First 2008 Presidential Debate Won by Obama

Last Friday night at 9pm couldn't come quick enough for me and millions of other 20- and 30-somethings who gathered around the country in living rooms, sports pubs, lounges, hotels, and private and public gathering places around the country to watch Jim Lehrer moderate the first McCain-Obama 2008 Presidential Debate between Senators Barack Obama (D-IL)and John McCain (R-AZ). It was guaranteed to have some fireworks of course and a little drama considering that John McCain blinked at the last minute after having allegedly "suspended his campaign" to mediate the $700B Wall Street bailout package, which of course was soundly defeated by a vote of 228-205 in the House of Representatives on Monday. Of course, it was a bit curious that McCain would "suspend his campaign" on the same day that polls were released showing that Obama had a 9-point lead over McCain for the first time in the race. Anyhow, a number of post-debate polls glaringly contradicted the debate scorers by showing that Obama won the first 2008 Presidential Debate by a comfortable margin in each of those polls including polls of Republican viewers.

There were several things that I will take from this debate.

Political pundits stated that Obama demonstrated "Presidential" bearing during the debate. Without a doubt, Sen. Obama seemed quite at ease during the debate, and was also classy, statesman-like and & gracious by stating at least 9 times that Sen. McCain was right, then showing how his own solution to that issue was different and better. This by the way, was not a sign of weakness, but is a debate tactic of conceding an obvious point to your opponent in order to score by making a more important point. Certainly he learned that at Harvard, no?


Several leading commentators (e.g., Charlie Gibson, David Brooks, Mark Shields) observed that McCain did not look at Obama during the debate at any time during the debate. He showed a condescending manner by stating at least 6 times that Obama "does not understand," as if McCain is the only person who can possibly understand how the world works. Apparently McCain "understands" how to be a President of the US, and "win wars" even though he has never done either. Several persons including Ambassador Richard Holbrooke noted that during the debate, Obama was calm and methodical while McCain was angry and ungracious.


Following the debate, Democratic VP candidate Sen. Joe Biden discussed the debate on a number of national networks. By contrast, Republican VP candidate, Gov. Sarah Palin was conspicuously absent. Does that sound like an experienced candidate to you? In either case, I can't wait for Thursday night's 2008 VP Debate between Biden and Palin.

Faux News Scrubs Palin Article from Website

I'm going to go out on a limb and say this Thursday's VP Debate between Sen. Joe Biden & Gov. Sarah Palin is going to be a massacre, a smackdown of epic proportions. If not, then it would be only because the McCain campaign would have so lowered the bar for her that simply showing up and looking at the camera will mark an impressive debate performance. Has anyone actually been able to watch any of Palin's national network interviews

without laughing themselves to death? It has nothing with her being a Republican--her performances have been pathetic for anyone who has graduated from college, or become a town mayor, or made Governor of a state, let alone someone who the Republican party has chosen to be next in line or in charge in the absence or incapacitation of the President.

Had Bill Clinton, or John Kerry, or certainly Barack Obama chosen such a
(non)intellectual lightweight, that ticket would have been mocked with derision and subsequently laughed out of town by the same folks in the media and at Fox News that are propping Palin up now. That the McCain campaign would foist such a fraud upon us who is clearly not ready to do anything besides recognize that Canada is a "foreign country", is an insult to anyone possessing a modicum of common sense. But then again, what would you expect from the same party that has brought us such mental stalwarts as Dan Quayle, George W. Bush, John McCain himself & now the simply awesome Parah Salin? I would argue that it has been a deliberate tactic by the GOP to continuously inundate us with such incredibly stupid candidates that literally anyone they put in front of the country has a legitimate chance of being elected President. Don't believe me? then fine, prove me wrong. As long as those candidates tout the Republican talking points of anti-abortion, pro-war, pro-guns & pro-business they appeal to the Republican base just fine.

Now to the issue at hand, which is that "Sly Fox" News deliberately erased, removed, or "scrubbed" an anti-Palin article from their web site which says the same things that I have thus far said in this post. (See my screen capture above of the page where the article "Conservatives Begin Questioning Palin’s Heft" once existed). Top Republican strategists, political pundits and other notables are reported to be in disbelief that John McCain would be so reckless as to present a vapid character as Sarah Palin to be his Vice Presidential choice, especially following the disastrous media appearances of the handful of interviews, most notably with ABC's Charles Gibson and CBS' Katie Couric, that the campaign has graciously "allowed" in the 30 days following her nomination and confirmation as VP choice during the 2008 RNC in Minnesota. Thank goodness, the good folks at German website, DerKeiler.com found and posted the original article, "Conservatives Begin Questioning Palin’s Heft". However, the closest article to this original post on Fox News' website is actually titled "Analysis: Pressure Builds on Palin Ahead of VP Debate", which if you compare both articles, you'll see the latter is a seriously dumbed down version of the former. The Brad Blog also re-posted the article. As my final bits of evidence, I will leave you excerpts from some of Palin's most memorable recent interviews which I'm sure you will find as incomprehensible, unintelligible, and ridiculous as I did. Dear Lord! No wonder Rick Davis and the McCain campaign have been hiding Palin from the media!

From Charlie Gibson's ABC interview with Sarah Palin, 9/11/08

Sarah Palin on 'the Bush Doctrine':

GIBSON: We talk on the anniversary of 9/11. Why do you think those hijackers attacked? Why did they want to hurt us?

PALIN: You know, there is a very small percentage of Islamic believers who are extreme and they are violent and they do not believe in American ideals, and they attacked us and now we are at a point here seven years later, on the anniversary, in this post-9/11 world, where we're able to commit to never again. They see that the only option for them is to become a suicide bomber, to get caught up in this evil, in this terror. They need to be provided the hope that all Americans have instilled in us, because we're a democratic, we are a free, and we are a free-thinking society.

GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?

PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?

GIBSON: The Bush -- well, what do you -- what do you interpret it to be?

PALIN: His world view.

GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war.

PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.

GIBSON: The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?

PALIN: I agree that a president's job, when they swear in their oath to uphold our Constitution, their top priority is to defend the United States of America.

I know that John McCain will do that and I, as his vice president, families we are blessed with that vote of the American people and are elected to serve and are sworn in on January 20, that will be our top priority is to defend the American people.

GIBSON: Do we have a right to anticipatory self-defense? Do we have a right to make a preemptive strike again another country if we feel that country might strike us?

PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend.

GIBSON: Do we have the right to be making cross-border attacks into Pakistan from Afghanistan, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?

PALIN: Now, as for our right to invade, we're going to work with these countries, building new relationships, working with existing allies, but forging new, also, in order to, Charlie, get to a point in this world where war is not going to be a first option. In fact, war has got to be, a military strike, a last option.

GIBSON: But, Governor, I'm asking you: We have the right, in your mind, to go across the border with or without the approval of the Pakistani government.

PALIN: In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists who would seek to destroy America and our allies, we must do whatever it takes and we must not blink, Charlie, in making those tough decisions of where we go and even who we target.

GIBSON: And let me finish with this. I got lost in a blizzard of words there. Is that a yes? That you think we have the right to go across the border with or without the approval of the Pakistani government, to go after terrorists who are in the Waziristan area?

PALIN: I believe that America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists who are hell bent on destroying America and our allies. We have got to have all options out there on the table.

From Katie Couric's CBS Interview w/Sarah Palin, 9/24/08

Palin Can't Cite Any Examples of McCain Taking a Stand on Regulation:

Couric: You've said, quote, "John McCain will reform the way Wall Street does business." Other than supporting stricter regulations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago, can you give us any more example of his leading the charge for more oversight?

Palin: I think that the example that you just cited, with his warnings two years ago about Fannie and Freddie - that, that's paramount. That's more than a heck of a lot of other senators and representatives did for us.

Couric: But he's been in Congress for 26 years. He's been chairman of the powerful Commerce Committee. And he has almost always sided with less regulation, not more.

Palin: He's also known as the maverick though, taking shots from his own party, and certainly taking shots from the other party. Trying to get people to understand what he's been talking about - the need to reform government.

Couric: But can you give me any other concrete examples? Because I know you've said Barack Obama is a lot of talk and no action. Can you give me any other examples in his 26 years of John McCain truly taking a stand on this?

Palin: I can give you examples of things that John McCain has done, that has shown his foresight, his pragmatism, and his leadership abilities. And that is what America needs today.

Couric: I'm just going to ask you one more time - not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation.

Palin: I'll try to find you some and I'll bring them to you.

Remember the Good Old Days (1992-2000)?

The good old days occurred from 1992-2000 when President William J. Clinton was in office. Unemployment was among the lowest in our history (about 5%), the economy was booming, and we were relatively at peace with the rest of the world (except for intervention in Kosovo, non-intervention in Rwanda, and a brief but failed stint in Somalia). Well, it's now 2008, and I'm sure wishing massive voter fraud perpetrated by the Rove Republican party hadn't succeeded in getting GWB forced down our collective throats.

Look at the picture. Need I say more?

Republicanism vs. Conservatism & the Death of Small Government

As a youth who is old enough to remember President Ronald Reagan (I was 4 years old when he was elected the second time), I have always heard certain catch phrases that have become embedded in the Republican psyche--conservatism and small government. Those terms especially starting with the administration of Reagan came to define the GOP, and to this day, these terms are what any good Republican will tell you is crucial to defining what the Republican party and Republicanism are all about. Unfortunately, I believe one of the major reasons that the Republican party is no longer relevant to the American people is because they have forgotten those ideals that made them respected in the Reagan heyday. Of course, they have totally disregarded their debt to the very people that have voted them in office time and time again (the little guy in Appalachia, and the "bitter" folks in Pennsylvania), and have instead catered to a very small group of morally bankrupt individuals & corporations who tell them what to do and say for the love of money. That discussion of course, could take up a series of blog posts, so I digress.

Now in the interest of full disclosure, I am a proud lifelong liberal Democrat who has no problem voting my conscience. All that means is that for national elections I tend to vote Democrat for President and Congress, and for local and state elections, I vote for the person who best articulates and has a track record of living the values that I care about, whether Democrat, Republican or independent. As a student of history, I have always been impressed with the way the Republican political machine gained and has largely held on to power state-wide and nationally since the Nixon 1970's to the present. Ironically, the GOP has in large part become successful especially throughout the South due to the rise of the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's-1970's and the resultant "white flight" from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party.

Certainly one term that President George W. Bush has made popular is "Compassionate Conservatism", which I guess is supposed to stand for the new and friendlier Republican way of governing. The "No Child Left Behind" endeavor as well as partnerships with community organizations and faith-based programs were to be critical elements of this better brand of conservatism. But 8 years later, all we have are broken promises, bigger government, record national debt, shaky at best standing in the international community, armed forces that are stretched thin by unnecessary war, and the collapse of our sacred financial markets due to the greed encouraged by Republican deregulation of corporate America, just to name a "negative benefits".

So I want to know what happened to the supposed GOP values of 'small government' and how does the modern GOP (not sure if that is an irony) reconcile exploding federal budget deficits, government bailouts and takeovers of failing financial corporations, disregard for the Constitution & a more insidious invasion of privacy? To help answer this question I read a recent article written on these issues by Wick Allison, the former publisher of one of the most well-known Republican publications, The National Review. In this article, I think he does a great job of describing how so-called Conservatives got away from the true meaning of small government, and why he believes a new type of politician, Barack Obama can restore conservative (lowercase "c") government to the US.

