The return of “The Canessa Corner”

Well, it's surely been a while since I last wrote a “Canessa Corner,” yet here we are. It’s hard to believe it’s been six years since the first one — back in The Observer days. 

With that said, we’ll go with a hodgepodge-style edition for the return.

• I’m so often late to the game when it comes to great television shows. With “ER,” it wasn’t until the very last year of the show that I found interest in it. And now, I can say the same for Canadian cop-drama show “Flashpoint.” 

The original cast of “Flashpoint.”

The show follows the fictional Strategic Response Unit of the Metro Toronto, Ontario Police Department. The “SRU,” as it’s known, is responsible for tending to serious situations that usually involved a hostage. The show gets its name from the idea that they’re there at the flashpoint – or the moment that’s about to explode.

The cast is remarkable, the story lines are phenomenally written – and unfortunately, after five seasons (the fifth of which is likely to debut this summer), the show’s been cancelled.

The show originates on CTV Canada, and was once on CBS in America. It’s now on the iON network. 

Check it out.

• Marty Brodeur has hired an agent. Zach Parise says he’ll likely test free agency come July 1. And yet, we’re still being told there isn’t cause for concern over the New Jersey Devils’ financial woes. 

Let’s get real here, folks. This team is in dire financial difficulty right now. And sadly, there’s no reason to feel good right now about this team. As hard as it is to envision, it’s looking more and more like the Devils will be without both Parise and Brodeur in October – and that, my friends, is nauseating.

• On the other side, envision this: Were I to have told you in March that on June 30, the Phillies would be 10.5 games out of first place in the National League East, and the Mets would be just 3.5 games behind, you and I both would have laughed it off to the bank. But it’s a reality – and this Mets team is for real. R.A. (Robert Allen) Dickey is 12 and 2! He’s 12 and 2!

And if the season were to end today, the Mets would play in the play-in game for the Wild Card.

Stranger things have happened.

And here I thought the Mets would win 39 games all year long.

• A friend of mine, whose name I won’t mention, today got a parking ticket in Kearny, my old hometown. He was in the car, parking it, and hadn’t even gotten out of the car yet to put money in the parking meter. 

He’d better fight that one in court.

• Found another Canadian drama I like – a summer show – called “Saving Hope.” Since I like it, it’ll likely end after one season.

• Boy did the Mets ever make it to Los Angeles to play the Dodgers at the right time.

• Now that Obamacare has been affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States, I’m still trying to figure out what it all means for me. Do you have any idea?

• Earlier today, I was watching some prelims for the Olympics in gymnastics. I’ve not been a big fan of the sport, but man are those athletes something. What they’re able to do on parallel bars, ropes, etc., is nothing short of remarkable.

• Gov. Chris Christie, R-N.J., says he’ll defy the federal ban on sports wagering to ensure there’s legal sports betting in this state – yet he won’t do the same for trace amounts of marijuana. He says everyone bets on sports already.

Hey, gov, don’t ya think the same could likely be said for most and marijuana smoking? (Not that I do – but let’s be realistic – most do).

Stay cool, everyone – hope the heat doesn’t get to you too much.

Should the Red Sox Retire Wade Boggs' Number?

It’s been said that the best stories on the Web are the shortest ones. So, for the return of “The Canessa Corner,” here’s a short list of “Yes,” “No” and short-answer questions that are often bantered about on talk shows [both sports and non-sports] these days.

•Should the Boston Red Sox retire Wade Boggs’ number? No.

•Should Pete Rose be in the Baseball Hall of Fame? Yes.

•Should steroid-era baseball players be banned from the Hall of Fame? No.

•Should Omar Minaya be fired by the Mets? Yes.

•Should Adam Rubin have accepted Minaya’s “apology?” No.

•Will the Mets make a serious run at the N.L. Wild Card? Yes.

•Will the Mets get the Wild Card? Probably not.

•What about the Marlins? Nope.

•How many true Marlins fans are there? 4,212.

•Will the Mets make a big deadline-day trade? Yes.

•Will anyone catch the Yankees for the A.L. East lead? Yes.

•Is the Shake Shack the best eatery at CitiField? Yes.

•Whose numbers should be retired by the Mets that aren’t? Keith Hernandez, Gary Carter and yes, Daryl Strawberry.

•Are the Red Sox’s championships tainted now that we know Manny and Papi did roids in 2003? Yes.

•How much longer before newspapers are totally dead? 5 years.

•Will any newspapers survive on the Web? Yes. Newsday is one, for sure. And The Times, too.

•Is John Sterling’s style annoying? Yes.

•Should Suzyn Waldman be on the air? No.

•Should Craig Carton have a job? No.

•Whose afternoon radio show do I listen to these days? Michael Kay’s.

•What about later on at night? That’s the Seth Everett Show.

•Who’ll have a better season? The Rangers or The Devils? Devils.

•Will Jacques Lemaire bring boring hockey back to Newark? No.

•Will the Panthers make the playoffs in ’10? Yes.

•Will the Islanders make the playoffs in ’10? Yes -- Tavares is that good.

•Does Sarah Palin have a political future? Did she have notable political past?

Be sure to comment. Be back soon with another corner.

The night the Knights went too far

Today, I am thoroughly embarrassed to say I am a member of the Knights of Columbus. Since 1997, I've been an official member of the organization-and some of my dearest friends are knights. But after news I read the other day, coupled with a letter written by the grand knight of the council to which I belong, I cannot sit by and allow the group to go unchecked as it so often does.

The letter I received this week noted all the good things the council was doing in the coming months. Since there's a lull in the summer, things start to pick up once September rolls around. This year was no different. But it wasn't about the things the council was doing that annoyed me to no end, it was the closing line that got to me most. And quite frankly, I couldn't blame the government for stripping the council of its tax-free status as a non-profit religious organization.

The letter concluded with an admonishment that no Catholic may support a candidate who supports marriage between anyone other than a man and a woman. It also said a Catholic could not support a candidate who supports stem-cell research and abortion rights. I'll focus on the first ideal.

"No Catholic may support a political candidate who supports anything but marriage between a man and a woman." These are the words. They were written by a grand knight, whose organization admonishes its members to refrain from bringing partisan politics into its chambers.

First, I'd say that although this isn't, per se, in the council chambers, there exists a clear violation of its own rules. Telling a member he cannot vote for a politician [clearly and obviously Barack Obama or any other Democrat for that matter] who supports non-traditional marriage constitutes hypocrisy of immense proportions.

What actually sickens me about what this man wrote is that it does not address some other serious issues facing people in this country.

For starters, I don't think it takes a person of great brilliance to realize that as "threatened" as some conservative people are by gay marriage, that marriage as it stands right now-heterosexual marriage-is beyond repair right now. In a most ironic twist, there are tons of full members of the K of C who are divorced, separated or living together with an unmarried significant other of the opposite gender.

Could you even imagine a member of the Knights sending out a letter to his constituency admonishing members who divorced? Who lived with his girlfriend out of wedlock? It wouldn't happen-it barely happens. And yet, these same people are afraid marriage between two women or two men is going to destroy the institution we know as marriage right now.

Sorry, folks. The greatest threat to marriage right now are married people. It's the people who see marriage as something more than just a couple who love each other, only to find they don't want to be married anymore, who damage marriage more than anyone or anything else.

Please-I beg anyone to tell me how two people who love each other and who just so happen to be of the same gender are doing anything to destroy the institution of marriage? Please tell me how a faith of believers that spends a year of marriage preparation with a priest who, in most cases, has never been married or who has never been in a committed relationship, can say marriage would be destroyed if two women or two men were permitted to marry?

Is it just me, or is there something wrong with the picture of a priest, who has no experience in committed relationships, telling a gay couple they can't get married because they'd destroy the institution as it is currently known?

Perhaps it's just me-but I cannot fathom the utter hypocrisy.

