Cynique

Yes, there is a lot of gratuitous sex and violence in Game of Thrones, as you will see when you view in the first episode. I guess the producers want art to imitate life. "True Detectives", a 6-episode series on HBO starring Woody Harrelson and Matthew McConaughey was another well cast and well produced show that just completed its run. Its settings were very compelling and eerie, and altho its plot was murky, the characters were riveting.

Why does this news not surprise me? When anything cruel or unjust or devastating happens to the population of a country, you can bet more often than not that the unfortunate victims are going to be black. Here in America, Blacks are still struggling with the negative aftermath of slavery, still despised and rejected by many, mired in their own epidemic of self destructiveness, ignored by a justice system stacked against them. Yet, through all the trials and tribulations, this race has been among the most faithful and devoted to a Savior who does the least for them. Go figure.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, TROY!

Well, the time has finally arrived! For what? The beginning of the Final Four March Madness count down? Nope. The canonization of 2 Catholic popes? Nope. The official announcement that Obamacare has reached its goal? Nope. The location of the missing Malaysian jetliner's black box? Nope. What? Tonight's premier epsode of the new season of - Game of Thrones! Me, along with millions of other fans have been patiently awaiting the return of this fantasy saga. Why, you wonder, would an octogenarian like me be anxiously anticipating the return of a series reminiscent of a video game? I dunno. Why am I not more excited about the movie based on the old biblical epic Noah? Why am I not looking forward to the next installment of Sweetie Pie, Oprah's reality series about a feisty senior citizen? Why am I not totally preoccupied with "Scandal", the nail-biting nighttime soap opera about a trouble shooter with jungle fever who is the power behind the POTUS? Well, my other favorite series "Boardwalk" which takes place during Prohibition takes up that slack. Mostly because I am a sucker for period dramas. Other eras are so much more interesting to me than those taking place in the present. Oviously I am into escapism. Whatever. All I do know about my Game of Thrones jones is that I am enthralled with this tale of dragons and swords and wars and kings and queens and the supernatural - captivated by a complicated plot fraught with treachery and violence and confusion and mystery. I guess it's the scope and the grandeur of the settings, and the fascination with the characters with unpronounceable names, all vying for the power that will elevate them to a throne that will make them the supreme ruler. They all speak so eloquently and dress so elegantly. The fact that all of this takes place in a different time and a different world adds to the intrigue. I'm bored with the dull, aimless world I'm stuck in. Everything is so senseless and unjust, and everyone in the public eye so devious and shallow. Similar, yes, to Game of Thrones except that, unlike planet Earth, this parallel universe benefits from better direction and special effects. The production is very well coordinated and the actors good at their jobs. And there is no FaceBook and Twitter and tablets for texting. I'm a stranger in a strange land. Always have been. But television, so often maligned by others, is a gateway for me. Tonight, I lose myself in another dimension, a place where winters last 10 years. I can identify with that,..

It's sounds very convoluted to me, as well as being a monumental task to implement. 25 reviews? What new self-published book could command that many reviews?? Or am I underestimating this practice? But since I have plans for making an e-book available on line, I will keep this project in mind. I guess one would have nothing to lose by participating in it.

Clash of the titans? More like a measuring of the penises to see who is the best hung. Male leaders personify the egos of their nations, and the guns and bombs and drones of their armies are phallic symbols. How much misery is inflicted and how many lives lost because one country has to prove that it is the most potent? "Peace" and "diplomacy" are synonyms for "wimp" and "wussy" by those whose lives won't be screwed up due to losing sons and daughters in senseless wars. Street gangs mimic this attitude by killing each other over turf. It's an "us" against "them" society. When does it end? How can it end? Is another big bang on the horizon, poised to blow this world back to square one? Maybe next time around gay men will be the Alpha Males and the only thing their fights will revolve around will be which queen has the best decorated palace. Brave new world.

