Book of the Month

Wattree's picture

It’s Time to Boycott Tavis,West, and All Black-on-Black Racists

Beneath the Spin * Eric L. Wattree

 

It’s Time to Boycott Tavis,West, and All Black-on-Black Racists
.

Like most black people I used to like and admire both Tavis Smiley and Cornel West a great deal, but after they made public fools of themselves on the very day that Barack Obama announced his intention to run for president, I decided to do a little research into them instead of simply buying into the hype. Not long thereafter it started to become clear that their images were merely facades that hid highly ambitious, self-serving, and untrustworthy clowns of the worst kind, and that assessment is not based merely upon my opinion. The most cursory review of the facts will easily bear that out.
.
I found that Tavis is the most prolific corporate shill in the Black community, and he's closely involved with some of the most exploitive corporations of working class people in the country. So I began to ask myself, how can his so-called concern for the poor and middle class coexist with his association with Walmart, Nationwide Insurance, and other corporate manipulators of the poor and middle class?
.
HERE’S A MESSAGE FROM A PRO-BUSINESS FRIEND OF MINE REGARDING NATIONWIDE INSURANCE.
.
“One thing that caught my eye was the picture of Nationwide because it's personal. Sharon's sister was blind-sided by a drunk, uninsured motorist. Donna had been paying uninsured motorist insurance though Nationwide for years. Donna was barely conscious in the hospital when a Nationwide rep showed up with a document he told Donna to sign because it would pay the ambulance fees (about $4-5,000). Donna had broken arms, broken ribs and other major injuries. Donna barely scribbled her initials and the guy left. Several weeks later, when she got out of the hospital, her bill was in the tens of thousands of dollars. Required Physical would add thousands more, all within her policy limits. Nationwide refused to pay, citing Donna's initials on what she was told was the ambulance and ER bills. Donna was unable to have physical therapy and had to file bankruptcy. Like Sharon, Donna is an American Indian (Cherokee), lives in the country and knew/knows nothing about lawyers. By the time we found out, Nationwide's weird statute of limitations had run out and they were legally "off-the-hook". Donna is crippled and debilitated to this day.
.
“Nationwide IS NOT on your side. They are scumbags to be avoided AT ALL COSTS! You have my permission to use this if you wish to help your community. Tom”
.
I also began to ask myself how Tavis could possibly claim to be concerned about the plight of Black people, and then seek to pad his pocket by promoting R. Kelly, a man who became more famous for his alleged appearance in a graphic underground video of himself molesting a 14 year-old Black child, than for his musical ability? Sure, Kelly beat the case, but the video is still out there, and it is what it is. http://newsone.com/384692/tavis-smiley-draws-child-rape-criticism-for-publishing-r-kellys-book/
.
And then there's Cornel West, a man who's literally made a career of spewing the depth of his love for his people to anyone who will listen, for a fee. With West, it's always brother this, or my dear brother that, yet, as badly as we need educators in the Black community, why is it that he has never taught at a school that more than 1% of Black people could afford to attend in his entire career? If he loves his people so much, why isn't he teaching third grade in the hood, or at the very least, instructing young people at one of the many Historically Black Colleges or Universities? Isn't teaching poor and middle-class students prestigious enough for him? Doesn't he love his people enough to want to see them well educated? I guess not, because while his incessantly running mouth says one thing, his behavior consistently says another. Over the years it has become abundantly clear that he would much rather preach us a sermon than live us one.

.
While it seems that West can't inconvenience himself to the point of busting a grape when it comes to helping to educate Black children, he wants us to believe that he loves the Black community so much that he was forced to join forces with Ralph Nader and help to elect George Bush in the 2000 election. Bush won by 537 votes. The Nader-West coalition peel off 97,488 votes in Florida alone. But, of course, West only hepled to usher in the Bush-Cheney era, and the misery that it brought to the Black community, in the interest of political chastity, you understand.
.
But as horrific as that episode was, for me, its hypocrisy is more than rivaled by West's mere association with Tavis Smiley. In this latest coalition, West reminds me of a guy running down the street ranting about fascism after just having lunch with Mussolini. But many Black people can't seem to see that, because they've been so bedazzled by the hype over Cornel's resume that even though he doesn't make a bit of sense most of the time, they assume that he must be saying something so profound that their limited education is causing them to miss the point. But what point could possibly be missing when a man advocates that you become so disgusted with the Bogeyman that you should go out and elect the Devil? Dumb is dumb, even if it comes from Princeton.
.
So my distaste for these two individuals run far, far deeper than their criticism of President Obama. The fact is, I’ve written several articles criticizing the president myself - as I do with every president - but I make sure that my criticisms are constructive, issue-specific, and I ALWAYS make sure that I afford the president all of the respect that he’s due. But the thrust of Tavis and West’s criticisms of President Obama are neither issue-specific, nor constructive. In fact, in the case of Cornel West, his criticisms are not only less than constructive, but they hover around a level of immaturity approaching The Dozens. So for the most part, Tavis and West are simply running around saying, "This guy ain’t no good and he can’t be trusted," under the guise of being concerned about poverty. But if you listen closely, after you get past all of the misleading rhetoric and disinformation, you'll find that the bottom line is, they’re campaigning for the Republicans as a cure for poverty, and you don't get no dummer than that. So we're dealing with one of two things here - either they're two turncoats, or they're so dumb that they shouldn't be allowed to hold a microphone.
.
Thus, their mantra about "attacking the messagener" notwithstanding, I’d like to hereby assure both, Tavis and West, and the world, that my raging distaste for them has absolutely nothing to do with their criticizing Obama. My distaste for these two individuals is a direct result of what I perceive as a gaping flaw in their character. So I am far less concerned about WHAT they’re saying, than I am about WHY they’re saying it. Because it's the "WHY" that's so toxic to the Black community.
.
I’ve been around long enough to recognize that as African Americas, we’re products of the very same racist environment as White people. As a result, many of us are just as racist toward other Black people as any Hillbilly, and that’s exactly what I see in Tavis Smiley and Cornel West. I've never forgotten the very valuable lessons that I learned from the FBI's "Cointelpro" operation launched during the sixties to destroy the civil rights movement.
.
During that time the FBI scattered turncoats, snitches, and provocateurs all through the Black community to intice us to destroy ourselves. I was just a kid, but I learned something I'll never forget during that period - always keep your eye on the ones who are always looking, acting, and talking the most militant. That's why Cornel West immediately got my attention. I also learned that a good rule of thumb when dealing with such people is to ignore what they say, and simply watch what they do. In that regard, what are Tavis and West doing at this very moment? As we speak, they're campaigning in the battleground states against Obama, and for the Republican Party.
.
So it has long since become clear to me that these two are not the least bit concern about poverty. They’re simply using the term "poverty"as a convenient metaphor to misdirect the people. You see, once their criticism of President Obama backfired on them in Black community, Tavis and West had to find a way to spread their anti-Obama message without generating so much heat. So they simply started using the word "poverty" as a metaphor for "Obama," much like the Republicans use the word "welfare" as a metaphor for "Black people." So now, instead of saying, "Don't vote for Obama, they just use the word "poverty" to IMPLY that Obama’s presidency is inadequate. It’s an old psychological technique right out of the Republican playbook.
.
You see, Tavis and West’s motives are exactly the same as Herman Cain’s, but they’re coming from a different direction. At least Herman Cain was honest enough to come at us as a Republican, but Tavis and West are so arrogant that they think the Black community is stupid, so they’re trying to use reverse psychology. Where Herman Cain’s message was, "Black people need to start voting Republican so the two parties will have to fight for their vote," Tavis and West are playing us stupid in a different way. They’re using militant rhetoric in order to get us to cut our own throats. They're trying to make unsophisticated voters so disgusted with Obama that they don't vote - and as every sophisticated voter knows, every Democrat who doesn't vote translates into a vote for the Republicans. So like I said, it's Cointelpro, revisited - the use of Trojan Horses to divide and conquer.
.
Tavis and West are currently wrapping themselves in the legacy of Malcolm, Martin, and every other historic Black figure they can think of in order to send the message that Obama’s not being Black enough. Yet, in doing so, they know full well that it’s impossible for President Obama to become more strident in pursuit of exclusively Black issues, because then, the Republicans would use it as a weapon to tear away his White support - and he can’t get anything done without White support. Just imagine what the Black response would be if a White President said, "I’ve got to put things on hold for a moment so I can do something for White people." Black people would go berserk, but essentially, that’s exactly what Tavis and West are demanding that Obama do - but again, just like the Republicans - they're making their demand in race related buzz words.
.
So Tavis and West have President Obama in a position where if he continues to be the president of ALL the people, as he should be, they’re going to divide his Black support; but if he caters to their call for him to pay special attention to the Black community, he’s going to have two problems - congress is going to dig in, so he won’t be able to get anything passed, and beyond that, it’s going to divide his White support. So instead of doing everything they can to help improve the condition of the poor and middle class (Black and White), Tavis and West are playing silly, self-serving little games to divide the people, help the Republicans, and promote their own meanspirited agenda.
.
So why are Tavis and West playing these games when they know it’s hurting both the country, and the administration of the first Black President of the United States?
.
It’s simple - for spite. As I mentioned previously, since Black people are a product of the very same racist environment as White people, many Black people have attitudes that are just as arrogant, condescending, and racist toward other Blacks as any White racist, and this is clearly the case with Tavis and West. They think that they're above us, and that we're undereducated and politically unsophisticated idiots that they can play to their advantage.
.
You see, contrary to what they would have you believe, these two don’t love Black people - they think they OWN us. They don’t see us as people. They see us as a commodity to be manipulated, bartered and sold. That explains why Tavis and West are so upset with President Obama. When he went around them to get our vote, as far as they're concerned he stole something from them.
 

.
If you go back and review the video of Cornel West ranting over the fact that Obama decided to hold a press conference to announce his intent to run for President of the United States instead of attending Tavis Smiley’s "State of the Black Union" broadcast, you’ll notice a clear sense of entitlement http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXj3_pjTTwg&feature=player_embedded. West takes the position that when Obama failed to come on Tavis's show, he turned his back on the entire Black community. I'd never heard such balloon-headed arrogance in my life! When was Tavis Smiley appointed the Grand Vizier of the Black community?
.
.
Tavis and West was clearly under the impression that they OWNED the Black community, and when Sen. Obama went around them to announce his intent to run for president instead of coming on the show and asking, "Mother may I?," it constituted a slight to their authority, and a huge failure in protocol on Obama’s part. They obviously believed that the proper thing for Obama to do was to come on the show and ask for their permission to BORROW their Black votes. Who the hell do they think they are? Even now, they're trying to force Obama to meet with them. We've got to bring these two egomaniacs down to Earth.
.
This bears repeating. Tavis and West hate Obama because in their tremendous arrogance they feel like he stole something from them - us, Black voters. They felt that they had us in their pocket like a commodity to be bought and sold, and they were right. They were, and they or, making money off of us. Large corporations, like Walmart, would come to Tavis Smiley and ask, "How much would you charge to deliver the Black community to us?" And he would tell them. So while Tavis and West speak of "loving their people," that's not exactly what it is. They don't see us as their loved ones - they see us as their whoes, and the evidence of that is glaring.
.
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT NATIONWIDE IS ON YOUR SIDE?
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT TAVIS DOES?
.
Tavis’ Solicitation To Corporate Sponsors (like Nationwide)
.

