Raynard Jackson, Author at The Archive Site for The Baltimore Times

Liberals fumble the ball when it comes to the Redskins

(NNPA) — I constantly tell my readers to always remember the key tenant of liberalism is “intent, not result.” To a liberal, the ends always justify the means.

Now I want to paint several scenarios for you.

You go to a restaurant and tell your server you want seafood, but yet they insist on trying to get you to have a steak.

You go to vote and you tell the election official that you want a Republican ballot, but they try to convince you to take a Democratic ballot.

You go to buy orchestra tickets for a concert, but they try to get you to buy seats in the upper balcony.

Liberal orthodoxy implies that they know what you want more than you do, therefore, they should be able to force you to take what they are offering you.

Under each of the above scenarios, you the consumer should get what you want. You, after all, are the customer and you are the one spending the money. You know what you want to eat, you know how you want to vote, and you know where you want to sit.

So, I was not surprised in the least at the reaction of liberals last week to a major poll that was released about the Washington Redskins of the National Football League (NFL).

Over the past ten years or so, liberals have been on a national shaming campaign to force sports teams to change the names of any mascot “they” deem offensive, even if the supposed offended group is not offended.

The Redskins have come under enormous pressure from the N.F.L., President Obama, many in Congress, even the mayor of Washington, D.C., Muriel Bowser, to change the team’s name.

The last time I checked, the Redskins are a private corporation and receive no government funds; thus can do what the hell they want to do with their name. If you have an issue with their name, don’t attend their games or watch them on TV.

But, please don’t tell a private entity what they can and cannot do.

Liberals are notorious for making a conclusion and then trying to find facts to support their conclusion, versus looking at the facts and then making a conclusion based on these facts.

Liberals have been claiming that the name Redskins is offensive to Indians; therefore the name should be changed. Since the Redskins’ owner, Daniel Snyder has resisted the pressure to change the team’s name; liberals have branded him a “racist.”

Liberals became apoplectic last week when a poll came out indicating that 90 percent of Indians did not view the name Redskins as offensive to their community. Yep, you heard right.

According to an article in the Washington Times newspaper, “Opponents of the Washington Redskins name struggled to justify their opposition Thursday after an independent poll showed that fully 90 percent of American Indians surveyed said the name doesn’t offend them.

The results of the survey of 504 American Indians by The Washington Post were identical to those of a 2004 Annenberg Public Policy Center poll, meaning that a decade’s worth of advocacy by top progressives and media outlets against the Redskins name has moved the needle not a whit.

Still, those who find the name offensive said Thursday they still find the name offensive even if the people affected by it do not.”

This last sentence sums up the arrogance of liberals. They know better than the Indian community what is offensive and what is not.

The whole basis of their argument was that the name Redskins was offensive to the Indian community; now with empirical evidence to the contrary, they still refuse to change their position.

As I stated earlier, with liberals, intent always supersede results and the ends always justifies the means.

Liberals claim their intent is to fight bigotry, therefore ignoring this polling data is justified, because they have, in their mind, a “noble” goal.

You have several announcers from ESPN, NBC, CBS, etc., who refuse to use the name “Redskins” when broadcasting a game, even though it is the legal name for the team.

If these announcers feel so strongly about the use of the name Redskins, then they should resign from their jobs or be fired.

According to a Washington Time’s article, ESPN’s Michael Smith (who is Black) knows more about Indians than they do. “This is like, ‘Who are you to tell Native Americans what they should be offended by? I can read the dictionary. It’s a slur. Simple, plain, point-blank. It’s a slur.”

But the Indian community says it’s not offensive to them. So, who is Mr. Smith going to listen to; a dictionary put together by a group of White guys, or the very members of the supposed offended group?

Smith, by his own words is doing the very thing he is accusing the rest of society of doing—telling Indians how to feel.

This arrogance by liberals says to the Indian community, “we will tell you what is offensive to you.” Liberals simply can’t fathom the notion that Indians can and should make their own decisions about what offends them.

So, to all my liberal friends, get off the reservation of liberalism and let Tonto be free from the continued reign of “kemosabe.”

Raynard Jackson is founder and chairman of Black Americans for a Better Future (BAFBF), a federally registered 527 Super PAC established to get more Blacks involved in the Republican Party. BAFBF focuses on the Black entrepreneur. For more information about BAFBF, visit www.bafbf.org. You can follow Raynard on Twitter @Raynard1223.

This is why Republicans continue to lose the black vote

(NNPA) — Those who have followed my writings know that I have been and will continue to be very critical of my Republican Party over the lack of real engagement with the Black community.

I am now beginning to question whether there is room for Blacks in this Republican Party. The recently ended Republican primary tells me the answer is “no,” but when party leaders are questioned about it, the answer is always “yes.”

Between the Republican National Committee (RNC), the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), the National Republican Campaign Committee (NCCC), all the state parties, all the 527 political action committees, the Republican Governor’s Association, etc., there are about fifty Black staffers that I am aware of and probably upwards of 90 percent of those work for a member of congress, thus most Republican entities have no Black staffers, advisors, or consultants.

