Rose vs Hill? Nigg*r Please!

Believe you me, I made sure to understand what both Jalen Rose and Grant Hill said and had to say before launching into the deep end of this pool myself. And first, let me say that Grant got it all wrong. Jalen was not disparaging black kids from two-parent homes. The tale-end of Jalen's comments explain his thoughts quite nicely: ". . . I looked at it as they are who the world accepts and we are who the world hates." It's not coming from a two-parent home that Jalen disparaged. As I've explained here (and other places), what's at issue isn't one's fidelity to certain standards of blackness; the issue is one's fidelity to equality for all blacks and not just the acceptable ones. Don't sweat it, I'll explain it again soon at some point.

Cause that's not the point.

Here's the point. There's a point in the documentary where they discuss all the racist hate mail they received. Even some Michigan alum were livid and ashamed that Coach Steve Fisher, now with San Diego State, had dared to start five "niggers." Apparently, that just wasn't the Michigan way.

So why exactly is the "Uncle Tom" comment more important than all the hate mail they received . . . in the 1990s! I'll tell you. It's "important" because it served as another avenue for whites to avoid self-examination and focus on perceived problem within the black community.

To wit, I call bullshit!!


White folks would do well to stop being such cowards and start facing their own demons. Cause until you address your issues, white America, race will be an issue. 

Great News for US and Africa!

First, the economic recovery package went through. Second, China-Africa trade is up 45%. Greater trade for Africa means a better economy for Africa. And with China? Africa can start throwing off the economic colonialism of the West.

Yeah!

Update: Colin Powell Endorses Obama for President

Update: These videos speak for themselves.

The video speak for itself. Secretary Power answers every question concerning his motivation.

Obama at the CBC Dinner

Courtesy of Prometheus6.org.

I really like this speech. It's rare that I agree with every word that proceeds from Barack Obama's mouth. Even during his speech to the NAACP. Didn't like everything I heard. But this is one time where I have to cheer and concur every word he says.

Now, let me say to any white person who happens across my blog. All African Americans want is equality. All we want is justice. That helps everybody. That helps all of us. And it's time that you stop letting those like the ones who've plunged us into this financial crisis take advantage of your racial "resentment" to keep you down, too.

Obama Heckled

Update: Here's another opinion/thought on the issue I think I agree with.

I debated whether or not to blog about this. I feel the hecklers were well intentioned but embarrassingly misinformed.

Now. I have my problems with Barack Obama and his "personal responsibility" rhetoric towards the black community. I wish they had heckled him on that issue. But, as I've said before, other places if not here, Obama is far better in policy for Black America than his rhetoric lets on. That was one of the reasons I chose to support him over Hillary Clinton before the Clintons went all redneck on us.

Of course, the heckling should help Obama with white folks scared of the "Revolution."

And I say all that to lead to this - check out Jack and Jill. They address the issue quiet well.

Sorry, Obama

I pretty much gotta side with Ludacris on this one!

Update: Four Year Wait

I'm not alone in my analysis of the situation. This post presumes that Barack Obama does win the nomination, and that the Clinton campaign only wants to make it impossible for him to win in November so she can run in 2012.

The point made is that she won't have African American support then, either.

Top House Democrat denounces Clinton campaign tactics

Posted by: Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON - “Scurrilous” and “disingenuous” were among the words a top Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives used on Thursday to describe Hillary Clinton’s campaign tactics in her bid to defeat Barack Obama for their party’s presidential nomination.

House Democratic Whip James Clyburn, of South Carolina and the highest ranking black in Congress, also said he has heard speculation that Clinton is staying in the race only to try to derail Obama and pave the way for her to make another White House run in 2012.

“I heard something, the first time yesterday (in South Carolina), and I heard it on the (House) floor today, which is telling me there are African Americans who have reached the decision that the Clintons know that she can’t win this. But they’re hell-bound to make it impossible for Obama to win” in November, Clyburn told Reuters in an interview.

Obama holds a sizable lead in delegates won in state-nominating contests which could be hard for her to overcome.

The purported theory is that an Obama defeat in November against Republican presidential candidate John McCain would let Clinton make another presidential bid in four years, Clyburn said.

