Cynique

Not surprisingly, I pretty much agree with Chrishayden. Any time a person supplies me with the choices when he gives me an option, I refuse to take the bait. Carey is, in effect, saying "heads" I win, "tails" you lose.

People have a right to hold the President of the United States accountable for his actions, no matter who he is. In fact, this is the duty of the "loyal opposition." You don't have to be a Republican to challenge the policies of a Democratic president, or be white to wince over the gaffes of a black president. Or do you have to come up with a suggestion for a replacement, just because you question who currently holds the office.

IMO, Obama is out of his league and in over his head and doesn't have the chops to hold the most powerful office in the world. His ineffectiveness is tied to his lack of guile - all of which stem from a mentality that is that of a professor rather than a politician.

Chicago's in a B&B mode, - all agog about Barak and Black Hawks. The president returned to his Hyde Park digs to spend his Memorial Day week-end in Chicago and the Black Hawks made it to the NHL finals and are now vying for the Stanley Cup. Woooo.

Elated White hockey fans and excited Black Obama supporters are all full of pride. Me, I don't give a "puck" about the Black Hawks but I do hope Obama doesn't injure himself while hoopin with his buddies or - choke on a rib bone while scarfing down some barbeque.

Obama will also be laying a wreath and giving a speech at Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery here in Illinois. That's where my brother, a WWII naval vet, is buried. He died before Obama got elected but he backed him from day one. Glad he'll be present when our first black president pays tribute to America's fighting men.

My hometown is also in a tizzy because we have 2 home grown graduates from our local high school in the NBA finals. Glen Rivers, coach of the Celts, and Shannon Brown a player with the Lakers. Booo, Kobe. And - come on, Lebron. You are the Bulls' missing piece!

Google "The Good Negro at the Goodman Theatre" for dates and times and tickets.

No, I haven't seen the latest Shrek. Can the argument be made that Black men are ogres, not the other way around?

LMAO. Forgive me Lord. I tried so hard to not insert myself into the preceding little love fest, but I feel it's my duty to keep shit going on the board lest it die from from a malingering boredom. I know this was an "A" and "B" conversation so I should "C" my way out of it, but since it's about clear vision I will see my way into it.

First, I guess we have to figure out that "entenched" was meant to be "entrenched". It is not clear to me how a person can speak on the subject of clear vision when, after a life time of reading, still can't recognize when words are spelled wrong. Such a shortcoming is all about not being detailed-oriented, a very helpful trait when pursuing clear vision. This gaffe also goes along with using big words you hear others use but getting them slightly wrong. I think "malapropism" is the term I'm searching for.

And I'm surprised to read how our great philosopher bemoans those wishy-washy souls who want to be everything to everybody for fear of not being liked, when this is the same person who takes others to task if they show no inclination toward slavishly pleasing others by agreeing with them or deferring to their asssertions.

And how can anybody speak with authority on the subject of clear vision while seemingly unaware that, in a debate, there are 2 sides to every question. Having a clouded perception is what describes someone who regularly slams those who don't concede to an opponent when arguing MOOT contentions.

To me, clear vision involves, among other things, having hindsight, something which facilites having an overview, all of which comes with age. And one thing age teaches is that, except in math, there are no absolutes. History is always challenged by revisionists, and the research of social sciences devalued by flawed methodology. Even some of the Einstein's calculations have recently been discovered to have been predicated on the wrong postulations. And every year studies come up with a new theory displacing the old one about what causes things like breast cancer. "Facts" are relative. Anecdotal evidence is based on "facts". Bottom line, taking oneself too seriously is a stumbling block on the road to seeing straight ahead. IMO.

Anyhoo, speaking of the theater, I just returned from a matinee showing of the "Good Negro" which is having a limited run at Chicago's Goodman Theater before opening on Broadway, and what a riveting play this was! A fictionalized version of the symbiotic relationship between Martin Luther King, Jr. and his alter-ego Ralph David Abernathy, this was a well-scripted, smartly-directed drama. The acting was excellent, and the staging imaginative in its starkness. I loved it!! The appreciative audience was mostly white but what a revival meeting this production would've been had black folks been filling the seats!

