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
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
A SENSE OF PRIDE IS A TERRIBLE THING TO LOSE
Monday, July 07, 2008
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 | ||
Friday, July 04, 2008
A JOURNALIST’S FIRST RESPONSIBILITY
Thursday, June 26, 2008
OBAMA IS TURNING THIS DREAM INTO A NIGHTMARE
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE OBAMA IS TURNING THIS DREAM INTO A NIGHTMARE Eric, I found your response over the top – emotional and unrealistic. Who would respond to such a challenge, do as I say or I won't send you any money and start my own grass roots organization. Please, for the first time in our history, we have a candidate who both embraces our people and is fit to lead the entire nation in a world on the brink of collapse. Of course he's a politician. Against his own best interests, that is his chosen profession and it is one of compromise, negotiation and deft balletic performance in a 24 hour news cycle. He will make mistakes and always disappoint somebody, but is that any reason to jump ship? Before Obama, the concept of "grass roots" was not even in the national lexicon. He has already performed heroic feats by winning the nomination, energizing the electorate, expanding the map and mounting a movement that is prepared to eject the Republicans whose ideology and machinery has done so much damage worldwide. As a journalist, you have power and influence and I would hope an unconditional love for a brother who has welcomed support from those like you and me, building a movement from the bottom up. His task is to galvanize a nation sorely in need of change, and everybody having a hissy fit on the brink of history in the making, from disgruntled Hillary supporters, neglected Muslims, rampaging preachers and astute journalists needs to have the courage, the hopefulness and the faith that this magical moment is ours for the taking and this man is the vessel of dreams deferred. The transition will be painful, but that's the nature of rebirth. Take a breath and chill out. FISA ain't done yet. We'll have time over the next 8 years to hold Obama accountable, but now is the time to believe in our power to do so. Resist the urge to divide and be conquered. Most important: get that brother in the White House period. Mamie--Louise, I'm sure you know I understand the argument that you're putting forth-- I've been making it to disaffected Black people since the day Obama declared. But we're talking about the fourth amendment of the Constitution here! If this man was going to compromise for the sake of politics, surely he could have found an area of less importance than that. In addition, he has undermined the very foundation of his candidacy--change. And beyond even that, by supporting a bill that gives immunity to the communication companies and the people in the Bush administration who violated our fourth amendment rights, he's also blocking litigation that allows us to find out whose communications they monitored, the information they gathered, and for what purpose. And there are also indications that this situation goes much deeper than 9/11, since the monitoring started before 9/11. If this situation had happened during the sixties or seventies, all hell would be breaking loose. Bush, and many in his administration would have been impeached, and others would be going to jail. We're taking it far too lightly because we've become undereducated over the years, and desensitized to the loss of our constitutional rights. And the horrible part of it all is that Barack knows this. He's not a dummie--the man is a constitutional scholar! They started chipping away at the constitution when Ford pardoned Nixon. Then they went a little further and got away with it when Reagan was not impeached after Iran/contra and flooded the Black community with drugs to finance his illegal war in contravention of the Boland Amendment. Now they're refusing to address the lie that Bush told to take us into Iraq, killing hundreds of thousands of people, and allowed his cronies to ravish the treasury, and take away our right to due process. Now this brother comes along talking about change, and then supports blocking an opportunity to investigate their spying on millions of Americans. Exactly what does the brother have to do before I have permission to get pissed? There's something very esoteric and ugly about this situation, and I don't like it. Of course, I have no choice but to vote for the man, considering my alternative, but I am going to close my checkbook and hold my nose while I do it. I'm not a groupie. I support politicians, only, as long as they support my best interest--and with this issue, this very important issue, Barack didn't do that. So again, while I am going to vote for him--although while holding my nose--from this point forward, I'm going to watch him like a hawk, and scream bloody murder every time he farts in the wrong direction. If I don't, I'm no better than the hacks who are giving George Bush a pass. So, over the top, I don't think so. The mere fact that we have a constitution represents a message being sent by the founding fathers from beyond the grave: "Don't trust any of 'em"--Black or White. And I'll never forget that in the future. The next superstar that gets a dime from me is gonna have to be able to tap dance. Eric 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. | ||
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
BLACK STAR NEWS
