Sunday, September 28, 2008

I Do Not Support Pastor's Pimping For Political Candidates - The Church Has Been Comprimised Enough Already!!

AJC: Pastor challenges IRS regulations on endorsements

The Rev. Jody Hice fired a verbal volley Sunday in a battle that he believes will return the United States to its American Revolutionary roots.

From his pulpit at Bethlehem First Baptist Church outside of Atlanta, he urged his congregation to vote for Sen. John McCain and to not vote for Sen. Barack Obam

He based his recommendations on McCain’s opposition to abortion and gay marriage and Obama’s support of those issues, Hice told the Barrow County church packed with about 400 listeners.

“These are not political issues,” Hice said. “There are moral issues.”

They may be moral issues, but Internal Revenue Service regulations say clergy cannot make public political endorsements to their congregations without risking the tax-exempt status of their house of worship.

Hice’s endorsement and argument is part of a coordinated effort by the Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative Christian legal aid society. Its members hope the IRS will challenge one or more of the 33 pastors across the United States who did what Hice did Sunday. They hope to overturn the no-endorsement regulation in court.


This Republican pastor is put into the same category as the Democrat Rev and baby daddy Jamal Bryant. The fact remains that these (and I use the term lightly) Men Of God - are supposed to be winning souls for Christ - not prostituting themselves from the pulpit to get a particular candidate elected.

If this IRS rule is overturned this is but one more slide of the church into that of "money changers".

I am starkly opposed to preachers that have a captive audience able to make political endorsements. In fact there needs to be a greater crack down on this type of speech. NOT BY THE GOVERNMENT but by the people sitting in the pews who are TIRED OF BEING USED!!!!

The Black Community And The Democratic Party Taxi Fare



Over the years there have been a steady stream of reports about a taxi driver who agreed to take a "fare" on an extended trip, beyond his own operating area. After being motivated on the one hand by the scenario that had been painted by the person in need of a ride and by the jackpot payoff to be received upon reaching the destination - the cab driver does something that we who are outside looking in on the situation pleasantly ask "What in the world were you thinking?".

On too many of these situations the fare states that he needs a ride from LA to San Franciso due to some emergency situation. There were no airplanes, buses or trains available to take him to his destination in a timely manner thus he hailed a cab. Waiting for the cab driver upon the completion of the trip is a large sum of money, plus some bonus money for going out of his way - or so he is told. During the trip the fare uses his flair for conversation to impress upon the driver and earn his trust for the bulk of the trip, appeasing any doubts that the driver has pop into his mind after seeing the actual time and resource commitment that the real trip entails.

The reason why this story reaches the national press is because - it doesn't quite always turn out as was promised up front to the driver. What typically happens is that the fare has the driver agree to stop at some public restroom or restaurant just shy of the destination where the big pay off is to be accepted. Having built up trust the driver agrees to do so. Hell - he has to go to the bathroom as well.

Upon returning to the cab, however, it is a good thing that he just cleared his bowels and his blatter because what is sees would have caused him to soil his pants. That trusted cab fare has GONE, leaving him high and dry.

It is possible that the fare has hitched onto another, more LOCAL cabbie to take him to his destination and thus he gets the reward and the risk was far less than cabbie #1.

Before I go into my direct correlation let us dissect the basic framework by which both stories are aligned with.

1) A person who needs to be made 'confident' by a confidence man to do something (or go further) than he is otherwise inclined to because there is a big payout at the end of the journey. Greater risk - greater reward.

2) The abatement of all logical questions that should be asked regarding the underlying story (and the alternative channels for transporation that are more appropriate and should have been taken) as a measure of certainty that the promised reward at the end of the trip will ever be seen. In creating a bond with the person and thust talking about everything BUT the core goals (the pay off) the confidence man can form the impression in the subject's mind that they indeed have something in common - regardless of the scheme that is fomenting in the confidence man's mind.

3) The buy in - in helping the confidence man to succeed - the subject is advancing his own causes for the "little guy" who is in need. "If not me, then who?"

and finally and most importantly

4) The failure to ask for earnest money along the way. Where as most lotteries offer either a steady stream of payouts over time OR one lump sum payout upon winning......the confidence situation requires a "gold at the end of the rainbow". Thus as a reward for your loyalty and sacrifice the payout will be great.....at the END of the journey.

A proper stewart of his own resources would ask for INCREMENTAL PAYOUT.
Since he is fully aware of the beginning and end of the journey and what he as a participant wants out of the deal - he will break the trip up into mile markers that are digestible. Upon the successful completion of a given segment of the trip - he will demand a PAYOUT for his services. This will provide him with a very important CHECK upon the confidence man. If the confidence man balks at the payment at that interval - then the trip is concluded - he is asked to leave and the EXPOSURE TO RISK BY THE SUBJECT are managed and reduced. He lost out on the services provided at Interval #3 along the road when the confidence man defaulted on his promise - but at least he got paid for #1 and #2.

Specifically with regard to the cabbie - if the cab fare needed to get to the destination to receive the money certainly he could tell the benefactor to send money to the Western Union at the end of interval #1 and thus have enough time to arrange for this to happen.


So how does this translate to the current state of affairs with regard to the Black community and our popular political sentiments? This is a very easy comparison to make.

We have had a multi-decades long communication from Democratic operatives - White and Black - for our community to stay united and "ride the donkey" into town as the vehicle for our racial prosperity. While the political landscape of America is red, blue and PURPLE - the color of the Black community is dark BLUE.

NO THIS IS NOT A CALL FOR BLACK FOLKS TO START VOTING REPUBLICAN.
This is a call for Black people to MAKE NOTE OF WHO IS RUNNING OUR COMMUNITIES!!! You put them there!!

Along the ride they promised you that at the end of the rainbow you would have:

* Good Schools
* Safe Streets
* Abundant Jobs
* Healthy Living

Now that you have done your party and made them powerful - it appears that the domain of delivery for these sought after benefits .....has EXPANDED. Translation the carrot has been extended forward just as it was about to be in our grasp. You see - previously we were told, for example - that "THEY don't care nothing about our children's education. WE need to run our own schools by putting people in place WITH OUR OWN INTERESTS and THEN our children will receive the education that they deserve". Tell me honestly how many times have you heard this line of thinking from various Black revolutionaries over time?

Now that THEY DO HAVE THE CONTROL that was struggled for for so long........the back end promises have not be received. The old crew has been purged and the community has selected those who represent their interests. Though years of policy fights when there were still elements of the old regime left to make a fight of it - THEY ARE NOW GONE!!!

In their place are the people who made PROMISES to the community.

Interestingly enough - where as the community took up a confrontational disposition against the former regime when they failed the communiyt......now the failure does not evoke quite the same response. Once again the community gets shorted.

But wait - these operatives know how the Black community thinks like they know the back of their own hands. They know that all they need to do is to EXPAND THE POLICE TAPE around the crime scene. Thus if they can convince the masses of Black folks that the failure in the class rooms is really a SOCIETAL FAILURE to "care for" the Blacks then despite them being in control of the system - they are actually NOT in control. Society has failed to provide them with the adequate resources for success.

In a brilliant shift of the ball under the shell - they now make this an issue not of ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE but one of FIGHTING FOR RESOURCES. Thus the equation becomes "give us EQUAL RESOURCES and THEN and only then will we produce EQUAL RESULTS".

Now people if you don't see what happens next then you have not lived long enough. In turning the issue into one of "resources" (as they did with the Chicago Public Schools - and the Kansas City Public Schools a few years ago) the dynamics of the argument are changed. On the one hand the students and parents are tacitly told "Don't worry baby - it's not your fault. THEY have not given you the tools that you need to be successful". Thus the kid who is the main thief of instructional time due to his discipline problem gets a pass for the damage that he has done to the rest of the class.

The parents who feel aggrieved and who believe that they too can take place in a 1956 style Civil Rights Movement are motivated to buy into the "racism chase" - departing the four walls of the school and what is actually going on WITHIN for the greater fruits that are to be had in the legislature and the court room. They only need to find a sympathetic ear who will believe their claims about being shortchanged. The ocean's temperature has gone up but the boiling point is centuries away. Equal outcomes will be had when it reaches 100 degrees Celcius.

Gone are the notions of local management and local funding as a means of achieving these goals. Instead the Civil Rights Movement which was once really about RIGHTS - the right to not be beaten down by another and have him walk way with impunity has now transformed into an ECONOMIC and POLITICALLY PARTISAN/IDEOLOGICAL movement where quasi-socialist economic theories, if not implemented means that society remains RACIST.

Some people mistake the failure for society to make provisions for you as being racist when they should make note of the failure of their own leadership to make inventory of the human resources that are present with a city and order them to produce certain directed outcomes for their common good.

It appears that some people are now standing face to face with their own economic theories, having achieved the political control that their aspired for - don't like what they see and instead choose to nationalize their entitlements.

Saturday, September 27, 2008

Clayton County Schools Watch - Going Accreditation Shopping

AJC: Schools could get alternative accreditation next month

Clayton County schools could get alternative accreditation as early as next month.

Consultants from the Georgia Accrediting Commission completed their week-long review of Clayton County schools today.

GAC’s 18-member board will vote on accreditation for each Clayton school at its Oct. 5 meeting, said Carvin Brown, the commission’s executive director.

Clayton school officials will learn the results by the end of October.

Clayton County schools turned to GAC after the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools revoked the 50,000-student district’s accreditation effective Sept. 1.

“We need all the support we can get,” superintendent John Thompson said earlier this week. “SACS is the only organization that can give us worldwide accreditation. … But we need to keep checks and balances.”

Like SACS, the Georgia agency will determine if Clayton schools meet a series of standards and then issue a stamp of approval. However, the Georgia accreditation will not help students looking to attend colleges outside the state, Brown said.

