Beware of the Black Guy

A Washington Post writer opened a can of racial worms about two weeks back when he theorized that President Barack Obama couldn’t show what some consider “enough rage” over the BP oil spill _ or over anything, for that matter _ lest he conjure the image of the “Angry Black Man.”

See columnist Jonathon Capeheart’s article here:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/06/rage_why_obama_wont_and_cant_g.html

With all this petro in our oceans and washing onto our shores, this was the LAST story line I was thinking about, but now that it’s out there, let’s consider the question: Do black men have to be careful _ maybe even more careful _ than the rest of society when it comes to expressing anger?

As a black man, I am obviously biased, but I would say yes. I feel many black men today can be revered but are still feared, especially by non-blacks. This isn’t to suggest that all non-blacks fear black men, but I do think this is probably the group of which they are most likely afraid.

I have also had some experience with the issue. From a young age, I recognized my distinction from non-blacks and even from black girls in terms of how I was treated by members of the majority race.

When I was about 11 years old, I was riding my bike with four of my boys (who happened to be black) and we stopped in a neighbor’s driveway. The police were called and came to our homes. As an intern at a major newspaper, I can remember standing up too quickly from my cubicle and drawing a startled, anxious response from my non-black co-workers.

For those of you reading this post who aren’t black men, this might seem a silly topic to you, and I’d hardly expect you to understand. Capehart’s point, however, is not unique to black men. All kinds of people draw looks of discrimination and cause a chain reaction of bad body language simply in this country for being who they are: the disabled, interracial couples, homosexuals, Arab-Americans.

Clearly, not all people feel the same way about these folks and others. But there is enough prejudice and stereotyping to go around. Black men face their challenges and will probably always be the target of certain misconceptions. But in 2010, that is a minor challenge considering from whence we have come. Still, it is worth understanding, mentioning and discussing.

So let’s do that here, and then move on.

Majority Mind: "Get Rid of the Bad Blood"

Below is a link to an article by Fareed Zakaria in the June 7 edition of Newsweek. It takes a similar line of logic to our "Get Rid of the Bad Blood" post, but tackles a different topic. It addresses President Obama's foreign policy and his critics. Check it out and post a comment here on Majority Mind.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/05/29/obama-vs-al-capone.html

"Get Rid of the Bad Blood"

RT @lwhack 4 IL Dems #blagotrial is like the "war" after Michael Corleone's 1st murder in The Godfather, but less honorable, hope 4 #freshstart #change

Yes, it is today. Disgraced Former Illinois Governor goes to trial for numerous corruption charges. The outcome is uncertain. Pundits, lawyers, jury members, judges and residents will all have opinions on what will happen.

But the outcome of the trial is NOT what I want to talk about. You see, we know the Illinois political reputation well enough by now. And at this point the nation and the world know there is "Bad Blood."

There is a laundry list of convicted and accused Illinois politicians. You know it, our you can Google it. Point is maybe, just maybe, this Blago Trial will lead to a "war." Like in "The Godfather" when Michael Corleone offed that mob boss and the police captain at the Italian restaurant. After that there was an all out "war" between the "five families." Things could have gotten better, many would say with "The Godfather II" that conditions worsened.

With the contentious fall election with anti-incumbent sentiments, with a dismal economic forecast hitting Illinois especially hard and with people being sick of "politics as usual" maybe some of the "Bad Blood" can be washed away.

But political change of this magnitude arrives like the slowest glacier, instead of at the speed of hurricane waves, but maybe this new low can rechart the course of Illinois. But it is up Illinois citizens of all backgrounds to rise up and get politically active in this non-presidential election year (in HIGH numbers). It is up to incumbents and "New Blood" politicians alike, to wash their hands of any "Bad Blood" and move forward with real solutions, that help real people as their core motivation. If Illinois makes this type of investment years from now we can be looking at a better state. If not, the "war" might just give birth to another. Or worse, there will be little or nothing to fight for.

The Matter with the Media: TV edition

An election year TV series has come to a close on our screens. And this year someone on TV always seemed to be talking about the impact of the media. Too harsh on Sarah Palin, some claimed. Too soft on Barack Obama others accused. Sexist toward Hillary Clinton others shouted. Not friendly to John McCain others insisted. Free passes to Joe Biden chided others.

With all this ruckus about the media flipping channels has been like navigating through a conservative vs. liberal pass-fail course. But do any of these programs really pass? It seems like most shows have political leanings. In this environment how do you get non-bias, engaging news anymore?

