The Forgotten Man

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE The Forgotten Man Every since Barack Obama's Father's Day Speech, there's been an ongoing debate about the need for more Black fathers to step up to the plate. But as usual, there's a forgotten man in this discussion, and admittedly, we've been remiss in giving him his due. I'm speaking of the millions of Black men across this country who literally relish their role as father. Too often we forget these men, and the many hardships they often endure in carrying out their responsibility. After the discussion on deadbeat dads, I was literally deluged with horror stories from Black men who have made every effort to do the right thing only to be confronted by a cold, heartless, and dehumanizing system that seems to work overtime to frustrate them at every turn. I may have been remiss, but I want to assure you that I'm fully aware of this situation--in fact, one of the most unconscionable of these scenarios is currently playing out in my own family: I met Jeffery Whitmore when he was about twelve years old. He's my late wife's younger brother. Even when he was a child, in spite of the fact that he grew up in the middle of the 'hood, and I still viewed the world through the eyes of a gangster, it wasn't lost on me that this young man was on the right track. And even then, I understood why–because he was being raised by people who were dead serious about raising their kids. Parenting wasn't a hobby with them. His father, Broadis, wasn't a highly educated man, but he had that old-school character, and was flawless in his role as a father. In fact, while I didn't know it at the time, later he would served as a role model that I would emulate while raising my own children. Jeff's mother, Katie, was also of good character, but of a different sort-- highly intellectual, loved children, and absolutely fixated on education. I would have put her up against any professional in the field when it came to childhood development. So it wasn't his own dysfunction, but a background of excellence that put Jeffery Whitmore on a collision course with a highly dysfunctional system. After Katie's own kids had grown up and left the nest, she decided to become a foster parent. She was semi-retired, and according to Jeff, "she needed fulfillment in her life." Jeff warned her not to become too attached to the kids, because "you'll try to adopt everyone you care for." According to Jeff, she assured him that she had it under control, but shortly thereafter, ended up adopting two of the four children that she cared for. Shortly after she adopted the youngest child she was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease and her health began to rapidly deteriorate. About two years later she had to be placed in a convalescent home, so Jeff, and his sister, Kathy, stepped forward to care for the children, and therein begins a story about the other side of Black manhood. Prior to all of this taking place, Jeff had gone on to graduate from USC, then obtained a Master's degree from the University of LaVerne. He was living the American dream–a handsome young man, single, highly educated, a good job (Revenue Manager for the City of Los Angeles) and plenty of security. He'd paid all of the necessary dues, so no one could have blamed him if he just drove around in his sports car and chased women for the rest of his life. But being true to his character, he put much of that on hold, and yield to the call of responsibility when the future of these two children came into jeopardy. But it wasn't long before he was smacked in the face by an unyielding, and irresponsible bureaucracy. Since he wasn't the kids' legal guardian, there was the problem of obtaining healthcare and enrolling them in school, so he consulted an attorney. He was advised that he would first have to have his mother declared incompetent, requiring a hearing, which would cost approximately $5,000. Then he would have to go to court again to actually adopt the children. That would cost an additional $6,000. That seemed prohibitively expensive, especially since all he was trying to do was step up to the plate, so he decided to explore other options. So he went to the Department of Children and Family Services at 3075 Wilshire Blvd., in Los Angeles. He related his story and was told that there was nothing they could do. The matter needed to be resolved through the courts. Eventually he wrote a letter to the California Superior Court, but they suggested that he resolve the matter with the county before proceeding. Then in 2004 Jeff was contacted by Medi-Cal, advising him that the childrens' primary medical care was being provided through his mother's healthcare provider. That's effectively left the children without healthcare insurance for the past four years. After his mother's death in 2007, he informed the county and requested post-adoption assistance be transferred over to him, as per his mother's living trust. He was then transferred to Post Adoptive Services, where he was advised that adoptive assistance was not transferable. He was then informed that he would need to file for legal custody of the children, and also advised that he would probably owe the county for payments made to his mother. So he filed for custody, but since he made too much money for court fees to be waved, he found himself in the position of paying, to put it in his words, "$1,040 for the privilege of caring for children I did not sire." In addition, he ended up returning eight un-cashed checks, totaling $4, 368, along with a personal check in the amount of $2,184 to cover funds the county claimed that he wasn't entitled to. In a letter that Jeff wrote the county he pointed out that bureaucrats are always mouthing what's "in the best interest of the children", while acting in direct contravention to that end. He points out the following: "If I'd decided I simply didn't want to assume this responsibility, I could [have] just called the county and you'd literally come to my house and pick the boys up. You'd likely place them in a group home and pay the group home thousands of dollars a month vs. the $546 my mother received for continuing support, and that I no longer receive; and you certainly would have restored their Medi-Cal coverage IMMEDIATELY!" He went on to say, "Yes, I could have played the game and let you pick them up. [But] you and I know that as the closest relative, you would have [soon] been begging me to take them back, and would have paid me far more than $546 a month. But in my mind, it was not 'in the best interest of the children' to move them unnecessarily." 'The best interest of the children'--"See, I remembered!" So yes, we do have irresponsible Black men in the community, and it's quite appropriate for us to demand that they step up to the plate; but it's just as appropriate to demand that our government be proactive in acting with competence, dispatch, and deliberate purpose in support of the many responsible Black men who do. This matter has been referred to Supervisor Yvonne Braithwaite-Burke. Let us hope she can bring some sanity to this situation. Eric L. Wattree Stay on top of what's going on around you. From Hip Hop to world and national news--stay informed about those things that impact both the Black community and the entire world, as interpreted by Dr. Boyce Watkins and some of the nation's top Black writers. Stay in touch with Your Black World www.yourblackworld.com/. It's our piece of the net.

