The Blog

Earl Ofari Hutchinson: GOP Again Has its Sights on the Voting Rights Act

2012-02-22T23:31:29Z

The landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act must be renewed every twenty five years. In 1981 despite some grumbles and idle threats to oppose its renewal from a few in the Reagan administration, President Reagan dutifully signed the renewal legislation. A quarter century later, again despite the grumbles and idle threats from some in Congress to delay or even block passage, President Bush again dutifully signed the renewal legislation with a big congratulatory celebration at the White House signing. The renewal of the Voting Rights Act by two conservative GOP presidents seemed to assure that any effort to scrub the Voting Rights Act from the federal books was a pipe dream.

However, that may soon change. A federal lawsuit by Shelby County, Alabama has quietly worked its way up through the appeals courts. The county wants much of the Act dumped and has recycled the same old argument that it is outdated, discriminatory, and a blatant federal intrusion into states rights. In times past this claim would have gone nowhere. But during the GOP presidential debates Texas Governor Rick Perry lambasted the Act. That squarely put it back into public focus and political play. State attorneys general in three states have endorsed the Alabama county's challenge. The announcement that Attorney General Eric Holder will vigorously enforce provisions of the Voting Rights Act to prevent voter suppression raised an additional howl from conservatives.

Then there's the Supreme Court. There is little to stop the court from taking a fresh look at the Act, and even ruling that the key requirement that Southern states get "preclearance" from the Justice Department before making any changes in its voting rights laws and procedures is unconstitutional. There are a slew of other challenges in addition to Alabama's to the Act that could give the court's five conservative judges more than enough ammunition to scrap the Act.

The crop of Tea Party driven House Republicans could give the court even more cover to question the constitutionality of the Act. GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul would be one of those. He's publicly boasted that he would not have backed the 1964 Civil Rights Act if he had been in Congress then. On the fortieth anniversary of the Civil Rights Act signing in 2004 Paul opposed the symbolic congressional resolution lauding it. Though Bush signed the renewal of the Voting Rights Act in 2006 a core of House Republicans stalled the legislation for more than a week and demanded that hearings be held. They used the same old argument that it punishes the South for past voting-discrimination sins, and they didn't like the idea of bilingual ballots.

A renewed assault on the Act fits right into the Tea Party's endless attacks on the federal government for alleged over-intrusiveness. It would also be set against the backdrop of the hotly contested 2012 battle for the White House and conservatives efforts to maintain or expand their congressional numbers.

The GOP has already pecked at eroding the Act with the rash of photo identifications laws that the GOP governors and GOP controlled state legislatures have enacted. They have one aim, and that's to discourage and damp down the number of minority and poor voters that overwhelmingly vote Democratic.

Despite the solid bipartisan support that the Act got in prior congresses and from GOP presidents, the Act has always been more controversial than many have believed. The popular myth is that congressional leaders were so appalled and enraged at the shocking TV clips of Alabama state troopers battering civil rights marchers in Selma in April 1965 that they promptly passed the landmark law that restored voting rights to Southern blacks. What's forgotten is that the marchers were there in the first place because the bill was badly stalled in the Senate and the House. It took nearly five months to get the bill passed.

Then Senate minority leader, Illinois Republican Everett Dirksen, heaped amendments on the bill that included scrapping the poll tax ban, adding exemptions and escape clauses for Southern counties, and excluding all states outside the South. House Republicans tacked more amendments on the bill to weaken it. The fight over these amendments dragged on for weeks in Congress. The biggest fight, though, was over the poll tax ban. The tax was the most odious and hated symbol of Southern racial exclusion. Civil rights leaders were enraged when the Senate refused to eliminate the poll tax, arguing that it wouldn't pass constitutional muster. House leaders agreed.

There's no real threat that a majority in Congress will switch gears and vote to scrap the Act in the immediate future. However, the action of many state officials, attorneys general and the always looming shadow of the Supreme Court are strong warnings that the Voting Rights Act could again be in the sights of the GOP.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. He is a weekly co-host of the Al Sharpton Show on American Urban Radio Network. He is the author of How Obama Governed: The Year of Crisis and Challenge. He is an associate editor of New America Media. He is host of the weekly Hutchinson Report Newsmaker Hour heard weekly on the nationally network broadcast Hutchinson Newsmaker Network.

Follow Earl Ofari Hutchinson on Twitter: http://twitter.com/earlhutchinson

Rog Walker: A Boy

2012-02-22T22:48:59Z

Many would agree that a child deserves to see the entire world and to know that he or she can be anything that they want to be. This is what we are taught in elementary school, and yet, the primary options are always limited. Doctor, lawyer, fireman, etc. As we grow and mature, these ideas become so embedded in our minds that we don't pursue life out of a vast understanding of the world's options, but rather out of what is deemed "successful" or "respectable."

On my journey, I never realized I was lost (at least not until I actually found myself). I was fortunate enough to discover a truth that remains hidden from most people for their entire lives. My identity and purpose exist in something present in this world, something that may not have been presented to me by my parents, teachers, or peers. I can be spiritually and practically fulfilled living from inward choice rather than a societal determination of success.

Don't buy the hype and don't sell it either. There is an entire world out there and it is up to you to connect with it and decide for yourself what works for you.

Don't buy the hype..
A Boy: A Speaking Pixels Photo Story
Experience the original spread: http://speakingpixels.com/boy

Tio Hardiman: Black History Month Is Real

2012-02-22T22:23:08Z

As we look back on all of the accomplishments and contributions of African-American people across the world. One must consider that African-American people have survived the test of time. African Americans should be proud and very grateful to their mighty ancestors for all of their struggles and not giving up on freedom and justice. Sometimes we forget about all of the sacrifices that were made by African Americans in order for them to be recognized as full citizens of the United States of America. African-American people fought in the Civil War, World Wars I and II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. You would think that African Americans would be very bitter and refuse to fight for the United States. However, African-American people became some of the most loyal patriots of the United States of America.

The scars of slavery will never completely heal and it's very important to realize that an injustice was done to people of African decent on the shores of America. Looking back on the journey from Africa to the United States were millions of African people, who were forced into the bottom of slave ships and kidnapped from their homeland. These same African people were treated like cattle or livestock, sold for rum and sugar, picked cotton, raped, lynched, and treated like non-humans for over 400 years. Out of adversity comes greatness.

