Scrambling for a Story

I'm always talking about how President Obama does not give the political journalists enough controversy from week to week. Well, with all of the legislative battles taking place in Washington, it would have been hard to prove my theory earlier in the year.

However, turn to the political shows now. Take your pick. FOX, CNN, MSNBC has a plethora of them every afternoon. What are they talking about? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. The pundits keep trying to drum up controversy over what President Obama saide about Vick, but is that all they have? Really, that's all they have. President Obama is in Hawaii enjoying a shaved ice cream treat and keeping his briefings and other official dealings away from the prying eye of the public. That leaves the pundits with a ratings rotten egg.

So, whether you are coming from the Left or the Right, before you criticize the President on anything, turn down the volume on your television. Though I am a liberal-leaning Southern Democrat, even I have learned to turn down the yacking. Those shows exist to stir up controversy instead of representing the true views of most Americans, which are right in the middle. But, if you notice, reader, there's a reason why it's called the "boring middle...."It's bad for ratings.

Exactly How Many Political Pundit Shows Did We Have in the 1980s and 1990s?

For the life of me, I cannot name more than four politically-driven shows from the 1980s and early 1990s. Let's see, there was "Washington Week" on PBS, "Face the Nation" on CBS, "Meet the Press" on NBC, and "This Week" on ABC. That's it. Unless my memory fails me and there's more, but we only got politics on Sunday morning. One hour on each network. I knew who the president was in the 1980s, the iconic Ronald Reagan, but America did not see him on television every day. As the 1980s drew to a close and George Bush I became our president, we didn't see his face on television every day, either. Instead, we saw the REAL Gulf War, and we heard about it from real soldiers and saw the real sands of the desert instead of Saturday morning cartoons.
Then in 1992, a young president named Bill Clinton took office. He was every Republican's nightmare. They went on a crusade, following each and every scandal, trying to dig up something that would impeach him. In 1996, a new network, FOX news, sprang up and it followed these details, exclusively. It started a crusade against the "liberal news media," and claimed to be both fair and balanced. If offered conservative political pundits, people who questioned Clinton's sexual life as well as his domestic/foreign policies.
It did not take CNN long to also follow FOX. And for the first time in our nation's history, we saw the President on television every day. Every day was a new episode in the live-action soap opera that was the Clinton Whitehouse. From Hillary's horrendous outfits to the Monica Lewinsky scandal to the government shut-down, there was always something new. Every day.
Then, George Bush II came to office in 2000. Though MSNBC and FOX were roughly founded at the same time, MSNBC began to be a counterbalance to FOX in 2001 by publicly offering more progressive-leaning opinion shows and news. While FOX only offered glittering generalities of the Bush-Cheney Whitehouse, political pundits on MSNBC rose to fame by pointing out the deep flaws of Republican-driven, Reagan-inspired Bush-Cheney policies. And so, once again, we saw our president on television. Every day.
Then came the 2008 Presidential campaign. It was so exciting. So divisive. So filled with distrust and strife. It made for good news. Every day. I mean, I put in 20 hours per week or more between FOX, CNN, and MSNBC. After the election, I was thoroughly let down because I didn't have anything else on television to watch. Then Obama was elected. A cerebral candidate. One who views the chess board from a thousand different angles before he makes a move. One who does not give the press privy to his sharp political intellectualism. One who does not give the press a story. Every day.
After almost two decades of seeing our leaders on television. Every day. We have one who takes his time and refuses to feed into the 24/7 world of media division and political punditry. On the left and the right, we've gotten so accustomed to seeing our Presidents. Every day. That we call Obama's deliberateness a lack of leadership. Is it a lack of leadership, or a lack of a news story which angers us? Several times, on the Left and the Right, media outlets have written President Obama off, saying what he's going to do before he even has a meeting about what he's going to do. For instance, The Huffington Post ran a story saying that President Obama caved on tax cuts for the rich, and he wasn't even in the country and had not met with any of the negotiating parties involved.
Instead of seeing the war on television so that we can empathize with our soldiers, we see a bunch of political pundits talking about how there's a lack of leadership and confusing vision concerning the war. Instead of waiting on a word from the President, the media, on both sides, hangs onto every word even a Whitehouse staffer may say. There are times when I see them literally stretching the smallest details in order to drum up controversy and ratings.
Pundits on the left and the right should be thankful for Sarah Palin. Lord knows she says enough silly things to keep them taking, and that's why she receives so much political news on both sides: our current President is not giving FOX News any controversy by participating in any sexual affairs, and the Vice President is not giving MSNBC any news by shooting somebody in the face.

Do Republicans Want a Fedual Society?

I remember the William Blake class I took in pursuit of my Master's Degree. I took it for purely nostalgic purposes. As an undergraduate, I did most of my course work in British Literature. So, returning back to the Romantic Era was like going back to my intellectual home.
Well, Blake, at first, was extremely difficult to understand. And the professor assigned this one book, Reflection on a Revolution in France by an Edmund Burke. Reading it was like watching paint dry, and my eyes began to fill with tears of sheer boredom. Besides, I thought, we live in America, why in the Hell are we reading something a British Whig Party member wrote about the French Revolution?
Over the years, as American politics have gotten crazier and dumber, I've come to appreciate that boring book. I've come to see it, the very long letter to a colleague, as the foundation for conservative thought.
Harshly critical of Populist political movements and anti-intellectual in tone, this long letter seemingly, advocates a two-class society: the very rich who Lord over the very poor. And ironically, this long letter has everything to do with modern American conservative thought. There are many allusions to Burke's original philosophical thought. If Republicans accuse Obama of secretly conspiring to turn America into a Socialist society, all we have to do is listen very carefully to John Boehner and conclude that Republicans are secretly conspiring to turn America into a feudal society: a society in which the richest two percent control both wealth and political power.
I don't have to waste time here quoting the grim economic statistics that would support my theory. As a nation, we've been looking at and experiencing this for the past eight years. For people in lower economic classes, the American Dream seems further and further out of reach, even with extensive education. We know, as actually finishing graduate school looms closer and closer, that we will be faced with massive student loan debt, and will have to delay home-ownership, retirement savings, and childbirth for several years, yet. Thus, the birthrate continues to decline, and the average age for first-time mothers keeps rising.
As Republicans continue to cloak their secret agendas in the rhetoric of "small-business" talk, how long will we shut our eyes to their truth. They want a modern-day feudal society, whatever that may look like. I wonder if they'll want to practice Enclosure in a few years?
Reader pick up Burke, and get back to me with your thoughts.

Mississippi is not a real place

Earlier this week, I read something in the Huffington Post about the poorest states in the nation. Not surprisingly, the poorest states were all red states, and mostly Southern. No argument there. The numbers don't lie, and of course, Mississippi is the poorest. It is not the reddest state in the South, the numbers show from the last presidential election that it was more Democratic-leaning than Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas. But, like its neighbors, Mississippi does have a Republican governor who is testing the waters for a presidential run in 2012.

