I know, I know - this is by no means a new topic. You might say that I am a little late to the Octo-mom bashing party, but you would only be half right. I didn’t want to say very much about this until I had enough information to draw an objective opinion. Every now and again, something happens in this society that challenges popular assumptions about responsibility and choice. This is one of those things.
Everyone seems to have to an opinion about Nadya Suleman’s decision to purposely impregnate herself with 14 children without the financial resources to take care of them. Most of these opinions are negative, to say the least. When I first heard that this woman who had these “miracle” octuplets had gotten herself fertilized with these babies after having 6 children prior to this, I knew it would only be a matter of time before people would be calling for her head on a platter. In fact, I don’t recall seeing this amount of outrage directed at someone who hadn’t killed somebody in quite some time. However, I’ve always considered myself to be a “big picture” kind of guy. So while I do believe that that her actions were not very sensible, I look at the overall situation a little differently.
The first time I heard someone ask Suleman why she decided to fertilize herself with the remaining embryos from her original IVF procedure, her response was that her only other alternative was to destroy them and she was not ready to do that. She claimed that because she believes in God, and God gave each one of these embryos life, no man should be able to decide which one of them should live or die. It has since come to light that she also had the option to keep them frozen like is currently doing with other specimens, so that just could have been another bullshit answer. However if I may play “devils advocate” for a second, if she was being sincere and this really was the reason she did it, then here is what that means: Christians, “pro-life” politicians, people who oppose embryonic stem-cell research for religious reasons, your moral argument against her doing this goes out the window. After all, this is your same fundamental belief, isn’t it? Is this not the same reasoning you give as to why there should be no abortions and such? Well guess what - it works both ways.
The most common argument that I have heard is against Suleman’s inevitable dependence on “taxpayer money”. It is estimated that the cost of raising these children (many of which obviously have special medical needs) will cost upwards of three million dollars. First off, if people are so reluctant to help this woman with public monies, then why is such a big production being made of every single opportunity that is offered to her to make some money? Why are people calling her opportunistic and criticizing her possible desire to get money from doing interviews or writing a book or selling baby pictures? Would this not give her the very same money that the public doesn’t want taxpayers to be responsible for? Second, it tickles me that people have such an issue with this woman and her babies’ cost to the system, even though it is a minute fraction of the amount that taxpayers pay to subsidize the lifestyles of politicians and the upper class. Yet people don’t seem to be very upset about that.
Just to be clear, I don’t want this to sound like I am defending Suleman’s decisions, because I am not. In my humble opinion, she has definitely acted in an irresponsible and selfish way. There is nothing that she can say to convince me that having these babies without knowing how she would support them was a good idea. When you think of the fact that the doctors didn’t even know how many babies were in there, and that one almost died in the womb, you realize how close this came to being a disaster. In fact, the whole reason they had to induce this labor is because the seventh baby (which they hadn’t previously seen) had been cut off from the placenta had stopped growing. Now there are already three of the children who either are autistic or showing early symptoms of autism. Not to mention the countless other health issues that could pop up later. In the end, these are the repercussions of the choice that she made and she doesn’t have any one to blame for them but herself. Unfortunately, she will share these repercussions with 14 living, breathing human beings who did not ask to be a part of this circus. I still don’t think she realizes that what makes this a selfish move has nothing to do with whether or not she loves these babies, but with the notion that she put her own desires to procreate over any consideration that it may not be good for the children.
During Suleman’s last interview, I heard her admit that when she had these last embryos planted, she was “thinking with [her] heart and not with [her] head”. This statement, among other things, indicates that Suleman’s need for these children, which she cannot support financially or emotionally on her own, likely came from an emotional void in her life; the desire to create the person(s) that will provide her with the unconditional love she craves. I believe that she made the choice to do this hoping for the best, but knowing in the back of her mind that regardless of whether or not people approve of it, the public is not going to let her suffer with these babies on her own. I hate to be the one to break it to the lynch mob, but this is quite common. She certainly is not the only person guilty of this, she is just an extreme case; and if we are talking about the common interest of a society, then one woman giving birth to fourteen children is far less harmful to the collective than a few million teenagers and young women having only one or two or three that they can’t support, most of the time out of this same emotional void - which is exactly what is happening.
