"We Are Watching"

"We Are Watching"

Place pennies next to rappers
who can't wrap their minds around hip hop;
choking on the same cake
the first Poets burned at the stake for.

We are not the last ones.
We are the first to view the worst
in a world where chivalry is thirst.
We are the apex where texts mean rough sex.

We observe the dark arts:
the very savagery of hidden fantasies.
Well placed tapestry this generation calls "Thirst Traps."
Hear the claps?

You won't hear many because
they only clap long enough
to distract us from their envy.
We clip their fishnets at the seams and crush gleams.

We also have the glimmer of sinners;
but the differential is when we clap hands,
we aren't taking a chance.
We sound without our pants down.

Resound without night gowns.
Bra straps popped
in front of fitted cap merchants
who champion their sermon
while praising the vermin.

We stand as the first ignored and seldom explored.
We write sex and cause bandwidth wrecks.
We say how we feel
and you say "That's real."

We see the truth but you want the stories.
We fall victim to perception
but we are not your categories.
Skim through it all and crawl.

Before you can scrape, scratch or sprawl,
you're taught how to "catch the wall"
against those who only stand tall
to deliver to the giver.

We can see the black water
gushing from the river.
You gorge forcefully;
ready for more slight in refreshment
to infect the connected.

We are free to pay homage
to those who were in bondage
yet we swiftly trade in the reins
for shackles and chains
like the untamed for fame.

We are not the answer.
We are not protection.
We as Poets know
that most questions need direction.
Know who leads before you proceed.

He who sows the seed
cannot neglect the garden.
You have killed our roots
but the heart must never harden.
Far then, but closer to you still.

If you've had your fill,
stand with us and state your will.

Written By: Devin Joseph Metz

Being a Leader, and Not a Follower, in Your Own Life

By Melanie Blake

When we are young and inpressionable, we are easily fascinated by everything and anything we see. Cool new fads and gadgets, the latest trends, the ways and means of how our schoolyard companions play, talk and act. We idolize everything we see, if even for a moment, because we are still trying to build and identify ourselves. We want so badly to have an identity, a way of communicating our thoughts , ideals, and goals, that we will grasp at anything in order to be socially acceptable. We are confused and unstable; one minute our favorite color is pink, next it is blue. One minute we want to be Britney Spears, the next Christina Aguilera.

As we go through the changes in identity, we take small pieces of each experience with us, resulting in a complex and unique individual person, personality, and history. We learn what we like; and what we don't. We learn what works for us, and what we're not quite so good at. We discover our strengths and weaknesses, and over time, we fall into a "category" that best suits our personality. We find like-minded friends, and begin to pursue interests promoted within our social group, such as competitive people becoming athletes and working hard to become the best in their sport, for example. It is in our youth that we are shaped into who we shall become in the future. When you are young, you need the "training wheels" of life to help guide you in the right direction, like parents, teachers, mentors, and family who are a positve influence on you. But as you get older, and hopefully more mature, it is crucial that you begin to take the reigns of your life and map out your own path, for your own sake. You must take off the training wheels, and feel the pride of being able to hold yourself afloat. Knowing right from wrong with mom standing over you, doing the right thing when no one is looking. Those are the moments that help define us as mature adults, and we continue to learn and grow from those experiences as we mature.

But now more than ever, more people would rather be a follower, and let the actions of others develop their personality and ethics, than be a leader and develop a set of goals, ideals, and morals for themselves. They still have a young mentality and look to celebrities and reality shows, TV and movies, to guide them in their real life pursuits. But it makes no sense; and our generation is suffering tremendously for it. The biggest problem with being a follower is that those that you are following are not emotionally invested in the outcome of your life, that you are coincidentally shaping around their behavior. That person that you are following blindly is not looking back to see the repercussions of your idolatry of them.

A great example that I will use is Rihanna. Yes, she's a celebrity, but many young women shape their behavior around this woman, her personal life and her music, for what reason I know not. But back to Bad Gal Ri Ri. What do we know about her? She's famous, beautiful and dramatic. She smokes weed. She has tattoos. She's rather promiscuous, and is proud of it. She's in and out of her emotionally and physically abusive relationship with bad boy Chris Brown. And her "Navy?" Worship the ground she walks on. Repeat her song lyrics and apply them to their lives. Dress like her. Talk like her. Sing, "Ain't nobody bidness.." about their own toxic relationships. Post cute black & white weed photos on IG, just like their leader Rihanna. But do you know what the problem is here? Rihanna is a multi-millionaire entertainer who's job it is to be wild and outrageous and keep her name in the tabloids. Obviously, the cops aren't checkin' RiRi for marijuana possession because she woulda BEEN locked up. But what happens when you get caught with it? You'll be going straight to jail, and "...but Rihanna does it!" will not be an acceptable defense.

We have to start coming to terms with the fact that we must be not only responsible for our actions, but be strong enough to develop our OWN sense of right and wrong. Set standards for ourselves. Just because celebrities sleep with everyone on the block does not mean that you have to. Just because everyone in your family is an alcoholic doesn't mean that you have to follow down the same path. Just because everyone in your neighborhood prides themselves on taking advantage of the governmental benefits system doesn't mean that you have to set your own personal growth bar that low. Hold you head up, and realize your own worth and potential. I know this sounds crazy and counter intuitive, but the media and these pseudo-celebrities that they crank out like K. Michelle and NeNe Leakes and whoever else is on those shows are meant to keep you down. To keep your mentality in the gutter. To stop you from wanting the best for yourself. To make you idolize material things, and lose focus on spiritual things. And even though you sit at home, scoffing at their pitiful personal drama, you will slowly but surely begin to mimic their behavior, their colloquialisms, and their lifestyle.

I know we all have our "crosses to bare," and everyone's life is different. We all want different things, and have different sights set for ourselves. But let your vision be yours; not somebody elses. When its all said and done, and the smoke clears, you'll regret not having the strength to live your own life instead of blindly following behind someone elses. Be your own beautiful, smart, unique, talented self, and make the best of it! The sky is the limit, don't let the TV, or the media, or your boyfriend, or your friends, or your family, or anything else stop you from being the best self that you can be.

Marriage Advice from a Newlywed

By Melanie Blake

As a newlywed woman (We jumped the broom on February 22 of this year), I always hear one of two things; "Congratulations, when's the baby coming?" and "Oh, how sweet! The little newlyweds! Wait until you've been married as long as me to what marriage is really like!" And I respectfully roll my eyes.

Yes, I get where that comes from, and yes, I understand that things are going to change over the years, and that we will face adversity as a couple. But we're not as ignorant as we look. We didn't blindly jump into marriage without a clue on what to do, what to expect or any guidance. We also dated before we got married, too, so we do know a little bit about each other. As much as older couples want to offer words of advice or caution every time they see a newly married couple, I actually think it is them that could greatly benefit from a "refresher course" on marriage from a happy-go-lucky pair of newlyweds like us.

1. Keep dating each other. Newlyweds usually don't have a problem with this because we still feel like we are dating, with wedding rings! But couples who have been married a while should still keep this in mind too. Keep bringing her flowers, keep getting dolled up when you two go out to dinner. Make your time together special. Married people like dates, too!

2. Have sex! Newlyweds can't get enough of it! We are still in the 'Honeymoon stage' and that phrase is based largely on the fact that we're having sex, and a lot of it. But being married for more than a year doesn't mean that you stop making it a priority to make love to each other and show your affection in a physical way. Don't let kids and work and personal goals get in the way of your physical intimacy with your spouse; that is a special bond that you two share that makes your marriage to each other unique from any other relationship you are a part of. Sex is important, and its good for the heart, both physically and emotionally.

3. Always say I love you and kiss each other goodbye. People often mock newlyweds for always making googly eyes and kissing incessantly. We hate to see each other leave, and we can't seem to get off the phone with each other. Our new marriage is so exciting and irresistable to us. We rejoice over each time we reunite. Though it sounds cheesy, you should keep doing it. You never know when you will get your last chance to kiss your lover goodbye and say I love you. Do you really want the last thing you said to your husband to be that you're tired of him leaving his socks on the ground while you were hastily walking out of the door? I don't think so. Value your spouse and let them know that you can't wait to see them again when you leave for work in the morning.

