What's more personal than Suicide?

     I don't really know what this says about me but I couldn't care less about the Royal Family. Kate's baby, The Queen mother, Buckingham whatever it's all the same to me. Aren't we here specifically not to lust over the Monarchy across the pond. If hearing about Kate's royal vomit wasn't enough, add suicide to the mix and you've got a story that's made for the likes of Rebekah Brooks' News Corp.
     So a couple of radio guys call Kate's hospital posing as the actual Queen of England to nurse A, the hospitals only line of defense against unauthorized personnel.  Clearly frazzled, and showing proper respect to her majesty she puts the seemingly obvious impostor through to nurse B, who spills the beans. Successful prank til nurse A goes and kills herself. Now people are saying the Dj's are responsible, for what? A guy catches his girlfriend in bed with another man, goes out and promptly commits suicide. Did his girlfriend commit a crime? A boss fires her employee, he walks outside and kills himself. Is she, or the company responsible? No. BofA forecloses on a home, the owner commits suicide is BofA at fault, well... yes but not in court.  More responsible for the family's loss than the Dj's. In this case it's her fellow nurses and doctors that surely berated her for such a monumental blunder. Especially due to the poor impression.
     One little discussed angle are the royals themselves. This could be a warning sign to all other commoners under the employ of her majesty the Queen. Do your part to preserve our dignity or meet the gallows, or a murder staged as a suicide. It makes the same point without the calling card of a public square. There has to be more info to come, or maybe not. This is the Royal family and the message has been received, exploit our privacy and feel our wrath.
     No Radio personnel should be fired or even reprimanded for this.  Now the police are getting involved and hopefully they put as much into the investigation of the radio stations role in this, as the co-workers who shared nurse A's final conversations and interactions. They are directly responsible for the state of mind that led this woman to take her own life. A personal decision by the way.

Mandate: A free pass to what exactly?

     It seems some of our politicians haven't come to grips with the fact that we're living in a new era. An era where you can't hide behind your empty words or strategically chosen speaking engagements. It's time for one of these political party's to get a wake up call. I wont be holding my breath for the GOP to embrace the reality that America is moving on with or without them. It's the Democrats that I fully expect to get too comfortable with this victory, which was almost as much about not electing Romney as it was about electing Obama.

      Don't get me wrong, Obama has a healthy list of accomplishments  But that doesn't give him a pass to violate rights just because the rights aren't yours. Or are they? Under this administration minorities still get longer sentences for equal crimes. What about drone strikes, enhanced wire taps, indefinite detention of citizens, multiple war deployments without adequate medical attention. That's not Bush stuff, those are all issues Obama addressed.

     The Dems think their victory gives them some philosophical breathing room. But the vote was a victory for the people against a vision for America we didn't want, not a Democratic power grab. Progressives must know that an Obama style Patriot Act is still the Patriot Act. Americans decided not to relinquish more freedoms for the illusion of safety. But what tools do the people have against a two term President coming off of an Election win, and his highest approval rating since 09. There is no lobbyist for the people.

    Don't let him forget that we see what he does. When he does his Presidential twitter town hall meetings ask him about drones. Maybe some mainstream press will start asking him serious questions about killing citizens... after the Inauguration.  Until then people can't loose sight of what they've always known, these people are politicians they use words to make money playing games with our lives. It shouldn't be a breath of fresh air when our rights are upheld by one. Our work isn't done. The same way people used the power of information to inform themselves about the possibilities of a GOP win and acted to stop it, is the way people need to be vigilant about the Obama led American governmental machine playing its part in keeping some of the institutions alive that limit our rights as citizens to freedom and equality. 

You speak softly..Now use the stick already !

     When in recent history has speaking softly and carrying a big stick actually been effective? Isn't it all prefaced on being prepared to use it? Sure, during the birth of the statement some unassuming guy, carrying some head bashing club might seem mysteriously dangerous. It is the quiet ones you have to worry about, right. But now history is common knowledge, so if you've used that stick or carry it just for show, it will be known. The humility strategy is evolving.
     Obama's debate performance is a perfect example of speak softly. But without evidence of his willingness to use the proverbial stick, his soft spoken demeanor doesn't command the same respect. The fight many wish to see from Obama but rarely do is sometimes explained away as not wanting to seem like the angry black guy or some sort of professorial authoritarian. People want somebody that'll stand up and fight for our common goals. And the truth is people will say those things, they already do. At this point one could argue that standing up would be more understandable than intimidating to Americans. And less contrived than always taking the high road.
     Romney actively controlled the tempo and the tone of the event. He overpowered the moderator who in my opinion seemed outdated and unfamiliar with the type of information the public has and needed answers to. In the face of that reality, Obama can't only speak of philosophical differences and vague references to programs and issues we already know he stands for. Without evidence of standing up in this forum, for himself or things he believes in, Obama comes off as a quiet guy with a big stick who's afraid to use it. That's how Romney treated him. Romney: You don't like my facts, so what. What are you going to do about it? Obama: Hope somebody notices it?
   

SF Mayor Ed Lee drives away the youth vote.

     After the wave wave of power gained by the GOP in the Mid-Term elections, and the election of Barack Obama the emphasis placed on voting, from both sides is at an all time high. The outreach to gain the inner-city youth vote to match the enthusiasm of the republican base is more than important it's a difference maker. But how do you get young people to engage when overwhelmingly the impression is, no matter who's in office the general conditions where they live doesn't change. The average young adult doesn't vote for deficit reduction or medicare, they expect tangible change in their everyday lives. Realistic or not.
      But democracy is slow, and immediate positive changes are few and far between. The logical school of thought is, I more than my vote is more consequential to the direction of my everyday life. We get some comfort when a person is in office that looks like we do, or seems to support our values but that isn't always what it seems. Case in point San Francisco mayor Ed Lee.
     Lee, a Civil Lawyer. The first Chinese American Mayor of San Francisco and a Democrat. And though government is always larger than one man. One could reasonably expect our most basic fundamental rights not be infringed upon. Especially by someone who litigates civil issues. So when Ed Lee proclaimed his admiration of New York's stop and frisk program, to the point where implementation was an option. The justification of non participation begins to rear its ugly head. The implied logic that states regardless of the person or party, the important will still stand on the backs of those deemed less significant.
     How could it be viewed any other way. A person makes his career fighting for civility seeks to implement one of the most unproven cruelly  un-just laws in recent history. Off the wall for some, and par for the course for those seeking an argument to justify forgoing their right to participate. Way to rally the base Mayor Ed Lee, only you did it in the wrong direction.

Equally stopped and frisked

     Ever wonder why we still hear about the Aurora shooting, but we hear nothing about those cops that were shot in Louisiana by that separatist grouphttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/19/terry-smith-6-other-suspects-linked-sovereign-citizens_n_1806598.html. Or anymore about the guy that shot those Sikhs in Michigan http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2012/0806/Sikh-temple-shooting-renews-fears-over-white-supremacist-groups-video. Did we ever hear anything about the guy that put the bomb in the path of the MLK day parade in Washington State http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/mar/09/announcement-expected-break-through-mlk-bomb-probe/
. Is it because the Aurora shooting is a safer subject. The act seems so abstract and random, rendering all commentary speculation because clearly the shooter has mental issues and left no clear motive why. Whats leftover becomes a debate on gun control, although important, it all but excuses the shooter and whatever drove him to commit his deranged act. There could be thousands of people on the verge of walking his path, but we will never know because our analysis in on gun control not the individual who commits the act.     The Temple shooting and the other two noted cases are different animals all together. These crimes were committed by separatists and supremacists with clear visions and motives of what they thought should be done. With more facts in these cases it seems a reasonable discussion can be had on how these feelings are being nurtured and acted upon. So why no discussion? In order to properly discuss these types of crimes, the subject of racism why it exists and how it recruits needs to be placed on the table.
     Generally speaking race is a tabu subject for mainstream news, it's usually reserved for special reports or lower rated minority centric shows. The mainstream speaks of racially tinged comments or dog whistles, but subtle slurs should get the same attention as the guy who wears the I hate N-words shirt with the confederate flag on the back. In some ways the under-coverage of these organised hate groups lends them some sort of warped justification that by not exposing them it's some kind of cry for help from the masses.
     If properly covered how could profiling not be an option or topic of discussion. There's a database of these guys. Why aren't militia types stopped and frisked? Tim McVeigh, that MLK bomber and the guys that shot those cops aren't criminals, they're terrorists. What percent of citizens sympathize with these guys, without meaningful discussion we'll never know. With no applicable spin and the ongoing culture of new racists the best option is silence and hope it all goes away.

