Unrelated Update (3/11): Very nice, although the last sentence should be attributed to John McCain. You may have to register to see it.
——————————————————————————————-
In its effort to “reach out” to black voters, the Republican National Committee has formed the African-American (Ed. note: Ugh!) Advisory Committee:
In another sign of its determination to win over black voters, the Republican National Committee announced on Thursday that it has formed an African-American Advisory Committee.RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman said the committee will bring together “respected community leaders” who will meet monthly with RNC leaders — to “provide a sounding board” for Republican outreach efforts. (Source)
Why not say “respected citizens in the community?” Who is advising George Bush? The last thing America needs are more “black leaders” of any political affiliation. I should call the RNC and chide them for making what I call a DNC-like move. The very idea of so-called black leadership conjures up unpleasant images of a horde of newly freed, mostly illiterate and helpless slaves fresh off the plantation looking for direction. These folks needed someone to guide them through the process of claiming full citizenship rights in a hostile, war-torn country.
But this is 2005. Why do blacks specifically need to be led by another propped-up black claiming to speak for all? Are we children? Perpetual followers? Perhaps my independent and prideful streaks blind me to the concept. I deeply resent the implication that I need a “black leader” for any reason. Am I the only black person bothered by this? Then again, some blacks may need/want leaders. What do I know?
Maybe it’s just semantics. Replace leader with a different, less patronizing word, and I’d probably keep my mouth shut. Maybe. Before my eyes, political lines are blurring.
The following op-ed is one of my early efforts at self-expression. If you like it, by all means say so. If not, you can say that, too.
I suppose.
****
No More Leaders! (December 2003)
Like voices in the wilderness, a group of black businessmen and clergy — who call themselves Voices of Morality — spoke out against Jesse Jackson for his self-appointed, self-interested leadership style.
Protesting last week at his Rainbow/PUSH Coalition headquarters in Chicago, the group contended that Jackson has taken advantage of his “leadership” position in black America. One problem the group has with Jackson is his pattern of “shaking down” businesses with threatened boycotts if they refuse to give in to his “suggestions” about who they will or will not hire. The boycotts usually end up financially benefiting Jackson’s family and friends. (See Shakedown)
“Jesse Jackson has passed himself off as a leader of African Americans,” said group member Reverend Lance Davis. “[He] is not a leader, and he is not a role model, yet he has been represented as one by the media and by himself and his supporters.”
Invigorating. A group of blacks criticizing a “black leader.” In public.
This striking image of non-white, non-Republicans publicly speaking out against Jackson is refreshing. Such censure typically occurs only behind closed doors. Openly doing so is tantamount to “airing dirty laundry” — an act still seen as traitorous in certain segments of the black community.
As expected, Jackson accused the protestors of being “politically motivated.” Really? It’s like the pot calling the kettle…well, you get the point.
Blacks claiming to speak for all are the first to accuse black conservatives of being pawns for the white man and ignorant of black history. But it’s the so-called leaders who are ignorant of the history of struggle and the virtues that enabled blacks to prosper in the first place.
Historically, the guidance of dedicated leaders was a matter of survival. Strong, focused leadership was essential to the progress of a people newly freed from the ravages of human bondage. In the post-Reconstruction era, the condition of former slaves declined rapidly. As the federal government withdrew protection from the south, “states rights” proponents sealed the fate of blacks with Jim Crow legislation. The uneducated, illiterate masses needed direction.
In 1895, Booker T. Washington proposed his famous (or infamous) “Atlanta Compromise.” He believed blacks would be better off training themselves in the ways of industry and economics, while temporarily forgoing the fight for political rights — a startling idea to our twenty-first century minds. Around 1903, W.E.B. Du Bois, an early supporter of Washington, became disillusioned with this approach and offered a radical alternative: In addition to studying the arts and humanities, blacks must fight to gain full citizenship rights. Forty years later, Martin Luther King, Jr. organized the oppressed masses and decisively forced white America to submit to the U.S. Constitution they claimed to honor and confer equal justice under the law to all citizens. These leaders knew that attaining education and equal opportunity — not to be confused with equal outcome — were the keys to uplifting a race subjugated by laws designed to “keep them in their place.”
But the era of dignified black leadership is over.
What’s important to leaders today? Corporate kickbacks, television airtime, grievance shopping, class envy, racial pandering and intimidation. So much for dignity. Today’s self-appointed leaders are superfluous and divisive.
But there is light at the end of the tunnel.
According to a recent survey conducted by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, Jackson’s approval rating among the black population since 2000 has declined significantly. In 2000, his favorable rating among blacks was 83 percent; in 2002, it’s just 59.5 percent. It’s still a majority, but very encouraging.
A growing number of younger blacks express greater dissatisfaction with the failing public school system and are more supportive of school vouchers, as are 60 percent of black parents. A rising percentage identify themselves as Independent, and are less inclined to view the race relations debate in terms of blacks as victims and whites as oppressors. No longer will they listen to so-called leaders who tell them they can’t make it in America without handouts from the federal government.
If the white media — liberal or conservative — care at all about black Americans, it must stop referring to these loud, headline-grabbing, media hounds as “black leaders” and castigating other blacks for speaking out against them.
Free-thinking, un-oppressed, enterprising black Americans don’t need to be led anywhere. Racial problems exist, but self-seeking, post-Civil Rights leaders represent only themselves and their special interest groups.
It’s time to leave the Follow-the-Leader game on the playground where it belongs.
***
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 124 comments }
The madness continues
As my Grandma used to say “Monkey see, monkey do”
In general, “Black leader” is a misnomer. There are leaders of groups/things/events who are Black and may be associated with Black people.
There used to be an organization called Center for New Black Leadership. It was headed by Glenn Loury, Shelby Steele and others. It went defunct. The GOP picked up the domain name and re-registered the organization to benefit the Republican party.
Newt Gingrich has such an effort as well.
Note that it is the “African-American Advisory Committee”. That is a different group of folks than the rest of us pilgrims.
Before you get started, DS, make sure you understand my position. I don’t care for so-called black leadership from any political party or person, liberal or conservative.
And this isn’t just some group of people who happen to be black or simply “associated” with blacks. It was formed specifically to go after black voters, and implied in the phrase “respected community leaders” is the word black.
Good point Ralph. Where’s the “American Advisory Committee”? That’s the one I would like to hear more about.
Well, wherever there’s a group, there has to be a leader. Which is why if one answers to the term “liberal” or “conservative,” that’s okay.
But, if one answers to the term “black liberal” or “black conservative,” one undercuts one’s own sense of self and indepedence. For, a leader will come along to be, not leader of conservatives or of liberals, but of black conservatives or black liberals.
As Aristotle, father of Western civilization, wrote, to be is to be individual. Classification of human beings by race is only useful in certain, very-limited contexts like law enforcement.
I reject any such classification: I am simply myself: individual. The group-worshipping racists can go to…
Dear La Shawn, I could not agree more. Here is how it would sound if this paragraph had been written for my race.
“In another sign of its determination to win over white voters, the Republican National Committee announced on Thursday that it has formed an English/ German/ French/ Irish/ Scottish/ Welsh/ Spanish/ Italian/ Austrian/ Swiss/ Danish/ Norwegian/ Finnish/ Swedish/ Russian/ etc, etc, etc. Advisory Committee.”
And, no you don’t need to be led by another propped-up black clamining to speak for all. No you are not children. And no you are not perpetual followers.
I don’t disagree with the premise but perhaps more with the delivery. It would probably be more helpful to have symposiums and townhall meetings with average citizens to better get the conservative/Republican message across. Going and standing in black churches for a sound bite and to sing one song with the choir isn’t going to cut it. Moreso, I really think it’s going to take efforts on the parts of many blacks to be more open minded and receptive to hearing the message and efforts on the parts of conservatives/Republicans to brand their message that reaches blacks in a way the Democrats have seemed to master.
And then unlike the Democrats, the message/policy/platforms need to be able to be delivered to the people in laws that are enacted to empower them.
And to be quite honest, sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn’t.
And as far as the PR image that the Republican party is racist, I don’t know how to solve that problem because folks are always going to believe what they want to believe. As my pastor would say about reciving Christ during benediction: “The offer is yours to accept or reject.”
I’m in agreement with the ideal that all humans should be judged as individuals. But I’m not sure this GOP is so bad, on an organizational level.
First, remember that Bush increased his “black vote” from 9 to 11%. That’s all — for a president which supports vouchers, is against gay marriage, supports the family, supports more private sector jobs; had a black Sec. of State; a black National Security Advisor.
The sad sad fact is that, today in America, there is prolly no non-political group that votes in a more mono-block than blacks — and they (mindlessly?) vote Dem. Heck, there were some 8% of registered Dem Party members who voted Bush. (See Pew; 6% of Reps who voted Kerry)
It might be silly to create a Women’s Advisory Committee, or Catholic, or Evangelical … but it might not be such a bad idea, either.
