The Boyce Blog

Oprah Winfrey, Bob Johnson, Barack Obama: What Gives in this Election?

2008-04-11T10:35:00.000-07:00

Oprah Winfrey, Barack Obama and Bob Johnson: Making Financial Lemonade with Few Demographic Lemons
By Dr. Boyce Watkins
www.BoyceWatkins.com

Oprah Winfrey’s support for Senator Barack Obama, while certainly admirable, has cost her some support among fans. According to a recent poll, Winfrey’s approval rating was 74% before the election, dropping to 61% after turning her support toward Obama. At the end of the Jeremiah Wright controversy, her approval rating dropped further to 55%.

I admired Oprah a great deal for stepping out in support of Senator Obama. I also knew that she would pay the greatest price for this bold political move. What surprised me about Oprah’s support for Senator Obama was the fact that she was willing to do damn near the exact opposite of what made her a billionaire: take political sides in a nasty race. She also had the audacity to support a highly qualified black man over a well-respected, powerful woman. When reporters asked me about Oprah’s decision to step out on the limb of controversy, I simply said “Damn, I thought I was the only one crazy enough to do things like that. Oprah’s going to get fried for it.”

Entertainment is based on popularity. The more of a jelly-like spine you have, the better off you’re going to be. You have to be able to move with the crowd and makes folks feel good. DL Hughley from Def Comedy Jam even appeared on several shows referring to the black women from Rutgers University as “Nappy Headed Hoes”, all so he could build a little extra fame on the back of a very serious issue. Entertainment moguls like Oprah Winfrey and Bob Johnson are the best when it comes to telling people exactly what they want to hear, and they’ve become quite wealthy for it.

But it is Oprah’s willingness to take a serious stand on critical social issues that will serve as the dividing line between the legacies of billionaires Winfrey and Johnson. Oprah will be celebrated and remembered 100 years from today. People will only think that “Bob Johnson” is the name of an exotic sex toy. Johnson’s time capsule will contain DVDs of BET (Booties, Exploitation and Thugs) videos, while Oprah’s capsule will contain pictures of the young women attending the school she built in Africa. I am not a woman, but even I am empowered by someone who stands up so firmly for women’s rights. So, I give a big “You go girl” to Oprah for doing something that many wealthy black entertainers with predominantly white audiences are not quite willing to do.

At the same time, it was Oprah’s decision to be a BLACK woman (not just a woman) and support Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton that led to the backlash from her audience. Simultaneously, it was Bob Johnson’s allegiance to Senator Clinton that led to him being compared to Uncle Ruckass, the first class Uncle Tom from the TV show “The Boondocks”. Both billionaires shifted away from their policies, and both of them are getting hammered for it.

Oprah and Bob were reminded of a valuable lesson: Popularity and politics just don’t mix.

People don’t pay their black entertainers to take political stands. They pay them to dance, sing and make jokes. One can’t wear the white suit of entertainment and swim in the dirty waters of racially-divisive American politics.

One thing I know about money is that it can empower and liberate you. The problem is that money can also enslave you. Many black professors at top white universities fear losing their precious jobs if they speak out on social injustice. So, we spend our entire careers writing research papers that no one ever reads, while a world that starves for our intellect dies around us. There are hoards of angry black middle class Americans who fear opening their mouths because they won’t be able to keep up the payments on the Lexus. We all understand, on some level, the tradeoffs that Oprah, Johnson and Obama are forced to make.

One of the great dilemmas of the black experience is that we judge one another on our ability to obtain wealth, power and popularity, three things in short supply in our community. Rather than asking WHY Bob Johnson has a billion dollars, we presume that he is a great man only BECAUSE he has a billion dollars. Our measuring stick for success is one that provides prominence and respect to those who’ve been most willing to sell their soul to obtain scarce social resources. This creates a sticky set of incentives, as we keep our eyes on the carrots while taking our eyes completely off the prize.

You (Barack Obama) can’t get elected with 13% of the vote, so you are forced to engage in a disturbing amount of diplomacy and “bridge building”. You even become the only major politician to not show up in Memphis on the 40th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s assassination. In addition, you are asked to denounce a different black male associate nearly every week, while your opponents have equally questionable affiliations that receive no attention from mainstream media.

You (Oprah Winfrey) are a TV mogul who can’t earn a billion dollars from your black audience, so you build a predominantly soccer mom constituency that will penalize you for supporting a black presidential candidate. The audience helps you pay the bills, as long as you keep feeding them more Dr. Oz and Dr. Phil without even considering building shows for many black experts across the country who DO NOT have that annoying country accent.

You (Bob Johnson) can’t quite get your message onto a mainstream TV network, so you create a network for African-Americans and spend 20 years feeding them nothing but naked women, gold grills, jock-grabbing “gangstaz” with guns and other profitable garbage. You don’t feed garbage for the survival of the network; you feed it because you want to have a billion dollars instead of 100 million. That’s what makes you a “playa”.

The sacrifices are great, and it is my argument that we should not only question the merits of the sacrifice, but also whether the rewards are as valuable as they seem. For every billion dollars of income earned by Bob Johnson, I speculate that there is at least another two billion dollars in lost productivity from a generation of kids who memorized the lyrics from “Back that Ass Up” before they began kindergarten.

Perhaps it is time to reconsider our social currency.

Does Cornel West have to be at Harvard to be important, or will we respect him at an HBCU?

If Barack Obama loses the presidency for refusing to condemn another black man, will he get as much respect from his Black Home as he would from the White House?

Oprah Winfrey and Barack Obama, to a measured extent, have earned my respect for putting their vast social capital on the line. As a Finance Professor, I understand Bob Johnson, since I have taught thousands of Capitalists to analyze money.

But one thing I know about money and democracy in a racist society is that if you measure your success by wealth, power and popularity, you end up with a Pandora’s Box of contradictions that keep you up all night and on the toilet all day.

Life is too short to work so hard on things that don’t matter. Perhaps we should set new standards.

Video: Dr. Boyce Watkins Speaks on Oprah Winfrey and Barack Obama

Come On People: Bill Cosby Has to Be Stronger than This

2008-04-06T20:45:00.000-07:00

by Dr. Boyce Watkins - www.BoyceWatkins.com

Judgmental Judges, Big Chins and Big Egos: Come on People, Let’s Stop Being Afraid

By Dr. Boyce Watkins

I recently appeared on an episode of Good Morning America about a judge in Atlanta named Marvin Arrington. The show renewed my skepticism of mainstream media, and helped me remember why I love Bill Cosby so much.

Apparently, Judge Arrington was fed up with seeing one black defendant after another in his courtroom, and surely to the liking of Bill Cosby, Arrington took matters into his own hands. Judge Arrington took the unprecedented step of dismissing all of the white attorneys from his courtroom and holding a private session with the black defendants.

During the session, Arrington gave the defendants a piece of his mind, preaching values we can all agree with: hard work, good behavior, and human decency. He topped it off by reminding these men that they are destroying the black community with their behavior and that they just need to stop.

When Good Morning America called to ask me what I thought about Arrington’s actions, they spent more time asking me about Bill Cosby than Arrington. I was confused, since they apparently think I don’t like Bill Cosby. That’s not true. I have a lot of respect for Bill Cosby, but it is my respect for human empathy that leads me to share my point of view, even if Bill Cosby does not agree. I truly believe Bill Cosby cares for black people, even if he has a unique way of showing it.

The reporter asked me if I thought it could be appropriate for a black judge to have a conversation with only the black defendants, excluding everyone else from the court room. I informed the reporter that it’s O.K. for African-Americans to have private conversations, and the nature of the Marvin Arrington’s words would be the ultimate determinant of conversation quality.

