A+ R A-

George Curry

A Biblical Reason to Vote Against Mitt Romney

E-mail Print PDF

By George E. Curry

NNPA Columnist

After President Obama expressed his personal support for same-sex marriage, there has been a robust discussion among African-Americans about whether his stance will make Black voters less likely to support him in November. A poll conducted by The Pew Research Center For the People & The Press found that 68 percent of African-Americans said Obama’s announcement did not change their view of him. Of those who did alter their perception of the president, 16 percent said his decision caused them to view him more favorably and 13 percent less favorably.

As the debate over gay marriage seemed to be receding from the public stage, the NAACP gave the issue new life Saturday when its board passed a resolution in support of what it artfully calls marriage equality. After adopting the resolution over the weekend, Board Chair Roslyn M. Brock, President and CEO Benjamin Todd Jealous, and board member Donald L. Cash held a press conference Monday in Baltimore to announce what they had already announced. Even some supporters of same-sex marriage question why the NAACP is spending so much capital on this issue, considering all of the problems plaguing the Black community. The NAACP’s latest announcement comes less than two weeks after the organization announced that it has initiated a national voter registration drive to help overcome recently-erected barriers designed to dilute the Black vote.

Of course, that’s not the only problem facing African-Americans. As the National Urban League observed in its 2012 State of Black America report: “Our analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics will clearly establish that whether one looks at education, income or any other meaningful measure, almost all the economic gains that blacks have made in the last 30 years have been lost in the Great Recession that started in December 2007 and in the anemic recovery that has followed since June, 2009.” And there is also the issue of HIV/AIDS. According to Centers for Disease Control data analyzed by the Kaiser Family Foundation, African-American women accounted for 64 percent of all new AIDS diagnoses among women in 2010 and 85 percent of the Black women were infected through heterosexual activity.

There is a similar disparity among teens. Although Black teens represent only 17 percent of those aged 13-19 in the United States, they accounted for 70 percent of new AIDS diagnoses among teens in 2012. Undoubtedly, the debate will continue over how the NAACP should spend its limited resources and whether President Obama should have weighed in on what is essentially a state matter. However, some supporters of same-sex marriage are making the mistake of minimizing the views of many who believe that a marriage should be a union between a man and a woman. This may be more of a religious issue than a racial one. A poll conducted by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life found: “More than half of African Americans (53%) report attending religious services at least once a week, more than three-in-four (76%) say they pray on at least a daily basis and nearly nine-in-ten (88%) indicate they are absolutely certain that God exists. On each of these measures, African- Americans stand out as the most religiously committed racial or ethnic group in the nation.” Regardless of where one comes down on the issue, it is the height of political naiveté to expect that we will ever find any politician with whom we can agree on every issue. And the nation’s first Black president is no exception.

Opponents of same-sex marriage are quick to quote Leviticus 18:22, which states: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination (KJV).” If we are going to apply a single-issue test to President Obama, Mitt Romney should not be given a pass. The Bible also says in Deuteronomy 15:7, “If there be among you a poor man of one of thy bretheren within any of thy gates in thy land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shall not harden thine heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother (KJV).” And what does Romney say about the poor?

“I’m in this race because I care about Americans. I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it,” he said in an interview with CNN. “ I’m not concerned about the very rich; they’re doing just fine. I’m concerned about the very heart of America, the 90 percent, 95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling.” Romney’s support of Republican proposals in Congress designed to gut the safety net is further proof that he is not concerned about the very poor.

If some African-Americans, albeit a small number, are seriously considering voting against President Obama solely because they do not agree with his views on same-sex marriage, they should apply a litmus test to Mitt Romney and vote against him because he’s not concerned about the very poor.

George E. Curry, former editor-in-chief of Emerge magazine, is editor-in-chief of the National Newspaper Publishers Association News Service and editorial director of Heart & Soul magazine. He is a keynote speaker, moderator, and media coach. Curry can be reached through his Web site, www.georgecurry.com You can also follow him at www.twitter.com/currygeorge

Every Republican in Congress Fails Blacks

E-mail Print PDF

By George E. Curry

The new NAACP Report Card for the first session of the 112th Congress is out and it shows that every graded Republican member of the House and Senate received an F on issues considered important to the nation’s oldest civil rights group. In the Senate, all 46 GOP senators received Fs from NAACP. Of those, 34 voted against the NAACP’s position every time, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and former presidential candidate John McCain. In the House, all 238 Republicans graded also received Fs. Although GOP House members have a reputation but being more conservative than their Senate colleagues, only 10 House Republicans voted against the NAACP every time.