Although the media is profiting from this debacle, they will certainly try their hardest to pound this woman into submission; to force an apology or an admission of guilt out of her that will soothe the egos of the self-righteous. In return, she will just give half-ass answers and defensive excuses that will just be enough get her off the hot seat. As a result, no one will learn anything from this - not her, not us. You may not feel like there is any reason to sympathize with Nadya Suleman and her situation, but I do believe it would help us to understand it. You see, that is how problems are solved: not with punishment, not with personal attacks, but with analysis of the underlying thinking. Who knows, maybe gaining insight into what causes such shotty decision-making may help us prevent more of it (remember, there is also a 50 year old woman with quadruplets on the way, who was fertilized by the same doctor). So while we may feel that all the venomous criticism of Nadya Suleman is warranted, keep in mind that entertaining ourselves by bashing her for a problem that will neither start nor end with her will not get us any closer to a solution…
…assuming of course that a solution is what we want.
…yeah, him. I’m curious, though - exactly what is the need to have a counter-partisan rebuttal to follow an address from the President of the United States. I could be wrong, but i don’t recall ever seeing the democrats get a chance to rebut any one of the speeches given by the Crawford clown over the last 8 years. Was that a part of the deal made between parties? The republicans allow themselves to be seen clapping during Obama’s speech in exchange for 15 minutes in the spotlight for their newest token minority? Certainly seems that way. I can’t understand why anyone would allow this at a time when the government is trying to convince folks that partisan conflict is not an issue. On top of that, you would also think that if they were trying to convince America that they are dedicated to reviving the working class, they would keep the man now in charge of accelerating the Louisiana gentrification project out of the public eye. I guess Jindal’s supposed refusal of the Dems’ stimulus money, along with his age and his race, makes him the obvious choice to soothe conservatives starving for a counter to the Obama factor, and thus makes this showcase well worth the risk.
Congrats on your 15 minutes of fame, Bobby - and all you had to do was ignore the dire economic needs of your state. It’s not like the city needs rebuilding or anything. It’s certainly not like the citizens of Louisiana need you to put their well-being ahead of your resume. And its certainly not like federal money is flowing into your cities and landing in the pockets of businessmen and construction companies. Oh wait a minute - it is.
Anyway, I guess I wont say much more about Bobby Jindal’s disaster of a speech last night, cause it’s really not that important. It’s not like anyone took him very seriously. In his defense, it would be hard for anyone to give a speech immediately after Barack Obama, especially if they’re going to try painfully hard to sound like him. However, it was quite obvious to everyone i spoke to last night that this was not much more than a lame GOP attempt to show off their Great Brown Hope. Here’s some advice - get him some help with his speeches before 2012.
Before I say anything else, let me take a second to commend Eric Holder for making this speech (which i have conveniently added for those who have not seen in in the news). Although this thing we call “racism” is definitely alive and well, I have always felt that the race argument in this country is at best wasteful and unproductive because we are so unwilling to exchange dialogue with those on the other sides of racial lines. To be honest, I feel like we spend so much time and energy belly-aching about this “racism” among each other, that it takes away from valuable personal resources that we can be using to find solutions solve all the other socioeconomic issues we have. I’m not sure that dedicating the month current reserved for the apologists’ token “Black History Month” to this is a better idea than opening continuous lines of communication in our personal interactions and in the media, but just the mention of this in such a forum is a small step in the right direction. Its certainly interesting to hear it from the Attorney General - which i guess is the perfect segue to my next point.
As the U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder is now at the helm of one of the most powerful, race-driven institutions we have ever known - law enforcement. In order for him to participate in such dialogue, he would have to be willing to disassemble many of the archaic ideals that he was hired to defend. In order for this conversation to “open” and “frank”, it would have it also have to include the challenging of a historically oppressive judicial system that not only administers its “justice” in excessive amounts to minorities, but also helps keep many negative stereotypes in play. Truthfully, although I have grown quite weary of pointless ranting and raving about race, I am more than willing to participate wholeheartedly in the type of honest, open-minded dialogue that Holder is suggesting. In fact, I welcome the opportunity. If you tell me that it will be different this time and that we will actively explore solutions, I will bring the tea.
Mr. Holder however, should only show up if he can really deal with hearing some things he may not want to.
Unless you live in a rural neighborhood 50 miles North of Tokyo, chances are you have heard about the cartoon that appeared a couple days ago in the New York Post that is causing such a stir. A large number of black folks took to the streets yesterday (of course, led by the Rev. Al Sharpton) to protest outside the headquarters of the Post, claiming that the cartoon is calling Barack Obama a monkey. Today, the Post issued an apology for the incident.
I found out about this after I came across an article about it by CNN’s token african american go-to guy, Rev. Roland S. Martin. I have been speaking with friends and other folks over the past day and almost everyone is offended. I heard people talking about writing the Post a letter, calling them and even joining the protest. Honestly I am not disturbed at all by the cartoon, but I am a bit disappointed by the reaction to this whole thing. Let me explain.
