Cynique

STFU, ignoramous. You're pathetic. Abe Lincoln was the object of immense scorn and antagonism during his presidency. He was subjected to great ridicule by newpaper cartoonists who compared him to an ape, and was relentlessly criticized for his conduct of the civil war, not to mention tormented by his bouts of depression that were exacerbated by the rumor mongering about his wife's growing insanity. Good grief. Have you forgotten that the man was assassinated??? Obama ain't Jesus, And he is not a black who is president. He's a president who is bi-racial. His job is to act in the interest of all the citizens of this nation. He is not above criticism. He's surrouded by incompetency and he's in over his head. It is what it is. And it's not like other presidents haven't been skewered by dissendents. The Chicago Tribune wanted to try FDR for treason claiming he maneuvered America into WWII. They tried to impeach Clinton. They forced Nixon to resign. They booted Jimmy Carter and the first George Bush out of office. Dubya was ridiculed as a buffoon and the constant butt of jokes. It comes with the territory. Quit whining. Yes, the Republicans are out to bring down the Democratic President. The Democrats are running scared. Is this a new scenario??? Here's my definition of a fool: Carey. If any more proof is needed, take a look at his picture. LOL

Puleeze. You are even more addled-brained than I thought, carey. What the hell does war and violence and power have to do with the niece of MLK attending Glen Beck's rally, the purpose of which was to return to the "old values". Instead of making a petulant attempt to analyse my motives, why don't you mount an intelligent rebuttal to my arguments. You're the one who started out your ravelling thread with an attack on Alveta King, and now you are desperately trying to obfuscate the issue by veering away from the question of whether or not Ms. King was betraying MLK's "I-have-a-dream" legacy by allowing Glen Beck to use her to promote his "take-our-country-back" rally. War and violence and racism and power had nothing to do with this. You're who injected them into the debate. I focused on racism because I didn't believe that even you would be stupid enough to think that Alveta King's appearance at Beck's rally was to attack war and violence and to seize power as opposed to promoting MLK's dream of Blacks and Whites coming together with the bleary hope of "making America great again". >>barf<< This was one of the stated purposes of Beck's rally, which pundits all agreed was nothing more than a bunch of disgruntled white folks throwing a pity party for themselves. This was not a tea party. I added my comments to your ego-tripping post because, as usual, you took cheap shots at the people who challenged Chrishayden's obsession with Uncle Tomism. If you don't want anybody to parse your befuddled commentaries then you ought to shape them up so that they are coherent and logical. And surely you didn't compare yourself to the spider who sat next to little Miss Muffet. Get real. You are more like a skittering bug-eyed roach, looking for somebody to throw you a few crumbs so you can get through another day.

Too bad you can't just can't limit your remarks to commentary about the pictures, and your relatives, carey. But, no. You have to take the occasion to impose upon your captive audience by editorializing about those who criticize Obama, - whose family history, incidentally, bears absolutely no resemblance to yours. Obama is no more critized and villainized and burdened than was Abraham Lincoln - who freed the slaves.

And I recognize an old stooped-over shuffling dispenser of non-sequitor arguments when I hear one. Just tell me, carey. Did Sirhan Sirhan, an Arab, kill Bobby Kennedy to promote racism? Did the Muslim shooter from an opposing group kill Malcolm X. to facilitate racism? Did Lee Harvey Oswald, an ex-Communist sympathizer, shoot JFK to encourage racism? No. These 3 were misguided crack pots. And what, pray tell, did their acts have to do with Alveta King attending an assemblage of white wimps longing for a return to "Christian values"? Yet you insist of padding your pontificating with a lot of maudlin blather in your attempts to bolster the nebulous points you are struggling to make, hoping your irrelevent quotes and references will make you sound intellectual instead of silly. Brutus? Pompei? Puleeze. LMAO. And since you can't figure out what a prominent black leader is, I'll re-phrase my question and ask if any high-profile Black spokespersons publicly denounced Alvera King for exercising her rights as a private citizen to speak at Glen Beck's rally? Name names unless you want me assume that such black leaders had the good sense to ignore Ms King's appearance so as not to play into Beck's hands by drawing attention to his rally. Then, there are those like you who feel they have the right to assassinate the character of a woman who doesn't adhere to your arbitrary "cookie cutter" image of how all black folks should act. As for your not having the time to chase me around Thumper's corner, your reply with all of its different fonts and sizes would seem to belie this. I agree, however, that your response was a waste of your time because what you had to say was your usual vapid droning.

