Breaking the Mirage: Obama, Kamala, and the ADOS Community

“the arrogance of Harris and Obama, who continue to play identity politics...” JA

President Barack Obama is hitting the trail in hopes of saving the Harris campaign from its seemingly impending demise. When I first heard he would be jumping back into the arena to rescue the Democratic Party, I thought maybe Donald Trump would be in trouble. Superman had flown onto the scene to save the day. Democrats were excited—the big dog was coming out. They saved the best for last: the October surprise, strategically placed to accelerate Harris straight to victory.

But as Obama steps back into the spotlight to support Harris, I can’t help but reflect on the earlier days of his own campaigns, when I, like many, had been swept up in the hope and inspiration he brought. Back in 2008 and 2012, when he was running for office, he was more than just a politician—he was a symbol of possibility for people like me. Each one of his campaign speeches was exactly the same, but it didn’t matter; I loved listening to him. Hearing a Black man speaking about something other than "bitches," "hoes," and "lean" was exhilarating. When Michelle joined him, there you had it—a complete American Black family. I was giddy with delight. I honestly believed back then that President Obama was like me—it took me a long time to realize the stark differences in how Obama had been raised compared to the way I had been raised.

Obama’s Return and the Reflection on His Legacy

The senseless murder of Trayvon Martin brought President Obama to the front lawn of the White House. I remember the sunny day and how the backdrop of the White House was pristine and white. President Obama stood on the lawn and proclaimed that Trayvon could have been his son. It made me feel proud, like one of our own was speaking on behalf of our sons and daughters. But it was all just rhetoric. Barry had no more allegiance to the Black community than he did to the Indonesian community that raised him.

Now, Obama wasn’t all bad. Of course, it was his leadership that got Osama Bin Laden. Additionally, there is something to be said about the free cell phones. Many people I knew couldn’t afford to keep a phone, but with Obama phones, even though their numbers changed every few months, they always seemed to have a phone. Even today, people still have those phones, and they’re starting to look more and more up to date.

However, despite these accomplishments, it wasn’t long after Obama’s second term began that I realized he was not truly an American Black man in the way I had originally thought. For Obama to gain political power, he had to step on the necks of ADOS (American Descendants of Slavery) Blacks to secure a seat in government. This realization shifted my entire perspective on him.

My views continued to change after I watched a documentary about his rise in politics. He went to Chicago, aligned himself with ADOS Blacks, pretended to be one of us, and flaunted his Black wife. He fit the script perfectly, and the Black community bought into the idea that Obama shared the struggles of an American Black person. But that wasn’t the case.

Unfortunately, once Obama took office, he served every group except the ADOS community. I had hoped he would at least open the discussion on reparations, but he remained silent. By the end of his term, it became clear to the ADOS community that Obama was just another Democrat focused on keeping the party in line, not a game changer like many had hoped.

What surprises me the most about Obama is his either complete lack of awareness or willful blindness to the reality that many in the ADOS community don’t consider him one of us. Perhaps he doesn’t realize this, or maybe he’s intentionally perpetuating the idea that he’s a savior to the Black community. Sadly, many of us have long understood that his involvement is primarily about mobilizing votes, not addressing the real issues we face. We’ve seen through the facade—the mask is off. Just because you call me ‘sister’ doesn’t mean I believe I am your sister.

This brings me to the arrogance of Harris and Obama, who continue to play identity politics and attempt to shame Black men into voting for them. But as Americans, we should vote according to our conscience, not based on racial appeals. I refuse to support a party that systematically uses my community while offering little in return.

There’s an assumption that Black people should vote for Kamala because she’s offering handouts and promoting abortion access. Seventy percent of Black women may support her, but she’s steadily losing ground with Black men. It’s clear that she recognizes this and is trying to regain their support, yet she has no substantial ideas to tackle the real challenges facing Black men in our community. Legalizing marijuana is an easy move, one already comparable to alcohol in its widespread acceptance. In my town, dispensaries have become common, but what else is she bringing to the table?

Kamala Harris and the Disconnect with Black Men

Kamala wants to legalize marijuana because she believes Black men are disproportionately impacted by its usage, but she has done nothing to bolster prison reform. She’s merely continued existing legislation, without attempting anything of her own. Donald Trump, on the other hand, signed the First Step Act into law, which saw 7,000 inmates released from prison. Can Kamala make the same claim?

Her $20,000 grants to Black entrepreneurs, and others, are camouflaged behind the reality that this initiative isn’t specific to Black men. Meanwhile, she avoids addressing critical issues like restoring the Black family, unemployment, and hunger.

Kamala claimed on a podcast that child hunger dropped by 50% during her first year in office, but she left out important context. One key point is that this reduction was due to the influx of COVID relief funds provided by Trump’s administration. Now, under Biden/Harris policies, hunger in America has risen again, standing around 12% higher than it had been during Trump’s term—reaching the highest levels since 1920. Last I checked, Black men want to go to work and feed their kids, not rely on temporary relief.

Kamala’s presidency could also confront the racial discrimination embedded in corporate practices that keep Black people out of the workforce, but she sidesteps these issues. Why are Black men incarcerated and working for corporations while in prison, only to be denied jobs at those same companies once released? Does Kamala think Black men don’t realize that having a criminal record severely limits their employment opportunities? What about expanding "Ban the Box" to the federal level?

Since she’s taken office, corporations continue to employ immigrants at lower wages, leaving Black men locked out of economic mobility in what is supposed to be a free-market society.

While corporations exploit immigrant labor for lower wages, systemic barriers such as racial discrimination, mass incarceration, and limited access to education and job training continue to block Black men from climbing the economic ladder. This cycle persists, trapping them in a system that claims to be free but operates very differently.

Despite all of Kamala’s promises, none of her policies directly impact Black men in America. Reparations for the ADOS community would make a tangible difference to Black men today and their future legacies tomorrow. American Blacks are tired of endless discussions. It’s time for implementation and action. Let’s be real—America owes a debt, and the only remaining question is how it will be paid. To this, Kamala offers nothing but empty promises.

My question is, why do the voices of immigrants seem to carry more weight than the voices of those with a longer, lived experience in America? The audacity of hope indeed—President Obama has the audacity to hope that the ADOS community is still the same one that supported him in 2008. Docile and unaware, they continue to offer our community nothing more than the illusion of hope, yet have the audacity to exploit our votes.

Challenging the Illusion of Blackness

Of all the things Barack Obama did while campaigning for Harris, the most troubling was the flat-out lie he managed to slip in during his criticism of Black men for not going to the polls and his condemnation of Black men who vote for Trump. He wanted to make the point that they would rather vote against their own interests than support a woman. I wish I could have asked him: What has Kamala specifically done for Black men in America? But what bothered me even more was when he repeatedly referred to Kamala as African American. He made this claim more than once while speaking at an impromptu meeting with her campaign staff.

The fact that people assert with such conviction that Kamala Harris is African American is truly troubling. If we are to believe Kamala is Black, it requires accepting the one-drop rule—a racist concept created to maintain segregation and reinforce the idea that any Black ancestry "taints" a person’s identity, forever categorizing them as Black. This assumption ties back to the deeply problematic one-drop rule: the idea that one drop of Black blood, even if diluted by generations of non-Black ancestry, makes someone Black. Harris’s claim to Blackness hinges on the notion that somewhere in her Jamaican lineage, one of her ancestors was African, though she conveniently leaves out key details about who this African ancestor was.

Kamala’s father, Donald Harris, admits to being of Irish descent, yet he never claims that his mother or grandmother was African. In fact, he has said he doesn’t know what his grandmother’s ancestry was. And now, we’re supposed to simply assume that there’s African lineage there, even though no clear evidence of African ancestry on that side of the family has been provided. Oh, and because her father is Jamaican—as if white folks have no lineage in Jamaica.

It’s not enough to vaguely trace one’s lineage back to Africa through Jamaica and then claim to represent the Black community in America. The cultural disconnect is too vast. Blackness is not just about lineage—it’s about culture, community, and lived experience. Kamala was primarily raised by her Indian mother, and her upbringing was shaped far more by her Indian heritage than by any connection to African American or ADOS culture.

To claim Kamala as "Black" in the ADOS sense—as someone with roots in the struggles of Black Americans descended from slavery—is to stretch the truth in ways that undermine the depth and meaning of Black identity. President Obama, acting as if he has the authority to speak on such matters, explicitly claimed that Harris is African American, intentionally conflating Blackness with ADOS. Together, they create a mirage of this truth. They blend in details of the Black struggle and attempt to capture Black culture. Lately, Kamala has been running around claiming to have grown up in the Black church, as if that alone would make her Black, or as if Black churches are 100% Black all the time.

Democrats have played this card before. This is an attempt to erase the distinct struggles of ADOS people, whose heritage is defined by the trauma of slavery, segregation, and ongoing systemic racism—experiences that neither Obama nor Kamala, despite their varied and complex backgrounds, have lived.

Obama continues to perpetuate this narrative, as if we are too naive to discern the difference. In 2008, we weren’t having these conversations, and we accepted the idea that every person with dark skin was "Black" like me because that was the lie we had been told for generations.

Growing up, my aunts and uncles had mixed-race children. They were raised in our neighborhoods, attended our schools, and ate collard greens and cornbread at Mama’s house. Though they may have white faces and their mothers came from different racial backgrounds, they share both the ADOS lineage and the cultural experiences of our community. Today, they may be more closely tied to their white families, but their identity as American Descendants of Slavery is undeniable. Neither Obama nor Harris can claim such ties, as their backgrounds are not rooted in the legacy of ADOS.

One moment, she’s sitting on a couch with Charlamagne tha God, and the next, she’s standing in the pulpit at the House of God. This week, Kamala stood on a stage in a Black church and quoted from Galatians. The devil is so slick, he can shape an individual whose strongest appeal to Americans is the promotion of abortions. What is becoming increasingly distressing is the way entertainers and political figures are using the pulpit to perpetuate their lies. How can you stand before God, knowing you’re telling women to "save your life," it’s okay to get rid of the unwanted lives you’ve created? Even more disturbing, some preachers agree with her.

Kamala and her allies are playing a dangerous game, exploiting both cultural identity and faith to push their agendas. But what they fail to realize is that many of us are no longer buying into their rhetoric. The ADOS community is waking up to the empty promises and hollow gestures. It’s time to hold our leaders accountable, not for their words but for their actions. The future of our community depends on us demanding more—more truth, more action, and more respect for the legacy of those who fought before us.

“...it took me a long time to realize the stark differences in how Obama had been raised compared to the way I had been raised.”

— Jacqueline Session Ausby

The System of Systematic Racism

On December 4, 1969, the FBI, with the assistance of the Chicago Police Department, entered the home of a 21-year-old Black man and shot him to death while he slept. That man was Fred Hampton, a Black Panther who dared to stand against violence and injustice in America. The officers who killed Hampton were acquitted of all charges, despite overwhelming evidence confirming that they entered his apartment and fired 99 shots without cause, executing the young man in cold blood.

The actions of the FBI and Chicago police were praised by Nixon and J. Edgar Hoover, who saw individuals like Black Panther members, Malcolm X, and even Martin Luther King Jr. as the greatest threats to democracy in America. Black men who rebelled against the system of racial injustice, violence, and hatred have always been met with violence and hate. Black people—stolen from their homeland, stripped of their identity, treated like cattle, and bought and sold for profit—had to be ‘checked’ with violence. They were the commodity necessary to build a nation, and today, they continue to be viewed as such, albeit in a different form.

The prison system has become the next iteration of slavery and sharecropping. The history of using Black people for labor has been replaced by mass incarceration. Whether by design or unconscious bias, Black Americans continue to be systemically abused by a nation that touts freedom. Masters and foremen have transformed into prison wardens and guards; police officers, once slave catchers, now pursue Black individuals, subjecting them to violence or killing those they see as ‘resistors’ in cold blood. What’s tragic is that nothing has ever been done to truly address the systemic racism that keeps Black people enslaved.

Some corporations have shamelessly invested in this system of mass incarceration for cheap labor. Companies like Starbucks, Verizon, and State Farm use prison labor, yet would never consider hiring these same individuals in the open market, using their criminal records as a barrier to employment once they are released. Other corporations quietly distance themselves once exposed, never investing a dime in restitution for exploiting prisoners.

To placate Black Americans, solutions to racial injustice are almost always reduced to promises of funding for housing, healthcare, and the gold standard: education. These promises have been made repeatedly for decades, yet they remain ineffective at bridging the gap of racism. In reality, government housing is often inadequate, and healthcare in urban communities is substandard. Education or STEM programs, though well-intentioned, are designed to handpick the brightest of our children while leaving others behind, perpetuating a system where Black individuals, unable to ‘assimilate’ because of the color of our skin, become obvious targets in corporate America.

After the deaths of George Floyd and Rayshard Brooks, corporations made promises for change, and some states even offered to defund the police or reallocate funds to mental health and social programs. Promises that will never be met. Yet, they continue to avoid addressing mass incarceration.

I believe that solving the problem of racism in America requires radical change, starting with the restoration of the American Black family. It must go beyond prison reform and address the deeper issues. Funds should be dedicated to real rehabilitation. Corporations that use prison labor should be required to pay prisoners fair wages and give them equal employment opportunities once they have paid their debt to society. Prisoners should be offered the chance to earn a diploma, pursue a college degree, or, for young offenders, join the military.

This is not the 1960s; we are no longer fighting segregation. Our fight now is even more essential: it is a fight to restore our families amid the destruction of our community by gun violence, drugs, and the police. I am tired of hearing apologies from white people—apologies that don’t lead to meaningful change. Instead of promising to fund or defund yet another program designed to help the sick and poor, or another education initiative that lifts up only a token few, how about making strategic investments to restore to a nation of Black people everything that has been stolen?

EVEN THIS WEEK

This week, I’m not sure where to begin—there’s just so much in the news. The biggest topic on my mind is Israel. The Middle East is in turmoil, with Israel defending itself amid rising tensions with surrounding Arab nations. This conflict runs deeper than politics; it is rooted in complex religious and historical divisions.

In his recent address to the United Nations, Benjamin Netanyahu invoked the Bible, framing Israel’s struggle as one of biblical proportions, referencing blessings and curses. Unfortunately, his words were met with rebuke from various world leaders, including Barbados’ Prime Minister Mia Mottley, who quoted, “Vengeance is mine, says the Lord.” It felt as if the very God Netanyahu called upon—the God of both the Old and New Testaments—was being made a mockery. The significance of Jesus as a Jew, bridging both the Old and New Testaments, was notably overlooked. Israel stands as a testament to the power of the Most High, a reality often ignored in these discussions.

It seems that Arab nations are intent on eradicating an ethno-religious state simply because of its Jewish identity, all while holding firmly to their own religious beliefs. This is not merely a battle over borders or land; it’s an ideological and spiritual conflict that has raged for generations.

Sometimes, I feel like I’m watching a movie as the world spins out of control. While the Middle East burns, our televisions, phones, and other digital gadgets keep us preoccupied with materialism. America’s consumerism is like a feign for crack—we’re all addicted.

---

Exploitation and Hypocrisy

A recent example is Ta-Nehisi Coates, who, after spending just two weeks in Israel and Gaza, has been presenting himself as an expert while promoting his new book, The Message. I haven’t read the book yet; it’s in my Amazon cart, and I plan on purchasing it. However, from what I’ve gathered, it seems Coates conflates the struggle for reparations for Black Americans with the Palestinian plight, seemingly exploiting it for personal gain. He’s been making the media rounds, including appearances on CNN, pushing the narrative that Israel is an ethnocentric, racist, apartheid state that must be dismantled to make way for a new Arab nation called Palestine.

Coates should be ashamed of himself. He has abandoned his advocacy for reparations to capitalize on the plight of Palestinians—all in the name of selling another book. His claims of a deep-seated desire to dismantle Israel’s so-called apartheid state ring hollow, particularly when considering Israel’s minuscule land area compared to the vast expanse of the more than 20 Arab nations surrounding it. Coates’s portrayal of Israel as a giant oppressor obscures the reality: it is a small nation surrounded by far larger Arab states.

Despite being perceived as a credible voice, particularly because he is an elite Black man, Coates’s recent narrative is troubling. The most credible voices today are often those who can sell a story—even if it’s not their own. But what happens when a Black man supports a narrative defending Israel? Or endorses Donald Trump? Suddenly, he is marginalized for not aligning with the prevailing ideology in America.

Meanwhile, Israel has decided to respond decisively against Hezbollah and Hamas, who are backed by Iran and have been bombarding them with impunity. Israel is no longer holding back, and it stands firm against Iran’s provocations. While many in the U.S. acknowledge Israel’s right and responsibility to defend itself, there are those who feign concern for the so-called innocents caught in the crossfire, conveniently ignoring the complexities of cause and effect and portraying Israel as acting unprovoked.

As Coates takes advantage of the prevailing narrative to promote his book, our President and Vice President appear indecisive. One moment, they call for the release of hostages and a ceasefire; the next, their stance shifts to a ceasefire followed by the release of hostages. These shifting positions seem more like convenient talking points than genuine expressions of concern, all while the Middle East remains engulfed in turmoil.

---

For The Love of the Game

Now for my sisters and brothers, we seem to have a myriad of distractions to divert our attention from such profound issues. From crazy Jaguar Write to YSL and contraband. But let’s focus on Black politics. The Breakfast Club, this week featured a debate in Black politics between Angela Rye and Byron Donalds. Once again, Angela attempted to wield her so-called “Black girl magic” to transform a Republican’s stance as she argued fervently for Kamala Harris. But the debate didn’t go too well for her.

I tend to agree with Byron on most issues, but both Donalds and Harris often come across as little more than talking heads. Angela Rye, however, is different—she’s sharp, undeniably beautiful, but tends to view the world through rose-colored glasses. She sees things in shades of pale pink and denim, as if she’s moving through fields of poppies. In that mindset, she wasn’t prepared to take on Byron. Despite her effort, her arguments were more like talking points, lacking real substance.

Still, I can’t help but think—and mark my words—if Kamala Harris makes it to the White House, Angela will likely be her Press Secretary. And I’ll watch her take on the media with glee, picturing the neck rolls and eye-popping moments. Of course, I’m speculating, but there’s a reason Angela goes so hard for Kamala. She’s aiming for a White House job, and honestly, I can’t knock her hustle—she plays the role well.

In that debate, Byron kept hitting Angela upside the head with facts until it became literally uncomfortable. Everything Angela said was disputed; all she could do was regurgitate the same Democratic talking points we’ve been hearing ever since Kamala was given the green light.

While I like Byron Donalds’ way of thinking, I completely disagree with him on the issue of reparations. He doesn’t support them, and as I listened to his reasoning, it clicked—he’s the son of immigrants. He has no real allegiance to the American Black community except when it suits his public image. That’s why he can sit on The Breakfast Club and switch between being a first-generation Jamaican immigrant and identifying as a ADOS man.

Byron’s argument is that since no one alive today was a slave, and no slave owners remain, reparations aren’t necessary. But he’s missing a key point—America was built on the backs of enslaved people. My ancestors fought, worked, and bled for the freedom he now enjoys. They were never compensated for their labor, nor were their descendants. Despite the laws of the land, they were given nothing. America owes a debt that still remains unpaid and immigrants that come to America have no right to tell us anything different. But here’s a greater fact: he has done nothing for America himself. He works in financing and has a bad record; he is currently under investigation because of his investments, and he is a representative for a state—meaning he gets paid by the American government. He fits a certain narrative of the shrewd and fast-talking Black man. Nevertheless, one fact is true regarding Byron Donalds: reparations are not owed to him or his legacy.

Donalds represents a certain pan-African mindset—one that seeks to utilize the ADOS community without addressing the debt remains unpaid. Honestly, he’s just as bad as Kamala Harris in that regard, but his policies align more with my own, so I give him some grace.

Meanwhile, Israel bombed Lebanon.

Another Debate

Despite concerns, Americans took its eyes off Israel last week for at least 90-minutes, to watch the Vice Presidential debate that demanded more than a modicum of our attention. Now, I will say the debate felt boring and redundant. Then again, I’m sick of text messages and emails asking for donations and I am ready to vote. Yet, there’s no denying that JD Vance stole the show. He’s sharp and clean-cut, complete with a beard that slightly defies the norms—a touch of ruggedness that works for him and a nice politeness that reads consultant all day.