Did it ever occur to you that my response went over your head? If you can call your dig a "joke", I can call my response a "joke". As usual you want to define the terms to suit your purposes, which in this case is to portray yourself as a "victim." zzzzzzzzzzzz

And what is the purpose of this silly list you are starting? I guess I should just restrict myself to addressing you as "Carey", - which is a pretty good insult unto itself.

Stop projecting, Chrishayden. You don't have your finger on the pulse of black America, you are simply looking in the mirror. The other day you were chiding black people about feeling sorry for Oprah. WHO FEELS SORRY FOR HER? Where did you get this idea that black folks pity her? Why would we? As for Venus, she was introducing a new feature of her clothing line. She had flesh-colored tights on under her tennis skirt; it was just an illusion. And illusions play a big role in today's outrageous culture.

A lot of stuff that goes on in America just rolls off black people's backs. We are experts at not expecting anything but foolishness from white people. Most of us just wish young black folks would get off FaceBook long enough to prepare themselves for a future where they will be challenged to stay afloat.

Maybe you'd better scrap the "cyniquian" designation, Troy. It's too confusing in this new format and people are always attributing posts to me that I haven't written. I've been taking Chrishayden's heat lately. He, not me, needs to get credit for his nuttiness. I didn't write that last post you responded to under the "De Self-hate Debate" thread. Chrishayden did.

Oh stfu, numbskull. It figures that somebody as myopic as you would refer to Chrishayden's panic-stricken rant, as "eloquent", Carey. And your thinking is so stunted that you actually believe that Chris' comments about survival are a revelation. Who doesn't know that survival is the wave of the future?? I guess this came as news to you and your clueless self. Survival has always been my mantra. And of course you would relate to Chris raggin on black people who don't think like you because that's all you're good for along with desperately demanding facts, - something you rarely deal in. yawnnnnnnnnnn.

Every now and then somone comes forth, fresh from a journey to the top of a mountain where they have received an epiphany which has inspired them to proclaim to the world that "black folks are brainwashed"! It’s almost like they don’t know that Carter Woodson beat them to the draw over 50 years ago when he wrote “The Mis-education of the Negro”.

I haven’t read this book, Troy, but I doubt if it will tell me anything astounding. I can’t imagine how the author would assume that the average black adult doesn’t know that slavery stripped us of our identities or that freedom turned us loose into a society that made us over in its image, the result being a mixed bag of ex-slaves heavily influenced by the dominant culture of the country where they live, all of which according to the book's sub-title has erroneously relegated Blacks to the ranks of the inferior. I've heard it all before and my reaction has always been that writing about this issue is a good way to sell books.

And talk about re-cyling revelations, does anybody not know how hip-hop has influenced the advertising industry, and how black side-kicks and magical negroes and sassy black sistas are staples in the entertainment world?

The monumental question is what are poor ol misguided Blacks to do about this brainwashed state of mind? Re-program themselves to emulate Africans? Abandon Christianity and embrace Islam? Pass themselves off as Nigerian royalty, maybe running a money-making scam in the process? Adopt new names? Celebrate Kwaanza? Will doing any of these things dispel the feelings of inferiority unsuspecting Blacks are supposedly mired in? Me, I don’t know, and am too old to care. Ignorance is bliss. BTW, I don’t think this subject is a priority of the President of the United States, either.

Are you addressing your comments to me, or Chrishayden? I ask this because I never made any reference to my kin folk fleeing the south because of southern persecution. And your "chip-on-the-shoulder" accusation, like your previous use of the word "venom" when responding to my comments, appear to be an indication that anybody whose thinking doesn't parallel yours will subjected to your paranoid-tinged judgments. You admitted to possibly being thin-skinned but it's more like being self-righteous in that you seem incapable of considering that see you what you want to see and subsequently overreact. (Just thought I'd match you by using a couple of descriptive opinions of my own.)

All your vaunted defense of the south, complete with your anecdotal proof indicting the north, does is to specify what you assumed I already know. And, indeed, I am aware that racism is wide-spread and institutionalized. But I still don't buy your suggestion, that it was just as bad in the north as it was in the south. There were, after all, hundreds of white Northerners who marched side by side with MLK through the hostile neighborhoods in Chicago. And back in 1963, federal workers like me needed only to pass the civil service exam to be paid the same wages as Whites. Also, it was that good old "yankee know-how" that won the civil war, not the arrogance of southern traditions.And, in the present how many rebel flag-waving states went for Obama??

