Billy Packer, Duke, Fags and ESPN

By now, most are aware of the -phobia faux paux committed by Billy Packer on Charlie Rose's interview show. Packer used the term "fag out" (in actuality, we believe anyone named "Packer" can use the word fag in any context they choose, you can't be a -phobic when your driver license says "packer"), in reference to Rose not following through on something he said he might do. Of course, the -phobia crowd is having a field day with it .

While we reserve the right to use any language or reference we choose, we will admit that it is plain foolhardy to get on a "nationally" viewed TV show and speak in such colloquialisms. Especially given the charged environment the anti- and the -phobia crowd are currently operating.

But all this is irrelevant. Truly. Billy Packer said "fag out". It isn't the end of the world for homosexuals. When in the past have they ever cared what Packer said previously? When did we, for that matter?

The insidious and truly flagrantly offensive aspect of this event isn't the term Packer used, and it isn't the overly defensive and borderline histrionic sensitivity of the -phobia folks (aside: if you don't want people to use the term "fag" interchangeably with "wimp" and "pussy", don't stamp your feet and act like a wimp and pussy every time the world doesn't greet you with a hug and a cookie).

The truly egregious aspect of all this is the fact that ESPN hasn't given front page coverage to this. ESPN's columnists (except for a reference by Simmons) haven't been treating this as if it were an earth shattering event. It must be upsetting to Packer that he isn't getting Hardaway level exposure from the WWL. Maybe ESPN isn't releasing a book this week that touches on this subject? Or maybe ESPN only feels inclined to castigate Negro athletes that make -phobia sensitive statements?

We posted the other day about the persecution that Duke suffers. And in that, it was argued by a Duke defender that ESPN is biased and anti-Duke. Now, anyone with a rational and logical intellect can deduce that Duke's basketball coverage team includes Duke's biggest fan and a Duke graduate, and calling the coverage anti-Duke sounds like the ruminations of a wandering, homeless whino. One would have to be either so blinded by their fanship of Duke; or so intellectually barren that the grey matter encased in their soft, malformed cranium is dried and cracked at Sahara desert levels, to take credit for such a diarrheal flow of obstinance, misinformation and unabashedly vacuous suppositions.

The notion that ESPN is anti-Duke is further refuted by the Packer incident and the lack of critical light ESPN is shining on it.

How so, you ask?

ESPN is a protector of the Dark Dungeon of Cameron in the bowels of Dukedom. And the handling of the "fag out" reference displays incontrovertible proof.

In an effort to protect Duke and its associates from negative press, ESPN has chosen to ignore the story. Charlie Rose went to Duke. As a result, Packer's transgression on his show gets a pass from ESPN.

Now, try and make the argument that ESPN is anti-Duke.

Checkmate.