Calm Over Calamity

Something you might not know for BHM

noreply@blogger.com (CAB) — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 08:51:00 +0000

Garrett Augustus Morgan
Inventor

Garret A. Morgan was an African-American inventor (1877-1963) who known mostly for two inventions: an affordable gas mask and a traffic signal. A son of slaves and a native Kentuckian, Morgan's inventions made a big difference for not only America but the world in his time, helping the U.S. win WWI with his cheap and effective gas masks, and his traffic signal was used from 1923 up until the automatic red, yellow, green lights became all the rage. And he did this with a formal education that didn't surpass elementary school. There's much more about him at places like about.com, so check him out and happy Black History Month! Hopefully I'll be less lazy and get you more short bios!

Part of Why I'm so late

noreply@blogger.com (CAB) — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 05:58:00 +0000

I know, I know. I'm late with the posting. It's largely due to two things.
1. I do not have a job, so I have to spend my energy and time looking for one.

2. I don't get as mad about things as I used to, so now I have to try to think up things to type about. It's much more difficult than it was even weeks ago. Hmmm...

Either way, let me get on with the show...

Recently, I've been watching off and on (like whenever I am eating or right before sleep) Kino no Tabi (Kino's Journey) and it's short at 13 episodes, but it's super-fan-tabuloso! The main character is a child that travels through different countries, picking up all kinds of experiences and learning lots about people and life in general. Kino at times borders on flatness, helped out by an entire episode devoted to Kino's upbringing and reasons for traveling around the world. Even with that, though Kino no Tabi is quite interesting and a very nice way to wrap up a day I think.

What's more boring than a debate? A debate with celebrity cut-aways!

noreply@blogger.com (CAB) — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 03:02:00 +0000

Well, it's been a while for blogging for me. I tried to get a job -- to no avail, but that'll come a bit later. For now, let's talk politics!

Well, for the Democratic Party, it was an exciting night last night as the two Democratic candidates apparently of any worth (sorry Mike Gravel) left in the race had a debate sure to be full of conflict and fire and passion and...WHAT??!?

Smiles? Jokes? They were even acting nice to each other? Where is the anger? Where are the skeletons in the closet?

Obama attacked a Republican?! Wow, he really IS a Democrat after all...

Really, this was how the blogs have been handling what was a pretty pedestrian, lackluster debate. People on the news as well said it was substantive and very nuanced, when I saw talking point after talking point. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't think two people sticking stubbornly to the same points they've had for months should be thought of as nuance. But, who cares what I think? In any case, it's always good to hear candidates tell the GOP that we fight back against their smears, so good on them for that.

Now to polls, which pollster.com provides very handily.

While I plan to give you an overlook at the state-by-state Super Tuesday polls tomorrow when I am not doing three things at once, here's a quick look using a chart that shows states that took polls within the new year and who in the Democratic primary is leading who, and same for the Republicans.

Now, since the picture placement function is giving me fits, here's a lowdown if it's too hard to notice...these are all 08 polls, state without 08 polls are excluded from the chart. The dots show on which candidate's side the poll of a certain week fell upon and the red line is the median of all the 08 polls for the state in terms of margin. Those markings on the right are Clinton-leading states, those on the left are Obama-leading states.

Obama is as of this week, out of these recently polled states, only apparently leading in Alabama, Colorado, Georgia and his home state of Illinois, leaving Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Utah, New York, Missouri, Tennessee, New Jersey, Arizona, California, Minnesota and Connecticut in Clinton country as of now. After he won South Carolina, Obama's bounce may be quickly scanned over by looking at the most recent polls, those with the darkest dots, and comparing them with the earlier polls, especially those of the week before. Not scientific but I think it can be a simplistic and yet helpful indicator nonetheless.

And now the two top Republican candidates, Romney and McCain. McCain on the right, Romney on the left. Here conventional wisdom says it's McCain with the bounce after winning South Carolina and then winning Florida.

Obviously a few ideas come up.