"Tavis Smiley builds brand identification and strengthens your corporate image. Sponsors benefit from the "HALO EFFECT" of being associated with PBS and NPR and its mission to make a meaningful contribution to our community. Nearly 85% of consumers believe such HIGHER-PURPOSE, CAUSE-RELATED marketing creates a positive image for sponsors. And almost two-thirds of PBS viewers and NPR listeners are MORE LIKELY TO PURCHASE the product or service of a PBS or NPR underwriter."
.
As for West, the man is greedy, immature, and petty. He complained because "The guy who carried my bags into the hotel" got tickets to the inauguration and he didn't. Wouldn't you think that a person who fights for equality would love the symbolism of a worker getting into the inauguration of the President of the United States? But not Cornel, he felt slighted and insulted - he felt that he was BETTER than the HELP. And when Dr. Melissa Harris-Perry got the job with MSNBC. Wouldn't you think a man who fought for equality would love seeing another intelligent Black female voice getting national exposure? But not Cornel. He made a public statement, calling her a liar and a fraud. How did that promote the interest of the black community? And is that the behavior of an enlightened intellectual? I don't think so.
.
We’ve got to bring this kind of petty, self-serving, Black-on-Black racism to an end. That’s why it’s time to boycott Tavis Smiley, Cornel West, and any corporation, product, or media outlet that’s associated with them. After over 400 years of manipulation, it’s time to send one message loud and clear - THE BLACK COMMUNITY IS NOT FOR SALE! And we're not going to tolerate ANYONE thinking that they can walk around with us in their pocket.
 

.
.

.
Eric L. Wattree
Http://wattree.blogspot.com
Ewattree@Gmail.com
Citizens Against Reckless Middle-Class (CARMA

I saw your post on ThyBlackman.com. One response in opposition to your post was that West had gotten arrested fighting NYPD's "Stop and Frisk" while the Obama administration had done nothing.

I reminded him that the DOJ had suggested changes to the program and were meeting with the Mayor because nothing had changed. I think because Obama and Holder don't publicize the moves they are making in the Black community, many can be hoodwinked by West and Smiley that nothing is being done.

That is so true, RM.

 

In addition, Cornel West looks forward to being arrested. That's publicity.  As I pointed out when he was arrested during the "Occupy" demonstrations, if they hadn't arrested him he would have filed a discrimination suit - "You arrested all these White folks; why you want to discriminate against me!!?"

I'm boycotting MLK too - he talked about education, but never taught at an inner-city school. Hypocrite.

And I realize a President would never say, "I've got to put things on hold because there's 16% unemployment among white people" - that would be catering to a minority, and he would never propose a jobs program, nor can he be seen as taking extraordinary steps for gay rights or Hispanic immigrants or pay attention to Israel and against Iran for his Jewish constituency or visit & spend time in speeches supporting the military or addressing continued support for Medicare for existing seniors or paying attention to other special interests. 

Though he might send Michelle out to teach a new dance to whites - that seems to be safe messaging to cross ethnic and gender lines.

Sigh, Obama got a discrimination settlement for Black farmers that had been lingering for decades. His DOJ pushed back on voter suppression.He fought to hold on to Pell grants. The DOJ Is beginning to move against "Stop and Frisk" in NYC. These things have significant impact in the Black community.

The jobs issue is chronic and currently exacerbated by government job layoffs. If you have an idea how to get the jobs bill through the Republicans in Congress,we'd love to hear it. The President did send a large jobs bill to Congress. A bill to jump start small businesses was signed into law earlier this year

Given the support the President has among actual Latinos, they might disagree that the President has done nothing of value.

So you say he can work on issues that help blacks - so why not a black jobs program, as blacks have been disproportionally hurt? What exactly are you disagreeing with?

And while Pell grants are nice, would you agree that increasing jobs has a more direct effect on current state of the union? What is your thought about lack of a jobs bill back when Dems had both houses of Congress? Are you disappointed, accepting, or that's water-under-the-dam, can't talk about it/look forward not backwards?

If Dems take the House back in November, what should be highest priority?

(BTW, who said "the President has done nothing of value" - me? or you're referring to points in the article I didn't discuss? I only addressed 2, most others I didn't have comment)

Obama went with saving the auto industry and healthcare initially. Do you think the job market would be better if the auto industry tanked? If the auto industry collapsed your argument would be that we lost even more jobs and were in worse economic shape. We we're losing private sector jobs and now we are gaining private sector jobs.

If the Democrats regain power, jobs will be the focus. Blacks, Hispanics and Whites will benefit.

I think the overall point is that Blacks can get the benefits of the jobs bill without the baggage of a Black President openly stating that it is a Black program. Obama has Black support because Blacks understand the political games he has to play in a "post-racial" America. Blacks and Hispanics understand Obama's actions, you don't.

The DREAM Act was overwhelmingly to help Hispanics, no?

If civilian black unemployment is over 16% compared to 8.5%, Obama or any other president can damn well say this is a shame and travesty and focus on it. 

Senate Republicans are trying to pass a jobs bill for vets because unemployment is 11%. So how come the discrepancy?

I am intrigued with the idea of using the tax code focused on net asset aggregation, which could help poorer black families along with other lesser-distressed groups. Maybe that'd be an easier sell than a jobs program?

However, as long as black job applicants keep telling stories like these, where they're qualified but passed up for arbitrary reason, asset aggregation just slows the sink into the abyss. 

But I still can't understand replacing the Audacity of Hope or MLK's "if not now, when?" with a meek "we can't openly state it's a Black program". Hell yes, you/we can. Just base the arguments on economic justice, not identity politics. That's what the DREAM Act is. That should be part of the Democratic platform. Not "hey, we made it to the Master's house, gotta be quite so he doesn't know we're here". I don't mean being obnoxious - it's simply being reasonable.

Organize, lobby, educate - mortgage theft came down disproportionally on black families - the key asset that was to fund the black middle class dream. That's been stolen. The government jobs that blacks had have been stolen/slashed, with needed services just cut. How come that's not a campaign issue? Democratic whites will cross over to vote Republican? Hispanics will complain? Obama will be weakened by making a strong stand on jobs in America? I don't understand.

Your Guardian examples seem to be cases of discrimination.

Why yes indeed - isn't that why black unemployment sky-rockets when jobs are scarce? First to fire, last to hire.

The Black unemployment has always skyrocketed. Even at baseline it is twice that of Whites. I guess the bigger question is where all the outrage has been prior to the age of Obama and the wingnut and bigoted GOP. Now you are upset.

Hopefully the Democrats will gain enough seats to get legislation through Congress that will have more impact. You will not hear loud rants from the Black community prior to the election. I doubt that you understand the reasons because you're too busy handing out advice.

 

No, Black unemployment hasn't always skyrocketed, as the graph below shows. It's worse now than any period since the recession around 1993. Yes, it was caused by Bush. No, it hasn't gotten much better under Obama. And he's taking no special actions to deal with it.

I understand reasons why no complaints.

You've yet to tell me what "advice" I'm handing out, aside from "do something, don't just stand there". I fully expect, unlike Dan, that there will be no action, no complaint after the election either. We'll just be in another part of the wait-and-see cycle, where they'll be munching on another wish sandwich. With Medicare & Social Security cuts coming up next term, I don't expect joy in Mudville. Less safety net, less opportunity. Better than Romney though.

If nothing gets done, you still have your role as a critic to fall back on.

Thanks, but had enough of playing Cassandra.

Perhaps Othello or Lady Macbeth.

Wasn't Othello the guy that who accepted rumors as proof that his wife was cheating? Didn't he commit suicide after killing his wife based on the rumor? I think I'll reject the critic's suggestion.

False question.

Auto bailouts were started under Bush and they were loans, not grants. Overall <$30 billion while TARP was around $870 billion. And $1 trillion or more behind the scenes by the Fed to the US and abroad. Of course much of the bailout was to prop up the financial arms of GM & Chrysler, not the manufacturing arms. 100 cents on the dollar for Cerberos, can't let investors lose out, unlike workers taking benefits cuts.

So it wasn't a question of auto bailouts or jobs. ACA didn't pass until 2010, and most costs were pushed off until later. So there was room to do more on jobs. But glad to see you think jobs will be a focus. Frankly, I as a white guy would be happy to see some focus on black communities. There's a saying, the chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and if black families can't make it despite best efforts, if they got hurt disproportionally by the economic crash/Wall Street theft of 2008, we're missing out on a basic tenet of the American Dream. (which I think is one of our few worthwhile goals, presuming it still is one).

You seem to be more upset about the situation than many Black and Hispanic voters. If you ask both groups about their outlook for the future, they are positive. In fact, they are more positive than many Whites. We have a tradition of surviving in times of strife. Black and Hispanic college enrollment is increasing.

The difference is that you stay focused on what is being done, while minority group are focusing on making progress. But you continue to fight the power ( on blogs) my brother.

Great. Hope you counted how many of the black unemployed have college degrees. Reminds me of Blimpy - "I'd gladly pay you on Tuesday for a hamburger today". A job in the hand is worth 2 in the bush if you consider accumulated wealth and lost opportunity.

Hispanics got a big wet kiss with the DREAM Act a few months ago, sealing the deal, and of course the president is still African-American and fulfilling some aspirations of the black community, so I can imagine some optimism. But you phrase things in terms of "voters". Romney's been a disaster as a candidate, especially since July, but I'm not talking about the election per se - I am talking about Black & Hispanic progress. But foreclosed homes and lost jobs don't tell of progress. Would Romney make it better? Hell no. So the election isn't the question. 

But in any case, you're on the road to small change, and seem to be happy with it. Enjoy.

Well while some of us blog, some of us take action. Some of us work with children to improve their educational skills and self- esteem. Some of us work on health issues. Some of us employ and train people.

And some of us just complain and give advice.

Some of us live elsewhere.

Maybe those of us who don't live elsewhere have a better grasp of the situation. It's easier to be a film or music critic, than it is to create film and music or live the life of the artist.

Odd, I imagine I know more about the life of an artist. Nevertheless, a film critic knows when a film's 1 hour 37 minutes long. A political critic knows when black unemployment is 14.1% and the racial gap is widening. How blacks feel about this issue, well, you likely have more experience than me. There's lots of political opinion across the spectrum that makes no sense to me. But it's hard to pretend a horror film's a love story, no matter how you spin the promos. Even a detached critic knows that much.

Well you keep up the good fight here online.

Well, you keep making excuses online and do whatever good you do off. At least it sounds like you have a job.

Why don't you carry out your conversation with West and Smiley and ask them why their protests have been so pathetic.

Heck, it was Rev Al who got the LGBT community to join a protest against "Stop and Frisk". Coalitions are being built while West and Smiley do photo ops. West and Smiley were MIA in voter suppression.

West and Smiley were MIA in the Trayvon Martin case. Rev Al's participation got the judicial ball rolling.

 

 

Maybe West & Smiley have a different job than Rev. Al.

Al's pushing on local communities - West & Smiley seem to be applying pressure to the top.

Not to be a broken record, but voter suppression is an issue that effects all levels of engagement. West and Smiley were nowhere tobe seen.

Didn't do it your way = must be bad.

Didn't Obama & Holder's DoJ have it covered?

PS - didn't you say above that nothing needed to be done with Stop & Frisk, as Obama & Holder were negotiating? I.e. it was bad for West to be protesting & arrested, but still good for Rev. Al to protest?

Sharpton's protest served as a means of getting Black groups and LGBT activists focused on the same issue. The NAACP was also involved . The organization had recently come out in support of Gay marriage. It was an alliance.It was something more than West's photo ops.

Obviously, West and Smiley have free speech rights to do photo ops.

Meant BET link, not Newsmax.

One can argue that it isn't so much that blacks have been disproportionally hurt in the attempt to find work, but that those at the lower end of the income spectrum that have been hit the hardest.  Of course, given the demographics of this country, this means that much of the black communities will experience an above average unemployment rate.  But the poor white folks and the poor Asian folks and so on also encounter the same dynamic. 

In other words there isn't some distinct facet existing within the black communities that are at the lower income spectrum that is keeping them from getting employment.  There are issues of racism, etc. obviously, but the primary barriers to finding employment (education and skills training, ability to interview and apply for openings, etc) beyond just having existing employment opportunities is across the board the same regardless of the individuals' ethnicity and race.