The benefit of being accredited by GAC is that Clayton students will be allowed to more easily transfer their credits to other public high schools in Georgia and may have a better chance of being accepted to a public university in Georgia, Brown said.

The alternative accreditation will cost the district about $10,000.

Clayton is still working to get its SACS accreditation reinstated, Thompson said. The goal is to meet nine improvement mandates by April so Class of 2009 graduates can receive a SACS-accredited diploma.




I seriously believe that a number of operatives in Clayton County have no clue as to why they were stripped of their accreditation. Prior to this action they figured that by delivering a 2,000 page report in which they could provide a convincing image of what they have done could would allow the pile of papers to represent a system that looks nothing like the one that is present in real life. The bottom line of it all is that the history of drama in this school system for at least the 10 years that I have been tracking it does not get whitewashed by a glowing report - done by those who have a vested interest in "glowing".

As is the case in so many other situations - the mind set of the operatives in Clayton County seems to be - "If I fail one set of standards, I'll simply go shopping for another organization that will 'certify me'". If this other organization has credibility I won't fault them for doing so. What I am critical about is that I am not sure if the lesson has actually been learned by the entire community in Clayton. What are they going to do to insure that it never happens again? This loss of accreditation can prove to be a death spiral as those who live in the county now realize that one simple move across the county line will free them of their problems. Once a mass exodus is initiated - only those who can't move will be left behind and their numbers will be concentrated. The more the concentration the greater the pressure upon the next group of 'those who can' to move out. The bottom is hit.

If there is one thing that I would like to see developed as an operating mandate for my people it would be to instill a spirit of PREEMPTIVE CONSCIOUSNESS. This speaks to a preexisting notion of who the community is and the standards that must be maintained for the ultimate end result that is hoped for to come to fruition. With this in mind those who usually remain silent will realize that they cannot be silent in the sight of "foolishness". They would choose to nip it in the bud, managing people on what they NEED TO BE DOING if this goal is ever to be achieved rather than managing based on their NEEDS (and rights) - lobbying outside entities for them to make the people whole.

In summary "SACS" nor "Georgia Accrediting Commission" can define who Clayton County is. They only document and then reflect what is the character of the county and its schools. The fiasco in Clayton is but a microcosm as to what is going on and has been allowed to go on in too many Black communities around this nation. We have been so brainwashed over time regarding the need for EXTERNAL focus to resolve our problems that in this and other entities in which those who have struggled AGAINST some force, now having taken control of the entity itself are not equipped to, more more clearly, don't promote the leadership who is equipped at expressing that which they seek - upon the backs of all of the players that have skin in the game - in this case educational excellence.

The previous campaign sign in Clayton which said "We Run Things Now" needs to be said not to the WHITE FOLKS who the candidate was speaking to but to the BLACK COMMUNITY that is at the controls now. YES you do RUN THINGS and thus you are RESPONSIBLE and ACCOUNTABLE for the results.

Friday, September 26, 2008

The Political Left In This Nation Control The Definitions Of Negative Sentiments

Sometimes people, it is best to accept certain things in life and realize when someone else has a particular advantage as you work to understand the advantages that your particular positions enjoys to the contrary. Such is the case with the ideological left and their ability to judge and define things as: hateful, racist, sexist, discriminatory, and all of the associated adjectives that you can think of.

I will now go through a list of examples to prove my point.

Saturday Night Live last week did a skit in which the actual family of Alaskan and Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin's family was alleged to have an incident of INCEST as part of their comedy bit. The fact that the Palins are White and they have been assigned the 'red neck' attribute by popular culture makes them fair game for such attacks. No problem, understood. Now just imagine if right wing operatives made a skit of the Black family of Barack Obama having suffered from child molestation upon his little girls? If the waffle box done a few weeks ago was called "racist" what ever do you think that this bit done in comedy would have warranted? I assure you that the FCC would have been called in to do something with the "free speech" of the offending television show.

The current gas crisis (at least in the Southeast) as a result of Hurricane Gustav having shut down the refineries on the Gulf Coast. As a result there are long lines at the gas pumps for the average consumers in Southern "Red States". Even though this problem has its roots in the recent evacuation rather than any particular national economic situation - the presence of long gas lines now and back during the Saudi oil embargo are unavoidable. I have made note of the power of News Fabrication over time. Certain conspiracy theorists see events and then seek to apply a narrative to them as a means of channeling people down a particular pathway. Thus this current gasoline crisis which is causing hardship upon the average citizen is likely to be bad news for the incumbents - even though they did not do anything directly to cause it. I suspect that if we had an array of Democratic incumbents who's jobs were on the line during an election that is about 40 days away - we would now be seeing stories about how industry manipulation of gasoline supplies are making for an uneasy voting public who will see this as yet another checkmark on there lists as to why "change" is needed. Thus far - I am the only source that I know of to make note of what would be the narrative if the situation were reversed.

When Will The Black Community Start "Asking For Results" From The Democrats Rather Than Using It As A Vehicle For Promised Results?

The presidential campaign is at a fevered pitch. The latest economic meltdown in the banking sector has the "economic experts" on Black talk radio feeling vindicated that what they have been saying about the Republicans and the "money exchangers" have been right all along. Now mind you in their arguments they can't swim away too far from the life preserver that they cleave to as they make their arguments in the context of fellow travelers who believe the same as they do. The Republicans are in control of the Executive Branch you know. The Democrats are in control over Congress but this doesn't count in their attacks. The fact is that the Republicans had control over congress for the past 6 years before the heroes in so thus the Republicans are to be held accountable. Any rational human being will vote to purge all Republicans out of office because they have failed and have hurt the country. This is the logic of the Black Democratic operative who swears upon his grandmother's grave that he is doing nothing more than pursuing the best interests of the Black community.

You know that he has been warning us about the financial turmoil that has been allowed to happen in this country due to unchecked capitalism. The greedy barons are "looting our nation" and they have been working to put a stop to this! One thing that I notice in listening to their arguments is the distinct difference between their RANTS AND CONCERNS and the PREVAILING POLICIES THAT WERE IN PLACE during the time of their favored president. This is an important distinction. I can point to several local activists here in town who have been fighting for "access to capital" and against "predatory mortgage loans".

The gaping hole in all of this, however, is the question - despite having your party in power during some of the time that you were saying these things - can you claim that yours was the prevailing SENTIMENT? In most cases the answer is not only NO - it is also the case that everyone else knew that this activist's policies would have thrown cold water onto the desire of all politicians - economic growth.

It is all too interesting that when we assign ownership of the following phrases:

* Access to capital
* Underserved communities
* More flexible loan terms

their attachment goes to the progressive. The fact is that the roots of this crisis (I am not saying the only reasons for) are in the fact that credit lending terms were lowered on the front end and the originating banks failed to do the necessary due diligence to validate the paper that was coming into their offices for consideration.

Please note, however, that in the wake of all of this mess will be tightened lending standards and thus the very people who were assisted into a home will have a hard time doing the same at least for the next 10 years.

But Houston we have a problem. Economic growth in America is centered upon extending credit and loans to people and organizations so that they can translate this capital into jobs, businesses and general opportunity. There is no getting around this fact. There is no "government blessing" via regulation that is going to change this fact.

Washington Mutual Collapses Under Bad Debt - I Pay My Mortgage That I Have With Them On Time

Government seizes WaMu, sells some assets; Largest bank failure in U.S. history; JPMorgan buys $1.9 billion in assets


$302 billion dollars in assets.
The largest bank failure in US history right before our eyes!!

I happen to have my own home's mortgage in Washington Mutual. I just checked. Despite the bank's collapse they still drew their bi-weekly payment our of my checking account last night.

Why can't a "bank collapse" also mean that my payments cease? It is the red ink that has been caused by other people with WaMu loans failing to pay their mortgages.

WaMu had flexible credit and payment terms. I chose to switch my former 15 year mortgage to a 30 year with Flex pay. This allowed me to pay off my mortgage in 22 year by paying twice a month. This was a favorable term for me and allowed me to pay for my basement renovation at the time.

WaMu expanded rapidly throughout the country. I saw them appear all of a sudden in Georgia, New York and other state over these past few years. They so often built brand new branches rather than acquiring older banks. Their branches were innovative in that they dispensed money from an automated safe. The teller never actually touched any cash.

These are some trying times and the wheels are coming off of several institutions all at once. Right before a major election - and just in time for one particular party to put all of the blame on another. They don't really know the B.S. that they are dishing nor what they are about to step into.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

I Now Can Understand How Some People Used The Bible To Justify Slavery And So Much Other Devilment



As I debate with some of you I seriously wonder if you see the hatred and bigotry that streams out of your own hearts. Worst than anyone else doing this today is the so called "Christian". Please note this is not an attack on Christians or Christianity. I am a fellow believer. I make no bones that I am on a journey and thus am by no means perfect.

I simply get amazed at the great amount of deception and manipulation that goes on among certain operatives WITHIN THE BLACK COMMUNITY. Where as they point out the "God told me so" words of their ideological enemies - many of these same people simply can't see that in their own form they too are just as jaundiced, having taken "Gods will" as expressed via the bible and used it like a roll of toilet paper.

The White Christian evangelist is often called to the carpet for attempting to enshrine America as "God's nation" - keeping the world pure for all Christians against the weeds that threaten the garden. They are the "power edgers" making sure that this threat does not enter in. These type of people are duly ostracized for that which allows them to live blindly about the aggregate impact of their actions - the people who are on the outside, having been on the sharp end of that long, pointy "sword of God".

For some reason that I simply cannot understand among some Negroes, however, they can't see how hateful, bigoted, selective and that they use the Christian infrastructure to justify certain things done in the name of JESUS that Jesus himself would not recognize if he came back after hearing his name called out during the commission of these sins of omission.