1) Obama's bounce doesn't make the race THAT much closer. He still has a lot of hard, hard, HARD work from tonight until Tuesday, as he is down big in California, New Jersey, Tennessee, New York, and Massachusetts. Tennessee, if the poll is accurate, actually rejected his bounce from South Carolina so the nomination may still be Hillary's to lose.

2) Romney has, if I were to draw out an arbitrary number, 10% chance of not getting his ass handed to him on Tuesday. I know, I know, he has tens of millions he can dump into a campaign at a given moment, but his brand is so tarnished right now that it seems his ads aren't working, his campaigning won't help, and the media is still notorious behind McCain to the point that I don't see why a reasonable person would think Mitt Romney will be on the ticket in the general election unless McCain feels he really needs to try to get the Mormon voters in droves and nominates Romney as VP. Won't happen though, mark that one down.

Another thing I thought of, though, caught me a bit by surprise.

3) Would an Obama/Clinton ticket work? I like to frequent the blogs of other black political junkies, especially Too Sense and Jack and Jill Politics, and it seems on J&J, the word is bloggers of color that were behind Obama when the race-baiting began are not planning to vote Hillary. I was unsettled by this because I think the Republicans represent something much worse than Hillary Clinton in terms not only of the policy issues, but also in terms of the precedent Republicans would continue if they were able to win on fearmongering, and the use of the "liberal" tag once more. I think beating the Republican nominee in John McCain who they think is the most electable with the Democrat they hate would be a good thing for beating back the neocon spin machine and is worthwhile. The argument against black liberals voting for her is that her campaign race-baited Obama, which I see as true btw, and that she is therefore completely undeserving of black votes. It's a catch-22 for me, and I wonder what your thoughts are.

So I think it's Hillary-McCain and Hillary has a good shot at winning if she has someone who can bring wit, ferocity and yet a good, clean face to the ticket. Her attack style is, at least in this primary, often too much, too relentless, too ferocious, and it turns off people. Having a more humorous, somewhat gentler sort of attack that is still consistent, would work in her favor, to me lending a VP opportunity to someone like Joe Biden.

McCain might want someone who may actually help him on economic issues, so I see an opening for Huckabee, though I don't know if it'll work out very well in terms of getting out the vote. I'm just saying it's hard to talk straight talk when you're number 2 is completely batshit insane. That's all I'm saying.

Little note: Did anyone see all the celebrities CNN kept cutting to? That, to me, was the proof I needed to know the debate was bullshit. That means that CNN was willing to allow many, many bouts of prolonged clapping to justify cutting to celebrities, wouldn't you think? Here let me try...

Now try to concentrate while reading the rest...mwahahahaha!

PERSONAL:
Speaking of people trying to land a job, I've been looking at a whole host of employment opportunities (stupid business speak is all I know from 9, er 10-5) and have turned up jack in terms of actual job offers. Maybe you can help. I have a couple places where I interviewed (supposedly did well) but have gotten no job offers in a couple weeks. I contacted the hiring manager last week and was told a proposal to hire me was sent to the Exec. Director, so now a week after that email no offer. What should be my strategy on this? Forget about it, pursue aggressively...? I'm confused and a bit worried, but meh. That's all I can think of for now.

Pick Up the Pieces, Sen. Clinton

noreply@blogger.com (CAB) — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:09:00 +0000

While I am thoroughly displeased with the lack of leadership from each of the last three major Democratic candidates in the Presidential race, one thing that keeps me coming back is my disdain for the Clinton campaign tactics in the current primary and my even greater disdain for the willful ignorance of the so-called progressive blogosphere and the mainstream press to these tactics.

Much have been made of the Andrew Cuomo "shuck and jive" comments, the Shaheen "drug use/dealer" comments, Bob 'Booty-Shake' Johnson's "he was doing SOMETHING in the neighborhood" comments, etc. That was one thing, in fact, it is their entire primary strategy and among whites, it works.

It's something else to hear people either say it's Obama's fault for having to defend his race against slander, or that it's okay because it's politics.

