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

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Rev. Jesse Jackson throws stones at Senator Barack Obama - 9.20.2007.1

It’s amazing what a mere 6 months allow. In this minor amount of time Reverend Jesse Jackson seems to have forgotten, and hopes we have as well, his endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama. That’s funny.

“He has my vote,” the Rev. Jackson told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.

“I just have an appreciation of him,” Jackson said.


That was on March 29th of this year. But on Sept. 19th the comments from Rev. Jackson seemed anything but supportive, or the words of a friend.

“Jackson sharply criticized presidential hopeful and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama for “acting like he’s white” in what Jackson said has been a tepid response to six black juveniles’ arrest on attempted-murder charges in Jena, La. Jackson, who also lives in Illinois, endorsed Obama in March, according to The Associated Press.

“If I were a candidate, I’d be all over Jena,…”


Wow. Talk about a reversal of position.

Let’s get a couple of things clear on this. I don’t think that Rev. Jackson really cares about Sen. Obama winning. Jesse Jackson Jr. may but not his father. That presumption explains the comments about the Jena 6 and how Sen. Obama acts.

By the way, Rev. Jackson would be all over the Jena 6 as a presidential candidate, but as a civil rights leader, and a news media declared “leader” of African Americans, he has had virtually nothing to say about this case? I mean though this has finally gotten attention, enough to have been part of questions asked to President Bush in his press conference today (roughly at 11am), it is hardly a new thing. Black bloggers have long been speaking on this, for months. The major news media just ignored all the commentary on the case. And I am unaware of Rev. Jackson, or Rev. Al Sharpton, stepping up and making a national press conference on the matter.

That is not only hypocritical, it’s wrong. Rev. Jackson and Sharpton have the ability to bring many issues to the media that the rest of us have to work 10,000x harder to bring to light. Yet they are quiet on many until they can get the limelight, even if at the cost to others in my opinion. Take the example of Ms. Megan Williams.

I’ve already commented on the horrendous crime inflicted on Ms. Williams. I have already criticized the major news media for their failure to follow this story, especially when they choose to cover nonsense like Britney Spears and every single nuance and footstep of OJ Simpson. I was not alone. Several bloogers, were on this at about the same time and some made similar points about their local and national major news media outlets. I heard nothing from Rev. Jackson or Sharpton. They STILL have not mentioned anything about the case.

So I have to say, with due respect, that Rev. Jackson should stop throwing his stones because his glass house is already massively cracked.

And will the media stop saying that Rev. Jackson and Al Sharpton are leaders of African Americans. There was no vote. No one asked my opinion nor any other Black person in America. The news media made up that claim. The news media wants them to be in the limelight as opposed to others that may well deserve it. Some might say that both reverends are the lapdogs of the news media, which is far worse than being accused of “acting white”.

More on the “acting white” thing.

Labels: , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Thursday, July 12, 2007

Presidential candidates only speak to one side of the fence - 7.12.2007.1

What’s wrong with this – the National Education Association (NEA), NAACP, National Association of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) all invited the Presidential candidates of both parties to speak before them, in each only one Republican candidate appeared. Why would that be?

While each group is considered ‘liberal’ that is not an absolute fact. To take the NEA, it’s 1/3 Republican in its membership. Mike Huckabee appeared and was well received by the group which had 10,000 members attending. Considering the 3.2 membership in the NEA, this was a big coup for Mr. Huckabee and one that no other Republican was able to share in.

See what the Presidential candidates have been asked and their response.
Colorado Representative Tom Tancredo was the only Republican to appear before the NAACP. At the NALEO event, Representative Duncan Hunter of California made the only showing. They were the only ones. Why?

I understand that the ‘understanding’ among pundits is that these organizations are all Democrat-leaning and that they are liberal groups. I understand that the focus at the moment is to gain the win at the Primaries of each party. But I have to believe that one of the most important goals for any Presidential candidate is to be able to win the Presidency of the United States. If the public is for a candidate, then what party would stop them from going forward?

I hate to see political math in action. It annoys me. I may have used the recent actions of Republicans here, but the same is true of Democratic candidates in the reverse. All because there is a theory out there that gaining the best electoral math determines the winner. That just makes me come to the conclusion that none of the candidates feels they are strong enough to appeal to the majority of the American citizenry.

I mean, if you believe you have the right position to move America forward, why would you be afraid to explain your plans to those that have a political viewpoint that is not the same as yours, and are likely unaware of your stance on the issues? It’s one thing to preach to the converted, it’s another to convert those that disagree. But a President should be able to do that. At least in my opinion.

I find it insulting that ANY candidate presumes that talking to any group of Americans is a waste of time. If you wish to lead this nation, you must be willing to speak to this nation. The President is the leader, but only so far as the public wishes to go in one direction or another. I think far too many candidates and pundits forget that. The public elects the President (yes, through the convoluted electoral election process) and the public backs the decisions the President makes. For the public to elect the best person we need to know what they stand for and what their plans are.

Dodging this group or that is not Presidential. I see it as a weakness. I said the same of the Democrats that turned down a debate sponsored by Fox News. If ANY candidate can’t answer tough questions for their political opposites, how good could they be at answering Al Quida? Or any nation that opposes the United States? Or achieving the goals they state are their agenda?

Speaker Pelosi is an example of this I think. She talked a great game speaking to her supporters, but due to her failure to convince her detractors the 100 day plan has failed, the Congress wastes time and money on fishing expeditions on matters where no crime exists, and the American public is angered. As low as the President’s approval rating may be, the Speaker and Congress are even lower.

The candidates need to step up. So much has been said about the women’s vote in this upcoming election. A lot is being said about African Americans and Hispanic/Latino Americans as well. Any candidate that assumes that these groups will or will not vote for them, without speaking to them creates a self-fulfilling wish, and that may not be the best thing for the nation.

I would hate to have to write a post 3 years from now saying, ‘I wish so and so stepped up and spoke more about this or that. We might be in a better place today if they did.’ I don’t anyone wants to be living in that situation, do you?

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Thursday, July 05, 2007

Presidential candidates say national healthcare sure, but HIV/Aids no ideas - 7.5.2007.1

In the recent Democratic Presidential debate held at Howard University, an interesting question was brought up. What are the candidates going to do about HIV/AIDS. The question was posed to specifically address the fact that it is the leading cause of death for Black women age 25-34. But considering roughly half of the estimated 1.3 million people infected in America today are not African American it is a question that EVERY American should be concerned about.

With over a decade of knowledge and research posed on this one subject, most would expect that the government would have a defined plan in place. Goals and targets set, with periodic reports of status towards those goals. Yet none exist. Nor does a single candidate of either political party have an answer.

Probably the most powerful comment came from Senator Clinton

“If HIV/AIDS were the leading cause of death of white women between the ages of 25 and 34, there would be an outraged outcry in this country.”


That may be a true statement, but we have learned a few things. HIV/AIDS is not a gay issue, nor an African American issue. It’s not something that is exclusive to the poor or uneducated. This is a medical problem that affects the lives of our brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers and children. That does not even touch upon the epidemic nature of these diseases in the rest of the world.

If we compare it to Viet Nam, which affected the entire nation, and is often quoted as affecting every 5th American in some personal manner, there were 58,209 reported dead, 305,000 reported wounded and 2,000 still considered missing. Right now there are at least 500,000 that have been killed and 1.3 million infected today. Viet Nam tore the heart out of America, and HIV/AIDS is killing us.

The fact that not one Presidential candidate has a plan, of any type, is remarkable and incredulous at the same time. This is an issue that does not go away in time or if we do not speak about it. If we do not act on this in a structured manner, it will grow and become more of an issue. If I were to compare it to a cancer, if you do not do anything about it it will kill you.

It’s not enough to hear a nice soundbite, that grabs our emotions on this issue. It’s not enough to make a statement that everyone can agree is true. We need a PLAN. We need LEADERSHIP. Isn’t that what the Presidential candidates are supposed to be presenting in these debates?

I’m glad that the issue of HIV/AIDS is more understood today than it was in the past. I’m happy that the rampant fear that came with the recognition of the disease has toned down a bit. But I’m not happy that there is no leadership in place, or seemingly forthcoming, to deal with this disease. Hiding our collective heads in the sand is not an answer.

Speaking in a Presidential manner is great. Looking Presidential is wonderful. Being a leader that can hold the position of President of the United States requires a bit more. Part of that is having plans for issues that affect 1 in every 300 Americans, and potentially could affect 1 in 10. And for those that think it’s not so bad the National Cancer Institute believes there are 8 million Americans with cancer today, that’s roughly 1 American in 150, and the second leading cause of death in America.

Don’t you think that an issue of such a magnitude deserves attention? Shouldn’t any potential President of America not only be aware that this issue exists, they should have a plan. One that takes more than 30 seconds to explain and get cheap votes on?

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Thursday, June 28, 2007

HR 180 IH, what does that mean? - 6.28.2007.2

Here is something annoying. You have not heard a single Presidential candidate speak about this. I don’t recall any news media coverage of this. Were it not for the efforts of Mr. Don Cheadle, and several other prominent actors, and the humanitarian award he received I might not have heard about this. Not that there was any significant attention made about Mr. Cheadle getting the award or why.

The point is that the United States government has reacted pitifully in regard to Darfur. So far 3 sessions of Congress have been discussing this and still nothing has been done. And here is the proof. On January 4th Representative Lee introduced HR 180 IH. If you wonder what that means it’s the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007 (Introduced in House). So far any attempt at accountability has gone out the window.

As of my writing this now, as Congress prepares to go on July 4th celebration seven months after introducing this bill the best thing that can be said is that it only took 3 months for a subcommittee meeting on this. In virtually seven months there has been no movement on this bill since March 20th. Perhaps if the members of Congress were in danger of losing loved ones there might be more action on the matter.

Now some of you may be saying, ‘Hold on, we don’t need to start another war.’ Others may be saying, ‘What is HR 180 IH?’

The answer to the first is that the bill doesn’t require the United States to put a single solider anywhere they aren’t already. The answer to the second is

“To require the identification of companies that conduct business operations in Sudan, to prohibit United States Government contracts with such companies, and for other purposes.”


Basically this bill cuts off money that goes to support what the 108th Congress
“declares that the atrocities unfolding in the Darfur region of Sudan, are genocide.”
That was almost 3 years ago to the day. How many have died since that time do you think? The GENOCIDE was unfolding according to Congress, it still exists, and we barely hear anything about it.

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell told Congress there was a genocide, President Bush told the U.N. that there as a genocide, yet only 4 states have passed laws requiring that no company doing business with the Sudan can do business with their state. Odds are it’s not your state. I can guarantee that it’s not New York State, home of Wall Street, and where the big six brokerage houses invest millions of dollars in mutual funds that could be doing business with [thus supporting] the Sudan and genocide.

I bet that 99% of those reading this now, that have a pension or mutual fund, have no idea what that mutual fund is invested in. I would bet that 99.5% have no idea what businesses might be supporting the Sudan government. Yet I am sure that, of those over 30 [which is maybe 50% of my readers] everyone was for and supported the bans against South Africa and Apartheid back in 1986.

To my knowledge, virtually every member of Congress is old enough to have at least heard about the 1986 bans. They have no excuse.

Of the 24 colleges mentioned in this bill there is not one that I am aware of that is a Black college. That could be simply an oversite of Representative Lee, or that they are doing matters separate of this bill. But I recall that back in ’86, there was more than one black college that was invested in South Africa.

Perhaps Congress can sleep at night without doing more than speaking about this terrible situation. Perhaps they have more to do in preparing their particular candidate for the 2008 election, or raising funds for that candidate. Perhaps every candidate for President right now can’t spend any time to come up with a 30 second soundbite for Darfur, as there isn’t enough time after explaining the resolution to Iraq, taxes, terrorism, social security, and why they are so great and warm people. Each of those points explained in 30 second soundbites. Perhaps the moderators of the debates are too overwhelmed with questions on when America will be out of Iraq, that question can be and has been asked in each debate maybe 20 different ways, to find one on Darfur.

I know that I was too busy writing to 6 blogs, and growing my company to stop and get into this issue. But at some point you have to stop and say, I can do more.

Well here I am doing more. I’ve raised the bar. Now you know. What will you do? Will you get in touch with you Congressional representative and ask them what they did over the 4th of July while people died and a simple resolution sat on the congressional floor? Will you take a moment to read HR 180 IH, the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007?

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Thursday, June 21, 2007

Media and justice equal? Part 2 - 6.21.2007.2

Continued from Media and justice equal?

“For the last year we have seen anger in white men about the miscarriage of justice they claimed occurred against these kids. In the last year they have had a chance to get a taste of the imbalance that can occur when a prosecutor decides he wants to go after a defendant. They got a glimpse of what Black men get all the time.”


But I am not the only voice in this matter. I have not been the only one to question the ‘innoccence’ of they boys. Has everyone forgotten that this incident started because these ‘upstanding young men’ decided that they needed to call an escort service to have women perform sex acts with a broomstick, while they engaged in under-age drinking?

