I asked what the difference was between Africatown and Chinatown. There are several important differences.
But Cobb recognized one of the significant ones.
I am reminded of a talk between King and Stokely Carmichael. Carmichael had just introduced the term "black power" into the American lexicon, with controversial results. King didn't like the phrase, though he agreed with the content. Carmichael asked King why couldn't black people have power, like other ethnic groups.
King's answer?
Other ethnic groups didn't talk about getting power, they just got it. Irish immigrants never talked about green power...but they got it nonetheless. Talking about it brings atttention. It is indiscrete, and it shows a lack of restraint.
Perhaps because the biggest supporters of this particular venue do not have capital of their own (Dr. Claud Anderson is an author and a popular intellectual, not a venture capitalist) they had to take the more vocal route. An option that the Chinese never needed to take.
I don't do politics at work. Work is not the place for it. When it's raised, I keep my mouth shut and listen to people go back and forth.
This silly season I've noticed a marked increase in the amount of political discussion in the workplace.
I've also noticed the increase in sarcastic comments as a result.
I wasn't going to go here.
Really.
But comments to blog entries by
dcthornton and Black Republicans don’t really want to go down this path.
Black GOP’ers claim that Blacks are emotionally tied to the Democrat party.
That’s a fair comment.
Black GOP’ers say that Blacks need to examine politics in a non-emotional way.
That’s a fair comment even if idealistic. The reality is politics is emotional.
Now they start with the plantation stuff?
Ya’ll don’t want to go down that path. Especially when there are Black GOP’ers whose words can come back to haunt them.
Think I’m kidding? Do this search in Google. Use the quotes. It’s one search.
“shannon reeves” “window dressing”
When you get the results, use the cached copy to get to the Contra Costa Times article.
Here’s a quote:
“Black Republicans are expected to provide window dressing and cover to prove that this is not a racist party, yet our own leadership continues to act otherwise,” party Secretary Shannon Reeves wrote in an e-mail to party board members.
60K to go to hurricane relief
Haiti is a national interest for U.S. because of drug running. Yet, the U.S. supports a new Haiti government which has strong drug ties and human rights violations.
The Bahamas used to be the rum running spot. Later, it was drug running, using the same rum running paths and hideouts. Because of anti-drug efforts, the U.S. helped out the Bahamas. The U.S. still helps out that country. Now, The Bahamas is off-shore financial haven.
The U.S. pressured Caribbean countries to not let Aristide into their country after he fled the coup. There is good reason to question the U.S.'s hand in what happened. The Caribbean countries basically told the U.S. no.
Now, during this crisis, the U.S. gives Haiti $60K in relief funds. Is this payback?
$60K?
Damn.
Now with all of that said, a couple of more points:
1. In the post that started this, I did talk about "future voting scandals" perhaps in the same way that Florida has future felons on their list.
Given Jimmy Carter's statements about Florida, the closeness of this election, and the unwillingness of the current Administration (and Congress) to fully fund the actions needed to protect and secure the right to vote, I expect the problems with this election to be severe. Severe enough that if Bush wins there will not only be calls that he is illegitimate (which won't be different from what happened in 2000), but there may be more than mass protests.
2. It DOES behoove us to prepare.
I support civic education. So I do think that teaching folks how to use ballots would be a good way to spend loot. But what I think is more important are statewide initiatives designed tactically to protect and secure our vote, and if that isn't possible to restrict the vote of our political opponents. I haven't thought much about this last point, but I know it is possible.
To my mind there are a few forms of vote tampering.
There are your heavy handed tactics. These tactics in the modern era happen infrequently, largely because of the Voting Rights Act. But I'd suspect that when they are used, they are used against relatively powerless populations--populations without the education, or the money, to understand and use their rights. I imagine that when my colleague talks about people needing to learn how to cast ballots he is assuming that the majority of people hit by vote tampering fit within this category. "Police" going through poor neighborhoods warning citizens that they will be arrested if they cast a vote and they are found to have warrants, fliers telling folks they can vote on Saturday if they are unable to vote today, police barriers, etc. are all examples of heavy handed tactics.
But there are a variety of methods that can either stop people from even casting a ballot in the first place...or that will neuter the value of that vote.
The Florida felon case is the best example. And it would've been worse if not for the Sunshine provisions that make the machinations of Florida politics visible for all to see (provided they ask). When the newspapers used these provisions to get a sense of who was removed from the rolls this year, they found 22,000 African Americans...and only 61 Latinos.
As far as I know (and of course I could be wrong) the African American felony rate isn't anywhere close to 4000 times higher than the Latino rate. Note here that being smart enough to cast a ballot doesn't matter. If your name is on that roll there is nothing you can do about it.
Another mode of vote tampering is tampering with the funds that are used to purchase voting machines. You'd think that states would allocate funds based on population size, or in some other way that could even things out.
They do in some cases, but they don't have to. Imagine a scenario in which the city of Saint Louis with more than 300,000 people was given the same amount of money as a city of only 10,000.
Then we can talk about the vote machines themselves. Are they butterfly? Are they hand operated?
Now I'm pretty sure there are articles written about this within the academic journals, but until 2000, we largely assumed that elections worked as advertised within the US. I'm willing to bet that munipalities that are poorer and blacker have poor voting systems--which have the effect of taking the votes away from a number of folks smart enough to cast ballots.
(Jimmy Carter has recently stated that the political conditions in Florida do not fit the conditions required internationally for a legitimate process. What are we to make of this? <----facetious question)
Final point in pt. 3.
One of my erstwhile colleagues made this comment after I wrote about UPCOMING voter scandals. He understood that there were a number of people placed on the felon list, but also notes that "some people need to learn how to use a ballot."
I'd like to go backwards a bit.
Approximately fifty years ago, it was customary to browse through political science journals and see little to nothing about black people's political attitudes or their voting behavior. In fact, when this information DID appear, it was always belittling. Black people don't care about politics. Black people don't have any political attitudes.
If you would've pressed these scholars up to prove their propositions...they would've pointed to one thing--black voting patterns.
