Here's a hint. They don't care.
Listening to RW talk radio discuss the Jena 6, for instance, should clue you in.
Facts that must be put onto the table
1) Tavis Smiley's "Convenant With Black America" IS NOT A COVENANT. It is better viewed as a POSITION PAPER where all Black folks who AGREE that a certain METHODOLOGY is best for Black people should advocate that the politicians that THEY vote for should support. IF ONLY they had more evidence on the ground in the districts that the politicians that they support that are already in office can deliver with these METHOLOGIES it would strenghten the book's positioning among those Black people (like me) who are learned to ASK QUESTIONS lest we be rolled upon.
2) Tavis Smiley is BY FAR no objective mediator in the fray. A sampling of his 10 years of commentary on the Tom Joyner Morning Show will tell you that he is laced with a particular bias. In fact if the Democrats claim that they didn't want to show up to the Fox News event because Fox is BIASED....this claim is more so advanced by inspecting the record of Tavis Smiley and the company that he keeps (Danny Glover, Harry Belefonte, Cornel West, etc - certainly not CENTRIST IDEOLOGUES in anyone's book)
3) I have learned from reading the various "Legislative Report Cards" that interest groups put out that their grades given to legislators is NOT an absolute measure of these individual's EFFECTIVENESS but a measure of where these people stand with respect to THOSE DOING THE JUDGING. Again if only the "Black Quasi-Socialist Progressive-Fundamentalist Racism Chaser" could PROVE that the Black community in following their course over the past 40 years has benefited WITHIN then such a realtive measure would be justified. Unfortunatley Detroit, Philly, Baltimore, DC, Cleveland, New Orleans SHOULD BE used as the showcase cities of what happens when THEIR POLICIES are adopted. Why aren't THESE CITIES used as REFERENCES regarding what Black folks can expect if we continue to follow this POPULAR mandate which is certainly not EFFECTIVE for us Blacks?
4)Why didn't Tavis Smiley, figuring that HIS FORUM would be threatened by the coordinated attacks on the Fox News debate (and our friend rikyrah was a participant) stand up at that time and pronounce that TALKING in uncomfortable settings is more important than HIDING? In my view Tavis knew that he would be able to spin this into a RACIAL DISS upon Black people. Once again it is intersting how some DEMOCRATS WHO ARE BLACK are able to fuse their BLACKNESS with their AGENDA and claim that attacks against THEIR IDEOLOGY is an attack against all Blacks.
If a group of Black Republicans held a forum do you think that the GOP candidates would diss them? If not then this is an IDEOLOGICAL issue rather than a RACIAL one.
5)
WHY HASN'T ANY BLACK & OBJECTIVE JOURNALIST (the few of them who are out there) take a dispassionate look at the Tavis Smiley Covenant and evaluate its EFFICACY on an independent manner? I notice that Progressives sell us THE FUTURE when they need to be measured against the PRESENT AND THE PAST. Where is the analysis of the impact of these policies and the questioning of why we should go forward with them as a People?
I hope that the top 4 will change their minds/schedules and appear at the debate. Not that I think that Tavis is the gatekeeper to black folk, but I do think that the GOP should take the challenge. It will be a challenge for them because I am willing to bet that the questions won’t be softballs like the ones for the Democrats. It’s a shame that they are punking out. If Ron Paul and his very small gov’t message is going to be there, then the rest of the guys should be there to give their positions on issues/questions raised.
I do think that Alan Keyes is going to attend, so this will be very interesting.
Seems to me that if the GOP candidates were truly interested in black votes they would rush to a forum like this and outline in detail how their ideas and initiatives would be more beneficial and effective for black folks and America in general than the so-called "leftist, collectivist" thought as Thornton puts it.
The bottom line is they have no ideas other than "no more government money for Negroes. We got a war to run".
They are not interested in black votes because they feel they have done better without them.
I would ask D.C. Thornton, how often do guys like you go before black audiences and "hold your head high" and present a case for black Republican support?
I have thought about this...and my conclusion is Who cares
Do most of the black people on this site who are conservative have fundamentally different issues from whites that need to be specifically answered in a predominately black forum hosted by leftists?
I seriously doubt it.
This is not Republicans trying to get "black votes" it is a forum for black ghetto people and their backers to shame republicans or pressure them into showing support for some nonsense ghetto government plan, etc.
It has nothing to do with the life of 98% of black conservatives as most of us are already upwardly mobile and productive and don't live in ghettos.
So no this is not "reaching out to the black community" because Tavis Smiley and his bunch don't represent most of the black people in the U.S. they represent the lower class.
They should be their period. You never know who is watching and who you could persuade. Also it would be nice if a less partisan group like the urban league would sponsor such a debate.
CS
"WHY HASN'T ANY BLACK & OBJECTIVE JOURNALIST (the few of them who are out there)"
omigod.
Now the blacks are all biased, huh?
Name me the white journalists you consider "unbiased".
I can't wait to hear this..
You're gonna tell me that Gwen Ifill, Leon Harris, and Derek McGinty are biased leftists???
I guess in your mind any black who walks upright and doesn't reflexively grunt "Yassuh" when talking to white folks is a "leftist".
"So no this is not "reaching out to the black community" because Tavis Smiley and his bunch don't represent most of the black people in the U.S. they represent the lower class."
Judging by the popularity of Smiley and Tom Joyner this is not true. The in fact do represent most blacks views to one degree or another. If you ask the average black whether the agree more with Tavis or Rob Woodson, I think most would say Tavis.
DH
All I can say is WOW.
You deserve a bust in the "Lawn Jockey Hall of Fame".
[quote]Here's a hint. They don't care.
Listening to RW talk radio discuss the Jena 6, for instance, should clue you in.[/quote]
This POST above perfectly encapsulates the PROBLEM with the debate.
You see TVD as with Tavis would like to post THEIR priorities for Black folks and have the "Right Wingers" talk about them.
Jena should be PROPORTIONALIZED with the NON-JUSTICE that I continue to speak about. THEN tvd would be asking those who showed up yesterday - attempting to recreate what got them fame in the 1960's WHY THEY "DON'T CARE" about all of the Black families who are not receiving JUSTICE over their dead loved ones. Now just image if gangs of WHITE MEN rode through the Black communities each night and registered the carnage that WE HAVE TO-DAMNED-DAY! Is there any chance in HELL that this incidents would be ignored? Why then the "Non-White WHITE SUPPREMACY" executed because the KILLERS ARE BLACK and thus can be ignored?
With Tavis, his Covenant to the Progressive Black attempts to ESTABLISH POSITION POINTS that all Blacks who hope remain in good standing should AGREE WITH and follow.
Once again he attempts to SET THE AGENDA and the FOCUS. They leave out large measures of KEY PROBLEMS WITHIN THE BLACK COMMUNITY as they focus on ADVOCACY that is OUTWARD upon the greater society. In summary they attempt to OBTAIN RESOURCES FROM THE GREATER SOCIETY so that the standard of living of Black people can be RAISED.
The thought of building an ECONOMIC BASE that is used as the propulsion system to lift us upward IS NOT the central focus.
Elb:
That is not really the issue.
I'm talking about voting based on your self interest. People agree with Tavis due to black groupism, the majority of what Tavis wants and talks about has nothing to do with Middle Class black people it has to do with the ghetto.
Steve:
You live in a town that is 60% white and relatively affluent...when you move to the ghetto let me know.
"If you ask the average black whether the agree more with Tavis or Rob Woodson, I think most would say Tavis."
I like both Tavis and Woodson, one of the few sincere and forthright black conservatives out there.
The reason most blacks would identify with Tavis is pure name recognition.
Tavis Smiley is a media celebrity.
Bob Woodson is not.
A more accurate comparison would be Tavis Smiley vs Armstrong Williams.
Don't you think?
LLR is on point. If the Republican argument is compelling, it should win out even in a hostile environment. And Republicans need the votes.
Although Ron Paul has made despicable statements.
[quote]Now the blacks are all biased, huh?
[/quote]
Steve - can you list popular Black media types who are BALANCED in their reporting? (Atlanta's Jeff Dickerson is one of them - I believe that he would be an excellent moderator in a GOP debate with a Black audience)
It is my view after more than a decade of observation that the Black journalist who was originally created to GIVE A VOICE to Black people because the mainstream press so maligned our image today sees himself as an important force in ADVANCING the agenda of the popular "Black Quasi-Socialist Progressive-Fundamentalist Racism Chaser" dogma.
He ECHOS were he should be QUESTIONING!
He defends where he should be checking his archieves to see what the Black politician PROMISED 10 years ago as their district has INCREASED in its misery index.
Again please list the noted OBJECTIVE Black journalist and commentators
You can scratch the following off of your list:
Derrick Z Jackson - Boston Globe
Dewyne Whyckham - USA Today
Cynthia Tucker - Atlanta Journal
Bob Hebert - NY Times
Roland Martin has GOTTEN BETTER since he left the Chicago Defender and joined CNN but he has shown his hand far too often in the past for me to totally believe in his objectivity.
[quote]If the Republican argument is compelling, it should win out even in a hostile environment.[/quote]
So you will be E-mailing Maxine Waters and the other Democrats who are Black in California to remove their ban on going on the Larry Elder show - RIGHT?
This "hostile environment" should be of no concern to them.
"The thought of building an ECONOMIC BASE that is used as the propulsion system to lift us upward IS NOT the central focus."
"Shut up, go back to work and make money" is not the proper response to someone who has been railroaded by a corrupt system. Systemic injustice carries a different set of issues than a crime wave.
...and, by the way, Black leaders talk about the crime wave all the time. It's just glossed over by the media because it doesn't inflame (white) people as much.
"The reason most blacks would identify with Tavis is pure name recognition."
That just shows blacks aren't necessarily thinking they are basing things on groupism.
If I put up George Bush, Noam Chompsky, Allen Greenspan and asked a room full of 1,000 randomly selected whites who they agree with on the economy you would get a variety of answers.
Black folks I think are more interested in racial solidarity than thinking independently. This is the residual effects of the civil rights movement...that were a strength now they are likely a hurt. Truth is what is good for middle class or uppermiddle class blacks is not necessarily what is good for the ghetto…not anymore. Whites seem to know this about themselves…which is why you have whites who range from right wing extremist wo anti-American neo-commie…most whites are middle of the road though..but there is definitely more diversity of political thought than with blacks.
"So you will be E-mailing Maxine Waters and the other Democrats who are Black in California to remove their ban on going on the Larry Elder show - RIGHT?"
Maxine Waters was personally, and viciously, attacked by Elder for years as "Kerosene Maxine." I still think she should go on the show.
