family values decision.

Know what a tornado and a West Virginia divorce have in common?

Either way, someone's losin' a trailer.

/try the veal

Anyone who thinks LA is most backward has obviously never set foot in MS.

I grew up in Mississippi and would have to agree. Alabama and Arkansas gave us some competition but neither was quite at our level.

Belfry: I repeat: Dan described about 90% of the actual population of Maryland in that fat little strip. Galesville has a population of, what, 12 people? 15 or 20 in Chesapeake Beach? Waldorf is the closest thing to a town in that list, and it's got maybe 15k-20k people in it?


I gotta disagree. I didn't mean that fat a line down the highway. The Towson/Timonium/Cockeysville/Hunt Valley corridor is really the only "Northern" suburban Baltimore area. North of Hunt Valley and practically as soon as you go east or west of 695 is quite similar to the suburbs in Virginia/North Carolina.

Baltimore City, Howard, Prince Georges, and Montgomery have just under 3 million people. The directly northern suburbs and credit for part of Frederick are at most 150,000. You're still talking about another 2.5 million people. And that's if you're calling Baltimore a northern city, which is a stretch. I'd wager that a large percentage of Baltimore City residents would see more familiar in Richmond or Atlanta than in Boston or New York.

No, there aren't real cities other than Baltimore because Maryland has a noted lack of incorporated areas - Howard and Baltimore Counties have a million people and not a single incorporated community.

David, I'm more in line w/Dan here. I've lived in Baltimore City, Howard County, Anne Arundel County, and now in Mt. Airy, all since 1989. Howard County is the only one of those I'd consider 'Northern' in attitude.

Once you cross the line into PA, the differences really start to show. That, to me, is the most telling way of making the distinction. Roanoke is 'more Southern' than Baltimore, to be sure...but Baltimore is a heck of a lot more 'Southern' than Philadelphia, and not just by geographical means.

Kevin:
I don't disagree with any of that. I'd just leave a single statement of caution:
It's not a coincidence that large tracts of our population cannot name more than a few tokens of a particular ethnicity that they have have a deep respect for. It's also not a coincidence that we have a tough time getting balanced judgments in our criminal justice system or whenever there is a dispute across racial lines in the society that it is difficult to get empathy or collaboration going.

I know there's some division over the Jena 6 case or the Seattle triple murder case on this site, but that's kind of my point--whenever an incident like these happens, there's this massive gap in perspective that has people saying, "Yeah, they killed that Asian dude with a baseball bat on the night before his wedding, but they are nice guys and we don't want to ruin their lives!" And that dynamic certainly can't be laid at the feet of a few bad black civil rights leaders gone wrong. I mean we would never say, "Bush is an ass, it's open season on white people!" (Thank God)

I'm not troubled that people don't like Jesse Jackson. I'm deeply worried that a lot of people seem to hate Jesse Jackson or Sharpton or Johnny Cochran more than they respect any person of color or any person of color that doesn't directly agree with them on every issue. (That's critical because if the condition for respecting a person in society is that they are a darker face useful for expressing your own opinions, that's not worth too much.)

So my statement was an off-the-cuff remark on the above dynamic and a wish that we could improve it, not an attack on any critic of Jackson--who as I said, I have my own issues with. He's not powerless in Chicago, and maybe not more-often-than-not, but frequently he seems put his political ties ahead of what's best for the people of the city.

Of course, in a few short years, most of the poor folks of color will have been pushed out of the city limits, so it will be a moot point :(.

I'm sorry to respond to a thoughtful, relatively short post with such a torrent, but it's an issue I've thought about quite a lot, and I actually left off a whole other arc on the damage that stereotypical media depictions do--there are large sections of the populace whose only meaningful interaction with Asian Americans is Action Movies and Sixteen Candles-ish minstrelsy.

but Baltimore is a heck of a lot more 'Southern' than Philadelphia, and not just by geographical means.


I never really picked up that vibe. Yeah Baltimore came off like a podunk little city but that to me was because of its size not because of its personality or heritage. Baltimore just didn't really have a strong southern vibe to me.


I note with interest the ranking of states identified as 'Southern' with their 'cosmopolitan' nature; is this an implication that the South is 'less cosmopolitan' overall than other parts of the country?

Yes.

