Prometheus 6

Many in the Black community are brain damaged. Her post is another in a line of proof, IMO.

White people hear the hope of not only improved lives from themselves but also the hope not having to deal the issue of race any more.

This makes Obama’s presidency particularly dangerous to the black community.

Look, if Black America gets that paper and works it the way other folk do, race will be dealt with on our terms, not on terms of begging and pleading. A different day, different tactics.

By the same reasoning:

Women hear the hope of having a woman president who will eliminate the gap between men and women in access to services, goods, resources and opportunities. Men hear the hope of not only improved lives for themselves but also the hope not having to deal the issue of sexism any more.

No, it's just all too scary. Let's keep letting the white men try--they'll get it right eventually.

Look, if Black America gets that paper and works it the way other folk do, race will be dealt with on our terms, not on terms of begging and pleading.

I enjoy your word choice.

Check this:

• Among those whose highest level of education was a high school diploma or equivalent, non-Hispanic white workers had the highest average earnings ($32,931), followed by Asians ($29,426) and blacks ($26,268). Average earnings of Hispanic workers in the same group ($27,508) were not statistically different from those of Asian or black workers.
• Among workers with advanced degrees, Asians ($88,408) and non-Hispanic whites ($83,785) had higher average earnings than Hispanics ($70,432) and blacks ($64,834).

They got the paper. What did they do wrong?

vrwhr g hr blm fr hw wht ppl pt n pstn t lck rsrcs nd hv r fmls dstrd. Hw cm m pr chns frnds d nt hv ths prblms? h, bcs th g t slp bfr mdnght, st mrd, wrk hrd nd stf nstd f crng. Bcs nstd f trng t bcm rpprs nd b bllrs th r hpp t hv rl jbs nd wrk hrd. knw wht trnd th Lwr st Sd rnd n Mnhttn? Th Chns. Nt th blck crck ddcts tht hrrssd s wh lvd thr bfr gntrfctn. Nt th hspnc hrn ddcts. Ddnt s Chns ppl n th strts hrssng ppl. Nt nc n 20 rs. Wh s tht?Wht bt thr blck nnr ct nghbrhds? Wnt t chllng ths kds t t ST nd t cdmc sn stdnts? bsss vr wht ppl. Gt rd t wtch sns, ndns nd Pkstns kck r ss cnmcll s wll s thm kckng wht ppl dwn 5 ws frm Frd. t s th blck mn tht mprgnts hs 18 r ld Gf nd lvs hrt s th blck mn tht hngs n strt crnrs nd crts nsprtn fr Sth Cntrl, Bz n th Hd nd Th Wr. Nt wht ppl. s stp crng, b lk th chns wh strt wth nthng whn th cm hr (sm wth th Jws f th rl 20th Cntr) nd gt t wrk! Crbb bstrds.

I had a choice: Delete, devowel or repeat the explanation of why you're wrong for the umpteenth time.

I chose door number two. 

Obama's candidacy is a GREAT opportunity.

See what's happening here though? Clinton isn't an option for me. Never was. Let's say she's flat out racist.

You know what? I don't care. That doesn't have a thing to do with how Obama will act as President towards my interest. But the discussion on her side (note to CLinton: it isn't RACE it's RACISM) and on his side (what's she's saying is she doesn't care about YOU because she's disrespecting ME) both ignore the critical needs that black people have.

He's running a play from the Jesse Jackson book. YES he's black. YES he's black in ways that matter symbolically (I, for instance DO care that he has a black wife and black kids). However at the same time this stuff will NOT get him my vote.

And I've already been turned off from Clinton.

So now what?

 

I guess you should be looking at Edwards.

But the discussion...on his side (what's she's saying is she doesn't care about YOU because she's disrespecting ME) both ignore the critical needs that black people have.

I do not believe I have heard that from the Obama campaign. Can you tell me where that was implied?

I guess you should be looking at Edwards.

McKinney is running on thr Green Party ticket. 

mckinney's incompetent.

if the huffington memo is accurate--someone in obama's camp is sending out memo's detailing each time that clinton is making comments that are deemed to be racially insensitive. it's over there now. in each case clinton isn't talking about black people per se, she (or someone else) IS talking about obama.

clinton's running the same scam with white women.

in both cases i could give less than a damn AS IT RELATES TO MY VOTE. 

mckinney's incompetent.