No. Blacks were more in government, and those jobs got slashed.

Blacks were heavily invested in housing and got hurt hardest by mortgage theft.

Blacks were hurt hardest by Michigan & other auto meltdowns, plus had pensions & medical benefits whacked.

Blacks suffer more racism when trying to find jobs in a tight economy.

So again, no. They don't suffer the same dynamics. Look at historical unemployment for one. 

I suggest reading Andy Kroll's article on the 60-year gap between black and white unemployment. 

The unemployment lines run through history like a pair of train tracks. Since the 1940s, the jobless rate for blacks in America has held remarkably, if grimly, steady at twice the rate for whites. The question of why has vexed and divided economists, historians, and sociologists for nearly as long.

The fact that it is currently twice the rate of whites is not particular to this particular economic crisis, or indicating there is some new trend in hiring of blacks by American companies.  If the unemployment rate gets down to 5%, it will probably be 10%, 11% or 12% for the black community - if the decades long trend continues.  It is reflective of systemic and cultural issues (including racism and the more benign hiring those one feels more comfortable with) (including incarceration rates as Kroll points out).

 

Poland lost twice as much of its Jewish population as it lost Gypsy population during WWII.

100% vs. 50%. I suspect that comparison of percentages aren't the right way to look at this equation, unless you're satisfied with the non-answer of "long trends".

The point is when has unemployment been at its lowest for the black community is at the same time it was at the lowest for all Americans.  People in the 1990s suddenly lost their racism (nor did the gap lessen significantly during this time), nor did they suddenly become racist in the last few years. 

While some targetted federal programs might be able to help some local communities, there is little on a national scale that the feds can do (esp given the Republican controlled House, hell the Senate Repubs even blocked a jobs program for returning Veterans) to impact the black communities on a national scale. 

Republicans abuse the phrase "a rising tide lifts all ships," but that does not eliminate the truth that does exist in this sentiment.  A jobs training program for everybody in a particular community helps blacks, whites, and everyone else.  If a community that is predominantly black seeks assistance for unemployment and they receive it because their community is predominantly poor, they receive the same assistance as if they received it because they were predominantly black and poor.

And actually a better analogy is that America is hit with a nasty airborne contagion.  Because of this, the greater the population density an individual lives in, the greater the chance of infection.  The outcome is that those who live in urban areas have a greater incidence rate than those in rural areas, even though all other things being equal (which they never are) those in rural and urban areas are equally susceptible to catching the infection.

The CDC develops a plan of action to provide the medicine to eradicate the contagion.  One can claim that the urban areas are more devastated by the outbreak, and thus needs a special program to ensure delivery of the medication.  But this would be silly.  One develops one program that takes into effect lines of transportation and distribution in each area whether rural, urban, suburban, high alpine or costal lowlands.  Of course, the program would recognize areas of greater quantities of medicine and personnel, and therefore would not send equal amounts to a rural area as it would to an urban area. 

Brilliant, the CDC - AIDS affects primarily gays and intravenous drug users, so let's take an approach that makes every heterosexual kid afraid of sex, rather than finding solutions to deal with the high transmission risks. Nancy "just say no" Reagan must have been proud.

If we have recurring hurricane threats in Florida, we don't have to prepare Oregon.

If we have recurring super high unemployment for blacks, we don't need more job training for whites - we need to figure out the causes for that entrenched difference and fix it.

Hey, earth has a global warming problem - let's apply it to the Moon and Mars as well....

This is such a lame response on so many levels.  Let's first start with the analogy of your last sentence. The moon and Mars do not have a global warming problem, and even if they were the problem would not be related to human activity on earth, and therefore no action taken on human activity would impact their problem. 

But as the graphs prove, as overall employment rates go up or down so do black unemployment rate - with the corresponding gap.  So unlike the pathetic moon and Mars analogy, addressing the overall unemployment issue does impact the problem you want to address.

Now let's go to your second paragraph - having live in Oregon I can say hurricanes was not among our worry.  But we did have tsunami scare, and forest fires and earthquakes were part of the reality in the Northwest.  The same disaster preparation and response, along with developing effective early warning systems found in Florida's effort to lessen the impact of a hurricane can be and should be translated to Oregon, and from Oregon to Florida. 

As someone who is actively involved in developing job training programs and other initiatives to move people out of poverty (and keep those on the edge from falling into poverty), it is far easier said than done to just go into a real community and both reduce poverty / increase employment and deal with entrenched cultural barriers that perpetuate the racial gap in the unemployment arena. 

One just has to look at the high school graduation rates and one knows that some federal program implemented by the feds is going to somehow correct the problem.  In other words these are entrenched, complex problems that will take years and years if not decades to effectively correct on a national level.  The reality is that there plenty of local, state and federal programs and grants working to tackle this, but it is at the grassroots level, on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis, through partnerships by government, schools, nonprofits, local businesses, and community volunteers that will turn this assistance into real results.

Now to your first paragraph.  Since I used an example talking about a disease that is transferred through the air, I don't why you pulled AIDS into the discussion.  I'm not going to say that the CDC has never made a mistake or couldn't have done a better job.  But your comment "so let's take an approach that makes every heterosexual kid afraid of sex," indicates a level of ignorance that surprises me. It indicates that heterosexual kids shouldn't be concerned about unprotected sex. 

Now to heart of the matter.

If we have recurring super high unemployment for blacks, we don't need more job training for whites - we need to figure out the causes for that entrenched difference and fix it.

Look at your graph.  There was a time toward the end of the 20th century and just before the latest economic meltdown when it wasn't "super high" - although the gap was still there.  All the evidence points to the fact that if we improve the situation overall, the black communities will also enjoy an improvement in their rate. 

So then we have to look at the gap.  Part of this racism, in all the various kinds that exist.  So what can the federal government, and specifically Obama, do to effectively address this in a way that is not already in place?

There is also a factor of incarceration rates and high school graduation rates.  With the former there is programs that deal with prisoner re-entry programs (such as those with Weed and Seed), but Congress is cutting the funding for those programs, so again what is Obama to do at this moment?  And yes programs like Weed and Seed help whites as well as blacks. 

Regarding the latter, it has to do more with early childhood education programs that the evidence points to having the best impact - ultimately having a child involved in a birth to graduation program of support.  In other words it will be over a decade before the results start to really show up. 

The birth to graduation rates deal in part with the culture of poverty - which has nothing do with race, although some claim it reinforces racist attitudes.  I've discussed this on dag before and won't go into it here, but I suggest you check out the work Geoffrey Canada and the Harlem Children's Zone are doing to get a better understanding on what kind of work is needed to make a dent on that gap. (i would add Obama has highlighted the work of the HCZ on numerous occassions).

I would also point out that your graph indicates that trend.  After a recession, the rate starts to go down - just at the same time that it is for the rest of the country, and likewise, it rises during the recession, along with the rest of the country. 

Kroll points out those times that gap narrowed:

Tracing black unemployment in America since World War II, there are two moments when, briefly, the gap between black and white joblessness narrowed ever so slightly -- in the 1940s and again in the late 1960s and early 1970s. For example in 1970, unemployment was at 5.8% for blacks and 3.3% for whites, a sizeable gap but significantly better than what followed in the Reagan era. Those are moments worth revisiting, if only to understand what began to go right.

According to University of Chicago professors William Sites and Virginia Parks, those periods were marked by a flurry of civil rights and anti-discrimination activity on the federal level. A series of actions ranging from the creation of the Fair Employment Practice Committee in 1941 to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (which mandated the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission), the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972, write Sites and Parks, had "dramatic impacts on employment discrimination."

But then adds:

Today, in terrible times, with the possibility of social legislation off the table in Washington, the question remains: What, if anything, can be done to close the jobless gap between blacks and whites? When I asked Devah Pager, she called this the "million-dollar question." This form of discrimination, she pointed out, is especially difficult to deal with. As she noted in 2005, many employers who discriminate don't even realize they're doing so; they're just going with "gut feelings." "It's not that these employers have decided that they are not going to hire workers from a particular group," Pager told me.

To put blacks back to work, lawmakers should invest federal money directly in job creation, especially for black workers. Other avenues for putting people back to work, like a payroll tax credit won't do the trick....

But how likely is that at a moment when, in a Washington gripped by paralysis, any discussion of spending in Washington begins and ends at how much to cut? The painful reality of permanent crisis for black workers is here to stay.

Peracles,

I get so bored with these kind of lame responses. I'm not here to defend President Obama, however:

Obama Initiatives

.

- Spur Job Creation: "In addition, to help those most affected by the recession, the Budget will extend emergency assistance to seniors and families with children, Unemployment Insurance benefits, COBRA tax credits, and relief to states and localities to prevent layoffs."

.

- Reforming the Job Training System: "The Budget calls for reform of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA), which supports almost 3,000 One-Stop Career Centers nationwide and a range of other services. With $6 billion for WIA at DOL—and an additional $4 billion in the Department of Education—the Budget calls for reforms to improve WIA." Strengthen Anti-Discrimination Enforcement: "To strengthen civil rights enforcement against racial, ethnic, sexual orientation, religious, and gender discrimination, the Budget includes an 11 percent increase in funding to the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division. This investment will help the Division handle implementation of a historic new hate crimes law. The Budget also provides an $18 million, or 5 percent increase, for the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC), which is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee. This increased investment will allow for more staff to reduce the backlog of private sector charges."

.
- Support Historically Black Colleges and Universities: "The Budget proposes $642 million, an increase of $30 million over the 2010 level, to support Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs), including Historically Black Colleges and Universities. In addition to this discretionary funding increase for MSIs, the Administration supports legislation passed by the House of Representatives and pending in the Senate that would provide $2.55 billion in mandatory funding to MSIs over 10 years."
.
- Help Families Struggling with Child Care Costs: "The Budget will nearly double the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit for middle-class families making under $85,000 a year by increasing their credit rate from 20 percent to 35 percent of child care expenses. Nearly all eligible families making under $115,000 a year would see a larger credit. The Budget also provides critical support for young children and their families by building on historic increases provided in ARRA. The Budget provides an additional $989 million for Head Start and Early Head Start to continue to serve 64,000 additional children and families funded in ARRA."
.
- Reform Elementary and Secondary School Funding: "The Budget supports the Administration’s new vision for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) … The Budget provides a $3 billion increase in funding for K-12 education programs authorized in the ESEA, including $900 million for School Turnaround Grants, and the Administration will request up to $1 billion in additional funding if Congress successfully completes ESEA reauthorization."
.
- Increase Pell Grants: "The Recovery Act and 2009 appropriations bill increased the maximum Pell Grant by more than $600 for a total award of $5,350. The Budget proposes to make that increase permanent and put them on a path to grow faster than inflation every year, increasing the maximum grant by $1,000, expanding eligibility, and nearly doubling the total amount of Pell grants since the President took office."

