Novel Adaptations

If I ever become a filmmaker, here are a few  books I would dream of adapting.  Of course that would take years, millions, and overcoming lots of legal obstacles.  Some have been done before, but not adequately.  And of course some could be done before I became filmmaker. This is only a partial list and does not mean I do not have interest in making films in other genres (because I do).  Of course I also have other original stories to prosecute.

The Virgin Suicides (perhaps in digital backlot)

The Cult Next Door

The Madness of Mary Lincoln

The Feast of the Goat

Last Night I Dreamed of Peace

The Vanishing Act of Esme Lennox

Out of the Dust 

Oyster (Janette Turner Hospital)

World Without End

The Jungle

A Tale of Two Cities

Great Charities

Here are the charities I'll be giving to this holiday season; I encourage anyone to look them over.

SOS Children's Villages-USA

The Sudan Project (Ginghamsburg)

Basic Needs

1010 Project

Opportunity International

Water Missions International

Not For Sale

Athletics-helping to kill education

      Tippecanoe High School has boys and girls basketball games scheduled for Dec. 23, two days before Christmas.  It is a little appalling, however not surprising, that there are high school sporting events going on just two days before Christmas.  You would think no schools would schedule sporting events, so families could travel to relatives or enjoy time with each other.  But that is outdated.  Athletics have taken over education and are doing significant damage.

      Long ago, sports were just a leisure activity.  Something to have fun with.  Maybe to help instill a few values like teamwork, hard work, etc.  There was some friendly pride with other schools involved.   Some excelled and played in college and a few even professionally, where the stakes were high and the competition intense.  School sports are now void of that innocence.

      Sports are no longer just a distraction.  They are the focus, often impeding the work of teachers.  To make a team you often have to play AAU or offseason leagues  Many teams hold practices that run several hours long several nights a week, if not every night.  Many teams now require time for film viewing or workouts on weekend, or even practicing.  By the time athletes get home most night's they are already physically and mentally exhausted - yet they are somehow supposed to do homework and study - of course, there is no time for freetime.  It is even worse on nights when there are games.  There is no quality time to study after school.  The game goes late.  If it is an away game, students supposedly can do their homework on the bus. Of course that will never happen.  By the time the students are done with the game and home, there is no time to study, and if the student does study, it will likely be very unproductive or cut into their sleep - leading to tiredness and sleeping in school the next day, which make the next day that much more unproductive.  And the next day there is probably practice.  This repeats and the student gets more and more worn out, grades keep dropping, and soon they are falling way behind other students.

     More emphasis is often put on sports than education (even if it is not admitted).  It is sad that at most schools a student can participate in sports with a low GPA- sometimes as low as a 1.0 and usually no higher than a 2.0.  I think it is a privilege, not a right, to participate in athletics.  In fact, I think it is a responsibility.  You are representing the school and trying to prove you are the better school.  You are the best the school has.  

      The most disturbing thing is parents that pressure their kids in sports.  To become involved in many sports these days, you have to give up your weekends, spring breaks, vacations, summers to dedicate their lives to sports.  Children are being robbed of their childhoods.  Even the most important things are being destroyed.  Not just education, but practices and games often cause families not to eat dinner together regularly, instead forcing people to pick up fast food.  (Causing not only family breakdown but overweight children.)  Many parents put so much pressure on having one type of talent -athletic talent- instead of letting the children develop their real talents and interests.  It seems every parent thinks their kid is the next superstar and they have to spends loads of money and time traveling, attending camps. training, to get the most out of their kids.  It is no longer fun.  And coaches that get into education so they can coach make it their life, working on it year-around.  Teachers are often hired not because they are the best educator but because they can coach.  The coaches make it sports become a job.  Everything revolves around it.  Getting good grades is necessary so you can stay eligible.  The more practices the better.  Even if it cuts into education.  No more spring break, no more summer break, or Christmas vacation.  We have to stay in town for our sports.         Much of school sports is just politics anyway, so you have to be in a certain family or group to get on a team or play.  School sports is no longer a positive pursuit.  It isn't fun, it is overwhelming.  The primary goal is winning.  Sports are winning.  And education is losing. Sports are a great, great thing.  I am a HUGE sports fan.  But in our hypercompetitive society, they are losing their meaning.    

 

Reds Offseason Moves

Continuing in the tradition of discussing a die and often unrelated subjects, I present my offseason plan for the Reds. 