What's the problem with this scenario? Black people couldn't vote.
Now to be technical, this isn't really true. Some black people could vote. But if out of a county with 90 black adults, only 2 got to vote, there are only two possible explanations. Either they didn't vote because they didn't want to...or they didn't vote because they couldn't.
Fast forward.
Now what my erstwhile colleague would have us believe is that a significant number of black citizens are so clueless that they just don't know how to cast a ballot. I disagree with this.
But whatever the case, the next entry will talk about why this misses the point.
I'm surprised that no one has written more about Roy Jones going down. It's times like this that I wish Ralph Wiley was still around. Jones needs to hang them up. Don't think he will because it's hard for us to acknowledge when the body won't do what the mind wants it to.
It's particularly hard for someone who for so long has been one of the best ON THE FACE OF THE PLANET at what he does.
I think I gained an adult appreciation for excellence sometime in the mid-nineties. Part of it was related to Jordan's comeback--even though I wasn't a big Jordan fan the first go around. A big part of it was related to my increased dissection of my own game (basketball). And other random and sundry bits and pieces (you ever played a full 82 game season on nba live? if it's hard as hell to get up for the clippers in the virtual world imagine how hard it would be to get up for them in real life and STILL drop 30 and 10?).
So even though I wasn't a big boxing fan, I admired what Roy Jones was able to do. I don't ever think I'll be able to do anything in my arena like Jones did when he played a pro basketball game in the afternoon, then defended his crown in the evening.
The most recent edition of The Black Slate deals with what you won't hear in the debates. Of course there's a whole LOT you won't hear about in the debates...but I focus on one particular health plan that Bush isn't finding much room for though there is bi-partisan support for it. I thought about focusing on the voting scandals, or the upcoming voting scandals. I suspect I'll be harping on it and policy differences as we get a bit closer to the election.
I guess it's my turn up on the game called "Lets Discuss Affirmative Action!" My turn in the mix comes from a blog entry made by LaShawn.
Generally, the "discussion" about affirmative action centers around statistics "showing" that those who are benefitted by affirmative action are not worthy.
Or, the "discussion" can also center around the perception that Blacks' self-esteem is some how damaged. Or, the "discussion" centers around how whites perceive Blacks to be incompetant.
I'll try to address those issues, but I'll do so by gathering previous comments that I've made. I've added more to some of the initial comments.
My ramblings start here.
The SATs are said to be predictors of first year grades only, but people assume it's a predictor of success in school. Additionally, the SAT score is more likely to predict the economic status of the student vs. the performance of the student in school. Furthermore, the highschool grades of Black students are better predictors of success in college than the SAT score.
When she wanted to go to a new school, typically mostly minority, she had to justify the school visit. Then, after the visit, if the high school had little or no responses, she had to justify why they should try again.
She felt it was a double standard, and from what I was told, it was a double standard. This is how she addressed it.
She created a list of high schools that the university always went to for prospective students. She determined the high school's application rate, the high school's student rejection rate, and the acceptance rate of students who went to the high school they recruited.
Later, when she was asked to justify why she should return to the school to recruit, she used the list and statistics and responded by asking why they went to certain schools although they received similar poor responses.
When she left the school to pursue other career interests, she wondered what would happen to the school's minority recruiting efforts. It was clear to her that the people she left behind would not go beyond their, white, comfort zone.
Armstrong Williams has written something similar to this when he has written about finding Blacks to work at the Supreme Court as clerks. He stated that he found it offensive when other justices on the court said they could not find qualified Blacks. Williams said the justices had to look beyond the Yale's and Harvard's. He also said that those who were qualified and were offered positions, would turn them down because of other offers.
Something else. Rush Limbaugh has stated that he would not go out of his way to expand the pool of minority candidates because it would lead to "quotas. " So, let me ask you. If you say you want to find qualified Blacks, but you continue to go to the same white sources, what's going to happen?
When responding to someone who said that affirmative action causes people to have no incentitive to do well.
The incentive is graduating. The incentive is doing the best that you can do. Once you get in, you’re in, but you still have get through. There is no such thing as affirmative action for getting grades. However, there is a thing called “grading on the curve” which applies to the entire class. In other words, your comment is lacking.
Let that same Black person, as an adult, comments that he/she doesn’t read much, doesn’t pay attention to details, and gets others to look into the issues and summarize it for him.
People would yell and scream about the state of Blacks, wail against affirmative action, yada yada yada.
Yet for George W. Bush, silence.
Blacks “drop out” of college in much greater proportion because of funding issues. That much was shown in an Urban League report.
The studies that "show" that Black students who they aledge entered as affirmative action students, have yet to show why the students left school. Was it funding? Did they transfer? Did they realize that school wasn't for them? Did they realize they weren't prepared? Other personal reasons? Does anyone know?
And what about the fact that the graduation rate of Blacks is shown to increased when the length of the study is increased? Meaning, when the period surveyed is increased from 4 to 6 years, it shows the graduation rate has increased.
The Hopwood vs Texas Law School case was an interesting “anti-affirmative action” case. In the end, Hopwood got compensation of $1. “The Right” looked at it as a verification of “reverse discrimination.” But here’s the details that people over looked:
1. Hopwood would have still been denied because her undergrad school was not an accredited school which was the requirement for entrance to the law school.
2. Whites with lower test scores than her scores were accepted to the school.
3. The lawyers for Hopwood didn’t prove that she was denied entrance because of her race. There were other entrance requirements that she did not meet.
Linda Chavez’s CEO does “reviews” of schools to see if they are discriminating against white students. They reviewed the University of Virginia, and based on the reviews, “determined” that Black students were getting in who weren’t qualified. The problem with her analysis, is that the Black student’s graduation rate matched those of white students.
What lowered standards?
Responding to someone who said that economic affirmative action would provide no complaints.
In Maryland, Gov. Erhlich changed the state college scholarship program to favor students in need vs. students with great scores. The white community in Maryland had a fit.
So, exactly what are we talking about here?