The wheel of Oppression

     The Chic-Filet controversy defines the differences between blacks and gays in their fight for civil rights in America. Neither plight is less important than the other, yet they are fundamentally different. When business owners wanted to refuse service to blacks the task was simple, don't let them in. If they complained, they would use violent tactics, and frame it as part of the blacks inherent violent nature. Then use the perception, as justification for not letting them in in the first place.
     Gays on the other hand make it harder for transparent discrimination, because unless ones sexuality is volunteered, gays can successfully assimilate into society, using silence as their weapon. A weapon unavailable to blacks in their struggle. So public love for chicken was used to express hate for gays, and as a rallying cry to eliminate their rights. It's better than beatings and fire hoses but the goal is still the same. The kiss in was ridiculous and are as effective today as marching for justice.
     So how now do we fight for our rights. Women, Gays, Hispanics and Blacks all have bounties on their rights in one way or another, and oddly enough by the same common enemy of individual freedoms. Separate we are the minorities able to be attacked on multiple fronts whenever their grip is threatened. But those four groups together become a clear majority, and are far more powerful than the regressive minds that look to retain the control they had before we realized the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
     Who will become the progressive Braveheart, and unite the clans against a common foe. Are our groups so egocentric that we can't see beyond our own path. Hate crimes, vaginal probes, self deportation, all acts that bolster GOP support. Not until the the progressive wheel of oppression randomly assigns the plight of one group to the other will we feel each others pain. Gay guys get internal ultrasound, blacks get deported, how about a constitutional ban on Hispanic marriage. And women forced to prove citizenship after being randomly stopped and frisked. Maybe then we will respect the causes that effect so many of our friends and neighbors. Until then we all stand divided, and one by one we will surely fall.

Does Obama really want my gun?

     So Barry O is coming for our guns, and by guns I mean your freedom. He want's to take away our second amendment right to defend our self.  If you don't know why people say that, but are too embarrassed to ask why. Here is the quickest rundown you're gonna get. The NRA head said if Obama is elected he's taking your guns, remember the outsider Obama complained about Americans clinging to their God and Guns. People saw that as a declaration of war on their Anglo heritage under the veil of change. Two years later, they said since he hasn't come for the guns yet, you know he's up to something.
     Reports surfaced that the Military is conducting training exercises for urban warfare and crowd control on American soil. http://patdollard.com/2012/01/election-2012-military-begins-training-for-domestic-urban-warfare-anticipated-in-the-near-future/ At the same time local police had their hands full corralling OWS protesters, as civil unrest got re-energized in the Wisconsin recall elections. If any two protest groups merge there would be problems for police. Following this Homeland security amassed a military sized amount of ammunition http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-03-28/news/31247765_1_atk-rounds-bullet.
     The Bush era Fast and Furious program opened the Nations eyes to the threat of automatic weapons, by showing the viscous aftermath of cartel killings in Mexico. Followed by the stories of the Governments failed gun plan. The news show's structure is supposed to stimulate your fears, and reinforce the notions that guns have to go.
      The theater killer, local mass murderer equipped with what, automatic weapons. Furthering the discussions of tougher gun regulations, the first steps towards trampling our second amendment rights. It's all a plan, allowing him to transform your America with his uppity European, socialist agenda. And with no guns we could do nothing to stop it. So that's the conspiracy in a nutshell. Now go and speculate with the rest of them. All of these stories have been widely reported, choose what you want to believe, but remember the truth may not be out there. Even if the Military would turn on their guns on mass groups of American citizens ( I think they wouldn't). Would the gun owners of America really be able to stand up to to the strongest Army in the world, hell, even the National guard might put up a good fight against untrained armed citizens. Who knows, one thing is abundantly un-clear Obama might be coming for your guns, and that defines your freedom somehow.

Red Meat and Dog Whistles, the new Bi

     Dog whistles, code words, and the infamous gaffe. When will it just become a proven fact that all of these overtly related instances are evidence. Evidence of a collective understanding by half of the country that Obama doesn't belong in office, solely based on his genetics. Really, who doesn't understand the Anglo relationship between Europe and the U.S. It's the basis of public elementary school American history. If a Constitutional Law Professor doesn't get it who does?
     Culturally, we don't like fence riders, and flip floppers. So if the tabu subject of historical guilt doesn't allow one to accept a black president, for fear that he might offset the inequities established in the last 147 years since slavery to the detriment of white society, then own it. Embrace it, shout it from the mountain top, just be a man, or a woman, and put your name on it. The time for innuendos is past. Society craves clarity, and transparency. Obama has shown to be no saint, nor do we expect the worlds problems to be solved by the institution that created them Govt.
     The problem with dog whistle politics is that the racial innuendos and code words, woven into general conversation somehow limits high level complaints to the level of the original statement. Elected officials constantly make statements birthed from the southern strategy, arguably, but not overtly racist, and the pundits call it red meat. Oh, the base wants it's red meat, it's what they came for. We all know it's racist but short of the n-word it's all fair game.
     Racist politicians are like Bi-sexual guys, if you're a guy who likes girls and guys, you're not bi you're just gay.(It's all good, and you deserve the rights everyone else gets, it's still kind of gay). In that respect, throwing around racist code words, and calling it red meat doesn't make you some creative southern strategist it makes you racist. We all know it. But when is the last time someone in office was labeled racist.  

Fast Furious Failure

    There's been a lot of talk about this Fast and Furious program, but the facts get lost in all of the posturing. It was started under the Bush Administration, and when Holder realized it's failings and moronic premise he moved to shut it down. Since then Holder has appeared before at least eight congressional panels after a border patrol agent was killed. He presented thousands of documents on the program. So now the information Congress wants is the correspondence after the program was dissolved, to search for any kind of cover up.
     The reason this wasn't pursued earlier is because the GOP wants to attach an Obama attack on second amendment rights. Using  logic that suggests  that the crimes committed using assault rifles from this program are so egregious that some new level of gun control would have to be proposed, and private citizens guns would be taken. All of the controversy was born from the mind of a right wing blogger and Fox News Contributor. Aside from the baseless 2nd amendment claims, there is no legal consequence for Holder as he is the Atty. General and won't prosecute himself.
     The real harm is to the agents that would be exposed if the requested documents are released, that will certainly put their lives in jeopardy. So if the Administration releases the papers they risk the agents, and if they don't and go with executive privilege they give the impression that they are hiding something. Obama chose to take the hit to his reputation and protect the agents that would be exposed. For the GOP the added bonus is that the controversy, though baseless, tarnishes Holders reputation to the point that his name has to be off of the short list for the next Supreme Court Justice, whom the next POTUS will definitely choose  if not more.
     Holders actions to stop rampant voter discrimination sealed his fate as a top GOP target in their 2012 smear campaign. Knowing his family's instrumental role in the Civil Rights movement, he no doubt has been labeled radical. So as it stands for the Republicans, the loss of agents lives, acceptable damages, suppressing testimony from credible witness, all part of a days work. Are there no depths to low for the GOP to reach for.

Don't I know you from somewhere?

     If someone told you there was a gang of men who terrorized the country, who have chosen to remain unknown, with the goal of dismantling the system that allows those with lesser voices to be heard on a larger platform. And although nameless and faceless their ranks stretch across the Nation, working united to turn back the crumbling hands of time and progress. Sound familiar? Only these marauders aren't hidden by hoods, or the dark of a southern summers night sky. They hide behind the Supreme Court and it's Citizens United judgement.
     The similarities are eerily familiar to our recent past. No name homegrown terrorists intimidating voters from exercising their constitutional right. Threatening bodily harm, and delivering on those promises. This time it's a voter purge, billed as a measure to stop voter fraud, though preemptive because no major or minor cases of voter fraud inspired this movement. These days bodily harm is reduced, with exception to the stand your ground laws. These same unknown villains committed undisclosed resources to eliminate the blue collar Union voice, the only unit large enough to stand up to these National terrorists.
     Instead of eliminating the leaders of grass roots movements like before, now they effectively work to kill the whole lawn. So who are these freedom killers?  It had to get hot under those white hoods. So they removed their trademark, and somehow remained invisible. We still don't know who they are, and legally we have no right to know.
     This is no coincidence, it's the same old plan. It's why soldiers destroy ports, roads, and bridges in the early stages of war. If half of the troops can't get to the fight, the better your chances of winning the war. Our amount of available information makes it harder for a less desirable elected official to hide behind lies. The only way to keep officials in office that don't respect the will of the people, is to silence enough of the voice of the collective people to win a numbers game.  And clearly that's the path we seem to be on.

Zombie invasion: Coming to a town near you.

