HOW MUCH LONGER WILL WE TOLERATE SAVAGE HOMOPHOBIA IN OUR COMMUNITY?

Listen up. Today, The Daddy is feeling a post he saw at The Intersection of Madness and Reality, run by Rippa, one of the best bloggers out there. It's about the fact that many of us turn a blind eye to the discrimination and actual assaults on gay people. The article isn't asking that we embrace homosexuality, join hands, and go singing in the rain with gay people. It simply asks that we recognize that we should treat them with civility and respect like everyone else. Check it out.

* Note the photo of a make-shift memorial for Lawrence King, a gay 15 year old teenager who was murdered at E.O. Green School in Oxnard, California. King was killed in class by a fellow student on February 12, 2009.

How Much Longer Will We Tolerate
Savage Homophobia in Our Community?
By Seattle Slim

Look, let me premise this by saying that I don't agree with homosexuality. Yes, I said it. And I don't care if anyone agrees with me or not on that. It is just a sexual preference, and I think people, straight and gay, put way too much stock into who people ultimately choose to screw.

Because of that, I am patently against homophobia and the attack on this poor child, 9th grader Jayron Martin, is nothing short of savage. He was threatened with an ass kicking by some bully punks for being gay. He went to his school leadership for help and they turned their backs on him (Click here for more info).

While I may not agree with homosexuality, they are fellow human beings. I'm a Christian and I know full and damned well that we are supposed to treat others the way we want to be treated. I also know that the Bible clearly states that God loves us all, even the people we as humans don't believe are worthy of His love. Thank God it's not up to us, and it's up to Him.

I sure as hell wouldn't want to be beaten for being straight, or being in an interracial relationship with a white guy. Even though I don't agree, I don't think, nay, I know it's wrong as hell to attack people for their sexual preferences, specifically for being homosexual. That's not alright.

Just this April, Carl Joseph Walker committed suicide because kids taunted him by calling him gay. No one even knows if he was gay or not, he was just different, and that was enough to start the gay taunts. Sadly, he was not the first suicide, nor the last, due to sickening homophobia.

Young black boys have this screwed up idea of masculinity because the fathers aren't in the home, or the fathers don't give a shit. That's bad in and of itself, and harmful to them, but if you add homophobia, you've got a toxic cocktail of disdain and hatred.

We need to stop turning blind eyes to this form of sexual harassment; this homophobia. Had the Horace Mann Leadership Charter School not turned a blind eye to homophobic taunting and teasing, Carl Joseph Walker might still be alive today. Jayron could've been killed, but of course, he's gay so his life must be expendable, right?

Most authority figures in schools could give a damn less about young black boys and girls, but they apparently throw "different" kids to the wolves without batting an eye. And don't think these beast won't come after you or your kids if you so much as get on their reactionary radar. These same beasts are from the same animal species that killed Derrion Albert, taunted Carl Joseph Walker and attacked a Haitian woman and her son in the Dunbar Village rape back in 2007.

If we don't stand up for youths and adults like Jayron, whether or not we agree with their lifestyle or sexual preference, not a soul will stand up for us when these feral ass kids turn on us.

Jayron should've been protected. He should've never been attacked. His story is a litmus test for all of us and we should be paying attention. How many more black boys and girls will have to be chased, beaten or driven to suicide before we do something?

USING BIBLE QUOTES TO PRAY PRESIDENT OBAMA DIES, CAN YOU BELIEVE IT?

Listen up. This morning, The Daddy is having feelings which seem to fluctuate between anger and sadness. It's about what appears to be an increase in slogans which speak to President Obama-- our president, America's president!-- being dead. These slogans can be found on bumper stickers, mugs, even teddy bears. What's more, the slogans come from biblical quotes.

The slogans actually talk of President Obama dying or hoping he dies real soon. But here's the question that keeps turning in The Daddy's head: how can the mind of a fellow American be so twisted that he or she would want their own president dead?

