The Republican Party Has Mistreated African American Voters, Senator Lindsey Graham Is Gay, and Other Terribly Obvious News

Sometimes “the news” is so utterly obvious that I find myself shaking my head and scratching my behind at the same time, because this is what I do when I am befuddled, while trying to figure out just what makes it news in the first place. Has this ever happened to you?

For example, remember last week when some poll came out that determined that the Tea Party Movement demographic was primarily Republican, white, married, male, married and over forty-five?  Did we actually need a poll to determine that?  That’s news?  Couldn’t we have just looked at a few photographs of a Tea Party protest and made an educated guess?

But I guess today was simply a slow news day because a few of the stories to come out today seemed painfully obvious to me.

In the first instance, Tuesday night in remarks delivered at Depaul University embattled Republican National Chairman Michael Steele announced that African Americans have not been given a very good reason to vote Republican.  And this is news?

Perhaps the real exercise here is determining if Steele unwittingly told the truth in saying something he should not have said that the party will take him to task for later, as is his usual habit, or if Steele has somehow grown a backbone and stood erect and decided to just tell it like it is.  Hmmm.

Speculation from those I have talked to on this end ranges from Steele having to make a humiliating and obsequious retraction by week’s end, as is his usual habit, to an angry, disgruntled Steele getting touch with his inner Tupac Shakur and giving the GOP the middle finger.  I wonder if he has Republi-Thug Life tattooed on his chest.  It would be so cool if he did.

However, just as I was contemplating the Steele un-news, I ran across a piece in which an anti-illegal immigrant advocate and conservative Michael Gheen accused Republican South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham of being gay and exhorted him to “come out of the log cabin closet.” 

Senator Graham is gay?  You mean a somewhat effeminate fifty-five year old life-long bachelor just might be living an alternative lifestyle?  Who would have thunk it?

But I have long had the notion that Senator Graham just might be gay.  The only thing is I never thought much of it.  In fact, until recently when he seemed to fall under the evil spell of the far right as has most of his party, I had a healthy respect for Senator Graham.  It didn’t matter to me if he was gay;  that’s his business.

However, Gheen is positing this whole spookish, CIA notion that as long as Senator Graham is gay and in the closet, others will use his alleged homosexuality as leverage to coerce him to vote as they want him to vote.  Another example of completely inane statements spoken at a Tea Party rally, but is it news?

Lastly, Jon Stewart of Comedy Central’s Daily Show has spent an almost inordinate amount of time and effort pointing out the hypocritical, cynical, disingenuousness of Fox News.  But is that really news?  Is that something that is so utterly obvious?

Perhaps the fact that fact that Fox News commentator Bernie Goldberg finally had to acquiesce and admit the truth after being confronted with video evidence is the real news;  someone at Fox actually can tell the truth.

But anyway, Stewart’s crusade against Fox does make for good entertainment.  I’ll leave you with the latest clip of him giving Fox the old tried and true FU once again:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Bernie Goldberg Fires Back
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

Public Service Advisory: Would the Following People Just Please STFU!

You know what I hate the most, what really chafes my behind? I absolutely abhor people who just won’t shut up. And it seems that the people who make the least sense, those spouting and espousing the most non-sensical BS are the ones who are always doing all the talking.

But usually, I am a laid back, mellow kind of fellow, and the BS doesn’t get to me. I just shake my head and move on. From time to time when the BS gets too deep, however, I will take the time to address it.

And since President Obama’s presidential campaign began in earnest last summer, the BS from the right, and sometimes from the left, has piled up wide and deep. From time to time I have addressed it, especially when it became such that I just could not ignore it.

This week the BS continued unabated, but at this point it has gotten so absolutely foolish, they I feel I must call for a BS timeout. I must call for some people to just STFU and give us all a break for just a minute. So, could the following people please just STFU for the time being:

Michael Steele, you make less and less sense as you go along For the record, I believe that for our political system to work for African Americans we must be represented across the political spectrum. In other words, it does no good for African Americans to commit fully to either party; that is tantamount to putting one’s eggs in one basket. We must make our voices heard from the right and the left.

However, African Americans on the right, and left for that matter, must not commit to just merely regurgitating the political bile you are fed, but instead be committed to truth. And from time to time, Michael Steele has slipped and told the truth, but political exigency has caused him to have eat his words.

Anyway, this week began with Steele demanding the ouster of Senate majority leader Harry Reid because of his remarks that because President Obama was light-skinned and he did not use “the Negro dialect,” he would make a formidable presidential candidate. According to Steele and his cronies on the right, this remark was racist in nature, right up there on par with Trent Lott’s seeming endorsement of a segregationist candidate and platform.

But if Steele was honest with himself and with the rest of us, he would be able to admit the truthfulness of Reid’s statement. What made Reid’s statement so remarkable was his use of antiquated language which proves only that culturally he is quite out of touch.

