The Worship of Sports in America

Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

How The Middle-Class Got Screwed (Video)

A most simplistic explanation of how the economic problems of the middle-class has become an actual threat to their well-being.

Why I'm Not A Democrat...Or A Republican!

There is a whole lot not to like about either of the 2 major political parties.

Whatever Happened To Saturday Morning Cartoons?

Whatever happened to the Saturday morning cartoons we grew up with? A brief look into how they have become a thing of the past.

ADHD, ODD, And Other Assorted Bull****!

A look into the questionable way we as a nation over-diagnose behavioral "afflictions."

Monday, May 28, 2012

How A Little Imagination Goes A Long Way (Or, “When I Was Your Age…”)

So I’m in a counseling session with one of my young clients, and I’m listening to her talk about her interests. And true to form with today’s crop of teenagers, the word “boring”—the personal bane of my existence—inevitably worked its way into our discourse. And no, you didn’t misread…I fatalistically anticipated that my client would assert how easily bored she becomes when faced with the prospect of doing something either constructive or—heaven forbid—as an alternative to inactivity.
Having worked with teens in one form or fashion for the last 15 years, I have observed that for whatever reason, today’s parents have failed miserably when it comes to instilling in the current generation of youth a sense of Imagination. Some may argue that today’s youth have quite a bit of imagination. If so, I challenge anyone to take away any form of technology that become commonplace today America youth and see how imaginatively impotent the average child in becomes.
Just as in my counseling session, when my young client complained how “boring reading” a newspaper and “journaling” were as a means to spur thinking and to focus thoughts (respectively), many of today’s youth have an aversion to devoting time to self-improvement, exploring the realms and recesses of their very thoughts, or just engaging their imagination in simply playing; never mind more complex exercises in cognitive engagement such as abstract thinking.
Simply put, many parents—and adults in general—have become lazy custodians, unwilling to say “no” to the materialistic indulgences and desires of today’s youths. And many are too busy to engage in the responsibility of direct parenting (or guardianship if they are left in our charge). We are too quick to give kids some shiny heavily-coveted objects of desire just to shut up their incessant whining and complaining that “I am bored.”


