Celebrate All You Want To, My Sisters And Brothers, This Election Is Still Bogus

As black Americans join hands with other Americans of all races to boogey down in celebration of the “fact” that our nation has erased hundreds of years of discrimination by electing it’s first black president, I think it bears remembering that the only thing we’ve really proven is that a black man can become president if white people approve of him first.  I believe, that when you think about it, you’ll realize, that’s always been the case.

Now, before y’all get your long johns in a twist and start going off on me, remember, many of you, black and white, in blog post after blog post, magazine and newspaper article after magazine and newspaper article, on TV and radio, have said the same thing, and went ahead and did it anyway.  The story goes, that before Iowa, black people hadn’t awakened and gotten it yet, that white people would vote for a black man, so many of us were still blindly loyal to a white woman, who would go on to speak the truth about Martin Luther King and Lyndon Johnson and other racist stuff like that.  But, once the “black man” we weren’t yet sure was “black enough” got the stamp of approval from the whitest state in the country, and we were made sure Hillary Clinton wasn’t even as black as her husband who was not the first black president, btw, I mean, look at him, he can’t even tell the difference between a real black man and Barack Obama, and besides, he can’t even dance, well then any fool could see that the black man the white folks picked to run in the first place was at least blacker than that.

Since I’m sure that there are those who might be outraged, livid, and just plain pissed off that I would allege, infer, or even suggest such things, I wouldn’t dare ask you to believe me just because I’ve been trying to tell you these things all over the internet all along, you can read what the white folks who selected, promoted and funded your Obamessiah had the people they pay at the L.A Times tell you he said and did almost one year ago to the day, Jan. 7, 2008:

Volunteers for Barack Obama’s presidential campaign fanned out into black neighborhoods over the weekend with new instructions: Tell undecided voters that Obama “proved the cynics wrong in the Iowa caucuses.”

The message about Obama’s decisive Iowa victory Thursday is familiar to those who have heard his theme of transcending old-style politics. But for many black voters, the warning against cynicism carries a special and somewhat different meaning: Let go of old fears that white America will never elect a black man to the presidency; Iowa has proven doubters in the black community wrong.

The fear that Americans will not accept a black president has loomed as a persistent obstacle to Obama’s chances in South Carolina, where blacks are expected to account for at least half of the voters in a crucial Jan. 26 Democratic primary, and in other states with large black populations.

In effect, they told you what your problem was, and how to fix it. It certainly wasn’t that you might be right about their candidate’s commitment to your issues.  Nooooo, it was “old school politics,” which refers to back in the day when black people chose their own candidates to support because those candidates supported them.  So, as you dance the night away in celebration of the fact that the WPS (White Power Structure, i.e., corporate America) has pulled off the biggest swindle since the Pilgrims bought Manhattan by having black America help them ensconce their preferred candidate in the Oval Office of a country where young black men can still be shot dead by the police on subway platforms without a word of protest from the “old school” Civil Rights leaders they got you to deem irrelevant in this post-racial Joshua generation, shout Hallelujah, praise Jesus, keep in mind that the next con might involve you boogeying your happy black asses right back to the plantation.

Parrrrtaaaayyyyyyyy!

Get down.

*Maybe more of us are awake and have gotten it than we’ve been lead to believe.

Elizabeth Hasselbeck For President

Suppose The View’s Elizabeth Hasselbeck announced that she was running for president in 2012?  As a Democrat?  Feminist?  What if she hired a sharp, ruthless, barracuda of a campaign manager who stage-managed an almost flawless production, assembling bright, committed women and men willing to think outside the box in order to get the job done, using the mysteriously acquired unlimited funds at her disposal to get Elizabeth’s unique, yet poignant story to the masses?  If Elizabeth, who has always claimed to be politically independent, dramatically recanted all previously uttered conservative statements as having been made under duress; unduly influenced and perpetually frightened as she has been because of years of  abuse, would you buy it?  How would you feel as you watched millions of people leap aboard her bandwagon, commiserating with her misery, applauding her for her courage in freeing herself from her oppressor, as all women must be made to feel free to do?

As her campaign grew, with Caroline Kennedy and Nancy Pelosi enthusiastically endorsing her, and female Democrats and Republicans of every race coming forward to embrace her and her story, and every male, Democrat and Republican, hurrying to align themselves with her, too, lest they be tarred with the chauvinistic, closet abuser brush her campaign cleverly wielded as a sword of implication hanging perilously over their heads, would you be cheered by the prospect of the seeming inevitability of finally putting a woman in the White House?  Or, would you watch in horror, transfixed by the spectacle, with a permanent “what the fuck?!” expression etched upon your face, questioning her experience as your friends, family and co-workers questioned your sanity?

When prominent feminists appeared onstage with prominent celebrities and exhorted frenzied poor people to join hands in history as they supported the women they love as they finally take their rightful place in society, would you want to cry, pull your hair out, or join in?  As “Sisters Are Doing It For Themselves” segued into “Respect” at rallies where men women and children waved “It’s Our Turn, Now” and “We Came The Long Way, Baby” signs would you scream at the TV, “yeah, but it’s fucking Elizabeth Hasselbeck, ya shits?!”

