August 4th, 2010
Newsone For Black America
In an interview with NPR, Cornel West criticized Barack Obama for his handling of the war in Afghanistan and treatment of poor people in comparison to Martin Luther King.
Well, I think in the past, we have. I mean, we look at the legacy of Frederick Douglass and Ida B. Wells and Ella Baker, Malcolm X and Martin King. We have, and part of the struggle now in the age of Obama is how do we keep alive the legacy of Martin King?
I know my dear brother, President Obama, has a bust of Martin King right there in the Oval Office, but the question is are is he going to be true to who that Martin Luther King, Jr., actually is? King was concerned about what? The poor. He was concerned about working people. He was concerned about quality jobs. He was concerned about quality housing. He was concerned about precious babies in Vietnam, the way we ought to be concerned about precious babies in Afghanistan and precious babies in Tel Aviv and precious babies in Gaza.
Martin King was fundamentally committed to the least of these. Of course, he was a Christian soldier for justice from the 25th chapter of Matthew.
And so more and more black folk tend to be well-adjusted to Obama’s presidency, but does that mean they’re well-adjusted to injustice? Because we don’t hear our president talking about the new Jim Crow, the prison-industrial complex.
West also accused Obama of treating him like a “cub scout.”
Well, I’ll tell you, I had not talked to my dear brother since the Martin Luther King gathering in South Carolina, and very briefly Super Tuesday. But he did come and make a beeline to me after his speech on I think it was Thursday morning in Washington, D.C. I hadn’t seen him for two and a half weeks, and he made a beeline to me, though, brother, and he was deeply upset. He talked to me like I was a Cub Scout, and he was a pack master, you know what I mean?
I said, well, my mother and father raised me right. I respect my dear brother, but I don’t like to be demeaned and humiliated in that way, and I didn’t get a chance to respond to him. And I hope maybe at some time we can. But it was very, it was a very ugly kind of moment, it seems to me, and that disturbs me because then it raises the question for me: Does he have a double standard for black critics as opposed to white critics?
August 4th, 2010
By Barry Secrest
In keeping with the ongoing theme of complete disregard towards the combined and true interests of The American People, Judge Susan Bolton emasculated the Arizona Immigration Law by actually blocking the operative part of the law which would aid Arizonians. State Police will, for now, be unable to ask an individual to provide ID in order to ascertain citizenship-however- they can still inquire via other channels.
We are given to understand by the Judge's ruling that, despite the fact the Federal Government has stated that it simply does not have the resources to fully implement its own law, no other primary Authority will be allowed, ostensibly, to enforce said Federal Immigration Law either....
August 4th, 2010
August 4th, 2010
GLAAD recently released their Network Responsibility Index, and Stephen Colbert couldn't have been more surprised by the results. His show wasn't singled out for intolerance toward gay people, unlike CBS, which will now introduce more gay characters due to a failing grade. Colbert concludes that his show only passed because someone on the show is gay, and it must be himself.
"Noooo! I can't be gay! I'm a happily married Conservative just like Ted Haggert and Larry Craig!" Colbert lamented.
He also used his masculine habit of beer drinking, and the Bud Light Lime he's been relentlessly advertising, as an example. But soon he starts to doubt himself, saying "I'm here. I may be queer. I might as well get used to it!" and promptly starts preparing for his cover story on People.
|The Colbert Report||Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c|
|Stephen Might Be Gay|
August 4th, 2010
Larry W. Smith / AP
Another Tuesday, another round of Republican primaries pitting self-proclaimed tea-party candidates against their (sometimes slightly, sometimes considerably) more moderate opponents--and yet another sign that the Glenn Beck brigade is a long way from "taking back the country," despite all the hype.
So far, the tea party has been the major political story of the 2010 election cycle, and in many ways it's a fascinating, vibrant reflection of the America's current fixations and frustrations. But given that the vast majority of the movement's favored candidates have lost their Republican primary battles--and given that the few candidates who've won, like Rand Paul and Sharron Angle, seem to be underperforming against vulnerable Democratic opponents--there's little reason to think that it will be a major electoral force anytime soon.
The "weak tea" trend continued Tuesday in a series of marquee primary battles stretching from the upper to lower Midwest. In Michigan, moderate Rick Snyder--a former Gateway executive who supports embryonic stem-cell research and sought to attract Democratic crossover voters with ads featuring Bill Ford--was competing against a flock of more conservative candidates (Oakland county Sheriff Mike Bouchard; state Attorney General Mike Cox; Rep. Pete Hoekstra) for the GOP gubernatorial nomination. In Missouri, Rep. Roy Blunt fought for Kit Bond's open U.S. Senate seat against state Sen. Chuck Purgason, an anti-tax, anti-government conservative who has worked hard to position himself as a true-blue tea partier. And in Kansas, the two orthdox conservative congressmen running to replace Sam Brownback, Todd Tiahrt and Jerry Moran, seemed basically indistinguishable until Tiahrt started harping on some of Moran's more moderate votes and secured the endorsement of a lady named Sarah Palin as a result.
Unfortunately for the tea party, the so-called "mainstream" candidates--Moran, Blunt, and Snyder--swept Tuesday night's races. Palin's endorsement couldn't push Tiahrt past Moran; he was trailing by 20 points in the polls when she announced her support earlier this summer, and lost last night by four. Purgason's strategy of pounding Blunt as the consummate Washington insider didn't pay off; he never raised much money and lost last night by almost 60 points. And Snyder’s vow to “reach across the aisle”—a cardinal sin in the tea party bible—actually paid off, landing him 11 points ahead of Hoekstra, his next closest opponent. The news wasn't much better for the tea party in a handful of House races. Social moderates, including Kansas’ Kevin Yoder, won several high-profile contests over their further-right challengers.
Still, there was at least one glimmer of hope for the strongly anti-Obama crowd. A Missouri ballot measure disapproving of the newly-inked federal mandate to purchase health insurance passed with 73 percent of voters shaking their fists at Washington. The only problem? The victory is largely symbolic: a loud protest almost certain to be shot down by the courts.
If anything, last night showed that mainstream Republicans have now devised relatively simple ways of fending off pesky tea-party challengers. Missouri's Blunt relied on his Washington connections to suck up all the fundraising oxygen and to secure the endorsement of tea-party icons like Michele Bachmann. Snyder realized that in an open primary against three bickering conservatives, going after disgruntled Dems could provide a decisive boost. And Moran worked to avoid alienating moderates in key battlegrounds like Johnson County by decrying the negative tone of the campaign. All in all, their success is proof that mainstream Republicans are tightening the reins and figuring out how to keep their party from--to borrow a phrase--going rogue.