Frank Talk

white is right

2006-08-07T11:52:00.000-07:00

White is right-- is wrong...
Why does everything considered right also considered white? why If I do postive and productive things as a black man am I considered to be acting white? Why can't I be a vegetarian and not be charged asacting white? Why can't I listen to talk radio and not be charged as acting white? Why can't I enjoy hiking at a national park and not be called white or granola? why can't my children particiapate in debate, chess, and horse back riding without being called "uppitdy"? Why is intelligence almost always asociated with white people, culture, or establishments? Why isit when teahcers teach about historical figures that represent intelligence, honor, integrity,and courage the references are predominately white people and their accomplishments? Damn it!- why is white considered right?--that in itself ain't right.
I guess what makes my Black people regard me as white when I am not acting stereotypically Black iswhat my actions may represent. To many of them acting intelligent and doing things that are ignorantly associated with white people makes me imtimidating. To them I represent an extension of the white racist system that seeks to destroy, discredit, and dominate them. To them I am a threat when I speak intelligently, because to them I am not talking to them--I am talkingat them or rather down to them. To them I have been infiltrated and possesed by the white alienforces that be. i seek to take over the Black planet with white thoughts in a Black body. i become the enemy by doing the very thing that I was told would make me the good guy and likely hero in theBlack community--Educating Myself.
when i do my seminars on word association (with a pre-dominately onon-white group)something intersting happens when I come to the word:"white". Words associated with white include: Violent, rich, intelligent, and evil. when you have word associations like these there is no we as a black people (and people in general) are so confused. The color associated with the group of people in power in America (and on this planet) is associated with money, violence and intelligence. it is no wonder when a Black person is intelligent (or acts intelligent)he or she will get critisized by other Black people because of the other associations that alsoexists. An intelligent Black person is acting white because we have been wrongfully taught that intelligence is associated with white people. Too many of us automatically think that a Blackperson is intelligence at another Black person's expense--because that is precisely our perception of how the white man does it. So I geuss one of the cons of being Black and intelligent is that you run the risk of being associated with white people. When will be inttelligent be associated with black people or better yet associated with the person that worked hard for it? Because for too many Black youth if being right is considered white they would volunteer to be wrong and delay if not eliminate the opportunities to be successful.

STOP BITCHIN' ABOUT SNITCHIN'

2006-06-16T00:34:00.000-07:00

Stop bitchin' about snitchin'
why is everyone trippin' about this snitchin' "phenomenon" in hiphop? Why are we acting like we don't understandand know why rappers don't snicth? Why are we acting like we hip-hop and the term rappers isn't code word forblack people and culture? So essentially--why do we act like we don't know why Black poeple do not like to make a habit of snitching on people eventhough they have been victimized and risk letting the aggressor gounpunished according to American legal system forever? Today lets make vow to stop bitchin' about snitchin'.
My homie called me the other day and said: "Man thats fucked up that Busta won't say nothing so that the cops can catch this guy. He know that he saw something--we need to stop that shit in our communities." And to that Isay this:
Have we forgotten about the countless times kops have pulled innocent Black people over and treated them as crimminals? Have we forgotten how kops enter Black communities and all of a sudden can't determine the differencea citizen and a crimminal due to the fact that they have taken guilty because of association way to far? So when the kops have spent generation after generation railroadin' Black people based their racist assumptions and stereotypes there is a tendancy for Black people to retain what little power they have in relation to law enforcement and that power is exercised when they plead the fifth...
Furthermore this cutural trait of no snitchin' is passed down I believe from the slave experience. I have read that Harriet Tubman was alot more militant than our lily white teachers would lead us to believe. Tubman carried a gun with her when she led a group of fugitives away from their masters. The gun was taken to shot anyone who didn'y wanto to be freed, and the ones who weren't strong to make it either due to injury or because of cowardliness. Tubman threatned to kill her fellow brothers and sisters because they were potential SNITCHES.Tubman was just one of our cultural heroes that we know and love and who were not snitches and who did not like snitches. Was Martin Luther King in the cell in Selma Albama snitchin' about what the next move of movement was going to be? Was Nelson Mandela snitchin' when he was in a jail cell for 26 years? And some of people believe the death of Malcolm X was carried out because he snitched about Elijah Muhammad's relationswith teen age girls. Why are we kidding ourselves: HISTORICALLY SNITCHES ARE NOT WELCOME IN THE BLACK COMMUNITY.
So when we fast forward to 2006 there is no coincidence why Black people frown upon snitchin'. Cause' unlike the white community we do not align ourselves with the establishment or the institution of privilage.These things are the enemy. So whether it's CPS, the principal, mall security, or the kops we like to keep our traps shut with the fear we may too be suspects in some bizzare way--maybe not that same day but there will be a day when they will be asking someone to snitch on you. We know the kops do not tallythe times we have helped them, the times we have sacrificed our credibilty with our firends and comrades to help an institution that does not protect our interests. To put it simply when your enemie's enemy is your enemy,then your enemy is your friend. And when push comes to shove instead of snitchin' we would rather retain some kind of power and take matters in our own hands and pray the next persondoesn't snitch on us!

