Black Professor

Here I sit already sick over the Media's play and replay of Barack Obama's bowling 37 points.
But doesn't the Media owe us at least 4 days of non-stop reporting on Hillary Clinton's Church Affiliation?

If the report that MSNBC broke this story a long time ago is correct, the Media is revealing its true bias with the lack of exhaustive reporting on Hillary's Church affiliation considering the almost murderous way they went after Barack Obama for his association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

If her relationship with The Family is what has been reported, the Media's action smell of blatant racism by its lack of coverage. Besides, all we Clinton supporters would want this topic widely aired before John McCain and the Republicans deal with it in the General Election. Or can we deduce that the Media's bias is for John Bush McCain and the retention of the Bush Dynasty and its sycophants.

For What it's Worth . . .

Let me get this straight!

Hillary is connected to Madonna by genes and DNA, but Obama is connected to 6 past Presidents including the One who authored Our Republic, and wrote the Virginia Plan and the draft of the Constitution?

Let me get this straight. Obama is descended from a stock from which we got James Madison, the "single most important American--the most creative thinker of his generation?" Madison, the one who solved the "obstacles to the creation of an effective national government: question of sovereignty and the question of limiting power?" (Alan Brinkley, American History: A Survey, Volume I to 1877, p. 163)

Hahaha! This is so funny. Let me get this straight. The one descendant from Madonna and Camilla (the would-be queen of England) derides Obama by saying he is not Commander-in-Chief material, yet he is descended from roots which produce 6 past Presidents, and even the one to whom we owe gratitude for this great Democratic Republic?

Get away! Let me get this straight. The man has what it takes and more. No wonder he towers head and shoulders over McCain and Clinton, and especially looks as one who is Presidential, even in his delivery if nothing else. Get away . . . it's in the genes. His DNA proves that he is above the rest, and we should stop the bickering. He's got it.

Last night, a reporter who has not spent 40 years on the Planet, complained to Keith Oberman that Obama does not talk to reporters. Why should he talk to them? Most of them only want to make sensational stories for their ratings. Besides, the truth is that the media will take his plans apart, and give Hillary ammunition to cut him down. McCain will use that information to thwart Obama and win another term for the Bushites. But if he remain silent, and give the reporters nothing, when he defeats Hillary and become the nominee Obama will bring it in the 4th quarter just like he said. He knows that he has to get on the ballot, and that's why he's better off not revealing too much of his plans. Just like he was the first to talk about "change," both Hillary and McCain grabbed the slogan and tried to make it theirs.

McCain is a has-been, and Hillary's aging constituencies are only afraid of the future. America needs new blood. So Obama went out and produced millions and millions of new young voters with more joining the movement every day. Consequently, the Democratic Tsunami will sweep away all those corrupt, money-hungry, Republicans in Congress who want to rule by America by a small committee.

So let me get this straight. An honest assessment of election 2008 is that the Democratic tide will flush away a lot of Republicans in Congress who hate social programs? Right? And by the same token, those Super Delegates who make up their minds and endorse him now, will ride his coattails to victory in November? Right? And what is more, they will discover that not only can he bring it, but they will discover that he's legitimate because "he's got the genes?" Right?

So hold on Barack. The campaign will get nastier. The last vestiges of racial hatred and class manipulation will try to make a last stand. But the correct assessment is that you'll get a chance to do what you promised. And when that time comes, we, the people, the poor and the indigent, Middle America locked in financial crisis made by Bush 43, young Americans full of hope and ideals in colleges and universities looking for someone to hear our cries, we want you to bring it. Bring it for us. Bring it for James Madison and his father's friend George Washington. Bring it on Obama, crank it up, because we're behind you. And if we have to go to Denver, never fear we and the power of Our God will be there. . . just bring it down the line, honest and true, down through the Red Zone and down through the goal-posts because we know now that you got the genes. And we know you can bring it, because you've got the genes.

For What it's Worth . . .

Labels: Black and Brown Brothers, Black Voters, Latino Voters, Minorities: Our time has come

Today, I am sharing an open letter sent to me purportedly written by Rev. Jeremiah Wright to Jodi Kantor.