“… ive decided to have some strippers over to eden 2c. all are welcome.. howerver there will be no nudity. I plan on killing the bitches as soon as the walk in and proceding to cut their skin off while cumming in my duke issue spandex.. “


Innocent of the charges but not innocent individuals, though the media has glanced way past this.

But when was the last time that Black defendants received this same level of positive coverage by the media or the justice system? What case can you name?

In the OJ Simpson case the nation displayed a
reaction to seeing how dismayed whites were when the legal system worked for a Black man in the same way that it had worked for whites all too many times. The intelligence of the mostly Black jury was questioned by the media and became a national punch line on late night television.


The Rodney King case, which prompted the riots, had many
figured the case for police brutality was pretty obvious. Everything you needed to know was right there on video. Instead many white people accepted the LAPD’s defense that King was a threat and the Simi Valley jury’s acquittal of the officers. The juror’s intelligence was never questioned the way the jurors in the O.J. trial was.


Beyond this, how many cases have we heard where an ambiguous African American was the perpetrator only to learn that the actual criminal was the supposed victim. How many times has an African American been arrested based solely on this presumption, and the media demanded their conviction with the harshest penalties only to become completely silent when the truth becomes known?

Injustice is not a Black and White issue, according to the law. Inequality under the law is a fact of life. Now that former D.A. Nifong has been quickly disbarred, the alleged rapists decried innocent of their charges, purported millions paid to their families, and the original victim discredited by the media – who have released her name and image – what happens next?

[I have to mention that I have never heard of a case, no matter the outcome, where an alleged rape victim’s name, image and virtually their address has been released to the public and promoted on several broadcasts. It was an unheard of act, but in this case, for this woman, there was an exception of what was previously a media rule.]

Will the justice system and the media start treating all defendants the same? Will Blacks be defended vigorously when potentially involved in an event? Well just observe the coverage on the missing mother Jessie Davis. Perhaps the father-to-be is guilty, but the media seems sure of it. These kinds of cases often involve someone close to the victim so it could be. But if you compare the questions and amount of coverage being directed to the father-to-be versus the coverage and questions of the man whose entire family was found dead in a car, you see a big difference.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Monday, June 18, 2007

What shopping at Olum's is like Part 2 - 6.18.2007.2

Continued from What shopping at Olum's is like

I was told that I would have an answer on my corporate account in 2 days after Olum’s received my corporate ID number. They received the number on Tuesday of last week, the next day after I had come into the presence of Linda. Mr. Dave Titus, as I recall, gruffly reminded me that it would take 2 days, so I am sure I was expecting to get an answer by Thursday.

I say gruffly because if you noticed, Linda in all her efficiency had scheduled my delivery for Wednesday and when I mentioned this and that it needed to be corrected Mr. Titus directly told me that couldn’t happen. When I mentioned that their automated system had already tried to confirm the delivery and that he should take care of it, he emphatical stated he would. Don’t you feel the love.

On Friday I called Mr. Titus to find out the status of my account. I only got his answering machine, and he never called me back. Hey it was a nice Friday, I figured he was out golfing or something, which I would have done if I wasn’t working. So Monday comes by, and I call him again.

I am on hold for him to pick up for 5 minutes. The receptionist picks back up and mentions he seems to again not be at his desk. It’s 2:30 in the afternoon. She asks me to leave a message in his voicemail, and in 10 minutes she would go in and remind him to call me. Odd that she knows where to find him if he is not at his desk, but I say ok.

At about 5:40 I walk into the same Olum’s store I was at 1 week ago. I ask if Mr. Titus is around, a woman takes my name and goes to check. Nope, not there. (Oh if it matters I’m in a pair of Dockers and a polo shirt – no time off this day). So I ask if I can get the status of the corporate account, I am hoping to schedule delivery as I may be out of town later in the week. 10 minutes to get someone that “might” be able to access the information, and another 10-15 later I find out that there is no one able to get the information and I will have to wait to reach the elusive Mr. Titus the next day.

Now I get a bit snippy, having been serviced poorly since the moment I walked in the door a week ago, and state that I will just purchase the furniture outright. 4 of the women working the sales desk all stopped and were startled. I was not rude in my words, nor loud, but I was direct. They seemed quite flustered that I wished to purchase the office furniture outright. I pulled out my corporate card, quoted the remainder of the balance due, stated that I was told delivery could be done next day as well as assembly of the items that needed it by Linda, and reminded them that this was an imposition as I had preferred to do this via a corporate account but no answers were disrespectful. # of the ladies then started to apply themselves for the first time since I was in the store and found my account, the balance (exactly what I stated it was) and made the purchase and set the delivery. It took 5 minutes of actual work.

Though I was annoyed I apologized to the lady helping me, as she was not whom I was angered by, and stated clearly but a bit more softly that this was the least professional service I had had in a while.

I think that 6 days are more than enough to make a 2 minute call. I think someone should be able to access the status of a corporate account at all times. I don’t think a man in a t-shirt is going to pick up a desk and sprint out of a store. I don’t like being followed as I look over a purchase. I don’t like being questioned if I have enough money for a purchase I state I want, or ignored when I mention I want to make a corporate purchase. I hate when my ability to own a company is questioned.

If you wondered, yes I was the only African American (besides my friend) in Olum’s each time I was there.

What do I think of Olums’s? I don’t use such profanity on this blog. Suffice to say that if I looked different in both instances I was there, and my name was less Hispanic, I would have been treated far differently.

Pass the word on this experience, as I also plan to provide a copy of this to the owners of Olum’s and I want them to know what kind of word of mouth they engendered from me.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

What shopping at Olum's is like - 6.18.2007.1

So here was a fun day. Before I mention more I want to give you some background. Binghamton, NY is a small town to me. It is considered a city and is the largest place south of Syracuse in the state. There are about 200,000 people living in the greater metro area, which includes several towns, and estimates of the minority population range from 2-5%. The average income in the area is about $30,000 but that includes a small population of executives from IBM and a couple of other companies. I say this so those from other places have an idea of the place.

Last week I went to a local furniture store, Olum’s. They are well known and large here. I was dressed casually in jeans and a t-shirt as I had some free time, it was 5pm, and it was a hot day. I had the intention of getting some new office furniture and asked where that section was. My friend and I were shown the area and selections they had and were there looking over the choices for about 3 minutes before being asked if we needed help.

I replied no and the worker, Linda, went off about 30 feet in direct line of site at all times for about 5-10 minutes. She returned to ask if I needed help 2 more times before I had selected some office furniture. I asked about a couple of options, switching the chair mostly, and then decided to purchase some items.

At this point Linda decided to let me know what the price of the purchase would be, which was clear enough to see that had I been blind I wouldn’t need braile to read the price. I just asked her if there were any corporate options available as this was a purchase I wanted to make via my company. Linda proceeded to explain how lay-a-way worked, which I corrected her 2x about. It was a corporate purchase not personal, not that I needed lay-a-way.

Linda excused herself for her error, and directed me to the main sales area. I was told that there was a form that I could fill out to create a corporate account. I mentioned that I was going to put down a third of the price and the rest in 30 days if that was possible. I was assured it was, which I expected. I proceeded to fill out the form that I was given as Linda went to arrange my delivery date for 2 days later, though the next day was available.

Another woman, I forget her name, came over when I had the form nearly done when I asked why it had no place for my corporate name. Well surprise it was because Linda had given me a form for a personal account. I was given the proper account form, which I filled out except for my corporate ID number, which I don’t have memorized. I was told it was no problem, it would take a day or 2 to process anyway and I could call later in the day or the next day to provide the number from my office.

At this point Linda is back, letting me know the delivery would arrive the day my application would be approved. She also casually dropped the fact, 3x, that I would need to deposit 20% for the corporate account. I reminded her, politely each time that I was placing a third down as I had originally mentioned. She then ran my corporate card, asked me if I was authorized on this account (I had mentioned several times at this point I was the owner/President of the company), I reminded her that it was my name on the card and showed her my ID again, then she ran it thru as a lay-a-way. After correcting her mistake I left, somewhat annoyed.

If you think that I was upset by her persistent implication, I felt, that I could not afford the office furniture, and that I was not an owner of a corporation, wait til you hear the rest.

Continued in part 2...

Labels: , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Sunday, June 10, 2007

Talking about Cancer Part 3 - 6.10.2007.3

Continuing from Talking about Cancer Part 2...

Nothing is worse than suddenly knowing you have a tumor, especially when it’s the size of an orange or more. Nothing affects your loved ones more than knowing that you have an affliction that could have been worked on years earlier if someone just checked and paid attention. It just shouldn’t happen. Yet the mortality rates prove that it does.

Politicians may want to talk about national healthcare and affordability, but no one seems willing to talk about quality of care and accuracy. No one mentions that there hasn’t been a cure to anything since Polio. No one mentions that many studies find that the care given to African Americans, Latinos/Hispanics and other minorities is not the same as to Whites. No one mentions that various medications do not affect men and women the same. Having healthcare is not the same as getting good healthcare. It’s not about money, at least not from what I have observed in those close to me.

I hope I am wrong. I hope these are exceptions and not the rule. But somehow I don’t think so. I’d love to hear someone ask this of the various Presidential candidates. Perhaps a question similar to one posed by myself to Senator Barak Obama (who has not to date responded in any manner):

What would you do to motivate institutions and individuals to seek out new innovations with the profit motive removed? How would you ensure that a national program would not function in the same manner most feel other government institutions do, such as the education system (which most feel is a failure)?


[To be fair, none of the Presidential candidates has formed any response to any of the questions I have sent to them. The reason for this lack of response is open to question, but the fact that they were sent these questions months ago is a fact. You can see all of the questions I have asked at Letters to Presidential candidates.]

This is a serious subject. I hope it has provided some thoughts. I will be discussing it more in the future.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Talking about Cancer Part 1

Talking about cancer Part 2

Labels: , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Talking about Cancer Part 2 - 6.10.2007.2

Continued from Talking about Cancer - 6.10.2007.1 Part 1...

Why is early detection so critical?
African American women, who have much lower ovarian cancer incidence rates than Caucasian women, are less likely than their Caucasian counterparts to survive five or more years with this disease, regardless of the stage at diagnosis.

African American women are more commonly diagnosed with widespread and therefore advanced stage, ovarian masses than Caucasian women.

African American, Hawaiian, and Alaskan native women have overall cancer mortality rates that are at least 40% higher than other minority populations.


Also:
Despite an overall decline in cancer deaths for all Americans regardless of race, 36% more black men and 17% more black women are dying from cancer than their white counterparts, finds a new study by Pfizer Inc and the National Medical Association. The study covered the period of 1990 to 2003.

For all five cancers examined – cancers of the prostate, colon and rectum, lung and bronchus, breast and uterine cervix – Racial Differences in Cancer found that blacks have higher death rates, as well as lower five-year survival rates. From 1990 to 2002, the gap between the races in deaths from breast cancer and colorectal cancer has grown, from a 14% greater rate of deaths from breast cancer for black women in 1990 to a 36% greater rate of deaths in 2002. For colorectal cancer, in 1990, blacks had a 24% higher death rate compared to a 40% higher death rate in 2002.


And in a previous post on Breast Cancer I noted:
Also of note is that Black/African American women are more likely to die from breast cancer without regard to age.


I think this says why without any need for further explanation from me.

Early and consistent diagnosis is important. Knowing the risk factors is vital. Yet, without doctors and medical institutions doing their part in identifying early stages of these diseases people will suffer and die for no reason. Not doing their job is not a reason for anyone to be inflicted with the trauma these diseases bring.
I am angered by the lack of attention I have been made aware of. The ‘sudden’ discovery of tumors of such sizes is insulting. The fact that African Americans may have lower incidence rates is not a reason to fail to pay attention to the exams being done.

I can say that I know a bit more about colon cancer in African Americans than my current doctor. When I had my last physical in February, we discussed the subject and he had to do research on the subject to get up to date. Not very inspiring I must say. It’s also odd since I had a previous doctor that was hyper-sensitive on the subject. Both work for the same hospital and are in the same area with similar client bases.

Suffice to say that just relying on your doctor or medical institution is not enough. Don’t wait to find out when the problem is advanced. Ask questions. Force your doctor to give you exams that you should get, based on age and risk. Make sure they know what they are talking about. Give yourself a fighting chance.

Concluded in Part 3...

Labels: , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Talking about Cancer - 6.10.2007.1

I want to talk about something that hits home for me. I want to discuss cancer. I don’t have it but it is someone very close to me. I won’t say who to protect her privacy, but she knows I love her dearly.

The situation is that this 35 year old Black Hispanic woman is about to have surgery to remove a tumor. The tumor is 14cm large. Not one doctor noticed this until very recently. The odds of malignancy are high, sadly. To say this is unacceptable is an understatement.