I was not offended at any of these things. What angered me the most, what really, really chapped my behind, was the number of times people used "uneducated" to describe the populace of Mississippi. People made these random assumptions that everybody from Mississippi is "uneducated" and "behind the times". A quick Google search would reveal that Mississippi actually has more universities and community colleges than states comparable in size and population. And even the most dilapidated school systems of Mississippi do not have the drop-out rate as high as Wayne County's of Detroit. Yet, nobody calls the populace of Detroit, or any other metropolitan area where the dropout rate is above 50%, "uneducated."

Then, I had this sudden realization: Mississippi is not a real place with real people in the minds of most of Americans. Mississippi is an idea. It is an ideological dumping ground for everything that America doesn't love about itself: homelessness, racism, uneducated masses who slavishly follow the Republican party against their own will, poverty, failing school systems, low-paying jobs that are non-unionized, teenage pregnancy, rises in sexually transmitted diseases and abortion rates among teens, sky-rocketing divorce rates, etc. All of these things are Mississippi's problems. I don't need to waste any space here outlining all of the "good ole' boy" and "cotton-picking" stereotypes about Mississippi that circulate in our national culture. According to Hollywood, there are no paved roads, it is never winter, and nobody has air-conditioning. We all talk lak Hai-leeeeeey Baaaaaaarbour (Whose accent is very questionable. Some people believe he has a coach so that he can appeal to his base. He certainly didn't talk like that at a commencement ceremony I once attended), and the state doesn't extend past the Delta region where white folks are forever night-riding with white sheets over their heads and Black folks are forever sitting on their porches singing the Blues about how miserable white folk done made them.

Mississippi exists as a psychological booster for the rest of the United States. When all else fails, when all looks bleak, when everything looks substandard and subpar, every state in the United States has the privilege of saying, "At least we're not Mississippi."

Blue Dog Dems in the Bush Era

I have but one question: where were these Blue Dog Democrats during the Bush/Cheney era?

What Exactly, is Fascism

In 1995, Toni Morrison published an extremely, extremely insightful article titled, "Racism and Facism" in The Journal of Negro Education. For those of you who are tech savvy and who have access to a college library, please use J-Stor, EbscoHost, or Academic Search Premiere to check this article out. Published more than 10 years ago, this article is scary in its accuracy.

Earliear this week, the NAACP challenged the TEA Party on its overt and covert racism and racist attitudes toward the President. Also, during this same week, I went into Wal-Greens for some oh so delicious salsa chips that they sale, and I heard the song, "Cult of Personality" playing on the loudspeaker. I was horrified by that song. Never, never in my life, even after surviving Reaganomics, have I heard so much disrespect toward the leader of the free world internally.

In response to the charge by Jealous and the NAACP, most TEA Party members claim that they are not racist at all. They simply don't like the socialist policies of Obama and the rest of the Democrats. These people use the rhetoric of fear, throwing around big words like fascism and racism, but absolutely do not know what they are talking about. The beauty of Toni Morrison is that she marries the calling of someone a fascist or a racist with covert racism...

Also, the beauty of Morrison is that she defines fascims for us, something that neither Glenn Beck nor Sarah Palin can do. Here's how Morrison defines it:
"Conservative, moderate, liberal; right, left, hard left, far right;religious, secular, socialist -we must not be blindsided by these Pepsi-Cola, Coca-Cola labels because the genius of fascism is that any political structure can become a suitable home. Facism talks ideology, but it is really just marketing -marketing for power."

Morrison goes on to link Fascism with unconstrained greed and rampant, global capitalism. She defines Fascism as dominance and control of entire populations by deregulation and abusive financial practices. As I reread her article today, the hair on the back of my neck stood on end. As I read, I heard a newscaster say BP lobbied the British government to release a convicted Libyan terrorist with 200+ murders on his hands just so the company could drill oil off the coast of Libya. Another Senator came on immediately after, claiming that continuing to pay unemployed people unemployment benefits makes people lazy.

On Both Sides of the Aisle

I must admit, when I go to vote, I vote based on my bank account. Since I'm not a six-figure wage earner, I vote Democratically for most elections. However, that does not mean that I don't listen to and understand Republican view points. Hell, I even like the way they get things done. They have an agenda and they stick to it, regardless.

Republicans are the REAL gannsters. They stick together much closer than any mafia, and are much more organized than the Bloods, Vice Lords, or Crips. They set an agenda and they go after it. Everyone else is either for them or against them. They pull their friends along and reward them handsomely for their loyalty. They run the country like drug empires, with policies benefitting a select few while destroying a whole populace. On top of that, they wrap it up in scripture, I tell you. Now what separates Republicans from vastly organized drug lords?

But seriously, Black people need Republicans as well. We shouldn't be one-party voters. We need people on both side of the aisle to effectively agitate for African American interests. For instance, many struggling African Americans want something done about welfare. It is too easy to fraud the system from state to state, and the laws are not written to favor those who really need the assistance: the elderly. I can already tell you that welfare reform is not something Democrats will touch, not now not ever! Republicans, on the other hand, may just try to reform welfare as an entitlement issue, if they ever get back around to making policy instead of running the country like they are drug lords.

However, Republicans, since Barry Goldwater, have done a horrific job at branding itself as a party for the people. It has been a party of exclusivity. Though African American leaders such as Frederick Douglass and even Dr. King were Republicans at the time of their deaths, we can all agree that their Republican Party is not the same as this new pack of gangsters we see today. These gangsters do not even take their own African American members seriously. How many times have they turned their backs on Chairman Steele, while allowing Rush Limbaugh to say anything he wants? Rush Limbaugh, an entertainer and college dropout, is indeed the de facto leader of the Republican Party.

In the meantime, I will continue to listen to and take into account Republican points of view. I like some of them, and would be willing to support POLICY issues, not the hate-filled rhetoric of exclusivity that I am hearing. African Americans, though we are statistically behind white voters financially, cannot afford to be one-party voters.

A Country of Contradiction

Perhaps, Americans find it difficult to call our politicians liars because of who we all are. This Independence Day reminds me that we live in one of the greatest democratic experiments in the history of mankind.
With that said, we should all take this week to reflect upon who we are as Americans. As Americans, we are a people riddled with complex contradictions and traditions. We are largely a conservative country politically. Yet, we believe in the freedoms of speech and religion, and the right to bear arms. We have the largest population of church members in the free, industrialized world. We have the largest amount of poverty, homicides, teen pregnancy, and drug addiction. To speak of sex is not polite conversation, and there are no federal policies demanding sex education in America's classrooms. Yet, sex sells. Period. Sex is ubiquitous. We teach abstinence only in some classrooms and pass out condoms at the end of the class.
Americans believe largely that we should be free to be who we are, and we should be able to serve our country and pick a partner of our choosing, unless that American happens to be gay. No marriage and no patriotic military service.
America, land of the brave, home of the free, unless of course, that American is Black. Though 40+ years after the end of Jim Crow, Black people remain at the top of all terrible statistics, like the incarcerated population is mainly Black. Is it because Black people are naturally predisposed to crime, or is it because they are monitored more closely and given harsher sentences than their white counterparts. Ask any Black person about DWB, and you get enough stories to fill a book.
Many of our Republican lawmakers claim to be ardent followers of the Word concerning abortion and gay rights. I guess they didn't read those parts in the Bible about a rich man and a camel. Or, they completely ignored the parts where Jesus talked about poverty and allowing our fellow Christians to suffer in poverty. On top of that, most Republicans blame the poor for being "lazy," not the industries who receive tax breaks to take their jobs out of the country...jobs the working poor would have been working.
Let's face it, I could go on and on and on. I hope those in power take some time to figure out who we are as Americans. Is our power structure a conglomerate of business? Are our soldiers simply the tools of free enterprise? Are we citizens simply a collection of workers and tax payers?

