" Razing the Grotto ": Exposing the Politics of Deceit, Intolerance, Prejudice and Common Sense.

The Objective of this Blog

2008-08-27T15:08:00.000-07:00

This is my first attempt to communicate with a large number
of people via the internet I am certain that you will enjoy
this journey into my mind. As it is too complex to be explained
away in simple terms, suffice it to say that hardly a day goes
by that I don’t fall upon some tidbit of idiocy, hypocrisy,
tarnished notion, misplaced directive, or act of stupidity.
Most, fall in the realm of ‘well-do- gooders’ who have their
own simplified version of the universe and hold it out as an
umbrella for all of us to stand under. The problem is that
when you stand to close, you run the risk of being drawn into
narrow mindedness and intolerance, often masquerading as truth.

There is no end to the amount of exposition and the infinite number
of topics that I intend to broach. I will often switch back and forth
between the pseudo intellectual and the ignorant sidewinder,both,
up to their heads in crap, but determined to find an audience.

I view my purpose much as the Sunday drunk longs for his 40 oz.
before the stores open; the need is there, but nary a drop of
satisfaction can be found. Perhaps you may even view this indulgence
in terms of the expression “all dressed up and nowhere to go.”

Alas, I am dressed up and I do have somewhere to go. I also have
something to do and that is too reach out to the hundreds, thousands
of our kind who long for a bit of sophistication in life.

I do not subscribe to the notion that the vast number of us are
inherently naive, therefore it becomes impossible to educate on any
mass scale and that any effort to do so would be met with a resistance
comparable to swallowing a cucumber.

While we are certainly prone to dim-witted behavior from time to time,
the average person would certainly object to being classified or grouped
into this type of category. For certain, it’s not pleasant and this is
the exact reason a sounding board from both ends would benefit us all.

Many of our actions and behaviors toward others may not be conscious
acts of malice or a willful aim to disparage an individual or group;
nevertheless, the result is often the same as if the exercise were
deliberate.

If we allow ourselves to categorically ignore that which we know to be
wrong and do nothing about it, then we are complicit in creating an
unsavory environment, whether intentional or not. At the opposite extreme,
any good that comes from such ‘lack of action’ may have unintended
consequences to which we cannot lay claim.

We are not pawns in the conduct of our lives and the way we coexist
with our neighbor. We do have choices. Conscious or unconscious acts
influence our world and the way we view it. Choices allow us to chose
freely and the freedom to act without coercion carries a responsibility:
thoughtful and considerate deliberation on points of agreement as well as
dissension.

This is the very essence of what this sight hopes to achieve. So if
you find some of my opinions annoying, tell me so. If I hit the mark,
give me a pat on the back. If I’m way off course or completely out of
line, I want the feedback on that also. I’m here to offer opinion on
various topics, but I’m also here to learn. I want that to be a life
long process and I promise I won’t cower or pull back from my stated
viewpoint in the face of opposition; yet, that very dissonance may
be a pivotal point to reexamine my position on issues.

I don’t know and I can’t say how I’ll react as this site engages more
and more interaction. For now, let’s just get on to the first topic
at hand.

Americans and their Love of Heroes

2008-08-26T05:36:00.000-07:00

I can't speak for other countries, but Americans have a love affair with
"redemption". We lionize sports heroes who regularly ingest or inject banned substances, watch while they lie to Congress, watch while they get inducted into the sports hall of fame, pay outrageous amounts to go watch their team mates also play while under the influence, watch them brawl, act like children and get in trouble with the law, many of which are doing the same thing, and then in turn sluff it off as though its to be expected.

We elect and reelect corrupt politicians and shady office holders whom we know to be ethically challenged, deeply flawed and often rotten at the core, and then we wonder why the system seems broken. The question is, Do we care? I don't think so. Here's why.

We are willing to build up our promising heroes, and likewise willing to tear them down, but we won't let them stay down, just long enough to vet our collective anger. Then we reinstate them into our good graces, give them another chance, often before they've learned a lesson from their previous choices. In short, we condone bad behavior as though it were an expected ritual, a type of rite of passage. Then the same behavior often occurs again. This time we take it with indignation, perhaps an affront to our choice, which was of course, to forgive and forget.

The problem with this approach is that very few lessons are learned by these people because they know, what we don't realize. We have lionized them and given them value far beyond their bad behavior. So they go on with that behavior, hide it, don't talk about it, and don't learn from it. They do this because we're more than willing to let them. They realize their entertainment value to us and for that we are willing to pay a hefty price for their redemption. They know this, we don't.

The bad behavior that so often characterizes our heroes is related to our willingness to accept it. That we do, to the point where the behavior is no longer an isolated event, but becomes a game plan. In the overall scheme of the individual's play book, they will play, deceitfully adhering to bad behavior while their adoring fans, the public, only find out when its too late. They know this. We obviously don't or we simply don't care. Which is it?

What we fail to recognize is the underlying culture that breeds deceitful behavior and the shallow circumstances under which it can be excused away. We use any justification possible to feel good about our choices, even in the face of overwhleming evidence to the contrary. And once again, we let them go on with their wrong.

We just touch the surface of these people, just enough to stroke their egos, but never challenge them to expose the real side. Too often, our heroes are fragile. Too much introspection and they come undone, often at tremendous costs. Although we idolize people in all walks of life, entertainers, celebrities, and politicians seem to be the focal point of aberrant behavior; They are definitely in the spotlight more, but fallen heroes are replete in every industry and in every lifestyle, witness Enron.
George Bush is a another examaple.

We knew this man was in his own special way, corrupt from the start. We knew his oil background and a laundry list of items that were questionable from the start. We ignored it because we needed a "hero" in the deepest American sense and we got what we asked for and then we went back and did it again. Once more, we didn't care to investigate or delve too closely into the undelying culture which breeds this type of deceit. Or maybe we just didn't care?

We take at face value, the traffic of deceit and watch it unfold in varying degrees until the evil implicit in its advance becomes whole, and the pie is ruined. We are never willing to admit that these acts are of themselves the product of a culture that tolerates them.

We continually elect and reelect corrupt politicians, promote incompetent people to positions of high authority. name crooks to head sensitive departments, and the list goes on. Who indeed represents the fool? They or us? I would gander that these so-called heroes have the last laugh, and rightfully so.

Americans need to engage in more critical thinking. That thinking requires that we stop taking every thing at face value and start delving deeper into the psyche of those, we desire to lionize. It could save us lot of time in the future, not to mention the loss of face to a global world that until recently, admired us.

The Jewish Classification: Are they a "race" or a "religion"

2008-08-19T06:44:00.000-07:00

I have always been confused about the classification of Jews. Does being Jewish mean that you're a member of a "race, or is being Jewish simply a "religious" affiliation.

The definition of ethnicity and race add to the dilemma.

Much of it is owing to conflicting views of Jews as a "race" of people or a people bound by a common religious doctrine and codified under the term
"Jewish". This intermingling and common usage of the term "Jewish" is indeed confusing.

As I was writing this post, I had to change my explanations several times because of the "gray" area that does exist when examining the use of the word "Jew". Are we talking about a "race" of people or a "religion?" That distinction through history and common usage has become blurred. I'm not certain that it has ever been clear as is pointed out in the many contrasting views on the state of being "Jewish".

Here are some viewpoints as taken from various sources and hence assimilated into this post.

2) Being Jewish is not a race because Jews do not share one common ancestry or biological distinction. People of many different races have become Jewish people over the years.

Note: This is both true and untrue. owing to intermingling. mixing and conversion, Modern day Jews might not be classified as a race in today's parlance. They do have different physical characteristics, but so do Blacks, whites, Latinos etc. A better indicator might be a common ancestral origin. : however, with so much mixing and conversions to judaism during modern times, the "ancestral origin" factor in the race definition, could only apply to the original descendants of Abraham. (hebrews). Here is a very short, good and concise genealogy on this subject.