4. Be best friends. Talk to each other. Have fun together. Put each other before everything and everyone else. Don't keep secrets from each other. It will always be better if you tell your spouse the truth. They can fix their damaged pride, but broken trust is never the same. You can maintain that "just like new" newlywed feeling all throughout your marriage by working hard to make it better each day, not idly watch it get weaker.

5. Celebrate your love. Realize how lucky you are that you have your spouse to share your life with. Think back on how happy you were the day you married them. For newlyweds, that was only a few months ago, but for me personally, it still brings tears to my eyes when I think of how I felt when I officially became Mrs. Blake. It was more than a name change; it was a life change, and I thank God for that moment, and every moment following that I will get to share with my husband. Find that moment that makes you feel all warm and fuzzy about your husband and wife and meditate on it for a few minutes, its guaranteed to make you appreciate your spouse!



These are just a few of the many, many tips that can be said about being married, and staying (happily) married. Many times, experience is the greatest teacher, and I do love and appreciate the wisdom that older married couples can provide, but there is a special knowledge that comes from still being in the "Honeymoon phase" that can be easily forgotten under a pile of bills, kids, and just life in general that tends to slip away from many couples over the years. Whether you've been married for thirty days or thirty years, you can never show your spouse too much love or appreciation.

The Rape Culture!

The Rape culture

What is the rape culture? The rape culture is when society sees a drunken girl who is passed out being attacked by a group of boys and do nothing. Rape culture is when one of those said attackers take pictures of the girl and post it on facebook, myspace or twitter and the audience take part in bullying and teasing the said victim. Rape culture is when we have idiotic politicians talking about legitimate rape.

We live in a type of society that is immune to the sexual assault of women, men and children and does nothing about it. We live in a culture where women are blamed for their rape because they dressed in what this culture says to be indecent or provocative or they decided to have a good time with their friends and get drunk.

Rape culture is when rape victims are denied the choice to have an abortion and made by politicians to have their rapist baby. Rape culture is when the police and judicial system fail and treat the victim like the criminal. Rape culture is when the system fails and give the criminal a 30 day sentence. Rape culture is when that said victim commits suicide. Rape culture is when a victim is mocked when he/she goes to therapy . Rape culture is when the victims are told to get over it. Rape culture is when the church and other religious groups are silent.

Rape culture is when religious organizations focus so much on the victim forgiving her abuser than denouncing the criminal. Rape culture is when religious organizations force their doctrine about abortion on the victim. Finally Rape culture is when society has become immune to sexual assault against women, children and men.

How can  we overcome the rape culture?

We can give the victims the choice to have an abortion if they were violated. We can stop with the blaming of the victim whether she dressed like a slut or whether she was passed out. We can get rid of Politicians who come up with this legitimate rape business. We can offer access to psychologists, therapists, counselors and other mental health professionals. The church must stop being silent and stop forcing their doctrine about abortion on rape victims. The church needs to stop talking about only forgiveness of the rapist but denounce them and focus on the healing of the victim. We must stop telling the victim to get over it. Healing takes time, sometimes days, sometimes weeks, sometimes months and yes sometimes even years. These things cannot happen unless we become desensitized from this rape culture. This may take very long because society is resistant to the cries of these victims.

"Idle Thoughts Part 2: Drunken Stroll"

"Idle Thoughts Part 2: Drunken Stroll"

Sprawling through the streets
like sheets bunched together,
I've surely worn my leather
In pursuit of you.
You....prancing about in glee
So fancy and free;
Not quite cheerfully
But nowhere near demure.
Thoughts this distinctly impure
Would not be easily received.
Maybe you aim to deceive.
Maybe I should turn and leave……

Still walking.
Remaining true to whatever is due.
Refreshingly stale. Routinely new.
I guess I'm still following you.

Wrought within it all
are memories of her phone calls
Months before I spent my nights
At bar tops under dim lights.
Her my refuge from the storm;
My protection from the swarm.
Harm at bay throughout the day
Until I can steal away;
And wash away after escape.
She would snatch away my cape,
Hold me close within her grip
And kiss each tear that lined my lips……

…………your hips………
Familiar in their sway.
Quite nostalgic, one would say.
I'd be further along my way;
But this liquor stirs within me.
Balance will not befriend me.
I stumble into the street
As I begin to lose my feet.
Feeling rugged. Hanging tough.
I suppose I've had enough.
Passers by so grim and gruff.
I just dodged another truck……

And I'm still walking.
Not so resilient but true to whatever is due.
Briskly stale. Commonly new.
Looks like I'm still following you.

For sake of reason, I wonder:
Are you always this seasoned;
Pouncing without one misstep?
Two turns left
Then across the median.
I mean am………am I?
Am I part of something greater?
Will you whisper "See you later"
After leading me this far?
Can you see the scars
Underneath my shirt and slacks?
Will you invite me back?
This feels intimate and preposterous.
Erogenous you may appear;
But are you aiming to endear?

Too intrigued to trace my fear;

So I continue walking.
Steadfast and true to whatever is due.
This life so stale. Your presence new.
Why wouldn't I follow you?

Let's see what we get into…………

Written By: Devin Joseph Metz

 

 

 

"Love For Literature Part 1: I Can't Write!!!"

Devin Joseph Metz

"Biting my truant pen, beating myself for spite: "Fool!" said my muse to me, "look in thy heart, and write."" - Philip Sydney from "Astrophel and Stella" 

Wanna know what really grinds any writer's gears; be it an Author, Novelist, Poet, Column Writer, etc? 

Its that period of time when everything is stagnant. Its that unpredictable amount of time when all of those great ideas that one has either vanish or never seem to piece together initially. Its that portion of your life where the most undeserving victims incur our wrath; and these victims are usually comprised of waste baskets filled past the brim with balls of paper, ink pens that are tapped against the edge of hard surfaces(including our heads) and pencils that find themselves inhumanely mangled between our teeth in confused anger.

There is nothing more frustrating to us than Writer's Block; especially for we poets of the world. Sydney is telling our life story with the aforementioned quote. We as writers undergo extensive or brief periods of writer's block until we have that epiphany moment of sorts where we are left slapping our palm against our head after realizing where our muse was the whole time. It doesn't always happen that way, though.The cure for writer's block won't always come in the form of a stirring moment of remembrance. In my honest opinion, I believe that writer's block can be easily rectified most times if not every time by first understanding what caused it in the first place; especially since there isn't necessarily one usual suspect here universally when it comes to writer's block occurring.

Take into consideration what may have been going on around you while you were trying to write. Some writers find themselves distracted easily; thus making it difficult for them to focus on their writing unless they are in complete solitude. For some time(and still to this day every now and then; although I am not easily distracted), I have found myself in this type of situation. I lived in a house full of people and the visitors of said people. There was always something going on or a huge crowd making as much unnecessary noise as is humanly possible. Foolish as it may be perceived, I tried drowning out the noise with the television or my own music. Not the best idea, of course. Drowning out noise requires louder noise; which will still defeat the manifest of what this writer is looking to attain: Solitude.

That peaceful silence may aid the writer's focus substantially; in turn helping the writer key in on his/her own thoughts instead of thoughts relative to what someone else is doing around them. Once this is achieved, the writer can have a fair, one on one battle with writer's block instead of one where the writer's surroundings places him/her at a severe disadvantage. 

Getting rid of writer's block isn't necessarily always a matter of confrontation, though. There may be other ways to subvert something so frustrating. Some of us find that we have to be in a certain setting in order to successfully write. For some writers, solitude serves as their largest deterrent if that makes any sense. The desired setting may call for mild to frantic activity to surround that person. I've not met many people who will claim this as their preference, however. Some writers just want some music while they are writing; be it on a radio or in their headphones. I can definitely say that I enjoy listening to music in my ear buds while writing; but there is a lot more to it than just having earphones on for me. I have detailed preferences.