     Does the Govt. use TV and movies to familiarize the public with future dilemmas. Does propaganda desensitize the public at large to events that are unexplained, or threatens the infrastructure of control that the Government possesses. You don't need to be a skeptic to realize that when the Govt. goes out of it's way to downplay an event or questionable occurrence, or says there is nothing to worry about, it's probably time to start worrying. After Roswell when a metallic craft crashed, with parts never seen before, the news published eye witness accounts in the local paper. The following day the Military came changed the reports and described the crash as a weather balloon, even though the new story contradicted the eye witness accounts.
     The so called balloon was then dismantled and loaded into many boxes, and taken to an undisclosed location. The usual nothing to see here was repeated. Even though a balloon was put into many boxes. As the reports show, top scientists were brought in to reverse engineer the foreign technology, they contained some names that would become very prominent. Soon after the head of what would become Motorolla would invent a way of wireless communication that enabled us to communicate with astronauts in orbit, even on the Moon. All of the recordings from moon landings were made possible by Motorolla. Also scientists who would design Concord Airplanes took the world from propeller planes and primitive jets to routinely breaking the sound barrier, a huge milestone. That's a lot to gather from a balloon. There are more than a handful of these events, but if the Military says no worries, then no worries right.
     Their newest claim is, there's no need to worry about zombies. 18 minutes of recorded face eating, no worries. 2 women eat live babies, coincidence. A guy throws his guts at arresting officers, bad drugs...really, drugs. The CDC gave it's official statement, don't worry. I was fine til that now i'm worried. They actually referenced Zombies. There's not even a such thing as zombies right? Brain parasites maybe, remember all the netty- pot brain infections, or the kids that got parasites from swimming in stagnant water. Birds fall from the sky, fish, whales and dolphins washing up on shore dead. Is it the water? Chemically treated clouds bring rain to Dubai and China. We all are paying the price but if the Government says don't worry, then I guess i'll move on nothing to see here, only the zombie apocalypse. All zombies don't rise from the dead. Some are created through infection. So maybe that's why Homeland Security bought all of that ammo.

What does good ol' boy even mean.

     I've been listening to ESPN radio leading up to the US Open. The hype regarding the threesome including Tiger, Bubba Watson and Phil Mickelson was just what the PGA and ESPN (which airs the event) needed. With Tiger winning 3 of his last 5 tournaments, the PGA has to be hoping it's cash cow has returned, and they're doing a good job of selling that. While listening to Amy Lawerence, one of ESPN radio's hosts it became clear just how they wanted this thing marketed.
     This all star trio is a reflection of Golf, and it's place in America today. The way she spoke of Bubba Watson told the whole story. He's a good ol' boy from Florida,went to college in Georgia, helped win the SEC title, and never had a lesson, he just goes out and plays hard. Then they play a clip of Watson joking about Tiger being to big to follow guys like him on twitter. Innocent enough, but I wonder, why aren't Tiger and Phil good ol' boys. What does she even think good ol' boys means. They aren't saying this is some good ol' boy threesome. Is Phil part of the elite because he is covered in corporate logos. Is it because he is one of the higher paid, premier names in the game. Phil is the1%. The most compelling story line is the everyman vs. the big bad 1%. Aside from the fact nobody's calling Tiger boy after Fuzzy Zoeller did, and never heard the end of it. You kind of have to fit in to be one of the ol' boys and Tiger just doesn't .
    It's the GOP southern strategy PGA style. You want to beat Phil because he thinks he's better than you, and he's trying to take all of your money. He looks like you, but he's not like you. Probably even took golf lessons. Tiger is the other other. He's done more for golf than anyone since the Ming Dynasty. The only thing louder than the cheers as he fell, were the tears that fell when it was truly understood that golfs fate and his were connected. His recent surge makes golfs relevancy visible but distant. Nothing a little suggestive marketing can't help. Its what golf has always had, and wanted to keep. The PGA thinks its ora of exclusivity makes it special, it openly looks for the next Tiger while the real Tiger is winning, because the real Tiger doesn't fit.
     So the pressure is on Bubba, like Rory Mcilroy or Luke Donald, all once the next Tiger, all missed the cut. But the marketing, it worked, I watched and enjoyed it. Tiger is tied for first. Guys like Hootie Johnson still run golf, ESPN plays games with race, nothing new.

Will somebody please connect the dots. .. ..

     How does one of the biggest shams in all of politics go largely unnoticed. This week the GOP presented it's Republican women's policy committee in Congress, to show their solidarity with women. As long as they don't adjust policy positions that don't support women's interests. It's really no different than running Sarah Palin for VP as a quick grab for women's votes. The same as allowing Michael Steele to head the DNC as a response to Obama being a black first, they needed a black first. Or now suggesting Marco Rubio as VP to lure the Hispanic vote. As if Hispanics don't know what he really stands for.
     They are all poor attempts at seeming like a party in the midst of a shift towards inclusion, but in reality the policies tell a different story. Rather than a boring recap of bad policy, I really wonder what the GOP sees in the average American citizen. What leads them to believe that they can promote policy against a particular group, then trot out a Republican member of that group to give the impression that they feel their pain or support their needs. At the same time implementing contrary to their cause laws that aim to slow that groups progress.
     In any other instance in life, a blatant attempt at false advertising would immediately be called out, and the perpetrator would get no support. In this case, the GOP does it with every group and it is largely ignored. Is it because we know politicians are corrupt, and we accept the lies as just part of the game. It's ok because it's expected. Is that what it's come to?
     Sadder still there's no end in sight. It's a winning strategy. They win elections, and not just with votes from those who benefit from their policies, they get support from all groups across the board. Sure talking heads do their spots on pandering politicians, and inevitably someone says, it goes on constantly with both sides being guilty. That may be true, but nobody has it mastered like the Grand Old Party, and nobody separates the dots like the mainstream media. If the groups the Republicans pander to would unite under the cause of being nobody's fool, the wool pullers wouldn't have the power. Until then, they will continue with the wooden nickels, and we'll continue to be the fools who look to cash them in.

Would an Obama loss Re-reshape Mainstream Media

     If Obama never became President, one thing would definitely be true. Cable News would be a lot less diverse than some would say it already is. Aside from being as close to a monopoly as possible, with predictable leanings and scripted talking points, one thing remains a fact. Since 08' more brown cable anchors began showing up on TV.

     I'm sure the Networks would say, it shows the American people that their stations were ready to have staff who better understand the social change to come due to the historic nature of the election, or maybe offer some new perspective on political issues since they lived the minority experience. All kind of meaningless because the news is scripted. So its just to put hosts on air who people feel comfortable looking at, and the more diverse the audience, so goes the hosts.

     The real change though isn't the hosts, its the guests. Since 08' the amount of young black professors we see discussing daily political issues, or current events is staggering. Melissa Harris Perry even got her own show where she introduces us to even more of black academia. Yet this phenomenon begs one question. If McCain was elected would we know Melissa Harris Perry,  Michael Eric Dyson or Marc Lamont Hill? I could fill a page with the names of smart Black professors from prestigious schools around the Country, some more recognizable than others, but none would have remotely become household names without POTUS.

    That's the problem, did these people spontaneously materialize on election day. These are professors from Tulane, Georgetown, and Colombia University, respectively. I'm pretty sure they were smart prior to the Obama Administration. Even putting intellectual perspective and experience aside, the image these people project that you can be a young, cool, urban influenced intellectual is needed in society. With all I've learned from Dr. Cornell West, he looks like a guy who should be teaching you something. This younger crop bridges the gap, and should be the new faces in our much needed public role model category.Only time will tell but, if Obama looses this next election we'll see if cable news continues to see the value of the black academic perspective, or if this handful of role model scholars vanishes as quickly as we were introduced to them.

   

     

Do you have a better plan? The move for unity.

    There seems to be a general problem anytime someone tries to do something different to bring about some sort of change. Inevitably more people tell you it won't work with no reason why, than people who say they support the effort your putting out. Hundreds of people have read my post about No McDonalds in October and the overwhelming response has been, why would hurting McDonalds be ok to advance the cause of people of color. Now I think I  laid it out pretty well in the first post, http://buildbackwards.blogspot.com/2012/04/no-mcdonalds-in-october.html but people see things differently.
     Most people see the amount of money McDonalds makes from the black community and that's all they see. Once again there's no way to measure where the money would be spent if we retained the over 400 million dollars in one month as a community. The suggestion would be to spend the money at local businesses, but the purpose is to come together, and enact some sense of measurable change as a group. Clearly the powers that be are working to diminish our rights. The fact that we have a President of color, and the efforts are still to shift laws and ideals back to a time where minority rights are limited necessitates us coming together as a block. To protect what symbolism of rights we do have.
     The President can't protect you. The best case for strength we have is in our numbers, but as a community we have been fractured for so long that its the norm. So how do we come together? The amount of people who don't participate in things because they say other people won't is staggering. A unified act of any kind Political or Economic justifies the group be taken seriously. So simply put a one month ban on McDonalds is not to hurt McDonalds, its to learn to come together as a group for common causes. McDonalds gets 18% of its revenue from 13% of the people 5.2 Billion per yr. McDonalds also heavily promotes it's 365 program that targets underprivileged areas and people of color, they rebuild playgrounds and offer scholarships to many needy people. Having said that, one would expect that McDonalds would be all for the community it works to help using any legal means available to better its self, for the good of all of society. If not they do all the other stuff because we buy the product at rates higher than our population percentage. And they're playing us.
    To offset the cost, McDonalds could limit black advertising for as long as it takes. People will still eat there with a few less commercials. I wonder if people really don't want to hurt McDonalds or just enjoy having something to complain about. To unify would mean everybody would have to do their part, and it seems as I have recently been told some people just enjoy being sheep. For too many the idea of sacrifice is something that's inherently difficult. In this case all you have to do is spread the word  through social media and don't eat McDonalds in October. The show of unity will speak for it's self.