YOUR BROTHER IS THE ONE WHO THINKS LIKE YOU

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE YOUR BROTHER IS THE ONE WHO THINKS LIKE YOU The raging controversy over Barack Obama addressing the issue of irresponsible fathers in the Black community, clearly demonstrates that many of the old-school thinkers in the community are living in a time warp. We now have a Black man who is very likely to be the next President of the United States, yet there are those in the community who want him to keep quiet about the fact that we have soiled toilet paper hanging from our inaugural tux. Instead of saying, "Thanks, let me clean up my act", they're saying, "Why are you picking on me–I saw a White boy with do-do on him too–why didn't you say something to him?" I call these people the "Devil worshipers". While these people often refer to the collective White establishment as the Devil, they wake up thinking about him, and go to bed thinking about him. They think the White man is all seeing, all knowing, and control every aspect of our lives. They're convinced that he has total control over what we learn, what we can't learn, how we act, and whether or not we can feed our families. While these people generally speak of the White man with either aggressive or dismissive disdain, they fail to recognize that their ceaseless preoccupation with him is actually a form of worship. That explains why they're so upset with Obama. They claim that by his saying that Black fathers need to step up to the plate, Obama is "stereotyping" Black men. But they know better than that. They're simply trying to rally Black support behind a false issue. Clear evidence of that is the fact that while they're up in arms about the issue of deadbeat dads being addressed, they have absolutely no criticism whatsoever about the behavior itself, or the fact that it's being celebrated in millions of videos being sent around the world as representative of Black manhood. Both are clearly doing more to stereotype Black men than anything anyone, including Obama, can say. So is it really Black stereotyping that they're concerned about, or is it actually Barack Obama himself? I'd say it's the latter. They're actually trying to camouflage their unacceptable belief that no Black man with the gathering power of Barak Obama can be trusted. In their eyes, since the White man is the Devil, and the Devil is evil, any Black man who is allowed to gain true power in this society must also be evil–he's made a deal with the Devil, as it were. The problem with that philosophy is that it perpetuates the belief that a Black man has a moral obligation to avoid influence in order stay pure, and to prove his loyalty to Black people. But if we follow that reasoning to its logical conclusion, it suggests that a Black man's place is on the bottom. That attitude is directly responsible for the crabs-in-a-barrel syndrome that we often see played out in the Black community. It is one of our most pernicious psychological shackles left over from our history of slavery. This attitude also explains why, in spite of a proven creative genius in the arts, Black youth tend to struggle academically--many feel they have a vested interest in academic failure. The reason for that mindset is that many Black people associate academic excellence, along with developing such disciplines as the ability to speak proper English, with being anti-Black. We've developed this attitude because during slavery, the only Blacks that field slaves knew who spoke proper English were the house slaves, and they were looked upon with disdain, because the house slaves tended to look down their noses at the slaves who worked the fields. As a result, even though many Blacks fail to realize it on a conscious level, a negative attitude has been passed down through the years towards anything that reminds us of the house slave–and that includes articulate speech, attempts at upward mobility, and the desire for academic excellence. The argument above also explains one of the reasons you hear so many Black Ph.Ds on national television quoting Tupac instead of Langston Hughes. Essentially, it's a public apology for being a seeker of knowledge. The message is, "Yeah, I've got an education, but don't worry about it--I'm still one of you." The argument also brings into focus the question of whether Barack Obama was "Black enough", and why there's so much pressure on Obama to attend functions like Tavis Smiley's "State of Black America" and Jesse Jackson's "Operation Push"–they want him to prove that he hadn't been "tainted" by his pursuit of excellence. We've got to get away from this kind of thinking--first, because it sends our young people the message that they have a moral obligation to remain ignorant and on the bottom rung of society in order to prove their worthiness as truly Black. And secondly, it leaves us unprepared to face the new realities of the world around us. White people, for the most part, have moved on to face reality. They're beginning to realize that the new battle is not about race, it's about economics, and class. Even those who didn't know it before, have learned in the last seven years that the powers that be don't care any more about poor and middle class White folks than they do Black people. That's the realization that made Barack Obama possible. The White community has come to recognize that it's not just Black people who are paying over four dollars a gallon for gas, and it's not just Black people who losing their homes as a result of subprime mortgages--everybody's throat is being cut by the neocons. They've come to realize that if we continue to let the corporate class divide us by race, we'll all be back in the fields–both Black and Whites. The most telling indication of that is the war in Iraq. That war is being fought almost exclusively by the poor and middle class. While Bush, Cheney, and the new corpo-political class are waving their flags, and handing out medals and coffins, their family, relatives, and friends are cheering on the dying poor over martinis in the lobby of plushly appointed country clubs. Not one of their family members have been wounded or killed by this war that's subsidizing their lifestyle. That's why many of the poor and middle class--Black, White, Brown, Red, and Yellow people--are on their third and fourth tours of duty, and not being allowed to leave the military when their enlistments are up. Essentially, they're being held hostage so the lives of the rich won't have to be sacrificed. And consider John McCain's statement regarding why he was against the new G.I. bill. He said, that he was against it because if we made it easier for G.I.s to get an education, they'd leave the military and we wouldn't have anyone to fight the war. He couldn't have been any more clear than that–we need poor people to fight the war. But as bad as things are, this is the first time that Black people have had anything close to a level playing field. Now that the world is in chaos, and everybody's hurting, it's time for Black people to put our best foot forward. We need to stop worrying about the superficialities of image, and start dealing with substance. We need to redefine who we are, reassess our cultural mores, and start seriously addressing the issues that will bring stability into the community. We've got to organize, and start rewarding our children based on how well they can read, do math, and think, as oppose to only stroking them for how well they can dance, shoot a basketballs, or imitate popular rappers. We need to teach our daughters to admire dedicated and focused young men, as opposed to aimless gangsters prone to dropping babies, and hanging out on the block. We need to enlist our churches to hire unemployed mothers to provide low cost childcare for working mothers. The BET Awards should be used to honor our young Black scholars, as opposed to giving out awards to those who corrupt our community. And finally, we should use our dollars to support excellence in the community, and see to it that there is no monetary reward for those who seek to profit from our corruption. These are the things that we should get worked up about. Once we begin to pursue excellence, we won't have to be worry about being stereotyped, because a negative stereotype won't fit the new reality. And once we began to see the struggle we've endured as a source of knowledge that makes us more, rather than less, we'll be able to look back upon our history, including slavery, with the pride of a people who have persevered against tremendous odds. We've got to begin to see ourselves as independent, yet an integral part of this society. Because as many in the White community have already started to realize, we're now living in a world where it doesn't matter what color you are. People like Bush, Cheney and the corporate Halliburtons of the world want to subjugate us all. Thus, this new reality demands a new way of thinking, that is, if we want to survive. And that new way of thinking involves clearly recognizing that your mind is the essence of your being. While the color of your skin may suggest a common heritage that makes it likely that you can bond as brothers, that's not always the case–people like Clarence Thomas and Larry Elder immediately comes to mind, in that regard. Therefore, the lesson that must be learned, is your brother is not always the one who looks like you; your true brother, is the one who thinks like you. So let's pull our heads out of the 19th century, and prepare to deal with the new challenges ahead. Eric L. Wattree wattree.blogspot.com Stay on top of what's going on around you. From Hip Hop to world and national news--stay informed about those things that impact both the Black community and the entire world, as interpreted by Dr. Boyce Watkins and some of the nation's top Black writers. Stay in touch with Your Black World www.yourblackworld.com/. It's our piece of the net.

