Members of the Virginia Legislature 1871-1872. Library of Virginia.

My latest op-ed appeared in The Virginian-Pilot Wednesday. With February being Black History Month, I wanted to write something for it. I had run across Senate Joint Resolution 13 when looking at bills earlier, reading just the synopsis of the bill. Thinking that there might be a local connection, I finally found the time to read the whole thing and noticed that one of those referenced shared my last name.

From the time I moved here, people have tried to connect me to the Paige family of Norfolk. But my own family is from the Peninsula and I’ve never found a link. Seeing the name of Richard G.L. Paige made me spend more time than I have right now to try to find a link again – to no avail. Nevertheless, as is always the case, I learned a lot about Paige during my search.

One of the things I ran across in my research was the photo above, which accompanied the column in the printed paper. Of note is the placement of the black legislators: all are at the bottom. R. G. L. Paige is 5th from the right in that row.

My own great-grandfather, Edmund G. Paige, was a contemporary of R. G. L. Paige. While R.G.L. was serving in the legislature, Edmund was doing some real estate investing of his own. I have a copy of the deed dated July 4, 1874 in which he purchased 6 acres of land in Elizabeth City County, now Hampton. Also like R.G.L., Edmund had been born a slave, but other than that piece of information, which was passed to me by my father many years ago, I have no other information. It is possible that my great-grandfather made his way to Hampton because of Freedom Fortress, Ft. Monroe. But that is pure speculation. Despite my efforts over the past 30 years, I’ve never found anything older than that 1874 deed about him.

As for the Paiges of Norfolk – I doubt I’ll ever find a link between the two families. I’ve been told many times – as recently as yesterday – that I look like them. While that is true, it’s not because of my Paige ancestry; as far as I can tell, there is no white ancestry on that side. My mother’s side of the family is a different story; it is that side which I resemble most.

My weekly column appears in The Virginian-Pilot on Wednesdays. You can see the columns as they are published here. With the recent update to the PilotOnline home page, navigation to my columns has been simplified: click on Opinion and then choose my name at the bottom of the dropdown list. You can also see the columns by liking my Facebook page.

A quick look at some of the stories and other stuff from the past week.

VA Republican primary: still Romney v Paul
The week started off with a ruling by Judge John Gibney to delay the printing of the ballots for the March 6 primary. When he put the ruling in writing the next day, it appeared that his final order might be in favor of the plaintiffs. (Rick Perry had filed the lawsuit but was joined by Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Jon Huntsman and Michelle Bachmann, the latter three having not even bothered to turn in any petitions.) That was not to be. Friday, the judge heard the arguments in the case and ruled that Perry, et al, had waited too long to fight the rules (pdf).

General Assembly back in session: Republicans in charge
The General Assembly convened Wednesday. To the surprise of no one, Republicans in the Senate claimed control of that chamber. With the large majority in the House, Republicans are now in complete control of Virginia’s government. Despite the exhortation of Gov. Bob McDonnell in his State of the Commonwealth address that Republicans not “be arrogant” and not “overreach,” I simply don’t see that moderation coming to fruition. Elections have consequences, and how Republicans act with their control might just come back to bite them in November.

Republicans in charge: fast-track for congressional redistricting
I have to say I didn’t see this one coming, although I mentioned it as being on the table in my op-ed this week. I just didn’t think they would get to it as quickly as they did, with the first committee vote coming on the opening day of session. The bill has passed the House, but not without some division amongst the members of the black caucus. I have seen the memo – and my first response was that was something that needed to be spoken to the members of the VLBC, not committed to writing, simply because I knew it would end up in a story somewhere. The black caucus is a minority within a minority – and the need to stick together on the big issues cannot be overstated. But next time, I hope this kind of conversation takes place in the caucus meetings.

Bob Marshall is in!
Delegate Bob Marshall, author of HB1, the personhood bill, is running for the U.S. Senate. Marshall, who nearly pulled off an upset in the 2008 Republican convention for Senate, is entering an already crowded primary field. If nothing else, it’s going to be fun to watch Marshall debate front-runner George Allen.

Transparency? Um, no
The finance committee of the Portsmouth School Board canceled its meeting on the budget, rather than allow a Virginian-Pilot reporter to attend. When those who are supposed to represent us are afraid of the media, something’s very wrong. “Stop treating residents with contempt.” And the media, too.

Missing
The latest addition to the Virginian-Pilot editorial board, Michelle Washington, wrote a nice piece earlier this week about the lack of women in public life. Women, as I learned during the 2008 Democratic presidential contest, can be our own worst enemies. The sentiment of that woman she quoted in the story was one I heard far too often from women who would not support Hillary Clinton. If you substituted black for women in the article, you’d find a similar sentiment. There’s a name for it: internalized oppression.

Missing, part 2
Speaking of missing, I attended the Norfolk Forum Tuesday night and the speaker was University of Richmond president Dr. Edward L. Ayers. Ayers is a historian and an expert on the Civil War, the topic of his remarks. I don’t recall a speaker ever not having received a standing ovation before, but Ayers didn’t. Perhaps his blunt talk on the causes of the war made his overwhelmingly white audience uncomfortable.

Playoffs
My picks for the NFL playoffs this week: Saints over the 49ers, Patriots over the Broncos, Texans over the Ravens and Packers over the Giants.

For realists, the true story of the Civil War illuminates the problem of ostensibly sober-minded compromise with powerful, and intractable, evil.

Al Sharpton says we should ignore the latest from Rush Limbaugh. I rarely agree with anything Sharpton has to say and this time is no different. Perhaps he’s just trying to protect his job, having morphed from the outspoken radical to what I call an acceptable Negro.

The old Sharpton would have been shouting from the rooftops.

The new Shaprton is just plain wrong.

“What is so hard to understand about this woman being booed?” he [Limbaugh] said, calling her “Mooch-elle.” “We don’t like paying millions of dollars for Mrs. Obama’s vacations,” he said, also complaining about her exhortations about nutrition and exercise. Nascar fans, he said, “understand it’s a little bit of a waste. They understand it’s a little bit of uppity-ism.”

Limbaugh knew exactly what he was saying and to not call him out just means there will be more and more overtly racist attacks. Death threats have prompted presidential candidate Herman Cain to obtain Secret Service protection, the first of any of the Republican candidates. It’s probably not a coincidence: after all, Barack Obama received a Secret Service detail earlier than any candidate in history.

Is Cain “uppity” too? Or does that only apply to “their” blacks?

Yeah, I’m not buying that, either.

Word on the street is that certain people were upset that Bentley, obviously a white guy, was hired in the first place to run the majority black school system. I’m just guessing here but the board considered him the best of the three finalists when he was hired, right? Despite the 3-3 vote, right?

Oh, yes, the board will do another nationwide search – on our dime, of course.

I think Thomas Calhoun, president of the Norfolk Federation of Teachers, got it right. From the article:

“You are the problem – it’s not the superintendent, it’s the inconsistency at the top,” he told the board, which is appointed by the council. Calhoun said frequent turnover on the board undermined continuity in the division’s leadership. “I will be so glad when the city gets fed up with this system.”

Some of us are already fed up, Mr. Calhoun. It’s beyond time for Norfolk to join the ranks of other cities and elect its school board.

UPDATE: In an article printed in Friday’s paper, School Board Chairman Dr. Kirk Houston says the separation was not about race. That he had to address that specifically is interesting, don’t you think?

A few links from around the ‘net:

• Virginia Beach appoints black council member, although not the one that some people wanted. But we have this thing called elections, and in this case, the election to fill the seat is just months away, this November. Rather than calling people names, supporters of Tanya Bullock should rally around her and get her elected.
• Portsmouth council elections moved to November. That’s November 2012. Not only do current council members get an extension of six months on their terms, but the election will be drowned out by the noise of the presidential race. Portsmouth also has a special election this November, to fill the seat formerly occupied by Elizabeth Psimas.
• Mixed drinks in Hatteras. Residents passed this yesterday. According to the article, only a few places in Dare County continue to not allow mixed drinks to be served.
• Michael Irving wants to eradicate homophobia. Yes, that Michael Irving. And Leonard Pitts is telling the president to “evolve faster.” What’s this world coming to when two black, straight men support equality?
• Congressman Ron Paul not running for re-election. He’s still running for president, though.

It’s going to be another smoker here in Hampton Roads today. Stay cool. And let me know what else is going on out there.

From Library of Congress

My latest op-ed, title above, appeared in The Virginian-Pilot Thursday. In case you haven’t noticed from my recent posts, Norfolk is now undergoing the process of redistricting.

It is sometimes easy to forget that not everyone who lives in Norfolk – or Virginia, for that matter – is aware of the fact that we are under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and that our redistricting requires that race be a part of the equation.

That we are still so uncomfortable talking about it points to a much larger problem.

In the mid-1990s, I was involved with a group called Neighborhood Network, a coalition of folks from all over Norfolk. One of the things that we did was to hold a public discussion on race at one of the city’s schools. We were encouraged not to do so, because of the fear of what it would stir up. Nevertheless, we did it. And not a single fight ensued.

What I remember the most about that night – besides it being the genesis of Norfolk United Facing Race – is how it was portrayed on TV. The 10 pm news just reported what had gone on. But by 11pm, they had their chance to put a spin on it. And spin they did.

