It is with tremendous sadness that we must convey
the news that Steve Gilliard, editor and publisher of The News Blog,
passed away June 2, 2007. He was 42.
To those who have come to trust
The News Blog and its insightful, brash and unapologetic editorial
tone, we have Steve to thank from the bottom of our hearts. Steve helped
lead many discussions that mattered to all of us, and he tackled subjects
and interest categories where others feared to tread.
Please keep Steve's friends and family in your
thoughts and prayers.
Steve meant so much to us.
We will miss him terribly.
photo by lindsay beyerstein
blksista: "The Shame of America"
Thanks to blksista for this great cross-post - THANK YOU!
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) estimated there were 754,000 homeless people in 2005, including those living in shelters, transitional housing and on the street. That's about 300,000 more people than available beds in shelters and transitional housing.
Of course, HUD admitted that they undercounted in 2000. That report, from the last year of the Clinton Administration, showed only 171,700 homeless. The Urban Institute, in 1996, used Census tabulations to find that there were between 600,000 to 840,000 homeless Americans.
Among the findings for people in shelters and transitional housing:
Nearly half were single adult men.
Nearly a quarter were minors.
Less than 2 percent were older than 65.
About 59 percent were members of minority groups.
About 45 percent were black.
About a quarter had a disability, though experts said the percentage is probably much higher.
Add to this that many of these homeless are addicts and/or are mentally ill. But these people could be assisted and redeemed, if local, state and Federal governments truly exercised the will to solve this continuing problem.
Emergency shelters are more than 90 percent full on average nights, said a recent report sponsored by the Urban Institute. Overcrowding would occur were it not for seasonal shelters (especially during this crazy winter) taking up the slack. By comparison, homeless families occupy less than three-quarters of transitional housing.
I would not be surprised that of the disabled, many may be veterans, veterans of the first Gulf War waged by Bush senior. No doubt, if patterns continue, their number will swell with junior Bush's war on vets: long on platitudes about supporting the troops, but way short on continuing benefits, physical and mental health care.
If minors are on the street, they are a part of families headed by single mothers. The number of homeless families are said to be markedly higher in rural areas than in cities. If not, they are children who have been kicked out of their homes because they are gay or 'unmanageable.'
But get this. The number arrived at doesn't even touch those still homeless from the ravages of Hurricane Katrina, which two years ago displaced another 750,000 people. There is no true accounting of how adequately the survivors are housed, in or immediately outside of New Orleans or outside the state of Louisiana. While there have been published stories of individuals and families being placed in favorable circumstances, many thousands have not been as lucky.
Worse, those who are already homeless in other cities and towns have to compete for services with those who are trying to recover from the disaster. This is something I witnessed when the Oakland Hills brushfires displaced many upper- and middle-class residents in the late 1980s. Interestingly, the residents refused to call themselves homeless, yet certainly availed themselves of generous short-term benefits from the city fathers and other charities before the insurance money kicked in. Meanwhile, scores of other homeless people were dramatically shortchanged, and wondered why they couldn't have the same assistance and concern for their plight.
Alphonso Jackson of HUD is still keeping out the bulk of New Orleanians who want to move back into their homes, while proposing to demolish the four largest projects. Meanwhile, those lucky enough to have a FEMA trailer or a car to live in are getting smacked by tornadoes before they can move back into new homes.
One notorious Katrina homeless camp in Baker, Louisiana, just outside Baton Rouge, Renaissance Village, could classify as a 21st century Hooverville. Dozens of underage children are still roving about unsupervised, truant or unregistered in local schools. Some parents use older children to safeguard what belongings and food remain, or to take care of younger siblings while the adults work.
It has been a very difficult year for these people. Their relocation to Renaissance Village has not been easy. Getting the children enrolled and attending school has been difficult. The number of teenagers not going to school is alarming. The school district appears overwhelmed and ill prepared to deal with these children from New Orleans. Two therapists from our team spent a separate week working hard to enroll the children and dealing with some of the difficulties involved. The day care center, teen center and Head Start facilities donated by RFAK over eight months ago are still not opened due to construction delays and the complexities of working with governmental entities. There are no computers for the people to access their e-mail or to do research. The bus service has been severely reduced. The food service closed. So many of these people have lost everything and lack the means, strength and skills to rebuild their lives and many of them are reluctant to accept the help that is offered through agencies . Their mental health needs are overwhelming. This displaced population has been traumatized. As reported by the New York Times: "Among children fourth grade and beyond, affected by the storm, 49 percent met the threshold for mental health clinical referrals." This is a generational problem that is not being treated. The Red Cross and members of the community report that our team of art therapists and volunteers has offered the most consistent and effective mental health services for the families of Renaissance Village. Yet we work there only every other month and have no future trips planned.