In stark contrast to Republicans, 47 Democrats in the Senate earned As, three received Bs, one got a D and none received an F. The two independents in the Senate, Connecticut’s Joe Lieberman and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, received a B and an A, respectively. In the House, all 238 Republicans graded earned an F. House Democrats voted like their counterparts in the Senate: 159 earned As, 22 got Bs, four earned Cs, one got a D and four received Fs.

I have been studying NAACP legislative report cards for a couple of decades and I can’t remember a time when Republicans in Congress have been this solidified in their hostility towards civil rights. About eight years ago, Republican Congresswoman Mary S. Leach of Iowa earned a C. More recently a couple of Republicans have earned Ds as the rest flunked. In the session of Congress that lasted from Jan. 5, 2011 to Dec. 23, 2011, only one Republican – Senator Scott Brown (R-Mass.) – voted with the NAACP 40 percent of the time. The GOP’s so-called moderate senators – Olympia J. Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine – supported the NAACP 33 percent of the time.

The NAACP graded members of Congress on votes taken on such issues as repealing funding for health care reform, judicial nominations, deep budget cuts, job creation and criminal justice reform.

This NAACP Report Card should put to rest the lie that there’s no difference between Democrats and Republicans.  There is difference – a huge difference at that. Even the Black Republican alternatives are not viable alternatives. Congressman Tim Scott of South Carolina backed the NAACP only 5 percent of the time. The only other Black House Republican, Allen B. West, also earned an F, supporting the NAACP 25 percent of the time.

It hasn’t always been this way. In fact, most Blacks voted Republican until switching to Franklin D. Roosevelt. Dwight D. Eisenhower received 39 percent of the Black vote in 1956. In his close election with John F. Kennedy in 1960, Blacks gave Richard Nixon 32 percent of their vote. In the bygone years, the Republican Party had such moderates as New York Gov. Nelson Rockefeller, Mayor John Lindsey of New York City and Connecticut Sen. Lowell Weicker. It even had Black Republicans who fought for civil rights. But the GOP began the political equivalent of ethnic cleansing in 1964 with the nomination of Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater, who made an open appeal to segregationists. Goldwater’s “Southern Strategy” went up with flames, with Blacks giving Lyndon Johnson 94 percent of their vote.

Over the last half century, GOP moderates, such as former Secretary of State Colin Powell have either been pushed out of the party or marginalized. Moderates have been replaced by rabid Tea Party activists who have pushed an already conservative party to the extreme right. The voting records of Democratic and Republican leaders in Congress illustrate the gap in support of African-Americans in the two parties. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, earned an A on the NAACP Report Card (93 percent) as did Assistant Majority Leader Richard Durbin (100 percent).  Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican from Kentucky, got an F (zero percent support of the NAACP). So did Assistant Minority Leader John Kyl of Arizona (zero percent). All Democratic leaders in the House earned As: Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (100 percent), Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (100 percent), Assistant Democratic Whip James Clyburn (100 percent) and Democratic Caucus Chair John Lucas (95 percent).

Each Republican leader in the house, on the other hand, got Fs: Majority Leader Eric Cantor (5 percent), Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (10 percent), Republican Conference Chair Jeb Hensarling (5 percent) and Republican Policy Committee Chair Tom Price (5 percent). In 2004, the Republican Party announced a goal of quadrupling its share of the Black vote to 25 percent. It has obviously abandoned that goal. The Republican Party’s hostility to civil rights reminds me of a comment made by the father of former GOP Congressman J.C. Watts, an African-American from Oklahoma. His father said a Black voting Republican is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders.

George E. Curry, former editor-in-chief of Emerge magazine, is editor-in-chief of the National Newspaper Publishers Association News Service and editorial director of Heart & Soul magazine. He is a keynote speaker, moderator, and media coach. Curry can be reached through his Web site, www.georgecurry.com You can also follow him at www.twitter.com/currygeorge.