The whole thrust of my argument, however, was how the black experience differs from location to location. Like my experiences at the University of Illinois, my tenure working for the U.S. Post office were atypical in that the black workers who dominated and controlled this work force in my area practiced discrimination against the white workers who were in the minority. And you can't obscure that with a lot of emotional subtefuge. Having said that, soulful sister, I appreciate your civility and informative responses and since you have discerned that I am cynical, I trust you will suck it in and keep on truckin. Next book on my agenda is "Oprah".

Talk about overkill. I wouldn't inject the word "venom" into my response to you, Soulful sister. That would be like me characterizing as "contemptuous" your rejection of my implication that the south is more guilty than the north of degrading their domestic workers. BTW, Doctor, the word is spelled "indict", not "indite". ;-)

I agree, Chrishayden, that the racism in the North was never as blatant as it was in the South.

I have no desire to live "vicariously" through anything as demeaning as being a domestic to Miz Anne. And I certainly have no desire to move down south like you apparently did, Soulful Sister. BTW, I'm sure Hispanic immigrants are going through these same experiences today. Domestics of any race are subjected to the whims and insensitivity to their employers. It comes with the territory.

None of this, however, neutralizes the irony of how the black experience differs from location to location. As I have previously mentioned, back in the early 1950s when I was a student at the University of Illinois and lived in the newly-integrated womens' residence halls, the year before a defiant Rosa Parks was arrested, me and my black dorm-mates, who elected to all eat our meals at the same table when we sat down to dinner in the dining room, were served by white waiters and waitresses, who were working their way through college - and who seemed to have no problem with catering to us. People have expressed skepticism about this, but it is true, and it is what it is. An AKA soror was also elected homecoming queen during that era. I dropped out of the U. of I. after 2 years and I have been reminded by others who followed, that things changed on campus when racial tensions began to surface. But this was my black experience and who is to say it is not authentic?

I hung in there and finally finished reading “The Help”. Whew! This is a 451-page novel which revolves around a way of life that harks back to ante-bellum times, and it was written by a latter-day southern belle named Kathryn Sockett.

The book begins back in 1963 down in the deep south, and is set against the historic back drop of the festering civil rights movement. Its story line relies heavily on the observations of 2 housekeepers who have consented to help a young white woman achieve her goal of recording the experiences of 12 black servants for the purpose of cobbling their recollections into a book.

What is most compelling about this excursion into Mississippi’s Jim Crow culture is the humble and humiliating demeanor that black domestics had to maintain in order to make a living working in the homes of their frivolous white mistresses. And what goes on between these black maids and their genteel white employers inspires not only amazement but anger as incidences of charity and cruelty are detailed.

Further engaging the reader’s interest are the problems that beset the personal lives of the sympathetic protagonist and her black cohorts. These sub-plots add to the book’s poignant overtones, but the author could’ve done a better job of developing her characters and their relationships. There were also distracting inconsistencies in her portrayals of the black women involved in the project. The book's ending is abrupt, but even though a lot is left to the imagination, it does conclude on a satisfactory note.

As an authentic, sometimes humorous look at the preserved lifestyle of a bygone era, “The Help” earns my recommendation mostly because it was sobering to be reminded how 100 years after the Emancipation Proclamation, below the Mason-Dixon line, black domestics were still treated like slaves. Some of the occurrences revealed are straight out of “Gone With The Wind“, replete with mammy figures. And they are all testaments to the absurdity of racist southern customs.

What further impressed me about this best-seller was that it provided a graphic illustration of how the black experience differs from location to location. Back in 1963, the small town life I and many others were leading in Illinois bore no resemblance to how things were in these little post-civil war communities of Mississippi. And even, unto this day, these contrasts have been influential in creating the schisms which exist among America’s black population.

I give “The Help” 3 out of a possible 5 stars.

