Richard Prince's Journal-isms™

Blacks, Latinos Break With Obama on Syria

Send by email
Wednesday, September 4, 2013

Survey Respondents Join Whites in Opposing Military Action

Stories on Low-Income Groups Said to Miss the Big Picture

Bezos Meets Washington Post Staff; Diversity Not a Topic

Opinion Editor Urges Writers to Protest Op-Ed Cutback

NPR's "LatinoUSA" Expands to an Hour

N.Y. Times Offends in Linking "Twerking" With Race, Class


Pinkston, Peterson Latest to Connect With Al Jazeera


Liberia Answers Jailed Journalist's N.Y. Times Op-Ed


Short Takes

Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., right, shown with Andrea Mitchell of MSNBC, opposes

Survey Respondents Join Whites in Opposing Military Action

African Americans, President Obama's most loyal voting bloc, nevertheless are breaking with the president over his request for military action against Syria, according to two new surveys. Hispanics likewise join the majority in their opposition to a military response to reports that the Syrian government used chemical weapons.

"A sharply divided Senate committee voted Wednesday to give President Obama limited authority to use force against Syria, the first step in what remains a treacherous path for Mr. Obama to win Congressional approval for a military attack,," Mark Landler, Jonathan Weisman and Michael R. Gordon reported Wednesday for the New York Times.

The 10-to-7 vote showed bipartisan support for a strike, but bipartisan opposition as well.

A national survey conducted for the Washington Post and ABC News found 40 percent of African Americans supporting airstrikes against Syria and 56 percent opposed. For Hispanics, the figure was 31 percent supporting but 63 percent opposed. For whites, it was 38 percent supporting, 58 percent opposed. The survey was conducted by telephone Aug. 28 to Sept. 1 among a random national sample of 1,012 adults.

A survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Aug. 29-Sept. 1 among 1,000 adults, yielded similar results, according to a racial breakdown provided to Journal-isms. The sampling of Asian Americans and Native Americans is usually too small to be included.

Photo purports to show Syrian victims of a chemical attack. (Credit: Zennie Abraha

Asked, "Would you favor or oppose the U.S. conducting military airstrikes against Syria in response to reports that the Syrian government used chemical weapons?" only 22 percent of black non-Hispanics said they were in favor, 53 percent said they were opposed and 25 percent said they did not know.

Among non-Hispanic whites, 29 percent were in favor, 47 percent said they were opposed and 24 percent said they did not know. Pew questioned 2,907 whites and 521 blacks.

In the Washington Post Tuesday, Ed O'Keefe listed Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., as one of "12 key voices in Congress for the Syria debate." A leading anti-war liberal, she convinced more than 60 colleagues to sign a letter to Obama asking him to seek formal authorization for military action, O'Keefe wrote. "Given her vocal stance, she could be especially influential over colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus, a bloc of more than 40 votes that the White House will need to ensure passage of a resolution in the closely-divided House."

Lee has said, "We must learn the lessons of the past. Lessons from Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and others. We must recognize that what happens in Syria does not stay in Syria; the implications for the region are dire."

Some columnists of color have agreed. In Tuesday's print edition of USA Today, DeWayne Wickham wrote, "Yes, the 426 children killed by the use of a weapon of mass destruction — which most of the world agrees is an unacceptable means of meting out death — is a chilling reminder of the indiscriminate brutality of war. But in a conflict in which both sides are accused of committing gruesome war crimes, President Obama should not let himself be bamboozled into plunging this nation down another Middle East rabbit hole."

On the other side, syndicated columnist Ruben Navarrette Jr. of the Washington Post Writers Group wrote, "We don't have to be the world's policeman, but — like it or not — we are the world’s moral referee. We haven't always done that when we should have, as when the United States turned a blind eye to what was happening in Germany in the 1930s. That's no excuse for refusing to do it now. We defend the powerless and voiceless. This is what America does. It is tough and often thankless work. But it is also indispensable work if we aspire to live in a civilized world. . . ."

Bridget Johnson, Washington editor of PJ Media, a conservative libertarian news and opinion site, made a racial argument on NPR's "Tell Me More."

