News Medias and the Sudden Need to find 'The Black Voice'

[Barbara Martin]

I had the opportunity, today, to watch, with great interest, the news coverage of President Obama's
presidency. Today, after watching the Tavis Smiley interview on CNN, I decided
to start a new discussion here because I would like others to be aware of what
I see is happening in politics and how African Americans, once again, are being
used.

History has shown us that White America only has a need for African American people
when it benefits them. Going back to slavery, some Africans were chosen as The
Right spokespersons because they did not appear as threats to American's
Economy. I believe White America's New Media outlets have learned throughout
history that there continues to be certain African Americans who they can
depend on to act as spokes-persons for the entire African American community
-even without being on the ol' slave plantation.

Today, I watched one of those spokespersons - Tavis Smiley. He was being interviewed
on CNN regarding, get this, "Has Obama done enough for the African
American Community?" I listened to Tavis's responses very leading
questions, and was dismayed by his answers. Why dismay? I guess I'm from the
mindset that says White people have always had the skill of pitting us against
each other...and some of us...fall for it. Why this conundrum happens, I don't
know. You would think that by the year 2011, we would have learned better. You
would think that the so-called well learned African Americas would know better.
It aint happening...yet. [I am so glad that my three adult children did not see
this Tavis Smiley interview where the biggest message was...African Americans
are not supporting this Black president as much as they did in 2008. Where did
this message come from??? Tavis helped push this White message because he cited
his disdain for the president’s agenda!!!

Those who own these cable news outlets are the rich White corporations who basically
want to see this president FAIL. How can we, if we say we love our people, help
push this message? How can we push a lie??? Here's a link I'd like to share
with you. It is titled, "Run Obama Run". I hope you will take the
time to read and make a connection here. http://www.runobamarun.com/2010/09/run-in-spirit-of-kunta-kinte.html

As I continued watching CNN this morning, the Tavis Smiley interview aired twice
within one hour. Then, get this, CNN rounded up a group of political pundits
who were ready to comment on Tavis's comments. Oh that was special! Dana
Losche, one of Missouri's finest racist, agreed with each of Tavis's comments. Dana
Losche agreed with Tavis. Now that should tell us that there was something
important missing from Tavis's responses to those leading questions. [We have
been fighting against Dana Losche [Dana is the woman who happens to be in
cahoots with Andrew Breitbart...yeah, you got it... the man who slandered
USDA's Shirley Sherrod and is now being sued by her] here in Missouri for quite
some time. Again, I was dismayed after hearing this interview. But...the media
knows who to call out for interviews of this kind.

What this president has done so far will benefit us all. (I have no health
insurance). One reason this president is getting so much grief from the Republican
Party is not because of his skin color; but because he has chosen to go after
the big boys with the big money -Hugh corporations (Insurance companies, big
oil companies, pharmaceutical companies, and Banks). He's paying for it too.
Right now, I don't think he needs a "Black Agenda". Besides, we have
to do our part: We need to clean up our own houses - educationally, spiritually,
mentally, and socially. We need to clean up our own 'mean streets'.

I would be more encouraged if the Tavis Smileys, Al Sharptons, et al. would make
a concerted effort in pushing back the idea of 'Black People are Not supporting
the President... whenever and however they can and as hard as they can. [BTW,
have you noticed how often we see Black folk on Fox News railing against this
president?] Before now, the only Black man we'd see (on Fox News) would be Juan
Williams. What's going on here? CNN has hired Steve Perry (I don't appreciate
what this young man is saying either.) He comes on National television to
berate public school education. He's the Charter school man. I don't have a problem
with Charter schools if they were doing better than regular public schools.
They are not. Many of them should be shut down. Why did CNN hire Steve Perry as
spokesperson on the topic Education? Well, he's a principal of a so-called
successful Charter school. Maybe that's it. I've heard that the students
attending his school are 'hand picked'. I might be wrong, but if you were given
the opportunity to hand pick the students in your school, you'd probably select
the best and the brightest. Hmmm!

If you have reached this point in this message, you understand where I am on
politics and education. I support President Barack Obama...would not speak
against him -outside the family. [I have not heard one White republican bashing
Bush...have you?) I support public schools over Charter schools and would
challenge anyone who tells me that Charter schools are better.