I have read that African American women, under 50, are less likely to have ovarian cancer. It’s not nearly as prevalent as in White women. I must assume that this causes doctors to not look for it, especially in those that are younger. Thus when it is looked at, we see larger tumors and further progression of the disease once detected. This is a major factor in that African American women have an exceedingly higher mortality rate than any other group. I have a lot of trouble accepting this.

But this is not an isolated case. I am aware of another woman, older but not 50 at the time and also Black that also had a tumor that was suddenly found. Luckily it was benign, though that does not excuse how a tumor the size of a lemon was not noticed for years. Obviously this is increasing my concern for my sisters and friends. Tumors should not be ‘suddenly’ found after years of growth at sizes ranging from a small fruit to that of a grapefruit. It’s not an oversight; it’s insulting and potentially deadly.

This doesn’t just happen in Black women though. I have known of the father of 2 close friends that died of colon cancer, also detected very late in life. In the case of one it was an African American man, younger and diagnosed in a more advanced stage. There is no reason for this.

I keep saying there is not reason, and let me clarify. In the cases of the African Americans let me describe the backgrounds. None are drinkers. 2 don’t drink at all, one rarely. One is a former smoker that quit about 22 years ago. None take drugs. One was a former war veteran that remained in excellent shape, another also served in the military. In each case these are people that live regular lives with at least better than average health other than the cancer. All of them have had professional careers. One, at least, has a Masters Degree.

I say all this because it shouldn’t be a sudden discovery. None of these tumors just appeared overnight. Each of these people should have had some one notice the tumors before they became so advanced. The anger this creates in me is more than I can explain.

Continued in Part 2...

Labels: , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Thursday, June 07, 2007

Rev Al Sharpton and Paris Hilton Part 2 - 6.7.2007.3

Continued from Rev Al Sharpton and Paris Hilton...

In Mr. Gibson’s own words, Paris Hilton getting released from prison and confined to a mansion with access to all her friends, family, servants and luxuries is “rich white privilege in action.” That is not to say that if you are African American, or Asian or Hispanic/Latino, and have a lot of money you can’t get the same privilege. It’s about money and not color of skin. Sadly, there aren’t a lot of Black Americans with net worth’s of the amounts needed to get this same treatment. If there were at least then the system would be fairer.

No one can doubt that an African American woman in jail right now would be released to home confinement if a psychiatrist said they were ‘about to have a nervous breakdown.’ It won’t happen. But I agree with Rev. Sharpton in his stated effort to go seek out women under similar circumstances and ask they receive the same treatment. It won’t happen, and thus some judge or law enforcement officer should pluck Ms. Hilton from her cozy mansion and but her spoiled butt back in a cell. As to the women Rev. Sharpton will pick to represent, I would hope they are “white daughters of coal miners” as well as African American and Hispanic/Latina women. The point is about justice, not color.

But be ready for the general news media to spin this in to a race issue. If they do it will divert attention from Paris Hilton to Rev. Al Sharpton. It will obscure what happened with issues that while real, do not apply here. Its smoke and mirrors played in front of televisions across America. And it may well happen.

Actually, thinking about it as I write I have to wonder if that isn’t the real reason Rev. Al Sharpton was sought out for a response. The Hilton family didn’t make and keep all their money because they are all as ‘smart’ as Paris. A diversion could help keep the most publicly recognizable family member out of prison and in her no doubt lavish domicile. If that is the case, then it wasn’t an inebriated exec but a very sober and far-planning Hilton that made the call. We shall see.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Rev. Al Sharpton and Paris Hilton - 6.7.2007.2

Here is a hot match for you. Rev. Al Sharpton and Paris Hilton. Just titillating don’t you think? Perhaps if you don’t you need to chug a 12 pack of beer. For those not inebriated I will continue.

It would seem that some exec over at Fox News, if not several other news organizations, thought that this match up made sense. Between 4 and 6pm there has been footage of Rev. Al Sharpton commenting on the news that Paris Hilton was released from prison and now is confined to 4000 sq. feet at her Hollywood mansion home for the next 40 days. I assume that whoever was the person making decisions on who to interview for an opinion of this news was inebriated. Why else pick Rev. Sharpton.

Image found from www.afro-netizen.com/
Rev. Sharpton has a dubious history, and is well noted for championing issues that solely affect African Americans. His efforts have had mixed results, the most recent being the removal of Mr. Don Imus from the public airwaves. That effort was one which I shared his view on. Other views not so much. Yet, the media has titled Rev. Sharpton as a leader of the Black community. I don’t know how he became one, nor do I recognize him in such a position, but the media seems to believe all the same.
Yet, without the sensationalism provided by the newspapers, Mr. Sharpton would probably not have become a known figure. Even with the newspapers influence what has he acheived? Has his presence led to changes in the actions of police in NYC in 1987? in 1989 or 91? Has he helped to create legislation that improves peoples lives? Is he taken seriously politically when he speaks about a subject?


Image found from http://bordom.net/
Paris Hilton is a spoiled, inept, seemingly obtuse individual. Oh I forgot to mention that she has a trust fund that has almost as many digits as the national gross product of Belgium. Given that last fact Ms. Hilton has had few people reject her desires to be in movies, make record albums, and generally pretend she has talent. She has far too much money and the family has far too much clout to say no, in most cases. Such is the shame of her life, in my opinion. In my opinion having a lot of money is not a redeeming quality.
I have to say, I hope that Ms. Hilton gets a cell with ‘Shanequa’ and ‘Betty Jean Sue’. Let her think that her name will get her out of cleaning a toilet, and a couple of those rough-neck girls will straighten her out on the real facts of life. Perhaps that will help her get her act right. Or at least let us all have less chances of being forced to see and hear about her antics. Either one would be good for me.


So some executive said ‘we have to hear Rev. Al Sharpton’s comments. Let’s get the African American view.’ Or so I think it might have gone. Ratings numbers on the rise from a racializing [not a word I know] of an obvious miscarriage of justice must have danced before their eyes.

Yet I must admit that Rev. Al Sharpton was correct in part. He stated, this is the “worst example of a double standard…” There is no question of that. Rev. Sharpton went on to state the more racial inequality of the release of Paris, which I find fault with. This is not based on an issue of Black and White. It’s an issue of celebrities [no matter how dubious the claim to fame] and entertainers, in addition to those ultra-rich, being treated in a massively preferential way.

There is no question that the clout of the Hilton family was a factor in the sudden release of Paris. The D.A. was not even notified of the release. Reportedly he found out via the news just as millions of other have. That smacks of politics in action. The kind of response only large amounts of cash and connections provide. In this respect I agree with Mr. John Gibson (The Big Story anchor on Fox News), that it’s similar to the OJ Simpson trial. If anyone, of any color, has enough money and celebrity, they can beat the system. That is more than a shame, it’s a crime.

Continued in part 2...

Labels: , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

Repost of JP Morgan Chase shareholder meeting on Slavery - 5.15.2007.1

This is a repost from http://www.blackentertainmentblog.com/2007/05/jp-morgan-chase-sharholders-vote-on.html

It’s amazing what a couple of years will bring. The public and investors alike are quick to forget so many items in this world of instant news, viral videos, Youtube and 24/7 cable network news. So many items are glanced over, missed, or forgotten in the attempt to get to the next thing that the impact of what’s happening rarely touches us. But some of those items come back and the impact continues to reverberate.

One such case is on subjects that I have discussed often in various posts in my Vass and Black Entertainment USA blogs. Reparations and apologies for slavery in America. The various posts [What Georgia House Speaker Richardson should apologize for - 3.9.2007.1, The surprise about broadcast television - 3.14.2007.2, ect.] reflect my views, and I think the views of many – whether Black Americans, Latino/Hispanic, White or purple for that matter. Many believe that the wounds inflicted to create this nation cannot ever heal if we ignore and hide from the past. Those wounds affect this nation to this day, whether it pops to the surface as the Rodney King riots, the Civil Rights Movement, the murders of Sean Bell and others, or the comments by Mr. Don Imus and other radio DJ’s.

Today the conversation of Reparations and apology took another step forward at JP Morgan Chase. Actually what happened today started in 2005, as a result of actions from 1831 – 1865, so I will recap that information. On January 20, 2005 JP Morgan issued an apology, in compliance with Chicago ordinances requiring the disclosure of slave ownership, for their predecessor banks from the abovementioned time period where slaves were taken as collateral on loans. The predecessor banks, Citizens Bank and Canal Bank in Louisiana, did take ownership of 1250 slaves.

A memo on this was released by ten-Chairman William Harrison and then-President James Dimon,
“We apologize to the American public, and particularly to African-Americans, for the role that Citizens Bank and Canal Bank played during that period," said the company on its website. "Although we cannot change the past, we are committed to learning from and emerging stronger because of it.”


In addition to the apology, JP Morgan created a $5 million scholarship for African Americans in Louisiana.

This commendable act by JP Morgan Chase should be the end of that story. It also should have been the motivation for other companies and states. Sadly this was not the case as lawmakers like Frank Hargrove, and Georgia House Speaker Richardson believe that no such action is either needed or justified. In addition it would seem that a portion of the shareholders at JP Morgan felt the same.

Deneen Borelli led a charge to have the apology, and the scholarship, rescinded in the 2007 Annual Sharholder meeting today. According to Deneen Borelli,
“It's absurd for someone to apologize for the transgressions of others committed hundreds of years ago. Slavery was an abomination and blemish on our Nation's history. JPMorgan Chase's apology for slavery, along with a $5 million donation for a scholarship fund, are the fruits of a shakedown. It is the looting of shareholder assets and sets a terrible precedent.”


Continued in Part 2...

Labels: , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Thursday, April 05, 2007

Letter to Rudy Giuliani - 4.5.2007.1

This is an unaltered copy of a letter sent to Mr. Rudy Giuliani. Any response made will be posted, unaltered, when recieved.

To see other letters sent to Presidential candidates, visit M V Consulting, Inc.

April 5, 2007

Mr. Giuliani,

I am writing you in regard to your current attempt to gain the Republican nomination for the race for President of the United States in 2008. I am a native New Yorker and lived in the city during your time as Mayor of that city. I am also President of M V Consulting, Inc., a non-partisan corporation that has not contributed to any politician or political group, which maintains several internet businesses including blogs. I add that I have not contributed to any politician or party, nor have any of my sites advocated any individual or party in regard to the upcoming Presidential election.

I say all of this because I would like to ask you some questions on why you feel you should be President of the United States. It is my goal to post your response, as well as this letter, unaltered on my blogs for my readers to evaluate. I feel that the 2008 election is a critical point for the United States and its future. As such I believe it is important for as wide an audience of the public as possible to be informed in their voting choices. In addition I feel it important that I inform you that no changes to any response you provide will be made.

I add that I have already sent a similar letter to several other candidates of both parties. If you wish to review the letters that were sent previously, and where any response you make will be placed, please go to:

www.blackentertainmentblog.com
www.mvass.com
www.vassconsult.com/politics/election2008.html

I thank you in advance for your co-operation in answering these questions for my readers and myself.

For many Americans the first time you came to national attention was after the attacks of September 11. What many may not realize is that you started your political career as a Democrat. What led you to change your political affiliation? What changed in your political ideology that caused this move?

Many may not recall that in 1989 you ran for Mayor of New York City and lost to Mr. David Dinkins. What did you attribute to this loss and what did you learn from it?

During your time as Mayor of New York City you implemented several programs that had mixed results. One of those actions was the renovation of the West 42nd street area. Many native New Yorkers feel that the area was sold out to major corporations, in particular Disney, and the soul of the area was lost as well as multiple mom-and-pop business owners. To those detractors, what would you say were your reasons and what benefits were gained by the average New Yorker?

Another matter that was received in a mixed manner was your choice of police commissioner and the law enforcement policies during your term of office. During your time as Mayor, Mr. Amidou Diallo and Mr. Patrick Dorismond were murdered by police officers in a disturbing manner and Mr. Abner Louima was tortured by police officers which was then attempted to be covered up. These policies and your defense of the police department created a significant atmosphere of anger and cries of racism among the African American, Hispanic/Latino and other minority groups in the city; that was not covered significantly across the nation. For those African American and minority voters in the nation, what are your views on law enforcement? Where do you stand on Affirmative Action and other reforms that address racial inequality?

Considering the strong stance against organized crime and for law enforcement, as seen from your actions mentioned above and in your work as a U.S. Attorney, what stance do you believe America should take under your potential leadership towards countries such as Iran, and towards terrorist groups such as Al Quida?

Considering the record number of drop-outs that are African American, and the problems in education nationally in general, what efforts would you emphasize to improve the situation?

Of late there has been a great deal of discussion regarding a national healthcare program. Are you in favor of such a program and if so how would you fund this program? One of the arguments against such a program involves the question of whether the quality of healthcare could be maintained, and what motivation or incentive would pharmaceutical companies have to continue to research new medicines. What are your thoughts on this?

