Yesterday, standing on the steps of the United States Capital Building, directly facing the Lincoln Memorial, where the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King delivered his "I have a Dream" speech, Barack Obama made history being the first African-American to recite the oath of President of the United States.
As an African-American, I looked at this historical event with a certain sense of pride that I think only an African-American could. With the painful history of the African-American engrained in mind since I was a little boy, watching Obama take center stage as the most powerful person in the world meant a little more to me.
I'm reminded of a Chris Rock stand up where he said "If you're white, the sky is the limit. If you're black, the limit is the sky." This may have been a very cynical observation by the comedian, but prior to this event, where was the proof that he was wrong. The image of African-American men was one of idiotic characters like Soulja Boy or Plies, they were all uneducated, made up the majority of the prison population because they were all criminals, and were all deadbeat dads. African-American children today, particularly young men, lacked a positive and realistic role model emulate and aspire to. Now that void has been filled with a man who lives his life through Christ, is a loving husband to a beautiful wife, a devoted father to two gorgeous daughters, grew up with no money, fame, or fortune yet with hard work and dedication worked his way through school to obtain an elite education, and dedicated his life to public service and helping others.
It is my sincere hope that black men will look at this and see they don't have to be rappers, athletes, drug dealers, or gangsters. Instead of aspiring to be the next T.I. or 50 Cent, Kobe Bryant or Lebron Jamses, there is now another option. If you work hard, play by the rules, live a good life, be a productive member of society, and serve causes bigger than yourself, the sky can be the limit for you too.
Thoughts?
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Monday, January 12, 2009
Israel-Palestine: Getting Past the Past
One of the first questions I am asked by friends or acquaintances of mine is how can I support Israel. I've also been accused of not being able to see both sides of this complicated history between the Jewish State of Israel and Palestine. However when it comes to history, its not that I don't see both sides- because I do. It's simply that after 60+ years (starting from the creation of Israel and going back as far as my critics desire to go) I think history is...well, history.
Show me more ....
Thoughts?
One of the first questions I am asked by friends or acquaintances of mine is how can I support Israel. I've also been accused of not being able to see both sides of this complicated history between the Jewish State of Israel and Palestine. However when it comes to history, its not that I don't see both sides- because I do. It's simply that after 60+ years (starting from the creation of Israel and going back as far as my critics desire to go) I think history is...well, history.
Following the fall of the Ottoman Empire, which controlled the land from 1517-1917, the Leauge of Nations (the prequel to the United Nations) delivered a mandate (known as the British Mandate for Palestine) to Great Britain to create in Palestine a national home for the Jews. Needless to say that Arabs were not happy. The attempts of the British (and the French) to divide the land that was Palestine led to many riots and fighting. By 1948, the British essentially gave up and turned the issue back to the United Nations which came up with its own plan on how to divide the land. Under this plan, two states where to be created, one for the Jews and one for the Arabs. The Arabs were soundly against the creation of a Jewish state and the loss of land and went to war with the Jews over it. The Arabs lost the war and the Palestinian State was never created. Instead, that land was loss to Israel and Jordan, leaving 780,000 Palestinians refugees.
If you are really interested in the detail of the history, check out the following links:
As for my support of Israel today, it comes down to this argument. The way that land belonging to Palestinian's and Arabs was essentially taken by a bunch of foreign countries, divided, and given away was unfair. In fact, the way a lot of land was acquired and countries were developed can be rightly described as unfair and unjust (the "discovery" of the United States by Christopher Columbus is a good example). However I look at it from a practical and realist standpoint. Does anyone really expect the map of Palestine to go back to the way it was 60 or 100 years ago? The reality is that today, in 2008, Israel is a sovereign nation. Starting wars by launching rockets and bombs into Israel's borders is not going change this reality. All it does is continuously aggrivate the situation and make life worse for the people you claim to represent. Additionally, if a sovereign country (Israel or any other country for that matter) was being attacked then I would say it is within their right to defend themselves also. That country should defend themselves using whatever means they have at their disposal, but they should also be responsible in doing such.
Show me more ....
Thoughts?
One of the first questions I am asked by friends or acquaintances of mine is how can I support Israel. I've also been accused of not being able to see both sides of this complicated history between the Jewish State of Israel and Palestine. However when it comes to history, its not that I don't see both sides- because I do. It's simply that after 60+ years (starting from the creation of Israel and going back as far as my critics desire to go) I think history is...well, history.
Following the fall of the Ottoman Empire, which controlled the land from 1517-1917, the Leauge of Nations (the prequel to the United Nations) delivered a mandate (known as the British Mandate for Palestine) to Great Britain to create in Palestine a national home for the Jews. Needless to say that Arabs were not happy. The attempts of the British (and the French) to divide the land that was Palestine led to many riots and fighting. By 1948, the British essentially gave up and turned the issue back to the United Nations which came up with its own plan on how to divide the land. Under this plan, two states where to be created, one for the Jews and one for the Arabs. The Arabs were soundly against the creation of a Jewish state and the loss of land and went to war with the Jews over it. The Arabs lost the war and the Palestinian State was never created. Instead, that land was loss to Israel and Jordan, leaving 780,000 Palestinians refugees.