Additionally, 85% of Blacks who attend college, have scores within the standard deviation of the mean for those who attend the school.
The group also looked at Bowie University in Maryland. Her group claimed that more Black students were accepted to Bowie with lower grades than whites. The fact is, Bowie is an HBCU with an affirmative action program for white students. Not only that, but they combined the day program with Bowie's evening program. It turns out that the proportion of whites who attend Bowie's evening program is much higher than those who attend the day program. In short, like other affirmative action studies, the statistics are flawed.
The Washington Post decided not to publish this week's Boondocks.
The thing is, they didn't say they weren't going to publish it. They just did another series. Then I find out about this week's strip and I'm mad The Post censored it.
Punk a****!
Who would have thought that the company that makes Twinkies would go bankrupt?
KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) - Interstate Bakeries Corp. (IBC), the nation's largest wholesaler baker whose products include Twinkies and Wonder Bread, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection early Wednesday. The company also named a new chief executive.
The electronic filing, made shortly after midnight with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Missouri in Kansas City, listed assets of $1.626 billion and liabilities of $1.321 billion.
Bill Jemas left Marvel comics to form his own company.
What does his new company deal in? Marketing cultural product. I remember seeing Chuck D. back in 1993 at the University of Pittsburgh. Talked a lot about Africa, and about black politics, and black economics. He dropped a sentence about an agency he wasn't quite able to put together with Ice Cube and some other folks, then talked more about black power.
Now there are a whole lot of folks my age who owe their livelihood to Chuck D. to some degree. I am one of them.
But Chuck D. knows a helluva lot more about music and the music business than he knows about black politics, or black economic power. If he'd have spent his time talking about the agency he wasn't able to create, rather than half formed ideas about black power, he'd have gone a lot of the way in producing those 10000 leaders he talked about back when Spike edited an edition of SPIN Magazine.
Reading this article about Jemas though made my head spin. Think about the branding opportunities within hip-hop, and black produced electronic music forms alone.
This is news.
So in the past four years, Anthony Appiah, Cornel West, and now Bobo are gone. Bobo works closely with Michael Dawson. I expect Dawson to leave also--perhaps back to Chicago. I expect Gates to leave to head up Princeton. He may take Wilson with him.
The repercussions of this for black academics at high tier schools will be significant. And not at all negative. I've long believed that Harvard needed a social science driven counter-weight, and that having humanities scholars weigh in on political and economic issues of the day was a bad bad bad idea. Hopefully Bobo at Stanford (and Dawson where he winds up) will be able to be more of a force in that area--their Dubois Review is already making waves.
Gates and his crew had a good run.
Some said that Larry Summers would take Afro-American Studies out. They were right...but it wasn't on sound footing to begin with.
On Monday, Joseph C. Phillips delivered this commentary on Tavis Smiley's NPR show:
http://www.npr.org/rundowns/segment.php?wfId=3927125
If you are "right of center," I'm sure you're screaming, turning purple, and swearing at those "left of center." So, after you catch your breath, consider this:
Clarence Thomas is said not to associate with anyone who has views left of center. This has been mentioned in a few articles about him, including some that show him in a good light.
So, while Mr. Phillips' friend was wrong, so is Clarence Thomas.
And what about Shelby Steele, who cast away his "friend," Glenn Loury?
http://phuakl.tripod.com/eTHOUGHT/Loury.html
A few days later, Steele phoned him. ''Where do you stand on race?'' Loury says Steele asked him. ''It's as if you're a racial loyalist here. I thought we all agreed.''''No, Shelby and I didn't agree,'' Loury says now. ''I was always aware that, whatever I thought about race, I'm still black. Shelby's position. . . . '' Loury starts to laugh. ''I was about to say, Shelby's position was that we had to completely transcend race, though I can imagine saying those words, too. But my heart wasn't in them, whereas he really meant it. How could it have been otherwise? His mother was a white woman. His wife is a white woman. When he looked at his own children's racial identity and wondered about an oppressive world that would say to those children, 'Choose sides' -- a dilemma I'd never faced -- Shelby's angle of vision was really quite different from my own. So in all honesty, it was I who betrayed him, not he who betrayed me.'' The two men have not spoken since that conversation. (Steele declined to be interviewed for this article.)
No, two wrongs don't make a right. But don't whine about it only when it happens to you.
For a second I thought that Africana.com had added Crouch to its stable. Talk about old school. But this interview with Crouch about the paperback version of his novel. I haven't picked up the novel yet, so I don't know if he hit it...but at least he's aiming for it. And talking about his aim too. As I start writing my first academic book TODAY, this is helpful.
I would've missed Gates' piece on Black Politics. In as much as I study this for a living, it is easy for me to dismiss the writings of an English Literature specialist (I've never seen a specialist in Shakespeare talk about the Appalachian poverty). But Ed misses the money quote:
What the big-tent rhetoric ignores is that a more "black friendly" G.O.P. might pay a price in white support. "The Republicans would lose more white votes than they would gain black votes," Dawson says. And so blacks, as a one-party constituency in a two-party system, get sidelined.
But I digress.
Cobb notes smartly that it doesn't necessarily matter how many racists are in the Republican Party. But Dawson is right...it DOES matter, to the Republican Party. And I don't see why it wouldn't.
One of the most censored stories of 2003 points out the local lie to the phrase "Fair and Balanced" as applies to Fox News, and other media outlets. How exactly is the market supposed to work if we can't get correct information?
The following was said about Blacks who are "achieving":
I think that these are people who haven't let historical prejudices stop them.
Why isn't that a condenscending statement in and of itself?
I have to think more about this...
