Adults...Children's Worst Enemy! Conclusion

Forget the questionable (and often rash) decisions that young people can and do make—sometimes leading to tragic consequences. Forget about cyber- or actual in-the-flesh bullying that some teenagers perpetrate against one another. Don’t even think about the last time you witnessed a fight between teens in high school hallways. When you think about the safety and well-being of today’s youth, think about the shock-value inherent in the actions Jerry Sandusky and the whole Penn State crew. Or think about Jessica Ridgeway, the 10-year-old Colorado girl who went missing for a week before she was found dead and dismembered. If you want to know the source of the issues today’s youth have to deal with, you needn’t go further than the nearest mirror.

Many so-called adults in America are simply bad parents! And while I know that questioning the child-rearing capabilities of many of today’s mothers (and fathers) by a man is the female equivalent of telling a man his penis is too small, many simply are doing a terrible job at raising today’s kids…the results of which we see as part of many a human interest story on the evening news. Take for example the recent story of Jessica Stilwell, the Canadian mother who recently made news by “going on strike” in order to “teach her kids a lesson” (yes, I know Canada is not a part of the United States, but I used this particular news item illustrate my overall point, which Stilwell’s actions illustrate). The frustrated mother, proclaiming herself to be tired of “constantly reminding, cleaning, and nagging her children” about cleaning up the mess they would make of the house daily, refused to clean up behind her 10 and 12-year daughters, videotaping the results of her refusal to clean up the residence and posting them on Facebook. An online article of the story at the Huffington Post supported the mother’s actions by reporting that “the results will make you want to pump your fists and do a solidarity dance.”

Quite the contrary, as I read the story I imagined kicking my feet off in their backsides to illustrate the roles and responsibilities of responsible parents. This kind of lazy parenting and overly-liberal attitude toward modern child-rearing does nothing more but reinforce a child’s thinking that they are the ones in charge of our homes. I actually found myself thinking, “Who’s the child in this family?”
Today’s parents—due to time constraints, laziness, irresponsibleness, guilt, or stupidity—are simply too afraid to apply and instill any measure of discipline in their children, and the rest of us pay the price. As a former camp counselor for at-risk teens, I would see and experience the results of such questionable parenting up close and personal (I spent 24 hours a day, anywhere from 7-15 days at a time, sleeping, eating, and using the bathroom out in the woods for 2 years with these teens—I dare you tell me that I don’t know what I’m talking about). I also saw how others in society are eventually forced to clean up the mess that other parents make when I was a long-term substitute teacher. Parents are all-too willing to accept any excuse for the behaviors of their children (a dubious clinical medical diagnosis, social trauma, or simply “being different”) other than the most reasonable explanation…they are simple not doing what they should be doing to raise children to be responsible adults.
No parent should have to go “on strike” in order to encourage their children to clean up. First and foremost, children should be taught how to clean up from the earliest moments they are able to hold a broom handle competently; I know that was the case in our house. My mother taught my siblings and I how to clean a house from top-to-bottom. In addition, she taught us how to iron out clothes (including how to align the hems in pants), and cook. During my stint as a camp counselor, teenage boys (and girls) would tell me how they didn’t know how to make up a bed because they usually had such a simplistic chose performed by them by over-doting (and irresponsible) mothers. If there should ever be a “strike” in a house, it should be the strike of a belt or an open hand against an unruly backside! Call it “barbaric,” call it “outdated,” but I’ve seen how spankings used in conjunction with active parenting works (See: "To Spank Or Not To Spank? Hell Yes!"). Back in the day, the police would pick up unruly children, and take them home to an expected meeting of hickory switch and butt by a responsible. Now in a perverse role-reversal, police are expected to jail parents who care about their children enough to ensure they aren’t a danger to themselves (or others). For the sake of any children that I might someday raise (and the nieces and nephews I helped to raise), I would hope that the local authorities would adopt an equivalent to a witness protection program in the event that one should decide to call the authorities on me for doing my job as a parent...and that's the attitude most parents and guardians should have!  And I’ve talked to many parents who quake in their shoes at the prospect of going to jail for administering a spanking to their children. In effect, their children are in control of the household, coming, going, and doing as they please.
The result is a generation of children who have little respect for adults. It’s one of the reasons an incident occurring at the end of the last school year in New York caught so much attention. Almost everyone remembers the story of 68-year old former bus monitor Karen Klein, who was taunted at the hands of disrespectful middle-schoolers to the point visibly crying. The entire incident was captured on video tape by others on the bus as it occurred.