Clyburn has not yet declared whether he supports Clinton or Obama. But in January, he raised his concerns about the heated exchanges between the two campaigns before the South Carolina primary.

On Thursday, Clyburn took Clinton and surrogates to task, complaining that they want the popular votes in Michigan and Florida counted, even though both states violated party rules for the early scheduling of their nominating contests.

“I think it’s so disingenuous … (adviser James) Carville and Sen. Clinton were all on TV. I’ve seen them two or three times this week, talking about counting Florida and Michigan.”

Obama did not campaign in those states because the Democratic Party said Florida and Michigan wouldn’t be included in the formal tally for the nomination. “Her name was the only one on the ticket in Michigan and still 42, 43 percent of the vote was against her,” Clyburn said.

Still, Clyburn said “I don’t think she ought to drop out.”

But he added, “There’s a difference between dropping out and raising all this extraneous scurrilous stuff about the guy (Obama). Just run your campaign … you don’t have to drop out to be respectful of other people.”

Four Year Wait? (Updated)

I guess should preface this by saying I was watching MSNBC when a viewer asked why Barack Obama's failure to win the white blue-collar voting bloc was seen as a bigger problem than Hillary Clinton's failure to win the African American voting bloc. What Joe Scarborough explained is that African Americans are the most loyal Democratic voters; that Clinton isn't really worried about losing African American voters to John McCain in November. Of course, Rachel Maddow had to point out that since 1964, no Democrat, including Bill Clinton, had won a majority of white male voters; that it shouldn't be a big deal that Obama can't secure the white male vote during the Democratic primary.

So. Hillary Clinton seems to presume that the African American vote is guaranteed even if she's viewed as having stolen the nomination from Obama, the first viable black candidate. I think African Americans should prove her wrong. No, I'm not suggesting that we vote for McCain. I didn't just drink a large glass of stupid. What I suggest is that we African Americans, and any other voters of conscience, either vote for Cynthia McKinney, the former Georgia congresswoman who is the frontrunner for the Green Party presidential nominee; or, vote for Ralph Nader, even though I think he's a bit cloudy; or, not at all.

Yeah, I said it. Essentially, I'm advocating that African Americans essentially phone it in in November. We've gone through far worse than what four years of John McCain might offer. So, yeah, let's forget this election. I'm loathe the campaign the Clintons' have been running. I loathe whatever plans John McCain might have, which I already know includes ending any and all legal affirmative action (And let me point out, few white workers or students are displaced by affirmative action; and, the primary beneficiaries of affirmative action are white women.)

But I'm really disturbed by the notion that African American votes can be taken so lightly. I'm disturbed by the notion that in the name of breaking the hardest, highest glass ceiling women face, the first viable black presidential candidate can be tossed under the bus. I strongly reject some of the reasons he'd make a "bad" president, most of which is, at least partially, racist.

• "He's all fluff." Interpretation: Black people are great speakers, but they never actually do anything about the problem the speech is on.
• "He's a snake oil salesman." Interpretation: Black people are very sly and cunning, and always looking for the next mark for their next con.
• "All he has are speeches." 1st Interpretation: All black can do is talk. They're to lazy to do anything else and aren't bright enough to know what else to do. 2nd Interpretation: All he has is speeches. That's make him unqualified. Don't make him the Affirmative Action president.
• Etc and so on.

Those and others hearken back to racist notions that supposedly explain black inferiority. The Clinton campaign has been playing the race card. And when others play the race card against Obama, even though some Republicans come to his defense, the Clintons use the "controversy" against him. I mean, the only argument Hillary Clinton is making is basically that Obama's all fluff, and unvetted fluff at that.

So what she feels she'd make the better president? George W Bush thought he'd make a better president than Al Gore and John Kerry. And so what there're some who haven't voted yet? Those same voters hadn't voted in elections before.