3)Being Jewish is not a nationality

Being Jewish is not a nationality because Jews have been dispersed throughout the world for almost two thousand years. People of many different nationalities are Jewish. Being Jewish is like being a citizen of a religious movement. Jews are a people of shared destiny and purpose and open to conversion to their beliefs, regardless of birthright.

4)Being Jewish means you are a part of a religious movement. However, the great majority of Jews become a part of the religious movement through birth and not due to their beliefs or actions. In this way, being Jewish is indeed like being a citizen of a religious movement.

A Jewish identity is automatically bestowed on the babies of Jewish mothers (according to Orthodox and Conservative Judaism) and of Jewish mothers or fathers (according to Reform Judaism). This Jewish identity stays with them throughout life even if they don't actively practice Judaism.

If a person is not born Jewish, he/she can undergo the process of conversion to become a Jew. A person who was not born Jewish or has not gone through the conversion process is not considered a Jew even if he or she believes in Judaism and observes Jewish practices. The conversion process is very meaningful because it is the only way for a non-Jew to become Jewish.

Another viewpoint actually defines being Jewish as a religion and a race, This one was presented by a Rabbi.

5)The Jews are both a race and religion.

While a Christian is defined as one who follows the teachings of Jesus, a Jew is defined as one born from a Jewish mother or converted according to Jewish Law. That being said - a person remains a member of the Jewish nation for the rest of their life regardless of what religious practices that person chooses to follow/reject. And yes, as a nation we have our own culture, foods, land, and even diseases.

Now, this viewpoint is a cross between the previous two; however, it doesn’t address the question as to Jews being a race since there are different types of Jews ie-Ethopian Jews

it is a religion in that Judaism is a belief system with ritual and practice, and an underlying philosophy aimed at a connection to the divine and an adherence to divine command, but it is a race in that membership in the system (even without belief!) is passed through a genetic connection -- you cannot choose not to be Jewish if you are born into it. However, because Judaism recognizes conversion, the religion cannot be purely racial (you cannot convert to another race). Therefore, it is easiest to say that it is a religion with racial/genetic components.

This viewpoint addresses the diversity of Jews and signals that being jewish is not a race because: “If the mother is a Jew, her child is a Jew. It is a religion that follows the mother. However, it is not a race or an ethnic group, because Jews come from several different ethnic groups.

Jewish” refers to the religion of Judaism in which the ancient Hebrews practiced and of which are its modern day descendants, save those that are Jewish through conversion, which one must undergo to officially practice the religion of “judaism” or in common terms refer to themselves as being jewish( ie-Whoppi Goldberg)

Now this Israeli American whose father is a Rabbi might have a problem with the
so-called “conversion of which i speak: He states,
“Jew can mean ethnic group, religion, or culture. No Jew says that the Jews are a race, we're Caucasian , but we're of the Jewish ethnic group. You can convert to my religion, but the Orthodox Jews will not recognize you as a true Jew. The Blacks who convert to Judaism are confused. You have to be born into it.

Another Viewpoint:

Jews are semitic people who are related to all the other semitic people of the mid east. You can say some Jews are Caucasian and some are not. But the original Jews were not white. Hundreds of years ago many east europeans converted to Judiasm in East Europe. Judiaism is not a race, but people have treated them as if they are a race.

Another Viewpoint:

“The Jew that you see today is truly a Khazar(white jew)of europe meaning a convert. Look at Ethiopain jews when they were discovered; the books that they had were very old.” Authors’Note: Khazars were Mongoloid looking-a turkic people.This wouldn’t qualify them as being white.

“Askenazi Jews are mostly European in origin while the sephardic/Mizrahi Jews are middle Eastern and African.”

Although there are only approximately 10 million Jews in the world, today the religion is split up considerably. All Jews come under the strands of Ashkenazi (Eastern European) and Sephardi (Spanish) referring to their origin, however these only change customs and traditions. There are two divisions within Judaism that significantly differ: Orthodoxy and Reform Judaism, from which has stemmed Liberal, Conservative and other different types. There is also a division under the Orthodox label with ultra-orthodox and Hasidic Jews.

Why are there Arabs in Africa? Genocide in the Sudan!

2008-08-09T17:43:00.000-07:00

Many of you may be unaware that there are Arabs in Africa. Yes Arabs! Unfortunately some of these Arabs have taken to genocide against Native Black Africans, as exist in the Sudan, backed by the President of Sudan,(although he denies it) and funded by China through its delivery of weapons that are being used to kill in Darfur( the Sudan). The Chinese are also after oil and a way to move millions of their citizens to the African Continent( say "overpopulation"); however, that's another topic.

Briefly, so that we can understand the present state of the Sudan, its Arab Africans and their uprising against Native Africans, we need to know why there are Arabs in Africa in the first place.

Geographic Connections

The Arabs of the Middle East have very old connections to the African continent, and indeed more than half the Arab world exists in Africa. As a result of this (in terms of area, and possibly population ) from Egypt, Sudan, and Eritrea in the east to Mauritania in the west, much of the North African population are Berbers (a separate, native ethnic group speaking an Afro-Asiatic language) or Arabized Berbers.

The Islamic world covers even more area,( Nigeria in the west and many other West African nations). So this intermingling of peoples on the African continent, along with the spread of Islam, has resulted in large populations of African Arabs covering a vast area of Africa.

Present-day Sudan is home to millions of Arabs, with 40% of the population identifying themselves under the ethnic group of 'Arabs' even though the option of 'Afro-Arabs' is also available. Note that Afro-Arabs within the Middle East itself are for the most part descendants of African slaves who were brought there during the Arab slave-trade.

East Africa is home to a significant Afro-Arab population, especially along the Swahili coast, such as in Zanzibar, Mombasa, Lamu, Malindi, the Comoros, Bagamoyo, and Ujiji.[5][6]

The Darfur region of Sudan

The Darfur conflict is among Arab and non-Arab speaking black Africans of many ethnicities in Sudan.

Northern Arabs, including Northern Sudan, identify with Islam, the Arabic and Bedouin philosophy. Southern Sudanese align with other non Arab nations in both ideology and religion. As told by Makau Mutua in the July 14, 2004 edition of The Christian Science Monitor: ”The blacks in the south either hew to their ancestral traditional African religions or have converted to Christianity.” Durfar is the exact opposite of the genocide of Bosnian Muslims by Serbian Christians. Sudanese Muslims, the Janjaweed, are perpetrating genocide on African traditionalists and Christians.

Please watch this video:

Black Arabs in Sudan have more in common with their Asian Brothers in Indonesia than their neighbors to the south. Black Africans in Sudan have more in common with their white brothers in Europe and North America than with their neighbors to the north. What the West needs to understand is that the color of the skin has absolutely nothing to do with the conflict in Darfur.

In order to understand Darfur, we need to put the conflict in terms of its historic context, something the media has neglected in it's coverage. Darfur is but one example of Arab racism toward non-Arabs within the broader "Arab world." The Darfur genocide, might be viewed not only as a case of an Islamic jihad, but also as a case of Arab racism and should be seen as parallel to Saddam Hussein's genocide against Kurds and the Algerian government's repression of the Kaybles.

The acts being committed against Black Darfurians are primarily based upon classical "jihad" and anti-African racism.

However, there is also a political/economic element that has added further fuel to the fire. Khartoum has used this element to further encourage the Jangjaweed militias to murder and pillage. The ilk of the Janjaweed and other nomadic Arab tribes have always been given preferential treatment by Khartoum over settled Black African Darfurian farmers. This is why government positions were attacked by Darfurians in the West. The Janjaweed militia are therefore not only motivated by Islam, and racial hatred, but are in a prime position for a power grab over some of the sparse arable sections of the West.