March 11, 2008
Jodi Kantor
The New York Times
9 West 43rd Street
New York,New York 10036-3959

Dear Jodi:
Thank you for engaging in one of the biggest misrepresentations of the truth I have ever seen in sixty-five years. You sat and shared with me for two hours. You told me you were doing a “Spiritual Biography” of Senator Barack Obama. For two hours, I shared with you how I thought he was the most principled individual in public service that I have ever met.For two hours, I talked with you about how idealistic he was.

For two hours I shared with you what a genuine human being he was. I told you how incredible he was as a man who was an African American in public service, and as a man who refused to announce his candidacy for President until Carol Moseley Braun indicated one way or the other whether or not she was going to run.I told you what a dreamer he was.

I told you how idealistic he was. We talked about how refreshing it would be for someone who knew about Islam to be in the Oval Office. Your own question to me was, Didn’t I think it would be incredible to have somebody in the Oval Office who not only knew about Muslims, but had living and breathing Muslims in his own family? I told you how important it would be to have a man who not only knew the difference between Shiites and Sunnis prior to 9/11/01 in the Oval Office, but also how important it would be to have a man who knew what Sufism was; a man who understood that there were different branches of Judaism; a man who knew the difference between Hasidic Jews, Orthodox Jews, Conservative Jews and Reformed Jews; and a man who was a devout Christian, but who did not prejudge others because they believed something other than what he believed.

I talked about how rare it was to meet a man whose Christianity was not just “in word only.” I talked about Barack being a person who lived his faith and did not argue his faith. I talked about Barack as a person who did not draw doctrinal lines in the sand nor consign other people to hell if they did not believe what he believed.

Out of a two-hour conversation with you about Barack’s spiritual journey and my protesting to you that I had not shaped him nor formed him, that I had not mentored him or made him the man he was, even though I would love to take that credit, you did not print any of that. When I told you, using one of your own Jewish stories from the Hebrew Bible as to how God asked Moses, “What is that in your hand?” that Barack was like that when I met him. Barack had it in his hand. Barack had in his grasp a uniqueness in terms of his spiritual development that one is hard put to find in the 21st century, and you did not print that.

As I was just starting to say a moment ago, Jodi, out of two hours of conversation I spent approximately five to seven minutes on Barack’s taking advice from one of his trusted campaign people and deeming it unwise to make me the media spotlight on the day of his announcing his candidacy for the Presidency and what do you print? You and your editor proceeded to present to the general public a snippet, a printed “sound byte” and a titillating and tantalizing article about his disinviting me to the Invocation on the day of his announcing his candidacy.

I have never been exposed to that kind of duplicitous behavior before, and I want to write you publicly to let you know that I do not approve of it and will not be party to any further smearing of the name, the reputation, the integrity or the character of perhaps this nation’s first (and maybe even only) honest candidate offering himself for public service as the person to occupy the Oval Office.

Your editor is a sensationalist. For you to even mention that makes me doubt your credibility, and I am looking forward to see how you are going to butcher what else I had to say concerning Senator Obama’s ”Spiritual Biography”. Our Conference Minister, the Reverend Jane Fisler Hoffman, a white woman who belongs to a Black church that Hannity of ”Hannity and Colmes” is trying to trash, set the record straight for you in terms of who I am and in terms of who we are as the church to which Barack has belonged for over twenty years.

The president of our denomination, the Reverend John Thomas, has offered to try to help you clarify in your confused head what Trinity Church is even though you spent the entire weekend with us setting me up to interview me for what turned out to be a smear of the Senator; and yet The New York Times continues to roll on making the truth what it wants to be the truth. I do not remember reading in your article that t Barack had apologized for listening to that bad information and bad advice. Did I miss it? Or did your editor cut it out? Either way, you do not have to worry about hearing anything else from me for you to edit or because you are more interested in journalism than in truth.

Forgive me for having a momentary lapse. I forgot that The New York Times was leading the bandwagon in trumpeting why it is we should have gone into an illegal war. The New York Times became George Bush and the Republican Party. The New York Times played a role in the outing of Valerie Plame. I do not know why I thought The New York Times had actually repented and was going to exhibit a different kind of behavior.Maybe it was my faith in the Jewish Holy Day of Roshashana.

Maybe it was my being caught up in the euphoria of the Season of Lent; but whatever it is or was, I was sadly mistaken. There is n o repentance on the part of The New York Times. There is no integrity when it comes to The Times. You should do well with that paper, Jodi. You looked me straight in my face and told me a lie!