In a NY Times opinion piece, Skip Gates gives his opinion on Blacks and the GOP. (Registration required)
The moment when the Republican Party lost black America can be given a date: Oct. 26, 1960. Martin Luther King Jr., arrested in Georgia during a sit-in, had been transferred to a maximum-security prison and sentenced to four months on the chain gang, without bail. As The Times reported, John F. Kennedy called Coretta King, expressing his concern. Richard Nixon didn't."It took courage to call my daughter-in-law at a time like this," King's father said about Kennedy at a church rally. "I've got all my votes and I've got a suitcase, and I'm going to take them up there and dump them in his lap." In 1956, Dwight Eisenhower had received nearly 40 percent of the black vote. (I myself sported an "I Like Ike" button in first grade.) In 1960, Nixon received 32 percent. A few years later, as the civil-rights era heated up and the G.O.P. pursued its "Southern strategy," blacks effectively became a one-party constituency.
Another quote I found interesting.
Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political strategist, says the Republicans' low levels of black support are unhealthy for the party - once the party of Lincoln, after all - and for the African-American community. Part of what's gone wrong, he told me, is that Republicans don't advertise in black media markets. "If the conversation in the community is predominantly Democrat, and we don't make the argument on urban radio and we don't pay attention to the African-American newspapers, and if we don't campaign in the community, then why are we surprised when people don't hear our arguments and don't vote for our candidates?"
I keep asking that same question. I'm going to have to rub that quote in the face of a talk show host in my area.
Gallup's recent polls have been a bit off compared to others, noting a ten percentage point gap at least between Bush and Kerry, whereas others have found the race to be closer. Given the volatility of this season's polls in general what I'm noting may be old news, but it appears that one possible reason for the difference is because of Gallup's assumptions. In as much as polls can drive behavior and attitudes, this is a significant issue.
Sounds remarkably like scratching. Almost 100 years ago, Dr. Ernest Everett Just was interested in cell division. Although contemporary wisdom posited a strict hierarchical process, Just believed something else was at work. Something akin to the individual improvisation he found in jazz. He used his knowledge of jazz to spark a hypothesis about biology that led to an intellectual revolution in the field.
What will hip-hop tell us?
Tavis Smiley did a great job covering the GOP convention.
He gave the Black Republicans an honest chance to have them present their views. He probably did more for Black Republicans than Black Republicans have done for themselves.
Now, how many Black Republicans have given Tavis his props?
Some in the GOP are saying that the number of Blacks owning homes is at a new high, so credit should be given to Bush because of some of his housing initiatives.
Blacks are starting businesses and getting more SBA loans so some in the GOP are saying that the credit should be given to Bush.
The Black unemployment rate is falling so some in the GOP say that the credit should go to Bush.
Meanwhile, the GOP is saying that they foster things so that people don't depend on government, and that Blacks really need these things because Blacks are too dependent on government.
So, isn't there a contradiction somewhere? If you give Bush credit, you have to say that Bush is fostering government dependence. But that's not what the GOP is about, right?
:-)
I look forward to the end of the silly season.
Marion Barry won the D.C. primary Ward 8 seat. Since there's no Republican, he wins.
Shakin' my balding naps
This "Black right" vs. "Black left" thing has me burning.
"Blacks on the left" look at the progress of Blacks as a whole, but still seem to define the state of Blacks as those who are not doing well. (So do "Blacks on the right" but this ain't about them).
Let's start here and engage in class politics.
About 63% of Blacks are middle class. About another 17% are not poor but not middle class. That's 80% of Blacks.
So, if 80% of Blacks aren't poor, why do the "Black left" define Blacks as being poor?
But let's use the "Black left" line of reasoning.
I am a poor Black person living in a depressed area. The "Black left" knows that the police don't service my area very well. So why would the "Black left" want to deny me the capability to defend my family?
If someone comes into my home, uninvited, and without a key, they intend to do me and mine harm. As the head of the household, I want to have the ability to pop a cap in someone's behind if I want to do so. In other words, leave me with the ability to own a gun.
The "Black left" knows that for most murders that happen, the people involved know each other. The "Black left" also knows that most of the murders are related to other criminal activities. The "Black left" also knows that the guns used are most likely obtained illegally. For my family's sake, let me have the option to bust a cap!
And if I don't bust a cap in the person breaking in, once they are caught, forget about the "root causes" of why the person did it, lock them up. They chose to go down that path. You were taught that there are consequences, positive and negative, for your actions. So, let them FULLY deal with the consequences of their actions.
And enough of the garbage about the "prison industrial complex"! We could put them out of business in about 10 - 15 years if our young people stopped doing the crimes and if those in jail, when they got out, stopped doing the things that got them locked up in the first place!
Yes, I know some of them have mental problems, but that still doesn't mean that they have to live a criminal life.
And speaking of mental problems, why the need to name call some of the people on the "Black right"?
If some on the "Black right" are fools, just let them continue to prove themselves to be fools. Consider Jesse Lee Peterson. There are such OBVIOUS illogic in many of the things that he says, all you have to do it let him dig his own grave.
And what good does it do calling Thomas Sowell names? He presents information in a logical manner. Sometimes it's highly misleading, but still in a logical manner. All you have to do is refute it.
Or, does the "Black left" think so little of Blacks, in general, that the "Black left" assumes Blacks can't handle the intellectual debate?
Finally, enough of the discrimination arguments by using proportional statistics. You know it's a weak argument.
When I graduated from college, I was the only Black person do graduate with a B.S. in Computer Science that year. Since I've been working in the field, for the most part, I am one of less than a handful of Blacks on the projects I've worked. The proportional representation argument doesn't hold true because, if my graduating class is typical, less than 12% of Blacks have a computer science degree.
If the "Black left" think they are correct, then argue on the merits, not garbage and name calling. Unless, of course, the "Black left" thinks that Blacks are too stupid to handle intellectual battles.
Today's column deals with Bushisms. Particularly a comment Bush recently made about OB/GYNs and love. Some think that Bush's gaffes are actually indicative of first stage dementia. While this sounds like lefty griping, I am not so sure. From what I've heard, Bush wasn't known to make mistakes like this earlier in life--when he ran for Congress for example.
But that for now at least is besides the point.
The larger issue is what exactly do we gain from treating Bush's missteps as either the mistakes of someone who knows what is right but for one reason or another can't put it together verbally (the conservative angle), or the utterances of an idiot (the non-conservative angle)? In the first case there is a real interesting racial dynamic that I haven't seen people deal with--and to be fair I didn't deal with it either.