Walz is just comedic. He was talking, but nothing he said made any sense. Perhaps he was sending a message to his blue-collar supporters that he is really not like Kamala Harris. There were times when Walz agreed with Vance so much that I thought he could have been Vance’s running mate. His usual loud-mouthed, middle-class American jargon he kept hid behind politeness. Instead, Walz was much more compromising.

All these things happened last week as the war in the Middle East escalated to the point where the word “nuclear” is being whispered under breath.

Conflict of compassion

But the thing I really want to focus on is what I witnessed this past weekend in America. It sort of culminated in me questioning American values. It reminded me of the story of the old poor widow who gave her last. Not because the woman gave her last, but because the woman was being exploited, and Jesus saw the exploitation and pointed it out. I witnessed something along that same line that reminded me of that story.

I volunteered for a nonprofit, giving out free food at a park filled with homeless people, and it felt like I’d stepped into another movie and I was suddenly one of the characters in the film. what was odd is, I felt as if I was on the wrong side. I handed out the lettuce and I can’t tell you the guilt I felt as some asked for two knowing the rule was one only—with the caveat they could get right back in the line.

I understand to maintain order there are rules that should be followed but there’s something in the eyes of each of the people that wanted me to give them as much as they wanted. Or more than that I could see how they wished they didn’t have to be in a line. They wished for their own resources to purchase their own fruit. As I handed out the lettuce I kept a smile on my face but inside my heart wrecked in agony. I couldn’t imagine being on the opposite side of that lettuce and yet none of us are really exempt.

I see homeless people all the time working in Center City, but I rarely engage with them. Sometime I may give out change to homeless people, but Handing out food forced me to confront homelessness, poverty, mental illness, drug addiction and immigration. What shocked me most was the sheer number of people who are homeless and hungry in this country. It transcended race, culture, and background. There were whites, ADOS Blacks, Blacks—from Africa and the Caribbean—Hispanics and Asians all waiting in line, hoping to get more than one or two green bananas. They’d come through once and looped back around to get more.

One little Asian lady stood out to me. She kept coming through the line, over and over, until finally, the leader of the group told her no more. She walked away but lingered, passing by me with her little wheeled cart, repeating softly, “I am hungry.” She tried to re-enter the line again, and eventually, the leader had to ask her to move along.

The nonprofit leader, a man who appeared to be of Asian descent, was firm—almost harsh—with an elderly woman who repeatedly asked for more food. Watching their interaction, I couldn’t help but notice how much he looked like he could have been her grandson. There was something unspoken in his demeanor, a conflict between duty and empathy, as though the weight of maintaining order restrained him from showing compassion. His sternness masked a deeper, conflicted emotion, as if he was holding back from giving more than the rules allowed.

At one point, the woman lifted her cart to show that it was empty, but the leader remained resolute in his belief that she had received enough. I was struck by the irony—he wouldn’t have been there if not for people like her, yet here he was, denying her. Nonprofits, while necessary, often feel like a double-edged sword. They thrive on donations, but the people they claim to serve remain stuck in a cycle of dependence. It’s as if their struggles have become a business model, with nonprofits built on the backs of the vulnerable.

The scene in the park was a grim reminder of this uncomfortable truth. We offer food, but the system allows those we serve to be perpetually dependent on handouts. As I watched the desperate faces, I couldn’t help but recall the story of the poor widow who gave her last coin. Jesus highlighted her sacrifice to show the exploitation of the rich, who focused on the gift rather than the individual. In that park, I saw something similar. Many were not just seeking food; they were seeking recognition of their humanity.

In that moment, as I watched him hold back food, I realized that the leader wasn’t just trying to ration supplies. He, like me, was caught in the tension between doing what seems fair and what feels right. Nonprofits walk that line every day—caught between helping people in need and maintaining order in a system that often falls short. It’s this contradiction that challenges both their mission and my view of what charity should be.

Jesus said, “The poor will always be with you.” He wasn’t telling us to accept their plight as inevitable but rather urging us to pay attention. As long as humanity exists, there will be exploitation of the weak. The homeless, hungry, displaced, addicted, and mentally ill are prime material for nonprofits. That’s why organizations like UNRWA thrive—they’re like bottom feeders in a broken system.

To be clear, I’m not suggesting that American nonprofits are as wicked as UNRWA, but without proper caution and oversight, there’s a danger they could become something similar—a new version of organizations that keep women and children trapped in camps for generation in places like Sudan and Jordan.

Volunteering that day reminded me that God’s command to love our neighbor goes deeper than just doing good. It’s about giving of ourselves fully, even to the point of sacrifice. And yet, as I reflect on my own actions, I realize how far I am from truly embodying that kind of love.

In truth, that nonprofit leader was a lot like me—caught between duty and compassion, balancing the need for order with the desire to help. He was doing what he believed was right, just as I was trying to do good in my own way. But in the end, both of us held something back, afraid to give more than what was asked. That tension is something we all face: knowing we could do more, yet unsure how far we’re willing to go.

Saturday, after volunteering, I went home to a house filled with my grandkids and their parents, rushing around getting ready for a football game. The house was warm and smelled of baked chicken that had been in the oven ready for dinner when they returned. I can’t express how this simple scene filled my heart with warmth—how easy it is to take such things for granted, yet how priceless they are. That sense of happiness and satisfaction grounded me, offering a momentary reprieve from the harsh realities that exists outside. As the world continues to turn—Israel under siege, the Middle East at war, people homeless and hungry, mentally ill and addicted—I’m reminded that, just like last week, God is still in control...

---

KAMALA HARRIS: The Oprah Event That Fell Flat

Kamala Harris’ recent appearance at an event hosted by Oprah Winfrey in Michigan was intended to rally support ahead of the 2024 elections, but it turned out to be a complete mess. While the format of the event was modeled after Oprah’s iconic talk show, it felt more like a staged campaign effort that missed the mark. The event featured a mix of personal testimonies from activists and celebrities and was supposed to be a conversation between Oprah and Harris discussing major issues like abortion rights, gun control, and the economy.

Although Harris took the stage alongside Oprah, the conversation wasn’t a critical exploration of her policies. Instead, it was a controlled environment designed to polish her public image. Oprah acted more like a facilitator than an interviewer, allowing Harris to deliver her talking points without much pushback. The tone was emotional, meant to connect with the audience, and framed largely around personal stories shared by the activists present.

A few months ago, I watched a documentary about Richard Nixon’s presidential campaign. One of the things that helped lead to his victory, after several campaign losses, was his decision to bring cameras into the homes of middle-class Americans. His message about ending the Vietnam War was broadcast directly into people’s living rooms, helping him secure victory in 1968—the same year I was born.

Donald Trump seems to have borrowed from that playbook. Instead of appearing in homes via television, he’s now showing up on podcasts and collaborating with influential streamers. It’s a savvy move, especially in today’s media landscape, and one that Kamala Harris has tried to replicate. However, her attempt to engage the younger generation didn’t go as smoothly. When her team reached out to popular streamer Kai Cenat, he took to social media to express his frustration, making it clear he had no interest in working with her or her campaign.

While I wouldn’t be drawn to Cenat’s style—his content doesn’t resonate with me—millions of young people follow him. Kamala likely saw his platform as a way to connect with that demographic, but her approach backfired, with Cenat publicly rejecting her overtures. Meanwhile, Trump has been successfully breaking the mold, appearing on podcasts and even attending events like the National Association of Black Journalists convention in Chicago this past August.

It’s becoming increasingly evident that Kamala Harris is struggling to stay relevant. Her recent appearance with Oprah felt like a last-ditch effort to salvage her campaign, but it fell flat. Celebrities like Chris Rock and Ben Stiller have also struggled to shine in Oprah’s orbit, and Harris was no different. Oprah’s natural charisma overshadowed Kamala, who seemed small and unpresidential next to her. Oprah’s over-the-top excitement, especially when calling out celebrities, reminded me of Effie Trinket from The Hunger Games, and the event started to feel like a real-life Reaping ceremony.

The entire thing came across as overly staged—celebrities dialed in via Zoom, and virtual attendees filled the screens. Harris’ answers felt rehearsed and shallow, and even Oprah had to frown and follow up, searching for something more substantive.

The emotional highlight of the event revolved around two tragic abortion stories from Georgia, used to underscore arguments against restrictive abortion laws. These stories involved two Black women who took abortion pills, experienced complications, and tragically passed away. However, what was glaringly absent from the conversation was the accountability of the medical providers who prescribed these pills. They gave the women medication but failed to offer the necessary follow-up care. It’s like handing someone a loaded gun and hoping they won’t shoot—but if they do, you’re quick to raise your hands, claiming no responsibility.

The narrative implied that these women had taken the pills in dangerous or unsafe conditions, but that wasn’t the case. They took them in the safety of their own homes. The issue wasn’t where they took the pills—it was the failure of their medical providers to offer proper support when complications arose. Fear of legal repercussions due to abortion restrictions drove these women to the ER, leaving them without adequate care.

This lack of accountability raises ethical questions. If agencies are willing to provide medication for a procedure restricted or illegal in certain states, they should also ensure the safety and well-being of the women who take it. Without proper safeguards, these women are left vulnerable and unsupported.

The most unsettling part of this segment was when the mother of one of the women tearfully recounted the loss of her daughter, without mentioning the twins her daughter had aborted. This wasn’t just one life lost—there were three. The absence of any acknowledgment of the twins felt disturbing. Every decision carries consequences, and there must be accountability for our actions. I cried for those women and their families, and I pray for them. I believe those babies are in a better place, but the weight of these losses cannot be ignored.

Kamala’s only strong moment came when she answered a question from a young couple about the economy. They had recently bought a home and had a baby. Like many middle-class Americans, they asked, “What will you do to help us?” Kamala mentioned her $25,000 first-time homebuyer program and her childcare tax credit for the first year of a child’s life. However, this couple wouldn’t qualify for either—by the time she might take office, they would already own a home, and their child would be too old for the credit. Oprah quickly shifted the conversation to gun violence, but the awkwardness lingered.

Kamala then mentioned that she owns a gun, which only added to the unease. The conversation again shifted back to emotional appeals about children, which felt like political exploitation. It’s disturbing how often children are used as tools in these discussions.

On immigration, Kamala’s responses were similarly vague. Immigration is a significant issue in cities like Springfield, Ohio, and across the country, but often, the legitimate concerns of local communities are dismissed as racist or irrelevant. The complexity of the issue deserves more thoughtful engagement, but the current administration has yet to offer any real solutions.

By the end of the event, I left with one thought—America is in trouble if Kamala Harris is elected president.

MORE THAN A STEREOTYPE: Navigating Corporate America while Black

Over the last couple of years, our culture has begun to collide with our corporate and business experiences in ways more divisive than anyone could have imagined. I often wonder if things will improve or if we will remain stuck in these patterns. Speaking from my experience of over 30 years in the corporate arena, I’ve faced the assumption that little could be expected of my capabilities. Yet, I have consistently exceeded expectations, outperforming my peers through countless late nights and taking on more than required.

Interestingly, I have never felt held back because of my race. The real challenge has been learning to navigate a world where behavior is paramount. Growing up in a dysfunctional community marked by violence and poverty, the adults around me were often too preoccupied with survival to teach their children how to behave in an America they only knew from afar. I’ve had to defy the low expectations placed on me as a Black woman, mastering everything from formal dining etiquette to corporate appearance standards, like wearing straight hair or braids.

The biggest difference between the 20-year-old me and the 56-year-old me is that I now understand how to be authentically myself in a world designed to create copycats and imposters—images of what “they,” whoever they are, perceive to be real. It’s a fallacy to believe that perception is reality when, in fact, reality is what is truly real.

In corporate America, the term “authentic” is overused and often misunderstood by many leaders. Authenticity is typically presented as the image of a man in a blue suit with a sharp haircut or a woman in a tailored suit with the ‘right’ heels and perfect posture. To be successful, you’re expected to learn the language, dress the part, and adhere to arbitrary rules. In other words, you have to go along to get along.

I have come to realize that if you can play these parts well—dressing the part, speaking the right language, and following the unspoken rules—then you can achieve success without merit or hard work. We live in a world where imposters are programmed and encouraged. Unfortunately, in many cases, that success becomes how people define their authentic selves. Their image of authenticity is shaped by the corporate definition of success: adhering to rigid standards of appearance, behavior, and achievement.

This flawed idea of what it means to be “real” has far-reaching consequences. It spills over into our communities, where people feel pressure to conform to certain images of success imposed by corporations whose primary goal is profit. In schools, we teach our children they can be anything they want to be, knowing full well that this isn’t always true—especially when it comes to staying true to who they authentically are. In churches, faith in God is often measured by how much you give rather than the condition of your heart. Even in our justice system, bias against those who fit a certain mold affects how individuals are treated. Now, in corporate America, we are told we must conform to societal norms because this is the direction the world is moving toward.

As a result, many of us struggle to find and embrace our true selves because we’ve been conditioned to measure our worth against these artificial standards. True authenticity, then, requires breaking free from worldly molds and redefining what success and self-expression look like on our own terms. We must do this in our communities, our schools, and our churches, as well as in corporations.

I have learned that authenticity has nothing to do with my success in Corporate America. My authentic self is rooted in the innate qualities I was naturally born with. I am a strategic thinker; I know this because I always have a plan. I am a dreamer, always looking beyond the horizon. I am wise enough to recognize that I can’t go it alone; relationships matter, not because of what they give you, but because of the wisdom you can share.

This wisdom comes from my experiences in two very different worlds. I have sat at kitchen tables, playing spades with individuals who had fed some ungodly habit, in some sinister basement or who had just shot up or smoked crack in a dark alley. Having grown up in the urban city of New Brunswick and spending over twenty years in the Grays Ferry section of Philadelphia, I have frequented dark bars and witnessed drug deals. Yet, I understand that the reality of that life never belonged to me, even though I lived in that world.

The other world I’ve encountered isn’t necessarily anti-Black; it’s simply distinct. While the food, the people, and the ideas may vary, we are all fundamentally the same at our core. The same demons dwell in high-class restaurants and hotels as those that linger in back alleys and whorehouses. Although individuals in one world may speak eloquently and engage in deep conversations, the underlying struggles and aspirations often reflect a shared humanity that transcends class and culture.

Whether I’m on a business trip in New York, visiting a play with family and friends, or exploring a museum, or dining at a restaurant, the experience is markedly different. The restaurants and hotels reflect a different atmosphere and clientele. I have also sat in meetings with high-level executives and politicians, completely aware that I am in spaces that do not reflect the world where I live and love. I have learned to adjust in both worlds, not preferring one over the other.

To be honest, there was a time when I desperately tried to shape my executive presence to fit prescribed molds, but I realized I don’t fit those clothes. To be authentic and real means embracing who I am, how I dress, where I came from, and what seats I occupy. It all manifests in my commitment to continued faith, growth, and transformation—but I move forward knowing full well that my legacy is watching me.

With this in mind, I show up with braided hair, big glasses, and dark skin, consistently affirming that many more can take these same seats. I remain true to my moral standards while navigating arbitrary rules and succeeding. ADOS Black women are intellectually capable and able to articulate effectively, even in a community designed to hold us back.

To be authentic is to reject cultural norms established by government or corporate standards. As Martin Luther King Jr. once said, to be excellent means breaking molds and not conforming to stereotypes imposed by community, culture, and, more recently, corporate ideology regarding what is right and wrong. Be ye a nonconformist.

Let me ask you: how often have you felt the pressure to conform to someone else’s standards? I remember being told that a black dress I wore to the office, with a sheer top, was inappropriate. I was twenty and working for a major bank. While that may have been true, I was a struggling single parent at the time and didn’t have many clothes. I was insulted and angry but received the comment with a smile. I went home and threw that dress in the trash, never to wear it again. Yet, I performed well—even without a college degree, I competed so effectively against those with advanced education that they were forced to recognize my capabilities. I don’t regret that precarious situation; it prompted me at twenty-eight to pursue my degree. I often reflect on this experience when I consider how I show up in corporate America. People are quick to judge based on appearances, rarely considering the circumstances of others—often because they haven’t been taught to do so.

Many corporations pretend to be woke and tout their commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). They make promises they have no intention of keeping—commitments that are often unmeasurable yet sound appealing. Have you noticed how often corporate agendas align with superficial ideals? They present images of what it means to be “real” while treating their employees like pawns who must conform to societal moral standards or face consequences. Meanwhile, in the office, racism persists as usual. While some can navigate through, there are bottlenecks in place that effectively hinder people like me, a Black woman. I literally have three strikes against me: I am not just a Black woman, but I also disagree with the prevailing ideology that Blacks are so oppressed that we are victims. I cannot support that narrative.

As a result, we find ourselves listening to the government when it shut down America, impacting the world with a single word, while corporations demanded their employees comply. It is imperative that we challenge this status quo and redefine success on our own terms. We must forge a path that values our authentic selves over imposed standards, creating spaces where everyone can thrive without sacrificing who they truly are.

---

ICONS TO BOOGEYMAN: The Dark Side of Justice in Black America

Since Bill Cosby was exposed in 2014 for initially unsubstantiated sexual allegations made by more than 60 women, mostly white, he was finally convicted of sexual abuse by Andrea Constand. Cosby allegedly gave Constand Quaaludes, in 2004, which she admits to taking consensually at first, but later led to an accusation of rape after she claimed she had been drugged. Despite the incident, Constand maintained contact with Cosby for some time. The case was initially dismissed due to insufficient evidence but was revived by the #MeToo movement. In 2021, the Supreme Court overturned Cosby’s conviction, citing a prior agreement that had granted Cosby immunity based on a sworn deposition in which he admitted to giving Quaaludes to women—not Constand. The court ruled that this agreement had been violated, leading to the conviction being voided.

The Impact on Black Men

The American Black father of our community was taken down by the claims of white women, reminiscent of the white crowds that gathered around and watched as Black men were beaten, exposed, and hung from trees. Somehow, this was acceptable. After all, didn’t Cosby give Quaaludes to women twenty years ago? Wasn’t he unfaithful to his own Black wife? Didn’t he admit to having an inappropriate sexual relationship with Constand? Cosby suddenly became Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde to the world. His crime is one that I am sure has been committed by countless men ieho frequented seedy places like the Playboy Mansion.

Consequences of #MeToo

Following Bill Cosby, the spark of the #MeToo movement has given many women the courage to claim sexual assault by high-level men in America, which has become a disease for men in general. Now, decades later, some women have used their own bodies to climb the social ladder and are now seeking to take down the villains who unknowingly hoisted them to the top.

Women in the Spotlight

We live in a world where women like Cardi B, Megan Thee Stallion, and others exploit the underworld and sell sex as part of their image. However, when love creeps in, and the sting of abusive relationships takes its toll, women from this community often must confront their lives and take account of their actions. Yet, in these moments of reflection, they may not see the consequences of their choices that contributed to their circumstances. Instead, all they recognize is the hurt, pain, and agony—placing the blame solely on men without acknowledging their own role in the situation.

The Complexity of Consent

Is the man innocent—in most cases? I can think of a few that were probably innocent: Tupac accused of rape, Mike Tyson accused of rape, Michael Jackson, and others—all accused of sexual assault of minors. Parents have placed their children in harms way and many women old enough to know better, motivated by unspoken ambition or hopes of unrealistic gain, place themselves in wolves’ houses and pretend not to understand that a wolf will attack. The tears and perceptions of their circumstances are now warped. They willingly take pills, go to hotel rooms, or locker rooms, and sacrifice their own souls, only to jump on the #MeToo train years later.

Patterns of Repetition

How is it possible that these circumstances manifest repeatedly? Sean Combs’ most recent troubles are an example. But before I get there, I want to say that I believe some African Americans have committed heinous crimes so egregious they deserve to spend the rest of their lives in prison. R. Kelly is one. I believe Black parents put their children in harm’s way, and I believe Kelly exploited one young girl so badly that for that crime alone, he should have suffered the death penalty. R. Kelly is the type of victim that should pay for his crimes, but even in his case, there were women old enough to know better.

Complicity and Responsibility

Women like his wife pretend to know nothing about what Kelly had going on, yet she comes off as if she is some wise woman mentally abused by Kelly. Then there are those other women who lived in the house in Atlanta, who ignored what Kelly was doing to those young girls and said nothing. Some left without reporting what was happening inside that house to the police.