Don Lemon Favors Reporters Using the N-Word

E-mail Print PDF

By George E. Curry
NNPA Columnist

Between the drama surrounding the arrest of George Zimmerman for the killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Fla. and the White terrorists who killed two Blacks and injured five others in Tulsa, you may have missed the news about CNN Anchor Don Lemon, an African-American, defending journalists who use of the n-word while reporting on hate crimes. In case you missed it, let me bring you up to date. The discussion about use of the n-word grew out of reporting on a racial killing spree in Oklahoma. On Good Friday, Alvin L. Watts, 32, who is White, and Jacob C. England, who is 19 and describes himself as White, though he is a Native American, went on a random shooting spree, killing three innocent African-Americans and wounding two others.

The day before, England posted on his Facebook page, “Today is two years that my dad has been gone, shot by a f—— n—–.” Of course, England did not mention that authorities determined that the Black man who shot his father was acting in self-defense. In discussing the case on CNN, Lemon argued that when used in proper context – such as referring to England’s rant – the actual n-word should be used in direct quotations. To substitute “n-word,” he contends, lessens the impact of the slur.

“I think it takes the value out of what that word really means, especially when we are reporting it,” Lemon said. “And I don’t care what color the reporter is, I think someone should say, ‘That person calls someone nigger’ instead of saying the n-word because I think it sanitizes it.” CNN correspondent Susan Candiotti did not sanitize the word the next day. After saying, “Please excuse the language, it’s very sensitive,” she quoted the Facebook post about England claiming that his father had been killed by a f—— n—–.”

Anchorwoman Fredricka Whitfield said, “We apologize to our viewers for the profanities used.” It wasn’t just the vulgarity that merited an apology. And this wasn’t the first time a CNN correspondent had used the n-word. Last month, CNN reporter Drew Griffin used it while reporting on Deryl Dedmon, a White Mississippian convicted of running down a Black man with his truck and killing him.

Griffin said, “To be absolutely factual, at the end of this, Deryl Dedmond is laughing with his friends and actually called on his cell phone and, pardon my language, but there is no other way to say this, and said, ‘I just ran over that f—— n—–.’” Griffin used the actual words. Let’s indeed be absolutely factual. The n-word, according to Merriam-Webster, “ranks as perhaps the most offensive and inflammatory racial slur in English.” When we hear someone refer to the n-word, we understand exactly what they mean and don’t need to hear the full word to realize the depth of the insult.

Contrast Lemon’s argument for uttering the n-word with the controversy that surrounded New York Knicks sensation Jeremy Lin, who is of Taiwanese descent. The nation has been mesmerized by the exploits of Lin, who blossomed from benchwarmer to star for the Knicks. After the Knicks lost to the New Orleans Hornets 89-85 amid “Linsanity,” a writer for ESPN.com posted the headline, “Chink in the Armor.” The post was removed within 35 minutes and the offending journalist was fired. Also, ESPN anchor Max Bretos was given a 30-day suspension after asking, “Is there a chink in the armor, where can Lin improve his game?” ESPN did the right thing in disciplining insensitive journalists. Just as it was wrong to use a slur in connection with Lin, it is equally obnoxious to rationalize the use of the n-word. There is no “context” that warrants its use.

Once you go there, the floodgates are open for every derogatory word used to insult women, gays, Jews and Polish immigrants, to name a few. In one comment on CNN.com, a viewer applauded Lemon’s position on the n-word and urged him to start using the f-word – he said the actual word – to describe homosexuals.

In discussing the n-word, Lemon said, “I hate it in music. I hate those kinds of things. I hate it when it’s misogynistic and rap and all of that. But what I’m saying is in the reporting of a story, you should say the word not to sanitize it.”

I don’t know of anyone other than Don Lemon who considers the n-word – even when not spelled out – sanitized. Instead of standing for Cable News Network, CNN should stand for Can Not (use) N—–.

George E. Curry, former editor-in-chief of Emerge magazine, is editor-in-chief of the National Newspaper Publishers Association News Service and editorial director of Heart & Soul magazine. He is a keynote speaker, moderator, and media coach. Curry can be reached through his Web site, www.georgecurry.com. You can also follow him at www.twitter.com/currygeorge.