A current focus point of debate is the War in Iraq. Many Americans are upset about the status of the war, and others seek to retreat from this engagement entirely. Repercussions from any decision in this matter are probable to have ramifications for some time in the future of this nation. Where do you stand on this debate? What path do you intend to follow if you are elected? What do you see as potential outcomes of your proposed actions in the next 5 years?

It is well known that you are a cancer survivor. The health of the future President of the nation is a concern for many Americans. To that end I ask what your current health status is. In addition, I would never wish cancer on anyone, but if your cancer were to return and you had been elected President how do you believe you will react? Based on your experience initially, how do you feel this could affect you actions and responsibilities as President?

In recent media interviews you mentioned that your wife could be involved in non-policy meetings, if you are elected. Many may have heard this comment and the flurry of comments about it. Not as many may have heard your subsequent explanation on this matter. Could you explain that for my readers?

I want to thank you for taking the time to read this letter. I look forward to your response. I again mention that this letter and any response will be posted without any alteration.

Sincerely,
Michael Vass

President - M V Consulting, Inc.
Author - Black Entertainment USA and Vass
vass@vassconsult.com
718-344-6921

Labels: , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Tuesday, April 03, 2007

Reflecting on more than 3 decades - 4.3.2007.1

Well another year is about to be added to the time I’ve lived on the planet and I want to share some thoughts on my experiences in my nearly 4 decades of life. One of the first things is that once you start turning grey (which started for me at 33) you can get grey hairs everywhere. You can imagine my surprise coming out the shower thinking I had a string on me and finding out it was actually a grey hair. I’m an intelligent guy, but I had no idea.

But on more serious observations, from the 70’s to today I’ve seen the world change dramatically. Black culture has had no less of a profound evolution for lack of a better term. In the 70’s there was no internet, or computers, cell phones or cd’s. These were good things not to have. I love my computer and the internet. I enjoy the anime I can see due to the creation and expansion of cable television. Yet, they are superfluous at best.

With the growth of interconnectivity on an almost instantaneous level, there has been a loss of real connection between people. Worse has been the hardening of hearts, if you will, that has taken place. Today we can send out a text to hundreds of people, but the time spent with close friends in person has dwindled. We have become more superficial in our contact with each other, or so it appears to me.

As a Black Puerto Rican I have seen this play out to see the wholesale commoditization of the culture. Being African American today is more about clothing styles, speech patterns and social interaction in the most visible sense. Millions across the world adopt the same mannerisms as what appears to make African Americans Black, because it’s a trend and fad that can be taken for a while without any of the negative repercussions it confers to those of color. It’s a waste in every sense of the word.

In the seventies I recall an ad on television by the NAACP about a Black man not being able to go to college. The key phrase I recall is, “A mind is a terrible thing to waste.” It seems too few saw this public announcement as today we have the highest levels of high school drop-outs than ever before. Think about that for a moment. We have the ability to access information about virtually any subject, from almost anywhere in the world, almost immediately, and our children and peers know less today than a decade ago to say nothing of 2 or 3 decades. We have fewer kids going to and graduating from college than ever. Knowledge, the greatest tool and treasure, surrounds us and yet few are reaching their hand out to take it. I do not have words for my anger and sadness on this fact.

Over past decades of my life I saw drugs move from a shady and reclusive item, hidden from children and the public at large, to a normal daily fact of life. It’s so pervasive and accepted that kids today grow up with dreams of becoming dealers, as opposed to wanting to be doctors and lawyers. If that isn’t a fundamental breakdown I’m not sure what is. How did this happen? The subtle and persistent acceptance by law enforcement, and the culture, of drugs in low income areas. The acceptance of drug dealing money in our neighborhoods. Lastly because we failed to educate ourselves and our children, instead blaming other sources for the failures around us.

Continued at my www.blackentertainmentblog.com

Labels: , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Thursday, March 22, 2007

What's behind your mortgage rate - 3.22.2007.2

Continued from part 1...

The fact is that there is a massive bias out there that no one wants to address. In 2005, it was found that 71% that earned 153,000 dollars or more had high mortgage rates as opposed to 9.4%
of Whites. For Black Americans and Hispanic/Latino Americans that earned between $92,000 and $132,000 (hardly a low income and indicating steady work habits I believe), 70% paid a high interest rate vs. 17% of Whites in the same bracket. You may wonder where these rates might be at, perhaps a small town in an isolated or economically challenged portion of the nation? Actually these are figures for the greater Boston area.

In fact the system is so skewed that when an experiment was conducted in that area with a White and an African American potential homebuyer the results were consistent to the above. The fact that the White homebuyer had a lower credit score and lower income, indicating greater risk which should guarantee a higher rate, had no reflection in the rate received. Does your face feel red, because mine feels like it was just slapped.

So given the unspoken fact that a minority citizen will be forced to pay a higher mortgage rate in the best of situations on average, it’s no surprise that many are facing the loss of their homes due to sub-prime mortgages today. That verges on the criminal if you ask me. Lenders are supposed to know better. They are supposed to evaluate the risks involved and the potential impact higher rates can have on the potential homeowner. They are supposed to follow one of the guiding principles of all investments – the ‘best man’ rule. That is essentially placing yourself in the clients position and acting in the best interest given the higher advantage the professional has versus the common person. While I have no doubt some have, the above data (that I have no doubt can easily be found and reproduced around the nation) indicates to me that many used this educated position to reap profit for themselves.

Yet not a word is mentioned on this. Millions are being systematically abused, stripped of funds they should have, stressed with the threat of losing the home their family lives in; and as a by-product contributing to the potential for severe economic consequences they may not fully understand. As regulators face Congress explaining why such bad loans were made, I have yet to hear one question to ask why there is such an extreme disparity. I have yet to hear why this situation was allowed to become so extreme.

And it won’t be asked. Because if it were Wall Street could not deny that they are ‘taking money from widows and orphans.”

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Was your home loan a good idea? - 3.22.2007.1

So everyone is scared about losing their homes, or the stock market crashing, because of the sub-prime loans made for years. Since the blip in the Dow Jones Index in February, and comments by Mr. Alan Greenspan, there has been constant news about the status of these loans that represent more than a million homes in the nation. And there is good reason to worry.

As teaser rates on mortgages are replaced my adjustable rates, many over 3 points higher than the market rate, late and missed payments are growing. Forclosures are growing and banking institutions of all sizes face drops in profit or worse as the year progresses. The ramifications go on and on. Virtually any nightly news will catch you up on all of this. Of course there are a few ‘minor’ things that are being left out.

By minor I mean minority, and when I say left out I mean overlooked. It’s a situation that is a blatant abuse, in my opinion, that is obvious to anyone that can count to 100. Now I’m sure you are wondering what I am talking about. You didn’t hear anything like this on the evening news, or your favorite cable news channel. That’s because the markets hate to mention an abuse that targets the poor, uneducated, and minorities. It’s like investing money for an elderly widow(er), take their money and you will get sued and lose guaranteed.

Specifically I mean that many sub-prime lenders swooped in on African Americans and Hispanics worse than vulture investors. This isn’t an opinion, though it’s not wholesale fact. I’ll explain.

It’s known, though not officially acknowledged, that an African American or Hispanic will virtually always be given a higher mortgage rate than a White person. To quote Mr. Jim Campen of the University of Massachusetts, “Blacks and Latinos have lower incomes and less wealth, less steady employment and lower credit ratings, so a completely neutral and fair credit-rating system would still give a higher percentage of subprime loans to minorities.”

The statement assumes that both groups are being given higher rates currently, and that the system is unfair or hardly neutral, which Mr. Campen does admit. It relies on the statistics of the census rather than individual data. It’s a great excuse to overlook what sub-prime lenders have done. It gives credibility to why a Black American is 3.8 times more likely to have a higher rate than a White, and 3.6 times more likely for Hispanic/Latinos.

That is both ludicrous and insulting. I am not a general statistic. I deserve better than an assumption that I cannot maintain a job, or that I will be paid less than another man, especially when being considered for a piece of the “American dream.” Loan originators are supposed to evaluate the person, based on the factual data before them. Mr. Campen’s statement seems to clearly state that this doesn’t happen, and you might imagine my shock being underwhelming by this.

Continued in part 2...

Labels: , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Friday, March 09, 2007

Conclusion on State of Geogia apology - 3.9.2007.3

Concluded from Part 2...

An example is that of Senator Hillary Clinton, which I quote from my previous post, Commenting on Sen. Hillary Clinton's Dr. Martin Luther King Day speech, “when you look at the way the House of Representatives has been run, it has been run like a plantation, and you know what I'm talking about.” Or in comments from Senator Obama mentioning that he is “home” in Selma. Or virtually any other politician during Black History Month, on Dr. Martin Luther King’s birthday, to humble or humiliate their opponents, or other noted dates of importance to Black Americans. Such comments belittle what was done, marginalizing the acts, and in my mind prove that the connection is real in the minds of all Americans. So why won’t politicians move forward and apologuize at least [other than those already noted]?

I have asked several in the current group of Presidential candidate hopefuls their position on this question. Not one has answered me. I ask all the Pesidential candidates now, will you support an apology from the government to African Americans for slavery and segregation and the various civil rights denials for more than 346 years?

I ask Mr. Hargrove, and Speaker Richardson, to provide me a sound and evidence supported argument that disputes my position. I ask them to show me how America has not benefited from slavery, how that is not connected to today, how there are not Americans alive right now that denied rights to Black Americans, and how the effects of more than 3 centuries of abuse and disrespect do not exist today.

Please help me with this effort. Pass this on to the above mentioned individuals, and every politician in the nation. Post this on the blogs of the candidates for President. Let’s hear exactly why they will not pursue at least an apology, and at best provide some form of reparation for the $9.7 – 24 trillion earned by slaves. Let them explain why they cannot seek forgiveness for the wholesale slaughter of Rosewood, the destruction of Tulsa’s Black neighborhoods in 1921, the Tuskegee syphilis experiments, and segregation to name a few items.

I really look forward to their responses.

This is what I think, what do they think?

Labels: , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

The apology part 2 - 3.9.2007.2

continued from part 1...

But that is not the end of it. From 1865 to 1965 the American government actively pursued policies of denial of rights, Jim Crow laws, duplicity, separatism, inequality, and racism. Whether it was sub-standard education, restrictive laws, and misrepresentation in laws, miscarriages of justice, denial of existence or other acts of racism the fact that being an African American for 100 years meant that you were also a 3rd-class citizen is undisputed. Was that not true the Civil Rights Movement, and multiple laws enacted since 1965 would not now exist. An apology for this treatment and abuse is also required. And as to the question of connection to this, some 60 million Americans have lived through at least a portion of that time period [based on my estimate of Americans age 57 or older giving them 15 years or more life in a Jim Crow, segregation enabled American society]. There is a connection and that is a fact.

Now some may question my last statistic. Perhaps it is not perfect, but there is no question that those 57 or older lived in and benefited from the system that existed. Those 60 or older had the ability to vote and maintain the status quo. Those who were 15 in 1965 had been indoctrinated in the system that existed. That does not mean that everyone in that group acted in a manner that promoted the situation, but the fact is most did. If not then the changes that came afterwards would have happened far sooner. The challenges I’ve had to live through in my youth would not have existed. Change is slow and takes generations, but there is more than just one generation still alive today that lived through and actively promoted the pre-1965 environment in America. They benefited and are directly connected. That much is a fact.

I think that anyone can see that this is not an old, unconnected, long past issue. I am old enough to have felt some of the effects of the pre-1965 Civil Rights world. This is no long forgotten event to me. I believe that there are some 82 million other Americans that fall into the same time range and have had the chance at the same situations growing up to varying degrees. I submit that ~142 million Americans are more than enough people to make this a relevant and current issue. To say it isn’t is to be in denial of facts.

Yet given this relevancy, there are constant refusals to provide an apology. There are adamant arguments made to reject any concept of reparations. Yet no one wants to address the efforts towards reparations in the past, such as where the cry “Where are my 40 acres and a mule” come from. Almost no politician want to even whisper on this subject, with the noted exception of Representative John Conyers Jr. and the above mentioned Rep. Tyrone Brooks, yet they have no problem using the concept of Slavery to their advantage.

finished in Part 3...

Labels: , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

What Georgia House Speaker Richardson should apologize for - 3.9.2007.1

Well here is a surprise and a disappointment all at once. The surprise comes from the fact that a Georgia lawmaker, Rep. Tyrone Brooks, has made a proposal for the state to apologize for slavery. Finally there is a renewed effort to make some kind of reparation for the centuries of abuse and mistreatment that was inflicted on African Americans. More importantly this is a real statement unlike the “regret” voiced by Virginia, The disappointment comes from the statements “I'm not sure what we ought to be apologizing for” voiced by Georgia House Speaker Glenn Richardson and others.