It seems the goal is to help African Americans decide for themselves which party/ person to vote for; and this is a good goal. If a Committee helps, it might be a sad message that the black community needed it, but it doesn’t mean that “creating” black Rep “leaders” is such a bad idea.
I think La Shawn’s Blog and the many varied responses she gets to her postings prove “we don’t all think alike”.
We faught for so many decades to be considered “American Citizens” and gain the right to vote (and we have some who have spent a few decades wanted to take 20 steps back and be considered “less” again).
How can one really take anyone serious who talks to them as if they are a clone?
Boggles the mind.
All of us are members of one or more interest groups. Our government has never been “of the people, by the people and for the people.” On the contrary, its always been “of the interest groups, by the interest groups and for the interest groups.” As an aging white born-again male, I don’t need a “leader” to speak for me either and I resent Mssrs. Falwell, Robertson and Dobson, etc. speaking for me. But they have access to power so I watch them with interest and possibly have benefitted from their activities. I watch the AARP with interest and benefit at the restaurant from showing their card. But I don’t want them speaking for me.
Politics is the art and science of dividing up the pie that is taxes. We each have “leaders” who represent us and seek to get as much of this money as possible to benefit us. Races are interest groups, especially but not exclusively those of color who suffered at the hands of the majority for at least 320 years before significant legislation finally made significant inroads into the fruits of injustice, which was based almost entirely on the color of their skin.
Their has always been a Carver-Dubois split in the black community. Some just went along subservantly, focusing on helping themselves and others to self-reliance. Others, beginning as early as 1776, worked diligently and eloquently, sometimes at the risk to their lives
to call the government to extend the benefits of the Constitution to those who were counted as three fifths of a person. BOTH ways were right and BOTH were necessary. Blacks were first loyal to Republicans because of father Abraham. But it was the northern part of the Democratic Party along with some northeast Republicans who finally acted. But they did not initiate the process. Their action was the result of at least 190 years of efforts by blacks themselves and the assassination of a Democratic President in the deep South. Now, Dems take blacks for granted and stand for some social issues that offend blacks, who for the most part are socially conservative. The Republicans are gamely trying to attract these folks with promises of what? for the purpose of what? Both sides are so cynical as to be repulsive. Whether you choose to play the game, La Shawn, it will go on. Who will come up with solutions to the plight of the young black male under-class? Should it be the Gospel only in the churches? Should it be the schools only and how should they do it? There are so many good folks of all races and classes who are working their tails off to help the young folk of all races who exist in the underclass. Isn’t there a way for this blog of creative people to start addressing the issues outside of the labels of “conservative”, “liberal”, Republican, Democrat? Its for the good of the kids isn’t it? Which means its for the good of all of us isn’t it? Conservatives, and I am one, need to propose constructive, creative ideas to get the job done instead of being against everything. What specifically needs to be done to engage young black males in the educational system and society as a whole? What can we do?
Conservatives who happen to be black absolutely hate it when liberals (black and white) call them Uncle Tom’s who are “mindless” drones just doing the bidding of their white masters.
But then, without fail, conservatives who happen to be black (gee, I really just want to say African-American conservatives, but I’m trying to defer to LaShawn’s wishes)… without fail, they or their fellow white conservatives turn around and call 90+% of blacks who vote Dem as “mindless” right back.
Pot. Meet Kettle.
This approach makes prefect sense. For the most part the RNC relates as well with Black people as the DNC with rural White people in the “fly over states.” (please don’t flame me with examples of how this is not always true. the very existence of this blog demonstrates an exception) Black people, for the most part, don’t trust the RNC, so they will get nowhere going directly to the people. They have to turn to the “leaders”, like clergy, civic activists, block captains, who ever has the ear of the people and convince them. And they will make the case RNC. The masses will be more apt to listen to someone from “around the way” then a “suit” from RNC.
*Blog hostess shakes head in exasperation, conceding that running a public blog and allowing comments will be trying at times.*
This just kills me. Americans of African descent are now a Democratic O-n-O. Yet consider the effect of the “leadership” of the community-do they bring home the bacon? Answer: no way.
Look at the last political cycle. Did the Kerry camp mention anything, ever, for urban interests that might be remotely interpreted as helpful to the long term interests of the inner-city community? Maybe-but I must have missed it. I can’t think of a politico more uncomfortable in front of a black audience. So, what happened? He got 89%.
Here is the truth: until black folks manage to get feet firmly planted in both national parties, nothing is going to change for the better. No leverage is the reason. Republicans have been ignoring the black vote for years because they did not think they had a chance. Democrats just took it for granted and did nothing. When this changes, then, finally, after 400 years, the mainstream beckons.
This is far too confusing for me to follow. I guess I need to redefine the word “leader” in my mind. And then I need to redefine the word “community” as well.
For example, the only “leader” I know who lives near me is a county commissioner. He didn’t declare himself a leader, but was hired by the voters. He works for us. We pay his salary. I daresay that if anyone else were to walk down our road with a sign declaring himself our “leader,” he’d be carefully bundled up and packed off to visit the nice mental health professionals over at the county seat.
As for this “community” business, I’ve always thought our “community” was the area in which a group of folks live. Geography, y’know. For instance, my “community” is a long, twisty country road. Along that road are the members of the “community,” including brown, yellow, black and white residents. When our “community” gets riled up over something, like needed road work or a new roof on the elementary school, we go to our “leader” (see preceding paragraph), and we tell him we need action.
I guess our “community” has been doing this all wrong.
Before you get started, DS, make sure you understand my position. I don’t care for so-called black leadership from any political party or person, liberal or conservative.
LB, I provided futher information to attempt to fuel your fire not douse it.
1. If people really are trying to bridge a racial gap, then one of the things to do is to start looking around instead of looking just at people who give good sound bites and/or are able to get some like minded people together and lump it to “all Blacks”.
2. My mention of the CNBL is supplemental information for you.
My wife has been preaching conservatism to me for years, and I continued to blow her off. I finally took a look around me and saw that under the so-called black leadership nothing is changing (except the black leadership is getting richer).
“We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” –
Einstein
Where are the parents stan? There are many of us who are trying to “focus on the family” (to quote Dobson
) Sure we help the young male also but if they have parents or a parent they should be the target.
My mother and I took in my male cousin, who dropped out of school and started the typical road to no-where, so we could show him something different.
What about his mother and four other siblings who are still in the same community because she “wants” to stay with a man who does not work (yes it is the stereotypical story and it is still going on). What do you think happened when his mother called and wanted him back home with a promise to make sure he goes back to school, which lasted all of one month.
You do what you can stan however in the end, they have a choice. Some will respond to your help and some will not. It is their choice. I do agree that we should put the alternative in front of them (and you would be surprised how many do have the alternative available, for whatever reason, it’s not taken).
There is no amount of money that can fix that. No amount of government programs or laws.
Just to clarify…
No amount of “dictated by man” laws that is
Well said. I agree completely. On the plus side, your blog is no doubt being read by those in high places.
The question is, are the Republicans going to treat all americans like children, as the Democrats have done, or are they going to empower people.
I identify myself as a Republican and right now I have this awful premonition that they’re going to embarrass me and what they do will not help either Blacks or Republicans.
I “Read More”.
Very well put. I like it! As I watched some of VH1’s “Black in the 80’s” this afternoon I was reminded of how difficult it is to get beyond what you are supposed to be. I’m supposed to be free to do, eat and listen to what I choose, but if I choose “incorrectly” I am labeled as “non-Black” despite the color of my skin.
(By the way, it’s something how VH1 did the best job of recognizing the people BEHIND Black History Month of all the broadcast/cable networks. The didn’t say “Oh, here’s an inventor and a Famous First”, the dug into human relationships past present and possible future. Too bad BET lagged far behind.)
I agree that the Republican party has made a mistake. If the President would just concentrate on doing what’s best for the country we would all be better off.
I’m so tired of being labeled.
In all honesty I believe that it shows a great deal of ignorance and an alarming lack of intelligence when those who have risen in the ranks of business, politics, education or any other thinking field fail to realize that “African American” is completely inappropriate as a descriptor of Brown Skinned Americans.
It should be obvious that there are White Africans, therefore White African Americans are certainly here.
I’m somewhat sick of it all. Better to spend time teaching a kid to be all he or she can be and how to take advantage of every opportunity and to keep his or her pants on and that no matter what goes on around them they don’t have to flow with “the crowd”.
If more people would do this we could turn things around in a generation or two.
LaShawn,
I believe it’s going to take voices like yours to eventually affect the changes you strive for, and for all of us of like mind. The major political parties though, I feel are responding to what they continually hear from the current crop of those referred to as “leaders.” And those leaders are still shouting “reach out to us.” (so please make that call to the RNC).
How cynical. This isn’t so much a matter of race politics, but interest group politics and the tendency to identify people by stereotypical characteristics. The pols think you can reduce their constituencies to one quality. Truly, their personal complexity will guide them to a conservative philosophy because we value all as persons and not objects. That is supposed to set us apart. Here, it is not. And the GOP then loses advantages over the Dems.
