Celebrating the Broken Chains

On a warm day in July of 1776, a document was signed that declared this nation's independence from the tyranny of the British government. Close to one hundred years later on another warm summer day, black Americans who had populated the same "free" nation for years prior as slaves were finally awarded the same freedom.

On this day in 1865 -- over two years after the Emancipation Proclaimation was signed, a general order was announced in Galveston, Texas indicating the end of the long and bloody civil war dividing the country. The order also called for the release of the close to 250,000 slaves in the state. This day of jubilee for those newly freed slaves became the day we know as Juneteeth.

Since that time, African Americans have used this time to commemorate the pain and triumph that came with years of captivity. While there is no doubt that American is deeply immersed in the shameful legacy of slavery (as much as people refuse to see that), there is much to celebrate. Now -- more than ever -- black Americans have considerable access to the same "American Dream" formerly reserved for whites. Even when only one state recognizes Juneteenth as a state holiday (Texas, for obvious reasons), the significance of the day will never be diminished.

Though I'll never be able to fully comprehend the anguish that came with bondage, I try to at least imagine the sheer joy that must have been the slaves as the document proclaiming their emancipation was finally enacted. Though it was long overdue and only truly recognized after the Civil Rights movement another 100 years later, the day was ours. We were officially declared a free people. That freedom has never been more apparent than it is today. The road for us to travel has been paved by the worn, calloused, and bloodied hands of those who came before us. We have hitched a ride to the new 'land of opportunity' on the whipped backs of our ancestors. For this reason, we owe it to those overworked and enslaved dreamers to not only remember their struggle, but to also seize every opportunity they have provided for us.

Today we have Juneteenth. But I'm also looking forward to the time where I can thank each and every one of them when we all meet in Glory.

- ACL

Barack's Achilles' Heel..?

I was over at Mirror on America reading an interesting report from Rikyrah; one of the site's contribitors. She wrote a post promoting a new site "Michelle Obama Watch"; created to "...monitor the media’s treatment and depiction of Michelle Obama..." The site was established by Gina McCauley at the popular blog What About Our Daughters .

After emailing a link to Rikyrah's page to some of my fellow Obama supporters (many of whom were women), some of them gave me flack for a response I posted on her page. When referring to the Michelle Obama Watch site, I said the following:

I hope this campaign to 'protect' Michelle will be successful. Lord knows, she will need it.

In the interest of "keepin' it real", we live in a pretty shallow and vacuous society that does indeed call for its leaders (including spouses and children) to fit a certain model in order to gain acceptance and validation. In that respect, Michelle's tough, no nonsense, and forced smile approach might just be an Achilles' heel to Sen. Obama's campaign when it's deemed to be the antithesis of what folks would consider socially graceful. That's not a diss on Michelle from my end. But to expect the hick in W. Virginia or the bigoted old white man in the deep south to see Michelle's strength and NOT interpret that as a negative attribute is a stretch.

I mean, even Laura Bush smiled while she delivered a pretty icy reply to Stephen Colbert at the White House Correspondents Dinner (I admit, I'm not sure if she said what everybody thinks she said, but the rumors have gone uncontroverted...)

I guess my ultimate point is: sometimes our identities need to be compromised...nay...softened if we want to successfully enter arenas predominately populated by superficiality. Essentially we have to "fit in to get in." This is especially true for the person who stands to be the country's first lady.

To be sure, I like Michelle Obama. I especially love what she represents: a strong black woman who climbed the ladder of success but remained devoted to her family in the process. But my liking her doesn't blind me to the reality that she will prove to be a weak spot in Barack Obama's campaign over the next few months. It's an unfortuate reality. But it is reality nonetheless.

Joslyn sent me a text yesterday reminding me of the story that made its was all over the internet (most notably in the black blogosphere) about Fox News referring to Michelle Obama as Barack's "Baby Momma." Initially, I was pretty upset about this. Not suprised, but certainly upset. This was textbook exploitation by Fixed Noise. But then I recounted a story where Michelle openly referred to Barack as her "baby's daddy." For the uninitiated, the term "baby daddy" was derived from a rap song released at the time by B Rock And The Bizz. Please forgive me for actually posting this, but I needed to so I could provide some context:




I'm sorry you had to see that. But I'm even more sorry that stuff like this is often the more portrayed aspect of black culture.

At any rate: Back to the post...

I've always maintained that black professionals are typically given an unfair charge to table our individualism to gain a certain level of social validation. As it stands, I challenge Michelle to do just that. Not to be confused with shufflin' and dancin' fo Mista Charlie, there are some activities that should never make their way to the light if you're a black person trying to accomplish the ultimate in mainstream validation: winning the Presidency of the United States. Truth be told: I'm not as critical about the Obama pound. I thought that was pretty cool (plus, if you get too critical of that, you must also go after Bush for chest-bumping a cadet during a graduation ceremony). But I am critical of (and concerned about) Michelle barely cracking a smile in front of the cameras, referring to a potential POTUS as her "baby's daddy" (as opposed to "the father of her children", which doesn't carry the same urban ties that apparently scare white folks), or any number of her antics that scream "I don't care what the world thinks." While it's pretty refreshing to see somebody so bold and committed to "keepin' it real", as an educated woman she should know that such boldness is not without consequence. As comedian Dave Chapelle joked, sometimes keepin' it real can go very, very very wrong.

If Michelle is not careful, she could very well lose this thing for Barack. But that's just what I think. What say you?

- ACL

Hope may lieth in the enemy

It pains me to write this particular post, mainly because of the mounting frustration I have with Senator Hillary Clinton. All throughout this campaign season, Sen Clinton and her surrogrates have provoked dirty attacks, selfishly created a gaping hole in the Democratic party and has given a GOP nominee who is the second coming of George W. Bush a legitimate chance of winning the Presidency despite the fact that people hate Bush and what he represents. But one thing this primary/caucus season has taught me is that -- as much as I fight the concept -- Senator Barack Obama cannont win without Hillary. Obama has found himself in the precarious position of wheezing his way to the finish line and; sadly, the only person to give him that last boost is none other than the person who attempted to derail his run from the very start.

For starters, one of the major mistakes often made by us Obama supporters (and, yes I'm including myself in that number) is that we use his record-setting fundraising and recent popularity as the sole litmus test for his electability. On one hand, I give it up to Sen. Obama for how he continues to create a certain energy from new voters that was virtually non-existent before now. Additionally, there is no denying that he is currently riding an enormous wave of popularity amongst his followers. But all of that notwithstanding, Obama's campaign -- particularly his moral high ground approach -- has made him as politically vulnerable as former 1988 Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis and his "Massachusetts Miracle" campaign (it's amazing I can still remember that). I know that sounds pretty harsh, but in the effort to stay committed to reality, we have to at least consider Obama's weaknesses as we approach November.