When Jeff Probst appeared on the news claiming that Hasselbeck’s experience on Survivor showed that she was indeed capable of enduring hardship, and people cheered so much that Elizabeth joined with Beyonce at fundraisers, even going so far as to sing along when girl group ditching Lady Jigglebooty performed her “Charlie’s Angels” theme song, would you feel like you’d entered an alternate universe?  When Joy Behar guest-hosted the Larry King show and professed to the hour’s guest, Donna Brazile, that after 3 years of interacting with the diverse women on The View, Hasselbeck was uniquely equipped to handle the office of the presidency, a position Brazile heartily agreed with and expounded on, would you cry?

If Hasselbeck raised more money than anyone in the history of campaigning, supposedly from millions of women, young and old, sending in withheld portions of grocery, milk, lunch and tithe funds, supplemented by donations from Massengil, Playtex, Gardisil, Black and Decker and other companies eager to cash in on the “She Can Do Anything” theme of the campaign, would you wonder where the start-up money, not to mention rest of the gazillion, came from?

If the sale of blonde wigs went through the roof, with women of every color and stripe wearing them with their “Who’s Stupid, NOW?” tee shirts, in solidarity with their new shero, would you rush to renew your subscription to Ms. Magazine and all the other periodicals whose cover Hasselbeck graced?  When Vanity Fair featured her on the cover, naked under a flag with make-up bruises and a black eye, in their “We’re Not Gonna Take It Anymore” issue, would you wonder where the real pictures were and why none of her male family members, let alone the never identified abuser had been interviewed, and how come there were no police reports, or would you keep your mouth shut lest you be accused of blaming the victim?

What if she had won caucuses she didn’t compete in, or just barely pulled out the nomination after her primary opponent was subjected to months of incessant media accusations of his unnecessarily bullying and trying to intimidate her?  Could any male candidate, even one with an exemplary record of standing up for women’s rights, stand up himself under a well-coordinated media onslaught portraying him as an insensitive brute willing to beat up on a girl to achieve his goals like men always do?

When she gave tepid thanks to Hillary Clinton, before proclaiming a new way forward for today’s generation of women, encouraging them to move away from the strident voices and divisive tactics of the past, how would you feel?  And, when she improbably rode the media generated wave of public sentiment to the highest office in the land, would you be proud?  Or would the “what the fuck!?” expression you’d worn for moths now, become covered with tears, despite your best efforts to stop them?

No matter how strongly you believe that it’s time to have the woman president we need, would any woman really do, any way you could get her?  For this black woman, Barack Obama might as well be the blonde on The View.  They might both be swell, peachy people, but c’mon, president?

Nah.

Ain’t enough hype in the world.

From Dream To Reality

As we near the completion of the politically motivated, Madison Avenue designed, stage managed transition from the Civil Rights Era of Dr. Martin Luther King to the myth of reality that is “post-racial” America’s eager embrace of fantasy as political policy represented by the passage of a proverbial torch-of-the-day to the Man Who Would Be Whoever He Need Impersonate at the moment for approval, perhaps a bit of reflection is in order.  As the mainstream media and internet bombard us with flowery, yet often illusory reportage of a nation united in celebration of triumph over its problems of its own making, having collectively overcome challenges only conquered through individual prevail, honest introspection might prove beneficial.

Rev. Martin Luther King was a man of unwavering principle.  He did yield to expediency, he was not satisfied with the appearance of victory.  He did not subscribe to the “by any means necessary” philosophy; he did not sacrifice his principles in his quest for equality through non-violent means, often under pressure to do so.  In his “Remaining Awake Through A Great Revolution” speech at the Episcopal National Cathedral, Washington D.C.  March 31, 1968, he spoke about the personal cost of his opposition to the Viet Nam war:

One day a newsman came to me and said, “Dr. King, don’t you think you’re going to have to stop, now, opposing the war and move more in line with the administration’s policy? As I understand it, it has hurt the budget of your organization, and people who once respected you have lost respect for you. Don’t you feel that you’ve really got to change your position?” I looked at him and I had to say, “Sir, I’m sorry you don’t know me. I’m not a consensus leader. I do not determine what is right and wrong by looking at the budget of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. I’ve not taken a sort of Gallup Poll of the majority opinion.” Ultimately a genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus, but a molder of consensus.

On some positions, cowardice asks the question, is it expedient? And then expedience comes along and asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? Conscience asks the question, is it right?

There comes a time when one must take the position that is neither safe nor politic nor popular, but he must do it because conscience tells him it is right. I believe today that there is a need for all people of goodwill to come with a massive act of conscience and say in the words of the old Negro spiritual, “We ain’t goin’ study war no more.” This is the challenge facing modern man.

As Barack Obama prepares to inherit Dr. King’s legacy by popular demand, the question must be asked, by what criteria does he qualify to do so?  Is a man who wants to end one war only to start another, who achieved his personal goal of the presidency through questionable practices, who has manipulated public opinion in order to justify his manipulation of the public, who pledges convenient allegiance to race and religion, really worthy of of Dr. King’s legacy?  By what measure does he inherit “The Dream?”  More compellingly, when did Dr. King express a desire to see a black president as evidence that his work had been done, his goals had been reached, his dream had been fulfilled?

He did not.

Ever.

No matter what those promoting the man ascending to the leadership of the free world on his shoulders tomorrow say.