Dr. Cornel West Assesses President Barack Obama -Nov. 2009

muckraker10021

Superstar *****
BGOL Investor
logo.gif
<br>
The Oracle
Dr. Cornel West Assesses President Barack Obama

091102_talkrmnckillus_p233.jpg
barackcornell.JPG


by David Remnick - November 2, 2009


Among the grandees of the Princeton University faculty, past and present, Cornel West is the only one to have appeared in two sequels of “The Matrix,” playing a Zion Elder called Councillor West; recorded songs with both André 3000 and John Mellencamp; and seen his words quoted on a Starbucks cup. A couple of weeks ago, West published a memoir titled “Living and Loving Out Loud.” He did not write it, exactly; the book is an as-told-to with David Ritz, who has similarly collaborated with Ray Charles, Aretha Franklin, and Grandmaster Flash. None of the above can be said of Christian Gauss or Woodrow Wilson.

Cornel West is everywhere, constantly on the road. A self-fashioned “scholar-bluesman,” he travels from lecture hall to church pulpit and on to Barnes & Noble, wearing a formal and elegant uniform––black suit, white shirt, French cuffs, black tie, black scarf. “I’ve got four more just like this one,” he says. “And the dry-cleaning bills to go with it.”

West stopped by Times Square the other day on his way to a speaking engagement uptown. He had in tow his publisher and his sweetly beleaguered assistant, Mary Ann Rodriguez, who valiantly attempts to get him to his gigs on time; just in case Rodriguez loses him, he carries a tiny leather-bound date book crammed tight with the details of his obligations, paid and otherwise. “I’ve never spent a weekend in Princeton,” West said. “I’m on the road, on the move, brother. I meet magnificent people, I have a great time, I learn so much, and, at the same time, I’ve got to make some money, because I’ve got women in my life—or women in my past, let’s put it that way.”

Of the many roles that West has played in the academy and the media lately, it’s been his ongoing support-slash-critique of Barack Obama that is the most curious. It was not a relationship that began with daffodils and candy. At Tavis Smiley’s State of the Black Union conference, in February, 2007, West said that he admired Obama as a “very decent, brilliant, charismatic brother,” but lamented that he “holds us at arm’s length,” the better not to alienate white voters.

A few days later, Obama called West and the two men spoke for what West described as four hours. “First thing he said was ‘Well, Brother West, you’re much more progressive on these things than I am. We’re not going to agree on everything.’ I said, ‘Of course! My only thing is—you be true to yourself, I’ll be true to myself. That’s all I ask.’ Then he went in and talked about what King meant, what that legacy meant, how he’d been shaped by it, and so forth. And it was a genuine opening. That’s why I could discern a certain decency. I said, ‘Brother, I will be a critical supporter. I’ll be a Socratic supporter.’ ”

Nine months later, at a fund-raiser at the Apollo Theatre, West introduced Obama with unbridled enthusiasm and Obama returned the favor, calling West “a genius” and “an oracle.”

West campaigned for Obama in Iowa, South Carolina, Illinois, and Ohio, but he was dismayed by his speech on race in Philadelphia. West thought the speech was politically “masterful,” but “intellectually, it was pretty thin.” He kept his thoughts to himself, but he was especially annoyed that Obama had said that the Reverend Wright was full of rage, because he was somehow stuck in time, still wrestling with Jim Crow, and that he equated black anger with white resentment. “Have you seen the young brothers and sisters in prison, on the block?” West said. “I don’t mind being an angry black man in terms of having righteous indignation at injustice, given the situation right now in the country. But as a candidate he had to distance himself. . . . There have been excesses of affirmative action and so forth and so on, but Jim Crow de facto is still in place. . . . Who are the major victims of that? The poor—disproportionately black and brown and red. You got to tell the truth, Barack. Don’t trot out this shit with this coded stuff!” And yet, West said, “I intentionally remained relatively silent. It was a very delicate moment.”

Now, a year after the election, West has kept to his promise: he is a Socratic supporter. “I don’t want to downplay the progress, though, because Obama is a black man. It’s just that: first, you’ve got the parents. It’s more Johnny Mathis than Curtis Mayfield, or more Lena Horne than Sarah Vaughan, in terms of phenotype. And, second, you’ve got someone who really is a master at easing the fears and anxieties of white brothers and sisters. That’s part of the basis of his success. And I don’t put that down. We need different kinds of people in the world.”

So far, West finds himself infinitely more impressed by Obama’s mastery of “spectacle” than by his attention to the poor. “In terms of the impact on young people, I think it’s a beautiful thing,” he said of Obama’s election. “But, in the end, even spectacle has to deal with the darkness. That’s where the bluesman comes in. Guy Lombardo can be nice on a certain night, but you’re going to need Duke Ellington and Count Basie.” ♦

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/2009/11/02/091102ta_talk_remnick?printable=true



<hr noshade color="#FF0000" size="10"></hr>
 
Last edited:
So far, West finds himself infinitely more impressed by Obama’s mastery of “spectacle” than by his attention to the poor. “In terms of the impact on young people, I think it’s a beautiful thing,” he said of Obama’s election. “But, in the end, even spectacle has to deal with the darkness. That’s where the bluesman comes in. Guy Lombardo can be nice on a certain night, but you’re going to need Duke Ellington and Count Basie.”



NICE
 
Didn't really see much assessment, some hope and disappointment... He was right about the Philly speech.
 
Didn't really see much assessment, some hope and disappointment... He was right about the Philly speech.

Yeah, don't you love it! First "West thought the speech was politically “masterful,” but “ Then, the article goes on to note, "You got to tell the truth, Barack. Don’t trot out this shit with this coded stuff!” And yet, West said, “I intentionally remained relatively silent. It was a very delicate moment.”

Now seriously, I'm not distrubed at Dr. West's remarks, but, who's the hypocrite ? ? ?

QueEx
 
Didn't really see much assessment, some hope and disappointment... He was right about the Philly speech.

Yeah, don't you love it! First "West thought the speech was politically “masterful,” but the article goes on to note, "You got to tell the truth, Barack. Don’t trot out this shit with this coded stuff!” And yet, West said, “I intentionally remained relatively silent. It was a very delicate moment.”

Now seriously, I'm not distrubed at Dr. West's remarks, but, who's the hypocrite ? ? ?

QueEx
 

Cornel West Questions Obama's
Commitment to Black America

Says a Prayer for Rahm Emanuel

by Kathleen Wells, AlterNet

February 27, 2010


http://www.alternet.org/story/145802/

Last week, I had an opportunity to talk with Dr. Cornel West. He is the professor of Religion and African American studies at Princeton University. Hope you enjoy the conversation.

Kathleen Wells: Dr. West, I’d like to thank you for taking the time to speak with me. I am speaking with Dr. West — Cornel West — who is the professor of African-American studies and Religion at Princeton University. And this month, February, being black history month, I’m delighted to have the opportunity to speak with you. Thank you very much.

Dr. Cornel West: Thank you so much.

Kathleen Wells: Okay, let me start by asking you some specifics about President Obama’s first year. We know he’s completed his first year, and I know you’ve been a critic — or rather, I’d like to say, you’ve critically analyzed his campaign and his presidency. How do you feel that his first year has impacted the black community specifically and America as a whole?

Dr. Cornel West: Well, I think on a symbolic level I would give him an A in terms of uplifting the spirits and providing a sense of hope and possibility going into the inauguration and sustaining it up to a certain point. On a substantial level I would give him a C- when it comes to policy, when it comes to priority, when it comes to focusing on poor people and working people — which has to do with the vast majority of black people — that he has really not come through in any substantial and significant way.

We’ve got an interesting dynamic going on that at a symbolic level you’ve got this tremendous impact that is beginning now to run out of gas and on a substantial level, the C- — jobs, homes, education, health care — he has not been able to come through, and so he’s at a very pivotal moment in terms of black people. He can no longer take the black base for granted.

Kathleen Wells: Do you feel we’re being fair to President Obama? Has any President other than FDR been able to put working class, the poor, at the center of their agenda?

Dr. Cornel West: Well, I think LBJ actually put all the black folk, given the American apartheid in the south and the Jim Crow junior situation in the north, at the center of his agenda right after JFK died. And so, actually, LBJ is probably the best example, even better than FDR, because, you remember, FDR’s New Deal excluded domestic workers and agricultural laborers, which was the vast majority of black people. So that when you really look at the one President who has done that, it has been LBJ in the 20th century and Lincoln in the 19th century. But Obama talked about Lincoln, he talked about LBJ, he talked about FDR, you see? So it was Obama who raised the hopes of the people.

Kathleen Wells: So he’s one person, he’s the president…

Dr. Cornel West: He’s not one person, he’s the president who chooses an economic team that has put Wall Street and banks at the center of their project and job creation as an afterthought — the homes of ordinary people as an afterthought. Then he’s got a foreign policy team that he chooses, and he chooses to be a war President and escalating the war, not just in Afghanistan, but escalating those lethal drones in Pakistan. You see what I mean?

You know what part of the problem is, Sister Kathleen? That Obama has a team that understands the black agenda to be a narrow, parochial, provincial slice of America that he can assume he always has because he’s a black President. They don’t understand what black history is all about, which is that the black agenda, from Frederick Douglass to Ida B. Wells to Martin King, has always been the most broad, deep, inclusive, embracing agenda of the nation.

Frederick Douglass' agenda was an agenda, not for black people to get out of slavery. It was for America to become a better democracy. And it’s split over for women’s rights; it’s spilt over for worker’s rights and so forth. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s agenda was not to help Negroes overcome American apartheid in the south. It was to make America democracy a better place, where everyday people, from poor people who were white and red and yellow and black and brown, would be able to live lives in decency and dignity. And that black agenda included a love of Vietnamese people, who were being bombed by American airplanes and repressed by gangster communists, right?

So this notion of a black agenda being some narrow thing is part of the duping that is taking place among — how could I put it — it’s part of the manipulation of those in the Obama administration vis-à-vis the press and vis-à-vis black people.

Our agenda is better than the corporate agenda, it’s better than the Catholic agenda, it’s better than the Jewish agenda, it’s better than the Italian agenda, and I love Italians — special place. This whole notion that the black agenda is something you can just cast aside and view as some kind of calculation for the next election is absurd. It’s nonsense and we refuse — I refuse — to put up with it.

Kathleen Wells: You’re saying this is a concerted effort, an explicit decision on the part of his administration, to exclude the interests of black Americans?

Dr. Cornel West: No, not to exclude, to downplay and to marginalize. We’re not talking about exclusion. He’s not a racist. You know what I mean? No, it’s not exclusion; it’s to downplay and marginalize.

Kathleen Wells: Why is that? What would account for that?

Dr. Cornel West: Because they tilt toward a corporate agenda. If you tilt toward a corporate agenda, then black suffering and poor people and working people is not going to be central. Why? Because corporate America ain’t never dealt that much with poor people and working people, right? That he tilts toward another agenda that he doesn’t want to say — he just calls it the American agenda, which is a cop-out because the America agenda is a composite of a variety of different agendas, of people trying to learn how to live together and help an evolving democracy.

That’s why you never hear Barack Obama or President Obama go to the corporate world and say, “I am a president of all America and not corporate America.” You never hear him say that when he goes to the Catholic world — they have a culture of life — “I am not a president of Catholics; I am a president of all Americans.” He would never go there in the Jewish world. He doesn’t go to a Jewish context and say, “I’m president of all Americans; I’m not president of Jewish America.” But when it comes to black people, he thinks he can get away with that. That’s ridiculous. We’re not putting up with it.

Kathleen Wells: This is a democracy, but it’s also a capitalist system. And so, in free market capitalism, isn’t having a poor or working poor inherent in that system?

Dr. Cornel West: Yeah, that’s true. But keep in mind that we’re not talking about anything in the abstract. Sweden is a capitalist society; it has no poverty. Japan is a capitalist society, four percent poverty. Canada is a capitalist society, seven percent poverty. See what I mean?

There are different varieties and forms of capitalism, right? There are priorities within the capitalist society so that you can have countervailing forces come in and empower your working people and your poor people. There are capitalist societies that do not have poverty. America needs to understand that. Look at Norway; look at Sweden. There’s a whole host of– I mean, they are not socialist societies. They are social Democratic societies with a capitalist economy.