Just laying out your options...constraints and choices...

if the huffington memo is accurate--someone in obama's camp is sending out memo's detailing each time that clinton is making comments that are deemed to be racially insensitive.

Lesson learned from Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. They send out a memo on each attack. Thy have never said the attacks were on anyone but Obama.

It don't sound like you're gonna vote. I'm disappointed. 

you're joking right?

and yes the attacks were on obama. both penn's comments and cuomo's comments were explicitly racist. the others weren't (clinton thinks that his wife is stronger than mandela!). but obama didn't respond as much as he did get others to respond. and they have. russert has...and bill clinton had to go on sharpton's show to explain himself. assuming that brazile really doesn't have a dog in the hunt she responded.

and black bloggers have.

the central narrative in the response--to the degree that there is one--is simple. clinton's insulting black people...and their support for her is dropping.

(the swift boat groove was different in two important ways. first it wasn't bush but a 527. second no veterans felt they were being attacked because kerry was.)

now i want to go back to the hilary support thing. The two primary objectives of negative campaigning are to drop support for your opposition and increase your own support. obama seems to have done a little bit of both.

oh. not voting too is a choice. 

but that's what this is all about.

and again i don't support clinton the first, neither of them. john edwards is the best candidate of the three and it's not that close.

Regarding:

• Among those whose highest level of education was a high school diploma or equivalent, non-Hispanic white workers had the highest average earnings ($32,931), followed by Asians ($29,426) and blacks ($26,268). Average earnings of Hispanic workers in the same group ($27,508) were not statistically different from those of Asian or black workers.
• Among workers with advanced degrees, Asians ($88,408) and non-Hispanic whites ($83,785) had higher average earnings than Hispanics ($70,432) and blacks ($64,834).

They got the paper. What did they do wrong?

 

You would need to examine data reflecting the career fields of choice.

The last time I really looked at related data, there were SIGNIFICANTLY higher numbers of blacks in the public sector. That will certainly lower the income, however often increase the benefits. (retirement, vacation, insurance, etc) The same can be said for women. You will find there is NOT a discrepancy on salaries within the actual sectors, it is fairly competitive. But if compare a "personnel manager" from the Child Support Division's salary to the Personnel Manager at AnyTech BioMed, you will have a gap regardless of race, creed, or color.

you're joking right?

Nope. You've described a position in which you have no candidate that's acceptable to you. 

but obama didn't respond as much as he did get others to respond. and they have.

His campaign has responded to each charge. They haven't felt free to call a racist pig a racist pig in those responses. If he did his campaign would crash and burn.

russert has...and bill clinton had to go on sharpton's show to explain himself.

I don't think Obama scheduled Bill's appearance on MTP or Sharpton's show.

and black bloggers have.

He DAMN sure didn't get most of us to respond. 

the central narrative in the response--to the degree that there is one--is simple. clinton's insulting black people...and their support for her is dropping.

There you go. 

The two primary objectives of negative campaigning are to drop support for your opposition and increase your own support. obama seems to have done a little bit of both.

One would normally consider that an example of skilled politicking.

Except he hasn't done any negative campaigning. Unless you consider his responses to the Clintons' negative campaigning to be negative. I do not.

And as I said, I have no preference on whether folks who dump the Clintons vote for Edwards...hell, I mentioned Biden and Dodd. ABC - Anyone But Clinton.

Jan:

You would need to examine data reflecting the career fields of choice.

That all sounds reasonable, but do you know WHY Black folks' economic niche is civil service work?

Because the government committed to hire Black folks when no one else would. 

Boggs asked us to consider what a black politician was. In her estimation, and my own, the whole idea of black empowerment was to get a candidate who could and WOULD address issues of social justice and engage in a transformation of the political system.

What Obama is doing is changing the framework of political campaigns to allow for a discussion of racism. Fine. This is a step forward. And--unless the memo is fake--he IS doing this. He sends the memo out...and then people act on it. Russert acts by inviting Clinton on the show--and he didn't give a damn about racism when he had Cosby on. Sharpton acts by having CLinton on.