BLACK STAR NEWS I am very happy to announce that in addition to my association with YourBlackWorld, and the Los Angeles Sentinel, I am also beginning an association as a featured columnist with Black Star News (http://blackstarnews.com/). I don't see this as just another job offer. I'm very excited to be associated with this organization because the publisher, Milton Allimadi, and his associates at Black Star News are serious journalist, involved in world class journalism. Allimadi received his journalistic training at the Graduate School of Journalism at Columbia University. After stints at The Journal of Commerce and The Wall Street Journal, Allimadi reported for the New York Times as a metro news stringer. At the New York Times Allimadi honed, among other things, his reportorial skills. Allimadi's passion for community-based and investigative news reporting took him to the legendary City Sun newspaper, an African American weekly newspaper published by the late Andy Cooper, who served as Allimadi's mentor. As an editor of The City Sun, Allimadi exposed corruption, police brutality and thereby developed a reputation as a hard-nosed editor and reporter. In late 1996 The City Sun shut down as a result of Cooper's failing health. In 1997, Allimadi founded The Black Star News with his savings and those of then partners Ben Otunu and Mana Kasongo; he obtained financial support from Bill and Camille Cosby. Today, The Black Star News is a renowned investigative newspaper. Following its motto of "Speaking Truth to Empower," The Black Star News has scored several major news scoops which has garnered for it several awards from the Independent Press Association and national media coverage, including from CNN financial news, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, New York Press, The New York Daily News, The New York Post, The New York Observer, New York magazine, The Village Voice, The Washington Times, and Brill's Content Magazine. During this time in our history when creditable journalism seems to be at its lowest ebb, I am thrilled to have this opportunity to be associated with a group of journalist who are dedicated to keeping the fires lit within the fourth estate. With all of the nation's news now being controlled by corporate interests, it will fall to journalists such as these to keep America informed. 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. | ||
Sunday, June 22, 2008
THE MODERN BLACK MAN: 21ST CENTURY ARGUMENTS FOR 19TH CENTURY THINKING
BENEATH THE SPIN * ERIC L. WATTREE THE MODERN BLACK MAN: 21ST CENTURY ARGUMENTS FOR 19TH CENTURY THINKING Less than three hours after Barack Obama declared his candidacy for presidency, the feeding frenzy began among Black people. It just so happened that Sen. Obama declared his candidacy on the same day as Tavis Smiley's "State of Black America" national broadcast, and many had the audacity to criticize him for not putting off this historic event so he could appear on Tavis' broadcast. And during the broadcast--again, on this historic occasion--Dr. Cornel West of Harvard University ranted on national television that the Black community should be asking Obama, "How deep is your love for your people" and "Where is your money coming from?" He indicated that Barack didn't put this historic event off to appear on Tavis' broadcast because he had people talking to him that didn't warrant our trust. And as he was saying these things, Tavis was standing there grinning like a chess cat prowling a South Georgia cotton field. That was the moment that Barack Obama got my unwavering support. It was at that very moment that I decided that this man was going to get my vote--and if that vote was wasted, as many suggested it would be at the time, so be it. Because it was on that day, and at that very moment, that I fully recognized the depth of our self-loathing, and the psyschological corruption of my people. Later on that day I wrote, "as African Americans we are the product of a racist society–and not just any racist society, but a society that is more efficient in producing subtle racists than any other society that has ever existed on the face of this Earth. Due to the necessity of America's need to subjugate Black people, while at the same time, live up to the hypocrisy of our "All men are created equal" credo, a form of racism has spontaneously evolved that is so subtle that even Black people have become racist against themselves–and amazingly, without even knowing it. As a direct result, Black people in America hate other Black people just as profoundly, and even more violently, than the most virulent White racist in the South. Clear evidence of that is the fact that of the thousands of homicides committed against Blacks every year, not one perpetrator was reported to have been wearing a sheet." I continue to hold that belief, and it's been continually reinforced throughout this election. It seems to me that the only difference between the modern Black man and the 19th century Black man, who shuffled about more interested in the master's welfare than his own, is the sophistication of his argument. Today, instead of simply saying that we can't trust him because he's Black, we say, "The people talking to him don't warrant our trust." And today, instead of saying, "No Black man has sense enough to run this plantation", we say, "He lacks experience." The situation is such that it's not safe for this brother to open his mouth without somebody parsing every comma, trying to find something to criticize–and when they can't find anything, they speculate about what he might have meant, or second guess what he should have said, or question his motives. On father's Day Barack spoke at the Apostolic Church of God, a predominately Black church in Chicago, Il. During his speech he discussed the need for man young Black men to step up to the plate and become better fathers. He pointed out that children who grow up without a father in the home are five times more likely to grow up in poverty, nine time more likely to drop out of school, and twenty times more likely to end up in prison. He also spoke of his own experience without a father. He recalled seeing how embarrassed his mother was to have to go to the market with food stamps in order to feed the family, and the pain she suffered when she couldn't get him some of the things that other children had. He also spoke of the epidemic of children killing children in the black community, and asked, "How many are we willing to lose?" Believe it or not, there were many in the Black community who took serious issue with that speech. Even Dr. Boyce Watkins, one of this nation's most prominent scholars (note