Troll

Okay, standing as an accused liberal, I've got to say I don't like Jesse either. But (you knew there was one), Jesse is just highly visible. Signifying not a whole lot of anything. So is Madonna and who listen to her.

I believe that the only "best interests" that people like Jese Jackson have in mind are their own. By pushing the idea of victimization, that they are "owed" by the white establishment, and that HE can get them what's coming to them, the Jesse Jacksons of this world guarantee themselves a job and a following.

Which changes nothing So Jesse is a con-man. He may even be a self deluding con-man. And there are always people who'll follow anyone who promises something for nothing. Its why pyramid schemes work so well. He may be one of the more dangerous types of con men, one who believes his own con.

Does that change that fact that there are structural barriers for some groups being able to share in the American version of paradise? Even if you steal an argument from the Durants, who commented that the gates to the old ghettoes were locked from both sides, that doesn't mitigate the problem. Whether the victimization is real or not, as long as it's perceived as real, it needs to be addressed.

What would happen if the Reverend Jackson started telling his followers that they could make it by study, by hard work and by adherence to traditional family values i.e. take responsibility for your children and give them a two-parent home for example.

There are a lot of non-Jesse followers who do that. And paradise remains as elusive as ever. There's just enough truth to his spiel to make it plausible. Its why a con works. The key is that there is some truth there.

What do you say when someone plays by all the rules and is still overtly kept on the outside? The fact that all the feel-good legislation and programs aren't very effective isn't the point.

Instead, he sets the example by having children out of wedlock and tells his followers that they are owed all sorts of special accomodations because they are victims, thereby perpetuating the situation.

Yes, he's part of the problem. And so are all the people who feel they are owed everything. But what about all the rest? The African Americans who think Jesse's an idiot. And still fell like they are being denied a chance? Talk to a loan officer sometime, very off the record, about unofficial policies and guidelines. Or a policeman in our own town. As a public defender we both know once commented as he was doing about 10 miles over the speed limit and I said something "Oh don't worry. Police won't stop us. Wrong color"

The Cubans, Koreans, Chinese, Japanese,Viet Namese and others who have come to this country have made it without all the help that Jackson and his ilk would have everyone believe is necessary. Yes, there was slavery in this country. It ended in 1865.

However, back in the 60's, I don't remember marching to get Chinese, Koreans or latino's the right to vote or to rent an apartment. I do remember sitting with my girlfriend and two African-American NAACP lawyers in her apartment with a cross burning outside the front and being told by the police "well what do you expect if you let those kind in your home?" BTW, that was the 1960's not the 1860's. I remember an apartment I had at the Beach. The couple across the hall was Chinese, Downstairs were more wasps. And the landlord wouldn't rent to African-Americans because "you know how they are". Which is why I moved, cause I knew how he was.

For whatever reason, the assimilation and acceptance hasn't happened. Jesse is a symptom and a leech. You seem to imply he's somehow a cause.

< I>In the past 45 years there have been hundreds of laws passed to end racial discrimination. If those laws are enforced, why should we still need special programs. Because people haven't changed? You cannot legislate the way people think. There have always been bigots and there always will be bigots. To think differently is to display a profound ignorance of human nature. We can legislate against actions but not against thoughts.

There may indeed always be bigots. Sadly, in some parts of the land, that's considered to good thing. There will always be obnoxious drunks too. I don't have to like them, tolerate them, or hang around them. What I should do is minimize the harm they cause and not tacitly accept that "oh well, they'll always be here. And when people glorify being drunk, I need to speak up. We all do. You do, btw. So is this arguing for the sake of arguing?

When the bigotry is institutionalized, of course you need laws to stop certain actions. The laws don't change anyone's minds. They're not supposed to. That's our jobs, as friends, neighbors, and citizens.

When the Democrats get over 90% of the African-American vote it's hard not to call that "lock-step" voting. The vote for Gore was certainly self-interest but Jackson and his demagogic brothers were out front telling them what their self-interest was and assuring them that they could make it happen only if the Democrats got in

Lock Step, perhaps. . But then so was, according to the polls, the vote of the less tolerant Christians.

And Jackson was out front, on the TV, in the news. That hardly equates to being a cause of it all. Or even showing that he's prolonging it. Just as Pat Robertson's pronouncements didn't cause the fundamentalist Christians to vote for W. They all remind me of the old phrase "I must hurry and catch the others, for I am their leader". . There is a story going around that the Voting Rights Act expires in a couple of years and a lot of African-Americans are worried about it happening. To date, I haven't heard Rev Jackson, Sharpton, or Mr M'fiune(sp?) address this lie. Why don't they set their followers minds at ease about this?

Maybe because debunking urban legends is a no-win situation?

Could it be that they want to keep things stirred up for their own purposes? We'll have to wait and see.

Could it be that it's easier to blame Jesse than address core problems? For society, I mean. Could it be that very few take the Voting Rights nonsense seriously? Could it be that you're taking this attitude in a deliberate attempt to irritate me?...but I digress.

Meanwhile, Jackson, who is a highly gifted speaker, pursues his own agenda under the guise of helping his followers.

Damn. The man's a demagogue and insincere. He's in good company. Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell Sharpton, and to some extent people like Limbaugh and Bortz(sp?). Brothers under the skin. They're a problem because they're opportunists, preying on fear and greed and hate and ego and seem to have little regard for consequences. Dare I say "ends justifying means". IMO, they're all scum who wrap themselves in righteousness. Probably self deluding scum.

Which changes nothing. The fundamental issues remain unaddressed and festering.

Regards

John