Not only is that something Democrats were supposed to be against (weren't we against this when Harold Ford Jr. ran for Senate?) but it's a desperate attack line that cuts against Democratic theme and populist message. Instead of empowering the lower economic classes and the dispossessed of America, we're demeaning some of that group and dividing them politically.

As Democrats, we need a large coalition of voters, and to slander part of the base so nastily and repeatedly is politically and morally disheartening. When the Clintons get some sense and realize this race is less about them winning some game and more about empowering the American people to make a choice about their future, then maybe they'll earn these lost voters back.

I implore the Democratic Party leadership (if there be such an entity) to do what it can to head off this madness lest they hurt themselves down ticket and let the Republican agenda they hate rule the land again.

Discussion: A Letter to Senator Obama

noreply@blogger.com (CAB) — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 06:09:00 +0000

Well, folks, a little update then onto business. Burger Chef Friday went well in Madison, though I was not near a computer. I had Charley's actually, but some White Castle was brought home so plenty o' burgers went around. Twas tasty.

Saturday was not so fun, for I wanted Senator Obama to win the Nevada caucuses, and he lost big, 51-45, though you wouldn't know it from looking at his website graphic:
So, now, after having read comments on Senator Obama's recent remarks about Pres. Reagan, which I'll display later, I'm starting to wonder where being an aggressive progressive fits into his rhetoric. I counted on the Senator returning to talking about progressive issues after Iowa so that he could show he would fight for the underserved and unnoticed against the powerwielders in American society. It has seemed otherwise, however.

When Senator Obama had a chance to talk about transformational politics, he mentioned former President Reagan and the quote made for some easy pickings by other campaigns:

I don't want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what's different are the times...I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. I think they felt like with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think people, he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.

That was enough to send the Edwards and Clinton campaign into gear slamming the Senator for saluting Ronald Reagan, yes REPUBLICAN bane of liberalism Ronald Reagan, without mentioning any of the bad policies, and there were many, that President Reagan enacted, nor how then-Governor Reagan won the Presidency in 1980 in dirty and divisive ways. I must say that I am personally conflicted. This episode combined with the loss in Nevada has worried me about his candidacy and campaign greatly.

So, this is an open letter to the junior US Senator from Illinois.

--------------------------------------------------------

Dear Senator Barack Obama,

Let me start by saying I appreciate the history of what you're trying to do, and I know it has already had a huge impact on black young men like myself and others and will continue to. I hope you win, and so understand that this is not out of hate, but love, my brother.

HOW THE HELL DO YOU INTEND TO WIN THIS THING?!

I sincerely worry that your greatest strength, your excellent communication skills, have been grounded down in part because of some gaffes along the trail and in part because of rival campaigns successfully baiting your campaign into exchanges that overall hurt your appeal. I KNOW you've been caught up in this media creation of "Barack the Uniter" and it's nice to talk about, but goddammit Negro, get your ass in the game!

You know politics is dirty, you said so yourself; get your helmet on and start hitting Clinton and Edwards around! It's not wrong to attack someone; it's called drawing contrasts, it's called fighting for a better future! What are you waiting for? Also, when are you going to seriously attack the far right and their loony toon behavior or value systems? Is the far right and their warmongering, corporate profiteering, overtly theocratic, anti-intellectual, fact-hating agenda impenetrable?

I thought that you were the person able to fight for progressive values by winning the election with Republicans on your side, our side, and then working with more political capital for OUR values, like civic equality, progressive taxation, fairer trade, anti-war foreign policy, and a return to reason in government -- when you praise people like Ronald Reagan, I know what you mean, but you give Republicans ample praise for batshit, crazy-ass ideas and your rival Democrats fodder to blow your ass up with. You make people who do listen for the liberal dog-whistle upset and pondering the reason they support your candidacy.

Do you want people to doubt you? If so, please continue to say running the bureaucracy eludes you, even as you intend to be the top bureaucrat in the public sector. Please say you want to build a fence over and over and tell Latino audiences, just so they KNOW not to vote Obama. Please make sure to run away from race and racist tactics, run far far away each and every time anyone ever gets close to implying you were a drug dealer or makes light of your name because it's different or they call you the "hip black friend". These are the tactics of a well-spoken, shuckin' and jivin', second place black candidate, just where Hillary Rodham Clinton and the centre-right DLC want you to be. If this be your lot in life, to be the "almost..." black candidate, then step aside for me to take the reins in a few decades so that someone with a bit of smarts, wits and balls can take over.