"You know, this is nauseating that we're having this argument that somehow says a Syrian life is worth less than another life. You know, if this was happening in Brussels right now we would be all over it. If it was European intervention, we would not hesitate one minute. If it was Rwanda, that's another story. . . ."

The Pew survey also asked, "Do you think Barack Obama has explained clearly why the U.S. should launch military airstrikes against Syrian military targets or has he not explained the reasons clearly enough?"

Among non-Hispanic whites, 30 percent said yes and 49 percent said not clearly enough; among non-Hispanic blacks, 51 percent said yes and 35 percent said not clearly enough. The remainder said they did not know.

Asked "Do you think U.S. airstrikes in Syria are likely to lead to a long term U.S. military commitment there?," 62 percent of non-Hispanic whites and 60 percent of non-Hispanic blacks said yes; 26 percent of non-Hispanic whites and 25 percent of non-Hispanic blacks said no.

Asked "Do you think U.S. airstrikes in Syria are likely to create a backlash against the U.S. and its allies in the region?," 76 percent of non-Hispanic whites and 69 percent of non- Hispanic blacks said yes; 14 percent of non-Hispanic whites and 19 percent of non-Hispanic blacks said no.

Just 30 percent of non-Hispanic whites and 39 percent of non-Hispanic blacks believed that airstrikes "are likely to be effective in discouraging the use of chemical weapons."

Fifty-seven percent of non-Hispanic whites and 61 percent of non-Hispanic blacks agreed that the United States "should first get a United Nations resolution to use force before taking military action against Syria."

Fifty-six percent of non-Hispanic whites and 51 percent of non-Hispanic blacks said they believed "there is clear evidence that the Syrian government used chemical weapons against civilians."

In a separate question about interest in recent news developments, whites and blacks differed markedly on how close they followed the 50th anniversary celebrations of the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom.

Fourteen percent of non-Hispanic whites said they followed "very closely," but 59 percent of non-Hispanic blacks did. Fifty-six percent of non-Hispanic whites said "not too closely," but only 30 percent of blacks did.

Stories on Low-Income Groups Said to Miss the Big Picture

"Over the past three months, major print outlets throughout the country largely failed to discuss rising structural inequality and poverty in the United States while reporting on policies and programs that affect low-income groups," Media Matters for America reported on Wednesday.

In May, Media Matters wrote, "According to Congressional Budget Office data, from 1979 to 2007 the top one percent of income earners have seen their after-tax share of total income rise by more than 120 percent, while the bottom 20 percent of earners have seen that share decline by almost 30 percent."

Wednesday's report said, "From June 1 to August 31, the major print outlets analyzed for this report published 456 articles that provided substantial discussion of policies and programs that have disproportionate effects on lower income groups. Of the total number of articles, only 88 —roughly 19 percent — mentioned rising inequality or poverty in the United States," Craig Harrington and Albert Kleine reported.

"Of the 12 print outlets analyzed, only two — The Atlanta Journal-Constitution and The Boston Globe — mentioned structural inequality or poverty at a rate greater than the group average of 19 percent. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution mentioned inequality in 24.4 percent of its coverage on policies and programs affecting low-income groups, and The Boston Globe mentioned inequality in 28.6 percent. The Chicago Tribune and The Denver Post mentioned structural inequality the least, accounting for only 6.4 and 4 percent, respectively, of each paper's total coverage on policies and programs that have disproportionate effects on lower income groups. . . ."

Incoming owner Jeffrey P. Bezos talks to the Washington Post staff in the paper'

Bezos Meets Washington Post Staff; Diversity Not a Topic

"The Washington Post's new owner, Jeffrey P. Bezos, long wary of journalists, courted the paper's editors and reporters in a series of meetings Wednesday, saying that he is optimistic about the future of journalism and wants to create a 'daily ritual bundle' that would appeal to a variety of readers," Steven Mufson reported Wednesday for the Post.

None of the accounts of Bezos' meetings, which took place over two days, mentioned that diversity issues were raised. Still, some Post journalists of color said they were pleased.

