Thoughts on LeBron not being in the dunk contest

Last night, while watching the All-Star game, I got so frustrated every time I saw LeBron James flying through the air to catch an oop from Wade or contort his body mid-air after jumping from a dead sprint, to reverse slam it, and monkey swing on the rim. As I'm watching this, all I can think of is "now why didn't dude enter the dunk contest?" The only legitimate reason a player can give me for not wanting to enter the dunk contest is fear of injury. I respect that. I understand that. A player's body, esp. their knees, ankles, and feet (crucial elements in jumping and landing from any dunk attempt) are how they eat, so I TOTALLY understand not wanting to injure yourself in non-essential activity like the dunk contest. HOWEVA, if you tell me that, yet turn around and do the EXACT SAME ACROBATICS in another non-essential activity like the All-Star game the VERY NEXT DAY, then I have a serious problem and must ask some tough questions. As a team owner I would have the same outrage if my star player got hurt dunking in a dunk contest that I would have if my star player got hurt dunking in an All-Star game. LeBron didn't approach the All-Star game in the same fashion as KG did. KG has a bad knee. KG shot jump shots yesterday. KG was not running around full speed trying to catch oops thrown up higher than the square on the backboard. KG played like someone who was concerned with not getting hurt. LeBron didn't. LeBron was "showin out"! I was impressed and I was disgusted. I'm like - "if you gonna show out, why not show out in the contest where you are judged and rewarded for showin out!". Since risk of injury OBVIOUSLY was not the issue, then I must ask, LeBron, are you afraid of losing the dunk contest? I tend to think that is the reason why dude didn't compete. Why else, after being totally unprovoked at last years All-Star game, would he say he would compete in the dunk contest in Dallas, and then back out? I've already established that risk of injury couldn't really be the reason. What I'm left to conclude is LeBron was afraid of losing the dunk contest, so he didn't compete. I can't really trip on him for having that feeling, because I had the same feeling in 8th grade. I won my school's spelling bee in 7th grade, but I was scared to lose my title in the 8th grade (esp. when I heard they had allowed 4th graders to enter the competition. I couldn't bear the potential shame of being eliminated before a 4th grader did, so I didn't compete). In hindsight, it was a punk move. I admit it. All I need for LeBron to do is admit it too. He's still my favorite NBA player, regardless. I am just a little disappointed. The All-Star weekend here in Dallas was ridiculous even without his participation in the dunk contest. If LeBron had of been in it, it would have just made the weekend legendary.

