Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Why it is Uniquely Unamerican

Over the past few days, the debate about the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy has come to the forefront. For those of you who do not know, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is the policy that prohibits members of the LGBT community from openly serving in the United States Armed Forces. If members of the LGBT community are found to be serving in the military, they are often kicked out because "it would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability." In my opinion this policy is one of the most offensive policies that is on the books, jeopardizes the American military and is uniquely unamerican.

Whether or not you support LBBT issues and causes, the issue of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" must be looked at in a more global sense. If the American military is supposed to be going into countries, instilling democracy and democratic ideals, while still having a policy on the books that discriminates segments of its own population, that is a slap in the face to all the men and women who have fought and died fighting for this country. If we are going to be sending men and women to fight for the ideals of "freedom and justice for all" or "that all men are created equal" then we need to live up to that ideal, at the very least in the U.S. military. It is very hard to ask men and women to put on a uniform and risk their lives for the Red, White and Blue, when the same flag for which they are fighting for will not accept fellow Americans because of their sexual orientation. This is completely unacceptable in my view to say the least.

Furthermore there have been cases where LGBT members of the U.S. military who have unique skills have been dismissed because of their sexual orientation. Imagine a member of the U.S. military who speaks Farsi, or may be an expert in Muslim religion and culture being kicked out because of his/her sexual orientation. Well it has happened and as long as this policy continues to be on the books it will continue to happen. Countless lives may be in jeopardy as we speak because we do not have the best and most capable members of the American people on board, simply because some of them may be gay.

The American military is undoubtedly the most powerful, the most revered, the most awe inspiring and the most phenomenal military that exists today, and maybe in history. It is imperative at this point in history, when people want to destroy the ideas of America and what it stands for, that that military is a clear reflection of all that exists in American society. Every hue and color, every religion and affiliation, every education level and yes every sexual orientation should be included as well. If the military isn't reflective of the great mosaic of people that America has to offer then how can we seriously ask people to fight for this country. And furthermore how can we ask people to die for this country. It doesn't make much sense to me.

Grading Obama One Year Later

One year ago today, many people experienced one of the most euphoric and amazing experiences ever. Being able to witness the inaguration of the first black president of the United States of America was a moving experience to say the least. Fast forward one year and the larger question of what has the Obama presidency done for diversity needs to be addressed.

Having a black president in office has had a profound impact on how people of color view themselves as active members of the American body politic. Being able to see a President that looks very different than previous presidents goes a long way to making people who have felt disenfranchised feel a little less so. It may simply be a matter of aesthetics, but do not doubt how important aesthetics are to many people both nationally and internationally.

Over the course of the year the image of the United States has improved greatly on an international front. President Obama made a duty to reach out to foreign countries, many of whom have been critical, or at the very least lukewarm, to the United States under the Bush administration. Overall his efforts to engage these countries have been well received. His speech to the Muslim world in Egypt was especially a powerful moment not only for his early presidency, but for the country and world as a whole. I also believe that the immediate response to the victims of the earthquake in Haiti will go a long way in showing that America cares for people outside of its borders.

While I support the aesthetic value and much of the foreign policies that the Obama administration has undertaken, I do believe that much more needs to be done on the homefront to truly make his presidency one that benefits diversity. In many instances over the past year many people have felt that President Obama has tried to steer clear of all matters having to do with race and sexual orientation (aside from the Skip Gates controversy, which he has a vested interest since Gates was a personal friend). While it is very much understood why Obama would steer clear of these issues as he has a very full slate to handle, it is incredibly important that he begins to address some of the larger issues that disproportionately affect the diverse communities that came out in droves to vote for him. Don't ask don't tell, immigration reform, race relations, the higher than average unemployment rate for people of color among many other issues all need to be addresses in some manner if not by Obama himself, then by his administration as a whole.

It is my hope that Obama taps into the high amounts of good will that he continues to have with many people in America. While many do not neccessarily support his policies (which is fair), he still can make amazing inroads on changing not only this country but also diversity as a whole. My grade on the Obama administration is a B/B-. While definitely not great, his potential is still high.

Harry Reid: Don't Kill The Messenger, Debate the Message

Senator Harry Reid has put himself in quite a political bind by stating that the electorate would vote for Obama because he is "light-skinned" and "has no Negro dialect unless he wanted to have one."