I'll leave you with links to a few articles so you can read more for yourself:

Former National Review publisher endorses Obama

The Death of Republican Philosophy

Nice Bailout. Now Pay for It!

Dodd bill more aggressive than Treasury plan

Racism Disguised as Free Speech Appears on Oregon College Campus

Universities and other similar places are considered to be institutions of higher learning and bastions of the "liberal" intellectual elites where students regardless of race, religion, or culture can freely interact and expand their world view while practicing free speech. That educational ideal has been threatened at George Fox University, a small Christian school in Oregon where recently students hung an effigy of Sen. Barack Obama who would be the nation's first African-American President. A friend of mine, former St Pete Times journalist and current post-graduate journalism student at University of Southern California discovered this story and wrote to me. So I thank Amber Mobley for allowing me to re-publish her thoughts on the matter as well as the President's response to her letter. Post-racial society? You'd better think again. I'm not saying that the University is racist. I'm just saying that any time something like this happens in the mold of Jena, Louisiana, (remember a similar beginning to the Jena 6 saga?) we should hold those in charge accountable at the very least for addressing the issue immediately and making it clear that despicable acts of this kind are NOT welcome at an institution of higher learning--or learning institution of any kind.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Mr. Baker, As a scholar, a black woman, but most importantly, as a Christian, I am writing you out disappointment, outrage and disheartenment at the recent acts of your student body.

Hanging Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama in effigy, as you have stated in the press, has got to be one of the most disgusting and disturbing things I have read about in quite some time.

I urge you to (and pray that you) find it absolutely necessary to find and expel everyone involved in the above-mentioned incident.

It not only leaves an indelible blemish on the history of your so-called "Christian" university, but also imbrues the very fabric of America and the supposed Christian values upon which our "great" country was founded.

If the correct actions are not taken in a timely fashion, your university, as well as you sir, will forever be a part of the culture of racism in America that continues to linger in the national conscience like the smell of so many innocent black men who were indeed lynched and hanged from trees, their bodies left to rot in the searing sun of the deep south.

Failure to act in an appropriate manner, I believe in my heart, will also add to the tainted image that so many potential believers have of our Savior Jesus Christ.

Please, think about what Jesus would do.

I will leave you with the lyrics to Billie Holiday's song, "Strange Fruit". I hope it paints a clear picture of the seriousness of lynching. Southern trees bear strange fruit,Blood on the leaves and blood at the root,Black bodies swinging in the southern breeze,

Strange fruit hanging from the poplar trees.
Pastoral scene of the gallant south,
The bulging eyes and the twisted mouth,
Scent of magnolias, sweet and fresh,
Then the sudden smell of burning flesh

Here is fruit for the
crows to pluck,
For the rain to gather,
for the wind to suck,
For the sun to rot, for the trees to drop,
Here is a strange and bitter crop.

~Amber Nicole Mobley

UPDATE Thursday, September 25, 2008

Dear Ms. Mobley –

Thank you for your very thoughtful note. I called a meeting yesterday of the community during our worship time and addressed this issue directly with them. If you would like you can listen to this address on our website, http://www.georgefox.edu/. What you may not know is that I have been working hard to address issues of race and diversity in our community. Several years ago I initiated on the campus the ActSix program which provides scholarships and aid to students from diverse backgrounds to come to our campus. The students (who are of every race) have provided great strength and power to our campus. The cutout of Senator Obama had a sign on it which read, "ActSix reject." I saw the incident as a direct attack on our efforts on campus to heal issues of race. Whoever put the Obama effigy up, was directly attacking our students of color. I considered the attack a personal one the students and on me and what we have been trying to do here. It is greatly disappointing. Unfortunately on a national level it is being depicted as a campus full of racists. The reality is far from that but we will diligently work to continue to bring change here.

We are trying to find those who are responsible. We have already had one talk back session and will begin a process of further dialogue on campus this coming week. You anger is justified but know that I am committed to continuing to address issues of race here and in the rest of the Christian community.

With regrets,

Robin Baker
President

Am I A Spectacle to You?! Are You (Not) Entertained?

Have you ever wondered why when it comes to minorities and non-Europeans the media is seemingly more than happy to show pictures of Africans and minorities in the worst light? When was the last time you saw a picture of a naked little white child with flies buzzing around and a stomach distended due to malnutrition. I'm waiting...you haven't! (According to missionaries I've talked to, donors stateside will not give or sponsor children if they look "too healthy" or appear not to "need assistance". What foolishness!) I get so tired of seeing minorities exploited on TV and print publications, just for the fact that "poverty sells". Unless a minority is scoring a touchdown, dunking a basketball, or performing comedy and making money for big business and advertisers, Western media doesn't tend to publicize them in a positive light the majority of the time. I mean how many times did we have to see pictures of Black "looters" trying to stay alive during Hurricane Katrina, while white "finders" were shown sympathy in the media? Most of the time when we see Blacks or Hispanics on the evening news (or "Cops"), they are wearing dreads and a white tee and being led to jail in handcuffs. Why is this? I believe there are several reasons. One reason is that reporting news of minorities sells papers and magazines because it only further reinforces the institutionalized and cultural biases of WASP's against others who are not like them. After all, if all I see are Blacks making mischief in the projects or getting arrested, I can say, "See! I told you THOSE PEOPLE were no good". What we see in the media then becomes self-fulfilling prophesy of what we wanted to believe anyway in order to make ourselves appear superior. Angela, a friend of mine, expressed her disappointment and disgust to tbt* (Tampa Bay Times magazine, a publication of the St Pete Times) for printing a disgraceful picture of a naked Haitian lady entering labor during Tropical Storm Hanna.

tbt* News Talk, Letters to the Editor 9/10/2008, p. 22
An insensitive photo

Re: Hanna can’t stop this baby (World in Snap photo, tbt*
Sept. 5)

I was a fan of your newspaper until last Friday. I am outraged by the photo showing U.N. peacekeepers carrying a pregnant Haitian pregnant woman in labor into a delivery area during Tropical Storm Hanna. She was naked from her stomach down!