Music lends us the opportunity to counter writer's block from a number of different angles; like a misdirection strategy of sorts. While writer's block serves mainly to stall us in our writing; incurring aggravation and other means of distraction, music in many ways soothes the troubled mind and spirit(really Zen, huh?) in a manner that calms the writer; allowing him/her to find peace with oneself so that productivity can eventually commence once more. It should be noted, however that this calming sensation is not hinged upon what type of music the person is listening to. 

Seriously. You don't have to listen to only Classical, Neo-Soul, R&B, or any soothing music in order to find your relaxation to avoid writer's block. I know some people who listen to rock music to get their desired degree of relaxation. I know others that listen to Hip-Hop; which is highly understandable given the lyricism. Peak lyricism gets the creative juices flowing consciously and some songs may even serve as a means of supplemental inspiration(a Muse, if you will.). Hell, I even know of one or two people that can only write when listening to Young Jeezy.

Don't ask me how that works out...

I can say that as a Poet, there are varying instances that must take place for me to write; especially if I am looking to rid myself of writer's block. There are some times when I find that I have to take my time and really think before keying in on my writing; which leaves me wanting to be closed off, in a matter of speaking. I must have total silence aside from an air conditioner unit blowing, of course. More often, however, I have become more accustomed to writing while listening to music. I'm able to spark some creativity contingent upon what I'm listening to at the time that may break me out of my stint of writer's block. I also find that I'm able to soothe myself with the melody and rhythm of the music or even the lyrical content therein; which in turn helps me better deal with writer's block and even offers me the elusive muse that I have been looking for given any certain amount of time. Music is one very potent accompaniment for literature as it stands; but there are times where it may serve best as a therapeutic means rather than just as a means of inspiration. 

One thing to understand about writer's block is that you should never give into it. It should also be understood that choosing not to write at the time until you can figure things out is in no way to be perceived as giving into writer's block. I think this would illustrate what I mean:

This poor fellow here is engaging in an extremely counterproductive response to his writer's block. Not only does he miss the opportunity to go around his issue so that he can get back to his productivity; but he also chooses to give in to both writer's block and the frustration that it incites. 

Banging your head against a wall, being short tempered and ridiculously scathing, or just being an overall hard person for anyone to find a plausible reason to be around won't make your situation better; whether you are dealing with writer's block or anything else in life. Giving in to writer's block involves feeding in to that frustration and aggravation; which only helps further the manifest of writer's block: distracting you from your manifest of writing. 

Ever been around that family member that complains more about the chores that need to be done instead of actually doing them? How about that coworker that complains about their job so much that it causes a lapse in productivity across the board?

Gotten used to the rhetorical questions in my entries yet?

My point here is that nothing productive comes from succumbing to the anger that we can and most times will find ourselves privy to when it comes to writer's block. The first step to solving a problem involves acknowledging that it is a problem; but there is a large difference between acknowledging something and dwelling on it. Time is wasted and nothing is solved from dwelling on an issue. The issue will be as ever present as it was before we first noticed it and it will continue to be there if no further action is taken. Avoid the distractions, remain calm and focus on a productive solution to your problem. After all...

"We wander for distraction,  but we travel for fulfillment." - Hilaire Belloc

Couldn't have stated it better. We often bring on our own distractions in our wandering. Not saying that this is always a bad thing, of course; but there are times where one's desired focus is compromised.


There are some that believe that the best way to rid oneself of writer's block is to just randomly write whatever comes to mind; even if it doesn't make sense or has absolutely no continuity to it. The general idea here is that one will eventually get to the point where he/she is either struck with inspiration or they will develop ideas based on what they wrote down that may forge some semblance of inspiration later on.

I can't say outright that I don't believe that this method is effective; but I do think that it harbors the potential to lead to what I consider to be a very distasteful habit later on. In my opinion, forcing your way through anything robs it of authenticity; especially when literature is involved. Forced work lacks the time, patience, care, love and dedication that is usually ever present in a complete piece of work; and it definitely shows itself as such when presented or observed. 

Think about those sandwiches from your favorite fast food establishments that always look awesome on television commercials but never look even 1/4 as great when you purchase it.

Same concept, pretty much; especially for those writers that have garnered a measure of tenure among their contemporaries. Well known writers have a reputation to laud; so it would be surprising and disappointing for them to forcefully release material just to fit within the confines of a deadline or because they are frustrated over not writing as frequently as they would like to be writing. 

If anybody knows anything about that, I surely do. It used to vex me to no end when I would go a certain amount of time without writing. what was only maybe a week or two felt like months to me(my wife reminds me of this constantly.) and I would find myself fighting the urge to just jot something down and put it out there just to say that I've written something. If you learn nothing else about me, you'll learn that I love my literature. I especially love my Poetry. I love it so much that I wouldn't dare disrespect it in that manner; and if you love what it is that you do, then you would make sure that you never disrespect it in that said manner either.

I've spoken with friends and contemporaries of mine regarding their perceived solutions to writer's block and they've even stated that their use of certain vices such as smoking or libation place them in a certain effect or "zone" for their creative thought processes. Now I'm not one to doubt their methods completely. I'm not and never will be a smoker; but I have written some rather awesome stanzas while enjoying a glass of whiskey every now and then.

As far as the effectiveness of these methods is concerned, I think that since writer's block already does enough to impair one's creative thought process, it may not prove beneficial to compromise it further.

This is just my opinion, of course. Feel free to engage in whichever method or series of steps you deem effective.

Writer's Block isn't a disease, condition, disorder or anything like that. It is merely a temporary state of mind; one that may last days, weeks, months or longer. Regardless of how long it endures, keep in mind that you still have control over your drive, ambition, passion, intellect, and overall timing of your creativity. That creativity is a God given talent that belongs solely to you; and nothing can take that from you without your consent. So tap those pens against the table if you need to(Be careful, though. Some of them explode after doing that for awhile.). Palm your forehead. Close your eyes. Listen to some music. Enjoy a drink or a snack. Hey, even take a walk if necessary. Just do your environment one huge favor, though:

Go easy on the pencil chewing, huh? We can certainly agree that they've suffered enough.

"The Fence"

"The Fence"

Turned off the lights
just to be certain.
Swiftly cocked my weapon
before parting the curtains.
Deafening these halls
where the stagnant scream.
Now silent after violence,
I've locked away my dreams.
The front door too heavy to hold.
Fortified dead bolts form fit the mold.
The slip latch rusts away in its groove.
Every key fits; but it refuses to move.

Dewdrops darker when the moon hides.
Whips wrap around hips. The eclipse.
The shroud cast upon iniquity.
Chilly showers rinse all divinity
as if it were mass produced.
Potential suitors have called a truce:
The stern tone that we hear
serves as a throne for their fear.
Crystal clear vision through my window.
Portrait of the consummate widow:
A bitter figure with no means
amid a dark and gloomy scene.

I have seen what lies ahead:
The streets a sea of blinding red
bred of lies that we were fed.
The fortunate are lying dead
while we toil with circumstance.
Against the fence they've danced;
prancing around what they covet.
I observe them hanging from it.
Above it the voulchers hover.
Their wings blanket the sky.
Even the brightest stars are covered.
The loosely dangling are soon smothered.

Some say they failed to realize
that they should look to the skies;
but some of them were wise.
They would not gouge their eyes.
Not willingly, at least.
I am never at peace;
but I'm certainly somewhat settled.
I've no desire to test my mettle.
Medals from my proud days
collect dust while tucked away.
Threw out the display case
the day it slammed against her face.

She used to be we.
She was never me;
but who would ever want to be?
Especially not now. I've often wondered,
how could one succumb
to the point where minds are numb
like the body it encapsulates?
How they would captivate her senseless.
Since less time spent at home,
I've found myself here alone
until the days stopped shining bright;
giving way to the darkest nights.