One must understand the nuances of Black folks in order to understand the popular misuse of Christianity in kind with the White Christian who used the book to oppress Black folks. You see - Black folks have never "ruled the world" as White folks have. Thus the Negro Christian operative - noting as such will always INFERIORIZE his own bastardization of Christianity as being too small an individual sin to stack next to the Global Christian pimping game that the European used to control the world. In his case since God Almighty told the White man that he is the superior being (this the White man talking not me), he is to go into the world and civilize the heathen races and make them Christians. Thus in doing so God made him superior just like God himself. You did see the painting of Jesus done by Leonardo Di Vici? Thus we know that Jesus was a European, right? :-/



Thus the Negro Christian Operative who is made of the same flesh, bones and manipulative thoughts as his White counterpart has mastered every word in the bible just as his ideological adversary has. He wraps himself in his ability to throw out the appropriate biblical phrase at the appropriate time in order to first show that he is a "man of God" and then secondly to couch his own motivations inside. Jesus told him to, you know.

Just don't get the Negro Christian Operative discussing politics in any way. If done you will see that the bible has certain amendments to it that few people have ever seen before which cover his justifications for his beliefs. The Negro Christian Operative has a different use for his religion though. Where as some segments of the Christian faith see God as a giver of commandments for all who wish to be in line with his will to follow - this operative sees his IDEOLOGICAL ADVERSARIES as having fallen short of God's instruction and thus THEY must be punished by God and by God......he is the one who is going to insure that this devil falls down.

Even the most non-judgmental, "Give him a second and a third and a fourth chance to do right in life" person who is void of any condemnation of those he favors seems to have a packet of fire and brimstone in his pocket at all times for his ideological enemies. For this Negro Christian Operative MERCY upon those he supports is a sign of Godliness but DAMNATION upon his enemies is a bargaining chip for him to make full use of. It just so happens that all of those who happen to have fallen short of God - also are his ideological enemies.

He looks upon the greed, selfishness of his enemies and notes how these have translated into the neglect in those within the margins of society and thus this battle reigns supreme as his Christian mission for the vengeance against these "Evil Doers".

In the backdrop of his outward focus reside the large body of people to which the fruits of his swordsmanship will be directed. In following the Christian directive to "help the poor" he justifies his antics described above because if he can create yet another "fish distribution" route into these people's hands - he indeed has moved closer to his God.

Now when you look at his flock - you'd better not tell him that they have their own fair share of bedevilment that likely contributes more to the perpetuation of their own condition today than anything which this outside adversary is doing explicitly. Like any misionary, however "Jesus' work" is found in works among the external heathen who must be changed rather than actually admonishing your own kind to consider their actions and get right with God so that change might come.

No sir - the aggregate state of the flock is due to the residual effects that the great earthly adversary hath done over time. Even a young Black boy born into the flock today - September 25, 2008 will one day grow into receiving the protective covenant that this swordsman has constructed. Jesus told him so you know.

The Negro Christian Operative is not prone to see that the HIV infections that are rampant in his community is a sign of the aftereffects that are brought on by not having a social order that attempts to "slow people's roll". His liberal pastor pushes "condoms" rather than spiritual guidance about resisting the flesh. In some noteworthy cases who is the preacher to tell his flock to do what he has not been able to do? In fact he will allow you to borrow some of his condoms that he prays over before he partakes in the "body of the church" in the form of a young hottie seeking spiritual healing.

The Negro Christian Operative will not see that the claimed poverty of his flock is not due to poverty that can be claimed in absolute terms. While other people around the world really are starving and are in need of "Christian charity" his "Christian boundary" goes about as far as the interconnected loop linking the 'inner city' with the closest 'lily White suburb' which is so frequently mentioned when it comes to school funding, differentiated punishments for crimes committed and the quality of produce in the grocery stores. God has yet to have it dawn upon him that these and so many other gaps are for HIM TO FILL by delivering for his people rather than for him to force greater society to "Get Jesus" and share with him as his birth right.

Could it be that God is trying to tell him to master the art of delivering these goods upon his own people's backs so that they might be one day "Good Missionaries", returning to other lands and spreading best practices for the actual betterment of those who have been left behind?

What about his schools? Absent any particular purpose of the schools in the context of God's vision for him - he will see the education of his own children as the responsibility of those ADVERSARIES who God has directed him to seek to change their selfish ways.

Could it be that the hatred in the heart of the Negro Christian Operative fails to allow him to see the real God's Will and Purpose of his life? All around him are vessels that are human beings who are not asked to live up to any particular standard and thus they live down to that which is expected of them.

In his "Godly" focus upon his Earthly enemies he is fully unqualified to lead his people out of the wilderness. Thus he turns to politics as a substitute for doing so. This gives him the impression of forward movement but the aggregate evidence when his own people are asked to express their own standard of living shows otherwise.

I thought that they were "Saved" and have given their life over to Jesus? I thought that the Earthly concerns will perish into fire and that we should be concerned about our salvation and where we will spend our eternity? No I don't expect anyone to turn a blind eye against where they are living in the world today. I do, however, expect that they can be more honest about themselves and not expect everyone to be disarmed with their religiosity and not make note of what they are doing.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

A Message To a Black Conservative Media Outlet

Dr. Wallace: (Freedom's Journal)

As a self professed Black conservative (independent not a Republican or Democrat) I believe that the strategy of Black Conservatives and Black Republicans (distinction noted) is flawed in attempting to effectively reach our people.

You see - our people are suffering now. I don't need to tell you this specifically as if you did not know this. My saying is "They are winning yet they are losing". They are winning in the American Political domain as that which they have most focused upon has gained more power over their communities where ever they have at least 40% of the population and therefore can turn the tide of an election to that which is favorable to them.

They are losing because many of these same places that have a favorable political arraignment are also places where the greatest amount of agony that can be found among Black people is present. This in the areas of public safety, education, economic development and state of health.

The Black community has been conditioned to believe that the same forces that suppressed our freedoms will one day lead to our collective prosperity if defeated. The same methodologies that resulted in a cease and desist in unpunished attacks against us can be used to provide us with prosperity.

Our people are oriented in an expansionary "chase" mode where the fight against this ideological enemy causes blindness to the other side of the coin which is also true - despite the fact that they/we have an expanding amount of popularly ideologically favorable people in place - our future has never been more uncertain - especially among young Black males.

The Black Conservative has little traction. He is away of the core concepts of faith and morality but he knows not how to translate that into actions within the community. More so he is unable to get past the filter that his internal ideological adversary who resides within the nucleus of our race has set up to protect against those who might disrupt the order that they have created - regardless of how dysfunctional or ineffective that it might be. As long as the Black is linked into the perceived success of this ideology that is more expansive and confiscatory than it is organic and self-sufficient he will not recognize the net loss that he is actually suffering.

The challenge of the Black Conservative will be to provide a framework from which Black people can evaluate our full potential as a people and then realize how short the current popular pathway has afforded the masses. This is not a negative, critical conversation - which the filter in the nucleus will simply spin as words from the "White Conservative" sponsor that they always refer to (as they go to "Huffington Post" or "Daily KOS" to get their fill from the "White Progressive" sponsor but risk no rebuke because of the popularity of doing so).

It is clear from my observations that the Black Activists via their vocalizations set the tone for the popular priorities for the rest of the community. As empty of a march that Jena was - it was the Activists (I call them "Actor-vists" who chose an incident and marketed it into a national march.

The Black Conservative needs to go inside the community and choose a similar agenda. Where as Ida B Wells choose the lynching of Black men by White men and ran up against opposition from the White community who were more beholden to the greatness of the American system at the time than they cared about the sores that infected its underbelly - the same focus should be made on the VICTIMS within our community from the great about of violence at the hands of another Black person. The rate of "Homicide Closure Rates" and the resulting "NON-justice" are as bad as the injustice that was had in 1908 America. The same defensive attacks upon you will come from the filters who are resident in the nucleus - the Black Progressive Machine itself. They are used to setting the agenda and determining which "killings" are worthy of consideration.

I understand your focus on the deaths from abortions but you must turn it from abstract moralisims over the the negative impact that these have on the Black Community and how from a FUNCTIONAL level this is separating us from our full potential. In my view FUNCTIONALITY is superior to MORALITY.

Morality is often taken as "judgmentalism" by those who do not wish to change. Functionality is done in the context of having the person understand his true purpose in life and thus how certain actions are an abomination to the person's order. Thus the actions that precipitated this end need to be managed by the person and the group so as not to steal away the person from his higher purpose.

In summary - the only way that at least a meaningful segment of the Black community will be made to step back and consider the question of their alignment to the straight and narrow if for a better framework for which they see the benefits of the end result and properly measure themselves against.

We are living in strange times. Some people's level of comfort today is about to be shattered.

Black Folks - "Going Along To Get Along" and Religous Operatives



I dun stepped into it now. The wrong time to engage in debates with a new set of Black people is right before a major presidential election where their candidate.....and their Jesus has anointed them to carry forth in the way that they have been doing so.

I have been looped into a vortex of a mailing list that contains about 90% people who I know from college and a few others that I have never heard of previously. I am convinced more than ever that some Black folks would rather other Blacks be silent in response to their slander and lies IF the ultimate end of the process leads to a favorable ending for the popular sentiment. This is where I get into trouble with some folks.

As I engage in these debates I operate from the assumption that as educated Black folks we should work from the basis of informed, information backed facts rather than more articulate forms of "street trash talk" where whom ever is liked is a hero and the bad guys will aways be......well - bad, regardless of what they do. I am suggesting that natural bias escapes people once they get a college degree. I am, however, expecting a group of professionals to make use of more statistical and data to bear out their talking point.

In having the new group of Black folks reading my responses in which I correct some of the propaganda I experience the usual phases:

* Your a Republican. Why are you defending George Bush?
* Do you have the best interests of the Black community in mind?
* Why do you talk so negatively about Black leaders but say little about White Republicans?

