Opening Day Radio Special: Cleveland Frowns v. Chuck Booms on Chief Wahoo, to be continued tomorrow morning at 8 on 92.3 The Fan (UPDATE)

by Cleveland Frowns on April 4, 2012

If you missed it this afternoon, a Chief Wahoo debate broke out on Andy Baskin and Jeff Phelps’ show on 92.3 The Fan this afternoon and these gentlemen let me on the air by phone when I called to make a few points on the issue. It was going well for about eleven minutes before 92.3 morning show host Chuck Booms called in to express his disagreement by shouting me down with insults (“idiot,” “moron,” “racist” propagator of “inflammatory liberal make-believe garbage,” etc.), and by misquoting a nebulous 2004 SI “study” that hardly speaks to Wahoo if at all other than to conclude that Wahoo-like imagery is worse than the team names.

You can listen to this afternoon’s segment live here (again, the Booms “debate” starts right after the 11-minute mark).

  • kjn

    My son, we’re pilgrims in an unholy land.

    • Anonymous

      Is it true kjn?
      If Cleveland is really the “unholy land” then I am moving back as soon as possible.
      All hail the unholy!

      • kjn

        was thinking more booms’ show

    • Anonymous

      Call 1-800-RACIST if you need support.

  • https://twitter.com/jimkanicki jimkanicki

    be crisp on this (reposted from other thread):

    here is one of the false premises booms (and many others) use:

    if _x_ isnt offended, why should we be? in fact, is it not arrogant of you to assume offense on the behalf of the aggrieved?

    this premise allows wrong to be relative. as though the outcome of some poll would grant a license to be disrespectful toward a community of people. it does not.

    a. i dont need al sharpton to tell me sambo is demeaning.
    b. i dont need rgrunds to tell me der sturmer is hateful.
    c. i know chief wahoo is the native american equivalent to those caricatures.
    d. thus, i know it is wrong to continue using it.
    q.e.d.

    i worry that jim-crow-cultural-domination arguments will evaporate into the ether with booms. the nuance of societal evolution? lost. (and dont say q.e.d. cripes.)

    keep it simple man. and good luck.

    • Anonymous

      Agreed, and even worse than “If _x_ isn’t offended …” was Boom’s apparent suggestion that “if a majority of Xes aren’t offended …” with his citation of the statistics which necessarily show that a significant portion ARE offended.

  • http://twitter.com/musicman06 Chris Music

    I’ll be out and about tomorrow in my Caucasians shirt. If anyone out there finds me and has proof that he/she owns this shirt as well, a round is on me!

  • Jim

    I just starting listening to Kylie (Kyrie?) and Booms this week solely because Howard Stern is on vacation and they are playing repeats of old shows during the morning commute. I now realize why people complain about sports talk radio in the Cleve.

    I look forward to tuning in tomorrow to hear you get shouted down and drowned out by what some will unfortunately perceive is logic because one talks louder than the other.

  • Anonymous

    Have you picked out a shirt to wear on tomorrow’s show yet?

    • Anonymous

      radio show bro, don’t believe Booms wants Frownie in the studio anyway… things could get testy

      • Anonymous

        I’ll be in the studio for sure.

        • Anonymous

          Frownie,
          I heard that you have the perfect face for radio.

      • Anonymous

        Frowns would likely be the best looking cat on the radio, and I was making a tongue in cheek reference to his Caucasians shirt.

  • Anonymous

    Here’s a good read on the potential #22 selection in this years draft, Brandon Weeden:

    http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/sports/columnists/hyde/blog/2012/04/draft_winds_breaking_down_bran_1.html

    • https://twitter.com/jimkanicki jimkanicki

      more like #37 because who would take him between 22 and 37?
      no one will want him to ‘develop’ for a couple years.