If someone black made Bush's missteps, along with being a C- student at school, along with not being that much of a reader, what would we say about him? Sounds like a Cosby poster-child. If Bush weren't President I'm not sure the dynamic would be any different.
On the other hand there is a casual tendency of non-conservatives to blow off people that talk like Bush as being beyond "saving." I don't know how many times I've thought this myself--we MUST be a nation of idiots if we could elect THIS fool. (don't give me any sc mess either--Bush still received almost HALF of the vote in 2000.)
But we have to get beyond this. We have to find a way to talk about the policy outputs of this administration and recognize that they don't just come from Rove pulling strings (the we obviously being left-leaning here). And on the other hand if we're willing to give Bush the benefit of the doubt, even given some of his obvious verbal mistakes, we should rethink our conceptions of what it means to be intelligent. Because we (and of course the we here is obviously right-leaning) are towing a line dangerously close to relativism.
Oprah's 19th season began yesterday.
And damn if she didn't start her show off with a bang. She gave 11 lucky viewers a car...then told the rest of the audience that one of them held a key to a car themselves. When she asked them to look into their gear to see which one held the 12th key, the audience members were shocked to find they ALL held keys.
Oprah (through GM) gave each of her audience members cars.
She also bought a house (complete with Crate and Barrel and Best Buy makeover) for a mother of 8 foster children.
She had Tyra Banks give a personal makeover to a college student who was formerly homeless, as well as a photoshoot in Lucky (i THINK that's the name of the magazine).
I came to the conclusion a few years ago that Oprah wanted to start her own religion. I think she's well on her way.
There is a relationship between the Oprah dynamic, and the Cosby critique that is worth fleshing out. I don't think I have the time to do it though.
This "Black left" vs "Black right" thing has me burning.
So, "Blacks on the right" say to Blacks that the Democrats preach "victimology" and that Blacks have fallen under the spell of "victimology."
That's a bunch of bunk.
Let's start here where I engage in class politics.
90% of Blacks vote Democrat. About 63% of Blacks are middle class. About another 17% are not poor but not middle class. That's 80% of Blacks.
So, if 80% of Blacks aren't poor, how can most of them self-identify as victims?
What it comes down to is do Blacks still see racism. Not, whether they see racism as a problem, but do they still see racism.
If you say you still see it, the "Black right" seems to say you are practicing victimology.
After BET went public, Bob Johnson felt that the BET stock was under valued. At the time, I owned some stock in BET and I also believed it was under valued, given the backing of the company by cable powerhouse John Malone.
Johnson took BET private and paid out an amount what some people thought was unfair. When he sold BET to VIACOM, the world was shown that Johnson was right about BET being undervalued while it was a public stock.
So by saying that his stock was under valued at the time, and saying it was under valued because of racial reasons, the "Black right" would say that he was practicing victimology.
Wait! Some of the "Black right" would say that victimology only occurs when you let it stop you.
OK.
But given the percentages I used before, then how can it be said, with intellectual honesty, that Blacks are letting racism stop them?
You can't have the "Black right" crowing about the growth of the Black middle class and how the Black middle class is at an all time high, and maintain that the majority of Blacks are letting racism get in their way.
Alphonso Jackson was booed when addressing the National Baptist Convention. In writing about it in the USA Today., Jackson states:
Bush received only 9% of the black vote in 2000, but his policies have done more for the black community than those of any other modern-era president.
His plan for an “ownership society,” for example, has translated into record home ownership in America — and the highest level in history for blacks, too. For the first time, more than 50% of black Americans own a home.
To me, that's just pablum.
Before Bush, it was said that Clinton did more than any other modern-era president. The unemployment rate for Blacks fell. The median income for Blacks rose. The home ownership rate of Blacks rose. So, will Jackson give Clinton any credit?
My income doubled during Clinton's terms? Should I give him the credit?
I purchased as new home. Who gets the credit? Clinton? During his term my income doubled, remember? Or me, for saving money and keeping my credit rating decent?
Let's do another quote from Alphonso Jackson.
America's “black political leaders” have built their careers on an ideology of black victimization. They tout the belief that if blacks want to succeed in this country, there is only one path: reliance on the government.
OK.
I didn't get this book, but I heard it being discussed:
Jesse Jackson, Sr. and Jr. wrote a book about building wealth. Is that about government dependence?
Periodically, Ellijah Cummings has an employment fair in P. G. County where he is able to get businesses in the area, with job openings, to come in and interview people on the spot.
Is promoting something that may help people get a job fostering government dependence?
Well, since I mentioned Jesse Jackson, let me state this: It's damned insulting to have politicians come into Black churches during the election season. Especially when you can't get in contact with them during the time when they aren't campaigning for another term. Just because you are in the church, it doesn't mean I'm going to vote for you.
But it's also damned insulting for the "Black right" to act as if politicians showing up in selected churches equates to politicans showing up in Black churches all over the country.
Come on! People should know that the politicians go to one church in the area, get the camaras to show up, and then move on.
Booker Rising get's 2 hat tips.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16309-2004Sep12.html
Key General Criticizes April Attack In Fallujah
Abrupt Withdrawal Called Vacillation
By Rajiv Chandrasekaran
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, September 13, 2004; Page A17
FALLUJAH, Iraq, Sept. 12 -- The outgoing U.S. Marine Corps general in charge of western Iraq said Sunday he opposed a Marine assault on militants in the volatile city of Fallujah in April and the subsequent decision to withdraw from the city and turn over control to a security force of former Iraqi soldiers.
That security force, known as the Fallujah Brigade, was formally disbanded last week. Not only did the brigade fail to combat militants, it actively aided them, surrendering weapons, vehicles and radios to the insurgents, according to senior Marine officers. Some brigade members even participated in attacks on Marines ringing the city, the officers said.
