On Friday September 5th, two people are dead in another senseless shooting in St. Louis, Missouri, on the north side of the city which is predominantly black thanks to the city’s history of redlining minorities out of certain neighborhoods that were reserved exclusively for white people. The shooting was part of a crime spree that resulted in six people dead and two people injured in a twenty four hour period. I was watching the story unfold on local television station KMOV, St. Louis’ CBS affiliate. The reporter on the story was Russell Kinsaul. In the video, Mr. Kinsaul was interviewing state senator Jamilah Nasheed about this problem. Out of the blue he asked the senator why black people weren’t protesting.
As soon as I heard the question I reached for the remote and flipped the channel I was so incensed. Instead of being a professional reporter asking pertinent questions in order to help people develop a real understanding and appreciation for the issue at hand, Mr. Kinsaul wanted to play a race card by making an implied comparison to the racial chaos that was playing out with recent events in nearby Ferguson, Missouri where white police officer Darren Wilson shot the unarmed Michael Brown. If black people are going to protest the murder of black people by white cops why blacks don’t protest black on black crime?
The KMOV website describes Mr. Kinsaul as having strong Midwestern roots and takes great pride in his community and spends his time on efforts to improve the lives of children in our community. I’d describe him as a petty white prick who wouldn’t hesitate to spice up his lame reporting with racially charged innuendos. The Midwestern roots that are mentioned in his bio are the same Midwestern roots that led the authorities of Ferguson to come down hard on black people, harassing black people for walking down the street, shooting unarmed black people as they walk down the street, and when black people protest the murder of one of their own by a police officer whose salary they help to pay with their taxes these people want to pull out their tanks and military gear to put black people in their place.
Mr. Kinsaul was reporting on a story about a shooting. Instead of keeping on track and doing his job, he wants to make a racially politicized statement with his question about where is black people’s indignation over this murder. He’s no different than all the people who constantly ask why don’t black people protest black on black crime but go out of their way to protest a police shooting. It’s the kind of question I’d expect from somebody trying to make a name for themselves on FOX News, not from a local reporter that should be sticking to the facts.
If Mr. Kinsaul wanted to make comparisons why stop there? Where are all the white people who want to protest their support for the person or people who kill black people? Where are all the white people who want to contribute money to the defense of people who kill black people? Where are all the videos that show the black people who were murdered doing something wrong in their past? Where are the Facebook pages of the victims? Where are the white people who are going to help hide the identity of the murderer or murderers? Where are the tanks ready to come down hard and heavy on the black people? Where’s the police chief to say that a fair and impartial investigation will be conducted even though they already know who killed who?
I find Mr. Kinsaul about as disgusting. The story is that two people were murdered in a senseless crime and we don’t know who did it. The story is that this crime happened within a short time window that saw a crime wave hit St. Louis, in particular the black community. Instead of focusing on this story, Mr. Kinsaul wants to ignore the story at hand to go back to something that happened a few weeks ago in order to make a statement about black people.
And just like a few weeks ago, when Darren Wilson killed Michael Brown and got the support of his racially insensitive police department and local government officials, Mr. Kinsaul got the support of his racially insensitive television station. Why else would KMOV air his garbage unless the editor, camera operators, producer, anchors, and other personnel at that television station agreed with that socially retarded poison this man spews?
This is the type of bullshit that leads to the mistrust and misunderstanding that perpetuates our racial status quo. It’s not just the cops in Ferguson that work hard to keep black people at a distance and in their place. It’s also television reporters who want to pretend that there’s equivalence when a criminal shoots unarmed black people and when tax paid police officers do it. It’s also reporters that want to proselytize that black people have a false sense of outrage when cops kill one of us but don’t have a problem when we kill our own. Too many of us have a role to play in this game that keeps racism front and center in our social collective.
While looking up articles about Michael Brown and Ferguson, Missouri I ran across an article written by the black conservative Ben Carson. You know, for a man that was an internationally renowned neurosurgeon he sure acts idiotic at times. Like everybody else, Mr. Carson has an opinion of Ferguson and like many he shares it openly. Mr. Carson says the events in Ferguson could have been avoided one of two different ways. Either Michael Brown backs down or Officer Darren Wilson backs down. And since Officer Wilson has the backing of the government officials in Ferguson and the state of Missouri, Mr. Carson believes that he had the legal standing to impose his will on Michael Brown with deadly force. To do otherwise, if Michael Brown was able to say no to the police, would be an invitation to anarchy. I guess Mr. Carson simply dismisses the fact that Ferguson erupted into supposed anarchy with protests (some would say riots because of some people that used the protest as a cover for their own criminal activity) that were met with a militarized police force.
Mr. Carson went on to claim that Michael Brown had the obligation to submit to Officer Wilson. However, because of all the young black men who grow up in the streets of America with defiant attitudes, it is only inevitable that the result would be mass incarcerations and death. The defiance is the result of the large number of black children growing up without a father figure to teach them how to relate (submit) to authority and teach them the meaning of personal responsibility. Mr. Carson said that it is not the case that mothers cannot teach these important social lessons. His own single mother was able to teach this lesson well to Mr. Carson. It seems he learned the lesson a little too well.
It is not too much of a leap to say that Mr. Brown is prepared to absolve Officer Wilson of any responsibility in the murder of Michael Brown. In fact, even though he went on to say that Michael Brown’s mother, Lesley McSpadden, really isn’t at fault because more than likely she never learned the fundamentals of personal responsibility, Mr. Carson puts more blame on Michael Brown’s parents lack of parenting skills than he does the man that hid behind his badge as he pulled the trigger a minimum of ten times to take down the unarmed black teenager. He puts more blame on the socio economic policies of the federal government for the last five years, the years of the Obama administration, for the rise of poverty in the black community that has led to such frustrations that leads young black people to become the antisocial misfits that are endemic to American life. It’s a generational thing that happens over and over in the black community with its vicious cycle of irresponsibility. How he’s able to tie responsibility for generations of black community parenting failure to the past five years of President Obama’s leadership defies logic, but that’s his opinion.