      22 Cleveland
      23 Detroit – bradford
      24 Pittsburgh – ben
      25 Denver – cmon
      26 Houston – schaub
      27 Pats – uhh.
      28 GB – pfft
      29 Baltimore – MAYBE. i could see this, but in 2nd round.
      30 SF – doubtful.
      31 Pats – nope.
      32 Giants – nope.
      33 StLouis – nope.
      34 Indianapolis – hell no.
      35 Minnesota – doubtful.
      36 Tampa – doubtful.
      37 Cleveland

      so, again MKC — why oh why does weeden start becoming 1st round talk? if the browns pass on him, i really can see him going to KC in second round. if KC LOVES HIM they *may* take him in first. but once he gets t0 #22 he’ll be there at 37 unless KC trades up.

      • Anonymous

        Definitely think he’ll still be there at 37. I’ll take his maturity any day.

      • http://twitter.com/cpmack Chris M

        Not trying to be that guy, but Detroit has Stafford (Sam Bradford on the brain?). Otherwise. the rest of your list makes perfect sense and that’s why I like Steven Hill @ #22 and Weeden @ #37

        • https://twitter.com/jimkanicki jimkanicki

          oops.

      • Anonymous

        I know it’s long, but did you read the article? The whole point is that this guy is not going to need a couple years to develop; he is a day 1 starter in the NFL unlike everyone else in this draft not named Luck.

        Anyways, if trades were banned in the NFL draft you may be correct about Weeden’s availability at 37. However, if Tannehill goes in the top ten like everyone is saying (however stupid that may be and I believe that is incredibly stupid), then you can’t feel too confident that someone won’t move up to grab Weeden prior to 37. Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to get Weeden at 37, but I can’t help but think that someone will hit the panic button and move up to grab Weeden so they don’t get stuck with the likes of Kirk Cousins or Brock Osweiller.

        • https://twitter.com/jimkanicki jimkanicki

          that was my point: if you draft a guy who is 29, he needs to start immediately. everyone on that list has a strong incumbent qb, therefore are not candidates to draft weeden.

          ps, cousins will be good nfl qb; osweiler less certain of success, but crazy high ceiling.

          • Anonymous

            Ok, I guess I read it wrong.

            Anyways, you still aren’t accounting for a potential trade up by a QB needy team who will want Weeden to start day 1. I guess I’m just not as confident that in this QB crazed era of the NFL that someone won’t make that move.

            Also, I will have to strongly disagree w/you on Cousins; he might have a chance to be a decent back up but nothing more; he will be overdrafted. Osweiller has no business being in this draft; he needs another 2 years of college football; he will be a major project and should be a mid to late round selection but will be overdrafted as well.

          • https://twitter.com/jimkanicki jimkanicki

            osweiler showed some stones waving back ericsson’s punt team when asu was down by 3 or 4 TDs against boise and had the ball on the boise 40. that play really stayed with me. asu was SUCH a mess; i was very impressed that he could keep an edge when everyone else from ericsson to of course burfict was mailing it in. i bet even osweiler wouldve preferred to stay but with a new coach coming in, maybe a new offense… it wasn’t going to get better for him staying there.

            (where’s riverburns on this?)

            as for cousins, he throws every bit as well as tannehill but instead of gagging in the 2nd half, he actually led some rallies and had some wins.

            i like weeden in 2nd round, if heckert does. if heckert likes cousins/osweiler im ok with that too.

            all that said, i could see heckert getting gamed into trading back up into the late 20s to take weeden because he was afraid someone else will trade up.

          • Anonymous

            I don’t know; Osweiller is a very poor man’s Ryan Mallett and he didn’t go until the third round but people are talking about Osweiller going early 2nd and maybe late 1st??? Seems crazy to me although he is certainly intriguing.

            Cousins on the other hand is someone I simply cannot get behind. I watched a lot of his games and he looked very average at best. I’d take Russell Wilson over Cousins all day long.

          • Anonymous

            Top 5 QB’s in this draft, in order:
            Luck
            Weeden
            RG3
            Wilson

            everyone else

          • Anonymous

            Agreed on your top 3 for sure. Weeden would be the most pro ready QB to come out in quite some time if not for this Luck character. RG3 has a serious uphill battle on his hands.

