Public Officials: Maybe the Government Should Regulate African-Americans’ Parenting Decisions
Posted by Enrique on 01.15.2009
What could possibly go wrong?
Most Americans are comfortable with modest government regulations on personal behavior. While we don't want the government micromanaging our lives, we typically aren't offended by things like seat belt laws, smoking bans, gambling restrictions, or the war on drugs. We generally accept that the government takes certain measures to ensure our safety and wellbeing, and we don't mind surrendering a tiny bit of freedom and personal choice if we perceive that it's for our own good.
But once the government gets used to throwing its weight around, the definition of "for our own good" can become problematic. For example, on this week's "Meet the Press," U.S. Congressperson Maxine Waters floated a novel idea on how to reverse educational underperformance in the African-American community – government officials should oversee black parents to make sure they're raising their kids properly. Heartwarming, no?
The story so far…
In fairness to Rep. Waters, she didn't explicitly declare that the government should assume the responsibility of rearing African-American children. She just suggested the idea shouldn't necessarily be taken off the table. During a roundtable segment including Bill Cosby and Washington DC Mayor Adrian Fenty, discussion turned to the challenges facing black families in America. All parties seemed to agree that the government should do more. Waters mused that maybe the government should do a whole helluva lot more:
"Now, as a public policymaker and a legislator, I think about ways by which we can be helpful in bringing about the kind of public policy that will assist families. And so parenting is one thing that I'm going to spend a lot of time on, because I think that we should dedicate personnel in our public schools to work with parents and to get parents involved. The PTA does not do that. But the teachers cannot do that, the teachers cannot be concerned about what is going on in the classroom and follow the kids home. But if we have a component in the school that's dealing with going to the home, finding out what is happening with this child, what are the circumstances under which they are living, and be able to direct resources toward that family and give families support, I think we can use parenting as a way to begin to deal with these very serious problems where children drop out and children are already considered failures before they reach high school."
She's from the government, and she's here to help. Of course, Waters was just thinking out loud rather than making a serious policy statement, but it's revealing that the idea of interfering with how black parents raise their children was her gut instinct. Surely, Waters meant well when she raised the notion of following kids home, only suggesting it as a way to "give families support." It sounds innocuous, but government support usually comes with strings attached (unless you're receiving TARP funds – in which case you probably don't even have to tell the government your name).
Blogger/lawprof Ann Althouse noticed Maxine Waters' blithe authoritarian impulse, and criticized new MTP host David Gregory for not pressing her to explain herself (emphasis in original): "Waters just said that the teachers can't follow the kids home, but that there ought to be 'a component in the school' that — what? — follows the kids home? What sort of 'component'? I'm afraid of these components! What is Waters proposing, and does Gregory have any capacity for critical thinking? How is it acceptable for government authorities to intrude into the home this way?"
Waters isn't the only public official to suggest that perhaps African-Americans aren't fit to be parents without a government watchdog nearby. Just last week, my hometown Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel featured an op-ed by Common Council President Willie Hines. Milwaukee's population is approximately 40% African-American, and Hines represents the mostly-black 15th aldermanic district. Like Waters, Hines thinks that the public schools need to do more:
Character development is a critical part of transforming [Milwaukee Public Schools] students into successful citizens who can contribute to society. While academic knowledge of the sciences, arts, languages, technology and mathematics is vital, I believe that MPS must dedicate resources to establishing an ethical framework for every child who walks through its doors. While I recognize that morals and values can be controversial, because everyone has a different take on rights and wrongs, I also know that we do our community a severe disservice if we do not arm our kids with the life skills that will give them a fighting chance to succeed upon graduation…
Who defines what is right? What do I mean by morals? How are ethics defined? These questions are predictable and valid. Generally speaking, MPS students can benefit from thoughtful instruction regarding personal accountability, respect for others and, perhaps most importantly, respect for self. If we can have specialized curricula designed for the arts and foreign languages, we can afford to reserve part of our curriculum to help our young people function in society. We can help them search out the answers to these and other questions: What are healthy approaches to conflict resolution? Why is it important to listen before speaking? How can we look beyond our narrow view of things to see the impact of our actions on a community? Why does society work better when we treat others as we want to be treated?
