GET RID OF THE DLC
THE DLC = VICHY DEMOCRATS OR FAUX REPUBLICANS, IF YOU PREFER
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
WE HAVE A RIGHT TO BE ANGRY
Says Tom Paine. An excerpt, and no one could have said it better:
Go read the rest of it. I'm just glad that I can be angry at what's happening to our government, because I have a right to be angry.
We’re angry that the federal government is brimming with people fundamentally opposed to the mission of the agencies over which they preside, the anti-environmentalists who run the Interior department, the mining company lobbyists in charge of mine safety and the union-busters in charge of worker safety. We’re still angry about Hurricane Katrina, that our government left thousands of its citizens stranded to suffer and die, while the president thought that the guy presiding over the disastrous failure was doing a heckuva job. We’re angry that our government sends religious fundamentalists around the world to discourage condom use, thus condemning untold numbers of people to unwanted pregnancy, disease and death.
We’re angry that forty years after the Voting Rights Act, the Republican Party continues to exploit racism and do everything in its power to stop black people from voting in each and every election. We’re angry that in the richest country in the world we can’t seem to find our way to a system in which you go to the polls, cast your ballot and know that it will be counted. And yes, we’re still angry about what happened in Florida in 2000, that through lying and cheating and pure luck the Republicans were able to steal a presidential election, and five unprincipled partisans on the Supreme Court helped them do it. We’re angry that every time we look at Al Gore all that pain and frustration and outrage comes bubbling up through our guts no matter how hard we try to “get over it.”
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO KNOW, TOO...
Daily Kos has this up:
Skeptical Brotha also informs us that John Edwards and Hillary Clinton are peeling off Congressional Black Caucus members to support them and not one of their own.
Sharpton went on to criticize Obama on other issues, including his relationship with Sen. Joe Lieberman, who's controversial within the Democratic Party.
"Senator Obama and I agree that the war is wrong, but then I want to know why he went to Connecticut and helped Lieberman, the biggest supporter of the war," Sharpton told TV.
Which blows the "African-Americans are monolithic" theory to hell.
I've run out of adjectives to describe the junior Senator from Illinois...and it's getting very painful to watch him detonate his very own WMDs on his quest for the White House...which are Barack Obama himself.
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
OBAMA DISSES HIS PASTOR
IN CHURCH...THINKING ABOUT HOW TO DISS HIS PASTOR
It is said that "Absolute Power corrupts Absolutely". We may want to think the same thing when it comes to politicians, substituting the word "Power" for "Politics".
Because it appears that Senator Barack Obama, the newest Presidential candidate; the one so vocal about his Christian faith, has decided that being President is much more worthy than standing firm on said Christian beliefs and principles. So much so, that upon the advice of his campaign handlers, he's publicly dissed his own Pastor.
I don't know about you, but the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., a Nationally and globally respected Pastor of the Trinity United Church of Christ; a respected Christian author and political leader in Chicago, is NOT someone you diss, or dismiss in cavalier fashion as Obama has. Consider this tidbit from the New York Times:
The Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., senior pastor of the popular Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago and spiritual mentor to Senator Barack Obama, thought he knew what he would be doing on Feb. 10, the day of Senator Obama’s presidential announcement.Many of you who read this blog have been very vocal in your objections to my opinions about the Senator. However, the fact that he will do anything and position himself any way to make himself appealing to white voters; to the point that he is apparently okay with dissing his own Pastor, should be enough to give you pause. This is what I, as well as Skeptical Brotha have been trying to communicate to you, since most of you say you're able to think for yourselves. We just wanted you to have the facts, and communicate our opinions about this brotha. We got flamed, accused of "crabs in barrel" mentality, etc., when your own responses to our posts appeared to continue suggesting a Jim Crow mentality that says Black people should celebrate "Black Faces In High Places".
After all, back in January, Mr. Obama had asked Mr. Wright if he would begin the event by delivering a public invocation.
But Mr. Wright said Mr. Obama called him the night before the Feb. 10 announcement and rescinded the invitation to give the invocation.
“Fifteen minutes before Shabbos I get a call from Barack,” Mr. Wright said in an interview on Monday, recalling that he was at an interfaith conference at the time. “One of his members had talked him into uninviting me,” Mr. Wright said, referring to Mr. Obama’s campaign advisers.