If you are really interested in the detail of the history, check out the following links:
As for my support of Israel today, it comes down to this argument. The way that land belonging to Palestinian's and Arabs was essentially taken by a bunch of foreign countries, divided, and given away was unfair. In fact, the way a lot of land was acquired and countries were developed can be rightly described as unfair and unjust (the "discovery" of the United States by Christopher Columbus is a good example). However I look at it from a practical and realist standpoint. Does anyone really expect the map of Palestine to go back to the way it was 60 or 100 years ago? The reality is that today, in 2008, Israel is a sovereign nation. Starting wars by launching rockets and bombs into Israel's borders is not going change this reality. All it does is continuously aggrivate the situation and make life worse for the people you claim to represent. Additionally, if a sovereign country (Israel or any other country for that matter) was being attacked then I would say it is within their right to defend themselves also. That country should defend themselves using whatever means they have at their disposal, but they should also be responsible in doing such.
While I do support Israel in their efforts to defend themselves, I hate war as much as the next person. Like everyone, I hope to see all sides come to the table and work out the differences. But be realistic. Israel isn't going anywhere. Have realistic expectations, wants, and needs. The creation of a Palestinian state...realistic. The extinction of Israel...not so much. Lifting the blockade on Gaza...possible.
There is nothing wrong with remembering the history. You just have to know how to get past it.
Thoughts?
Israel should defend itself; But do it Responsibly
My support for Israel is no surprise at this point. As a sovereign nation, it is my opinion that Israel has a right and a responsibility to defend itself against threats of terrorism. However recent developments cause me to write expressing my concern for what appears to be, for a lack of better terms, irresponsible warfare on behalf of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF).
Show me more ....
My support for Israel is no surprise at this point. As a sovereign nation, it is my opinion that Israel has a right and a responsibility to defend itself against threats of terrorism. However recent developments cause me to write expressing my concern for what appears to be, for a lack of better terms, irresponsible warfare on behalf of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF).
First, on Tuesday, January 6, the IDF fired rockets at a UN School that was being used as a refugee shelter. About 40 civilians were killed in that incident according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune. The IDF first said it believed it was firing at Palestinian militants who were operating at the school. Today it says the rockets were aiming somewhere else, but missed its target and hit the school.
Show me more ....
My support for Israel is no surprise at this point. As a sovereign nation, it is my opinion that Israel has a right and a responsibility to defend itself against threats of terrorism. However recent developments cause me to write expressing my concern for what appears to be, for a lack of better terms, irresponsible warfare on behalf of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF).
First, on Tuesday, January 6, the IDF fired rockets at a UN School that was being used as a refugee shelter. About 40 civilians were killed in that incident according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune. The IDF first said it believed it was firing at Palestinian militants who were operating at the school. Today it says the rockets were aiming somewhere else, but missed its target and hit the school.
Also today, it was reported that the IDF may be using white phosphorus in the bombs and rockets its using in the war against Hamas. White phosphorus is a chemical that is legal in the rules for international warfare. It can cause serious burns to the skin, even causing it to peel off. It can also be used to ignite fire.
In regards to the first incident, I understand that mistakes happen. It's certainly unfortunate, particularly when you talk about the loss of life in children. However the IDF is using some of the most sophisticaed technology created and should be doing everything it can to avoid civilian casualties, especially when the international world is watching with a critical eye. Striking refugee camps is simply unacceptable and the IDF must double, triple, and quadruple check its coordinates and intelligence before engaging in a battle that could result in a substantial loss of civilian life.
The white phosphorus is another situation that is just not acceptable. Even though it is allowed in international warfare, it does not have to be used. The situation would be different if the IDF were dealing with an army that distinguished itself from the civilian population. However Hamas has a track record of hiding among the civilian population, meaning the risk is far too great to use such a dangerous chemical.
Finally, Israel has to do more to get aid to the people of Gaza. I applaud the daily 3 hour cease-fire and lifting of the blockade to allow for essential supplies to get to the people. However given the scope of the humanitarian crisis, I'm not sure that is enough. The government needs to better coordinate with international aid groups to safely get more aid to the people for more than 3 hours a day.
Israel should defend itself. But with the rest of the world watching and being critical of the IDF, it needs to be done tactfully and responsibly.
Thoughts?
Friday, January 9, 2009
Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon INDICTED on 12 counts
Many may know that I used to work in Baltimore Mayor (the Council President) Sheila Dixon's office while in high school and did some volunteer work for her first inauguration ceremony after she inherited the office from the newly elected Governor O'Malley. I plan to reserve all judgement and opinion until after all the facts come out and we know exactly what took place. But I encourage you, particularly my Baltimore family, to read the article attached.
Baltimore City Mayor Sheila Dixon was indicted today on twelve counts including perjury and theft.
Thoughts?
Baltimore City Mayor Sheila Dixon was indicted today on twelve counts including perjury and theft.
Thoughts?
Blagojevich Impeached
The Illinois House voted overwhelmingly Friday to impeach Gov. Rod Blagojevich, an unprecedented action that sets up a Senate trial on whether he should be thrown out for allegedly trying to sell President-elect Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat.
Show me more ....