Kathleen Wells: Often I’ve heard you say that your calling is Socratic, which is teaching, and prophetic, which is predictive, foretelling.

Dr. Cornel West: No, no. Prophetic is bearing witness to suffering.

Kathleen Wells: Bearing witness to suffering, and that you’re…

Dr. Cornel West: Prophetic is not predicting.

Kathleen Wells: It isn’t?

Dr. Cornel West: No, no, no, not at all. When you say that King was a prophet, you don’t say that he predicted anything; you say that he bore witness. He left a committed life so that people would never forget the suffering of people that he was connected to. King was prophetic because he lived a committed life. Now he did critique society, saying you’re going to go under if you don’t treat your poor right. I mean, that is part of prophetic calling, but it’s not predicting anything. No, that’s a soothsayer.

Kathleen Wells: That’s a soothsayer. Okay, so that was my mistake. So, it’s a…

Dr. Cornel West: I just wanted to clarify that with you.

Kathleen Wells: Yeah, that’s fine. And that you’re committed to unarmed truth and unconditional love. And that…

Dr. Cornel West: That’s right.

Kathleen Wells: And that President Obama’s calling is to progressive governance and trying to shape policy. So, how do these two roles, these two commitments, how are they reconciled? Where do we find common ground?

Dr. Cornel West: Oh, no…well, we do. One is, as you know, I did 67 events for the brotha, right? From Iowa to Ohio. Why? Because I was convinced — and I would do it again — that he was the best politician, given our relative options of McCain and Palin, to take us beyond the age of Reagan. We had to get beyond the greed-run-amok. We had to get beyond indifference to the poor and working people. We had to get beyond polarized politics.

Barack talked about — not greed — he talked about fairness; not indifference — he talked about compassion; not fear — he talked about hope. I was with him all the way. But, of course, I knew that, as a person who would govern, that his democratic rhetoric during the campaign was going to be challenged by technocratic policies of his party and experts who he hired. I understand that.

We have significant overlap. One is, I do want to protect him against the vicious right-wing attacks, many of which are lies. I do want to make sure he is respected as a human being, as a President and as a black man in the White House with a precious black family. But I want him corrected when he leans toward the strong and not toward the weak. I was hoping he would be a progressive politician. That’s a politician like Russell Feingold, like the late Paul Wellstone — who leaned toward the weak as a politician — like Harold Washington in Chicago. Has he been a progressive politician who leaned toward the weak? Well, that’s a good question.

Healthcare. What does that look like? Public option is negotiable. Deals behind the counter with pharmaceutical companies because they know that the government is the biggest seller of the drugs that they sale. That doesn’t look like progressive in that regard. It looks like typical centrist manipulation of the forces — interest groups — in order to make deals.

Kathleen Wells: And this goes back to what I sort of touched on before. Is America ready for that kind of radical change, that kind of revolutionary change?

Dr. Cornel West: It’s not revolutionary, though. To give money to community banks and small banks rather than billions and billions and billions of dollars to a few huge investment banks too big to fail and the rest of it too small to be rescued? That’s not revolutionary at all.

What I’m talking about is really consistent with much of what you read in the columns of New York Times with Paul Krugman, and Bob Herbert and Joseph Stiglitz’s wonderful new book, Freefall, that needs to be read and reread. I don’t think that calls for anything revolutionary. In fact, I am a bit more radical than they are, but I resonate with what they have to say, but it’s not revolutionary, I don’t think, at all. In fact, I think it’s commonsensical. I think if Obama doesn’t begin to move in that direction, he’s going to lose the black base. The white Independents have already begun to distance themselves, and the right-wing are coming on with tremendous vigor, and it’s dangerous.

These tea-party brothers and sisters — I’m telling you … conservative? They’ve got some crypto-fascist element. And Barack, if he can’t somehow displace that populist energy that they have in a progressive way, he’s going to be left dangling there with his experts and brainy smart folks who refuse to side with the weak. Then we got a bigger mess.

Kathleen Wells: So, give me some specifics. How can he change this C- or C+ into an A?

Dr. Cornel West: He’s got to zero-in on jobs. He’s got to use his might to try to push through serious legislation for jobs and investment and infrastructure, job-training centers. He’s got to re-channel much of this money to these small banks who are lending and make accountable these big banks who got all of these billions of dollars, and not just giving them out for bonuses for their executives, but are sitting on it because they don’t trust one another, and none of the money is getting down to the ordinary people who need the money for lending to get their own projects off the ground, their lives together.

And so, once you get caught within that kind of Wall Street connected — or put it this way, intimate relation between Wall Street, Washington elites and the investment bankers — then you can’t talk about job-creation. Job creation has to be a very, very slow evolutionary process in which the Federal Reserve that has no public accountability whatsoever. Who did he choose to be head of the Federal Reserve again? Same chap who got us in the mess in the first place. He certainly came to his defense strong, didn’t he? Come to Van Jones’ defense? No, no. But he came to Bernanke’s defense strongly. He came to Geithner’s defense strongly. Progressives — sell down the river; centrists who are elites — come to their defense strongly because he gives us a sense of where he leans — what his priorities are. That’s what I find upsetting and disturbing.

Kathleen Wells: You mentioned, you said, the President is going to lose the base, the black base. He’s going to lose us as a base.

Dr. Cornel West: That’s because black people will sleep-walk, tied to symbolic victories, only for so long. Once they wake up and see, My God, my child has gone to Afghanistan! My God, my girl is still unemployed and these schools are still dilapidated and this housing is disgraceful and I see more and more an Obama administration siding with bankers, investment, commercial insurance companies, black folk are gonna say, “Wait a minute, this symbolic victory only goes so far. I am waking up.” Then he’s in deep trouble.

Does it make sense to you though, my sister?

Kathleen Wells: It makes sense to me. But…

Dr. Cornel West: You think I’m being too unfair? I don’t want to be unfair, I love my brother. I just love the people more than I love him.

Kathleen Wells: I know that, and I’m just thinking of the mechanics of D.C., all the competing and conflicting interests.

Dr. Cornel West: That’s real. That’s real.

Kathleen Wells: That’s real, and so…

Dr. Cornel West: That’s very real. But the part of it is, you got to tell the people that. You see what I mean? Just explain to the people: “You know what, I’ve got these lobbyists paying millions and millions of dollars. It’s around my neck. I’ve got these banks that put a gun to my head.” Just explain that to the people the way that Harold Washington used to explain it. And say, “I can’t do that much.” Right? That’s not what he’s doing? What have they said this past week? Look at that, Sister Kathleen? They are arguing there’s not even such a thing as a black agenda. That’s what Al Sharpton, that’s what Charles Olgetree, that’s what Marc Morial, that’s what Benjamin Jealous have said. Now, that, to me, is ridiculous.

How could there be a corporate agenda, a Catholic agenda, a trade union agenda, a Jewish agenda — whatever agenda — but when it comes to black people, especially with 96 percent behind him, we don’t have an agenda? He must be losing his mind, especially when we have the best agenda for the country if we take the legacy of King as our agenda, you see? We got the best agenda out there — accountability for the corporations, job creation, priority on education, focus on the young children until the early child educational development, green policy, be cautious when you go to war — that’s King’s legacy. Was King a black man? Was King part of a black agenda? Was he at the center of black history?

Kathleen Wells: But what accounts for this? What is the intention? What is the motivation?

Dr. Cornel West: It’s because Obama people have predicated their whole project on speaking to the white moderates and white Independents to easing their fears and anxieties, and assuming that there is black solidarity by giving black folks only something symbolic, and not wanting to respond with any substantial way and saying, “Just let it trickle down like everybody else.” And you know what? The white Independents have now backed off and the black base is upset. So they are in a world of trouble. That’s why I pray for them ’cause I’m a Christian, too, you know?

Kathleen Wells: So, is this basically a political strategy and you’re saying it’s failed?

Dr. Cornel West: Absolutely. And I’m saying also that you can only engage in a strategy of cutting deals that will take you so far. You have to end up taking some stands. And he has been reluctant to take stands when it comes to poor people and working people and black folks.

Kathleen Wells: And we should also keep in mind, this has just been his first year, correct?

Dr. Cornel West: Yeah, that’s true. And he can change, you know? You’re absolutely right. But a lot happens in 12 months, though.

And part of the problem is, is that, as you know, given this sped-up process and 24/7 cycle of news, they’re already talking about 2012 anyway. It’s permanent campaign. Now, permanent campaign — what did he do during the campaign? Couldn’t get too close to black folk ’cause he assumed black people are going to vote for him. Have to present himself as the non-angry black man for the white moderates in order to win. So black folks say: “OK, on the down-low, we know, you’re with us, but you can’t be connected too closely with us because you will lose.”

That goes over and over again for eight years? And there’s no serious wrestling with the level of suffering, not just in black communities, but in poor communities, and working communities. With an economic team that is in the back pocket for the most part of Wall Street. Come on, now.

Kathleen Wells: You’re presenting a really persuasive argument of course, right?

Dr. Cornel West: I think I’ve got a case that you seriously have to come to terms with and there is no doubt about that. Keep in mind, the aim is not for me to be right. The aim is to make sure that we keep the focus on the people who are suffering. That’s what we’re here for, you know?

Kathleen Wells: And so this goes back to me about expectations. What can we reasonably expect?

Dr. Cornel West: I think that part of what is needed (and I applaud the Huffington Post for being very much a part of this — Tavis Smiley is a part of it; Amy Goodman is a part of it) that in the end, until we have a social motion and social movement to put pressure on Barack Obama from the vantage point of poor and working people (because we love poor and working people and they are too unloved in our society; they are low priority in our society) we have to keep our voices consistent, strong and hope that an awakening takes place of the sleepwalking of poor and working people so that there’s some kind of movement to put pressure on Obama.

If we had 300,000 poor and working people in the streets in Washington, D. C., while Obama is having one of his nice little socials where they’re listening to some music, then they’d have to take notice. And people would say, “Oh, my God, why would they be marching against him? That’s the fundamental part of his constituency!” No, he is symbolically speaking to that constituency. But he’s not substantially speaking to the conditions of that constituency. So in some ways, the ball is also in our court.

Kathleen Wells: It’s totally in our court, I believe, because Obama said, during when he was campaigning, that he needed us. We the people…we the people are the government. So where is the answer to…

Dr. Cornel West: There’s another side to it you’ve got to keep in mind. He has to be receptive. He has to be receptive. I want to listen to “We the people.” But he has nobody in his circle who has this perspective other than Eric Holder and probably Christina [Romer] and Cecilia Rouse. But, for the most part, the people who are closest to him — the Rahm Emanuels and the Geithners, and the Summers and the Valerie Jarretts — they are not thinking this way at all. So then, in other words, when he said “We the people,” he was saying either we make a loud noise because he is not really listening that closely when we don’t speak that loud. And those who he does listen to view those of us as these — what did Rahm Emanuel say? — these “f-ing activist?” Isn’t that what he called us?

Kathleen Wells: [laughter] Where did you read that?

Dr. Cornel West: Pray for you, Rahm. Pray for you, Rahm.

Kathleen Wells: Where did you read that?

Dr. Cornel West: That’s what he told the … It’s in the issue of Rolling Stone, the recent issue of Rolling Stone. When he met with the Organizing for America, people who wanted to try to galvanize into a movement, and Plouffe said, “No, we’re going to push them into the Democratic National Committee.” So they got incorporated, diluted, and they capitulated, just like so many black leaders right now are incorporated, diluted, and incorporated into the Obama administration and not speaking to the needs of black people and poor people.

Kathleen Wells: Well, I don’t mind telling you that it disappoints me to hear this. I don’t know if it’s cynical or pessimistic. But I’m…

Dr. Cornel West: Oh, but I’m not pessimistic, because poor people tend to bounce back. We’ve been through worse than this — working people been through worse than this. We’ve got slavery and Jim Crow. We’ve got workers with no rights up until '35. We’re going to bounce back. We are resilient, resisting people. So, it’s not pessimism, but it is blues-like. It’s not optimistic. We’re just prisoners of hope, that’s all.