I contend that all problems don't have solutions; time is what brings change. Situations naturally evolve, sometimes randomly and the most resilient survive. We are the "masters of our fate and the captains of our souls" so we just have to try and get our shit together, as the world turns.

Black fast food is certainly not something that can be promoted as healthy. Ribs, fried chicken, soul food menus made of fatty starchy food are precursors of high blood pressure and diabetes which, in turn, adversely affect the heart. So giving such franchises their piece of the pie, may fatten the pockets of the owners but certainly won't benenfit the well being of the black community. I'm not defending McDonalds or any of the other big name servers except to say that they represent the supply and demand principle, and taking on the welfare of the general population can be akin to a Nanny society where people are told what's best for them and made to feel guilty if they do as the please. We do have a right to personal choices. I eat what I have a taste for whether it's good for me or not. I've convinced myself that savoring good food releases endorphins and phereonomes, and these chemicals balance out the bad effects of calories and cholesterol. Crazy, I know. But never underestimate the oblivion of rationalizing or the power of pleasure, and enjoying what I like to eat is one of the few pleasure I have left in a life where I'm still here in spite of my bad habits.. But - I digress. What is occurring to me is that we tend to ennoble the masses. We think that because they are victimized, that they are morally superior to those who victimize them. Cynic that I am, I starting to feel that the only difference between the "haves" and the "have-nots" is that the haves have managed to pull off what the have-nots couldn't. Just because people are indigent doesn't mean they are brimming with sterling character and scruples and integrity. Folks steal from and cheat each other on a daily basis.Opportunists are not limited to the rich. Philanthropy, however, is the domain of the rich where many practice the "to whom much is given, much is expected" credo. Altruists are in a class all by themselves. These humanitarians are a rare breed who deserve credit and gratitude and respect. They are our hope. Obviously nobody wants to be poor and impotent and exploited, and in order to better their circumstances, if given a chance, they are very likely to emulate what profit-driven successful people have done. A poor slob working for minimum wages in a factory, stealing and selling equipment on the side, looks at the CEO of the company and thinks: "there, but for the lack of guile, go I." Never mind how he got to the top; he got there. Being a cut-throat is the name of the game Politics is another arena where honesty suffers. Elected officials who rise from the ranks of the common man, promising to represent the best interests of their neglected constituents, sell them out Power and money corrupt at the grass roots level just as much as at the upper echelon. "I got mine, now you get yours" is the mantra of our capitalistic system where what unites the poor, huddled masses is a "misery loves company" lament. Man is such a flawed entity and materialism so enthralling how could the world be full of anything other than greed and need????

Clothes have always been indications of status, dating waay back to when which cave man sported the best lookin animal pelt. Clothes, in fact, identify our gender, our nationality and our rank. And our aspirations. In a naked world, we would have to really prove ourselves. When public schools in my district introduced uniforms, requiring students to all dress alike, I was not against this. Made things a lot easier for me as a parent. There is safety in the numbers of sameness. Time enough to be classified by what you wear. Back in my college days during the early 1950s, the preppy look was in. Everybody, both guys and gals had to have a pair of white buckskin oxfords with red rubber soles. Gray flannel pants were an essential to the wardrobes of frat boys, along with navy blue pull overs. For girls, cashmere sweaters were to die for. I can remember rejecting guys who didn't conform to the fashion dictates of the day. The fact that they were usually smart and interesting wasn't a priority for me. I was conflicted by not courageous. My first year at Illinois I lived in the AKA house and clothes definitely mattered among these black female sorors. Once again, my own garb did not adhere to what I approved of in others. I was just never a clothes horse and my outfits were non descript. I did have a pair of white bucks but I never made my way up to a cashmere sweater. As was the case back then, what I lacked for in dress was compensated for by my color. The contempt of the darker girls toward me was thinly-disguised. But the guys always showed great appreciation for my being a "red-bone". In a way, the skin we wear is the ultimate mark of distinction.