.
- Help Relieve Student Loan Debt: "To help graduates overburdened with student loan debt, the Administration will strengthen income-based repayment plans for student loans by reducing monthly payments and shortening the repayment period so that overburdened borrowers will pay only 10 percent of their discretionary income in loan repayments and can have their remaining debt forgiven after 20 years. Those in public service careers will have their debt forgiven after 10 years. The Budget also expands low-cost Perkins student loans."
.
- Prevent Hunger and Improve Nutrition: "The President’s Budget provides $8.1 billion for discretionary nutrition program supports, which is a $400 million increase over the 2010 enacted level. Funding supports 10 million participants in the WIC program, which is critical to the health of pregnant women, new mothers, and their infants. The Budget also supports a strong Child Nutrition and WIC reauthorization package that will ensure that school children have access to healthy meals and to help fulfill the President’s pledge to end childhood hunger. The President continues to support the nutrition provisions incorporated in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)."
.
- Revitalize Distressed Urban Neighborhoods: "The Budget includes $250 million for HUD’s Choice Neighborhoods program, which will target neighborhoods anchored by distressed public or assisted housing with physical and social revitalization grounded in promising, measurable, and evidence-based strategies."
.
- Increase Funding for the Housing Choice Voucher Program: "The President’s Budget requests $19.6 billion for the Housing Choice Voucher program to help more than two million extremely low income families with rental assistance to live in decent housing in neighborhoods of their choice. The Budget continues funding for all existing mainstream vouchers and provides flexibility to support new vouchers that were leased and $85 million in special purpose vouchers for homeless families with children, families at risk of homelessness, and persons with disabilities."
.
- Preserve 1.3 Million Affordable Rental Units through Project-Based Rental Assistance Program: "The President’s Budget provides $9.4 billion for the Project-Based Rental Assistance program to preserve approximately 1.3 million affordable rental units through increased funding for contracts with private owners of multifamily properties. This critical investment will help low-income households to obtain or retain decent, safe and sanitary housing. In addition, the Administration requests $350 million to fund the first phase of this multi-year initiative to regionalize the Housing Choice Voucher program and convert Public Housing to project-based vouchers."
.
- Promote Affordable Homeownership and Protect Families from Mortgage Fraud: "The Budget requests $88 million for HUD to support homeownership and foreclosure prevention through Housing Counseling and $20 million to combat mortgage fraud. In addition, the Budget requests $250 million for the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation’s (NRC) grant and training programs. Of the $250 million, $113 million is requested for foreclosure prevention activities, a $48 million increase (74 percent) over 2010."

.
- Fight Gang Violence and Violent Crime: "The Budget provides $112 million for place-based, evidence supported, initiatives to combat violence in local communities, including $25 million for the Community-Based Violence Prevention Initiatives that aim to reduce gun and other violence among youth gangs in cities and towns across the country, and $37 million for the Attorney General’s Children Exposed to Violence Initiative, which targets the youth most affected by violence and most susceptible to propagating it as they grow up."
.
- Expand Prisoner Re-entry Programs: "The Budget provides $144 million for Department Justice prisoner re-entry programs, including an additional $100 million for the Office of Justice Programs to administer grant programs authorized by the Second Chance Act and $30 million for residential substance abuse treatment programs in State and local prisons and jails. In addition, the Budget provides $98 million for Department of Labor programs that provide employment-centered services to adult and youth ex-offenders and at-risk youth.."
.
- Fully Fund the Community Development Block Grant Program: "The Budget provides $4.4 billion for the Community Development Fund, including $3.99 billion for the Community Development Block Grant Formula Program (CDBG), and $150 million for the creation of a Catalytic Investment Competition Grants program. The new Catalytic Competition Grants program uses the authorities of CDBG, but will provide capital to bring innovative economic development projects to scale to make a measurable impact."
 

 


 

 

 

 

Nice - but did he

1) have a positive effect on black employment

2) stop illegal mortgage foreclosure and get people compensated?

3) stop counter-productive marijuana busts that hurt blacks more than others?

etc., etc., etc.?

There's a pot of money for everything - what were the actual results? Do you even know, or it's just a litany for you to recite?

Like the first one: Spur Job Creation - huh? no, that's not what it does - it's an increase of joblessness benefits, labeled as "job creation". Quite an Orwellian term.

Preventing job discrimination? Well, any evidence it does, as black unemployment skyrocketed after 2008? But throw a bit of money at it, job done, constituents satisfied.

Meanwhile, cost for Afghanistan War skyrocketed to $9 billion per month in 2010, $10 billion a month throughout 2011, and now has dipped to $6 billion a month. Veterans Disability benefits will jump from $46 billion this year to $57 billion next - they were $15 billion in 2000. So goes our "smart war" as we prepare to run. Did putting money towards this goal help it?

Thanks, Eric. Very thought provoking post. 

Thank you, Oxy Mora.

I'm looking forward to this election being over.  Among other healthy outcomes, I think that once the black community is freed from its felt need to muster an extreme degree of unity and loyalty behind the nation's first black president, we'll begin to see much more ferment, dissent and vibrant activism.  Except for Obama, black leaders have never been more invisible than they are now.  Obama is a political giant who seems to swallow up every other black progressive idea or figure in his shadow.

The relative silence about catastrophic unemployment among a community that is a central pillar of the progressive community is one reason the political response to unemployment has been so disturbingly lame.  I'm not saying blacks are wrong to suppress the dissatisfaction that must be felt.  People have to pick their fights, and having a black president is progress in itself for the black community, a phenomenon which is no doubt helping to undermine racism and stereotypes, and open up opportunity for blacks in America.   But I'll be happy when the reelection of Barack Obama is no longer Job One in the black community, and people begin to step out of Obama's shadow during his second term and liberate themselves to play the dissatisfied, dissenting role that is needed.

Dan,

The next election has absolutely nothing to do with Obama's race; it's about the people, and keeping corporate fascists out of office. Black people were also loyal to Bill Clinton. So the assumption that Black people are only loyal to Obama because he's Black, is rooted in either projection, or racist and gross underestimation of Black intelligence. Black people are no different that any other group of people with common sense - we support the person who we think is acting in our best interest.  At one point during the primaries Hillary Clinton polled 37% over Barack Obama in the Black community.

That's not what I'm talking about.  Blacks might be consistently loyal Democrats, but they have not been consistently silent on major economic problems afflicting the black community.

In my community they are not silent on a local grassroots level, but you would never know how they are going to vote come November.  Their energy is focused on working on local initiatives and programs, doing outreach into neighborhoods, and developing a community dialogue.

The unfortunate facet of the web is that the discourse tends to value national movements over local ones, as if it isn't happening nationally, nothing is happening.   \

One of the keys to improving the economic conditions in the long run of the various black communities (see Harlem Children's Zone) across the countries rests on improving the education achievement.  This is something that does not happen overnight.  The results will take years to reflect the effort (unlike focusing on monthly unemployment rates).  The reality is, given the way education systems are structured, there is little the Federal government can do to significantly impact how local school districts implement their "curriculum."  It is up to each local community to ensure every child is ready to succeed when they enter school and then are supported with the necessary resources all along the way to graduation.

For a man who claims intelligence, you're sure packing a lot of hate these days, Eric. As I've followed your trajectory down over these past months, let me just say that it seems to me that you crossed the line of sensible conversation somewhere a ways back, and are now pretty much in a zone of pure hate. Which is a shame.

-- Just to take an obvious example, when you criticize West because he has only ever taught at places only 1% of black citizens could afford to attend, I assume you're including Harvard in that. Which is odd, because not only did someone like Articleman - a reasonably liberal-democratic fellow - attend that very institution, but so too did... President Obama. I'm not sure why you think it would be inappropriate for him to be taught by a black man at Harvard.

-- Or your stuff about how West et al "think" that they "own" blacks, as commodities, who can be bought, bartered and sold. I donno about you, but I find this to be fairly inflammatory stuff, when used as a reference to blacks. I've said it before - if slavery was the atrocity most people would argue it was, then to make too easy extrapolations to daily differences in opinions in 2012 is to cross a line, degrading the word, and disrespecting a lot of people. Much like attacking a Jew by saying they are someone who wishes to liquidate his own people. 

-- Or your quote from someone lodging a complaint against a particular insurance company. Now, personally, I can't stand insurance companies. But the idea that somehow it's right to use the named complaint of a single person - with all its horror, with all its bias, and with all its completely unknown connection to any facts - is just idiocy. 

In fact, your whole piece shows not just signs of increasing fury (which I understand fairly well), but of a man who has come off the rails entirely. It's not enough to attack West and Smiley in a blog, you have to do it dozens of times. And normal argument isn't enough, they have to be labelled as fascists, racists, new age slavers, undercover spies for the government, greedy, immature, petty, arrogant, pimps and whore-owners, spiteful, condescending, mean-spirited, Republicans, turncoats, snitches, provocateurs, hypocrites, shills, ambitious, self-serving and untrustworthy clowns.

And it disappoints me that white liberals have such a hard time in discussions of black issues. And in this case, what I mean is.... they have a hard time handling writers such as yourself, who have clearly thrown a rod, and are saying things that would get any serious writer thrown off a blog altogether. I mean, can you imagine if I came on here, week after week, and attacked a black man, such as perhaps Barack Obama, as being a pimp, a spy, a traitor, a whore-monger, and a modern day slaver? Here, let's try it out.

Barack Obama is a pimp.

Hey, how about that pimp Obama? 

Who you pimping today, Barack? 

Maaaaan, you sure do look like a pimp Barack. 

Now, I don't know about you, but those seem to me to be slightly beyond what most people would regard as useful contributions to the debate. 

Eric. Get a grip. You used to do a lot better than this.

I find it funny that you feel qualified to dictate decorum.

You and Eric should do a doubles-act, following West and Smiley around.

We could call it "Froth & Drool." 

Or maybe the "We're Sniffin' Out Pimps" Tour.

Well it looks like you lost your job as Chief Decorum Inspector.

I have to admit that I laughed out loud at your comment, rmrd!

You're kinda caught there, Quinn.

My dad always used to say

There's no one who loves Jesus more

Than the reformed whore!

(I'm glad to see you back, sans pseudonymical disguises.)

Like Quinn l'Esquimeau is his real name?

I'll have you know that the l'Esquimeaux were an old and respected Canadian family, who achieved both wealth and prominence in the early 1900s by inventing and selling a popular frozen concoction known as the l'Esquimalt.

The l'Esquimeaux' fortunes declined after the 1930s; an American entrepreneur stole the l'Esquimalt formula from the icy cave where it was kept hidden, patented it and re-marketed the treat as "Eskimo Pies."

The l'Esquimeaux never really recovered from the insult to their name and fortune, and the family faded out of public view. Little is known of their whereabouts or activities after 1965, and I believe Quinn is the last remaining descendant of the original l'Esquimeau family.

                                                     ****

Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.

And sometimes it isn't. (heh heh heh)

 

Well, it was around '65 that I joined The Band. They didn't do a lot during the next years, just wanted to hang around the house in upstate NY and play with this Zibberman kid or somethin'. Bit of a losing strategy, I figured, so I went off to join the Marines in '72. Bit of a crisis in Vietnam, thought I best lend a hand if we were gonna pull this one out. 

Anyway, apparently The Band were a bit upset with me leaving, Rick Danko even wrote this song in hopes I'd return.

I didn't though. Sadly, I died, face down in the mud, at Khe Sanh, 4 years earlier. 

 

 

Tapped into Bob Dylan's Dream, eh? careful, powerful stuff. And stay away from those Esquimaux pies - they're like catnip to a dreamer, better than peyote. And a lot more calories for those cold winter nights.

Quinn,

Of course, I disagree with everything you've just said here. I'm an effective communicator and an educated hood rat, which means, in effect, that I'm  both bicultural, and bilingual. So you communicate to your audience in the way that you feel is appropriate, and I'll communicate with mine in the way that I see fit.

 

Oh, and since you went out of your way to inform the world that you went to Harvard, I'd feel remiss if I ended this response without taking the time to stroke you. So, congratulations. 

Eric;

You claim, repeatedly, to be educated and intelligent and an effective communicator. Sorry, I don't find your blogs of recent months to be any of those things. You used to be better though. But since you started in on this repetitive ranting thing, no, they aren't.

They're full to overflowing with hatred, for starters. These days, they no longer really go after anything new. They just search for new ways to say that West and Smiley are evil. Fascists? Pimps? etc. 

And who is your audience here? Who here is learning anything new form what you're saying, or being deepened in their appreciation of the world? 

Not sure I see it. 

Anyway, I've pointed this out before, but you can't even be bothered to actually read what people have written anymore. For example, I didn't say I had gone to Harvard. Why? Because, ummmmmm, I didn't. Not at all, not for a moment. So your crack about me needing strokes? Well, it apparently made you feel good, but like I say - you're not seeing the world anymore Eric. You're basically just broadcasting your feelings out onto it. 