Kathleen Wells: Prisoners of hope. Well, I wanna ask you. There is no grassroots movement. There is no answer to the Tea Party movement. I mean, we have to at least start there before we…

Dr. Cornel West: That’s right. Actually it’s around but it’s not organized yet. We haven’t reached the point where we’ve come together. We’ve got different fragments of expressions of it here and there in poor communities, progressive trade unions. We’ve got certain black activists who have been very critical from the very beginning of Obama administration, just haven’t come together.

And right now, we’re working on the churches because, as you know, you know Obama does not have a strong relation to the black churches. He has a strong relation to black talk radio. He can call up Steve Harvey. He can call up Tom Joyner and talk with them anytime he wants. But the black church leaders, they’re getting more and more frustrated. Can you imagine telling black churches that there’s no black agenda in America given all the suffering they have to go through and all the funerals they go to and all the hospital rooms they have to attend to?

Rahm Emanuel and company must be losing their minds when they tell Barack that and he allows them to say that. Good God almighty! [laughter] They are not going to put up with that too long.

Kathleen Wells: Well, I’m glad you brought up the black churches because, as a professor of religion, speak to me about the tradition of religion in the black community. Has it been a disservice and a service? Can you approach it from that point of view?

Dr. Cornel West: Well, what happened, so many black churches went to sleep during the age of Reagan, became addicted to prosperity gospel, the market- driven conception of religion, of chamber-of-commerce religion, a market spirituality, a commodity-centered religion. Lexus, Lexus, Lexus, commodity, commodity, commodity becomes a means by which blessings are distributed. It’s a sick, impoverished form of religiosity but it was — it went hand in hand with– the market-obsessed culture, a market-obsessed religion. You saw the mega churches that became dominant. These mega-churches — you see an ATM before you see a cross on a lot of these churches.

Kathleen Wells: How can this be addressed?

Dr. Cornel West: We got to tell the truth. We got to love the folk enough, tell them that we can’t turn the blood of the cross into Kool-Aid. That there’s a difference between just gaining access to a commodity as opposed to a spirit that allows us to live a life of love and justice, that when crisis and catastrophe hits you, that the biggest mansion in the world is not going to help you. If you don’t have anybody who loves you, if you don’t have any God who cares for you, that you’re not going to have what it takes to move to the next stage in your life. And the prosperity gospel is coming to a close just like the age of Reagan is coming to a close, and the churches are also beginning to wake up.

And Obama, of course, wants to be able to incorporate them, too, but one thing you can rest assured is that when you let the Holy Ghost loose among black people, no politician can control it. It’s just that the churches have been sleeping for a long time. A lot of people argue that the churches are even dead. I don’t believe they’re dead, but they’ve been sleeping, but they, I hope, will wake up, and that’s one of my tasks is to make sure they wake up as much as they do before I die.

Kathleen Wells: What are you doing specifically to make sure they wake up?

Dr. Cornel West: Well, you read the Chicago Sun Times today where I was at a black church in Chicago, saying exactly what I just told you. In fact, you can get the tape — it’s an hour.

http://east.streamguys.com/fcssc-video/2010_02_14_stsabina_cornelwest.wmv

Life is too short to get the whole thing. But it was a sermon, precisely on this issue: How do we wake up, how do we protect, respect, and correct Obama? How do we create possibilities for movement? How do we ensure that we bear witness to a deep and profound love of poor people and a deep and profound love for working people? Not hating the rich but just knowing that the rich have had priorities and privileges from the S&L crisis of the ‘80s to the bail-out of last year that is unprecedented and it’s nothing but corporate welfare at the highest level, and, therefore, their priorities ought not to be at the center of public policy right now. I do that every Sunday.

Kathleen Wells: You do that every Sunday? I wasn’t aware of that. That sounds interesting and I would be interested in hearing a tape on that.

Dr. Cornel West: It’s the Chicago Sun[-Times]. You know that newspaper?

http://www.suntimes.com/lifestyles/2048377,CST-NWS-blackhist15.article

Kathleen Wells: Right.

Dr. Cornel West: They had a story this morning on the sermon. I think it was: “West’s tough words for Obama” or something like that.

Kathleen Wells: OK, let me…what would you say…

Dr. Cornel West: One last question. I gotta let you run here, though. So good talking to you, but I had a 6 o’clock thing and it’s almost 6:30 now.

Kathleen Wells: OK, let me say, thank you very much for taking the time.

Dr. Cornel West: But did you want one more question now?

Kathleen Wells: Oh, yeah, I have one more question.

Dr. Cornel West: Okay, sure.

Kathleen Wells: Race-Talk is committed to revolutionizing the way we talk about race and promoting equality. How have we been talking about race? How can we do better, and what does equality look like?

Dr. Cornel West: All talk about race that is serious and substantive is tied to how we expand the possibilities for democratic practice. What I mean by that is that all talks about legacies of white supremacy must be tied to empowering the lives of poor and working people as a whole. This is precisely what I meant at the very beginning when I talked about the black agenda — from Frederick Douglass to A. Philip Randolph, Martin Luther King Jr, Fannie Lou Hamer to Ella Baker– has always been tied to race talk inseparable from expanding possibilities of democracy, expanding empowerment of everyday people.

And in that sense, the black agenda becomes the best agenda that we have right now in the country. But for 40 years there’s been such a vicious attack on any talk about race or any talk about black agenda that is not cast as — they would want to reduce the black agenda to some narrow parochial, provincial agenda about the interest of black people only — that has no moral content, no ethical substance, just Machiavellian calculation. That has never been the black agenda. That’s not what Martin King was about. That’s not what Frederick Douglass was about. That’s not what A. Philip Randolph was about.

There is no evidence whatsoever in the history of black people at our best that our black agenda was just being concerned about us. But that is how it is cast. And it’s wrong. It’s a lie. It needs to be revisited. And that, in fact, the irony is we got a black President who needs to be saved from himself and his experts and cabinet, for the most part, because only a black agenda can save him, because the legacy of King is the very thing that must be expanded if America is to be free and democratic in the 21st century. It’s just as simple as that. Somebody said, “Well, well, King, he didn’t really have a black agenda. He had a — What kind of agenda did he have? He had a democratic agenda.” That’s the point. Yes, he did have a democratic agenda. But it was a black agenda because it started with what? The needs of black and working poor people. And he had a spill-over love that went to poor and working people across the board of all colors. And then he had a critique of American imperial foreign policy, of invasion and occupation of Vietnam in his day, Iraq in our day, Afghanistan in our day, drones in Pakistan in our day. That was — the black agenda has always been like that.

And the best analogy, of course, is music. Anybody who thinks that Louis Armstrong is only concerned with black music, tied to black people, don’t understand what jazz is. Is jazz black music? I think so. Is it a music for the world? Absolutely. Because it’s always been all-embracing. It’s always been cosmopolitan, but it’s rooted in a specific people’s creative vision and practice. It is black music. Is Stevie Wonder black music? Absolutely. Is it narrow, parochial, provincial? When was the last time they heard Stevie’s records? It is as cosmopolitan and universal as it can get.

And that’s the same truth for black agenda, if we’re talking about black history as I understand it. Now, somebody else might have a different version of black history, you know what I mean? The black history that I understand — Douglass, A. Philip Randolph, Ella Baker, Martin King — that is the center of the black freedom movement. That’s the center of American democratic expansion. Do we have any other movement that has done more for American democracy than that movement? And Barack says he comes out of that movement, but now, all of a sudden, there’s no black agenda. Please. Please, my brother, let us have cognac together and learn some history.

Kathleen Wells: Well, I want to thank you for taking the time…

Dr. Cornel West: Thank you so much. I’m sorry to go on, and I hope that my holy anger and righteous indignation was not viewed in any way as either disrespect of either you or my dear brother, Barack Obama. But I’m deeply concerned about this crisis and all this suffering out here.

Kathleen Wells: I really appreciate you taking the time.

Dr. Cornel West: Definitely. You take good care now.

Kathleen Wells: Okay. Thank you very much.


<hr noshade color="#FF0000" size="10"></hr>
 
Dr. Cornel West: It’s not revolutionary, though. To give money to community banks and small banks rather than billions and billions and billions of dollars to a few huge investment banks too big to fail and the rest of it too small to be rescued? That’s not revolutionary at all.

It is revolutionary and it scares people, mainly white people, thats why reps are poised to re-take congress. When they do it will be the final nail in the coffin for most Americans because they will give power back to globalist.
 
March 2010 Cornel West Interview Below

[FLASH]http://www.youtube.com/v/aVl8QFhnadY&hl=en_US&fs=1&[/FLASH]

<IMG SRC="http://chattahbox.com/images/2010/01/teaparty_robertson_spelling_racist_problem.jpg" width="400">
agreed-black.jpg
 
masthead.gif


The Obama Deception: Why Cornel West Went Ballistic


inK4y.jpg


May 16, 2011

by Chris Hedges


http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_obama_deception_why_cornel_west_went_ballistic_20110516/

The moral philosopher Cornel West, if Barack Obama’s ascent to power was a morality play, would be the voice of conscience. Rahm Emanuel, a cynical product of the Chicago political machine, would be Satan. Emanuel in the first scene of the play would dangle power, privilege, fame and money before Obama. West would warn Obama that the quality of a life is defined by its moral commitment, that his legacy will be determined by his willingness to defy the cruel assault by the corporate state and the financial elite against the poor and working men and women, and that justice must never be sacrificed on the altar of power.

Perhaps there was never much of a struggle in Obama’s heart. Perhaps West only provided a moral veneer. Perhaps the dark heart of Emanuel was always the dark heart of Obama. Only Obama knows. But we know how the play ends. West is banished like honest Kent in “King Lear.” Emanuel and immoral mediocrities from Lawrence Summers to Timothy Geithner to Robert Gates—think of Goneril and Regan in the Shakespearean tragedy—take power. We lose. And Obama becomes an obedient servant of the corporate elite in exchange for the hollow trappings of authority.

No one grasps this tragic descent better than West, who did 65 campaign events for Obama, believed in the potential for change and was encouraged by the populist rhetoric of the Obama campaign. He now nurses, like many others who placed their faith in Obama, the anguish of the deceived, manipulated and betrayed. He bitterly describes Obama as “a black mascot of Wall Street oligarchs and a black puppet of corporate plutocrats. And now he has become head of the American killing machine and is proud of it.”

“When you look at a society you look at it through the lens of the least of these, the weak and the vulnerable; you are committed to loving them first, not exclusively, but first, and therefore giving them priority,” says West, the Class of 1943 University Professor of African American Studies and Religion at Princeton University. “And even at this moment, when the empire is in deep decline, the culture is in deep decay, the political system is broken, where nearly everyone is up for sale, you say all I have is the subversive memory of those who came before, personal integrity, trying to live a decent life, and a willingness to live and die for the love of folk who are catching hell. This means civil disobedience, going to jail, supporting progressive forums of social unrest if they in fact awaken the conscience, whatever conscience is left, of the nation. And that’s where I find myself now.

“I have to take some responsibility,” he admits of his support for Obama as we sit in his book-lined office. “I could have been reading into it more than was there.

“I was thinking maybe he has at least some progressive populist instincts that could become more manifest after the cautious policies of being a senator and working with [Sen. Joe] Lieberman as his mentor,” he says. “But it became very clear when I looked at the neoliberal economic team. The first announcement of Summers and Geithner I went ballistic. I said, ‘Oh, my God, I have really been misled at a very deep level.’ And the same is true for Dennis Ross and the other neo-imperial elites. I said, ‘I have been thoroughly misled, all this populist language is just a facade. I was under the impression that he might bring in the voices of brother Joseph Stiglitz and brother Paul Krugman. I figured, OK, given the structure of constraints of the capitalist democratic procedure that’s probably the best he could do. But at least he would have some voices concerned about working people, dealing with issues of jobs and downsizing and banks, some semblance of democratic accountability for Wall Street oligarchs and corporate plutocrats who are just running amuck. I was completely wrong.”

West says the betrayal occurred on two levels.