Some black leaders are questioning Mr. Obama’s decision to distance his campaign from Mr. Wright because of the campaign’s apparent fear of criticism over Mr. Wright’s teachings, which some say are overly Afrocentric to the point of excluding whites.
Bill Burton, a spokesman for the Obama campaign, said the campaign disinvited Mr. Wright because it did not want the church to face negative attention. Mr. Wright did however, attend the announcement and prayed with Mr. Obama beforehand.
“Senator Obama is proud of his pastor and his church, but because of the type of attention it was receiving on blogs and conservative talk shows, he decided to avoid having statements and beliefs being used out of context and forcing the entire church to defend itself,” Mr. Burton said.
Instead, Mr. Obama asked Mr. Wright’s successor as pastor at Trinity, the Rev. Otis Moss III, to speak. Mr. Moss declined.
It also means, just like the Edwards' camp, that the Democrats are going to cave in and run their campaigns like the ReThugs want them to, because they're complaining that Democrats aren't being "nice". Well, "Niceness" went out the door on Capitol Hill for twelve years, and really got nasty during the last six years of Bush Cartel rule. It's bullying and I will be glad when the Democrats grow a pair and tell the ReThugs to go to hell about how to run their own campaigns. Looks like Obama wants to play "nice" with the vipers in the snake pit.
And having Black Faces In High Places don't mean squat if said Black Faces are going to vote for and implement legislation and run the country in ways that because they are catering to corporate interests in exchange for money and personal favors - to the point that the Black Communities wholeheartedly supporting them get screwed over and over again.
If Barack Obama is an example of "New Black Leadership"... think about what I highlighted in red for your consideration. There is always something when a statement is divided by the word "But" that always indicates to me that the person is about to make a compromise in their "stand" or opinion. Sometimes, it qualifies the statement for clarification; but (LOL), it usually means they're about to backtrack on their previously stated position. There should be nothing that would not make Obama proud of his pastor...but, I digress.
You know the Rev. Al Sharpton was asked to weigh in on this and he didn't disappoint:
Exactly. If you can't stand by your own Pastor when it matters, you will cave in during a spring day when the temperature gets above 70 degrees.
In recent weeks, word of Mr. Obama’s treatment of Mr. Wright has reached black leaders like the Rev. Al Sharpton and given them pause.
“I have not discussed this with Senator Obama in detail, but I can see why callers of mine and other clergymen would be concerned, because the issue is standing by your own pastor,” Mr. Sharpton said.
For those of you who want to still support Obama after this, I say to you, "Thank God, we still live in a Democracy. That is your right." But, please, do not come to blogs with your whining and bellyaching when you feel as though you got screwed by your vote for Obama, because we've been like voices in the wilderness, giving you plenty of warning not to be taken in by Obama's bling.
Four years ago, when I first heard about Barack Obama, I had the Audacity to Hope that this brotha was on the real, and would be able to demonstrate to established sellouts like Harold Ford and Artur Davis that you could obtain National Office without engaging in the fine art of selling out.
How wrong I was. I won't go as far as calling him a "Harvard Law Grad Snake Oil Pimp" though I must admit, I'm sorely tempted.
Barack Obama is just another opportunistic politician who will once again take the African-American vote as his due, and for granted.
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
IF FOX HOSTS XENOPHOBES, WHY WOULD THE CBC CONSIDER THEM FOR HOSTING A PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE?
Uh, to possibly upstart Tavis Smiley, perhaps?
Consider what Americablog had to say on the subject:
Aravosis is on CNN. Coulter isn't -- she's hiding out at FOX News, a network that should not host a Democratic debate
by Joe Sudbay (DC) · 3/05/2007 07:58:00 PM ET
Discuss this post here: Comments (309) · digg it · reddit · FARK ·· Link
John is on Paula Zahn tonight. He'll be appearing throughout the hour. However, as John predicted, Coulter chickened out. Instead, she's appearing on the refuge of the right wing: Fox News. And, to top it off, she's going on Sean Hannity's show. Coulter will get some real tough questions over there, huh?
That Fox News where Ann Coulter feels so safe is also the Fox News that is hosting a Democratic candidates debate this summer in Nevada. Fox is a mouthpiece of the GOP and the right wing. And, if anyone had any doubt (not that anyone should), Ann Coulter's appearance there tonight confirms it. The network that gives comfort and cover to Ann Coulter doesn't deserve a Democratic debate. Matt Stoller explains more here. "Fox Attacks" and MoveOn have a petition here.