I think it's no longer about Democrats and Republicans but about the victors and the vanquished. Losing Republicans will fall, and losing Democrats will stumble. The strong and powerful of both parties, however, will survive, and although the Dems have a wimpy facade, individually they are as treacherous and expedient as the Republicans when it comes to indulging their power-hungry interests. Opposing candidates will simply co-op each other's campaign promises and mislead the voters into thinking they will give them what they want - after telling them what it is they want. Politics.

Yes, America is undergoing change, but not upheavel. Things will be different in the future but the more things change, the more they'll become the same and the masses will just go with the flow like they always have, doing what it takes to survive. Baby Boomers are being replaced by the "Me-first" generation and these self-absorbed narcissistics will stay afloat. This will be a time of separating the swift from the slow, the unfettered from the entangled, which is why young Blacks should be careful about burdening themselves with a lot of baggage/children. IMO.

First of all, carey, you capitalized the word “ME” for emphasis when trying to distance yourself from being a self-hater, then attempted to back-track, weakly declaring that you were talking in "general" terms before you proceeded to give "specific" reasons as to why you were not a self-hater. How you can even fix your mouth to say you have debating skills I’ll never know. You can’t even articulate the proposition you are trying to prove. Somebody must be misleading you into thinking you are smart.

And you want proof of your equating an uncle tom with self-hate?? You just did this by calling me both of these names, even as you try to deny that this is not something you have a habit of doing. Your own words indict you. Just an example of your not being able to argue with any degree of clarity.

One minute you’re crowing about you having a right to your opinion and the next minute you’re declaring yourself the indisputable person who determines who is and who is not what YOU say they are. You’re blinded by your own sense of importance and you're stuck in the past, clinging to old cliches and notions about race and color.

And if you think I’m going to waste a lot of time and energy trying to change your mind about what you consider me to be, you’re more stupid than I thought. I place no value on your opinions and have no respect for the conclusions you reach about me because they’re based on your skewed perspective. I don’t give a good damn what you call me. Just keep on trying to convince yourself that I am what you have a need to believe I am because this is the only way you can bolster the claims which have no grounding in reality.

You are the personification of the saying that “there’s nothing worse than a fool, who knows not that he is a fool.” And to make matters worse. You are an OLD fool. LMAO.

Talk about somebody twisting things around. Your thought processes are so befuddled, Carey. WHO ever called YOU a "self-hater"? As much as you elevate and admire yourself, I can't imagine anyone accusing you of not having an over-abundant supply of self-love, - despite the fact that, where intellect is concerned, yours ain't that great.

Now all of sudden YOU are calling this "self-hate" label tomfoolery when YOU have used this term yourself in connection with people who YOU consider to be uncle toms. Talk about BS. You're full of it.

You may be speaking of the white public, but the black public is a different story. And things differ from place to place when it comes to racial concepts. This "one drop rule" is rarely envoked where I live, with folks routinely referring to light-skinned people as "mixed" rather than as "black". This is especially true among young people. My grand daughter actually complains because both her black and white classmates and new acquaintances always refer to her as being "mixed" and both of her parents are "black". These youngsters apparently believe what they see. Their brains seem to be wired to perceive anybody body who is not brown or darker as having white blood in them, thus making them "mixed" and this doesn't seem to bother them. The adults, are less forthcoming, but they will get around to voicing suspicions about the bi-racial parentage of light-skinned people. My daughter says that some of her white co-workers insist that she must be "mixed" as do her black ones.

"Mixed" is becoming more and more accepted as a category among the hoi poloi. As for Obama, black people claim him because he's the closest we are going to get to having a black president. And his story book rise to fame is an example of what the media loves to exploit so they prefer to describe him as African American. Tiger doesn't look white so he doesn't even fit into this equation. IMO.

Although I didn't call for toilet paper, I won't be surprised if Carey rolls out to whine about my take on this subject. Argh.

This from a guy who recently devoted paragraph after paragraph trying to prove to the world how he's got Cynique all figured out. Wooooooo. Puleeze. Me, I just had some extra time to waste which is why I dumped on you, Camode. Oops I mean, Carey. Doing so really propelled me into my comfort zone because it's fun to come up with different ways to describe your ineptitude as you tremble in your boots over the possibility that you might have to produce some facts of your own to counteract what I say.