This is by no means an indictment on the priesthood. I respect and admire the priesthood of most [hardly all] Catholic priests. What I cannot accept is the church-or its members [in this case, the Knights]-telling anyone of the importance of keeping a broken institution as is. Because quite frankly, folks, marriage is not threatened by the LGBT community. It is ruined by people who cannot and don't live up to the expectations of marriage.

Period. End of story.

There will be many people whose minds will never change on this issue. I'm one of those people. And as much as there will be people who find fault with two people loving each other and wanting to spend the rest of their lives together, with the same rights afforded other married couples, I cannot stand by anymore and allow these hateful and disgusting words to go unnoticed.

And just as word comes that the Knights have donated $1 million toward helping to pass Proposition 8 in California that would redefine marriage in the state constitution as between one man and one woman, I know that I, too, as someone who considered himself Catholic, can do what I think is best in the same realm. I don't need a Grand Knight telling me who I can and cannot vote for.

And even worse, I wonder just how many people will read a similar letter, as a Catholic, and as a Knight, and then go on to vote for a pro-gay-marriage candidate anyway? Unlike them, I won't just ignore that notion.

And if it means that I am no longer worthy of the church-and no longer worth of the Knights-then so be it.

Quite honestly, I could do without all that hatred and viciousness.

I think we all could, folks.

Sadly, however, the debate will rage on for many years to come-and I doubt, in my lifetime, the church or the Knights will ever see it as I, and many other Americans do.

I guess that means I'm now divorced, too-from the Knights of Columbus.

Reflections on 9.11.01

EVERY YEAR WHEN SEPT. 11 GETS CLOSER, I wind up saying to someone: "I can't believe it's been (however many) years since the attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and Shanksville, Pa. Such is the case again this year—seven years after that awful day that saw nearly 3,000 people lose their lives. On my regular blog, The Hudson Line, I've shared, several times, my Sept. 11, 2001 experiences. 

They say people who were old enough in 1963 always remember where they were when they learned President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas. For a younger generation—one that wasn't around in 1963—the same can be said of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

It's true.

Not only do I remember where I was—I remember precisely what I wore to work that day. I remember the songs I listened to as I drove into work. I remember almost every single minute of that day as if it were yesterday—not seven years ago.

It happened that Sept. 11, 2001 was the first full day of classes for me at St. Anthony High School. As my schedule had it, Monday, Sept. 10, I only had a handful of classes. Tuesday was the first day I had all five sections. It was first period. Senior religion. I was on the first floor of the dingy St. Anthony High School. It was room 101.

I had just walked over to my podium, from my desk, after having taken attendance for the first time. I took my course syllabi, and handed them to a then senior, Pedro Rodriguez. I asked Pedro to pass out the syllabi as I handed out the classroom rules and regulations. At that very moment, there was an intense boom. It was a sound that wasn’t too uncommon—after all, we were just three blocks away from the Holland Tunnel, and there are always trucks overturning or bouncing as they hit potholes.

But this boom was a little different. It was louder. Still, I thought nothing of it.

Pedro continued to pass out the syllabi. Within a minute, CJ Flaherty, a history teacher at St. Anthony's, ran into the building from his trailer classroom outside that overlooked, of all things, the New York City Skyline—and the World Trade Towers. You see, St. Anthony's is situated 2.5 miles to the west of the old towers. And you could draw an imaginary line from one of the Towers directly to the school building. When CJ came in, he was out of breath. He screamed at me to get to the door. I went over, tripping on my bag that I left aside the podium.

"Dude, the World Trade Center's on fu**ing fire," he said, his voice cracking.

"CJ, what the f**k are you talking about—don’t kid around like that," was my response.

"I'll stay here. Go outside on 8th Street and see for yourself," he said.

And outside I went immediately, almost hoping that what he said was a sick joke to play a prank on me
 for all the pranks I pulled as a teacher.

We know that wasn't the case—far from it. What I saw when I was outside is the last memory I have of the Towers—the Towers I saw each and every day I was in Jersey City. It's a sight I just can't erase, as hard as I try.

I had a direct view of the north side of the North Tower. And in it, I'd later learn, was that first airplane—the one we all saw from the footage shot by the French documentarians filming the rookie in the New York City Fire Department. I hadn’t a clue an airplane hit. All I knew—all anyone knew at the time—was that there was an immense fire at the North Tower. We were in for an unforgettable, memorable day.

The late Brother James Redunski, who at the time was assistant principal at St. Anthony's, came around to let us know, about 20 minutes or so later, that we should turn the televisions off. Yet before he did—only Channel 2 was working at the time since the antenna on the North Tower was obviously damaged—we saw on WCBS-TV another explosion—this time at the South Tower. Ironically, it was Pedro who recognized the second airplane coming around—no one else could tell.

"Holy, sh*t, Canessa," he said. "That was an airplane."

Everyone—and I mean everyone—sat in stunned silence, including a girl, Michelle, whose mother was working at the Trade Center. She began to cry when she realized it was likely her mom was in one of the buildings. She couldn’t remember which one, though.

Since we were a Catholic school, we all dropped everything and could do but one thing—pray. And then, believe it or not, we went on with what remained of the 40-minute class. By the end of the class, parents were coming to pick their kids up. Everyone had realized the trouble we were in.

Second period came and went—and I still hadn't seen a thing other than the one moment I went outside. When third period arrived, many of the kids had been picked up—they went home. Michael McNutt, the dean of seniors at the time, came in to tell me the South Tower collapsed. Then the North Tower. Then he told me of the hit at the Pentagon.

It was at this point I gave up on teaching—too much was happening outside our doors. Since many New Jersey rescue units went into the city, they passed by St. Anthony's to get to the Holland Tunnel. The sirens were deafening. The kids who remained—including a few who had a parent working at the Trade Center—were a mess. I can still recall one teen, who went on to play Division I college basketball, crying intensely. He couldn’t reach his mother. He thought she was dead.

We learned later she wasn’t.

The distractions aside from the sirens were hard to digest, too. Scores of people came by 8th Street. Some from buildings in Jersey City, others from the ferries that came from New York to the Jersey City waterfront. Some were covered by soot. Others had blood one them. Some were completely intact.

As the day went on, smells began to reach Jersey City. Clouds of grey smoke—smoke from the burning buildings, and as we'd later learn, smoke from burning flesh—made its way over the Hudson River to Downtown Jersey City. It was a scent I can still recall to this day—and it was one that lasted months.

By the time 2:30 arrived, mostly all the kids had been picked up. But for those who remained, they had to wait at school until they could be picked up. Members of the Jersey City Police Department stood at every single street corner within sight. The kids could not leave without an adult, per the commanding officer. Those who lived in New York City were put up for the night in the homes of teachers who lived close to school. Since the PATH was out of commission, and since the ferries were only taking people away from Manhattan, they had no way of getting back to their homes.

I left Jersey City at 4 p.m. I didn’t get home until 6 p.m. The traffic was at a standstill almost the entire way home. And in my mirror was the smoldering of the buildings. In my mirror was a reminder of what had just happened. It didn’t matter whether it took 20 hours to get home. All that mattered to me, at that moment, was knowing I was OK—and at that moment, all of the kids were, too.

There's something I skipped chronologically on purpose—it was something so sinister it's hard to even write about.

Back at around 11:30 a.m., one of my colleagues came around and made the following statement to me: "1010 WINS is reporting a nuclear bomb is on its way to New York." Of course, there was a lot of mis-information out there that day. We also heard there was a fire on the Washington Mall—there wasn't.

But when I was told there was a nuclear warhead on its way to New York, for the first and only time ever, I believed I was about to die. I stood in the parking lot during a break, all the while listening to Don Imus and Charles McCord, both of whom remained on the air after Imus' scheduled show ending. I could hear the fear in Charles and Don's voices. I was just as much in fear.