The Illinois House voted overwhelmingly Friday to impeach Gov. Rod Blagojevich, an unprecedented action that sets up a Senate trial on whether he should be thrown out for allegedly trying to sell President-elect Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat.
Impeachment required just 60 votes. The final result was 114-1.
Blagojevich was arrested on December 9, 2008 under suspicion that he was planning to either sell or trade the US Senate seat left vacant by President-Elect Barack Obama.
Thoughts?
Show me more ....
The Illinois House voted overwhelmingly Friday to impeach Gov. Rod Blagojevich, an unprecedented action that sets up a Senate trial on whether he should be thrown out for allegedly trying to sell President-elect Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat.
Impeachment required just 60 votes. The final result was 114-1.
Blagojevich was arrested on December 9, 2008 under suspicion that he was planning to either sell or trade the US Senate seat left vacant by President-Elect Barack Obama.
Thoughts?
Thursday, January 8, 2009
100 Things American's may not know about the Bush Administration
After Jon Stewart mentioned it on the Daily Show I thought it would be interesting to post. Enjoy!
Thoughts?
No Due Process in Illinois
Today, an Illinois House panel looking into whether or not Governor Rod Blagojevich should be impeached, voted unanimously to send the case to the full House. The Illinois legislature has been looking into ousting the embattled Governor after he was arrested on December 9, 2008 for, among other charges, attempting to sell the US Senate seat left vacant by President-Elect Barack Obama. If the full House accepts the panel's impeachment recommendation, Blagojevich would then have a trial before the Illinois State Senate who will decide his ultimate fate.
Is anyone surprised? I certainly am not. The day Blagojevich was arrested practically every member of the Illinois State government called for his resignation. They publicly blasted the governor as a corrupt politician who doesn't represent Illinois values. These same legislators are expected to fairly and impartially decide whether or not the Governor committed actions worthy of impeachment.
Show me more ....
Today, an Illinois House panel looking into whether or not Governor Rod Blagojevich should be impeached, voted unanimously to send the case to the full House. The Illinois legislature has been looking into ousting the embattled Governor after he was arrested on December 9, 2008 for, among other charges, attempting to sell the US Senate seat left vacant by President-Elect Barack Obama. If the full House accepts the panel's impeachment recommendation, Blagojevich would then have a trial before the Illinois State Senate who will decide his ultimate fate.
Is anyone surprised? I certainly am not. The day Blagojevich was arrested practically every member of the Illinois State government called for his resignation. They publicly blasted the governor as a corrupt politician who doesn't represent Illinois values. These same legislators are expected to fairly and impartially decide whether or not the Governor committed actions worthy of impeachment.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of Rod Blagojevich. But this is about more than him. This is about America and civil liberties. When one American has their civil liberties threatened, it threatens all of our civil liberties. Without access to a fair and impartial legislature, how are we protecting Blagojevich's civil liberties- his right to a fair trial. The members of the house panel walked into the chambers of the Illinois State Capitol with their minds already decided. Blagojevich's impeachment process has become nothing more than a formality seeing as though the lawmakers in Illinois have clearly made their minds up. Under this system, if Blagojevich is removed from office, he'll be taking due process with him.
Thoughts?
Is anyone surprised? I certainly am not. The day Blagojevich was arrested practically every member of the Illinois State government called for his resignation. They publicly blasted the governor as a corrupt politician who doesn't represent Illinois values. These same legislators are expected to fairly and impartially decide whether or not the Governor committed actions worthy of impeachment.
Show me more ....
Today, an Illinois House panel looking into whether or not Governor Rod Blagojevich should be impeached, voted unanimously to send the case to the full House. The Illinois legislature has been looking into ousting the embattled Governor after he was arrested on December 9, 2008 for, among other charges, attempting to sell the US Senate seat left vacant by President-Elect Barack Obama. If the full House accepts the panel's impeachment recommendation, Blagojevich would then have a trial before the Illinois State Senate who will decide his ultimate fate.
Is anyone surprised? I certainly am not. The day Blagojevich was arrested practically every member of the Illinois State government called for his resignation. They publicly blasted the governor as a corrupt politician who doesn't represent Illinois values. These same legislators are expected to fairly and impartially decide whether or not the Governor committed actions worthy of impeachment.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of Rod Blagojevich. But this is about more than him. This is about America and civil liberties. When one American has their civil liberties threatened, it threatens all of our civil liberties. Without access to a fair and impartial legislature, how are we protecting Blagojevich's civil liberties- his right to a fair trial. The members of the house panel walked into the chambers of the Illinois State Capitol with their minds already decided. Blagojevich's impeachment process has become nothing more than a formality seeing as though the lawmakers in Illinois have clearly made their minds up. Under this system, if Blagojevich is removed from office, he'll be taking due process with him.
Thoughts?
Numbers, Details, Plans, NOW!
So far, the government has spent (or plans to spend) $7.2 trillion in efforts to fix the economy. If you're not somewhat taken aback by this number, then maybe you need to see it written another way. The government plans to spend $7,200,000,000,000 of your taxdollars to fix the economy . Since December 2007, everyone from banks, investment firms, insurance companies, automobile companies, student loan programs, and more have received millions or billions of dollars from the federal government. The idea is to stimulate the economy. I don't know about you, but I don't feel stimulated.