Jesse Jackson on Obama: 'Wanna Cut His Nuts Off"

IN RESPONSE TO DR. BOYCE WATKINS
ON THE JACKSON REMARK

The only good thing about both Obama lovers and haters alike being upset with me, is that it should give me a little bit of credibility regarding not having a vested interest in anything but truth.

The fact is, I have a problem with both Obama lovers and haters, because, as I see it, both groups are motivated by shortsighted and superficial agendas. Obama lovers are so deeply in love with the idea of having a Black superstar for president that they're closing their eyes to the fact that Obama lied to us, and did the moonwalk on one of the most important issues that's come before congress in the history of this nation. And Black people who are Obama haters seem to hate him because either they resent that his prominence in the nation and Black community serves to diminish their own accomplishments as Black people, or they resent the fact that he's addressing issues in the Black community that they've refused to face for the past 40 years.

As for Jackson, I don't see how he could have even mouthed the words "talking down to Black people" without biting his own tongue off. He's been talking down to Black people for the past 40 years–that's one of the reasons that a large number of Black people are so critical of him, that along with his tendency to be self-serving and disingenuous. For 40 years he's been acting like Black people are incapable of grasping a serious concept unless it's couched in a nursery rhyme–"from the outhouse to the White House." And for 40 years he's been telling Black people to "repeat after me, I am somebody", as though we don't know that.

And further, one of the reasons that Obama had to address the issue of Black fatherhood is because, for 40 years Jesse has been pimping Black people by telling them that we can lay all of the problems in the Black community at the White man's door, and he's the only one in the community that can speak the White man's language. If the White man ever said that he was going to step up to the plate and correct all of the harm he's done to the Black community, it would have been Jesse's worse nightmare. Then, he'd have had to get a job like everybody else.

And there's a word for a brother who grins in your face, then sit up and whisper behind your back--it's right on the tip of my tongue, but I'm going to refrain from using it through respect for the sensibilities many of our brothers and sisters. But everybody knows where I'm going with this, and what I'm referring to. That's why it's so silly to try to ban the use of a word--because the concept remains live and well, it just deprives you of a useful descriptive tool.

Now, to address you're other issues. I've truncated them in many cases, but I attached the full text at the end of this response:

1). “I am not sure if we should be so quick to believe that a Black president can replace every Black leader in America. As I've asked before, who is going to show up for the next Hurricane Katrina or Sean Bell shooting?”

First, we don't need Black leaders–we need Black thinkers. One voice can't speak for millions. We need to educate ourselves, so millions of voices can speak as one. That'll take care of both the Jackson and Obama problem.

2). “Let's not forget that there is a difference between the hatred Rev. Jackson is receiving in the blogosphere and so-called mainstream media (almost none of which is owned by Black people) vs. What is happening in the street. When I put my ear to the street, there is a concern that Senator Obama is not prepared to truly represent the interests of rank and file, working Black folks.”

That's mere speculation. We don't know what kind of president Obama will be–but we do know what kind of president McCain will be. So to even speculate about such an issue is a part of the crabs-in-the-barrel syndrome.

3). “Senator Obama (again, whom I support) is, in many ways, like most other politicians. The reason he felt comfortable stereotyping black men (whether you agree with his comments or not) and no other ethnic group is because he knew there would be little negative political consequence for doing so, but tremendous benefit from those who already think Black males are immoral (note that Bill O'Reilly congratulated him on his speech).”

Of course he's like other politicians–that's what he is. What are we suppose to be waiting for the Messiah? And he's not stereotyping Black men, we're stereotyping ourselves with our behavior, and on videos right there on BET. He's simply telling us to wake up, and I stand with him 100% in that regard.

4). “If you want to be nit-picky about Senator Obama's position on Black fathers, we cannot presume that he "can relate to the issue" because he was abandoned by an African American man. Obama's father was KENYAN. So, as a black man, it's hard enough to defend the silly stuff that happens here without being forced to account for what someone did across the sea. That is like holding white males accountable for what a man did in the Ukraine.”

Man, what is that about? I can't believe that someone of your caliber even wrote something like that. Dr. Watkins, I know that at some point during your educational career you took syllogistic logic. Are you now seriously telling me that the trauma of being bit by a dog differs depending on what country the dog came from?