And what's their major policy differences? The fact that he doesn't have a health coverage mandate? Or, the fact that he's not proposing a Middle East umbrella under which any country that promised not to acquire nuclear weapons would be protected by the US military industrial complex should Iran attack them. Yeah, forget the fact that the most recent NIE said the Iranians weren't trying to build nuclear weapons. Forget the fact that Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, the "crazy" leader we must guard against, doesn't even have control over the military, and the Supreme Ayatollah has acknowledged that attacking Israel or any US ally isn't worth the risk. Yeah, ignore all that. Just like she ignored the NIE before the Iraq resolution. I mean, she's arguing that she'll be best to handle an emergency, but she keeps making these awful decisions under specious reasoning, and is now threatening to nuke Iran if they attack one of "umbrella" allies. I'm not alone in thinking threatening Iran with nukes as a bad idea.

Had she dropped out earlier, she would've made an absolutely incredible vice presidential candidate, and an unbeatable ticket. With his "speeches" and inspiration, Obama would've changed the political landscape and gotten some good policies passed. With her as vice president and his willingness to listen, they would've gotten very strong legislation passed. His presidency will show that the country is actually left of center. Americans actually care about each other and aren't going to cede our country to the wealthiest 1% and multinational corporations. And if she were the vice president those eight years, the country would be ready for her more wonkish style in 2016. She would've walked right through the elections. I guess she didn't want to wait that long. So, she's willing to undo Obama, and if she doesn't win the presidency this year, she can try again in 2012.

So really, why is she continuing her candidacy. The only way she can win, and "win," is that Obama implodes, and it doesn't appear that they may happen; or, that she blows him up. If she's willing to destroy his candidacy to benefit her own, then yes, I say African Americans should not vote for her. Other voters of principle are invited to join us.

Understanding the Black Church

I haven't quite gotten my thoughts together about the recent flaps concerning Geraldine Ferrarro and Rev. Jeremiah Wright and the reactions to their comments. But, I came across this letter to the editor by a SNCC activist I thought I should share.

Dear Editor: The general White community does not understand that
Black people in general join the church and not enjoin the preacher.
I am 4th generation of my family church, Hutchinson Missionary Baptist
Church. Through the generations, my family has seen six
pastors. I, personally, have seen three ministers in the pulpit. I
am certain that there were congregants who disagreed with this or that
minister down through the years, especially during the height of the
modern Civil Rights Movement from World War II in the 1940s to the
Montgomery Bus Boycott and the Voting Rights Movement in the 1960-1970s.
Almost no congregant, particularly those with historical family ties, left
our church. Most Black churches have generational family members. We
must keep in mind the historical development of the Black church, which
came into being by fighting against de jure enslavement of our people and
then the de facto practices to continue discrimination, injustices
and institutionalized racism at the detriment of Black U.S.
citizens. In this current discussion of Black social-justice in accord
with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which I think is good in gaining
understanding and appreciation for our diverse religious cultures we
must remember: A preacher is not running for the presidency.
Sincerely yours, Gwendolyn M. Patton

My Hope for Obama Has Not Dampened

It’s been several weeks since I last blogged. It’s not that I haven’t had any thoughts about some of the world’s current events; it’s that my physical condition (CFIDS) hit a down period. I’m not sure if I’m back on an upswing, let’s hope so, but I think I can find a way to keep blogging every so often. Or at least, more often than every 6 weeks. And yeah, I know I don’t have a (large) audience, but I wanna do my part to advance true democracy and the struggle for justice, and join brothers and sisters is racial solidarity. And before a European American or a Latino brother or sister denounce my obvious endorsement of black political solidarity; black solidarity doesn’t preclude aligning with progressives of other races to achieve equality (having just finished We Who Are Dark, by Tommie Shelby).

So, in the wake of 1- 4 March 4th for Senator Obama, let me restate and explain my support and answer to some questions I’ve seen raised.

First, get over this notion that African Americans are only voting for Obama because he’s black. Remember, initially, Hillary Clinton had an overwhelming majority of black support in the polls. Obama has black support not only because of his color and the tremendous good it could do for our community and country, but because he’s more progressive than Clinton; he rejected the occupation from the beginning – I’m not upset with his funding the war because the troops were going to be over there and they need the funding, though the waste of thievery of private companies is criminal; he runs a campaign based on the issues; he doesn’t triangulate his political policies; and most importantly, he doesn’t play ‘divide and conquer’ with the electorate. I’m personally rejecting Clinton primary campaign because I don’t like how she’s run this campaign. And I’ll add, Bill Clinton is not black, he’s white, and Toni Morrison’s point had nothing to do with ethnocultural identification.