“There is the personal level,” he says. “I used to call my dear brother [Obama] every two weeks. I said a prayer on the phone for him, especially before a debate. And I never got a call back. And when I ran into him in the state Capitol in South Carolina when I was down there campaigning for him he was very kind. The first thing he told me was, ‘Brother West, I feel so bad. I haven’t called you back. You been calling me so much. You been giving me so much love, so much support and what have you.’ And I said, ‘I know you’re busy.’ But then a month and half later I would run into other people on the campaign and he’s calling them all the time. I said, wow, this is kind of strange. He doesn’t have time, even two seconds, to say thank you or I’m glad you’re pulling for me and praying for me, but he’s calling these other people. I said, this is very interesting. And then as it turns out with the inauguration I couldn’t get a ticket with my mother and my brother. I said this is very strange. We drive into the hotel and the guy who picks up my bags from the hotel has a ticket to the inauguration. My mom says, ‘That’s something that this dear brother can get a ticket and you can’t get one, honey, all the work you did for him from Iowa.’ Beginning in Iowa to Ohio. We had to watch the thing in the hotel.

“What it said to me on a personal level,” he goes on, “was that brother Barack Obama had no sense of gratitude, no sense of loyalty, no sense of even courtesy, [no] sense of decency, just to say thank you. Is this the kind of manipulative, Machiavellian orientation we ought to get used to? That was on a personal level.”

But there was also the betrayal on the political and ideological level.

“It became very clear to me as the announcements were being made,” he says, “that this was going to be a newcomer, in many ways like Bill Clinton, who wanted to reassure the Establishment by bringing in persons they felt comfortable with and that we were really going to get someone who was using intermittent progressive populist language in order to justify a centrist, neoliberalist policy that we see in the opportunism of Bill Clinton. It was very much going to be a kind of black face of the DLC [Democratic Leadership Council].”

Obama and West’s last personal contact took place a year ago at a gathering of the Urban League when, he says, Obama “cussed me out.” Obama, after his address, which promoted his administration’s championing of charter schools, approached West, who was seated in the front row.

“He makes a bee line to me right after the talk, in front of everybody,” West says. “He just lets me have it. He says, ‘You ought to be ashamed of yourself, saying I’m not a progressive. Is that the best you can do? Who do you think you are?’ I smiled. I shook his hand. And a sister hollered in the back, ‘You can’t talk to professor West. That’s Dr. Cornel West. Who do you think you are?’ You can go to jail talking to the president like that. You got to watch yourself. I wanted to slap him on the side of his head.

“It was so disrespectful,” he went on, “that’s what I didn’t like. I’d already been called, along with all [other] leftists, a “F’ing retard” by Rahm Emanuel because we had critiques of the president.”

Valerie Jarrett, a senior adviser to the president, has, West said, phoned him to complain about his critiques of Obama. Jarrett was especially perturbed, West says, when he said in an interview last year that he saw a lot of Malcolm X and Ella Baker in Michelle Obama. Jarrett told him his comments were not complimentary to the first lady.

“I said in the world that I live in, in that which authorizes my reality, Ella Baker is a towering figure,” he says, munching Fritos and sipping apple juice at his desk. “If I say there is a lot of Ella Baker in Michelle Obama, that’s a compliment. She can take it any way she wants. I can tell her I’m sorry it offended you, but I’m going to speak the truth. She is a Harvard Law graduate, a Princeton graduate, and she deals with child obesity and military families. Why doesn’t she visit a prison? Why not spend some time in the hood? That is where she is, but she can’t do it.

“I think my dear brother Barack Obama has a certain fear of free black men,” West says. “It’s understandable. As a young brother who grows up in a white context, brilliant African father, he’s always had to fear being a white man with black skin. All he has known culturally is white. He is just as human as I am, but that is his cultural formation. When he meets an independent black brother, it is frightening. And that’s true for a white brother. When you get a white brother who meets a free, independent black man, they got to be mature to really embrace fully what the brother is saying to them. It’s a tension, given the history. It can be overcome. Obama, coming out of Kansas influence, white, loving grandparents, coming out of Hawaii and Indonesia, when he meets these independent black folk who have a history of slavery, Jim Crow, Jane Crow and so on, he is very apprehensive. He has a certain rootlessness, a deracination. It is understandable.

“He feels most comfortable with upper middle-class white and Jewish men who consider themselves very smart, very savvy and very effective in getting what they want,” he says. “He’s got two homes. He has got his family and whatever challenges go on there, and this other home. Larry Summers blows his mind because he’s so smart. He’s got Establishment connections. He’s embracing me. It is this smartness, this truncated brilliance, that titillates and stimulates brother Barack and makes him feel at home. That is very sad for me.

“This was maybe America’s last chance to fight back against the greed of the Wall Street oligarchs and corporate plutocrats, to generate some serious discussion about public interest and common good that sustains any democratic experiment,” West laments. “We are squeezing out all of the democratic juices we have. The escalation of the class war against the poor and the working class is intense. More and more working people are beaten down. They are world-weary. They are into self-medication. They are turning on each other. They are scapegoating the most vulnerable rather than confronting the most powerful. It is a profoundly human response to panic and catastrophe. I thought Barack Obama could have provided some way out. But he lacks backbone.

“Can you imagine if Barack Obama had taken office and deliberately educated and taught the American people about the nature of the financial catastrophe and what greed was really taking place?” West asks. “If he had told us what kind of mechanisms of accountability needed to be in place, if he had focused on homeowners rather than investment banks for bailouts and engaged in massive job creation he could have nipped in the bud the right-wing populism of the tea party folk. The tea party folk are right when they say the government is corrupt. It is corrupt. Big business and banks have taken over government and corrupted it in deep ways.

“We have got to attempt to tell the truth, and that truth is painful,” he says. “It is a truth that is against the thick lies of the mainstream. In telling that truth we become so maladjusted to the prevailing injustice that the Democratic Party, more and more, is not just milquetoast and spineless, as it was before, but thoroughly complicitous with some of the worst things in the American empire. I don’t think in good conscience I could tell anybody to vote for Obama. If it turns out in the end that we have a crypto-fascist movement and the only thing standing between us and fascism is Barack Obama, then we have to put our foot on the brake. But we’ve got to think seriously of third-party candidates, third formations, third parties.

“Our last hope is to generate a democratic awakening among our fellow citizens. This means raising our voices, very loud and strong, bearing witness, individually and collectively. Tavis [Smiley] and I have talked about ways of civil disobedience, beginning with ways for both of us to get arrested, to galvanize attention to the plight of those in prisons, in the hoods, in poor white communities. We must never give up. We must never allow hope to be eliminated or suffocated.”



<hr noshade color="#FF0000" size="6"></hr>
 
West's criticisms are in reality mostly accurate[i.e. obama's response to: wall street, corporate oligarchs, the poor, black people, e.t.c.] but are distasteful to people who are desperate to see the nessessity of white supremacy brought to its knees symbolically [i.e. trump, teaparty, palin etc.].
 
I hate this M/F and his dedication to posturing up people with misunderstood bullshit of a position/predicament he truly knows nothing of. He's so hypocritical and you'd think he'd understand being a professor and all but he teaches at the Center for African American Studies and in the Department of Religion so I'm almost feeling like he will not accept Obama unless he's clutching his balls in one hand, wielding a brown bagged 40 in the other with recklessly raised kids and an unmanageable 140 lb Pitt in protest to the republicans and the Tea Party(baggers) Activists(largely racists). But those people are lost as well in that they are manipulated to bed with people who could really give a fuck less about them but are using them AGAINST themselves.

Without reading most of the previously posted it sounds like he has no idea of what it is like to be he first black at upper levels in a career genre. Honestly, the personal cost and taxing of that individual in simply putting a face in these situations you are the accessible one of a world they know nothing of. You take on more shit for being "that guy" than people lacking the balls, will, survival skills, understanding, ego(it takes a healthy one), education, drive and sacrifice needed to do something like this and pull it off.

Obama is the president of the country! Of America, to be exact! Not the African American Community. Besides, No president truly runs the country, LOBBYISTS are the real conscious of the American way of life. Explore that if you are curious for the truth without conspiracy.:hmm:

I get tired of seeing this bullshit posted on here. No one ever posts about stepping up and sharing the hardship in that. Sharing our difficulties instepping out of the box and helping each other handle it, help bring in/up others to truly futher future opportunities for blacks and everyones understanding of them. Stop kickstanding the rest of the black culture that are in dropping out due to pressure and peer pressure, don't try because no one else around them tries, acts like a nigga, dresses like a nigga and sounds like a nigga but feel mistreated and offended when being told they are one by someone not a nigga. Letting you in on a lil secret though. People that are truly against you for being black uses that shit to keep you where they want you or to make you who they think you are. Just like the gullible in the Tea Party.

Ima get outta this but y'all propping up this dudes outdated philosophies are detrimental for him and you. Learn to react to whats really happening rather than what may be happening.

To you prejudiced cacs out there who may be posting this shit and downing Obama and yourselves are not acknowledging the reality of his predicament and your own, :beatyourass::furious::hulksmash:
 
Obama is the president of the country! Of America, to be exact! Not the African American Community. Besides, No president truly runs the country, LOBBYISTS are the real conscious of the American way of life. Explore that if you are curious for the truth without conspiracy.:hmm:


Oh yea? If white unemployment was at 40%, do you think President Obama would be more intense in his "Bully Pulpit" position?
 
Oh yea? If white unemployment was at 40%, do you think President Obama would be more intense in his "Bully Pulpit" position?

Yes I do!I'm not sure here but are you saying he's only the President of AFRICAN AMERICA in your eyes. I don't think it would be any different because to be black and successful outside of hip hop and sports you have to be in the middle. It just won't work any other way. Fact is Obama has tried to do the things he said he would but all the MONEY power is on the republican side. Every time he tries to implement anything the Republican side just throws out obvious BS baiting the gullible and it works every time. The money controls all the jobs also so if/when he starts to put anything into play that'll help all the companies have already been lobbying the FEDS literally paying them to push agendas only good for corporations, Well that machine gets ramped up too. They bait the News, Tea party and the Non Tea Party but Religious America and with anything that amps them up and wrap it up in politics and consistently people bite, hook line and sinker, every time. Meanwhile the Corporations are deliberately not hiring till Barrack compromises.

If you are saying he doesn't do enough for Black unemployment I agree and disagree. Fact is since he's been in office he's had to deal with the crap applied above with every spin they can come up with to incapacitate him.
A good portion of us are unemployed for being under qualified and lacking communication skills. Others are unemployed because there are very few blacks if any in their respective fields. If you work in a predominantly white field as I do you're the accessible punching bag for Republican whites without peer to peer access to blacks. Honestly they all hate Barrack and will thump him against you whenever the news comes up making you the obvious one to go because they pit you with him.

I could go on with this but I'm hungry which is why it may seem sporadic a bit. Hope this explains a bit. In other words his hands are tied.
 

Open Letter To Cornel West, Tavis
Smiley, And The Obama Critics​



tavis-smiley-and-cornel-west-300x180.jpg




Written by: Ryan Mack
on May 11, 2011


As I begin this letter I would like to say to Dr. West that I have the utmost respect and admiration for you. I have been and continue to be a long time fan of your work, your intelligence, and passion to assist the community…especially the underserved. As president and CEO of The Optimum Institute of Economic Empowerment, much of my time is spent teaching in prisons, working with those recently released from prison, and in urban public housing teaching financial literacy (from June through September I will be in Detroit doing a series of financial literacy workshops directed at this demographic funded by Fifth Third Bank).

I have traveled from New York to Appalachia and to California because like you, I too have a passion for trying to empower the working poor and impoverished of this country. It is my belief that our country is developing an underclass of Americans who are continuously overlooked; I am sure you agree that this is a problem which must be addressed.

Mr. Smiley, I admire your work as well. I was honored to be asked to write a section of your bestselling book “The Covenant in Action”. The fact that I was chosen to write in your book indicates that the work I am doing in urban communities is consistent with your vision of empowerment for the underserved in our communities. You represent a stable voice for many of us using your platform to discuss issues that plague this country …….issues that are not only Black American issues but also issues that concern all Americans.