To their credit, the middle-schoolers apologized publicly to the former bus monitor. However, it took shaming on a national stage before they developed the testicular fortitude to do so. It also illustrates how little respect that today’s kids have for adults who, by virtue of their parents’ fears and ineptitude as parents, have instilled in them the idea that they are the equal of adults…which they are most certainly not! 
If parents do not do their jobs, they should expect others to take the initiative to do so. This happened earlier this year in Texas. A 6-year old kindergartner attending Salinas Elementary School, near San Antonio, Texas had developed a reputation for being a bully at the school (and it’s only reasonable to believe that the parents had been notified of their child’s status as a school bully). So his teacher devised a lesson for the class’s resident terror; the teacher had each of the “24 other students in the class line up and slap Neely one-by-one” (See: "Mom Says Teacher Had Students Slap Her Son").   Granted, such an overboard action has its risks, it also illustrates how society will develop ways to correct aberrant behavior in children whose parents fail in their responsibility to instruct them in how to interact with others. Sadly, the teacher was fired by school officials (you guessed it...I applaud such actions as instructional objects in the pitfalls of bullying).  We need more adults willing to take such hard approaches in order to teach life-long lessons to such kids who parents are obviously not up to the task!

This is not to say that there are not responsible parents left in America. Some not only do engage in regular directing and responsible parenting, but they are not the sort who hovers over their children’s every actions in the name of keeping them from potential harm. Too many parents are raising wimps. They do not allow their children to explore their limitations. They put a bandage on every scratch and scrape. They are afraid to let their children do this or that without a suit of armor. As children, my friends and I explored every nook and cranny of our city…without relative harm. We climbed trees. We went to local ponds, explored abandoned houses (this was before they became havens for dope fiends), and always traveled in packs for safety. And our parents were well aware what we were doing.
But today, even when parents are responsible and aware enough not to treat their children like fragile glass, other over-doting parents tend to overact. In La Porte, Texas, a stay-at-home mother was arrested on a charge of child abandonment after one of her neighbors called the police because on the complaint that her children to play outside their mother’s immediate presence, which was not true. On its face, the case was eventually dismissed by authorities. The mother is in the process of suing the local police for false arrest (See:  "Mom Sues Police After Being Arrested for Letting Her Kids Play Outside").

It's sad that the paranoia fear of other weak parents has to interfere with how another chooses to allow her children the freedom to be independent (and to grow).
If this was the worst the mother can do in regards with raising her kids, she could do a lot worse. Many Americans see far worse on a weekly basis in the form of parents who exploit their children for fame. The Learn Channel’s “Toddlers and Tiaras” and the “Here Comes Honey Boo Boo” spin off caters to the lowest in decadent parental behavior. Such shows sexualize and objectify underage girls, and puts their emotional and physical health at risk for the same of fame…of a sick perversion of it. And the fact that such shows garner so many viewers is indicative of how far we’ve such as a society in how we validate and enable bad parenting.

"Honey Boo Boo" from TLC's series of the same name

The bottom line was parenting and parents was much better back in the day.  When I was younger, playgrounds were covered with rocks, not padding. We weren’t mandated to wear bicycle helmets. We stayed away from our homes for hours at a time. There was an underlying element of minimal danger, but our parents were OK with it all. Parents spanked, and police would often collaborated with the dynamic. It didn’t mean parents were less responsible; quite the contrary, they were more responsible. We didn’t have courts, interloping social services organizations on hair triggers for any perceived sign of “abuse” (to which, the scope of what constitutes such has become so wide as to encompass everything short of yelling “boo”), or interfering paranoid adults who bring their personal judgments and prejudices into how others responsibly raise their children. Our parents weren't parading us in front of the world in order to gain the notoriety of an audience who couldn't give a damn about our emotional and physical health.  And we as children were definitely more respectful to not only our parents but most adults. 
We need to get back to the spirit of tough love in raising children, allowing them the privilege and opportunity of exploration in order to facilitate both their independence and growth. But at the same time, being cognizant of the need to restraint impulsiveness and disrespectful attitudes, as well as ungratefulness for having their immediate needs (not wants) met. And we definitely need to get back to the understanding that what you do in your house with your children definitely affects how the rest of us have to deal with your mistakes as parents!And this is something every adult can do, not just parents.

