Obama's views on Race

The place for measured discourse about politics and current events, including developments in science and medicine.
halplm
hooked
Posts: 4864
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:15 am

Obama's views on Race

Post by halplm »

I find it strange the topics that are avoided on this board, and I feel compelled to bring this up now, as it is in the news a great deal. Below is President Obama's speech from 2008 about Race, and race relations in the United States. I believe it is one of the greatest speeches on race we have ever had. I believe it is the reason he won the primary, and is likely one of the reasons he won the presidency.

It is a fully idealogical statement of much that is wrong with our society, and much that should be done to improve the state of our society. Frankly, it is brilliant, and those of you that know me, know it is strange for me to say such a thing of President Obama.

However, I find it hugely strange, that nothing... and I mean absolutely NOTHING has been done by President Obama's administration to address the issues he puts forth in this speech.

On the contrary, currently, with the nonsense of the Zimmerman Trial, President Obama's administration, and even more so his justice department, are specifically trying to build up racial divides. President Obama's statements today were meant to cause fear and resentment among the black communities across the country. He is himself just as white as Zimmerman is, and yet he makes statements implying that this was a crime of White people hating Black people, which is so far away from reality it is sickening.

I'm not a fan of President Obama, and I fully admit a bias in that respect, but if there IS a problem with race relations in the US (which I personally don't believe), then clearly the ideals put forth in the speech below are far more likely to improve the situation... rather than trying to incite violence among the black communities over a trial that has nothing to do with race.

I find it sad that someone who claimed to have the ideals presented in this speech, should prove to be so contrary to those ideals as soon as the political scene might prove to provide alternative opportunities... or so his advisors would have us believe.
"We the people, in order to form a more perfect union."

Two hundred and twenty one years ago, in a hall that still stands across the street, a group of men gathered and, with these simple words, launched America's improbable experiment in democracy. Farmers and scholars; statesmen and patriots who had traveled across an ocean to escape tyranny and persecution finally made real their declaration of independence at a Philadelphia convention that lasted through the spring of 1787.

The document they produced was eventually signed but ultimately unfinished. It was stained by this nation's original sin of slavery, a question that divided the colonies and brought the convention to a stalemate until the founders chose to allow the slave trade to continue for at least twenty more years, and to leave any final resolution to future generations.


Of course, the answer to the slavery question was already embedded within our Constitution - a Constitution that had at is very core the ideal of equal citizenship under the law; a Constitution that promised its people liberty, and justice, and a union that could be and should be perfected over time.

And yet words on a parchment would not be enough to deliver slaves from bondage, or provide men and women of every color and creed their full rights and obligations as citizens of the United States. What would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing to do their part - through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience and always at great risk - to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time.

This was one of the tasks we set forth at the beginning of this campaign - to continue the long march of those who came before us, a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America. I chose to run for the presidency at this moment in history because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together - unless we perfect our union by understanding that we may have different stories, but we hold common hopes; that we may not look the same and we may not have come from the same place, but we all want to move in the same direction - towards a better future for of children and our grandchildren.

This belief comes from my unyielding faith in the decency and generosity of the American people. But it also comes from my own American story.

I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived a Depression to serve in Patton's Army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas. I've gone to some of the best schools in America and lived in one of the world's poorest nations. I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners - an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters. I have brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles and cousins, of every race and every hue, scattered across three continents, and for as long as I live, I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible.

It's a story that hasn't made me the most conventional candidate. But it is a story that has seared into my genetic makeup the idea that this nation is more than the sum of its parts - that out of many, we are truly one.

Throughout the first year of this campaign, against all predictions to the contrary, we saw how hungry the American people were for this message of unity. Despite the temptation to view my candidacy through a purely racial lens, we won commanding victories in states with some of the whitest populations in the country. In South Carolina, where the Confederate Flag still flies, we built a powerful coalition of African Americans and white Americans.

This is not to say that race has not been an issue in the campaign. At various stages in the campaign, some commentators have deemed me either "too black" or "not black enough." We saw racial tensions bubble to the surface during the week before the South Carolina primary. The press has scoured every exit poll for the latest evidence of racial polarization, not just in terms of white and black, but black and brown as well.

And yet, it has only been in the last couple of weeks that the discussion of race in this campaign has taken a particularly divisive turn.

On one end of the spectrum, we've heard the implication that my candidacy is somehow an exercise in affirmative action; that it's based solely on the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap. On the other end, we've heard my former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike.

I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely - just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren't simply controversial. They weren't simply a religious leader's effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country - a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.

As such, Reverend Wright's comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems - two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all.

Given my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church? And I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and You Tube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way

But the truth is, that isn't all that I know of the man. The man I met more than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor. He is a man who served his country as a U.S. Marine; who has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country, and who for over thirty years led a church that serves the community by doing God's work here on Earth - by housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.