I'm hearing speculation from all sorts of quarters that Fox News is going to try and co-host a Presidential debate with the Congressional Black Caucus. If this comes to pass, it's a big deal, and a mistake by the CBC. But here's the thing we ought to realize. If it happens, it's partially our fault.First off, I want to know a couple of things:
(a) What jackass in the CBC did FOX approach in making the offer? He/she should be asked to resign their membership in the CBC, and there should be a recall effort on Chairwoman Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick for even considering going to Fox Network for any damned thing. Given their media history regarding CBC members (Maxine Waters and Cynthia McKinney come to mind here), why would the chicken go to the fox and ask for protection from Col. Sanders? Either way, that chicken is toast, because either the Colonel gets him, or the protector shows their true nature and eats him. So why would you think Fox is going to be "fair and balanced" in their coverage of CBC Members and the presidential debates?
(b) See question (a). I'm fresh out of reasons as to why the CBC thinks getting in bed with the Devil is a good idea. Consider this, if you will. Your erstwhile member, former Rep. Harold Ford, Jr. (D-TN) was a Fox News Media Darling. Then, during his Senate race, here comes some ads with some bimbo saying she met Harold at the Playboy Mansion and says, "Harold, call me!" Though you can't see where Fox may have had a hand in Harold's demise in the Senate race, I would bet dollars to donuts, that Rupert Murdoch funneled money to Ford's opponent, the junior Senator from Tennessee, Bob Corker. Ford thought Fox would be "fair and balanced" since they gave him all that media coverage, right?
I'm willing to bet that while they built him up as poster boy for "New Black Leader" they were also acting like the fox in the henhouse, ready to eat him alive. Ask if they ran that ad on their network. Yeah, it was probably to demonstrate their "faux outrage" at what was being done to Harold and his campaign, but if they loved him, they wouldn't have shown those ads; considering how Fox has this great tendency to report only what they consider "Fair And Balanced".
The fact that they constantly give Satan's wife, Ann Coulter, a free pass (especially when she called John Edwards a "faggot") says volumes about how they regard any and everybody who is of color, female, and most of all, LIBERAL.
So, why are the CBC considering going to Fox News for anything? Have they become xenophobes as well?
THE VALUE OF THE BLACK VOTE
The Value of the Black Vote is such that Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama went to Selma, Alabama this past Sunday to have a good, old-fashioned showdown. From Taegan Goddard's Political Wire:
African-Americans have a unique opportunity to make our vote work for us. Barack and Hillary are already demonstrating that our vote counts. But we should not leave it there.
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Barack Obama (D-IL) "came to an emotionally evocative touchstone of the civil rights movement Sunday seeking to strengthen their bonds with African American voters and tie their campaigns to the cause's unfinished work," the Chicago Tribune reports.
Sunday also "marked the first entrance into the presidential campaign by former President Bill Clinton, a popular figure with African-Americans whom writer Toni Morrison once called 'our first black president.' He avoided upstaging his wife at her speech by staying away from the church. But people cheered and rushed to be near him when he joined his wife and Obama for a re-enactment of the 1965 march."
The visit -- which we called the Showdown in Selma -- "became a proxy battle for black support between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama, whose candidacy represents a threat to Mrs. Clinton's traditional base," according to New York Times.
Verdict from the New York Daily News: "Barack Wins Battle of the Bridge"
The Montgomery Advertiser has video of the event and the Huntsville Times features a photo gallery.
We should also let them know that if we support them and they screw us over, that we have long memories of being screwed over by people we trusted (400+ years, to be exact). We should let them know that if they screw us over, we won't be as forgiving as usual - that schmoozing and a few kind words will put things right. That used to work for Rastus and Rufus, not Raheem, Charles, Jack and Jill or Skeptical Brotha.
They need to know that if they get the White House, we will be on them like a fly on stink. One wrong move, and we call in our chits (and we will have chits to call in, boys and girls). They need to know it will not be Business as Usual.
Especially Barack. Now that your "blackness" quotient has been settled, while we know you won't be the "President of Black America, but all of America", we are also demanding that you go in the House and do your job, because the POTUS is not a Carnegie Institute training class for you to "win friends and influence people". In short, don't be another "snake oil pimp"with a Harvard Law Degree, cause we're watching.