Read More

Adults...Children's Worst Enemy! Part 1

Over the past year, I have time again come across examples of young people—children and teenagers—making questionable decisions, and involved in questionable behaviors. Forget about the children I see in working with at-risk youth and their parents; I’m talking about those engaged in decisions which have become newsworthy human interest stories that illustrate a certain social pathology in behavior among our youth. What’s more, many of the questionable decisions I have witnessed children make today have had the tacit or explicit blessing of their parents. This leads me to conclude that the reasons today’s American youth are so trapped in an ethos of negative decision-making is due to the adults in their lives as both negative influences and as mentors.
Take for example 19-year Miami native Amanda Rodriguez. A day before her 17th birthday, she underwent the radical medical procedure—radical for a teenager—known as gastric bypass surgery. Watching the health segment on NBC’s Today Show from a June airing spotlighting Rodriguez’ decision, I decided to research not only her case, but those involving other teenagers either considering or having undergone the final-option procedure for weight loss. I was surprised to learn that something under 1,000 teens a year have some kind of medical procedure related to stimulating weight-loss in dangerously obese children.

Granted, there are many benefits of this radical medical procedure for those young people who opt to undergo it, the fact that such an extreme measure is needed at all to address health issues related to teenage obesity—issues such as high blood pressure and diabetes—speaks volumes about how much bad parenting and by adults mentoring adversely affects young people.And the ironic thing about this procedure is that:

Surgery usually requires preliminary weight loss and then a strict postsurgical regimen of dietary changes, vitamins, and exercise. If the teen and his family aren't fully committed, the results can evaporate quickly or fail to materialize in the first place (see: "Surgery Is No Quick Fix for Obese Teens").

In addition, there are other possible post-surgery complications based on unrealistic expectations of the radical and often irreversible surgery, including an “increased likelihood” of nutritional and vitamin deficiencies, possible follow-up surgeries, and anemia. Teens receiving this surgery “must be committed to becoming more active and eating healthier for life,” indicating that there are life-long obligations and consequences of having to undergo such a radical means of confronting childhood obesity. The funny thing is that the same level of healthy and active lifestyles required after such procedures could have been employed by responsible parents prior to the decline of their overall health by simply monitoring their children’s diets…things parents are supposed to do.

 A superimposed photograph of a teenager from the 1950s and today.

Instead, we have a nation of parents who enable such deleterious decisions by their children by shirking their responsibility to directly parent to their children, opting instead to avoid the conflicts and tantrums inherent in opposing their desires. In the case of fattening our children, it should come as no surprise that many parents often reward their children with food for various reasons. In addition, many parents do nothing to discourage laziness in today’s crop of youth; I can’t tell you how much I have heard older teenagers whine and complain about having to actually walk someplace as opposed to being chauffeured by parents who have too-little time to spare for such menial tasks. Furthermore, we are no longer a nation of manual labor; we have not only become too dependent on technology, but actual work—especially that consisting of breaking a sweat of even minimal amounts of physical exertion–is almost unheard of. And then we wonder how is it that our children have become so fat and lazy…!  Our inexplicable addiction to watching the misadventures of “Honey Boo-Boo” anesthetizes us to the health-related dangers of over-indulging (and in Boo-Boo’s case, exploiting) our kids for whatever reason!

And then there is the sense of morals—or lack thereof—that parents nowadays instill in their children. Earlier in the year, I was watching CNN’s sister network, Headline News when it aired a piece featuring a controversy involving former adult “actress” (although I think “actress” in such a context stretches the credibility of the word) Alana Evans. Evan was fired from her job as a public school science teacher after her co-workers had revealed that she had been an x-rated porn star. An administrator for the school where Evans had been fired from asserted that “her presence would disrupt student learning.” Having been a long-term substitute myself, I applaud the school district’s decision as a prudent move to avoid the distraction her presences would have no-doubt caused.
What I found so astonishing was Evans’ unapologetic attitude about her sordid past; she was literally a “working mother” at the time of her involvement in her former profession. She proudly defended her decision to seek out such work in order to “take care of her children.” While I agree that being able to put food into the bellies on one’s children is important, so too is what we feed their hearts and minds. A sense of morals and responsible parenting is just as important a contribution to a child’s upbringing as ensuring their nutritional and material needs are met.
My mother used to say that “all money isn’t good money,” and perhaps no level of questionable decision-making illustrates this notion than this (and other related) instance. The problem with being able to justify our actions, our responsibility to take care of our children is that it fosters a sense that making money is the most important thing in the world—no matter what the moral and/or social implications. This mentality doesn’t make much room for being able to look our in children in their eyes and explain to them that we were able to meet their needs in ways which don’t (or shouldn’t) foster a sense of embarrassment in having to explain one’s choice. And one can only think of the stigma Evans’ children would have to endure because of her ill-thought-out decision to take on a vocation with such negative social connotations attached to it. In short, just being able to house, feed, and clothe a child doesn’t necessarily make one a good mother. Yes, it sounds a little judgmental, but maybe judgments are what we need in order to become better models for our children. How many of us would really want our children to mimic our mistakes in judgment? “Legal” doesn’t necessarily mean “right.”
When I was a teenager, my mother took me and my younger brother out with her to farm fields to help her pick fruits and vegetables in order for us to pay our rent and utilities. She didn’t have to resort to such a morally bankrupt vocation in order to take care of us…and I have nothing but respect for her for not having to do anything she would be ashamed to tell us about. Bottom line, there are always options which don’t emotionally scar our children as we fight for their souls trying to raise them. However, too many adults don’t consider the consequences of their often selfish thinking when it comes to how we influence children today. And then we wonder why our children think it’s ok to lie, cheat, and steal to get what they want…!  It's because of our often selfish decisions as poor role models for teaching children that the ends justifies the means.