5). “I would not presume that Rev. Jackson's challenge to Obama implies that he doesn't advocate for personal responsibility. Anyone who has heard Rev. Jackson speak knows that he is very conservative in his value systems.”

Then, why is he slacking in his own personal responsibility? Don't preach me a sermon, live me one.

“Finally, let's love ourselves. I am not a fan of the idea of denouncing strong blackness just because the words make others uncomfortable.”

Then, let's not criticize Obama for telling Black deadbeats to get off their ass.

“Getting into the big white house on the hill is a good thing, but we must remember that the ultimate goal is to get off the plantation. We only do that through education and economic empowerment. There really is no other way.”

Wait a minute, are you stereotyping Black people as undereducated plantation dwellers? Many White people are undereducated too. Why aren't you telling them that?

You see how ridiculous it can become when you choose to be offended? In the end, nobody will be able to say anything without being attacked.

Eric L. Wattree



Dr. Boyce Watkins :

I'm set to appear on the Jesse Jackson Show tomorrow morning at 8 am, along with one of my esteemed colleagues, Dr. Marc Lamont Hill. I am sure I don't have to tell you the topic of the discussion, since we all know that Rev. Jackson's unfortunate slip on Barack Obama has kept the world churning as of late.

I should make these quick points on the issue, so you can understand my perspective. This point of view came from personal reflections, extensive conversations with individuals in media, politics, and leadership and even a good conversation with my mama (please feel free to share your thoughts with me as well). I love my mama. What is most interesting is that she complains about Jesse Jackson more than she compliments him (the same for my father, a high ranking police official). But she made a good point that it's easy for us to attack people for what they are not doing when the truth is that most of us aren't doing anything. Remember that Jesse was #3 on the list of world leaders most likely to be assassinated (behind the President and the Pope). He has sacrificed for our community, and although I have critiqued him myself in the past, I consider him to be an elder worthy of respect. It was his landmark run for the White House that cleared the path for Senator Obama to do what he is doing today. I will never forget that.

Here are my thoughts:

1) I am not sure if we should be so quick to believe that a Black president can replace every Black leader in America. As I've asked before, who is going to show up for the next Hurricane Katrina or Sean Bell shooting? I will give you a hint, it may not be Barack Obama (his response to the Sean Bell shooting was quite weak, to be honest). This doesn't mean that Obama shouldn't get our vote, but you can't throw out your mama just because you have a new daddy. The fight for Black people should be multi-dimensional in nature.

2) Let's not forget that there is a difference between the hatred Rev. Jackson is receiving in the blogosphere and so-called mainstream media (almost none of which is owned by Black people) vs. What is happening in the street. When I put my ear to the street, there is a concern that Senator Obama is not prepared to truly represent the interests of rank and file, working Black folks. Not the hoity-toity of us who went to college and make enough money to (uncomfortably) afford the high price of gas. But rather, those who don't worry about the price of gas because they can't afford to buy a car. This reflects a clear division between the haves and have-nots, implying that we are as diverse as any other group of people. What is most challenging for me is that while I supported many of Senator Obama's positions on the BET shoot we did last weekend, I am concerned that other interest groups may move him toward anti-Black agendas in the White House. Jesse may have wanted to cut his n*tts off, but it appears that others may have his n*tts in a vice grip already (excuse my French, but I have to tell it like it is).

3) Senator Obama (again, whom I support) is, in many ways, like most other politicians. The reason he felt comfortable stereotyping black men (whether you agree with his comments or not) and no other ethnic group is because he knew there would be little negative political consequence for doing so, but tremendous benefit from those who already think Black males are immoral (note that Bill O'Reilly congratulated him on his speech). He would not, however, take the same tone with AIPAC (the pro-Israel lobby) no matter how questionable their policies (they could have a 100% fatherless rate and he wouldn't say a word). Why is that? Because they are mobilized, organized and well-funded. African Americans must become engaged and educated in the political process in order to become well-funded and sufficiently mobilized to ensure that our interests are protected. Asking Barack Obama to help black folks is like borrowing money from a loving relative: charity will get you so far, but ultimately, you have to make it worth their while to keep supporting you. It would be selfish and silly to expect otherwise.

4) If you want to be nit-picky about Senator Obama's position on Black fathers, we cannot presume that he "can relate to the issue" because he was abandoned by an African American man. Obama's father was KENYAN. So, as a black man, it's hard enough to defend the silly stuff that happens here without being forced to account for what someone did across the sea. That is like holding white males accountable for what a man did in the Ukraine.

5) I would not presume that Rev. Jackson's challenge to Obama implies that he doesn't advocate for personal responsibility. Anyone who has heard Rev. Jackson speak knows that he is very conservative in his value systems. Actually, the only things that make him liberal are that he speaks for black people, stands up for the poor, and believes in stronger gun control. I don't defend his remarks against Obama, but my belief is that, again, we should think carefully before trading in 40 years of sacrifice for a few speeches on hope and change. I will vote for Obama, but I want to wait and see if he does the right thing for us, or allows other groups (some of whom dislike African Americans) to control his actions. What you believe is not as important as what you do.

Finally, let's love ourselves. I am not a fan of the idea of denouncing strong blackness just because the words make others uncomfortable (that doesn't include Rev. Jackson's comments this week, but rather, the words of Jeremiah Wright and others who speak out on racial inequality). Getting into the big white house on the hill is a good thing, but we must remember that the ultimate goal is to get off the plantation. We only do that through education and economic empowerment. There really is no other way.

Dr. Boyce Watkins

Stay on top of what's going on around you. From Hip Hop to world and national news--stay informed about those things that impact both the Black community and the entire world, as interpreted by Dr. Boyce Watkins and some of the nation's top Black writers. Stay in touch with Your Black World www.yourblackworld.com/. It's our piece of the net.

