Birthright

Oh, Reverend, you're so 2015:

After all, what Thurgood Marshall and Dr. King and Medgar Evers was about, was fighting for the American dream. What is the American dream? The American dream is one big tent: [Of the many, we are one]. One big tent.

Actually, Reverend Jesse Jackson made that statement in 1997, to PBS' Frontline, when he was considered on the left-wing of the Democratic Party. Today, America's presumed pluralistic party has something different in mind as The Washington Post reports

Jennifer Psaki, a veteran Democratic spokeswoman, will be Biden's White House press secretary, one of seven women who will fill the upper ranks of his administration's communications staff. It is the first time all of the top aides tasked with speaking on behalf of an administration and shaping its message will be female.

Biden's team will be steered by Kate Bedingfield, a longtime Biden aide who was his campaign communications director and will hold the same title in his White House.

To those who believe the color of one's skin is more important than the content of one's character, that is is insufficient:

The faces of the economic team President-elect Joe Biden unveiled publicly Tuesday included an African American woman, a man born in Nigeria, an Indian American woman and just one white man.

The response from Asian American, Black and Latino Democrats: It's not enough.

Jesse Jackson's plea was for diversity- diversity by quota, but still for diversity, for blacks (fewer Latinos and Asian-Americans at the time) to be fully included in a national mosaic. Now diversity is honored in the breach, a rhetorical trick. In the Post's 26-paragraph article, "diversity" or its root is mentioned seven times, though not by Kamala Harris, who nonetheless maintains

Our country is facing unprecedented challenges — from the coronavirus pandemic to the economic crisis, to the climate crisis, and a long-overdue reckoning over racial injustice. To overcome these challenges, we need to communicate clearly, honestly, and transparently with the American people, and this experienced, talented, and barrier-shattering team will help us do that.

Addressing the pandemic, economy, climate, and racial injustice take a back seat to breaking a glass-ceiling. Those born with testosterone need not apply.

In the video below, journalist Zaid Jilani notes that with Senator Harris ascending to the vice-presidency, California governor Newsom is being lobbied by forces advocating she be replaced by a Latino. others for an African-American, and still others for an Asian-American. Qualifications and ideological principles take a back seat.  Saagar Enjeti observes "the discussion around this is around quotas. None of it is around policy." There has not been

one iota of sort of oh, it pushes this person, it pushes this policy, believes this person would change this, or this person would adhere very strongly to Kamala Harris. But then again, this is the problem with Harris herself. She never really stuck by any sort of ideological prism..... the way that they talk about these issues, it boils down to something completely vacuous and empty, that when it comes down to filling a successor, they're literally using a quota system.

Enjeti and Zilani were referring to California, where most prominent Democratic officials support ethnic discrimination in public policy. But perhaps in California, and more likely nationally, they might find that replacing "no blacks need apply" with "no whites need apply" or "no men need apply" is no recipe for long-term electoral success. More clearly, it is very bad policy.

 

 

Share |

Predictable


The killing fields go on.

Two young men and one juvenile are accused of gunning down an Australian baseball player, jogging in the Oklahoma town of Duncan, for "the fun of it," as the 17-year old reportedly has acknowledged.

Fox and Friends' guest host Anna Kooiman, recognizing the absence of a live shot of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton she expected, commented "Oh, wait, we don't have it.  Why don't we have it. Because they haven't come forward and said anything. Are they going to? Will they? And should they?"   Colleague Steve Doocy responded "We heard a lot from them during the Trayvon Martin situation."  (JesseJacksonSharpton: they are the same person, right?)

Rush Limbaugh also suggests that JesseJacksonSharpton is responsible for any problem among blacks, emphasizing "We have not heard from the Reverend Sharpton, the Reverend Jackson, the NAACP. We haven't heard from anybody."  He claimed:

Two black guys and a white guy in the group.  No matter where you look in the media, it's not a racial event. Nothing about is racist. This is the epitome of media irresponsibility.  It's a classic illustration of just what role the mainstream media is playing in the destruction of American culture and society...