According to a poll on this Majority Mind blog 66 percent of you said that the "mainstream media could do a better job," reporting on the news. (Please vote in the poll if you have not already)

With this being the case many people ages 18 to 34 get their TV news from sources like "The Daily Show" or "The Colbert Report" on Comedy Central. These programs hosted by Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert seem to have a humorous liberal slant. The Comedy Central duo is even held their own election night coverage in a program entitled "Indecision 2008."

On the other end of the spectrum Mike Huckabee, Republican Arkansas governor and former Republican presidential nominee, has a show on FOX with a more conservative vibe. After dropping out of race Huckabee has stayed in the news reel by becoming part of it. He has recently published a book that he will be surely cross promoting on his show.

And now CNN has a show, "D.L. Hughley Breaks the News" on which the comedian host a late night style show on socio-political issues. He is openly an Obama supporter.

Pundit and partisan press as news is becoming more prevalent, not just on these shows, but in media outlets in general. And there seem to be more analysts (who are normally permitted to lean left or right) filling segments with their partisan opinions. That seems cool, but then anchors and reporters on major networks seem to tilt too far off center that's not so cool.
That's just crooked.

Part of the solution is that since opinion seems here to stay in the media viewers should insert their voice into the discussion in order to heard. Ever been watching TV and started talking back to the anchor or reporter, disputing or agreeing with what they are saying?

Now TV show Web sites host blogs related to their programs and viewers can log on a post comments. One example is CNN anchor Rich Sanchez who uses Twitter, Facebook and MySpace as a conduit for dialogue with viewers. In the current media landscape, when viewers are going to get opinion with most stories, at least there are opportunities to share your stance.

In later posts we will address media bias in web content, newspapers and radio.
But in TV do you think news programs are turning bias? Why? And what would you like to see done differently?

Post a comment below

High schools for gay students a positive alternative?

Walking down the hallway or stopping in the bathroom countless students that identify themselves as gay have probably been harassed and ridiculed. Other gay students may feel scared to express their developing or developed sexual identity because they fear being judged by their peers. In years to come these students may have another option in Chicago.

The Chicago School Board will vote on the proposed School for Social Justice Pride Campus Nov. 19. Initially, this vote was to have occurred Oct. 22, but a decision was postponed because of the large number of other school proposals that the Board of Education must decide on.

What makes this vote significant is that this proposed school is being created to cater to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender students. Officials say that the high school will not be a “gay high school” but rather an institution for students who find traditional schools non-conducive to learning because of their sexual orientation.

This would make Chicago the third city in the nation to have this type of school. The first two high school are New York's Harvey Milk and Milwaukee's Alliance.

The proposed Chicago school would enroll 600 students and would be open for anyone to attend. Officials are hoping the school would be open for the beginning of the 2010 school year.

Research and surveys have found that students who are bullied because of their sexual orientation are more apt to miss class, drop out and not graduate. Enormous percentages of students surveyed also report being harassed and physically assaulted at school.

Supporters believe that the creation of these schools would help tremendously in the academic and social development of high school students who choose to live an alternative lifestyle.

However, the creation of these proposed schools leads to other issues and more questions. By sending students to these alternative high schools, we as a society are not completely addressing the core issues.

Instead of teaching tolerance in our schools, maybe this implies view separation as a better solution. This may send a message to “normal” students that there is something wrong with their fellow classmates who live an alternative lifestyle and that separation is the only solution.

Majority Mind Question
Do you agree or disagree with creating high schools for gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender youth? Why or Why not?
Do you think this will further stigmatize gay students? On the whole will it lead to more or less prejudice?
Post a comment below

Palin, Obama shake up presidential landscape

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama definitely stand for fresh, history-making perspectives in this presidential election year.

Palin has burst on to the 2008 presidential scene and in less than two weeks has established that she is a politician with the characteristics of an 'ordinary person.' As a Republican governor she has an 80 percent approval rating in her state, still few in the other 49 states knew her name.

As a relatively unknown Palin has assumed the role of attack dog (she would say 'pit bull with lipstick') in this race—her 'red meat' is Obama. With her acceptance speech the Republican Vice President nominee tore into the Illinois senator like a moose she has slaughtered and was preparing to dress. Since her speech she has repeated her slick one-liners on the campaign trail.

Palin had some interesting one-liners (this time as answers) ABC interview with Charles Gibson in her first non-scripted television appearance. Her foreign policy knowledge on NATO, Russia and Georgia relations and Bush Doctrine were the first litmus test on her expertise on international affairs. You do the math, did she pass?