In my first book, Dreams From My Father, I described the experience of my first service at Trinity:

"People began to shout, to rise from their seats and clap and cry out, a forceful wind carrying the reverend's voice up into the rafters....And in that single note - hope! - I heard something else; at the foot of that cross, inside the thousands of churches across the city, I imagined the stories of ordinary black people merging with the stories of David and Goliath, Moses and Pharaoh, the Christians in the lion's den, Ezekiel's field of dry bones. Those stories - of survival, and freedom, and hope - became our story, my story; the blood that had spilled was our blood, the tears our tears; until this black church, on this bright day, seemed once more a vessel carrying the story of a people into future generations and into a larger world. Our trials and triumphs became at once unique and universal, black and more than black; in chronicling our journey, the stories and songs gave us a means to reclaim memories that we didn't need to feel shame about...memories that all people might study and cherish - and with which we could start to rebuild."

That has been my experience at Trinity. Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity embodies the black community in its entirety - the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger. Like other black churches, Trinity's services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear. The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.

And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions - the good and the bad - of the community that he has served diligently for so many years.

I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love.

Some will see this as an attempt to justify or excuse comments that are simply inexcusable. I can assure you it is not. I suppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork. We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias.

But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America - to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.

The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through - a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American.

Understanding this reality requires a reminder of how we arrived at this point. As William Faulkner once wrote, "The past isn't dead and buried. In fact, it isn't even past." We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country. But we do need to remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.

Segregated schools were, and are, inferior schools; we still haven't fixed them, fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education, and the inferior education they provided, then and now, helps explain the pervasive achievement gap between today's black and white students.

Legalized discrimination - where blacks were prevented, often through violence, from owning property, or loans were not granted to African-American business owners, or black homeowners could not access FHA mortgages, or blacks were excluded from unions, or the police force, or fire departments - meant that black families could not amass any meaningful wealth to bequeath to future generations. That history helps explain the wealth and income gap between black and white, and the concentrated pockets of poverty that persists in so many of today's urban and rural communities.

A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families - a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods - parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement - all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.


This is the reality in which Reverend Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up. They came of age in the late fifties and early sixties, a time when segregation was still the law of the land and opportunity was systematically constricted. What's remarkable is not how many failed in the face of discrimination, but rather how many men and women overcame the odds; how many were able to make a way out of no way for those like me who would come after them.

But for all those who scratched and clawed their way to get a piece of the American Dream, there were many who didn't make it - those who were ultimately defeated, in one way or another, by discrimination. That legacy of defeat was passed on to future generations - those young men and increasingly young women who we see standing on street corners or languishing in our prisons, without hope or prospects for the future. Even for those blacks who did make it, questions of race, and racism, continue to define their worldview in fundamental ways. For the men and women of Reverend Wright's generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away; nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years. That anger may not get expressed in public, in front of white co-workers or white friends. But it does find voice in the barbershop or around the kitchen table. At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician's own failings.

And occasionally it finds voice in the church on Sunday morning, in the pulpit and in the pews. The fact that so many people are surprised to hear that anger in some of Reverend Wright's sermons simply reminds us of the old truism that the most segregated hour in American life occurs on Sunday morning. That anger is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition, and prevents the African-American community from forging the alliances it needs to bring about real change. But the anger is real; it is powerful; and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races.

In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience - as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they're told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.

Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren't always expressed in polite company. But they have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation. Anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism.

Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze - a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns - this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.

This is where we are right now. It's a racial stalemate we've been stuck in for years. Contrary to the claims of some of my critics, black and white, I have never been so naïve as to believe that we can get beyond our racial divisions in a single election cycle, or with a single candidacy - particularly a candidacy as imperfect as my own.

But I have asserted a firm conviction - a conviction rooted in my faith in God and my faith in the American people - that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds, and that in fact we have no choice is we are to continue on the path of a more perfect union.

For the African-American community, that path means embracing the burdens of our past without becoming victims of our past. It means continuing to insist on a full measure of justice in every aspect of American life. But it also means binding our particular grievances - for better health care, and better schools, and better jobs - to the larger aspirations of all Americans -- the white woman struggling to break the glass ceiling, the white man whose been laid off, the immigrant trying to feed his family. And it means taking full responsibility for own lives - by demanding more from our fathers, and spending more time with our children, and reading to them, and teaching them that while they may face challenges and discrimination in their own lives, they must never succumb to despair or cynicism; they must always believe that they can write their own destiny.

Ironically, this quintessentially American - and yes, conservative - notion of self-help found frequent expression in Reverend Wright's sermons. But what my former pastor too often failed to understand is that embarking on a program of self-help also requires a belief that society can change.

The profound mistake of Reverend Wright's sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society. It's that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country - a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old -- is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past. But what we know -- what we have seen - is that America can change. That is true genius of this nation. What we have already achieved gives us hope - the audacity to hope - for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

In the white community, the path to a more perfect union means acknowledging that what ails the African-American community does not just exist in the minds of black people; that the legacy of discrimination - and current incidents of discrimination, while less overt than in the past - are real and must be addressed. Not just with words, but with deeds - by investing in our schools and our communities; by enforcing our civil rights laws and ensuring fairness in our criminal justice system; by providing this generation with ladders of opportunity that were unavailable for previous generations. It requires all Americans to realize that your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams; that investing in the health, welfare, and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper.

In the end, then, what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the world's great religions demand - that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Let us be our brother's keeper, Scripture tells us. Let us be our sister's keeper. Let us find that common stake we all have in one another, and let our politics reflect that spirit as well.

