How Bush & Ahmadinejad punked the American public …

Did anyone find it kind of odd how silent President Bush was during Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s hot mess Manhattan visit and Columbia lecture?  You’d think he’d have quite a bit to say on the subject of yet another Middle East dictator being targeted for possible U.S. military action.  But, instead, we got a mouthful on American “moral outrage” over little known Burma.  We know where Burma is, we just didn’t know we were outraged about it ….

But, Bush was oddly silent amid the firestorm of protests, insults, slander and melee thrown in the face of the theocratic dictator, who was in full form with denials over obvious human rights abuses and a bizarre rejection of proven Holocaust atrocities.  In fact, we found him completely mum on the subject – with both men being in the same city, Bush should’ve been a man about the whole thing (don’t you think), did a face-to-face and stared the Persian cat down.  Our Texas bred president is so “gangsta” on camera, but he appears too timid when it comes to simply sizing his enemies up in the same room. 

We then figured that he really didn’t have to say anything because he’s got everybody else – Democrats included – working it for him.  And so, here we go again: mass hysteria and hype stampeding us into another misguided war, Part II.  We really know how to get caught up in the moment, and the Administration feels this; feeds off of it; uses it to its advantage.  Rather than let cooler heads prevail and, perhaps, punk the Iranian president by doing what he wouldn’t have expected (because, trust us, the way we acted this past week played right into his nefarious plan to be the HNME: Head Nucka of the Middle East), we got all wound up and wiled out.  Ultimately, we played into the present global perception of Americans as anti-Muslim and anti-everybody-else-who-doesn’t-do-it-our-way. 

Yeah: we should’ve snubbed Ahmadinejad.  He’s got issues, we agree.  But, we should’ve been chill about it. 

Instead, we chose to bug out.  The Administration is loving it because they won’t have to do the hard work to convince peeps that we should now go after Iran; which is one of the reasons that the collective American public (and, yes, mainstream media) is just as responsible as the Administration for Iraq because, once again, we failed to do our due dilligence.  We reject thoughtfullness and intellectual fortitude, and opt for stupidity and hyperbole.  Then we end up paying for it.

The Senate even jumped into the fray, passing a measure that urges the State Department to label the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization. A 76-22 vote.  Lot of Democrats jumped on that boat; go figure that they’re unable to pass any measures on U.S. troop withdrawals or de-funding of the Iraq War.  We agreed wholeheartedly with Senators James Webb (D-VA) and Christopher Dodd (D-CT), who both rejected the measure because they felt it “enabled” the president to get us snagged up again in another useless military action.   Props to the 22 Senators who were actually thinking yesterday. 

Being Black, Aloof & White …

There is a new breed of Black politician out there that’s got the poli-hack wire buzzing with sudden interest: the aloof

We’ve seen this term thrown around lately in describing presidential aspirant Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL).  It is, to date, the best explanation experts can offer for his lagging poll numbers which continue to drag further behind assumed front runner Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY).  The poll numbers are a nagging problem that has beset the candidate’s White House hopes despite the fact he’s raising the most money.  What’s up with that? pundits ask.

“Well – he’s too aloof,” they now say. 

Meaning he appears a bit detached from the working and average middle class, using – as one recent Chicago Tribune article put it – “professorial” tones to discuss critical policy topics before the masses.  This same characterization has also been used to describe Philadelphia Mayor-to-be Michael Nutter (D), as he struggles to find a connection with Philly’s disillusioned and rather unemployed and crime-riddled masses while describing sophisticated platforms and policy ideas.  

It’s a good point, especially considering the current economic climate and a need to discuss issues in a manner that is transparent and user-friendly.  But, it also suggests the permanence of an established Black professional and political class.  We continue to “arrive,” so to speak – which is what we wanted in the first place, right?  Not according to reported comments by professional foot-in-the-mouth Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sr. who claimed Obama might be “acting too White.”  So, now, not only do “smart” Black kids get tagged for “acting White,” influential and “aloof” Black public figures who appear aloof get no break either.  What is “acting White” anyway?  “Compared to what?” asked legendary West Coast jazz pianist Les McCann in his enduring 1969 classic.