The Vanishing Black Middle Class

E-mail Print PDF

A chapter in the National Urban League’s 2012 State of Black America report reached a sobering conclusion about the Black middle class. “Our analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics will clearly establish that whether one looks at education, income or any other meaningful measure, almost all the economic gains that Blacks have made in the last 30 years have been lost in the Great Recession that started in December 2007 and in the anemic recovery that has followed since June, 2009.

“This means that the size of the Black middle class is shrinking, the fruits that come from being in the Black middle class are dwindling, and the ladders of opportunity for reaching the Black middle class are disappearing.”

That’s pretty strong language from the four authors: Chanelle P. Hardy, Valerie R. Wilson, Madura Wijewardena and Garrick T. Davis. But they provide strong figures to buttress their case. The Black median household income in 2010 was $32,106. That’s 30 percent less than the comparable figure for Whites. In today’s dollars, that’s where the White median household income stood in 1980. Even with the tremendous income gap, the Black median household income increased by 32 percent between 1992 and 2000. White income increased by 14 percent over that same time period. The latest economic downturn has eroded many of those gains.

“The Great Recession and the recovery has led to a dramatic widening of the gap between White and Black middle class income households,” the report stated. “Although both Blacks and Whites suffered declining median household income during and since the recession, the decline for Blacks has been considerably higher – between 2008 and 2010, White median household income fell by 2.9% while the Black median household income fell by 7.7%.”

A similar decline can be seen in home ownership.

“Since the recovery, Black home ownership has been falling at just under twice the rate of White home ownership – from 2009 to 2011, Black home ownership declined by 1.4 percentage points while White home ownership declined by 0.9 percentage points. This means that almost all the gains in Black home ownership have been lost and now we are at a point where there are real reversals in Black home ownership.”

Education, the ladder to upward mobility, is also going in the wrong direction.

“An especially troubling trend can be observed by looking at the fortunes of those with a 4-year college degree,” the report observed. “The most significant impact of this trend has been on Black college graduates who saw their unemployment rates skyrocket to an average of 7.1% in 2011.

“This led to an unprecedented widening of the gap between Black and White college graduates –in 1972, the gap between the unemployment rates of Blacks and White college graduates was 1.4 percentage points and in 2011 it had increased to 3.2 percentage points.”

Middle class can be defined generally as having income that places one in the middle of overall income distribution. And because White household income is more than 1.5 times Black income, a White family must earn more than African-Americans in order to be considered middle class. Even though Blacks still trail Whites in income, there was no significant Black middle class before the modern Civil Rights Movement.

“…The civil rights movement of the last 50 years forced open the door of full-fledged American prosperity to all those who had been barred from its many comforts in decades past, either through economic, legislative, a racial apartheid, or some institutionalized combination of all of the above,” the report said.

After the Civil Rights Movement and affirmative action opened the doors of opportunity, they are now being slammed in our face. The National Urban League chapter on the Black middle class did not address the issue of Black net worth, which has also been pummeled.

The Economic Policy Institute, analyzing data collected by the Federal Reserve, found that in 2004, the median net worth of White households was $134,280, compared with $13,450 for Black households. By 2009, the medium net worth for White households had declined by 24 percent to $97,860. Over that same period, the medium net worth for African-American households had fallen 83 percent to $2,170.

Despite the Republican crusade for smaller government, the National Urban League report argues that the federal government must be an active partner if these blows to the Black middle class are to be reversed.

“Programs such as targeted job training, Pell grants, small business lending, pre- and post-purchase housing counseling, and Medicare and Medicaid provide the foundation which makes middle class life possible,” the report stated. “These programs should not, and must not be sacrificed in the hyper-partisan debate designed to produce political winners and losers.”

George E. Curry, former editor-in-chief of Emerge magazine and the NNPA News Service, is editorial director of Heart & Soul magazine. He is a keynote speaker, moderator, and media coach. Curry can be reached through his Web site, www.georgecurry.com You can also follow him at www.twitter.com/currygeorge.