And to be honest, I’ve never quite understood the word “boring.” And while I understand the psychological mechanics of the concept, I just can’t wrap my mind around the idea that in a country where, from birth we’ve been indoctrinated to consume-to-satisfy, today’s young people simply cannot “find” something to keep themselves entertained. From my personal perspective, it’s “bored” people who are “boring.” In fact, I would go so far as to declare that boredom is the result of an untrained, unsophisticated, and unintelligent mind that lacks the imagination to keep itself occupied (or entertained). And like many things that are wrong with today’s youth, we have overly-emotional liberals and conservative we-know-what’s-best parents to thank for uninspiring today’s young people with their half-assed child-rearing.
When I was young (there…I said it), many families didn’t have the resources to buy things in order to keep us otherwise mind-occupied. For that, we were reared to develop and rely on our imaginations. One of the institutions where we learned to use our imaginations was—believe it or not—in the public schools of yesteryear.
Schools didn’t teach for standardized testing; creative and talented teachers had the skills and the ability to instill in us the creative—as opposed to standardized—thinking (even if we as children failed to appreciate their talents at the time). They tended to be older, wiser, seasoned, and not young and inexperienced enough to be our older sisters (or brothers). In lieu of some formal lessons, they could regale us with tales from their youth, and inspire us to work around problems which presented themselves. They inspired us to cut, paste, draw, write and write repeatedly…and we were graded on penmanship (which inspired some of us to be the most creative in adopting the most unique and/or the neatest handwriting). They had the experience to frame lessons in such a way as to compel us to ask questions to supplement what they were already teaching us. They made us want to melt crayons and iron the shape of maple leaves onto paper in order to understand their structure. They made us want to cut paper in the shapes of snowflakes. And like the cavemen of earlier times (which we learned about), the tools we used to help us learn were simple; we had to use scissors, glue, rulers, abacuses and (gasp) books if wanted to know about the world around us. They were given the freedom to teach, and not handcuffed by policy to ensure our “rights” were observed; most seasoned teachers had an instinctual awareness of both theirs and our rights as students. We were not allowed to use calculators. We were taught how they counted and added in ancient times…whether we thought doing such was relevant or not.
Today’s teachers are every bit as quick to take unimaginative shortcuts to learning as the students they rob of imagination. They lack the age-life experience of those who taught my generation. As such, they lack the experience gained through a life of relative simplicity and technological deprivation which imparted into us the appreciation of—and the encouragement to develop—wit as the source of our abilities. This is to say that the lack of technological sophistication which both our generation and the generation represented by the older teachers who taught us put on something of a parity insomuch as our will and confidence to use our heads to meet challenges; a if-s/he-can-do-it, so-can-I attitude. Schools taught those of us within the “X” Generation (as well as the early part of Generation “Y”) not to rely on scripted and imagination-curtailing only-this-way type of thinking in order to find solutions to problems, but to use the lack of technology to develop and arrive at our own solutions. Nowadays, unless they are unusually interested in learning and expanding their mental faculties, youth are more likely to seek any and every shortcut toward the goal of learning. They right-click, cut, and paste in order to “complete” assignments in school. They walk up next to the nearest computer terminal and type in a term, eschewing the legwork and effort of actual research, and simply copy the entry…almost verbatim onto paper. In worse cases—those requiring absolutely nothing in the way of imagination, they appropriate papers from each other. They are encouraged to use calculators. They are too quick to come up with excuses for why learning isn't important…and teachers, often too young and too inexperienced in life, do not have the insight to tell they why doing so is important.
But the lack of imagination that kids today have starts in the home, and translates into many other aspects of their lives. As a child, my own imagination was the best remedy for boredom, inactivity, and —at least in limited ways—a means to address the lack of economic resources which painted my reality. Whereas today’s crop of youth are quick to complain about “nothing to do”—despite their X-boxes, computer tablets, and access to unlimited learning—I had no issue with passing my time walking to the local public library, just reading and learning about the world the old-fashioned way…actually seeking out knowledge instead of sitting on my butt at home on a computer, searching for irrelevant pop culture references. Whereas kids today are quick to become “bored” with all of their electronic gadgetry, I made my own toys; the “unusable” cardboard roll from paper towels, combined cut cardboard strips made a very realistic looking “X-Wing” Fighter a-la “Star Wars” to use with my action figures. And whereas today’s kids are always looking for someone to give them money (or things), out of a misplaced sense of entitlement rather than duty, I would team up with siblings, other relatives, or friends to go out to look for aluminum cans for recycling money, searching the city for abandoned cans and bottles to recover the deposits, or to secure a ride out to farming areas to work the farms for a little summer money. Others I knew had similar hustles, including paper routes, cutting lawns, raking leaves, and other colorful ways of making an honest buck. Having work with children for the last 15 years, I often find myself standing in silent disbelief at the lack of imagination, and by extension, the lack of creative thinking among today’s youth.
As a child, I routinely found myself in the company with peers who were just as imaginative as I. As kids, we would (for example) not just read fiction but use a combination of staplers, paper, creative folding, and actual penmanship to actually make our own “books” to share among each other. We could (and did) scavenge for bicycle parts from all over the city to build our own bikes; as you can imagine, we addressed “boredom,” not complained about it. And we would work together to secure ways to secure money…work together to find (or make) work.
The lack of something as small as imagination among today’s youth has resulted in a generation of lazy, uninspired, and cognitively unsophisticated future Americans. And the more we force them to focus on things, the less they will be capable of developing themselves and contribute to developing our country.

Thursday, May 24, 2012

Election Day Is The New "Groundhog Day!"

Ever since I was in high school I always wondered why every 4 years, presidential candidates would spend billions—and recently hundreds of millions—of dollars in tax-free contributions and donations to obtain a job that only pays $400,000 a year. As an adult driven to observe, analyze, and report, it finally dawned on me that it’s about power…at least for most individuals who accept seek the position.
Albeit a cynical conclusion, as Americans, we delude ourselves with the belief that the majority of our elected officials have our best interests at heart; we spend hours in barbershops, in bars, online, and in each other’s faces putting down the incumbents and boosting up challengers for reasons which adhere more to belief and baseless faith more than a clear analysis of facts and application of reason (see: “Our Politicized Thinking Explained”).
And although at times both Republicans and Democrats are right about some issues, both political parties are overly-beholden to Big Money and corporate/special interests, which often results in scandal (see: “Congressional Ethics & Why We Deserve Corrupt Officials”)—and we as citizens often forget that the ideological distinctions between these two political entities become irrelevant when we ignore that particular fact.
In addition, we allow all of the rhetoric about “socialism” and “class warfare” to obfuscate the true class warfare—the political class and their monied benefactors vs. the rest of us (see: "The Sin of Congressional Perks")! To that end, I found a great graphic message which reflects the greater truth of the upcoming election.