But actually, there's no real danger of that because you will just come up with the same ol re-cycled come-backs that you kid yourself into believing are on point. It figures that you couldn't spell "original" because you are incapable of formulating an original thought. All you do is co-op other people's words and try to adopt them as your own. Or worse still, make feeble attempts at humor that fall flat because, like you, they never have any relevancy to the subject at hand. (As if children frequent this board and read what's written here when it's hard enough to get adults to stop by.)

I don't know or care how old you are, but you are really played out. Yawnnnnnnnn.

Well, as I anticipated, that geek carey has apparently changed his diaper after what I said made him pee on himself because, heaven forbid, he didn't agree with it. Now with a dry ass he has come forth and weighed in, taking on his usual self-appointed role of being the arbitrater who decides who is right and who is wrong, making this decision by determining whose opinion coincides with his. When the shoe fits his big crusty foot, he howls because his toe has been stepped on. The stand-by argument black people raise against Obama's white critics is that they are just mad because he's black and got elected president. Why does HE think white people detractors attack Obama??? And this is the retort included in the accusations that Blacks make against other Blacks who criticize Obama, - after they are done accusing them of hating themselves because they don't unconditionally support the bi-racial president who the accusers think represents blackness.

And I should've known that carey's lame brain couldn't process what else I said. He cannot figure out that for 2 sets of black people to hate 2 different black leaders and then for both groups to be accused of being self-haters, becomes a case of 2 negatives cancelling out a positive thus rendering the self-hate label as applied to Al Sharpton and Barak Obama as being invalid, amounting to nothing more than a moniker that is in the eye of the beholder. Further more, Troy's definition of what self-hate is just one way to define it. (Some people think giving a black child a made-up name is not in the best interest of the child because it stigmatizes him/her in the corporate world, while others think such names are not a handicap. WHO is right? Some call Bill Cosby a self-hater because of how he criticized underclass Blacks, while others consider him a brave crusader for speaking out) Also, opinions vary as to what constitues "black self-interest". Yes, self-hate is a maladjustment that does exist. But when it is modified by the adjective "black" then, I repeat: it becomes an ambiguous subject!

The term "black self hate" became popular back in the 60s along with the "black is beautiful" slogan. It was a phrase used by black activists to lay guilt trips on anybody who didn't go along with a militant credo. Over the years this phrase has become a convenient tool used to taint anyone who doesn't agree with the standards of another black person. The problem back then and the problem now is that there is no common criteria adhered to by the 39 million of African-Americans in this country as to what constitutes authentic blackness. So being the diverse group of people that we are, this is a subject that makes for a legitimate debate because neither side can prove the other completely wrong.

As for Carey, he just can't resist trying to manage people, becoming indignant if they don't say what he has made up his mind to be the way things are. He's so immersed in his delusions of self-importance that he cannot conceive of the idea that what he says is not above being challenged. He tries to set the rules and then stews and mopes if others don't play his game and adhere to his demands. He picks and chooses what points he going to try and disprove and ignores the ones he can't rebut, resorting to a lot of pyscho babble bunk in an attempt discredit his opponent and distract from the weak arguments he offers. Pitiful.

And BTW, carey, you misspelled "original" you semi-literate ignoramous.

I partially concur with your lists, Troy. But declaring that those who criticize Obama are black self-haters and then to follow this by saying that those who criticize Al Sharpton are black self-haters really muddies the picture. This fingerpointing is an exercise in inconsistency. It's like the pot calling the kettle black. The message this sends is that for one group to disapprove of Al Sharpton is a sign of black self hate because Al is not like Barak Obama, while the other group is guilty of black self hate because it disapproves of Barak Obama who is not like Al Sharpton.

All of which is why I have always found the term "black self-hate" to be ambiguous. For one thing, it has never been clearly established just what qualifies as an official black trade mark. Why? Because black people are not monolithic! With this being the case who is to say what it is that has to be rejected in order to qualify a black person for hating something black. Let's see. If a black preacher hates gangsta rap is that a sign that he's a self-hater. If a black woman has short kinky hair and observes how this often puts her at a disadvantage in the dating game and thus decides to get a hair weave which results in her being more competitive when it comes to attracting men, is this a sign she hates herself because she didn't like a certain trait, or is this a sign she loves herself because her vanity motivates her to step up her game. It just depends on how you frame things. IMO.