Why would you choose to display such a private moment in your newspaper? I am a brown-skinned minority, and I am greatly offended. It makes the woman look like a National Geographic spectacle. Is that how you see brown-skinned minorities? Would you photograph a pregnant Caucasian woman (regardless of what country she is from) like that? I highly doubt it.

The persons who approved the publication of this photo are insensitive beings. How would you like a photographer to capture your mothers, wives, daughters, sisters, or aunts lying on a cot naked from the stomach down, pregnant and in labor, spread eagle and displayed for a large population to see?

Angela Esquitoria Steele, Tampa

Why It's Important for "US" to Vote

Watch the following videographic evidence of why this election on Tuesday, November 4th will be so historically and socially significant for the United States of America as well as symbolically important to oppressed peoples everywhere. If you STILL don't want to vote after watching this video, then there's simply no convincing you. Thanks to one of my subscribers, Reginald, owner of Rabicas Coffees in Tampa, FL for sending me this information.

Remember the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. which are applicable in all areas of life, "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."

Voting Rocks by Shirre Hodges & Voting Information

My wife, Shirre A. Hodges, is at it again! Like me, she's taking an active part in this election. We believe that we SHOULD participate actively, not just because we want to show our own children the importance of political action, but also because we realize how critical this 2008 election is, and want to ensure that as many folks in our local community exercise their right to vote.

If you're in the Lakeland/Polk County area (or even Brandon, Valrico, Riverview, New Tampa), come on out Saturday, September 27, 10AM for a great time with voting education and some refreshments (first-come, first-served for first time voter's registration applicants.

For more information, make sure to logon TheListbyKeto, for mapping information from the Winter Haven area and Tampa. Other things to know:

WHERE: Washington Oaks (formerly Washington Park) Lakeland, FL

COST: FREE to general public Complimentary refreshments, first-come, first-served for voters registration applicants.

FMI: If you have any questions or comments please feel free to contact Shirre A Hodges @ 863.662.8554.

Polk County Voter Registration: If you would like to contact your local Supervisor of Elections for more information please call 863.534.5888.

I'm including below some voting information that Shirre will cover during the session and also listed a couple online resources which are currently assisting folks nationally and locally with preparing their voter's registration documents.

VOTERS’ QUALIFICATIONS
18 years or older
A U. S citizen living in the state of Florida
Registered to vote in the state of Florida
Must not be adjudicated mentally incapacitated unless your rights have been restored
Not be a convicted felon unless you have had your civil rights restored
Provide a current valid Florida drivers license number of identification card number. If you do not have a current and valid license or ID you must provide last four digits of SSN
If you do not possess a current valid drivers license, ID, or SSN please mark NONE on your voters’ application.

CIVIL RIGHTS RESTORATION
There are twenty states in the United States were an ex-felon can vote after his/her release, unfortunately we are not one of those states. The one thing that may happen after the exhaustion of your incarceration period is that you may receive a letter in the mail notifying you of your civil rights restoration. If your civil rights have not been restored or invalid address is registered in the system than of course you will not receive the letter. If you are a convicted felon that has been rehabilitated or released and want to know whether your rights have been restored or if you are eligible for civil rights restoration, contact the Office of Executive Clemency @1800.435.8286 or logon www.fpc.state.fl.us.

At this time it MAY BE be too late to restore your civil rights [in time to vote in the November 4 election]

REGISTRATION MYTHS
If I register to vote then will be selected for jury duty? This is not completely true, if you have ever purchased anything online or registered an account online, filled out any surveys or anything that can be publicly viewed than you can be selected.

Recently there has been a viral email circulating stating that Florida polling officials will turn away anyone wearing Obama gear. Please ignore this email. According to poll officials, this is not true. If you have on a hat or carrying a poster or sign the Deputy on the outside will ask you to leave it outside until you cast your vote. So you are free to wear your Obama t-Shirt. For further details, call your local Supervisor of Elections office.

VOTING EARLY
Early voting may be better for some people trying to beat the hustle and bustle at the polls on November 4, 2008. One surefire way to beat an extremely large crowd is to participate in early voting starting on October 20 and ending on November 1, Monday-Saturday 9a-5p. This is for everyone

CAN’T FIND MY CARD OR HAVE NOT RECEIVED IT YET WHAT DO I DO?
If you have misplaced or have not received your voter’s registration card by the day that you chose to vote bring along a copy of your driver’s license or identification card. This serves as two forms of identification.

INFORMATION CHANGES
If you have moved, married, or divorced and need to change your personal information just complete a voters' registration application, check the box number that applies to you and submit the application.

REGISTRATION STATUS LETTER
If you receive any political mail asking you to prove whether you are registered to vote please make sure to rely to that letter right away and return to sender only including your name [and no other personal information].

ALL NEW VOTERS' REGISTRATION APPLICATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED NO LATER THAN OCTOBER 6, 2008!!!!!!

Also, there are several national organizations that are assisting with the Get Out the Vote efforts.

