WHY???

Why all of the interest in holding cops to a higher standard than gangs?  Because they are not the navy blue negro killers.  They should be the example of the best in the community;  those willing to lay their lives on the line to serve and protect.  If they  choose to be thugs with a badge, why not just turn the badge in and either join or form a street gang because that is what you are.  

 

Why focus on a white cop killing an unarmed black teen when you should be focused on so-called black on black crime?  So are you saying that before we begin talking about  a long overdue problem of racial injustice we should focus on its legacy?  That is like focusing on disease symptoms but not the disease itself.  Why not focus on both?  We as black people have the capacity to multi-task.  It is an insult to our individual and collective intelligence when you as a black person say that we can't focus on both. 

 

So you see a rally in Ferguson, New York and California, but you don't see a rally about so-called black on black crime?  Really?  When was the last time you went to a black church?  When was the last time you paid attention to your community?  No one mentioned it at your church?  No one rallied in your community?  Why don't YOU mention it in church?  Why don't YOU organize a rally?  What?  You do not attend a black church?  What?  You do not live in a black neighborhood?  AND... 

 

Stop criticizing those who ARE DOING something just because they are not doing what YOU feel they should do.  Be the change that you want others to be.

Jesuorobo A. Enobakhare, Jr. is a Moderate Democratic Blogger who cuts through the rhetoric so that individuals can see the reality of political statements and how those statements turned into action can affect them.  Contact him by email at jesuorobo@yahoo.com or follow him on Twitter @Jesuorobo.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Jesuorobo A. Enobakhare, Jr.

Nelson Mandela

TATA MADIBA , Student, Acitvist, Revolutionary, Prisoner, President, Elder Statesman,  showed the world that there is no time for bitterness, revenge, wrath nor hatred when you are trying to save your people and your nation. Mandela could have spent his years after release from what was a life sentence as a bitter old man, but instead immediately continued his fight for justice and equality which culminated in successful negotiations to end apartheid.

Mandela went from prison to the office of the Presidency as the first democratically elected South African President under the new 1 person 1 vote policy allowing all citizens regardless of race access to the ballot box. Under his leadership, instead of using his power to take vengeance on those who persecuted his people or settle old scores, he reconciled his country. And with the humility that few world leaders show, Tata Madiba only served one term when his popularity would have guaranteed re-election to a second term.

Tata, Well Done! Rejoice! Your work is finished.

Now it is time for us to carry on your mission and live in your example while you look down upon us.

Jesuorobo A. Enobakhare, Jr. is a Moderate Democratic Blogger who cuts through the rhetoric so that individuals can see the reality of political statements and how those statements turned into action can affect them. Contact him by email at jesuorobo@yahoo.com or follow him on Twitter @Jesuorobo.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Jesuorobo A. Enobakhare, Jr.

The War on Voting Rights for Minorities Begins

What we have witnessed in regards to the United States Supreme Court decision on Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a clever strategic move (gamble, hedged bet, etc...) by the Republican Party that caught many by surprise.  In 2006 when Congress voted to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Republicans knew that would buy them some votes from the so-called black conservatives (and other minorities) and their hands would be clean regarding voting rights for minorities.  

What most of us did not realize was that Republicans knew by stacking the Supreme Court, they would be able to eventually get the "unelected" branch of the United States government to do their dirty work.  Now in 2013 Republicans pretty much have a stacked deck.  They control congressional redistricting, they control the Supreme Court (to a degree), they have the majority in congress (house), and they now have what appears to be the advantage when it comes to voting.

The Republican “Master Plan” was unleashed with all of its fury and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is pretty much useless as there is currently no way to enforce it, thereby opening the gateway for any and all voter suppression tactics to become state laws. This was but the first successful shot launched in the war against voting rights for minorities. Now is the time for us to get our hands dirty and fight to win this war. 

How do we win?

1.       We educate everyone in every state on their respective state’s Voter ID Laws.

2.       We make sure the elderly have transportation to get their Voter ID’s and the money to pay for them.

3.       We put our respective congressmen on notice that if they don’t do something about Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that they will not be in office after the next election.

4.       Most importantly we vote in the next election and every election afterwards as if our lives depended upon it.

Time to get out of our soon to be nonexistent comfort zones, create our strategies to implement the four objectives mentioned above and prove to our forefathers that the blood, sweat and tears they shed in order to ensure a guaranteed right to vote were not shed in vain.

Jesuorobo A. Enobakhare, Jr. is a Moderate Democratic Blogger who cuts through the rhetoric so that individuals can see the reality of political statements and how those statements turned into action can affect them.  Contact him by email at jesuorobo@yahoo.com or follow him on Twitter @Jesuorobo.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Jesuorobo A. Enobakhare, Jr.

My Thoughts as I Watched President Obama's Acceptance Speech

"I wouldn't be the man I am today without the woman that agreed to marry me 20 years ago." - The 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama.

Woman (and men), If you look at many of the great men in history, you will see a strong supportive woman, not behind him, but beside him, as a respected partner. Such a man would not have achieved greatness without her; without her encouragement; without her belief in him when no one else did. President Obama acknowledges this in his presidential acceptance speech. He acknowledges that without her there would be no President Obama. He acknowledges that his wife is such a blessing to him that all of America recognizes it and also has fallen in love with her just as he did 20+ years ago.

Women, are you ready to support a man in that fashion? Are you ready to sometimes delay or sacrifice your dreams for those of your husband?

Men, are you ready for a woman that will put her very life into your hands and believe in you, even when you have doubts about yourself? Are you ready as a leader to submit to an equal partnership with your wife built upon love, sacrifice and respect?

A union like that of First Lady Michelle Obama and President Barack Obama has led them to the White House; two times. Now the White House might not be your destination but are you willing to join in a union that will lead you to greatness?