This is a sore subject for me. Ignorance and a refusal to acknowledge the factual past is infuriating. It is the main causes of why an apology at the least has never been made by the United States government to the millions of African Americans who’s ancestors were forcibly brought to this nation and treated worse than livestock. I am not alone in my thoughts in this issue, nor is it a new one. Perhaps the first call for reparations was in 1829, and there have been continuous efforts in the 178 years since that time.

Let me address the stupidity of the statements made by Speaker Richardson, and others including Mr. Frank Hargrove of Virginia. The argument goes that Americans today did nothing, and have no connection, involved with Slavery. This is the most obvious and persistent fallicy since perhaps ‘the world is flat’ or ‘the universe circles the earth.’

The fact is that since 1619 to 1865 African Americans were slaves. Those slaves were forced to work in plantations and fields, providing America with cotton, tobacco, and food crops, that created an economy that rivaled any nation in the world at that time. The economic power of the nation allowed the foundation of the nation to be formed and built upon. During this time slaves were used to also build the cities, roads, railroads and other forms of infrastructure that the nation grew upon. Without the efforts forced to be done over this 246 year period nothing that exists today would exist. That is a fact. It cannot be disputed.

The connection is obviously that without the unpaid, forced, demeaning work done by African slaves there would be no internet, highways, tobacco companies, skyscrapers, stock market, 37 states, or anything else we call America today. Everyone in this nation benefits from the 246 years that slavery existed in America and are thus connected to it. This is not a new view of causation or reasonable consequences. Similar arguments have been made and accepted in regard to the treatment of Native American Indians. Not only did they receive an apology various tribes have been given lands that are separate of U.S. jurisdiction and many visit the casinos on Indian reservations based on reparations to Native American Indians. Similar arguments were made against Germany and Switzerland in regard to their actions to the Holocaust, and both countries have made apologies and reparations long after the time of those that committed the acts. And we should not forget the apology and reparations made to the families of those Japanese Americans that were interred in camps during WWII. Again, these are facts. They cannot be disputed.

So in the first place, what we should be apologizing for (to answer Speaker Richardson and other of his mindset) is the labor, deaths, treatment and abduction of unknown millions of Africans over 246 years. I say unknown because while there are estimates that claim 4 million were slaves, records of African slaves were not accurately kept since they were considered on par with chairs. Those that do not wish to apologize should give up their houses, cars, clothes and money as each item they have and use that was created or exists in this nation is without question connected to the efforts made in the past, just as every law and right we have in this nation is connected to the Constitution and the American Revolution. That is a fact. It cannot be disputed.

Continued in part 2...

Labels: , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

You can be Black and intelligent - 2.28.2007.1

As Black History month comes to an end I wanted to address something I read on Sunday, [I have just heard about the Kenneth Eng piece in AsianWeek and will be discussing that shortly!] As I was doing laundry I was reading the Press & Sun – Bulletin and noticed the article Success comes with a price. The article, written by George Basler, deals with an old issue – “acting white”. It seems that students in Binghamton, and I know for a fact in other parts of the country, are ridiculed for having intelligence. When I say this is an old issue I mean it evokes thoughts of slavery with slaves in the field taking task with those that lived in the slave-owner houses.

I cannot believe that this still goes on. I spoke on this a while ago in my post Do you qualify to be black? - 10.01.2006.1 and I need to say it again it seems. Why is there this expectation that to be African American there has to be a specific style and manner? Since when have any individuals been locked into any narrow view of how they should act or think? How did the pursuit of knowledge, the one treasure that once gained can never be taken away, become a less than noble pursuit? How as a culture have we allowed our children to view being able to think (language being the vocalization of thought) as being an indignity?

This is not a new thing as I mentioned above. I can clearly recall the occasional comment that I thought I was too smart, or white, or not black, back in high school at Evander Childs and during my career as a stockbroker. The one or two people that mentioned such a comment to me, or a few of my best friends (whom I still know to this day and have known for 30 years), were virtually always in remedial classes, drop-outs, on drugs and/or dealers. That doesn’t make them bad people per say but it did make their comments meaningless to me. I mean how stupid do you have to be to not be able to look at me and see I have African blood in me? But I really thought it was something that wasn’t common.

I am wrong, as this article proved. Black culture in America, and the Black community, have failed our kids by allowing this ignorance – no let me correct that – idiocy to continue. This is the slave mentality actively affecting our children. This is the result of children having children, drugs, inadequate schools, and parents failing to be parents first and the child’s friend second, as I see it.

I have never heard any other race question the race of someone in their race. I have never seen any group complain that their children are intelligent. I have never seen such an active pursuit to hold back peers as this article and my own experiences describe. And this is the root of back-handed comments such as the ‘articulate’ ‘clean’ and others often used to address any African American that has gained a higher education. This is the heart, in my opinion, of why so many fail to try to achieve better in their lives.

It is this mentality that creates lemmings, rushing out to blindly buy the latest $100+ sneaker (that costs $5-10 to make and advertise), or watch a film because a black actor/actress is featured in it (though the quality of the film is obviously sub-par like the Honeymooners remake or Soul Plane), or blindly vote for a politician because of their party affiliation without any knowledge of their platforms or politics in general. To be a Black American is more than what I wear, what I buy, or what career I endeavor in. Being an African American is not a commodity choice. I cannot shed it like a pair of over-priced jeans, nor would I.

To deprecate those that chose to improve their lives with knowledge, rather than pollute it with drugs or mindless apathy is a crime. Not a legal crime but a social and moral one. To be intelligent is not ‘white’; there are intelligent people of all races. Again I mention that for centuries African American have made inventions and breakthroughs that have helped create the world today as much as did the slave labor that made the foundations of this nation. Those that would say others are ‘acting white’ need to invest some time in reading about history and the achievements of those African Americans that came before them and see that perhaps they should say that those same individuals are in fact ‘acting Black’.

I hope the kids in Binghamton and in school across the nation hear this. I hope they remember that Black and Proud is not just a song or t-shirt slogan (and I freely admit I do sell a clothing line of a similar statement) but that it has a meaning. I wish that they keep a copy of this and recall it when they seek higher educations and better lives. There is no trade off in being African American, or Black American if you prefer, and intelligent. Anyone who would proffer such a choice has nothing to offer. Inevitably I suspect that anyone that would make such a comment will fail, the source of that downfall being within them. I learned long ago, I could chose to abandon my pursuit of knowledge and join those on the corner selling drugs and making a lot of cash. Of course I would also share in their short lives, extended jail terms, and drug addition. That choice was easy to make and hard to live. Yet my life and experiences today are often the only conversation piece I have with the survivors of the corner when I visit home, still selling, still going to jail, still dying violent deaths without glamour or fame or family and true friends. That is the true outcome of the thug life and the antithesis of knowledge in my opinion.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

Repost from Black Entertainment USA

Full comments can be seen at www.blackentertainmentblog.com :

I’m not sure how many read the piece by Mr. Bruce Kluger, but I hope many did. The opinion found on USAToday.com today was a well-balanced view of America. Very well-balanced from the view of a White American. I say that with no disrespect intended, rather with the emphasis that while there have been many improvements in the nation when it comes to race, they are just superficial. I do not fault Mr. Kluger or his opinion, I think it is accurate to a degree. I just feel it needs to be expanded on from a different view point.

When I was in elementary school, some 30 years ago, I recall that I was definitively told that I could not speak to Rosemarie because she was white, by her older brother. I recall how this public scolding made me feel, especially as every parent and older kid there said and did nothing to stop him. Not even a cross look. That was in the later 1970’s.

Let’s fast forward to 2006. I have spoken several times on experiences I’ve had and quite a few I haven’t. I recall in late October – November how I was confronted by a man for speaking to his girlfriend’s friend. Both women were white. The one I was speaking with was a friend, and I knew both women previous to this encounter. I was given a clear understanding of what the man’s problem was. I was, in his eyes, a Black American. [I in fact am a Black Puerto Rican and proud of it]

Another situation in 2006, I detailed in a previous post. You can read it at What is a Black African Hispanic American supposed to think?. Given 3 decades there has been no change in some opinions. It’s not nearly as uncommon as some believe, especially as you travel farther from major cities into the ‘heartland’ of the nation.

But there is little change in business as well. If I had $5 for every time a client of mine did a double take upon meeting me I’d be far wealthier. As a stockbroker I have won bets and stunned colleagues by the reactions clients had upon meeting their broker for the first time, in some cases after having been their broker for 5 years. Luckily I was either an exceptional broker [which I was and many former clients to this day will still attest to] or highly charismatic - or perhaps a combination of both – because I never lost a client due to my color I am aware of. I did have some clients stop sending new funds and taking fewer of my calls, counter to their prior trend, though.

I cannot count how many times I have been told that I am ‘articulate’ or ‘speak really well’. That is virtually never a compliment, it is a comment that is used almost exclusively for non-whites. It is meant to convey a back-handed compliment. It implies that, excluding the individual getting the compliment, all others of that group are incapable or generally without the ability to speak or comprehend English. That rational though, as conveyed by language, is beyond this group. For those that question the thought I suggest you think back to the last time you heard or spoke such a comment. Visualize who the comment was made to. Then recount the last time you have ever heard the comment given to someone that is white. Then speak to a white person you have never met, and give them this ‘compliment’, I am sure the perplexed look they give you back will make my point.

Continued in part 2 ...

Labels: , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Thursday, February 01, 2007

Senator Biden and Senator Obama - 2.1.2007.1

I don’t think Senator Biden is a racist. I really don’t. I think his comments though betray a mindset that pervades America and is implicit of the double standard in American society. This mindset is deeply entrenched in the 45 and older age group in America. Sadly they are also the ones that do the most voting, helping to pass laws or failing to do so.

I think most have heard of what Senator Biden said. "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," he said. "I mean, that's a storybook, man." These comments have started a flurry of comments. I have been waiting to hear more from Sen. Biden, and I have been unsurprised at his follow-up.

Some have readily accepted that Senator Biden misspoke. That the reactions to his words are extreme. Some feel that since he is a Democrat, the media and therefore the public are taking this in stride; and that if a Republican had said the same words an uproar would have occurred. To some extent all are correct. But I have no doubt that there was a clear secondary meaning that he did not even notice he made. It’s so subtle that he just blew past it.

To say Senator Obama is ‘articulate’, ‘clean’, and a ‘nice-looking guy’ is to belittle him. It’s a back-handed compliment at best. And not much of a compliment at that. Perhaps the Senator meant clean-cut, though that implies a description of looks and not quality of character. Senator Biden has said he intended, and should have used, the term fresh. Again that implies a description of look and not quality. The only positive part of the comment is that he called Senator Obama bright. Of course that was mitigated by his further stating that Senator Obama is a storybook, which implied that he is unreal or something that only little children would believe. Wow, what a nice compliment.

I am highly upset with the articulate comment. It implies that African Americans are generally incapable of being eloquent speakers. While rap and hip-hop may be popular, there are millions of African Americans that speak as well, if not better than Senator Biden. Several entertainers in fact speak better, when not in their on-stage personas (like Mr. Eddie Murphy, Mr. Marin Lawrence, Queen Latifah, Mr. Dave Chappelle and many others). This same kind of thinking was used to describe Former Secretary of State Colin Powell. It is this mentality that is used to insult African Americans while seeming to compliment us. It directly attacks the thought that intelligent African Americans are anything but a rare occurrence.

The use of the term clean, where many have focused, is very straight-forward. It implies, like all of his statement, the look of Senator Obama. This troubles me. From the mistaken thought that African Americans are dark because we are ‘dirty’ to bring the thought that the average Black American fails to have good hygiene. Both are false, shallow-witted thoughts.

The fact that Senator Obama is not ugly, detracts from his abilities. Most Senators, and Presidents, are anything but model quality in looks – to me. Yet I do not recall hearing that as part of their platforms which the public votes on. American Idol yes, politicians no. The looks of a politician have no bearing on their ability, but when a person seeks something nice to say – and they have no real positive comment – statements about superficial, transitory, subjective fluff fill in nicely for real substance. If done right it can even be used as a positive soundbite to gain attention.

So while Senator Biden, Democrats and some bloggers (like the one at Main and Central by Lurch who is mostly neutral but supporting the misspoken view) wish to try to turn this into a one term gaff, the totality of the comment do not reflect that in my view. The fact that there are no other politicians that are referred to in such belittling and cursory terms further supports my thought. That is unless the figure is an African American – such as Ms. Condolezza Rice, Mr. Colin Powell and so forth.

The belittling is further compounded in that Senator Biden relegates all other Black Americans that have run for President as insignificant or non-existent. Sen. Biden may wish to compliment and acknowledge Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton, and former Representative Shirley Chisholm now, but his thought at the time as conveyed by his words and full context of the statement is clear to me.

This was not a misstatement. This was not a miscommunication. The theme is clear and supported by the totality of the statement. Words are very powerful, and when taken as a whole make a visceral comment that can go beyond the actual words. Sadly many in America don’t fully understand the words being used, as opposed to college English majors, teachers, salesmen, or a politician as examples. Those that rely on words to convey their thoughts to achieve a goal do understand completely what they say.