The comments by Lt. Gen. James T. Conway, made shortly after he relinquished command of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force on Sunday, amounted to a stinging broadside against top U.S. military and civilian leaders who ordered the Fallujah invasion and withdrawal. His statements also provided the most detailed explanation -- and justification -- of Marine actions in Fallujah this spring, which have been widely criticized for increasing insurgent activity in the city and turning it into a "no-go" zone for U.S. troops.
The "Black left" seem to think of Blacks in dire straits, that we all are poor, unable to process any complexities.
The "Black right" seem to think of Blacks as sheep, stupid, and lazy.
Is it no wonder that the "Sterotype Threat" rings so true?
I'm going to get into this pretty soon. The silly season seems to be bringing this out in full force, and I'm friggin' sick and tired of the Black self-hatred -- YEAH I WROTE IT -- from both sides.
Highly selective quotes from J. C. Phillips.
http://www.josephcphillips.com/html/Essays2003.asp?Essay=61&Title=Republicans%E2%80%99+Room+to+Grow
Conservative Commentator Armstrong Williams has stated that the party cannot remain lilly white any longer. He is correct. As big a fan as I am of Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice I am frankly tired of hearing about them. Where is the rest of the talent in "The Big Tent?" Unless Republicans manage to place a few more Black faces on the national scene and elect some Black congressmen, they will continue to have trouble refuting Liberal claims that Black conservatives are lackeys who represent no one but themselves.
...
The case for Republican policies must be made in churches, it must be made on the campuses of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), and it must be made anywhere there's a gathering of Black minds and bodies. And Republicans -- both White and Black -- must make these arguments! White candidates must stop conceding the Black vote to their Democratic opponents.
...
If Blacks have been slow to respond, it is only because Republicans have not yet taken that all important step and leaned in for that first kiss.
http://www.josephcphillips.com/html/Essays2002.asp?Essay=34&Title=How+did+this+conservative+end+up+on+National+Public+Radio
Commercial radio didn’t call me up and give me an opportunity to put my views on the airwaves, National Public Radio and Tavis Smiley did. And I have been listening to Public radio ever since.
What I have discovered is that NPR and in my case Tavis Smiley, is dedicated to providing a forum for voices you might not otherwise hear, for exposing issues that other broadcast media might overlook and this reaches across the entire ideological spectrum. Just goes to show that you never know what or whom you might hear on NPR. I have heard everyone from David Boaz from the Cato Institute talking about the Libertarian Party to Ward Connerly of the American civil rights institute talking about pizza delivery. You just never know.
http://www.josephcphillips.com/html/Essays2002.asp?Essay=12&Title=Barely+Entertainment+Televison
The sad truth, however, is that so convinced are Viacom and other “White” media companies that this underachiever represents the sum total of the Black consumers desires that they are not only reluctant to challenge BET in the marketplace as they would any other company, but they also hail, Johnson’s performance as genius. (Performance, by the way, they would not accept from a white executive running a 3 billion dollar company.) Meanwhile, the Black cable subscriber (who clearly has the patience of Job) waits for BET to fulfill its promise and become a real network catering to the entertainment and informational needs of the Black community.
http://www.josephcphillips.com/html/Essays2003.asp?Essay=102&Title=Vanguarde+Media:+Black+voices+silenced?
Unfortunately, as with BET's film series, Vanguarde was not given the opportunity to nurture the creative venture to success. According to media experts I spoke with, it takes five to seven years for a magazine to turn a profit. Vanity Fair, considered by many as one of the premier publications in the nation, hemorrhaged money to the tune of $40 million during its first four years of operation, but Conde Nast, the owners of Vanity Fair, had the luxury of very deep pockets. Vanguarde, on the other hand, was going into its fifth year of operation, and while revenue was up, ad pages were up and the circulation (which dictates advertising sales) was growing for all the magazines, their pockets were empty. The result is that there are now three fewer outlets for journalists who wish to speak about black issues to black people and 70 full time professional journalists will be looking for work during the Christmas holiday. The financial impact of the magazine closings will also be felt by the many black freelance writers, photographers and other independent contractors that were able to make ends meet with work garnered from those publications.
I worry, because just as Hollywood did not rush to fill the void left by BET and offer a flood of diverse films featuring black characters, I do not believe mainstream publishers will sprint to fill the void left by Vanguarde and suddenly begin speaking to the issues and concerns of the black professional reader.
Tavis Smiley's NPR program during the GOP convention did a good job in show casing Black Republicans.
He should have received kudos for his coverage, IMO. While he asked the same "simple minded question" of "Why are you, a Black person, a member of the GOP?" he was fair and even handed.
So, where's his props?
Highly selective quotes from Tim Wise:
http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2001-08/23wise.htm
Although blacks and Hispanics tend to try drugs for the first time at a slightly younger age than whites, by the end of high school, whites have caught up and surpassed them in every drug category. White seniors are a third more likely to have smoked pot in the past year, seven times more likely to have used cocaine, three times more likely to have used heroin, and nine times more likely to have used LSD. And it's not just that there are more white users, as this would reflect mere population percentages, but rather, that the white rate of use is that much higher than the rate for blacks.
It's the same story for young adults. Whites are 66% of 18-25 year olds, but 70% of drug users that age. Blacks are 13.5% of persons in that age cohort, but only 13% of young adult users, while Hispanics are nearly 15% of that age group, but only 12% of drug users 18-25.
When it comes to drug dealing, the picture changes only slightly. According to the Justice Department, drug users tend to buy from same-race dealers. So the nearly three-quarters of users who are white, mainly rely on white dope peddlers, not the Jamaicans or Dominicans of popular imagery. And when it comes to drugs like Ecstasy--a hot product for the Virginia cartel--the dealers and users have long been known to be mostly white, middle class males between 14 and 32.
http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2002-12/16wise.cfm
But that said, it was David’s side comments about Taylor that indicate how comfortable Horowitz has become with the racist right, even as he blisters the left for supposedly condescending to people of color in a racist fashion. For example, about Taylor, Horowitz says that he is "author of a pioneer book of political incorrectness on race...a very smart and gutsy individualist...a very intelligent and principled man."
