“We can’t expect the Congressional Black Caucus to act within ethical boundaries – but put some money in front of these self serving Black Democrats and its on. Family and friends first – then maybe the community. It’s another sad day for Black America.”

By The Associated Press and Black News.com

WASHINGTON — An internal audit of the scholarship program of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation was under way Tuesday, sparked by the admission by Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson that she had steered scholarships to her relatives and the children of a staff member.

The foundation’s chairman, Rep. Donald Payne, D-N.J., said that neither the foundation nor the Congressional Black Caucus “will allow unethical behavior in the awarding of scholarships or any programs that are designed to benefit the community.”

The foundation is a tax-exempt organization that is run by its own staff, but with strong ties to the caucus of African-American lawmakers.
The Dallas Morning News first reported that 23 scholarships Johnson, D-Texas, handed out since 2005 violated eligibility rules.

Johnson said Monday that her actions were unintentional, but foundation attorney Amy Goldson pointed out that the students, the lawmaker awarding the foundation scholarships or the lawmaker’s designee must certify that the recipients are not related to the lawmaker.

Payne said that despite a system of checks and balances in philanthropic organizations, “there are weaknesses and there are people who find a way around the system.” He said the next scholarship programs will be delayed for four months to ensure that new measures are in place to prevent any self-dealing or nepotism.

Goldson, the organization’s longtime lawyer who is not a staff member, said, “I never dreamed such a thing would have occurred.”

“Rest assured they are not just sitting idly by,” Goldson said of the foundation’s staff. “They are looking at this very seriously. They are going to do everything they can to see if this has occurred in the past and put in place additional guidelines to make sure it doesn’t occur again.”

The Morning News reported that Johnson had arranged scholarships between 2005 and 2008 for two grandsons and two grandnephews and the son and daughter of a Dallas-based aide.

The foundation said it awarded $716,000 in scholarships to 556 students in 2009.

In addition to violating the ban on awards to relatives of lawmakers, the scholarships from Johnson apparently violated a foundation rule that recipients live or study in the member’s congressional district.

The foundation aims to develop future African-American leaders, research issues important to African-Americans and promote good health. It has numerous corporate sponsors. Of its 32 officers and board members, 11 are House members.

The foundation has an annual golf and tennis event, a prayer breakfast and a legislative conference.

Goldson said the foundation was formed in 1976 when there were few African-American members of Congress and congressional staff members. There was an occasional secretary and others had jobs such as elevator operators.

The foundation was formed to allow African-Americans to learn about Congress and develop leadership skills.
“In all these years the CBC Foundation has really done a lot of good and it is very sad that an infraction by a member can undo all the good work the foundation has done,” Goldson said.

"Gerron S. Levi, Maryland State Delegate"

Prince George (USA Radical Black/September 3, 2010)…The owner of the Ledo Pizza at Eddie’s Place in Crofton told the Gazette Wednesday that he has filed a police report naming Delegate Gerron S. Levi (D-Dist. 23A), of Bowie, as a chief suspect in the Aug. 27 incident. The restaurant owner asked the Gazette not to publish his name. Anne Arundel County police were unable to provide a copy of the police report but said an investigation into the case is ongoing. When workers realized the check hadn’t been paid, they noticed a “Vote Levi” magnetic sign on the door of the departing car and identified Levy by looking at the candidate’s website, the owner told the Gazette. Reached Wednesday, Levi said she ate at the restaurant last week, but said she didn’t believe she had left without paying. “Really? That is so crazy,” she said. “I’m almost certain I paid. … If I didn’t, it would have been a mistake. I always pay my bills. I don’t believe I would walk out a restaurant and not pay the bill. ” Levi said she would call the restaurant. “They couldn’t call me if they thought that was the case?” she said.

“It doesn’t matter who you are. You don’t do this,” the owner said. “Even if it was an honest mistake, she’s had four days to come back and pay, and she hasn’t.”  Levi campaign consultant Julius Henson denied the restaurateur’s allegations. “This is a politically motivated smear campaign,” Henson said. SURE!!

Levi is one of five candidates seeking the executive nomination in the Sept. 14 Democratic primary election.

NOVOZAVIDOVO, Russia — People in this Russian town used to stare at Jean Gregoire Sagbo because they had never seen a black man. Now they say they see in him something equally rare – an honest politician.

Sagbo last month became the first black to be elected to office in Russia.