What does putting the errant Chrishayden in check have to do with knowing who a nonentity like Alveda King is??? Yes, carey, it's me again, wondering how to take seriously anybody who's naive enough to believe that JFK and RFK and Malcolm X were all assassinated because they were against racism? I am familiar with Alveda King and Glen Beck, and it's really amusing how you deconstructed this woman and then end your diatribe by making the claim that you know nothing about her politcal views or position on social issues. I heard Ms. King being interviewed by a black reporter who tried unsuccesfuuly to corner her into admitting that she was violating MLK's legacy. Yes, she and Beck are riding on the coat tails of MLK's desire for racial harmony, injecting a return to things like "family values" into the equation. People do this all the time. So what? Is it really necessary to castigate this woman for following her own agenda? She ain't no different from any other public figure. And it's not like she made any Black converts by appearing at this rally. All she and Beck were doing was preaching to the choir. Furthermore, Beck & Co. purposely do not spew vitriolic racist rhetoric because that would defeat their tactic of allying themselves with MLK. Glen even "apologized" for calling Obama a racist. So, all their critics are doing is giving Beck grist for his mill, enabling him to accuse people like Al Sharpton of denying that MLK wanted the races to work together. And Ol Al probably welcomed the opportunity to garner a little publicity for himself by leading a counter march. It's all a big game. Did any other prominent Blacks even legitimized this farce by calling attention to people exercising their right of free assembly. (Maybe these leaders were afraid white conservatives might accuse President Obama of co-opting his predecessor's legacy, riding George Bush's coattails by recently appearing on TV decaring the war in Iraq over, - when 50,000 American troops are still occupying this country ready to put down any insurgencies.) Nobody can distort the legacy of the Reverend Martin Luther King. His words ring so true that anybody who seeks justice adopts them. Glen Beck's kissing the robes of MLK is a testament to King's greatness. Justice is blind and it's not the sole possession of any one group. Anybody can claim to be the victim of injustice. Truth is the final judge.

Well, ChrisHayden, in responding to my challenge, you failed to prove anything other than that you see things differently from me. And you pretty much neutralized the effectiveness of what you had to say by starting out with a lie. YOU know and I know that George Bush is not "my idol". Or does declaring yourself a God-fearing Christian make your stance sacrosanct. It just proves that you love yourself to a fault, totally convinced that your opinion is above reproach because God is on your side. Puleeze. You chided me for, among other things, not realizing that you are a product of the Clarence Thomas era, as if this is significant. What’s your point? Clarence Thomas is maligned by all but the most conservative of Blacks. You apparently managed to remain untainted by his example. And so did countless others. I'm sure your favorite target, Troy, holds Thomas in just as much contempt as you do. This is just an example of how your attempts at justifying your position do nothing but veer off the mark, landing in a miasma of irrelevancy, leaving you to grasp at the straws of your ol grandpappy's platitudes. To me, your whole outlook is based on a "world according to Chris" mind-set and this alienates you from objectivity, making you unable to distinguish between the violent and the vulnerable in the inner cities, - incapable of seeing a connection between the baby mama lifestyle and the gang culture in the ghetto. So you go through life, fancying yourself some kind of a romanticized Champion of the downtrodden. Now, if you could just get the downtrodden to wipe your crocodile tears and justify your excuses by doing something other than sullenly dismissing the progress of the upwardly mobile, then your mission might be worth while. As it is, you remain a blubbering apologist begrudging the success of anybody who has elevated their status in life as you make that terrible ol "bully" Bill Cosby your favorite scapegoat. Wooooooo. As for the old "self-hating" standby, if this is the principle that causes an ignorant person to reject his incompetence by trying to change himself through education, then let's hear it for the self-hate that motivates someone into realizing that since the world doesn't adjust to us, we have to adjust to the world. I end by reminding you that before I went into my rant about young people, I prefaced it with an "IMO". I was simply venting. I am well aware that I see things as a old person from another generation as I utter my last hurrah before endeavoring to adjust to change.

i say yes, too, Troy. I am at the age where I'm getting my affairs in order, currently debating whether or not I want to be cremated and have my ashes scattered. But now that I've learned about this facebook memorial feature, I kind of like the idea of being immortalized in the perpetuity of cyberspace,- of being frozen in time. I think your Dad would appreciate this kind of tribute from his son. What better way to show your gratitude for the genes that surely had something to do with your being where you are today.

