[
Views
]
[
Top Five Views
]
[
Blog Roll
]
Discuss:
End Games
Member Comments
-
- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By:
fsilber at 05/14/2008 2:33:27 PM
Comment:
What is so bad about being compared to Booker T. Washington? Most of what Washington wrote and said was true. We're frequently told that Black America is little better off than it was before the Civil Rights Amendment was passed, and in many ways worse off. Yet, those blacks who do follow Booker T. Washington's advice _are_ doing much better.
True, B.T.Washington's approach provides little in the way of direct vengeance for past wrongs, but vengeance doesn't come cheap. -
Posted By:
earlp74 at 05/12/2008 1:11:03 PM
Comment:
Michael C. Dawson! please stop putting out this silly issue into the thoughts of society. You are trying to question Obama's loyalty to the black community, by words that he says, or doesn't say?? It only makes sense to "pick your battles". C'mon, if we have a man that has a chance to win the presidency. It makes no sense whatsoever to jeopardize it by alienating votes (sensitive mainstream "white" votes). He can help, once he's there. You sound like Rev. Wright! pick your battles playa! -
Posted By:
Freedom_Jury at 05/12/2008 3:55:13 AM
Comment:
Sharpton is correct in this case, but not for the reasons he believes...
"Let us render the tyrant no aid; let us not hold the light by which he can trace the footsteps of our flying brother" -Frederick Douglass (from 'Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave')
How is it that there are still Jim Crow laws in all of our major cities, and that the citizens of the USA are not educated enough to oppose them, in the year 2008? A full 143 years after the fall of slavery, the laws treat black men and women horribly unequally... WHY?
Well, my brothers and sisters, I have done my research, and I have found the answer to this question.
SIMPLY: The culture of prohibition is the factor that allows the unequal enforcement of the law. Any law that violates inalienable property rights allows a minority to be singled out and targeted by law enforcement. The 4th amendment, the 2nd Amendment, the entire Bill of Rights cannot exist as the Supreme Law of the land, so long as there is prohibition of private property. The abolitionists of our time, the libertarians, are in agreement with me. Frederick Douglas would certainly have been a Libertarian Party member, if he had lived in our time: he fought for equality under the law, and justice for all.
Equality under the law is the last thing that modern liberals or conservatives want. The liberals want to control your pocket book, and the conservatives want to control your thinking and social behavior.
Douglass noted that the religious slaveowners were the most vicious, and he was right. The mask of social respectability is used to hide tyranny from the gullible and conformist. And the prohibition laws are championed loudly by the religious blacks. (Of course, the black panthers once saw the contradiction, and fought valiantly for their rights. The answer of the Chicago police was to literally murder thier leadership. One more reason to educate EVERYONE.)
Make no mistake: the preachers and politicians who want the inner cities to be unarmed want one thing: they want black men to be unable to properly wield force. What does this say, when the people being disarmed have committed no crime? It is racism, pure and simple, based on geographical demographics. (Sure, the occasional white man is sent to jail for gun ownership in the city, but this is simply a ruse used to propagate a system that is predominantly racist. I know of three times when whites in Chicago went unpunished for gun possession that would have carried a 14 year prison sentence had they been "uppity" black men.) The racism is institutionalized to the extent that those who claim to be fighting racism propagate it, in their simpleminded acceptance of the status quo. -
Posted By:
Freedom_Jury at 05/12/2008 3:47:28 AM
Comment:
Where is the friend of the black 19 year old who owns a gun and is sent to jail for felony gun possession? Where is Sharpton then?
Remember this: the very first Jim Crow laws in the USA were the laws that disarmed southern blacks after the civil war. Those laws required the permission of white sherriffs for any citizen to own or carry a pistol or firearm. Although those laws directly contradicted the 2nd amendment, they were tolerated by the white and black majority that failed to understand their implications. The laws allows every southern sherrif to literally condemn disarmed black families to lynchings.
And now, in the inner city, those same laws keep the upstanding black men from taking back their neighborhoods from lawlessness and crime. And that's where the new prohibition comes in: Ever since the beginning of prohibition of drugs (other than alcohol, since alcohol was the Christian white man's drug, and that somehow put it in a separate artificial category), the prohibition was directed at negroes and non-conforming whites.