Sincerely and respectfully yours,
Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr. ,
Senior PastorTrinity United Church of Christ


The lies and the hypocrisy of racists will come back to haunt them when they look in the Face of the Naked Truth. Jesus said: "I AM the Truth . . ." and Paul said: "We shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ to give account . . ." 2 Corinthians 5: 10.

For What it's Worth . . .

Today, I feel extremely happy that Bill Richardson decided to make public the only rational decision for a respected and well-thought of Hispanic leader. Consequently, I repeat for you my blog of March 1, 2008.


Saturday, March 1, 2008

Hermanos Y Amigos!
Two years ago Rush Lumbaugh spent 31 days lambasting Hillary Clinton with defacing rhetoric. He was happy he said that the Liberal Dems would nominate Hillary, and this would give them the chance to sink the Liberals once and for all. This was during the time that the Republican-Abramhoff scandal was in its heyday, and he himself was under investigation for something regarding prescriptions. But, what stuck with me was a reference he made to Ronald Reagan and the Latino vote. He did not differentiate between Cubanos, Mexicanos, Ricanos, Columbians, Panamanians, Peruvians or Dominican Republicans. And that started me thinking. Rumour and inuendo was being emitted intermittantly from Republican talk show hosts that Blacks and Latinos hate each other and that they don't have the intelligence to band together to bring about change in America.

At the time, I was teaching a class of 42, thirteen of whom were Hispanics. These students often raised political questions in my History class, with even more coming in my Religion class. My response was always the same. There will come a time, I said, when Latinos, Blacks and White women will realize that if they band together and become "Hermanos Y Amigos" they would take over the country from the "good ole' boys." Some Hispanics wanted to know more about becoming brothers with Blacks when in numerous communitites in LA, Chicago, New York and Miami, there seemed to be an endless stream of bloody turf-wars. My response was to show that throughout recorded history tribes, clans, nations and ethnic groups have always fought over turf.

The fights in 20th century New York, I said were typical. When Italians from southern and eastern Europe came to America there were constant battles between them and those from northern and western Europe who had come 2-3 decades before. Italians-northern against southern-fought to the death, and there was the same between Sicilians and Italians during the 1920s and the time of Capone. When one million Irish, who fled Ireland because they were starving to death, came to America, they fought with the Italians and Europeans who were here already, and then they turned their ire on the Blacks because they found it difficult to get jobs. They were the last hired for the more dangerous jobs.

Then, when I told them that everyone in America is an immigrant of sorts, or the descendant of immigrants, the Hispanics and the Blacks in my classes began to share a comadery they had never experienced before, but they challenged me to clarify that bold statement. I explained that the native Americans came across the Bering Strait at Alaska following game some 12,000-14,000 years ago, and they spread out across the north, east, west and south. When the Spanish came after Columbus discovered the Bahamas and the New World in 1492, the Pope settled an argument between Spain and Portugal, which caused everything west of the line agreed in the Treaty of Tordesillas (1494) to be Spanish and Hispanic in culture, and every new land, including Brazil, to be Portugeuse.

I explained that the English running for religious and political freedom landed in Virginia and Massachusetts, and that over time, others came. And since that time, every generation born in the United States wanted to keep others from coming.The only ones whose ancestors did not migrate to the United States were the Blacks. They were brought here in abject, filthy, and brutal diabolic conditions in the holds of ships laced with dysentry and disease, which led some historians to claim that more than 15 million died crossing the Middle Passage. This bit of history, I shared, meant that Jews who lost 6 million by European hands, should be more sympathetic to Blacks who lost 15 million--many of whom were thrown overboard, chained and alive. This also means that the Irish, who had sympathized with Blacks during their slavery, should have continued that kinship rather than opt to join the supremacy of the color line. Ultimately, this means, I said, that Mexicanos who should be taught that the U.S. border crossed the lands of their ancestors, who were for a while protected by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, should also feel a kinship with the Blacks. Because these Blacks, whipped and threatened in some instances by dogs, had to cut down the trees, drain the swamps, dig up stumps and boulders, and clear the land before they could plant and harvest. Yet, they had a great relationship with Latinos and Mexicanos in Tampa and Texas long before the Civil Rights Era began in earnest.

