Ron Daniels Gives Advice to President Obama

by Professor Ron Daniels

Clearly British Petroleum Oil Company (BP) is responsible for the most disastrous oil spill in U.S. history and must be held fully accountable for its negligent behavior. Beyond overseeing the crisis and ensuring that BP is deploying the necessary resources to stop the flow of oil and clean-up the damaged beaches and marshlands, there is precious little President Obama can do to clean up the mess. However, I agree with New York Timescolumnist Thomas Friedman and other commentators that the crisis presents the President with an opportunity to offer bold and visionary leadership in terms of the future direction of the U.S. economy.

Ever the pragmatist and craving “bi-partisan” support for his massive energy bill, prior to the horrific oil spill, Obama caved in to the McCain/Palin “drill baby drill” crowd and ordered more areas opened for off shore drilling. Earlier he threw another plum the Republicans way by placing priority on building new nuclear power plants. I strongly disagree with these decisions but chalk it up to Obama being Obama. It’s his inside the beltway method of trying to drag defiant Republicans to the legislative table at a time when they are out to create a “waterloo” moment by whatever means necessary to defeat him and advance their conservative agenda. However, the oil spill has potentially created a new political calculus.

Click to read

Ron Daniels Gives Advice to President Obama

by Professor Ron Daniels

Clearly British Petroleum Oil Company (BP) is responsible for the most disastrous oil spill in U.S. history and must be held fully accountable for its negligent behavior. Beyond overseeing the crisis and ensuring that BP is deploying the necessary resources to stop the flow of oil and clean-up the damaged beaches and marshlands, there is precious little President Obama can do to clean up the mess. However, I agree with New York Timescolumnist Thomas Friedman and other commentators that the crisis presents the President with an opportunity to offer bold and visionary leadership in terms of the future direction of the U.S. economy.

Ever the pragmatist and craving “bi-partisan” support for his massive energy bill, prior to the horrific oil spill, Obama caved in to the McCain/Palin “drill baby drill” crowd and ordered more areas opened for off shore drilling. Earlier he threw another plum the Republicans way by placing priority on building new nuclear power plants. I strongly disagree with these decisions but chalk it up to Obama being Obama. It’s his inside the beltway method of trying to drag defiant Republicans to the legislative table at a time when they are out to create a “waterloo” moment by whatever means necessary to defeat him and advance their conservative agenda. However, the oil spill has potentially created a new political calculus.

Click to read

Setting the Record Straight: A Response to Henry Louis Gates, Jr.

Statement by the Committee to Advance the Movement for Reparations

We, the undersigned, take strong exception to the Op-Ed, “Ending the Slavery Blame-Game,” published in the New York Times, April 23, 2010 by Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. There are gross errors, inaccuracies and misrepresentations in Gates’ presentation of the transatlantic European enslavement system. Moreover, we are duly concerned about his political motivations and find offensive his use of the term “blame game.” It trivializes one of the most heinous crimes against humanity—the European enslavement of African people. Gates contradicts his stated purpose of “ending” what he refers to as a “blame-game,” by erroneously making African rulers and elites equally responsible with European and American enslavers. He shifts the “blame” in a clear attempt to undermine the demand for reparations.

The African Holocaust or Maafa, as it is referred to by many, is a crime against humanity and is recognized as such by the United Nations, scholars, and historians who have documented the primary and overwhelming culpability of European nations for enslavement in Europe, in the Americas and elsewhere. In spite of this overwhelming documentation, Gates inexplicably shifts the burden of culpability to Africans who were and are its victims. The abundance of scholarly work also affirms that Europeans initiated the process, established the global infrastructure for enslavement, and imposed, financed and defended it, and were the primary beneficiaries of it in various ways through human trafficking itself, banking, insurance, manufacturing, farming, shipping and allied enterprises.

 

Click to read

Setting the Record Straight: A Response to Henry Louis Gates, Jr.