Please point to Tavis saying something similar about a Republican candidate.
There's a difference between
[quote]and, by the way, Black leaders talk about the crime wave all the time. [/quote]
Police Chiefs TALK about what they are doing to reduce the conflict between the patrol man and the Black detainee that leads to the death of the Black person.
WHY IS IT that you are not pacified with TALK when it comes to the Police but FLAPPING LIPS of the "Kneegrow On Stage With A Mic In His Hands", talking about CRIME SOOTHS YOU SO?
Is what they are talking about EFFECTIVELY changing the situation?
[quote]Please point to Tavis saying something similar about a Republican candidate. [/quote]
Dude - If Tom Joyner had his years of Tavis' comments posted it would be like shooting fish in a barrel.
"You live in a town that is 60% white and relatively affluent...when you move to the ghetto let me know"
It's also 40% black and affluent.
I grew up in the inner city pal. The West Bronx.
And what does where I live NOW have to do with your idiotic remarks.
In fact you contradicted yourself.
If the Dems are all about "lowclass ghetto blacks" (do you actually read the crap you post?) then why is Eastern PG county, the most affluent black community in America, solidly Democratic????
DH,
They advocate for the lower classes, but they represent most of black americas views on most issues.
Steve:
It is not 40% black.
Your question is simple. Racial solidarity. People vote against their interests all day every day.
Shay posted about a popular book out on that very subject (that I mentioned weeks ago as I am reading it)...where you live now has a lot to do with it as you critisize others and have said repeatedly you live in "the hood" and help out in "the hood'.
Complete B.S.
"Steve - can you list popular Black media types who are BALANCED in their reporting?"
I just did.
Gwen Ifill, Leon Harris and Derek McGinty all go out their way NOT to be labelled liberal.
Now I'll try this once again.
Name me the popular white journalist whom you consider "unbiased".
"Your question is simple. Racial solidarity. People vote against their interests all day every day."
White people don't have to deal with a major party that has a substantive element that is openly hostile to white people by virtue of their whiteness.
Tavis vs. Armstrong is even more lopsided.
"White people don't have to deal with a major party that has a substantive element that is openly hostile to white people by virtue of their whiteness.
tvd | 09.21.07 - 9:25 am | # "
That would be democrats. lol
"Truth is what is good for middle class or uppermiddle class blacks is not necessarily what is good for the ghetto…not anymore. Whites seem to know this about themselves…which is why you have whites who range from right wing extremist wo anti-American neo-commie…most whites are middle of the road though..but there is definitely more diversity of political thought than with blacks."
This is a conclusion to what study that was done? And when we say black are we including Craibs, Latins who define themselves as such, Africans.
Are we not all part of some group, where our individual is protected.
On Sunday Morning don't most of America return to their grouping?
Nana:
"This is a conclusion to what study that was done? And when we say black are we including Craibs, Latins who define themselves as such, Africans.
Are we not all part of some group, where our individual is protected.
On Sunday Morning don't most of America return to their grouping?"
Then why don't hispanics vote in one big block?
In Texas they are split, slight more voting Democratic, but a good portion republican, in Flordiday predominately REpublican Cubans, in Cali, predominately democratic...
They should be their period.
Yep!
LLR is on point. If the Republican argument is compelling, it should win out even in a hostile environment. And Republicans need the votes.
If you think that your message is better than the other guys message, you shouldn’t be scared to present it in front of ANY audience. That even applies if the audience probably won’t vote for you.
The 10% of black folk that vote for republican presidential candidates probably aren’t going to go anywhere. What they need to be doing is taking their message to places that it’s not heard or received well. It’s that simple. If that means the NAACP, Urban League, NOW, Planned Parenthood, or whatever that is what they need to be doing.
I said that the Dems were punking out by not coming to the CBC debate, and I say that the GOP candidates are punking out by not coming to Tavis’s debate.
To be honest, I don’t’ care if Rudy McRomney comes, but I would like for FDT to be there, so I can finally hear his positions on issues from his mouth rather than from his website and press releases.
If FDT comes the rating will be through the roof because it will be his 1st presidential debate. I just hope that Tavis doesn’t take 15 minutes of time up at the beginning. You only got like 90 minutes and a ton of candidates and questions, so get to it.
Will it be tough? Probably
Will the questions probably have a left lean to them? Probably
Should all of them have their asses there? Hell yeah.
"That would be democrats."
Yeah, the white man has significantly suffered whenever the Democrats are in office.
You know I learned something everyday. Truth is owned by the upper class boy I better re-read history LOL
I just thought about something.
I just got a little more pissed off at Rudy. He is taking his ass to a NRA event and speaking. In can you don’t know, the NRA isn’t exactly the biggest fan of Rudy. Now if his ass can go to an NRA event and speak, I know that he can go to Tavis’s debate and talk.
"The 10% of black folk that vote for republican presidential candidates probably aren’t going to go anywhere. What they need to be doing is taking their message to places that it’s not heard or received well. It’s that simple. If that means the NAACP, Urban League, NOW, Planned Parenthood, or whatever that is what they need to be doing."
The problem is they don't WANT to see any more black support of Republicans.
The black righties like being different. Contrarians, the "un-negroes".
They love being little black fish in shiny white ponds, grinning broadly and spreading the ugliest lies and slander about their own people.
Just listen to DH and CS.
Do you honestly think those to would go in front of a live group of black people and spew the garbage they spew here?
tvd:
I was making light of your comment...no sorry I don't agree with that...this is not 1960-1970 whatever...
LLR:
You are assuming blacks in those organizations are not ideologically retarded to the point where their reasoning will allow them to be open to any other ideology besides leftist fight the power(whitey) revolutionary nonsense from the late 60's.
I'm sorry but I've talked to quite a few relatively educated black people about these things and it goes back to how they "feeeeeellll" which they can not justify with any verfiable information..no data...just what they "believe" based on what they have "been told"...and the fact the onlyproblem with blacks is whites and systemic racism.
As long as a majority of blacks think that way (which is not really thinking at all) then nothing will change.
[QUOTE]They advocate for the lower classes, but they represent most of black americas views on most issues.[/QUOTE]
POPULARITY, POPULARITY, POPULARITY, POPULARITY, POPULARITY, POPULARITY
DOES NOT = EFFECTIVENESS in reaching our COMMON GOALS
What might be POPULAR during your time of AGGRIEVEMENT is not necessarily the same set of POLICIES that you will adopt when you depart this state.
From my objective view -DESPITE the fact that the Democrats and Black Democrats have control over many of the political knobs WITHIN the Black community the average Black person DOES NOT SEE THEM as the force which is going to allow their communities to proser. This is why, despite this TAKE OVER the shift from INTERNAL development toward EXTERNAL resource redistribution has taken place. I recall the mayor of New Haven CT say that his primary job now is to lobby the state and the feds to bring more resources INTO his city. Compare this with the original reason for a CHARTER for the city which was the acknowledgement that this unincorporated plot of land, ONCE CHARTERED INTO A CITY is able to produce more common good for its residents as a stand alone entity because of the resources contained within
The current strategy of the PROGRESSIVE is a near total bastardization to the original founding principles of these CITIES.
Steve:
Why aren't you in the hood doing work? Didn't you say nothing is wrong with poor black people? So why aren't you living in SE DC or right across the border...why aren't your kids in those schools with their kids?
TVD,
"White people don't have to deal with a major party that has a substantive element that is openly hostile to white people by virtue of their whiteness."
Who is the substantive element,explain the open hostility and how is the open hostility manifested in terms of policy.
If the Dems are all about "lowclass ghetto blacks" (do you actually read the crap you post?) then why is Eastern PG county, the most affluent black community in America, solidly Democratic????
Also Dekalb County, Georgia, the second most affluent black community in America.
I am noticing that black people who are afraid to call themselves Republicans or conservatives call themselves libertarians.
[quote]This is a conclusion to what study that was done? [/quote]
What about THIS?
Black Investors Form A Coalition To OPPOSE Taxes That Diminish ACCESS TO CAPITAL
http://withintheblackcommunity.b...alition-
to.html
"The black righties like being different. Contrarians, the 'un-negroes'."
"They love being little black fish in shiny white ponds, grinning broadly and spreading the ugliest lies and slander about their own people."
Steve, its called dissent. There is a streak of intolerance exhibited by folks who are staunchly paritisan. Right now black folks are solidly left leaning and those black folks who are right of center and beyond are dealing with some of that intolerance. There however some black folks who are leftist but respectful of the counter dialogue in that they do not resort to name calling and insult (ie: Uncle Tom, Steppin Fetchit, etc.,).
[quote]White people don't have to deal with a major party that has a substantive element that is openly hostile to white people by virtue of their whiteness.[/quote]
This is a DAMNED LIE.
The BLACK ELECTED CLASS ARE LIBERALS. The attacks are based upon their LIBERAL STANDING.
TVD - IF ONLY you could see the RACIST LIBERAL WHITES who are ATTACKING YOU all the while they are trying to feed you:
Jonahtan Kozol's PRESCRIPTION for the education of Black kids:
http://withintheblackcommunity.b...iption-
for.html
You are assuming blacks in those organizations are not ideologically retarded to the point where their reasoning will allow them to be open to any other ideology besides leftist fight the power(whitey) revolutionary nonsense from the late 60's.
If those folk are willing to open up their doors to let a republican speak, then that republican should be smart enough to attend. Sure a lot of folk there won’t like the message, but at least you tried and if you can get one on your side then maybe that one can bring someone else along.
There however some black folks who are leftist but respectful of the counter dialogue in that they do not resort to name calling and insult (ie: Uncle Tom, Steppin Fetchit, etc.,).
Al let’s not forget about the plantation (among others) remarks that a lot of black folk on the right make. If you ask me both sides need to drop the attacks and concentrate on the issues. Throwing insults just distracts from your message and make you look like a fool.
sweetness
"I am noticing that black people who are afraid to call themselves Republicans or conservatives call themselves libertarians."
Libertarians are little more than dope-smokin rightwingers.
So why aren't you living in SE DC or right across the border...why aren't your kids in those schools with their kids?
Now that an American lady of Korean descent has been sent there to clean up the mess known as the DC Public School System, I am sure you will send your kids there.
[quote]What they need to be doing is taking their message to places that it’s not heard or received well.[/quote]
What a PERVERTED statement and thought process.
Black America - 2007:
92% Democratic Loyalists
99% Democrats elected over Black majority districts
BITTER UNHAPPINESS ABOUT THE STATE OF THEIR CITIES AND VOTING DISTRICTS
To this FACT Steve tells the ODD MAN OUT, the Black Republicans that HE NEEDS TO WORK HARDER TO convince Black people of his message.