The obvious question to ask you, Chrishayden, is: as a black man, are YOU full of self-loathing? Do YOU look at yourself in the mirror and hate what you see? If you don't, then why do you think others do? If you do, then how can you scold people when you are as guilty as they? You regularly distance yourself from the crowd, covering yourself in the "onlooker" cloak, as you criticize "Negoes" who offer opinions about the black problem. Yet you, yourself, do what you accuse these "Negroes" of when you attempt to assess Blacks who are not in your proximity, painting all of them with the broad brush of a self-hating slave mentality. But, what makes the scenarios you concoct anymore valid then the scenarios of those with whom you disagree? You delude yourelf into thinking your perspective is infallible and that you are incapable of misinterpretation The "black problem" cannot be encapsulated in one view! It is full of contradictions. What's true is some cases is false in others, all of which contributess to the familiar claim of Blacks not being monolithic. One size does not fit all, What's irrefutable is that the younger generation needs to shape up. IMO, they'd do well to get back to basics, to be re-programmed and moderated, their minds weaned from the electronic gadgetry and computerized dependency that is pacifiying and stultifying them. Their shameless pregnancies also need to be put in check. Will this happen? I doubt it. What masquerades as progress is really seduction as the technology whore fucks up initiative and creativity and the mindless need to breed spirals out of control. OK, Chris, the ball's in your court. Bring it on.

Obviously I'm having a hard time trying and failing to edit and correct this post so that it will make better sense. It's very frustrating. I thought I had figured out a way but I just ended up re-posting instead of replacing. Anyhow, to anybody who attempts to read what I've tried to say, I hope you get the gist of it. (I just can't understand why I no longer have the "edit" option.)

I was just getting ready to add my response to Mr. Mason's post, when I read Troy's remarks and decided that they should stand on their own, without the distraction of what I have to say, especially since what Troy and I have to say are somewhat similar. So, I started a new topic and below is my commentary. (Cynique) With all due respect, I agree with some of what you had to say, Mr. Mason, but one of your assertions didn’t win me over. Your implication that black men should not emulate white men because this would endorse white supremacy is debatable. You obviously equate success with skin color. But the traits and qualities necessary to excel and prevail are not exclusive to one race. White alpha males have no monopoly of these qualities. The behavior and demeanor of a man who reigns over his domain, whether his domain be a nation or a household, is not the exclusive entitlement of white men. White supremacy becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy when others empower white men by suggesting that they are the only ones who know how to manage and control. Instead, it could be argued that Black men should, indeed, emulate white men so that they can beat them at the their own game. Why? Because we live in America, not Africa. What you seem to be suggesting, however, is that black men revert to a laid-back “jungle” mentality, or straw-hut village mind-set, doing the best they can and with the cooperation of their women folk, simply be satisfied with just getting by. Forget about adapting to the country where they now dwell. You remind us that black folks were once a beautiful spiritual race of people as if we would just hold that thought, we will miraculously feel inspired to embrace this collective conscious, and live in contentment. I have my doubts. And, on the contrary, the idea that Malcolm X was the paragon of what a black man should be, if closely examined would be reveal that he projected a bold demeanor and honed his mental acuity in order to confront his oppressors on a equal footing. Implicit in much of what he preached was how black men should aspire to achieve what white men had acquired by equipping themselves with the skills and aggression necessary to thrive. Malcolm X, further realized the importance of a façade, hiding behind his, concealing his insecurity about his male impotency as revealed in his confidential correspondence to Elijah Muhammad, - a figure whom Malcolm, in the throes of his naïvete, once believed could do no wrong. Martin Luther King, flawed though he may have been, had the wisdom to realize the merits of Gandhi’s philosophy of passive resistance as a tactic and his emulation of this resulted in a degree of success for his movement. White supremacists realized certain things, too. That MLK and Malcolm were dangerous, and the urgency to eliminate them was a begrudging admission of respect for the power these 2 leaders embodied. Or it is accurate to claim that the white establishment has not acknlwedged the impact these men had on racism. Today, black men and women continue to be engaged in adversarial relationships, black children are growing up educationally-challenged, the ghetto is mired down in a paradigm of young black girls poppin out babies as fast as they can in order to replace those who have reached the age of killing and being killed by each other. The black middleclass continues its “lemmings-over-the cliff” pursuit of materialism, the hip-hop tsunami has inundated the black literary community. America’s economy is on a collision course with disaster, the infra-structure of the country is on the verge of collapse, the environment is turning on itself. God is on hiatus, while the faithful desperately try to take up the slack. But if you have your way, Mr. Mason, there’s an alternative. And, who knows, maybe black folks should fall back and re-group, become a new community within the nation, a retro culture where rejecting the mores of the dominant society would allow them to lead simple lives, tuning out the clamour of urban civilization, left with nothing to worry about but food and shelter. Dream on.