The Reds have done a pretty good job this offseason, but there are a few things I would do if I were the general manager instead of Walt Jocketty.

First, I would trade for Jeff Francoeur.  He struggled with the Braves last year and could use a change of scenery.  The Reds, of course, are looking for a right-handing hitting rightfielder. Check. He's struggled a little with his power and slugging numbers, but they should go up in the hitter-friendly Great American Ballpark.  With the Reds, he would not be asked to hit cleanup and face so much pressure, as he often was (or is) with the Braves.  He is also a good defensive player and could further solidify the young nuclear of the Reds.  He is already a star, but would be best in a park like GABP, without the hometown pressure or tension, which manifest last year when he was sent down to the Braves Double-A minor league affiliate.  He could come for fairly cheap, probably Ryan Freel and Homer Bailey and a prospect, such as one of the young shortstops, like Chris Valaika or Todd Frazier, or even a Ryan  Freel and Matt Belisle combo.

Second, I would sign Ivan Rodriguez.  He can repeat his 2003 performance when he led the young Florida Marlins to a World Series championship.  He can mentor the young catcher, Ryan Hanigan, and play, say 60% of the time.  It would also be great for the young latino players like Johnny Cueto and Edison Volquez to have a battery mate and mentor like Rodriguez.

Third, sign Dennys Reyes.  The Reds need a veteran left-handed specialist, and I'm a sucker for getting ex-Reds back in town.

Fourth, bring Sean Casey back.  Just because I love Sean Casey.

Fifth, I would pursue Milton Bradley, even if Jerry Hairiston is resigned.  Neither stays healthy, but both would provide a right-handed spark to the lineup.  Even if both stayed healthy, Hairiston is valuable in a utility role, so he could find plenty of playing time.  I would say an incentive-laden contract would be best, but is probably unlikely because he'll try to get a big deal because of all of his past problems staying on the field.  A three year deal, worth somewhere in the neighborhood of 22-28 million would do the trick, with a fourth-year option worth around 11 million.  I would offer Hairiston a one-year deal worth a base salary of 2.75 million and plenty of incentives.  A second-year option would also be included, worth about 6 million, without major incentives.  

All of these moves would be very cost-effective, be restore the offense, finding a middle way between homer-focused run production and small ball.  The  defense would also be better, which will be crucial to the Reds this year.   

Tom Cruise

I think Tom Cruise gets a bad rap.  He's said some pretty outrageous things.  His association with the Church of Scientology has made some people think he is crazy.  But watching an interview with him, as I am right now, a few things come across.  He seems pretty normal, nice, and very talented.  Hopefully, it will be another lesson, that has to be relearned, that you shouldn't judge a book by a cover or make quick assumptions.  And I can't wait for Valkyrie.

At first I was upset Cruise was given the role.  He doesn't come across as German and it's hard to think of him as a historical figure when it is Tom Cruise.  It's hard to forget it's supposed to not be him.  But the more I look at it, I think he the role suits him just fine.    

Obama-Progress?

      I'm worried many people don't fully understand the importance of the election of Barack Obama. (myself included.)  It is hard for somebody who hasn't had the experiences of a persecuted people, like a white person for instance, to understand what they have gone through.  The importance of the election of the first black president in American history cannot be overstated.  

      Racism has been one of the the world's greatest evils.  It has disenfranchised millions of people, led to the breakup of thousands of families, and destroyed generations of blacks.  It (sometimes literally) raped an entire race of people.  It has led to so many of the world's modern problems. Colonization led to chaos in Africa.  It has led to a region to become enslaved (no pun intended) to amazing poverty, medical crises (including the AIDS epidemic), and continuous war, as people fight over resources, land, and power.  Racism has been manifested in genocide and a tremendous income and educational gap.  In the U.S. racism has led not only to slavery and persecution, but now to a race that fails to find a comfortable or appropriate identity.

      America was one of the last countries to outlaw slavery and has had one of the most difficult times overcoming racism.  Luckily, the country that may have had the most difficult time, South Africa, elected a black as president almost two decades ago.  That is why it is so important that America has elected a black person.  It has always, historically, been one of the last countries to deal with racial problems.  The world doesn't like America much right now. And the world is watching.  It is a historic moment not just for the United States, but the entire civilized world.   