Walked for miles in my confusion
amid woeful destitution.
Institutions we once treasured
are now havens for ill pleasures.
Vile pollution in each camp,
prostitution running rampant,
and the youth I thought were trapped
are the ones who've proudly stamped it.
I can't find her anywhere.
Then her silhouette once fair
was riddled with sores once bare.
Leaking from them are her cares.

I observed her on her knees.
Fists full of her hair he squeezed.
He oscillates his head in splendor.
she assumes her role as lender.
Splinters stab her from the skies.
Rinsed his remnants from her eyes.
Couldn't even start to cry.
Wiped her chin then we locked eyes.
No remorse as recompense.
None of it made any sense.
They walked away; leaving me tense.
I haven't heard from her since.

The autopsy made it plain:
yet another addict slain.
Said she never felt the pain.
Scraped her off the fence again.
She met her killers in distress.
She gave them her home address.
Told them when I would return;
so as far as I'm concerned,
I'll make good her claim tonight
on this street of broken lights
and if any should take their chance,
look for them where they once danced.

Written By: Devin Joseph Metz

"Idle Thoughts Part 1: First Glance"

"Idle Thoughts Part 1: First Glance" 

Strobe lights capture playful glimmers
Every time the liquor shimmers.
Bypassed sharing dessert
To skip in after dinner.
Music playing loud,
waves move through the crowd
Like soft hands through drunken clouds.
…………you just sit there.

The bar top an appealing mixture
Of colored glass and solid oak
Provoking a brief stare
Because the glass sits there.
Bottles are only passed
To fill flutes and flasks
For those requesting more
Before new faces grace the door.
The floor a sea of sweat
Washing away any regret,
Extensive stints of sorrow,
Or concerns waiting tomorrow.
Shapes bounce and break in rhythm.
Limbs find exuberance in bass.
One's vantage point is lost within them;
But I can still see your face.

Long, dark hair with a heavy sheen,
Skin pristine. Milky vanilla in hue.
Directly in my view.
Legs crossed beneath resting hands.
Fingertips reflect your glow
Like sunlight crossing snow.
I sized you up so slow
That I forgot about the show.
Paid for it in advance
But couldn't rob you of a glance.
Saw my money wasted
but found my suitable replacement.
Placement so concise
that I feared blinking twice
should your presence be removed.
It was as if you behooved
In your dubious enchantment
That my heartbeats chant with
The cadence of your grace.
Such rhythm in a still face?

This drink must be heavy.
I've had so many
That the bartender befriends me.
You whisk away quickly.
Slipping through this maze
In a daze of bewilderment,
Chilly air cleaving my pores
as I inch closer to the door
That you just stepped behind.
Barely straight lined,
My mind desperate for focus
Among this freelance flock of locusts
That have become this crowd,
Speakers still blaring so loud
As I lean against the brick...
...was this a trick?

Your silhouette fierce yet fair
And a soft, inviting pair of eyes
with lashes dark blue in hue
Silken hair in every sinew,
This from far I have observed
And what surely strikes my nerve
Is this newly apparent fact:
A motive accompanies that swerve.
Concerned barely,
You tarry far from grasp
Yet close enough to fawn over;
Only glancing above your shoulder
To make sure that I still follow.
Hollow your discernment
over your shame, my anger
Or some impending danger.

So what am I to do?
1:52 and I'm near you.
Who is tracking who?
Why this intrigue?
What of your mystique?
Will I incur a change of heart
if I continue to advance?
Should I chance this first glance…………?

Written By: Devin Joseph Metz

I am Not my Hair

I am Not My Hair is a beautiful song by India Arie where she sings about how no matter how you wear your hair , it does not say who you are and who you are going to become. I love this song so much that when I have doubts about how I am wearing my hair whether it is relaxed or natural, I put it on blast! There are two versions of the song: one with the singer Pink and the other with Akon.

I AM NOT MY HAIR BY INDIA ARIE AND PINK:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7rSv5NvAK8

I AM NOT MY HAIR BY INDIA ARIE AND AKON:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_5jIt0f5Z4

I have often said that my hair would never be natural. I will continue to relax or texturize my hair for convenience but there are some things that bother me. Often many times in the past, no one knew how I was going to have my hair, whether if it would be in twists , gelled back, whether I was going to wear an Afro wig or wear a wig that is straight and looks like relax hair. I had this experience a while back. I was attending the University of Louisiana at Monroe, taking graduate-level courses in Marriage and Family therapy. I remember it clearly. It was on a Monday.

 

I wore my hair in twists the previous week and I didn't really get a reaction; but that Monday I decided to wear the wig that looks a lot like relaxed hair and then someone in my class said that they liked my hair. They liked it better than the twists and they liked how I straightened it instead of wearing it in that terrible Afro style or when I had it in twists on the previous Monday. They said that I looked so much prettier. This person happened to be a white girl. I was  really   plagued   about   her  comments  but I didn't have  time  to bring  it  up  to  her    because  my  5  o clock  was  starting. I  felt offended  because  I wondered,if she  would   ever

speak  to me if my hair  was  in  dreads,braids  or   kinky  style. To me, it didn't matter. I was  still Princess,   the  same  girl  who now  was constantly changing  her   hair styles; and  those days   however  I had  my hair. I always  made sure  that  I was dressed to impress and  I looked damn  good but   I  digress.

 The  more  I thought about  it, the   more  I  didn't  understand and the  more  I was  shocked  and  appalled .  I  had  not  thought back  on  than  event  for  some time  until  when  I  cut  my  hair  and  relaxed  it  again. A comment about  why  I  am  even  relaxing    was  made  to  me; that I should  be   natural and  proud  of  it and  not  fill  my pores  and  my body with chemicals. This time around, my classmate was a black person. I  just  don't understand people's  (both  black and white)  obsession with  straight hair  and I  don't  seriously  get   those  natural  hair nazis either.

You know, if  I could better  take  care  of  my  nappy, natural  hair,  trust me:  I would  not  be  relaxing or  texturizing  or  wearing  hair  pieces  and  wigs;  but that’s just  me.   The  problem  is  not  with  white  people  but  with  other  blacks.  In fact,  whether  my hair  was  natural   or  relaxed  and  it  is combed  properly,  I would  get  good  reviews  from  most  whites with  the  exception  of  that  one  incident.   We  as  black  people have  to  be  united and  not cause  division  among  ourselves. Somewhere  down the  line  we  have  come  to  think as   an  ethnicity and  race  that long, straight hair  is  better.  We  tell  our   children  that they better  marry  a white  man  or   Indian  man  or  someone  with good hair because  their  children would  come  out  with  nice hair. Trust me.  I know the drill   and sayings  of parents and grandparents,  my  mother, grandmother etc.  have  always  said   that  I needed  to  bring home  someone  with good hair   because  every member  of  my family has good  quality  hair  and  I used  to think   that a  lot of  things  have  changed, I don’ believe  in all that  nonsense.  If it’s not straight hair, it’s the opposite.   You do not need  to marry   a  white  man  or  anyone  that's not  black  and   keep  your  hair  nappy  and  natural, that's what  God  intended. Stop trying to be white. 

 Anyways,  I have  problem  with  any one telling  me  how to wear my  hair  unless they are telling me  for  my own good.     I digress, but  let me  get  back on  topic. I said  I was  offended by  that  girl  in that  class, somehow  my  professor   brought the topic  of  race,  prejudice, etc. and   the African Americans  in the  class  brought  about  the issue   of blacks  being discriminated  against  and  that  same girl  said  in an  uncaring  way:  “white people get discriminated  against too. I don’t  know  why  it is  important  for  white  people   to    have  black people  be  like  them  or  why   we    constantly  want to  be  like  them,  straightening our  hair, bleaching  our  skin etc.    The girl I talked  about   did  not believe  she said anything   wrong and would not   apologize   to  the  class. After  class, she came  up   to  me  and  said I really  should  wear  my  hair  like  that; claiming that it  is  much  better  that way  and more appealing  to    everyone    in the  school. She left after that.  All  I am going  say is that we  as   black   people don’t  need  to change  our  hair to  please   anyone  in the  majority  so  that    we can fit     into their  category  of  beautiful.   We are beautiful   on   our own and  we  don’t  need them to tell  us we fit in but I digress. A year later,  I got the same  reaction but from the opposite end only to not keep my hair relax and stop trying to be white.

