Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts

Saturday, December 12, 2009

Pres. Obama's Acceptance Remarks for the Nobel Prize

I've just seen these comments released by the White House. I've not read them all yet, but I appreciated the humble and forthright way the President acknowledge that more worthy recipients have received/deserved the award, and that he receives the award while the country continues in two wars.

I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your generous decision has generated. (Laughter.) In part, this is because I am at the beginning, and not the end, of my labors on the world stage. Compared to some of the giants of history who've received this prize -- Schweitzer and King; Marshall and Mandela -- my accomplishments are slight. And then there are the men and women around the world who have been jailed and beaten in the pursuit of justice; those who toil in humanitarian organizations to relieve suffering; the unrecognized millions whose quiet acts of courage and compassion inspire even the most hardened cynics. I cannot argue with those who find these men and women -- some known, some obscure to all but those they help -- to be far more deserving of this honor than I.

But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 42 other countries -- including Norway -- in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.

Perhaps a few more thoughts when I've read the entire speech.

Wednesday, December 09, 2009

I Told You "Race" Makes You Crazy

At least it makes you say crazy stuff. Three cases in point:

Rush Limbaugh:

".. Limbaugh said, “Black unemployment is terrible. The black frame of mind is terrible. They’re depressed. They’re down, Obama not doing anything for them. How’s that hoax and change working for ya? They’re all livid. They thought there was going to be an exact 180 degree economic reversal, and it’s done nothing but get bad for everybody, but they’re especially upset about it because they look at him as one of them, and now they feel abandoned, and I’m sure Tiger Woods’ choice of females not helping them out with their attitudes either.”'


What?! Why is this guy still employed? Why is anybody still listening to him? What non-sense!

Sen. Harry Reid

Okay... let's switch political aisles for a moment just to show that "race"-induced insanity strikes all political varieties. Check the comments from Sen. Reid re: health care reform and those who oppose it.



Really?! Not passing health care reform is akin to opposing abolition, women's suffrage, and Civil Rights legislation?! Wow. Health care reform is either very, very important, or two very sad things just happened. One: Sen. Reid used some very "race"-freighted comparisons to essentially demonize his opponents. Two: He just trivialized some rather huge social and political issues with an unwarranted comparison. I think the first is unkind. I resent the second.

As I've written elsewhere, the current "let's take our issue and make it the new slavery or the new Civil Rights" is both offensive to many and ineffective. The abortion=slavery, Civil Rights=gay rights analogies should be abandoned, if for no other reason than the sometimes tacit and other times explicit racial freight they carry. It's not helping us.

Tiger Woods and Racial Reconciliation?

Finally, Tiger Woods. If you've not read C.J.'s post, you should go there now. It's must reading. I've been pretty disinterested in all the Tiger mess. I'm surprised people are surprised, and I wonder if all the shock and horror are simply more respectable guises for our voyeurism.

Anyway, I was caught by one of Challies' A La Carte items (don't you love that feature!). In it, he quotes a section from an article at American Thinker. I don't really know this blog or this person, so this isn't aimed at anyone in particular. I just couldn't understand how this sentence about Tiger could be true: "...he was our first living embodiment of the collective hope for racial reconciliation."

The man defines himself as so "racially" or ethnically "other" that it's nearly impossible to see him as reconciling anything, or embodying any hopes for reconciliation. What exactly is a "Calabanasian," Tiger's self-designation? He has a right to that, and I don't begrudge him one bit. So, let's not make him "black" all of a sudden (an imposition and a false assumption from our one-drop rule past). But it's a huge stretch of the imagination to consider him "our first living embodiment of the collective hope for reconciliation." Heck. I'm not even sure there is such a "collective hope." Seems most are pretty comfortable with marginal interaction masking deep stratification.

Anyway... that's my mental health post for the week. Let's check the craziness at least through the New Year.

Wednesday, June 04, 2008

Whoa... Is This for Real?!

My son Titus will not know a time when no African-American man had ever a chance to serve in the highest office of the land. I've spent all my life thinking it utterly impossible.

My daughters Afiya and Eden can say, "I remember when Barack Obama became the first African American candidate nominated by a major party. We were living in the Cayman Islands watching it on television with our parents... really proud of the U.S."

I heard David Gergen say, "I'm from North Carolina. Barack Obama won that state with large margins. Twenty-five years ago... even ten years ago... that was unthinkable." I'm from N.C., too. I thought it was unthinkable last year.

But here we are.

Where are we exactly?

I don't think we know. But it's a different place than the one we were in two weeks ago or two decades ago. It's a completely unanticipated development--no longer arrested.

