What do Jesus, MLK, and ESPN have in common?

I just read one of the better articles I've seen on ESPN.com. If you're like me, you probably get a little annoyed with the athletes who always thank God after winning the big game - its almost cliche. However, the two head coaches in the upcoming Super Bowl are anything but insincere, and although they will be the first black head coaches ever to take a team to the Super Bowl, it's character (i.e. Jesus), not color, that separates Lovie Smith and Tony Dungy.

While Michael Smith (no, not THAT Michael Smith), the author of the above article, is trying hard to get past race issues, the NCAA can't see anything BUT color. I'm not sure exactly what the NCAA actually does, but my impression is that it's one of three things: (1) Find and punish college kids who happen to play sports and also happened to accept some cupcakes from a tailgating fan (or other similar recruiting/compensation violations); (2) Seek and destroy any college that has a mascot that resembles an Indian in any fashion; (3) Beat the "America-is-still-racist-and-we-as-a-athletic- organization-are-personally-gonna-to-fix-that" Drum until it busts. And then beat it some more. It appears that the NCAA wants to further limit universities in South Carolina and Mississippi ability to host post season tournaments/games, simply because we "display the Confederate flag." And by display the flag, they mean that there is a monument on the state house grounds that commemorates that significant part of our history, and the flag flies there. The absurdity of all this warrants no more of my time than I've already given. NCAA - sub yourself out.

The front page of ESPN.com has a huge picture and link to an article about some 20 year old kid in jail in Georgia. The whole article is basically criticizing Georgia for having what the author believes is an "antiquated law," and caricatures the Peach State as a backwards, racist place, while making this kid out to be an innocent victim of biased white southerners. Nevermind the fact that the guy had oral sex with a 15 year old, or that he did drugs as a high schooler. How an article of this nature, that argues public policy issues and grossly stereotypes an entire state, fits in a sports magazine, I don't know.

This from the same ESPN that was so quick to jump on the bandwagon that berated the Duke lacrosse players for their alleged sexual assault of a dancer, making it out to be a huge issue of race. A Black dancer. Raped by White, Middle Class, SUV driving prep school Males. Turns out they probably didn't do it (they did maintain their innocence all along), meanwhile the relentless prosecutor who's main goal in life apparently was to bring down the Duke lacrosse players is facing ethics charges from the state bar. I may only be a 1L law student, but I'm pretty sure that that's about as bad as it gets as a lawyer.