OBAMA HAS MY SUPPORT-- AS LONG AS HE REMEMBERS WHO’S THE BOSS

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE OBAMA HAS MY SUPPORT AS LONG AS HE REMEMBERS WHO'S THE BOSS I'm both a progressive and Obama supporter, so it goes without saying that I'm deeply disappointed with his reversal on the FISA issue. But the mere fact that Sen. Obama felt it both safe, and necessary, to moonwalk this issue after stating unequivocally that "I am proud to stand with Senator Dodd, Senator Feingold and a grassroots movement of Americans who are refusing to let President Bush put protections for special interests ahead of our security and our liberty", says just as much about what we've allowed our political process to become, as it does about Sen. Obama's inability to stand firm on the convictions that he said he was so proud to embrace. I am vehemently opposed to any politician giving political expedience priority over principle, so while I don't excuse Obama for his lack of backbone, I do understand why he reversed himself on this issue. The fact is, we've become so apathetic, lazy-minded, and uninformed as an electorate that even when a politician wants to be guided by principle, he has to rely on deceit just to navigate our stupidity. If Obama had voted against FISA, the Republican spin machine would have played on our ignorance to convince us that "he doesn't love America." They would have neglected to tell us that passing FISA was one step away from giving the government the right to go through our home and papers while we're at work, without a warrant, and then possibly arresting us on what they found, thereafter. They would have simply accused Obama of being soft on terrorism, and we would have bought it–just as we bought into Bush's claim that the best way to catch Osama Bin Laden was to go to Iraq and seize the oil, even though Osama was living quite comfortably in Afghanistan. If we'd been an informed electorate, it would have been perfectly clear to us that Bush didn't care about 9/11, or the Americans who were killed. All Bush and Cheney cared about was the oil, and the political advantage they would gain by seeming to fight for American interests as they stole that oil. And the irony is, as it turned out, they didn't even have to take the oil, all they had to do was disrupt the flow, and that allowed them to rob both America and Iraq, with our empty-minded blessing. Think about it–our young people are dying–at least, the poor and middle class--the nation is in the grip of what is rapidly sliding into a depression, and who's the only ones living high on the hog? That's right, the oil companies–making record profits. And who's leading this nation? Right again, oil men. How dumb do we have to be not to be able to connect the dots? But we placed ourselves in this situation--with gas rapidly approaching five dollars a gallon, as we lose our homes, our parents unable to afford the drugs that keep them alive, and our tax dollars going towards propping up Wall Street millionaires--by becoming so enamored with politicians that we began to see them as leaders, and superstars, instead of what they are meant to be–our employees. We find ourselves in this condition due to the blind devotion of Bush supporters, and the Democratic Party doing exactly what they did on FISA–caving in. And now, Obama supporters are doing the very same thing–allowing the tail to wag the dog, by assuming that he has more sense than we do. Immediately after the FISA debacle, one of the most intelligent men I know called me with a long, drawn-out scenario on how Obama intends to outsmart the Bush administration by voting for FISA. It took him twenty minutes to lay it out, and it was as convoluted as a pre-Copernican description of the solar system. When he was done I suggested that I had a much better explanation, and a much shorter one –the brother caved-in. Instead of wasting out time trying to make excuses for these politicians, we need to be spending it letting them know that we're not going to tolerate them putting their own political careers ahead of what's in the best interest of the country. We need to help this brother to understand, right now–before he gets into office–that we're not interested in a superstar. We intend to elect an employee–and we expect him to act like one. If we say, vote no–dammit, we mean, NO! If he wants to think, he can use his intellect to figure out how best to carry out our instructions. But when it comes to issues that the people have come to a consensus on, we want him to act like he's sitting on our knee with our hand in his back. That's the way the founding fathers intended this country to be run. They were quite specific--they said, "of the people, by the people, and for the people." Period. They didn't say nothing about acting in a politician's best interest. Obama moonwalked this issue because he's more afraid of the opposition than he is his base--and the reason for that is that we've already shown that we don't have a backbone either, by not throwing Nancy Pelosi out of office when she refused to initiate impeachment hearings on Bush. If we had, I guarantee you that Obama wouldn't have voted the way he did. What Democrats are failing to recognize is by always legislating with an eye on not angering the Republicans, all we're going to get is Republican legislation. Republican politicians know better than to cross their base, because Republicans will vote them out in a heartbeat. It's about loyalty--Republican politicians do what they're told, and their base shows up to vote. That's why they win elections, and that's why the nation is constantly moving to the right. On the other hand, Obama thought that he had to moonwalk the FISA issue because he was afraid that if he didn't, Republicans would be able to convince the American people that he's too weak to face our enemies. But what Democrats fail to realize, is voting to preserve the Constitution doesn't make you weak. The primary reason that the American people see Democrats as weak, is because they lack the backbone to defend their own principles. The American people are absolutely justified in wondering if Democrats can be trusted to face up to our enemies--if they can't even stand up to the Republicans, how can we possibly trust them to stand up to a terrorist attack? We have a situation where progressives are supporting politicians who have little faith in either their supporters, or the legitimacy of the progressive agenda. Evidence of that is, in spite of the fact that there's been a thunderous clamor among progressives that Bush be brought up for impeachment, Bush's job approval is at 28%, and Rep. Dennis Kucinich spent over five hours listing 35 articles of impeachment against the Bush/Cheney administration, the Democratic congress has been more effective than Bush's own lawyers in seeing to it that this very important issue is buried in committee. And now, even though this is one of the most unpopular presidents in the history of this nation, he still had enough strength to cower this Democratic congress into acting as an accomplice in covering up a gross violation of the fourth amendment of the United States Constitution. The problem is, progressives have been so apathetic and lax in their vigilance for so long, that we're no longer electing statesman. We're electing politicians to office whose only concern is their own political careers. We've got to change that immediately, or risk creating a political class that sees us as totally insignificant--if it's not already too late. "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." Thomas Jefferson Eric L. Wattree wattree.blogspot.com Stay on top of what's going on around you. From Hip Hop to world and national news--stay informed about those things that impact both the Black community and the entire world, as interpreted by Dr. Boyce Watkins and some of the nation's top Black writers. Stay in touch with Your Black World www.yourblackworld.com/. It's our piece of the net.

