Local Blogs

Raucous Caucus

By Tom Cushing

E-mail Tom Cushing

About this blog: The Raucous Caucus shares the southpaw perspectives of this Boomer on the state of the nation, the world, and, sometimes, other stuff. I enjoy crafting it to keep current, and occasionally to rant on some issue I care about deeply...  (More)

View all posts from Tom Cushing

Tin Cup Moment

Uploaded: Jun 12, 2014
Somebody named Collin Cowgill hit a 14th inning walk-off homerun for the Anaheim Disneys Tuesday evening, handing our Athletics a fairly rare defeat in the process. In ten years, he may have to remind even his mother of that achievement.

But in ten years, every baseball fan will still buzz about The Throw launched by A's left fielder Yoenis Cespedes earlier in the contest. After bobbling a Mike Trout double down the line, Cespedes recovered and launched a precision Cuban missile strike to A's catcher Derek Norris, 300-feet away, at home plate. Norris easily tagged-out Anaheimer Howie Kendrick to keep the game tied.

It was stunning to watch, as despair at the miss-play was quickly overtaken by joy at the tag and stupefaction at the sheer athleticism of the feat. An instant classic to be debated as among the best throws, ever. The internet lit-up with adoring tweetery, and he trended on facebook. It was an odd bit of actual baseball attention for the A's, whose excellent team record goes routinely unnoticed. Ten years after Moneyball, the team remains the Island of Misfit Toys, mostly journeymen with particular skills, assembled by mad Dr. Beane and well-deployed by Mr. Melvin.

So, how did the perpetually penurious A's end-up with a star and all-tools talent like Cespedes? When he defected three years ago, there was considerable interest in him among well-heeled teams, but also doubts about his major-league readiness. Only the A's offered both blindingly good money ($36 million over four years, a huge gamble for our Locals), and an instant opportunity to play in The Show. I recall seeing his first At-Bat in Spring Training. Far from being an undiscerning free-swinger, he walked on five pitches. It was a good sign of great things to come.

Like many instinctive athletes, Cespedes has shown a flair for the dramatic. He hit homers in both his first MLB game, in Japan that year, and at the home opener at the Coliseum. The latter might have left earth orbit if it hadn't collided, still on the rise, with Mt. Davis. He's excelled in the Play-offs, and won last year's All-Star Game Home Run Derby going away, with a punctuating bat-flip (at about 8:14 on the video) at the end. That success amazed everyone-not –a-die-hard A's fan, meaning nearly everyone. His former Cuban teammate, the temperamental Jasiel Puig has gotten more ink, to-date, in media-frenzied LA; Cespedes is a special player, though, and arguably a better fit for the team-oriented A's. Those two will be fun to watch, head-to-head, at this year's Derby.

Before Tuesday, his arm strength and accuracy were under-appreciated, although not without his trying. He'll often appear to 'nonchalant' a ball hit his way, hoping to lure a runner into trying to take an extra base; he'll also challenge them with a stare-down worthy of an uber-alpha dog. The Anaheim nine in particular has been slow to get the memo; he has thrown them out four times in the last two weeks – part of his majors-leading nine outfield assists. Interestingly, his may be only the second-best arm in the Oakland outfield – the league now knows not to run on his book-end, right-field Gold Glover Josh Reddick.

As of last week, Cespedes was sixth among American League outfielders in the fan-based All Star voting. New totals come out on Sunday. He may become the second A's rep voted onto the team this year, as Josh Donaldson currently leads the tally at third base. Brandon Moss is also worthily in the running. However that goes, his Tuesday fantasyland toss has secured him as sure a place in MLB annals as that last golf shot, over the water at the US Open, in the movie Tin Cup (video has a bit of ungolfly language in it). The Throw was made not far from Hollywood, and had the considerable advantage of being real.

Comments

Posted by American, a resident of Danville,
on Jun 12, 2014 at 1:28 pm

Amazing year for an amazing team! It seems like every game a new "best play" occurs, or a new hero emerges from the Island of Misfit toys...Steven Voight's key hits and homerun after being brought up(again) from Sacramento, Coco Crisp spiderman like catch of what appeared to be a homerun yesterday, and Cespedes throw to third base shows that his throw to home was no fluke!!