The prohibition of drugs has turned a minor social ill into a money-making opportunity for street gangs and criminals who naturally have contempt for the law. The violent and uneducated naturally hold contempt for the law. So prohibition both punishes them, and provides a financial incentive for those criminals to exist outside the law.
In most urban areas, there are gun bans in the cities, and the drug laws are PRIMARILY enforced in the inner cities.
This is the last vestige of institutionalized racism in America.
In all other areas, a black individual is every bit the equal of the white man.
But leave chance to a darkened street, and the police man quickly becomes the overseer. All to the ignorant delight of the black churches and "neighborhood watch communities".
And what is the answer to the prohibitionist system, from those who claim to fight racism? SILENCE. Preservation of the politically-liberal status quo at all costs. Obama has offered plans for a new DEA office in New Orleans, in order to better aid the gestapo in rounding up his "fellow" negroes. He is also a champion of the "Jim Crow" gun laws that knock down the doors of responsible black men, and throw them into slavery cells for exercising their 2nd amendment RIGHTS, in order to preserve the power of the Democratic Party. -
Posted By:
Freedom_Jury at 05/12/2008 3:46:53 AM
Comment:
Every election, the Democratic Party hires expensive lawyers to strike competitors of theirs from the ballot. So much for "Democratic" (this was the fate of Humberto Prado in Chicago who dared to challenge a stooge of the Daley administration, the laughably inane 10th ward drug warrior John Pope). A truly Democratic Party would welcome competition...
And, yes, the Republicans are equally bad. McCain is a drug warrior who wants to use your tax dollars (and military equipment they pay for) to bomb coca farmers in Colombia with paraquat. He wants to wage a holy war against the very idea of private property. And these holy warriors of his ---Do they knock down the doors of suburban white families? Or mostly poor black ones in the inner city? Who goes to jail?
Cindy McCain (John's wife) didn't go to jail when she was busted with illegal painkillers. She cried and whimpered, and pissed herself in submission, and stated her support for the war on private property. Smack on the wrist! She cowarded out, and blindly served her husband's career!
SO WHO BELIEVES IN EQUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS FOR ALL?
If you want to vote for the abolitionist and the suffragist of today, you need to vote for whomever the Libertarian Party runs for office.
If you, the black American, were to show this simple capacity for independent action, you would quickly see an end to the knocking down of doors, and the filling of prisons with your youth and economic lifeblood. You would see an instant respect for your voting power, and an instant catering to demands that the racist prison industrial complex be halted in its tracks.
But this would require you to break rank. To walk away from your bought and paid for counselors of conscience (be they religious or political).
I expect this message to be ignored and/or hastily taken down. And that would be too bad, because it is the living message of a dead and buried Frederick Douglass: the message of individual freedom, the message of abolition, born again.
I am a white man, and I can't stand to see young black men and women preyed upon mercilessly by the prohibitionist police and prohibitionist courts. ( for advice about how to legally prevent this predation, I suggest http://www.fija.org and http://www.isil.org ) If only one black man in a thousand demanded justice, the statist city regimes of Daley, Bloomberg, etc... would crumble, and the police would once again be our servants, not our masters.
No Peace for the Wicked,
-A. Not Guilty Verdict
http://www.blackmanwithagun.com
http://www.rootforamerica.com
http://www.lysanderspooner.org
http://www.lp.org -
Posted By:
DrewReason at 05/09/2008 3:21:31 PM
Comment:
Wow. I am not an Obama supporter and even so, I initially found comparisons to Booker T hurtful.
If Hillary's campaigning alongside Obama has taught the world one thing, it is that Obama's Achille's heel is black folks' disapproval. He gets weary when black folks are mad at him. He can swear that Wright's divisiveness has caused him sadness, but all could see was weariness.
If you really want to hit Obama in the gut, go ahead, call him a Booker T. Washington. Watch him roll over and hold his gut, lose his natural efflugence for weeks upon weeks until something huge happens (like a big win in NC) to buoy it again.