Elitist finger wagging at members of an oppressed group is not only counter-productive, but it is consistent with how minority groups are dealt with around the world. From the Turkish minority in Germany to the Aboriginal population in Australia, it is always the habit of the elite to presume that minority groups can’t fit in because they are just lazy, stupid and bad. But a conversation from a point of understanding might actually achieve something. The problem is that some judges feel they are only there to talk, not to listen or learn. Also, Bill Cosby has shown Michael Eric Dyson, Marc Lamont Hill and myself that he feels no obligation to listen to anyone. Apparently, we have not yet created enough episodes of Fat Albert to earn the license of unconditional, single-minded self-righteousness.

I know a judge named Langston McKinney who would also hold the same kinds of private conversations as Judge Arrington. The difference with Judge McKinney, however, is that right after having a private conversation with black defendants, McKinney would be equally bold in having another “tough love” conversation with the very justice system responsible for giving these men longer sentences for the same crimes, inadequate legal counsel, disenfranchisement from voting and employment rights after they’ve been released and a horrifically bad inner city educational system that provides no options.

That’s what a real man does. You don’t just beat up on those who have less power than you, you go after those who might kick your ass.

I have never been one to say that either Bill Cosby or Judge Marvin Arrington hate the black community. I feel they both love African-Americans very much, and that is what distinguishes them from professional black bashers like Juan Williams at Fox News. But one thing Cosby might want to learn is this: given that all human beings are fundamentally equal and equally rational, individuals engaging in behavior that makes no sense to you are probably responding to factors that you have not taken the time to fully understand.

The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Inequality released a report citing that the United States has a horrific habit of incarcerating black men, giving them longer sentences for the same crimes, pushing them out of society and leaving them uneducated. It is hard to earn my respect when you accept rewards for attacking those who respond to the disparities, but you do not have the courage to address the disparities themselves.

If a husband is beating his wife because she talks too much, any man can come into the house and tell his wife to stop talking so the beatings will stop. Many men will not have the courage to confront the husband responsible for the abuse. America, according to the United Nations, has abused black families for the past 400 years and continues to do so until this day. Anyone can tell black people to stop misbehaving so the abuse will stop. But it is fear of losing stature with the oppressive majority that leads us to avoid taking further steps to actually deal with the abuse itself. Black people have survived this long by being AFRAID. There is the added opportunity to gain favor with the majority by allowing oneself to be used as an additional distributor of racial tyranny, hypocrisy and condemnation. That’s how you get invited to Fox News and Meet the Press, Cosby knows this.

Bill Cosby and Judge Marvin Arrington should learn that it’s time to stop being scared. If you are tough enough to yell at a poor single mother about how she raises her kids, then please be strong enough to yell at a court system that incarcerates black men 7 times more than it incarcerates white men. Be strong enough to address a public education system that puts black boys in special education 5 times more than white boys. Be complete with your boldness, and don’t feel that you are strong just because you can continue to pile onto the weakest members of our society. The same is true for any black man who is strong in “the hood” but afraid to go to the other side of town.

I had a friend who grew up on terrible conditions, went to a terrible school, was shot at on the bus stop and had a high school counselor that put her in special education. In spite of all this, she went on to college and had a great life. Her story would surely serve as a source of inspiration for one of Bill Cosby’s speeches. But my question is this: What if this girl had not been strong enough to overcome a situation that would have destroyed 90% of us? What if she’d shot a drug dealer, slept with a strange man to get money or became a prostitute to feed herself? Would that make her a terrible person or simply an individual who responded to a world that the adults around her have not had the courage to confront? Cosby’s argument that the little girl should “just behave herself” is not likely to be enough to help millions of children manage such dramatic racial inequality.

Barack Obama had it right. We must honestly talk about racial inequality, and we must begin the conversation with the correct assumptions. Mathematics teaches us that if you solve a problem using incorrect assumptions, this will lead to incorrect methods and ultimately, an incorrect conclusion. The simple-minded presumption that “black youth are simply screwed up” is not only incorrect, it’s what we’ve been hearing for the past 400 years.

To Bill Cosby and Judge Marvin Arrington, I say this: Come on people, we’ve got to have more personal responsibility than that. The same courage you command from youth to overcome the system must be the courage you possess when confronting the system. That’s REALLY how you keep it real.

Video Below: Dr. Boyce Speaks on Bill Cosby and Judge Marvin Arrington:

Wendy Williams vs. Nicole Spence: What in the Hell is Going On?

2008-03-31T08:17:00.000-07:00

by Dr. Boyce Watkins - www.BoyceWatkins.com

Quick Note: Yes, Wendy Williams and Nicole Spence are in a beef involving the sexual harassment situation at WBLS. However, I have no interest in discussing this particular issue, since I would rather reflect on these two women I admire and have done a lot of work with over the past 2 years. It is my greatest hope that my perspective can add something positive to this terrible situation.

I had the chance to watch Wendy Williams and Nicole Spence in action a lot over the past couple of years. I was invited to Wendy’s show about 6 times, with each time being better than the last. I proposed to my fiancé on her show, and fitting with juicy celebrity gossip, my fiancé and I are no longer together. But like my fiancé, I maintain a tremendous amount of respect for Wendy, Nicole and the amazing women in the WBLS office.

Nicole Spence was the woman in charge. Nicole was soft and pretty on the outside, but torrentially loyal to Wendy and ferociously capable of maintaining their ground in the tough New York media market. If something needed to get done, we kept Nicole on speed dial. WBLS and Hot 97 were the two New York shows I loved appearing on the most, since they bring a lot more flavor than CNN, FOX, CBS and other networks. In other words, I could be myself, since black media doesn’t try to put you in a box.

I was a little nervous upon meeting Wendy Williams, since I’d seen her carefully remove the testicles of one celeb after another, with Nicole being one of her partners in crime. Wendy was brutal at times, and I thought she might be brutal with me. During my first appearance, Nicole Spence introduced me to the show, telling me “You’ll be on for at least 20 minutes. Maybe longer if Wendy likes you.”

Fortunately, Wendy and I had chemistry on the air, and the rest was history. I never cared about her beef with other guests, since she was never anything other than completely respectful toward me. She even referred to me as the “most eligible bachelor in America” during one show, a perception I can’t help but disagree with. I know how to treat a woman, but workaholics like me are nothing special when it comes to the ladies. I was also impressed with the number of intelligent black women Wendy and Nicole had in the office working with them. I love seeing black people achieving together, it was awesome.

One thing that was clear during my observations of Wendy Williams and Nicole Spence both on the air and in the “pink room” was that they needed each another. Nicole described to me, with great passion, how Wendy was booted out of New York and came back in a blaze of glory years later. I recall sitting with Wendy right before our CNN appearance together, hearing her on the phone with Nicole preparing for the next day’s show. I can only imagine how hurt each of them must be to have their powerful and fruitful relationship disrupted with the events that have just taken place.

I know greatness when I see it, and I have concluded that Wendy and Nicole were two pieces of the puzzle which created the powerhouse combo they became at WBLS. But like Kobe and Shaq, I am concerned that one piece of the puzzle without the other may derail both of their careers.

I am not in a position to take sides, since I’ve never met Wendy’s husband. I can only say that I hope each of them truly understands the price of their beef and that they are genuine with one another in how they resolve the situation. Nicole Spence is determined to be great and I know she will be. Wendy Williams is only second to Oprah when it comes to black women in media. My time with each of them has been precious, and I only hope they walk out of this situation in one piece. Or perhaps I should say one “peace”. Life is too short to be angry.

Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Professor at Syracuse University and author of "What if George Bush were a Black Man?" He does regular work in the national media, including CNN, BET, ESPN, and CBS. For more information, please visit www.BoyceWatkins.com

Boyce Watkins and Wendy Williams on CNN

Financial Leadership Gone Wild: Our Government's Response to the Recession

2008-03-31T08:00:00.001-07:00

by Dr. Boyce Watkins

The United States is respected throughout the world for its powerful economy. We are also, unfortunately, known for our arrogance. U.S. Monetary policy, headed by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, is both art and science, and the success of Alan Greenspan has forced any subsequent Fed Chairman to become a Financial Da Vinci.

The 2008 recession provides just the right landscape for an allegedly great monetary artist to strut his stuff. The US economy saw its financial chickens coming home to roost, and the recession was a long time coming. These financial chickens included excessive spending by American consumers, mixed with irresponsible borrowing and lending on the part of both individuals and banks. Personal responsibility is thrown out the window when discussing wealthy and middle class Americans, as financial leaders are called upon to bail out the banks, the consumers and everyone else.

Two great weapons in the arsenal of the Federal Reserve are government spending and interest rate cuts. Higher government spending increases consumer demand for the goods and services we continue to buy but almost never need. Interest rate cuts reduce the cost of borrowing for everyone in the economy. This marginal decline in rates serves to stimulate investment by all Americans, since the cost of borrowed money is lowered.

The government bailout package for 2008 included a massive spending bill, one that featured tax refunds and support to help consumers keep their homes, even if they were the causes of their own demise. Another financial steroid being employed has been the strong and consistent cuts of the Federal Funds rate by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. Bernanke has become known as “Bold Ben” by the media, who are consistently stunned by the Chairman’s massive and powerful attempts to control the economic downturn.

The strong and bold financial leadership by our government has been applauded by some, and demonized by others.

Republicans, known for being fiscally responsible, have created budget deficits our country has never seen. Between the Iraq War and the 2008 recession, spending continues to go up, even when tax revenues are expected to go down. The ready availability of additional lending to support our massive spending bills has our financial leaders behaving like teenagers holding a “really awesome” American Express card.

Continuously cutting interest rates may provide additional stimulation to the economy, but the problem is that cutting interest rates, allowing the value of the dollar to slide and frivolous government spending is a recipe for serious, horrific and uncontrollable inflation. Inflation is like a Pandora’s Box: Once it’s out, it’s extremely difficult to reign it back in. It’s hard not to feel that “Bold Ben” and “Big Bad Bush” aren’t gambling with our children’s futures and current taxpayer resources.

Sometimes, when you party too hard, you are forced to deal with the hangover. Americans have been blessed with a financial celebration that has lasted over a decade. We danced with lamp shades on our heads: not saving effectively, spending like crazy and borrowing to cover our financial insanity. But rather than simply allowing the party to end and letting everyone sober up, our financial leadership has taken on the irresponsible behavioral norms of American consumers. Their excessive rate cuts and spending increases have kept us pumped up on Financial Dope in order to avoid the impending crash.

This is not solid financial leadership, and something has GOT to give.

Open Letter from Pastor Jeremiah Wright

2008-03-24T03:27:00.000-07:00

An Open Letter to Jodi Kantor from Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr.

March 11, 2007
Jodi Kantor
The New York Times
9 West 43rd Street
New York,
New York 10036-3959
Dear Jodi:
Thank you for engaging in one of the biggest misrepresentations of the truth I have ever seen in sixty-five years. You sat and shared with me for two hours. You told me you were doing a “Spiritual Biography” of Senator Barack Obama. For two hours, I shared with you how I thought he was the most principled individual in public service that I have ever met.
For two hours, I talked with you about how idealistic he was. For two hours I shared with you what a genuine human being he was. I told you how incredible he was as a man who was an African American in public service, and as a man who refused to announce his candidacy for President until Carol Moseley Braun indicated one way or the other whether or not she was going to run.
I told you what a dreamer he was. I told you how idealistic he was. We talked about how refreshing it would be for someone who knew about Islam to be in the Oval Office. Your own question to me was, Didn’t I think it would be incredible to have somebody in the Oval Office who not only knew about Muslims, but had living and breathing Muslims in his own family? I told you how important it would be to have a man who not only knew the difference between Shiites and Sunnis prior to 9/11/01 in the Oval Office, but also how important it would be to have a man who knew what Sufism was; a man who understood that there were different branches of Judaism; a man who knew the difference between Hasidic Jews, Orthodox Jews, Conservative Jews and Reformed Jews; and a man who was a devout Christian, but who did not prejudge others because they believed something other than what he believed.
I talked about how rare it was to meet a man whose Christianity was not just “in word only.” I talked about Barack being a person who lived his faith and did not argue his faith. I talked about Barack as a person who did not draw doctrinal lines in the sand nor consign other people to hell if they did not believe what he believed.
Out of a two-hour conversation with you about Barack’s spiritual journey and my protesting to you that I had not shaped him nor formed him, that I had not mentored him or made him the man he was, even though I would love to take that credit, you did not print any of that. When I told you, using one of your own Jewish stories from the Hebrew Bible as to how God asked Moses, “What is that in your hand?,” that Barack was like that when I met him. Barack had it “in his hand.” Barack had in his grasp a uniqueness in terms of his spiritual development that one is hard put to find in the 21st century, and you did not print that.
As I was just starting to say a moment ago, Jodi, out of two hours of conversation I spent approximately five to seven minutes on Barack’s taking advice from one of his trusted campaign people and deeming it unwise to make me the media spotlight on the day of his announcing his candidacy for the Presidency and what do you print? You and your editor proceeded to present to the general public a snippet, a printed “sound byte” and a titillating and tantalizing article about his disinviting me to the Invocation on the day of his announcing his candidacy.
I have never been exposed to that kind of duplicitous behavior before, and I want to write you publicly to let you know that I do not approve of it and will not be party to any further smearing of the name, the reputation, the integrity or the character of perhaps this nation’s first (and maybe even only) honest candidate offering himself for public service as the person to occupy the Oval Office.
Your editor is a sensationalist. For you to even mention that makes me doubt your credibility, and I am looking forward to see how you are going to butcher what else I had to say concerning Senator Obama’s “Spiritual Biography.” Our Conference Minister, the Reverend Jane Fisler Hoffman, a white woman who belongs to a Black church that Hannity of “Hannity and Colmes” is trying to trash, set the record straight for you in terms of who I am and in terms of who we are as the church to which Barack has belonged for over twenty years.
The president of our denomination, the Reverend John Thomas, has offered to try to help you clarify in your confused head what Trinity Church is even though you spent the entire weekend with us setting me up to interview me for what turned out to be a smear of the Senator; and yet The New York Times continues to roll on making the truth what it wants to be the truth. I do not remember reading in your article that Barack had apologized for listening to that bad information and bad advice. Did I miss it? Or did your editor cut it out? Either way, you do not have to worry about hearing anything else from me for you to edit or “spin” because you are more interested in journalism than in truth.
Forgive me for having a momentary lapse. I forgot that The New York Times was leading the bandwagon in trumpeting why it is we should have gone into an illegal war. The New York Times became George Bush and the Republican Party’s national “blog.” The New York Times played a role in the outing of Valerie Plame. I do not know why I thought The New York Times had actually repented and was going to exhibit a different kind of behavior.
Maybe it was my faith in the Jewish Holy Day of Roshashana. Maybe it was my being caught up in the euphoria of the Season of Lent; but whatever it is or was, I was sadly mistaken. There is no repentance on the part of The New York Times. There is no integrity when it comes to The Times. You should do well with that paper, Jodi. You looked me straight in my face and told me a lie!
Sincerely and respectfully yours,
Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr.