Republicans will counter that Blacks are an insignificant part of primary voters (about 2 percent), which is factually true, but that should not prevent the hiring of Black staffers, advisors, or consultants during this process.

Implicit in this bogus argument is that Blacks should only be hired to engage with the Black community. I totally reject this approach. As a matter of fact, if a campaign has a limited budget, they are better served by hiring a Black staffer over a White staffer.

Blacks, out of necessity, are forced to live in two worlds simultaneously. We have to be able to live and function within the Black community (where most of us live); but we must also be able to navigate the white community (where most of us work).

Most whites could not navigate the Black community effectively since most have absolutely no relationship within the community. So, by hiring a Black staffer, you get a two-fer. I find this an extremely compelling reason to hire a Black staffer.

To my utter and total dismay, every Republican presidential campaign other than one gets a failing grade on the issue of Black staffers.

You never hear the few Black Republicans who have a media platform talk about the lack of Black staffers within every level of the Republican Party. They are too caught up waiting for the proverbial pat on the head from their overseers.

You rarely, if ever, see them take a principled stand against the party when it comes to the invisible Black man.

You see them on CNN mouthing all the words they are told to speak and not bringing light to a party that is lurking in the dark.

According to the Gallop, “almost two-thirds of blacks identify as Democrats, with most of the rest identifying as independents. Only 5 percent of Blacks nationwide identify as Republicans.” This means about 29 percent of Blacks label themselves as “Independent.” In business, this 29 percent is called a “target market.”

Did we really need an autopsy report after the 2012 election to tell us what needed to be done to diversity our party? This was a cheap political stunt to give the party cover, because they didn’t really want to address the reality starring them in the face.

In typical Republican fashion, they appointed two minorities, one Black and one Hispanic, as co-chairs (the other three being Whites) of the committee. Then they had a White as the national face of the report who did most of the media interviews after the report was released.

This little fact is exhibit “A” in how Republicans just don’t get it. Why would they not have the Black and Hispanic as the face of the report to engage with the media? Duh!

Even when they try to do the right thing, they do it the wrong way.

The one person who understands these issues is the one person the Republican establishment tried to defeat, Donald J. Trump. He constantly talks about engaging with the Black community, he constantly talks about how illegal immigration has devastated the Black community, he constantly talks about how the Obama administration has been disastrous for Blacks and he has hired “real” Blacks and put them in positions of power.

Trump has substantively talked about the Black community more than the sum total of the 16 candidates he defeated. Yes, you heard me correctly.

Trump’s national spokesperson, Katrina Pierson, is all over TV speaking on behalf of the campaign. The visual of a Black female being the face of a presidential campaign is unprecedented and very powerful. Neurosurgeon and former presidential candidate, Dr. Ben Carson, is leading Trump’s vice presidential search; I can’t recall a Black ever serving in this position for any other Republican nominee.

The Republican Party has no Blacks that ever speak for the various entities listed above, so please don’t get mad when the Democrats label our party as racist; visually and optically, we are; on policy, not so much.

Democrats and Republicans are trying to brand Trump as racist, sexist, and a xenophobe. If these claims are true, I hope he continues to live up to those characterizations; because if he does, he will be sworn in as the 45th president of these United States.

If you don’t believe what I am saying, maybe you will believe one of Trump’s long-time employees, Lynne Patton. This video says it all.

Black liberals are hypocrites when it comes to the N-word

(NNPA) — Once again, two nights ago, liberal hypocrisy was on full display at the White House Correspondents’ Association’s (WHCA) annual dinner. The dinner was begun in the early 1920s and usually the incumbent president and vice president of the United States attend. It is supposed to be a time of merriment and humor; but over time, it has become more and more of a liberal lovefest for the journalistic community in Washington, D.C.

Members of this group brag about their supposed storied history, but as is habit with liberal journalists, they only tell you what they want you to know. The first thing one should do is take special note of is the first word in its name. I rest my case.

What’s not included in their own historical narrative is the fact that they didn’t allow women to join until 1962. WHCA leaders were forced to change that policy figuratively at gunpoint.

In 1962, iconic journalist, Helen Thomas urged President Kennedy not to attend the dinner unless the WHCA changed their policy on female membership in the organization. They agreed and Kennedy attended the event.

The other thing the WHCA won’t tell you is that in their more than one century of existence, they only had one Black journalist to head the group, Robert M. Ellison of the Sheridan Broadcasting Network, and have only had one Black on their board (April Ryan, White House correspondent and Washington bureau chief for American Urban Radio Networks).

In recent years, WHCA has begun to hire noted comedians to provide the entertainment for their dinner. They have hired comedians like Sinbad, Jay Leno, Jon Stewart, and Al Franken, to name a few.

For this year’s dinner, they hired comedian Larry Wilmore (who is Black), the host of “The Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore” on Comedy Central.

Wilmore was an unmitigated disaster. But what was even more disastrous than Wilmore’s performance was the deafening silence from liberals to his act.

You can view his unedited performance on C-SPAN’s website. His ending was what got everyone’s attention and not in a good way.