You'll notice that, as with Waters, there's no reason to doubt Hines' sincerity. Here's a man who sees no end in sight to poverty, illiteracy, and violence in the inner city, and he wants to do whatever he can to help. Few would argue that underachievement in inner city public schools isn't a distressing problem. But to suggest putting the government in charge of regulating the ethical development of anyone's child – well, it seems excessive. And inappropriate. I'm not blessed with children myself, but my understanding is that parenting decisions are quite simply off limits to official inspection. Even if Hines and Waters are well-intended public servants, shouldn't we be grossly offended by their implications? A person's parenting skills, no matter how dubious, simply aren't the government's business.
Besides, politicians can only do so much; I'm not sure what they've done lately to earn any amount of child-rearing authority. History indicates that we should be modest in our expectations of government performance, and we should be discreet about how much state oversight we allow into our private lives. I think we should be concerned when public officials nonchalantly express the desire to tell parents how to raise their kids.
...They do realise the Cosby show wasn't a documentary, right?
Posted By: Jza (Guest) on January 14, 2009 at 11:28 PM
Oh Enrique you clever fellow, how do you do it?
Posted By: Dent Kelly (Registered) on January 14, 2009 at 11:31 PM
If that's what she meant, she's got a point...at least if you're a liberal. See, for decades now, conservatives have believed black people WERE capable of doing better on their own, thus we didn't see the need to coddle them every moment of their lives. Liberals (and this is proven by their policies, not my opinion) on the other hand, believe black people AREN'T good enough; AREN'T smart enough, and AREN'T civilized enough to make it without government assistance. Yet conservatives are always the ones labeled racist. Guess liberalism works, since most black seem to be convinced they can't make it without the government's help. I'm amazed sometimes at the winners in the battles of perception vs. reality.
Posted By: Conatus (Guest) on January 14, 2009 at 11:35 PM
I would suggest the government disallow blacks from naming their children...I mean, I know personally a girl named Aquanetta. WTF! That's got to be some form of child abuse. I mean, hell, the girl will be 26 before she's able to spell her own name. And that's one of the more normal names I know of for black people. Seriously, why is it the most ignorant blacks give these stupid names to their kids? Can ANYONE explain that to me?
Posted By: Muck Fuslims (Guest) on January 14, 2009 at 11:38 PM
You like looking like a racist?
Posted By: David (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 12:59 AM
Huzzah! David's here! We can be treated to infantile comments by a Down's Syntdrome patient with narcissistic personality disorder! Yay! David, please rinse your mouth out with a 12 gauge.
Posted By: David D. Douchebag (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 02:06 AM
You know.. in a perfect society in some far away fictional story, an Idea like this may actually work, but we all know the US government is far too corrupt these days to manage anything like that right now. The American economy has enough problems right now as is.. what person in thier right mind would assume an issue like this would be handled correctly!?
The US government needs to gain a little credibility and confidence back from it's people before even talking about a rediculous idea like this.
If you begin to cure the main problem ie: The economy, Then the rest of the underlying problems will work themselves out to a degree.
Sorta like killing the head vampire.
This sounds like nothing but Big Brother to me..only presented to us in an authorative, good-willed manner. Another turd burger given to us in gold wrapping.
Ahh,More and more freedoms going down the shitter.
Posted By: DrSmoov (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 08:06 AM
WTF does a child's name have to do with their education level? No one complains about whites naming their kids after baseball stadiums and cities, but its automatically assumed that if you have an ethnic name that you're destined to fail, can't spell, whatever. Anyway, the problem in the black community is lack of male role models. If there were more men that were responsible for their children, gangs wouldn't be able to prey on these children as easy. If a gang is telling a child that they can give them money, love, protection, respect and a family that they aren't getting from home, what else do you think their choices are? Another problem is also that blacks own nothing in the community. Every liquor store, beauty supply house and mom and pop shop is owned by an immigrant. Why is that? Because blacks always want a hook up, and if you don't give them a hook up, you're labeled a sellout.
Posted By: A Cynical Mark (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 08:49 AM
Thank you, Enrique, for another article that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny at all. Let’s look at the meat of what Waters said:
“… we should dedicate personnel in our public schools to work with parents and to get parents involved. “
“…be able to direct resources toward that family and give families support”
“…public official to suggest that perhaps African-Americans aren't fit to be parents without a government watchdog nearby”
It’s quite a leap from that to the headline of “Public Officials: Maybe the government should regulate African Americans’ parenting decisions.” It seems pretty clear that she is talking about working to increase parental involvement in their children’s education. One way to do this would be to dedicate personnel to focus on establishing a relationship with the students’ parents. This seems like a good idea from both a liberal perspective (ensuring all students are given a chance to succeed) and a conservative perspective (if each school with this program keeps at least a couple extra kids in the workforce vs. going to jail, the program will pay for itself many times over).
