DL Hughley Hates Thirsty B*****s. Definitely Supports Columbus Short. » VSB

Dating, Relationships, & Sex, Pop Culture, Race & Politics, Theory & Essay

DL Hughley Hates Thirsty B*****s. Definitely Supports Columbus Short.

COLUMBUS SHORTI’m not sure how I didn’t hear about this until this morning (and I’m guessing amidst the bigger hubbub of Donald Sterling, many others missed it too), but last week D.L. Hughley went all renegade on the estranged wife of Columbus Short, Tanee McCall-Short. Effectively, Hughley thinks that Mrs. McCall-Short is a “dizzy a** broad” and a “thirsty b*tch” who acted against her best interest by stating in any way, shape, or form that Columbus (allegedly) threatened to kill her (even if its true). She should have “shut the f*ck up” because by ruining Columbus Short’s reputation, she is directly affecting her own pockets. He also doubts that Mr. Short threatened her in any capacity and chalks it all up to the on-going divorce proceedings; in short (no pun intended), she’s just trying to take him for what he’s worth without realizing that he is the hand that feeds her.

You should listen for yourself to come to your own conclusion. DL is a comedian but he wasn’t joking. He meant everything he said. And his premise all rests on “women will say stupid sh*t at the most inopportune time because they’re mad and regret it later” especially women who are financially dependent on the men they married. To his credit, he does think that if what has been alleged is true – or if she was dead – that he’d think Short was a bad guy. Not much credit here. Like on the credit score ledger, he’s at like 400.I’m not even sure if you can get a 400, but let’s assume you can.

There’s so much wrong with his assertions and this ain’t so much about Hughley as it is about a mentality that I’m sad to say I’ve heard from more than enough people to notice.

1. She’s probably lying about domestic violence.

2. She shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds her. Or at least keep it to herself to not ruin the reputation of the hand that feeds her.

3. Don’t ruin the reputation of the person who still needs to get work.

I’ve never been a huge fan of DL Hughley so this helps cement that. And for a few reasons. But before we get to that, let me veer to the left real quick.

This is a very male-centric viewpoint, but is also sahred by many women too. I believe the smart people refer to it as patriarchal. Either way, as a man. I’ve definitely fallen victim to that first one. In fact, I remember years ago on the post that shall not be named, explaining how I used to view, well most things that fall in this category with skepticism. It’s not that I didn’t believe anybody who told me that they’d been abused in some capacity, I was just always skeptical. And I’m not even sure why. Hell, given the numbers of women who have informed me that they’ve been victims of SOME type of abuse I think the benefit of the doubt should always rest squarely with the women. Of course, there are high profile cases of women lying (Duke lax, for instance) that feed the skepticism and that’s sad but if my homegirl tells me some dude put his hands on her, the fact that my first inclination was often is one of questioning its veracity is a problem.

Problem for some of us is that when you add in experiences that many of us (men and women) have had with women who will ABSOLUTELY take things too far (I’ve got fully corroborated stories for days, a few involve authorities) for the sake of proving a point or seeking attention…I get why skepticism occurs. And again, that makes it harder on those who have truly suffered. Which feeds the “non-reported” statistical category. At the same time, and the comments here on DV and rape, have actually made me say “wow” and realize the error of that thinking. So it’s a hard line to tow. I’ve got sisters and mothers and daughters and well you get the point. So I never want to be one of those folks who doesn’t trust what he’s hearing JUST because of what I’ve experienced, but humanity is a b*tch. Working on it.

Now all of that has to do with that first bullet. Even admidst my humanity, I think its ri-damn-diculous to NOT take a person’s history into account. And whose history do we have to take into account in this case?

Brolivia Pope.

Columbus Short is a known hot head. It was in NO way surprising what his wife alleged he did. Not even a little. He’s got anger issues. He broke the nose of somebody who said that he did something with his wife. Which, I’m not saying isn’t understandable under certain circumstances, but if HE doesn’t give a sh*t about ruining his rep and money, why should she be worried about ruining his rep and money. Which leads to the second point. Don’t bite the hand that feeds you? Until when? It kills you? That’s the stupidest logic I’ve ever heard. Yeah, if you’re being petty, sure. You’re mad at somebody…then yes it is dumb to not be forward thinking enough to NOT jeopardize a good thing over some petty argument.

If folks are holding knives to your throat threatening to kill you and themselves and they are clearly of historically terrible temperament (we’re talking restraining orders, etc), perhaps you may want to bite the f*ck out of that hand. Or ransacking your home! (Guess he took the stomp the yard thing personal). Nobody is thinking about money and stability when you have a crazy motherf*cker running roughshod. And once that fool is gone…you don’t do a pro-con list to see if its worth it to see if you all either work it out or you die? And you definitely don’t keep that sh*t to yourself and shut the f*ck up JUST for the sake of their ability to help take care of you in the future. F*ck them. You do for you. And reputation? What reputation. Columbus Short does a good enough job of ruining that on his own. His wife doesn’t have to do anything.