Speaking directly to President Barack Obama, Wilmore said, “But behind that joke is the humble appreciation for the historical implications for what your presidency means. When I was a kid, I lived in a country where people couldn’t accept a Black quarterback. Now think about that. A Black man was thought by his mere color not good enough to lead a football team. And now to live in your time, Mr. President, when a Black man can lead the entire free world. Words alone do me no justice. So, Mr. President, if I’m going to keep it 100, Yo, Barry, you did it, my nigga!”

Obama grinned from ear to ear and gave Wilmore a bear hug.

If a White comedian, especially a conservative one, had called the first Black president “my nigga” he would have been immediately excoriated and rightfully so.

When Trump questioned Obama’s birth certificate, the media gave the issue wall to wall coverage. The Democratic National Committee (DNC), the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), the National Association of Colored People (NAACP), the Urban League, Al Sharpton, Joy Reed, Melissa Perry, etc. all demanded every Republican official to immediately “repudiate” Trump; and if they didn’t, these liberal groups and individuals implied that these Republicans somehow agreed with Trump’s position.

I find it totally hypocritical now that these same liberal groups and individuals have all come down with a severe case of laryngitis.

As of this printing, the WHCA has not issued so much as an apology to the president or the American people for the total and incomprehensible disrespect Wilmore showed towards our first elected Black president.

What have we, in the Black community done, to create an environment where a person, let alone a Black person, feels comfortable calling the president of the United States “my nigga?”

If we can’t condemn a Black for using this insidious word, how can we justify criticizing others for doing the same thing?

How can we criticize Jennifer Lopez or the Quentin Tarantino, the director of the cult classic “Pulp Fiction” and “Django Unchained” for using it? How can we criticize former West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd for using it on the senate floor or during an interview with “60 Minutes?”

Instead of Obama nervously laughing at Wilmore’s description of him, he should have immediately taken to the microphone and denounced Wilmore on the spot.

So, to all my liberal media friends, especially the Black ones, the next time Trump makes a statement you disagree with, I don’t want to hear your moralizing lectures about racism and civility.

The next time a Republican official makes a stupid, racially-charged comment about Obama (and they will), I hope those same liberal members of the media will also get a sudden case of laryngitis like you did over the Wilmore foolishness.

I know why Republicans are silent on this issue—they have absolutely no credibility within the Black community. But liberals “claim” to love Black folks, but yet they can’t muster enough courage to take a principled stand and denounce Wilmore’s performance.

What a shame this moment has found them totally unprepared for the moment that could have been their finest hour (Jackson out, drops mic).

Traditional values are popular in the black community

(NNPA) — What do these four people all have in common: Wardell Stephen “Steph” Curry, II, better known as Steph Curry, Ayesha Alexander Curry, Carvin Haggins and BriaMarie?

Yes, they are all involved in entertainment at the highest levels. Yes, they all have achieved some measure of success within the industry. Yes, they are all Black. Yes, they are all Christians and yes they are all Americans.

But I think the other things they have in common are infinitely more important. They have never received a congratulatory phone call from President Obama for their courage to come out of the closet about their Christian faith. They have never been interviewed on MSNBC. They have never been cited by Sen. Harry Reid or Rep. Nancy Pelosi for speaking up for those who don’t have a voice and they have never been invited by Michelle Obama to sit in her box during the State of the Union.

While these snubs should be worn as a badge of honor, it also points to the fact that Blacks who have committed to living a “values-based” life are quite often and intentionally ignored.

These four individuals are each in the public eye and are not hesitant to talk about their Christian faith as the key to them enjoying the level of success each of them has attained. By any standard, they have all proven to be model citizens, both publicly and privately. They all live “PG” lifestyles.

But, the real reason people like these are so often ignored in and by the media is because they are Black, heterosexual, American citizens, who are God fearing Christians.

Stephen and Ayesha met at a church youth group in North Carolina. They were 15 and 14 respectively. They both attended Davidson College and there they began dating. They married in July of 2011.

They asked their friends to forego getting them wedding presents, but instead to make a contribution to ThanksUSA, a charitable organization that provides college scholarships for the children of those serving in the military. Curry serves as their national spokesman.

Curry’s team, the Golden State Warriors, won the NBA championship this past June and Curry was named the Most Valuable Player (MVP) in the NBA for 2015.

During his acceptance speech, Curry said, “First and foremost I have to thank my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for blessing me with the talent to play this game…I do a little sign on the court every time I make a score or make a good pass, I pound on my chest and point to the sky; that symbolizes that I have a heart for God…and as a reminder of who I am playing for…People should know who I represent and why I am who I am and that’s because of my Lord and Savior.”

Even Curry’s line of basketball shoes with Under Armour comes with a Bible verse on each pair for which he has come under some criticism ala former NFLer, Tim Tebow. Curry’s wife is a successful actress, model, and a mom.

Carvin Haggins is a multi-Grammy Award-winning songwriter/producer who has worked with some of the biggest names in music—Algebra, Justin Timberlake, Ledisi, Musiq Soulchild, Jill Scott, Chris Brown, BriaMarie and Jazmine Sullivan to name a few.

