Monday, November 03, 2008

Picking a President doesn't make you more or less Black

I find it interesting as we come upon the 2008 election to reflect on what has occurred in this year. From the surprising Democratic Primaries up til now there has been a shift in politics that will never be undone. I never thought I would see this in my lifetime, and now I look forward to the fact that it will happen again and again.

Obviously I am speaking about Senator Obama, his rise in prominence, and the potential of his becoming the First Black President.

It’s a proud moment for every African American. Especially for those of us that have lived decades without the chance even being a glimmer in possibility. This in many ways is the culmination of the struggles of the 1960’s.

To bad that I won’t vote for him.

And that is the big thing. I have been slammed by associates, readers, and too many others on this one point. The non-acceptance of my decision to not vote for Obama has been a sledgehammer in my blogs and my personal life. You would think I was stabbing someone.

This has been a very personal election, unlike any other in my life. I’ve been questioned, insulted, disputed, and more often than not cursed. Were it not happening to me I’d even say it was sort of funny.

I can’t count the number of times I’ve been told I’m not Black. That I’ve done something wrong. That writing about the issues, and noting the problems I have with Obama’s policies is somehow a disservice to my race. I’ve even been told I’m un-American. And of course there have been more than a few racists that have misused my words and thoughts for their own twisted ends.

But tonight I was just sitting back writing and listening to my MP3 (I bought my first one just this year) and James Brown’s Say It Loud came up. I listened to the lyrics several times and then read them.



    Uh! With your bad self!

    Say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud!
    Say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud!

    Some people say we've got a lot of malice
    Some say it’s a lot of nerve
    But I say we won't quit moving until we get what we deserve
    We have been bucked and we have been scorned
    We have been treated bad, talked about as just bones
    But just as it takes two eyes to make a pair, ha
    Brother we can’t quit until we get our share

    Say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud!
    Say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud!
    One more time!
    Say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud!

    I worked on jobs with my feet and my hand
    But all the work I did was for the other man
    Now we demand a chance to do things for ourselves
    We're tired of beatin' our head against the wall
    And workin' for someone else

    Say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud
    Say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud
    Say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud
    Say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud

    We're people, we're just like the birds and the bees
    We'd rather die on our feet
    Than be livin' on our knees

    Say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud
    Say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud
    Say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud
    Say it loud: I'm black and I'm proud

I’m Black Puerto Rican and I’m Proud. I’m also insulted that I have to make such a statement because of my political beliefs.

I have worked hard, lived through fights, slurs, been denied jobs, and been homeless twice. I’ve gained an education, never been hooked on drugs, lived overseas, been part of the military, and helped more than a few on my path to where I am today. And every day I’ve lived I woke up as Black Puerto Rican as the day before. I have no illusions, and no problems with that.

But to try to discredit my lineage and birthright because of a political position is just absurd. It pisses me off.

This election is not about righting the wrongs of racism, segregation or any other race based issue past or present. Obama is not Malcolm X, Martin Luther King or any other civil rights activist. Electing Obama will not suddenly make police forces in L.A., New York, Philadelphia or anywhere in the nation treat Black, or any other racial and ethnic group, any better than the day before. And racists won’t wake up with larger minds or a better understanding of humanity.

I respect and admire Senator Obama. He’s accomplished things I wouldn’t try to do. The fear of being murdered, especially before I could enact positive change on some issues is too strong in me. He is going for it anyway and that takes balls.

But that does not mean I must follow blindly and accept his every word and policy as best because he said so. His path was no less difficult or extraordinary than my own, and that of millions of other non- and White Americans. As such he is subject to the same critique as anyone. In fact I would consider myself much less of a man, and less of a Black Puerto Rican, if I did not judge him in the same way I would anyone else.

Listen to that song. James Brown didn’t ask for any corners cut. He didn’t demand obedience to a color, in fact he demands the opposite. He demands that we empower ourselves and live by the standards we create. That everyone that meets us shows the same respect and dignity that we exemplify individually and as a group.

And when I have lived a life of just that, how dare anyone try to denigrate me for that.

Obviously I am speaking about a few people. Many have sound reasons for believing in Obama. Many never considered race and they came to a separate decision than mine. And I respect that.

But that’s not who I am talking about.

I’m talking about the people that loved me when I supported Senator Obama over Senator Clinton in the Democratic Primaries. They also ignored my support of Fred Thompson and Senator McCain at the time. They ignored my strong Republican views. They only saw my race and that of Obama. Some where White, and some where not.

It’s those same people that have abandoned my blogs, or attacked them since. And I have to wonder how they came to see me as any less of a man, no matter my color.

When America comes to a point where race is more important than the man or the message, the nation is in trouble. Just as the nation was falling in the late 50’s and 60’s the same threat still exists. And when that same color-focused blinders are on and any deviation is attacked we return to the same dangers that existed a mere 40 years ago.

Maybe I’ve followed this election for too many years, been too involved in trying to cover the facts that too few have the time to see. Maybe I’m up to late every night and day for you my readers. Maybe I need a vacation as my skin is getting a bit thin.

So yes I’m venting. But as that may be, I’ll get some sleep and be back at it tomorrow like I have for years now. I hope to see you all then.

Labels: , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Friday, August 29, 2008

Senator Obama's speech at the Democratic National Convention

I listened intently last night as Senator Barack Obama accepted the nomination at the Democratic National Convention with some 70,000 democrats looking on. If Senator Obama didn’t want to look like a celebrity, this was not the way to do it. But as the first African American to reach this history making level a bit of fanfare is warranted.

Now I could rip into Obama’s speech, line by line. I can highlight all the improbabilities, and all the things that will end up costing America more than we can afford. I can even point out all the mistakes of Presidents Carter and Clinton that he seems to be determined to repeat.

But instead I will just make this easy (my shoulder injury has not healed yet). Senator Obama promises to lower taxes of 95% of Americans receiving paychecks. He plans to increase taxes of business. That is a problem. Because I expect that this will equate to less hours at more pay for the average American, and adding in the higher cost of food (because of expanded corn ethanol production) and the increase taxes and cost of energy will mean less money overall. And that’s before a nationalized healthcare plan.

With nationalized healthcare will come lower quality medical treatment and lines for x-rays and doctor visits – like those found in Canada and England right now. Seeing a doctor will become a trip to the post office, won’t that be great?

Obama is a great speaker, and part of a President’s job is communication. But also part of the job is the ability to pass legislation, which Obama is not bi-partisan enough to do. A President must be able to show strength, which Obama’s demand to run from Iraq does not inspire. And a President must have a unified Administration, which Senator Biden does not provide (he opposed several policies of Senator Obama, as well as believing he is not qualified for the Presidency – as he has stated).

Senator Obama is a strong intelligent capable man. He loves America and has a great vision for the future. But he has neither the experience, nor political flexibility, to achieve his grand plans. No matter how you want to do the math, his initiatives are more expensive than he has claimed requiring more of your money than you may think. His voting record shows his desire to stand by the most far-left of Democratic policies, and that is too extreme for the centrist average of America.

But I will leave you with the speech that Senator Obama spoke yesterday. I remind you that Joe Biden represents the same ‘old’ politics that McCain supposedly embodies. I remind you that the Surge has worked. I remind you that the economy is slowing, and energy prices are rising – both are equally the fault of Democrats and Republicans.

Senator Obama is a great man, creating history before our eyes. But as you listen to his speech ask yourself is he a war-time President, that can stimulate the economy and move America into a safer better America – which requires more than just words.


Part 1


Part 2


Part 3


Part 4

Labels: , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

The Full speech of Senator Obama - 319.2008.1

There are so many things I could say about Senator Obama's speech, and the response that the news media has had to it. But rather than do that, At least for now, I will provide you the full speech so you can see more than just the 15 second soundbite the media provides. It's short soundbites that got this whole situation started.

"We the people, in order to form a more perfect union.”