Very Interesting exchange. Things differ in different parts of the country, I guess. Back in the day, All Stars were big in the Chicagoland area. They came in all colors. If my kids couldn't start off the school year in September with a new pair of All Stars, they were bummed out. Generic gym shoes were called bo-bos. After a while bo-bos were in. Keds, were called "white girl shoes" because, having nothing to prove, white girls wore them. Keds were also standard gear for cheeleaders so that embued them with a certain amount of prestiege. Also around these parts, Arabs moved in on the Jews when it came to clothing stores. They sold a lot of knockoffs, but name brands as well. Black guys were mesmerized by labels and price tags. They really got off on buying expensive clothes and shoes. These were status symbols that embellished their self-esteem. In my hey day I was, personally, never into real expensive clothes. Mainly because after I wore something a couple of times, I was done with it, so I couldn't see paying a lot of money for something that would just be hangin in my closet.. I guess you could say my wardrobe was disposable. Coats I did consider an investment. And I did have a good black dress that was my uniform for funerals. And I did have female friends who would often tease me about shopping at discount department stores but I would blow them off, always making sure to correct their grammar or word pronunciation or vocabulary, never hesitating to quote Shakespeare or some other dead poet. I honed my intellectual snob skills and after a while I started to develop my own unique style, and began to adopt the persona of a Bohemian full of scorn for superficial materialistic people. It was funny how some folks reacted to someone not impressed with their high-priced clothes. Of course these were, in a way, my defense mechanisms. If I'd been affluent I might have opted for quality over quantity. But I was never one to live above my means. I love dollar stores. And I love bargains. Now I can get by with shopping at WalMart, by reminding everyone that I'm a senior citizen on a fixed income. Yet, wonder of wonders, I love a well-dressed man. And my idea of being well-dressed, does not include bright pimp outfits. I like conservative attire, but I do think earrings are kinda cool. Am so glad, stove pipe pants and 3-button suits are making a comeback, thrilled that tab collars secured with tie pins are still around. One thing is sure. when it comes to class, you either have it or you don't. Clothes are just trappings.

Yes, Troy, what you say on FaceBook can have negative and dangerous repercussions. It's interesting that even though this is the case, people continue to post things that can come back to haunt them. They take the risk, nudged by impulse. Things I have posted on FaceBook about religion have strained relations between me and 3 of my children and several of my friends. I know when I make certain comments that this will offend people, but - I do it anyway. Why? Because I've decided not to let disapproval from others inhibit my convictions. In its own perverse way, Facebook has emboldened and enabled me, - allowed me to do what I would hesitate to do in the live setting of polite society. It has liberated me even as it isolates me. But somehow being alone in the company of my personal beliefs doesn't bother me. So, the insidious Facebook can be a vehicle for whatever drives you. It's like a parallel universe for people with a need for expression and attention and sharing and ranting. My avatar spends about an hour on FaceBook in the morning and then about the same amount of time again in the evening. In between time, I pursue other interestes and diversions. It's almost like I have a love-hate relationship with FaceBook and all of its trivia and blather and platitudes. Yet, it is an organic entity that pervades my awareness and its panorama of topics provokes me to challenge and ridicule, something I am naturally inclined to do. But wait. There's more. I've also been known to click on the "like" icon.

