News: Black Congressman’s Sign Covered with a Swastika

A swastika was found Tuesday painted on a sign outside Rep. David Scott's district office, an act the Georgia Democrat said reflects an increasingly hateful and racist debate over health care and should serve as a reminder for people to tone down their rhetoric.

Scott's staff arrived at his Smyrna, Ga., office Tuesday morning to find the Nazi graffiti emblazoned on a sign bearing the lawmaker's name. The vandalism occurred roughly a week after Scott was involved in a contentious argument over health care at a community meeting.

Scott, who is black, said he also has received mail in recent days that used N-word references to him, and that characterized President Barack Obama as a Marxist.

"We have got to make sure that the symbol of the swastika does not win, that the racial hatred that's bubbling up does not win this debate," Scott said in a telephone interview. "There's so much hatred out there for President (Barack) Obama."

A moderate Democrat who represents a majority-white district near Atlanta, Scott said he thinks the racism is isolated but can't be ignored. He said the swastika probably was intended as a warning. He hopes it instead persuades reasonable people to maintain a more substantive debate over health care changes.

"We must not allow it to intimidate us," he said.

 

Click to read.

Your Black World: Dr Boyce and Madeline Discuss Domestic Violence and Octomom

President Barack Obama Worried about Stimulus Passing in the House

President Barack Obama faces a barrage of questions on his plans to reinvigorate the economy with a massive stimulus bill and additional billions in bailout money for the financial markets.

Trips Monday and Tuesday to cities hurting under the economic meltdown and a prime-time news conference Monday night show that Obama and his advisers are worried about a looming Senate vote on the stimulus bill, which failed to gather meaningful Republican support during rare weekend debate. The question-and-answer sessions with citizens and later with news reporters will allow Obama to appeal directly for grass-roots backing of his plans.

Both trips were added to Obama's schedule as difficulties with the legislation on Capitol Hill increased. Originally, aides had insisted his time would be better spent in Washington to shepherd the bill rather than traveling the more traditional presidential route around the country, pressuring lawmakers from his bully pulpit.

The $827 billion Senate version of the plan was expected to pass the Senate on Tuesday. However, it must be reconciled with the House version, which totaled $820 billion in spending and tax cuts. With Senate and House negotiators preparing to deal, Obama is likely to push for a bill on his desk for his signature by mid-month.

 

Click to read.

Technorati Tags: barack obama,stimulus package,black politics,african american politics,black news,african american news

Your Black News: Dr Boyce and Madeline Talk Politics – Click to Watch

African American Scholar Boyce Watkins and Madeline Talk Black Politics

Technorati Tags: black scholars,black politics,african american scholars,african american politics,barack obama

Your Black News: Black Surgeon Ben Carson Gets a Movie

TNT's "Gifted Hands" is one of those longform projects that has Emmy written all over it.

It boasts near-flawless direction from Thomas Carter, a vivid teleplay adaptation by John Pielmeier and uniformly magnificent performances, particularly from star Cuba Gooding Jr., who puts himself back onto the Hollywood map here in a way he hasn't since his Oscar-winning turn in 1996's "Jerry Maguire."

Gooding portrays the real-life world-renowned brain surgeon Benjamin Carson, director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Children's Center and author of a best-selling 1990 autobiography.

It's taken nearly two decades to get Carson's inspiring story to the screen, but Gooding does him more than proud with a portrayal at once sensitively wrought and quietly moving.

In lesser hands (if you'll pardon the pun), this biopic could easily have drifted off into maudlin sap, but Gooding keeps the character of Carson centered and human and the film honoring him wise and surprisingly graphic. (The surgical procedures are showcased in all of their bloody glory, but not so much as to cross the line to gratuitousness.)

Click to read.

Technorati Tags: ben carson,black doctors,african american doctors,black physicians,african american physicians,black news headlines,african american news

President Barack Obama says He Screwed up on Daschle Appointment

"I don't think Washington wins," President Obama tells NBC's Brian Williams in the interview that the TV network will broadcast this evening -- one of five sit-downs the president did with national news anchors this afternoon.

"The fact of the matter is Tom Daschle pulled out today," Obama continues. "And I'm here on television saying I screwed up and that's part of the era of responsibility; is not never making mistakes; it's owning up to them and trying to make sure you never repeat them and that's what we intend to do."

The networks are sending out excerpts. Highlights from the others we've gotten so far:

• Obama tells ABC's Charles Gibson this was an embarrassing day for his administration, with the collapse of Daschle's nomination as Health and Human Services secretary and Nancy Killefer as chief performance officer.

"We're going to have some glitches," Obama adds, "and I understand that that's what people are going to focus on. And I'm focused on it because I don't want glitches. We can't afford glitches because, right now, what I should be spending time talking to you about is how we're going to put three to four million people back to work. And so this is a self-induced injury that I'm angry about, and we're going to make sure we get it fixed."

 

Click to read.

Technorati Tags: black news,african american news,black president,barack obama

Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson Says God Looked Out for Black Folk Through Slavery!