In the R. Kelly case, I believe not only was Kelly guilty, but his bodyguard and staff, along with many of those women in that house, were complicit in what happened to those young girls. Now they sit around as if they were victims, having had no responsibility or duty to go to the police, but they understood they would receive no reward. They were just other women in the maddening crowd, willing to sacrifice their bodies for a come-up.

Sean Combs and the Media Narrative

Now, regarding Sean Combs’ recent events, one of my favorite CDs back in the day resonates with me even now, is PressPlay. The soundtrack captured the emotional rollercoaster I had been on in my life. The language in those songs tapped into the struggles of my generation, we had to build families in a world designed to hold us back. But the pain of that struggle is captured in that soundtrack.

Now there is the reality of the lives of pop stars or stars in general that crosses racial lines. There is an underbelly of silence around what it takes to get there and what you are willing to sacrifice. In the rap world back in the nineties, what started off as a manifestation of urban life revolutionized into a world of violence and sexual abuse.

The Culture of Exploitation

Suddenly, ADOS women became whores and bitches, the kind that lived in project houses, receiving WIC and food stamps, and willing to sacrifice their souls for a gangster. Today, we teach our children the value of using their bodies to achieve goals. To be clear, if that is your game, I am not knocking your hustle. However, when you play that game, let’s not pretend that you have nothing to lose.

Case Study: Ayanna Jackson

Case in point: Ayanna Jackson, the woman who claimed she had been sexually assaulted by Tupac. When you hear her story, you reflect on the desperation of a woman. She admits she wanted to have sex with Tupac, and while in the middle, two other men came into the room and started taking her clothes off, yet she continued having sex with Tupac. After he finished, he got up and left, and she had sex with the two others. She accused Tupac of rape. She went to an apartment with five men, the only female, went into a bedroom, and never once thought to leave. She consented, even after being undressed by the two other men that entered. She made a sacrifice of her own self, and when confronted with the reality that she was a booty call, she couldn’t handle that fact, so she cried rape.

Shifting Perspectives

I would have placed Diddy in the category of Black brothers like Tupac back when I was listening to PressPlay, but the media has now shifted my opinion with the release of the hotel video showing Sean Combs beating Cassie in that hotel hallway. In the court of public opinion, he is guilty and all other allegations of sexual assault or manipulation and exploitation have led to the takedown of another boogeyman. Without question, we believe the narrative that Sean Combs is a monster.

The RICO Charges

Now he is indicted on RICO charges—the new term for the takedown of Black criminals. There is no responsibility placed on the backyard players—those who walked the streets, talked the talk, and created environments where strippers and groupie whores get to work. Sex sells; the secret is, who’s buying?

Men go to strip clubs every day. It’s big business in every way, and we act as if women are clothed in nun uniforms handing out candy. When we know these women are selling sex and men are buying. We act as if drugs and violence don’t go hand in hand with sex, knowing full well they do.

The Price of Fame

I will say this: I don’t believe rappers just die, use drugs, or go mentally insane on their own. I believe it’s a slow process inflicted by managers, handlers, and so-called friends. When Kanye rants about what has happened to him, he may sound mentally unhinged, but the streets don’t lie. People with greedy motives love to exploit American Black artists. Across the board, from movies to music, the entertainment industry direct souls straight to the gates of hell. Many Black artists, once on top find themselves falling fast. It’s not always about race, but the reality is that there are so few Black stars at the top that when one falls, it crashes onto our community.

There is a pattern of exploitation of stars, and unfortunately, many—particularly Black men—fall prey to a lifestyle that thrives in the underworld.

They live in a place where they feel untouchable. Without caution, or regard they expose themselves in videos, phone conversations, cameras, text messages, and on social media, all the while believing they won’t get caught.

The Role of Social Media

To be fair, both white men and Black men alike are being found out because of social media. It has become the beast used to expose every secret and reveals every lie. Money had been the tool used to hold back the masses but today one bad night captured on film or audio becomes your death sentence, hence Diddy and Cassie in that hallway.

Clearly, social media trumps money, as we see Diddy paying Cassie to keep her silence, but she relented, and the hotel tape was mysteriously released. Diddy should have remained silent, but his own response video, may be used in the RICO case against him.

The Bigger Picture

I wonder about this RICO situation, especially as it relates to the case against YSL. YSL is being prosecuted under RICO in Atlanta, drawing a frenzy of media coverage. The incidents in that case can only be described as enlightening, spectacular, and at times bizarre—providing a fascinating glimpse into the world of corruption. Yet, there’s something to be said about the way both the media and our judicial system are prosecuting men, often for simply being men.

I don’t believe the court has proven Young Thug is guilty of any crime, but all this will undoubtedly lead to movies, podcasts, and interviews. I can see the same happening to Diddy. He has been accused of so many things and exploited for so long—why not let the media take its course?

I can’t say whether Diddy is guilty of human trafficking, drug dealing, or any of the other allegations. In this country, every person is innocent until proven guilty. But what’s clear is that he’s a deeply insecure Black man, trapped in a world devoid of love. He has sought love in the faces of women with bright skin, and his one true love, dark-skinned, died under mysterious circumstances.

What this all means is that we will wait and see. This case, like many before it, will be covered by the media, dissected in podcasts, and eventually become the subject of movies and books—all focused on the creation and demise of yet another boogeyman.

THE NOT SO GREAT DEBATE

Like millions of Americans, last week I watched the 2024 Presidential debate, and like millions more, I watched it on CNN. I wasn’t surprised that the pundits on the CNN panel sided with all things Kamala, especially given the media rhetoric ever since she stepped up to the plate and hit Joe Biden in the head with a bat. What I didn’t expect was the blatant bias from the moderators, who claim to be objective journalists. The debate wasn’t just a clash of policies but a striking example of media manipulation, leaving many, including myself, questioning the integrity of both the candidates and the moderators.

I didn’t expect much from Kamala Harris’s fellow sorority sister, Linsey Davis. Her scowl during the introduction and that gray, untouchable pinstriped outfit suggested she was on a mission to take down Trump. After the debate, Davis admitted to reporters that she fact-checked Trump because the moderators had failed to do so during his debate with Biden. There goes journalistic integrity.

David Muir, the other moderator, is a respected journalist—Trump even praised him for his reporting on the Afghanistan withdrawal. Yet, he showed bias. Muir set aside his integrity and used debate tactics to make Trump stumble. Whenever Trump was on point and stating facts, Muir interrupted him constantly. In contrast, when Trump went off the rails, Muir allowed him to speak freely. This pattern was consistent throughout the debate, and Muir never applied the same tactic against Kamala Harris.

It’s clear that CNN is biased in favor of Kamala Harris. Meanwhile, Donald Trump had one primary task: to behave. He managed to stay composed and even delivered memorable lines, like reminding Harris, “I’m speaking now—remember that,” referencing her debate with Mike Pence. However, many of Trump’s one-liners were glossed over by the left-leaning media. When Trump confronted Harris with harsh truths, she often deflected with name-calling. Whenever Trump spoke directly, the media intervened to fact-check him and protect Harris.

The bias wasn’t limited to interruptions and selective fact-checking. It extended into sensitive policy discussions, particularly on abortion.

SPOTLIGHT

One of the most contentious topics discussed was abortion, where Kamala Harris delivered what could be seen as her standout moment—at least, for certain voters. Her key selling point to the American Black community. Harris had promised a $6,000 child tax credit for first-time parents, offered $25,000 to first-time and first-generation homebuyers, and providing $50,000 to first-time business owners. Yet, when it comes to the Black community, her focus seems to be on reproductive rights—specifically, abortion. The narrative is that no one should have to travel alone to terminate a pregnancy.

Linsey Davis fact-checked Trump on the topic of abortion, particularly late-term abortions. Trump stated he does not support late-term abortions, but Kamala Harris would. When Trump mentioned cases where babies survived attempted abortions and were then terminated, Kamala dismissed it with laughter, treating it as if it were a conspiracy theory. To be clear, there have been discussions about how to handle babies born alive after an attempted abortion. Virginia Governor Ralph Northam once suggested that such babies should be terminated, and Governor Tim Walz supports similar policies in his state. However, the left often dismisses these discussions as absurd, ignoring the reality that such cases can and do occur. Whether legally or illegally, what happens when a baby survives an attempted abortion?

A few years ago in Philadelphia, a doctor was convicted for terminating three babies who were born alive. So, when Linsey Davis fact-checked Trump and claimed, “there is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it’s born,” she was playing semantics and being misleading. While it may not be legally sanctioned, the reality is that such things happen.

Harris stated that people should let their own religious or moral convictions guide them, which gives me the right to speak according to mine. In any nation, under any sun, childbirth is the epitome of love. It’s one of the most spiritual experiences when two people unite and create another soul. However, sex and sexual desires have been exploited since the time of Eve. There’s a reality in all things: good and bad, and we are aware of this distinction. Life is good—God said so. Questioning how anything is created or determining its outcome is like playing God. Man is incapable of creating life—according to science, we can’t even figure out how to create a single cell that can produce life. All man can do is destroy life. Yet here the Democrats are, promoting the idea that it’s acceptable, under certain circumstances, to decide who lives and who dies.

The entire debate on when life begins reminds me of Satan asking, “Did God really say…?” People claim a fetus is not a life, but the Bible tells me that life is in the blood, and since a baby in the womb is connected to blood, that makes it a life. Life begins even before it is perceived. Any other conversation is a lie.

Name Calling

Kamala started the debate by stating Trump is going to lie, call names, and make false allegations. But everything she claimed Trump would do is exactly what she had to do to win this debate. Unable to stand on her own record and return facts, she resorted to name-calling. “You’re a disgrace.” Imagine if Trump had turned to Kamala and said, “You climbed the ladder on Willie Brown’s lap.” He would have been labeled a bigoted white supremacist and smeared across liberal media.

Kamala, on the other hand, was given permission to play the “angry Black woman” role and take Trump down. She started by referencing the 34 counts against him and mentioned that he was liable for sexual assault. From there, she brought military generals into her corner, even claiming an endorsement from Dick Cheney. Talk about bad name-dropping—nobody cares that Cheney endorsed Harris.

Trump, meanwhile, had no reason to go low. As Michelle Obama said, he went high. He focused on Harris’s policies instead: immigration, inflation, and the Biden-Harris economics now renamed the “Opportunity Economy.”

The Conflict

Harris knows her issue: America has two administrations to compare. We know Trump’s record—his four-year presidency, which in no way compares to the madness of the last three years. There were times when CNN cast Trump and Harris side by side, giving the world an opportunity to compare two sides of a coin.

During Trump’s presidency, he stood up for American values on the world stage, taking out enemies like Iran’s Soleimani. Under the Biden-Harris administration, groups like the Houthis have become emboldened to attack U.S. military bases and ships. Under Biden-Harris, three Black Americans were killed on a base in Jordan. Yet Harris claims no Americans are at war, failing to recognize that millions of Americans are in harm’s way. We understand our military officers remain vulnerable because of the weakness of this current administration.

Identity Politics—Again

Harris was so desperate to prove she is with American Blacks that she invoked the story of the Central Park Five and Trump’s op-ed. To be clear, that case is more about the failings of the justice system than about Trump himself. Many in Black America didn’t believe they were guilty, but then, to our disappointment, they pleaded guilty. This is a sad story for the ADOS community, and Harris has no shame in exploiting it to make herself look like she’s down for our cause and to condemn Trump. If Harris were wise, she’d stop reopening old wounds in the ADOS community to push her narratives.

Race

This brings me to my final point: Kamala Harris’s race. I’ve said this before—Kamala is not Black in the sense of having lineage to American Black descendants of slaves (ADOS). When she references the Civil Rights Movement, Jim Crow, segregation, or slavery, she is not speaking from her own legacy but is misappropriating the history of ADOS. However, she gets away with this because people with darker skin, who migrated here recently without ties to the legacy of slavery in America, label her as Black. They mean her skin is dark, but Kamala is not African American in the ADOS sense. She has no direct Black blood; her lineage traces to Irish and Indian ancestry, not Africa.

Whenever questioned about her race, Kamala avoids directly claiming to be African American or a descendant of slaves. I understand the parallel to how Trump repeatedly questioned Obama’s birthplace, prompting him to release his birth certificate. However, Obama is also not ADOS. Kamala now uses that story to divert attention from her background. She knows the ADOS community is aware of the difference, so she avoids making explicit claims. Instead, she laughs and conflates the issue, knowing that such a claim could create a massive divide. By not addressing this directly, she skirts around accusations of cultural appropriation for political gain.

Fact Checked

After the debate, CNN labeled Trump a liar. They claimed Trump lied 33 times and Kamala only once. Kamala’s first answer was a big fat lie. Throughout the debate, all she did was gaslight. It’s Trump’s fault the economy is in shambles, inflation is high, energy costs are skyrocketing, the border is out of control, the Afghanistan withdrawal was disastrous, and the wars in the Middle East are all Trump’s fault. All lies.

Daniel Dale fact-checked only one of Kamala Harris’s misleading statements during her appeal to the American people for a second chance with the economy, despite many middle-class Americans struggling due to her policies. However, Dale overlooked many more significant inconsistencies during her debate, like her stance on fracking, immigration, Medicare for all, and even her stance on race.

DAHTRUTH

Trump’s comments on abortion and other topics were met with severe media scrutiny, while Harris’s remarks, including those about immigration and crime, were presented uncritically. Harris’s attempts to distance herself from Biden’s record were undermined by her inability to defend against the realities of two different presidencies. Her failure to address her own background and her reliance on scripted responses further exposed her shortcomings.

Despite CNN’s attempts to highlight Harris’s strengths, Trump’s performance revealed a lack of substantive plans from Harris. Her criticisms of Trump’s handling of the economy and public health were countered by Trump’s own record and the current state of the country. Harris’s campaign, characterized by emotional appeals and a lack of concrete policy proposals, stands in contrast to Trump’s focus on economic achievements and criticisms of current administration policies.

As the nation watches and waits, we are left not with the clarity or truth we deserve, but with a charade masquerading as a debate. Yet, we remain hopeful and steadfast. Just as Samuel anointed Saul and Elisha wept knowing Hazael would be king, so too must we seek guidance and trust in the outcome. Our eyes are wide open, and in God we place our faith. Let His will be done.

https://www.ncregister.com/news/tim-walz-born-alive-abortion?amp

SEARCHING FOR REAL LOVE IN THE BLACK COMMUNITY

When I want to tune out from high-vibrational activities like reading the Bible, painting, or writing another blog no one else will probably ever read, I will turn to more visceral activities just to pass the time. Lately, I’ve been watching the YSL trial and podcasts like Shannon Sharpe’s, “Club Shay Shay” and Cam Newton’s, “Funky Friday.” There’s something to be said about Black men providing digital content for the American Black community that’s both engaging and entertaining. But the more American Black men show up in the media, the more I realize that something feels off, and I couldn’t quite put my finger on it until I watched Cam Newton’s recent podcast with the renowned Relationship expert, Dr. Cheyenne Bryant.

I like “Funky Friday,’ better than “Club Shay Shay,” because Cam is more introspective. Shannon’s podcast is strictly for entertainment purposes. The show is filled with gossip and big personalities who have the opportunity to lick their wounds and pour out their heart to settle scores on Shannon’s couch while sipping on his premium cognac. But Cam’s topics seem to resonate with people in the Black community who’ve maintained a certain level of success and now want to gloat about their success while telling you the journey they took to get there.

I’ve listened to guests like Charleston White, who strategically explained how to transition from the gangsta life to the life of a community activist, and Iyanla Vanzant, an American inspirational speaker who worships false gods and speaks with a sound of credibility. There is some depth to these discussions, but the conversations reveal some other hidden issues—many of these digital media platforms are rooted in bad behavior. There’s a rebelliousness that defies structural norms, and it manifests in the lives of these men—especially those American Black men from the South like Shay Shay and Cam.

Shay Shay is an unmarried Black man with three children, all the same age, by three different mothers. His sexual orientation has been questioned, but he still presents himself as an alpha male. The kind who hides his truth in the closet, unwilling to face it. Cam, on the other hand, is an unmarried man with eight kids by three different women. His sexual prowess is obvious essential to his identity.

During slavery, Black men were forced to watch as their families were torn apart, and it seems like that disregard for family persists today. It’s become normalized for Black men to father multiple children with different women, without any sense of responsibility toward building a stable family. Cam, a self-proclaimed Christian, has taken on this “alpha male” image to the extreme—he’s more committed to his image than to the lives of his own children. He embodies the persona of Legba, the Haitian loa, with his long trench coats, tall hats, cigars, and a bottle of brown liquor in hand.

In his most recent episode with Dr. Cheyenne Bryant, I found myself disheartened by the display. There were two successful Black people, both high achievers, still struggling with relationships and behavioral issues, as they pretended to be experts.

At first, I was vibing with Dr. Bryant as she introduced herself and reflected on her personal status. Her advice, to the women watching was a mix of Mary J. Blige’s, No More Drama and Lauryn Hill’s sophomore Album, wrapped in a Black boogie-down agony that defines black love. Dr. Bryant revealed she is still in search of love, just like Cam. She speaks about being a “high-value” woman, deserving of a “high-value ” man, because she has been successful, she has survived much, and grew up with disfunction in her family structure. She has achieved great and now she is in search of a “high-value” man to match her “level.” Though she uses fancy terminology to describe her wants it all boils down to she wants a man that can provide for her materially and emotionally—because that is what she has to offer to any man. In her mind love is that image in the picture frame of the happy family standing in front of a beautiful house with a white picket fence, a few children, marketing lies whitewashing love with money and status. Love isn’t about how fly you dress or how much money you have and is certainly not about meeting arbitrary standards.

Cam too, sees himself as “high-value” and this can’t be denied given his determination, success and wealth. It’s been displayed for the world to see through social media. His performance as a football hero, although tainted by a few missteps and his net worth is indeed respectable. He pretends to be a family man, as he boasts of his eight kids and three baby mamas—and he is ready to add more to his “collection.” His focus is not on loving one woman, according to him his fear of divorce is greater than his desire for marriage. Instead he spreads himself in pretend family structures one over here and another over there. He is searching for that next beauty-chick to spawn another seed and has little time to consider the impact his behavior has on his own children.

I think about a story I know—it is what I would described as being in a loving relationship. There’s this guy I know that is in love with his childhood sweetheart. His sweetheart is a crack addict. She was beautiful once, but years of addiction have taken their toll. She is tired, beat down, toothless and pimped out. Once I asked him why he still lovers her, he said, “I see her the same today as when we were kids.” That’s love. It’s not about appearances, status, or fitting into a certain mold. Love just is.

As I listened to Cam and Dr. Bryant debate back and forth, it struck me how immature they both were. They kept talking about “high-value” people as if love can be measured in dollars, looks, or status. But love is not so decisive or predictable. Individuals may have an idea of what love looks like, and you try to find it out there in this world—but there are countless disappointments. Finding a love is like searching for a needle in a haystack, especially when you have a fraudulent list of what that looks like.

Dr. Bryant mentioned she’s been in several relationships and has turned down marriage proposals, but still, she would consider dating a 27-year-old “high-value” man at 41. A serious red flag: warning, warning. She is so desperate for this image of love that she would step down to coddle a boy. The only caveat is he has to be “high-value,” as if that is something tangible.

Cam and Dr. Bryant are both caught up in this idea that being “high-value” is the key to building a successful relationship. They overlook all the work, love, laughter, fights, and sacrifices that establish the foundation for any relationship. But love doesn’t work like that. It’s not a respecter of status, and it’s not something you can buy or negotiate. Love is about sacrifice, and you don’t know that you’re in love until you are already in action—turning it on or off is not allowed when you fall in love. To present this on a podcast by two individuals who are clearly broken and searching is odd—but we live in a world where experience is no longer the best teacher and inexperience is valid if it comes with accolades and wealth. Many individuals from the Black community often seek definitions and advice from social media influencers who lack substance, resulting in guidance that is impractical.

The challenge narratives like Cam and Dr. Bryant presents is this idea that you will eventually find a “high-value” relationships that brings you a certain level of happiness—if you yourself have your morals and values together. As if opposites don’t attract. People will grasps onto this misleading narrative as they enter relationship after relationship with false expectations. If you want to find real love, I would suggest reading, James Baldwin’s, If Beale Street Could Talk—then you will discover what real love is about. In that story, Tish stands by Fonny, who is accused of a heinous crime, even though he has nothing to offer but his love. That’s real sacrifice. That’s real love.

