Progressive Values Must Shape Federal Budget
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
April 17-24, 2011
Contrary to television “talking heads”, all budgets are not all the same. How private citizens construct budgets is vastly different from how government should do so. Household budgets at their best are balanced by not spending more than revenue received. Government budgets are different in that, by providing services to the public, there is not a “zero/sum” construct. Some programs within a federal budget must be preserved for the good of the nation.
In short, politics can be defined as who gets what, and when. Therefore, budgets drafted by politicians are moral documents, filled with the values of who and what is-important.
Such is the backdrop for the raging debate in Congress over America’s federal budget in how to address spending cuts to the “debt ceiling” (America’s credit card) and retain our nation’s bond rating in order to produce lower long-term deficits
There are two budgetary views that receive most of the news coverage by commercial television outlets: Those of Democratic and Republican members of Congress.
The Republican budgetary proposal seems to value war and the wealthy. As though imitating “reverse Robin Hood” the Grand Ole Party would take from the poor and give to the rich. The idea of “trickle down” economics where the rich get richer, and somehow stimulate the economy to share there money with the less fortunate has been proven untrue over the past 30 years. In the spirit of President Ronald Reagan who coined the phrase “starve the beast”, Republican leaders today intend to use the federal budget to dramatically reduce programs established for the dispossessed and downtrodden. Another popular phrase used by Republicans is to “shrink the size of government.” Yeah, right!
If such a philosophy of “smaller government” were taken to its nonsensical conclusion, we would have less post offices, interstate highways, traffic lights, and police and fire departments. Not good.
Democrats, on the other side of the political aisle, seem to favor cutting programs for the poor underprivileged within the national budget, but by less than the Republicans’ plan. Thus, top Democrats propose to place “everything [programs] on the table for cutting.” The one major point of the Democrat’s plan I believe will be beneficial to the nation is the proposed repeal of Bush-era tax cuts to millionaires (top 2% wealthy in the nation.
In the 1970’s I remember one of my grandmother’s favorite television shows was “The Price is Right”. On the show, contestants were asked to decide whether they wanted to take a chance on winning the contents behind sealed doors. The show’s host would euphorically ask: “Do you want door number one or door number two?”
In today’s budget proposal battle, the nation may well need “door number three”, by way of the proposed budget offered by the Progressive Caucus of the United States Congress. Unlike proposals thrown by the Democrats and Republicans, the Progressive Caucuses “People’s Budget” would preserve needy domestic programs and cut programs for the greedy. For example, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Planned Parenthood would be left in tact. Moreover, the “public option” would give Americans the choice of selecting a health plan provided, in part, by the government that would cost less than those provided by private health providers. Under the “Peoples Budget” would cut costly programs such as military ones within the Department of Defense and millionaires would be forced to pay their fair share in taxes. Sounds good to me.
The American people should value the People’s Budget offered by the Progressive Caucus within the Congress. Ask your representative is he or she is a member of the Progressive Caucus.
In linking leadership,
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Reintroducing Rosa!
Reintroducing Rosa: Mrs. Park’s Fight to Prosecute Rape of Black Women
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
May 8-15, 2011
Traditionally Black History is presented with accounts of luminaries such as Harriet Tubman, Frederick Douglas, Sojourner Truth, Gabriel Prosser, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Rosa Parks. In nearly every instance the narrative is narrowly offered, and skewed to heroics of Black men.
Mrs. Rosa Parks is no exception. To read most history textbooks students have been fed fiction as to who Mrs. Parks was and how she came to be the Mother of the Modern Civil Rights Movement. I vividly learning the limited lesson that Mrs. Parks was a “poor seamstress who was simply too tired to move to the back of the bus”, as racially segregated laws required in most American cities, from 1896 (Plessy v. Ferguson Supreme Court case) to 1954 (Brown v. Board of Education court case).
In reality, Mrs. Parks was no “shrinking violet” in response to racial segregation. First, Rosa Parks sought to attend, and completed college at the Philander School, which was a training ground for activists who wanted to challenge “Jim Crow” laws. Secondly, after finishing her studies, Mrs. Parks returned to her home of Montgomery, Alabama and immediately challenged the racist voting laws of Alabama by applying for the right to vote. In 1943 and 1944, Rosa Parks was told she failed the voting examination. In 1945, Mrs. Parks not only memorized the questions, but the answers to the exam repeated them to voting officials. As a result, she passed and was granted her right to vote in Alabama—twenty-years before African Americans could vote via the 1965 Voting Rights Act; and ten years prior to the Montgomery Bus Boycott.
Moreover, Mrs. Parks intentionally chose to be a part of history. Rosa Parks was elected to serve as the Secretary of the Montgomery Chapter of the NAACP. As such, she regularly met with Attorney Fred Gray (lawyer to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.) to strategize on challenging racist laws. In fact, James Blake, the bus driver on whose bus Mrs. Parks refused to move was well known within the Black community of Montgomery as a virulent racist, who regularly verbally insulted African Americans, particularly Black women. Rosa Parks deliberately chose the exact bus and the date (December 1, 1955) to enter the annals of world history.
However, one major role Mrs. Parks played in history has not been sufficiently revealed until recently in the form of the book, The Dark End of the Street, (2010) by Danielle McGuire. Due, in part, to male dominated Civil Rights historians the role of Black women has usually been relegated to secondary status. In her book, Ms. McGuire exposes wide-spread cases of rape by White men of Black women, few of which went to trial, and despicably even less resulted in conviction. All-White juries from 1896 to well into the 1960’s simply refused to honor justice and convict Whites of crimes against Blacks (Let me not mention the “legal” rape of Black women by White “Founding Fathers” such as Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, and others).