Haggins, who is also an ordained minister, has the audacity to think that he could write positive, uplifting songs and still have his music at the top of all the music charts. His record label, Ethical Music Entertainment, will only work with artists who are committed to living a “values-based” life.

BriaMarie is the first artist signed to Haggins label. Her inaugural CD, “Freshman,” was just released last year.

She is a native of Columbia, Md., and a graduate of Temple University (with a 3.8 GPA). She has what I call “brains, beauty, and values (BBV).” She sings, writes, and plays several instruments, but most importantly, she is a Christian woman of virtue.

Her CD takes you on her journey through her metamorphosis from a caterpillar into a beautiful black butterfly. She was bullied most of her life, therefore she has taken up this issue as one of her charitable initiatives. She travels across the country sharing with students her personal story of how she overcame the effects of bullying in her life.

People of faith cannot count on the mainstream media to promote and highlight those of us who have chosen to live a values based life. The values-based community must do a much better job of highlighting those who are living examples of a values-based lifestyle.

The four people in this column are not exceptions to the rule, but rather they are the norm. The liberal media would have you believe that people like Beyoncé, Bruce Jenner, Michael Sam and Miley Cyrus are the norm. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In the Black community especially, these four people are our norm. They represent our traditions and they live our values. Politically, no one reaches out to this group and the liberal media wants to continue to perpetuate the myth that there are no values-based celebrities who are Black.

If you share the above values, I strongly encourage you to support all the projects these individuals are involved in. Only then can we take back our country.

Homosexuality is the new black

(NNPA) — In order to have a fully functioning society, we must have some common baseline of beliefs that join us together, whether it’s a fraternity, a church, or a political party. Without this commonality, belonging to a group or a society is impossible.

We hold these trues to be self-evident: the Earth is round, the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, Barack Obama is the president of the United States, and if you are born with a penis you are a male. If you are born with a vagina you are a female.

Oh-oh! These last two are going to get me in trouble. Now I will be called homophobic, hateful, un-Christian, a divider, not fit for public service, unfit for management in corporate America, etc., but the question is, “Why?”

In God’s senility, he has become so old and feeble that he is making a lot of mistakes. He is mistakenly putting penises on girls and vaginas on boys. As the philosopher Protagoras argued, “Man has become the measure of all things.” This was the essence of the philosophy called relativism.

Many Christians and conservatives have willingly bowed at the altar of political correctness for political gain. Why do we feel the need to apologize for not wanting a man going to same bathroom as our 14 year-old daughter? Why do we feel the need to apologize for not wanting a woman going to the same bathroom as our 16 year-old son?

Spineless corporate America has never shown in any principles when it has come to issues of right and wrong. They respond only to profit and liberal orthodoxy. Why would a business oppose legislation describing those born with a penis as male and those born with a vagina as female?

These orbiters of “moral hypocrisy” have come out of the closet, literally, against the state of North Carolina because their governor, Pat McCrory, recently signed legislation codifying the biological principle of male and female.

How this bill, HB2, is being described as hateful and discriminatory is baffling to me. Singer Bruce Springsteen has made this his cause célèbre by cancelling his upcoming concert in Greensboro, North Carolina. Bruce seemed to have gotten laryngitis when it came to the lack of any Black actor nominees for the past two years for the Academy Awards, but I digress.

If the corporate community showed the same amount of outrage over the “real” discrimination towards the Black community, we would have more Blacks in the executive suites and on their corporate boards.

According to 2013 research by Richard L. Zweigenhaft of Guilford College, the board of directors of Fortune 500 companies are:

Whites 87.2% (about 75% male)

Black 6.8% (5.3% male)

Latinos 3.1% (2.4% male)

Asians 2.4% (2% male)

Now let’s look at sports.

Based on 2013 research from Richard Lapchick, director of the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport at the University of Central Florida, the demographic breakdown of the players and owners of the NBA and NFL respectively are:

NBA Players Ownership Head Coaches League office staff

White 19% 98% 53% 64%

Black 76% 2% 43% 18%

Latinos 4% 0 3% 6%

Asians <1% 0 0 0

NBA Players Ownership Head Coaches League office staff

White 30% 97% 88% 72%

Black 66% 0% 9% 9%

Latinos <0% 0 3% 5%

Asian <1% 3% 0 10%

Homosexuals are estimated to be 3 percent of the U.S. population, but yet corporations are more aggressively seeking diversity based on sexual preferences than other measures of diversity.

Based on the above numbers, corporations, the NBA and the NFL should focus more on the lack of diversity among Blacks and Latinos on their corporate boards and the ownership and management of professional sporting teams;, not on this radical leftist agenda to allow confused people to go into bathrooms with people of the opposite sex.

The homosexual community has done a masterful job at the old art of bait and switch. They have portrayed their issue as one of equality, but their real goal is to obtain “legal status” as a protected class in order to get their radical agenda codified into law. All this other stuff is simply background noise.

Isn’t it amazing that former homosexual football player, Michael Sam, recently told Attitude Magazine, “It’s terrible. You want to be accepted by other people, but you don’t even accept someone just because of the color of their skin? I just don’t understand that at all. How are you saying that, “oh, I want people to accept me because I’m gay, but I don’t accept you because you’re Black or because you’re White or because you’re Asian.”