What other first place team in the majors can you get tickets in the first few rows for about $50 each, and watch passionate, true team baseball being played for the love of the game, by players with the fourth lowest payroll in all the majors? Where else can Republicans from Danville sit next to Democrats from Oakland and buy each other beers and celebrate the common love of a team of comic book characters achieving beyond their modest talents?

Just when you think our country is so fragmented and partisan with no common ground, you spend 3 hours at the Coliseum and it inspires your hope that maybe we really are one America...


Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of Alamo,
on Jun 12, 2014 at 6:04 pm

Yup -- I remember stopping at a restaurant in Palm Springs on the way back from a Spring Training pilgrimage. In the next booth was a group of kids I might have crossed the street to avoid at home -- all in Dodgers gear.

We talked baseball -- the great common denominator.


Posted by American, a resident of Danville,
on Jun 13, 2014 at 3:58 pm

Dodgers fans... Reason enough to cross the street!


Posted by Frederick, a resident of Birdland,
on Jun 14, 2014 at 9:14 pm

So, Tom, what would have made you cross the street? That they were kids? That their clothes might have indicated poverty? Their skin color? All of the above? You need to get out more. Cloistered life much? Next thing we know you'll be complaining about BART bringing Oaklanders to Pleasantville. You maybe need to grow a pair, Dude. Or should I call you William Tell?


Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of another community,
on Jun 15, 2014 at 6:12 am

Thanks for reading the blog, Frederick, and for the advice -- even utterly uniformed as it is about my life and history. As to my 'pair,' they serve me well, but I've learned to not always listen to them, and seldom let them do my thinking -- or commenting.

How 'bout you?


Posted by Frederick, a resident of Birdland,
on Jun 15, 2014 at 8:20 am

No need to get graphic about your parts.

As to my own commenting, when I hear a racist remark I usually don't ask to become involved in the racist's appeal to his life and history or other forms of denial.

Now, aside from the denials, you want to get past your racism? I'd recommend getting out more, meeting new kinds of people, expanding your horizons. You might then begin to learn to get past judging people based upon their appearances, racial make-up, and other superficial indices of personal identity.



Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of Alamo,
on Jun 15, 2014 at 7:34 pm

Son, accusing somebody of racism is one of the most serious charges you can make.

Now, I don't know who may have told you that it's okay to level such an accusation with No Evidence Whatsoever (there is sweet fark-all Nothing in my comment to indicate anyone's race), but it was bad advice. I have no intention of dignifying it with an unnecessary defense. As a famous African American once said: "You cannot prove a negative." (Clarence Thomas).

You might take a look at your assumptions. Your mother was right about them.


Posted by Frederick, a resident of Birdland,
on Jun 16, 2014 at 9:34 am

Dad, look at your response to American. And then perhaps look at it again. You really ought to know better, and you're setting a rather poor example for us youngsters. Your denial is dishonest and you embarrass us all. You really need to examine and own up to the undeniable strain of racism that runs through your discourse. It's never too late to speak the truth to oneself and others. It might be a valuable first step toward you becoming a better human being.


Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of Alamo,
on Jun 16, 2014 at 10:02 am

Time to get back to baseball.

In the immortal words of one Bryce Harper: "That's a clown comment, bro." Web Link


Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore,
on Jun 16, 2014 at 10:49 am

INDEED!

Web Link

A cup in need is a friend indeed!


Posted by American, a resident of Danville,
on Jun 16, 2014 at 1:20 pm

Frederick: Although I usually do not agree with Tom on almost anything(except the A's, and both being active in dog rescue programs), I think you are off base(no pun intended) with your racism allegation against Tom. There are many reasons anyone out for a walk might consider crossing the street rather than encounter someone that has nothing to do with that person's race. I support the Saint Vincent de Paul charity that helps homeless people, but often I will cross the street if I see someone who looks like they may be under the influence or mentally unstable, and does that make me anti-homeless? Or if I see young people just loitering suspiciously, I might cross the street, and does that make me anti-youth? It is human nature not wanting to encounter someone who may be a threat to your safety, and I think you read racism into Tom's blog that had nothing to do at all with his thoughts or opinions.