• http://www.rockthevote.com/ Easily enter your information here, and RocktheVote, provided by MoveOn.org will create the registration form which you can then print out and mail to your local Supervisor of Elections for your county. Reminders: You must be a U.S. citizen to vote in the U.S. You must provide your month, day, and year of birth, and you must be 18 to vote.
• 
  https://www.voteforchange.com/ Founded by the Obama for America Campaign, this site provides a very simple tool which allows people to 1. Register to vote. 2. Request to vote absentee. 3. Find your polling location. The process only takes about 3 minutes.

REGISTER NOW!

Does Whoopin' Really Change Things?

Last year, on June 19, 2007, I had an online discussion with my friend LIFE on spanking or physical corporal punishment of children. Life doesn't believe in spanking his children because he believes that it teaches children violence against others as a means of disagreement. At the time, I agreed with him 100%, and wrote a comment on his Myspace blog supporting his view.

Now that I am a new parent for the first time, having married a beautiful woman with 3 wonderful but completely normal children, I have changed my mind somewhat. My wife and I are two people with totally opposite temperaments. She is a highly intelligent and more dramatic type of person who frankly says what is on her mind, and is visibly passionate about anything of interest to her. On the other hand, I am somewhat averse to confrontation, prefer not to talk any louder than necessary, and am a fairly easy-going, laid back person. Not too much upsets me. So you can believe that before we were married, we had to sit down and discuss exactly HOW we would raise, nurture, and discipline our children. I still believe that spanking should only be used as a last resort, and that it is by no means the ONLY avenue for addressing, correcting, and improving a child's behavior. So in our family life, my wife and I first try to find out WHY a child did something they were not supposed to do before rushing into full Jackie Chan mode. This may then lead us to TEACH that child HOW we expect something to be done. As an example, each child in the house is assigned at least one chore on Monday through-Saturday. One chore is to clean their bathroom which is on their side of the house a couple times weekly. (You can imagine that with 3 children bathing daily, etc. you've got to be vigilant about keeping a clean and orderly house). In order to not leave any room for misunderstanding or confusion about what my wife and I mean when we said, "Clean the bathroom," I demonstrated for them, and had them watch me while I cleaned their porcelain and chrome fixtures, swept, mopped the floor & cleaned the mirrors. Because we mostly teach and demonstrate the right things to do, doing chores, studying homework, etc. the children usually respond positively. However, I have learned that as a parent sometimes just talking isn't always enough to convince a child that you mean business. Now if we deduce that a child has acted improperly out of defiance for the rules or disrespect then we certainly address that with a correction that fits the action. We have already drawn up boundaries for the family, so the children know that every action carries a consequence, whether positive or negative. If you do this, your reward is everyone getting to go to Busch Gardens for a day of fun. Conversely, if you don't do what is expected, no Playstation tonight. Most children will at some point learn that it is in their best interest to be obedient by looking at the consequences logically.

Again, I can't speak for anyone else's children. Nor do I position myself as the 2008 Dr. Spock of child raising. You have to do what works in your household. I'm simply stating in this writing what works in MY household. My children are certainly not what I would refer to as "bad" or problem children. Truth be told, I don't tend to worry too much about their behavior because they generally behave very well and are polite and respectful (for the most part). Of course ALL children misbehave and at times act in disobedience to family rules. In a future blog I may give more specific examples which will illustrate why I have changed my mind and now believe that spanking is a necessary part of parenting one's children. But for now, please read my comment below. How a year changes things!

Well, Life, I just read this blog today, and am suprised I hadn't seen it before. But I must respond considering my first-hand knowledge of the subject (I mean first hands, son). I do agree with your points that whippin' children does teach them that violence is acceptable. It continually reinforces to them that if they disagree with someone or if that person violates a rule, especially a person that they have control over (and control is key), that they can alter that behavior by an outward physical confrontation. In fact I believe this STILL does not address the inward reason why a person did something. If you really want to re-direct a person's behavior, it would seem the best course of action is to change, modify, or at the very least understand why they think as they do so you can deal with them at their level (whether professionally, socially, or family-wise as with children).

As a tutor of children since age 14, and a Sunday School teacher for children ages 3 years-High School for 6 years, I can say that I never once put a hand on any children who were misbehaving in my classroom in which I was the sole authority figure. Being physically stronger and bigger the majority of "my" children, it would have seemed easy to address any public behavior issues by striking or using abusive language, but I realized that every child is different in the way they think and act (their character). These elements make each person unique and are impacted by their environment at home, school & socialization patterns as well as biological make-up (nature vs nurture). I can remember that as a child, it was not the ever-present threat of whippings that made me change my "bad" behavior. As most children of reasonable intelligence I simply altered my behavior to avoid whippings as I grew older. Of course, as I matured, I understood that many of the things I did as a child were indeed foolish, but again that realization came from gaining maturity & experience, and learning from a parent who taught me critical family, spiritual, educational & social values. Now that I'm an adult, I understand fully that I represent myself and my family, so I don't do the things that would shame my family.

People who practice whipping as a form of "discipline" often quote 2 references--the Bible in Proverbs 29:15 (the author in particular was a grown man who also whipped adults as a form of public punishment/coercion--look it up I Kings 12:10). Also they quote the supposed historical assertion that it was BECAUSE children were whipped more in the past (up until the 60's/70's) that the American family and the African American family in particular had fewer behavioral problems with their children and lower incidence of juvenile delinquency, incarceration, disrespect for authority, etc. To those folks, I would say that the primary reason why juvenile behavior problems are more prevalent now is b/c family life has been devalued by society & the media. I believe that up until the 60's/70's youth seemed to be more respectful of authority NOT b/c their parents whipped them frequently (although God knows they did), but rather b/c the entire family provided their youth with a sense of belonging and place in the family, and taught them respect first for themselves, God & their family, which then translated to respect outside the home for the community, authority figures & fellow man.