Throwing Red Meat or Plain Lying

What's the difference between throwing political red meat to the base and just plain lying? It doesn't seem to be much of a difference these days. I have first-hand experience.

Most residents of the South suffer through Republican governors, senators, and representatives. Yes, many of us vote progressive/liberal/Democratic, but Republicans always seem to outnumber us. Many of our Republican office-holders win office by taking tough stances against spending, entitlements, and the deficits. Some even claim to be against stimulus funding and increasing unemployment benefits. Yet, everywhere I ride around the South, I see projects funding by the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (the stimulus plan). Louisiana even has signs that show you how much money the state has received from the federal government. Does nobody see anything wrong with Republicans playing to the base when they talk about "runaway, big government spending," and taking more money from the Big government;thereby increasing spending and the deficit?

Where are the people who chanted, "Drill Baby Drill?" These people encouraged more drilling by private enterprise and then criticize the federal government for not acting quickly enough to clean up the spill. Why is the oil the property of private enterprise but the spill the responsibility of tax payers? Are we mere golden parachutes for corporations and megabanks?

Scott Brown, the Tea Party, won office based on tough stances against the banks who gambled their money, and used tax-payer funds to cover their behinds. Yet, he was key in watering down the financial reform bill. In other words, he threw red meat to the base, then voted for his own interests. But when do these political moves become blatant lies?

Proof Positive for Taylr Mayd, a Second Response

Normally, I bring you my long rants only twice per month, but I think the recent election results in South Carolina garner a rant from everyone. Let us stop, first and foremost, "figuring out" Alvin Greene, the Democratic Senate nomination. Hell yes! He was paid and paid for. No doubt about it. As I watched this man, who obviously has some sort of mental deficiency, struggle through an interview with Keith Olbermann last night, I thought about Taylr Mayd. Do you all remember the commentary he made about the chicken? Remember where he took us? He implied that there was an underlying reason for the giving away of chicken, and how the media portrayed the people who were lined up to get this free chicken.


Now, no one wants to be labeled as a cooky conspiracy theorist. Nobody. But Taylr Mayd had a valid point. There is something sinister going on in this country with our symbolism. Someone is talking to someone else about the "place" of Black people. Mr. Greene (let us all pray for him), is clearly not cognizant of how he is being used. The man did no campaigning, no house visits, no townhall meetings, and no political rallies. Did I mention that he also raised no funds? None of the other Democrats in the state knew of this man. Yet, he won with 60% of the vote. As a matter of fact, he got more votes than were cast at several precincts. Let us top being political rat and call a buyout what it is. He's somebody's puppet.

But could it be more than that? Why this unemployed military veteran with obvious mental deficiencies? Why this BLACK, unemployed military veteran with obvious mental deficiencies? I've heard more than one Black person say that Michael Steele is a Republican puppet. But whether we agree with this assessment or not, we can all agree that Mr. Steele is very well-educated despite his many, many on-camera gaffs.

I can agree with Taylr Mayd about the power of images -very real images being shown on of Black people both domestically and internationally. When Black people are making so many inroads politically on both sides of the aisle, someone had to put us back in our place. Someone found the perfect Black male puppet to portray Black political leaders as inept and mentally incapable of leadership. Whoever put up the $10000 fee for Mr. Greene to enter the election should be prosecuted with all deliberate speed for purposefully attempting to murder the image of Black political leadership.

Oh, before I forget, let us look at how someone is also accusing President Obama of being an exra in "Whoop There It Is." Could the symbolic racism be any more overt?

Uninformed in an Age of Information

What's going on in Israel? What about Brazil? What goes on in Brazil on a day-to-day basis? As far as the healthcare bill is concerned, is the one recently passed only a starting point for improvements? Will there be more amendments? What about the relatively weak financial reform bill? Will it be strengthened as the months pass? What is the President doing daily to stop the Gulf Spill? Have the families of the 11 TransOcean explosion been financially compensated?

I don't know. I haven't heard. I watch at least two hours of news and two hours of news commentary every day, and I don't know. Headlines from the Washington Post are inboxed to every day. My homepage is MSN.com, and CNN.com is bookmarked. With all of this, I still don't know. Could it be possible that even in the age of information, when people want to know everything about everything, the most informed of us are still uninformed? What does this say about the state of our media, and the types of information we crave most?

I'll give one example. For the past two weeks, straight news and liberal/conservative news commentators have criticized President Obama for now "showing enough emotion" concerning the Gulf Oil Spill. Hours have spent on this with talking heads analyzing the man's every facial expression and comment. However, we don't know how much money fishermen stand to receive. What kinds of cleaners have been used to clean the wildlife? What is actually in that dispersant? What happened to the less-harmful dispersant? Is it still in Texas? What are the plans to replenish the wetlands that are being choked off by the oil? What would the military do if they were involved? What could they do that BP is not doing if they don't have the equipment? We don't know any of these things because our media has been wasting time asking why the 6'0+ Black man who runs a country that many see as a white man's country hadn't blown his top or started crying. We already know the damn answer to that. If you are reading this post, and you don't know, see Jonathan Capehart's June 8 column at washingtonpost.com. I'm more into action, not posturing. Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh can show emotions. Would we want them in charge of this catastrophe?

Don't buy my implication that our national media is keeping us ignorant of important policy while focusing on mind-numbing fluff? Remember the year of Bennifer? That very public affair of Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez? While our news and our minds were following the couple around as they made out in public and purchased a gun permit, our country was embroilled in two foreign wars. Servicemen and women were dying daily, and we couldn't get enough of what the powercouple -two individual adults with their own lives and damn it, their own prerogatives -garnered more of our attention and news space than two wars.

By now I know you want to ask, "Why should we even care about what goes on in those other countries?" I'm glad you asked. Our national deficit is reaching epic proportions, and Republicans are correct to be concerned -lest America become Greece. Spending has to stop at some point. Something needs to be cut. I find it strange, though, that none of these Republican (or Democratic) lawmakers ever speak of reducing American aid to Israel. And I'm not saying this because of any political standpoint I have concerning Israel and Palestine. As pointed out earlier, I don't know enough about the on-going conflict to make a judgment call one way or the other. I say this because Israel receives tens of billions of dollars of American aid, and America gets what in return? While Republicans focus on cutting social welfare funding and education here at home, what of Israel and our lack of return for the investments we have there? What social welfare programs are American citizens bankrolling in Israel? What benefit does giving tens of billions of dollars hold for the average American citizen? Why does America continue to give Israel aid when the country deliberately disrespects our leader?

