Prometheus 6

Bacon has my respect.

The problem isn't that Obama's admonishing some of the negative traits of the black community. Black folk hear that stuff all the time. Most of us every Sunday, right? The problem is that he's perpetuating the racist myth of pathological blackness. He's proving those of us who refuse to criticize black folks in the presense of white folks right: mainstream America is all too exuberant to look down on African Americans and forgive their own racism.

When I hear Obama blast institutional racism and white pathologies like their rate of drug use, or their deadbeat fathers, or the teachers who place black children in class that are lower than the children's indicative scores on standardized tests; when I hear him say the problem within the black community exist in every community, that what makes black problems "special" is the mixture of historical racism, current racism, and human frailty, then, I'll listen to him blast black folk. Until then, he and everyone else like him can be quiet.

Yesterday, I had two separate encounters with groups of young black men that, among other things, only served to reinforce my position that Obama's approach, which I call the "Roy Innis-Jive Nationalist-Pseudo-Conservative-Hustler's Strategy", is all wrong and more about elevating the status of the person offering the critique than trying to help young black folks.

The first incident occurred on a city bus. I was enroute to an Obama fundraiser that was being held in the far southern reaches of the city at the home of a black woman who was a retired member of the state legislature. As the bus passed through downtown a group of six young black men boarded and sat down in the rear of the bus where I was sitting. The bus was full but nobody was standing. They were full of high spirits and laughing and talking. One of them began telling his partners a story about a fight he had been in with another guy at the home of a former girlfriend. I never learned what the fight was really about but it was not about the ex-girlfriend.

The story-teller used the word "nigger" about four or five times before I leaned over, got his attention and quietly asked him to stop. He got it immediately because he apologized to me and said that he did not mean any disrespect. I think my words had an effect on this young man because I did not call him out and try to embarrass him in front of his friends. I treated him with respect and he gave me some back, which told me that he had some home training whether his father was on the scene or not. He continued telling his story but he did not use the word "nigger" again in the telling.

Hours later I was waiting on Third Avenue between Pike and Pine Streets for a bus to take me home. I noticed a group of black male teenagers who seemed to be in serious discussion with a lone white kid who definitely looked out of place. He did not look uncomfortable; he just looked as if he was someplace where he did not belong. At some point he attempted to move away from the group but they pursued him. When he tried to move again he was grabbed by the arms and somebody in the group began throwing punches at his face. I realized immediately that he was going to be rat-packed and would wind up a bloody mess so I walked over and shouted for them to stop.

I was not the only adult male at that bus stop but I was the only adult black male. The other men, all white, went into what the social psychologist Erving Goffman identified as "civil inattention." That is, they kept their eyes averted from what was happening right in front of them. The boys stopped almost immediately and released the white kid except for one them who turned out to actually be a girl. She would not let go of him and threw a few more punches before I could remove her hand from his wrist.

The girl was out of control in my opinion. She really wanted to hurt somebody but I got her to calm down and listen to me. I told her that I did not want her to get arrested and put in jail. She did not apologize but she gave me some grudging props as she walked away. I was tense after this incident and kept my eye on every young black person as I waited for the bus. The adult white men who witnessed the incident continued to act as if nothing had happened. I did not see the white kid again.

Maybe I was just lucky that nothing happened to me. In any case, I tried to deal with those young people as if I knew and cared about them. I addressed them respectfully as an adult male and, fortunately, they paid attention to me. I think that young white kid had to sadly learn that he was all by his lonesome.

You think people want to solve the problem more than they want to show they are offended concerned?

It seems like you're asking if we think people are more interested in showing concern than they are actually solving the problem, and that's kinda hard to know. Certainly those white adults ptcruiser talked about just want to show "concern."

I think that some folks enjoy using the problem as a platform to elevate themselves. I mean, if Obama thinks that black absentee fathers are such a serious problem why didn't he and Michelle invite a few of them over to their home on Fathers Day for dinner and have a quiet discussion sans media about the problem? If you don't think government always has the answers, then what are you doing at a personal level to address the problem?

My late father used to go down to his union's training facility on his days off and after he had retired to make sure that the black apprentices were being properly trained to weld and use the equipment because he did not wholly trust their white instructors.