To conclude my essay (lol) I must ask us to consider this question, "Should we carry out an act just because we can, i.e. b/c we have the physical capacity take a particular action?"

Tim Wise On White Privilege

Recently, Tim Wise, the author of "White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privileged Son" expounded on what it really means to have "white privilege" in the United States of America even in the 2000's, when many people would like to believe that we have transitioned from a racist (read racially conscious or race-charged) society of the 1960's and 1970's to a "post-racial" society which embraces all regardless of race, religion, or cultural background. His words make a lot of sense to those of us who live the American experience from "the other side of the fence" of the white privilege argument, and if we are honest and take a serious look at how our world really works, we will admit that yes, there are benefits to being white. There always have been, and there always will be. This is what the majority of US Supreme Court Justices failed to recognize in their landmark affirmative action ruling of 2003, Grutter v. Bollinger in which University of Michigan's law school admittance process was upheld which awarded points to applicants based on certain characteristics. It is hardly likely that 40 years of progress, while significant, will completely erase 400 years of attitudes that have been consciously and subconsciously ingrained in the minds of WASP's and fellow Europeans regarding others who hail from diverse cultures and races. Thanks to Tim Wise for pointing out all the things that I suspected but am not quite articulate enough to verbalize. I've provided the Youtube videos of two of his speeches above, as well as a ten-minute piece below on the topic that he wrote on September 13, 2008. In the first video, Tim discusses the origins of "whiteness" as a racial and social identity. The second video reproduces in full Tim's speech given on white privilege June 25, 2002 at Bloedel Hall, St. Mark's Cathedral, Seattle. Thanks also to my good friend, Lacey B. Smith for putting me onto this topic.

For those who still can't grasp the concept of white privilege, or who are looking for some easy-to-understand examples of it, perhaps this list will help.

White privilege is when you can get pregnant at seventeen like Bristol Palin and everyone is quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or your parents, because "every family has challenges," even as Black and Latino families with similar "challenges" are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.

White privilege is when you can call yourself a "f_in' redneck," like Bristol Palin's boyfriend does, and talk about how if anyone messes with you, you'll "kick their f_in' ass," and talk about how you like to "shoot sh*&" for fun, and still be viewed as a responsible, all-American boy (and a great son-in-law to be) rather than a thug.

White privilege is when you can attend four different colleges in six years like Sarah Palin did (one of which you basically failed out of, then returned to after making up some coursework at a community college), and no one questions your intelligence or commitment to achievement, whereas a person of color who did this would be viewed as unfit for college, and probably someone who only got in in the first place because of affirmative action.

White privilege is when you can claim that being mayor of a town smaller than most medium-sized colleges, and then Governor of a state with about the same number of people as the lower fifth of the island of Manhattan, makes you ready to potentially be president, and people don't all piss on themselves with laughter, while being a Black U.S. Senator, two-term state Senator, and constitutional law scholar, means you're "untested."

White privilege is being able to say that you support the words "under God" in the pledge of allegiance because "if it was good enough for the founding fathers, it's good enough for me," and not be immediately disqualified from holding office--since, after all, the pledge was written in the late 1800s and the "under God" part wasn't added until the 1950s--while if you're Black and believe in reading accused criminals and terrorists their rights (because the Constitution, which you used to teach at a prestigious law school, requires it), you are a dangerous and mushy liberal who isn't fit to safeguard American institutions.

White privilege is being able to be a gun enthusiast and not make people immediately scared of you.

White privilege is being able to have a husband who was a member of an extremist political party that wants your state to secede from the Union, and whose motto is "Alaska first," and no one questions your patriotism or that of your family, while if you're Black and your spouse merely fails to come to a 9/11 memorial so she can be home with her kids on the first day of school, people immediately think she's being disrespectful.

White privilege is being able to make fun of community organizers and the work they do--like, among other things, fight for the right of women to vote, or for civil rights, or the 8-hour workday, or an end to child labor--and people think you're being pithy and tough, but if you merely question the experience of a small town mayor and 18-month governor with no foreign policy expertise beyond a class she took in college and the fact that she lives close to Russia--you're somehow being mean, or even sexist.

White privilege is being able to convince white women who don't even agree with you on any substantive issue to vote for you and your running mate anyway, because suddenly your presence on the ticket has inspired confidence in these same white women, and made them give your party a "second look."

White privilege is being able to fire people who didn't support your political campaigns and not be accused of abusing your power or being a typical politician who engages in favoritism, while being Black and merely knowing some folks from the old-line political machines in Chicago means you must be corrupt.

White privilege is when you can take nearly twenty-four hours to get to a hospital after beginning to leak amniotic fluid, and still be viewed as a great mom whose commitment to her children is unquestionable, and whose "next door neighbor" qualities make her ready to be VP, while if you're a Black candidate for president and you let your children be interviewed for a few seconds on TV, you're irresponsibly exploiting them.

White privilege is being able to give a 36 minute speech in which you talk about lipstick and make fun of your opponent, while laying out no substantive policy positions on any issue at all, and still manage to be considered a legitimate candidate, while a Black person who gives an hour speech the week before, in which he lays out specific policy proposals on several issues, is still criticized for being too vague about what he would do if elected.

White privilege is being able to attend churches over the years whose pastors say that people who voted for John Kerry or merely criticize George W. Bush are going to hell, and that the U.S. is an explicitly Christian nation and the job of Christians is to bring Christian theological principles into government, and who bring in speakers who say the conflict in the Middle East is God's punishment on Jews for rejecting Jesus, and everyone can still think you're just a good church-going Christian, but if you're Black and friends with a Black pastor who has noted (as have Colin Powell and the U.S. Department of Defense) that terrorist attacks are often the result of U.S. foreign policy and who talks about the history of racism and its effect on Black people, you're an extremist who probably hates America.

