NegroWithOpinions's Blog

Originally posted June 29, 2008

This week, NWO (Negro With Opinions) discusses "the candidates"

        Well, well. The primaries are finally over. It seems as though a year worth of events happened in what was just 5 short months (153 days to be exact). Obama is your Democratic Presidential nominee and Senator McCain is your Republican nominee, (Ralph Nader and Bob Barr are also running).  So, how did these two men get there? McCain, whom I think was a better candidate 8 years ago, gave it a go again this year. I personally didn't give him a shot because I know many conservatives don't favor him and I felt the public as a hold wouldn't want a guy in his early 70's to be sworn in as the President. Should he win, John McCain would be the oldest President elected on the day of swearing in. Left for dead late last year and received a tough loss in Iowa, McCain found new life in New Hampshire and never really looked back since. He's had his party's nomination locked up for some time now.

        In the case of Senator Obama, the story's a little different. Unlike McCain, late last year Obama began to gain serious ground. During a Democratic debate in Pennsylvania, Hillary was asked whether she would favor giving illegal immigrants driver's licenses? When her answer seemed to be 'double talk', in the following days, polls showed a surging Obama cutting into her inevitability. By the time Iowa came around, Obama found himself victorious while Clinton finished a distant 3rd! From there it was on as the 2 candidates went coast to coast trading victories and loses. Then February came. 12 straight victories for Obama proved in the end to be too much for Hillary to overcome though she fought hard for it. And in the end, the Democratic Party saw one of the closest finishes in their party's history. So here we are. In the beginning there were 16 candidates between the 2 major parties, now we have the final 2!

        Let's take an objective look at each of the 2. Their pros and cons. First, McCain. Senator John McCain served in the Vietnam War. During which he was captured and held as a POW for more than 5 years!! He was tortured to near death and even contemplated suicide during his imprisonment. Once released, McCain later got into politics and eventually became U.S. Senator for Arizona winning the late Barry Goldwater's seat. He's had some controversy during his career (see Keating 5) and has developed a reputation as a man with a bad temper. In 1995 McCain and the late Senator Strom Thurman had a dust up on the Senate floor. Besides his temper, McCain has also been labeled a maverick for his willingness to reach across the aisle and work with Democrats and his 'straight talk express' was a media favorite in 2000. Reasons to vote for him: he has experience, for the most part he seems to be a true and honest person, and I believe he would do everything to keep this nation safe. Reasons not to vote for him: he's old!! and for someone who's supposed to be an expert in foreign relations, he has had quite a few misstatements. He's admittedly stated he doesn't know much about the economy and....he has a temper.

        Senator Obama. It's important I let you know ahead of time, Obama is my candidate this Fall, but I will nevertheless try to be objective anyway. First, a little bit on the man. Born to a white mother and African father from Kenya, Obama was raised for the majority of his childhood in Hawaii. His father left the family when Barack (who was actually born Barry) was 2 and came back one other time when Barack was 10. Raised by his white grandparents in Hawaii, Barack struggled with his racial identity. Later on, he became the first black President of the Harvard law school, eventually moved to Chicago and worked as a community organizer. In 1996, Obama was elected to and served in the Illinois state senate representing the south side of Chicago. There he helped passed legislation increasing tax credit for low-income workers, made it mandatory for police to record the race of the motorists they stopped in order to monitor racial profiling, and supported his Republican Governor's bill to regulate predatory mortgage lending and those 'payday' loan practices that you always see commercials for on TV. He ran for a House of Representative seat in 2000, but was blown out by 4 term incumbent Bobby Rush. In 2004, Barack Obama became the only African American in 109th Congress's U.S. Senate. So, reasons to vote for Obama: he hasn't been in Washington long enough to become 'tainted' so I think he will be the change this nation needs. From the few small words I've had with him, he's genuine. Long before he decided he was running for President, he was one of the few Senators that would ask, "How's it going today? How are you doing?", and your answer really mattered to him. Plus, he's the only candidate that has mentioned he wants to concentrate on capturing Bin Laden and that's important to me. Reasons to not vote for him: he's young! He's had some questionable friends and affiliates, and he's had his share of misstatements and has seem to change his position on some of his policies making him seem less like change and more like a typical politician. So....you decide. Unlike Fox News, I'm 'Fair and Balanced'.

        Now each has an important decision to make as far as VP choices. For Obama, I personally hope he doesn't pick Hillary. I acknowledge she brings a huge following with her, but I would really like to see him win without her on the ticket. My choice for him would be Senator Biden. The guy really impressed me during the debates. And I know Senator Webb has been a favorite inside the Capitol Beltway. For McCain, even though he's not my candidate, I hope he doesn't pick Romney. Is there anyone more fake than Mitt? I think Governor Crist would be a great choice for him. He's young and the Governor of a very important state in the general election. Another name that's been thrown around is Senator Kay Baily-Hutchinson. If you really want to steal some of the female Clinton supporters, she may be your gal. I also think a 'can't lose' for either candidate would be Colin Powell. Now I know that won't happen, but despite the small tarnish he's received from the current administration, I'd love to see him in the next administration. So there you have it folks. Did I keep my word? Was I objective enough? I even gave you cons to my candidate. You think Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity would ever do that?

        Speaking of those 2 idiots, what happened to the news? It has diminished. I challenge you to name 5 'news' programs. No, not O'Reilly Factor, Chris Matthews, or Glen Beck. Those are just guys with their own TV show who give their opinions like I do. Minus the TV part. But I mean a show that reports the story, no slant, no guest on there to promote an agenda, no one-sidedness. Just facts! Where is it? People tell me to watch BBC, but is that it? You know what happened? Cable news. When guys like Bill O'Reilly brought in big ratings for yelling, screaming, cutting their guest off, and just giving their opinion, other networks followed. We need more Meet the Press's and less Hannity and Colms.  These days you have to watch Countdown, Lou Dobbs and everything in between and make a conscience decision on what to believe. More importantly, you have to research this stuff yourself. News has become an agenda driven business, left and right. We can't depend on the media to give us the whole story; we've got to do it ourselves. So when a guy like Bill O'Reilly tells you the unemployment rate has been lower under George Bush than the Clinton years, you can respond by saying that's because Clinton inherited a high unemployment rate from the first Bush. Once Clinton took office unemployment went down every single year during his 8 years as President, thus, handing George W. Bush a lower unemployment rate than the one he inherited. You got to research on your own!

        I can't leave without saying that Senator Clinton's speech this past Saturday was near perfect. I think she did about as well as anyone can do given her situation. There are some things I think she could have added or worded differently, but it was the right thing to finally do and I'm glad she finally did it. I know it was tough for her to accept that she won't be the Democratic nominee. I never leave without sending my prayers out and this week is no different. Last month, the unemployment rate rose .5% Now with a bad economy as it already is, this only makes things near impossible for some. So I pray for you. I pray and believe God has something better planned for. You just cannot lose hope though. Even if you didn't agree with one word NWO said I thank you anyway. Everybody take care and I hope you visit next week.

If you're in the Washington, DC area; NWO can be heard, on 3WT (107.7 FM), using my real name Byron  between 5:30a.m.- 8a.m. as I frequently call in the show to voice my opinion on the issues for the day

And P.S.

Did anyone else enjoy how Clinton and Obama fooled the media on Friday as to where their 'secret' meeting would take place? All of the news outlets were outside of Clinton's D.C. home while she and Obama met at Senator Feinstein's home. Lol. It's always good when you can fool the media!

Also, visit myspace.com/The Ramz and check out his blogs.

Originally posted June 29, 2008

Originally posted June 22, 2008

This week, NWO (Negro With Opinions) discusses "hypocrisy"

        Greetings to all. I hope everyone had a good Father's Day last week. Dads get overlooked so easily, but good fathers deserve to be shown how much we appreciate them just as much as mothers do. Unfortunately, especially in the black community, kids raised in single parent homes are all too normal these days. Brothers we have got to own up to our responsibilities and be there for our children. Ladies you've got to do a better job in whoever you chose to be with intimately. Otherwise, this sad cycle will continue. Last week, a political icon was laid to rest. I touch on the late Tim Russert last week, but let me just say again, he will truly be missed and may he rest in peace. Finally before we get into this week's topic, I'd like to thank everyone that took the time to read my blogs last week. NWO received more views last week than any other week ever. Thank you all!!