I guess it's a two way street as long as he is happy and the folks who support him are gleeful as well. -
Posted By:
juliea at 05/09/2008 1:33:13 PM
Comment:
This is exactly why blind support of Obama is problematic. It seems to me that black people and Rev. Wright has to subbordinate their positions and their truth-telling to the blind ambition to elect a black president. However, it now begs the question "is he black enough?" given his lukewarm responses to black issues and his distancing himself from Rev. Wright in order to gain white approval. If he is no different from Clinton policywise then why should black people vote for him just because he is black if he isn't interested in black issues?How did black people really benefit from having Condi Rice or Colin Powell in the halls of power? -
Posted By:
benjones1366 at 05/09/2008 1:09:22 PM
Comment:
Michael, much of what you say is true and some is wrong. Barack Obama cannot become President with black votes alone. He must bring in the tribe of ""WHITE."" that means using symbolism of whites hokey and all! Flag pins, super patriotic pro military and finding away of bringing the troops home WITH HONOR. With whites it's all about winning and losing. To bring the troops home without some sense in winning is a bust. Many black folks including myself have served in the military and have a great pride in America, yet love to criticize it as a means to bring about change and to keep from getting a gun when some clerk disregards you at a checkout counter
Just a Revered Wright preached sermons that make white uncomfortable, many blacks listened, felt good and then went home to eat chicken diner. It was an escape valve that you so called black intellectuals have not come forward to explain. Where are the Barack Obama Black wise men? The black leaders have been noticeably absent in the presidential race so far.
Now Hillary is using the race card and you better believe the right wing pundits have been feeding her tactics to use to win at any price. It???s down to white women and racists making up her supporters. The women won't be denied and the racist will not vote for a democrat in the general anyway.
Many white folks still harbor anger over black civil rights and affirmative action and have learned the language of politicians speaking to them without spelling out in public, the racist policies that they want continued.
Why are blacks never portrayed as hard working Americans? Only whites and Hispanics are described in glowing terms in America -
Posted By:
befree1619 at 05/09/2008 12:18:55 PM
Comment:
great article. -
Posted By:
Aprjoy at 05/08/2008 6:27:57 PM
Comment:
Sorry, but your disapproval of Obama's reaction really doesn't make sense. What, should Obama have advocated a riot, like the ones in LA after the Rodney King trial? What good would that do? The context of Obama's statement is completely different from that of Washington's--it's a bad comparison. -
Posted By:
dailyfare at 05/08/2008 3:05:57 PM
Comment:
Outrage expressed in the form of protest marches is old and tired. Can we seriously not come up with better strategies? What is the State of the Black Union all about? Why has no political pact or ongoing political strategies come out of that gathering? -
Posted By:
choobop74 at 05/08/2008 3:04:12 AM
Comment:
Yo fam, it's not an issue of race we're talking about. It's about injustice, police brutality and excessive use of force. If Barak cannot recognize that then he's about a Change I can do without. Black faces in high places aint my cup of tea. -
Posted By:
Khathu at 05/07/2008 11:30:04 PM
Comment:
We as a people must not limit our vote to just the Democratic or Republican Parties. Both parties have and will continue to take our votes for granted if we do not hold them accountable. I want real change something that neither the Democratics or Republicans can give. Make a statement and look at other parties.
By the way, Senator Obama should have stood up for justice and equity. They have nothing to do with race. This is a clear indication of the type of change he will be bring. New color same policies. I can't wait. -
Posted By:
7233145 at 05/07/2008 5:22:53 PM
Comment:
I do not have a problems, at all, with Obama's statements. This "Bell Case" is not Abner Louima, its not Amadou Diallo, its not Micheal Griffiths, Crown Heights, Howard Beach, or Bensonhurst! Its a bunch of hoodlums coming out of strip club, being trailed but renegade (Black and Syrian) cops for past drug dealing. We cannot let these "reprobates" stand in the way of our finally making history this election. Call me all the names you want for that statement, but I'm a Black conservative who is Pro-Obama. -
Posted By:
Dbloooh7 at 05/07/2008 4:52:26 PM
Comment:
Obama cannot win this election solely dependant on "Black" votes. Instead of being criical of his decision, I believe minorities should be applauding it. If he takes the "Black Militant" stance, he will lose-end of story. He knows he's black and I"m quite confident Michelle will never let him forget where SHE comes from, so let's support him instead of complaining that he's not "Black enough". He's made better progress than any African American politician ever has, so let's save the "black fist metality for after the inauguration. -
Posted By:
trackfan at 05/07/2008 4:46:56 PM
Comment:
What does Dawson expect Obama to do? Call for riots? When cops do things like this, the only thing we can demand is that they be vigorously prosecuted. That's what happened in this case. In a democratic society, you can't resort to violence every time you disagree with a verdict. White folks felt the same way about the OJ verdict, but they didn't riot. -
Posted By:
dmac225 at 05/07/2008 4:46:25 PM
Comment:
How was the Sean Bell case racist when 2 of the three officers involved are black? Also sorry to educate you but unless you immigrated here from Africa you ARE NOT African-American. When blacks in this country decide to quit being African victims and start being American citizens then perhaps they will make progress. -
Posted By:
Imani at 05/07/2008 4:03:11 PM
Comment:
Thank you for bringing Professor Dawson's voice, with its depth and clarity, to your website. His commentary consistently shows the hypocrisy of electoral politics, on the part of all the candidates, including our beloved Obama. As Dawson emphasizes, true progressive politics does not come from following any one candidate, but by organizing in our schools, neighborhoods, workplaces for the change we want. I have become energized around the Obama campaign, not because I think he will solve my problems or those of the African-American community, but because I am reminded that the only force that can truly change history is the people united for their own interests.