In one particular case in 1944 a young, married African American woman named Mrs. Recy Taylor was walking home from church with family members on a dark road when a car full of White men slowly passed and returned. At gunpoint, Mrs. Taylor was taken and gang raped by 6 of the 7 men. Like countless Black women raped by White men prior to the 1960’s Mrs. Taylor was let go by her captors and threatened by life if she told. Unlike most she immediately and courageously told her family and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).
Mrs. Parks was assigned by the NAACP to investigate the rape case and organized a portion of the Black community to call for the rapists to stand trial. She won the battle of bringing the men to court twice, but all-White juries never convicted the rapists. Nonetheless, Mrs. Parks’ organizing skills and activism led to a network of community organizers upon which the historic Montgomery Bus Boycott was successful. Who knew?
Actually, many historians knew of Mrs. Parks’ work on the Recy Taylor case but declined to write about such due to the violence of rape, and the need to first dismantle racial segregation via federal legislation such as the 1964 Civil Rights Act; the 1965 Voting Rights Act; and the 1968 Fair Housing Act.
America cannot move “beyond race” until our nation moves into a frank discussion of the lasting effects of the false notion of White Supremacy.
In linking leadership,
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
May 8-15, 2011
Traditionally Black History is presented with accounts of luminaries such as Harriet Tubman, Frederick Douglas, Sojourner Truth, Gabriel Prosser, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Rosa Parks. In nearly every instance the narrative is narrowly offered, and skewed to heroics of Black men.
Mrs. Rosa Parks is no exception. To read most history textbooks students have been fed fiction as to who Mrs. Parks was and how she came to be the Mother of the Modern Civil Rights Movement. I vividly learning the limited lesson that Mrs. Parks was a “poor seamstress who was simply too tired to move to the back of the bus”, as racially segregated laws required in most American cities, from 1896 (Plessy v. Ferguson Supreme Court case) to 1954 (Brown v. Board of Education court case).
In reality, Mrs. Parks was no “shrinking violet” in response to racial segregation. First, Rosa Parks sought to attend, and completed college at the Philander School, which was a training ground for activists who wanted to challenge “Jim Crow” laws. Secondly, after finishing her studies, Mrs. Parks returned to her home of Montgomery, Alabama and immediately challenged the racist voting laws of Alabama by applying for the right to vote. In 1943 and 1944, Rosa Parks was told she failed the voting examination. In 1945, Mrs. Parks not only memorized the questions, but the answers to the exam repeated them to voting officials. As a result, she passed and was granted her right to vote in Alabama—twenty-years before African Americans could vote via the 1965 Voting Rights Act; and ten years prior to the Montgomery Bus Boycott.
Moreover, Mrs. Parks intentionally chose to be a part of history. Rosa Parks was elected to serve as the Secretary of the Montgomery Chapter of the NAACP. As such, she regularly met with Attorney Fred Gray (lawyer to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.) to strategize on challenging racist laws. In fact, James Blake, the bus driver on whose bus Mrs. Parks refused to move was well known within the Black community of Montgomery as a virulent racist, who regularly verbally insulted African Americans, particularly Black women. Rosa Parks deliberately chose the exact bus and the date (December 1, 1955) to enter the annals of world history.
However, one major role Mrs. Parks played in history has not been sufficiently revealed until recently in the form of the book, The Dark End of the Street, (2010) by Danielle McGuire. Due, in part, to male dominated Civil Rights historians the role of Black women has usually been relegated to secondary status. In her book, Ms. McGuire exposes wide-spread cases of rape by White men of Black women, few of which went to trial, and despicably even less resulted in conviction. All-White juries from 1896 to well into the 1960’s simply refused to honor justice and convict Whites of crimes against Blacks (Let me not mention the “legal” rape of Black women by White “Founding Fathers” such as Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, and others).
In one particular case in 1944 a young, married African American woman named Mrs. Recy Taylor was walking home from church with family members on a dark road when a car full of White men slowly passed and returned. At gunpoint, Mrs. Taylor was taken and gang raped by 6 of the 7 men. Like countless Black women raped by White men prior to the 1960’s Mrs. Taylor was let go by her captors and threatened by life if she told. Unlike most she immediately and courageously told her family and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).
Mrs. Parks was assigned by the NAACP to investigate the rape case and organized a portion of the Black community to call for the rapists to stand trial. She won the battle of bringing the men to court twice, but all-White juries never convicted the rapists. Nonetheless, Mrs. Parks’ organizing skills and activism led to a network of community organizers upon which the historic Montgomery Bus Boycott was successful. Who knew?
Actually, many historians knew of Mrs. Parks’ work on the Recy Taylor case but declined to write about such due to the violence of rape, and the need to first dismantle racial segregation via federal legislation such as the 1964 Civil Rights Act; the 1965 Voting Rights Act; and the 1968 Fair Housing Act.
America cannot move “beyond race” until our nation moves into a frank discussion of the lasting effects of the false notion of White Supremacy.
In linking leadership,
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
Monday, February 21, 2011
The Wisdom of our Mothers and Fathers
“Remove not the ancient landmarks for which our mothers and fathers set”
Proverbs 22: 28
As Black History Month for 2011 comes to a close we must keep our collective ears open to the voices of our cultural mothers and fathers whose wisdom is as relevant today as it was in the past. Their voices cry out for people of conscience, particularly African Americans to place justice and wisdom at the forefront of our family’s focus.