Senator Biden needs to apologize to more than just Senator Obama. Every Black American deserves an apology. These comments are reminiscent of the mentality that necessitated the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960’s. These comments belittle every success and successful Black American in the nation. Hiding behind one term in a statement whose total purpose is too subtly insult will not fool us. The mainstream media may not wish to address this but I will.

For me, Senator Biden will never get my vote. He will not receive a letter to investigate his views, as I have done of other Presidential candidates. Perhaps this is rash, or an over-reaction. I accept that it may be. But the underlying thought of his statement cannot be warmed-over by platitudes or a plea of a single term misstatement. The meaning of the full comment does not change. That meaning places me and 14% of America in a second-class, less than meaningful position. I will not accept that of an American President of politician if possible.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Senator Clinton's open letter on yahoo - 1.25.2007.1

To see a complete list of all letters sent out to political figures seeking the Presidency to date, please go to Letters to and from Presidential Candidates. To date there has been no response from any candidate contacted since December 2006.

Has anyone noticed the tactic being used today by Senator Clinton? The Senator is asking for the public to tell her what they think to a question she has asked. The exact question is “Based on your own family's experience, what do you think we should do to improve health care in America?” Now perhaps it’s just me, but I find this odd.

It seems to me that Senator Clinton is conducting a poll, seeing what various demographics and regions of America is thinking. Once this poll is does I have no doubt that any comments on healthcare will be shaped by the responses in the given region. That is duplicitous. That is deceptive, if I am correct. I also see it as useless.

As a Senator, and former First Lady, there has been talk about healthcare for over a decade. The opinion of various Americans given in this poll is not going to shape the healthcare plan that she has. Her goals have been decided and recited with little variance through out the time since President Clinton was elected. Given that, why would she ask what we the people think, beyond using it to shape the manner in which she might campaign? Is it not the explicit obligation of a candidate to tell us what SHE thinks on the subject so that we can make a decision for ourselves?

I also find it interesting that Senator Clinton decided to have announced her run on a Saturday, via the internet. That seems to eliminate any potential question from the press that every other candidate so far has had to answer, live. And on a Saturday which is not a day most are paying attention to news. And the video recording seemed to be quite old, to me. I say that because there is no part of the Northeast that has leafy bushes or trees in the winter that I am aware of. If you notice in the background, outside the window the leaves are on the tree/bush.

It’s nice to know that Senator Clinton has enough time to arrange and create an opinion poll (which is what I feel it is), dedicate staff to review and correlate the answers, launch a Presidential Campaign, but not enough time to respond to her email from a constituent.

I refer to the letter I sent to Senator Clinton. It was sent December 16, 2006 – some 40ish days ago at this point. [The link at the top of this post will take you to an EXACT copy of the letter sent to the senator] Other than an automated letter acknowledging receipt of my letter. Considering the extended time off for Congress during the holidays, and the 4 day work week, and the fact that Senator Clinton is not in the Congress every day it is open - nor in New York State for that matter – I think responding to a constituent would be nice. Even a letter from a staffer saying that while there is a delay, an answer is coming.

While I did not ask for an answer on healthcare, I did ask for an answer on, “What are you doing to address the drop-out rate of African American males? And what are you doing for Latino/ Hispanic Americans on the above matters?” Also, “What legislation have you initiated, that has passed, that has benefited those living in NY state and/or this nation?” There are other questions I asked, and have gotten no hint of an answer. I don’t want Senator Clinton to waste my time (she is a public official for my state) on an opinion poll so I can hear a modified soundbite that won’t answer my questions. I want Senator Clinton to fulfill her obligation and state what her platform is, what her opinions are. Anyone who is elected President of the United States should do no less.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Monday, January 22, 2007

Letter to Senator Obama

This is an exact copy of a letter sent to Senator Obama. Any response will be posted unaltered.

January 22, 2007
Dear Senator Obama,

I am contacting you today as part of an ongoing series of letters that I am sending to many of those that are planning to run for President of the United States. To date I have written letters to Senator Clinton, Mr. John Edwards, and Mr. Mitt Romney.

I am the author/writer of several blog sites including Black Entertainment USA (www.blackentertainmentblog.com). My letter to you, as well as any response from you will be posted on these sites without alteration.

Senator Obama I am aware that you are a junior Senator, having served 2 years at this time, representing Illinois. As I am from New York I am not familiar with the platforms you were elected for. What was the main issue that you campaigned on, and what progress have you made in attaining that? What laws have you helped to pass, or prevented from passing, that have directly benefited your constituents and African Americans in general?

As a fellow African American I’m sure you are aware that there are several issues that are of great impact to the Black community. One of the most important may be the issue of education. What have you done to improve the number of African Americans that finish high school and/or seek higher education? If you were to be elected President, what plan would you follow that will improve the education system in America?

In terms of your own education I ask a question that has recently been in the news. It has been stated that during the 4 years in Jakarta you had attended a Madrasa. I wonder if you feel this has any influence on the education you received, or more importantly do you believe that having lived and studied overseas provided you any benefit that your peers may not have had?

It has also been stated that you are a smoker. If this is true do you believe that has any effect on your views on healthcare? In addition how do you feel about the current trend to leave businesses without a choice and disallow smoking? Do you believe that the smoking ban is fair to businesses, and does it make sense to have a ban while also allowing adult citizens to purchase cigarettes?

As a lawyer that worked on civil rights issues, what do you believe you can do, or are doing currently, to improve the rights of African Americans and Latino/Hispanic Americans or any other people of color in this nation? What do you feel is the largest obstacle and what plan do you have to remove it?

In terms of national healthcare, do you agree with the push for a national healthcare system? If you do how would you have this program funded? What would you do to motivate institutions and individuals to seek out new innovations with the profit motive removed? How would you ensure that a national program would not function in the same manner most feel other government institutions do, such as the education system (which most feel is a failure)?

What role, if any, do you feel religion plays in the government? Do you believe that the fact you have never served in the Armed Forces would have any effect on your ability to perform as Commander-and-Chief?

Speaking of the Armed Forces, at this time there is a general feeling that the war in Iraq is going badly. President Bush has just announced a plan that would elevate the number of troops serving in Iraq. The democratic party is generally opposed to this plan. What exact alternative would you implement in place of this current plan, and what plan would you establish to ensure the safety of Americans if Iraq becomes more unstable (thus promoting terrorist attacks on America)?

Do you feel that the fact you have little experience in the Senate, or with dealing with international politics, is a hindrance to your ability to act as President and if not why?

Recently there has been a growing apprehension among some in the nation about the number of immigrant that are allowed into the nation for non-European nations (as per Rep. Goode). How do you feel about this? Also there is a strong debate on what to do about the large numbers of illegal immigrants. What plan do you have to deal with this issue?

I thank you for taking the time to read and to respond to this letter. As I stated earlier this will be posted on several sites, particularly Black Entertainment USA (at the address noted above).

Sincerely,

Michael Vass
President – M V Consulting, Inc.
Author – Black Entertainment USA and Vass
info@blackentertainmentblog.com

Labels: , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Friday, January 12, 2007

Sen. Boxer attacks Secretary of State Rice personally - 1.12.2007.1

Who does Senator Boxer think she is? I am speaking directly to the comments Senator Boxer made to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. I find the comments insulting and unfair. The implications are insulting, on several levels.

If you are unfamiliar with what was said I quote Senator Boxer, "Who pays the price? I'm not going to pay a personal price. My kids are too old and my grandchild is too young," Boxer said. "You're not going to pay a particular price, as I understand it, with an immediate family. So who pays the price? The American military and their families."

In response, later, Secretary of State Rice said, "I guess that means I don't have kids. Was that the purpose of that Well, at the time I just found it a bit confusing frankly. But in retrospect, gee, I thought single women had come further than that. That the only question is are you making good decisions because you have kids?"

White House spokesman Tony Snow state in regard to this, "I don't know if she was intentionally that tacky, but I do think it's outrageous. Here you got a professional woman, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and Barbara Boxer is sort of throwing little jabs because Condi doesn't have children, as if that means that she doesn't understand the concerns of parents. Great leap backward for feminism."

Sen. Boxer has since release a statement that tries to clarify what she meant. In essence she tries to make the claim that she only meant to highlight the sacrifices of military families. In my opinion this is a crock.

I have no doubt that the Senator knew exactly what she said and it’s intention was not what she has since stated. To me it sounds as if Sen. Boxer made the claim that any woman without children should have no voice on the war. It can be further implied that a woman without children is somehow incomplete, according to the statement of the Senator.

I’ll even follow the logic a step further. From the statement made, and considering whom it was made to, the logic follows as such. A Black African American woman, that is not a traditional Democrat, that is single, educated, successful, and without children should not speak about a war where someone’s children will serve and is flawed. Whether the flaw is the lack of marriage and children – as Sen. Boxer stated she had – or that Secretary of State Rice is Republican, is unclear.

How dare she. If either point is her logic then I must say to Sen. Boxer that she has no idea of the cost of this war, as she has never served in the military. If, and I do not know the facts on this, Sen. Boxer’s husband and/or children did not serve in the Armed Forces then she, by her logic, is even further removed from speaking on this subject let alone question anyone else on it.

I may not agree with some choices that feminists have decided to take on over the years, but I do recognize that the choices that any woman has made should be respected. The same respect should be given to anyone that has made choices about their life goals. I deserve respect because of what I have done and chosen to do, the fact I am not married nor have children makes me no less of a man nor a success. Any woman deserves the same. Having children does not elevate the position of a woman, just as it does not a man. To imply such difference is rude and wrong.

To imply, or allow to be implied by the nature of the comment and to whom it is stated, that there is something wrong with an individual due to their political affiliation, education, gender, and/or race is deplorable. If this statement were made by a white male to a woman, feminists would be up in arms. If this were a liberal being told this there would be a rage in the media. IF an African American democrat said this to a white woman republican it would be labeled as racist. The race and gender does not change the merit of what was said. But it seems to affect the attention the media is willing to place on this – giving more time to discuss Mr. Donald Trump vs. Ms. Rosie O’Donnell.

Were I a constituent of Senator Boxer, I would contact her and make it clear she did not represent my views with her comments. Thankfully she is not my Senator. But sadly she has made it necessary for me to write this post.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Letter to Mitt Romney - 1.10.2007.1

As part of my ongoing series of letters to known and potential candidates for the Presidency I add this letter to Mr. Mitt Romney. Previous letters have been sent to Mr. John Edwards and Senator Clinton.


January 10, 2007
Mr. Romney,

I am aware of your recent declaration to enter the race for the Presidency of the United States. I maintain several blogs (www.mvass.com is most relevant) as well as being a citizen, a former member of the military, and a small business owner. For these reasons I wish to ask you some questions about why you believe you should be President. It is my intention to also post this letter, and any response from you, verbatim on at least one of my blog sites. I have previously sent a similar letter to Senator Clinton and Mr. John Edwards. I plan on sending a similar letter to several candidates for President, as time and their declarations allow.

I am not familiar with your positions or your actions as Governor of Massachusetts. Given this lack of knowledge can you tell me what you have done for your former constituents, especially those of Latino/Hispanic and African American heritage, that has improved their lives.

In regard to your position on healthcare, I have read that you believe in universal care – at least on a state level. Given this I would like to know, how would you fund a federal universal healthcare plan? What would you do to motivate innovation and the quality of care that currently exists in the current profit motivated system? If the healthcare is universal, does it also mean that illegal aliens are entitled and if so where would the funds for those individuals come from?

In regard to education, I see that in 2002 you were in favor of school vouchers and the reform of underperforming institutions, how effective have you been in MA? Considering that nation-wide there has been a huge increase in African American dropout rates, what would you do to improve those numbers? Based on your reported desire to abolish the Department of Education (2002), what would you have to replace it and how would it function?

It appears in what I have read, that you have a very strong stance on punishment for convicted criminals. I would like to know, do you agree with the death penalty? Since you believe in mandatory sentences, and increasing sentencing, how would you correct the imbalance that exists in the justice system currently? To clarify my point, African Americans, and to a slightly lesser degree Latino/Hispanics, are routinely given stiffer penalties and sentences than White Americans for the same crimes. This is even more evident in sentences that are for life or the death penalty. What initiatives would you take to ensure a more even-handed approach?

In recent weeks a great deal has been made of Representative Ellison’s informal swearing in using the Quran. As an individual of the Mormon faith, if you were to be elected President, would you use The Book Of Mormon to be sworn in on? (Please excuse my ignorance about your faith but I believe that is your religious text) Do you feel that your religious background would have any affect on your performance if elected President? Would it have any affect in dealing with dignitaries and governments that hold a different religion, and if so what? What place do you feel religion has for any elected official, if any?