Nonetheless, the concept of "Jihad" (Holy War) should be viewed as a strong undercurrent behind the governments support for the Janjaweed in Darfur.

"Jihad" is likely a more strong policy consideration of the Bashir( President of Sudan-An Arab) regime. The Islamic government of Sudan was never prepared to recognize the self-determination of any other people in Sudan. This is the common thread that Islamic states have shared throughout history in terms of ethnic and religious minorities: the non-recognition of their self-determination. Self-determination does not have to mean secession or statehood, but does necessitate some level of autonomy.

The self-determination of religious and ethnic minorities is an anathema to the Islamic state. This is an essential concept of Islam. Non-Muslims are "dhimmi". Thus it is of no surprise to see Muslim violence against non-Muslim's in Muslim countries, whether it be in Sudan or in Iraq.

The Arab role In the African Slave Trade and Sudan's importance.

Along ancient Saharan trade routes, 1,300 years of shared history that have mingled the faiths, cultures and skin tones of Arabs and Africans have left another, more vicious legacy: Arab-African slavery that has endured as long as the two peoples have been together, leaving black Africans fighting perceptions of themselves as lesser beings and of Arabs as the civilizing, conquering force.

A "Genocide" Confined to Sudan.

Today, the old roles are playing out at their most extreme in Sudan's Darfur region, with murderous results: Arab horseman clutching AK-47s raze non-Arab African villages and drive off and kill the villagers, in what rights groups call an ethnic-cleansing campaign backed by Sudan's Arab-led government.

In Sudan, this racism is the spark setting fire to Darfur. Up to 80,000 black African villagers are believed to have died, many slain by Arab Janjaweed nomads competing with them for a fertile zone shrinking under desertification and by a minority Arab government accustomed to keeping power by killing opponents.

With power and land at issue, Sudan's central government "is stoking racial and ethnic animus more than it ever has in Darfur's history," said Eric Reeves, a professor at Smith College in Massachusetts and one of the leading academic experts on Sudan. "It's the animating feature of the war ... on African tribal groups," Reeves said.

In southern Sudan, the common word for non-Arab Africans today among the Arab elite remains "abid," or slave. In Darfur, in Western Sudan, non-Arab Africans often are referred to as "zurga," which translates as "black," but is thought of more as a slur, Reeves said.

It's important to note that only in Sudan are the African-Arab differences spilling out in blood. Across the Sahara and its edges, the Sahel, most of the coexistence is peaceful, linked by shared cultures and by Islam.

Sudan has long been one of the anchors of the Arab-African slave trade. Its appetite for slaves remains such that a rebel group in neighboring Uganda that calls itself the Lord's Resistance Army is alleged to trade African children to the Sudanese for an automatic weapon each.

A Difference: Traditional American Concepts of "Racism" versus "Racism" against Black Africans as practiced in Sudan(Darfur).

Most Americans are used to the term "racism" as directed against people with darker skin tones, mainly "Blacks', although certainly not limited. Asians and Hispanic cultures occasionally suffer this injustice. This is "racism" mainly in terms of skin color, where the predominating aspect is skin tone, followed by a host of stereotypes and disparaging attributes that follow.

Now this point could be argued, but that's not the issue here. American forms of racism are directly and implicitly founded and derive from differences in skin color. Color is the dominant villain and a darker color, as with most cultures, almost always guarantees victimization, where racism is practiced.

Most of us don't undertstand the full parimeters of race, by definition. This link will clarify it.

In Darfur and elsewhere, intermarriage between Arab and non-Arab Africans over the centuries has become so common that physical differences have ebbed or disappeared. The skin of the Arab Janjaweed militiamen is as dark as the African villagers they hunt.

"Many generations of intermarriage have ensured there's not really a physiological difference, Often, however, the Janjaweed "clings to the notion of Arab racial identity. It's racism where there is no racial difference."

Slavery-An Ancient Institution

When Americans hear the term "slavery," often images of southern plantations come to mind. People tend to forget that the African slave trade was widespread. The African slave trade depleted the home continent's population and blended African cultures with others worldwide, after which, much of the original culture was lost.

Experts estimate that over four and a half centuries, about 25 million Africans were systematically enslaved. About half of those people were kidnapped from their West African homes, hauled across the Atlantic Ocean, and sold to European settlers throughout the Americas. In addition to the southern United States, slave destinations included ports and plantations in the Caribbean and Brazil. A similar slave trade, conducted by Arab and African traders over roughly the same period, captured about 12 million from the continent's east coast and shipped them to the Arab world.

Slavery is nothing new to humankind. Enslaving others in servitude has been part of human culture—at one place or another—for milennia. But, unlike others, this era of slavery was the most widespread and culturally devastating. Some experts argue that by removing what may have been half of the continent's population, the depletion resulted in the slower social and economic growth still affecting many African countries today.

So how did such large-scale trade using people as a commodity come about?

Between 800 and 1500 A.D., advances in ship design and navigation techniques fueled European exploration in and around Africa. Portuguese, Spanish, English, and Dutch mariners established regular trade routes. Africa's metals (especially gold), feathers, and ivory were highly desirable to buyers in Europe and Asia. During that time, some African rulers customarily kept and sold human slaves, who were also African. At some point, those local slaves became accepted as international commodities.

Rants and Raves(Tidbits) You be the Judge

2008-08-05T15:09:00.000-07:00

I think I can classify this under the part about Common Sense or the lack thereof...

I keep seeing these commercial with from Vets for freedom talking about how well the surge has worked and then people saying " so stay there till the job's done."
ow they've even put us on notice that they don't want us there!

Bullshit...! Let snot stay there one more moment than necessary. They don't want us there, which was recently revealed. We went there under false pretenses, to which Mr. Cheney and Mr, Bush have not been held accountable' perhaps an indictment by the world tribunal for "war crimes" would do just that...

People that want us to stay there are only interested in two things
1) That America not lose a war and lose face- heh...I've got news, the loss of face is well documented, the lost of the war is still a mystery. (Oh...Oh... we still don't have the oil)...yet, but latest news says the big oil companies are still trying to nab it!

2)The appearance that leaving Iraq means that the men and women who have died during this invasion and problematic occupation would have given their life in vain..

Well I know this sounds callous, but yeah...I think that's right, and guess who was the architect of their deaths?

Staying in Iraq to honor the memory of fallen comrades, while invoking jingoistic emotion, is flawed reasoning. It's plain and simple. Sometimes soldiers do die in vain when they have corrupt and unresponsive leaders. We have the full house here in America.

When we leave Iraq, they'll fall back to killing each other as usual, such is the curse of fundamentalist ideology, just around the bend, down the road, detoured but not deterred.

2) Did you hear about the 12 year old girl who was given a car for three months of perfect school attendance. Ever wonder why kids are so needy for immediate gratification? What kind of a statement does that make to a generation that thrives on praise and requires accolades for the smallest achievement.

3) What about the guy who fetched the apple core that Tiger Woods was eating and preserved it, not touching it, by putting it in a baggy. last I heard, it was being auctioned on e-bay for thousands. Can we say....can we truly say...."dah? " We are true blue fools of a larger nature." Only in America!

White and Black males-Can They be Friends?

2008-08-04T02:41:00.000-07:00

This topic is more narrowly focused than the larger topic of "male on male friendships" in general. I'm asking a question for a targeted group "black and white males." Another post will explore the larger issue of male to male friendships, and gay to straight males and their viability within our culture. Note: Because the issue is applicable to both sites, this post can also be found at www.theconflictedmale.com

When I first approached this topic, I began by going on a hunt for research relating specifically to "Black and White Males-Can they be Friends? I soon found all kinds of variations on this topic, many of them sexual, but none dealing specifically with the question.