Why The United Nations Agrees with Pastor Jeremiah Wright

2008-03-15T16:24:00.000-07:00

Jeremiah Wright is the Pastor for Senator Barack Obama at The Trinity United Church of Christ. Pastor Wright was attacked for very strong comments he has made about race in America.

I am a huge fan of Pastor Jeremiah Wright and I consider Pastor Wright to be one of the great Americans of our country.

There, I said it. Now crucify me.

Just realize that by doing so, you will surely be on the wrong side of history. You will be on the same side as the founding fathers, who built a nation on the kind of racial bias that Pastor Jeremiah Wright and others are bold enough to honestly discuss in America. You will be on the same side as the generation before you, who swore that racism was a thing of the past and surely did not affect them. But when you look back at your grandparents’ generation, you can see their racism clearly. The problem is that your grand children will say the same thing about you.

I have been to Jeremiah Wright’s church, and I admire his spirit. He is truly a man who walks the walk of Jesus, who would also not stand idly by and allow this blatant discrimination to exist. But like Jesus, Jeremiah Wright finds himself being held up for bloody attacks by the American public. As Dr. Martin Luther King showed us, America is good at persecuting its heroes, especially when it comes to race.

The logical reaction to individuals such as myself and Pastor Jeremiah Wright, educated black men who speak honestly on race, is to say that we are extremists or perhaps even insane. I can’t help but agree. Both I and Jeremiah Wright must be insane for having the audacity to point out the obvious. We are no different from anyone crazy enough to point out the holocaust during the Nazi era, or to speak honestly on liberty during the height of McCarthyism. The point that Pastor Wright makes is both correct and clear: America is a racist country. It has been in the past and continues to be to this day.

You think Jeremiah Wright is a lunatic? Let’s look for objective analysis, shall we?

The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination recently issued a scathing report about racism in America. In the report, the committee cited the following:

- The mass incarceration of black men in our prison systems. America has the largest prison population in history and half of those men are black. The problem is that black people are only 13% of the general population.

- Inadequate legal defense for these individuals, leading to a higher likelihood of incarceration.

- Longer prison sentences for the same crimes for black men and a disproportionate willingness of our government to kill these men when they are on trial for murder.

- Segregated school systems leading to far worse education for black children.

- The disenfranchisement of individuals with criminal records, denying them the right to vote, and significantly reducing their opportunities for employment for the length of their entire lives.

You see, I am with Jeremiah Wright on this one. I applaud him for having the courage to speak the truth in support of people of color. Pastor Wright is a doctor, offering medicine to a country that is truly sick. We allow the Rush Limbaughs, Sean Hannitys and Bill O’Reillys to continuously attack people of color, while millions of blind Americans listen to these uneducated monsters continue the most horrific traditions of our nation.

Well Jeremiah Wright and others like him are not going to sit by and let that happen. We’ve been taught to be honest and to fight back. I do it because it is what I am led to do. Jeremiah Wright does it because that is what Jesus would do. Either way, what we see is real and America needs to learn to deal with it. Silly terms like “reverse racism” are nothing more than ploys to alleviate our country of the guilt of what it has done to black families for the past 400 years. If you feel that someone is being racist for fighting against inequality, then this may imply that, deep down, you do not feel such individuals are worthy of the equality they seek.

Many have critiqued Pastor Wright’s assertation that AIDS was created by the US government to rid the world of black people. I have not seen evidence to support such an assertion. The problem is that Pastor Wright’s theory is NOT out of the question. Were we not the same country that injected black men with syphilis just to see what would happen? Did the CIA not play a role in allowing drugs into the black community before and during the Reagan era? Did the government not engage in illegal covert activities to undermine black leadership via CointelPro, in which Hoover said that the objective was to "expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize" movements within the black community?

It’s not as if Pastor Wright, nor any other person of color, has good reason to trust the country that has made a market of exterminating black people. Sorry to break this to you, but those are just the facts. As I mentioned before, the United Nations agrees with us. Perhaps they are insane as well. By attacking people like us for speaking the truth, it is only perpetuating the global perception that The US is a self-righteous nation, quick to point out of the flaws of others, but unwilling to honestly assess its own areas for improvement.

On many other issues, Jeremiah Wright and I are in lockstep. America is a country that continues to allow racial inequality to fester and does nothing about it. We, for some ridiculous reason, have told our children that we can spend 400 years creating systemic inequality and then cure it overnight. Such a conclusion is not only nonsensical, but borders on the ridiculous.

Our government refuses to apologize for the atrocities of slavery, yet we are quick to condemn the Nazis for what they did to the Jews. What America did to black people was far worse, as the horror lasted over several centuries.

The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Jeremiah Wright and others are 100% correct when it comes to racism in America: many Americans just don’t get it and none of them want to understand how it works. But then again, that’s exactly how they were trained to think, so I am honestly not surprised.

Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University and author of "What if George Bush were a Black Man?" For More Information, please visit www.BoyceWatkins.com.

The State of the Black Union: When Money and Activism Don't Quite Mix

2008-03-14T11:49:00.000-07:00

When reading Tavis Smiley-related blogger comments on YourBlackWorld, I actually started to feel sorry for Tavis. Not since Milly Vanilly have I seen a brother lose so many fans so fast. His attacks on Barack Obama were about as popular as Cheeseburger flavored Ice Cream, and the brother was going down hard. It’s one thing when your enemies hate your guts (i.e. the racist viewers on Fox News), but it’s another thing when your old friends are feeding your kidneys to the family dog.

I didn’t hate Tavis for being hard on Obama, since I happen to believe that healthy skepticism is….well….healthy. Obama-mania is a frightening reminder of the same support Clarence Thomas received during his Senate Confirmation in 1991, and we all know how that one turned out.

Rather than being concerned with the fact that Tavis was attacking Barack, I was more concerned about WHY Tavis might have been attacking Barack. As a Financial Expert, I am trained to always sniff out the money trail. If you ever want to know why a hooker hooks, why a politician lies or why a doctor rejects a patient…..the money trail is always a good place to start.

When I studied the money trail being left by Tavis Smiley’s Superman cape, I saw things that gave me cause for grave concern. One of which was the following:

Hillary Clinton is on the board of Walmart.

One of Tavis Smiley's biggest sponsors is Walmart.

Tavis Smiley just happens to be a lot nicer to Hillary Clinton than Barack Obama.

Oh yeah, Tavis gets a percentage of Bill Clinton’s book sales.

While I am not ready to accuse Tavis of any wrong-doing, I can’t help but wonder how Walmart might have reacted if Smiley had launched the same verbal ass whooping on Hillary Clinton that he did on Barack Obama. The idea that such an attack on Mrs. Clinton would have possibly jeopardized Smiley’s sponsorship is certainly not out of the question.

This led me to reflect further on the sponsorship of the State of the Black Union. The State of the Black Union had achieved almost sacred status in the black community. Smiley had the brilliant foresight to put together a political gathering in which African-Americans could map out our destiny, hear thoughts and ideas from excellent thinkers, and put together a set of policies and expectations not unlike those created during congressional gatherings on Capitol Hill.

If the goal of the State of the Black Union is to present itself as a political forum, one must spend time carefully considering the implications of corporate sponsors, if such sponsors are necessary, and who those sponsors should be. Imagine seeing an ad stating that “The State of the Union Address given by President Bush was brought to you by McDonalds, Al-Qaeda and Petroleos de Venezuela”. As ridiculous as it may sound, that is exactly what you have when all money is green and good, and there is no accountability regarding who is allowed to provide sponsorship, who collects the money and the form by which that sponsorship is provided. In light of the peculiar financing structure used to support the State of the Black Union, one wonders if the Obama shake up was actually a public shake down. Was he attacked for lack of accountability to the black community or for refusing to kiss the pinky ring of King Tavis?