Still, to be “aloof:” is it such a bad thing?  Frankly, we prefer a bit of intellectual reflection from our elected officials.  It’s especially refreshing to witness an African American public figure who can wax science with the policy wonks. 

Does it really explain Obama’s stagnant showing in the polls?  Or Nutter’s trouble in connecting to the gritty realities of working class Philly? 

One should be careful in such characterizations because we have to ask: is there an issue with these public figures being aloof because they can’t connect with the masses effectively?  Or: is there an issue with intelligent African American officials being ”aloof” and able to articulate on that level?  Those we question would vehemently deny the latter, we expect.  We say: check yourselves. 

But, the other problem with the “Aloof Label” is that it prompts the greater electorate to dismiss cogent policy-speak when it might be in our best interests to listen carefully.  If we don’t listen to what’s being said, we might find ourselves getting left behind. 

Instead, we select candidates based on appearance, appeal and feel-good mannerism. Remember what happened when half the country (allegedly) picked the “plain spoken” guy – twice – over the “aloof” guy?  Ultimately, we end up knowing little about where they stand on an issue (or if they even know anything about it) and end up paying for it.  This is an unfortunate state of affairs considering our collective predicament.     

The Convergence of the Hot Buttons …

This week has found itself molding into a pretty busy week in Black news and politics.  Everything centers around “race” this week as we are spinning in a headline soup of it. African Americans appear as a frequent headline on a potpourri of some of your most emotional racial topics:

 - Today, we are encouraged to wear black in observation of the embattled “Jena 6″ in Louisiana, their fate in the hands of a White prosecutors and deep Southern justice.  Tens of thousands of protesters are expected to converge on the small town of 3,000 today. 

- O.J. Part Two is now on and there are grumblings about whether he was set up.

- Republican presidential candidates, citing the notorious “scheduling conflict,” decide to diss Tavis Smiley’s PBS debate at Morgan State University.

- Rep. Bobby Rush (D-IL), Chair of the House Subcommmitte on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection will hold a hearing on stereotypes and derogatory images in Black entertainment with a major focus on hip hop.  We have yet to hear if he’ll be holding hearings on predatory lending practices, the credit crunch on working and middle class families or the rise of foreclosure rates, particularly in places like his district. 

- Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb is creamed in the media and by fellow Black quarterbacks for pointing out that African American quarterbacks face greater scrutiny than their White counterparts and have to work harder. 

- The George Washington home at Mount Vernon tops all of that with a cherry by unveiling what is described as “their highest profile” slavery exhibit: a 16 foot by 4 foot slave quarters cabin. 

What does this all mean? The Rev. Al Sharpton today calls the Jena 6 event the beginning of, perhaps, the ”21st century civil rights” movement.  This blog is a bit concerned by that characterization.  At current glance, the priorities seem a bit lopsided

For one, we question how these events are picked and prioritized.  On one level, Jena 6 is a daily, perhaps hourly occurrence in terms of the disparity of Black youth and, particularly, men being vilified and systematically castrated (yes – that’s a heavy word, but we’re going there) by the criminal justice system.  Not to mention those convicted who didn’t do anything or have no prior criminal record (let’s not forget that one of the Jena 6 has one of those).  So: how did this particular incident make it to the top of the list?  What sets this apart or makes it special?

Two: so what happened to the marches or outrage or protest in Newark, NJ and West Virginia.  The brutal rape, beating and torture of a Black woman in West Virginia by poor White trash racists is as ugly a violation of human rights as it gets – we’re left pondering in disgust why this wasn’t considered a federal hate crime and they only face state charges.  We’re also left wondering why thousands are in Jena, LA today and why, to date, we count none converging on West Virginia or even a knock on the door of its senior Democratic Senator (a former Klansman in his youth).  And, no feet on the streets of Newark, long mired in economic and social decay, in the wake of the brutal execution style killings of three promising African American college students. 

We’re trying to figure this all out.  