This move had all the style and sauve finesse of an elephant sitting in my living room.
I don’t know who came up with this but I think they don’t have a clue about how to go about this.
Geez. I’m a white guy and can figure this one out…
Hey LaShawn,
I agree with your assessment. In fact I often agree with your thoughts. As far as leadership, unfortunately I do believe we need leadership, badly. Not so much leaders who speak for everyone, but rather leaders who are willing to stand for truth, call people to a higher standard, give people hope, a vision and inspire them towards greatness. There is a definite need for leadership among my generation that has been slaughtered by secular humanist culture that has manifested itself to lead people to be hopeless zombies who only care about the here and now. On the other hand, leaders are not appointed, self-appointed or otherwise, but rather they emerge through their hard work, determination, perseverance, and the Lord’s blessing of their efforts. Forgive me if I upset you, but I just referred to you as a “conservative leader” to another friend of mine. You inspired me to start my blog and grow in my knowledge of conservatism. To me you are a leader, and many are willing to follow you. The only difference is that you are equipping the saints with truth, knowledge and wisdom in order that they not be mere mindless followers but rather fellow leaders. Thanks LaShawn, keep up the good work
God Bless
Renee,
I don’t disagree with you. I spent a number of years working in some very difficult neighborhoods in Phoenix and San Diego. Once kids get to be teenagers it is very difficult to set them on the right track. Its even more difficult to move the parents to change. So, it seems that the focus must be on the very young. What should be done? Who should do it? Who should pay for it? What should be the specific goals and how can we measure them? Who’s going to teach them what Mark said they need to know when their very young lives are born in chaos and headed off to disaster, both to them and society?
La Shawn:
I agree with you 100%. As you know, I’m white and adamantly refuse to use the term “African-American”. Yet I still sometimes cringe at saying “black” before an audience *not because I think I’m doing something wrong* but for honest fear of simply causing offense. Because people have gotten so darned twitchy in today’s climate – some of them seem to be actively looking for reasons to get mad. Which mystifies me – what the heck is wrong with being black? When we’re talking about race issues, we’re talking about prejudice due to skin color: the dumbest thing in the world.
In a way, you have to feel for the RNC. On the way across country this summer, I listened to black ‘leaders’ whine about how the RNC doesn’t “reach out” to the black community. How it doesn’t ‘feel their pain’.
I have never heard so much touchy-feely crap in my life “We need to feel like they care about us”. Yeah, whatever. This is the same BS you hear about Anthony Williams in DC (ironically a black man) vs. Marion Barry, who I can guarantee you didn’t give a toot about his constituents. Williams just makes things run on time and doesn’t steal them blind… but apparently that doesn’t count as caring. Be that as it may, there seems to be this petulant demand to demonstrate ‘caring and sharing’ and (perhaps more reasonable) wanting to see ‘faces like us’ in the ranks of the RNC. One show got so schmaltzy I rather expected the Care Bears to show up.
So although, like you, on one level I deplore this kind of exercise, on another I have to ask myself, how else is the RNC going to reach out and meet the opposition where they live? If you’re trying to change hearts and minds, you do it a little at a time, sometimes by simply changing their preconceived notions about you so that you’re a bit more receptive to the message.
And for generations of blacks raised to believe that the RNC is all-white, racist, etc, maybe one way to do that is to raise the visibility of blacks within the party. And if you’re going to do that, unfortunately, you probably don’t want to go out there with language that will alienate the opposition right off the bat (and nothing will get a Dem’s pantyhose in a knot quicker than saying “black” instead of “A-A”).
Distasteful though, isn’t it???
stan,
One thing we must remember is that we are not going to save everyone. The problem with spending gross amounts of money on the issue (as we have seen and see even now) is that it has cause a condoning of the behavior to the point of complacency on those in need of the help. We also have a gross problem of “lumping” people into one size fits all category (i.e. the poor). All the youths in questions are not there for the same reasons. That might be a way to focus your help. One at a time works also (the gross spending of moeny also causes us to think we can fix them all in one swoop… just does not happen and won’t).
Interesting piece La Shawn. Jesse Jackson has always been about self-promotion it seems. I remember him in that blood-stained shirt back in ‘68 (I’ve seen video of it anyway). While I personally don’t subscribe to the idea of one Black man (or woman) speaking for us all, you MUST consider the FACT that many of us are still illiterate and ignorant and clueless. Now, this may be by choice in many instances, but it is a fact nonetheless. Some folk lead. Other folk follow. THAT is just how it is. I’d love to see everyone get the education they need so that they can do the things that they desire to do, armed with the knowledge that they need. But with crumbling schools, et cetera, et cetera, ad nauseum, it isn’t going to happen. Someone still needs to SCREAM for most of the Blacks in this nation; make that a few someones. There was a reason the newly freed slaves were ignorant; they weren’t allowed to be educated. Since the Brown decision (1954) what has changed? I spent a year in one of the craziest school systems (Washington, DC) on the planet. I can tell you from EXPERIENCE that when children don’t have basic necessities, learning won’t happen. I am not mad if someone wants to stand up and scream a little for those that WON’T scream for themselves, those that have accepted their lot. I thank my God that I can fend for myself. Obviously as intelligent and independent as you are, so can you and the others that post here. Bravo me. Bravo you. However, we aren’t the most important ones simply because we have a clue and can fend for ourselves. I believe that God will judge this nation on how it treats its uneducated and poor folk–the ‘least of these’. I can reach a few that in my lifetime. If others get inspiration from from someone else (I could care less if they are lining their pockets with corporate money–they aren’t stealing from the masses), let them. I can tell you that many of those that criticize Rev. Jackson are jealous of his status. They remind me of crabs in a barrel. He will be prominent until others (like all of us Talented ones) that are less visible stop being so selfish and GIVE (not just lend) a piece of ourselves to the cause of uplifting the ‘least of these’. If you already are helping someone (outside of your DNA pool) or are involved in charitable work or tutoring/mentoring our young ones, great. If not, please take a minute to consider doing so. THAT way we can forever solve this problem of whether or not we need that mythical monolith Black Leader. We will have taken matters into our own hands. No government involvement, just you and I and a little love for our brothers. I believe God would be pleased.
You’re exactly right, Renee. People are poor for different reasons. Some just catch bad breaks. Others refuse to work, preferring to live on government scraps. Back in the day, people made such distinctions about “the poor.”
Why am I reminded of Luke 18:13 after reading what Rafael wrote ??
Cassandra, I live in DC, and while I am no Marion Barry fan, DC gov’t isn’t much better under Tony “Bow Tie” Williams. Bow Tie’s administration has seen its share of corruption, although he personally has kept his hands clean. I voted for Carol Schwartz the last two elections. Should he run for re-election in ‘06, I will vote for Bow Tie, for the cheesiest of reasons–baseball is back. I am not mad at the RNC for reaching out to Black folk. However, they have to be a little bit more ‘real’. They are, like the DNC, patently dishonest. All they care about is maintaining power. You have to remember that Blacks USED to vote Republican just like they vote Democrat now. What changed? When THAT question is (honestly) answered and the issue(s) addressed, then maybe the RNC will be able to make serious inroads into the Black vote. I personally don’t see it happening in my lifetime.
Crabs in a barrel? You mean Jesse’s jealousy of Colin Powell and Condellezza Rice?
I agree
On the strategic. Blacks represent what thirteen percent of the population and vote what ninety percent democratic. They are easily, for the republicans the most indentifable large group of potential new voters.
Further, the democrats are already a minority party. If the republican can make inroads into the black population, the democrates are finished.
On the tactical, is the black population worth the effort to target? I don’t think so.
That’s interesting, David L., to write off 13% of the American population? Care to elaborate?
And for the record, I am black, so I can assure you I’ve very interested on why my potential vote isn’t important.
Awesome post and comments La Shawn. You really know how to stir up trouble don’t you.
Several commenters with superior intellect, insight, common sense, and experience (or just because I agree with them
) have touched on the source, rather than just the symptoms of the problems in the black community that they believe require solidarity in order to get a voice in the special interest, big business, lobbist clogged, contribution money driven halls of our government.
It is not about color anymore. It is about poverty of all colors. It is about the deteriorating income gap between the have and have nots. It is about a proud man needing a job that stands a chance of allowing him to support a family instead of giving up and getting drunk instead. It is about being able to earn a decent wage so someone can stay at home with the children, keep a house, contribute time at their school, and keep them out of gov’t jails and/or ‘programs’ as adults.
It’s about the family and what the gov’t can do with our tax money to promote the family, its value(s), and a decent wage for the breadwinner so they don’t just give up. Everything else is just noise and food fights about how much gov’t money is needed, after the fact, to treat the disease. Gov’t handout programs and welfare are demeaning to people and are a treatment, not a solution.
The RNC doesn’t need to be reaching out to the black vote, it needs a Special Advisory Committee to determine what can be done to stop the deteriorating gap between the rich and poor. It needs a Special Advisory Committee to determine what can be done to stop the deteriorating power difference between business and labor.