These recent blogs, for instance, are basically just pimping out hate. I don't think you started out that way, but that's where you've ended up. Pimping hate. I'm not saying I like West and Smiley. I can't stand Smiley, and I don't have much time for West. But where you're coming from is a place a whole lot darker than they deserve. 

I remember how you used to write, Eric. And think. And it was better than this. 

I hope you get better, or feel better, or find better, real soon. Seriously. for all the jabs of debate and insult-counterinsult nonsense we do here, I hope things get better for you. And soon.

Have a good night.

Just a question, you suggest that you played a part in the Civil Rights movement. Do you have any reservations about repeatedly questioning Wattrees's intelligence?

rmrd. Let's set aside our past differences (for the moment, at least) and just discuss this point, ok? We can return to "not speaking" after. 

[Before I respond on substance, let me add a correction to what you said. I don't believe I have ever claimed to play a part in the American Civil Rights movement, other than cheering it on and at best, strictly at third hand, ok? Also, anything I have done has been primarily in other countries, and certainly only of tertiary importance there.]

Now, I assume you mentioning this in connection with intelligence means that somehow I shouldn't be saying such things. But to me, as a believer in equal rights for blacks, women, native peoples, immigrants and even Nova Scotians, part of this includes the equal right to call a person's views idiotic, asinine, racist or even unintelligent - as they appear to me. 

NOTE. I do try, hard, to separate a person's arguments from who they are as people. I genuinely try to make my slapdowns more about their comments, and less about them as people. I suspect if you reread my last comment you can see me actually trying to do that. but it's a fairly common failure, I believe, to not do well in this regard. I know I fail regularly, and am wrong to do so. So again, I apologize for those times when I fail - today, as well as previously.  

However. I make no such retraction of my statements that this blog is not making a very solid, enlightening or substantial contribution. I listed only some of the stream of insults which Eric has included in it. It is simply not possible to make a rant such as that above and then dub it an intelligent contribution. I have listed some of the terms he uses above. Try to imagine if someone from Fox had written a piece in which they called Obama and Michelle ALL of these terms, in less than 1 minute!

"... fascists, racists, new age slavers, undercover spies for the government, greedy, immature, petty, arrogant, pimps and whore-owners, spiteful, condescending, mean-spirited, Republicans, turncoats, snitches, provocateurs, hypocrites, shills, ambitious, self-serving and untrustworthy clowns."

Say what you will, that's an extremely high-powered set of insults. And a ridiculous set, at that. All these Mussolini references, for instance. Hell, why not throw in Hitler? Or the Cointelpro/spies bits. Really? No evidence offered, at all, just a smearing of somebody Eric disagrees with as being in the pay of Government spies? Can you imagine if I - a "progressive" - blogged, again and again, that Obama was a spy for Communist China or some such. What would you do? Well, actually, we KNOW what you would do. Because there are Republican whack jobs saying those very things. You would dismiss it as ridiculous, in the absence of any evidence. And pronounce it a smear. Which... it is. In both cases.

Now, as a champion of Civil Rights, are you saying that I should somehow not attack Eric's pieces, and in particular, not dare call them unintelligent? That strikes me odd, as I use that term - intelligence - precisely because Eric uses it as a bit of a mantra, the fact that he's intelligent and educated, by his own means and his own hand. To which I say, more power to him.

But am I then going to somehow pull my punches, and not say when I think he's behaving like an ass, or saying things that are absurd, insulting or stupid? No, I won't. I don't care if he's black. His piece here today is crap. It's awful. I mean, he criticizes West for teaching at Harvard, when the man he's DEFENDING... went to Harvard. This would strike most people as a damn weak argument. And then the Mussolini bits, the single person wronged by an insurance company, etc. etc.

So I said what I thought. That the piece was not good, and in fact, pretty much crossed over into the territory of smear. And then, I tried to add that for whatever reason, I don't think Eric's on his game. I suspect that things in his real world must be deeply troubling to him, for his work to fall to this level. Because he IS, based on previous efforts, a smart man, intelligent, insightful, as well as a solid writer.

This piece is not, however.

I'm sure some people don't like these sorts of things being mentioned on blogs, but I've been around long enough now, in blog terms, to see that sometimes.... people ARE in difficulty in their worlds, and it infects their work. In fact, I've come to realize it happens a surprising amount on these blogs. Not sure why. For example, this past year I've personally been going through the process whereby my partner has been diagnosed and then received treatment for ovarian cancer. Does that affect my writing? Damn right it does. 

Could I be wrong about Eric? Sure. Could he be just fine in his life? Sure. But as it stands, the piece is still nonsense. And I'm not shy about saying that. It's not the end of the world, it's just the end of this piece. 

Hope you are well.

Thanks for the explanation.

Our dear brother Cornel often appears in articles in the Black blogosphere. West and Smiley often will make an appearance in an area where Obama is campaigning to do a poverty tour. Then they leave. I think Wattree is just blowing off steam.

Eric Wattree is writing about jazz musicians like Rita Edmunds (and Jackie MacLean)

http://wattree.blogspot.com/2012/07/presenting-ms-rita-edmond-contempora...

He also writes on general jazz topics

http://www.leimertparkbeat.com/profiles/blogs/reflections-on-the-stanley...

 

I think Wattree is OK.

I hope your partner is doing well.

Thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt, RM,

But I meant every syllable. If it seems that I'm a little more harsh and "in your face" than I've been in the past, it's because I've decided to start writing from the more honest perspective of a writer, than from the sterile, ivory tower perspective of a journalist. The genteel rules of journalism were appropriate when we had an educated and engaged electorate, but now that much of the press and our entire educational system have been preempted, writers have a responsibility to also become educators, and when necessary, advocates, in order to get the people's attention. So you'll be seeing that change reflected in my writing in the future. 

I've become fed up with watching journalists gloss over blatant lies as though they deserve "objective" consideration. A lie is a lie, and since the word "objectivity" only becomes valid when we're weighing "facts," a good writer should be able to distinguish between a fact and a lie, and he should be prepared to point out the difference between the two in the most stark and uncompromising terms. In the future, that's what I intend to do, by any means necessary.

Thanks for the explanation

Cornel and Tavis are frequently mentioned in the Black blogosphere. They were in West Virginia around the time of an Obama appearance. They do the photo-op, then disappear.

Wattree has been writing about jazz musicians like Rita Edmond and Jackie MacLean.as well as other jazz topics

Hope that your partner is doing well.

Oops I thought the first post had been blocked.

I must say that I mostly agree with quinn's comment in substance, and commend him for having modified his form of argument to keep it very cleanly between the lines.

This is the eleventy-millionth piece saying the same thing, and the "whoes" and "Mussolini" are absurdly over the top, and I will even second Dijamo's revisiting of the bone-in-mouth image as disabling the author from commenting any further on this topic for me.  That was an extreme low point in blogging hereabouts, and deeply offensive to me for the reasons she stated.

I say that as someone who has views of Smiley and West that (extreme rhetoric aside) are extremely unfavorable, and modestly unfavorable, respectively.

Eric, quinn is right that you have written far better, and even on the civil rights and African-American politics beat, there is so much good stuff to write about.  I hope you write more broadly soon, as I have over time enjoyed reading your take on things.

And quinn didn't say he went to Harvard.  And the piece's point about Harvard deserves to be called dumb.  Harvard does more to advance the development of black leaders than most American institutions, and is a driver of making our society, and professorial and professional classes more diverse.  And Barack Obama also doesn't teach third grade in poor neighborhoods, and I like him anyway.  It's not a fair form of criticism, IMO.

Maybe you can elaborate on why the "bone-in-mouth image" is somehow an "extreme low point in blogging hereabouts." I can point to satire pieces here to the Onion to the Daily Show that go over top in an effort to make a point.  I'm sensitive to racist imagery as well as those attacks that go over the line in a non-racist way, but I seriously  don't see it with this image.

I mean here is this:

So are we saying an African American could not play this role

Wow, simply wow. You don't know, do you?

Racist depictions depict a whole class of people to demean them.

Terms like "spooks" are accompanied by caricatures of blacks with bulging eyes.

Saying George looks like a monkey (tied to "Curious George") doesn't imply Peter down the street also looks like a monkey.

Comparing blacks to monkeys ties into centuries of calling them primitive, one step back on the evolutionary scale, and of course actual enslavement under atrocious conditions, destroying a whole continent.

Yes, we call white kids "little monkeys", and blacks can call their own kids "little monkeys", and gee, while a few blacks might really really look like a monkey or a gorilla (vs. just having dark skin), we don't say it or depict it because:

1) they're human and evolved, not animals and primitives, and we know or should know this animalistic symbolism is hurtful

2) we as whites are on parole - we used up our funny quotient long ago on race matters by enslaving, abusing and murdering people, so no, we don't get the benefit of the doubt on racial matters. We have to tiptoe around it and be more aware and sensitive - even constructive. T'ain't that hard with a little effort. Maybe in a hundred years we'll have reached an easier space without all the race baiting in politics, and juvenile white thinking, but we're not there yet.

So just because Vladimir Putin might resemble an ocelot doesn't compare to us using stereotypical imagery for our age-old problems with race relations. And Wattree should know better about repeating this kind of imagery as well.

you really need to follow the flow of comments before you comment.  I have stated that there particular cultural memes of racism that make certain images off limits.  So it is okay to compare Bush to a chimpanzee, but such a comparison with Obama is off limits.  But if someone want to compare Obama's ignoring the poor like a ostrich putting its head in the sand that is okay. 

So again I ask where is the evidence of comparing african americans to dogs, i.e. the image is tapping into some cultural meme.

Bye.

Comparing a black person to an animal to demean is racist.  Your ostrich idiom is not to me, probably because it is a figure of speech and not a move to dehumanize.  Saying in argument that West acts as an attack dog, for example, is to me not analogous to the bone image for the same reason. The bone pic is way obviously racist to me, as the peanuts thrown with the epithet "zoo animals" is incredibly racist, which the woman receiving the racist taunt well understood.

There is no semantic value-add to the author's prior use of the bone, and because it is dehumanizing it only confounds and defeats his message, because it removes his moral authority to criticize, at least to this reader.

comparing a human can be used as an effort to demean (as in the case of comparing Bush to a chimpanzee) or to compliment or show a positive quality as below:

The question is one of intent.  When it is an intent, the issue of racism revolves around the question of what compels the comparison.  The incident of the peanut throwing highlights this perfectly.  The reason she was being compared to an animal is because the mere fact of her blackness.  Her race drove the comparison.

This is different when the comparison comes from an effort to show the individual's character or behavior to like an animal used to compare, as what I took the comparison to a dog. He wasn't saying he was like a dog because he was black, but his behavior and attitude made him like a dog.  

Whether it was a good comparison or an effective one is another debate.  But I didn't take it be racist. 

I for one do not want to limit artists, including political cartoonists and bloggers, being told that any image they create that could be seen as racist as off limits.  In other words, another person with racist intent could have produced a very similar dog comparison pic, but if we go down this path we do end up the PC world that the conservatives warn us about.

If someone wants to show Alan Keyes as a dodo bird because the guy is an idiot and the current polls show the conservative politicians like him will soon be extinct after this next election because of that stupidity, then he or she be able to do so without someone saying because it was an attempt to demean a black man with an image of animal that it was also racist.

Quinn,

You indicated that I have nothing to say, and that my articles are declining in quality, yet, you continue to read them, and you write a critique that rivals the length of the article itself. Why would you waste your time doing that on drivel? I certainly wouldn't, so I detect an inconsistency there. But I don't have a problem with that, because one of the ways that I determine my effectiveness is through the amount of passion that I manage to evoke from the reader - it doesn't matter whether it's love or anger. Thus, if I'm not being attacked, criticized, or harangued by those who disagree with me, I feel like I'm being less than effective. So thank you for your passion.