In order to stand a chance against the Republican machine during the general election, the people's support will be paramount. But in a culture where racial politics reign supreme, I can't say for sure that the nation is completely ready for the unification Sen. Obama has included in his platform. With the number of Clinton supporters on the rise despite her polarizing campaign, I'm convinced that Obama trying to go above the fray will not be without some consequence. In fact, even with the positivity Obama has tried to bring to politics, it has not been potent enough to compel people outside of his circle to learn much about him outside of the ongoing association with Rev. Wright. This has not been any more evident than in the Clinton's recent landslide victories. and indeed the too-close-to-call numbers in the popular vote. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that if the Dems used the same winner-take-all process for assigning delegates as the GOP uses in selecting their nominee, Clinton would have likely had this contest wrapped up. All of this in spite of Hill's attacks; subtle and otherwise. Try as I might, there is no denying the power that she brings to the table.

Also (and again, I hate to concede this point), but Hill brings a certain force to Obama's presidential campaign that others in the field may not. As much as I like John Edwards as the pick for Obama's Veep, or as much as Bill Richardson could captivate more of the much needed Hispanic vote (apparently, much more needed now as Clinton recently creamed Obama in Puerto Rico), or as much political experience as a Joe Biden would bring, Hill has shown how she can bring a mixture of all of their elements. Adding to that, she can also deliver on another highly sought group far more than any of the other prospects could: female voters. In an interesting and ironic twist, feminist types who -- in other circles -- have been socially irrelevant (that's not a diss. I'm just keepin' it real) have been making a lot of signifcant noise for Clinton that won't go away any time soon. As I watched the Rules and Bylaws committee rule on the Michigan and Florida votes, I also caught the act of some of Hill's women followers and how deeply passionate they were about the outcome. In a time where their attempts at activism have been a lost cause in most circles, the one time where their mobilization will actually be effective could be at Obama's expense.

We must also examine some of the major thumpings that the Obama camp has suffered at the hands of the Clinton camp in places like Pennsylvania, Ohio, W. Virginia, and Puerto Rico. Those huge losses could potentially spell serious problems for Obama should he secure the nomination. Too many people are so deeply entranced by Hill's spellbinding campaign (most likely because they share the nation's fear of having a black president) that they have indicated that they'd rather support an arch nemisis Republican candidate than they would somebody who is not Clinton. Obama cannot simply rely on his message of change to appeal to people's 'better selves' . Instead, he needs a candidate with the necessary support and credibility to attract those not entirely convinced by Obama's spirit, message, and intentions. Regrettably, stories about Obama's fictional ties to Islam, his 20 year relationship with Rev. Wright, his "unpatriotic" lapel pin issue, etc. have been pushed so much that he can't defuse them alone. Instead, somebody who "white hard working Americans" trust like Clinton (I know. I can't figure it out either) can debunk those claims far more effectively than anybody else can. I mean, these folks cling to Clinton like she suffered, bled and died on the cross for our sins.

Most Obama supporters have become so disenchanted with Hill's shrewd tactis during this race that they've severed any ties to her. I -- for example -- make no bones about the fact that I'm decidedly done with the Clintons. Likewise, many Clinton supporters are too sore of losers to accept anything but a bid for the presidential nomination (you know: those "bitter" folks to whom Obama was referring). Still, I have to admit that an Obama/Clinton ticket may be the very thing that is needed to secure the White House. As much as I'd like to think, Obama can't do this with all the steam he's lost from diehard Clinton supporters. Likewise, we all know that we can't rely on a third party ever offering any legitimacy to the campaign. So we're stuck with the crazy Democratic party we have or the even crazier Republican party we have. But before we can start talking about striking before the iron is hot, the iron must first be heated up. Unification has to be forged before McCain can be soundly defeated. Ironically, said unification may need to be accomplished with a figure as polarizing as Clinton.

- ACL

Uncle Tom-dre...?

I hate putting myself on blast. But sometimes, maybe I just deserve it.

Yesterday as I was leaving a gas station, I was confronted by a young, white woman in tears. Appearance wise, the woman seemed relatively "together"; insofar as I could determine. She was wearing an Nike jumpsuit, had her hair neatly pulled back in a ponytail, and was wearing a hint of conversatively applied makeup. Minus the cigarette she was puffing (I get endlessly annoyed by smokers) she appeared innocent enough. She proceeded in giving me a sob story about how she ran out of gas up the road, how her cell phone died, and how she didn't have any money. Though I offered to take her where she needed to go (Admittedly this is a pretty naive and dangerous habit of mine. I'm working on that.), she declined. Instead, she asked me for "a few dollars". Without hesitation, I pulled out the last $8 I had on the planet and gave it to her. She thanked me for the money and started on -- what I think was-- a trek back to her vehicle.

After that encounter, I stuck my chest out in a self congratulatory manner; praising myself for doing what I considered my good deed for the day. But upon further reflection, I thought about all the times I was approached by scrungy, unkept people with similar stories where I wasn't so quick with my benevolence. I thought about the brothas I see in downtown Flint to whom I'd likely not be so generous. While I do still make it a point to offer assistance if it's requested, I never, ever freely distribute money. Instead, I'd take it upon myself to buy the goods or service they needed. For instance, if someone asked me for money to buy something to eat, rather than giving them my cash, I'd offer to buy the food for them. I simply don't trust people enough to use my cash donations for the purposes they indicate. Yet, when it came to this innocent looking (and yes, pretty) white woman, I did the exact opposite. When she came to me in distress, I not only gave her cash -- thus breaking my own rule -- I did it without hesitation.

I can't help but to feel like I somehow displayed the same kind of prejudice that continues to pervade our society; prejudice based on looks and race. I mean, I could've very well given my last $8 to a pretty, white con artist to whom I immediately showed compassion -- just because she looked a certain way. What does that say about me? Does that make me as bad as the media of whom I'm so critical?

Your thoughts?

- ACL

Redemptive endorsement...?

OK. OK. OK. I know that I was supposed to take a break from my regularly scheduled programming about the madhouse that has become the Democratic race. But I couldn't resist myself.

Today I discovered that in a strange and pretty unexpected turn of events, Sen. Obama has been endorsed by West Virginia Senator Robert C. Byrd. Yes, that Sen. Robert C. Byrd.

Byrd's endorsement came at a pretty bizarre time; considering that W. Virginia -- the state to whom he is beholden was overwhelmingly pro-Clinton during their primaries. It's strange to me that an elected official would so blatantly go against the wishes of his own state.

But perhaps what's most surreal about this whole thing is the endorsement from Sen. Byrd itself. We're talking about the same Robert Byrd who was formerly of the Ku Klux Klan. The same Robert Byrd who attempted to filibuster a vote for the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The same Robert Byrd who opposed the appointments of Thurgood Marshall, Clarence Thomas, and Condoleezza Rice because they were black (though I must admit, he got it right with Thomas and Rice. I'm just sayin...)