First of all, just in case you haven’t read the NY Post in the last 20 years, let me inform you that not only is it owned by Rupert Murdoch and his racist FOX news conglomerate, but it is the probably the most racially biased rag in a city where the media (and laws for that matter) are historically biased against blacks and in favor of Jewish interest. I can probably pull a hundred things out of the Post that are just as racist as this cartoon. I guess the protesters must have missed those. It is entirely possible that the cartoonist and the editors at the Post meant this to be a play on the chimp story and meant nothing racist by it. It is also entirely possible that that they knew it would be taken as racially offensive and decided to print it anyway. Based on the history of the source, I would guess the latter. In either case, I really do not care. I have no interest in getting all excited about some stupid gesture in an insignificant racist rag.
What i can’t figure out is how these people are so lathered up about this incident, and are willing to take to the streets to protest this, but seem to have no desire to fight back against any of the other glaring social and economic injustices against minorities. I agree that racism is still very much alive in this society, but are these people telling me that with all these other things we need to change, THIS is the issue that we choose mobilize against? What about the huge discrepancies in the amounts of public resources allocated to black communities compared to other communities? What about the recent data that highlights police harassment of minorities via traffic stops? What about the privatized prison system that subcontracts “law enforcement” to make sure there is a constant inward flow of black males to increase their revenue streams? No one seems to be taking offense to that. I don’t see anyone making any calls or writing any letters to challenge this. What we are saying in effect to the establishment is: you can do whatever they want in our communities to oppress us; you can keep education and social reform out of our neighborhoods; you can keep disparaging numbers of our young men in prison; but you better do it quietly - you better not say anything insulting about us in public.
People like Roland Martin, Eric Adams, Sharpton and others will always be called upon by the establishment-owned media to inject enough race rhetoric into the social climate to distract the public from the real issues at hand. Following these men down the throat of every person or media outlet that makes a statement perceived as racist hasn’t gotten us anywhere to date, and serves only them and the establishment that they are ultimately helping by distracting us. These men will always seize these opportunities offered to them because the race argument makes them relevant. I don’t recall ever seeing Martin called upon by the networks to discuss anything that wasn’t related to blacks, race relations or for his angle as a black minister. Wouldn’t this also be racist by the same standards?
In my humble opinion, we can no longer allow these people to manipulate us emotionally, to serve their own agendas. We have had decades of this reactionary behavior by the masses, and the powers that be have used it to divert our attention from their actions that have put us on the brink of social and economic collapse. This will continue as long as we keep biting the bait and absolutely nothing will change. It disturbs me a bit to see that after all the talk this fall, this cycle still has not changed. People will go out in numbers to go protest against companies like the NY Post because they know that they can actually get the Post to apologize. Then they can feel like they took action to change something; like they fought the system and won. However, it’s a different story altogether when it comes to fighting back against the real system; against those responsible for the real racist crimes against humanity. A battle for change against the system that really has control will take a lot more than marching - it will call for radical thinking, strategic action and new ideas.
I guess the first thing i should say is that this post only applies to those who have been asleep for the past few centuries and somehow believed that this “bipartisanship” they speak of in the White House was actually possible. Sen. Judd Gregg’s withdrawal as President Obama’s nominee for commerce secretary is just more proof that most things in Washington will NEVER change. In fact, they are designed not to.
My question is, how believable is it that Gregg ever agreed with the agenda of the Obama administration in the first place? These “irreconcilable differences” couldn’t have just popped up out of nowhere after he accepted this nomination. Did Gregg just find out this week what side of the ticket Obama ran on? Unfortunately, this could not have come at a worse time for Obama and the stimulus bill he is trying to get passed. What was one of the key examples of someone from the other side of the aisle putting their party affiliation aside to try tonight things in Washington, now will just look to most like a token Republican nomination that backfired. I am pretty sure that conservatives are finding great satisfaction in the idea that a position in the current ruling cabinet just doesn’t look good enough on Sen. Gregg’s resume to risk being seated with Arlen Specter at the next GOP gala.
In the long-term, i guess it won’t be that big of a deal - Gregg will just be replaced and in most circles, this will be forgotten. I do hope that the Obama administration and the public will let this (as well as the current log-jam in Congress over this stimulus bill) serve as proof that we should not waste very much time on this ridiculous notion that “bipartisanship” is attainable - or even desirable for that matter.
I don’t think anyone is more proud of Barack Obama than I am. That is a bold statement given how much pride it seems that everyone has in this man and his achievements. That being said, I think this is the type of thing that we have to be very careful with.