But yet, the corporate community throws millions of dollars at the white homosexual community despite their well-known discrimination of Black homosexuals. Can someone please reconcile this fact for me?

These same corporations that are criticizing HB2 in North Carolina are actively doing and pursuing business in countries that are the most repressive in the world in their treatment of homosexuals.

The NBA plays several exhibition games in China and spends millions of dollars advertising in this country. Google, PayPal, Facebook, Delta Airlines, Hilton Hotels, and Coca-Cola do millions of dollars of business in Saudi Arabia, China, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc.

So, if they are so concerned about the treatment of homosexuals, why do they do business in these repressive countries?

This has nothing to do with equality and everything to do with the politics. Homosexuals don’t deserve special treatment based on their sexual preferences, but they do deserve equal treatment based on their humanity.

Trump’s hostile takeover of the Republican Party

(NNPA) — I have repeatedly heard many of the talking heads in Washington, D.C. and the Republican establishment accuses Donald Trump and his presidential campaign of engaging in a hostile takeover of the Republican Party. I agree with them.

Raynard Jackson, NNPA columnist

Having received my undergraduate degree from Oral Roberts University in tax accounting, let’s define what is a hostile takeover.

According to Investopedia, “a hostile takeover is the acquisition of one company (called the target company) by another (called the acquirer) that is accomplished not by coming to an agreement with the target company’s management, but by going directly to the company’s shareholders or fighting to replace management in order to get the acquisition approved.”

Investopedia continues, “the key characteristic of a hostile takeover is that the target company’s management does not want the deal to go through.”

Typically a company is targeted for a hostile takeover when their assets are considered to be undervalued. Trump sees the Black community as an undervalued asset within the Republican Party.

Unfortunately, many in the party see no value in the Black community because they don’t think they will ever vote Republican. These are the consultants that go from one losing campaign to another, doing the same thing, and wonder why they never win an election.

In 2016, you still have people in the party that believe if you seek the Black vote it will alienate White voters, therefore they should ignore the Black vote.

Trump sees the Republican Party and the Black vote as an undervalued asset and its management totally incompetent. He is right on both counts.

The Republican Party, as currently constituted, is the party of old White men. Trump sees a great opportunity to expand the party’s market share by cultivating substantial relations with the Black and Hispanic communities, not just with words, but also by his actions.

Trump’s national spokesman is a Black female; his state director in North Carolina is a Black male. No other presidential campaign or party institution has Black staffers in such a position. Trump has publically stated his goal of getting at least 25 percent of the Black vote. No other presidential campaign or party institution has made such a goal.

The Republican Party will continue to be an undervalued asset as long as they hire consultants who go from losing campaign to losing campaigns.

We have a national convention coming up in July, but where are the Black staffers who have decision making powers? Where are the Black delegates? Where are the Black vendors? Will there be any Black entertainment?

Yes, Trump does say some incendiary things and can be quite impolitic at times. But like anyone who is thrust from high school to the NBA, there will be some growing pains and many unforced errors (LeBron James, Kobe Bryant).

One way of trying to prevent a hostile takeover is by using a poison pill. The purpose of the poison pill is to prevent the takeover from ever happening.

Marco Rubio said, “Trump can’t win the general election.” Nebraska’s United States Senator Ben Sasse said, “I will never vote for Trump.” Defeated campaign staffers constantly go on TV and talk about how Trump can’t beat Hillary or he will never get the female vote, etc.

They don’t really believe that, but this is the poison pill that the establishment is putting up because they can’t fathom the idea of an outsider like Trump becoming president and they have little to no access to the inner circle.

Republicans have spoken out more on racial issues during the past two weeks than they have in my entire time as a Republican; not because they are so concerned about racism, but because they think it will hurt Trump’s candidacy.

The shareholders of the party (Republican voters) have no faith in the current management (congressional leaders, the consultant class, Republican TV pundits, etc.) so they have told the establishment that they strongly support a hostile takeover (by Trump).

They have made this perfectly clear with their vote. Those opposed to Trump’s takeover have spent north of $ 30 million in just two weeks to try to damage Trump before the Florida and Ohio elections last week; but Trump still won four out of five states.

The shareholders want new management and they want Trump to lead the team. The shareholders have repeatedly told the current management that they don’t want amnesty for illegals, they don’t want these trade deals, they don’t want continued increases in government spending; but the current management told the shareholders to sit down and shut up, thus the rise of Trump.

Hostile takeovers usually catch management by surprise because they have gotten complacent, lazy, and comfortable; thus making them out of touch with their shareholders.

Clearly, the Republican establishment caused this problem and now they are trying to stop the takeover from happening. Well, it’s too little too late and they will be forced to accept the inevitable.

Raynard Jackson is Founder and Chairman of Black Americans for a Better Future (BAFBF), a federally registered 527 Super PAC established to get more Blacks involved in the Republican Party that focuses on the Black entrepreneur. Learn more information about BAFBF at www.bafbf.org.