Now compare what she actually said to the language that is used in the article:
“Maxine Waters floated a novel idea … government officials should oversee black parents to make sure they're raising their kids properly.”
“idea of interfering with how black parents raise their children was her gut instinct”
It’s a pretty big leap to go from what she actually said and to what this article implies. Also, nobody is talking about literally following the kids home. She used that to illustrate a point.
This is Enrique’s second article in a row that is basically smoke and mirrors and falls apart upon closer inspection. And whereas Chris, Ashish, and Andrew will follow up on the comments to defend their positions, Enrique basically throws some crap at the wall and then immediately starts balling up another pile of crap to throw. He doesn’t even bother to look if the first crap stuck or not.
Posted By: Caleb (Registered) on January 15, 2009 at 09:10 AM
Conatus, do you really believe the crap that you're shoveling?
Yes, Liberals are stupid with their constant coddling of blacks. Thanks to many ignorant liberal policies, there are a good number of blacks that feel they are entitled to certain things just because of the color of their skin. At least the liberals are trying, in their own misguided way, to help.
But to say that conservatives aren't racist? And then to back it up by defending the decades upon decades of racism from the Republican party by framing it as "we just think they can take care of themselves." No, that's not it. It's more like a conservative wouldn't walk across the street to piss on a black man that's on fire, saying "oh, he can take care of himself."
From fighting against equal rights, to defending the presence confederate flag, to the constant racist comments of their big celebrity Rush Limbaugh, the Republican party is steeped in racism and ignorant comments like yours only go to prove it.
Posted By: Scott B (Registered) on January 15, 2009 at 09:46 AM
Troll,
You want attention don't you? Ahh...you're such a precious little thing. Heaven forbid you actually ADD anything to the conversation. My criticism is full of truth.
He could have said Government Officials Should Regulate The Parenting Decisions of Its Citizens. First, picking out ANY ethnic group for a problem that effects all, that screams of racism. So, you should stop trying to Goose Stepping into critique I have on the writer in question.
Refresh my memory, what was the skin color of the people SHOOTING up class rooms? Hmmm? To lay the blame on one skin color screams of ignorance, but I guess that is the conservative/libertarian M.O., right?
Posted By: David (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 10:13 AM
My two bosses are black- they are my mentors and I really look up to them.
I believe that every single person is a product of the enviorment they are raised- but some of "great" qualities that allow them to overcome anything.
One of my bosses grew up in the inner city, Baltimore no less, and he has told me time and again that he had to work hard to shed alot of bullshit to become what he is now.
I'm not spell checking things today...
Posted By: The Spook (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 10:40 AM
David,
Enrique didn’t say “Government Officials Should Regulate The Parenting Decisions of Its Citizens” because he is addressing a discussion by Bill Cosby, Rep. Waters, etc. about the importance of parenting in the black community. Crying racism adds nothing to the discussion (nor does assuming that liberals don’t think blacks can raise children on their own).
Nobody is laying the blame on one’s skin color. The facts are that blacks are far more likely to be raised by single mothers, end up in jail, drop out of high school, and be unemployed. Only blatant racists would attribute this to their skin color. It’s much more likely due to socioeconomic and cultural issues.
Posted By: Caleb (Registered) on January 15, 2009 at 10:52 AM
Scott,
What is wrong with protecting the presence of the Confederate Flag? If you think that flag was born of racism then you need a history lesson. Also to deny that flag you are denying not only the white men and women who died defending States Rights, but you are also denying the 90,000+ free black men who died defending that flag.
The Army of Virginia has close to 30,000 free black men serving as soldiers, not cooks and porters. Fredrick Douglass spoke often of seeing armed black men marching in grey uniforms, and he warned Lincoln that unless he freed the slaves in the North that they would also fight for the Confederacy. As of Feb. 1865 1,150 black seamen served in the Confederate Navy. One of these was among the last Confederates to surrender, aboard the CSS Shenandoah, six months after the war ended. This surrender took place in England.