AS WE TURN OUR BACKS ON OUR CULTURE

LOOK AT WHAT'S HAPPENING AROUND THE WORLD AS WE DENIGRATE OUR OWN CULTURE.

But I guess we should thank God that SOMEONE thinks it's worth preserving.

Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot.com

UNQUENCHABLE THIRST

UNQUENCHABLE THIRST

Disembodied eyes of unquenchable thirst,
soak red the Sun seared sands
in search of manifest destiny.
An oasis of ancient waste
lie just beyond passion’s grasp,
as avarice pleads for the corruption,
and assent of man.

*
But hot blood boils cold,
even among souls of dishonor.
Thus, for a fleeting moment
immorality collides
with the soft caress
of elusive sanity.
Yet, stupidity prevails,
and the ancient dump
continues to win,
as the oasis consumes
with open arms,
the new waste
that now lies within.

Wattree
wattree.com

A SENSE OF PRIDE IS A TERRIBLE THING TO LOSE

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

A SENSE OF PRIDE IS A TERRIBLE THING TO LOSE

When I look back on the sixties it seems like it took place on another planet. There was so much to be proud of during that period. We didn’t have much in terms of material things, but we had pride, a love of self, and a sense of optimism that sustained us quite well.

During that time I was sure that the Black man had finally come into his own–it seemed that we’d finally pulled it all together, and got it right. Black on Black crime was frowned upon, we loved who we were, we respected our women–and more importantly, our women respected themselves. Everyday was a day to celebrate the beauty of our rich, Black culture, and that’s exactly what we did.

It was a time when the genuine pride of self-definition held court throughout the Black community. We weren’t getting rich by any stretch of the imagination, but even that played a useful function in our lives–it taught us to base our respect for one another on one’s character, talent, and intellect. Sure there were people even then who had bling, but they were more a curiosity than anything else. The ones we respected were those who had something genuine to bring to the table–“what” you were didn’t mean a thing–it was “who” you were that mattered.

I’ll never forget how empowering it felt to move away from that grinnin’, shufflin’, accommodatin’ image that had previously been placed on us. Finally we were defining ourselves, and the world watch intently as we began to embrace our true character. They watched, as we watched with a vicarious thrill as Mohammad Ali asserted our collective manhood in the ring. They also watched as Malcolm and Martin instructed us in the lessons of character and intellect, and as Miles, Trane, Marvin, and Areatha taught us to bring the world to its knees with the beauty of our artistic genius.

I was certain we were on a roll that nothing could stop, but ironically, it was our failure to prepare for the unexpected that brought it all to an abrupt end. If it wasn’t so tragic it would almost be funny, but believe it or not, what brought it all crashing down was the very thing we’d been fighting so hard obtain--integration.

What we failed to realize was that integration didn’t come without a price. Along with it would come all of those temptations that corrupted the soul–and, unbeknownst to us, it also came with a ticking time bomb, a Trojan virus still shackled to our psyche, a legacy from the days when we were still shackled to a post.

While segregation was a horrible practice, it had the effect of forcing the Black community to be self-sufficient. Thus, once we knocked down the barriers that prevented Blacks from obtaining jobs in White corporations and moving into the White community, that opened the doors for the best and the brightest in the Black community to chase the “American dream”. That’s when the virus kicked in, because, unfortunately, to many of our shackled minds, the American dream meant, to get as far away from other Black people as possible.

While the confluence of desegregation and Affirmative Action allowed many to “escape” the Black community, every Black person didn’t have that option. As mentioned above, these social policies only helped those who needed the help least. Those who needed the most help weren’t helped at all–in fact, they were left worse off than before. By making it easier for the best and the brightest to leave the community, the very people that the community needed most, it not only left the Black community without role models, but also without those people who created the jobs and maintained the social infrastructure within the community. So the community was left in far worse shape than it was under segregation.

And what made a bad situation even worse was the mindset that we kept as a legacy from slavery–the need to segregate ourselves from our own. If you put most other cultural groups in this same situation, they’d utilize their new freedom as an opportunity to interact with the outside community for business purposes, but they would remain within their own neighborhoods. But as pointed out earlier, many Blacks equate success with getting as far away from other Black people as they can get. Many of us don’t feel that we’ve “arrived” until we arrive at a location where there are no other Black people for as far as the eye can see. So many not only left the community, they wouldn’t even come back to do business–they setup businesses in their new White communities instead.

Then to compound the tragedy, shortly thereafter, President Reagan flooded the Black community with drugs in order to fund his illegal war in Nicaragua during the eighties. That hit the Black community during a time when there were no jobs, and no positive Black role models. When these easily acquired addictive drugs were added to the mix, it essentially wiped out an entire generation of, would-be, competent Black parents.

As a result, in 2008 we’re left with a generation of young Black people who are remote from their own culture due to the generational void of the eighties. We now have a generation that’s been cut off from their roots--they haven’t been taught what it means to be Black, many think that education is a “White thing”, and they haven’t been schooled in either the Black musical or literary tradition. They’ve been raised by BET, and nurtured by Robert Johnson’s culturally deprecating pursuit of the dollar. As a direct result of such conditioning, they are easily manipulated by malevolent interests into portraying Black people in anyway these malevolent interests see fit.

It’s not surprising, therefore, that these young people have developed, and embraced, a form of artistic expression that is self-deprecating, and culturally destructive. It’s being perpetuated by interests in this society willing to pay huge sums of money to promoted any Black man with a following who’s willing to say, “I’m a gangster, I love drugs, I want to kill my brother, and the very queen of my culture is a slut.” But it’s not the art form that’s the problem, the problem is the message the art form is being used to convey.