          • Anonymous

            Thank you Captain,
            I may be correct, however, it may just be the LSD talking.
            How did you know?

          • Anonymous

            Experience.

          • Steve

            Cousins has nothing on Tannehill other than a defense which gave him plenty of chances. Cousins has nowhere near enough athleticism or arm to play at the next level.

        • Anonymous

          Captain,
          Great, the damn scary clowns are after me again.
          jk has me gently losing my panic stricken sobbing and you get me started all over again.
          Rotten clown!
          I forgot about trading up to get Weeden.
          He may be as highly sought after as that Montalberta Hardesty guy.

          • Anonymous

            Umm…ok pal. Maybe lay off the lsd?

      • Believelander

        We could always toss some 6th or 7th round picks to move up a bit if we’re that.worried. Also, how the hell does New England always end up with someone else’s first round pick for some sort of Pats castoff?

      • Anonymous

        I do kind of like the way that lines up, but there are no bargains at QB, so someone will pull the trigger on this early with a trade up I think. The new economics combined with his readiness dictates it. Love to see him be the 37, he’s low mileage.

      • Anonymous

        jk,
        That makes a lot of sense. I was worried that he would be gone by 37.
        Thank you for assuaging that fear.

  • Anonymous

    Booms is brutal to listen to. I enjoy Bull & Fox and Phelps & Baskin….the rest of the 92.3 guys are not very good. Good luck against that blowhard.

    • Anonymous

      Lull on Sports ain’t too shabby

      • Anonymous

        Aside from his hard on for Ryan Tannehill of course.

      • Believelander

        Agreed. I also like Carman because he’s a different sort of solo show host. And because he would crush me like an insect.

  • Anonymous

    PS (re:your baseball preview)—about half the guys on ESPN/ESPN.com are picking the Rays to win it all. Get in with them and cut your Yanks picks out. Old stiffs+huge payroll=another disappointing season in the Bronx.

    • Anonymous

      so glad to see Pineda on DL! (nothing personal Mike), but they traded away a stud in Montero, hopefully for a DUD! Cashman must’ve been distracted by the Stalker on that one..

  • Anonymous

    damn frowns, props for your handling of the first “debate”

    don’t know how you manage to stay nice to people like that. its inspirational.

    i love how his theory is that this is some extreme minority of the native minority that is upset. even if its just 1/3 that opposes it like the SI poll says (which seems unlikely based on the “lumping” factor), that is over 1 million americans that are deeply offended by the racist symbol. so this is not just a few people. yet he acts like this is something made up by white liberal elites.

    moreover, the mere fact that there are protests led by native activists show there is an issue in dispute.

    and i fucking love how native activists don’t count as activists.

    its like how republicans don’t think New Yorkers and Californians count as Americans.

    but you know all this.

  • Anonymous

    re: #4 pick.

    Jamison Hensley (same guy that depressed the shit out of me after missing RG3) over at ESPN has convinced me merits of taking Richards. Hard to be too excited, since a year ago I thought we had a running back…then we sucked…and now our top addition will be to give add a top RB.

    i am confused, though, if we really need a RB. I mean, we did resign Alex Smith.

    nonetheless, i have calmed down from the Tannehill thing. Main reason is that by all indications he will take a few years to realize his alleged potential (due to limited experience in college). And i am passed the point of being willing to wait thru several more years of awfulness.

    Here is the article: http://espn.go.com/blog/afcnorth/post/_/id/45250/no-mystery-browns-should-pick-richardson

  • Anonymous

    OK, everyone take one last gaze at my avatar. With a heavy heart, I’m going to do the unthinkable tonight when I get home.

    • Anonymous

      We’re here for you CTIL. But it better not be Palin.

      • Anonymous

        Why don’t you send me a list of appropriate choices?

        • Anonymous

          No. We liberals have to obey the prime directive. We can’t interfere with your choices a priori we have to wait for your mistakes and only then are allowed to nag.

          • kjn

            Kirk taught me that there are plenty of loopholes in the prime directive.