Cam and Dr. Bryant, and others like them, are missing the point. They’re leaders in our community, but the example they’re setting is one based on superficiality. Their focus on finding “high-value” people misses the deeper truth: love isn’t about wealth, status, or image. Love just is.

THE HARRIS/WALZ INTERVIEW | Recycled Policies and Weak Leadership

Over the last three years, I have struggled to pay for gas, electricity, and groceries on my corporate salary. I believe I am what most would describe as middle-class. I work for a major corporation, own my home, have a moderate amount of savings, and drive a mid-level luxury vehicle. I am fortunate to share a home with my son, daughter-in-love, and my grandchildren. In this environment, we can support each other, and although I don’t like asking for help, as a widow, it’s good to know that I can get assistance if needed. That’s my situation, but it hasn’t been the same for many middle-class Black Americans in our community. I have heard story after story of high prices, soaring electric bills, and the fear of losing jobs. I know many who have taken second jobs just to survive and others who lost jobs and couldn’t find another in the same field with the same income. People are slipping from the middle class to the bottom in droves.

Listening to Kamala Harris in her first interview on CNN Thursday night, in a sit-down with Dana Bash, my initial impression was: stop it! She just can’t go big on big—she is no President, though she pretends to be presidential. This interview with Kamala came at a pivotal point in her run for the highest office In the land, as the nation grapples with various crises—from inflation and immigration to wars. The media, in the days leading up to the interview, speculated whether Harris would finally break free from the shadow of Biden and present herself as a strong, independent leader. The Democratic party’s expectations were high; many anticipated that this would be her opportunity to clarify her vision for the country and assert her leadership—but she failed.

That move to add Tim Walz to the interview was bad. It belied the strong, tough, prosecutor persona Democrats have tried to create over the last few months and attempted to solidify at the DNC. It was just a few weeks ago at her rallies that Harris called out Trump, saying, “Say it to my face,” yet she couldn’t even take on Dana Bash alone. If she intended to present herself as strong, she should have left the coach on the bench. Walz had no business on the field. He reminded me of a father in the principal’s office because his daughter was in trouble. It was disturbing to see him sitting there looking down over his shoulder, as Kamala, tried to explain away the failure of what has happened over the last three years.

According to Harris, everything from immigration to the failing economy is Donald Trump’s fault. She claims she’s going to move America forward and create the change America is craving and deserves—without acknowledging her current role and direct impact in the challenges facing our nation. She has nothing to offer except an array of liberation slogans. But everything she said was in step with Biden’s plan for America. Her policies—from climate to immigration to the economy to foreign affairs—will now be known as “Opportunity Economics,” but they represent the same failed Democratic policies that have nearly crippled our nation over the last three-plus years.

As far as the interview goes, it felt uncomfortable—they seemed crowded in the space. Also, Kamala looked a lot older, with bags beneath her eyes, which surprised me considering all the recent debates around age and stamina. She looked tired and small, sitting next to Santa in a blue suit.

Kamala answered no questions. From the start: “What is the first thing you will do if elected President?” her answer—or should I say non-answer—had something to do with hope, change, opportunity, and the middle class. The answer was all mixed together in a bowl and sprinkled with heavy verbiage. Left-leaning pundits, including Bill Maher, had to come to Kamala’s defense and confirmed Dana Bash’s question was stupid. So much for there are no stupid questions. The question may have been stupid and predictable, yet Kamala had no answer.

False Campaign Promises

Child tax credit

Having botched the first question, Harris went on to not explain her plan to extend the child tax care credit to $6,000 per taxpayer for the first year of a child’s life while extending the current tax credit of $3,600 per child tax credit. It’s interesting how her plan offers child tax credits while simultaneously promoting abortions. It’s akin to giving weapons to your ally to defend itself while at the same time feeding their enemy. Notably, JD Vance has said he would support a $5,000 per child tax credit, giving no special preference to the first year of a child’s life. All children matter.

First Time Buyer

Kamala Harris’s homeownership plan, which includes support for first-time and first-generation homebuyers, it reminds me of the Obama administration’s homebuyer tax credit. While Obama’s policy aimed to boost homeownership, it actually contributing to inflated housing prices and market distortions. Harris’s plan risks repeating these same issues. But just for shits and giggles let us consider.

A homebuyer knowing there’s a $25,000 cushion might be inclined to raise the price of their home, potentially inflating home values or creating another housing bubble. Additionally, her proposal doesn’t seem to prioritize the interests of the ADOS middle-class community. To start, in 2021, approximately 82% of first-time homebuyers were White, while only 7% were Black. Among those receiving federal rental assistance, according to HUD, approximately 27% are African American. When considering all housing programs (e.g., USDA, Section 8, Vouchers), 45% of those receiving rental assistance are African American. Many within this community have little hope of acquiring sufficient resources to consider homeownership, while landlords continue to build wealth in the form of equity. White Americans benefit from the credit, while Black Americans, especially Black women, continue to pay landlords. Once again, the Black lower-class community is left behind with little opportunity to break the cycle of poverty.

Instead of giving special benefits to first-time homebuyers or first-generation buyers, how about providing ADOS women who are receiving housing assistance with that $25,000 credit to purchase a home? Additionally, we could use the potential rental assistance the government would have spent over a ten-year span as proceeds to help them buy the same home. This approach would directly benefit those least served in the community—and could be part of a broader reparations solution.

Moreover, by focusing the $25,000 tax credit on first-generation homebuyers, Harris’ policy will effectively exclude my ADOS sons from benefiting. Having struggled to purchase and maintain my home, it now becomes a stumbling block for both my sons, as they won’t qualify for the benefit because I am a homeowner. Meanwhile, every immigrant who comes to America could potentially purchase a home as a first-time, first-generation homebuyer—just as Kamala’s mother benefited—while my mother, a descendant of slaves, former Mississippi sharecropper, lived in Section-8 housing and worked three jobs.

Harris’s plan would use American tax dollars contributed by citizens like myself who have lived here all our lives and have participated in this quest for the American dream.

Border crisis

Harris talks about moving forward without recognizing that sometimes you have to step back to move forward. Having failed to secure the border for the last 3 1/2 years and unable to develop any policy of her own, she has now promised to sign the Senate Republican-led bill, H.R. 29 - Border Safety and Security Act of 2023. The question many are pondering is why haven’t Biden and Harris done anything since January 20, 2021.

Since Biden/Harris stepped into office Immigrants have put a strain on our communities. Individuals are flown, trained, or bused into our neighborhoods use resources meant for our own communities, with no accountability and no contribution. Democrats argue that illegal immigrants are not violent, yet we see police beatdowns in NYC and Chicago, murders in our border cities, an influx of drugs, and child trafficking and a host of individuals that feel as if they can take from the bank having deposit absolutely nothing. Only in America could Palestinians claim to hate this country, while standing on our soil with green cards and begging us for embargo’s. We have watched as immigrants from Caribbean nations have come to this country, manipulated the system, and even took over vacant properties. In recent weeks, there have been numerous news stories about illegal immigrants taking over apartment complexes and school buses. All this is the result of Biden and Harris’s failed immigration policy. Now, Harris wants us to give her a second chance.

What is worse is knowing all these things, the ADOS community is one of her biggest supporters and has backed Democratic policies for decades, even though we have not benefited. The ignorance is surreal—for real.

Flip flop on fracking

If that’s not strange, consider she is for the Green New Deal and fracking—at the same time. I don’t know much about energy, except they don’t seem to go together. She was once against fracking and has been on video saying she doesn’t support it, but now she is all for it. In fact, she criticized Biden for supporting fracking during the 2020 debate in South Carolina, where she performed so poorly she dropped out of the 2020 Presidential race. But now, she claims to be in support of fracking without having increased her knowledge on the topic.

The Harris administration, as part of the broader Biden-Harris agenda, has significantly shifted U.S. energy policy towards clean energy, leading to cuts in support for fossil fuels. The Biden/Harris Administration reduced new oil and gas leasing on federal lands, cut subsidies for fossil fuel companies, enforced stricter regulations on coal plants, and redirected federal funding from traditional energy projects to renewable energy initiatives. All these changes have sparked debate over potential impacts on energy costs and independence.

Let’s be clear: my electric and gas bills have tripled, and this is a direct result of Biden/Harris policies. This year alone, I’ve spoken to countless people who have had their electricity turned off and, like me, struggle to pay the electric and gas bills. It’s a real issue, caused by Biden and Harris’s rush to embrace clean energy while China drills a hole in the earth’s crust. It’s maddening, and the people sitting at home in the dark, scrounging for groceries and rent money, or banding together to hold things down, are suffering the most—yet they are the main ones who will vote Democrats into office.

Plan for Inflation

Harris doubled down on her plan to go after corporations that practice price gouging in an attempt to reduce inflation. It’s an inflated hoax. She wants America to believe that her “Opportunity Economics” is different from Bidenomics by telling you nothing different. But every word salad she used included aspects of current Democratic policies. She merely rebranded the same Democratic policies with a corney name. What does “Opportunity Economics” even mean.

In an attempt to define her policy, she tossed together a mix of ideas that expand social safety nets, increase government intervention in the economy, and focus on climate change initiatives. While these are well-intentioned goals, the problem isn’t the need for opportunity but the failure to create a sustainable pathway for the middle class and poor communities to grow.

All the other talk about lowering prescription medications for seniors so they are paying only $2,000 a year. My thought is, how about not giving our resources to other countries and providing free prescriptions for American seniors? And her lie that their administration cut poverty by 50% while excluding 2021. What she doesn’t mention is poverty is now up 12% when it was only 9% under Trump.

LEFT OUT

She offered nothing to help middle-class Americans that already own their homes and have been around long enough to remember how we had to tighten the reins to save the housing crisis, and how we had to buckle down during COVID and the manufacturing crises, and how things seemed to be improving—we were headed in the right direction and then came Biden/Harris.

Absent from her conversation was any mention of the ADOS community. But when asked about her race, she refused to answer that question—who are you. She declined to speak on her lineage and pretended what Trump had done by questioning her race was outlandish—when the ADOS community have been asking that same question since she came on the scene. Her refusal to admit who she is speaks to her character—she would rather you believe a lie than reveal the truth that she is NOT Black, i.e., in the words of Glenn Loury, “she does not share the African American historical heritage.” She could have ended the conversation by admitting the truth—but instead, she just blamed Trump.

She has run around calling herself African American for decades. She went on the Breakfast Club during her previous run, and called herself an African American who smoked weed and listens to Snoop. But when asked before the entire nation, she refused to make that proclamation and speak her truth. Kamala is not a descendant of a slave—her family owned slaves.

This dissonance between her public persona and her personal background raises questions about her authenticity and her commitment to addressing the unique challenges faced by the ADOS community.

Coach

Now, I would be remiss if I left out the elephant in the room, Tim Walz. All I can say is, wow. Like Harris, he used the same strategy—redirecting every question back to Donald Trump and JD Vance. Walz has lied about his military record, point-blank. One would think that a man in line for Vice President, who has already been caught in one lie, wouldn’t tell another lie on stage at the DNC and get busted again. He claimed his child was conceived through IVF, but it turned out that wasn’t true. It was some other form of fertility treatment—though they never specified what form. Seeing a VP candidate cover up something he didn’t have to lie about speaks to his character. It aligns with his record as a leader, like sitting back and watching as Minnesota burned. His wife even boasted that, as the city burned, she opened the window to smell the scent of the tires.

This man had a DUI while he was a teacher, lied about his military service, and lied to the American people about reproductive rights to evoke emotions from the crowd. He’s like a fat, greasy preacher who pretends to do good while stealing your vote with a bright coach smile.

What became clear to me last week is, Kamala Harris and Tim Walz are weak, lying leaders trying to masquerade as strong leaders. They fail to address the real issues facing middle-class Americans, particularly American Blacks. Instead, they offer recycled policies, empty rhetoric, and a refusal to confront the truth about their own records. They speak of progress and moving forward, but all I see is a return to the same failed policies that have brought us to this point.

As a member of the middle class, I am not convinced. I’m tired of the lies, the avoidance, and the lack of accountability. We deserve leaders who will genuinely fight for our interests, not ones who merely pretend to understand our struggles while continuing to push the same old agenda. Perhaps that person is not Trump—maybe we get Trump and redirect in 2028. But the time for change is right now, and that means voting the current Democratic Party out of office.

DNC 2024 PERFORMANCE, POLOTICS AND A NATION IN PERIL

The Democratic National Convention (DNC) was everything you could have imagined and more. It wasn’t just entertaining; it was downright inspiring. The crowd size was impressive, and the hype was elevated by an array of celebrities and actors, culminating in appearances by several former Presidents and First Ladies of the United States. The event’s highlights were the back-to-back keynote speeches, with a crescendo marked by the magical appearance of Michelle and Barack Obama. For four days, from Monday through Thursday, the progressive-liberal agenda took center stage. We were treated to performances by Stevie Wonder, comedy skits by D.L. Hughley, and motivational speeches from the likes of Oprah Winfrey. And let’s not forget one of the key takeaways: how to properly pronounce “comma-la.” Any disruptions—such as the cries of Palestinians inside and outside the center, demanding an embargo on Israel—were drowned out by the excitement and performances that filled the convention hall.

If diversity had a face, it would surely be that of the DNC. The convention started on a righteous note, embracing both Jewish tradition and Islamic faith. Rabbi Sharon Brous spoke of justice and unity in her invocation, followed by Imam Omar Suleiman. During his invocation, he declared:

“In the name of allah, the most gracious, the most merciful, we come together in this sacred moment, seeking guidance and unity for the future of our nation.”

This quote may seem to reflect the inclusive nature of the Harris-led convention, but it points to something deeply troubling. When the Imam speaks of “our” nation, which nation is he referring to? A nation of Jesus Christ or the Nation of Islam—they are not the same. It makes me wonder, how can two walk together unless they agree? The values of Islam do not align with American values, and it’s concerning that, despite the devastation wrought by radical extremists around the world, our nation—built on Christian principles—would so readily embrace a religion that, in my view, opposes Western values and oppresses societies in the Middle East.

My initial thought about this unorthodox opening was the challenge of combining religions that are fundamentally opposed in the name of unity. Yes, the Archbishop of Chicago prayed at the DNC, but absent from his prayer was any mention of Jesus Christ. Instead, he paved the way for the Rabbi and the Imam, who carried the spiritual torch.

As stories of moral righteousness filled the convention center, Kamala Harris’s so-called stellar public service career was put on full display. According to a diverse array of Black and minority politicians, she has done wonders, especially on the topic of abortion, thinly veiled as reproductive rights. So much for the issue being something private, reserved between a patient and their doctor. Stories of life-or-death circumstances, supposedly created by a government that took away the right to abort, were recounted before the world. One speaker, with his wife standing by his side, told the story of how doctors guaranteed his wife would lose their child so they insisted on having an abortion in a state where that was not allowed. But doctors should terminated that pregnancy—because why give that child any chance of hope if it means the mother will miscarry.

Well, I know plenty of women who suffered miscarriages, and most of them do not die. In fact, to be real about the number of women who die in childbirth, in 2023 a total of 680 women died during childbirth. It’s a sad statistic indeed, but compare that to the 930,000 babies aborted in the United States, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

There’s an old wise tale that says death walks around the room seven times when a woman is delivering a baby. The point is that a mother understands the risks and is willing to face the threat of death to bring a child into the world. More than that life is in birth—it’s what’s called legacy. Absent life there’s only history.

During the DNC, these stories played out like those commercials begging for donations using starving children as props—only this time, the focus was on sacrificing lives created for the sake of your American dream or your peace of mind—a fair exchange for your vote. Meanwhile, just four blocks from the DNC in Chicago, a van was ready to provide free abortions, abortion pills, and vasectomies to anyone and everyone, and according to some reports, this van had aborted at least 25 pregnancies. Chicago, the great, has fallen!

In all this so-called inclusion, there were clear exclusions: the unborn, the poor, and most notably, Jesus Christ. Yet somehow, Democrats pretend to be more loving and accepting, moral, embracing any and all with arms wide open as if they had been given the authority from on high to distribute peace and justice—their hands are cleaner than Christ’s. As Christ Himself looked upon the crowds with deep empathy, knowing many would never be saved, it was the crowd that was lost, and so we sat and watched the lost perform.

What was also missing from this spectacle was any real policy. The speeches by Walz and Harris, given on the third and fourth nights respectively, were mediocre at best. Walz, for one, has some serious credibility issues. He talks about Trump’s convictions but conveniently skips over his own struggles, like his DUI. He skirts around the 15-year lie about his military service as if it’s something we should overlook. After all, he’s no George Santos. Walz can talk about J.D. Vance’s military service all he wants, but the difference is Vance told the truth about his service, while Walz spun a tale, even lying to veterans for years about his military rank. Yet somehow, J.D. is painted as weird.

As for Harris, she offered no policies—just jargon and empty promises. In just two days, her stance on fracking flipped, and she’s once again talking about climate and opportunity economics. She speaks as if the failed policies and attacks on the middle class occurred during the Trump administration. They talked about change and not going back, using rhetoric from the Obama campaign as if they don’t recognize the difference. “Change and not going back,” as if we don’t realize what she is disparaging is the return to policies enforced by the Biden-Harris administration. Harris’s top agenda was immigration, but what this campaign is failing to recognize is that the shift to Trump has everything to do with this current economy, which is a reflection of the Biden-Harris agenda and policy on immigration and the economy. On both these topics, Kamala should forever remain silent.

She moved from rhetoric about a temporary ceasefire in Gaza and bringing home hostages to bringing home the hostages and a ceasefire. She talked about inflation as if her brilliant plan to tackle it—penalizing corporations for price gouging—sounds effective. And let’s not forget her history: she has failed on the border, she has failed the American Black community while she was District Attorney and Attorney General in California.

Meanwhile, almost a million jobs have simply disappeared. I am most certain that wasting time going after corporations that do not support her agenda, for price gouging, is not going to impact the middle-class community in enough time to save us.

Now she wants another chance to fix the problems their administration has created that have devastated our community. The immigration project that’s failed under her watch, promising to heal the wounds she inflicted. But under Biden and Harris, homelessness has risen, the middle class is sinking into poverty, and she takes no responsibility for convicting American Black men for weed while admitting to smoking herself.

The Democratic National Convention was widely praised, especially in contrast to the Republican National Convention, according to most pundits on CNN. However, beneath all the hype, critical issues persist: the ongoing immigration crisis, the continual rise of inflation, the strain on our economy, and the fact that American troops are being deployed to the Middle East to assist Israel while Ukraine continues its invasion of Russia.

Well, at least while America is seemingly being set on fire—we will all be entertained!

The rights to the content and images on this website are owned by Jacqueline Session Ausby, and you have no right to use any of the content / images without her expressed permission.  If you would like to contact Jacqueline Ausby, please email jmbeausy@aol.com

AWAKENING ADOS | SHE CALLS HERSELF BLACK

I grew up in New Brunswick, NJ, during a time when our community was not a melting pot—it was a mix of Black and white families with a few Hispanic families sprinkled in between. The only familiarity I had with Asians came from news stories about Vietnam. As I got older, I noticed that fewer and fewer white families remained in our neighborhood. Our home was a three-story apartment building that stretched half a block, with three sets of apartments on each side. It was a close-knit community, but things began to change when I was around nine or ten years old.

Where I grew up

One Fourth of July night, one of my childhood friends’ father lost control and violently attacked the father of the last remaining white family in our neighborhood. I remember that night so clearly because the celebration turned into a nightmare. The dark sky was lit by fireworks and police lights, and the air was filled with the sounds of explosions and sirens. That night marked a significant turning point for our community. The white family, understandably shaken, moved out shortly after. Although the father survived, the fear of living in a place where they could be attacked so unexpectedly was too much for them to bear. What happened to the man who attacked him remains unknown—I never saw him again, and his family remained silent.

As I grew up, I watched the neighborhood evolve—an evolution that meant different things for different people. What once signified new beginnings turned into old stories, and the composition of the community shifted from Black and white to predominantly Black, eventually becoming a mix of Black, Hispanic, African, and Caribbean families. Looking back, I realize that my generation represents a shift from being solely defined by our ADOS roots to embracing a broader American identity.

