Making REAL Change

With this being the last posting before many people go out and vote on Tuesday November 4th I just wanted to take the opportunity to focus people on a topic that is very important to me. Many people are excited to vote for Sen. Obama or for Sen. McCain, as well they should be, but what's important is that people recognize that all the votes they will cast on Tuesday will be equally important. There will be ballot initiatives in states and municipalities that will have a very real and meaningful impact on people's lives.

Another thing to keep an eye is on the Democratic ticket. There are a number of Democrats that are running lower on the ballot that many people will vote for because they are voting for Obama. The important thing for voters to do is to find out who these Democratic candidates are. In an effort to maintain and expand on a majority in the Senate and House the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) are running a good number of conservative Democratic candidates that some Obama supporters ordinarily wouldn't vote for.

Voters need to be able to harness the energy surrounding this historic election. These feeling aren't necessarily limited to Democratic voters. There is a swirl around the Republican party over the historic nomination of Gov. Sarah Palin as a Vice-Presidential candidate. For the first time in its history the Republican party is nominating a woman for the second highest office in this nation. It is imperative that supporters to the McCain-Palin ticket know about district Congressional races and municipality races in order to know if a candidate is speaking to their needs. Republican supporters must recognize whether or a not a candidate is sincerely speaking to their concerns and issues, or is just planning to capitalize off of the huge expected voter turnout.

About four years ago, I saw the huge efforts made by Diddy and others particularly in the hip-hop community with the "Vote or Die" campaign. Though I was happy about their civic engagement I thought they were particularly quiet on lower ballot races that would affect voters' lives just as much as the presidential election. In 2006 (politically referred to as "off-year" or "midterm" election) there was not a mass get out the vote effort though there were important Gubenatorial, Congressional and Senatorial elections that changed the balance of power in both chambers of Congress. In no uncertain terms, be it real or perceived did celebrity activist try to drum up any voter attention to these elections. The get out the vote effort was non existent. This type of fair-weather civic engagement will not create real change. It is important to vote for presidential candidates but citizens must be informed of all their elected representatives in order to properly hold them accountable for the decisions that they make, and the way those decisions affect people's lives.

President George Bush has shown us that perhaps a President can affect everyday citizens lives in ways we never thought a president could, or even in ways that the constitution forbids a president from doing. With that in mind, the efforts to rally citizens to vote in this presidential election is more than justified. Citizens should always look to exercise their civic rights. However when going into the voting booth, exercise not only your right to vote, but your right to be educated. I recognize a vast majority of my readers are college educated, and internet saavy. Many of us also have family members who may be voting for the first time, or out of excitement for the presidential election. It is our job to know all the races and ballot initiatives that will be at stake on November 4th in our particular states, cities, towns, municipalities and/or communities. It is important to a democracy to have an excited voter, it is a necessity of a democracy to have an informed one. Happy Voting!

Beaten at One's Own Game

Rick Perlstein's book Nixonland talks of the atmosphere of the country when Richard Nixon ascended to the highest office in the land. Perlstein talks of the Watts riots and the contentious relationship between pro-war and anti-war activist. Perlstein also looks at the demise of the Republican Party and idea of conservatism after the 1964 election. Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater seemed to represent a far extreme idea of conservatism that turned out to be quite unpopular. On the back his landslide victory President Johnson passed three significant pieces of legislation, the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The political progress of Black Americans continued to alienate and frustrate many voters that would later be dubbed "the silent majority."

The book's focus was on Nixon and how he was able to use the backlash from of the progressive moments of the 1960's to reestablish conservatism and get himself elected President of the United States. However, Nixon may not have been the best example of the ability to stimulate the majority of Americans. That distinction would go to the man who would be elected president a mere six years after Nixon resigned in disgrace. That man would be none other than Ronald Reagan. Reagan was able to put the bitterness and divisiveness of the previous two decades behind many Americans by emphasizing the good things about the United States and instilling a national pride.

In theme and message, Reagan pardoned Whites from the past injustice against Blacks. He exonerated them from their guilt and put an end to those beating up America for its past transgressions, be them domestic matters of race or abroad with memories of Vietnam. In policy Reagan's campaign used the issues of that time to motivate voters to choose him. He nailed the incumbent on issues like the rising energy cost and the energy supply crisis the nation faced. Reagan also attacked the sitting president and his party on the issue of the nation's reputation with regard to foreign policy. Finally he railed against the country's woeful economic condition (starting to sound familiar). He turned out to be such a transformational figure that a new term was developed for those who crossed party to vote for him; "Reagan Democrats."