But the discussion has absolutely nothing to do with the way black people actually live their lives, and more to do with the hurdles he has to face as a presidential candidate. And again this decreases support for his prime opposition, and perhaps decreases willingness in support to critique his own positions. 

This IS normal politicking isn't it? Skilled, normal politicking, right? 

Right.

Is this what we want? 

 

But the discussion has absolutely nothing to do with the way black people actually live their lives

Whose discussion does, at this point? Cosby? 50 cent? 

To me a Black politician is a Black person that makes a living in politics. And it's smart to take advantage of knee-jerk reactions (it's not smart to try and fail at it though...).

I am not under the illusion that any single election is about Black liberation.

However, punishing those that offend is just as important as rewarding those that help. We can't be all carrot and no stick. Make your plans and analyses, but react to what actually happens as you plan, that's my motto.

Whose discussion does, at this point? Cosby? 50 cent?

Why did you present Boggs' article? Were you doing so because you agreed with it? For information? 

I have a very good idea of how long the process of organizing citizens for popular participation will take. At what point do we begin this process? How does Obama's candidacy represent an opportunity to advance this idea? 

This is about something a bit larger than carrots and sticks. That's not much different to me than the "positive" vs. "negative" news depiction argument. I understand why someone has to respond to Penn or Cuomo's comments. I get that. But let's say that instead of the racism Clinton's campaign continually referred to how groundbreaking Obama's candidacy was. They still ran against it of course, but they did so "respectfully".

Why or how would/should this matter?

Okay. On me:

Why did you present Boggs' article? Were you doing so because you agreed with it? For information?

For information. I respect good modelling and clear thought. It is relevant to the cross-blog group discussion that's going on. I felt it would be a good addition.

At what point do we begin this process?

Immediately, of course. But it's not so linear a thing that you can't do it while backslapping folks for being disrespectful. Maximize your current situation in a way that compliments, or at least doesn't obstruct, youe collective efforts.

Why or how would/should this matter?

1. Given the primacy of belief over knowledge in the USofA, running respectfully is a loser for the Clintons, and all the folks that supported him will feel empowered. Again, given the primacy of belief over knowledge, you can expect a surge of political activity similar to that which the progressive blogosphere kicked off among progressive white folks.
2. Either way, boundaries of decency will be established.

i forwarded you an email that brings together a couple of different pieces. I agree that folks should be backslapped. I also agree that this doesn't have to be a zero-sum game...backslapping folks doesn't have to come at the expense of presenting real stuff.

But it LOOKS like Obama is choosing one over another because he's much closer to the DLC policy wise than his message of hope would suggest. And to this degree the backslapping serves as an evasion. 

Okay, that wasn't what I expected. I was looking for something by Reed. I got two articles I'd already read.

Let me tell you why I'm on this mission. It's because if Clinton is punished in the South Carolina primary:

1. She will cut the shit
2. There will still be googobs of time to challenge Obama or whoever else

On the other hand, if voters accept that crap she and every other politician in the country will know casting your opponent as a 'typical Black' works.

the salon piece came out yesterday.

it is refreshing to see the racial tactics dealt with. but as you're well aware there's much more going on here.

 

I am aware.

It started last Monday in New Hampshire, when Clinton made an attempt to distinguish between her practical experience and Obama's lyrically potent message of "hope," and noted that while Martin Luther King Jr. nobly fought for change, "it took a president to get it done." Then came the "fairy tale" remark by former President Clinton, who now says he only used it to refer to Obama's claim that he's never wavered in his opposition to the Iraq war.

It didn't start there, you know...

Hillary's insult was to black Americans as a whole. It took black Americans marching in streets and protesting to wake this country up and to spur it to begin taking corrective actions.

i know it didn't start there. i'd say it had to have started before penn. but that trajectory isn't really of interest to me. 

ptc this is going to sound weird, because i have never supported sen. clinton or her husband. but i wasn't offended by sen. clinton's comment. i WAS offended by the constant reference to obama's drug use. i was also offended by cuomo.

and not to put too fine a point on it...but I AM black last i checked.

better to say that she offended a number of African Americans. probably older ones.