Why should we care about Brazil? Well, it has one of the biggest and fastest-growing economies in the world, and it is almost independent of OPEC. What does that mean for us? Well, nothing right now. Brazil relies mainly on ethanol for fuel. Their government offered to import to the United States some of its very cheaply-made ethanol (the abundance of sugar cane in Brazil makes ethanol production there much cheaper than ethanol made here in the United States from corn). Unfortunately, our then President Bush, in all of his wisdom, placed a 100% tarrif on this fuel, according to the History International Channel, while his MMS office issued more and more drilling permits. You make the connections between Brazil, Bush, and our current crisis. I don't need to spell it out.

Even in this age, most younger citizens, who are part of the soundbyte generation, remain uninformed. With cuts to our education in favor of more foreign aid to our "allies" and millitary spending, the American populace will be even less informed that what we are now. And a population of uninformed taxpayers become....What? I'm too afraid to finish the thought.

Some Things Really Are Priceless, Part III

Last night, Rachel Maddow did someting amazing on her show. She found, from the NBC Archives, footage from a 1979 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Amazingly, the owners and operators of that rig were TransOcean, the same owners of the rig that recently exploded and sunk in the sea. Amazingly, the company used the same techniques that are currently being used now. Unamazingly, most of those techniques failed, and oil spewed into the Gulf for more than nine months until two relief wells were drilled and put in operation. Please go to www.msnbc.com and find Rachel's show for the entire segment. It is amazing. Also amazingly, the well that exploded over 30 years ago was at a much shallower depth. The TransOcean well that exploded a little over a month ago is more than one mile down. It is at a depth that no human can reach.

The safety precautions for an accident with deep-sea drilling has not been updated since the 1970s. In fact, even the very lax precautions that the United States government imposes upon the most profitable business in human history, the oil companies, were ignored.

Superpose the oil spill with the financial sector meltdown. Okay, superpose those two things with the fact that Black hair care is a nine billion dollar business and only five percent Black-owned. Okay, superpose that with the fact that most Red states continue to build prisons while simultaneously cutting education budgets. Classrooms may go empty while prison cells are awaiting inhabitants.

None of this makes sense, does it? Here's how I see the world....some things are priceless. Having sense enough to stay informed through world news from reputable a source (NPR, CNN, FOX, MSNBC,...it doesn't matter) and picking up a history book -though not easily, quantifiable, is priceless. As Americans, the oil spill and financial sector meltdown has taugh me that we have learned how to turn greed into cold, hard cash. In America, the horrible cliche is true, "greed is good." But at what cost? Oil companies are the most profitable businesses in the world, but oil spills DO happen. One would think that 30 years after one of the most horrible oil spills in the history of man occurred, oil companies would spend at least a miniscule amount of their profits, maybe $1 billion out of the almost $500 billion profits they posted each year for the past few years, would have been dedicated to precautionary measures and increased safety technologies. Instead, profits were put over people and our ecology. People have died, and so has parts of the multi-billion dollar fishing industry and the livelihoods of countless small businessmen along the Gulf Coast. The loved ones who died cannot be replaced, and sadly (though I hope this may not be true), part of our marsh they may be destroyed by oil and/or dispersants.

Second, Black people fought and died for us to be able to sit at a Woolworth's counter. I appreciate that. Love them for it. But 40 years later, we have not been trained to own and patronize our own businesses. As a result, we own almost nothing. We do not even control the things and chemicals that go on our head. It is a nine billion dollar a year business, and we own less than five percent of it. That's pitiful. When I hear that people in the 'hood do not have access to fresh produce and good meat, I wonder why it has never dawned on any Black person to open a grocery chain that can service lower-income neighborhoods with fresh produce and decent cuts of meat? Why is it that Black beauticians are the only race in the world who do not learn how to style their own, natural hair first?


As far as prisons are concerned, does anybody know the impact of putting prisons on the stock market alongside vacation resorts and hotels? No one builds a hotel without expecting occupants. Same with prisons. Whereas hotel owners use the economy and the amount of money people have for leisure spending to predict how many rooms and the amenities they will offer, those who build prisons use elementary school reading test scores. Sadly, Black boys often lag behind their white/latino counterparts in reading test scores. Draw your own conclusions here.

I want to leave my readers with a high note. My friend, Tamieka Pippins, is a child therapist for the state of Mississippi. With two Master's Degrees, she earns less than $40,000/year, but she has dedicated her life to helping children with behavioral problems -children that most teachers, administrators, and even parents have written off and cast aside. About 90% of her clients are young, Black boys of elementary school age. For some of them,even their parents have given up on them. Tamieka refuses to give up on these children. She works with them. She nurtures them. She makes them believe that they are somebody and that their futures are priceless. She gives them rewards and trophies when they do well, and punishes them when they do not. But she's sincere, and the children feel that and respect her for it. On May 20, she held a graduation for some of the children in her group, which she bank-rolled from her own pockets. Her graduates were all Black males. She gave all of the children either huge trophies, gold medals, and/or certificates. There were many mothers, and a good amount of fathers, present to see their children read scripture, perform master of ceremony duty, sing, and receive rewards. The children were so proud that they even sung Tameika a song, and presented her with a dozen roses that they'd put together and bought from their own little piggy banks.
Many of Tameika's graduates go on to middle and high school with no behavior problems. Some of them ask her to attend their various extracurricula activities. Normally she tries to make their activities, and it inspires the children to strive toward a future that does not end in a new jail cell.
And that, my dear reader, is priceless.