Two hundred and twenty one years ago, in a hall that still stands across the street, a group of men gathered and, with these simple words, launched America’s improbable experiment in democracy. Farmers and scholars; statesmen and patriots who had traveled across an ocean to escape tyranny and persecution finally made real their declaration of independence at a Philadelphia convention that lasted through the spring of 1787.

The document they produced was eventually signed but ultimately unfinished. It was stained by this nation’s original sin of slavery, a question that divided the colonies and brought the convention to a stalemate until the founders chose to allow the slave trade to continue for at least twenty more years, and to leave any final resolution to future generations.

Of course, the answer to the slavery question was already embedded within our Constitution – a Constitution that had at is very core the ideal of equal citizenship under the law; a Constitution that promised its people liberty, and justice, and a union that could be and should be perfected over time.

And yet words on a parchment would not be enough to deliver slaves from bondage, or provide men and women of every color and creed their full rights and obligations as citizens of the United States. What would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing to do their part – through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience and always at great risk - to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time.

This was one of the tasks we set forth at the beginning of this campaign – to continue the long march of those who came before us, a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America. I chose to run for the presidency at this moment in history because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together – unless we perfect our union by understanding that we may have different stories, but we hold common hopes; that we may not look the same and we may not have come from the same place, but we all want to move in the same direction – towards a better future for of children and our grandchildren.

This belief comes from my unyielding faith in the decency and generosity of the American people. But it also comes from my own American story.

I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived a Depression to serve in Patton’s Army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas. I’ve gone to some of the best schools in America and lived in one of the world’s poorest nations. I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners – an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters. I have brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles and cousins, of every race and every hue, scattered across three continents, and for as long as I live, I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible.

It’s a story that hasn’t made me the most conventional candidate. But it is a story that has seared into my genetic makeup the idea that this nation is more than the sum of its parts – that out of many, we are truly one.

Throughout the first year of this campaign, against all predictions to the contrary, we saw how hungry the American people were for this message of unity. Despite the temptation to view my candidacy through a purely racial lens, we won commanding victories in states with some of the whitest populations in the country. In South Carolina, where the Confederate Flag still flies, we built a powerful coalition of African Americans and white Americans.

This is not to say that race has not been an issue in the campaign. At various stages in the campaign, some commentators have deemed me either “too black” or “not black enough.” We saw racial tensions bubble to the surface during the week before the South Carolina primary. The press has scoured every exit poll for the latest evidence of racial polarization, not just in terms of white and black, but black and brown as well.

And yet, it has only been in the last couple of weeks that the discussion of race in this campaign has taken a particularly divisive turn.

On one end of the spectrum, we’ve heard the implication that my candidacy is somehow an exercise in affirmative action; that it’s based solely on the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap. On the other end, we’ve heard my former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike.

I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.

As such, Reverend Wright’s comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems – two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all.

Given my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church? And I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and You Tube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way

But the truth is, that isn’t all that I know of the man. The man I met more than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor. He is a man who served his country as a U.S. Marine; who has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country, and who for over thirty years led a church that serves the community by doing God’s work here on Earth – by housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.

In my first book, Dreams From My Father, I described the experience of my first service at Trinity:

“People began to shout, to rise from their seats and clap and cry out, a forceful wind carrying the reverend’s voice up into the rafters….And in that single note – hope! – I heard something else; at the foot of that cross, inside the thousands of churches across the city, I imagined the stories of ordinary black people merging with the stories of David and Goliath, Moses and Pharaoh, the Christians in the lion’s den, Ezekiel’s field of dry bones. Those stories – of survival, and freedom, and hope – became our story, my story; the blood that had spilled was our blood, the tears our tears; until this black church, on this bright day, seemed once more a vessel carrying the story of a people into future generations and into a larger world. Our trials and triumphs became at once unique and universal, black and more than black; in chronicling our journey, the stories and songs gave us a means to reclaim memories that we didn’t need to feel shame about…memories that all people might study and cherish – and with which we could start to rebuild.”

That has been my experience at Trinity. Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity embodies the black community in its entirety – the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger. Like other black churches, Trinity’s services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear. The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.

And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions – the good and the bad – of the community that he has served diligently for so many years.

I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love.

Some will see this as an attempt to justify or excuse comments that are simply inexcusable. I can assure you it is not. I suppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork. We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias.

But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America – to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.

The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we’ve never really worked through – a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American.

Understanding this reality requires a reminder of how we arrived at this point. As William Faulkner once wrote, “The past isn’t dead and buried. In fact, it isn’t even past.” We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country. But we do need to remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.

Segregated schools were, and are, inferior schools; we still haven’t fixed them, fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education, and the inferior education they provided, then and now, helps explain the pervasive achievement gap between today’s black and white students.

Legalized discrimination - where blacks were prevented, often through violence, from owning property, or loans were not granted to African-American business owners, or black homeowners could not access FHA mortgages, or blacks were excluded from unions, or the police force, or fire departments – meant that black families could not amass any meaningful wealth to bequeath to future generations. That history helps explain the wealth and income gap between black and white, and the concentrated pockets of poverty that persists in so many of today’s urban and rural communities.

A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one’s family, contributed to the erosion of black families – a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods – parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement – all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.

This is the reality in which Reverend Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up. They came of age in the late fifties and early sixties, a time when segregation was still the law of the land and opportunity was systematically constricted. What’s remarkable is not how many failed in the face of discrimination, but rather how many men and women overcame the odds; how many were able to make a way out of no way for those like me who would come after them.

But for all those who scratched and clawed their way to get a piece of the American Dream, there were many who didn’t make it – those who were ultimately defeated, in one way or another, by discrimination. That legacy of defeat was passed on to future generations – those young men and increasingly young women who we see standing on street corners or languishing in our prisons, without hope or prospects for the future. Even for those blacks who did make it, questions of race, and racism, continue to define their worldview in fundamental ways. For the men and women of Reverend Wright’s generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away; nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years. That anger may not get expressed in public, in front of white co-workers or white friends. But it does find voice in the barbershop or around the kitchen table. At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician’s own failings.

And occasionally it finds voice in the church on Sunday morning, in the pulpit and in the pews. The fact that so many people are surprised to hear that anger in some of Reverend Wright’s sermons simply reminds us of the old truism that the most segregated hour in American life occurs on Sunday morning. That anger is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition, and prevents the African-American community from forging the alliances it needs to bring about real change. But the anger is real; it is powerful; and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races.

In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don’t feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience – as far as they’re concerned, no one’s handed them anything, they’ve built it from scratch. They’ve worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they’re told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.

Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren’t always expressed in polite company. But they have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation. Anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism.

Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze – a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns – this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.

This is where we are right now. It’s a racial stalemate we’ve been stuck in for years. Contrary to the claims of some of my critics, black and white, I have never been so naïve as to believe that we can get beyond our racial divisions in a single election cycle, or with a single candidacy – particularly a candidacy as imperfect as my own.

But I have asserted a firm conviction – a conviction rooted in my faith in God and my faith in the American people – that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds, and that in fact we have no choice is we are to continue on the path of a more perfect union.

For the African-American community, that path means embracing the burdens of our past without becoming victims of our past. It means continuing to insist on a full measure of justice in every aspect of American life. But it also means binding our particular grievances – for better health care, and better schools, and better jobs - to the larger aspirations of all Americans — the white woman struggling to break the glass ceiling, the white man whose been laid off, the immigrant trying to feed his family. And it means taking full responsibility for own lives – by demanding more from our fathers, and spending more time with our children, and reading to them, and teaching them that while they may face challenges and discrimination in their own lives, they must never succumb to despair or cynicism; they must always believe that they can write their own destiny.

Ironically, this quintessentially American – and yes, conservative – notion of self-help found frequent expression in Reverend Wright’s sermons. But what my former pastor too often failed to understand is that embarking on a program of self-help also requires a belief that society can change.