Sincerely,

CAB

Feel free to explain how dumb and naive I am. Maybe then I'll understand how Sen. Obama got into this situation.

Some things for your amusement

noreply@blogger.com (CAB) — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 01:34:00 +0000

It's a boring Thursday today. I had that interview yesterday (it went AWESOME, thanks for asking) and today was just a lay-around day, really. I don't know what else to do but wait for the job offer and tie up loose ends like check my books, cancel any subscriptions I may have forgotten about, get in touch with contacts, etc.

In the state news, Governor Rod Blagojevich tried to smooth over the fact that he was raising the sales tax by pushing through the IL legislature free transit rides for seniors. Low? Yes, but that's the Rod we voted for. Good for Illinois...

Nationally, it seems DoD officials may be setting us up either to be supremely disappointed or on our way out starting 2009. I wish our candidates were in Congress asking the Department about this, but if "ifs and buts" were candy and nuts...

Sucks that the "success" in Iraq is at best debatable...

Do not forget that:

The surge was always, in a sense, a gamble for time, a pacification program directed at the "home front" in the President's Global War on Terror as well as at Iraq itself. And if this is what you mean by "success" in Iraq, Bush has indeed succeeded admirably. As in the Vietnam era, when President Richard Nixon began "Vietnamizing" that war, a reduction of American casualties has had the effect of turning media attention elsewhere.

So, I'm left to ponder why we're still there, (IT'S THE MONEY, STUPID!) and to, without a hint of irony, turn my attention elsewhere.

On the campaign trail...

*Bob "Booty-Shake" Johnson has apologized for "inappropriate comments" he made about Senator and presidential candidate Barack Obama. It's odd to me that, since Mr. Johnson said he was only referring to Senator Obama's community organizing experience and not his past substance abuse, ole Booty-Shake would want to apologize and call such comments "inappropriate". Oh and plausible deniability is awesome when it is even linked to a person campaigning on your behalf, isn't it Senator Clinton?

*In MD-04, progressive challenger Donna Edwards (whose campaign I have donated to) has garnered the endorsement of EMILY'S List, a group that supports pro-choice women in local, statewide and national elections. Great stuff, since Al Wynn LOVES corporate power, and as a part of the Energy and Commerce Committee has been in the pockets of corporate lobbyists.

As Matt Stoller of Open Left noted, he's openly throwing his corruption in the voters' face. Time for a change, people, and local groups like EMILY'S List have gotten on board. Good for them.

To the right is a picture from Open Left of an invite to a fundraiser for Wynn with the telecoms celebrating his record. Now maybe he's somehow really progressive on telecom issues and yet they love him, but the cynic in me thinks it's possible he's really just another stodgy, corrupt pol that needs to be ousted yesterday.

Lastly, I am going up north to check out some vacant rooms and possibly sign a lease so I can move post haste. Wish me luck and patience.

Why Interviews Are Not Fun at This Age

noreply@blogger.com (CAB) — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 06:04:00 +0000

Okay, so I'm 20, and I'm interviewing for a job in nearby Chicago tomorrow, or later today, depending on when I get this entry posted.

I'm thinkin' blue shirt, grey slacks, ballroom shoes, grey sports jacket as a suit. What do you think?

I know one should be able to know what sort of candidate they're getting and that looks are important to that, but I really wish I could just apply through phone interviews and emails and online applications. Then I could relax and let them make their decisions without having me get on the El or anything like that.

In other news, Slime wins out in Michigan! Yah!

In serious news, Bush wants Congressional complicity in arming, er FURTHER arming Saudi Arabia. Boo.

So, basically life sucks, everyone.

