Posts
Canton, Oh - October 27, 2008
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Echos of Abraham
Posted on http://www.bobcesca.com/
FOREVER
Posted by Elvis Dingeldein.
My great-great-grandmother’s great-great-grandfather was a man named Minor Wilkes, who was born in New Kent County, Virginia, in 1734. He died in 1811, and left a will bequeathing to his many children various and sundry workaday items: a feather bed; a saddle and bridle; the odd cow and sheep; a whiskey still (though he declares, oddly, that “only my wife is to have the use of it”); a few calves and hogs. But scattered throughout Minor’s will he also passed on the following less-fungible property to his wife and children:
I lend my wife two Negroes Ned & Pat during her natural life; I give to my daughter Jincey Winn one negroe man Julis to her and her heirs forever; I give to my daughter Ann Winn one negroe man Stephen; I give to my daughter Patsey Winn one Negroe Girl Clary; I give to my daughter Susanna Wilkes one Negroe boy Dick; I give to my daughter Sally Snead…one Negroe Girl Lucy to her and her heirs and assigns forever…
Forever. How crushingly apt that promise must have felt to Ned or Pat or Lucy in 1811, the Emancipation Proclamation still half a century in their futures. And with what speechless wonder would they gaze upon the figure of Barack Obama, nearly two centuries after their lives and liberties were handed down like chattel in Lunenburg County, Virginia. But where the sight of a free African-American man standing at the threshold of our country’s highest office might have stunned them to awed silence, how effortlessly fluent that property of Minor Wilkes’s would have been in the fierce rhetoric stoking the fires of the McCain campaign and its feverish legions of “real Americans.” Ned and Pat, Lucy and Stephen would have no trouble deciphering the epithets and slanders hurled at this black candidate for president, and they would understand immediately that maybe things hadn’t changed in this country so much after all.
Like many white Americans of a certain social caste with deep roots in the antebellum South, I’ve always suspected my ancestors were slaveholders. It was an unconscionable but not uncommon joke on the Country Club fairways of my hometown in southern Mississippi that “those people” -- or the singular “that one” -- ought not get too uppity, as our great-great-grandfathers probably owned theirs, and they hadn’t had a steady job since. I grew up laughing at these jokes because adults did, because I didn’t know any better, because my parents and their parents were infallible. But until very recently -- until I found Minor Wilkes and his Last Will and Testament while on a search for my family’s shameful American roots -- I had no real proof that my forebears owned human beings, and they certainly had no names.
Ned. Pat. Julis. Stephen. Clary. Dick. Lucy.
Five “Negroe” men and two women. Handed down as property, with the hogs and the cows and the feather beds, to the children of Minor Wilkes and their heirs, forever. When my great-great grandmother’s great-great grandfather signed that document on March 9, 1809, it was notarized by Messrs David, William and Jesse Abernathy and became a legal document empowering Minor’s heirs to the lawful enslavement of seven human beings. They had names, and hopes, and dreamed of change. They had mothers and fathers and sisters and brothers, scattered to the four corners of a burgeoning Republic that had failed, 33 years before, to liberate all of those equally-created amongst us. That Declaration made a promise of parity once again under siege by agents of intolerance and the subtle noose of insinuation.
That my forebears owned black men and women bears no weight on my respect for Barack Obama or my decision to vote for him. I’m a proud American and a Democrat and Senator Obama most closely represents my political and moral ideology. That my forebears owned black men and women is, however, one of the many reasons I would never vote for Senator John McCain or his craven, feckless and vapid running mate. That an American politician could so easily forfeit his sacred and hard-won honor to the altar of race-baiting and fear-mongering in pursuit of office defames the memory of those seven Negro men and women in my own ignominious personal history, and sullies the House that for them and generations of their kin would always be White. If Barack Obama represents the Better Angels of our national character, then John McCain and Sarah Palin are those shoddier souls that would have our house divided, forever unable to stand.