In a country where racism is entrenched and often violent, Sagbo’s election as one of Novozavidovo’s 10 municipal councilors is a milestone. But among the town’s 10,000 people, the 48-year-old from the West African country of Benin is viewed simply a Russian who cares about his hometown.

He promises to revive the impoverished, garbage-strewn town where he has lived for 21 years and raised a family. His plans include reducing rampant drug addiction, cleaning up a polluted lake and delivering heating to homes.

“Novozavidovo is dying,” Sagbo said in an interview in the ramshackle municipal building. “This is my home, my town. We can’t live like this.”

“His skin is black but he is Russian inside,” said Vyacheslav Arakelov, the mayor. “The way he cares about this place, only a Russian can care.”

Sagbo isn’t the first black in Russian politics. Another West African, Joaquin Crima of Guinea-Bissau, ran for head of a southern Russian district a year ago but was heavily defeated.

Crima was dubbed by the media “Russia’s Obama.” Now they’ve shifted the title to Sagbo, much to his annoyance.

“My name is not Obama. It’s sensationalism,” he said. “He is black and I am black, but it’s a totally different situation.”

Inspired by communist ideology, Sagbo came to Soviet Russia in 1982 to study economics in Moscow. There he met his wife, a Novozavidovo native. He moved to the town about 100 kilometers (65 miles) north of Moscow in 1989 to be close to his in-laws.

Today he is a father of two, and negotiates real estate sales for a Moscow conglomerate. His council job is unpaid.

Sagbo says neither he nor his wife wanted him to get into politics, viewing it as a dirty, dangerous business, but the town council and residents persuaded him to run for office.

They already knew him as a man of strong civic impulse. He had cleaned the entrance to his apartment building, planted flowers and spent his own money on street improvements. Ten years ago he organized volunteers and started what became an annual day of collecting garbage.

He said he feels no racism in the town. “I am one of them. I am home here,” Sagbo said.

He felt that during his first year in the town, when his 4-year-old son Maxim came home in tears, saying a teenage boy spat at him. Sagbo ran outside in a rage, demanding that the spitter explain himself. Women sitting nearby also berated the teenager. Then the whole street joined in.

Russia’s black population hasn’t been officially counted but some studies estimate about 40,000 “Afro-Russians.” Many are attracted by universities that are less costly than in the West. Scores of them suffer racially motivated attacks every year – 49 in Moscow alone in 2009, according to the Moscow Protestant Chaplaincy Task Force on Racial Violence and Harassment, an advocacy group.

After the Soviet Union collapsed, Novozavidovo’s industries were rapidly privatized, leaving it in financial ruin.

High unemployment, corruption, alcoholism and pollution blight what was once an idyllic town, just a short distance from the Zavidovo National Park, where Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev take nature retreats.

Denis Voronin, a 33-year-old engineer in Novozavidovo, said Sagbo was the town’s first politician to get elected fairly, without resorting to buying votes

“Previous politicians were all criminals,” he said.

A former administration head – the equivalent of mayor in rural Russia – was shot to death by unknown assailants two years ago.

The post is now held by Arakelov, a veteran of the Soviet war in Afghanistan who says he also wants to clean up corruption. He says money used to constantly disappear from the town budget and is being investigated by tax police.

Residents say they pay providers for heat and hot water, but because of ineffective monitoring by the municipality they don’t get much of either. The toilet in the municipal building is a room with a hole in the floor.

As a councilor, Sagbo has already scored some successes. He mobilized residents to collect money and turn dilapidated lots between buildings into colorful playgrounds with new swings and painted fences.

As he strolled around his neighborhood everyone greeted him and he responded in his fluent, French-African-accented Russian. Boys waved to Sagbo, who had promised them a soccer field.

Sitting in the newly painted playground with her son, Irina Danilenko said it was the only improvement she has seen in the five years she has lived here.

“We don’t care about his race,” said Danilenko, 31. “We consider him one of us.”

"Black in America?"

“The rush to condemn Shirley Sherrod exposes a lack of courage that we cannot afford in the coming media war.”

• By: Tom Burrell | Posted on July 23, 2010 at 12:56 PM from THE ROOT

The debacle surrounding the virtual lynching of black agriculture official Shirley Sherrod has left everyone involved scrambling for cover. President Obama, while not directly linked to the premature decision to fire Sherrod, called her Thursday to apologize. Video provocateur Andrew Breitbart has insisted he was not after Sherrod but after the NAACP. Fox News’ Glenn Beck displayed a time line on his show to argue he only covered the story after Sherrod was shown to have been unfairly dismissed.