It’s entirely possible that you may listen to DL’s words and completely agree. I won’t say I understand why but I’ve learned that there’s an audience and viewpoint for everybody. I personally think his comments are non-sense.

I guess the most important take away here is this: n*ggas gon’ nig. Perhaps Columbus and DL should tour together. At least we know if Columbus punched DL in the mouth, DL wouldn’t talk. And that’s ultimately what love is to DL right?

Taking it on the chin until the lawyers get paid?

Bye felicia.


Filed Under:
Panama Jackson

Panama Jackson is pretty fly (and gorgeous) for a light guy. He used to ship his frito to Tito in the District, but shipping prices increased so he moved there to save money. He refuses to eat cocaine chicken. When he's not saving humanity with his words or making music with his mouth, you can find him at your mama's mama's house drinking her fine liquors. Most importantly, he believes the children are our future. You can hit him on his hitter at panamadjackson@gmail.com.

  • SweetSass

    I often forget D.L. Hughley exists.

    • panamajackson

      OMG…I ain’t seen you around in eons.

      • SweetSass

        I lurk the shadows. Ninja style.

    • nillalatte

      *waves @sweetsass:disqus Come on in. Sit a spell. :D

  • nillalatte

    I got all lost in your post there PJ when you started doubting victims claims of DV. But, then again, I know there are people out there who claim to be victims that are not, and you know what? It is to the 100th degree harder on true victims. I take the stance that the saving grace is time. Time eventually reveals the truth. Question is, can we afford to wait?

    • panamajackson

      Read that carefully. I said I used to. Or at least was skeptical. I also completely acknowledge how sad that is. I’ve learned many lessons in ilfe and this is why I said that they women should get the benefit of the doubt.

      • nillalatte

        It’s all good. I did read it several times because I was like ‘wait, what?’ I get it. It is hard. As a survivor and advocate for women and children in DV situations, I’m a little more touchy about this subject, that’s all. No worries.

  • Rachmo

    “n*ggas gon’ nig”- the end

    • ratchet d-Ibaka

      Yap. A great summation of both of these idjots.

    • panamajackson

      at the end of the day, that’s what it really all comes down to

  • Sigma_Since 93

    I can only ride with the hand that feeds you portion of the DL’s argument. I’m not suggesting that women keep quiet about DV but it’s hard to ask the court for a gazillion dollars a month knowing that he’s now a poison pill and will be luck to make $20.

    We see this all the time with ballers and child support; yeah you locked in those payments at the height of his earning potential but dude is only getting $10K a month now and your monthly payment is $40K a month. I would hope somewhere a math class was taken but a) common sense is not so common and b) there’s a belief that he’s probably lying about his pockets.

    • menajeanmaehightower

      Again, men cannot compare themselves to athletes, actors, or musicians who make millions. If they are defining their assumptions off of a millionaires reality (which we never know the entire story), they are inane.

      • Sigma_Since 93

        The comparison is valid since the impact of the argument doesn’t diminish based upon socioeconomic status. I don’t know about you but I’ve seen this play out too many times.

        Dude’s married / got kids and has a good job and get’s overtime
        Wife / girlfriend leaves dude and payments are based upon current income levels

        If the result of the break-up stunts dudes ability to keep job / maintain the disbursement levels wouldn’t it be prudent to say we have irreconcilable differences and keep the cash flow at the desired levels?

        • menajeanmaehightower

          Question: do these men try to get custody of their kids? I’m just wondering.

          • Sigma_Since 93

            Some do and some don’t. The custody thing is a whole separate can of worms. The system is not set up for men to get custody and maintain current work production levels. The exception would be wealthy people. The counter claim would be the man isn’t taking care of the kids but some nanny / boarding school is.

    • Aly

      “I’m not suggesting that women keep quiet about DV”

      So what are you suggesting then?

      • Sigma_Since 93

        What I said below:

        “If the result of the break-up stunts dudes ability to keep job / maintain the disbursement levels wouldn’t it be prudent to say we have irreconcilable differences and keep the cash flow at the desired levels?”

        • Aly

          Oh, I see. Well, the answer to your question, imo, is “no.” Wife beaters should be held accountable for their actions.

          • Sigma_Since 93

            I agree. I’m just struggling with the lack of fiscal foreshadowing that takes place on the part of some women. It’s hard to ask for an amount that your ex may never see again but it happens again and again.