I write in order to share my thoughts and to have a good debate. (I never argue with people on topics.) I do have opinions that might raise an eyebrow; and I am willing
to discuss those ideas as long as the conversation stays decent and in order.
You can contact me with your thoughts.

My granny would say, "If you can't say something good about a person, then dont say nothing."  I think she's right.
We don’t' need to bash this very wise president; we should be saying "Run Obama Run"...every time we have the opportunity. 

 

[Marcus Van Williamson]

I read the link you referenced and I must ask you, "Are you as crazy as the author of that piece?"  I mean seriously, "Run away from race?"  That is like running away from a positive diagnosis of illness and shunning treatment for a curable disease that can kill you. We can run out of darkness but never can we escape our blackness.

Now, I do agree with you that there are those who, like myself, may tend to put the President against the grindstone, but it is not our intent to whitle him down but to sharpen him. 

I have heard much of Brother Smiley and Dr. West on many issues prior to now and never once can I say that they have slandered the President or tried to rip him apart. Now I have not yet seen or heard any of the interview that you are accounting, but I would wager a certainty that nothing was said by the brother that, 1) is not a definable truth 2) was meant to derail our President's chances at a second term 3) was meant to leave an appropriate question unanswered.

That said, the one thing you are failing to do in your message is identify the balance that Mr. Smiley and Dr. West both deserve.  They both tell you regularly that they support President Obama.  What they do is out of LOVE for him and also out of LOVE for all Americans.

Ask the trainer of a great pugilist if he loved to have a fighter in the ring who had the greatest shot [odds on favorite] at winning the big one.  Ask the same of all the sparring partners who month in and month out ran the risk of taking a beating to help hone their champion's skillsets.  If their champ wins everyone is happy - the trainer, the sparring camp and most of all, the fans.  Everyone is in love with the victor. 

But if you ask the same trainer about his love for a contender who he knows will get his block knocked off in a championship prize fight he will tell you that that love is base on how hard is contender works to get better.  Likewise, the sparring camp of the underdog will link their allegiance to the performance and output of the man they are conditioning. 

However, fans are fickle, more so toward the training camp than the fighter they believe in.  But we all know that someone has to get that fighter ready so that their are no excuses when the battle is over. 

But what we find is that people get mad when coaches and trainers push their loved ones HARD.  If my mom knew the obscenities that were screamed at me during boot camp, I am sure she would have gone and slapped our state senator.

Run Obama! Run! But do not flee in fear of a fight we all know MUST be faced. 

 

 

[Bri'on]

[Renard Smith]

I have not seen the interview that you referenced because I do not have cable to access CNN. I am, however, acutely aware of many statements that Mr. Smiley and Dr. West have given in application to our president. Most I am in agreement with because I feel that politicians are elected to represent the people and need to be held accountable to those that voted for their elections. Now I fully understand that not everyone can be satisfied, but I have yet to see anything tangible that Mr. President has done for us as a black nation. Should he have a black agenda? Some say no!  I say that our problems should at the very least be acknowledged. Black on black crime, unemployment, illiteracy, poverty, and a host of other issues are real and need to be addressed by someone. And in this I include our local and state elected officials. They want our votes, yet do not want to address issues specific to our communities. I am disappointed by this president and am not currently, nor ever was I, enamored by this gentleman. Call me cynical, but quite often minority politicians forget about us once they are elected. And I see no difference now. All of a sudden he wants to have dialogue with the CBC. Our problems are real and should be taken as such.

[Penguin Board of Directors]

"My granny would say, "If you can't say something good about a person, then (dont) say nothing."  I think she's right. We don’t' need to bash this very wise president; we should be saying "Run Obama Run"...every time we have the opportunity" And so says Barbara Martin.

Barbara,

My admiration of Obama and the rest of the first family does not run that fanatically deep. I reserve the right to critique actions/policies of this Administration and any other, insofar as they are worth critiquing. Anyone as sold on your granny's wise saying as you have shown has really foreclosed the prospects of a meaningful discourse. But, you have to be granted the right to uphold your granny's wisdom; afterall, she is your granny. Yep.