Statement by the Committee to Advance the Movement for Reparations

We, the undersigned, take strong exception to the Op-Ed, “Ending the Slavery Blame-Game,” published in the New York Times, April 23, 2010 by Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. There are gross errors, inaccuracies and misrepresentations in Gates’ presentation of the transatlantic European enslavement system. Moreover, we are duly concerned about his political motivations and find offensive his use of the term “blame game.” It trivializes one of the most heinous crimes against humanity—the European enslavement of African people. Gates contradicts his stated purpose of “ending” what he refers to as a “blame-game,” by erroneously making African rulers and elites equally responsible with European and American enslavers. He shifts the “blame” in a clear attempt to undermine the demand for reparations.

The African Holocaust or Maafa, as it is referred to by many, is a crime against humanity and is recognized as such by the United Nations, scholars, and historians who have documented the primary and overwhelming culpability of European nations for enslavement in Europe, in the Americas and elsewhere. In spite of this overwhelming documentation, Gates inexplicably shifts the burden of culpability to Africans who were and are its victims. The abundance of scholarly work also affirms that Europeans initiated the process, established the global infrastructure for enslavement, and imposed, financed and defended it, and were the primary beneficiaries of it in various ways through human trafficking itself, banking, insurance, manufacturing, farming, shipping and allied enterprises.

 

Click to read

Dr. Julianne Malveaux: Obama Disappoints Black Women with the Kagan Nomination

I was among the many who were disappointed that President Barack Obama did not nominate an African American woman to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. After all, there are six white men, two women, one Latina and one white, and a nominal African American man on the Court.  Why not an African American woman?
The Black Women's Roundtable, led by Melanie Campbell, was so disappointed that they shared their concerns with the President in a letter that spoke both to the contributions African American women have made and the qualifications of a few good women that President Obama should have considered before nominating Ms. Kagan to the nation's highest court.

I won't even speak on what I perceive as some of the shortcomings of the Kagan nomination.  The Solicitor General has earned the support of some colleagues that I fully respect, such as Harvard Professor Charles Ogletree.  At the same time, we have to pause at the fact that her definition of diversity is ideological diversity, not racial and ethnic diversity, and that she seemed to make Harvard a more welcome place for conservatives, if not for African American faculty.

 

Click to read

Dr. Julianne Malveaux: Obama Disappoints Black Women with the Kagan Nomination

I was among the many who were disappointed that President Barack Obama did not nominate an African American woman to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. After all, there are six white men, two women, one Latina and one white, and a nominal African American man on the Court.  Why not an African American woman?
The Black Women's Roundtable, led by Melanie Campbell, was so disappointed that they shared their concerns with the President in a letter that spoke both to the contributions African American women have made and the qualifications of a few good women that President Obama should have considered before nominating Ms. Kagan to the nation's highest court.

I won't even speak on what I perceive as some of the shortcomings of the Kagan nomination.  The Solicitor General has earned the support of some colleagues that I fully respect, such as Harvard Professor Charles Ogletree.  At the same time, we have to pause at the fact that her definition of diversity is ideological diversity, not racial and ethnic diversity, and that she seemed to make Harvard a more welcome place for conservatives, if not for African American faculty.

 

Click to read

Black Women's Leadership Groups Disappointed in Elena Kagan Appointment

From Politic 365: The announcement of Elena Kagan could not really be called a surprise, since the White House went out of its way to all but announce her as their pick over the last week. The Obama Administration dropped hints by the dozens to their favored reporters, who dutifully shared their information with the rest of us. I had come to accept it as a done deal, even though I had been a little perturbed at the way the D.C. pundits only mentioned three or four names from the president's short list, as if the rest of the names on it, like Georgia's ownLeah Ward Sears, were invisible.

It wasn't until I called a friend of mine, an African American lawyer here in Atlanta who had been a diehard Hillary supporter and then a reluctant Barack Obama supporter after he became the Democratic nominee, that I realized that others felt the same way. "First he puts a Hispanic woman on the court. Fine. He's paying back the Hispanics for their support," she said. "Then he puts a white woman on the court. Okay – he's paying them back for coming over to his side after Hillary lost. I see that.

But why do I have to be last? Why do black women always have to be last? I don't think he cares."
Where are the Sistahs? See Politic365 to find out