            • Aly

              So then how, exactly, do you think they should be held accountable?

              • Sigma_Since 93

                Too many levels to that question. I guess it’s up to the woman; does she understand the trade-offs of the recourse available to her. If the judge give her options and I would let her pick.

    • panamajackson

      I still don’t ride with that. At the end of the day somethings are bigger than just making ends meet off of somebody else. You keep quiet and then he does that to somebody else…then what?

      Though to be clear, and I didn’t mention it upon re-read. TMZ got the police report and request for a restraining order and blasted him. She didn’t do it.

  • Val

    DL has a history of this sort of thing. He was on Don Imus’ side back when Imus called the Rutgers women’s basketball team nappy-headed h*es. In fact he went on The Tonight Show and said he agreed with Imus. So, this isn’t surprising at all.

    But, Kirsten West-Savali has a Change.org petition going around demanding that he apologize. Which is ridiculous to me. He should be fired. An apology is not an acceptable consequence, IMO, considering his history.

    • panamajackson

      I forgot that he was on the Imus train back then.

    • VibezFlow

      Don’t forget his media tours while promoting his book last year. There is an interview with NPR he did in which he talked about how angry black women were and his feelings towards us.

  • John Shannon

    He’s an Arse for sure, and at the same time there are plenty of Double Standards when it comes to Both Genders being Victims and Offenders. It is Fact and Non-Debatable.

    I don’t like the Dozens Game when it comes to these things, but Denying them is just as bad

  • Shay-d-Lady

    I just always wait until the smoke clear. We have no way of knowing what happened. Ive learned in this life that it will all come out in the end. I pray for all involved. I just wish more people would all these things to play out with out the additional commentary. its detrimental to all sides.

    • panamajackson

      Here’s why I’m less inclined to question her in this matter. Columbus Short is pretty much a known d-bag. She took her matters to the authorities. TMZ spread the news. It isn’t even like she blasted him.

      But you’re right. You never know until the smoke clears. But given his history…I ain’t surprised.

      DL on the other hand is an idiot.

      • Shay-d-Lady

        D.L. Hughley, though? I used to like him. but you can never trust a ninja who dreds wont grow. See how long it took for Wale to get some real hang time. He aint right.

        • Diggity Dead. Just saw this…and I shan’t…..lol *tears*

  • b sweet

    THIS dude…
    This seems to revisit the age old question of, ‘If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound’? Why yes, yes it does. Witnesses, snitches, whistleblowers are targeted when they can’t exist
    without the wrongdoing. The wrongdoing is the issue, not the person who
    tells it. ‘Don’t shoot the messenger’ ring a bell?
    The basis for these asinine comments seem to lie in this societal shift that proof is the victim’s encumbrance. That’s why they are called DEFENDANTS in court. It’s sad and shaming to know that a person who speaks out about violence, threats, rape, and injustice is persecuted.

  • “Don’t bite the hand that feeds you? Until when? It kills you? That’s the stupidest logic I’ve ever heard.”

    The thing is, DL is espousing a view that’s been long held in the Black community, quiet as it’s kept. It’s an old view, but there nonetheless. My great-grandmother would tell my grandmother to go back to her husband whenever she left, after he would beat the crap out of her. And when you have 6 kids, what else are you going to do when you’re up against a rock and a hard backhand?

    One major obstacle for women who are victimized by domestic violence is the absolute dependence on their spouse/partner to provide, especially if there are children involved. It makes it that much harder to leave if you are concerned about food and shelter after you leave.

    That said, DL is an absolute d0uche for suggesting she stay to protect Short’s assets. It’s a total disregard for her life.

    • Sigma_Since 93

      “One major obstacle for women who are victimized by domestic violence is
      the absolute dependence on their spouse/partner to provide, especially
      if there are children involved. It makes it that much harder to leave if
      you are concerned about food and shelter after you leave”

      Ding, ding, ding!!!!!!

      This is why the logic exists. A woman who’s been abused has every right to get out of that situation and seek remittance. The problem has always been that too many utilize the scorched earth principle and try to take everything in the negotiation. I know the kids need a place to stay but you can’t afford to maintain the current house even if he was required to pay you some amount. Wouldn’t it be more prudent to sell the current house and use your proceeds to get something you could afford without his dollars and then the monthly money you get would become “gravy money”???

      • “The problem has always been…”
        i don’t follow you, SS93? :/ Are you saying that full “punishment” shouldn’t be sought?

        • Sigma_Since 93

          Possibly but it would be at the discretion of the woman. If I was the lawyer, I would ask the following:

          Are you seeking jail time, financial compensation or both?
          If you are seeking financial compensation, how much will the amount you obtain comprise of your income?
          Will you need to liquidate assets to obtain financial freedom?