People like Fredrick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Nat Turner, and many more African-American leaders emerged to help African people work on their liberation from slavery. Subjecting people to slave conditions and depriving people of the basic human rights to read or write is very damaging to a people's self-development over time. In spite of all the constraints placed on African slaves, they were able to persevere. The African slaves had a vision of freedom because they were free in their homeland. The American people should always be grateful for the many contributions that former African slaves made to this great country.

There were times when most people would give up and just roll over but the spirit of the African people would not allow them to surrender. Surrender meant giving up on the next generation and everyone should want to make things better for their offspring. I'm not sure how the African slaves held up under such extreme conditions but only God knows what he had in store for them.

If people would take a serious look and this dark period in American history, I'm sure everybody would have a deeper appreciation for the former slaves. To rise up and become intellectuals, property owners, inventors, doctors and lawyers, to build strong families, and become preachers and entertainers when everything was taken away from you in the beginning represents what's real about Black History Month. Black History Month provides everybody in the world with a window into the lives of African-American pioneers and pacemakers that had overcome adversity on all levels. That's why Black History Month is real!

Erin Harper: Whitney Houston, One Amazing Crack Ho: An Open Letter to John and Ken

2012-02-22T22:15:47Z

Until now, I have not written about Whitney Houston, largely because so many others have. However, recently when a friend told me that Los Angeles radio hosts, John Kobylt and Ken Chiampou of KFI AM 640 had referred to Ms. Houston as a "crack ho," I could not remain silent.

"Here comes the crack ho again...look at that, she's doing handstands next to the pool. Very good crack ho...And then you find out she's dead. It's like, really? Took this long?"

Wow. Classy, right?

In recognition of John and Ken's classiness, which obviously makes them much better than two crack hoes, I have written them a nice little letter. If you know these guys, please feel free to pass it along.

Dear John and Ken,
Despite your suspension and public apology, I am still extremely disturbed. Although I am far too upset to present you with a breakdown of the societal structures that led to the advent of the "crack ho" and the subsequent ignorance that is the hackneyed crack ho joke, I am not too angry not to present you with this letter. Nevertheless, if an in-depth analysis of relevant societal structures is what you need, then you might start by fetching a copy of Dr. Tupac Shakur's 1992 Doctoral Dissertation, Changes.

In my world, where you have an open invitation, there is no such thing as a "crack ho" or even a "ho." My friends and I prefer the terms "people who have been victimized by the crack epidemic", "people involved in prostitution", and "victims of prostitution". It might seem a bit crazy, but we actually like to think that these folks just might qualify as human beings and that many did not become involved in these circumstances by choice, or simply because they did not have anything better to do.

As I stated in one of my tweets the night of her death, Whitney Houston was much more than a singer and she certainly was not anyone's crack ho. Each time she sang a song, won an award, or broke a record, she literally helped to enhance the "sense of pride" of African-American girls who had previously seen few artists who looked like them reach a comparable level of superstardom. Furthermore, Houston's reach extends beyond African-American females to people from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds, including the boys and men whom you would probably call little sissy-faggots for singing her songs.

There are far too many young people who, instead of engaging in junior crack ho activities, spent after school hours refining renditions of "I Will Always Love You" with the help of a voice coach or mentor (because they wanted to sound exactly like Houston) to minimize Whitney Houston to a crack ho. In addition, there is a countless number of people who, because they almost hit one of Houston's famous notes and won a talent competition, were left with an enhanced sense of self-confidence, a known protective factor against the risks that many young people face, to ever minimize Whitney Elizabeth Houston to a drug-addicted prostitute.

Lastly, I was going to include a list of Ms. Houston's formal philanthropic efforts in order to lend further support for why she isn't a crack ho. However, after listening to and reading the personal accounts of how her work touched and will continue to touch so many lives, a list of her formal philanthropic efforts became irrelevant to my case. Simply belting a tune over the airways, in a way that only "The Voice" could, was enough to earn her the respect of never being called a crack ho or any name other than the one her parents gave her ever again.

John and Ken, your comments lead me to believe that you're whack -- you know, like crack. However, instead of minimizing you to crack hoes, I will just hope that you can learn from this unfortunate experience and use the fruits of your knowledge to teach others henceforth.

Warm regards,

Erin Harper

P.S. Allow me to leave you with this video -- I like to call it "The Antithesis of The Crack Ho".

David Alexander Bullock: Whitney Reminds, Black History Demands -- We Must Choose to Lose

2012-02-22T20:41:00Z

By and by, I'm goin' to lay down this heavy load. By and by, by and by, I'm goin' to lay down this heavy load. - Negro Folk Song

The death of Whitney Houston was tragic. She was young. She was talented. She was beautiful. She brought us joy. Her death is tragic for at least two reasons. First, it is tragic because we have lost a great artist, a great entertainer -- someone who brought us joy. Second, It is also tragic because it reminds us of human frailty and reawakens us to our mortality. We are a people who run from these two realities -- loss and death. The death of Whitney Houston forces us to confront and consider the powerful lessons taught by loss and death.

In a culture obsessed with accumulation, we deny the truth that life is really about loss. All great human achievement requires loss. The blessing of conception requires the loss of virginity; the joy of childbirth requires the loss of the womb's protection. Indeed, great artist like Whitney lost privacy and the security of anonymity in order to become an American icon. Many believe Christ lost his life to secure humanity's salvation. According to others, Buddha teaches we must lose our connection to material things to ultimately become enlightened. Loss is the truth of life. The key is to choose wisely what we are willing to lose. African-American history teaches us to lay down that heavy load.

If loss is a key to ultimate happiness, then death is the door. This does not always mean physical death -- death has many manifestations. Still, death is the gateway opened by loss that leads to our ultimate authentic life. Christians celebrate dying to sin. America celebrates the death of Jim Crow and obvious institutional racism. The poor often wish for the death of poverty. On today -- with Whitney's funeral -- we celebrated the death of the heat and flame of celebrity living that dried out the well of songs joy. We miss her, but we know now that she is finally at rest.

Our freedom demands we choose what we will lose. Our freedom is exercised by deciding on the terms of our spiritual, cultural, political, economic or physical death. Whitney reminds us that in life we experience loss and ultimately all of us must die -- but our loss and death have purpose. Black history helps us discover that deeper purpose. It inspired us to choose to lose the institution of slavery, the habit of racism and the legacy of economic apartied. It demands we die to an unhealthy commitment to states rights, insensitivity to poverty and a greed that demands maximal profit in the face of obscene levels of wealth inequality.

Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., they all died to low self-esteem and ethnic inferiority -- they loss a heavy load. John Brown, Lyndon Johnson, Mother Teresa all died to an insensitivity to poverty - they loss a heavy load. Today we are challenged to choose the terms of our death and what we will lose. Lets us choose to die to a corporate culture that puts profit before people, a political culture that stifles direct democracy and a social culture that denies the legacy of human dignity present most vividly in African-American history. Let us choose to lose racism, sexism and classism. Let us all lose a heavy load.

Dee Evans: Smithsonian Groundbreaking Snubs Obama: Were They Low on Shovels?

2012-02-22T19:26:36Z

As an African American, I'm very proud of the upcoming Smithsonian National Museum for African American History and Culture and all that it represents, but the groundbreaking event itself left a whole lot to be desired.

First of all, someone please explain to me why the President of the United States (and our country's first black president) was not included in the actual groundbreaking shovel ceremony?! This was a major oversight and one that I think was embarrassing for President Obama because he stood up when they called for the 'groundbreakers' but then sat back down when he realized that he was not included. Believe me, it was noticed. Politico already has this up on their homepage with the title, "No Shovel for Obama." I don't think I can ever recall witnessing a groundbreaking event where the President of the United States was in attendance but was not allowed to participate in the actual shovel ceremony. It seems to me that if the president was there, you would include him just out of a sense of protocol.

In the grand scheme of things, is this a major story? Probably not, but to many African Americans, having the first black president is a sense of pride and having him sit on the side and watch while the ground is broken on the first national African American museum is a farce! I think it would be interesting just to know what the thought process was behind the decision not to have the first black president participate in the shovel part of the ceremony for the first national museum dedicated to African American history; heck, he is African American history! This was a huge and very noticeable mistake that looks like a major snub of the president and someone should explain it.

And finally, who in the world told them to make the Negro National Anthem into an opera??? I've been singing that song for as long as I can remember and for the first time in my life, I couldn't even recognize it. This was just one flub too many... get with it, people!

Georgiana Bloom: Urban Youth Make a Splash in D.C.

2012-02-22T18:26:35Z

As a lifelong swimmer, when I get a whiff of chlorine, I get excited. But when I saw hundreds of kids swimming in every lane at D.C.'s Takoma Aquatic Center on President's Day weekend, I was thrilled.

The joint was jumping. Lane after lane was full of swimmers racing and practicing; kids' voices echoed throughout the spacious facility, along with parents and coaches cheering them on, talking together, while young swimmers hung out in groups on the sidelines between races. Energy resounded throughout the facility.

Swimmer Brieanna Romney

So this is an upbeat post. But don't stop reading, because there's plenty of bad news to go around and it can shrivel your soul. Instead, you can feel good about the 26th Annual Black History Invitational Swim Meet, which was something to behold and has an awesome past. And, it might just make you feel good about local government. In this case, D.C.'s Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR), which hosted this year's event with the United Black Fund (UBF).

Called "Ride the Wave," more than 800 youth took the plunge. Thirty swim teams from throughout the country, comprised of minority athletes ranging in age from 8 to 18, competed in the full complement of swim events: freestyle, butterfly, back stroke, breast stroke and (my personal challenge and favorite,) the individual medley (IM), which incorporates all four strokes.

USA Swimming, the national governing body for the sport of swimming, calls it the "premier minority swim competition in the United States and World."

Coach Rodger McCoy

Wow. And when I met some of the dedicated people behind it, I understood why. Like DPR Senior Coach Rodger McCoy. For decades, he was the coach and mentor to thousands of swimmers of all ages. This year's Black History Swimming Invitational honoree and founder of the first meet, McCoy is strong, wiry and gracious and the coach who made the D.C. Wave and Takoma Park swim teams nationally competitive.

The Annual Black History Invitational Swim Meet was founded by Dr. Calvin Rolark and Dr. William Rumsey in 1987 to nourish well-being and healthy competitive activity. Now, hundreds of minority urban youth nationwide flock to D.C. to be part of it. And the history of black swimmers behind the scenes is fascinating. A small sampling: Ambassador Andrew Young was a competitive swimmer at Howard University in the 1950s and subsequently won the International Swimming Hall of Fame award; Maritza Correia was the first black female swimmer to set an American record and in 2004 and to make the U.S. Olympic Swimming Team; and the first African-American swimmer to hold both an Olympic and World swimming record was Cullen Jones in 2008.

(Right to left) Roy Fagin, former DPR Coach and a 2011 honoree; Muriel Bowser, Ward 4 Councilmember; Honoree Coach Rodney McCoy; Jesus Aguirre, DPR Director; Sean Link, DPR Director of Aquatics

Meeting McCoy was an honor. When he grew up in Virginia Beach, V.A., beaches were segregated and blacks had no facility where they could learn to swim. It wasn't until he came to D.C. in his late 20s that McCoy started swimming -- and quickly excelled -- at the Capital East Natatorium, now called the William H. Rumsey Aquatic Center. Today, he's known as "Coach," and thrives on teaching "kids" from 1 to 103 years of age.

As his son, Brandon, briefly on leave from Afghanistan, stood proudly and watched his dad, McCoy said of his swimmers: "They helped me, they taught me."

Photos courtesy of Georgiana Bloom

Bonnie Fuller: Rihanna & Chris Brown Are Telling Their Fans, 'We're Back Together' With Their Music

2012-02-22T16:40:52Z

Rihanna and Chris Brown gave what they saw as a birthday present to their fans yesterday -- the release of remixes of two of their songs, which tell us why they are so in love again.

It was Rihanna's birthday Monday, Feb. 20, and the birthday girl couldn't wait to make it a special day in a way that no one would ever have foreseen three years ago, after then-boyfriend Chris Brown subjected her to brutal beating. But first, Chris Brown tweeted a birthday message to the woman he clearly still loves, "Happy Birthday ROBYN!" to which she replied: "Thanks!"

Then came the big gift -- first Rihanna tweeted her remix of "Birthday Cake" with Chris on vocals and then tweeted the remix of Chris Brown's new single "Turn Up the Music," to which she had lent her vocals, too.