The RFAK website has not been updated since November, 2006. Must be that the Rosie-Trump feud that gets better headlines.
LowerManhattanite: "Okay! It Happened! Get Over It! Uh . . . Not."
Somewhere In Hell, I Pray It’s Goin’ Down Like This
MAJOR THANKS to the incomparable LOWERMANHATTANITE for this kickass piece - THANKS LM!
“History is like herpes”, a professor once told me. “It just keeps coming back, reminding us of the initial contact and infuriating us every time it does. But son-of-a-bitch, it’s real. And if you don’t take care of it, and deal with it…well, you know the rest.”
In our relatively young country—by historical standards—we’ve come a long way, from trading pelts and trinkets for beaver overrun, Northeastern islands, to becoming the lone “mega-ultra-super-but-in-spite-of-all-that, f*cking-it-all-up” power in the world. And we’ve managed to compress a lot of history in our brief time millennially. We’ve squeezed in ten or so Goddamned wars, including one for independence—and excluding one involving a preciously described “peculiar institution” of ours. I exclude that “peculiar institution” driven one today, because that one, is our great national wound—and the maddeningly named “peculiar institution”—oh, f*ck it—Slavery Goddammit, is such a festering boil unto itself that it requires analysis beyond the war it fueled in large part.
The Rev. Al Sharpton has come to discover in recent days that in tracing his family’s lineage back a little, his antecedents may well have been—and it’s ugly even typing these words—chattel property of the slave-holding family of noted 20th century bigot, segregationist, and venerated Dixiecrat/GOP senator Strom Thurmond.
“And?”, say the usual punk-*ssed apologists and soft-core hate-mongers on the right. “Big whoop”, they whine. “It happened. Can you let it go? I mean, jeez! What dusky killjoys you people are! How are we supposed to move on and rag you n*ggers with “news-speak” language while slobbering over Beyoncé’s thighs if you keep harshing our myopic mellow with this bullsh*t?”
Well my little instaf*ckwits, cornerites and fellow travelers down that flaming cross-lined road to racial utopia, it ain’t quite that simple. You see, it would be easy as all hell to trot out the “it’s a Black thang, you wouldn’t understand” meme, but—sh*t. You know what? It’s actually apt for this, so yeah—“It is a Black thang, and too many of you really wouldn’t and quite honestly don’t wanna understand.” So lemme break it down. I don’t know Reverend Al—contrary to what many White folks may believe about how we all have each other’s e-mail addys—but I have a pretty good idea that finding out this ugly little bit of family history brought on a few sleepless nights for the permed, progressive preacher. You see, it’s a helluva thing for Black folks born here who have antecedents who were slaves. Our American history is a nasty one. “We didn’t land on Plymouth Rock…Plymouth Rock landed on us”. I remember my 8th grade History class, which as luck would have it coincided with the first showing of “Roots” on television. My teacher, Dear Mr. G______ thought it would be cool to assign a class project of having us kids attempt to trace our history back towards our own “Roots”, if you will. It was a two-week long project spanning the week of ‘Roots’ broadcast, and the week thereafter. God bless Mr. G______, the man meant well, but the project was doomed to be a pigf*ck from jump. You see, when time came to present the assignments—replete with illustrated family trees, a brutal truth became apparent. The White kids in class were able to present large, multi-branched and dense-leaved sequoias of lineage, going back in some cases to the 1800s, with indications of residence and occupation as supporting information. The Black kids for the most part brought the equivalent of small, barren azaleas to the party. Missing and incomplete branches. Stunted roots as it were, for once we hit the blood, sweat and tear-stained wall of slavery in the research, the trail often went cold. I remember the collective pall that came over the class as it became evident that the project had gone down two very different paths for the two groups of students. It was depressing as f*ck. Kid after kid went up there with a mixture of shame and sadness in their delivery, as they sought to explain the odd, yet obviously minimal presentations they were able to mount. Once you got to great-grandparents, (and for those of us with older parents--grand-parents) the trails often grew cold, and there was little description of familial anecdotes and detail like occupations and migration with reasoning. The discomfort in the class was palpable, and it was only a couple of kids after my lame-*ss, brief and apologetic presentation that Mr. G prematurely ended the oral reports, opting to just collect the projects and grade them. He somberly apologized—for not “giving some of you as much time as you probably needed to do this project properly”, he said. But us Black kids understood what he meant. He regretted putting us in a f*cked up position like that where we’d discover—harshly, what damage slavery had wrought.