Show me more ....
So far, the government has spent (or plans to spend) $7.2 trillion in efforts to fix the economy. If you're not somewhat taken aback by this number, then maybe you need to see it written another way. The government plans to spend $7,200,000,000,000 of your taxdollars to fix the economy . Since December 2007, everyone from banks, investment firms, insurance companies, automobile companies, student loan programs, and more have received millions or billions of dollars from the federal government. The idea is to stimulate the economy. I don't know about you, but I don't feel stimulated.
Now I will be the first to admit I don't know THAT much about the economy. I took Econ200 my sophomore year and got a C (and that was WITH a curve!). So my opinion comes from basic common sense. And using my common sense, the idea of spending $7.2 trillion (that we don't have) to bail out businesses that are largely responsible for the crisis in the first place (due to their idiotic and greedy management practices). And its not like this money was spent all at once. It was over the period of a whole year. After a while, maybe the first 3-6 months, you have to realize that throwing money around like candy isn't the solution to the problem.
What I see going on here, is panic. When signs of an economy first going into the tanker first appeared, so did the fear-mongers. You would have thought 1929 was right around the corner! President Bush dispatched Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson to Capital Hill to tell us that we needed to spend insane amounts of money immediately to solve the problem. And with no real plans, no real method of accountability, Congress gives them the money! And after spending $7.2 trillion, the economy is just as bad as it was then. December 2008 retail sales were the worst in 60 years. Unemployment rates are nearing double digits. I can't even talk about the housing situation, that deserves its own post! So the bottom line is that we spent $7.2 and have nothing to show for it.
So where do we go from hear? We throw MORE money at the problem! President-Elect Barack Obama is "urging" congress to act on a stimulus package without providing any real details on how much he would spend, only that it would be a "considerable" amount. He says congress needs to "act quickly" before things get worse. Of course the last thing I want to see happen is the economy to get worse. But I also don't want to see is more money spent without a concrete plan and explanation as to how every dollar is going to benefit the economy. Again, I'm not anywhere close to an expert on the economy. But I know that abstract ideas and lofty speeches won't cut it. Numbers, details, plans is what is needed now.
Thoughts?
Show me more ....
So far, the government has spent (or plans to spend) $7.2 trillion in efforts to fix the economy. If you're not somewhat taken aback by this number, then maybe you need to see it written another way. The government plans to spend $7,200,000,000,000 of your taxdollars to fix the economy . Since December 2007, everyone from banks, investment firms, insurance companies, automobile companies, student loan programs, and more have received millions or billions of dollars from the federal government. The idea is to stimulate the economy. I don't know about you, but I don't feel stimulated.
Now I will be the first to admit I don't know THAT much about the economy. I took Econ200 my sophomore year and got a C (and that was WITH a curve!). So my opinion comes from basic common sense. And using my common sense, the idea of spending $7.2 trillion (that we don't have) to bail out businesses that are largely responsible for the crisis in the first place (due to their idiotic and greedy management practices). And its not like this money was spent all at once. It was over the period of a whole year. After a while, maybe the first 3-6 months, you have to realize that throwing money around like candy isn't the solution to the problem.
What I see going on here, is panic. When signs of an economy first going into the tanker first appeared, so did the fear-mongers. You would have thought 1929 was right around the corner! President Bush dispatched Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson to Capital Hill to tell us that we needed to spend insane amounts of money immediately to solve the problem. And with no real plans, no real method of accountability, Congress gives them the money! And after spending $7.2 trillion, the economy is just as bad as it was then. December 2008 retail sales were the worst in 60 years. Unemployment rates are nearing double digits. I can't even talk about the housing situation, that deserves its own post! So the bottom line is that we spent $7.2 and have nothing to show for it.
So where do we go from hear? We throw MORE money at the problem! President-Elect Barack Obama is "urging" congress to act on a stimulus package without providing any real details on how much he would spend, only that it would be a "considerable" amount. He says congress needs to "act quickly" before things get worse. Of course the last thing I want to see happen is the economy to get worse. But I also don't want to see is more money spent without a concrete plan and explanation as to how every dollar is going to benefit the economy. Again, I'm not anywhere close to an expert on the economy. But I know that abstract ideas and lofty speeches won't cut it. Numbers, details, plans is what is needed now.
Thoughts?
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
President Obama hosts the Youth Inaugural Ball
Ladies get out your dresses and gowns! Gentlemen bring out the tuxedos! It's Inaugural Ball time! After witnessing history as the first African-American takes office as President of the United States, join Barack and Michelle Obama as well as Vice President Joe Biden and his wife Jill at the Youth Inaugural Ball. It's one of ten Balls being hosted by the 44th President. Tickets are $75, half the price as tickets for the other events. More information to come as soon as its released!
Save the Porn Industry!
Time for another Federal bail out! So who which CEO or American industry has their hand out now for American tax dollars? Real estate Industry? Nah. Telecommunications Industry? Nope. How about...the porn industry? Well, the politically correct term would be the "adult entertainment" industry and today CNN reports that Larry Flynt of Hustler Magazine and the CEO of Girls Gone Wild have put in a request for a $5 billion bailout from Congress.
Show me more ....