Kobe Doin' Work: A few observations

• Kobe is a very intelligent basketball player. His greatness isn't just in his physical abilities, it's in his mental approach to the game as well.
• Kobe and LeBron are interesting icons of the culture they live in. In one scene, Kobe commented on how he and Bruce Bowen are such great competitors. It's interesting for me to hear guys speak of their greatness WHILE they are still in the midst of their prime (LeBron spoke of his greatness at the post game press conference when he went off for 47 in Game 3 of their series against the Hawks). I don't think I recall Magic or Bird or Isiah speak about their greatness while their careers were in progress.
• I love the way Kobe communicates on the floor, especially on the defensive end. He's literally another coach on the floor. Even if you can't get with Kobe the man, one must at least give him kudos that he understands what the other team is trying to accomplish offensively and how best to make it difficult on them to score. 
• Kobe is only great when he plays with talent. He needs other players with high basketball IQs around him to flourish. He's not that great of a teacher. I get the sense that he is able to provide information to his teammates. However, there is a wide gap between providing information and being able to teach. Teaching requires a level of subtly and nuance that I don't sense Kobe has in his personality. 
• It was interesting hearing him speak on how much he loves L.A. I'm curious then about how serious he was about leaving L.A. to go to Chicago when he was a free agent and if he loved L.A. so much, then why the trade demands two summers ago?
• He admitted to throwing elbows. I wonder if anybody else heard when he said that or was surprised by that admission? I don't think he even realized what he was copping to, but he admitted it plain as day.
• I like the Triangle Offense. It's suited to the free-flowing, unpredictable nature of basketball. In basketball I prefer concepts over plays. Plays breakdown, concepts have options. Don't give me fish, give me a fishing pole...
• I didn't know teams could watch replays of the TV broadcast at halftime. It seemed to me that they were watching a DVR recording of the 1st half of the game when they were in the locker room at halftime. Instant video feedback. Is this legal in the NFL? Do they do this in college basketball too?
• I really couldn't see Kobe playing well for any other coach than Phil. The only evidence we have thus far is the whole Rudy T. experiment, which didn't last long or go well. It will be interesting to see what the Lakers do if Phil retires this year (which I think he will. Remember Tex Winters is already gone). How will Kobe react to somebody new at the helm? Kobe is very vocal and even expressed himself how a coach needs to be able to keep his ego in check to be able to deal with all of Kobe's input. Phil and Kobe are on the same page, but Phil's page is the only one Kobe has had to be on. Can he get on another coach's page? Or better yet, will another coach have the humility to deal with all that is Kobe Bryant?
• I think Kobe's teammates respect him for what he has accomplished, the supremely gifted player that he is, as well as his knowledge of the game, but I don't know how much they enjoy following him. He does lead them, but I get the sense his team's followship lacks the intimacy that Magic's teammates or Isiah's teammates or most recently LeBron's teammates have for their leader. Kobe's followers are similar to Jordan's followers, except I think Jordan's teammates had a level of fear of him and a sense of not wanting to let him down. After seeing the clip of Kobe hitting the 3rd quarter ending 3 point shot, he commented that when he makes that type of shot it gives the 2nd teammers who are going to start off the 4th quarter energy - it gets them enthused and they get up off the bench and give high fives to their teammates coming back to the bench. All of this is true and good stuff. However, I contrast this with how the Cavaliers relate to each other and how they don't require a high-degree-of-difficulty, quarter ending 3 point shot to respond to their teammates in an enthusiastic fashion. They are hype for each other from the initial jump ball. Similar to the Jordan's teammates, but maybe from different motivations, LeBron's teammates have his back and don't want to let him down. Kobe's teammates don't seem to have that feeling at all. They are enthusiastic about each other when things are going well, but don't seem to have each other's backs when they encounter adversity. I think we don't see this side as much with the Lakers because they are typically so good that they rarely face adversity. But their track record with adversity has not been good sense Shaq's last season in L.A. when they lost to the Pistons in the Finals. On the positive side, they are so good this flaw in their team rarely shows up. On the flip side, they typically find such adverse situations deep in the playoffs and haven't responded well when they faced with it (practically swept by less talented Pistons team, blown out in closeout Game 6 in Boston, blew HUGE lead in Game 4 at home vs Boston).
• To the previous point, it seemed to me a little forced in how Kobe spoke of how he looks out for his teammates with the officials. He says he really only talks to the refs to stick up for his teammates. In all the games I've watched him in, he seems to get the most animated when he's arguing his own case about how HE is being fouled. I think he understands what a good leader should do, but it didn't seem authentic when describing his role as protector for his guys. 
• Kobe's not a spring chicken anymore. When you start getting ice on your knees while the game is still in progress, it shows there are a lot of miles on his tires.
• He threw a not-so-subtle jab at both Shaq and at Smush Parker. He told Pau Gasol that he never had a big man who could make that kind of pass to him. I agree that Pau is a great passer in the high post of the Triangle, but he could have complimented Gasol purely on his passing skills and not in reference to the big men he played with in the past. He also said he trusts kicking the ball out to Derek Fisher for 3s and said he wouldn't have made those types of passes the previous year (when Fisher was not with the team). 
• Kobe desires the adulation of the crowd. He was soaking up the fact the Staples Center crowd was chanting M-V-P. He really wants to be liked. I'm not sure I've seen that trait in other NBA superstars as high as it is in Kobe. (of course we all want to be liked, but what I'm questioning is the degree to which we desire it. I'm sure Barkley wants to be liked, but I don't think it bothers him if he isn't. I would put Barkley and Kobe on extreme opposite ends of this spectrum.)
  

Thoughts on the NBA Playoffs Round 1

• The Bulls Celtics series was not the greatest series ever. It was one of the most compelling to watch, but let's be clear, these were two middle-of-the-pack teams who matched up well against each other. If you duplicated the same exact events that happened in this series, but changed the names on the front of the jerseys to Memphis and Minnesota, would everybody really be falling over themselves to call this the greatest series ever? Come on. People get a grip. Stop worshiping the god of Now. It was great to watch, but please, have some perspective.
  
  
• I was impressed with the shot making abilities of both Big Baby Davis and of Tyrus Thomas. My theory is it helped both of them that they played together in college. I can imagine that familiarity made them both comfortable offensively when they saw their former teammate guarding them and took away some of the fear factor associated with playing basketball on the big stage. I thought both of them played with a lot more confidence than what I would have expected otherwise.
  