Saturday, May 5, 2012

Contraception As A Political Issue...Does This Make Too Much Sense? (Part 2)

With the economy still in "slow-recovery" mode (but relatively still in the crapper), an ongoing War on Terror, huge economic disparities, Big Money corrupting the political process, and a laundry list of other socioeconomic issues, it's still surprising that some politicians are more interested in individual liberties in the form of suppressing reproductive choice.
Admittedly, reproductive choices do in fact have an economic bearing on society as a whole. There are thousands of children throughout America who are borne to unfit parents, many of whom have inadequate economic resources to properly raise children, which furthers already existing socioeconomic disparities. However, many of those who would rightly seek to nip creating socioeconomic inequalities in the bud have taken their crusade to the level of absurdity. The good folks over at Funny-Or-Die.com have put together a rather hilarious video which illustrates the political effects of such policies. Beyond The Political Spectrum invites you to watch the video.

WARNING! DO NOT WATCH IF YOU DON'T HAVE A SENSE OF POLITICAL HUMOR (there...you've been warned! Don't blame me if you become "offended")!

Friday, April 20, 2012

Contraception As A Political Issue...Does This Make Too Much Sense?

Don't get me wrong; I'm definitely for human beings, especially adults having a sense of self-control and discipline when it comes to sexual behavior. However, the reality is that we live in a sexually-obsessed society which helps influence weaker wills with less-than-moral practices in regards to human sexuality. To be blunt, we often allow our hormones, emotions, and cultural mores--distorted though they are--to dictate our sexual behavior.
For some, particularly those from the lower socioeconomic strata of our society, the results can be a [potentially] financial burden for families, as well as society as a whole.
The recent political dust-up regarding the War on Women (reproductive rights) and the issue of contraception is a lot simpler to address and resolve; all it takes is the application of a little reason. Unfortunately, reason is rarely found in either politics or human sexuality. Still, I found a rather insightful Facebook graphic which conveys the simplicity of addressing the issue of contraception, abortion, etc. The only thing needed is for all sides--Republican, Democrats, Evangelicals, women, and men--to put the simplicity of reason into practice. Observe:

Monday, April 16, 2012

Issues In The News (For Dummies!)

As a first for Beyond The Political Spectrum, I recently got the inspiration to start posting exceptionally insightful political satire (via political cartoons) about various social and political issues currently in the news.
For my first such posting, I thought I post some very sharp political commentary, courtesy of The Houston Chronicles' Nick Anderson (disclaimer: don't shoot the messenger!)



Sunday, April 15, 2012

Here We Go Again - Ozzie Guillen, Free Speech, & American Foreign Policy

So I’m watching HBO’s “Real Time” with comedian and social critic Bill Maher, and during his final “New Rules” monologue he reminded me about how important it is that we not limit freedom of expressions or opinions in this country.
I’m a firm adherent to the doctrine of free speech, whether it promotes hate or inspires love. Simply put, putting restrictions on someone else’s right to voice their opinion potentially limits my own. Individuals—unless it is obviously and immediately disruptive to society—should be able to speak without censor or sanction, except that of counter opinions.
What makes attempts to put a lid on free speech dangerous and counter-productive is that it limits the information that we use to engage in a reasonable discourse on potential and actual government and/or social policies. Especially policies which seek to influence thinking and opinion of the general public…regardless how devoid of reason such policies are.
These converging issues, free speech and irrational government policy, became the focus of news earlier this week when Florida Marlin’s baseball team coach Ozzie Guillen responded to a question by a Time Magazine writer about men he admired. The often outspoken veteran sports figure reportedly responded,

"I love Fidel Castro" and "I respect Fidel Castro. You know why? A lot of people have wanted to kill Fidel Castro for the last 60 years, but that [expletive] is still here."