The South knew that slavery would be obsolete before the late 1800's. With the invention of the Cotton Gin and other harvesting inventions, it was not smart business to own slaves. You are also neglecting to remember that free black men owned slaves also. In South Carolina alone there were over 300 black slave owners. Believe it or not that is quite a lot. Most people in the South did not own slaves. Less than 5% of Southern Americans owned slaves. The majority of the plantations in the South were owned by the British. Most people in the South were either too poor to own slaves, their farms were too small or like in states such as TN, the areas were either too rocky or the soil was not good enough to warrant slave ownership.
I will not and cannot defend what others have done with the Confederate Flag. The KKK adoped to fly it with the American Flag in the 1920's and I will admit that the Confederate Flag took on a new meaning at that time. But one must remember this also. The Flag of the United States of America enslaved more black people than the Confederate Flag ever did. Even during the Civil War, there were slaves in the North. When Lincoln Emancipated the slaves in the South, he allowed Northern states to keep their slaves. KY, MD, DE, D.C., and MO were all allowed to keep their slaves as long as they stayed loyal to the Union.
Neither the Confederate Flag nor the American Flag has hurt or hated a single person. It is the person that flies the flag, that gives that flag it's meaning. So keep both flags in the air. It should be up to the individual state if the Confederate Flag should be flown over it's capitol, not the Federal Government.
Posted By: Jim (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 12:28 PM
Conatus, do you really believe the crap that you're shoveling?
Yes, Liberals are stupid with their constant coddling of blacks. Thanks to many ignorant liberal policies, there are a good number of blacks that feel they are entitled to certain things just because of the color of their skin. At least the liberals are trying, in their own misguided way, to help.
But to say that conservatives aren't racist? And then to back it up by defending the decades upon decades of racism from the Republican party by framing it as "we just think they can take care of themselves." No, that's not it. It's more like a conservative wouldn't walk across the street to piss on a black man that's on fire, saying "oh, he can take care of himself."
From fighting against equal rights, to defending the presence confederate flag, to the constant racist comments of their big celebrity Rush Limbaugh, the Republican party is steeped in racism and ignorant comments like yours only go to prove it.
Posted By: Scott B (Registered) on January 15, 2009 at 09:46 AM
Well, Scott B, you just reinforced my statement. Even you admit liberal attempts to help were misguided. It's because they don't believe blacks can get by on their own, so they instituted policies which kept them in a cycle of poverty, ignorance, and entitlement. And, you fucking idiot, it was the Democrat party, more than any other, that perpetuated the Jim Crow South, fought against civil rights, etc. You do remember Lincoln freed the slaves, and he was a Republican, dontcha? I'll go as far as admitting many Republican policies since the 60s are heartless and business oriented, but not racist. They policies they espouse are ruthless to all, not a certain race of people. Oddly enough, for the party that seems to represent the triumph of science over faith, Democrats refuse to follow the tenets of Darwin, and for all their protestations of tolerance, if someone disagrees with them (usually someone who has actually accomplished something in their life, rather than sit back and whine about how unfair it is for those who haven't) they get tarred with the epithet "racist", "homophobe", etc. Please...fuck off.
Posted By: ScottB'sAlmostAsBadAsDavid (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 01:49 PM
Awesome! More David comments. It's nice to know there are a few constants in the universe: Pi, death, taxes, and the fact that David is the goddamn dumbest motherfucker on the planet, who never fails to bring down the level of discourse and post something even a profoundly retarded 11 year old would know is naive bullshit. Thanks, douchebag, you give me faith in the stability of the fabric of reality.
Posted By: Christ, David Sucks (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 01:52 PM
Scott B,
To quote you “do you really believe the crap that you’re shoveling?’
Let’s go down a list to make you look foolish:
1. Have you ever heard of the Jim Crow laws? Look it up. Go democrats!
2. Why don’t you ask Governor Jim Hodges of South Carolina why he, a democrat, had the confederate waving. Look it up.
3. No wonder MLK was a republican.
Posted By: anti-messiah (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 02:21 PM
Jim,
Yes, I know what the confederate flag stood for, believe me. I'm not one of those "the civil war was fought over slavery" types.
That being said... just as Hitler took a symbol of peace and perverted it into what most of mankind sees as the symbol of ultimate human evil (especially since most don't know about the difference in what direction the arms point), the confederate flag has been taken down the same route. It is now seen as a symbol of racism. For that reason, I believe it has no place in our society.
The American flag isn't that much better. Under that flag we have stolen land from the native population, endorsed slavery, invaded a sovereign nation to re-absorb them back into our country after they left in accordance with our laws... and many other things. However, it is the flag of the victors, so that's why it flies.