Race matters in America. However, race matters are minimal compared to MONEY matters. America is more capitalist than it is democratic, it is more capitalist than it is religious and it is certainly more capitalist than it is racist. Wealth is, arguably, the single most important factor in the obtainment of influence in this country. Universities sell their souls by admitting (and not graduating) unprepared students to earn billions via NCAA sports. Doctors force patients to decide which life saving surgery they can afford to purchase. Many churches sold just a little slice of Jesus in order to expand the collection plate with faith based initiatives. Young kids are dying in Iraq to fill the bank accounts of dirty old executives. Many powerful black lawyers, doctors and professors are afraid to speak honestly about racism because it might jeopardize their job security.

Money can clearly liberate you in a capitalist society. The problem is that it can also enslave you. Few are better at raising dollars “for the cause” than Tavis Smiley, who has obtained a massive collection of corporate sponsors for his forums. It is the ability to obtain sponsors and major media outlets, and little more, that makes Smiley the broker of African-American perspectives to the broader community. I don’t doubt Smiley’s commitment to black people. But when the very institutions you are fighting are the ones financing the war, you eventually lose both the will to fight and the capability. You and your adversary have become the same, and you can’t hurt one without slaughtering the other.

One must look no further than many third world countries, where leaders are paid handsomely to allow companies to extract resources without compensating the people. When companies accused of abuses or discrimination are the first to line up to sponsor The State of the Black Union, the first question that must be asked is “why?” It is usually cheaper for a firm to market their good behavior than it is to actually engage in good behavior. A $50,000 donation with a $5 Million dollar marketing campaign goes a lot further than a $5 million dollar donation with $50,000 in marketing. Conversely, a firm like Wells Fargo, who has been accused of stealing the homes of poor people and those of color through predatory lending, may find that a donation to Tavis Smiley goes a lot further than the high cost of actually helping these people keep their homes in the first place.

This is not, again, to imply that Tavis Smiley, Tom Joyner or anyone else is doing anything illegal or unethical. It is to say that the noble ambitions of many freedom fighters in history have become tainted by choosing the wrong sponsors for their endeavors. What lies in your heart matters far less than what you actually do. The more you allow those with contradictory incentives to hold a stake in your behavior, the more your intentions and actions become misaligned. To the extent that forums such as That State of the Black Union are critical to the leadership infrastructure of the black community, then sponsorship accountability becomes an issue moralistic security.

In other words, a payment comes with a debt and some degree of control. There’s no such thing as a free lunch, even if it’s soul food.

Barack Obama May Unite Us or Divide Us

2008-03-09T20:44:00.001-07:00

by Dr. Boyce Watkins

Barack Obama’s emergence as a powerful Presidential candidate is truly worth celebrating. Beginning as a modest participant in the election, his creative political genius gave African-Americans the courage to support a black man. Hillary Clinton’s role as the “political sugar substitute” came to an abrupt end once Obama came with the real cane. Obama created his base of believers by going to the whitest parts of white America and showing that he could build a bridge long enough to gain universal trust and support.

As he gained the backing of white America, his black audience ran up in droves. The words “Did you hear what Obama pulled off?” were echoed across Black America, as silly terms like “hope” and “change” actually started to mean something. Some of us gave up on hope after the last season of the TV show, “Good Times”, since the family never quite seemed to make it out of the projects.

But the latest numbers lead one to wonder if too much black support is causing Obama to lose love among white voters. Last week in Texas and Ohio, Obama saw many white voters head toward Hillary Clinton. Clinton grabbed nearly two-thirds of the white votes in Ohio and over half of the white votes in Texas. This is a sharp reversal from the “political ass-whoopings” Obama has been handing Hillary for the past couple of months.

I’ve always feared the possibility that Barack Obama could end up becoming “the black candidate” in this election. I thought about it during his highly publicized challenge by Tavis Smiley (which I told Tavis that I disagree with) and his battle with Hillary Clinton over Martin Luther King’s legacy. Personally, as a man who speaks about race on a regular basis, I’ve never been rewarded for talking about race in America. Fortunately, I’ve never had to worry about people liking what I have to say. I came into this game well aware that extracting the disease of American racism would surely ignite the spite of a country that has spent 400 years in denial. But Obama, on the other hand, actually NEEDS everyone to like him. In his case, nearly any discussion of race is going to be incredibly counter-productive to his goal of being elected president.

The peculiar issue of political racism hit me first hand while watching my little brother run for student body president during college. My brother, who is going to attend graduate school at either Cornell or Harvard this fall, isn’t a “big mouth black man” like myself. He possesses quiet strength, builds bridges and is liked by nearly everyone he meets. In fact, he even looks like Barack Obama, which is just a little weird.

My brother’s campaign for student body president was a strong one, as he gave one stirring speech after another, met with all sororities and fraternities, produced innovative ideas and inspired tremendous energy from the students. All the while, he spent very little time discussing racial politics and worked deliberately to find common ground with the non-black students on campus. The black students, less than 10% of the student body, knew he was “playing the game”, and felt that he would support them once elected.

My brother found himself going into the election with over 95% of the black student body behind him. He was the Barack Obama of his campus, the hippest thing going that semester. He even substantially increased black voter turnout, which had been historically low. The problem was that his possession of such powerful and vocal black support on such a racially polarized campus transformed him into “the black candidate”, leading the white students to run for the woods. He dominated the African-American vote, but got almost none of the white vote. And he wasn’t even a Dangerous Negro.

I often wonder: if my brother had been a young Bill Clinton, a white male so readily endeared by the black community, would the outcome have been the same? I am not sure, but I sincerely doubt it. Like Vanilla Ice, JFK, Eminem and Elvis Presley, Hillary and Bill Clinton were never served a political liability for having overwhelming black support. Additionally, they were never attacked by individuals like Tavis Smiley for not being truly accountable to the black community, even though their years of leadership have led to highly questionable outcomes.

As a calming voice in the O’Reilly-Hannnity-Post 911 world, Barack Obama’s campaign has revealed the greatness of America. It may also reveal what is still wrong with America. African-Americans have become quite offended with Hillary Clinton, and the indication I’ve received from recent radio interviews is that there may be a movement towards a “Black Out” of Democratic votes if Hillary Clinton wins the nomination. Simultaneously, the election of Obama may lead many older white voters to become resentful that “the black guys are taking over”. The notion that a black man can control the White House and simultaneously promote an agenda that is supportive of African-Americans could very likely lead to a backlash. At least that’s what history tells us, but Obama is rewriting history every day.

I recall my own grandmother telling her children not to visit black doctors, because she didn’t trust them. If some black folks feel this way, I can’t imagine how some whites must feel. I also can’t help but wonder how long America can fully trust a black presidential candidate with the middle name Hussein, who also possesses past ties to the Muslim community. I can only “hope” that Obama’s success can “change” me into an optimist. The last season of “Good Times” is still lingering in my brain.

To our country’s credit, I will say that the overwhelming support of Obama implies that we’ve come a long way. At the same time, we have murdered and tortured some of our greatest heroes when it comes to moving the country forward on issues of race. Advancing racial equality is like being a lineman in a football game: to clear the path, you get bloodied and your face is smashed into the ground. However, the lineman is not the one who dances in the end zone. When one considers our nation’s 400 year addiction to racism, one must ask whether the addict, long in denial, long denying treatment, who continuously kills the messenger, has truly kicked the habit of racial inequality.

I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.

Dr. Boyce Watkins Delivers a State of the Black Union Address

2008-03-03T09:00:00.001-08:00

My state of The Black Union Address is below. I delivered it to highlight critical issues in the black community that should be addressed during 2008. The State of the Black Union Address being offered here is meant to complement, not to compete, with that of Tavis Smiley and his State of the Black Union Conference.

