Skip to main content

NPR Roundtable

Yesterday I was on NPR's Bloggers' Roundtable Discussion segment on the show News and Notes. I just listened to the show again--of course, while it was going on, I felt that I was stumbling over my words, but listening again, it didn't seem that way. Of course, I didn't make all of the points I had in mind.

This is always the challenge with these live shows. As a writer and researcher, I write and revise. But on live radio, that's it! You've got one shot, no time to reflect on things.

The other guests were Debra Dickerson and L.N. Rock of African American Pundit.

The first topic was a new survey by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies about black voters preferring Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama.

It doesn’t really matter who blacks vote for in the primary. Democrats can count on them during the general election. My former radio co-host, Eliot Morgan, makes the point that the black vote is as mysterious and as unpredictable as who is in Grant’s Tomb.

After every election in which 80 to 90 percent of blacks vote the straight Democrat ticket, we hear that next time, the black vote shouldn’t be taken for granted, that blacks need to be active in both parties. But we can see that according to the Joint Center that almost 90 percent of blacks will be voting in the Democrat primaries. I don’t see any reason that blacks, if they vote, won’t go 80 to 90 percent for Democrats again.

I don’t know when is the last time the black vote has been in doubt in the past four decades.

I was going to admit my bias: I seriously doubt that I'll be voting for any of the Democrats running. When I hear them talking, I'm reminded of the Capital One commercial: What's In Your Wallet? Not only do Democrats want to know what's in your wallet, but they want at least half. That's not to say that I'll be voting for any of the Republicans running. As economist Stephen Moore has pointed out: Republicans were put on earth to do one thing: Cut taxes. And they can't even get that right.

* * *

The second topic was about Obama discussing his use of drugs and alcohol as a youngster. The first question was on whether or not Obama's answer was too honest!

Wait...a politician being too honest? As I mentioned on the show, we should not attack that endangered species--politicians being honest--when it shows up unexpected.

While those of us in the chattering class are constantly seeking greater meaning out of the actions of politicians, I suspect Obama had some strategic moves in mind:

1) He is drawing a direct contrast to the first black president's declaration that he did not inhale. As of late, Clinton and Obama have been chippy with each other.

2) Obama is still trying to prove that he is really black, that he's not a Magic Negro, so he may be trying to prove he has some street cred. Of course, that street cred was probably smoking week in an Ivy League dorm room...

I'm one of those folks who still doesn't understand why people have more credibility on an issue because they've experienced it. I'm not saying experience is irrelevant. But I guess if I want to go on a speaking tour discouraging kids from not using drugs that I apparently I need to start using them and get arrested.

* * *

The final topic was Jesse Jackson saying that none of the Democrat candidates have the right social justice message. In April, Jackson endorsed Obama, but he is now calling him out. Jackson now says that Edwards is the only candidate with the right social justice message.

As usual, Jackson is more impressed with words rather than actions--and the actions he wants would devastate black Americans. As much as Jackson talks about the importance of personal responsibility, you can be sure once there is government policy actually putting responsibility on individuals to take care of themselves that Jackson will be out in front in opposition. The example that comes to mind immediately is welfare reform of the mid-1990s. Jackson was being alarmist talking about America turning its back on the poor.

John Edwards opening his campaign in the Ninth Ward of New Orleans looked to me like a criminal returning to the scene of the crime. He talks about addressing poverty, just as a company he is affiliated with is foreclosing on poor people.

CJL

Popular posts from this blog

Get rid of that watermelon!

Part 1: When I was a youngster I used to collect Confederate money, posters and photographs with caricatures of blacks, and "No blacks allowed signs." I loved the money because it was a reminder of how far the sorry Confederacy had fallen. I had one poster of a dark-skinned black boy munching on a watermelon. I would look at that small poster and wonder, "What in the world is wrong with anyone wanting to eat watermelon?" Yes, white people, I'm talking to you. Your parents, grandparents, and other ancestors who thought making fun of blacks for eating watermelon were crazy ! Even people who say that nothing has changed in race relations must acknowledge that the many stereotypes of blacks are no longer prevalent. But then, there are also some ready to remind us of days-gone-by by debunking stuff that doesn't need to be debunked today. According to the Washington Post: The sound you just heard was yet another racial stereotype going kersplat ! Some ...

Common Sense on North Korea (Korea Times, April 2, 2012)

By Casey Lartigue, Jr. As interesting as Kookmin University professor Andrei Lankov’s writings are, there is nothing quite like attending one of his lectures. He can barely restrain himself behind the podium, often pointing and waving his arms. I also enjoy his unscripted speeches, but his answers in Q&A sessions are like the difference between watching Michael Jordan shoot baskets in warm-ups and an actual game. I have finally discovered the secret behind Lankov’s consistently solid analysis about North Korea: Use common sense. At an Asan Institute conference last summer, he argued that North Korea watchers should try to understand North Korea from its perspective. Don’t most people know that you must understand the mindset of others you are dealing with? Yet, common sense in theory gets ignored politically. From the North Korean perspective, nuclear weapons are the best thing they’ve got going. They will NOT give them up easily, even if President Obama ...

Rich talking back

The rich are talked about very often in negative terms, but how often do the rich respond in kind? Australian billionaire Gina Rinehart, who inherited most of her money but apparently has also done very well with it, recently railed against class warfare and had some advice for the non-rich : "There is no monopoly on becoming a millionaire," she writes. "If you're jealous of those with more money, don't just sit there and complain. Do something to make more money yourself - spend less time drinking, or smoking and socializing and more time working."   She complained about politicians raising taxes, regulations that slow investment, and other anti-business policies that harm the poor. "If you want to help the poor and our next generation, make investment, reinvenstment and businesses welcome."

Park Jin welcoming remarks to FSI (and Casey Lartigue)

  National Assembly member Park Jin makes the welcoming remarks at FSI's conference featuring North Korean diplomats. Park Jin | Greeting message to FSI and Casey Lartigue mention - YouTube

2015-10-16 speech: Legacies of the Korean War at GMU (Korea)

Yesterday I was one of the speakers at a special event at George Mason University's campus in Seongdo (Korea). Charles Cousino, an 84-year-old Korean war veteran, discussed his connection to Korea. I discussed Teach North Korean Refugees. And North Korean refugee Sehyek Oh talked about what freedom means to him. It was the speech he used to win TNKR's second English speech contest. Special thanks to Roland Wilson and Michael Dunne for making it happen! support TNKR: www.lovetnkr.org/donate