Why I Admire The Great Jim Brown

I got a phone call today. I get a lot of calls from “observers” (translation: supporters and haterologists), and I appreciate every single one of them. However, being as busy as I am, I usually don’t have time to call anyone back. I call my mama back and if my daughter would call me, she would be at the top of my list. I also call my grandmother. That’s enough to fill the free time at airports or on the way to the office.

If I call you back, I am returning the call because I either love you or respect you. I don’t return calls just because I think the caller is a “big shot”. In this business, everyone is into networking and butt kissing so they can meet this important person or that one. I’ve always felt that life is too short for that crap. For example, my homeboy Marc Lamont Hill at Temple University (one of the top black scholars in America), Al “The Inspiration” Duncan (an amazing public speaker and youth advocate) in Atlanta and Bill Thomason (a top black money manager) are brothers I always call back immediately because I respect their integrity. It’s really that simple for me.

On this day, I had some free time. I was driving to the office and I had a message from a woman named Karen. Karen’s family is full of Syracuse alumni. Honestly, most calls and emails I get from Syracuse alumni are not all that favorable. While I get cheers from the black and latino alums, the reality is that Syracuse has not had a strong historical black and latino presence. This is doubly true on the faculty, where a tenured professor of color is incredibly rare.
But I respect everyone, and I decided to use my free time to call Karen back. I was a little nervous, since I really wanted to talk to my grandmother. The risk was that I would miss a great conversation with grandma just so another alum could yell at me for being an outspoken black man.

But Karen was worth the investment because she was super duper cool. It also turned out that Karen is the daughter of the greatest alumnus in Syracuse University history, the great Jim Brown.

Jim was not amazing for what he did on the field. Yes, he had super human strength and was such an outstanding athlete that they changed the rules to find ways to stop him. But that doesn’t impress me, for black men have always possessed amazing athletic ability. Jim’s intellect impressed me far more than his athletic ability, for he is every bit as intelligent as he was athletic. But truth be told, while his intellect impressed the heck out of me, it didn’t impress the HELL out of me. Don’t get me wrong, he was a smart brother, but there are a lot of smart black male athletes, in spite of what the media tells you.

What impressed the HELL out of me was Jim Brown’s COURAGE. That is what left his mark on the university, and that is what will leave his mark on the world. While he may not be perfect, his strength inspires me as a black man to focus and overcome all that lies around me.

I have a Trinity of strength when it come to my black male “adopted fathers”. In this trinity, there is Malcolm X, Muhammad Ali and Jim Brown. I adopted these men many years ago when I saw my intelligent, highly educated, rich, famous African American predecessors selling out in droves. It seemed that the only black men rising to prominent positions in American society were the ones who most readily allowed themselves to be fully emasculated. Sure, these men might speak big behind closed doors, but out in public, there was a degree of weakness, cowardice and commitment to self-preservation that made me shudder. These were the men who would tell me that speaking out in favor of the poor would get me into trouble. They would tell me to leave behind the brothers in prison and the kids in the educational system because it might jeopardize my chance to drive a Jaguar one day. While I listen to such men respectfully, I found myself having a midlife crisis at the age of 25, wondering if there was a way to have a more meaningful existence.

I miss the days when athletes used their platforms for something other than another McDonald’s endorsement. It is most sad and ironic that the athletes with the most wealth and greatest power also happen to be the least educated and the least willing to become educated. Individuals such as Michael Jordan become about as politically-neutral as a can of spinach, all so he can turn his $200 million dollar fortune into a $300 million dollar fortune. I have always been of the opinion that black prosperity and social activism can go hand in hand. We can all continue Dr. King’s work, whether it is on the streets or in the board room. It doesn’t have to be one or the other.

I connected with Malcolm just because he was Malcolm. Malcolm X was clearly the greatest leader in American history. I connected with Muhammad Ali because he is from Louisville, my hometown, and also my second cousin. He taught me that a black man does not have to hold his head down in shame and weakness when the cameras turn on. I connected with Jim Brown because his spirit lives on my campus, Syracuse University. Jim created the path for me to do what I do today, and it was his ability to endure the firestorms of Syracuse controversy that remind me to stay focused in my endeavors.

The great shame of our generation is that someone convinced us that our existence is about one person. It is important for all of us to remember that we are part of something greater, and the greatest gift you can give to future generations is to clear a path for someone else to run through. Malcolm gave his life, Muhammad gave the prime of his boxing career, and Jim risked his life so that my generation could walk through doors that had been previously closed. I plan to march through that door with dignity and open another door for those behind me.

That is what scholars and intellectual leaders are supposed to do.

Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University and author of “What if George Bush were a Black Man?” For more information, please visit www.BoyceWatkins.com.