After the third day of asking them to google-up the proof of the history, I discovered that the Mexicanos began to interact with the Blacks in such a way that even the white students in the class joined the group of "Friends and Brothers." Indeed, "Vamanos, amigos y hermanos, va el tiempo, y, si se puede."

For What it's Worth . . .
http://bethsaidabible.org/
http://blackissachar.blogspot.com/

Tonight the world is laughing at our great America. Two would-be leaders have embarrassed us today.

It was bad enough that after 3 years of fighting a war in Iraq, top level officials at the pentagon could not tell a British reporter the difference between a Shiite and a Sunni. What is even worse, they sent thousands of innocent, not yet gone to college, high school graduates into a war but they, themselves, did not know the importance of the Shrine of Ali and the significance of Nasiryah.

Then, too, the Republican nominee, who struts as though he is already beginning George Bush's 3rd term, showed the world how deep the ignorance is, which characterizes people who live shut-out from the world's reality. Mixing up Shi'a and Sunni, how could that be? Not one of my students over the past 7 years would get that question wrong. In fact, they laughed their heads off last year when the British reporter spread the news of the Pentagon's ignorance. What idiocy? No, what treachery? How loosely we have gamboled away our leadership capital. And now the world laughs in hysterics.

Today, on the 5th anniversary, we are told that it was noble to get rid of Sadaam because he was a bad man. But, if I remember correctly, in 1988 when Sadaam gassed the Kurds fighting for Iran against him, neither Ronald Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43, Donald Rumsfeld, nor Dick Cheney made a sound. No-one condemned Sadaam then. So, even if we found no WMDs, Sadaam was a "bad" man? By whose estimates? He wasn't considered a "bad man" in 1988, because no-one condemned him. Oh! I forgot, we went in for "regime change."

(2) In the second scenario, Hillary blames Obama for not allowing the Florida and Michigan voters to be heard. Someone should tell her that several more millions would have voted if her opponent was on the ballot. What an exercise in blatant hypocrisy? If this is what it takes to be President, I would not want to be one. And certainly, people of integrity cannot want a President so shallow either, because in the long run, she will get us into more trouble with the rest of the world. Will someone please tell her that the slip is showing . . . and nowadays, in case she hasn't heard, world leaders are not so forgiving. They talk behind your back.

For What it's Worth . . .

It was chilling to hear Hillary say, from New Hampshire to Texas, words that she borrowed without giving credit, even while she accused Obama of plagiarizing words given by his co-chair. In several speeches she said that”a politician looks to the next election, but a statesman is concerned about the next generation." These words are not her own. She was quoting without giving the credit; nevertheless, these words are true. And now, the world knows that Hillary is the politician who is only concerned about getting elected, while Obama is the statesman who is concerned about the country and the next generation. Obama’s speech demonstrates that he stands above the common and deserves to be the one who leads this troubled nation.

It is interesting that the female analysts on TV do not mention that Obama’s mother was a White woman. They systematically deny that he is half-white; and by doing so they destroy U. S. History and denigrate everything the House of Burgesses in Virginia did in 1662. For it was in that year that Virginia passed a law, which said that all the children of a Black woman was born a slave for life, but all the children of a White woman was born free. The implication changed International Law. Children were automatically classified by the nationality and condition of their father in the 17th century, but America changed that and declared that a child took on the status and condition of its mother. Thus, Obama’s condition by law should be discussed and referenced by his “whiteness” not his “blackness.”

What this is all about really, is that those White Americans who berate Obama’s so-called race, and denigrate his association with the Rev. Dr. Wright, are the ones who refuse to face the fact that America did wrong during slavery, and that the Constitution was not written to grant “equality” to blacks. In fact, women were not considered “equal” in 1787, and even now, the good ole’ boys refuse to pass the ERA Amendment.

Barack Obama’s speech demonstrates that he is one who would push for the passing of ERA and grant American women equal rights by law, just as he would push for legislation granting equal rights to Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Latinos. Indeed, the world now knows who should be President, because the man at the podium was not pleading for votes, but standing up for Truth and Righteousness, which is a characteristic suggested by his first name-“Barack, Hebrew for Blessed!”

For What it’s Worth . . .

The News Media called it incorrectly, and now they can stop talking about Hillary's fabulous "kitchen-sink" comeback. According to Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish, Obama won the Texas Caucus, which gave him a total of 99 delegates to Clinton's 94. So much for that lie.