The profound mistake of Reverend Wright’s sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society. It’s that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country – a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old — is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past. But what we know — what we have seen – is that America can change. That is true genius of this nation. What we have already achieved gives us hope – the audacity to hope – for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

In the white community, the path to a more perfect union means acknowledging that what ails the African-American community does not just exist in the minds of black people; that the legacy of discrimination - and current incidents of discrimination, while less overt than in the past - are real and must be addressed. Not just with words, but with deeds – by investing in our schools and our communities; by enforcing our civil rights laws and ensuring fairness in our criminal justice system; by providing this generation with ladders of opportunity that were unavailable for previous generations. It requires all Americans to realize that your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams; that investing in the health, welfare, and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper.

In the end, then, what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the world’s great religions demand – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Let us be our brother’s keeper, Scripture tells us. Let us be our sister’s keeper. Let us find that common stake we all have in one another, and let our politics reflect that spirit as well.

For we have a choice in this country. We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism. We can tackle race only as spectacle – as we did in the OJ trial – or in the wake of tragedy, as we did in the aftermath of Katrina - or as fodder for the nightly news. We can play Reverend Wright’s sermons on every channel, every day and talk about them from now until the election, and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she’s playing the race card, or we can speculate on whether white men will all flock to John McCain in the general election regardless of his policies.

We can do that.

But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we’ll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And then another one. And nothing will change.

That is one option. Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, “Not this time.” This time we want to talk about the crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children and Asian children and Hispanic children and Native American children. This time we want to reject the cynicism that tells us that these kids can’t learn; that those kids who don’t look like us are somebody else’s problem. The children of America are not those kids, they are our kids, and we will not let them fall behind in a 21st century economy. Not this time.

This time we want to talk about how the lines in the Emergency Room are filled with whites and blacks and Hispanics who do not have health care; who don’t have the power on their own to overcome the special interests in Washington, but who can take them on if we do it together.

This time we want to talk about the shuttered mills that once provided a decent life for men and women of every race, and the homes for sale that once belonged to Americans from every religion, every region, every walk of life. This time we want to talk about the fact that the real problem is not that someone who doesn’t look like you might take your job; it’s that the corporation you work for will ship it overseas for nothing more than a profit.

This time we want to talk about the men and women of every color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag. We want to talk about how to bring them home from a war that never should’ve been authorized and never should’ve been waged, and we want to talk about how we’ll show our patriotism by caring for them, and their families, and giving them the benefits they have earned.

I would not be running for President if I didn’t believe with all my heart that this is what the vast majority of Americans want for this country. This union may never be perfect, but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected. And today, whenever I find myself feeling doubtful or cynical about this possibility, what gives me the most hope is the next generation – the young people whose attitudes and beliefs and openness to change have already made history in this election.

There is one story in particularly that I’d like to leave you with today – a story I told when I had the great honor of speaking on Dr. King’s birthday at his home church, Ebenezer Baptist, in Atlanta.

There is a young, twenty-three year old white woman named Ashley Baia who organized for our campaign in Florence, South Carolina. She had been working to organize a mostly African-American community since the beginning of this campaign, and one day she was at a roundtable discussion where everyone went around telling their story and why they were there.

And Ashley said that when she was nine years old, her mother got cancer. And because she had to miss days of work, she was let go and lost her health care. They had to file for bankruptcy, and that’s when Ashley decided that she had to do something to help her mom.

She knew that food was one of their most expensive costs, and so Ashley convinced her mother that what she really liked and really wanted to eat more than anything else was mustard and relish sandwiches. Because that was the cheapest way to eat.

She did this for a year until her mom got better, and she told everyone at the roundtable that the reason she joined our campaign was so that she could help the millions of other children in the country who want and need to help their parents too.

Now Ashley might have made a different choice. Perhaps somebody told her along the way that the source of her mother’s problems were blacks who were on welfare and too lazy to work, or Hispanics who were coming into the country illegally. But she didn’t. She sought out allies in her fight against injustice.

Anyway, Ashley finishes her story and then goes around the room and asks everyone else why they’re supporting the campaign. They all have different stories and reasons. Many bring up a specific issue. And finally they come to this elderly black man who’s been sitting there quietly the entire time. And Ashley asks him why he’s there. And he does not bring up a specific issue. He does not say health care or the economy. He does not say education or the war. He does not say that he was there because of Barack Obama. He simply says to everyone in the room, “I am here because of Ashley.”

“I’m here because of Ashley.” By itself, that single moment of recognition between that young white girl and that old black man is not enough. It is not enough to give health care to the sick, or jobs to the jobless, or education to our children.

But it is where we start. It is where our union grows stronger. And as so many generations have come to realize over the course of the two-hundred and twenty one years since a band of patriots signed that document in Philadelphia, that is where the perfection begins."

Labels: , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Friday, February 29, 2008

What if they took away Black History Month?

This is a repost from Black Entertainment USA and can also be seen at Black & White Blog

What if Black History Month was removed? Would anyone have noticed? Would anyone complain?

It seems not.

Why would I say this? Because I just learned that the school system in Endicott New York has removed all Black studies in the curriculum. There was nothing discussed in this past month about Black History, not even Dr. Martin Luther King, because the entire subject was deemed unimportant.

Hello, stop and read that again. Unimportant and having no place in the minds of any of the children, including those that are African American. And this was all done without a single word to the parents, a single complaint from ANY of the students. It was just wiped out without a concern as if it was no more than a piece of errant string found on a piece of clothing.

Why am I upset? What if the school decided not to discuss the Holocaust, or Native American history? What if all the history about England was removed, or France, or Ancient Rome? What if history in schools forgot about President George Washington, just not ever mentioning what he did, or the Constitution?

People would be up in arms. Parents would be inflamed. Jewish communities would claim its anti-Semitic, Native American Indians would say it’s a slap in the face. Whole communities would demand a reason why their rich pasts were being denied their children. Cries that the fundamental based of what is America was being corrupted.

And I ask, in what way is this different? How are the lives and blood of the African Americans that helped build and shape this nation any less important than anyone else? I am not just talking about the Slaves that literally built the foundations of the nation, but the inventors that created thousands of items we use every day, like the stoplight, or save millions of lives, like blood transfusions. How can we value the lives of soldiers like the Tuskegee Airmen, or those that fought in the Civil War, or the American Revolution with any less honor than every other American.

I don’t know how we can equate those lives and contributions as less, but obviously this town in Upstate New York has. I’m willing to bet that they aren’t the only ones. What are the odds that kids in Montana, or Florida, or Ohio, or any other State have no idea about these inventions or people? How many believe that being a slave, less than a dog or piece of furniture, was no different than having trouble getting a job? I know there are more than a few as I’ve read comments that insist that the trouble the Irish had in getting a job was the same as working 20 hours a day for your entire life, with no days off or concern for your health, without pay, and with the reality that at any moment your entire family may be sold away from you and that you can be killed for no more than amusement or the crime of looking at the wrong person.

If we can allow these schools to just toss away a piece of American History, a history of an essential people that helped found and defend this nation, what will go next? Dr. Martin Luther King’s Holiday? A holiday that over half the nation fought from coming into existence, and many still ignore? Maybe the laws dealing with segregation could be next. And if we get that far, why not restate Jim Crow? Hell, just bring slavery back and make it national.

It’s not that crazy. Slavery was just 5 lifetimes ago for some families. Jim Crow was just 2 or 3. Segregation was just 1. And a people without a history aren’t really a people are they?

And this was so important an issue, that not one child mentioned it. Not one parent noticed. Not one meeting was held. It was just understood that it was ok. As long as no one spoke about it, and no one asked why.

So as long as no one asks you if you are Black, or Hispanic, or whatever color, religion, or background you claim, you are nothing. And you can’t hurt nothing. You can’t defend, offend, steal from, brutalize, rape, murder or anything to nothing. And in Upstate New York, that’s what they are equating being African American with. Perhaps the Jews will be next?

Are you nothing? Is your history, your family nothing? Are you sure?

“Don’t learn Black History because of what you know, learn it because of what you don’t know” – C. Miller


I don’t have children. I’m not a teacher or involved in the school system. Maybe that’s a cop out, maybe not. But I am now aware, and so are you. Part of my responsibility is to let you know, and ask for your comments. What will you do?