"I think he's smart without being condescending, a quality I admire," local Post blogger Clinton Yates told Journal-isms by email. "I also feel that he has a very realistic grasp of what the mistakes are that the news industry has made on the whole, not just The Post, which is refreshing beyond just any potential innovations that may come in the future."

Yates was one of several Post staffers who tweeted during the visit. "To me, this tweet said it all," Yates told Journal-isms. His tweet quoted Bezos: "The deathknell of any enterprise is to glorify the past. No matter how good it was."

Kevin Merida, the paper's managing editor and a black journalist, told Journal-isms by email, "The meetings were invigorating. Lots of creative energy and ambition for the future. Jeff sees the value of what we do, and the journalists in our room already believe in themselves. So it's exciting to think about what a great news organization like ours can be in the next phase of our life. As Jeff himself said, put readers first. And stay forever young."

Mufson's story continued, "The Amazon.com founder and chief executive, who has agreed to purchase The Post for $250 million, said he plans to invest in the paper and rejected the idea that news organizations could cut their way to profitability or stability, or attract advertisers without adding readers. . . ."

When news of the sale broke last month, stunning the news industry, Bob Butler, who had become president of the National Association of Black Journalists only a day before, told Journal-isms that he would seek a meeting with Bezos, whose company is based in Seattle. "We do not know whether this will have any negative impact on our employees, especially our members," Butler said then.

On Aug. 6, journalist Farai Chideya, who teaches at New York University, wrote an "open letter" to Bezos quoting a 2010 column by former Post ombudsman Andrew Alexander.

"All told, journalists of color comprise about 24 percent of the newsroom, comfortably above the ASNE [American Society of News Editors] census average of roughly 13 percent in recent years. But here's the problem: Minorities are 43 percent of The Post's circulation area, and a large part of the region is edging toward 'majority minority' status. For The Post, being 'good on diversity' isn’t enough. . . . "

Opinion Editor Urges Writers to Protest Op-Ed Cutback

Harold Jackson

"There's a new wrinkle in the ongoing tensions at Philadelphia's daily papers. The editor of the Philadelphia Inquirer's editorial page has publicly criticized a decision to eliminate that paper's op-ed page as of next week," Elizabeth Fiedler reported Monday for WHYY/NewsWorks.

"In a Labor Day email obtained by WHYY/NewsWorks, The Inquirer's Harold Jackson speaks out against plans to reduce the daily opinion section of The Inquirer to one page, starting next Monday.

"For decades, the paper has had what is known as an 'oped' page (literally OPposite EDitorial) page six days a week. The page usually carries commentaries by members of the community, syndicated commentators and some of the paper's own columnists.

"The Saturday oped page was dropped for cost-cutting reasons in the middle of the last decade.

"Jackson, writing to people whose work has appeared on the Inquirer oped page over the year, urged recipients of the email to protest the decision to the papers' owners. He listed several owners' emails. . . ."

His email said the reduction "not only does a disservice to the greater Philadelphia community, but represents a reduction in the status of one of America's largest cities."

Jackson declined to comment.

As a result of the cutback, Melanie Burney, an editorial writer at the Inquirer since 2008, was transferred to a reporter's job in the New Jersey bureau effective Sept. 9.

NPR's "LatinoUSA" Expands to an Hour

"Latino USA" offers listeners their own Maria Hinojosa paper doll "to print, dre

"On September 6th, 2013, NPR's Latino USA with Maria Hinojosa, the foremost Latino voice in public media and longest running Latino-focused program on radio, will expand to an hour," the Futuro Media Group, the show's producers, announced Wednesday.

"Building on its 20 year tradition, the new Latino USA will be fast-paced, lively and smart with varied points of view and writing designed for the weekend NPR listener. The program will continue to chronicle how Latinos are living in, shaping and changing America.

"An engaging cast of new voices and contributors will join Hinojosa, among them Al Madrigal, standup comedian, actor and correspondent on The Daily Show; Pilar Marrero, political reporter and veteran immigration reporter for La Opiníon; Julia Preston, immigration reporter for the New York Times; Marta Moreno Vega, writer, scholar, cultural activist and 'Wise Latina;' and Jimmy Santiago Baca, poet, novelist and essayist.