What damage slavery had wrought. Black folks don’t think about it every day. We work. We plod along through life like everybody. Pay the bills, Fret about the kids. But slavery is a stealthy mother-f*cker. It creeps up on you when you least expect it. You hear folks discuss their lineage in great detail and your mind cannot help but wander to where your lineage effectively wisps out into a vapor trail. And that point doesn’t take much of a journey to get to. You realize your American history is different from the revered and regaled ones of people you know. And different in an ugly, mean way that an outsider—a not-Black person can never really understand. It depresses you. If your life is hard, it can make you feel less American than a lot of folks. Sh*t, if your life is easy and people get too giddy about the depth of detail about Great-Great-Grams Mimsy and Durwood and their horse-drawn move from Ol’ Virginny to Sandusky in “ought four”, you often can’t help but feel a bit of second-class citizenship in the face of that. Your American experience is not pretty, charming or romantic. It’s truncated and abrupt. Not a tree, but a weed. A dandelion. A dandelion long ago blown upon, with its bits scattered the million different places the wind blows.
And when you do manage to break through that wall, if you’re of means and have the wherewithal to gather those historical dandelion scatterings to form a whole thing again, the odds are you’ll stumble onto a slap in the f*cking face like Rev. Al’s getting now. “Pyow! Right in the kisser!” It’s a helluva thing. You go through life and make your way, trying to succeed, pushing the thoughts of your history to the backmost part of your mind, because let’s face it—dwelling on your folks having been slaves is a bitch—and then, once you do dig around a bit, you hit a flaming gas pocket of America’s overt racist past like this. And it burns. Burns you right to the core. In Rev. Al’s case, the lineage going back to the Ol’, Ol’, Oldest of Ol’ Strom’s plantation is a true kick in the gut, but is ironic and instructive in a way. You get the mantra of “Hey! I got nothin’ to do with what happened then, so lighten up!” from those who would minimize slavery’s damage.. But the sad reality is that just like the roly-poly Rev didn’t have to scratch history too deep to find Ol’ Strom grinnin’ there with a whip, the odds are a lotta White folks wouldn’t have to scan too hard before finding a relative who benefited from slavery’s enforcement. It’s our collective wound, people. The historical nail bomb that’s pockmarked us all.. Beyond the issues of reparations, mules and acreage, we have to acknowledge the way slavery has bifurcated this country—beyond blue n’ gray, north and south, but yes, you’ve got it--to Black and White, while linking us all the same. And yes, I mean beyond the superficial, “get beyond it”, mock-dealing with it, people.
It’s there. It’s real. And in your face every day like the headlines that jump out at you from the newsstand, i.e.”Sharpton Descended From Slaves Owned By Thurmond Family”
It would appear, that irony is far from dead. And sadly, neither is slavery’s legacy.
Twelve-year-old Deamonte Driver died of a toothache Sunday.
A routine, $80 tooth extraction might have saved him.
If his mother had been insured.
If his family had not lost its Medicaid.
If Medicaid dentists weren't so hard to find.
If his mother hadn't been focused on getting a dentist for his brother, who had six rotted teeth.
By the time Deamonte's own aching tooth got any attention, the bacteria from the abscess had spread to his brain, doctors said. After two operations and more than six weeks of hospital care, the Prince George's County boy died.
Deamonte's death and the ultimate cost of his care, which could total more than $250,000, underscore an often-overlooked concern in the debate over universal health coverage: dental care.
Some poor children have no dental coverage at all. Others travel three hours to find a dentist willing to take Medicaid patients and accept the incumbent paperwork. And some, including Deamonte's brother, get in for a tooth cleaning but have trouble securing an oral surgeon to fix deeper problems.
In spite of efforts to change the system, fewer than one in three children in Maryland's Medicaid program received any dental service at all in 2005, the latest year for which figures are available from the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
The figures were worse elsewhere in the region. In the District, 29.3 percent got treatment, and in Virginia, 24.3 percent were treated, although all three jurisdictions say they have done a better job reaching children in recent years. "I certainly hope the state agencies responsible for making sure these children have dental care take note so that Deamonte didn't die in vain," said Laurie Norris, a lawyer for the Baltimore-based Public Justice Center who tried to help the Driver family. "They know there is a problem, and they have not devoted adequate resources to solving it."