To be concluded...!

Read More

Election 2012 - Perception vs. Manipulation!

At the risk of favoring one pundit over another, I thought last Friday’s (10-05-12) segment of “New Rules” on HBO’S Real Time with Bill Maher provided an excellent analysis of reality versus perception (I know many on the political right cannot stand Bill Maher). If you count yourself among the number who cannot tolerate Maher’s take on society, politics, and personal observations for more than a few minutes, I have taken the liberty of clipping the more irrelevant parts of his weekly “New Rules” monologue and posting the more relevant portion where Bill Maher gives an insightful clarification of the economy…a reality presented by one side in the current election discourse.

I’ve also taken the liberty of posting President Obama’s newest campaign ad satirizing former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney’s declaration that he would cut federal subsidies to the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), potentially affecting the noncommercial network’s hallmark long-running children’s “Sesame Street.” Granted, Obama’s attack ad is a little over-the-top, it’s also a tragically funny-as-hell illustration in how far political campaigns go to manipulate the public perceptions to the point of the effectiveness we see in Maher’s observations (and how many people embrace the negative).

As I have reiterated so many times before on my blog, people...take the time to actually read, research, and actively think about how you perceive reality, not how your beliefs influence how you perceive it. Take the time to measure whether your beliefs and your experiences are in-synch with the way the world operates. Questions perceptions and propaganda, not embrace them.  In other words, use your heads, not your hearts or emotions!

Read More

African-Americans & The Democratic Party, Conclusion

                     
Continued from Part 1:

