Change the Wind

Why Do Poor Whites Slavishly Vote Republican?

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 14:32:00 +0000

I wish I had a dollar for everytime I was either asked or even heard someone ask why black people have slavishly devoted themselves to the Democratic Party. Not even the most cogent argument reviewing the history of the GOP or its unwillingness to include blacks (and Hispanics, for that matter) in the formation of their party's agenda, helps critics see that it's not so much having given up on the party, as the party saying 'We only want you under certain guidelines.'

But here's another question: why do poor and lower class continue to vote overwhelmingly Republican? It's not like the trajectory of their lives has been significantly altered for the better by that party.

This column in The New Yorker, written by George Packer, "Poor, White and Republican", raises the corollary to the question asked by blacks in the Democratic Party. Maybe you can come up with a meaningful answer.

Here's an excerpt. You can read the full column here...
"F.D.R. called him “the forgotten man,” but that was long ago. By 1972, he was a member of the silent majority and had become a Democrat for Nixon (he wore a hard hat with an American-flag sticker). 1980 produced the Reagan Democrat (this time he came from Macomb County, Michigan, and was discovered by the pollster Stan Greenberg). By 1994 he had curdled into the Angry White Male (he elected the Gingrich Congress). In 2008, he was simply the working-class white—by then he was no longer forgotten, and no longer a Democrat of any kind; he was a member of the much-analyzed Republican base. The television godfather of the type, of course, is Archie Bunker, but you can also trace his lineage more darkly through the string of hard-bitten blue-collar movies that begins with “Joe” (Peter Boyle, 1970), goes on to “Falling Down” (Michael Douglas, 1993), “Gran Torino” (Clint Eastwood, 2008), and, in a rural context, “Winter’s Bone” (2010). He’s a descendant of the thirties Everyman played by Henry Fonda and Gary Cooper, except that in the intervening decades he lost his idealism and grew surly, if not violent, consumed with a hatred of hippies, immigrants, blacks, government, and, finally, himself."

"This election year, he’s back and getting a lot of attention from sociologists and pundits (Charles Murray’s new book “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010” sparked the current flurry of commentary). But in 2012 he’s no longer even working class. He’s fallen through the last restraints of decency and industriousness, down into the demoralized and pathological underclass that, in the past, Americans associated with the black poor. There, he lives on disability, is no longer fit for employment nor has any impulse to get a job, is divorced, fathers illegitimate children who grow up to do the same, gets hooked on meth or prescription drugs, does time in prison now and then, and has bad teeth."

"Is it useful to make generalizations about whole classes of people? We all know the reasons why it’s not—they stoke prejudice, crush nuance, distort reality, are unkind and unfair. But just as it was wrong for a generation of liberals to reject Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s notorious 1965 report “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action,” it would be a mistake to dismiss the subject of Murray’s new book simply because it insults half of the Americans who weren’t already tarred by “The Bell Curve.”"

Is 'The Help' the Best Hollywood Can Do?

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:00:00 +0000

Here is an exchange that I really enjoyed.

I had every intention of going to see the movie 'The Help', but waited too late and had to see it on DVD. I know of the controversy surrounding the book, but because I can rarely enjoy a book after seeing a movie on which one is based, I probably won't be reading it now.

But as we get closer to the time of the Academy Awards, I too am interested, indeed conflicted about the nomination of Viola Davis for 'Best Actress' and Octavia Spencer for 'Best Supporting Actress' (although I'm pretty sure that as wonderful as Ms. Davis was in her movie, I'm pretty sure Meryl Streep will win for 'Iron Lady'). But I'm actually not conflicted because I object to their portrayal of two maids. I am conflicted because the controversy regarding their portrayal again raises the question of difficulty of getting other movies with a greater diversity of characters made at all.

Watch Actresses Viola Davis & Octavia Spencer on PBS. See more from Tavis Smiley.

I disagree with the idea that it takes a 'movement' to get a good movie made with 'positive' portrayals of black life.

The movie 'Malcolm X' was an excellent cinematic depiction of the life of the human rights leaders and spokesman for the Nation of Islam. Yet, while Denzel Washington's career has fared well - to say the least - Spike Lee still has trouble getting movies made.

The dog-eared criticism of Tyler Perry's 'Madea' belies the fact that it appears that there are no more substantive movies coming to him to produce, even though he has his own studio.

The issue is more than artists and the roles they choose, or sensitive directors or producers. It has to do with distribution and the financial wherewithal to make and get into theaters a broad range of movies that tell the story of black life.

But while we work on this problem, its equally important to know that Hispanics and Asians have the same complaint - with even fewer opportunities to get on the screen!

Perhaps what we really need is a society in which we stop stereotyping one another and see one another as genuine human beings with stories to tell that can entertain and teach all of us.

That means we've got a lot of work to do...that's not Hollywood's job.

Watch the second half of the interview with Viola Davis and Octavia Spencer here...

Conservatism Run Amok!

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 11:00:00 +0000

INDEED!

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 11:00:00 +0000

In Memoriam: Whitney Houston (1963-2012)

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:33:00 +0000

There will be tons of tributes poured out to Whitney Houston and accolades will inundate us over the next weeks and beyond. That's because this woman was simply one of the greatest voices of our lifetime. She was almost without peer. Listening to her sing was pure joy. There are times when you are witnessing a display of great talent, there is almost a sense of privilege.

Her death is an incredible loss.