Here's one timeline:

1619--the first African slaves arrive at Jamestown, Va

Virginia, 1662 - “Whereas some doubts have arisen whether children got by any Englishmen upon a Negro shall be slave or Free, Be it therefore enacted and declared by this present Grand assembly, that all children born in this country shall be held bond or free only According to the condition of the mother."



Maryland, 1664 - “That whatsoever free-born [English] woman shall intermarry with any slave [...] shall serve the master of such slave during the life of her husband; and that all the issue of such free-born women, so married shall be slaves as their fathers were.”



Virginia, 1667 - “Act III. Whereas some doubts have arisen whether children that are slaves by birth [...] should by virtue of their baptism be made free, it is enacted that baptism does not alter the condition to the person as to his bondage or freedom; masters freed from this doubt may more carefully propagate Christianity by permitting slaves to be admitted to that sacrament.”



Virginia, 1682 - “Act I. It is enacted that all servants [...] which shall be imported into this country either by sea or by land, whether Negroes, Moors [Muslim North Africans], mulattoes or Indians who and whose parentage and native countries are not Christian at the time of their first purchase by some Christian [...] and all Indians, which shall be sold by our neighboring Indians, or any other trafficking with us for slaves, are hereby adjudged, deemed and taken to be slaves to all intents and purposes any law, usage, or custom to the contrary notwithstanding.”

1712--New York Revolt



1739--The Stono Rebellion in South Carolina



1741--New York Slave Insurrection of 1741



1800--Gabriel's Rebellion in Virginia


1808--the slave trade is abolished in the U.S.

1811--Louisiana Territory Slave Rebellion, led by Charles Deslondes

1815--George Boxley Rebellion in Virginia



1822--Denmark Vesey Uprising in South Carolina ()



1831--Nat Turner's Rebellion in Virginia



1839--The Amistad Seizure on a Spanish ship


1857--Dred Scott decision, decided 7-2, held that a slave did not become free when taken into a free state; Congress could not bar slavery from a territory; and blacks could not be citizens. Furthermore, a state could not bar slave owners from bringing slaves into that state.


1861--American Civil War begins


1863--Emancipation Proclamation delivered on January 1


1865--Emancipation following American Civil War, commonly celebrated on June 19th (Juneteenth); final ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in December


1865-1877--Reconstruction


1870--Hiram Rhodes Revels became the first black member of the Senate and thereby also the first black member of the Congress.



1874--rise in white paramilitary organizations, such as the White League and Red Shirts, whose political aim was to turn out the Republicans. They also disrupted organizing and terrorized blacks to bar them from the polls. From 1873 to 1877, conservative white Democrats (calling themselves "Redeemers") regained power in state elections throughout the former Confederacy.


1877--President Rutherford Hayes withdrew federal troops from the South, causing the collapse of the remaining three Republican state governments. Through the enactment of disfranchising statutes and constitutions, and extralegal means, the white Democrats subsequently removed most blacks and hundreds of thousands of poor whites from voter rolls in every Southern state. White Democrats established one-party rule and enforced a system of racial segregation that continued throughout the South into the 1960s.


1876-1965--Jim Crow laws enforce de jure segregation with "separate but equal" status for blacks and whites.


1960-1980--Civil Rights Movement


1954--Brown v. Board of Education overturned earlier rulings going back to Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, by declaring that state laws that established separate public schools for black and white students denied black children equal educational opportunities. Handed down on May 17, 1954, the Warren Court's unanimous (9-0) decision stated that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal." As a result, de jure racial segregation was ruled a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.


1964--the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a landmark legislation in the United States that outlawed segregation in the U.S. schools and public places.


1965--Voting Rights Act of 1965 outlawed discriminatory voting practices that had been responsible for the widespread disenfranchisement of African-Americans in the United States.


Tonight--Barack Husein Obama, as "white" as he is "black," became the first "black" Presidential nominee of a major political party in United States history.



It's been a long road. And many have cried, "How long, Lord?" But it's undeniable that the sovereign hand of God has moved to change things radically.

One other thing seems certain: The patronizing political strategy of promising token positions with little influence to some African American leaders in exchange for delivering the black vote is out the window. If a man with brown skin can be President, who needs political fool's gold and worthless trinkets? If a man with brown skin can run a successful candidacy not predicated upon "race," not "race" baiting, not settling for the conventional wisdom that insists upon race-based coalitions, then the rules for old-styled politics are over.

Perhaps there will be a Willie Horton pulled out of someone's political tool box. But for tonight, everything is potentially different.

Never thought I'd see the day.