For we have a choice in this country. We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism. We can tackle race only as spectacle - as we did in the OJ trial - or in the wake of tragedy, as we did in the aftermath of Katrina - or as fodder for the nightly news. We can play Reverend Wright's sermons on every channel, every day and talk about them from now until the election, and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she's playing the race card, or we can speculate on whether white men will all flock to John McCain in the general election regardless of his policies.

We can do that.

But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we'll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And then another one. And nothing will change.

That is one option. Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, "Not this time." This time we want to talk about the crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children and Asian children and Hispanic children and Native American children. This time we want to reject the cynicism that tells us that these kids can't learn; that those kids who don't look like us are somebody else's problem. The children of America are not those kids, they are our kids, and we will not let them fall behind in a 21st century economy. Not this time.

This time we want to talk about how the lines in the Emergency Room are filled with whites and blacks and Hispanics who do not have health care; who don't have the power on their own to overcome the special interests in Washington, but who can take them on if we do it together.

This time we want to talk about the shuttered mills that once provided a decent life for men and women of every race, and the homes for sale that once belonged to Americans from every religion, every region, every walk of life. This time we want to talk about the fact that the real problem is not that someone who doesn't look like you might take your job; it's that the corporation you work for will ship it overseas for nothing more than a profit.

This time we want to talk about the men and women of every color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag. We want to talk about how to bring them home from a war that never should've been authorized and never should've been waged, and we want to talk about how we'll show our patriotism by caring for them, and their families, and giving them the benefits they have earned.

I would not be running for President if I didn't believe with all my heart that this is what the vast majority of Americans want for this country. This union may never be perfect, but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected. And today, whenever I find myself feeling doubtful or cynical about this possibility, what gives me the most hope is the next generation - the young people whose attitudes and beliefs and openness to change have already made history in this election.

There is one story in particularly that I'd like to leave you with today - a story I told when I had the great honor of speaking on Dr. King's birthday at his home church, Ebenezer Baptist, in Atlanta.

There is a young, twenty-three year old white woman named Ashley Baia who organized for our campaign in Florence, South Carolina. She had been working to organize a mostly African-American community since the beginning of this campaign, and one day she was at a roundtable discussion where everyone went around telling their story and why they were there.

And Ashley said that when she was nine years old, her mother got cancer. And because she had to miss days of work, she was let go and lost her health care. They had to file for bankruptcy, and that's when Ashley decided that she had to do something to help her mom.

She knew that food was one of their most expensive costs, and so Ashley convinced her mother that what she really liked and really wanted to eat more than anything else was mustard and relish sandwiches. Because that was the cheapest way to eat.

She did this for a year until her mom got better, and she told everyone at the roundtable that the reason she joined our campaign was so that she could help the millions of other children in the country who want and need to help their parents too.

Now Ashley might have made a different choice. Perhaps somebody told her along the way that the source of her mother's problems were blacks who were on welfare and too lazy to work, or Hispanics who were coming into the country illegally. But she didn't. She sought out allies in her fight against injustice.

Anyway, Ashley finishes her story and then goes around the room and asks everyone else why they're supporting the campaign. They all have different stories and reasons. Many bring up a specific issue. And finally they come to this elderly black man who's been sitting there quietly the entire time. And Ashley asks him why he's there. And he does not bring up a specific issue. He does not say health care or the economy. He does not say education or the war. He does not say that he was there because of Barack Obama. He simply says to everyone in the room, "I am here because of Ashley."

"I'm here because of Ashley." By itself, that single moment of recognition between that young white girl and that old black man is not enough. It is not enough to give health care to the sick, or jobs to the jobless, or education to our children.

But it is where we start. It is where our union grows stronger. And as so many generations have come to realize over the course of the two-hundred and twenty one years since a band of patriots signed that document in Philadelphia, that is where the perfection begins.
For the TROUBLED may you find PEACE
For the DESPAIRING may you find HOPE
For the LONELY may you find LOVE
For the SKEPTICAL may you find FAITH
-Frances C. Arrillaga 1941-1995
User avatar
yovargas
I miss Prim ...
Posts: 15011
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Florida

Re: Obama's views on Race

Post by yovargas »

halplm wrote:...if there IS a problem with race relations in the US (which I personally don't believe)
Um. I found it hard to get past that statement. Because, um...what? Rather than jumping down your throat about that I suppose I'll ask what exactly it is that you personally don't believe in this regard. Asides from the reams and reams of evidence that blacks are discriminated against in our society, doesn't the very fact that, whether real or not, the Zimmerman Trial has incited racial reactions prove that there IS a problem with race relations? :scratch:


(For the record, I've very purposefully avoided the Zimmerman Trial media circus so I'm fairly ignorant on the topic and thus have no real opinion about that one way or the other.)
User avatar
Lalaith
Lali Beag Bídeach
Posts: 15719
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Rivendell

Post by Lalaith »

I do think there are legitimate race relation issues in America. I'm not well-versed enough to get into a super deep discussion on that, honestly, but I do have a few observations as I've gotten more educated on subjects such as sex and human trafficking and abortion.

My heart breaks for the black community in this country, and I can begin to see where the anger comes from. The number of abortions is disproportionately high; you can take that as you will, but I see it as a subtle, insidious attack on their community. Also, the vast majority of girls caught up in the sex trade are black.