At one time in my life, I was as guilty as any other partisan type when it came to judging and basing my thinking on my personal beliefs rather than an objective observation of the facts, evidence, proofs, statistics, and ascertaining how my personal experiences mesh with the facts of a given situation. But, to paraphrase Maya Angelou, when I knew better, I thought better. I don’t subscribe to the belief that truth is always somehow the average of opposing ideas. Oftentimes the meeting point of liberal and conservative ideology is not where truth is…sometimes, some people are right, and some are wrong. But our reluctance to either see or accept this fact is what contributes to our perception that it’s always others who are “wrong,” and that our beliefs “represent” the position of the good guys. This is why it’s so easy for those identifying themselves as Republicans to believe that they are patriots who love America, while those “evil liberals” want nothing but handouts and want to see the destruction of “American values.” It’s why Democrats can view Republicans as narrow-minded theocrats who see no value in diversity, and care more about markets than people. And it’s why we as African-Americans tend to continually (and without questioning) ally ourselves with the Democratic Party after 50 years of only mixed results economically and politically, while ignoring other options.
And perhaps no other point speaks to the need to question African-Americans hitching unquestioningly to the Democratic Party wagon than our overall quality status as a respected demographic in America. One of the things which come to my mind is the effect that general Democratic support for some entitlement programs has on black families. Consider the 1990-era expansion of Supplemental Security Income (SSI). This is the government program which allows for government payouts to families—usually low income—with children diagnosed as being “disabled.” While this program helps some needy families, the problem with it is that virtually any diagnosis by a medical professional, especially those linked to behavioral disorders, results in a monthly SSI paycheck to address the “disability.” In reality, such supplemental income goes to families in order to help meet the burden of paying monthly bills and living expenses.
Additionally, such over-diagnoses and labels legally compels public schools—by federal law—to accommodate the “special needs” these children “require.” Among these accommodations is forcing schools to overlook or treat with “understanding” the disruptive behavior these children exhibit, which contributes to crippling the learning environment of both individual classrooms and as well as entire schools. In a lot of cases, the only problems these “disabled” children have are parents who are just too lazy to administer a disciplined hand at rearing them. Rather than a New-Age clinical diagnosis of a behavioral “disability” (such as “Oppositional Defiance Disorder…yeah right) and psychotropic drugs, the only thing many of these kids require are parents willing to place a boot in their backsides, and school districts not willing to tolerate or have their learning environments held hostage of irresponsible parents who threat to sue if “their rights” are not acknowledged. But instead, many low-income African-Americans are content with receiving "crazy checks" (as entitlements based on such mental/learning disabled diagnoses are known as in the black community), which reward bad parenting, and enables these children to misbehave and be disruptive in both school and society--with an "explanation."  Between this reality of the "learning impaired" disruptive element in our schools, and the general half-assed and apathetic parenting of other students, it's no wonder why teachers fail to make a dent in test scores or why they strike for better working conditions. More still, many of these children grow up with an increased propensity to physically assault just about anyone and/or anything that happens to get into their way, spurred on by their "I'm crazy" diagnosis. At the risk of using anecdotal evidence, my years as a long-term substitute teacher gave me a ringside seat to observe this reality of life in the ‘hood. The results of such Democratic-backed entitlements are parents who don’t participate in the labor market (those who are capable of), spurred on in part by receiving entitlement payments (for those whose need for them are questionable at best), schools forced to shift resources to special education programs, at the expense of other students, and an increased likelihood that families will associate the negative behaviors of their children with some form of mental impairment, in a sense justifying their behavior. Sure, entitlements have had a negative effect on contributing to the breakdown of the black family as a unit, but as a direct and singular cause, I can’t see how. Can we say that entitlements make young black men wear their pants down behind their butts? Does welfare force young black children to gravitate and celebrate the “gangsta” lifestyle portrayed in music videos and today’s rap music? Or why there are so many absent fathers? Granted, there are many sociological and social-psychological explanations for a great deal of these behaviors, but the existence of entitlement programs doesn't explain why, for example a 33-year old Tennessee man fathering some 30 children by 11 different women…

No, entitlements are not the sole (or even primary) reason that the black community's allegiance to the Democratic Party should be questioned, but it is one worthy of consideration.
Approximately 70% of black children are borne to single mothers. Teenage pregnancy is rampant in the black community. Irresponsible decisions should not be rewarded (or encouraged) by the assurance that tax dollars will be provided to support a decision whereby the consequences of which were not considered (say what you want, but economic motives have a way of altering behavior; its why there are fines for speeding, and monetary penalties for late bill payments).  The Democratic Party's rabid promotion of female reproduction as a "right," even among teenagers simply does nothing to benefit the black community. 
When I think of all of the possible reasons for why the black community is sacked with absent fathers, why there is so much unemployment in the black community, why we allow so much crime to go unchecked (for fear of being labeled a "snitch"), I cannot help but conclude that the Democratic Party is the party of excuses and justifications more than promoting self-determination and personal responsibility. I'm definitely not meaning to imply that the Republicans are a better option, but maybe the black community needs to adopt a mercenary style of voting...selling our votes to the highest "bidder" as it were. Maybe if we start putting out indications that we will vote for who we feel not only represents our interests but will actually work toward our interests, maybe we can start seeing changes.  However, this is not mean to absolve the black community of responsibility for our socioeconomic ills.  For all the years African-Americans have given electoral allegiance to the Democratic Party, we have to ask what does it owe us, and what do we owe ourselves?

Read More

Thinking About African-Americans & The Democratic Party, Part 1

The problem with aligned thinking—that is, identifying one’ self with a particular ideological way of thinking such as “liberal,” “conservative,” “anarchist,” etc.—is that no one wants to believe the worst of whatever associated group they affiliate themselves with. Take for example last year’s Pew Research study, “Muslim-Western Tensions Persist:”

A new poll by the Pew Research Center finds the majority of Muslims from Egypt, Turkey, the Palestinian territories, Jordan, Lebanon, Israel, Indonesia and Pakistan do not believe the 9/11 attacks were carried out by Arabs. The highest rate being in Egypt where 75 percent of Muslims do not believe Arabs were responsible. 