My generation grew up witnessing the impact of drug abuse on everyone in some way. It could be your mother, father, uncle, or that woman who sat in the dark corner of The Dog House, nodding off from another heroin binge. Prison and prison visits became part of our world—whether it was the anxious anticipation of being scrutinized by guards, deciding whether to wear shoelaces, stretch pants, or long sleeves, or enduring the indignity of pat-downs, metal detectors, and sitting in a gym with strangers, all waiting for a glimpse of a loved one who was locked away. This was our reality.

The ADOS community consists of individuals born in America long before the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. This Act, also known as the Hart-Celler Act, fundamentally changed U.S. immigration policy by eliminating the quota system that heavily favored European immigrants. This shift opened the door to a significant increase in Black immigrants from non-European countries, including African and Caribbean nations.

The conflation of ADOS with Black immigrants is a significant mistake made by U.S. policymakers, one that has been strategically exploited by immigrant groups who benefit from policies meant to address the historical injustices faced by ADOS. The legacy of an African who immigrated to this country does not align with the legacy of an American Black descendant of slaves. Our history can be traced back to slavery and includes Jim Crow, the Civil Rights Movement, Vietnam, the herion and crack epidemic, and mass incarceration. We are the descendants of severed roots, cut off and replanted on foreign soil. My generation represents the last fruits of a lineage of individuals who were treated as animals by those who called themselves believers in God. We represent the darkness that stepped into the light. We represent the ADOS community, but this generation is starting to fade.

For far too many within the ADOS community, subsidized housing and Section 8 have become a generational way of life, passed down from mothers to daughters like an inheritance of despair. Mothers raise their children in the same cramped 2-3 bedroom apartments where they themselves grew up, navigating the dehumanizing gauntlet of disinterested and overwhelmed bureaucrats. This persistent cycle stifles upward mobility, as limited access to quality education, healthcare, and job opportunities keeps families trapped in poverty. In this environment, young men, seeing no viable paths to success, often turn to drug dealing and street violence as their only means of survival. The tragic irony is that they end up selling poison to their own community, deepening the very wounds they seek to escape. Meanwhile, women are forced to depend on a system that keeps them imprisoned and impoverished.

The ongoing YSL trial exemplifies what happens when systemic neglect and a lack of opportunity lead young Black men to seek out criminal enterprises as their only escape from the cycle of poverty. The flashy image of the rap industry, often intertwined with criminal activity, becomes a lure for those who feel they have no other options. Yet, as we see in the trial, the consequences are devastating: incarceration can rob twenty-eight black men of their freedom because an American black DA wants to prover herself to be tough on crime. The unjust incarceration of these men threatens to destroy their futures and could potentially leave another generation of children growing up without fathers, further entrenching the cycle of poverty and despair.

This cycle is exacerbated by Democratic policies that, while well-intentioned, have too often focused on providing just enough to get by rather than truly empowering the ADOS community to break free from systemic poverty. Policies that perpetuate reliance on government assistance without addressing the root causes of economic disenfranchisement have left many in the ADOS community feeling abandoned, with few viable avenues for genuine advancement.

There is currently a clarion call that the Democratic Party and its elite supporters are missing, and it has become necessary as the ADOS community assimilates. Clearly, the transition of my generation won’t happen overnight. It’s akin to the shift from Moses to Joshua; our generation has grown up and is starting to pass the baton to the next, but not too hastily. Before our legacy fades, the ADOS community is realizing that we don’t want our heritage to endure the same struggles our ancestors faced.

What is obvious about the ADOS community is that we have evolved, changed direction, fought, regrouped, but we have won and done these things—despite obstacles. If we consider the way American Blacks have dominated in entertainment, education, and sports, and although less obvious, American Blacks have excelled even in corporate America despite known and unknown challenges. It’s clear we've made significant strides. However, we have often been stagnated, and our economic growth has been stunted as if our ankles are shackled, leaving us clamoring for more handouts. There’s nothing inherently wrong with receiving assistance, but when your mindset is, "Why work—it’s easier to go down to a shabby government facility once a year and get the benefits you need for free. So what if the people are nasty and disrespectful— the monthly stipend, the food stamps, the free housing, and medical care is all that matters.

It’s as simple as wasting a single day of irritation for a year’s worth of getting by. While we all may need help at times, a handout is no longer beneficial if it comes at the cost of our own quest for self-preservation. In that case, a handout becomes a stumbling block.

Still, 50 years later, many refuse to see the impact these types of policies have had on our community. The Democratic Party is once again asking the ADOS community to support them, offering the continuation of rental housing, access to abortions, and the reduction of prescription drug costs—all of which our community is told we need to survive. They encourage abortions, Food Stamps, and taking away guns from our sons.

Yet, the conversation about reparations and the theft that has stolen away our legacy is conspicuously absent. Instead, the discussion of systemic racism is somehow reserved for the Republican community.

For the last thirty years, my community has voted for Democrats. We got this way because of all the sentiment following JFK’s death and the Civil Rights Movement. A documentary about JFK, MLK, and Robert Kennedy was played on television every year that I can remember growing up in the '70s. I remember my mother telling the stories of the days John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. were assassinated. Every time she’d say, “Those were sad times.” I remember men going to Vietnam as a regular norm. I remember my uncles going into the military in blue uniforms, only to return home addicted and dejected, wearing green jumpers.

The idea that Kamala Harris emerges from our community is a blatant, deceptive lie. Harris, along with other American Blacks like Rich Smiley and Roland Martin, is misappropriating the ADOS community. Her experience was not like mine. Heck, I would have loved to make clay pots as a child or travel the world as a young lady, but instead, I was in America fighting the cycle of oppression. Harris’s stories of rags to riches, working at McDonald’s while in college, and attending a lowly HBCU don’t resonate with my own. Her exploitation of our truth disregards what women like myself endured—growing up poor, eating sugar sandwiches, and standing in line for cans of peanut butter and blocks of cheese. Yet Kamala Harris lies and pretends that was her life.

Now, don’t get me wrong, sometimes in life, you are forced to lie—but lying for votes is just plain insulting. The Democrats created the momentum in 2005-2006 to get President Obama elected in 2008. When President Obama spoke at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, the ADOS community saw one of our own on the world stage, assuming the highest position. He may not have been ADOS, but he had an ADOS wife, and that was close enough—or so we thought.

Hope and change for the American Black community rolled Obama into the White House—but when he got there, he gave us free cellphones, Obamacare complete with a $75 healthcare fee if you refused to sign up—this was later overturned by the Supreme Court, as how are you going to charge the poorest in the community for not signing up for a benefit?—but he tried it.

For more than fifty years, I can attest that the Democratic Party has begged and pleaded for the ADOS community to follow them. And like pigs headed for the slaughter, we followed along, hoping we’d find that elusive path to justice and righteousness. They threw crumbs in the form of free housing, food stamps, healthcare clinics, and the promise of education. In return, our reward has been Section 8 or USDA housing in apartment complexes that were once pristine but have since deteriorated. Planned Parenthood clinics have sprouted up to address sexual diseases and offer abortions, effectively terminating our babies and our legacy.

These are the same policies Kamala Harris touts as she talks about making America affordable for the middle class by going after corporations that practice price gouging. She proclaims that she’s done it before, citing a lawsuit she co-sponsored with other governors to target companies inflating prices on consumer goods like televisions. Now, we’re supposed to ignore her other policies and focus on the one that claims to control pricing for the middle-class.

American Blacks continue to align with a party whose only priority is keeping just enough of us in allegiance for voting day. In exchange, the Black community supports a platform whose highest hope and only economic policy they can run on is reproductive health—convincing our community that we don’t need reparations because we have the right to terminate our own legacy in exchange for the American dream.

It’s a sad state of affairs that many American Blacks remain unaware of what’s happening in our community, even when it’s right before our eyes. The prevalence of a black markets driven by sex, drugs, and violence has become so ingrained that it’s difficult to imagine a world without those things—all a direct result of oppressive Democratic policies. As we approach the Democratic National Convention, the party will gather en masse to persuade the ADOS community to rally behind Kamala Harris, despite the fact that the same policies she champions continue to devastate our communities all because she calls herself “black.”

The rights to the content and images on this website are owned by Jacqueline Session Ausby, and you have no right to use any of the content / images without her expressed permission.  If you would like to contact Jacqueline Ausby, please email: jmbeausby@aol.com

Weird Pick: Walz Over Shapiro?

WHAT? WALZ? WEIRD! Kamala Harris has made her pick, and the world is wondering why she selected Tim Walz, a liberal white man from an electoral swing state she’s already winning. The right is taking a victory lap, seemingly unaware of the old adage: don’t count your chickens before they hatch.

The left-leaning media is trying to justify Harris’s choice of Walz, Governor of Minnesota, as her running mate. The obvious pick was Josh Shapiro, but Harris chose Walz, who was also governor of Minnesota during the George Floyd protests and riots. For many in the ADOS community, Minnesota is closely associated with George Floyd and BLM. Walz, as governor, faced significant criticism during the riots, and Trump even had to advise him on handling the situation. Despite media claims that Trump thanked Walz, they often omit that Minneapolis called for the National Guard too late, and Walz’s praise for Trump’s “strategic direction” was more about damage control.

THE MAN

So, who is Tim Walz? According to most sources, he’s a man who lives modestly, sacrifices for his country, feeds the homeless, and supports aspiring minds while coaching hopefuls. He has served in the military, worked in the House of Representatives, and became the Governor of Minnesota. An all-around “Mr. Nice Guy,” he’s like Mr. Nice Watch—right on time to sacrifice it all for Kamala Harris.

When comparing Walz to Shapiro, the choice seems questionable. In today’s political landscape, appeal is crucial, and Josh Shapiro offers the appeal, delivery, and politics that align with middle-class Americans. As Governor of a state with 19 electoral votes and a swing state trending Republican, Shapiro supports Israel, believes in school choice, and supports fracking. His policies would have been a better fit for a broader electorate and could have helped in the Rust Belt.

CHALLENGES

Kamala Harris’s choice of Walz suggests a divergence from Shapiro’s appeal. While Shapiro’s policies might have resonated with voters, Walz’s selection could be seen as a strategic misstep. Additionally, the Palestinian groups that have been attending Harris’s campaign rallies and forming alliances to threaten the Democratic National Convention with protests now find themselves in a precarious position. They are outside, demanding rights they have not earned and that do not align with American policies, particularly regarding our support for Israel. It appears Kamala is trying to burn the candle at both ends—secretly coddling Palestinian groups while publicly standing with Israel at the podium.

While she seeks support from various communities for votes, she offers the ADOS community absolutely nothing. Palestinian groups are able to make demands for America to abandon its allies, as if they have somehow earned that right, while the ADOS community is ignored and merely expected to vote without receiving any substantive consideration.

Furthermore, the Harris/Walz ticket might face significant challenges in the Rust Belt. Walz’s personal and political controversies, including his DUI and misleading statements about his military record, combined with Kamala’s husband’s infidelity, could undermine their appeal. Shapiro, with his more moderate stance and potential electoral advantages, might have offered a stronger ticket.

Harris’s choice of Walz over Shapiro is puzzling. While Walz’s alignment with some Republican policies—despite his support for LGBTQ rights and abortion—mirrors Shapiro’s in many ways, her decision may reflect a focus on climate. Walz’s progressive record on climate contrasts with Shapiro’s more moderate stance, which could very well be her linchpin. By choosing Walz, she risks alienating swing voters in the Rust Belt. This decision, combined with personal and political controversies, could prove challenging as the campaign progresses.

DAHTRUTH

Keeping it honest, the crux of the matter is that Josh Shapiro overshadows Harris; he has the presidential appeal that she lacks. When we look at Shapiro, we see the future, while Harris represents a stale past and bad policies. Moreover, America is clamoring for a moderate. We want a race based on policy, not on identity or theatrics, but these are our choices: Harris/Walz and Trump/Vance. We also have records for each of these candidates, and every time, Harris/Walz loses. Kamala is not brilliant, and the optics of being a U.S. President elude her. Appearance and appeal are one thing—let’s be real, she is unfit. She has no agenda, and the selection of Walz highlights her inability to make strategic decisions, shedding light on her poor decision making practices. Yet she goes around pretending to be American Black ADOS, misrepresenting our community, knowing full well she ain’t like us, but without the ADOS Bloc, she will lose.

The rights to the content and images on this website are owned by Jacqueline Session Ausby, and you have no right to use any of the content / images without her expressed permission.  If you would like to contact Jacqueline Ausby, please email: jmbeausby@aol.com

Kamala Harris: Anointed by Identity Politics and Empty Promises

What do you do when you are the U.S. Democratic Presidential presumptive nominee with no agenda, haven’t won a single delegate, and have a vice-presidential performance so poor it can only be compared to the likes of Dan Quayle? Well, when you don’t have anything to run on and you are aiming for the highest office in the land, you pretend you have enthusiasm and momentum on your side by playing identity politics. Kamala Harris has been tossed the ball, and now she is running, rallying her most important voting bloc—the American Black community—to sweep her into the White House.

The Media Hype and the Real Kamala

Kamala Harris is being propped up by the media as the poster child of “I have a dream,” as if her legacy is comparable to Martin Luther King’s. She is a pretender, becoming whatever is necessary in the moment. Today, she is an American Black woman, cooking collard greens—as if collard greens are reserved for Blacks only. She’s been visiting jazz shops in Black neighborhoods and attending sorority meetings, perpetrating a straight fraud, telling stories reminiscent of the American Black struggle, pretending to have been there.

Her mother would never have been able to tell the story of growing up on a farm, sharecropping in Mississippi, or how our brothers and sisters went from “raggedy little begging motherfuckers” to the new kids on the block with a Glock, only to be set up and arrested by a white undercover cop. Kamala will never know what it means to walk on needles and crack vials or to see your uncle in an alley with your childhood friend, shooting up. She will never understand how one steps outside of harsh reality to sit back and watch fiends and alcoholics parade down bleak streets. She will never grasp the longing to leave a place of poverty and destitution. She will never understand.

Listening to the media, you might start to believe the hype; her campaign appears locked and loaded. The enthusiasm is intoxicating, and this rise in momentum—right over Joe Biden—can only be compared to President Barack Obama’s campaign. It’s as if they believe the ADOS community learned nothing from Obama’s presidency.

Don’t get me wrong, there is a difference between President Barack Obama and Harris: he fought for his positions. Yes, he lost a race, but he continued to fight by convincing voters. President Obama ran a grassroots foot campaign that inspired a nation. Harris, on the other hand, is unable to even convince enough CA voters to come to her side—not because she has Black skin but because she has a poor record. She is a drag.

After President Joe Biden shocked the world by announcing he would drop out of the presidential race, Harris’ campaign raised $81 million in 24 hours. In the next 48 hours, she secured 1,900 delegates to become the Democratic presumptive nominee. To celebrate, she held Zoom calls with Black Women for Kamala, racking up millions more and creating a domino effect. Then there were Zoom calls with White Women for Kamala and, lately, White Dudes for Kamala, steadily increasing her funds. Meanwhile, warships are headed to the Middle East, Iran has hit another American military base, the stock market and our economy are in shock, yet every left-leaning pundit will deny the truth of the economy and instead attempt to convince their largest voting bloc to ignore these issues because Kamala is Black.

At the same time, she is unable to draw more than 100 people to her rallies. To pretend she has the numbers on her side, after an embarrassing performance at a few events and rallies, Harris had to call out the big dogs in Atlanta, GA. She had Andre Dickens, Keisha Lance Bottoms, Raphael Warnock, Quavo was in the house and Meg the Stallion gave a performance so cringe all that can be said is—this how you go big on big—stop it!! All the grand standing and lies that floated around claiming Harris is African American was followed by another word salad speech, that lacked facts, failed to take responsibility for the current economic conditions impacting middle class and self proclamation of being a powerful Black DA capable of bringing down Donald Trump. “Say it to my face,” Harris feigned.

DEI PICK

Kamala Harris is the hand-picked representation of every negative connotation associated with the acronym DEI. She exemplifies DEI gone wrong. Her selection by Biden was a watered-down version of what DEI was designed for—to benefit ADOS. She has exploited this privilege, and it’s sad. She doesn’t represent ADOS and certainly doesn’t represent American Black women like myself. Yet, we are judged in our corporate lives by her standard.

Kamala is undoubtedly a DEI hire; her selection as VP is still used as a talking point by Joe Biden. She was chosen for her skin color, not her capabilities. The perception that all Black people are selected solely because of our skin color, regardless of qualifications or capabilities, is the fallacy she represents.

Her campaign should have countered the DEI perceptions by highlighting her qualifications. However, the problem they found is that all she has to offer America is a dismal record as District Attorney of San Francisco and California Attorney General. She rose through the ranks due to skin color, favoritism, Willie Brown, and the backs of Black folk. To present herself as a tough prosecutor, she treated Black people as pawns, imprisoned women, and kept men in jail. Harris doesn’t align with my ideas, beliefs, or heritage.

Poor Performance and Perceptions

Over the last three years, Kamala Harris has kept her promise to focus on immigration, but she has made no attempt to define any ADOS initiative. The left-leaning media attempts to obscure this truth, claiming, “She was not the immigration czar,” despite her two responsibilities as Vice President: to mislead the American public about the economy and to empower communities in other nations, while avoiding the topic of generational wealth for the American Black community.

The obvious result is failed immigration policies and an economy on the brink of collapse, a direct consequence of poor energy policies and Bidenomics. Our stock market crashed on Friday, August 3, due to inflation and a poor jobs report; Bidenomics highlights the failure of the Biden/Harris presidency. Even if you ignore facts about her race, you can’t ignore her failures. She has ignored the border, our allies, and our communities. She has lied about student loan debt, Medicare for All, Bidenomics, and even Biden’s mental state.

Trump doesn’t have to play identity politics with Harris. She has a record. The media will tell you that Harris’s enthusiasm is generated because she’s Black, but her public record is being swept clean. You can barely find an article critical of Harris, but we remember. How many times is Joy Reid going to dismiss those of us who disagree with this notion that Harris is Black and claim those of us that believe that she’s not are ridiculous? We have to listen to this nonsense repeatedly in the media, as if we are so blind and dumb we will believe any narrative coming from the donkey’s ass.

All the shouting from the left and their emphasis on polls favorable to Kamala Harris, while downplaying more reputable pollsters for positive headlines, is a strategy. It is quite obvious there are cracks in that foundation.

As an American Black woman, I would love nothing more than to see a qualified ADOS Black woman run for president and win. Heck, when I knew very little about Kamala, I rooted for her when she came on the scene in 2017. Not knowing better, I believed she was the only ADOS female senator at that time—now I know she’s not ADOS. Back then I was hyped for her, but then came the Brett Kavanaugh Senate confirmation hearings—and her ridiculous performance. When I listened to Harris, I felt dumb because nothing she said made sense. I got lost in the fog of words, clichés, and veiled threats. It was all a staged game she was playing, and we know the result: Kavanaugh was confirmed.

Identity Politics infused in Media Narratives

MSNBC is pandering and playing identity politics with loud-mouthed pundits like Joy Reid, but CNN is playing the same game. Every host echoes the same narrative: Kamala Harris will be the first Black female vice president, a Howard graduate with a Jamaican father.

Even American Black podcasters are contributing to the ambiguity surrounding Kamala Harris’s racial identity. Mark Lamont Hill says Harris is Black but stops short of calling her African American, showing a bit of integrity in handling the issue. On the other hand, Don Lemon, who argued in 2020 that Harris was not American Black, has now reversed his stance and claims she is Black. This flip-flopping, without defining what “Black” means, is sheer conflation. It highlights how race is used ambiguously and strategically in politics, demonstrating that Harris is using identity tactics to boost her campaign.

Democrats have had the media referring to certain whites as nationalists, white supremacists, and deplorables since 2012. They have referred to Trump as a criminal, a rapist, a racist, and have made allegation after allegation for the last three years. Some privileged American Black women have even called out, on media platforms, the fact that Trump cheated on Melania with a porn star while Melania was pregnant—as if Melania Trump is not a woman. It’s as if cheating with a porn star is worse than a 30-year-old woman selling her body to an old married man for a DA seat. We all have skeletons in the closet. Yet, the Trump campaign, according to the media, is accused of playing dirty politics.

I will say that what happened on January 6 was maddening—that is no lie. For a moment, I thought America was on the brink of civil war, but the way the judicial and legislative branches of government checked Trump and upheld the Constitution was inspiring. It demonstrated that when tested, Trump had no power. If he wanted to serve as President for another term after Biden/Harris won the White House, he would have to do it the democratic way—by running again and winning.

