Ok, maybe HATE isn't a STRONG ENOUGH word...but I don't feel like scrolling through my mental roledex for the proper adjective to describe how much I LOATHE and DESPISE "D.L. Hughley Breaks the News", his new show on CNN...talk about buffonery. I was happy to hear the brotha got a shot and was actually looking forward to watching it on a regular, hoping it would be the TV equivalent of Chuck D's "On the Real" (on Air America Radio)...NOT! His jokes are stereotypical, he doesn't seem informed and his commentary is...lets just say lacking...and just when I thought it couldn't get worse than Michael Baisden.  Instead of being informative and enlightening, "D.L. Hughley Breaks the News" has simply been reduced to "CNN in blackface".  WTF? Flava Flav  and Soulja Boy weren't available?

You're Invited
This Saturday, October 18th, please join Barack Obama in St. Louis, where he will talk about his vision for creating the kind of change we need.

Change We Need Rally
with Barack Obama

Under the Gateway Arch
Jefferson National Expansion Memorial
Memorial Dr. and Market St.
St. Louis, MO

Saturday, October 18th
Gates Open: 10:15 a.m.
Program Begins: 12:00 p.m.

RSVP

http://mo.barackobama.com/StLouisChange

This event is free and open to the public. Tickets are not required; however, an RSVP is strongly encouraged. Space is available on a first-come, first-served basis.

For security reasons, do not bring bags or umbrellas. Please limit personal belongings. No signs or banners permitted.


If you cannot make it to this event but would still like to support Barack, you can make a donation here:

https://donate.barackobama.com/wecan

Make-Believe Maverick

A closer look at the life and career of John McCain reveals a disturbing record of recklessness and dishonesty

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain

I am still stoopified at Jesse Jackson's recent comments about Barack Obama during a commercial break in a recent interview on Fox News of all places.

If you haven't heard, Jesse Jackson took offense at a speech Barack Obama gave on Fathers Day asking black fathers to step up to the plate and black people in general to accept more personal responsibility. To Reverend Jackson, this is speaking down to black people....and for that offense, he would like to cut Obama's nuts off....I'm serious, Jesse Jackson said he would like to cut Barack Obama's nuts off....and the entire episode was captured on Fox News of all place.

Once the shit hit the fan, Reverend Jackson (and I use that term Reverend when applying to Mr Jackson very loosely) attempted to explain that he was offended that Obama didn't include the reasons why a large segment of black men haven't accepted their parental responsibility...systematic racism, lack of education and opportunities, etc...

I don't take any offense at what Barack Obama said, but I do disagree with Jesse Jackson wholeheartedly...and the reasons go back to my previous post about Barack Obama's Fathers Day speech.

Obama's speech was given at a predominately black church, in front of a predominately black audience, a group which disapportionally has 50% of households maintained by single mothers. There are millions of reasons why, but that doesn't change the fact that children need fathers in the household...that doesn't change the fact that having unprotected sex will generally lead to unplanned pregnancies....unplanned pregnancies lead to the breakdown of relationships, increase in single mothers, a drain on social services and children introduced to a life of poverty.

I will be the first to say that the United States is a racist society, but that doesn't excuse absentee fathers...Barack Obama grew up without a father in the household, so he's speaking from personal experience. His speech wasn't directed at the millions of brothas out there handling bizness, he was speaking to those who aren't....and a lot of em ain't.

Yes, the US is racist, we can all point to Rodney King, Sean Bell, Jena, the fact that the govt will pay more to incarcerate black people than educate us and state definatively, systematic racism is alive and well.... but no one speaks on one of the greatest forms of systemic racism affecting our community.... a mean spirited backlash against anybody who speaks truth about uplifting the black community. Martin Luther King was labeled a communist....Malcolm X was considered a terrorist, even Jello slangin' Bill Cosby was demonized when he called for more personal responsibility within the black community.