Trying to wrap my arm around this question, I came across this interesting article in Think Progress by journalist Amanda Terkel that talks about this phenomenon. Check it out:

Using Bible Quotes to Pray That Obama's 'Days be Few'
by Amanda Terkel
November 20, 2009

A new slogan is making its way onto t-shirts and even teddy bears: 'Pray for Obama: Psalm 109:8,' which reads, 'Let his days be few; and let another take his office.”

The newest far-right craze is an anti-Obama slogan that is making its way onto t-shirts, bumper stickers, mugs, and even teddy bears: “Pray for Obama: Psalm 109:8,” which reads, “Let his days be few; and let another take his office.” The meme is also taking off on Twitter, with conservatives calling it “hilarious.” Commentators have noted that it’s unclear whether the intent is to hope for an end to Obama’s time in office — or an end to his life. But a look at the lines in the rest of the psalm hint at the latter:

Let his days be few; and let another take his office.
Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.
Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places.
Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and let the strangers spoil his labor.
Let there be none to extend mercy unto him: neither let there be any to favor his fatherless children.
Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be blotted out.
Let the iniquity of his fathers be remembered with the LORD; and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out.
Let them be before the LORD continually, that he may cut off the memory of them from the earth.

Diana Butler Bass at Beliefnet explains that Psalm 109 is one of the “imprecatory” prayers, “a lament in the form of petition to destroy one’s enemies.” While perhaps intended to be a joke, she notes that the psalm actually “entreats God to destroy the president”:

It is the personal prayer of an individual, someone who has been dealt an injustice by another–and usually more powerful–person. The words of Psalm 109 are those of deep agony, the longings of a victim for retribution and justice. This psalm is considered one of the most difficult of all the psalms–full of violent images of vengeance and death.

Quite a few of the “Pray for Obama” items are being sold at CafePress.com, although many of them have been taken off of the site (here’s a cached version of some of them). Cafe Press representative Margene H. told ThinkProgress that while the site took down some of the “Pray for Obama” items today, it is now in the process of reinstating them:

We initially pulled the Psalm 109:8 content from our products today because broader media dialog indicated that these designs potentially suggested violence towards the president. Based on current public discourse and further review of the actual content, we have determined that it is fair political commentary and we are in the process of reinstating this merchandise. As with all of our content, these designs will continue to be reviewed and if at any time their meaning is construed as advocating violence we will revisit our decision.

On Tuesday, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow spoke with “Patience With God” author Frank Schaeffer, who said that while the psalm was “frightening” in a secular context, it’s even “more threatening” in a biblical context.

Can you believe there are Americans who actually want to see their president dead?

WALTER MOSLEY, ONE OF AMERICA'S GREATEST WRITERS

"You could tell by some people’s homes that they came to L.A. to live their dreams. Home is not a place to dream. At home you had to like your father did and your mother. Home meant that everybody already knew what you could do and if you did anything different, they’d laugh you right down into a hole. Festered in it, after a while, you either accepted your hole or you got out of it. There were all kinds of ways out. You could get married, get drunk, get next to somebody’s wife. You could take a shotgun and eat it for a midnight snack. Or you could move to California. In California, they wouldn’t laugh at you or anybody. In California, the sun shone for three hundred days in the year. In California, you could work until you dropped. And when you got up, there was another job for you. --Walter Mosley, From Black Betty, page 31

Listen up. A brotha received an email last night. It said that I was a very good writer and asked what writers do I read the most. I said James Baldwin and Walter Mosley. She said she never heard of him. After telling her he wrote the book that turned into the film "Devil in a blue dress," I sent this bio of Mosley to him. Those of you who haven't heard of him or read one of his books, The Daddy recommends that you write a note to yourself to buy one of his books as a gift to yourself for Christmas.

You'll love the writing of a guy who transformed himself from programmer to mystery writer, professor at New York University, and one of America's greatest writers. Here's the bio I sent to my friend:

The author Walter Mosley was born in 1952 Los Angeles, California. He attended Goddard College and Johnson State College, and has been a computer programmer. He is currently a professor of English at New York University.