Time for another Federal bail out! So who which CEO or American industry has their hand out now for American tax dollars? Real estate Industry? Nah. Telecommunications Industry? Nope. How about...the porn industry? Well, the politically correct term would be the "adult entertainment" industry and today CNN reports that Larry Flynt of Huster Magazine and the CEO of Girls Gone Wild have put in a request for a $5 billion bailout from Congress.
According to a statement released by Flynt, "the US government should actively support the adult industry's survival and growth, just as it feels the need to support any other industry cherished by the American people." The statement goes on to say that "people are too depressed to be sexually active. This is very unhealthy as a nation. Americans can do without cars and such but they cannot do without sex. With all this economic misery and people losing all that money, sex is the farthest thing from their mind. It's time for congress to rejuvenate the sexual appetite of America. The only way they can do this is by supporting the adult industry and doing it quickly."
I say Congress give them the money! I doubt they will, but seeing as though they've already blown nearly a trillion dollars trying to "fix" this economy, what's another $5 billion right? The sexual appetite of America needs this...and to deny them that would be a serious case of cock-blocking!
Thoughts?
Show me more ....
Time for another Federal bail out! So who which CEO or American industry has their hand out now for American tax dollars? Real estate Industry? Nah. Telecommunications Industry? Nope. How about...the porn industry? Well, the politically correct term would be the "adult entertainment" industry and today CNN reports that Larry Flynt of Huster Magazine and the CEO of Girls Gone Wild have put in a request for a $5 billion bailout from Congress.
According to a statement released by Flynt, "the US government should actively support the adult industry's survival and growth, just as it feels the need to support any other industry cherished by the American people." The statement goes on to say that "people are too depressed to be sexually active. This is very unhealthy as a nation. Americans can do without cars and such but they cannot do without sex. With all this economic misery and people losing all that money, sex is the farthest thing from their mind. It's time for congress to rejuvenate the sexual appetite of America. The only way they can do this is by supporting the adult industry and doing it quickly."
I say Congress give them the money! I doubt they will, but seeing as though they've already blown nearly a trillion dollars trying to "fix" this economy, what's another $5 billion right? The sexual appetite of America needs this...and to deny them that would be a serious case of cock-blocking!
Thoughts?
Monday, January 5, 2009
Barack the Magic Negro
For a party that can't ever seem to get more than 11% of the African-American vote, Republican leaders don't appear to be the brightest crayons in the box. Over the Christmas holiday, Tennessee Republican and candidate for the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee Chip Saltsman sent out a CD titled "We Hate the USA" which apparently makes fun of liberals and Democrats. One of the tracks on Saltsman's CD is titled "Barack the Magic Negro"
Show me more ....
For a party that can't ever seem to get more than 11% of the African-American vote, Republican leaders don't appear to be the brightest crayons in the box. Over the Christmas holiday, Tennessee Republican and candidate for the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee Chip Saltsman sent out a CD titled "We Hate the USA" which apparently makes fun of liberals and Democrats. One of the tracks on Saltsman's CD is titled "Barack the Magic Negro" and is supposed to be parody directed at Al Sharpton. The implication is that President-Elect Barack Obama is stealing Al Sharpton's spotlight because of his extreme popularity among all different races, ages, etc. The lyrics are sung by a Sharpton impersonator and are as follows:
Barack the Magic Negro lives in D.C.
The L.A. Times, they called him that
‘Cause he’s not authentic like me.
Yeah, the guy from the L.A. paper
Said he makes guilty whites feel good
They’ll vote for him, and not for me
‘Cause he’s not from the hood.
See, real black men, like Snoop Dog,
Or me, or Farrakhan
Have talked the talk, and walked the walk.
Not come in late and won!
[refrain] Oh, Barack the Magic Negro, lives in D.C.
The L.A. Times, they called him that
‘Cause he’s black, but not authentically.
Oh, Barack the Magic Negro, lives in D.C.
The L.A. Times, they called him that
‘Cause he’s black, but not authentically.
Some say Barack’s “articulate”
And bright and new and “clean.”
The media sure loves this guy,
A white interloper’s dream!
But, when you vote for president,
Watch out, and don’t be fooled!
Don’t vote the Magic Negro in –
‘Cause — ’cause I won’t have nothing after all these years of sacrifice
And I won’t get justice. This is about justice. This isn’t about me, it’s about justice.
It’s about buffet. I don’t have no buffet and there won’t be any church contributions,
And there’ll be no cash in the collection plate.
There ain’t gonna be no cash money, no walkin’ around money, no phoning money.
Now, Barack going to come in here and –
Personally, I wasn't offended by the song. I know that not everyone in the country is in love Obama. For many, it is because of his politics, but for a select few it is because of his race. However for the leader a party that has a reputation (whether or not it deserves it) of being anti-minority and home to southern white racists, to publish such nonsense at a time when Americans of all races and ethnicities are uniting behind the first African American president is just dumb. Sufficient to say, Ken Saltsman's candidacy to lead the Republican party died...at the hands of Barack the Magic Negro.
Thoughts?
Show me more ....