 

You also made me smile when you talked about how angry I am, because the fact is, I rarely, if ever become angry over people's behavior. Throughout the course of history man has clearly demonstrated himself to be stupid, so why should I become angry when he's merely adhering to his nature? So, when I observe our political environment, I look at it with the very same kind of detachment that I use when I'm looking upon an ant farm. And when I write, I select my tone in the very same way that a golfer decides which club to use. I select the tone that I decide will be most effective in getting my point across. I thought every writer did that.  Didn't they teach you that at Harvard?

It's important to stand up against ugly in this world.

Sadly or fortunately, you're not trying to be ugly.

So why not just think about it - we all like you - we're friends. What you wrote is over the top. You've written much better, but you're on the wrong train right now.

This isn't cool jazz, this isn't "path with a heart". You see West & Smiley as a threat, but they're a bit of coyote in the staid politosphere - some shit disturbing that's needed whether they're exactly right or way off. They're the bum note that lets the real jazz artist take off in a different direction.

Take the "A" train - there's none better.

Quinn,

if I misread what you said, I apologize. But I write about issues that I think need to be discussed, and we are discussing this issue, aren't we? Several people in the Black community have told me that this, and my last article about Tavis and West have caused them to take another look at what they've previously thought of these two characters, and that is why we write, am I correct? So regardless to what you think, I've succeeded in what I set out to do, haven't I? 

And I'm going to continue to write about these two, because regardless to whether you're tired of reading about them or not, I don't write for your entertainment. I'm on a mission, specifically targeted at the Black community, to undo a political dog-n-pony show that's been established over years of public relations, demagoguery, and political  hype. So while I'm sorry that the subject matter doesn't meet your standards of what constitute relevance in your world, everything is not about you, is it?

 

We write about Mitt Romney and say the exact same things about him over and over again every single day, don't we? So why is it considered redundant in your eyes when that very same standard is applied to issues relevant to the Black community?  Thus, it is the height of arrogance for you to presume to dictate what I should write about, and what level of passion I should bring to the subject, don't you think? 

You write repeatedly about a money making operation being conducted in the Black community. Therefore, some suggest that you are mentally ill. That in and of itself is crazy.

It is also interesting that if one disagrees with a certain approach to getting things done in DC that merely shout to the rooftops that you oppose Barack Obama in the same manner as they, you are somehow "Less than Black" or even a race traitor. They have the audacity to make these charges as they sit on the sidelines and do nothing more than criticize.

They want to dictate what gets written. They want to determine who is holier than thou. It's ridiculous.

Half of what's written about Romney is unhinged, which is why it isn't terribly effective.

Complain about West & Smiley all you want - just avoid the absurd and hateful imagery.

Peracles,

 

You write what, and in the way, that you want to write, and I'll decide what's appropriate for me. That's why I write my own articles instead of calling you and asking you to write them for me. if you don't like my approach to writing, or subject matter, do yourself a favor and don't read my writings. Life is simple, why blow it all out of proportion?

 

Actually, if you truly hate what I'm writing, you're doing yourself a severe disservice. Because the more people like yourself tell me that I'm being ridiculous, the more motivated I become. It serves a clear signal that I'm on the right track. When you hate something, you simply ignore it. That's why I know so little about Guy Lombardo.

Peracles,

You write what, and in the way, that's appropriate for you, and I'll decide what's appropriate for me. That's why I write my own articles instead of calling you and asking you to write them for me. if you don't like my approach to writing, or the subject matter that I broach, do yourself a favor and don't read my writings. Life is simple, why blow it all out of proportion?

Actually, if you truly hate what I'm writing, you're doing yourself a severe disservice. Because the more people like yourself tell me that I'm being ridiculous, the more motivated I become to move forward. You see, the mere fact that your cage is rattled serves a clear indication that I'm on the right track. 

When you hate something, you simply ignore it. That's why I know so little about Guy Lombardo.

Tried to be friendly, but...

Keep up the hate speech, buddy, keep on keeping on. Don't want to hold you back.

I was just watching Dick Gregory in some replay on Reno....hahahaha. he had no pants on.

hahahahaha

We forget he was a top comedian at one time.

You get me laughing so hard at Cornell in these blogs that now I cannot watch the fellow without laughing.

The hair and the scarf and the scowl?

I am just chiming in because I am watching Professor Dyson again on Bashir's PM show at MSNBC.

Dyson is a poet and a lexiconist. hahahah

I have always liked Dyson.

The contrast between he and Cornell is phenomenal.

I appreciate your posts on this subject.

Maybe Cornell has just become a comedian but you are sure helping him along.

hahahah

Thank you, Richard.

Many people tend to become so star struck that it blinds them to reality. So I thought I'd take the time to place things in perspective. 

As always, I appreciate your post and once again, making me more aware of all the 'back stories' and nuances that otherwise I would not know.   

There are so many interesting layers in your blogs- I confess I read each more than once - the first time for the 'story', the next is to obtain the facts and 'back story'.

When you brought in Cain, I was struck by how perfect it was to use him, because - at least for me - this clarified some of the traits and motivations of these two men. I always found Cain to be phony and a perfect caricature of a oily used car salesman.   But even worse are Tavis and West, who seem to 'wannabe' Cain (and that's just beyond sad).

Do you believe that the majority, no matter black or white or what ethnic identifier, consider them to be at all credible in their rantings?  What is their long term goal?  And ideas?

 

Thank you, Aunt Sam.

I'm glad that you're getting something out of my articles. People like yourself make it all worthwhile.

As for Tavis and West's long-term agenda, I don't think they've even thought it through themselves. I think that they're so overwhelmed by their sense of anger, greed, envy, and entitlement that at this point they're just acting on instinct. Initially, they stepped out on a ledge by overestimating their value within the Black community. Now they find themselves unable to come in from the cold without losing face. That's why they've changed their lyrics from "Obama's not Black enough," to "All we want to do is help the poor." 

I forgot about Cain until I read Auntie's comment and then saw his quote in Huffpo that he would be leading President Obama right now if the repubs had chosen him. hahahahaha

Brings one back to Keyes. hahahahahaha

Out of context, but 'Saintorum' is back at it again too and he almost makes Cain look sane or at least on house-release. hahahah

See, this whole thing just cracks me up.

I do know this...

Cornell and his buddy and Cain and Keyes and Saintorum have found a way to make moolah!

They do not give one goddamn about humanity or our nation or anything else.

Of course neither do Pawlenty or Newt or hundreds of other politicians turned pundits!

Richard,

Exactly!

Aunt Sam,

When I re-read my response I noticed that I didn't answer your question about whether or not Tavis And West have credibility. In that regard, I think they have just enough pull among the undereducated - those who tend to become starstruck by notoriety and hype - to have a negative impact on a close election. But most serious thinkers have long since writtent them off as opportunists, publicity whores, and entertainers.

Cornel West is an expert showman but nothing more: The lead huckster of the Ivy League's takedown

Cornel West, the Princeton professor of African-American studies who recently made some crude statements about President Obama, has never been much more than a six-figure entertainer, ready to bite the hand that pays him even while reaching for his check. He has never seen a microphone or television camera that he did not like.

Publicity, not scholarship, is his true tradition. West often gives his listeners no more than sound and fury, signifying nothing. And he is very good at appearing overcome by his passionate convictions.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-05-23/news/29592494_1_cornel-west-black-public-intellectuals-black-academics

 

Too freaking funny - apparently his crime is he appeals to white liberals? And Peggy Noonan is part of the integrity of the right? Peggy wrote a speech for Reagan and never came down - I think Sinatra wrote "Fly Me to the Moon" for her. Here, have some Peggy from Wonkette.

As for David Frum, well, he enabled the whole Bush II era, including "Axis of Evil". Is his integrity spinning a bit on a dime like Andrew Sullivan to start supporting just a bit of non-neocon reality once the cow's left the barn? But he still thinks invading Iraq was worth it. Frankly, who knows what he really thinks? Born into media royalty, he's turned his connections and his huckster-for-hire skills into a good career. Shame no WMDs or he'd be running for office by now.

  • But once again, it's a pretty meatless opinion piece on West. He's a huckster, Harris-Perry is authentic. One of these days, one of these articles can actually state "why", rather than throwing out just so many ad hominems. I suppose maybe after November. Until then, I'll ready about how Peggy Noonan actually talked to an Africkan. Should be delicious and profound coming from Our Lady of the Soundbite.

I’ve been around long enough to recognize that as African Americas, we’re products of the very same racist environment as White people. As a result, many of us are just as racist toward other Black people as any Hillbilly, and that’s exactly what I see in Tavis Smiley and Cornel West.

LOL.  Which is exactly why I can't take your hit job pieces on Cornel West and Tavis Smiley seriously after you posted that dehumanizing photo of Cornel West with a bone in his mouth barking it up like a dog.  As despicable as the Obamacare witchdoctor photo, but I guess it's cool to post racist shit as long as you are black.  I disagree with Obama vehemently and would never ever do so in a racist way.

But I'm thrilled to see you're advocating boycotting yourself though!  Finally an end to your never-ending litany of diatribes against West and Smiley for having the audacity to speak about the poor and urban communities this President can't be bothered to give a shit about.  Insert happy dance here.

You care about the poor, but you are voting for Romney.That negates your authority to criticize Wattree. Romney is still searching for what he believes. What day and time is it and pick a position, within the hour, Romney will agree with you. Thirty minutes later, he'll be disagreeing with you.

Somehow voting for Romney and suffering through his Presidency will energize. The Democrats. Wow. What a brilliant game plan. Let Romney gain office by supporting voter suppression. Romney gets to chose the next Supreme so a woman's right to choose can go bye bye.

Turning out the vote to get Elizabeth Warren elected and Sherrod Brown re-elected must be too rational for you. Using the surge Obama is experiencing to get more Democrats elected now must seem like 12th dimensional chess.

Let's elect the Republicans now and wait for the population to figure out how bad they are. Realizing that the public has figured out the GOP is just too foreign a concept.

While Smiley and West are doing photo ops. Rev Al got the ball rolling on Trayvon and voter suppression while the twins were just flapping their lips. Jesse Jackson got two Americans freed from Gambia.

West and Tavis are all hat and no cattle. Just like a plan to elect Romney to make the public pay.

My authority to criticize Wattree is not negated because I don't post racist shit about Obama ever, even though I hold Obama in as much disdain as Wattree holds West and Smiley.

At least Romney is honest enough to actually say he's not concerned with the poor.  Neither is Obama.  You're voting for Obama who blew off the poverty tour he promised in the 2008 campaign and quite frankly does not even mention the poor at. all. ever. You constantly make apologies about why Obama can't be concerned for the poor or the soaring unemployment of African Americans.  If Obama can't be concerned with it , why should you expect Romney to be?  Any long-time advocates for the poor inner city communities who choose to keep pressuring the president to DO SOME something or show some concern are labeled sellouts by some rational people (Wattree is no longer rational, so he goes way beyond sellouts) who believe supporting Obama is more important than supporting the people suffering under his pathetic presidency.

I'm all about keeping a Democratic senate if they act like Democrats.  We will need it if Romney wins.  Sherrod Brown was always outpolling Obama, so no coattail riding there.  I'll be happy to see Elizabeth Warren win if she does.  The post-convention bounce is going going gone.  Amazing how a few good polls and people think the election is won already.  FYI.  It's not anywhere close.

Your hatred for Obama is obviously deep. I suggest you head over to Nate Silver's blog so you have a better grasp of the polling data.

What I just don't understand is that you would support ushering in the folks who would take control of your health care choices as woman.  You want to empower the Aikins of the world...that just blows my mind.

As I mentioned above, Dijamo,

 

I want to thank you for your outrage. It means, and says, more to me than you know.

I really do not understand her commitment to Romney.