Many off shots of the term did generalize about connections between white and black males such as articles by varied authors and a book by Dr. Keith Boykin dealing with "black men on the "down low", the movie, "White men Can't Jump", the "National Association of White and Black Men Together" and all kinds of derivations, relating to their co-existence together. None of it answered the question, "Black and White Males-Can They be Friends".

Some of it went into cultural differences, the sources of conflict between white and black males and various assundry viewpoints and analysis on specific differences, perceived or real. None of my research brought up the exact connection I was looking for. It may be out there, but I couldn't find any non-sexual content that delved into the topic. Perhaps its not racy enough. Perhaps my combination of keywords and phrases was insufficient to carry the topic. Maybe the topic is too complex to be narrowed down to specifics.

With that in mind, I'll give you my opinion. Black and White males can be friends if both are willing to throw aside cultural differences and greet each other in the raw. So what does this mean? It means simply that there is no magic to black and white males having meaningful and lasting friendships. As a larger extinction on this topic, it would follow that black and white males have the capacity to show affection toward each other.

Being bi-racial, this issue seems trivial to me, but even today, I witness limited relations between white and black males, save those in which both groups are forced by circumstance to co-exist in a work, educational or social setting; however, living close to a university community, I do see a higher degree of camaraderie between black and white males than exist in the larger demographics of the populace.

In order for white and black males to form lasting bonds and become true friends, both, must work against a history of mistrust which is the framework of separation between the races, in general. Together, they have to embrace commonalities which exist within the gender and not differences which exist in the larger scheme of racial polarity.

If I estimate your value as my friend based solely upon your race, and the inherent baggage from either side, then I'm drawing from a history replete with distrust on both sides. That said, it becomes impossible to move beyond that point if I'm unwilling to see you in a different light. When I begin to see you as a friend and not a white or black friend, simply a friend, then the whole situation changes. Hope exist in that moment and the bonds of friendship are no longer as remote.

This may appear to be a simple generalization in the larger scheme of race relations, between white and black males, but I don't find it that complex. As with any topic, it's possible to break it down into so many academic variables that the simple response seems trite, but the answer doesn't require rocket science. It's simply a question posed to get all of us to think about it. Some questions do have fairly simple answers. I believe this is one of them.

The Chinese In Africa: Another Potential Colonizer?

2008-07-30T04:24:00.000-07:00

China is actively seeking to colonize the whole of Africa: Through an aggressive plan which puts hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars into the hands of Africa's leaders, many of them corrupt( read Mugabe, the Sudan),the Chinese are supplying arms for the genocide movement in Darfar, supplanting local economies with Chinese production, recolonizing Chinese Workers to Africa and gradually establishing a new homeland for millions of Chinese citizens.

A staggering 750.000 Chinese have settled into Africa over the last decade. One source estimates that the Chinese will need to send some 300 million Chinese to Africa to solve problems with over population and pollution.

A few years back, the Chinese government reckoned that economic success could not continue unless the country proved able to increase its international political standing, mainly because of the need to secure raw materials supply contracts to feed to its rapidly expanding industrial sector. Unfortunately, relations with the big Asian players (India, Japan and Russia) were and remain tense: historic rivalries and territorial claims mean that the country is still deeply mistrusted by them.

Given this, starting from around 2005 China decided to focus on Africa, tightening relations with those countries that are shunned by the international community:

China isn't doing all of this out of the kindness of its heart. In fact, most might say that China is seeking new markets for its export-driven economy—now the world's fourth largest. In addition, China wants unimpeded—even exclusive—access to Africa's abundant natural resources, especially sources of energy. And don't forget: as a rising power, China is also keen on gathering political influence in Africa.

Arguably, nothing is driving China into Africa more than its quest to satisfy its insatiable appetite for oil and gas. For the past decade, the Chinese economy has expanded annually at near double-digit rates, requiring an enormous influx of natural resources, especially energy.

China is now the world's second largest energy consumer, leading Beijing to Africa's door in an effort—like the U.S.—to find new sources of energy and reduce its reliance on volatile Middle Eastern sources of oil and natural gas. Today, Africa provides China with 30 percent of its energy imports, meeting 5 percent of China's energy needs and rivaling the Middle East as a source of Chinese energy.

Beijing is building ties with African energy suppliers through investment, aid, high-level visits, and a strict policy of "noninterference in internal affairs" that some African governments, under international scrutiny, find comforting. The People's Republic of China has invested billions in resource development and infrastructure—and written off billions more in debt—to help build friendly relationships with oil-rich African countries. For instance:

Some points to consider:

* China has $3 billion invested in Nigerian oil, now the world's eighth largest oil exporter.
* Beijing has at least $3 billion invested in the Sudanese energy sector, for a total of $10 billion since the 1990s.
* In Angola, another African energy giant, a $2 billion credit line for much-needed infrastructure projects secured Chinese access to highly coveted offshore oil fields. Today, Angola is China's biggest oil supplier, outpacing China's previous largest supplier, Saudi Arabia.

China also sees Africa as a potential market for its goods. China–Africa trade soared to $56 billion last year, an increase of 40 percent over 2005, bringing critical revenue to some of the world's poorest nations. The Chinese economy is still export-driven, and Beijing must continue to find and develop new markets to ensure that its economy continues to grow and draw foreign direct investment.

Today, there are over 800 Chinese companies operating in nearly all African nations. There are stories that in some cases, market penetration and influence are more important than profits for Chinese companies operating in Africa.

Beijing has also written off at least $1 billion in African debt, and more write-offs are expected. The World Bank believes that the Chinese import–export bank has loans valued at nearly $13 billion in infrastructure projects in Africa alone. As a matter of fact, the African Development Bank has chosen to hold its annual summit in Shanghai this spring in recognition of China's increasingly pivotal role in the region.

One of the places that China is seeking political influence at the expense of others is Africa. Think about it: With over 50 nations, the countries of Africa represent more than one-quarter of the United Nations General Assembly—a significant voting bloc.

Friendly relations with African nations can bring favorable results for Chinese efforts at the United Nations or U.N. agencies such as the World Trade Organization. They can even reduce the number of states that diplomatically recognize Taiwan: There are five countries in Africa that still recognize Taiwan. For example, in recent years, African states have been pivotal in preventing Taiwan from joining the World Health Organization and in tabling a condemnation of Chinese human rights practices at the U.N.'s Commission on Human Rights.

Today, there are over 800 Chinese companies operating in nearly all African nations. Market penetration and influence may be on equal footing profits for Chinese companies operating in Africa. That remains to be seen, but China is a devious regime, without bounds, and with one objective, to expand beyond its overcrowded frontiers.

Not everyone is optimistic or impressed by China's presence in Africa. Many Africans themselves are skeptical, viewing the Chinese presence with a mixture of anticipation and dread. As China continues to court Africa, how it views the people of Africa, will be a telling story to Beijing's future prominence or its perceived role as another imperalistic colonizer. One thing is clear, Africans don't want to go down that road again, but will their leaders make the right choice?

"Quick Notes": Ethanol and Rising Food Costs and the " Pickens Plan"

2008-07-22T00:01:00.000-07:00

This is one of my frequent points of interest that I put under the "Common Sense" category, although, clearly the sense of it is not that common and not that well explained to the American consumer.

"The recent spike in food costs is all related to energy. Corn based Ethanol incentives are behind the rising costs of food. Why? Corn is an ingredient at some point at every stage of production. A huge percentage of of foods, including dairy cows, chickens, cattle and all livestock eat corn feeds. In addition processed foods often include corn syrup."

This over emphasis on Ethanol as an energy alternative, while well intentioned, has obvious repercussions. We do indeed need to move away from the stranglehold of foreign oil. It permeates every faction of our society. Here's T Boone Pickens Plan to break the hold of foreign oil. Notice no mention is made of "Ethanol.

Young Black Males: What Has Gone Wrong?

