Amen.

If there would have been school vouchers, Cam'ron would have learned to read. If he knew how to read he would have read "The Bonfire of the Vanities" by Tom Wolfe.

In his book, Tom Wolfe explains in detail how anybody driving an expensive car in the hood is going to be wacked. Nobody who read this book would ever drive an expensive car in the hood.

This incident is the fault of the Democrats and the Teacher's Union.

It's not the Village Voice per se, it looks like just some writer's blog. But his attempt to second-guess the actions of a gangsta rapper driving through the 'hood are hilarious.

You know, at first I thought you were just a boring republican type trying to scare up some hits for her blog, then it occurred to me that there was something else - something more frightening at work.

You are a rare type of philistine, and you don't seem to understand that having not heard of an artist, even in the digital-information-everywhere age, does not reduce his skill or standing as an artist. You need to be reminded of the stories that litter our immediate history of great painters and musicians and writers that perish poor and alone only to be discovered by the masses 10 or 50 years later.

I won't respond to the political sniping that you've done, but I will say that in the author's defense, the points that most offended you were presented as questions, and were part of what is really an ongoing dialog about life in America's dark mirror neighborhoods and the conditions there.

Republic, the excuse of 'dialogue' is often used to say the most vile things about people in the context of questions. I'm repulsed by the suggestion that poor people can't help but steal, having been poor most of my life. I have no idea what 'dark mirror neighborhoods' is supposed to mean but I grew up in a really racially mixed 'hood that was mostly black and the conditions there still didn't excuse stealing a rich man's car as he drove by or shooting him when he wouldn't give it up.

I don't really care one way or another about Cam'ron as a rapper. Down&Out was kind of boring and that's his hottest tune. But, anyway, I'm defending his right not to get shot for being rich and you seem to be doing the opposite, so I think he'll forgive me for not being a fan.

Hypothetical question - if another wealthy musician, say - Alan Jackson - got robbed and shot driving a fancy ride through a poor neighborhood - same reaction?

That's some impressive righteous indignation for someone who is pro-profiling.

Oh come on, people. It's obvious that George W. Bush is responsible for Cam'ron being shot.

Most of the Left is opposed to self defense in almost all situations; crime, warfare, domestic violence. In Britain, the government has turned this anti-self defense attitude into a series of laws that have caused crime to increase to record levels.

I'm not sure why the Left has this attitude, but they do, and it's probably the reason for their downfall. In the food chain of life, they're the krill.

Ugarte, there is zero correlation between that post and this post. Draw me a picture, what're you trying to say? That because I'm for using nationality or race as one factor in profiling suicide bombers that what, I hate people of color?

where shall I begin? I'll start with Cam' is just plain no good as a rapper. Me saying that means nothing, I'm just voicing my opinion. Now for a bit of substance(not much though), I am sick of these clowns that have only been to the ghetto in the same capacity as me going to the zoo...."Can u believe how close we are to them?" they probably say(ofcourse not when standing at a light and certainly not loud enough to hear). I have lived in the real deal ghetto for most of my life, and for those lucky enough to make some dough, it is like a high school reunion to come back to the hood and flaunt alittle,take a few neighborhood folks out to eat, blast some music from the monster speakers, drive a few kids around in the new whip and talk up the 19 year old girls that were jumpin rope when u left but now have filled out nicely. Sure some poor people do bad things for money and if u are in the ghetto and flashin' cash, u may very well be the victim, but that doesnt mean that they have a right to do that. It also does not mean that Cam'ron is somehow to blame for this from a societal stand point.His momma can say it's his fault, his wife can say it's his fault because he knew the risks having grown up there, but certainly some meatball who writes for the Voice has nothing to say here, and anyone else who isnt in his immediate "circle" is just spewing some self serving nonsense saying that this is anything but just another unfortunate violent crime that we all have to be aware of on some level or another. To defend this in anyway is to also say that the artist girl who was killed in the botched robbery recently was at fault because she was affluent "looking" to her attackers. Republic of ghosts, you know nothing of these dark mirror neighborhoods and their conditions. What possible commentary can you have on the subject? You are transparent to me, another clown relieving your guilt of being more fortunate by damning(in words only ofcourse) the fortune itself. No one who truly knows what it's like to live in your so called dark mirror neighborhoods would ever talk about this situation in the way this "author" or you have.