Black Finance Professor Speaks Out "Against D.L. Hughley Breaks the News"

Dr. Boyce Watkins
www.BoyceWatkins.com
Hey peeps!
The response I received from you guys on the new CNN show, “DL Hughley Breaks the News” was overwhelming. Within 20 minutes of sending out the email statement, we had an entire inbox full of messages expressing extreme disappointment in CNN and this offensive new show. This helped me realize that we need to do something about it.
Our goal is to present an intelligent, dignified and firm response to CNN, letting them know that programming based on racial stereotypes is not acceptable. Political satire can be quite funny, but it must be intelligent, balanced and conscientious. This is not the brand of humor presented in “DL Hughley Breaks the News”, which went back to the same degrading media stereotypes and disturbing images that scholars and consumers have been upset about for decades. Senator Obama opened the door for us to see ourselves as educated, enlightened and empowered, so the last thing we need is to be readmitted to the asylum of pimps, thugs, criminals and buffoons.
A sample letter you can use to contact CNN is presented below. You can get the contact information at this link. You can also forward this link and email to anyone you believe to share your sentiments regarding how our community should respond to this painful and disappointing new show. If you wish to hear my personal comments on the topic, please click here.
Finally, don’t forget that we are going to “Get our paper straight in 2008”, so if you wish to join our group for Dr. Boyce Financial Advice, please click here.
The sample letter is below. You can get contact information for key decision-makers at CNN by clicking here. Remember: Change won’t start with Obama or McCain. Meaningful change is going to start with US.
To CNN and its key decision-makers,
As a member of the Your Black World coalition, I am writing to inform you that I found your recently released show, “DL Hughley Breaks the News” to be a tremendous disappointment. While I certainly respect CNN’s effort to develop itself as “The most trusted name in news”, I did not find the new DL Hughley show to be consistent with the degree of trust that CNN has worked to obtain with the American public.
The 2008 Presidential campaign represents an amazing landmark for change within our country by allowing an African American male to present himself to the world as a dignified and educated member of our society, an image which lies in stark contrast to media representations confining Black men to being criminals, rappers, athletes and entertainers. I found it disheartening that this progress was reversed by CNN’s decision to create a show which relied on the very same stereotypes to build a consistent stream of laughs at the expense of African Americans everywhere. The show was also degrading to those in the broader community who support the candidacy of Senator Barack Obama, and who wish to see our great country move past the deep and painful wounds created by our nation’s legacy of racial inequality.
We ask that you discontinue the show, “DL Hughley Breaks the News”, and consider a brand of political humor that is respectful to all ethnicities and shows greater appreciation for the tremendous gains made in the 2008 Presidential election. Perhaps then, CNN can regain its status as “The most trusted name in news”.
Sincerely,The Your Black World Coalition

What's Wrong with You People: Dr Boyce Watkins

Since everyone appears to be on the "black people have no personal responsibility" band wagon, I thought I would buy a ticket. I read some of the transcript from Senator Barack Obama's NAACP speech Monday, so I thought I would pick up the spoon and get myself a big fat dose of personal responsibility. After all, perhaps we should consider ourselves fortunate: We are the only group that presidential candidates visit and tell us all the things that are wrong with us. I should have figured it out long ago: everyone else is perfect, and we are just ficked up.

In fact, our fortune runs even deeper than we can imagine, since our presidential candidates have taken notes from the great Ronald Reagan and given us the privilege of looking past everyone else's flaws. We don't have to listen to our president lecturing white Americans on their 50% divorce and child abandonment rate: all that matters are the black men who don't get married. We don't have to listen to our presidential candidates talk about the hundreds of thousands of alcoholics, drug addicts and rapists being produced on college campuses every year: all that matters is that black men are the ones being sent to prison for drug possession. Finally, we don't have to listen to our president talk about how many conservative family politicians have been caught sleeping with every woman (or man, or little boy) on the block: all that matters is that black men need to keep their "thing" in their pants and black women need to stop opening their legs to every man who brings them a bag of Cheetos.

Nope: the personal responsibility speeches are all saved for us. I guess that's the benefit of being so pathetic. It's not like we don't need it. I saw several black boys on TV the other day getting arrested for stealing. I hate it when all those black boys steal. I mean, 100% of the black boys I saw on TV last week were stealing, which MUST mean that 100% of all black boys steal. The white kids I saw on the news were going to college. Why don't black men ever study like those kids? If it were not for the media, I wouldn't have a chance to see just how pathetic we all are. It's a national epidemic I tell you!

I really could use a speech on personal responsibility. Had it not been for my ability to manipulate the welfare system and get an extra check every month, I would never have been able to manipulate my way to a PhD. I am not sure how my trifling mama got a child into Cornell University, another in the Mayo Clinic and a third on the faculty at Syracuse University. If only that pathetic single black mother could have been more responsible. Perhaps then her children could have gone to Harvard like Senator Obama.

So, you black people, please listen: You need to simply accept the fact that you are screwed up and have no morals. Forget what everyone else is doing, your kids are lazy and worthless, and you've never learned the value of hard work in your lives. No, no, no. Stop mentioning all the corporate welfare that our government gives out every year to lobbyists, or the fact that millions of Americans (of all races) were begging for government welfare to save themselves from their mortgage crisis. That might be true, but this is about you: everyone else's government support is not the issue, it's not like you people pay taxes or anything. We would rather talk about the person I saw on The O'Reilly Factor last week who said that they get welfare so they can buy extra crack. See, like I said, black people have no morals.