If some of you knew how predictable you all were and you cared about your integrity - you would choose to come up with a better strategy. Thus I have come up with a better strategy than most to address the schemes that are so pervasive within our community.

Let me say with 100% certainty - There is no consequence for being a "Democratic Party Sellout" among the majority of Black people!!! You could have sold your soul to the donkey - promoting things that are clearly in the party's interests over your proven racial development (I'm sorry - Racial Progress) issues and no one is going to call you out on it. Since your plans will be POPULARLY assumed to be in the best interests of our people and since you will have alignment with what most think already - who cares about that little pesky thing call ACTUAL RESULTS that bear this out?

In fact it is people like me who dare to inspect the results that will be the target of attack rather than those tell straight up lies.....favored lies but lies none the less.

One's "sellout-tedness" is measured by their lack of willingness to go against the popular grain and speak out against this sentiment when it is good for he whole despite what they think in the short run.

I am not going to lie to you though - where as I can easily handle the straight up "political operatives" who wears his donkey or elephant like a fashion logo on the back of his urban gear jacket.....it is the religious political operative that floors me the most.

Just to set this up - the major dust up recently were the comments from Rev (and I use this term only out of formal respect) Jamal Bryant of Baltimore and his scathing attack on all things Republican while standing in "God's pulpit" where he is charged with winning souls for Christ rather than winning over Democrats. You see God moved him to speak out against Joe Lieberman, Cinidy McCain, John McCain and Sarah Palin. This same God, however did not come into this brother's soul and speak out to the 100% Democrat city council of Baltimore and its mayor nor the significant Democratic majority state house and state senate. Indeed God works in mysterious ways.

See the details here about Rev Jamal Bryant and his antics: http://bqpfrc-bias.blogspot.com/2008/09/black-preacher-operative-my-diagram-is.html

So just to set this up - Bryant was brought into the debate via a YouTube video of his attack on the Republicans. It was delivered to the e-mail thread by a "Christian man" who attests to being so via his e-mail footer. This attack video from the pulpit sat easily with his Christian soul as Bryant was clearly "speaking truth to power" against the "pit vipers" - the Republicans second animal logo.

I passed the video onto a friend of mine who has a blog site which regularly disassembles these "false prophets" as being money exchangers in the temple. He lead me on to other web sites that had already disassembled the hypocrisy of Bryant. Where as Bryant attacked Cindy McCain for her expensive jewelry worn during the Republican convention - few in his flock noticed his own $140,000 Bentley that was sitting out side.....during this "recession" that he spoke of as people struggled.

I am learning some hard lessons though about entrenched bias. Just as I have gotten over the fact that I am not going to ever hear a stand alone, scathing analysis of Democratically Clayton County Georgia from the desk of AJC opinion writer Cynthia Tucker and that it is ME who has the problem for waiting for her to deal a square deck - I too have learned to transfer this temperance in regard to what I see coming from other people. I just thought that confirmed "Christians" might be a bit different in their sentiments.

You see - my own reply to the matter focused on the appropriateness of this "Christian Seeker of Men" to lob such an attack from the pulpit that had more regard to the American political election than anything God has ever commanded. I figured that fellow Christians would agree to uphold the integrity of the church rather than let it degrade for the sake of their own worldly political passions. Where as I did not want to get into a volley of character assassinations - the review of Jamal Bryant's words by the article I sent mentioned his divorce from his wife due to martial infidelity, his having fathered a child by a 17 year old church parishioner, charges of physical and verbal abuse from his former spouse, not to mention his "PDitty" lifestyle.

It was then that I was given my own "enlightenment". You see Black folks are bound up by the notion of "judge lest you be judged". Thus we are to accept the FAVORABLE judgments of attack against the Republican candidate but we are not allowed to review the credibility and integrity of one Rev Jamal Bryant in making such judgments. After all - as it was pointed out to me - there were plenty of flawed men of God that GOD had used to carry out a certain plan. Indeed - Jamal Bryant's rant against the "pit vipers" who all just happened to be assembled on stage at the Republican National Convention - a week following the "divine intervention" that happened in Denver was "GOD INSPIRED"!!!! You did see him standing in the pulpit didn't you? Thus God himself had channeled his command through the voice of Jamal Bryant.

Here is where strategy comes into play. Obviously Rev Bryant (and those in the email thread) saw some particular Christian threat coming out of Minneapolis. That particular machine has some type of suppressive force to which they are responding to. I have stated many times that people show themselves by who they are silent upon when their standards are violated rather than by the notation about who they are most vocal against for doing the same. Thus the easiest way to understand the voices heard from Rev Jamal Bryant directed from God is to go closer to home and to do an inspection.

Being that Bryant resides in Baltimore it was all too easy. The 100% Democratic city council had not moved the good reverend into condemning them for the current state of Baltimore with respect to HIV infection rates, crime and a woefully inadequate educational system. Far be it from him to actually attack those who are RUNNING THE PLACE. It is the National Republicans via their selfishness that are responsible for Baltimore - per the GOD of Jamal Bryant and others who are similarly afflicted with a cataract on their mind's eye.

You know what - that is not good enough. You see upon establishing the fact that their city is 100% Democratic dominated they will simply run to the state to find some "Republican Opposition" to blame everything for. Maryland proves to be a worthwhile state to refute these claims. You see Maryland is one of the strongest blue states there are in the nation. Once again just as I turn people's claims of strength of their ideology into a statement of "You are right that you are the man. You are also responsible for the woeful results within" - so is the case in Maryland. The domination of that state by the favorable political machine should negate the "Republican under every rock" strategy of excuse making by external projection. But of course when that fails - they focus upon the "National Republicans". It does not matter how strong of a Democratic base that exists locally, county wide or state wide. The Black Democratic Operative - inspired by God up above will ignore all of this and focus on the "National Republicans" as the main opposition force standing between him and God's province.

The sad part about it all folks is that even after laying out the ground work of detail pointing to the entrenched power that is most responsible for the situation in Baltimore I STILL received messages of nullification regarding "God's Will" as expressed through Jamal Bryant in the fight for the poor and the trampled upon. He indeed is a tool for God. "God don't like ugly" but he also don't like National Republicans but he shines favorably upon Local Democrats who have all the power over the community. That same God must have given Bryant that child by the 17 year old girl because he has great plans for the child when it grows into an adult. That same God told Bryant to rebuke his wife for her audacity to be angered that her husband conceived a child through such a "virgin conception".

I now fully understand how the White racist slaveholder had convinced himself - through his Bible that GOD told him to own and brutalize another man in pursuit of a greater mission.

The Lord indeed works in mysterious ways - so do Negroes.

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Federal Goverment $6 Billion Reading Program Fails To Deliver Results - Black Kids As Political Ping Pongs

NATION IN BRIEF: Reading program gets failing grade

From News Services
Published on: 05/02/08

The $6 billion reading program at the center of President Bush's signature education law has failed to make a difference in how well children understand what they read, according to a study by the program's own champion —- the U.S. Department of Education. The program, Reading First, was designed to help boost student performance in low-income elementary schools but failed to improve reading comprehension, says the study from the Institute of Education Sciences, part of the Education Department. There was no difference in comprehension scores between students who participated in Reading First and those who did not, the study found. The findings released Thursday threw the program's future into doubt. "We need to seriously re-examine this program and figure out how to make it work better for students," said Rep. George Miller (R-Calif.), chairman of the House education committee.


USA Today: Study: Bush's Reading First program ineffective

The results, issued Thursday, could serve as a knockout punch for the 6-year-old Reading First program — Congress has already slashed funding 60%. Reading First last year was the subject of a congressional investigation into whether top advisers improperly benefited from contracts for textbooks and testing materials they designed, and whether the advisers kept some textbook publishers from qualifying for funding.


Advocates of Reading First, an integral part of the 2002 No Child Left Behind law, have long maintained that its emphasis on phonics, scripted instruction by teachers and regular, detailed analyses of children's skills, would raise reading achievement, especially among the low-income kids it targets. But the new study by the U.S. Education Department's Institute of Education Sciences (IES) shows that children in schools receiving Reading First funding had virtually no better reading skills than those in schools that didn't get the funding.

The large-scale study looked at students in first through third grade from 2004 through 2006. For each of three samples, researchers studied 30,000 to 40,000 students, says IES Director Russ Whitehurst. "This is a big study."


"For all intents and purposes, the kids read at the same level in each grade," Whitehurst says.

Congressional Democrats were quick to point out the program's ties to President Bush. In a statement, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said the Bush administration "has put cronyism first and the reading skills of our children last and this report shows the disturbing consequences. Instead of awarding scarce education dollars to reading programs that make a difference for our children, the administration chose to reward its friends instead."

Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., who presided over the April 2007 hearings, said the report, "coupled with the scandals revealed last year, shows that we need to seriously re-examine this program and figure out how to make it work better for students."

While critics will likely say the data portray Reading First as an expensive failure, Whitehurst speculates that the study may simply suggest that schools need to spend even more time on phonics and the like.

But he also notes that states that got Reading First money earlier in the program's history actually got worse results than those that more recently got their federal funding. The difference may be unrelated to years spent in the program, Whitehurst says, as schools in more recently funded states tend to spend more per student to implement the program.

He also says school districts may have spread their cash thin — they can use up to 20% of their Reading First funding outside of Reading First schools to improve reading skills districtwide. Eligible schools have high numbers of students from low-income families.

The Abortionists Scythe Of Death Shifts Toward More Black & Hispanic Women


AJC: Overall rate declines, demographic shifts dramatically to black, Hispanic older women.

By Rob Stein

Washington Post

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Washington —- The types of women getting abortions has shifted significantly in the past 30 years, with relatively fewer white childless teenagers and more mothers of color in their 20s and 30s opting to terminate their pregnancies, according to a report being released today.

In the first comprehensive analysis since 1974 of demographic characteristics of women getting abortions, researchers found that the overall drop in the abortion rate has been marked by a dramatic shift, declining more among white women and teenagers than among black and Hispanic and older women.