I wondered—when the nuke hit, would I feel it? Would it burn? Would I suffer? Would any of us suffer? Would it be long and drawn out? Would it be quick? These thoughts all went through my mind—yet when there was word the nuke attack was a false alarm, there was a sense of relief.

But what that happened Sept. 11, 2001 had any relieving qualities? It certainly wasn’t the jumpers. It wasn’t the lost lives. Nothing that day offered any relief. The kids who watched the jumpers jump and the Towers fall from a classroom window were scarred for life. The kids who didn’t know if their mom or dad was alive lived in agony.

The only thing that offered relief was the sheer notion that we were a united America. If only that lasted until now. For a short time in New York and Jersey, people were very kind to one another. People weren't rude to each other. It was like nothing we'd ever seen before.

But that day—those incredible experiences—that's something I can never forget. What a better world we'd be if people kept that spirit going. But it didn’t happen.

Still, seven years later, it's clear many have forgotten that day. They’ve forgotten the people who jumped 100-plus stories to their deaths. They've forgotten the 343 firefighters who died. They've forgotten the 2,800-plus dead. They've forgotten almost everything about that day.

But I haven’t. I can't. Having been so close, it's impossible to forget any facet of that day.

As we approach the 7th anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001, I ask, as I have at every other anniversary of this day, for people to take some time to recall the events that transpired. I ask that if you believe in a higher power, you offer up some kind of prayer for the victims.

Sept. 11, 2001 is a day no one should ever forget. It's a day you and I will remember for the rest of our lives. It's our very own version of JFK's assassination.

And wouldn't every one of us give just about anything to have never had a day like Sept. 11, 2001? I know I would—but that is impossible.

And because of it, I will always remember the sacrifices made by countless brave men and women that day.

Will you?

Part of my childhood ended yesterday when Dog got out

Yesterday, part of my childhood died.

On a September day in 1989, like may others who fell quickly in love with sports radio, I was tuned into WFAN to listen to the first-ever Mike & The Mad Dog program. I had usually tuned into the Fan at that time slot because I always enjoyed Mike Francesa and Chris Russo's predecessor, Pete Franklin. But even when Pete unceremoniously left WFAN, I was still going to listen after school—to Mike, who had been in an earlier timeslot with Eddie Coleman, and Mad Dog, who was a weekend favorite of everyone who listened to the station.

So yesterday morning, when I received a text message from a buddy of mine that it was official that Mike and Chris were no more, I honestly felt like part of my childhood died. From age 14 to now 33, Mike and Chris were always a part of my life—they were always part of my daily routine. I even made a habit of listening to them when I lived in Newport, R.I., though the signal wasn't as good. 

Still—from 9th grade to this very day, two people came into my living room, car, bathroom ... wherever. They were always on. 

I have been critical of Mike often. Heck, even yesterday, as people called to say their farewells to Chris, Francesa took time to demonstrate his usual arrogance, by adamantly assuring us there would be no new partner for him on the radio. But that was inconsequential.

The bottom line is that something that had been a staple of this area for a few weeks short of 19 years was gone—never to return.

It wasn't hard to see Mike and Chris were not the same pair they once were earlier this year, when it was obvious they were angry with each other. That "chat" about whether the Yankees needed a new stadium [see Youtube] demonstrated a lot of anger on both their parts. 

It wasn't hard to see they weren't the same when Neil Best wrote a story about information he knew about Chris leaving.

It wasn't hard to see they weren't the same when in the months leading up to their 19th anniversary, there was little talk about them entering their 20th season.

Yes, it was rather easy to see they were on a path to different places. And boy did it come sooner than most could have dreamed. And, as usual, CBS Radio did a horrendous job by enforcing its rule that an outgoing personality—ask Don Imus about this—doesn't get a last horrah show. Instead, Chris spent seven minutes or so on the air with Mike—from a telephone at his place {or hotel ... wherever it is he's staying] on the Jersey Shore.

Months ago, I took a shot in the dark and wrote a column on this site saying I thought the jingles would have to be changed. But I honestly thought that was because of Mike's arrogance—and I really thought he'd have been the one to go. Instead, it's Chris.

Like many fans of the show, I'll miss the show. I'll miss the malaprops Chris speaks on a regular basis. I'll miss Dog poking fun of the Yankees. I'll miss Mike and Chris screaming at each other. 

I'll miss something that was more a part of my life than almost anything else I can think of. In those 19 years, friends came and go. Relatives died. Friends moved away. Hell, I even lost my cat, Metsy, who was named after—well you get the idea.

But now comes the fun part: Watching whether Mike can handle this show alone. Ask me, the answer is no way in hell. But there's a lot of talent out there—and without writing it, it doesn't take a brilliant person to know who I'd like to see paired up with Mike come September or sometime thereafter. I can hope.

But until that time, I say thank you to Mike and Chris for together being a part of my life for nearly two decades. You set the standard by which every sports talk radio host should follow. You set the format that truly works—and that fans demand. Good luck, Chris Russo. Wherever you go, you will do well.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand WFAN will never, ever be the same without you.

Be sure to post comments about Mike and Dog's split. Have a favorite moment? A favorite Chris Malaprop?  Mine is when Chris would call "Mets Extra With Howie Rose," Mets and Howe Extra....mmmmmmmMets Extra and Howie Rose...

Shenandoah Pa. could easily be Kearny

It could very well have been Kearny. A small town. A once bustling economic structure. A loss of a lot of tax money when plants closed. A town once dominated by Irish and Scottish immigrants now with many Latino (and Portuguese-speaking) people.

Enter Shenandoah, Pa., a small town (around 6,000 residents) where there were once a score of available jobs. It's a place where there once was a lot of white faces—but where there are now many more faces from several Spanish-speaking countries, including Mexico, which plays an important role in this place.

Save for the gap in population (there are 40,000 or so in Kearny), Shenandoah and Kearny share a lot of similarities. Once economic hotspots, neither is exactly a perfect picture for economic bliss.

In Shenandoah, like Kearny, the jump in Latino residents is easily noticeable. The jump in Shenandoah was 65 percent since the 2000 census.

Kearny has seen a considerable jump in Latino residents, too.

So in a way, this little Pennsylvania town is a lot like Kearny in many ways. And unfortunately, Kearny is a lot like Shenandoah for the wrong reasons too—the lack of appreciation by many for the diversity of the townsfolk.

Yet we can only hope Kearny doesn’t completely follow in this town's footsteps, because what happened there recently is almost impossible to fathom. It's almost incomprehensible that in 2008, something out the history books could happen again. But it did—and this little town is reeling.

The big story: A Mexican immigrant, who was here illegally, were beaten to death, allegedly by four teenagers who were members of the local varsity football team. Though he survived his attack initially, Luis Ramirez eventually died of his injuries these four supposedly inflicted on him. Let's not focus on the perpetrators in this case though—instead, let's look at the incident itself.

A man, who granted was not supposed to be in this country, was savagely beaten. He was beaten badly enough that it killed him. And according to numerous published reports, he was killed because he was an immigrant—and because he wasn't like the faces that once ruled the land in Shenandoah. Others say racism is rampant in this neck of the woods. Some, conversely, say we should turn our attention to other matters, because racism isn't found there.

Yet whatever the case may be, one thing is absolutely certain: A man died, he'll never roam this earth again and four teens—including one being treated by the juvenile justice system—stand accused of the beating.

The video on CBS.com (which I'll embed below this post) shows some white kids saying the underrepresented people (a much nicer word for 'minority') have caused there to be more trouble. They claim the circumstances would be different if the victim has been white and not of Mexican descent.

Quite frankly, I'd love to know: What the hell does it matter what this man's ethnicity was? What the hell cares if there's a belief that the guy's getting more attention that if he had been white? What kind of kids are living in this community?

Maybe more importantly, what are these parents teaching their kids? What are these schools teaching these kids about diversity, uniqueness, character? What are they teaching these kids about tolerance?