Despite the exhaustive investigative endeavors of American and many foreign law enforcement and investigative agencies, this thinking continues to shape Muslim perceptions about America and the West.
We find examples of this same phenomenon of selective thinking here in the states. Another Pew study found that “Only 49 percent of voters know that (President) Obama is a Christian, and 17 percent continue to say that he’s a Muslim. Among conservatives, 30 say that he is a Muslim” (see: “Many Conservatives Still Think Obama is a Muslim”). Oddly enough, and despite the reality that President Obama has for years attended (and continues to attend) a Christian church, many of these individuals do not consider themselves “crazy” or “fringe” for embracing such baseless thinking.
In 2005, a survey published in the February edition of the Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes that year revealed that a substantial number within the African-American community believe that, among other things, “AIDS was produced in a government laboratory, and…was created and spread by the CIA” (“Study: Many Blacks Cite AIDS Conspiracy”).
The point is that we live in a world where it’s too easy to believe the worst of others, and not question whether our allegiances are of a higher moral or ethical caliber. It’s simply too easy for Muslims to believe that Americans are such a duplicitous people that its government would conspire to kill thousands of its own people. Or that all whites are racists. Or that blacks are lazy and intellectually inferior. Rarely do we every question ourselves, or are willing to believe that members of the various groups that we identify with or belong to can commit transgressions every bit as callous as those we slander or are believe the worst of. It’s simply too intellectually burdensome for black people to believe that O.J. murdered, for Muslims to believe that some among their number could have been responsible for taking 3,000 American lives, or for conservative whites to believe that their politicians are every bit the “race-baiters” as traditional black leaders they accuse of the same…ignoring the remote molecule of reality each conspiracy has its basis in.
As an African-American, I find such a propensity to be an impediment to both the political and social well-being of the black community. I see this most evident in how the black community devotes its collective allegiance to the Democratic Party. I say this because during my own years-long history of working with special needs and at-risk population groups, while I have seen some indications of hope I have also been able to put things in a bigger-picture perspective. Many of the same socioeconomic ills which currently plague large segments of the African-American community existed to some degree during the 1964 election season—the year African-Americans began voting en masse for and identifying with the Democratic Party, buttressed mostly by Lyndon Johnson’s support (and Republican opposition) to the Civil Rights Act of that same year (OK Conservatives…now you know why).
This fact is not meant to imply that the Democratic Party as a whole took an enlightened view of race relations when blacks started gravitating toward it during this period. Many Southern segregationists were every bit as conservative—if not more—as Republicans. The difference then was that the majority of Republicans were nowhere near as ideologically-driven or polarized from the moderate mainstream as they are today…the presence of the Civil Rights Act-opposing Republican presidential nominee Barry Goldwater and his far-right supporters in the party notwithstanding. Republicans were more politically-pragmatic than inherently racist in seeking to court Southern white conservatives who typically identified themselves with the party of the common man rather than the GOP. Many blacks also identified themselves with the common man thread of the Democrats to the point where they were willing to overlook the segregationists and racists who formed in many aspects the nucleus of the Democratic Party to embrace its stance toward potential integration and Civil Rights. Intolerant whites within the Democratic Party, seeing the writing on the wall in the form of blacks all-but whole-heartedly aligning themselves with the party, fled it in typical white-flight fashion in favor of the now-almost all white Republican Party. This is why you have blacks caught between a rock in a hard place in regards to race-related issues. Some Democratic black leaders often insert race into political discourse when it’s not an issue (or use race-related issues to gain media notoriety), while not playing up personal responsibility in addressing black socioeconomic ills. And while other white Republican figures can make remarks like Newt Gingrich’s notion to talk “to the African American community should demand pay checks and not be satisfied with food stamps,” and Rick Santorum’s play to white fears about not wanting to “make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money; I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money" without seeing themselves as “race baiting.”  Seeing others as being "bad" is easier than seeing ourselves the same way.