      Obama's heritage and story make him perfect to be the first black president.  He's half black, and grew up with his white mother and grandparents.  He lived was raised in Kenya and Hawa'ii.  His heritage serves as sort of a symbolic bridge.  We are not to complete racial equality or justice now, but we are getting there.  It is only appropriate that in a country with such diversity as America, the first black president has such a heritage.  I am proud because this election represents progress in two ways.  First, obviously, is the fact that a black man was elected.  Second, however, America didn't fall prey to fear and repeat its past mistakes.  Even with all of the anti-Muslim hysteria, it still elected a president with ties to Islam and an Islamic name.

      I am hopeful, though cautiously skeptical, that this could be a new start for America.  The past eight years, everything has been blamed on Bush and the Republicans.  Worldwide, once positive opinions of America have turned negative.  With so many Americans having such great admiration for Obama and so many foreigners so excited about his election, I hope we pursue a polity that is a little more civilized.  Human nature probably guarantees combative and power politics, hopefully, in this new age of development, things can be a little more pragmatic and solution-oriented.  The world is in an unprecedented era of globalization and interdependence, economically, technologically, etc.  It is amazing that a man like Obama, with his heritage, has been elected the leader of the free world.  While I would disagree with Nancy Pelosi that he is sent from God, or with Louis Farrakhan that he is the messiah, in some ways, he may be.             

Societal Problems

The problem's in today's society are so easily understood.

We spend money we don't have, have sex without any responsibility, do drugs and alcohol without any responsibility, have kids without any responsibility, get married without any responsibility. 

We antagonize people that aren't like them or don't think like them.

We kill people who kill to show people that killing is bad.

Jeremiah Wright

I see Jeremiah Wright preached an anniversary sermon at Trinity United, once again criticizing Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly and once again compared them to those that beat and brutalized Jesus.  He also referenced the "dizzying broad on the View" and "educated her".  (She is a Christian by the way, usually you pray for fellow Christians not condemn them, but of course Wright can't do that.)  I just love Wright's humility.  And I'm sure Jesus called the woman at the well the "dizzying broad".  It seems every time he speaks the Reverend Wright gets a little less like Jesus and makes people a little more hateful. 

Dying American Dream?

      One thing phrase that has popped up during political speeches the last few years (almost exclusively by Democrats) is the "dying American Dream".  Most notably, it was used as the central theme of Joe Biden's DNC speech.  Even if the phrase isn't blatantly mentioned in speeches or town hall meetings, the idea is often present in a latent way.  The idea centers around the idea that wages are dropping, manufacturing jobs are leaving the country (resulting in less jobs overall), and education is becoming more expensive.  The idea is usually pitched to low wage-earners.  Many already believe it, though, so it isn't hard to convince them.  However, I would strongly question this notion.

      I would think that most Americans would be happy about their labor options.  Until a few decades ago the vast majority of the population had two options: farming and manufacturing. Most opportunity was for vertical, not horizontal, promotion.  Meaning that people usually couldn't change careers, they had to move up within their company or be recruited to a better job in the same industry.  Today people can make a living nearly any way they want.  There are literally thousands of career to choose from.  This is certainly not a negative development.  The diversification of the laborforce should not be overlooked.     

Living conditions are not mentioned.  Housing is safe.  Most water and food is safe. Sanitation is good and people are generally well-bathed.  People take those things for granted. But that is only a recent development.  For much of the country's history there was tainted food and water and people couldn't trust that what they were eating was healthy let alone safe. People now have more food options than ever.  In the past living conditions were downright filthy and often dangerous.

      Racial and religious equality is also not included.  American society is more tolerant than ever.  There is no longer outright racial or religious persecution.    

      The availability of college education is frequently mentioned explicitly.  But like labor, there is more opportunity than ever.  There is an incredible and unparalleled diversification.  There are small schools, big schools, private and public.  Religious and secular.  Four years schools, community colleges, and conservatories.   Often times, Democrats seem to want the college of every student in America paid for or somehow subsidized.  However, this is not needed.  The fact is that there are many, many young adults that shouldn't be in college.  For these students there are more options than ever.  Not only are there community colleges, but a tremendous number and variety of technical schools.  Students shouldn't have trouble paying for a college education.  There are of course the option of community colleges, as stated.  But there are also many opportunities for aid.  If you are poor and/or work hard, you will be able to get scholarships or grants.  It just takes some creativity and smart thinking.  Loans are also readily-available and if one is responsible they won't take that long to pay off.

