The race card is a term mainly used by whites to denote an instance where a black person cries racism. Typically said in a derogatory manner, the worn-out cliché is usually followed by admonitions for blacks to stop whining and cries of why does every thing have to be about race. There is often the misunderstanding that using the race card is not based on an actual racist occurrence but rather it is a weapon used by blacks to accomplish a particular means (thereby further encouraging racial strife). Both whites and blacks can be accused of racism, yet one thing is clear: white racism is often rooted in fear and fiction. Black racism is often rooted in an acknowledgement of reality and an awareness of historical trends and facts. While I must admit everything is not always about race, and blacks can certainly be accused of pulling the race card falsely and a little too often, the reality is they did not create the deck it was drawn from.
During the slave trade, the race card was pulled by white hands through infusing race-consciousness into the psyche of its participants by way of false mythologies in order to justify the peculiar institution. A good example is the curse of Ham where white Christians used the ancient biblical story to enforce the idea that black servitude was by divine design. Not only was it considered a mandate of God, but also the law of the land as slave-holding states created laws that prevented blacks from participating in society as full citizens. This continued after the Emancipation Proclamation where, although slavery was outlawed, black progress was continually frustrated by overt and covert white supremacists who either believed in the idea of black inferiority and/or feared their white reign of power would end (and reap what they’ve sown). As time progressed, so did racial understanding; however it was only about fifty years ago that there were still “race cards” played…by whites, that is. These race cards read “Whites Only”, “Nigger Go Home”, and “Blacks Served in the Back”. We are not yet one generation removed from race cards that were legally displayed to remind anyone who was not white that the “United” States of America was united in theory, not in practice.
To America’s credit, great strides have been made to level the playing field, but that does nothing to dismantle the myths in people’s minds. Forcing an employer to hire an African-American for the sake of diversity does not change the fact that that employer may think very little of his or her employee’s ability to perform because of their skin color. Laws cannot stop a real estate agent from secretly steering black clients away from neighborhoods that make it clear “their kind” is not welcome. And it certainly does not stop churches from giving missionaries maps of a neighborhood with X’s in certain areas denoting households containing people not desired at their church, or deliberately not wanting to have outreach in underprivileged areas for fear of blackening their congregation (both are true stories). These instances, and more, contribute to a sort of racial self-consciousness amongst blacks because to non-blacks, their color points to more than skin tone. For many people, black means uneducated, welfare, violent, illegitimacy, criminal, ugly, and more. These ideas are why blacks continue to have their own organizations in a so-called post-racial America, not as an effort to segregate, but rather to bring the promises of cultural acceptance and enfranchisement to pass on their own.
Many blacks have a mistrust of all things white and a belief that history will continue to repeat itself. Racial equality often appears to be nothing but the product of disillusioned rhetoric. There are varying realities in this country because everyone’s American experience is not the same. There are many issues within the African American community that need to be addressed, and it is more than fair to say those issues cannot be solved through white guilt, being absolved of personal responsibility, or staying stuck in the past. However, until racial misunderstanding and paranoia are blotted out by an acknowledgment of reality and not the conjured one we often possess when we want to pretend the world is racially sanitized, the race card might very well continue to be the most played card in the deck.
For all the racial profiling assessors regarding the Louis Henry Gates, Jr. arrest, looks like the record of the 911 call and the released notes from the arresting and other officers clearly demonstrates that some people need to leave “THE MAN” alone.
Knowledge is power. Nonetheless, people who live to be right in their own eyes will still try to extract some adverse racial motivations from actions and dialogue in the highly over-publicizied incident when there was none. At least on the part of Crowley, the arresting officer, towards Gates.
Now, Mr. Gates is reputedly calling for the nation to move on. This magnanimous stance is quite convenient as it comes after the transcripts and notes show Gates escalated and really charged the entire incident and called a cop with a good record a “racist” simply because the cop did his job and had a spat with Gates, a Black man.
Obama needs to think again when attempting to defend any of his homeboys. Correction: “esteemed colleagues”.
Again, “The Man” is at play and causing a rucus with the arrest and four-hour detainment of Yale Graduate and Harvard Professor, Henry Louis Gates. By now, you would think that Black folks and “conscious” folks of other races would abandon the notion of “The Man” who gets too much credit in situations where common sense is overridden and self-responsibility is despised. It is much easier to cry racism and point to a plethora of social behavioral theories than to accept the bare-boned truth. Sometimes Black people do stupid stuff and race has absolutely nothing to do with it.
First, a call is made to the police because Mr. Gates’ allegedly appeared to be breaking into his own home. Apparently, the door was jammed. Questions flare about why the police was even called. Of course anyone in a residential neighborhood who views someone trying to force a door ajar should call the police. People break into homes in broad daylight. Doctors murder their own wives in broad daylight. Mr. Henry Louis Gates lives in the real world where men just like him-not just stereotypical younger Black male thugs-commit heinous crimes. Accomplished, affluent, successful people often find themselves in prison garb for quite some time because they have committed crimes.