My hair has always been difficult to maintain and I have always relaxed my hair so that I can manage; but I was really offended when the white girl said that my hair in its kind, natural state was not pretty; but what did I expect from a typical blonde hair, blue eyed white girl? From a typical brown skinned or dark skinned  girl, I expected better. This goes to show that even though white people may have created the social construct of the hair problem, we as black people continue to embrace it whether we agree with the concept of long straight hair or whether we  like our natural hair. It does not matter if one wants to wear their long and straight or have their hair nappy and natural.  We need to stop this division among ourselves and deconstruct this social nonsense of what Black hair  should be and love each other no matter how we wear our hair.

 

I wore my hair in twists the previous week and I didn't really get a reaction; but that Monday I decided to wear the wig that looks a lot like relaxed hair and then someone in my class said that they liked my hair. They liked it better than the twists and they liked how I straightened it instead of wearing it in that terrible Afro style or when I had it in twists on the previous Monday. They said that I looked so much prettier. This person happened to be a white girl. I was  really   plagued   about   her  comments  but I didn't have  time  to bring  it  up  to  her because  my  5  o clock  was  starting. I  felt offended  because  I wondered if she  would   ever  speak  to me   if my hair  was  in  dreads, braids  or   kinky  style. To me, it didn't matter. I was  still Princess,   the  same  girl  who now  was constantly changing  her   hair styles; and  those days   however  I had  my hair. I always  made sure  that  I was dressed to impress and  I looked damn  good but   I  digress.

 The  more  I thought about  it, the   more  I  didn't  understand and the  more  I was  shocked  and  appalled .  I  had  not  thought back  on  than  event  for  some time  until  when  I  cut  my  hair  and  relaxed  it  again. A comment about  why  I  am  even  relaxing    was  made  to  me; that I should  be   natural and  proud  of  it and  not  fill  my pores  and  my body with chemicals. This time around, my classmate was a black person. I  just  don't understand people's  (both  black and white)  obsession with  straight hair  and I  don't  seriously  get   those  natural  hair nazis either.

You know, if  I could better  take  care  of  my  nappy, natural  hair,  trust me:  I would  not  be  relaxing or  texturizing  or  wearing  hair  pieces  and  wigs;  but that’s just  me.   The  problem  is  not  with  white  people  but  with  other  blacks.  In fact,  whether  my hair  was  natural   or  relaxed  and  it  is combed  properly,  I would  get  good  reviews  from  most  whites with  the  exception  of  that  one  incident.   We  as  black  people have  to  be  united and  not cause  division  among  ourselves. Somewhere  down the  line  we  have  come  to  think as   an  ethnicity and  race  that long, straight hair  is  better.  We  tell  our   children  that they better  marry  a white  man  or   Indian  man  or  someone  with good hair because  their  children would  come  out  with  nice hair. Trust me.  I know the drill   and sayings  of parents and grandparents,  my  mother, grandmother etc.  have  always  said   that  I needed  to  bring home  someone  with good hair   because  every member  of  my family has good  quality  hair  and  I used  to think   that a  lot of  things  have  changed, I don’ believe  in all that  nonsense.  If it’s not straight hair, it’s the opposite.   You do not need  to marry   a  white  man  or  anyone  that's not  black  and   keep  your  hair  nappy  and  natural, that's what  God  intended. Stop   trying to be white.  Anyways,  I have  problem  with  any one telling  me  how to wear my  hair  unless they are telling me  for  my own good.     I digress, but  let me  get  back on  topic. I said  I was  offended by  that  girl  in that  class, somehow  my  professor   brought the topic  of  race,  prejudice, etc. and   the African Americans  in the  class  brought  about  the issue   of blacks  being discriminated  against  and  that  same girl  said  in an  uncaring  way:  “white people get discriminated  against too. I don’t  know  why  it is  important  for  white  people   to    have  black people  be  like  them  or  why   we    constantly  want to  be  like  them,  straightening our  hair, bleaching  our  skin etc.    The girl I talked  about   did  not believe  she said anything   wrong and would not   apologize   to  the  class. After  class, she came  up   to  me  and  said I really  should  wear  my  hair  like  that; claiming that it  is  much  better  that way  and more appealing  to    everyone    in the  school. She left after that.  All  I am going  say is that we  as   black   people don’t  need  to change  our  hair to  please   anyone  in the  majority  so  that    we can fit     into their  category  of  beautiful.   We are beautiful   on   our own and  we  don’t  need them to tell  us we fit in but I digress. A year later,  I got the same  reaction but from the opposite end only to not keep my hair relax and stop trying to be white.

My hair has always been difficult to maintain and I have always relaxed my hair so that I can manage; but I was really offended when the white girl said that my hair in its kind, natural state was not pretty; but what did I expect from a typical blonde hair, blue eyed white girl? From a typical brown skinned or dark skinned  girl, I expected better. This goes to show that even though white people may have created the social construct of the hair problem, we as black people continue to embrace it whether we agree with the concept of long straight hair or whether we  like our natural hair. It does not matter if one wants to wear their long and straight or have their hair nappy and natural.  We need to stop this division among ourselves and deconstruct this social nonsense of what Black hair  should be and love each other no matter how we wear our hair.

"At Least Someone Cares..."

Devin Joseph Metz

There are some people in this life of ours that you can't deny.

Seriously.

You can't deny how outspoken they are. You can't deny how opinionated they are. You can't deny their crass; often intrusive, uncomfortable humor. You can't deny their ability to supplement that humor with fact. You can't deny their willingness to say what others won't; regardless of whether or not others may have been thinking it. You can't deny the hate they generate to pair alongside the venom they spew selectively. You can't deny the praise they receive to pair alongside their willingness to remain who they are; regardless of who has a problem with that. 

People of this mettle in my opinion epitomize what it truly means to be American. There is no doubt a code of ethics and an overall level of acceptance, accountability and appropriateness that is implied among the masses; but individuals like the aforementioned know better than to let themselves become imprisoned by what others may deem appropriate. They do not confine themselves in lieu of what may make someone uncomfortable. These individuals are not above tact, however; but they believe that tact should not be used as a shield for ignorance.

What makes these particular individuals truly special, though?

They happen to be comedians.

That's right. They don't take themselves seriously as much as the next person. Hell, many of the issues currently going on across the nation aren't taken very serious, either contingent upon the importance of what is being discussed. What is truly enjoyable about these comedians is that they do have a certain standard that they hold themselves up to. They aren't here for the basic, run-of-the-mill slapstick humor that most people associate with comedians. They are rather inclined to make light of what is going on in the world in a humorous manner while still giving you an informative, enlightened view of these issues per their perspective of the issue themselves. Very few comedians will ever state that one does not have to be informed to some degree in order to thrive in their profession; but the two guys that I will elaborate on in this entry are quite educated indeed.

They say what some of us won't say. They say it when many of us would consider it inappropriate to do so; and they aren't looking to apologize. 

Why?

Because more times than not, it needed to be said regardless of what the circumstances were. They understand what constitutes their rights as Americans probably a lot more than anyone else does.

Jon Stewart has certainly established himself as a prominent figure in our entertainment and news world. He has incorporated himself rather well into our political world while keeping intact his manifest goal of comedic entertainment. Jon is in fact a political satirist; implying that he expresses his displeasure with politics in protest or other outright displays of discontentment. He will be the first to tell you, however that he is not an activist of any kind. He is just a guy that cares about what we should all care about. Jon is also a writer, television host, author, media critic and stand-up comedian, of course.