To all the critical President Obama supporters…I understand your frustrations. I too was frustrated when Van Jones was ousted despite his positive work to create a green economy. I too was frustrated when Shirley Sherrod was “thrown under the bus” for a carefully edited video that misrepresented her remarks despite being a faithful/loyal employee. ACORN? I had mixed feelings about this dilemma. Despite the good they have done in our communities, their indiscretions were targeted and emphasized. The treatment of our union brothers and sisters in Madison, Wisconsin and other union workers across the country have been targeted by a conservative movement that has opted to take away their collective bargaining rights ………….this makes me very angry! While many progressives are speaking out on all of these issues, one has to wonder where is the President Obama voice in any of this? Where is the voice of the President for those union workers who put him in office? The silence is deafening.

As many Americans I can go on and on with my less than positive critiques of President Obama: The expansion of the war in Afghanistan and maintaining a military industrial complex that seems more concerned with making money for those who profit from war than keeping our troops safe and bringing them home; the neglect of a public option and the creation of a health care reform bill that is essentially a gift to the health care companies; the creation of a financial regulatory reform bill that continues to allow big banks to continue their harmful practices that resulted in the collapse of this economy while at the same time having no penalties to those who stole taxpayer dollars in order to pay high bonuses to top level executives; and even the failure to end the tax cuts for the rich that were never paid for and were the FIRST tax cuts EVER provided by any President during a time of war for any party. These are all examples of actions that I have disagreed with and will continue to speak out about until they are corrected. I adamantly believe in holding our elected officials accountable for their actions just as you do.

However, I was driven to write this letter after sitting on a panel discussion which was introduced by Councilman Charles Barron of New York whom I also respect even though I don’t always agree with his positions. He spoke in his usual rhapsodizing manner which got the crowd really excited. He then began to talk about President Obama, a topic about which he exhibited a great deal of passion. He went on a 10 minute tirade about the President and all of his actions that he found disagreeable. In fact if one did not know our President and knew nothing of what he has done, one would have thought that President Obama was nothing but an Africa bombing, war mongering, dictator who could care less about life or Black people.

Dr. West…I have heard you many times on television, and on many occasions I have also heard you speak negatively about our President. If someone were to listen to you on any of those occasions one would also believe that the President has sold out to the banks (or oligarchs as you so often say) and could care less about the working poor or impoverished in our society.

Mr. Smiley…you as well are consistently stating your displeasure at the lack of specialized attention the President has given to the issues of the Black community.

Again…I do not disagree with analyzing the actions of our President and holding him accountable for these actions. I have done it and will continue to do it. However, I have a problem with bias and an inability to be completely objective particularly when your audience may be easily influenced. My problem arises when those “critical” supporters do nothing but criticize without taking an equal amount of time to discuss the positive actions our President has done for this country. Many people look upon you with a great deal of respect and admiration and because of this you have the capability to influence many people, some of whom do not listen to the radio talk shows or watch the political commentaries on TV. In many cases your dialogue represents the only source of objective guidance and analysis these people will experience. If your dialogue is biased and presents only what our President has not done, many will be denied the opportunity to formulate an educated or fair opinion. As highly respected role models you have a responsibility – an obligation – to present an unbiased account of what our President has done. If you feel there are those people who have done nothing but provide praise for our President with positive bias, the answer is not to provide nothing but critique with a negative bias to provide balance…the answer is to eliminate the bias and be objective, fair, and balanced showing ALL sides of his performance (good AND bad).

Yes…there are many things I did not like about the health care reform legislation, but I did like the fact that it was the largest and most sweeping reform in this system in a lifetime and was a tremendous step in the right direction. Pre-existing conditions…gone; lifetime caps on coverage…gone; shrinking the pool of coverage to more who didn’t have access…gone; and many other components that were accomplished that WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED UNDER MCCAIN OR ANY OTHER REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT! This was a great step in the right direction. Not only will it expand coverage to 31 million who did not have coverage before, it will also reduce the deficit by over $2 trillion over the next two decades (it is often called the biggest domestic achievement since 1965 DESPITE all its imperfections).

Yes…financial regulatory reform didn’t go as far as I would have liked, but it was another great step in the right direction. Nor did I like the expansion of the war in Afghanistan, but the President did remove 100,000 troops from Iraq and has scheduled a withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan soon (in his campaign the President promised he would do just this…remove troops in Iraq and focus on Afghanistan – again many critical supporters forget that he is just sticking with this promise). However, there is never mention of the positive components of his legislation. Dr. West, Mr. Smiley, and Councilman Barron…I challenge you to consider how much more you would have had to complain about had not President Obama been elected? Have you thought about the fact that your constant biased criticism (it is biased if it only comes from one direction with no regard for the other side) could be causing Black America, the working poor, and the impoverished in this country to get so discouraged that they just stay at home on election day? Your words are only inspiring many in this country…those who are working class, working poor, and impoverished…to stay home in 2012?!

Did you see what happened when people stayed home in Wisconsin and Governor Walker took office? The unions were attacked. Did you see what happened when the people in Michigan stayed at home and were discouraged causing the victory of Governor Snyder? Benton Harbor, Michigan was taken over and other EFMs are now positioning themselves to take over other cities in my home state. Did you see what happened when people stayed home for the 2000 election? We suffered 8 years of policies from a President who did nothing but end budget surpluses, expand the national debt, cut taxes for the rich, increase our dependency on foreign oil, bankrupt this country with wars we never should have fought while killing thousands of troops, and cause the largest recession since the great depression. This is what happens when people in our urban and working class/poor communities are inspired to stay at home on voting day. This is what can happen if people hear only a biased account of what our President has done and decide that it is useless to vote in 2012.

So Dr. West, Mr. Smiley, Councilmember Baron, and all other critical supporters…I am NOT asking you to stop with your critiques. What I am asking you to do is to make sure that you provide your listeners with a COMPLETE picture of what the President has done…..that is an obligation you have to the people who respect you and admire you! When you are discussing the President’s disagreeable actions, also discuss any of the following accomplishments so people will be encouraged (not discouraged) to vote and force the President to go further in his efforts to please everyone (which is never possible):

  • The recovery of the Dow Jones which almost doubled since its lows during the end of the Bush presidency and the start of the Bush recession (Dow gained 30% in one year)

  • The GDP contracted as much as 6.8% in the final quarter of the Bush Presidency to within A YEAR we had expanded 5% which is almost a 12% turnaround – the largest turnaround in such a short of a time frame in the history of this country

  • We have created 2 million jobs in the past year with almost a third of those jobs coming from the first quarter of this year alone

  • Through it all TARP funds were almost all returned (have to give President Bush half the credit on this) and will only cost approximately $25 billion

  • He signed the Lily Ledbetter Act for equal pay for women

  • The drastic increase in investments in alternative energy that will finally decrease our dependence on foreign oil

  • He has issued the toughest ethics requirements for those working in his administration than any other previous President

  • Don’t Ask Don’t Tell…gone!

  • He signed into law the State Children’s Health Insurance Program

  • He enacted the largest reform in the history of this country of the student loan program through the Student Aid and Financial Responsibility Act (SAFRA) making college more affordable for those who wish to further their education (Dr. West…I assumed you would have loudly praised this as the banks lost billions of dollars on this legislation because they were previously the middle man in the transaction between the US Government and students….President Obama took them out of the equation. A clear example of you Dr. West highlighting how the banks profit under President Obama but disregarding discussing with as much assertiveness those instances that disprove your argument of his “selling out” to the oligarchs.)

  • He instituted the largest reform of oversight through the Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure (CARD) Act in 2009 which also caused the banks to lose out on billions in revenue (Where was the praise from this Dr. West and Mr. Smiley? He certainly didn’t sell out to the oligarchs with this legislation.)

  • He was able to accomplish the most comprehensive nuclear arms treaty with the Russians making us more safe through smaller amounts of nuclear arms availability (START Treaty ratification)

  • He has improved America’s image and reputation abroad

  • He has started construction on a new high speed rail system

  • He actually put $4.3 billion into the previously unfunded “No Child Left Behind” legislation to help schools improve their performance

  • Don’t forget about the negotiated rescue of the Americans from Somali pirates

  • He has made more major terrorist captures in two years than the entire 8 years of the Bush presidency including the most obvious Bin Laden

  • He SAVED the Detroit automotive industry from collapse through bailouts of Chrysler, GM, and GMAC which have largely been paid back (Don’t many of those in my home town who still have jobs count as assistance to working poor and the working class Dr. West?)

  • He poured $18 billion in tax breaks for small businesses into a jobs bill through the HIRE Act to spur hiring and also gave $20 billion for transit and highways programs (Dr. West and Mr. Smiley…I do a lot of work in providing jobs for those in construction and many of these jobs are filled by people who would be considered “working poor”…doesn’t this count?)

  • He extended unemployment insurance again in the middle of one of the most productive lame duck sessions in the history of the country (More money given to the unemployed…aren’t they are part of the impoverished since they don’t have a job? Doesn’t assistance towards them count as help for the underserved? How much more tangible can you get outside of directly giving them a check and putting billions into community colleges and job readiness programs which our President has done?)


Again…please understand, I am not asking that you should stop being critical of President Obama. I ask only that you are mindful of your awesome responsibility to many others. If you are truly in favor of helping the working poor and impoverished in this country, your slanted chastisement of the President serves only to discourage many and therefore discredit the one politician who has the best possibility of doing the most for these people.

If your sole purpose is to provide your listeners with impressive rhetoric, you have succeeded and there is no doubt or question about your intellectual prowess. However, if your purpose is to help the working people and the impoverished, you must ensure that you are providing a more balanced critique of our President so those who listen to you who won’t be discouraged, will have a basis to form an educated opinion, and will be encouraged to vote in 2012. Bottom line…don’t hurt our best chance of helping the people!

I hope you know that this was written in love and respect for you and all that you do for many Americans. I do many outreach programs across this country and would love to partner with you on these initiatives and/or receive your endorsement and support for them. I adamantly believe that where the President has fallen short we can join together to fill the void through our collective efforts to empower the working poor, impoverished, the underclass, and ALL of America.

Regards,

ryan-m2.jpg


Ryan Mack

President and CEO

The Optimum Institute of Economic Empowerment







http://newsone.com/newsone-original/rmack/open-letter-cornel-west-tavis-smiley-obama/
 
I wonder how much this clown is getting from the goobermint for holding Obama's water.

Don't know; but I wonder if its the same person who pays you to take such dim views of brothers when you haven't first demonstrated the error of their ways.

Its okay, you know, to differ; but to do so without articulating a reason makes you no different than those whom you accuse.

QueEx
 
Don't know; but I wonder if its the same person who pays you to take such dim views of brothers when you haven't first demonstrated the error of their ways.

Its okay, you know, to differ; but to do so without articulating a reason makes you no different than those whom you accuse.

QueEx


He lives in the world of conspiracy theories, not facts. Leave him be, he's happy there.
 

Cornel West and Melissa Harris-Perry
at Odds on Obama's Performance




<embed name="msnbc367e89" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" width="420" height="245" FlashVars="launch=43071536&amp;width=420&amp;height=245" allowscriptaccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed></object><p style="font-size:11px; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: #999; margin-top: 5px; background: transparent; text-align: center; width: 420px;">Visit msnbc.com for <a style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;" href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com">breaking news</a>, <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032507" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">world news</a>, and <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032072" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">news about the economy</a></p>



Cornel West v. Barack Obama


scenes6.jpg

Dr. Melissa Harris-Perry, a professor of politics and
African American studies at Princeton University,
delivers the keynote speech at the 41st Annual
Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial Breakfast held at the
Boston Convention and Exhibition Center on Monday,
Jan. 17. (Don West photo)


By Melissa Harris-Perry
May 17, 2011


Professor Cornel West is President Obama’s silenced, disregarded, disrespected moral conscience, according to Chris Hedges’s recent Truthdig column, “The Obama Deception: Why Cornel West went Ballistic.”In a self-aggrandizing, victimology sermon deceptively wrapped in the discourse of prophetic witness, Professor West offers thin criticism of President Obama and stunning insight into the delicate ego of the self-appointed black leadership class that has been largely supplanted in recent years.