I just had the thought that so many people think having faith is an affirmative act that the may well think showing concern is all they need do.

Rev. Jackson will be the topic of discussion Friday, July 11th on the Zookers Radio Program. 8:00 central time. Call in and be heard. www.zookersradio.com

"I just had the thought that so many people think having faith is an affirmative act that the may well think showing concern is all they need do."

Faith alone is going move the causal lines in the universe. Right.

My daddy used to say that black people been praying so long that either we wasn't worthy or that God wasn't listening. Such views are not popular among the folk but I immediately got his point.

I just had the thought that so many people think having faith is an affirmative act that the may well think showing concern is all they need do.

The idea of "faith," at least as far as Christianity is concerned, involves action as well as emotion. So, those "so many people" are wrong on both counts.

And as far as the personal involvement - if the issue is fathers not living with the family, that's one thing. What it seems as though we're talking about is fathers who don't spend time with their kids, and black unwed fathers are apparently doing okay with spending time with their kids. Or, at least, better than those white fathers who aren't married to their baby mamas. So start having speeches about absent white fathers, and then get back to me.

But, if we're talking about having kids without being married to their mother, it would help if people made clear that boys/men have to be sexually responsible, too. And stress the message that making a baby doesn't make you a man. Any animal can make a baby. If you wanna have lots of sex with lots of women and not have to pay child support, vasectomies are out-patient surgeries. I've heard to many stories of guys complaining about their baby mamas acting crazy.It's not like anyone's forcing these men to have these babies.

Let's remember something - lots of men want to be studs. But, it's actually the stud horse's owner who makes the money . . . and sometimes watches. Point being, having lots of sex with no responsibilities doesn't make you a "stud." It makes you an ass, excuse my french. (No, I'm not a big horse racing fan, but I watched the segment on Bryant Gumbal's HBO sports show.)

But, if we're talking about having kids without being married to their mother, it would help if people made clear that boys/men have to be sexually responsible, too. And stress the message that making a baby doesn't make you a man. Any animal can make a baby.

Truth, Obama is doing that. But it seems like he's just showing concern because he is NOT doing what in necessary to convince the people he's talking ABOUT. He's doing fine with the people he's talking TO.

he is NOT doing what in necessary to convince the people he's talking ABOUT. He's doing fine with the people he's talking TO.

That's the problem.

props to you for taking a stand for positivity right where you are.

Reverend Jackson embarrassed himself and seriously damaged his credibility to speak with any authority about Senator Obama’s campaign. Rev. Jackson speaks as if he continues to crave the spotlight and that the times have simply passed him by.

Re Senator Obama’s comments…for those taking care of their families, including fidelity, the message seems paternalistic and not necessary. To those not taking care of their families, including infidelity, the message hits too close to home and offends.

"To those not taking care of their families, including infidelity, the message hits too close to home and offends."

I find Obama's pronouncements and perorations in these areas quite offensive and they are so far removed from my home, metaphorically speaking, that he and I cannot even be said to be in the same country.

Let me add something else: I am supporting Obama's candidacy for the presidency of the United States. I am not supporting him for president of Black America or for the role of Head-Negro-In-Charge (HNIC). Obama is not my father, uncle, brother, cousin, friend or acquaintance.

I find it surprising that so many younger brothers and sisters who seem so eager to overthrow the old heads (In many, many cases they are correct.) and usher in a new day do not understand that a new day REALLY does mean a new day. The days of black celebrities, leaders, politicians etc. lecturing black folks about their alleged collective behavior or responsibility is over. O.V.E.R.

I don't think JJ was displaying any jealousy. If he were, he would've made similar, less crude comments on a mike he knew was hot.

Obama's comments were offensive all the way around. Not because he hit anyone "to close" to home, but his comments are based on the false premise that only black fathers don't do right by their kids that's patently untrue.

Good points.
So was Senator Obama pandering to white folk when he gave this speech on Fathers' Day?...does he just not know that it's just not black men who don't take responsibility?

I would have preferred if Obama had started the speech/conversation talking about the so called black crisis of family and had expanded the topic to include data from white folk and other groups....moving then into a conversation about what exactly are we going to do. Policy ideas?