They opened the news segment with a clip of the KKK riding horses in full gear. (I still have that tape around here somewhere.) The interviews they showed were the folks on the edges of the conversation, the ones who routinely engage – some to this day – in race-baiting.

I guess it’s a lot easier to show discord than accord.

We cannot get past race until we face it head on. And that means that we need our elected representatives to face it, too. Younger people today don’t understand why the issue hasn’t gone away. They need only look to the so-called “leadership” to see why.

One part of the discussion centered around the plan put forth by Councilmen Tommy Smigiel and Andy Protogyrou. The mayor was perturbed that the so-called Pretlow plan had not been presented to council. Both Smigiel and Protogyrou made good points as to why that hadn’t happened. Smigiel raised the issue that the council did not present any of their plans at the public hearing. Protogyrou said that he and Smigiel had discussed the plan with City Attorney Pishko on May 25 and that Pishko was supposed to discuss it with the mayor. This whole part of the discussion got pretty heated at times, with charges flying back and forth.

The other part of the discussion was that of the so-called Jordan plan. Although it appears in his letter to council that Pishko was saying that the plan would not be approved by DOJ, he said that was not the case. The plan would meet the criteria of DOJ, Pishko said repeatedly, which left me scratching my head as to why an ordinance to be voted on for that plan was not included. After some discussion, the plan – sans ordinance – was added to the agenda to be voted on.

Throughout the formal session (watch here), the redistricting issue appeared to hang over everything else. There was a counting of heads to see who would vote for which of the now three plans on the agenda. When it became clear that none of the plans had the requisite 5 votes for passage, Barclay Winn moved to delay the vote.

There was considerable discussion about whether there should be a public hearing when the plans are voted on in two weeks, with Angela Williams advocating for it. Council apparently has a rule that once a public hearing is held, no further comments are allowed on the topic. This makes sense if the public hearing covers everything, but in light of the introduction of the Jordan plan, makes no sense at all. The public has not had a chance to weigh in on it yet – and they were not allowed to do so last night, either.

With the delay, I expect the city to now look at the plan and post it to the website for all to see. And I hope that the citizens will take the time to review it and let council know, via snail mail, telephone or email, of their opinions on it.

In other news, the Council received nominations last night for School Board. One existing member, Vice Chair Karen Jones Squires, asked not to be reappointed. The three other members whose terms expire June 30 have all asked to be reappointed. In all, 16 names were entered into nomination last night, which is a pretty good number. The entire list is here.

I suspect the three will be reappointed – no earth-shattering news out of the schools this year – and that the new member will be Warren Stewart, who is eminently qualified to serve, having been a superintendent.

So where is the discussion of this? When did council review the plan and decide for or against its inclusion in the actual vote? There hasn’t been another council meeting since the public hearing, right?

As of this writing (8:48am), the supporting documents for the council meeting are not yet on the website, so the average Norfolk citizen has no way of knowing exactly what has transpired in the past week.

I’ll be following this throughout the day. Check back later for more info.

Attending another meeting last night, several people mentioned to me why they didn’t make the public hearing: the notice in the paper that they saw had the wrong time in it. Of course, if the city hadn’t waited until Memorial Day to announce the hearing, there would have been more time to promote it in the first place.

At this point, I think the city needs to slow down and take a good look at the new plan offered. There is no rush to submit a plan to the Justice Department – council elections are not until next year.And they could hold another public hearing – this time, properly advertised so that the citizens can participate – and discuss the pros and cons of each plan.

We live with these lines for ten years. Minor tweaking of existing lines should not be the only alternative.

>” />

One never encounters this wholesale dismissal of the past when one commemorates, say, the Kennedy inauguration or the Holocaust. That’s because those things makes us feel sorrow, nostalgia, resolve. As Ryan Price would testify, African-American history makes us feel . .  other things.

And if we find those things difficult to process, that’s understandable. But to respond to that difficulty by declaring this one strain of history off limits is to commit an act of plain moral cowardice.

Revisionist history does none of us any good. Let’s be honest about the past. Then and only then can we move forward.

• Norfolk CSB sues staffers to recover no-show worker’s pay.This is a no-brainer. Somebody should be held responsible for this. Interesting that the attorney for a couple of the staffers is questioning why the Norfolk City Attorney’s office, who investigated the complaint that caused the worker to be placed on leave, never followed up with her termination, a charge CA Pishko calls “Absurd.”
• A break from redistricting. The General Assembly plans are in the hands of the Governor. The House and Senate have competing plans for the Congressional districts, so they are taking a break until April 25.
• Need tax help? The federal tax filing deadline is not April 15 this year, but April 18, due to a holiday in Washington DC. Smart states, like New Jersey, likewise extended their due date as well. Virginia, on the other hand, did not, so returns normally due on April 15 will still be due on that day. Although I’ve received numerous emails reminding me of this, I can’t locate it on the website.
• Civil War was about slavery.  So says Leonard Pitts. And James Loewen.

What did I miss? Link it in the comments.

EDIT: Oops, forgot one. Birthers undermine GOP chances. Or at least that was the headline when I read the article in the Pilot. Gee – ya think?

In an editorial today, The Virginian-Pilot discusses the difficulty of the topic:

The legacy of slavery is with us always in America. It is the durable bequest of the Founders, who, for all their idealism, managed to institutionalize one of history’s great inhumanities.

The historical freight of that injustice doesn’t disappear because people want it to, or because time passes. Slavery is as integral to American identity as the Revolution, as Manifest Destiny, as the world wars.

But the board whiffs when coming up with a solution on how to teach it, only saying that the way the teacher did it was wrong.

I’ll admit it: I have no solution. I know that the lesson needs to be taught. I just don’t know how you do it. My niece, who teaches first grade, told me about how her kids didn’t realize there were different races until she pointed it out to them. Part of me wants to live in a utopian society where judgements are not made based on the way people look, so I cringe at the thought of pointing out the racial differences.

At the same time, it is the legacy of slavery that most black people deal with on a regular basis. So it is important that we teach that history – to understand the context in which the U.S. operates today.

The “how” is the hard part.

So, dear reader, how do you suggest we teach slavery?

This will be a futile column.

Experience dictates that it will change no minds, inspire no reconsideration among those who disagree. It will sit on the computer screen or the newspaper page taking up space, affecting nothing, until another column replaces it. It will be a useless essay, written for one reason only: to protect the writer’s mental health. If the writer did not write it, you see, there is a great danger his head would explode.

I know how he feels, on so many levels.

My latest column, Redistricting and race, appeared in The Virginian-Pilot Wednesday. Writing about either topic, much less both, is so much of an effort in futility. I happen to believe that no matter how many articles are written, no matter how many hearings are held, there is absolutely nothing that can be done about the redistricting process this cycle, at least not at the statewide level. That horse has already left the barn. The time to have done something about it was several years ago, in 2008, when the first split General Assembly was seated. If redistricting by someone other than the General Assembly couldn’t be accomplished then, why in the world does anyone think it can be done now? The lines were mostly drawn last fall, with minor tweaks in them once the census numbers were released. The hearings on March 31 and April 2 in advance of the General Assembly session on April 4 is pure window dressing. Make the public think they are being listened to.

And then we have the issue of race thrown into the mix at the last minute. Come on, folks. I recall conversations about a potential second minority-majority Congressional district at least four or five years ago. Heck, I could even give you the names of the folks who were lining up to run. So why all the talk about it now? Why wasn’t it an issue much, much earlier?

But one thing is certain: mention race in any context and the racists out there come out of the closet. Read through the comments in Pitts’ column for a sampling. And remember, those probably aren’t the worst of what Pitts gets. My own column has not a single comment – but I can tell you that I’ve gotten emails. Happens every single time I mention race – and I knew it would happen this time, too.

We have a problem in this country and the problem is that we have yet to openly and honestly deal with the issue of race. As the result, any effort to try to do so is met with hostility from some very vocal quarters.

One of the rules we used to have when I was a facilitator with Norfolk United Facing Race was to “speak harsh truths softly.” Sometimes, no matter how softly you speak the truth, ears, as Pitts said, don’t hear it. They hear what they want to hear. Just as it is a problem when Democrats and Republicans talk past each other, so, too, is it a problem when blacks and whites do the same. The only thing we can do is to continue the conversation, hoping that somehow, someday, we’ll reach a point of understanding.

So yeah, I had to write that column. And yeah, I had to point out that blacks are under-represented in elected office in Norfolk and in Virginia, even if there is virtually no hope that the situation will be addressed.

Because otherwise, my head would have exploded.

Despite all of this, there was something else going on with this project, an invisible hand pushing it as it rose, phoenix-like, from the ashes for the third time. In various reports since it was announced in 2008, the project was described as being located in an impoverished neighborhood desperately in need of development. A speaker at the town hall meeting finally named it: race.

I have to say that although the project appears to be off the table, I believe it will be resurrected at some point in the future, for the very reasons that I outlined in the article.  I hope the citizens continue to be engaged, continue to ask questions. And, of course, think towards next May’s council elections. The Three Amigos – Tommy Smigiel, Andy Protogyrou, and surprisingly, Angelia Williams – could use some help.

Whenever one of these “firsts” comes along, I’m reminded of a post of mine from from four years ago where I first (at least on this blog) discussed the whole dynamic of race and gender. I think this is further fuel to the idea that gender trumps race, and that white women are #3.