Maryland officials emphasize that the delivery of basic care has improved greatly since 1997, when the state instituted a managed care program, and in 1998, when legislation that provided more money and set standards for access to dental care for poor children was enacted.
I’d quote the whole article, but that would run afoul of fair use stuff. Go read the whole thing.
This is an economic justice story with elements of race. As ever, race and class are all tied up together in America. Can you imagine this story written about some white kid in Bethesda, instead of Prince George’s County? No? Neither could I.
There are new things happening in African American culture and politics mistrustful of old line, established political groups, insiders, but it’s not happening online to the same degree the progressive netroots is organizing online.
These groups could become very powerful allies, but offline bridge building has to take place. Netroots progressives need to be able to tie matters of economic equality not just to concepts like the middle class squeeze and income disparity, but right back to color.
With the right wing’s racism so nakedly on display more and more, that shouldn’t be hard, but it would make a lot of heads in DC explode. I like Jim Webb. He speaks compellingly about working people, but he doesn’t speak that way about race or the racism of the right wing. That would make Mudcat Saunders’ head explode, not to mention James Carville and the Clinton gang that punked Ned Lamont after seeing him onstage with Sharpton the night he won the Connecticut primary.
It’s the same thing with immigration, the war on brown people in America, and for my writing on the subject at FDL, I always tie the right wing’s immigrant bashing back to its racism. I hope more writers online will start watching what Tavis Smiley and others are doing offline. If we can build trust and work together, we can accomplish a helluva lot.
Chris Keane for The New York Times Tom Joyner, shown at a “Sky Show” in Greensboro, N.C., in November, is the host of the nation’s largest black-oriented radio program, which is broadcast daily in 120 markets.
HAMPTON, Va., Feb. 11 — At a gathering here Saturday of roughly 10,000 people who came for a conversation concerning the problems confronting blacks, Tom Joyner, the conference co-host, told the audience he had been “ready to be angry” as he took a tour about the Jamestown settlement nearby and thought of slave ships. What he experienced instead, he said, was not anger but something akin to his feelings about mainstream media coverage of blacks: a story certainly not from a black perspective.
“We’ve got to stop going to other people to get what we need,” Mr. Joyner told the predominantly black audience, here for “State of the Black Union,” an annual event, held this year at Hampton University in conjunction with the 400th anniversary celebration of the establishment of the first permanent English colony at Jamestown.
For the past 13 years, Mr. Joyner has been the host of “The Tom Joyner Morning Show,” which is dedicated to offering what he thinks blacks need: an unfiltered conversation about black life and black issues from a black perspective. Far less known outside African-American communities than other radio talk-show hosts like Rush Limbaugh or Howard Stern, Mr. Joyner has an estimated eight million listeners in a given week in the roughly 120 markets where his show is syndicated, making it the nation’s largest black-oriented radio show.
Representative Jesse L. Jackson Jr., Democrat of Illinois, said that black radio was “probably the most central vehicle for communicating with the masses of African-Americans.” And within that niche, he continued, Mr. Joyner’s show is “the pre-eminent vehicle.”
Unlike Mr. Stern or Mr. Limbaugh, Mr. Joyner does not aspire to shock his audience or to hammer home a partisan position. In Mr. Joyner’s town square on the radio five mornings a week (with a recap on Saturdays offering highlights of the week’s shows), the conversation ranges from speculation about the White House to jokes about Whitney Houston. His guest list in the last year has included former President Bill Clinton; the actors Will Smith and Jamie Foxx; Senator Barack Obama of Illinois; the singers Lionel Richie and Aretha Franklin; the comedian Bill Cosby; the scholars Cornel West and Henry Louis Gates Jr.; Representative Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker; and Bishop T. D. Jakes, the televangelist.
Mr. Joyner’s show blends such interviews with radio staples like news, sweepstakes and comedy. There’s a “cash call contest” and a humorous soap opera called “It’s Your World,” about a fictional, prosperous all-black town. The four-hour show also includes news analysis with Jacque Reid and celebrity news with Jawn Murray. Mr. Joyner’s site, BlackAmericaWeb.com, includes news, surveys and games.