Ideas welcome! 1st ShoutOut Monday!

noreply@blogger.com (CAB) — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 22:40:00 +0000

As you may be able to see, I just started this blog up and I have yet to seriously delve into any design ideas or thematic ideas, just shooting off the top of my head when I get the spark. Any ideas as to how it could or should look or what I should talk about, are totally welcome. Maybe this could be something I do on Mondays, just give me ideas! I call it ShoutOut Mondays!

Image courtesy s2art over at Flickr

Be afraid.

Oh so now human rights are cool?

noreply@blogger.com (CAB) — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:41:00 +0000

President Bush apparently thinks human rights are cool again. Hoorah.

"You cannot expect people to believe in the promise of a better future when they are jailed for peacefully petitioning their government," Bush said. "And you cannot stand up a modern, confident nation when you do not allow people to voice their legitimate criticisms."

How true. I'm just glad we don't have any overseas prisons, we don't torture or anything like that. Cause that'd suck, big time, right, Decider?

Image courtesy whitehouse.org

King, Cosby, and the debate on race: Where are we headed?

noreply@blogger.com (CAB) — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 04:50:00 +0000

This is video of an interview (in two parts) with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Judge J. Waites Waring, a South Carolina judge who was against segregation before Brown v. Board of Ed. for a 1957 show called "The Open Mind".

Pt. 1 - The Open Mind, "The New Negro"

Pt. 2 - The Open Mind, "The New Negro"

Now this was a snapshot, imperfect as it is, at the debate on American race relations a couple years after Jackie's debut and Brown v. Board and Montgomery and a few years before the Freedom Rides and the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom and what has in popular verbage become known simply as "the civil rights movement".

Watching this interview reminded me of something about today's argument at least amongst other brothers and sisters and even with white brothers and sisters, something struck my mind. Let's see if I'm onto something here.

Let's try to contrast that previous interview with today's look at race in America from another prominent and seriously taken black opinion on the topic. This was an interview between Tavis Smiley and Dr. Bill Cosby taken after Dr. Cosby's famous 'Pound Cake' speech
made in 2004 to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision by the Supreme Court. My thoughts after a few excerpts...

Cosby: The mistake I made was not in clarifying that I wasn't talking about 'all.' I think that unless it's later on, I think I said prior to this, the 50% dropout. I think I said that prior to this, '50% dropout in school.' Very, very important, because with that, that means 50% of our African American males, from grade 9 through 12, in certain parts of the city, have no education.

Now I'm also listening to what is a new language, and it's a new language in the area, and it's only good for the people you come in contact living in that area. It's no good on Wall Street. It's no good at Temple University. It's no good filing and understanding an employment waiver or blank.

What I'm saying here, and the mistake I made was... In saying that there are people who are striving and working in the lower economic area, the people who are not holding up their end is quite obvious to me. And that happens to be those people who don't have a clue in terms of what education, learning standard English, math, and graduating from school, what that has for them in terms of empowerment. Many of them, after they drop out, they have to turn around and come all the way back in again. That's not bad for those who want to drop out and come back in again, but we want--I want more voices in the home challenging the child to not just stay in school, 'cause I've always been against saying to children, 'stay in school'. I've always wanted to add 'study' because that's a part of it.

I don't think that there's a greater high... I challenge any high--heroin, marijuana, booze or anything--that if you know your stuff and you go into an exam knowing that you know it, there's no better high. There's no better high than sitting down and then opening the booklet and reading your first question and saying to yourself, 'Who made up this question? This person didn't-- You know, I'm ready to go.' There's no greater high than walking out after the exam and saying, 'How did you answer?' Or being the second or third person out of there.

So, I think that we have not given our children a true picture of our history and that's when I-- I mean, to look at those people, Brown vs. the Board, and then to think about Kenneth Clark and Mamie Clark, deceased, sitting someplace in New York, and Kenneth is a friend of ours, and Kenneth in the last 5 or 6 years would just say, 'What's going on? What's going on?' And he's speaking specifically about these people who are changing the language, who are not studying, who--go ahead.
----------------------Later in the interview--------------------
Cosby: You understand? I have a feeling of pain when I hear and watch the 6:00 news, and I hear about somebody holding up a place and being shot, somebody calling a pizza man and then shooting and killing the person and then running away. I have a feeling about a child jumping double-dutch and some people arguing over drug--over turf, and they shoot and can't hit each other and kill a child double-dutching.