I've always said that Whitney Houston was born to sing Gospel music. I selfishly wish that she sang it exclusively. Her faith and her spirit came through in such a way that there was an immediate sense of worship the moment she began to sing gospel. I think it's fitting to listen to her this morning...

For Those Who Would Change the Wind

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 18:20:00 +0000

Etta James

(1938-2012)

Blues/Jazz Artist

The Folly of a Law in Search of a Crime...

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:07:00 +0000

I had the priviledge of speaking to a group this morning about the dangers of Texas - and other state's - Voter ID laws. As I mentioned, in my January Dallas Morning News column, this is a law in search of a crime.

It's incredibly important to know that this is an assault on the voting rights of millions of Americans and an implicit indication that law makers believe the wrong people voted in 2008! San Antonio Congressman Charles Gonzales hits the nail on the head in pointing out the how the very nature of these laws is antithetical to the Constitutional guarantees of the rights of citizens...
"[There have been] a lot of letters supporting Texas' new voter ID bill. Most say something like, “Everyone has a photo ID and we show it all the time, so why is tying it to voting such a problem?” I'd like to answer that question."
"First, it is true that almost everyone has some form of photo identification. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, 89 percent of American citizens have photo ID. But that means that 11 percent of us, about 23 million eligible voters, don't. Millions of our fellow citizens might be disenfranchised."
"“But,” say the bill's proponents, “we'll give them a free ID.” Not really. We may stand in line for two hours for the privilege of driving, but this law asks millions to stand in line for what the 14th Amendment calls “the right to vote.” The ID may be free, but you need a birth certificate, something many Texans don't have. The Texas Vital Statistics Office charges $22 plus postage for a birth certificate. It's hard to square that with the 24th Amendment's ban on charging anyone to vote."
"Many ID-less Texans live 100 miles from a DPS station, and it's hard to get there when you don't have a car. It's harder for many senior citizens and people working two jobs. Yet the elderly, the poor and the disabled are most likely to be affected by the new law. Why make things harder for the people who already have it the hardest?"
"Supporters point out that they have to show a photo ID to buy alcohol, drive a car or board a plane. That may be true, but the Constitution doesn't guarantee your right to do those things. But five of the 27 amendments guarantee our “right to vote.” Texas' voter ID law could disenfranchise citizens who have voted for decades."
Read the rest of Rep. Gonzales' op-ed here...

Rooting Against Economic Recovery?

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:00:00 +0000

I really enjoyed Super Bowl Sunday. No, my prediction didn't come true. The team I rooted for didn't win. But on any number of levels it was a very, very good game.

What I didn't particularly care for were the commercials. It wasn't that they were distasteful, it was that they were, well...pretty dull.

The one exception was this one...

Now, of course, this proved to be the most controversial the next day.

Detroit, a metaphor for how America comes together to solve it's toughest problems. Unable to be knocked out with 'one punch'. The auto industries come back as an illustration of how Americans find their way back from a seemingly no win situation.

It's half time in America. What's wrong with that?

It seems like even the Super Bowl can't be totally devoid of politics. Some are taking this to be an 'issue ad' for the Obama Administration because it mentions the success Detroit and the auto industry are experiencing because of the bail out. Check out this column by E.J. Dionne...

"The arguments against the bailout were predictable but not unreasonable. Many suspected that government would inevitably make politicized choices: plant-closings determined by political influence and Obama favorites on company boards pursuing pet administration projects at the expense of sound business judgments."

"This didn’t happen. Even though the administration lost one fight when Congress voted to protect the interests of the auto dealers, the White House let the automakers behave like private companies. Ron Bloom, a major architect of the restructuring, told the columnists: “For the last nine or 10 months, we’ve kept our hands off of it.” Directors, Bloom added, were chosen for their business expertise, not for their politics."

"Ironically, Steve Forbes, the former Republican presidential candidate, confirmed the administration’s story in an opinion piece in Politico last week, whose purpose was to deny Obama any credit for the auto industry’s comeback. “GM’s management,” Forbes said, “is using solid, conservative, free-market management principles to get the company back to long-term profitability.” But this is exactly what opponents of the bailout said could never happen if the government stepped in. By Forbes’ own testimony, they were wrong."

"That’s why Obama could declare at a Chrysler plant in Detroit on Friday that “for the first time since 2004, all three U.S. automakers are operating at a profit,” meaning that taxpayers are likely to recoup most of their investment and possibly more."

So here's the question - if the President's political opposition actually considers this ad controversial and objectionable - doesn't it mean that you have to be rooting for economic calamity to help you win an election?

And if that's true, how is that 'patriotic'?

How About Two Parties?!

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:20:00 +0000

This morning it's announced that the President would begin accepting money for a 'super pac' fund. It underscores the problem of big money in our electoral process. Not just big money - unaccountable, vast sums of money, from virtually anonymous donors. Make no mistake about it, it is troublesome.

At the same time, a stand on 'principle' leaves you out of the race.

Ironically, from the 'life imitates art' department, just such a dilemma was depicted in an episode of 'The West Wing'. I posted this in 2010 and it emphasizes the problem with 'the principle' and the practical reality.

What do you think?

________________________

One of my all time favorite character actors was Ron Silver (1946-2009). And, of course, I especially loved his portrayal of the hired gun, political operative Bruno Gianelli in 'The West Wing'.

Silver was apparently quite the paradox. A former Democrat, who became a Republican, but described himself as a liberal. He supported George Bush, the elder, but voted for Obama in 2008. I love it when you can't pin a person down to just one thing!