Debating the debates

Every time I think the media has sunk below the point of no return on the scale of embarrassment; they prove to the world that there is truly no floor for how low they can go.

Raynard Jackson, NNPA columnist

Of course I am talking about last week’s Republican presidential debate hosted by the Comedy News Network (CNN). The on air talent did not try to hide the fact that their stated goal, individually and as a supposed news outlet, was to get the candidates to attack each other personally.

Both the preliminary and main debates each spent the first 20 minutes or so talking exclusively about Donald Trump; not about the policy positions of Trump, but rather about some personal comment he made about one of the candidates.

For CNN, the debates were all about theatrics and “gotcha” moments; it was all about ratings and ultimately money by selling advertising during the debates.

During future presidential elections, all debates, both Republican and Democrat, should be hosted by C-SPAN where they are known to make the on air talent as invisible as possible. Debates should be about the issues that are affecting the American people, not all the sideshows that the media are interested in promoting.

Most of the elite media, with its openly liberal bias, makes these debates about them and their networks, not about the American people.

I am also very amazed and amused by the elite media’s constant lecturing about diversity— see actor Matt Damon lecturing black film producer Effie Brown about the lack of diversity in Hollywood— and yet they rarely display it when given the opportunity.

Why does the media and both the Republican and Democratic Party continue to ignore the more than 200-black owned newspapers in the U.S.? To my knowledge, there has never been a reporter from a black newspaper asked to be part of a presidential debate by either party.

CNN and FOX News think so little of their own black on air talent that they made a conscious decision to go with their default position— all white!

I also put the blame on the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ). I don’t know why they have not made a public fuss about the lack of diversity in these presidential debates. I am not a journalist, I am a columnist, but yet I spend more time advocating for their members than they do— go figure.

We have had two Republican debates, yet not one question about how amnesty for illegals would further decimate the black community; not one question about “specific” Republican solutions to the high black unemployment rate under Obama; not one question about how Obama’s policies have devastated Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs); not one question about “specific” Republican solutions to the shrinking percentage of loans from the Small Business Administration (SBA) to black businesses going from 8 percent under Bush to 1.8 percent under Obama.

Do you really think a white reporter is even aware of these indices affecting the black community or even care about them? This is why diversity is important; it makes you aware of things that normally would be of no consequence to you simply because you have no direct connection to the issue.

When the most vulnerable of a society is stronger, those at the top are even stronger.

Yet the media has feigned righteous indignation all because last week Donald Trump didn’t chastise a questioner at one of his town-hall meetings for castigating the Muslim community. Really?

Weak people take strong positions on weak issues; but I digress.

In these two presidential debates so far, I can guarantee that no blacks had any input into who the panelists would be or the questions that would be asked. Am I the only one who continues to notice the optics of these debates?

None of the candidates have been seen arriving at the venue with any blacks accompanying them; no blacks have been seen in the spin rooms after the debates representing any of the candidates on TV, radio, or newspapers; I am not aware of any blacks being involved in the debate preparations of any of the candidates.

For all the talk of the renewed focus on diversity within the Republican Party, there is absolutely no visible evidence of it anywhere. If the Republican Party and these various news networks are not able to identify blacks to participate in their efforts, please contact me and I will be more than happy to introduce you to very capable blacks with relevant experience.

Have you ever wondered where Republicans find white staffers for their campaigns? Have you ever wondered where the media finds all of their white on air talent? Hmmm, just wondering.

I will continue to speak and write about these issues because if they are not dealt with immediately, we Republicans will continue to lose the White House— and on this issue, there is no debate.

Raynard Jackson & Associates, LLC is an internationally recognized political consulting, government affairs, and PR firm based in Washington, D.C. Jackson is an internationally recognized radio talk show host and TV commentator. He has coined the phrase “straticist.” As a straticist, he has merged strategic planning with public relations. For more information, visit his website: www.raynardjackson.com.

NFL keeps fumbling

(NNPA) — I am sick and tired of all the hypocrisy swirling around pro athletes and the National Football League (NFL) in particular. With all the accusation about domestic violence and child abuse consuming the NFL, I wonder why the public wants to hold athletes to a standard that they don’t want to live by.

Raynard Jackson, NNPA columnist

If you work in the private sector as an accountant, engineer, or a secretary, there is a bright red line separating your professional life from your private life. Your job may prohibit you from smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol at work; but they cannot mandate that you abstain from such activities in the confines of your home. If what you do at home impacts your job performance, that may be grounds for termination; but in general, your job cannot punish you for the things you do in your private life.

Professional sports are slightly different simply because athletes sign a contract and there is a “moral” clause that is part of the agreement. The moral clause basically says that if you bring disrespect to your team or the league because of “bad” behavior that can be grounds for terminating a player’s contract.

So, let’s be real, pro sports could care less about domestic violence or child abuse (nor should they— they are not a social welfare agency). They are about making money and if they have to pretend to care about these issues to keep the money flowing, then they are willing to make an example of Ray Rice and anyone else who stands between them and their $10 billion a year revenue.