Ask me, it seems like they're not doing a damn thing.

And because they didn't do anything, a man is dead, four teens are accused of killing him—and this little town will never be the same.

Shenandoah is a microcosm of many small towns, where not all the people respect others for who they are, and not for the color of their skin. Given what I've seen, this could just as well be Kearny, N.J., where there are still many people who don’t appreciate the diverse cultures right before their very eyes.

This is, of course, not to say there's anyone in Kearny who would kill someone just because he's Mexican. But it does mean there are people here who still just don't get it.

If anything good comes out of this story, it will be that people who are less tolerant than others might just get a better sense that diversity, in its purest form, is not a bad thing. There have been many whites caught committing crimes—why else would there have been a police department in town up to now?

I can only hope something good comes of all of this.

I won't be holding my breath waiting.

'Boys from Baghdad High' is a riveting HBO documentary worth sitting down to watch

The other night, I had little to do. So, as I do every time I'm bored, I searched my digital cable lineup for something to watch. Though it wasn't on when I'd be awake, I saw something called "The Boys from Baghdad High." It was a documentary about four teenagers — all living in the war zone of Iraq, and all of whom were entering their senior year of high school — who were given video cameras to document their school year.

All four of the teens knew each other, though some were better friends with others. They weren't a traveling group of friends, so to speak.

Three were Muslim and one was Christian. They Muslims were from different sects. And yet, all four went to school with each other, and without issues — hardly the way things were in their very surroundings.

When all was said and done, the producers of the show took some 300 hours worth of footage and packed it into a 90-minute documentary that was some of the most riveting television that I've ever seen outside of "24" and "ER." 

Perhaps it was the sheer reality that what was on the screen was as real as it gets. Perhaps it's the notion that I can relate to the lives of teenagers having spent years as a teacher. Perhaps it's the shocking value of seeing these kids struggle as teens do with teen issues — girls, academics, family, growing up — all as guns were being used, as explosions were happening, as buildings burned, right in their very own neighborhoods.

The documentary brought to life the War in Iraq — a war we often only see in 30-second sound bites on the news or on cable. It brought to life the harsh reality that kids, just like the kids we know in this country, struggle with day-to-day issues. But unlike their American counterparts, they've got to deal with the horrors of war. They've got to worry about getting shot at and killed as they drive from their homes to school. They've got to worry about whether they'll be able to keep the electricity running through the night with their power generators, since electricity is staggered throughout Iraq.

Yes, the Iraqi teens are a lot like American teens. They wear ripped Abercrombie jeans. They listen to hip-hop. They like to use the Internet. They worry about whether they'll do well enough to go on to university. But seeing the side shows they deal with — seeing their incredible struggle to survive — demonstrates just how difficult this war is ... how difficult life in Iraq is ... how different things are for the teens of the United States of America.

"Boys from Baghdad High" is absolutely worth a watch. If you have onDemand and HBO, you can watch the program anytime through August. Check listings for other air times. 

If you watch the documentary, be forewarned: some of the scenes are hard to fathom. One thing's for sure though — if you don't come away after watching the show with a better appreciation for what we have here in America, then nothing, I repeat, nothing, will ever affect you in any way.

Edwards: Not the first, hardly the last

I am hardy ashamed to admit that I am a liberal. Call me whatever you want. You can use all the Rush Limbaugh-Sean Hannity adjectives to describe me if you'd like — I've heard them all hurled at me at one point or another. Yet the liberal in me gets a little less liberal anytime I hear about a politician who has had an "incident" involving some sort of an extra-marital affair.

This afternoon, I sat in my office, waiting for the Internet to come back. It had been out for hours, starting at the beginning of the day. As the day progressed, we had CNN on in the background, as per usual. Out of nowhere, it happened: CNN announced that John Edwards, whose wife was stricken with cancer, admitted to having an affair with a woman who had been his campaign Web site's documentarian. 

It took my breath away.

This wasn't supposed to be something John Edwards did. He's the guy who enjoys going to Louisiana to help rebuild neighborhoods hit hard by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. He's the guy who kept on telling us how he was the poor son of a mill worker who made it big. This John Edwards would never, ever have an affair.

Yet again, another big-name politico in yet another sexual tryst. Add him to the list: JFK, Bill Clinton, Jim McGreevey, Newt Gingrich, Eliot Spitzer, David Paterson, Larry Craig ... I could go on forever here.

Sometimes, I just wonder what goes on in the mind of these politicians. Is it the power? Is it arrogance? Is it that their wives are that unsatisfactory? Is it a combo of all these ideas and more?

Whatever the reason is for these extra-marital affairs, it's all sickening. But it's even more sickening because so often, the very politicians who are sleeping away from home are the very same ones who keep on telling us how important it is to protect "the (so-called) sanctity of marriage."

What, in these marriages, is sacred? You'd almost think based on what we hear from the far right that marriage, as it is right now, is perfect. 

Hardly.

Instead, it's a complete mess. And it's an atrocious shame. 

John Edwards is just another name to add to a list that sadly will continue to grow. He's not the last politician we'll hear of who cheated on his wife, lied about it — and then got caught by the media. In this world, it seems more and more that it's almost acceptable for one spouse to cheat on the other.

And yet, the biggest issue — even bigger than the infidelity itself — is the sanctity of marriage. 

In so many ways, it's really broken. And it's going to take more than a Constitutional amendment to fix it.

Send feedback by clicking here.

Savage's autism comments cross the line

The other day, I received an e-mail from a friend of mine who read my short call for Michael Savage to be yanked off the air for his comments about autism. He called the affliction “a fraud.” He also made some other disparaging remarks about autism — and you can hear those in the video embedded on this site.

The e-mail I received was rather interesting, because it aptly pointed out my once-strong fervor for getting Don Imus back on the air after the “nappy-headed hos” comments — and it pointed out my relationship to Sid Rosenberg. We all know that Sid has had his moments, in the past, with remarks that caused a stir.

With that in mind, I was asked how, given my defense of Mr. Rosenberg over the years, I could call for Savage’s head since he was simply exercising his First Amendment rights.

And as I’ve said over and over during the course of my career — there is a huge difference between expressing one’s opinion and expressing something that is false as fact.

In the case of Savage, saying autism is “a fraud” is the equivalent of screaming fire in a movie theater that isn’t really on fire. Here’s how.

Take these examples. If someone wrote in a column “Kevin Canessa is a fat man,” though the words aren’t exactly nice, they’re true. Anyone in this country can make that statement. It’s irrefutable fact. On the same level, if someone said “Kevin Canessa held up a bank in Miami over the weekend,” this statement, which is absolutely false, is easily proven untrue — and as such, the writer or speaker of said comment would be open for a slander or libel lawsuit.

From these two examples, it should be much clearer there is a huge difference between expressing one’s opinion and expressing something controversial that is false.

Let’s get back to autism for a moment.

If, on his show, Mr. Savage made the following comment, he’d be clear of much criticism: “People who have autistic children should keep their kids in special schools — and they should refrain from mainstreaming them.” Sure, it’s a bit of a controversial comment to make — just ask anyone who has a child (or grandchild) who is autistic.

On the other hand, when Savage says autism is “a fraud,” he is, in essence, attempting to get his audience to believe there is no such thing as autism — and that those kids who have it are really “brats who act up and whose parents have lost control of them.”

Again — ask any parent of an autistic child, and they’ll be able to tell you that autism is no fraud. Instead, it’s a serious problem that needs more funding and more research.

The First Amendment does not, therefore, protect Savage’s words because he is taking a statement that is false and he’s proposing it as fact. Anyone with a minute knowledge of autism knows it’s not a fraud — and that Savage has done a great injustice the any child with autism, to any family that deals with autism on a daily basis.