This doesn't even get into issues like poverty and the like. You know I see things through a spiritual filter just as much as through a pragmatic filter. So I see this as an evil targeted against the black community in our country.

Solutions? There are probably some decent, pragmatic solutions out there, but I think there are deeper spiritual issues. I personally believe that unless those deeper spiritual issues are addressed the overall issue may never get resolved.

But now is not the time to deliberately create divisiveness; however, I'll admit here and now that I haven't paid attention to what Obama has said on the Zimmerman trial. So I have no idea if he is creating more trouble.
Image
Passdagas the Brown
Posts: 3154
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 9:31 pm

Louis CK said it best

Post by Passdagas the Brown »

And I will paraphrase:

If you take two 70-year old ladies' lives, back to back, you get 140 years of life. That is how long ago a white person could purchase a black person in America.

Sorry, but wishing away the legacy and repercussions of such a brutal recent history is impossible.

And as someone who has lived in the southeast for much of my life, I can tell you: racism is an ever-present problem, and it is primarily driven by racist white Americans. Openly.

And sorry - but President Obama is just as white as George Zimmerman? Whatever the President's parentage, he LOOKS like an African American, and that means he has been treated like an African American for most of his life (right up to the present - the "shuck and jiver" in Chief, according to Ms. Palin).

Tell me in all seriousness: If an armed black man followed and shot an unarmed white 17-year old, on a dubious suspicion, and after being ordered by police officers to walk away, do you seriously think the public conversation would be the same? This trial was about the ridiculous Stand Your Ground laws, AND it was about race. Zimmerman's comments, which came to light during the trial, make it clear that he found Martin suspicious due to his race and clothing style, which is typical of an African American youth. The defense attorneys also adopted typical racist means of smearing an African American.

Finally, here is a link to a story from 2010. A black woman in Florida fired warning shots IN THE AIR, allegedly in response to her husband, who was beating her. She argued that she was standing her ground, as per her rights in Florida. She was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-574 ... ing-shots/

Post-racial America my left foot! The divisiveness has already been created by the defense attorneys, by the verdict, and the far right television and blogosphere space, which features many a pundit rejoicing over the verdict, and vociferously defending the laws that lead to this sort of thing. And tell me, why is it okay for white suburban Tea Party Americans to get outraged in public, but not for African Americans? Are the latter inherently more frightening? Is it scary when "they" get "uppity?"

There should be outrage about this, and the President is absolutely right to make the personal statements he made. Without some modicum of outrage, nothing will change.
halplm
hooked
Posts: 4864
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:15 am

Post by halplm »

Sorry, I meant a problem of White people hating black people. It's just not true. There are plenty of racial problems, most of them perpetuated by the democratic party.

But That's not really what I felt needed to be said. Although I probably shouldn't have said anything, because no on here will call Obama out on anything.
For the TROUBLED may you find PEACE
For the DESPAIRING may you find HOPE
For the LONELY may you find LOVE
For the SKEPTICAL may you find FAITH
-Frances C. Arrillaga 1941-1995
User avatar
yovargas
I miss Prim ...
Posts: 15011
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Florida

Post by yovargas »

halplm wrote:Sorry, I meant a problem of White people hating black people. It's just not true. There are plenty of racial problems, most of them perpetuated by the democratic party.
So how do you explain, say, blacks getting more convictions and longer sentences than whites? Is that one of the problems perpetuated by the democratic party? :scratch:
halplm wrote:But That's not really what I felt needed to be said. Although I probably shouldn't have said anything, because no on here will call Obama out on anything.
You haven't really called him out on anything either since you didn't specify what or why it is that you're criticizing him for. Hard to have a discussion when we don't know what you're trying to discuss.
User avatar
Lalaith
Lali Beag Bídeach
Posts: 15719
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Rivendell

Post by Lalaith »

I'm no fan of Obama, hal, but I don't know what he's said about the Zimmerman trial.
Image
halplm
hooked
Posts: 4864
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:15 am

Post by halplm »

yovargas wrote:
halplm wrote:Sorry, I meant a problem of White people hating black people. It's just not true. There are plenty of racial problems, most of them perpetuated by the democratic party.
So how do you explain, say, blacks getting more convictions and longer sentences than whites? Is that one of the problems perpetuated by the democratic party? :scratch:
First of all, where are you getting your information?... but secondly Of course it is. Where is most black crime? It's in inner cities where it's usually black on black crime. Who sets the laws and penalties in those areas? It's the people in charge, who are democrats.

Why you may ask? Because of several reasons, but primarily so that they can continue the "victim" mentality in black communities.
halplm wrote:But That's not really what I felt needed to be said. Although I probably shouldn't have said anything, because no on here will call Obama out on anything.
You haven't really called him out on anything either since you didn't specify what or why it is that you're criticizing him for. Hard to have a discussion when we don't know what you're trying to discuss.
I believe I said he was inciting violence among black communities by making the zimmerman trial about race when it was not, and specifically by making it about a white person killing a black person, which it wasn't.

Why isn't he doing anything about places like chicago where many many murders of black people are happening daily. Are those crimes of less importance simply because it's black people killing black people?