Anyway, this is one of my favorite scenes in which Silver appeared. Here his is trying to convince President Bartlett's staff, that if they want to compete in his re-election bid, they are going to have to use 'soft money' - money that is not officially a part of the campaign, so that there is no limits to usage. The Republican candidate is doing it and as he says earlier, 'I just think we ought to be running in the same race...' This scene is Silver's (Gianelli's) response to the staff's ethical queasiness to his idea.

Enjoy...

This Time Let's Vote with a Purpose - Thiiis is NOT 'American Idol'!

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 11:00:00 +0000

There are issues and there are issues...

Take for instance the Dallas ISD Trustees decisions to close 11 schools in Dallas. That's an issue - a serious one. It is fraught with all kinds of implications.

What does it do to the psyche of the neighborhoods in which these schools are located. Virtually all are located in low income neighborhoods. They are all being closed because of declining student populations. In the best of times, school buildings which must be kept lighted, heated, cooled and cleaned are expensive propositions. In times of dwindling dollars, how do you justify keeping these buildings in operation when the number of students in them make that expensive proposition even more expensive?

But closing schools require other expensive propositions - in some cases the transportation of students, in all it means personnel. What do you do with the staff? Not just teachers. Administrators? Custodial staff? Lunch room staff? Support staff? Who becomes 'collateral damage' when you have to make such a decision?

But that's not the only area in which school closures are expensive. Nearly all of these schools are undergoing some level of redevelopment. Some neighborhoods more than others. But redevelopment cannot just be business, whatever kind. Redevelopment has to include housing and not just any kind of housing, it has to be housing for young families with children. That was a challenge with these schools anyway. You can't be fooled by the TEA designations of 'acceptable', 'recognized' or 'excellent'. You have to understand that either because these categories to tell the true story of what's happening inside the school or because of the reputation of the communities, these were not schools in which the district was investing the resources necessary to be attractive to young families in the first place. And redevelopment of low income communities has not focused on the type of housing that would attract these families either. Now compound all the challenges of redevelopment in these areas with the actual closing of the schools in these neighborhoods - you've just complicated neighborhood redevelopment in these communities.

Now certainly all of this tells us what needs to happen. Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings has publicly stated that he wants the city to figure out how to work with the school district to make education more effective. It's a challenge because the 'Independent' in Dallas Independent School District, means that city officials don't run the school district. However, City Hall's answer to its engagement with the district, can be most effective by prioritizing public investment to redevelop the surrounding communities. That means making them more economically viable and safer.

And, of course, the District needs to figure out what kind make the kind of investment in these schools that do more than help them become 'recognized', they need to be stellar. But, among other things, that takes money. And that's another issue.

While I don't give DISD trustees a pass on this issues, they are dealing with forces beyond their control. Economic forces. At the state level.

DISD's trustees have to deal with the $5 billion the Texas Legislature cut from education in the 181st session last spring.This is a budget cut mandated by an increasingly conservative (if that can be imagine) legislature that sought to balance it's budget at the expense of its future. This in spite of the fact the number of children coming into our state school system are projected to increase.

This really isn't solely because of the Great Recession. It's because of tax laws enacted more than 5 years ago, projected to generate sufficient revenue - and which did not. It would have been nice if the Governor at that time (the one who just made a humiliating return to Austin after a less than auspicious foray into national politics) and the legislature had listened to the State Comptroller, who told them that this tinkering with the tax laws would result in a $23 billion shortfall. But, of course they didn't listen. For a hot minute, the deficit was masked with stimulus money (that dirty money that the Governor said he didn't want). But there came a time when there wasn't enough stimulus money to fill the hole our legislature dug for us.

There was also the 'Rainy Day' fund - the state's savings account, as it were. But the Legislature refused to use that money to fund the shortfall. So the cuts were enacted. And our education system is suffering.

Which brings us to another issue.

The people who made such an extremely short-sighted and fiscally careless decision, were voted into office in 2010. This is 2 years after Texas' primary was characterized by long lines and caucuses so crowded, it's amazing someone didn't call out the fire marshal! And the day of the Presidential election, we voted like it was American Idol. But 2010, most of that crowd stayed home.

The results?

Among other things, ridiculous voter ID laws and eleven closed schools.

When it comes to the closed schools, protests and demonstrations full of frustration and angst are going to have to yield to very creative solutions for the use of those buildings. The redevelopment of those areas are going to have to be equally as creative.

But the real answer to the question must be political engagement that begins at the ballot box. There really is no other sustainable answer. The challenges of the closing of these schools pales in comparison to the root cause of their closure - the $5 billion cuts enacted by a very conservative state legislature. This will rob future generations of our children - black, brown and white - of the education they need to meaningfully contribute in the 21st century. It will consign the poorest of them to low wage jobs and dead end futures. It will blunt the futures of some of our offspring whose giftedness may not be apparent from birth. We will lose professionals, politicians, businessmen and businesswomen, writers and teachers.

And it will all happen if we don't vote - in 2012 and the ensuing 2014 election.

We need to show up at the polls in November of this year with a clear understanding of our interests. But we've got to vote in November 2012 with November 2014 squarely in our view.

And we need to repeat to one another in those lines a paraphrase of Ryan Seacrest's iconic introduction, 'Thiiis is NOT American Idol!'

Super Bowl XLVI Prediction...

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 11:00:00 +0000

I think its no secret that my record as a football prognosticator is, ummm, not stellar...

But it's the Super Bowl and who can resist. So here it is...