THUS THE BLACK IS A CONSUMER OF A SOLUTION.
Steve - WHY IS IT NOT THE CASE that the "BLACK AGGRIEVED" upon seeing their situation and SEEING WHO DOMINATES THEIR POLTICAL DISCOURSE doesn't come to the conclusion that WHAT EVER I HAVE WORKED SO HARD EVER 2-4 YEARS TO BRING FORTH HAS NOT STOPPED MY GRIEVING?!?!?!?
If you are complaining about a tack stuck in your behind. The guy that is supposed to pull it out HAS FAILED how in the world do you TELL THE OTHER GUY - What are YOU going to do to convince ME that YOU are going to pull this thing that is hurting me so OUT?
Steve - where is the SCIENTIFIC BLACK COMMUNITY who SEARCHES FOR SOLUTIONS - ACCEPTING IN and then PURGING ideas AFTER THEY FAIL????????
You and others are so beholden to the DEMOCRATIC PARTY that you LIVE VICARIOUSLY through the success of the Democrats - leaving YOUR SOUL behind to be trampled on the streets in the dampest Ghetto.
Why are you asking of the ODD MAN OUT but not the ONE WHO HAS THE MONOPOLOY MAJORITY POWER OVER YOU?
Isn't this quite perverted?
steve, here is a problem. If I say that I am religious, pro-life, and pro-capitalist you automatically develop a bias. The only way for you to open your mind to my ideas (or at least have for you be tolerant of my beliefs) is to wear a suit, a bow tie, and sell the Final Call.
Libertarians are little more than dope-smokin rightwingers.
HA! LOL! So true, so true.
"Al let’s not forget about the plantation (among others) remarks that a lot of black folk on the right make."
I agree LLR this is why I used the term "staunchly partisan" to open my remarks. I'm no fool. I'm not going to let you guys catch me out there like that. A Brutha gotta be careful on this blog.
Al,
The reason why I am often hostile to black conservatives is because I consider most of them dishonest.
You don't make a case for blacks SUPPORTING Republicanism or conservatism.
You merely state that we're stupid for voting Democrat.
Most times you don't answer direct questions and that's because honest answers will expose your hypocrisy and inconsistency.
And most starkly, you black righties reflexively side with whites when their is a racial injustice against blacks.
And you wonder why you're veiwed with scorn by most blacks.
I agree LLR this is why I used the term "staunchly partisan" to open my remarks. I'm no fool. I'm not going to let you guys catch me out there like that. A Brutha gotta be careful on this blog.
You’re right, but I wanted to make sure that the black republican comments were highlighted as well. Gotta keep it “fair and balanced” in this place.
Steve,
Libertarians are little more than dope-smokin rightwingers.
Read up a little more on Libertarian priciples. There's a book named Libertarianism: A Primer. You can find it on the Cato Institute web site.
LLR
"fair and balanced"
nice one dude. lol
Republicans have a great issue to engage black voters with -- illegal immigration. But since the head of the GOP has given up on the black vote to try to get the hispanic vote, the GOP will remain at 10-20 percent of black voters.
Republicans have a great issue to engage black voters with -- illegal immigration. But since the head of the GOP has given up on the black vote to try to get the hispanic vote, the GOP will remain at 10-20 percent of black voters.
Yeah II is a issues to engage some voters, but the left will just spin it as racism by Republicans anyways.
[quote]You don't make a case for blacks SUPPORTING Republicanism or conservatism.[/quote]
Again - Black people should view OUR COLLECTIVE CONDITION.
Why do you focus on the failure of the OUTSIDER to gain traction rather than what those who are IN DOMINANT CONTROL are FAILING to do RIGHT NOW?
This is my fundamental challenge - when THEY are allowed to set the agenda of what Blacks are to focus on - THE BLACK COMMUNITY LOSES.
When the BLACK COMMUNITY PRIORITIZES/PROPORTIONALIZES our issues and then MANAGES those who represent us THE COMMUNITY WINS.
Cultural Strategist: So you will be E-mailing Maxine Waters and the other Democrats who are Black in California to remove their ban on going on the Larry Elder show - RIGHT?
This "hostile environment" should be of no concern to them.
Roderick: Once again you're comparing apples and oranges.
Waters represents one of 435 congressional districts which is overwhelming minority and not in line with Elders.
These men say they want to be president which means they want to represent Americans of all races and colors, but by refusing to attend this debate are showing the true colors of the Republican party.
Furthermore if these presidential candidates can't handle the 'hostile' environment of a crowd of a few hundred then how are they going to handle the pressure of being the leader of the free world?
Furthermore if these presidential candidates can't handle the 'hostile' environment of a crowd of a few hundred then how are they going to handle the pressure of being the leader of the free world?
I’m sure that you said the same thing about the Dems/CBC/Fox BS.
"If I say that I am religious, pro-life, and pro-capitalist you automatically develop a bias"
THAT IS BULLCRAP.
Are you telling me that most blacks are anti-religion and communists???
Black people are probably the most religious in the country.
And black businesses are growing at a faster rate than other segment.
Why do you guys say these things and you KNOW that they're not true?
elb1999
You do know that the Libertarians opposed the Civil Rights Act, don't you?
Just some info my brutha.
"Black people are probably the most religious in the country."
yeah that explains a 70% out of wedlock birthrate...I know in the "black bible" Jesus said go forth and produce bastards...marriage is for whites. LOL
"Most times you don't answer direct questions and that's because honest answers will expose your hypocrisy and inconsistency."
As opposed to you outright lying on this board constantly...hmmm
"You don't make a case for blacks SUPPORTING Republicanism or conservatism."
Why do black conservatives have to make a caser to black people? Can black people think or not?
We've made some serious cases to you, backed up by real data which is ignore, make ignorant ass comments over, and blatantly lie about...
"
You do know that the Libertarians opposed the Civil Rights Act, don't you?
Just some info my brutha."
This is the dumb $#1t I'm talking about, where you born from a donkey?
All libertarians don't think the same there are many schools of thought morons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian
I have never heard of a liberterian in support of Jim Crow, slavery or any of that, the ones who were against the civil rights act, not the movement...for legal reasons...something that I'm sure is far far too complicated for you to understand...stick with white liberal patting you on your head and throwing you a banana.
DH
You're getting hysterical.
"As opposed to you outright lying on this board constantly...hmmm"
NAME ONE.
Steve, yes I do...do you know the principle upon which they did?
You live in a majority black city.
Lie.
Black crime in urban areas is just as bad as HIspanic and the only difference was population density.
Lie.
Need I go on?
DH
Here you go Rastus.
Some info on blacks and religion.
I'm still trying to figure out what belief in the Almighty has to do with giving birth.
http://www.michigandaily.com/new...d-
1420479.shtml
"I'm still trying to figure out what belief in the Almighty has to do with giving birth.
"
The bible clearly says Thou Shalt No Commit Adultry.
I have never heard of a liberterian in support of Jim Crow, slavery or any of that, the ones who were against the civil rights act, not the movement...for legal reasons< /B>
Jim Crow flies in the face of pure Libertarianism because it was the gov’t and laws on the books that said that whites couldn’t serve blacks. Libertarianism would be against a law that said that whites couldn’t serve blacks but at the same time they wouldn’t like a law that said that whites had to serve blacks.
"yeah that explains a 70% out of wedlock birthrate...I know in the "black bible" Jesus said go forth and produce bastards...marriage is for whites. "
See, now this is why it's easy to believe that you dislike black people.
LLR: I’m sure that you said the same thing about the Dems/CBC/Fox BS.
Roderick: No, it's a totally different situation.
Fox was hosting the event which meant that some of their 'news' persons would either be moderators and/or on the panel asking questions.
Fox which is notoriously biased against Democrats and smears them on a regular basis was hosting the event.
If you have ever watched O'Reilly or Hannity interview anyone on the Left (which is defined by FOx as anyone who disagrees with them) they interrupt them when they are try to respond and sometimes they will cut to a commercial if they bring up a controversial point.
So why should the Democrats subject themselves to such BS?
http://www.fbcny.org/bible/adultery.htm
No, sorry God does not approve of bastard production.
LLR:
you are right. Libertarians would have never supported the government structure that proped up Jim Crow.
I never said I lived in a majority black city and I stand by my assertion that inner city barrios are identical to black ghettoes regarding crime, out of wedlock birth and poverty.
So you are still all wet Rastus.
Roderick,
Did you conveniently forget that the CBC was co-sponsoring the event? Is Fox any more biased towards Dems than Tavis and his Co-hort are to Reps.
"See, now this is why it's easy to believe that you dislike black people."
tvd
This guy is walking tragic example of the damage racism has done to the psyches of many of our brothers and sisters.
Roderick: No, it's a totally different situation.
Really?
Fox which is notoriously biased against Democrats and smears them on a regular basis was hosting the event.
Tom Joyner (Tavis’s friend that was at the last debate) regularly smears Republicans.
So why should the Democrats subject themselves to such BS?
Whatever. That’s BS. Sure maybe one fox personality might ask questions, but at the same time the CBC was in charge of the debate. It was about pandering to their base. Plain and simple. The left loved it when they turned down the invitation. I guess they saw it as the Dems sticking it to Fox.
One top of that I am sure that the CBC would have stopped any BS that might have come from the fox folks. Also please tell me why fox was the only station willing to carry the debate in the 1st place.
Why hasn’t CNN or MSNBC asked to pick up the debate since all of the candidates are “scared” of the fox folk.
The Dems were punking out by not attending the CBC debate the and the GOP candidates are punking out by note being at Tavis’s debate. Plain and simple!
Did you conveniently forget that the CBC was co-sponsoring the event?
I may be wrong, but didn’t the CBC say that they were the ones in charge of the event. Wasn’t Fox just airing the event?
"Steve, yes I do...do you know the principle upon which they did?"
elb, my brother
I could give a rat's a$$ about their principle.
The bottom line was the libertarians placed the right to discriminate ahead of the black man's HUMANITY!!!!
YOUR humanity.
The bottom line was the libertarians placed the right to discriminate ahead of the black man's HUMANITY!!!!
That is so untrue. Libertarianism would not have created the laws that existed on the books, but at the same time it would not have created laws that prevented one from hiring whom they wanted to.
Because this is off topic I won’t go into too much depth, but was the CBC in violating of the Civil Rights Act when it would not allow Steve Cohen (who represented a majority black district) to join the CBC?