2008-07-13T04:51:00.000-07:00

A certain percentage of Black Males have drifted far from Mainstream America, marginalized themselves of their own doing, skirted their responsibilities as fathers, become willing participants in crime, taken to higher incarceration rates in prison as opposed to getting a college education and in general become problems for society. If this continues, the emasculation of the black male will become reality. Witness an Atlanta Judge and his comdemnation.(The Cultural Strategist, blog Archive, April 24,2008)

I am a black male, okay biracial. I'm writing this article in the
hope and in part from the recent remarks brought to the forefront
by Barack Obama, that the black community needs to stop operating
with blinders on, open up their eyes and address "pipe dream mentality",
where sports is seen as the only way to succeed, while ignoring education.
Black America doesn't like to air its dirty laundry. Both Barack Obama and Bill Cosby have tred on uncomfortable ground in speeches that highlight problems with black males within our society; in specifics, the preoccupation with sports such as Basketball as the only means to achieve. Both Cosby and Obama's delivery is caustic but timely.

Barack likewise tuned into the misleading and detrimental effects of "rap" on black males, and its contribution to the sloven, carefree attitude of many young males, yes, even some young white males. Obama also spoke of the undo influence of Basketball, and in this context as well as my opinion, any popular sport, seeded in the black community and inordinately idiolized.

Sports and Rap compose the pipe dream construct as a way to escape poverty. Jesse Jackson didn't like Barack's comments and made it known through some nasty remarks of his own. Unfortunately, these remarks were picked up by a microphone that Jackson assumed to be off.

But the issue here is not about white males, they have their own set of problems. They also have much higher rates of matriculation through college and influence within our society. Now, before we go there, which is another topic, and we can point to past injustice all we want, but the issue is real- a sizable percentage of young black males lack the wherewithal, fortitude and drive to succeed in our society.

How many times can you walk down the street, go into a store, go anywhere for that matter, and you see Black Males behaving in a embarrassing manner? When you see them, how often do they appear to be "scowling," angry at the world? Unfortunately, this is more of the norm than exception. As bitter a pill this is to digest, it is present reality and effectively acts as a shackle about the necks of young and middle age black males.

The very actions of these males in trying to somehow make themselves seem 'unigue' or 'exotic', now make them prisoners of their own device.

I live in a neighborhood which borders the hood. Every day, and it never ceases to amaze me, how many aimless young black males are walking the street with no direction and with no sense of pride and self-esteem. If this continues we will most likely have two generations of black males lost to what I call "attitudinal suicide."

The black community cannot let this happen.We need to step up to the plate when we see wrong: when we see the elderly treated with disrespect by black males, when we see young blacks watching the school bus as it goes by them, when we see them congregating in gang" like groups, when we see them dress like old time sharecroppers, sloven by choice not by economics, when we hear disrespect toward women in rap lyrics and when street talk or Ebonics takes precedence over speaking the English language properly. These are just some of a multitude of actions that threaten the black community and the world community at large.

We are here as one, separate cultures, yet bound to a common humanity. That humanity must flow from every dimension of our civility toward each other. We need to address that which is 'poison' to our ranks, because the metastasizing effect of ignorance and neglect has long range implications for the race, for the nation and for the world.

Original Poetry: "The Laylords of Summer"

2008-07-10T11:34:00.000-07:00

They sit on the banks where a mighty river once flowed
and cry the tears of so many wrongs. Their bodies are
tanned, darkened to bronze, like taffy that flows in luxurious
waves. They stretch their already knowing forms to receive
the cool mist that rises.

They must extend further this year,
The end of a great satisfaction is near.

They relax in the felled patterns of lazy summer
wearing. Clothed, in the nonessentials, they lay beside
the other’s dream and speak of unkept treaties that
ravage the splendor where they once banked,
and speak in hushed tones that catch the air and fall on
silent ears.

They have seen the mighty river flow,
The mighty Colorado.

For a brief reminder, they imagine that the river rises:
that they can feel the flush of foam as it spews into the
treacherous ravines, leaving them awe inspired: so much
desired of the times when caution would move them back
up the banks. Now, they challenge what little is left of its
might.

If they return next season the river will be too low,
Destiny plays folly on their plans, takes bounty
on the dreams that flow.

Dark feet rub toes together to catch whatever it is,
before it is no more. They rush the moments of
simple pleasure: each outdoing the other in their
remembering. They touch, feel the ephemeral
wash that has caught them daydreaming.
They stretch for more.

This will be the last of the summers haunt,
beneath the towering wings that cover them
and pull together the shade. The last of something
that man has destroyed, that nature made.

Each holds back the tear that glazes from knowing
eyes. They put together their memories,
and signal,
their last goodbyes.

An Eagle Scout Lament:Boy Scouts of America: Shame and Intolerance

2008-07-07T04:40:00.000-07:00

I come from a very successful troop, both in its approach to Scouting, its matriculation of Eagle Scouts and the parental and financial commitment to our troop. We were Troop 916 of the Buckeye Council. Stark County, Ohio

Our Scoutmaster was a beefy male in his 30's who embodied the concept of tough yet compassionate discipline, possibly owing from his blue collar upbringing. He could be jovial and serious, disciplined yet playful, intelligent yet down to earth and most of all, we had a lot of fun. We were made up of steelworkers kids, doctors kids, and the mix in between. We were indeed varied and racially diverse.

Much of the fun and camaraderie that we had when we were off the serious tract would not be allowed in today's paranoid society> You see, we all wrestled with each other, sometimes gleefully rolling around in prolonged matches of spirit and exuberance. We laughed, boy did we laugh and there was nothing wrong with our play, then.

Today, that might be another matter. While not involved in the physical act of wrestling with us, since we were kids and our scoutmaster was a hirsute adult male, he did have a habit of pinning us down, tickling us until we couldn't stand it anymore and running the rough stubble of his beard over our faces. We hated that one, but it was all done in the spirit of commaraderie. Today, I relish that an adult could be so playful, clowning, like the little boy inside the man.

Now, he would be hauled off, locked up and charged under any number of statutes which have their base in the fear of child molestation, but much deeper, in the fear of open male to male expressions of friendship and affection. Although, it would be denied as a cause, the reality lives in the present.

So then, was I surprised to learn a while back that the Boy Scouts of America had taken to interpreting morality, based upon a heterosexual code of conduct. Put simply, Gay scouts were no longer welcome, and the implication was that the lifestyle itself was somehow in conflict with the Scout Oath. Don't confuse this with the twelve points below, these points aren't the problem.

There are twelve points which form the Scout Law > they are as follows:
A Scout is,
1)Trustworthy 2)Loyal 3)Helpful 4)Friendly 5)Courteous 6)Kind 7)Obedient
8)Cheerful 9)Thrifty 10)Brave 11)Clean and 10) Reverent.

Now, here's the Scout Oath or Promise, Guess where the problem rest.

"On my honor, I will do my best, to do my duty to God and my country. To obey the Scout Law. To help other people at all times. To keep myself physically strong, Mentally Awake and Morally Straight."

Got a clue? Yep, you got it. It's that "Morally Straight" part that gets the gay scouts in trouble. I don't even know if they're interpreting the word "straight" literally, as in "heterosexual". or merely the concept of being "morally straight" as inconsistent with a gay lifestyle.

During my passage through the ranks of Cub Scouts and through the ranks of Boy Scouts, finally culminating as an Eagle Scout, I never once encountered any openly gay talk or hostile talk, It just wasn't done. There probably were gay scouts, but that issue as well as the lifestyle was closeted. Perhaps, because it was assumed that all Scouts would assume their rightful place and carry out their duties, all,
within the framework of a heterosexual upbringing.