"New recurring segments will broaden the scope and story mix of Latino USA. In 'Dimelo,' new advice columnist for Latina magazine Pauline Campos will offer advice on listeners’ 'Latino Problems.' At a time when one out of four kindergarteners [is] Latino, 'Class of 2030' will take a look at how these students will impact the education system. As deportations reach record highs, 'Dearly Deported' will chronicle the personal stories of thousands of Latinos separated from their families because of US immigration laws. The new series 'Somos/We Are' will present an intimate insider's conversation about Latino identity, how Latinos self-identify, what they look like, and how others see them. . . ."

N.Y. Times Offends in Linking "Twerking" With Race, Class

"I'm black but I don't eat watermelon. What other 'black appropriate' food should I substitute? #askteddywayne."

"There was no twerking featured in Roots. Was that movie historically inaccurate? #askteddywayne @TeddyWayne1999."

"how long after i stop twerking can i also stop worrying about my black male friends being murdered by cops? @TeddyWayne1999."

Those were just three of the tweets that surfaced after the Sunday Review section of the New York Times published "Explaining Twerking to Your Parents" by novelist Teddy Wayne.

Wayne made clear the piece's intended audience when he wrote as its third paragraph, "Explain that twerking is a dance move typically associated with lower-income African-American women that involves the rapid gyration of the hips in a fashion that prominently exhibits the elasticity of the gluteal musculature."

Some thought the piece cute. Others simmered. Still others mocked it. They created an #askteddywayne hashtag.

"idk my lineage, but my skin tone suggests race-mixing somewhere in my family tree. can i listen to rap? @TeddyWayne1999 #askteddywayne."

"am i less or more black because i went to prep school? #askteddywayne."

"Please stop @nytimes having Negrologist writers attempting to define black culture. It's offensive. #blacktwitter #askTeddyWayne."

Pinkston, Peterson Latest to Connect With Al Jazeera

Randall Pinkston, Latoya PetersonRandall Pinkston, who left CBS News in May after 33 years, has resurfaced as a freelance correspondent for Al Jazeera America.

Pinkston told his Facebook friends Tuesday, "I had not anticipated returning to work so soon after my departure from CBS. The AJAM gig is free-lance. My new colleagues include several former colleagues. So far, it's fun and I'm thankful I can still have a venue that wants me. Thanks for watching and please tell our friends."

Meanwhile, Latoya Peterson, owner of the award-winning blog Racialicious.com and a a 2013 Knight Fellow at Stanford University, has joined Al Jazeera America as senior digital producer for "The Stream."

Liberia Answers Jailed Journalist's N.Y. Times Op-Ed

"In an op-ed recently published in the New York Times, "Jailed for Journalism," Mr. Rodney Sieh attempts to paint a gloomy picture of the prospect of free speech and the practice of journalism in Liberia," the Liberian government wrote Tuesday in a response to the op-ed.

"On the same day that Mr. Sieh posted the piece, a lower court, the Office of the Independent Information Commissioner, ruled in favor of a private petitioner's right to information under the Freedom of Information Law passed a few years earlier by the government. Freedom of speech is being experienced as a daily reality in Liberia.

"Obviously, Mr. Sieh blames the Liberian government for his imprisonment, and for the unanimous jury award of US$1.5 million which he believes to be excessive. . . . "

Meanwhile, Sieh's newspaper, FrontPageAfrica, reported, "Journalists in their numbers turned out at the Corina Hotel in Monrovia on Tuesday hoping to put an end to a situation that has been dragging for weeks that has seen one of their colleagues the Managing Editor of the FrontPageAfrica newspaper Rodney D. Sieh in jail for a week and another week in the hospital after falling sick in his cell, but later found that Dr. Chris Toe was determined to prolong the crisis.