I guess it's my computer that's the problem, Troy. It probably needs to be upgraded. Once I sign in, it's like I'm trapped and the only options I have are "add a reply" or "cancel". The only way I can sign out is to click on a link to the board "index" which I discovered when I clicked a mysterious "x" at the top of the page after I posted a comment. Oh well.

So, what is the consensus in regard to Troy's question? Is the black male crisis caused by the equal rights for women movement??????

Trooooooy. No sooner do I resign myself to doing without the "edit" option which you have taken away from posters, than you discontinue the "sign out" option which allowed members to get a lurker's view of the proceedings on the board. Rather than making things simpler, you have made them more restrictive. You may call this fine-tuning, but I call it stifling! Excuse me while I go somewhere and sulk. Humph.

Thanks everybody for the birthday greetings!

This is one of the few times that a topic has come up that I don’t have a definite opinion about! The subject is so multi-faceted that I can’t articulate a consistent response, which is to say that I have mixed emotions about the feminist movement. "I am woman hear me roar" - after I purr. Where the woman's movement is concerned, liberation from oppression is one thing; equal rights is another. Because they are biologically and physically different, males and females are not equal. Their emotions are also wired differently. So the idea that women should be firefighters, construction workers, combat soldiers, Navy Seals, jail guards, and other pursuits that require brawn I personally find problematic. (Obviously I don't put racial equality and gender equality in the same category.) I also don’t think that married women of child-bearing age should be competing for CEO positions for obvious reasons. Prospective motherhood is not conducive to giving your profession your undivided attention. Others inevitably have to take up your slack. Of course, none of this has anything to do with intellect. Which is why women rebelled, insisting, among other things, that to level the playing field they have a right to expect exceptions to be made for them, and that they deserve equal pay when they hold the same job as a man. It gets complicated when they are performing the same physical tasks as a man but not with the same amount of exertion. Whatever. Mentally, women are also reputed to be more flexible and insightful than men; more observant, more compassionate. I’ll drink to that. When we look at the natural order of things, we can conclude that through the evolutionary process in order to procreate, males and females became a role-playing unit wherein they embraced the skills for which they were best-suited in order to stabilize and preserve the family dynamic. Presumably this also served to cement a relationship between couples, based on mutual appreciation. This is the best case scenario when it is efficiently carried out. But Life is about variables and randomness. Shit happens. External factors came into play and where the black race was concerned, roles began to overlap and even reverse. Black women rose to the occasion. Black men faltered. Why? Because mental flexibility serves you better than brute strength. And so it goes. Now, other factors appear to be creeping into the brotha/sista equation, - what seems to me to be a growing tendency toward lesbianism, something possibly influenced as much by disappointment, disgust, distrust and dissatisfaction with black men as by chromosomal aberrations. This scenario is also emerging among other races. Welcome to the first decade of the 21st century. Order is gradually descending into chaos. Maybe the sexes will become interchangeable and the mating scene will be just one big free-for-all, and children will be raised by committee. Or, like Troy says, maybe things will come full circle and the dilemma will work itself out. Or maybe, I just don't know what the hell I'm talking about since I'm from a different generation...

No matter how hard you try to obfuscate the issue with your usual rendering of subtefuge and rhetoric, Chrishayden, "the mind is a terrible thing to waste". You are implying that young black men have no potential and should settle for being manual laborers/field slaves despite the fact that, as evidenced by their partiacipation in FaceBook, and their apt facility for video games, none of them seem to be computer illiterate. What they need is motivation instead of the rationalization that excuses their aversion to education. Bad schools also have to share the blame for this dire situation. But your solution is to ignore all of this and criticize those who lament it. And your determination to prove to me that I have an idealized image of the 1950s continues. But I can tell you that back in the 50s getting your high school diploma was a priority of all black folks. And - what you never explain in your skepticism about my claims, is your own situation. You never suffered any of the hardships you insist were rampant during the late 50s and 60s. You instead start lecturing about St Louis being the "South", which has nothing to do with the fact that YOU apparently got a good education, weren't subjected to "whites only" public facitilties, didn't sit in the back of the bus, or go to segregated schools, and weren't the victim of hooded night riders. Puleeze.

I was a Leo before you, Chrishayden, and had it been in my power, I would've deigned that your entrance into this world be delayed for a month, a condition doctors would've diagnosed as being a case of fetal constipation.