Now, in recent years they seem to have cared enough about it, to have opened a Pandora's box of hostility and resentment against Gay Scouts. What a ridiculous waste of time, as is any venture into this area. Being Gay simply has nothing to do with fulfilling the Scout oath. I find it deplorable that supposedly well meaning, concerned adults have seen fit to crucify those that are different.

For a well placed collection of views on this type of intolerance and a history of the Scout movement, please visit this site.

Independence Day-Freedom from Tyranny!

2008-07-04T04:06:00.000-07:00

Happy Independence Day, everyone!

Much as the founding fathers of this country sought to escape tyranny, we are faced with a similar situation in the administration of George W. Bush.

We have the power to change it and draw from it, the lessons of a better tomorrow. America is a repository of potential, of abiding hope and strength drawn from our past, indelibly etched in the collective psyche of its people. This is where true freedom abides: open, resolute, and borne of a shared dream.

That dream is rising again, a ways down the road, just around the bend, a new day is coming. Let's make it happen.

Now...go and watch a parade!

Politics: George W. Bush-"A legacy of Shame"

2008-06-23T14:51:00.000-07:00

I can't recall any president in modern times who has acted in a such a reckless and reprehensible manner as George.W.Bush. His actions bring me to believe that possibly he does have some underlying mental issues. No one person, especially the President could act with such wanton disregard of public opinion and the outcome of his actions. Is he for real? Is he balanced or way off center when it comes to his personal beliefs as weighed against the beliefs of the average American citizen.

Currently, George W. Bush ranks as one of the most, if not the most unpopular President in the recent history of record keeping. Polls now put his popularity at 29%, and yet he continues to get everything he wants from our newly elected do-nothing Congress.

They capitulate to his every desire and show little backbone in facing him down on issues that are obviously important to the American people; otherwise, they wouldn't have thrown out so many Republicans from the last Congress and elected a democratic majority.

Well tough luck on that issue. With their number's reduced, the Republican minority still rules the roost and supports the most unpopular and incompetent boss in our lifetime.

George Bush's fanatical pursuit of his own set of ideas in favor of the interest of the American people reminds me of child in a candy factory. His seeming religious fervor seems to put him to a mind set that he needs to spread democracy around the world and what better way to make money for his friends, the monied oil interests, than to start an unnecessary war over oil.

Only recently, it was revealed that after being Nationalized by Saddam Hussein some 36 years ago, several large oil companies are moving back into Iraq to claim their renewed stake in that country's oil. Coincidence?

My belief that George Bush doesn't get the large picture is not limited to this foolish war in Iraq, oh no, I find him incompetent on almost every front. His willingness to shield, resort to subterfuge, falsify, lie, deceive, and any manner of treachery, when it comes to protecting his interests is legendary. He is not a man for the country but a man for himself living in the country.

He should have been impeached, but our fearless Congress would have none of that, although we attempted that over the single act of Bill Clinton's indiscretion, while the Republican's were in power.

An extended rant as a tribute to George Bush's legacy is really needed here, but that could promote an endless reading cycle. Books could be written on the fallacies of this man. Anytime, the head of our country acts with such wanton disregard for the American people and plays it off as Patriotism, acting over and over again in like manner, without compromise, then there is something wrong with that person.

I believe that George Bush actually believes in his actions. That belief extends to the observation that what he really needs is truthful mental assessment. Narcissism aside, we have a troubled person at the helm of this ship. Fortunately, we can throw him overboard in a few months, Hopefully, our next President can undo the remarkable damage to our prestige in the world, produced by his administration and his loose hold on right versus wrong.

Voting Rights Injustice: Felons with Criminal Records Can't Vote

2008-06-19T17:44:00.000-07:00

In the USA, the majority of those labeled by our criminal justice system as felons have no voting rights. The mix of rights depends entirely at what stage you are in prosecution. Rights vary from those charged with a felony, those actually convicted and incarcerated, to those on parole, even extending to those on probation.

Keep in mind that what constitutes a felony can differ from state to state. Obviously, the more serious crimes such as rape and murder would all be classified as felonies by each state, but their are a host of lessor offenses that can elicit a felony conviction, based upon what state you reside.

Currently, reputable sources put the number of people labeled as felons, or in some stage of this process at 4.7 million
to 5.3 million.

Various factions, depending upon if you're for or against the rights of felons to vote, use different justifications for inclusion or denial of voting rights. One source says that denying felons the right to vote stems from Ancient Rome and Greece, and that Europeans extended those beliefs to this country when they settled here. That same source also claims these laws denying felons the right to vote were on the books prior to the civil war and the abolition of slavery; therefore denying the vote to felons was not and has not been racially motivated.

While there may a trace of truth in this as it concerns the history of denying people voting rights from a historical context, it is evident that the precivil war and in more modern times, many of these laws were devised as a means to deny the vote to blacks, since a high percentage of felons are black. Yet, there are those that also contradict the assertion that felony laws are racially motivated. Some, fairly enough, point out the history behind voting rights and are more casual in their explanation as to the denial of voting rights to felons.

Another source points out, that in 1800, there were no states that denied felons the right to vote. The felon statutes came back into play prior to the civil war and the subsequent abolishment of slavery. Many believe that this was to further limit the access to voting by blacks.The New York Times, Washington Post and a host of other reputable sources also attribute felon statutes as directly rooted in " efforts to marginalize, dilute and limit the black vote."

In other words, a racist past is in a large part responsible for felons statutes as they exist today and not the argument that these laws reflect hundreds of years of tradition. If this was so, then there wouldn't have been any time when the laws were not on the books.

Even if this was in part true, one could argue that these laws were strengthened and extended by some states after the abolishment of slavery, purely as a means to limit the black vote. In fact, some criminal acts were added to felony roster in the south, solely for that purpose. Accessing the fact that certain crimes were committed primarily by blacks, the addition of these crimes to the felon statutes is absolute evidence that the laws were in part or possibly in whole, racially motivated.

Voting rights disenfranchisement for felons may be a controversial issue, as well it should, but their is no denying the impact of such laws, especially in recent times and instrumentally in this forth coming election. Felons tend to vote overwhelmingly democratic. Who knows what the outcome would have been in Al Gore's race for the white house, had felons been allowed to vote. Not only did Florida deny that right, but other sates as well.

For the first time in this nation's history, a black man, Barack Obama, has the democratic nomination for the office of President. He is poised to efectively compete and possibly win the Presidency. The vote of felons could be the deciding factor. Unfortunately, no politician has the guts to take on this emotive issue, and thus, we'll probably never know what role the felon's vote could have on the outcome. And, that's the way some want it,as expressed by someone in the know.

The transgender Question? A Man having a baby..?

2008-06-17T12:33:00.000-07:00

Did any of ya'll see the Opera show a while back? I didn't, but I heard plenty about it. It seems that there's no shortage of opinion on this issue, even from the usually reserved crowd. So here's the issue.

A former beauty queen, having gone through a transition to become a man, yet still possessing female genitalia, but with the outward look of a man, and married to a real woman, is having their baby. That's right. A man having a baby. Sound strange? It is.

Things are just getting too complicated. I don't even know where to begin in formulating a reasonable opinion that isn't one sided. I don't understand this move, the motive behind it, or the judgment that precipitated such a calamitous decision.

If there was such a need to have a child between this couple,why didn't they adopt? Why put a child through this? Did either of them consider the hell that this child will go through trying to explain this or possibly even hide it, not to mention the possible mental anguish knowing that he has essentially a dad for a mom. The whole thing is crazy. Is there no end to the level of selfish acts by people who just have to breed, regardless of the consequences to the children?

A Doctor has said that the pregnancy is progressing in its routine and normal stages. That part is good, but it doesn't address the question as to why it even happened. Why did two supposedly sensible adults let their emotions fuel a scenario that could have serious repercussions for the child as it grows up?