This type of libertarianism is associated with Milton Friedman, Ludwig von Mises, and Friedrich Hayek. Some writers who have been called libertarians have also been referred to as classical liberals, by others or themselves. Also, some use the phrase "the freedom philosophy" to refer to libertarianism, classical liberalism, or both.[2]
Some left-libertarians in modern times include Peter Vallentyne, Hillel Steiner, Noam Chomsky, Philippe Van Parijs, and Michael Otsuka, whose book Libertarianism Without Inequality is one of the most egalitarian leaning libertarian texts currently in publication.
The reason this doesn't help black folks is that you do not find toomany "anarcho-capitalism" among blacks. As a matter of fact, b/c many I know are traditionalist, as pointed out by Steve, when he mentioned religion among Africanam.
Many like Travis uses this to their advantage.
There is great confusion in these terms used by folks here. They would never win black floks over as a group.
The Cato Institue was never pro-black never.
The proper characterization of the difference is not collectivism vs individualism it is coercion vs liberty.
I'm as black as I can be and Smiley doesn't speak for me nor does this latest set of acronyms.
nana,
please...Noam Chomsky, libertarian lol!
elb1999: Roderick, Did you conveniently forget that the CBC was co-sponsoring the event?
Roderick: So?
I am still mystified as to why the CBC would co-sponsor an event with a network that only has black coons on there repeating the Fox line.
elb199: Is Fox any more biased towards Dems than Tavis and his Co-hort are to Reps.
Roderick: Fox is an entire damn network. Tavis gets in where he can fit in.
BTW how much bigger is Fox's audience than Tavis' or Tom Joyner's?
I'm as black as I can be and Smiley doesn't speak for me nor does this latest set of acronyms.
Tavis has supporters just like other folk and like I said he is not the gatekeeper to black folk. Each person should look at the candidates and vote for whom they think is best to lead this country. A lot of black folk like Democrats, and I got no problem with that. Some black folk like republicans and Libertarians and I got no problem with that either.
The GOP should not be scared to talk to groups/people that don’t’ normally support them. You can’t make anyone vote for you, but you sure as hell can try and sway them your way.
LLR
"That is so untrue. Libertarianism would not have created the laws that existed on the books, but at the same time it would not have created laws that prevented one from hiring whom they wanted to."
This is so much jibberish.
The fact of the matter is that before the CRA is was perfectly LEGAL to discriminate against blacks in most areas of American life and the libertarians sought to perpetuate that practice as a "right" of individuals.
"Because this is off topic I won’t go into too much depth, but was the CBC in violating of the Civil Rights Act when it would not allow Steve Cohen (who represented a majority black district) to join the CBC?"
Show me the evidence that he was "prevented" from joining the CBC.
I saw Cohen on CNN where he stated clearly that he decided NOT to join.
Craig Bardo - I was pointed to this page by DH. This is what it say. I know you have an anal feeling about him. But have you really studied the man.
The proper characterization of the difference is not collectivism vs individualism it is coercion vs liberty.
That makes no sense, who would be not be against coercion, if they are aware. 2) are you saying that the Government of USA is a coercive force?
I am still mystified as to why the CBC would co-sponsor an event with a network that only has black coons on there repeating the Fox line.
Come on Roderick, you’re better than the name calling.
Roderick: Fox is an entire damn network. Tavis gets in where he can fit in.
BTW how much bigger is Fox's audience than Tavis' or Tom Joyner's?
Well if Tavis can only get in where he can fit in, why should the GOP candidates even entertain him and his debate?
Don’t try and call them out for not attending and then say that Tavis can on get in where he can fit in. Tavis has tons of supporters and so does Tom Joyner.
If you ask me, I think that the GOP candidates should be calling into Joyner’s show the same way that the Democratic candidates are. Sure their position on the issues might be direct opposite of what a lot of folk that listen to his show have, but at least they can get their positions on issues out there.
Between 12-1 Eastern, Michael Steele is on WBAL radio discussing this.
DH, essentially, has said Michael Steele is focusing on the ghetto.
The Dems were punks for not having the Fox News debate.
Repubs are punks for not addressing Blacks.
LLR,
The problem with your construct, go anywhere talk to anyone, is that this is politics. The Dems aren't asked questions like Republicans are and one of the aims of politics is to control the message.
It would be ceding ground for Hillary to go to a "debate" where panelists from the Hoover Institute were questioning her on her fundraising practices or those with REAL economic understanding asking her to explain where socialism, collectivism has worked effectively anywhere in the world.
Now the difference between my scenario with Hillary being asked real questions, vs what you're suggesting Republican candidates do is a little different, because with the exception of Giuliani, they don't suffer from those personal character issues like Hillary nor are the vulnerable on the economic facts. But they would nonetheless be stepping into hostile territory and spun like tops.
Politically speaking, discretion is the better part of valor.
Darkstar:
I don't know much about Michael Steel but I can tell you that a lot of black conservatives also speak to the ghetto and not the middle class on a regular basis.
Show me the evidence that he was "prevented" from joining the CBC.
Article
"Mr. Cohen asked for admission, and he got his answer. ... It's time to move on," the younger Clay said. "It's an unwritten rule. It's understood. It's clear."
Just search for Steve Cohen and CBC. There are a lot of articles out there. the member
The thing is that they can’t make it about being for Democrats because they were going to let J.C. Watts in and Steele talked about how he would join if elected to the senate.
The Dems were punks for not having the Fox News debate.
Repubs are punks for not addressing Blacks.
Yep. That’s the same thing that I have been saying. It’s not too late for them to come to the debate and state their positions on issues.
Nana did make some points...something I should consider...I'm glad he is here...more insightful than our resident lunatic.
nana,
I have not only studied Smiley, my uncle, who was the Urban League President of Riverside California and my brother in law, who was the pastor of a Riverside Church (and was selected to represent all the black churches in Riverside) were interviewed together on an hour long program by Smiley regarding the Tyisha Miller shooting.
I most often completely disagree with his perspective.
"collectivism has worked effectively anywhere in the world.
Homestead Act
World War II
150 years of Jim Crow
Trade Unionist
Southern Baptist Church
African Traditional Religions
Team Sports
Credit Unions
Politcal parties election campaigns
Police Action
there is plenty
LLR
He was not PREVENTED from joining and nowhere in that article does it establish that he was.
tvd:
" "yeah that explains a 70% out of wedlock birthrate...I know in the "black bible" Jesus said go forth and produce bastards...marriage is for whites. "
See, now this is why it's easy to believe that you dislike black people."
What I said was true...you can say you are religious all day and believe in God but if you constantly openly defy God then what does that say.
Do most black people believe in God?
Sure...but if they practiced what they preached and lived up to the bible they wouldn't have so many bastards running around all over the place and teh marriage rate would be higher...that is not me, that is God's word...
In reality the fact most black people are so god fearing just tells me the general state of black America is not good, as I have showed over and over again countries that are not very religious have better standards of living, higher levels of education, less crime, etc.
I know you have seen this data.
CB i don't like Smiley will never trust him. He b/c whose leader and spokeperson
I was talking about Noam Chomsky
Son of a Donkey Steve...
"The bottom line was the libertarians placed the right to discriminate ahead of the black man's HUMANITY!!!!"
Libertarians are a diverse group and all of them don't feel that way so stop stereotyping, you steretype based on absolutely no evidence more than anyone on this site.
LLR: Don’t try and call them out for not attending and then say that Tavis can on get in where he can fit in. Tavis has tons of supporters and so does Tom Joyner.
Roderick: It may be true that both have tons of supporters but it doesn't mean that they are guarenteed platforms by the MSM.
Only those black folk who are deemed non-offensive to whites are granted a platform and at this present time Tavis is that black.
And I never called the Republicans out for not attending the debate.
I could care less if they attend or not.
If any of them had attended they would been seen as cow-towing to black interest or being politically correct by the Bubba vote. So it's a no-win situation for them.
Craig Bardo: The problem with your construct, go anywhere talk to anyone, is that this is politics. The Dems aren't asked questions like Republicans are and one of the aims of politics is to control the message.
Roderick: Umm, maybe that's because we are still in the primary season and voters on each end of the spectrum have very differnt concerns.
Wait until we get to the general election then moan and groan about candidates not being asked the same questions.
For a party that criticizes "collectivist" action, the GOP frontrunners sure made a collective effort to snub the Smiley forum.
Maybe Giuliani isn't leadership material after all. If anyone's worthy of being a leading contender, it's Mike Huckabee.
Roderick: It may be true that both have tons of supporters but it doesn't mean that they are guarenteed platforms by the MSM.
Only those black folk who are deemed non-offensive to whites are granted a platform and at this present time Tavis is that black.
I have seen Sharpton and JJ on every news network. Fox used to always have some guy from the NOI on TV and plenty of black pundits from the left. C-Span aired the Millions Move Movement. I could go on and on, but there are plenty of “offensive” blacks that have gotten plenty of TV time.
Roderick:
"Only those black folk who are deemed non-offensive to whites are granted a platform and at this present time Tavis is that black.
"
What does this mean?
LLR: Yeah that NOI guy called Michelle Malkin a "political whore" on Fox News.
Exactly what Malkin is.
A Media and Political whore.
An Asian-American who defends the internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII.
See, this is the price people of color have to pay to be accepted by conservatives and the Repubs.
You have to outracist the racists.
And serve as an attack dog for whites against your own people.
Hence all the anger from the black right about the demonstrations in Jena.
I bet these same black sellouts were wilding cheering the media depiction of "victimization" of the Duke Lacrosse players.
"Exactly what Malkin is.
A Media and Political whore."
There are ways to say things with out making yourself look lowly. That was beyond the pale to say on network television, sorry. I can't speak for how you were raised, some of us were raised better.
"Hence all the anger from the black right about the demonstrations in Jena."
You are talking to some of the black right...here on this site.
Who here said the verdict in Bell's case was fair. I didn't.
DH,
Are White? I ask because if you can so aggressively attack black foks for their hypocrisy, which, BTW is COMMITTING FORNICATION, not ADUlTERY, then surely you must be aware of all of the hypocrisy at the hands of RIGHTWING REPUBLICANS!
DAVID VITTER, ADULTERY
LARRY CRAIG, ADULTERY
TOM DELAY
REP. ALLEN
REV. HAGGARD
MARK FOLEY
And a host of others, DH. Where shave you been? The subject of RIGHTWING hypocrisy has dominated the news for almost a year! So, DH, BlaCKS AREN'T THE ONLY GROUP OF PEO. WHO DON'T PRACTICE AS THEY PREACH! I'M SURE YOU WOULD LIKE FOR THAT TO BE TRUE, BUT YOU'RE WRONG!!
