Jack and Jill Politics - Latest Comments in NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

jelana — Thu, 01 May 2008 19:18:00 -0000

People see and hear what they want to see and hear. Obama actually said he could not disown any of us (Wright, the black community or his grandmother). He was forced to disown Wright by Wright himself! I don't deny that Wright has some legitimate points but he buffooned
himself. We all know that Barack has to walk a fine line in order to become POTUS. When Barack made the bitter comments, he was actually defending working class whites, but the media intentionally failed to mention that fact. We all need to get a grip: I agree with

Mahana. This is all manipulation by the media who does not want a Black POTUS. This is classic

conquer and divide politics. The one thing I know for sure is that we all will be in BIG Trouble if we end up with either Hillary or McCain.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

SquarePeg — Thu, 01 May 2008 09:03:00 -0000

As always, Nquest eloquence in getting to the heart of the matter and saying what I so inelegantly cannot leaves me speechless.

Thank you.

As I have attempted to say so many times, Obama in order to curry favor of the main stream masses must throw anyone over/under the bus to obtain his objective. That Reverend Wright did not stay silent as Obama basically called him the crazy old uncle to the pleasure of white folks was truly amazing. I sat and listened to that speech and listened to the pundits dissect it, and like you Nquest, I wondered if I was hearing the same words they had. Indeed, I was troubled that Obama summarized all the tortures, humiliations, discrimination, and injustices done to African Americans for centuries as the angry of a by-gone generation (which I am a member) who just don't understood this brave new world. It played well to his white listeners who wanted to hear that yes, Black folks were ready to move on and forget about what had happened to them in the past, since it would so uncomfortable to keep bringing up the atrocities that have yet to be atoned. Yes, Obama was not speaking to Black America but to those white folks who felt a little of the pressure removed from them as this man who was raised by white folks and lived in other countries, who never suffered many of the torments that Black folks in this country suffered and continue to suffer.

That was an appeasement speech to white folks. Period.

We are supposed to understand that as we always have when we have allowed one house negro to succeed knowing that maybe if he does, he can make our lives a little better, if we just look the other way.

Yes, Obama was surpised when Rev. Wright refused to play his role.

Now, the new meme is that Obama has cut him off completely. IMHO he did that in this original "race" speech, but to White folks he didn't go far enough until he denounced, disputed, blah, blah, blah.

Now, after he has done their bidding, will he be accepted? What would you have him do, you ask? You matter how much he grovels, it will not change the minds of people who had no intention of voting for him and only gave ammunition to the ones who were trying to find a so-called legitimate reason not to.

America, the beautiful. Don't you love it? That includes you Reverend Wright.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Ms.Martin — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:58:00 -0000

NQuest, Squarepeg

This from the commenter BlackinUSA over at Field:

I'm going to talk like my grand momma did down on the E.S. of Maryland. "Who that little boy runnin fo' President...Byrack Obiama." Grand momma his name is Barack Obama! "Whatever the funny looking niggas name is he better git that Rev. off his ass cuz them white folks ain't gonna have it." Whatcha mean grand momma? "I knew 2 cents into his $4 speech Rev. Wright was only on TV get his 15mins. He ain't there to help no BARACK OBAMA or nobody else." But grand momma Obama has distance himself from Rev. Wright. "Well he ain't running fast enough and that preacher gonna ride along as far as he can. Mr. Baroma should leave his church goings be a private matter and let them newse folks dig up stuff all they want...you just keep you eyes on the prize." Grand momma his name is Barack Obama. "Humph! He still funny looking to me."

Granny is keeping it real!

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Ms.Martin — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:49:00 -0000

"And Ms. Martin, I tend to ignore and not be able to stand Black folks who deny the existence of the ongoing problems of institutional racism and believe that it is all now a thing of the past and chastize any Black person who speaks of these truths. Only individuals are racist according to you"

TLW - you have attempted to mix apples with oranges here. I agree with Wright on many, many levels (check through some of my comments on older posts) - I disagree with the "performance" of Wright at the Q&A; session period.