The Trayvon Martin shooting? I'll just tell you something: From Obama on down, they didn't care about Trayvon Martin.  All that mattered was that incident offered them an opportunity to advance their political agenda.  This doesn't.  Everything to these people is political.  There's nothing about this Oklahoma shooting that will allow the left or the Democrats to advance their political agenda.  This harms their agenda, so that's why the media is not trumpeting it.

Will Bunch observes "Both Lane and (Trayvon) Martin would be alive today if the strangers that they encountered were not carrying guns" and explains

Meanwhile, you may have heard on the news that some people in Lane's native Australia are furious at the United States, that a few have even talked about a tourism boycott. But many media accounts have left out the real reason why Australians are so angry. It's not so much about the "thug culture." It's that the U.S. body politic refuses to take action on guns: 

Tim Fischer, who served as deputy prime minister under John Howard from 1996 to 1999, urged Australians not to travel to the United States. He said that such a boycott would send a message about the need for tighter gun control regulations in the United States, according to News.com.au.


 “I am deeply angry about this because of the callous attitude of the three teenagers (but) it’s a sign of the proliferation of guns on the ground in the USA,” Fischer said this week. “This is the bitter harvest and legacy of the policies of the NRA ..."

As deputy prime minister, Fisher led Australia’s gun control reforms in the late ‘90s alongside Howard.


It's ironic, because Australia is proof that things in America don't have to be this way. Before enacting saner gun laws, the Land Down Under had witnessed 13 mass killings in 18 years. Since legislation was passed there have been none. Let me repeat that: None. Isolated murders by gunfire have not been eliminated there, of course, but they have dropped substantially -- down 59 percent over a decade. And the last I heard, Australia has not become a tyrannical hellscape because of its saner gun laws.


Hard at work, Bunch probably wasn't aware that a mere three hours before his post, the St. Louis Dispatch had reported

A 20-year-old man with mental disabilities apparently accidentally shot and killed his 15-year-old sister Thursday afternoon in St. Louis, police say.

The man told police he didn’t know the gun was real, according to authorities.

St. Louis Police Lt. John Green said that the man and his family moved into a home in the 4600 block of San Francisco Avenue a few days ago, and that the man had found a shotgun — spray-painted gold — hidden behind a dresser. The gun belonged to a friend of the family and was there when the family moved in, Green said. The shooter’s mother told police she had tried to hide the shotgun.

Authorities identified the victim as Alicia Anderson. Several relatives at the scene Thursday declined comment.

Incidents such as the T. Martin and A. Anderson killings are attributed to race by conservatives, who are blamed by liberals for pointing the fingers at blacks.    Apparently, Australians are more-cleared than are we because, Bunch finds, they are mystified when they "look at our failure to act after a slaughter like the Newtown massacre, at our seeming tolerance of dozens of gun muders like that of Chris Lane every day." And now, we have yet another victim of our fondness for firearms, this time of someone even younger than was Trayvon Martin.



Share |

Talk Of Slavery

Slate's Joan Walsh laments the reaction of the Reverend Jesse Jackson to the reaction of Cleveland Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert to the departure of NBA superstar Lebron James to the Miami Heat. In a reprehensible press release, the head of Rainbow PUSH coalition wrote:

He speaks as an owner of LeBron and not the owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers. His feelings of betrayal personify a slave master mentality. He sees LeBron as a runaway slave. This is an owner employee relationship -- between business partners -- and LeBron honored his contract.

Walsh writes that she "winced" at Jackson's rhetoric and as a "stickler about language" avoids "terms like 'psychological rape,' 'emotional incest,' 'cultural genocide,' 'environmental holocaust' or pretty much any metaphorical variations on the term 'slavery.' All those words have real-world meanings, and to use them as metaphor diminishes that impact."

