Skip to main content

From the ASCENT Blog, 12.1.05 ...

On the scandal of Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA):

Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA) by all appearances and impressions seemed to be a decent guy in a sea of shallowness. He was affable and approachable, less dripped in the hard core ideological ilk of partisans. Definitely an unapologetic conservative, but at times willing to reason and consider the other side. A prostate cancer survivor, Cunningham at one time expressed deep interest in addressing the disproportionate impact of this disease on African American men, who have a 50 percent greater chance of getting it as opposed to White men and are twice as likely to die from it. You don't hear aging White Republican men often interested in what's happening with Black men ...

We can't nor will we even try to defend the indefensible, particularly as our governing institutions presently leave notions and expectations of democracy completely shattered. And, certainly, there are a lot of brothers and sisters out there (overpopulating our Apartheid-era like prison system at this very moment) being accused or incarcerated for crimes they never committed or petty misdemeanors they had scant resources to fight. Cunningham's crimes were not mere "ethical" violations or lapses in judgement. These were calculated, audacious crimes. But, as we focus for now on Congress, we have to reflect on the fact that, at least this guy finally admitted to doing something wrong. At least he accepted responsibility and avoided the ritual blame-gaming, feet shuffling and legal acrobatics that most politicians perform. Instead, he simply and bluntly admitted to accepting bribes, going so far to say during an emotional press conference that he now knew "... shame." Maybe that was staged, maybe it was intended to impress the prosecutors after his arm got twisted. But, we can't deny it left an impression and led us to thinking about it some more ..."

For more of this, read the ASCENT Blog at http://www.blackpolicy.org
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
At least he accepted responsibility and avoided the ritual blame-gaming, feet shuffling and legal acrobatics that most politicians perform. Instead, he simply and bluntly admitted to accepting bribes, going so far to say during an emotional press conference that he now knew "... shame." Maybe that was staged, maybe it was intended to impress the prosecutors after his arm got twisted. But, we can't deny it left an impression and led us to thinking about it some more ..."



the only impression it left me with...is that people fess up when shit is obvious........
The premise of your assertion is awfully misguided and misinformed.

You are, obviously, not thorougly reading the blog nor familiarizing yourself with the site, or the online radio program or staff affiliated with the Center. It would be fairly difficult to "thinly disguise" right-wing activites when the Executive Director of the Center for African American Policy (responsible for posting content on Blackpolicy.org) is also a well-known and very active young Democratic Black legislator from a rather "liberal" Denver who heads the Colorado State Senate and is one of the highest ranking African American state elected officials in the country. You might want to check out his bio and the legislative agenda he promotes.

Is it shady to simply present various opposing perspectives (whether left, center, right, Green, Libertarian, Reform, Communist, Socialist, etc.) or introduce balance of information in an effort to, at the very least, take Black political discourse beyond its dreadfully stale predictability?

It's called an intellectual exchange. An attempt to spark good, healthy discussion beyond the narrow confines of antiquated paradigms.

Bottom line is that regardless of what side of the ideological fence you may sit on, no one can presume that their argument is solid unless they - for even a few moments - take the time to analyze, dissect and fill the shoes of the other side.

You've got quite a bit of learning to do, not to mention taking a course in Political Science 101 to retain correct definitions of ideological points of view. You might want to consider populating that bookshelf, get cracking on a little Walters, a dose of Cruse, a cup of West, a few liters of Fanon, maybe some Frazier, DuBois, Washington, and Asante while you're at it.
quote:
Originally posted by Blackpolicy.org:

You are, obviously, not thorougly reading the blog nor familiarizing yourself with the site, or the online radio program or staff affiliated with the Center.


Well at least you are honest about your motivation. AfricanAmerica.org is a community. It is a place where people contribute and dialogue in a give and take that is designed to create real growth and learning. While I don't doubt the value of your site, I feel like you are approaching this community in a wholly usurious and exploitive manner. You are coming to try to take, without giving or contributing to what is here.

That's not how communities work. If I were MBM I would consider banning you.

quote:
You might want to check out his bio and the legislative agenda he promotes.


Why should any of us do that? You come into our house and then tell us to go check someone out someplace else because we have questions? Why not advise him to come and present himself here? Why not have him tell us what he is doing in an honest and straightforward way?

quote:

You've got quite a bit of learning to do, not to mention taking a course in Political Science 101 to retain correct definitions of ideological points of view. You might want to consider populating that bookshelf, get cracking on a little Walters, a dose of Cruse, a cup of West, a few liters of Fanon, maybe some Frazier, DuBois, Washington, and Asante while you're at it.


