It does feel a bit like they're almost disconnected, but it's nothing I haven't seen before.Thunderous Cacophony said:Usually I like Bob's columns, even if I disagree with his stances, but the first page is such obvious argument-bait it makes me sad. I think it's a good show, and it does have promise and a likely inclination to move in certain directions (or at least comment about them), and Bob's column would have been better had he focused on that rather than trying to unnecessarily provoke people. It reads like he wrote the latter two pages as a complete work some time previously, then stapled on the first page to get people to comment.
It wasn't in reply. Brown was shot in reply to walking on the street instead of the sidewalk.Jhereg42 said:Edit: And while he may have crossed a line and deserved arrest, I think we can all agree that 6 bullets to his torso and head is a bit of overkill in reply.
Crossed what line, exactly? The "it's okay to shoot him to death now" line? Because, hate to break this to you, that line requires use or potential use of deadly force, last I checked.tyriless said:Despite the fact that it appears that it was over what amounts to likely less than a hundred bucks worth of goods, he crossed the line when he assaulted someone in the process of taking it.
Which is cause enough for outrage on its own, but also remember that the man in the video may or may not have even been the shooting victim, and the connection wasn't suggested by police until after the fact, when it came time to cover their own asses. Truly, there's no goddamn excuse.Shjade said:Snippity
Judging from his comments, I'm guessing it's going to feel a little familiar. The art style to the Boondocks, one of my favorite things about the show, will of course be lost so it'll be interesting to see how that commentary comes off in the new show.shirkbot said:As to the show itself, how does it compare to The Boondocks (since McGruder is involved).
McGruder said:What has never been lost on me is the enormous responsibility that came with The Boondocks ? particularly the television show and it?s relatively young audience. It was important to offend, but equally important to offend for the right reasons. For three seasons I personally navigated this show through the minefields of controversy. It was not perfect. And it definitely was not quick. But it was always done with a keen sense of duty, history, culture, and love. Anything less would have been simply unacceptable.What do you think?
As for me, I?m finally putting a life of controversy and troublemaking behind me with my upcoming Adult Swim show, Black Jesus.
Pretty much another of Bob's topical segways.Thunderous Cacophony said:Usually I like Bob's columns, even if I disagree with his stances, but the first page is such obvious argument-bait it makes me sad. I think it's a good show, and it does have promise and a likely inclination to move in certain directions (or at least comment about them), and Bob's column would have been better had he focused on that rather than trying to unnecessarily provoke people. It reads like he wrote the latter two pages as a complete work some time previously, then stapled on the first page to get people to comment.
I wonder if the Escapist actually makes more money on stories with lots of comments. More comments means more forum page views, but its not clear to me what percentage of the Escapist's ad revenue comes from the forums. My hunch is that its not actually very much, but I could be wrong about that. I don't suppose there is any way to know for sure without someone from the Escapist weighing in. More likely Bob is trying to hook the audience into reading the second two pages of his article by tying the first page to real world events, which is either just as cynical as what you suggested or good writing, depending on your perspective.Thunderous Cacophony said:Usually I like Bob's columns, even if I disagree with his stances, but the first page is such obvious argument-bait it makes me sad. I think it's a good show, and it does have promise and a likely inclination to move in certain directions (or at least comment about them), and Bob's column would have been better had he focused on that rather than trying to unnecessarily provoke people. It reads like he wrote the latter two pages as a complete work some time previously, then stapled on the first page to get people to comment.
Shjade said:I know this is a sensitive subject, but read what I said in context of the robbery alone. That's all I was commenting on. Also, I agree, if Mike Brown did do it (which I have no clue if he did) he was subject to arrest and getting shot should not have happened. Whoever that robber was, he was a massive jerk and deserved time in jail, not to be sent to the morguetyriless said:Despite the fact that it appears that it
If, for instance, he had shoved the employee away with a car, that would be much closer to "crossing the line" of allowing for this kind of response. In the act. Even if he'd threatened some clerk with a deadly weapon during an earlier crime, that doesn't just open the door for riddling him with holes at some unspecified later date when he's no longer posing a threat, particularly not if he's trying to surrender.
I get the impulse to want to defend law enforcement, but in this case, the officer in question does not warrant your sympathy. One shot out of fear or surprise, maybe that's understandable, maybe you can let that slide a little. But six? SIX shots into an unarmed person?
There's no excusing that.
Regarding more of the article itself: okay, I might have to check out Black Jesus. Which would make it the first show on Adult Swim I've thought looked worth checking out in years.
Well, yeah he robbed it and they should have used the surveillance footage and good policework to find him and bring him to court for it. Petty theft is still a crime, and you could probably get him with assault and armed robbery if you stretch the intended meaning of both. Although, then you're looking at throwing him away for several years, and probably just making him worse, instead of getting him any real meaningful help.tyriless said:I watched that video and I would like to point out that whoever that man was, he robbed that place. It crossed the line when he was confronted, he shoved the employee violently away. Despite the fact that it appears that it was over what amounts to likely less than a hundred bucks worth of goods, he crossed the line when he assaulted someone in the process of taking it.
I'm not opposed to him being a social liberal, or even his views on what happened. It just seems that there was a fully fleshed-out piece already written about Black Jesus and the portrayal of the black inner city in American media that was measured and focused on the art (which is where I'd expect a TV/movie critic to focus).Jhereg42 said:I completely disagree. Bob's stances have always leaned toward being a Social Liberal. He's from Boston after all. The fact is however that because of the timing there will be no way NOT to tie this to the real world events that are informing it. Asking him to exclude context from an opinion column just because you may or may not agree with it is kind of ludicrous, especially when it directly relates to WHY the subject of said column exists.
The cop who shot him didn't even know he was a robbery suspect - changing the story since then to cover their asses.tyriless said:I watched that video and I would like to point out that whoever that man was, he robbed that place. It crossed the line when he was confronted, he shoved the employee violently away. Despite the fact that it appears that it was over what amounts to likely less than a hundred bucks worth of goods, he crossed the line when he assaulted someone in the process of taking it.