        'Hypocrisy'. An act of falseness; pretending to have qualities or beliefs that you do not have; an expression of agreement that is not supported by real conviction. Is one automatically guilty of 'hypocrisy' by changing his or her mind on something? Would me saying I'm going swimming tomorrow be considered a flip-flop, if when tomorrow gets here I see it's storming outside so I say, I'm not going swimming today? Or better yet, I decide not to go, because I just don't feel like it. Is that 'hypocrisy'?

        Senators Obama and McCain have both been accused of that this week. First Obama. About 16 months ago, Obama answered a question on whether he'd be for public financing in the Presidential election and he answered yes. Millions and millions of dollars raised since then, he's had a change of heart, or if you're a McCain supporter, HE FLIP-FLOPPED!!! The Senator's reason, "the system is broken". Making him the first candidate since 1976 (when public financing was introduced) to do so. McCain said this is big! His supporters echo it too. "You see, he's just a regular politician!" I agree, he did flip-flop but you know what, I'm glad he did. These same people weeks ago were complaining about how we don't really know Senator Obama and how the working white class isn't going to vote for him. Well, with the extra money he can raise, he can attempt to undo these things. He can afford to spend in states most Democratic candidates wouldn't be able to afford to spend in. In the next 4 months he can continue to introduce himself to America and let them decide if he's their choice for President. And most importantly, contrary to what Maria Liasson (Fox Sunday News) stated today, there are 527's lining up to attack him. Has any other candidate had to launch a "fight the smears" website? The extra money helps combat what defeated John Kerry in 2004, extremely negative ads. (Although that wasn't the only reason Kerry lost)

        For years now, McCain and several other Republicans for that matter have been against off shore drilling. But like Obama with public financing, McCain had a change of heart. Or if you're an Obama supporter, HE FLIP-FLOPPED!!! (Note: See how silly both sides are. You Dems & Reps are alike in so many ways!) Just 3 years ago, McCain was against drilling off the coast of the U.S., but this past week, he's now for it. Could this be 'hypocrisy'? Or did the Senator just change his mind? Again, he flip-flopped, but I'm glad he did. Even though I'm an Obama supporter, I'm more open to exploring and drilling off the coast of the U.S. than he is. (We let China do it!!) I still want us to develop alternative energy, but for now, I think we should drill. I think we can do it in a safe way.

        When did we get to the point where a candidate can't change his or her mind? Look, time changes everything and I want a President that's tough and strong in his beliefs, yet flexible enough not to be stubborn. Because the same people that are criticizing Obama, support a President, that by their definitions has flip-flopped also. He was against Homeland Security now he's glad we have it. He was against an independent 9/11 commission, he's glad we had that. Hell, at one time he told us we will not rest and we'll hunt down those responsible for the attacks on 9/11, but more recently said, "I don't really think about Bin Laden that much." Is our current President a 'hypocrite'? And for those criticize McCain for his change in position, you are the same ones who tell us Bush is too stubborn and you want a candidate who's flexible!! What do you people want? Both candidates want to win. In order to win, your strategy has to change from time to time as well as your position. McCain defenders like Senator Grahm (R-SC) will tell you him and McCain were against off shore drilling and are now for it because no one could have predicted $4 per gallon gas back then. Not true! On August 31, 2005, Grace Wong, CNN/Money writer wrote an article, "Consumers can expect retail gas prices to rise to $4 a gallon soon..." Senators, you didn't hear about that? None of our elected officials heard about this? We could have had 3 year head start!! Remember a few blogs ago (disappointment) when I said our politicians are reactive when they should be proactive? There's an example!! Ben Brockwell, director of pricing at the Oil Pricing Information Service (OPIS) said "it doesn't take a genius" to realize $4 a gallon gas will be here soon. Mind you folks, this was in 2005 when the average gallon was $2.62! You know, the good ol days!!

        I want my candidates to be flexible. Not Mitt Romney flexible, but flexible. The fact is folks; all of our politicians are flip-floppers. They have to be. They're pulled in a million directions everyday. Name a politician that you think is authentic and I'll show you when and where they've changed their mind on something. Because they're people just like us. Sure they have more privileged lives than most of us, but they are merely just men and women. We've all changed our minds one issue or another. We're all guilty of hypocrisy at one time or another. You still say no? How many of you no longer want that Escalade, Suburban, Yukon, Tahoe, or any other SUV you bought a few years ago? I thought so!

        Be ready for a change up next week folks. People that I see in person that read my blogs enjoy them, but would like to hear my thoughts on issues other than politics and I have decided to deliver. In a NWO first, I'd like suggestions and opinions on next week's topic. I touched on it earlier in this blog. The rise in absentee fathers and single mother homes is devastating. What do you think are the root causes? What can be done to fix it? And do you blame women mostly, the men or both equally? Let me know. May God blessed all affected from the flooding in the mid west. Some lost all, all lost something. I pray God keeps you all strong and guide you through this difficult time. To everyone else, remember, God blesses you, so that you can help others. If there's anything any of you can do to help these people, don't hesitate to do it. Even if you didn't agree with one word NWO said I thank you anyway. Everybody take care and I hope you visit next week.

If you're in the Washington, DC area; NWO can be heard, on 3WT (107.7 FM), using my real name Byron  between 5:30a.m.- 8a.m. as I frequently call in the show to voice my opinion on the issues for the day

Also, visit myspace.com/The Ramz and check out his blogs.

Originally posted June 22, 2008

Originally posted June 1, 2008

This week, NWO (Negro With Opinions) was going to discuss "agendas", but after Saturday's DNC Rules committee meeting and the reaction to some of the Clinton supporters there, NWO cannot resist writing a letter them. So here goes............

          This past Saturday, May 31st, the Democratic Party met in Washington, D.C. to resolve the issues on whether or not to seat Florida and Michigan's delegates since both states violated party rules and held their primaries earlier than they should have. Before Saturday, Senator Obama had a total of 1,982 delegates while Senator Clinton trailed with 1,782. After Saturday and today's primary in Puerto Rico, Obama leads 2,070 to Clinton's 1,915 and the new finish line total is 2,118. For Florida, the DNC ruled that Clinton would receive 105 pledged delegates to Obama's 67, but it was the Michigan ruling that had a lot of Clinton supporters crying foul as she was awarded 69 pledged delegates while her opponent, whose name wasn't even on the ballot, obtained 59 pledged delegates. Many of the Clinton supporters vowed to vote for McCain in the Fall and could be heard saying the Democratic Party has mistreated the women in this country and they are either voting Republican in November or not at all. One Clinton supporter was seen crying.

          So, how did the Democratic Party get here? It was just 2 years ago when the party took back both Houses in Congress and were projected to easily win the Presidency in 2008 no matter who the candidate would be. It was also around this time that the inevitability of Hillary Rodham Clinton becoming the first female to win the Presidency began. More on that later. Yet, the Democratic Party is on the verge of watching a Republican occupy the White House for 12 consecutive years! They are so weak, and so divided, that John McCain may actually pull this off!

          And to think, had Florida and Michigan not violated the rules, there wouldn't have been any need for a May 31st. If you're a non-political savvy individual, you're probably asking, "Why did these 2 states break the rules in the first place?" Well, in Florida's case, they have a Republican administration which proposed a bill fixing a problem them had down there during the 2000 debacle, but also stating that their 2008 primary be held earlier than party rules allowed. Even though I detest the decision, I understand why they agreed to it. Michigan in my opinion just wanted to 'buck' the system. Which means, they didn't think it was fair that the same 2 states, (which I happen to agree with them on this), hold the first caucus and primary every election cycle. So Michigan decided to go against the rules and have an earlier primary so they too could be an important contest like Iowa and New Hampshire is. Ironically, had Michigan held their primary when they were suppose to, they would have been just as important as New Hampshire and Iowa given how closely contested this race was.