The message couldn't have been clearer to the world: we're a couple again and we're saying it in the strongest way that we know how -- through our music.

"They are both powerful artists and music is what they are passionate about so using music to communicate with their fans is the most passionate statement they can make," believes celebrity relationship expert, Cooper Lawrence, author of the new novel, The Yoga Club.

I absolutely agree. This pair lives, breathes and eats music. It's second nature for them to express their feelings through their songs. And in this case, the lyrics that Chris Brown wrote to sing on Rihanna's "Birthday Cake" couldn't have been clearer. "Girl, I wanna f*** you right now. Been a long time. I been missin your body ... give it to her in the worst way. Can't wait to her blow her candles off."

Rihanna returns the hot favor on the couple's remix of "Turn Up the Music."

"Turn up the music, cause I feel a little turned on. Turn up the music, don't you try to turn me down. Turn up the music, can I feel it just a little more. Turn up the music, turn me up and take me down," Rihanna sings.

Listen, this isn't a couple that is comfortable issuing press releases about their relationship. They aren't going to release a "statement" about their love. This is what they've done instead.

"It's absolutely a public statement that they're together and that Rihanna thinks it's time for her fans to forgive Chris," believes Cooper Lawrence.

She thinks that if we, her fans, can accept the songs they did together, then it will be easier to accept them as a couple.

Chris Brown's mother/manager Joyce Hawkins is absolutely echoing that message.

"Leave those young people alone!!! Let them live their lives and go live yours!!!" she tweeted Feb. 20, on Rihanna's birthday.

Well forgiving and moving on is just fine, but let's sure pray that this pair has both had enough counseling -- individually and together -- to truly move on and not end up back in an abusive relationship.

Let's hope lust hasn't displaced every shred of common sense.

"They're both hot for each other. Sexually attracted and it's obvious that they want to be together again," agrees relationship expert to the stars, Dr. Gilda Carle. "And make-up sex is the hottest you can get. But let's hope that he's learned in therapy how to control his temper and that she's learned not to push his hot buttons."

Dr. Jeff Gardere, a contributor to HealthGuru.com, also worries that the pair hasn't invested in the therapy they need.

"They could shut people up if they announced they were together, but said they would be getting couples counseling," he points out.

Totally agree. This pair is clearly just so caught up in the heat they are feeling for each other. They had a real connection, a real relationship that was meaningful to them before it ended in horror. Now they are singing "let's do it tonight and do whatever is takes to make it right," in the remix of "Turn Up the Music."

Kevin Sessums: Happy Birthday, Sidney Poitier!

2012-02-22T15:54:40Z

Sidney Poitier turned 85 this past Monday. For those of you who have read my memoir Mississippi Sissy you know he becomes a kind of motif in it, his very name the incantation that our family's maid would say to herself whenever she heard the n-word in her presence, a word she even heard from me the morning after Poitier won the Oscar. He was the first African American to win the award for Best Actor and I asked Matty May, as she was making my bed the next morning before I went to second grade, if she could "believe a n----r won Best Actor." It was a pivotal moment in my life and it is a pivotal scene in the book -- as is my seeing Matty May a few years later as we both picked cotton on my uncle's farm and I overheard her quietly saying his name, "PoitierPoitierPoitier," over and over to calm herself with each boll that she reached for and belligerently wrenched forth to put into her sack.

Indeed, when Oprah Winfrey called me one Sunday to talk about Mississippi Sissy after having read it she told me that she was seeing Mr. Poitier that coming Thursday and was going to take the book with her and read to him the passages she had marked, especially the post-Oscar and cotton field ones. The thought of Oprah reading to Mr. Poitier my words moved me beyond measure -- not just for me, but for sweet dear brave proud Matty May, who changed my life by being a part of it.

I've linked to Mr. Poitier's 1963 Oscar win here in celebration of it as well as the upcoming Oscar ceremony this Sunday. I also recall an Oscar weekend a few years ago when I was out in LA to attend the Vanity Fair Oscar party and a friend's Friday night star-filled shindig at his home and the Saturday afternoon picnic that two other friends gave at their home that was the epitome of low-key easy glamour, many stars lolling about on rugs having been strewn about their Beverly Hills lawn and others sitting at picnic tables. I've seen Oprah a few times at those same parties in the past and at that picnic. When she told me she was going to read to Mr. Poitier from my book I told her about that one picnic afternoon when I spotted him sitting at one of the picnic tables. I gathered up my courage and went and knelt at his side and began to tell him about Matty May and my book and how much he had meant to her. In the middle of my telling him all this, Penny Marshall came up to say hello to him and I rose to leave them but he grabbed my hand and asked me to stay. Penny said her helloes and went to sit with some other friends at a neighboring table.

I continued to kneel by Mr. Poitier's side and he continued to hold my hand. "Please finish telling me all about Matty May," he said softly, her name now coming from him as his had so often come from hers. In that moment I not only felt Matty's presence in my life once more but I felt God's. It truly was a moment of grace to have arrived at that moment from that earlier moment back in Mississippi when as a little southern boy I had broken Matty May's heart with my use of the n-word to describe this dignified man who now held my hand and before whom I was kneeling.

I can still hear her old soft throaty voice now whispering to me even as I type this birthday wish to one of our country's greatest actors: "... PoitierPoitierPoitier... " And I can hear him, too, whisper her name: "... Matty May..."

Check out Kevin's book, Mississippi Sissy, over at Amazon.

Marcus Samuelsson: Savoring Harlem: Watching the New Harlem Renaissance Come Alive

2012-02-22T15:11:18Z

As the famous Langston Hughes poem entitled "Harlem" starts, "What happens to a dream deferred?" many often think that the line refers to Harlem itself. That somehow some grandiose dream of what Harlem was or could be has withered or in this case "dried up like a raisin in the sun." Well, I'm here to testify that that's not the case! The Manhattan neighborhood of Harlem is alive and thriving, more so now than ever before, and in many cases food is at the center of Harlem's new economic growth. Within the midst of great history and cultural diversity lies a food side of Harlem just waiting to be discovered by those foodies who seek it. My goal is to show you just that, and that's why I invite you to join me this Friday at 8pm ET/PT for a Food Network special where I show you my neighborhood, Harlem as we cover its current food revolution.