New England Patriots 17 - New York Giants 14

There, got it out of my system - GO PATS!

For Those Who Would Change the Wind

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 11:00:00 +0000

Don Cornelius

1936-2012

Founder, Host of Soul Train

"And as always...we wish you Love, Peace and Soul!"

Not Enough Charity to Fix the Holes in the 'Safety Net'...

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 22:56:00 +0000

By now you've heard it...

Governor Mitt Romney's statement (misspoken, of course). You know, the one where he says he's doesn't care about 'the very poor'. I listened to the statement and, yes, it's taken out of context - somewhat. The fact is, the way he's taken his fellow GOP candidates statements out of context, not to mention President Obama, any claim of unfairness should fall on deaf ears.

But if you examine the logic behind the statement, it's still disturbing. That's because he is espousing the same 'trickle down' economic theory that has never worked in this country.

Never...

Romney, who also said he's not concerned about 'the very rich' because he's doing just fine, also wants to cut the taxes of the very rich. The assumption? The rich, with more disposable income, will create jobs. Those jobs will go to the struggling middle class. The middle class, along with the rich, will supplement the government's 'safety net' for the poor.

Here's the thing though...

This logic, expressed as a campaign policy, is a tacit admission that at this time, 'the very rich' haven't created the jobs. As a matter of fact, if you exclude the era of Obama and go back to the Bush era, job growth was in decline and wages were stagnant...in spite of tax cuts, which are now said to be essential to economic recovery. The 'safety net' for the poor, also, he suggests, might have holes in it (ya' think?!). The general, conservative 'fix it' strategy for the holes in the safety net, is usually charity.

But there's a problem there as well...

The more income Americans make, the less charitable they are!

In fact, according to McClatchey newservice, the poor are actually more charitable than Americans of means.

They fact that we are even having this conversation shows how superficial our politics has become. How many of our candidates for office are actually talking to poor people? How many of them are citing surveys and polling data about poverty and who is actually in a neighborhood where the poor live?

There are very generous people who are rich. There are very generous people who are very rich. But their generosity has to also be characterized. Because 'donations to charity' cover a broad spectrum. Are they giving to an after school program, or an arts museum? Are they giving a hospital or are they giving to a homeless shelter? And what is the impact of the donation, relative to the need being addressed?

At best, there isn't enough charity to go around. And what is needed is not a 'safety net', but a floor below which we don't let people fall. That's a commitment of public funds - a commitment from which we shrink at our peril, if we 'don't care about the very poor'...

What the Disrespect of President Obama Tells Us About Us...

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 11:00:00 +0000

Politics is a difficult business. It would be difficult enough it were simply a world of policy, ideas, opinions and ideology. But those things are inclusive of a number of issues that we often congratulate ourselves for being noble enough to have transcended. Issues like class and race.

Because of that, we are either insensitive to, or ignorant of the impact of our policies, ideas, opinions or ideologies. In a country like ours, that has struggled so hard to realize the 'American Dream' its hard for us to understand that to realize that dream actually means to make room for other groups. It means that at some point the people on top, who have struggled to be on top, must compete to remain on top. It means that those in power, must learn what it means to share that power. Equality of opportunity means that someone may show themselves more capable and may catch up or even surpass us. Or it means that oppressed groups, emerging from oppression, will ascend to places of prominence and yes, even power, that were previously reserved for the oppressor.

It's the reaction to those changes that determine how close we are to realize that dream. It's the proof that our politics is as authentic and noble as we believe.

President Barack Obama's ascendancy to proved that America had become desperate enough to try to ascend the issue of race. It also proved that there are those in power, who had not realized the transcendence on which we prided ourselves and that there is an startling intransigence when it comes to the idea of sharing power.

Obama - at least as qualified to serve as president as Abraham Lincoln was when he took the oath of office; whose ability to raise money in mounting a campaign actually placed him in the category of some Fortune 500 corporations; whose agenda was no more 'liberal' the John F. Kennedy; who came into office facing an economic crisis second only to FDR and who dealt with foreign policy issues rivaling only FDR's second term, has been assailed more than any other president in our country's history.

And that's saying something.

In the midst of an economy on the verge of economic collapse and fighting two wars abroad, Republican Party leadership declared it's number one agenda was to make certain that he only had one term in office. No other president faced such a publicly stated opposition goal - and that's saying something. FDR, Kennedy and Nixon were vilified, but the most vehement and venal forms of hatred came from those outside of the political arena. Obama has faced publicly stated hatred and disrespect from elected officials.

It is not only astounding, it is revealing. It is revealing in that a significant portion of our country is publicly stating that it refuses to be governed by anyone other than those from its own ranks. And the fear is, confirmed in the minds of many, that they will be governed by no one who doesn't look like the previous 43 presidents.

Under the best of circumstances, the revelation of how far we are from the 'Dream' we covet, would be a cause for national reflection and the reassessment of who we are as a nation.

That type of reassessment and reflection doesn't seem to be forthcoming.

At least not yet...

Why Would Arizona Governor Jan Brewer Disrespect Me?!

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 11:00:00 +0000

By now we've all seen it. But, I think it's a picture we ought to remember, for any number of reasons...

I'm am hardly alone in being angered at the level of disrespect shown President Barack Obama. I feel that it is unprecedented in any number of ways. And I think it should not only be called out, but I think people who feel it is ok, should be made uncomfortable.