The Hypocrisy

As soon as Trump and JD Vance use terms like “cat ladies,” “DEI hires,” or “immigration czar,” the media cries foul, accusing them of using language that belittles women and reflects disdain for people of color. Both sides engage in name-calling and ad hominem attacks.

The left is using language to throw bricks—but even light punches seem like knockouts to them. The outrage is almost comical. It’s unfortunate that if you lack a record, no voter support, and have been handed the ball and patted on the back by a nice white man, all that’s left to do is play the race card and name-call.

Harris has no clear agenda. In contrast, Trump has a defined agenda—whether you agree with it or not, he has one. Yet, Joy Reid and other MSNBC hosts, along with media pundits, are creating fear around Project 2025 as if it’s Trump’s agenda and as if Harris has a more appealing agenda of her own. If you visit her website, all you find is jargon and empty space.

During her 2020 run for president, Harris exploited the ADOS community by going on speaking tours and appearing on Black platforms, offering free incentives to our community, like crack. Today, she continues the same strategy—attending Black national sorority conventions, speaking at Black funerals, and campaigning in African American communities to portray herself as one of us. The American Black church will be next—just watch.

Her affiliation with AKA (Alpha Kappa Alpha) is used as proof that she is ADOS. I was never an AKA, nor did I attend an HBCU—does that mean I am not Black? These liberal pundits even reference the one-drop rule, echoing sentiments from the Jim Crow era, where whites hoped to preserve purity in their bloodlines by classifying even a drop of Black blood as tainted—it is absurd. Now we are running around saying that even a drop of Black blood makes you Black. Perhaps that is true, but I don’t know the measure of what constitutes Blackness. However, having a drop of Black blood does not make you ADOS. Peep the difference.

Harris’s 2020 campaign championed abortion and promised a monthly stipend to poor communities, I.e. the American black community, she exploits vulnerabilities within our community to attract support. Since becoming VP, she has not fulfilled these promises; instead, she continued to advocate for abortion and has remained silent on reparations for the American Black community.

Although she has not explicitly acknowledged her inability to restore Roe v. Wade, it is clear that overturning the Dobbs decision would be a significant challenge, especially given that it took 75 years for Roe v. Wade to be decided and then returned to the states. Now, she claims she can overturn Dobbs in just four years without the support of the Supreme Court.

To achieve this, Biden and Harris have proposed introducing policies to impose term limits on Supreme Court Justices. This move is ironic, considering that the rule change made by Senate Democrats in 2013—eliminating the filibuster for most judicial nominees—set the stage for the current makeup of the Supreme Court.

Flip flop

Harris’s shifting positions on various issues highlight her inconsistency and lack of genuine commitment. A prime example is her Middle Eastern foreign policy. She was once a supporter of Palestinians, calling for a ceasefire. However, as the Democratic presumptive nominee, she now aligns with Israel and is even considering a Jewish white man as her VP candidate.

She briefly supported Palestinians, even traveling to Israel to hold secret meetings with Benny Gantz, a former member of Netanyahu’s war cabinet, seemingly to mediate the conflict in Gaza. Recently, after becoming the Presidential nominee, Harris gave a speech expressing unwavering support for Israel and echoing Joe Biden’s talking points. Clearly, there is no distinction between her policy views and Biden’s, so it’s no surprise if Biden’s 2024 agenda becomes her de facto agenda.

Today, Nate Silver predicts that Kamala Harris has a path to the White House, claiming she will win all four Rust Belt states and Georgia. It’s troubling to think she could actually win. President Obama and Biden carried Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania. Harris would also need Georgia to win.

Trump needs only one of the Rust Belt states, and with JD Vance, he could clinch a win in Pennsylvania. We have been surprised before, and Kamala knows she needs all four states to have even a semblance of hope.

Out of her six VP choices, it’s likely she will pick Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, believing he can help her win blue-collar voters and stop Trump. This choice reflects her disregard for the American Black community, as she wouldn’t consider selecting an ADOS candidate for the White House. Now, she’s promoting fracking when she previously supported the Green New Deal—a clear contradiction.

She has flipped from being an Indian-Jamaican-American, a Palestinian supporter, and a believer in abortion and climate change to presenting herself as a Black woman who supports drilling and Israel. Yet, she still argues that American Black women should have the right to terminate pregnancies, which undermines our legacy, while pretending that some states don’t respect that right.

Threat to America

“Trump is a threat to democracy,” says a candidate who has received zero delegates, bypassed a primary election, and has done nothing for America.

I want to mention JD Vance for a moment. He’s from the rust belt, he grew up poor, his mother suffered from addiction, raised by his grandmother, went to Yale and served in the military and somehow Harris had the audacity to question what Vance has done for America. What has she done for America beside suck up DEI benefits.

She states Vance is an Hypocrite hypocrite hypocrite because, like many Americans, he once despised Trump based on the Democratic narrative. But I despise Trump less than I despise the Democrats for their policies that continue to destroy our community.

I resent the way Democrats use “free for all” to keep us dependent, drunk, and stupid. Free healthcare, free college, food stamps, and rental stipends—they give a crumb here and a crumb there for us to nibble on, keeping us quiet until we cast that vote. Then they cut us off—one month of food stamps and access to abortion clinics is all we will get from Biden/Harris.

Harris has nothing more to say about the Trump/Vance ticket except to claim they are “weird.” For an entire week, there was serious wordsmithing around a five-letter word. “Weird” became a national buzzword. When she referred to Trump/Vance as “weird” during her campaign rally in GA, I realized she was responsible for pundits going on a media blitz, calling Trump and his campaign “weird.” All week long, her surrogates have been like marionettes, repeating the same talking point.

Dahtruth

Examining Harris’s performance as Vice President reveals a lack of significant initiatives or policies. Her handling of the border crisis has been abysmal, with record numbers of illegal immigrants entering the United States under her watch. The administration now pretends as if she wasn’t in charge of the border, claiming numbers are dropping and pointing out the border bill that failed because of Trump. Of course, he was not in office but they blame him for disrupting the law-abiding bodies—and the Biden/Harris administration could do nothing to stop it.

I think it’s fair for any American to consider who we vote into office. In 2020, I voted for Biden out of fear of another Trump presidency. But look at our world today: Iran and Israel’s war in Gaza, Russia’s attempted annexation of Ukraine, our failed policies in Africa, the destruction in Haiti, our failed border crisis, inflation, rising gas and food prices, and soaring electric costs. I could go on and on—but I won’t.

In the end, Kamala Harris’s lackluster performance, empty promises, and reliance on identity politics reveal a candidate who is not fit for the highest office. She has no substantive agenda or real policies to offer the American people. Despite the media hype and her attempts to play the race card, the fact remains: her record as Vice President is underwhelming, and her campaign is devoid of genuine substance. Voting for her simply because of her skin color is not a viable option. We deserve a leader with clear principles, a robust track record, and a vision that truly addresses the needs of our country. Harris fails on all counts, and we cannot settle for less when the future of America is at stake.

"Justice for Sonya Massey: A Reflection on ModeRn Racism and Accountability

What an exhausting week last week was for America. There is so much to talk about, from the rise of Kamala Harris to the out-of-hand killings in Philadelphia. There was the embarrassment of America as we received Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, one of our greatest allies. Our leadership was completely absent. The President was licking his wombs in Delaware and Harris was at a sorority meeting, pretending to be ADOS. That was a disgrace, and super disrespectful. Unfortunately, the most devastating thing we witnessed last week was the killing of Sonya Massey. Words can’t explain.

Sonya Massey’s unfortunate killing in cold blood is devastating. I am convinced that without the body camera, the story of what happened in that house would have forever been covered in lies and distractions. Thanks to video cameras, we can all attest to a crime that was not just tragic; it was downright evil.

The police in Illinois were called by Sonya Massey because she believed she had heard a prowler. When the police officers arrived, Sonya came outside and stood with them. She was acting strangely, as if she was afraid, and she invoked the name of Jesus repeatedly as she spoke with the police. The police seemed to reassure her that she was safe. They let her know they had searched the property and found no one there. Despite this, they stepped inside to get her ID for the report.

Once inside, Sonya couldn’t find her ID, and a pot had been boiling on the stove. One of the officers pointed out the pot—you could see the steam rising in the video. Sonya got up to turn off the pot, and this is where the friction escalated. As Sonya took the pot from the stove, she turned and headed toward the police—it appeared she may have been going to pour the water into the sink. As she turned, she asked the officers why they were backing up. One of the officers said, “That’s a hot pot.” The two officers laughed a little, and then she said, “I rebuke you in the name of Jesus.” That’s when one of the officers became enraged. He yelled, “I’ll shoot you in your fucking face: She screamed, “I am sorry, I am sorry,” as she knelt down beneath a counter. Then, just like that, the officer shot her three times, killing her instantly.

To be honest, the police had no real reason to enter her home. Had she been in her right mind, she probably would not have allowed them in. She had called for help; they helped her and should have left. Both officers seemed pretty calm, but once inside, you could sense growing frustration as Sonya searched for her ID. She even asked at one point for one of the officers to hand her a Bible.

The officer, Sean Grayson, only seemed to be slightly annoyed, but as she turned with that pot, both officers stepped back. They both had the same fear that she was going to throw the water at them.

But she did not.

What’s unclear is if she had the pot in her hand when she dropped down. Nevertheless, when she said, “I rebuke you in the name of Jesus,” it seemed to trigger Officer Sean Grayson. A rage took over, and he shot and killed Sonya Massey, a 36-year-old woman suffering mentally in that moment.

Intertwined within all this is the experience no Black American ever wants to encounter. There was a longer thread of racism ever-present in that house. The towering white men looking over a Black, feeble person clearly in need of medical assistance, failed to see her humanity because of that thin thread. There was the whimpering and the pleading for a second chance from Sonya’s bowed-down frame.

A testimony in video. Watching, my mind went back to August 1964 when Fannie Lou Hamer gave her testimony at the Democratic National Committee after being arrested and beaten in Winona, Mississippi, for exercising her right to vote. There was no video, only her words that told the story of the abuse she suffered at the hands of the police. We had to use our imagination to think of the way evil manifested inside the cell. Then there was Sandra Bland—whose arrest had been videotaped, but her death behind bars wasn’t captured by a single camera.

In Fannie Lou’s case, there were no convictions for that crime. In Sandra’s case, there was a cover-up and no charges for the crime. But with Sonya Massey, we have the video camera; we see what occurred, and justice will be served. To think this will never happen again is a fallacy. The thought that it could have been me or you is visceral and real. Perhaps the officer wasn’t a racist; perhaps he never saw her as human—but we witnessed the event, and what happened can’t be denied or reshaped or reframed. Grayson was fired immediately and charged. His audacity is just the same as those officers that beat Fannie Lou, as he has pled not guilty. But we wait for the jury to decide.

I will say, just off-topic, there are two people running for the presidency, and only one supports cameras for police officers, and that is Donald Trump.

What is also shameful is how one family’s tragedy becomes another man’s pursuit. Right after hearing about Sonya Massey’s death, I watched her family hold a press conference with Benjamin Crump himself, the money man. Crump exudes payday. He is like that eel lingering below the surface, waiting on another senseless death of a Black person to build on his wealth. Talk about a walking, talking ambulance chaser pretending to be an advocate for justice.

Every single court case he fights comes to an end, and he disappears back into the depths of darkness only to arise again at another death or police shooting. If the case involves a cop and a Black person, Crump suddenly appears with a big smile, trying to articulate the matter with some random slogan. George Floyd’s death was “get off my neck.” I suppose Sonya’s may be: “She called for help and got a bullet to the head.” It doesn’t even register with any impact because we are sick of slogans.

I am sick of the story of a white cop killing a Black person being told as if every individual in an entire police force is corrupt. Or as if the white police are running around hoping to shoot another n****r (using for context). At the same time we pretend crimes like those committed by Officer Grayson, can be eliminated. If we are good enough to one another the entire world will be good. It’s unfortunate but a grim reality that people can change and transform, but it’s not always for good. Evil is ever-present in the heart of every individual, and therefore, every system that governs our lives will continue to exhibit its wickedness in one form or another as long as man is born with motivation and aspiration.

What we witnessed in Sonya Massey’s home was no doubt wicked. As a community we can be hopeful,. Considering Fannie Lou Hamer was only able to articulate the beating she suffered for attempting to exercise her right to vote and because Sandra Bland and so many other blacks that were murdered at the hands of police officers, we now have body cameras that capture the dark moments of injustice. ,Sonya’s death although very tragic speaks to changes in our nation that have benefited the American Black community.. We are no longer living in 1964—we are indeed in a digital age. With Sonya Massey, although her life was taken by evil and viciousness, we have the video. We can all witness everything that had occurred.

To hear some American Blacks, like Officer Brandon Tatum, a YouTuber, who has viewed the video and somehow finds ways to justify the actions of the police officer in this incident, is truly disheartening. You can condemn the officer’s behavior without condemning the entire police force. That’s what we did after George Floyd; we started campaigns to defund the police, condemning the entire institution. Again, I believe Kamala Harris was a significant supporter of the progressive initiative to defund the police, as if crime doesn’t exist.

Today is not 1964, and it’s not 2019—it’s 2024, we should have confidence that Justice will be delivered for Sonya thanks to the video camera. For Sonya, I pray that the gates of heaven opened and received her soul, just like Stephen. As for the officer, unlike in 1964, justice will be served. An eye for an eye, a life for a life. That’s justice.

Men like Benjamin Crump, who seem to measure justice by the size of the check in their hand, perpetuate this cycle. As tears fall from yet another grieving family members eyes, he will come to eat every crumb that drops from the table, profiting from their pain. True justice should not be commodified but should honor the memory and dignity of victims like Sonya Massey.

DIVISION IN LEGACY

The recent assassination attempt on Donald Trump has stirred a whirlwind of reactions across various communities in the United States. Among these, the response from the American public is particularly concerning. The widespread belief that the incident was staged, either by Trump’s supporters or his opponents, underscores the deep divisions within our political landscape. This reaction goes beyond mere political disagreement; it hints at a profound and pervasive distrust and disdain for one another that transcends partisan lines.

The Political Divide

The divisiveness within our political parties has reached a point where the lines between truth and conspiracy are increasingly blurred. Governance is no longer just about differences in political ideology. This deep-seated animosity now appears to be woven into the very fabric of our society.

In America, our nation is divided into three classes: the elite, which includes government officials, corporations, entertainers, and political pundits; the middle class or bourgeoisie, led by intellectuals, teachers, preachers, and other professionals who conform to the elite’s whims and are content with modest living spaces and luxury cars; and the poor, who represent the masses and whose primary value in society is as voters. This division has fostered a culture where the elite, including leaders from corporations and both major political parties, are entrenched in their ideologies without compromise. As leaders rise and fall, the middle class conforms, complains, and mutters but adapts with agility, while the poor endure the elite’s decisions without any real voice on critical issues such as COVID-19, healthcare, Social Security, and pension reform.

Over the last several months, I’ve heard political elites and their supporting pundits refer to the novel “1984” by George Orwell as a way of implicating the opposition in acts deemed criminal, depending on one’s perspective. However, the reality is that neither side could ever mirror those in “1984” due to the absence of divine intervention and the inherent freedoms in our society. This misunderstanding is prevalent among those who use the novel to support their viewpoints. A major assumption in “1984” is that people can act as they see fit because there is no divine oversight. The very act of comparing our political situation to Orwell’s dystopia underscores a level of freedom and rights fundamentally absent in the totalitarian world of “1984.” Yet, much like in the novel, both the left and the right use platforms like podcasts to propagate their narratives, spreading lies and half-truths, and making implications about events such as assassinations.

This phenomenon was starkly evident in the aftermath of the reported assassination attempts on Donald Trump. Every single social media outlet I listened to either insidiously implied that Trump staged the alleged assassination attempt, or that Biden and his team were secretly responsible. Of the two scenarios, it ultimately comes down to motive. Why would Trump stage his own assassination? He would risk not only his own life but also the lives of everyone around him, including those truly impacted by this unfortunate lapse in judgment. Moreover, he is currently leading in many polls, his legal troubles seem to be abating following the Supreme Court’s decision to send back to the states the question regarding the immunity of the President, the recent dismissal of the classified documents case, and the ongoing troubles with the Georgia election fraud case—and Fani Willis. There doesn’t seem to be any realistic reason for Trump to place himself in that type of situation when he is winning on all fronts to the chagrin of the world.

Biden, on the other hand, has every reason to do such a thing—I mean the debate was enough to arrange such an attempt. But I don’t know what dirt Biden has swept under the rug, but it doesn’t seem to fit his character to carry out such an indecent act just because he is losing. However, there are questions about his cognitive capabilities and those truly running the ship at the White House that makes you wonder—could he have done such a thing? I honestly don’t believe he would have done such a thing, but Democrats and their pundits pretend Biden had no reason to order the assassination and Trump had every reason to stage his own assassination. Listening to Joy Reid, (who is the worst) and Roland Martin imply Trump staged the assassination was like listening to two minutes of hate on repeat for an entire week.

I am not saying that there are no lies being told on all sides. Everyone has something to sweep under the rug—and there are deep, dark truths that have been conveniently covered up. There could also be something deeper in this tragedy that remains ambiguous amidst all the smoke. While speculation burns about who shot Trump, stories surface involving BlackRock’s CEO, Trump’s selection of JD Vance, and Rupert Murdoch. A video emerges of the shooter in an BlackRock video and According to Newsweek, Murdoch aggressively preferred Doug Burgum, Governor of North Dakota, to be Trump’s VP pick. Would Rupert Murdoch or Larry Fink actually arrange for the assassination of a former president—and potentially the soon-to-be 47th US President? These allegations surface but are quickly swept away into the ether. This leaves us squabbling over who did what, why, and how, failing to pinpoint the responsible party and to ignore the fact.

The Problem with Our Youth

If we take a step back and closely examine recent events, one key theme emerges: violence. This isn’t just political violence but also ideological, educational, and religious violence carried out by young people. From mass shootings and persistent gang violence to violent protests, our youth resemble those from Orwell’s “1984.” In this culture, we have allowed our children to tell us what is right and wrong. We have set up our youth to have more faith in social media platforms than in their own parents. They rely on their own thoughts and ideas without fully understanding the implications, using social media to expose supposed evildoers. This mirrors another theme from “1984,” where there is a sinister undercurrent in our society. This is a massive problem.

There are also some among the bourgeoisie who, having not achieved their desired status, exploit gullible minds under the guise of truth. From wannabe pastors and teachers to podcasters with personal agendas, these individuals target children when they can’t manipulate adults. This is another indication of a deeper problem affecting our society’s fabric.

We have a problem with our youth. Mass shootings and gang violence, setting bodies on fire, and shootouts at Super Bowl parades—we have a problem with our youth. We lie to their faces and pretend, then wonder why. Pay attention, wake up. Trump could have staged that assassination, Biden could have set him up, and maybe the head of the Secret Service should resign. But none of that matters if we don’t deal with the problem of our youth.

The recent attempt by a 20-year-old to assassinate a former president highlights a disturbing trend among our youth, reflecting the troubled state of our social and political environment. This act speaks volumes about the current condition of our society, where the real issues are often overlooked because we are too focused on the so-called adults in the room. Meanwhile, our children, thinking they have the answers, are running around terrorizing people. It’s a shame—but no one is sounding the alarm.Ideological Blind Spots

In recent years, there have been numerous instances where young people, influenced by cultural social norms and driven by social media, have committed heinous acts. Social media platforms amplify extreme ideologies and often glorify violence, creating a toxic environment that can incite vulnerable individuals to take drastic actions. This cultural phenomenon is deeply concerning and requires urgent attention.

THE CONCLUSION

Amidst all this, we are so focused on ideology that we often ignore these harsh realities and instead waste time wondering who shot Trump. The response to the assassination attempt on Trump highlights a deeper issue: a society divided not just by politics but by a fundamental lack of empathy and understanding. Instead of addressing the root causes of such violence, we are quick to point fingers and assign blame based on our political affiliations.

The assassination attempt on Donald Trump is more than a political event; it is a reflection of the deep-seated issues within our country. The reaction from the American public, along with the broader public’s divisive stance, highlights the urgent need for a reassessment of our social and political discourse. However, realistically, this reassessment seems unlikely given the current climate.