West begins with a bit of historical revision. West suggests that the President discarded him without provocation after he offered the Obama for America campaign his loyal service and prayers. But anyone with a casual knowledge of this rift knows it began during the Democratic primary not after the election. It began, not with a puffed up President, but when Cornel West’s “dear brother” Tavis Smiley threw a public tantrum because Senator Obama refused to attend Smiley's annual State of Black America. Smiley repeatedly suggested that his forum was the necessary black vetting space for the Democratic nominees. He needed to ask Obama and Clinton tough questions so that black America could get the answers it needed. But black America was doing a fine job making up its own mind in the primaries and didn’t need Smiley’s blessing to determine their own electoral preferences. Indeed, when Smiley got a chance to hold candidate Clinton “accountable” he spent more time fawning over her than probing about her symbolic or substantive policy stances that impacted black communities. Fiercely loyal to his friend, Professor West chose sides and began to undermine candidate Obama is small and large ways. Candidate Obama ceased calling West back because he was in the middle of a fierce campaign and West’s loyalties were, at best, divided. I suspect candidate Obama did not trust his “dear brother” to keep the campaign secrets and strategies. I also suspect he was not inaccurate in his hesitancy.

West may have had principled, even prophetic reasons, for choosing this outsider position relative to Obama, but it is dishonest to later frame that choice as a betrayal on the part of the President. After what I had written about Senator Clinton during the campaign I wasn't expecting an offer from the State Department.

Furthermore, West’s sense of betrayal is clearly more personal than ideological. In Hedges's article West claims that a true progressive would always put love of the people above concern with the elite and privileged. Then he complains, “I couldn’t get a ticket [to the inauguration] with my mother and my brother. I said this is very strange. We drive into the hotel and the guy who picks up my bags from the hotel has a ticket to the inauguration... We had to watch the thing in the hotel.” Let me get this straight—the tenured, Princeton professor who collects five figures for public lectures was relegated to a hotel television while an anonymous hotel worker got tickets to the inauguration! What kind of crazy, mixed up class politics are these? Wait a minute…

What exactly is so irritating to West about inaugural ticket-gate? It can't be a claim that the black, progressive intellectual community was unrepresented. Yale's Elizabeth Alexander was the poet that cold morning. It can't be that the "common man" was shut out because the Neighborhood Ball was reserved for the ordinary women and and men who worked to make Obama '08 possible. It must be a simple matter of jealous indignation. While I appreciate the humanness in such a reaction, it hardly counts as a prophetic critique.

Since the inaugural snub, Professor West has made his personal animosity and political criticism of the president his main public talking point. There was that hilariously bad documentary with Tavis Smiley and the rest of the Soul Patrol in 2009. There is the tiresome repetitiveness with which West invokes the name of his erstwhile Harvard nemesis Lawrence Summers as indicative of President Obama’s failed economic vision. And just a few weeks ago there was the eminently watchable screaming match on MSNBC where love-the-peoplc West called Rev. Al Sharpton a “mascot” for the Obama administration. Add to this three year screed the current Hedges article and it looks more like a pissing match than prophesy.

Take for example West's ad hominem attack on the President’s racial identity.

“I think my dear brother Barack Obama has a certain fear of free black men… It’s understandable. As a young brother who grows up in a white context, brilliant African father, he’s always had to fear being a white man with black skin. All he has known culturally is white. He is just as human as I am, but that is his cultural formation.”

This comment is utter hilarity coming from Cornel West who has spent the bulk of his adulthood living in those deeply rooted, culturally rich, historically important black communities of Cambridge, MA and Princeton, NJ. And it is hard to see his claim that Obama is “most comfortable with upper middle-class white and Jewish men who consider themselves very smart, very savvy and very effective in getting what they” as anything other than a classic projection of his own comfortably ensconced life at Harvard and Princeton Universities. Harvard and Princeton are not places that are particularly noted for their liberating history for black men.

Let me be clear, being an Ivy League professor does not mean that one has no room to offer critical engagement on issues of race. Like Professor West, I too make my living at elite, predominately white institutions. For the past five years we were on the same payroll at Princeton. Like Professor West I supplement my income by giving lectures about race, politics, and history. Like West I hope to influence policy, inspire individuals, and intervene in public conversations about race. My criticism of West is his seeming unwillingness to acknowledge how our structural positions within the academy and in public intellectual life can be just as compromising to our position vis-à-vis black communities as is President Obama’s.

As tenured professors Cornel West and I are not meaningfully accountable, no matter what our love, commitment, or self-delusions tell us. President Obama, as an elected official, can, in fact, be voted out of his job. We can’t. That is a difference that matters. As West derides the President’s economic policies he remains silent on his friend Tavis Smiley’s relationship with Wal-Mart, Wells Fargo, and McDonald's—all corporations whose invasive and predatory actions in poor and black communities have been the target of progressive organizing for decades. I have never heard him take Tavis Smiley to task for helping convince black Americans to enter into predatory mortgages. I’ve never heard him ask whether Tavis' decision to publish R. Kelley’s memoirs might be a less than progressive decision. He doesn’t hold Tavis accountable because Tavis is his friend and he is loyal. I respect that, but I also know that if he were in elected office the could not get off so easily. Opposition research would point out the hypocrisy in his public positions in a way that would make him vulnerable come election time. As a media personality and professor he is safely ensconced in a system that can never vote him off the island. I think an honest critique of Obama has to begin by acknowledging his own privileges.

Instead, West seems determined to keep black politics tethered to a patronage model of politics. He tells Hedges:

“Our last hope is to generate a democratic awakening among our fellow citizens. This means raising our voices, very loud and strong, bearing witness, individually and collectively. Tavis [Smiley] and I have talked about ways of civil disobedience, beginning with ways for both of us to get arrested…”

God help us if Cornel West and Tavis Smiley getting arrested is our last chance at a democratic awakening.

I have many criticisms of the Obama administration. I wrote angrily about his choice of Rick Warren to deliver a prayer at the inauguration. I have spoken on television about my disagreement with drone attacks in Pakistan and been critical of the administration’s initial choice to prosecute DADT cases. I worked for more progressive health care reform legislation and supported organizations that resisted the reproductive rights “compromises” in the bill. I’ve been scathing in public remarks and writings about the President’s education policy. My husband leads a non-profit that is suing HUD for its implementation of a discriminatory formula in the post-Katrina Road Home program. The president has never called me. I got my ticket to the inauguration from Canada! (Because Canadian Broadcast Television who gave me a chance to narrate the day’s events.) But I can tell the difference between a substantive criticism and a personal attack. It is clear to me that West’s ego, not the health of American democracy, is the wounded creature in this story.



http://www.thenation.com/blog/160725/cornel-west-v-barack-obama
 

Black Critics and President Obama​

Are African Americans expected to shut up
and suffer? That's just not democratic.





By: Eddie S. Glaude Jr.|Posted: May 23, 2011



cornel-obama-split.jpg




Black America finds itself in an unusual moment. By any measure, many of our communities are suffering heavily during this economic downturn. Black unemployment is officially at 16.1 percent (some believe the real number hovers around 28 percent, making nearly one-third of black America jobless). Even those who have been fortunate to keep their jobs have seen their weekly wages decline.

The foreclosure crisis has also disproportionately affected black communities -- we are 70 to 80 percent more likely to have lost our homes. And it is well known now that there is a direct correlation between racist lending practices and the vulnerability of our communities to foreclosure.

Faced with failing schools (while we wait for Superman) and the destabilizing effects of the prison industrial complex (nearly 1 million of us are locked up; families are destroyed as the rate of black female incarceration skyrockets, leaving many of our children languishing as wards of the state), entire communities -- even entire cities -- have been engulfed in what seems to be spiraling cycles of misery and hopelessness.

And yet we find ourselves embroiled in a heated public debate over whom to hold accountable for the failure to address these conditions. Recently, Cornel West offered a strident critique of President Obama's relative silence on this matter. For him, the president has failed to address substantively the conditions of the poor and the most vulnerable in our society. Instead, West maintains, Obama has been too concerned with appeasing the robber barons on Wall Street.

Many took offense, not only with the personal nature of the criticism but also with the fact that West dared to criticize the president at all. Some African Americans hold the view that this only contributes to right-wing attacks against Obama, making him vulnerable in 2012. Others believe that such criticisms betray an unreasonable expectation that Obama owes something to the black community because he is the first black president -- a troublesome black identity politics, they might say.

Worries about Democrats closing ranks for an upcoming election seem, to me, at least, to be a perennial (and uninteresting) concern. I am more interested in the underlying anxiety about black people criticizing Obama. It is as if we are being told to keep our mouths shut.

This takes me to the last point: that the combination of race loyalty and postracialism effectively banishes black suffering from public view. We see Hispanic organizations demanding the passage of the DREAM Act; we saw the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) community push for the repeal of "Don't ask, don't tell"; we witnessed the president of the AFL-CIO, Richard Trumka, threaten reprisals for those politicians who refused to support labor's agenda.

In none of these instances have we heard as a response to their demands that the president must be seen as the president of all Americans. Nor do we hear that such appeals are remnants of old forms of bad identity politics. And of course, they are identity politics.

What is going on here? One could be a bit cynical and say that this is just plain old politics. Folks are using race loyalty as way to keep black folks in line. So the Rev. Al Sharpton, Tom Joyner and others appeal to black solidarity as a way of shoring up the base. And yet Obama and the Congress don't have to deliver "the goods" because any race-specific policies are rejected out of hand as holdovers from a time long gone. But I want to resist going there ... for now.

What I do know is that folks are really scared to talk about racial inequality in this country. That fear stems from the belief that any effort to address the suffering of black communities directly would trigger deep-seated prejudices that still animate American life. America would lurch even farther to the right and all hell would break loose.

In 1903, W.E.B. Du Bois published The Souls of Black Folk. He dared to take on the power and influence of Booker T. Washington. Du Bois was concerned about Washington's style of leadership. He believed that it undermined democratic life within black communities. Too many cowered before him. Too many stood by silently for fear of reprisal.

Du Bois wrote: "[T]he hushing of the criticism of honest opponents is a dangerous thing ... Honest and earnest criticism from those whose interests are most nearly touched -- criticism of writers by readers, of government by those governed, of leaders by those led -- this is the soul of democracy and the safeguard of modern society."

He was right. What is at stake here is not some idea of race loyalty. Black people are suffering, and we need to engage that suffering publicly and directly. And that isn't an issue of whether someone is black enough. This is about genuine democracy, about holding to account anyone, including ourselves, who fails to muster the moral and political courage to respond to this crisis.

Do the fact of blackness and the fact of Obama's presidency commit us to some kind of uncritical loyalty? Are we to stand by silently in the face of this devastation? Absolutely not! In these critical times, to borrow a phrase from the late Palestinian critic Edward Said, "Never solidarity before criticism" must be our cry.





http://www.theroot.com/views/black-critics-and-president-obama
 
ibbWGXW0pawJei.gif


Dr. King Weeps From His Grave


by Cornel West | Princeton, N.J.
<div align="right"><!-- MSTableType="layout" -->
<img src="http://i.min.us/ibv2FP19HzyvwY.jpg" align="right">
</div>
Aug. 25, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/26/o...r-would-want-a-revolution-not-a-memorial.html

THE Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial was to be dedicated on the National Mall on Sunday — exactly 56 years after the murder of Emmett Till in Mississippi and 48 years after the historic March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. (Because of Hurricane Irene, the ceremony has been postponed.)

These events constitute major milestones in the turbulent history of race and democracy in America, and the undeniable success of the civil rights movement — culminating in the election of Barack Obama in 2008 — warrants our attention and elation. Yet the prophetic words of Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel still haunt us: “The whole future of America depends on the impact and influence of Dr. King.”

Rabbi Heschel spoke those words during the last years of King’s life, when 72 percent of whites and 55 percent of blacks disapproved of King’s opposition to the Vietnam War and his efforts to eradicate poverty in America. King’s dream of a more democratic America had become, in his words, “a nightmare,” owing to the persistence of “racism, poverty, militarism and materialism.” He called America a “sick society.” On the Sunday after his assassination, in 1968, he was to have preached a sermon titled “Why America May Go to Hell.”