I know that there are other precedents who have been vilified. And I know that there other presidents who have been subjected to ridicule. It comes with the office. No matter the crest of adulation with which a man has assumed office, eventually he does something and there are critics. There are even enemies. And those enemies inevitably do and say things that are out of bounds. There are times when it's even public.

It can almost be shocking, when one reads history, at how even some of the Founding Fathers would go after one another, questioning the morality or the ethics of their opponents.

Clinton was called a murderer...

George W. Bush was called a racist...

Reagan was called derisively referred to as a 'cowboy'...

Nixon was called a 'liar' and a 'criminal'...

LBJ was called a 'killer' for his escalation of the Viet Nam war...

Just before Kennedy came to Dallas, there was a full page ad taken out in a local newspaper calling him 'a traitor'...

No president has been left unscathed. But this is different.

I can't remember, in my lifetime, when a president's legitimacy has been called into question in such disrespectful and venal ways, by other sitting elected officials, who clearly are pandering to a constituency.

There are crackpots and lunatics throughout our society. Many of whom, cannot be controlled. But when other politicians feel comfortable in taking the airways to say and do things that are obviously unprofessional and classless...and then actually search for ways to defend those words and actions, it goes beyond disturbing.

A State of the Union address in which A CONGRESSMAN YELLS, 'You Lie'...

Congressmen actually tweeting and texting during the SOTU...

A SITTING President, forced to release his BIRTH CERTIFICATE in order to quell lingering suspicions that he is not a citizen - flames of suspicions flamed by an entertainer who is threatening to run for office - while real politicians, demure and deflect on the issue, just enough to give those suspicions an air of legitimacy...

They have even supported the calling into question of his academic credentials. Not one Republican leader stood up and called a halt to questioning the education of a graduate of Harvard University, a former president of the Harvard Law Review and a Constitutional law professor!

Nearly immediately after election, LEADERS in opposing party is comfortable in proclaiming that their number one agenda is to make sure that a president, elected by a clear majority, only serves one term. They openly declare this, while Osama Bin Laden is still on loose; they openly declare this while the economy is in shambles; they openly declare this while American troops are fighting not one, but two wars abroad...

And, for years, even the President's religion is questioned, in spite of his public statement of commitment to the Christian faith.

When, under his leadership, Osama Bin Laden the terrorist whose shadow has been cast over this nation's security for a decade - after President Bush had publicly stated more than once, that he had no interest in where he was and didn't think about it. The opposition avoids giving him credit for a clear victory saying it isn't HIS leadership, but the action of the troops! Troops under his command!

And now, Jan Brewer, the governor of Arizona, publicly wags her finger in the face of the president. She does it in front of the Secret Service. In front of the press corp. In front of the country. And excuses it by saying she felt 'threatened'.

Threatened? By a sitting President.

Again, the continued disrespect: playing into the stereotype of the dark, sinister African-American, who, although president might do...what?!

Let's turn the picture around and take the issue of race out of it for a moment. How would we be discussing this picture, if Obama as a man, was wagging his finger in the face of the Governor of Arizona?

What is particularly sad, that during an election season, a season that is supposed to be about choices this is what we have. Republican candidates are not just questioning the wisdom of Obama's policies. They are not just questioning healthcare, or national defense or economic policy. They refer to him as 'dangerous', they refer to his policies as 'un-American', they refer to his leadership as 'European Socialism' (because in a democracy, there can only be one concept of governance, any other way must be foreign and therefore, sinister).

Of course, there has also been the explanation that those who do and say such thing respect 'the Office' of the President. The suggestion is that you can respect the 'Office' without respecting the person in the Office.

Throughout 2011, we heard that the off year election vote in November 2010 was the 'will of the people' and should be 'respected'. If that's true, then it should be remembered, that the election of November 2008, by a larger margin and by a larger majority, was also the 'will of the people'. That will is not demonstrated by slavish obeisance to the President's agenda. It is demonstrated by respect for him, as the person in the office. It is demonstrated by the way you refer to him. It demonstrated by the way you express that disagreement on issues of policy.

During the budget battles last summer, House Speaker John Boehner said that he had 'the same responsibilities as the President'. At best that is a clear misunderstanding of the Constitution! Only the President of the United States is directed by the majority of ALL of the American people. To disrespect that elected executive, is to disrespect those who voted for him.

Frankly, that type of disregard and disrespect, is more dangerous to the fabric of our democracy than any policy that Obama or any other President has ever proposed. Legislation can be overturned, but what we see in this picture on the tarmac in Arizona, is something that cannot be corrected in an election. It's the sign of a corrosion at the heart of our country that we mistakenly felt we had overcome four years ago...

Dr. James A. Forbes, Jr.

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 11:00:00 +0000

Another preaching hero of mine is Dr. James Forbes, Jr.

Dr. Forbes is Senior Pastor Emeritus of the historic Riverside Church in New York, where he served for 18 years. His erudite, sophisticated intellect, is in sharp contrast to the stereotype I carried for years of Christians of his background. Forbes' early spiritual formation in the Pentecostal Church, with its charismatic worship, is usually thought of in juxtaposition to theological scholarship and ecumenical ministry. But throughout his career, Dr. Forbes has demonstrated a commitment to social justice, Biblical preaching and the strengthening interdenominational and interfaith relationships.