I wonder a little if a little of Senator Obama's approach in some of his speeches (like the Fathers' Day speech) is to get marginal white voters (blue collar who aren't sure they can vote for a black man) to say to themselves, "At least he'll try and get the blacks in line."

Re Reverend Jackson...jealousy and longing for limelight....maybe not an obvious overt desire on his part; but, subconsciously, you have to wonder. The gentleman loves his air time on Fox. But, Rev. Jackson isn't alone in this at all. Many leaders have a hard time passing the torch on...Bill Clinton?

Wretch, I'll give you Bill Clinton. Maybe Jackson longs for the limelight, but I don't think it's the way pundits have been putting it. That's all.

And I agree about the marginal white voters.

No1kstate, don't forget to add serial child sexual abuse, and serial killing sprees to that list of white pathologies. Remember the D.C. sniper? For the longest time, everyone thought that they were a couple of white boys.

What Obama is doing is largely for (white) public consumption. I expect to see more of it, especially as we get to right around Labor Day, and average white Americans start paying more attention. From now on, when somebody asks me why some blacks are the way they are, I simply say "that's what the system produces," and enemies of justice see to it that black males don't have access to a level playing field that would foster strong black families. But White Supremacists don't care about that. They don't care about abortion or homosexuality amongst blacks.

Obama knows that he won't lose the black vote, so he has leeway to go out of his way to placate white voters. I don't know if I'd campaign the way Obama does, frankly I hate him smiling all of the time, which seems like big time compensation in order not to seem like the angry black man. We know about the incredible double standards though. Can you imagine if Obama had graduated 894th out of 899 students? I know Obama knows this. The question is
is this posturing necessary? I know Obama probably believes some of this because of his personal story; having not really known his father. I can't read Obama's mind, but I have to wonder if his maneuvering on FISA is moot because if it is done to manage perception, isn't it defeating the purpose if the undecided voters he is courting think he isn't doing it because of principle?

You're right, Sall. I forgot about those pathologies.

Though, I sometimes wonder about serial killings. Just because on occassion, I wonder if a white serial killer would've been caught sooner if he were black. Serial killers would probably still be overwhelmingly white, I just wonder about that sometime. My mom pointed out that a black cop killed his pregnant girlfriend, and they had him within days. A white cop has gone through 4 wives, 3 of which are dead, and they're just now looking at him as a suspect.

Obama is just posturing when it comes to race. I've gotten a look at his senate record. There's a reason why JJ and Al support him. Or, at least I hope his posturing. I do wish he would stop. In my fantasies, he goes Stokely Carmichael on them during his second term.

And, I think he's FISA vote was one of principle for him. At least we got something. Had Dems forced the issue, we could still have the status quo. You know?

As for his smiling . . . I like his smile, so I never thought of it the way you do. But, taking a moment to think about it, two things have to be considered. One is McCain's reputation for having a terrible temper; he can't come across as angry, either. The other is McCain's yellow teeth and ill-timed cackles; Obama's smile is a thousand times more attractive than McCain's yellow toothed smirk. I know he can't raise his left arm above his shoulder because of the abuse he faced as a POW. I wonder if they did something to his facial muscles cause his smile looks painful, too. Then again, that could be simply because watching him smile pains me. So, you never know.

"Just because on occasion, I wonder if a white serial killer would've been caught sooner if he were black."

Over the past ten years there have been several serial murderers that were black who were able to ply their so-called trade for years before they were captured and convicted. Serial killers are difficult to apprehend because the investigators seldom, if ever, find any connection between the killers and their victims.

Thanks, ptc. You see I watch a lot of crime drama.

"You see I watch a lot of crime drama."

Well, you are way ahead of me.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/15_3_black_family.html For those not familiar with Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Very old material -but still true.

There are so many people here familiar with the Moynihan report that the others won't admit it.

So what's your point? Are you championing his observations or his suggested solution?

Can I piggyback on your point, P6?

What does this particular thread or discussion have to do with the Moynihan Report?