And let’s face it, folks. With Savage, it’s a lot more than just this one statement. This is the same guy who was canned by MSNBC for telling a caller he hoped he “died of AIDS.” The guy is a loose canon — and he’s a really disturbed man. He’s in a class by himself, and it’s extremely unfair to compare him with the likes of Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh. Though I often (not always) disagree with the aforementioned two, they’re both true broadcasting professionals and geniuses. Savage is a man who has no problem insulting the defenseless — a man who has no problem spewing great hatred for people who are remotely different than he is.

There’s a huge difference between being protected by the First Amendment and expressing an opinion. I hope this makes a little sense.

And I hope, now more than ever, that in a few days, we get news that its distributor has yanked Savage Nation off the air.

Then, on only then, will there be justice.

And that moment of justice can come not a moment too soon.

Hodgepodge on sports

For the newest edition of The Canessa Corner, I thought I'd take a hodgepodge look at the Tri-State Area sports situation. So here it goes.

• You've got to really feel for Willie Randolph. Unquestionably, he's got to be aware of what his former team is doing of late — and that includes a 9-game winning streak, and pulling to within .5 of Philadelphia. When he was fired, the Mets were 5.5 behind Philly.

I often wonder what a fired manager must think when his once-struggling team goes on to a streak like this — one that should propel the Mets to playoff birth.

• With that said, you've got to love with Jerry Manuel is doing with this team. He rewards good, solid play with starts, he's got a great command of the media and he just seems to have brought a new-found fun to Shea, something that wasn't there with Willie.

Every post-game press conference seems to have part baseball, part stand-up routine. And considering how banal Willie was, this is a refreshing change for most Mets' fans.

• The New York Rangers appeared, at the end of last season, to be just a piece or two away from being a serious contender for The Stanley Cup. As a New Jersey Devils fan, having had to deal with watching Sean Avery pestering Martin Brodeur was painful. Which is why I just can't understand how the Rangers could allow Avery to go to Dallas.

Devils fans once had a love affair with the pesky Claude Lemieux. And we knew what a menace he could be. Avery was a modern-day version of Lemieux — and any chance a team has to have a player like that should be capitalized on. But for some reason, the Rangers chose to let Avery walk.

It just doesn't make sense — and it sets the Rangers back, coupled with the loss of Jaromir Jagr.

• The Devils, meanwhile, continue to show they're serious about winning another Cup for their 12,309 fans (I'm one of them). Bringing back Bobby Holik, old as he is, will help, and Brian Rolston's 30 or so goals will bring much needed offense to a team that struggled to score so often.

Perhaps most intriguing with the Devils is a rumor they're pursuing Sergei Fedorov. This would be a tremendous move if Lou Lamoriello can fit him in under the salary cap — and it's one that could help the Devils give the Penguins and Canadiens a serious Eastern Conference challenge.

• I never liked the Yankees, but there are some Yankees who I've always admired and respected. One was Bobby Ray Murcer, whose death this weekend was bothersome. When you listened to him on TV or doing Old Timers Day, didn't you just get the feeling he was speaking directly to you? He was like an uncle you always wish you had.

What a tremendous loss this is. Rest in Peace, Bobby. God bless you and your family.

• If you've listened to a Mets' game on WFAN, don't you get the feeling Howie Rose can't stand Wayne Hagin? Of course, Hagin is Rose's third broadcasting partner in four years, but there's something about Hagin that seems to really piss Howie off.

In Sunday's game, when a foul ball was heading to the radio booth, Rose tried to get out of the way, but couldn't, because Hagin apparently didn't move far enough. So, instead, Howie went the other direction, only to meet a wall.

"I was trying to get out of the way but someone didn't budge," Rose said on the air. "The wall doesn't give that much, Wayne. I was trying to get out of the way, but someone else wasn't."

It's not the first time he's gotten testy with Hagin. And it probably won't be the last.

Of course, Hagin's OK as a broadcaster, but when compared with Gary Cohen and Tom McCarthy — there really isn't a comparison. Hagin's very slow in his delivery and shows very little emotion. Sometimes, his home run calls are so slow that a runner is likely between second and third before he says "home run."

Makes you long for the days of Bob Murphy, Cohen and Gary Thorne.

• Speaking of announcers: Man John Sterling and Suzyn Waldman irritate me. The two absolutely ripped the Mets for the way they treated former Yankee Willie Randolph. Of course, neither of the two homers peeped a word after the Yankees screwed Joe Torre after winning for World Series and after making the playoffs in every year of his tenure.

I don't mind them being critical of the Mets, but if they're not going to rip their own team for the crappy way they treated Torre — then they'd be better off keeping their annoying mouths shut.

Then again, this is the same duo who thought it was "dramatic" that the Yanks brought Roger Clemens back last year for one of the team's all-time greatest busts.

• That's all for now. Enjoy the week, everyone — and enjoy the All Star Game.

I'm back after a little hiatus

It's been a while since I've blogged forcefully (I've been very backed up the last few weeks, and quite frankly, I needed a little break after a long stretch without much of a break). But I am back now, and I thought I'd start off with a hodgepodge Corner, something I haven't done in a while.

So, here it goes.

• MSNBC did a deplorable job this morning covering the death of journalist and former White House Press Secretary Tony Snow. When NBC's Tim Russert died, MSNBC did itself a big disservice by blanket covering his death. And this, of course, is not to say Russert didn't deserve the coverage that he got. Because he was a true giant in the media and an even greater human being. But in cases like this, when someone like Snow, similar in age, similar in career, dies, it's next to impossible for the coverage to be fair.

MSNBC barely covered Snow's death and conversely, it covered Russert's passing for days on end — non-stop.

As someone in the mainstream media wrote days after Russert died, it is possible to overdo coverage of the death of someone important. And in Snow's case, it is certainly possible to under cover all the same.

• Yesterday, I had a chance to ride the NJ Transit Light Rail for the first time. I went from Bayonne to the Newport Centre Mall in Jersey City. Talk about a tale of two cities.

The first leg of the journey passes through much of the Greenville Section of Jersey City — and the second leg through Downtown Jersey City. It's hard to believe it's the same Jersey City — it seems like two different worlds. The start of the journey takes place in a depressed Greenville neighborhood, only to end up in the privileged Downtown, with high-end, high-priced posh apartments and office buildings.

I still have never understood how mayors of Jersey City have allowed so much attention to be paid to Downtown, while completely neglecting other parts of the city (yes, I mean Jerramiah Healy, Glenn Cunningham, Bret Schundler and Jerry McCann).

Still, it ought to be interesting to see how the city's new mayor (there's an election in 2009 and with any luck, Healy will be packing his bags) handles these other neighborhoods.

• I read this week's editorial in The Observer. Can anyone explain it to me?

• Speaking of The Observer, I found it interesting Publisher Lisa Pezzolla was the focus of a story in The Kearny Journal this week. Hey Jon Chundak, are you reading this? Remember what happened when you were the focus of a Kearny Journal story? Think maybe she'll pull her own column now?

• Jersey City's Downtown Councilman Steven Fulop has successfully gotten two ballot initiatives on the November ballot for Jersey City. One is a pay-to-play type deal and the other would bar sitting members of the Jersey City Council from being employed publicly. This writer is extremely pleased with Fulop's initiatives — and we'll have much more on this first victory for Fulop later on this coming week. Way to go, Steve.

• Bret Schundler is planning a run for Jersey City's Mayor in 2009. Can you believe he actually thinks he could win again? A two-time loser for governor, Schundler has as good a chance at winning the mayoralty as Jerry McCann has at becoming Jerry Healy's best friend.

• Only East Newark has received extraordinary aid from the Department of Community Affairs for the new fiscal year. This is terrible news for the people of Kearny. Get ready for another tax increse, Kearny residents. (Keep in mind, however, that it won't be as bad as last year's. Then again, we're just a year away from the next Kearny mayoral election — so of course the increase isn't as harsh. Doesn't it always happen this way)?