“There’s been a real change in the picture of women who get abortions,” said Rachel Jones, a senior research associate at the Guttmacher Institute, a private nonprofit reproductive health research organization considered to be one of the most authoritative sources on abortion trends. “This is the first time anyone has looked at this in a comprehensive way.”

Jones and her colleagues analyzed annual data collected by the Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and by periodic surveys that Guttmacher conducted of abortion providers between 1974 and 2004.

The analysis confirmed previous reports that the abortion rate fell to the lowest level since 1974, dropping 33 percent from a peak of 29 abortions per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44 in 1980 to 20 per 1,000 in 2004.

During that period, the proportion of abortions obtained by women under age 20 dropped steadily, falling from 33 percent in 1974 to 17 percent in 2004.

For those younger than age 18 it fell from 15 percent of all abortions in 1974 to 6 percent in 2004.

At the same time, the proportion of abortions obtained by women in their 20s increased from 50 percent to 57 percent, and the share done for women age 30 and older rose from 18 percent to 27 percent.

Although abortion rates have declined among all racial and ethnic groups, large disparities persist, with Hispanic and black women getting abortions at rates three to five times the rate of white women.

In 2004, there were 10.5 abortions per 1,000 white women ages 15 to 44, compared with 28 per 1,000 Hispanic women of that age and 50 per 1,000 black women. That translates into approximately 1 percent of white women getting an abortion in 2004, compared with 3 percent of Hispanic women and 5 percent of black women. Jones attributed that to the focus on reducing teen pregnancy and increased contraceptive use.

“We’ve made the most important progress in reducing teen pregnancy and abortion rate, [rather] than reducing unintended pregnancy in older women,” Jones said.

The proportion of all abortions done for white women decreased from 45 percent in 1994 to 34 percent in 2004, while the proportion done for Hispanics increased from 16 percent to 22 percent and the proportion done for black women rose from 35 percent to 37 percent.


“We know from other research that having lower income makes a woman more likely to get an abortion. Women of color tend to be lower income, and so in turn when confronted with an unintended pregnancy are more likely to have an abortion,” Jones said.

The findings indicate “we need to figure out efforts to reduce unintended pregnancy, not only among teenagers but among all women, and in particularly women of color,” Jones said.



In the coming weeks as this statistic gets debated I suspect that the usual suspects will respin this into that of a "civil rights" violation. The fact that White females reduced their abortions will be made into the claim that government resources aimed at "PROTECTING WHITE CHILDREN" and thus sustain the population rates of White America might be used to inject "victimization" of people of color within the context of a grand scheme. Where as the notion of "a woman's choice" is typically promoted as the primary consideration in this entire debate - this will not stop the usual suspects from turning this into such a conspiracy.

Whenever WHITE FOLKS do certain things that make them "less in the mud" than others - those who have no management skills to produce certain optimized results for their own people (per their OWN standards) will conclude that some hidden hand is at work. Sadly - this works more than it fails. Unfortunately the people who take these messages in also outsource consideration of solutions that are born from within their community.

Monday, September 22, 2008

Clayton County Watch: Crime Rates Up 21%, Things Have Changed Now That We Are In Power



AJC: Crime gives Clayton one crisis too many

The FBI’s report of a double-digit rise in violent crime in Clayton County stings a community already reeling from lost school accreditation and a staggering foreclosure rate.

It also foreshadows a possible spiraling out of economic control.

Violent crime in Clayton rose by 21 percent in 2007 to 1,366 reports, up from 1,126 in 2006, according to the federal report.

To the head of Clayton County’s Chamber of Commerce, the crime statistics are the final blow.

“There is nowhere to go but up,” said Geoff Fulton, chairman of the chamber’s board of directors. “The sheriff, the district attorney and all nine school board members are gone.”

But Fulton, in a breath of cautious optimism, is hopeful the county can recover.

“Certainly, it isn’t always going to be this way,” he said.

Clayton reported 143 more aggravated assaults (up 28.3 percent), 35 more rapes (up 83 percent) and 61 more robberies (up 11.2 percent).

Neighboring Fayette County, which reported just 33 violent crimes — up just six violent incidents — was the only other county in the metropolitan Atlanta area to see double-digit increases.


Yesterday I reported about the record number of Black folks moving into the former Republican stronghold of Fayette County. This is evident by the number of Democratic party campaign signs in the yards. Yes - in 2 cases that I am thinking of I saw Black folks standing in the yards of these particular homes.

In summary they are "loyal Democrats living in a Republican environment" some of whom have escaped areas such as Clayton County where the policies that they are inclined to support at the voting booth being policies and outcomes that they avoid in their real lives.

I have been on the look out for Clayton County. I have seen an otherwise stable county spiral out of control by a group of leaders, many of whom had their personal ambitions above the best interests of county that they were presiding over.

I have been in a feverish debate with a good friend of mine regarding ACCOUNTABILITY. He, a loyal Democrat, has his mind set on holding "National Republicans" accountable. I countered that in 2008 more of the issues that impact Black people are local in nature. His inclination was to put Barack Obama in the White House "working for us" and then have the people to hold each other accountable, just as Barack Obama said. (Yes he made the circular reference to Barack Obama).

I am not saying that Barack Obama is at fault in Clayton County and other places where Black Democrats are in charge yet the community is suffering. I am only making a comment about the current disconnectedness between the claims of the Black community and inability to manage these desires into fruition.

I keep referencing "The Machine" that currently dominates our communities. In my friend's view the alignment between local, federal and state, once achieved is going to result in untold benefits for the Black community. He is able to rationalize my focus on the current failures of the local governments that are already aligned in his favor by quickly pointing to the "Republicans in the state" who stand against providing more resources to the cities. (I am not making this up one bit folks). Thus as I have reported for a while, the story goes - "Don't criticize me on my quarterly results, focus on my over all agenda in which all of this will be made right". Where as a normal lottery payout will give you incremental payouts over time or you can get a factor of your money up front. In the case of my friend and other BQPFRC's - the concept is turned on its head. There is only one payout - the gold at the end of the rainbow. Its benefit is only received if we as Black people all stay "united" and execute the strategy that they control. Of course "united" means - don't fundamentally question what is going on and, most certainly, don't seek to ask that competitive concepts be considered so that BETTER RESULTS might be achieved

I live in the numbers that this crime report captures about Clayton County. As a neighbor of the county the criminal does not care much about invisible borders painted on the ground separating the counties. They have come down and increased their robberies of local stores and gas stations. In truth - there is no escape. While I don't have any legislative control over Clayton County per my vote I do have an interest in not having it collapse, turning into a death spiral where even more people will vacate the county.

Sunday, September 21, 2008

The Court House Shooter Case - "Better To Allow A Guilt Man Go Free...." Put To The Test

AJC: Financial drain of case damages indigent defense system

No man made system is perfect. There will aways be exceptions that one can point to which shows that even the best intentioned justice system can produce examples which totally pervert the very concept of justice. Such is the case with the Brian Nichols/Court House shooter case.

Brian Nichols killed 4 people. I am not a journalist and thus I don't need to use the word "allegedly" in any play within my text. There are few other individuals ever put on trial before who's guilt is more certain. Despite these facts - this case has been allowed to suck the Indigent Defense System in Georgia dry as this one man's case has been allowed to derail the cases of people's who guilt is more at play.

I am most disturbed at the lawyers for the defense and their various antics. They have tried to get various judges removed (they were successful with one). They have tried to get the Fulton DA removed. Nearly any theatric antic you can think of - they have tried it. The total tab for this case now stands at $3 million defense fees.

In our perverted system - the actions of this rabid killer caused a liability for the Fulton County system of justice. Thus far they have paid out $10 million to two of the 4 victims of the killer that was in county custody when he broke loose and went on his rampage. In our perverted world of justice and liability - the same person who's murderous action done as a free person on the street which would lead to a response of "That's just a shame he killed those people" becomes a multi-million dollar pay out once he is placed as a ward of the state and commits the very same killing. This is not a defense for Fulton County. They were foolish to allow a female deputy with an firearm on her side into an elevator with a strong male who has a violent streak.

It is frustrating to know the number of killers that have not been identified who are walking the street that we spend public safety resources defending a known killer of 4 people.

The Internet Bubble - The Reference Article


Note: This is a post of the article and data points that I plan to reference as a means of addressing the narrative that a friend of mine laid out regarding the view that today the "financial wolves" that were once contained "before the past 8 years" are now out of their cages running amok.

Please read the following article which gives a good appraisal of the characters who have collapsed today and how their finger prints were all over the previous bubble and later collapse which vacated $7 trillion in equity from the market.

To be clear - I am not a "hater of capitalism". This is an attempt to show the continuity of events that have taken place, dispelling all partisan rambling to the contrary.

I read this article a few weeks ago and then panicked in not being able to find it. Since I found it again I have chosen to permanently record it on my blog so that I can keep track of this important information.


[The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition]
July 14, 2000

How the Internet Bubble Broke Records, Rules, Bank Accounts

By Wall Street Journal Reporters Greg Ip, Susan Pulliam, Scott Thurm, and
Ruth Simon

"The world has gone mad."

The thought flashed in the mind of Internet analyst Lise Buyer one morning
in November 1998, as she and colleagues at Credit Suisse First Boston
stared at a stock-quote machine. They were, Ms. Buyer recalls, agog at the
trajectory of the initial public offering of theglobe.com, a collection of
community Web sites. Theglobe.com had puny revenues and heavy losses. CSFB
bankers didn't think the company was ready to go public. Yet
theglobe.com's stock, offered at $9 a share, instantly soared to $97,
briefly giving the company a market value of nearly $1 billion.