Optimistically, I'm hoping that Sen. Byrd's endorsement represents the ultimate in redemption. As a former Klansman who fought assiduously to deny blacks any equality whatsoever endorsing a black man for one of the most prominent positions in the world speaks all throughout the cosmos. It's true that Byrd has renounced many of his former racist ways, but no single statement speaks to a potential reformation more than by publicly endorsing the very type of person against whom Byrd was once so opposed.

Honestly, I'm not sure what to make of this situation. I want to believe that Sen. Byrd has made a complete 180; transitioning from a racist with no social or moral constraints to a rehabilitated person who has learned from his mistakes. I mean, I strongly believed in the redemption of Stanley "Tookie" Williams; and I hate everything about gangs. So should Byrd be any different? Obama doesn't seem to think so.

In his latest book The Audacity of Hope, Sen. Obama eloquently states:

Listening to Senator Byrd I felt with full force all the essential contradictions of me in this new place, with its marble busts, its arcane traditions, its memories and its ghosts. I pondered the fact that, according to his own autobiography, Senator Byrd had received his first taste of leadership in his early twenties, as a member of the Raleigh County Ku Klux Klan, an association that he had long disavowed, an error he attributed—no doubt correctly—to the time and place in which he'd been raised, but which continued to surface as an issue throughout his career. I thought about how he had joined other giants of the Senate, like J. William Fulbright of Arkansas and Richard Russell of Georgia, in Southern resistance to civil rights legislation. I wondered if this would matter to the liberals who now lionized Senator Byrd for his principled opposition to the Iraq War resolution—the MoveOn.org crowd, the heirs of the political counterculture the senator had spent much of his career disdaining.

I wondered if it should matter. Senator Byrd's life—like most of ours—has been the struggle of warring impulses, a twining of darkness and light. And in that sense I realized that he really was a proper emblem for the Senate, whose rules and design reflect the grand compromise of America's founding: the bargain between Northern states and Southern states, the Senate's role as a guardian against the passions of the moment, a defender of minority rights and state sovereignty, but also a tool to protect the wealthy from the rabble, and assure slaveholders of noninterference with their peculiar institution. Stamped into the very fiber of the Senate, within its genetic code, was the same contest between power and principle that characterized America as a whole, a lasting expression of that great debate among a few brilliant, flawed men that had concluded with the creation of a form of government unique in its genius—yet blind to the whip and the chain.

From the passage above, it's clear that Obama is ready to turn the other cheek; even to a person who would've fought tooth and nail against a black man ever running for president.

All of this nothwithstanding, I can't help but wonder if Byrd's rehabilitation is more of reflection on the changing of times than it is with the changing of his personal beliefs. For the first time in history, people who engage in racist acts can actually be brought to bear, arrested, prosecuted, and convicted for those activities. Racism -- though still manifesting itself in many covert ways -- simply doesn't have the same kind of openly mainstream validation as it once did. Has Byrd's political career as of late -- including his shocking endorsement -- been a much needed corrective action for his shameful past or is he still the same racist; only closeted because of the lack of overt social and institutional support of racism that existed but a few decades ago?

Your thoughts?

- ACL

Progress

Hat tip to Carmen for this video:




- ACL

Black, missing, & insignificant

A while back, I wrote a post about how America tends to place a higher premium on missing white women than they do for just about any other group in this society. After reading that post again (as I frequently do with some of my older stuff), I thought that perhaps I was writing with hyperbole. Maybe things weren't as overt as I speculated.

That is, until I heard the story of Romona Moore. Here's the Reader's Digest of the story:

Romona Moore was a 21-year old daughter of a Guyanese immigrant and a student at Hunter College in New York. One day she stepped out to go to a local Burger King. She never came back. Worried, her mother -- Elle Carmichael -- called the NYPD; who essentially blew off the report. Moore was later found tortured and murdered. The NYPD is now being sued for botching this case.

What was most interesting about this case is that Moore's disappearance came fresh off the heels of another woman abduction that grabbed the attention of all of New York. In contrast to Moore's case, the NYPD launched a massive seearch for Svetlana Aronov; spouse of an affluent white doctor fom the Upper East side of New York. They pulled out all the stops during Aronov's investigation; including search dogs, door-to-door visits, and -- get this -- a psychic. A PSYCHIC!!! Oppositely, they didn't even so much as file a report for Moore.

For the full story, check out the article written by Sean Gardiner from the Village Voice. It's a little lengthy, but well worth the read.

Reading this article -- coupled with the conspicous reality that people of color apparently don't make good news stories (unless they're the ones committing the crimes), I'm convinced that my thesis about missing white women is not that far off after all.

Having a few police officer friends myself, I try to show a little more tolerance and forgiveness for the men and women wearing the badge. But stories like this; where those who operate under the "protect and serve" mission ignore particular types of people; sicken me to no end. But I don't place the onus solely on police negligence. True, they likely could do far more to address victims of color; especially considering the resources they willfully devote to the Natalee Holloways of the world. But I'd be remiss if I wasn't equally as critical of the media who feed off stories centering around white vicitimization while casually dismissing people of color. As the Village Voice article points out, attempts to involve the media in Moore's case were met with apathy by the media -- who are ostensibly committing to disseminating information affecting our world. When they decide to exclude particular groups in the interest of others whom they consider more 'newsworthy', they have to be brought to bear.

It is indeed a sad day, when people have to consider bleaching their skin in order to receive any validation in this country.

Hat tip to Malik for this story.

-ACL

Turning back the dial

File this one under "Things we can't blame on racism."

In this video, some obnoxiously ghetto girl in Atlanta is acting like a fool toward an elderly woman. I don't know what caused the incident and I'm not sure on any other developments that may have come out of this story. But what I do know is that I'm ashamed to be a black person right now. I'm also ashamed to admit that I've actually rode on the MARTA:

[Warning: Explicit Content]

When watching episodes like this, it's important to be reminded that no social or racial groups on this planet are monolithic. We don't all act like this. Still for me, it hurts to see my people showcasing themselves in this light, even when it's not done as often as people suggest.

I think about all the battles waged to open the world up for minorities; whether it's the fight for equal opportunities, combatting negative perceptions, or raising social awareness in our communities. So when I see igornant a** stuff like this, (especially in my hometown of Flint, Michigan; where it's more of a norm than an exception), I admittedly wonder to myself: "What's the use?"

What is we gon' do?

- ACL

The reincarnation of the poll tax?

I just read that by a 6-3 margin, the Supreme Court has upheld the Voter ID law in the state of Indiana. This coming only a few days before the pivitol Democratic primary election.

According to MSNBC:

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can require voters to produce photo identification without violating their constitutional rights, validating Republican-inspired voter ID laws. In a splintered 6-3 ruling, the court upheld Indiana's strict photo ID requirement, which Democrats and civil rights groups said would deter poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots. Its backers said it was needed to prevent fraud....

