It has been socially unacceptable to talk about race relations long before there was a United States. The United States with all of her riches and dignity was founded in the roots of slavery and oppression. However, because of the inherit moral turpitude the topic of race in America has taken a back seat and remained out of the mainstream culture. The written, spoken and otherwise expressed "mantra" of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness has always been countered with the subterfuge of conduct that is contrary to our community standards of justice, honesty, or good morals.
Our American ideology was taken from this dichotomy. We have always been divided into exclusive contradictory groups. It has been mended and woven into our culture.
The social, economical and political gains that black people have made has come at the high cost of human life. As we continue to progress there will undoubtedly be more sacrifices that many of us will proudly make. As Americans continue to attempt to unite the duality that separates the races, we will be faced with challenges that appear different than those of our forefathers but have the same effect on our communities.
For example, discrimination may not be overt with racial overtones but the racism that faces our generation is shrouded in a clandestine illusory promise of equality. The laws of discrimination have been erased with the Jim Crow South. First Reconstruction and then The Civil Right's Movement were era's in our nations recent history that helped to ensure that Constitution applied to all Americans regardless of race, color or ethnicity. We may no longer be faced with the black letter laws, rules or regulations of racial discrimination but the policies of its effects still exist. In order to understand the policies of racism's effects, one must understand the effects of racism. The power to divide and oppress goes far beyond legislative statutes and executive agency rules and regulations.
The effects of racism are evidenced by the disparity among whites and blacks in America in almost every level or caste of American society. While no one may contest this reality the reasons for the disparity is what divides many.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Friday, February 13, 2009
Setback for President Obama May be a Blessing for the Administration
On Thursday February, 12, 2009 President Obama's nominee for Secretary of Commerce, Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire withdrew his name from consideration for the post. President Obama has taken the bold step of actually trying to diversify his administration by appointing persons from both major political parties. Sentator Judd is a republican and has been a critic of the Department of Commerce.
President Obama has nominated a diverse stock of candidates to his cabinet. He has nominated 2 republicans and retained one person from the Bush administration. It seems as though President Obama has tried to stay true to his "mantra" of inclusion and bipartisanism to the dismay of his detractors. In fact, the unofficial motto for many consersatives is that "President Obama Fail."
Anyone who wants to the see the President of the United States fail wants to see the United States government fail. This philosophy is as harmful as treason against our government. It may be even worse than treason since the underlying factor is a wish that our government fail from within. Furthermore, while we should respect free speach, it is not in the best interest of our government to include those who would like to see if fail.
Thus, Senator Gregg's withdrawal from nomination as Secretary of Commerce only 10 days after his initial acceptance should be viewed as positive for the Obama Administration. Senator Gregg cites his reasons for the withdrawal as his difference with the President on the $789 Billion stimulus package and the impending census count. However, Senator Gregg was well aware of President' Obama's position on each of these issues months before he accepted the nomination. In fact, Senator Gregg has sent a strong message that he would not be a part of the Obama administration because he disagrees the President on certain issues. The irony is that Senator Gregg disagrees with many federal laws that did not prevent him from taking the oath of office to uphold the laws of the United States. Senator Gregg once voted to abolish the Commerce Department. This did not prohibit the senator from serving in government. Thus, the issue is that many politicians have served in a capacity where they did not agree 100% on the executive branch's administration. Change only comes about through recognizing differences.
The issue before us is that there is a movement not only to disagree with the Obama administration but for the first time in history (at least since the civil war) there is a movement of those who actually want to see the Administration and thus the nation fail. This un-American ideology is deeply rooted in a conservative philosophy that opposed change but only with respect to their agenda. Their agenda has been exclusion. Rather than work with an Administration in which they may have differences, the conservative movement would rather see and hope for failure as opposed to working with the Administration to bring about effective change.
President Obama has nominated a diverse stock of candidates to his cabinet. He has nominated 2 republicans and retained one person from the Bush administration. It seems as though President Obama has tried to stay true to his "mantra" of inclusion and bipartisanism to the dismay of his detractors. In fact, the unofficial motto for many consersatives is that "President Obama Fail."
Anyone who wants to the see the President of the United States fail wants to see the United States government fail. This philosophy is as harmful as treason against our government. It may be even worse than treason since the underlying factor is a wish that our government fail from within. Furthermore, while we should respect free speach, it is not in the best interest of our government to include those who would like to see if fail.
Thus, Senator Gregg's withdrawal from nomination as Secretary of Commerce only 10 days after his initial acceptance should be viewed as positive for the Obama Administration. Senator Gregg cites his reasons for the withdrawal as his difference with the President on the $789 Billion stimulus package and the impending census count. However, Senator Gregg was well aware of President' Obama's position on each of these issues months before he accepted the nomination. In fact, Senator Gregg has sent a strong message that he would not be a part of the Obama administration because he disagrees the President on certain issues. The irony is that Senator Gregg disagrees with many federal laws that did not prevent him from taking the oath of office to uphold the laws of the United States. Senator Gregg once voted to abolish the Commerce Department. This did not prohibit the senator from serving in government. Thus, the issue is that many politicians have served in a capacity where they did not agree 100% on the executive branch's administration. Change only comes about through recognizing differences.
The issue before us is that there is a movement not only to disagree with the Obama administration but for the first time in history (at least since the civil war) there is a movement of those who actually want to see the Administration and thus the nation fail. This un-American ideology is deeply rooted in a conservative philosophy that opposed change but only with respect to their agenda. Their agenda has been exclusion. Rather than work with an Administration in which they may have differences, the conservative movement would rather see and hope for failure as opposed to working with the Administration to bring about effective change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