Dreams of not dreaming anymore

2006-02-25T17:21:00.000-08:00

I have been thinkin' about my dream lately. In my dreams I am able to do things I can't do in reality. I am able to hang out with rap stars, play professional sports, do back flips, and fly over buildnings to name few. But what if I learned how to do a back flip, dunk, or made it big in hip hop, what would be the purpose of my dreams then? Why would I have to dream. Do we sub consciously discourage ourselves not to fullfill our dreams so we can have a reason to dream some more?

say what you said when you said what you said to me

2006-02-25T17:20:00.000-08:00

True sight is seeing with your eyes closed. - Logic Amen
Living is not living waiting to die. - Logic Amen
People want to buy into what Black people were born into. – Logic Amen
Even the best leader follows the truth. - Logic Amen
A smile looks good on everyone. - Logic Amen
I recently turned down dollars all I want is change. – Logic Amen
If the people are rich in spirit, poverty does not exist. – Logic Amen
If she is good enough to lay with, she is good enough to stay with. -
Logic Amen
Always question the answers that leads to more answers. – Logic Amen
To say God is limited is saying God doesn’t exist. – Logic Amen
Death is the only thing that makes older people younger than you. – Logic
Amen
If you ignore me when I speak, don’t punish me if I begin to scream. –
Logic Amen

Appearance

2006-02-25T17:16:00.000-08:00

Appearance is everything in a capitalistic society. In a free marketsubstance and performance is inferior to how a product is marketed andbought in this society-sad but, true. Now after you have bought a productyou may wish you hadn’t because the insides weren’t as good as thepackaging, but that’s your problem not the seller’s. NBA over the yearsdefinitely has an image problem (Players with drug addiction, legalproblems, a huge fist fight that left fans beat up by players) and the newdress code was an attempt to cover up a depreciating product in a lot ofpeople’s eyes. If someone is paying you top dollar to perform they want toget their money’s worth even if you are not in the game. The fans and thecommissioner want to convince the public that the NBA is a good product.And the fans want to believe their money has some leverage in theappearance of the product they are buying. In simple terms: If you agreeto wear a uniform for millions of dollars, stand by your word as soon asyou enter the building before the people that pay your pockets. But Iunderstand the concern of the players also. To the players money was told to give them freedom-freedom to say whatthey want, date who they want, consume what they want, live where theywant, and thus wear what they want. But what they don’t understand isthat freedom isn’t free in a capitalistic society. In fact as I look athistory I am starting to understand freedom isn’t bought with money.I remember looking at a book on the history of lynching in America and Isaw something I hadn’t noticed before. The Black slave being lynched wascovered in rags hanging lifeless by a rope. However the white menattending the lynching were not only wearing smiles to cover up theirdisgusting act, but they were also wearing spotless suits with ties andhats to match. The only innocent person in the picture was the Black manin tattered clothes and he was dead hanging from a tree. I suppose thereis some credence to what Iverson said when he stated: “Just because youput a guy in a tuxedo doesn’t mean his a good guy”.If you wear a smile with nice clothes you can fool the public to believeyour outside represents a good product when they open the box. Now I amnot saying it is your job to fool the public with good dress and poorperformance. What I am saying is that this capitalistic society is shallowand to truly be success in this society you have to increase yourmarketability. Do not seek to fool the public with good dress, rather useit to attract them and insure them the performance is just as good if notbetter.