It’s not a good start for my party(conservative reasons only) to just kill a bill to increase the minimum wage, followed by this dumb comment from Senator John Sununu “Well most workers don’t make minimum wage anyway”. Well then what’s wrong with throwing out a bone if it isn’t gonna cost anything, Senator.
You are so cold, cowboy.
The GOP out here in California has made similar efforts with the Latino/Hispanic community, hiring Latino Repubs to come to committe meetings and teach them spanish. Saying that being able to speak “their” language will appeal to Latino voters more. Rediculous!
Speak the language of truth.
That is the problem with politics and politians, ultimately in order to maintain or gain power they will pander to whomever appears to hold that power rather than merely standing on the merits of their positions and beliefs.
If the GOP or Dems for that matter truly want to reach out to the black community, stop appointing leaders and start addressing the people. I agree Miss Barber, such tactics are insulting!
The last thing the GOP needs to do is imitate the dems by pandering to ethnic groups. Blacks should vote Republican as Americans, not as blacks. Republicans are supposed to believe in patriotism and equality, not balkanization and promises of favors to some at the expense of others.
Tiffany, thirteen percent of the population, which votes ninety percent democratic is a very tempting target. Certainly all new voters are always welcome.
You can judge a population by whom they consider to the their leaders. I look at what passes off as black leadership, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton. I look at blacks who not considered leaders, Thomas Sowell, Walter E. Williams. I see a population more intereested in being pandered than listening with an open mind to a consevative message. As I see it, too many blacks are wedded to the idea of victimhood. Conservatism doesn’t work if you think of yourself as a victim.
David
David L,
Look. You can be among friends here. But I’m going to try to give you some constructive criticism…. Try to come at it from the opposite angle. La Shawn and Tiffany are conservatives and so am I but the way you are wording things is a little irksome. Don’t do what a liberal does and make judgemental statements such as “I see a population more interested….”
Just talk about what you believe in. Like, you believe in equal opportunity and from this day going forward my kids and all other kids should be treated equally with no preferential treatment.
It is a daily struggle for me. But if we communicate well, I believe we can pursuade one individual at a time. There are folks who might listen to what you had to say and be turned off of what they would’ve thought to be a conservative message yet it didn’t state a conservative message it only referred to a group of people tending to something…
I hate it when people just mouth of about some “black community.” What is this black community, anyway? Where is it? Is it in DC? or is it in Atlanta, Memphis, or Maryland? Or is in New York, Minnesota, or Texas?
Is it in Williamson County, TN? or in Montgomery County, MD? Would you call those places “white community?” If so, then, how come many blacks live there? I know many blacks who do. Are they then less “black”?
Even if, statistically, many people of African descent may be found residing in certain areas of the nation more than other parts, it does not warrant talk of a “black community.” But, many people, even those who claim they are looking out for America (and they are of ALL physiologies), feed this notion gladly. Why?
Because it helps them to escape their own inadequacies. Only when there is a “cause” for them to “help,” are they happy. If you tell them to mind their own business and fight Big Government for their own benefit, they ask, “R U a monster??! Do U want the helpless to remain helpless?”
They ask this despite the evidence of many years of what is wrought by trying to correct problems with politically and socially altrustic “solutions.”
And one way they can perpetuate this false “do-gooder” self-image is to hold up some cultural underclass, and since, today, so many Americans of African descent are wealthy and since there are very few poor people in America, the only way this “do-gooder” industry can continue is to appeal to primordial instinct. Hence the term, “black community.” That way, all wealthy “blacks” are automatically guilty of not helping “their own.” This has the effect of slowing many “blacks” down, since they’re always stuck in the rut of “helping the community.” If everyone’s doing that, who will live their own lives to the full? Who will become financiers, inventors, writers, engineers?
I have had to put up with many non-blacks who have the nerve to make unqualified remarks like “blacks vote for…”, “blacks do ….”, “what is the opinion in the black community?”, “why do blacks do X….?”, etc.
Heck, how am I supposed to know? Can I read people’s minds? Even the Borg never had it so bad.
I’ve had to put up with non-blacks who can’t speak English as well as I do, who didn’t get 1400 on their SATs [and I only studied for 5 or 6 days], who don’t have graduate degrees, who don’t know X about Y, who don’t know much Math or Physics, use the “problems in the black community” or “Africa’s situation” to try to assuage their individual self-doubt. Well, time’s up, people.
The history of Western civilization is not the history of the “white community.” It is the history of the efficacious individual. Thomas Sowell, Ernest Just, and George Washington Carver have more claim to Western civilization (Aristotle through Newton and Einstein) than 99.9% of whites today living, including the current U.S. President.Without those kinds of men, there would be no cars, roads, computers, airplanes, etc.
For many years, America, the first country in history to realize the above truth, made the mistake of allowing a practice that negated it to last a little while. But then, it was defeated, but then, the tribalists instituted Jim Crow laws. Then those were struck down. Then, the tribalists instituted Affirmative Action. Which must be struck down.
As long as people hold the group over the individual – in any shape or form – there will always be this problem. The only way out of it is to remove all race-based laws, embrace capitalism, and leave any loser behind, lest he pull you down.
Amen
Dear La Shawn,
You make an excellent point. At first I thought it was a good idea to reach out to blacks but from your point of views it does seem condescending. With your help, I hope they change their approach. I’m reminded of a call to Denver talk radio by a black man after the Columbine shootings. He deeply resented that the one black victim was always singled out as black. He was a human being just like the rest. Why didnt the news just mention his name only when listing the victims?
Highlander,
Leave any loser behind? What about Scripture admonitions to help the weak and care for the least of these? Pure, unadulterated capitalism results in things like slavery and exploitation. Read the book of James in the Scripture. We are going to be judged on our treatment of the poor, including the underpaid and the non-paid. Be careful of what you’re saying. Read the preamble to the Constitution. It contains phrases like “establish justice”, “promote the general Welfare”, “secure the blessings of Liberty”. These grand ideals have often been imperfectly carried out but they are still there. None of this, including Jesus’ injunction to love our neighbor as ourself, fits into your survival of the fittest philosophy.
Renee,
If I were to work in the “black community” again I would focus on reading, writing, black history and the Gospel. This applies to any race but especially to young blacks in the inner-cities. The study of black history is especially rewarding and encouraging. There are so many good folks to emulate, especially those who struggled and persevered for their race before 1968. I believe that its extremely important to promote these models because they struggled mightily for justice AND the opportunities for blacks to prove themselves. It is only in the last 25-30 years that shameless black “leaders” have tried to freeload on those good folks’ accomplishments and character. In that they are an aberration and not representative of the race’s past victories.
What is wrong with being an American – as opposed to a —American or a —American or a —American?
It’s amazing stan how our ancestors seemed to do a WHOLE lot better when the Gospel was what was used to teach them to read…
nothing else.
What a concept.
Ah Stan….
But what defines a loser?
If a loser is someone who won’t help himslef, won’t do what he can to stand on his own, but expects the world to do for them, then I am all for leaving the loser behind.
If a man is down, I will help him up. I will share his burden. But as soon as he thinks his burden is now mine and no longer his, he’s back on the ground.
I am my brother’s keeper. But I am not his nanny.
And I would admonish you to read the Constitution as well… “Promote the General Welfare” does not mean “Provide for Everyone’s Wellfare”.
And nowhere in the Bible does it tell us to force those who stay behind to move forward. Encourage them, yes. Make a place for them when they are ready to join, yes. Forgive their tresspasses, yes. Extend a hand, yes.
Charity, morality and capitalism are not mutually exclusive. Which would seem to be your blind spot, as I’ve read your posts.
But Renee,
Our ancestors were evil oppressors. They stole land from everyone (which was stolen by whatever group was there when they arrived). They impossed their ideas and religion on others (who had again, done the same when they arrived). They changed the environment to suit their needs(again, as had the previous tennants).
They were…. HUMAN BEINGS.
/end sarcasm
ROFL
Renee,
That is just not true historically. During the time that the Scriptures were used most often your ancestors weren’t allowed to learn to read.
Wuzzy,
I can agree that some are beyond help. I believe that they should be in work camps, sterilized and forced to learn to read and write and take up a skill. Your other historical arguments lack a certain amount of seriousness. You seem to want to throw out the horrors visited on the original populations and the Africans by white Europeans. I don’t know if you’re a Christian but there is a whole segment of the Bible that warns against that behavior and promises the judgment of God upon it. It is commonly thought that the judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah was because of their homosexuality. This is only partly true. The other reason was that they neglected the poor. The same reason applied to the Jews expulsion from Israel. Scripture rightly points out that some are poor because of laziness and that they should be forced to work or not be able to eat. But most of Scripture is aimed at those who are poor because they are oppressed or weak.