The focus of this discussion is that if you you were not so weak and worthless, you would not have depression-era unemployment in your communities, we wouldn't have to pass you over for jobs and your black men would not be getting longer sentences for the same crimes. You think that America is being racist against you. Get a life. That racism excuse is old and tired. Everyone knows that racism doesn't exist. We support Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity because they are truly great Americans, unlike that afro-wearing loud mouth Jesse Jackson. It's not as if he's ever done anything important.

So, here's what I am trying to say to you people: Get off welfare and learn how to work. Stop whining about companies that haven't hired a black manager in 100 years. If you guys could actually do the job, then maybe they would give it to you. There is no reason to learn to love yourself, because who you are right now is pathetic. If only you black people could learn to be as perfect as the rest of America, you might just be OK. Thanks Senator Obama, I needed to learn my place.

Black Public Scholar Takes on the NCAA: Dr Boyce Watkins

 

Is a Scholarship Enough?: Boyce Watkins on NCAA Reform | Bleacher Report

Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Professor of Finance at Syracuse University. He frequently appears on CNN, ESPN, and other news networks to discuss his innovative ideas for reforming college athletics. Bleacher Report was thrilled to have an opportunity to interview Dr. Watkins about his belief that college athletes should get paid.

 

 

1) People often say that the opportunity to receive a free education is enough compensation for college athletes. What's wrong with that argument?

 

A free education is valuable, no one knows that better than a college professor. The problem is that we can’t assume that $30,000 per year is fair compensation for any job. If Tom Cruise stars in a blockbuster film, he is going to kick your butt if you try to pay him $30,000, even if you throw room and board in with it. In America, you get paid what you’re worth.

 

I see many athletes who are literally responsible for bringing $20M per year into their campuses, yet their mothers are starving to death or homeless. This should be a shame for us all, since I’ve never seen a D-I college coach’s mother go hungry.

 

 

2) If colleges could pay athletes, the wealthier schools would appear to have an advantage. Do you think there would need to be a salary cap or other measures put in place to ensure some parity in college sports?

 

I am not opposed to the idea of a salary cap, although I haven’t seen a salary cap for coaches. My goal is not to support preferential treatment for athletes, I only endorse fairness. I don’t see why coaches and athletes can’t have the same rules. They are all under the same pressure to win, they are both treated as professionals and expected to produce as professionals. This pressure doesn’t come from the fact that their campuses love sports so much, it’s because CAMPUSES WANT THE MONEY. They are pushing these guys much harder on the court and the field than they do in the classroom, because good grades don’t pay university bills; only big wins bring in big paychecks.

 

But in terms of a salary cap, I would not be opposed to that. The NCAA is lucky, since they are the only multi-billion sports league that can get away with paying their players 1/100 of what they are worth. Players would be ecstatic to play for $150,000 per year, which is far less than the millions many of them would earn in a fair market system. The money wouldn’t have to come from university budgets, they could start by sharing the money coaches get from shoe deals. After all, the players are the ones we pay to see and they are the ones wearing the shoes. But as a general rule, the Finance and free market capitalist in me doesn’t like the idea of any kind of government regulation restricting wages. I am sure coaches wouldn’t like a cap on their wages either.

 

 

3) Do you think that recruits should be offered contracts by schools based on the performance they showed in high school? How would one individual's contract differ from another?

 

I don’t think that we know all the answers to these questions, but one thing is true: The market knows ALL ANSWERS to ALL QUESTIONS. In other words, if a player is the next Lebron James, then the schools know what he can do in terms of revenue generation. I say let them bid it out and the highest bidder wins. Seriously, who is to say that Rick Pitino is worth $3 million per year? Nobody says it, there is a negotiation and the price that he gets is what he is worth. The beauty about the free market is that when the market is fair, open, and efficient, no one gets more than what they are truly worth, since no one pays more than the value of the commodity.

 

What I love about the NCAA (who expends a tremendous amount of money on their propaganda machine) is that they do a good job of making it seem that paying the athletes would be excessively complicated and nearly impossible. The problem is that they find a way to get around the complications when it’s time to bring in a coach for $4M dollars per year. The market works out all complications, because you either get the deal done, or the game doesn’t happen. They have a lot of PhDs working for them, and we are smart enough to help them work out the complications of their contracts.

 

The reality is that anyone who exploits someone else, whether it’s the NCAA or a pimp on the street, is always going to find a good excuse for keeping their money in their pocket. I say this as a financial expert. I am sure that when Billy Packer or Dick Vitale show up for their multi-million dollar paychecks, they wouldn’t want to hear any reasons that their money isn’t available. For some reason, they expect athletes and their families to accept these excuses.

 

 

4) What should be done regarding sports that bring in very little revenue such as golf, tennis, and track? Would the contracts for these athletes be substantially less?

 

Yes, they would be. That’s the way things work in the real world. I am a professor, and some could argue that educating our youth is far more important than being a Hollywood actor. However, I will always make less money than (and not be attractive enough to date) Angelina Jolie. I accept that.