Fans of Jon Stewart will fondly recall his back and forth stints with programming between MTV("The Jon Stewart Show" and "You Wrote It, You Watch It") and Comedy Central("Short Attention Span Theater") early on after his days performing stand-up. Many others will recall him from various movie roles("Half-Baked," "The Faculty," "Big Daddy," "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back," etc.). What he is no doubt most known for more than anything else, however is his highly successful run on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart."

Jon became host of the show in 1999(although the show started in July 1996 with Craig Kilborn until his departure in 1998); taking the reigns as writer and co-executive-producer of the show as well. Since his joining, "The Daily Show" has experienced steadily increasing popularity and a respectable degree of critical acclaim; evidenced by Jon Stewart earning sixteen Emmy Awards. Now anybody willing to use the information option on their remote controller knows what his show is all about. It is pretty much a satirical spoof of other daily news programs and even networks that show current events and other news twenty-four hours a day. This includes such networks as FOX, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC and others. What is refreshingly humorous about his show is that he supports his satire and humor with actual news clips instead of using fixed props or fake stories. There are times where comedic art is used such as in posters, etc to substantiate his point given a current topic; but everything else for the most part comprises what other networks have covered that day or that week in the news. 

Many critics of Jon Stewart have stated that he benefits from a double standard: He critiques other news shows from the safe, removed position of his "fake news" desk.

What was Jon's response to this criticism?

He completely agrees.

He states, in fact that neither his show nor his channel purports to be anything more than satire and comedy. 

See that? He knows his manifest and the manifest that of his network. He isn't one to be staunchly fazed by the criticism of another at all; especially if that criticism is indeed true. Despite claims that the show is merely for his own entertainment, "The Daily Show" has been nominated for a number of news and journalism awards. In 2005, it even also gave us in my opinion one of the best spin off shows ever on television in the form of "The Colbert Report;" hosted by long-time Daily Show correspondent Stephen Colbert.

Jon Stewart obviously has his reservations when it comes to television journalists and news stations. Fans fondly recall his criticism of CNBC; especially in a week long criticism of the network through early to mid March 2009 involving his very public feud with Jim Cramer; host of CNBC's "Mad Money;" an American finance show focusing primarily on investment and speculation usually centered around publicly traded stocks.

A week beginning on March 4th, 2009 found itself filled with segments and comments between Jon Stewart, Jim Cramer and others including Rick Santelli, Joe Scarborough(from the "Morning Joe" show on CNBC) as well as shows spanning The Late Show with David Letterman and NBC's Today Show among others; culminating in a confrontation between the two on a March 12th episode of The Daily Show. Suffice it to say, the episode became the second most viewed episode of the shows tenure; trailing only the 2009 Inauguration Day episode. Reaching 2.3 million viewers the next day, it also garnered a high influx of traffic on the shows website by that evening.

So what exactly made this episode so riveting?

Well that morning while appearing on "Martha"(Martha Stewart's syndicated cooking show), Cramer revealed that he was a huge fan of Jon's implying even that he idolized the guy; stating that he fashioned his show after Jon's in the idea that one could have an entertaining news program. He stated that this made it a very difficult week for him since he never thought he would be trading shots back and forth with his own idol.

That evening as he appeared on The Daily Show, Jon gave Jim the television host equivalent of a first round knockout:

Stewart first scolded CNBC; claiming that they did not uphold their journalistic duty by by simply accepting information given to it by corporations, rather than playing an investigative role as a "powerful tool of illumination." He believed that this was due to the fact that far too much of an emphasis was placed on entertainment value rather than just rendering the content in its organic form.

He stated amid clips that he aired of Cramer's penchant for manipulating markets that Jim's on-air personality lacked honesty. Per his words:

"I understand you want to make finance entertaining, but it’s not a f*****g game. And when I watch that, I get, I can’t tell you how angry that makes me. Because what it says to me is: you all know. You all know what’s going on. You know, you can draw a straight line from those shenanigans to the stuff that was being pulled at Bear, and AIG, and all this derivative market stuff that is this weird Wall Street side bet."

Jon then delivers hay makers like this one to Jim:

 
"I can't reconcile the brilliance and knowledge that you have of the intricacies of the market with the crazy bulls**t I see you do every night."

No doubt humbled but still willing to stand his ground, Cramer disagreed with a few of Stewart's points; but agreed that he could have done a much better job with his coverage before and during the economic collapse. Jon wouldn't let him off the hook that easily with his response, however; showing video clips of Cramer recommending ways to drive down stock prices by spreading rumors; which deceives the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission as well as other journalists. Cramer simply apologized and promised to do better.

But Stewart wasn't finished there. He also had a few choice words for one Joe Scarborough who claimed that the satirical nature of his show was unfair. He did so by apologizing to Jim for the personalized nature of the media coverage by stating the following:

"You now have become the face of this, and that is incredibly unfortunate. Because you’re not the face of it, you shouldn’t be the face of it. You were the person that was, uh, I-don’t-know-what enough to stand up and go, 'Hey, that wasn’t fair!' Which it’s not, because this show isn’t fair, and you can tell ‘Doucheborough’ it isn’t supposed to be fair."

 

Tell 'em how you really feel, Jon! 

 
The interview ended with Stewart suggesting, "Maybe we can remove 'In Cramer We Trust' and go back to the fundamentals and I can go back to making fart noises and funny faces." Cramer responded: "I think we make that deal right here."

There was obviously a palpable amount of media attention following the show the next day in the form of various blogs, Internet memes, forums and various discussions; but none more poignant than what David Folkenflik of NPR stated:

"At times, Stewart crystallizes the frustration others have with the failings of the media with near-perfect pitch. It's one thing for media critics like me to pore through hundreds of articles to say the press didn't quite do its job as a watchdog of the nation's financial system. It's another for Stewart to cudgel a channel that has often championed the markets at a time when so many people have lost so much of their net value."

 

Quite the embarrassment for someone that shouldn't be as astute at another person or faction's duties aggressively outlining all of the inadequacies of what they were doing compared to what they were set there to do, huh?

Jon Stewart has an obscene amount of distaste for Fox News(to be honest, who doesn't these days?) due to their distorting of news to fit it within a conservative agenda of sorts. He even went so far as to call the network "the meanest sorority in the world." He first criticized them in November 2009 for using footage from a previous Tea Party rally in a report for a more recent rally; which made the latter of these two events appear larger in attendance than it actually was. The shows anchor apologized for the act the following night.

 

 Stewart increased his criticism of the network and its shows the following year; having aired over twenty-four segments criticizing Fox News as of April 24th, 2010. Bill O'Reilly from "The O'Reilly Factor" countered that Jon Stewart's show was "a key component of left-wing television;" further stating that Jon was a big fan of Fox News as the network was deemed highly interesting to watch. Stewart has even reached out to viewers of Fox News; referring to them as the "most consistently misinformed" viewers of political media.

The moment that Jon Stewart gained my total respect and admiration, however came when he visited a show that CNN used to air called "Crossfire." You guys remember that show, right? The show that centers around two political pundits of differing factions and opinions debating over current issues, affairs and political arguments? Yeah. That show. Well, it occasionally would feature a guest appearance such as the October 15th, 2004 appearance of Jon Stewart to promote one of the books he had written.

On the show, Jon shared a very entertaining yet obviously heated exchange with CNN personality Tucker Carlson in which he criticized the show as well as the overall state of television journalism; pleading with the shows hosts that they "stop hurting America." He referred to Carlson and his co-host Paul Begala as "Partisan Hacks;" claiming that not even close to enough debate and discussion of an informative nature took place between them no matter when he tunes into the show.

Although he was invited on the program to comment on current events, Stewart immediately shifted the discussion toward the show itself, stating that Crossfire had failed in its responsibility to inform and educate viewers about politics as a serious topic. Stewart said that the show engaged in partisan hackery instead of honest debate, and said that the hosts' assertion that Crossfire is a debate show is like "saying pro wrestling is a show about athletic competition." 