[Renard Smith]

Yomi Ace said:

"My granny would say, "If you can't say something good about a person, then (dont) say nothing."  I think she's right. We don’t' need to bash this very wise president; we should be saying "Run Obama Run"...every time we have the opportunity" And so says Barbara Martin.

Barbara,

My admiration of Obama and the rest of the first family does not run that fanatically deep. I reserve the right to critique actions/policies of this Administration and any other, insofar as they are worth critiquing. Anyone as sold on your granny's wise saying as you have shown has really foreclosed the prospects of a meaningful discourse. But, you have to be granted the right to uphold your granny's wisdom; afterall, she is your granny. Yep.

 

I must say that I am in total agreement with you Yomi Ace. We should be comfortable examining the performance of those who are public servants and be critical when necessary. To simply say nothing would be an abdication of our responsibilities as citizens.

[Penguin Board of Directors]

"To simply say nothing would be an abdication of our responsibilities as citizens" ... Renard.

 

How or why this simple axiom can be so confounding to comprehend is hard to imagine. Perhaps, it would have been understandable if the call were being made in a less developed society than America. 

[Osirian]

Maybe ya'll don't understand the meaning of the parable. It means not to talk bad about a person behind their back, it is an act of jealousy and vanity. But ya'll are correct that you reserve the duty to criticize your leaders, but is your critique an informed one, now that is the question. Or is your critique an emotional one, and if so, it is irrelevant because when debating issues of governance, the opinions have to be based upon reason. What the problem is really, is that some of us whom voted for the Prez 'expected' him to bring about reperation styled policies, when, if you truly understood the nature of the american white supremacist  social order, then you would have known that would not have been feasable.

 

One thing I have noticed is that those criticizing the President, are not so quick to criticize those members in congress who intentionally hindered and outright blocked legislation, and if you understand  that this is a 'constitutional republic', then you would understand that the blame has to be passed around 'equally'. The only 'targeted' policy the Prez could initiate that would directly and solelly benefit Black people is something 'racism' oreinted, and when he did with the Gates issue, where was all the 'critque' for those white people across the country who felt the President 'overstepped his bounds', when he spoke out. Where was that 'critique' from these 'intellectuals' then? 

 

 

[Renard Smith]

Osirian, you are very correct in your response. They all must be held accountable. I do not subscribe to the thinking of if he can't get legislation through, it is being blocked. That may be true in some instances, yet we tend to use that line of thinking across the board when it comes to the president. It is almost as if we are trying to excuse his inactions. I simply want relief and that is why he applied for and accepted this position. We trounced Bush and his predecessors on job performance and Mr. Obama and the members of congress will recieve no less treatment. I do not view everything as a matter of color. I could really care less what color any of them are. We need results and not rhetoric.

Osirian said:

Maybe ya'll don't understand the meaning of the parable. It means not to talk bad about a person behind their back, it is an act of jealousy and vanity. But ya'll are correct that you reserve the duty to criticize your leaders, but is your critique an informed one, now that is the question. Or is your critique an emotional one, and if so, it is irrelevant because when debating issues of governance, the opinions have to be based upon reason. What the problem is really, is that some of us whom voted for the Prez 'expected' him to bring about reperation styled policies, when, if you truly understood the nature of the american white supremacist  social order, then you would have known that would not have been feasable.

 

One thing I have noticed is that those criticizing the President, are not so quick to criticize those members in congress who intentionally hindered and outright blocked legislation, and if you understand  that this is a 'constitutional republic', then you would understand that the blame has to be passed around 'equally'. The only 'targeted' policy the Prez could initiate that would directly and solelly benefit Black people is something 'racism' oreinted, and when he did with the Gates issue, where was all the 'critque' for those white people across the country who felt the President 'overstepped his bounds', when he spoke out. Where was that 'critique' from these 'intellectuals' then? 

 

 

[Osirian]

I guess you missed the part about bringing an informed opinion to a political debate. Understand that during the first two years of Baracks presidency the senate conservatives set an all time filibuster record. And besides that, I don't believe that there have been as many 'party defections' on the Democratic side in the history of this nation. Simpler put, how can you blame the President, when every initiative he has put forth that would directly effect the lives of everyday people was fought tooth and nail by opposing 'ideologies', in congress?  The only way Obama can be effective in ya'llz  mind is if he were a dictator, that is the only way he could have gotten everything done in a manner which would make ya'llz happy.