I stand by my statement that we don't know how to treat each other.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Nquest — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:45:00 -0000

Reverand Wright left Obama no other political choice.

Ms. Martin, I'll readily concede that point but just as people criticize THE WAY Rev. Wright 'performed'... Obama failed, likewise, in the way he's gone out and there's that pattern that's there that we've both noted.

A simple genuine or feigned blowup saying, "Rev. Wright doesn't speak for me" and "I found his statements to be ridiculous" would have sufficed. But Barack Obama has no qualms with the double-standard. He accepts it and can't be so dumb as to not know that that's all HIS POLITICAL ENEMIES want from him -- to "prove" himself worthy showing how he's not like THOSE Black people.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Nquest — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:37:00 -0000

yThat Q&A; shit wasn't about injustices against you it was about Reverend Wright. I didn't need to hear that he was mad at Obama. Grown folks have those conversations in private.

Who said he was mad at Obama? Going by this logic Obama should have kept his mouth shut when it came to claiming Rev. Wright insulted him by saying he is what he is: a politician.

Just like Rev. Wright played the fool... Obama did too and Obama was hardly "grown up" running his mouth about a MEDIA CREATED slight. Yes, Barack Obama gladly purchased his ticket and joined in the silly season celebration all on some self *ish.

It's nothing but media spin for anyone to take Rev. Wright's statements as a slight against Obama. This idea that Rev. Wright pointing out a simple point of fact and saying something that can't be debated -- Obama is a politician and, by definition, has to consider polls, etc.

Pundits talk about Obama making politically expedient decisions all the time and he's never claimed to be "insulted." This is Obama being lead by media spin just like he's repeated other popular myths that disparage Black people.

Obama definitely wasn't acting like he was "grown" when he dismissed Rev. Wright as an "Angry Black Man" from some older generation that's out of touch. The kind of ideas Rev. Wright holds don't belong to any particular generation.

Obama is about as dumb as idiotic white conservatives with silly rhetoric like that. By the same token, Obama's kind of worldview and regard (and deference), unfortunately, has no generational bounds either.

Now that's the biggest "insult" and that wasn't limited to one person (like Wright's supposed 'insult' was). Barack Obama felt it was cool to diss Rev. Wright's whole generation:

"For the men and women of Reverend Wright's generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away; nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years...

That anger is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition, and prevents the African-American community from forging the alliances it needs to bring about real change. But the anger is real... to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races."

As imperfectly as I tried to make the point before (elsewhere)... It's clear that it's Barack Obama who is the one coming up short in the understanding department.

Yes, he was content to join in the campaign to paint Rev. Wright as the "angry Black man." No matter how "nuanced" Obama wanted the picture to be... he readily conceded the point time after time after time and, again, Obama said that essentially about a whole generation of Black people who just don't happen to subscribe to his problematic view of America.

Obama has every right to his opinion about America and it is definitely appropriate for someone running for president but Barack Obama can no more define what the Black Church is and the way Black America is than Rev. Wright.

Rev. Wright said that he is ONE representative of the Black Church and Obama along with a number of other people quick to pretend like they honor and want "diversity" in the Black to be recognized felt like they had to contradict Rev. Wright as if Rev. Wright claimed to be THE Black Church.

Note: Barack Obama never dared to explain BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY, etc., etc.

One thing that was really funny was when the token Black conservative on CNN tried to play that card then, after a break, CNN came back with the clip (shown previously after the "God damn" YouTubes first made it on the news) of people who supported Rev. Wright's take on Black Liberation Theology/social gospel from CNN.

People are right to criticize Rev. Wright's behavior at the NPC but people who can't bear to muster any more defense of the Black Church than to say Rev. Wright isn't representative... Well, they're in the same category as CBC members, etc. who support Hillary Clinton who couldn't find anything in them to confront the race-baiting in Campaign Hillary.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

TLW — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:31:00 -0000

And Ms. Martin, I tend to ignore and not be able to stand Black folks who deny the existence of the ongoing problems of institutional racism and believe that it is all now a thing of the past and chastize any Black person who speaks of these truths. Only individuals are racist according to you. We are all on a level playing field and when Blacks complain about this then they are just being divisive and are ruining the "liberal consensus." I like to thank you for confirming my beliefs that the "liberal consensus" does not have Black peoples best interest at heart.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Ms.Martin — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:25:00 -0000

Nquest

As always, you make a very compelling argument that is based solidly in fact.