On an unrelated topic, I find it ironic that the Oakland's A's going away presents to Derek Jeter yesterday at his final game at the Oakland Coliseum was a bottle of Napa wine and gift card for free lodging at hotel and restaurant in Napa Valley. Does that tell you how A's ownership thinks about Oakland? Nothing good at all or unique to Oakland that the A's could give El Capiton to remind him about playing in Oakland? Had to give him things from Napa Valley? What about a Fenton's ice cream gift card? Tickets to a Warriors game? Anything Oaklandish?


Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore,
on Jun 16, 2014 at 2:49 pm

I've NEVER had the impression that Tom is a racist.

I cross the street if see a group of teens that are in my judgement too loud and seemingly intrusive. As a senior, I don't always feel safe after dark.

If that's racist then so be it...tee hee




Posted by Frederick, a resident of Birdland,
on Jun 16, 2014 at 9:57 pm

Too much. When some old white guy talks about crossing the street to avoid some young males, only a total doofus would conclude that the old white guy is worried about the vases of flowers the kids are holding, or the beanies they're wearing on their heads. When Tom says what he did, he clearly meant the following: he'd have crossed the street because he was afraid of them, and not because they're holding a vase of flowers or wearing beanies. When someone says what Tom says, the reader knows exactly what he's talking about. He and his friends can squirm, deny, rationalize away, and deflect all they want to. A racist statement is a racist statement, and anyone living in America today knows exactly what Tom was getting at. Got hayseeds Pleasanton?


Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of Alamo,
on Jun 16, 2014 at 11:32 pm

OWG here. I've mentioned this previously, but it's remarkable how much license some folks feel is conveyed to them by internet anonymity. It's like they think they can just write any outrageous thing -- statements that good sense, decorum, civility and maybe just a tad of risk would militate against expressing in person, and for attribution.

So much so that even after two folks who could hardly be considered allies rose to my defense (thanks, btw!), here comes Frederick again, shovel in hand, forgetting that the first rule of getting out of a hole is to stop digging. Not content with having been called-out/off-base for a conclusion based on the smallest of samples (that'd be zero), he soldiers on in a very lost cause. It's lost for many reasons ...

... including the fact that those kids in the restaurant were white.


Posted by Frederick, a resident of Birdland,
on Jun 17, 2014 at 5:17 am

Ah, yes, now Tom tells us those kids at the restaurant were white. Right. Got it. And they were all wearing beanies on their heads, too. Scouts honor! Why, we really should have realized this from the get-go!

Small sample? Sorry Tom, but speech isn't a matter of statistics and sample sizes. Each speech act carries both a literal and an intended meaning. Speakers (writers) know very well how to produce a meaningful sentence that is interpreted as such by hearers (readers). Your speech act conveyed an unambiguous, intended meaning. It was racist, and unambiguously so. How one deals with one's own racism, Tom, is best measured by honest struggle, not pathetic denial. Instead of twisting and turning, own up to it. Deal with it.


Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of Alamo,
on Jun 17, 2014 at 6:34 am

Aw, Frederick, I'm sorry that this story cannot have the ending you intended for it -- but then, it was never your story in the first place, was it? It does make you look terribly silly, repeatedly going down in flames over something that you (and only you) only Thought you saw in it. BUT it could be worse -- at least you've got that anonymity thing working for you.

You Could always apologize -- after all, confronting your 'unwarranted assumptions' problem could help make you a better person! It wouldn't even have to be sincere, but it's the right thing to do, and it Would be appreciated.


Posted by Ray Shemter, a resident of Rosewood,
on Jun 17, 2014 at 11:40 am

I winced when I saw the reference. I think most people would. We can all do better than this. Frederick, you're right but Tom's photo shows he's an oldster. Give him a break. We can all treat this as a learning moment. Tom ... you too.


Posted by spcwt, a resident of Danville,
on Jun 17, 2014 at 12:23 pm

You say you're not a racist, eh?