How many times--and you ask this same person who's criticizing these fellows--how many times have they heard what I've said? And the reason why these whatever it is, is upset, talkin' about, 'hubba-dubba-dubba,' he doesn't even understand what that was about.

These are 5 guys, 5, African American boys who look nothing like what would be acceptable to teach people that it's what's in here. You understand? With [Fat] Albert, you can't get a character more out of sync coming through the sixties and into the seventies than a fat person. And here's a guy who could play, and he is intelligent, and he has a heart. So these anti-heroes are doing something. 50% dropout--and I'm not saying all of the 50% are gonna be thugs and criminals, but we've missed the parenting. We've missed putting them in a position where they have to do what we say. This is not about 'hubba-dubba-dubba-dubba.' [Fat] Albert and those boys had parents--who parented.
-------------------------------------------------------
Cosby: No, if you have a son and you get a phone call and your son is shot by the police--and you say, 'Oh,' and then you say, 'Well, what was it?' 'Well, the cop said he stole a--' The first thing that you're gonna say is, 'He didn't do it,' which means you hope that your child didn't do it.

But I'm saying with the parenting, this force of a child continuing to go out and take something and not realize the value of this. The value of a stolen Coca-Cola bottle is a dead human being. That's the value. The value of a child carrying a gun into a school is the value of 2 lives. One--the person that he may kill, and then his life or her life in prison. And I'm saying that there are parents--there are some parents who don't know what subjects their child is supposed to be taking in school. They don't know what grade the child got. And not only that, but they don't even know if the child had an exam.
----------------------------------------------------
Cosby: It was the white man who got the word from somebody who was there, who called the white man, who put it in the white paper, which is called the Washington Post. And from that, they left out Mr. Cosby saying 50%. They left out the part about fathering, and they certainly left out 'We've got to take back the neighborhood and the responsibility--take it back.' Then they added something that I think was incorrect, that the people came out stone-faced, stunned. I don't think they were. And I heard the audience a couple of times saying, 'yes,' people applauding.

Responsibility? No, a pain. I'm really in pain. And I want it stopped. I want people to get together, and I want people to take their neighborhood back. Hey, man, you know, to be--I've traveled around all the different cities, and to turn on the TV or the news at 5:00, and I read that some child, 12-year-old, shot. Whether it's Dayton, Ohio; Wilberforce, Ohio; Pennsylvania, Mississippi. And for me, it's painful. That's a life gone. And then when they catch the person that did it, that's another life gone. Where are we? Who are we? 50% dropout in school. 60 to 70% of our incarcerated are illiterate.
----------------------------------
Tavis: Let me ask you about, back to this notion of Cornel's point that you have done this in the spirit of love and that you have earned the right to criticize or to check or to say whatever you want to say in the best interests of black people. Take me back right quick to your growing up, to your childhood. Talk to me about your mother, Anna Cosby. And I ask that because people--you mentioned earlier, I didn't say it--you're a millionaire. You're a multimillionaire. You got your own plane--by the way, how's Camille doing?

Cosby: She's doing just fine.

Tavis: Camille's the name of the plane. You got your own plane. You go where you wanna go. But you weren't born, though, with a silver spoon in your mouth. Your mama worked 2 or 3 jobs--

Cosby: It wasn't even stainless steel.

Tavis: Ha ha. OK, you weren't born with a stainless steel spoon in your mouth. Your mama worked 2 or 3 jobs. Your daddy was an alcoholic, didn't bring home his paychecks. Your mama read you the Bible, she read you the classics. I think that people look at you now and if they call it classist or elitist, maybe they are not aware of the background. But tell me about how you got so passionate about this.

Cosby: I don't have to--to really show these people anything.

Tavis: But how'd you get so passionate?