"The former Agriculture Minister Dr. Chris Toe Tuesday acknowledged  [the General Auditing Commission] report that accused him of his alleged failure to account for millions of United States dollars offered by the government to fight army worms that invaded two regions but claimed that the report was unprofessional. . . ."

Short Takes

Follow Richard Prince on Twitter

Facebook users: "Like" "Richard Prince's Journal-isms" on Facebook.

Richard Prince's Journal-isms originates from Washington and is published Monday, Wednesday and Friday. It began in print before most of us knew what the Internet was, and it would like to be referred to as a "column." For newcomers: The words in blue (on most computers) are links leading to more information. The Web site BugMeNot.com provides passwords and user names to some registration-only news sites, but use may be illegal in some states. Any views expressed in the column are those of the person or organization quoted and not those of any other entity.

Send tips, comments and concerns to Richard Prince.

To be notified of new columns, contact journal-isms-subscribe@yahoogroups.com and tell us who you are.

Special thanks to The McCormick Foundation for its generous support of the Journal-isms column.

 

Comments

Cross-postings from The Root

QuietThoughtsII

I don't know if it's "disapproval" as much as not being able to see A.) How it's in America's best interest, B.) What the goal is, and C.) How do we NOT end up involved deeper.

To me, I am more concerned with what it will do to US and Russia relations. Like it or not there are times you stand by your ally even when they are wrong and that is what Russia is doing. Imagine for a moment that Israel does something dumb and Russia said they were going to lob bombs at them. We'd be staring at WW III because the US would not back away, I don't see Russia backing away easily either.

My take is the people in the region MUST stand up and deal with this situation or,,, deal with the consequences. If we were working together with them I might be inclined to say go for it but as it is, the rest of the entire planet doesn't care enough to act and it seems foolish for us to be going it alone again.

hal bleavy

This is a great poll; it shows that Blacks don’t blindly follow Obama on Syria because he’s Black.

Itsjustme

If you aren't following Obama (and trust me Im no Obama lover) then you are blind. True, the Petro dollar play a role in this matter, but do you think the Assad family's rule since 1971 is just big coincidence???? He's a dictator and babies are being killed Syria, and not by the "so-called" rebels.

ricthought1

The so - called rebels? Well, who are these rebels? Thay are some of the same Gun for hire terrorists who(with CIA money) fought and, overthrew the Libyan government. These zionist rats have not only been losing this civil war but, many have been captured with (get this) Israeli weapons in their possession. The U. S. muzzle media have described these FSA gangsters as muslim freedom fighters. Well, in that case itsjustme, why aren"t these freedom fighters in Israel fighting the real enemy: The Israeli Zionist?

E Mey

Itsjustme:

Petro dollars? Syria doesn't produce oil, so please explain that reference.

Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedow likes this.

Borrokatu

NOW is the time for folks to show some guts!! Time to show some resolve for the man YOU voted for! Where is that 92% NOW?

Laymen2

Obama is pathetic leadership on display and making Putin look better and better everyday. His administration has not even closed the door that the rebels may have deployed those chemical weapons as Russia claims. His trying to weasel out of the "Red Line" statement is troubling if not pathological. He threw, Americans, congress, and the international community under the bus in his attempt to escape responsibility for his own declare statement. The whole world witness this cowardly, narcissistic, and non-statesmen behavior.

Libya, a mess, Egypt a mess, and if he topples Assad, another mess; all are worse off since American involvement under the Obama Administration. The only success Obma has achieve is to bring more server persecution on Christians by propping up Islamic radicals (e.g. Muslim Brotherhood, Syrian Rebels, etc)

FYI:

http://inagist.com/all/375423552235003904/

http://guardianlv.com/2013/09/obama-denies-setting... Excerpt: -- Obama Denies Setting ‘Red Line’ on Syria, After Setting Red Line on Syria --

After the President drew his red line last year, the statement was widely reported in the media. Nobody from the White House or the Democratic Party objected to those reports; no-one wished to clarify those remarks or make it clear that this was not what the President had said. He, his advisors and his party were quite happy for it to be reported that the Commander-in-Chief had issued a clear warning on the use of chemical weapons – that he had, indeed, set a red line.