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Friday, January 25, 2008

How do you beat an African American Presidential candidate? 1.25.2008.2

How do you beat an African American Presidential candidate? This is not just a question that the entire Clinton political machine is working on or should be concerned with. Be assured, Republican strategists are paying full attention to some of the most effective and base tactics being used currently. And the future Presidential candidates, or even more local level election hopefuls, should take notes.

The precedent is being defined in front of our face right now. And many of the tactics will appear again. I would even state as a near guarantee that in the future the attacks and tricks will even be worse than what we are seeing now, as future opponents will push the line further than where it is being actively drawn now. I expect that the truly low points of what this could mean are angering, demeaning, and divisive.

What are some of the tactics?

One of the first that will be used is to attack the heritage of the Black candidate. Their family tree will be examined and any past actions, made by any member of the family, will be fair game. The education of your parents, their nations of origin, how much money they make, and more will be brought up.

If you have a parent that believed in getting in touch with their roots and gave you a more traditional African name, expect ridicule. If that name has any connection to any religion other than Christianity, you will be labeled by that religion without regard to what you may devoutly believe. If that religion is out of favor, or in any way attached to a negative, you will be attached to that as well. And even if you are Christian, your faith will be questioned, as well as the type of Christian faith you observe.

If you have any parentage that is not African American, or recent predecessors that are not, then you will be in a vicious circle attack. Like sharks in a feeding frenzy you will be attacked on one side for not being Black enough, separated from other African Americans and the struggles of the Black community. At the same time you will be assaulted for being Black, and thus only interested in a specific pool of issues that many non-Black Americans fear and disagree with.

To counter any of these actions, in fact to even mention that they are being used will open you to media attacks stating you are playing the race card. That any defense you offer is merely lowering the issues to claims of prejudice and inequality. It doesn’t matter if your defense is true, you are still to blame.

If you are successful, as virtually every politician is independently of the office they hold (at least at the state and federal level), then you have no understanding of what inner city African Americans go thru. You are a sell-out, and a wanna-be. Opponents will line up Blacks that are no less successful, well spoken, and recognized to boast your ignorance to Black audiences. The media will highlight these attacks, placing your life into question.

If you have made any missteps, admitted or not, they will be taken to stereotypical extremes. Today in America 31% of high school students have used marijuana, 66% have used alcohol, and 6% have used cocaine. That says nothing of the millions of adults that used cocaine in the 1980’s (the most popular drug at the time) or the uncounted masses of adults that used marijuana (and inhaled) in the 1960’s and continue to use it today. But be an African American and you will not be a mere user like the millions of other Americans. You will be presumed as a drug pushing dealer, the equal of the stereotypes promoted in movies and television for decades.

And at every step your opponent will be above the fray. Subordinates, associates, and ‘unrelated’ parties will be making the attacks for your opponent. The major news media will populate these smears for weeks, and views of these attacks will be front page items. The apologies and firing of these outside ‘rogue’ operatives will be far less popular. Any attempt by you to connect the dots will be called race baiting.

And then the biggest part will come to play. In every vote, if you gain non-Black support you will be called a sell-out and will have abandoned your heritage. If you gain Black support you will be defined as singularly a candidate of only African Americans, and out of touch of the needs of the rest of America.

Every item I have mentioned has not only occurred since 2007, but continues to happen now. And I expect that if a woman were in contention similar attacks will be made. But the tactics really play out best when the candidate is Black, or a minority. The obvious and entrenched racial disparity in America really comes to the top when any aspect of race is even hinted at. It even goes so far as to attack acclaimed and recognized leaders that sought peace and equality.

So I want to know this. Are we as American citizens so blind as to not see the tactics being used? Have we traveled so little since the days of segregation and fire hoses being used on peaceful Civil Rights supporters? Or do we expect so little of our political leaders that when shameful and base tactics are used we ignore it?

Really, I want to know.

Labels: , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

What happens after the New Hampshire primary?

So we continue to hear that Senator Obama is leading the Democratic candidates as the nomination for the Presidential election draws near. The further the day goes, the more we are hearing that the initial results from the midnight voting are proving more accurate.

Record turnouts, bolstered by unseasonably warm weather, are trending in favor of the candidate that 1 year ago was considered a joke, and a minor distraction to the inevitable nomination of Senator Clinton. Well the pundits were wrong, and 1 year later reports are surfacing that the Clinton campaign is grasping for the political advisors that were critical for the elections of President Bill Clinton.

On the Republican side, there is a less clear view. Senator John McCain entered New Hampshire with a strong lead, but Mitt Romney and his huge television ad spending are whitling away at that lead. Independants, the majority of New Hampshire voters, are the most critical factor. The beliefs are that independents will trend towards Obama, though many will also favor McCain.

Even with a solid win by Senator McCain, the final result is not nearly as clear as with the Democratic race. This is an odd election year indeed. Normally the fractioning seen in the Republican race has been something more akin to Democrats. It is very possible that the Republican candidate will be unknown well into, and possibly after the Super Tuesday vote in February. Effectively Mitt Romney, Senator McCain, Mike Huckabee, and Fred Thompson all have the ability to pull off first place wins, with 2nd or 3rd place finishes in multiple states before February.

All of this is causing turmoil in campaigns dubbed inevitable by media pundits in 2007. Senator Clinton has had a very public emotional breakdown, which many felt was a critical blow against her. In the campaign for Senator Clinton it is rumored that key individuals responsible for President Clinton are going to get involved, as I mentioned above. This is currently being denied, and if true seems to kill the concept of change promoted by the campaign. The addition of these figures indicates a return to the era of the 90’s, which in many ways has no place in the 21st century.

One thing that is beginning to creep into the pundits conversation is one thing that gives me pause though. Since the win by Senator Obama in Iowa, I have heard more about the racial breakdown of the various races than I have in all my life. Not just the racial make-up of South Carolina, where the African American vote is critical, but about New Hampshire where Blacks are easily outnumbered.

This is a negative, and it’s a subtle and backhanded way of bringing race forefront in the election. The real question being asked is will White Americans vote for a Black President? Had Senator Clinton been in the lead, I’m sure the question of women voters would be investigated, but the degree to which it would be questioned is unknown. But the big question after a solid and dramatic win by Senator Barack Obama will undoubtedly be the one I have asked.

Few will come out and say it. Most will hide the question in words like electability, or likeability. Polispeak for Black. Polispeak for is America still so racist as to refuse a popular, educated, qualified, and enigmatic candidate solely on the basis of the color of his skin? Polispeak for the question, Can America give up the stereotypes that have been built and relied upon for centuries?

If America can do that, and I believe that regardless of the eventual outcome we are moving to that day anyway, then what will happen? Because this would be more than just a Presidential candidate. It would signify a cultural change in America that has never occurred before. It would imply and justify an equality that any candidate, bereft of polispeak, would admit does not exist today.

No matter what, New Hampshire will have a demonstrative effect on the candidates of both parties. The implications are far reaching and only now being addressed by pundits across the media. Only now are some Americans realizing the implications. What will that result be?

However this continues to go, I must restate, your vote counts. Do not give it away cheaply. Don’t base it solely on the gender, religion, or color of the candidates. That is the least of all reasons to pick a candidate. Pick whomever you feel is best for America. Because that vote, and only that, will benefit the entire nation.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Friday, January 04, 2008

Mike Huckabee, Senator Barack Obama win Iowa

This has been quite the remarkable night. You may not have heard this, but the Iowa caucus is over. More importantly is the advent of history that has occurred.

I realize it’s 2007, so many may not notice but an African American has taken the forefront in the Democratic race for the Presidency of the United States. Others will likely focus on the more decisive win by Mike Huckabee in the Republican race, which is a surprise, but it’s not historic. Yes, historic and a massive statement about America.