I will begin by saying that there needs to be a clarification between what is true or false and what is right or wrong. While what Senator Reid may have been wrong morally, he is telling the complete truth. And that is the sad part.

Many people may want to make a big deal out of the use of the word "Negro." And there are valid reasons why people should. Nowadays the word is out of date. But in segments of society, especially among an older generation, the word still is used. In fact so many people self-identified themselves as Negro on the 2000 census that it is now a choice on the 2010 census. I agree that the term does have offensive connotations and am not a fan of its use. But I also agree that harping on that one word dillutes the larger point that Reid made in his statement.

The next argument is what is Negro dialect. While there is no set definition on what that is, there is a clear pattern of speech, cadence to the voice and use of urban slang that is stereotypically more ascribed to people of color. One may argue about the merits of said ascription to people of color as opposed to whites, but the fact still remains that even within communities of color the term "speaking white" and "not speaking white" is used. So let's not get upset that someone would argue about the benefits or not of speaking with a stereotypical racial dialect, when that has been a debate that has raged for decades.

As for the debate about light skinned versus dark skinned people, that too has been very charged for a long time. There are even studies that say that the amygdala, the segment of the brain that controls emotions, especially fear, becomes more active when dark images, including people are viewed. So one would assume that lighter images, including people would be seen as more safe, at the very least from a scientific standpoint. Needless to say light skinned blacks have been viewed as closer to whites because of their skintone. Again I am not arguing whether this is right or wrong, but it is true.

If we are to look at the context of what Harry Reid said, one would be hardpressed to disagree. If Barack Obama spoke more like brothers on the corner not only would whites not vote for him but neither would people of color. Now as long as there is imprircal as well as anecdotal data to suggest that lightskinned blacks are more palatable than darkskinned blacks, to not only whites but to segments of the black community itself, one would assume that his skintone was maybe not a benefit but definitely did not hurt his chances of winning the Presidency.

Now people want to make the argument that Reid's comments are similair what Trent Lott said back in 2002. This is ridiculous. To compare Lott saying that the country would not have the problems that it has if we would have elected a segregationalist president to what Reid says smacks in the face of all that makes sense. I do not even see the comparison frankly.

The debate needs to be had about wbat Reid said. But I do not believe the focus should be on his words, but on the uncomfortable truth about them and what that means for larger society. We have made great strides in race relations, but there still is work that needs to be done and discussions and thought practices that need to be addressed. I am not in the least bit upset at Reid. In fact his honesty and candor should be appreciated. Too often when it comes to issues of race and diversity we say what is appropriate as opposed to what is honest. We say beautiful falsehoods as opposed to ugly truths. And we say what is politically correct as opposed to what are societal blatancies. Maybe we should not just look at the packaging, but open up and actually look at what is inside the box. Because whether or not you choose to agree with the message, truth of the matter is the messenger was right.

Rod Blagojevich is blacker than Obama?

You ever have one of those moments where you hear something so outrageous and ridiculous that you look around the room thinking that you are in a bad episode of Ashton Kutcher's "Punked". That happened to me this morning when I heard former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich's comments in Esquire Magazine.

For those of you who haven't heard the quote, Blagojevich stated "I'm blacker than Barack Obama. I shined shoes. I grew up in a five room apartment. My father had a little laundromat in a black community not far from where he lived. I saw it all growing up."

Excuse me?! Where do I begin? Firstly this commentary is so ignorant that I really wonder how a man like this even gets elected as governor of a state. I know Chicago politics are wild but come on. What I find extremely troubling with this commentary is not that Blagojevich would even say it, but the fact that he uses shining shoes and living in a small apartment to sum up what being black is.

The black culture is as diverse as any culture in the world. From the varying cultures of the African diaspora, to the hoods of cities around this country, to the affluent black communities of Sag Harbor and suburban Atlanta and Washington DC just to name a few. Even to the halls of HBCU's and non HBCU's, black culture can not and should not be defined in such simple terms. It is not only offensive, but it is so ridiculously ignorant that an apology can not be accepted at this point. One may say that we shouldn't care what a fool of Blagojevich has to say. Truth be told I doubt anyone does. But for us to let his comments go lets another teachable moment pass us by. Let the dialogue begin so that we can have a larger discussion of what blackness is and has been. Narrow minded commentary has no place in our political discourse. But narrow minded people who simply let narrow minded comments go by the wayside are even more troublesome to me.

