Kane Watch: Worth Watching? YOU BETCHA!
Earlier this evening, Casper and I had a candid discussion about the "Kane Watch" he started several posts ago. It seems throughout the blogosphere, others followed suit and began commenting on the columnist as well.
Our discussion centered on whether or not we felt the originality of the concept remained, and more so, if Kane was deserving of the scrutinity (I'd like to state that these concerns belonged to Casper, and not to me).
Well, after checking in on McBride's blog tonight, and reading the email Kane wrote in which he personally attacked McBride in a completely unprofessional and quite racist manner, I say with enthusiasm: Long Live the Kane Watch!
Checking in on Kane's blog, I was not surprised to find this, a post predicting "fireworks" would occur on a talk show discussing blogger James Widgerson's recent reaction to the mob beatings on the north side. Kane stated that some people found Widgerson's comments "racially insensitive."
I wonder if comments from Kane like, "In my opinion, she went on a mission to save one black male based on little more than a bleeding heart impulse that was destined to fail," are racially insensitive? I mean, what proof or reasoning did he use to conclude that Sam was a dead-end cause? Was it because...I donno...he was black? According to McBride, Kane didn't get too many details about the young man, so clearly he must have come to his conclusion using SOME kind of premise.
Or, here, what about this one from Kane, "I knew McBride pretty well when she worked here, so I feel confident saying she is clueless on many fronts regarding race in Milwaukee." Again, what is it that gives Kane confidence in saying that? Where's the proof? Is it because she's white so she can't know about race in Milwaukee? I'm confused.
One thing I'm not confused about is whether or not Kane is deserving of the scrutiny he's been receiving. Scrutinize on, my fellow bloggers.
posted by Tanker311 @ 4:59 AM
3 comments
3 Comments:
One of the reasons I finally started a blog was to have a public forum where I could respond to Eugene's writings instead of continuing to accost strangers on the street and ranting about him.
And I'm sure many Milwaukee-area bloggers had similar motivations.
Here's my latest commentay on Kane's comments.
But I don't think you should consider that any of the rest of us are "stealing your thunder."
If Mr. Kane's opinions are ever going to mature, I think it's going to take all of us bloggers working together to show him the error of his ways.
After all, sometimes it takes a villiage...to raise Kane.
Hey Elliot,
I probably could have chosen more careful words when I was writing last night, as it pertains to the discussion I had with Casper. We don't feel that anyone stole our thunder at all. It is true, though, that several other blogs in the area at around the same time began to write about Kane and /that/ made us wonder about the originality of the concept. That's really all I meant.
Casper has something great to say about it, and you touch on it in your comments. Effectively, our goal is also to hold him responsible for the irresponsible things he writes, BECAUSE he is in a position to possible say things that could make a difference.
Thanks for reading, Elliot.
There's nothing racist in Kane's email. McBride looks the worse for publishing it and for trying to milk it to make her look good. All the good things she learned and can teach others about inner city issues she corrupts by layering in this personality game and petty blogger careerism.
What is evident in practically her own admission in the starfish series is that Kane was right: she was on a probably hopeless cause. That doesn't make it non-admirable, and Kane doesn't attack what she she was doing as unadmirable. Just naive. Which hope often is. As in the case of the kid she befriended.
Post a Comment
<< Home