I have never said that I’m against capitalism. I said that when it is unfettered it leads to slavery and exploitation. I never said that the Constitution says “Promote the general Welfare”. But “promote the general Welfare” leaves plenty of room for the government to actively encourage and fund ideas to do so.
Would you disband with agricultural subsidies to farmers, including Cargill and ArcherMidlandDaniels? Are you ready for the country to lose nearly all its farms and manufacturing to lower-cost labor? Are you ready for most of our automobiles to be made overseas? Do you support the continual flow of illegal aliens for the purpose of maintaining low-cost labor? Are you ready to eat fruits and vegetables that mostly come from other countries? Think things through a bit. There is no free market. It is a canard.
stan
I think you need to start reading again…
and not the stuff that’s in the school’s now
Renee, since Jesse was prominent long before Colin and Condi, I seriously doubt he is jealous of those two. I actually like Colin, although I think he should have run for president. Maybe Condi will one day. As for the Luke 18:13 reference, you lost me. I am a minister, so maybe that comes through, I don’t know. Although vv. 9-14 (the whole parable) of chapter 18 puts me in mind of Republicans/Conservatives in general with their (seriously) Pharisitical bent. Yes, I said it.
Thank you Stan. I definitely couldn’t have said it better.
Rafael,
Hey you got it…YEAH!!
No, being a minister does not come through…
but then I guess it depends what you are ministering
Charity, morality and capitalism are not mutually exclusive. Which would seem to be your blind spot, as I’ve read your posts.
Very well put, SCSIwuzzy. I couldn’t have said it better myself.
I’m not against helping others, but I’m against helping the unserious.
Renee are you trying to pick a fight with me? Just kidding.
Highlander, I happen to believe that the unserious need help the most. So what if it is frustrating and unsatisfying to see them waste opportunity after opportunity? What I glean/learn from them can be put to use helping someone else, maybe even myself. But for the grace of God…
Stan – Can you give some references for your assertion that part of the reason for all the brimstone and fire was neglect of the poor? I know you assume no one on this blog reads the Bible, but I do.
Rafael,
I love you Brother
Republicans/Conservatives are equivalent to Pharisees? Ouch! Haven’t heard that from the pulpit yet. Maybe I got more to repent of than I realized.
ROFL
I just pointed out the parable based on some comments here. That parable has nothing to do with a group but of individual men . You might be ok Dave 
That’s not what I said
La Shawn, the Lord has a serious interest in the helpless/downtrodden/unfortunate. Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed because of SIN, period. Yes, there were homosexchildren there, but that burg was going to get fried anyway, because of their collective unrighteousness. God even allowed Abraham to bargain with Him to save the city, but Abraham apparently didn’t realize the depth of their depravity. Stan DOES take a little license with his statement, but it isn’t much of a stretch to imagine that they neglected the poor also considering how evil the place was. We just can’t ignore the poor, no matter how they acquired their poverty.
Renee, thanks for the clarification. (I was actually referring to Minister Rafael’s comment). I strive to be OK with the Lord daily, and His word gives daily revelation (for all who desire it).
Very well said Dave.
What else should we start “stretching to imagine? I am really interested to know.
My take on Republicans/Conservatives in general is that they are as self-righteous as the typical Pharisee. Take the Bush administration’s REFUSAL to admit mistakes of any kind. That is what I meant.
You are taking me out of context ma’am. I just see where Stan is coming from.
Compassionate Conservatism. Now THAT is a stretch.
Hmmm…
Jude comes to mind now
Renee, at your prompting I just reread Jude. Took about a minute LOL. I could exegete/riff on politicians of any stripe with Jude as scriptural backup, but I am especially drawn to vv. 11-16. “Clouds they are without water…”
In all honesty Rafael, I am not much concerned with politicians as I am so with so called “Ministers” (not talking about you because I don’t know you) who mislead the flock (i.e Jackson and you mentioned in your earlier comments here) and give mislesading, messages in the name of Jesus Christ. That is one of the most devestating things that has happened to America as a whole and more so to the “Black” communitee.
Also, in keeping with La Shawn’s topic (why it is wrong for any politicians to come at me with a message based on color unless they want to talk to me about suckle cell anemia), for me, the day I became a follower of Jesus, I no longer was a “Black American” an “African American” or any other label that referred to the color of my skin. I am an American because it is the land I was born in (no other place). I lived all over this country, parts of Asia and in Europe due to the military (so no specific communitee or area of the US can label me either).
I meant sickle cell
we’re just seeing the result of politicians, not leaders. politicians do what it takes to earn the vote. leaders make decisions that are best no matter if they are popular or not and do not need anything but their ideals for people to follow. leaders put out a messsage, their values and their ideas and let them stand. politicians do whatever to get a vote.
La Shawn,
I actually assume that most people who read your blog do read the Bible. The best text for the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah is Ezekiel 16:44-50. This entire chapter is written to Jerusalem comparing her to her older sister Samaria, which used to be Israel, and younger sister Sodom, which is the southern kingdom of Judah. Judah is called “Sodom” because she was like Sodom and Sodom’s sins are made clear in v 49. This not only means that Judah was judged in part because of her neglect of the poor but that Sodom was also. This is a recurring theme in the OT prophets and is very noticeable in the Lord’s ministry, when the first words out of His mouth in Luke 4:18 and Luke 6:20-21 refer to the poor and hungry. He follows up this thought in the sheep and goats judgment of Matt. 25:31-46, in which the judgment is based almost solely on our response to the poor as they exist in several situations. His step-brother James especially seems to continue to emphasize care for the poor. In fact, much of the book is devoted to the topic. When he says that faith without works is dead he is clearly referring to mistreatment of the poor. He issues a very severe warning to employers who withhold wages from their employees in chapter 5. His definition of religion as ministering to widows and orphans and keeping oneself unstained from the world comes directly from the OT prophets, who use the term several dozen times. If God visits the sins of the fathers down to the 4th generation, we might still expect mighty judgment to fall on the U.S. for the sins committed against Indians, blacks and Mexicans in the years leading up to the Civil Rights movement. We may say that the battle is over and legislatively it may be true that it is. But God has a very long memory and a very strong commitment to justice and it may not be that the Civil War was His final judgment.
Conservatives are being accused repeatedly of not caring or not wanting to help the poor or disadvantaged. I disagree strongly, and suggest that there is a serious dichotomy in the discussion that is being fostered through a general difference of opinion about what it means to help someone.
Liberals think that the best way to help people is through special-interest legislation and direct transfer payments, and think that equality of outcome is the desired result. This is a socialist utopian impossibility.
Conservatives think that the best way to help people is to create a climate in which individual initiative will allow people to rise above their circumstances, and think that equality of opportunity is the best route to take. This is the apex of freedom and human dignity.
Miss Barber, I think the notion of Sodom and Gommorah being destroyed for their mistreatment of the poor may stem from Ezekiel chapter 16:49;
49 ” ‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.
I’ve heard this be used before to somehow magically justify homosexuality. Amazing!
stan,
The one thing I see you are failing to seperate is “what is poor”? WHich is the message many have said all along since your brought it up. You bring up poor as something very general and fail ti discuss the other biblical “sins” that will cause a person to be in what we American’s call a poor state. That does not necessarily make the person poor. Also remember, Jesus went among the poor and sinners and to the sinner he said “go and sin no more” (as he told the man he healed in John “or something far worse will happen to you”.
That is where your opinion loses me because you fail to address the fallen nature of man (and that is all of us). The passages you speak do say the poor, and they say abominations ten times more. You seem to throw only the message of the poor out there and forget all the rest when it is a package deal, not a buffet of what we want to pick and choose.
When Jesus says, “what you do to the least of me”, that also extends to teaching and allowing them to continue in a sinful way.
La Shawn,
Thanks for another day of your insight (and to all the great range of posters (opinions) you allow here.
Nite everyone
I think it is clear that Stan is talking about the economically stricken. Look, there are many ways a person or group of people can be poor. My sincere belief is that God wouldn’t have any of us poor in any way. Poverty of the spirit is worse than a paucity of revenue or other resources. Having said that PLEASE understand that the rich (I will restrain myself) are probably more impoverished spiritually than many that are not. I am so desperately trying to leave ‘trickle down economics’ out of this, so I’d better stop. Right now.
Stan: I seriously recommend you seek the writings of G.K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc. They had many of the same concerns as you, and their theories built upon centuries-old Roman Catholic principles of “economies of scale”. Plus both men were really funny writers. (Esp. GKC’s “Utopia of Userers”, citicizing modern corporate capitalism)
The RNC resembles the DNC? Well, why not? The RNC believes that they pretty well have sown up the white conservative base, and are probably correct in this assumption (”you voted for Peroutka? Badnarik? none of the above? Why, a vote not cast for George W. is like voting for the worst of the… etc. etc..”)
The Republican Party is there to advance the Republican Party, not necessarily conservatism. If they were, they would be advocating, to white, black, and otherwise, the principles of limited government. But they’re not.
stan said: I believe that they should be in work camps, sterilized and forced to learn to read and write and take up a skill. Your other historical arguments lack a certain amount of seriousness.