I have heard many people over the last few days saying things like, “this is proof that there is nothing that you cannot do” - and I agree. However, I also heard friends of mine saying that Obama is the now the blueprint for the black man in America. Although this was the first time I heard it put into those words, there seems to be a general agreement with this concept in may circles. This is only to be expected - his moderate professional image lines up so perfectly with middle class ideals, you would only expect there to be droves of people wanting to see the same from their sons, and brothers and husbands. The idea i am getting (and this is based on my perception, of course) is that part of the excitement from the events of the last week comes from the popular conception that black men finally have an example of what they should be like.
I think we need to take a step back.
Barack Obama of course has achieved a number of phenomenal things, one of them being changing the scope of American politics forever. The thing that stands out about Obama to me though, is that first and foremost he is an exceptional individual. I don’t mean exceptional as in great, i mean exceptional as in unusual. Exceptional enough to transcend race, gender, nationality,culture or whatever other categories we create to segment society into groups we feel we can easily define. He is an strikingly moderate, profound, balanced individual who is the type of leader that we need right now.
However, while the image of such a man is extremely positive and inspiring, we would be doing ourselves a great injustice to accept this image as the model for black men or for anybody. Plain and simple, the man is an extraordinary human being. However, the definition of an extraordinary will change just as dynamically as the definition of ordinary. So if everyone one in a group strives to be like the prominent individual in that group, where will the next extraordinary individuals in that group come from? There are so many different ways that so many different people can change things and set new precedents going forward, and in my humble opinion we should all allow ourselves the social and philosophical freedom to explore them.
If there is something for us all to take from Barack Obama, it is that his greatness comes from his willingness to break the mold. In that sense, if we truly desire to be like him, we should then strive to not be like him.
..Barack Obama is the 44th President of the United States.
As I am saying it, it sounds like something I am rehearsing just to see if it sounds right - if it is really something I can see myself one day saying..
I underestimated how moved I would be by the events of the last 24 hours. It is finally starting to sink in. We have seen a man transcend race, gender, party and whatever other obstacles he has faced what could be the most storied events in human history. We have seen a man that no one knew a couple years ago, take to the streets and redefine the process of running a political campaign strategically and financially. In the process, he has become to many Americans a brother, a leader and more importantly, a symbol of exactly what the human race needs at this time - balance.
I have expected for some time that Obama would win this thing hands-down, so in theory I have been prepared for this for quite some time. That however, apparently has not prepared me for the moment. I am very happy, very excited, very proud. I am however, not satisfied.
This is only the beginning, and there is alot of work to do - by Obama, by you and by me. Americans today showed that they can galvanize when they are motivated to. President Obama will soon find out however, that Americans have very short memories. The novelty of this will soon fade, the honeymoon will be over and it will be time to deliver. That’s understandable, however we must understand that one man can’t deliver what we’re asking for alone. He will never be able to heal the self-inflicted financial woes that Americans are bleeding from. Obama being President will not keep these astronomical numbers of black men out of prison. These are things that we all need to contribute to for us to have a chance to change them. We need to change our way of thinking. We need to keep this momentum and keep the channels of communication open through all levels of society. That is the only way that we can turn this inspiration into commitment. The only way we can turn commitment into results. Barack Obama has given the masses something that we haven’t had to this point - an image that is representative of how quickly the tallest, strongest barrier can fall. As I watched him speak so eloquently to the very people that have expressed very clearly the confidence they had in him, it felt like I was watching a man who understands how difficult a job we have to do - but whose confidence comes from his conviction; his belief in our ability to do it. The question is, does the rest of America feel the same way. Whether or not we do, the man has stepped up and accepted his responsibility - it is now time that he rest of us step up and accept ours.
My cynicism is not likely to change on one November night, mostly because i think it’s healthy. Tonight however, is a night for celebration; for President Obama and those who came together to elect him. So go ahead, enjoy the moment..
…all come down to this one night - two years in the making.
I have to say, those of you who know me know a couple things about me. First, I have admired Barack Obama for quite sometime. His rapid rise to this stage is a bit of a surprise, but the way he has handled it thus far, is not. Second, I am the living embodiment of the word “cynic”. These two things would normally work against each other when it comes to the subject at hand, but not in this case.
I think that my cynicism has served me especially well amidst all the hype. Over the last year and a half, I have watched as Obama became more than a movement - but as a brother of mine said the other day, he has become a brand - complete with merchandising and all. This has disturbed me a little because I have always felt like people are allowing the hype to make them lose focus of the fact that this can only mean a beginning and not an end. I am very wary of this and will continue to be. However, I woke up this morning to go to my local voting precinct, and the minute I walked out of front door I could feel the buzz. Something was stirring..it was as though the environment was alive again.