It's impossible to do unless you choose to or are able to look thru the same type of 'lens' she utilizes.  Her agenda and rationale is not yours and vice versa.  The twain will never meet as they say - so your choice and hers to engage (IMO, a waste of time and energy better spent in more productive ways) or not.  wink

I know. I've got some of that argument for argument.'s sake tendency myself 

Thanks for pulling my coat tails wink

Yeah, right - Dijamo is so out there - she supports a progressive agenda, and gets angry when someone who ran on progressive veers right on assuming office. Real tough to understand. I'd be much happier right now if McCain had mud on his face over Afghanistan rather than a Democrat, if all the Wall Street bailouts and mortgage fraud and unemployment and drone strikes were stuff we could run against this election, rather than the record we're supposed to be proud of.

Let's just say Dijamo is not impressed.

It's always a treat pp.

I know you love to inject your own version just to be able to stir the pot, but my comment wasn't a put down or a derogative jab to either one's stance and you know it. 

It's just common sense that if both are firmly bound in the ties that bind them to their respective stances and there is no common ground to meet on, then it's (IMO) a waste of their time and energy to just keep goin' round and round.  There's nothing productive to be gained.  Quite the opposite.

dijamo has, more than once, very adroitly articulated her views just as mrd has. 

So, that said, have a nice day and take care.  cheeky

No, I wasn't stirring the pot. I was amazed by what you seemed to be saying about DJ's "agenda" and "lens" as if it's so bizarre to be a straight-forward principled progressive.

And then you say a waste of time for the 2 to engage - guess there's no meeting of minds, no persuasion, no rights, only disjoint universes? Seems pretty forlorn. But then again, I keep trying for an acknowledgment that high unemployment is a problem, and have run into a brick wall. Guess all I learned in economics is wrong.

Your argument is that a principled Progressive is voting for Romney is a rational act. The Progressive is not writing in Ralph Nader or going for an actual Progressive third-party candidate. It simply fails the smell or logic test.

No one is saying jobs are unimportant. You bellow about jobs, but what's the best option now?. Is it more rational to go for an Obama re-election coupled with Democratic wins in the House and Senate and push for passage of a jobs bill, or to vote for Romney and watch him veto a jobs bill passed by Democrats in Congress?

It is easy to be a critic. What is your best option for the choice we are faced with in November? .

The principled progressive has explained her strategy.

You & Trope and a host of others have basically declared that 1) it's not okay to disagree, and 2) if you disagree you have to do it in the way I would have, and 3) it has to lead to the same action I want you to take.

Re: jobs, I noted via one link that it could be ameliorated with help on lower income wealth accumulation, though helping those with no jobs to invest would be silly.

But since this is the first time I've heard you actually imply jobs are important and it's 6 weeks to election and Congress has adjourned, well, there's no reason to come up with a hypothetical now on what could be done - yes, he could have passed more jobs support in 2009-2010 - when it was known the stimulus wasn't big enough. Here's a review of what he proposed last year. Will he push through something effective next year? Fingers crossed. (and no, don't think Romney has a plan, not about him)

And screw your "easy to be a critic". I don't know what you've done to make yourself Mother Theresa, so only your opinion is valid, but yes, other people have proposed tangible jobs programs that could work. Not just more unemployment benefits and tax cuts for business hoping they'll hire.

The situation on the ground has changed. The Romney vote was stated to be to get Democrats angry and active in the future and thereby win seats.  The Democratic energy is occurring now. Polling indicates Democrats are winning now. Djamo is still voting Romney. She rejects the polling data because she is hard wired to vote Romney. How does this make sense now, given her original argument?

 

1) She's principled - probably won't change her views based on a Convention bounce.

2) I haven't heard any big change in policies to warrant her change. 

So to you the Romney vote is rational, even if Congressional projections hold up? Voting for Romney is more rational than a third- party Progressive?

If the Congressional  projections hold up and Democrats win, wouldn't we expect Romney to veto anything positive? It seems some Progressives are so pessimistic that they will opt for failure rather than push the newly invigorated Democrats for change.

It simply does not make sense.

"The arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards justice"_MLK

The Republicans attempts at voter suppression met wit public and judicial opposition. I think the public is engaged, the Democrats are engaged, registered voters are engaged. Why in the midst of all this would a Romney vote make sense?

This is a meliorist's moment.

since you mentioned me

1) this is such a redstate response.  in no comment I have made have i implied let alone explicitly stated that it is not okay to disagree.  i have a stance on the issues and i will defend that stance, until someone persuades me I am wrong.  i assume the same is true for you and the reason i come here is to lock horns in the hopes that maybe someone who is lurking will be persuaded if you or one of the others i disagree with are not persuaded.

2) & 3) obviously if one believes in one stance than one will defend it as the way to see things.  this is similar to 1).  If Q draws a line in the sand, y'all applaud his standing up for whatever, because you agree with him.  But since you disagree with me, the same attitude in pushing a point, I am demanding if you disagree,  you have to do it in the way I would have disagreed and it has to lead to the same action I want you to take.

You want people to disagree with the Prez in the way you do.  More power to you in your attempts persuade others to see the world as you do.  And more power to me with my agenda.  Each of us have the right to our agenda.  Together.  Trying to make our way home.

I want people to ask the tough questions of the President and get results. Not "disagree" with him. Out of Afghanistan, more jobs, shackles on Wall Street theft.

Oh please, be assured I am not outraged or angered by your post. I'm just disgusted that your only raison d'etre is to hurl racist invectives (and pictures) towards two people merely because they disagree with you about Barack Obama. You apparently consider getting people angry, outraged, and riled up by your writing is such an achievement. By those standards, West and Smiley are winning every time you put pen to paper to hurl more insults their way because it shows how far from rational you've become on this issue.  Have you ever stopped to consider West and Smiley want people to be angry about unemployment?  Whereas you just hurl personal attacks and want people to be angry at West and Smiley because they don't heart Obama.

Dijamo,

Do you really expect ANYONE to believe that you're supporting the Republican Party and you're disgusted by what you perceive as racism?  You must think we're idiots. The very fact that you want to make this discussion about Barack Obama when I made it clear in the article that my main concern was keeping corporate fascists out of office, is in itself racist. 

In addition, the fact that you've even jumped to the conclusion that I even like Barack Obama is based on the racist assumption that because I'm Black, I support the "Black" guy. You said,  "I'm just disgusted that your only raison d'etre is to hurl racist invectives (and pictures) towards two people merely because they disagree with you about Barack Obama."

What evidence do you have that I disagree with Tavis and West about Obama?  I might agree with them about Obama but just have sense enough to see that it's stupid to be so disgusted with the Bogeyman that you elect the Devil. Did you ever once consider that? Why not, because both me and Obama have Black skin? So do talk to me about you disgust with racism

And there's one other thing, what motive do you attach to your Republican contention that "Obama is un-American, because he's engaged in an Islamo-socialist plot to insure that our families have health care?"

So sure you're disgusted by racism, Dijamo. Give me a break!

Look dude.  Believe what you want.  Anyone who creates and posts this shit is a black on black racist. 

 

 

 

If someone were to replace West and put Obama's pic in the same setting you'd be up in arms.

So criticize West all you want.  You've done it repeatedly and your main issue with them has been that they arecritical of Obama or jealous of Obama or not supportive of Obama.  Perhaps you haven't read the other 1,00,000,000 versions of your Sisyphean post, but I've read enough to know your hatred for West started when he started criticizing Obama. When you turn your vendetta into pathetic racist shit like this, it shows how low you have gone and what little substance there is behind it rather than pure hatred.  And after posting this racist "impression" of Cornel West, you then have the audacity to preach about black on black racism.  Hahahah.  Try looking in the mirror dude, or take a critical look at your post (I know so hard to do when you are so in awe of your own brilliance and intellect and writing skills).  This is pathetic.

I don't think comparing Obama to a dog would elicit much outrage.  Comparing public figures with animals in one way or another is very common. 

The issue is when doing so reinforces a cultural meme tied to racist views.  Which is why doing a similar comparison of Obama to a chimpanzee is off limits.  There is of course the charge that white racists in this country see blacks as less than human, and therefore any comparison to an animal could be claim to be racist imagery.  But I think it is going too far to claim that in age of web imagery that all such comparisons are completely out of bounds for any black public figure, and are innately racist.

But I am white, so I will say I might be unaware why a comparison to dog is somehow particularly offensive to blacks, as opposed to any public figure who finds any unflattering comparison like Bush to a chimpanzee as unpleasant. 

"But I think it is going too far to claim that in age of web imagery that all such comparisons are completely out of bounds for any black public figure, and are innately racist."

You're quite good at this - I don't recall anyone saying "all such comparisons are completely out of bounds". I just noticed the picture that Dijamo objected to, and said, "wow, that's a racist piece of crap". Not "unflattering" or simply humorous - completely over-the-top, dehumanizing. 

Comparing Bush to a chimpanzee is dehumanizing - but it isn't racist.  She is saying that that particular image is racist.  And I just don't see it.  I am sincerely willing to be enlightened as to why comparing him to a dog is somehow racist, as opposed to me calling one my co-workers a lapdog of the officers of the organizations.

It's because it comes so close to the bone-through-the-nose racist image that it essentially merges. I'd say these are racist.

 

oh freaking please - it has a bone thus it is related to those other images...what a pathetic reach to justify the outrage. So it isn't a comparison to animal, but a bone was used in the pic. So black public figures cannot be parodied in any way which includes a bone. Wow.  This is the mental gymnastics that reinforces the mental gymnastics on redstsate.

Yawning now.

"Obama good, all else bad."

Nightie-night Trope. Sleep tight.

The response of someone who cannot argue their point.  This is not about whether Obama has come down from the heavens or he is just really one us slobs on the bus.

It is about what kind of satire and humor should be considered racist.  Obviously you can't back up your assertion, so I win.  My win is your win.  Your win is my win. Together.  Trying to make our way home. 

Uh, no.

Your "win" is an opening the size of a Mack truck to drive racist material through.

It's not racist for a white so how could it be racist for a black? What makes a bone racist? It was in his mouth, not in his nose - who could mistake? What makes a watermelon racist? It's just a summer snack, no?

The right wing thrives on dog-whistles and halfway racist allusions. But under the Trope rules, Trope can't see it, so must not be racism. 

So lets have cartoons of blacks as mules, blacks, big smiley-step-and-fetch-it, noble savages, whatever - just good college fun.

Next week we tackle sexism in America - with photos and cleavage!!!

so give me the examples that connect blacks and dogs.  oh wait the witchdoctor had a bone so it is connected....once you go down that path you do get to that point where everything is racist....the Florida State Seminoles is as racist as the Wasahington Redskins and not at all like the Minnesota Vikings because Seminoles are related to Native Americans and the Redskins are, too.

But since you are so enlightened, please explain in the response to post how does one differentiate between erotica and sexist garbage in 1000 words or less.  I'm sure you can do it since it clearly defined, just as the difference between acceptable satire and racist crap. 

I address the issue here:

http://dagblog.com/reader-blogs/it-s-time-boycott-taviswest-and-all-blac...

I suspect you could use some time reading about racist imagery in historical and current usage, but I'll leave it to you - I've said enough.

Uh, yes, one more item.

The Vikings were bloody conquerors, and Minnesota has a lot of Danes, so the name is symbolic of victory and cultural pride, and if it's about repression, it's about the slaughter of English and other Europeans, and we left that behind long ago.

The Seminoles were from Florida, wiped out by invading Europeans, and sent walking to Oklahoma at a loss of thousands. Ferocious people, mostly dead.

Washington DC presided over the extinction of the free Native American peoples, finished a bit over a century ago, sending out troops to kill them, using tourists to wipe out their food source, imprisoning them on reservations, and regularly screwing them by re-writing treaties.

So maybe it will help you if we think of 3 sports clubs - one named after Michael Jordan, one after Sharon Tate, one after Jeffrey Daumer.