I Can't Leave, a Reminder

Given all of the craziness that happens in politics nationally, I felt I had to remind myself. I know that some of you have read this once before. But for others, this is new. Yes, I'm suffering through Haley Barbour's idiotic budget plan right now, and sometimes, I just don't know. Perhaps this can help me and you weather the Republican storm.
I have decided to stay in the South to help bring about change here. I know the South is often pigeon-holed as America's "third world" section of the country. Being from Mississippi, no one feels and lives this myopic perception more than us. However, there are some good reasons for staying in the South. I'm not saying that these reasons apply to everyone. This is my South as I see and live it.
1. $250,000 will get you a nice home (a home, home. Not a condo), some land, and a house full of furniture in a nice neighborhood in the South.
2. $100,000/year is still a better-than-average salary in the South. Getting a college education is definitely worth the sacrifice here.
3. Gaining 5 to 10 extra pounds will not ruin your social life in the South. Unlike our Northern counterparts, Southern brothers are still into thick chicks (I said thick not flabby).
4. Food is plentiful. Most of my cousins from the North think it is horrible the way we just go into each other's refrigerators to help ourselves. Why not let one person fix the food so that everybody gets something to eat? Well, everybody always has something to eat. Food is plentiful here. I know many, many Southerners that will let a credit card bill slide to put some extra food on the table. Do you remember coming home to grandma's. Did she ever limit your food? No. Even though she lived on a fixed income, there was always plenty of food on the table.
5. The rat race is slower here. Work is important, but a worker can be replaced. A mother or a father cannot. Southerners work hard and play hard. Life and family are to be enjoyed -which explains the scarce amount of boarding schools in the South. There's always time for family.
6. Children are not inconveniences. Yes, they get on our nerves. They make us mad when they are being hardheaded. But in the South, you still see Mommas walking into churches with switches. You see Momma's taking their children to the dressing rooms with belts. And it's okay. Everybody knows what that Momma is trying to do. She's trying to raise her children to be productive citizens. And sometimes, they just need a little heat put to their bottoms. As we say in the South 'Sip, "a little heat to the bottom will make the top percolate!"
7. In the South, it's just easy to chill and let it all hang out. I love throwing on last year's fashion with some flip flops and going to the store with no makeup. It's too hot for all that!
8. In the South, you know where you stand. Racism tends to be covert in the North. I love knowing where I stand down here so I don't have to wonder and blame myself for another man's prejudices.
9. The beaches of Texas,Florida, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia, New Orleans, Atlanta, Hot Springs, Arkansas, can be reached in a day's drive...sometimes in as little as three hours, depending on your location.
10. In most places, the Spirit is still alive here. Whatever that Spirit is for you, you can always drive to the country and feel it. We still chill real hard in the South. Want an instant party? Put the radio outside, get the coals smoking, and before you know it, somebody shows up with some beer, sodas, dominoes, spades, cigars, and jokes! There's a spirit of unity there...even if a bunch of old women just get together and shell peas on the porch together.

The South is no Utopia. The cities here have many of the same problems and issues of our major Northern Counterparts. But I love this South. I was born in this South. My folks made this South. It's my South, and I can't leave her. I'm staying

Some Things Really Are Priceless, a Response to Taylr Mayd

a. Last week, I tuned in to Taylr Mayd's Chopped and Screwed Show, and I must say, it was hilarious. You can hear it at wwww.chroniccast.blogspot.com. He made me think twice about biting into a fried chicken leg. I'll never do it on camera! Taylr Mayd, in a round-about way, made some very important social commentary concerning stereotypes of Black people, and how the media plays with those stereotypes. Let me leave off here, and I'll come back to that later.

b. Yesterday, Governor Robert F. McDonnell of Virginia declared April Confederate History Month. It can be read in its entirety at http://www.governor.virginia.gov/OurCommonwealth/Proclamations/2010/ConfederateHistoryMonth.cfm. The language is very beautiful. The imagery is heroic. The tale is stuff of legend.

c. Last year, Governor Rick Perry of Texas played to his base by campaigning on the right to seceed from the union. Texas is a sovereign state, he claims, and can seceed from a tyrannical government that would impose its bigness on the great state of Texas.

d. About three decades ago, Ronald Reagan kicked off his presidential campaign by talking about states rights in Philadelphia, Mississippi.

The genius of Taylr Mayd's commentary is that he asks a simple question over and over again, "What's up with people giving all this chicken away?" He goes on to ask, "What's up with Black celebrities endorsing stereotypical commercials that feature Black people laughing and singing about chicken?" By now, my very expensive liberal arts education is causing me to sit up and take notice. The chicken, the declaration from yesterday, Rick Perry's crazy secessionist talk, Ronald Reagan kicking off a "states rights" campaign at the site where three Civil Rights workers were brutally slain, these things are very symbolic.

They symbolize the fact that America is definitely not post-racial. America is still steeped in white Supremacist rhetoric and culture. A bunch of Black folks laughing and singing and biting into a juicy fried chicken leg is exactly what white supremacist culture needs to comfort itself in the wake of America electing an Ivy League educated Black man to lead the free world. It is a way, if I may say so, to put Black people, "back in their places" behind the fried chicken counter, Taylr Mayd.

Reading the declaration by Virginia's governor is stunning because it does not mention the long nightmare that lasted over 400 years in a "free" country. Civil War apologists have been touting "states rights" for almost 150 years since the war ended. They simply do not finish the sentence. The war was over "states' rights to enslave other human beings and treat them as chattel property." Rick Perry's secessionist banter, in no way, mentions the over 600,000 dead because rich, Southern planters convinced many poor, white boys that they were better than Africans simply by virtue of their white skin. They neglect to mention that most white people of the South were lower-classed white who were either ignored or scoffed at by the plantocracy. And when the plantocracy lost the war, they had no more time to waste on their poor, white brothers who died to maintain their wealth. Ronald Reagan's bid for presidency, based upon smaller government and "welfare queens," began at the site of one of America's most heinous acts during one of its darkest hours. Taylr Mayd, I think the message is clear.

The state of Texas has even demanded textbooks for innocent school children based on this sanitized version of history. Attending school at Ole Miss, I've met people who were honestly brainwashed enough to cry and become angry when they learn the real truth about the South. I've heard people, barely over 20, scream very fervently that Ronald Reagan was the greatest president of all time, and I know damn well they were not even alive when Ronald Reagan served as President! Oh, the horror the horror they experience when they say these things in front of Vietnam veterans and suck up that first ass whipping in the name of Ronald Reagan!

What damage will this type of misinformation do to a new generation? It won't be harmful for the richest 1% of America that propagates lies about itself. It will produce of generation of sheep who vote how they are told, become angry when they are told, and hate who they are told to hate...regardless of the facts.

Taylr Mayd, I have one question for your thoughts: I wonder what would happen if the true builders of the South, my ancestors and your ancestors, begin to fly the Confederate Flag? It should be ours. Our ancestors were killed, raped, and worked to death for it. Would all of these people then yell about tradition and continue to sanitize history?

Some Things Really Are Priceless

"English? English? Shit, I thought you went to school for something. English ain't nothing."

The above quote is the response I get from people 90% of the time when I tell them that I am a Ph.D. candidate in English. In addition to that quote, I work with a gang of Education professors who look upon my graduate work with condescension because, as one Education professor put it, "You never have to do any quantitative studies. You just read and write, and what you all read and write really aren't pragmatic at all." Well, I can't argue with that. Anybody who has ever tried to read Lacan or Spivak knows that the obfuscate nature of their writing is difficult enough to read, let alone apply them to real situations.

It is true that since the 1980s, when Ronald Reagan and other hardline conservatives painted humanities and social science professors as a bunch of ex-hippies looking to badly influence students with their Communist-inspired ideology, these majors have been on a steady decline. It seems that everyone who was anyone who went to college ran to the MBA programs. Those who really wanted to major in something that mattered took hardline sciences such as Biology, Physics, or Chemistry in order to obtain entrance into medical or nursing schools. Still others who wanted a quick, guaranteed job after college majored in elementary education. For the most part, by the time I enrolled in college in the late 1990s, people only majored in other Humanities/Liberal Arts courses to help them pass their LSATs and enter into Law School.