What is even worse, is that according to DNC the released voter count today, Obama has a substantial lead in the popular vote, by a margin of 705,691 votes. The breakdown is as follows:

Obama - 13,335,159
Clinton - 12,629,468
Margin - 705,691

So, even though Republicans in Mississippi voted heavily for Hillary in order to substantially decrease Obam's lead, the grassroots Big Mo' Express continued to roll and will gather speed heading into the fourth quarter. Republicans are scared that one could win the White House who is not like Geraldine Ferraro. They are more than happy, one said, that al Qaeda has started bombing, and this time, Americans will beg John McCain to step in and save them. What crock!?! This is worse than Hillary fooling Ohioans that the President will answer a red phone at 3:00am without anyone of the dozen people in the Pentagon or White House staff knowing about it. What does this say about the integrity of the Clinton who wants to be President?

The conspiracy to knock out Obama with all the negative publicity against him, with lies and inuendoes, with positive upbeat news for Hillary, with sympathethic ads and photo ops showing her hugging babies, is not working. All of these Republicans are smarter than we are, and the Clinton Campaign staff had cornered the market on intelligence and truthfullness, but what these self-important people fail to acknowledge is that just maybe Barack Obama has the backing of Heaven. Now there's a thought for those on the low road-whether they believe a Creator exists or not.

For What it's Worth . . .

The charge that Governor Crist is a hypocrite and not saying all is making the rounds in Iowa as we speak. For two years, Rush Limbaugh and his Republicans have been planning how to defeat Hillary Clinton. They have catalogued all the Clinton's baggage from more than two dozen questionable pardons, to Marc Rich's questionable millions and the $100 million dollar fine, to Tony Rodham's questionable association with the Gregory's and the $125,000 so-called loan.

The fact that Governor Crist stolidly claims that the voters of Florida MUST be heard is hypocritical because not all the voters in Florida have been given the opportunity to vote in a fair election.

The Florida Primary was not a fair one because the DNC rules had been violated and the Florida chapter had been forewarned that they would forfeit seating. Besides that, the up-standing honest Hillary had agreed with the others not to campaign in Florida, but she violated that by what the Clinton Campaign did immediately before and after the voting.

There were 2 conspiracies: (a) the first was the Republican conspiracy to do whatever nastiness necessary to help Hillary Clinton win the Democratic nomination; and when she did they could easily beat her becaue of the baggage she carried beside being a Corporate woman; and (b) the Clinton Campaign deliberately seized on the actions of Florida and Michigan to create confusion, which would trouble the Democratic Convention in Denver.

Democratic leaders of the DNC need to be extremely careful that Governor Crist, the hypocrite, nor the Republican Media Newreporters, who do not report news but give personal opinions with only glowing reports for their female candidate--using female-oriented language--they are illogically persuaded that "the voters vote must count." Governor Crist was not saying this in 2000 when Jeb Bush was governor and it became apparent that 45,000 Jews and others in Broward and Palm Beach had voted for Liberman to be Vice-President. Neither did I hear him object to the phony felony list that Catherine Harris and Jeb Bush made up through some private firm, by which black mothers, who had never seen the inside of a courtroom were turned away en masse.

Perhaps Governor Crist has met the Savior, whose chiefest apostle did his greatest work for Truth in the Greek Isles almost 2,000 years ago. Just maybe the Governor has sin cere intentions. But just in case he has forgotten what the Latin phrase means, it means "without wax." That means that anyone who is "sincere" he or she can be held to the fire and they will not melt.

But please, will someone remind the Governor that there is a hell that will burn . . . even though its not burning now (2 Peter 3:7-11).

According to this text the whole planet will be on fire, and its at time that the universe will see if he and Hillary are sincere.

Political pundits and Media analysts are slow to realize what Republican conspirators are getting them to do. It has long been Rush Limbaugh’s publicly stated case that Conservatives want Hillary Clinton to be the Democratic nominee. He was touting this the month after John Kerry lost, and for the next two years that was his daily theme. Make him show the record of all his programs.

Republicans want Hillary to be the nominee, so they are dumping everything against Barack Obama and are placing news items in the right places to compel the news media to speak against Obama. John McCain has attacked Barack Obama more than 3 times he has attacked Hillary Clinton.