Mr. Gates was allegedly into his home by the time the police confrontation began. Allegedly, the cops knew exactly who he was when they arrested him. There is a huge gap-between when Mr. Gates supplied proof of identity and was arrested-that Mulloverthis is not willing to suppose is filled with improper behavior by law enforcement simply because Mr. Gates is a Black man. Mr. Gates was allegedly “shocked” that after he proved who he was, the incident continued.
Having had to prove TWICE that I lived in my own house because the burglar alarm went off in the middle of the night, I disengaged it, and answered the calls from the alarm company with the appropriate code, I know how aggravating it is to look at law enforcement (two white officers) who challenged me because of what could have actually been “suspect”. However, having an appreciation for law enforcement-the same fellas that might have been answering the same call if I actually had a gun pointed to my head by an intruder-governed my disposition in getting my license, a piece of mail with my name and address on it, and answering numerous questions. There was no unseemly conduct or display of irritation to the point where after having established my identity, I could have been arrested for disorderly conduct. By the way, being one who is more than averse on my legal rights and most knowingly and audibly equipped to express them, I could have stopped the officers much sooner than they chose to stop in both encounters inside the home where I LIVE. However, I did not. I worked with the program. Mulloverthis smiled and thanked the officers both times, although I could have been indignant.
Law enforcement cannot cease to stop a swurving car because Jesse Jackson may be in it, or fail to make initial inquiries because Black people are involved. Nor, should law enforcement have to be disrespected, interrogated, or challenged because they have to do their job. Those cops did not know who Henry Louis Gates was, and even if they did, so what. Yaleducativism, Harvardism, and African-American intelligencia does not absolve anyone-including Mr. Gates-from knowing that law enforcement must be respected, even if they want to be tough guys/gals. The cops were within reason to confirm Gates’ identity and then ensure that there was nothing fishy going on, despite the fact they were dealing with “Henry Louis Gates”.
If the depth and breadth of Mr. Gates’ interaction with the Cambridge police consisted of him providing identification and fully cooperating with the officers, then the officers do need to offer an apology. If not, Mr. Gates and his supporters need to sit down somewhere and eat some chocolate.
Meanwhile, Mulloverthis chooses to commend the people that help to keep our neighborhoods safe and when everday “good” people do bad things, sometimes have to put their lives in danger to muddle through the particulars. Thumbs up to law enforcement.
You hit the nail on the head and smashed it, with a few exceptions.
Although Sharpton has been a long-time friend of the Jackson family, he is ”milking” the moment.
MJ was just an entertainer to many. Not all Black folks are drinking the kool aid on this one and certainly many of us have not “heroized”, or deified Michael Jackson. Personally, MJ’s life was tragic and he did not live a life that anyone should want to emulate. Human compassion causes the good in us to want to see the good in others. So, even in death, as with most human beings, we don’t focus on all of the gutter talking points on a person’s life. But the reality is, Michael Jackson did not provide an ideal life for celebrity children as they were reputedly never around any other children (while MJ has been quoted numerous times as saying children were the only reason worth living) and significantly deprived them of normal socialization skills. MJ’s conscious construction of his children through ensuring their sperm donors were White and carving their nifty womb-for-hire mothers out of their lives wreak of self-hatred. Self-loathing Blacks could not have had a better spokesperson, being that MJ planned to and did legally procreate non-Black children, and actually “de-Blacked” himself as much as he could. Forget the debt factor in relation to the philanthropic giving. His spending on medication–allegedly because of drug dependency–in what really needs to be examined. Additionally, no well-adjusted stable grown man walks around in underwear entertaining and befriending young boys whether there was literal pedophilic contact or not. People have the audacity to laud MJ for being a great father while living a life allegedly riddled with drug addiction. I will have to agree with you, that only in this country can someone be so visibly inept and then celebrated because he was a paramount entertainer. FYI Bill: Many African Americans raise their children NOT to be like Michael Jackson. Who wants to live and probably not be genuinely fulfilled?
Lastly Bill, you have conveniently overlooked a number of other endearing commentaries from White people during MJ’s celebration of life that was more than delusional. Brooke Shields immediately comes to mind. Please be equitable and just in your disdain for the post-mortem crowning of MJ by his fans, which may be quite difficult for you as is often the case for White folk who try to analyze Black folk. By the way, some of MJ’s largest and most lucrative concerts were played before audiences of people that looked like MJ’s kids, MJ after enough plastic surgery to re-compose himself, and your own (Bill O’Reilly’s) family–White people. So, the absurd international influence MJ has had has never been a Black thing, and cannot ever credibly be characterized as such.
Note: Clearly, MJ’s fan base is not solely comprised of African-Americans and White people. MJ’s influence crossed all so-called barriers and stratifications. This post is specifically designed to respond to the criticism of Bill O’Reilly and his take on the media and public’s reaction to MJ’s death.
There are a number of isolated cases of older women having babies as “seasoned” senior citizens.
So, now one dies and leaves her twins without a mother or father, having conceived them through donated eggs, a sperm donor and the trusty In Vitro fertilization process. Reputedly, after giving birth, the woman developed cancer.
In a nutshell, a mother dies of cancer. Yet, with the kind of journalism we see today, the dialogue leading to the bottom line misses the quintessence of the matter: Her age had nothing to do with it.