Why, then, is Obama now flat-out denying that he said the very words that came out of his mouth last August? Perhaps it is because he has already lost all credibility, regarding the Syrian conflict. It is widely known that the Syrian opposition movement is dominated by two main factions: The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood and its de facto ally, the al Nusra Front, an organization that is part of the al Qaeda terror network.

Paul Pearce

The President's thinking is sort of reverse risk reduction.

His best outcome - is a nominal affect. While his worst possible outcome is WWIII.

Borrokatu

P.S. He won't just send white guys..

Mongo_slade

Really Borrkatu? You mean to say that black people, Asian, and Latinos have to fight as well? I don't think anyone here knew that.

I'm so glad you're here to state the incredibly obvious even if you're making a lame attempt at sarcasm.

Mongo_slade

I disagreed with Obama’s handling of this situation from the start. He should have either backed a rebel group (who would best serve our interests) to overthrow Asad or stay out of this completely. Once the President stated that chemical weapons would cross a “red line” and that there would be reprisals if Asad did this he—unfortunately—involved the USA in this situation.

As the USA, we CAN’T threaten to take military action if a specific event occurs and when that event does happen…do nothing. We lose all credibility and no country will take our future threats seriously. So while it doesn’t serve out interests to attack Syria—because President Obama opened his mouth—we HAVE to take action.

I support Obama but he screwed this one up. MissCheevious

You know Mongo, just SAYING it was bad enough, because you are right, we cannot THREATEN without following through. It just weakens our standing more than it has already been weakened.

But the REAL problem that I have with this President, is the fact that he LIES!! He is SO incredibly childish that he cannot take responsibility for anything that he says.

He LOOKS LIKE AN IDIOT!

Doesn't THAT bother you at all???

Laymen2 likes this.

Mongo_slade

You're going to have to site examples of where he "lies". Now remember a lie is defined as knowingly telling a statement that is not true with the intent of deceiving someone.

Paul Pearce

Bill Ayers is just a guy in my neighborhood.

Benghazi is about a movie.

He knew both of these to not be true when he made them. He also knew that he was making them - not out of error - but in an attempt to manipulate his audience.

He isn't even close — you should guard your credibility a bit tighter.

"40% of guns are bought without background check" - he may not have known he was telling a non-truth - but he should know. Again - INTENT to deceive.

Heck - just this week: "I did not lay down a the red line - the international community did". WTF? The guy is a serial liar. He is a narcisist and pathological liar.

It is harder to find something he has told the truth about than something he has lied about.

Laymen2

Ha, "examples of where he "lies", are you kidding, just start with Jeremiah Wright; Obama lied from the get-go! Try Google "examples of where Obama lies youtube", you''ll get enough examples that if you every make such a challenge, your displaying willful ignorance - A.K.A. head in sand.

FYI: start here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0D3IWl37ng

QuietThoughtsII

To be fair, most of the world has said the same thing, biological weapons will NOT be allowed. It is now apparent that isn't true with the world either...

Paul Pearce

Obama's actions in the Middle East have led to deposing dictators who were allies/had good relationships with the US, and replacing them with tyrants who don't support the US.

Egypt?

Syria?

Libya?

That is OK though - he has Susan Rice to help guide him. John Kerry? Hillary Clinton? Powers? Stop me when you hear the name of a professional foreign relations person.

He is clueless, and he has surrounded himself with people even more clueless.

D Man

Good!!!!! Let him go cater to the WHITE MAN who most can't stand his guts. But he want to lecture us on things in our communities. But stay silent when it comes to other communities......We need to stop supporting this man just because he is the "FIRST". He take our votes and support for GRANTED. Period

QuietThoughtsII

I love when people stay on topic and contribute to it. Unfortunately your post doesn't.