King did not think that America ought to go to hell, but rather that it might go to hell owing to its economic injustice, cultural decay and political paralysis. He was not an American Gibbon, chronicling the decline and fall of the American empire, but a courageous and visionary Christian blues man, fighting with style and love in the face of the four catastrophes he identified.

Militarism is an imperial catastrophe that has produced a military-industrial complex and national security state and warped the country’s priorities and stature (as with the immoral drones, dropping bombs on innocent civilians). Materialism is a spiritual catastrophe, promoted by a corporate media multiplex and a culture industry that have hardened the hearts of hard-core consumers and coarsened the consciences of would-be citizens. Clever gimmicks of mass distraction yield a cheap soulcraft of addicted and self-medicated narcissists.

Racism is a moral catastrophe, most graphically seen in the prison industrial complex and targeted police surveillance in black and brown ghettos rendered invisible in public discourse. Arbitrary uses of the law — in the name of the “war” on drugs — have produced, in the legal scholar Michelle Alexander’s apt phrase, a new Jim Crow of mass incarceration. And poverty is an economic catastrophe, inseparable from the power of greedy oligarchs and avaricious plutocrats indifferent to the misery of poor children, elderly citizens and working people.

The age of Obama has fallen tragically short of fulfilling King’s prophetic legacy. Instead of articulating a radical democratic vision and fighting for homeowners, workers and poor people in the form of mortgage relief, jobs and investment in education, infrastructure and housing, the administration gave us bailouts for banks, record profits for Wall Street and giant budget cuts on the backs of the vulnerable.

As the talk show host Tavis Smiley and I have said in our national tour against poverty, the recent budget deal is only the latest phase of a 30-year, top-down, one-sided war against the poor and working people in the name of a morally bankrupt policy of deregulating markets, lowering taxes and cutting spending for those already socially neglected and economically abandoned. Our two main political parties, each beholden to big money, offer merely alternative versions of oligarchic rule.

The absence of a King-worthy narrative to reinvigorate poor and working people has enabled right-wing populists to seize the moment with credible claims about government corruption and ridiculous claims about tax cuts’ stimulating growth. This right-wing threat is a catastrophic response to King’s four catastrophes; its agenda would lead to hellish conditions for most Americans.

King weeps from his grave. He never confused substance with symbolism. He never conflated a flesh and blood sacrifice with a stone and mortar edifice. We rightly celebrate his substance and sacrifice because he loved us all so deeply. Let us not remain satisfied with symbolism because we too often fear the challenge he embraced. Our greatest writer, Herman Melville, who spent his life in love with America even as he was our most fierce critic of the myth of American exceptionalism, noted, “Truth uncompromisingly told will always have its ragged edges; hence the conclusion of such a narration is apt to be less finished than an architectural finial.”

King’s response to our crisis can be put in one word: revolution. A revolution in our priorities, a re-evaluation of our values, a reinvigoration of our public life and a fundamental transformation of our way of thinking and living that promotes a transfer of power from oligarchs and plutocrats to everyday people and ordinary citizens.

In concrete terms, this means support for progressive politicians like Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont and Mark Ridley-Thomas, a Los Angeles County supervisor; extensive community and media organizing; civil disobedience; and life and death confrontations with the powers that be. Like King, we need to put on our cemetery clothes and be coffin-ready for the next great democratic battle.



<hr noshade color="#0000FF" size="8"></hr>

iWXZxhykOv8KZ.jpg


iISXH8XrJ7wAo.jpg


ilVPBEyyx2jpT.jpg
 
Last edited:
I always pictured West as a lil bitch ass crackhead coming up to President Obama bowed, hands clutched together, looking up at him and saying, "Uhhh...uhhhh...Brother Barack.....uhhhh...how can I be down?":yes::yes:
 
Last edited:
ibbWGXW0pawJei.gif


Dr. King Weeps From His Grave


by Cornel West | Princeton, N.J.
<div align="right"><!-- MSTableType="layout" -->
<img src="http://i.min.us/ibv2FP19HzyvwY.jpg" align="right">
</div>
Aug. 25, 2011

<hr noshade color="#ff0000" size="8"></hr>


Good Read.
 
Very Good Points!

Yes I do!I'm not sure here but are you saying he's only the President of AFRICAN AMERICA in your eyes. I don't think it would be any different because to be black and successful outside of hip hop and sports you have to be in the middle. It just won't work any other way. Fact is Obama has tried to do the things he said he would but all the MONEY power is on the republican side. Every time he tries to implement anything the Republican side just throws out obvious BS baiting the gullible and it works every time. The money controls all the jobs also so if/when he starts to put anything into play that'll help all the companies have already been lobbying the FEDS literally paying them to push agendas only good for corporations, Well that machine gets ramped up too. They bait the News, Tea party and the Non Tea Party but Religious America and with anything that amps them up and wrap it up in politics and consistently people bite, hook line and sinker, every time. Meanwhile the Corporations are deliberately not hiring till Barrack compromises.

If you are saying he doesn't do enough for Black unemployment I agree and disagree. Fact is since he's been in office he's had to deal with the crap applied above with every spin they can come up with to incapacitate him.
A good portion of us are unemployed for being under qualified and lacking communication skills. Others are unemployed because there are very few blacks if any in their respective fields. If you work in a predominantly white field as I do you're the accessible punching bag for Republican whites without peer to peer access to blacks. Honestly they all hate Barrack and will thump him against you whenever the news comes up making you the obvious one to go because they pit you with him.

I could go on with this but I'm hungry which is why it may seem sporadic a bit. Hope this explains a bit. In other words his hands are tied.
 

Cornel West’s Obsession with Obama



cornel-west-retna-660.jpg





BlackAmericaWeb.com
Michael H.Cottman,

Tuesday, May 22, 2012


Cornel West is obsessed with criticizing President Barack Obama.

Every few months West rolls out new material to beat-up on Obama whenever he has an opportunity to meet with the media.

In a recent interview with the Financial Times, West insists that it’s Obama who is fanatical.

“I think at this point he’s obsessed with being on Mount Rushmore, he wants to be a great figure in the pantheon of American presidents," West, the outspoken Princeton University professor, told the Financial Times. “If you’re thinking about Mount Rushmore, you’re thinking about your legacy, your legacy, your legacy. Puh-lease.”​

When asked to critique Obama's first term in office, West said Obama is "much much better than Mitt Romney" but he remained critical of Obama.

"Mitt Romney is a catastrophic response to a catastrophe, whereas Obama is a disastrous response to a catastrophe,” West said. “Is disaster better than catastrophe? Yes it is. I wish we had a third candidate who could actually do something, but we don't at the moment."

West was also tough on the president’s foreign policy.

"The Obama administration is involved in some very ugly killing of innocent people," West said.

West was once one of Obama’s most steadfast supporters, but he has turned on Obama over the years and some black Democrats accuse West of being disrespectful toward the president.

It’s unclear why West feels so compelled to lash out at Obama and why he needs to evaluate Obama through the media. Some of his criticism has been bitter – and downright hateful.

There was widespread speculation that West was upset because he didn’t get a ticket to the inauguration after campaigning hard for Obama in 2008. For West, it seems, Obama can’t do anything right: He’s not black enough. He isn’t doing enough or poor people. He lacks foreign policy experience. He doesn’t listen to black folks.

Some of what West says has been echoed by other black Democrats – that Obama doesn’t have enough black advisors in his inner circle and that he keeps black congressional leaders and civil rights leaders at bay.

But West prefers to share his complaints about Obama with the media, perhaps in hopes that he will shame Obama into coming around to his way of thinking.​

That’s not going to happen – not today, not tomorrow, and probably not ever.

Still, West keeps piling it on. Last year, the attacks on Obama by West were particularly ugly.

"I think my dear brother Barack Obama has a certain fear of free black men," West told reporters. "It's understandable. As a young brother who grows up in a white context, brilliant African father, he's always had to fear being a white man with black skin. All he has known culturally is white. He is as human as I am, but that is his cultural formation.”

"When he meets an independent black brother, it is frightening,” West added. “And that's true for a white brother ... Obama, coming out of Kansas influence, white, loving grandparents, coming out of Hawaii and Indonesia, when he meets these independent black folks who have a history of slavery, Jim Crow, Jane Crow and so on, he is very apprehensive. He has a certain rootlessness, a deracination. It is understandable."​

Does West really think that if Obama loses his bid for the White House in November, that black Americans will be better off without Obama? Or is West just being petty?

Six months before the presidential election, several major polls show Obama leading Romney by a slim margin – seven points. Obama campaign manager Jim Messina predicts the race will be extremely close and black voter turnout is critical.

West won’t be on the road campaigning for Obama this year as he was in 2008, but the question remains whether West will continue to attack Obama right up to Election Day.

And more important, are black voters really listening?







http://www.blackamericaweb.com/news/top-news/analysis-cornel-west’s-obsession-obama

 
source: eurweb

West: MSNBC is ‘Rent-a-Negro’ Net and Sharpton is on ‘Obama Plantation’




*This past week Dr. Cornel West has been working overtime with the clowning of anything Obama. His latest fusillade is directed at both both MSNBC and their host Rev. Al Sharpton.
As we reported earlier, When Dr. West was asked his opinion President Obama’s comments on the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman case, he resorted to characterizing the president as a “global George Zimmerman.”

Well, West made a visit to Tavis Smiley’s radio show this past weekend and said Rev. Sharpton is still on “the Obama plantation” which has keeps Sharpton from being more critical of the president and Attorney General Eric Holder.

Smiley has also made controversial remarks about Obama and his response to the George Zimmerman trial.

“Deep down in his soul I think he really does feel a fire, but he can’t allow that fire to in any way spill over toward the White House. Why? Because he’s still too tied, he’s too uncritical, he’s too deferential, he’s too subservient as it were and as long as that’s in place we’re going to find ourselves unable to tell the fundamental truth,” West told Smiley.

Both West and Smiley of course had their own spin on Zimmerman’s acquittal in the death of Trayvon Martin and continued to delve into the media’s handling of the racial dynamics involved in the case.

“What’s your sense of how the media, and not just Fox News but beyond that, your read as you’ve been watching this, how the media handled this case?” Smiley asked West.

“I think that it’s been decrepit though, brother. I mean, you get a focus on some of the upper middle class folk. I mean, what I call the ‘rent-a-negro’ phenomenon on MSNBC…’” West answered.

West’s displeasure with MSNBC may come as a surprise to some as he has appeared as a guest on the network frequently in the past.
 
<img src="http://theluncheonsociety.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/salon_com2.jpg" width="800">


Cornel West:

“He Posed as a Progressive and Turned out to be Counterfeit.
We Ended Up With a Wall Street Presidency, a Drone Presidency”



<img src="http://media.salon.com/2014/08/cornel_west2.jpg" width="600">



Exclusive: Cornel West talks Ferguson, Hillary, MSNBC -- and unloads on the failed promise of Barack Obama


<img src="http://media.salon.com/2011/09/thomas_frank_square.jpg" width="150">
by Thomas Frank | August 24, 2014 |http://www.salon.com/2014/08/24/cor..._a_wall_street_presidency_a_drone_presidency/

<font face="arial unicode ms, verdana, helvetica" size="4" color="#000000">

Cornel West is a professor at Union Theological Seminary and one of my favorite public intellectuals, a man who deals in penetrating analyses of current events, expressed in a pithy and highly quotable way.

I first met him nearly six years ago, while the financial crisis and the presidential election were both under way, and I was much impressed by what he had to say. I got back in touch with him last week, to see how he assesses the nation’s progress since then.

The conversation ranged from Washington, D.C., to Ferguson, Missouri, and although the picture of the nation was sometimes bleak, our talk ended on a surprising note.

Last time we talked it was almost six years ago. It was a panel discussion The New Yorker magazine had set up, it was in the fall of 2008, so it was while the financial crisis was happening, while it was actually in progress. The economy was crumbling and everybody was panicking. I remember you speaking about the financial crisis in a way that I thought made sense. There was a lot of confusion at the time. People didn’t know where to turn or what was going on.