I'm not surprised at Jesse Jackson's comments....or any of the old guard, whether republican, democrat or civic rights leaders. An Obama presidency threatens the status quo....and none of these people who profit and are responsible for the fucked up state of the black community, the United States and the world for that matter are going to go quietly into the night...so like I said Jackson's comments didn't surprise me....however Nas' did.

Nas gave MTV his opinion on Jackson's comments:

"I think Jesse Jackson, he's the biggest player hater," Nas stated on his recent conference call with the media. "His time is up. All you old n---as, time is up. We heard your voice, we saw your marching, we heard your sermons. We don't wanna hear that sh-- no more. It's a new day. It's a new voice. I'm here now. We don't need Jesse; I'm here. I got this. We got Barack, we got David Banners and Young Jeezys. We're the voice now. It's no more Jesse. Sorry. Goodbye. You ain't helping nobody in the 'hood. That's the bottom line. Goodbye, Jesse. Bye!"

Has Nas lost his muthafuckin' mind? How the fuck do you equate Barack Obama or even Jesse Jackson for that matter with David Banner and Young Jeezy?

Think about it, world conference on Africa and the parallels between the plights of africans and blacks in America, similar to the conference Malcolm X was gonna attend before he got assassinated, you gonna call Young Jeezy? Jeezy, the embodiment of dang near every stereotype about black males...Nas considers him a voice, while he might be a voice for ex dope men turned stereotypical rapper, he isn't a leader, activist or community organizer...and judging from his riff with Monie Love, he's not even knowledgeable about the foundation or power of hip hop.

Sorry Nas, goodbye. Your statement is as detrimental to the hood as Jesse Jackson's were to Barack Obama. That's the bottom line. Goodbye, Nas. Bye!

- b

"I'm outspoken, my language is broken into a slang,
but that's just a dialect that I select when I hang".
Special Ed, I Got It Made

My name is Otis Grigsby and I play DE for the Minnesota Vikings. I'm not very known but I'm trying to raise awareness on a tragic situation that has hit my family. My Uncle Sandy (Lernard) Grigsby was murdered by Illinois State Police recently and I just want to mobilize as much support as possible because I don't want to see these people enjoying life like law abiding citizens. Please pass this video on to as many people as possible. Thank you and God Bless.

UPDATE...This video was removed by Otis Grigsby, I'm guessing at the request of the NFL

Peace and Many Blessings Family and Friends,                                             

                                                 

  Below is a Food Stamp Challenge proposed by an organization called Mazon.  I encourage all that can to please participate and help bring awareness to the issues of hunger in this community, this country, this world.  Enter into the world of millions of Americans who eat with $3 per day.  Experience the hunger, the nutritional lack and join us in this fight against hunger out of true understanding and not just pity.  I challenge you to leave your comfort zone and take the Food Stamp Challenge.  For those who want to sign up please contact Mazon, www.mazon.org  and then send me an e-mail at sdavis@stlfoodbank.org to stand with the St. Louis Area Foodbank in our fight to feed the people right here in St. Louis and Illinois.                           

Thank you,                                                                                                               

Shante Davis                                                                                                           

 

 

 
  
Food Stamp Challenge

Take the Challenge with MAZON

May 1-7, 2008

The History

Today, over 35 million Americans are at risk of hunger, that's 12.4 million children who go to school with pangs in their belly; and 22.7 million adults who are faced with the decision of paying their rent or putting food on their table. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Food Stamp Program is the nation's single most important resource in the fight against hunger.

The Food Stamp Program provides a basic safety net to millions of people. The idea for the program was born in the late 1930s, with a limited program in effect from 1939 to 1943. It was revived as a pilot program in 1961 and was extended nationwide in 1974. The current program structure was implemented in 1977 with a goal of alleviating hunger and malnutrition by permitting low-income households to obtain a more nutritious through normal channels of trade. While this program takes important steps toward addressing hunger in America, there are several improvements that could be made to ensure that no one in the United States is food insecure.