          If you are seeking both? Will jail time adversely impact his ability to fulfill said obligation (dude filing for bankruptcy or working at Footlocker doesn’t help her)?

          Based upon the answers,she would then seek the appropriate relief instead of putting the screws to him and it coming back to adversely impact her down the road.

          • nillalatte

            SS93… there are flaws in your analysis. Sometimes I get the feeling that men in particular do not get how incredibility challenging it is to be a single mother- even if you never wanted that, but that is the hand you’re dealt. It feels like more men than not WANT to walk away from providing any kind of support for their children or to their destitute partner. She probably wouldn’t have been destitute if not for him!

            From your questions, I’m assuming your thinking of a married couple. In that case, Family Law kicks in for custody, and dividing assets and debt. That is all the courts are supposed to decide on. Yet, you wouldn’t believe the sh*t that happens in family court that ‘judges’ try to decide which, in some cases, jeopardizes the woman and children’s safety and right to live their lives as they see fit.

            When a battered woman leaves an abusive relationship, she often leaves with only the clothes she is wearing. She typically has NO financial resources. The abuser has effectively eliminated her receiving help from friends and/or family. She doesn’t want anything at that point, but to survive and heal. If children are in the mix, it gets even more tricky. How to provide visitation and provide for the safety of the battered woman is paramount, and often the courts fail at providing that environment and the abuser gets complete access to the victim to victimize her again. It’s a vicious cycle.

            I could go on, but there are more important things than a man’s bank account, and I have even less consideration for him as an abuser. If he didn’t want to lose everything, he should have kept his hands off of his partner. Period. Otherwise, he made his bed now he must lie in it!

            • Ms TLC

              Thank you for this! I know women who have gone through this exact situation, his comments were very insensitive but sadly typical.

            • Sigma_Since 93

              “When a battered woman leaves an abusive relationship, she often leaves with only the clothes she is wearing. She typically has NO financial resources. The abuser has effectively eliminated her receiving help from friends and/or family.”

              Sigma_Since 93 here

              I can’t remember my password but I wanted to comment. Your section above was one of the elements that my post attempted to address. I clearly realize that not everything is financial but finances do help.

              I had a neighbor in the exact situation above. She would leave her man only to return when she ran out of money or he found her. The shelters in our area were not permanent residencies so you had to be in line to get a bed. When she ran, we gave her money, bartered for items to assist how we could. When the authorities finally got involved, dude went away for a long time. The problem for her is that the $6.25 job at Piggly Wiggly did not afford her a means to keep the house she stayed in. Her “man” pressing plates awaiting trial not sending money home did not help things out. The moral clause at his job and the jobs in the area will keep him from supporting her and his kids like he should.

              When dtafakari said:

              One major obstacle for women who are victimized by domestic violence is the absolute dependence on their spouse/partner to provide, especially if there are children involved. It makes it that much harder to leave if you are concerned about food and shelter after you leave”

              My point was that we lack a holistic approach to DV regardless if the woman is single or married and the man is the bread winner. In the case of my former neighbor, it didn’t do her any good to still be in a recessive position given the system didn’t provide her any resources, her man couldn’t provide resources for his child, and didn’t have a family support system to lean on.
              Any man should pay but I think how he pays should be up to the woman working with a team to identify what she needs; sometimes getting it all doesn’t make everything better.

              • nillalatte

                Some what agree. You are preaching to the choir on the holistic approach. Trust when I say, I know from personal experience, and I have vowed never to put myself in such a situation again. When I say I don’t need a man, I mean it. I am absolutely capable of providing for myself and my kids. It took a long time to get to that point and he should have been in jail for at least 11-29.

                But, what you’re saying is ‘oh, he abused her and is in jail and she has no way to support herself, maybe he shouldn’t be in jail so he can provide support.’ As hard as it is on the woman, that does not negate the fact that the man should be punished for his violence. Yes, it is the same concept of non-violence, but not paying child support. They lock them up if they are in arrears. They can’t make money in jail or provide for their children. The caveat is… they weren’t providing it when they were working.

                We’re good. DV is a hard subject to understand unless you’ve lived it and/or worked with women and children who have experienced it. Thanks for participating. :)

    • @Ms. Dtafakari:
      Please contact me at theobsidianfiles@hotmail.com ASAP. We need to talk.

    • nillalatte

      Tell ’em girl! Tell ’em!

  • Joel

    D.L. Hughley was always my least favorite of the Kings of Comedy. This further cements why.

    • Amethyst


    • LupeThaKilla


More Like This