I must admit that I have not kept up with the lastest figures on single motherhood in the black community, but some years ago it was > 90% in Washington DC and about 80% in Detroit. Mr Obama rebuked absentee black fathers. Mr Moynihan's report suggests that the single most important factor for black poverty is the single parent household. This poverty is self perpetuating. Prof. Dyson says that such stereotypes have "little basis in reality". Yet the single black mothers that I know have to work very, very hard to keep it all together. The married black mothers, even those who work, have more time and energy to spend on their children and have higher aspirations for their children. Yes, this is all old news - but Mr Obama still feels that it is an important subject and I agree with Mr Obama.
Mr Jackson's statement abut the "collective moral responsibility of government and the public policy which would be a corrective action for the lack of good choices that often led to their irresponsibility" just bafles me.

So you champion his observations.

What do you think of his solution?

Ishmael,

I'm not trying to be cute but did Obama talk about school drop out rates for Hispanics, pregnancy rates among adolescent Latina females or gang violence among Latino males today when he addressed the National Council of La Raza?

Ishmael, I get your reference. But you should know, as I learned in college, that you only quote information if you explain the point you want others to get from it. How did you miss that in the school where you learned standardized English?

But I'll shred it here all the same.

The answer to the problems Moynihan pointed out isn't for black women to become more submissive or control the number of kids people have or anything like that. Here's how you solve the problem: EQUAL EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME.

The answer is not to get up pontificating santimoniously to an entire group of people as though they have pathological issues. The answer is certainly not to perpetuate negative myths about said entire group of people. The truth of the matter is white fathers who aren't married to their "baby mamas" spend less time with their kids than black fathers of similar conditions. Studies have shown that a man's ability to provide for and take care of his family impacts his decision to marry and how he fathers his kids. The truth is that not only has census changed the way the count families and households, married black couples are having children at a lower rate than in decades past. Why isn't all that ever mentioned?

Next, lets talk about the disparities in employment and income that have nothing to do with a job applicant's education or criminal history. We can talk about the disparities in criminal justice and education.

Then, before it's all said and done, let's talk about those white men who have every advantage in life and still abandon their kids. How about that? Let's study and document and talk about white people like they have pathologies, cause we know they do. These are the same people who voted for Bush twice and are considering voting for McCain all so they won't have to vote for the black guy or the party that represents, even if superficially, equal rights. Academia has a word for that kind of behavior - insanity.

Stop apologizing for the status quo, Ish. It just won't fly.

And, Ishmael, I'm baffled by how you're baffled about Jackson's comments.

Per the article above- "Jackson made a similar point, writing in a statement "my appeal was for the moral content of his message to not only deal with the personal and moral responsibility of black males, but to deal with the collective moral responsibility of government and the public policy which would be a corrective action for the lack of good choices that often led to their irresponsibility.""
Just what corrective action does Mr Jackson contemplate? Cutting off their b*lls? The State is going to promulgate a policy about procreation?

I wonder if folks would have better understood Jackson's point if he had said that he was going to cut off Obama's water. This is the expression that my friends and I used when we were in the business of caring for and feeding politicians. If somebody crossed us, we would say that we were going to cut off his water. Nobody ever thought we were making a derogatory remark.

LBJ made a lot of remarks about male anatomy when sizing up his opponents.

No, Ishmael. You bring shit up and don't respond to questions. That's not acceptable.

No more comments get approved until you answer the questions that have been asked of you. They are in writing, so you don't have to ask anyone to repeat them.

The problem with Jackson and others vis a vis Obama is that the smart move would have been to publicly embrace him and publicly reserve the right to criticize him if and when it became necessary. Jackson and the old heads don't think hard enough about the possibilities and circumstances presented by new developments. All of them need to start reading better books and talking to smarter people. Not slicker, but smarter. What you have to do with guys like Obama is to play back the same hand they play, which is not the same as tit-for-tat.

"I would have preferred if Obama had started the speech/conversation talking about the so called black crisis of family and had expanded the topic to include data from white folk and other groups....moving then into a conversation about what exactly are we going to do. Policy ideas?"

Something I should've mentioned earlier - the only way we're going to get govt to address the issue is to make it a white issue. The truth is, if it weren't for the privilege they receive as white males, white fathers wouldn't be any better or worse than black fathers.