Do you own any Beyonce albums?

Did you see any of her shows on her "Dangerously in Love" tour?

Can you even name one Beyonce song? Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It) does NOT count. That's too easy.

If you answered no to any of those questions, then Frederick is right!!!

I suggest you get your Obama tattoo removed immediately. You don't deserve it.


Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of Alamo,
on Jun 17, 2014 at 12:52 pm

S-P: I saw Goldmember, does that count? I really wanna keep that tattoo, even if, for me, it's obviously only Mr. Obama's Caucasian-side heritage that I Really favor.

And Ray, when the charge is as serious as racism, and it's backed by no evidence, And it's even factually inaccurate about the kids in the restaurant, as a matter of principle I have no room in me for any kumbaya resolution. That's especially true when a comment is as youthfully arrogant and patronizing as yours is.

But I guess age-ism is okay.


Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore,
on Jun 17, 2014 at 7:55 pm

S....do you own any movies starring Maria Felix? Pedro Infante?

No...then you must be a R A C I S T! tee hee...

Did you ever see the movie "Amor Indio"? No?

What American star did Pedro Infante resemble/look like?

duh...are you a porkchop or what?

tee hee...




Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore,
on Jun 17, 2014 at 7:57 pm

ps But I guess being a Caucasoid is OK...you deserve it!

tee hee hee...


Posted by Frederick, a resident of Birdland,
on Jun 18, 2014 at 9:02 am

I'm going to tell you something the clowns you cozy up with probably won't, though Mr. Shemter did, but you refused to listen. You've got a real issue with race, Tom. Beyond the racially saturated quip you offered in response to American, your reference to Obama's half-Caucasian side and then "kumbaya resolution" shows extraordinary insensitivity to matters of race. Have you thought about how your comments might play with African-American readers? Or do you simply assume none are reading you? Your comments ooze racial animus and insensitivity. You, along with your friends American and spcwt, appear to be exasperated at having to share the planet with people of another race. It shows, and it shows rather blatantly. You may take solace in some mythical poll of your readers -- I won't comment on which of these are coming to your defense -- but this shouldn't be about whether a majority or a minority finds your comments racist. It should be about your willingness or unwillingness as it were to consider seriously the likelihood that your words are offensive to those who think of Obama as our president (without reference to his ethnicity), and kumbaya as a practice deeply rooted in an ethnic tradition. You are insulting many of your readers. You appear not to care. It is your loss.


Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore,
on Jun 18, 2014 at 11:17 am

help help...a white dude is on the war path...mercy...BUSTED!

he can't even take a joke from a fellow poster...white is as whitey does...

tee hee hee...

almost a caucasoid myself...put up you dukes...i mean it!


Posted by spcwt, a resident of Danville,
on Jun 18, 2014 at 11:18 am

Yeah Tom!!! How can you NOT see that your use of the word "kumbaya" was offensive??!!! Using it the way you did shows an extraordinary insensitivity to matters of race!

You probably think that since you sang the Kumbaya song at scout camp in the 1960's that it's okay to use that word whenever you want. Well, you CAN'T!!! The Kumbaya word is deeply rooted in ethnic tradition!! There is a proper place and context for its use. You need to show respect!

Frederick and I are exasperated at having to share the planet with people like you and the "clowns" you cozy up with.

Isn't that right, Frederick? I've got your back, buddy. Don't worry. Is it ok if I call you Fred? Or do you prefer Mr. Frederick?

So Mr. Frederick, what's your favorite Beyonce song?


Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore,
on Jun 18, 2014 at 11:24 am

besides...like i said: Send In The Clowns - Web Link


signed,

BOZO Chozo


Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of Alamo,
on Jun 18, 2014 at 12:07 pm

Okay, sprout, here's the deal. I've written more than 160 of these missives, and lots of other stuff that's on the web if you google me. I've written repeatedly in these blogs on matters that touch race: its effect on the presidential sweepstakes, the Voting Rights Act, Debo Adegbile's nomination to head the Civil Rights Division of DoJ, Third World poverty, African development among others, and also about other groups who suffer status-based discrimination: women, LGBT individuals, and other animal species among them. (You might also be aware that I teach anti-discrimination law, but probably not). All 160 of those blogs are listed and available above, in the intro.