I agree and felt the same disappointment at the failure to speak out in favor of Michelle, denouncing of Farrakhan, the backing off from the bitter statements (as the were very true) and the notion that he corrects quickly for the mainstream populous.

My question to you is what would you have him do instead?

And, what is it that you expect from him.

On Reverend Wright and older black americans

They are very angry and unforgiving and understandably so. I know many senior people who either hate the white man or are still so afraid that they fall right into line with the script they were given over 40 years ago. I also know some very angry young black folks.

Reverand Wright left Obama no other political choice.

Lest we forget - Obama was raced in a white household and does not share the same fundamental experience and cannot fully understand it.

So when he speaks of us in ways that you believe that are pandering to white America, it could just be that it is what he truly believes.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

TLW — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:15:00 -0000

Can somebody explain to me this Black people are not a monolith thing because quite frankly I don't get that concept and it always seemed to me that Black people are the only ones to adopt this concept.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Nquest — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:54:00 -0000

I don't listen to people when they start screaming...

I listen to it all and don't grant any excuse on some arbitrary basis like the "presentation." Obama's race speech was "presented" well but the things he said about Black anger and White resentment were more problematic than anything Rev. Wright has said.

The popularity of Obama's kind of narrative, even his "good" presentation of bs don't take the stink off of it.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Nquest — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:50:00 -0000

Afrocentrism has limits in a pluralistic society.

Craig, the very fact that you said that shows your ignorance of both what Afrocentricism is and the idea I was speaking to when I invoked the idea. Don't try to engage me or talk about anything I've said unless you have the intelligence and HONESTY to do so.

Simply put, your comment doesn't even begin to make sense let alone approaches any kind of intelligent observation given what I said about Afrocentricism or Min. Farrakhan.

Moving on...

Ms. Martin

I can't stand black folks always going on and on about how white folks treat us and we know we can treat each other shit.

That's part of the issue I have with Obama in this whole ordeal. He's quick to dump on Black people or play that Noble Negro role. "The double-standard is real", they say, and, again, Obama is all too accepting of it.

I credit him for taking a stand when he gave his speech on race but found some profound issues where he granted all kinds of deference to OTHER people but was nowhere near as understanding when it came to Black folk and I will constantly highlight how Obama dissed a whole GENERATION of "men and women" from Rev. Wright's era and how he's quick to call White folks issues "legitimate" and not misguided or counterproductive while regurgitating that tired old narrative that it's Black folks whose "anger" and resentment is disabling and all the other derogatory things that get associated with however we are/feel while excuses are made for White folks. He should have caught more hell in the "bitter-gate" blow up for being a flip-flopping politician saying one thing in front of one croud while saying the opposite in front of the other.

In his race speech he defended White "resentment" while disparaging Black "anger" (using OTHER people's words to describe and frame the way Black people respond in society) and insisted that White "resentment" was not only "legitimate" but also not misguided. The whole "bitter-gate" stuff centered on the idea that working class Whites is vulnerable to the politics of division and often get caught up in scapegoating ... the very definition of misguided, misdirected angst.

In both cases, he tried to paint working/poor White folks as VICTIMS which, like the "bad English" Rev. Wright talked about, only seems to be a bad word when someone talks about Black VICTIMIZATION however real and legitimate because we're tired of the "politics of division"... as long as Black folks can be framed (Barack Obama included) as the source of the division (see Geraldine Ferraro and Bill Clinton's claim that Obama "played the race card").

Yes, Obama falls right in with mainstream America on that. He's big, bad and "tough" when it comes to playing the Cosby role showing "tough love" for the Black community.