Walter Mosley's mystery novels have often been compared to those of Raymond Chandler, mainly because they share vivid settings on the seamy side of Los Angeles in the middle decades of the century, a less-than-rosy view of human nature, and tough but noble main characters in Philip Marlowe and Ezekiel Rawlins.

There's another similarity: like Chandler, Mosley wields elegant, economical prose to create unforgettable characters. Chief among them is series protagonist Easy Rawlins. In many ways Rawlins is a kind of black Everyman, reflecting the great migration from the South in mid-century. He grew up in Houston, fought in World War II and works hard for a better life in Los Angeles, keenly aware of the boundaries imposed upon him by racism. But Easy is no stereotype; endlessly complex, he continues to surprise and reward readers. Chandler once wrote that the best mysteries are those you would read even if the last chapter were torn out; Easy Rawlins is a character who would make you do just that. Rawlins is not a private eye; he makes his living at everything from real estate to janitorial work. He's a sometime fixer, drawn into mysteries, often against his will, because some friend or connection needs his help.

Like many other Black detective/mystery authors (witness Chester Himes), Mosley novels use the side-kick accessory to blunt the dark side of the protagonist's character. Beginning in the early 1940s, the Ezekiel "Easy" Rawlins novels use this most effectively with Easy and his sometimes buddy, Mouse.

In the course of five novels, he's lost a wife and daughter and gained a couple of adopted children, made tidy sums of money and lost them, drunk a lot of whisky and given it up, fought despair and anger and, provisionally at least, won. The sixth published novel is the first Mosley wrote, the first in the series, the first not set in the Watts section of LA, though it is strengthened by reading it after the first published.

Devil In A Blue Dress (1990), published to critical acclaim and nominated for an Edgar, established him as a mystery writer of the first rank. When President Bill Clinton cited Mosley as one of his favorite writers in 1992, it brought Mosley even wider media attention - making the remainder of the first three, A Red Death (1991) and White Butterfly (1992), very popular. Black Betty (1964) made the New York Times best-seller list, and the 1995 movie version of Devil in a Blue Dress, starring Denzel Washington as Easy, was well-reviewed, although it was, for some perverse reason, a box office washout. His fifth, A Yellow Little Dog (1996) made the New York Times best-seller list too. With his sixth Easy Rawlins novel, Gone Fishin' (1997), Mosley chose an African American publisher, Black Classic Press instead of his usual W.W.Norton. A seventh Easy Rawlins novel, Bad Boy Bobby Brown, is due in 1998 or 1999.

Mosley's non-"Easy" books are quite good. RL's Dream, based in part on the life of blues legend Robert (Leroy) Johnson. Always Outnumbered, Always Outgunned (1997) suggests a new introspective detective series with its remarkable protagonist Socrates Fortlow. HBO created a movie out of it starring Laurence Fishburn as Fortlow. His first science fiction novel, Blue Light, is Walter Moseley's current release and the prelude to a trilogy.

I was introduced to Walter Mosley's books during the early 90s nearly simultaneously by my wife, a mystery writer friend, and President William Clinton. In all of his six (soon to be seven) "Easy" novels, Mosley uses period detail and slang to create authentic settings and characters, especially the earnest, complex Rawlins, who continually is faced with personal, social, and moral dilemmas. They are fast page turners laced with drugs, desire and death. Inside and outside the genre, Walter Mosley is an American writer of our times.

What books are you buying to read over the holidays?

THE REBELLIOUS SIXTIES? YES, I REMEMBER

Listen up. As an African American, a student of American history and a person who sometimes entertains the illusion that he is a writer, The Daddy had been trying to write this book for a long time. It weaves a historic yet personal tale about the excitement and the dangers of the turbulent sixties. It shares a personal story, or stories, about this period as a learning experience which helped shape who we, the children of the sixties, are today and the values we try to inculcate in our children.