Ask Ned. Ask Pat. Ask Julis and Stephen and Clary. Ask Dick and Lucy. Ask them how a house divided fell upon itself, and so ground its foundations to dust that a man like Barack Obama could see it united again in Change, and Hope. Forever.
FOREVER
Posted by Elvis Dingeldein.
My great-great-grandmother’s great-great-grandfather was a man named Minor Wilkes, who was born in New Kent County, Virginia, in 1734. He died in 1811, and left a will bequeathing to his many children various and sundry workaday items: a feather bed; a saddle and bridle; the odd cow and sheep; a whiskey still (though he declares, oddly, that “only my wife is to have the use of it”); a few calves and hogs. But scattered throughout Minor’s will he also passed on the following less-fungible property to his wife and children:
I lend my wife two Negroes Ned & Pat during her natural life; I give to my daughter Jincey Winn one negroe man Julis to her and her heirs forever; I give to my daughter Ann Winn one negroe man Stephen; I give to my daughter Patsey Winn one Negroe Girl Clary; I give to my daughter Susanna Wilkes one Negroe boy Dick; I give to my daughter Sally Snead…one Negroe Girl Lucy to her and her heirs and assigns forever…
Forever. How crushingly apt that promise must have felt to Ned or Pat or Lucy in 1811, the Emancipation Proclamation still half a century in their futures. And with what speechless wonder would they gaze upon the figure of Barack Obama, nearly two centuries after their lives and liberties were handed down like chattel in Lunenburg County, Virginia. But where the sight of a free African-American man standing at the threshold of our country’s highest office might have stunned them to awed silence, how effortlessly fluent that property of Minor Wilkes’s would have been in the fierce rhetoric stoking the fires of the McCain campaign and its feverish legions of “real Americans.” Ned and Pat, Lucy and Stephen would have no trouble deciphering the epithets and slanders hurled at this black candidate for president, and they would understand immediately that maybe things hadn’t changed in this country so much after all.
Like many white Americans of a certain social caste with deep roots in the antebellum South, I’ve always suspected my ancestors were slaveholders. It was an unconscionable but not uncommon joke on the Country Club fairways of my hometown in southern Mississippi that “those people” -- or the singular “that one” -- ought not get too uppity, as our great-great-grandfathers probably owned theirs, and they hadn’t had a steady job since. I grew up laughing at these jokes because adults did, because I didn’t know any better, because my parents and their parents were infallible. But until very recently -- until I found Minor Wilkes and his Last Will and Testament while on a search for my family’s shameful American roots -- I had no real proof that my forebears owned human beings, and they certainly had no names.
Ned. Pat. Julis. Stephen. Clary. Dick. Lucy.
Five “Negroe” men and two women. Handed down as property, with the hogs and the cows and the feather beds, to the children of Minor Wilkes and their heirs, forever. When my great-great grandmother’s great-great grandfather signed that document on March 9, 1809, it was notarized by Messrs David, William and Jesse Abernathy and became a legal document empowering Minor’s heirs to the lawful enslavement of seven human beings. They had names, and hopes, and dreamed of change. They had mothers and fathers and sisters and brothers, scattered to the four corners of a burgeoning Republic that had failed, 33 years before, to liberate all of those equally-created amongst us. That Declaration made a promise of parity once again under siege by agents of intolerance and the subtle noose of insinuation.
That my forebears owned black men and women bears no weight on my respect for Barack Obama or my decision to vote for him. I’m a proud American and a Democrat and Senator Obama most closely represents my political and moral ideology. That my forebears owned black men and women is, however, one of the many reasons I would never vote for Senator John McCain or his craven, feckless and vapid running mate. That an American politician could so easily forfeit his sacred and hard-won honor to the altar of race-baiting and fear-mongering in pursuit of office defames the memory of those seven Negro men and women in my own ignominious personal history, and sullies the House that for them and generations of their kin would always be White. If Barack Obama represents the Better Angels of our national character, then John McCain and Sarah Palin are those shoddier souls that would have our house divided, forever unable to stand.