Like a lot of people, mostly socially and politically conservative, Mr. Carson is ready to give Officer Wilson a pass. Officer Wilson has no need to demonstrate personal responsibility when he murders unarmed black men. Regardless of the generations of police abuse of black people and the murder of unarmed black people at the hands of the police, the parents of police do not have to teach their children the rules of socially acceptable behavior. Police are above the law. They are above the social contract that says the killing of people is only acceptable as a last resort. For you and me, that means that we can only take the life of our fellowman when there is no absolutely no alternative. No one would simply take our word that a murder was unavoidable. But police? They are above reproach especially when their victim is a young person from the black underclass that, according to Mr. Carson, have no clue what the social norms are because, without any evidence to support such a conclusion, their single mother parent never learned orthodox social behavior. However, it should be noted that Mr. Carson’s single black mother was able to teach her black son social behavior.
To an intelligent person, Mr. Carson himself is undeniable proof that what he says is total bullshit. Mr. Carson is ready to paint the black community with a very broad stroke of contempt reinforced with racially reinforced prejudice. His conclusions are based on racially charged stereotypes without merit. No police officer is above the law. Yes black people have to exercise personal responsibility, but so do white people and everybody else. If Mr. Carson can look back on his own personal experience as a young black man, toss it all out the window and come to the conclusion that black people deserve to be murdered because they don’t know personal responsibility, then we can use that same yardstick of personal responsibility against a white police officer for the murder of an unarmed black youth.
In fact, we can hold Officer Wilson to a higher measure because not only did he supposedly learn acceptable social behavior from his white parents, he was the one that received the benefit of tax payer financed professional police officer training on top of the acceptable social rules. The community paid to give Officer Darren Wilson a loaded weapon and a badge that said he had the authority to enforce our social laws. He was trained to know the law so that he could enforce the law. He had the power of the badge. The power of an armed police officer is many times greater than the power of an unarmed teenager. In many respects, it is far greater than the power of a parent. And with great power comes great responsibility. Mr. Carson should remember that.
I was tracking the latest news over the string of unfortunate incidents related to the shooting death of the unarmed black Michael Brown by white Officer Darren Wilson of the Ferguson, Missouri police department when I ran across an article about the shooting death of white Dillon Taylor by a black police officer in Salt Lake City, Utah. After a series of clicks to find more information about this event one thing became more and more evident. After visiting several sites such as The Washington Times, WND, the Inquisitor, FOX News, and others, it became apparent to me that these news sources were more concerned about the disparity in the level of attention about the death of Michael Brown compared to the level of attention to the death of Dillon Taylor than they were concerned about the potential injustice of someone being murdered by police.
Indeed there are similarities between the two events. Both men were shot by police. Michael Brown lived in an area that was about sixty five percent black with a police force that had about six percent black officers while the allegedly white Dillon Taylor lived in an area that was seventy five percent white. I couldn’t find the racial makeup of the Salt Lake City police department but I’m willing to go out on a limb and say that it’s predominantly white.
After reading a few articles it turned out that Dillon Taylor was a white Hispanic with multiple convictions for felony robbery and obstructing justice. The black police officer that is said to have allegedly shot him turned out to be a non white police officer because his true racial identity was not released. He might in fact be black. But it should be noted that a lot of these “news” articles made the assumption that non white meant that the officer was black. I’m sure the reason for the speculation on race is to sensationalize the comparison with the events in Ferguson. While we know for a fact that the eighteen years old Michael Brown was unarmed, the police in Salt Lake City have not released any statement as to whether or not twenty year old Dillon Taylor was armed.
The police officer that encountered Michael Brown had resumed his patrol after responding to a call for an ambulance nearby and was not actively responding to any emergency. The encounter with Michael Brown started when Michael Brown and his friend Dorian Johnson were walking down the middle of the street with the potential of hindering the flow of traffic. The officer that encountered Dillon Taylor was responding to an emergency 9-1-1 call about a man waving a gun around. Several officers responded and Dillon Taylor happened to have matched the description of the person reported in the emergency call. Dillon Taylor was wearing headphones and it is possible that he did not hear police orders.
Most of the articles went on to point out that although there was an organized protest in Salt Lake City, but asked why there was no looting, destruction of property, and the all out anarchy that happened in Ferguson, Missouri. Most of the articles asked why Reverend Al Sharpton didn’t go to Salt Lake City. All of the articles asked why didn’t the liberal media, the one that does so much to codify black people, show up and give the same level of attention to the shooting of an unarmed white man by a black police officer?
As a black man I find the willful racial ignorance of people and organizations that claim to want to understand the racial divide seriously frustrating. Supposedly intelligent people act like the dumbest fucks that ever walk the face of the earth. People want to pretend that everything’s equal and we have racial parity because we have a black President or because Oprah is worth billions or for any other exception to the general condition of our social structure that ignores the plight of the black community. These people do their best to make false equivalences between totally unrelated horrible events and then act like a two year old wondering what makes the moon hang in the air with intellectually asinine questions that can be answered if one simply takes the red pill, open their eyes, and shift their fucking brain into gear.
The protests in Ferguson happened because instead of the police responding to a community’s need to mourn the latest loss of another young black man to the apparent heavy handed approach of the police, the police respond with dogs to attack protestors and military vehicles and equipment doled out like candy by our defense department in order to defend against terrorists. Not every protestor in Ferguson was a looter. Most of the protestors were non violent and even did their best to defend property against the criminals that would use the unfortunate death of Michael Brown for their own means. Instead of the police doing police work to protect the community, the predominantly white police force turned on the black community in the very same heavy handed approach that Officer Wilson turned on Michael Brown. People were arrested for exercising their constitutional rights. The local government instituted a curfew. This was the same heavy handed approach the state of Alabama took when the black community tried to peacefully march from Selma to Montgomery.