Professor Dawson speaks above the narrow realm of electoral politics and many folks' tendency to be apologists for Obama when we should hold him accountable, as with Sean Bell.
Eudora -
Posted By:
nfamous at 05/07/2008 1:16:20 PM
Comment:
I agree that they are all bad choices and that it is prudent to consider the alternatives strategically to minimize the damage to the country and world but Obama doesn't minimize any damage. He may slow it down but the process will continue. Corporations will continue and desecration and destruction of the planet will continue. We do have the time or money to play massage politics of chiding corporate representatives to do the right thing. We are running out of time on this planet. Children born today have a very bleak future if any at all. Americans do not realize they have the right and the duty to overthrow unjust government. That does not mean protesting and signing petitions folks. It means kicking ass via violent revolution and no, it will not be televised.
We cannot make Obama accountable because power concedes nothing without a demand. We can demand nothing of Obama and do not demand anything him. Blacks are powerless in this struggle over the reins of white supremacy. For us to argue that we deserve our face on global imperialism is duplicitous at best and hypocritical at worst for a people who have historically held the moral high ground in this country. Until we are ready to die we will have no effect on the sociopaths who run this country and this world. It is that plain and simple. If you want to live in denial then continue doing exactly what you were doing. -
Posted By:
stargazr at 05/07/2008 11:29:42 AM
Comment:
I can appreciate Mr. Dawson's perspective....but i'll just say this. Booker T wasn't running for President. And there are things you can do as a sitting Pres that you can't do while running - just like there are things you can't say and do during an interview, that you can do and say once you get the job. I agree that the issues facing Blacks are extremely important, and we must hold Barack accountable when/if he is President, but right now, i guess i'm not holding it against him for attemping to pick his battles, so that he can win the war...
LAL -
Posted By:
choobop74 at 05/07/2008 6:24:06 AM
Comment:
I appreciate your comparison between Barak and BookerT. I only wish that our community had vetted Barak more throughly before putting all of our eggs in his basket. If we had done so, perhaps, he would have given a little more thought to the Sean Bell situation and showed some compassion and empathy to the Bell family. And another thing. How can you speak out against violence that has not happened and remain silent about violence that did happen? I guess that's just Barak being Barak. -
Posted By:
POLpursun at 05/06/2008 6:12:01 PM
Comment:
The following was truncated from my previous entry to meet the 3000 character limit.
Now, I add the following, re who can get whose votes, here, albeit that your reticence re Obama is well taken. The juxtaposition of the Booker T. and Barack comments is a poignant explication of the black experience in America. One thing which the Wright saga shows is that not everything which may seem intuitive and, indeed, obvious is. One would have thought that, even with a modicum of intelligence, people would understand the interplay between experience and perspective, notwithstanding that 1100 hours on a Sunday is the most segregated hour in America. With the nonsense, rationalization, projection and euphemistic verbosity around the various, shall we call them, Wright profferings, obviously intelligence was a necessary, but not sufficient, attribute.
