By now I'm sure you've heard the uproar over a recent ESPN article about Mike Vick, his dog situation, his comeback and of course... his race.
If you haven't:
I think it is very important to note that this article was written by a black man. Not only is he black, but he goes by the name "Toure." Toure Neblett to be exact... although he doesn't use his last name. He's the black equivalent of Cher or Madonna. He must be "fancy" because he doesn't even use his last name. He isn't a sportswriter and he isn't a professional columnist in the sporting sense. He's written for Rolling Stone, music/cultural articles, writes poetry and seems to be prevalent in the music industry. I don't know why ESPN solicited his opinion on sports, or why they would approve such a racially charged article.
Some excerpts from the article:
"Vick's style reminds me of Allen Iverson -- the speed, the court sense, the sharp cuts, the dekes, the swag."
"I'm not saying that a black QB who stands in the pocket ain't playing black."
It hurts my brain to read an article from such an esteemed company like ESPN and find the *ahem* words "swag" and "ain't." If this guy really wants to publish an article for the world to read, couldn't he at least use proper English? Or would that be asking him to write "like a white man"???
I don't think I'll ever understand why people are always so quick to pull the race card in ANY situation. The answer to the questions are so simple, there isn't even any point in asking them.
If Michael Vick were white, he probably wouldn't have ever been subjected to dogfighting. With that assumption, he never would have committed the crime and been sentenced to jail. Of course, if Mike Vick were white... he probably wouldn't be as fast as he is. Sound racist? Well can it be racist if it's true?
If Peyton Manning or Tom Brady were white... they probably wouldn't have had the pedigree they had and their entire lives would have been different. The question is just as stupid backwards as it is when presented in it's current state.