Does that make it clearer? Can you see a distinction?

It might surprise you but the Seminoles are still here and they gave their blessing to FSU as using their nation as the name and mascot of their sports team.  As of Norwegian, English and Welsh ancestry (in part, also 1/16 native american for the record) (as well as majoring in English history and therefore well aware of the invansions) I have no problem with a team calling themselves Vikings (for all the misery, they were also able to develop one of the most inclusive and open societies in the Mediterranean).  But I do have a problem with Redskins, which is based on bounty for Native Americans.  But this all too nuanced for you it would seem.

Ah, the master of nuance.

I am humbled.

"Seminole Tribe of Florida has an established relationship with Florida State University which includes its permission to use the name `Seminole' as well as various Seminole symbols and images such as Chief Osceola," the resolution reads.

T.K. Wetherell became the first FSU president invited to a meeting of the Seminole Tribal Council when he received the resolution Friday at the Big Cypress Seminole Reservation.

"The tribe believes that they haven't signed a peace treaty with the federal government, and they're not about to roll over for the NCAA," Wetherell said after returning from the reservation. "We expect Florida State University to stand up and show that same independence. In our minds, as far as the NCAA goes, we've made our decision, and it's not discussible anymore."

There were only 200 Seminoles left in Florida after the wars and expulsion to Oklahoma.

But if the Seminoles in Florida and Oklahoma are fine with it, I've got no problem.

PS - by the way, Wattree's complaints about Smiley and West have mostly been classless diatribes, smears and ugly depictions, character assassination and guilt by association, not an argument about the validity of their statements.

Sorry Trope, but the image is deeply offensive and objectively racist. It's a cross between a couple of historical black caricatures, namely the pickaninny and golliwog. Look 'em up. Not cool.

 

seriously? because he has a bone in his mouth and has dog sounds around him it is the same as those images?  please. 

 

Sure, it Obama was the dog in that picture going after Hillary, no one would have called it racist.  you are so beyond full of shit.

It would depend on context.  If Obama was a VP candidate and playng the role of attack dog as it is well understood as the VP's role, than folks like me would not have had a problem.  As you notice Hillary is not shown as a dog.  Bill at the time was being her attack dog, so the imagery works within the context of the reality.  Of course, there would have called any depiction of Obama as a dog, whether with a positive or negative intent, as a racist, but one can also find someone to call something as reverse-racism as well.  My point is not based on what might be able to find on some blog comment or said on a talk radio call in, but on what should be agreed upon as to how we talk about depiction of public figures, black white et al, as animals.

dang duplicate comment

dang triplicate comment (the dag system must have seen it as a sentiment that really needed to be expressed :p )

I agree, seems racist to me. What I find amusing is how easily you can tell with this picture yet when 2 white guys throw nuts at a black women and say, "This is how we feed the animals." you get all confused. dijamo posted, "Was the person intending to be racist and call black people animals or just the media animals?  Who knows?" And you too peracles.

http://dagblog.com/link/black-cnn-staffer-taunted-nuts-rnc-14606

There's no difference - was Wattree being intentional racist or unintentionally? Dunno, but we complained, deal is done.

Did the *ACTIONS* of the guys at the Convention come across racist and demeaning? Yes, pretty easy to interpret it that way. Do we know they *INTENDED* to? No. They might have been doing that with everyone, they might have been clueless. But they were thrown out of the convention - pretty appropriate response.

Even the law works that way - it punishes actions even without intent, though the penalties may be more severe if we can prove intent.

Is the distinction so tough?

Just a few posts from this thread and the "feed the animals thread" by you. Inconsistent much?

It's important to stand up against ugly in this world.

I just noticed the picture that Dijamo objected to, and said, "wow, that's a racist piece of crap". Not "unflattering" or simply humorous - completely over-the-top, dehumanizing.

"feed the animals" is just insulting juvenile fratboy humor.

Yes, there are typical slanders, subtexted comments about welfare or subsidies are often racist, comments about "boy", etc. "Animals" however is not the sole realm of the racist.

 

I said over and over again that with the way conservatives think of the press, I can easily think of a context where "feed the animals" referred more to the media zoo/animals in the press as looking at the woman's complexion.

I didn't say that an animal comment or tossing peanuts made the behavior acceptable.

Because the reporter's black, racist connotations should be taken more seriously, but that doesn't mean I can conclude what was in the 2 idiots' brains.

So I can't be sure whether it was racist or unacceptably frat boy/rightwing freak - I'm not their shrink - but they got thrown out, which was the acceptable solution. 

 

Well the picture is perceived by me as racist because it's unquestionably intending to dehumanize him as a rabid angry black dog.  I experienced the photo myself directly and I can't imagine an alternate explanation that was not intended to be racist.  Apparently neither can Wattree who won't try to defend it.

In the case of the circus animal incident which was not caught on camera, I wasn't there, didn't experience it.  Could someone have thrown peanuts at a white media camera person saying the animals intending to insult the media?  Well, sure.  Would they also have been thrown out maybe.  Not knowing the context, I do put credibility in the people that directly witnessed it.  Also the perpetrators of the act if they had not intended it to be racist would have likely come out and publicly apologized if they did not intend their actions to be perceived that way. 

I find this picture issue more similar to the NY post wild chimp stimulus cartoon where people were clamping for the artist to be fired.  (including our own dear Trope who can't see any racist imagery in Wattree's Cornel west image, but if Obama was portrayed as such would be horrified by the racism).  The chimp in the cartoon wasn't  Obama.  There were multiple other interpretations that were not racist, but everyone was so outraged the paper had to put out an apology.  My personal experience of that cartoon was not that it was racist.  I understand other people may have thought it was, but it was not indisputable.

Wattree's Cornel West hack job is indisputably and intentionally racist.  But you know, black on black racism is okay so long as you don't agree with the person.  So west is a subhuman wild rabid black dog. Black republicans are uncle toms, or house niggers, or Oreos and this is cool.  But let someone more liberal than Obama call him those names, and people would be up in arms about black on black racists.  It's simple for me:  this is either wrong (it is) or it's not.  Which is why no matter how much I disagree with Obama or condi rice or herm Cain or Clarence Thomas, I don't use racist language or imagery to demean them. 

As a reminder of the guys at the convention, their comments were cited as proof that all Republicans at the convention were racist, and that it was incumbent on Republicans to out the perpetrators, shame them, and each politician denounce racism publicly.

It was also contended that all delegates and alternates to the convention were well-connected public personalities, not just local hacks that got one of the fairly meaningless delegate slots (the phrase "you embarrased me in front of 4400 of my closest friends" comes to mind.

Wasn't the problem at the RNC the result of peanuts being thrown, a physical act?

 

Well of course all republicans own the racism because all they did was kick the people out rather than publicly identifying them.  Just like all democrats are responsible for the NYC democratic delegate who said on camera she wished to kill Romney.  Obama himself and all democrats own those comments. She wasn't even kicked out, though the secret service paid her a visit.  And the GOP painstakingly verifies the credentials and the viewpoints of every person present at the convention.  Which is why the Dems had so many protestors infiltrate the convention.  The stupid, it burns.

lOh come on, the GOP suffers from self-inflicted wounds when it comes to racial issues. They are working to actively suppress votes in minority communities. Romney's views about Democrats voting for Obama because they are dependent on government is a common belief . A recent poll asking why blacks choose Democrats over Republicans gave the following Oh come on, the GOP suffers from self-inflicted wounds when it comes to racial issues. They are working to actively suppress votes in minority communities. Romney's views about Democrats voting for Obama because they are dependent on government is a common belief . A recent poll asking why blacks choose Democrats over Republicans gave the following answers.

 

A new Post poll put the difference between the two parties’ perception of minority voters on stark display. Respondents were asked an open-ended question: Why do most black voters so consistently support Democrats?

Though “don’t know” was the top answer for members of both parties, a close second among Republicans was that black voters are dependent on government or seeking a government handout. Democrats more often said that their party addresses issues of poverty

There have been episodes like the "You Lie" shout during the SOTU speech and Governor Brewer's finger wagging to produce the image of a bigoted GOP. The birther nonsense adds to the image. These are not dog whistles, they are bull horns. Chris Mathews, for example,  hears the horns loud and clear.

The Democrats could act like the grownups in the room - criticizing  what's absurd while avoiding hysterical overreaction.

I'm sitting here watching "Gandhi", and there he seems to advocate proper behavior and morals no matter what the other side does. Oddly, I thought this was obvious 30 years ago when I first saw the film.

You are watching "Gandhi". Please look at the picture of Black voters huddled at a Pennsylvania DOT office trying to get photo IDs that are acceptable to those in charge of the state's voter suppression program and tell me about Gandhi.

President Barack Obama was called a liar during the SOTU speech. He remained calm when a bigoted Arizona Governor shook her finger in his face. Tell me about being the adult in the room.

At least put some thought into a post. Your  statement is absurd.

 

 

As Dan noted, 3 years of real black unemployment checks don't count for outrage, only some affront that might keep Obama from being re-elected. #Fail.

Bringing up "liar" or a finger shaken in his face as petty little grievances? #TooPathetic4Words

(How many times did Gandhi get bashed with sticks or get thrown in rough jails? Would he whine about some shaking a finger at him? Absurd.)

The finger wagging and liar comment addressed the act like an adult portion of your post. You keep fighting the good fight here on the blogs while watching Gandhi and giving advice. While you wait for West and Smiley to actually accomplish something, others are actually doing things like attacking voter suppression and getting more Progressives elected. I'll leave it to others to complain on blogs or voting for Romney.

Wattree is fighting the good fight against abuses at the Post Office, not just blogging about two scam artists.

Dijamo,

You're seeing what you've been programmed to see.  I don't see racism here, and you wouldn't either if you didn't automatically associate West's being Black as animalistic. What I see here is a junkyard dog who's been trained to snap at Obama.  Now, explain to me exactly what YOU see, and how YOU relate what you see to Cornel West being Black. It should be very educational.

Buddy, please stop. I don't care if you could argue that your picture isn't racist. It's not the right way, and you have better morals than this. You don't need to ask Dijamo what to see - you were raised better.

I don't mean don't criticize - just find your right groove.

Peracles,

 

Who are you to determine my morals, and what's "the right way?"  You seem to be setting yourself up on a pretty lofty perch. You know absolutely NOTHING about my morals, and even if you did, who are you to determine whether or not they pass muster? 

You're right - calling black lecturers Uncle Toms and traitors, and demeaning them as rabid dogs with sick photos just might be your style. Mea culpa.

Well since you are so proud of being an attack dog against West and Smile, why not substitute your own picture for Cornel West?  Since its not racist or dehumanizing and you relish your attack dog role, you should have no problem with it.

Dijama,

I wouldn't have any problem with that at all. In fact, if you could arange to send me an image of my face embedded in that of a bulldog I'd use it as my internet icon. It would be appropriate in so many ways. One, I'm a former Marine and the bulldog is our mascot - I have a tattoo of one on my right arm. So yes, I would love that, because that's exactly how I see myself - as an old marine, on bullshit patrol.  

Thanks for the idea.

Why do you need to merge your pic with a bulldog picture?  Just throw a bone in your photo and you are a dog, just like you did to Cornel West's photo.

So Romney's "The Devil"? Yeah right, how about Antichrist and Lord of the Flies as long as you're going for over-the-top imagery. Vote Mitt is a vote for Baal.

Baal's numbers are down this week too--I had been wondering why, but now it makes perfect sense....

and Beelzebub is facing some difficulty in sustaining his slim lead in his congressional district.

This was a double post.

Wattree's post was bound to generate controversy. Fine.

It needn't have generated the exchange of insults that accompanied the controvery.

An independent voter , just arrived from Mars, who read this thread what have thought- I want to know what Party these people belong to . So I can be sure to avoid joining it.

 

Latest Comments