• Speaking of the race for Kearny's mayor — 2009 should be one of the more intense campaigns. Al Santos, from all indications, will seek another four-year term. Yet 2009 should be a lot different for Al. Chances are good there will be a host of candidates running against him, given Kearny's tax situaion and a plethora of other reasons. It wouldn't be all that shocking of there were people in his own Democratic Party who decided on a run. Wonder if Jim Mangin is reading?

• That's all for now. Enjoy the rest of the weekend and remember: There are just 191 days until the Bush family vacates the White House once and for all! If that's not reason enough to celebrate, what is?

Helms is hardly a big loss for the country

Not even the Fourth of July could stop me from writing about this one.

Former U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., died today. He was 86.

In his obituary, the Associated Press, which often prepares these kinds of obits well in advance of the actual death, wrote of Helms' undying conservatism, his hatred of gays and lesbians, his utter disregard for people with AIDS, his segregationalist leanings and his campaigning for office in the 1990s which made it abundantly clear he was still a racist.

Here were a few of the quotes from Helms that really struck me.

In 1993, then President Bill Clinton was looking to appoint a lesbian to the position of Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Based solely on the woman's sexual orientation, Helms said: "I’m not going to put a lesbian in a position like that. If you want to call me a bigot, fine.”

I'd say bigot is more than appropriate a name to call Helms based on this comment.

A few years ago, after Helms wrote a book on his career as a politician, he wrote the following an e-mail to a reporter: “My legacy will be up to others to describe."

Indeed it will.

Today, the very day this 86-year-old man leaves this earth for the next life, there is just too much to say about Helms, his career and his policies, for a blog entry such as this. And yet, on the very same day conservative talk show host Mark Levin told Gen. Wesley Clark to "go to hell," I can't help but wonder: If Clark is deserving of hell, isn't Helms on his way there right now?

This man was as divisive as anyone who has ever called the United States of America home. His hatred for "non-traditional" people as he'd call them — gays, lesbians, blacks, Hispanics, you name it — was as despicable as humanly possible. His disregard for AIDS was almost as bad as Ronald Reagan's was in the early '80s. His desire to keep schools segregated was unmatched. His disdain for African-Americans was clear even as late as 1996.

And yet there are some in this country, including Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ken., who praised Helms as a champion.

Here's what McConnell said.

“Today we lost a Senator whose stature in Congress had few equals. Senator Jesse Helms was a leading voice and courageous champion for the many causes he believed in.”

A leading voice? A champion?

No doubt, McConnell was right about one thing: Important to Helms were "the many causes he believed in." But a champion? A leading voice? What would be so leading about spewing hatred for six terms — 36 or so years in the United States Senate?

Helms indeed will be a man remembered by the masses. Yet what he'll be remembered for are all the wrong reasons. Helms was a man who I'd bet would have owned a slave if he had had the chance. He probably would have had gays and lesbians shipped off to some deserted island if he had the chance.

Thankfully, the progression of America outweighed Helms' senatorial influence.

Today, indeed, the United States lost one of its former leaders.

We are hardly a better nation because of that leadership.

And to once again use the words of conservative talk show host Mark Levin, "it'll be hell" for Helms. And if you're a believer, this notion is absolutely undeniable.

And depending on your beliefs, unbeatable, as well.

Thank heavens for David Paterson

The day he was sworn in as New York's governor, I immediately realized there was something very special about David A. Paterson. Despite his limitations with vision, he has an incredible sense of humor — and an incredible sense of honor to be serving as the state's governor.

So when we learned this week the World Trade Center rebuilding project was moving along at a snail's pace — you'd have to be living in a cave not to realize this though — and when he demanded answers as to why it was taking so long, and when he demanded to know how long it was really going to take and cost, I wasn't the least bit surprised.

You see, David Paterson isn't like his predecessor. He's not like Gov. Jon S. Corzine. He's not like Jim McGreevey. He's not like the weasel we now know as George Pataki. No, folks, he's not like any of these men. Because he's shown, in a small period of time, what it means to be a true leader, what it means to have honor, what it means to be truthful with the people — something none of the aforementioned men know at all.

Paterson was disgusted to learn the project at Ground Zero is well behind schedule and above budget. And yet, unlike Pataki and company, instead of giving a half-ass excuse, instead of standing before a podium making excuses for the builders, the Port Authority and any others responsible for this mess, Paterson stood up, said this is unacceptable — and demanded ... that's right folks, demanded ... accountability.

For the first time in memory, a sitting governor demanded to know how it's possible this happened. He demanded to know how Pataki allowed all of this bureaucratic crap to transpire for years.

And I don't know if there's anything more refreshing than this from a political standpoint.

It's nauseating to think that when the United States of America pauses to remember the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on Sept. 11, 2011, there won't be a permanent memorial built to recall the lives tragically lost that awful day.

And David Paterson isn't pleased.

He shouldn't be.

Earlier today, I spoke with my dear friend and colleague on this site, Sean McDonald. He told me of his journey to Manhattan today and the time he spent, in transit, near Ground Zero. He, too, couldn't believe what he saw. Nor could he believe what he heard.

While he stood looking at the site, he noticed a group of tourists who clearly didn't know what was going on with the site. He says the mom in the group said: "Wonder when they'll rebuild here?"

Sean's response to me was priceless. He said: "You know, I wish George Pataki was standing somewhere close by. I would have gone up to the family and told them to ask him that very same question."

Why?

Because Pataki truly and apparently could care less — nor did he ever care — about what happens at the World Trade Center. If he did, would we be in this mess right now? Would we be struck with the realization it'll be perhaps 11, 12, 13, 14 years after the attacks before a memorial is built? What does Pataki care? He's getting his $10K a speech on the speaking tour.

Sean and I also discussed what it's like to lose a relative. Both of us have had too much experience with these things. It hit me: Imagine if any of us had lost a relative, and the cemetery caretaker told us we'd have to wait 13 years before we were able to put up a headstone.

We wouldn't have it.

Yet George Pataki, for the hundreds of people whose remains were never identified, and whose final resting place is Ground Zero, allowed something similar to happen by ensuring it'd be more than a decade before a memorial was built at the site.

Disgraceful, George. Disgraceful. How can you look at yourself in a mirror and be proud of anything good you accomplished as New York's governor? Because as good as the good things were, this one bad element trumps it all — and I mean everything.

Yet in the same breath, it's comforting to know we've got someone who truly does care in David Paterson.

Perhaps the saddest part of all of this is that it took a governor who made it into office by fate.

Perhaps we'll learn from the mistakes of the likes of George Pataki, and do whatever it takes never to elect him — or anyone like him — to public office ever again.

Then, folks, and only then, will any kind of justice be served.

I defy you to tell me — or the relatives of a 9/11 victim — otherwise.

Taking much longer than expected at Ground Zero

The Canessa Corner
By Kevin Canessa Jr.

This morning, when I woke up, my routine was no different than usual. I made a pot of coffee, and sat down at the computer to read the morning news.

As I normally do, I went to the New York Post's Web site as one of my first stops. And when I saw the headline I am about to discuss, it instantly made me sick to my stomach — literally. The headline read: "MASSIVE WTC COST OVERRUNS LOOK GRIM." The headline was enough, but the story itself was extremely painful to read. And I can only wonder what the people who directly lost someone Sept. 11, 2001 at the World Trade Center must think in reading such an incredulous, yet brilliantly presented story.

The piece, written by New York State Editor Fredric Dicker, explains that the cost of rebuilding at Ground Zero will far surpass the originally estimated costs. But worse, the story reveals what we all sort of already knew: The rebuilding project is way off schedule, and it may be many years past the originally projected 2012 completion date before everything is said and done at the site of our nation's worst-ever terrorist attack.

Here are some absolutely alarming new projections, courtesy of The Post:

• The massive transit hub, originally slated to open last year, may be scrapped completely.

• The Freedom Tower, scheduled for a 2011 opening, may be pushed back to 2013.