Today is not only August 18, 2010, but is also my 77th birthday! I can't believe I've been around this long. How things have changed and progressed since that sunny afternoon in 1933 when the doctor whose office was where my Daddy worked as a part-time janitor, hurried to the home of my parents and kept his promise to deliver his employee's baby instead of paying him his measely salary that week. With my mom's best friend, who was a nurse, in attendance, I was delivered at home, - like a whole lot of other "depression era" babies. I weighed in at 9lbs, - surprising since for most of the rest of my life I was thin. Over the years, I've been a witness to a lot of history, and it's been a great ride. If I go tomorrow, I would leave this planet with few regrets because life is not about the destination; it's about the journey. Last week I sat on my front porch in the dark of night, gazing skyward trying to spot the shooting stars that were supposed to make up a meteor shower, the likes of which will not occur again in my life time. I stared so long and hard that it was like I had an out-of-the-body experience. The cloud cover obscured this phenomenon somewhat but finally I saw a faint streak across the sky and my spirits soared. I was one with the universe. C'est la vie. You never know what you might see, - if you keep looking.

Unfortunately, these are the baby daddies and baby mommas who are replicating themselves, bringing more children into the world to lead the same dead-end life as their parents, bogging the race down with ignorance and violence. It's depressing.

Hi Jackie! Welcome back, girlfriend! Congratulations on the new addition to your family. When it comes to your new role, just go with the flow. Hopefully your maternal instincts will steer you in the right direction. ROFLOL.

You are simply expressing your personal opinion when you say what currently passes for literature "stinks", Chrishayden. In the annals of literature, 20 years is a short period, and - Time is what will tell. Furthermore, fiction doesn't have to be flawless to be classified as "literature. Its prose and its approach to a story is what determines this. To me, Toni Morrison produces literate works, whereas Terry McMillan produces commercial fiction ala Danielle Steele. Terry is a competent formulaic writer whose target audiences are women and their complicated relationships with men. Toni Morrison captivates her readers with her creative use of language and her unique characters who are resolute in confronting their dilemmas. You have to have patience to get through a Toni Morrison book, but that is as it should be. Literature is not for the faint of heart. It is for those who love words and how they are used to weave stories. Ralph Ellison and Richard Wright wrote about street life but it was their command of the language that elevated their books to a literate level.

I agree with Gwen when it comes to confusing "literary" fiction with "mainstream" fiction. Just because a book isn't of the urban or romance or mystery genre, doesn't auomatically mean that it should be categorized as literary. To me, literary fiction exemplifies literature; its style being as impressive as its subject, its narrative making imaginative use of language, its story adhering to the tradition of a novel illustrating how events transform people. Literary fiction stands the test of time and its characters and plots endure because they are engaging. Literary fiction is, in a word, "classic". Black readers seem to prefer a lot of drama, and characters they can identify with. They like their books to in the soap opera mode. So much for literary fiction.

Come on, Chrishayden! Thumper qualified his statement about black people being better educated back in the day by saying "except in the South". The example you gave to refute his claim was descriptive of how things were in the South. Your experience as a school boy in St. Louis were not comparable to your southern counterparts. And although you could've benefitted from some anger management counselling, you apparently received a good education. - back in the 50s. You continue to use the south as a microcosm when assessing the 1950s, refusing to acknowledge that the North was not the domain of Jim Crow. I agree with Thumper when he says that Blacks were better-educated back in the day than they are now - when it comes to the products of public schools. I agree with you when you say the priorities are different today. It has, however, been my observation that for the most part, members of the current generation with all of their visual and audio skills and instant access to information, are shallow self-absorbed people, not well-rounded or well-informed. Knowledge is power; something these intellectually-challenged mopes have yet to discover. Time brings change. Reading and writing must be preserved. Somebody has to write about how things were before the change, and others have to be able to read about this so that lessons of the past can be applied to the present. Yes, literary fiction is on its last legs, but access to its archives should always be available for those who opt for the written word to stimulate their minds.

As with any other genre, I like to read a well-written work of fiction featuring a plausible story with a compelling plot line. What inspires me in a novel is when the characters are so well-developed that they become real people who I either like or dislike. I'd say I'm a pretty typical reader.

I can’t believe what I‘m hearing on the news! It’s not bad enough that whooping cough and head lice have resurfaced, now bed bugs have made a come back, their infestation reaching epidemic proportions. “Good night, sleep tight,” has taken on a whole new meaning. Yikes! Oh well, this is something to take my mind off Obama having to rely on the Republicans to get his bill for more billions to fund the war in Afghanistan after his fellow Democrats refused to support this folly. No wonder his hair is turning gray. Add to that the irritation caused by all the hoopla involved in keeping the details of Chelsea Clinton’s multi-million dollar wedding a secret, and my chagrin is complete. Nothing left for me to do but go see “Inception” so I can pick up some new techniques on manipulating my dreams. I got a hankering to experience my carefree youth again.