The whole thing is a conspiracy to get Barack Obama to go negative so that they can charge him with being of moral turpitude, promising one kind of campaign but running another hate one “just like what he says he wants to change.”

The fact is, John McCain will get lots and lots of hundreds of millions from the well-heeled rich Conservative Republicans, but it will be in vain because he can’t win. There are too many millions more poor and middle class people, who do not earn 200,000 per year. This avalanche of working people, who feel it is time for the rich to stop it, will drown McCain and his supporters Bush 41 and 43 in a deluge of votes that will make him think he’d been hit by a tsunami.

For What it's Worth . . .

Thirty-Six years after Gary, it will be abundantly clear that Blacks and Browns in America must form their own political party. The history of the United States of America clearly shows that the dominant culture has used these voters for their own ends for more than 100 years.

If we consider several historical facts, the proof is so overwhelming that all opposition will crumble and detractors slink away in shame.

(1) Today no-one considers the fact that the first Civil Rights Act of 1865 was passed, which gave Black people the same rights as Whites. In 1868, in order to keep the Southern politicans out of control of Congress, the Radical Republicans gave black men the right to vote in the 15th Amendment, which was ratified in 1870. And they did this, despite the Black cry for "land" instead of the vote. Black Americans wanted land to cultivate so that they could feed their families. But the Republicans used them to work the land for Whites and vote for Republicans to control Congress. Women had to wait for another 50 years.


Ten years later the Civil Rights Act of 1875 was passed with the intention to open public accommodation including "schools, churches, cemeteries, hotels, and transportation to all people regardless of race" (Hine, Hine, & Harold, 2006, p. 327). Hispanics and Asians in the country at that time benefited greatly and were allowed to flourish somewhat.

(2) Blacks dutifully and loyally voted Republican for 60 years, then in 1933, Herbert Hoover appointed a racist judge, John J. Parker, to the Supreme Court. From that point on, the NAACP prompted every Black to vote Democratic since the Republicans only wanted to use them. Voting toghether, Blacks defeated every Senator (22 of them) that voted for Judge Parker, and they still vote Democratic today. But the question remains: "For what purpose do Blacks vote Democratic?"

(3) Blacks fought and died in every war, and they suffered worse than death everytime the Democratic Party failed them. They suffered under discrimination, segregated in every area of life until in 1960, in the heat of the battle for their citizenship rights, the Democratic Party produced John Kennedy and his brother Bobby who showed some affinity to Black people. Black hope for equality was short-lived because conspirators effectively murdered both Kennedys and, in the process, murdered Dr. Martin King the leader of the Civil Rights Movement. After Kennedy, President Lyndon Johnson carried forward the initiative started by Kennedy and finally signed the Civil Rights Bill of 1964, and the Voting Rights Bill of 1965.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 banned discrimination in public accommodation, restaurants, night-clubs, schools, swimming pools, parks and playgrounds as well as employers from discriminating against African Americans. Through all of this, Hispanic, Latino and Mexican-Americans benefited.

The Civil Rights Act of 1968 banned discrimination in housing and authorized the Justice Department to sue landlords and Real Estate companies that violated the law.

The Civil Rights Act of 1972 firmly established Affirmative Action, with the intent to level the playing field for minorities and Blacks in particular. President Carter appointed Eleanor Holmes Norton as the first woman to chair the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Because of the EEOC, African Americans began to move into the Middle Class. But this also benefited many Hispanic and Latino professionals.

Some African Americans positioned to take advantage of Affirmative Action were appointed to many top positions in Corporate America and high posts in state and local government. Despite all this, the majority of Black America still suffered.

(4) In 1972, 8000 blacks convened the National Black Political Convention. The Convention addressed Black America in an attempt to define some "essential changes" that must take place if the full potential of black children was to be realized. The general understanding at that time was "Both parties have betrayed us!" But because many of the participants were enjoying Middle Class status and high appointments at the hand of White America, the convention split before it could decide what was the best strategy for African Americans. This was the result of White strategy of divide and conquer. Ever since native Americans and Blacks united to fight White domination in Florida, a clear strategy has been to keep Blacks and native Americans divided. Native Americans had been used to track runaway slaves; but the Army had also used Blacks to track and fight rebel native Americans. Unfortunately, the same kind of strategy is being used today. The theme of the American Media is that Blacks and Hispanics are in some kind of culture conflict over jobs and empowerment.