Having a Jewish husband is not something I'd get excited about. Were I young and single, I'd still hold out in hopes of finding a good black man. Way back in th day, I would always hear that Jewish men liked black women - to have on the side. When I attended the University of Illinois back in the early 1950s, there was a very substantial communityof New York Jews among the student body, the reason being, as one of my female Jewish dormmates told me, was that it was much cheaper for their parents to send them to a top notch Big 10 school than a private Eastern college. Anyway, the singular goal of these Jewish princesses was to marry doctors or lawyers and live comfortable lives. I encounered Jewish males in my classes. They always had twinkles in their eyes, which I now think was a sign that they and their kosher brand of soul liked the possibilities black women represented. Back then black women never thought of white men in terms of marriage. It just wasn't likely. The high school I went to was overwhelmingly white, and I had a little thing for the Italians guys. Mostly because, in addition to being good looking, they were not unlike black ones. They had swag and bluster weren't that racially-prejudiced. Also back then when I started working at the Post Office, I had a chance to compare black guys and white guys. To me, Brothas could talk it, but they couldn't walk it. White guys didn't have as much style but they had substance. But they all shared a common "desire", and color wasn't that big of a factor when it came to who was good or bad in bed. Or so I was told. While I'm lingering back in the day, I can also compare how things were before TV came on the scene. Black women have always liked to gossip and speculate about what was going on in the lives of their acquaintances, and there was plenty of grist for this mill because somebody was always sneaking around with somebody, and so-and so was going with so-and so, and he said, and she said. When television came on the scene, soap operas soon followed. Soon a TV screen became a neighbor's window, providing an opportunity to eavesdrop on the private worlds of dysfunctional people. I was always amazed at hearing black women discuss the characters on "their stories" as soap operas were called. They were totally wrapped up in these daily offering, seemingly unable to distinguish fiction from reality. Now we have all these night time soap operas and reality show drama queens, all of which continue to captivate their female viewers, particularly black ones Why read a book, or seek out intellectual stimulation when it's so easy to just press the "power" button on your remote and escape into a world of sex and intrigue? Of course, if you can find a book to duplicate this simplistic experience, then that can work, too. Enter FaceBook, where people can create their own drama, write their own dialogue, star on their own stage; a platform where they can rant and vent without being held accountable. A lot of this is undoubtedly about escaping the hum-drum existence of a pay-check-to-pay-check life. And it's a situation that's just begging to be exploited, because it gives the people what they want. And so it goes: life in the 21st century. Many have expressed the opinion that the downfall of black folks stems from their undisciplined pursuit of what they want, instead of what they need. Whatever.

Jump in on these exchanges anytime, CDBurns. You always have very interesting input. I am planning to have a short run of paperback copies of my book. Actually, the plot of the book remains the same but I have just tightened it up. I am basically a story teller, and I tried to make my narrative voice more concise, and intimate and hip. I really believe that the selling point of this book would a curiosity about how an 80 year old woman handles contemporary fare. I am tempted to use a pen name because I think my children and grandchildren might be embarrassed by some of the things I write. Ironically a lot of my impressions about current generations come from them and their friends, and from live TV shows, not to mention my own contacts and interactions. Anyhow, as they say, if you don't use it, you lose it, so this book is also an exercise in staving off dementia by stimulating my mind and imagination. How did I miss hearing about this new discovery that surpasses Higgs Boson, Troy? This stuff is so mind boggling that even if I do hear about it, it will probably still boggle my mind.

Yes, Troy, Steve Harvey has a daily afternoon talk show that originates in Chicago. He seems to have inherited Oprah's audience which is made up almost exclusively of women, about evenly divided between black and white ones. They LOVE him and all of his home spun advice. He's like a modern day Uncle Remus. Yes, Maury's show is still on and has not changed its format one iota in 10 years. It seems people never tire of finding whether or not Tyrone is LeQuisha's baby daddy. Bethenny's show is just something I stumbled across while channel surfing. The appeal of these shows to me is the opportunity they provide for me to observe everyday people uncut and unrehearsed in action. This common fare provides a contrast to my other choice, The Science channel and its exploration of time and space and the mysteries of the unverse. I also reguarly check out the the Investigation Discovery (ID) channel that dramatizes true crime stories. I find it interesting because it, too, is about real life. Everyday folks are steady killing each other, mostly to collect on big buck insurance policies and hook up with the new and younger lovers who've they've been having intense affairs with. Actually, these folks aren't exactly everyday ones. Most of them are either psychopaths or sociopaths and the unsuspecting people they victimize. Obviously, I find this fare more riveting than how Google, FaceBook, Wikipedia and Amazon are exploiting us dumb consumers.