The convergence of highly emotional hot button headliners sparking protest is also of great concern.  We’re focused on quite a bit of symbolism when we’re in desperate need of attention to some very real, solid issues:

- Rising foreclosure rates in the wake of the housing slump are, in a very big way, impacting African American families on a large scale across the United States.  There are many Black families who are losing and will lose their homes;

- Our overcrowded, under-achieving, over-tested and decaying public schools – particularly in major urban centers with high concentrations of African Americans - are in serious need of real reform, rather than the template testing model everyone is playing into;

- African Americans are disproportionately targeted by predatory and payday lenders;

- Are we experiencing the sort of economic empowerment and asset growth we need to become competitive and on equal level with our White counterparts?  Are we financially literate? 

- How literate are our kids in reading, math, science, social studies, history?  Do we have a plan to make African American kids competitive enough to attend top colleges and universities (in the face of eroding diversity admissions policies) or are we simply satisfied with merely throwing them into HBCUs?  Do we have a plan to pay for rising higher education costs? 

- We are disproportionately impacted by a tsunami of major health issues, suffering from disparities in HIV/AIDS, diabetes, obesity, respiratory illnesses, domestic violence, alcohol and substance abuse and cancer.  Where is a collective preventive and primary health care plan? 

- Where are we on U.S. foreign policy throughout the African Diaspora to which we are, whether we like it or not, inextricably linked?  Where are we on Liberia, Sudan, rising Islamic fundamentalism in Africa, and trading with the Caribbean? 

There are other major issues, but to us these seem to truly define a movement for the 21st century. 

  

Why GOP Contenders Aren’t Showing up to a Black Debate …

BlackAmericaWeb’s Michael Cottman writes a solid and real comical piece on GOP presidential candidates withdrawing from Tavis Smiley’s PBS debate:

Several black Democrats said Monday it is unfortunate — but not surprising — that three Republican frontrunners have dropped out of next week’s presidential debate at Morgan State University to discuss issues that impact people of color.

Arizona Sen. John McCain, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney have all declined to participate in the debate at the historically black college in Baltimore.

Allright: let’s think about this for a moment and get real.  A few pertinent questions to ask.  First: If you were a Republican candidate, would you go to a debate in a room full of Black people at a Historically Black College/University in overwhelmingly Black Baltimore?  Common sense would tell you the answer to that. Smiley knows the answer to this and he keeps on with it. 

Second: If you were a Republican candidate, among many other Republican candidates, battling fiercely for the nomination of your party in a primary where only about 8% (perhaps even lower than that given the current President’s low approval ratings) of the Republican Party electorate is African American, then would you show up at a Black debate in a room full of Black people (who will be overwhelmingly Democratic) in a city where 80% of registered voters are Democratic?  Nuff said on that.  Smiley knows the answer to that question, too, but here is where cats like him like to play more style than substance. 

Third: Do Black people, on a large scale, contribute money to the Republican party or their candidates?  Do African Americans participate, en masse, in Republican party activities and events?  Do Black people have any clout in the Republican party?  You see where we’re going with this.  It’s a scene out of Bullworth: You didn’t contribute anything to my campaign. 

And so presidential candidates schedule their priorities accordingly.  Why even waste breath and time if there is no major effort on the part of Black folks to influence Republican party politics?  Because, on the real, that’s the only way the GOP will really ever change with respect to its relationship with African Americans. 

Of course GOP candidates wouldn’t show up.  It’s primary season: Black folks don’t vote in GOP primaries for the most part, so – if you were a Republican candidate – would you put any time and effort into making a Black debate?  Now during the general election, that’s a different story: practical political strategy suggests the GOP Presidential nominee should make every effort to form ties with Black voters since that person will need every swing vote they can get. 

Rather than finding creative ways to pimp his book and line-up of debates, Tavis Smiley (and others) need to give African Americans a true education about how politics really works.   So they snubbed us – so what?  What’s so different and shocking about that? 

The Abysmal State of Voting in Baltimore …

FYI from last week: the Democratic primary for Mayor of Baltimore was a joke.  Why?  Only 28% turnout in a city 79% Democratic, 60% African American.   Very sad state of affairs considering the shape Baltimore is in with a continuous high homicide rate and struggling public schools.  Not to mention the drug problem. And deficits continue to loom both citywide and statewide. Baltimore voters must be smoking something other than good sense to not even hit the 50% mark. Nuff said on that. 