that I didn't limit it to "Black scholar"), a brother that I consider a friend, and I highly respect, took issue. He asked, "why he waited to speak at a predominantly black church to give the message only to black parents?" My response to Dr. Watkins was, had Senator Obama gone to a predominantly white forum to criticize black fatherhood, there might have been some validity to the argument that it was inappropriate, but that was far from the case. First, it wasn't black fatherhood he was criticizing. In fact, he took the time to commend those black fathers who had stepped up to the plate. He also went out of his way to praise his wife's father, who in spite of a severe disability that required him to get up an hour earlier than most people just to get to work on time, he managed to step up to the plate and bring the type of excellence to his parental responsibility that allowed him to raise two well rounded and successful children. So he wasn't criticizing black fatherhood at all–on the contrary, he was encouraging those being less than responsible to rethink their way of life. And as for the propriety of addressing this issue in a predominantly black forum, I don't understand the objection. He told the truth, in a black setting, as a black man who grew up without a father. Who better to speak to an issue that needs so badly to be addressed in the black community than one of the most prominent figures in the community? And what would be a more appropriate place to deliver such a message than in a black church, and among black people? It seems to me that a good case could have been made that he would have been remiss not to have given such a speech. We often talk about the courage to speak truth to power. That's exactly what Sen. Obama demonstrated. He's not a stupid man –he remembers the backlash that came down on Bill Cosby for broaching this very same subject. And even Rev. Al Sharpton said he was taking a big chance. Yet, in spite of the fact that he desperately needs black support to win the presidency, he decided that it was so important to delivered this message to his people that he was willing to take the chance on losing that support. That is the true meaning of speaking truth to power. The brother should be applauded instead of criticized, and I think he would have been if it were not for a latent undercurrent of hatred and distrust of Black people--but ironically, this time it's among ourselves. 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. | ||
Friday, June 20, 2008
A RETROSPECTIVE
| BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE A RETROSPECTIVE: IS OBAMA BLACK ENOUGH TO WARRANT AFRICAN-AMERICAN SUPPORT? At this writing, it has been less than three hours since Senator Barack Obama has declared his candidacy for President of the United States of America, and already the feeding frenzy has begun. Just once I'd like to see Black people come together without reverting to the old "crabs in a barrel" syndrome. Just once I'd like see Black people come together and say, yes, he is Black, and Black is good. But we just can't seem to bring ourselves to do that–and the sad part about it is that we've never stopped to examine the reason why.
Now, I'm certain that a brother as well read, and has as many obscure facts at his command as Professor West, would probably mop the floor in political debate with an average brother like myself–after all, knowledge is indeed power. Yet, he's demonstrated once again, that wit without wisdom is a waste. His words brought to mind words stated by another group of Black people--a group who were far less educated, but obviously endowed with far more wisdom. Those were the words of our Black elders that went something like this–"Beware of educated fools." His words also reminded me of words that my grandfather said to me when I first enrolled into college. He told me, "Education is a very good thing–as long as you don't let them educate away your good, common sense." I didn't understand the wisdom of those words back then, but all of a sudden, they've taken on a new, and much more profound meaning. But the only thing that gives me hope in that regard, is to see how the seed that Dr. King, Ralph Abernathy, Thurgood Marshall, and the other insightful thinkers of the last generation has taken root. They had the insight to plant a seed that has begun to flourish–in spit of our current leaders. It's not those so-called Black leaders that we always see running their mouths on television that's changing America's perception towards Black people–on the contrary, if anything, they've delayed the process. What's changing America's perception towards blacks are people just like you, the reader–the everyday, hard working Black person. America has been watching the competence, integrity, creativity, and in many cases, brilliance, that you have been quietly bringing to your jobs on a daily basis. You don't hear them, and you're so busy that you're probably not even paying attention, but when they're alone they're saying, "Did you see how easily she handled that?" And at other times they find themselves saying out loud, "Don't worry about it–William will be back tomorrow, and he'll know how to handle it." Those are the perceptions that's changing America–one person at a time. 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. | ||
| |
Barack Obama's Speech on Father's Day
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE
THE AUDACITY OF TRUTH
Sen. Barack Obama was roundly criticized by some in the black community for having the audacity to go before the Apostolic Church of God, in Chicago, Il--a black forum, on Father’s Day--and suggest that young black men should step up to the plate and become better fathers. He pointed out that the very foundation of the entire nation is being shaken by too many young fathers, of every race and ethnicity, failing to embrace their responsibilities, but the problem is particularly pronounced in the black community, where one half of all children grow up without a father in the home, a number that has doubled since he was a child.