The Death of Tookie (contintued)...

2005-12-13T15:56:00.000-08:00

And let us not forget that Tookie was a product of his environment. I know that sounds trite, but what I mean is: There are thousands of Tookies in the ghettos of America. They are victims of racism and are thus educated to hate themselves and to shatter their reflections in the image of people that look like them. You killed Tookie but you didn’t kill the conditions that taught him to kill.

More on Tookie…
Its funny because the CRIPS started off as: Community Revolutionaries In Peace. However after the influx of drugs (heroine and cocaine) the once community building organization turned into a violent gang used to extort money from rivals to compensate for lack of resources in the community. Lack of resources will cause a people to do drastic things. Social scientists know this but we haven’t successfully implemented measures and methods to bring enough resources to these communities to ease the stresses that lead to violent and non-productive behaviors.

How many Tookies are walking the streets right now? How can we prove that capital punishment really deters people from creating violent crime? How does capital punishment and intensive (at times abusive) law enforcement stop people from committing violent crime? How are people who commit crimes because they are traumatized by lack of resources going to learn to solve their problems non-violently when law enforcement are so aggressive and violent towards them for the most minor criminal infraction? We have to ask ourselves: Has violent crime gone down since law enforcement has put the hammer down on violent crime and drug dealing? If crime has gone down how can we automatically associate tougher penalties with the decrease of violent crime? How do we know that the work of the people and community organizations isn’t helping to prevent violent crime? The states that have capital punishment on the books and are tough on murder—have murder numbers gone down?
Just some thoughts on Tookie.

The Death of Tookie

2005-12-13T12:18:00.000-08:00

As Tookie was laid to rest there are some important things to think about. I hear people saying that he started the CRIPS and that he killed hundreds if not thousands by inspiring senseless death associated with gangs. I agree Tookie has lived a meaningful life, made plenty of mistakes, was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize, repented for his sins (in my book) and thus can be laid to rest with no qualms or complaints from me. But there is a but…It’s one thing to say he should die, its another thing to say he should fry. We as a society and people should not degrade the event of death. Putting someone to death should never be cynical or condescending. The more we look at death in this manner the more we are responsible for the environment that creates death and violent people. What is more interesting than anything is the man who denied him clemency for his murders has murdered countless people in his movies. Arnold assisted in the imagery of violence just as much as Tookie acted it out in real life. If Arnold had been a rap star with the same amount of violent content, they would have said his music perpetuates, condones, and increases the amount of violence in American society. Why don’t people see the connection between violent movies and the acceptance of violence to solve problems in the inner city? To be continued...

How racial profiling hurts white people...

2005-12-05T12:10:00.000-08:00

Have you ever really thought about how racial profiling hurts white. I mean here is this racist and biased mechanism that stalks non-white people based on the myth that we have a greater proclivity for crime, but at the same time it over looks the profiles of societies' deadliest criminals. Can you imagine how much better off this society would be if they racially profiled middle aged white men the way they do every black person? What if they racially profiled Gary Ridgeway and Bundy the way they do us? Wouldn't you feel alot safer if they traked the purchases associated with the crimes of middle aged white men the way they profile black men in nice luxary cars and late modeled American cars inthe hood? There is no way that a white dude should be able to buy a bucket of gasoline without them being profiled (license recorded, background check. You know the shit they do when they profile us) based on the profile for serial arsonists! Whatever the profile for sex offenders is that criteria should be scrutinized when a white man is involved in it, seeing that the figures show they are more likely to be sexual offenders.

The way of white privilage allows white crimminals to have professional careers and slip under the radar for racial profiling. White privilage allows them not to be targets of the harrassment associated with racial profiling because their profile fits the profile of a "normal law abiding citizen". But since our profile includes our race (our race is the determining factor), we can not escape our profile no matter what job we have, what kind of car we drive, what kind of name we have, no matter the color of the mate we have, or no matter where we live. In fact in some cases these things make the scrunity even stronger because it is implied in racial profiling that Black people are not supposed to leave the secure confines of the ghetto and if they do it's becaus they are up tp no good! I have been targeted for many crimes in white neighborhoods because I was one of the only Black people around and that in itself is suspicous.