          So enter May 31st, the DNC meets and decides a 'fair' way to divide delegates for a flawed system. Needless to say, a significant amount of people were going to be pissed at any decision handed down. Those Clinton supporters that were crying and yelling were very emotional. This has been a very emotionally charged election. But when I hear you Clinton supporters say you're going to not vote or vote for John McCain, that's your emotions speaking. It is never good to cast an emotion vote. You have to vote your interest, this country's interest, and the future of your loved ones interest. I know you truly want her as your President, but have any of you thought about what a President McCain would mean? Most child experts will say don't whip your kids while you're upset, but to wait until you cool down. Well I'm asking you all to please cool down before November's election and I believe most of you will. John McCain? A guaranteed additional 4 years in Iraq! At a time when our economy is in a bus station toilet, McCain has admittedly stated he doesn't know much about economics. His party just recently voted against a 'Fair and Equal Pay' bill for women in the Senate and your going to vote for this man because you didn't get your way? And by the way, had you gotten your way, you'd still be behind in delegates, (Many wanted a 73 - 55 split in Michigan instead of 69 - 59). Come on!!!! In the one area he claims to be an expert in (Iraq and foreign policy), he's gotten the facts wrong at least 4 different times, even being corrected in the middle of his speech on television at one time! You still want to vote for this man? 'Clintoners' listen, if you like the job the Republicans have done the last 8 years, by all means vote for the guy. If not, don't vote for McCain in November. You can do it to spite Obama, but the bottom line is this (About to take a page from John Edwards). After everything settles and the votes are cast, win or lose, Barack Obama will be fine. So will Hillary. How will you be? Gas is will be at least $5 a gallon by September. Your kids, who some of whom may be 14 or 15 now, how old will they be 4 years from now? Not old enough to purchase alcohol, but old enough to fight in Iraq. Is that what you really want? This election is too important to let a few months of emotion translate into a 4 year mistake. Be upset for now, but be rational later on. And for those who say they won't vote at all, particularly the women, that rationale is flawed also. How can you claim the Democratic Party is disenfranchising you, yet voluntarily disenfranchise yourself by not voting? Many women fought for the right the vote just like African Americans and you're going to throw that prestigious privilege away because you didn't get your way? How old are we? We're all adults last I checked right? This isn't the time to pick up your ball and go home.

          For those that want to say the DNC was unfair to your candidate and want to make the argument that she's ahead in popular vote should keep this in mind. One, it was your candidate and her campaign that didn't plan past Super Tuesday. You all argue how every vote should be counted yet you want to ignore all the caucus contests you lost. You add that, you're not ahead in popular vote. You're not ahead anyway because your total includes a state your opponent wasn't even on the ballot for. Speaking of popular vote, when Obama was ahead in popular vote, but was losing in delegate total, many in her campaign stated that it was the delegates that determine the victor not the popular vote, but that argument has changed hasn't it? Before Michigan, your own candidate said, "It's clear, Michigan isn't going to count for anything", now you all want it to count for everything. You have changed the rules every step of the way while my candidate has continued to abide by them. One of your latest arguments has been the media and its sexism towards your candidate. Now wasn't it about a month and a half ago she and some you all said if you can't take criticism and seemingly unfair treatment by the media you sure as heck can't be President? It was Bubba (Bill Clinton) who stated, "This is a contact sport. If you don't want to get hit, you need to stay on the side line." Now that same person is complaining about how unfair everyone has been to his wife. Basically, you all and your candidate are in this situation because, you underestimated Obama. I'm sure her campaign considered him as an opening weekend blockbuster thriller. Something that's hot for a few weeks, but eventually fizzles out, and loses steam in the end. And it is your candidate who overlooked the caucus states, didn't campaign well in them and allowed herself to fall behind in the delegate count. When it's all said and done, if she doesn't get the nomination, don't blame the DNC, or Michigan, or Florida, or even Obama. Blame her campaign and their flawed, underestimating strategy.      

          Now what some Obama supporters won't admit is we're going to need all of you. We cannot do it without the supporters of Hillary Clinton. If not nominated, Hillary Clinton will be the most important political figure this Fall. McCain and Obama are in a dead heat right now across the country so she will hold the key as to which way her supporters sway. Who ever wins, it will be earned. I don't think any honest Obama supporter can deny she's been a tough opponent and I don't think any Clinton supporter can deny Obama has been an equally tough opponent as well. I'm an Obama supporter, but more importantly, I'm a 'don't want McCain as President' supporter. So to any and everybody that has been disappointed in the past 8 years of the current President, we're going to have to come together to get this thing done. Otherwise, if Obama is nominated, but loses in November, he doesn't lose, we lose! If Hillary is nominated and loses in November, she doesn't lose, we lose!! I hope I was able to reason with some of you Clinton supporters. I didn't like what I saw on Saturday and felt I had to say something. Don't let your emotions vote for your. Make a clear, intelligent choice this November.

          Next week I'll pick back up on a particular issue like I have in previous blogs, but this was just too important to not say anything about. I would like to issue my deepest sympathy and prayers to the family of the four victims killed in New York during a crane collapse as well as the other 17 plus that were injured. It was unexpected, yet I believe avoidable making it all the worse. May God bless you and keep all of you strong. Finally, 'and then there were 2'. South Dakota, Montana, bring it home. Don't forget to vote this Tuesday no matter who your candidate is I encourage all to go out and exercise your right. Even if you didn't agree with one word NWO said I thank you anyway. Everybody take care and I hope you visit next week.

Originally posted June 1, 2008

Originally posted May 26, 2008

This week, NWO (Negro With Opinions) discusses "disappointment"

        Good day to all! I hope everyone enjoyed their Memorial Day and took a moment to remember those who gave the ultimate sacrifice in wars past and current. It's been a little over a week (8 days) since I last left you with my thoughts for the week so let's get right into it. Early last week a youtube political ad from the Tennessee GOP surfaced attacking Senator Obama's wife. Obama responded by essentially and literally saying, "Lay off my wife!" Which is understandable but I disagree with the Senator. I wish that both sides would simply stick to the issues and leave the personal attacks out of it, but you can't have someone that's criticized his opponents, helped raised money for his campaign, and be as outspoken as she is, but yet say, "Hey, don't you attack her." Sorry Senator, I support you, but it doesn't work that way.

        Has anyone been following these last few democratic primaries? I mean, the previously mentioned Senator has things so wrapped up these days that a Clinton victory barely makes news anymore. Nevertheless, Obama took Oregon and Hillary took a decisive victory in Kentucky. Finally, this week, I was watching the O'Reilly Factor last Monday, which was being hosted by Laura Ingram in O'Reilly's absence, and on this particular segment Juan Williams was on there. Now Juan is a Fox News analyst, a host on NPR, and author of Enough. I've found myself from time to time defending him, particularly among African Americans, who buy in large, consider him an "Uncle Tom". But last Monday, Juan let me down a bit as he and Laura were discussing Obama's criticism of the Fox News channel. They could not fathom why Senator Obama would criticize the network and call them unfair to his candidacy. Juan went as far as to say the Senator looked weak in saying such comments. Juan, I know you're employed by Fox News, but you should be able to always tell the truth even if it means criticizing them. For both Laura and Juan to sit there and ask, "When has the Fox News channel ever been unfair to Obama?", is just not being honest. You guys don't watch Hannity and colms? How about Fox and Friends, when even Chris Wallace had to question how much more time were they going to spend on bashing Obama? Don't let it happen again Juan, I was quite disappointed.

        But in this game of politics and even politicians, 'disappointment' is something I'm all too familiar with. This election season, the theme has been CHANGE. Obama uses it. Romney tried using it. McCain tries hard to convince us he'll be different from Bush, and even Hillary uses it from time to time, "We need to change Washington!" But will anything change? So far, none of the 3 remaining candidates have shown us anything new. Politicians are pretty much all the same (that's right I said it!). They're all poll driven and re-active instead of pro-active. Disagree? How long did it take for any of them to address gas prices? What about the economy? Tell me, what's Obama's specific plan on illegal immigration? During a debate late last year, Hillary had 2 different answers on whether they should be allowed to have driver's licenses. Early on, when Iraq was still the main issue, McCain admitted he didn't know much about the economy.