Well stan, you are a harder man than I. I’ve never considered a “Final Solution”, even in jest.
As for the second point… yes, I am often less than serious, esp when pointing out the absurdity of certain arguements.
Minster Daniel said: Having said that PLEASE understand that the rich (I will restrain myself) are probably more impoverished spiritually than many that are not
How so? What makes this so? I am neither rich nor poor, IMO, in either the physical or metaphysical sense, so if you could provide examples of both forms of wealth (in your definitions) and who the haves and have nots are.
Rafael and Stan…
What constitutes the “economically poor”? I mean really it is subjective term so what fits that category? How little money constitutes the economically poor? What is the “lifestyle” that demonstrates this concept? Is it not having a play station and a DVD player… or how bout a picture cell phone?
And I ask you, what is the priority message to take to those who you consider “poor” (as Christians), regardless of economics, spiritual, whatever definition you want to use:
1. Reading, writing Black History and the Gospel.
Or
2. Spreading the Good News that Jesus Christ died for their sins and they can be forgiven and start new if they put their trust and faith in him?
Which one will be most important to the person who dies tomorrow? As you give the “poor†a cup of water, food, clothes, etc. which one has the possibility of truly saving his life?
Also,
When we die Stan, we are not going to stand before God as Americans. America is being judged in the here and now and we see it everyday.
Regarding the Indians and Blacks, 1st, let’s get over this concept that here in America is the first place these things ever happened on the face of the earth. The Bible, as you quote, has many stories of this happening over and over again. Slaves were taken for no justifiable reason at all my other nations, and some nations were taken into captivity for their turn against God. Some land was taken, some land was given.
What’s happening today seems to go hand in hand with the book of Romans.
Rafael said
:::I believe that God will judge this nation on how it treats its uneducated and poor folk–the ‘least of these’.:::
I agree, including the unborn as the least of these. Now, let’s look at how the poor and uneducated in America live, what they can take for granted, what their daily conditions are, and compare that to any other country in the world. I see… that poor Americans are richer than 95 percent of the world.
The preborn don’t fare quite so well.
:: I can reach a few that in my lifetime. If others get inspiration from from someone else (I could care less if they are lining their pockets with corporate money–they aren’t stealing from the masses), let them.::
That is a sad, and shortsighted point of view. First of all, Jackson is stealing from individuals. Secondly, when somebody is inspired by an extortionist and an embezzler, that should disturb you, not be dismissed as okay because, you know, at least the guy isn’t stealing from you. A lack of integrity in one area spills over into other areas. We don’t have compartmentalized lives. A greedy bully who is willing to extort money through threats of violence is reprehensible, no matter who it is he threatens.
Furthermore, *Human beings* work at, for, and with those businesses. Human beings own those businesses. When you dismiss unjust, illegal, and greedy attacks against them because they’re richer than you, you are part of the problem. Justice is for everybody.
:: I can tell you that many of those that criticize Rev. Jackson are jealous of his status.::
Ad hominem.
:::They remind me of crabs in a barrel. He will be prominent until others (like all of us Talented ones) that are less visible stop being so selfish and GIVE (not just lend) a piece of ourselves to the cause of uplifting the ‘least of these’. If you already are helping someone (outside of your DNA pool) or are involved in charitable work or tutoring/mentoring our young ones, great. If not, please take a minute to consider doing so. :::
I have provided free daycare and daycare at far less than the market rates to mothers outside my DNA pool. I’ve offered free tutoring for the same. My help was of limited value, and in fact, only of service to those who had a personal ethic of integrity and self-discipline to begin with- otherwise, I wasn’t helping, I was enabling. Nothing but the gospel will be effective with people who admire thieves and despise education.
Jesus said that the poor we would always have with us. I suspect that this had something to do with the fact that in many (not all) cases, a lifetime of poverty has more to do with the sin nature than with anything else.
I’ve been poor- lived far below the poverty line for many years. It’s not that I don’t understand what it’s like to do without, to skip a meal because the money just doesn’t stretch that far- but I do not understand the attitude of entitlement that many seem to have, the unwillingness to take personal responsibilty, and the disrespect for education.
Regarding teh charge of hypocrisy and Pharisaism against conservatives and the President- I’m not surprised, but disappointed at the ad hominem, and hypocritical nature of that charge. The President was asked an unfair question in a public debate- that question was motivated clearly and obviously by bias, and the reporter who permitted it was clearly engaging in partisanship. Basically, the President was asked “Publicly tell your opponents your weakest and most vulnerable point so they may attack you there instead of doing their own homework.” He wisely refused to answer that question. Anybody who expected him to do otherwise is intellectually dishonest. I expect a President to confess sins he has commmitted which constitute an abuse of his office or crimes. I do not expect any President in an election campaign to tell us all his political misjudgements. It is not his job to give ammunition to his opponents, and it is not being a ‘Pharisee’ to refuse to do that- although it may well be rather Pharisaical to insist that he should.
Madame Renee and Deputy Headmistress,
Where do I begin? Let’s see…poverty is one of those relative things. What is poor in these United States is rich in say, the Philippines (I’ve been there). As for which is more important, the Gospel message will always be more important, but remember what James had to say about it. Material and educational assistance isn’t to dicounted due to the posiblity that the recipient may be out of tomorrows. The two things need to be combined.
Deputy Headmistress you seem to assume I favor abortion. I do not. As for Jesse stealing from individuals, give some proof. I am saying I personally could care less if he is ’shaking down’ corporations. What you fail to understand is that the average joe or Jane DOESN’T know the behind-the-scenes machinations. If they see Rev. Jackson standing up and getting results, they may be inspired to do the same. THAT is my point. I don’t endorse his peculiar methods. I don’t know or care what goes on behind those closed doors. It is in the image of the man FIGHTING for justice. Don’t let your contempt for the man distort what I was trying to say, please.
If the greedy get ‘got’ (pardon the slang), good for them. Just desserts comes to mind. Judgment is an ongoing thing. Justice IS for everybody, I agree.
I honor and applaud you for providing free and below market rate daycare to folk that needed it. if you feel your help was of limited value, then you are short-sighted. You planted a seed. Someone else will water it. God will give whatever increase there will be. Don’t judge the ones that didn’t come to your way of looking at things so harshly. Love is patient…
Finally, calling a spade a spade isn’t hypocritical. I could have kept that to myself, but it is a true expression of how I feel. The incident you mention is but one of many opportunities someone from that administration has had to ‘come clean’. I don’t know how closely you follow Washington, but I follow it closely enough to KNOW that the neo-cons that run the Executive Branch are NOT in touch with reality. My comment isn’t limited to a political campaign. You seem to be saying it is okay to equivocate (lie) when asked a question, just because it isn’t convenient. I would stand up and cheer GW if he admitted making an error in judgment somewhere, sometime. Shoot, we all do! But, until I hear a mea culpa from him, I will see him as a Pharisee. Honesty and integrity are for everyone, even your favorite politicians.
Mr. Wuzzy,
I won’t provide examples. I will say this to you: Get to know a few of the affluent. Watch them. Interact with them. LISTEN to them. Then you can come to your own conclusion.
There is a reason it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to get into Heaven. I won’t define ‘eye of the needle’ either, other than to say Jesus wasn’t speaking of something one uses to sew with.
I dig your handle by the way. It reminds me of my days as a COBOL programmer in the USMC. Scuzzy Wuzzy. Peace.
I have been busy Stan. But I see you are doing an excellent job here trying to get other commenters to address the real expensive Welfare for change.
Stan said: “Would you disband with agricultural subsidies to farmers, including Cargill and ArcherMidlandDaniels? Are you ready for the country to lose nearly all its farms and manufacturing to lower-cost labor? Are you ready for most of our automobiles to be made overseas? Do you support the continual flow of illegal aliens for the purpose of maintaining low-cost labor? Are you ready to eat fruits and vegetables that mostly come from other countries? Think things through a bit.”
Everyone wants people to stand on their own. But can we talk about why this is almost never the case in big business, big political contributors, big (ex gov’t execs) lobbyists? Can we talk about the billion dollar business bailouts and special favors using our taxes” Can we talk about the fantasy of a fail and level playing field?
What is your chance as an individual to get a bailout of your failure using others taxes to pay for it if you can’t afford an expensive lobbyist? What is your chance of getting ‘pork barrel’ anti-competition legislation to benefit your business at the expense of others? What is your chance to get the ear of your congressmen when you can’t afford a $1000 dollar a plate dinner to be up close and personal?
Can we talk about the ‘real political’ world of ‘real expensive’ welfare for a change folks. What can we, as one individual, do about that?