Nevertheless, if Blacks and Browns revisit what was discussed in Gary, and become to realize that they have both been betrayed, they will derive a power never before experienced in America and things will change. With the power to elect a President and give a Party the votes to control Congress, the Black-Brown Coalition of some almost 60 million people will be formidable.

For What it's Worth . . .

Two years ago Rush Lumbaugh spent 31 days lambasting Hillary Clinton with defacing rhetoric. He was happy he said that the Liberal Dems would nominate Hillary, and this would give them the chance to sink the Liberals once and for all. This was during the time that the Republican-Abramhoff scandal was in its heyday, and he himself was under investigation for something regarding prescriptions. But, what stuck with me was a reference he made to Ronald Reagan and the Latino vote. He did not differentiate between Cubanos, Mexicanos, Ricanos, Columbians, Panamanians, Peruvians or Dominican Republicans. And that started me thinking.

Rumour and inuendo was being emitted intermittantly from Republican talk show hosts that Blacks and Latinos hate each other and that they don't have the intelligence to band together to bring about change in America. At the time, I was teaching a class of 42, thirteen of whom were Hispanics. These students eagerly raised political questions in my History class, with even more coming in my Religion class. My response was always the same. There will come a time, I said, when Latinos, Blacks and White women will realize that if they band together and become "Hermanos Y Amigos" they would take over the country from the "good ole' boys."

Some Hispanics wanted to know more about becoming brothers with Blacks when in numerous communitites in LA, Chicago, New York and Miami, there seemed to be an endless stream of bloody turf-wars. My response was to show that throughout recorded history tribes, clans, nations and ethnic groups have always fought over turf. The fights in 20th century New York, I said were typical. When Italians from southern and eastern Europe came to America there were constant battles between them and those from northern and western Europe who had come 2-3 decades before. Italians-northern against southern-fought to the death, and there was the same between Sicilians and Italians during the 1920s and the time of Capone.

When one million Irish, who fled Ireland because they were starving to death, came to America, they fought with the Italians and Europeans who were here already, and then they turned their ire on the Blacks because they found it difficult to get jobs, and were the last hired for the more dangerous jobs.

When I told them that everyone in America is an immigrant of sorts, or the descendant of immigrants, the Hispanics and the Blacks in my classes began to share a comadery they had never experienced before, but they challenged me to
clarify that bold statement.

I explained that the native Americans came across the Bering Strait at Alaska following game some 12,000-14,000 years ago, and they spread out across the north, east, west and south. Then, when the Spanish came after Columbus discovered the Bahamas and the New World in 1492, the Pope settled an argument between Spain and Portugal, which caused everything west of the line agreed in the Treaty of Tordesillas (1494) to be Spanish and Hispanic in culture, and every new land, including Brazil, to be Portugeuse. I explained that the English running for religious and political freedom landed in Virginia and Massachusetts, and that over time, others came. And since that time, every generation born in the United States wanted to keep others from coming.

The only ones whose ancestors did not migrate to the United States were the blacks. They were brought here in abject, filthy, and brutal diabolic conditions in the holds of ships laced with dysentry and disease, which led some historians to claim that more than 15 million died crossing the Middle Passage. This bit of history, I shared, meant that Jews who lost 6 million by European hands, should be more sympathetic to Blacks who lost 15 million--many of whom were thrown overboard, chained and alive.

This also means that the Irish, who had sympathized with Blacks during their slavery, should have continued that kinship rather than opt to join the supremacy of the color line. And ultimately, this means, I said, that Mexicanos who should be taught that the U.S. border crossed the lands of their ancestors, who were for a while protected by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, should also feel a kinship with the Blacks. Because these Blacks, whipped and threatened in some instances by dogs, had to cut down the trees, drain the swamps, dig up stumps and boulders, and clear the land before they could plant and harvest. Yet, they had a great relationship with Latinos and Mexicanos in Tampa and Texas long before the Civil Rights Era began in ernest.

After the third day of asking them to google-up the proof of the history, I discovered that the Mexicanos began to interact with the Blacks in such a way that even the white students in the class joined the group of "Friends and Brothers." Indeed, "Vamanos, amigos y hermanos, va el tiempo, y, si se puede."

For What it's Worth . . .

http://bethsaidabible.org/
http://blackissachar.blogspot.com/