But as the Black people are being blamed for these crimes through racial profiling it takes the attention away from the "normal" white person living right next to you plotting to kidnap your child and kill them in ways not appropiate for this blog. So, all in all this makes the white neighborhoods a whole lot more unsafe, because they so often are looking for the wrong person based on their racist theories and myths. If I was white I wouldn't be worried about the black gang member accross town doing me harm, I would worry about "Good ole" white boy Bill down the street who gets drunk, kills his wife and kids because she was having an affair and threatening to leave him. Who in the midst of running away from police drives his car into three other vehicles killing everybody but himself (It almost always happens that way). Then again you might not watch this person because they may be on the police force!

living and dying...

2005-12-05T12:06:00.000-08:00

Dying is fundamentally living waiting to die. Living is knowing that death is apart of the after life. Once you have children or have taught another person the basics to making them grow to be a better person than you--you have basically accepted death because you have created your substitute.

Whose democracy are "WE" creating in IRAQ...?

2005-11-08T15:03:00.000-08:00

The US says they are tryin' to create and establish a democracy in Iraq? But if this was really true wouldn't the US (in the spirit of a real democracy) give the people of Iraq the choice to let America stay there and also the choice to have democracy as their form of government? I mean it seems America came there to overthrow a dictator and they did, but what makes them any less than a dictator when the people aren't allowed to vote if they should be allowed to stay there or not.

Because at this point, the US I have read, can not differientiate between terrorists and citizens--insurgents and those who simply resist US millitary occupation. Once you kill an innocent native of Iraq, even the people who were for America are going to be aganist them in honor of their relative(s) killed. In the spirit of a "TRUE DEMOCRACY" shouldn't the people be able to chose if they want a democracy or not? In the spirit of democracy shouldn't the people be able to chose if they want the Americans there or not. HOW GOOD IS THE DEMOCRACY YOUR PUSHING THROUGHOUT THE WORLD WHEN THE PEOPLE CAN'T DECIDE IF THEY WANT IT WANT IT OR NOT? I THINK WE NEED TO COME UP WITH A WORD THAT DESCRIBES THE ACT OF FORCING DEMOCRACY (OR ANY OTHER FORM OF GOVERNMENT) ON FOREIGNERS ON THEIR NATIVE LAND. Let me know if you have any good words for this action.

Its just a game...

2005-11-03T10:17:00.000-08:00

Why you gettin' so mad man, it's just a game--fuck dat'! Why cats want to say it's only a game when they lost or when they are talkin' to the person who is mad cuz' they lost. Shit if it's just a game then being pissed off because your team mate is launchin' up off balanced three pointers like he's in the NBA is apart of the game also.

These are my sentiments after cutting a 30 point deficient to 11 only to have my team mate shoot us out of our hard earned hustle and possible comeback. Oh did I mentioned he is the main reason we haven't won a game after 9 tries. We are the only defeated team at the evening league at the Y. With 50 seconds to go in the game down 20+ he didn't understand the principle of a team oriented game should dictate the shots and passes (or lack of!!) even if the game is out of reach. Why... because it shows you give a fuck that we worked hard as a TEAM to comeback and don't appreciate you throwing up threes like a drunk center!

My team mates had the nerve to get mad at me because I started to get dressed when there was time still on the clock after witnessing my man sprint in front of his team and cast up a fade away three pointers from like Glen Rice range. I didn't pay 20 bucks to watch a cat take bad shots--I could do that for free watching the clippers on the tube...

So we can can get happy and brag when we win a game based on great teamwork, but we can't be mad and get dressed before the game ends if we don't play like a team and get blown by 20. Its just a game--yeah but what part of the game is that?
Nuff said.

When should Football Players hit?