massets4

We are causing so much damage to the rest of the world with our incompetent foreign policy. John Kerry, Susan Rice, Hilary Clinton, Mccain and an incomptent president. I hope we will not fall for this lie again. Remember weapons of mass destruction? I lost all respect for Colin Powell after that one. John Kerry lookd as if he was going to throw up after having to lie for this administration. I smell a collaborative rat: Israell, Saudi Arabia, Quatar and the US. Who are the syrian rebels really and how many of them are actually syrian and how much did we pay them or how much did they pay us for the chemical weapons? This is so embarrasing, Putin is beginning to look like an actual statesman. When will we get a Head of State we can be proud of? In my opinion Black people who sacrificed so much for this country are now being marginalized, ostracized, legally murdered and imprisoned in this so called post racial america under Barrack Obama

cmck

Why should this be a surprise, most blacks have never been a lover of war period. I suggest those here, before you comment, please check the history on blacks for any type of war. Blacks have never been a supporter of any wars. As for me, I hate wars period, but I do back the president to do something about the chemical weapons in Syria...Any person that seeks as low as this tyrant Assad did, gassing his own people, where 465 children died, just to maintain POWER, should be extincted, penalized...I understand the possibilities of escalation, but Assad must go.

DRT Goodman

Hate to break it to you, but Black people are irrelevant and nobody cares what we think about anything in the political arena -- except maybe Spike Lee and I think even he has gotten tired of trying to explain the world to us... "Wake the F*&% UP!"

Laymen2

That is a blanket statement which doesn't hold up under scrutiny; your stereotyping. Case-n-point, a lot of people are very interested in what Dr. Ben Carson has to say.

MrsJesusChrist

Nobody want us to go to war and if we attack Syria that's exactly where we will be. Blacks are Not stupid and have Not backed the POTUS on everything. I wonder if anywone has the balls to ask the 1st Lady, Michelle, Bo, Sasha or Malia what they think. Two wrongs don't make a Right

ocean

I wonder why Obama really is insisting on going to war with Syria? I have not heard any proof the Assad had any foreknowledge of the attacks. They should assist Assad in finding the attackers. Make Assad prove that he is against what happened by hunting for the culprits.

There was a guy, from the United Stated Military, that when on a killing spree at Ft Hood. Should another country come in and take out this government and blame the Obama administration for that? If the President of a country did not authorize an attack, why is our country going to go to war against that country? They need to go after the ones who planned the attack. This is another Iraq. Osama Bin Laden supposedly planned the 9/11 attacks, yet we go after Saddam Hussein.

The United States government condones the mistreatment of blacks in this country: racial profiling , discrimination, false imprisonment, criminal injustice etc. Should the U.N. and china or Russia or Iran come in and kick in the doors and clear out the american government and liberate our people? hmmm ricthought1 likes this.

1 Lady

Yes there will be strikes on Syria whether we like it or not. Not to sound cruel but do Arabs, including Iraqis, Syrians and the Palestinians speak out against the rapes and murders that have been widely reported in the Darfur region in Sudan? How many African Americans have spoke out against the race based enslavement of Black people in Mauritania which was only abolished in the 1980s. Why don't we seem to show concern or call for military intervention for black people too? ocean likes this.

ricthought1

Because, the United States is all about condoning the genocide of Black people, Rwanda, again, Darfur, Chicago. And, yes, Obomb ma will order the bombing of Syria because, thats what his zionist handlers want him to do.

GregAbdul

The President's going, whether black people like it or not. The real question is after he goes and bombs Syria. What leverage will the CBC have going forward, if they follow the lead of selfish black people who somehow think that their opposition to war wil increase spending at home for blacks? First, we all need to realize, the Republicans are blocking spending at home and they are not going to stop until the Obama coalition becomes so strong that the tea party people get nervous. This is like '68. A lot of folk couldn't wait for LBJ and do things his way. They rioted at the 60Democrat convention. What did your radical pacifism get you? NIXON.

GregAbdul

*rioted at the 68 DNC convention.

Borrokatu

Some of you here consider Glenn Beck and his lot the epitome of Satan but here's an interesting take on SYRIA...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfHSPLW63Gg

Lydia in MN

Call your member of Congress & tell them how you feel about the U.S. BOMBING SYRIA: 1-855-788-0202

ocean likes this.