This whole affair have proved beyond a fucking doubt that we have learned nothing from our racially troubled past and are poorly prepared for a supposed post racial future. Just like it was news worthy back in the sixties when the public saw the televised images of so many peacefully marching black people being attacked by dogs, beaten with batons and nightsticks, and assaulted with tear gas by state troopers in gas masks, it is news now. It was news when we saw the videos of reporters being arrested in Ferguson for not moving fast enough. It was news worthy when we saw the politicians representing their constituents in Ferguson being arrested. That was all news worthy.
All of that happened before Reverend Al Sharpton showed up to insist on calm and non violence from the community as well as justice from the government. Why didn’t Reverend Al show up in Salt Lake City? Did anybody ask Revered Al to come to Salt Lake City? Contrary to popular believe, Reverend Sharpton does not show up where he’s not wanted. The family of Michael Brown asked Mr. Sharpton for help. Did the family of Dillon Taylor do the same?
Tthe bottom line is that we shouldn’t be trying to compare tragedies to see who’s suffering the most. The bullshit from these articles does nothing to help the family of Dillon Taylor. I apologize if I appear unsympathetic. If anyone loses a loved one to the homicidal acts of the police they need to be heard and they need justice. If Mr. Taylor was wrongfully murdered I hope the police officer who did it is charged and tried for his crime. And if the man is found guilty then I hope he rots in jail.
This bullshit asking why is everybody looking over here and nobody is looking over there has to stop. This isn’t a case of a war on whites. It isn’t a case of we only care when black people are murdered by white people. It isn’t a case of black people in Ferguson just rioting at the drop of a hat while the good white people of Salt Lake City are suffering in martyred silence. It’s another case of a police shooting that needs to be investigated and prosecuted. Let’s not play black versus white. Let us all keep our eye on the bigger picture.
I have read tons of comments from a lot of people condemning the black community of Ferguson, Missouri for their protest over the murder of the unarmed black teenaged Michael Brown by Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson. Despite the suspicious circumstances that led to Michael Brown’s murder, Darren Wilson was protected by the Ferguson police department and was allegedly given paid administrative leave. It is hard work for cops to kill black people and walk away scot free knowing all the local governments got your back. Mr. Wilson needs that time off to get over the exertion of pointing a gun and pulling a trigger on somebody who has the audacity to step out of line while obviously wearing black skin.
But nevertheless, people are entitled to their opinion. A lot of black people in the area of Ferguson believe an unarmed teenaged black male was murdered in cold blood by a police officer. A lot of other people with “traditional” values believe that the shooting of an unarmed black teenaged male was justifiable homicide in the culmination of a series of unfortunate events that started with jay walking.
The police responded with an escalation of hostility by arming up in military fashion. Pictures show officers in military garb and gear, armed to the teeth to take on the worst terrorist imaginable. At the first sign of an unruly protestor or a few unruly people in the protesting crowd, the police stood ready to respond with overwhelming force against any and every protestor in the vicinity along with any news reporter or innocent bystander that just so happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Again, people are entitled to think whatever. Some people will think that the police acted with total disregard for the community and with unbelievable racial insensitivity. Some people will say that the police response was appropriate.
Like most stories, there are two sides. But instead of all of us stepping back and looking at facts, too many of us are trying to spin the story to fit what we want to believe. The fact is that a white police officer shot an unarmed black male. The officer initiated a confrontation with Michael Brown and his friend Dorian Johnson because the two black teenagers were walking in the middle of the street. The officer was not responding to any police reports or police emergencies or any emergency for any public service. An altercation ensued. There was a physical fight in and/or near the police vehicle. Michael Brown started to run away. Darren Wilson shot and killed Michael Brown. In the crime scene photos taken by civilian cell phones shortly after the shooting, Michael Brown’s body laid in the street nowhere near a police vehicle. Witnesses on the scene say Michael Brown was facing the copy with his hands up when the police officer shot him multiple times. Those are facts that have a bearing on this case.
What is not a fact in this case is the testimony of friends who may have heard a version of events from Officer Wilson or a friend of anyone else who was not at the scene. What’s not a fact in this case are crime statistics and skewed data that may show that black people commit more crime per capita. What’s not a pertinent fact in this case is the protest that followed the shooting after Mr. Wilson was given a pass and was allowed to leave the scene without being arrested. What’s not pertinent is the surveillance video that showed a figure resembling Michael Brown leaving a convenience store after a hostile exchange with what may have been a store employee. According to facts, Michael Brown was not a suspect for anything that may have happened at any convenience store at the time he was stopped by Mr. Wilson. Within minutes after the shooting an ambulance was called to the scene to assess Michael Brown’s body. No ambulance was ever called to assess any injuries to Mr. Wilson.
Since Michael Brown’s shooting I have read a lot of comments that depict Michael Brown as a thug and a seasoned criminal without a single fact to support such characterization. Many of those comments include racially charged comments about the protestors who are predominantly black and racially charged comments about the black community. The black protestors have repeatedly chanted “no justice, no peace”. The message is simple. Until we have our government acting in a manner that is obviously fair and just there will be people willing to nonviolently break the peace.
In response, people on the other side have described black people as thugs and criminals who would rather live on welfare than find a job. There are so many comments from people who want black people to stop the looting and stealing and get jobs. Note that the comment isn’t for criminals to stop their criminal activity. People questioning the employment status of some of the protestors is nothing more than an attempt to use racially charged stereotypes to distract from the main issue of a police officer going free after the murder of a black teenager. Again, people’s employment status is not a fact that is pertinent. The only person whose employment is a factor is the employment of Officer Wilson.