This situation needs to be addressed--and in a hurry, because as I speak, yet another generation is being infected by this psychological virus. We are casually ignoring a situation that is destructive to the Black family unit, and all but guarantees the corruption of millions of young people. But what concerns me almost as much, is the very real possibility that it’s politically motivated.

Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot.com



akil said...
damn Mr Wattree, this article expresses the typical-change-toward conservative-politics-as-I-get-older perspective.

The black generational divide will fuel and become the basis for the future political position(s) for older people of African descent (read civil rights/60's babies).


Besides everyone wants to police something, even disenfranchised black people...It seems that Mr. Eric Wattree wants (or someone else) to police hip-hop...

My Brother,

Are you actually suggesting that promoting the use of drugs, your brother's murder, and the denigration of Black women is a progressive art form? If so, just call me a neo-con–and I’m absolutely certain that you’d be able to add Martin, Malcolm, and every other Black revolutionary to that list.

But actually, I was indeed being conservative in one sense–In fact, I was being much too conservative in my criticism. What I actually think, is hip hop–at least, as it’s being used--is not only less than progressive, but one of the most regressive art forms that’s ever come out of the Black community.

If hip hop didn’t exist, racists would have to invent it, because it serves to substantiate everything negative claim that racists have ever attributed to Black people. The primary message that hip hop sends around the world is that Black people are so ignorant, inarticulate, and undereducated, that we don’t even like ourselves.

You also imply that with time I’ve become out of touch. But as an aging revolutionary, I suggest that everything new is not better, and you’ve simply become the latest victim to the latest twist on oldest game in the world–divide and conquer.

Brother, we’ve been there, and done that. Every thought you think, we’ve already considered–and if you were truly informed of your heritage, you’d know that.

Click on the video above, and meet another "old conservative”.

Eric Wattree

THE PROBLEM’S NOT HIP HOP--IT'S THE MESSAGE WITHIN

BENEATH THE SPIN * ERIC L. WATTREE A SENSE OF PRIDE IS A TERRIBLE THING TO LOSE When I look back on the sixties it seems like it took place on another planet. There was so much to be proud of during that period. We didn't have much in terms of material things, but we had pride, a love of self, and a sense of optimism that sustained us quite well. During that time I was sure that the Black man had finally come into his own–it seemed that we'd finally pulled it all together, and got it right. Black on Black crime was frowned upon, we loved who we were, we respected our women–and more importantly, our women respected themselves. Everyday was a day to celebrate the beauty of our rich, Black culture, and that's exactly what we did. It was a time when the genuine pride of self-definition held court throughout the Black community. We weren't getting rich by any stretch of the imagination, but even that played a useful function in our lives–it taught us to base our respect for one another on one's character, talent, and intellect. Sure there were people even then who had bling, but they were more a curiosity than anything else. The ones we respected were those who had something genuine to bring to the table--"what" you were didn't mean a thing–it was "who" you were that mattered. I'll never forget how empowering it felt to move away from that grinnin', shufflin', accommodatin' image that had previously been placed on us. Finally we were defining ourselves, and the world watch intently as we began to embrace our true character. They watched, as we watched with a vicarious thrill as Mohammad Ali asserted our collective manhood in the ring. They also watched as Malcolm and Martin instructed us in the lessons of character and intellect, and as Miles, Trane, Marvin, and Areatha taught us to bring the world to its knees with the beauty of our artistic genius. I was certain we were on a roll that nothing could stop, but ironically, it was our failure to prepare for the unexpected that brought it all to an abrupt end. If it wasn't so tragic it would almost be funny, but believe it or not, what brought it all crashing down was the very thing we'd been fighting so hard obtain--integration. What we failed to realize was that integration didn't come without a price. Along with it would come all of those temptations that corrupted the soul–and, unbeknownst to us, it also came with a ticking time bomb, a Trojan virus still shackled to our psyche, a legacy from the days when we were still shackled to a post. While segregation was a horrible practice, it had the effect of forcing the Black community to be self-sufficient. Thus, once we knocked down the barriers that prevented Blacks from obtaining jobs in White corporations and moving into the White community, that opened the doors for the best and the brightest in the Black community to chase the "American dream". That's when the virus kicked in, because, unfortunately, to many of our shackled minds, the American dream meant, to get as far away from other Black people as possible. While the confluence of desegregation and Affirmative Action allowed many to "escape" the Black community, every Black person didn't have that option. As mentioned above, these social policies only helped those who needed the help least. Those who needed the most help weren't helped at all–in fact, they were left worse off than before. By making it easier for the best and the brightest to leave the community, the very people that the community needed most, it not only left the Black community without role models, but also without those people who created the jobs and maintained the social infrastructure within the community. So the community was left in far worse shape than it was under segregation. And what made a bad situation even worse was the mindset that we kept as a legacy from slavery–the need to segregate ourselves from our own. If you put most other cultural groups in this same situation, they'd utilize their new freedom as an opportunity to interact with the outside community for business purposes, but they would remain within their own neighborhoods. But as pointed out earlier, many Blacks equate success with getting as far away from other Black people as they can get. Many of us don't feel that we've "arrived" until we arrive at a location where there are no other Black people for as far as the eye can see. So many not only left the community, they wouldn't even come back to do business–they setup businesses in their new White communities instead. Then to compound the tragedy, shortly thereafter, President Reagan flooded the Black community with drugs in order to fund his illegal war in Nicaragua during the eighties. That hit the Black community during a time when there were no jobs, and no positive Black role models. When these easily acquired addictive drugs were added to the mix, it essentially wiped out an entire generation of, would-be, competent Black parents. As a result, in 2008 we're left with a generation of young Black people who are remote from their own culture due to the generational void of the eighties. We now have a generation that's been cut off from their roots--they haven't been taught what it means to be Black, many think that education is a "White thing", and they haven't been schooled in either the Black musical or literary tradition. They've been raised by BET, and nurtured by Robert Johnson's culturally deprecating pursuit of the dollar. As a direct result of such conditioning, they are easily manipulated by malevolent interests into portraying Black people in anyway these malevolent interests see fit. It's not surprising, therefore, that these young people have developed, and embraced, a form of artistic expression that is self-deprecating, and culturally destructive. It's being perpetuated by interests in this society willing to pay huge sums of money to promoted any Black man with a following who's willing to say, "I'm a gangster, I love drugs, I want to kill my brother, and the very queen of my culture is a slut." But it's not the art form that's the problem, the problem is the message the art form is being used to convey. This situation needs to be addressed--and in a hurry, because as I speak, yet another generation is being infected by this psychological virus. We are casually ignoring a situation that is destructive to the Black family unit, and all but guarantees the corruption of millions of young people-- and what concerns me almost as much, is the very real possibility that it's politically motivated. Eric L. Wattree wattree.blogspot.com