People seem to be willing to go to any extreme to have children. Fertiltiy clinics are rife with couples looking for embryos while so many children remain unadopted, waiting for a home. I'm not going to buy into that 'my own child' syndrome, because if you're trying to genetically engineer your own version of the perfect child, then I do believe that you're taking too much of God's work upon yourselves.

The transgender issue is enough to deal with, as it's complicated ands cuts across morality codes. I understand that and It's easy to understand
how transgendered people feel about existing societal norms which isolate them. People often reject that which they don't understand and this is a real winner for rejection. I personally don't believe in vilifying a person or group just because I don't understand it; however, the act of transgendering from woman to man and then having a baby is too much for me. It pushes the envelope too far.

Since the act has taken place, what do we do to stop it in the future and prevent similar behavior? I don't really give a damn about my individual prejudice against this choice, what I do care about is the child who has to suffer the repercussions of that decision. Its selfish not to consider the child and that above all should have been the fundamental issue at the onslaught.

I have nothing against transgendered individuals. I'm sure the pain of what they feel is real. I'm a man and have always been comfortable in my body, but not everyone is. I see women who are so masculine that I
truly believe genetics plays an important role in their lifestyle. Likewise, I see men who are so effeminine, minus the drama acquired through their environment, there is no way that genetics isn't responsible for their behavior. No way, they're just too butch or too nellie to be doing this on their own.

So the transgendered issue is around to stay and let's just hope we can keep a reasonable head in coming to terms with it. I'm not sure how my thinking will evolve on the issue of a transgendered man with female organs still intact, having a baby?

Obama Sharply Assails Absent Black Fathers - NYTimes.com

2008-06-15T15:27:00.000-07:00

Obama Sharply Assails Absent Black Fathers - NYTimes.com

Father's Day

2008-06-15T04:30:00.000-07:00

When I was growing up, I was unable to have a close relationship with my father and to this day I regret it.

Born in an earlier time and nurtured on the mistaken idea that fatherhood involved a type of 'tough love', my father's connection with me was to make sure that I didn't grow up to be a 'sissy'.

Looking back, I don't fault him for that, for like me, he was a product of his time. That time was when 'masculinity' was often defined by the crippling application of punishment in harsh and unseemly ways.

My father was difficult, distant, and given to 'molding' me in his masculine likeness. There was no affection, or in the lyrics of Jackson Browne, "thundering velvet hand". That was missing from my life. He was more of a taskmaster, and God help you if you didn't abide his wishes.

The Father I congratulate and speak of today, is the father of friendship and affection, of tolerance and discipline, of strength and humility, of openness and kindness, and most of all, love: love for family and love for his children.

In a time when males have been marginalized in our society, when many don't live in the same households as their offspring, when their importance as a role model is diminished by faddish concepts of 'feminism'. where
child birth is often impersonal and the singular role of a potential father is his donation to fertilization, it is important to remind ourselves of a father's vitality in the life of his child.

So this day is for dad. for all of you out there who cherish and take this responsibility to heart, and for all who are separated from their families and long to be with their children, take heart, we honor you.

Barack Obama-Biracial or Black? Does it Matter?

2008-06-11T05:17:00.000-07:00

Why isn't Barack Obama being touted as the first "biracial" contender for the Presidency, instead of the first "Black" contender. There are several reasons.

1) The Media has gone along with accepted tradition in referring to him as the first 'black' nominee. Most biracial people of black/ white heritage usually refer to themselves as 'Black' and not 'White', although they could easily claim that reference,

2) Black society has been accepting of bi racial children much more than the white society in the United States. In the black household a biracial child is no different than a black child in which both parents are black. He or she is welcomed as a part of the household and not looked down upon. This hasn't been the case with white households in the past, although it does seem attitudes are rapidly changing. We now are seeing muti-ethnic households of all races.

3) The old standard that having one ounce of black blood in you makes you black, regardless of the mix, when it comes to white/black couplings. Ironically, black society has accepted and even nurtured this standard. perhaps unwittingly, but with heartfelt intent. This acceptance has helped mixed children find acceptance with themselves and rise above the once held stigma of a mixed race child.

4) The degree of the media and public acceptance also relates to how the individual r accepts and identifies with his mixed race heritage. If Barack Obama would call himself 'white', while he might have an equal claim, it would be doubtful that the media would follow suit in referring to him. In fact, not just the media but the black community itself would hold it as a form of implied denial or rejection of that 'black part of him'. Since his pigmentation obviously is darker than a caucasian pigmentation, it makes it much easier to see his acceptance as a'Black'man, rather than a 'White' man.

In his speeches, Barack also makes clear his identification with the black community when he speaks of his mixed race heritage. So, much of the label is self-imposed although as stated, it wouldn't make any difference if he chose to refer to himself as 'white. It would never be accepted by the society at large, white or black.

Strange? Yes, indeed, but such are the residual values of a past which glorified institutionalized racism by whites and the opposite extreme within the black community, a deeply held racial pride.

Manifest Greed: Why the American Dream is Disappearing

2008-06-09T11:07:00.000-07:00

This is the first post of a multi installment on this issue:

America's middle class is quickly disappearing. The so-called "American Dream" is following in footstep. People are working longer and earning less, corporations are basically controlling our economy and through lobbyists dictate policies with benefit them and leave the consumer wanting and more in debt.

We are a nation in trouble, engaged in a senseless war that undermines our credibility at home and around the world, and leaves a mountain of debt for the next generation to absorb. All of this comes with a shameful Presidency that has sapped the moral fiber of this country, left us suspect with our neighbors throughout the world and placed this great country in peril. All that we now have, was not once part of the American Dream.

When I was growing up in my hometown in the 1950's, even with the advent of the civil rights era on the horizon, there was always hope out there. In my cohesive football town, juxtaposed between Canton and Akron Ohio, there existed a spirit of camaraderie and kinship that was the nexus of this small, but bristling community.

Many worked at the local steel Mills, as did my father. With the knowledge of a steady job, honest wages,communities activities and the overall umbrella of a stable community, I grew up feeling no different because I was Black. Color wasn't such an issue in my town, although surely prejudice was out there. My father and mother both benefited from the availability of a stable income, not subject to encroachment or any of the nefarious schemes that have taken the American Dream down a rough and shoddy pathway toward extinction.

People shook hands on deals, books and ledgers were merely signed against charges and you knew the local banker who held the mortgage to your house.It was more personal and because of that there was no sense of inevitabilty that exist today: your day to day thoughts were not that someone would come in and take your job or that a pension fund would rob your retirement or devastate your future retirement nest-egg. It wasn't pleasantville, but it ceratainly wasn't anything like it is today.

My Restless Walk

2008-06-06T10:20:00.000-07:00

I would like to believe that the quest for peace,
is enough to draw us to a softer side of our journey ;
one that isn't hardened by the constant pounding of
footsteps that walk in unbridled course and drive
men to commit unspeakable atrocities against
each other.

Yet, there are those that see hope as an ancient relic,
reserved for a sufferable few; they know
the undoing of dreams is furthered
by minds that linger too long in the past,
and see continued strife as nothing new.
and they pray for change.

In the shadows,
where the tyrannical go to act out impulse, to forgo diplomacy:
In dress, that wears of yesteryear's mistakes.
that searches endlessly for strength through conflict,
There, we see a vacuum,
that denies the spoils of carnage,
staves off an advancing age,
where all can meet on a common ground.

There comes a new day,
where our footing is as steadfast as the
elated peaks of compromise.
Where the lover's smile
is for the stranger in us all,
without dimension,
and without restraint
to the bread of life.

What mercy awakes us to the sun?
What searching thinks its purpose a sin ?

In all things gone,
we see the innocent youth before the scourge set in ;
the small child reared to walk in boots,
aged on the backs of the less fortunate,
And then, we see those whose rhythm set them to
patterns stitched from day old bread.

All in all, It is their creating,
which will bring us down the line from warrior
to peacemaker.

