dagblog - Comments for "Tavis Smiley, Cornel West, and Boyce Watkins: The Treacherous Trio"

Check out Asamota's Corner. I

Daniel Asamota — Sat, 04 Aug 2012 02:22:38 +0000

In reply to Tavis Smiley, Cornel West, and Boyce Watkins: The Treacherous Trio

Check out Asamota's Corner. I have a lot to say about these traitors.

Okay, here's one answer to

Peter Schwartz — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 21:15:16 +0000

In reply to The guy says, "I want my

Okay, here's one answer to his issues:

http://www.epi.org/publication/webfeatures_snapshots_20081205/

"The motor vehicle and parts industry, a sector of the economy that has been particularly welcoming to African Americans, is becoming a shrinking island of prosperity. The share of black workers (14.2%) in automotive industries is much higher than their overall share of the labor force (11.2%), as shown in this Figure.

"African Americans earn much higher wages in auto industry jobs than in other parts of the economy, and the loss of these solid, middle-class jobs would be a devastating blow. Hourly wages for African Americans in the motor vehicle industry averaged $17.08 (excluding fringe benefits) in 2007, versus economy-wide average wages for African American of $15.44 per hour.^2"

Doesn't this count as answering at least some of his issues? Last I heard, Mitt wanted Detroit to fail? Or does this not count because Obama hasn't solved the problem of black unemployment and incarceration in his three years in office?

He may think he's sticking it to Obama by withholding his vote, but really he's sticking it to himself and the people he cares about. If he wants to push Obama to do more, then he needs Obama in office. If he'd prefer to push Romney, then...

I have to say: Sawyer's

Peter Schwartz — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:26:13 +0000

In reply to Where Mark Sawyer says We

I have to say: Sawyer's article is VERY good and thoughtful and clarified a number of things for me.

In essence, everyone has a role to play in the movement, but it makes no sense for X to criticize Y for not playing X's role, nor vice versa.

And it makes even less sense, and is in fact harmful, for X to impugn Y's motives or integrity (unless, I guess, there's clear evidence of this kind of treachery or duplicity) or attempt to actively harm Y.

A number of things popped out for me, but especially this:

A better tact would have been to address the strongest aspects of West's argument and offered a critique of his best positions rather than his worst positions.

If we're honest, we dispense with the easy problems quickly and move on to address the other side's best points. How else to move forward?

After all, it's not as if we're fooling anyone when we simply ignore the other side's best points. The audience is reading them and nodding their heads.

So the best points of opposition stand un-addressed and we look superficially partisan, just hacks trying to bring down people with whom we disagree.

..........I would like very

rmrd0000 — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 04:14:20 +0000

In reply to I would like very much ethnic

..........I would like very much ethnic and racial diversity on television.............

Fine, we have Melissa Harris-Perry on MSNBC. She gets to set her own agenda, not yours. If it gets good ratings, she stays. If she doesn't get good ratings, she leaves. There are a number of show hosts that I don't watch because I find them distasteful, it eases may gastric discomfort. Or you can write to MSNBC and cite your reasons for objecting to Harris-Perry having a show. You might also try the other MSNBC programs.

I have seen Melissa Harris-Perry live and she does address the issues you note above

The guy says, "I want my

Qnonymous — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 03:34:18 +0000

In reply to I think it's more that

The guy says, "I want my issues answered." Your answer? Literally, that MATH says you cannot have those answers.

Do you not understand how idiotic responses like the one you've offered, coming again and again from Democrats, will turn people, one by one by one, away from the party?

I give up. This blog literally calls a man a traitor for asking that his issues be answered. And you, rather than respond to this absolutely uncivil, undemocratic, smear-ridden piece of idiocy, actually try to back him up, with an appeal to... math.

Here. I know you guys have frozen your brains til after November, but believe me, it would have been better had you responded, "Here's what we've done on your issues Mr Watkins, here's what's more we plan to do, and hey, here are a few of the things you've mentioned that we think are worth considering."

I would like very much ethnic

HSG — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 02:15:27 +0000

In reply to rmrd0000 - is there a reason

I would like very much ethnic and racial diversity on television. I would like even more class diversity. I don't believe that MHP speaks for the disenfranchised, the poor, or working Americans or, to the extent that she does, she doesn't do it loudly enough. For all his bombast and affectations, I believe Cornel West does. I did not see the specific segment when MHP brought up the record number of brown people Obama has deported but I have heard other "liberal" commentators quote this statistic approvingly as proof that Obama is not the radical socialist RWNJs call him. Perhaps, MHP was criticizing Obama and, if so, I retract that criticism. Her lovefest with Michael Steele did not endear her further to me.