Why would you make comments that fan the flames of violence rather than instead state the truth, that the justice system operated as it is supposed to, and the ACTUAL EVIDENCE available showed that it had nothing to do with race, and as tragic as it is, was not something worth creating riots about.

Instead, he did nothing to diffuse anyones anger, and said that if it had been a black person that killed a white person (there was no white person involved), the verdict "may" have been different. Of course, there's no way to know such a thing, but it sure sounds like this was only the result of a racist white nation hating black people...

Anyway, I'm done here, I can't get into it any more, I apologize for bringing it up.
For the TROUBLED may you find PEACE
For the DESPAIRING may you find HOPE
For the LONELY may you find LOVE
For the SKEPTICAL may you find FAITH
-Frances C. Arrillaga 1941-1995
User avatar
Túrin Turambar
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:37 am
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

Post by Túrin Turambar »

I suppose I’ve taken a pretty stoic view of the Zimmerman trial – if the evidence was not there to convict Zimmerman of murder or manslaughter beyond reasonable doubt, then he could not be convicted. Like with most western countries, the U.S. judicial system is based on a presumption of innocence. The issues of race that surrounded the trial could not and should not change that.

That said, I thought the President’s speech was interesting. He rarely speaks from the perspective of an African-American, which I think is a sound approach for him to take, but I think he added some value to the discussion in this case.
User avatar
Primula Baggins
Living in hope
Posts: 40005
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:43 am
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
Contact:

Post by Primula Baggins »

I just would say . . . that . . . from a statistical point of view, consider who's going to have the more valid sampling of what minority/majority interactions are like: someone in the majority who rarely interacts with anyone from a minority, so maybe 1% to 3% of their interactions are like that . . . or someone who is in a minority, so 100% of their interactions are like that? Who gets to gather more data? Who has the preponderance of the evidence?

I have to add that, on a visceral level, hearing the president of the United States talk about hearing car-door locks click when he crossed the street, and seeing elderly women clutch their purses when he boarded an elevator with them—that was powerful. I have never had, could never have, such an experience. I have to acknowledge its validity for those who have had it. Including the president.
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
halplm
hooked
Posts: 4864
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:15 am

Post by halplm »

Really, and what does acknowledging that experience entail? Are you suddenly not going to lock your door when you see someone you don't trust? Are you going to go around admonishing people who want to feel safe and lock their door? Such an action has nothing to do with race, and you can't possibly make a statement about such a hypothetical person's reasons for doing so.

If someone hears a door locking as they cross the street, they can't possibly know WHY that door was locked. Assuming it's because of their race is their problem, not an epidemic or whites hating blacks.

In the context of current events, such a statement helps no one. All it does is make angry people angrier, because they hear the president saying that "yes, white people do hate you, just like they hate me, and you have every right to be angry."

What good does that do?

Wouldn't it have been better for the president to say... I don't know... "More violence doesn't do anyone any good. We have a justice system that looks at evidence and determines guilt. In this case the evidence showed Zimmerman was innocent, and the tragic situation had nothing to do with race." Worse case, that wouldn't provoke anyone to more violence than they were already going to take part in.
For the TROUBLED may you find PEACE
For the DESPAIRING may you find HOPE
For the LONELY may you find LOVE
For the SKEPTICAL may you find FAITH
-Frances C. Arrillaga 1941-1995
User avatar
River
bioalchemist
Posts: 13432
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:08 am
Location: the dry land

Post by River »

Did the President make any remarks about the Zimmerman trial? He hadn't said anything about it Friday morning, but I've been off the internet until now and I'm now on another continent.

ETA: Okay, caught up.


REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON TRAYVON MARTIN

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room



1:33 P.M. EDT



THE PRESIDENT: I wanted to come out here, first of all, to tell you that Jay is prepared for all your questions and is very much looking forward to the session. The second thing is I want to let you know that over the next couple of weeks, there’s going to obviously be a whole range of issues -- immigration, economics, et cetera -- we'll try to arrange a fuller press conference to address your questions.



The reason I actually wanted to come out today is not to take questions, but to speak to an issue that obviously has gotten a lot of attention over the course of the last week -- the issue of the Trayvon Martin ruling. I gave a preliminary statement right after the ruling on Sunday. But watching the debate over the course of the last week, I thought it might be useful for me to expand on my thoughts a little bit.



First of all, I want to make sure that, once again, I send my thoughts and prayers, as well as Michelle’s, to the family of Trayvon Martin, and to remark on the incredible grace and dignity with which they’ve dealt with the entire situation. I can only imagine what they’re going through, and it’s remarkable how they’ve handled it.



The second thing I want to say is to reiterate what I said on Sunday, which is there’s going to be a lot of arguments about the legal issues in the case -- I'll let all the legal analysts and talking heads address those issues. The judge conducted the trial in a professional manner. The prosecution and the defense made their arguments. The juries were properly instructed that in a case such as this reasonable doubt was relevant, and they rendered a verdict. And once the jury has spoken, that's how our system works. But I did want to just talk a little bit about context and how people have responded to it and how people are feeling.



You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago. And when you think about why, in the African American community at least, there’s a lot of pain around what happened here, I think it’s important to recognize that the African American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that doesn’t go away.