When it was a Black/White thing, he essentially played the Black pathology card while being deferential to Whites to the point of saying that their misdirected angst and frustration over the diminished opportunities, etc. and, in fact, their opposition and resistance to African Americans and our historic quest for justice and equity was something we all need to understand.

That's the sacrifice mentality and worn-out narrative I'm talking about. Rev. Wright didn't fit any of the criteria in Obama's disparaging remarks about "Black anger" but then again... That didn't matter. Politicians and public figures have a long tradition of dogging Black folks and getting away with it.

In the Nevada debate, Obama confronted a Black woman's question about immigration in the strongest (pejorative) of terms, labeled it as "scapegoating" (I agreed with him and defended him on that, btw), but the second HIS POLITICAL ENEMIES made an issue out of him applying that same kind of idea to White folk, even in the most genteel of tones, explaining "why" poor Whites are "bitter" and happen to (vote against their economic interest and) "scapegoat", he's willing to offer very public apologies for something that he was right about... just like Rev. Wright was RIGHT about the things he said -- no strawmen counterarguments ("he said AIDS was invented by the gov't") allowed -- AND just like there was absolutely NOTHING wrong with what Michelle Obama said about being "proud of her country."

That's the sacrifice mentality I'm talking about. And the second HIS POLITICAL ENEMIES told him to dance to the tune of the Farrakhan (let alone Israel) broken-record...

Well, you know what happened and all of that FOR WHAT??? It's not like this kind of stuff is going to end January 21, 2009 when he becomes president. The very basis of the cooperation he could ever hope to get is now, more than ever, bought with the price of how much he is willing to sacrifice right now in the campaign.

It's the whole history of this double-standard and Obama's ready acceptance of it that has me at a crossroads in terms of how much support I'm willing to give Obama.

Just like Obama feels betrayed by Rev. Wright (because somehow the Rev. was supposed to understand how much he had to be sacrificed and surprised Obama because he got tired of being the Obama's convenient villain as well as the villain of Obama's POLITICAL ENEMIES)... I can no longer stomach the way Obama behaves. I understand the politics of it all but I also understand the sorry history of this double-standard Obama has accepted.

Obama always has an excuse that he "didn't hear" all of what Rev. Wright said... but that didn't stop him from doing the very thing his political enemies did... reduce Rev. Wright to a convenient stereotype of the "Angry Black Man."

Me, I can't stand people who can't be honest. Obama framed his issue and disagreement with Rev. Wright as one about the different worldviews they have particularly as it relates Rev. Wright "spoke as if" there was no progress. Well, again, Rev. Wright fully acknowledge how "governments change (for the good, etc.)", including our own.

So, Obama has no room to talk about being "insulted." Whatever Rev. Wright "did to him", Obama had it coming. Obama was willing to let people frame Rev. Wright as a "racist" (no press conference on that) even as he's defended Hillary, Bill, etc. and said none of them or the things they've done or said were racist or race-baiting.

To whatever extent Rev. Wright was the teacher to Obama's pupil... one lesson Obama hasn't learned is how unity can't exist with subordination and in the presence of asymmetrical deference.

I think it's that kind of naive notion MLK had to come to grips with and dispensed with. Maybe one day our beloved brother Barack Obama will progressed to that point instead of staying in the holding pattern of this idiotic Rodney King like simplistic and problematic race narrative.

There are a few more lessons in nuance and depth Obama is lacking. He'd be wise to catch a clue and understand how the difference in the way he sees things and the way Rev. Wright sees things don't make his superior to Rev. Wright's and, by extension, Rev. Wright's views, somehow, deficient or wrong.

And his idea that Wright's so-called "anger" is "generational" is about as dumb as anything I've ever heard. I'm sick and tired of people who use idiotic rhetoric like that.

Obama very public acceptance of the double-standard especially his remarks about Min. Farrakhan the other day really shows the fault lines and just how eager Obama, even if he begrudgingly did it first, is to satisfy White people's anxiety and "Your name is Toby" tests.