Although Horowitz criticizes Taylor’s white nationalism as a capitulation to destructive "identity politics," he cannot bring himself to call Taylor a racist. Indeed he defends him against the charge, saying it is more accurate to call him a "racialist." That this is a distinction without a difference, and the same term David Duke uses to describe himself--all the while adhering to the beliefs in white superiority shared by Taylor--apparently matters not to Horowitz, who goes on to say that Taylor and AR are no more racist than Jesse Jackson or the NAACP.
http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2003-02/12wise.cfm
In truth, the fertility rate for black women is hardly different than for white women. For every 1000 white women 15-44 there are 66.5 live births, while for every 1000 black women that age there are 71.7.
Indeed, the fertility rate for black women has fallen by more than half in the last forty years, such that the gap between black and white fertility has been slashed by nearly 80%, according to the Centers for Disease Control. The birthrate for unmarried black women--especially vilified by racist rhetoric--is at a forty-year low and the rate of babies born to black teens hasn’t gone up one iota since 1920.
And speaking of teens, only six-tenths of one percent of black babies are born to women under the age of fifteen, and the birthrate for black teens 15-19 has dropped by a third since 1991. Overall, more than eight in ten black babies are born to mothers in their twenties or older, and the teen birthrate has fallen faster among black youth than any other racial group over the last decade.
The parallel belief that black women have too many children--at whatever age--and therefore can’t properly care for them is equally mythical. The average number of minor children in white households and black households is identical, and for female-headed black and white households the difference is statistically insignificant. Contrary to the widespread notion that black women typically have four or five children (if not more), only one in twenty black female headed families have four or more kids.
Even for families receiving public assistance--and even before welfare “reform” bumped tens of thousands off the rolls and restricted eligibility for benefits--the typical “welfare family” of whatever race included only a mother and two children and was actually slightly smaller than the typical non-welfare family.
Of course I can hear the voices of racial apoplexy now. “What about the skyrocketing rate of out-of-wedlock births in the black community?” Doesn’t that indicate the sexual irresponsibility of black females and their male compradors, one might ask?
Well no. In fact, not even close.
The reason for the increase in the share of black children born out-of-wedlock in recent decades is that two-parent black couples are having fewer children than ever, meaning that a growing share of the children who are born in the black community will be out-of-wedlock, even though sexual behavior hasn’t changed, and fertility rates among single black women have been falling.
Indeed, eighty percent of the increase in out-of-wedlock childbirths in the black community is because of the falloff in children born to intact black families: a falloff that has been even steeper than the decline among single moms.
Additionally, the apparent “increase” in out-of-wedlock children in single mother homes within the black community, and generally, is the result of the Census Bureau changing the methods used for counting such families in the first place.
Whereas single moms with kids who lived in extended family settings (such as living with their own parents) were historically not counted as separate family units, since the early 1980’s they have been. So even though such families may have existed for many years prior to the accounting switch, they would not have appeared in statistical data until more recently.
http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2004-03/02wise.cfm
---Urban and suburban high school students are equally likely to have had sexual intercourse, with suburban students having had sex at an earlier age, on average;
---Suburban students are more likely to have commitment-free sex, and there are no real urban/suburban differences in rates of contracting sexually transmitted diseases, or rates of pregnancy or abortion;
---Suburban students are more likely to smoke cigarettes regularly and drink alcohol, and they tend to start drinking younger than their urban peers.
---The two groups are equally likely to use drugs, roughly equally likely to have been alcohol or drug-impaired at school, and suburban students are more likely to drive drunk;
---There are no substantial differences between urban and suburban students in terms of whether they have been in a fight, shoplifted goods, or damaged property; and finally,
---Suburban students are slightly more likely to sell drugs than their urban counterparts, and there are no major differences between urban and suburban students in terms of bringing a weapon to school, mostly because so few of either group ever do so.
Let's be real for one moment during this silly season.
The U.S.'s war on terrorism is a sham.
For years people along the southern border have dealt with drug and human smugglers. Unknown to most people in the U.S., some land owners along the southern border have had gun fights with drug and human smugglers.
If human smugglers are trafficing workers and sex workers, what makes anyone think they aren't trafficing terrorists?
What about the "Shoe Bomber"? Do we want to remember him? Do we care to think that the only reason that airplane wasn't blown out of the sky is because his shoes were wet?
"Awwwww we want the funk!
Gotta have that funk!"
Where's the funk?
Who has the funk?
Where's it at?
"Awwwww we need the funk!
Give Up That Funk!"
Help a brotha out!
Where's the bass line?
"We're gonna turn
this mutha, out!"
Where?
These young bucks have some decent sparse beats, but where's the funk!?!?!?!
Where's the beats and bass line from ConFunkShun?
How about the bass and lead guitar work of Slave?
Or the random keyboard, guitar, and bass lines swirled together to make serious music of P-Funk?
Where's that hard line bass of the 2nd generation of The Bar Kays?
What about the melodies and bass of the Average White Band?
"You don't like my music.
You don't have to use it,
Funkin is a thing that
all of us release"
Where's the melody and hard bass lines of Cameo?
Wheres Thunder Thumbs and Lightening Licks of The Brothers Johnson"?
"All through the morning rays I gaze
The sun doesn't shine
Rainbows and waterfalls
Run through my mind"
Where's Rick James bass line?
If you've listened to a collection of James Brown's music, you know how much he's been sampled! And it's a damn shame!
"So if you wanna stretch out
And find out what it's all about.
Get on down, Get on down
See what funkin can do!"
Where's it at?
[Update] Cobb does a nice job with this list. I'd quibble with the rankings of a few, but all in all, top notch.
I'm blessed to be paired with a woman who I can trust.
I'm blessed to be paired with a woman who has my back.
I'm blessed to be paired with a woman who, although we dont' always agree, has a similar mindset about many of the important things in life.
I'm blessed to have an offspring who, although strong willed, has followed a productive path.