Republic:

"You need to be reminded of the stories that litter our immediate history of great painters and musicians and writers that perish poor and alone only to be discovered by the masses."

That is a myth. I went back to the 1850s looking for great artists who did not prosper from their work during their life times. I could not find anybody except Van Gogh. And he was poor because he was too insane to market his paintings.

They might have dissipated their fortunes through drugs or bad business practices. But, the people recognized their greatness then and paid them for it. That is a rule of art-if they are not famous during their lifetime they will never be famous.

Believing this artist myth of yours proves you are a philistine of the worst order.

Wow. That's a leap, Karol. I usually leave it to Dawn to call you a racist.

All I'm saying is that you seem to think that one type of profiling ("Arabs should be given extra suspicion as terrorists, after all they keep blowing things up.") is better than another ("Poor, high crime neighborhoods aren't the safest place for your Lamborghini.") If you are going to do one you might want to be a bit less shouty about the other.

You tell me why one is more offensive than the other. I think that they are both pretty offensive, but my guess is that you are a lot safer on a subway with a Muslim than in the ghetto with a sports car.

"That is a myth. I went back to the 1850s looking for great artists who did not prosper from their work during their life times. I could not find anybody except Van Gogh. And he was poor because he was too insane to market his paintings."

Jake, then you should bone up on your American history. Herman Melville ? Wrote a number of huge bombs including "Moby Dick" and "Billy Budd" and was forced to take a spoils system job. Emily Dickinson ? Yankee spinster writing weird poems in Masscahusetts that were almost untouched. Do those names ring a bell ? No ? Well they wrote after 1850. Let's go back a few more years. What about Edgar A. Poe ? I'm sure you know the name. Really creepy death. If you're ever in NYC, take a look at Edgar's on the Upper West Side, named after him. Some of the best coffee in Sodom on the Hudson.

Music ? Stephen Foster was often overlooked despite his numerous contributions to American music. He died in 1864 with 38 cents in his pocket. Music privacy was nowhere near as bad today as it was then.

If you want to hop across the pond, we see a number of great poets who died in obscurity in the Great War. A century before, John Keats died in poverty at an early age (I really think had he lived, Keats would be number two in the cannon next to only the Bard himself). His reviews sucked and his books did not sell either (see Percy Shelley's classic eulogy Adonias).

Don't call history a myth. You offend my fair lady, Clio, muse of history and I am always ready to take up my lance in her service.

Most Contemporary rap promotes an ethos which can best be described as "Get Rich or Die Tryin'" as someone or other said. It's fitting that Cam'ron saw what it was like to be on the other end of this proposition. If the lyrics explicitly glorify committing crime it's tough to sympathize the rapper for being a victim of said crime. That said, I have no idea specifically how thugged out Cam'ron's lyrics are, but it's just the general philosophy of his chosen profession I'm talking about. I liked that "Oh boy" song because I'm a cheeseball pop fan.

And Jake, Herman Melville.

I don't think his level of thugged outness is anything to worry about. The guy owned a pink Range Rover. That can't be good for street cred.

Well, it's one thing to say 'stay out of bad neighborhoods if you plan to be flashy'. My problem with the post isn't that Cam'ron should or shouldn't drive his flashy car through the ghetto but the premise that poor people just can't help themselves-- they have to rob and shoot people. The better analogy would be if I thought that Muslims just couldn't stop themselves from becoming suicide bombers. And, well, I don't think that.

How is stay out of bad neighborhoods if you plan to be flashy any different from he should've thought about the effect his car would have had on people who have nothing? I don't see any difference at all. You are just looking for a way to call a liberal a racist. Might as well just blame the AFT like Jake.

I think you missed the train that was heading to sarcasmville...

Again, the difference is that I don't blame Cam'ron for driving his nice car through any neighborhood. And, I'm not making excuses for thieves and killers on the basis of them being poor which the guy at the Voice certainly is.