I watched with interest an airing of The Injustice Files last week on the Discovery Channel. The Injustice Files is the work of filmmaker Keith Beauchamp, producer of The Untold Story of Emmett Louis Till and CBS EYE Productions, which reveal the circumstances of three racially motivated unsolved murders of African Americans prior to 1969. Brilliantly, Beauchamp weaved together whatever he could find—family interviews, police records, eye witnesses—into a compelling expose. The Injustice Files serves as much as a history lesson as it does to inspire people today to come forward with information that would lead to the prosecution of murders and the legal closure of countless of acts of racism and domestic terrorism.
Prior to the Injustice Files Beauchamp’s most critically acclaimed work brought new attention to the heinous murder of Emmett Till in 1955. Till, a 14-year old boy from Chicago was visiting relatives in rural Mississippi and allegedly flirtatiously whistled at a White woman—a cultural crime in the American deep south of 1955. The woman’s husband and brother-in-law took Emmett Till from his uncle’s house in the middle of the night.
The vicious torture and murder of Emmet Till, according to Mrs. Rosa Parks, inspired her to take a more active role in the Civil Rights Movement by refusing to surrender her seat to a White man (thus, challenging the application of federal law on buses in Montgomery, Alabama) just six months after Till’s victimization. As Mrs. Parks did in 1955, people of conscience today must pursue justice by reforming public policy.
The Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Act of 2007 was introduced to establish an Unsolved Crimes Section within the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice. Since then, funding issues have stymied progress of the Act.
If “cold cases” such as the ones featured in The Injustice Files are to be solved federal legislation must have enforcement provisions to meaningfully aid prosecutors and families in court. In particular:
• Congress should appropriate funds necessary for fulfillment of Emmett Till Act
• Congressional oversight hearings are needed to examine activities of law enforcement officials relative to Emmett Till Act
• The relationship between federal and local prosecutors must be better defined
• The relationship between Ku Klux Klan members and local police and sheriffs must be revealed
• A “Family Bill of Rights” must be defined in information sharing between law enforcement officials and families
• Families must be given status updates on a regular basis by law enforcement officials
• A full accounting of unsolved disappearances, “accidents”, “suicides”, “self defense” must be compiled
• Cases determined “outside of jurisdiction” of Emmett Till Act must be covered by new legislation
Federal legislation must be matched by state, county, and municipal policy that emboldens prosecutors and families and imprisoned murderers. The collective voices of our ancestors direct us to pursue justice in unsolved murder cases.
In linking leadership,
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
Proverbs 22: 28
As Black History Month for 2011 comes to a close we must keep our collective ears open to the voices of our cultural mothers and fathers whose wisdom is as relevant today as it was in the past. Their voices cry out for people of conscience, particularly African Americans to place justice and wisdom at the forefront of our family’s focus.
I watched with interest an airing of The Injustice Files last week on the Discovery Channel. The Injustice Files is the work of filmmaker Keith Beauchamp, producer of The Untold Story of Emmett Louis Till and CBS EYE Productions, which reveal the circumstances of three racially motivated unsolved murders of African Americans prior to 1969. Brilliantly, Beauchamp weaved together whatever he could find—family interviews, police records, eye witnesses—into a compelling expose. The Injustice Files serves as much as a history lesson as it does to inspire people today to come forward with information that would lead to the prosecution of murders and the legal closure of countless of acts of racism and domestic terrorism.
Prior to the Injustice Files Beauchamp’s most critically acclaimed work brought new attention to the heinous murder of Emmett Till in 1955. Till, a 14-year old boy from Chicago was visiting relatives in rural Mississippi and allegedly flirtatiously whistled at a White woman—a cultural crime in the American deep south of 1955. The woman’s husband and brother-in-law took Emmett Till from his uncle’s house in the middle of the night.
The vicious torture and murder of Emmet Till, according to Mrs. Rosa Parks, inspired her to take a more active role in the Civil Rights Movement by refusing to surrender her seat to a White man (thus, challenging the application of federal law on buses in Montgomery, Alabama) just six months after Till’s victimization. As Mrs. Parks did in 1955, people of conscience today must pursue justice by reforming public policy.
The Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Act of 2007 was introduced to establish an Unsolved Crimes Section within the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice. Since then, funding issues have stymied progress of the Act.
If “cold cases” such as the ones featured in The Injustice Files are to be solved federal legislation must have enforcement provisions to meaningfully aid prosecutors and families in court. In particular:
• Congress should appropriate funds necessary for fulfillment of Emmett Till Act
• Congressional oversight hearings are needed to examine activities of law enforcement officials relative to Emmett Till Act
• The relationship between federal and local prosecutors must be better defined
• The relationship between Ku Klux Klan members and local police and sheriffs must be revealed
• A “Family Bill of Rights” must be defined in information sharing between law enforcement officials and families
• Families must be given status updates on a regular basis by law enforcement officials
• A full accounting of unsolved disappearances, “accidents”, “suicides”, “self defense” must be compiled
• Cases determined “outside of jurisdiction” of Emmett Till Act must be covered by new legislation
Federal legislation must be matched by state, county, and municipal policy that emboldens prosecutors and families and imprisoned murderers. The collective voices of our ancestors direct us to pursue justice in unsolved murder cases.