Majority Minority: The Browning of America

     The media explosion over the new minority majority is simple. A large segment of society believes America is a white nation created by and for white people. Supported by a Presidential statement by Andrew Johnson," This is a Country for white men, and by God as long as I am President it shall be a Government for white men." In reality it's all about genetics. Theoretically, if you place a Brown family and a White family on an Island and leave them there undisturbed for three or four generations, when you returned the inhabitants would be overwhelmingly browner.
     Nothing too shocking about that. But on a larger scale if America was that island, some scenario of racial separation would have to be in place to prevent the eventual browning of the entire Country. This explains the attempts by the majority to enact safeguards such as segregation and interracial marriage bans. Preserving our blood line is at the core of our animalistic instincts, like when lions eat the cubs of other lions to preserve the legacy of their DNA.
     Its really kind of sad, the blending of cultures brings so many positive things to society, the negative being that outdated codes in our DNA will be erased, in this case white skin. Skin color doesn't define you as a person, it only explains your where your ancestors lived in relation to the equatorial line, and their tolerance to the Sun's rays. The 0.1% difference in our DNA is so insignificant that the variation genetically between countrymen is no different than that of a man a continent away. That's why organ donation isn't effected by racial boundaries. It's normal to fear impending doom, the real crime is that this is not discussed in a way that relates it to current racial challenges present in America and throughout humanity. It's proof of evolution, nature continues to transform in the face of insurmountable obstacles.
     This isn't going away, at some point we have to recognize the elephant in the room. Examining the true roots of racism lets us better understand the problem giving us a clearer path to an eventual solution. In the end we all want the same things. To live happy healthy productive lives, with the ability to give our kids more than we had. Its possible, only if we all accept the impending fact that the world may just be getting a little bit browner.

Is Multiculturalism really that Bad

     After the Presidential elections of 08', we began to regularly hear the new battle cry of the right, Its time to take our Country back. Now originally, I thought this idea was formed with political ideology in mind. After all Obama won Iowa and a host of other less integrated areas of  the US, all the while the economy was beyond declining and we were in questionable wars on two fronts. As the dust settled I realized this was the battle cry of a culture war.
      Now that we are in election season its becoming increasingly apparent that some expect, and hope that time and progress can turned back, and are actively trying to do so. So many prominent Republicans have said this is the most important election since 1860. After Lincolns assassination President Andrew Johnson said “This is a country for white men ,and by God as long as I am president it shall be a government for white men”. The new majority minority numbers are making this an increasingly difficult promise to keep.
        I've never been one to take a politician at their word but, this crop of Republicans are speaking with actions and not just words. In no particular order, the absolute outright assault on women's reproductive rights with no representation, and voter suppression and redistricting efforts in largely minority communities. But the least covered is the mostly men who speak to the heart of the Republican party about fear based, antiquated ideas. This years CPAC (conservative political action) convention featured panels on “The failure of multiculturalism: How the pursuit of diversity is weakening the American Identity”,and  High fences Wide Gates. Both groups of speakers considered supremacists by some, and at the very least racially insensitive were denounced by none at CPAC not even by Republican minorities.
     These views are not held by most Americans, but they are tolerated by far too many. Free speech is granted to all citizens, but the no fire in a crowded theater rule should apply here. Anyone can hate progress, and the coming together of like minded people from different races working for the good of the Country. Its fine if you don’t participate, whats not ok is actively working to prevent progress in the name of fear. What I don't understand is the wave of minority Republicans like Marco Rubio working hard to champion the ideas that oppress their own. It's really strange.

Of Choice and Sin

     I always considered myself to be pro life. There's nobody I want dead. I never killed anybody, and I accept that life is a precious thing. All common ideas expressed by reasonable people. Then there's that grey area. Is supporting a woman's right to choose a testament to ones lack of respect for potential life. Encompassed in that metaphorical sea of grey, is the potential life vs. actual life side of the spectrum. A legitimate question but inconsequential in the grand scheme of things. That's right in this case the facts do nothing but deepen the muddy waters.
     Ideologically, as good Christian folk, pro lifers have done their job. They've succeeded in their job of informing the masses of the Lord (several times). They also have shared their experiences of how the Lord has willed them to succeed. Pick any random public speaking event and you will hear multiple mentions of  God. Your job is done, you've effectively proselytized. Now if some (as you say) sinner, after hearing the tales of the Almighty God, chooses to act out against the teaching in the book he left you, and chooses abortion, that's between them and the Almighty. You've done your part.
     But no you say. You can't stand by and watch innocent babies slaughtered. It's immoral. The discussion then turns back to when life starts. Now, using the mind God gave you what is the rational solution. It should be when the kid can survive outside of the womb on its own. When its well within reach of being tempted by Satin, and can recognize Jesus as the son of God. Satin never possessed embryos or zygotes did he?
     So, no abortions after your old enough to inherit that original sin huh? 28 weeks is a little rough, even for me. So lets just leave things like they are, and you remember, God loves you, and you're doing a top flight job. Feel comfortable that in your belief, everyone gets theirs in the end. God doesn't need you to fight his battles for him. Why would he now? He never did before. God routinely laithed the smackith down on non believers. Call it tough love. Whatever the case its not your place to interfere in the free will of Gods creations. Its their life to lose in the afterlife. Not yours, leave it alone, it's not your fight.

Gay Rights, Religious Oppression, and You: How are you even mixed up in that?

     It's times like these that Religious skeptics will point back to when explaining the use of Religion to oppress society. So many people claim to be children of God. Some choose to gain power by governing in the name of God. Half of society wishes to control progress, to what they deem The Lord would envision us having. The other side wanting some representation of free will. For the Religious side to win power in the face of the prospect of ultimate free will, some sort of divisional tool must be used to sway the balance of power before the tide of freedom  turns,If not, the ability to rule through religion, (the easiest way) is lost.
     With Gay rights being our lightning rod, it's difficult to watch one minority (blacks) consider putting in power,  people who openly work to limit our daily rights, (republicans) to join in their fight to suppress the rights of another minority (gays), in the name of God. You want to put someone in power to hold back these gays, even if it means holding you back too. That's how you'll get it. No Gay Civil Rights fine, cut the college grants also, and the healthcare for those poor sick people. Oh yeah, see guy and girl doing equal jobs, on payday give her twenty percent less.
     So we give up what we fought for because someone has the perceived will, to stand up for what they think God would do. Even if it means we take a loss too. That plan always works. It's always in the movies. Some cowardly little guy goes to fight by the villain's side, in return for some agreement for some sort of power. As it always goes, towards the end of the fight the villain sacrifices the coward in order to make his escape, and live to fight another day.... And this is supposed to help, how?
     I never had an opinion on Gay stuff until recently. People have to do what they have to do, but using them as an oppression tool?  It's the Religious people calling them sinners, like it's strange to see a sinner. Then in the same breath saying we all are sinners, and no sin is greater than the next, and blah blah blah, whatever fits their momentary point. So you, Gods child, can't work to better yourself in Gods eyes. A sinner, equally beside other sinners, but not those sinners, because their sin is greater than yours. It all seems kind of confused. Confused people are easy to manipulate. Manipulate enough people you can control them all. That's the role you're considering playing in the future of our children? Brilliant..

Does Voting even matter anymore?