Read the full story here.

By Tim Wise who is the author of five books and over 250 essays on race. His latest is Colorblind: The Rise of Post-Racial Politics and the Retreat from Racial Equity (San Francisco: City Lights Books, 2010).

Prominent white conservatives are angry about racism.

Forget all that talk about a post-racial society. They know better than to believe in such a thing, and they’re hopping mad.

What is it that woke them up finally, after all these years of denial, during which they insisted that racism was a thing of the past?

Was it the research indicating that job applicants with white sounding names have a 50 percent better chance of being called back for an interview than their counterparts with black-sounding names, even when all qualifications are the same?

No.

Was it the study that found white job applicants with criminal records have a better chance of being called back for an interview than black applicants without one, even when all the qualifications are the same?

No.

Was it the massive nationwide study that estimated at least 1 million cases of blatant job discrimination against blacks, Latinos and Asian Americans each year, affecting roughly one-in-three job seekers of color?

No.

Is it the fact that black males with college degrees are almost twice as likely as their white male counterparts to be out of work?

No.

Is it the data indicating that Chinese-American professionals earn less than 60 percent as much as their white counterparts, even though the Chinese Americans, on average, have more education?

No.

Was it the study that found the lightest-skinned immigrants to the United States make as much as 15 percent more than the darkest, even when the immigrants in question have the same level of education, experience and measured productivity?

No.

Perhaps they finally stumbled upon the evidence suggesting millions of cases of race-based housing discrimination against people of color each year, and this is what has them so incensed?

No.

Or maybe their anger is due to the reports of blatant racism practiced by Wells Fargo, which was deliberately roping black borrowers (to whom they referred as “mud people”) into high-cost loans, targeting them for these instruments, and even falsifying credit histories to make black applicants look like greater risks than they were, so as to justify the scam?

No.

Was it the study demonstrating that e-mail inquiries about rental property submitted by people with white sounding names were 60 percent more likely than those with black sounding names to get a positive response from a landlord (meaning an indication that a unit was available for rent), even when the housing had been previously advertised as available?

No.

Maybe they’re furious because of the way whites in the New Orleans area conspired after the flooding of the city to keep blacks from returning and being able to find housing on equitable terms, if at all?

No.

Or maybe it’s because of the data from the Justice Department, to the effect that blacks are far more likely than whites to have their cars and persons searched after a traffic stop, even though whites, when searched, are more than four times as likely to have drugs or other illegal contraband on us?

No.

Well then, perhaps it’s the recent revelations that police in New York City are blatantly profiling blacks and Latinos, stopping and frisking them in massive numbers, even though in 90 percent of all cases, the people they stop are released without any charge because they are found to have done nothing illegal?

No.

Is the source of their anger the data showing that although whites and blacks use and sell drugs at roughly the same rates, African Americans are anywhere from 2.8 to 5.5 times more likely than whites to be arrested for a drug offense, depending on the year? Or perhaps the state level data indicating that in nine states, blacks are arrested at more than seven times the rate of whites, and in Minnesota and Iowa at rates that are more than eleven times greater than white arrest rates for drugs? Or perhaps the additional data that blacks are more than 10 times as likely as whites to be sent to prison for drug offenses, despite relatively equivalent rates of drug crimes? Or the fact that a majority of persons admitted to prison for drug offenses are black, even though there are about six times more white users nationwide?

No.

Maybe they’re beside themselves over the fact that millions of black men who are ex-felons and have paid their debt to society are permanently blocked from voting thanks to disenfranchisement laws that were devised for blatantly racist reasons? Surely they are upset that these laws have led to blacks being denied the right to vote after serving their time at a rate that is 7 times the national average?

No.

Perhaps they’re enraged by the way white police officers conspired to murder a black man in New Orleans after Katrina, and then cover up the crime, or the way other whites formed a vigilante terror squad and went hunting for black people in the aftermath of the flooding?

No.

Maybe it was that racist e-mail sent by the white Boston police officer to the reporter at the Boston Globe, in which he called Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates a “banana eatin’ jungle monkey?”

No.

Then maybe it was the story about that high ranking racist in the Chicago police force who OK’d the torture of black men to extract confessions for years?

No.

Then I bet they must have finally seen that story about the Philadelphia cop who refers to black folks as animals and niggers. That’s it, right?

No.