A JOURNALIST’S FIRST RESPONSIBILITY

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE . A JOURNALIST'S FIRST RESPONSIBILITY: TO PROTECT HIS FAVORED CANDIDATE, OR THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO KNOW? As anyone who has regularly read my column is fully aware, I've been one of Barack Obama's most fervent supporters since hours after he first declared his intention to seek the presidency, and I continue to support that effort. But I was bitterly disappointed with the position he's taken on the FISA bill now before the U.S. Senate, and I've been quite vociferous in making that disappointment known to all who would listen. On June 20th Senator Barack Obama announced that he was supporting the current FISA bill before the senate. That bill gives retroactive immunity to all telecommunications companies against all private law suits for cooperating with the Bush administration's program of spying on the American people without a court order, as currently required by current law. If that bill is passed, it will preclude private law suits that would reveal when they started spying on the American people, who they spied on, their justification for spying on them (in cases where it was unjustified), and who in the administration the information went to. Bush claims that it wouldn't prevent criminal charges from being brought against administration officials for abuse, but if the administration remains true to form, once the bill is passed, Bush will simply give a blanket pardon to all those involved. Obama's position on this issue is a complete departure from the position he took during the primaries while running against Hillary Clinton. While he "missed" the vote on a similar bill by the senate on February 12, he issued a statement indicating, "I am proud to stand with Senator Dodd, Senator Feingold and a grassroots movement of Americans who are refusing to let President Bush put protections for special interests ahead of our security and our liberty." I've been roundly criticized by fellow Obama supporters for bringing this issue out. They say that "I'm hurting our candidate", and "I'm not seeing the big picture." But in response I suggest, when truth becomes a hindrance to a candidate's viability, it's not truth that's the problem–it's the candidate. And when the "greater good" involves journalists keeping the people in the dark, it becomes the nation's problem. Thus, it's not up to journalists to keep Obama's candidacy viable--it's up to Obama. While I desperately want to see Obama become our next president, we simply cannot allow him to take our vote for granted. We must support ideals, not individuals. What is the sense of voting for a class of people who feel safe in ignoring us once they've secured our vote. I understand that Obama is going to have to make some compromises, but we're talking about modifying the United States Constitution here! If he'll compromise on something as important as that, what else might he compromise? I'd like to ask my fellow Obama supporters a question: Would you think your arguments regarding remaining mute in order to get Obama elected still be valid if he compromised on an assault on the Voter's Rights Act, or a Woman's Right to Choose? Would you still be as adamant about keeping it on the down-low? Well, his position with respect to FISA is every bit as serious, and as a journalist, I have an obligation to inform the people of that fact. We simply cannot pick and choose what rights are important, and which ones we can do without. When a journalist start saying to himself, I can't tell the people that, because it may hurt my candidate, it's time for that journalist to stop writing, because then he's no longer a journalist--he's a political hack. And if I did it, I'd be buying into the very same philosophy that too many journalists have embraced over the past seven years with regard to Bush. My first allegiance is to the people and the American ideal that keeps them secure within their person, and only then, to a particular political candidate. I can't allow myself the luxury of getting so caught up in a personality cult that it obscures my objectivity. Thus, I'm not at war with Obama due to one isolated decision--I'm at war with a political class who feels free to ignore the will, and the best interest of the people. Therefore, I'm not moving away from Obama, he's moving away from me. We've already gone much too far down the road of compromise. As I mentioned in an earlier article, they started chipping away at the constitution when Ford pardoned Nixon. Then they went a little further when Reagan was not impeached after Iran/contra, and when he flooded the Black community with drugs to finance his illegal war in contravention of the Boland Amendment. Now congress is refusing to address the lie that Bush told to take us into Iraq, killing hundreds of thousands of people, and allowing Bush cronies to ravish the treasury, and take away our right to due process. Now, in spite of the fact that Bush's job approval is at 28%, and Rep. Dennis Kucinich spent over five hours listing 35 articles of impeachment against the Bush/Cheney administration, they've been buried by this Democratic congress because Democratic Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, is insisting, "impeachment is off the table." We were angered by these betrayals, but we held back to put our faith in Obama, a brother who is talking about change. But now that he's secured our support, he not only supports blocking an opportunity to investigate Bush's spying on millions of Americans, but giving retroactive immunity to both the administration officials, and the communication companies involved, precluding any law suits by private citizens to bring out the facts regarding this abuse of the American people. So exactly what do they have to do before I have permission to speak out? So to Sen. Obama: I urge you to reconsider your position on this bill. Your current position is not only a gross assault on the rights of the people, but it's greatly undermining your credibility among many of your most ardent supporters. The entire thrust of your campaign has been about change. So I have but one question begging to be asked--when? Eric L. Wattree Http://wattree.blogspot.com Ewattree@Gmail.com Citizens Against Reckless Middle-Class Abuse (CARMA) Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.