      There is also the issue of manufacturing jobs leaving the country.  Firstly, this accepts the lump of labor fallacy.  But it is not as if the loss of manufacturing jobs is a necessarily a bad thing.  There will always be factory jobs.  It is a natural and positive development for economies to change away from a manufacturing-based economy.  It is a natural progression, societies move from agriculture to manufacturing to service.  This usually means that wages and white-collar jobs are increasing.  Just because jobs from a certain sector are decreasing, that doesn't mean the economy is worse.  It just means it is changing.  This doesn't mean that we should go crazy.  An positive reaction would be accept it and create more job-training and transition centers.

      There would be several key indicators to evaluate this statement.  One would be be the number of college attendees.  If college was really so outrageously expensive, there would be a very low college graduation rate.  However, this is not the case.  There are far more college attendees and graduation than ever before.  The very discussion reflects the change.  It is no longer seen as a privilege but a right.  Another indicator would ask about the unemployment rate.  If there were that many fewer jobs, and jobs were that much harder to come by, then the unemployment rate would be very high.  However, it is actually relatively low.  For much of the great depression the unemployment rate was over twenty percent.  Now it is roughly a third of that.  (Of course a fully-productive, healthy economy will produce an unemployment rate of around five percent.)  More people than ever have an opportunity to pursue their version of the American dream.  The problem is that most people want it to come easily.  But the whole idea is to work hard and have the work pay off.  I would not agree with the idea that the American dream is dying.  I think it is clear that it isn't.  So why would one say it?  Because there are people who believe it, and those people have votes. 

Things I Could Do Without In College

-Long lectures

-Long papers

-Huge reading assignments

-Very leftist profs

-Exams

-Students who talk too much or always raise their hand

-Sidewalk preachers

All of these things are probably necessary for the proper college experience, but I could do without any of them.

Insulting Politics

      We were treated to an unusual amount of insulting politics this year.  Politics that played on people's fears and wasn't honest.  Of course, politics isn't honest.  And the politicians don't care. It is both sides framing the debate.  Saying the other side only cares about rich people or the other side doesn't like America.  Instead of going above name-calling, which are usually false labels, they embrace them.  Because the fact is, most people on both sides are too stupid to know what is true and what isn't.  Not even that they aren't intelligent enough, just that most people don't care.  They have preconceived notions and ideas about the other side (or positive thoughts about their side) and they don't want them changed.  

      In typical Democratic fashion, the Democrats tried to show that they were on the side of the little guy.  There were countless comments about the struggles of "blue-collar workers" and mention after mention of specific lower-paying jobs -factory workers, nurses, firefighters, teachers.  The theory seems that if they just mention them time after time while the Republicans didn't, people would believe they cared about the folks while Republicans didn't.  They attempted to further ingrain this by saying as often as possible that Republicans wanted to give tax cuts to the rich and big business.

       The Republicans had a problem.  Republicans seem to be largely inept when it comes to communicating and how to shape a message.  They rarely tried to speak to these people, for whatever reason.  Finally, they realized they needed to do a better job.  So what did they do?They used Sarah Palin.  They had her openly identify herself as one of these type people, calling herself a "hockey mom".  While the Democrats tried to paint the Republicans as out of touch and elitist, the Republicans tried to do the same thing, using Palin to present themselves as regular, hard-working people while the Democrats were big spenders and big taxers who didn't care about small-town America.  Republicans continually tried to paint this picture.  Palin talked about the "average Joe's" and " Joe six-pack".  They tried to use Obama's connections to Hollywierd and his statements about rural America.  After Republicans made modest gains among small-town independents and locked up their base, Democrats fought back by trying to paint Palin as too much of a regular person, stupid, effectively, and extremist.  They also tried to catch John McCain on how many homes he owned.  If they hadn't already embarrassed themselves enough by employing such language as "hockey mom" "Joe six-pack", Republicans used  stooped to a new-low.  They began talking constantly about "Joe the Plumber" and to a lesser extent, "Tito the Construction Worker".  They weren't ashamed either.  Some Republicans continued to try and label Obama as a Muslim or not a U.S. citizen.  Democrats talked about the fact that John McCain wasn't tech savvy or that Sarah Palin didn't believe in evolution. 