I proceeded to my local voting precinct and could not believe not on the lines that had formed, but the overall excitement of the people that were besides themselves about the fact that the moment that they had been waiting for had finally arrived. They had been on the line since very very early in the morning and were ecstatic to be a part of the moment.
Now, I have been very careful (and warned others to be as well) not to act like all is well if Obama gets elected. I still feel like this is what’s happening, but honestly, even I can’t help but feel inspired. I didn’t expect that anything is saw today would move me very much, but it did. When I saw the droves of people who only a little while ago were apathetic and unconcerned, now taking the first step toward changing their environment, it reminded me of exactly what is possible when the people are driven. Maybe we will see the change that we have been hearing so much about; maybe we never will. From what I have seen though, enough has changed already for us to build on.
By early morning, we will know for sure the outcome of this saga. Whether or not we ever get to see the man who has mobilized millions of people take the reigns, I believe it is yet to be revealed how much he has changed already. This is one of those moments in time that doesn’t announce itself - in one instance it is here and in another it is not. This is our moment folks - all of us. It is time for us to sieze it and run with it.
I really don’t like working in the Wall Street area, for a number of reasons. The droves if empty suits walking around is one negative, but another thing about working in the Wall Street area is how crowded it always is. It’s crowded normally, but the recent influx of tourists makes it almost impossible to navigate the streets. I can imagine why of all the places in NYC to see, why the Wall Street area would be crowded. It’s Wall Street after all, and on top of the New York Stock exchange, there is ground zero which is now one most popular tourist attractions on the planet, it seems. The most crowded of all the places in the area is Century 21 - no, not the real estate brokerage. For those of you have never been to NYC, Century 21 is an all-purpose department store, mostly popular for their blowout prices on designer clothing. This place is packed with tourists all day every day.
I can’t count how many times I have thought to myself that the people that are spending any money are those that don’t live here…and thinking about it, it makes perfect sense. Obviously with the current strength (could you use a term more loosely?) of the US dollar, it’s cheaper to come here, and it’s certainly cheaper to buy just about anything while you’re staying here - except gas maybe.
As many of you are aware of by now, the honorable Rev. Jesse Jackson will not be speaking at the Democratic National Convention after doing so at every convention since 1984. The reason for this has not been made clear by the Democrats so your guess is as good as mine, but I for one am not surprised or disappointed. I said that on my recent appearance on News and Notes and heard a surprising amount of negative comments about it, so maybe I should make it clear why I feel this way.
For starters, I will admit i am a bit biased. I am not the biggest fan of Jackson and never really have been, for reasons that are honestly not relevant to the subject at hand.
For many years, Rev. Jackson has had the honor of being black America’s go to man in the political arena. I would imagine that he has gotten quite used to this, just like lazy politicians and the lazy media have…fine. Now that black America’s political interests have a new prime subject, what I have sensed from Jackson and some other prominent figures in the black community is a sense of saltiness that the focus is no longer on them. Makes you wonder whether they have been in support of the community all along, or in support of their own resumes.
In light of Jackson’s recent comments about Barack Obama, why should anyone feel sorry that he is not being included?
Now just to be clear, i am not speaking to him actually saying what he said about Obama. After all, the man is entitled to whatever opinion he may have. On top of that, who knows what was going through his mind when he said it. He may have even been kidding, or drunk, or high. We will never know for sure. What I am speaking to, is him making these comments knowing verygiven his awareness of what the fallout could be - not just for him, but for the Obama campaign that he claims he is a deep supporter of. If we are even talking about him not being a part of this, then he must be important. So how do you think the Obama camp feels about someone so influential in the black political arena, saying these things about him and his attitude toward blacks? What reason would the Democrats have for inviting Jesse Jackson to speak after such an error in judgement. How much ammunition would it give the opponent to have this man speaking at the most important event thus far, who not so long ago was talking about castrating Obama for “talking down” to the very people who are his primary support base. Jackson wasn’t making any effort to be considerate of Obama, or Jesse Jackson Jr. for that matter. So why make any special effort then to have him there, simply because he is Jesse Jackson? Would this not be more of the same nonsense of that we have seen in the past? I don’t think that because Jesse Jackson has been around the arena so long that there should be any hesitation to pull the plug on him if he is hurting more than he is helping.
So those of you who were waiting for that powerful image of the grand old warrior handing down the torch to the our latest and greatest, let it go. I really don’t see this as a snub at all. This is a game that Jackson has been involved in for quite some time, and in the context of that game, this move makes perfect sense to me, and it should to him as well.