...More than 20 states require some form of identification at the polls. Courts have upheld voter ID laws in Arizona, Georgia and Michigan, but struck down Missouri's. Monday's decision comes a week before Indiana's presidential primary.

The decision also could spur efforts to pass similar laws in other states.

Ken Falk, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, said he hadn't reviewed the decision, but he was "extremely disappointed" by it. Falk has said voter ID laws inhibit voting, and a person's right to vote "is the most important right." The ACLU brought the case on behalf of Indiana voters.

The case concerned a state law, passed in 2005, that was backed by Republicans as a way to deter voter fraud. Democrats and civil rights groups opposed the law as unconstitutional and called it a thinly veiled effort to discourage elderly, poor and minority voters — those most likely to lack proper ID and who tend to vote for Democrats...

...There is little history in Indiana of either in-person voter fraud — of the sort the law was designed to thwart — or voters being inconvenienced by the law's requirements. For the overwhelming majority of voters, an Indiana driver license serves as the identification.

Read the rest of the article here.

For once, I think Republicans got something right. I'm not diametrically opposed to the idea of using identification to vote. I mean, even in my home state of Michigan, I've seen voters who were able to hit the polls without showing so much as a paper ID. So I think having a legitimate form of picture identification is a necessary thing; especially when we recall the debacle in Florida during the 2000 Presidential Election; where certain people (many of whom were black) were erroneously denied their right to vote because of identification issues. Knowing who cast a vote is one of the best check and balance systems we can have.

Still, I'm deeply concerned that a misapplication of this law could spell trouble for minority and poor voters; particularly those who would most likely vote Democrat. While I think that people should have identification anyway and not just for the sake of voting; I fully accept the reality that many people simply do not. The hundred bucks or so that I can spend to keep my identifications up to date is not necessarily a privilege held by poorer people. For those people, mandating them to purchase ID for voting comes dangerously close (to me) as reinstituting the poll tax; which was deemed unconsititutional after the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

If the Voter ID law is to be effective without trampling on the poor and marginalized, I think the government should create a universal Voter Identification Card for all age-appropriate voters. These cards should include the person's name, photo, social security number, date of birth, and an unduplicable seal. Further, these cards should be issued as a courtesy to anyone who decides to exercise their right to vote (including convicts). Anything less than that is a slap in the face to democracy.

That's what I think. But what say you?

- ACL

Black card REVOKED!

BET founder and devout Clinton supporter Bob Johnson is once again up to familar race-baiting antics against Senator Obama. To refresh your memory, during a public appearance for the Clintons, Johnson weasled in a cheap shot about Obama's drug use as a teenager. After the damage was done, he denied ever saying anything; only to then apologize for it. But recently as he interviewed with the Charlotte Observer, Johnson gave a hat tip to former Clinton advisor Geraldine Ferraro for her recent declaration that Obama would not be in the position he's in had he been white. Apparently, Johnson didn't learn a lesson from the hailstorm that ensued from Ferraro's comments.

Then again, this dude also conceived BET. So it's not that uncommon for him not to 'get it.'

Said Johnson:

What I believe Geraldine Ferraro meant (is) if you take a freshman senator from Illinois called 'Jerry Smith' and he says I'm going to run for president, would he start off with 90 percent of the black vote? And the answer is, probably not. Would he also start out with the excitement of starting out as something completely different? Probably not. He would just be a freshmen senator...

"Geraldine Ferraro said it right. The problem is Geraldine Ferraro is white. This campaign has such a hair trigger on anything racial. It is almost impossible for anybody to say anything."

Call me crazy, but I think Johnson is jealous. I think he's pissed that -- with all the billions he has -- the greater society will never respect his work as much as Sen. Obama's. Being the father of the worst black form of media in history, Johnson can never match the style, charm, class and dignity (and apparently, a legitimate shot at the White House) that Obama has. Obama represents everything wonderful about black people; while Johnson represents everything sad and unfortunate.

But I'll concede on one point. Johnson and Ferraro are right: Obama would not be in the position he's in if he were white. If he were a white candidate:

1. He probably wouldn't have people associating him with Islam at a time where being Muslim is the new "Black"
2. He could probably buy his way into the White House.
3. He probably wouldn't have any student loans to pay off.
4. He most definitely would not have worked his way up from the streets of Chicago. Unless of course he was doing community service as a replacement for the prison time he SHOULD'VE had.
5. He would've completely blown Hillary out of the water a long time ago.
6. He would not have been accused of "shuckin' and jivin'.
7. People would never make references to his race.
8. He would not be guilty by association with his controversial minister.
9. He would have never been called "Boy" (which, in some context, is the same as being called a nigger).
10. He could actually be an elitist and not be called one (versus the opposite with Obama)

I guess they were right about Obama all along.

Now, I'm not trying to suggest that Johnson must be loyal to Obama simply because it would fall under black-on-black support. I mean, I wasn't exactly leading any protests in support of black Congressmen William Jefferson (also a Democrat, I should point out) when he was caught with his hands in the cookie jar (or should I say the freezer). I'm not exactly on Jesse Jackson's mailing list. To this day, I still bury my head when I see Evander Holyfield give an interview. So if Johnson wishes to remain committed to the Clintons, all power to him. But at the same time, I'm disgusted at how Johnson would stoop so low when it involves another brotha; a righteous and prophetic brotha at that. But after watching BET for a half hour, I'm reminded that Bobby has never really had black interests in mind.

- ACL

Beneficiaries

Whether it's indirectly or directly, racism has its beneficiaries. Understanding this is the first step to reconciliation.

Hat tip to Barry Deutsch (aka Ampersand) over at Alas, A Blog for this strip.

- ACL

Racism in the courtroom...?

I was watching Fox & Friends the other day (strike one). On the show, they were discussing the racial implications of a controversial story surrounding Marvin Arrington, a black judge in Atlanta who removed the white attorneys from his courtroom as he lectured to black defendants prior to their sentencing. Using the lame and baseless citation of "reverse racism", some of the commentators were quick to call the judge on being racist. After all -- they say -- if a white judge demanded that blacks leave the room while he addressed white defendants, the NAACP, Al Sharpton, and Jesse Jackson would be all over the place.

I can address their observations and claims in two words: DEAD WRONG!

For starters, I will at least concede on one point by saying that the judge should have used a more tact in clearing the courtroom. I believe he would've likely been less accused of racial isolation if he met with the defendants privately in his chambers. Oppositely, his decision to essentially kick people out of the courtroom exuded the notion of separtism, thus fueling the "reverse racism" argument.