Never before has an African American done so well in an election bid. Never before has a state with an approximately mere 2% of the population being African American stated that the Black candidate is their first choice for President. Thank god we have come so far from the days of segregation, Jim Crow and random lynchings without any pursuit of criminals involved.

Seriously, America is taking a step forward and it is needed. I was just commenting in a separate post, found at Black and White Blog, about the fledgling trend in states stepping up and making half-hearted attempts at apologizing for their role in slavery. I spent a good part of the night discussing the issue with friends. I felt that this was something that is the first step in America finally healing the festering wound that is racism in this nation. But this is far more in that direction.

Just one year ago pundits were laughing, almost literally, at the prospect of Senator Obama running. Just 2 months ago, the pundits guaranteed the sweeping victory and absolute nomination of Senator Clinton as Democratic candidate for the Presidency. For the entire year there were constant cries of if Senator Obama was too Black or not Black enough. And today he stands in position to realistically win the nomination.

Is America ready for a Black President? Not the crap assigned to President Clinton by pundits that obviously have ocular issues, but a real Black President. That question is more viable than ever before. I must admit a personal rush at the thought. That isn’t an endorsement, just an observation.

Is he the best candidate for the Presidency? That’s a question I will answer only after all the primaries are done, and the candidates are announced. But he is an indication that the ‘old boys club’ of America is coming to an end. That’s something I never expected in my lifetime.

The fact is that America must deal with the inequalities that minorities face everyday, and the closer Senator Obama gets the closer that day of reckoning comes. This is not a radical or bad thing. It’s a day that is 143 years overdue. Whether he wins the nomination or not, the closer he gets the closer America comes to being truly unified and approaching a better future for all Americans at the same time.

There are many questions facing Senator Obama. There are many issues that America faces and he has not presented any plans or platforms that address these issues. As we go forward we will see if this was just a signal of what will come, or a real challenge to the glass ceiling that most minorities know. That ceiling has long been referred to as

“If you’re White the sky is the ceiling, but if you’re Black the ceiling is the sky.”


This is not the most political analysis I have ever made. I am excited about thoughts that have little to nothing to do with the actual potential of the Presidential race. I’m honest enough to admit that. But is America willing to admit that perhaps, after this adrenaline rush passes and the real questions get answered, a Black man may be the best choice for America? Would America still elect him?

Well that my more emotional thoughts based on the Iowa results. Tomorrow I’ll get back to seriously evaluating the results, and the potential nominees.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

The Black middle-class is not better than 5 years ago Part 2

Continued from The Black middle-class is not better than 5 years ago Part 1...

The point of this is that while one part of our society is extolling the perceived improvements in our society, the other part is reeling from the reality. Is there any wonder why inner city schools are not getting additional funds they need. Or that police departments are still biased in their actions or that hate crimes are increasing yet hate crime statutes are unevenly applied?

Something needs to be done. The facts are out there, but without action the numbers will just continue to degrade. That action must come from both sides of this disparity. Just as no one side is singular in fault, no one side can fix the problem.

I say we need to remove the welfare system. Its inception, in the current form, has created benefits only to single parents with multiple children. It has enforced the single parent household, and is a malaise in the Black community. In its place I say we go back to the original concept from the depression era. Everyone works, no matter how trivial the job, and for that they get a wage.

I suggest that ½ of all police officers must come from the communities they patrol. Only those with a connection the citizens they protect do so with an even hand.

I suggest that inner city schools are the priority in getting funds. Every school must have enough books for all the students, and those books should be current to within the last 5 years.

I suggest that we hold the media accountable. No longer will music videos depicting violence, degradation of women, drug use and sale be allowed on the airwaves. I respect the right of artists to be free to express themselves, but at the same time the public has the obligation to not be shown promotions of these base acts.

I suggest that major news media becomes more responsible. An even hand and fair reporting is more essential now than ever. Rather than consistently showing only minorities every time a negative trait in the nation is discussed balanced images should be shown. Instead of 95% of all Amber Alerts, and missing persons reported on the news being only Whites, a fairer look should be done. Black children are missing too.

News stories involving African Americans deserve airtime too. The Jena case did not just happen; it’s been discussed for months by bloggers before the media bothered to pay attention. The Megan Williams case, which has been ignored, is more important than 2 days of discussion about Ellen DeGeneres losing a pet.

These may be small steps in appearance, but they are answers to the roots of a problem that has been ignored for too long. They are simple steps. They are responsible acts. And they will benefit the nation. But to continue in the manner we have will result in steps backwards to a time and acts some assume only existed in the shadowy past of America. But all shadows never disappear completely, and given time they can grow long in their reach.

America cannot benefit from 70% of a class of its people being unable to attain the same or better than their parents. America should not have such a situation to contemplate. We are better, and we can do better. All of us.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

The Black middle-class is not better than 5 years ago

I am troubled. I could not sleep having read the numbers and thought of the implications they held. The severity of them stands out, with a stark foreboding nature. And I think you will agree.

The numbers I speak of come from USAToday, and the Pew Research Center. Simply stated, African American kids are more likely to make less than their parents. Specifically this is what was found for middle-class Blacks, a group of individuals that is incredibly small and decreasing every day. In that group 70% of the children made less money than their parents, while virtually 70% of White children of middle-class parents made more. And if you are wondering, this is from October 2007 hardly ancient times.

What this implies is very straight forward. Life as an African American is about to get much more difficult rather than better. And this is the situation when there are more Blacks involved with government, business, and entertainment than perhaps ever in the history of the United States. Is it any surprise that when asked 56% of Blacks see things getting worse, or that Whites asked the same question had the same percentage (56%) saw the future for Blacks improving.

I can hardly imagine a more problematic situation for the nation. On one end we have the very real perception that fewer are doing better held by African Americans, and the other is a cheerful belief that life is getting better held by Whites. Is there any wonder that so many question why there is such an uproar when events like Genarlow Wilson, Megan Williams, or the Jena 6 occur? Blacks see things becoming more like the 1950’s and Whites see a hoped for future envisioned in the late 1960’s.

The window dressing looks fantastic. Figureheads like Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, Denzel Washington, Bill Cosby and Senator Barack Obama are making strides that my grand-parents could only dream of. Yet, fewer children stand a chance of gaining even a portion of such success in their adulthood. And that means strife. And strife inevitably equates to violence.

The question arises why this is happening. Some will say it’s the fact that Blacks fail to be involved in their community. Others claim it’s a lack of education. There is the question of the loss of the 2 parent family, and the impact of major media promoting base, generally illegal, violent aspects of culture. I believe they are all factors to different degrees.

Given that, why would Whites have an entirely opposite belief of what the current status is? Thinking about it, and speaking with a friend that is in a mixed marriage, I would say that it’s because of the figureheads they see. Because Senator Obama is running for President, and Condoleezza Rice is Secretary of State, and the apparent opulence of a few, very visible entertainers (mostly rappers in this case) the impression is that things must be better in general as 20 or 30 years ago you did not see this. That of course is the assumption of thinking what you see in one is common for all.

While there are dramatically more African Americans in politics today (elected office or in the executive branch) there is no difference in injustices in the legal system (as I am aware). 30 years ago a Black man would get sentenced harsher than a White for the same crime, and violence against a White virtually guaranteed a life sentence or the death penalty. That has not changed. In the 1990’s Rodney King was viciously beaten by cops that were acquitted, last year Sean Bell and 3 Black men were shot (he was killed) multiple times by 5 police officers without cause (no viable proof was ever provided to my knowledge). There is no difference.

Yet many might point to the success of OJ Simpson as an example of the correction in the balance of the law. And I would have to counter that for over a decade he has been hounded by the media with the carefully worded accusation of guilty ever since. And there are the examples I cited earlier, which are a mere handful of cases that show a consistent trend in the media and legal system.

Continued in part 2...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

Facts are not as important as myths Part 3 - 11.7.2007.3

Continued from Facts are not as important as myths Part 2...


    Michael Richards went into a racist rant, and was only covered in the news after 2 ½ days of the video being at the top of YouTube. Within 24 hours the story was turned into how this might affect DVD sales of the Seinfeld show.