  
• When Ray Allen was going off for 51 all I could think about was his pregame shooting routine. A lot of the shots that he took in Game 6 were reminiscent of the types of movements he practices before the game. That's the only way I can see him being so comfortable shooting so quickly and getting himself the slight space he needs to get off his jumper.
  
  
• I think one of the secrets to successful offense is spacing the floor (DUH!). However, I don't see many teams making use of the baseline corner to accomplish this, though I've heard the Spurs incorporate this concept (think: the Bruce Bowen corner 3) and D'Antoni uses it in his system as well. The situation where I think this spot is not used to the extent it should be is in fast break situations. On the break, guys running the wing tend to make a 45 degree cut toward the basket once they get to the three point line. I'm an advocate of running to the corner instead of cutting toward the basket in this situation, especially when there is a defender already waiting in the lane. Running to the corner creates the greatest distance for defensive players getting back in transistion to cover and it keeps the lane open for the ball handler in the middle of the floor to make a 1-on-1 move to get by the defender in the paint. If the lane is clogged, passing out to the shooter in the corner presents a good look for a 3 and it puts the defense in a scramble situation, even if they are able to close out on the shooter in the corner. 
  
  
• Stan Van Gundy has been the focus of a lot of rhetoric, ridicule, and other media attention this season. Van Gundy called Shaq out for flooping, Shaq in return called him the "Master of Panic" (a comment reiterated by a backup center on the Magic), Van Gundy went after the Knicks for their treatment of Ewing, and Dwight Howard has mocked his Van Gundy's overstressed demeanor pretty much all season long. It's obvious this guy has something stuck in his behind and for a while I was like, dude needs to "just shut up!". But, upon further review, I'm backing off the guy. I thought back to how Pat Riley knifed him in the back and took the Heat to the championship in '06 and it all made sense to me. He has to have been really scarred by getting kicked to the curb like that, so I can see why now he's so panicky and overly confrontational. He knows he's going to get fired again within the next 3 years (NBA coaches have VERY short tenures, ask Avery Johnson about it), so I can see him being very insecure about his job and wanting to get off anything that's on his chest before he gets the ax. For that, I'm going to lay off him.
  
  
• Maverick fans, please do not get excited about them beating the Spurs. No Ginobili + a hurt Duncan = a team that's average at best. It was a good matchup for Dallas. Denver is not. Denver is going to spank that tail.
  
  
• My Pistons were unwatchable in their series with the Cavs. I knew we weren't going to do anything this year, even before we traded Chauncey. However, it was still tough to watch us get rolled like that. It reminded me of 1991 when the Bulls steamrolled us to end the era of Bad Boys Part 1. It made me sick then, and it makes me sick now.
  
  
• Though I did get caught up in the drama of the Bulls Celtics series, please understand nothing matters in this playoffs until  the Cavs meet the Lakers in the Finals. I know the NBA was glad to be able to milk a subplot (drama filled Bulls/Celtics series) out of what is a pretty pedestrian lineup of playoff series, pre-Finals. The sizzle and steak will be there when it's LeBron versus Kobe. Anything else is mozzeralla sticks. Even if the mozzeralla sticks have a good marina dipping sauce, it ain't steak. Kobe versus Lebron is filet mignon.
  

Thoughts on the Cowboys and T.O. in the wake of his release

Given the reported release of T.O., my status as lifelong Cowboys fan, and self-acknowledged T.O. expert here are a few thoughts about the whole situation:

The wicked witch is dead...
The scapegoat is gone. Because of his polarizing persona, T.O. made for an easy target when things went wrong with the Cowboys. In addition, Pacman Jones and Roy Williams are also gone. Over the past 3 years the most popular people to blame for the Cowboys failures are Jerry Jones and whoever the Cowboys head coach is (this will never change), Owens, Williams, and Pacman. Now when things go wrong with the Cowboys, other people will be square in the sights of those who enjoy (and many who get paid handsomely) to play the blame game. Here are a few butts that are on the line now that T.O.'s gone:

• Tony Romo - the convenient excuse for his poor play has become that he's too busy trying to force the ball to T.O. Given this theory, he now has the mental freedom to scan the field and just find the open man. If he doesn't, he better grow some even tougher skin because the sharks are beginning to circle.