The poems in section II are personal. The heroes discussed in section III are primarily political. But the signature poem in the second part of Section III is intensely personal, involving two college student's deep, undeniable love, painful, unforgettable loss, and bitter-sweet memories that neither time,maturity, or subsequent affairs could erase from the heart. Ultimately, it was these intensely personal memories set in the midst of the civil rights, black power, and anti-war movements and my attempt to recall them honestly that took this book so long to write.

The Daddy prays that you will click on the Lulu.com logo on the sidebar and purchase the book. He hopes you will appreciate it. Those who have said that they were impressed with its honesty and its ability to take them back to the sixties and early seventies, when they were in college.

One of those who read the book was Verna Monson, one of the two editors of the book and child of the sixties herself. This is what she wrote:

"Mac Walton's The Rebellious Sixties? Yes, I Remember is part-memoir, and part-tribute to the civil rights movement that intertwines themes of racism, sexism, poverty, homelessness, violence, and war. Walton's poems span several decades -- recalling the Atlanta of his childhood, of anti-war rallies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, of the homeless in Minneapolis, and of encountering the hollow transformation of friends through the decades following the civil rights movement. Walton weaves poetry of clashing values and personal upheaval with poetic portraits in tribute to heroic men and women of the civil rights movement. The Rebellious Sixties evokes a time of hope and change, passion and loss. Walton confronts the rawness of racism, hatred, and violence faced by African Americans thrust into a society unprepared for change."

This book was written in memory of Emmitt Till, a 14 year old black manchild whose brutal and tragic death sparked increased protest and the end of apartheid in the southern part of the United States of America.

Blessings,

The Daddy

EUGENE ROBINSON SAYS, "BRING THEM HOME, MR. PRESIDENT"

EUGENE ROBINSON SAYS, "BRING THEM HOME, MR. PRESIDENT"

Listen up. The Daddy already knows that some of you don't want to talk about war. But some things we just have to face. Remember: these soldiers are ours. That means we can't celebrate and remember them on one day out of the year. We must honor and celebrate them by doing everything we can to get them out of Afghanistan.

In Truthdig, Eugene Robinson, Editor of the Washington Post and Pulitzer-Prize winner for journalism, just wrote a brilliant piece. Even if you don't read it all, read some of it. You'll still get a lot out of it. Our soldiers are involved; an so is our integrity as a nation:
Check it out:

by Eugene Robinson Posted on Nov 12, 2009

The most dreadful burden of the presidency—the power to send men and women to die for their country—seems to weigh heavily on Barack Obama these days. He went to Dover Air Force Base to salute the coffins of fallen troops. He gave a moving speech at the memorial service for victims of last week’s killings at Fort Hood. On Veterans Day, after the traditional wreath-laying at Arlington National Cemetery, he took an unscheduled walk among the rows of marble headstones in Section 60, where many of the dead from our two ongoing wars are buried.

As he decides whether to escalate the war in Afghanistan, Obama should keep these images in mind. Geopolitical calculation has human consequences. Sending more troops will mean more coffins arriving at Dover, more funerals at Arlington, more stress and hardship for military families. It would be wrong to demand such sacrifice in the absence of military goals that are clear, achievable and worthwhile.

And what goals in Afghanistan remotely satisfy those criteria?

The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the U.S. ambassador in Kabul, Karl Eikenberry, recently sent two classified cables to officials in Washington expressing what the newspaper described as “deep concerns” about sending more troops now.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, chosen by Obama to lead U.S. forces in Afghanistan, has asked for perhaps 40,000 additional troops to carry out a counterinsurgency campaign. Armchair Napoleons in Washington, comfortably ensconced in their book-lined offices, insist that Obama must “listen to the generals.” But Eikenberry was a four-star general until Obama named him ambassador earlier this year. He commanded U.S. troops in Afghanistan in 2006-07. He as well needs to be heard.

n what were described as sharply worded cables, Eikenberry reportedly expressed serious doubts about the willingness of Afghan President Hamid Karzai to tackle the corruption and mismanagement that have made his government so unpopular and ineffectual—and that have allowed the Taliban to effectively regain control of much of the country.

Karzai, you will recall, committed what observers described as widespread, blatant election fraud in “winning” a new term in office. In many parts of Afghanistan, the Karzai government is seen as so weak and corrupt that the Taliban has been able to move in as a lesser-of-two-evils alternative.

It is axiomatic that a successful counterinsurgency program requires a partnership with a reliable, legitimate government. If the Karzai regime is not such a partner, the goal that McChrystal would be pursuing with those extra 40,000 troops would not be achievable.

Obama is also reported to be considering scenarios in which he would send roughly 30,000 extra troops, somehow persuading our unwilling NATO allies to make up the difference, or send about 20,000 troops and modify the McChrystal plan, opting instead for a “hybrid” strategy that’s part counterinsurgency, part counterterrorism. I’m skeptical that either of these options sets goals that are achievable, and I’m certain that neither sets goals that are clear.

Following his visits to Dover, Fort Hood and Arlington Cemetery, Obama should focus the attention of the White House and the Pentagon on a question that too often is overlooked: What troops?

Our all-volunteer armed forces have been at war for eight years with no end in sight, serving tours of duty of up to 15 months in the war zones of Iraq and Afghanistan. Many units have been called to serve multiple tours. By contrast, most Vietnam War veterans served a single one-year tour.

Fighting two big simultaneous wars with our armed forces stretched so thin has put enormous emotional, psychological and economic stress on military families. The suicide rate in the armed forces has climbed steadily, as has the incidence of stress disorders among veterans. The Pentagon is adept at shuttling its people around and has worked out how to provide the 40,000 troops McChrystal wants. But any new deployment would come at a heavy cost—a human cost—far beyond the billions of dollars required to train, equip, transport and maintain the units being sent.

To read the rest of the story, click here.

Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com.

A VETERAN'S DAY PRAYER

On this Veteran's Day, a Prayer for Peace

"But fame is theirs - and future days
On pillar'd brass shall tell their praise;
Shall tell - when cold neglect is dead -
"These for their country fought and bled."
~Philip Freneau

Today, this Veteran's day, the daddy is praying for the end of war in Iraq, the end of our presence in Afghanistan (except to leave a small group of soldiers to train and support Afghanistan troops), for closer monitoring and enforcement of laws against those who assault our women in uniform, and for greater funding and less red tape to help soldiers who come home maimed and traumatized mentally, physically, and spiritually.

A Veteran's Day Prayer
by Rev. Scott Elliott

Good and loving God we are gathered here today on the eleventh day of the eleventh month. It is the traditional day for Veteran’s Day and our thoughts are of the women and men who have served our nation in times of war and truce. We stand before you grateful for the dedication of these heros who have lived and died, suffered and cried and stood with pride on ship, battlefield and parade ground.

We ask that these women and men experience your healing and comforting presence for the wounds they have known and still know, for the losses they have endured and always will endure. We also ask that your healing and comforting presence be experienced by the families and loved ones who have suffered with them and who have had to endure living without them.

We especially ask that your presence be experienced by the veterans of tomorrow, those soldiers and sailors who are in harm’s way today. Please, gracious God, guide them to safety, guide them to justice and righteousness in even the toughest of conditions. Bring them home to their families and loved ones. Comfort those families and loved ones, and teach us how we might help them with their troubles and be your compassionate presence to them as they experience anxiousness, anguish and the loneliness and pain that comes with the knowns and unknowns of war.

Finally, God, for veterans, for all who are in the service, for America, for the world, we pray for peace. Lead the leaders of the world to the day when “they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; [to a day when] nation shall not lift up sword against nation; neither shall they learn war any more” (Isa 2:4).

We long for your peace, for your shalom.

In Christ’s name we pray, Amen.

PRESIDENT OBAMA TAKING OVER THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN: GOOD LUCK WITH THAT

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.