For some time now politicians have said that they are for ‘family values’. I have heard this stated by politicians and candidates of every party. How do you exactly define family values? How do you plan to promote those values, if you were elected? And what recourse or alternative would be available to those Americans who have values separate of yours?

It appears that your views on abortion and gay rights have changed over the years. What has prompted your change of view? What is your exact position on these issues today?

Consider that America has taken on a war against the ideal of terrorism, and terrorists, in addition to being engaged in an active war in Iraq and maintaining troops in Afghanistan. Given this do you feel that your lack in being a member of the Armed Forces is a benefit, detractor, or of no concern? How do you come to this conclusion? What are your plans to protect America, as Commander-and-Chief?

Currently there have been many soundbites used by politicians of every party in discussing every platform and idea. In each question I have asked I hope for full and complete answers. I would rather an extremely long and complex answer that details exactly your plans and goals, rather than a short answer that details and explains nothing. I feel strongly about the use of snippets of information to almost convey an actual position. I feel that the recent win by democrats in the mid-term elections were due to this use of soundbites. How do you feel about this?

I thank your for your time to review this letter. I, and my readers, look forward your responses.

Sincerely,

Michael Vass
President – M V Consulting, Inc.
Author – Vass and Black Entertainment USA
info@blackentertainmentblog.com

*I have used an email found at http://blog.electromneyin2008.com/ , but am unaware if this will reach Mr. Romney. I have also used the email found at info@mittromney.com .

** At this time there has been no response from any individual I have sent a letter to previously.

Labels: , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Friday, January 05, 2007

Letter sent to John Edwards - 1.5.2007.1

This is an exact copy of a letter sent to Mr. John Edwards, via his website. Any response received will be posted, unaltered.

January 5, 2007
Mr. John Edwards,

I recently heard of your decision to run for President of the United States. I am owner and author of multiple blogs, one of which deals primarily with political issues and individuals. This letter is both based on my personal interest and that of my readers. [My sites include www.mvass.com and www.blackentertainmentblog.com]

I am a native American citizen, with my heritage coming from African Americans and Latino Americans. I was born and raised in the Northeast, though I have traveled and lived across the country and am a former Marine. The focus of the blogs are presenting news and events from the perspective of an African Latino American view; which I feel is under-represented in the media.

Given these facts, and that I am largely unfamiliar with your past, I have several questions for you. I have already asked several questions of Senator Clinton and am awaiting her response. I intend to ask similar questions of all (or at least most) individuals that intend to run for the office of the President. I look forward to your responses.

I understand that you have pursued initiatives in healthcare, education, social security and medicare throughout your time in the Senate, and previous to that to a degree in your work as a lawyer. In regard to your work in the Senate, what laws did you initiate, that were passed, that directly improved these issues for Americans in general, and Black and/or Latino Americans specifically? What exactly do you propose to improve the education system in America, specifically for those students in the inner city?

In regard to your desire to create a universal healthcare system in the United States, how do you expect that system to be paid for? In addition what do you believe will be a motivation for professionals and medical industries to work to current standards or to create new advances without the benefit of profit?

What exact plan do you have that will allow Social Security to continue to exist or to be modified for future generations as the baby boomer generation continue to age and existing funds continue to fail to meet the need?

In the 2006 mid-term elections, the democratic party won several seats in both the House and Senate with the cry of changing the current policy in Iraq. What is your exact position on Iraq? I feel that it is not possible to support the troops and question the mission that we have sent them on. I further feel that to remove the funding of the troops, while still engaged in the mission, is neither a show of support nor a plan to win. Do you agree or disagree with this? If you were to be Commander and Chief of our troops what would you have them do to complete our mission in Iraq? Do you feel that the fact that you have never served in the military is a benefit or detriment to the country?

Your party, as I have understood, has no stated plan to change the events and status for the war in Iraq or against terrorism, beyond the statement that change is needed. What exact plan do you wish to implement if you were to be elected that could prevent future attacks by terrorists against this nation?

In terms of the economy, what exactly do you propose that will help those below the middle class to improve their standard of living? It is often held that the democratic party believes that taxes, particularly for the upper incomes, should be increased to provide funds for programs that benefit those of lower income, do you agree with this position? As a business owner and member of the middle class I would like to know what are your economic plans for the country?

Considering events such as the shooting of Mr. Sean Bell, the Duke rape case, the Rodney King riots and other similar events have highlighted the racial tensions that continue to exist in the nation, what would you do to help improve race relations.

Perhaps one of my biggest questions is that America has apologized and made reparations to Native American Indians and Japanese Americans for atrocities and crimes made in the past. Given this fact, how do you justify that America has never made an apology or considered reparations for slavery, jim crow, and segregation. Would you as the President finally provide an apology for these acts? Would you make reparations, and if so what might those reparations entail?

I must mention that I intend to post this to the abovementioned blog. In addition to posting this I will post your response, unaltered, on the blog as well.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Michael Vass
President – M V Consulting, Inc.
Author – Black Entertainment USA and Vass

Labels: , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Thursday, December 21, 2006

Anger at Rep. Virgil Goode - 12.21.2006.1

I just heard about something that is offensive and troubling. It seems that Representative Virgil H Goode Jr. has a problem with Muslims. I come to this conclusion via his comments made in a December 5th letter. If you have not heard about this you should.

The letter in question states, “I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped,“ among other choice words. It makes me ask what is wrong with Representative Goode.

I assume something must be wrong with him because if there is not, and he is reflecting the views of his constituents in Virginia, then there are problems in this nation that are worse than what I would have guessed. I must say that Representative Goode, and any person that agrees with him, do not represent me or other Republicans I know. I can’t imagine how a narrow-minded view of this nation could have representation in this government. Yes I realize the President is very religious and that factors into many of his decisions, but at the same time I do not see him promoting religious persecution.

Rep. Goode, as well as Mr. Dennis Prager and others that fail to think (in my opinion), seems terrified that any other religion exists. Especially if they exist in this nation. Perhaps they have all forgotten that this nation was created in part due to the hope of religious freedom. Perhaps they forget that this nation has always been a mix of cultures and nationalities and religion. The original 13 colonial states and territories represented Spain, England, France and other nations. Every single person that signed the Declaration was an immigrant.

But that is only part of the problem with this letter. I would like to know how a person’s religion has anything to do with immigration, legal or otherwise. It would seem that Rep. Goode and others have no idea what issue they wish to be lashing out about. This letter is a sweeping statement of how small-minded some can be, I feel.

Let me slow down and focus, unlike this letter. First I am angered by what I see as blatant fear of Muslims, whether they are American or otherwise. If this letter were aimed at those who are Jewish the outcry would be huge. If it were against Lutherans, or Protestants, or born-again Christians Rep. Goode would have calls to be removed. Why should it be any different when this is directed against Muslims?

Second, the private swearing in ceremony has nothing to do with the position the politicians are elected to do. I doubt that a Jewish politician is asked to use a Bible, and the official swearing in is devoid of any religious connection (due to a little thing called separation of church and state). Rep. Keith Ellison is free to use (or not use) any religious tome he chooses. He hasn’t asked anyone else to use the Koran, or become a Muslim. Only a fool, in my opinion, would demand that everyone believe and do what one group says – except perhaps in a dictatorship or Communist state.

Third, immigration is a separate issue. Rep. Ellison is a native African American citizen.
Fourth, what is wrong with Muslims living in America? Many Americans are Muslim and since some of them will have children it seems natural that the number of Muslims will grow over the next century even if none immigrated to this nation. So what’s wrong with that? The number of Muslims has been growing in America for decades. The actual statement from Rep. Goode seems to be that Black or Arab or non-White Muslims are a bad thing for America. If that is correct it is blatant racism. That kind of thinking once justified slavery, and genocide. Actually it still does, which is a shame.

Fifth, what values and beliefs is Rep. Goode afraid of losing? What resources could be swamped? The freedom of speech or religion? The freedom to elect representatives to our government? The desire to raise a family and do a good day’s work? How might an immigrant change that or any religious group? Should these “strict immigration policies” extend to Jews or Catholics or Lutherans? Should these “strict immigration policies” extend to non-Christian immigrants from France, England, Germany, Italy, Russia, or just those who come from those nations and are not Caucasian?

I have this to say, the world is not just one religion. It never has been. I doubt if it will ever be as long as humans walk the earth. Fear of the unknown is powerful and destructive. It benefits no one. In my opinion those who wrap themselves in such a cloak diminish what makes us human and American.

Legal immigration to this nation should not be based on religion or color. But this is the real world and color has always been a factor (I recall that the percentage of immigrants from European nations was roughly 70% of all immigrants) which is sad. Some wish that they can hide from the reality of the world. They feel like that American should be the all white nation that movies, television shows and their romanticized memories of the 50’s seem to depict. Thankfully this is not true.

Individuals of color and various religions have helped to create the nation we live in and the quality of life we enjoy. At least a third of this nation is non-Caucasian, and different religions are a reality. This is part of the strength of America. To limit that is to limit our greatness. To try to penalize citizens, or others in the world, for their personal freedoms is to descend to a nation more like Communist Russia (penalized Jews and Russian Orthodox Christians) or China or North Korea (filled with paranoia and still preparing to finish fighting a war that stopped 50 years ago) than to be what we are or hope to be.

This is not merely what I would call small-minded. This is stupid [I define ignorant as a lack of knowledge, stupid is the ability to have knowledge and the refusal to act on that ability] and dangerous. Perhaps people in Virginia think that Rep. Goode is a great elected official, perhaps he has done well for them. I don’t know as this is the first I’ve heard of the man, but the first impression he has made leaves me with a sour taste in my mouth. I can only hope more feel the same.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Saturday, December 16, 2006

Letter to Senator Clinton - 12.16.2006.1

This is a copy of a letter sent to Senator Hilary Clinton. If and when I receive a response I will post it without edit.

December 16, 2006
Senator Clinton,

I am a citizen, former military, an entrepreneur, and resident of upstate New York. As we approach the 2008 presidential race, more and more of the talking heads on television are commenting that you are the leading hopefully for the Democratic Party. Based on that I would like to ask a few questions.

Before I go any further I must mention that I am the owner of 2 blog sites, and co-author of a third. The site that pertains to this subject the most is the www.mvass.com site. This letter, along with any response I receive, will appear in at least that blog.

If you review the site you will see that I have followed your progress and commented on several actions. While these reviews may be critical, that is due to my desire to promote the best government possible with disclosure to the public that consists of detailed relevant commentary. I invite you to review the site and respond to any comments I have made. My focus is not personal, as I do not know you, and has always centered on the actions or comments of your office and fame.

With the above said, I wonder why should anyone expect that you would run for the Presidency? While many believe that as a female candidate you could cause more women to vote than what is normally found in an election, but that is not a valid reason. To say that you are one of the few Democratic political figures that have name recognition and little negative exposure is also a good thing, but not a reason.

What legislation have you initiated, that has passed, that has benefited those living in NY state and/or this nation? When I say benefited I ask that you demonstrate the actual improvement and not the projected improvement that a study or poll has stated. Obviously any recent legislation (less than 6 months) can’t be expected to have necessarily had an immediate effect.

As a key Democrat I ask, what your party has done for African Americans in the last decade, and more importantly since you have taken office. What legislation has passed that benefits African Americans that was initiated by the Democratic Party since you have gained office? To be fair, what legislation has the Democratic party prevented that would have harmed African Americans (in NY state and/or the nation) and how did the party derive that this legislation was harmful?

What are your positions on the platforms? I have heard several soundbites for multiple politicians and none seem to really mean anything when thought about, at least to me. In the recent mid-term elections many Democrats seemed to have won, in my opinion, on the basis that they were for a change in policy. Yet none seemed to have an answer as to what that new and different policy was or could be. In a soundbite such an answer may work, but that is not a reason to be elected for, especially not presidential candidates if such a choice were up to me.

In addition I ask what are you doing to help small businesses? What are you doing about improving the public education available in New York State (especially city schools)? What are you doing to address the drop-out rate of African American males? And what are you doing for Latino/ Hispanic Americans on the above matters?

Lastly, what is your position on the various laws and actions that are in place or proposed to impede illegal aliens from entering this nation from our southern border only? Do you agree or disagree with the thought that more should be done to protect our largely unwatched northern borders, especially since there has been evidence of how dangerous this lack of attention has been.

Senator Clinton, I look forward to your responses on these questions. I also plan to ask these questions, or similar ones, of Senators Obama, McCain, and any other candidate for the presidency (actual or rumored) throughout 2007.

Thank you for your time and attention in this matter.

Sincerely,

Michael Vass
info@blackentertainmentblog.com
President – M V Consulting, Inc.