Over the past year, a number of local anti-hunger and poverty groups from throughout the country have sparked public awareness about the inadequacy of food stamp allotments ($21 per week) by challenging their community leaders to try feeding themselves on those allotments for a few days, a week, or a month. In May 2007, Members of Congress led by Representatives James McGovern (D-Mass.) and Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.) embarked on a Food Stamp Challenge.

What is the Food Stamp Challenge?

Today, we challenge you to live on a food stamp budget for one week in order to raise visibility and understanding around the challenges that millions of low-income American's face in obtaining a healthy diet under current food stamp benefit levels.

Up for the challenge? Here are the guidelines:

1. The Challenge begins May 1 and ends with your final meal on May 7.
2. Each person should only spend a total of $21 on food and beverages during the Challenge week.
3. All food purchased and eaten during the Challenge week, including fast food and dining out must be included in the total spending.
4. During the Challenge, only eat food that you purchase for the project. Do not eat food that you already own (this does not include spices and condiments).
5. Avoid accepting free food from friends, family, or at work, including at receptions or briefings. (This includes coffee and tea.)
6. (Optional) Please keep track of receipts on food spending and take note of your experiences throughout the week via blog, video blog or podcast and share it with MAZON. Selected entries will be posted to MAZON's website and Facebook page.
7. To sign-up for the Challenge, visit MAZON's Facebook page and link to the Food Stamp Challenge group. If you do not have a Facebook account, please email MAZON and let us know that you will be participating.

Although you are being challenged to live on $3 a day, also consider those who are struggling abroad. Of the 6.5 billion people on the planet, more than 1 billion earn less than $1 a day. What would it be like to live off of $1 a day for a week?

Suggested Activities:

• Get your members of Congress, state legislators, and other local leaders to take the challenge with you: As soon as you commit to taking the challenge, you should issue invitation letters to members of Congress, state legislators, and other local leaders to describe what the Food Stamp challenge is, explain why you are taking it, and invite them to take the challenge along with you.

• Record your experiences to share with the community. Each day, keep a thorough diary of your experience including: what you buy, what you eat, how you feel, what activities you participate in, people's reactions, and other relevant information. The more details, the better people are able to relate to your experience.

• Volunteer in a Food Pantry for one evening that week.

• Arrange to be the op-ed guest in the local paper to write about your experiences.

Advocacy

As the Challenge approaches, MAZON staff will be in touch about ways you can be an advocate on behalf of the millions of individuals who are at risk of hunger.

Slang Editorial: The Difference between Ferraro & Rev Wright....

The media is going into overdrive on both comments made by Geraldine Ferraro & Rev Wright, the pastor at Barack Obama’s church...but that’s to be expected considering Obama’s run for the presidency based .. in the status quo in the way the United States conducts bizness...

Not only are lifetime politicians with 20-30 years in Washington fearing REAL CHANGE, but also corporate America that owns the radio and tv stations that controls what we hear and see.

Keep in mind, most tv and radio stations in the United States are owned by a handful of conglomerates and their routinely biased, one sided self serving coverage of the issues (and even more so of non issues) is purposeful, intended to spark a particular reaction in viewers without telling "the other side" of the story.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the media’s coverage of controversial statements made by Geraldine Ferraro and Rev Wright....despite the fact that there are major differences between the two.

First, Geraldine Ferraroo made public comments in the media and repeated them over and over again to anyone who would give her print, radio or airtime on behalf of the Clinton campaign. Rev Wright made his comments in the privacy of his own church. Ferraro’s comments were made in recent days, Wright’s were made years ago.

Second, Geraldine’s comments attempted to belittle Obama’s accomplishments and to imply that he is where he is because of Affrimative action....and in an attempt to give more credence to such remarks, she also stated she was put on the ticket to serve as Walter Mondale’s running mate because she was a woman.  