Of course, I’m looking up from the perspective of a #4.

Matthew Henson (Library of Congress)

My latest op-ed appeared in The Virginian-Pilot last Wednesday. (Although I love the fact that the columns are online, I have to admit that the printed newspaper looks a lot better.)

A couple of points in the piece that bear a little additional information.

First, despite the president’s proclamation, I still consider it Black History Month, not African American History Month. In my lifetime, I’ve been (at least) colored, a Negro, Black, Afro-American and African American. I came of age in the “Young, Gifted and Black” era – and I’m completely comfortable with being stuck there

Second, I feel strongly that Black History Month has turned into either a Martin Luther King Jr. lovefest or a celebration of “the first black _______ ” (fill in the blank), neither of which was the intent of Carter G. Woodson, when he started Negro History Week in 1926. Firsts are all well good but knowledge of such doesn’t necessarily add to the understanding of how our American culture has been shaped by the contributions of blacks. Elvis Pressley, for example, was influenced by gospel music, which can trace its roots to black Americans during slavery. One of those cited in my op-ed, Dr. Charles Drew, is featured rather prominently on the American Red Cross website for his contribution to their work.

Finally, there is the issue of oral tradition. That so much of black history wasn’t written down made it possible for misinformation to be passed from one generation to the next – note the case of Benjamin Banneker  – and for so much to have been lost. “History,”  Winston Churchill said, “is written by the victors.”  It should not, therefore, be of surprise that the claim of Matthew Henson is open to suspicion. Henson was a member of expeditions to the North Pole with famed explorer Robert E. Peary and his account of it can be read here. (While this article says that there is controversy surrounding whether Peary’s team or that of Frederick Cook got to the pole first, this one disputes that and says that Cook’s claims have been “widely discredited.”) Arlington National Cemetery, where Henson is now buried, calls him the “Co-Discoverer of the North Pole” and says that it was Henson, not Peary, “who first reached the Pole and planted the American flag.” In this profile of him, National Geographic says Henson arrived 45 minutes ahead of Peary.

Henson greeted Peary, “I think I’m the first man to sit on top of the world.”Henson later recalled that this angered Peary. “Oh, he got hopping mad … No, he didn’t say anything, but I could tell,” wrote Henson. Henson wrote that Peary “fastened the flag to a staff and planted it firmly on top of his igloo.”

That Henson’s name is not as well known as that of Peary is a testament to Churchill’s statement.

I think there is a continuing need for Black History Month, no matter what it is called, because we all need to know who contributed to our shared heritage.

1. Military Spouses Residency Relief Act: it’s gonna cost us
2. American Idol results 4/28/10: down to five
3. American Idol results 5/12/10: top 3
4. Why Nye lost
5. Joint Forces Command to close
6. Report: Hampton City Council candidates’ forum
7. Who is McKinley Price?
8. BREAKING: Hester running for Mayor in Norfolk
9. A step too far
10. House Dems call on McDonnell to replace Malek

I guess I need to keep writing about American Idol

One of the more interesting things when I look at my stats (which isn’t often) is the older posts which consistently remain at the top of the list in terms of views. Among them are:

• DYK…Virginia is a Dillon Rule state?
• Trailer trash?
• Up the Ridge: looking at Virginia prisons
• Male vs female, white vs black

I guess people are still searching for these things.

A textbook distributed to Virginia fourth-graders says that thousands of African Americans fought for the South during the Civil War — a claim rejected by most historians but often made by groups seeking to play down slavery’s role as a cause of the conflict.

Local schools use history book with error about black soldiers

The book is being used by fourth-graders in Norfolk and fourth- and fifth-graders in Chesapeake. In Suffolk, it is not the official textbook, but it is used as a resource for fourth grade.

Virginia Beach schools also use it as an optional resource for fifth grade, and Tuesday the School Board considered adopting it as a primary text.

I remember the history book we used in elementary school that basically said slavery was a good thing. It didn’t jibe with the stories my father told me about his grandfather, who had been a slave. But that was in the 1960s, not 2010.

This is beyond ridiculous.

One issue I should mention: that of the benefits of affirmative action for white women. One of the many sources that I read on this topic can be found here. But a Google search brings up a ton of them.

I have to admit that I was put off initially by the title of the piece, which, more than likely, Webb did not write. White privilege is not a myth: go read the Peggy McIntosh’s seminal article (pdf) on the topic and tell me that there is not an inherent benefit in our society for being white. Webb’s love for our shared Scots-Irish heritage tends to sometimes obscure the harsh reality: you can take the poorest, least educated white person, teach them how to dress and speak, and that person will be almost universally accepted. The same is cannot be said for a black person. Perhaps I need to send the Senator a copy of Noel Ignatiev’s book, “How the Irish Became White.”

Webb seems to be blinded by his desire to improve the lot of his Appalachian kin, who he thinks have been wronged by the expansion of diversity. He inches very close to the “reverse discrimination” mark as being the reason so many whites are poor and remain poor. Webb fails to acknowledge that many of the anti-poverty programs put in place in the 1960s were geared towards poor whites just as much as poor blacks. There are reasons, Senator Webb, why the white and black underclass remain. The two groups have much in common, even if politics mostly keeps them separate.

The timing of this article is curious as well. Given all that transpired last week with Shirley Sherrod, it’s just a weird read. To whom, exactly, is Webb speaking? His rich, all-white colleagues in the Senate? Or, in gearing up for a re-election campaign, possibly against George Allen, is he trying to send a signal to “real Virginia” that he’s one of them?

But I agree with him that in pursuing diversity, we have lost sight of the original purpose of affirmative action. The goal was redress for black Americans, who, along with Native Americans, had suffered discrimination at the hands of our government. Interestingly enough, Webb made no mention of Native Americans.  Nor did he mention that the largest beneficiaries of affirmative action have been white women.

Diversity has the same Latin root as diversion – diversus­ – and while not synonymous, the two terms are linked, at least in my mind. As America has embraced diversity in our culture, we have been diverted from the real issues that are unique to black Americans. No other group was brought here in chains, enslaved for 250 years, and subjected to second-class citizenship for another 100 years after that. When Webb says “generations of such deficiencies do not disappear overnight,” he is absolutely correct. One must actually have boots in order to pull oneself up by bootstraps.

There should be – and are – programs to assist the poor. That doesn’t mean that there shouldn’t be programs geared towards black Americans – because there should be. When only five of the Fortune 500 CEOs are black, it’s hard to claim that the playing field is level.

This morning, there are reports that Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack is reconsidering her firing. That she was fired in the first place – without a full hearing of the facts – is troublesome.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

Yes, we live in a 24/7 information world. But that doesn’t mean we fail to do due diligence on the facts. The swift condemnation of Sherrod by those who should know better was an utter failure in the old adage “consider the source.” Because of the source, the very first thing that should have happened is that someone should have gotten hold of the full video.

But no. Folks were too busy tripping over themselves trying to prove how quickly they could disassociate from a “racist.”Except Shirley Sherrod is no racist.

Even the edited video, at the end, gave a hint that this was not a racist story. The support of the white farmer couple for Sherrod should have raised alarms.

Nope. It was easier – safer – to label this 62-year-old black woman a racist.

When the so-called “leadership” in this country is quick to condemn, without all the facts, it’s a sad state of affairs for our country.

But there are some downsides. One is that, despite my comment policy, some will push the envelope. Those people are pretty easily dealt with. Harder to deal with, sometimes, are the emails that come through the Contact me link at the top of the blog.

I get a lot of wonderful emails from people who cannot or will not post a comment here. But those can be overshadowed by the venomous ones that come through. Such is the case of one I received this morning. If a Leonard Pitts column appears in The Virginian-Pilot, if there is a column anywhere on the issue of race – like a recent one in the Seattle Times – you can best believe that I’m getting an email from this guy – one filled with such racist drivel that his emails are no longer allowed to be delivered to anyone at the Pilot. He has been banned from commenting on PilotOnline, he has been banned from commenting on this blog. And no doubt, I’ll get another email once he reads this post.

I thought he had discovered me when my article, The struggle toward inclusiveness, appeared in the paper. Not so. Recently, I was cleaning out some old papers and ran across a letter that he had written to me years ago. The content of his letter was the same, only the medium was different.

I could turn off the Contact Me link, but that wouldn’t be fair to everyone else. I could post some of his comments, but most wouldn’t get past my spam filter. Besides, I refuse to give a platform to racists.

Sometimes, there’s a lot more to running a blog besides posting an article or two.

While I appreciate what Mayor Holley accomplished over the years, this recall election has nothing to do with race. It has everything to do with whether the mayor is helping or hurting the city of Portsmouth. His fellow members of council – both black and white – voted unanimously to ask for his resignation. His former assistant, whose revelations prompted the vote, says that it is time for him to go. No one is denying that Holley helped race relations in Portsmouth in the past. But how much of a help is it when the mayor says there is a need for a “black” hotel? Is this 1964?

Yes, racism is alive and well in America. But we no longer fight the same battles today that we fought in the past. Today’s problems require a new set of skills – and a new group of leaders, both black and white. There is a lot more to be done. That cannot be accomplished when we cling to the notion that being black – no matter how incompetent – is enough.

The people of Portsmouth deserve better. Recalling Holley is a first step.