Well-played, and Walsh obtained statements from "folks I admire" (we're supposed to know they're all black) about the affair. Although there was considerable sympathy for James' assertiveness against a wealthy, paternalistic owner, some of the statements specifically about the promiscuous use of the term "slavery" were on target.

Sportswriter Howard Bryant notes "Unless you're talking about the actual American institution of slavery, or the German National Socialist Party, the terms should never be used. The acts are too heinous, the shadows loom too large, the images are too broad and powerful to have any equivalent." Author Brad Snyder observes "slavery is an inappropriate and ahistorical metaphor to describe the current state of labor relations in professional sports." Author and columnist Toure reasons "if you're becoming rich by willingly doing something you love you're not a slave." Author and comedian Elon James White argues "slavery has zero to do with this and to bring it up with something so trivial when the verdict of the police officer who shot Oscar Grant just came out makes this sillier and downright irresponsible. " Author Debra Dickerson realizes "just as comparing run-of-the-mill morons to Hitler is an insult to the planet, let alone those harmed by WWII, so is comparing Kunta and Kizzy to LeBron." Professor and author Blair LM Kelley explains

Although elements like the draft and trades made from team to team lend themselves to hyperbolic comparison to slavery, it’s a comparison that fails to account for the extreme nature of the lived experience of American slavery.

The enslaved African-American ancestors of most of today’s NBA players suffered from an extreme deprivation of basic rights. Slaves performed the most grueling work for no pay, they were provided only the subsistence necessary to support life. Slaves had no ability to improve their status or the status of their children through hard work. In fact, according to the slave codes that governed Southern states, slaves could not take advantage of the most basic freedoms most Americans take for granted like raising their own children, gathering to worship, learning to read or even entering into the most basic legal contracts. There was certainly an ugly tone in Gilbert’s letter, and such a tone should be condemned.

However, it was just a tone; slavery was an all-encompassing, constitutionally enforced system. LeBron James is a free man. He freely chose to determine where he would work, where he and his family will live and the best way to carve out his own future. None of this has anything to do with slavery.

But wait! The right will not be outdone! Responding to the NAACP's draft statement condemning the "racist" elements of the Tea Party, Tea Party Express chairman Mark Williams made his own comparison to slavery, referring to the NAACP as a "vile, racist organization(s)." Being among "professional race-baiters," "they make more money off of race than any slave trader ever." Because nothing says tolerant and reasonable better than comparing a civil rights organization to a "slave trader" and relegating it to "the trash heap of history."

Williams is a little touchy. But what's the excuse of Representative Michelle Bachmann (R-MN)? At the Western Conservative Summit in Denver on July 9, Bachman commented “We will talk a little bit about what has transpired in the last 18 months and would we count what has transpired into turning our country into a nation of slaves.” Because nothing says respect for her fellow citizens and confidence in the U.S.A. better than saying we have become "a nation of slaves."

Ridiculous statements have emerged from one longtime leftist activist and one emerging right-wing activist. But Michelle Bachman is a member of the United States Congress- and none of her colleagues even has questioned her remarks. And that tells us something about the modern Republican Party.

Share|

Limbaugh, Again Confused

I enjoy periodically tuning in to Rush Limbaugh's program with the intent of leaving it on until he says something ridiculous. Today, July 22, 2008, I listened longer than normal, almost two minutes.

Limbaugh was complaining about sponsorship by the Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation of the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition and Citizenship Education Fund Annual Conference. The event, described here as "Jesse Jackson's main fundraising event of the year," took place June 28 through July 2 in Chicago.

I don't know why Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac sponsored the annual conference of the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition. But I do know that Limbaugh, after referring to the two corporations as "federal government private sector (which is impossible) mortgage loan institutions," claimed "they're giving men (sic) to the Reverend Jackson. Yet people want more of this! They want more government; I don't get it."