I may have writer's block when it comes to posting here, but I am busily involved in putting the finishing touches on a manuscript I want to publish primarily as an e-book. Talk about writing being re-writing. The latest version of this story bears little resemblence to the original which I posted here a couple of year ago. Even the characters' names have been changed. All the revisions have been necessary because the first version of this book was written almost 15 years ago and things have so radically changed since then. And that includes me and my atttudes. The original story ended up just being a blueprint for the final draft which I have taken great pains to make current. Because this book is about relationships, certain TV programs have inadvertantly turned out to be references for me. From time to time, I check in with 2 shows that are relevant for my purposes; one of these is hosted by Steve Harvey and the other by Bethenny Frankel. Steve, in all of his buck-eyed, Ebonic-speaking expertise continues to harp on what it takes to turn a man into the whipped, henpecked one he's become. He always pussying footin around like he' s hopin his wife ain't watching the show in case he says something she won't approve of and punishes his dufus ass. Bethenny is a feisty, rail thin white girl who I believe is a fugitive from one of those house wife reality smack-downs. Her show has become an arena for debate between the mostly female audience and the rotating panels of horny buffoons chosen to represent the male point of view, discussions she mediates in the strident piercing voice so prevalent among her type. (Maybe that's why Tameron Hall was promoted to a Today Show anchor, since a perpetual wild-eyed grin and a cackling laugh accompany every vapid observation she utters as a nasal parody of her white counterparts. ) But I digress. What the Steve and Bethenny shows have done for me is to confirm how ongoing is the friction between males and females when it comes to the mating game.( Maury's show is more typical than we like to admit.) What is a tad surprising to me, however, is how the spines of men appear to be eroding. They seem to be utterly confused and wimpish when it comes the demands of women looking for somebody to sooner or later have sex with. Women also come across as clueless when evaluating themselves and what they bring to the table. No wonder finding someone to be compatible with is such a challenging mission. But the chase can be an interesting exercise in the pursuit of The Only One which is both the theme and title of my upcoming e-book.

Back during the 1930s my grandfather was interviewed for one of these narratives. His name was Elijah Donaldson Merrill. One thing I remember being mentioned in the narrative, which various members of my extended family have copies of, was him telling how his father was the plantation owner and how as a young child, he was allowed to play with the plantation owner's other children who were his half-siblings. (He actually looked like he was white.) This was in Franklin, Tennessee, and he told how, as a young man, he headed up a black brigade who would run off the Klan when its members would stage midnight raids on black neighborhoods. He said this group was so good at doing this that the Klan finally stopped the harassment. He later became a deputy sheriff, assigned to the black section of the town.

Interesting, indeed, how an answer to a question can feed upon itself and expand like a pyamid. Maybe that's why pyramids have a prominence in mysticism. Feynman's dissertation also kind of illlustrates the inadequacy of trying to capture reality in language, which is why the simple phrase "it is what it is" is really profound. When responding to the question "WHY?, one word can be the gateway to infinity. "BECAUSE"...