In linking leadership,
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Reagan Robbed the Poor and Raised the Rich
Reagan Robbed the Poor and Raised the Rich
“…sleeping on the grates…the homeless…are homeless…you might say, by choice”
President Ronald Reagan
Last week, many Americans celebrated the 100th year of President Ronald Wilson Reagan’s birth. In honoring Ronald Regan’s impact on the United States of America his policies have been mislabeled as good and positive. In reality, Reagan era policies have had a net negative on our nation and its promise to grant life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all citizens, regardless of color or cash in hand.
My mother always admonished me that if I did not have anything good to say about someone, then say nothing. Thus, Ronald Reagan made three significant contributions to public policy formation: 1) Projection of national pride, 2) Discipline of message. and 3) Generational training of young policy students. That said Reagan’s policy legacy leaves a lot to be desired.
As a high school student government leader in 1980, at the beginning of the
“Reagan Revolution”, I instinctively recognized that a massive cold front would be in the political forecast for many years. And I was correct.
Sure enough, in 1988, at the end of an 8-year Reagan Administration the nation was not better off for most Americans. In particular, Reagan and his cohorts:
• Dismantled labor unions
• Decreased living standards
• Deregulated financial industry
• Decreased wages by freezing minimum wage at $3.35 per hour for 8 years
• Increased gap between rich and poor
• Increased number of Americans in poverty
• Increased homelessness
• Appealed to racist people in America
In 1994, by my third year in college President Reagan had been re-elected to a second term. In doing so, he announced his plan for a second term in Philadelphia, Mississippi at the Neshoba County Fair. As a student of civil rights history I was keenly aware of the secessionist symbolism of Philadelphia, MS as a chosen venue. In 1964, Andrew Goodman, James Chaney, and Mickey Schwerner were brutally murdered while registering African American residents of Philadelphia to vote. Later, trial evidence would reveal that after leaving Meridian, MS the three civil rights workers were followed by Neshoba County Sheriffs and pulled over. Those present have testified that the Sheriff “released” the three only to be followed and murdered by a mob of Ku Klux Klansmen and other racists. The bodies Goodman, Chaney, and Schwerner were found week later in the dirt of an earthen dam. With such a notorious history Ronald Reagan selected Neshoba County to launch his bid for re-election to the White House.
On Sunday, February 6, 2011 I read an article in The Nation written by Peter Dreier that compellingly drove the point of Reagan’s regressive public policy ideas. In response to Reagan supporters’ insistence that he was the “Great Communicator”, Dreier researched a quote from President Reagan in which he said, “I was not the ‘Great Communicator’ as much as I communicated great ideas.” Great ideas? Really?
I, like Peter Dreier, believe that great ideas should have positive outcomes. Not true in the Reagan repertoire. Dreier correctly concludes that today’s dismal economy and widening wealth gap are due, in large part, to the you-are-on-your-own political and policy choices of Ronald Reagan rather than mere social and economic forces.
Today, for example, Republican Governor Cristie decries “big government” as the reason states and local governments are facing budget deficits. Contrarily, it may well be the fact that under the Reagan Administration federal assistance by 60%, resulting in the elimination of revenue sharing to cities; cuts to funding for public service jobs; reduced funds for public transit; severely weakened legal services for the poor; anti-poverty programs; and lowered federal funding for Section 8 rent subsidies housing. Accordingly, as federal funds decreased, homelessness increased.
Today’s mindless mantra of Tea Party conservatives that “government is not a solution to our problem…government is the problem.” Actually, good governmental policies benefit society; and bad policy hurts future generations. As the Reagan Administration robbed the poor and raised the rich in the 1980’s, such policies continued in the 1990’s and 2000’s with the George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush Administrations.
In particular, the deregulation of the Savings and Loan industry by the Reagan Administration (with the help of Neil Bush—brother and son to presidents Bush) looted the S & L industry of $130 billion dollars. In turn, the Clinton Administration deregulated the banking industry by letting the Glass-Stegall Act expire. By 2008, the second Bush Administration had allowed American corporations to eliminate domestic jobs in return of international tax credits. Moreover, two undeclared wars had given obscene profits to war companies such as Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin.
In short, Reagan Administration policies of the 1980’s penalized the poor and pumped up private profiteers, which are still reaping benefits, to the demise of the most Americans.
In linking leadership,
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
“…sleeping on the grates…the homeless…are homeless…you might say, by choice”
President Ronald Reagan
Last week, many Americans celebrated the 100th year of President Ronald Wilson Reagan’s birth. In honoring Ronald Regan’s impact on the United States of America his policies have been mislabeled as good and positive. In reality, Reagan era policies have had a net negative on our nation and its promise to grant life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all citizens, regardless of color or cash in hand.
My mother always admonished me that if I did not have anything good to say about someone, then say nothing. Thus, Ronald Reagan made three significant contributions to public policy formation: 1) Projection of national pride, 2) Discipline of message. and 3) Generational training of young policy students. That said Reagan’s policy legacy leaves a lot to be desired.
As a high school student government leader in 1980, at the beginning of the
“Reagan Revolution”, I instinctively recognized that a massive cold front would be in the political forecast for many years. And I was correct.