He went on to point out that children who grow up without a father in the home are five times more likely to grow up in poverty, nine time more likely to drop out of school, and twenty times more likely to end up in prison. He also spoke of his own experience without a father. He recalled seeing how embarrassed his mother was to have to go to the market with food stamps in order to feed the family, and the pain she suffered when she couldn’t get him some of the things that other children had. He also spoke of the epidemic of children killing children in the black community, then asked, How many are we willing to lose?
I was caught completely slack-jawed that anyone in our community would take issue with such a pertinent and timely message, but when I read one of the nation’s most prominent black scholars asking, If you have a message about the value of fatherhood, why did you wait to speak at a predominantly black church to give the message only to black parents? , I was completely taken aback.
What?
Had Senator Obama gone to a predominantly white forum to criticize black fatherhood, there might have been some validity to the argument that it was inappropriate, but that was far from the case. First, it wasn’t black fatherhood he was criticizing–in fact, he took the time to commend those black fathers who had stepped up to the plate. He also went out of his way to praise his wife’s father, who in spite of a severe disability, he got up an hour earlier than he would have had to ordinarily just to get to work on time, yet, managed to step up to the plate and bring the type of excellence to his parental responsibility that allowed him to raise two well rounded and successful children. So he wasn’t criticizing black fatherhood at all–on the contrary, he was encouraging those being less than responsible to rethink their way of life.
And as for the propriety of addressing this issue in a predominantly black forum, I don’t understand the objection. He told the truth, in a black setting, as a black man who grew up without a father. Who better to speak to an issue that needs so badly to be addressed in the black community than one of the most prominent figures in the community? And what would be a more appropriate place to deliver such a message than in a black church, and among black people? A case could have been made that he would have been remiss not to have given such a speech.
We often talk about the courage to speak truth to power. That’s exactly what Sen. Obama demonstrated. He’s not a stupid man –he remembers the backlash that came down on Bill Cosby for broaching this very same subject. Yet, in spite of the fact that he desperately needs black support to win the presidency, he decided that it was so important to delivered this message to his people that he took a chance on losing that support. That is the true meaning of speaking truth to power.
We’re often hoodwinked by demagogues to believe that speaking truth to power means screaming at those holding the highest offices. But power is relative, and true power belongs to those who are most apt to have an immediate impact on our lives. During the fifties and sixties speaking truth to power meant speaking out to the powers that be on the issue of civil rights. Back then it took great courage to do that, as the murder of Malcolm, Martin, and many others will attest. But speaking out on those very same issues today is all but meaningless. Since there’s nothing new or evocative in such a message, there’s absolutely no danger involved. That’s why you find every militant brother with lips and low self-esteem shaking his fist at the white man. It allows them to look hard, like modern day Malcolms, but without experiencing any of the risk that Malcolm had to endure.
True power, in this case, is not the government or Barack Obama–true power lies within the status quo, and peer pressure. So if we really want to speak truth to power in this case, it involves challenging the mores of our culture. The truth is, we need to be asking why are we criticizing a man that’s advocating personal responsibility while lionizing people like Fifty cent, or ‘Fiddy’, as he’a affectionately called, who’s getting filthy rich by denigrating the very womb of our culture. And if we want to speak truth to power, we should be asking, why are we allowing Langston Hughes and James Baldwin to be all but forgotten, while black Ph.D.s are running around on national television quoting entire courses of gangster rap.
Ironically, among the many criticisms that was made about Sen. Obama’s speech was that he was contributing to the stereotyping of black men by suggesting that more of us help our sisters raise our children.
Stereotyping?
Every time a rap video is made that denigrates black women and portray black men us as ignorant, illiterate, and vulgar, it serves as a commercial that goes around the world that says, black men are stupid. Now, that’s stereotyping. We constantly put out these commercials saying I’m a gangster, I want to kill my brother, and the queen of my culture is a slut , then when we’re treated like the idiots we portray ourselves to be, we want to point to Sen. Obama as the source of black stereotyping? The level of disconnect is amazing.
In contrast, I recently saw a remake of King Kong. While watching it, the very first thing that caught my interest was how differently the white man portrays his women. The entire point of that movie was built around the fact that this white, blue-eyed, blond woman made the Earth stand still.
When they took that white woman ashore and the natives laid eyes on her blond hair, and blue eyes, they went totally berserk—I mean, into an absolute frenzy. And in spite of the fact that the island was full of black women, the natives were convinced that nothing in this world would appease this twenty-five foot gorilla like the opportunity to lay his hands on this one White woman. And it turns out they were right, because the minute King Kong laid eyes on her he forgot about all else. Thereafter, he fought forty foot snakes, numerous dinosaurs, and finally, the United States Air Force, just for the love of this one white woman, who wasn’t even as big as his thumb. Now that, demonstrates a love of culture, and a love of self. For you can never have any self-respect without first having respect for the very womb from which you came.