There are very few African American men in this country who haven't had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me. There are very few African American men who haven't had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me -- at least before I was a senator. There are very few African Americans who haven't had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off. That happens often.



And I don't want to exaggerate this, but those sets of experiences inform how the African American community interprets what happened one night in Florida. And it’s inescapable for people to bring those experiences to bear. The African American community is also knowledgeable that there is a history of racial disparities in the application of our criminal laws -- everything from the death penalty to enforcement of our drug laws. And that ends up having an impact in terms of how people interpret the case.



Now, this isn't to say that the African American community is naïve about the fact that African American young men are disproportionately involved in the criminal justice system; that they’re disproportionately both victims and perpetrators of violence. It’s not to make excuses for that fact -- although black folks do interpret the reasons for that in a historical context. They understand that some of the violence that takes place in poor black neighborhoods around the country is born out of a very violent past in this country, and that the poverty and dysfunction that we see in those communities can be traced to a very difficult history.



And so the fact that sometimes that’s unacknowledged adds to the frustration. And the fact that a lot of African American boys are painted with a broad brush and the excuse is given, well, there are these statistics out there that show that African American boys are more violent -- using that as an excuse to then see sons treated differently causes pain.



I think the African American community is also not naïve in understanding that, statistically, somebody like Trayvon Martin was statistically more likely to be shot by a peer than he was by somebody else. So folks understand the challenges that exist for African American boys. But they get frustrated, I think, if they feel that there’s no context for it and that context is being denied. And that all contributes I think to a sense that if a white male teen was involved in the same kind of scenario, that, from top to bottom, both the outcome and the aftermath might have been different.



Now, the question for me at least, and I think for a lot of folks, is where do we take this? How do we learn some lessons from this and move in a positive direction? I think it’s understandable that there have been demonstrations and vigils and protests, and some of that stuff is just going to have to work its way through, as long as it remains nonviolent. If I see any violence, then I will remind folks that that dishonors what happened to Trayvon Martin and his family. But beyond protests or vigils, the question is, are there some concrete things that we might be able to do.



I know that Eric Holder is reviewing what happened down there, but I think it’s important for people to have some clear expectations here. Traditionally, these are issues of state and local government, the criminal code. And law enforcement is traditionally done at the state and local levels, not at the federal levels.



That doesn’t mean, though, that as a nation we can’t do some things that I think would be productive. So let me just give a couple of specifics that I’m still bouncing around with my staff, so we’re not rolling out some five-point plan, but some areas where I think all of us could potentially focus.



Number one, precisely because law enforcement is often determined at the state and local level, I think it would be productive for the Justice Department, governors, mayors to work with law enforcement about training at the state and local levels in order to reduce the kind of mistrust in the system that sometimes currently exists.



When I was in Illinois, I passed racial profiling legislation, and it actually did just two simple things. One, it collected data on traffic stops and the race of the person who was stopped. But the other thing was it resourced us training police departments across the state on how to think about potential racial bias and ways to further professionalize what they were doing.



And initially, the police departments across the state were resistant, but actually they came to recognize that if it was done in a fair, straightforward way that it would allow them to do their jobs better and communities would have more confidence in them and, in turn, be more helpful in applying the law. And obviously, law enforcement has got a very tough job.



So that’s one area where I think there are a lot of resources and best practices that could be brought to bear if state and local governments are receptive. And I think a lot of them would be. And let's figure out are there ways for us to push out that kind of training.



Along the same lines, I think it would be useful for us to examine some state and local laws to see if it -- if they are designed in such a way that they may encourage the kinds of altercations and confrontations and tragedies that we saw in the Florida case, rather than diffuse potential altercations.



I know that there's been commentary about the fact that the "stand your ground" laws in Florida were not used as a defense in the case. On the other hand, if we're sending a message as a society in our communities that someone who is armed potentially has the right to use those firearms even if there's a way for them to exit from a situation, is that really going to be contributing to the kind of peace and security and order that we'd like to see?



And for those who resist that idea that we should think about something like these "stand your ground" laws, I'd just ask people to consider, if Trayvon Martin was of age and armed, could he have stood his ground on that sidewalk? And do we actually think that he would have been justified in shooting Mr. Zimmerman who had followed him in a car because he felt threatened? And if the answer to that question is at least ambiguous, then it seems to me that we might want to examine those kinds of laws.



Number three -- and this is a long-term project -- we need to spend some time in thinking about how do we bolster and reinforce our African American boys. And this is something that Michelle and I talk a lot about. There are a lot of kids out there who need help who are getting a lot of negative reinforcement. And is there more that we can do to give them the sense that their country cares about them and values them and is willing to invest in them?



I'm not naïve about the prospects of some grand, new federal program. I'm not sure that that’s what we're talking about here. But I do recognize that as President, I've got some convening power, and there are a lot of good programs that are being done across the country on this front. And for us to be able to gather together business leaders and local elected officials and clergy and celebrities and athletes, and figure out how are we doing a better job helping young African American men feel that they're a full part of this society and that they've got pathways and avenues to succeed -- I think that would be a pretty good outcome from what was obviously a tragic situation. And we're going to spend some time working on that and thinking about that.