Some of the comments I have read said that black people need to take more responsibility for what happens in Ferguson. And that’s pretty funny when you stop to think about it. Because when black people step forward to challenge the status quo that tolerates police officers killing black people, a lot of people want to point a damning finger at black people and tell them to shut up. If black people don’t like it they can go back to Africa. The fact is, the majority of black people that are protesting in Ferguson are not from Africa. They are, in fact, from Ferguson.
But the fact of the matter is that black people in America have the right to protest. The fact of the matter is that police do not have the right to violate anybody’s rights without just cause. We shouldn’t assume that police who shoot black people are justified any more than we would assume that black people who shoot police are justified. Police are afraid of black people. Considering the fact that cops are often acquitted for shooting black people, I seriously doubt if that’s true. However, it is true that unarmed black people often die in a hail of bullets by police officers. The fact of the matter is that more black people die at the hands of police per capita than police die at the hands of black people. And if we want to change that fact, we need to stop giving police a pass whenever they kill a black person. The fact of the matter is that we need to hold them accountable.
Ferguson, Missouri is a scant six miles from the house I grew up in. As I write this, it’s less than thirty miles away from me. I know Ferguson, Missouri. I knew it back when it was predominantly white. My parents would take me there often when we visited the old Korvettes store that resided in nearby Cool Valley just down the street off Florissant Road. White flight had kicked in a long time ago. Now, predominantly black, I have family and friends living there neck deep in the chaos that is following the murder of the young, black Michael Brown at the hands of a local police officer.
Despite the despair you might see and/or hear in the news, Ferguson is a beautiful little town with a lot to offer people. The white flight that the town experienced has a lot more to do with the drastic downsizing of McDonnell-Douglas, of the major employer for the area, before it was bought out by Boeing many decades ago. Without the constant infusion of revenue from defense contractor paychecks that fueled city development, a lot of people saw the writing on the wall and fled to greener pastures. As “traditional” America left, a new browner populace moved in ready to take advantage of inexpensive housing in an established area.
What makes Ferguson look like some kind of perdition is not the population, but the heavy handedness of the police against a peaceful African American community. In response to watching a black, eighteen year old Michael Brown and his friend walking down the middle of the street, a police officer initiates a confrontation that results in the young man’s death.
This happens just days after a similar confrontation is initiated against Eric Garner, the forty year old black man who suffered from asthma and obesity and wound up in a choke hold by police officers after he had the audacity to express his frustration at being harassed by the police accusing him of illegally selling cigarettes. Mr. Garner didn’t resist arrest. When the officer grabbed the frustrated black man from behind and put the long arm of the law around Mr. Garner’s neck, the black man put his hands in the air as if to surrender. Never once did he fight back to defend himself. And when he complained he couldn’t breathe the police responded by watching him die. Who knew the penalty for a black man selling cigarettes was death?
Michael Brown probably thought about that when the police officer drove the squad car right up against him. According to witnesses the officer couldn’t even get out the car without hitting the young man that was about to die. Michael Brown probably felt threatened. And if that was truly the case then he was right because the unarmed, young black Michael Brown wound up dead. The police department claimed that there was a struggle for the officer’s gun before the young black man was murdered. An investigation is being conducted so we’re not privy to everything. But we have enough information to know that another black teenager died needlessly because of another gung-ho police officer.
Black people are frustrated and angry. The black community wants swift justice. The police department wants to slow things down to make sure every move that goes down from this point forward is careful. Leaders of the black community say they wanted peace and they asked the black community to respect the memory of Michael Brown and the family of Michael Brown with peaceful protest and prayer. The leaders of the police department said they wanted peace as well. But then the police department responded by pulling out their camouflage uniforms, riot gear, full body armor, assault rifles with rubber bullets and laser sights, and the mine resistant armored personnel carrier that are little more than small tanks. People were arrested without being read their Miranda rights. The police arrested journalists. The police arrested the local state senator and an alderman that were there to support their constituents. The police fired tear gas at people protesting peacefully.
These people were unarmed and exercising their Constitutional right to peacefully protest. Now there have been some opportunistic people using this chaos to loot business and for other criminal activity. And while they might be “inspired” by the death of Michael brown to commit crime, the bottom line is that they are criminals and they deserve to be arrested and prosecuted because they committed a crime. They committed a crime and deserve punishment just like the police officer who killed Michael Brown committed a crime and deserves to be punished. But instead of arresting criminals, the police want to arrest peaceful protestors, politicians, and journalists who have the audacity to question their authority.
Now all of this is unfortunate. There was no need to kill the unarmed Michael Brown. There was no need to respond to the unarmed protestors with an escalation of police driven violence. How would the police respond if somebody in the Ferguson neighborhood brought out their own armored vehicle? Let’s think about that for a second with an analogy. How did the United States respond when Russia brought their armored vehicles to the border of Ukraine? It was unacceptable. It was a clear sign of defiance and a provocation. The mere presence of peaceful protestors is a provocation to the police. But the police are free to bring their big toys out when they are the ones who are clearly in the wrong.
And if all of this isn’t enough to show the rotten stench of disparity in America, let’s throw one more issue into the mix. Where was all of the police in camouflage and riot gear and military vehicles when Cliven Bundy was stirring up his militia buddies in Nevada earlier this year? Those protestors were armed to the teeth with assault weapons and sniper rifles aimed at federal officials and instead of meeting that force with government sanctioned overwhelming force, the encounter was deescalated and the government is still examining the situation, waiting to exercise its options. Imagine what would have happened if Cliven Bundy was black and the armed people who gathered to support him were black. I’m sure Mr. Bundy would have been dead a long time ago.