Second, enough with the question of who has it worse – blacks or women? Not only is it clear that black men have it worse; not only does this question ignore black women; worst, it puts two groups who should be working together against one another. And for the purposes of this campaign, the question doesn’t have to be who has it worse; it can be who can make things better. In my opinion, the candidate who hasn’t been playing on divisions is better position to make things better for everyone. And let me respond those who argue if Obama were a woman, with his record, there’s no way he’d be a serious candidate. Assuming you mean black woman, of course he wouldn’t be where he is. If you mean white woman, well . . . Clinton’s considered a serious candidate and the only difference the two have in experience is age. And may I ask how do we imagine the campaign going if it were Barack Obama vs. Diane Rodham?

Now, I really don’t like the way Clinton’s been campaigning. I don’t like that she does attack Obama. And I don’t mean the whole ‘pointing out differences’ thing. I’m okay with that. What I don’t like is distorting and lying about your opponent’s record. Even Dan Abrams, who is constantly ranting about the alleged anti-Hillary traditional media bias, constantly gives her more demerits than the demerits he has to imagine to give Obama.

I really like the way Obama’s run his campaign. It really is from the bottom-up. It really is a campaign of the people. Moreover, point by point, Obama talks about policy specifics as much as Clinton. And that’s one thing I discredit about Clinton’s campaign. I mean, I understand you want voters to act on the basis of how you paint your opponent; but, how can you feel good about wins based on the distortion of your opponent? Obama is more than just “speeches.” I repeat I know that’s standard fare, but that’s what folks don’t like about standard politics. Clinton keeps saying ‘this is your campaign,’ but that’s not true. Her campaign is run top-down. I know some argue that you can’t be sure of what you’ll get from Obama. I respond that we do know that he’s opened and awakened latent progressive activists. We’ll be able to affect his policy as president. I know some are afraid that those who’re active now will go back to sleep after Nov 4 Election Day, but I don’t think we will. Most of those who’ve come alive have been waiting for such a moment as this. We’ve been waiting for a president who acknowledges our importance and promises to listen to our voice. We all realize the “urgency” of this moment and have no intentions of seeing it lost to us. I know not everyone can join a “movement” as some have to “work the night shift,” but I have no idea what that’s supposed to mean.

Now, let me make clear my concern with the campaign continuing on. I think Obama will do well and eventually lock up the nomination. And I’m sure even if the contest goes through June, the candidates themselves will be friends again. What I don’t like is what I see from the two groups of supporters. Admittedly, I especially detest the arrogant attitude and condescending comments coming from Clinton supporters to Obama supporters. We’re called Obamabots and deluded. And while there are those who argue Obama supporters are just as bad, I haven’t seen it. I have seen nasty comments from Obama supporters, but they’re mostly based on whatever idiotic comment some Clinton supporter has made, not on someone’s support for Clinton per se. And what’s gonna make it hard for Obama supporters to have to face a ticket with Clinton in November – by that I’m referring to those who’ll still vote and not sit out November – is that we’d have to vote for a person who’s called us deluded, suggested we’ve been fooled, who dismissed the black vote, who’s played blacks against whites, and blacks against (white) women. I’m not looking forward to that. I’d just hate a John McCain presidency even worse!

Don’t get me wrong. I’m sure Clinton will get things done. The problem is that I’m also sure she’ll get things done by resorting to politics as usual, pissing off half the electorate, and leaving conservatives demanding “change” by 2012. Obama will get things done, but he’ll do it by changing the frames of public debate. With an Obama presidency, conservatives won’t be able to talk about the abuses of “liberalism.” Instead of a Democrat having to move to the right in 2012, the Republicans’ll have to move to the left because the debate will have changed.

And now for my last thought: If Clinton and her supporters have such a problem with Obama’s words and speeches, STOP STEALING THEM!!