     If voting isn't an option for enacting long term change in society what is? I have friends that are smart, happy successful, family first guys who choose not to vote. These are not under informed or disinterested citizens, these are well read students of history, who speak the language of governmental corruption, from international conspiracy to local inconsistencies. They believe change comes from within. If everyone would be the best person they could be and stop chasing material things, most importantly parent their children, while mentoring those kids that need it. This remolding of the core of the group, should insure a stronger group of leaders moving forward into the future, a legitimate observation that fundamentally addresses the roots of society's short comings.
     But what of the meantime, we just continue to complain? What about when locally elected officials, who's campaign positions don't reflect the will of the people get in office and enact their unwanted agendas. They under fund schools, cut senior programs, and close Fire Stations.  People literally gave their life for our opportunity to effect local change. They knew laws were set up against them and the ones that weren't were birthed to protect the ruling class of society. Yet they still gave their lives. They died so we could protect our homes and schools and have some sense of governmental inclusion and responsibility for our own communities.
     I think both concepts can be mutually correct, although not voting seems to have more appeal. You can be a rebel against the corrupt system, giving the establishment the middle finger by not giving your time to play their game. That's the problem though, non participation supports not being informed, clearly not for all but more people do get informed about life around them when they are engaged. Non participation makes reshaping the core infinitely harder, which jeopardizes yet another generation. A unified front got us these rights and to ignore them is a slap in the face to those who fought for them.
     So this is where we stand fractured and bruised, fueled by adversity and led by the experience and tenacity of ordinary people taking extraordinary measures to shed light on our uphill push. So what do we do, collectively check out, keeping only the hope of a life altering hard look in the mirror to inspire change, or combine that with electoral participation in the face of institutionalized corruption, at the risk of not seeming rebellious or anti establishment enough. What is the path to teach your kids....You Decide.
 

Too little too late: Is the NFL Really concerned about player safety?

     It seems the NFL never is out of season. Once again player safety is at the top of the list. Or is it? To this day the NFL reports that concern over head injuries is molding the future of the game. Along with a steeper fining scale, and rule changes, the goal appears to be creating a safer environment for players of today and tomorrow. Concussions have been and will be a part of the game, some see this act of working to protect it's players as just that, an act. Currently over 1500 former players have brought a lawsuit against the league for doing nothing to curb the risk of concussions in the past. And that number is growing.
     It seems the NFL could have prevented this by providing some sort of after football care for the players that built this league into  the juggernaut it has become today. We all know Baseball is Americas pastime, but Football is Americas Passion. So wheres the compassion? So many of the guys we watched growing up can't even play with their kids, or make it down a flight of stairs, they transformed a fledgling game into a ratings, and commercial monster, now airing three nights a week. So what gives?
     Wouldn't this be the time, with all of this talk of player safety and and injury concerns, to take a look at the players left behind and their lack of health care options due to pre existing conditions. The NFL Network shows all of those classic games with paid commercials, still making money off of retired players and offering no help in their lifelong health battles. The Current players dropped the ball during the last collective bargaining sessions, by not demanding some sort of mandatory health care for retired players. As they too will soon be joining the ranks of used players, only to be tossed aside like broken toys.
     With the possibility of concussion linked suicides, astronomical fines, and player bankruptcy. Now more than ever seems like the time to take care of these guys. The money is there on both sides, players and management. Use that NFL Classic advertising money, and the fines from illegal hits. Even the salaries and fines accrued through bounty gate would be a start to get things moving in the right direction. We used to laugh at the Steve Young I'm Batman concussion mocking commercial, but it's not going to be funny watching him waste away into a delusional old man, literally walking his neighborhood in his Batman underoos. Trying to find his way home. Wondering why the league he helped make great abandoned him and so many others like him.
     Football is a violent aggressive and lucrative sport, so either help these guys with medical care, or go back to those leather helmets. So guys think twice about launching head first into a 6'6 350lb wall of bone and muscle. Just a thought.

How old school Facebook gave birth to Civil Rights

     Its strange to think of a Facebook of the 40's, but in lots of ways it existed. Like most things of that era it started as a Military tool, which inadvertently worked to help Black America. During WWII the Japanese program titled "Negro Propaganda Operations" used short wave radios to broadcast to any African Americans within earshot across the Country. They used Japanese broadcasters, and Black POW's, to tell the story of the treatment of Blacks in the Military, of lynchings, and other race related injustices across the U.S.. The POW's in exchange were given the opportunity to give their names, to let loved ones know they were still alive.
     The point wasn't to shine a light on the plight of Blacks in America, but to create major racial turmoil in the States and hinder us from fighting effectively in the war. Americas Military recognized the strategy, and since the broadcasts were rooted in so much truth, the potential for unrest was very real. Even though, most blacks didn't own short wave radios at the time, the word still spread. As a result the U.S. Government improved Military conditions for black troops while enlisted. Some believe this to be the first steps toward some sort of Civil Rights. Before the change, German prisoners were treated better than Black Military Officers. After, even Black civilians were given the opportunity to work decent war time jobs in factories and shipyards.
     So there it is, Social Media cart & buggy style. Desired effect or not. Information that was being spread from half a world away carried a message that was strong enough to initiate change. It's that time again. Time to use the ability to communicate in mass numbers to enact change. Facebook should be our village drumbeat, informing the tribe of impending danger, our negro spiritual to let us know whats going on on the other side of the field. Communication has always been the key to effective action. We will use this tool to take back our Political and Economic power. To take the first step toward controlling our collective futures. We can't continue to wait for events to react to, we are the catalysts. We will unite. Remember no McDonalds in October...http://buildbackwards.blogspot.com/2012/04/no-mcdonalds-in-october.html

Go Black Mr. White: Why the UFC needs more black Ads

     When advertisers specifically target black audiences with some product, openly looking to garner support from that community, two things are bound to happen. 1 People are going to question the ethics of ethnic ad targeting, and 2 the community sees the ad, and chooses for themselves if they want to buy said product or not. I think the UFC is missing the boat on this one. This Jon "Bones" Jones fight vs. Rashad Evans, could be the best thing blaxsploitation advertising ever created.
     Listen to this set up. An epic saga between two athletes, training partners for two years, teammates, friends. Jones the new champion and regarded as potentially the best ever, and Evans the former champion and seasoned veteran, TV star, and budding celebrity. While teammates, the new guy Jones renewed Evans' passion for the sport. Evans helps Jones to learn to deal with his new found success, and how to remain focused through it. Although they agreed never to fight each other, Jones publicly entertained a question about a hypothetical fight between the two. Evans feeling disrespected leaves the team, and starts his own team on the other side of the country. Evans, now looks to defeat his old team, old trainers, and his one time brother. Classic Right?
     Bones Jones. 24year old religious good guy, goal setter, and ferociously committed to his craft. From a family of athletes, and a sister whose story would leave no eye dry. Evans, the flashy Former champion one of the most recognizable fighters in the sport, and one of the most dangerous. Also on a winning streak. Both are great fighters at the top of their games. You couldn't make this stuff up.  This story line has everything, friendship, jealousy,betrayal, tragedy, and placed in front of the right eyes, these guys could, and should become household names. People should know Jon Jones on sight. This guy represents all that is good in sports, and what we want our athletes to be. In the age of the you pay to see me, so I must be great athlete. Promoting Jones more would be a welcomed change.
      So more money for Dana White, and the introduction of a good guy black athlete, from a newer sport who might just be one of the baddest men on the planet. So Mr.White please, a few blaxploitation ads in this direction would be a good thing. Force the Bones Jones community to know your new star. I guarantee the long term reward will be worth more than the short term criticism.

No McDonalds in October !

      With the justice system beginning to take course in the Treyvon Martin murder case, now what. It seems unrealistic to think the level of outrage and media coverage will remain this supportive when addressing simularly controversial stories that inspire racial debates. We as a people can still use the tidal wave of energy caused by this Treyvon Martin Tragedy. He should be our Khalid Said, he was the young man who died mysteriously in the custody of Egyptian police. Mysterious until the photos were released. The outrage expressed through social media started the Egyptian revolution of 2011, it will be seen as the historic first step towards freedom in the future.
     Nobody is calling for a physical revolution, but it is time to take our power back or at least begin taking the steps. The plan remains the same, using the megaphone that is social media blacks should spread the word to not eat at McDonalds for one month, six months from now in October. Not to hurt McDonalds, (who makes 5.2 billion per yr. from blacks that's 433 million per month from our community or 18% of total profits)http://www.thegrio.com/health/how-mcdonalds-new-ceo-affects-black-community.php, but to make a statement as a people or voting block that we can remain solid and support our interests.
     We then use the Collective 433 million dollars of McDonalds money to invest in positive local entities black businesses or otherwise. If the Government dedicated 433 million dollars totally to miniority interests it wouldn't solve all problems but it would be historic none the less. Its a small price to pay. Its not sacrificing all fast food just one company. So spread the word No McDonalds in October Spread the word.
     Make no mistake, there probably won't be a way to measure the way the money changes a given community. The actual point is showing that as a group we can act collectively ,to mold our future.  This is the natural progression, to work together with sit ins and marches, to show our strength as a unit. In America the legitimacy of a group is defined by the strength of its block, voting or economic. A unified mass exodus of a given block in either of these two instances garners courtship, thus the block is taken more seriously and treated with respect. But how in the black community, arguably the most fractured block in America do we take our voice back. This isn't designed to topple McDonalds, or change the diets of black people. Its only to highlight small sacrifices we all need to make to get the wheels of change turning again. Without sacrifice change is hard to come by in any circumstance, and no McDonalds for a month would definitely be a small sacrifice in relation to the statement it sends. This might not change perception overnight, but it would mold our reality, back into the form of a people with power, and a united voice, with a realistic chance to respectfully navigate our own course, as we all effectively become the new leaders of our own community. We use Social Media for everything else, why not this.