Now, if, as you say, I have a "real issue with race," it's bound to have "saturated" my other writings with similarly egregious and insensitive content. Those blogs must overflow with statements of racial animus, right? In the evidence-based world, these 200,000-or-so words, including comments, must be what they call a 'target-rich environment.'

Okay then, here's your mission, should you choose to accept it: Find 'em.

I will await your report in my cloistered tower, striving mightily to "grow a pair." It shouldn't take long (to get your analysis, that is).


Posted by spcwt, a resident of Danville,
on Jun 18, 2014 at 1:29 pm

That Tom fights against racism and carefully uses politically correct language and concepts in all of his articles doesn't prove he isn't racist. He could be a closet racist. Closet racists developed political correctness as a language system in order to deflect attention from racist suspicions.

Often those who protest the most against racism are closet racists. Don't forget, Donald Sterling was outwardly anti-racist, nearly earning a Lifetime Achievement Award from the NAACP.

Closet racists are terrified that people will learn they are racist. They go out of their way to hide their racism from view. In many ways, they're like homophobes who persecute gays and dress and act in ways to hide the fact they are closet homosexuals.

I'm not saying Tom is a racist, only that the proof he offers isn't exculpatory.

On the other hand, Tom can't even admit how he desecrated the sacred word Kumbaya. He all but admitted he doesn't own a single Beyonce album. Rumor has it he was spotted humming "Broken-Hearted Girl." How could he possibly claim he wasn't racist when he obviously didn't know the words to Beyonce's classic mid-tempo pop ballad with an emo-soul texture?

Is Tom struggling with an inner conflict?

Should Mr. Frederick's warning serve as a call to self-reflection for Tom and all the "clowns" on this webpage?

Is it time for Tom and others to "know thyself?"


Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of Alamo,
on Jun 18, 2014 at 3:23 pm

So stay tuned, folks, for the next episode of The Old and the Pairless.


Posted by Frederick, a resident of Birdland,
on Jun 18, 2014 at 9:26 pm

I turned here because I love sports, baseball in particular. I encountered a racially insensitive remark. When I pointed this out, Tom and a cadre of like-minded pals (the company we keep?) offered nothing but denial, and a slew of additional racially insensitive remarks.

Now, after several exchanges.... I am not surprised to learn that Tom is a lawyer. He is not a thinker. Like a lawyer, he appeals to anything out there to help his case. Aristotle called this forensic discourse. The lawyer seeks to win a case, and truth has no relevance. Just win, that's all.

A thinker probes the possibility that his or her way of thinking may be mistaken, and does this in hopes of finding a shortcoming, error, contradiction, all because these are the entryway to higher truths, about the world, about oneself.

Tom is like the rapist standing before judge and jury. I'm a family man your honor. My neighbors will tell you I'm very respectable and well behaved. I've interacted with many women, some have been really, really hot!, but have never been found guilty of rape, nor have I admitted such. I have no problem with chicks, judge. Honest. I even donated to ERA (ha-ha) once, and teach courses on chicks and law. I'll tell ya what, judge, just search out everything I've ever written about babes, you'll find no evidence I'm a rapist. Hey, judge, I know all the lyrics to "I am woman." But of course the judge will say: "Save all that for the sentencing phase of this trial. Here we are interested only in how you have acted in the here and now."

I doubt Tom is a very good teacher. He refuses to examine what he has stated or written, or the intentions that inform such. He assumes his own words are unproblematic. When a student challenges what he says, or informs him that he finds his words racially insensitive, Tom tells the student to go read his books. Oh, sorry, go read his blogs.


Posted by Jake, a resident of Alamo,
on Jun 18, 2014 at 9:35 pm

I think this is the first time I have seen the word racist being used against a liberal! Someone needs to explain to Fred that Racist, Homophobic,Anti-women,...are only to be used against non-liberals. Clear case of label abuse!