White privilege is not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is when asked by a reporter, and the people get angry at the reporter for asking you such a "trick question," while being Black and merely refusing to give one-word answers to the queries of Bill O'Reilly means you're dodging the question, or trying to seem overly intellectual and nuanced.

White privilege is being able to go to a prestigious prep school, then to Yale and then Harvard Business school, and yet, still be seen as just an average guy (George W. Bush) while being Black, going to a prestigious prep school, then Occidental College, then Columbia, and then to Harvard Law, makes you "uppity," and a snob who probably looks down on regular folks.

White privilege is being able to graduate near the bottom of your college class (McCain), or graduate with a C average from Yale (W.) and that's OK, and you're cut out to be president, but if you're Black and you graduate near the top of your class from Harvard Law, you can't be trusted to make good decisions in office.

White privilege is being able to dump your first wife after she's disfigured in a car crash so you can take up with a multi-millionaire beauty queen (who you go on to call the c-word in public) and still be thought of as a man of strong family values, while if you're Black and married for nearly twenty years to the same woman, your family is viewed as un-American and your gestures of affection for each other are called "terrorist fist bumps."

White privilege is when you can develop a pain-killer addiction, having otained your drug of choice illegally like Cindy McCain, go on to beat that addiction, and everyone praises you for being so strong, while being a Black guy who smoked pot a few times in college and never became an addict means people will wonder if perhaps you still get high, and even ask whether or not you ever sold drugs.

White privilege is being able to sing a song about bombing Iran and still be viewed as a sober and rational statesman, with the maturity to be president, while being Black and suggesting that the U.S. should speak with other nations, even when we have disagreements with them, makes you "dangerously naive and immature."

White privilege is being able to say that you hate "gooks" and "will always hate them," and yet, you aren't a racist because, ya know, you were a POW so you're entitled to your hatred, while being Black and insisting that Black anger about racism is understandable, given the history of your country, makes you a dangerous bigot.

White privilege is being able to claim your experience as a POW has anything at all to do with your fitness for president, while being Black and experiencing racism and an absent father is apparently among the "lesser adversities" faced by other politicians, as Sarah Palin explained in her convention speech.

And finally, white privilege is the only thing that could possibly allow someone to become president when he has voted with George W. Bush 90 percent of the time, even as unemployment is skyrocketing, people are losing their homes, inflation is rising, and the U.S. is increasingly isolated from world opinion, just because a lot of white voters aren't sure about that whole "change" thing. Ya know, it's just too vague and ill-defined, unlike, say, four more years of the same, which is very concrete and certain.

White privilege is, in short, the problem.

(Still) Crazy in Love! Shirre & Kéto Celebrate 1 Year!

One year ago today, I began officially dating Shirre A. (Miller) on Saturday, September 15, 2007. So today is another good day in a long sequence of good days. I had met Shirre earlier in June 2007 when she began attending Black on Black Rhyme, Tampa's largest spoken word, open mic poetry show. At the time, I was co-hosting BoBR along with LIFE. I was also learning the art of DJ'ng from Forge as he prepared to leave the state to begin his Masters degree in Social Sciences. I remember the first night Shirre was at the show, she walked on stage and read a piece which was so passionate and heart-felt that the audience immediately loved her. I knew there was something about her, and I went over to say hello and congratulate her during the show. Certainly as a 28-year-old male, I had met quite a few attractive women in 7 years of community college, BS studies & MBA studies, and because of my professional networking, community service, and nightlife interests, I was often making their acquaintance. However, Shirre was different. I would notice that whenever Shirre walked in a room, everyone took notice. She was amazingly beautiful and commanded attention without being arrogant or self-absorbed. There are some women who beg for attention and others who simply take it by virtue of their personality. I would notice that she seemed at ease with everyone, and people genuinely liked her. There were also quite a few men who were enamored with her, but she didn't seem to be easily impressed by their advances. That's saying quite a bit, because in my brief life experiences I have observed how easily women either lose their head or take advantage of the situation when everyone wants to know their name. Those who don't go crazy over the attention tend to be the ones who are "grown-up", already have goals, and are self confident and true to their values. By late July, Shirre was still attending BoBR every Tuesday night, we would chat from time to time, then she mentioned that she loved tea, so I asked her out for tea on a weekend. It turned out that one of her relatives died that weekend, so we couldn't get together. But we did keep up by phone during the weeks that followed. We would talk for quite a while on the phone and the chemistry was awesome. We could talk for a long time and not worry about whether one could keep the other's interest or whether we would run out of words. By August I invited her to several of my events and we went to breakfast and dinner a few times. In early September, we reached a critical point based on a disagreement, and I decided to just chill out for a bit. I have always believed that as far as dating that we should follow our heart while having faith that God will send the person that is right for us. However, we should not get bent out of shape or become hysterical when things don't happen as we would like, because I strongly feel that if a relationship is meant to be, then nothing can separate two people. Sometimes you just have to sit back and be patient. If the other person is not for you, then hopefully you both enjoyed each other's company, and there are no hard feelings, but at some point you have to move on.