But if Blagojevich really wants to prove that he is more blacker than President Obama, I can show him a few places where he can prove that. But like his political career he wouldn't last very long. I guess that could make an awesome episode of "Punked". How about we use all Ivy League educated Black actors who surprise him in the end with their degrees. I know I would enjoy that episode.

An Open Letter To Gilbert Arenas

To Mr. Arenas,
As an avid fan of the NBA, I can not describe the level of anger, frustration and malaise that I currently feel in regards to your gun situation. I am deeply curious what was on your mind when you decided to bring four guns into a basketball arena (which is a clear violation of federal as well as local law), but even more curious as to your actions after bringing those guns into an arena. Do you honestly think that people would believe that you brought these weapons in order to play a joke on your teammate (please help me find the humor in this). Or that people would enjoy the image of you firing finger-pistols at your teammates while they pretended to be shot. Sorry Mr. Arenas, this is not working for any of us.

Many people are killed by guns on a daily basis. Too often they are of the black and brown variety. For you to make light of guns and gun use slaps in the face of the countless men and women whose lives have been taken by the wanton use of guns in this country. But I guess you didn't think about those people when you posed for your twitter pic with your team.

Lest you forget you are a role model for many young men and women who look up to you for your great talent. You have set the worst kind of example to these children. At a time when gun violence and murder affect many people that look like you, one would expect you to be somewhat understanding of the way your behavior looks to those who look up to you. I guess that slipped your mind. Well hopefully now as you sit home missing out on your $147,000 a game, you can begin to feel the true impact of your actions. But I doubt that you will. You may just continue to make light of the situation.

I wonder if you look at the other athletes like you who have gotten in trouble for ridiculous behavior. Did you pay attention to Plaxico Burress? Did you shake your head at the Tiger Woods scandal? I suppose not. Do not forget that as a black man you have been given a power and a blessing that few of us get and many of us want. The ability to do what we enjoy, and become ridiculously rich off of that passion is a dream come true. What you have shown with your wanton, flippant and insulting behavior is that you clearly have a horrible sense of humor and even more that you have a considerable amount of growing up to do.

I hope that this teaches you a lesson about behavior. But the sad thing is that it had to take something so drastic to get that message across. In my opinion if you never play in the NBA again I would not have a problem with that. Too many men would take your spot and do well with the chance. Here's hoping you get your act together, for your sake.
Yours truly,
A former fan

Blacks with College Degrees face hardships

In an article published in the New York Times published 12/1/09, entitled "In Job Hunt, College Degree Can't Close Racial Gap" there has been new evidence that suggests that Blacks with college degrees have suffered more than Blacks without college degrees. The article cites the statistic that the jobless rate for black male graduates 25 and over is 8.4% compared with 4.4% for white males. The article also cites a study says White, Asian and Hispanic managers tended to hire more Whites and fewer Blacks than black managers.

The impact of this is hardly lost on me. Personally I have been on a rather arduous job search for over a year. I have often wondered whether my race plays a role in me getting hired or even called back for interviews. Many who know me would consider me unashamedly black and clearly opinionated at that. I have walked into interviews after having great phone conversations, felt that things went well to find out that I did not get the job. By no means do I sit down and automatically assume that I did not get the job because of race. But when I see many blacks and other minorities with college degrees from equally amazing universities in situations similar to mine, I tend to wonder does race play some part in the continuing battle for economic equality?

I know the impact of the recession on everyone, but as the old adage goes when the country gets a cold, black people get a flu. And in this recession the flu that Blacks are getting will no doubt erase many of the economic gains that have been accomplished during the past 20 years. The saddest part to the whole thing is that as we continue to tell our young people to go to college and get a degree and want them to believe that they will be fine, the stats show a completely different reality. By no means do I favor Blacks not going to college. In my opinion that is simply stupid, but the way we view a college degree needs to be analyzed even more.