Harlem's rich culture and impressive ethnic diversity inspired me to move to Harlem eight years ago. I knew when I moved here that one day I would want to open a restaurant in Harlem that would represent Harlem's diverse community and be a place people from around the world would want to visit. What makes Harlem special is that at any given time, food seekers can not only find food deeply rooted in Southern, Latin and African traditions, but also can taste the newer Senegalese, Chinese, and Italian influences as well. Virtually every type of cuisine now has a place in Harlem.

For decades, Harlem has also been the birthplace and safe haven for the arts and social movements like jazz, American poetry, and many other ideals that still resonate in our country today. In one of its most flourishing times, known as the Harlem Renaissance, great poets, musicians, actors, athletes and intellectuals roamed its streets finding inspiration in its people, buildings, and living institutions of thought and culture. It was home to dozens of theaters, restaurants, and even speakeasies -- and all shared the purpose of housing creativity, entertainment, and brotherhood. Even at Rooster, we take inspiration from an original Harlem speakeasy.

While many thought opening a restaurant in Harlem was a lost cause because of its economic decline in the past couple decades, I knew through its deep artistic and cultural history there could be a resurgence of the types of restaurants that made the original Red Rooster a prime destination for everyone from politicians to musicians. With a higher unemployment rate than the rest of the city (18% as compared to 4-5%), Harlem has been hit hard by the recession, yet in recent years, Harlem has seen an influx of new shops, restaurants, and businesses that are starting to bring it back to how it once was in its glory days. These businesses are not only bringing commerce to the neighborhood but are also hiring within the neighborhood as well. When I opened Red Rooster in 2010, I quickly learned that you can't help improve a neighborhood unless you bring everyone along with you. We made it a priority to hire the majority of our staff from Harlem. I constantly think about affordability when planning out my menus, since inclusion of the community is what drives my interest for Red Rooster.

Slowly, we're starting to see great improvements in Harlem and city dwellers are starting to see plenty of reasons to come uptown, not just to be entertainment but as a new place to live and create new business opportunities. Harlem currently has a higher percentage of growth in new housing units, population growth, and growing median household income than the rest of Manhattan, according to the Upper Manhattan Empowerment Zone. With a cheaper rent base and available vacant spaces, Harlem is starting to see an influx of diverse city dwellers that are moving uptown. When new businesses like Harlem Shambles butcher shop meet classic Harlem institutions like Sylvia's, the hope to revitalize Harlem starts to shine.

Join me on Friday, February 24 at 8pm ET/PT for my Food Network special, Savoring Harlem, as I share with you what all the excitement in Harlem is about! You'll not only get to see the new food revolution happening in this great neighborhood but you'll also get to witness what truly makes Harlem so great.

Ken Blackwell: Beware the Brokered Convention!

2012-02-22T14:58:46Z

Politico is a journal subscribed to by none but political junkies, and most of those are liberal. So, when this serious publication starts talking about a brokered convention for the GOP in Tampa next August, beware!

General Dwight D. Eisenhower won a first-ballot nomination in 1952. But there had been a prolonged and bitter floor fight over convention rules. Supporters of conservative Sen. Robert A. Taft ("Mr. Republican") charged that they had been unfairly denied delegates by Ike's manipulative Eastern Establishment backers. Had Ike not been the odds-on favorite to sweep the nation after twenty years of Democratic Party rule, the Republicans might well have remained angrier at each other than at their rivals.

Even so, Ike felt he needed to smooth ruffled feathers of the party's conservative base. So he named then-Sen. Richard M. Nixon of California as his vice presidential running mate. Nixon was offered to conservatives because he had made a name for himself going after Communists in the State Department. He pursued New Dealer Alger Hiss, against whom ex-Communist Whittaker Chambers had so heroically testified. Denying all, Hiss went to prison for perjury.

That Richard Nixon would go on to become president and to betray Taiwan in his famous "Opening Up" of Communist China could not have been imagined in any of those 1952 Republican delegates' wildest dreams. That he would be forced to resign in the face of impeachment stuns us even now.

The consequences for the nation of that 1952 "brokered" convention have been vast. When Nixon went down in 1974, thousands of "Watergate babies" were swept into office. These very liberal Democrats left a record of radical social and economic policies that still haunts us.

A more recent example of a brokered convention might be the Republican National Convention of 1980, in Detroit . Former Gov. Ronald Reagan had swept the primaries and caucuses that year and his nomination for president, after New Hampshire, was never in doubt.

But who would be his running mate? Reagan was then the oldest man ever nominated for president, so Number Two could easily have become Number One.

With no mystery in the presidential nomination to chew over, the national media -- liberal then as now -- began their own mini-campaign. With the collusion of former Sec. of State Henry Kissinger, the media began floating the idea of a Reagan-Ford ticket.

Like a beach ball at a rock concert, one reporter after another asked delegates what they thought of pairing the conservative Californian with the moderate ex-president. The idea began to gain real traction, stoked as it was by media boredom, the mother of mischief. Liberals snickered at the thought of the supposedly inexperienced Reagan ceding foreign policy and defense to Ford. It would be, one wag said, "a presidency with training wheels."

To conservatives, who had denounced Nixon-Kissinger-Ford détente as an immoral concession to Soviet imperialism, the very idea was anathema. Ford had erased a 30-point deficit in the polls in 1976, only to impale himself by saying Eastern Europe was not under Soviet domination during a presidential debate with Jimmy Carter. And this was the man whom the party Establishment and their cohorts in the media hoped would restrain Ronald Reagan.

To prevent being forced into such a misalliance, Gov. Reagan moved and quickly to spike all such talk. He named his defeated rival, former UN Ambassador George H.W. Bush as his running mate.

With that, the fate of the Republican Party and, to an extent, the nation, was sealed for twenty years after Bush 41 won the White House in 1988. Columnist George F. Will spoke for many conservatives after the senior Bush was trounced by Bill Clinton, following a single term: He turned the silk purse of the Reagan coalition into a sow's ear.

If we think the products of such brokered conventions were good for America, good for good for the conservative cause, or even good for the Republican Party, we should think again. A brokered convention could only leave us all, well, broker.