As Martin Luther King’s Birthday approached last month, Mr. Joyner and his crew — which includes Sybil Wilkes, a newscaster, and the comedians J. Anthony Brown, “Ms. Dupre” and Myra J., who delivers tongue-in-cheek tips to single moms — joked on the air that listeners should remember to wish their white colleagues a happy holiday.
Mr. Joyner has had his share of setbacks, of course. He has failed to make a go of it in either Los Angeles or New York, the biggest markets in radio. His comedy-variety television series, “The Tom Joyner Show,” which was syndicated in 2005 in more than 100 markets, including New York, lasted only one year; Mr. Joyner blamed production costs for its demise.
Some critics say Mr. Joyner’s emphasis on his core audience — mostly female, middle-aged and middle-class — has led him to neglect certain issues. “A lot of issues on the younger end don’t get touched,” Paul Porter, a founder of Industry Ears, a research group dedicated to promoting justice in the media, said of Mr. Joyner’s radio show. Mr. Porter said that Mr. Joyner had largely missed the debate over the misogyny and violence found in the lyrics of some rap music. “There are topics he can’t discuss because of the advertisers,” Mr. Porter speculated.
Still, some people believe that Mr. Joyner is poised for greater visibility. Donna Brazile, the Democratic political strategist, is among them. “He is the black version of Rush Limbaugh, but he’s a lot different,” she said, in a telephone interview. “Rush Limbaugh speaks only to conservatives, the true believers. Joyner crosses over all the lines in the black community.”
Mark Anthony Neal, a professor of black popular culture at Duke University and the director of the university’s Institute of Critical U.S. Studies, said: “I think you could make the argument that he’s the most important black man in black America. There are 32 million African-Americans and he reaches about one in four. He’s impacting people in their cultural quarters and in their everyday lives.”
When you discuss subjects like Obama, you wind up with a very different conversation in black radio than in the general media. One whites do not realize exists.
Joyner, is by far, the most popular media figure in black America, but is nearly invisible outside it. His power reaches even into areas where he isn't broadcast.
Joyner failed in NY because there was already strong local black radio, but that doesn't mean people are unaware of him. If you wanted a cross section of black thought, his show is a good place to get it.
While I find it amusing to have words and sentiments in my mouth, it's really tiresome
But before I say anything else, the idea that his "blackness" is under debate is amazingly silly. What people are debating is his fidelity to the issues and causes which have defined black America since 1954. Not his skin color. Or the silly cultural issues Debra Dickenson raised. It is a political argument. After all this is America, where anyone who looks black is black .
A: I have no particular view on Obama as a presidential candidate. I'm neutral.
B: No one man can trump the entire black political structure. If Cornell West is saying somthing you don't like, dismissing him on a personal basis is to be a fool. At this point in the campaign, he is far more highly regarded than Obama among most informed black voters. As is Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Both could doom his campaign among African Americans if they were to attack his positions and there is nothing white fans can do about it. You cannot ignore a half century of struggle because you like the new guy. Listening to their concerns is a wise political move.
I think, like most people, they are waiting to see what he will do and where he stands.
Showing contempt for them hurts Obama among black voters. Because it demonstrates the kind of whites who support him have no respect for blacks, their institutions, leaders or views.
C: What black voters want to know is will he protect their interests or will he seek to pacify them. Is he going to push policies which help African Americans, or continue the racial and economic problems we have now under the guise of colorblindness.
D: Obama himself has admitted he must earn the black vote on the merit of his positions. Because he hasn't earned it. He has not been part of the national black community. He is a relative unknown. While I have no idea what Hillary Clinton have done to gain such overwhelming support in black America, it is there and it is real.
E: What white supporters need to understand is that his appeal to white voters causes suspicion among black voters. The daily, open contempt they express for wildly popular figures like Sharpton and Jackson, despite their support for blacks facing police brutality and other issues like Katrina, makes their sudden embrace of Obama highly suspicious.
Those of us who were born black in the years just after World War II had front-row seats for the collapse of American apartheid. We started out confined to all-black communities and schools at a time when skin color was still destiny. But as segregation gave way, many of us were vaulted out of this sequestered world and into colleges, jobs and walks of life that had been closed to us pretty much since the nation’s founding.
The rush of upward mobility produced the inevitable identity crisis, which led in turn to endless discussions about the meaning of blackness in a world where skin color was beginning to matter less and less.