Ask Ned. Ask Pat. Ask Julis and Stephen and Clary. Ask Dick and Lucy. Ask them how a house divided fell upon itself, and so ground its foundations to dust that a man like Barack Obama could see it united again in Change, and Hope. Forever.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses...
An excerpt of an interview of General Colin Powell:
"Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer is no. That's not America. Is there something wrong with a seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing he or she could be president? Yet I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion that he is a Muslim and might have an association with terrorists. This is not the way we should be doing it in America.
I feel particularly strong about this because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay, was of a mother at Arlington Cemetery and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone, and it gave his awards - Purple Heart, Bronze Star - showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death, he was 20 years old. And then at the very top of the head stone, it didn't have a Christian cross. It didn't have a Star of David. It has a crescent and star of the Islamic faith.
And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan. And he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was fourteen years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he could serve his country and he gave his life."
"Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer is no. That's not America. Is there something wrong with a seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing he or she could be president? Yet I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion that he is a Muslim and might have an association with terrorists. This is not the way we should be doing it in America.
I feel particularly strong about this because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay, was of a mother at Arlington Cemetery and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone, and it gave his awards - Purple Heart, Bronze Star - showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death, he was 20 years old. And then at the very top of the head stone, it didn't have a Christian cross. It didn't have a Star of David. It has a crescent and star of the Islamic faith.
And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan. And he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was fourteen years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he could serve his country and he gave his life."
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Emancipate Yourselves From Mental Slavery
I visited the town of Salem this past weekend. I would seriously recommend for everyone to visit during the month of October – it’s Halloween Town, quite a fun time and many sites to see. As most people know, Salem’s biggest tourist attraction is the Salem Witch Hysteria of 1692 - the incident that Arthur Miller based his play "The Crucible" upon.
My thoughts today rest on the parallels to be found between Salem in 1692 and the current political landscape. The Witch Hysteria was fueled by a lack of reason and by fear – fear of the Devil, of evil, of the unknown. From that vantage point, they proceeded to try their fellow townspeople with flawed ideas including guilt by association and “spectral evidence” – a term that amounted to hearsay. 19 people were hung based on the “findings” of these trials and one man was pressed to death for, in essence, asking his accusers what he was being tried for. As an aside, the particular case of Giles Corey draws a strong comparison to the current debate raging over the reinstallation the Great Writ of Habeas Corpus to the detainees in Guantanamo Bay.
Reasoned thought and real evidence played no part in the Salem Witch Trials and innocent people were executed because of it.
Reasoned thought and real evidence play no part in the current McCain campaign and the echo chamber that is Right-leaning television, radio and print media.
When the bottom began to fall out of our economy, Senator McCain stated that the “fundamentals of the economy are still strong”. Two hours later, he declared that the economy was in crisis. He then “suspended” his campaign to return to Washington to fix the problem – the exact opposite happened. From that point on, his responses to the evolving economic crisis have been erratic at best, dangerously unwise at worst. They have changed policy as quickly as the news cycle can report – with no cohesive vision, no foundations laid out to build an evolving policy upon. They were tactical changes meant to appease specific constituencies, distract and run out the clock to November 4th.
When his poll numbers continued to drop, his campaign stated that “if we continue to talk about the economy, we lose”. Seriously? If you talk about the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, if you talk about the biggest crisis to effect the next President, you lose? I think that speaks volumes about the readiness of Senator McCain to assume the Presidency.
So instead, they decided to try and “turn the page” on the crisis effecting, at this point, the global financial market. And so, Senator John McCain, the man whose 2000 race for the presidency was destroyed by a whisper smear campaign by Bush decided to employ the exact strategy with the same players. Simply amazing. We began to hear about Bill Ayers, the former Weather Underground member and about ACORN, the network of community organizations whose missions include voter registration.