I humbly submit these ideas to the Your Black World Family in two parts. Part 1 covers The Economy and Education. Part 2 covers Health Care and The Criminal Justice system.

The State of the Black Union is something that evolves through time, and I do not believe in talking about black people from a point of negativity. I am a believer that we have worked hard to overcome a great deal through time and will continue to improve our plight. We are not "headed to hell in a hand basket" and we are not a "troubled people". We are a diverse people, with some of us on top of the world, some of us on the bottom.

My point is this: A State of the Black Union conversation must start from a position of self-love, positivity, productivity and courage. We can't all change THE world, but you can change YOUR world that lies within our reach.

Let's change YOUR BLACK WORLD.

The State of the Black Union Address is below. I hope you enjoy.

With complete sincerity and love,

Dr. Boyce Watkins

Dr. Boyce Watkins State of the Black Union Address - Part 1

Dr. Boyce Watkins State of the Black Union Address Part 2

Why Obama Denounced Farrakhan

2008-03-02T17:02:00.000-08:00

by Dr. Boyce Watkins

During the recent Democratic debate, I saw Barack Obama getting pushed into the "black corner". This is the same corner that Hillary and Bill Clinton pushed him into during the campaign in South Carolina. The same corner that caused some Americans to (temporarily) limit him to being "just another black candidate", instead of a potential visionary who can guide our country out of one of it's darkest periods.

This time, Hillary's weapon of choice was Minister Louis Farrakhan. Those who hate Farrakhan usually don't know much about him. Most have never heard him speak, and probably can't tell you anything about what he's done for this country.

Those of us who respect him know exactly why we respect him. We also understand why others respect him, even though he is quite direct and unique in many of his perspectives.

I admire Louis Farrakhan because Minister Farrakhan, quite simply, is the freest black man in America. He makes his own money, and speaks his mind. We listen to him because he is one of the few black men in America who remind black people of what they can really become.

Yes, he has had a problem with Jews, as many Muslims do. While there is certainly room to challenge Israel's oppressive policies against the Palestinians, any form of consistent antisemitism is simply regrettable. Those who've followed him through time would notice that Minister Farrakhan has dramatically changed his language as it pertains to Israel, as well as those who disagree with him. Therefore, he too has grown.

Most importantly, Louis Farrakhan is not only the most eloquent and powerful speaker in America, he is what we all strive to be: Free black men and women. That is, in my humble opinion, why we followed him to the Million Man March. That is why we cry when he speaks. He speaks to the soul of the black experience in a way that is painfully honest and quite direct. He also advocates for the building of a black state in a way that feels necessary in a nation that (through 400 years of economic and social exclusion) allows black children to go to terrible inner city schools and incarcerates black men in holocaust proportions. After living through a 400 year nightmare, we are invited to sit at the American dinner table, as long as we agree to mute any serious discussion regarding how this socioeconomic inequality came to be.

Louis Farrakhan, in one of his most exemplary moments, recently issued a statement telling supporters of Barack Obama not to relinquish their support for Obama in spite of Hillary Clinton's forced denunciation of Farrakhan and his words.

This shows that Farrakhan "gets it". He knew that Hillary Clinton was again, in her typically liberal, paternalistic and ultimately racist way, trying to use Obama's blackness as a weapon against him. She knows that, in America, being black is a liability in the eyes of many white Americans, and the "blacker" Barack is, the more votes he would lose. Her support of black people all these years has been driven through puppy dog sympathy, self-congratulation and opportunism, with the full expectation that we should worship her for being kind enough to associate with the downtrodden.

I see that kind of racism all the time when dealing with liberals here at Syracuse University. For some, black people are somewhat acceptable, but never quite treated as equals, nor considered competent enough to actually lead the organizations with which we've become affiliated. That is why my university, to this day, has never seriously considered a black person to become chancellor. That is also why the vast majority of academic departments have not tenured a black person in over 100 years of operating history.

Unlike my respected brother, Tavis Smiley, Louis Farrakhan sees that Obama's candidacy is not about egos and power. It is about making America better and Black America better in the process. Farrakhan also understands that it is because he is so far ahead of his time, that most of America would not understand why any other Black American might hold Farrakhan in high regard. In fact, we are punished for publicly supporting Farrakhan, as Obama would surely have been attacked.

But the rest of us understand. Obama, in his equally elegant manner, was careful to denounce Farrakhan's words without denouncing Farrakhan. This is exactly why, in spite of the words of some, Barack Obama certainly is "black enough" for all of us. It is also why he is going to be the next President of The United States.

I congratulate both of these men for jumping the hurdle. Their tactics differ, their paths are divergent, but their grace, power and magnificence simply cannot be denied.

Why the World Hates Kwame Kilpatrick

2008-03-02T10:13:00.000-08:00

Kwame Kilpatrick is feeling more heat than Michael Jackson when he burned his Jerry Curl in that Pepsi commercial. Detroit Chickens are coming home to roost and the Mayor of this great city, the shining Kilpatrick star of yesterday is getting just a little bit dimmer every time we look.

Mayor Kilpatrick has been hit with some interesting and disturbing charges, including having police officers fired for their willingness to snitch on a stripper-heavy party held at the Mayor's Mansion. He has been charged with perjury for lying about an affair with his Chief of Staff. He has even been hit by a nasty rumor about a stripper named Strawberry, who was assassinated (yes, I said assassinated, since the shooter used a whole bunch of bullets) right before she was expected to blow the whistle on some possible misbehaving by Kwame and his Mayoral homeboys.

I don't know what's what, but I do know this: Kwame Kilpatrick is in serious trouble.

When I first met Kwame Kilpatrick, I wasn't sure what to expect. I'd heard about this highly successful young man, who'd found a way to become the youngest mayor in Detroit history. He was clearly a man of the people, earring, hip hop and all.

To my surprise, I didn't see the Tiger Woods-like focus I thought I would see from such a young achiever. I didn't see the damn-near holy charisma possessed by a future Barack Obama. I just saw Kwame Kilpatrick, a man who impressed me as neither extraordinarily capable nor incapable of doing the job.

Quite honestly, Kwame Kilpatrick left me a little empty, unsure if I was getting a great black leader of tomorrow or a privileged kid who was smart enough to ride the coat tails of a mother who'd served in Congress. I honestly saw a little bit of both, as listening to Kwame speak made me feel like I was hearing a politician, not a black leader, and not a visionary. But truth be told, I never held it against him, since politicians are trained to say alot without saying anything.

What I see in Kwame Kilpatrick is that he is simply YOUNG. Kilpatrick took on a huge job that most of us would not have been able to do successfully. He took on a city that has been gutted like an economic fish, with jobs leaving, crime rising and corruption left and right.

Kwame's public screw ups as an alleged cheater and perjurer are not, in my opinion, any worse than what Slick Willy (Bill Clinton) did in The White House. The difference is that Kwame Kilpatrick did not have a great economy to allow forgiveness of his sins. He also didn't have the privilege of white skin, nor the kind of charisma that makes women forget about the last 50 women you've slept with.

Kwame had none of that. He was no Bill Clinton. People didn't see him as a Slick Willy, they saw him as a Trifling Negro. Kwame Kilpatrick was simply Carolyn Kilpatrick's son. Had he not been Carolyn's son, he would not have been Mayor of Detroit.

Should Kwame be forgiven? I think he should. Should he be removed? Absolutely. The reality is that, although his job was one of the toughest in America, the truth is that he was not quite ready for it. What made it worse was that Kwame did not approach the job with the humility and focus necessary to take on such a daunting task. He approached it with arrogance, and the cavalier nature of a young man who didn't quite realize what he was getting into.