John S. Wilson: Key and Peele Are Selling Comedy Blacks Arent Buying

2012-02-22T14:45:35Z

Key & Peele, a sketch comedy show on Comedy Central, is peddling offensive comedy. I watched a variety of clips spanning 5 episodes. Not only were the subjects of their humor not ever any non-black group, but jokes solely focused on either parodying aspects of black culture (think black fraternities or soul food), or, worse, "black pathology," an all-encompassing category for any negative behavior exhibited disproportionately in urban areas for which, apparently, blacks have been genetically predisposed for over 25 years (according to the media). And maybe that's why Key and Peele feel the need to remind audiences they're only half-black. Less chance of the pathology gene manifesting itself perhaps?

Comedy Central, the home of South Park, isn't exactly a place known for its humility. Notching Comedy Central's best premiere in two years, the Key & Peele show earned 2.1 million viewers and was recently renewed for a second season. Clearly, it's a success. The brainchild of Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele, the show seeks to deal with issues of race in a fresh and "universal" way that lets the audience in on the joke.

But apparently, when Key and Peele say their comedy is universal what they really mean is that blacks will be the butt of the jokes and others will be the ones universally yucking it up. If that's their thing, that's fine, after all it is their show. But they shouldn't serve audiences horse crap and call it horseradish.

This isn't to say there isn't a demand for these kinds of jokes. Far from it, there certainly is. But why is that? And more important, why do Key and Peele believe they should be the ones supplying it?

I'm neither a mental health professional or expert on race. But even a layperson can recognize the level of self-loathing required to produce such comedy. Key and Peele go to extraordinary lengths to consistently remind their audiences of their biracial heritage and who they are both a product of: white mothers and black fathers.

Let's step back a bit. There's been a movement afoot in the U.S. for biracial people to be recognized as multiracial (as proven in the 2010 Census results). For too long they have had to 'choose a side' and predominantly identify as one race or another. The Census, college applications, and government forms all have forced this decision and some still do today. But overwhelmingly, that is changing. Those who are biracial espouse the view that it is their right to be identified accurately and holistically.

In the biracial movement, there's an implied disadvantage in a system that pits individuals in a tug-a-war between one race and another. But what about the advantages that biracial individuals have? Interestingly, studies show that "depending on the ethnic composition of their environment, many mixed race individuals will adopt that racial identity that is most congruent with their environment and/or most rewarded." In other words, as individuals take note of the world around them they are more likely to identify with the race that will yield the most benefits for them as they advance through society. Research has yet to show if individuals also base this decision on how they physically look -- skin tone, features, or hair texture -- and if they can "pass" as white or not. But it can be presumed that an individual, who is already leaning toward identifying with the white race, would find it that much easier to do so if they look the part.

Key and Peele are far from looking the part. With light brown hues, there is little doubt they were always perceived by others as black, or at least mixed. And maybe this is where the tone of their comedy emanates from: a sense that they have always been on the outside looking in and now they get to produce the stuff their non-black peers have always found incredibly funny.

Further research shows that there is a "protean identity, in which an individual can change his or her racial identification to suit the needs or appropriateness of the situation -- thus allowing someone to -- choose his or her identity." The biracial individual is essentially a chameleon equipped to change identity to suit a particular purpose at a particular time.

"When we write, we say, 'This is a really funny premise, it's pretty universal; we just happen to have melanin in our skin,'" Key recently said to The Root.

He went on to say: "At its core, race is an absurd notion," he says. "For some reason we find ourselves obsessed with something that's primal: If you don't look like me, you must be from a tribe that's not next door to me. It is intertwined with our basic fears. Only in this point of time, as the world gets smaller and smaller and we achieve a greater sense of what it means to be human in this world, can we find the humor in it."

But why should the subject of that humor only reside in black culture? Taking negative stereotypes that have existed for years and regurgitating them in some "universal" packaging that is little more than spoon-fed coonery is neither funny nor courageous; least of all is it achieving a "greater sense" of anything.

When did black comedians ever have to strive for "universal" appeal? Or package jokes differently in order pander to a particular racial group? There is a long list of black comics who were or are successful with a broad range of audiences: Dave Chappelle, Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, Richard Pryor, and Redd Foxx, are just a few. Usually when comics seek a "universal" audience they just clean up their acts and use less profanity. They sterilize their comedy and take it down a notch from an R-rating to PG. Eddie Murphy in Dr. Doolittle or The Nutty Professor is a perfect example.

Blacks will have little use for Key and Peele's brand of comedy. It's not that we don't get the jokes; it's more so we're tired of being the butt of them.

Tiphani N. Montgomery: How To Be Amazing When You Stink At Everything

2012-02-22T13:30:15Z

There was once a time in my life where I sucked at everything (yeah, I know... hard to believe!). I was in my early 20s and unsure of the world and all the broken promises life handed me. I was a freshman in college for three years straight and every job I got fired me. I was also a single mom (since my teenage years), and I was failing my daughter miserably.

For every dream that I was passionate about, there was always someone who shot it down as a hobby or tried their best to convince me of how unrealistic it was, and I started to believe what "they" were telling me. That I was going to fail. And because I was already failing, I figured that this had to be true!

That's when I heard it. A voice that whispered in my heart and screamed into my ears:

TIPHANI, YOU ARE AH-MAZZZZING!

I heard that voice and instantly believed!

The fact was I wasn't amazing because of my accolades. I had none. I wasn't amazing because I had tons of money. I was broke. I was amazing because God meticulously picked me and made me perfect. I was perfect and amazing because I existed, and that fact alone made me worthy.

I did some reevaluating of my life and realized that the reason I was failing at everything I touched was because it wasn't in my destiny to do them. I found that I had to force myself to work jobs everyone else told me I'd be good at. Stuffing myself in the same box that the people who didn't believe in me stuffed me in. I was trying to be something that I wasn't to please people who didn't give a $@!* about me anyway.

So I made the decision to live my life according to what was going to make ME the happiest.

One of my passions (and gifts) was to write, and I had a "crazy" dream to be an Essence Magazine Best Selling Author (side note: "crazy" = 1.7 gpa in high school and a 0.0 gpa in college... and yes, I actually attended class *sighs*). What did I make of that dream? I'm an Essence Magazine Best Selling Author. Seven times over. And I did it when everyone said I couldn't.

I went on to start other businesses and have done well for myself.

So here are some tips on how to be amazing when you suck at everything!

You know you're right. Release the urge to prove it.