As for the internet toughguy that replied to me with insults - grow a pair, register and talk to me as an adult. Look at Jim's response if you need instruction on how to talk to someone that you disagree with.
Posted By: Scott B (Registered) on January 15, 2009 at 02:32 PM
Cart before the horse. I don't think it is fair to critique the parenting skills have those who do not currently serve as parents for their off-spring.
Posted By: AdmChesterMynutz (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 02:46 PM
The Confederate flag is a symbol of opposition to the American government. Anybody who flies or supports this flag ( black or white) is guilty of advocating the overthrowing of the American government. Aka- Treason! which is a capital offense. Why should that be allowed in any shape or form? Especially by a State government.
Posted By: Johnny (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 02:51 PM
I have an idea: spend more time working to be contributing members of society than blaming your crack habit on white people.
Posted By: Mikel (too lazy to log in) (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 03:18 PM
As for the internet toughguy that replied to me with insults - grow a pair, register and talk to me as an adult. Look at Jim's response if you need instruction on how to talk to someone that you disagree with.
Posted By: Scott B (Registered) on January 15, 2009 at 02:32 PM
If you deserved that much respect, I assure you I would. You wanna impress me, post your REAL name, address, and phone number, and I'll be more than happy to get in touch with you. See how silly that seems?
Posted By: ScottB'sAlmostAsBadAsDavid (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 04:40 PM
The Confederate flag is a symbol of opposition to the American government. Anybody who flies or supports this flag ( black or white) is guilty of advocating the overthrowing of the American government. Aka- Treason! which is a capital offense. Why should that be allowed in any shape or form? Especially by a State government.
Posted By: Johnny (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 02:51 PM
Johny,
The same thing could be said about the American Flag. Just edit the Confederate Flag to the American flag, and substitute American Government with British Government. The only difference is that the Colonies won, therefore they are considered Patriots and not traitors. The winners write the history. Before the Revolutionary War every person who signed the Declaration of Independence was guilty of treason.
Posted By: Jim (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 05:11 PM
I was pretty hot when I read this title, but it lead me to a pretty interesting piece.
Posted By: Buck I (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 06:07 PM
I think a parenting license, and proof of being able to support a child should be required.
Posted By: Ant-LOX (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 06:08 PM
Bill Cosby was on this committee? Why the hell is he on it? All he cares about is kids listening to jazz/jello pudding/kodak film/new coke instead of the rap.
Posted By: Chris (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 06:41 PM
i am black. i was raised by two loving married parents. i am tired of everyone thinking that black people are incapable of running their own lives. we are somehow the source of every problem in america. sorry, but i grew up in a poor bad neighborhood. i was never tempted to use crack, rape or steal. i am happily married with no out of wedlock kids. dont let the media and right wing conservative tell you that it isnt possible.
Posted By: rey (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 06:54 PM
I can understand that people think parents should be allowed to raise a child how they see fit...
But you're wrong. Sorry. It's true.
If all parents really "knew what was best for their children" then we wouldn't have such things as racism, war, poverty, drug abuse, etc.
The fact of the matter is that there are many children, black, white, yellow, whatever that are not raised properly. Because of this we have people that are physically mature but not mentally. That person then has a child, and do you expect that they will be able to raise that child properly?
Come on. Let's be serious. How many abusive households are there in the country? Do these people all know what's best for their child?
What about the households where kids are running around while 3 or 4 adults smoke on the couch. Do those parents know what's best for their child?
IMHO, there should absolutely be a mandatory course and license for people who are having a child. If you become pregnant, then I believe both the father and mother should be LEGALLY REQUIRED to learn how to properly care for a child and understand how their behaviour will affect the upbringing of their son/daughter. If they can't then the child should be placed in the care of a licensed foster home. And anybody that wishes to adopt must not only take these courses but be subject to rigorous background checks, and regular, unnanounced checkups.
However the notion that it should be exclusively restricted to one demographic, be it racially or financially based, is ridiculous.
There are good and bad parents all over the spectrum. The bad ones need to be regulated, and the good ones should understand why they are as well.
Posted By: Mike of Da F'n Jungle (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 07:37 PM
"Anyway, the problem in the black community is lack of male role models."
Posted By: A Cynical Mark (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 08:49 AM
The President-elect is black. What else do you need for role models?
Posted By: Jeremy (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 08:17 PM
"I have an idea: spend more time working to be contributing members of society than blaming your crack habit on white people."