The govt can't make men raise the children they father, but it can create the environment - including economic, justice, education, and labor equality - that would support a man being in the home or at least very active in his child(ren)'s live(s).

What's saddening is that when Barack Obama was going through a tough stretch right before North Carolina, who was it that has saved his ass time after time? That simply speaks to the quiet strength implicit solidarity amongst black people in this country. Only to then be maligned and denigrated in front of the NAACP so that Mr. Obama can compensate for the worldwide system of White Supremacy. The very fact that Obama enjoys almost unanimous support in the black community should say rather explicitly in a logical sense to the white collective, that whether most blacks are willing to acknowledge it publicly or not, they know subconciously, that race is the only game in town, and that we have a race problem. I keep hearing echoes of W.E.B. Dubois. It's the problem of the century. While there are a lot of problems to solve, logically, one has to start with the biggest of all.

sall, I thought his NAACP was pretty fair. I wish he'd make that speech more often.

I haven't watched it yet, and that's totally incorrect for me to comment on something I haven't yet watched. I'm actually have it up as another webpage I just haven't yet clicked on it. I was going to study Bill Clinton's "polarization" speech first. I probably wrongly as you have said assumed it was yet another victim blaming, own worst enemy, crabs in a barrel, not valuing education or wanting to be productive (when everyone in fact wants to be productive) bootstrap pulling speech.

There was some personal responsibility, but I guess he felt free to talk about the inherent disadvantages in education, the labor market, and criminal justice. He also mentioned how MLK was in Memphis for the sanitary workers' strike, and that much of the Civil Rights Movement is premised on the fact that blacks do take personal responsibility for our lives. Ie, what's the point of the Brown case if African Americans hadn't been taking education seriously? [I'll admit, sometimes I want to hit people "ignorant" of racial reality with a dumb-dumb stick. Do people really believe black Americans don't take education seriously when so much of our history in America has been about fighting for quality education.]

I didn't like that he got a little self-righteous about people saying he was being too hard on black America. That's not what people have been saying. What folks have been saying is that victim-blaming makes a bad situation worse if you don't talk about the ways society fails people of color. So, I didn't like the manipulation. Otherwise, it was fair.

Mr Obama and Mr Moynihan have several things in common. The fathers of both men abandoned their families. Both men expressed concern about black fathers abandoning their families. Both men were raised by their mothers. Both men went to university via scholarships. Neither man was born to wealth. Both succeeded through their own merit and hard work. Both men had stable marriages and children in those marriages.

As to the question of Mr Moynihan's solutions: The "Moynihan Report" did not offer solutions. (from the report) - "The object of this study has been to define a problem, rather than propose solutions to it."
further "Three centuries of injustice have brought about deep seated structural distortions in the life of the Negro American. At this point, the present tangle of pathology is capable of perpetuating itself without assistance from the white world. The cycle can be broken only if these distortions are set right.
In a word, a national effort towards the problems of Negro Americans must be directed towards the question of family structure. The objest should be to strengthen the Negro family so as to enable it to raise and support its members as do other families. After that, how this group of Americans chooses to run it affairs, take advantage of its opportunites, or fail to do so, is none of the nations business."

The report speaks to the cycle of poverty created by teenage girls dropping out of school to have babies and not finishing their education. "Low education levels in turn produce low income levels, which deprive children of many opportunites, and so the cycle repeats itself"

The report is not about the middle and upper class Blacks. It is about the urban poor.

I suspect that their childhood experiences may have influenced both men. Then "Mohnihan report" is very sympathetic to the plight of American Black families. It does not cast blame but simply points out that in 1960, 1963, and 1964 an unexpected and unprecedented change occured in Black family structure namely that despite a decrease in Black unemployment the number of AFDC cases rose. It was a call to action to help correct this situation.

Mr Moynihan was later to champion the minimum guaranteed income which was supported by President Nixon. This idea went down in flames in the legislative branch before it even got started. Mr Moynihan was also a champion of the Manpower Development and Training Act, The Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Mr Moynihan was hoping to stimulate a program or programs designed to strengthen the Black family.

I admit that sociology is not my field of training. I do not believe that the monolithic Black needs to "take responsiblity" But each parent should and must take responsibility for raising their own children. I further believe that a stable home is the best place to raise children.