That concession aside, I'm amazed at how people can sit back and play the race card on this story. But I'm not letting them off the hook; no more than I let blacks who unmeritability play the race card off the hook. Consider the following:

(1) Judge Arrington's moves were not anti-white. They were pro-black. There's a HUGE difference between those two ideologies. Arrington didn't use his platform to villify those 'white, blue-eyed devils'. Instead, he wanted to smack some sense into black defendants who keep appearing in his court. Now one might say that a "colorblind" judge would have that same level of sympathy for all people, regardless of color. And I'd agree with that. In fact, even Judge Arrington agrees with that himself. But, as I've argued before, delivering messages to a person or group of people is far more effective when it's done by someone who has a shared experience; even if that experience is as cursory as race (though I personally don't think that race is a superficial topic at all. But you get the point). The fact is: the judge saw this as an opportunity to empathetically intervene in lives of black kids in a way that a white judge probably could not or would not have intervened. I mean, who better to kick knowledge about being black to other blacks than ANOTHER BLACK PERSON? I remember watching an episode of The Practice where a white judge became the laughing stock of his courtroom when he tried to give moral lectures to black defendants. For this reason, Judge Arrington is the right man for the job.

(2) The hypothetical scenario of "reverse racism" is foolishly and incorrectly used in this situation. Contrary to what we might see on Judge Joe Brown, Judge Mathis, or any of those other ridiculous court shows, the American judicial system is predominately made of up white officers and black defendants. In order to use a hypothetical argument effectively, you have to consider the complete inverse of the scenerio currently being assessed. So in the case, the judicial system (and indeed, the greater society at large) would have to be set up where blacks were the controlling and leading elements and whites were the socially oppressed minority group. If that were the case, then I'd see nothing wrong with a white judge -- sick of seeing his people damaging themselves and their communities -- unleashing a "Judge Arrington" on trouble whites teen. If he felt it necessary to kick blacks out (thus avoiding the bad practice of airing dirty laundry), you best believe I'd be supportive of his cause.

Again, I don't deny that the judge should've avoided kicking people out or making his 'lecture' solely focused on blacks. But I applaud Arrington for addressing an issue and indeed people central to his own existence. The occassional house cleaning is good for us; especially when it's done by us.

- ACL

40 years later

An excerpt from a speech delivered by an angry black preacher:

God didn't call America to engage in a senseless, unjust war. . . . And we are criminals in that war. We've committed more war crimes almost than any nation in the world, and I'm going to continue to say it. And we won't stop it because of our pride and our arrogance as a nation. But God has a way of even putting nations in their place.
...and if you don't stop your reckless course, I'll rise up and break the backbone of your power.

No; this didn't come from the now villified minister of Sen. Obama, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. This came from the one and only Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. Source

As we commenerate his death -- 40 years to this date -- we should ask ourselves how the media would respond to this passage from Dr. King. Lord knows they still refuse to lay Rev. Wright's "anti-American" comments to bed.

- ACL

In the news

Here's a roundup of some of the stuff hitting the airwaves (or not):

Spitz or swallows?
OK. Fine. That was a little crude. Still, it's a pretty appropriate headline for NY Govenor Eliot Spitzer after it was revealed that he has been tied to prostitution. Using the psuedonym "Client 9", Gov. Spitzer -- husband and father of three -- was recorded by an FBI wiretap engaging with a high priced called girl in Washington. With him being a resident of NY, some folks are calling for him to be prosecuted under the Mann Act; which (among other things) prohibits transporting women to other states for prostitution.

I honestly can't say whether or not the charges will stick. But whether they do or not, this dude still needs to resign immediately. Maybe I stand alone in my principles, but I'm sick of hearing about these corrupt politicians. Yes; we all do wrong. Whether the vice is money, drugs, or sex, we all have our demons. But how many of us stand on a bully pulpit everyday decrying the very sins that we commit ourselves?

Hill to Obama: Be my VEEP
Obama to Hill: Hell-to-the-naw!

According to reports, Billary has been hinting at the notion of having Democratic frontrunner Barack Obama as a Vice President. Sure, Hill's got...uh...35 years of experience (Oliver Willis has his fun with this argument), but as it stands: she's currently LOSING this contest. If Hill wins the nomination, this offer will make a little more sense. But right now, isn't it a bit presumptuous and arrogant to assume that a person currently winning a contest should lie down and become an underling?

Obama thinks so:

Supporting torture?

According to the AP, sources from the White House have announced that President Bush will veto the anti-torture bill this week. This bill will prohibit the use of waterboarding, or simulated drowning, or suspected terrorists.

It always makes me chuckle when I remember how Bush said that Jesus was his most influencial political philosopher. I mean, we all know how Jesus loved him some war and waterboarding.

Don't drink the water

Speaking of supporting things, here's another classic example of your government "supporting the troops". KBR, a contractor hired by the U.S., has been providing soldiers stationed in Iraq with questionable water which has likely contributed to health problems of some troops. If you think Blackwater is bad, try Dirtywater.

KBR (then owned by Halliburton. Yes. That Halliburton...) was first investigated regarding dirty water in January of 2006. But it's just now being brought to light. Between this, overcharging for food, and contractor's fraud, somebody is due for some serious prison time.

Deadly day in Iraq

Another eight U.S. troops and 16 Iraqis were killed Monday from separate incidents involving a roadside bomb and a suicide bomber. These deaths are pushing us close to the 4,000 U.S. casualties mark. All this, and the war still doesn't have an end in sight.

Suing for stupidity

File this one under "WTF?!": A former attorney who lost nearly $1 million has filed a $20 million lawsuit against several casinos in Atlantic city, who she has accused of allowing her to compulsively gamble away her own money. I'm seriously not making this up.

Lester Street Murders

My heart sunk after hearing this story; particularly since I was in Memphis not too long ago: Two toddlers and four adults were brutally tortured and murdered inside a Memphis residence. Three other children are being treated in the hospital with injuries ranging from mild to critical. Though the police have a suspect, they have been unable to form a solid case.

Interestingly, another development in this story has surfaced. A blogger somehow snuck into a Memphis funeral parlor and took gruesome photos of one of the murdered victims. As far as I can tell, no charges have been made on the blogger.

What disappoints me about this story (in addition to the obviously horrific nature of the crime) is the limited attention this story has received from the media. While "the nation is mourning" the deaths of UNC student Eve Carson and Auburn student Lauren Burk (tragic as they both are), very little coverage has been devoted to the Lester Street murders. I suspect that America's Missing White Woman Syndrome also applies to stories of murder. But -- whatever the case -- let's keep all of these victims' families in our prayers.

I guess I'll wrap it there. I'm not sure if I can handle too much more of this for one day. God bless this nation. God bless this world.

- ACL

When race and music collide

I was just over at Jess's site: Stuff White People Like (You should stop by. I think you'll agree that -- regardless of race -- this site is hilarious!). Just so I'm not branded a racist (just covering myself here), I think the author of the site is white. So please folks, no nasty letters.

Anyway, one of her guest writers put togther a list of the top 10 rap songs white people love. To keep things on an even keel, the writer also created a list of the top 10 rock songs black people love. I haveta admit, I found myself doing the occasional air drumming when I heard some of the rock songs on this list. Likewise, I can remember times being out with some of white friends watching them cut a rug to some of the rap songs on the other list. Ultimately though -- at the end of the day -- I gather this is all just a little racial/musical humor.