That is the lesson that Obama was trying to teach–and since he had a white mother, and was raised by white grandparents, he has much more than a passing acquaintance with that philosophy. So instead of criticizing him, we need to listen to this black man. He understands that the very foundation of any culture begins with respecting, and protecting, its women, because they symbolize the value of that culture, and everything that culture represents.
On the other hand, meet Fifty Cent:
Fuck Dat Bitch
If a bitch don't like me
Somethin's' wrong with the bitch...(fuck that bitch)
Why...oh why...why..you wanna fuck with me now?
And you say Obama is stereotyping the black man? I’d say you’re trying to shoot the messenger.
Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot.com
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Can We Call Americans Racist and Still Expect to Get Their Vote?
| BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE CAN WE CALL AMERICANS RACIST AND STILL EXPECT TO GET THEIR VOTE? Michelle Obama made a simple statement-- "For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of this country"–and one would have thought she declared a jihad on America. FOX news, Rush Limbaugh, and the various other Republican conduits have been harping on it for months now, trying to convince the American people that she's hated America all of her life. But the fact is, when Michelle Obama made the above statement she was actually complimenting America. Conservatives are representing her statement as though she said, "For the first time in my adult lifetime I am proud of my country." That implies that she has never been proud of her country before. But that is not what she said at all. She said, "For the first in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country." When she used the word "really" as a modifier to the word "proud" it means that she is "exceptionally" or "more proud" of her country than she's ever been before. You'd think I wouldn't have to explain such a simple grammatical construction to professional journalists, but when one decides to invent a story, it often becomes necessary to conveniently overlook facts clearly before one's eyes. That transparent misrepresentation of the facts not only shows the desperation of the Republican Party, but it also shows how the country has ended up in the shape that we currently find ourselves. For the past thirty years conservative strategy has been based on the assumption that the American people are stupid, and America's reasonable belief that we should be able to trust our institutions has allowed Republicans to play us like a fiddle. But that is a part of the journey that America has embarked upon during this election–a journey towards change. Due to a confluence of events in this country-- 911, the ineptitude, excesses, and greed of the Bush administration, and the seeming paralysis of the left–the ship of state has drifted into such rough waters that it has served to rouse a sleeping giant--the pragmatic center within the American electorate--and Sen. Obama has been sent as their agent of change. This previously dormant but huge majority in the American electorate is generally content to maintain national equilibrium by allowing the antipathy between the right and left wings of the electorate to balance one another out, but the nation's fear after 911 has allowed the right wing to indulge its most fascistic tendencies, while the left has been rendered, literally, impotent. So America's sleeping giant has arisen to take over the helm, and as a result, the fringies on both extremes of the political spectrum are screaming bloody murder, and employing every divisive tactic at their command to maintain control. On the one hand we have those on the right looking beneath every log trying to find a way to smear Barack Obama, and they're being given able assistance by opportunists on the left who can't resist the opportunity to embrace their 15 minutes of fame. Then on the other hand, we have those on the left complaining that Sen. Barack Obama should be standing firm behind those very same opportunists who have chosen this critical moment to wag their finger at America. It is clear that there is no reasoning with the people on the right. They've had it totally their own way for the past seven years, and they see no reason to change. They've shown throughout the Bush administration that they don't deal in reason. Their weapon of choice is emotion–they deal in hatred, fear and anger, exclusively. In fact, the right has been so successful in playing on our emotions that the left has come perilously close to embracing that very same political philosophy as their own. As a result, political discourse in this country has degenerated into a schoolyard brawl. So at this point, instead of addressing the nation's pertinent issues, both the left and the right are allowing themselves to be distracted by meaningless side issues, which has left the ship of state adrift. So now the political center has arisen to give Sen. Obama the mandate of bringing some vestige of equilibrium back to the nation, but the left is still fighting yesterday's battle, and arguing that Obama is selling out by resigning from his church and not standing by Rev. Wright. Some are even saying that Obama is deserting black people completely in his pursuit of the presidency. But that's patently ridiculous. Obama is simply being prudent and following his mandate of distancing himself from any, and all, non-productive influences. In fact, he's doing exactly what anyone of common prudence would do in their personal life. If you were going on an interview for the most important job of your life, as the CEO for a large corporation, for example, would you take along your militant old uncle to tell the board of directors how racist