Posted by john, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood,
on Jun 18, 2014 at 10:12 pm

But Tom didn't say anything that was in the slightest bit racist.


Posted by Formerly Dan from BC, a resident of Bridle Creek,
on Jun 18, 2014 at 10:28 pm

Formerly Dan from BC is a registered user.

Tom,

You're being played by a sock puppet and troll.

At this point, wouldn't it be better to require registration to comment and cut down on all this silliness?

Dan


Posted by spcwt, a resident of Danville,
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:05 am

Yeah Tom, Mr. Frederick is right. You're not a THINKER!! Aristotle called this being a dumb dumb head.

You don't care about the entryway to higher truths about the world. Mr. Frederick does. So there!!

Like Mr. Frederick says, you're guilty of using insensitive remarks. You're like….a RAPIST. Yeah. That's right. Rapist.

I hope you learn to be a little more sensitive.


Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of Alamo,
on Jun 19, 2014 at 8:16 am

S-P: after absorbing that latest scattershot slander, I had to read the terribly sad child molester article -- just to make sure it wasn't me.

John: Dan's probably right (this time) -- the blog troll has been well-fed. My understanding of 'sock puppets,' though, is that they are fictional identities created for a purpose -- like promoting a product with fake user reviews. Hard to discern much of a goal here, beyond some odd personal animosity. Who knows, maybe I flunked him?


Posted by Formerly Dan from BC, a resident of Bridle Creek,
on Jun 19, 2014 at 8:26 am

Formerly Dan from BC is a registered user.

"This time". LOL!

I try and give you good advice and you use passive aggression in response. :) <---joke, so don't get bent out of shape.

The goal of a sock puppet (and a troll for that matter) is to be an annoying snit. Why else would they use different usernames. Better to not take the bait and move on.

Dan


Posted by American, a resident of Danville,
on Jun 19, 2014 at 8:29 am

Frederick: If you read prior blogs, you will see that I almost never agree with Tom, as we have very different political views on most issues. That being said, I do think if you are going to accuse someone of something as heinous as racism, you better have the facts and the truth on your side.

I have been a litigation attorney for over 20 years fighting insurance fraud and have tried jury trials all over Northern California. I fight people making bogus and fraudulent personal injury claims. Any litigation attorney will tell you that the facts and the truth win cases, as we see it first hand. Stop watching fictional t.v. shows about attorneys, and go watch a real jury trial down at the local court house, and you will see that the facts and the truth win cases. The facts and the truth matter.

Frederick, you do not have the facts and the truth on your side in this issue. I am certainly not an "ally" of Tom or his political views, but actually feel bad for him as he was responding to my comments about how much I love the A's when he made his comment that you mistakenly and without the facts or truth took to suggest he was racist.


Racism is unfortunately out there, Frederick, and I admire your desire to fight it, but you do not have a dog in this fight, as this blog by Tom was not racist.


Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of Alamo,
on Jun 19, 2014 at 11:02 am

Hey Dan -- I let 'your' thread go all the way to 60 comments before taking that step. And your continuing concern about my 'shape' is noted. I do think trolls and sock puppets are different species of internet malignancies.

Am: appreciate your post -- that said, I'm not sure that our boy cares as as much about any particular cause as he does about blowing stuff up, for no particular reason.


Posted by Frederick, a resident of Birdland,
on Jun 19, 2014 at 11:20 am

Forensic discourse and ways of thinking. Tom appears to know nothing else. American defends Tom's ignorance. Neither, both claiming to be lawyers, seems even remotely keyed in to the core of their practice. Let me clarify: Legal discourse does not aim at truth; it aims at victory. Each side (rarely more than two) strives to make the best case for their respective positions. E.g., the defense lawyer, even convinced that his client is guilty, nevertheless seeks to have him win an innocent verdict. This is not about truth. It is about winning. And truth? Ideally, it is more likely than not to belong to the victor. At best, that is, it is a byproduct of the legal process. In reality, it belongs to the best legal team (which ends up being not much about truth at all).