Renee,
Your problem is not with me, it is with the Scriptures. La Shawn asked me to provide Scriptural evidence. I did. Please deal with those Scriptures before slighting me. A study of poverty in Proverbs might be in order. Most of the reasons for poverty are mentioned there. You are assuming things about me that aren’t true. I’m a former pastor and urban worker who has spent a lifetime helping the poor, as the Scriptures command. I am well-trained and well-versed in theology, black history, American history, Indian history, world history and economics. But the Scripture is always the glass that I view life through. I believe that it is without error in faith and fact. I have ministered to the needs of the desparately poor in Cambodia for 8 yrs. The training for that work came in the poor neighborhoods of Phoenix and San Diego, the former being predominately black. I challenge you to read the Scriptures more widely and thoroughly. I challenge you to read many works on black history by those with all kinds of viewpoints, but especially by those who review historical documents. The evidence is clear for all to see. By the way, I believe that this fellow that was caught today in Atlanta should be tried and executed publicly within a period of 1 yr. I’m not who you think I am.
Not at all stan, only with buffet style interpretations of scriptures
stan,
Again I challenge to read the scripture also. You generalize and throw poor, widow, etc. around like it fits everyone who is in “a self made” state. Just for an example, tyry 1 Tim 5:3-16
There is a difference.
It would be interesting to see an article or a post which shows what either party, when in the whitehouse, has done to empower or develop blacks or those living in poverty.
Personally, I am convinced that blacks are mere political pawns to be pushed around conveniently by either party. Its interesting that the RNC is now targetting blacks; my question however is for what purpose are they targetting blacks? I am again convinced that this new drive has nothing to do with the plight of blacks, the empowerment of blacks but for the simple reason of ensuring that the base of the democrats is crushed beyond recognition and the democrats will never see the steps of the whitehouse again…. and blacks are the ideal fools to ensure that this happens.
In other words, the RNC is simply on a charge to use us, just as the democrats do, for their own political and other gains.. there is no other reason.. trust me..
The other question however is, how long will we continue to assume and accept the role of political pawns? When are we going to assume the roles of leadership within both parties and direct the pace for ourselves? When will we get really uncomforatable and tired of being followers and be leaders of the very institutions that seek to dictate the pace of our lives? I am just wondering.. thats all.
BEL, I agree with what you wrote. Blacks are being used by pawns.
But Blacks can get something out of it, and should do so.
Dark Star: Ah, yes; that is the purpose of our government.. to “get something out of it”.
Okay, I think I know what you mean, but I can foresee the only ones “getting something out of it” being the hucksters.
La Shawn, how do we get more people to hear your voice. I’m an old man (72), who grew up in Washington Heights. I went to a parochial high school in the South Bronx. In my graduating class, there was only one black senior. He went on to become a doctor and now there’s a scholarship at the school named after him. (Probably, in part, thru his donations, though I’m not certain.) Presently, some 85%+ of that school’s graduating class is made up of non-white students. And the admission rate to college of this year’s class? 100%!!!. I’ve lived in really affluent towns (Wellesley and Newton, MA), and have taught high school in others (Locust Valley, LI). But none of them achieve 100% college acceptances. I’m the youngest son of Irish immigrant parents. They had 4 kids: a PhD daughter, an RN daughter, and two sons with Masters. And my mother winded down her life in deathly fear of the “leader”, Malcolm X, who railed nightly in the early 60’s about “killing whitey.” We lived 10 blocks from the Audubon Ballroom. Leaders like this, who incite hatred, are not “leaders.” When will leaders of all colors agree to bring people together? Your voice might be able to do it. Certainly, isolated individuals and schools are working towards that goal. But nobody hears them. By the way, the school I refer to is All Hallows High School, just off the Grand Concourse, at 164th St.
YES DS, we can get something out of it but wont until we assume real leadership roles in these organisations, beyond this there is very little in it for us…. just those token handouts. What a waste.
Renee,
I haven’t even really interpreted the Scriptures. I’ve just said to read them. Why are you so unkind as to accuse me of buffet style interpretation? Specifically, what do you mean by that? Provide me with one example. Just go back and read the Scriptures that I provided at La Shawn’s request and interpret them yourself. After you do, I’ll be glad to comment on your verses. I’ve only pointed out where the words “poor” and “widow” were used and what God does to those who do not care for them. Please discuss the Scriptures with me. Your accusations and generalities aren’t helpful to any of us. It seems like in any discussion of the word “poor” the first response is but “who are the poor?” We must be careful when we ask this because it is the same kind of question that the Jewish lawyer asked after he heard Jesus say that the second part of the summary of the Law was “love your neighbor as yourself.” There followed the parable of the Good Samaritan.
Also, please note that the goal of God for His people, with reference to their economic status, is fairness and generosity to each other to the point of equality or near-equality. God is not necessarily a Republican or conservative.
La Shawn,
Your unease with the continuous use of the term “leader” is well-taken but applies to the Church even more specifically. Christ was very clear that none of us in the church are to take titles to ourselves or place them before our name. Every time a Christian “leader” takes to him/herself the title “pastor”, “reverend”, “bishop”, “father”, “priest”, “leader”,”docrtor”, etc. they are in absolute disobedience to their Lord. The fact that they continue to do so leads me to the conclusion that they are ignorant of the Word they profess to teach or are being willfully disobedient to the Lord of Glory.
stan,
Again, no one argues the fact of helping the poor or the widow. It is your geralization of the term without qualifying that everyone is not poor and everyone is not a widow in need.
You yourself have said you have just read (and it appears you pick put the nice messages that make you feel good about yourself for helping others).
Love thy neighbor as theyself goes a lot farther than economically.
And as for:
“Also, please note that the goal of God for His people, with reference to their economic status, is fairness and generosity to each other to the point of equality or near-equality. God is not necessarily a Republican or conservative.”
Unless you believe in Jesus Christ as being the savior and having died for your sins and by his grace you have faith….
Continue to read, you might just learn something.
Just to add,
Your arguments were to continually say “help the poor and the widows”, in general and from a secular point of view that totally negates the fact that with our family structure being totally broken (not holding people accountable for negating their responsibilities to their family), we are in a continuous circle, going nowhere (and the problem just gets worse).
The verse I pointed out was to show their are responsibilities for families to each other. Someone earlier pointed out “how many of you help someone that is not of your own DNA” but I would argue, if you are not helping your family, you have just made the problem much worse.
Renee,
I’m not really arguing anything. You can read the Scriptures yourself. I’m just pointing them out. Go get a concordance and look up terms like “poor” and “widow” yourself. Read the book of James. And you tell me that I’m just pointing out passages that make me feel good about myself? I’ve never been accused of that. That is an extremely serious accusation to make to someone. Why are you so personally hostile to me?
And you’re not even interested in where I came up with the notion that Christians are to aim for equality of economic outcome? Are you really interested in the truth of Scripture or not?
You’re not the easiest person to discuss things with, Stan. The tone of some of your comments is indicative. Your comment on another post about “self-importance” is quite appropriate. I deleted one already because you chided some of us for writing about important issues rather than volunteering or working for the government or in a nonprofit to “help” those in need. It was more than a bit presumptuous and self-righteous.
Renee,
The passage you cite is a very important one. And it means exactly what it says. How can I disagree? I’ve done you the courtesy of reading it carefully and I am not accusing you of using it to help you feel good about yourself. It clearly points out the specific conditions for Christian widows to receive help. But it is explanatory and complimentary to the other passages I cited. They go hand in hand.
stan,
I would ask you the same question. I have a concordance and I have looked them up (you assume again). I am just pointing out, that we, man, especially here in “privaledged” America have grossly confused being poor and widow, and left out the rest of the scriptures and our repsonsibilities.
I say again, I am not against helping the poor and the widow, or those truely in need. The point is not all are.
Contray to popular belief, we are no longer a Christian based society. Our faith is now being placed in other men and the almighty dollar (and the magical power we seem to think it has to fix things) and less in our Creator and what he can do through us.
I am not personally hostile toward you (to answer your question).
La Shawn,
Your point is well-taken. But in a general sense, in every aspect of life, I’ve always been told that if you’re not part of the solution, then you’re part of the problem. This applies to all of us all the time. For example, I believe that abortion is an abhorrent evil. But if I am not in some way contributing to the solution, then I need to be careful about how much I chide others. I helped in a pro-life sidewalk movement for about a year and then dropped out. You will never hear me blaming anyone else for their inactivity on this issue. I stand condemned with everyone else. My only point was that especially with blogging, it is much easier to talk the good talk than to walk the good walk.
Stan, writing and blogging is what I like to do, and I believe raising awareness about these issues is also important. You’ve been reading this blog for a while, I suspect, so there is something about it that draws you. Whatever you think your mission is, you return again and again to comment. I believe that others benefit from what I do, even if it’s simply learning something they hadn’t know before. God uses each of us as he sees fit, and one thing I don’t need is to be preached to by other Christians. We’ve had this conversation before, and I hope the end result isn’t the same.