More government? Although founded as a government agency in 1938, Fannie May was converted into a private corporation in 1968. And its own website describes Freddie Mac as "owned by its shareholders and, like other corporations, is accountable to its shareholders and a board of directors." Like it or not, the federal government is socializing risk by bailing out these two corporations. This is not a failure of government, but of two corporations now coming to the taxpayers for handouts- i.e., welfare. True, the federal government has not covered itself with glory in its handling of the mortgage crisis, but then, the Executive Branch has been in singularly incapable hands for almost eight years due in part to Limbaugh, Scalia, and others who thwarted the popular will in 2000.

Controversy On "The View"- 1

It now appears that Jesse Jackson used the word "n------" (plural form) when on July 6, 2008 he accused Barack Obama of "talking down to black people" and threatened to remove a critical body part of his. And on July 17, 2008 the women of ABC's The View were talking about it. According to the conservative blog newsbusters.org, this is the (relevant part of) the transcript:

WALTERS: Is it-- and what you’re saying– is it okay for black comics primarily, like yourself when you do an act and so forth, is it okay then to use as it is still done and not okay for white people? Is that the case?

SHEPHERD: Yeah I, I have no problem with them using it. It’s something that means something way different to me than it does to you. I grew up with my family using it. It– for me, I can use it as a term of endearment.

WALTERS: But if I used it...

SHEPHERD: I don’t want to hear it come out of your mouth.

HASSELBECK: I just think, here’s the like, how do you, okay, so wait a minute, let’s think about this. This is how I think things can be simplified sometimes. How do you teach children, okay? We should be acting. We’re trying to teach our kids certain things in this world, no? So then are we, are we acting out on what we’re actually preaching them? Am I supposed to tell Grace, "Grace okay, here is [sic] some words you can use, here is [sic] some words you can not." And then but you’re friend over there can use it because-

GOLDBERG: Can I simplify it for you? The little kid is not going to walk up to Grace and say "[bleeped out]" It’s not going to happen. [laughter]

HASSELBECK: It’s an example. I’m just giving an example.

GOLDBERG: But, but I understand your example. I understand your example, but Elisabeth, as I said at the beginning when we first talked about this word, this is a word that has meaning when you give it meaning. I’ve never met [bleeped out], I have never gone to [bleeped out], I don’t know any [bleeped out]. There are [bleeped out]. You can try it, just like you can-

HASSELBECK: I am not trying to.

GOLDBERG: No, no, no, listen to me, listen to me. Just like you can talk about comical Italian people if you were a comic.

HASSELBECK: I’m half Italian.

GOLDBERG: And yeah, so you can say all kinds of stuff. You can say the stuff that your mom and dad would say in the privacy of their home and not outside. That’s just the way that it works.

SHEPHERD: What about teaching, what about teaching Grace with different things that- There are some things where people are sensitive to. There are some things that we can’t say because people are sensitive to it. Kids say "why does that person have a hump on their back?" You know, that might hurt their feelings. So why not explain it in that way?

HASSELBECK: Look, I’m not saying I won’t explain to my daughter how to talk about words. I grew up in a household where we didn’t say- I’m half Polish and half Italian. If somebody said to me "you’re a dumb Pollack," it offended me. I never made fun of myself saying, you’re, you’re that word. I’m a this. I never would go into my own heritage and use a phrase that is used against me in the privacy of my own home because I think it perpetuates stereotypes and hate.

GOLDBERG: You have to understand [bleeped out] word that has followed us around, and basically what we did is we took it out the hands of people that were using it and put it into our hands and we use it the way we want to use it and that’s the way it is.

HASSELBECK: Then it sneaks into pop culture then. I’m just trying to get an answer.

WALTERS: You did. You’re not listening you’re just talking. She is saying-

HASSELBECK: - I am listening.

WALTERS: -it’s okay in her culture, but it is difficult as you as a white mother to explain that, that Jeffrey can use it, but Grace can’t.

HASSELBECK: It’s not difficult for me. It’s just an example in terms of general philosophy. I have no problem explaining things to Grace. My thing is that we don’t live in different worlds. We live in the same world.