Could it be that they’ve read and been moved by the dozens of studies that show the cumulative health effects of racism and discrimination on people of color, and which indicate that doctors do indeed treat patients of color differently, and worse, than their white counterparts? Or perhaps the research that finds how even black women with college degrees, decent jobs and good incomes have infant mortality rates for their children that are higher than the rates for white women who dropped out before high school? And the way that researchers believe stresses associated with racial discrimination are implicated in the worse fetal and neo-natal health of these mother’s children?

No.

Perhaps it’s the research that shows black students being suspended and expelled from school at far higher rates than white students, even though there are no significant differences in the rates at which students of different races violate serious school rules?

No.

Maybe it’s the research indicating that teachers set lowered expectations for children with black-sounding names, independent of observed ability, and even when compared to the child’s own siblings who have less identifiably black names. These lowered expectations, based on presumptions of lowered competence and ability then result in lower performance by the stigmatized students.

No.

Or maybe it was that troubling story on CNN about how white children and even many children of color seem to prefer white skin, and think that children with black skin are bad, dirty, mean and ugly?

No.

Well then it must be the blatant stuff. Maybe they finally got around to looking at those images of Tea Party protesters and other assorted conservatives coming to rallies with signs advocating the lynching of Democratic party leaders, or portraying the President as an African witch doctor? Or maybe somebody informed them of all the times that conservative and Republican Party activists have sent around blatantly racist e-mails lately, like those portraying the white house lawn covered in watermelons, or once again with the witch doctor imagery, or likening Michelle Obama to an ape, or picturing the President as a pair of “spook eyes” against a black background?

No.

Maybe they’re angry at Tea Party leader Mark Williams for calling the President an “Indonesian Muslim” and a “welfare thug?” I mean, that’s pretty racialized rhetoric, right?

No.

Or maybe it was the Tea Party leader in Ohio who tweeted about how he wants to shoot Hispanic immigrants, to whom he refers as “spicks?” (sic)

No.

Well then surely it must have been the story about Tea Party candidate for Governor in New York who sent e-mails picturing the President dressed as a pimp and featuring a group of African tribesman performing a traditional dance, which he referred to as the “Obama Inauguration Rehearsal?”

No.

Perhaps what has them angry is the statement by that Arizona Congressman, to the effect that black folks were better off under slavery than they are today?

No.

Maybe it was because of those guys over at the popular right-wing website, FreeRepublic.com who called the President’s daughter, Malia, “typical ghetto trash,” and a “whore” whose mother likes to entertain her by “making monkey sounds?”

No.

Or perhaps they finally had enough when they heard about how Rep. Ciro Rodriguez was called a “wetback” by one of his constituents and told to go back to Mexico?

No.

Or maybe it was that lawmaker in South Carolina who called both President Obama and Republican Gubernatorial candidate (and Indian American) Nikki Haley, “ragheads?”

No.

Or perhaps they’re upset about how the guy who sponsored the law in Arizona, ostensibly to catch “illegal immigrants” (a law they support), turns out to be pals with neo-Nazis? Or the fact that the organization that takes credit for writing the bill has longstanding ties to blatant racists and hate groups?

No.

Or maybe it was the story about how National Review columnist John Derbyshire told Harvard law students that black achievement lags behind white achievement because blacks are biologically inferior to whites?

No.

Well perhaps it was that story about the motorists in Prescott, Arizona who continually shouted racial slurs at artists who were painting a mural on the walls of a school, which featured children of color who go there? And certainly they must have been upset about the fact that initially the school was actually planning to lighten the subjects’ skin color so as to appease locals and a right wing talk show host?

No.

Or maybe they’re irate because of the report that employees of the Department of Homeland Security have posted blatantly racist comments about Latino immigrants on web boards?

No.

Surely it must be because of the evidence that uniformed American soldiers are joining up with neo-Nazi organizations and even flaunting their membership in such groups?

No.

It is none of this. Neither the evidence of systemic discrimination against people of color in every walk of American life, nor the repeated examples of blatant racism directed towards people of color individually moves them.

But they’re angry nonetheless about racism in America.

They’re especially angry about the tax being placed on those who use tanning salons. Because this is racist. Against white people. No, seriously.

Oh, and the President criticized a white police officer for arresting a black man for a crime that, turns out, the black man didn’t actually commit, according to state law. That Obama would do such a thing–namely, criticize an officer for making an unjustified arrest–means that white police officers are “under assault” from Obama, and that the President is trying to “destroy” the white officer, no doubt because he’s white.