          • Anonymous

            Ooh, a glimpse at the play book! Why is yours so much thicker?

          • Anonymous

            >>>Why is yours so much thicker?>>>

            I refuse to channel Biki here.

          • Anonymous

            Ewww

          • Anonymous

            I think it’s b/c we let members have differing opinions.

          • Anonymous

            CLTIL,
            “Why is yours so much thicker?”
            Write “COOL IT” 1,000 times on our respective blackboard for that line.

          • Anonymous

            Nine hundred ninety nine, one thousand.

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOi3yAdqTYA PittsburghisforManLovers

      You are going to Pittspuke?

      • Anonymous

        Finally, you made me laugh. I can let go now.

        Will you be my date for the draft party? I’ll wear flats.

        • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOi3yAdqTYA PittsburghisforManLovers

          Raycess – you sure you aren’t rooting for Booms?

          • Anonymous

            Booms is not a bad guy, he is just a little rough around the edges. He still lives in Euclid where he grew up, and he could probably live pretty much anywhere he wants to right now.

            You have obviously been in the sunshine and whatnot for too long, grab the reins and ease on down.

            I’ll pick you up at the airport, what time do you land on draft day?

          • Anonymous

            Can you come up off some details to support this statement that Booms “isn’t such a bad guy,” or is that just what you want to believe because you live in his neighborhood? I’d really like to believe you, I swear.

          • Anonymous

            Euclid and South Euclid are pretty much worlds apart, despite their names. I happen to have a soft spot in my heart for Chuck because, though I do not know him personally, he has lived and had comedic success around the country and yet has landed back in Euclid.

            If you listened to him regularly as I do, he wants only the best for Cleveland, he challenges forces that may be detrimental to the city’s forward progress, very much like you do, Peter. You two are equally as passionate about your allegiance, hope, and pure love for that imperviousness that you each recognize. You just approach it from your individual perches. You’re very much alike in my eyes, and I so admire you both.

          • Anonymous

            That is really nice of you to say (about me), and I appreciate the humanist element of what you’re saying here, and really, I’m trying, but please: What are these forces that Booms “challenges that may be detrimental to the city’s forward progress” and how has he undermined these evil forces in any measurable way? I really want to like the guy.

          • Anonymous

            You each have your own way of getting to the heart of things. I am just not equipped to strip it down into a list of how you two are seriously on the same road.

            It goes way beyond the politics of racism, government, whatever. You guys could not be more different in background and approach, but at the center you both live and die for your city and sports it represents day after day, year after year. You both struggle with the shame of corruption in our local government.

            Booms values the openness of the Cavs and Indians, and seethes about the Browns PR and product on the field.

            Hey, if he were to ask me about you, it would be much the same.

            It’s real, and it’s deep.

          • https://twitter.com/jimkanicki jimkanicki

            you may be onto something and i will say that for the longest time i liked booms and found kylie insufferable.

            but yesterday he showed a real knee-jerky way of arguing his point and it was an attack on the person, not the issue. it didnt persuade on the issue and he couldnt have been more ugly.

            he’s lost my respect and we’ll see if he get win it back.

            prediction: common ground is found with the holmgren/daiquiri/blender meme.

          • Anonymous

            He really is the poster child of “Get off my lawn!” isn’t he?

            I don’t know, he has a hard shell but a very soft center if you can get past the rough exterior.

            He makes me laugh – Kiley too – so there’s that.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOi3yAdqTYA PittsburghisforManLovers

            Sorry – I was under the assumption you didn’t take anything I said seriously. I have no idea who Booms is.

          • Anonymous

            Oh God, please warn me to stretch before reading, I may have pulled something laughing.

            I wish I was kidding. Ow.

        • Anonymous

          Is that a racist Asian joke?

          • Anonymous

            No, it’s a tall cheesehead joke.