Dr. Forbes after retiring from the pastorate of Riverside, Dr. Forbes became the founder of the Healing of the Nations Foundation (www.healingofthenations.com) is a non-partisan, interfaith, not-for-profit organization for the promotion of a holistic understanding of health and wellness. It seeks to broaden the awareness of the inter-relatedness of physical, emotional, mental, spiritual and community health. Healing of the Nations Foundation encourages individuals, families and communities to be seriously committed to achieving and sustaining good health for themselves and to find specific areas where they may offer their support for the health and wellness of others. It seeks to promote conversation and where possible, cooperative ventures across boundaries of faith traditions, professional disciplines and cultural perspectives.

Here is an example of Forbes' gifted insight into scripture and it's relationship to our world's imperative for peace and justice...

For Those Who Would Change the Wind

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 16:38:00 +0000

Albert Camus

1913-1960

French Philosopher

"Freedom is nothing but a chance to be better."

Memphis Mayor A.C. Wharton Seeks to Tame City's 'Sea of Poverty'

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 11:00:00 +0000

In an earlier post, I mentioned the great time I and my family spent during the holidays in Memphis, Tennessee and the Mississippi area. We have family in both Tennessee and Mississippi and it's always a joy to visit them.

I also had a chance to check out a special series in the Memphis Commercial-Appeal and found out they like Dallas have a problem with poverty. They also have a new mayor, A.C. Wharton, who promised to reveal an aggressive plan to deal with the economic depression that has a stranglehold on some neighborhoods in that city. Mayor Wharton was inaugarated a few days ago and he laid out his plan in his State of the City Address. I think it lays out a bold plan, that is a blend of public, private and philanthropic solutions to what is for most of our cities, a near intractable problem.

Here's an excerpt...

"Our city’s long-time income disparity is ice on our economic wings. The number of Memphians living in poverty has essentially been the same for 30 years, and it is simply unacceptable. We have too many people who are unemployed and even more who are underemployed."

"The density of many Memphis neighborhoods is half of what it was only a few decades ago, and this aggravates the problem of blight and crime and increases the costs of city services. There are too many vacant houses and too many families struggling to keep their homes."

"That’s why city government will act with an impatience for the status quo and business as usual."

"This is our moment. This is our time."

"Within 100 days, we will announce our investment in Memphis neighborhoods. Our neighborhoods are the connective tissue that ties together our work on jobs, education, public safety, and quality of place. That’s why we will be deliberate in assessing the needs of our neighborhoods, in developing a plan of investment with residents to respond, and in executing a sustained program of improvements."

"These reinvestment strategies will be implemented by a strike force equipped to act courageously and in solidarity with the people in our neighborhoods."

"This is our moment. This is our time."

We will work in the next 100 days to develop procedures to determine the condition of every park in Memphis, to develop a consistent plan of maintenance and consistent standards for equipment and programming, and to recommend ways to partner with neighborhood groups so city government helps them oversee and operate their own neighborhood parks.

"Neighborhood parks are the backbone of our parks system, and we will ensure the equitable distribution of resources and connect parks to greenlines to open up new opportunities for healthier lifestyles. We are also working to strengthen the presence of the Redbirds in our city by reimagining our relationships and refinancing costs. As part of this process, we will also bring competitive baseball back into our neighborhoods."

"Meanwhile, in the next 100 days, we will move to create a new seven-acre park on our riverfront to replace the Lonestar concrete plant. Before the end of the year, there will be another special place on our most important natural resource: our riverfront."

"The riverfront was Memphis’ first great place. On the north, there is the construction of a reinvented Pyramid and ultimately, new landscape, and streetscape to upgrade the entrance to downtown off I-40. On the south, Beale Street Landing moves toward completion."

"Because of these new anchors on our riverfront, we will embark in the next 100 days on a place-making process to find consensus about how we can protect the riverfront while making it more active and vibrant. Our purpose is not to create a master plan, but to set a general direction for the riverfront that we can all support so it can once again be a force for harmony rather than conflict."

"This is our moment. This is our time."

"In our neighborhoods, there is no success story more dramatic than our fight to reduce crime. While our crime rates have seen record drops, our work has just begun."

"In the next 100 days, we will move ahead with community policing programs, reentry programs to return former felons to lives as productive citizens, programs to give deserving youth alternatives to Juvenile Court, Metro Gang Unit, and plans to put more cameras in high-crime areas."

"We will fight gun violence and gang activity, and we’ll do it with a carrot and a stick. We’ll punish strictly anyone who uses a gun in the commission of a crime, but we’ll also create the jobs that give youths better choices for their lives."

"In addition, the Police Executive Research Forum will begin to examine the Memphis Police Department’s systems, priorities, plans of attack, and manpower deployment. This review will guarantee that the police department is operating at peak performance. We are making important progress, but we can do more."

"This is our moment. This is our time."

"Today, about one in two Memphis children live in neighborhoods of concentrated poverty where crime, blight, and economic vulnerability are all too common. These high stress environments put the optimal brain development of our youngest children at risk. In the first three years of a child’s life, research has proven that the brain grows to 80 percent of its adult size; however, in those days, less than three percent of money spent on education is spent getting infants and toddlers hard-wired to learn."

"In two years, city government’s role in education will change but our responsibility won’t. Research indicates that what takes place outside of the classroom is just as important in determining academic success as what happens inside it. That’s why city government should take its work to the neighborhoods and to the youngest children in Memphis."

"We must find ways to expand Early Head Start so every child can attend rather than the fortunate few, and we must pilot intervention strategies that give every child a fair start in life."