Sure enough, in 1988, at the end of an 8-year Reagan Administration the nation was not better off for most Americans. In particular, Reagan and his cohorts:
• Dismantled labor unions
• Decreased living standards
• Deregulated financial industry
• Decreased wages by freezing minimum wage at $3.35 per hour for 8 years
• Increased gap between rich and poor
• Increased number of Americans in poverty
• Increased homelessness
• Appealed to racist people in America
In 1994, by my third year in college President Reagan had been re-elected to a second term. In doing so, he announced his plan for a second term in Philadelphia, Mississippi at the Neshoba County Fair. As a student of civil rights history I was keenly aware of the secessionist symbolism of Philadelphia, MS as a chosen venue. In 1964, Andrew Goodman, James Chaney, and Mickey Schwerner were brutally murdered while registering African American residents of Philadelphia to vote. Later, trial evidence would reveal that after leaving Meridian, MS the three civil rights workers were followed by Neshoba County Sheriffs and pulled over. Those present have testified that the Sheriff “released” the three only to be followed and murdered by a mob of Ku Klux Klansmen and other racists. The bodies Goodman, Chaney, and Schwerner were found week later in the dirt of an earthen dam. With such a notorious history Ronald Reagan selected Neshoba County to launch his bid for re-election to the White House.
On Sunday, February 6, 2011 I read an article in The Nation written by Peter Dreier that compellingly drove the point of Reagan’s regressive public policy ideas. In response to Reagan supporters’ insistence that he was the “Great Communicator”, Dreier researched a quote from President Reagan in which he said, “I was not the ‘Great Communicator’ as much as I communicated great ideas.” Great ideas? Really?
I, like Peter Dreier, believe that great ideas should have positive outcomes. Not true in the Reagan repertoire. Dreier correctly concludes that today’s dismal economy and widening wealth gap are due, in large part, to the you-are-on-your-own political and policy choices of Ronald Reagan rather than mere social and economic forces.
Today, for example, Republican Governor Cristie decries “big government” as the reason states and local governments are facing budget deficits. Contrarily, it may well be the fact that under the Reagan Administration federal assistance by 60%, resulting in the elimination of revenue sharing to cities; cuts to funding for public service jobs; reduced funds for public transit; severely weakened legal services for the poor; anti-poverty programs; and lowered federal funding for Section 8 rent subsidies housing. Accordingly, as federal funds decreased, homelessness increased.
Today’s mindless mantra of Tea Party conservatives that “government is not a solution to our problem…government is the problem.” Actually, good governmental policies benefit society; and bad policy hurts future generations. As the Reagan Administration robbed the poor and raised the rich in the 1980’s, such policies continued in the 1990’s and 2000’s with the George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush Administrations.
In particular, the deregulation of the Savings and Loan industry by the Reagan Administration (with the help of Neil Bush—brother and son to presidents Bush) looted the S & L industry of $130 billion dollars. In turn, the Clinton Administration deregulated the banking industry by letting the Glass-Stegall Act expire. By 2008, the second Bush Administration had allowed American corporations to eliminate domestic jobs in return of international tax credits. Moreover, two undeclared wars had given obscene profits to war companies such as Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin.
In short, Reagan Administration policies of the 1980’s penalized the poor and pumped up private profiteers, which are still reaping benefits, to the demise of the most Americans.
In linking leadership,
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
The History of Watch Care Church Service
The History of Watch Care Church Service
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director and CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
December 26-January 2, 2010
For all Christians, the Christmas holidays are the most sacred spiritual time of the calendar years.
For African American Christians, the week after December 25 holds immense significance as well.
On September 22, 1862, President Abraham Lincoln, following a decisive Union military victory over confederate forces at Antietam, Maryland, penned and signed the Emancipation Proclamation. The Proclamation would free enslaved African Americans in confederate states that seceded from the United States of America such as Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi.
The Emancipation Proclamation was to be effective January 1, 1863. As such, Christmas of 1862 and the week following was the most important week of enslaved African Americans who had fought, bled, prayed, strategized, and died for their legal emancipation. Yet, their spirits were reminded of freedom through song.
The “Negro Spirituals”, developed as sacred songs of African Americans who were forcibly converted to Christianity by un-Godly Whites who disrespected the religions and cosmology of Africans legally designated as “slaves.” Regardless of earthly bondage and inhuman degradation enslaved African Americans established Spirituals to uplift their souls, in the words of James Weldon Johnson, “…felt in the day when hope, unborn, had died…”
During enslavement many states outlawed gatherings of the enslaved. Nonetheless, African Americans gathered in “camp meetings” after sunset (and 14-hour work days) in secluded and wooded areas to feed their souls through song. For example, singers long for freedom in “There Will be a Great Camp Meeting in the Promised Land”. Likewise, “In dat Great Getting’ Up Morning” the writer prophesizes freedom from bondage and wishes that the freed “fare ye well.” Similarly, the Spiritual “My Soul Be at Res” featured the lyric: “One of deese mornin’s my soul be at res.”
Leading up to January 1, 1863 our enslaved ancestors sang and prayed, and sang and prayed. On December 31, religious leaders asked the faithful to have “camp meetings” or church services to “watch” for freedom in the morning. The idea was to spiritually ensure that President Lincoln’s promise of emancipation would fulfilled.
And thus “Watch Care” service was established.
Emancipation Day featured feasts of the diet of the day in 1863—collard greens, black-eyed peas, pig’s feet, and yams.
Today, many African American communities celebrate Emancipation Day
In linking leadership,
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director and CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
December 26-January 2, 2010
For all Christians, the Christmas holidays are the most sacred spiritual time of the calendar years.
For African American Christians, the week after December 25 holds immense significance as well.