He can disagree, dislike and even 'hate' Min. Farrakhan but for a Black man to go out of his way to "denounce" another Black man for White folks fickle pleasure (i.e. his Farrakhan statement only shows how he's willing to answer: "TOBY!")... Well, that makes me lose respect for Obama real quick.

Again, according to reports, Obama went to the Million Man March. So exactly what was he objecting to when Rev. Wright acknowledge (get this Ms. Martin) that Farrakhan is NOT his enemy?

Obama tried to act like he can deal with and want people to talk about race in all its nuance but somehow he can't apply a nuanced view to Min. Farrakhan. Note: How Obama hasn't treated Roy Ayers someone who actually plotted to harm people in a comparable manner.

Yes. Obama is, like Cosby IMO... all too willing to treat Black people like $&1#.

I still want him to be president out of crew that's running and still believe he's a decent person committed to the Black community but I won't excuse the flaws in his thinking...

(that Rev. Wright made in a much more sincere and legitimate manner than Obama) is More than anything, it's Obama's theme of unity

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Ms.Martin — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:44:00 -0000

SquarePeg

You've missed my point - presentation is everything.

I don't listen to people when they start screaming it's just too stressful and I'm black.

Also I was fine with Wright until he went out of his way to put his message on display as opposed to when he was speaking to injustices because they were injustices.

That Q&A; shit wasn't about injustices against you it was about Reverend Wright. I didn't need to hear that he was mad at Obama. Grown folks have those conversations in private.

Now having said that, I sent Obama and "hold up" message when he made his "off the cuff" remarks trying to explain Wright's style and he appeased me with the race speech where he addressed my concerns.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

TruthSeeker — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:31:00 -0000

@ jack turner,

well, I don't think African Americans should do it to satisfy racists...they should do it to marginalize their opinion. If they think a flag makes you patriotic, then you get a BIGGER flag..

I'm kinda being silly about this, but the underlying idea is to back them into a corner until they run out of reasons. Force them to adopt more bizarre reasons which will marginalize them.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

SquarePeg — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:25:00 -0000

M. MARTIN,

You have made my point.

"You and Reverend Wright can shout from the rooftops about the injustices like screaming mimis and nobody is going to give a fuck but you and Reverend Wright."

Apparently if you do indeed feel this way, then that kumbaya world you strive for will take a little longer.

Now, and I truly thank you for allowing me to voice my opinions without all the hate, I do truly appreciate it, I mean if you overlook all the name calling.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Anderkoo — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:07:00 -0000

Also, Craig, thanks for sharing your personal story -- it is so powerful and it captures that weird and ephemeral sense of hope that I have that we can acknowledge racism AND still believe that something better can happen.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Ms.Martin — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:05:00 -0000

SquarePeg

You are tripping!

Obama has chosen not to focus on all that's wrong with the world and set about making a difference in it in some way.

You and Reverend Wright can shout from the rooftops about the injustices like screaming mimis and nobody is going to give a fuck but you and Reverend Wright.

On the other hand, if you choose to come together with rational minds you can find a place in the world that is not all doom and gloom.

I know people are prejudice and until the emotional process of the election process, I never really given a fuck because I'm doing me regardless to what any people think of me.

I can't stand black folks always going on and on about how white folks treat us and we know we can treat each other shit.

I know this because I live it. I, like Obama, know that there are people who don't care about what color you are and will treat you decently and those are the only people I'm concerned with the rest get no airtime from me.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

SquarePeg — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:02:00 -0000

Now you fall into the trap of calling me an Ass because you disagree with my opinion, now how is that allowing me to voice my opinion that is clearly different from yours.

I am not an Obamaniac, and am obviously frustrated at his willingness to appease the "main stream" community at the expense of Reverend Wright. We will disagree on this issue to no end. Call me an Ass if you wish, that's your prerogative. I stand by by comments and hopefully Obama will grow a pair. Oops!

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Anderkoo — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:02:00 -0000

Craig Hickman writes: "Wright, for all of his intellectual brilliance, clearly doesn't have the spiritual clarity to see what's happening right in front of his eyes, and if by chance he does, then he doesn't have the courage to put down his armor and let the past go."