Crazy -- but there was a message to the madness. CSFB soon scrapped some
of the rules it had used to gauge whether a company was ready for the big
time, and took public no-profit Internet plays Audible Inc., Autoweb.com
Inc., CareerBuilder Inc. and others arguably just as slight as
theglobe.com ever was. Today, Audible trades at 54% below its offering
price, Autoweb is down 69% and CareerBuilder is off 86%. Theglobe.com
closed Thursday at $1.8125, or $3.625 before a split. Theglobe.com
declines to comment on its IPO but asserts that the company is "committed
to achieving profitability." Its underwriter, Bear Stearns & Co., very
much believed in theglobe.com at the time, a spokesman says, noting that
it traded above its offering price for months.

The Great Internet Bubble may be starting to fade from many memories, but
the fallout blankets the landscape. This craze, after all, ranks among
history's biggest bubbles. Investment bankers, venture capitalists,
research analysts and investors big and small, through cynicism or
suspension of disbelief, financed and took public countless companies that
had barely a prayer of prospering. Rarely have so many people willingly
put prudence on hold to enter a game most were sure couldn't last. "We all
knew we were going to get a big kahuna correction at some point," says Jay
Tracey, former manager of the Oppenheimer Enterprise Fund.

Murky Realms

While the Nasdaq Composite Index has clawed back half of its 37% plunge
between March 10 and May 23, Internet stocks as a group, valued at $1.4
trillion at their March peak, have lost 40% of that -- erasing almost as
much paper wealth as the 1987 crash. Even former stalwarts like Amazon.com
Inc. trade at a third of last winter's highs. Though investors are slowly
warming again to Internet IPOs, almost half of existing Internet companies
now trade below their IPO price.

[Diary of a Bubble]

The question is: What brought on the mania? Some answers lie in the murky
realms of mob psychology, the human capacity for denial, the
get-rich-quick mentality -- factors in speculative frenzies since the days
of the tulip. But to an unusual degree, the Internet bubble was a product
of basic avarice and tactics that smacked of the boiler room. From Wall
Street pro to fledgling day trader, all joined hands in a giddy game of
lowering standards, pushing out IPOs and trumpeting prospects, with little
regard for a company's true long-term -- that is to say, more than three
months' -- outlook.

"People were throwing money at businesses that wouldn't pass simple
due-diligence screens five years ago," says venture capitalist Jim Breyer
of Accel Partners. "People overlooked almost all business fundamentals and
drove valuations into the stratosphere."

Drenched in Warnings

Many investors have made good money, but many got clobbered. And the pros?
They made billions, and most of them wound up winners even after the
bubble burst.

People were certainly warned. Every IPO prospectus was drenched in
warnings and risk factors, but most investors breezed past them. When the
hype crossed the line into manipulation or other wrongdoing, the
Securities and Exchange Commission usually stepped in. But most of the
time, regulators could only stand by and warn investors about the risks of
playing a completely legal game.

There is no denying the enormous business opportunity or the huge changes
represented by the Internet and information technology. Some of the
companies that emerged from the Internet upheaval will almost certainly
mature into enduring, valuable enterprises, as the rebound in a handful of
Internet leaders in recent weeks seems to bear out. Yet with the true
potential came some truly cynical actions driven by a willingness to see
what the market would bear and the investor buy -- i.e., a bubble.

Here's how some of the pivotal players stoked one of the hottest
stock-market crazes in history.

These have been heady times for investment bankers. Just since
theglobe.com's IPO -- an event many cite as a line of demarcation between
raging bullishness and outright bubble -- Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Morgan
Stanley Dean Witter & Co. and Credit Suisse Group's Credit Suisse First
Boston each pocketed more than $500 million in IPO or secondary offering
underwriting fees, according to Thomson Financial Securities Data. It was
the most lucrative hot streak investment bankers have ever seen in a
single sector.

It wouldn't have happened if bankers hadn't changed their rules. For
instance, way back at the beginning of 1999, CSFB had a rule of thumb that
a company needed at least $10 million in revenue in the 12 months before
its IPO. (Profits were no longer critical; Netscape Communications and
Amazon.com, two early IPO meteors, had proved that.)

Flying over Thailand on his way to meet a client in January 1999, CSFB
Internet analyst Bill Burnham piped into a regular Monday morning
teleconference during which a spirited debate had emerged over whether the
rule should be canned. The bank was losing clients -- and fees -- to
competitors. "Everyone realized the entire market was doing deals like
this," Mr. Burnham, now a venture capitalist, recalls. "Companies we had
relationships with but didn't have any intention of taking public anytime
soon announced, 'Hey, if theglobe.com can go public, we can.' "

No formal decision on relaxing the guideline was taken at the time, but
soon CSFB's bankers concluded that if they really liked a company, they
could take it public with $10 million in annualized revenues -- in other
words, just $2.5 million in the previous quarter, regardless of revenue in
earlier periods. "It was emblematic to me of the competitive devaluation
of underwriting standards that went on and reached a crescendo in the
first quarter of this year," Mr. Burnham says.

One company that wouldn't have fit CSFB's old standard was CareerBuilder,
an online recruitment firm. Before CareerBuilder's IPO in May 1999, its
prior 12 months' revenue was just $8.8 million. But revenue in its last
quarter was $2.8 million, or $11.2 million annualized. After CSFB took
CareerBuilder public at $13, it traded as high as $20 but has since fallen
to $4.0625.

Bill Brady, CSFB's head of global corporate finance for technology, says
CareerBuilder remains a great company that is meeting expectations. He
says he doesn't regret any of the deals CSFB has done in the past 18
months. Some, like Commerce One Inc., didn't fit the old standard either,
but were successes. Still, he acknowledges that he thought that the prices
many stocks hit after their IPOs were irrational, even as CSFB brought
similar companies to market.

Other investment banks were priming the IPO machine, of course. Alan
Naumann, chief executive of Calico Commerce Inc., says that for nine
months before the business-to-business e-commerce software company went
public last October, he had 15 different investment banks courting him
with regular phone calls.

"The pitch to Calico was, 'Other companies are going public with smaller
revenues and fewer customers -- we think you're ready. You've got $2
million in sales, go for it,' " he recalls. Calico held off and eventually
picked Goldman Sachs as its lead underwriter. It went public at $14, shot
above $62 on the first day, but have since slid back to $17.375 a share.

Mike Yiu, a software developer in Los Angeles, paid an average of about
$58 a share for 1,100 shares of Calico between late October and early
January. Mr. Yiu sold about 900 of his shares in April at about $19 a
share and the remaining 200 last month at about $16 a share, for a total
loss of more than $43,000. The timing of Calico's IPO was "perfect," Mr.
Yiu observes. But "we got burned."

The stock price notwithstanding, Mr. Naumann says Calico's business
remains on track. Its revenue grew 66% to $35.6 million in the fiscal year
ended March 31 -- but its loss widened by 82%, to $27.8 million.

Goldman's Brad Koenig, head of the firm's technology investment banking,
says Goldman had good reason to believe early-stage companies could be
winners. He points to the debate preceding an early Internet IPO in April
1996. "There were a certain number of people who were highly skeptical of
this company named Yahoo! with its yellow-and-purple logos," he says. Even
with the recent 51% decline in its price from early January, Yahoo! Inc.
is up more than 100-fold since its IPO.

The risks Goldman took on Yahoo went from being the exception to the norm.
In 1997, of the 24 domestic companies Goldman took public for which data
are available, a third were losing money at the time. Of the 18 it took
public this year through mid-April, 80% lose money. A Goldman spokeswoman
says this trend reflects the growing number of IPOs of Internet companies,
which typically are unprofitable.

Some were companies that its arch-competitor, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter
Inc., had decided were too speculative to underwrite. Mary Meeker,
Morgan's star Internet analyst, says the firm passed on taking the
TheStreet.com Inc., the Internet financial-news site, public because it
wasn't ready. (An official at TheStreet.com says Goldman was its first
choice.) After Goldman took it public in May 1999 at $19 a share,
TheStreet.com shot above $70 on its first day, but has since slumped to
$6.

Goldman officials deny that their standards slipped, and contend that the
firm also passed on deals that rivals chose to underwrite. Mr. Koenig adds
that the criticism of underwriters is off-target. If an Internet start-up
with losses exceeding revenue "goes public and goes to a $22 billion
valuation, whose fault is that? It's a tough philosophical argument. ...
Is it an underwriter's responsibility to determine whether the market is
overvalued or undervalued? Investment bankers wouldn't be making a good
living if that was required."

The bankers got help in feeding the furnace from a new breed of mostly
young securities analysts who presented themselves as pathfinders in the
uncharted terrain of the Internet.

The best-known is Henry Blodget, famous for forecasting in December 1998
that Amazon.com would hit $400 a share. At the time, Amazon.com was
trading at $240; within four weeks it blew past $400 on its way to a high
of more than $600. Mr. Blodget was celebrated as a seer and left his job
at CIBC Oppenheimer for Merrill Lynch & Co. Amazon.com? It closed at a
split-adjusted $35 Thursday, equivalent to $210 at the time of Mr.
Blodget's big call.

Mr. Blodget, 34, has regularly predicted that 75% or more of Internet
companies will fail, and he stands by his general belief that Amazon.com
and many of his other picks will be winners over the long haul. Mr.
Blodget adds, "If AOL, Yahoo, Amazon, eBay, a few others we recommend as
core holdings, go down 70% and stay there for four years, I will have been
wrong. No argument. But a 50% pullback is still in the line of how this
industry performs."

Still, to critics, Mr. Blodget epitomizes the change in the analyst's role
during the overheated market in tech stocks: more cheerleader than
detached observer. And the buzz -- and career opportunities -- that Mr.
Blodget did draw may have encouraged other analysts to make similarly
adventurous forecasts, the critics add.

