Race Hustlers 2.0 for the Millenial Generation

Fellow bloggers Shecodes and Villager, authors of the blogs Black Women Vote and Electronic Village respectively, were contributors to the Bloggers Roundtable at NPR recently. The topic: Are Civil Rights Groups Obsolete? The discussion was prompted by the fairly sorry performance of the NAACP and Al Sharpton in response to the Dunbar Village gang rape case. The NAACP and Sharpton after months of ignoring the case, decided to engage in some advocacy on behalf of the rape suspects from which they relented only after dedicated activism by a group of women bloggers and their allies.

The discussion concluded that while not quite obsolete, civil rights organizations clearly have not figured out their next evolution. Or have they? Enter Color of Change. A portion of their stated mission:

Using the Internet, we will enable our members to speak in unison, with an amplified political voice. We will keep them informed about the most pressing issues for Black people in America and give them ways to act. We'll bring attention to the needs and concerns of Black folks.

When I turn my attention from their mission statement to the action campaigns they have initiated, the issues they focus on differ very little if at all from those of older civil rights organizations like the NAACP. Voting rights, police brutality, responses to racially insensitive statements, criminal defendant/prisoner rights and Katrina which gave them their start seem to be Color of Change's stock in trade.

Their stated goal is to give black Americans a political voice. What is different is the mechanisms they use to spread their message (the web) and the primary audience they target (the young). But the voice they want to bestow differs not at all from the existing black establishment, in tone or content. The tactics and approach are the same old dance of victim identity. Look at the Jena Six, their most notable accomplishment. What was the most impressive piece? They made a huge march happen, but as I asked some time ago, is the march the only thing in our playbook? To be fair, they raised money for the Jena Six's legal defense. I wonder if COC is picking up the legal defense tab for the civil suit brought by the parents of Justin Barker against the Jena Six parents?

Some of the campaigns are inane exercises in ineffective naivety. Take for example their campaign to stop genocide in Darfur. Their goal: to get at least 100 people from each congressional district to send a letter to President Bush, urging him to push for a UN Security Council resolution which would create a peacekeeping force with the power to stop the violence. Send a letter to BUSH to URGE him to PUSH for a UN resolution? How timid and inconsequential is that? Or the whiny and irrevelant campaign to complain to the RNC about Sen. George Allen and his macaca statements. Without exception, COC's campaigns are exercises in whinyness or entreaties for government action to do something for black people.

In short, they are as myopic in outlook and lacking in proactive, strategic relevance as the NAACP, the Urban League, PUSH, the National Action Network and others. For all the Move On.org money, the nice website and the huge mailing list, at bottom, their just the next generation of race hustlers.

Another Clinton Surrogate Levels Harsh Attack at Obama

New York Rep. Charlie Rangel picks up the action as the designated "black attack dog" for Sen. Clinton where Bob Johnson left off, calling Obama "stupid" for suggesting that Dr. King could have signed the civil rights act;

“But for him to suggest that Dr. King could have signed that act is absolutely stupid. It's absolutely dumb to infer that Doctor King, alone, passed the legislation and signed it into law." He tortures a comment on Obama's book to again associate Obama with drugs;

"I assume that the book was not written for political purposes. It was honest….It was a big mistake for him to have done it [used drugs.] For him to be honest enough to write about it, I guess he thought it might sell books."

Rangel is a little Johnnie come lately to the party on this one, considering Hillary had already seconded Obama's call to ramp down the racial pyrotechnics in the campaign. His comments are completely dishonest.

His attack only further demonstrates the length the Black Democratic Establishment (BDE) is willing to go to help the Clintons win and restart the gravy train of patronage. Even as Hillary retreats from commenting on Obama's drug use as a youth, her black surrogates are taking every opportunity to raise it in order to smear and damage Obama in the minds of voters. Its the politics of personal destruction at its very best and I find it despicable and disgusting that African American politicians and elites are willing to engage in lowdown tactics of this sort, gleefully doing Hillary's dirty work to curry favors. It is vile behavior and those who engage in it are bereft of integrity.

Hillary joined Obama's call to ratchet it down, but with every sycophant eruption, one can only draw the conclusion that either the Clinton campaign is terribly undisciplined and can't keep their surrogates on message, or in fact this is the message.

House Negroes for Hillary

I've opined in previous posts that the Black Establishment, along with the race hustler contingent, would most likely lead the way in undermining support for Obama's campaign. And sure enough, not only are they doing that, but they went me one better with "African American Men for Hillary" which you can see at the Clinton website.

This is a Exhibit #1 when it comes to black folks selling themselves out. In Obama, we have a credible, eminently qualified African American candidate for the nomination. He's got the skills to pay the bills. He's a bit of a neophyte playing at this level, but if I'm gonna support somebody thats trying to step up to the presidential plate, he's a good horse to bet on. He's raised $52 million to support his campaign. But what is our black political and establishment leadership doing? They are selling the brother out to support Hillary.

I'm a republican and a conservative. Obama isn't necessarily my first choice to vote for based on his politics. Nonetheless, as an extremely credible black candidate making a run for the White House, I want the guy in it. I want him to get the shot via the Democratic nomination. And for all her vaunted "experience" in the halls of the White House, Hillary comes with her own set of baggage. She is not a slam dunk.

But I'm watching the black establishment and I'm trippin, because these "negroes" are backing Hillary. They have all been co-opted by the Clinton machine and they are backing Hillary because they are all dreaming of how the good times are going to roll if she wins. The patronage train will be leaving the station then and they want to be on board. Phenomenal woman Maya Angelou for crying out loud is backing Hillary over a credible black man. How in the hell do you square that?

Now, here is the question of the hour. Is the black street going to follow the establishment's lead and sell Obama out too? We were down for Jesse, but Obama can't get any love? I understand that establishment negroes and the race hustlers are in it for themselves and have been bought off with promises. They are whoring themselves out. But then again, I don't understand it. Obama is as liberal as anybody could want. He is against the war, he's for civil unions, supports abortion rights, I mean what more could they want?

But they are selling him out. And what I want to know is whether or not the black street is going to go along with this BS. Are the common black folk of America going to see this for the sellout that it is and support Obama? Or will they follow like sheep the establishment negroes that are leading the charge for Hillary?