Even if you discount the racial history and the different racial perceptions between the two parties, one still has to wonder whether black allegiance to the Democratic party has meant a being in a better place overall.  Take the area of economics.
For the last 50 years, there has been a persistent disparity between black unemployment rates and that of white Americans. Last year, “the African American unemployment rate averaged 15.8 percent – twice the white average of 7.9 percent” a figure representative of the reality of a 5-decades long average of black unemployment being twice the rate of that of whites (For African Americans, 50 Years of High Unemployment). While the alliance between the Democratic Party in the big Northern cities and manufacturing industries benefited many blacks economically during the majority of this period when America still had a viable manufacturing industry, the gulf between black unemployment and white unemployment has remained steady for a large segment within the black community. Some short-term Democratic-sponsored fixes (such as government-funded summer employment programs and the defunct CETA program) helped to mitigate the employment problem to a minor degree, but failed to address the root causes of this particular problem, which tend to be more sociologically than political. The bottom line is that the unemployment woes of African-Americans have not gotten any better since we started throwing in our lot with the Democratic Party…worse I you take into account that the highest unemployment rate of any demographic belongs to black males (See:  Record High Black Male Unemployment...A Non-Political Issue).
Part of the problem is that local Democratically-controlled administrations were so busy schmoozing up to the major manufacturers (i.e., job providers for many African-Americans) in the areas they dominated that they allowed themselves to be blinded to changing economic realities, and were caught flat-footed when many American industries either folded or moved overseas due to increased global economic competition from abroad.  Over-relying too much on the idea that their economic bases would never change, many Democratic administrations on the local level lacked the foresight and/or vision to sense how local economies were quickly changing, and failed to replace failing business models with rising business models.  This is why China manufactures more "green energy" commodities like solar panels, which could be both an economic and employment boon to urban areas like Detroit or Toledo, than America.  And although it may be easier to believe that the Republican Party simply doesn't give a damn about black employment as an issue, we might want to stop and ask ourselves has the Democratic Party benefited blacks any better?

Black teenage pregnancy rates, although lower than in most periods over the last 50 years, continues to lead those of every other demographic in America. I can recall growing up in the 70s and early 80s a time when teenage pregnancy was something of a social Scarlet Letter…a symbol of personal moral failure and shame. Quite simply, it was considered a grave wrong, with easily comprehended negative consequences which the mother-to-be would have to suffer with for her foreseeable future. Liberal-leaning women’ groups and related organizations’ allegiance to the Democratic Party—in their zeal to empower women—helped to remove the social stigma from teenage motherhood, to the detriment of the black community. I can recall how when a young teen became pregnant, she would simply “move away” to some relative’s distance house to avoid the social stigma attached to premature motherhood at the time. Today, combined with liberal New-Age parenting philosophies which emphasize “getting to know your child” rather than the traditional model of being a parent first, the current liberalizing view of teenage pregnancy is that it is something of a group pathology among poor African-Americans rather than an individual lapse in judgment with no forethought of consequences. Stories like the 2009 revelation of 115 teenage mothers/mothers-to-be (out of 800 girls) located in one Chicago high school would seem to give this view some credence (See: 115 Moms, Moms-to-Be at South Side High).
And as you would expect, the pundits on both the left and the right have things wrong.  Poor black teens are not as much pathological as they are making the best “rational” choices that they are able to considering their sociological circumstances. Many black teenage females live under harsh socioeconomic conditions which—in the same way they fail to see the importance of learning algebra or history—do not allow they to see the practical costs of teenage motherhood. Unlike many of their white (and/or conservative) counterparts, many do not see college, the prospect of a high-paying job/career, social status, marriage/a stable monogamous relationship as being realistic or even attainable goals. As such, the prospect of “ruining their lives” via an early pregnancy is just not a factor in their judgment lapses. They simply view themselves as not “giving anything up” by engaging in risky behavior which could result in premature motherhood…or even worse. This may sound far-fetched until you consider that we saw the same phenomenon occur in the sole high school in the small fishing village of Gloucester, Massachusetts back in 2010. According to the principal of Gloucester High School and news reports, some 17 girls formed a pact to become pregnant on purpose. The link: “The once thriving fishing community has seen jobs drift overseas. Economic depression has left many teens trying to fill the void” ("Teens' Pregnancy Pact Shocks Mass. Town").