Ferguson may look like a hell hole. But it’s not because of the people who live there and walk down the middle of its streets. Ferguson is a hell hole because the black people there are treated like enemies of the state. This is just the latest example of a long list of examples of unarmed black people losing their lives because of some perceived slight by some police officer with a chip on his/her shoulder. Ferguson looks like a hell hole because it is full of black people and black people are truly the enemies of our police state.
President Barack Obama learned a long time ago of the dangers associated with being a black politician at a national level and vocalizing anything about the institutionalized racism of the United States. While obviously racially non black politicians are free to remind the public of America’s racial shortcomings, a black politician doesn’t have that luxury out of some perception that the black politician would appear too close to the black community. When such an observation starts to manifest, the fear is that the black community’s need would trump the white community’s wants and America would never tolerate such a circumstance. It wouldn’t matter if the entire black community was slipping further into the oblivion of poverty and all the social ills associated with that condition, if white America wants ice cream somebody better make sure there’s a national plan to provide ice cream. To hell with black people!
When the news broke that candidate Barack Obama’s pastor Reverend Jeremiah Wright was a closet racist who hated white people, regardless of how inaccurate the story was, Mr. Obama had to stiff arm his spiritual mentor for his political survival. When Mr. Obama weighed in on the arrest of his friend Henry Louis “Skip” Gates, Jr. and called the behavior of the Cambridge police stupid for arresting the prominent black American out of his own house, Mr. Obama was so vilified by his political opponents and many across the country that he had to back pedal his comments like Michael Jackson in a Billy Jean video. And when Trayvon Martin was shot and killed in cold blood and his killer was allowed to go home with his murder weapon and protests were being held all over the country, Mr. Obama’s rather benign comment that if he had a son he would look like Trayvon, his political critics again pounced on him calling the President a race baiter as they did their best to inject race into the matter as they rallied support for the black teenager’s murderer.
But all of that happened prior to Mr. Obama being reelected for his second term as commander-in-chief. Now that he’s been reelected and is no longer eligible to run for the highest office in the land again, Mr. Obama is a little freer to express himself more openly about issues of race. Before being reelected he would do his best to quell the specter of racism by saying that he didn’t think race was a factor in any happenings no matter how racially charged. But if Mr. Obama’s latest venture into the unwelcomed discussion of America’s racial dysfunction that many loath to have is any indication, things might be a little different now from the President’s perspective.
Six days after a six women jury acquitted George Zimmerman of any wrong doing in his assassination of Trayvon Martin the President surprised the White House reporters by appearing before them during a routine press conference being conducted by Press Secretary Jay Carney. Unprompted and unscripted the President extended his sympathies to the parents of Trayvon Martin. The President actually empathized with the murdered teenager saying that he could’ve been Trayvon thirty five short years ago. Thirty five years ago a young Barack Obama could have been murdered as he was walking home minding his own business and somebody thought it a good idea to snuff his life out and his murderer could’ve been acquitted because young Barry foolishly thought he could rebel against the establishment like so many other teenagers do, black and white.
Mr. Obama talked about how people responded to him in his earlier years by locking their car doors as he walked through the neighborhood, by people crossing the street as he walked towards them on the sidewalk, by women clutching their purse closer to their body as he got onto an elevator, and by being followed through a department store as if he would shoplift at any moment compelled to do so driven by his black skin. Mr. Obama knows all too well that being black is not even close to being some kind of benefit in our social construct. It is a curse that makes it possible for a black teenager to be murdered in the darkness of the evening.
Mr. Obama is ready to talk about his racism of the past. But he still needs to acknowledge the racism he continues to experience to this day. How else can anyone explain how the most powerful man in the free world is constantly hounded to produce his birth certificate as proof that he belongs in America and is eligible to serve as President unlike every single President that has come before him who were all accepted to be a citizen without question? Even though he doesn’t have to run for office again he still needs the support of the American people in order to do his job and hold his political opponents at bay. And the last thing America wants is to support any black person who is willing to say that they can’t do their job because of the racism that runs rampant in this country. Too many people are too ready to dismiss claims of racism as little more as whining in order to cover incompetence. Pull yourself up by your bootstrap is the knee jerk, overly simplistic response to racism regardless if it can be proven or not. The question is can you prove it beyond a shadow of doubt. And for many people, that shadow is so long it can never be overcome.
Americans want to hear that everything is good and racism is in our past or at least it’s getting better. In fact, Mr. Obama said as much when he gave his impromptu press conference. Despite our racial dysfunction, Mr. Obama says he looks at his daughters and their friends and comforts himself with the belief that things have gotten better and will continue to improve with time. We believe things have gotten so much better that we don’t even recognize the horrible fact that nothing’s changed. Just like Emmett Till was murdered way back in 1955 accused of doing something unseemly and paying for it with his life, Trayvon Martin was murdered today under accusations of attacking the man who was stalking him. Just like black people testified about what happened to Emmett Till and were dismissed, according to juror B-37 Rachel Jeantel’s testimony was dismissed as unreliable because of her lack of proper diction and the fact that she wasn’t properly educated. It’s a fair bet that the fact that she was black had something to do with her lack of credibility as well. Just like back then somebody got away with murder even though he was standing right there with the gun in his hand.
Things might look like they’re getting better. But the simple fact that to this day we continue to let our black children die and their murderers walk free proves that it isn’t getting any better at all. In fact, if you add the lies that things have gotten better, the deception of racial equality that we live under, things are far worse now than they’ve ever been. Back in Emmett Till’s day black people knew that they were second class citizens and no amount of sugar coating about how black people weren’t slaves anymore was going to make it better. Our measure for discrimination is not how good or bad our ancestors and elders had it. The measure for racial discrimination is the fact that we still do not live in a racially equal society. Our black children will continue to die until we wake up and recognize this simple fact and really begin to do something about it.