For a party that can't ever seem to get more than 11% of the African-American vote, Republican leaders don't appear to be the brightest crayons in the box. Over the Christmas holiday, Tennessee Republican and candidate for the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee Chip Saltsman sent out a CD titled "We Hate the USA" which apparently makes fun of liberals and Democrats. One of the tracks on Saltsman's CD is titled "Barack the Magic Negro" and is supposed to be parody directed at Al Sharpton. The implication is that President-Elect Barack Obama is stealing Al Sharpton's spotlight because of his extreme popularity among all different races, ages, etc. The lyrics are sung by a Sharpton impersonator and are as follows:
Barack the Magic Negro lives in D.C.
The L.A. Times, they called him that
‘Cause he’s not authentic like me.
Yeah, the guy from the L.A. paper
Said he makes guilty whites feel good
They’ll vote for him, and not for me
‘Cause he’s not from the hood.
See, real black men, like Snoop Dog,
Or me, or Farrakhan
Have talked the talk, and walked the walk.
Not come in late and won!
[refrain] Oh, Barack the Magic Negro, lives in D.C.
The L.A. Times, they called him that
‘Cause he’s black, but not authentically.
Oh, Barack the Magic Negro, lives in D.C.
The L.A. Times, they called him that
‘Cause he’s black, but not authentically.
Some say Barack’s “articulate”
And bright and new and “clean.”
The media sure loves this guy,
A white interloper’s dream!
But, when you vote for president,
Watch out, and don’t be fooled!
Don’t vote the Magic Negro in –
‘Cause — ’cause I won’t have nothing after all these years of sacrifice
And I won’t get justice. This is about justice. This isn’t about me, it’s about justice.
It’s about buffet. I don’t have no buffet and there won’t be any church contributions,
And there’ll be no cash in the collection plate.
There ain’t gonna be no cash money, no walkin’ around money, no phoning money.
Now, Barack going to come in here and –
Personally, I wasn't offended by the song. I know that not everyone in the country is in love Obama. For many, it is because of his politics, but for a select few it is because of his race. However for the leader a party that has a reputation (whether or not it deserves it) of being anti-minority and home to southern white racists, to publish such nonsense at a time when Americans of all races and ethnicities are uniting behind the first African American president is just dumb. Sufficient to say, Ken Saltsman's candidacy to lead the Republican party died...at the hands of Barack the Magic Negro.
Thoughts?
Norm Coleman: Let the healing begin!
Talk about hypocrisy! Today, Minnesota Senator Republican Norm Coleman was defeated by former comedian and Saturday Night Live writer Al Franken by 225 votes. Franken certainly wasn't handed a mandate of any kind by the voters of Minnesota, but after counting and recounting the votes cast on election day in addition to all the absentee and provisional ballots cast, I think Minnesotans should feel confident that democracy worked. So where, you might ask, does the hypocrisy kick in?
Show me more ....
Talk about hypocrisy! Today, Minnesota Senator Republican Norm Coleman was defeated by former comedian and Saturday Night Live writer Al Franken by 225 votes. Franken certainly wasn't handed a mandate of any kind by the voters of Minnesota, but after counting and recounting the votes cast on election day in addition to all the absentee and provisional ballots cast, I think Minnesotans should feel confident that democracy worked. So where, you might ask, does the hypocrisy kick in?
The recounting of votes saw numerous legal challenges by both Franken and Coleman. The candidates challenged hundreds of ballots that had either been "improperly rejected" or double-counted, among other alleged irregularities. During the series of legal challenges by both candidates, the Coleman campaign criticized Franken by saying "while our campaign remains focused on the recount, it's clear the Franken campaign is more interested in court challenges, U.S. Senate intervention, and making new commercials attacking local election officials." NOW that a winner has been declared and that winner is NOT Norm Coleman, the Coleman campaign has declared that they will be going to court to challenge the results! What's even more funny is that the day after the election, the Coleman asked Al Franken to waive his right to a recount citing "the need for the healing process."
Well former Senator Coleman, let the healing begin!
http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/coleman-asks-for-exclusion-of-ballots-that-cant-be-found-2008-12-10.html
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/05/board-certifies-franken-senate-race-winner-lawsuit-looms/
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/33900844.html
Thoughts?
Show me more ....
Talk about hypocrisy! Today, Minnesota Senator Republican Norm Coleman was defeated by former comedian and Saturday Night Live writer Al Franken by 225 votes. Franken certainly wasn't handed a mandate of any kind by the voters of Minnesota, but after counting and recounting the votes cast on election day in addition to all the absentee and provisional ballots cast, I think Minnesotans should feel confident that democracy worked. So where, you might ask, does the hypocrisy kick in?
The recounting of votes saw numerous legal challenges by both Franken and Coleman. The candidates challenged hundreds of ballots that had either been "improperly rejected" or double-counted, among other alleged irregularities. During the series of legal challenges by both candidates, the Coleman campaign criticized Franken by saying "while our campaign remains focused on the recount, it's clear the Franken campaign is more interested in court challenges, U.S. Senate intervention, and making new commercials attacking local election officials." NOW that a winner has been declared and that winner is NOT Norm Coleman, the Coleman campaign has declared that they will be going to court to challenge the results! What's even more funny is that the day after the election, the Coleman asked Al Franken to waive his right to a recount citing "the need for the healing process."