 

I find it most ironic that when individuals expect payment equity among young athletes, as well as gender equity, they almost never mention the necessity of such equity among the coaches.

 

Again, going back to a fair market, if an athlete brings revenue to the university, he/she should have the same rights of negotiation that coaches, administrators, corporate sponsors, and everyone else getting paid from his/her labor. If you simply release the rules and let the market work, you will get the result you are looking for.

 

 

5) How would you like to reform the horrendous academic environment in college athletics?

 

I agree, the environment is horrific. I’ve seen athletes admitted to college with no expectation that they are ever going to consider graduating. Money is a drug, and a drug addiction can make any of us lower our standards. Universities are no different, as many of them abandon their academic missions in exchange for the opportunity to earn a few million dollars off the next superstar from the ghetto.

 

We must remember that incentives roll downhill. A coach with high graduation rates and a low winning percentage would be fired, while a coach with low graduation rates and a high winning percentage is given a raise and promotion. This shows blatant disregard for the value of academic success. I see universities giving coaches blank checks for controlling every aspect of their players’ lives in order to get them ready to play, but they throw their hands up and negate their responsibility to see to it that these young men and women are getting educated. The excuses are interesting: “We can’t make them study if they don’t want to!” At the same time, the same coach who claims that he can’t make the athletes study miraculously finds a way to get 80 grown men awake at 6 am for intense weight lifting sessions. They are able to motivate the athletes to do what coaches deem to be most important.

 

I don’t completely blame the coaches for these contradictions, I blame the campus. Coaches understand that they are not going to be rewarded for academic achievement. Winning, however, is key to their job security. Campuses should take the lead in putting oversight in place that insures that academic progress is the most important part of any athletics program. That means that if a player has practice the night before an exam, he/she misses practice. If they have an exam during a game, they miss the game (even if it is a million dollar game on ESPN). THAT, my friend, is the life of a student athlete. Right now, college athletes live the lives of professionals.

 

 

6) If you were named President of the NCAA, what other changes mightyou make other than compensating athletes?

 

I am hesitant to be an armchair quarterback on the NCAA, primarily because I believe that many of the administrators in the NCAA know that what they are doing is wrong. In fact, Walter Byers, the former executive director of the NCAA has reversed his position and stated that athletes should be paid. Honestly, anyone with common sense realizes that if you earn millions for someone else, you deserve more than a college scholarship. I believe that Myles Brand, in spite of the propaganda exercise performed by he and CBS Sports last year (in an attempt to refute my analysis), knows that he would never allow himself or his coaches to operate under the same constraints, penalties and exploitation placed on athletes and their families (especially if his mother were getting evicted, as many of these players come from poverty). In fact, I found it quite ironic that nearly every participant in the CBS sports special was earning at least a few hundred thousand dollars per year while simultaneously explaining to athletes and their families why they shouldn’t get any of that money.

 

Beyond paying the athletes, I would make a decision: either the NCAA is going to be a professional organization or an amateur one. It’s not going to be a hybrid. A truly amateur organization doesn’t have coaches earning as much as $4M dollars per year. Coaches earn no more than, say, $80,000 per year.

 

 

• An amateur organization doesn’t fire losing coaches with high graduation rates and reward winning coaches with low graduation rates—any coach hired by the NCAA is expected to not only teach at the university, he/she is expected to ensure that academic achievement is first and foremost in the life of each athlete.

 

 

• The rules should disappear: why can’t players transfer to other schools without being penalized? Coaches leave in the middle of the season all the time. Why is it illegal for athletes to receive compensation from outside entities? Coaches take money from whomever they please. Athletes are given the same responsibilities as adults, told to behave as adults, yet we put rules in place that treat them like children. Again, anyone who exploits another human being, whether it’s the NCAA or a corrupt warlord in a third world country, is going to place constraints on you and then guise his/her motivations by claiming that the rules are in place for your protection. That is the consistent theme of the NCAA’s justification for controlling their student athletes. But their desire to protect the athlete goes out the window when an athlete gets into trouble, loses his/her eligibility or loses his/her scholarship for not being able to perform on the field.

 

 

• The NCAA needs to redefine its mission and be honest with the world. Right now, it is an elephant with bunny ears, swearing that it’s nothing but a harmless little rabbit. The truth is that the NCAA is exactly what it appears to be: a professional sports league. So, rather than allowing me to become the head of the NCAA, I would rather be the head of the House Ways and Means Committee, which initiated an investigation into the NCAA and began to question its non-profit status. A bureaucratic beast that has grown so deformed with contradictions needs to be deconstructed and rebuilt in a model of fairness. As it stands, the NCAA exists in stark contrast to the values most of us embrace as Americans. I’ve seen it up close over the past 15 years and it bothers the heck out of me.