As is the case whenever a public figure airs a personally-held opinion, he was condemned and forced to apologize.
As a blogger, voracious reader, and information-news junkie, I must admit that I have heard far more controversial and far worse commentary by other public figures, some being our elected officials. However, what I find disturbing are the calls for Guillen’s firing…and for what? For daring to express a personally-held admiration for someone whom nine American presidential administrations have blindly expressed contempt for based on an outdated international policy?
In the early 1970s, the Nixon Administration established formal diplomatic relations with then “Red China”s as a counter to Soviet adversarial relations, and forsaking the previous recognition of the “real” Chinese government on the island of Taiwan (where Western-friendly Chinese Nationalists fled after being defeated by pro-Moscow Mao Zedong’s Communists in 1949). During this time, 50 million Chinese were being starved to death as a result of Mao’s state-sanctioned policies. Also during this time, thousands of Chinese were still being arrested and summarily executed for ambiguous “crimes against the state,” and free speech was still harshly suppressed. Chinese military forces had even fought against American forces during the Korean War. And as late as the 1989, the year of the massacre of young dissidents in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, the United States continued its diplomatic ties to (yes…”communist”) China.
But we still continued and continue to condemn Cuba based on our ideological demonization of Castro’s brand of “communism” (and the fact that the American government couldn’t stand that Castro nationalized foreign-owned interests in order to pay for socioeconomic reforms he instituted in order to establish his communist policies only 90 miles off our shores). Ok, so Cuban exiles in Miami are still a little peeved that Castro is still alive and kicking. You’re not there, and he’s not in power—in theory anyway. Is that a reason to rake a man over the coals because he is able see through the propaganda machine of our often irrational policy toward Cuba to still admire the man who’s made such a mark on the country for the last 50 years?
However, practical as it was that Guillen apologized, it says a lot for the erosion of free speech in this country when people must yield to the opinion of a small but vocal minority group...especially when our foreign policy toward Cuba makes no rational sense. Censoring Guillen’s and others’ right to be heard and to put forth opposing points of thinking with regard to public policy limits discourse. America has been in bedfellows with far worse dictators, had relations with far worse regimes…some guilty of war crimes! Yet, we continue to ostracize the government of Cuba based on an outdated ideological--not rational--policy.
For a brilliant summary of this issue, I invite you to watch Friday’s broadcast of Maher’s “New Rules” segment from “Real Time.”




It seems that when it comes to American foreign policy, there are "Communists" and there are Communists. And when it comes to personal opinions and free speech, there are opinions which are "honest" and those which are "correct."

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Let's Talk About Race...Again! (...or, "Get Ready To Be Pi**ed Off...Again!")

Allow me to lay the foundation. I’m an adherent to the politics (and thinking) of pragmatism. This is to say that I cannot abide by dogmatic- or emotional-based thinking. I shun it. It’s as much as abhorrence to me as stupidity and emotionally-based thinking. As such, I believe that public—and in most cases, individual—policy should be made based on what’s in the general interests of those involved, and not based on some narrow ideology…whether liberal, conservative, libertarian, religious, socialist, or whatever (with the acknowledgement that on occasion, a policy may originate from and/or be a platform of one of these traditions of thinking). I extend the following examples:

-The taking of a human life is wrong, whether its an individual decision, such as in the case of abortion, or by the state-sanctioned taking of a life in the case of the death penalty (neither of which addresses the personal or societal issues they stem from).

-Gun ownership should not be restricted among qualified and reasonable individuals (i.e., without criminal/psychological records or unsavory intentions). Personally I wouldn't feel safe living in a house without a gun to defend myself. Simply put, the police cannot be everywhere, nor can they always prevent crime.

-Government cannot solve every problem. And neither can the Free Market.

-There is no Constitutional provision which says that America must be a Capitalist/Free Market society...that's based solely on tradition.

-O.J. did it (Mark Fuhrman's racism not withstanding).

-Religion has no place in public policy (although there may some influence based on the level of tradition it has on a particular policy).

-Our government spends too much. So too do individuals; neither seems to have a sense of what it means to work within a budget, or save for a rainy day.

-People need affordable health care, not some ideological preservation of “American values." And simply put, 230 plus years of medical services being another commodity of the market economy, and an exploding amount of health care spending as a percentage as a part of our Gross Domestic Product proves that the Free Market is not wholly up to the task.

-Based on reason and a passing knowledge of history, there is no way that anyone—outside of an emotional argument—could have concluded that the Founding Fathers and Framers of the Constitution, in their wildest dreams, have imagined or even anticipated the reality that two adults of the same sex would want to ever get married, thus negating a “Constitutional Right” for them to do so (this is not to say that gay people don’t merit the same legal rights and/or protections against discrimination and persecution that all other Americans have, because they do).

I felt it necessary to establish the thinking behind this post. It is not about beliefs, emotions, or ideology, neither yours or mine. Policy should be based on what people need, not some ideological dogma...not reason, not passions. Setting the parameters is a way of heading off the accusations that I know are bound to come when one reads this; now you know that accusations of "Conservative," Liberal," "Fascist," "racist," or whatever are not going to fly. And now my rant.

I am an African-American.

And race is still an issue in America.