So is there any substance to this “culture of violence” in pro sports, specifically the NFL? Let me kick the statistics. There are 1,696 players in the NFL, 1,280 in Major League Baseball (MLB), and 450 in the National Basketball Association (NBA) for a total of 3,426 professional athletes.

Let me try to add a little context to this discussion. The San Diego Union-Tribune has been tracking arrests of NFL players dating back to the year 2000. They calculated the annual arrest rate per 1,000 NFL players by type of crime committed. The three most common charges are DUI, assault/battery and drug possession.

Compared to adult men in the general population, an NFL player is 11 percent less like to get a DUI charge, 23 percent less like to get an assault charge, and 59 percent less likely to get a drug charge. So, if there is going to be any outrage expressed, it should be directed towards the American population as a whole, not the NFL and its players.

The issue swirling around the NFL is about public relations, not about how their players treat women. For the NFL, bad PR means less money; so they are reacting to their corporate sponsors, not because of some concern for women’s issues.

Isn’t it ironic that feminists groups such as the National Organization of Women (NOW) are calling for Roger Goodell’s head, but they have said nothing about Nike using child labor under slave-like conditions to make shoes for the NFL when many of these workers are women and little girls.

Isn’t it ironic that Rice and his wife both admitted to being drunk when they had their fight; but yet there is no “moral outrage” being directed towards Anheuser-Bush?

If you are going to hold team owners and the NFL responsible for the conduct of their adult players; shouldn’t you also hold the beer company that provided the alcohol to the player just as responsible?

The point is, individuals make choices and must be held accountable based on those choices. If Anheuser-Bush is not responsible for a person driving while drunk, the Baltimore Ravens shouldn’t be responsible for what a player does away from his job.

The NFL is going to allocate tens of millions of dollars to all kinds of women’s groups to prove they “get” it. They will do the same thing for child abuse now that the Adrian Peterson situation has become public.

Thus far, all the players making the headlines are black in a league that is 67 percent black, so what does Roger Goodell do? He hires three white women to help advise him on women’s issues. When black women called him out on this, he basically said sit down and shut up.

Brian McCarthy, Goodell’s spokesman issued this statement: “There is a need for diverse thinking to address the issue…and that the effort to better handle this issue is a collaborative one… To be successful and make a real difference, the entire NFL will be responsible for the development and implementation of education, training and support programs.”

In other words, these white women and the white commissioner will make all the decision and then they will get black women’s input once they have allocated all the funds to white women’s groups who deal with domestic violence and child abuse.

Seems like the NFL continues to fumble the ball.

Raynard Jackson is president & CEO of Raynard Jackson & Associates, LLC., a Washington, D.C.-based public relations/government affairs firm. He can be reached through his website: www.raynardjackson.com.

NFL threw Ray Rice under the bus

By now most people have heard how Ray Rice has been thrown under the bus by the National Football League (NFL) and his former team, the Baltimore Ravens.

Raynard Jackson, NNPA columnist

First, some background for the non-football fans. Rice was drafted by the Ravens in the second round (55th overall) of the 2008 NFL draft. He signed a four-year contract for $2.805 million plus a $ 1.1 million signing bonus. Last year, he signed a five-year, $35 million contract, paying him a $15 million signing bonus.

Second, here are some cold facts:

*On February 15, both Rice and his then-fiancée, Janay Palmer, were arrested and charged with assault after a fight at an Atlantic City, N.J. casino.

*On March 27, a grand jury indicted Rice on third-degree aggravated assault (charges against Palmer were dropped).

*On March 28, Rice married Palmer (the date had been planned and announced before the assault charge).

*On May 20, Rice was allowed to enter into a pretrial diversion program. Upon successful completion of the program, which will be a minimum of one year, the third-degree charge of aggravated assault causing serious bodily injury would be dismissed. The arrest would remain on his record, but with no conviction.

*On July 24, the NFL suspends Rice for two games.

*On July 25, the Raven’s organization rallies around Rice.

*On August 28, the NFL established domestic violence policy for the league.

*On September 8, the celebrity Website TMZ releases video of Rice knocking out his wife in an elevator and dragging her out of the elevator when it stopped.

*On September 8, the Raven’s terminates Rice from the team.

*On September 8, 2014, the NFL suspends Rice from the league indefinitely.

The Associated Press reports that on September 10, a law enforcement official says he sent damaging video of Rice knocking out his then-fiancee to the NFL, despite League denials.

The above narrative is the only thing we know to be indisputable.

Prior to the video’s release, Rice had been caught on a security camera dragging his fiancée out of the elevator. That got him suspended for two games without pay. The penalty, which some criticized as too lenient, cost him about $530,000 in salary.

Now that everyone has seen the graphic video of the actual event, people have all of a sudden become filled with phony righteous indignation. Rice should have been punished not because of the video, but because of the act itself. But doing a bait-and-switch on his punishment amoung to pilling on.

Now many professional athletes, entertainers, politicians and the public want to make public statements about how terrible a person Ray Rice is.

Where was this outrage before the release of the video? Where is the outrage from these athletes and entertainers about the precious black children being killed in Chicago? Where is their outrage about anything other than collecting a bigger paycheck?