  Here's a cool list of  blk spending habits. http://www.thechicagocitizen.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/StateOfTheAfricanAmericanConsumer_v22-1.pdf

P.S.

  Nothing Personal McDonalds.

To Tithe or not to Tithe: That is the question?

     In the age of instant globally distributed information, and all we hear of corruption by religious institutions. I wonder if tithing to the Church as important as giving to the least of our brothers and sisters, or would Jesus rather you give to the institution of the Church. With collections going to pay Pastors salary, and not just supporting the building fund any more, do you really know where your money is going. Is there absolute transparency.
      If Catholic parishioners money is going to legal defense funds, or settlements to victimized followers. Do you think that really is the best way for your offering to be distributed?  If the Catholic Church protects pedophiles with your money. Is that any different than anyone in society harboring a fugitive pedophile in their basement, keeping them warm and safe, free from legal prosecution? Should your money really go to fueling Eddie Long's private jet, or pay his settlements? Should old Mother Robinson's offering pay for the First Lady's vast collection of Sunday whites, with hats to match? Then they say, the good Lord's come as you are rules apply to everyone else in the congregation, tube socks and all.
       Is that what you were taught your Jesus envisioned for his flock? This absolutely doesn't apply to all churches, but the influx of stories are enough to generate some healthy skepticism. So the next time Pastor helps you pop your clutch after Sunday service, then glides past you in his new Benz, look down at your WWJD bracelet or bumper sticker and ask your self. What would he do? You helped buy that car. Jesus rode a donkey, and even with inflation thrown in, a donkey doesn't translate to a Benz nowadays, at best its a Truck or one of those big Church Vans or something.
     What about that whole camel through a needle eye thing, what was that Mat.19:24. Now Pastor might not be rich, but wealth is relative to who its compared to. Jesus was about acts, lessons and time spent, not the sum total of his generosity through golden coins. Go ahead and anoint pastor as your king, and I'm sure through some miraculous act that will compel God to leave you a spot at his side. That's how Jesus would do it. Right?  

Olympic play for pay : We made you great for free already.

     So D. Wade and Ray Allen think Olympic athletes should be paid for their services, I couldn't agree more. Whenever a millionaire black says anything about compensation, the stigma of the ungrateful greedy black male athlete rises up right on cue. Even when arguing with billionaire owners, the players who generate the money are the ones whom it is perceived are letting their greed cause the games disruptions, and cheating the fans. So NBA Olympians are greedy, I'm pretty sure they don't get a percentage of jersey sales or any cut of NBC ad revenue. But critics will say they should do it for the love of country, for deep rooted patriotism, for the good ol USofA.
     But those same people forget Jesse Owens 4 gold medals in the '36 Olympics didn't protect him from potential lynching, and definitely sent a political message to Hitler and his theory of Aryan dominance. What about Ali 24 years later coming back home to America after winning Olympic gold, and not being treated like a man let alone an Olympic hero. Wearing proudly across his chest the name of the country that routinely beat, humiliated, dehumanized, and killed his people while he  fought for American excellence. Thus his medal was thrown into the Ohio river. 8 years later Tommy Smith and John Carlos, on the track and field winners platform, donned one black glove each from the same pair to make a statement against human rights violations, I wear a shirt with the famous photo from '68 and I still get negative looks 40 years later. Imagine what they went through. Tommy Smith said it best "If I won I'm an American, if I do something deemed bad I'm just a negro, Black America will understand what we did tonight".
     That's only three cases of black athletes showing patriotism above and beyond the level of treatment they received from their home nation. Yet some are still seen in some circles as, arrogant self centered trouble makers, and in one case a draft dodger. Aside from testing ones skills against the rest of the world I don't even see the benefit of Olympic competition from the professional athletes perspective. The sports talking heads say players like Wade and Allen should be proud to have USA across their heart, and anything less is spitting in Lady Liberty's face. Generally black sports talk guys swing the conversation back to the money which perpetuates the greedy argument, not that its wrong, but its the jab. The Right Cross is the level of patriotic sacrifice made by black Olympic athletes over time, in the face of inhumane conditions at home.
     So yes, all USA Olympians should be paid, amateur or not. These athletes are labeled as the best of the best, and in no other forum do amateurs in any field reign supreme. Swimmers, track and field, archers and gymnasts need funding, if NBC and the USOC gets paid, why not the people who make it possible to generate the revenue in the first place. They say NBA players benefit through a rise in popularity at home through Olympic play. I think Christian Laettner and Clyde the Glides USA basketball jersey sales tell a different story. Its a tough position to be in, if players don't play for the USA for reasons of fairness, the media will label them unpatriotic and say its all about the money.  Also if this isn't fair, what was all of the problems ALI and Jesse Owens went through, is there a name for something lower than unfair? This is a stand for something moment, Our Olympic heroes made the stand in the past, now today's guys cant let them down, and fall for anything.

Race Riots, Black Wealth, and the GAP Band

     Anybody ever wondered what the gap in GAP Band stood for? Definitely not me, but the reason is so intense that it will change your view of them, and of the history of modern America forever. Allow your eyes to be opened by the depth of the GAP Band. Greenwood Ave., Archer and Pine St. the g,a,and p, respectively, three streets in Tulsa OK. home of the band, also home of  collectively two of the best and worst of what America has to offer, the latter being the worst atrocity committed by American citizens on American citizens ever. Black Wall St.( not the record label) the real BWS, 1921 Oklahoma a community of black doctors, lawyers, veterans, farmers, and small business owners working to build their community from within. At the time, Oklahoma was supposed to be a Black, and Indian state, its citizens even elected a black Governor who the Klan vowed to kill within 48 hrs. if he took office.

     The community was so tightly knit because money was traded hand to hand due to Jim Crow laws, little Africa, as it was called had many black millionaires due to oil on many properties, even when Indians married Blacks their families were given 40 acres and a mule, and whatever oil was found on their land. Oklahoma only had 2 airports in 1921 and 6 blacks owned their own planes. It was proof of successful black business structure where nepotism was key, and a dollar could circulate through the community for almost a year, and now a dollar leaves in about 15 minutes. So where'd it all go? My grandmother was alive already and I never heard  about this. By now we know It all ends the same. It always does.

     May 31, 1921 Dick Rowland shoe shiner, in danger of being lynched for the accusation of attempted rape of a white elevator operator. Black WW1 vets (welcomed home as heroes) there to protect Rowland, were threatened for bearing arms, and violence ensued, and in the end a white man lay dead shot by a black soldier. What followed the next day was nothing short of amazing. With the white residences of the surrounding communities lined up on the borders of Black Wall St. the Klan came in and burned the town down and hunted the black citizens. Roughly 3000 blacks died that day, along with 600 successful  businesses, and 21 churches. 21 restaurants, 2 airplanes, a bus system, hospitals, a bank, schools and a library. Not to mention 1500 homes. The Klan even dropped flaming gas cans from planes to bomb the people from above. 

     In 1997 the Tulsa Race Riot commission was formed to see if anything would be paid to the roughly 100 survivors. There was no insurance paid, or help from local or Federal Government agencies. Reparations were recommended, but the report states that only 300 were killed. Many bodies were thrown into rivers, down mine shafts, and buried in mass graves. Researchers using GPR (ground penetrating radar) found a mass grave outside of a cemetery that contained hundreds of bodies. Remember this is 1921 there are pictures of these riots, labeled with context look them up sometimes. I would paste them in but I'm going to see if I can learn anything else from the GAP Band.