Now, as a former democrat (now independent) I have a problem with that for a coupla reasons, for one because in making such comments, she’s giving Republicans permission to use affirmative action as a wedge for any non white male democratic running for office for years to come....and second, it simply isn’t true.

Opportunists use affirmative action as a wedge time and time again, as to imply that it is not needed, that we are all truly equal and get equal opportunity, which of course is something else that simply isn’t true.

We’re not all given equal opportunity...women still get paid far less than men for equal work. Blacks are forced to overcome obstacles such as dysfunctional schools, lack of resources in our community and a society that spends more money incarcerating non whites than educating them....no to mention a society that continuously overlooks the correlation between crime and lack of education opportunities...

I could go on and on, David Dante Troutt’s Theater of the Patently Absurd or "Bitch Is the New Black" on Huffintonpost.com breaks it down better than I ever could.

From the comments I’ve seen by Rev Wright on television, his remarks weren’t all that different from views expressed in Michael Moore’s OSCAR WINNNING DOCUMENTARY Farhenheit 911...translation...when a white man says it, give him an award, when a black man says basicially the same thing he’s villified.

Even when you factor in religion, the villification of Barack Obama’s pastor is still a case of "villifying a black man for making similar statements as a white man"... Revs Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson have made similar "chickens coming home to roost" statements shortly after 911.

Jerry Falwell said God allowed 911 to happen because of moral decay, the ACLU, abortionists, feminists and gays. Pat Robertson made similar statements and no one claimed either was anti American. No one in the media scrutinized all their sermons for controversial statements...even with their records of making controversial statements PUBLICIALLY separate from PRIVATE sermons in their churches.

Last I heard, no one in the media has asked any white politician who supports either to speak against them...or any of the other white evangalists that serve as spiritual advisors to white politicians.

There is a big difference in how both Clinton and Obama dealt with these statements and similar controversies in their campaigns...

If you remember the last debate, Hillary stated rejecting these types of statements wasn’t enough, they must be denounced. She never denounced Geraldine ferrario personally, instead allowing her to step down from her supposed non existant position within Hillary’s campaign and to continue to "speak for herself", meaning she would continue to attack Obama, but without Hillary’s official blessing.

Obama on the other hand, opened himself up to criticism from the main stream media in interviews about Rev wright, rejected and denounced his statments publicially and I have yet to see Rev Wright making the rounds on the news shows adding more fuel to the fire.

But that doesn’t tell the half...

There’s a bigger story in how these campaigns dealt with controversy and transperency...just this week, Obama opened himself with his hometown newspapers to answer any question posed to his about Rezco...and he did to the satisfaction of Chicago journalists who have been covering Rezco since day one and have more knowledge than mainstream media pundits who don’t know
the whole story outside of quick soundbites and ziners.

The conclusion they came to...

"When we endorsed Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination Jan. 27, we said we had formed our opinions of him during 12 years of scrutiny. We concluded that the professional judgment and personal decency with which he has managed himself and his ambition distinguish him. Nothing Obama said in our editorial board room Friday diminishes that verdict... Barack Obama now has spoken about his ties to Tony Rezko in uncommon detail. That’s a standard for candor by which other presidential candidates facing serious inquiries now can be judged." - The Chicago Tribune

To this day Hillary has’t even acknowledged HER connection to Rezco.

Obama opened himself to more scrutinty in keepin with his pledge for transparency in government by releasing his tax returns (Hillary has yet to do so...and surprisingly, has not PUBLICIALLY releasf any tax returns since she’s been in elected office)....

Furthermore Obama has releasef his earmarks, Clingon and McCain have not...and probably won’t....hell McCain won’t even release his health records, which is a major issue for voters who want to make sure he’s healthy enuff to make it through a 4 year term.

When asked by a New Hampshire high schooler whenter he was too old to run, given the likelihood that a man in his 70s could possibley die in office, McCain’s response was "Thanks for the question, you little jerk. ... You’re drafted."