Renee,
But you’ve made some serious accusations. I’ve only pointed out Scripture. I’ve suggested Proverbs, where one of the reasons for poverty is laziness. This is made even stronger by Paul, who says if Christians don’t work, they don’t eat. I’ve suggested work camps for those who won’t. I’ve said that Sodom and Gomorrah and Israel were destroyed PARTLY because they neglected the poor and widows and orphans. Almight God says this. Other than work camps, I’ve made no comments on what the U.S. government should do or not do with regard to the poor. I’ve not indicated in any way that I’m liberal or that I believe in massive amounts of welfare or anything. I’ve only provided Scripture. I’ve said that MOST, not all, Scripture suggests oppression as the main source of poverty. My comment that our country could face massive future judgment PARTLY because of the treatment of blacks, Indians and Mexicans and other poor is based wholly on Scripture, especially all the material which God has provided to show us how He judges nations who do these things. If you want my specific opinion on U.S. policy, I’ll be happy to give you my opinion. But you seem to assume that I’m some liberal, irrational nutcase who tries to do good so I can draw attention to myself through a selected buffet of Scriptures. Please be fair. I’m for you…I’m for us…I’m for all of us.
Someone poke me in the eye with a pencil please
La Shawn,
I’m not critical of you! Your blog is a mission, a place for helpful discussion. But not all are. You allow “liberals” and everyone to participate. Just because I made a somewhat general statement about some bloggers doesn’t mean its about you. Why would I even stop by here if I thought you were just a talker, not a doer? Your talking and letting others talk IS your doing. But those kind of blogs are somewhat few and far between.
*Making pencil-stabbing motions at Renee’s eye.*
It’s not sharp enough (typical American that I am)…LOL
Stan: “I’ve said that MOST, not all, Scripture suggests oppression as the main source of poverty. My comment that our country could face massive future judgment PARTLY because of the treatment of blacks, Indians and Mexicans and other poor”
I’ve skipped a lot of the Scripture details, but this jumped out at me. I am certain that oppression is one of the main sources of poverty. Most poor people live in a “morally oppressive” family; and/or a community oppressed by a lack of morality; and/or under a gov’t that fails to support property rights, rule of law, and enforcement of honest contracts — especially for the poor against the rich.
In America there are many children in families whose father is not married to, nor living with, the custodial mother. I call this moral oppression, by free choice of the parents, supported by a materialist/ consumerist/ sex-crazed culture.
In America, the families (& lack) of most poor folk are MORE responsible for their poverty than any reason. The ability of hard working Spanish speaking illegals to get jobs and avoid poverty seem to show this pretty strongly.
Finally, why not have your own blog, and make references here to there, so those interested can see more details of your thoughts? You’re welcome to visit mine, for instance. tomgrey.motime.com
Long Time…
Let me add my two cents…
Whites have leaders…blacks have leaders…
But in my experience in politics, corporations, and communities…it is the myopia of those who “annoint” these so called leaders which is the problem…
Traditional, whites who want to make an inroad into black culture select a so-called “black leader”…democrate, republican whatever, simply because they are black and profess a similar ideology without looking at if the individual is really respected in the community, is progressive in thought, and has the type of dedication and discipline to execute leadership strategy…
Ergo…
You have a bunch of so-called token black leaders mostly on the left but some on the right…who are totally disconnected from the grassroots masses but yet continue to get funding and support from those who want to them to increase market share…
If the Publicans really want to increase black turnout in support from them, then they need to not attempt to unilaterally imposes their political will on black folks, but instead actively participate and integrate their philosophies with the black experience which is UNIQUE in this nation and the world…
They need to be at the local events, local business get togethers, put on positive programs that are not party specific and make themselves known and trusted in the urban communities as individuals who really are committed to change…and this doesn’t necessarily mean they have to grossely sway out of their fundamental ideological positions…
But as the old saying goes, “they don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care”…
So if they are serious..they will take a much more hands on approach…be it through the formation of this council or some other methodology…
I think many blacks subconciously are looking for a reason to change, but as of yet, the publicans just have not given that to us…
This just goes to say that at the end of the day you’re still black, conservative or liberal. So you can put black liberals down, but only realize you’ll be judged and treated just the same.
Tom,
I don’t disagree with you. And I’ll visit your site. Thanks.
HiRez,
Good stuff.
Tom…
I think what you state is an interesting theory, about moral oppression…but morality does not occur in a vacuum, and the question then must become what are the influencers of morality…
As I have stated before, I co-majored in biblical studies & hermeneutics, and also have been in the ministry for approximately 8 years…
In the bible there is a duality of social and individual morality which for the most part the conservative philosophy seperates emphasizing almost exclusively the individualistic oriented side…but throughout the bible, the shape of a nations moral character was defined by the quality of its leadership, this social/civic morality without fail always translated into the personal morality of the individuals underneath…this is the theme in I Kings & II Kings as well as many of the major and minor prophets…
Somehow we as conservatives have inverted the relationship as demonstrated in the bible between social morality/justic, and individual morality/justice…for what I feel is the political expedience of building a base of constituents who do not want to address any national culpability for true social decline…
We focus on macro moral issues, such as abortion and homosexuality, but fail to adequately address and create platforms for change in the overall moral social structure and address moral ethereal issues such as justice/racism, such as selflessness/selfish, such as family/fornication, such as sacrifice/materials…
Alex De Toquiville said, (even though he ignored slavery and racism) “America is great because it is good, when it ceases to be good it will cease to be great”…
I think we need to reframe our positions as Christians, as Americans, and as “conservatives”…and engage society in an effort of true social change IN HUMILITY…as opposite to spot issue morality, and ignoring others plight and perception…
Black White or Other…
This is why I appreciate Alan Keyes, even though I think he is misguided on issues of race, and race relations…because he focuses dialogue on the fundamental issues of morality from a social perspective which provide the context for morality from the individual perspective…
Kind of off topic, but I don’t think we can begin to talk about leaders, particularly black leadership in the conservative party, without addressing the very real question of social morality and justice in the conservative party, and how that affects this thing called race relations in America, and the history of fraction race relationships that the predominantely white leadership in the past has produced…
HiRez,
More good stuff although I disagree with you on Keyes. He is a poser and self-promoter. If his message came from someone with more thought and humility, it would come across much better. If he wants to preach, he should start a church.
Humm..you think he is a poser? What lead you to think that? To you think it is a promotional gimmick or he legitimately believes what he says? I heard him in an interview after the election against Obama, on the Catholic Channel, and he was touching on some very critical issues. Do you think he has just taken up those positions because its his niche?
HiRez, at risk of you getting labeled a liberal,
good points.
Yes, I think he’s disingenuous and proved it by trying to run for the Senate in Illinois. He has lost any credibility he ever had. He was one of the first conservative blacks co-opted by Republicans in the 1980s and has accomplished next to nothing since. He makes the rest of us conservatives look bad. The best thing would be for him to fade away and get a real job or get elected mayor or representative or something. Anyone can run around and get conservative white people to pay them to speak, like Jackson runs around getting liberal white people to pay him to speak. Again, if he wants to preach he should start a church.
Stan, You are losing some of my respect with your last comment.
Keyes problem is he is ‘too’ genuine about what he talks about, a little too conservative for most. The reason he gave for running in Illinois was Obama was pro-choice and no one in Illinois was running against him. Keyes has ‘always’ been very anti-abortion and gave this as his primary reason for opposing Obama.
Why the term ‘co-opted’ by Republicans? You aren’t usually known to be this lazy in your thinking. Isn’t this the code word for any outspoken black Republican?
Why the ‘anyone can run around and get conservative white people to pay them to speak. Just like Jackson …? I don’t get your point. Are you saying only white people have money to pay speakers, and poor miss-guided blacks??
Keyes values, hence his obvious heart felt mission, is routed in his very strong religious beliefs, too strong for me. But certainly not ‘disenguinous”.
Bottom line, your last comment comes across with racist overtones, to me.
Great comment in your response to Tom, HiRez.
Jim R.,
I understand your concern about my comments. I respected him when he first came to national attention because I share many of his beliefs. And I didn’t say that he wanted to be co-opted by Republicans but that he WAS co-opted, but only for awhile because he fairly quickly became an embarrassment to them. He cannot really point to any significant accomplishment or influence in his life’s work.
He has not one idea as to how to accomplish goals in a diverse, secular nation. There is a role for prophets and there is a role for statesmen. There is not one reason anyone should have voted for him for president and there is not one reason anyone should have voted for him for senator. He was a carpetbagger of the worst order, running for senator as he had run for president, to make a show. It was the worst thing that could have happened to black conservatives. I’m all for black conservatives gaining national influence and attention. But he’s a flame-thrower like Coulter, Malkin, Carville, Jackson, etc. and people who are looking for real answers and solutions ultimately don’t pay any attention to any of these folks and their ilk. They are side-show entertainers, who haven’t had a fresh, original thought in years. I would really like some black conservatives to get a hearing. But too many of them are locked into a “conservatism” that is predictable on almost every policy. When someone comes along that is conservative, compassionate, informed, convinced, congenial and authentic then you’ll have to fight me to be the first to jump on the bandwagon and if it’s a woman, so much the better.
Comments on this entry are closed.