On September 22, 1862, President Abraham Lincoln, following a decisive Union military victory over confederate forces at Antietam, Maryland, penned and signed the Emancipation Proclamation. The Proclamation would free enslaved African Americans in confederate states that seceded from the United States of America such as Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi.
The Emancipation Proclamation was to be effective January 1, 1863. As such, Christmas of 1862 and the week following was the most important week of enslaved African Americans who had fought, bled, prayed, strategized, and died for their legal emancipation. Yet, their spirits were reminded of freedom through song.
The “Negro Spirituals”, developed as sacred songs of African Americans who were forcibly converted to Christianity by un-Godly Whites who disrespected the religions and cosmology of Africans legally designated as “slaves.” Regardless of earthly bondage and inhuman degradation enslaved African Americans established Spirituals to uplift their souls, in the words of James Weldon Johnson, “…felt in the day when hope, unborn, had died…”
During enslavement many states outlawed gatherings of the enslaved. Nonetheless, African Americans gathered in “camp meetings” after sunset (and 14-hour work days) in secluded and wooded areas to feed their souls through song. For example, singers long for freedom in “There Will be a Great Camp Meeting in the Promised Land”. Likewise, “In dat Great Getting’ Up Morning” the writer prophesizes freedom from bondage and wishes that the freed “fare ye well.” Similarly, the Spiritual “My Soul Be at Res” featured the lyric: “One of deese mornin’s my soul be at res.”
Leading up to January 1, 1863 our enslaved ancestors sang and prayed, and sang and prayed. On December 31, religious leaders asked the faithful to have “camp meetings” or church services to “watch” for freedom in the morning. The idea was to spiritually ensure that President Lincoln’s promise of emancipation would fulfilled.
And thus “Watch Care” service was established.
Emancipation Day featured feasts of the diet of the day in 1863—collard greens, black-eyed peas, pig’s feet, and yams.
Today, many African American communities celebrate Emancipation Day
In linking leadership,
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Double Standard for Black Politicians
Double Standard for Black Politicians
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
November 21-28, 2010
The United States of America boasts to the world community that it is a nation of equality under the law for all citizens, regardless of color or conviction. Yet, for African American elected officials such has hardly been the case.
In 1865, following the end of the American Civil War the Freedmen’s Bureau was established by President Abraham Lincoln and Congress the protect the rights of newly freed African Americans. By 1870, Congressional Amendments stretched to U.S. Constitution to guarantee—on paper, that is—the right to be free (13th), citizenship (14th), and to be free from racial discrimination at the polling place (15th) for Black people. Moreover, citizenship afforded African Americans the right to hold elective office. Within our family, my paternal great grandfather, Lawrence Clayton, was elected Constable in Surry County, Virginia in 1882.
In total, 22 African Americans were elected to Congress following 1870. However, the forty years that followed saw the number of Black Congressmen dwindle to zero by 1910. In the words of the late Dr. Ronald Walters, White Nationalism accounted for the lost of Colored Congressmen in the white marble halls of the U.S. Capital.
By White Nationalism, I mean the use of double standards in the targeting of Black elected official for removal of office. Following the 1870 15th Amendment prohibiting racial discrimination in voting the demise of Black Congressional Representatives dropped sharply after the presidential election of 1876. Known as the Hayes/Tilden Compromise, the loser, won; and the winner, lost. Under the agreement, Rutherford Hayes agreed to remove federal troops in the south which were dispatched to protect newly freed African Americans.
From 1870 until 1901, voter disenfranchisement schemes eliminated Black Congressman from office. Schemes such as poll taxes, literacy tests, and voter roll purging of convicted felons were common. In some cases, an “eight box law” was used to confuse voters by forcing voters to place an individual ballot in separate boxes.
As Black voters were disenfranchised the number of Black Congressmen declined. History repeats itself. While literacy tests and poll taxes are uncommon the purging of felons and relocating polling places are used today.
Currently, Congressman Charles Rangel, former Chairman of the House Ways and Means committee, and Congresswoman Maxine Waters…Sub-Committee Chair on Financial Services Committee are facing rulings from the House Ethics Committee. In the case of Congressman Rangel…
In the 2010 Congressional mid-term elections voters in Congressman Rangel’s district overwhelmingly re-elected the 21-term Congressman, providing a ringing affirmation of Rangel’s approval rating on the ground.
What smells funny in the Rangel case is that no corruption was found and none of the 13 charges were criminal in nature. So far, the ethics committee concluded that Congressman Rangel was essentially sloppy.
Congresswoman Waters is charged with three counts breaking House Rules by setting a meeting with African American banks, one of which her husband was on its Board of Directors. Despite lacking strong evidence of wrong doing, the Ethics Panel investigating the case announced on Friday that Congresswoman Waters’ hearing has been continued until the end of November.
Unlike most Members of Congress facing investigations, earlier in the process, Congresswoman Waters invited the media for a six-hour press conference to answer all questions. The press conference was regarded as a success.
If the Committee fails to conclude either the Rangel or Waters case both cases would be taken up in the 112th Session of Congress under Republican control.
The double standard, which screams today is that Black Members of Congress in overwhelmingly African American districts (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and others) have been investigated with flimsy evidence. On the contrary, White Congressional Representatives facing criminal charges have been treated more fairly.
If America politics is to be great, the double standard for Black Congressional Representatives must end.