Well former Senator Coleman, let the healing begin!
http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/coleman-asks-for-exclusion-of-ballots-that-cant-be-found-2008-12-10.html
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/05/board-certifies-franken-senate-race-winner-lawsuit-looms/
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/33900844.html
Thoughts?
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Barack Obama's Vacant US Senate Seat- Could Hollywood have written it better?
Politics can sometimes be like a good movie, TV show, or book...whichever you prefer. You get sex, lies, and videotapes. Its filled with a good plot complete with a cast of characters- heros and villains. There are even the villains who are so bad, you just can't help but to love them. Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is one of those characters. One day, the guy is standing in front of protesting factory workers daring the feds to record his phone conversations because "anything I say and do is lawful." (not an exact quote but thats basically what he said). Then the next day, what do ya know, the feds HAVE been recording his phone conversations! Among those conversations are topics such as...how much are you willing to pay me for the US Senate seat left vacant by Barack Obama. He also tried to get some Chicago Tribune editors fired and threatened to withhold funding from a children's hospital which, for the record is a pretty douche thing to do.
Show me more ....
Politics can sometimes be like a good movie, TV show, or book...whichever you prefer. You get sex, lies, and videotapes. Its filled with a good plot complete with a cast of characters- heros and villains. There are even the villains who are so bad, you just can't help but to love them. Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is one of those characters.
Show me more ....
Politics can sometimes be like a good movie, TV show, or book...whichever you prefer. You get sex, lies, and videotapes. Its filled with a good plot complete with a cast of characters- heros and villains. There are even the villains who are so bad, you just can't help but to love them. Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is one of those characters.
One day, the guy is standing in front of protesting factory workers daring the feds to record his phone conversations because "anything I say and do is lawful." (not an exact quote but thats basically what he said). Then the next day, what do ya know, the feds HAVE been recording his phone conversations! Among those conversations are topics such as...how much are you willing to pay me for the US Senate seat left vacant by Barack Obama. He also tried to get some Chicago Tribune editors fired and threatened to withhold funding from a children's hospital which, for the record is a pretty douche thing to do.
So the feds bust him and announce they are launching an investigation. The Illinois legislature, Attorney General, and pretty much anyone capable of speaking all told Blagojevich that he should resign. His response: no. Well, the chorus said, at least don't appoint anyone to that senate seat while we find a way to get you out of office. His response: ok.
That was then, this is now...and NOW Blagojevich has looked his critics in the eyes, essentially made an unkind gesture using all but four of his fingers (a hint: it wasn't the pinky), and appointed a gentleman by the name of Roland Burris, former state Attorney General, to succeed Obama as the junior senator from Illinois. Ofcourse, outrage followed. The Illinois Secretary of State has said he won't certify the appointment and the Democrats in the Senate said they wouldn't accept the appointment. Even President-Elect Obama has said Burris shouldn't be allowed to serve. All were citing the scandal surrounding Blagojevich as justification.
I think Burris should be allowed to serve, and here is why:
- The appointment is legal. While Governor Blagojevich has been accused of some pretty bad deeds, he hasn't been convicted, charged, or even indicted of any crime. Since this is still America, Blagojevich is entitled to the presumption of innocence. Also, as Governor, he has a constitutional responsibility to appoint someone to fill the remained of the senate term. That being said, Blagojevich was legally entitled to appoint someone, despite the controversy.
- The Senate has no standing to reject him. They keep citing Article 1 Section 5 of the constitution which gives Congress the power to be "judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members." Well there were no elections or returns since this is an appointment, so all we have to go on is qualifications. And in a similar case before the Supreme Court (dealing with the House) it said that the only qualifications that matter are the ones outlined in the constitution. Those qualifications state that a Senator has to be a) 30 years of age, b) a resident of the state s/he is representing, c) and a US citizen for nine years. Burris easily meets these qualifications and THUS, the Senate has no legal standing to deny him an appointment.
To add to the juice, turns out Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid discussed who he did and did not want to serve in the Senate, citing their ability to retain the seat in the 2010 elections. Gotta love it! It will be interesting to see how this week develops when the new congress is sworn in. One things for sure, this is a movie that even Hollywood couldn't write.
Thoughts?
Friday, January 2, 2009
Imagine living in a city or town where at any minute in any hour on any day rockets and mortar bombs are being launched into your very own neighborhood. The offenders- a terror organization that is on record for saying you and your country has no right to exist and dream of the day that you were wiped off the map. This is the life of those living in Southern Israel, within range of the rockets and mortar bombs Hamas launches by the dozens. Hamas, terror organization disguised as a political faction that used force to take control of the Gaza Strip from the Palestinian Authority, is currently engaged in a military conflict with the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) whose stated objective is to wipe out Hamas.
Show me more ....
Imagine living in a city or town where at any minute in any hour on any day rockets and mortar bombs are being launched into your very own neighborhood. The offenders- a terror organization that is on record for saying you and your country has no right to exist and dream of the day that you were wiped off the map. This is the life of those living in Southern Israel, within range of the rockets and mortar bombs Hamas launches by the dozens. Hamas, terror organization disguised as a political faction that used force to take control of the Gaza Strip from the Palestinian Authority, is currently engaged in a military conflict with the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) whose stated objective is to wipe out Hamas.