Colion Noir is an “urban gun enthusiast” and the latest spokesperson for the NRA. He is featured in a new television advertisement aimed primarily at the black community. The following snippet is the start of Mr. Noir’s spiel:
“No one wants to fight for their protection. They want the government to do it. The same government who at one point hosed us down with water, attacked us with dogs, and wouldn’t allow us to eat at their restaurants and told us we couldn’t own guns when bumbling fools with sheets on their heads were riding around burning crosses on our lawns and murdering us.”
Mr. Noir reminds people of the life of our ancestors and elders and their attempts to bring the nation’s attention to all of the racial inequality that black people had to deal with in the southern states prior to the civil rights era. Just imagine how the nation would have responded if instead of seeing peaceful black people being attacked by the white establishment intent on keeping black people in their place of second class citizenship, black people grabbed guns and started shooting it out with the white sheriffs, their deputies, and other law enforcement officers charged with keeping the peace with the weapons of their choice. Just imagine what life would have been like for the black community if they were to rise up en masse Nat Turner style and said enough was enough.
I would imagine that instead of the black community garnering national sympathy for their cause there would have been a swift and nearly universal condemnation of any black person who even looked like they participated in such civil unrest, which basically means any black person in the vicinity of the United States. In the vast majority of the public’s eyes, black people and guns is a volatile concoction that should never ever be allowed to mix. Any black person that raises a gun to defend his or her self from a white person is tempting fate whatever the circumstance. If anybody needs any convincing just ask the black John White who was convicted for murder the night he used a gun against the white seventeen year old and intoxicated Daniel Cicciaro, Jr. when the teenager got a drunken posse of four of his buddies to drive across town in order to teach Mr. White’s son Aaron a lesson for being accused of dishonoring a white girl as part of a joke that had gone totally and horribly wrong.
Black people with guns are a threat. Tell a white home owner that one of his neighbors is a black man and owns a gun and dude will probably make a beeline to the gun store to max out his Visa on all the weaponry that can fit in the back of his Ford pickup just so he can defend his self. In fact, the NRA’s executive vice president Wayne LaPierre has made statements warning law abiding people in the areas hit hardest by hurricane Sandy to prepare for a hellish world of overwhelmed if not totally collapsed law enforcement agencies and having to deal with roving gangs of armed minorities. In his eyes, it only makes sense that white people buy more guns to protect themselves from all the black people who are going to go out and buy guns. And if you don’t believe him just take a look at their new commercial featuring that black Mr. Noir.
However, Mr. Noir’s sales pitch is totally off base. A lot of people want to fight for their protection. A lot of people are fighting the good fight to keep guns out of the hands of people who should never have guns. Not every fight means you have to pick up a weapon with the intent of fighting to the death. Sometimes, the fight is one of politics, where people argue their point to convince the majority of what’s the right approach to a problem.
That’s the way our ancestors fought the good fight. It’s probably true that a lot of people wanted back in the civil rights movement wanted to meet violence with their own violence. But that would have done nothing but led to an escalation of violence that the black community, outnumbered and under armed, would have surely lost. Black people picking up guns in an attempt to inflict racial equality on a country chock full of white entitlement would have surely ended in disaster. Guns are not always the answer and many times they are the problem.
The answer for our ancestors and elders was actually government. More specifically it was a strong federal government that stepped into the picture to keep local and state government from trampling the rights of people in the black community. It was the federal government that told people stores and restaurants that they had to serve black people. It was the federal government that told the local sheriff that he couldn’t use fire hoses on black people. It was a strong federal government that passed the laws that protected black people’s right to attend schools previously reserved for white people. It was the threat of the federal government stepping in to enforce civil rights laws that made the local government step up to the plate for fear of having their authority revoked by a federal marshal. And if that wasn’t bad enough, the local heads of government could wind up under scrutiny of a federal investigation that could end with federal criminal charges.
Bottom line is that Mr. Noir has it all wrong. A lot of people want to fight for their protection. A lot of people want to fight to make sure that the government keeps its responsibility to its citizenry. The government that protects our rights isn’t the same government that hosed black people down. And if we aren’t careful and don’t remember that fact, the governments that did abuse black people will be back. It will be like they never left.
Today’s Christmas and the latest Quinton Tarantino film “Django Unchained”, featuring Jamie Foxx as Django, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Kerry Washington is being released today. The film is set in the pre civil war southern United States when America’s institutionalized enslavement of the people of Africa is running at its peak. These days when most people’s idea of black people in movies runs along the lines of the timid Aibileen Clark in The Help who was resigned to her fate of jumping at the beck and call of white people at the expense of her own black children, we have a movie about a black man bold enough to buck the racial status quo with guns blazing to save his woman.
I have yet to see the movie and I probably won’t bother to see it until we can stream it through Vudu. But from what I understand it’s a new twist in the style of the old spaghetti westerns made famous by Clint Eastwood. Django is a slave with a knack for tracking who wound up being owned by a bounty hunter who promised Django his freedom if he helped him apprehend the infamous Brittle brothers. When the job is completed, instead of taking advantage of his new freedom and high telling it up north, Django hangs around the bounty hunter essentially becoming the man’s partner. He develops his tracking and hunting skills and bides his time with the ultimate goal of finding and freeing the wife he lost to the slave trade.
Considering the debate over gun control initiated by the mass shooting by Adam Lanza of twenty first graders and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary in Connecticut, Django is hitting theaters at just the right time to be impacted by the controversy over guns. But Django was fated to be controversial even without the mass shooting of Sandy Hook. Django is a movie about a black man shooting and killing a bunch of white people. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen a movie with a black man on a righteous killing spree. You’d have to go back to the Richard Roundtree’s version of Shaft to find a black man given cart blanch to break out a can of whip ass on white people and even then there were restrictions.