It turned out, that we were still thinking about each other but not communicating. So Shirre surprised me by showing up at Cater 2 You Tampa, a unique upscale event for women started by my friend, Rocky Cusseaux, featuring massages of your choice, music, fine wine & gourmet desserts. I was as glad to see her as she was to see me. That evening we talked about the things that we had in common and decided to go ahead and start dating. From that point, there were other interests, but I found that I wanted to see less and less of other women and focus on Shirre instead. It seemed like we had known each other for years, and our souls were in a sense linked, though we had only met recently. As the weeks went on, we instinctively knew how to "feel" each other. If something was wrong, or one was thinking about the other, one of us would pick up the phone at that exact moment--as if we were telepathically connected. On September 19th, I casually introduced Shirre to Ma at my monthly forum, Wide aWoke Wednesday. By October we were seeing each other exclusively and I was just crazy about her, but aware based on her recent history that she was not at that point ready for a long-term relationship. But again, instead of being aggressive, I wanted to just see what would happen. Later in October, we discussed where we both were in the relationship and decided to continue the relationship based on our mutual love. I knew that I really loved her and there was no doubt that I wanted to marry her, but did she want the same thing? In early November, we discussed marriage, and we agreed that that was what we both wanted to do, though being of a practical business mind, I suggested that we wait two years to get married. I had never before considered marrying a woman who already had children, but because I loved her so much, I was willing to see if it all made sense.

On November 17, Shirre invited me to a family seafood cookout at her brother's house in Bartow. We met her 3 children, Reuben (11), Lanay (10), and Jada (7). They seemed so polite and respectful that I couldn't believe it. Certainly, I thought, their mother had told them to, "Be good today and don't chase away the new guy--or else." But we got along well--thanks in part to their mother having prepared them to meet me--and in future interactions they were always the same and made me feel at home. I met her mother also, and I was glad that the family gave me their stamp of approval. The next weekend, Shirre & her family invited me to Thanksgiving Dinner, so I brought my Mom with me to meet the family as well. She had some misgivings (as I found out later, this is quite common among mothers and mothers-in-law), but I enjoyed the time and decided not to worry about it. I figured that eventually Ma would love Shirre as much as I did.

Shirre & I continued to date and soon decided that waiting two years was a bad, bad idea, so we decided on November 2008 as the tentative wedding date, then a few weeks later moved up the date to August 19, 2008, then June/July. By the last week of January 2008 we had decided on a final date for our wedding. We would get married on my Birthday, April 26, 2008. So on Shirre's 27th Birthday, February 2, we had breakfast with the children & later that day we went to the jewelry store in Tampa where we picked out the rings and ended the day with a romantic engagement dinner at Bonefish Grill in Brandon. From that day the wedding day was our focal point. We made wedding task lists & financial spreadsheets to determine how much money should be outlaid and when, called each other, identified wedding vendors and service providers who were friends or business associates of ours, and set up consultation visits with them to determine if their reputation and quality matched their price. We scheduled marriage counseling with our Bishop at my church, but before that we sat down and over several days wrote out questions and answers about finances, raising and disciplining children, family, and real-estate property. (As I said, I do have a practical mind, and I'm aware that just being in love is not enough. I wanted to make sure that we could pay the bills too.) We hired Shirre's cousin Sherrita & husband Prinshon Dension as wedding planners. We also hired Tynese Randolph, a dear family friend as wedding consultant/bride's stress reliever. We looked for wedding dresses in Winter Haven and Orlando, and Shirre tried 3 dresses before finally deciding on one. We had to plan and pay for a wedding in 3 months instead of the customary 6, 9, or 12 months in advance that most couples have to plan their wedding, but we were excited, and couldn't wait! We also hired poet, Wally B (my "cousin") who interviewed us so that he could write a wedding poem for us, "At Last", and whose wife, Charmaine and mother, Aunt Frances provided an incredible wedding rehearsal dinner for the wedding party, my friend Marcie, who is an amazing songstress, one of my best friends, Motown Maurice for videography & Karen's Kamera for photography. Meanwhile, Bishop Matthew Williams, my pastor, had Rev. A.L. Wingfield provide marriage counseling for us, and he agreed to marry us since Bishop would be out of town on our wedding weekend. We had marriage counseling on April 6, 10, and 12, and the advice we were given on communication, family, finance, love, letting go of past history to embrace the present, etc. only strengthened our resolve and love for each other.

Finally, our wedding day arrived on April 26, 2008, 2:00pm at Brown Memorial COGIC in Tampa and our theme was "At Last". I was ready, thanks to my best men and former college classmates, Mark and Gary who were indispensable friends. (Yes, I lost my wedding ring that morning, and they found it and hid it while I sweated). After that I really wasn't nervous, until about 1:50pm, and Mark advised me to pinch my hands to relieve tension. I knew that either I had made the best decision ever or the worst decision of my life. The service was beautiful and lasted about 20 minutes from the time groom and best man walked onto the platform until the time Shirre & I walked down the aisle as husband and wife. Several hundred of our closest friends and family were in attendance, and afterward we had a 1 1/2 hour standing meet & greet reception with a receiving line to mingle with our friends and family. April 27-May 2 we honeymooned in Las Vegas, the City of Lights! Without a doubt, we had an incredibly relaxing and wonderful time, and closed on our newly built townhouse condo while staying at Las Vegas' largest hotel, the MGM Grand.

For pictures of Shirre & Kéto's Wedding, Engagement, and Honeymoon, please logon the following Facebook photo albums: Wedding 4-26-08 by Karen's Kamera [Part 1] , Wedding 4-26-08 by Karen's Kamera [Part 2] , Wedding 4-26-08 by Karen's Kamera [Part 3] , Meet & Greet by Karen's Kamera 4-26-08 , Shirre & Kéto Meet & Greet Slideshow 4-26-08 , Shirre & Kéto's Honeymoon, 4/27-5/2/08 , Shirre & Kéto's Honeymoon, 4/27-5/2/08, Part 2 , Shirre & Kéto's Honeymoon, 4/27-5/2/08, Part 3 , Shirre & Kéto's Honeymoon, 4/27-5/2/08, Part 4 , Shirre & Kéto's Honeymoon, 4/27-5/2/08, Part 5 , Shirre & Kéto's Honeymoon, 4/27-5/2/08, Part 6 .