Given scope of issues in the news recently, once again I feel compelled to bring a little objective sanity into an otherwise contentious discourse (or lack thereof).

African-Americans

Although African-Americans have a right to be angry over last month’s shooting death of 16-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida, every American should not only be just as angry but in the mood to engage in deep introspection. This includes African-Americans.
For African-Americans, such outrage should be a daily occurrence. Throughout many urban areas, we see or read about killings of children every bit as tragic Trayvon’s, almost on a daily basis. Maybe if Americans were to exhibit as much outrage over these murders, maybe we could make an impact. But sadly, most Americans—especially African-Americans—have adopted a level of fatalism with regard to life in the ‘hood. Many of us have come to see the senseless death of children as part of our daily existence.
Yes, there are instances of organized protests and candlelight vigils in these areas whenever there is a particularly brutal or senseless murder of an innocent occurs, but in general all such murders are senseless. If traditionally recognized “black leaders” such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson were as motivated to travel around the country and address the deaths of young black children who are victimized by similar violence almost daily as they are at appearing at higher-profile murders, they would soon have to be hospitalized for exhaustion. And the lack of even acknowledgment from black conservatives speaks for itself; it gives the appearance that it’s not even a concern for them.
As a matter of priorities, black leaders—both locally- and nationally-recognized leaders—should be as quick to organize and shame those criminal elements in black communities who would engage in the same level of unreasonable behavior as George Zimmerman.
Yes, there is an acknowledgement that revealing the identities of perpetrators of such violence on black children may result in violent reprisals against would-be responsible individuals, the “don’t snitch” mentality which feeds this insanity needs to be eradicated See: "Stop (Not) Snitching! Part 1" and "Stop (Not) Snitching! Part 2").
Black parents need to be more responsible and not validate such counter-productive thinking. They need to be even more of an influence in the lives of their children than their children’ friends.
Black mothers and relatives need to treat their hearts like the enemy. If black-on-black murder is to stop, blood relationships can no longer be allowed to influence blood allegiances. If these individuals know that their relatives are responsible for the murders of young black children, they should be not only obligated but pressured to turn them into the authorities. Such behavior needs to be shamed like the community offense and threat that it is.
Black churches, and in particular black clergy need to do more than, in the words of the late great James Brown, “talking loud and saying nothing.”
More professional police officers are needed in communities where getting to know the people who reside there is more of a tactic than profiling those who live there. Working relationships with organized groups are needed.
If you want a more radical solution, I would propose that responsible black people arm themselves and start patrolling the streets in groups, and enforcing order. The Black Panthers did it in the 1960s and early 70s. Perhaps the “New Black Panthers” would be more constructive in redirecting their anger into the black community and threaten those who would disrupt the lives of law-abiding black citizens instead of putting a monetary bounty on the head of Trayvon Martin’s killer, or shouting to the rooftops how they “hate Whitey!” (See: "New Black Panther Leader Arrested as Group Sets Bounty in Florida Shooting"). Maybe if African-Americans were just as willing to patrol their communities with the same fervor of George Zimmerman, then maybe Trayvon Martin’s murder could be placed within the context of an abhorrent single instance instead of another senseless taking of a young black life. Maybe black child murders need to be the ones living in fear for a change...

White-Americans

No, soul-searching is not just for blacks. White American thinking with regard to race is something of mystery, not just for myself, but for most blacks.
But before I make my points, allow me to say that I like President Obama. I admire his intelligence, his cool-under-pressure-demeanor, and his desire to want the best for all Americans. Is he perfect? Of course not…and no, I don’t agree with every policy he proposes or enacts. Among the policies I have issues with was his decision to involve America militarily in what was essentially an internal matter of Libya. I don’t agree that enhanced interrogation techniques employed against suspected and confirmed terrorists should be banned or discouraged (when at war, fear is every bit an option as any other when it comes to matters of security…especially against foes who are willing to die for their cause anyway). And I don’t agree that America should have closed down prison facilities at Guantanamo Bay (enemies willing to die to inflict harm on Americans need something to fear). But I still like him. He means well.
However, a great many whites do not—or are not able to—view their opposition to (seemingly) every policy proposed or enacted by Obama, our nation’s first African-American president as being problematic, especially in regards to race relations. Indeed, some of these individuals have successfully managed to convince themselves that their opposition to policies such as health care reform is nothing more than ideological differences. And while any difference of agreement is not meant to imply that the President should be given a “pass” with regard to his policies being scrutinized, make no mistake about it; much of this opposition is just a proxy for racial-based animosity.
Without question, President Obama is the most disrespected American president since Abraham Lincoln…an ironic observation considering that many of those who opposed Lincoln’s policies did so based on their racial animus also. One would be hard-pressed to find a president in recent memory that has had his credibility assailed in the most non-traditionally disrespectful of manners—remember South Carolina’s conservative Republican Congressman Joe Wilson’s outburst, “You Lie!” from the president’s 2009 address in front of Congress (yes, there have been occasional “boos” or jeers from other Congressmen toward other presidential addresses, but nothing in the records like Wilson’s)? Then there was that famous picture of Republican Arizona’s Governor Jan Brewer pointing her finger in the face of the president of the United States. Simply put, if these individuals had tried that with most other African-Americans of lesser stations, their actions would have rated an immediate (and probably illegal) response. And then there are the thousands of unflattering caricatures of the president meant to (ostensibly) mock his policies, but in many cases, amount to attacks on Obama’s ethnic heritage, without appearing as such.





