At their best, these discussions, held in college dorm rooms at night, were probing, serious and heartfelt. At their worst, they turned into lectures by the race police — ’60s-era ideologues who characterized blackness not as a matter of individual interpretation or choice, but as a narrow set of attitudes and experiences that were said to make up the authentic black identity.
Back then, black Americans who came from successful, suburban and upwardly mobile families were regularly dismissed as white or inauthentic. The authentic black experience, it was said at the time, was limited to the hard-core, impoverished upbringing that black people often chose to brag about, even when they had actually grown up with private prep schools in the lap of luxury.
The race police ran rampant in the black community itself, but were rarely heard in the white world. But they have been parading up and down Main Street since Senator Barack Obama of Illinois — the son of a black African father and a white American mother — made clear that he intended to seek the Democratic presidential nomination.
The arguments being raised about Mr. Obama’s blackness — or his lack of blackness — seem positively antique at a time when Americans are moving away from the view of ancestry as a central demographic fact and toward a view that dispenses with those traditional boundaries. Even so, the complaints about Mr. Obama provide an interesting opportunity to examine the passing of the old and the rise of the new.
First, he has no civil rights track record and got savaged at Tavis Smiley's state of the black nation for holding his announcement in Springfield to honor Lincoln, who was a racist who wanted to ship blacks back to Africa.
Second, he actually has to get the votes of white voters. They say nice things now, but the Bradley effect is still in play.
Third, he has to avoid the fate of Martin Luther King, Robert Kennedy and Malcolm X. It is no guarantee some racist won't try to kill him. I constantly pray that he survives his run. Because given America's track record, that is no lock.
By Michael Wilbon Friday, February 9, 2007; Page E01
Just as it would be a relief to arrive at the place in time when the color of the coaches in the Super Bowl matters not one bit, it would be fabulous to reach the day when a male athlete in a team sport doesn't have to worry about the reaction of declaring his homosexuality.
But that day isn't here just yet, as we found out this week now that John Amaechi has become the first former NBA player to publicly say he's gay. The reaction to Amaechi's announcement in advance of his soon-to-be-released autobiography, "Man in the Middle," is all over the place, from appropriate indifference to utterances that border on homophobic to, well, stock ignorance.
NBA Commissioner David Stern, in trying to make plain that a player's sexuality simply isn't important, said: "We have a very diverse league. The question at the NBA is always, 'Have you got game.' That's it, end of inquiry."
While we knew Stern's approach would be enlightened, the diversity of his league is reflected in the diversity of opinion we've been hearing from players throughout the NBA, from the sensible to the idiotic. For instance, the 76ers' Shavlik Randolph, who likes to throw his religious beliefs in everybody's face, is quoted as telling reporters, "As long as you don't bring your gayness on me, I'm fine." And Steven Hunter of the 76ers said: "As long as he don't make any advances toward me, I'm fine with it. As long as he came to play basketball like a man and conducted himself as a good person, I'd be fine with it."
So clearly, not everybody is in line with Stern's thinking, which is why it's so difficult for male athletes in team sports to say they're gay. No, Amaechi isn't the first such athlete to go public. In fact, he's the sixth professional male athlete from one of the four major U.S. team sports to openly discuss his homosexuality.
But they've all been former athletes, not active ones, which speaks to how difficult it is for men in team sports to deal with an issue essentially every other workplace in America deals with continuously. The fact that a great number of heterosexual male athletes actually believe they don't already share locker rooms and showers with gay teammates is laughable.
Black atheletes would drive an openly gay teammate out of the sport.
Wilbon acts like homosexuality is unpopular in only sports. It's unpopular in black culture. Any week of viewing Jerry Springer would show that. Where black men are called sick and disgusting for being gay. The now infamous Snickers ad had black athletes laughing in disgust as two men kissed.
Who the fuck is Wilbon trying to fool? Homophobia is as much a part of black male culture as sports. If you asked most black athletes how they would feel about being around gays, their answer would be little different than most black men. Which is: I don't want any faggots around me. Faggot, punk, cocksucker, queer are very commonly heard terms in black America, as is suck my dick.
We need to be honest. Athletes reflect the attitudes they are raised and surrounded with. And that is contempt for black gay men.
Of course, this has led to an explosion of AIDS in the black community. But why stop being ignorant when everyone else is.
Many young blacks believe they are treated as third-class citizens in the U.S., ignored by a government that considers them the lowest of the low, researchers said yesterday.