Interestingly enough the same issues Reagan campaigned on to create "Reagan Democrats" Sen. Obama is using to mobilize his "Obama Republicans." He has been endorsed by a good number of Republicans none perhaps more prestigious than former Secretary of State and Four Star General Colin Powell. However we see some in the conservative circle crying foul. When Colin Powell endorsed Sen. Obama, Rush Limbaugh called it racially motivated. Limbaugh asked when was the last time Powell endorsed a very liberal white candidate? As I remember Powell admittedly was a LBJ man in 1968, and I don't remember many being considered more liberal than him. Limbaugh goes on to attack on Powell for forsaking the Republican administrations that had elevated him to such high places. Rich Lowry in the New York Post calls Powell's reasons for supporting Obama "lame."

Sen. Obama has been able to excite millions of people across the nation in the idea that "there is more that unites us than divides us." It has worked well for him. It seems straight out of the playbook of Ronald Reagan. His rhetorical and campaign success has also translated into huge campaign finance amounts from a massive reservoir of small donors. Sadly though, we see conservative pundits agitated that Sen. Obama is outspending Sen. McCain 4-1 nationally. With Obama having raised over $600 million dollars some are arguing that Obama is seeking to "buy" the election. This crowd that cries bloody murder now was surprisingly quiet when George Bush outraised both Al Gore and John Kerry. Sen. Obama has apparently learned and mastered the game of presidential politics better than many thought he would. He has used the national sentiment to create a place where “there is no Red America or Blue America but the United States of America.” This place is called "Obamaland" and conservatives hate it. It seemed fine when Nixon had “Nixonland” or Reagan had the “Reagan Revolution.” Perhaps we are seeing a living example of the Mos Def song Mista Nigga. “When theirs start doing it, well its success; when ours start doing it, well its suspect.”

View from Behind the Veil

Without a doubt, presidential elections are about using soaring rhetoric that excites the electorate to voting for a given candidate. Sen. Barack Obama has been a master of this. With his amazing oratorical skills the Senator from Illinois has amassed a large amount of followers that seem eager and ready to believe in the “change” Sen. Obama promises. In another meaningful but different way Sen. John McCain has a group of eager and loyal followers who have been moved by his rhetoric. Sadly though, his rhetoric is leading to an all-too-familiar yet unpleasant place for many Americans.

Not too long ago Sen. McCain changed his campaign direction from policy based critiques to character critiques. This has been and continues to be a slippery slope for the Senator from Arizona. Sen. Obama has appeared to lead a rather wholesome and decent life, so any character questions raised tend to come with a form of racist or prejudice overtone. The most serious form of character assassination Sen. McCain has attempted is the idea of guilt by association. By linking Sen. Obama to figures such as Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers, Sen. McCain has ginned up such deep passion and emotion that it has turned into hate.

This can be seen in the hanging effigy of Sen. Obama found on the campus of George Fox University (a Christian school no less). The atrocities do not stop there, after the McCain campaign dismissed one blatantly racist rant in a newspaper as essentially insignificant, the Virginia head of the GOP told volunteers to play up Obama’s connections to Osama bin Laden, claiming “both have friends who bombed the pentagon.” Although there is one rally where Sen. McCain recognized the outrageous nature of what was going on and put a stop to it (or one would like to think). When Sen. Obama was called an Arab by one woman, Sen. McCain responded that he was not an Arab but rather a decent family man. I suppose Sen. McCain thinks Arab men cannot be decent family men. Even if this is reading too deep, the tone of this election and the absurdity in the character questioning is getting out of hand.

What makes this uniquely worst than any other presidential campaign character questioning is the issue of race. Consider that on two occasions supporters at rallies have chanted “kill him” when Sen. Obama’s name is mentioned. Most would agree the idea of killing a candidate is very disturbing. This has a unique meaning to many Black Americans who have seen important figures in the community gunned down by assassins’ bullets. Many remember the feeling of hearing that Malcolm X was pronounced dead, or that Dr. King was gunned down in Memphis. Black Americans are not taking kindly to the kind of “hate” tactics and political games being used by the McCain campaign. Rep. John Lewis eloquently articulated this in his writings to Politico.com. Congressman Lewis says that he is “deeply disturbed by the negative tone of the McCain-Palin campaign.” Lewis says they are “growing the seeds of hatred and division.” The behavior of McCain supporters are example of that happening.