They began saying that Senator Obama surrounded himself with “domestic terrorists” and that he was involved in organizations attempting voter fraud – two completely uninformed positions. They decided to run 100% negative advertisement and stir up the fear and division that already exists in this country. They decided to continually attempt to link Senator Obama with terrorism in every stump speech and surrogate remark. They decided to stand back and do nothing as the situation became increasingly volatile and dangerous – so much so that the Secret Service had to investigate attendees to the McCain/Palin rallies due to shouts of “Kill Him” and “Off with his Head” in reference to a Presidential candidate.
This entire time, the echo chamber spent untold time and resources on these issues. Not the economy, not the 2 wars hemorrhaging our blood and treasure, not the unlawful detainment of American citizens, not the scandal involving the Justice Department, not the move by the Bush Administration and Treasury Secretary Paulson to receive untold power over taxpayer money, not climate change, not the energy, education or healthcare crises. Sean Hannity, as an example, spent an entire show “uncovering” Senator Obama’s associations. And by associations, they mean anytime he represented an organization as a lawyer, spent time on a Board of Directors of a educational foundation, was a parishioner in a church that had a controversial pastor or anytime his name appeared in the same paragraph as anyone with a checkered past.
The problem with this line of reasoning, if it can be called reason, is that no one is free from guilt by association. Here is a short list that levels McCain and Palin’s charges of Senator Obama’s radicalism –
The Alaskan Independence Party, The Keating Five, Richard Quinn, John Singlaub & the U.S. Council for World Freedom, Senator Ted Stevens, G. Gordon Liddy, John Hagee, Rod Parsley, Thomas Muthee, Max Blumenthal, Rick Davis, Phil Gramm, Randy Scheunemann, William Timmons and ACORN (?)… yes, Senator McCain spoke at an ACORN convention and praised their involvement in voter registration.
The issue here is that a reasoned and thoughtful person understands that certain “associations” are a matter of circumstance while others may need to be investigated further. Senator Obama’s “associations” have been investigated by the American people – Senator McCain’s and Governor Palin’s have not. This has not stopped them from drawing inane correlations. We are all guilty if guilt by association becomes the standard by which we measure someone’s character.
In conclusion, I would like to offer a story that we should all meditate on. There once was a child that was born to a woman whose husband was not the father. When he was grown, he voluntarily became a homeless vagrant, shirking all of his responsibilities. He began to surround himself with hookers and bankers. He talked about overthrowing the government. He spoke out against the Church. He destroyed others property as a political statement. He socialized with terrorists and extremists. He hung around with drug addicts and the insane. He was a convicted felon on death row who was executed for attempting to overthrow the government and commit treason.
I know a lot of people who associate with him. Think for yourself.
My thoughts today rest on the parallels to be found between Salem in 1692 and the current political landscape. The Witch Hysteria was fueled by a lack of reason and by fear – fear of the Devil, of evil, of the unknown. From that vantage point, they proceeded to try their fellow townspeople with flawed ideas including guilt by association and “spectral evidence” – a term that amounted to hearsay. 19 people were hung based on the “findings” of these trials and one man was pressed to death for, in essence, asking his accusers what he was being tried for. As an aside, the particular case of Giles Corey draws a strong comparison to the current debate raging over the reinstallation the Great Writ of Habeas Corpus to the detainees in Guantanamo Bay.
Reasoned thought and real evidence played no part in the Salem Witch Trials and innocent people were executed because of it.
Reasoned thought and real evidence play no part in the current McCain campaign and the echo chamber that is Right-leaning television, radio and print media.