Republican Deception

Republican politicians claim that they are going to succeed in completing the following tasks if they win back the White House:

• Reduce the federal debt
• Cut taxes
• Shrink the federal government
• Bring jobs back to America

Republican supporters across the nation rejoice in jubilee as if they have caught the Holy Spirit whenever they hear those four points. Now when I hear those four points common sense immediately kicks in. Those points contradict each other.

• Reduce the federal debt

The reason for the increase in the federal debt is simple. A reduction in tax revenue due to a few factors: George Bush tax cuts (The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and The Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003), The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, a war in Iraq based upon a lie and millions of Americans out of work. Anyone owing debt knows that a job loss or even a reduction in salary will cause you to either fall behind on the debt that you owe or incur more debt trying to stay current.

No matter how much you want to reduce your debt; that won’t happen without either an increase in income or drastic budget cuts. So which will the Republicans choose? Currently they are willing to cut everything that doesn’t matter. If they are really serious about reducing the debt they should reduce defensive spending and spending entitlement programs for senior citizens; however both areas are where they get the majority of their votes, so that won’t happen.

• Cut taxes

So with everything that has caused the federal debt to increase, is cutting taxes really a good idea? I have heard the Republican spill about how cutting taxes will spur economic growth. Maybe back in Ronald Reagan’s era (Reagan believed that deficits did not matter) when a tax cut would give a corporation the incentive to expand; but not in the age of the global economy.

The George W. Bush tax cuts are proof that tax cuts will no longer result in economic growth; hence the anemic jobless recovery during the George W Bush era. US corporations will add that tax cut to the bottom line and expand their operation in India or some other foreign country that has an emerging (cheap) work force. Plus, aren’t you trying to reduce the deficit? How are you going to reduce it by cutting tax revenue? You cannot pay off debt if you voluntarily reduce your income.

• Shrink the federal government

There are many federal employees that support the Republican Party. They clap and cheer whenever they here a Republican politician talk about shrinking the federal government. I wonder do they really understand what that means. Congress will not shrink and neither will their legion of aids and associates. So guess what it means? Yep those same supporters will be voting themselves out of a job. Shrinking the government means cutting jobs. Cutting jobs also reduces the amount of tax revenue that can be collected. That means a further reduction in the ability to pay down the federal debt.

• Bring jobs to Americans.

Now that is the most misleading of them all. The reality of things is that many of those jobs that left are not coming back. Why hire someone for American wages when you can pay someone in India considerably less without the overhead cost of benefits. You have a workforce sitting at home trusting you to bring their old job back without informing them that 21st Century jobs will require an overhaul in their skill set. And overhauling skill sets will require an investment in the people in the form of training. Republicans would consider that to be a socialist endeavor (the word socialist used by Republicans will be dedicated to a future article).

Yes the Republican Party is deceiving those that are willing to take their message at face value. While their message may sound good on the surface the results will be disastrous to America.

States' Rights

States' Rights.  I hear these terms quite often when listening to conservatives in today's political landscape.  It is a term that has been used by conservatives (democrats, dixiecrats, republicans) for centuries.  But when you really look at their pro-states' rights arguments they tend to have an unconstitutional tone.
 

Let’s take, for instance, Slavery.  Many southern conservative lawmakers felt that the slavery issue should not have been decided by the federal government but instead left up to the individual states.  If one did not agree with a state's decision to continue slavery, one could just move to another state.  Well that would work out pretty fine for a white person who was against slavery but not so much for a black person who was a slave.  Hence some refer to the Civil War as the “War of Northern Aggression”.

Let's skip ahead to public and state school desegregation.  Again many southern conservatives felt that school desegregation was overreach by the federal government and that the issue should be decided by the states.  Once again many of the southern conservative lawmakers were completely against school desegregation.  For a white person your school was just fine as it was but not so much for a black person going to a substandard "separate but equal school".

In both examples, had "states' rights' won slavery might still exist in some states or at the very least slavery would have had a longer lifespan in the United States and school segregation would probably still be the law of the land for public and state schools.

What is the lesson here?  We hear a lot of commentary about not trusting the federal government; however considering the track record of state governments vs. the federal government, some of us probably should look at our state governments with an even higher degree of suspicion. 

Flashback Friday - Barack O' Reilly, Irish - American President of the United States (posted in 2009)

It is interesting how some people are still up in arms about President Barack Obama. In spite of two books, an endless number of interviews, and a one hour biography on MSNBC, they still ask the question...Who is Barack Obama? Or let me say they continue to repeat the email that started last year titled "Who is Barack Obama?" Because of his heritage they tend to claim he is a closet Muslim terrorist even though neither of his parents practiced any type of religion. President Barack Obama was born in the United States and spent most of his life in the United States. But there are a few who tend to still believe the rumors, lies, and false hoods of Right Wing propaganda instead of reading his books, paying attention to his interviews and truly seeing the man for who he is. It appears that the those people only want to hear President Obama say is this:

I am a Muslim
I hate white people
I am here to destroy this country
And until he says those three things they will never believe anything else that comes out of his mouth. Actually they already believe those three things.

But what if Barack Obama was instead Barack O' Reilly, Irish-American President of the United States? Would people still think he is a closet terrorist? Would they accept Barack O' Reilly as an American or would they think that he is secretly trying to bring "the Troubles" to the United States. The Troubles was considered a time of terrorism, ethnic cleansing and questionable civil war in Ireland from the 1960's - 1990's. Would they think that Barack O' Reilly is the living embodiment of what it means to fulfill the American dream? Would they think of him as the son of an Irish immigrant and American mother who learned that success can only be achieved thru hard work and education?

Or

Would they think of him as a closet Irish terrorist plotting to overthrow the United States government and make the United States of America the United States of Ireland?