     

      

     

Would lowering NFL bounty fines send a negative message to players

    Bounty Gate is the biggest thing to hit  professional sports in a long time. Fines have been handed out, and now some involved are looking to have their fines reduced through appeals. The NFL had to set these fines high to send a statement to its players,to confirm that they weren't the only ones being held to new higher standards. Uncharacteristically high fines were leveled against many players in the past year, most notably James Harrison, 125,000 total last year, and teammate Ryan Clark 55,000 also, Chicago Bear Brandon Meriweather 85,000 over the past two seasons. Many skeptical about the rule changes made in order to protect player health point to the leagues lack of compassion towards retired players and their lifetime of football related health issues.
     With the leagues crackdown on end zone celebrations, and non structured self expression. Many wonder about leagues with majority black players, and non black league Commissioners, like Bryant Gumball said speaking of NBA commissioner David Stern, "Among other things his moves were intended to do little more than show he's keeping the hired hands in their place." With dress codes, and facial expression technical fouls I see where he's coming from. Who would have thought Gumball would take the hard stand.
     With player safety as its new focus allowing these coaches and management to appeal their fines is within the rules, but actually allowing the fines to be lowered would be a slap in the face, not only to the players targeted by name and body part to be injured, but also to the player over fined for not conforming to the new rules to the game. Some hits being legal just a year earlier. I'm never one for taking food off of another man's table, but in this instance its just a case of keeping the playing field level. Anything else is just another black eye for the league.

The art that is Racial Profiling

     The phenomenon that is racial profiling may be based in fear and prejudice, but it doesn't feel organic. Was there ever some incident where mass crimes were committed by angry mobs of blacks, against whites solely for their soft spoken good natured disposition? Looking to sink our teeth into their gullible, Jesus fearing hearts. Not to my recollection. 
     Here's where the seeds were planted. During slavery, blacks were no threat. Insubordination was severely punished. After slavery, to maintain a flow of cheap labor, laws were enacted, black specific laws. Things like, no farmer could sell his crops after dark, punishable by law, or if you couldn't prove you had a job, you go to jail,  creating a new prison workforce and saving the tobacco and textile industries. The high number of black arrests combined with the lack of white arrests, for crimes against blacks, gave birth to the idea that blacks were not ready for freedom and were inherent criminals. These purposely force fed ideas, by Government to the people, to justify the treatment of blacks, became what defined  newly freed blacks in America. And gave birth to segregation, and modern discrimination, prejudice and racial profiling.
     The fact that this hasn't been addressed by a figure of white authority, on a national platform, gives some sense of legitimacy to an antiquated idea that's been passed down for two generations, adapting and evolving, it can be killed but that doesn't seem to be part of the plan.

Can Social Media re-shape Black America

     The uphill struggle for black equality and respect just got help, social media. The success of the Civil Rights movement was predicated on the unity of like minded people fighting for a common cause. So what happened, who pushed the pause button on the hunt for social equality and economic justice. Some blame the crumbling family structure, others say economic gains by some blacks blurs the line between progress and equal opportunity for the advancement of all. Its true southern segregation spawned sit- ins, marches, protests, suffering and death, televised, but generally localized through the southern states.

     So how now, in these times of two jobs to survive, multiple distractions, and the general complexity of modern life do we get that back. What could be the plan to make a concerted long term statement without taking food off of the table, yet still making a sacrifice for the cause. Recent marches have shown  effectiveness in shedding light on  given issues, but the black community, now leaderless, can learn from the occupy movement, that multiple nationwide marches do little more than raise awareness without real change and sustained results.

     In America the legitimacy of a group is defined by the strength of its block, voting or economic. A unified mass exodus of a given block in either of these two instances garners courtship, thus the block is taken more seriously and treated with respect. But how in the black community, arguably the most fractured block in America do we take our voice back. With practice, and social media. So here's the plan in theory.

     A social media organized boycott by all blacks for one month, lets say Mc Donalds, with their first black CEO ever, and their 365 black program celebrating black history year round, they seem to be sympathetic to the community. They should be 13% of the population makes up 18% of their profit margin so they throw us a bone. Mc Donalds earns 29 billion a year 18% black dollars 5.2billion annually that works out to 433 million per month. Any company that looses 433 million in one month wont go unnoticed, but why Mc Donalds, whats the cause? Plainly put, practice, a dry- run of sorts to re learn how to unite as a unit behind a given cause. To flex our economic muscle and learn effective strategies to garner respect and be taken seriously as a defined united group.

     This isn't designed to topple Mc Donalds or change the diets of black people. Its only to highlight small sacrifices we all need to make to get the wheels of change turning again. Without sacrifice change is hard to come by in any circumstance, and no Mc Donalds for a month would definitely be a small sacrifice in relation to the statement it sends. This might not change perception overnight, but it would mold our reality, back into the form of a people with power, and a voice, with a realistic chance to respectfully navigate our own course, as we all effectively become the new leaders of our own community. We use Social Media for everything else, why not this.

     

The New Massa... REALLY?

     I never really bought into that modern day slave talk. Inequities sure, racism, got it, but slavery, Really in 2012?  Also, whenever you have to say, that's still going on, or in this day and age, there's probably a good chance that spells out, what ever it is never really stopped. Imagine your a slave owner, 10 slaves working your field, eating your food, clothing them sheltering them keeping them healthy, because sick workers don't make money,  spread illness to others and blah, blah ,blah, we all know the story.

      So fast forward slavery is abolished, and the entire American economy is threatened without a source of cheap labor. A plan is devised, pass insane laws that arrest blacks for ridiculous crimes, charge a fee they can't pay, and lease them to industry to work off the infraction. Plantation owners carried out black punishment while courts handled whites only 10% of arrests at the time. Slavery was not illegal for punishment of a crime and convict labor was 50 to 80 % cheaper, driving down wages for everyone. This new labor force, cheaper than slavery used blacks who made up 12.5% of population 30% of prisoners. This for profit criminalization of blacks forged the social mindset that blacks are bad and thus the basis of segregation and blah blah blah.

     Now 40 years after freedom, the stock market is open, cars are on the road, the Wright brothers are trying to fly, and blacks are still corporate slaves, still beaten and mistreated same ol thing. Through the 40s 4.8 mil blacks still lived like that. 1942 the last arrest was made for slavery. Most importantly from 1877-1966 no white was convicted for killing a black. States Still worked criminals on chain gangs into the 50s to pave roads after private companies were prohibited from using prison labor in the late 30s. Wartime building in the 40s offsetted the loss of income and factories grew and as we now know eventually closed. In '79 restrictions were lifted, and companies were back in the prisoner leasing business. 

     To end it quickly, prison labor is cheaper than third world sweatshops. State workers get .93-4.73$ per day while fed prisoners get .23 to 1.25$ per hr. The government uses prison labor to close budget gaps. BP used prison labor to clean many beaches along the gulf coast. The largest modern day bossman is a congressionaly created company Unicor. 50% of its sales are to the DOD and it employs 22,000 inmates. Prison programs now employ more inmates than any fortune 500 company, besides GM. Some think that's the price you pay for going to jail, but when you look at the incarceration rates, and the profitable prison industry, the connection is clear it doesn't really end. So whats next step, parolees working off time in fields, vacated by migrant workers due to a deportation threat in order to keep labor prices low. They tried it last year in  AL. but the parolees left the fields. To this day AT&T, Target, Macys,  Motorola, Microsoft, Nordstroms, Dell and many other modern companies still use cheap prison labor.These companies get tax breaks for hiring at risk employees. Its all exploitation of the alleged criminals in America through unjust laws ,you know who they are .

     

Bottom line: Who does America hate least Mormons or The Blacks

   With Mitt sizing up the the big piece of chicken at the GOP convention, and Obama winding himself up into campaign mode. It seems all the money being spent to sway voters one way or another is a waste of time. Its all going to come down to who America has the least amount of disdain for, Mormons or Blacks. How is that even measured? The advantage clearly goes to Romney because one can't look like a Mormon, no matter what the black guy is the black guy. As long as Romney keeps his religion hidden it might remain hidden, but the questions deserve asking, not for ridicule but for clarity. Please, someone ask him, not about magic underwear, or no caffeine or alcohol, ask about the multiple heavens, or multiple gods, or baptizing long dead non Mormon people. Not to mention that whole Jesus in America thing. Then there's the radical black Christian -Muslim, who wants to give away all that white America has worked for, while emposing crippling regulations that will destroy America from within based on its evil treatment of its blacks, something that should be a non issue to him because he's no citizen, he's not one of us.

     So who will they hate least, the flip-floppy, stiff no fun candidate with, in their opinion, a warped version of Christianity. Where a man, Joseph Smith led by an Angel, found gold tablets in 1823 New York, that included a Christian history of ancient America, and have only been seen by eight people, whose stories changed over the years, and were then returned to an Angel. This clearly differs from the beloved Christianity that allegedly forged this country into existence. Or the radical non African American race bating community activist/organizer, who wants to change the power structure of America by stealing citizen wealth and giving handouts to the overwhelmingly larger number of blacks on welfare. The only equalizer is to put Mormon ideals along side Obamas perceived ideals, to see whose structural belief system and rationale disqualifies them from getting behind the wheel. Who will have the courage to ask these questions?