Michelle Obama is now Barack Obama's Baby Mama, According to Fox

Michelle Obama is referred to as a "Baby Mama" by Fox News. The black community is outraged over this statement and considers it to be an insult. This is not the first time that Fox has insulted the black community. It has allowed Bill O'Reilly, one of it's most prominent talk show hosts, to refer to actually lynching Michelle Obama. Additionally, it has paid many African American commentators to say degrading things about the black community.

Michelle Obama and Barack Obama haven't responded to the statements, but many in the black community are concerned about the racism terrorism used by Fox News in this election.



The video is below.

Obama and McCain: Shameless demagogues

By John Eidson

Barack Obama and John McCain both favor hitting Big Oil with a stiff windfall profits tax. Their implied logic is based on the (false) premise that greedy oil industry executives are the primary recipients of misbegotten record profits.

The after-tax profits of any corporation belong to its stockholders. So how much oil company stock do oil company executives own? According to a report by Robert J. Shapiro, former president Bill Clinton’s Undersecretary of Commerce for Economic Affairs, the answer is a meager 1.5%.

Here’s what Shapiro’s report has to say about the demographic makeup of the 98.5% of oil company stockholders who are not oil industry executives: “The data show that ownership of oil industry shares is broadly middle class.” More specifically, Shapiro found that:

• 43% of oil industry shares are held in the mutual fund accounts of 55 million U. S. households with a median income of $68,700.
• 27% are owned by more than 2,600 federal, state and local pension funds, funds that represent the retirement security of middle class worker categories ranging from veterans, policemen and firemen to teachers, air traffic controllers and sanitation workers.
• 14% are held in the IRA and other personal investment accounts of 45 million households.

In short, the overwhelming lion's share of oil industry profits go to ordinary Americans, not oil industry fat cats.

Here’s something else you won’t hear from McCain or Obama. Oil industry profit margins -- the amount earned per dollar of sales – is roughly the same as it has been for decades, and is in line with profit margins of other U.S. industries such as banks, cosmetic companies and pharmaceutical manufacturers.

The rapid rise of the price of a barrel of oil is largely responsible for $4 a gallon gasoline. Knowing that most voters are almost totally uninformed about the economics of oil industry profits, the country’s presidential candidates are being shamelessly dishonest about an important issue that affects us all.

John Eidson is a white conservative who takes great delight in black success.

Marine officer's view of Iraq

By John Eidson

A woman who once taught kindergarten with my wife is married to a retired nuclear sub commander and graduate of the U. S. Naval Academy.

Their son, Jeff, is a Marine officer in Iraq. His job is training Iraqi soldiers and accompanying them on missions to deal with the remaining al Qaeda cells and other extremists.

In recent conversations with his parents, Jeff has expressed extreme pride in the terrific job the American military is doing in helping the Iraqis learn how to defend their country.

He reports that the Iraqi Army is making major strides, that violence is down significantly, that political reconciliation is occurring, and that the lives of the Iraqi people are returning to normal in many of what once were seething hotbeds of death and violence.

His mother said his main frustration is the same as that of other soldiers and Marines who risk their lives every day to bring peace and stability to Iraq: how the traditional media has virtually ignored the war ever since a flood of good news began occurring this time a year ago.

His perspective as a combat officer in the thick of things: the war in Iraq is being won.

John Eidson is a white conservative who takes great pleasure in black success.

The Talking Heads Missed The Point

A note from a friend: THE TALKING HEADS MISSED THE POINT By Rosemary Farmer I think the Talking Heads and pundits missed the whole point of Hillary's speech. They all say that she endorsed Obama, yes she did, but not without some diggs, if you listen closely. Clinton is still trying to parse and divide the electorate up into women are the victims here, since she lost her bid to be the nominee. Since when did the situation this country finds itself in today by the Bush Administration and a Republican dominated Congress, just become about only women? That is the whole point Clinton refuses to admit. This Election is about the SOUL of the Country; the last time I looked, that included everyone, NOT just women. Women have made great strides in this country, and will continue to make then with Democrats in the White House and Congress in the majority. So for Clinton to still insist that it is all about her and womenʼs feelings is totally disingenuous. Yes, I said it and I am an older woman. This election is about the country and our standing in the world and taking back the leadership role we had in the world to actually make it a better place for the world. From, Clinton's view it is still about how the press treated me because I am a woman. . Since she was playing in a Man's arena, conceding and offering congratulations to your opponent is being a good sport. She proved that she cannot be even responsible in that capacity. So to think she should be President is over stretching the truth. In fact the press all but anointed her from the very beginning and in certain words told everyone else to get out, especially young Freshman Senator Barack Obama, that he was wasting his time. . The truth is, I feel there is a woman out there waiting in the wings, if not already in the pipeline who will be President--and she will not go whining about Sexism, the press is beating up on me, and more than likely, she will not have an ex-President for a husband who will act like a bull in a china shop and insult all of the other candidates. Clinton, herself showed little respect for Sen. Obama, where he was always complimentary of her at every turn. . Was that favor returned? no. So this idea that she needs to be treated special because she is a woman that she and her supporters believe is true, does not show she is ready to be prime time. As a matter of fact, because she was the spouse of a President has gotten her farther than she really should have come if it she was just plain old Hillary Clinton. In others words, she got starting gate privileges that the next serious woman candidate will not get. . Come on Folks, a whole week to concede and endorse . . .!!  Stay on top of what's going on around you. From Hip Hop to world and national news--stay informed about those things that impact both the Black community and the entire world, as interpreted by Dr. Boyce Watkins, and some of the nation's top Black writers. Stay in touch with Your Black World www.yourblackworld.com/. It's our piece of the net.