When the bottom began to fall out of our economy, Senator McCain stated that the “fundamentals of the economy are still strong”. Two hours later, he declared that the economy was in crisis. He then “suspended” his campaign to return to Washington to fix the problem – the exact opposite happened. From that point on, his responses to the evolving economic crisis have been erratic at best, dangerously unwise at worst. They have changed policy as quickly as the news cycle can report – with no cohesive vision, no foundations laid out to build an evolving policy upon. They were tactical changes meant to appease specific constituencies, distract and run out the clock to November 4th.
When his poll numbers continued to drop, his campaign stated that “if we continue to talk about the economy, we lose”. Seriously? If you talk about the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, if you talk about the biggest crisis to effect the next President, you lose? I think that speaks volumes about the readiness of Senator McCain to assume the Presidency.
So instead, they decided to try and “turn the page” on the crisis effecting, at this point, the global financial market. And so, Senator John McCain, the man whose 2000 race for the presidency was destroyed by a whisper smear campaign by Bush decided to employ the exact strategy with the same players. Simply amazing. We began to hear about Bill Ayers, the former Weather Underground member and about ACORN, the network of community organizations whose missions include voter registration.
They began saying that Senator Obama surrounded himself with “domestic terrorists” and that he was involved in organizations attempting voter fraud – two completely uninformed positions. They decided to run 100% negative advertisement and stir up the fear and division that already exists in this country. They decided to continually attempt to link Senator Obama with terrorism in every stump speech and surrogate remark. They decided to stand back and do nothing as the situation became increasingly volatile and dangerous – so much so that the Secret Service had to investigate attendees to the McCain/Palin rallies due to shouts of “Kill Him” and “Off with his Head” in reference to a Presidential candidate.
This entire time, the echo chamber spent untold time and resources on these issues. Not the economy, not the 2 wars hemorrhaging our blood and treasure, not the unlawful detainment of American citizens, not the scandal involving the Justice Department, not the move by the Bush Administration and Treasury Secretary Paulson to receive untold power over taxpayer money, not climate change, not the energy, education or healthcare crises. Sean Hannity, as an example, spent an entire show “uncovering” Senator Obama’s associations. And by associations, they mean anytime he represented an organization as a lawyer, spent time on a Board of Directors of a educational foundation, was a parishioner in a church that had a controversial pastor or anytime his name appeared in the same paragraph as anyone with a checkered past.
The problem with this line of reasoning, if it can be called reason, is that no one is free from guilt by association. Here is a short list that levels McCain and Palin’s charges of Senator Obama’s radicalism –
The Alaskan Independence Party, The Keating Five, Richard Quinn, John Singlaub & the U.S. Council for World Freedom, Senator Ted Stevens, G. Gordon Liddy, John Hagee, Rod Parsley, Thomas Muthee, Max Blumenthal, Rick Davis, Phil Gramm, Randy Scheunemann, William Timmons and ACORN (?)… yes, Senator McCain spoke at an ACORN convention and praised their involvement in voter registration.
The issue here is that a reasoned and thoughtful person understands that certain “associations” are a matter of circumstance while others may need to be investigated further. Senator Obama’s “associations” have been investigated by the American people – Senator McCain’s and Governor Palin’s have not. This has not stopped them from drawing inane correlations. We are all guilty if guilt by association becomes the standard by which we measure someone’s character.
In conclusion, I would like to offer a story that we should all meditate on. There once was a child that was born to a woman whose husband was not the father. When he was grown, he voluntarily became a homeless vagrant, shirking all of his responsibilities. He began to surround himself with hookers and bankers. He talked about overthrowing the government. He spoke out against the Church. He destroyed others property as a political statement. He socialized with terrorists and extremists. He hung around with drug addicts and the insane. He was a convicted felon on death row who was executed for attempting to overthrow the government and commit treason.
I know a lot of people who associate with him. Think for yourself.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Truer Words Rarely Spoken
Bruce Springsteen - Vote For Change Rally - Philadephia, PA - October 4th, 2008
Friday, October 3, 2008
What Makes A Leader?