A little bit of history made though: sisters in Baltimore dominating the political scene, with 3 being elected to top posts including Sheila Dixon as Mayor; S.

Here are the results:

Reflections on 9/11 & The “Petraeus Report” …

The unfortunate thing about the 6th anniversary of 9/11 is that its tragedy was marred by the politics being played out in earnest on Capitol Hill, as Ambassador Crocker and General Petraeus fend off Congressional inquiries into the progress of the troop “surge” in Iraq.  The political drama unfolding is difficult to trump, but some careful emotional and intellectual reflection on what 9/11 means six years later is in high demand whether we accept that or not. 

While on the “Petraeus Report” we are a bit confused as to why it is being called such, and not just for the obvious reason: that it is, by all accounts, a White House editorial on the progress of the president’s surge strategy.   Instead, we are just as amazed that the American public would accept the notion that a military officer (a soldier following orders) would actually be offering his own analysis of the situation when, at the end of the day, he is – by duty – supposed to answer to the Commander-in-Chief.  That the Administration misled the public into thinking it would get an untainted analysis from an active general is more proof of where this thing has gone and continues to go.  In essence, Petraeus is a soldier – he’s not supposed to have an opinion.  We make that observation as a matter of fact.  To expect otherwise is ridiculous.  Let’s be fair and real about that.  If we want that from Petraeus, we’ll have to probably wait till he retires.  If we continue to want that from active military personnel then we should prepare for the end of the armed forces as we’ve always known it. 

However, we are also stunned that a field commander would actually continue committing troops into battle after admitting that he’s uncertain how the situation in Iraq will turn out, whether the surge is having any lasting impact or about the exact nature of the mission given the deteriorating situation there. 

As far as 9/11, beyond the emotion of it, we are in need of a collective re-examination of America’s place in the world.  The tragedy is now against the backdrop of an enduring “War on Terror” with no end in sight.  Hence further reflection on who and what we are as an “empire” and our relationship with the world.  There is a need to be honest with ourselves about that and how that will influence future outcomes. 

Gonzo, Craig – Winners & Losers ….

Republican political guru and hack mastermind Mary Matalin poses a key question on this week’s Meet the Press in relation to the Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) scandal: “Why does this have so much glue?”

The obvious answer, of course, deals with the innate hypocrisy of a party dominated by public figures who represent a hardline family values platform, yet engage in scurrilous activity in their private lives.  This issue is being bantered about and regurgitated excessively these days, so we won’t spend too much time on that.  However, journalists and ethicists alike are debating whether its necessary to headline a politician’s personal misdeeds as a matter of responsible journalism.  Although no one’s personal life, including a politician’s, is not the business of public discourse, elected officials who wave the family values banner in an effort to corral working-class White religious votes are playing Russian Roulette if their spot is blown. 

But, who was the winner this scandal-ridden dog days of humid August?  Believe it or not, there is.  President Bush stands to gain since we’ve noticed some heat lifted off the impending Iraq Progress Report; in this case, the stars appear to align for the embattled president.  The departures of loyalists Karl Rove and Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez can potentially shift focus from White House culpability in the politicization of the Justice Department to the actions of zealous political advisors.  Proof of Bush’s direct participation in the DOJ firings, in the wiretapping hustle and the destruction of the DOJ Civil Rights office will erode through the end of his Presidency; we’ll discover the true extent of this participation in history books and unauthorized biographies. 

The Gonzales resignation will naturally trigger a mad search for a replacement AG. Bush is certain, in usual form, to go with the combative pick since that will effectively deflect attention from a significant milepost in his presidency: the Iraq Progress Report.   The Craig debacle and subsequent resignation has deflected public attention from this critical report and we find ourselves immersed in the gladiator pit rather than paying attention to real issues which fester outside the stadium.  Interestingly enough, there is a larger inability for the Congress to seriously address the growing threat of recession as stocks violently fluctuate in response to convulsing housing market.

Craig’s downfall will also spark a renewed round of conservative street-cred measuring contests as GOP presidential candidates will desperately seek to patch that sucking sound in the wake of Graig, Vitter, Gingrich and others who ran afoul of their public morality positions.