White Female Mourning vs Black Victory

Last night while I was enjoying the giddiness of the victory of my chosen candidate after a long, long battle, two events took place that amazed and dazed me. The first one was a statement made by a commentator on CNN and the other was an email I received from someone I know who also closely follows politics. It got me thinking about just how racial ignorance must be bliss for some in the white community and how some of them make statements that they don't think are offensive, when actually they are.

I was listening to CNN while cleaning my house since I'm throwing my daughter's graduation party this weekend when I heard one of the commentators giving out historical tidbits about why this election was so significant historically and racially. The one fact that floored me was how in 1808 the Slave Trade ended and here we are 200 years later with our first African American nominee for President. He said it like it was this amazing thing, just 200 years ago this happened and look where we are now! Because of the delivery I felt sort of offended and confused. Was I supposed to be happy about this because my former Social Studies teacher kicked in gave me about 156 years worth of reasons why this wasn't such an awesome fact. I would love to hear someone one talk about the 156 out of the 200 years when we didn't have either the legal or protected right to vote. Although I'm sure he didn't mean for it to sound the way I took it, I can't imagine anyone can honestly think that is amazing. If it were a Black person up there I'm sure we would have had a different tone to that statistic. I think it would have gone more like, and isn't it interesting that it has taken 200 years to get to this place in history. Same fact, completely different connotation.

My second foray into the racial fray of this election came when I checked my email at midnight. There I found a message from a Baby Boomer generation, white woman. She sent this email to me, and our friend who is a Mexican woman. She conceded that the primary was over and she will support Obama, but she cried when he won because her mother and other women her mother's age may never get to vote for a woman for President. She asked us to give her a few weeks to mourn the loss and to not be too enthusiastic about our victory in her presence. WHAT!!!? Are you flippin serious?! So now I can't just go to bed I have to say something. My mind was like, oh no she didn't but I knew I couldn't just snap. So I sat there and thought about how to intelligently address this email that was sent to me by someone who is not uneducated but definitely suffering from racial ignorance. So for those of you that are going to be faced with the same White woman mourning issues here is a piece of how I addressed the issue.

"I don't know if this will help but I never thought that voting for either candidate simply because of their race or sex was the right thing to do. Hillary is has admirable qualities that have nothing to do with her gender and Obama's message and achievements transcend race."

"It may sadden you to think that your mother and other women her age won't get to vote for a woman but, that wasn't a great reason to vote for her anyway. But if we are using their race and gender as qualifiers then maybe it will help to think about all of those older Black men and women that lived under Jim Crow and fought and struggled under segregation while being disenfranchised to an extent that White women have never had to deal with in this country. Those people will now have the opportunity to say they can vote for and African American for President. Amazing because up until 1964 many of them couldn't have voted with out fear of retaliation and death IF they could get past the poll taxes, literacy test and grandfather clauses. I am happy to think that my parents who marched and protested during the Civil Rights Movement, will now have the opportunity to see the fruits of their labor by being able to see the first African American Presidential candidate It is sweeter because my father is 68 years old and lived in the South he didn't have the protected right to vote until 44 years ago while your mother did. I think it is nice that we can now say that Dr King's Dream is coming to pass and people looked past the color of his skin and voted for him based on the content of his character. "

I hate quoting Dr. King but since there are only about 3 Black people deemed acceptable by society to get a mention in high school US History and I couldn't think of an appropriate quote from Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass right then I had to use Dr. King. It makes no sense to me. So a woman didn't win but history was made in a big way last night. Can't we as a nation celebrate a national victory together. Why does it have to be seen as the defeat of White women in favor of a Black victory? I guess for the same reason some of those same women hate Oprah now because she is supposed to stand for women above all else. Ignorant of the fact that maybe she isn't just a woman but she has other things about her that make up who she is and one of those things is race.

This racial ignorance falls along the same lines as Dr Watkins protest of the Axis of Ignorance. People want to have us and Senator Obama denounce our leadership because they don't like what they have to say. But the problem isn't what is being said it is why some of our leaders feel those things need to be said in the first place? Instead of shooting the messenger and denouncing the message why not find out why the message exists in the first place. It isn't like people of all educational levels and socio-economic backgrounds in our community aren't listening to and agreeing with the message. Why is that? Could there actually be something that rings true for many of us in Reverend Wright's and Father Pfleger's sermons? I am tired of my leaders being marginalized because of ignorance and editing. I'm tired of being told that because I agree with 85% of what they say that I'm a racist and I shouldn't listen to them. Who are they to tell me that I should ignore my history and live in a blissful little world where all is well because it makes them feel better to not have to deal with their part in my racial reality.