** This is seperate of the above letter. Items of interest relating to Senator Clinton and or the Democratic Party found on this site:
what-about-afganistan
stem-cells-ect

vass-thoughts-on-senator-clinton

elections-for-06-and-08
patriot-act-and-politics
reparations-for-black-african
A few words on politics, war, and Dr. Martin Luther King
Commenting on Sen. Hillary Clinton's Dr. Martin Luther King Day speech
election-year-stories-for-2006
senators-obama-clinton-and-mccain
which-woman-for-president
no-votes-for-senator-hilary-clinton
Senator John Kerry 'jokes' about the military - 11.1.2006.1

Labels: , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Monday, November 20, 2006

Why not a draft - 11.20.2006.1

Ok, just a few quick thoughts as getting everything set for the holiday purchases and work are keeping very busy.

I have to speak about Congressman Charles Rangel. He has renewed his efforts to pass a reform in the military re-instituting the draft. Of course virtually every Democrat has come out and stated they won’t support him in this decision. Representative Rangel has made his case based on the fact that there would be no war, in his opinion, if the sons and daughters of our nations’ politicians and the citizens they represent were potentially in harms way.

While this line of though has some merit, it is not my reason to agree. Yes, there is a fear among politicians to increase the number of white American sons and daughters that may be killed in fighting in defense of the nations’ policies. That seems factual considering the press to highlight the military as an option for the poor and minorities.

I find that serving in the military is an honor, and possibly an obligation. In times of peace I have no problem with a volunteer military. Those that do chose this option help to maintain the rights and lifestyle that is the daily life of every citizen. It has been the blood and sweat of all those that have and continue to serve that drives millions to seek out our nation as the best place in the world to live. This choice to offer their lives to support and enable citizens to make poor choices, or beneficial ones, is not something that can be bought and definitely not cheaply. On this point I disagree with Rep. Rangel, to a degree. Some do chose to join just for the future potential benefit in gaining an education, and many are minorities. But I feel more do so because they realize that for all the faults of the nation, this is the greatest nation in the world.

But I need to add that this is not a time of peace. Also the youth of this nation, whether African American, Latino/Hispanic, or any other minority, are in desperate need of self-discipline. In the world today we have the rampant use of drugs by kids of all ages, as young as 13 in some places. Kids today look up to and idolize violent entertainment figures, and the slang is filled with derogatory language that is misused to convey common pleasantries. For Black American kids there is a huge amount of dropouts (in males – 70%) and single parents. In the inner city many teens and young adults seek out lives in criminal pursuits – due to the money and public image portrayed in music videos and media. This says nothing of the failure in education across the nation. This screams a need to improve the self-discipline in the youth of the nation.

Given that, and the fact that I love this nation, I feel no reason why a draft would be a bad thing. To my knowledge every NATO nation has some form of draft. Like Greece, where everyone serves 2 years after high school. Not a big commitment, but enough to change a life. Is that to much to ask of a citizen. President John F. Kennedy once said “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.” Perhaps we need to teach a bit more than ask for rote memorization and the question of a draft wouldn’t be fearful.

I’ll speak more on this shortly.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Barbershop thoughts - 11.1.2006.2

Continued from Senator John Kerry 'jokes' about the military - 11.1.2006.1 ...

Considering how I feel on this matter I asked several people their thoughts. An older taxi driver thought Sen. Kerry should learn to ‘shut up if he can’t figure out what to say’ especially since there isn’t a Presidential race for another 2 years. Not too far from what many election-motivated politicians are saying. But as I received a haircut I saw a major revelation.

The barbershop is African American owned and run. Everyone in the shop was younger than myself, beyond that I can’t say more as I don’t know. When I brought up this subject, not one person out of the 9 there knew anything about the issue. I found this surprising as I do know the barbershop has a cable fed television. When I mentioned the comments, the response from President Bush, and the follow-up by Senator Kerry I asked what were their thoughts.

Virtually no one had a thought. One man did say that he though that Kerry was wrong, but he disagreed with President Bush. When he was asked about why he felt like that he said he wasn’t sure. So I pressed on. I asked if there was a draft would he serve, his reply was I wouldn’t have a choice. I corrected that he could refuse or run away like some did during Viet Nam. Given that option he thought about it and said yes he would. 2 other younger men (I’m guessing 18 -23ish in age) said no. Their reason to not do it was that they disagreed with President Bush. These young men felt that the war was about oil and that President Bush failed to protect the nation, as opposed to President Clinton. Then they asked me if I thought Senator Clinton could win an election for President.

I mentioned a couple of choice comments on her, and I mention that while we were not attacked in America there were many things happening during the Clinton Administration. This was confirmed by another man.

In an effort to be more consice I’ll summarize the rest of the conversation that basically only dealt with the two 20-somethings. We discussed Senator Clinton (and her voting record as well as announcements on popular subjects), North Korea and its nuclear weapons, the future oil needs of America (and the untapped reserves in Alaska) and the world, the media’s manner in providing information, and the full comments of the 2nd stripper in the Duke rape case (some of my comments can be seen at Duke allegations part 1). In each case and on every subject these men had no idea about the background of the subject.

To be concluded in Barbershop thoughts part 2 ...

Labels: , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Marriage, age and intellect - 10.18.2006.2

I was reading an opinion piece by Laura Vanderkam and I started to wonder a few things. Parts of what she spoke about apply to me and other men I know that are college educated, especially those that are African American. I have been told that some of her comments are true of African American women too. But there is a bit that I don’t agree with, and do not see at all. This could be a factor of where I have lived, or just being a man. I’m sure the ladies that are frequent readers will let me know.

I am constantly surprised when I hear women say they need to dumb themselves down to be with a man. In part I think that there is an assumption made commonly that presumes that this is what a guy wants. Kind of like the thought that men prefer women to look like models, or be similarly thin. That has never really been the case. Yes, many like a woman that is of a moderate build, but I’ve never known a single guy who wants a woman that looks anorexic or a bunch of sticks. Every man I know agrees that we prefer a woman with curves. In this same manner, every man I know prefers women who can hold a conversation.

There may be a difference when culture is added to this though. African American men these days do enjoy the ‘music video girl’ look. Having a girlfriend with those looks is nice, but none of them would hardly be described as a model. This has no bearing on intelligence though. Yet the guys I am aware of that prefer this look in their women, tend to also have great interest in the thug life. Those men tend to be less educated, but exercise a great deal. I’ve seen African American female lawyers and doctors who date these thug types. An odd mix at best. In every case I’ve known, the guy was about as intelligent as a brick. Often the woman with him had to jump into the conversation and did in fact, dumb it down, significantly. But that was due to her choice in a mate. To say that another man, African American or otherwise, would need her to disavow her intelligence is over-generalization.

Of course the fact that there are fewer married people in the nation is another factor. In black culture today there is the fact that up to 60% of women are single parents. This would make it harder to get married, especially as the culture advocates not having the father involved with the children. [what I like to call the baby-momma syndrome.] It would also help explain why some get married later in life, intelligence is not a factor. But this is a bit specific to one culture.

Perhaps Ms. Vanderkam has grown up in a different time in NYC than I, or it’s the difference in culture (I grew up in the Bronx) but young women having children is not a new thing, nor attributable to any pop star. Especially the, in my opinion, marginally talented Mrs. Britney Spears. The need for nannies and/or $700 strollers might be though.

One thing that is related to this is the question of what age do college educated African American men get married? There are fewer men that fit in this criteria. Considering the estimates that Black males are dropping out of high school at a faster pace than ever before I really wonder about this. In just a cursory thought on the subject it would seem that Black women that are college educated might have to be older to get married, as the pool of Black men that are their intellectual equal is smaller and more difficult to find. This fact is not one that is changing quickly. Nor does it have a readily available answer.

I’m sure I’m only scratching the surface of this. But tell me what you think on this subject.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Monday, October 02, 2006

Do you qualify to be black? - 10.01.2006.1

In a recent conversation I had with a friend, I was told that “no disrespect, but you’re not black.” Now this is a friend and I understood the context in which he was speaking, so I wasn’t upset. But it’s not the first time that I’ve been told this. Considering my Puerto Rican, Irish, Native American Indian and Taino Indian background, I agree that I’m not just an African American. But that isn’t what was meant. It was more in reference to the fact that I do not live in a thug lifestyle, speak proper English, and dress in suits more often than jeans.

But that got me thinking. What is it to be Black, or African American. I mean there is a huge economy based on just that thought. Music videos, rap songs, clothing lines, billions are spent world wide to capture an image that is “black” and “keeping it real”, whatever that means. But can that really be all there is to being black? Is the culture that superficial these days?

Mr. Juan Williams wrote an interesting opinion piece recently, Missing: A black voice for economic equality, that addressed the fact that many are asking about the next Dr. Martin Luther King. In that opinion he mentions the fact that 100 years ago prominent Black African Americans, such as Mr. Booker T. Washington, stated the key to improving the quality of life is self-help. This same message was repeated by Dr. King and Mr. Malcolm X.

Yet those messages have been mostly discarded. What else can be said when the chances of a young Black African American male being killed or jailed by 25 are greater than the chance to graduate high school. That the chance of a young Black African American woman having a child, out of wedlock, by 25 is higher than her chance of getting thru college. Obviously there are problems and they aren’t getting answered.

The insistence within the Black culture on living as thugs is a self-limiting expression. The fact that the youth of today want to be pimps and hoes, criminals by any other terms would make the fore-fathers spin in their graves. I cannot imagine that Dr. King or Malcolm X, envisioned a day were equality was considered the ability to father children without the attempt to take care of them, or the inability to communicate socially with others. In fact by the standards of today both of these men would not be considered black either.

At least in that respect I’m in good company. So what is being black today? Is a rapper black? Is a thug black? What about a stockbroker or a doctor, a sanitation worker or a teacher? Must any professional also be ill-spoken and brutish or risk being a sell-out? Can a person like other genres of music, or styles of dress and still be what they obviously are by birth.

Without opening my mouth, I am Black and Puerto Rican. I look in the mirror and I am just that, so why do some presume that I must also act, speak and look a certain way to confirm what I am. I understand when friends say I don’t match the popular norms associated with being African American. But why should anyone have to match a set of criteria? Is this an isolated thing? I’ve never heard anyone tell a White person that they aren’t White. The same with Asians. So why does this division exist?

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Friday, September 15, 2006

Hispanics, and higher education

I was reading an article recently [Hispanics Have Unique Cancer 'Profile'] when I noticed something. Why is it that in various documents from the government Hispanics are compared to non-Hispanic whites? I’m Hispanic (Black African American and Puerto Rican) but the government classified me African American, so does my doctor. Mexicans, Cubans, Brazilians, Ecuadorians and dozens of others are ‘Hispanic’ and many are not light skinned enough to be white. I also know many of all the Hispanic groups that are white skinned, including parts of my family. But none of them are white either.

In fact the only ‘white’ Hispanics I know of are Spaniards from Spain. Of course anyone who has paid attention to medieval history is aware that the Moors controlled Spain for 100+ years. The Moors were from Africa, need I say more? But I’ll take Spaniards as a given regardless. So who else are these Hispanic whites the government is referring to me not being? I just find that whole category annoying, but perhaps it’s just my ignorance on the subject.

By the way, the term Hispanic is dumb and misleading. It is derived from the word Hispania – an old word used to describe Spain. While the old Spanish did do a lot of ‘getting to know the natives’ (or ‘bringing them civilization/Christianity’ whichever you prefer) the native peoples/Indians of the various areas are as much part of the equation as Spain. Why such a term is used I do not know. It’s like the term Latino, which is better applied to Italian since Latin came from the Ancient Romans. While it is a pet peeve, it does annoy me that a more fairly descriptive term was never used. And why would it be a bad thing to call me a Black African American Taino Indian.

As for the above-mentioned article, read it and look at my post The health of this Puerto Rican Black African American. “If you don’t have your health what have you got?” (Bonus for those that know where that quote is from – hint, it’s a movie)

Another interesting article [Rising college fees will cost us in time] is one that hits home. I can definitely attest to the fact that college tuition has been raising since 1986. I recall the increase at Rutgers University; that would ‘only’ cause 11% of the student body to no longer be capable of affording the college as the school board of directors said. Not a big deal if you can afford it I suppose, I for one could not. And that was after taking into account the fact I maintained 3 part-time jobs while going to school.

Higher education has always been difficult to attain for minority students, especially those that are Black African American and Hispanic. Between less support from a family with lower incomes, less disposable income, fewer homes or assets, more difficult social backgrounds, worse elementary through high school systems and other factors – getting to college is hard enough. Of course that is a blanket statement, some of those factors apply to some people others don’t. But they do exist in abundance to many.

So with that said it’s no surprise that America is again becoming an elitist society in terms of education. One based on those with better education, and thus generally better pay, and those without. Not a new revelation, it has been happening since well before the 1980’s. It’s just far more apparent with the advances in technology in the last 20 years.

But that does not mean that higher education is impossible. Nor that anyone should give up. Some education is better than none. Such was true for me. It doesn’t mean that we should open up the colleges to everyone either. There should be some challenge, it makes the journey worthwhile. Making it attainable is a challenge; letting tuition prices continue on this path makes it a dream.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: , , , ,



Ask for ad rates
Ask for ad rates