“No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States”
And so the Founding Fathers laid out the requirements for the highest office in the land. In the simplicity of these three requirements, I believe they showed, yet again, the level of their genius. Anyone can be President; there is no schooling requirement, no required flight hours, no measure for what would make a good President. It is as if the Founders stated that we must decide those requirements, if there are to be any – that if it is truly to be a government for, of and by the people; than those people need set a threshold for who shall lead them.
In the history of our 43 Presidents, we have had men from all walks of life – military leaders, senators, congressmen, governors, lawyers, professors, businessmen. All have brought different qualities – some good, some not – to the Presidency. But I think we can agree that the best Presidents have brought similar qualities and characteristics. Among these can be listed temperament, judgment, an ability to contemplate deeply the complexities within the challenges we face, an ability to articulate those thoughts and an ability to draw the greatest from our nation while stifling the worst.
At this moment in our 232 years – at a turning point in the dawn of a new millennium – I think we need to truly ask what we require of the leaders of our great nation. If we look to the beginning of our Republic, we see men who thought deeply, contemplating the nature of humanity and the need for self-governance. They paid heed to history and knew the ways in which ideology can replace reason, ignorance can replace wisdom and how, seemingly innocently, tyranny can replace democracy.
Do we want a leader ruled by reason and patience or by ideology and rashness? Do we want a leader who asks that we give up freedoms, however justified, for the promise of security? Do we want a leader who cloisters themselves with a handful of advisors and closes their ears to the wishes of the people? Or do we want a leader who listens and understands the plights of Americans and does their best to adjust policy to the interests of the people?
Let us ask our leaders for temperance, reasoned judgment, intellect and wisdom. Let us ask our leaders for vision and for inspiration. Let us wake our apathetic society and mold this country into what we believe it can be. Let us shorten the distance between the world as it is and the world as it could be. Let us decide that at this time, in this election, we will face the myriad challenges confronting us as our Founders intended – E Pluribus Unum – Out of Many, One.
Yes We Can.
And so the Founding Fathers laid out the requirements for the highest office in the land. In the simplicity of these three requirements, I believe they showed, yet again, the level of their genius. Anyone can be President; there is no schooling requirement, no required flight hours, no measure for what would make a good President. It is as if the Founders stated that we must decide those requirements, if there are to be any – that if it is truly to be a government for, of and by the people; than those people need set a threshold for who shall lead them.
In the history of our 43 Presidents, we have had men from all walks of life – military leaders, senators, congressmen, governors, lawyers, professors, businessmen. All have brought different qualities – some good, some not – to the Presidency. But I think we can agree that the best Presidents have brought similar qualities and characteristics. Among these can be listed temperament, judgment, an ability to contemplate deeply the complexities within the challenges we face, an ability to articulate those thoughts and an ability to draw the greatest from our nation while stifling the worst.
At this moment in our 232 years – at a turning point in the dawn of a new millennium – I think we need to truly ask what we require of the leaders of our great nation. If we look to the beginning of our Republic, we see men who thought deeply, contemplating the nature of humanity and the need for self-governance. They paid heed to history and knew the ways in which ideology can replace reason, ignorance can replace wisdom and how, seemingly innocently, tyranny can replace democracy.
Do we want a leader ruled by reason and patience or by ideology and rashness? Do we want a leader who asks that we give up freedoms, however justified, for the promise of security? Do we want a leader who cloisters themselves with a handful of advisors and closes their ears to the wishes of the people? Or do we want a leader who listens and understands the plights of Americans and does their best to adjust policy to the interests of the people?
Let us ask our leaders for temperance, reasoned judgment, intellect and wisdom. Let us ask our leaders for vision and for inspiration. Let us wake our apathetic society and mold this country into what we believe it can be. Let us shorten the distance between the world as it is and the world as it could be. Let us decide that at this time, in this election, we will face the myriad challenges confronting us as our Founders intended – E Pluribus Unum – Out of Many, One.
Yes We Can.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)