• Jason Garrett - T.O had one great year in his offense and T.O. had one average year in his offense. We have a small sample size of Garrett's offense without T.O. (Garrett's first year when T.O. got hurt at the end of the year) and it wasn't pretty. The offense ground to a halt. Remember, T.O. put up numbers BEFORE Garrett came in as offensive coordinator. It can be said that the biggest thing missing with the Cowboys offense last year was Tony Sparano. Even with the small sample size the Cowboys were DESPERATE to get him back for the playoff game against the Giants in January '08. I didn't hear these people who are glad T.O. is gone saying they didn't want him back for that Giants game. The idea of T.O. being gone is easier to digest than the reality of him being gone. Garrett not only has to prove he can do it big without T.O., but also how to implement the other weapons he still has at his disposal. His lack of use of Felix is comical in light of what Chris Johnson did at Tennessee. If I played with this offense on Madden, I would be unbeatable, yet he didn't do much with all that firepower. His clock is ticking loudly.

• Witten - Life with T.O. on the field is easier than life without T.O. on the field. Can he produce without a beast on the edge opening stuff up for him over the middle and underneath.

• Roy Williams - I think he has much more than what he showed this year, but it's now even more imperative that he has a big year. If not, he will have to deal with the Joey Galloway comparisons - got big money, Cowboys gave up a lot in the draft for him, yet very little ROI (get it ROI/Roy, hehehehehe)

• Wade Phillips - dude was on the hot seat after going 13-3. His butt will be glued to the hot seat as long as he's the head coach of Dallas.

Revisionist history
Media pundits will attempt to lump this Cowboys situation into T.O.'s history with the Eagles and with San Francisco. These are 3 distinct situations. The one that is most different than the others is the 49ers situation. T.O. did not get cut from the 49ers. T.O.'s agent screwed up and didn't file his paperwork in time for him to become a free agent (thus he fired his agent and hired Drew Rosenhaus). The 49ers didn't cut him after he feel back into their laps. If they were so determined to get rid of T.O., why didn't they just let him walk, even after his agent screwed up??? They did subsequently trade him because he was pretty much hell bent on becoming a free agent (the player's union and an arbitrator eventually got involved). I think the biggest domino that led to T.O. becoming the most polarizing figure in the NFL today was his former agent screwing up his bid for free agency. T.O. was not a high draft pick, so his route (which is the route that all non-first round draft picks take) to get paid is through free agency. The whole debacle in Philly was over money. T.O., because he was in a poor negotiating position with the Eagles due to his agents gross negligence, had to take what the Eagles were offering because if not he was going to be stuck in San Fran or traded to a team where he didn't want to go. T.O. was traded to the Eagles from the 49ers with his sub market level deal already in place. After having a big year he wanted to renegotiate the deal, the Eagles did not and the drama ensued. He did not tear up San Fran's locker room, however he did have issues with coaches Steve Mariucci and Greg Knapp. He was integral in the divide in Philly's and in the Cowboys locker room though in both other cases. I don't think T.O. was totally wrong in his position in any one of the situations (San Fran, Philly, or Dallas). However, being right and negatively affecting team chemistry is still net-net a bad outcome. Holding on to a position of right to the detriment of the relationships cannot be excused and is an indefensible position, especially in the ultimate team sport such as football.

The question of leadership
Last year (and for the past couple of years) the Cowboys have had a void of leadership. Parcells was the unquestioned leader while he was here (there are varying opinions on whether it was good or bad leadership). Before Parcells, the leadership was Jimmie Johnson and the Triplets. The Cowboys for the past decade, minus the Parcells years, have had a void of leadership. Removing T.O. does not address this issue. The lack of leadership allowed the Cowboys situation to blow up in the media like it did last year. As much as people didn't like Parcells when he was here, there weren't these types of issues when he was around. Giving a pregnant women medicine to help combat nausea does not do anything about the root cause of the nausea. T.O. in this analogy is nausea (no pun intended), but the Cowboy's are still pregnant with a lack of leadership. You cannot make Tony Romo a leader by removing somebody who will test his leadership. Absence of conflict does not a leader make. Eli Manning is no greater a leader because of Jeremy Shockey leaving. Dude still is not a leader. Tom Coughlin is the leader of that team. The on the field leaders of the Giants (Tiki and Strahan) are gone now. Eli didn't step into that void. Coughlin assumed total control. Coughlin butted heads with those veterans (which speaks to his asserting himself as leader) initially, went on to make peace with them and now that both are on TV, Coughlin is the unquestioned leader of that squad. Wade isn't that type of leader. So far, Garrett isn't that type of leader. Romo isn't. Now that T.O. is gone. Who???? The Steelers don't have a questions of leadership. The Patriots don't have a question of leadership. The Colts don't have the question of leadership. The Giants and Eagles don't have the question of leadership. The Ravens don't have a question of leadership. These are the best teams in the NFL over the past 6-7 years. As much as I love the Cowboys, they still have a GAPING hole in this area. Until somebody, some coach, some player steps up and assumes the mantle of leadership the Cowboys will have a difficult time winning a Super Bowl, even with all that talent they have.