I think the thing that some of you are missing is that, if you live in the ghetto, you dont need to rob anyone because you are living in a government subsidizeded residence(if not fully paid for), with some spending cash(most if u r a drug addict or mother with a bunch of kids) and food. People with even modest jobs live more of a middle class life than some hollywood glorified struggle for survival. The people who u have to worry about in the ghetto are the same people you have to worry about being homicide bombers: young, healthy men with no jobs and nothing to do but share uninformed opinions about what's wrong with their lives and who is responsible(rarely is the man in the mirror seen as the culprit). That angst manifests itself in dangerous ways no matter where you are in the world. Idle hands... and all that. Make no mistake about it, if you took away government subsidy from these people, there would be a short period of rebelion followed by a bunch of hungry people scrambling to do the jobs that illegal aliens crave and the American people are "too good to do". This asinine notion that illegal aliens are neccesary to do nasty jobs that everyone needs done, but no one wants to do is moronic. Hand out severe fines for hiring illegal aliens and take away this ridiculous crutch the government is extending our poor and u will find that fewer and fewer illegal aliens will be so eager to risk life and limb to get here and the street corners of ghettos all around the country will be a safer and quieter place.

Eric,
Hold on just a damn minute. Herman Melville? PLEASE! PUhhhh-lease. Melville is perhaps the most over-rated writer in American literature (well, aside from hacks like Dan Brown and Ann Rice). When he was alive, he was actually well-rewarded for his readable works like Typee, Omoo and White Jacket, which in essence were a mix of journalism and travel writing. But when he started to "think big" and produced absolute crap like Pierre and, to a lesser extent, Moby Dick, he found himself out of favor. In fact, his later work so harmed his reputation that he wasn't pretty much forgotten until he was the revived in the 1920s. Did Moby Dick have some important "stuff" in it? Sure. But overall, it fails as a coherent narrative--perhaps one of the reasons why movie version tends to suck. He was trying to be a Hawhtorne (who he had some serious father-figure issues with) and was failing miserably.
Billy Budd made for a much better story (probably because it was more focused) but if memory serves, it wasn't published until after he was dead.
It wasn't the reading audience's fault that they didn't feel like going along as he swam in over his head.

(Just thought I'd do my point to add to a somewhat silly debate.)

"Billy Budd" was published well after his death and I agree that it is his best work (though I like some of his Civil War poems save "Antietam" with the amputees raising toasts to McClellan). As for Typee, Omoo and White Jacket, those did well (though I don't think White Jacket did as well as the other two) and are readable but I don't see any of them as classics, any more than I would see the works of William Gilmore Simms as classics.

I don't know k, I have a feeling that "Dialog" is just folks talking about an issue, and I'm sorry that you may sometimes not agree and indeed, may even be offended by what you hear, but that's how it goes. You have to ask hard questions.

I don't think the author suggests in any way that the people had no choice but to steal or shoot, I think that came out of your own rolodex of fears and frustrations - and both are well founded I know. To me it seems rather like the author is saying that it may have been foolish to drive a big blue status symbol through a neighborhood that has been torn up by a Piru/Crip gang war, and he might be right. He's not 'excusing' anything. He's recognizing a reality and wondering if Cam'ron maybe should have done the same, and that is open for debate. No sane person would argue that he does not have a right to drive fear-free through any neighborhood that he wants to at any time in any car, but the reality of the situation has undermined that right. I am a little surprised that you would even insinuate that I felt otherwise.

Your reflex to opposition is not well aided by your desire to sound authentic. I would suggest that growing up white in a rough hood isn't really the credential that you want it to be. The black urban situation is not something that can be understood experientially by a white person.

The "Dark Mirror" is a reference to a chapter in a popular analysis of gang warfare patterns and the criminal economies of american ghettos. It's an interesting read.

In reference to the quality of Cam's music, stating subjective opinions as fact is generally bad form. There are a lot of people rocking his records, and it's true that he will probably not miss you as a fan.

Ok, let's flip this around.

'That black guy shouldn't have been walking though Bensonhurst at night. You know those Italians hate black people.'

'What was that Jewish guy thinking going to a party in that Muslim area. Obviously those people have ingrained, ignorant hate for him, he should know better.'

Just dialog, right?

oh, and jake, your rebuttle is a mess, i missed it before i posted the last chunk - but i'm glad you gave it a shot.

And my mentions of my neighborhood was to show that even rough places have semblence of right and wrong and excuses shouldn't be made for the people that don't, not to get some kind of street cred from an anonymous commenter.

The author doesn't mention gang members, merely people who have nothing. Basically, if conservative person or publication said what he's saying, the charges of racism would be deafening.

I don't know what that has to do with dialog, but yes - you're right. When there is a war going on, you have to be aware of the dangers in the environment. Even if you're not an active combatant.

This is why the department of state issues travel advisories to areas where americans are likely to be targeted by terrorists.