Is NDAA really the worst thing for Obama and America?

    Little known to most people. On Jan. 2, 2012 the President signed the National Defense Authorization Act, giving the government power to detain citizens indefinitely for less than capital charges. But why, its by far the most controversial piece of legislation ever, with the least amount of media scrutiny. In searching for possible reasons, piecing together separate stories paints a picture as to why, and to why Obama might be keeping those reasons quiet. Some believe protests overseas during an economic meltdown can carry over to the US, as the occupy movement grows, and crowds reach numbers far too large to manage. But there's more.
    Recently little known Somali terrorist organisation Al-Shabaad forged an alliance with Al-Qaeda and adopted their cause.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-16979440 But why would Somalia providing a safe haven and training ground to terrorists a world away, inspire the signing of this highly repressive law. In the last 25 years America has admitted 83,991 Somali immigrants to the us 43,682 since 9/11. Some being born into American citizenship.
    Recent news stories show, since the economic downturn many terror recruiters have turned to American born children of refuges to take up fundamental causes.http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/02/07/somali-american-admits-aiding-al-qaeda-terrorists/ Being that they are American, their passports allow them travel freely around the world, and some choose the terror route. Travel information collected as well as American born insurgents captured show a definite link between economically challenged Somali-American students traveling to terror entrenched countries and returning home to continue studies.
     Like the recent terror killings in France, these students, not only Somali but others,http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/02/8585706-born-in-the-usa-but-now-among-somalias-islamist-terrorists may be trained sleepers waiting for the signal to strike. With the terror sentiment remaining stagnant and the economy crawling back from the dead, America is one bad event away from social chaos. Travel records coupled with the freedoms that we've conceded in the name of preventing terror attacks could give the administration cause to be able to round up potential suspects based on evidence of terror without the restrictions of laws protecting law abiding citizens. Hopefully.
 

5 simple rules for stealing the next election

     The line that separates The Voting Rights Act, Voting fraud ,and manipulation seems to be a big fat grey line. There are so many ways to sway results one way or another not deemed illegal, that its hard to know when you're being had. These are just 5 quick ways our votes are being devalued without generating consolidated complaints. It all starts by perpetuating negative feelings. Modern campaigns use negative ads to highlight the oppositions failures and down falls, which energizes the base but also reinforces in some the instinctive attitude that, they're all crooked so why vote for any of them. Right or wrong this successfuly eliminates a block of independent voters, smaller numbers are more easily managed.

       The remaining committed voters are a tougher nut to crack. Lately, some of the most complicated balloting forms to date are being used to further confuse an already difficult process. This year in Illinois the revised voting sheet was so large it wouldn't fit into the machine, delaying counting. The voting process should at-least be consistent within a given State but that's a different story. Believing in one person one vote can leave you disappointed. The popular vote doesn't win elections, You have to vote for the guy who has a delegate vote who also supports your candidate. It doesn't always work though, some voting districts don't have delegates who support your candidate so no matter how many votes your guy wins, they loose. Not how it should be. Ballot confusion and delayed counting are the second and third steps.

         Restricting voter rights hits on two fronts, one by cutting gains made through the Voting Rights Act, cutting citizen participation, and at the same time allowing business to donate unlimited funds to candidates who promote restrictive revisions on average citizens. New voting laws disproportionately hurt lower income voters and students. Veterans Military ID isn't allowed in some cases, fight for us fine, vote for us no thanks. Students can go to war but not vote on who might send them.

          When all else fails. The last trick is the best. Actual vote manipulation, 130 million people voted in 08. According to computer science and security experts at Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois, on quarter of those voting machines can be hacked with 20 dollars worth of equipment and an 8th grade science education. In 06  Princeton University conducted a successful cyber attack on electronic voting machines, but it required knowledge of the voting machines and all types of complicated hacker code. The new hack was done by constructing a primitive remote control out of basic electronics parts and were able to tamper with votes in machines that 32 million people are still on track to use this year. Homeland Security issued a bulletin in 04 http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB04-252.html#diebold but no technical advances were made. 

          These tactics all focus on the poorest segments of society. With all of these actions currently in play, the hardest part of conducting the fix will be, what margin of defeat would generate the least amount of suspicion that corruption has occurred.

Death to Regulations

    Ever wonder why there are so many regulations. Why does the EPA even exist? I like to start with my favorite point of reference Ohio's own Cuyahoga River. Ask most people what makes this body of water infamous and they probably couldn't tell you. It's the definition of what happens when industry is allowed to police their own without outside intervention. August 1, 1969  Time Magazine reported  " The lower Cuyahoga has no visible signs of life, not even leaches and sludge worms that usually thrive on wastes." its also quite literally a fire hazard. This, after a fire earlier that year June 22 . It also burned 9 times before that. Yes the River burned. Literally.

    The Clean Water act and the formation of the EPA soon followed in 1970. Some believe its main function is to generate income by relentless fining of companies not meeting regulatory standards, unobtainable at worst or not profitable after costly conformation at best. Or its focus may be on keeping our drinking water clean and our agriculture relatively edible.

      Most people do know about how dirty those New York rivers are, you know, no fishing in the Hudson River. That's because Kodak,GE and a host of others used the Erie Canal as their waste disposal area during that regions manufacturing boom that lasted until the 1970's. The best is Lake Onondaga also in New York 125 years of pollution, 20 lbs of mercury per day. All surface water, ground water, and sediment, contaminated. It's the most polluted lake in the country, no swimming since 1940, no fishing since 1970. Its not clean now and experts say it wont be clean for a generation. So at the next Restore our nations freedom obligatory photo op in front of the Statue of Liberty, ask a Republican if they would eat a fish from that water, and what they think it's situation would be without regulations.It's amazing that a whole platform could be based on dismantling regulatory bodies. The death of regulation goes unquestioned as a political talking point by people that were adults when some of these things happened. As politics go, not too shocking, but it still seems kind of dirty to me.

        

When did Progressive thought become a bad thing ?

   Socially speaking, when did the concept of progressive thought become something worthy of questioning ? Progressive ideas and reasoning have permeated our existence from the beginning of time. Who wants their dentist to get out the pliers for a root canal . Where would modern medicine be? If the Wright Brothers were conservative thinkers where would modern travel be? What about the Pyramids or the Pantheon , the Space Shuttle , the internet , Google, all brought to us through progressive thinkers to push the boundaries of their respective limitations. Why now is the act of progressive thought under attack. Who would promote non progressive thought in their own life, could you tell your kids that's enough progress you've learned enough, no more exercising your mind , no need to keep up with the ever changing world.
    Put plainly the implementation of conservative concepts as a governing guideline would doom our society to a future of mediocrity at worst, and progress by chance and circumstance at best. More importantly the question is why? What would drive so many to silence progressive thought... fear. Fear of failing of being labeled incompetent and eventually irrelevant. The best way to suppress fear is eliminating risk of failing by limiting the reach of everyone's progress, some through religion which offers the security blanket of a predetermined destiny, and some fear the fight to overcome their own perceived limitations. In reality deep inside the mind of a true conservative must be all of the fear and anxiety of a fight they know they cant win.

Is Political climate fueling Treyvon Martin outrage ?

     Why does the Treyvon Martin killing resonate with so many Americans? Do Americans across color lines care more for Trevon than they did for Oscar Grant or Sean Bell ? I say absolutely not, the passion however is clearly increased though all three young men had their lives stolen from them. Though the incidences differ the results are the same. The difference is the climate in witch the Treyvon Martin killing occurred .The overt attempts to restrict the rights of women and minorities in general shines light on the dots to be connected with the perception being that a conservative streak in America wants to turn back the hands of time, to a point where civil and social rights were positioned to keep the powerful in power hence the phrase , most important election since 1865.
     Moving forward, with each violation of progressive civil liberties, marches, rallies and, boycotts have to intensify. With the advent of social media and watching the Arab spring and the 99% sit ins the prospect of standing up and becoming committed to a cause has become a tangible way to incite change. The recent marches and boycotts put the rights of women and minority voting restrictions on our doorstep, in our living rooms.  Even though the fight was against the same ideology the fights remained separate , but the trail of dots became visible.
      The connecting factor comes from this tragedy. The notion of a throwback style good ol boy network type of  investigation reminds us of an archaic process of justice that disrespects minorities and returns us to some of Americas darkest days. So no America doesn't care more about Treyvon than Oscar or Sean , but the times dictate a rising of the people against a vision of America that we already lived and know didn't work for the liberty and freedom of all people, the base of which America was founded. So to a lesser extent the outrage speaks to the push for turn of the 20th century style policies that will continue to unite people hopefully not in the face of such heartbreaking conditions.