Amen! And the same thing is happening across white evangelical America. If McCain thinks that Hagee can deliver those precious votes, he should take a look at Christians on college campuses today. Many of them would easily end up Barack supporters.

It's been a long time coming, but a change is gonna come.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

SquarePeg — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:55:00 -0000

Craig,

If the ass fits, so be it!

At least I stand up to my assness, does Obama?

And will defend my assness any day of the week. I would say I have an ass backbone.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Jack Turner — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:54:00 -0000

@truthseeker,

real quick point: nothing will shut the racists up. they are racists. the will retrofit any rationale over their preexisting reasoning.

i'm not weighing in on craig's suggestion, but i think this is a point we often miss in our political tactics. do something if you believe it will make a difference or simply because you believe it to be right. doing something so your most die hard opponent thinks favorably of you is futile. they'll still hate your ass but will make up a new reason :)

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

TruthSeeker — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:44:00 -0000

Craig,

you make a good point.

It would be amusing to see African styled clothing made with star and stripe print...and I think it would shut the racists up.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

N. Mahana — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:36:00 -0000

Omg! Craig reading what you wrote reminded me of what I've dealt with in the past and now. I'm on the other side of the country (from you) in one of the whitest places imaginable and everyday I'm reminded that some people simply are not comfy with the fact that I am indeed a black woman in their community.

I constantly get asked to show my I.D. when I use my CC, although I frequent the same stores and people see me everyday. However I'll stand behind a white customer and not one time will they be asked to show their I.D.

I was also harrassed by the police years ago (in another state) while on my way to the movie theater with my ex husband. They had the nerve to insinuate that I was a prostitute. Because a white man could not possibly be dating much less married to a Black woman!

Silliness, they pulled us over simply due to racial profiling because we had not violated any traffic laws. They humiliated me on the side of a busy intersection by making me get out of the car and stand behind it while flashing lights in my face.

I know how racist cops work and let me tell you, that's not the only thing I've dealt with in my life along those lines. However no matter what experiences we all may share, the point is that, as you said...we are not monolithic. We have different opinions and different ideas on how to tackle the issues we face.

I respect that.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

JJ — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:32:00 -0000

Hickman...

I never questioned whether you were Black or not. And I said "many" not "all."

We aren't a monolith, but there are enough Black folk who feel the way Wright do to make their points valid.

They are just a valid as the "white resentment" that Obama seek so hard to assuage.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

Craig Hickman — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:27:00 -0000

truthseeker, I see no reason why Black people so inclined can't do both. Irish Americans in Boston have the largest St. Patrick's Day Parade in the nation (so the locals say) and consider themselves the most devout patriots.

Re: NYT Editorial On Wright And Hagee

N. Mahana — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:24:00 -0000

My comments are only directed at Obama supporters and since this is Jack and Jill that is...Black Obama supporters.

Personally my opinion is not that people here and elsewhere do not have a right to voice their opinions and concerns. All I'm saying is that the bigger picture seems that we are all being manipulated. We are working on emotional fumes, which is clouding our outlook on what overall needs to happen. I'm guilty of the same at times but I have a wise friend that tells me..."honey take a step back and see where we are right now".

So that's all I'm trying to do is take a step back and regroup. Focus on what we can do and what we need to accomplish. I say we because that is what Senator Obama has been saying all along. It is we that have the power. As long as we keep telling ourselves we don't then we'll never get to where we want to be.

Well to those who care, I'm all for organizing to send a clear message to the DNC that Black Americans are indeed Americans and our votes count as much as anybody. We are consumers, tax payers and all the rest that make up this country.

Our votes count and we will not stand by and let them continue to place the importance of one constituency over another, while doing nothing for any group besides giving empty lip service.

Sorry if I'm soapboxing right now but I'm proud to say that I'm idealistic even in my most pessimistic moments I can stop and we can have a different world.

As history has shown the bad it has proven the above statement as well.