The cascade of missteps that led to the arrest suggest a combination of public racial profiling and the over reaction of law enforcement officers who are unfamiliar with autistic behavior.

The story details the events which led to the arrest: someone made a call to the Sheriff’s office to report a young black man sitting in a grassy area, possibly with a gun.

Except there was no gun.

The official report is here:

No gun was found on the subject and subsequent investigation has indicated that that a gun was not actually seen by the reporting parties at Park Ridge Elementary. While no weapon was seen authorities are still investigating the possibility.

I’m guessing that black means there must have been a gun, right?

Asperger Syndrome is “characterized by significant difficulties in social interaction,” according to Wikipedia. It is no wonder, then, that a confrontation between law enforcement and the young man took place. The sheriff’s department had no way of knowing of Neli’s condition, however:  according to the article, the young man did not have a medical alert bracelet.

But we know now. So why is the young man still in custody?

Yes, he’s been moved to a state mental hospital, but he remains in custody. According to the article and a website being maintained by his mother, his condition is deteriorating.

All because a young black man was sitting under a tree.

What happened in Stafford was a tragedy.

Why do I get the sense that this story will not have a happy ending?

In Virginia, Juneteenth is a state holiday with observances being held throughout the state. Not included on the list is one local observance, which will be held from noon to 6pm today at the Dr. Clarence V. Cuffee Community Center in Chesapeake.

In June 2001, I along with a number of others involved with Connecting Communities, went to Washington. Our mission was a simple one: we washed the steps of this great monument to freedom, ironically built by those who were anything but. We had speakers and the like, before we, brushes in hand, symbolically washed away the sweat and tears of those slaves. It was a powerful moment, made even more so by the reaction of a guard and some other visitors, who ridiculed our work. I recall being overcome with emotion as I thought of the men who had toiled to build this monument: their own freedom was probably never far from their minds.

All these years later, I still have that brush. And all these years later, I am reminded of how far we’ve come – and how far we have to go – in dealing with the issue of slavery and its impact on our society. Recognition, 217 years later, is better than no recognition at all, I guess.

Johnny "Pep" Morris in his I.C. Norcom year book. (David B. Hollingsworth | The Virginian-Pilot)

Stuff like this just makes my blood boil.

Morris’ contribution: 127 points. His total shot attempts are lost to history, but Morris made 57 field goals, a bucket about every 30 seconds. He was 13 for 21 from the foul line, shooting underhanded “granny-style,” as required by coach Smith.

[...]

Morris’ point total still stands as the second-highest nationwide for a high school player. The record, set a year earlier in 1960, is 135. Morris is one of 15 high school boys to score more than 100 in a game, according to the National Federation of State High School Associations.

His 57 field goals that night are a national record.

Morris holds another record from that night for which he’s not recognized: highest point total in a Virginia high school basketball game.

So the record is good enough for the national record book is not good enough for Virginia? And why would that be?

I.C. Norcom couldn’t be part of the all-white Virginia High School League in the segregated South in 1961. The school belonged to the VIA from 1954 until integration in 1969.

The VHSL maintains records for schools that were part of its league when the record was set, said Ken Tilley, VHSL executive director.

“VIA was a separate organization, and we don’t have access to that information,” Tilley said.

Except:

Morris’ feat has been listed in the national record book since 1978, the first year it was published. The Virginia High School League had to sign off on the record before the national group would accept it, said John Gillis, assistant director of the National Federation of State High School Associations and editor of the group’s record book.

And those records of the all-black, Virginia Interscholastic Association? Lost? Nope:

Lucious Edwards, archivist at Virginia State University in Petersburg, which maintains VIA records, said the records are open to review.

The records exist and are readily available. At some point, somebody at the VHSL looked at them – or at least was aware of their existence; otherwise, they would not have been able to certify it for inclusion in the national record. So what could be behind the VHSL not including the record, now that we know their excuse isn’t much of one?

If the VHSL had said the reason the records weren’t included was because they don’t have the manpower to put them in, I might buy it. Hell, I’d even volunteer to help them update the data. But here were are, some forty years after integration, and the VHSL’s excuse is they don’t have the records?

Here we are, in 2010, in supposedly an integrated, multicultural society, and something as simple as a record book is not complete. Anyone who claims we have no need for Black History Month needs to look no further than stuff like this.

He’s not aware of any other records in the national book that aren’t in the respective state’s record book, Gillis said.

And Virginia stands alone, one more time.

Hogwash.

Outside of the City of Richmond, there is no such thing as a full-time mayor, let alone a full-time council member, in Virginia.

I think The Daily Press summed it up nicely in its endorsement of McKinley Price for Mayor:

[Pat] Woodbury offers a false contrast when she says that, as a retiree, she can devote more time to the job than Price, who must maintain his dental practice. Newport News, like most cities in Virginia, long ago moved to the city manager form of government, with professionals overseeing operations under the elected council’s direction. The mayor and council members are meant to be part time, and a “full-time” mayor overly involved in day-to-day affairs is actually something to be avoided.

It’s one thing to hear candidates make the claim that they will be “full-time.” It’s quite another to hear it repeated by business leaders who should know better, as I have heard over the course of the last few months.  Norfolk’s city charter, just like all of the other cities in Virginia except Richmond, dictates a city manager form of government.

A part-time, citizen legislature – on the local level, the council – is part of the rich history of our nation. James Madison wrote that legislators should be “called for the most part from pursuits of a private nature and continued in appointment for a short period of office.”

Saying that they will be “full-time” doesn’t make it so. A quick look of the composition of councils around Hampton Roads reveals members that work in sheriff’s departments, members who are school teachers, members who are attorneys, members who are doctors, and yes, members who are retired. All of them have the same goal: to serve the public. And because of the part-time nature of council (not to mention the related part-time pay), they are able to do so.

So it’s time to stop attacking candidates on the basis of their holding another job. It’s the way our local government works. Don’t like it? Petition council to request a charter change.

Oh – and at the very least, be consistent. You can’t attack one candidate for holding another job while simultaneously supporting another candidate who also has another job.

What happens to a dream deferred?
Does it dry up
Like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore–
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over–
like a syrupy sweet?
Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.
Or does it explode?

~ Langston Hughes

In 1959, A Raisin in the Sun debuted on Broadway. The play is currently being performed by the Virginia Stage Company, the professional resident theater company in Norfolk whose home is the magnificent Wells Theater. I attended the show about a week ago.

It’s been a long time since I saw the black and white film version starring Sidney Portier, who originated the lead role of Walter Lee Younger on Broadway, and Claudia McNeil, who originated the role of family matriarch Lena Younger. I was surprised at how much I remembered as the performance progressed. There was an intensity in the characters on film that seemed difficult to match on the stage. For example, I recall McNeil slapping her daughter, Ruth, played by Ruby Dee, and making her repeat “In my mother’s house, there is still God.” There was a steeliness in her voice and in her carriage that makes me cringe to this day.

Nevertheless, the performances by Wendell B. Franklin as Walter Lee, Elaine Graham as Lena, Lisa Renee Pitts as Ruth, and Nicole Gant as Walter Lee’s wife, Beneatha, were good. This was not a performance where there was a lot of moving parts; the entire story takes place on a single set – a living room and a kitchen – with doors providing the illusion of other spaces. Of course, one does not need a lot of scenery when the story is so compelling. Insurance proceeds from the death of Mr. Younger provide a financial opportunity for the family. The question is how that money will be used.

Do yourself a favor and catch this show. It runs through April 18.

Part of me wants to believe him. Part of me wants to think that whoever drew up the proclamation, in the hustle and bustle of getting things done, simply overlooked the whole slavery issue.

But the other part of me says nope – no way, no how could anyone look at that proclamation and not realize the glaring omission of a mention of slavery. There’s only one way that such an omission could occur and not be detected: no one black looked at the proclamation before it was issued.

Methinks the governor needs some people of color around him.

Of course, had McDonnell issued a proclamation about the Civil War, instead of the Confederacy, we may not have been having this conversation. After all, that is what he referenced in his mea culpa Wednesday:

During the commemoration of the Civil War over the next four years, I intend to lead an effort to promote greater understanding and harmony in our state among our citizens.

And it is what I’ve seen proposed in a couple of places (1,2) across the blogosphere. I think that is a reasonable compromise.

I’VE BEEN thinking about the subject of race in an ideal society, a world where we talk about race without making everything about race. It’s something I long for, something I once thought was not only possible but just around the corner. I’m no longer sure that is the case.

I grew up in a completely integrated society. I never attended all-black schools, and I never lived in all-black neighborhoods. It was instilled in me at an early age that I could be whatever I wanted to be. There were no barriers — as long as I did well in school and took advantage of the opportunities. I truly believed that for a long time and couldn’t understand why folks my age thought differently. That all changed when I left the government to work in the private sector.

At 25, I came face to face with racism and how deeply imbedded in our society it is.

I will never forget the look of shock on the face of one interviewer at one of Norfolk’s largest private employers when I was being interviewed for the No. 2 accounting job in that company, an interview I had garnered on the strength of my resume as well as a phone call. He finally blurted out a question: How well did I work with white males?

I will never forget the partner in the then-13th largest CPA firm in the world telling me that he believed I could make partner, but that I’d work twice as hard to get there.

So much for that levelplaying-field idea.