T.O. post-Cowboys, post NFL
I am concerned about T.O. in his post Cowboys and his post football life. First T.O. is going to find the marketplace to be full of tumbleweed. He's an aging receiver with significant baggage. He was to make 8 million this year if he stayed with the Cowboys. He probably will be lucky to make 3 million with most of the contract being laden with incentives. The sad thing is there will not be many teams lining up to sign him. It's interesting to me how in sports with hall of fame talents like Bonds and Ramirez we left dangling in the market with nobody really willing to step up to pay them. Aging talents with baggage are persona non grata in today's sports landscape. Owens' wallet will be much lighter this year. I really hope he has his money in order. He never signed one of these Albert Haynesworth, McNabb, or Mike Vick type 100 million dollar contracts, so missing out of 5 million could be significant. His house in New Jersey (back from his time in Philly) is still sitting on the market. Second, what is T.O. going to do after football? He won't get a position as an analyst on TV. A radio show??? Maybe, due to his needle moving personality he would work out on the radio, but in what city? I hope he has thought about what life is like minus the spotlight. It's obvious that he desires attention, even if though he has consistently characterized much of the negative that such attention brings him as being unfair. I hope for his sake that he has some hobby that he really enjoys because the public's attention will move on and he will find himself unable to make anywhere near the type of money he made in the NFL. That's a scary cocktail from my perspective.

Overall assesment
The Cowboys still have talent, but have a lot of questions to be answered. It will be interesting to hear sports talk radio in Dallas now that the usual suspects have left town. I guess it will just morph into more Jerry and Wade bashing. Until they get the leadership question answered, I still have questions on how far my 'Boys will go. I can hope as a fan that they make a deep run next year, but as an analyst I'm still quite skeptical. Now, don't get it twisted, I remember 3 straight years of 5 and 11. I don't want to go back there. I much prefer the underacheiving Cowboys versus the Cowboys that are just trash.

A LeBronsian Obama?

As I've watched the media coverage leading up to Barack's inauguration, I was struck by the very lofty expectations and comparisons used by pundits in relation to Barack. On several occasions, pundits in the midst of their analysis, would launch into a roll call of past great presidents (including the likes of Lincoln and JFK) and invariably an implicit or explicit connection would be made to Obama. This caused me to ponder the question of why is Barack being attributed greatness (specifically in relation to other presidents) without ever having a day in office? His name was used in a list of great presidents and he was not yet even the President! If this were 8 years down the road and Barack had helped turn the economy around, reformed the broken education system, and figured out a solution to the impending Social Security armageddon - I could understand such elevated comparisons. I understand and firmly believe he has the potential to be a great president, but to already label him as such is a bit premature.

As I pondered this further, the only thing I could compare it to was the type of talk I heard from basketball pundits when LeBron was coming out of high school. It was amazing to me back then the level of expectations that were placed on the head of King James before he ever took a dribble in the NBA. The really crazy thing about LeBron is that he has actually (IMHO) surpassed those expectations. This is when I coined the term "LeBronsian". It describes a person who enters a situation with the label of being great and over time actually performs to the level (or beyond) of the expected greatness.