Cosby: No, no, wait, wait. I have an attitude--not towards you. No, no, not towards you. My attitude is here, is who I am.

I am saying to the people, 'Hey, man, the bridge is out. The bridge is out.' You can drive over there. You can get angry with me if you want to. A friend of mine said--I was sitting with a diabetic friend of mine, and this cat has got to take a shot or else he'll go blblblblbl--like that. So the cat sat down and he ordered a Coca-Cola. And I said, 'Hey, man, what are you doing with a Coca-Cola?' The guy said, 'What you want me--' I said, 'OK, man.' You can go ahead and get mad at me, but you're not gonna get mad at the Coca-Cola. I'm not the one sending--you understand?

Whether I deserve to, whether I have the right to, I'm saying that I see many things. I see those people who did Brown vs. the Board of Education in the room to make whatever it was--separate but equal or to equal, or to show the children--Ken Clark and his wife with the dolls to show that children felt inferior, too. I'm looking at Nashville and the march where people are trying to sit at a counter, and we say, OK, all of that was done for...this! And then here it is--50% dropout. You can't just blame white people for this, man. You can't. Whether I'm right-wing or left, some people are not parenting.

Tavis: But there are a lot of folk who say that, because Cosby said it, the right wing is gonna take it and use it as ammunition--

Cosby: I don't give me a blank about those right-wing white people! They can't do any more to us than they've already started with. They can't try to throw us back any farther than they've tried to throw us back. And they're doing a very good job of it.

But by the same token, for God's sake, turn around and let's have some meetings and say, 'Brother, um, let me explain to you. You're the father of so-forth and so-on. Brother, you gotta rein them in, man. You gotta go talk to 'em.' 'Oh, what do I do, man? I got a son, he won't listen to me, but--' 'Well, hey, brother, that's your son.'
--------------------------------------------
Cosby: Ladies and gentlemen, do me a favor. Talk to each other. Talk to each other. I have too many positive stories also. When I said, 'Take your neighborhood back,' this can happen. You have to get out and talk to each other. And you have to realize what is good and what is not good and who's tweaking your children to buy things.

I mean, when girls are beating up other girls because the other girls were virgins, when boys are attacking other boys because the boys are studying and they say, 'You're acting white.' Well, I got news for ya, a guy told me that there were some white kids who attacked other white kids because they were studying and they said, 'You're acting Asian.' So it's a disease all around.

To be honest, I do not see a problem with saying that we in the black community as a whole need to stand up for ourselves and our future. I don't oppose a strong push for much greater levels of participation in the lives of our children, I think it's a critical step toward getting other young black men and women ready for the challenges that face them in the world. The responsibilities of black parents, hell any parents, in the lives of their children is crucial. That fact cannot be forgotten. My sense is that Cosby feels parenting is the strongest force for social change in America, for good or ill. I get the feeling he thinks that by having strong parental forces that guide youngsters to obey the rules and ordinances and laws and customs of American society, we'll be able to better integrate into that society, a Washingtonian point of view. I see the merits of a parenting focus, but...

Cosby talks for one about how he made it despite his father's alcoholism and lack of financial supports as a young person of color in America, and he asserts here that he doesn't have to prove anything to us. The problem I thought of when I saw the Dr. King interview was that Cosby's position in terms of race relations was to focus SOLELY on black responsibility. It wasn't just a plea for some individual blacks to stay with their kids and guide them, as a personal responsibility argument would go. This was a community-wide charge for us all as blacks to take up the mantle of protectors of black youth and maximize their educational attainment.

This is all well and good except that a societal appeal to my ears seems lacking in terms of trying to bridge the racial gap, if we do not even acknowledge, as Dr. King and Judge Waring did in the clips above, the need to directly confront the evils of white supremacy in the same breath that we acknowledge our need to confront our own demons in terms of deadbeat fathers, ever-growing tendencies toward violence, and an alarming anti-intellectualism that threatens to limit black opportunities for future occupational and personal aspirations severely.