I don't disrespect Kwame Kilpatrick as a black man, because I still think he is an extraordinary human being. However, I fully understand why Detroit is angry. Given the crime, economy and horrible school system, Detroit residents have reason to be angry every time they walk out the door. But through his arrogance, mismanagement and audacious behavior, Kwame Kilpatrick made himself a convenient target.

Why I called Juan Williams a "Happy Negro" on CNN

2008-03-01T21:05:00.000-08:00

Why I called Juan Williams a “Happy Negro” On CNN and Why He and Bill O’Reilly Were Not Happy About It

A friend, Valencia Roner, called me one night to ask if I watch “The O’Reilly Factor." I said, “No, I don’t watch silly, racist television programs.” She then informed me that I might want to watch this particular episode. Why? Because I was the topic of conversation. For the entire show.

I set the DVR and went to sleep.

I woke up the next morning to watch what had been recorded. Valencia was right. Bill O’Reilly and his loyal sidekick, Juan Williams, were showing images of my CNN appearances and playing my comments repeatedly, like "SportsCenter" highlights. I’ve never seen so many guests asked for comments about someone else’s comments. This continued throughout the week, as Bill O’Reilly spent 5 episodes in a row expressing his disdain for my critique of his racist remarks and Williams’ support of them.

During the show, Juan Williams and Bill O’Reilly sat there congratulating each other like brothers for allegedly winning the “smear campaign” placed upon them by CNN. I listened to O’Reilly tell the world that CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, Mediamatters.org and other news organizations were all corrupt, but not him. Juan Williams even wrote a piece about me in Time magazine, in addition to making several radio and TV appearances to complain about my words.

Watching one episode, I honestly thought Juan was going to cry. He continuously pleaded with “Mr. O’Reilly” (in a self-degrading sort of way) to understand that he cares about black people and that “people like Dr. Boyce Watkins” were simply race mongers who want to keep black people poor and pathetic. Yes, Juan Williams and Bill O’Reilly were simply misunderstood freedom fighters…..how quaint.

I was asked on CNN (and other shows) about O’Reilly’s racist remarks about Sylvia’s, a black restaurant in Harlem. In his comments, O’Reilly said that he could not get over the fact that the people were civil and well-behaved. He commended black people for finally learning to “think for themselves” and was relieved that there was no one in the restaurant saying “MF-er, I want more ice tea (Good thing no one was really thirsty!)."

O’Reilly, the man who later mentioned wanting to “lynch” Michelle Obama, tried to argue that his comments were meant to compliment the black community. He said that they were meant to defy stereotypes. As humbly and naive as a school girl, he argued that he was only intending to shed light on how racial stereotypes are bad for our society. Like the movie “Transformers," Bill O'Reilly, “America’s educated redneck," had morphed himself into Martin Luther King Jr.

On CNN, I essentially explained that anyone who thought Bill O’Reilly was suddenly a reformed racist who’d seen the light needs to be checked for drugs. I’ve been on this man’s show before, and he has consistently demeaned, degraded and devalued everything about black culture he could get his hands on (remember when he said that Katrina victims would not have been stranded on rooftops if they’d chosen to get an education?). I also mentioned that I was unimpressed with Juan Williams’ agreement and defense of O’Reilly. Seeing Juan Williams sitting there congratulating O’Reilly for his bigotry reminded me of the Negro in the white suit defending “massa” at all costs. His attitudes were consistent with his latest and most terrible book, which does nothing but blast black culture and black people, as if we are the sole causes of socio-economic inequality.

Therefore, I could only use terms I felt appropriate. I defined Juan Williams as "the Happy Negro." On CNN, I compared Bill O’Reilly’s use of Williams to Hugh Hefner hiring a stripper to tell him that he’s not a sexist. Juan was irate after hearing my words. In other words, “the Happy Negro” was no longer happy.

I am not sure how smart or dumb Juan Williams is (without bragging, I can say that I have three times more education than him, but I presume he is of at least average intelligence.). I hope he has enough sense to know that he is being used by a man who has consistently and reliably shown himself to be an enemy of black people.

I have -- through my books “Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about College” and “What If George Bush Were a Black Man?” -- consistently attacked problems in the black community. I have spoken to millions of African-Americans about the value of getting an education and managing their money. I wish I could tell you how many times I argued with CNN producers to cover the Jena Six story long before it was popular to do so. So, everything that Juan Williams might say about advancing the community has been consistently on my radar screen.

But here is where Juan Williams and I differ.

I am very hard on the black community about improving our plight. But I am also man enough to challenge the white community, the media, universities, corporations and other American institutions for their role in creating racial inequality. Racism is a disease that lies within the fabric of nearly every American institution. So, any conversation about racial inequality that does not include White America’s flaws and roles in the process is ridiculous, misguided and counterproductive. In mathematics, I learned that you cannot solve a problem without working with both sides of the equation. The functions and systems of that equation are at least as important as the individual parameters. In other words, a society’s systems and historical oppressors play a powerful role in the creation of incentives, opportunities and outcomes of the individual.

Many black conservatives are simply afraid to challenge white America to acknowledge their personal responsibility in the creation and perpetuation of racial inequality; for this is biting the hand that feeds them (How long would Juan Williams be on the Fox News payroll if he were to tell white America that their institutions and attitudes are a large cause of racial inequality? Contrary to Bill O'Reilly's indication, I am not compensated by CNN or any other networks for what I say.). It also feeds directly into white supremacy to say, “The black community is in shambles because black people are making bad choices. The 400 years of oppression have nothing to do with the last 30 years of expression.” Hence, we have Bill O’Reilly getting his rear-end rubbed by Juan Williams, as they both agree that black people are just stupid.

Bill O’Reilly claimed that Rev. Jesse Jackson, another guest on the show, was appalled by what I said about Juan Williams, but of course he could not validate his claims on camera. I got a call the very next morning from Jackson’s daughter Santita and received no indication of disapproval from the Jackson family. I am sure that if they had disagreed, they would have told me personally. Santita is a good friend and straight shooter.

Juan Williams believes he can fool us into thinking that he is contributing to the advancement of black people by teaming up with a proven racist who has KKK members and Neo-Nazis watching his show (You should see the language used in my hate mail.). A man who has a problem with President Bush would not team up with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to go after Bush. No matter how valid his arguments might be, the fact is that such actions amount to treason and are ultimately destructive. Having a black face does not mean you care about the black race. Clarence Thomas taught us that.

Hence, at the end of the day, I still call Juan Williams "the Happy Negro." I stand by my remarks and might even put it on a t-shirt. From the response I've gotten so far, I wouldn't be the only one wearing it.

Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University and author of “What if George Bush were a Black Man?” He does regular commentary for CNN, BET, ESPN and CBS. For more information, please visit www.BoyceWatkins.com.

Harrassing Bill Collectors: How to Deal with Them

2008-02-29T08:26:00.001-08:00

By Dr. Boyce Watkins - Syracuse University

Bill Collectors really want their money, like the rest of us. Some of them seem to feel that it is O.K. to resort to flat out thuggish intimidation to get their money back. That might work on The Sopranos, but it shouldn't work in real life.

Part of the reason abusive bill collectors can have their way with the public is because many citizens do not know their rights. Bill collectors prey on the uninformed in a terrible way: they threaten to have them arrested, they harass their relatives, call all hours of the night, the list goes on and on.

One woman successfully sued a rogue bill collector after he called her repeatedly with threatening language. The woman, a senior citizen, was told by the man to "Stop with the sob stories and pay your god damn bill!"

The Federal Trace Commission states that complaints against bill collectors are rising, reaching the highest level they've seen in the past 3 years. Most of the complaints focus on vulgar language, trying to collect more than the amount of the true debt, and extra fees, such as court costs.