      Ultimately, the Democrats were able to fool America better, making Americans believe that Republicans only cared about the rich.  Interestingly enough, they made it a negative to be elitist or rich.  But they also made it a negative to be too normal, stupid, in essence, like Palin. Most politicians know that the America people really aren't that bright most of the time.  They don't pay attention that closely to the news.  They don't know the context of the stories.  That's why the founding fathers created the electoral college - because they didn't trust the people to be the ultimate decision-makers.  Politicians say things like "Are you better off than you were four years ago?", which of course is fallacious because that implies that the president has a great degree of influence over the economy and that economic conditions remain constant, as if the economy one president inherits is the same as another.  However, it would appear to be a simple and logical question to the average person.  These are the type of things they do.  Both sides use the same tactics.  It is just a matter of how well they use them.  Every few years the tastes of the America people change and the other party is voted in power.  Politicians craft the campaign.  They know which stories they can get the media to hype. They are well-aware of how the American public thinks.  This election, they were particularly well-aware.  And those Americans that aren't stupid realized it.  It doesn't feel to good to us to know when we are being talked down to.  I'm better than "Joe-the-Plummer" nonsense and my vote isn't going to be bought by mentioning my job (and perceived struggles) often.  I don't expect this pander to end anytime soon, it's what the American people know and neither party seems to want to change that.  

My BCS Playoff Idea

      Everyone is clamoring for a playoff in college football.  The cries will probably grow louder after Texas was left out of the national championship game this year.  The game pits Oklahoma against Florida, though Texas had the same record as the Sooners and defeated them in October.

      Some people -including Texas Tech coach Mike Leach-  want a full-scale, March Madness sytle tournament with at least 64 teams.  (Of course there are only 119 college football programs that are Division 1-A while there are well over 300 Division 1-A men's basketball teams and the NCAA basketball tournament only includes 64 teams.)  

      This would probably be a mess.  The travel would be difficult and the expenses enormous.  Putting on a basketball tournament is much easier logistically than a putting on a football tournament.  Preparing for basketball games through the tournament are also much easier. Football requires more planning and takes longer to recover, physically.  For these reasons, I believe this plan wouldn't work.

   Furthermore, I frankly don't see the need for a tournament to determine the national champion.  The goal is to create a system that is fair and really does reward the national championship to the best team.  The most blatant failure was in 2004, when Auburn won the SEC with an undefeated record but wasn't selected for the national championship game, because it didn't have the #1 or #2 ranking in the final BCS poll prior to bowl selection.                Meaning, that no matter what it did, that it couldn't have gotten into the national championship game.  Which is obviously unfair.  I don't know how there wasn't a national outcry that demanded the system changed after the season.  But there fact of the matter is that most teams wouldn't have a chance to win the national championship.  If 64 teams were selected, that would most likely mean several teams from non-BCS conferences like the MAC or Big Sky would be in the tournament, and the fact is those teams aren't going to win.  In a basketball tournament, like the NCAA tournament, there is a slight chance a team could win.  It would be possible, but not likely.  However, in football it would be impossible because the best programs, OSU, USC, Florida, Michigan, Texas, Oklahoma, etc. are some much faster and so much stronger.  With good execution a basketball team that isn't that athletic can beat a very talented basketball team, but in football that won't happen for in a tournament.

       My idea is to still have your regular bowls which are outrightly selected, with each individual bowl inviting the teams they want, and nothing based on a ranking system like the BCS.  However, the BCS series still would be used.  The top 14 teams in the final BCS rankings would be invited to engage in a playoff.  This way all teams that would have a real legitimate chance to win and deserve a shot would get win - including non-BCS conference teams, like a Boise State or Utah.   There would still be some motivation for being #1 or #2.  Those teams would get a bye the first round of the playoffs.  After the first round, there would be six teams left.  After adding the # 1 and #2 teams to the mix and playing the next round there would be four teams left...and then two.  They, of course, would play in the national championship game.  The games would be played on pre-selected sites.  They would also be neutral.  So if Arizona State was to play and there was a site at the stadium in Glendale, they would have to play somewhere else.  There could still be the same traditional BCS bowls.  Round two would feature four games, and the third round would feature two games, of course (because it is eight teams playing then the four left playing for a spot in the championship, for a total of six games) so you could keep the four main games - the Sugar Bowl, Orange, Fiesta, and Rose.  Then you could also add two more-perhaps the Cotton Bowl and Citrus.  