Until then, I believed that, as my generation came of age, the old vestiges of racism would fall away. I learned a new term — institutional racism — and its effects on our society’s ability to leave the past in the past.

I began to see that the token black person doesn’t open the door for others; he or she remains the token, only to be replaced by another token. Those who have the power are willing to share only if forced.

So much of racism and prejudice — the two terms are not interchangeable: racism requires power, while prejudice does not — is not even intentional. When a person gets hired, for example, the natural instinct is to go with the one with whom you feel most comfortable, the result being hiring somebody who looks like you.

Working for myself full time for 23 years, I’ve learned that prejudice isn’t one-sided. On occasion I’ve had white people who, upon discovering I’m black, take their business elsewhere. Far more common is the internalized oppression in black clients. Without realizing it, they see blacks (and themselves) as inferior, and nearly every one who leaves me does so for a white CPA.

Parents unconsciously teach their children racism and prejudice, and our society reinforces it. No matter how open-minded one is about race, because it is a part of our fabric, most people succumb to its realities. Norfolk, for example, has a rule that its appointed boards — except the School Board — must reflect the racial makeup of the City Council. My father, a minister, used to say that 11 on Sunday morning was the most segregated hour of any day. For the most part, that remains the case. Outside of work, how many of us socialize with members of another race?

I’m tired of seeing black politicians take advantage of black folk because it’s easy. I’m tired of white politicians taking advantage of blacks in general. I’m tired of seeing natural groups — the poor, for example — pitted against each other simply because of race, a point made by Leonard Pitts in a column The Pilot published this month.

I’m frustrated watching my nieces and nephews struggle with racism and having to talk them through it. I’m tired of reading stories that show discrimination in housing, in lending, in so many aspects that make the mythical “American Dream” an impossibility.

So while it is possible that racism and prejudice will diminish with each generation, I’m no longer convinced that they will be obliterated. There’s simply too much at stake in maintaining the status quo, in staying in this comfortable place where we don’t talk about racism and prejudice and their effects, where we continue to live the lie that everything is OK. We’ve come a long way since the various civil rights acts, but the distance we have yet to travel is equally as far and much more difficult.

At 25, I had hope. At almost 50, I’m struggling to maintain it. But an inclusive world is important, and I will continue pushing to get there.

___________

Vivian J. Paige, a certified public accountant, was co-founder of Norfolk United Facing Race. She writes a blog at http:// blog.vivianpaige.com and lives in Norfolk.

From arrogance stems the idea two things that I witnessed yesterday: the tendency to exaggerate – or tell outright lies – and the tendency to speak about things with which the speaker has no knowledge. In one of my favorite quotes, Mark Twain said, “It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt.”  The problem is that a lot of folks don’t have the knowledge themselves to determine the veracity of a statement. When someone makes a claim that is patently false, it is accepted as truth.  A little knowledge – by the speaker or the hearer – is truly a dangerous thing.

Another thing reinforced in my mind yesterday is that sexism is alive and well. And the sexism of some black men is more than alive and well – it’s over the top. You would think that black men – of all people – would get the discrimination thing. Far too many don’t.

Finally, I don’t know when, exactly, America lost its sense of community – that we’re all in this together – and replaced it with an “I’ve got mine, you’ve on your own to get yours” attitude.  What I do know is that it is no longer a part of the way that many of us think. And, as Carter G. Woodson wrote back in 1933, it has penetrated the consciousness of the so-called “educated” black folk.

Michael Steele has been, by most accounts, an embarrassment to the Republican National Committee. The list of things he’s done wrong got longer with the release of a book he wrote, a book he never bothered to tell anyone about. Despite his gaffes, Steele is not being fired; his race is his shield.

Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, issued an apology regarding comments he made about Obama during the campaign. Reid reportedly referred to Obama as “light-skinned” and speaking with “no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”

Steele, thrilled to have the spotlight on someone else, is calling for Reid to resign. President Obama has accepted Reid’s apology, deeming the matter closed.

I believe we are missing a bigger point here, that point being we continue to put our heads in the sand when it comes to the issues of race. If Steele were white, I doubt that he would have even been elected chair, much less being able to hang on to it, given what he’s done. Yet he continues to serve. He is just as much of a race hustler as Rev. Al Sharpton, yet I don’t hear the Republicans referring to him as such.

And Reid is a throwback to an earlier era, when calling someone a Negro (or colored), was considered polite. To be honest, I don’t find his use of the term “Negro” offensive; it was his characterization of the Negro dialect that raised my hackles. I’m assuming he’s never watched Maury or any of the other afternoon shows where both blacks and whites use the same speech patterns.

Two wrongs never make a right, and in these cases, both men should lose their positions.

Racial equality demands that we treat everyone the same, regardless of skin color.

But until we have an open and honest conversation about race, the handling of these two and those to come will be uneven and unequal.

Electing a black president didn’t change that one iota.

The original flier promoting the event (courtesy of PilotOnline) shows the words “blowout adoption event for our black babies,” wording which has drawn the ire of some.

“On the face of it, I do think it’s insensitive to African Americans who did come to this nation as slaves and were sold,” Norfolk NAACP President James Rivers said. “It does seem sort of strange they would use that as a promotion for selling animals.”

“Yet I know that in many instances we do things without thinking about the broad implications,” Rivers added.

The language on the flier has, according to the article, been changed to “blowout adoption event for our black furry friends.”

So, dear readers, what do you think? Was the reference to “our black babies” insensitive? Or was it political correctness gone too far?  Or something else?

Inquiring minds want to know

The first story dealt with a report released yesterday by the Census Bureau about voter turnout in the November election. The press release, including a link to the data, can be found here.

About 131 million people reported voting in the 2008 U.S. presidential election, an increase of 5 million from 2004, according to a new table package released today by the U.S. Census Bureau. The increase included about 2 million more black voters, 2 million more Hispanic voters and about 600,000 more Asian voters, while the number of non-Hispanic white voters remained statistically unchanged.

As I searched online for the article that was printed in the Pilot, I ran across a number of  articles discussing the report. Interestingly enough, the one the Pilot reprinted was this AP story, which carries the inflammatory headline, “Voting rate dips in 2008 as older whites stay home.”  Yeah, that is one conclusion. Here’s another:

The 2008 election also suggested that the gender gap will continue to be politically important. About 66% of women voted compared with 62% of men. Neither was statistically different from 2004, but 10 million more women said they voted than did men in 2008—70.4 million women compared with 60.7 million men.

Why didn’t the AP story mention that? Or is it only race that matters?

The second news story – also from the AP – deals with the arrest of  “Henry Louis Gates Jr., the nation’s pre-eminent black scholar.”  The headline reads as if the reason for his arrest was racial profiling. But further in the story we get to the meat:

He was arrested on a disorderly conduct charge after police said he “exhibited loud and tumultuous behavior.”

Racial profiling may have brought police to his door – the call to police was for two black males trying to force entry into a home – but that’s not what got him arrested. What got him arrested was his refusal to identify himself. The idea that police should not ask someone who has appeared to have broken into a home for ID is beyond comprehension. That the AP writer’s angle in this story was racial profiling demeans the very real occasions of such and desensitizes readers to the issue. It’s like crying wolf.

Finally, we have an op-ed piece by New York Times writer Ross Douthat. A conservative blogger-turned-author, the 30 year old Douthat writes about race in 2028, a reference to former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s writings from 2003 that affirmative action “must be limited in time.” While Douthat makes some interesting points, it’s rather hard to take seriously someone who has never suffered the injustices of discrimination – and never will.

What these three stories told me today is that America still hasn’t had that big conversation on race. We cling to the notions of yesteryear without acknowledging that progress has been made but that we still have a long way to go. None of these stories advanced the collective consciousness about race and race relations.

And I wish the Pilot hadn’t printed them.

I thought about this case a couple of weeks ago as I met, for the first time, with a man originally from the Philippines who had come to the US after enlisting in the Navy in the mid-1960s.  While I tend to think in terms of black and white on this issue, the prohibition applied to him, too. He spoke of how his friends went to NC to marry, although because he married in 1970, he and his wife were able to do so in a Norfolk church.With more than a touch of bitterness in his voice, he told me how difficult it was for him to be in no-man’s land in the US: neither black nor white, he wasn’t accepted anywhere.

Sometimes, I think we forget just how recent these actions are and how their legacy continues to shape our lives today. Virginia Native American tribes are fighting for federal recognition because of racism on the part of one bigot in Virginia government.

While we cannot change the past, we can influence the future. I hope we all consider that when we take certain actions.

But as this article points out, it wasn’t just Marsh/Deeds supporters who were upset. Richmond Mayor, the Rev. Dwight Jones, a supporter of Brian Moran, and Sen. Donald MacEachin, who has not endorsed in this primary, joined with Marsh last Friday in questioning the endorsement. MacEachin went so far as to call it “tainted.”

The endorsement was one of the topics of conversation at Del. Kenny Alexander’s picnic on Memorial Day. One of the attendees was from Richmond. Interestingly enough, he said something very similar to what Marsh said: that this process would “diminish the credibility” of the organization.

Could this be the beginning of the end?

Here in Norfolk, we had an organization called the Concerned Citizens for Political Education*. Founded by Evelyn Butts, one of the things that the organization produced was the Goldenrod Ballot. This guide ballot, which was printed on goldenrod-colored paper, was distributed to let black voters know who the organization had endorsed. (To give some idea of the strength of the organization, read through this 4th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion in which the group is cited. Or this oral history provided by Al Teich in which the goldenrod ballot is cited.) Although the organization no longer exists (as far as I know), the goldenrod-colored paper is still used (note that was what was used in the Sessoms campaign) as many try to tie their candidates to this storied organization.

There are a few things that are worthy of comment. First, if there were irregularities in the process, then the endorsement means little. And one has to wonder: will the endorsement carry any weight with the targeted voters?

More importantly, though: these organizations were started as a way of educating black voters, not just on candidates, but on the political process. The need for that education continues to this day – for all voters, not just black ones. The disappearance of these organizations has left a void not filled by any other source.

*This organization’s name was used by whoever produced a hit piece against me when I ran in 2005. Given that the organization was inactive at the time, the flier had to have come from someone who was familiar with the historic organization.

The documentary was compelling and had the Chrysler Hall audience alternatively clapping, laughing and somber. What was most intriguing was the Q and A session afterwards with the film’s makers, Elvis Mitchell and Timothy Greenfield-Sanders. The “questions” often took the form of statements, as people spoke about the film’s effect on them.

I’m not going to give it away – you’ll just have to watch it yourself Thursday, February 26 at 8pm. Trust me – it is worth every minute of your time.

In his nomination letter to the Pulitzer judges, managing editor Robert Mason made the case for Chambers:

For all during the school crisis, and particularly during the year of its nadir — 1959 — Lenoir Chambers said and said again in his editorial columns what the law was, and what justice was, and what good sense was, and what reality was.

He never wavered. He wasted no time on the fiction of what might have been or might be. When some of his colleagues of the Virginia press at last joined him in his view, he welcomed them warmly, and he did not chide them for the lateness of their education.

It is not too much to say, I am persuaded, that Lenoir Chambers has done more, and under conditions more vexing and longer sustained, to give logic and direction to Virginia, and to the whole South, in the school problem than any other editor.

Editorial page editor Donald Luzzatto says in a companion piece that these editorials  “have apparently not been published in this newspaper” since they originally appeared. That is a shame, since if nothing else, they are a reminder of a time when the newspaper demonstrated its true independence. Even after the Norfolk schools reopened, Chambers continued to write about the subject, taking on the powerful Byrd machine, discussing the situation in Prince Edward County. I wish all of the articles were available to the public. (The other 12 are available to the paper subscribers via ePilot and since they changed the provider for ePilot, I haven’t figured out how to link to the articles.)

These editorials will become a part of my newspaper collection. And when the Pilot editoral board fails to live up to its rich history, I’ll have them at my fingertips to use as a reminder for them.

Massive Resistance was a policy declared by U.S. Senator Harry F. Byrd, Sr. on February 24, 1956 to unite other white politicians and leaders in Virginia in a campaign of new state laws and policies to prevent public school desegregation after the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision in 1954. Although most of the laws created to implement Massive Resistance were negated by state and federal courts by January 1960, some policies and effects of the campaign against integrated public schools continued in Virginia for many more years.

The Virginian Pilot did an excellent six-part series on the topic last fall. Last year, at the Norfolk State of the City address, Mayor Paul Fraim mentioned the anniversary and said that something would be done to recognize it. Ultimately, an 18-member commission, co-chaired by former Vice Mayor, Rev. Joseph N. Green and former Mayor, Joseph A. Leafe, was formed.  Little by little, information on the celebration of the end of this era in our city is coming out.

Until last week, I was quite unaware that a website regarding the event had been established. It was this announcement, which, as of this writing, appears in the RSS feed I have in my sidebar for Norfolk.gov press releases. Unfortunately, the announcement contains a link to a non-existent website – www.emr50th.com – instead of the real site, which I finally found here.  An indication of things to come?

Perhaps.

One part of the observance started last Friday. Members of the Norfolk 17 and the Lost Class of 1959 gathered to view the Chrysler Museum exhibit, “50 Years Later: The Lessons of Massive Resistance.” A private viewing for those who lived through it seems an appropriate start.  But what about public events?

Looking at the website, I see that the Unity March, which has been going on for several years after being started by former Vice Mayor and current council member Daun Hester, is now part of the 50th Anniversary Observances.  Hmm.

Then there is the invitation-only reception at the Chrysler Museum on January 29, a dedication of an as-yet-unidentified site on January 30, and an invitation-only reception at First Baptist Church, Bute Street on February 2.

The public is able to visit the Chrysler on Sunday, February 1 from 1pm – 5pm to view the special exhibit. And thanks to the Norfolk – Portsmouth Bar Association, there will be a public forum on Wednesday, January 28 at 7pm at the Half Moone Cruise and Celebration Center. Not that the information about this is on the website, though. Here’s what I got on it via email:

Please join us Wednesday, January 28, 2009, when we proudly host “The Triumph of the Rule of Law Over Massive Resistance: A Community Forum” moderated by Juan Williams. This noted civil rights author and National Public Radio and Fox News Analyst will lead a discussion, open to the public at no cost, that will include the Chief Justice of the Virginia Supreme Court and Norfolk native, The Honorable Leroy R. Hassell, Sr.; constitutional and civil rights law scholar, Professor Davison M. Douglas of the William & Mary Law School; and Professor Charles Ford, Chair of the History Department at Norfolk State University.

There will also be a play by the Virginia Stage Company. Entitled “A Line in the Sand,” the play will run February 24 through March 15.

To say I am disappointed that Norfolk won’t be doing more public events would be an understatement. When the announcement was made last June, it appeared that there would be ample opportunity for Norfolk’s citizens to come together in a celebration of how much progress has been made. Instead, I see the special events of this commeration being “invitation only,” much too close for me to the segregation of people of yesteryear.

Will they never learn?

The articles have been informative and entertaining as we look back on this shameful period in Virginia’s history. Unfortunately, a reading of the comments on each story leads me to thnk we’ve still got a long way to go. A number of comments complain about the timing of the story – as if the 50th anniversary could somehow be moved to a point after the election. One comment sums up much of what my own thoughts are:

… I am extremely embarrassed by many of these comments. I grew up in the segregated south (separate water fountains for “Whites” and “Coloreds” in the Portsmouth Giant Open Air Market as recently as the early 60′s.) I am proud of how far we have come. That is, until I read such ignorant comments as posted below about the Pilot trying to stir up racism and effect election results simply by writing about factual events – about history! … If you truly believe that reading about these historical events only perpetrates racism than I really feel sorry for you.

Norfolk was not the only school system closed during these days nor was it closed for the longest period of time. But the effect of the closing – and subsequent reopening – of the state’s largest school system revererbated. In conjunction with the anniversary, Norfolk’s City Council appointed a Commission, which has been working to determine how to commemorate the occasion. Yesterday, the End of Massive Resistance Commission announced a series events, scheduled for January and February 2009. On February 2, 2009 – the 50th anniversary of the schools reopening – members of the Norfolk 17 and the Lost Class of 1959 will visit the schools.

The term Bradley effect, less commonly called the Wilder effect, refers to a frequently observed discrepancy between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in American political campaigns when a white candidate and a non-white candidate run against each other. Named for Tom Bradley, an African-American who lost the 1982 California governor’s race despite being ahead in voter polls, the Bradley effect refers to a tendency on the part of white voters to tell pollsters that they are undecided or likely to vote for a Black candidate, when, on election day, they vote for his/her white opponent.

Some have suggested that Obama’s historic candidacy shows no effects of the Bradley effect; in fact, some have argued that there has been a reverse Bradley effect leading up to the nomination. From the same article:

The researchers noted that to that point in the election season, opinion polls taken just prior to an election tended to overestimate Obama in states with a black population below eight percent, to track him within the polls’ margins of error in states with a black population between ten and twenty percent, and to underestimate him in states with a black population exceeding twenty-five percent. The first finding suggested the possibility of the Bradley effect, while the last finding suggested the possibility of a “reverse” Bradley effect in which black voters might have been reluctant to declare to pollsters their support for Obama or are underpolled.

I doubt much reverse Bradley effect exists now that we are in the general election cycle. The underpolling of blacks remains an issue, though, as evidenced by the CNU poll released last week. But a new poll released Saturday may shed some light on why the race remains close. And if true, it doesn’t bode well for Obama.

Deep-seated racial misgivings could cost Barack Obama the White House if the election is close, according to an AP-Yahoo News poll that found one-third of white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks — many calling them “lazy,” “violent,” responsible for their own troubles.

Obama may be a post-racial candidate but the poll (pdf) indicates that we don’t live in a post-racial society.

More than a quarter of white Democrats agree that “if blacks would only try harder, they could be just as well off as whites.”

Those who agreed with that statement were much less likely to back Obama than those who didn’t.

Among white independents, racial stereotyping is not uncommon. For example, while about 20 percent of independent voters called blacks “intelligent” or “smart,” more than one third latched on the adjective “complaining” and 24 percent said blacks were “violent.”

Nearly four in 10 white independents agreed that blacks would be better off if they “try harder.”

Without white racial prejudice, the article says Obama would be polling 6 points higher, presumably from white Democrats and Independents.

The one poll question that stood out for me was this one:

RAC13. Some people say that black leaders have been trying to push too fast. Others feel that they haven’t pushed fast enough. What do you think?