There are rights that can protect you from bad and malicious bill collectors. You want to keep these in mind as you work yourself out of debt:

1) There is something called "The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act". If you are not familiar with this document, get familiar with it. You can read it by clicking here.

2) A bill collector cannot contact you at work if your employer does not approve of the contact. Let the bill collector know that this is the case and they must legally stop contacting you at your job.

3) Bill collectors cannot call you before 8 am or after 9 pm. The only exception is if you give them permission to do so.

4) A bill collector can only contact your friends and family if they are trying to find a way to get in touch with you. However, some of them may do this in order to harass or embarrass you. If that is the case, you may want to tell your friends to tell the bill collector, "She does not live here and I do not know how to get in touch with her. Please don't call here anymore." Then, get the bill collector's information from your friend and reach out to them when you can.

5) You can get them to stop contacting you altogether by sending them a letter telling them to stop. You still must pay the debt, but they won't be calling you during dinner.

6) The bill collector can not curse at you or use foul language and they must tell the truth about how much you owe. They cannot threaten to sue unless they are serious about it, and they can't touch your 401k or IRA.

7) If they call you, you can demand that they send you a written notice of the amount you owe and who you owe the money to. If you do not believe that the debt is yours, you can write a letter to them stating that this is not your debt. They must then send you proof that the debt is actually yours.

If you feel that a debt collector has violated any of these rules, you can contact the Federal Trade Commission at www.ftc.gov. Remember that you are not powerless in this situation.

Bill O'Reilly Wants to Lynch Michelle Obama: How Nice

2008-02-22T09:46:00.001-08:00

Dr. Boyce Watkins

www.BoyceWatkins.com

Call me a crazy black man, but why do I keep hearing commentators on major media outlets discussing the idea of lynching African-Americans? A golf channel analyst used the word to describe suggested treatment of Tiger Woods, and now Bill O’Reilly from Fox News has used it as a way to describe his feelings toward Michelle Obama. In fact, O’Reilly even said that he may have a “lynching party”, bringing back images of people gathered for family picnics to watch a charred black body hang from a tree.

In response to Michelle Obama’s recent comment about being proud of America for the first time, O’Reilly had this to say: "I don't want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless there's evidence, hard facts that say this is how the woman really feels.”

At least he’s going to make sure Michelle Obama did something wrong before he lynches her, that’s awfully nice of him. O’Reilly’s comment takes you back 100 years to a time in which community Klansmen felt they were being “good people” by waiting to hear the evidence before going to the black man or woman’s home to have them shot, burned, maimed, stabbed or castrated.

Fortunately, Michelle Obama has taken the classy route and is only taking Bill O’Reilly as seriously as the rest of us do. He may as well be called “Irrelevant O’Reilly”, as both he and Sean Hannity gained their popularity in a post-911 world, built on fear, anger and negativity. The “Post-Post-911” period in America appears to be one of bringing people together and moving forward, not allowing the extremists such as Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and O’Reilly to dictate the dialogue. The War on Terror has been as successful as the War on Drugs and we are finding that working together achieves far more than bullying our way through foreign and domestic policy.

I have dealt with Bill O’Reilly up close on many occasions. Three months ago, he had my picture slapped up on his show for 5 days in a row, calling for me to be fired from Syracuse University for insulting him and his Bojangled Caricature of a sidekick, Juan Williams. My refusal to appear on his show earned me an entire episode of anger and nasty attacks by both he and his conservative guests. Perhaps this too qualifies as the type of “lynching party” he plans to give Michelle Obama, I’m not sure. I consider myself lucky, for a “lynching party” 100 years ago would not have consisted of meaningless words, it would have put my black butt in a casket.

I am sure Bill doesn’t truly want to physically lynch Michelle Obama, but there are many ways he could have expressed his frustration. Mrs. Obama could have been challenged on her remarks, criticized for them, and even taken to task on O’Reilly’s show. But the fact that Bill O’Reilly, a man whose racism exceeds both Don Imus and David Duke, would choose the word “lynch” to describe Michelle Obama is not only disturbing, it’s downright revealing. What’s more revealing is the fact that Fox News has not felt the need to punish O’Reilly for his remarks, implying that it is ok to talk about lynching a woman who might be the First Lady of the United States. I am not sure he would have gotten away with offering to send a prominent Jewish woman to “the concentration camp”, no matter what she had to say.

Bill O’Reilly is not only racist, he is unpatriotic. How can you love your country when you want to have a “lynching party” against the wife of a Presidential candidate? While he is quick to jump on the anti-Muslim bandwagon in the War on Terror, O’Reilly is the first to use terroristic words to describe his reaction to the potential First Lady. This should alarm all of us, whether we agree with Michelle Obama or not.

America has many enemies, both foreign and domestic. Overzealous commentators, draped with the American flag, making terroristic threats toward our leaders are first and foremost among them.

Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Finance Professor at Syracuse University and author of “What if George Bush were a Black Man?” For more information, please visit www.BoyceWatkins.com

Dr. Boyce Video: Tavis Smiley vs. Barack Obama

2008-02-17T13:27:00.001-08:00

by Dr. Boyce Watkins
www.BoyceWatkins.com

I received alot of mainstream media requests about the situation between Senator Barack Obama and Tavis Smiley. Some interpreted my commentary to imply that I somehow wanted to take sides on this issue. I also received calls from some close friends of Tavis Smiley (but nothing personally from Tavis, who may be angry with me right now), who were concerned that I felt that Tavis was wrong for doing what he did.

I will now set the record straight.

I make it my primary objective to speak with complete honesty. I also found the situation between Barack Obama and Tavis Smiley to be disturbing. However, I do not consider either individual to be worthy of any form of persecution from the American public. I refused to do any mainstream media appearances to discuss this issue, because there are some things that black people need to discuss among themselves. I have a good relationship with the people at The Tom Joyner Morning Show and Black America Web, and it is my goal to keep it that way.

Tavis Smiley is a good man and a respectable brother. I want to see Barack Obama win this election, and Mr. Smiley has stated that he too celebrates Obama's success. It would never be in my plans to disrupt Obama's path to the White House, nor is it to add to the stress Tavis Smiley is clearly feeling right now. Did I take Tavis Smiley to task on what he said? A little bit, yes. But I only made my comments because I felt that some things needed to be said.

It is my personal opinion that while Tavis Smiley has no problem seeing Senator Obama jeopardize his race to The White House in order to appear at the State of the Black Union, I wouldn't expect Tavis to be willing to jeopardize one of his many corporate sponsorship deals to appear at someone else's forum. Also, if people were to accuse him of being anti-black for refusing to give up his sponsors, that would be wrong. While Smiley has proclaimed himself to be a tireless freedom fighter for the black community, I have never once seen him take Walmart to task for the way this company has consistently pillaged poor people and those of color. It would not be in Mr. Smiley's interest to do so, but yet the broader community would certainly benefit from such a commentary. Thus, like the rest of us, Tavis does sacrifice a little freedom for a little "me-dom" every now and then.

So, for those who are fans of Tavis Smiley, Tom Joyner or Barack Obama, please understand that my goal is to be fair, not to take sides. Tavis should have invited Barack to his conference, but for him to assume that anyone who is anyone in Black America should be attending the State of the Black Union.....well, that's just wrong. There are many forums in Black America that allow individuals to express their blackness, and his convention is just one of them.

Sorry to be honest brother, but I've got to tell the truth. I've had alot of people compare me to Tavis and we have alot of mutual friends. I will always respect you.

My video statement is below. A special thanks to the production crew for putting it together. For those who don't like the hip hop in the commentary, I'm sorry, but that's just me being Dr. Boyce.

Respect and Love:

Boyce Watkins