their company has been towards black people? Of course not–that would not only be imprudent, but foolish. Yet, that's exactly what some of us are asking Obama to do. Others are taking the reverse position, and placing malevolent intent at America's door. They contend that Sen. Obama is being "forced" to distance himself from Rev. Wright due to the country's tendency towards racism. That's patently ridiculous as well, since the nation's frontrunner for president is, indeed, a black man. It is my opinion that many blacks are not placing enough significance on that extremely salient point. That isn't to say that racism no longer exists in America, but the fact that a black man may very well be the next President of the United States makes a very profound and inescapable statement about the American people as a whole. Thus, while it is true that the senator should have every right to attend the church of his choice, and associate with whomever he chooses, the fact is, he does have that right–but only if he doesn't want to be president. It is important to remember that voters also have rights--and fundamental among them is their absolute right to set the ground rules upon which their vote will be delivered. So while Sen. Obama has the right to associate with whomever he likes, the voter has just as much right to say I'm not going to vote for you because I don't like your associates. And that's neither unfair nor racist–it's politics. In addition, Rev. Wright brought much of his national disfavor upon himself. While I defended him initially because it wasn't his fault that opponents dug up one of his sermons and presented him in the worse possible light, the issue might have been rendered moot had Wright been content to redefine his image during the Bill Moyers interview. But the good reverend just couldn't resist strutting under the spotlight of the National Press Club. His decision in that regard was not only ill advised and a public relations disaster, but it represented nothing less than a lose cannon propelled by a huge ego in full self-service–and, at the very worse possible moment in American history. So in light of what was on the line, Rev. Wright's behavior was both unconscionable, and indefensible. So the common-sense question that needs be asked on the left, and by black people in particular, is not whether or not Sen. Obama was forced to dump Rev. Wright, but rather, what kind of fools are we to think that Americans are going to allow us to shake our finger in their face, call them racists, and then expect them to deliver their vote for a black man as president? We need to wake up. 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. | ||
| |
Friday, June 06, 2008
AN OPEN LETTER TO REPRESENTATIVES DIANE WATSON AND MAXINE WATERS
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE AN OPEN LETTER TO REPRESENTATIVES DIANE WATSON AND MAXINE WATERS It has been pointed out within these pages on many occasions that you've both been excellent black leaders. I agree with only part of that contention. I agree, you have indeed represented the community well--in the past. But I disagree with the contention that you're "black leaders". You're not leaders, you're employees–you've been employed by your constituents to "represent" their views. So in light of the fact that both your constituencies overwhelmingly support Barack Obama, it's quite understandable that like any employer, many want to know why you're failing to reflect their views on this, the most critical issue in our history. So the issue before us is not how you've represented us in the past, but rather, how you're representing us now. Most of your constituents are passionately opposed to Hillary Clinton, and contrary to Hillary's contention, that opposition has absolutely nothing to do with race or gender. African Americans have been Clinton supporters, and defenders, for close to two decades, in overwhelming numbers. Initially, Hillary had as much as a 23% lead over Obama in the black community, but she lost that support by repeatedly playing the race card to rally white support. In addition, African Americans have voted over 95% of the time for white candidates, virtually without exception. So for the Hillary camp to imply that the African American vote is race based is flatly disingenuous–and since there are more female senators and governors than there are blacks in those same positions, it is also clear that the gender issue, relative to Hillary and Obama, is also being manufactured, as it applies to America as a whole. Like several other issues, this issue is being carefully inserted into the political debate through the crafting of subliminal messaging to inflame Hillary's female base–clear evidence that her entire campaign has been based on division. The truth is, similar to the black community, a growing number of Democrats as a whole have turned against Hillary–and for reasons that have nothing to do with race or gender. The problem goes to the very heart of what it means to be a Democrat. Hillary has violated several fundamental Democratic ideals–the Democratic tenets of loyalty, honesty, and fair play. These are the primary tenets that sets the Democratic Party apart. They're what makes Democrats Democrats. In addition, her behavior has clearly demonstrated that she's putting her own ambition before the people, and that's a trait that's distasteful to most Americans as a whole. For weeks Hillary's been whipping her supporters into a frenzy–just as Bush did before invading Iraq–to go before the DNC to challenge a decision that she fully supported before she started losing the campaign. She's purposely creating dissension within the Democratic Party to further her own ends. Thus, by engaging in this scorched Earth strategy, she's literally telling the Democratic leadership, "If you don't