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
November 21-28, 2010
The United States of America boasts to the world community that it is a nation of equality under the law for all citizens, regardless of color or conviction. Yet, for African American elected officials such has hardly been the case.
In 1865, following the end of the American Civil War the Freedmen’s Bureau was established by President Abraham Lincoln and Congress the protect the rights of newly freed African Americans. By 1870, Congressional Amendments stretched to U.S. Constitution to guarantee—on paper, that is—the right to be free (13th), citizenship (14th), and to be free from racial discrimination at the polling place (15th) for Black people. Moreover, citizenship afforded African Americans the right to hold elective office. Within our family, my paternal great grandfather, Lawrence Clayton, was elected Constable in Surry County, Virginia in 1882.
In total, 22 African Americans were elected to Congress following 1870. However, the forty years that followed saw the number of Black Congressmen dwindle to zero by 1910. In the words of the late Dr. Ronald Walters, White Nationalism accounted for the lost of Colored Congressmen in the white marble halls of the U.S. Capital.
By White Nationalism, I mean the use of double standards in the targeting of Black elected official for removal of office. Following the 1870 15th Amendment prohibiting racial discrimination in voting the demise of Black Congressional Representatives dropped sharply after the presidential election of 1876. Known as the Hayes/Tilden Compromise, the loser, won; and the winner, lost. Under the agreement, Rutherford Hayes agreed to remove federal troops in the south which were dispatched to protect newly freed African Americans.
From 1870 until 1901, voter disenfranchisement schemes eliminated Black Congressman from office. Schemes such as poll taxes, literacy tests, and voter roll purging of convicted felons were common. In some cases, an “eight box law” was used to confuse voters by forcing voters to place an individual ballot in separate boxes.
As Black voters were disenfranchised the number of Black Congressmen declined. History repeats itself. While literacy tests and poll taxes are uncommon the purging of felons and relocating polling places are used today.
Currently, Congressman Charles Rangel, former Chairman of the House Ways and Means committee, and Congresswoman Maxine Waters…Sub-Committee Chair on Financial Services Committee are facing rulings from the House Ethics Committee. In the case of Congressman Rangel…
In the 2010 Congressional mid-term elections voters in Congressman Rangel’s district overwhelmingly re-elected the 21-term Congressman, providing a ringing affirmation of Rangel’s approval rating on the ground.
What smells funny in the Rangel case is that no corruption was found and none of the 13 charges were criminal in nature. So far, the ethics committee concluded that Congressman Rangel was essentially sloppy.
Congresswoman Waters is charged with three counts breaking House Rules by setting a meeting with African American banks, one of which her husband was on its Board of Directors. Despite lacking strong evidence of wrong doing, the Ethics Panel investigating the case announced on Friday that Congresswoman Waters’ hearing has been continued until the end of November.
Unlike most Members of Congress facing investigations, earlier in the process, Congresswoman Waters invited the media for a six-hour press conference to answer all questions. The press conference was regarded as a success.
If the Committee fails to conclude either the Rangel or Waters case both cases would be taken up in the 112th Session of Congress under Republican control.
The double standard, which screams today is that Black Members of Congress in overwhelmingly African American districts (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and others) have been investigated with flimsy evidence. On the contrary, White Congressional Representatives facing criminal charges have been treated more fairly.
If America politics is to be great, the double standard for Black Congressional Representatives must end.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Preaching the Politics of Privilege
Preaching the Politics of Privilege
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
October 24-31, 2010
“…the detection of national White-majority interests can be achieved by understanding the sources of White racial alienation that led to the development of an intellectual rationale of polices of ‘failure.’…this rationale was used as a pretext for attacks upon policies oriented toward Black group interests and on the federal government which supported them…the federal government must be weakened…Whites who control that system have always utilized their power to create a subclass of Blacks who are especially attentive to their political needs.”
Dr. Ronald Walters
White Nationalism, Black Interests
Politics is widely defined as who gets what, when, and how much.
The mid-term elections for United States Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, and Governorships scheduled for Tuesday, November 2, 2010—whichever American political party prevails—will determine the who gets what, when, and how much.
My interpretation of the connection between politics and religion is simple: Religion determines politics rather than politics determining religion.
Such an interpretation was tested last Sunday for me while visiting my parents and sister in Richmond, Virginia. While sitting with my family I surfed television channels and found the Sunday Broadcast of Grove Avenue Baptist Church. What caught my eye was the introduction of Bishop Earl Jackson as the morning speaker. Bishop Earl Jackson, who is African American trained lawyer who took classes in Divinity School, and founder of Exodus Faith Ministries, presented quite an interesting case for religion as a predicate for politics to which I distinctly disagreed. Having been raised in a Christian household I found his inferences un-Godly.
Bishop Jackson asserted that the “Founding Fathers” (Smith, Washington, Jefferson, Franklin et al.) were “ordained” by God to establish a Democratic Republic in America. If so, their God ordained ethnic annihilation, economic exploitation, rape, and the false notion of White supremacy. Captain John Smith was sent to America by the Virginia Company of London to make a profit on the land, albeit the presence of Native Americans. Nearly all of the delegates to the first Constitutional Convention legally enslaved Africans. Thomas Jefferson himself wrote of the racial inferiority of dark-skinned people. Moreover, the religion of racial superiority led the founders to use violence to achieve their greedy ends. I do not believe anyone’s interpretation of God condones rape, pillage, and plunder in the name of religion.