• Towers 2, 3, and 4, scheduled for a 2012 opening, have been pushed back "months," according to The Post.

• The 9/11-World Trade Center Museum, slated for a 2009 completion, may not be done until 2013 or 2014.

• And finally, and perhaps most disturbing, the planned Sept. 11 Memorial, scheduled for a 2009 completion, may not be ready until 2011.

On this very same Web site, I have lamented, over and over, about how Ground Zero, a place of such great horror, a place of final rest for thousands of Americans and people of many nations, is void, to this day, of a remembrance or memorial to honor those who died that day in 2001. It is difficult to even walk anywhere near Ground Zero, because a once-sacred place is now being treated solely as a pit and a construction site.

Those who died there — the innocent office workers, the cops, the firefighters, the EMTs, these heroic people who woke up one September morning in 2001 — are now an afterthought. And though we've invaded two nations since the attacks of that fateful day, nothing, nothing at all, recalls the lives that were lost. There's barely a plaque. The original names that donned the perimeter of the site exist no more, thanks to construction. The fences around the site close off this once-sacred place from the view of the people who might want to come there to remember their lost relative.

And now, June 29, 2008, we learn that in all probability, it will be 10 years after the actual attacks before a long-overdue and fitting memorial to the victims is complete and ready to accommodate visitors.

Is this even possible?

We are the United States of America. How on God's great earth could it take 10 years — 3,650 days or so — before a memorial is built? After all, it only took a few months to rebuild the Pentagon. There's a memorial there.

There's some semblance of a memorial in Shanksville, Pa.

Yet in New York, the site of the largest number of casualties, there isn't a thing to remember the victims. Nothing. Absolutely nothing at all.

A lot of the blame here, according to the Post, belongs with former New York Govs. Eliot Spitzer and, moreso, George Pataki.

Pataki did a terrible job ensuring the pace of the project moved along adequately.

How terribly sad this is.

In 2001, when America's Mayor Rudy Giuliani gave us all comfort after the attacks, always by his side was Pataki. When Pataki spoke, you felt a sense that he cared. You felt a sense he, too, was in pain over the loss of so many people.

And yet, we now know he allowed bureaucracy to slow this rebuilding project down to a snail's pace.

In my lifetime, nothing comes close to being more horrendous than the actual attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. But this new news comes very close. Pataki dropped the ball here like no one else ever has for just about any reason.

And the next time you're around or near Ground Zero, stop for just a second. Take a long, hard look at the site where two majestic Towers once stood. Then ask yourself: "How is it possible that seven years after the attacks, there has barely been an inch of progress?"

Then think George Pataki. And then, continue to wonder. Because no answer, no reason, no explanation would or could ever be good enough to explain why there's still no memorial and still very little progress — and how it is possible that it will be 10 long years after the attacks before a memorial is built. Just think of how many who survived the attacks — or many who are surviving relatives — might never, ever get to see the memorial for a plethora of reasons.

For that, Pataki should always be remembered as the governor who said he would — be who never, ever did.

That, my friends, is one of the biggest disgraces in our lifetime.

Keeping it in context: It's a disgrace what the mainstream media does to the spoken word

For crying out loud, America: Can anyone say anything without it being taken out of context?

I had planned not to address this situation, but because it goes well beyond the arena of Don Imus, I feel I have no other choice.

Today, in a discussion with sports reporter Warner Wolf about Pacman Jones, Imus asked Wolf what color Jones was. Wolf responded: "African-American."

On the surface, it might seem like Imus was getting himself into trouble again, right?

Wrong.

What many media outlets — including MSNBC, Drudge, CNN, Sports Illustrated, ESPN and many others — failed to mention when they reported this non-story today was that Imus had been discussing the notion that the police often give more trouble to African-Americans because their skin color is black.

To illustrate his point, Imus asked Wolf what Jones' skin color was.

When Wolf responded, Imus said: "There you go. Now we know."

Again, when read out of context, it seems pretty bad.

But it's not.

It's not because, as usual, two-bit weasels in the mainstream media, who for some reason don't like Imus, want to see the man fail. And what better way to see him fail than to take legitimate comments and blow them out of proportion and without context.

This is downright sickening, folks. Sickening.

I haven't been this angry about a news story since last April. But this one is worse, because this time, Imus was making a point about bigotry and discrimination in this country — something he does not like — and the media took it, ran with it, and made issue out of a conversation that was meant to be illustrative about the hardships many African-Americans experience on a daily basis.

Today, I spent a lot of time reading the Imus-related blogs: Imus Truth, Imus Times and Not Another Imus Blog. Wholeheartedly, the posters are saying they're tired of this kind of treatment Imus is getting.

I concur.

Yet it goes well beyond Imus.

The hypocrisy is surreal, first of all — and the irresponsible nature of the mainstream media is even worse.

It makes me wonder why anyone, anywhere, would ever make a statement in public. I could make a statement "I hate black shoes," and the media could simply cut out the word shoes, and quote me as saying "I hate blacks."

This is precisely what is happening to Imus — and it's happening to people everywhere, constantly, and without justification or the opportunity to explain and defend.

Folks, today, Imus made a statement that is beyond true. And because he has a history — a skewed one at that — of making comments that might be considered offensive, the media tried to crucify him today.

If they win, I will officially give up any hope of anyone getting a fair chance in any realm. If they win, it'll be all based on lies and untruths.

And while I am at it: Again, would someone please tell me how it's possible the Associated Press could run to the buffoon and scum of the earth Al Sharpton to ask him for a comment on Imus today, when Sharpton is himself currently under investigation more than just about any other living American? Can someone please tell me how it is possible that the self-professed, self-loving bigot himself is even allowed to appear in the newspaper for reasons other than his own transgressions?

Can someone please tell me who died and left Al Sharpton the authority on mistakes made by media members, when Sharpton himself has made more unpublished and more forgiven mistakes than anyone to live in New York City in the modern era?

Sometimes, it's just an embarrassment to be considered a member of the media when the likes of the AP, MSNBC and others use as a principal source a man who has no business running a hotdog stand, let alone a so-called "National Action Network."

I wonder if things like this happen in Canada? I wonder if things like this happen in England?

Somehow I doubt it.

And boy do I wish the day would come when a man like Sharpton would be laughed at when he spoke — and boy do I wish the day would come when the media would actually pay attention to a person's entire statement, and not just the words that might be misconstrued.

I'll wait and long for those days — but they'll never come. And that's a true shame.

And the biggest shame of them all would be if something happens to Imus over what was said Monday on the air. (Or even worse, if something similar happened to you or me).

Sorry, folks: This time, the media got it wrong. If they're allowed to get away with it this time, it spells the end of journalism as we once knew it.

Then again, when we lost Tim Russert at an all-too-young age last week, journalism already ended as we knew it, did it not?

Addendum:

This is something I posted on a few Web sites tonight. When Imus returned to the airwaves in December, it was noted he's be on a 45-second delay. Bernie McGuirk and Lou Rufino both have access to it. And yet, it wasn't used. Why? Because everyone on the show — including Karith Foster and Tony Powell knew Imus' comment wasn't offensive, since they knew the context under which it was said. This, alone, should be enough to drop this entire mess.

We can only hope...

The pain of watching the newspaper industry die

Did you ever think, back in 1993, that the day might come where the newspaper industry was in serious trouble? Sad to say, it really is — and it won't be long before they're a thing of the past, just like 8-tracks, mimeograph machines and dittos (remember those cold, blue dittos you would sniff when the teacher handed them out) and the Betamax.

Yes, soon, newspapers may just be a thing of the past, something we'll all remember, yet might never again see sitting, well, on the newsstand.

The downward trend in the industry started well before the advent of the Internet, but the Internet has, without question, sped up the process. Think of it like this, if you will. I have spent years in the field of journalism, having been a reporter at two different newspapers and having been an editor at two newspapers. And the truth be told, I haven't purchased a hard copy of a newspaper in years. Quite frankly, there's no need to spend 50¢ or so for a newspaper when, for free, one can get the exact same news, in an online format, for nothing.