The crisis in the Black family refered to by Mr Obama started in 1960. Anyone who has lived in an urban area like Detroit has witnessed the cycle of poverty created by illegitimate births to teenage girls. Without any real proof I suggest a correlation between the approx. 70% illigitimacy rate in Detroit and the approx. 70% high school dropout rate. Black families are well aware of this problem. Much of the black middle and upper classes have moved from the city. Aretha Franklin moved out decades ago (her father was murdered in Detroit). Other black parents put their children in "charter schools" to try and ensure that their children graduate at least from high school.

The link that i posted shows how some blacks are in denial about illigitimate births. We can honestly blame whites for unequal job opportunities, unequal educational opportunites, and all the other crap that rolls downhill in a racist society. But the very high rate of illigitimate births is all of our own doing.

I believe you left off Mr. Moynihan's benign neglect suggestion.

In a word, a national effort towards the problems of Negro Americans must be directed towards the question of family structure. The objest should be to strengthen the Negro family so as to enable it to raise and support its members as do other families.

And that means jobs that pay enough that one person can support a family while the other does the child rearing (which is MORE than a full time job if we're going back to the Donna Reed model).

Unfortunately family structure is deforming under the weight of financial and social change. And "just say no" didn't work for Nancy Reagan; it damn sure won't work with sexually mature 12 year olds, or for adults that are working and paying their own way.

If you REALLY want that olde time nuclear family, you're going to have to do for Black families what was done to achieve it for white families: subsidize it.

"If you REALLY want that olde time nuclear family, you're going to have to do for Black families what was done to achieve it for white families: subsidize it."

Ishmael and folks like him are so immersed in the mythology of black pathology that they fail over and over again to see how whites were structurally advantaged over blacks especially during the period from the brutal and abrupt end to Reconstruction to well into the 1960s or 70s. Part of the problem is that they read bad books. That is, books that tend to have a polemical point as opposed to books that employ scholarship to illuminate and increase our understanding of events.

Yeah, but he came correct enough this time. I'm willing to see where it goes.

Yes, Ishmael, did come more correct. Moynihan and Obama, however, never addressed the ways in which blacks were denied for nearly a century an opportunity to receive any return on their public investments.

I was aware of the benign neglect suggestion. My gut feeling was that after he was savaged for 7 or 8 years by Black and White liberals, he shrugged his shoulders and said in effect "ok have it your own way, lets maintain the status quo - i.e. benign neglect." And yes I was immersed in the pathology- for gods sake I lived in Detroit. And I do not read bad books. I am looking down at the pile of books next to the "puter that I got out of the library last week.
1) Cultural atlas of mesopotamia and the ancient near east by michael roaf
2) A pictorial history of crime films by ian cameron
3) India: treasures from an ancient world by marilia albanese
4) the hutchinson atlas of battle plans: before and after - various authors
5) great dynasties - various authors
6) and last but not least: a do it yourself plumbing book

I look around the small room the 'puter is in and see a couple of hundred books: hmmm - do you think The Life of Greece by Will Durant does not employ scholarship?

If you REALLY want that olde time nuclear family, you're going to have to do for Black families what was done to achieve it for white families: subsidize it.

There it is. I've never heard it put that well.

My gut feeling was...

Gut feelings are legitimate conversation fodder here. What we (I feel comfortable speaking for the regulars here) don't respect is when (for example) someone says "Moynihan had no suggestions to fix the problem" one comment before saying "I am aware of the benign neglect suggestion."

You can understand that, I'm sure.

Now, if you came up from the problematic areas of Detroit and worked your way through to your low six figure salary, yes that is a worthy achievement worth discussing. And if you grew up wealthy enough to bypass all that and react as you do, that too raises issues we can talk about. Hell, maybe you're a comics fan...

But you have to talk with us, not preach at us. Nothing lies that way but disrespect, and we're really trying not to disrespect the brothers and sisters here.

"Part of the problem is that they read bad books. That is, books that tend to have a polemical point as opposed to books that employ scholarship to illuminate and increase our understanding of events."