For those not too familiar with the back-story between Israel and the Gaza Strip- a brief history: The Gaza Strip is a small piece of land about twice the size of Washington, DC and home to 1.5 million people, mostly Arab. As a result of the Six Day War of 1967 Israel took occupation of the Gaza Strip, previously under Egypt's control. During Israel's occupation, a total of 21 settlement blocs were created which covered 20% of total Gaza territory.
Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization reached an agreement in 1994 under the Oslo Accords where Israel would withdraw from parts of Gaza and a phased transfer of authority to the newly minted Palestine Authority would occur. Israel would maintain control of the Jewish settlements created. Israel wouldn't completely withdraw from the Gaza Strip until the summer of 2005, when all settlers left the territory (either by choice or force) and the IDF removed all military bases. On September 12, 2005, the Israeli government declared an official end to any and all military rule in the Gaza Strip, thus ending its occupation.
In January of 2006 the Palestinian Parliamentary Elections saw the rise to power of the Hamas organization that won 74 out of 132 seats in Parliament. Hamas has a history of violence, refuses to recognize Israel, and wishes that Israel did not exist. Refusal to renounce this radical ideology led major nations, including the United States and the countries that comprise the European Union, to cut direct aid to the Palestinian Government. This economic and political isolation led to disorder in the Palestinian Government between the Hamas and the opposition ruling party, Fatah, leading to an on-again off-again civil war. By June 2007, Hamas effectively had complete control over the Gaza strip, forcing President Mahmous Abbas to declare a state of emergency, dissolve the unity government, and form a new government without Hamas. This new government was based in the West Bank area of the Palestinian Territory and was recognized by the international world as the sole legitimate Palestinian government. The Hamas maintained control of the Gaza strip and continue to face international, diplomatic, and economic isolation. As a result of hundreds of rockets and mortar bombs being fired into cities and towns close to Israel's southern border from the Gaza Strip, Israel declared the area hostile territory and created a Gaza embargo, blocking practically any goods (food, electricity, fuel, medicine, etc.) from crossing the Israel-Gaza border. Under a six-month truce agreement negotiated by Egypt between Israel and Hamas, Israel would lift the blockade in return for a halt to to rocket fire by Hamas. The truce was always fragile and during that time rockets continued to be sent into the southern part of Israel.
Prior to the current conflict, Israel warned Hamas on more than one occasion to halt the rocket attacks or else they would respond. "We are bigger and stronger," they said. Hamas failed to listen. In the meantime, the people living in those cities and towns within range of Hamas rockets and mortar bombs live in constant fear. So Israel made the decision to protect its citizens and go after Hamas.
Good for them! Now don't get me wrong; I hate war. I don't think I know anyone that likes war. However in this situation, Israel was not left with much of a choice. It was either let the rockets and bombs continue to be launched by Hamas militants or take action to stop or, at the very least, limit the number of attacks. The government chose the latter. It wasn't the most desired action, but after extending the hand of peace time after time and getting nothing in return, the IDF was left with little alternative.
Today marks the seventh day of Israeli airstrikes with a possible ground assault on the way. Media reports that Israeli casualties stand at 4 while Palestinian casualties are roughly 400, mostly Hamas militants with about 100 civilians. Daily pictures and videos coming out of Gaza show the destruction, the blood, the children, and undoubtedly invoke sympathy. I don't want to come off as someone who is unsympathetic to their plight because I'm not. The fact is that there are no winners, only plenty of losers in this conflict. The biggest losers are the innocent people of the Gaza Strip- a densely populated region with 1.5 million people essentially clumped together, 50% unemployment rate, and isolated from the rest of the world. However, the question I ask myself is would any of this had occurred if Hams had simply stopped the rocket attacks. The answer is no. Thus, while my heart goes out to the people living in the Gaza strip, the blame rests on Hamas for continuing to launch those rockets and Israel has every right to use their arsenal to defend itself. I compare it to picking a fight with someone who has a gun when all you have is a pocketknife. It's a dumb move and you should expect a lot of damage and destruction. However, the IDF has taken steps to limit civilian casualties such as firing warning shots and calling, warning civilians when attacks are coming. And just today, they allowed women and children in Gaza to escape through Israel and board waiting buses to Jordan and other cooperating nations.
One might ask how Hamas even came to be democratically elected to power in Palestine. However, for all the evil that Hamas possesses, I can't hold it against the people of the Gaza Strip for electing its members to Parliament. The Palestinian Authority had been dogged by charges of mismanagement and corruption and saw Hamas as an alternative that took care of many social needs such as school and hospital construction, and funded orphanages, mosques, clinics, soup kitchens, and sports leagues. They took care of the people, and the people rewarded them with elected positions in government. However the good that they accomplish does not compensate in any way for the evil they represent.
At the end of the day, war is no good for anyone. Israel should find and destroy Hamas' weapon supply, do everything it can to limit civilian casualties but accept that some civilian life will be loss, work with international humanitarian organizations to prevent a food and health crisis, and (hopefully) cripple Hamas into a cease-fire that will ultimately lead to a longer term truce agreement that will require the reinstallation of a Fatah-Hamas coalition government. Is that likely? One can hope...
Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