Candace:
I'm not Christian, and I am not a member of the Republican party. Get that straight right now. Unlike some on this board I’m not a partisan hack and you rarely here me singing the praises of the Republican party per se. I'm a libertarian. Obviously you either did not read or choose to ignore how many times on this site I have called Bush and idiot and condemned neocons as utopianism religious fanatic that are not better than liberals.
I vote democrat and republican, more republican than dem but I vote for who I feel represents my interest. Last Nov I voted for Jim Webb, a democrat.
My point is (regardless of who you are) don't shout Jesus all day and produce bastards all night.
I don't have children out of wedlock, I'm married and I do not commit adultry.
So even though I'm not a Christian I can say I'm more moral than a lot of people who claim to be.
IfFORNICATION, not ADUlTERY upset you so much then don't do. I can't think of why a black women would get upset by what I said unless she behaved in this way and felt I was calling her out. LOL
dh
You don't agree with the demonstrations though, do you?
Which is the point I was making.
Stop trying to be slick son because you're not mentally equipped for it.
BTW I caught your little lie on the other thread.
I'm starting to feel sorry for you.
Let me make this very clear.
On the 2000 census which you posted the city of Bowie, MD was 30% black.
In the 7 years since, it has moved closer to 40%.
The area where I live, which is what I have always discussed, is SOUTH BOWIE.
The area south of RT 50, North of 202, East of 197 and West of 424.
THAT AREA IS 90% Black, very affluent, and virtually street crime free.
Does that make it pretty clear to you?
I really can't believe some of these fools.
Black people actually arguing against the existence of safe black neighborhoods.
So sad.
Steve son of a donkey:
"You don't agree with the demonstrations though, do you?
Which is the point I was making."
you did not even wait for me to answer and then started assuming and responding...dumb @$$.
[quote]The Dems were punks for not having the Fox News debate.
Repubs are punks for not addressing Blacks.[/quote]
SORRY - I AM NOT BUYING THIS COMPARISON.
Fox's base are Conservatives. They are mostly but not exclusively WHITE.
Tavis Smiley's base are LIBERALS. In his case they are mostly but not exclusively BLACK.
Please STOP equating Tavis Smiley with BLACK PEOPLE unless he and the other "Black Quasi-Socialist Progressive-Fundamentalist Racism Chasers" ALSO want to stand accountable for how we have fared UNDER THEIR ELECTED LEADERSHIP in the past 40 years.
Okay, DH
That's better. I just wanted to be clear that I understood you. Thanks for the clarification, and DH you probably are more MORAL than a lot of loud, overt religious people! It's a sad state of affairs for christians right now!!!!
"ALSO want to stand accountable for how we have fared UNDER THEIR ELECTED LEADERSHIP in the past 40 years."
ONCE AGAIN
Poverty rate in 1960 for blacks. 60%
Today? 21%
Illiteracy rate for blacks in 1960.
55% Today 12%
In the last 40 years, the numbers of black homeowners, business owners, college graduates have TRIPLED.
This election has about as much credibility as Tyra's selection on "America's Top Model." We sit up watching Fox News and CNN cover two candidates on each side. What a joke.
[quote]Are White? I ask because if you can so aggressively attack black foks for their hypocrisy, which, BTW is COMMITTING FORNICATION, not ADUlTERY, then surely you must be aware of all of the hypocrisy at the hands of RIGHTWING REPUBLICANS!
DAVID VITTER, ADULTERY
LARRY CRAIG, ADULTERY
TOM DELAY
REP. ALLEN
REV. HAGGARD
MARK FOLEY
And a host of others, DH. Where shave you been? [/quote]
I hope that you use what I am about to say as a LEARNING experience.
For ME, at least, I judge the ORGANIZATION rather than the INDIVIDUAL in order to determine their hypocrisy. ONE MAN might have many things in his closet that, when they come out, will prove embarrassing.
I look to what the ORGANIZATION does in response to THEIR PRINCIPLES being violated rather than THE FACT THAT A PERSON HAS VIOLATED THEM.
Most of the "hypocrites" that you point to above have been purged.
Compare this to William Jefferson who not only did not go......WAS REELECTED.
Compare that to Bishop Weeks in Atlanta. After BEATING DOWN HIS PREACHER WIFE on a Wednesday night, getting arrested on Thursday, was back in the pulpit on SUNDAY.
Let me ask you today - WHAT IMPACT do these hypocrite REPUBLICANS have on the Black Community? (Other than bolstering the thoughts of people like YOU that YOUR ENEMIES on the OUTSIDE are flawed?)
Walk INTO THE BLACK COMMUNITY.
Look around. Look Around. WHERE ARE THE REPUBLICANS that you might gain comfort from that THEY ARE HYPOCRITES?
Who is in POWER where you stand?
What exactly do YOU do to keep them in line and DELIVERING UPON THEIR PROMISES TO YOU?
Why is there such a tendency to focus on the enemy on the OUTSIDE while the termites are getting away with EATING THE HELL OUT OF OUR WOOD FRAME holding up our house?
rant, rant, rant
Does he ever answer a direct question?
Why should they show up?
In order to continue the farce that they actually are trying to covet Black votes.
So that they can mumble ' Big Tent' and not have to look around to see whether or not lightening would strike.
IF, as some have suggested, that The Covenant isn't what represents the concerns of the Black Community, then I welcome others to come up with their own Covenant....and ask the GOP Candidates to debate about THAT.
I am a utilitarian; I believe that we use each other for many things, and I like to see things get better for many not for few. Wealth is a social phenomenon not individual as a Nobel Prize winner as proven. Many black folks have done pretty well in Brooklyn and Harlem, whether it was under the Democrats, Bloomberg, an independent conservative, or NY State Republicans. I am not for any party, but if we are talking about wealth building on local levels, the Republican have done a poor job for us. And in today world, local is the key for gaining votes. For success gains popularity!
Seems to me that if the GOP candidates were truly interested in black votes they would rush to a forum like this and outline in detail how their ideas and initiatives would be more beneficial and effective for black folks and America in general than the so-called "leftist, collectivist" thought as Thornton puts it.
The bottom line is they have no ideas other than "no more government money for Negroes. We got a war to run".
Steve,
BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Thanks for that.
[quote]IF, as some have suggested, that The Covenant isn't what represents the concerns of the Black Community, then I welcome others to come up with their own Covenant....and ask the GOP Candidates to debate about THAT.[/quote]
rikyrah - as you, the folks at Jack & Jill Politics and so many other Black bloggers ran your interference against the Fox News debate why didn't YOU ALL also present some ALTERNATIVE that would allow you to hear your candidates voices rather than JUST advocate to SHUT IT DOWN?
Candace:
It seems to me that those who outwardly try to act holier than thou are usually the people who need to pray the most becaue they are the most messed up immoral people you can find. 
Even when I was a practicing Christian (Catholic) I was quiet about my faith...as it was between myself and God.
"ONCE AGAIN
Poverty rate in 1960 for blacks. 60%
Today? 21%
Illiteracy rate for blacks in 1960.
55% Today 12%
"
All true.
Crime rate...number of people in prison...black males dropping out of high school...
Didn't mention those.
What you are talking about is the majority...but the bottom end has got worse.
"Crime rate...number of people in prison...black males dropping out of high school..."
All those rates went up across the board, regardless of race.
You didn't mention THAT.
no they did not. You have lied about this before with out of wedlock births. I shoed Asians actually decreased in the last 10 years.
And yes if we are not to have a “make work bias" why isn't the rise in those stats you like to talk about all the time not associated with the rise of jobs lost to technology. And what are we to do if local jobs aren’t there any more, with our unproductive “non-existing status” elements. So we beat on a generation who got caught in the cracks of this huge transition, as if they consciously determine their fate.
[quote]
Poverty rate in 1960 for blacks. 60%
Today? 21%[/quote]
Steve - are you SATISFIED that 1/5 of Black people are STILL IMPOVERISHED?
What plans do you have to ask the DEMOCRATS that preside over most of these people to do to CHANGE THIS CONDITION that IS NOT PRIMARILY BASED ON transference of economic resources from THE OUTSIDE of these districts INTO these districts?
[quote]
Illiteracy rate for blacks in 1960.
55% Today 12%[/quote]
Are you SATISFIED with the average level of READING COMPREHENSION of the Black High School Graduate today?
Do you feel that this level is able to have them COMPETE in a world where MANUFACTURING JOBS are being transfered to other low wage forums ALL THE WHILE jobs that pay well but REQUIRE ADVANCED EDUCATION are begging to be filled (Pharmacists, Registered Nurses, various engineers)
Steve - in the next 30 years many of the baby boomers will be RETIRING. This will THEORETICALLY be a golden opportunity for BLACK FOLKS who have THE SKILLS upon interviewing for the job openings to take the place of these aging WHITE FOLKS who old these mid-level management positions today.
STEVE - what exactly are the people who HAVE YOUR BACKING POLITICALLY DOING TO TALK TO BLACK FOLKS TO TELL US TO BE PREPARED FOR OPPORTUNITY?
I know that YOU can go on all day long about their attempts to SUBSIDIZE EDUCATION. These are CHANGES TO THE SYSTEM - not CHANGES TO BLACK FOLKS and OUR PRIORITIES. What are they ASKING OF BLACK FOLK in the way of RISING UP and being prepared for the opportunity?
CS - being prepared for the opportunity?
Believe that with all my heart? Tell folks when it comes and you can not grab it; it may not come along ever again.
The two C's Chance and Choice
and your choice is based on your Personal Repertoire
As a matter of fact: there are 5k short as trained commerical drivers; short in the field of computer graphics. list goes on.
Nana:
"And yes if we are not to have a “make work bias" why isn't the rise in those stats you like to talk about all the time not associated with the rise of jobs lost to technology. And what are we to do if local jobs aren’t there any more, with our unproductive “non-existing status” elements. So we beat on a generation who got caught in the cracks of this huge transition, as if they consciously determine their fate.
"
That is not true.
When I was a kid in the 1980's I started seeing layoffs and factors shutting down...that was 20 years ago...if you didn't see the writing on the wall...well...
If you do get laid off what is stopping you from making some sacrifices, working a crap job and going to school at night to learn a new trade, don't have to be college.
I know people who did it.
Hell I went to grad school full time and worked full time and I'm in grad school again (PhD program) so don't cry me a river.