        It's estimated that people enter this country illegally in the millions each and every year. Who's out campaigning on what to do about it? Since the McCain / Kennedy bill a couple of years ago was rejected, John hasn't touched the subject. I'd love to hear Obama's plan. I admit, it's a very complex issue, but that's no excuse for all 3 Presidential candidates to almost totally ignore it! You see, our candidates would rather tackle something easy like saying high gas prices are bad. Or, we got to do something about this mortgage crisis. But illegal immigration; they know, no matter what side they choose, the opposition to it is very large and they can't afford to lose those votes. Hell, they can't even get our gas prices down. I mean really, a holiday tax relief? And I never heard any type of plan from Obama either.

        So if Change is what you're hoping for, set the bar low. Otherwise, you'll probably be pretty disappointed. Now, I do believe if Obama is elected, some good will get done. I don't know him personally, but I did see him at the Capitol frequently long before he announced his candidacy, and he's always come across as a sincere and good hearted person. So I definitely think he will do his best, but I think the system is rigged and there will only be so much he can do.

        My 'disappointment' doesn't end with the politicians though, it manifest to the tactics as well. The whole guilt by association thing is so petty when you really think about. Obama and Rev. Wright and William Ayers. McCain and Pastor Hagee. Hillary and Bill (Just playing you Clinton supporters). There are those that have criticized Obama, (Sean Hannity), for serving on a board with Ayers and attending a fund raiser hosted by him. Well if that's the case, and you feel Obama shouldn't be President because of that, then surely you'll agree that Hillary shouldn't be either. She's served in the Senate with a man that was the Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. So has McCain, who also served with Strom Thurman, a segregationist. So can we please kill the guilt by association tactic? Cause I can go on and on with the people McCain has served with over his career. Now you're probably tempted to say that questioning our candidate's associations helps us analyze their judgment. Not necessarily, cause if that's the case, how good was Reagan's judgment when his administration gave weapons to Bin Laden? What about when his administration gave Saddam Hussein mustard gas and other weapons? The point I'm making is vote for who you think will do the best job for the country. Not because of who knew who when, or who served on a board with whoever, or who sought who's endorsement. Let's keep it simple and stick to what's important people.

        I would like to think any and all for reading this week's blog. And those of you Obama supporters that got upset at the attacks on Michelle, remember I told you a few blogs ago to be ready for it. Consider that just the tip of the iceberg folks. The closer he gets, the nastier the attacks will be. Also, before I go, I just want to say that during holidays such as Memorial Day, and 4th of July, or any holiday for that matter, you hear a lot of "God Bless America" which is ok, don't get me wrong. But for me, its God bless everyone. The whole world. So that's who I pray for this week. God bless us all, because if the rest of the world isn't at peace, America won't be either. Even if you didn't agree with one word NWO said I thank you anyway. Everybody take care and I hope you visit next week.

If you're in the Washington, DC area; NWO can be heard on 3WT (107.7 FM) between 5:30a.m.- 8a.m. as I frequently call in the show to voice my opinion on the issues for the day

Originally posted May 26, 2008

Originally posted May 18, 2008

This week, NWO (Negro With Opinions) discusses "contradictions"

        Wow!! What a week! It seemed as though everyday of the past 7 days has given me a weeks worth of content to blog about. However, I'll narrow it down into a few paragraphs to try and get my 5/13/08 - 5/17/08 points across. Will we ever have another President like Bush? The man time and time again gives me countless material to discuss. You couldn't make the stuff he does and says up if you hired Hollywood's best writers!

        For the second week in a row, this blog is a, conversation at work, inspired discussion. Friday, I'm in our break room, the TV is on CNN during Barack Obama's response speech to McCain and Bush. A white female (who obviously doesn't pay much attention to politics, because she didn't even know how many terms in the U.S. Senate Obama has served) made the statement, "So pretty much because he's black, that's the only reason he's even come close to becoming President?" As offended as I was, (and I admit a bit angry), she almost has a point. (All you pro-Obama people bear with me for a second!) She almost has a point because I truly believe if Barack Obama were a white male, he wouldn't have stood out in the field of eight when this thing first started. Whether we want to admit it or not, different makes us pay attention more, and he was different. Here we had a black man, who didn't have a perm like Al Sharpton and wasn't a race-hustler like Jesse Jackson. But the more important difference from those 2 is this man can do the job (if not, he can't do any worse than the one who has it now). So for my co-worker and Geraldine Farraro and anyone else who thinks it; Has being black helped him? Yes. But it's also hurt him. Listen, anyone who wins the Presidency or comes close to it benefits from something. Bush: because of his father, Hillary: because of her husband, McCain: because of his heroism in war. Obama's race doesn't help him anymore than what the previous 3 I named had or have going for them, because if it were just being black that qualifies you, then we could have Chris Rock run for Oval Office. He pulled it off in a movie once. So let's stop the silliness!

        But with all that said, we Obama supporters must prepare for any and every kind of attack and try not to be so sensitive about everything negative said about him. We've seen the plays the other side runs and we know their tactics. More importantly, we MUST hold him accountable when he messes up and not be like Bush supporters who act as though he hasn't done a thing wrong and everything is running smoothly. Finally before we dive in this week's topic, people of Kentucky don't forget about this Tuesday coming up. Please go out and vote no matter who it's for, just vote.

        You would think Hillary's thrashing of Obama in West Virginia was months ago instead of days ago it seems. Yet, just 5 days ago, Obama lost by 41 points to Hillary which is a huge victory until you factor in the fact that the 19 delegates she won to Obama's 9, were negated by Senator Edward's endorsement which gave Obama another 19 pledged delegates. Checkmate! Then to further over shadow all of that, Bush goes to Israel and does what he does best, which is be Bush!

        'Contradiction'. - A statement or proposition that contradicts or denies another or itself and is logically incongruous. Opposition between two conflicting forces or ideas. In a sad effort to score political points, Bush stated that people who are willing to talk to radical leaders like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are a lot like those who wanted to appease Hitler before WWII. So I think it's safe to say Dubya would not be willing to have talks with Iran nor would he have anyone in his administration that would right? Then why did his former Secretary of State suggest the opposite? Why did his current Secretary of Defense also suggest the opposite? Hmmm.....could that be a......'con-tra-dic-shun?' We're talking about an administration that is paying a radical cleric in Iraq not to kill us. That's worse than talking! That's an elementary kid's strategy to stopping a bully from picking on him everyday! So it's not ok to talk to them but it's ok to pay them? We're paying Musharraf millions to help find Bin Laden. 7 years later how's that worked out for us? So I really don't want to hear any advice from the sorry Bush administration on how to handle hostile foreign leaders. And not to be out "tuffed", McCain came out blasting Obama for being willing to sit down with Iran or Hamas. But in 2006, because one of our policies backfired and now members of Hamas have government positions in the Palestinian government, the 2006 McCain suggested that we'd eventually have to talk to Hamas and deal with them. Now GOP nominee McCain is criticizing Barack for suggesting he would, knowing full well, Obama stated that Hamas would have to meet certain criteria before he would even think about speaking with them. So he's A: bashing Obama for something that isn't even true. B: if it were true, he's then bashing him for something McCain himself said America would have to do eventually.

        Interviewer quote: " Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?"

        McCain: "They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it's a new reality in the Middle East......" Another definition for 'contradiction' is inconsistency and McCain and Bush gave us 2 great examples of it! I personally don't think talking to leaders of Hamas or Iran would get us anywhere, but I'm not 100% against it either. Hell, we talk to North Korea and no one criticizes that. They're continuing to develop nuclear weapons and we even gave them millions of dollars to stop but they continued anyway! Again, let's stop the silliness!