Some people are well-known enough to have world recognition by a letter, nickname, or merely initials. MJ, Michael Jackson, the King of Pop is said to have succumbed earlier this afternoon in L.A.
Reports say that MJ was rehearsing in L.A. for a comeback tour in London.
As when death hits any family, there is a great loss and deep feelings of grief. Let us remember the Jackson family in our prayers and well wishes. For those of us who are still alive and able to read this, where will you spend eternity?
The oldest reported British woman to give birth, Elizabeth Adeney, is a brand new mom thanks to In Vitro fertilization. Of course, the new mom has not only the joy of her first child to look forward to, but also the criticisms of yick yackers who feel she is monsterously selfish for having a child at her “old” age.
Although I do not generally think that child-bearing is ideal at 66, again, I ask as I often do, “Who cares?” Adeney has only joined the ranks of an increasing number of senior citizens who raise babies that are their grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. Her baby raising is purposed and intentional, not a result of premature death in the family, or some sort of parental neglect. People Adeney’s age get custody and are entrusted to raise children everyday, and do so heroically.
So who are her critics? Is it the same monsterously selfish people who advocate abortion for convenience? Or, the population of classless candidates-both male and female-who contribute to the “who’s my baby’s daddy” talk show conundrum. Thank God for DNA testing, or so many everyday people who live impulsive hedonistic lives would never know who fathered a child. Certainly, Adeney’s critics cannot be amongst the population of people with terminally ill diseases in advanced stages, such as AIDS, that knowingly bear children with slight chances they will probably not be around to raise them, and often bring them into this world infected (although babies can receive treatment to reverse HIV status). How about all of our babies born on drugs or to mothers who drink and smoke? The wonderful people who have children for complying with the status quo with a firm plan for nannies, boarding schools and plenty of photo ops in-between need not register any critques. Their time would be better spent scheduling an appointment to laugh with their own children. There are certainly too many people in this world that are blaring self-advertisements for irresponsible parents to make this woman a guinea pig.
The only real concern is whether this senior citizen is capable of providing a loving, safe, healthy, reliable home for a baby and in good enough health to do so. Adeney just may outlive some of the young everything-goes, to hell with any type of morality people and smile at this child’s college graduation. She just may give this child the kind of devotion, attention and guidance that will produce a good sound human being. At least we can hope. This of course, can only take place if the powers that be and the hipsters don’t cause the world to end before then.
A woman who was raped and gave her daughter up for adoption thirty years ago is suing the state of New Jersey for allegedly assisting the adoptee find her. The thirty year old adopted daughter apparently went to her birth mother’s home, and has attempted to contact another birth sibling from her birth mother. The birth mother had been made aware of the adoptee’s request to communicate prior to the unsolicited home visit, and did not respond to the letter the State of New Jersey sent her apprising her of the same. For the full story, here’s the link to the article:
Every now and again, MULLOVERTHIS gets stumped. I had to think about this one for a few seconds, but only a few seconds. After mulling through the emotional components, this is a clear cut case. This adopted woman, if her story is correct, should get a million plus a few extra bucks. Adoption laws are SUPPOSED to work such that someone like the plaintiff can make the decision that she was prepared to live with, albeit thirty years ago. It is unjust to shift the rules now, because some lackadaisical state employees felt like doing whatever they wanted. Had the daughter found her through some ingenuity on her own, or with private people locaters, then we’d have a different story. This woman had a right to close the door to the rape, and the child that came from the rape, without having to face her at her front door thirty years later.
Once NJ pays, and pays dearly, they might impose some personal penalties to the employees that break the law and get caught up in an adoptee’s personal pursuits. Had this adoptee had a “need” that was life-threatening or considerably commensurate, she should have acquired a court order. The adoptee’s need does not outweigh the mother’s need to live in peace and privacy. This mother has absolutely no bond with the grown woman and should not have been jolted into re-visiting a part of her life that I’m sure she wished never happened.
As one who is not pro-life-but anti-murder and anti-disassociated human depravity through murdering pre-born children-this mother made a courageous decision and should teach the state a good old-fashioned lesson: Keep its word.
Folks, Nany Pelosi just gave her weekly press conference. Cameras can be our friend or enemy. Pelosi, whose demeanor is normally two shaves shy of brazen and forthright, did quite a bit of stumbling and near-stuttering today. Nonetheless, she managed to unequivocally say that she is not answering any questions surrounding the current controversy about her remarks debunking the credibility of the CIA and current GOP attempts to get Pelosi de-throned. Speaker of the House Pelosi said the country must stay on our course, and not be distracted. She is committed to a bi-partisan approach to dealing with the economy, health care and everything other than what she says was never said because to do so would say that she has said too much to avoid why she didn’t deal with what was said.
The GOP just needed to take notes and the next time a major GOP leader needs a mask, just mimick Pelosi’s attempted ballyhoo. Serve up the tactic where questioning the issue is a partisan attack, and take the high road of moving onward with the bi-partisan business at hand.
Too bad we all can’t live above warranted reproach.