Instead of getting lost in conspiracy theories, we need to turn our energy toward addressing the issues facing our youth. We should consider the type of legacy we want to leave for our children and focus on the upcoming election with that in mind. It’s time to set aside conspiracy theories and focus on building a future that prioritizes the well-being and development of our younger generation. Only by doing so can we ensure a stable and prosperous society for the years to come.

Now, I started writing this blog a few days after Trump was shot, on the day Biden resigned, and Kamala Harris stepped up to try and take center stage. The troubling events unfolding make me feel more concerned for our children's future than ever before.

DUBIOUS HOPE

I listened to CNN a few weeks ago, and Van Jones was on, visibly upset about Biden’s poor debate performance. I cry a lot, especially as I get older, but Van Jones seems to cry even more than I do. With tears in his eyes, Jones implied that because of Biden’s apparent mental challenges, the Democrats are effectively positioning Kamala Harris for the presidency. This is a shocking admission from a left-leaning Democrat. He suggested that she might as well run and that Joe Biden should step aside. Has he determined Biden’s fate? Jones was serious—he genuinely sees Kamala Harris as a better candidate than Biden. This raises a crucial question for the American Black community: What has Harris truly done for us? I want to take a minute to delve into her record and the implications of her potential presidency and urge for a more critical evaluation of her contributions and policies affecting American Black community.

Jones, of course, is not alone in his stance. I read an article stating that Harris is leading Biden and Trump in the polls, a claim the media will likely disseminate widely. According to one poll, Harris was leading Trump among 1,000 voters a few days after the debate. Another poll, conducted by Redfield & Wilton Strategies for Newsweek, found that Harris was by far the most popular choice among Democratic contenders, with a significant 23 percent favoring her to replace Biden should he drop out. She is firmly ahead of Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama, and Gavin Newsom. It’s evident that the left has finally realized Biden is not capable of serving as President for four more years. I mean, how many times did the man have to stumble before they opened their eyes? Unfortunately, with only 23% support for her candidacy within her own party, the question remains: how can she win this race? It seems clear that she is relying on the support of American Blacks.

In 2020, Biden and Harris won 92% of the American Black vote, but recent polls show that only 77% of American Blacks support Biden/Harris in the upcoming election. A drop that could be potentially devastating in November. Critical to these numbers are American Black women who are rallying to her side once again without any consideration of her record, who she is to our community, and what she has done.

Kamala Harris is a first-generation Indian-Jamaican, born in Oakland, CA. She often speaks as if her family came to America in 1619. But her loyalties doesn’t align with the American Black community—I mean she nearly kissed Prime Minister Modi’s feet when he came to America. Harris’ mother, was a biologist from India who immigrated to this country to receive a better education. After she utilized ever benefit awarded to American Blacks Harris’ mother later moved to Canada when Kamala was 12 years old. Her father was a Jamaican economics professor.

Harris was never poor or oppressed—but at the age of five or six, while living in Oakland, she was bused in a two-way busing program in Berkeley, from the flats to the hills. Meaning, she was bused from the American Black community to the rich hills of CA. Clearly, if her life aligns with the struggling American Black community—then cry me a river.

Kamala has gone from an Indian-Jamaican immigrant to nearly the president in one generation, meanwhile American Blacks are not questioning why or how. Early in July, she spoke at a meeting of her sorority sisters for the Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc.’s 71st Boulé in Dallas, Texas. During her speech, she talked about American Blacks from the 1900s and the 1930s and used terms like “our people” as if her ancestors played a part in the American Black struggle. American Black women sat there clapping and agreeing as if her experiences aligned closely with the struggles of American Black women.

Harris pretends to be supportive and champions “Blacks,” yet she has not spoken a word about reparations for American Blacks. The only resources she champions for the American Black community is resources for abortions and food stamps—The amount so small—if I were a mother on food stamps, I would sell them for the cash.

It seems she would much rather support immigration policies, handing out millions of dollars to nations like Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala as part of her immigration strategy. This attempt to reduce the number of immigrants fleeing to the US by giving these nations money and resources to build up their countries and provide opportunities for their citizens has clearly failed.

In June of last year, she signed a bill investing $100 million into the Caribbean. Of that, Haiti is set to receive $54 million in aid. It appears a black woman is doing something positive for the Caribbean, including war-torn, earthquake-ridden Haiti. That is a big deal, except when you dig into the details, you make a huge discovery. The $54 million won’t actually appear in the hands of the individuals needing the resources. The funds will be allocated for food, bread, and weapons for the police department to fight the gangs that have plundered Haiti and be distributed or invested. Nonprofits and particular US partners like the Clinton Bush Haiti Fund and the Clinton Foundation will be huge beneficiaries of these resources. These NGOs raised a great deal of money back in 2011 after the earthquake in Haiti decimated the island. Millions of dollars were given to NGOs for humanitarian aid, and yet Haiti is still a nation in shambles. Many remain homeless, the country is barely rebuilt, and is now infested with gangs and guns smuggled in from the US. Coincidence? Perhaps.

Nevertheless, Kamala made the announcement in the Bahamas last June about the $54 million in resources. But what happened to all the other money US organizations received that should have gone to Haiti after the earthquake? Wouldn’t it have been prudent to figure out how resources were exploited the last time it had millions of dollars allocated for the island nation? Harris is silent on that question but is handing out millions more for partners and NGOs on behalf of that island nation. At a time when Haiti is in chaos, and the government has been overthrown, with gangs now in control, this situation presents a great excuse—or opportunity—for the US to partner with the UN and NGO collaborators to provide immediate food assistance, safe drinking water, and protection services to Haiti. This begs the question: how much of the resources will trickle down to help the poorest in Haiti? It’s been interesting the way all this money is being poured into Haiti, and the ones getting rich seem to live on American soil. Right, wrong, or indifferent, the connections can’t be denied.

The Facts of the Matter

Recently, I was listening to Anthony Moore’s TonTalks Podcast. He’s a lawyer, I believe, and an ADOS (American Descendants of Slaves) supporter. During his show, he said something that is so true and should resonate with anyone discussing DEI initiatives in America. Many people who classify themselves as Black benefit from these initiatives based on the enslavement of American Blacks, but they are not themselves descendants of American slaves. They have built nothing in this country and yet come here and receive benefits because they have black skin. President Obama was not ADOS, and neither is Kamala Harris. But American Blacks don’t see this trickery.

What they share in common is that they both had one parent with black skin. Obama’s father was from Africa; Harris’s father was from Jamaica. Reflecting on history, I realize President Obama was a naïve young president selected on the back of American Blacks. He tore down other ADOS politicians in Chicago on his way to the presidency.

Kamala Harris is not much different. Only where President Obama stepped on the backs of American Black politicians, she stepped on the backs of the poorest in the American Black community. Her judicial record as a prosecutor shows the ways her policies negatively impacted American Blacks, particularly American Black women. While she was Attorney General, she instituted a truancy law to combat child absenteeism. Women struggling to keep their families alive, trying to manage day-to-day, would face Harris’ promise: up to one year in jail and a $2,000 fine if their children were truant.

Kamala Harris's truancy policy, implemented during her tenure as San Francisco’s District Attorney and later as California's Attorney General, aimed to curb school absenteeism by legally penalizing parents of chronically truant children. This policy led to increased prosecutions, which disproportionately affected low-income and minority communities, where many families were already faced socio-economic challenges. Harris criminalized poverty and added legal and financial stress to vulnerable American Black families. She never addressed any of the root causes that impacted these households: healthcare, stable housing, and transportation.

Kamala Harris was rallied in 2019 into the White House by American Blacks—90% ADOS. Most ignored her checkered record and policies that negatively impacted American Black women. They love the fact that she fights for abortion rights and appeases the American Black community with $120 a month in summer food stamps and legal marijuana. We smile with pride, happy to appoint a Black woman, when to be clear—she ain’t like us.

Why are we supporting a woman who has failed the ADOS community over and over? Harris has set up laws that kept American Black men imprisoned and if that isn’t bad enough, she had cases overturned by the State of CA Supreme Court when it was discovered her drug analyst was a drug-addict and imprisoned many Black men based on faulty lab results. Heck, Harris is so low down she even argued to extend prison sentences so inmates could use their bodies to fight fires. Since she has been in office, what policy has she shepherded that benefits the American Black community? Not one.

If she gets a seat and becomes the first Asian-Jamaican President, not American Black, she will have ADOS to thank for it. Nevertheless, we are the community she has done absolutely nothing for but sold a bunch of lies: we have reduced millions in student loan debt since taking off. I’m not saying American Blacks should have been her priority—but at least the subject of American Black initiatives should have been in the conversation. Especially since immigration was her top priority. Instead of considering the the legacy of slaves in America she stretched forth her hands to help other nations giving away American resources.

DAHTRUTH

All I can do is shake my head. Democrats need to wake up and recognize Biden is cognitively unstable and Harris doesn’t align her policies with America or the ADOS community. Now, because of all these politics, we are forced to elect Saul—I am sorry, Donald Trump. After the debate, I was second-guessing myself—neither of these two cats deserves to be President. But Trump is the more reasonable choice. Although I have been saying I was voting for Trump, inside I haven’t been sure of doing such a thing. But if Harris runs, there is no doubt that I will vote for Trump.

Kamala Harris for President? God forbid. I have played this out: if she becomes President, maybe she will be great. Maybe she will bring world peace—maybe we should give her a chance. After all, she’s not Sarah Palin; she’s VP.

The VP that disappeared for years and only emerged for elections. Matter of fact, there was a point not too many months back when we were asking, “Where is Kamala?” like we were asking, “Who’s afraid of Virginia Woolf?” Not really, but get the point; Kamala ghosted the ADOS community. But here she is again, selling abortion, weed, and student loan forgiveness because the American Black community is like Mikey—we will take anything. American Blacks are still rallying to her side. Without question or consideration because we want to see a person with black skin in office.

Old Jim Clyburn has said in recent interviews, “If Biden is out, the VP has my full support.” No further questions from this man that has been in office for decades after decades—a leader in the American Black community—okay.

Where does all this leave us?

The Democratic Party never seems to think strategically. I believe Biden/Harris is going to lose—not like that’s a prophecy; everyone knows it. Given this, they should focus on down-ballot races. Securing the House and the Senate could counter Trump, but the party is too divided. There is no solid loyalty to a single focus. Some are boosting the VP, others are pushing far-left Democrats like Michelle Obama or Gavin Newsom, and some are even supporting third-party candidates, suggesting figures like socialist Claudia De la Cruz and Jill Stein over ADOS socialist Cornell West.

Now that Trump has been shot, his momentum is rising, and we truly face the prospect of him becoming President again. I like Trump, and despite my fear of him damaging our democracy, I will vote for him. It’s not just because there are no worthy Democratic or Republican alternatives, but also because his policies align with my own. My hope is that the safety net holds and democracy endures after his term. Therefore, I will render to Caesar what is Caesar’s, knowing that man can plan, but ultimately, God has the final word.

REDEMPTION OR RUSE

Maybe it’s just me, but the BET Awards red carpet reminded me of a rundown motel parking lot with a gaudy billboard out front. It’s one of those cheap, tasteless sights that you can’t avoid seeing. I don’t know when the red carpet changed to the blue carpet, but whoever made the choice of that shaggy blue carpet has probably never been in a motel and should be fired. I will refrain from commenting on the white trashcan liners that accessorized the walls, nor will I comment on the fashion because I am old, and I realize my attire is outdated and very old school. Just wearing a dress with a slip is out of style and old-fashioned, and that was obvious from the various photos I happened to see.

Now, to be truthful, I did not watch the BET Awards. As a matter of fact, I haven’t watched that awards show in years. But now, I am a feign for social media and will gladly watch shorts of supposed cultural events that align with my profile. It’s just unfortunate that my algorithms include the likes of Miss. Netta and Charles, hairy underarm pit, Shonda and a a host of fat chicks eating food and modeling cheap cloths that cover horse asses. Mixed in between those shorts are more shorts of events like the BET Awards. My algorithm is twisted.

When an image of Will Smith appeared, I felt compelled to search for and watch the video of his great performance. The darkness, fire, and red hues throughout the video were particularly captivating. Considering Will Smith's public humiliations and embarrassments, one can say so much about this performance. Adding Kirk Franklin, a proclaimed gospel singer, choir director, record producer and rapper, who has similarly faced public scrutiny, further completes a narrative of public redemption. They appear to be employing the strategy Manipulation 101-B: (I made this up) using a song complete with a church choir to regain public favor after their falls from grace. There is no better way to claim redemption than to visible align oneself with Jesus Christ and add a nice, somber, melodic beat complete with a flaming fire and a mass choir to a public performance.

Will Smith, has portrayed the image of a great father figure for years. He has been playing this role of a respected and loving father and husband for so long that he forgot it was just a character. His image as an ideal family man was shattered when his wife, Jada Pinkett Smith, used her 'Red Table Talk' as a platform to confess everything that was wrong in their marriage. Affairs, misbehavior, and a multitude of personal issues were aired publicly. The world discovered that one of the couples we admired, especially in the Black community, was not what they seemed. Then came that slap. Will Smith, apparently so enraged probably with his wife, smacked Chris Rock during the Academy Awards after Chris Rock made a crack on Jada—no better place to display pent-up rage. Will Smith's movies, once symbols of his profound and loving persona, now seem to be extensions of his charade. His slap at Chris Rock and the ongoing revelations from his wife have destroyed this image and made his true self clear: a caricature rather than a genuine individual.

His recent performance at the BET Awards seemed like another desperate attempt at redemption. The dark, fiery stage setting, meant to symbolize his journey from hell to redemption, was featured with a powerful gospel choir. The choir was the only authentic part of the performance, stirring emotions and masking the underlying insincerity of Smith's plea for forgiveness.

Adding Kirk Franklin into the mix only compounded the spectacle. Franklin, with his public battles and questions about his spirituality, tried to leverage the same gospel choir to cleanse his tarnished image. His recent controversies, especially involving his son, have left many questioning his authenticity as a representative of Christ. This performance at the BET Awards seemed like a last-ditch effort to manipulate public perception, a façade of repentance wrapped in gospel music. He is saved! He is saved!

Despite these overt displays of redemption, the underlying motives are hard to ignore. Chants of 'He is saved! He is saved!' may resonate in the background, but they do nothing to mask the strategic intent behind these public acts. In fact, their performance only adds another layer to the reality that both men will do anything to remain on top, including masquerading a lie.

DAHTRUTH

Will Smith and Kirk Franklin's performance at the BET Awards was nothing more than Manipulation 101. It was a spectacle where two grown men, publicly pleading for redemption, seemed more focused on appealing to the audience than to God. They seek to reclaim their reputations by masquerading as something they are not—redeemed by God. Their attempts to gain approval from the masses for their past misdeeds are transparent and ultimately unconvincing. The façade of the true family man and the devoted spiritual leader has been shattered, leaving only the hollow remnants of their former images.

“I assure you that everyone who has given up house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or property, for my sake and for the Good News, 30 will receive now in return a hundred times as many houses, brothers, sisters, mothers, children, and property—along with persecution. And in the world to come that person will have eternal life. 31 But many who are the greatest now will be least important then, and those who seem least important now will be the greatest then”

— Mark 10:29

DEBATE, DECISION AND POLOTICAL DYNAMICS

Presidential Dilemma

Welp, much has already been said about the presidential debate between Joe Biden and Donald Trump. There are actually no surprises for us to speak of if we really want to be honest. Both candidates got on the stage and lied. However, it is evident that Joe Biden should reconsider running for another term as president. His performance has raised serious concerns about his cognitive capabilities and his ability to inspire trust and project strength on the global stage. Equally disturbing is his apparent reluctance to step aside for a more moderate candidate to prevent a potential Trump reelection and the grim reality that his mendacity will not allow him to sacrifice himself and step aside.

After witnessing the debate and Trump's performance, I felt genuinely ill. What is one to do when caught between a rock and a hard place? It's only four years, after all, but there's an unspoken fear lurking beneath the shadows of our political landscape. On one hand, there's worry that Trump may fundamentally uproot our democratic norms. On the other, fears loom that Biden could inadvertently lead us straight into WWIII or step aside and pass the battalion to Kamala Harris. . To say America faces a tough decision this November is, frankly, an understatement.

The Fallout of the "Nuclear Option"

Amid these presidential tensions, the pressures from both the democratic House and Senate are palpable. What is ironic is we can turn back the hands of time and see how their pulling a single thread in our democracy to silence one side has resulted in near disaster for our nation.

It is difficult to believe, but a single Democrat decision from 2013 has brought us to this unfortunate point. Despite warnings from Mitch McConnell, we find ourselves in a real-life pickle. The choice by Harry Reid and his fellow Democrats to invoke the "nuclear option" was celebrated as a victory back then, as they finally had enough power to silence the Republicans. However, seemingly oblivious to the cast of democratic characters was the fact that the same rules could one day turn against them. Blinded by their their own desires to silence the cohort of Republicans against President Obama, they pulled the thread and paved the way for a king.

Since at least 1806, the right to filibuster has been a part of Senate proceedings. The filibuster tactic involved prolonged debate to exhaust the opposition. The longest filibuster in history opposed the passing of the Civil Rights Bill in 1957; it lasted 90 days and also survived a 24-hour filibuster from Senator Strom Thurmond. This was precisely the tactic Democrats sought to silence in 2013, blocking the opposition to President Obama’s nominees. This prompted Reid's threat to employ the "nuclear option," adjusting the cloture threshold from 60 down to a majority plus one.

For nearly 40 years, any debate on the Senate floor required a two-thirds majority vote to end and move forward. That was known as the "cloture rule," giving the minority a voice in the government process. The two-thirds majority was further reduced to 60 senators in 1975 and in 2013, it was a significant victory when Harry Reid further lowered the number to only 51, diminishing minority voices by shutting down debate.

This one change could have had a significant impact on President Obama’s nominations as it allowed executive and lower court judicial nominations to be confirmed with a simple majority, rather than the 60 votes previously required to overcome a filibuster.

To be fair, Harry Reid did warn the Republicans that he was going to go nuclear. That wasn’t a new threat—it had been waged by Democrats and Republicans for years. But in 2013, it seemed to make so much sense as the Democrats held the power in both houses. It was in support of the first Black President of the United States. It was necessary to establish his government and rid the process of filibusters. If not in 2013, then when—so Harry Reid pulled that string, setting off the "nuclear option," and the ripple effects still have unfortunate consequences.

The original bill reduced the cloture numbers to a majority, for most bills and other issues; but it maintained the 60-super majority vote for Super Court nominations keeping some of the balance in place. However, in 2017 after Republicans took over the Senate, Mitch McConnell further expanded the bill by allowing the 51-majority threshold to apply even to Supreme Court Justices, ushering in Neal Gorsuch.

The bill was a success for President Obama and he managed to get 329 nominations through, across his two terms of which 312 were confirmed. He also elected two Supreme Court Justices: Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

In comparison, Trump confirmed 234 judicial appointments and three Supreme Court Justices: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. This impact has affected the court right to this very second.

According to Ballotpedia, Joe Biden has had 197 nominees confirmed and appointed and confirmed one Supreme Court Justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson in 2024.

The irony is stark. The 'nuclear option' was meant to streamline the governance process by reducing the threshold for overcoming filibusters against most presidential nominees from 60 votes to a simple majority. However, this change, although effective during President Obama's tenure, proved even more impactful under President Trump as it allowed him to reshape the courts with a very conservative bent. His political appointees have overturned Roe v. Wade with the Dobbs decision, addressed issues related to the Jan. 6 rioters, and most recently, returned the question of presidential immunity back to the lower courts.

Supreme Court’s Immunity Decision

You would think the Democrats would have learned their lesson, but evidently, they have not. To be clear, I believe that although it is not said—and probably should never be uttered, especially by a Supreme Court Justice—the President of the United States does, in some ways, have immunity from petty or frivolous crimes. Now, January 6 was neither petty nor frivolous; however, Trump did not actually force those individuals to Washington, DC. I think if Trump is held responsible for January 6, then so should social media outlets. What happened that day was a comedy of errors and missteps that resulted in a group of radical individuals attempting to overthrow the government, the death of one women and injury of countless others.  However, that attempt failed, and every door that was forced open in an attempt to oust Joe Biden was firmly shut. The government held strong to the Constitution.

I think it was a very wise decision for the Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling to return the immunity case to the lower courts. Of course, this decision came with condemnation from some, including for the liberal judges, Sotomayor, Kagan and Brown-Jackson.