Now it was Obama who burst onto the scene during the 2004 presidential race at the Democratic National Convention. His oratory skills and charisma was what made the first-term Senator stand out. But attack dog was never his style. His speeches and his demeanor have inspired, much like a motivational speaker, a preacher even (hmmm?).

But his speaking abilities were not Obama's only attributes or associations during this campaign. The issues of Rev. Jeremiah Wright (controversial remarks at Trinity Baptist Church), Father Pfleger (pastor at St. Sabina who made remarks at Trinity), William Ayers (co-founder of radical left organization with alleged associations to Obama), Tony Rezko (political finance mogul who is under federal indictment) and his association with notorious Chicago machine politics have made Obama's journey to the Democratic Presidential nominee a dramatic one.

What is interesting is these two politicians with very different paths share a lot in common. They both were virtually unknown (and in essence they are still politically mysterious). To many Obama and Palin have questionable levels of experience to be the No. 1 and No. 2 ranking political officials in the U.S. They are both relatively young, in their 40s (Obama, 47 and Palin, 44). They both represent historic firsts for their parties as nominees (Palin, first woman and Obama, first African-American man). Frankly the both are compelling speakers and personalities—different facets of the American Dream have gotten them to this point.

Alleged scandal plagues them both, as mentioned with Obama — for Palin the flip flopping on support of the 'Bridge to Nowhere,' media scrutiny around her 17-year-old daughter's pregnancy and the pending ethics investigation of her firing of Alaska Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan who did not dismiss state trooper Michael Wooten despite Palin's allegedly urging. Wooten is Palin's ex-brother-in-law.

The irony is these two are not battling it out directly. Obama's running mate, Delaware Senator Joe Biden is the Democrats' Vice Presidential nominee and John McCain is atop of the Republican ticket.

Biden and McCain have been friends, long-time senators working on opposite sides of the aisle in Washington, DC for over two decades. The are both entrenched and experienced in the political landscape domestically and internationally. With an unpopular incumbent president 'change' is the buzz word this election and Biden and McCain are not change as much as they may try to be. Their running mates, however, embody change.

The Democrats should be running away with this election many pundits say because of the failures of the Bush administration. But the forecast doesn't call for a landslide at this point. This seems like it is going to be another close one, 2000 and 2004 were down to the wire contests as well.

But this election is close for different reasons. Whichever party takes control of the White House is going to usher in change—historic and hopefully substantive. Whether Obama or Palin are sitting in the White House offices history will be made.

What is more exciting is the changes or reforms that will be made during the next administration. What direction will that lead the country in?

During this campaign so many have reminisced on the leadership of former presidents like John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. Whether Obama or Palin reach the nation's office it is a wonder who they will inspire and what leaders will spring up that will call out their historic names as their role models.

What do you think? Sound off by posting a comment below.

Racism in the 'Eyes' of the Beholder

Spain lost to the U.S. in the gold medal game in Olympic men's basketball. But the Spanish squad, its players and its management have a tainted legacy for the 2008 Games that is mark by more than their silver medal. Tainted with their racist act of taking team photograph where each member of the team took their fingers and pull his eyes in order to look, well, Chinese.

"The advert for a courier company, which is an official sponsor of the Spanish Basketball Federation, occupied a full page in the sports daily Marca, the country's best-selling newspaper" according to The Guardian [United Kingdom publication]. Members of the federation have defended the photograph saying it was not meant to be offensive, that they were paying homage to the Chinese.

What makes this even more interesting is it has been reported that the "Spanish national teams are sponsored by Li-Ning, the footwear company owned by Chinese Olympic hero and torch lighter Li Ning," according to the New York Times. You would think this would given them a heighten sense of cultural sensitivity.

This makes me wonder . . . in 2008 is this offensive, is the acceptable?

Would an African-American trying to make their lips thinner to appear German . . .
Would a Chinese person putting black face on to appear Nigerian . . .
Would a Mexican wearing a turban to appear Afghan . . .
Would these be gestures of imitation as the highest form of flattery or would those being imitated enrage those races?

The thing is these types of things happen everyday, some are publicize like this, most are not. Most of these racy comments and actions occur around dinner tables, at churches or barber shops among other places — and typically the people in the conversation tend to look the same.

And that is fine, but maybe we can start having more constructive conversations about race, so we can see how these racy comments and actions can be turned into actually understanding each other better.