And then, finally, I think it's going to be important for all of us to do some soul-searching. There has been talk about should we convene a conversation on race. I haven't seen that be particularly productive when politicians try to organize conversations. They end up being stilted and politicized, and folks are locked into the positions they already have. On the other hand, in families and churches and workplaces, there's the possibility that people are a little bit more honest, and at least you ask yourself your own questions about, am I wringing as much bias out of myself as I can? Am I judging people as much as I can, based on not the color of their skin, but the content of their character? That would, I think, be an appropriate exercise in the wake of this tragedy.



And let me just leave you with a final thought that, as difficult and challenging as this whole episode has been for a lot of people, I don’t want us to lose sight that things are getting better. Each successive generation seems to be making progress in changing attitudes when it comes to race. It doesn’t mean we’re in a post-racial society. It doesn’t mean that racism is eliminated. But when I talk to Malia and Sasha, and I listen to their friends and I seem them interact, they’re better than we are -- they’re better than we were -- on these issues. And that’s true in every community that I’ve visited all across the country.



And so we have to be vigilant and we have to work on these issues. And those of us in authority should be doing everything we can to encourage the better angels of our nature, as opposed to using these episodes to heighten divisions. But we should also have confidence that kids these days, I think, have more sense than we did back then, and certainly more than our parents did or our grandparents did; and that along this long, difficult journey, we’re becoming a more perfect union -- not a perfect union, but a more perfect union.



Thank you, guys.



END 1:52 P.M. EDT
Not sure what in there is particularly incendiary. Perhaps hal or someone else who feels ruffled could highlight the relevant bits for me?

As far as being looked at with suspicion goes, I've experienced it. It's hard to put a finger on exactly what happened. It was just something in the air. May've even been my imagination, though I don't think it was.

There's another factor that needs to be remembered and that is, when you don't look like the majority, you feel it. It's hard to ignore (if you don't believe me, it might be time for a trip to Latin America or one of the other parts of the world where most of the population is not white). And once you're already feeling different, it's not much of a leap to feel you're being treated different. Especially if there's reason for distrust. That feeling of distrust isn't going to come from anything anyone says in a speech either; it's going to come from things that have happened to you or things that happened to friends and family or from the tales told of friends of friends or friends of relatives. And then, when people who look like the majority or the powerful say "Oh no, that's not what we meant," or some such, it sounds more like gaslighting than the truth, because you believe the stories, or you believe what you felt when you heard a lock click or a fist clench.
When you can do nothing what can you do?
User avatar
yovargas
I miss Prim ...
Posts: 15011
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Florida

Post by yovargas »

halplm wrote:If someone hears a door locking as they cross the street, they can't possibly know WHY that door was locked. Assuming it's because of their race is their problem, not an epidemic or whites hating blacks.
This statement feels either strangely naive or like a state of denial, I'm not sure which. Again, hal, look at the factual evidence. Look at the giant piles of study and data showing how whites and blacks in identical situations are treated different. Just two weeks ago I read a study where they would send out a bunch of resumes out to companies, one with names common only to blacks such as Tyrone, and another identical one with names common only to whites such as Cody. Completely identical resumes, the only difference was one could be assumed to be coming from a black person and the other from a white person. The ones with the black names consistently received 15-20% less call backs than the whites ones. So simply being black makes it harder to get a job.

Is that also caused by democrats?

This stuff is real. It happens. It's a problem. And ignoring it or pretending it doesn't happen or never commenting on it doesn't make it go away.
User avatar
Lalaith
Lali Beag Bídeach
Posts: 15719
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Rivendell

Post by Lalaith »

Thanks for posting that, River. I actually think that what the President said there was very powerful and good.

Do as many white people hate black people as 50 years ago? No, I don't think so. Does that mean that racism doesn't exist any more? No, it definitely does still exist.

Even speaking to yovi's post above, I can remember a few years ago that my good friend's sister couldn't get hired. She is an RN and had connections in one of the hospitals in Georgia where she put in her application. She heard through the grapevine that she wasn't getting hired because she was black. The problem? She was white (blonde hair, blue eyes). She had a "black-sounding" first name and had married a man whose last name was Brown. Once she had her connections whisper in the ears of the hospital people that she was white, she immediately got hired.

:suspicious:

That makes me sick. :x
Image
User avatar
yovargas
I miss Prim ...
Posts: 15011
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Florida

Post by yovargas »

Wow. That was a fantastic speech. Thank you for actually looking it up, River. Though I voted for Obama both times I've largely become disillusioned about him in general, but speeches like that remind me why I had once been excited at the prospect of his Presidency.
User avatar
River
bioalchemist
Posts: 13432
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:08 am
Location: the dry land

Post by River »

Yeah, I thought that if we're trying to talk about a speech Obama made recently, we should have the text. Just so we're all on the same page about what was or wasn't actually said.
When you can do nothing what can you do?
Infidel
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:10 pm

Re: Louis CK said it best

Post by Infidel »

Passdagas the Brown wrote: Tell me in all seriousness: If an armed black man followed and shot an unarmed white 17-year old, on a dubious suspicion, and after being ordered by police officers to walk away,
A civilian dispatcher, not police officers. It was not an order. Even if it were an order the civilian dispatcher has no authority to issue orders, nor is Zimmerman under any legal compulsion to obey.
do you seriously think the public conversation would be the same?