DP

Syria's situation is awful. Bombing will only lead to more anti American rhetoric. However, bombing is a better option than arming the rebels who will end up shooting at us eventually. This is a no win situation. We should stay home. Our involvement only prolongs the inevitable. It feels like the USA is the rich father or stepfather. All these countries (children) in turmoil want our money and help, but don't want to listen to our rules. Time to clip the cord. Let the middle east implode without more American lives being lost. Lydia in MN likes this.

Hipnotik

Thank God, we are finally waking up! We've waited five long years for the truth about him to filter through. Now it's perfectly clear that like most recent U.S. Presidents, Obama is not running the show. He's merely the latest waterboy designed and controlled by corporate America and the MIC (military industrial complex) to carry their messages of deceit and endless war. In our community we call people like him the "frontman". For the longest time I've been saying the emperor is wearing no clothes. Now he's been exposed for all of us to see.

ricthought1 and Lydia in MN like this.

DP

The country is run by the rich. Money equals power. The government 'for the rich people by the rich people.' Obama is no different. If politicos can make money off war then wars are what we will have.

ricthought1 and Lydia in MN like this.

cmck

One statement, dislike him all you want, while not perfect, Obama is a good president. The most incompetent and feckless president this country has ever had since I start paying attention to presidents since the early 70s, is George walker Bush our 43rd president.

DP

The POTUS will forever be an important part of US history. Whether he is remembered as a good or bad president remains to be seen. Clinton, even with all his indescretions, had a more positive run. (I voted against him every time). Choosing not to get involved will help his legacy, I believe.

DP

And most importantly, our counrty as well.

cmck

Why should this be a surprise, most blacks have never been a lover of war period. I suggest those here, before you comment, please check the history on blacks for any type of war. Blacks have never been a supporter of any wars. As for me, I hate wars period, but I do back the president to do something about the chemical weapons in Syria...Any person that seeks as low as this tyrant Assad did, gassing his own people, where 465 children died, just to maintain POWER, should be extincted, penalized...I understand the possibilities of escalation, but Assad must go.

Lyndia Jones

Are YOU willing to go over there and fight against Assad? Are You? Wouldn't that be assisting a group of people that hate us/them? Have you ever heard of the Brotherhood of Muslims and Al Qaeda? Aren't they the ones fighting Assad? Are you intelligent enough to see or comprehend how an attack on Assad would help the two groups that I mentioned? Sorry, this is a Civil War and America should stay out of it.

Lydia in MN and BlakDr like this.

cmck

I can assure you my intelligence of the military supersedes yours, I have served in the US armed forces, and my calculation tells me that some type of strike is warranted. No one has the ability to determine what the outcome will be, neither you or I. Your facts are based on what you've heard from those you support, my facts are based on experience and an understanding of our military. What the white house and the intelligence are giving as it relates to information, is just enough to justify an action, but neither you and even many members of the congress will never be privy to the full scope of their methods, intention and intelligence - to do this, there would be no purpose for the Pentagon and also would be alerting our opponents.

DP

I'm won't argue with your knowledge of the military. Just take the peaceful option this time. We have seen what happens if we fight, Iraq, Afganistan and Vietnam and Korea. What if we don't? I cannot think of specific examples of bad things happening to the US because he did not fight.

BTW I respect your view/opinion, even if I disagree.

DP

And I'm pretty sure Syria has been alerted.

cmck

DP, you made me laugh...I honestly see your point.

DAMU99

How can you be Anti War , Pro Obama on this issue? Makes no sense... Sorta Like being a "Drug Free" "Crack Head" Taking a High Ground on chemical weapons while Drone Bombing Sovereign Nations... Our Hands aren't clean enough to take that stance.

cmck DAMU99

An education lesson: What I implied was that I am not a fan of wars, just like many times matters enter our lives, which we despise or resent, but circumstances caused us to pay attention to them. In this case, the present perception cause me to reshape my own philosophy....WE SHOULD STRIKE....my heart is with the innocent children who have suffered. These children are like the children of Sandy Hook to me, it is a vivid reminder - such a dictator must go, uprooted, eradicated.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.