Right up there with the perennial debate about who’s to blame for the relationship rift that exists between black men and black women, is the ongoing finger-pointing that goes on in regard to what constitutes a self-hating black person.

Lately, a person’s attitude about Obama can become what triggers accusations of self-hate. But first it becomes relevant to offer a definition of a “self-loving” black person. Supporting the president unconditionally because “white people are just out to get him“ is a priority for the self-loving black person. Making fun of or chiding him for not honoring the promises that got him elected is tantamount to blasphemy. The connection between criticizing Obama and hating yourself apparently has to do with the idea that black people are interchangeable and to give the president’s job performance a C- makes one ashamed of oneself because “he” is “us“.

To really be a card-carrying self-loving black person, one seemingly has to reject anything that smacks of white envy and embrace everything that is black. Of course this creates a conflict in regard to black people who self-loving blacks consider to be Uncle Toms. An inconsistency occurs here wherein a self-loving black person rejects certain other Blacks if they don’t love what he loves. This, of course, is where making a distinction between a black person and a negro comes in, - a distinction that’s ineffective because there is no unanimous consensus about who rates as what; only opinionated assessments.

All of this raises the uncomfortable possibility that where our esteemed President is concerned, he could fit the self-lover's definition of being a sell-out. He has, after all, out of expediency, chosen to be a president of all the people. And this is as it should be. He simply cannot be a “black” president and since he had to have know this before he ran for the office, he also had to know that showing any affinity for his fellow blacks would be a “no-no“. How lucky he is that his self-loving supporters abandon their criteria and excuse him from qualifying as a black self-hater because, by their standards, he compromises his blackness, - not to mention how his wife gets her hair permed, not daring to wear an Afro

I personally dismiss anyone who says I‘m a self-hater because implicit in such an insinuation is that black self-hate is synonymous with admiration for whatever is white, as if white people have a monopoly on productive behavior, as if this is not a human survival trait, that transcends race. Yes, because I know they could do better, I cast a jaundiced eye at things some black folks do that result in them becoming their own worst enemy. But I don’t sweat it, and I usually find humor in it. I am who I am, a woman who identifies herself as black, who loves the freedom of being true to myself. No problem. No self hate. Think what you will, I know better.

In conclusion, it can be deduced that the subject of black hate is a many-faceted issue, one that is rife with vacillating debators. And to those who would smugly attempt to point out that I “doth protest too much“, I say that this is a subject that lends itself to an in-depth analysis, and, beside that, this board needs something to wake it up. z z z z z z z

I have really never been among those who chastise celebs for cheating on their wives because I am cynical enough to accept that being polygamous is the nature of the male beast. What I roll my eyes about is how dumb these players are because they never cover their tracks. Then I remind myself that being dumb is also the nature of the male beast...

Your use of the catch-all "self-hate" phrase also caught my eye, Troy, and, at the risk of stimulating the bladder of a certain geek who shall remain nameless, I will pick up the gauntlet you hurled down and respond to your accusation in a separate post. heh-heh.

I just started reading "The Help" a work of fiction currently gracing the top-10 best seller list. I had no idea what this book was about but it came highly recommended.

It's turning out to be quite engrossing. Hint: Scarlett O'Hara must be turning over in her grave, her green eyes blazing! One of my thumb-nail reviews will reveal more when I finish it.

If it turns out to be a guy, the gay community will embrace Obama and take up the slack created by the Christians who will desert him in droves. Of course he will have to come out in favor of same-sex marriage. Michelle can, of course, write a book and line up a photo-op to schedule another HIV test. And the doomsday clock ticks closer to the 2012 zero hour...

In keepng with his new and improved image, Tiger refrained from sulking, and in the post game interview, he stoically resorted to the old

"it is what it is" conundrum when referring to one of the worst losses of his career.

This is getting serious. Wooooooo. What if the golden boy never snaps back from his set back???? Wonder who could play Tiger when a made-for-TV-movie chronocling the rise and fall of a legend comes out in a few years? Hummm. Let's see. Johnny Depp??