I realize everyone can't go that route but unless you are retarded or physically handicapped you can do something. In situations like this, if you have kids, it really helps to be married. I don’t have kids yet, but I know when I come home late at night, my wife has been home for hours and already have some dinner ready or might have my clothes ironed the next day…if she works late I can cook and pick her up from the trains station, etc.
Conservatives push “family values” for a reason. They work most of the time and make life easier most of the time.
You can make jobs two ways. You can reduce efficiency or limit technology to make more jobs necessary which really doesn’t do anything but suppress wages as expenses increase or you can expand the economy. You are not the first generation to go through this…there have been jobs lost to new technologies since the Cotton Jin or the Steam boat…the question is what are you and others going to do about getting the jobs that have opened up in other sectors?
I do agree with Thorton, just show up. So what if they're hostile. Present your points and maybe you'll get some supporters. How hard is that? Or is the GOP afraid of losing rednecks?
"So that they can mumble ' Big Tent' and not have to look around to see whether or not lightening would strike. "
Awesome.
"STEVE - what exactly are the people who HAVE YOUR BACKING POLITICALLY DOING TO TALK TO BLACK FOLKS TO TELL US TO BE PREPARED FOR OPPORTUNITY?"
Same thing they've been telling us black folks who've been in Corporate America for the last 20 and 30 years.
Work hard, pay your bills, keep your nose clean and don't forget to vote.
I mean, what kind of stupid ass question is this CS?
You run out of gas?
Nana:
I will also say something else...my dad dealt with this directly...
When he had me...he had a crap job. My mother dropped out of college and started working at a factor making military equipment.
My dad was not ready to go to college, but there were not a lot of good options for a high school educated black man at the time (70's recession and inflation time)...what could he do.
He went in the Navy. Navy paid for his degree in electrical engineering. He was in for 22 years, retired. Got a pension and then started working as a contrator for the military.
Now he lives in a big house in the Hampton Roads area...came a long way from a working class home in Eastern Ohio.
Point is there are always options, always...only thing is what you are willing to pay...
[QUOTE]Gravatar CS - being prepared for the opportunity?[/QUOTE]
nanakwame - we can't even come to a consensus as a community about the OUTRAGE of a 20 year old BLACK MAN walking down the street with his PANTS hanging below his crotch line.
What OPPORTUNITY can the POPULAR culture within prepare our young people for when the SILLY SH T divides us so?
Until there is a TURN AROUND where those who cry "WOE IS US" are made to ACCOUNT FOR the "OPPORTUNITY COSTS" of their guidance - we are going to CONTINUE down this path as others PASS US (while dominating retail in our community along the way).
I have to give it to some of you. Your STAYING POWER in regards to maintain your message BEYOND ALL POINTS OF LOGIC is strong. The snowball that you keep fighting against keeps GROWING (in your own mind). Little do you notice that YOU are assisting in packing more snow onto it as you ROLL IT back up the hill rather than stepping out of the way and allowing it to ROLL past while YOU continue your climb UPWARD.
I one day wish to see things that are said to be "no big deal" be DROPPED by those who advocate for them because for example, the LOSS OF hanging pants are NO BIG DEAL.
rikyrah - as you, the folks at Jack & Jill Politics and so many other Black bloggers ran your interference against the Fox News debate why didn't YOU ALL also present some ALTERNATIVE that would allow you to hear your candidates voices rather than JUST advocate to SHUT IT DOWN?
We did advocate for the CBC to find another network partner...they clung to Fox News.
I've suggested that the GOP Candidates TAKE that CBC/Fox News Debate Slot - can't fix it anymore than that for them.
"we can't even come to a consensus as a community about the OUTRAGE of a 20 year old BLACK MAN walking down the street with his PANTS hanging below his crotch line.
What OPPORTUNITY can the POPULAR culture within prepare our young people for when the SILLY SH T divides us so?"
This is beyond stupid.
This is downright moronic.
Is this what you discuss at the Project 21 meetings?
And you actually wonder why most blacks think you're pitiable fools?
Who here believes that if Democrats controlled a majority in the House, Senate, and the Executive, and even Supreme Court that black people would be significantly better off in 8 years...I mean to the point were are at parity or surpassed whites or even Asians?
Who really believes that?
If you don't then what you fighting for?
Reality is for me I vote Republican or moderate Democrat because it is in the personal best interest of my family. Screw other black people, not worried about them get your own.
White male Republicans might have a higher % of people who don't care for blacks, but living in predominately Republican states I could do everything I wanted to do and what I do know is my taxes are damn low and the government is not in my business making me jump through all kinds of hoops...the economy has been good for me (can't speak for the uneducated and/or lazy)...so for the most part my experience is Republicans are not for or against in reality they just get the hell out of my way. I don't need liberal whites in 2007 to have a good life...I have one.
I think the big difference between conservatives and liberals (as far as black people) is Dem are perpetually upset, they believe everything is so bad.
Conservatives are actually optimistic and believe things are fine.
I think, most black conservatives recognize racism as a problem in society, I do, Shay does, and I know a few others as well. The issue is liberals (black liberals) tend to blame racism for everything and lack of government action and if not for those things somehow the ghettos of America would be productive, law abiding, clean, etc.
Conservatives usually say that racism is a factor but not the greatest factor and if people did what they were supposed to do (what was in their control to do) they would not be living as bad as they do in the ghettos of America, so the problem is culture/family issues more than anything. I also think conservatives are much more comfortable with inequality as we see it as somewhat natural that in any population some people will never amount to $#1t, that is tragic, but it is life. I would say I believe this but I also think the amount of people this applies to in the black community is not 20%, that is too high a poverty rate, more like 5-10%.
The reality is most black people in poverty could get out if they were willing to make the sacrafices it took. I can (and have) analyzed people's lives and it is not hard to point out exactly where they screwed up (often more than once) that lead them to a life of perpetual poverty and almost all these issues go back to the values that conservatives constantly rant about.
"Conservatives are actually optimistic and believe things are fine."
Sooooooooo, why is it that whenever it's pointed out the tremendous advances black people have made since the CRA, you refleixively rant about how screwed up we are???
[quote]CRA, you refleixively rant about how screwed up we are???[/quote]
You know Steve - you might have a point. It does kinda sound like the response heard when evil Bush documents the numbers about how NCLB has helped reduce the gap between minority and White elementary students.
My question "are you satisfied" is an attempt to get past the biased cheerleading and get some of the people who are otherwise appeased when "their guy" is in power to start thinking in ABSOLUTE terms instead of relative.
"I think the big difference between conservatives and liberals (as far as black people) is Dem are perpetually upset, they believe everything is so bad."
So I guess all that talk about the "Angry White Man" and the GOP's direct appeals to them in their takeover of Congress in 1994 was all in our imaginations, huh?
"It does kinda sound like the response heard when evil Bush documents the numbers about how NCLB has helped reduce the gap between minority and White elementary students."
That's bs.
[QUOTE]We did advocate for the CBC to find another network partner...they clung to Fox News. [/QUOTE]
So where as the Congressional Democratic Black Caucus should find a new dance partner - indicating YOUR angst at Fox News...................the Black GOP was told by you to BRING FORTH an alternative Covenant for Black people.
Why didn't YOU suggest that the GOP find a different partner other than TAVIS SMILEY who has a "Fox News like" track record when it comes to ideological bias? (That is IF your goal is to remain CONSISTENT).
[quote]So I guess all that talk about the "Angry White Man" and the GOP's direct appeals to them in their takeover of Congress in 1994 was all in our imaginations, huh?[/quote]
How SHORT your memory is Steve.
Recall that when John Kerry LOST. (or in the view of some people - When Bush stole Ohio) there was much consternation in YOUR party Steve. Many spoke of how the WHITE MALE was lost by the Democratic Party due to the party's catering to minorities and special interest groups.
Now I know that there was no chance in hell that the Democrats would have lost YOUR support at the time Steve - but what does this acknowledgement say about YOUR party and their need to keep the White Male?
Well my friend CS we only got one solution. Military
Well, we will close down all areas that are deem lower class and disgusting send in mental health workers in and persuade them to have no more children, and learn to be civil. Or force all to be religious – Muslims groups would love that. You do see the young girls wrapped all up in the inner cities. Do this for 20 years and we will see.
I am not a utopian and sometimes you sound like one. My fear is that TPTB will use your disgust as a reason to lock us all down.
Take Care U All
GTG
your imagination Steve.
"Many spoke of how the WHITE MALE was lost by the Democratic Party due to the party's catering to minorities and special interest groups"
That's racist demogoguery.
Give me one example of the Dems "catering" to minority groups.
I guess you, like most righties, consider anything less than out and out contempt for minorities as "catering".
One more question.
Yes, you always here Democrats lamenting having lost much of the white male vote.
Ever wonder why you never hear the Republicans wondering why they lost the black vote??
Which was evenly split between Dems and Repubs until 1960.
[quote]I am not a utopian and sometimes you sound like one.[/quote]
Not "utopian" but more of a "LAY IN THE BED THAT YOU HAVE MADE because no one else is going to wipe your......" type of person.
If you are going to "indoctrinate" a people then AT LEAST lie to them and tell them that they are GREATER THAN WHAT THEY ACTUALLY ARE rather than there is NO GREATER VICTIM in this world than what they have experienced in the past.
UTOPIA is what we were told would come about once we got "people who had our interests in mind" elected over our cities.
[quote]And you actually wonder why most blacks think you're pitiable fools?[/quote]
I worry not what "Blacks think of ME" Steve.
I worry what my people think of THE PEOPLE THEY KEEP RELYING UPON TO PRODUCE CHANGE WITHIN the Black community. When someone TRIES HARDER to produce DIFFERENT RESULTS using the SAME TACTICS as before and are surprised that the RESULTS come out the same - you tell me what we should call them Steve?
Why have they allowed them selves to OUTSOURCE their hopes on the backs of an ENTITY THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THEIR CONTROL Steve?
Why is it that as THIS GROUP has grown in more power over them - THEIR FATE has not more substantively improved?
You keep pointing to the reduction of the poverty rate as a function of the GREAT SOCIETY. I figure that GM, Ford, Kodak, General Electric, Campbell Soup, Lockheed Martin, and Whirlpool had a major part in this as well. What do YOU think Steve?
Steve - Your URL that shows up as your "Homepage' next to your name does not work. I am interested in seeing your home roost.
Sooooooooo, why is it that whenever it's pointed out the tremendous advances black people have made since the CRA, you refleixively rant about how screwed up we are???
uptownsteve | Homepage | 09.21.07 - 3:11 pm | #
I think CS touched on this.
Yes blacks have collectively made improvement. 55% down to 12% illiteracy. Jolly! 12% is still TOO DAMN HIGH.