And now you malign a member in solid standing here merely because she also questions your motives? If you merely "came correct" you wouldn't be faced with this opposition. You seriously risk giving your site a bad name among a group of black thinkers who might otherwise be interested and active in what you are doing. Does that make sense?

Either become a real member of our community while being honest about your motivations or buy some advertising or something. bsm
Either become a real member of our community while being honest about your motivations or buy some advertising or something---LibDem

I rejected the possibility that this poster was the voice of an entire orgnization.

Why would anyone do that I thought, particularly if the organization was focused on 'black' issues. Clearly, the focus is not, overtly, aligned with African America.

It is disappointing to find not only an organization, but one that is the reflection f the thought, approval, of a legislator of unknown African ancestry who STILL projects himself/herself simply as 'black'.

These postings are editorials having gone throght the process of peer review and journalistic oversight.

Damn, MBM, whose your speech writer.

I support the suggestion that this legislator have the decency to represent himself/herself.

Anonymity is one thing.

Sending a messenger is something else entirely.

Could it be the mountain air??


It's called an intellectual exchange. An attempt to spark good, healthy discussion beyond the narrow confines of antiquated paradigms.---Blackpolicy.org

We appreciate 'intellectual exchange' or you won't be here.

AND...please, please tell me what, exactly, is the 'antiquated paradigms' discussed on the board.

Please don't run and hide, now.

You invited 'intellegent exchange'.

PEACE

Jim Chester
Considering the gravity of this crime and the position this man was in as a trusted congressmen with access to high level government secrets, he SHOULD go to jail. Further more, this story was definitely underreported. Only CNN carried this story live, other TV stations including local affiliates didn't even include this in their top stories. You know FOX covered it for about 1 minute. SO MUCH FOR LIBERAL MEDIA!
I would think that they would've been all over a story like this.
We found AfricanAmerica.org one of the most compelling Black forums in cyberspace. There are some extremely captivating and important conversations taking place. We simply wanted to take part in the fun and include this community in what we've recently developed over the past year.

Hence, some time ago, we formally approached the Founder (a.k.a. "MBM") with specific ideas for an extensive and strategic co-branding relationship which would be mutually beneficial for all involved. As with any proposal, that always takes time and there seems to be some good vibes flowing in that direction. We'll see what happens.
quote:
Originally posted by Blackpolicy.org:
The premise of your assertion is awfully misguided and misinformed.


No, it wasn't.

quote:
It would be fairly difficult to "thinly disguise" right-wing activites when the Executive Director of the Center for African American Policy (responsible for posting content on Blackpolicy.org) is also a well-known and very active young Democratic Black legislator from a rather "liberal" Denver who heads the Colorado State Senate and is one of the highest ranking African American state elected officials in the country. You might want to check out his bio and the legislative agenda he promotes.


I don't know what activities you're referring to, I referred only to the post. The thin disguise is your presentation of a right wing article without clarifying that someone from a site called redstate.org wrote it.

quote:
Is it shady to simply present various opposing perspectives (whether left, center, right, Green, Libertarian, Reform, Communist, Socialist, etc.) or introduce balance of information in an effort to, at the very least, take Black political discourse beyond its dreadfully stale predictability?


I've already explained the shady element to the post. Stale predictability? Because the discourse isn't interesting to you and yours by no means makes it stale or predictable. Your statement implies that no one here seeks out information from other sources or political perspectives. That is an arrogant and erroneous presumption.

quote:
It's called an intellectual exchange.


Intellectual exchanges are not enhanced by rightwing slant.

quote:
Bottom line is that regardless of what side of the ideological fence you may sit on, no one can presume that their argument is solid unless they - for even a few moments - take the time to analyze, dissect and fill the shoes of the other side.


Who is to say that none of the posters here have not taken the "time to to analyze, dissect and fill the shoes of the other side?" You? What makes you an authority on what the posters here have or have not done? ...another arrogant and erroneous presumption.

quote:
You've got quite a bit of learning to do, not to mention taking a course in Political Science 101 to retain correct definitions of ideological points of view.


Current day definitions of idealogical points of view have been distorted beyond recognition, but the difference between right wing and left wing ideology is clear to posters here.

quote:
You might want to consider populating that bookshelf, get cracking on a little Walters, a dose of Cruse, a cup of West, a few liters of Fanon, maybe some Frazier, DuBois, Washington, and Asante while you're at it.


Apparently your idea of an intellectual exchange is to personalize your dissent. Wink That tactic is as stale and predictable as a con-feed diatribe. ...not a surprise considering the right wing slant of some of the recent articles you've presented.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×