It is one thing to get your base riled up. It is a completely different thing to have folks wish ill on your political opponent. In Lewis’ statement a reference was made to Alabama segregationist governor George Wallace. Sen. McCain took offense to being compared to the former Alabama Governor. However in the eyes of many Blacks (and I’d like to think many Americans) the reference is appropriate. Neither McCain nor Wallace has explicitly called for direct violence against Black Americans. However, what is being done is creating an environment that becomes blatantly hostile to those who aren’t WASP (White Anglo Saxon Protestants). I hope this wasn’t Sen. McCain’s intention. And I hope it is in the sincerest faith that Sen. McCain just doesn’t understand the severity of he and Sarah Palin’ rhetoric. Perhaps it’s because Sen. McCain isn’t a Black American who has had to ward off explicit and implicit racism in this nation since its inception, that he doesn’t understand the severity of his words. I hope Sen. McCain really didn’t know how hateful people can be if motivated by words. But I feel a need to be cautious with my hope. After all, it is Sen. McCain who warns us to be wary of hope.

The Darkest Invisible People

Much has been made of the recent Presidential and Vice-Presidential debates. Republicans have clamored over how well Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin are able to "stay on message" and get their point across to the American people. Democrats have praised Sen. Obama's regality and the way Sen. Biden comes off as a no-nonsense candidate looking to fix things on Main Street. However on the matter of foreign policy one place has been woefully ignored. The continent of Africa has received little to no meaningful attention and a sparse amount of rhetoric. The VP debate got things started when Gwen Ifill asked the question about Darfur. Sen. Biden responded with a suggestion about putting air support in place to cover African Union soldiers doing the peacekeeping work on the ground. This seems like a great suggestion, one that would should be immediately brought to the attention of the Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations committee. The ironic thing is, Biden is the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations committee. He has introduced one piece of legislation on the matter of Darfur. He called for multinational peacekeeping mission with enough size, resource and leadership to protect the civilians of Darfur. The interesting thing is that Sen. Biden is not a multi-national Senator; he is a United States Senator. His proposed legislation has no real effect on other sovereign nations. In breaking down this piece of legislation we see it really holds no water because it doesn't demand anything in the way of specifics from the United States. As a little sidenote there were 39 sponsors of this legislation, none named Obama or McCain.

Sen. Biden is not the only one who has turned a blind eye to crises on the continent. In the same VP debate, Gov. Palin claims that she had Alaskan state money divested from holdings that did business with the Sudanese government. ABCNews found this to be not true. They spoke with a state legislator who said "the [Palin] administration killed our bill." Gov. Palin has long list of issues she has shown herself to be uninformed on, but now we move into the dangerous place of lying about records. Palin's deputy revenue commissioner called the bill "well intentioned" and said it was "noble" but cleared up that "mixing moral and political agendas at the expense of our citizens' financial security is not a good combination." Clearly there was no long range threat to the citizens of Alaska financial security because the investments could have simply been moved from one holding to another. But apparently when money is involved, morality and Black faces just aren't "a good combination."

The issue of Darfur has essentially served as a one stop shop for matters on the continent of Africa. When addressing foreign policy Sen. Obama made it a point to visit several European nations, even touring parts of Asia on his trip to the Middle East. That is all well respected but when discussing Africa; Darfur seems to be the only place worth mentioning. This seems a bit outlandish considering the human trafficking tragedies that are taking place in Kenya. One would think Kenya would be of particular interest to Sen. Obama considering he has family roots there. He even has a brother still living there. In fact when American writer Jerome Corsi went to Kenya to dig up dirt on Obama, the Kenya government had him deported for what they called "not having a work permit". Here is Kenya looking out for Obama, and yet Obama has failed to at least mention the atrocities in Kenya. Sen. McCain is no better, in fact if anything he is worse. Repeatedly in the most recent debate did Sen. McCain echo how he would never let a Rwanda happen again. Yet right now, Equatorial Guinea is drawing huge oil revenues yet the people there are living in some of the worst poverty of the world. The leader of that country has such distrust in his people that the guards who protect him are from Morocco. Despite all of this Sen. McCain is silent.

McCain talked during the debate about how he stood against his hero Ronald Reagan when Reagan sent troops in to Lebanon. McCain focused on how he was committed to not using troops when the situation wasn't one of direct consequence to U.S. national security. With that I wonder why he was mum on his hero Ronald Reagan's invasion of tiny Grenada. As Reagan and his administration made it seem like Grenada posed a threat to the United States, a vast majority of the world saw it as intervention into a sovereign nation, which happened to be not only Black, but anti-U.S. In that same debate Sen. McCain brought up the United States' failure in Somalia. Many believe this to be the reason the U.S. was inactive in Rwanda. Sen. McCain talked about how the U.S. went to Somalia to be peacekeepers and ended up having casualties. Despite this, the Senator from Arizona continued to echo there will be no more Rwanda. Sadly what the candidates are either unaware of or neglectful to is the horrific transgressions taking place in the Congo. Journalist Glen Ford goes into detail about how in the name of diamonds and other precious minerals, up to five million Congolese have died. For a candidate where foreign policy is supposed to be his strength Sen. McCain is noticeably absent when it comes to international issues regarding Black faces. There is so much left to be desired by the candidates from the major parties and we haven't mentioned Haiti. The United States has had a particularly aggressive and hegemonic position to the island nation since it first threw off the shackles of enslaved oppression.