This is nonsense: If Clinton is going to work as hard for a democrat as she has said recently (a definite indication that she REALLY believes she will win, albeit that she could not really say anything else when asked as she was --------- Ah! But she said it so STRONG, with such vehemence!!) and he, if the nominee, still can't get sufficient white votes, why, pray tell, should blacks pay ANY attention to Barack if he stomps for Hillary, should she be the nominee? Now blacks SHOULD turn out in the very, very large numbers, indicated by the primaries, to listen to him AND to treat him properly. However, IF he is talking as a presidential surrogate then NOTHING he does or says should dissuade blacks from leaving the presidential slot on the ballot blank. However, they (and the young as well, who also should turn out in large numbers) should all vote for democrats down-ballot. -
Posted By:
POLpursun at 05/06/2008 6:07:37 PM
Comment:
What happens if HRC obtains the nomination?
I posted the following as a comment to the article, "Clinton, Obama duel on gas prices on eve of Indiana, N.C." :
This Clinton pandering ( political calculation) defines her. Further, this emphasis on Obama's electability: Remember folks, of the last nine potuses, i.e. numbers 35 to 43, four have been democrats (35, 36, 39 and 42) and five republicans. LBJ was the last democrat to win the white vote. Carter did not. Clinton did not.
Clinton CANNOT win in November if she does not receive sufficient of the black vote. This is NOT being emphasized in the media as is Obama's difficulty with the white vote.
I opine that, if HRC gets the nomination and blacks go ahead and vote for her, if one thinks one has seen take for granted, that will be nothing compared with the message that future would-be Clintons will take note of for the future.
Look, this Clinton argument re momentum now, whatever happens, is BS!! Obama's momentum took him to where he is, if any subsequent momentum which she has does not take her pass him at the end, then he wins.
In fact, given the despicable campaign which the ClintonS (yes, Hill and Bill are, and have been throughout, a duo ----- WHATEVER he did was a part of THEIR strategy) have run, if she is the nominee in November, blacks should employ, let's call it, a down-ticket strategy. That is, leave the presidential slot on the ballot blank and vote for all democrats for everything else. If others REALLY want democrats so badly, then that strategy should result in veto-proof majorities in congress and a filibuster-proof majority in the senate.
The Clintons should have thought about things such as supreme court nominees and disastrous foreign policy when they decided to initiate the southern strategy post-Iowa, step it up at South Carolina and take it to full bloom just before Pennsylvania, albeit that they had unexpected (but hoped for) help from the Wright saga and from Barack's so-called "bitter" comment.
Enough was enough at South Carolina. Enough needs to be enough again at November, if it come to that. -
Posted By:
rainydaiyz at 05/06/2008 1:54:22 PM
Comment:
The Booker T. Washington-Obama comparison was brilliant -
Posted By:
rossiik at 05/06/2008 1:12:07 PM
Comment:
Well, the historical analogy between B. T. Washington and the sen Obama, is intellectually acute. But in the present context, it is not timely delivered. Elect him first, then hold him accountable. A well understood social and judicial activism can amount to a naive (or armchair) political activism. The mistake beeing that we believe that both have to be perfectly synchrone...No: elect him first, THEN hold him accountable! -
Posted By:
brian07 at 05/06/2008 12:25:01 PM
Comment:
I'm confused??? So the responsible/pro-black position is let's take to the streets? Enough with psuedo litmus test of blackness. -
Posted By:
bylinediva at 05/06/2008 12:12:09 PM
Comment:
very interesting piece. thanks for your view. -
Posted By:
Young Professional Unknown at 05/06/2008 11:46:53 AM
Comment:
While I respect your view that Obama may be the best of a mediocre field of candidates, you don't make a particularly convincing argument for why Obama's call for NYC blacks not to riot or resort to violence is a position "detrimental to progressive causes and the black community." You've implied that the position most beneficial to progressive causes and the black community would have been for Obama to express outrage at the verdict, tell NYC blacks not to respect the ruling, and tell NYC blacks that resorting to violence is an appropriate means of expressing their (our) anger. While this kind of reaction may have made blacks feel better about voting for Obama, and it may have made him more of a "black" candidate, you don't speak at all towards how it would have furthered progressive or black causes - most specifically how a reaction that would have endangered his general electability but endeared him to the black public is better for progressives and blacks than a reaction that endangered his status among blacks but improved or maintained his general electability. Thanks. -
Posted By:
Samantha T at 05/06/2008 11:20:48 AM
Comment:
Obama is likely not advocating rioting in the streets in the wake of the Sean Bell verdict because he understands that the state simply didn't bear its burden in this case. The verdict isn't "racist", it's based upon the state's foolish decision to put a bunch of sketchy, contradictory witnesses on the stand. There's going to be a civil suit and there are likely going to be disciplinary proceedings against the defendants and a federal civil rights suit as well. They are not walking away scot-free, they've just not been found criminally responsible for Bell's death. -
Posted By:
macdw at 05/06/2008 10:11:04 AM
Comment:
First of all, I am sorry, you can not compare the two. A black man was shot by black police officers. Are black police officers not black people? How is this a black/white issue? It isn't. Do I think it was tragic? Yes. Do I think it was wrong? Yes. But like it or not Mr. Obama is right. What good does rioting in the streets do? Demand justice. Vote the Mayor out of office. Vote the judge and police commissioner and the district attorney our of office. There is legal recourse....take it! Having a garrish display of some knee jerk emotional violent reaction is not productive, and I can't believe that you would even think that Mr. Obama should have supprted such a thing. Grow up.