Yes, but the "flying under the radar" is partly due to a lack of self-promotion and partly due to the fact that mainstream America is uninterested in positive minority figures.

I mean we have a rather overeducated bunch here, but how many "educated" folks in the country do you think know much about civil rights leaders? I mean there's not much beyond King and Parks in terms of name recognition and it's unclear how many people who name drop have much clue who Dr. King was.

Should it even be possible for someone like John Hope Franklin to fly under the radar. I mean, if we want our bombers to be unnoticeable, we don't need to spend billions on stealth technology--we should just put a positive portrayal of an African American on the side.

To illustrate, make a list of known non-white Americans. What is the mainstream sentiment about them? I'd be surprised if you could make a fair list that wasn't overwhelmingly stacked negatively. You even have examples like Cochran or the Williams sisters who are seen in a strongly negative light for no reason I can possibly fathom.

And full disclosure: I don't know anything about Stanley Crouse. Who is that?

E-X: Did you ever reply in the other thread to my question about the point of your link to that Seattle (?) trial?

To illustrate, make a list of known non-white Americans. What is the mainstream sentiment about them? I'd be surprised if you could make a fair list that wasn't overwhelmingly stacked negatively.

Julius Erving
Magic Johnson
Michael Jordan
LeBron James
Alex Rodriguez
Roberto Clemente
Albert Pujols
Derek Jeter
Bernie Williams
Robby Cano
Stuart Scott
MLK
Bill Richardson
Will Smith
Jada Pinkett Smith
Whitney Houston
Denzel W
Oprah
Barak Obama
50 Cent
Tupac
Jerry Rice
Warren Moon
Anthony Munoz
Tim Brown
Vince Young
Tiki/Ronde Barber
Samuel Jackson
James Earl Jones
Michael Jackson
Janet Jackson
Bill Cosby
Kanye West
Cornel West
Orlando Patterson

Just off the top of my head.

I'll also note that Baltimore is south of the real north-south line, the WWF-WCW line.

I never really picked up that vibe. Yeah Baltimore came off like a podunk little city but that to me was because of its size not because of its personality or heritage. Baltimore just didn't really have a strong southern vibe to me.

Did you live in Baltimore or visit Baltimore? I can imagine the latter wouldn't give you the same feeling - Baltimore's historical ties are entirely to the colonial north so I'd imagine most of the places one would most likely visit would have a Northern feel to it.

As Bob says, the culture, the food, and even the speech change extremely quickly north of the MD border. Going north on I-83, as soon as you pass Leader Heights, boom, you're in the rust belt. South of that, you still have a lot of Marylanders as the PA line is only 20 minutes north of the northern Baltimore suburbs and with the except of sales taxes, the taxes, both property and income drop quite a bit from MD.

lived in Philly, visited Baltimore.

If Barack Obama is elected president, it will be interesting to see how that affects the tactics and strategies of people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. So much of their game is based on the notion that someone like Barack Obama could never be elected president. Of course, they may be right.

I'd add Edward James Olmos and Tiger Woods to the "positives" on JC's list. But it also does not include Terrell Owens, Barry Bonds, Allen Iverson, Al Sharpton, Wesley Snipes, Deion Sanders, Gary Sheffield, Kobe Bryant, Mike Tyson, Carl Lewis, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, as well as Johnnie Cochran and the Williams sisters, all of whom have many haters (in part certainly for legit non-racial reasons in many cases).

Olmos came to speak at my college and it was a huge deal, and he was very effective on stage. He also did some one-on-one stuff afterwards that obviously was huge to many people, incluidng whites, who interacted with him.

Just off the top of my head:

Different head

Thanks! Your list is extremely athlete heavy. There's not much "respect as a human being" in terms of mainstream capital here. (That's not to speak toward your sentiment at all. I know you are sincerely speaking here.)
I'll supply my readings of mainstream sentiment on these figures. Obviously these are just my opinion, but not on the athlete, only on what I think public opinion is.

Julius Erving
Magic Johnson
Michael Jordan
LeBron James
I'd say neutral, although there is the general negativity around African American athletes. I don't think "He is/was awesome at doing some stuff with a ball"-->humanization in this case (obviously Robinson would be a counter-example).

Alex Rodriguez
Negative.

Roberto Clemente
No longer in the mainstream eye. Anyone who has heard of him has a strongly positive impression, but he's been marginalized at this time. As an interesting aside, this might be part of the reason why his supported pushed for his universal jersey retirement--a poor idea from my perspective, but I can understand the sentiment.

Albert Pujols
Completely neutral.

Derek Jeter
Negative here, but generally positive in the media, although not in any substantive way.

Bernie Williams
Non-existent.

Robby Cano
Non-existent.

Stuart Scott
Negative, unless you count frat boy minstrelsy--we can all see why Chappelle walked from $50 million

MLK
Positive but in a disgusting neutered sort of way where his own words or character are unconsidered or cherry-picked to hell.

Bill Richardson
Second rate politician

Will Smith
Jada Pinkett Smith
Big stature as celebrities, no stature as human beings.

Whitney Houston
Negative

Denzel W
Positive but neutered. In a way, this speaks to a corollary of kevin's points--since he is a stable African American man who has a solid wife instead of drama, he the person takes a backseat to him the actor.

Oprah
Severe gender split. I hear her mocked on a daily basis by white men, but adored by white women. An interesting case.

Barak Obama
A great case. I'd say positive, but it'll be interesting to see how the next steps develop. You see a lot of mainstream attempts to define his ethnicity for him. Also this crap about "black people don't think he's black enough". Of the 1700 black people I work in close proximity to, I know one who isn't supporting his presidency. Many of them respond with variations of the classic line from Chris Rock's American Movie Classic: "Who the **** do you think I'm voting for?"

50 Cent
Negative. Rapper stereotype.

Tupac
Negative, especially around any aspect of him being a positive leader in the black community.

Jerry Rice
Neutral. Admiration as an athlete, otherwise that's about it.

Warren Moon
Anthony Munoz
Tim Brown
Vince Young
Tiki/Ronde Barber
Non existent.


Samuel Jackson
Positive, but a little crazy.

James Earl Jones
Positive, although not much interest in his amazing life story.

Michael Jackson
Negative.

Janet Jackson
Positive until the last album Negative now.

Bill Cosby
Mostly just glee at taking his quotes out of context to drive home conservative anti-black culture points. I suppose that's positive?

Kanye West
Negative. Him demanding respect for his work as compared to Brittany Spears or whomever is seen as being self-absorbed.

Cornel West
Postive.

Orlando Patterson
Positive, but less visible.
Just off the top of my head.

Nice list. Now the entire list compare anywhere to the perception of OJ, Jesse Jackson, Farrakhan or Sharpton? (even individually)

I'll check the other thread when I get back from the store--wife is sick :(

Ahh yes, the "thoughtful" Stanley Crouch, who once wrote a column about entering a store and being disgusted by the "Negro thugs" he encountered therein -- based on nothing they said or did, of course, merely their appearance.

Just off the top of my head:

It's notable that not one person on that list is an Asian. I think the main reason for that is because there are not a lot of Asians in sports we watch on TV and not too many Asian-American actors and TV talking heads. So to make up for that oversight, here is my off the top of my head list of famous Americans whose heritage is in whole or in part from Asia:

F. Murray Abraham
Spencer Abraham
Andre Agassi
Rudi Bakhtiar
Joseph Barbera
Wild Bull Curry
Dick Dale
John Elway
Antonio Esfandiari
T. J. Houshmandzadeh
Jamie Farr
Doug Flutie
Phillip Habib
Sammy Hagar
Benny Hinn
Darrell Issa
Casey Kasem
Ray LaHood
The Maloof Brothers
George Mitchell
Michael Mizrachi
Ralph Nader
Daniel Pearl
Natalie Portman
Bobby Rahal
Rony Seikaly
Donna Shalala
Tony Shalhoub
Iron Sheik
Gene Simmons
John Sununu
Danny Thomas
Helen Thomas
John Zogby

Rich, doesn't Tiger Woods belong on that list ahead of some people like Elway (I am totally ignorant of any Asian heritage he has).

Yes, but the "flying under the radar" is partly due to a lack of self-promotion and partly due to the fact that mainstream America is uninterested in positive minority figures.

I mean we have a rather overeducated bunch here, but how many "educated" folks in the country do you think know much about civil rights leaders? I mean there's not much beyond King and Parks in terms of name recognition and it's unclear how many people who name drop have much clue who Dr. King was.