Yeah! Take that President Barack Obama!
Posted By: Guest#7929 (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 08:31 PM
i am black. i was raised by two loving married parents. i am tired of everyone thinking that black people are incapable of running their own lives. we are somehow the source of every problem in america. sorry, but i grew up in a poor bad neighborhood. i was never tempted to use crack, rape or steal. i am happily married with no out of wedlock kids. dont let the media and right wing conservative tell you that it isnt possible.
Posted By: rey (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 06:54 PM
wHat iS wRong wiTh ThiS PicTuRE?
Posted By: Guest#7740 (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 08:33 PM
am black. i was raised by two loving married parents. i am tired of everyone thinking that black people are incapable of running their own lives. we are somehow the source of every problem in america. sorry, but i grew up in a poor bad neighborhood. i was never tempted to use crack, rape or steal. i am happily married with no out of wedlock kids. dont let the media and right wing conservative tell you that it isnt possible.
Posted By: rey (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 06:54 P
Dumbass, it's the LEFT WING media and the LIBERALS telling you this. If you're gonna be stupid, at least blame the right people.
Posted By: Christ, David Sucks (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 10:11 PM
The government will always be involved in child rearing to some degree. I don't think even the most stauch conservative would be against DCFS and other social work type agencies. Every public school has a social worker to make sure that kids aren't suffering from, neglect, or severe financial deprivation, let alone abuse.
A parent can't raise their kids however they see fit. They can't leave bruises from whippings like prior generations. They can't deprive the kids of needed medical attention based on religion or other reasons. The government NEEDS to be involved in how our kids are being raised to a certain extent. I wish agents pressed harder to look behind circumstances that may be signs of abuse. Some of our kids(future generations) are being destroyed because of addicted, neglectful, and often abusive parents at home.
"But if we have a component in the school that's dealing with going to the home, finding out what is happening with this child, what are the circumstances under which they are living, and be able to direct resources toward that family and give families support, I think we can use parenting as a way to begin to deal with these very serious problems where children drop out and children are already considered failures before they reach high school."
These are social workers, and they need to do a better job of figuring out what the hell is going on in some of America's homes.
Conservatives often like to bitch about the failures in the urban communities. They should be more interested in helping some of these kids who can't help themselves before they become society's dropouts, failures and offenders. You can't choose your parents, and nobody is more helpless than a neglected or abused child.
Of course the parents should be the ones in charge of child-rearing. However, many are wholly incapable, or at least need direction and resources. It's all about the kids...not political rhetoric and ideology.
"Save the babies....."
Marvin Gaye
Posted By: Buck I (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 10:17 PM
Guest#7929 (Guest) - I take it by your response that you were being facetious. Understand, though, that both Bill Cosby AND president Obama said effectively the same thing. Cosby was attacked in the media for it and Reverend Jackson wanted to kick Obama in the nuts for daring to say the exact same thing.
And, with Obama in power, using racism as an excuse becomes moot.
Posted By: Mikel (Guest) on January 15, 2009 at 11:56 PM
Christ, David Sucks,
I'm sorry if things go over your head. Too bad I'm a little too hold to suffer autism, then we'd be on the same level.
Posted By: David (Guest) on January 16, 2009 at 01:57 AM
Christ, David Sucks,
I'm sorry if things go over your head. Too bad I'm a little too hold to suffer autism, then we'd be on the same level.
Posted By: David (Guest) on January 16, 2009 at 01:57 AM
Dude, even your responses suck. And learn to spell, stupid.
Posted By: Christ, David Sucks (Guest) on January 16, 2009 at 02:05 AM
Rey,
I have no doubt that is true, improbable but true. As I said earlier, I don't blame anyone for the current circumstances and in fact I have personally reached-out to help my inner-city neighbors by higher a couple youths to help with chores around my house.
PS: If anyone spots a yellow 1964 Chevrolet Impala Super Sport with black interior, 300 horse 327, historic plates and being driven by two teenagers both wearing naval officer caps, please call your local police and drop me a note.
Posted By: AdmChesterMynutz (Guest) on January 16, 2009 at 10:39 AM
We should BOMB those mother fuckers in Gaza...and turn them into cinders and ashes...
Sorry, wrong thread...
These dumb blacks will NEVER get fair shake as long as the Democrats are running things...
We should BOMB the Democrats to free the black people!
I hope this adds nothing to the conversation.