2005-10-25T13:56:00.000-07:00

Ken Hamlin and the contradiction…
There seems to be a double standard or a lack of understanding when it comes to professional athletes who train and compete in violent sports. Ken Hamlin was assaulted the other day outside a nightclub in Seattle’s Pioneer’s Square and was hospitalized after his skull was fractured due to being struck in the head with a street sign. It didn’t take long for the media to get started with their take on things. Here we go: Ken Hamlin shouldn’t have been there in the first place. Pro athletes should stay away from nightclubs. Its their responsibility to avoid these places and fights at that matter. Ken Hamlin should have just walked away when the confrontation began to avoid the potential of being hurt. Ken Hamlin is a role model and whatever he does reflects on to the young and vulnerable who adore him. Ken Hamlin was seen on the video recording breaking away from security agents trying to get at a target outside of view—he shouldn’t have done that. He was looking for trouble. There were people who chimed in and said the Pioneer Square area has been a violent place ever since they have adopted a hip-hop play list in the clubs. I’ll conclude with the contradiction connecting hip-hop with violence, but for now lets looks at the Hamlin contradiction…

Let me peep you to some “game” about Ken Hamlin if you didn’t know already—dude is good, I mean damn. I mean so good he has the potential to be great someday (That is if he recovers fully from a fractured skull). The reason Hamlin is so good because he is a an absolute terror on the field. At 6’2, 209 pounds Hamlin is known for his devastating hits he administers on opposing deer in headlights. To make a long story short Hamlin starts and is appreciated so much by the Hawks because he is very good at administering pain and consequence to opposing offenses. He has been trained to use his muscular frame to administer pain. His job and pay depend on his ability to violently collide with opposing receivers, QBs, running backs etc. He provides the perfect product for those highlight films depicting the leagues best and hardest hitters. Lets be real the NFL makes a lot of money off of players like Hamlin. They record him at his best (hitting people violently) and sell it to eager fans who appreciate this type of excitement. Whether us football fans want to admit it or not—most of us watch football for the great hits. The score and cheerleaders are a close second. What was the score when Jack Tatum broke dudes neck? Who won the game? What was the score when Lawrence Taylor broke Theisman’s leg? We all remember these hits but we don’t remember much of anything else. My point is that I watch football for the hits (it’s a big part of the marketing scheme in football) and I know I am not alone in this fascination with hard hits.

We fans grow to love these football players who hit hard on the field, but when we find out they are not avoiding contact in the public we act surprised and wonder what is wrong with them--That’s a contradiction. For a moment I thought it was a cultural or racial thing when I heard these same journalists who would celebrate one of Hamlin’s devastating hits and then get on the radio or print saying: He needs to mature or he needs to stay inside the house and not go places where he knows trouble lurks. I think there are some subtle racial undertones with the situation. Yeah I think white folks to a certain degree think they own a Black person (especially athletes) when that Black person works for the establishment and gets paid well for it. But more so I think it is a culturally thing. However, it is not a culturally thing that is exclusive to Black men but to men who are physically superior to the average man. I think if these scrawny journalists transformed into a being who was physically superior than the average man in height and muscle structure (like Hamlin) they too would understand why people of that makeup are not scared to defend themselves and at times initiate contact. But there is more to consider…

I have heard that Hamlin knocked out a dude for assaulting his girlfriend. Why is the media so quick to criticize a man protecting a woman? In a society where respect for women is dwindling, we should condone men “steppin’ up” to defend their women. Oh snap another contradiction: Why is it when Black men are bashing women in hip-hop and film people have a fight, but when they defend their honor they should walk away? It’s obvious not only are most of these journalists physically challenged when it comes to confrontation they are also vaginal when it comes to defending their women. I would be damn of I let someone disrespect my wife (or a girl friend I loved like a wife). Citizens that protect other citizens deserve the same respect that law enforcement gets. If Hamlin was protecting his girlfriend from a violent man, he’s already a hero in my book.

It was later reported that the same dude and his buddies were waiting for him outside the club. Somewhere in the midst of this Hamlin’s brother was reported being involved, which prompted Hamlin to run towards a group of people opposing his brother. Now if Hamlin was on the field, we would want him to hit the opposing forces threatening the other people on our team (the girlfriend and brother). If it comes out that Hamlin was in fact aiding his brother in tribulation, how can we expect him to walk away from him? That’s just foolish. All of a sudden we didn’t like to see Hamlin running to hit someone on camera (Part of the melee was captured on security cameras). First we need to reserve our comments and critique until we get all the details. Plenty of journalists had no idea what happened, but were quick to comment—not good. Secondly, asking a football player to be praised for hitting people and then turn that ego off at a club is easier said than done. Just be consistent….either you want them to hit or not.