Oh, and since people of color disproportionately lack health care coverage, the President’s plan for expanding coverage is obviously a racist scheme to get reparations for slavery.

Oh, and the President is deliberately trying to destroy the economy so as to pay back white people for slavery and hundreds of years of oppression.

Oh, and two black kids beat up a white kid on a bus in Belleville, Illinois–something that is obviously due to Obama being President.

Oh, and the President picked Eric Holder as Attorney General. Since Holder has said Americans have often been “cowards” when it comes to discussing race, this proves that Holder is racist against white people, even though he didn’t mention white people. He said Americans, and Americans means white people. So he’s a bigot. And so is Obama for picking him.

Oh, and the President nominated Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. And she’s a Latina, who notes that she sees the world through the lens of her experience, and that she hopes that experience would positively inform her decision-making. And that means she’s a bigot. And the fact that Obama nominated her, as well as Eric Holder, proves that he “views white men as the problem” in America, and that the only way you can get promoted by Obama is “by hating white people.” Like Tim Geithner, who most definitely hates your honky ass.

Oh, and the President also nominated Elena Kagan, and Kagan once worked for Justice Thurgood Marshall, and Marshall once said the Constitution as originally conceived–which, ya know, excluded blacks from citizenship–was flawed. Imagine. And this means that Marshall was anti-white, and anyone who worked for him must be too.

Oh, and the Obama Justice Department dropped criminal voter intimidation charges against three members of the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia (while obtaining an injunction against a fourth member). So this proves the Administration is allied with the Panthers, whose Philly leader proclaims that he “hates all white people,” and Obama probably agrees with him, and is refusing to prosecute because he doesn’t care about white folks’ voting rights. In fact, the New Black Panthers are part of Obama’s “army of thugs.” Even though the same Philly leader of the group didn’t support Obama for President, and has called Obama a “puppet” and “slavemaster.” And of course, as a point of fact, the criminal charges against the other three Panthers were dropped by the Bush Department of Justice. And there have been no voters who actually claim to have been intimidated by the Panthers. And even a leading conservative Republican on the Civil Rights Commission says the incident is much ado about nothing.

Oh, and since the Justice Department is considering bringing federal charges against the white officer who killed Oscar Grant–a black man–in cold blood in Oakland last year, this proves that we’ve returned to the 1950s, only this time it’s whites who are the victims of racist oppression. Because it’s oppression to bring charges against a white cop who kills someone. Naturally.

Yes indeed, they all agree, Obama is a “reverse racist” who has a deep-seated hatred of white people, and who is like Hitler, and we know this because he’s proposing a national service corps to help work on various community problems, and this is just like the Nazi SS, well, except for the murdering part. Or if not Hitler, then at the very least he’s just like an “African colonial despot”.

And for sure, Obama is the reason race relations are so strained: not because of the ongoing discrimination against people of color, which the data indicates is commonplace, or because of the incendiary rhetoric coming from conservative commentators. But because of Barack Obama.

Race relations could never be strained by say, for instance, having a white talk show host fantasize about murdering a black congressman with a shovel.

Or by another host calling undocumented migrants from Mexico “invasive species”.

Or by spreading lies about how 5 million so-called “illegal aliens” were given subprime mortgages, as a way to blame the undocumented for the housing meltdown, even though there is no evidence whatsoever to support the fabricated claim.

Or by alleging that ACORN (a community-based organization comprised mostly of people of color) committed massive voter fraud so as to help elect Obama, even though there is no evidence that a single illegitimate vote was cast due to ACORN’s voter registration efforts, and despite the fact that when a few ACORN operatives filed phony voter registration cards, it was ACORN itself that alerted election officials to the problem

Or by a prominent conservative commentator insisting that white men are experiencing the same kind of oppression that blacks faced for years, even as that commentator has previously reminisced fondly about the days of segregation.

Or by another radio host and prominent conservative author blaming “multicultural” people for “destroying” the country, or calling Arab Muslims “non-humans,” or fantasizing about killing people in the “civil rights business.”

Or by another radio host and prominent conservative author referring to the mostly black residents of New Orleans, in the wake of Katrina as “worthless parasites” and “human parasitic garbage” because of their high rates of welfare receipt. Even though, according to Census data, there were only 4600 households in all of the city receiving cash welfare at the time of the flooding, which was less than 4 percent of all black households in the city, and whose annual benefits came to only around $2800 per year.

Or by walking around with a sign suggesting that President Obama intends to put white people into slavery.