But even though I get a little fired up and militant about these issues I want to find a way to fix things instead of making them worse. Most of these people who make ignorant comments are people I have to interact with everyday so how do I make my point and not make them feel stupid in the process? I really don't think most of them know that some of the things they say are ignorant. So I'm not going to get mad and defensive and give them a reason to marginalize me too. But I won't allow an ignorant statement to go by without comment. Counter with some much needed history to explain and educate them. It will be more than most of them have gotten in their formal education.

It is interesting that Obama supporters were classified as educated white collar where Hillary supporters were considered uneducated and working class. I have seen this dynamic in action repeatedly. We are going to need them all to win in November. Now we are going to have to welcome these disappointed souls into our struggle as we try to win the election. Let's take this time to rise above and do a little W.E.B. DuBois Talented Tenth teaching across racial lines to see if we can make some more history and break down some more barriers. Maybe we can help alleviate some of the racial ignorance that abounds and in so doing have a dialog about race and history and commonalities. Maybe we can look at it as combating the Axis of Ignorance one viewer at a time on a personal level. Whatever you decide to do when confronted with the racial ignorance, whether it is in the media or in your personal life, don't let their ignorance and mourning take your Black victories and leaders away from you.

Understanding tax cuts

(Author Unknown)

Some politicians claim, "It's a tax cut for the rich!", and the statement is often accepted as fact. But what does that assertion really mean? Let's put tax cuts in terms that are easy to understand. Suppose that every day, ten men go out for lunch, and the total bill comes to $100. If they paid the bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing
The fifth would pay $1
The sixth would pay $3
The seventh would pay $7
The eighth would pay $12
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men ate lunch in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement. But one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." Lunch for the ten men now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes, so the first four men were unaffected -- they would still eat for free. But what about the other six - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's bill, the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to eat their meal. So, the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill according to a sliding scale, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay:

The fifth man, like the fist four, now paid nothing (100% savings)

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings)
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings)
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings)
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings)

The richest man now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings)

Each of the six was better off than before, and the first four continued to eat for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. Then, pointing to the tenth man, he said, "But he got $10!" "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than me!" "That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!" "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

Posted by John Eidson, a white conservative who takes great pleasure in black success.

Today I Have The Audacity of Hope

I watched and enjoyed Barack Obama's 2004 Democratic National Convention speech. The speech titled "The Audacity of Hope" was electrifying and gave Americans especially black Americans glimmers of hope. Those hopes include the possibility that Obama a black man might one day win, The Presidency, the highest office in the land.

I have been urging people to endorse Obama since his historic victory in Iowa. I was so excited about Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Senator Obama on Monday, January 28, 2008. Listening to the speeches of Obama and all of the Kennedy clan gave me great joy and hope.

(Thank you Senator Kennedy. May God continue to shower you with his grace and mercy during your current trial.)

Hope that we will continue to seek God's face and that God will heal our land. Hope that we will come together as a one nation united under God. Hope that Obama will win the nomination of the Democratic Party and hope that he will become the next President of the United States of America.

Today, June 3, 2008, as a fifty-four year old black woman I hope that this man Obama time has come, that his time is now! Today I have the audacity to hope, pray, and believe that Senator Barack Obama will be the next President of the United States of America.

OBAMA 2008 !!!!!!!! FIRED UP, AND READY TO GO!!!!!!!!!!!

Vera Richardson is the author of “A Case of Racial Discrimination and Retaliation Real or Imagined." http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?r=1&EAN=9780615177014

Exposing a myth: "Bush's tax cuts only help the rich."

By John Eidson

It’s amazing how many people in the tax brackets below have been led to believe that the Bush tax cuts are only for the rich, and that President Clinton is the one who really cared about reducing the tax burden of the middle class. According to Federal Income Tax Rate tables (see link below), the facts show just the opposite.

	Taxes under Clinton (1999)	Taxes under Bush (2008)
Single - taxable income of $30K	$8,400	$4,500
Single - taxable income of $50K	$14,000	$12,500
Single - taxable income of $75K	$23,250	$18,750
Married - taxable income of $60K	$16,800	$9,000
Married - taxable income of $75K	$21,000	$18,750
Married - taxable income of $125K	$38,750	$31,250

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html

Can we win in Iraq?

By John Eidson

Many Americans have been led to believe that we cannot win in Iraq. The outcome remains in doubt, but history proves even "hopeless" wars can be won.

In the period leading to World War II, a high-profile group of defeatists led by none other than Charles Lindbergh claimed we had no hope of winning a war against the mighty Third Reich, much less a two-front war against major world powers with far superior forces that "would come at us from all directions."

Despite the forecasts of doom-and-gloom, we prevailed. It wasn't easy, but FDR stood firm, and the rest of the nation, including Lindbergh, rallied around the flag, even when things appeared "hopeless."

John Eidson is a white conservative who takes great pleasure in black success. In addition to postings on MyBlackPolitics, he also contributes money-saving ideas to YourBlackMoney.