"Our progress as a city can be no faster than our progress in education. That’s why city government will always have a job to do. In the next 100 days, I will convene a special task force to evaluate the best strategies for early childhood development and to make recommendations for investing the money now allocated to school funding so our children are ready for school and life."

"This is our moment. This is our time."

"As for our neighborhoods, we will make recommendations in the next 100 days to deal with the flooding problems in Memphis. Our community has 165 drainage basins and 13 are problematic. It’s an issue that cries out for more than crisis management. It demands an overall plan of action and a strategic context for action."

"This also applies to anti-blight and clean up programs. With the merger of three divisions, we have now aligned city services to be more coordinated and have more impact. However, to succeed, we need the help of our neighborhoods. Already, we are entering into contracts with grassroots groups to clean up and cut weeds in their neighborhoods. In the coming 100 days, we will expand this program and build on the lessons learned from last year’s 25-square block strategy."

"This is our moment. This is our time."

This is a big agenda. But Mayor Wharton appears determined to go big. I hope we can all follow his example. We certainly should all be watching.

You can read the rest of his State of the City Address here.

We Don't 'Envy' the Rich; We've Got a Problem with Callous Selfishness

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 11:15:00 +0000

Enough with the 'class warfare' whine!

Seriously.

It actually amazes me that whenever the wealth, or income inequality is even mentioned, the retort from those who are either rich, work for the rich or who think one day they might be rich is 'class warfare'.

Of course its not 'class warfare' to denigrate the poor.

Nor is it 'class warfare' to erroneously conflate food stamps and poverty with minorities (principally, blacks and Hispanics).

It's not even 'class warfare' to refer to those receiving public assistance to be living off of someone else's money.

And of course, its not 'class warfare' to suggest that because those of us who get refunds on our tax returns don't pay taxes!

No, it's not 'class warfare'. Many of us admire the rich. A preponderance of Americans want to be rich - or at least comfortable. We don't hate wealth. Americans loathe selfishness. It's callousness with which we have a problem.

Call those who feel this way 'the left', 'liberals', 'socialist' or whatever way you want to denigrate us, the fact is, we have problems envisioning someone in office who campaigns as if the poor don't exist. Or, who if they admit their existence, they are viewed as 'the problem' and the 'cause' of America's problems. And, they are those toward whom we have minimal (if any) responsibility.

It's not the rich. It's the selfish.

Proof? There was, at one time, a rich politician whom young, poor and the middle class absolutely adored. He was wealthy and he came from a wealthy family. He counted the rich and celebrities among his friends and supporters. And there wasn't a poor person who resented or 'envied' him. He spent the kind of time among the poor, learning about their lives and their conditions and spoke about what he learned with humility, gentleness, respect and compassion.

He spoke to the poor all over the country. Poor Appalachian whites, poor blacks in Harlem, migrant farm workers in California. He visited their homes. He got in the dirt with the children. He asked them about their diet. He talked to them about their hopes, their dreams, their fears.

All across the country...

The day after President's State of the Union address, Mitt Romney said he spent the day talking with eight people who were unemployed or who have lost their homes to foreclosure, in Florida.

Eight...

A New Venture and an Issue that Still Needs Our Attention

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 11:00:00 +0000

For the past several years, I've had the privilege of writing a monthly column for the Dallas Morning News. What's really exciting is that my contributions were a part of the DMN's editorial board's Pulitzer Prize winning North/South Gap series (it's nice to have a piece of a Pulitzer!).

Yesterday, I began participating in a new opportunity: the first monthly column for Dallas South News. Shawn P. Williams, the founder and senior editor of DSN, has become a seminal voice for issues related to the southern part of our city, and I've been an admirer of his since I had the pleasure of making his acquaintance a few years ago. I admire his courage and his journalistic entreprenuership! So I'm looking forward to expanding the conversation about issues related to race, culture, politics and poverty here with CTW, at the Morning News and now with South Dallas News.

The first column, by the way, deals with the laws that are going into effect in Dallas, Austin and throughout the state that regulate payday and auto-title lenders. You can read it here...

Dr. Frederick Haynes, III, pastor of Friendship West Baptist Church, in an earlier column reveals that now banks are getting into the short term lending business, at interest rates as high as 365% - certainly lower than 500%, but, come on!

"One of the most egregious exploitations is an emerging trend among major banks to offer advance deposit loans or bank payday loans. When the bank repays itself, the customer is left with about half of the monies from that deposit, forcing yet another cycle of loan and interest charges to cover other living expenses. Although Wells Fargo was the first major bank to offer this type of loan, Fifth Third Bank, Regions Financial and U.S. Bank all now offer these loans."

"Only bank customers with direct deposits from employers or government benefits have access to these loans. Nearly 25 percent of the transactions occurred with Social Security recipients. Further, older customers were 2.6 times more likely than others to use this type of loan."

"If you’re thinking that this loan sounds like a street corner payday loan, you’d be right. Just like storefront payday loans, these newer bank payday loans charge triple digit interest too. A key difference is that while 17 states and the District of Columbia have enacted interest rate caps of 36 percent or less, federally regulated banks appear somehow exempt from state laws."

While we're making progress, this is a fight that's far from being won!

Ahhh, A Once Proud Party...

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:00:00 +0000

Wayman Tisdale (1964-2009) - An Inspiration Any Day of the Week!

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 11:00:00 +0000

Perhaps this isn't the way to start the week. It is if it inspires us to be more grateful and joyful.

I confess that I didn't know Wayman Tisdale's story. I knew a couple of things - he was a terrific basketball player who happened to be a popular jazz musician. I also knew that one of the young men who grew up at the church I pastored played in his group occasionally.