Thus, at this late date in the year of our Lord, most people ask me, "What in the Hell did you major in English for?" My answer is simply, "I like to read." Most people do not understand the purpose behind a humanities/liberal arts major because they cannot easily translate these majors into six-figure jobs. Most college undergraduates attend college to make money. The formula goes: 4 years of college + self-deprivation of the college life = big bucks, authority, and prestige upon matriculation. Since the 1980s, fewer and fewer jobs have been awaiting Humanities/Liberal Arts majors -even at the Ph.D. level. The degrees are equally difficult to obtain, since theories relating to human culture are never as simple as even the most difficult calculus equations. Humans just aren't that predictable. The purpose of a humanities/liberal arts education is to expose students to other cultures and other times in the human famiy through art/literature/anthropology/music/theatre/dance/philosophy/psychology/history, etc. And hopefully, along the way, we learn something about ourselves. We learn, through an engaging study of history, that it does not have to always repeat itself, and that people do not fit into neat little labels. But most of all, a degree in the humanities/liberal arts teaches us how to think about our world. LIBERAL ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES TEACHES US HOW TO THINK.

And seriously thinking about problems before we try to solve them really is priceless. If I have any criticism of American culture at large is that it is anti-intellectual. We continue to be the dumb jocks of the world -all muscle and no brain. Our current political discourse encourages all emotion and no reason. Other countries laugh at us because they can. Let me provide some prime and contemporary examples of where more liberal arts/humanities course would help our world reputation.

1. During last year's Presidential election, the Right accused Barack Obama of being a "Muslim/Islamic terrorist," and then proceeded to play clips of a very militant sermon from his long-term pastor, Jeremiah Wright. People were calling and twittering in to various political pundit shows saying how they were afraid of this "Muslim terrorist" who sat in church all of those years and listened to hatred from that antiwhite pastor. Sigh. When was the last a Muslim regularly attended your local churches? I've never known a Muslim to attend a Christian church regularly, seeing as how they have mosque sevices to fill their spiritual needs.

2. Not simple enough for you? Let's look at the healthcare debate. Why should we listen to people who use government/tax-payer funded healthcare tell us that government/tax-payer funded healthcare is bad? In case you don't know, all government workers/Congressmen use government/tax-payer funded healthcare...including Republicans. I was so embarassed for old people when they said, they don't want government-funded healthcare and the government had better not touch their Medicare. I can hear the French and Canadians laughing even in South Mississippi.

3. It's not American to pay taxes, but it is American to send soldiers to foreign countries to take natural resources. If not for taxes, who pays for wars?

4. Somehow, being gay has become a cardinal sin in America, but we're the fattest country in the world. Do I have the only Bible in the world that lists gluttony, not homosexuality, as one of the seven abominations before the Lord?

5. Celebrating Halloween is fine, but Harry Potter is witchcraft? How are the two different?

6. Wow, here's a good one. Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin tell people to watch out for liberal news bias and liberal news agendas. Those poor conservatives are always under threat, even though 91% of all talk radio is conservative talk radio and they have an entire news network devoted to their agenda. I guess the other 9% is REALLY dangerous.

These are just a few examples. I could go on and on. But hey, I'm writing to Americans, and you're tired of reading by now. Thanks for sticking around this long. Think about this, most of our greatest leaders, presidents, and thinkers were liberal arts majors. However, George Bush II had an MBA from an Ivy League school. Bill Clinton, on the other hand, studied in three liberal arts areas before attending law school: Philosophy, Economics, and Political Science. One left a surplus. The other left a deficit. THINK about it.

Disappearing White Privilege?

I must say, I hate when people relegate racism, sexism, homophobia, and xenophobia to Mississippi. I hate it because I travel extensively. I follow the news extensively. I'm a history bug. I consider all of the above -hatred - an American problem; not one exclusive to any state or region of the country. From Watts, to Detroit, to Chicago, to Memphis to Jackson to Dallas to Washington D.C., senseless acts of violence have erupted in this country, taking the lives (or in the case of Reagan, attempting to take the lives) of some of our most promising leaders.
When historians write of these times, most of them talk about the politico-economic uncertainty that produced flames of fear and hatred. What they don't talk about is the importance of the hot air coming out of people's mouths that whipped those flames into 5-alarm fires of violence. Case in point: the Oklahoma bombing of 1995 was not a random act of violence. It was carefully planned and orchestrated. Could it also be that Mr. McVeigh, and other domestic terror groups are being given signals to use extremism and violence against opposing points of view from Conservative -often Republican -leaders?
With the passage of the health care bill, the secret service has seen an increase in terror threats against Democratic lawmakers. In Ohio, New York, and even in Washington D.C., seemingly random acts of violence and racial/sexual epithets have been hurled at lawmakers. In Pinson, Alabama, a Mr. Mike Vanderboegh is calling for like-minded patriots to break the windows of Democratic lawmakers before rifle owners have to resort to pulling guns in a new revolution. Mr. Vanderboegh is not patriotic enough, however, to turn down his government-issued social security disability checks which support his suburban lifestyle. Michelle Bachmann, giving an interview earlier this week, described herself as a "foreign correspondent on enemy lines." I saw senior Republican Party members fan the flames of angry Tea Party members by waving their flag back and forth. Meanwhile, on the floor of government, Republicans are just now proposing some sane amendments to the health care bill. Why now? We don't even know what's in the health care bill. Neither does Mr. Vanderboegh. And I'm willing to bet that most of those Tea Party members don't know, either.
So, what's the real issue here? We know that the Congressional Budget Office said that the new health care bill actually reduces the deficit, and is not guaranteed to grow the government. So, what are these people really wailing about? Most of them receive Medicare/Medicaid or some form of assistance. Those who are not already receiving this benefit, will certainly qualify for it in the future. So, I ask again, what's really going on here?
It is my belief that domestic terrorism and anger at government increase from those who stand to benefit the most from government increase is a screen for a more American problem: that of hatred. These people are terrified of losing what they feel is some sort of white privilege. In America, whiteness is a property that comes with not only a form of normalization of life and experiences, but with a certain intrinsic value protected by legal, social, and economic institutions. J. W. Cash called it the Proto-Dorian bond, and it is to be guarded and watered by the "blood of tyrants" who dare take it away. One of the cornerstones of white privilege is that it is exclusive. In order to enjoy this white privilege, one needs first and foremost, white skin. I think that may be all, because certainly the throngs of poor white people gathered in Washington D.C. and who live and benefit from government intervention, have nothing to gain under Republican rulership, which leans toward big business. According to W. J. Cash, the Proto-Dorian bond is a feeling of unity and support that unites whites across all class lines in a common culture of white supremacy. So, it was no slip of the tongue when Pat Buchanan, when being interviewed by Rachel Maddow, claims that white men alone built this country and its theirs.
All of this violence, protesting, screaming, and yelling is not about Big Government. It's not about health care. It's not about the deficit. If you ask me, these are just code words in a common culture of white supremacy. White supremacists feel like they are under attack, and may very well lose the white privilege they've enjoyed for more than three centuries in the United States of America. They are angry at the white people who voted for Barack Obama. They are angry at the white lawmakers who would betray them by guaranteeing immigrants and minorities a share of that seemingly shrinking American Pie. Most of all, they are afraid, and their leaders are stoking that fear every day. People like John Boehner, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin, John McCain...good white American people who stand up to this "socialist/communist takeover" are their last hopes. In true American fashion, they react the only way they know how: with hateful words and equally violent actions that follow. If this violence results in tragedy, I think the people who are fanning the flames should also be held accountable, not just the participants of the protests and acts.