The thing is, if you make 1 widget in 1 day, then 3 widgets the next...sure it looks good, but relative to what?
Can't we agree that there is room for improvement?
Can't we agree that there are some internal changes that need to be made by the poor to improve their lot???
[quote]Can't we agree that there are some internal changes that need to be made by the poor to improve their lot???[/quote]
This is all that I am saying LaJane Galt.
The (supposedly) GLORIOUS PAST is all that some people have to reference. We had our FISTS held up in the air. We were "Too Black, Too Strong".
As the winds of change converge and we see that NO ONE ELSE is going to do some things; that some folks DON'T want to live and learn next to us while others want to COME IN and run our retail operations - there has never been a better time to GET FOCUSED on a real agenda based on FACTS AND OUTCOMES rather than IDEOLOGY.
Some people point to our relative advances. What was the INFRASTRUCTURE that this was built upon? Resources send in from someone else or those build up from the INSIDE?
The old "teach a man to fish" tale has never been more true or more needed for a people.
Lajane:
See your problem is you use too much logic...Steve gets angry when people reason beyond a 4th grade level because you are just being elitist. :p
[QUOTE]We did advocate for the CBC to find another network partner...they clung to Fox News. [/QUOTE]
So where as the Congressional Democratic Black Caucus should find a new dance partner - indicating YOUR angst at Fox News...................the Black GOP was told by you to BRING FORTH an alternative Covenant for Black people.
Why didn't YOU suggest that the GOP find a different partner other than TAVIS SMILEY who has a "Fox News like" track record when it comes to ideological bias? (That is IF your goal is to remain CONSISTENT).
CS,
That's why I suggested that they take the CBC/Fox News Debate Slot.
CBC- representative of the Black Community - legislatively, right?
Fox News - can't fix it anymore than that for them.
So, let them do the CBC/Fox News Debate in Detroit (another Black audience), and present GOP alternatives to the Democrats for concerns of the Black Community.
[quote]CBC- representative of the Black Community - legislatively, right?[/quote]
Actually the answer is NO. They do not represent "the Black community" legislatively.
The represent THE DISTRICTS that VOTED FOR THEM.
I have no dEMOCRATIC means of running Maxine Waters and John Conyers OUT OF WASHINGTON DC because I fervently disagree with much of their policies and politics. How is it that they "REPRESENT THE BLACK COMMUNITY - LEGISLATIVELY"?
Worst yet they don't even stand accountable for the conditions that are present in many of their districts .....what on earth makes you believe that they want to represent "Black Communities" where there is no "CBC member presiding over them"?
The community that I live in is a "Black Community" based on the patterns of congregation that me and my Black neighbors exhibit despite having a mix of White and other nationalities mixed in. How does the CBC represent ME?
****
Concerning your point about the shift with the Fox News Debate - why didn't we hear such a plan expressed by you during the series of high fives that were given on the various left leaning Black blogs that I see you on? There was a sense of VICTORY that the thing was shut down. I didn't hear a thing about a switch. Do you have any particular archival reference that you could point to indicating that this was your belief all along?
lajane galt
"Can't we agree that there is room for improvement?"
OH FOR THE LUV OF GOD, YES!!!!
"Can't we agree that there are some internal changes that need to be made by the poor to improve their lot???"
Once again....
OH FOR THE LUV OF GOD, YES!!!!
My point Lajane, is that your buddies incessantly rant that there has been NO PROGRESS in the black communtiy because we've been duped by paternalistic liberals who keep us in psychological bondage with promises of gubmint programs and 24/7 vigilance against white racism.
The majority of black America is solidly productive and middle class with the same values and interests of their counterparts in other segments of American society.
We have an isolated, stagnant and dysfunctional inner city black subculture which conservatives insist on making the face of black America.
DH and CS blame this condition on Democrats, their policies and domination of black politics.
My question, for the 1000th time, is if blacks support Republican candidates, how will the inner city transform???
This is the point where CS starts ranting about the need for blacks to stop seeking outside forces to change their condition.
So if that's the case, why is he condemning blacks for voting Democratic?
It's all about "pulling up bootsraps" right?
Which is what the solidly Democratic black middle and upper class has already done, right?
School me LaJane.
What am I missing?
Steve son of a donkey:
"there has been NO PROGRESS in the black communtiy"
didn't say that.
"he majority of black America is solidly productive and middle class with the same values and interests of their counterparts in other segments of American society."
I have said that more than once.
"We have an isolated, stagnant and dysfunctional inner city black subculture which conservatives insist on making the face of black America."
Right on the first part, wrong on the latter half...political hawks on both sides do this.
I can find liberals and republican talking heads who do this.
"DH and CS blame this condition on Democrats, their policies and domination of black politics."
Partially, not fully.
"My question, for the 1000th time, is if blacks support Republican candidates, how will the inner city transform???"
My opinion is the inner city won't change but middle class blacks might better off financially.
The inner city won't change because people are inherently dysfunctional on average, at least a majority and make others around them dysfunctional as a result. They are poor by choice, if they want to admit it and take responsibility or not. The only ones who are not are the mentally and phsycially disabled.
"
It's all about "pulling up bootsraps" right?
Which is what the solidly Democratic black middle and upper class has already done, right?"
Yes, but those aren't the blacks anyone is worried about, the lower class is not following the example of the black middle class, obviously. If they were this site would likely not exist and we would not have 20% of the black population in poverty...a good portion of those multigenerational endemic poverty at that...not to mention strung out on drugs and crime ridden.
Steve obviously does not listen after being told over and over and over again which makes him a obvious troll or too cognitively challenged to understand the complexity of the arguments posed to him...likely some of both.
Candace was worried about Republican sexual indiscretions...fair enough. A black woman has broke it down in a way that even Steve can understand.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8...h?
v=8_uiBeW4Uig
Dragon Horse
So this is what happened to you? I knew it was something bad. Please, I urge you to seek assistance in helping you to deal with the abuse you suffered. You have nothing to be ashamed of.
Steve -
Let me tell you - soon YOU will be the source of a blog entry from me - The Profile Of a BLACK MAN who has SOLD OUT....to the Democrats.
It is standard procedure to point to Connerly or Armstrong. YOU prove to be a bigger example. You won't be attacked because, let's face it - most Blacks are Democrats but your antics are no different in your promotion of your party over your race. I bet when you say "WE" you are saying "We Black Democrats" rather than "We Blacks"
**********************
[quote]My point Lajane, is that your buddies incessantly rant that there has been NO PROGRESS in the black communtiy because we've been duped by paternalistic liberals who keep us in psychological bondage with promises of gubmint programs and 24/7 vigilance against white racism.[/quote]
An 8 hour DRIVE out of a town that has 178 HOMICIDES with about 80 of them UNSOLVED with the KILLER STILL WALKING THE STREETS.
You tell ME Steve is this is not example of 'RACISM CHASING'?
[quote]The majority of black America is solidly productive and middle class with the same values and interests of their counterparts in other segments of American society.[/quote]
This is what kills me folks. When the subject is the DEFENSE of the DEMOCRATS Steve paints a picture of BLISS in Black America.
Let there be talk about cuts in Welfare, the failure of GOVERNMENT to match the increases in tuition from The Big Education Industrial Complex or the introduction of Photo ID requirements for VOTING. STEVE will be the first one talking about the VICTIM named "The Black American" who has been trampled upon and thus it is RACIST to hold us to the same standards as WHITE AMERICA.
[quote]We have an isolated, stagnant and dysfunctional inner city black subculture which conservatives insist on making the face of black America.[/quote]
Steve - I have several hours of testimony from Maxine Waters, John Conyers, Barbara Lee in which THEY PUT THE FACE OF BLACK AMERICA as you indicate. I see you VOTING for these types instead of CRITICIZING THEM.
[quote]
DH and CS blame this condition on Democrats, their policies and domination of black politics. My question, for the 1000th time, is if blacks support Republican candidates, how will the inner city transform???[/quote]
Why do you LIE so much Steve? Please find me a single sentence when which I have told anyone to vote Republican?
I am AGAINST THE FORCE THAT DOMINATES MY COMMUNITY WITH LITTLE TO SHOW FOR IT AND LITTLE WORRY THAT THEY WILL BE DISLODGED.
I ask YOU to turn your notion around. Look at the GRIEVANCES that the average Black person has. Look at the PEOPLE WHO PRESIDE OVER THESE AREAS and then ask the question - IF THE PEOPLE ARE SO UNHAPPY - WHY DO THEY CONTINUE DOING WHAT THEY DO?
Worst of all Steve - some of the same people who talk about the RACIST SYSTEM (ie: the failed FEDERAL LEVEES) are the main people promoting MORE DEPENDENCES on the system that hates them - in their view. This is ILLOGICAL. Where is their call for local control via local ECONOMIC BUILD UP?
[quote]
This is the point where CS starts ranting about the need for blacks to stop seeking outside forces to change their condition.[/quote]
Amen brother. Is it sinking in to you yet? WE ARE A STRONG PEOPLE!!! My ancestors (I am not sure about YOURS) lived on this Earth for tens of thousands of years and managed to be prosperous. It is WHITE SUPREMACIST to believe that Blacks are not capable of promoting change from WITHIN.
[quote]
So if that's the case, why is he condemning blacks for voting Democratic?[/quote]
It is not VOTING DEMOCRATIC that is the essence of my attacks. It is CONTINUING TO CENTRALIZE ON SOMETHING THAT HAS NOT WORKED.
Blacks LIVE VICARIOUSLY through Democratic electoral success. The sad truth is Steve, all of the CHEERLEADING over the years has our community 99% representated by DEMOCRATES. They have benefited greatly.
Why do YOU need to go into Washington DC to do your community work in this city that is 80% DEMOCRATIC Steve? It should be a utopian environment.
At the end Steve - you are SATISFIED in as much as the political control LOCALLY within the Black community is as you desire. All Democrat. You are untruthful with yourself in that YOUR VIEW is not outlook held by many Blacks. Even the 2nd wealthiest Black county - Dekalb County GA has a crime spree that threatens the peace of the average Black resident who should have little to worry about.
Keep dreaming Steve.
You are a SELLOUT to the Democrats - which does not get you condemnation WITHIN the Black community but it does not BENEFIT the community EITHER.
[quote]CBC- representative of the Black Community - legislatively, right?[/quote]
Actually the answer is NO. They do not represent "the Black community" legislatively.
The represent THE DISTRICTS that VOTED FOR THEM.
