Saturday, January 25, 2003

Spike Lee backs out of Feb. appearance at UC
Is this a boycott of downtown or is this a boycott of the entire city? It appears that the boycotters will take what ever gets them attention and what ever can harm someone. Spike Lee is a bandwagoner. He sees a boycott against "whites" and he joins in. What is odd here is that he seemed to change his mind. He agreed to appear at UC and knew fully of the boycott, but he now changes his mind.

I have two theories as to why he changed his mind. One is simple. He had to cancel for other reasons and choose to or was asked to claim it was to support the boycott. The other theory is that, like other people have alleged, he was warned that his appearance might cause more riots. That warning would logically come from one of the boycott groups and would by some be interpreted as a threat.

Most people in Cincinnati will not care about missing Spike Lee. I did not even know he was to appear in at UC. This does nothing but hurt Spike Lee fans and UC. If they boycotters want to prevent the visit of any and all famous black people that is not going to hurt most people. If they are going to do that, why are they not pushing the professional sports teams to comply? Why aren’t Griffey, Larkin, and Dillon front and center in line with the boycott? Why haven’t other city players refused to play here? Why are they black players on UC and XU still playing? Why doesn’t the boycott have a consistent boycott target? The answer is obvious. They boycott cherry picks who they can get to comply to their demands. They have but one plan: Gain power, seek revenge, and get rich.

UPDATE: Matt Weiler comments on Spike Lee's cancellation.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Don't be an idiot or your post will be deleted.