        Finally, this week we saw the California Supreme Court passed gay marriage. What a victory for homosexuals nationwide. I have never understood why this has bothered so many straight people? "This is a sign of the end of times", some say. No it's not! A cyclone in Myanmar that kills nearly 80,000 people may be a sign, an earthquake in China that kills nearly 22,000 may be a sign, parents drowning their kids, kids murdering their parents may be a sign, but gay people getting married, is just one of thousands of sins we all commit on a daily basis. I don't agree with gay marriage, I think homosexuality has become too pop and fad-ish and I do believe it is wrong. But to me, this is what happens when a society allows people to get married and divorced in a weekend. Marriage has become a joke. The divorce rate is higher than the President's approval ratings because many are getting married for the wrong reasons. Infidelity is running ramped in a lot of marriages and some of the same politicians and people who cry foul on gay marriage, because it's suppose to be so sacred, are the main ones guilty of all of the above. So before we strike down gay marriage, can we work on regular marriage first?

        That's all the time I have for this week. Two things I want to leave you with before I go. If Obama is elected President in November, again, Obama supporters, please be ready for everything he does and says to be attacked. Brace yourselves. God forbid we get attacked, because whether it's his fault or not, he will get ALL of the blame. Last, I usually like to end my blogs with my deepest prayers to a group or groups of people. And for this week, it's to those who are doing everything they can but are still struggling during this economy down swing. Those that are choosing which bills to pay this month because you can't afford to pay them all. People losing their homes, wondering when gas prices are going to top out, and how much higher are food cost going to rise? It is not a fun time for anyone in that type of situation and it's damn near unlawful for people like Neil Cavuto (on the Fox News Channel) to suggest the economy is not that bad because 3.6 million copies of the video game Grand Theft Auto IV was sold on the first day. Neil, the dollar is down, gas is more than ever, and in April alone, foreclosures rose 8%! Compared to this time last year 173%! Stop the silliness. I pray God will help us all see better days and I pray that He blesses those that are beginning to or may already be feeling hopeless. Even if you didn't agree with one word NWO said I thank you anyway. Everybody take care and I hope you visit next week.

If you're in the Washington, DC area; NWO can be heard on 3WT (107.7 FM) between 5:30a.m.- 8a.m. as I frequently call in the show to voice my opinion on the issues for the day.

Originally posted May 18, 2008

This week, NWO (Negro With Opinions) discusses "patriotism"

          It's been more than a week now since I last checked in with you fine folks. Barack Obama earned a huge win in North Carolina and narrowly lost in Indiana. He also made a surprise visit to where I work, where if you didn't know, is the U.S. Capitol. I've seen him plenty of times before and have shaken his hand before, but this past Thursday seeing him and speaking to him was different. I can't explain it, but for the first time since he announced his candidacy, I have always doubted his chances of winning. But after Thursday, I now believe he can do it. And I hope he can. But unlike some of the other supporters on this site, I will always be critical and hold him accountable if need be. 2 other issues I want to get into before I get into the meat of this blog and that is, one, my prayers go out to all those who have lost love ones in these recent tornados that have touched down here in the U.S. and in Myanmar as well. Second, who can stop these gas prices from becoming near mortgage payments for some of us? Congress? The President? Any of the 3 current hopefuls? It is un-be-lieve-able!!

          Last Tuesday were big days for Indiana and North Carolina democratic voters as they hit the polls and voted for whom they would like to see win the White House. About 17,000 more (or 2%) felt Hillary Clinton would be better for the job than Obama in Indiana and N.C. a whopping 14% felt the opposite way. But what has overshadowed both of those results in my opinion is, as of today, Obama has caught up and passed Clinton in the super delegate count. Put in perspective that Senator Obama was down by more than 100 super delegates just months ago and has now taken the lead. This has been Senator Clinton's constant argument for staying in the race. I'm not one to say it's over for her and she should drop out, but it isn't looking too promising for her right now.

          I was having a light hearted conversation with a co-worker this past week on how could I convince her to support Obama over McCain in November. Early into the discussion, she mentioned that she didn't like that Obama doesn't where a flag lapel pin or that he had his hands down by his side and not over his chest during the pledge of allegiance. She said it made her question his 'patriotism'. Now, without getting into what my response was to that, I want to ask my fellow blog readers, "What is 'patriotism'?"   The dictionary defines it as devoted love, support, and defense of one's country; national loyalty; love of country and willingness to sacrifice for it. So basically, it's someone who loves his or her country. Folks if we all agree that despites its mistakes, that this is the greatest country in the land, that many of us would not be able to achieve our dreams anywhere else but here, that being here in the U.S. has led to a more prosperous, successful lifestyle than it would anywhere else, and that this country has become so much better than it ever was centuries ago, that no longer are people trying to escape to Canada by the thousands or to Africa by the hundreds (during slavery), but in a complete 180 degree about face, people are trying to sneak in (don't know if trying is the right word since thousands come in undocumented daily) by the millions; if we all agree on that and we all can agree that we love this land, why on Earth would ANYONE sum up that love for this country in the form of a cheap ass flag lapel pin!!

          Is that what 'patriotism' has boiled down to? In some cases it has and it's a shame. There isn't a candidate today that can announce he's running for President, or Senate, or House and not have the American flag in the background. Each of the 3 running now will have it behind them during any major speech. Have we the people become so simple that display or non-display of a red, white, blue cloth helps us determine who's patriotic? To quote John McCain, 'my friends' it shouldn't be that way. NWO is simply suggesting that instead of (pay attention, this is a sport analogy) looking to see who's wearing the team colors, watch the actions of the players to make sure no one is 'shaving points', because in my mind that's how I'm going to determine who's patriotic.

          I could care less if McCain, Clinton, or Obama never where a flag pin, (maybe it doesn't match their suit), or where they're hands are placed during the pledge (maybe their hands are tired or they may have slight arthritis), or if they never stand in front of the flag to give a speech. That's their preference. But come November 2008, who ever is elected I will watch their administration closely. Because if they implement policies that affect my family the wrong way and don't make things better for the majority of Americans, I'm not going to give a damn what they were wearing on their lapel when they signed that legislation!!

          Now, I wanted to pose the question can one criticize his or her country and still be patriotic, but I have taken up enough of your time so we'll discuss that on a later date. I would like to remind those who live in the state of West Virginia to vote in the democratic primary tomorrow. I hope that I have given everyone a different outlook on 'patriotism', and I began this blog with prayers going out to those affected by the recent tornados, I also would like to send my deepest prayers to the relatives of the near 9,000 deaths in China from an earthquake earlier today. My God help you all rebuild and recover as soon as possible. Thanks to all that read this week's blog. Even if you didn't agree with one word NWO said I thank you anyway. Everybody take care and I hope you visit next week.

If you're in the Washington, DC area; NWO can be heard on 3WT (107.7 FM) between 5:30a.m.- 8a.m. as I frequently call in the show to voice my opinion on the issues for the day.

Originally Posted 5/12/2008

Originally posted 5/04/2008

This week, NWO (Negro With Opinions) discusses "divisiveness"