nominate me, let them eat cake" –and the "them" that she speaks of, includes her own loyal supporters. So if Hillary had any concern whatsoever about either her supporters, the black community, or the plight of the American people as a whole, she wouldn't even think of sabotaging the Democratic Party's efforts in the upcoming general election. What's infuriating many Americans is that Hillary knows full well what's at stake in this election. The very fate of the nation hangs in the balance, yet, this lady is so self-centered that she's chosen this critical moment in history to place herself before the welfare of the nation. Even many Republicans have recognized that George Bush has placed this country in such a precarious position that this is no time to play political games. That explains why we're seeing some of the strangest bedfellows in the history of this country lining up to support Obama. On the one hand you have Ted Kennedy, and John Edwards supporting Obama. In addition, over a hundred New York feminist leaders--including peace activist, Cora Weiss, columnist, Katha Pollitt of The Nation Magazine, and the New York Times Pulitzer-prize winning writer, Margo Jefferson –have come together to sign a joint statement endorsing Obama. Then on the other side of the ledger you have Bush's long-time friend and former press secretary Scott McClellan indicating that he's considering supporting Obama. Also, Rupert Murdoch, the ultraconservative owner of FOX and the Wall Street Journal, recently indicated that he not only likes the Illinois senator, but was instrumental in the New York Post's endorsement of Obama. Even the ninety year old Sen. Robert Byrd, the longest sitting senator in the history of the United States, the senate's most staunch supporter of the U.S. Constitution, and a former Klan member, has endorsed Senator Barack Obama. Having such a disparate group of people coming together in support of a young, first-term senator against as powerful a political force as the Clintons speaks volumes. Hillary's tactics alone should send up a red flag telling you that she's a prime example of everything that's wrong with this country. Think about it on a personal level–Hillary agreed to ground rules in Florida and Michigan that she now wants to change in the middle of the game, not because she cares about the people of those states, but because she's losing the race. If she was truly genuine in what she professes, she would have objected from the very beginning instead of waiting until she began to lose. If you had a friend that did that at a card party, would you want to keep them as a friend? And think about this–Hillary became so desperate after falling behind in the primaries that she aligned herself with the Republican candidate, in spite of the fact that she knew it would hurt the Democratic Party and all of the people who have put their heart and soul into supporting her. And now she's taking it even further by blatantly threatening the Democratic Party--you and I-- with possible defeat if she doesn't get her way. So, once again, let's personalize this. Would you tolerate a person in your bowling league who tries to change the rules in the middle of the game, lies and cheats on the score, helps the other team to try to force you to let her play, and then threatens to sabotage the game if you don't agree to let her be the one to hold the trophy when you take the winning picture? I don't think so. Hillary could never win the presidency, because every American has known a backstabber, and in the end they'd never vote for one. So, tell me, why are you? Eric L. Wattree wattree.blogspot.com * Subsequent to this writing Rep. Maxine Waters has come out for Sen. Obama. 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. | ||
Friday, May 30, 2008
It kinda Makes You wanna go, Hmmmmm
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE It kinda Makes You wanna go, Hmmmmm President George W. Bush's former press secretary, Scott McClellan has shocked both the Bush administration and the world by revealing in his new book, "What Happened", that the Bush administration has been manipulating the American people, and the invasion of Iraq was based on a farce. Oh, really? Well, what else is new? On September 15, 2002–six months and four days prior to the Iraqi invasion--I published an article entitled "Would Bush's Saber Rattle as Loudly Against China?", in the Portland Independent Media Center http://Portland.indymedia.org/en/2002/09/21292.shtml –no one else would publish it at the time–that said the following: WOULD BUSH'S SABER RATTLE AS LOUDLY AGAINST CHINA Now that we've reached the anniversary of 9-11, I am consumed by one thought--in light of what I've seen over the past year I find myself much more afraid of Bush, Cheney, and Ashcroft than I am the al-Qaeda While I understand that terrorists strike without warning to destroy life and property to promote their own agenda, it has become increasingly clear that Bush and his cohorts threaten to be even more destructive by attacking life, liberty, and the very foundation of this nation in the promotion of theirs. So what I'd like to know is this--if a shade tree "journalist" sitting up in his den in the heart of a Los Angeles ghetto could see what was going on, why couldn't the New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, CNN and all of the networks, Harvard, Yale, and the various and sundry Ph.D.s from the other great institutions of learning, the nation's think tanks, all of the nation's political scientists, the United States Congress and Hillary Clinton couldn't figure it out? It kinda makes you wanna go, hmmmmmmm. 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. | ||
Monday, May 26, 2008
IS HILLARY ENGAGED IN SUBLIMINAL MESSAGING?
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE
.