Barack Obama, Political Chess Master II (Special Commentary)

Last night, I watched as this historic healthcare reform passed. There was much drama and action. The procedure itself has the making of a very good movie: the Tea Party members spitting on members of Congress and calling them racial/sexual epithets, Jessie Jackson Jr. having to bang that gabble and raise his voice to call for order during a very heated verbal exchange, John Boehner invoking scripture trying to shame a few more Democrats away from the "Yes" box. I tell you. I was on the edge of my seat.

The highlight came when a cool President Obama, standing in front of a very emotional and passionate Vice President Biden said, "This is what change looks like." As cool and as calm as expect any Black man to be, he looked square into the eyes of his political adversaries and he said in so many words, "Checkmate."
I bubbled over with laughter. My eyes brimmed with tears as I remembered the Lion of the Senate, a rich man who devoted almost his entire career to attaining healthcare for those less fortunate than himself. Then, I became uncontrollably angry because the public option/expansion of Medicaid for everyone is not in this bill. Why in the Hell would they take out such a huge victory for the American people? I mean, it's such a big bill that includes....

Then, exactly ten minutes after Barack Obama declared "checkmate," I realized that I don't know what is in this bill. Yes, I am a political junkie who watches at least four hours of political commentary every day, and I don't know what the heck is in this bill. I know if I don't know what's in it, all of those fanatics out there yelling about socialized medicine don't know, either.
So far, the coverage of this historic change has not been on the specifics of this bill. We saw the sausage making process, but not the ingredients of the links. Media focus has been on the strategy of the game, the coaches' game plays on each side, rather than what was happening on the field. Who wins? Who loses? Who's going to suffer at the polls? Who's going to benefit? What's Obama going to do next? How have the Republicans been so effective at controlling the message? What message? Aside from scaring the hell out of folks about death panels and "socialized medicine," there hasn't been a message.

So, the public option is out, but what's in? I don't know. The opposers of the bill don't know. This factor, including the ramping up of the rhetoric of fear and the constant referral to this bill as "Obama care", further affirms my view that this whole ordeal has been more about fear of what this Black man, leader of the free world, can do than about policy-making. Inciting violence against Barack Obama and the Democrats smacks of the jealous jouissance of Southern lynch picnics. What was that dark day in America's history all about? Power play dynamics and phallic authority. Just listen to Rush Limbaugh...you don't have to take my word for it.

Sadly, our public discourse is stil informed by white supremacy and jealous sexual projections. Sadly, those people who were out there spitting on lawmakers and taunting them probably need that help the most. Sadly, those people out there probably cannot even define the very words that very rich, white men like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh told them to use. Sadly, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh know exactly what they are doing. Sadly, those folks do not know that they are being used in a powerful class war and a fear of redistribution of wealth and elitism. They are no better than those young, poor white boys who died in the Civil War to enrich the pockets of wealthy plantation overlords, a class they could never belong to. Sadly, those people and their children will also benefit the most from the passage of such a bill, in spite of their manifest hatred.

So, even though President Obama cannot directly say it to his adversaries, I will. Check mate. "On to the next one" in the words of Jay-Z.

Some advice for all political pundits -liberal and conservatives - get used to a new, cooler style of leadership. We are dealing with a very calculated political genius, not someone prone to egotistical, masculine posture. There's actually some substance behind his exterior, and nobody can rush him. He's the chess master. You don't rush a chess master before he makes his move. He must study the board from every angle. He must study his opponent's peices from every angle, anticipate his move, and be prepared to counter it. That takes more than posturing. That takes brains. And brains is what we have back in the White House after an eight year vacuum.

President Obama, the Political Chess Master

President Obama has occupied his current post for about 15 months now. For 14 of those months, he has aggrevated his base to no end...even myself, an African American woman who is a Southerner to boot. He has made me regret voting for him, and left me wishing that I'd voted for Hillary Clinton instead. As the "birthers," including Lou Dobbs, questioned his citizenship, we asked, "Why doesn't he do something?" As the Tea Party members showed up to his rallies with loaded weapons, we asked, "Why doesn't he say something?" As the antireform factions interrupted town hall meeting after town hall meeting, we shouted, "When are you going to take the lead?" As we watch Republicans controll the healthcare debate message, every one from Chris Matthews to Bill Maher challenged President Obama by telling him, "Lead, damn it Lead! You are the president of the United States! Act like it and lead."

Which is exactly what Barack Obama, current president of the United States, wanted us to do. Barack Obama the candidate played down race. He ran as an American man, not a Black one. He quoted Abraham Lincoln as his favorite president, and failed to mention the works of Frederick Douglass (an "overlooking" that garnered him criticism from some in the African American community). He stayed out of sight as Republicans and Conservatives concocted fake Kenyan birth certificates. He sat "idly" by and let the Democratic Congress and Nancy Pelosi mop up after the "death panels" windfall. Like a political chess master watching a three-dimensional chess board, he let everyone say what they wanted to say when they wanted to say it, and when everybody ran out of steam about everything, he moved. He went directly to a Republican meeting and took unscreened questions with no teleprompter, and had it televised -a first for our nation. He held a boring, seven-hour press conference on healthcare, calling out Republican incentives and naming names. When he'd done all of that, Daddy came back home and gave Congress a deadline for a bill, giving them the go ahead for reconciliation. To date, no Republicans have made an effective rebuttal.

Check mate.

Though Barack Obama the candidate played down his race, he has conducted himself like the level-headed Black man that he has to be in order to operate in America. He gave us the old ideological rope-a-dope as long as he had to in order to obtain a signed permission slip to lead (Right now, the letter supporting a public option in the Senate has up to 40 signatures). He knows that as a Black man, he's always already perceived as an angry Black man. He is always already perceived as less than capable of being in a position of leadership. As a Black man, he is always already perceived as someone more interested in chasing tail than chasing enemies. As a Black man, Barack Obama could not come out swinging and jabbing. Like Richard Pryor's character on Harlem Nights, he had to play it smooth and he had to play it sweet.

Now we're begging him to lead. Lead damn it! We're begging him to cease being a Black man, and be our president. Exactly what he wanted to hear. To his opponents I say:

"Check mate!"