    So it's 2 more days until another primary. Barack Obama is still battling his Rev. Wright problems, Hillary Clinton has momentum on her side after a big PA win, and John McCain is still reminding us that he's running for President too since it's so easy to forget. I think Sen. Obama gave the speech this week that he should have given a year ago, Sen. Clinton is still saying whatever it takes to win the nomination (a holiday gas tax proposal that would never pass Congress or get signed by the President for that matter), and democrats are missing key opportunities to really capitalize on mistakes and misspeakings (is that a word?) by Sen. McCain.
    The Rev. Jeremiah Wright is getting pounded by the media, the public, and almost anyone with an opinion about how "divisive" his words were. "Divisive". You're hearing that word a lot. From Sean Hannity and others to even Obama on Meet the Press this morning and in his speech earlier this week. Sen. Obama stated that it's important that this country come together to help solve problems and people like Jeremiah Wright and his speeches are the complete opposite of that. His words are "divisive". I agree. This country is great, but it is not perfect and in order to solve the remaining issues in America, it's going to require blacks working with whites. Asians working with Latinos, Christians with Muslims and so on. It's much easier that way. So I think the majority of Americans agree that when someone is being "divisive", they're not going about the best way to solve today's issues.
    But does that only apply to racial divisiveness? Or is divisiveness bad for America no matter how you slice it? I mean, because we just agreed that "divisive" language is bad and makes it harder to solve our issues right? Correct. If that's so, then Rev. Wright, with all his divisiveness and "divisive" language and speeches should not be the only one being beat up in the public forum. Is Sean Hannity inclusive? Rush Limbaugh? Don't take my word for it. Just watch or listen to each of their shows and count how many times they attack the opposite side compared to how many inclusive statements they make. You think if Obama did everything George Bush has done in the last 7+ years Hannity would be defending him the same as he has for Bush the whole time? Don't you think Limbaugh would have done all but call for Clinton's impeachment had she been President during 9/11, and then just a few years afterwards go on television and say she doesn't really think about the man responsible (Bin Laden) for those attacks that much? I'm sure both would say, "That's not being "divisive", that's just not agreeing with someone on their policies." Bologna!! And even though both have criticized McCain in the past, it doesn't change how "divisive" people like them can be. How is 'operation chaos' inclusive Rush? How can Sean all of a sudden be so concerned with if Obama is being sincere with cutting off Rev. Wright yet not even slightly question this current administration on numerous key policies and issues? These people don't want to be inclusive and compromise with whom they disagree with, they just want you to agree with their side or attack and discredit you if you don't. And to be fair it happens on both sides. Keith Olbermann isn't all that inclusive and neither is U.S. Senate hopeful Al Franken.
    Is anyone surprised that this election is so "divisive"? Didn't we see this coming? I did. I new once black people agreed that Obama was black enough; we'd be passionate about his candidacy. I knew women would feel the same for Hillary, and despite John McCain not being the 1right wing choice, I knew republicans would rally around him or who ever their candidate was eventually. I truly believe republicans are the most loyal people to their party.
    With that said, I believe, at least for the last few years, the Democratic Party is WEAK!! Very weak. We're talking about a party who said Bush 'tricked' them into going into Iraq. Bush!? Tricked them? You mean Dubya outsmarted damn near an entire political party? Wow! Ok, so then they say we don't want to be in Iraq anymore and the only way we'll give you more money Mr. President is if you agree to a time table for withdrawal. Dubya said, "Oh no. I'll veto that and make you give me more money for a war you don't want to continue without a timetable". And guess what? They gave him more money without a time table. Keep in mind that's what they ran on in 2006. Lastly, picture this for a moment. If Hillary R. Clinton had won more states, more delegates, and most of the popular vote, would Obama still be running? Or would some of the party's heavy hitters had pulled him aside and said, "You did good son. You really did. But it's time you step aside so we can focus on McCain......Oh and Barack; you still have a bright future in this party. Just try again in 2016." And Obama would have been forced to drop out. Not asked like she reportedly has been, but forced out. Like, 'if you ever plan on running for anything else in the future, you better drop out' kind of forced out!
    One more thing on Rev. Wright before I leave you for the week. For all those who support Obama and wish Rev. Wright would go away, keep wishing, because I don't think he is. Best case scenario, if he does go away for now, his book is do out in September or October. Just in time for the general election. So Obama, if you are the nominee, which I believe you still will be (but you can not afford to lose NC or have another Rev. Wright type issue in your closet), be prepared to deal with all the Rev. Wright talk again.
    It's a shame these distractions dominate the news like it has. Rev. Wright was like the lead story on Hannity and colmes for like 8 out of 10 days it seemed. And since I mentioned Hannity again, doesn't he seem so happy Obama has been hurt by all of this controversy? Sean, my question is are you happy because you feel like you brought up a legitimate issue concerning Obama or are you just happy because you helped damage a candidate that you know would have easily defeated your GOP nominee? It's got to be both if not the latter of the two only. People like you, Rush, and Ann Coulter have a lot of nerve. The fact that you all can criticize Obama for wanting to pull out Iraq and focus on capturing the man responsible for 9/11, yet support a President that has been willing to let him go is nearly hilarious if the events in question were not so tragic. You all describe the democrats plan for the 'War on Terror' as 'cut and run', but here's how I sum up yours. Let's say I go on Hannity and colmes one day, and in the middle of the interview, I punch him in the eye, leave the set and go wait in the green room. Which means he knows where I am if he wants to retaliate. Instead of Sean coming at me though, he decides to punch his next guest in the eye and defend his actions by saying, "This guest was a potential threat to me. He could have punched me like NWO did, so I struck first instead." Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the GOP's strategy for the war on terror. "Don't strike those that strike you. Strike those that could strike you one day.....possibly". Thanks to all that read this week's blog. Even if you didn't agree with one word NWO said I thank you anyway. Everybody take care and I hope you visit next week.
   
May 6th, 2008; Get out and vote North Carolina. Get out and vote Indiana!!

If you're in the Washington, DC area; NWO can be heard on 3WT (107.7 FM) between 5:30a.m.- 8a.m. as I frequently can in the show to voice my opinion on the issues for the day.

Originally posted 05/04/2008

         Greetings to all! This thing is FINALLY about to be over. Thank goodness. Less than 2 weeks to go! Before we get into today's topic, NWO would like to get your opinion on something mentioned at my job the other day. A co-worker of mines made the following statement, "If Barack Obama is elected, the racial tensions in this country, will rival those of the 1960's." Does anyone agree with that? Anyone disagree? If so, why do you or don't you? Get back to me on that one folks.

        "Every vote counts!" "Make sure you go out and vote, because every vote counts." "When you go out and vote, you're exercising your right and demonstrating your power as individual that one person can make a difference!!" "So don't forget, November 4th, get out and vote. Make sure your friends and family vote too, because, e-v-e-r-y vote counts!!" Well.....yeah, I guess that's true. But doesn't the Electoral College make voting for some people in certain states discouraged from voting depending on whom they support? Stick with me.....

        The Electoral College was created with the idea originally that there would be no national campaigning for the Presidency and there wouldn't be any national parties. The founding fathers also felt that they needed a buffer between who the population felt should be President and who was more qualified to be President. Many, like Alexander Hamilton, feared a tyrant could manipulate the public and come into power; the Electoral College was to prevent such an instance. It was also created to please and comfort smaller states that felt their vote wouldn't matter as much as the larger states. So with the magical number set at 270, the Electoral College will determine who the next President is. NWO feels the Electoral College is outdated though.

        I'm originally from Mobile, Alabama, how encouraging would it be for me to vote for Obama if I still lived down there? How about someone in California or New York that wants to vote McCain? Vote for Obama in Texas? McCain in Vermont? All are examples of how someone could easily be discouraged not to vote this year. Obama's not going to win AL! McCain won't win CA either, which is why neither of these candidates haven't even campaigned in any of these states since the general election began.

        Maybe if candidates were rewarded electoral votes proportionately to their popular vote count in each state, it would be a little less discouraging. But if I'm in CT or MA, I'm not all that enthused about voting McCain if that's my preference. Because it doesn't matter if you win a state 50.1% to 49.9% or 80% to 20%, it's all or nothing in the Electoral College. So whenever I hear, "Now go out and vote and make a difference!", I'm like "Yeah, if you're in a battle ground state." I'm quite sure citizens of Ohio, Florida, my current state Virginia, Colorado and a few others can't wait to go out and vote. We actually will make a difference. But people of Mississippi and many other states like it that are already pre-determined, probably aren't all that excited about November 4 depending on who they're for. And who can blame them? Because as it stands, every vote does count, but like the people of Arizona, Louisiana, North Carolina, Kentucky, Arkansas, and other deep red states that voted for Kerry in 2004, not every vote matters, and that should change. Anyway, that's how I feel about it, how about you?