It's a shame, in a sense. Holding a newspaper and reading it while on a train or elsewhere was always exciting to me. Whether my own work was inside the newspaper made it even more thrilling. Ask any print journalist, and he or she will tell you that it never gets old reading your own work in print. It's hard to explain.

But is there room for newspapers anymore in this ever-technological world?

It's very hard to tell.

There is a generation, of course, that still relies on newspapers for everyday or weekly news. Many of those people have always relied on newspapers. These same people still send news items into the newsroom to announce their senior citizens meetings and trips to Atlantic City.

But as one goes down the generational line — to Baby Boomers to Generation Xers, we're finding that a newspaper is more of a nuisance to them than a benefit. Heading online to get news is as simple and as good as it gets. And considering the way people's schedules are packed, from sports to clubs to the kids and more, who has time to sit down, even on a Sunday, to read the very same news you knew about a day earlier, because you either saw it online on a blog or because you heard it on the radio or saw it on the television news?

The truth is, people just don't have time for newspapers anymore. If they get one sent home, even for free, taking time to actually read it is even more of a challenge than it's ever been before.

So how are newspapers surviving these days?

Well, in most cases, they're constantly using the Internet to augment their print product. If a newspaper refuses to embrace technology — and there really are some newspapers that haven't done this — they're destined to fold. Why should anyone have to wait until Tuesday to read about something that happened a week earlier? So in essence, the Internet has become a source for day-to-day news.

The newspaper, on the other hand, becomes a place to showcase advertisers — and a place for features, or, news without a timely element. If someone volunteers 30 hours a week and it's newsworthy, it's great for a newspaper, because the story is just as good on Monday as it will be Friday.

But if there's a shooting on the very same day a weekly newspaper is circulated, people are going to grow impatient having to wait to find out what happened. So newspaper editors have no other choice than to take to Cyberspace to disseminate information.

So, is there room for newspapers still? Absolutely. Is the niche as strong as it was in 1920? Absolutely not.

As sad as the notion is, it's one we're all (in this industry) going to have to embrace at one point or another.

There was a time people LOVED to tell others they had a VCR at home. Remember those monstrosities that used to have a top-loader? And yet, many people now have digital video recorders, and the concept is one most have embraced. Can you remember, now, the last time you were in Best Buy and saw someone looking at VCRs?

There was a time people would go for jogs or walks, and they'd have a portable CD player in hand. On comes Apple and the iPod, and the portable CD player becomes a distant memory — as does the CD, really. People have embraced this change.

So in a sense, just as we've accepted the DVR and the iPod, and have acknowledged the end of the VCR and CDs, so, too, comes the time where everyone, not just those in this industry, must admit the newspaper is becoming passe, as well. And it's a medium that may not be around much longer.

So while they're still around, let's enjoy them before they're gone. Because once they're gone, chances are they'll never be back.

And all we'll have to remember them are the faded ones we've got sitting in the basement in the closet.

And when that day comes, it will be sad, indeed. But we'll make it. Because just like every other form of media that has come and gone, we've survived.

And surprisingly, we usually wind up better for it.

A hodgepodge look back at last week

Well it has definitely been an interesting week. From the Mets playing like garbage to John McCain playing himself on "Saturday Night Live," there was something for just about everyone over the last seven days or so. Here's a look back at some of the more interesting events, in a hodgepodge format.

* Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., made an appearance on "Saturday Night Live" last night, the show's 33rd (and hopefully final) season finale. Unfortunately, he wasn't close to being funny, save for one self-deprecating joke about his elder-statesman status.

In years past, the time around Presidential Elections was always so much fun on "SNL." The 2000 spoofs on the Bush-Gore debates were as good as it gets. But the show, once a huge hit, has taken such a downward spiral that it's kind of sad.

* Things appear to be really heating up between the Harrison Police Department and the Harrison Town Council.

The tensions are rising because the mayor, Ray McDonough, won't rule out possible layoffs in the police department as a means for saving money in a rough economic period for the town. Common sense dictates this is political suicide for an politician -- in suggesting trimming police personnel. But you just never know what might happen.

When all is said and done, however, this writer can't envision a single scenario under which cops would be laid off. Perhaps it's just wishful thinking, or applying too much common sense.

But if McDonough does go ahead and call for a slashing to the police department -- one that is already severely undermanned, he may as well write his ticket off the council, because with redevelopment and a potential population boom here, cutting cops would equate to being the worst-possible decision any politician has ever made in West Hudson -- period. Ever.

McDonough is too smart to allow this to happen.

* Speaking of Harrison, did you see the video of the last council meeting? It's amazing what running a meeting can do to a person's personality, as witnessed by Council President James Doran, who ran the get-together in place of the absent McDonough.

* I still hope Bobby Valentine comes back to the Mets, even though he's happily employed as a manager in Japan. The Mets need him -- or someone like him -- to take over for the woefully dreadful and passive Willie Randolph.

* With Carmen Orechio out as a Nutley commissioner, it'll be intriguing to see who is picked to be the next public safety director. Logic dictates it'll be Mauro Tucci getting the nod. Then again, whenever logic enters a discussion, it's time to end said discussion.

Tucci has it made as the parks and recreation commissioner, but someone with council and managerial experience is needed for the public safety post. And Tucci has plenty of experience dealing with large numbers of employees, as a former township manager of Belleville.

* Sticking to Nutley, Joanne Cocchiola's stunning first-place victory margin in last week's municipal election was one of the widest in the township's history. She will remain as mayor, though Tucci privately wanted the post -- and spent a good deal of cash to potentially get there.

Wouldn't be all that surprised to see Cocchiola beginning to look at higher office at some point. Her value as an honest, hardworking politician is rare these days -- and she should be seen by the Essex County Democratic Party as a hot commodity.

* Congrats to Hudson County Exec Tom DeGise for being honored by the Boy Scouts of America. DeGise continues to support worthy causes despite his busy schedule of the county's top official.

* The Jersey Journal continues to report that Sandra Cunningham, the widow of former Jersey City Mayor Glenn Cunningham, is mulling a run for the mayoralty of the county's largest city.

Talk about a dream matchup -- the former mayor's widow against the man who ultimately replaced her husband after his untimely death in 2004.

Though Healy would have the Hudson County Democratic Organization's backing, Sandra would give him a run for his money.

And boy does Healy have a lot of it. At last check, reports indicate he's got a cool mill saved for the 2009 race. And given Healy's PR problems of the last year or so -- Bradley Beach, for instance -- he might just wind up spending all of that and then some to defend his job.

* I learned the other day that Walter Koszyk, a legendary teacher at St. Peter's Prep, who was planning on retiring at the school year's end, collapsed and had a stroke in class the other day. He is recovering in the Jersey City Medical Center.

Walt is the epitome of an English teacher -- and I certainly wish him and pray for a speedy recovery.

It's always worse when things like this happen right around the time of a person's retirement. Here's hoping he'll soon be able to enjoy all that time off.

* Big Brown won the Preakness yesterday after winning the Kentucky Derby a few weeks ago. He's poised to win the Triple Crown in three weeks at the Belmont in Elmont, N.Y. Were I a betting man, I'd stay clear from Big Brown. It's been more than 30 years since we've seen a Triple Crown winner.

* Finally, I was happy to learn my former colleague Celeste Regal was appointed Editor of The Observer. Celeste was a consummate professional, and an absolute delight to work with. Congratulations, Celeste, on your new achievement.

One thing though: My spelling may not be the very best, but be careful of the following words -- it'll help in the long run: athlete, Schaer, Nitin and Lutheran. There are others, too, but these are the ones that stick out right now.

Best of luck along the road!

That's all for now. Enjoy a good week.