'A President is entitled to use the trappings of his office for personal gain without facing criminal liability because our Constitution does not shield a former President from answering for criminal and treasonous acts.' —Sotomayor

'Personal gain to use the trappings of his office without facing criminal liability.' —Jackson

In response to the Supreme Court's decision, the White House and House of Representatives Democrats, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, are now threatening to impeach Supreme Court justices. Another House Democrat is preparing a constitutional amendment to reverse the decision, emphasizing that the President is not above the law. Meanwhile, broadcast media has been abuzz, with MSNBC hosts Joy Reid and Rachel Maddow delivering strong rebukes of the Supreme Court. These are the same individuals who previously criticized Donald Trump after he condemned the 12 jurors and the courts for their decision in the Stormy Daniels case; now, they are admonishing the highest court in the land.

Once again, the Democrats, who currently lack power, are attempting to take the power out of the hands of the people and give it to the government. The Supreme Court has spoken, and Justice Roberts has given his perspective:  the President holds certain powers that are so integral to the role that they provide him with absolute immunity from criminal prosecution when exercised. Roberts upholds the separation of powers principle, that ensures the executive branch can operate without undue interference from the legislative or judicial branches. 

DahTruth

I believe that whether to remove a president or prevent someone from running for a second, non-consecutive term should generally be decided by voters. However, once a president is elected, the Constitution assigns the House of Representatives the role of impeachment and the Senate the role of removal. Should Trump be re-elected, these questions might arise again, including considerations about the potential implications of his Vice President and the value of pursuing impeachment. These are speculative issues until the election takes place. If Trump were to commit a severe and unimaginable crime—comparable to the alleged crimes of Hunter Biden—he should certainly face legal consequences. Minor administrative disputes or questions about the origins of actions, however, are less significant. The matter of holding Trump accountable for the events of January 6th through alleged violations of state and local voting laws introduces a separate and complex legal debate.

To be fair and in keeping with fairness, just as Trump had to give up the office in 2020—he has the opportunity to run again without persecution of ‘so-called’ crimes he committed while in office. It is now up to the people to decide if they want to elect Donald Trump for another 4-year term.

Reflecting on the presidential debate that opened this discussion, it is clear that the performances of both candidates not only set the tone for the electoral campaigns but also highlighted the urgent issues at stake. The debate itself serves as a microcosm of the larger political dynamics that are shaping our country's future. As voters, it is our responsibility to scrutinize these moments of direct confrontation between candidates because they often reveal underlying truths about their capabilities, priorities, and how they might wield power.

In conclusion, as we inch closer to the election, let us not only remember the charged exchanges of the debate but also consider the subsequent actions and decisions made by our leaders. These elements combined give us a fuller picture of what is at stake. It’s crucial for every citizen to stay informed, critically evaluate the information presented, and participate actively in shaping the future of our democracy. Our collective choices will determine the path that our country takes, making every vote count more than ever.

Supreme Court Decision.pdf

A CHANCE: Empowering school choice

In a move that underscores Marxist ideology and the rigidity of the left, a few weeks ago, black social media launched an attack on Jay-Z—Hova—Shawn Carter because, Roc Nation, the company he founded in 2008, has the audacity to support, "Pass It Forward," a campaign in support of a bill backed by Jeff Yass, the wealthiest man in Pennsylvania and a prominent Republican. This bill aims to provide students in low-performing public schools with a choice—a lifeline to better educational opportunities when school system in districts have failed. But black podcasters are making the most ludicrous arguments against the bill and against Jay Z.

We all know Jay-Z epitomizes what American success looks like for a Black man raised in the '80s. Not Tupac or Biggie, but he is, right now, our living example of what excellence looks like after overcoming tremendous struggles. Yet, some argue this Black man is not doing enough. Black media is ablaze, criticizing him fiercely—not because he has committed a crime or because there are allegations of misconduct against him. Rather, Jay-Z is being called out because he supports school choice.

Mark Lamont Hill, called out Hova. Sabby Sabs called Jay-z’s campaign a scam. Jerrell Blakeley, Director of Government, Community, and Racial and Social Justice for Indiana's largest labor union, (Yes I don’t know him either), but he criticized Jay-Z in a Substack article entitled “Can Knock the Hustle,” a snub to Jay-Z first album, Reasonable Doubt. But even my girl, Yvette Carnell, founder of ADOS (American Descendants of Slaves), has joined the ranks attacking Jay-Z.

These folks make it plain: Jay-Z has done nothing for the Black community except bring more Black faces to the Super Bowl halftime shows and the Made in America Concert—a concert that creates a platform for Black rappers and entertainers.

Jay-Z is nothing more then a capitalist—even worse he is a black capitalist—talk about the Known World. The nerve of Jay-Z to shake hands with a white Republican in an attempt to rob black schools. The Pass It Forward campaign was established to gain support for the Republican-backed Senate Bill 795, the Pennsylvania Award for Student Success (PASS) scholarship program. According to loudmouth black media, we should not believe the hype! This campaign is a scam and will only benefit Jay-Z—the capitalist. Somehow, when a black man has enough resources to scale, he is torn down by the left for doing so.

Jay-Z, used to be an entertainer, but he has now transformed into a business—MAN, now according to Marxist he is not giving enough of his wealth back to the black community. How dare he take advantage of an opportunity to help even one single student from the ghetto by giving them a choice between a private school or a failed public school system.

Meanwhile, those of us hoping for reparations out of the fabric of America will take resources from that same soil without prejudice. This double standard is glaring, as successful black individuals are often criticized for their achievements and accused of not doing enough, despite their efforts to make a difference.

The left’s unwavering commitment to a failing public school system, despite its disorganization and lack of merit, highlights a troubling trend. Instead of embracing policies that empower students with options, they cling to an outdated model that continually underperforms and disadvantages our children.

Despite the Nation's Report Card showing that private schools outperform charter and public schools whenever private schools are included, some would suggest we ignore this data and instead cherry-pick individual states to form our opinions. It’s as if we are so unaware we don’t understand states may face challenges with implementing voucher programs. They negate the broader trends observed nationwide. However, the left would like for you to base your opinion on a few statics. Based on skewed facts the argue vouchers for private schools do not achieve educational outcomes comparable to public schools. Additionally, they argue that vouchers are mostly advantageous for families earning over $100,000 annually.

Their perspective often overlooks broader data sets, such as those from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Schools Dashboard. The NAEP manages a comprehensive assessment, conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics within the U.S. Department of Education, and provides an ongoing evaluation of public, charter, and private schools nationwide. The data indicates that private schools generally perform better than public and charter schools, in particular for students in the 4 or 8th grades.

It is true that vouchers for public schools benefit groups that make more money. However, there are other factors to consider when thinking about poorer communities, namely that the poorest communities can’t afford the difference between the voucher payment per student and the cost of private schools. The fact they are the last to get information is no surprise, as information is sometimes slow to trickle down to the poorest communities. But does that mean give up and continue to put gas into bombs.

Part of Jay-Z's audience is made up of poor communities, and his campaign with Roc Nation aims to bring awareness to additional educational options for the poorest in the community. However, some criticize this as a capitalist move exploiting black students and undermining the public education safety net. To clarify, Jay-Z isn't donating millions to voucher programs; instead, he's informing the community about existing alternatives. Roc Nation is committed to enlightening the black community about other choices available beyond the public and charter school systems, especially in failing districts like Philadelphia.

Contrarily, some black podcasters accuse Jay-Z of using scare tactics, supporting a white Republican agenda to dismantle the public school system. Critics of the bill argue that it will drain resources from the public schools, offering no real benefit to the community and effectively crippling the public education system..

The reality though is school systems are already crippled. Public schools are no longer teaching just science and math. The school system follows shifting culture norms, teaches ideas that are one sided and narrow minded. School choice not only empowers parents with the freedom to select educational environments that best suit their children's needs, fostering greater parental engagement and student success, but also catalyzes innovation and diversity in educational methods.

In my opinion, the greatest benefit of voucher programs to the public school system is the potential to create competition. By giving students a choice, I believe it will compel the public school system to compete with private and charter schools. If public schools want more students, they should compete. This approach is more democratic than having no choice at all. Parents and students should have the opportunity to select a school that aligns with their thinking and mindset. If public schools aim to attract individuals capable of getting into private and charter schools, they should strive to compete with these institutions.

By introducing competition, it holds schools accountable, encouraging them to improve their offerings and performance. This, in turn, alleviates overcrowding in public schools, enhances educational quality across the board, and promotes long-term economic benefits by cultivating a more skilled workforce. Ultimately, school choice serves as a vital tool for social equity, providing all children, regardless of their economic background, the opportunity to access superior educational resources and opportunities.

Jeff Yass and his associates at Susquehanna International Group have poured hundreds of millions of dollars into foundations that support school choice. These efforts are not about politics but about providing quality education to those who need it most. Yet, the left’s reaction is to demonize anyone who dares to support this cause, even if it means attacking a black superstar like Jay-Z for aligning with a Republican.

Left-leaning blacks are the first to scream and holler about choice but the first to suppress choice from every conversation. A baby in the womb has no choice, and neither does a child trapped in a failing school system that offers no realistic path out of their circumstances. In every case it’s the system that matters, not the children, especially not the “black and brown.”

The resistance to school choice is a disservice to black students trapped in underperforming schools. They want billionaires from the black community to continue pouring gas on a fire, continuing to invest in failing school systems that attempt to brainwash our children in failing school districts.

It’s time to question why the left continues to champion a broken system and to recognize that the real solution lies in providing our children with the choices they deserve.

While many out here will argue what Jay-Z is doing is a scam, an attempt to double-down on his wealth using the black community,

I say Give it—

The Misrepresentation of Black Women

Firing of Briahna Joy Gray

Mammy

“Mammy had taken the whole household on her stout shoulders and carried them." - Margaret Mitchell, "Gone with the Wind"

Jean-Michel Basquiat's 1982 work Untitled (Woman with Roman Torso [Venus])Private Collection © Estate of Jean-Michel Basquiat. Licensed by Artestar, New York; Photo: Robert Baye

Dismissed

Briahna Joy Gray has finally been fired by Nexstar Media Group, owners of The Hill's Rising a/k/a Rising, and I say BRAVO. Unfortunately, the Harvard graduate and former National Press Secretary for Bernie Sanders’ 2020 campaign, used that platform to disrespect one person too many. She is another young lady who is extremely intelligent, yet she lacks any semblance of empathy. She is misguided by the idea that words are weapons. Her American privilege gives her the freedom to fire shots at anyone who disagrees with her warped, blinded worldview so she can freely pledge allegiance to terrorists.

Gone with the wind

I want to deviate for a moment and share my thoughts about black women in American society in general. One of my favorite books and movies is “Gone with The Wind.” I know this work is controversial and shunned by some because of its romantic depiction of the ugliest part of American history. It's like Basquiat’s paintings, which at first glance might seem chaotic and ugly but hold deeper messages within. Similarly, “Gone with The Wind” presents a beautiful exterior, yet underneath lies the ugliness of slavery, war, death, and loss.

The novel, written by Margaret Mitchell in 1936 and brought to the big screen in 1939, features Scarlett O’Hara the main character, played by Vivien Leigh. It is a quasi-sentimental version of the struggles between whites and blacks that ultimately resulted in the Civil War and its aftermath of Reconstruction. I understand the movie has its challenges, of glorifying a time when whites oppressed blacks and presenting a skewed version of history that reinforced black stereotypes.

Mitchell’s book is fiction. However, amidst the ugliness of slavery, war, life, and death, it captures the historical reality of the complacency of whites who suddenly found themselves staring truth in the face with the Civil War. “Gone with the Wind” depicts the images of southern whites who fought to hold on to an idea and image of family, love, and luxury on the backs of a race of people they disregarded and abused.

It is true we should always remember the horrors of chattel slavery. The reality that millions of black women were raped, and men were beaten, hung, and murdered by white men and their wives. While it might be possible that not every individual experienced physical violence, the very act of slavery was inherently abusive and dehumanizing. What is also painfully obvious is that blacks understood their condition and chose to love and live despite the circumstances, often having to navigate their existence with resilience and strength even in the face of unimaginable adversity.

This is a long way to make this point about black women. There is a very specific reason why “Gone with the Wind” is one of my all-time favorites. It is because of the character of Mammy—played in the movie by Hattie McDaniel. She became the first black woman to receive an Academy Award for her portrayal of the maid to the O’Hara family. Perhaps to some, she played a caricature in the movie, but what can’t be denied is that McDaniel poured her talent and strength into the character, capturing the essence of the strength of black women.

Throughout “Gone with the Wind,” Mammy was the source of reason and the example of strength in the direst circumstances. She was the voice of wisdom as the O’Hara family lost all they had, she was the glue that kept the camp together through the Civil War and Reconstruction, and she was a constant hand that steadied the ship amidst death, chaos, and confusion.

Mammy was not just an image on screen; the symbol of strength she represents, although fictitious, can be seen throughout history. Many black women such as Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, Ida B. Wells, Mary McLeod Bethune, and Fannie Lou Hamer, have embodied similar resilience and wisdom, providing stability and leadership during the most challenging times.

Unreasonable Voices

Not today. Although many black women like Briahna Joy Gray try to ride this storm and position themselves as voices of reason, they are nothing more than real life Caricatures themselves. Pretending to be oppressed and victimized. They are like bougie bots, devoid of empathy programmed for consumption of information to regurgitate one-sided talking points around the continued oppression of American blacks.

Instead of embodying strength and resilience, they cry systemic racism and oppression by a white colonial regime from the walls of Harvard. They speak as if they were stolen from their land and forced to work for a white man, as if they themselves were enslaved in big houses in Baldwin Hills or Uniondale. They sit in high places, pouring down the venom injected into their minds by elites — a squad of angry black women. Joy Reid, Whoopi Goldberg, Candace Owens, Sabrina Salvati, and Briahna Joy Gray are only a few examples of intelligent women who have been groomed to spout divisive narratives in ways that do not reflect the true spirit and potential of black women.

Black women have always had the magical-like power to steer our community back toward unity, truth, and strength, embodying the qualities that Mammy represented. However, today our young black leaders will harken to black women of the past and use their platforms to embrace systemic victimhood. This brings me back to my point.

Idealism and Rhetoric

Briahna Joy Gray is a beautiful young woman, who unfortunately is programmed. She thinks she’s woke but rather she is still living inside a box conditioned by the elite. She has been programmed to believe that some genie in the cloud is going to create this utopia where the world will be democratic and the earth free of pollutants—a world of Gucci and Louie Vuitton without a single sacrifice.

She strongly believes in this idyllic world. Focused on her works in pursuit of this false perception, she will tear down anyone who dares to enlighten her with the truth, using the weapons of her words and the cutting gaze of her eyes. It's quite impressive to listen to Brie when she goes on the offensive. She presents her facts confidently, regardless of how one-sided. She is well-versed in both cultural and political stories and will shove her one-sided viewpoints onto the face of her guests and co-host until they have no choice but to concede.

However, despite her brilliance, she can be very nasty. I understand that as black women, there are times when people push you to your limit, and you have to respond assertively. But it's not appropriate all the time, nor with everyone. When I think about Briahna, I believe she just doesn't know how to behave. She believes that freedom of speech includes insulting, disgracing, and humiliating others.

The Great Debater

I listened to the debate on Dissident Dialogues with Konstantin Kisin, when he moderated as pro-Palestinians supporters, Briahna Joy Gray (The Hill “Rising”) and Jake Klein (The Black Sheep) debated Israeli supporters, Eli Lake (The Free Press) and Michael Moynihan (The Firth Column). The most I can say is that the perception and vibes Bri gave off were exemplary of the angry, black women stereotype. With proud arrogance she defended Hamas and this idea that the Palestinians want to live in a free democratic society. It is simply naive. Her denial of what actually happened on Oct. 7 is downright disturbing, and her refusal to acknowledge the way women are treated in Islamic nations today is deafening.

She had all her facts and talking points together on a stage of all white men, as she represented a new generation of black women—the sort that is smart and bold enough to get on a stage and hold their own. Brie used the stage to show her support for a terrorist organization that is anti-American, anti-democracy, and anti-women—with the pride of an educated black woman.

This debate didn’t go well for Brie.The audience, the panel and the moderators seemed to be against Brie, not just because of her outspoken support of Hamas but because from the moment she sat down she was hostile, snide and downright disrespectful.

Since the debate, she has gone on her podcast, Bad Faith, to blame the crowd and double down on her views that Israel is racist and Zionist, oppressing Palestinians and stealing their land, thereby justifying the events of Oct. 7.

It has been reported that Brie later said, during the debate, the people were disrespectful and Islamophobic, she expressed a hope that someone would “blow up the building” where the debate took place. After the debate, she also accused the audience of being anti-Arab, viewing their behavior through a historical lens and comparing what has been happening in Gaza to American slavery. With one broad swop Brie paints the plight of an oppressed people ignoring the reality the Palestinians have always had more freedoms than any black slave had during the days of slavery. There is no comparison between people who were held in chains and forced to build a Land for a nation of oppressors and what has happened in Gaza. They are in no way the same.

Briahna was fired by Nexstar after a recent interview she and her co-host, Robby Soave, the libertarian senior editor of Reason, and Brie’s co-host on the “Rising.” Now to be clear I don’t believe Brie was fired because of this interview. Oh contra, I think there were already issues with her team members. She was not just fired because of the interview, she was fired because that was the straw the broke the camels back. Her behavior that day was appalling. On June 4, Rising, interviewed Yarden Gonen, the sister of Israeli hostage, Romi Gonen. I watched the interview and I remember thinking how cold and cruel and straight callous Brie had been. She lacked any sense of empathy and simple kindness to her guest. Here you have a woman whose sister is being held hostage by Hamas, trying to explain how she had been feeling since Oct. 7, and Brie flipped the script and started talking about the starving Palestinians who are not receiving AID because of Israel.

What made this interview even more appalling was the way Brie rolled her eyes, and popped her teeth with annoyance, as the Yarden Gonen spoke about her fears for her sister safety especially because of the rapes reported after Oct. 7. Brie snapped with annoyance almost belittling the woman for the feelings she has for her sister. And as Yarden attempt to explain how Hamas were known for abusing women, Brie cut her off.

Now if you are on your own platform and want to tell off a sister of one of the hostages for agonizing over the circumstances and having no power to control the fight—that is one thing. But I suppose when you behave in that way on a platform you do not own your fate is in the hands of your employer.

As I watched this young lady, I thought about my own three granddaughters and wondered about her home training. Sitting with a posture of rigid freedom, Brie refused to muster a single sign of empathy for Ms. Gonen. Although Brie might consider herself a Good Samaritan, she clearly misunderstands who the true Good Samaritan is. Bound by her own abstract sense of justice, she will never show mercy. I would be so proud to see one of my granddaughters facilitating such an interview, but not from that side.

DahTruth

Well, after months of listening to Brie spin one sided narrative of the Palestinians 75-year plight with Israel, I suppose Nexstar and its board decided enough with the rhetoric that supports the indefensible. They cut Brie off with an email. Brie took to X to let the world know that she had been fired, but instead of blaming her own behavior and self-righteousness, she decides to tell the world Nexstar fired her because she does not support Israel.

To be clear, it appears Briahna has burned many bridges. Bernie Sanders doesn’t even claim her, and she is so mean she will destroy her co-host Robby if he even dares to share an opinion that is anti-Brie.

This behavior is not a representation of the leading black figures of older generations. This is the new generation of privileged black women without an axe to grind but are happy to invent one in exchange for a platform.

Many young people in their late 30s and early 40s believe that are in a position to right what has been wronged because they are smart and understand history. As if they know better because reading about history is more real than lived experience. They believe that America is an oppressive regime that needs to be toppled, despite valuing the freedoms of speech, choice, and the pursuit of life, liberty, and justice they enjoy every single day.

This behavior impacts how black women in corporate America and in general are being judged by their leaders. This isn’t about race, yet they make it about race. Briahna was not fired for her outspoken stance on Israel; those things just added fuel to the fire that had already been burning. She was already nasty, and Nexstar were putting up with it, but she became downright vicious.

Briahna Joy Gray represents a segment of young black women who believe in disrespect and confrontation rather than respect and reason. We need to move away from this divisive behavior and remember the qualities that Mammy embodied—strength, wisdom, and resilience. These are the traits that will truly uplift…