Sigh.... I gave you the

rmrd0000 — Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:41:24 +0000

In reply to rmrd0000 - is there a reason

Sigh.... I gave you the example of Harris-Perry noting the high deportation rate under Obama, you rejected that as not being a criticism. I don't know what else I can do for you. Harris-Perry does not criticize Obama at every turn the way you would like. She has a different view than you. She has a earned a TV show. You have a right to complain or not to watch. Rating will decide if her show stays on.

Blacks and Democrats, in general, are not going to be going on the type of tirades against Obama that you want. The majority of self-identified Democrats are satisfied with Obama. The majority of Blacks are satisfied with Obama. Some Progressives are dissatisfied with how the majority of Democrats and Blacks are in synch with the President.

Over at DailyKos last year there was a near purge of minority voices who disagreed with the tone being used against Obama at the website. Disagreements exist.

Yeah, but all of those

tmccarthy0 — Tue, 28 Feb 2012 15:51:34 +0000

In reply to rmrd0000 - is there a reason

Yeah, but all of those "arguments" you give are just your opinion Hal, nothing more than that, you don't think Harris Perry should have a platform with which to support the administration, even though she may or may not do much more than that, (I don't know I haven't seen her show).

But MSNBC doesn't care so much about what she does with her platform, but they do care about how she attracts a much different demographic, one that cable TV shock-jock stations have never really tried to attract prior to the President being elected. And that is what Harris Perry is, she is expanding the demographics of MSNBC, a station that is finally attempting to address it very white and male line up.

You have to admit these cable stations are very white and very male. MSNBC is attempting to expand their slice of viewership by adding diversity to their line up. Notice that Ms. Harris Perry is on the weekend, I mean, that can't be a great time slot to be in can it?

But MSNBC doesn't have a responsibility to take your criticism into account, because the line up is already overwhelmingly white and male and libertarian (you can't explain the existence of Dylan Rattigan, Ed Schultz and Joe Scarborough any other way). I think stations like MSNBC have already catered to you, (by you I mean your demographic as a white guy). They are simply trying to attract more people by diversifying their line up. That is a good thing, isn't it.

rmrd0000 - is there a reason

HSG — Tue, 28 Feb 2012 15:18:09 +0000

In reply to Harris-Perry serves to

rmrd0000 - is there a reason that you refuse to respond to my two very simple (and powerful IMHO) arguments that MHP should not have a show? 1) MHP repeatedly takes up the cudgel for Obama regardless of who's disparaging him and why - even in cases when the disparagement, in my view, is wholly warranted. 2) Rather than responding directly to the substance of the varied criticisms leveled against Obama, she attacks the critics personally.

Harris-Perry serves to

rmrd0000 — Tue, 28 Feb 2012 14:36:06 +0000

In reply to Of course we're not

Harris-Perry serves to highlight some differences between black and white Progressives and does question motives. She ignites a needed discussion. Let's take the recent suspension of Roland Martin from CNN. Martin's suspension followed homophobic tweets made during the Super Bowl. Pressure came to suspend Martin from CNN. Martin also hosts a program on TV One and appears daily on the "Tom Joyner Morning Show", a radio show. Both TV One and the TJM radio show are targeted to Black audiences. Why was CNN the only focus in getting Martin off the air? Do white Progressives feel that the black audience is unimportant?

If Martin expressed homophobia, why not have him completely off the air. The overall sense is that black Progressives have a feel for what goes on in white media, but white Progressives are blind to the things happening in black media. In that setting feeling that Harris-Perry did not earn her right to a show on MSNBC seems a little out of focus, given how few black voices exist on the airwaves.

80% of black voters in Ohio voted for Kerry. 20% of black voters who may have been swayed by Bush's Christian Outreach Project and the campaign against gay marriage voted for Bush. Blacks get part of the blame for Kerry's defeat. 80% voted for the Democrat and blacks are partially responsible for Kerry's loss?

We are not post racial. Motives get questioned in the case of Gingrich, Santorum, Paul, etc. Motives of white Progressives also get questioned. That is why the Progressive love-fest with Ron Paul is all part of the mix.

White Progressives do not get to decide if Harris-Perry gets a show.

I think one thing that can be accomplished given the format of the MSNBC weekend show is that she can have a serious discussion about homophobia in the black community, for example.

Recently, Eddie Long a preacher with a large following was found to have abused some young men (allegedly). His church recently sat in the pews as he was crowned a "King". While there has been criticism heaped on Pastor Long from lay people, much of the black clergy has been silent. The preachers have been too busy in Maryland trying to stop Gay marriage.

I think that Harris-Perry is far more capable of having a "come to Jesus" discussion about Gay issues than Cornel West ever could. That is just one example of the benefit we could see from Prof Harris-Perry's show.