I'm blessed to be born into a family that has come together when it was really needed.
The next large document in this series begins with the following executive summary:
Download file
There are major differences in the perceptions of blacks and whites about the status of race relations in this country today. Whites are more positive than blacks on a variety of perceptual measures of how well blacks are faring in our society, and how they are treated in the local community. These gaps are in some instances smaller than they were in the 1960’s, but have not narrowed in recent years.Whites also tend to view themselves as having very little personal prejudice against blacks, but perceive that “other” whites in their area have much higher levels of prejudice against blacks. Blacks also ascribe to whites significantly higher levels of racial prejudice than whites give themselves. Blacks claim that they have little prejudice against whites.
Whites express tolerant racial views across a variety of measures, and a majority of whites indicate a preference for living, working and sending their children to school in a mixed racial environment. A majority of whites say they would not object if blacks in great numbers moved into their neighborhood, or if their child went to a school which was majority black. Almost no whites would object to voting for a black for President, and six out of ten now approve of interracial marriage. The over time changes in a number of these attitudes have been profound. There has thus been a significant decline in the past several decades in the number of whites who express overtly prejudicial sentiments.
Whites and blacks have distinctly different views on the role of the government – perhaps building off of their differential perceptions of the status of race relations in the U.S. today. Whites want the number of affirmative action programs to decrease or at the least stay the same, and feel that blacks should help themselves rather than relying on the government. Blacks hold the contrary views.
The average white American tends to live, work and send their child to school in environments which are mostly or all white. Blacks, on the other hand, have relatively high degrees of contact in these everyday settings with whites. Less than a majority of blacks live in mostly or all black neighborhoods, and only a fourth send their children to schools that are mostly or all black. Both blacks and whites, however, are very highly likely to worship only with members of their race.
Blacks remain less satisfied than whites with major aspects of their lives, but the satisfaction gap between the races on most of these measures has been closing significantly over time. On some measures of personal satisfaction, there are no differences at all between comparably matched groups of highly educated, higher income blacks and whites.
Only a minority of blacks – three out of ten or less – say that they have felt unfairly treated because of their race over the last 30 days in each of a series of everyday life settings. Retail shopping is the setting in which the highest number of blacks perceive discrimination within the last 30 days. Young black males are particularly likely to say they have felt discrimination while shopping, and in terms of contact with the police. A little less than half of all blacks say that they have been unfairly treated in the last 30 days in at least one of the settings used in the research.
Why did we go after Iraq?
I think it was because of Iraq's gift of $25,000 to the family of terrorists who blew themselves to bits when attacking Israel.
Iraq supported terrorism by doing this.
It wasn't about non-compliance.
It wasn't about WMDs.
It wasn't about a direct threat to the U.S.
It was about a threat to a U.S. interest. And that interest wasn't oil.
At least that's what I think.
So, here is a quote that I hear a lot:
The war on poverty has failed. We have spent a lot of money on it, and the poverty rate is virtually unchanged.
[ On edit ] Well, that's an interesting comment.
But for the war on poverty to be declared a failure, it would have to be demonstrated that the poverty rate would have been lower without it. But, no one can demonstrate that it would have been lower.
Conversely, no one can demonstrate that without the war on poverty, the poverty rate would have been higher.
I hate to do this, because in general, I consider the man to be off the deep end and an opportunist of the bad kind. But I have to do this.
Sigh
Alan Keyes has staked his claim as a man of faith. His faith states that homosexuality is a sin. So, why should he be blasted for stating in straight forward terms, that those who practice homosexuality are immoral?
And since he believes his faith tells him that abortion is murder, and his faith states that murder is a sin, why is it wrong for him to say that the "leader" of his faith would not vote for a man who goes against the teachings of the faith?
Okay, now I have to go take a long shower.
This post by Ambra got me ta thinkin'.
If we as a society believe that we should not lower standards, and that we as a society strives to be one based on merit, why do the following exist without much comment?
My major was a part of the engineering school. Would you want someone designing a bridge who had a grade average of 75, but a curve adjusted average of A-?
Just some questions.
I have a number of documents relating to race that I should share with everyone. They've been sitting on my hard drive for years doing nobody any good.
The first:
"POVERTY AND RACE: LOCAL POLICY ISSUES AND SOLUTIONS"
WEDNESDAY FEBRUARY 11, 1998
Download file
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
+ + + + +
THE PRESIDENT’S INITIATIVE ON RACE
+ + + + +
ADVISORY BOARD MEETING
+ + + + +
AFTERNOON ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION:
"POVERTY AND RACE: LOCAL POLICY ISSUES AND
SOLUTIONS"
+ + + + +
WEDNESDAY
FEBRUARY 11, 1998
+ + + + +
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
+ + + + +
The Commission’s Advisory Board met at
Independence High School, Luiz Valdez Performing Arts
Center, 1776 Educational Park Drive, San Jose
California, at 1:00 p.m., Dr. John Franklin, Chairman,
presiding.
BOARD MEMBERS:
Dr. John Hope Franklin, Durham, NC, Chairman
Linda Chavez-Thompson, Washington D.C.
Suzan D. Johnson Cook, Bronx, NY
Thomas H. Kean, Madison, NJ
Angela E. Oh, Los Angeles, CA
Robert Thomas, Fort Lauderdale, FL
William F. Winter, Jackson, MS
OPENING REMARKS:
Blanca Alvarado, Supervisor
Santa Clara County
Aida Alvarez, Administrator
Small Business Administration
PANELISTS:
Moderator: Lorna Ho, KNTV
San Jose, California
Rose A. Amador, President/CEO
Center for Training and Careers, Inc.
San Jose, California
Gordon Chin, Executive Director
Chinatown Community Development Center
San Francisco, California
Amy B. Dean, Executive Officer
South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council
San Jose, California
Dr. Denise Fairchild, President
Community Development Technologies Center
Los Angeles, California
Jose R. Padilla, Director
California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc.
San Francisco, California
Dennis Turner, Executive Director
Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s
Association
San Diego, California