It is fascinating to me how LeBron and Obama's rise to perceived greatness followed a similar track. LeBron may or may not be the greatest high school basketball player ever, but it's safe to say he was the greatest high school basketball player that most of the country had to ability to see play WHILE he was still in high school. LeBron opened the flood gates for high school sports to be shown prominently on ESPN other cable networks. He created such a buzz that people like Jay-Z and Shaq would attend his games and his games would have commentary by top announcers like Dickie V. LeBron also was not the first to go from high school to the pros, but he was the first to have the country paying attention to his assent from the beginning. His rise to prominence was not as some local playground legend that was unleashed on the country during the NCAA's March Madness. Rather it was on a national stage that we all began to be "witnesses" of the high school phenom. Similarly, Obama rise to prominence was also done on the national stage. His explosion on the scene at the Democratic National Convention just 4 years ago, put him on the map. And given the extended campaign season that began almost 2 years ago, the nation also had a front row seat to his rise to being the #1 draft pick (so to speak). What is also similar is the luck, good fortune, providence (or whatever you want to label it) for each of them coming to the stage. If LeBron where a high school senior graduating in '09, he wouldn't be eligble to enter the NBA draft this spring. Cleveland had to win a lottery in order to be in position to pick LeBron #1 (I submit to you that part of LeBron's meteoric rise is because he started his NBA career in Cleveland. He would have been special wherever, but I don't know if he would have jumped off the entire package both on and off the court, if he wasn't operating from the home base). Taken all this together, several things beyond LeBron's control had to go right in order for him even be in the position that he is in currently. In late fall '08, Obama found himself in a situation that that was fortuitous to him, that also had several elements beyond his control. He was running against the incumbent party who had a historically unpopular president and the bottom fell out of the economy. The comparions don't end there. Both James and Obama had situations that could have derailed their rise before they really got off the ground. LeBron had the Hummer-gate. Barack had Jeremiah Wright.

Ultimately, it will be quite interesting to see if President Obama is indeed a LeBronsian figure. Heavy is the head that wears the crown, but Obama better have done some serious neck excersies because he has a King James-like crown that is being placed on his head on day one.

Is Muslim an ethnic distinction?

The headline reads, "Pope baptizes Italy's most prominent Muslim", but in the article it says,

Allam was born a Muslim in Egypt, but was educated by Catholics and says he has never been a practicing Muslim.

So how can one be born a Muslim? I understand how someone could be born a Jew, yet not be a believer in Judaism (there is a ethnic group called "Jews" and a belief system called "Judaism". I know that many of the Muslims in the Middle East are of Arab descent, but I was unaware that there is an ethnic group called Muslims. Where did they come from and where are they most prominently living now? It seem like a big deal that this guy, Magdi Allam, converted to Catholicism and was baptized by the pope on Easter weekend, but he says he has NEVER BEEN A PRACTICING MUSLIM. So why is he fearful of his life? If a person is born a "Muslim", yet don't practice Islam, is that considered Islamic apostasy? The only why I can grasp this at this point is if Muslims are an ethnic people group like the Hebrews where during the times of the Old Testament. In those days, being born a Jew meant that you were born into the family of Yahweh and any movements contrary to the Mosaic Law were considered apostasy. However, I feel fairly comfortable saying that for Jews under the Mosaic Law, not practicing the Mosaic Law as akin to apostasy. I don't think the apostasy flag went up only after Jew's began worshipping other gods, I think the apostasy flag was flying high at the point when the Hebrew ceased to practice the Law. Given this, I'm struggling to understand the dynamics in play with brother Allam. I do believe dude is in danger and that some Muslim people are mad at him. I'm just trying to understand why?!?!?!

If you're one of those diehard alumni, this is another reason to root for your school during March Madness

This takes the "my daddy can beat up your daddy" thing to a whole other level...

Sorry for the 2 week hiatus...

...I got a new laptop, router, reinstalled all my programs, moved over all my files from my old computer, and am now ready to start cranking out stuff like you wouldn't believe. Check out all of my new postings below...

Race Matters: Barack Obama

I find it interesting the oversimplified way in which Barack Obama is oftentimes characterized. However, it is interesting to me that he really doesn't fit into the neat little boxes that people (both black and white) want to put him in. For example:

• He is not simply a black man. Dude is mixed. White mother and African father.
• His dad isn't the typical American black man and his dad is the typical black man. Barack's father isn't the typical black man in that he grew up in Kenya, spent sometime in school in Hawaii and at Harvard, and ended up going back to Kenya. He is the like the typical American black man in that he was not present in the home to raise his child (according to government statistics only 35 percent of African American children between the ages of 0-17 lived in a home with two married parents)
• Barack was raised by a single white mother and later an Indonesian stepfather
• Barack spent significant time living overseas as a child
• He went to college (not the typical experience of the average black man in America)
• He went to Harvard (not the typical experience of the average person in America)
• At Harvard he was the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review

I do acknowledge that Barack is black, but a qualification must be given to that observation. His life experiences are far different than those of most black men in America and any characterization of him must be done with that in mind.