I also remember, and this is just me I’m talking about, being impressed by Barack Obama who was running for president at the time. I don’t know if you and I talked about him on that occasion. But at the time, I sometimes thought that he looked like he had what this country needed.

So that’s my first question, it’s a lot of ground to cover but how do you feel things have worked out since then, both with the economy and with this president? That was a huge turning point, that moment in 2008, and my own feeling is that we didn’t turn.


No, the thing is he posed as a progressive and turned out to be counterfeit. We ended up with a Wall Street presidency, a drone presidency, a national security presidency. The torturers go free. The Wall Street executives go free. The war crimes in the Middle East, especially now in Gaza, the war criminals go free. And yet, you know, he acted as if he was both a progressive and as if he was concerned about the issues of serious injustice and inequality and it turned out that he’s just another neoliberal centrist with a smile and with a nice rhetorical flair. And that’s a very sad moment in the history of the nation because we are—we’re an empire in decline. Our culture is in increasing decay. Our school systems are in deep trouble. Our political system is dysfunctional. Our leaders are more and more bought off with legalized bribery and normalized corruption in Congress and too much of our civil life. You would think that we needed somebody—a Lincoln-like figure who could revive some democratic spirit and democratic possibility.


That’s exactly what everyone was saying at the time.

That’s right. That’s true. It was like, “We finally got somebody who can help us turn the corner.” And he posed as if he was a kind of Lincoln.

Yeah. That’s what everyone was saying.

And we ended up with a brown-faced Clinton. Another opportunist. Another neoliberal opportunist. It’s like, “Oh, no, don’t tell me that!” I tell you this, because I got hit hard years ago, but everywhere I go now, it’s “Brother West, I see what you were saying. Brother West, you were right. Your language was harsh and it was difficult to take, but you turned out to be absolutely right.” And, of course with Ferguson, you get it reconfirmed even among the people within his own circle now, you see. It’s a sad thing. It’s like you’re looking for John Coltrane and you get Kenny G in brown skin.

When you say you got hit hard, are you talking about the personal confrontation you had with him?

I’m just thinking about the vicious attacks of the Obama cheerleaders.

The personal confrontation you had with him is kind of famous. He got angry at you because you were saying he wasn’t progressive enough.

I just looked at him like “C’mon, man. Let the facts speak for themselves. I’m not into this rhetorical exchange.”

Is there anybody who thinks he’s progressive enough today?

Nobody I know. Not even among the progressive liberals. Nobody I know. Part of this, as you can imagine, is that early on there was a strong private-public distinction. People would come to me and say privately, “We see what you’re saying. We think you’re too harsh in how you say it but we agree very much with what you’re saying in private.” In public, no comment. Now, more and more of it spills over in public.

There’s a lot of disillusionment now. My liberal friends included. The phrase that I have heard from more than one person in the last year is they feel like they got played.

That’s true. That’s exactly right. What I hear is that, “He pimped us.” I heard that a zillion times. “He pimped us, brother West.” That’s another way of saying “we got played.”

You remember that enthusiasm in 2008. I’m from Kansas City. He came and spoke in Kansas City and 75,000 people came to see him.

Oh yeah. Well we know there were moments in Portland, Oregon, there were moments in Seattle. He had the country in the palm of his hand in terms of progressive possibilities.

What on earth ails the man? Why can’t he fight the Republicans? Why does he need to seek a grand bargain?

I think Obama, his modus operandi going all the way back to when he was head of the [Harvard] Law Review, first editor of the Law Review and didn’t have a piece in the Law Review. He was chosen because he always occupied the middle ground. He doesn’t realize that a great leader, a statesperson, doesn’t just occupy middle ground. They occupy higher ground or the moral ground or even sometimes the holy ground. But the middle ground is not the place to go if you’re going to show courage and vision. And I think that’s his modus operandi. He always moves to the middle ground. It turned out that historically, this was not a moment for a middle-ground politician. We needed a high-ground statesperson and it’s clear now he’s not the one.

And so what did he do? Every time you’re headed toward middle ground what do you do? You go straight to the establishment and reassure them that you’re not too radical, and try to convince them that you are very much one of them so you end up with a John Brennan, architect of torture [as CIA Director]. Torturers go free but they’re real patriots so we can let them go free. The rule of law doesn’t mean anything.

The rule of law, oh my God. There’s one law for us and another law if you work on Wall Street.

That’s exactly right. Even with [Attorney General] Eric Holder. Eric Holder won’t touch the Wall Street executives; they’re his friends. He might charge them some money. They want to celebrate. This money is just a tax write-off for these people. There’s no accountability. No answerability. No responsibility that these people have to take at all. The same is true with the Robert Rubin crowd. Obama comes in, he’s got all this populist rhetoric which is wonderful, progressive populist rhetoric which we needed badly. What does he do, goes straight to the Robert Rubin crowd and here comes Larry Summers, here comes Tim Geithner, we can go on and on and on, and he allows them to run things. You see it in the Suskind book, The Confidence Men. These guys are running things, and these are neoliberal, deregulating free marketeers—and poverty is not even an afterthought for them.

They’re the same ones who screwed it up before.

Absolutely.

That was the worst moment [when he brought in the Rubin protégés].

We tried to point that out as soon as he became part of the Rubin stable, part of the Rubin group, and people didn’t want to hear it for the most part. They didn’t want to hear it.

Now it’s six years later and the search for the Grand Bargain has been fruitless. Why does he persist? I shouldn’t be asking you to psychologize him…

I think part of it is just temperament. That his success has been predicated on finding that middle ground. “We’re not black. We’re not white. We’re not rich. We’re not poor. There’s no classes in America. We are all Americans. We’re the American family.” He invoked the American family last week. It’s a lie, brother. You’ve got to be able to tell the truth to the American people. We’re not a family. We’re a people. We’re a nation. And a nation always has divisions. You have to be able to speak to those divisions in such a way that, like FDR, like Lincoln, you’re able to somehow pull out the best of who we are, given the divisions. You don’t try to act as if we have no divisions and we’re just an American family, with the poor getting treated in disgraceful ways and the rich walking off sipping tea, with no accountability at all, and your foreign policy is running amok with Israelis committing war crimes against precious Palestinians and you won’t say a mumbling word about the Palestinian children. What is history going to say about you? Counterfeit! That’s what they’ll say, counterfeit. Not the real thing.

Let’s talk about Ferguson. All I know about it is what I’ve been reading in the newspapers; I haven’t been out there. But I feel like there’s a lot more going on there than this one tragic killing.

Oh, absolutely. I mean, one, we know that this is a systemic thing. This thing has been going on—we can hardly get a word out of the administration in terms of the arbitrary police power. I’ll give you a good example: Carl Dix and I, three years ago, we went to jail over stop and frisk. We had a week-long trial and we were convicted, we were guilty. While the trial was going on, President Obama came into New York and said two things: He said that Michael Bloomberg was a terrific mayor even though he had stopped and frisked over four and a half million since 2002. Then he went onto say that Ed Koch was one of the greatest mayors in the last 50 years. This is right at a time when we’re dealing with stop and frisk, arbitrary police power, and Bloomberg is extending stop and frisk and proud of it. At least Bloomberg is honest about it. Bill De Blasio is just trying to walk a tightrope in this regard. At least Bloomberg was honest about it. He was glad that stop and frisk was in place. When we went to jail he said, “Y’all are wrong. If stop and frisk is stopped, then crime is going to go up…”

I just give you that as an example in terms of arbitrary police power because in Ferguson we’re talking about arbitrary police power, and this particular instance of it has been going on for a long time. The Obama administration has been silent. Completely silent. All of a sudden now, you get this uprising and what is the response? Well, as we know, you send out a statement on the death of brother Robin Williams before you sent out a statement on brother Michael Brown. The family asked for an autopsy at the Federal level, they hold back, so they [the family] have to go and get their own autopsy, and then the federal government finally responds. [Obama] sends Eric, Eric’s on the way out. Eric Holder’s going to be gone by December.

Oh, is he?

Yeah, he’s already said, this is it. He’s concerned about his legacy as if he’s somehow been swinging for black folk ever since he’s been in there. That’s a lie. He’s been silent, too. He’s been relatively silent. He’s made a couple of gestures in regards to the New Jim Crow and the prison-industrial complex, but that’s just lately, on his way out. He was there for six years and didn’t do nothing. See what I mean?

I see exactly what you mean, but I look at the pictures at Ferguson and it looks like it could be anywhere in America, you know.

Absolutely. It looks like it could be New York, Chicago, Atlanta, L.A. It’s like they’re lucky that it hasn’t hit New York, Chicago, L.A. yet, you know.

When they rolled out the militarized police, it frightened people. Something is going on here. It’s not breaking down the way it usually does. People are reacting to this in a different way.

That’s true. It’s a great moment, but let me tell you this though. Because what happens is you got Eric Holder going in trying to create the calm. But you also got Al Sharpton. And when you say the name Al Sharpton, the word integrity does not come to mind. So you got low-quality black leadership. Al Sharpton is who? He’s a cheerleader for Obama.

I haven’t followed him for years; I didn’t know that.

He meets with the president regularly.

I did not know that.

On his show on MSNBC…

I knew he had a show, I just…I guess I don’t watch it enough.

You gotta check that out, brother.

That’s the problem with me, I don’t watch enough TV.

It’s probably good for your soul but you still have to be informed about how decadent things are out here. But, no: MSNBC, state press, it’s all Obama propaganda, and Sharpton is the worst. Sharpton said explicitly, I will never say a critical word about the president under any condition. That’s why he can’t stand what I’m saying. He can’t stand what I do because, for him, it’s an act of racial traitorship to be critical of the president. There’s no prophetic integrity in his leadership.

I understand that. I think a lot of people feel that way. Not just in a racial sense but because Obama’s a Democrat. People feel that way in a partisan sense.

I think that’s true too. You have had some Democrats who’ve had some criticisms of the president. You’ve got some senator that has been critical about his violation of civil liberties and so forth, and rightly so. But Sharpton, and I mention Sharpton because Sharpton is the major black leader who is called on to deal with arbitrary police power. So, Trayvon Martin, what did he do? You got all this black rage down there calling for justice. Has there been justice for Trayvon Martin? Has the Department of Justice done anything for the Trayvon Martin case? None whatsoever. The same is true now with Ferguson. They call Sharpton down. He poses, he postures like he’s so radical. But he is a cheerleader for the Obama administration which means, he’s going to do what he can to filter that rage in neoliberal forms, rather than for truth and justice.

One last thing, where are we going from here? What comes next?

I think a post-Obama America is an America in post-traumatic depression. Because the levels of disillusionment are so deep. Thank God for the new wave of young and prophetic leadership, as with Rev. William Barber, Philip Agnew, and others. But look who’s around the presidential corner. Oh my God, here comes another neo-liberal opportunist par excellence. Hillary herself is coming around the corner. It’s much worse. And you say, “My God, we are an empire in decline.” A culture in decay with a political system that’s dysfunctional, youth who are yearning for something better but our system doesn’t provide them democratic venues, and so all we have are just voices in the wilderness and certain truth-tellers just trying to keep alive some memories of when we had some serious, serious movements and leaders.

One last thought, I was talking to a friend recently and we were saying, if things go the way they look like they’re going to go and Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee and then wins a second term, the next time there’ll be a chance for a liberal, progressive president is 2024.

It’d be about over then, brother. I think at that point—Hillary Clinton is an extension of Obama’s Wall Street presidency, drone presidency, national surveillance, national security presidency. She’d be more hawkish than he is, and yet she’s got that strange smile that somehow titillates liberals and neo-liberals and scares Republicans. But at that point it’s even too hard to contemplate.

I know, I always like to leave things on a pessimistic note. I’m sorry. It’s just my nature.

It’s not pessimistic, brother, because this is the blues. We are blues people. The blues aren’t pessimistic. We’re prisoners of hope but we tell the truth and the truth is dark. That’s different


</font>


<hr noshade color="#993300" size="10"></hr>
 
Back
Top