Still, I was a little suprised not to see Kris Kross's "Jump" on the white people's rap list:



...or Vanessa Carlton's "A Thousand Miles" on the black people's rock list:



What other songs do you think should've made the cut?

- ACL

In the News

I haven't done a news piece in a while, so I thought this would be a perfect time to do so. So without further ado, here's a roundup of some of the things going on in the world:

Women refs are unholy
St. Mary’s Academy -- a private religious school outside of Topeka, Kansas -- removed a female referee from a boy's basketball game because of the often mistaken interpretation of a Biblical rule forbidding women from "having authority" over males. Though school officials had no comment regarding the affair, their website clearly indicated that they often practice separation between boys and girls in according to "Biblical standards."

Is there any wonder why I have a HUGE issue with organized religion...?

Overinflated economy

If you think you're getting poorer, you're probably right. According to reports, the rate of inflation has risen up 4.3% more than what it was last year. Between that, the ridiculously skyrocketing oil prices, and a weakening dollar, we should all start running for the hills. Pretty soon (with the mortgage crisis on our hands), we'll probably be living in those hills.

Boozed-up pregger

File this story under "Things We Can't Blame On Racism": A Pennsylvania woman seven months pregnant was charged for assaulting a bartender who refused to serve her drinks. The mother-to-be smashed the bartender in the head with a beer bottle. This incident required the bartender to get part of her ear reattached.

After hearing this story, I'm now convinced that some people just should NOT be allowed to procreate. Where's Darwin when you need him?

Funky cold Madea

As if he couldn't leave well enough alone with those insipid plays, Tyler Perry is now turning his horribly stereotypical character Madea into a cartoon. I guess -- on the one hand -- I can't hate on the brotha for his success. But a part of me just can't forgive him for his ministrel-like representation of black folks; particular black women when he performs in drag.

Perhaps I won't be as critical once my play blows up.

Pimp your gun?

Stories like this make you shake your head. Much to the dismay of police (and rightly so), Jim's Gun Supply store in Barbarro, Wisconsin is in the business of custom painting firearms. In doing so, firearms that should be distinctively recognized as dangerous items are starting to look more and more like toys. This supplier even does -- get ready for this -- Hello Kitty themed artwork. If this doesn't open a window for children to become further fascinated with guns...

Conservative joins ACLU for prisoner rights

Hat tip to Malik for this story: David Keene, Chairman of the American Conservative Union, has partnered with the American Civil Liberties Union in challenging laws currently in place to curb prisoners lawsuits. I should also point out that Keene's son is currently incarcerated himself.

I guess I can't blame Keene for wanting to get involved in this case. But he hasn't exactly been a champion for prisoner's rights before now. So that begs the question: Would this conservative hardnose be such a staunch supporter of convicts' rights if his son wasn't a con himself?

No supply of vitamin E(ar)

I thought I was finished with the stories that make you shake your head. But I guess not.

This time the story is about PETA's ridiculous fight to have Christopher McCuin (who was charged with killing and eating his girlfriend), placed on a vegetarian diet while being held by the police. I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried. Though there is no evidence showing that McCuin actually ate any parts of his girlfried, police did find what they think is an ear boiling in water and a piece of flesh in a plate on the kitchen table.

I'm in now way downplaying the heinous nature of this crime; but stuff like is the very reason why I despise PETA with all my heart and soul. Only they could somehow compare the killing and eating of a human being with that of an animal.

Jena 6 member in trouble again

This story is a little old, but still worth mentioning. Bryant Purvais, one of the members of the Jena 6, was arrested once again for assaulting a student; this time the student being someone whom he suspected of vandalizing his vehicle. Included in the charges are choking the student and ramming his head into a table.

When the Jena 6 case first went down, I was all for the organizing and protesting done to rectify some of the blantant civil injustice (trying teenagers for attempted murder because of a school fight). But I also get unnerved when Black America uses criminal defendants as the motivation behind different movements. Since (as far as I'm concerned), the civil rights component of the Jena 6 case has been addressed and resolved, our support of this situation should be over and done with. Now's the time to start to smacking some sense into these kids and holding them accountable for their actions.

McCain-gate

The NY Times released a stinging article accusing Presidential Candidate John McCain of having an affair with Vicki Iseman, one of his lobbyists. Naturally, Senator McCain is denying the incident.

I honestly can't say that I believe the reports; mostly due to opportunistic timing of it all. On the heels of a Presidential election, the almost sure-shot nominee for the right is being attacked by a newspaper commonly believed to have a liberal slant. Still, if it is true, I have to give Sen. McCain some dap. He did a whole lot better than Bill Clinton back in his day. *Joke*

But more importantly, if this is the kind of "political experience" that Sen. Obama doesn't have, all the better for him.

Os(b)ama

It's possible that this one may get chalked up to being a simple mistake, but I'm not entirely convinced. An MSNBC employee was recently reprimanded for flashing an image of Osama bin Laden while Chris Matthews was leading in on a story about Barack Obama. This isn't the first time that such associations have been made publicly, though I can't recall it coming from the usually liberal MSNBC. Despite all of that, I'm in favor of the reprimand; especially since I'm always on Fox News for their constant mishaps.

Hillary's concession?

According to sources, some of the folks in the Obama camp are calling for the Hill machine to call it quits. While I'm truly excited that Barack Obama has built considerable momentum over the past few weeks, he really needs to put his surrogates in check. There are still over 1,000 delegates left to earn. This thing is far from over. As I've stressed before, the fat lady hasn't sung yet.

Bill-O's lynch party

In an attempt to give Michelle Obama the "benefit of the doubt" about being an angry militant, conservative pundit Bill O'Reilly recently said that he wouldn't form a "lynching party" against her unless there's evidence supporting that claim. (H/T to Mirror on America for the story).

Now I know that O'Reilly would never personally organize a lynching party for Michelle Obama. So I'm not taking his words directly to heart. Still, you'd think that with all of the uproar about blacks and lynching, a little more caution would be used when linking those two ideas together in a discussion. But I guess that being conscious enough not to make those kind of comments is asking too much.

Bush = Worst president ever

An American Research Group study indicates that -- at 19% -- Dubya's approval rating is the lowest ever. You don't say?! I suppose that next they're going to tell us that Michigan is a cold and miserable state to live in. Sheesh!

Castro resigns

Fidel Castro, the aging leader of Cuba has retired after 49 years. But Cubans who were not necessarily loyal to Castro are not so quick to celebrate; considering that Castro's brother Raul is set to take over. I wonder what this will do to US/Cuba relations -- if anything.

Well, I guess that's it for now. I'm done entertaining you for one day. Until next time: Peace!