   This system doesn't quite have all the kinks worked out yet, but it is the most reasonable, fair, and best I've seen.  (Of course I'm biased since it's my idea.)  The main problem right now is that the university presidents are concerned mostly about bowl money - how much they will get from playing and how much they will cost.  Money always seems to ruin things.  Now fans are being shortchanged.  I would be happy with any new playoff system and it's a travesty there won't be one anytime soon. 

OJ Simpson

I heard the following exchange between Neal Boortz and a caller on his radio show talking about OJ Simpson:

(paraphrasing)

Caller: I hope he gets murdered in prison and rots in hell.

Boortz: I hope he gets his throat slit a week before his sentence ends...

I hope neither man claims to be a Christian.

Removed to edit.

Why Jeremiah Wright Offended Me So Much

      The Jeremiah Wright "scandal" caused an uproar.  Partially because many, probably most white Americans don't know the history of black Protestant Christianity in America.  They don't know about the Jeremiad sermon style Wright used.  They can't sympathize with the experiences of blacks and don't understand how difficult the past is.  They don't know what goes on in black churches.   They didn't react well.  Instead of acting with peace and forgiveness, understanding, and dialogue, they lambasted Wright and didn't give him a chance.

      Perhaps one of the things that most upset me is his speaking for God.  Of course, you must be confident that your message is from God and pray that you are speaking His truth. However, it must be done humbly, not with arrogance. I am probably one of the biggest critics of American culture that you could find.  I rarely mince words about it.  However, I would never, ever, ever say "Goddamn America...it's in the Bible".  That is off the charts arrogant to say that. 

      I was also offended that somebody in the pulpit would make a crude sexual gesture when talking about Bill Clinton, someone who had invited him to the White House to honor him and fellow clergy.

      The single most distubing thing to me was his message (specifically his tone).  Pastors are supposed to represent hope and share hope.  Black people have a right to be angry, to say the least, about the past. There were terrible, terrible things done to them that are straight from hell.  However, there must come a time of reconciliation.  No whites living right now have ever owned a black slave or actively persecuted them (with the exception of white supremicists). They must lose their heavy hearts and let their mouths overflow with forgiveness.  Hundreds of thousands of whites dedicated their lives to black equality or gave their lives in the civil war. White Americans have done nearly everything possible to help them and atone for their transgressions. There was affirmative action and the Great Society.  We are not in the 1800s. Blacks need to get over the past. (And whites must understand why that is so difficult for them.)  They must not look past it or forget about it, but they must not dwell on it or use it as an excuse.  Yet Jeremiah Wright didn't preach that.  He should have shared the prophetic message of Jesus and talked about forgiveness and love, not preach hate or encourage blacks to begrudge their white brothers and sisters.  He was cultivating bitterness. It is up to Christians to change culture, not encourage it.  Blacks have focused on the past for decades.  Everyone acknowledges the sins committed.  He should speak to the problems blacks are creating themselves through things like gang violence, drug addiction and trafficking, promiscuity, teenage pregnancy and abandonment, violent, sexual, and sexist rap lyrics, and failure to act responsibly. Reverend Wright was focusing on the dark truth of history, but Jesus wants us to focus on the light!  He can lead us to overcome!  He is the messiah and the savior and He can and will deliever us!  But only if we let him!  He doesn't want to focus on the old, he wants to create something new and beautiful that is full of mercy and love, not something focused on the past filled with animosity. The fruits of the spirit are love, joy, peace, patience...I didn't see much of that when he was saying the U.S.K.K.A. or Goddamn  America, racism runs the country, that the country is run by rich white people, or that Bill Clinton did America just like Monica. His tone is not respectful or loving and that doesn't sound like a positive message that is loving or peaceful.  My favorite bible passage reads "And what does God require of you?  Do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with your God."  Wright has done justice.  He's done great work in the inner city and poverty.  He should be honored, praised, and commended.  But there are two other requirements, loving mercy and walking humbly.  Jeremiah Wright spoke out of personal spite and anger and arrogance when making these remarks.  You can see it in his mannerisms.  I actually agree with many of the sentiments he espoused, but I can't get over his attitude.  He wasn't leading the black community to forgiveness or a new era of racial justice and dialogue, he led them to more hate, while dividing the Christian community and driving white Christians away.