We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."
--President Eisenhower's farewell address to the nation, January 17, 1961

"...this system of waste and private profit from public funds...which, when you think about it, is what these wars, the stock market and health care all have in common."

--U.S. officer quoted in Truthdig, November 9

Listen up. The Prez has decided to provide his General McChristal the troops he wants to "win the war in Afghanistan," although he didn't define to the Daddy's satisfaction what the hell winning would look like in a country with few Al Queda people there, with a dusty, mountainous country, with a complex tribal system which acts as its own government, with a lucrative drug economy (heroin), and a government corrupt to the bone.

Whatever winning means to McChrystal and his horde of leaders on the ground, what it will mean to us back here are four things:

1. The war in Afghanistan is the Prez's war now. No longer can he blame it on his predecessor. Sure, Bush made the blunder of getting us there with only about 12,000 troops to train Afghanistan army and to look for Osama Ben Laden, who, it was believed, was still in the area trying to escape to Pakistan. But Bush never cared about Afghanistan. His sights were on Iraq.
2. In making the decision to send additional soldiers to Afghanistan, The Prez is making a long-term commitment of 10 years or more. We'll be there a long time.
3. With this long-term commitment will come increased numbers of U.S. casualties, increased funding to run this war, funding the U. S. no longer has, and a significant lowering of The Prez's popularity. No, this low popularity will have nothing to do with race but policy, which is just as it should be. It's a poor decision of historic proportion; and, as Americans soldiers's death rise and this drawn-out war rages with few improvements, he will deserve all the criticism he gets.

Welcome to the real world, Prez. This real world consists of the one you inherited and the one you have made. Good Luck with that.

Do you feel The Prez's decision to send a significant number of troops to Afghanistan, raising our level there to as much as 100,000 is a good idea?

“Afghan soldiers leave the KMTC grossly unqualified,” this lieutenant, who remains on active duty, said. “American mentors do what they can to try and fix these problems, but their efforts are blocked by pressure from higher, both in Afghan and American chains of command, to pump out as many soldiers as fast as possible.”Afghan soldiers are sent from the Kabul Military Training Center directly to active-duty ANA units. The units always have American trainers, know as a “mentoring team,” attached to them. The rapid increase in ANA soldiers has outstripped the ability of the American military to provide trained mentoring teams. The teams, normally comprised of members of the Army Special Forces, are now formed by plucking American soldiers, more or less at random, from units all over Afghanistan.“This is how my entire team was selected during the middle of my tour: a random group of people from all over Kabul—Air Force, Navy, Army, active-duty and National Guard—pulled from their previous assignments, thrown together and expected to do a job that none of us were trained in any meaningful way to do,” the officer said. “We are expected, by virtue of time-in-grade and membership in the U.S. military, to be able to train a foreign force in military operations, an extremely irresponsible policy that is ethnocentric at its core and which assumes some sort of natural superiority in which an untrained American soldier has everything to teach the Afghans, but nothing to learn.”“You’re lucky enough if you had any mentorship training at all, something the Army provides in a limited capacity at pre-mobilization training at Fort Riley, but having none is the norm,” he said. “Soldiers who receive their pre-mobilization training at Fort Bragg learn absolutely nothing about mentoring foreign forces aside from being given a booklet on the subject, and yet soldiers who go through Bragg before being shipped to Afghanistan are just as likely to be assigned to mentoring teams as anyone else.”The differences between the Afghan military structure and the American military structure are substantial. The ANA handles logistics differently. Its rank structure is not the same. Its administration uses different military terms. It rarely works with the aid of computers or basic technology. The cultural divide leaves most trainers, who do not speak Dari, struggling to figure out how things work in the ANA.“The majority of my time spent as a mentor involved trying to understand what the Afghans were doing and how they were expected to do it, and only then could I even begin to advise anyone on the problems they were facing,” this officer said. “In other words, American military advisers aren’t immediately helpful to Afghans. There is a major learning curve involved that is sometimes never overcome. Some advisers play a pivotal role, but many have little or no effect as mentors.”