Aside from the caricatures, President Obama has had nearly every aspect of his life either challenged or impugned in ways that white presidents have rarely experienced. Despite long-ago revealed evidence proving otherwise, many people still continue to think that the president’s birth certificate is a forgery. And of course, those willing to believe such paranoid insanity don’t offer an alternative birth certificate showing his “true” birthplace (hint birthers: instead of trying to prove the president’s birth certificate is a “forgery,” try providing a birth certificate from Kenya…it would go a long ways to proving your assertions. But I won’t hold my breath waiting for you to produce one). Many Americans also still continue to believe that Obama is a Muslim partially because non-Anglo name, despite the fact that he had to distance himself shortly after taking office from the church of Chicago Pastor Jeremiah Wright…a Christian pastor!
President Obama is also the most threatened American president in memory. He's the former presidential candidate who's required the earliest Secret Service protection, and also the most. Please don't tell me this all about "ideological differences."
And sadly, the issues surround the president’s legislative Pièce de résistance, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act—health care reform—has given white xenophobes a great policy issue to mask their racial animus toward Obama. We see this most often in how they accuse him of being a “socialist,” which for many is a proxy term for the “N-Word.” More so, they mask their fears and racial apprehensions behind a paranoid fear that health care reform someone is a “threat to individual liberties.” Really? In reality, when have whites in America ever had their individual liberties “threatened” on a wholesale level? On the other hand, history showcases many instances where government entities have actually—not implied—to not only threaten the lives and livelihoods of African-Americans, but done so.
Shall I cite how Southern states conspired to keep blacks from enacting their right to vote, to be represented in the South up until the early 1970s? How about the instances in American history where entire black towns were wiped off the map due to racist mobs because local government’s complicity in refusing to intervene (or because of government intervention)? The Greenwood district of Tulsa during the May 1921 race riots? The Rosewood Massacre of 1923? How about the various gun control laws that were enacted when blacks opted to (legally) pick up weapons and defend themselves against lynchings in the South and official abuse by authorities elsewhere back in the 1960s? The upshot is that whites possess a phantom fear of having their liberties threatened (that health care reform is supposed to do) in a way that has never happened to them on the same scale in which blacks have experienced them. So where does such fear and paranoia stem from? From the fact that an African-American occupies the Oval Office, and their intolerance of that fact. The health care debate is just a convenient vehicle for many whites to voice this point without having to be vocal about it in the way they would like.
Think about it this way: Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are seen as “race baiters” by many whites, who invariably (and ironically) do not see the same tactic being employed by white politicians who pander to white suburban fears. In much the same way, Republican presidential candidates Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum recently made subtle racial innuendoes pandering to these white fears:

"I don't want 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" (Rick Santorum at a campaign stop in Sioux City, Iowa, January 1, 2012).

“I will go to the NAACP convention, and explain to the African-American community why they should demand paychecks instead of food stamps” (Newt Gingrich at a campaign stop in New Hampshire, January 5, 2012).


These are the same white suburban paranoid fears which caused George Zimmerman to carry a weapon whereas many black neighborhood watch volunteers—who operate in far worse neighborhoods than Zimmerman’s—leading to the death of Trayvon Martin.
These are the reasons that radio and television demagogues like Rush and Glen can surreptitiously slide in a subtly but racially-insensitive remark and not be called on it; it takes something more blatant, such as calling a law school student “a slut” before people react.
Yes, both black and white America has some serious soul-searching to to. Sadly, it was needed before Trayvon Martin was killed, and it will no doubt be needed long after.