To further support his point, Bishop Jackson cited the Biblical Book of Ephesians, which calls for believers to put on the “full armor of God.” The last time I checked giving tax breaks to the wealthiest 2% of Americans; voting against extending unemployment benefits; and repealing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is not in accordance with Christian belief of “…do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly before God”, found in the Book of Micah, Chapter 6, verse 8.
Bishop Jackson finally revealed his political hand more directly by encouraging Christians to go to the polls on Tuesday and vote for “Godly” candidates and implied that Tea Party candidates were worthy of elective office because of their religious beliefs. Yet, such Tea Party candidates have admitted experimenting with witchcraft, donned German Third Reich uniforms, and supported taking up arms to enforce their political views. Wow, what a God they serve!
I agreed with Bishop Jackson’s point that Americans, by way of the upcoming elections, are fighting a pitch battle for the soul of our nation. One side believes in suppression and one team believes in liberation. On the paradox of the “Founding Father’s” support of slavery, Bishop Jackson said, “If slavery is what it took to get me here, I am glad to be here.” Seriously?
The “Founding Fathers” and their Tea Party descendants have let their belief of politics of privilege, exploitation, and race superiority determine their religion. Both their politics and religion bend toward the false notion of White supremacy, from their portrayal of a blond-haired, blue-eyed Jesus to their “Anglo-first” political views on immigration and other issues.
Tea Party and their White nationalists cohorts often exclaim, “God bless America.” I believe America must bless God by electing righteous candidates who believe in the policy of people over profits; inclusion over exclusion; and helping the “least of these” within our nation. Who gets what, when, and how much should not be predicated on privilege, but on the Godly principles of justice and equity.
Vote conscientiously. God is watching.
In linking leadership,
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc
By Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc.
October 24-31, 2010
“…the detection of national White-majority interests can be achieved by understanding the sources of White racial alienation that led to the development of an intellectual rationale of polices of ‘failure.’…this rationale was used as a pretext for attacks upon policies oriented toward Black group interests and on the federal government which supported them…the federal government must be weakened…Whites who control that system have always utilized their power to create a subclass of Blacks who are especially attentive to their political needs.”
Dr. Ronald Walters
White Nationalism, Black Interests
Politics is widely defined as who gets what, when, and how much.
The mid-term elections for United States Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, and Governorships scheduled for Tuesday, November 2, 2010—whichever American political party prevails—will determine the who gets what, when, and how much.
My interpretation of the connection between politics and religion is simple: Religion determines politics rather than politics determining religion.
Such an interpretation was tested last Sunday for me while visiting my parents and sister in Richmond, Virginia. While sitting with my family I surfed television channels and found the Sunday Broadcast of Grove Avenue Baptist Church. What caught my eye was the introduction of Bishop Earl Jackson as the morning speaker. Bishop Earl Jackson, who is African American trained lawyer who took classes in Divinity School, and founder of Exodus Faith Ministries, presented quite an interesting case for religion as a predicate for politics to which I distinctly disagreed. Having been raised in a Christian household I found his inferences un-Godly.
Bishop Jackson asserted that the “Founding Fathers” (Smith, Washington, Jefferson, Franklin et al.) were “ordained” by God to establish a Democratic Republic in America. If so, their God ordained ethnic annihilation, economic exploitation, rape, and the false notion of White supremacy. Captain John Smith was sent to America by the Virginia Company of London to make a profit on the land, albeit the presence of Native Americans. Nearly all of the delegates to the first Constitutional Convention legally enslaved Africans. Thomas Jefferson himself wrote of the racial inferiority of dark-skinned people. Moreover, the religion of racial superiority led the founders to use violence to achieve their greedy ends. I do not believe anyone’s interpretation of God condones rape, pillage, and plunder in the name of religion.
To further support his point, Bishop Jackson cited the Biblical Book of Ephesians, which calls for believers to put on the “full armor of God.” The last time I checked giving tax breaks to the wealthiest 2% of Americans; voting against extending unemployment benefits; and repealing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is not in accordance with Christian belief of “…do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly before God”, found in the Book of Micah, Chapter 6, verse 8.
Bishop Jackson finally revealed his political hand more directly by encouraging Christians to go to the polls on Tuesday and vote for “Godly” candidates and implied that Tea Party candidates were worthy of elective office because of their religious beliefs. Yet, such Tea Party candidates have admitted experimenting with witchcraft, donned German Third Reich uniforms, and supported taking up arms to enforce their political views. Wow, what a God they serve!
I agreed with Bishop Jackson’s point that Americans, by way of the upcoming elections, are fighting a pitch battle for the soul of our nation. One side believes in suppression and one team believes in liberation. On the paradox of the “Founding Father’s” support of slavery, Bishop Jackson said, “If slavery is what it took to get me here, I am glad to be here.” Seriously?
The “Founding Fathers” and their Tea Party descendants have let their belief of politics of privilege, exploitation, and race superiority determine their religion. Both their politics and religion bend toward the false notion of White supremacy, from their portrayal of a blond-haired, blue-eyed Jesus to their “Anglo-first” political views on immigration and other issues.
Tea Party and their White nationalists cohorts often exclaim, “God bless America.” I believe America must bless God by electing righteous candidates who believe in the policy of people over profits; inclusion over exclusion; and helping the “least of these” within our nation. Who gets what, when, and how much should not be predicated on privilege, but on the Godly principles of justice and equity.
Vote conscientiously. God is watching.
In linking leadership,
Gary L. Flowers
Executive Director & CEO
Black Leadership Forum, Inc
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