Posted By: The Spook (Guest) on January 16, 2009 at 10:43 AM
Damn, that rap music!
Posted By: BlackLesnar (Guest) on January 16, 2009 at 11:03 AM
Cheerist.
Democrats are occasionally morons of the worst sort and Republicans are usually morons of the worst sort.
Thank Satan Obama will *hopefully* be governing from the center...
Posted By: Dage (Guest) on January 16, 2009 at 03:26 PM
Alright,first HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
if all the popular black comedians have shown us anything it's that racism is funny as hell.
Second one of the single largest issues facing the future development of the black youth isnt the name's(although this is a byproduct)
and is not nessiarily the current musical trends, as in reality Hip Hop has toned down a lot in the last 10 or so years(personal note Biggie was never the best rapper period)
in terms of violence and the promotion of the worst sort of civil behaviors.
The real issues facing the youth of all of America, but the Black and Hispanic cultures especially is no only the lack of positive role models, but the fact that every time there is one, they are torn down from within their own community.
Part of the most pressing issues we currently face in rearing children is america's current(and very undeserved) attitude that we are owed something, from the Baby Boomers on down.
It is no longer a Can Do society it is a can i have society, or a he has why dont i.
The whole keeping up with the Jones's mentality, it is an ongoing issue that we as a people think that our view is the only one that matters,and if anything in our very very short history as a nation has shown us, is that we are a nation of mut's all of us are displaced from where we came from even 200 years ago.
Many cultures teach through story or song or tale, even now many lessons are thought this way,so who is suprised that their children turn into spoiled criminals when all the parents are concerned with their immediate gratification, and then the few that are not, that set a path for their own, and force them to walk it are called too hard or harsh or not staying current.
Well if the creation of the current state that makes anything aside from a two bit whore of the Paris's and Tara Reid's of the world is the opposite of being to hard.
Well my children has best prepair too have many a blistered ass.
It's funny we love what champion animal raisers do with their work, but we have no professional parents.
The truth(and i will catch alot of shit for this i know) is that the two are very similar
A champion dog raiser/trainer goes through all the hardships and trials a parent does, only many many more times.
Maybe instead of watching the Opera's and DR.Phil's of the world, if more parents took que's from professionals in other fields that could even possibally be associated with their current trials, maybe a true Profession Parent would emerge, or at least some guide lines, easing the strain currently facing modern parents
Posted By: Showster (Guest) on January 16, 2009 at 08:42 PM
So, let me get this straight. Liberal administrations coddle blacks but nothing improves. Conservative administrations show blacks tough love but nothing improves. I'm beginning to detect a pattern.
Last time we went into a depression, it took a major war to pull us out. I can say with 100% confidence that it would be cheaper and easier to win a war against a visually identifiable enemy at home than to wade into Asia never knowing who is your ally and who is your enemy.
Of course, Washington will take the coward's way out and start its war overseas somewhere, leaving the US to slowly drift closer to the fate of Rhodesia and South Africa.
You guys should quit arguing over which party does the better job of managing the subprime enemy combatants. Both parties have betrayed their country, abandoned their constituency and destroyed their heritage - both parties too lazy, too ignorant, too unwilling to risk interrupting their IV drip of tax dollars.
Posted By: Kevin Brown (Guest) on January 16, 2009 at 08:46 PM
Obama will mandate this because being raised by White people made him the President.
Posted By: Guest#3391 (Guest) on January 16, 2009 at 09:37 PM
i'm not offended as a black man, nor as a teacher, because 60% of the students I work with have a lousy family environment. Ignorant adults should not be allowed to conceive. PERIOD.
Posted By: jayt11 (Guest) on January 16, 2009 at 09:43 PM
"Dude, even your responses suck. And learn to spell, stupid."
I'm not going to even dignify that statement with a response. *grins*
Posted By: David (Guest) on January 17, 2009 at 03:24 AM
The Federal government doesn't have a right to tell African Americans how to raise their kids. If you don't like how black people raise their kids, then too bad. Let us worry about that. The Federal Government shouldn't tell us how to raise our kids. Yeah you can tell us to stay in school, to always believe in ourselves and to never give up, but I'll be damned if you're going to regulate how we raise our kids. NOT EVERYBODY IN THIS WORLD IS PERFECT! DEAL WITH IT!
Posted By: Dwayne (Guest) on January 19, 2009 at 04:42 AM
STAY CURRENT