          • Anonymous

            Tall, genius, Cheesehead!
            You had me at 150+

  • Anonymous

    I think the problem in arguing this deal is that just about everyone has worn the logo and is worried agreeing with the truth would suddenly make them a racist/proponent of genocide. It’s not a bad line to say “yeah, who knew the history of this thing…I certainly didn’t at first, I used to wear the Sambo, but once you know–once you figure it out–you know and you quit, and you will figure it out at some point, Rush.”

    • Anonymous

      Completely agree. And in fairness to me, that is precisely the tack that I took in the original “Curse of Wahoo” piece here on the subject.

      • Anonymous

        Listening to it now.

        • Anonymous

          OK good but I meant the original Curse of Wahoo post written here back in 2008.

          • Anonymous

            redacted.

    • Anonymous

      I think people fear being called a racist maybe more than being called a criminal, thief, adulterer… because it’s so hard to prove or disprove. Everybody’s perception and sensitivity is so diverse.

      • Anonymous

        It would be great if we could get past the binary label and just agree on two points. That everyone is essentially guilty of racism in greater and lesser degrees. And that racism is bad. Because it is stupid. Because “race” hardly exists in reality.

        • Anonymous

          Yes. I mean, we all make involuntary judgements on anyone we encounter. Visual perception is first, because it provides immediate information about another person which is processed before we know it.

          Can’t help but think of Chappelle’s Clayton Bigsby character.

          I can say I’ve been pre-judged just by being female – not here, because appearance does not come into play. Also being white in my hospital days, I was treated a certain way by some patients initially. I didn’t take exception to that, ever. Once a trust was formed, any false perception vanished and I was allowed to do my job.

          But I do have to say, it is a bit hurtful to be lumped into a category once identified as right-leaning, or conservative. Most people have more layers than an onion and it’s kind of disrespectful to make generalizations. Both sides are guilty of that, for sure.

          • Anonymous

            Love the new avatar, which is the same as the (old) old avatar, if I’m not mistaken.

            >>>But I do have to say, it is a bit hurtful to be lumped into a category once identified as right-leaning>>>

            I think since you folk are a true minority now, it probably is time to lay off. You need to be nurtured like an endangered species. You’re the only natural predator for leftist conspiracies like contraception and health insurance and the middle class.

            In all seriousness, I don’t think anyone’s going to categorize the chick who keeps stomping new mudholes in the male dominated world of sports wagering. Woe unto them I say.

          • Anonymous

            No kid gloves for me, now. I stand behind my actions. I just think it’s weak to assume certain things based on ideology. Also, there is no chick power in a guessing game. Zero. Unless you factor in those intangibles that apparently are beyond some (most) of the current sports wagering population.

            Oh, I know it’s a lame avatar, but I like it so…..

  • Jack Watkins

    What was the sample size on that poll? Margin of error? Number of Native American respondents? Were the Native American respondents from a particular state? Of demographically-correct gender, age, and income distribution?

    We don’t know, because Sports Illustrated didn’t tell us. That’s fatal to use of the poll as anything other than a trivia answer.

    • Anonymous

      Good call Jack,
      I have critiqued many “medical studies” that used self report stats.
      I felt guilty getting paid to throw their research out the window in less than 5 minutes.
      If it is not truly empirical, scientific method research then it is merely “fool fodder”.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOi3yAdqTYA PittsburghisforManLovers

    Stick it to the paleface, Frownie. Seriously, anyone who would make this out to be a liberal issue gives people who attempt to think out their positions on any issue a bad name.

  • ChiefStrongbow

    The white guilt is strong in

    • Anonymous

      mm hmm…

      • Anonymous

        Come on, we only have control over actions that we ourselves perform. We can disapprove of plenty, but as I have endlessly taught my kids…you are responsible for what you bring to the table, and how you carry yourself. What others think, do, or say is beyond your control. We can feel sorry for or perhaps even empathize with the plight of others. Any guilt should lie with the perpetrators of mistreatment of others, period. If we see someone in need, we help. That is our nature.

        • Anonymous

          CLTIL,
          We usually disagree, but you always score extra points with me when you play the “kid card”.
          Well…. I guess I see your point.

Previous post:

Next post: