Ferguson: Seems Like Everyone Has An Opinion

By Black Men In America.com Staff

The recent White House summit regarding the events in Ferguson is one of many incidents and experiences resulting from the Ferguson Grand Jury’s decision not to indict Police Officer Darren Wilson for the shooting death of Michael Brown.

Everybody seems to have an opinion on this topic and some of the opinions have nothing to do with facts and other related data.  Here is a fact or two to consider:

• According to a study by USA Today, an average of 96 blacks are killed by white cops per year. 
• Last year, 6,000 blacks were murdered by other blacks — more than 60 times the number of blacks killed by white cops.
• In 2013, 409 whites were murdered by blacks.
• Black participation in the labor market has been steadily going downward during the Obama presidency.  All other racial groups have moved up.  Blacks are the only group that has taken a definitive step backwards.

The National Review Online posted an article by Peter Kirsanow with statistics on other issues of concern to black America including black unemployment, educational achievement, single motherhood, household income, poverty rates, and school discipline.

Black columnist Deroy Murdock wrote an article in May of this year contending that black Americans are worse off economically under President Obama.

NBA Analyst and former NBA great Charles Barkley conducted a “no-holds’ barred interview on CNN where he called the looters in Ferguson scumbags.  Barkley also said:  “Every time something happens in the black community, we have the same cast of sad characters. We don’t have to have Al Sharpton go there, we don’t have to have — and I’m not disparaging [Brown family lawyer] Mr. [Benjamin] Crunk.  I know he represented what happened in Florida with Trayvon’s family, and God bless them, but we have the same sad sack of black characters, we need strong black men in St. Louis to stand up, and say, hey, let’s handle this situation?”

Writer Jason L. Riley wrote:  “Today blacks are about 13 percent of the population and continue to be responsible for an inordinate amount of crime. Between 1976 and 2005 blacks com­mitted more than half of all murders in the United States. The black arrest rate for most offenses — including robbery, aggravated assault and property crimes — is still typically two to three times their representation in the population. Blacks as a group are also overrepresented among persons arrested for so-called white-collar crimes such as counterfeiting, fraud and embezzlement. And blaming this decades-long, well-documented trend on racist cops, prosecutors, judges, sentencing guidelines and drug laws doesn’t cut it as a plausible explanation.”

Pediatric neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson wrote a column where he opined the following:  “There are few things that can compare to the emotional devastation that accompanies such an event. This makes the varied emotional responses of Michael Brown’s family more understandable as the tragic events unfolded in Missouri. What is difficult to understand, though, is the benefit that the Ferguson, Missouri, community derives from burning and looting business establishments in their own neighborhoods, especially when unemployment is already a problem. In the meantime, the outside agitators in many cases are sitting in their hotel rooms sipping wine and watching the carnage on television.

Hopefully, people in communities such as Ferguson, like people all over America, are beginning to awaken and realize that they should be more than pawns in the hands of manipulators who, in reality, could not care less about them.”

President Obama held a summit on Ferguson but did not invite any representatives of the Ferguson Police Department.  “The president was interested in gathering stakeholders from across the country, not just one community,” said White House press secretary Josh Earnest, who said the meetings focused on “building bridges and restoring some trust between law enforcement agencies and the communities that they’re sworn to serve and protect.”

Was the summit more of a political move?  Is the White House and Department of Justice serious about bridging the gap between the police and the black community?

President Obama photo courtesy (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

Critics Were Right About Obama’s Incompetence

By Raynard Jackson

During the past six years, some Republicans and conservatives have described President Obama and his administration as totally incompetent. I have harshly criticized those who would use such incendiary language because it showed total disrespect for the office of the presidency.Though I still think this language is totally inappropriate, I have come to agree with the point they were trying to make: this administration is in way over its head. Obama and his team constantly lie to the American people (IRS, Benghazi, illegal immigration), they put the interests of others before the interests of Americans, and they are obsessed with the notion of being “liked.”

Two weeks ago, President Obama told us that he “intends to destroy the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) without putting American boots on the ground.” Everyone who follows politics and foreign policy knew Obama was lying. This is what his former Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, had to say, “There will be boots on the ground if there’s to be any hope of success in the strategy… I think that by continuing to repeat that [there will be no boots on the ground], the president in effect traps himself.”

Obama refuses to admit the obvious simply because of the upcoming mid-term elections. His liberal base would defect en masse from Democratic candidates all across the country if he actually told the truth.

Then again, this is the same president who has constantly lied to those in the country illegally about giving them amnesty by executive fiat. He has now promised to do it after the elections in November. Remember, one of the main tenants of liberalism is “intent.” Obama will argue that he didn’t “intend” to put boots on the ground, but circumstances on the ground changed. He “intended” to give illegals amnesty, but if Republicans take over the senate, he can’t.

As a U.S. Senator and a candidate for president in 2008, Obama was a very harsh critic of Bush’s war in Iraq. Yet, in six years as president, he has continued the Bush doctrine in foreign policy (attempting to spread “democracy” around the world).

According to the London based Bureau of Investigative Journalism (BIJ), “Since becoming president in 2009, Obama has launched over 330 drone attacks in Pakistan alone; Bush only launched 51 in four years.” When you add in Yemen and Somalia, according to this same report, the total jumps to 390 drone attacks and have killed more than 2,400 people (273 of whom were innocent civilians). http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2014/01/23/more-than-2400-dead-as-obamas-drone-campaign-marks-five-years/

Many Democrats called for Bush to be tried as a murderer and a war criminal. So what does that make Obama?

This administration thinks that everyone is “entitled” to be in the U.S., whether they entered legally or not. They are providing five-star accommodations for illegals, while American citizens are increasingly homeless, more likely to be unemployed, and less educated.

In essence, Obama and his administration actually think he was elected to be president of the world. They think they and we Americans should be willing to sacrifice our own standard of living to provide relief to those around the world who are less fortunate than us. Not even Jimmy Carter displayed this level of arrogance and disdain toward his own country and its people.

We are not responsible for the problems of the world. How do you justify allowing illegals into the country under the guise that “they are just looking for a better life in America” when Americans are looking for the same thing – in their own country?

In the 1980s, Cuba unlocked its jails and dumped the worst of their worst into the U.S., which led to the drug cartels wreaking havoc in Miami. Now we are allowing the most unskilled illegals to enter into our country from Central America and wreak havoc on the inner cities as well as the suburbs.

As president of the world, Obama really believes that we should have no borders, even if it jeopardizes our national security. Our intelligence community has already publicly and privately admitted that terrorist from the Middle East have already entered into the U.S. from Mexico.

Obama really thinks the sheer strength of his magnetic personality will get Iran to give up its nuclear program, get Putin to return U.S. traitor Edward Snowden to the U.S. and cause Bashar al-Assad to leave the presidency of Syria.

In trying so hard to be liked, world leaders don’t fear or respect him. As Niccolò Machiavelli said, “It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.”

Obama is neither.

Raynard Jackson is president & CEO of Raynard Jackson & Associates, LLC., a Washington, D.C.-based public relations/government affairs firm. He can be reached through his Web site, http://www.raynardjackson.com. You can also follow him on Twitter @raynard1223.

Business Exchange by William Reed: Africans Come To America

By William Reed

As he winds through his second term with high “disapproval” numbers, Blacks are the only people President Barack Obama can turn to. As we enter August, a third of America’s voters think Obama is the worst president since World War II. Except for Blacks providing an upside, the first African-American president of the United States’ image is one of inexperience and ineptness. With his domestic and foreign policy portfolios both in tatters, Obama has turned to Blacks for support. This time it’s leaders from African nations that are “in good standing” with America. As he holds history’s first U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit, Obama is hosting 50 African heads of state and more than 100 of their ministers.

Recent domestic polls have Obama being viewed as “less competent” and “more dishonest” than George W. Bush. Obama’s approval rating among American registered voters stands at 45 percent, but among Blacks, his job approval soars to 86 percent. Almost nine out of every 10 African American would support Obama no matter what, no matter how far America sinks under his leadership, even if they have no jobs and their own lives are in shambles. Seventy percent of Africans say pretty much the same about Obama.

The three-day Summit is the largest event any U.S. president has held with African heads of state and government. Those Africans coming to America for the Summit will be displaying the latest fashions, prints and styles of the continent. But, not much of substance is expected. It’s a “photo-op” to help Blacks, from here and there, feel good and in charge. Truth is, China, which devotes half of its $14.41 billion aid budget to its projects on the continent, regularly hosts individual African heads of state and has far outpaced the U.S. in trade and everything economic, in Africa. The structure of today’s trade relations between the U.S. and Africa is primarily dominated by fuel and fuel-related products.
Colonialist countries exploited Africa for centuries. As “the Black President,” Obama gets a “pass” for America’s colonial practices, but little else. These days China is the “most dominate” foreign country in Africa. The Africans are being very polite in coming to America because little else will come of the occasion other than a “Polaroid moment.” Obama has a long way to go to put America on economic par with China among Africans.

The African continent is home to more than a billion people that speak more than 2,000 languages. Only a few of Africa’s 54 leaders – Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe, who is still the target of U.S. sanctions and the Sudanese whom the U.S. bombed and assisted in the separation of South Sudan – were not invited to the Summit.

U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman is hosting the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) Ministerial at the World Bank. Obama’s Power Africa initiative is a key Summit issue item. “Power” is one of Africa’s most pressing challenges. According to the World Bank, only a quarter of sub-Saharan Africa has access to electricity and 10 percent per-year capacity growth is needed to meet electricity demand.
A Summit Business Forum will be presented by the Department of Commerce and Bloomberg Philanthropies. The Senate Foreign Relations and House Foreign Affairs Committees will host a Capitol Hill welcoming reception. The key Blacks on African issues there are U.S. Rep. Karen Bass (D-Calif.), the Ranking Member on the U.S. House of Representatives’ Subcommittee on Africa and the Republican majority’s Gregory Simpkins the Subcommittee staff director, who says his main focus is: “increasing economic linkages between the U.S. and Africa.”

Summit planners say the discussions will encourage progress in areas that Africans define as critical for the continent’s future: “expanding trade and investment ties, engaging young African leaders, promoting inclusive sustainable development, expanding cooperation on peace and security, and gaining better futures for Africa’s next generation.”

“Everyone must understand that Africans aren’t looking for people to save them, but for people to partner with,” says Melvin Foote, head of the U.S.-based Constituency for Africa.

William Reed is publisher of “Who’s Who in Black Corporate America” and available for projects via the BaileyGroup.org.

An Open Letter to President Obama

By Nicholas M. Young, Ph.D.

Re: A possible path to Reparations for African Americans? Housing grants as the unfinished path of American Democracy

“To have given each one of the million Negro free families a forty-acre freehold would have made a basis of real democracy in the United States that might easily have transformed the modern world.” W.E.B. DuBois, Black Reconstruction in America, p. 602.

Greetings Mr. President. I hope that you and your family are well. It has been many years since I ran into, and chatted with you at the Hyde Park Hair Salon on E. 53rd St. in Chicago. It has been much longer since my last encounter with your great wife, Michelle. Please know that while it is still a little surreal for me to see you both in The White House, I have accepted the fact that a guy that I used to play ball with at The University of Chicago (The U of C) holds the most powerful position in the world, and his wife is the brilliant, First Lady of The United States.
But, I digress.

I write this editorial to share with you, the country, and the rest of the world my thoughts on how you, The President of The United States, can bring to conclusion the case of Reparations for African Americans. A conclusion that, journalist Ta-Nehisi Coates states recently in his impressive article in The Atlantic, would be just compensation for the “250 years of slavery, ninety years of Jim Crow, sixty years of separate but equal, and thirty-five years of racist housing policy” at the hands of The United States.

While there may be no widely accepted starting point for when the question of Reparations was first raised, the issue of compensating contemporary African Americans from whom originate from families whose ancestors were enslaved actors in the U.S., has never really gone away. Nor should it. To be sure, the question of Reparations became an issue of serious import for U.S. lawmakers after, if not before, the passage of the Emancipation Proclamation—the legislation that “freed” millions of enslaved “Americans” of African descent.

To be sure, while the Emancipation Proclamation (A Civil War measure that proclaimed the freedom of slaves in the ten states that were still in rebellion with the U.S. Government) did not “free” anyone, what the legislation did do was give Lincoln and his political allies in Congress the breathing room that they needed to craft the legislation that would eventually become the following Amendments of the U.S. Constitution: 13th (Abolishing Slavery), 14th (Granted U.S. Citizenship to Blacks, former slaves, and those born or naturalized in the U.S.), and 15th (Prohibits the federal or state governments from denying a U.S. citizen the right to vote).

As Kerry T. Burch points out in his book, Democratic Transformations: Eight Conflicts In The Negotiation of American Identity, the project of compensating the newly freed “Americans” involved promising over one million people of African descent that they would be given land (Forty Acres and a Mule) to help ease their transition from enslaved actors into a self-sustainable agricultural entrepreneurial class, dependent upon only themselves to live and become capable members of society. As Dr. Burch states, “The origin of the phrase is traced to January 1865, when General William Tecumseh Sherman, having just finished the devastating ‘march to the sea,’ issued Special Field Order 15. It set aside ‘forty acres and a mule’ for the newly freed along the coastal areas of South Carolina and Georgia, a swath extending some 100 miles in length and 30 miles inland” (p. 56).

Unfortunately, after Lincoln’s Assassination, this “…officially stated promise…was ‘taken back’ by President Andrew Johnson when he began rescinding these federal lands in late 1865. Thus began the process of returning the federal lands (my emphasis) to the confederate aristocracy…For the newly freed, despite their eventual status as formal citizens, the consequences of enforced landlessness—economic and political dependency—crippled their ability to actually be citizens” (my emphasis; p. 56).

Thus, for the newly freed former enslaved actors, the ability to create independent and prosperous lives was taken away from many of them before they had the chance enjoy the fruits of their own labor from living in and on their own property.

However, President Johnson’s reversal of General Sherman’s action also had another effect: Johnson’s policy reversal removed from African Americans the possibility of forming a new middle class that would be built on their own labor. Unfortunately, the plantation sharecropping system put the planter class back on top of the economic arrangement, and hence, back on top of the political system, as well.
Therefore, because of the failure of Reconstruction, African Americans were forced to fend for themselves, and manage their economic and social lives without the benefit of a managed social structure to navigate them from the grips of Jim Crow policies.

Unfortunately, as many African Americans made their way to Northern cities to avoid the aggressive grip of Jim Crow, their happiness was short-lived because, as Mr. Coates states in his article, The Case for Reparations (2014): “In Chicago and across the country, whites looking to achieve the American dream could rely on a legitimate credit system backed by the government. Blacks were herded into the sights of unscrupulous lenders who took them for money and for sport.”

Thus, with this background in mind, I should like to propose the following limited remedy to the Reparations problem: awarding housing grants to needy African American families, to be used for creating new homes or improving existing residential properties.
Mr. President, the creation of these properties, built on federal lands, would provide African Americans with a legitimate chance to form a sustainable black middle class; one built on the basis of their own ethnic heritage, struggle, success, sweat, and tears.

If done correctly, this Presidential program could take the form of a new Presidential Proclamation; a policy that acknowledges the previous mistakes and failures of past Presidential administrations to compensate African Americans for what was promised to them. Further, such a program could redress the problem of land ownership for African Americans seeking to build wealth through home ownership. Such a policy could also help improve the U.S. jobless rate by hiring Americans from different social and economic groups to build and or improve these homes.

In short, I believe that you, Mr. President, represent the last chance for the United States government to fulfill the promise that it made to newly freed Americans of African descent to become property owners in this country. Sir, you are on record for saying that the United States keeps its commitments, not just abroad, but also to our fellow Americans. Therefore, your Proclamation could transform the United States into the democracy that Du Bois imagined. Please know that I, for one, hope that you will use your executive power to help grant home ownership to African Americans; American citizens, after all, whose ability to be landowners was systematically denied to them after the Civil War. I believe that such a proclamation could help establish a sustainable African American middle class. I hope that you will see the importance of creating such a program for African American families that seek this form of redress. All of them.

Take care,
Nick

Sources cited:  Coates, Ta-Nehisi. “The Case for Reparations.” The Atlantic. May 2014.
Burch, Kerry T. Democratic Transformations. New York: Continuum Books.

Nicholas Maurice Young, Ph. D., is a Sociologist, writer, screenwriter, Community Activist, and Independent Scholar. He is a former Fellow with the Center for the Comparative Study of Race and Ethnicity at Stanford University.

The President’s “Promise Zones”

By William Reed

The Obama White House continues a pattern of attacking symptoms instead of the underlying disease, one rehashed progressive ploy at a time.  President Barack Obama’s Promise Zones initiative is aimed at lifting up some of the America’s poorest communities.  At a White House press conference Obama told the story of his time organizing in Chicago and highlighted the work local communities do to support their neighbors and prepare them to be contributors to the economy. In his Promise Zones program, Obama proposes to invest more than $750 million in hard-hit communities to provide a tax incentive to help build homes and create jobs.  The first five are: San Antonio, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Southeastern Kentucky and the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.

“There are communities in this country where no matter how hard you work, it is virtually impossible to get ahead,” Obama said in his speech. “America is not a place where the chance of birth or circumstance should decide our destiny. And that’s why we need to build new ladders of opportunity into the middle class for all who are willing to climb them.”

The Obama administration is designating “promise zones” by looking for areas where local officials can make strategic, targeted investments. For instance, a “promise zone” may be interested in reducing violent crime with increased Justice Department funding for local law enforcement. Alternatively, a region may want to leverage Housing and Urban Development grants to attract private real estate investors to high-poverty neighborhoods. The president’s plan also includes tax credits for hiring workers and tax write-offs for capital investments within the “promise zones.”

President Obama has called income inequality, “the defining challenge of our time”, and is pushing to raise the minimum wage and “find new ways to help poor children break out of the cycle of poverty.”  Obama says the “Promise” programs are part of his pledge to narrow the gap between rich and poor in America.  The White House says the programs “will target job creation, housing, law enforcement and education.”

This latest big-government stimulus initiative is going to formulate yet another front for Democrats’ big “income inequality” campaign. The Democrats are full of expensive and ultimately unsustainable ideas for helping people temporarily cope with poverty (i.e., the welfare state), but are pretty much intellectually bankrupt when it comes to actually creating opportunities for people to lift themselves out of that poverty (i.e., economic growth and job creation). Income inequality is one way the White House seeks to address the larger problem of economic mobility.  The problem is that this “promise zone” initiative actually doesn’t address economic mobility in any real, lasting, or widespread way. The Obama administration is once again using more bureaucracy – via the Departments of Education, Housing and Urban Development, Justice, Health and Human Services, Agriculture, and Commerce – to create top-down faux-collaboration in which the feds will decide upon “targeted investments” with “free money” the U.S. Treasury does not have.

The ineffectiveness of the Congress in the 50 years since Lyndon Baines Johnson introduced the “War on Poverty” makes the probability of sane and soon federal legislation to address income inequality a pipe dream. Shifting responsibility for economic development away from the dysfunctional legislative branch and toward local communities could evolve into a good thing.

Obama’s presidency never became the “Promise Land” many Blacks had hoped.  Instead of the “prosperity” most of the nation realized, large populations of Blacks have struggled economically under Obama.  Overall, 25.6 percent of Blacks in urban areas live in poverty.  Recent estimates put the figures at 17.9 percent in Atlanta, 19.3 percent in Charlotte and Los Angeles and 26.5 percent in Chicago. Two-thirds of Black children who were raised in the poorest of U.S. neighborhoods a generation ago now raise their own children in similarly poor neighborhoods.

What the whole of the country really needs to fight poverty are streamlined regulations, less red tape, fewer taxes, less prohibitive labor laws, less government spending, and less national debt at the macro level.

William Reed is publisher of “Who’s Who in Black Corporate America” and available for projects via the BaileyGroup.org

17 Highlights from the New Yorker’s Profile on President Obama

By Gary A. Johnson

The Washington Post.com has an article written by Zachary Goldfarb detailing the highlights from President Obama’s lengthy (18 web pages) interviews with New Yorker magazine editor David Remnick.  The interviews cover a number of different topics.  If you are a supporter of the President, you definitely want to read these series of interviews.

I find the President to be consistent if you are honest in your assessment of him.  By that I mean, if you accept that Barack Obama is a politician first, and you realize what politicians say and do, then you are not likely to be shocked or surprised by what you read.

That being said, here are a few comments by the President that we thought were worth highlighting:

• President Obama acknowledges that the color of his skin might have affect how some Americans perceive his presidency, but he doesn’t think it has a major overall effect one way or the other. “There’s no doubt that there’s some folks who just really dislike me because they don’t like the idea of a black President,” he said. “Now, the flip side of it is there are some black folks and maybe some white folks who really like me and give me the benefit of the doubt precisely because I’m a black President.”

This is an interesting comment.  The President thinks that the color of his skin “might” affect how some Americans perceive him.  “Might?”  Race is always a factor.  Another factor why some Americans may have soured on President Obama is that he’s been in office for almost 6 years and for many Americans, especially, Black Americans, they have not seen any significant improvement in the areas of creating jobs, reducing unemployment and affordable healthcare and the environment.  It’s not like the President can wave a magic wand and make these things disappear.  There is a complicated process called our system of government that has not been very cooperative with this President.  I’ll just leave it at that.

The President in my view has a trust issue.  Look no further than the incidents with the NSA, IRS and the Affordable Healthcare Act aka “Obamacare,”  Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, etc.  Barack Obama has been our Black President for over 5 years.  People have had plenty of time to give him the benefit of the doubt or sour on him.  Sure, there are some people that criticize him because he is Black and others who blindly support because he’s black.  There are also people who have a problem with the President making speech after speech after speech telling Americans that they can keep their doctor and their current health insurance, only to find out that was not true.  POTUS has been getting some bad advice on a number of high profile issues.

President Obama’s approval rating among all voters is 39 percent and his disapproval rating is 53 percent, according to a Gallup Poll conducted Jan. 14 to 16.  In the 2012 presidential election, Republican candidate Mitt Romney won 59 percent of the white vote, compared with Obama’s 39 percent, according to exit polling by a consortium of major news outlets.  President Obama won 43 percent of the white vote in 2008 against 55 percent for opponent John McCain.

• The President said he is most concerned about the impact of drug laws on minorities and the poor.  “Middle-class kids don’t get locked up for smoking pot, and poor kids do,” he said. “And African-American kids and Latino kids are more likely to be poor and less likely to have the resources and the support to avoid unduly harsh penalties.” He added that he supports Colorado and Washington’s efforts to “go forward” with their efforts at legalization and decriminalization.

• The President said he does not regard the leaks by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden as comparable to the Pentagon Papers or other leaks vindicated by history.  Remnick writes: “The leaks, he said, had ‘put people at risk’ but revealed nothing illegal. And though the leaks raised ‘legitimate policy questions’ about N.S.A. operations, ‘the issue then is: Is the only way to do that by giving some twenty-nine-year-old free rein to basically dump a mountain of information, much of which is definitely legal, definitely necessary for national security, and should properly be classified?’”

President Obama said that even the greatest presidents — like Abraham Lincoln — had to operate in the currents of history. Remnick concludes the story with President Obama saying, “I just wanted to add one thing to that business about the great-man theory of history. The President of the United States cannot remake our society, and that’s probably a good thing.” Obama then adds, “Not ‘probably’. It’s definitely a good thing.”

Click here to visit New Yorker.com and read the entire article.

Bold Predictions for 2014

By Raynard Jackson

Now that a 2014 has come, I have decided to pull out my trusted crystal ball and give you some of my predictions for the year.

I think the biggest thing to watch is on the political front.  This year we will have congressional elections for the House and Senate.  Republicans will keep the House.  Even if Republicans have a total meltdown, they will still keep the House. But their margins may shrink (currently the Republicans hold a 17-vote margin over the Democrats).  The way congressional districts have been gerrymandered , that virtually guarantees minimum change in the composition of the House.

Republicans have a better than even chance to take over the Senate if they nominate the best conservative candidate that is “electable.”  The GOP should be able to pick up seats in Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana, North Carolina and West Virginia.  Republicans need only a net of six seats to win the Senate.

The Black vote could be the margin of victory in states such as Arkansas, Louisiana and North Carolina. Each has Black voters who thoroughly turned off by the Democrats and Obama.  If these Republican candidates take their message to the Black community, Republicans will take over the Senate.

I know many of my Democratic friends will laugh at me and my Republican friends will continue to want to dismiss the Black vote; but I dare my Republican leaders to call my bluff if they really want to win the Senate.

As I often say, I have been Black most of my life and I know the sentiments of my community very well.  To prove my point, what was unthinkable just a month ago is going to happen more frequently going forward.  Democrats, especially Blacks, for the first time are publicly voicing their dissatisfaction with Obama.

A group of very liberal Blacks are about to file a lawsuit against Obama for enacting policies that have decreased the number of Black students attending HBCUs. Civil Rights leaders such as Congressman John Lewis have publicly threatened to go to war with Obama over the lack of Black judges being nominated.  On Black radio, there is huge vocalization of dissatisfaction with Obama. This was unimaginable only a few weeks ago.

Blacks turning away from Obama will be one of the top news stories of the year.  The question is are Republicans prepared to take advantage of this opening within the Black community?

Gun violence and mass shootings will continue, not because of the availability of guns; but  because of the continued breakdown in our moral fabric.  By 2016, I predict that morals and values will be in the top five issues of importance to voters.  This liberal drift towards pluralism and relativism will begin to reverse itself with a lot of help from within the Black community.    Republicans, are you listening?

Look for a major reduction in corporate support for many of the reality TV shows that have proliferated over the past several years.  These corporations will find it increasingly more difficult to justify the expenditure of their corporate dollars from a cost/benefit analysis.

I expect to see more suicides from those who played professional football and hockey.  The issue of trauma to the brain during violent sports is a lot worse than the public is being told.  I think over the next few years, pro football will become unrecognizable as we know it today.

There will be no comprehensive immigration reform. However,  as a compromise, there will be a path to legalization, but not citizenship.  Republicans who vote for citizenship will lose their next election and some will even be recalled before their next election (on the local level).

Journalism will continue its downward spiral towards the cult of personality.  Journalists will continue down the path of becoming bigger than the story they are supposed to be covering.  They will continue to put more emphasis on being famous versus being accurate.

My final prediction is that Obamacare will be a huge albatross around the necks of the Democrats for the next three years and will make their retaining the White House very problematic.  The issue will be are the Republicans prepared to address some the major problems facing America with policy solutions?

If the answer is yes, then Republicans will win the White House. If the answer is no, we can kiss the America we know goodbye.

Raynard Jackson is president & CEO of Raynard Jackson & Associates, LLC., a Washington, D.C.-based public relations/government affairs firm. He can be reached through his Web site,  http://www.raynardjackson.com. You can also follow him on Twitter at raynard1223.

Winners and Losers of 2013

By Raynard Jackson

Well, it’s that time of year once again for me to pick my biggest winners and losers for 2013.  Unlike most of the year end lists, mine will not be based on polling data, or popularity. Rather, it’s from the lens of a businessman. Based on the contribution of time, money, or intangible capital, did the person or group receive an appropriate rate of return on their investment?

I will begin with the three biggest losers and work down from there.  By far, the biggest loser of the year and of the Obama presidency was and is the Black community.  How can a group give a president 96 percent and 94 percent of their vote to him and have little, if anything to show for it. If the White unemployment rate was the same as the Black unemployment rate, it would be declared a national crisis. No sitting president, regardless of party, would have won reelection with that dynamic at play.

According to the November 2013 unemployment report (the most recent data available), the national unemployment rate was 7.2 percent. For Blacks, it was 12.5 percent; for Latinos 8.7 percent, and Whites 6.2 percent.  According to Heidi Shierholz, an economist for the Economic Policy Institute, “the Black unemployment rate has always been higher, largely due to long term structural trends that include a lower education level and a more limited social circle.”

Blacks have been the most loyal voting bloc for Democrats and for Obama particularly in the history of the U.S. and yet this president says he is not going to do anything specific for Blacks because he is president of all of America. All except Black America.

Yet, this president can’t go a day without trying to shove homosexuality down the throats of Americans and Africans. He doesn’t have the guts to try this in the Middle East because he know how the pro-Israel lobby will react.

This president can hardly go a day without trying to give amnesty to those in the U.S. illegals. He wants to inject millions of new people into the labor market to compete with Blacks for low and unskilled jobs, thus further exacerbating the high unemployment rate in the Black community.

And to think, educated Blacks said all of last year, that if Obama won reelection he would then help Blacks since he didn’t have to face the voters again.  When a person shows you who they are, you better believe them.

The second biggest loser is the “truth.”  According to Obama, “You can keep your own doctor.”  Enough said.

The final biggest loser is the media.  They have bent over backwards to curry favor with Obama and his minions.  They worked hand in hand with Obama to perpetuate the story line that Benghazi was about a video tape.  They reluctantly covered the IRS scandal and many of them hold out Edward Snowden as some kind of hero. Obama has more active journalists in his administration than any of his predecessors, yet he is one of the least transparent presidents.

By far the biggest winner of the year is the homosexual movement, both under Obama and the U.S. Supreme Court. Obama has done more to expand the homosexual movement than any other person on the face of the earth.  He is the same person that Newsweek magazine labeled  the “first gay president.”  It is estimated that homosexuals account for 2-5 percent of the U.S. population, but they have been showered with more tangible benefits under Obama than all other groups combined. And the Supreme Court has also been complicit in furthering that agenda.

The second biggest winner of this year are those in the country illegally. They can’t even vote, but yet they have received more attention and action from Obama than the Black community.  As if this weren’t bad enough, you have the NAACP and the National Urban League supporting illegals and their push for citizenship. This defies logic that they would put a group of non-citizens before the interests of citizens they purport to represent. What is it about Black organizations that they have to be “inclusive” yet other effective groups look after the narrow interests of their supporters.

The third biggest winner is Vladimir Putin.  During his annual state of the nation address two weeks ago, he said, “…We do not infringe on anyone’s interests, we do not force our patronage on anyone, or try to teach anyone how to live…We know there are ever more people in the world who support our position in defense of the traditional values that for centuries have formed the moral foundation of civilization, putting traditional family values top of the list.”

Wow!  Who would have ever dreamed that the U.S. would be lectured by Putin on traditional values and the sanctity of the traditional family?  This was a direct rebuke of Obama’s attempt to force other nations to accept his views on homosexuality.

So I end this year as I began—trying to get people to think a new thought.  Happy New Year!

Raynard Jackson is President & CEO of Raynard Jackson & Associates, LLC., a Washington, D.C.-based public relations/government affairs firm. He can be reached through his web site,  http://www.raynardjackson.com. You can also follow him on Twitter at raynard1223.

Tavis Smiley: Black People Are Not Better Off Under Obama

By Black Men In America.com Staff Writer

Last week Tavis Smiley, who seems to show up more frequently on the FOX News Channel appeared on the Sean Hannity Show.  While discussing the government shutdown the conversation shifted near the end of the interview.

Host Hannity:  “Are black Americans better off five years into the Obama presidency?”

Smiley:  “Let me answer your question very forthrightly: No, they are not,” Smiley said. “The data is going to indicate, sadly, that when the Obama administration is over, black people will have lost ground in every single leading economic indicator category.”

Smiley:  “On that regard,” he added, “the president ought to be held responsible.”

Smiley:  “I respect the president. I will protect the president. And I will correct the president. He’s right on this government shutdown. Republicans are thwarting the rule of law with the Constitution. If they let this debt go into default, they’re trampling again on the Constitution.”

You can click here to watch the entire interview.  Of course, not everyone agrees with Tavis.  James E. Causey, of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel says Tavis is wrong. Causey writes:  “Things are bad, but blacks are better off than we were before Obama took office.  Click here to read Mr. Causey’s article.

What do you think?

Republicans Goin’ Black

Business Exchange By William Reed

Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Reince Priebus inherited a simple mission: stop inflaming racism and expand the voter base beyond White, male America. Like so many Republicans before him, Priebus repeatedly gets in his own way in his attempts to appeal to Blacks and other minority groups.

Over the months since the Democrats’ decisive electoral victories among Blacks, Hispanics and Asian Americans, officials at the RNC have talked a lot about engaging the country’s different and more diverse communities. At their Boston summer meeting session the Republicans declared that “engaging youth and building the party at the grassroots level is key” to the party’s successes toward 2016. The RNC’s latest effort to sell itself is a plan to showcase the diversity in the GOP ranks. The Rising Stars initiative highlights the next generation of Republicans: a group of activists, authors, elected officials and candidates who combat the GOP’s “old boy” image.

In its initiative, the RNC’s publicity professionals will be shining a spotlight on its younger, minority up-and-comers every three months. The first batch of Rising Stars includes T.W. Shannon, Oklahoma’s first African-American Speaker of the House and a protégé of former Rep. J.C. Watts. The RNC plans to thrust Black Republicans like Shannon into the limelight.

To grow and expand the party among Blacks, the GOP should remember that “it’s all about the economy.”  Despite woeful, to no, economic gains under Democratic political leadership, African Americans have allowed themselves, and their issues, to be dumbed down to accept mediocre governance. The last 40 years, the Black vote has gone so overwhelmingly for Democrats that the GOP has never invested much effort in trying to capture it. In what Priebus says is “an unprecedented effort”, the RNC is putting money and muscle into getting more African Americans to vote Republican. The RNC just hired 150 field staffers “to help court new voters.”

Throughout the spring and summer of 2013, Priebus and a core group of Republicans, lurched from convention-to-convention in a kind of “rock star” procession seeking “grip-and-grin” photo-ops with notable Blacks. What he needs to do now is move out of the picture, replacing himself with strategic “outreach” professionals and techniques “to effectively spread the word” specifically, among African Americans.

Some say Preibus should spend his money elsewhere and think that the Republican Party faces an impossible task adding Blacks to their ranks. With targeted efforts, the RNC can easily capture 30 percent of the Black vote by 2016. Party leaders can’t second guess themselves and they must continue to provide the resources necessary for the outreach to be successful. The Republicans have to deliver messages among African Americans that explain to them why the GOP’s world view is in their best interest.

The Republicans need to project images and an agenda that Blacks can relate to. In order to be effective, the party needs to provide the Black outreach team the budget and autonomy they to need to set up networks that allow them to consistently engage African Americans through their media, about their issues. In addition to the field representatives Priebus announced in Boston, the RNC headquarters outreach team includes Amani Council, director of the RNC’s African-American Communications, Kristal Quarker-Hartsfield, who heads up the political arm; and Raffi Williams, whose focus is the youth vote.

Priebus says the RNC expects the staffers they recently hired to live and work in minority communities and pitch Republican values. Between the headquarters’ crew and field representatives, Republicans should be putting forth issues that Blacks truly care about, and through new technology and local news outlets to “meet them [Blacks] where they are.”

Republicans can take a page from companies that target and develop the African-American consumer market. It’s time Priebus & Company allow their “Black outreach” team the full reign they need to effectively sell the Republican message, convene conferences, and be a resource on Republican ideals, and assemble and conduct political education among African Americans that touts: strong families, faith in God, personal responsibility and equal economic opportunities.

William Reed is publisher of “Who’s Who in Black Corporate America” and available for projects via the BaileyGroup.org