Despite Mr. Blodget's 75% caveat, his recommendations on individual
stocks, like those of many Internet analysts, got more bullish even as
they led the Nasdaq Composite Index to ever-more-dizzying heights. Today,
he rates 12 of the 27 stocks that he follows as "buy" (the rest are
"accumulate"), compared with just one buy rating for the 10 stocks he
followed a year ago, says Bob Kim, a former Merrill Lynch supervisory
analyst whose Web site, Restex.com, monitors Merrill technology research.

Consider Pets.com Inc., which Merrill took public at $11 in February. It
slid to $6.125 in a month, when Mr. Blodget initiated coverage with a
prediction that it would soar to $16 a share, or 160%, in 12 to 18 months.
A major justification: Despite the pet-supply seller's continuing losses,
he noted that it was trading at five times this year's estimated revenue,
a discount to Amazon.com at eight times revenue. Since Mr. Blodget's
prediction, Pets.com has been a dog, falling 70% to $1.8125.

"Out of one side of his mouth, the message of caution," says Mr. Kim, "the
other side, buy the leaders." He describes the Blodget message as: "The
risk isn't losing 100% of your investment now, it's giving up 10-times
gains in the future." But, says Mr. Kim, "it seems that so far, little of
that has panned out except for the downside part."

As lucrative as the bubble has been for investment bankers and analysts,
their profits pale compared with the money venture capitalists and other
early-stage investors have made. The journey of eToys Inc. shows why.

The online retailer went public on May 20, 1999, at $20 a share, and
soared to $76.5625 on its first day of trading. On Oct. 11, it closed at a
high of $84.25 -- and has since plunged 93%, closing Thursday at $5.625 a
share.

A disaster for eToys' early-stage investors such as idealab, an Internet
incubator that invests in and nurtures start-ups? Not exactly. Idealab
paid just half a cent a share -- a total of $100,000 -- for its eToys
stake in June 1997. In late 1999, idealab sold more than 3.8 million
shares at prices between $47.50 and $69.58, for a profit of $193 million.
It still holds a further 14.5 million shares, so idealab has seen its
paper profits dwindle. But even idealab's remaining stake in eToys is
still worth roughly 1,000 times what idealab paid for it, while anyone who
bought at the IPO price is down 72%. (Idealab, which itself is trying to
go public, declined to comment, citing its quiet period.)

And plenty of investors fared worse than that. On Dec. 2, Daniel Sperling,
a 35-year-old technology consultant in the Detroit area, bought 200 shares
of eToys at $70. "Our goal was to ride the tidal wave of Christmas
shopping and get out," Mr. Sperling says. But in early December, it became
clear that big Internet sales weren't materializing, and eToys skidded.
Mr. Sperling bought more: A hundred shares at $58.50 on Dec. 6. A hundred
more at $47.50 on Dec. 14. A hundred more at about $20 in January. Today,
his $26,600 investment in eToys is worth $2,800, a paper loss of $23,800.

Some venture capitalists' profits were truly astounding. Benchmark
Capital's $5 million early stage investment in eBay Inc. grew to $4.2
billion by the time Benchmark distributed the shares to its investors late
last year and early this year. If Benchmark's partners kept a typical 25%
to 30% of the firm's investment profits, five of its partners would have
split more than $1 billion when cashing in eBay stock.

Venture capitalists say they deserve big rewards because they take big
risks. Many investments go bust. During the early stages of the Internet
frenzy, however, it appeared that venture capitalists couldn't lose. They
threw more money in earlier stages at start-ups than ever before. Often,
they pushed the companies to go public as quickly as possible, to cash in
on their investments faster than ever.

Even some who benefited from the feeding frenzy agree. "You could invest
in a company, take it public and cash out before you proved your business
model," says Michael Barach, a former venture capitalist who is now chief
executive of Mothernature.com, an online health-products seller.
Mothernature.com received its first venture-capital investment in June
1998 and went public last December.

The Internet craze set off an "Oklahoma land rush," says Roger McNamee,
general partner at Integral Capital Partners in Menlo Park, Calif., which
manages both private and public investments. "In a land rush, you suspend
rules because your perception is that time is of the essence."

All told, venture capital invested in start-ups jumped to $36.5 billion
last year from $14.3 billion in 1998, according to San Francisco market
researcher VentureOne Corp. The number of deals increased to 2,969 from
1,972.

Mr. Barach of Mothernature.com attests to the craziness. Two investors
gave him $10 million apiece after hearing him give a speech at an
investment conference. Investment bankers told him they could take his
company public when it reached $750,000 a month -- an annualized $9
million -- in revenue, and they did. "No one ever mentioned or talked
about how much money we'd lose in 2000 to get to that revenue," he says.
The company, which Bear Stearns took public, reported a loss of $59
million last year on sales of $5.8 million. Its stock trades at 81.25
cents, down 94% from its IPO price of $13.

IPOs can't soar without big buyers -- and mutual funds are among the
biggest.

As tech stocks roared, mutual-fund managers faced powerful incentives to
ride the rocket, trying to boost their funds' returns -- which can mean
higher compensation for fund managers. Their voracious appetite for tech
shares expanded the bubble.

Between Nov. 1, 1998, and last March 31, investors poured almost $72.5
billion into technology and small-cap-growth mutual funds, according to
Financial Research Corp., a Boston-based financial-consulting firm. It
says that about $11.4 billion of that total flowed into funds specializing
narrowly in the Internet. Six of the 14 Internet-only mutual funds tracked
by Lipper Inc. had gains of 100% or more last year.

Sometimes the tactics driving the action in mutual funds have raised
questions. When business-to-business Internet player Ariba Inc. went
public at $23 (pre-split) share last June, it shot to a first-day high of
more than $90, thanks to people like Gary Tanaka, a founding partner of
Amerindo, a growth-oriented mutual-fund group.

On most IPOs, Mr. Tanaka would get 50,000 to 70,000 shares. On Ariba, he
got 100,000, in part because he informed underwriter Morgan Stanley that
he would buy an additional 100,000 in the after-market once the company
went public. His agreement to buy shares in the after-market "probably
helped boost us to the top bracket for allocations," he says. Internet IPO
allocations helped juice returns of Amerindo funds; its Technology Fund,
for instance, posted a 249% gain in 1999. After-market orders also
contributed to a big first-day run-up in the stock price -- more than ever
the mark of a successful IPO.

Some market experts say agreements to buy stock -- and thus support the
price-in the after-market raise regulatory questions depending on how
explicit the arrangement is. Mr. Tanaka says he believes his arrangements
are both appropriate and a natural result of his firm's role as "long term
investors. If we are buying one million shares, we feel we should get a
better allocation." Mark Hantho, managing director of equity capital
markets at Morgan Stanley, says the firm doesn't use after-market bids to
allocate IPOs, although "it's common to hear feedback as to how investors
value the company, ... and we listen carefully to that."

Funds' appetite for IPOs also supercharged the market in another way. "On
a hot deal, everyone would put in for 10% and the bankers could tell how
hot a deal was by the number of guys who were circling 10% on the deal,"
Mr. Tanaka says. None of the institutions really expected to receive a
full 10% allocation of a red-hot IPO, many of which involved only 10
million or so shares. But the idea was to get a bigger piece of the pie.

The overstated "order book" from institutions, as it is called, was then
sent to research firms that rate IPOs based on their interest from
institutions. "Sure, that artificially inflates demand. But that's how you
rate a deal," says Vinnie Slaven, with Cantor Fitzgerald, whose job it is
to rate IPOs based on investor demand. So the process itself helped to
create an aura surrounding certain deals of vast enthusiasm among other
institutions. This in turn helped to whet the public's appetite for shares
of hot IPOs, often leading individuals to buys shares during an IPO's
giant first-day run-up.

To catch the Web wave -- and keep up with peers' performance -- many fund
managers loaded up on Internet stocks even though many in their hearts
believed the shares to be overvalued. Twice last year, Mr. Tracey, until
recently manager of Oppenheimer Enterprise Fund, thought a mammoth
correction was coming and sold many Internet stocks. Both times he was
wrong. So, after the second time, he jumped at the chance a few weeks
later to buy into the IPO of an online industrial auctioneer called
FreeMarkets Inc. It was valued at $1.8 billion based on its IPO price,
despite 12-month sales of just $16 million and steep losses. But Mr.
Tracey figured that similar companies were trading at far richer levels,
and as to whether those valuations were ridiculous: "I said, 'I'm going to
suspend judgment for the moment.' "

That proved profitable for Mr. Tracey, who watched FreeMarkets rocket from
its IPO price of $48 in December to $280 the first day of trading. He held
on as it roared to $370 in January, then dumped it in February at $215. It
now trades at $55.0625 a share. This strategy helped Mr. Tracey's fund
post a 105.8% return in 1999, though it's down 4.1% so far this year. Mr.
Tracey recently moved to Denver fund manager Berger LLC to become chief
investment officer.

The tech bubble had one thing no past manias had: the push from online
brokers, who made speculating on stocks easier than ever and advertised
heavily to encourage people to chase riches.

In September 1998, employees at online broker E*Trade Group Inc. hit TV
viewers with a barrage of commercials in an effort to add one million
customer accounts to its total of 500,000 in the coming year. Some ads
suggested that trading stocks over E*Trade was a better route to wealth
than waiting to win the lottery, others that it was better than waiting
for a rich relative to die. All promised a fast, cheap, powerful way to
play the stock market.

As new accounts poured in, E*Trade kept upping its ad spending, says
Michael Sievert, chief marketing officer. E*Trade spent $321 million on
marketing in the fiscal year ended last Sept. 30, and surpassed its goal,
with 1.6 million accounts -- but with a loss of $54.7 million. It has
already spent an additional $307 million on marketing in the six months
through March 31, helping to boost the number of accounts to 2.6 million.

The astonishing growth made online brokers a powerful force in the market,
as their customers drove the stocks of newly public and established
companies to unprecedented levels. By some estimates, individual investors
-- most of them trading online -- accounted at the peak for 65% of the
volume on Nasdaq.