The most comprehensive survey of black youth for years has found a community that sees itself as ravaged by poverty, crime and poor education - and kept down by leaders who represent only white America.
The University of Chicago survey found 48% thought even new immigrants are treated with more respect than blacks are.
Their sense of marginalization is so strong that the overwhelming majority believes the government sidelined the struggle against AIDS because it affected more blacks that whites.
"The most disheartening thing about this is that these are young people who have this feeling of isolation and secondary status," said Cathy Cohen, who led the research.
"What shocked me was the matter-of-fact way that young people, in what's supposed to be the post-civil rights period, just expect that the government will not respond to their needs," she said.
The nationwide survey questioned 1,590 blacks, whites and Hispanics between 15 and 25.
African American conservatives have and continue to be ineffective in reaching the African American electorate for a number of reasons. Foremost, they can be found extoling ideas within the conservative canon concerning personal responsibility, a color blind society and equal opportunity with no regard for the actual realities of the landscape.
Some Black Conservative Talking Heads (BCTHs) such as Armstrong Williams, Larry Elder or Ward Connerly speak with such disdain about a certain segment of the African American populace or the entire African American populace without reference to themselves, without identifying with being African American or doing so tangentially such that the African American electorate defensively, after consideration and even instinctively disregard their positions and dialogue.
Black Conservative Talking Heads (BCTHs) sound like any other conservative. That being said, the African American electorate is heterogeneous and unique which renders the conservative ideology with regard to the African American community, the Pick Yourself Up By Your Bootstraps AddressTM wholly ineffectual and unproductive. When Tucker Carlson disingenuously argues that the Black Caucus is racist for not allowing the inclusion of a white member, he is mimicking the conservative radio talking heads and others employed to continue racist, zenophobic, treasonous, Nancy Pelosi is the antichrist dialogue that is the present staple propping President Uniter at 30%. When BCTHs come along with the same mimicry, it is no wonder that they are not regarded by the African American electorate.
When BCTHs address the ills of the African American community, they do so without addressing relevant causative factors as well as failing to propose solutions that factor in these extant, critical points. We refer to this as the Cosby Rant. It is intrinsic to the African American community as a whole that discussion of some of our poor, underperforming schools in our neighborhoods in terms of giving vouchers so that a few escape these schools instead of addressing the schools inadequacies is not supportive of the community. Any African American can see that affirmative action sometimes benefits affluent African Americans and that financial factors may need to be a new consideration. It is disingenuous to suggest that Black folk won't have a sense of pride because they went to school by affirmative action unless you give that student a 4.0 and not make him go to any classes.
BCTHs reality blindness and refusal to address the particular ills of the African American community furthers the cause of the progressive community by pushing the African American community away from them and toward us. Any conservative that cannot understand the advantage that my high school best friend, Murray, whose grandfather attended Vanderbilt while my Big Daddy didn't finish sixth grade, whose father attended Vanderbilt and got help from his Dad to get a small business loan when my father went to the Air Force to go to college while Murray went to Vanderbilt as a legacy and was employed by a fraternity brother of his father upon exiting college while I exited and sought employment(not to say that I am doing bad, I love who and where I am) does not want to see reality and will remain hopelessly lost. Many BCTHs fall in that category.
Ultimately BCTHs will continue to fail to bring the African American electorate to the Republican Party. The appeal for most of the minute African American conservative electorate is a religious one, values issues of abortion and gay rights. As more and more clergy and religious organizations and national bodies address the message of Jesus Christ and the conservative disregard of the poor of which Jesus championed as well as the selfish, politically motivated and tunnel visioned co-opting of religion by the Right, the "values" appeal will continue to wane in this electorate.
The Democratic Party needs to enlist vibrant, young and savvy African Americans to represent the party and its ideals to bring a new wave of voters to the 2008 election. We need individuals that can "take it to the streets", speak the vernacular and inform the African American youth, underrepresented and disadvantaged that the ideals of the party are the ideals of their families and the communities. We need to communicate that although they may feel a certain powerlessness insofar as a failed or poor educational opportunity (theirs, the system's or both), their failure to recognize their responsibility and poor choices already made and the lack of jobs and opportunities in the immediate and surrounding community, that if they want to begin to make a small difference toward their lives and their futures, register to vote and here is the registration form right here. The Democratic Party shoud employ a street brigade similar to the advance teams used to promote the release of rap albums or concert tours. The youth I engage are eager to skeptically ask a barrage of questions and listen; those who aren't felons and can register to vote are often surprised the process is so simple.