The point in the contrast to me is that in the clips above, there is more complete honesty in terms of talking about the social environment in which many people of color live instead of heaping criticism on one side or the other. While the interviews happened in different times, and the actions of Dr. King likely had an effect on the debate Dr. Cosby was engaged in, there is little doubt in my mind that the underlying problem of racial inequality Dr. Cosby was addressing and still does since 2004 and before that even is still not too much altered since the 1960s.

This is not apologetic for malfeasance but rather mindful of the need to demand that those in the bully pulpit more equitably discuss the issues at hand so that we may actually attack the sources and symptoms of such malfeasance. I do not think we really alter the racist system if we do not challenge those in charge of it but instead ONLY ourselves. What do you think?

Burger Chef Friday! And Race vs. Sex? Come on...

noreply@blogger.com (CAB) — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:53:00 +0000

For all those who are or aren't (more likely the latter) reading this, hi ya and welcome to Calm Over Calamity. My name's Colin, and C.A.B. are my initials. Hmmm...where to go from here? Ah!

Today's Friday, or as it should be known, Burger Chef Fridays! Fridays are the best days of the week cause you get that nervous, "It's almost time" sort of feeling, either because you're going to do something on Friday, see a movie, go to a restaurant, or if you're like me, you're going to watch the 24 hr news stations, just to try to catch a weird story that made the news, like the horse that got stuck in the mud, or the latest Britney story, or even more depressing...how quickly the Democratic Primary itself got stuck in the mud. Hillary's tears were fake and calculated to win New Hampshire, implies Obama co-chair Jesse Jackson, Jr. And Clinton supporter Andrew Cuomo says the candidates can't "shuck and jive" to win voters over.

Overload! Overload!

This is too much idiocy for one person to take.

Someone help me with this...

I'm struggling right now to calm the restive anger I have over the apparent divisions between race activists and feminists, in the current campaign, where Clinton supporters have been routinely sniping at Sen. Obama, many times using racial coding like the shuck and jive comment, and Obama staffers have pilloried Sen. Clinton's campaign on non-substantive issues, questioning her tears as the latest issue.

While I am an Obama guy nominally, I get weird shivers and not in the good way when I see people engage in identity politics, not just because it's divisive, but because for a young, emotion-driven person like myself with a stake in such politics, it's a bit alluring. It's like trying to stay on the light side of the Force. I know that the movement to get a progressive president means we have to stay together, but part of me, like the Gollum to my Smeagol, tells me that it's "time" for America, after 43 white presidents to have one (1) non-white president. One more like me and less like Bush. It's a thought I regret when I think on it later, when people of grayer hairs and longer term chastise me for it.

As I think about the "issues", though the differences between the candidates on these are largely superficial, I even start to see myself leaning Edwards, not because he has my views on every issue, but on the issue of HOW he will run a general election campaign, I get more faith from him that we will have an assertive candidate, not a naive one, nor a desperately low one.

It seems to always be then, when I feel like leaving my support for Obama on the doorstep of his glass house, that he seems to get into a stone-throwing match with Hillary Clinton, as though he's trying to get Hillary to get on him about his race so that he can rally black support. Now I don't seriously believe Senator Obama or Senator Clinton are trying to dupe me and other voters to engage in identity warfare with other progressives I should be fighting alongside, but my question is WHY? Why in a Democratic primary are two frontrunners for the highest office in the land starting to foment the seeds for sex/race division? It's a narrow-minded strategy; wouldn't the very nature of such a dirty contest undercut the messages they're trying to deliver to the American people, that they have the best "judgment"?

NOTE: There was an interesting op-ed on the 8th by Gloria Steinem about sex and race, and well, you take a look:

Gender is probably the most restricting force in American life, whether the question is who must be in the kitchen or who could be in the White House.

I wonder how one could qualify this statement...

Black men were given the vote a half-century before women of any race were allowed to mark a ballot, and generally have ascended to positions of power, from the military to the boardroom, before any women (with the possible exception of obedient family members in the latter).

Ah ha. That's right. Once they got the right to vote, those former rebels and slaveowners were just jumping for joy at the opportunity to let blacks vote.

Sigh. Burgers on the house.