After watching an ESPN documentary about him I found out that I was wrong about the first thing I knew: Wayman Tisdale was a terrific jazz guitarist who had a great career in the NBA. I didn't know about his enthusiasm, his joy and his courage. And knowing those things make it seem appropriate to start off the week with his story.

Usually, when you see something like this you hear people say 'His story is more than cancer'. But without Tisdale's bout with cancer you miss his story. I LOVE multi-talented people who don't try and choose between their talents. But Wayman Tisdale's life was a devotion to excellence to the sport in which he made his living and the art through which he made his life. And when he diagnosed with cancer the infectious joy with which he lived his life and his pursuit of excellence never seemed to wane.

Wayman Tisdale died in May of 2009 at the age of 44. The year before his died he said, "Nothing can change me," Tisdale told The Associated Press, "You go through things. You don't change because things come in your life. You get better because things come in your life." It's just hard to not be inspired by that kind of hope and determination.

I was deeply moved and greatly challenged by Tisdale's story, by his talent, his faith and by his courage. As a cancer survivor, I know how hard it is to maintain that equilibrium when you're confronted with your mortality. But I also know that something to which you can be devoted beyond your illness, your trust in God and mustering the courage to live a moment at a time, is the only way you can make it.

Come to think of it, that's not a bad way to start a Monday...or any other day, for that matter.

By the way, here's an example of Tisdale's music...

For Those Who Would Change the Wind

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 11:00:00 +0000

Ed Sullivan

1902-1974

Television Host, Writer, Entertainer

"If you do a good job for others, you heal yourself at the same time, because a dose of joy is a spiritual cure. It transcends all barriers."

How Quickly They Forget!

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 11:00:00 +0000

Is Frisco More Concerned with It's Citizens Than Dallas is Theirs?

noreply@blogger.com (Gerald Britt) — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 11:00:00 +0000

Watch this...

Good for Frisco. Good for its city council and good for its citizens! The citizens stood up for themselves and the council put the welfare and the well being of its citizens above the interests of business. Maybe it doesn't happen every time in Frisco...but it happened this time.

I wonder if Dallas is paying attention?

What am I getting at? Here's what I'm getting at...

The Frisco City Council, in effect, told a battery recycler that it's presence was no longer compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. It represented a health hazard. It was close to schools, residences and was, in general, prohibited the property value and growth of the surrounding area. Granted, the battery recycler was there first and granted the neighborhood had grown up around the area. But, residents decided that this was no longer a hazard they wanted to risk; no longer an eyesore they wanted to see daily.

And Frisco's city council responded.

No cries of being ant-business. No cries of bullying. No one telling Frisco neighbors to just go somewhere else. No one called them whiners or called them ungrateful. No one questioned their morality.

My mind raced back to June of last year, at Dallas' City Hall.

I and a few supporters of a zoning ordinance to regulate the operation of payday lenders, were exulting in another victory. The zoning ordinance, the second in as many months, passed unanimously.

But I also noticed, had spoken to, the owners of Gold Metals, a scrap metal recycler in South Dallas. This heavy industrial business is located across the street from a residential neighborhood. The neighborhood is one of concentrated poverty and majority black. Abutting the homes in the area are clubs (dives really), some open late for 'business', others abandoned. Gold Metals shares it's side of the street with other metal recyclers, concrete recyclers and liquor stores.

In one of the most amazing turn around of civic concern, the council voted to allow Gold Metals to EXPAND its business!

There are eerily predictable similarities between the Frisco city council meeting and the one in Dallas last summer: Gold Metals had its supporters there. There were employees who talked about their jobs; there were supporters to testify as to their corporate neighborliness; they talked about their long presence in the area (35 years).

Unlike Frisco, there weren't very many there in opposition. I hadn't signed up to speak on the issue because I didn't know the issue was on the agenda. The council representative for the area had 'hidden' the item on the agenda and had assured the residents of the area that there was no need to show up, because she would take care of everything...at the meeting she made the motion to give the recycler the additional land they needed to operate.

There is another difference between the Frisco/Dallas council meetings - the residents were in this area first! It's an area in which I spent me early childhood. I first went to the drive-in movie on the spot were the recyclers are.

Suffice it to say that was more than 35 years ago...

I've written before about CitySquare's partnership with Unify South Dallas and our efforts to get the recycling operations moved. While we've not given up, we've seen the power of organized money trump the welfare of organized citizens - especially when those citizens are poor and black.

I can't be envious of the citizens of Frisco. They acted as citizens and they did what they were supposed to do. I can't be angry at the batter recycle plant owners, or their supporters. They too acted as citizens and did what they were supposed to do. Both in the court of public opinion and by participating in the political process they achieved an outcome that favored the residents. That is the way it's supposed to work. The interests of residents should come first.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.”

By the same token, what took place at Dallas' City Hall, the interests of business trumped the interests of residents who want to see their neighborhood redeveloped. They want a place where families will repopulate the area - some of the same families who fled to nicer parts of Dallas when highways cut the community in two and heavy industry drove down property values. It can't be done when your neighbor across the street is a scrap yard, contaminating the very ground upon which it sets - and, arguably your property across the street!

In Frisco, the rights of residents trumped the rights of business owners. In Dallas last year, just the opposite happened. Frisco trumped Dallas in the concern it showed for its citizens.

Come to think of it, maybe I am a little envious...and ashamed.