GOLDBERG: We do live in different worlds. I’m sorry. I’m sorry it’s the way it is Elisabeth. This is the way it is. This is how I grew up. My mother could not go and vote in the United States of America, the place of her birth. We, go- wait, wait.

WALTERS: And don’t we want that to change?

GOLDBERG: Yes, we would like to. But you don’t understand.

HASSELBECK: I’m not going to take that away from no.

GOLDBERG: No, no, I, I want you to. But what I need you to understand is the frustration that goes along when you say we live in the same world. It isn’t balanced. And we would like it to be. But you have to understand, you have to listen to the fact that we’re telling you, there are issues, there are huge problems that still affect us. And you’ve got to know this if you want to know us.

HASSELBECK: I’m not trying to take- I understand. I’m not trying to-

GOLDBERG: But it didn’t sound like it.

HASSELBECK: I am not trying to take that away from you. When we are living in this world and we are living in the world where there is in, in the pop culture, when that word is in use. When there are- [crying] this is upsetting to me because-

WALTERS: Okay, just take a breathe and let someone else talk.

HASSELBECK: I am, I am, but this is a conversation that is hard and we’re going to have it here and we have it here for a while because we love each other. When we live in a world where pop culture then uses that term, and we’re trying to get to a place where we feel like we’re in the same place and we feel like we’re in the same world, how are we supposed to then move forward if we keep using terms that bring back that pain?

GOLDBERG: I can tell you.

HASSELBECK: How?

GOLDBERG: Here’s how we do it. You listen and say "okay this is how we’re using this word and this is why we do it." You have to say, "well, you know what? I understand that, but let’s find a new way to move forward." You must acknowledge the understanding of what it is and why it is in order to go-

HASSELBECK: But when is it time to have the conversation?

GOLDBERG: But we are.

HASSELBECK: We are, yes.

WALTERS: Okay, but one second, let somebody else have a conversation for just one second. [laughter] We have a man- [laughter and applause] We have a man running for president who is 50 percent white and 50 percent black. And one of the things that he is trying to do is to bring people together and there still is racism. I have not heard anybody on this show say the word that you just said. They say the "n" word, we’re so afraid of it. If I said what you said, I would never hear the end of it. But when- wait I’ll grant it. But when you say it’s okay, we are trying to change. This is what Barack Obama and others are trying to do, to move forward. In the meantime, we have to understand that we haven’t gotten there yet. And maybe we should and maybe it’s not okay for you to use the word, but that is the reality, that’s the reality of the moment. And whether it’s a good thing or a bad thing.

It was long but I think worth the read, though in this post I'll respond only to one small portion of this extraordinary discussion.

WALTERS: Is it-- and what you’re saying– is it okay for black comics primarily, like yourself when you do an act and so forth, is it okay then to use as it is still done and not okay for white people? Is that the case?

SHEPHERD: Yeah I, I have no problem with them using it. It’s something that means something way different to me than it does to you. I grew up with my family using it. It– for me, I can use it as a term of endearment.

Sherri Shepherd here is saying a) comics can say what others can't; and b) it means something different for her than it does "to you" (by which presumably she meant white people because, apparently, for Shepherd all white people are the same).

Shepherd has, inadvertently, stumbled into a little bit of truth here. It does mean something different for black people than for white people which, fortunately, the latter have come to understand over the past few decades. And it is this impact upon the victims of hate speech that has spurred the efforts of well-meaning individuals to stigmatize this, and other, hurtful language.

There always has been a reservoir of belief in this country that entertainers are allowed to say things the average unsophisticated rube is not. Perhaps it's the idea that bigotry is acceptable when done for a profit (think Steven Colbert's trashing of Catholicism, ironic though it is from a church-going Roman Catholic), or that the harm wrought by hate is inversely correlated with the number of people exposed to it. If that doesn't make any sense, evidently you're not part of the ignorant mass to which Ms. Shepherd would like to consign you.