        On a personal note, NWO is in the process of preparing to welcome a new addition to my family (due on Election Day no less) so I will be away from the blogging for a few weeks. But you're not going to get rid of me totally, lol! I have some older blogs I wrote and posted elsewhere before I began posting here as well, so I'll be providing oldie but goodies for you. Let you see what predictions I got right, which one I got wrong, and everything in between. I will continue to check comments on them and will interact in that fashion from time to time, so please continue to leave your comments. Everyone take care, God bless, and even though it may be discouraging, NWO does not condone not voting no matter what state you're in. This was just my opinion on the Electoral College. It was in no way a suggestion to not vote. No matter how red or blue the state you live in, still go out and vote. I know it can be discouraging, (I wrote this blog didn't I?), but hey, you never know. VOTE NOVEMBER 4! I have already!! I'll catch you all later. Fatherhood, here I come!!! LOL!

P.S.

NWO sends his prayers to the Jennifer Hudson family and to the safe return of the missing child involved.

This week, NWO (Negro With Opinions) discusses, "The Misleading of Polls"

        Over last few weeks, I have learned 3 things. One, only people who live in small towns represent real America and are real Americans. They are ALL patriotic and they have decent values that those in more populated cities don't have. Two, instead of fighting his dogs, Michael Vick should have shot them from a helicopter, and three, Rush Limbaugh is a mind reader (no wonder they pay that guy so much).

        On with the subject at hand. Over the last past 20 + months, polls have been mentioned a lot. Who's up, who's down, who's surging, and so on. But how much stock should we put in them? *Currently, in the Rasmussen poll, Obama is at 50%, McCain 46%. Daily Gallop poll shows Obama with 52% of the vote, McCain 41%, and in network polls like CNN/Opinion Research Corp., as of 10/20/08, Obama has a six point lead with 51% to McCain's 46%. I personally am not a big fan of polls. Too many candidates change strategies because of them, say certain things because of them and as a result, our politics are somewhat determined by the opinions of a handful of people in relation to how many are in this country (Only a few thousand are questioned for most polls). As accurate as they can be at times, they are overall too unreliable for so many important issues to be based on.

        In 1982, Tom Bradley, then mayor of Los Angeles, was ahead in these so called polls before and even after the election for Governor of California, as exit polls had him ahead of his opponent. The end result was a lost for Mr. Bradley. Months before the 1988 election, Dukakis lead George H.W. Bush by 17 points before eventually losing to the Reagan vice-president. America's first black Governor (and only 1 of  2 I might add in the history of this country) L. Douglas Wilder won his election, but the polls were still misleading as he was ahead by as much as 9 points in the polls, but only won by a mere HALF of a percentage point!! In a similar case, David Dinkins defeated Giuliani for Mayor of New York by 2 points, yet polls showed him ahead by 18 points, just a little over a week before the election. But none of these compares to the 1948 election. Dewey was so far ahead of his opponent Harry Truman, that wrong headline was printed and pressed claiming him the victor, though Truman wound up winning. Forget the Bradley effect; this is the one that should be most troubling for Obama supporters. Like McCain, Truman's party was considered to be in disarray and many didn't give the incumbent party a shot. Dewey led in all the polls.... (Sounds familiar yet?) and in the end, Dewey lost, Truman won.

        What has been a joy, is to watch how both parties respond when they are down or up in the polls. When they're up, they point to the fact that Americans are buying their rhetoric and believe in their policies. When they're down, they usually say something along the lines of, "polls don't matter", or "polls don't decide the winner, the American people do!" (Too funny) Polls can be and usually are misleading. I don't gloat (like MSNBC does whenever Obama is up. Yes you Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann, & Chris Matthews) when my candidate is winning, nor do I think it's over when he or she is down. So go out and vote no matter who's up or down and by how much or how little. VOTE! The hell with polls!!

        Speaking of voting, no matter who wins, I hope we have a winner the night of November 4th. Let's not relive 2000. After watching **footage of some of the most ignorant, racist, and narrow minded people in Johnstown, PA before a Palin rally, I'd like to pray for them and people all over the nation that are like them and share their views. My God bless you, touch, and eventually reveal to you your ignorant, hateful ways. Next time, we'll discuss the Electoral College. Can you guess who's against it? Even if you didn't agree with one word NWO said I thank you anyway. All comments are strongly encouraged.

*As of October 21, 2008

** Aired on CNN 10/17/2008

This week, NWO (Negro With Opinions) discusses, A Letter to Obama Supporters

         Only 26 more days to go, and finally, we can stop hearing, "I'm 'so and so' and I approve this message." What a long process it's been. Really every since the 2006 midterm elections concluded, the Presidential race began. Debate after debate, 1 talking point after another, 2 conventions, and television ads every commercial break, will soon all be over. McCain/Palin vs. Obama/Biden. Country First vs. Change. Experience vs. Youth and yes.....White vs. Black.

        I'm only 27 years old, so this will be just the 3rd Presidential election I've been eligible to vote in. So far, this one has been the most passionate on both sides.  For McCain supporters, the main question has been why? Or how? How can someone who has little to no experience be this close to the White House? How can someone who's been linked to Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers, even be allowed to be considered elected President. How, how, how???

        For us Obama supporters, the questions are what if? Those 2 main what if's are, what if Obama really wins it? Or, what if after leading in the polls for months, Obama loses anyway? What would happen next?

        What if Obama really wins? Before his announcement to do so, I was very weary of him even running in the 1st place. I felt things were so messed up, that the next President would be set up for failure, while the Prez after the next would look like a hero (or she-ro). But nevertheless, he ran anyway and I now support him. Should he win, supporters of Obama should expect an ALL out blitz of criticism from conservatives and republicans as they would immediately begin positioning themselves for 2012. (By the way, Hillary will keeping her fingers crossed that he does a horrible job too) I have always said, had Obama got elected in 2000 and did the same job Bush has done, gotten attacked on 9/11 as we did, and had everything that has happened during this administration happen to him, he'd been impeached. He will have to be near perfect and even that won't retard the criticism. Obama supporters, should he win, please prepare for the most vicious attacks you've ever seen at a President. I'm not a fan of Bush, but I have to admit even some attacks at him have at time been unfair and over the top. But that will be nothing compared to what B.O. would experience. For some African-Americans, it's going to be hard not to nearly take it personally when you hear a co-worker or someone else criticize him unfairly. That's if that hasn't happened already, I know has at my job during this election process it has. Finally, this is a bit touchy, but should he win, everyday he makes it without an assassination attempted on him, will be a blessing. Though I believe them to be the minority, there are some who do not want this man to be President and if that means killing him, then so be it! Touchy but true!

        What if he doesn't win? The first and easiest reason to point at will be because he's black. Should he not win, expect a lot of 2nd guessing and Monday morning quarterbacking. "I knew they should have chosen Hillary!" "We lost because of the Clintons, they damaged him so much during the primaries, he never recovered." "He just wasn't tough enough." And so on, and so on. A lot of African-Americans will confess, "I knew they weren't going to let him win. Racism is alive and well in this country and this proves it." "I knew he wasn't going to win anyway! This country just isn't ready for a black President." Conservatives will try to act as though race had nothing to do with him losing and merely because he was wrong on policies, he lacked experience, and he was a weak candidate that didn't share middle American values (that ladder one is code by the way) is the real reason he lost.

        For my, what if he wins crowd, NWO suggests not to expect big change. I like Obama too, but at the end of the day, he's a politician. So some of what he's saying isn't going to translate to being put in action during his administration. I hope he does a fantastic job, but he would have a lot to clean up first. Economy, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, global warming, deficit, and oil prices just to name a few. I also ask that we hold him accountable for any and everything he does. We can't be like some on the other side and give him a pass. We must be critical, if not even more critical of him as we would be of McCain should he win.

        If he doesn't win, NWO realizes it will be easy for some to feel discouraged, but as an African-American, no matter what happens, many of us can still say we witnessed something we thought we'd never see. A black man with a legitimate chance of winning the Presidency. That excitement alone is something no other race can understand due to the history here. But I caution you, not to paint this country with one broad brush of racism. The U.S. has come a long way and continues to make strides towards a post racial attitude. It would be unfair to say America is racist. Yes, there is a significant percentage of Americans who will never vote for an African-American as President and harbor racist feelings, but the majority of this country is beyond that. Should he lose, don't let a few fools, form your opinion of many decent and honest people.