Carlson responded by saying that Stewart criticizes news organizations for not holding public officials accountable, but when he interviewed John Kerry, Stewart asked a series of "softball" questions; which inadvertently uncovers the fact that Jon voted for Kerry. Stewart responded that he didn't realize "the news organizations look to Comedy Central for their cues on integrity." When Carlson continued to press Stewart on the Kerry issue, Stewart let him have it:

 "You're on CNN! The show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls! What is wrong with you?" 

Carlson then made attempts to mock Jon; saying things like "Come on. Be funny." Stewart responded with "No, I'm not going to be your monkey." 

Later in the show when Carlson chimed in with "I do think you're more fun on your show." Stewart retorted, "You're as big a d**k on your show as you are on any show." 

In one final response to Stewart's criticisms, Carlson stated "You need to teach at a journalism school," to which Stewart responded, "You need to go to one!"

So let's check the score here: 

Carlson: 0

Stewart: 5

How monumental was this exchange? How about to the tune of 867,000 viewers for that particular episode alone when Crossfire itself only saw a monthly viewing average of 615,000 viewers per month? 

Not enough? Would a cancellation suffice? That's right. Although some have stated that there is no evidence supporting that Stewart's appearance on the show was what led directly to the shows cancellation in January of the following year, we all know better. Apparently, Jonathan Klein knew also knew better. 

I mean, he's only the CEO of CNN. Nobody major.

Klein expressed his desire to change the tone of shows on his network; stating in interviews that he sympathized with Jon Stewart's criticisms of Crossfire:


"I think he made a good point about the noise level of these types of shows, which does nothing to illuminate the issues of the day."

Soon thereafter, Stewart exclaimed on The Daily Show that "I fought the law, and the law lost!"

The Monday following his appearance on Crossfire, Jon decided to briefly discuss it on The Daily Show: 

 "We decided to go to this place, Crossfire, which is a nuanced public policy analysis show… named after the stray bullets that hit innocent bystanders in a gang fight. So I go to Crossfire and, let's face it, I was dehydrated, it's the Martin Lawrence defense… and I had always in the past mentioned to friends and people that I meet on the street that I think that show… um… blows. So I thought it was only the right thing to do to go say it to them personally on their program, but here's the thing about confronting someone with that on their show: They're there! Uncomfortable! And they were very mad, because apparently, when you invite someone on a show called Crossfire and you express an opinion, they don't care for that… I told them that I felt their show was hurting America and they came back at me pretty good, they said that I wasn't being funny. And I said to them, "I know that, but tomorrow I will go back to being funny, and your show will still blow."


Is that awesome sauce or is that awesome sauce! There are layers to what this guy does with his information when he mixes it with fact; and the fact is that he wouldn't stand by and let someone judge him on how he conducts himself in his setting when those judging him have evidently lost their own way; diverting so far from their own manifest that they can't see clear enough to light a candle. The comedian that is willing to slap the face of those who shouldn't trying be making others laugh is someone to heralded highly in my opinion. 



There is yet another figure in news media entertainment that is just as influential as Jon Stewart if not more than in the opinions of some. He is highly opinionated. He has a very low tolerance for ridiculousness but is not above putting one's face in it if for the sake of enlightenment; and he will do this in a public setting with as wide a range of crass humor as anyone who has ever dared employ such so openly.

Not compelling enough for ya?

Well, he's an atheist that consistently pulls no punches when it comes to topics regarding religion and one's beliefs in a comedic fashion, of course.

He supports the legalization of Marijuana and Same-Sex Marriage.

Oh! He also dated Karrine Steffans; but who honestly cares about that?

 

Who else has the balls to say something like that?

With a resume' boasting talents that of a political commentator, actor, author, television host, satirist and of course stand-up comedian, Bill Maher can definitely call himself quite the decorated individual.

Will he do so?

No.

He'll leave that to everybody else; not so much out of modesty or the need to be lauded by others; but just because he isn't so much concerned with how others view him contingent upon what the topic is.

While he has been acting, doing stand-up and making television appearances since 1979, Bill's television career also saw its budding starts on Comedy Central with a late night talk show centered around politics entitled "Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher." The show saw extensive air time on the network from 1993 to 1997 before being picked up in 1997 by ABC. The show usually began with an initial monologue from Bill before he introduces a panel of four guests ranging in diversity from pop culture, pundits, consultants, show business, occasional news figures and authors. Much like a show that came around later on that was hosted by Maher, topics would consist of issues chosen by Bill.

Maher also did the writing and producing for the show to accompany his hosting of it; which earned him a number of award nominations including ten Emmy nominations, two TV Guide nominations and two Writer's Guild nominations. Politically Incorrect itself won quite a few awards including an Emmy for Outstanding Technical Direction, a Genesis Award for Best Television Talk Show and two CableACE awards for Best Talk Show Series.

Despite all of the accolades that Bill received for the show, ABC chose not to renew his contract for another season in 2002 in lieu of a controversial remark that he made on-air after the September 11th attacks. One of his guests on the show was conservative pundit Dinesh D'Souza. Maher expressed his agreement with his guest's rebuttal to President Bush calling the hijackers of the air crafts cowards; stating that the terrorists were not cowards nor did they act in a cowardly manner. Maher expressed his concurrence in stern fashion:



"We have been the cowards. Lobbing cruise missiles from two thousand miles away. That's cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building. Say what you want about it. Not cowardly. You're right."


Noting that his comment was widely perceived as anti-military, Maher later stated that this was not the case at all; citing well-documented support over an extensive period of time for the American military. There was still significant insurmountable backlash, however as both FedEx and Sears Roebuck pulled their advertisements from the show; which incurred a substantial blow in revenue for the program.

Bill underwent similar controversy again that same year on the show when he faced criticism for comparing his dogs to retarded children. He later apologized for his remarks, of course; expressing immense regret for his oversight in the usage of such scathing terms in his comparison.

Much to the chagrin of Bill, Politically Incorrect was cancelled on June 16th, 2002.

Much to the triumph that is his influence, however, Maher received the Los Angeles Press Club president's award or "championing free speech."

Let it be known that he received this award on June 22nd, 2002; six days after the show's cancellation.

Is that boss or what?!?!

What many fans of Bill Maher within the past decade associate him with is his HBO show "Real Time with Bill Maher." Maher became the host of this show in 2003; but also shared duty as co-producer and co-writer. Bill has gone on record to state that he definitely prefers his serious, well-informed guests on this program rather than the random celebrities that comprised his discussions on Politically Incorrect. For those that don't watch the show(whoever you are...), it follows similar formats that the previous show did.

Bill shares a humorous opening monologue with his audience before proceeding to an interview with a guest; which may take place in the studio or via satellite. Following the one-on-one discussion, Maher sits with a panel of three guests consisting primarily of figures much like that of the variance of diversity observed on Politically Incorrect. There were a list of changes made to the show between 2008 and 2012 ranging from featuring non-political stand-up comedians to Bill foregoing the opening monologue and holding three one-on-one interviews(which didn't last very long) to the inclusion of his very entertaining "New Rules" ending segment.

The most intriguing addition to the show was the "mid-guest" portion of the show where a fourth guest was brought in after a few of the the topics are discussed between Bill and the three person panel. This guest usually serves as a convenient segue into the next headlining topic of the show. There have been authors talking about their new book releases relative to world issues, directors, and even a celebrity or two. One mid-guest that I was definitely surprised to see on the recent August 2nd, 2013 episode was Jay Z.

It must be understood that on a premium television network such as HBO where there is unadulterated freedom from censorship, one as charismatic and potent as Bill Maher is sure to issue a controversial remark here and there. Hell, look what he did on a network where he couldn't cuss or be crass?

In May 2005, Alabama Congressman Spencer Bachus sent a letter to Time Warner's board of directors requesting that Bill's show be cancelled in light of remarks he made after noting that the military had not met up to 42% of its recruiting goals. Bachus felt that what maher said was treasonous and demeaning to the military at large. Once again, Bill reiterated his utmost respect and support for the military troops, but he would not allow the issue to rest on the laurels of his contrition; inquiring why Spencer would criticize him instead of working to rectify his recruitment issues.