Should it even be possible for someone like John Hope Franklin to fly under the radar. I mean, if we want our bombers to be unnoticeable, we don't need to spend billions on stealth technology--we should just put a positive portrayal of an African American on the side.

To illustrate, make a list of known non-white Americans. What is the mainstream sentiment about them? I'd be surprised if you could make a fair list that wasn't overwhelmingly stacked negatively. You even have examples like Cochran or the Williams sisters who are seen in a strongly negative light for no reason I can possibly fathom.

E-X, those are some fairly good general points, but some of your implications are a bit misleading.

John Hope Franklin is revered within academia, as is Leon Litwack, a white history professor at Berkeley with credentials every bit as impressive as Franklin's. Yet how many Americans outside the academy have any idea who Leon Litwack is? The point is that while Franklin may have been ignored at the start of his career due to his race (though Harvard was publishing his books over 50 years ago), that certainly hasn't been the case lately. Mainstream America simply doesn't pay attention to any serious academics, black or white, who aren't among that tiny number of superstars who appear on television giving their opinions every time a news story breaks, or who wind up hogging the camera time on all those Ken Burns specials.

And if you don't think that mainstream America is interested in "positive minority figures," then I guess I have to wonder exactly what you mean by "mainstream America." If all you mean by that are the boobs who squat in front of their TV all night and watche nothing but sports and sitcoms, and who don't pay attention to anything outside the realm of celebrity, than I suppose you're right.

But if you mean to extend that to many or most of the critical institutions of mainstream America, I'd have to disagree with you. Take out a subscription to the Washington Post for a year, read it cover to cover with particular emphasis on the Metro section (where under the radar people of all races are most likely to be noticed), and tell me after the year is up that you still believe that. Maybe it's just that I tend to look at half full rather than half empty, and maybe it's just the perspective I have by seeing what it's like now compared to what it was like back in the day. And maybe it's just seeing all those "minority" faces on TV where you didn't see them not that long ago, nearly all of whom are positive by any stretch of the imagination. But I don't think that fully explains my perspective.

You could still say that it's a "white man's world," I suppose, if you just count up the cash and the property. That's certainly one important very important measure, and it's an obvious counterpoint to any simplistically optimistic view. But just as the world didn't freeze in place in 1958, it's not frozen in place today. And I'm pretty sure that someone like Obama might have a bigger effect than you realize on the pace of that change.

One oddity: the current California election. Yes, we're having a primary this Tuesday. I've seen maybe 3 Clinton ads on TV and one Obama ad. What saturates the airwaves are the pro and con ads concerning four propositions to ratify revised compacts with four casino-owning Southern California Indian tribes allowing them to greatly expand their operations. The opposition is funded mostly by one other SoCal casino Indian tribe and non-Indian gambling interests (racetracks and Las Vegas). It's hard to have any respect for either side (or either side's advertising budget).

But I wanted to note one cultural item: both sides choose to structure their television ads around talking heads who are obviously and unmistakably Indian - faces that look Indian, long braided hair, turquoise/silver jewelry, the whole business.

Go back, for instance to the court case you linked to a few days ago. You seemed to link to it as an illustration of continued racism. It didn't strike me as OBVIOUSLY that, as unfortunate as the deaths of those people is.

It isn't meant to be a single case to prove racism in the criminal justice system. It just one of many cases and studies that show that the courts consistently place a higher value on some lives as opposed to others.

I can't imagine a situation in which, even if it is assumed that the one account of the story--those in the car glanced on of the occupants of the house--is completely and utterly true that it would be anything other than murder to unload a dozen rounds into the unarmed occupants of that car and your friend.

In the Asian American community we are used to these cases: The Chin case, the Hattori case, the He case where the parents were found to be unfit simply because they were Chinese, and see the eerie parallels in the Vang case.

This actually reminded me of the Vang case--except in the Vang case he was outnumbered by half-a-dozen and he was defending himself from a gunshot and other hunters rather than some unarmed drunk guys in a car. Also, there was the area's history of white hunters threatening Hmong hunters. Does anyone think it was a problem though that he was convicted for killing all of his assailants?

Personally, I'm against mass murder, but if the society decides otherwise, that's fine, as long as people are treated equally.