        With so many Americans continuing to lose their homes, their jobs, their whole livelihood, NWO sends his prayers to all those effected negatively by the down economy. May God bless you and help you rapidly recover to a normal life again. Thanks to those who left comments on last week's blog, America's Punching Bag. Next time, we'll discuss why I believe the electoral college is outdated and needs to be done away with. Until then, everyone take care. Even if you didn't agree with one word NWO said I thank you anyway. All comments are strongly encouraged.

This week, NWO (Negro With Opinions) discusses

"America's Punching Bag" parental discretion advised

        Did you miss me? Gone all last week I am back and my, my, my, look at everything that has taken place. It appears Congress has reached a deal with the Wall St. bail out plan and all is well. The similarities between this and 6 years ago are eerily and horrifically similar. 6 years ago, we were warned of a different crisis that needed our attention immediately! (Just like this time.) Cheney was sent to Capitol Hill to round up support for the idea. (Just like this time.) If we didn't act now, we could experience GRAVE danger and consequences. (Just like this time.) And it's going to cost a lot of money and trust controlled by essentially one person..... (Just like this time.) We have now entered a sequel, Iraq II: The Financial War. Let's just hope that this movie is a lot better than its predecessor. Oh and thank goodness for Mr. Country First. The guy, who'd rather win a war and lose a campaign, yet chose a sports anchor as his running mate. Thank goodness he came back to D.C. and suspended his campaign in doing so in order to save the day. Except he didn't really suspend his campaign at all. And once in D.C., had only a mere 2 sentences to utter that offered nothing to a solution in this mess. I can't wait until the Palin/McCain...excuse me, McCain/Palin ticket is sworn in as Maverick and PTA President. But, to be fair, despite what some pundits have said, I do believe McCain won the first debate. Obama agreed way too much with him, he still has to work on all those "ahh, ahh...ahhh.....ahh", and he missed some key openings McCain left to capitalize on. But overall the Senator did ok; I just don't think he won. But...moving on from politics..........

        It's been called poison, trash, inspiration, a loud voice for the usually unheard, talent, skill, a hobby, a threat to all Americans, a bad influence on youth, filth, nonsense, noise pollution, and freedom of speech exercised. To some extent, all are true about rap music. What began as a fad, transcended into a phenomenon? Rap hit mainstream America in 1979 with Sugar Hill Gang's Rapper Delight,

"I said a hip hop the hippie the hippie to the hip hop, and you don't stop......" But as early as 1970, rap was beginning to take form. A group called the Last Poets released an album with socially-conscious spoken words and rhythmic beats. This is exactly what rap was in the beginning. It was a voice for the oppressed, the ignored, and the minority within the majority. Rap did a lot of good as it made the hopeless feel empowered, the weak feel strong, and encouraged the ignorant to want to learn. Over time, different forms of rap began to emerge, different people got involved, and as a result, different intentions for the music changed. So instead of 911 is a Joke1, we also had Cop Killa2 and BLEEP tha Police3. Instead of Self Destruction4 we also have A BLEEP with a MuthaBLEEPing Gun5 and Serial Killer6. And instead of Fight the Power7, we also get Kill You8 and Tear da Club Up9. Nowadays, while there are still many positive messages in rap, the majority of what you see and hear on TV and on the radio show no evidence of it. And there are multiple reasons for that.

        Let's discuss why certain forms of the music are bad. Many defenders of rap will say, "It's just music!" "Eminem can't make a kid pick up a gun shoot someone." "Drug dealing was around long before Jay-Z" "It's just music and its freedom of speech". I hear all of you, but, for those of you who say they are just words and what not, I submit to you Matthew 12: 36-37 which says "But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned." Now I ask you, do you really want your kids repeating some of the things these rappers are saying? Now what about those who may say, "Well I listen to it or my child listens to it, but I don't sing the lyrics or my child knows not to repeat those lyrics", I submit to you Romans 10:17, "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Even if religion or the Bible means nothing to you, we all were kids once. Almost any and everything can influence you when you're young. It's foolish to think that it's just music and it has no affect. Many kindergarteners learn their alphabets through song. "A, B, C, D, E, F, G,........" you know how it goes (My favorite is how some kids rush through the ella-mena-pee part). I don't think there's any doubt, that negative, influential music on unsupervised kids is harmful. In 2000, even Eminem admitted he didn't let his daughter listen to his music. If he's responsible enough to realize that, shouldn't you?

        There are always at least 2 sides to every argument. And while I have pointed out how and why rap can be harmful, I do believe too much blame is placed on it and too many times it has been unfairly criticized. From politicians to political pundits, parents, conservative citizens, and pastors all have put the sole blame for crime and bad behavior on hip-hop. Drive by shootings in neighborhoods, blame it on rap. Drug dealing, blame rap. Treating and referring to women as bitches and hoes, ay Don Imus who should we blame?, rap music. And if you go to court for a crime, when you get on that stand or in front of the judge, just blame 2Pac, Eminem, 50 Cent and any other rapper you may have listened to. To quote a rapper, Jay-Z, "Men lie, women lie, numbers don't!" We can't sit and blame rap for everything wrong in our societies, when during the peak of rap music (late 90's, early 2000's), violent crime statistics have gone down. A co-worker of mines didn't believe this, but the majority purchasers of rap music are young white males. Not the kids you see in the hood or that are portrayed in the music videos. So while rap is bad for an unsupervised kid, movies have to share the blame. There is no way an 8 year old hearing Young Jeezy rap about loading a gun is any worse than that same child seeing Arnold Schwarzenegger load a gun, BLEEP it, and shoot it. I try not to go racial with anything unless I have to, but to a certain extent, I believe society has a problem when young black men are making large sums of money. Now, I know many want to automatically point to Michael Jordan and any other young black athlete accepted by mainstream America. But I'm talking about when there's questionable morality behind the money making, the criticism is much louder when young black males are involved. Because the women in rap videos are portraying soft porn, but the women walking around in a thong bikini during a boxing match holding up 'Round 3' isn't. Because half naked women in Jay-Z's Big Pimpin video should not be tolerated, but Hugh Heffner's completely naked girls should be considered art. And because any rap song/video about guns and violence should be censored, but the Sopranos deserve awards and accolades. The bottom line folks, is all rap music needs to be is better regulated. Because if parents are doing their jobs, kids should not be seeing the Sopranos or a violent rap video. Many movie theatres will turn away knowingly underage youth from rated R movies, but many retail music stores will sell a 13 year old 50 Cent's latest album. Playboy magazine is regulated and meant for adult entertainment, and that's exactly what I'm calling for with rap music. I listen to the music (although after reading those bible verses, I may not for long) and as long as responsible adults listen to it, I don't have a major problem. But when kids, especially kids of single parents who aren't supervised as much as children in dual parent homes, are the ones listening, that's when I have a problem. So to the defenders of the music, don't just dismiss it as its just music. It's more than that. But what is not and should not be, is America's punching bag. Of all the problems in our society and in this nation, rap contributes at best maybe 2%. There are too many other instruments that play a role into crime and bad behavior which we won't even get into right now.

        Next time, NWO will write a letter to Obama supporters, as we'll discuss what to expect if he wins and what I expect from all of us should he not. Looking forward to the VP showdown between Sen. Biden and Gov. Palin, should be very interesting. Thoughts and prayers go out to the family of Paul Newman, and I will see you all next time. Take care. Even if you didn't agree with one word NWO said I thank you anyway. All comments are strongly encouraged.

*

1. Pubic Enemy - 911 is a Joke

2. Ice-T - Cop Killa

3. Niggaz With an Attitude(N.W.A.) - BLEEP tha Police

4. KRS-One feat. (many other rappers) - Self Destruction

5. Dr. Dre - BLEEP wit a MuthaBLEEPing Gun

6. Snoop Doggy Dogg - Serial Killer

7. Public Enemy - Fight the Power

8. Eminem - Kill You

9. Tear da Club Up Thugs - Tear da Club Up

        Did you miss me? Gone all last week I am back and my, my, my, look at everything that has taken place. It appears Congress has reached a deal