- ACL

A comprehensive celebration

We are officially half way through Black History Month. But for some inexplicable reason, I haven’t had even a remote interest in taking part in any BHM celebrations or commemorations. I suppose that I’m done with the novelty behind the month.

I guess I should’ve prefaced this post by making it clear that I will forever recognize the importance of noting the contributions Black Americans have made – and continue to make – in our society. But – IMO, dedicating one month of the year waters down any significance of that proclamation.

Perhaps what fuels my argument most against the notion of Black History Month is the narrow scope it offers. Every year, we hear about the MLK’s, the Rosa Parks, the Harriet Tubmans, and the Fredrick Douglasses. With enough motivation, folks may even be inclined enough to toss radicals like Nat Turner and Malcolm X into the discussion. But don’t push it too far. Ultimately, Black History Month has been used to comfortably discuss some enslavement, some oppression, and some figures who rose against it. But that’s about it. While those elements certainly shape the way the world has come to be, they certainly don’t exhaustively cover the history of blacks in this country. What’s more: Black History Month is becoming dangerously similar to a bad round of Jeopardy. [This man invented the cotton gin. Who is Eli Whitney? Judges? We'll accept that.]. I’m sorry; but the ability to recall a few names, a few feats, and a few inventions will never replace having an understanding of the historical and modern-day implications associated with these tidbits of knowledge.

Though I’m sure nobody will ever listen to me (when has that ever happened..?), I have a way to deal with my frustration with Black History Month while also truly honoring the past. I don’t presume to have the lone solution, but I think it’s a start. I think the answer starts in the classroom, but can easily spread to just about every public institution. Rather than focusing on random trivia for an entire month, why not integrate Black history into American history? For that matter, we should be able to toss in contributions made by every marginalized group in this country. There are enough of them to go around; trust me. Contrary to how American tends to have a ‘celebration of the month’ philosophy, the struggles and histories of different groups is not somehow separate from the country’s struggles and history.

For the sake of concentrating on the ‘Black’ element of history (it being Black History Month and all), why not focus as much on the thoughts and ideological motivations behind different activities as we do on the activities themselves? We know about the marches, the speeches, the sit-ins and boycotts, but what’s being conveyed about the philosophies regarding those acts? How did the debates between WEB Dubois and Booker T. Washington set the stage for the openly expressed debates between MLK and Malcolm X? How did those public exchanges relate to the today’s systemic racism vs. personal responsibility debates between Michael Eric Dyson and Bill Cosby? How would some of the heroes that we honor from the past feel about the state of Black America today? What would they say about B.E.T., the growing problem of black-on-black violence, the rampant drug use, the explosion of teenage pregnancies, and the rising rate of AIDS?

As my dear blogging friend Sylvia pointed out, Black History is not limited to what has happened in times past. It also addresses present-day events and how those events will undoubtedly shape the future. It’s not just about the suffering and oppression we’ve endured, but it’s also about the strength, resolve, and esteem that arose. BMH is Joslyn, Sylvia, Carmen, Malik. It’s the emergence of the HBCU. It’s Tony Dungy. It’s Barack Obama. It’s Oprah Winfrey. It's the long list of white anti-racism activists in this country. BHM even has its occasional black sheep (pun intended).

Black history is not just as month long celebration. Black history is you. Black history is me.

-ACL

Dream turned nightmare?

There is something special about the life of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., but it’s not the stuff they write in the history books.

Many people are unaware of the reality, but Dr. King's support and popularity from the general society saw a significant decrease as he drew closer to his assassination. Don't be completely taken by all the commenorations, the furniture sales, and the commericials you see. For a while Dr. King was a far stretch from being an "American hero." In fact, it wasn't until after his death that his cause was able to acheive the type of mainstream validation prevalent in today's world. As with just about any other personality with a profound message/agenda, Dr. King was more appreciated in death than he ever was in life.

I believe that we should keep this in mind when we celebrate Dr. King’s life today.

Some are quick to point out that Dr. King was awarded a Noble Peace Prize while he was still alive. But I submit to you that he received that award in Norway, not in the deep South. Let's face facts: people simply did not like him. In fact, as he drew closer to his death, his popularity significantly diminished. His bold anti-war protests made him a target by governmental agencies. His association with Bayard Rustin drew criticism and rumors. Many fellow blacks resisted his nonviolent approach in favor of retaliation. Colleges and universities withdrew their offers to have him speak. I even heard rumors of him being involved with Rosa Parks.

Although Dr. King is now widely celebrated as a great American hero, we must never forget that he was also once seen as one the greatest threats to the American agenda.

Interestingly, though most of the assault came from bigotted right-wingers who boastfully stood in the way of black progress, MLK was quick to point out the role of liberals who were typically resistant to the flourishing of blacks in the south. He often called out liberals who were ostensibly committed to being the "moral" voice who -- when it was time to act -- did nothing and often steered clear of the awesome role of embracing blacks. This disassociation provide as much of an obstacle to black progress as the blantant racism of opponents to the Struggle.

Sadly, I can't say that things have progressed all that much. While we celebrate Dr. King's life, many of the things he stood against are allowed to live on. We still rely on the machine of war to promote our version of "right". Republicans still dismiss the plight of minorities, the poor, and the disenfranchised. Democrats still tip toe around the prevalent issues of the time, while doing little (if anything) to annihilate racism, sexism, and classism. Many sections of Black America continue to be divided, uncommitted to progress, and supportive of socially void and destructive institutions (*ahem* B.E.T.)

So much for "The Dream."

**UPDATE**

In the spirit of the times, I think I still have a little hope remaining in this world. Especially after seeing this again:



Preach Brotha Martin!

Let our world's healing being NOW!

- ACL

Whites, PLEASE get it Right!

To all my white readers out there, let me first say that I appreciate you sticking with me so far. Admittedly, some of my commentary regarding race relations (particularly about white privilege) may be a little uncomfortable at times. But let me just say that I commend you for taking the bumpy ride with me. But, I've got one more request that may be a little uncomfortable, but necessary: please tell your fellow white folks to stop being so damn stupid.

I was ready to put the Tiger Woods lynch joke behind me. Until I read this article:

Golfweek magazine replaced the editor responsible for illustrating the current cover with a noose and apologized Friday for its depiction of a Golf Channel anchor’s use of “lynch” in a comment about Tiger Woods.

“We apologize for creating this graphic cover that received extreme negative reaction from consumers, subscribers and advertisers across the country,” Turnstile Publishing Co. president William P. Kupper Jr. said. “We were trying to convey the controversial issues with a strong and provocative graphic image. It is now obvious that the overall reaction to our cover deeply offended many people. For that, we are deeply apologetic.” Source

So let me get this straight: the woman who made the joke in the first place only gets suspended for two weeks, but the editor who brings the issue to light while trying to address the problems of racism in golf was forced to resign fired?