Or by saying that President Obama only won the election because he’s black, and if he weren’t black, he’d be a tour guide in Honolulu.

Or by saying that the only reason Colin Powell endorsed Obama was as an act of racial bonding.

Or by saying that Oprah Winfrey is also successful only because she’s black.

Or by blaming the economic collapse on fair lending laws and lending to minorities, even though all the evidence suggests such laws and such loans had nothing to do with the housing or larger economic crises.

Or perhaps by having a right-wing talk show host announce a plan for conservatives to “take back the civil rights movement,” and compare himself to Martin Luther King Jr. This, even though conservatives were almost uniformly opposed to the movement and King, and even though the talk show host’s favorite authors, whose work he promotes regularly, viewed the movement as a communist conspiracy and referred to civil rights activists as animals.

Or by another conservative comparing himself to Dr. King, and speaking of how much he respects King’s legacy, even as he–the conservative–has said he believes private businesses should have the right to discriminate on the basis of race.

No, none of those things could strain race relations, or further racism.

And certainly not when compared to a tanning booth tax.

While on the face of it, these kinds of right-wing inanities may seem so absurd as to hardly merit being taken seriously, it’s important to step back and think about the internal logic of even the most outlandish claims. I mean, no one can honestly believe that health care reform is reparations. After all, what the hell kind of reparations is it where you have to get sick first in order to get paid? That’s not a good hustle. And no one can really believe that some white kid got beat up on a bus because it’s “Obama’s America,” as if the President had sent a text message to those black guys saying: HEY, YNOT BEAT SUM CRAKA ASS 4 ME, U DIG?

But the intellectual strength of the claims is not the issue. It doesn’t matter. From a political perspective, even the most insane-sounding claim about Obama’s supposed hatred for white people makes sense. It’s a perfect way to prime white racial fears and anxieties, to say, in effect, they’re coming for your money white folks, and then your children. In a nation where the population will be half people of color within 25-30 years, and where the popular culture is now thoroughly multicultural (and thus many of the icons don’t look the way they used to), and where the President doesn’t fit a lot of people’s conception of what such a person is supposed to look like, and where the economy is in the toilet for millions, playing upon white anxiety is the perfect recipe for political mobilization.

They’ve said very clearly that they want their country back. And if we who oppose the right don’t challenge these folks for the racists they are, or continue to shy away from making race an issue (as if it weren’t already), they just might get it.

“Why are Black Americans still having first’s in 2010?”

In 2010, Black America has fallen by the wayside. It seems as though we have given up. Some are blinded by the hope that with the election of America’s first Black president – the struggle is over. We tend to think the struggle has never left us and its getting worse.

This week, USA Radical Black invites you to join long-time Twin Cities Civil Rights activist; also the longest seated Chairman of the Board for the Minneapolis Urban League; Author of “The Minneapolis Story Blog,” and host of Minneapolis Television Network’s (MTN-17 at 5 p.m. Sundays) “Black Focus,” Mr. Ronald A. Edwards and co-host Don Allen who is the editor-in-chief of two very controversial blogs, “The Independent Business News Network,” and “USA Radical Black,” as they come together for the show, “ON POINT!”

This week’s topic: “When did the Revolution Stop?” Hosts Ronald A. Edwards and Don Allen will discuss significant “repeat” issues in the Black community and how these issues were addressed in history and made a priority to fix but still affect the Black communities around the United States today. We will also talk about Minneapolis’ African-American Leadership meetings and why the organizers and participant have missed the mark in addressing the issues of poverty, foreclosures, jobs and economic development. We take a look at the recent homicides in Minneapolis and the fact that the last 8 have no suspects in custody.

“ON POINT!” is a nationally syndicated radio program on BlogTalkRadio that covers World, National and Local News focused to Black Americans.

Listeners can participate by calling our toll-free guest call-in number: 1 (877) 572-42881 or locally in the Twin Cities metro area dial: (347) 426-3904.

We encourage listeners to call in and ask questions.

How to listen to the show – “ON POINT!” is broadcast via the Internet: Listeners can click here or copy and paste this address in your search engine’s browser: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/ibnnnews/2010/06/19/on-point-with-ronald-a-edwards-and-don-allen

The 1-hour show starts at 5 p.m. (CST) on Saturday, June 19, 2010.

By MXySTAFF (MXyMAG.com)

“USA Radical Black invites readers to enjoy another very popular media outlet, MXyMAG.com. MXyMAG.com features news and information that is Sexy and Business while providing relevant Entertainment news.”