I respect that wholeheartedly. Instead of ignoring the Congressman's accountability altogether for the purpose of issuing an apology, he insisted upon upholding the fact that something had to be done to fix the situation. One shouldn't be let off the hook just because they may have found a way to divert the attention to someone else.

Real Time was and is still to this day a very successful show; earning considerable praise. The show has been nominated for over ten Primetime Emmy Awards as well as six Writer's Guild awards. Maher himself has quite the distinguished feather in his cap as a matter of fact; having notched the record for most nominations without winning one at twenty-two.

Maher is just as colorfully outspoken regarding his views as he is when on television. He doesn't like to classify himself to any certain political party; referring to himself as practical. Bill supports the legalization of gambling, prostitution ad marijuana across the board. He refers to himself as an environmentalist; opposing global warming and environmental pollution and is also a member of PETA(People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals).

Amid controversy regarding his support, Maher openly expressed his support for John Kerry before the 2004 U.S; but criticized him for being ashamed of the term "liberal."

Maher consistently supports the death penalty and has supported the use of racial profiling in airports since the 9/11 attacks.

Maher has professed that he is a gun owner; but he won't go as far as to say that he is "Pro-NRA." He states that he does not consider himself a "proud" gun owner; saying that being such is the same as saying "I'm a proud remote control owner." He like many of us does not believe in the likely fabricated statistic that gun owners are more likely to do harm to a member of their household; believing rather that this is caused by irresponsible gun owners. He has even gone on to state that tragedies along the lines of school shootings will render no critical change of any variance to gun laws due to the fact that both Democrats and Republicans favor guns.

Can't really argue with him there at all.


Bill is consistently extremely critical of religion; viewing it as very destructive. He has been described as an agnostic; implying that he does not believe that there is substantial truth to prove that there is the existence of a deity. Although he has referred to himself in comedic fashion as an atheist, he has denied the label; stating the following:



"I'm not an atheist. There's a really big difference between an atheist and someone who just doesn't believe in religion. Religion to me is a bureaucracy between man and God that I don't need. But I'm not an atheist, no."


Bill has referred to himself occasionally as an "apatheist;" however:



"I don't know what happens when you die, and I don't care. There's atheist and there's agnostic, and I'm okay with us not splitting the difference on those; if you are just not a super-religious person, you are on my team."


Pretty fair if you ask me. He isn't denouncing those who are inclined to their beliefs; but he will definitely make his stance on the institution of religion well known. When he has to defend said stance, he knows how to do so in staunch fashion. Consider his take on a news story reporting in 2010 that the name Mohammed had become the most popular name in the UK. In an October episode of Real Time, he felt that him feeling alarmed about that finding shouldn't be viewed as racist. He defended this comment on CNN later on when asked about his use of the term "Westerner:'

"And when I say Westerner, I mean someone who believes in the values that Western people believe in that a lot of the Muslim world does not. Like separation of church and state. Like equality of the sexes. Like respect for minorities, free elections, free speech, freedom to gather. These things are not just different from cultures that don't have them...It's better...I would like to keep those values here."

Another valid point driven home after having to defend one of his candid comments on his own show. Geez! Maher is doing work!

Bill knows how to press the buttons when he knows that he has one whom he debates with on the ropes; especially when it comes to religion.

Take his Fox News debate with Bill O'Reilly:

"If Jesus was in charge of the country we'd probably have health care for everybody."

Go ahead and guess how entertaining that debate must have been.

Bill has even garnered accolades and recognition for his stance on religion; evidenced by him receiving the Richard Dawkins Award for Atheist Alliance International in 2009 and being ranked first by MormonVoices on their Top Ten Anti-Mormon Statements of 2011 list for saying "By any standard, Mormonism is more ridiculous than any other religion."

Are you not entertained?!


Mentioning health care, Maher views the American Medical Association as an extremely potent lobbying group; citing it as one of the main reasons why the United States has not successfully enacted health care reform. He believes that illness is the general result of poor diet and lack of exercise; stating that medicinal endeavors are not always effective when it comes to facing said illnesses.

Makes sense if you ask me. Medication can't cure everything. Maher supports his belief by stating that "The answer isn't another pill."

I certainly concur with Bill when it comes to the Flu Vaccine. He is completely against it. During a debate on his October 9th, 2009 show, he debated Bill Frist regarding the effectiveness of the vaccine:


"Why would you let them be the ones to stick a disease into your arm? I would never get a swine flu vaccine or any vaccine. I don't trust the government, especially with my health."

Bill is very skeptic regarding how serious of a threat the swine flu really is; disputing if completely healthy people could die from it. As is to be expected, Maher's views regarding medicine garnered heat from medical communities; whom believed his remarks to be inaccurate and even harmful to those willing to listen and heed to his views. He basically pissed off experts ranging from Oncologists to infectious diseases experts; all who perceive him as grossly misinformed per his "non-medical" stance on the issue.

Look.

I didn't believe in the effectiveness of the vaccine when it first hit the field; and have abstained from taking it since inception. I like Maher don't understand how placing an infection into my system will help me fight against it. I just do what every not-so-normal-person does: Soup up on meds ahead of time and roll with the punches.


Another large issue that grinds Bill Maher's gears is the litany of 9/11 conspiracy theories that have become commonplace in society and news media over the years. His opposition here proved to be rather direct; heckling Bill from within the audience during an October 19th, 2007 episode of Real Time. He soon thereafter had them ejected from the audience after repeated interruptions centered around their rather raw attempt to raise public awareness about what they believe were government mandated conspiracies regarding the tragedy.

*I believe that it my serve better if I withhold my reservations regarding the 9/11 conspiracy theories until I can dedicate another post to them altogether.*



What I and most people can definitely see in both Bill Maher and Jon Stewart is that while both of have very controversial, colorful, crass and stirring opinions about the world around them, they aren't out to just randomly express and exclaim their stances or beliefs without being prepared to substantiate their point.

Who wants to be that person that goes completely out of their way to express how he/she feels about certain issues only to have no factual knowledge to support why they feel that way? That's embarrassing for the person doing so and annoying to those forced to listen to that person.

Who wants to be that person that expresses their beliefs in a timid or passive manner? That won't ensure any degree of respect from the people one engages; which may result in vital information or a degree of poignancy that may have proven itself beneficial to some if not all being dashed and shun completely. These two individuals definitely have the attitude, intelligence and fearlessness essential to making sure that vital points(although controversial in nature) are divulged.

Jon Stewart holds accountable those who fashion themselves as purveyors of unbiased, unadulterated truth in news media; and trust me: He's probably more angered and discouraged by the fact that he has had to and to some degree still finds himself having to do so. It's sort of like the eldest son having to babysit every Friday night. It gets old. Soon.

Bill Maher is completely comfortable with the complete understanding of what his freedom as an American entails. He takes serious what he truly stands by regardless of who joins him. He isn't afraid to let anyone know how he feels about anything; be it in a heated debate, film, crass humor or any other medium that will hazard a portion of time for him.

Are both of these men highly opinionated? Yes.
Are both controversial? Indeed.
Do both men command an obscene amount of attention? Better believe it.

Why are they so In-Your-Face?
Why are they so willing to deal with the ramifications of their thoughts and statements?

Because they understand that there are points in life where polite niceties just won't drive home what is essential to the enlightenment and advancement that we as a nation should have found ourselves privy to much sooner in its growth and development. They are willing to be the jerk in the eyes of some so that they can be the champion for many more; a sacrifice that some would never be so receptive of in any capacity.

The do this because they care.

The do this because more of us should.

They do this because we need it.

Honestly, I believe that they do this because they live in a country that in one way or another has consistently proven to them that no one else would've wanted to.

Pretty disheartening that charismatic comedians among a perceived meager handful of others have taken up spearheading the importance of voicing informed opinion and holding those in certain positions of influence accountable; something that each of us is expected to do individually and collectively as Americans.



That should disturb you.