I saw a discussion of Django on MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry Show Sunday morning. One of the commentators who participated in a pre release viewing of the movie said it was immoral. A movie about a man killing people with the sole purpose of freeing his loved one was too unethical even though it’s already been done by Arnold Schwarzenegger in Commando and True Lies, Bruce Willis in all the movies from the Die Hard series, Jodie Foster in Flight Plan, Gina Davis in the Long Kiss Goodnight, Liam Neeson in Taken, Tom Hanks in Road to Perdition, and just about every James Bond film where the heroine gets captured and 007 has to roll up his sleeves and get busy to get her back. And if we had added a list of movies where the main character kills in order to protect somebody else’s loved ones we’d have Sylvester Stallone in Cobra, Jason Strathom from the Transporter series, Nicole Kidman in the remake of the Body Snatchers, Jennifer Lawrence in the Hunger Games, Ryan Gossling in the Driver, or Tom Cruise in Knight and Day. A movie about people killing other people is a prime staple in the entertainment industry. But when the movie has a black person as the protagonist doing all the killing of the white bad guys, suddenly the genre becomes too immoral for some people’s sensibilities.
The idea of a black man indiscriminately killing white people, even white people who are depicted as the epitome of racists and the worst perpetrators of America’s history of the enslavement of black people, is just too foreign a concept for people to accept. A black man with a weapon who is willing to use it to defend himself or his family is just not something we are prepared to accept. The depiction of a black man living straight as an arrow is still not living straight enough to be able to justify killing without permission. Some of us are just not ready to accept the concept of a black man taking charge the way we accept others taking charge and doing whatever they need to do to set things right. With Django Unchained Quinton Tarantino is treading where nobody dares to these days.
On Melissa Harris-Perry they played a video clip of an interview with Jamie Foxx and Kerry Washington talking about the movie. Ms. Washington said that above everything else she saw the movie as a love story. Despite all the guns and despite all the violence, here’s a man doing everything he can to get back to rescue his woman to save her from a life of enslavement, living the rest of her life as somebody else’s property. We’ve already seen this story from the perspective of non black people. Ever since Snow White little white girls have been conditioned to believe that their prince would one day come and rescue them to live happily ever after.
Black girls have never had a story that they could relate to. What black man was coming to save them in their time of peril? It doesn’t happen. Even when the Disney Corporation was trying to do their first movie featuring a black princess they couldn’t envision have a black man coming into her life. The Disney people were too steeped in the thinking that a black man having the love and commitment to do something great for his woman just doesn’t makes sense. Thankfully, Mr. Tarantino goes where others simply don’t have the vision to see.
There have been plenty of movies with black heroes. But those heroes are rarely depicted as being personally motivated. It’s usually the black guy that’s trying to save an entire neighborhood from a criminal or a black guy that’s trying to save the future from a super computer gone rogue. It’s rare to see the black man that endeavors to save his black woman from harm. And a black man with the cajoles to save his woman from slavery, the greatest atrocity white people have ever perpetrated against black people? Now that’s something new at a time when Hollywood is stuck on remakes, sequels, prequels, combic books, children’s books, and the same predominantly white oriented usual.
Former New Hampshire Governor John Sununu decided to wear his racism on his sleeve after former Secretary of State Colin Powel went public with his decision to endorse Barack Obama for a second term as President of the United States instead of his Republican associate former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. Way back during the GOP primaries Mr. Powell was critical about Mr. Romney. After Mr. Romney made the comment that Russia was the number one geopolitical foe of the United States Mr. Powell made the suggestion that Mr. Romney should actually think about what he’s saying if he wants to become President. Instead, Mr. Romney doubled down on inconsistent nonsense and conservative rhetoric meant to excite the Republican faithful but few others. In the end Mr. Powell made his critical endorsement.
Like a pit bull trained to attack, Mr. Sununu leapt to criticize Mr. Powell. During an interview with CNN’s Pierce Morgan, Mr. Sununu made the suggestion that Mr. Powell suffers from being black. Mr. Sununu said that when some black people are conditioned to support other black people in a key position or role no matter what. Mr. Powell supports Mr. Obama only because of the commonality of their skin color and not because Mr. Powell made an honest assessment and concluded that Mr. Obama as the better choice to lead the country. Mr. Sununu wants people to believe that a black man that served three conservative white skinned Presidents is now so color struck for another black man that he can’t think straight.
Later, Mr. Sununu offered an apology to his “good friend” Mr. Powell and retracted his statement. Like a lot of conservative politicians these days, he says his words filled with race baiting rancor were being taken out of context. But the message was clear to the racially bigoted voters who could be motivated to keep a couple of Negroid boys from working together to keep America out of the hands of people who are most assuredly more competent simply because we know that they aren’t black.
Yes it is true that a lot of black people have a lot of pride in the fact that Mr. Obama is our first black President. And it is also true that there are black people who will support Mr. Obama for President no matter what simply because of the color of his skin. But Mr. Powell hardly fits into such a category. Mr. Powell is one of the many black people who understand facts from their personal perspective and have decided that Mr. Obama is a better choice for the black community as well as the larger community of America as well as the world. And in the grand pantheon that comprises the black community, some black people might isolate between the two conditions of color struck and thoughtful analysis.
But just like some black people may suffer from a color struck condition that will drive their preferences, this malady is far more prevalent in the white community. Far more white people will see a black person and respond instinctively to skin tones. White people’s penchant for judging people by the color of skin is so strong that they have an entire history of enslaving people for nothing more than having the wrong skin color. And with white people’s history of blatant, disparate racism, why would a white person like Mr. Sununu feel compelled to accuse Mr. Powell of overt racism? Mr. Powell explained his position in thoughtful detail and yet Mr. Sununu felt compelled to play the race card and say that it all boils down to black people wanting to see each other do well.