All Respondents
Trying to push too fast 18
Haven’t pushed fast enough 21
Pushing at about the right speed 57
Refused / Not Answered 4

Whites Only
Trying to push too fast 21
Haven’t pushed fast enough 12
Pushing at about the right speed 62
Refused / Not Answered 5

Stanford political scientist Paul Sniderman, who helped analyze the survey, said it best:

There are a lot fewer bigots than there were 50 years ago, but that doesn’t mean there’s only a few bigots.

Indeed.

The highest honor bestowed is called the Mary Helen Thomas Racial Justice Award and the 2008 recipient was Sen. Yvonne Miller. Just who is Mary Helen Thomas?

Ms. Thomas was with us Wednesday evening, making the viewing of this video all the more powerful. Sometimes, I think we forget just how much those who are still among us have experienced in their lifetimes. Ms. Thomas is definitely a living hero. And how appropriate that the recipient of the award was another such person.  Of Senator Miller, Executive Director Cheryl Marks had this to say:

Her commitment to serve across all racial lines and to improve the quality of life for all people exemplifies the power that one individual can have on a community.

Others recognized at the meeting:

• Cheryl Foster Johnson award
  Michael Banks
  Helen Pulongbarit
• Leila Robertson award
  Ann Dearsley-Vernon
• Volunteer of the Year 2008
  Vivian Paige

The YWCA-SHR has four major program areas in carrying out its mission of eliminating racism and empowering women, two issues that are near and dear to my heart.  Some statistics on those served in the past year, from the Annual Report:

women in crisis 12,216 room nights of shelter

crisis intervention 1757 hours

24 hr. women’s helpline 1468 calls

sexual assault services 1631 female victims

before & after school child care 221 children

summer camp 54 children

sexual assault services 324 male victims

response 24 hr. hotline 2302 calls

community education, seminars

& workshops 978 hours

racial justice initiatives 1057 hours

subsidized child care 306 working parents

court accompaniment & advocacy 698 victims

63 community & civic groups

domestic violence shelter 276 women

& 182 dependent children

If you have some free time, the YWCA-SHR is an excellent place to spend it.

The program is open to the public and will allow time for questions from the audience. Seating is limited, however, so make you reservations either by email or by calling Barbara at 625-4248, extension 16.

Southern politics is not solely bound up with race and religion, but almost every issue or controversy has some racial or religious element beneath the surface. The dual power of race and religion in southern politics will make it extraordinarily difficult for Democrats to recapture the South.

In chapter 3, entitled “Blacklash and the Heavenly Chorus,” author Thomas F. Schaller looks at the twin issues of race and religion and their effect on Southern politics.

RACE

The chapter opens with Election Day 2005 in Virginia and a discussion with former governor and current Richmond mayor Doug Wilder, who, at the time the book was written, was the nation’s first and only black governor.Wilder offers the opinion that the reason another black governor had yet to be elected was because the candidates were “running to make history,” and suggest that instead, candidates shouldn’t talk about race and history, focusing instead on issues that people care about. Schaller believes removing race is difficult, if not impossible, for any Democratic candidate, whether white or black.

According to Schaller, race has been a part of southern politics for 400 years, although today it is much more subtle. Mentioning again that almost half of all blacks live in the South, Schaller points out that the majority of local, state and national black elected officials are from the South and for the most part, are Democrats. Nevertheless, only a third of black members of Congress are from the South. Why?

Conventional wisdom says that blacks are not voting. Schaller says this is not true and offers proof in the form of this table:

2004 African-American Percentage of Southern Population, Eligible
Voters, Registrants, and Voters (Table 3.1)

State	Population	Age 18+	Registered	Voted
Alabama	26.4	24.0	24.1	24.8
Arkansas	15.8	14.7	14.2	12.7
Florida	15.7	13.9	11.7	11.1
Georgia	29.6	26.6	27.4	27.6
Louisiana	33.0	29.8	28.7	29.3
Mississippi	36.8	33.5	35.2	36.9
North Carolina	21.8	19.9	20.4	21.5
South Carolina	29.4	27.3	26.6	26.2
Tennessee	16.8	14.8	15.2	14.4
Texas	11.7	10.6	11.8	11.7
Virginia	19.9	17.9	16.0	15.2
South	19.8	17.9	18.0	17.9
Non-South	9.7	8.8	8.4	8.4

Schaller says another factor in the lack of black governors and senators is that few are nominated, a point on which he says “Democratic leaders have some explaining to do.” In their defense, though, Schaller says that it is an uphill battle:

All of the noble and earnest efforts to register and mobilize African Americans in the South during the four decades since the Voting Rights Act cannot overcome the reality that too many white southerners simply refuse to vote for black candidates.

Black voters are simply outnumbered. Look at Mississippi, for example. Black voters constitute nearly 37% of the electorate but even if all of them vote for a given candidate, the candidate cannot win without white support. And the white vote is overwhelmingly Republican.

At the national level, Schaller says that presidential candidates of both parties have used racial imagery. He points to Jack Kennedy, who, in the 1960 race, distributed photos in Virginia’s white communities showing pictures of Richard Nixon smiling with black leaders, “noting that he’d been an ‘NAACP member for over 10 years!’” In 1964, Barry Goldwater defended states’ rights, echoing the Dixiecrats’ Strom Thurmond’s candidacy from 16 years earlier. The evolution of the politics of race continued, unabated, through the current day.

Another issue that Schaller brings up is that of majority-minority districts, which he calls an “unholy alliance” between black politicians and Republicans, both of whom benefit from their existence.

One-seventh of the black members ever elected to Congress were part of the 1992 freshman class; almost as if on cue, the next freshman class gave the Republicans their first House majority since the 1952 elections.

Racial gerrymandering – the packing of as many blacks into as few districts as possible – has aided the cause of Republicans as they have taken over state legislative seats and majorities throughout the South. As the result, Schaller says, only two types of Democratic legislators remain: conservative whites who distance themselves from the national party and young minorities elected from the majority-minority districts.

Because of racial gerrymandering, the southern delegations are now comprised of white Democrats who survive by denigrating the national party and black Democrats who often complain that they are marginalized by the national party. Why should Republicans bother to vilify Democrats when Democrats will do this dirty chore for them?

Why, indeed.

Racial attitudes. more than anything else, predict Republican voting of southern whites, even more than attitudes on abortion or national defense. Schaller provides data that shows southerners harbor more racist attitudes than those outside the south, with those in the five Deep South states (Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina) having more than those in six Outer South states (Arkansas, Florida, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia). The effect of these racist attitudes has been that the South has become increasingly Republican. While the Outer South states went Republican first – because they were more party-competitive – the change in the Deep South was more profound. He demonstrates this by comparing the Republican presidential support in the 1960 election to that of the 1988 election. Mississippi, for example, voted about 25% for the Republican presidential candidate in 1960; in 1988, the figure was almost 60%, a relative increase of almost 143%. By comparison, in 1960, about 52% of the vote in Virginia went to the Republican presidential candidate, while the figure in 1988 was about 60%, a relative increase of about 14%.

Schaller then provides examples of race-baiting employed by the Republicans in the South. He points to the 2003 elections in Mississippi, in which the issue of the state flag, containing the Confederate Stars and Bars, was raised. He gives a great rundown on the career of recently deceased North Carolina senator Jesse Helms, of whom Schaller says “embodied the tradition of steadfast southern resistance to racial equality.”

Apologists can claim otherwise, but the Republican national chairman has already conceded the point: The GOP manipulated racial attitudes to win the South. Race provided the electoral turnkey Republicans used to unlock the South and become the majority party nationally.

RELIGION

The South is America’s most religious region. “According to 2004 presidential exit polls, 51 percent of southerners attend church at least once per week, compared to just 38 percent of Americans in the rest of the country,” Schaller says. The Moral Majority and the Christian Coalition are both southern creations, and the South is home to more evangelicals than any other region: 58% of Deep-state southerners and 49% of Outer-state southerners consider themselves evangelical or born-again Christians, compared with less than a third of all Americans.

Schaller uses the work of sociologist Mark Shibley in pointing to two events that created the strong following of evangelism in the South: the Civil War and the “fundamentalist-modernist dispute” within Protestantism in the 1920s. The former resulted in the replacement of the political dream of a cohesive Southern people with a cultural one, with religion at the heart of it. The latter is best epitomized by the 1925 Scopes “monkey” trial, in which John Scopes, a 24-year old science teacher, challenged the Tennessee state law that prohibited the teaching of evolution in schools.

Southerners are, according to Schaller, “exceptionally religious.” A strong determinant of religious attitudes is social class, “and the evangelical ranks are filled disproportionately by Americans of lower socioeconomic status.”

They are more likely to affiliate with charismatic or Pentecostal churches, to believe the Bible to be literally true, and foresee a period of glorious Christian rule followed by the rapture.

Typically, the younger generation is less conservative than the older generation on such issues as abortion, school prayer, homosexuality, women working and premarital sex. However, in the South, religious-based conservatism is non-generational. Young (under age 40) evangelicals in the South are more conservative than older (aged 40+) evangelicals in the rest of the country on nearly every issue save one: premarital sex.