E*Trade's Mr. Sievert says the firm's ads tell investors they won't get
rich quick, and that they should take charge of their finances. He notes
one of E*Trade's commercials warned against getting carried away with a
profit that could quickly disappear.

But critics say the Internet brokers did indeed encourage many
unsophisticated investors to trade aggressively in the belief they could
get wealthy and failed to adequately disclose the risk. "The marketing
campaigns by these Internet brokers encouraged novice investors, who had
no business trading securities, to short-term trade stocks, and they in
many instances ended up losing a major portion of their net worth,"
charges Douglas Schulz, a Westcliffe, Colo., securities-fraud expert who
advises investors with complaints against their brokers.

Jay Kiessling, a physician living near Mobile, Ala., had been trading
through E*Trade for about 16 months when he heard about theglobe.com. "I
wasn't quite sure if it was a good stock for the long run, but I was
almost sure it would have a terrific first day," he says. He put in an
order for 5,000 shares, expecting to get the stock at the IPO price of $9
a share.

But because the stock rocketed at the opening, he ended up paying between
$84 to $88 ($42-$44 split-adjusted), more than $420,000 in total. He
finally dumped most of the stock a few days later at $42 a share, and had
to liquidate about two-thirds of his retirement investments to cover the
loss.

Dr. Kiessling and his wife filed an arbitration claim against E*Trade,
saying it allowed them to "buy an unsuitably over-concentrated position,"
according to his attorney, James Eccleston, and that E*Trade should have
alerted customers that the stock would open up so much higher. In a
statement of answer filed last year with the National Association of
Securities Dealers, E*Trade said that the Kiesslings "could and should
have minimized their risk" by immediately selling the shares and that the
couple is responsible for the loss. The case is pending.

Mr. Kiessling hasn't made a single investment since theglobe.com. But
though such stories are commonplace, it's hard to say whether the bubble
mentality is dead. Just Thursday, two new technology companies went
public. Neither is a pure Internet play and one actually is making money.
Still, the prices of both more than doubled.

-- Kara Scannell contributed to this article.

Race And The Presidential Election and Residency

AJC: Racial views steer some white Dems from Obama


There you have it folks - some White folks who are Democrats and otherwise prone to vote for the "Democrat" will instead choose to vote for the White guy due to their latent feelings against Blacks and Black leadership. This news is peppered on just about every news media outlet. It serves to put a check upon those who will put RACE before POLITICAL CONSIDERATION.

Now of course - you know me - I must "hate being Black" or I am "working for Massa" for daring to note and then talk about the counter challenge that is present but unanalyzed with regards to what Black folks are doing.

What if we saw a rampant increase in White voter registrations in order to STOP the Black guy from being elected? If the news media got a hold of a group that was registering White people so that they can insure that the White guy defended off the threat from the Black guy - would they be maligned as "racists"? If this same group was seen sending out e-mails to their respective social groups to get them thinking right where there was a high correlation in the race of their distribution network - what would be the results?

Folks I am here you - this is exactly what is going on among some operatives within the Black community. I will be the snitch that lets this out to the world. One note - I am NOT a "sellout against Black people". I happen to have the perverted belief that support for the Democrats DOES NOT prove my "Blackness". In fact my goal is to have the machine that already runs our communities and which is not held accountable by the COMPLICIT Black community who continues to suffer from gaining more complete control of this country without having done what they promised to this same Black community.

Shamefully - for the Black community it exposes some sad truths - we are less interested in advancing certain core goals within our community and hold those who have fallen short accountable than many of us are interested in having our POLITICAL PARTY and our IDEOLOGY advanced. If anyone can read my works as expressed on my 6 venues that expose my own words and find me a pattern of REPUBLICAN ADVOCACY rather than CRITIQUE OF THE POWERS THAT BE.....within the BLACK COMMUNITY - I would love to see it. I am tired of the game in which our community are the ultimate losers in the context of the grand strategy that works on behalf of those who reside outside our own community; outside of our own interests - despite the popularity as such.

In the mind of many Black voters the Republican Party is the metaphor for "White Supremacy" and "White Racism" thus when they run up against the Republicans (even when they have departed various cities - Philadelphia, for example) they are fighting against their historical adversary. As we consider that which stands in the way of this nation having its "first Black president" there again is the face of the "White Republican" as the road block.

There is currently a great amount of energy within the Black community - a great amount of investment in this candidate. Barack Obama - despite his tenuous connections with the Black community in his origins - these are not my words but the words of many of these very people - is now the symbol of Black America's progress in America. Where I differ greatly my statement of this is not the case. In my vocal debates with people I care for I tell of my view that "Black progress" is exposed through the statistics regarding education, community, business and health. We have allowed symbolism and the lust for power within the American political system to overshadow a dispassionate analysis of the question if these statistics are being actually advanced under the machine that is currently administrating our communities and our "best interests".

I live in Fayette County Georgia. Fayette is two counties south of Atlanta-Fulton County. It has always been known for its strong educational system and its quality family lifestyle. For years it has been a Republican stronghold. As I ride through the capillaries of this Republican county I can see a clear amount of change from 10 years ago. There are an abundance of Black people living in this county than ever before. To be clear - one would expect that the new subdivisions that have marketed themselves to all to have their fair share of Black folks. What surprises me so is when the fully settled subdivisions and even stand alone homes in the furthest nook and cranny of the county also have an abundance of Black folks. I am impressed in that all of this has come about in such an uneventful manner. This Republican, conservative county has not lynched a Black for daring to move in to the community. There have been no crosses burned on the lawns.

Today many of these lawns have Barack Obama signs on them where previously there would not likely be any such monikers displayed. For me this is a sign of GREAT PROGRESS. The county has retained its high educational and public safety record all the while accepting in the STEREOTYPICAL threat to such a standing - Black folks. I am one of these Black folks and I am honored that my children are raising and maintaining these standards rather than lowering them.

There is yet another message that I can't get out of my mind though. I can count at least 5 housewarming parties that I have attended over the past 3 years where there were loyal Black Democrats who have departed the various solid Democratic enclaves to the north of Fayette County and have chosen to live among these Republicans, eschewing their ideological soul mates in the process. Why does this story get so little attention? This is the essence of everything that I am arguing in my Internet presence when it comes to race.

Black people don't VOTE IN ELECTIONS for CONSERVATIVES.
Black people VOTE WITH THEIR FEET (and their moving vans) for CONSERVATIVE enclaves.


This situation allows many Blacks to avoid supporting or outwardly VOTING FOR Republicans and receive the accompanying ostracism while enjoying the FRUITS of the policies that are afforded by these conservatively managed communities.

Thus my key questions is brought to birth: Is our ultimate racial goal to bring a PARTY into power so that our 'best interests are expressed' or is our goal to actually live out "OR BEST INTERESTS' while taking advantage of the new found freedoms that the law enforcements provides to us?

Let me be very specific - I have no problem giving due credit to the "progressives" who fought the system and thus allowed this day to come to be where Black people can live where we want to without the threat of attack for nothing more than our race. It would be supremely dishonest of me to then fail to make note of the fact that when Black folks indeed have an option - they will choose to reside in areas where they can CONSUME the a certain standard of living than they have the stomach for defending a declining state or turning barren ground into a Utopia.

Many of these same people who have migrated will cleanse their souls with the rationalization - "Yes I am living within conservative environs which has a certain amount of infrastructure that I benefit from.....I remain loyal to that which I have moved away from because I want these benefits spread onto other areas to which this sun does not shine". (On a personal note - I do admit that the majority of my social intervention work is focused upon Clayton and south Fulton county)

The key flaw in this line of thinking is that many of the people in the Democratic enclaves are hostile to some of the key conservative management policies that make their new county homes operate efficiently. That which is criticized as "intolerance" or "exclusivity" when it comes to zoning or even discipline policies are the very policies that allow their new homesteads to function. Thus the painful truth of the matter is exposed:

Certain Black folks have a schizophrenic relationship between their ACTIVISM and their LIFESTYLE PREFERENCES.

It is my personal opinion that certain Progressive Blacks are more comfortable being ACTIVISTS against a prevailing, White controlled system than they are able to put their own skin in the game and fight against local Black threats in the form of thieves of academic performance, of property and those who's actions are prone to shutter local businesses. Thus if these people are placed into a barren situation where their are forced to take an organic disposition rather than a reactionary one - they will see that they lack the management skills via CULTURE to get their own people into shape.

What does all of this mean for the propensity for Black folks to vote for the Democrats in the expression of what I call "Black Voter Nullification"? It should be clear. The racialized hope for the growth in Democratic power is in truth an expression of the LACK OF 'LOGISTICAL and MANAGEMENT' skills AND the entrenchment into IDEOLOGICAL FUNDAMENTALISM within Black folks. In summary of this phenomenon - the hope is that in having the Democratic hegemony blasted over all of their concerns will IN AND OF ITSELF prove to be the solution to their problems. This party has those who are WORKING "for their best interests". Thus the INTENTIONS and the APPROACHABILITY of these activists prove more compelling than the actual RESULTS that they deliver.

In my view the future of Black America is far more undefined and up for grabs than are the questions about this nation's finances as we go through this current turmoil. I have stated in great detail on this blog that the single party domination of the domains which we already live (Detroit, St Louis, Philly, etc) has NOT translated into the benefits that were promised on the front end now that these political victories have been had.

My singular goal is to force Black people to realign ourselves to a commitment to our endgame rather than remain as fundamentalists to the chosen METHODOLOGY. This is threatened by the current expression of our racial best interests though the channels of popular political ideology as expressed in the American political system. If we were to dispassionately inspect to see if the term "sellout" (of one's racial interests) can be applied to the current high rate of activism of Blacks upon the Democratic party one could collect more evidence to affirm that this is the case than to the contrary.

Thus I say "You are winning but you are losing at the same time".