Romney's Foot-in-Mouth Disease

E-mail Print PDF

(NNPA) Mitt Romney may have made have moved closer to wrapping up the Republican nomination for president on Tuesday but he can’t seem to move his foot away from his mouth whenever he goes off script. Throughout this campaign, the former Massachusetts governor has been his worst enemy as he struggles to connect with average voters.

Here are some examples:

April 25, 2011 – In an op-ed in the Manchester Union Leader, Romney accused President Obama of going on “one of the biggest peacetime spending binges in American history.”

Simultaneously fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan hardly qualifies as “peacetime.”

April 30 – Speaking at an Americans for Prosperity dinner in Manchester, N.H., Romney said: “Reagan came up with this great thing about the ‘misery index’ and he hung that around Jimmy Carter’s neck. Well, we’re going to have to hang the ‘Obama Misery Index’ around his neck.” Romney continued, “…We’re going to hang him…” After stopping mid-sentence, Romney added, “So to speak – metaphorically. You have to be careful these days.”

Yes, Mitt, you do have to be careful these days. And saying even metaphorically that you want to hang a Black man, in this case the president of the United States, shows appalling insensitivity to this country’s long and ugly history of lynching.

June 16 – Speaking to unemployed workers in Tampa, Fla., Romney said, “I am also unemployed.”

When you are worth between $190 million and $250 million and receive more than $20 million a year from investments, you don’t have to work.

Aug. 11 – At the Iowa State Fair in Des Moines, Romney said: “Corporations are people, my friend.”

Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz said the comment was “one more indication that Romney and the Republicans on the campaign trail and in Washington have misplaced priorities.”

Dec. 10 – During Sioux City GOP debate: “Rick, I’ll tell you what, 10,000 bucks, $10,000 bet?”

Oct. 18 – In the GOP debate in Las Vegas, recalling a conversation he had with his lawn-care service that had employed illegal immigrants: “We went to the company and we said, look, you can’t have any illegals working on our property. I’m running for office, for Pete’s sake, I can’t have illegals.”

Would it be alright if Romney wasn’t running for office?

Jan. 9 – Speaking at a Chamber of Commerce function in Nashua, N.H.: “I like being able to fire people who provide services to me.”

Jan. 17 – In Greenville, S.C., Romney called the $370,000 he earned in speaking fees in 2011 “not very much money.” According to the Census Bureau, that’s more than seven times the average household income of $49,445.

Feb. 1 – CNN interview: “I’m in this race because I care about Americans. I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I’ll fix it. I’m not concerned about the very rich; they’re doing just fine. I’m concerned about the very heart of America, the 90 percent, 95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling.”

Romney made it very clear that he is no John F. Kennedy. And although he professed not to be concerned for the very rich, independent analyses of his tax plan show that’s the group that would most benefit under his proposal.

Comedian Jon Stewart said on his Daily Show: “It’s like a doctor going, ‘I’m not concerned about the very healthy, because they’re doing fine, or the very sick because, you know, morphine.’”

Feb. 24 – Speaking in Detroit: “I drive a Mustang and a Chevy pickup. Ann drives a couple of Cadillacs, actually.”

Way to go Mitt. Remind the audience that your wife drives two vehicles that sell for $35,485-$54,525 each and that you have two homes, each with its own Cadillac. Working-class people can really relate to that.

Feb. 26 – When asked by a reporter at the Daytona 500 if he followed racing, Romney replied: “Not as closely as some of the most ardent fans, but I have some great friends who are NASCAR team owners.”

One blogger said Romney saying he had friends that were NASCAR owners was akin to saying you enjoy football because you hang out with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell in a sky box at the Super Bowl.

But Romney didn’t stop there. He told a group of racing fans wearing plastic ponchos: “I like those fancy raincoats you bought. Really sprung for the big bucks.” Describing ponchos as “fancy raincoats” shows that Romney needs to get out of his mansions more often.

Despite Romney’s effort to put his best foot forward, he usually sticks it in his mouth.

George E. Curry, former editor-in-chief of Emerge magazine and the NNPA News Service, is a keynote speaker, moderator, and media coach. He can be reached through his Web site, www.georgecurry.com You can also follow him at www.twitter.com/currygeorge.

Page 21 of 36

Quantcast

BVN National News Wire