    Don Imus took 3 days before it reached the major news airwaves. Within 2 days after that the question from pundits and news anchors was why certain words were promoted by rap artists. The questioning never addressed the fact that there have been constant debates, arguments and articles against the use of these words for over a decade. The questions also failed to address that corporate executive’s greenlighted the marketing and solicitation of a specific type of music that contains only these words, and that they virtually removed artists that promoted any other form of the genre.

I can go on. There is the month long attention to the death of Anna Nicole Smith, and the scant attention to the death or month long delay of the burial of James Brown. 2 days of conversation about Ellen Degeneres whining about a pet vs. coverage of the above mentioned Megan Williams. I’m just picking major stories; I have discussed all of these individually in blog posts.

The point is that there is a bias in the media. I’ve said it over and over again. The result is that there is the image of all African American males as being stupid, violent, drug-addicted, felons. It’s not true. It’s not even close.

Yet there is no suggestion of White males as being wife killing, co-worker murdering, school mass murdering, hate promoting fiends. If there was a fairness, an equality of the major media, that would be the conclusion. It’s actually more accurate as the numbers show. But the mere suggestion of such a thing evokes anger and cries of lack of education.

Without knowing these numbers I recently claimed that young White males are the most dangerous people in America today. For that I was told I was mentally challenged, a fool, and uneducated (all in far more colorful and explicative laden wording, which is why it was not approved). But having done the numbers it seems I was not only right, I am dramatically right.

Yet for all this information, for all the facts that more Whites are killed in a given year – overwhelmingly by other Whites – over the last 29 years (if not longer) and in every year, Blacks are feared and demonized. African American males, of all ages but particularly the youth, are considered dangerous and animalistic yet without real validation.

Concluded in part 4...

Labels: , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Facts are not as important as myths - 11.7.2007.1

So recently I had a comment on a post where I was told about homicide rates of Black on White crime. Now considering the source of the information, I had serious doubts on the credibility of the information. So I decided to look around and find the facts.

The facts (as reported by the Department of Justice) are that 86% of White victims are killed by Whites, and 94% of Blacks by Blacks since 1976 to 2005. A White is most likely the attacker in murders of family, at work, with poison, or if more than one person is killed. If drugs are involved, or an argument, then the numbers make it more likely to have a Black offender.

But that still did not answer some questions I had. So I looked further. I found that a Black or White friend is highly unlikely to be a victim of a person of the opposite race (8%), and a stranger is only killed by a person of the opposite race 25% of the time.

Focusing on 2006 (estimated data from the FBI) there were 611,523 violent crime arrests and 17,034 people murdered. 70% of all arrests were for Whites, with 59% of those responsible for violent crimes being White. And White teens represented 67% of all teens younger than 18 arrested.

And in 2005, 61% of all hate crimes were committed by Whites (20% were by African Americans). There were 828 incidents and 975 victims of anti-White hate crimes. As for anti-Black hate crimes there were 2,630 incidents and 3,322 victims. Black-on-White murders were 934 (8.8%) vs. White-on-Black murders of 337 (3.2%).

There were 296,507,061 American citizens in 2005, and 299,398,484 in 2006.

Ok, so those are all the numbers, but what does it all mean? Why did I bother doing all this research?

Because the numbers are often twisted and misrepresented by the media and those that have a bias one way or another. Because these stats are the basis of ignorance and prejudice in the hands of some.

If you go by major media reporting you might not get the same kind of impression that these numbers give. That impression, spread across the world, is that Blacks kill Whites on a regular basis. You might believe that all African Americans are violent, or that Black teens commit most crimes. You could gather the opinion that most criminals arrested are Black and that the Black community is filled with murderers and violent felons.

Watch the nightly news; see how often an African American face is attached to violent crimes. Count the time that Black images are shown in regard to crime, or how many news stories feature alleged African American perpetrators. Notice how often reports claim a non-White is being sought in connection to a crime. When you actually notice these things, you see a trend.

Continued in part 2...

Labels: , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Tuesday, October 09, 2007

Responding to Michael Medved's rant against reparations Part 6 - 10.9.2007.6

Continued from Responding to Michael Medved's rant against reparations Part 5...


    6.THERE IS NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT TODAY’S AFRICAN-AMERICANS WOULD BE BETTER OFF IF THEIR ANCESTORS HAD REMAINED BEHIND IN AFRICA.F*** you Medved. I’m sorry but I had to say that as my anger is huge. How dare Medved say that. How could he possibly assume that?

    If there were no African slaves, I feel it’s obvious there is no America as it exists today. There would have been fewer and smaller cities everywhere, incredibly less agriculture would have been grown to be traded. Less money means less arms and ships to defend America from the British, or others. Perhaps the effect means no America at all. And that means world history from that point completely changes in manners NONE are able to accurately comprehend.

    But of the things I can say, my ancestors would not have died by the millions. I’m sure the children and families of those lost would have been better having their father or mother still live. I know that without slavery MILLIONS of families would never have been broken up. That would be better. I know that MILLIONS would not have had to live worse than cattle and livestock for their lifetimes, nor would they need to see their children born into an equal life and taken from them. I know that untold numbers of women would not have been raped (men too for that matter), and their children from these forced encounters viewed as non-existent. I know that untold thousands upon thousands would not have been mutilated and murdered for sport or as punishment for trying to be free or not doing their job properly.

    I can imagine that the word N***** might not have the same meaning it does today and has for centuries. I can imagine that I would not be treated as an object of fear as I go to and from work. I can imagine that my ancestors would not have had to strive to be considered equal for 100+ years. I can imagine that my father, mother and grandparents would not have been denied a place to live solely for their color of skin.

    How much are those things worth? How much more when multiplied by 346 years?

    It is only the greatest level of conceit and self-aggrandizement that could allow anyone to claim that the lives of anyone is better with 346 years of racism, murder, abuse, mutilation, sexual abuse, degradation, insults, and I fear to imagine what else. If this was such a positive effect on the African Americans of today, I ask that Medved, his family and friends all be sold into slavery under the same conditions of the past for the next 346 years. I’ll even grant him just 89 years. I’ll guarantee that at the end of that time his descendant s will live in a nation of stronger economics and greater education than now. Is he willing to volunteer? Would anyone of sane mind?

    But wait, your descendants will have better lives. Isn’t that worth it? According to the all-knowing and generous Medved, and those that think like him, it is. Someone give him Prozac.


**I will end this line of discussion here, but I will continue the response under another title - Real points on reparations**

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Responding to Michael Medved's rant against reparations Part 5 - 10.9.2007.5

Continued from Responding to Michael Medved's rant against reparations Part 4...


    5.WHILE AMERICA DESERVES NO UNIQUE BLAME FOR THE EXISTENCE OF SLAVERY, THE UNITED STATES MERITS SPECIAL CREDIT FOR ITS RAPID ABOLITION. – That is just insulting. Of course America did not create slavery. Medved insults the intelligence of his readers to again debate this issue. It is not the question of the existence of slavery that is in question. It is the actions of America with slavery that is the subject. Again this is obfuscation of the subject.

    The blame is the fact that American slaves had no rights, unlike indentured servants, and were not considered or treated as human beings. That is indisputable. Unlike slaves throughout history, such as the Romans, the Greeks, and others where slaves were considered 2nd class citizens and were able to either integrate or elevate themselves to part of the society American slaves were considered property similar to chairs. Livestock were more ingrained in American society.

    Even today, the concept of a cowboy (a term created to describe slaves that worked with cattle) and movies of them feature more scenes and plot involvement with cattle than African Americans. From start to finish it’s denial and obfuscation. Even for over 100 years after the 13th Amendment African Americans were not able to integrate into American society due to segregation and Jim Crow laws.

    Perhaps if Medved considers time according to geological parameters he would be correct in saying it was a quick change. But to my knowledge there is no other society that had slaves or indentured servants (which are quite different I say again) that treated them in the same manner as American slaves. They may have been treated badly, but they were human. African Americans were not. So the comparison is flawed, because being a 2nd class citizen for 500 years (exaggeration) is not the same has being less than a cow, horse, pig, or chair for 300+.