"Bush dosen't Care About Black People..."

2005-10-25T13:05:00.000-07:00

Hurricane Katrina

The media coverage of the victims of Hurricane Katrina was racist as usual. It was apparent that even in the wake of natural disaster, the media wanted to take the opportunity to perpetuate the stereotype of the Black criminal. Though there was a minority of people raiding stores and looting ATMs, the majority of people were dealing with the trauma in shell shock and sadness. Lets remind our selves that it was trauma that even the looters were experiencing even when they were committing criminal offenses. Let us also remember it was trauma that made these same people do these things before the Katrina even hit New Orleans! Because before they were flooded with that bitch Katrina they were flooded with that bitch Cocaine and Heroin. Anyone with little knowledge in sociology would know that prolonged subjection to poverty leads to a life of violence, greed, and other anti-social behavioral traits. It was apparent that the media was not forgiving of this state of trauma before the flood and wasn’t going to take the responsibility let alone the opportunity to present these people in a different light during the flood. The media wasn’t ready or willing to give these people the benefit of the doubt.

"I hope we realize that the people of New Orleans weren't just abandoned during the hurricane," Sen. Barack Obama said last week on the floor of the Senate. "They were abandoned long ago—to murder and mayhem in the streets, to substandard schools, to dilapidated housing, to inadequate health care, to a pervasive sense of hopelessness."
-Barack Obama

This was the perfect opportunity for the American media to make these people look human. Make them look like people who were displaced and victims of an act of GOD. But instead they drove images of “crazy” Black looters stealing shoes in the fulfillment of their crass consumer fantasies. They took the opportunity to talk people killing and raping each other in the Astrodome. These things don’t fit the image of victims, but rather aggressors! I am not saying these heinous crimes should be overlooked and excused because they were victims of Katrina. But what I am saying is this: If you are really concerned about the welfare of the people affected by this disaster why would you feed the public images and news that makes them look like the aggressors? How does showing Black people during desperate times acting like savages encourage the general public to help them? I am not saying the public wouldn’t and didn’t help because of these images and news reports, but precisely how does it help it? Because after Katrina is over us Black people still have to deal with the repercussions of the savage imagery and news used to describe them during this disaster. So the public after seeing these images of looters and killers are going to be scared to death when it comes to relocation for these people. They are going to be like: Is that nigger looting that store going to be the person that the red cross is going to relocate to my community and go to school with my kids. And this just what the citizens are saying. What do you think the law enforcement is doing after they see these images? They are refueling their tanks of racial profiling and the tactics and procedures that follow it’s protocol. So not only were Black people hit my Hurricane Katrina, they were also hit by Hurricane Media!!!

It was irresponsible for the media to jeopardize the aid and sentiment of the majority by sensationalizing the criminal acts of the minority. There are displaced victims of Katrina who will be stereotyped as criminals and savages based on the media’s portrayal of criminal minority. And when I say criminal minority I mean the ones doing the crass armed looting, killing and raping. People not paying for food and eating it after a hurricane destroyed the store the food was in are not criminals—point blank. Anyone who disagrees has never been hungry without money---nuff said.
I can remember someone telling me that the journalists and reporters were criticizing some people looting Nikes and saying something to the effect of: These people are stealing Nikes, things they don’t need in a in a crisis like this. But this is grossly taken out of context when you look at the fact that we live in a capitalist society that promotes and encourages crass consumerism! So this means that the majority of the people in this country own and consume things they do not need. There doesn’t have to be a hurricane to figure out that all those shoes you have you DON’T NEED! All the FAST FOOD YOU CONSUME YOU DON’T NEED! All the TVs you have in your HOME YOU DON’T NEED! The CARS you have YOU DON’T NEED! The list could go on and on and on and on and on… The consumption of these unnecessary products should be criticized whether it’s purchased, stolen, or donated when you understand the basic premise of capitalism is in order for you to have--- someone in turn has to have not!