Abortion has become the issue of the Christian Right. As a region, the South is pro-choice by a margin of 50% to 44%, but that statistic is misleading. In five southern states – Louisiana, Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi and Tennessee – those who are pro-life exceed those who are pro-choice. In Louisiana, the difference is 21 points, with 36% being pro-choice and 57% being pro-life. Outside of the South, 58% are pro-choice, while 36% are pro-life, almost the exact opposite of Louisiana. It is this little fact that prompted the Christian Coalition, who, in following the lead of the national Republican Party, came up with its Contract with the American Family, to tone down its language on abortion.

More and more, clergy in the South are using their pulpits as a place to discuss politics.

Southern clergy have become to the Republican Party what labor leaders are to the Democrats: opinion leaders, political gatekeepers, and supervisors of a formidable retail voter and volunteer delivery machine.

It is this southern voting bloc that elected George Bush. Excepting Florida, the evangelical vote gave Bush large enough margins to allow resources to be directed elsewhere. But will it last? As the U.S. becomes more secularlized, some Republicans have become concerned that the party has become the “political arm of conservative Christians.” And they hope that the transformation will not be permanent. Some with the Republican Party think that they can just ignore the fundamentalists within their ranks. But this is difficult as the South has become the “anointed region within the Republicans’ governing coalition.”

By encouraging religious conservatives to disregard their historical aversions to political activity, the GOP set into motion their capture of its party by its southern wing. The South’s religious conservatives now make demands on their party and the federal government, make them publicly, and quickly grow impatient when their demands are unmet.

In other words, they created a monster. Schaller says, though, that there is an opportunity here for Democrats. With control of Congress in the hands of Democrats, they can force Republicans to vote on controversial issues, like a constitutional amendment to ban abortion. In effect, Democrats can force Republicans to choose – between the religious conservatives who monitor every move and the more moderate constituents who elect them.

The South’s version of Christianity isn’t very Christian at all; Schaller refers to Jim Wallis’ book God’s Politics in which Wallis points out that there are more than 3,000 calls in the Bible to support the poor yet the South, through its support of Republican policies, ignores this. Other areas of the country embrace the Christian-based progressivism and provide Democrats “a far better opportunity to recapture the mantle of faith through their deeds, not words.”

The effect of race and religion on politics in the South make it an inhospitable place for Democrats.

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

Despite the fact that reporter assigned to cover this story got the initial notice wrong (hey – what can you expect from a staff writer who has only been here since May and covers public safety issues in Virginia Beach?) and then wrote an article that is long on selected quotes and short on substance, not to mention the fact that the photo caption in the printed copy is wrong (so much for those editors, I guess), The Hampton Roads Committee of 200+ Men, Inc. hosted a forum at St. Patrick Catholic School Saturday morning.

L-R: Tom Shields, Suzy Kelly (partially obscured), Beatriz Amberman, Ray Boone, Vivian Paige, Gary McCollum, Rudy Wilson

First, kudos to the 200+ Men for putting together such a diverse and comprehensive panel. I was honored to share the stage with Tom Shields, from the Center for Leadership in Education at the University of Richmond; Suzy Kelly, the self-described conservative from Chesapeake who recently lost her first bid at elected office but who feels like a winner because her positions are being taken up by others; Beatriz Amberman, a member of the Virginia Beach Human Rights Commission; Ray Boone, founder, editor and publisher of The Richmond Free Press; and Rudy Wilson, political science professor from Norfolk State University. Also joining us as a special guest was Rabbi Lawrence Foreman, director of the Institute for Jewish Studies and Interfaith Understanding at ODU.

There is no question in my mind that the issue of race is a topic not discussed openly often enough. Saturday’s gathering did nothing to refute that. The audience of 100 or so people, including Norfolk Mayor Paul Fraim and Virginia Beach Delegate Joe Bouchard, listened as the panel offered their opinions on a wide range of topics, including whether America is ready to elect a black as president. While the issue may have appeared to have been about the candidacy of Barack Obama, in truth this forum was much more than that. There was an awful lot of information being exchanged – about the progress of blacks over the last 40 years, about “conservatives” versus “liberals,” about the appropriateness of a colorblind society – that made this forum well worth the time.  The panel also took questions from the audience. Some of those “questions” took the form of statements, as has been my experience whenever I’ve participated in a forum like this. People want the opportunity to be heard. By the time we finished,  it was not just the members of the panel who wanted to talk more: there were questioners/speakers lined up at both floor microphones who didn’t get a chance to be heard.

I was reading another blog a couple of days ago and someone commented that electing Barack Obama will mean the issue of race is over. I wish that commenter had been present Saturday because Obama as president is not a “get out of jail free” card for the issues of race. They will not magically disappear. That’s why forums such as this are so important. And I was please to hear someone say afterwards that this was “part 1.”

Yeah – let’s continue the conversation.

Simply put, the South is no longer the “swing” region in American politics. It has swung to the Republicans.”

In making this statement, author Thomas F. Schaller takes on the likes of Steve Jarding and Dave “Mudcat” Saunders, who believe that Democrats must win in the South in order for us to become a majority party again. The opening chapter of the book, entitled “Partisan Graveyard,” argues that a new coalition – made up of Democrats in the Northeast, Midwest and Pacific Coast states – is what will bring the Democrats back to power.

Schaller says that the South – consisting of the eleven states of the Confederacy – has always been a political outlier. “[S]ocial and cultural issues tend to trump economic considerations for many voters in the South, where race and religion are woven through almost every aspect of the region’s political culture,” writes Schaller. Half of all African Americans – the Democratic Party’s base – live in the South, but due to “racial antagonisms,” a white backlash has been created, with few whites voting for Democrats. Simply put: while the Democratic base is there, African Americans lack the power to move the states into the Democratic column. Add to that the presence in the South of the largest share of of the country’s evangelical voters ~ and evangelicals tend to not vote for Democrats, either.

Schaller points out that there is an increasing number of Southerners who have come of age with no connection to the Democratic Party or the South’s prior history of being a Democratic stronghold. As this number increases, Schaller says, it will be harder and harder to attract voters who have never cast a vote for a Democrat in their lives. Trying to capture this vote is to reach for the “high-hanging fruit. Schaller says the ripe-for-the-picking votes are in the pan-western states, where, unlike the South, there are swing voters and independents.

But for a few thousand votes in New Hampshire, Al Gore would have pulled it off [won the election] while winning the popular vote; more astounding, but for the switch of about 60,000 vote in Ohio, Kerry nearly did so despite losing the popular vote.

There are votes to be had out there, but they happen to not be in the South.

Chapter 2, “The Southern Transformation,” focuses on the history of the South from 1964 through about 2006, the date the book was published. This chapter is a must-read for anyone wanting to to understand the depth and breadth of the Republican takeover of the South.

Most point to the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as the starting point for the South’s turning away from the Democratic Party. But Schaller says that was not the case. Schaller says it happened 16 years later, when Republican presidential nominee Ronald Reagan gave his first major speech after receiving the nomination in Neshoba, Mississippi. The county had demonstrated “a severe case of electoral schizophrenia: 95% of their votes went for Barry Goldwater in 1964, 82% for George Wallace in 1968, 88% for Richard Nixon in 1972 and then, by 32 votes, Jimmy Carter carried the county in 1976. Schaller says that Neshoba was a bellwether for the South on matters of race. In his speech, Reagan gave his support of “states’ rights,” which Schaller calls the “friendly term” for opposition to civil rights. Schaller credits Reagan for “perfecting the southern strategy of luring away white southern Democrats,” although it was Goldwater who first used it.

The Republican takeover of the South has three aspects: elections won and governing majorities achieved, how it has changed national policy and politics, and the significance of the South’s takeover of the Republican Party itself. Schaller takes the reader through the last 40 years, looking at the presidency, Congress and governors as well as state legislatures. Then starting with Barry Goldwater, Schaller looks at each major figure in the Republican Party – Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush – and how each man strengthened the party’s grip on the South.

At the end, though, it is the Republican Party which has been taken over by the South, not the other way around.

Stripped bare of the platitudes and catchphrases, the southern-based Republican majority stands naked as a ruling cohort no longer interested in limited government, in states’ rights, in judicial review, in consensus-building filibusters, or any of the other measures of restraint that once informed the political philosophies of movement conservatives.

Southerners have captured the GOP and with it, they bring the evangelical movement and their desire for a “rapturous accounting.” In doing so, though, they are alienating the moderates in the party who live outside the South. And these are the people who the Democrats can win over.

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

It has become standard for high-profile brothers in trouble (think R. Kelly, Marion Barry, Mike Tyson) to wrap themselves — or be wrapped — in the flag of racial victimization. The claim that someone has been mistreated on account of race resonates powerfully for black people in a nation where the Jena 6, Genarlow Wilson, Marcus Dixon, Hurricane Katrina and other abominations are both recent memory and ever-present fear. Black folks tend to close ranks first and ask questions later when one of our own is in trouble, because we know the unfairness this country is capable of.

I honor my people for that.

But I’m sick of seeing our generosity cynically abused, our genuine fears manipulated, by brothers who have flat-out misbehaved. How often have we wasted political capital making racial martyrs out of guys like you?

This is why I like Pitts: he tells it like it is. Keep on preaching it, brother.

=========

You’ve probably also noticed a relatively new addition to the RSS feeds in my sidebar. Black Agenda Report or BAR, as I call it, is another source of keeping it real. Somebody has to do it and I’m glad Glen Ford has taken on this task.