What Hillary Clinton is doing is reprhehensible, and I can't believe that she will get away with it, and that black people will still support her. She has shown her true colors and it is truly a disgusting display. She is willing to disenfranchise the very people she claims she has spent her life helping. I am sure she would tell us it is for our own good, because we couldn't possibly think for, and care for, ourselves. That is racism at the purest level. -
Posted By:
Outkast at 05/06/2008 9:20:15 AM
Comment:
Abuse of force by the police is real, and I want justice for Bell family as much as anyone, but you cannont expect any individual running for President to speak out against the Rule of Law. They have a name for that: political suicide. -
Posted By:
anniemcw at 05/06/2008 9:15:54 AM
Comment:
Martin Luther King Jr also called for non-violence. Is he an Uncle Tom too? -
Posted By:
bklynbro at 05/06/2008 8:38:21 AM
Comment:
Everyone has the right to be wrong Mr. Dyson - including you. -
Posted By:
rossiik at 05/06/2008 3:37:20 AM
Comment:
Well, the historical analogy between B. T. Washington and the sen Obama, is intellectually acute. But in the present context, it is not timely delivered. Elect him first, then hold him accountable. A well understood social and judicial activism can amount to a naive (or armchair) political activism. The mistake beeing that we believe that both have to be perfectly synchrone...No: elect him first, THEN hold him accountable! -
Posted By:
rossiik at 05/06/2008 3:32:17 AM
Comment:
Well, brother the historical analogy between B. T. Washington and the sen Obama, is intellectually acute. But in the present context, is not timely delivered. Elect him first, then hold him accountable. A well understood social and judicial activism can amount to a naive (or armchair) political activism. The mistake beeing that we believe that both have to be perfectly synchrone...No: elect him first, THEN hold him accountable! -
Posted By:
firewire at 05/06/2008 3:20:25 AM
Comment:
How typical you are to sit in your comfortable chair at UC and throw stone at one of our own who's brave enough to risk life, limb and family. Do you really understand the power structure that he's challenging?
If you don't like the system, get up off your lazy butt and campaign for political office and change it!
I agree that the verdict was a bad one, but instead of drawing the conclusion that our only choice as a people is to settle for the least of all evils is destructive. It serves no one. You would have said the same of Martin Luther King and Malcolm X after his conversion to peaceful methods to exact change. You'd be the one criticizing and pointing the finger at Gandhi or Jesus Christ too.
What you fail to reason is that history has proven that violence has not served us in the long run. An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind. Our African ancestors had a saying, learn all you can from you adversary, study them closely and then use their system to over come.
Get involved! Put your butt on the line or zip-it-up!! -
Posted By:
blessinggirl at 05/05/2008 11:38:48 PM
Comment:
How many meals does militancy provide those who are hungry, or eggs, bread and milk to families whose food stamps run out the 15th of the month? Senator Obama cannot change police behavior, and ranting can't either. The Justice Department (now freed from the facist Gonzalez gang) may well bring civil rights violations against the Bell killers and the NYPD. A federal civil rights case would address the judge's wrong far more than punishing the shooters. I'm not willing to dismiss Senator Obama for the contortionistic views he must take to hold on to his dignity and core values. Wright's speechifying was rooster-like crowing when our folks are suffering out here, and reminiscent of the "hot rhetoric" we radicals used to charge those who merely ranted and didn't get out there are help the people. And Obama is no Booker T. Washington. Please give the man a break.
Reply
Report Abuse
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse