
Jury denies death penalty for Cobbins' role in murder of Channon Christian
“Take Back The Black Community Consciousness". It has been hijacked by embedded operatives who don't intend to develop the COMPETENCIES within. We once controlled this consciousness, focusing our activism directly upon our permanent interests. Today the "Malcolm X Political Football Game" has us as starters and some believe that this playing time translates into absolute progress for our people. My goal is to hold our permanent interests in their faces, forcing them to explain their actions.




A vigilant Grant Park couple posted video footage on YouTube of a robbing crew breaking into their home, throwing furniture at their dog, and making off with a laptop computer.
This was the second time in 10 months that a break-in at Dan and Alyssa Kopp’s bungalow was captured by surveillance video.
And just as with the October 2008 burglary, the couple took the footage to police and put the images up on the popular online video-sharing Web site.
This time, of course, there were twice as many cameras rolling.
“The last time, our things were recovered within a week,” Alyssa Kopp said on Sunday. “Someone called police with a tip that said, ‘I am watching the people I saw on YouTube unloading a TV at a home.’”
Those thieves from October were caught, and Kopp is hoping the same will happen to the four men who kicked in her door on Friday afternoon.
“The reason my husband installed cameras in the house in the first place, is because we live in a high-crime area,” she said.
Just after 5 p.m. Friday, surveillance videos from the Kopps’ home showed a black Nissan Armada pull up to the house.
A young man in green shorts and a green t-shirt walked up to the front door, rang the doorbell several times, then went back to the truck.
A second young man in jeans and a white t-shirt follows and checks the door, before returning to the truck.
The SUV pulls to a corner of the block, and a crew of four emerge, jump the fence and run up to a back door.
A third individual with a bandana, white T-shirt and jeans, kicks the door twice — stopping intermittently to pull up his sagging jeans — and the crew enter the house.
Inside, video shows a fourth male in a dark t-shirt and jeans lob a bar stool at the Kopps’ dog as the crew spread out through the house, apparently in search of a robbery booty.
Within seconds, the four quickly file past the hidden camera with just a laptop computer, and exit the house.
“Ironically, [it] was the same laptop that was stolen last year,” Kopp said. “We had a flat screen last year. But we never replaced it because we didn’t want to be targeted.”
Atlanta police are investigating the theft.
But Kopp said the last group of thieves are just now being prosecuted.
“It’s doubly frustrating knowing how not cut-and-dry the first case is going through the court system,” she said. “So even if these guys are caught, it’s just the beginning.”
But why was the Kopp home targeted again, especially after shedding the lightweight flat-screen TV?
“That’s the million-dollar question,” Kopp said. “We have a fence, a dog, surveillance cameras and a security system.
“But I guess there’s always so much more you can do.”


RiPPa's Favorite Quotes:This statement seems compelling at first read. It appears to be an indictment of the thinking and expectations of the Black Conservative.
"The need of black conservatives to gain the respect of their white peers deeply shapes certain elements of their conservatism. In this regard, they simply want what most people want, to be judged by the quality of their skills, not by the color of their skin. But the black conservatives overlook the fact that affirmative action policies were political responses to the pervasive refusal of most white Americans to judge black Americans on that basis."— Cornel West

This Harper's Weekly cartoon by Thomas Nast is a counterattack on press criticisms of the Reconstruction policies of President Ulysses S. Grant. The Grant administration (1869-1877) had the difficult task of enforcing the Reconstruction legislation of the Republican Congress in the face of an often hostile white population in the South and an increasingly disinterested one in the North.
As the former Confederate states were readmitted to the Union, the states' biracial Republican governments, established during Reconstruction, were replaced by white-only Democratic governments. By 1874, only four Southern states--Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina--retained Republican governments. While corruption existed in both parties, paramilitary groups associated with the Democratic party (e.g., the Ku Klux Klan) used intimidation and violence to prevent black and white Republicans from voting in the South.
The onset of an economic depression, the white public's impatience with Reconstruction, Congressional scandals, and talk of a third-term for President Grant, all combined to give the Democratic party a decisive victory in the 1874 elections. Democrats regained control of the U.S. House of Representatives for the first time since before the Civil War, along with several Northern state governments. In the South, the Republican party virtually collapsed, electing only 17 of the region's 106 congressmen.
In December 1874, President Grant's annual message to Congress argued forcefully that federal intervention against political violence was necessary to allow the 15th Amendment (barring racial discrimination in voting rights) and Reconstruction legislation to work. The inset cartoons on the upper-right and upper-left depict reaction to Grant's message, which was called "another outrage." Grant is a courageous, though dismayed, lion who (on the left) drops his presidential-message knife of truth into the slimy, poisonous tangle of copperhead snakes ("copperhead" was a nickname for Confederate sympathizers); while (on the right) he stuffs his presidential message and "The Truth/Facts" into the mouths of the Democratic donkeys.
The central cartoon refers to the volatile political situation in Louisiana, where both political parties were claiming victory after a campaign and election rife with corruption. Republicans asserted that they had rightfully elected William Pitt Kellogg as governor and retained control of both houses of the state legislature, but Democrats said that they had successfully gained both states chambers and the governorship for John McEnery.
On January 4, 1875, Democrats prevented Republicans from organizing the state legislature, and (a fact soon forgotten in the public discourse) requested reinforcement from federal troops. President Grant did dispatch Philip Sheridan, commanding general of the U.S. Army, to keep the peace, but ordered the general to ensure that the Republican government was duly installed.
Newspapers and Democratic politicians from across the country assailed Grant and Sheridan for imposing "bayonet rule," or military dictatorship, on the South. Grant was accused of "Caesarism" amid calls for his resignation. Many Republicans worried that the administration's Louisiana policy was a political liability. Liberal Republican Carl Schurz wondered how long it would be before troops marched into Northern statehouses or the U.S. Congress. Even the president's cabinet was divided over the appropriateness of the response.
Lost among all the hysteria against federal intervention (besides the fact that the Louisiana Democrats had requested it first) was the fact of massive corruption, intimidation, and violence perpetrated by white Democrats in the state, and their attempt to circumvent the democratic process.
On January 13, President Grant responded to criticisms in a message to the U.S. Senate. While admitting that both parties were guilty of corruption, the president chastised the Democrats for inexcusably resorting to terrorism to achieve their political goals. Employing impassioned language, Grant detailed Louisiana's record of past violence against black and white Republicans.
President Grant's strong statement of moral principle, however, was used by other Republicans merely to limit political damage from the affair. Congressional Republicans agreed to a compromise which gave the lower house of the Louisiana legislature to the Democrats, while the Republicans retained the upper chamber and the governorship.
The 1874 elections were a turning point for Reconstruction policy. Significant civil rights legislation would not be passed or enforced by the new Democratic house, and the notion was reinforced among Republicans that Reconstruction was best abandoned if the party wanted to stay in power.
Cartoonist Thomas Nast had long been committed to both black civil rights and President Grant, who was one of his great heroes. Here, the main cartoon lampoons those in the press critical of Grant's Louisiana policy; they are wild animals, blinded by bayonets on their heads, who have escaped from the Central Park zoo. The latter is a reference to a hoax perpetrated by James Gordon Bennett Jr., publisher of the New York Herald.
In late 1874, Bennett reported in bold headlines that wild animals had broken loose in Central Park, causing "Terrible Scenes of Mutilation." Many readers were hoodwinked by the sensational hoax. Nast used the image in several cartoons over the ensuing months, including this one which mocks Bennett and his journalistic colleagues. The cartoonist's message is clear: charges against the Grant administration of military despotism are the equivalent of a public hoax, and the offending journalists are blinded by their own prejudiced rhetoric.
Keylina Clark was puzzled when her son told her shortly after taking state standardized tests last year that he knew he’d passed.
Dequayvious struggled mightily in school. His Blalock Elementary report cards said he was below grade level in reading and math. Then the second-grader explained his confidence: A test proctor gave him answers, he said. Clark believed him.
Atlanta Public Schools, however, apparently did not. Though two other students supported the boy’s claim, the district marked the complaint unsubstantiated.
Considering the hundreds of thousands of test-takers each year, formal complaints about test cheats are relatively rare.
The Atlanta district, however, has received more such claims given its size than any of the five other large metro districts, an AJC investigation shows. The newspaper also found the district’s handling of 20 cheating complaints in three school years raises questions about how it polices its educators.
Atlanta’s investigations differed from those of its metro peers in key ways, the AJC found. Investigators sometimes left allegations unresolved, turning up fresh questions about suspected irregularities but never scrutinizing them. The district was more likely to mark complaints unsubstantiated. Fewer teachers stepped forward to help investigators and more complaints were anonymous, making eye-witnesses harder to find.
And in three years, records show, just two teachers left after the district found cheating. Departures were more frequent in Cobb, Fulton and DeKalb.
Atlanta officials said in a prepared statement that they take allegations seriously, investigate fairly and don’t tolerate cheating.
This summer, a cheating scandal propelled the district into the news when its handling of suspected test-tampering at one school elicited sharp criticism from Gov. Sonny Perdue.
A state investigation found someone had altered tests at Atlanta’s Deerwood Academy. But Atlanta Superintendent Beverly Hall challenged the findings. Perdue called her stance outrageous, saying “any reasonable person” could see cheating occurred.
Educators who cheat do more than teach bad behavior: False scores rob schools of an important warning sign that students are academically underwater. Extra tutoring is often there for students after they fail. Dequayvious needed such help, Clark said, but he didn’t get it because his scores weren’t low enough.
“What they’re doing is just passing them through and, in the long run, they’re not going to know what they need to know,” she said.
Hall said she does not believe cheating is “pervasive” in Atlanta schools and is satisfied with the district’s investigative process. She attributed anonymous allegations to “poor performers” and disgruntled employees, questioning the merit of the claims. She said some educators resent being held accountable.
She said the district has a broad record of achievement. “Could you cheat in all these schools?” she asked, adding, “You would have to spend your whole life cheating...
“It’s been nine years of consistent progress,” she said.
Districts investigate selves
In the Blalock case, records show an investigator from the system’s Office of Internal Resolution interviewed 11 students.
Some of the children’s explanations changed over the course of the conversation. One of the students who said the test proctor gave Dequayvious answers later said she only gave the boy’s friend answers, district notes show. Other students said they didn’t get help from the proctor. She denied the allegations, as did another teacher in the room during testing.
In the end, at least three students said she had provided forbidden assistance.
Through a district spokeswoman, the proctor declined to comment. The district said in a statement that it stands by its investigation.
The state inquiry this year into soaring scores at Deerwood and three schools in other districts included analyzing erasures on answer sheets. Officials studied summer-school retakes of the Criterion-Referenced Competency Test, the state’s main measure of student academics through eighth grade.
While they said evidence of cheating was overwhelming, Atlanta maintains its own investigation found insufficient proof.
Schools and districts typically do the initial investigation when allegations of cheating surface. Educators must report such improprieties to superiors; systems must report testing irregularities to the state.
At least one national testing expert has questioned the practice of leaving the initial probe to school districts, which are measured by test results, too.
“The incentives are for the districts to get high scores,” said Gregory Cizek, a University of North Carolina testing expert.
The AJC reviewed 98 complaints of testing irregularities reported to the Atlanta, Clayton, DeKalb, Cobb, Fulton and Gwinnett districts. The investigative reports filled 2,445 pages obtained through the Georgia Open Records Act.
When Cobb determined a serious breach was committed, records show, the outcome was often severe: Five teachers resigned in three years.
DeKalb and Fulton reported fewer complaints — 17 total — but stiff consequences. Seven educators left the two districts after the districts found test misconduct. Gwinnett had one resignation. Clayton reported few complaints and no departures.
In Atlanta, one of the teachers who left after an investigation had been disciplined for breaking testing rules before, records show.
In April 2007, a tearful student at A.D. Williams Elementary said teacher Barbara White told her to change three students’ answers to match hers, records show. Seven years before, White had been suspended after giving students a page from the Iowa Test of Basic Skills to study before taking the exam, records show.
After the second testing complaint, the teacher licensing agency suspended her for a year. White denied the allegations, records show. Hall, the superintendent, recommended firing her. She resigned. By phone, White denied cheating and declined to discuss her case further.
Misconduct sometimes drew a gentler response in Atlanta, however, than in Cobb or Fulton, records show.
After investigators found Bolton Academy teacher Theresa Powell had given students answers to CRCT questions by nodding and shaking her head or pointing, Atlanta and state licensing officials suspended her for 45 work days. When similar allegations of coaching were substantiated against two teachers in Cobb and two in Fulton, all four teachers resigned.
Through a district spokeswoman, Powell declined to comment.
Few eyewitnesses involved
The Atlanta district uses its own employee relations officers and outside investigators – who are often lawyers – to conduct investigations. When those investigators come across new allegations beyond the initial claim, however, they do not always explore them, records show.
A teacher at Thomasville Elementary, for instance, reported during an investigation last year that answer sheets and test booklets were placed differently in a stack returned to her after being locked up overnight. She noticed at least two answers had been changed. They no longer matched the student’s markings in the test booklet.
And at Walter White Elementary, a student said a different teacher — not the one who was the subject of the investigation — gave answers to CRCT questions, records show.
The new allegations generated little, if any, scrutiny, records show.
Documents suggest that at times, Atlanta’s investigations of testing deception were hampered by a lack of willing eyewitnesses. Five complaints were anonymous. While teachers were a regular source for initial reports of test irregularities in districts such as Cobb and Fulton, few stepped forward in Atlanta.
One who did sounded regretful. “I didn’t realize the effect that it might have on the school and my new principal,” a White Elementary teacher wrote in a statement for the district. She had reported two students said their teacher told them to look ahead in the CRCT – a violation – and ask her questions.
In another complaint, a teacher said the last time he had answered truthfully about a problem, he had been reprimanded. “I don’t want any more questions from Atlanta Public Schools,” the teacher said.
Hall, the superintendent, said employees are protected by the state’s whistle-blower act, which prohibits retaliation for speaking up. The district also has a policy against reprisals. Hall said no employee has ever written her to complain of being fired for coming forward.
Good scores bring bonuses
Potential whistle-blowers may have another incentive to keep quiet: All Atlanta school employees can earn bonuses when scores rise.
Each year, the district sets targets for raising test scores. Bonuses range from $50 for bus drivers to $2,000 for teachers and principals if the school meets 70 to 100 percent of the district’s targets.
Last year, 50 of 83 eligible schools qualified at some level, with three schools meeting all targets. The district spent more than $2 million on the bonuses. Hall received an extra $82,000, partly due to test scores.
Jeff Schiller, a partner with Instructional and Accountability Systems, an Atlanta Public Schools consultant, said the incentive focuses teachers on effective instructional programs. “If you take a look at the amount of money they get, after taxes, it’s hardly enough to motivate somebody to do something illegally or unethically,” he said.
Low scores matter for students. In one case at Cascade Elementary, a parent complained that her daughter should have repeated the third grade. On classroom work and other tests, the child’s results were among the lowest in her class and in national comparisons with peers, records show. But her CRCT scores were stellar.
How, the mother asked, could those test scores be valid? One top district official’s answer: Some kids may make lucky guesses.
Clark, whose son Dequayvious said a test proctor gave him answers, was disappointed the district’s probe seemed to go nowhere in her case. “Just giving him the answers is not giving him an education,” she said.
Blalock closed this year and Dequayvious began classes at another Atlanta school – Deerwood Academy.

New demographics
And while the city’s demographics have changed, the change may not translate into votes. The percentage of white residents has increased since 2000, but there’s little change in the percentage of white registered voters. About 37 percent of Atlanta’s registered voters identify themselves as white. The majority, 50.5 percent, still describe themselves as black, although the percentage has dropped by 5.5 percent since 2001.
Some black voters said they will support an African-American candidate this fall.
Southwest Atlanta resident Sabrina O’Neal, who is black, is not convinced a white candidate can win this year. She asked a friend one recent morning who she supports.
“The black guy,” the African-American woman said, referring to Reed. “I vote for my folks.”
The Norwood camp is banking on potential voters like Sylvia Johnston, an African-American woman who lives in Mozley Park and has a Norwood sign on her lawn. Johnston said Norwood has been more responsive than black elected officials to problems like trash on abandoned properties.
“If we can elect Obama, then we can put Mary Norwood in,” said Johnston.
With no candidate holding a commanding lead, Borders, Norwood and Reed have vigorously appealed for votes among all racial groups as well as the city’s influential lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. Borders has been more willing to discuss race, saying Atlanta is “largely inattentive” to the subject. Reed, who’s highlighted Atlanta’s diversity when asked about race, plans a speech on the topic this week.
Norwood has preferred focusing her public safety message. Spikes and other candidates have attacked Norwood’s record, arguing she is part of the Atlanta bureaucracy that’s responsible for many of the city’s troubles.
The true test of Norwood’s chances will come in places like The Final Cut barbershop on Martin Luther King Jr. Drive. It’s in city council district 10, an overwhelmingly African-American area in which city elections have traditionally been decided. Shirley Franklin won her largest share of votes here, 5,753, in 2001, the first of her two victorious mayoral campaigns.
On a recent Friday, the folks there said race won’t be a factor for them, but they thought it might be for others.
“Race is always going to be a factor,” said customer Bishop Brown, 43. “Will it be the predominate factor? Probably not. But it will be a factor.”
Sam Massell, the last white mayor, predicts race would be a major plotline in a runoff.
“The real battle will come in a runoff where you’ll have a black and white candidate,” said Massell, mayor from 1969 to 1973 and now president of the Buckhead Coalition. “That’s when the fight will be.”
C-Murder's life as a free man is over.
Everybody believes that, except for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) , which wants to go to the Louisiana Supreme Court and see if they can't garner a retrial.
Why?
One juror in the initial trial, Mary Jacob, said in an interview that she was pressured by her fellow jurors to enter a vote of guilty. She said the jurors verbally abused her during the sessions. Although Judge Hans Liljeberg ordered another deliberation, a vote of 10-2 found C-Murder guilty.
C-Murder, whose real name is Corey Miller, was sentenced to life in prison for the murder of Steve Thomas, 16, in a nightclub in Harvey, La.
Miller's brothers are rap mogul Master P, founder of No Limit Records, and MC Silkk the Shocker. P's son Romeo is also an MC.
Ernest Johnson, president of the NAACP's Louisiana chapter, called to Chief Justice Catherine Kimble in a letter, requesting “a full investigation of this entire case, the immediate removal of the trial judge, the appointment of a new judge from outside the 24th Judicial District to hear all post trial motions, and the immediate release of Mr. Miller from prison pending a review of this entire matter because justice delayed is justice denied.”
I hope a retrial, with no controversy, is given to C-Murder. I've had my doubts about the trial in the beginning. I'd hate to see a guiltless man be in jail.

WHAT - are they driven by? Their intrinsic strength or their instinctual fear?
WHEN - will they become the "UN-Least Of These"? Is this even a favorable condition per their current mindset?
HOW - have they prepared themselves and their future generation upon the death of their caretaker to whom they are so loyal?

Do the noisy protests directed at President Barack Obama's health care plan reveal something uniquely sinister about the American right? A surprising number of liberal pundits seem to think so. "Let's be honest with ourselves," progressive blogger Josh Marshall declared, "the American right has a deep-seated problem with political violence....The ideological pattern is clear going back at least thirty years and arguably far longer."
Chip Berlet, a senior researcher at the liberal think tank Political Research Associates, went even further than that, telling New America Media: "For over 100 years—more like 150, you've had these movements, and they came out of the Civil War. It is a backlash against social liberalism and it's rooted in libertarian support for unregulated capitalism and white people holding onto power, and, if they see themselves losing it, trying to get it back."
Now, it's certainly true that the United States has seen some brutal right-wing thugs over the years, particularly during the Cold War and the Civil Rights struggle of the mid-20th century. But Berlet's ridiculous claim that "libertarian support for unregulated capitalism" created a racist backlash stretching back "over 100 years—more like 150," reveals nothing more than Berlet's own profound ignorance about what actually happened over the past century and a half.
Perhaps Berlet should consider the career of South Carolina's Benjamin "Pitchfork" Tillman (1847-1914), a leading progressive who railed against the sins of "unregulated capitalism" while preaching the salvation of white supremacy. An ally of the agrarian populist William Jennings Bryan, Tillman supported antitrust laws, railroad regulations, the free coinage of silver, and a host of other progressive panaceas. He first entered politics as a member of the Red Shirts, a Klan-like terror group that "came out of the Civil War" to menace African Americans during the early years of Reconstruction. When President Theodore Roosevelt entertained the black leader Booker T. Washington at the White House in 1901, Tillman served as a de facto spokesman for the Southern opposition, declaring: "The action of President Roosevelt in entertaining that nigger will necessitate our killing a thousand niggers in the South before they will learn their place again." It's hard to imagine a nastier threat of political violence than that—and Tillman is obviously nobody's idea of a libertarian.
In fact, as the historian David Southern has documented, the worst evils of the South's Jim Crow regime, including segregation, disfranchisement, mob violence, and lynching, all "went hand-in-hand with the most advanced forms of southern progressivism." Remember that progressives wanted an interventionist government with sweeping powers to regulate all walks of life, an approach that fit nicely with Jim Crow's bullying assault on economic liberty and freedom of association.
As for "white people holding onto power, and, if they see themselves losing it, trying to get it back," let's not forget the racist history of the American labor movement, particularly the powerful American Federation of Labor (AFL). Since most AFL unions banned African Americans outright until federal anti-discrimination laws appeared in the 1960s, blacks often had to take drastic measures to break into union-dominated fields. This led many African Americans to accept dangerous work as strikebreakers—"scabs"—while the lily-white AFL walked the picket line.
In response to this unwelcome competition, AFL chief Samuel Gompers thundered: "If the colored man continues to lend himself to the work of tearing down what the white man has built up, a race hatred worse than any ever known before will result. Caucasian civilization will serve notice that its uplifting process is not to be interfered with in any such way." Along those lines, during the infamous 1892 Homestead strike against Carnegie Steel, black strikebreakers were beaten and dynamited by members of the picketing Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers. Once again, racist political violence coming from the left.
Have some ugly views cropped up at the recent health care protests? Sure. But to take that as evidence of a century-long battle between enlightened liberal reformers and knuckle-dragging laissez-faire racist goons is to believe in a self-serving fairy tale. It's time for any pundit who thinks that way to grow up.
Damon W. Root is an associate editor at Reason magazine.
Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, a Democrat, told CNN Tuesday he supports the late Sen. Ted Kennedy's wish to appoint an interim senator to serve during the five months before a special election is slated to be held.
Calling the proposal "eminently reasonable," Patrick told CNN's Larry King. "Massachusetts needs two voices in the United States Senate, especially at a time of momentous change like this."
Under current Massachusetts law, a special election must be held 145 to 160 days — about five months — after a Senate seat becomes vacant. The winner of that election serves the remainder of a senator's unexpired term.
Last week, Kennedy — who died Tuesday at age 77 after serving nearly five decades in the Senate — urged that the law be changed to allow the governor to appoint a temporary replacement until the special election can be held.
Patrick also said he has no interest in running for the post itself.
by Hazel Trice Edney
NNPA Editor-in-Chief
Originally posted 8/25/2009
WASHINGTON (NNPA) – This week marks the 46th anniversary of the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, August 28, 1963. Nearly a half century since the march that drew more than 200,000 to Washington, D.C., Black activists confess they have changed their strategy in the wake of an African-American President, but they contend that their commitment remains the same.
“I think that some leaders are now reluctant to engage in public struggle because President Barack is in the White House. But, I would remind you that a public demonstration for justice would not be a march on the President. That would be unfair,” said the Rev. Jesse Jackson, president and CEO the Chicago-based Rainbow/PUSH Coalition. “We supported Kennedy over Nixon, but we still had the march on Washington. We supported Johnson over Goldwater, but we still had the march on Selma.”
Though public demonstrations by Black activists have been scaled back significantly since the election of America’s first Black president, the intense focus on issues is still the same, Jackson says. (Blog Editor's Note: SO THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED TO THE "ANTI-WAR MARCHES"!!!!)
“In 1963, we were marching for the right to vote. Now we’re marching to the polls by the millions all over the nation. Activism now is the election of city councils and state legislatures, Congress and President of the United States,” Jackson says. “When you fight, you fight with the whole armor of God – litigation, legislation, registration, demonstration.
All of those are forms of fighting.
Even in 1963, we had won the ’54 Supreme Court decision, the ’55 Montgomery bus boycott, and students across the South marched on Selma. Even then, we used litigation, legislation, registration and demonstration. We’ve always used several forms of fighting.”
Jackson admits that the current lack of street activism that had resurged during the eight years of the Bush Administration may be necessary to make ultimate progress on issues through the first four years of the Obama Administration.
“We have made milestones politically – two African-American governors and an African-American president (Blog Editor's Note: Look at the PORTRAITS ON THE WALL as evidence of our Racial Progress) – but, we still have a disproportionate number of infant mortality, shorter life expectancy, discrimination in hiring, in home foreclosures and in student loan debt. So, it’s mid day in our politics, but mid night in our economy,” Jackson says.
He was referring to the nation’s jobless rate that has neared double digits while the Black unemployment rate has passed 14 percent and well above that for Black males.
Street demonstrations are not only still needed to fight remaining inequities, but to counteract the uprising of White-led right wing activism around the nation in the wake of health care legislation, Jackson says.
“The evidence of hostility is shown clearly in the town hall meetings”, he says. “We are still fighting. But we’re winning. The reason why the right wing is acting so hostile is because they are feeling desperate. They lost the White House. We won.”
(Editor's Notes - In the Bloody Summer that is coming to a close - The VIOLENCE came from the Street Pirates - not the Right Wing Militias)
He concludes, “Our agenda has not changed. It’s just that instead of having an adversary in the White House, we have an ally.” The National Urban League’s Marc Morial agrees.
“We have to be fundamentally realistic. Our constituencies voted for this President … Black leadership’s roll is to support the public policies that we believe will benefit our constituencies. I think we must realize that personality politics in my opinion are [unnecessary] when there’s an opportunity to work along with a president for the shaping of public policy that benefits our community. Having said that, I believe it’s important to recognize that Black leadership’s roll is to hold every elected official accountable. And I sometimes wonder why people say we have to hold Obama accountable, when I don’t hear that kind of conversation from some people about the Congress of the United States, congressional leadership, about the governors and the mayors.”
Morial says it is much easier to work with a president who has been historically friendly toward civil rights and equality.
“Some of the fights and the pushing and the shoving takes place beyond the view of the media. In the previous administration, sometimes we had no choice but to hold press events, to write letters and to do things,” Morial says. “There’s an opportunity with this administration that if we access the system, if we push our agenda aggressively, if we seek to meet with and participate in shaping the public policy as some of us are. It’s not just about what we say publicly. It’s about what the results of the policies and the programs are.”
Morial says he has been working with the Department of Labor on accessing green jobs and green job-training in the Black community in order to lower the Black unemployment rate.
Political observers have intently watched the first 200 days of the Obama presidency.
Dr. Julia Hare, co-founder of the San Francisco-based Black Think Tank says while Black leaders should not treat Obama any differently than the 43 White presidents who came before him, there does appear to be a need for more activism on economic equity.
“I don’t believe they’ve become too soft on this president,” she said. “They didn’t press White presidents on issues such as ‘draconian drug laws’ and ‘police profiling’.”
But, Hare observes there has appeared to be a fear factor in Black leadership’s reluctance to criticize the first Black president on issues such as the need to get economic stimulus dollars to the poor faster instead of to banks and financial institutions that caused the crisis.
“Some of them are terrified of being accused of being haters, jealous of the man,” Hare said. “The financial crisis is killing people. And of course if it’s making White people sick; then it is murdering Black people.”
U. S. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Cali.), chair of the Congressional Black Caucus which now has 17 subcommittee chairs and four full chairs in Congress, says the president is doing a remarkable job given all that’s on his plate. She says it’s a relief to not have to fight like they did with the Bush Administration.
“We met with the Attorney General Eric Holder. He gets it on mandatory minimum, on the devastation of this policy on African-American males in terms of crack cocaine and powder cocaine disparity. We’re working on that, straight up, out front, we’ve talked to him about it and we’re working on it. And there are many, many issues like that,” she says. “So, this wouldn’t have happened, I know, under a different administration. The president gets it. … When you look at what he’s done already, it’s just amazing.”
She concludes that giving praise when politicians do right is just as important as criticizing them when something is done wrong.
“The positive is what we need to accentuate. We have a very forward-thinking, progressive, bold agenda and that’s what we’re working on in terms of the Congressional Black Caucus agenda, but also the president’s agenda, which 99 percent of the time is in sync. So, I see us as being in partnership with members of Congress with the Executive Branch that speaks to the Black community, communities of color, but probably the whole country.”
AJC Article:
The Atlanta mayoral race went into overdrive today when two of the leading candidates held dueling press conferences to talk about race.
Sen. Kasim Reed (D-Atlanta) and City Council President Lisa Borders were responding to a letter that has been circulating through the city calling for a black agenda. Specifically, the letter strongly implies that the city would be better off electing a black mayor. More specifically, the letter endorses Borders.
Reed urged the Borders campaign to denounce the email, which he called “divisive,” and “racist.”
Long-time Atlanta political insider and consultant Aaron Turpeau has been distributing the letter, but has denied actually writing it. He said the paper was produced by an ad hoc group of black Atlantans who have been meeting on and off since 1994 to promote a “black agenda.”
“This campaign should be based on the merits of each candidate, not the color of someone’s skin,” Reed said at his news conference.
About an hour later, Borders did just that.
“I recognize the constitutional right of every citizen to express their concern,” Borders said. “I reject the analysis offered by Aaron Turpeau. He is absolutely wrong. I oppose anyone, or any race, who would distract us from what is important today.”
Mary Norwood, the only white candidate in the race, and a front-runner, would not comment on the letter. In fact, in an emailed response to the AJC, she mentioned her efforts to fight crime and fix Atlanta’s finances and never mentioned race.
“She is focused on asking voters to judge her on the things she has done and what she wants to do,” said Norwood’s campaign manager Roman Levit. “Judge her on her ideas and abilities.”