In the near future, the African American scholarly and engaged leadership, brothers like Michael Eric Dyson and Cornel West will have to engage the community on a wide scale as to the co-opting of African American megachurches by the Republican Party by those that receive faith based initiatives, misrepresent the realities of our community and or fail to address the unattended problems. This is not to say that those African American church clergy/leaders are disingenuous solely because they are Republican, receive faith based initiatives or champion the conservative ideal. Simply, there are those who have been co-opted just as there was Republicans asking parishioners to identify fellow church members and turn in church rolls to Republican party workers.
Finally, many refer to BCTHs as Uncle Toms or sellouts, that they have betrayed their community for power, career or financial advancement. I do not engage in such rhetoric finding it counterproductive and leading to the sidetracking of the conversation. Suffice it to say that if you are a member of the African American community and you are not addressing the causation of the ills of my community, then you do not represent my community. Leaders represent the community. They are informed, they walk among us and they reflect the anguish, the helplessness and the hope, the problems and the multitude of possibilities and solutions.
We need plain and honest discussion about Black folk. A caller to the C-Span morning show Washington Journal said "Blacks won't vote for Barack Obama." This wasn't the first time I had heard the idea that some African Americans have a self hate and distrust still embedded from a previous era. These are the conversations that must occur in earnest as we move toward casting the most important vote of my lifetime, the 2008 presidential race (congressional as well). A sneeze in the wrong direction and we will have engaged with Iran as the deluded continue to swill the kool-aid as their king, Vice President Cheney declares in interview after interview the fantasy of our herculean progress and sidesteps what he finds to be minutiae, the Iraq civil war a teensy bit of sectarian violence in the capital.
Every vote counts and it is the duty of African American Democrats to put to rest the idea of the neglect of the African American electorate by the Democratic National Party. In comparison with the neglect by the Republican Party of African Americans, the poor, middle America and everybody else except their corporate amours, we are talking pebbles to planets. The BCTHs are doing their part to insult the community, pitch the same BootstrapTM rhetoric, getting paid to champion the administration a la Armstrong Williams and sit up front at the Republican National Convention. If they keep this up and we do our part, the Democratic nominee may get 100% of the African American electorate votes cast and that electorate may swell in numbers as well.
Alicublog has this insane bullshit up from professional asshole James Lileks
NOT THAT HE'S APPROVING OF STEPIN FETCHIT -- WHY, THAT FELLOW WOULD MAKE AN AWFUL CLERK AT TARGET. Did you catch James Lileks' passionate defense of olde-style Negro servitude?
The Steward was one of those peculiar archetypes of American apartheid – along with the Porter and the Maid. Unlike the domestic servant, though, he contained no sass. Think Uncle Ben: big toothy smile, yassir. Domestic servants, however, were allowed a great deal of sass – listen to the old Great Gildersleeve shows, and you get a perfect picture of the popular idea of this idealized relationship. Gildy is henpecked and outdone by all his domestic associates, but the only person who comes across with any degree of pride or level-headedness is Birdie, the servant, and Gildy’s relationship to her is one of kindness and deference. You could say that’s easy: she didn’t count, so it was easy to be nice to her. But that’s wrong. There was a fundamental decency and mutual affection in their relationship. Yes, yes, idealized depiction of inherent inequalities, etc. As the argument no doubt goes, the shows perpetuated inequality by pretending they really didn’t exist. But it’s instructive to note what the popular culture held out as the ideal. Equality, not subjegation. Birdie was fully integrated into the family, and shared the same values. Nowadays I suspect a sitcom with a Black servant in a middle-class family would milk the clash of cultures, not the similarities. Wanda Sykes would star.
There's something missing here.... something... oh yeah -- the wounded, pre-emptive dismissal of accusations!
I am now bracing for the mail that accuses me of missing the days of Jim Crow. Whatever.
That's how the pro wingnuts do it, folks! Next up: why the passing from the scene of Joe Jitsu harmed our relations with China.
Hey Jim, what the fuck are you talking about? Some fantasy world created for TV? In the real world, black people could die for disrespecting their white patrons. Die.
All that smart backtalk you imagine happened was fiction. You forgot your place around white people, death could be the punishment.
Let's not forget when white bosses would compell sex their black maids, like Strom Thurmond. This image of happy servants is just bullshit, a sick fantasy.