No, I don't think the conversation would be the same. I think there would be no conversation at all. If Zimmerman's dad was Hispanic-African instead of his mom (ie Zimmerman had a Hispanic last name) no one would have given this a second glance. The only reason there is a conversation is because the Media portrayed Zimmerman as white.
This trial was about the ridiculous Stand Your Ground laws,
The media tried to make it about SYG laws, however the defense did not use SYG, nor was the verdict based on SYG. SYG would not have applied in any event, with Zimmerman prone and Martin straddling him and throwing punches, he could not retreat.
AND it was about race. Zimmerman's comments, which came to light during the trial, make it clear that he found Martin suspicious due to his race and clothing style, which is typical of an African American youth.

By the 911 call, Zimmerman found Martin suspicious because of his actions. Zimmerman did not mention race until prompted by the dispatcher, and even at first did not seem sure.
The defense attorneys also adopted typical racist means of smearing an African American.
?
Finally, here is a link to a story from 2010. A black woman in Florida fired warning shots IN THE AIR, allegedly in response to her husband, who was beating her. She argued that she was standing her ground, as per her rights in Florida. She was sentenced to 20 years in prison.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-574 ... ing-shots/

She left the house, got a gun, and then came back. That's not exactly SYG.
See also:
http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2012 ... our-ground
and:
http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2012 ... d-shooting
and a similar case:
http://www.theledger.com/article/200906 ... 5060?tc=ar
Man's daughter and her boyfriend fighting, boyfriend punches hole in wall, dad fires warning shot, gets 20 years.

Times analysis of SYG cases in Florida:
The Times analysis found no obvious bias in how black defendants have been treated:

• Whites who invoked the law were charged at the same rate as blacks.

• Whites who went to trial were convicted at the same rate as blacks.

• In mixed-race cases involving fatalities, the outcomes were similar. Four of the five blacks who killed a white went free; five of the six whites who killed a black went free.

• Overall, black defendants went free 66 percent of the time in fatal cases compared to 61 percent for white defendants — a difference explained, in part, by the fact blacks were more likely to kill another black.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/cri ... aw/1233152
Passdagas the Brown
Posts: 3154
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 9:31 pm

Ah

Post by Passdagas the Brown »

So you have, for some reason, completely accepted the talking points of the defense...

An ARMED man followed an unarmed teenager who was allegedly just "walking" in the wrong neighborhood. That ARMED man then proceeded to follow the teen, despite the contrary advice from the dispatchers. He then precipitated a confrontation. When the unarmed teenager then decided to defend himself from this strange armed man that was following him, the ARMED man shot him in the chest, and killed him.

Yet, you seem convinced that Zimmerman did the right thing...

Honestly, this is impossible to discuss. There is an extraordinary amount of racism in this country - particularly in the region of my birth - the Southeast. It is second nature for a large number of white people to simply assume that a black person is probably going to do something terrible, particularly if they are in a neighborhood that isn't predominately black.

The defense attorneys did an excellent job, with very little evidence and just a few photos (the kinds that are pretty typical for a teenager that age) getting some people to believe that Trayvon was a violent, dope fiend. When you're black, there doesn't need to be that much evidence that you're a violent dope fiend. Just a picture of you fooling around with gold teeth or something equally inconclusive and POW, you deserved to die.

We have some serious growing up to do in this country.
Infidel
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:10 pm

Re: Ah

Post by Infidel »

Passdagas the Brown wrote:So you have, for some reason, completely accepted the talking points of the defense...
That's odd, I think I provided some facts, which countered your assertions. Are any of the facts I provided wrong (such as your statement that Zimmerman was ordered by police to walk away was wrong)?
An ARMED man followed an unarmed teenager who was allegedly just "walking" in the wrong neighborhood. That ARMED man then proceeded to follow the teen, despite the contrary advice from the dispatchers. He then precipitated a confrontation. When the unarmed teenager then decided to defend himself from this strange armed man that was following him, the ARMED man shot him in the chest, and killed him.
When Martin ran, Zimmerman lost him. The dispatch operator suggested that Zimmerman did not need to follow Martin. Zimmerman said okay. The woman Martin was on the phone with testified that Martin told her he was at the back of his fathers house. The fight and shooting took place some distance away from the house Martin was staying at.
That indicates to me that Martin, after getting home, went back looking for Zimmerman.
What does that indicate to you?
halplm
hooked
Posts: 4864
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:15 am

Post by halplm »

What is incendiary?

There's a difference between trying to get people to stop being violent in response to an outcome of a trial that had NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE... and telling everyone else that that violence is understandable and essentially justifiable.

The first is what a responsible leader would do, the second is what a political activist with no thought to the repercussions of his statement does.


I've done a lot of study of biases over the last year, but it still astonishes me how two intelligent people can hear this president speak and come away with two totally different understandings of it. Perhaps neither are wrong, but it makes discussions of it difficult.
For the TROUBLED may you find PEACE
For the DESPAIRING may you find HOPE
For the LONELY may you find LOVE
For the SKEPTICAL may you find FAITH
-Frances C. Arrillaga 1941-1995
Post Reply