    And I will add that, if other nations had slavery, of any form at any time in history I could care less. The discussion is American slavery. The issue is American reparations for American slavery. What the Roman, or the Brazilians did and for how long is an interesting side note but it does not justify nor resolve the American issues. This may be a wonderful way to avoid the actual argument, but it does nothing to resolve it. It’s sidestepping the issue. Medved should realize that most of us can see this and should stop insulting us. Deal with the issue.

    “When magistrates in Massachusetts discovered that some of their citizens had raided an African village and violently seized two natives to bring them across the Atlantic for sale in the New World, the General Court condemned “this haynos and crying sinn of man-stealing.” The officials promptly ordered the two blacks returned to their native land. Two years later [1648], Rhode Island passed legislation denouncing the practice of enslaving Africans for life and ordered that any slaves “brought within the liberties of this Collonie” be set free after ten years “as the manner is with the English servants.” ”


    Oh how kind and merciful. Thank you Medved for showing me the compassion that America had at the time. 2 slaves out of MILLIONS that died in forced transit, and countless others killed on American soil, were sent home. I can sleep better now.

    The kind people of Rhode Island decided my ancestors should ONLY be enslaved for a decade. Well that is better than a lifetime, how gracious of them. Too bad that the number of slaves in Rhode Island did not approach the perhaps hundreds of thousands that were sold for a lifetime of slavery during the very same time period.


Continued in Part 6...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Responding to Michael Medved's rant against reparations Part 4 - 10.9.2007.4

Continued from Responding to Michael Medved's rant against reparations Part 3...


    3.THOUGH BRUTAL, SLAVERY WASN’T GENOCIDAL: LIVE SLAVES WERE VALUABLE BUT DEAD CAPTIVES BROUGHT NO PROFIT. – Slaves that arrived in America had a value. Those that died in the slave ships were just flotsam. To ensure profitable trips, cargo ships overloaded their ships planning ahead of time for the deaths of a portion of the Africans. Photo found at http://americanabolitionist.liberalarts.iupui.edu/middle_passage.htm

    By your own admission, probably millions of Africans died and there was no accounting for them. Just as there is no accounting of the chairs that were lost on those same voyages. How many people need to be killed for how long to claim genocide? How many died in the Holocaust? How many Serbians died before American troops were sent with the U.N. to stop the genocide? In Darfur today, it is considered genocide in action with over a million dead and that has been ongoing for 4 years at least.

    By your own admission slaves died en route to America for 300 YEARS, creating millions of dead, not counting untold numbers being killed once in America. Remember, you don’t need to account for, nor is it a crime to kill livestock. Slaves were less valuable than many livestock and there was no full accounting of them. How do these numbers not reach Genocidal numbers?

    Is it not a genocidal act because a far smaller number of Slaves lived than the total dead? By that logic some have denied the Holocaust. That is no less an ignorant answer. Just because the total population of Africa was not killed does not make it less of a horrific and despicable act.

    “By definition, the crime of genocide requires the deliberate slaughter of a specific group of people; slavers invariably preferred oppressing and exploiting live Africans rather than murdering them en masse.”


    As you stated slavers overcrowded their ships because they knew as many as 1/3 would die in the forced transport. That sounds like a deliberate slaughter. Causing the expected death of hundreds if not thousands of a specific people at a time, each time they moved their ships. While you try to drive sympathy to the slavers, I fail to join in that opinion. They committed knowing Genocide, without pause since they claimed that Africans were not human.

    Your further argument, implying that ALL slaves were considered as valuable as livestock, fails as well. First I’m not grateful that some slave owners felt as much pride in some of their slaves as they did their cattle or horses. The fact that some were selected as breeding stock does not make me feel better either. It is inhumane.

    Further it means that some slaves were NOT given this favored status. Much like some horses and cattle were put down to improve the heard, your logic means the same happened to slaves. The loss was considered acceptable. Since the value of ALL slaves was not the same, murder of some was par for the course as it would be with any livestock.

    4.IT’S NOT TRUE THAT THE U.S. BECAME A WEALTHY NATION THROUGH THE ABUSE OF SLAVE LABOR: THE MOST PROSPEROUS STATES IN THE COUNTRY WERE THOSE THAT FIRST FREED THEIR SLAVES. – Again you lie. America was not a manufacturing economy. That is a fact. America at that time was an agricultural nation, exporting sugar, cotton, and tobacco. Those were huge cash crops. Those crops came from slave labor.

    “50% of U.S. exports in 1855 were cotton”


    “American cotton production soared from 156,000 bales in 1800 to more than 4,000,000 bales in 1860… the number of slaves in America grew from 700,000 in 1790 to 4,000,000 in 1860”


    “New York rose to its preeminent position as the commercial and financial center of America because of cotton. It has been estimated that New York received forty percent of all cotton revenues since the city supplied insurance, shipping, and financing services and New York merchants sold goods to Southern planters. The trade with the South, which has been estimated at $200,000,000 annually, was an impressive sum at the time.”


    While the North made huge amounts of money from providing slaves, equipment, insurance and trade for the South, it was the crops of the South that was the source of American income until the industrial revolution took hold.

    One of the primary causes of the Civil War was the fact that the North, without the agricultural trade from the South could not sustain itself. Prosperity in the North was only attained from the slave labor in the South. From 1619 until well in the 1800’s America was a farming nation that is fact. We made virtually all our money at that time from that income source, again a fact.

    Another fact that needs to be noted is that Northern slaves were used to build the infrastructure that became the North. They were used to build city, streets, buildings and everything else. Similar work was done in the South. Jim Crow laws were in massive effect in the growth of the West. There is no aspect of the nation that exists today that does not have its roots in Slave labor. That is a fact.

    America could not exist as it does today without slave labor. Thus all the wealth that exists today has at its roots African Americans and their unpaid work, their blood, and their inhumane treatment and living conditions. There is no amount of double talk or distraction that takes away from these facts.


Continued in Part 5...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Responding to Michael Medved's rant against reparations Part 3 - 10.9.2007.3

Continued from Responding to Michael Medved's rant against reparations Part 2...


    2.SLAVERY EXISTED ONLY BRIEFLY, AND IN LIMITED LOCALES, IN THE HISTORY OF THE REPUBLIC – INVOLVING ONLY A TINY PERCENTAGE OF THE ANCESTORS OF TODAY’S AMERICANS. – Not only is this absurd, it is a lie. It is factually in accurate. American history includes and is part in parcel tied to the 13 colonies. We accept as American history everything from the first colonists beyond. In fact the ‘discovery’ of America by Christopher Columbus (who was not the first European here and thus why we are called America and not Columbia) is considered a national holiday. To deny that portion of our accepted history is to minimize everything about America.

    The 13 colonies all have slavery. That is a fact. The northern colonies had more indentured servants, but there were slaves. To deny that is a lie. It is an attempt to romanticize the facts. It is also true that the northern colonies took on abolition after a time, to deny the initial action is to sidestep history. You know better.

    Further the first African slaves were recorded in the American colonies in 1619, which does not mean slaves were not here before then. 89 years later as you claim, they were still slaves before the Declaration of Independence. In fact slavery existed in America from 1619 until its formal end in 1865. That’s when de facto slavery took over with Jim Crow laws and sharecropping. The Jim Crow laws were in effect, to varying degrees, as late as the 1970’s. If we only count until the Civil Rights acts (which should not have been needed if the 13th and 14th Amendments were actually enforced) then slavery lasted roughly 346 years.

    Math and time do not change because you prefer to view it a certain way. If you wish to parse split hairs you can, but that does not change facts. It just allows you to view things in a manner that will let you sleep at night and live with your head in the sand.

    “Of course, a hundred years of Jim Crow laws, economic oppression and indefensible discrimination followed the theoretical emancipation of the slaves, but those harsh realities raise different issues from those connected to the long-ago history of bondage.”