So do white people ever feel compelled to see other white people do well? Or more appropriately we should ask do white people ever feel compelled to make sure black people don’t do well? All we have to do is look at America’s racially polarized history to find the answer to that question. American history proves that white people will go out of their way to keep black people from being successful or credible. For some white people, to see a black person do well is to see a target that needs to be attacked and taken down at all cost. Some white people are so driven by this instinct that they would be willing to throw the country into chaos just to keep a black man from being successful. How else would you explain why four years ago a group of white politicians got together to make sure the term of America’s first black President would be as ineffective as possible and do their best to block his every move with filibusters and legislative maneuverings meant to being government to a screeching stop.
Mr. Sununu’s assessment of Colin Powell was a twofer. He knocked the black former Secretary of State for being so racist that he would support a black President with nothing to base that decision on but the color of his skin. Both Mr. Powell and Mr. Obama have a history of working for white people and with white people that should prove their willingness to put everything else to the side for the bigger picture or the issue at hand.
The same can’t be said about Mr. Sununu. In his eye, the only reason black people support other black people is the commonality of skin color. Unfortunately, Mr. Sununu is one of those white people who cannot stand to see black people do well and is driven by an inherent need to follow his racially biased instincts at all costs.
Years ago I was in a Home Depot store trying to buy eight feet of heavy chain for a home project. Home Depot sells chains by the foot off of a large spool of chain hundreds of feet long. You have to get some assistance in order to have the chain cut to your specific need. After the chain was cut the Home Depot employee handed me the chain and I asked if all I had to do was take it to the cashier and checkout. The guy replied that he had to give me a sales slip that indicated how much chain I had and how much it cost. Then in a rather pitiful attempt at humor, as he handed me the sales slip the guy said that if I took the chain upfront without the slip that they would put me in chains.
I’m sure the guy didn’t mean anything by what he said. He was a young black guy, probably still in high school, and there was a good chance it was probably his first job. Nevertheless, I was somewhat offended by what he said. It wasn’t that he didn’t know how to give good customer service. When I first arrived in the hardware section he was helping a white couple with whatever it was they were purchasing. Without trying to eavesdrop as I waited for my turn for service I could hear how courteous and professional he could be. When he started to help me he started with the same customer service demeanor. The quip was totally jarring. Without another word I snatched the sales slip out of the guy’s hand and left to complete the purchase.
I was reminded of that incident in the Home Depot when I heard the news about Vice President Joe Biden’s reference that the Republican’s repeal of Wall Street regulations enacted since the financial crisis that threw the country into economic crisis would throw people back in chains. The remark was made in front of an audience of supporters with many African Americans. I thought Mr. Biden should not have gone there. Whatever excuse he had for the inspiration of the metaphor he should have thought twice about it. For me it didn’t matter if it was a reference to the some conservative saying that Republicans should unshackle business from the burden of unnecessary regulations imposed by the Obama administration.
At first glance the remark could be construed as somewhat racially insensitive. But kind of like the young black guy back at the Home Depot a few years back who probably wasn’t trying to offend a customer, I’m pretty certain that Mr. Biden wasn’t trying to offend his supporters. Mr. Biden has a reputation for making gaffs and his speech the other day is just one of the latest in a long line that goes back decades. Generally speaking he has been the type of politician that supports the view of the black community on most issues. If his words can be judged to be racially insensitive it is more than likely a momentary lack of judgment and not just the latest manifestation of a personal philosophy of racial insensitivity or a possible hostility towards black people.
Compare Mr. Biden’s single sentence remark to the recent philosophies of conservative politicians who wear their disdain for black people on their sleeves. Compare Mr. Biden’s single sentence to Newt Gingrich’s core belief that black people need to give up their pursuit of welfare checks and start earning an honest living. Compare Mr. Biden’s remark to Ron Paul and his newsletter with its plethora of racist statements like black people will stop rioting when the welfare checks arrive or that young blacks accused of crimes should be treated as adults because they are black. Compare Mr. Biden’s remark to Herman Cain’s contention that black people are too brainwashed against the conservative philosophy of the Republican Party. Compare Mr. Biden’s remark to the conservative’s current political strategy to disenfranchise black people from voting under the guise that voting fraud is so rampant that new standards for voter identification are required to combat the problem. In all honesty the slip of Mr. Biden’s lip is nothing compared to the long chain of political attacks against black people as well as the institutions and policies that support a large portion of the black community.
Now some conservatives want to point at Mr. Biden’s statement and say that he’s the one that is now being divisive and insensitive. Some claim that Mr. Biden telling people that the Republicans want to put people in chains is out of line. It is an affront to the party of President Abraham Lincoln who freed black people from America’s nationally institutionalized racial enslavement. But these same people don’t have a problem saying that President Obama has chained or shackled businesses with regulations. These are the same businesses that continue to show record profits and distribute massive executive bonuses while at the same time shedding jobs for workers. When Mr. Obama took office, the stock market was trading somewhere down in the eight thousand range. Now it is trading over thirteen thousand. That’s a healthy improvement for anybody forced to operate under the burden of shackles.
So I guess we can wrap this all up real quick by saying Mr. Biden shouldn’t have said what he said. We all know he wasn’t trying to be literal just like we all know that the conservatives who accuse liberals of trying to shackle business to the burden of regulation weren’t meant to be taken literal. If some conservatives want to act like they’re so offended, after all the shit that they have said about and have done to the black community, join the fucking club. Whatever Mr. Biden said pales in comparison to what many conservatives have said and done. Some of these people have made political and personal attacks against black people an art form.