I'll plead guilty to stereotyping here and apologize. I want to point out, however, that when someone begins quoting Moynihan's report as if it were the primary source of information about the problems of black families today or forty years ago I get annoyed. Moynihan himself never addressed the various ways in which blacks had been structurally disadvantaged for nearly a century.

Yes, Moynihan was aware of racism and racial segregation and their corrosive effects but he never addressed how blacks were excluded, for example, from the trade and craft unions or denied federally insured mortgage loans etc. He certainly never discussed the historical role that his Irish-American brethren played in preventing black men from working in various trades or becoming civil service employees in cities like New York, Boston etc.

Ishamel, ponder the following little fact for a moment: an 1870 study done by the U.S. Department of Commerce showed that more than 80 percent of the skilled artisans and craftsmen in this country were Negroes.

Question: why weren't these men able to pass their skills along to their children, relatives and other blacks?

I don't get it. Why should blacks have to be any more "personally responsible" than other groups? You can look at every disparity from education to employment, housing to "morals" and at the end of your answer will be racism. Or some other answer that has nothing to do with blackness.

It's not that more and more unmarried people in the black community are having kids. It's the less married couples are having kids. And that a woman with a child living with her parents is counted as her own household, so that out of this one house, you have two households. Households weren't always counted that way before.

If someone wants to say we have to be better because historical and current racism means we can't afford to be as good, I think that's fair. But to act like we need improvement when are numbers are the same or better than others is ridiculous and hateful.

I for one gave up on this notion that black folks could behave our way to racial justice years ago. Cause the bottom line is, no matter how many absent fathers there are, that doesn't excuse discrimination in the labor market. And if employers/hiring staff/managers excuse their discrimination because they think no matter how good his resume, a black man will sooner or later be "irresponsible" and/or "criminal," then you have another reason why all this ridiculousness about "personal responsibility" needs to stop.

And another thing.

This whole argument about African Americans accepting personal responsibility for the choices they make has been around since the late 19th century. When are we going to stop arguing the same racial arguments from over century ago? It was a red herring then, and it's a red herring now.

"Why should blacks have to be any more "personally responsible" than other groups?"

It is a psychological ploy that was adopted by the majority population and elements of Negro leadership in the 19th Century to deflect, explain and justify how black folks were treated. Booker T. Washington's speeches, for example, are laced with this theme. It is a way to spiritually roast and psychologically cripple black people.

"For twenty-five years after slave times, there ain't no race of people ever traveled as fast as the Negro did."

Minnie Hollomon of Arkansas; former slave.

I know, ptcruiser. That's what's so upsetting about Obama, MSM, and even the NAACP - which, lets be clear, is a top-down organization mostly controlled by black elites that really hasn't made white people, except those who think a NAAWP is necessary, uncomfortable in quite sometime. When they do speak out, they're mostly ignored, anyway.

But back to the point at hand. That's why Ishmael and anybody else citing Moynihan's argument falls flat with me. The rhetoric of "personal responsibility" belies the fact, and lets white America off the hook. I know of many who didn't "personal responsibility" their way into top classes, schools, or jobs. There's a situation going on where I live where a bunch of school bus drivers were fired for failing the driving test for stuff like, not breaking hard enough at a stop sign- and they were all black. All the white drivers passed. And several of the fired drivers had been driving for 10+ years and have taken many driving tests without problems.

Ishmael,

I'm not trying to be cute but did Obama talk about school drop out rates for Hispanics, pregnancy rates among adolescent Latina females or gang violence among Latino males today when he addressed the National Council of La Raza?---ptcruiser

In fact in front of so-called Latino/Hispanic communities he calls them an "aspirational community", as if black people don't have ambition, and don't want to be productive. There is definitely a pattern here, earlier this year on Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday, he was talking to black people about anit-Semitism, etc. It is always about what black people are doing wrong, no encouragement. We all know this is compensation for the racism that he knows we all face.

Sall -

See, all the Obama kool-aid drinkers in the black electorate have lost their minds as far as I am concerned. They will allow Obama to slide and argue us up one side and down the other when we accuse him of hypocrisy and pandering. They have no response to how he addresses black folks, for example, versus the different tack he takes with Latinos and other groups except to try to convince us that we did not hear what we heard.