It is their vision of the sun
lasting, welcoming to the taker.

Why won't Hillary concede the nomination to Barack?

2008-06-04T09:04:00.000-07:00

That's a very good question and only Hillary can answer it, but judging by
her past actions in this campaign, I can offer a plausible explanation.

It's sad that the first woman presidential contender who has garnered more support than any female candidate in the history of this country, would be so damned determined to stretch her mark, hold on, and not concede her defeat. She has accomplished so much and everyone knows that she is strong, but now she risk damage to her reputation with her failure to realize the inevitable. Barack Obama has beat her for the nomination.

Barack Obama has lavished praise upon her for her efforts and justifiably so. So why has she attempted to ruin his moment by pushing herself as a VP candidate before he could even savor the win?

Hillary may very well want to change the way things are done in Washington, but she brings with her old school politics and this is one of the problems that would come with it, should Barack consider her as a Vice President on the same ticket. This throwing out her name as the contender again, this time for the VP spot, her husband's earlier alluding to it and the implicit caption that she somehow holds sway over Baracks ascension to the Presidency, is classic Clintonian politics.

Over and over again, she has directly or indirectly alluded to the power of the 17-18 million people who voted for her, her pull among women and working class whites and latinos. She never misses an opprtunity to throw it out onto the field. So does it indicate that she believes that Barack couldn't win the Presidency without her help?

Is she that presunptuous? Is she that full of herself? Yes, she is indeed and apparently, in classic Clinton arabesque, she has no compulsion about the implication behind it.

While her attempts to upstage Barack's moment by her implicit recognition that she should be considered as a VP candidate, this early in the game, she is showing another side of herself. Hillary is all about Hillary and not just about the people's concerns.Her ambitions ride saddle with any and carry equal weight as any of her desires to change the direction of our country. She has one direction, to foster a path toward some type of nomination. First, it was President, now it's the VP slot. This carries with it the implied threat that she somehow holds sway over Barack and can make or break his campaign for the Presidency.

Questions to consider?
1) Will Hillary listen and accept her subordinate position as VP?
2) Will she reign in Former President Clinton, his conflicts of interests as dictated by her office, and keep him from jeopardizing Barack's campaign with his temper and ill mannered remarks?
3) Will she work to undermine Barack while in office so that she can draw more power to herself,now or in future contests. Recognize the unchecked power of VP Cheney and what that has done to this country.

I'll reserve judgement on her selection as a VP candidate, but she brings with her a lot of garbage and that's exactly what Barack wants to change. While i consider her formidable and highly competent, I just don't trust her. I also consider her highly manipulative and she has already, so early in the game, shown that to be true.

What Makes Butch Lesbians so Irritating?..and Queens?

2008-05-27T04:13:00.000-07:00

What makes butch lesbians so Irritating? It’s the hair thing? No, it’s the weight,
No...they’re aggressive, well yeah...and more. Guess what, they’re human, and because we’re all different, we irritate each other.

Have you ever driven down the road or come out of a store and had one of these so called gal-guys, within sight. You know, the type where you can’t figure out if it’s a guy or gal and you just don’t understand. Then, you ask why?

I have and I know about the confusion and the questions and the why, but I don’t have any answers, just like I don’t have answers to the generational change which gives us new fashion, piercings galore, punk fetish and dress, etc. You name it, it’s there in our world. Yeah, you say, but that’s not the same thing. That’s fashion choice and that’s different than behavior we often associate with ultra butch lesbians. We call them ‘dykes’, and it isn’t a very nice label because it’s met to disparage this particular group of lesbian women. keep in mind that not all lesbians look like railroad pile drivers, little boys, have super short haircuts, wear mohawks, dress like factory workers,but that doesn’t matter, sadly, many lesbians, much more than the average gay man are huddled into one category.

If you want to go further, there is even the super disparaging category of “bull dyke”: supposedly, these are the really bad ass lesbians. They can kick your ass, or at least they believe they can. If it’s a choice of mind over matter, these women got it going. They set fear to you when you see them. You don’t dare diss them in line, or bump into their super feminine girl friends.

While, I’m at it, why would a feminine lesbian want to hang out with one of these testosterone laden females? Why do some of them dress like young guys, often wearing their hats backward like young college age males? I may have answered my question in the label “testosterone”.

It’s probably involved in the choices of ‘very butch women’. It’s the same with the ‘estrogen’ deal in real effeminine men: however, I think that really butch lesbians get a much more heated response than ‘queens’ or very effeminine men, but I don’t see the difference.

I go to a church that is open to gay people and there are many lesbians in the congregation. A great deal of them are active and at least half of them appear to be more on the butch side. They almost never wear a dress, but for that matter, what woman does today, unless she’s at work. I don’t have a problem with that , it just seems that butch lesbians reinforce the masculine stereotype when in reality these butch appearing women may be as effeminine on the inside as any female, maybe they just don’t want that part to show to the world. I don’t know. maybe it’s all a front- a ruse to shield them from the ugly and malicious thoughts toward them.

Now, on the point of them being irritants. This is my hardest thing to overcome since I do find that the more butch lesbians tend to be more aggressive in their thoughts and actions than their feminine counterparts. On the other hand, some very effeminine men and ‘queens’ comport themselves and have body posture that exceeds any feminine traits by women. Their movements are excessive and often don’t mimic the average female, save a beauty queen.

What makes Butch Lesbians so irritating? I guess it’s just that the very act of attempting to look and act like a male when you’re a female, is disgusting to me, and the same goes for males acting extremely effeminine. So why don’t they just stop acting and behaving like this?

I hate to say it, but they may not have much choice in their behavior or actions. Now, before you crucify me over this justification, let me explain that I’m not disavowing the ‘environmental’ influence on either group. No, I understand its impact and it does indeed add an element of drama to the way they comport themselves.

The aggression issue is a problem with me and it’s probably because I have a one-sided view of butch lesbians and queens. They’re simply irritating, but my irritation gives them no less right to the fundamental freedoms that we all should enjoy as Americans.

I’m biracial, white and black with a mix of ethnicity's, but I still find some things about each race that are irritating. Does that give me the right to discriminate or levy against their right to exist as free individuals within our society? No, it doesn’t and that’s where the problem shifts to me.

Granted, different individuals and groups have the ability to alter or change offensive behavior. First, that requires that the person understand the existence of their offensive behavior and the will to change. Perhaps, the behavior is merely the result of biology or some disorder and not subject to to choice. Then again, the supposedly offensive behavior, may in reality. be a lack of education as to the person's motives or expressed lifestyle.

Acting or behaving in a supposedly offensive way doesn't qualify as "offensive" behavior simply because we don't understand it. Said behavior has to have a negative impact on our surrounding or be a conduit in which the end result causes harm. Being a butch lesbian,bull-dyke or queen doesn't qualify.

I have to come to terms with this and this little expose is more for me than you, the audience. It’s pure therapy as it’s an ongoing problem that I need to deal with and think through. Maybe I can change my view and in the end, change the my perception, but I don’t think so. We’re all to stubborn.

For now, I’ll just recognize this prejudice and offer up a prayer to overcome it. On Sunday, I’ll remind myself to sit beside, one of these butch girls or queens, grit my teeth and pray for release from this prejudice. I hope it works.

Thanking our Veterans for our Freedom!

2008-05-26T06:02:00.000-07:00

Let's thank our Veterans for the freedom we have and remember those loss in pursuit of our liberties that we enjoy as citizens of this great country, the United States of America.

Our Veterans
Our heroes!

Sunset In Quepos, Costa Rica

2008-05-25T06:18:00.000-07:00

This is one of many beautiful shots taken in Costa Rica. I have added the wording or poetry. All of it is original. If you would like a download, or a full scale reproduction, email me at reidercody@yahoo.com and I'll send you details.