Does this mean we should ridicule people that are victims? Not in my opinion, but regardless of my opinion, stating this idea bears no reflection of spin you're handing us in your reply to the article in the first place or the title of this journal entry.

Nobody here is saying that poor folks have no choice but to steal or shoot. I don't think this is a common "liberal" opinion.

I find your war on the term 'dialog' to be a little spurious, we don't need to villianize this term to get things done do we?

I'm out the door to go do 'Hoist' but I'll reply to this later. If you get an error message when commenting, don't repost, it just means the comment is held for my approval.

Republic of Ghosts:

Wrong on every artist. My rule still stands. If they are not famous during their lifetime they will never be famous.

Herman Melville- not great. His works are derivative of other authors of his time.

Emily Dickinson- was insane-kept all of her writing secret. Does not count against my rule.

Edgar A Poe- Famous in his time. He was well published during his life. He was broke because he went insane.

Stephen Foster -famous in his time. Everybody published his songs He was a bad business man so he did not get paid for his works.

John Keats was famous in his time . Was a lion of London society.

You know nothing about art history or life. You are so stupid you must be a Democrat. But you are dumber than that-you are so stupid that you are a Kennedy and a Kerry Democrat.

Get out of our sight. We don't associate with idiots like you on this blog.

Is there a separate forum where the "homicide" bomber thing is being discussed? Last time I checked most bombings were homicidal in nature. I guess sometimes you would want drop a bomb to wreck a bridge or a building or something, but most of the time you drop bombs because you want to kill people. This phrase, even if not redundant, includes far more people than you mean it too. Unfortunately, that's probably not the reason the term hasn't emerged fully into the cultural lexicon. I think it hasn't been used widely because it sounds stupid and immediately brands the user as someone who has been reading Fox News talking points a little too closely.

"Herman Melville- not great. His works are derivative of other authors of his time."

By that definition, nobody is great.

"Emily Dickinson- was insane-kept all of her writing secret. Does not count against my rule."

She was not insane. That is slanderous.

"Edgar A Poe- Famous in his time. He was well published during his life. He was broke because he went insane."

Again, slanderous. Published does not mean famous.

"Stephen Foster -famous in his time. Everybody published his songs He was a bad business man so he did not get paid for his works."

His works were famous and stolen.

"John Keats was famous in his time . Was a lion of London society."

No. He was not Byron or Shelley. He was studying to be a medical assistant. Indeed, he took more than a few punches from critics for being a poor man. He was trashed by almost all critics. Even at his death, he felt his obscurity. 'Here lies one whose name was writ in water'.

You know nothing about art history or life. You are so stupid you must be a Democrat. But you are dumber than that-you are so stupid that you are a Kennedy and a Kerry Democrat."

No. I have given you the facts and you pull stuff out of your ass which is not true and which is also slanderous in some cases. I am prolife, progun, pro-God and for small governmemt, throwing illegal aliens out, lowering taxes and severing all ties with soverignty stealing organziations like the UN. Not exactly the platform of a Kerry-Kennedy Demorcat.

"Get out of our sight. We don't associate with idiots like you on this blog."

Do you call the shots here ? I give you the facts and you make stuff up. All you have are lies and name calling, clutching your lifeboat like a Soviet in 1993. "The Party comrade ! All for the Party comrade !"

Those won't save you from these deep waters.

Dang Jake - you are having a tough time! sorry friend, but your very off topic argument is just busted: Kafka.

From here on out, everytime you mention this (off topic) point, I will post the name of one artist that proves you wrong. We can go for months if you want!

"Does he understand the effect that a car like that might have on people who have nothing?"

This question is based more on common sense than any liberal guilt for being rich. It should have been written:"Doesn't he realize that driving that machine in the hood can get his ass shot?"

The author is not presenting a scapegoat for the crimes of poor people. Nor is he saying that Cam should be more considerate towards the poor's lack of expensive cars.

I once had a nice car in a pretty shitty neighborhood. It was robbed and stripped and everything in between. I blamed myself though, because I should have had the common sense not to park my nice new car on the street. And just like that, Cam's guilt is lack of common sense.

w3BGdt ycedsbffntha, [url=http://bjerbipwlugl.com/]bjerbipwlugl[/url], [link=http://ncyzjkptflkm.com/]ncyzjkptflkm[/link], http://vxoouuplsgvp.com/