Unfortunately, I know this score all too well. Too many White Americans are unwilling to accept the fact that this time-honored sport is littered with a shameful and racist history of exclusion and marginalization (I should point out that the absence of blacks in golf is not a reflection of the idea that we don't play. In fact, it's actually just the opposite). It's just a shame that as long as the sport of golf can maintain its covert system of racial inequality and segregation (with the occasional exceptions), people will never realize the impact blacks have made in the sport over the years.

Perhaps what's worse is that apparently racist stupidity from people like Tilghman (deliberate or not) is given a slap on the wrist; while trying to be disturbingly critical about it will most assuredly get you canned. Instead of using this magazine story/cover as a method of engaging in hard-hitting discussions about race, some folks would rather brush it under the rug. At the end of the day, shit like this does very little to deal with the problems. If anything, it only makes it worse.

So again to my readers, please get the rest of your folks to get a clue. Lord knows I'm not doing a good job of it.

- ACL

Victims to victors (and back again?)

I was watching Oprah not too long ago (I know. I'm sorry...). On the show were Drs. Bill Cosby and Alvin Poussaint as they discussed their new book Come on People: On the Path from Victims to Victors. This book is the latest in the long list of public appearances and open discourse they've had regarding the state of today's black community. Their forums -- controversial as they be -- are calling on the Black community to be more aggressive in their advocacy for change and community improvement. Not surprisingly, their commentary has been met with opposition; mostly from public intellectuals like Dr. Michael Eric Dyson, who insist that they place too much emphasis on personal responsibility and not enough on the systemic and structural racism that exists. Further, opponents contend that "airing dirty laundry" allows many in White America (especially conservatives) to justify their own bigotry by using observations from other blacks like Cosby and Poussaint as a support system.

Truthfully, I see both sides of the argument.

On the one hand, I completely understand how some of Cosby and Poussaint's biggest critics can get incensed by their observations. Looking at their commentary from a certain vantage point, I can see how it can be perceived as being generationally out of touch, classist, and unbalanced.

To address the first point regarding the generational breakdown; for some time now, Dr. Cosby has been waging war on young people; particularly as it relates to how they embrace a certain urban culture that often includes activities, images, and representation that have negative implications. But what Drs. Cosby and Poussaint fail to note is how complex many elements of urban culture truly are. Now I'm not exactly a hip-hop subscriber myself. But even I can tell that many circles of hip hop go beyond simply celebrating thuggery, drugs, misogyny, violence, and the vacuous pursuit of material. There are quite a few mechanisms in place through the urban community that speak directly to the importance of education, community awareness, the harsh conditions of the streets, and the presence of systemic racism in law enforcement, the courts, and society at large. But messages like these are often ignored simply because the entire platform of hip hop is disparaged by the likes of Cosby and Poussaint. Simply put, some of their messages about black folks living outside of our means, killing each other, and promoting ignorance can sometimes be found in the very rap lyrics that they are so vehemently against.

Moving on to the next point, many critics tend to view the antics and commentary of people like Drs. Cosby and Poussaint as being laced with a great deal of classism. Though I don't think that is at all their intention, one would be hard pressed to disagree. One of the problems with how they (and other "well off" black folks) delivery their message is that their commentary typically suggests a level of antipathy toward poor and lower class blacks. Oftentimes, that antipathy is unfairly assigned. For instance, I read an amazing book by Barbara Ehrenreich called Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America; where she experimented by taking on a series of unskilled jobs while trying to earn a living. Yet she was unable to make ends meet. Such is the case with many poor blacks. They have solid work ethic and an interest to take care of their families; but because of certain precipitating events (racism, the ills of job outsourcing, corporate greed, low wages), they are often left out of the "American Dream".

Speaking to the last point, I understand why Blacks are sensitive to criticism about their lifestyles; albeit constructive. When analyses and cultural criticisms appear to be unbalanced and conveniently discount social, economic, and political deficiencies that create the problem, the 'victim' tends to get more offended when you place the blame squarely on them. The unfortunate consequence of this type of critical analysis -- though somewhat on point -- is that it can get lost if it isn't balanced by an understanding and an appreciation of the systemic problems that contribute just as much to this plight.

Still, I think that critics of Drs. Cosby and Poussaint should stop and really listen to the message they are trying to convey; regardless to how poor and incomplete the delivery might be. They talk about how gangs, drug/alcohol addiction, violence, and ignorance should be viewed in the same light as the other nefarious forces that exist in this society. Jim Crowism no longer "keeps us down". Now it's B.E.T. The Klan no longer terrorizes our neighborhood (at least not to the same extent as it once did). Now it's young black teenagers who are committing the assaults. It's no longer the George Wallaces of the world who work assiduously to keep blacks out of college. We're the ones voluntarily dropping out of high school. Simply put, in many cases, we're the ones self-imposing things that threaten our advancement and indeed our very survival.

Rather than painting black folks as sad and pathetic victims of circumstance, people like Cosby and Poussaint seek to empower us to control our own lives. They challenge parents to play a more active role in determining what images their children are exposed to; particularly when that imagery is the product of what we throw out there ourselves. True, most of the enterprise out there has a great deal of corporate sponsorship/ownership; but we are the ones being portrayed. Cosby and Poussaint are trying to urge us to be more actively engaged in promoting education in the community. They are calling for us to manage our households. They are calling for us to be more fiscally responsible. Frankly, there is nothing classist about that. They're using their "bully pulpit" in a responsible and necessary manner.

Again, I don't deny that there are major social obstacles in place that can hinder progress. But now is the time for the black community to have a renewed mind when facing those challenges. Let's take Oprah for example. Sure, she can be pretty shallow; especially with some of her ridiculous talk-show and magazine coverage and how she flaunts her money. Sure, she panders to middle-aged white woman far more than a person ever should (interestingly, the same thing can be said of most rappers; who largest consumer markets are white teenagers). But she is also a black woman who, by her success, wealth accumulation, and philanthropy; is living the life. This coming about in spite of racism. Though she is a rare case of insane success, the possibility of emerging from dysfunctional and oppressive environments is not at all inconceivable. True, not everybody can earn the status as an uber-billionaire in the same fashion that Oprah did. Only so many black people can cater to the interests of White America before the novelty wears off (are you listening Wayne Brady?). Nevertheless, the possibilities for other forms of success are as attainable now as they have ever been. That being the case, I see nothing wrong with one of us who "made it" occasionally lighting a fire under everybody else's ass.

What's often deplorable is that any time a Black person makes even a slightly critical assessment of other blacks, they are labeled as an Uncle Tom, classists, or as being apologetic for/dismissive toward racism. But if you believe that, you must also believe that their attempts to improve the conditions of Black America are somehow wrong as well. That, to me, is a ridiculous claim. This country is full of great people who have emerged despite the mounting structural disorders they faced. So rather than solely channeling out frustrations at Cosby, why not use our resources to confront both the systemic problems AND the ones that we create?

Holla at me!

-ACL