Competent courtroom lawyers who realize this, seek out jurors who are most likely to have biases that favor their own client's and his/her legal team. This means, often, that some lawyers will seek the dumbest jury possible.

Tom seems to have surrounded himself with a dumb jury made up of racists, racist fools, and incompetent attorneys. Tom is too obsessed with face-saving victory, to admit this in that he cites his hangers-on misanthropes as a competent panel of judges. See, he says, these fools agree with me so I must be right.

Does he actually defend against the charge that his use of kumbaya was racially insensitive (it was) or that his dismissive reference to Obama's racial composition mocked (as it did) the significance of racial categories in our society? Does Tom actually reflect upon his oafish, race-imbued claim about crossing the street to avoid the you-know-who's? No. Stubborn denial is the best he can offer, backed by fools, incompetents and clowns. He wants to win this. He's a lawyer, after all. Does he use this as an opportunity to examine his own race-based biases, how they are rooted in our racist society? Nope. He either doesn't have the adequate tools, resorting to cardboard cut-out evidence as he does, or he doesn't have the strength of character. Of course, it may very well be both.

And the part about owning up and taking responsibility for his string of racially insensitive remarks, even learning from them? Nope. And he's got a chorus of losers and fools to slap him on the back and egg him on. Because, if Tom is racist as his very revealing remarks suggest he is, then so are they.


Posted by Formerly Dan from BC, a resident of Bridle Creek,
on Jun 19, 2014 at 12:33 pm

Formerly Dan from BC is a registered user.

My "continuing concern" about your "shape"?

If you've got an accusation Tom, then come right out and say it.

In short, one descriptive comment about you does not make a pattern. But I will say that I have felt terrible about what I said about you in that thread and do want to take this chance to publicly apologize. You didn't deserve it.

Sincerely.

Dan


Posted by Formerly Dan from BC, a resident of Bridle Creek,
on Jun 19, 2014 at 12:35 pm

Formerly Dan from BC is a registered user.

"about you..." should read "to you..."

Dan


Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of Alamo,
on Jun 19, 2014 at 12:48 pm

Thanks Dan -- it was the 'shape' you didn't want me 'to get bent out of' to which I was referring. Garsh, it seems like most of us are getting along so well -- perhaps a verse or two of kumbaya is in order?

I'm surprised we haven't heard from from troll boy today. Seems odd -- after all, there's invective to be spewn. Anyway, I am taking your sage advice (this time) and putting the thread on 'registered user' status.


Posted by spcwtjd, a resident of Danville,
on Jun 19, 2014 at 1:01 pm

spcwtjd is a registered user.

Tom referred to Mr. Frederick as "boy," a well-known derogatory term used by southern racists in the Jim Crow south.

Tom referred to Mr. Frederick's comments as "scattershot slander," proving Mr. Frederick correct that Tom is a crummy lawyer, as slander must be spoken, whereas defamatory remarks that are in written form are referred to as libel.

Tom jokingly said he favors Obama's Caucasian side. How is Tom's joke about our Dear Leader much different than the San Jose students who "jokingly" referred to their roommate as "three-fifths" and "fraction," which racist "jokes" resulted in those students being expelled from San Jose State and banned for life from enrolling in any California State University? They are also being charged with misdemeanor hate crimes, causing outrage at the NAACP who demanded that those students must be charged with felony hate crime for saying such words (and for having a confederate flag in their dorm room and locking their roommate in a closet and other pranks).

People have lost their jobs for saying less racist things than Tom has. They've been sued for millions. They've been labeled as criminals, as felons, for saying words.

Why shouldn't the same thing happen to Tom?


Posted by Formerly Dan from BC, a resident of Bridle Creek,
on Jun 19, 2014 at 3:30 pm

Formerly Dan from BC is a registered user.

LOL...you definitely read too much into that comment, but noted.


To post your comment, please click here to login

Remember me?
Forgot Password?
or register. This topic is only for those who have signed up to participate by providing their email address and establishing a screen name.

Not Endorsements
By Roz Rogoff | 7 comments | 1,180 views

A second half of life exceptionally well lived
By Tim Hunt | 1 comment | 605 views