I recognize that there are a plethora of domestic issues that are of grave concern to many people in the United States during this election season. Homes are being foreclosed on, jobs are being lost by the hundreds of thousands, energy prices are astounding, oh and the collapse of modern capitalism is taking place before our very eyes. With all of these issues I don't expect that foreign affairs will dominate our debates, or campaign speeches. But when there is conversation about foreign policy, the conversation should be about more the European markets, and Middle East battlegrounds. And in this election with so many candidates promising change, it would be nice to have a candidate who changes the United States' national view of African people around the world. But maybe the U.S. can't do that because they could be the ones living in the “Heart of Darkness.”

Black Athletes Crossing the River Jordan

Charles Barkley famously said "I am not a role model." This came at a time when professional athletes were trending away from social responsibility. For Black athletes Barkley's comments were a departure from social responsibility. Since sports became national phenomena Black athletes have made their voices heard on social and political issues of the day. We can trace this back as far as Moses "Fleetwood" Walker. Walker was the first Black man, to play professional baseball in the United States. Though an extremely talented baseball player Walker was also a scholar having studied at the University of Michigan Law School. After his playing days Walker presented an essay that espoused Marcus Garvey's cries for Black Nationalism and even called for Africa for the Africans as the best way to solve the United State's race problems.

With the topic of race and baseball, the name Jackie Robinson is going to inevitably be mentioned. As race neutral as Robinson sought to stay, even he involved himself in politics and fighting for the poor at the end of his career. However, we can really see Black athletes starting to flex their collective power in the late 1960's. Understanding this may have been one of the most militant periods for Black Americans, we can see how this decade would provide fertile ground for athletic activism. During this period we see the creation of the Negro Economic and Industrial Union. This was an organization started by Jim Brown, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Bill Russell. The purpose of this organization was to provide funding to aspiring Black business who would get denied Bank loans because they were Black.

Funding Black business may have been their intention but one of their greatest moments was standing in solidarity with Muhammad Ali in his 1967 refusal to fight in the Vietnam war. Here today Black politicians are often on the losing end of the "love my country" debate, so it must be easy to imagine the sacrifice stars such as Russell and Abdul-Jabbar were making. Their sacrifice still may not measure up to John Carlos and Tommie Smith's Olympic defiance. While accepting their gold and bronze medals at the 1968 Summer Olympic games, Carlos and Smith walk to the podium without their shoes but with Black socks. As the flag of the United States raised and the star spangled banner played, both men, bowed their heads and raised a clenched fist in the air. They donned Black gloves over their fist. The men made a statement of Black power to protest what was happening in the nation at the time but the men lost all future endorsement deals because of their actions.

This brings us back to Charles Barkley and his good friend Michael Jordan. Both of these men came to fame in the Reagan/Bush era. This is a period when the people of the United States were at their most individualistic. People lost the sense community that tied groups together in the 60's and 70's. This sense of community had been so vital to the Black community in making many of the gains that were made during that time. It appeared that extremely lucrative contracts won out over potential benefit to the collective. The individualist, materialistic approach was brought to a head when Michael Jordan refused to endorse a progressive Black Senate candidate who sought to take the seat from conservative (and in many Blacks opinion openly racist) Jesse Helms. When asked why he wouldn't support Helms' opponent Jordan infamously quipped "republicans buy sneakers too."

Many think today's' athletes to be cut from the same self-serving, money before community ilk as Jordan was. Some cite Lebron James' refusal to sign a petition condemning China for their complicity in the Darfur genocides. People suspect he won't do this because shoe titan Nike does a great deal of business in China, and James signed a $90 million dollar deal to endorse Nike tennis shoes. However what many people aren't aware of is the work athletes like Dikembe Mutombo have done. Mutombo has built and primarily paid for a $29 million dollar hospital in his home of the Democratic Republic of Congo. Even more are unaware of pro football player Ed Reed and how his Eye of the Hurricane Foundation has rebuilt houses that were entirely destroyed during Hurricane Katrina, only so the family that was originally living there could return. Reed is doing this at no cost to the victims of the hurricane. What may be most encouraging, is NBA star Baron Davis' response when told that his community and political involvement would cost him corporate sponsorship. Davis replied "who gives a sh*t." To know there are athletes once again recognizing their kinship with the community gives us all hope that Black athletes are on their way to safely crossing the river Jordan.