Toronto…A model came up to me a while back, dejected because she was just told that she is too dark to be a “successful” model. As a person who understand the business very well I was thinking to myself “welcome to the new world my friend”. As a black man I was thinking you should have kicked him in his nuts. But in the end what the person had said carries a truth to it and here is why.

People want to relate to the person they interact with. Most people who aren’t black don’t know how to relate to black and in most cases it’s out of fear or intimidation. Most black people I have seen or talked to don’t know how to relate to black neither.

There are several points that I will cover through the article starting with Jennifer Lopez. What makes her a good example is that she could relate to black consumers, Spanish consumers and white consumers all at the same time. With whites (mainly parents) having the most money to buy for their children at a local Wall Mart. Whereas we are more inclined to download it and as a business man I understand were the guy was coming from.

It’s one thing to be praised by your own circle of friends and fans but in the end as a model you’re a business and businesses need green to come in to stay healthy. So mathematically speaking the worst thing to rely on as a person is a friend for support. But that is a different subject all together.

Another good study of this is also MXy the darker skinned models make it to the top 16 countdown but I have yet to see one black model become number 1 or hover in the top 7 for too long.  I remember sometime in the beginning of the year that I posted Raquel Reigns and Sarah Visa Lee at the same time and they both came back to drop new pictures and interviews around the same time and though promoting themselves as a brand has a part to play Sarah eventually got bumped from the SWEET 16 and Raquel is in the 8th place (still standing). It’s not a knock on Sarah (she is a good friend of mines) It’s showing that she would have to work twice as hard to stay up in the 16.

The trend on MXyMAG is this, once the fifth week passes and the girl comes off the recent interview tabs their numbers start to sink faster. The models who have come on and stuck around and in some instances have never left the countdown are mostly lighter skinned and in some cases they are white and this is not by my choosing because it’s all based on individual computers that visited the pages.

Another perspective on this topic is our black president who made it clear to the world that he has a white family. I used to bring up the political move by him to relate to the other side as just that, a chess move to cancel out the opposition. For those who didn’t know what was going down the other were trying to tell the people who vote that Obama was too foreign to become a president with what were a barrage of subliminal messages and direct messages.

Essentially his move worked and the majority of the people who ended up actually voting for the president were white. We are all happy he won but the majority of votes came from whites. It’s sad but these are the facts, facts hurt. So essentially it’s a good thing to be black it’s the best choice that was made for me before I was born. It’s another thing to have my own people praise me but who is going to invest in to my product? How are you going to position it to them without alienating your own people? (too much) If you can’t answer that then you are going to have a tough time to sell.

TekNiq

By Simon Cable from Mail Online – re-posted by Admin at USA Radical Black
Last updated at 1:13 AM on 4th June 2010  – A special thanks to M. Renee, San Fransisco, CA.

Claudia Schiffer has been accused of racial insensitivity after appearing on a magazine cover made up as a black woman.

The 39-year-old supermodel wore dark foundation and an afro wig in the shots taken by celebrated fashion designer and photographer Karl Lagerfeld.

His images, taken two years ago for a Dom Perignon advertising campaign, were among six shots of Miss Schiffer used by German fashion bible Stern Fotografie to celebrate its 60th anniversary.
Claudia Schiffer

Claudia Schiffer in the pose for a 2007 Dom Perignon campaign shot by Karl Lagerfeld, which has caused a fashion race row

But Shevelle Rhule, fashion editor at black lifestyle magazine Pride, said the images of Miss Schiffer were tasteless.

She said: ‘It shows poor taste and it’s offensive.

‘There are not enough women of colour featured in mainstream magazines. This just suggests you can counteract the problem by using white models.

‘I don’t believe they deliberately set out to offend, they obviously see it as being arty and feel that they are pushing boundaries.

‘But clearly no thought has been given to the history behind what they have done and the comparisons it draws with minstrel shows.’

The magazine has used a collection of pictures from the Dom Perignon shoot to adorn different covers of the popular magazine including another that features Schiffer as an Asian character.

Others depict her as a secretary, while a further image shows her impersonating Marie Antoinette.

Representatives of the model claim the pictures are intended to show the model as a variety of fantasy figures.

A spokesman said: ‘The pictures have been taken out of context. The images were designed to reflect different men’s fantasies.