Stupid people will gang up on you in mass numbers, trying to convince you that your dreams shouldn't be your dreams and for a slight second, you may argue with them.

But it's pointless.

They don't see your vision. Never have. Never will. And your intense desire to try and prove them wrong through words will only make you look stupid, like them. So starting today, don't tell anyone else about your plans to quit school or your 9-5 to pursue your career as a celebrity wardrobe stylist.

Just do it, knowing you've made the right decision all along.

Get rid of everything that's not useful, beautiful, or joyful.

Misery loves company, and you'd be surprised at how many people you entertain in your "circle" daily who are suffering from a severe case of misery! You cannot be amazing around bitter people. Period. They will steal your happiness and suck the joy right out of your soul every time. Let them go and shine!

Follow your heart.

Your heart never lies. You just choose to ignore it and then believe what everyone else says about you.

Today, make the decision to trust your gut and do whatever it takes to make you happy!

For more by Tiphani N. Montgomery, click here.

For more on happiness, click here.

Mark Sawyer: The Crisis of the African-American Intellectual: What's to Be Learned From the Cornel West v. Melissa Harris-Perry Debate

2012-02-22T03:06:29Z

In 1967, Harold Cruse wrote the fabled book, The Crisis of the Negro Intellectual. In the book, Cruse mapped the unsettled space between intellectuals and an increasingly fragmented set of social movements. I argue here we are at such a place, as we have on one hand a pragmatic Obama administration under siege from right wing forces and on the other hand black intellectuals trying to articulate the voices of what are absent mass social movements. This creates a crisis that plays itself out in peculiar ways. The conflict between Professors Melissa Harris-Perry and Cornel West is one such area.

As academics and scholars, our job is to teach and develop scholarship that aids human kind. For African-American scholars we carry the additional burden of trying to provide a deeper understanding of the issues that confront the black community in the United States and sometimes beyond. Our task is to illuminate, to provide analysis and critique that elevates the discussion and provides the public of all races with a better understanding of issues and ideas for a way forward.

But we are ciphers. Unlike W.E.B. DuBois and even some of the intellectuals in the period that Cruse wrote about, black intellectuals are not leaders in the way we once might have claimed. With the access to the ballot, African Americans have elected city councilmen, mayors, senators and even a president. We have supported politicians of all races for ideological and strategic reason. And the African-American community no longer must rely on unelected artists, academics, athletes and entertainers to speak for us. This situation is at once liberating and scary. While we are rightfully angry to decry those who suggest American is post-racial or celebrities who avoid speaking out on issues, it is also liberating for non-elected black folk to not speak for us.

That is why the recent comments published in Diverse Issues in Higher Education about Professor Melissa Harris-Perry by Professor Cornel West so saddened me. West's reference to Melissa Harris-Perry as a "fraud" is bad but the use of the adjective "treacherous" invokes a gender dog whistle that harkens back to the concept sexually available black woman cozying up to the master. Boyce Watkins, in his attack on Harris-Perry, on his website doubles down on the Jezebel stereotype by accusing Harris-Perry of "whoring herself out." What could have been an interesting discussion about black politics in the Obama era, has degenerated into a series of ad hominem attacks. We might have had a debate a la the high minded engagement with Michael Dawson's essay on Black Politics published in a recent issue of the Boston Review. Instead, we have been treated to ever deepening ad hominem attacks. Academic versions of street level put downs.

However, within the back and forth between Harris-Perry, West and others is a deep structure in terms of assessing the Obama administration that must be understood. But first we need to understand how we got here.

In response to Cornel West's Truth Dig attack on Obama, Harris-Perry crafted her own scathing critique. That critique pointed out that much of what was discussed in the Truth Dig article involved perceived personal sleights by Obama and also included some fairly ridiculous questioning of the President's racial authenticity. Harris-Perry focused her analysis on these points, which went right up to and perhaps over the line of assailing West's character. To be fair, Harris-Perry only responded to West's statements, and West didn't offer a terribly coherent critique of POTUS, but for what it's worth it is clear that West took Harris-Perry's response personally. It is also the case that Harris-Perry focused on the weaker parts of Cornel West's argument rather than the areas of more legitimate concern. A better tact would have been to address the strongest aspects of West's argument and offered a critique of his best positions rather than his worst positions. What was obscured in all of this is a real substantive disagreement on how we should assess and engage the Obama administration. West and Harris-Perry are using very different metrics to address the Obama administration and we need to understand those metrics and what they mean.

But we can learn from the row. I posit there are essentially two sides to this debate and I think it is easy to caricature either side.

To characterize Melissa Harris-Perry and Obama supporters more generally they often assess the administration contextually. That is their analysis of the success or failure of the Obama administration is based on an analysis of the limits of American political institutions, our current economic situation and the political climate. Further, the metric used to measure the President's accomplishments is what other Presidents were able to accomplish in similar or other circumstances.

For analysts like Harris-Perry the unprecedented use of the filibuster, and a Republican party who are less loyal opposition and more like a drunk driver playing chicken on a two-lane highway, make for formidable obstacles for the President. They not only cite Republicans but the conservatism of the democratic coalition in the Senate. A coalition still recovering from Clinton's Democratic Leadership Council that spent over 25 years attempting to move the party and especially Senate Democrats rightward. These analysts see the compromises and deals as sausage making of an effective legislative agenda. This group is not without criticisms of the President. Some disagree with aspects of foreign policy etc. or have criticized framing failures, but generally see the President as attempting to bend the momentum of trends toward inequality that are almost 40 years in the making.

For critics like West, the context is not significant. They desire messianic leadership that is transformative in its articulation of progressive values. For them the President's compromises undermine progressive arguments and more progressive stances on a range of issues. Some just want to see results. The fact of black unemployment regardless of how long the trend has existed is a critique of President Obama in and of itself. These critics tend to ignore context a la West's appearance on the Ed Schulz show discussing health care. When West was confronted with the fact that there were not fifty votes in the Senate for a public option, West simply changed the subject. Or on the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act), critics tend to ignore the fact the bill passed with a veto proof majority. Ostensibly the President was supposed to hand his political opponents the weapon of having vetoed funding for the troops, in order to take a purely symbolic stand on an issue average Americans don't understand. In doing so the Bill would have gone into law without the signing statement that limits the scope of what are clearly unconstitutional provisions.