Google is a vast faceless entity. Who is Google's CEO? Where is its home office? Should I google Google??? Or will that enable it to profit off itself?? If I look up Google on Wikipedia will they give an accurate answer and will they include this lawsuit brought against Google in their data?? What happens if I google Wikipedia? I'm conflicted. I am also reminded of the Jeopardy contestant who was finally defeated yestereday after winning for 12 straight days earning over 300,000 dollars. He was criticized for the tactics he used in playing the game. BTW, this Asian guy was extremely knowledgeable, which of course gave him a great advantage. He'd never stick to one category but would jump all over the board in search of the Daily Doubles he could use to increase the lead he usually had. And when hitting a Daily Double square, if he didn't know anything about the subject, he'd just bet a small amount, satisfied that he had blocked other contestants from having an opportunity to increase their total, while not losing very much. himself. Do we fault this guy for running rough shod over others? Is the name of the game to win at any cost? Or should opponents be given a fighting chance? Should a capitalistic nation of rabid sports fans be expected to ignore the mantra that embodies their spirit of competition: "winning isn't everything; it's the only thing!", a motto which the other side of the "greed is good" coin. And have the ethics and morality of the average person been over estimated? Considering that everyone's goal is to get ahead and lead a life of affluence, are we, as individuals, just microcosms of ruthless successful monopolies, manuevering and manipulating to achieve our American dream of being in control and having it all?? Who knows? Corporate America, however, is more socialistic than it realiizes because the only difference between it and Socialism is that instead of the Government running everything, business conglomerates are laying the ground work to do this. Whatever. I have better things to be interested in. I'm so glad Neil DeGrasse Tyson, the black astrophysicist is emceeing the latest version of Cosmos, now appearing on network TV. He's my own private Pope because he is a supreme spokesman for free thinkers, awed by the wonders of the universe. And listening to Tyson expound on the paradox of quantum physics is much more compelling than watching Obama trying to explain why young people should enroll in the afforable care insurance program (and frustrate the large companies).

The re-cycled African diaspora is manifested in fast running, in beaded, colored hair extension, in regal stylish garb, in the griot of Rap, in belicose tribal warfare, in line-dancing and throbbing percussion, all in a testament to its Agrarian roots. Its Mercantile ones? Not so much. The concrete jungle remains cloistered and full of suspicion...

I'd be interested in reading the article entitled: "Lupita’s Spotlight: A Reality Check for Light-Skinned Women?" Lupita to me is the equivalent of celebrities adopting babies from Africa. Hollywood has found a new fad to embrace, - an exotic pet to stroke. What light-skinned women, along with their darker sisters have to worry about, remains the same ol threat: successful, high profile brothers, like Henry Gates, marrying WHITE women. I am curious, however, as to whether Lupita's flat-chest and small behind will usurp her more voluptuous sisters of color.

Do these books offer solutions? Or simply define the problem? What do they predict will be the ultimate outcome of these corporate shredding machines. Will life as we know it change? Will that be bad - or good? Glad I'm old, and won't be around to witness the social media apocalypse. As central as Facebook is to the exstence of so many black folks, as usual, po ol niggas will be the losers. Or will Jesus save them?

Susan Crawford is undoubtedly a brilliant woman but to me she, with all of her perky congeniality, also seems naive. She is concerned about what should be the case in a democratic society. It seemingly hasn't occurred to her what has become increasingly apparent, which is that capitalism and democracy cannot co-exist. The monopolistic greed of capitalism has usurped the idealism of democracy and it no longer exists. Yes, we still embrace the concept of individualism, but what individuials want, is to acquire the affluence that capitalism offers. Democracy is also incompatiable with racism and classism, both of which continue to infect the individual. So it's the same ol same ol. The "haves" enable corporate America because they are a part of it, and the "have-nots" are penalized for burdening themselves with the baggage that hampers their escape from their dire circumstances.. Can these 2 divergent groups come together and overthrow the corrupt government that is victimizing them by being in cahoots with the bad guys??? Tune in tomorrow.