‘The pictures were not intended to offend, they were done very creatively and they are some of Karl Lagerfeld’s favourite images of Claudia. People should not jump to conclusions.’

Read more here.

Contact Information:
Press Office 202-646-5172, ext 305

Washington, DC — May 25, 2010

Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Obama Justice Department to obtain documents related to the agency’s decision to dismiss the claims against several members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense who were accused of engaging in voter intimidation during the 2008 presidential campaign (U.S. v. New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense).

Judicial Watch filed its original FOIA request on May 29, 2009. The Justice Department acknowledged receiving the request on June 18, 2009, but then referred the request to the Office of Information Policy (OIP) and the Civil Rights Division. On January 15, 2010, the OIP notified Judicial Watch that it would be responding to the request on behalf of the Offices of the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, Associate Attorney General, Public Affairs, Legislative Affairs, Legal Policy, and Intergovernmental and Public Liaison.

On January 15, the OIP also indicated that the Office of the Associate Attorney General found 135 pages of records responsive to Judicial Watch’s request, but that all records would be withheld in full. On January 26, the OIP advised Judicial Watch that the Office of Public Affairs and Office of Legal Policy completed their searches and found no responsive documents. On February 10, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division indicated that after an extensive search it had located “numerous responsive records” but determined that “access to the majority of the records” should be denied. On March 26, the OIP indicated that the Office of Legislative Affairs and the Office of Intergovernmental and Public Liaison completed searches and found no documents.

Judicial Watch appealed the determinations of the Office of the Associate Attorney General and the Civil Rights Division. To date, Judicial Watch has received neither a response regarding searches conducted by the Offices of the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General, nor responses to its two administrative appeals prompting its lawsuit. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, an independent, bipartisan unit of the federal government charged with investigating and reporting on civil rights issues, has also initiated a probe of the Justice Department’s decision to dismiss its lawsuit.

The Justice Department originally filed its lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense and several of its members following an incident that took place outside of a Philadelphia polling station on November 4, 2008. A video of the incident showing a member of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense brandishing police-style baton weapon was widely distributed on the Internet. According to multiple witnesses, members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense attempted to block access to polling stations, harassed voters and hurled racial epithets. Nonetheless, the Justice Department ultimately allegedly overruled the recommendations of its own staff and dismissed the majority of its claims.

“The Obama administration owes the American people an explanation. How can the Justice Department dismiss a clear-cut case of voter intimidation involving the use of a weapon? Are voting rights important at the Justice Department? If there is nothing to hide, then Eric Holder should release this information as the law requires. And this is just one more example of how Obama’s promises of transparency are a big lie,” said Judicial Watch Tom Fitton.

Originally posted in The St. Louis American – re-posted by Admin at USA Radical Black
(IBNN NEWS/May 23, 2010) – Sheila Johnson, the co-founder of Black Entertainment Television alongside her ex-husband Bob Johnson, was asked by The Daily Beast blog what she thought about her groundbreaking network since selling it to Viacom in 2000 for $1.3 billion.

“Don’t even get me started,” says the 60-year-old Johnson, who has since divorced and remarried. “I don’t watch it. I suggest to my kids [a twentysomething daughter and a college-age son] that they don’t watch it… I’m ashamed of it, if you want to know the truth.”

Johnson was being interviewed at the Tribeca Film Festival about the premiere of “The Other City,” a searing, but ultimately hopeful documentary she produced about the AIDS epidemic in Washington, D.C. — an epidemic Johnson says BET is making worse, and potentially contributing to its spread, by promoting promiscuous, unprotected sex in raunchy videos.

“When we started BET, it was going to be the Ebony magazine on television,” Johnson told the blog. “We had public affairs programming. We had news… I had a show called Teen Summit, we had a large variety of programming, but the problem is that then the video revolution started up… And then something started happening, and I didn’t like it at all. And I remember during those days we would sit up and watch these videos and decide which ones were going on and which ones were not. We got a lot of backlash from recording artists…and we had to start showing them. I didn’t like the way women were being portrayed in these videos.”

Johnson says she has absolutely nothing to do with BET these day.

“I just really wish—and not just BET but a lot of television programming—that they would stop lowering the bar so far just so they can get eyeballs to the screen,” she says. “I know they think that’s what’s going to keep programming on the air; that’s what’s going to sell advertising. But there has got to be some responsibility. Somebody has got to take this over. Because with all the studies that are out there, this is contributing to an atmosphere of free sex, ‘I don’t have to protect myself anymore.’”