While I am not generally sympathetic to this view, it is important to understand its origins and its importance. Often these critics of the President cite the idea that the President should use the bully pulpit to advocate for progressive causes. They want the President to be a leader of progressive social movements, and to be fair, in his campaign the President rhetorically flirted with the idea that he would assume that role. These types are happiest when the President is talking tough but getting nothing done a la his proposed jobs bill. But how do we square the circle?

Folks like Melissa Harris-Perry tend to underplay the need for the President to sometimes better frame and articulate a progressive agenda and the West's and Smiley's of the world overestimate the degree to which the President can through persuasion enact a more progressive agenda. However, while both positions are important to understand they are not equivalent. A President's primary job given the nature of the crises we face is to get things done. The President is also not a dictator he can't pass immigration reform on his own, end black unemployment by fiat, or create a single payer system. Nor does the bully pulpit mean the same thing in the era of 24 hour cable news and blogs. Even the cacophony of this debate demonstrates how easy it is for sideshows to muddy the stage. Frequently when I hear left critics of the President say "the President should say," he often has said just that and often on the biggest stage. We should criticize him when he says or does things that undermine movement in those areas but we can't demand he do things that political institutions don't allow.

At the same time, we need voices focusing on issues like poverty, inequality, immigration reform, women's rights, human rights, mass incarceration and a host of other issues that get scant attention in the day to day of our current politics. The success of Occupy Wall Street in putting inequality on the national agenda helped push the President to articulate a more progressive populist position on taxes and spending. What that means is we need West's voice and we need it to speak out loudly about this issues. West is trying to speak for what should be an active vibrant and articulate set of black and multi-racial social movements. However, conflating concern for these issues with support or non support of the President is just wrong. The biggest offender of this has been Dr. Boyce Watkins. Watkins not withstanding his sexist claim Harris-Perry is "whoring herself out", in his video rant and blog posting he suggests that Harris-Perry and Obama supporters simply don't care about poor black people, mass incarceration and a host of other issues. He's just wrong. You cannot conflate pragmatism and realistic expectations with an ideological difference.

My broader point is we need movement voices to call attention to these issues and we also need realistic cogent and pragmatic analysis of the work the President and all of our leaders are actually doing. While at times these two spheres can come together, it is also important that both institutionally and analytically they remain separate. Social movement actors need to avoid capture by political parties and elected officials in order to have the freedom to articulate issues and make demands. But we also can't criticize a President of the United States for not being a social movement leader. We need Melissa Harris-Perry and we need Cornel West, what we don't need is ad hominem attacks that obscure the inevitable friction between vision and pragmatism, social movement and institutional politics. But most important is we need active Black grassroots social movements to show us as scholars the way. Until we have such movements we will continue to have a Crisis of the African American Intellectual.

Dr. Susan Taylor: Five Questions to Help Determine Why You May Be Itching

2012-02-22T02:34:47Z

Itchy skin is a common complaint this time of year. In most cases, the itching can be attributed to dry skin but there can be several other reasons for itching. A few years ago a colleague called me to tell me that she had very itchy skin and she was not sure what to do. It was the middle of the summer so dry skin was not the culprit. She also said that she did not feel exactly like herself, although she did not have any specific complaints. I told her to have her thyroid levels checked out. Sure enough, she had a problem with her thyroid and the itching went away when the thyroid hormone level was brought back to normal. She now thinks that I am brilliant! On a serious note, itching can be a dreadful experience. In addition to feeling uncomfortable, it can lead to exhaustion because it may keep you awake at night. People who see you scratching may not want to be near you. The scratched area can become infected. Don't despair because there is something that you can do. The following five questions may help you get to the cause of your itching.

Do you know if you have dry skin? Since dry skin is the most common cause of itching (particularly in the winter) and the most easily solved, it's important to determine if it is the case for you. Simply look down at your feet and legs (body areas that tend to be drier than others) and if the skin is an ashen or grey color, is flaky or scaly and if the skin lines are prominent, then you have your diagnosis, dry skin. The solution may be is as simple as applying a combination anti-itch and lubricating lotion like Sarna Lotion or Eucerin Calming Cream each morning and night. Check out this blog for additional tips.

What are you doing when you become aware of the itching or when the itching intensifies? If you notice that the itching occurs consistently when you are at school or work or even when you are with a certain person, you should consider that stress or anxiety may be the cause of your itching. Indeed, there are psychological causes for itching. This does not mean that your itching is not real. It only means that the trigger of your itching is psychological. The key to alleviating this type of itching is to identify the stressor and then find solutions to reduce the stress. Another approach is not to place yourself in the stressful situation to begin with. Lastly, if you think that you are unable to take care of the problem by yourself, consider asking for a referral to a psychologist or counselor or speak with your minister.

What medications are you taking? Medications can cause itching of the skin indirectly from drying of the skin or directly by causing an allergic reaction. Water pills, also called diuretics, used to treat high blood pressure or swelling of the extremities can lead to dry skin and itching particularly in the winter. Cholesterol lowering medications may decrease the skin's oil and produce dryness. Ask your doctor if anything can be done. Finally, allergic reactions to medications can cause very severe itching of the skin along with hives or a rash. The medication must be discontinued (after consulting with your doctor) for the itching to resolve.

Have you traveled out of town, stayed in a hotel or visited a hospital, nursing home or day care center before the itching started? Infestations and bites caused by bedbugs, lice, scabies, or even mosquitoes can cause significant itching. These infestations can be acquired when you are at hospitals, nursing homes, daycare centers or hotels. Although you itch, you may or may not see a rash with these infestations or bites. With scabies, the itching is very severe, often keeping you awake at night, and a sign you may see is a tiny white line between your fingers or on the wrists. For bed bug bites, you may see three itchy red bumps lined up in a row. With lice, you may not see a rash but rather if you look closely you may see the louse attached to the seams of your clothes or the root of a hair. Before the itching will resolve, you must get rid of the infestation. See your doctor in the case of lice and scabies and an exterminator in the case or beg bugs.

Have you felt ill or just not yourself? There are quite a few internal disorders that can result in itching. Liver problems from hepatitis or gallstones, kidney problems and even thyroid problems may all cause itching. More serious problems like cancer of the lymphatic system called lymphoma, may also cause itching. In the situation of not feeling well, it is important to see your health care provider for a physical examination and testing.