Seeing teenage pregnancy as a pathology among a particular demographic rather than an error in judgment tends to feed into the ethos of seeing others are capable of engaging in behavior which we can't see ourselves engaging in.  Just ask Bristol Palin.
On a related issue, as exemplified by the Chicago teachers’ strike in recent weeks, many schools in Democratically-dominated large urban cities are in trouble in every way imaginable. Yes, teachers unions hold some responsibility, but not as much as one might think. Teachers unions have always been acting as teachers unions do, and compared to now, their culpability was not always considered an issue back in earlier decades when our public school were relatively functional and turning out talented students. And those who like to blame unions solely as the problem for failing urban school don’t think about teachers unions operating in more affluent districts, often Republican-leaning districts where test scores and student performance seems to weaken any argument of union impairment of potentially high-performing schools; it’s only in the areas where Democrats are heavily linked to unions where unions are perceived as solely being the problem; thank the Republicans for scaring up this anti-union bandwagon.
However, the Democratic Party’s penchant for creating well-meaning programs which end up having the opposite intended effect are an issue. For example, expanding social security entitlements to include students who are identified as “at-risk” creates a whole host of problems related to “bad schools.” These kids, who are more often than not simply over-diagnosed with “mental impairments” rather than identified as teens in need of home-based discipline, and forced upon public school teachers by virtue of “their right” to the same educational accommodations as other students. These often disruptive special needs children add another burden to teachers who are expected to bear many other responsibilities—with none of the authority—such as social worker, counselor, part-time parent, disciplinarian, tutor, baby-sitter, maid, and advocate just to name a few. Democrats aligned with the public school systems are acting as appeasers to the real problem with African-Americans in black-dominated public schools, lack of parent support for students in these schools…preferring instead to support programs which keep poorly-performing schools barely functioning. Many of these Democrats are afraid that if they adopt the Republican mantra of personal responsibility that they might alienate African-Americans as a voting bloc. This is not to say that charter schools, the “solution” Republicans love to promote, is the answer; most poor and urban areas are over served by the charter schools, which are not fully or empirically proven to be better than public school in educating black youth (“10 Things Charter Schools Won’t Tell You”). If charter school are so much better at educating students, why don’t they appear—or rather why aren’t they allowed—in more affluent areas in the same numbers as they appear in urban/black areas?
Again, it's always easier to see "those people" as the flawed individuals rather than consider that we are just as capable of being "those people" under a similar set of circumstances. The situation has not improved much for the black community under the African-American/Democratic Party alliance.


To be concluded...

Read More

America's Poorest States...In Perspective!

While trolling the internet for my daily dose of relevant news, I came across a very interesting bit of research from the investor analysis site, Wall Street 24/7 (I suppose “trolling” isn’t the right word; I actually read the news, not have it spoon-fed to me via partisan sound-bites for instant regurgitation in a “debate”). According to 24/7, an analysis of information from last year’s Census Bureau’s data revealed the “America’s Poorest States,” based on the average median income of their residents, as well as other data. According to the Bureau’s data, the 10 poorest states are:

1.- Mississippi.
2- Arkansas.
3.- Tennessee.
4.- West Virginia.
5.- Louisiana.
6.- Montana.
7.- South Carolina.
8.- Kentucky.
9.- Alabama.
10.- North Carolina.


Oddly enough, what I found based on the latest projections polls, was the voting patterns among these states.

Click on map to enlarge

1.- Mississippi. Voting for: Romney
2.- Arkansas. Voting for: Romney
3.- Tennessee. Voting for: Romney
4.- West Virginia. Voting for: Romney
5.- Louisiana. Voting for: Romney
6.- Montana. Voting for: Romney
7.- South Carolina. Voting for: Romney
8.- Kentucky. Voting for: Romney
9.- Alabama. Voting for: Romney
10.- North Carolina. Voting for: Toss-up

In order to avoid the whining accusations of my being a shill for the political Left-Wing, I will leave it up to you, the reader to reach your own conclusions…assuming you can think beyond the dissonance between your political leanings and your perceived self-interests…

Read More

Mitt, This Video Doesn't Help You!

Just when you thought Mitt Romney couldn't think of anything else to say to sabotage his chances to win the White House in November, a new videotape of the Republican challenger to President Obama has surfaced revealing Romney making disparaging remarks about potential Obama supporters. The tape, alleged to have been shot secretly at a recent private donor event in Florida, was obtained by Mother Jones magazine and shows the quasi-conservative Romney reinforcing sociopolitical stereotypes of an entire segment of the voting electorate...not how one goes about "uniting America."

Watch and listen to the video below:


There are so many things I could say about this emerging issue, but I'll leave it up to you, the reader to choose a catchy tagline for this video:

Choose the best tagline for this video:
(a) INSTRUCTIONS FOR HOW TO LOSE AN ELECTION: (1) "Open Mouth. (2) Insert foot.
(b) "I knew the rich ate better than everybody else...but BOTH feet...?"
(c) "Where's an 'Etch-A-Sketch' when you need one?"

Read More