-b
"I’m outspoken, my language is broken into a slang, but that’s just a dialect that I select when I hang" - Special Ed, I GOT IT MADE

Slang Editorial: Geraldine Ferraro & the media purposely miss the point...

Call it what you want...

Generally speaking on Legacy, Affirmative Action, Nepotism, what have you...
and all the isms from the old guard...

White people have benefitted from being white since the beginning of this country.
Non whites have been systematicially denied the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness since the beginning of this country.

Would Bush be president if his father were not president? No, yet nobody in the media says he only got to where he is because of his father.

Would Hillary Clinton be in the position she is in if she wasn’t married to a former president? No, yet nobody in the media says she only got to where she is because her last name is Clinton.

Affirmative action is a term opportunists like to spin in order to make it appear that any person of color only got to where they are because of their skin color...the reality of the matter is without it, nonwhites and women would not be given the same opportunities as white men, given experience and education being the same across the board. Thats more a testament to white men and their hiring practices and the good ol boy way of conducting business. That is the issue, but nobody dares tread there.

To add insult to injury, millions of nonwhites and white women are force to compete for a tiny percentage of the pie. If employment were based on merit, the number of white males employed would be more in tuned with their percentage of the poplulation.

The biggest myth about Affirmative Action is that its chief beneficiaries are black, denying the the fact that white women benefit more from affirmative action than any other group of people...and since white women are married for the most part to white men, white men are even benefitting.

Imagine a Monopoly game...me and my friends have been playing for hours and we own everything. Then we decide to let you play, only thing is, we aren’t gonna start a new game, we’simply put you on GO and give you $200. No one if their right minds would think this is fair because all you can do is land on our hotels and owe us or go to jail....you might slide on Free Parking, but for the most part the game is stacked against you. Thats black people in America...we’re owed reparations, but we don’t expect them, we do however expect to compete based on merit and not be denied by white men who still control the board.

You can’t have it both ways...either start a fresh game (pay us reparations), stop racist and sexist hiring practices...(sports is the only field where we compete and are rewarded on merit) or shut up about the hundreds of thousands of people of color who compete with white women for the 10-15% allocated to Affirmative Action...we’d trade places "employment opportunitywise" with white men any day.

-b
"I’m outspoken, my language is broken into a slang, but that’s just a dialect that I select when I hang" - Special Ed, I GOT IT MADE

Rage Against the Machine

When blacks vote overwhelmingly for a black candidate, the mainstream media is quick to say blacks are only voting based on race? As if we’re predisposted more than any other candidate to vote for someone based on race. Whites do it everyday and nobody claims they’re voting based on race....even when they are.

The simple truth is that blacks (I’m not speaking for all, but for myself and a great number of black people I know and am related to)....the simple truth is that blacks vote for those who best understand us....in this case it’s Barack Obama....who happens to be black.

Furthermore, blacks have voted for white presidental candidates 100% of the time since we were "granted" the right to vote.

When blacks vote for a black candidate, the MSM says its because they’re black...when blacks vote against a black candidate, such as "establishment types" such as Alan Keys, the MSM implies it’s because we’re stoopid.

Blacks have a long history for voting for white candidates....our judgement only becomes an issue when we "rage against the machine".

187’d for Change

I had a conversation with one of my male cousins who was supporting Hillary Clinton because he was afraid Barack Obama would be assassinated if he became President. And it’s not just my cousin...I know many black people who fear for Obama’s life.

To those who do, I want to simply say...

Brothas die on the block everday...why is it somehow acceptable when brothas die in the streets...by acceptable, I mean with live with it....we move on, and where one brotha dies on the streetcorner, another takes his place...we don’t miss a beat.

But somehow in politics, we fear.

Lets say for the sake of arguement, something "bad happens"...we gotta do what we do on the block. Where one brotha dies, another takes his place. we don’t miss a beat.

People are killed everyday...it isn’t about how you die, but what you live for....but if it wer,e I would rather go out 187’d for change.