To ultra-feminist groups, especially the National Organization of Women (NOW), why are you so selective in your outrage about how women are treated? To this day, you have never criticized Beyoncé for objectifying herself and women in her music. Yet you criticize Hip Hop for the same thing. Where is their outrage about a woman who raped a child in Arizona when he was 14 and now, at 20, is being forced to pay child support for a six-year-old child he never knew existed?

It sickens me that people want to take, by all accounts, a good person and kick dirt in his face because he made a terribly horrible mistake; a mistake because there was nothing in his past that indicated this type of behavior. Even more troubling is the contention that Ray Rice does not deserve a second chance. That’s a mighty high standard, considering human frailty.

There was absolutely nothing in the video that Rice hadn’t already admitted to police and the Baltimore Ravens. The Ravens have admitted as much. The difference is that the NFL faced a growing backlash, based on the release of the video.

Rice is not guilty of breaking any laws. The criminal justice system— with everyone having access to the controversial video— treated Rice as the first-time offender that he was. He was dismissed by the NFL for violating the league’s, “conduct” policy. In other words, for “conduct detrimental to the league.” Once, that is invoked by the league or a team, based on their collective bargaining agreement, punishment can be anything from a fine to being banned from the sport.

The NFL, after meting out a two-game suspension, changed the rules in the middle of the ride. After serving half of his two-game suspension, Rice was retroactively given a death sentence.

Residents of Ferguson need to make a change

I’m Gonna Make A Change,

For Once In My Life

It’s Gonna Feel Real Good,

Gonna Make A Difference

Gonna Make It Right…

I’m Starting With The Man In

The Mirror

I’m Asking Him To Change

His Ways

And No Message Could Have

Been Any Clearer

If You Wanna Make The World

A Better Place

Take A Look At Yourself, And

Then Make A Change

(From Michael Jackson’s hit song: “Man in the Mirror”)

This song is very appropriate for the situation going on in Ferguson, Missouri. Regardless of what happens during all the legal wrangling, one thing is certain: the residents of Ferguson have had all the power they ever needed to make the change they have been seeking and they haven’t used it.

Raynard Jackson, NNPA columnist

Some have argued that Ferguson is symbolic of “inner city America.” They argue that Ferguson is about racism, hopelessness, structural and systemic discrimination, and blacks who feel helpless.

Well, it’s kind of hard to make these arguments when blacks are almost 70 percent of Ferguson’s population.

According to the 2010 U.S. Census, there are 14,297 blacks and 6,206 whites; 22 percent live in poverty; the mayor is white; there is only one black on a six-member city council (.096 percent); three blacks out of 53 policemen (5.6 percent); and the St. Louis suburb is the sixth most segregated city in the Uniteed States.

As a native of St. Louis, I worked closely with my friend, Freeman R. Bosley, Jr. in his successful efforts to become the first black Circuit Clerk for the 22nd Judicial Circuit in 1983 and the first black mayor in 1993 (with 66 percent of the vote). Blacks were a majority of the city; so I thoroughly understand the power of the vote.

Juxtapose this with the voting history of Ferguson. In this year’s elections only 12.3 percent of eligible voters actually voted (17 percent white, six percent black); 11.7 percent in 2013; and 8.9 percent in 2012.

How can one argue that blacks have no power? A more accurate statement is that blacks have refused to exercise their power. You can’t blame that on the “white man” or “racism” or the “system.” In the Wizard of Oz, the Lion already had courage; the Tin man already had a heart, and the Scarecrow already had a brain; but they had all been so psychologically abused that they couldn’t see the power they already had.

The Wizard just simply reminded them of what they already had. Upon the prompting from the Wizard, they began to actually believe again in themselves and the power lying dormant inside of them.

Many across the country are asking: What do the residents of Ferguson want? Thus far, their response has been “justice;” meaning they want the white policeman who killed Michael Brown, Darren Wilson, indicted, convicted and sent to jail. Well, that is out the control of any one person. The facts of what happened must be established and then let the justice system function.

The fact that blacks have the power of the vote is undeniable. They have the power to control the political climate in Ferguson— that is no fairytale. The question is do they have the courage to look at the man in the mirror and make that change? Do they have the heart to change their apathetic approach to voting as a perpetual tribute to Michael Brown? Do they have the brains to understand the power dynamics of voting?

Just like the Wizard did nothing to change the conditions of Dorothy and her friends, there is nothing America needs to do for Ferguson that they can’t do for themselves. They have everything they need. Maybe the death of Brown will be the reminder of what has been lying dormant in the residents of Ferguson all along.

Maybe after all of the marches are over, they will be, as Fannie Lou Hamer put it, “sick and tired of being sick and tired.”

Ferguson has non-partisan elections, meaning no votes are cast based on party affiliation, but vote for the individual.

The residents of Ferguson need to begin to run— and vote for— candidates who can best represent their interests. The government can provide tax credits and other tax incentives for businesses to locate to Ferguson. Social service agencies can provide job-training programs and the federal government will even help provide much needed training of their police force.

However in the end, Ferguson will have to look at the man— and the woman— in the mirror and make that change.