But to attack Reid but say nothing of the largely racist rhetoric which has become part and parcel of the right’s efforts to regain relevancy decries a certain lack of sincerity. Michael Steele, your own party has little or no respect for you, and as time goes on, you become simply a caricature, a big joke. Do yourself and the rest of the country a favor and just STFU.

Rush Limbaugh is not a racist; he just plays one on TV I had a debate with one of my African American conservative friends concerning whether or not Limbaugh is actually a racist. But does it even matter if he is a racist or not when the racist rhetoric he constantly espouses reaches so many and does little more than reify and concretize the boundaries of race that keep us apart and prevent real progress.?

To tell you the truth, I don’t think he even believes half the bile that issues forth from that vile orifice he calls a mouth, but when you are getting filthy rich from little more than reinforcing the racist views of a handful of ignorant bigots, why not?

But to maintain this racist, bigoted persona even in the face of remarkable human tragedy and suffering is morally despicable. And to go so far as to discourage your viewers from not contributing to the rescue and recovery effort should earn you a special place in hell.

However, I am most disappointed that no one from the right, no one from the party that claims to represent morality and Christian values even bothered to come out against you. So, Rush, until you assume your proper place amid the fire and brimstone of hell, I wish you would just give us all a break and just STFU!

What Would Jesus Do (WWJD), Pat Robertson? Speaking of Christian values, what values were on display when 700 Club founder and pastor Pat Robertson blamed Haiti’s misfortune on a “pact with the devil” the country made hundreds of years ago so that it might throw off the shackles of slavery and gain its independence from France?

When I heard this clip, what I actually interpreted Robertson’s remarks to mean is that “those Negroes had the unctuous audacity to insist on being free and then to take their freedom by force, and they are now paying the price for their refusal to be slaves.” Or maybe I’m just reading too much into it.

If, in fact, Haiti made a deal with the devil, it was throwing in its lot with the United States and allowing the United States so much influence in the political processes of the country.

Anyway, this is not the first time Pat Robertson has been in violation. Every now and then he says something off the wall that simply links him to a long line of racists who wrap themselves in the flag of Christianity.

My greatest hope is that Black Jesus will reveal himself to Pat Robertson in that moment before he enters into eternity; spending eternity with the image of Black Jesus burned into his subconscious is hell enough for Robertson, but right now I just wish he would STFU!

Honorable Mention: William Jefferson Clinton, please step forward and explain yourself Before we were interrupted by the catastrophe in Haiti, we spent the first days of this past week debating the meaning and import of Senator Reid’s remarks. However, no one seemed to pay any real attention to the remarks of our purported first black president, William Jefferson Clinton, that at one time then presidential candidate Obama would be bringing him and Ted Kennedy coffee.

This remark could be interpreted one of two ways. It could just mean that because of Senator Obama’s relatively newness to the senate, he would be beholden to them as senior members. Or it could mean that that uppity Negro has seemingly forgotten his place.

Despite the notion that Clinton has done so much to help black folk, if his record were critically examined, you would find that his contributions to African Americans have been little more that symbolic gestures.

And given he and his wife’s seemingly racially derogatory remarks during the darkest days of her campaign, I think he should be pressed to come forward and provide an explanation of his remarks. Until he does, he can just STFU!

Do we act differently when we think white folks are watching?: Toward a Definition of Coonery

So, this past Sunday a good friend sent over the above photo and a link to several photos like it with Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele clowning around with some of his interns. The text of the email read, “Have you ever seen such coonery in your life!?”.

I was preparing to type back my assent when my wife came into the room, so I decided to share the photo with her. “Hey, look at this, baby. Have you ever seen such coonery in your life!?”

So, she takes a peek of my shoulder, and then she reminds me that I have many similar pictures that I have taken throughout the years with students and/or assistants. But she doesn’t stop there; she throws in a clincher just before she walks off: “Were you cooning when you did it?”

Darn her for throwing in truth and reality where it does not belong. But I had to admit that she had a point. I have taken similar photos with students and/or assistants throughout the years, and coonery was never my aim; I meant only to have a little fun and/or bond with those young people under my tutelage. Perhaps my judgment of Chairman Steele was colored by my assessment of him which is right there along with foot fungus.

However, just to be sure, I shared the photo and link to my Facebook page with the question, “Is this coonery or a man simply having a light moment with his interns?”, and several people commented. The vast majority labeled his actions outright and abject coonery. However, more than one person just saw a nerdy black man having fun with his interns.

But the comment that caught my attention asked the question, “Why it is always labeled coonery every time a black man acts a little silly or smiles a bit too broadly?” I had to take a step back and figure this one out.

If it were a high-ranking African American Democrat, would we still have come to the same conclusion? Would we have called it coonery if it was President Obama in the photo clowning around with his White House interns? Would we have called it coonery if it was anyone but Chairman Steele in this photo clowning around?

Or do we simply seem embarrassed for ourselves and for Chairman Steele because we believe he is showing his black behind, and white folk might be watching?

I remember when I was growing up, and I could judge the race of the person on the other end of the phone by the manner in which my mother spoke. My mother was an English teacher, so her grammar was always impeccable; however, when she spoke to white people, she added a special tone and timbre to her voice. She seemed to believe that her already pristine speaking voice was not good enough for white people.