I do believe that with time as the economy rebounds Blacks will start getting hired in positions. But as the scarcity of jobs becomes more obvious and companies have to dig through a pile of qualified candidates, people with names like Akim and Akilah will continue to struggle in comparison to Adam and Ashley. Things will change eventually, but the impact of the damage done may even take longer to recover from.

Jimmy Carter's Comments? True or not?

Now I have been very hesitant to delve into the comments that former U.S. President Jimmy Carter made recently. If you all haven't heard, President Carter made this statement in an interview with NBC's Brian Williams:

"I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African American," Carter said. "I live in the South, and I've seen the South come a long way, and I've seen the rest of the country that shared the South's attitude toward minority groups at that time, particularly African Americans...And that racism inclination still exists. And I think it's bubbled up to the surface because of the belief among many white people, not just in the South but around the country, that African-Americans are not qualified to lead this great country. It's an abominable circumstance, and it grieves me and concerns me very deeply."

The reason I have been hesitant is because I normally am very careful when using the "race card." In essence I like to make sure that my motives are very clear and beyond reproach before I accuse people of being racist. In my opinion I believe that there is a level of truth to what Jimmy Carter is saying.

Unlike Carter I don't believe that most of the arguments against Obama's policies are steeped in racist ideology. But like Carter I do see major areas where the arguments have a strong racial overtone. I also believe that many of the arguments that are having the biggest voice and most power tend to be very much from the far conservative population. Furthermore I believe that what makes this argument palatable is that many of the arguments against Obama are not policy based but tend to call into question him as a person.

I will detail three areas where I believe racism played a role in how the opposing side views Obama. The areas are the Birther Movement, the Obama is a Muslim debate and last but not least Talk Radio (namely Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh).

The Birther Movement to me is the most obvious forms of racism I have seen in quite some time. There is a clear group in society, even some journalists and politicians (Lou Dobbs) who honestly believe that President Obama was not born in America. This is even after he issued his birth certificate, after Hawaii's major newspapers released notices of birth stating that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii on the date he was and even after every authentication service has come to the same conclusion. There still is a segment of society that believes he isn't a citizen of the United States. While there are people that said John McCain was not a citizen of the United States during the campaign, the clamor died down quickly. In this case it hasn't been the same. There are still government officials who publicly comment that Obama isn't a citizen. The only reason I can come up with is that there must be of a level of xenophobia and cultural racist thought that allows for this to be permeated in the manner it has been.

The question of Obama's religious affiliation has been a topic of discussion since Obama announced his candidacy for President. Many people have questioned whether he was a Muslim as a result of his father being from Kenya as well as the fact that Obama lived in Indonesia and attended an Indonesian school as a youngster. Aside from these few aspects of his life there is no proof that Obama is a Muslim. In fact he was a member of Jeremiah Wright's church for a few decades. But the larger argument that I make is even if Obama was a Muslim what is wrong with that? I believe that to a segment of society being anti-Muslim is problematic. The argument goes to the xenophobic and cultural issues that Obama has experienced in being the first black president.

The most blatant form of racist thought clearly comes from conservative talk radio. Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh have been some of the most outspoken broadcasters who have blatantly said that Obama either was racist or made comments that could be perceived as racist to him. Glenn Beck has called Obama "racist to white people" and Limbaugh has gone to the extreme of saying that a school bus incident involving a white teenager and some black boys was racist, after the police department found no racial overtones in the incident. He even went so far as saying that segregated buses should become the norm to protect kids. I find the level of racist thought that exists on conservative radio to play a huge role in whether some of the arguments against Obama and his policies have a racist overtone.

While I believe there are many policy angles that should be debated amongst supporters as well as opponents to the President, when we allow comments steeped in racial subtleties to become the way in which those against his policies make their point, then we have a problem. I fully believe that as a country we can and should be bigger than that. But I also feel that those who quickly comment and say that there isn't a racial overtone to the arguments that exist are being blind to the simple reality of it all. While again its not all the arguments, there definitely appears to be enough out there that makes this argument stand on its own feet. Racism to me is not the most obvious things to discuss or even notice sometimes, but when its there it is incumbent on people to call others on it. It is my hope that other prominent members of the political elite, especially other white politicians, speak truth to power. Then and only then will others begin to take the arguments seriously.