2,000 On A Debit Card—Come on get real!
To make things worse they offered the adult victims 2,000 dollars on a debit card to: Get them back on their feet—HA. Are you shittin’ me 2,000 dollars can get me back on my feet now after my credit card and student loan disaster let alone a NATURAL DIASTER! I don’t know what was worse—them offering a measly 2gs to these people are the fact that it was only good for a freakin’ weekend. This is ridiculous. They gave the 911 victims a million, but give the Black majority of Katrina victims 2gs—absolutely unbelievable! As if these people were hoping and praying for a natural disaster so they could strike it rich. And they wonder why many Black people don’t consider themselves Americans. The reason is simply: We don’t feel we are treated like one! It was as if they were calculating how much some of the looters got from the ATMS and the destroyed banks to determine how much money to allot the victims. I’m not saying they really did this, but come on can you think of another rationale for such a small amount in a short amount of time for such a huge catastrophe? Shouldn’t the distribution of money be comparable to the amount of destruction? They indirectly told Black people: What happens to you deserves our minimum attention (monetary, military, etc..) These victims should have at least gotten 50,000 dollars. But it was like they didn’t want to help the poor and Black for nothing. Or maybe they didn’t want to help them for anything humane! It is evident like I said earlier the poor Blacks were being punished for being poor and Black. Since this country counters crime and ignorance (Lack of education) with punishment and not rehabilitation, the poor Black people of this region (Based on being the murder capital, lacking educational achievement among the poor, etc) were serving a life sentence that could not be pardoned even by one of the worst natural disasters ever! These people in the eyes of the feds were still criminals. You are to clothe, feed, and provide some medical attention to criminals, but you are never to forget they are CRIMINALS!

It has been reported that the victims used the 2,000 dollars debit cards to solicit strip clubs. Now Neo Cons and the like are saying: “SEE I TOLD YOU SO THOSE IGNORANT POOR FOLKS SPENT OUR HARD EARNED TAX MONEY ON LIQOR AND TITTIES!!” Again the media chooses to report the minority of people that chose to spend their money in strip clubs. But what is really being said here? What is the real argument here? Is the argument not to go to strip clubs or is the argument: Go to strip clubs but just don’t do it with FEMA relief debit cards! Why do you think the people who went to strip clubs to “get away” from the stresses in their life would stop after another traumatic occurrence in their life? Who are we to say how they deal with the stress of losing their homes and family members. For those of you that say: They should have been spending that money on food. How do we know they didn’t spend that money on food and clothing prior to going to the club? Why do we find it necessary to audit poor Black people? Do we do this when natural disasters hit white people? So do you not donate money or allow tax money to be allotted to poor people because a minority of people chose to spend it on something you don’t morally agree with. If that is the case shouldn’t the government that issued the cards have taken the initiative to make the cards only good for “necessary” items?

Bush doesn’t care about Black people…
And for the people that were whining because of Kanye West’s comments are obviously ignorant when it come to President Bush. If you haven’t forgotten Bush refused to attend a meeting with NAACP, saying that he declined the invitation because he was tired of the NAACP criticizing him (This would probably be in response to one member saying he was comparable to Hitler). Let us remember he did this approximately a month before the elections against John Kerry. He also during his first administration refused to show up to the Un Council on racism in South Africa. To many like myself (who do not have the opportunity to sit down with the president and personally talk about race relations), perception is reality. So what perception are we already skeptical Black people supposed to have of a president after he has on two occasions refused to address issues pertinent to the Black (global) community? It is his responsibility to be the president to all the citizens and if there is a section of the nation that feels “snubbed” or “Bamboozled”, then it is responsibility to address those perceptions whether they are good or bad. It is irresponsible for a PRESIDENT to be arrogant and take a school yard approach to criticism and say: “You guys are always on my case so I ain’t gonna’ listen to you. I am going to ignore any criticisms you may or may not have!” So at worse the president is ignorant. And the people who defend him and spit at Kanye are equally ignorant of the president’s relationship with Black people. IF HE CARES ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE THEN SHOW UP TO AN EVENT AND ADDRESS THE ISSUES THAT CONCERN THEM—CAUSE SHIT THERE WERE SOME BLACK PEOPLE THAT VOTED FOR HIM.