I can't really say, because the truth probably lies somewhere between the two opposing sides. But, traditionally, Hollywood is very tolerant of those who they perceive to be genuises, giving great weight to their artistic temperament and eccentricities. They reacted the same way to Roman Polanski, a brilliant director, who was accused of statutory rape for seducing a young teen aged girl. Also Charlie Chaplin. Woody Allen has had numerous relationships with adult women, most notably Diane Keaton, and is now married and has 2 children whom he is presumably not molesting. Mia Farrow has always been perceived as flaky. She was the precursor of Angelina Jolie. She adopted about 12 children from different countries many of whom were disabled. But as one of her adopted sons claimed, their household was a chaotic zoo and Mia who had a fiery temper was in over her head when it came to mothering skills. Bottom line, who really cares? I don't why I even bother to post all of this. The friction between Ridley and McQueen is more salient. Interdispersed throughout the dreaded Facebook posts are links to different articles about this feud, one of which was written by a sister who took Ridley to task for his history of being hypercritical of his race, saying "niggas" bring on a lot of their troubles by their inexcusable behavior. Kind of a sanitized version of the comedy litany Chris Rock did in his routine distinguishing "niggas" from "Blacks". Another "take-away" for me, after the Oscar proceedngs, is that black actresses are pretty much gaining a lock on the supporting role category, as long as they play maids and slaves and other demeaning characters. And when all is said and done, implicit in all the heartfelt speeches of black winners is a "thank ya, boss, I sho is glad y'all white folks gimme dis validation. Now I is truly worth somethin," vibe.

The Hollywood crowd is very supportive of Woody Allen, apparently believing that tests administered to his 7-year old adopted daughter at the time proved inconclusive and raised suspicions that she had been coached by her mother. Once again the rumors cropped up after this now grown daughter recently came forward to again accuse Woody because she was angered that he was honored by the Golden Globes for his body of work. But another adopted child defended Woody claiming Mia was an abusive erratic mother who taught all the kids to hate Woody because she's never forgiven Allen for taking up with another daughter she and second husband, Andre Previn adopted before she and Woody even hooked up. Incidentally Mia and Woody were never married. Allen and Mia's adult adopted daughter are now wed and have 2 adopted daughters. John Ridley conspicuously thanked everybody but Steve McQueen in his Oscar acceptance speech. These 2 apparently fell out because Ridley wouldn't agree to have McQueen listed as co-author of the screenplay just because he was the director of the movie. In the pop culture world, this is fertile dirt. That's show biz.

Me, myself, I'm glad all the Oscar hoopla is over. It was getting tiresome. I was especially bored with Lupita's (whatever her last name is) over exposure, modeling an endless display of high-priced designer dresses that went so well with her high top fade hair style. Back in 1939, Hattie McDaniels won best supporting actress for playing a slave mammy in Gone With The Wind". In 2014 an African actress wins this award for playing a slave in another epic movie. Ah, the irony. Grade school-educated Hattie was descended from slaves. Yale graduate, Lupita is descended from slave traders. Whoopi! (Yea, Ms. Goldberg was there, too, looking like the flip side of Lupita's coin.) FaceBook was bristling with black women rejoicing over this win. Why? I don't know. Didn't a black actress just win as supporting Oscar for playing a maid in "The Help" 2 years ago? Didn't Monique also just win one before that for playing a negligent ghetto momma? The idea that black women should be rejoicing over the latest awardee whom they presumably regard as an inspiring role model, brings out the cynicism that just keeps rearing its ugly head on my horizon. I like my role models more authentic, and a littlle less frivolus. Which proves, of course, that I am out of step. I didn't realize black women felt so neglected, considering the eye-rolling, booty shakin, hip-grindin dancer who serves as our first lady. Go, on, Girl. I haven't seen any of the nominated pictures, but I'm glad "12 Years a Slave" won. It kinda neuturalizes all the accolades the movie about Lincoln received last year. I thought host Ellen Degenerate did a decent job of reminding us how unremarkable these proceedings really are. Somebody should give her an Oscar for her portrayal of a man. I could go on and on but I would once again be violating my new year's resolution to stop being so negative. BTW, Sidney Poiter looked how I imagined that man in the news who came back to life, kicking off his body bag just as the mortician was getting ready to start embalming him. Louis Gossert, Jr., where are you when we need you? Poor ol Kim Novak, who's the same age as me, looking all bewildered in her JC Penney pants suit, while few people in the audience even remembered her or what a hottie she was back in the day I know the feeling. Bye-bye. I'm done.