I have no dEMOCRATIC means of running Maxine Waters and John Conyers OUT OF WASHINGTON DC because I fervently disagree with much of their policies and politics. How is it that they "REPRESENT THE BLACK COMMUNITY - LEGISLATIVELY"?
CS,
They are part of the LEGISLATIVE BRANCH of the United States Government, as outlined in The Constitution.
Therefore, they are the Legislative Representatives of the Black Community.
The overwhelming majority of Black people, in the United States, is represented by the Congressional Black Caucus. It's where we live, CS.
Now, maybe you didn't vote for the CBC Member that represents your Congressional District, or maybe you don't live where other Black folk live, and your Congressional Representative isn't a member of the CBC.
But, in the United States of America, today, the overwhelming majority of Black folk,TODAY, are represented LEGISLATIVELY, by one of the members of the Congressional Black Caucus.
So, yes, they are the Legislative Representatives of the Black Community.
[quote]
They are part of the LEGISLATIVE BRANCH of the United States Government, as outlined in The Constitution.
Therefore, they are the Legislative Representatives of the Black Community.
The overwhelming majority of Black people, in the United States, is represented by the Congressional Black Caucus. It's where we live, CS.
Now, maybe you didn't vote for the CBC Member that represents your Congressional District, or maybe you don't live where other Black folk live, and your Congressional Representative isn't a member of the CBC.
[/quote]
This makes no LOGICAL sense rikyrah.
You say:
1) Most Blacks live in districts that are represented by a member of the Congressional Democrat Black Caucus. This may or may not be true BUT the greater point is that FOR THE BALANCE OF BLACKS WHO DO NOT live in their districts and thus cannot run the one's that have long past their effectiveness - you being a dEMOCRATIC (small D) would be opposed to someone who YOU DIDN'T have the opportunity to VOTE FOR speaking on your behalf.
2) You say that they are the "legislative representation of the Black community" - I beg to differ with you. They are no more so than ALL OF THE REPUBLICANS and WHITE DEMOCRATS who are ALSO legislators. Once again - the CDBC only REPRESENTS those districts that actually VOTE FOR THEM.
I would be more than happy to have an overlay system in which the entire slate of CDBC members are put on a "Black Ballot" and we Black Americans vote for them. If they are voted out - then they agree not to run in their real congressional district. This would be a good way to get rid of Waters, Conyers, Lewis, Carson, the one lady from Florida and a few others who have stayed long beyond their usefulness.
[quote]But, in the United States of America, today, the overwhelming majority of Black folk,TODAY, are represented LEGISLATIVELY, by one of the members of the Congressional Black Caucus.[/quote]
Funny how you promote REPRESENTATION but not ACCOUNTABILITY.
I wonder if you or the NPR radio host that interviewed the CBC members individually earlier this year as the Democrats took over the Congress will HOLD THEM TO THEIR PROMISES? Rep Stephanie Tubbs Jones indicated that her district has a 13.9% unemployment rate and that she is going to leverage the NEW DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY to fix this problem. In 2 years/4 years - do you think that anyone will replay this audio report and hold her to it if the rate is STILL at 13.9% or is up to 15.9%?
It seems to me that many people are PROUD of the growth of the Democrats but it never seems to translate into actual BENEFIT WITHIN the Black community. Yes it buys them a voice against their arch-enemy the evil, racist Republicans but they don't seem to distinguish between being AGAINST someone/something and evaluating what they are FOR and how it works out on the ground. They live vicariously though Democratic electoral victory but the high doesn't seem to last beyond the period between election night and the inaugural.
CS,
What would be different if the CBC was made up of Republicans? What benefits would befall the community.
[quote]What would be different if the CBC was made up of Republicans? What benefits would befall the community.[/quote]
NOPE.
Furthermore rikyrah IF the Black community had the REPUBLICANS controlling nearly all aspects of the Black political discourse AND PRODUCING THE SAME RESULTS as we have now - I would be attacking the GOP just as vociferously.
I am not sure what "benefits" would be produced by a REPUBLICAN controlled CDBC but all that I know is that THE PROMISED BENEFITS for Black folks STAYING UNIFIED (as political operative Dr.Ronald Walters has touted for years) HAS NOT PRODUCED THE PROMISED OUTCOMES FOR THE BLACK COMMUNITY. it is a HELL OF A GOOD IDEA FOR THE DEMOCRATS THOUGH
The Black community will BENEFIT once WE retake the locus of our control BACK INTO our community and not as a INDIRECT benefit of supporting the electoral success of an external group that NEVER SEEMS TO COME.
When will you and others start looking OBJECTIVELY at the situation rather than with bias toward your loyalties?
rikyrah:
If republicans were in control...not much would change, unless black people want it to change in the poor ghettos.
Every black community already has all the tools it needs to change...the reality is the average person is dysfunctional and pulls others around them down hurting the community.
As I said...getting out of poverty is not hard...it is not rocket science, not in America in 2007.
You can find me any poor black person who has been chronically poor who is under 50 and I can show you specifically what they did (usually more than once) to causes this to happen and what they could do or could have done to change their situation.
You ever notice most black conservatives grew up poor, often in ghettos or rural poor...
Sowell grew up in Harlem...Cosby (is moderate I would say) he grew up in the hood in Philly?, Thomas grew up poor in Georgia during Jim Crow...Condi Rice grew up in Jim crow black and lower middle class, I can go on and on with this...the vast majority of black conservatives I have read about grew up poor or blue collar working class...so more than anyone they already know what it is they are talking about when they say what they say...
Rikyrah:
This would not have worked in 1947 or 1957 for blacks in the South but it does work in 2007, and it worked in 1987 and 1997.
Show me a black person who followed this or a person with two parents who did and 90% of the time these people will not live in poverty:
Guide to getting out of poverty:
1) Keep a job, any job, no matter how pathetic. Money coming in is better than no money. Even if you have to commute by bus or train 5 or 6 miles away..fine. Hey I commute 10 miles during the week daily to work, and most of my white neighbors do to...so what? Welcome to adulthood.
2) Stay in school no matter what. Graduate from high school, no matter how bad your school is and at least go to a technical school to learn a trade/skill if you are not going to go to college. There is a such thing as student loans...most white kids who are middle class have debt...debt is fine if you aren't buying bling bling and investing in your future.
3) Thrift. Do not buy outrageously expensive tennis shoes, weaves, rims, stereo systems, etc when you are living in poverty. Use money wisely. You don’t need a brand new car that will be nearly worthless in 5 years when you live in the hood, buy a used Japanese car with low miles, it will last a long time and try to buy it cash.
4) Credit…use it only in emergencies or to increase wealth (like a mortgage), not on bling bling and other “shiny things”. Keep your credit rating as good as possible because everything is credit based.
5) Do not have children (I don’t care if you need to use Norplant, whatever) until you are married or at least finished with your education and have a good stable job.
6) Stay away from drugs or excessive alcohol use and those who engage in such things…these and other vices (such as gambling) are counter productive to building wealth and getting ahead.
7) Do not have sex without protection, no raw dogging anyone…HIV will kill your black @$$ dead. If a man or woman sleeps with you easily that means they have done it before and will likely do it again, protect yourself. Avoiding HIV is easy, get circumcised and use condoms, do not be promiscuous…your chance of getting HIV is less than 1%. Nothing magic about it.
There are some other smaller things but these are basic.
If black people in the ghetto do these things, I am 100% sure at least 75% will be out the ghetto in their lifetime and living middle class.
If black people are not doing these things than that is a cultural/personal problem in that case business/community plans are not needed psychologist are needed in mass.
These things are not magic and they do not take genius, people of any race who do not live in poverty of large numbers in America do these things. From Chinese, to whites, to Cubans, etc. It is a very very basic formula, time test, and it works in most cases.
I don’t need a Poverty Pimp or a Ghetto Thought Pusher (i.e. Black Leader to teach me commonsense).
The problem with the ghetto is not democrat or republican it is much more base than that...this is all you need to know:
"However, a higher proportion of children in poverty come from single parent homes (Dowd 1997: 20). In 2003 also, the Census Bureau reported 42.3% of children who are being raised by single mothers were below poverty (http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/histpov/
hstpov10.html)."
snip
"In a consumer society like the United States, it is becoming more and more important to have a second income for all households (Kinnear 1999: 17)."
snip
"Still, it may come as a surprise that the single parent family makes less than one-third as much as the two parent family (McLanahan and Sandefur 1994: 79-81), and the poverty rate for single parent homes is 6 times that of two parent homes (Renwick 1998: 3)."
If black people actually stopped making bastards and got married and worked together to support and raise a family...most of the people in poverty in the ghetto right now would not be, especially if they have at least a high school education (and black males did not drop out at over a 50% rate in many urban areas like Detroit, NYC, DC).
The great white hope and the government can't make people use birth control, attend classes, study, do homework, etc.
[quote]
Guide to getting out of poverty:[/quote]
DH:
I think that the one unspoken principle that is the foundation of all of what you say is:
* Manage the MESSAGES that you accept into your brain that guide you forward. All of the other things are exactly true but this person needs to find FRIENDS who are of the appropriate mindset and LEADERS who have adopted all of the elements on your list.
A leader who sees this person as a VICTIM is going to undercut every attempt in this person in which they try to make THEMSELVES strong by following the recipe on your list.
It is up to the person who is seeking positive change to sample the message from the preacher who is attempting to "victimize" him and to GET UP AND WALK OUT OF THE CHURCH lest this demon latch onto him and his mind and way of thinking. (I know you are not into the Christian thing so instead of 'demon' how about 'shady, hustling character' latching on.....)
If we could put a COST to the wasted potential that is out there and have these "shady characters" head accountable for all that they have squandered because of their messages conditioned upon the masses - they would never be able to pay off the debt that they have ran up.
Rikyrah,
"What would be different if the CBC was made up of Republicans? What benefits would befall the community."
Of course no one knows for sure, but here are a couple of possibilities.
The idea of a living wage would be a non-starter. Making the climate for business coming into and investing in inner cities much better. Reps pro business orientation in general would probably lead them to incentivize business to locate in those area. I'm sure anyone in Chicago is familiar with the Walmart saga, when they sought to build inside the city limits. City council gave them all sorts of headaches, while people were lining up for the jobs that the were creating. NOt to mention the benefit of Walmart pricing to poor people. A similar Situation happened in Cleveland. A last minute compromise saved the deal. Things like that would happen under pro business republican leadership.
Since republicans tend to be law and order types, The crime problems might be handled a little differently. You might see an emphasis of more botos on the ground and a general lower tolerance.
Just some thoughts.
Commenting by HaloScan