Beneath the spin has never been more meaningful than it has become during this political season, because it’s beginning to look like Hillary Clinton has taken it’s meaning to a new and very insidious level. After her comment regarding Robert Kennedy’s assassination, I began to consider all the “gaffes” that both she and Bill have been involved in during this campaign, and I’ve found strong evidence that points to the possibility that Hillary has been engaged in the practice of subliminal messaging throughout this campaign. If this is indeed the case, it makes her latest misstatement much more serious than many of us would like to believe.
Subliminal messaging involves sending messages to the subconscious mind that are not picked up on a conscious level. This technique is often used in advertising–sometimes overtly, but at other times very covertly. An example of the overt use of subliminal messaging in advertising is to have a beautiful woman caressing a new car that’s being advertised for sale. Having the woman there caressing the car sends a subliminal message to the subconscious of perspective male buyers that if they buy this car, it will draw beautiful women to them. Another example of overt subliminal advertising is in the use of Michael Jordan to advertise tennis shoes. It sends the message that if you buy these tennis shoes, it will help you to play basketball like Michael Jordan. Neither is necessarily true, but the beauty of subliminal messaging is since the message goes directly to the subconscious, it circumvents the scrutiny of logical thought.
That’s what makes the use of covert subliminal messaging so ominous. I remember studying one case in college involving a group of moviegoers who were subjected to the technique. In that case, while the group was watching a movie, one frame of a juicy and delicious-looking, cheese burger was spliced into the reel. the moviegoers never even noticed it on a conscious level, but the subconscious doesn’t miss a thing. Later, when they became hungry “out of the blue” and flocked to the concession stand, they never realized that they’d been manipulated.
This technique can also be applied in a political context. But instead of one frame in a reel during a movie, it becomes one word in a sentence, a paragraph, or even an entire speech. I suspect very seriously that this technique was being employed when Bill Clinton mentioned “Jesse Jackson” while discussing an Obama win in the South Carolina primary. By doing so, it was Bill’s intent to implant a subliminal message in the mind of the voter associating all of Jesse Jackson’s baggage, or perceived baggage, on the back of Barack Obama. The beauty of such a strategy is that it doesn’t matter what the context, as long as the statement is graphic, and mentioned while discussing Obama, it serves to implant itself in the mind of the voter.
Another example of subliminal messaging at work was in Bill’s post-Iowa remark that, “This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.” He said that during a time when the Clintons thought that they still had a chance of getting the black vote, so by implanting “fairy tale” in the mind of black voters, it sent the message that they were wasting their vote, because Obama’s candidacy was a fantasy.
Hillary’s comment regarding John McCain having more experience than Obama is another example of this type of manipulation at work. Hillary said, “He’s [McCain] never been the president, but he will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience. Senator Obama will put forth a speech he made in 2002.”
In this case, Hillary was trying to implant two messages. First, by saying, “He’s never been president, but . . .” She was attempting to implant the subliminal message that she had been president. Then, by aligning McCain and herself on the one hand, and Obama on the other, and saying Obama only had a speech, she was contrasting the white experience with the presidency, against that of a black man--and then dismissing Obama by saying all he could bring to the table was a speech.
That was the primary reason that no one could figure out why Hillary had aligned herself with the Republican candidate–it had to do with race, clear and simple. Notice her phrasing–McCain “will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience.” She emphasized, and then re-emphasized the word “lifetime”. So she wasn’t talking about governmental experience, or even legislative experience–she was talking about white experience. So the message she was actually trying to implant was, What experience could a black man possibly have that would prepare him to be president?
Then on May 8th she went there again when she said, “Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me." The reason she stuttered after the first comma was because on her first attempt, she forgot to implant the word “white.” The message? Vote white.
In addition, the implication of her remarks left the message that white people are the only one’s who work hard. So the subliminal message is, if many black people are poor, yet, don’t work hard to remedy that condition, what does that say about them–and through extension, what does it say about Obama?
Now we come to her latest “gaffe” about the assassination of Robert Kennedy. She claims that her words are being taken out of context, but she could have made the very same point by using other examples. In fact, that would have been the prudent and compassionate thing to do considering Sen. Ted Kennedy’s condition, and what the Kennedy family was already going through. But for some reason, Hillary deemed it absolutely necessary to implant the word “assassination.”
And this was clearly not an issue that hadn’t been considered within the Clinton camp. On May 11th while appearing on Meet The Press, Hillary’s campaign chairman, Terry McAuliffe, made the same kind of statement to Tim Russert. He said that in order for Hillary to win the nomination "something big" would have to happen. Then Russett asked, "An act of God, or something catastrophic?", and he said, "Yes, something big would have to happen–absolutely."
So let there be no doubt about it, the Clintons know exactly what they’re saying--and it behooves us to listen very carefully to every word. Because these two are desperate, and they want to get back into the White House bad–real bad.
.
Posts