The Perceived Hypocrisy of the Republican Party

In 1964, Barry Goldwater ran for president against Lyndon B. Johnson. Goldwater leaned heavily to the right of the Republican Party. He championed free enterprised and ranted against large government. He was a strict constitutionalist who also believed in the moral health of Americans. He was also a gun rights advocate. Many Southern and midwestern Democrats switched parties; thus, began the Goldwater Movement. It joined social conservativism and the Republican Party. The tenants of the Goldwater Movement were simple: socially, the followers were conservative; economically, the followers believed in free enterprise and libertarianism. Social conservatives and Economic liberals joined together under the same tent.
Though Goldwater did not win his bid for presidency, he opened the way for every Conservative's champion, Ronald Reagan, who gave a speech for Goldwater in the 1964 campaign. Today's GOP prides itself in being "The Party of Reagan." Ronald Reagan preached smaller government, lower taxes for corporations to spark job creation, deregulation of the banking and finance sectors, fewer dollars spent on social benefits, cuts to education spending and mental health services, looser gun laws, and individual responsibility for crime (tougher crime penalties). That was 1980-1988. Fastfoward to 2010.
The problem with the Republican Party is that it looks hypocritical. Young people, who are not well-versed in history or political theory and who have never heard of Barry Goldwater, were born after Ronald Reagan or even George Bush elder served, do not understand how social conservativism and economic liberalism can exist together. For instance, most conservatives are against abortion but support the death penalty and war. So, conservatives would save an unborn life but take away another's who they may not like or regard highly? So, when the rich have to pay more taxes to support social/infrastructure improvement project it is "redistribution of wealth," but giving the banks and other Fortune 500 companies a tax-payer funded bailouts is not? Medicare and a public option are forms of socialism and that's bad, but allowing a few private companies to determine who is worthy of healthcare, what kind of treatments they can receive, and whether someone lives or dies is not a form of tyranny or even terrible? So, people should be free to choose when it comes to healthcare and medical treatment, but gay couples are not free to choose to be married? If Sarah Palin were truly a Conservative woman, why isn't she supporing her husband in the background while he commands the spotlight?
To younger voters, it seems as if the Republicans want things both ways. It seems like mass hypocrisy to a younger generation. How do they remedy this? If they do not remedy this perception problem, the party will dissolve as old, white male voters die and leave confused and angry younger voters who see their ideals as hypocrisy.

The Problem with the postBaby Boomer Generation

Detroit is in ruins. Unemployment amongst African Americans is well past that of other nationalities. Suicide rates amongst African American males between the ages of 18 and 35 is also increasing. Most people, who live inside Wayne County, have to drive an hour for fresh fruits and vegetables. Even on Black in America, it was revealed that it is easier to obtain a gun in some Black neighborhoods than a fresh tomato.
How did this happen? When did this happen? How could we just sit by and let it happen?
It has been my privilege to spend my days teaching and discussing African American/diasporic literature. For the past two semesters, I've been focusing on Black people and our quest to achieve the American Dream. First, I ask my students, who are normally between the ages of 20 and 60, what they think the American Dream is. The answers include: a nice home in the suburbs, plenty of designer clothes, and at least one luxury car. Next, I ask them if they think the myth of American prosperity is true. If my class consists of mostly middle class white students, the answer is overwhelmingly "no." If my class consists of mostly Black and poor white students, the answer is "yes." These students really and truly believe in the American Dream. And they believe that it is achievable, one way or the other.
The next sector consists of me teaching them several texts written by Black people that are related to the American Dream. My major text is "A Raisin in the Sun," the groundbreaking play by the late Lorrain Hansberry. Here's the thing about their answers and the play that disturbs me the most, and these notes are also part of my lecture to the students.
I notice that in their answers, nobody said anything about getting a better education. Nobody says anything about having more time to properly raise their children. The answers were solely materialistic and having the ability to buy bigger and better material goods. "A Raisin in the Sun" also has an interesting subplot. There is a generational/geographical shift between the mother, Lena Younger, and her children, Walter and Beneatha. Lena Younger and her husband, Walter Younger Sr. migrated from the South to one of our Northern industrial centers. Like the millions of African Americans to do so during the Great Migrations I and II, they were filled with hope and joy at the prospect of earning fair wages. But like so many, their hopes turned into the nightmare embodied by the ghetto in which they lived. Walter Younger, Sr. had to die in order for his family to earn enough money to even think of leaving that ghetto. I notice that, in the play, neither one of the children mourned their father. They were totally focused on that $10000 pay check, and what it meant for them individually. Lena sees this tendency in her children, but cannot quite articulate the trouble with them. Asaigi, the African boyfriend of Beneatha, did. He, like so many readers of the play, found it odd that the children argued over money that their father died for, with no mention or thanks to him.
Here's where I come in. With the Great Migration II, African Americans became mostly urban people for the first time in history. People were glad to get away from the cotton fields of the Mississippi Delta and the sugar cane farms of Louisiana. I cannot blame them. Share cropping is another name for volunteer slavery. These people took with them horror tales of white supremacy, Blues, jazz, quilting, church, spirituals, hair braiding, soul food, and jive. They told their children stories of how they were so poor that they could not afford new shoes and clothes; how they could not get their hair pressed every week; how they did not even have enough to eat most days. Suddenly, it became fashionable to poor and Black from Mississippi. Children, once seen as sources of wealth because added hands meant added labor for the farm, became an inconvenience. Women, like Ruth Younger, did not want added mouths to feed because they had to think about the children that were already here. Abortions became a blessing, and not a taboo.
What these people failed to take with them was family history. Yes, Jim Crowism was bad, but what about the uncle that always outsmarted the white man or the passive aggressive aunt that told her white woman employer, "I don't know about this strike Ms. Dorothy, but I'm gone stay off them buses until this mess get straightened out." What these people failed to take with them was a sense of pride and dignity. Yes, people were share croppers, but walking with your shoulders rounded is not worth anything man can offer. No, people did not have the best houses or the trendiest clothes. But the houses and the clothes that they had were kept clean and neat. Being poor does not give us a reason to live like animals. Cleanliness is next to Godliness.
So the thing that came down between Lena Younger and her children was a lack of teaching and too much teaching. The South was bad. Mississippi was everybody's nightmare, but being next to the soil taught survival skills, dignity, family unity, and pride. The Baby Boomer generation, most of them having grown up in the South, or least visited with their grandparents from the summer, still have some of these skills. In the name of "progress," or in the name of achieving the ever-elusive American Dream, either wanted to forget these things or failed to pass them on. And look at what the forgetfulness, the lack of teaching has wrought. Look at Detroit. Look at Chicago. Look at Memphis. Look at New Orleans. Look at Houston. Look at Richmond. Look at Oakland. The next time a Baby Boomer asks, "What's wrong with the young people?" Look in the mirror.
In breaking the glass ceiling, in becoming the first this and the first that, in becoming middle class, in achieving the American dream, in racing to be my competition because you do not want to retire and become irrelevant, have you failed to teach me, my elder?