 

And white supremacy is not just about 'white skin' considering, you have far to many Black, Brown, and Yellow peoples who 'insure its maintanance' across the globe.

 

Renard Smith said:

Osirian, you are very correct in your response. They all must be held accountable. I do not subscribe to the thinking of if he can't get legislation through, it is being blocked. That may be true in some instances, yet we tend to use that line of thinking across the board when it comes to the president. It is almost as if we are trying to excuse his inactions. I simply want relief and that is why he applied for and accepted this position. We trounced Bush and his predecessors on job performance and Mr. Obama and the members of congress will recieve no less treatment. I do not view everything as a matter of color. I could really care less what color any of them are. We need results and not rhetoric.

Osirian said:

Maybe ya'll don't understand the meaning of the parable. It means not to talk bad about a person behind their back, it is an act of jealousy and vanity. But ya'll are correct that you reserve the duty to criticize your leaders, but is your critique an informed one, now that is the question. Or is your critique an emotional one, and if so, it is irrelevant because when debating issues of governance, the opinions have to be based upon reason. What the problem is really, is that some of us whom voted for the Prez 'expected' him to bring about reperation styled policies, when, if you truly understood the nature of the american white supremacist  social order, then you would have known that would not have been feasable.

 

One thing I have noticed is that those criticizing the President, are not so quick to criticize those members in congress who intentionally hindered and outright blocked legislation, and if you understand  that this is a 'constitutional republic', then you would understand that the blame has to be passed around 'equally'. The only 'targeted' policy the Prez could initiate that would directly and solelly benefit Black people is something 'racism' oreinted, and when he did with the Gates issue, where was all the 'critque' for those white people across the country who felt the President 'overstepped his bounds', when he spoke out. Where was that 'critique' from these 'intellectuals' then? 

 

 

[Marcus Van Williamson]

Oarian,

I think you may need to check your facts or at least present some form of citation in regard to the "party defections" you are referencing as I am finding this difficult to confirm - especially defections to have occurred during Pres. Obama's first 2 years in office.  I do recall and can identify numerous individuals who resigned from roles in his administration but cannot find any info on those who "defected" from the party for whatever reason.

As far as your question of, "How can you blame the president...?"  First of all there is no matter of blame.  However, to keep things honest, you don't look for a Junior officer to give answers to top level navigation decisions.  It is always the Captain who bears that responsibility for the ship's status.  If it runs aground, neither yoeman or helmsman will have their commisions called into question.

To further call answers to your question, first you only have to look at the persons he called on to staff his cabinet and prime admistrative offices.  The men who created the financial crisis [GS Cronies] align the branches of the majority of appointed positions regulating finance and our monetary system.  Second, every time he has mentioned the promotion of a measure to help "Main Street", nothing has happened because he has always feinted at such measures at times when he has nearly 0 political capital to leverage with.  However, succinctly he has bent and bowed to submission in order to pacify corporate interests regularly. This in itself presents the primary case for arguement that "Main Street" is a kickball that is used to entertain us while the "regular business" goes on.  He caves on us to gain capital that he graciously fumbles to the other team.  Third, he has spoken to introduce measures that are widening the income gap rather than curbing it. Skilled workers have been benched for lack of degrees as the result of mandates to increase statistics regarding graduation rates in this nation.  However, there is no money to pay for such measures while financing wars, so our government now funds 2 yr degrees while employers require 4 yr just to hire persons back to roles they have already mastered through experience.

I could go on stating widely known points that you will never hear on CNN, Fox of any of your fodder mills but I am certain that you understand that without facts to support what I am saying, it is probably difficult for an Obamabot to accept any of this as more than just my opinion.  But if you begin knocking on doors or engaging in conversations with some of the middle aged and older persons who are now working in positions that were once held for our children you would clearly find your answer. Degreed or not, the majority once worked in positions before that required specialized skillsets. For this reason, they share a resounding sentiment.  The majority feels they've been forgotten since the inauguration.