And recently during a discussion of culture and stereotypes with one of my classes, a young white male who works as a waiter admitted that he favored serving African Americans because we tend to grossly over tip in an effort to overcompensate for the stereotype that blacks don’t tip. But we don't want to risk being uncouth do we, especially when white people are around.

While I am at it, let me admit my own complicity in this matter. When I am with my own, I gets buck from time to time; however, when I find myself surrounded by those of a certain hue, I tone it way down. I am careful that I am not too loud or too intimidating; big, loud, bald black guys scare white people sometimes.

I remember when in high school the gospel choir advisors took us to a chorale competition at which we were the only all black choir. Before they would even let us off the bus, they gave us the long speech on how to conduct ourselves. They concluded this speech with the admonishment, Don’t you dare get in there and act black on us!”.

And as we waited to perform, we watched the other choirs laughing and joking and being teenagers while we set as straight as possible, quietly and demurely in a corner. Any attempt to smile or laugh or even talk to our neighbor was meet with a stern look of rebuke. And though we were considered one of the best choirs in the region, we performed poorly on that day; it was though our spirit was crushed. But everyone complimented us on how well-behaved we were.

However, I do know and concede to the notion that there are standards of public conduct that should and must be followed, and I am not talking about these. I am talking about those moments when we seem afraid to be ourselves, when we cannot laugh out loud or even smile, when we alter our conduct to the detriment of our selves simply because we believe white folk is watching. Perhaps, we will only be free when we can get past the notion that we must conduct ourselves a certain way simply because certain eyes are upon us.

Do we act differently when we think white people are watching? Can someone give me a definition of coonery?

Negro, Please!: Exhibits B & C

I had not intended to devote another post to Michael Steele and his foolishness. However, as more bits and pieces of his weekend media forays come to light, I find myself in a position from which I cannot help but comment. Let me repeat, each and every time Steele opens his mouth, foolishness seems to gush out in a massive torrent. I am almost apt to agree with those who just a few weeks ago charged that Steele should just keep his mouth shut and work to build the RNC.

Earlier I commented briefly on Steele’s comment that he had attempted to engage President Obama in a dialogue, but thus far the president had resisted. When it was suggested that he was in someway jealous of the president, he stated that there was not reason he should be jealous. After all, he was the chairman of the Republican National Convention, and that both men were at the pinnacle of political power. (See Exhibit B below) He quickly catches himself and states that he does not equate the two, the presidency and his chairmanship.



And now this clip from the same interview (See exhibit C below) when he lapses into a long colloquy about how he partied during his freshman year of college which led to him being expelled. But then he seems to catch himself and tries to fashion some type of redemption story around it.



Who is he talking to? Is he admitting his screw-ups and asking for a second chance to redeem himself? I know that he is responding to the interviewers question; however, I'm not able to understand where it fits in to his whole agenda.

The question becomes does he think before he speaks? What exactly is he attempting to accomplish? Because each time he goes in front of the camera, each time he does an interview, he seems to dig himself in a deeper hole.

It is not that I want Steele to fail. In fact, it is quite the contrary. All African Americans have a stake in Steele’s success or failure whether we realize it or not. If Steele does fail, his failure will be accorded to certain shortcomings inherent in African Americans. If he does succeed, his success will be accorded to a certain singularity in his being, or, in other words, he is simply an exceptional human being.

I can only hope that Steele pulls it together. It certainly pains me to see another African American male thrash about so.

Negro, Please!

When Michael Steele was selected chairman of the Republican National Committee, I must say that I was more than a little skeptical. I mean, this followed right on the heels of the elections. The country had just selected its first black president and the republicans had been trounced. Then, Michael Steele is selected. Sounds a little suspicious, does it not?

But I wanted to give him a chance. I wanted to believe that he was selected on his merits and not just as a token. But things quickly fell apart.

I will not recapitulate the whole sequence of events that led me to believe that Michael Steele is but a figurehead, but let’s just say the whole Rush Limbaugh debacle caused me to lose any respect I had for him.

Everytime he opens his mouth he loses credibility. He showed up on CNN this weekend claiming that the whole Rush Limbaugh episode was part of some master plan. This makes no sense. For one, if this whole thing was planned, what was the end result supposed to be? It did nothing to further Steele’s cause. In fact, it made the whole Republican Party seem like a ship of fools. Secondly, if it was planned, why was it that Steele emerged from the whole affair looking like a complete punk? Why would anyone put themselves in such a position for any reason? See the video below for a glimpse of this foolishness.



Steele also claims that Obama has rebuffed all his attempts at a dialogue. This I believe. Why would anyone want to be caught up with a negro like Steele?

Steele states further that he does have political aspirations for the future that might even involve the presidency if God gives him the go ahead. If Steele really believes that he has any political future after the events of late, he is more disillusioned than he was when he allowed himself to believe he was really in charge of the Republican National Committee.