    How can you not connect the cause with the result? Without slavery there is no Jim Crow. As you admit, slavery continued de facto under a different name for over a century after the 13th Amendment. For something ‘indefensible’ you seem to provide many defenses.

    As for your claim of

    “Even in the South, more than 80% of the white population never owned slaves.”


    Exactly what time frame are you using for that claim? Given the fact that slavery existed for some time in all 13 colonies, then was predominant in the south for at least the 89 years you are willing to provide for, and then continued de facto under Jim Crow, there are centuries of Whites that owned slaved for some period of time. And those that owned slave did not own just one. They owned several families, working in the fields and the homes. So to say, arbitrarily and for your conscience, that only 5% of today’s White population is descended from slave owners is a farce. I would guess that if you count from the start of slaves in America, which includes the colonies that we count as America, then I would guess that the number could be at least as high as 25%.

    I submit the extended family of Thomas Jefferson. Denied acknowledgement for centuries yet proven as descendants, how many other African Americans share tied ancestries to White American slave owners going back centuries. Oh, and don’t forget that many slaves were not documented as they were not considered humans, so you cannot give an accurate guess as to who owned slaves where and when.

Continued in Part 4...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Responding to Michael Medved's rant against reparations Part 2 - 10.9.2007.2

Continued from Responding to Michael Medved's rant against reparations Part 1...

As for students of history and their feelings, do you feel guilt that the Romans held slaves? Do you feel guilt that Genghis Khan ruled more of the world than any other leader? Do you feel pain knowing that the Crusades and the Inquisition happened? Does the story of the 300 Spartans become less heroic because Spartans routinely left babies thought to be too weak in the woods to die? So why should a student of history feel more or less guilt in knowing the rarely spoken facts of American history?

“the current mania for exaggerating America’s culpability for the horrors of slavery bears no more connection to reality than the old, discredited tendency to deny that the U.S. bore any blame at all.”


I’m sorry, bringing up facts is an exaggeration? You say this as opposed to the constant barrage of media, in all forms, that has for centuries claimed that America never did anything wrong. Let’s take our heads out of the sand for a moment and realize a few things. The original colonies are thought of in the most romantic of forms. Similar to how the Middle Ages are seen now. Books, movies and television shows have and continue to obfuscate the truth. When you look at old Western movies, how often are Whites portraying the Indians? How many movies ever show ANY Blacks? How many address the fact that slavery existed in America at that time? Or that Indians were given diseases blankets and driven forcibly from their homes? Who do you think is exaggerating those ‘facts’?

The fact is that these things happened. America did them. To acknowledge that is not an exaggeration. It may feel extreme because the ‘family secret’ that everyone knows and no one speaks about may feel like its being shouted when someone whispers about it, but it is not. The extremity is the degree that it is hidden from the common discussion. It’s so extreme that when the current democratic presidential candidates were asked about reparations, all except one refused to even answer at all. Talk about fear.

As for the points you make:

    1.SLAVERY WAS AN ANCIENT AND UNIVERSAL INSTITUTION, NOT A DISTINCTIVELY AMERICAN INNOVATION. – There has never been a claim I am aware of in my lifetime that has said Slavery is only an American idea. As I recall, my elementary education addressed the fact that Romans and Greeks had slaves. My later education made clear that Spain and England had indentured servants (which is not the same no matter how that is spun around). And there have been many movies that have further let the public know that slaves existed long before America; I believe you’ve seen the 10 Commandments with Mr. Charlton Heston.

    To claim that other nations having slaves and to mention how many does not change our actions. The issue is not what happened in the Ottoman Empire, but in America. If you watch wrestling and then go out and have a fight you will not be absolved because someone else did a similar thing. You are still culpable for your own actions.

    This entire argument is just a means of distraction from the original point that America had slaves. Those slaves were not considered human, as indentured servants were. They had no rights, as indentured servants did in several nations including America and Spain. They were considered on par with furniture, and livestock was often considered more valuable. What other countries did with and about their slaves has no bearing. 2 wrongs don’t make a right.

Continued in Part 3...

Labels: , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Responding to Michael Medveds rant against reparations - 10.9.2007.1

I want to thank my friend MichaelH and the Bakare Chronicles for bringing this post to my attention. This is long, but I feel it’s important and worth it. Please read it all.

I feel insulted, and Michael Medved is the reason for it. Photo found at http://www.koze950.com/?p=29I would like to blow this off as a rant by a guilt-ridden ignorant man, but given the prominence and success of Medved in general that does not apply. Thus I will just have to accept that he is stupid. [Stupid is defined as wanting in understanding or as I like to say “ignorance does not know, stupid is knowing and not caring.”] Given that, I think it’s time that a better answer to his “Six inconvenient truths about the U.S. and slavery” is addressed with some logic.

Before I go there I find it quite interesting that in the comments to his post, there are many jumping on the bandwagon of Medved. I hope they are all happy to be in the same mindset and company of Georgia House Speaker Richardson, and Frank Hargrove.

It is interesting that most people I have known in life across this country don’t want to discuss slavery at all. It’s barely and poorly discussed in schools. Few who have discussed it at all have been able to remain calm in the discussion. I have observed more denial and anger from this conversation than anything else. And none have provided me reasons to change my opinion on reparations or an apology. But I will note that when someone does address these issues, especially in denying any culpability, hoardes come out to comment in agreement. To me that is just mob justification.

But I ask Medved to reply to this.

I served in the Marine Corp, as did my father in Viet Nam where he suffered life altering and permanent injuries. My father volunteered because our nation needed him. My sister served in the Army. My grandfathers on both sides of my family served in the military. I can go on with my cousins and so forth but the point comes down to the fact my family, like many others, love this country enough to give out lives for it. At the same time, we are all intelligent enough to realize that our nation has made mistakes and done outright acts of wrong over it’s history. To acknwledge this is not a bad thing, it’s just honesty. America is not a saint among nations, and for me to say that is not an attempt to

“discredit the United States and to deny our role as history’s most powerful and pre-eminent force for freedom, goodness and human dignity”


To make such a broad and baseless implication is an attempt to discredit your detractors on a basis of patriotism that is insulting and inaccurate. How dare you.

Also to belittle the plight of Native American Indians is also insulting and an attempt to justify actions taken in the past. America did not just 'displace' Indians, we removed them from ancestral lands and stuck them in swamps and barren plains, and those that refused we killed. If you wish to minimize that as ‘mistreatment’ then that is your own guilt. If you feel both these actions detract from our better actions now then that is your personal problem. I do not share your guilt and personal shame. I understand that a child may get into fights and perhaps steal, but with maturity and time that same child can become a great religious leader or hero or another form of leader.

Continued in part 2...

Labels: , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Thursday, October 04, 2007

Some racial slurs some American schools teach - 10.4.2007.1

You can comment here and at Black & White Blog, a blog I co-author to discuss issues from both the African American and White American viewpoints. I invite everyone to take a look and give their thoughts.

I want to thank my friend Shay for pointing this out to me.

School is about education. We all go there to learn. Learn about history of the world and the nation. That’s what it’s supposed to be about. But some schools feel there are other things that kids need to learn.



Of all the things that kids could learn about Slavery and the Civil War, how does this help? Where does knowing this word expand the mind and promote new thoughts? In what way could this be construed as being positive in race relations?

Maybe the school should have had the word REPARATIONS on the cross word, defined as – What America refuses to do or discuss, though it’s been done for Native Indians and Japanese Americans.

Perhaps another word may have been APOLOGY, defined as – Words never spoken by any President or Congress to African Americans in any form.

I would even go with MODERN DAY, defining that as – Impossible to exist without the work, sweat, and blood of African Americans Slaves that built the economy and infrastructure of America from roughly 1619 to 1865, and continued under Jim Crow laws until 1968-ish.

If they wanted to be controversial they could have used 13th AMENDMENT defined as – America opens its eyes and suddenly realizes that human beings exist in colors beyond white and pink.

Labels: , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates
Ask for ad rates