You sir, are a racist!

Ignorant racists are the most dangerous kind. No, not belligerent racists, but those who are subtly racist and fail to recognize their own prejudice. How can we ever dispose of racism if we don’t first acknowledge it? Accordingly, I composed this list, specifically for the benefit of the ignorant majority. Note (*cough* white folks): If any of these apply to you, YOU ARE WAY MORE RACIST THAN A LITTLE BIT.

• Said “I’m not racist”. Everyone is at least a little racist. Defending any of your actions with this statement is merely an indication of your ignorance.
• Believed “white privilege” doesn’t exist. Minorities are ~35% of the US population. Name 35 minority senators…GO!...What?! No dice? Ok, gimme 5 minority senators…Give up yet?
• Worn an afro as a Halloween costume. Frankly, I’m surprised by the frequency of this behavior.

• Believed Mexicans aren’t minorities. *sigh* Mexicans aren’t the majority. Not in the US. Not in the world.
• Argued that Barack Obama was born in Kenya. *sigh again*. I can’t. I just can’t with this one.
• Said “I have 3 black friends”. Why are we counting? Is there a limit?
• Celebrated “post-racial” America. Don’t make me fall out of my chair laughing.
• Given your car keys to black man in a Prada suit. If the silk tie didn’t indicate that he wasn’t the valet, the Italian leather shoes damn sure should’ve given it away.

Additionally, let me say I don’t buy into the notion that black people can’t be racist simply because as a people they lack power over the establishment. Fooey. There’s institutional racism, and there’s individual racism. Furthermore, there are gradations of racists. If you were raised in the United States of America, a nation founded on the premise that “all men were created equal” (except the skins and the coons – to hell with them), you almost certainly have at least one racist bone in your body. The question is, how racist are you? Realistically, if you don’t realize you’re at least a little racist, you’re probably A LOT.

Relax. ACORN is not a left-wing conspiracy. It's a hot ghetto mess.

The controversy over ACORN has reignited with many on the right outraged following Fox News coverage of a video posted on BigGovernment.com. James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles are being heralded as heroes for conducting a “sting operation” which revealed ACORN personnel on hidden camera advising a “pimp” and a “prostitute” on a mortgage application.


The ACORN staff members caught on tape were subsequently terminated. Sadly, they probably thought they were doing their jobs. Congratulations James and Hannah! You’ve discovered what many have known for years: ACORN is a hot ghetto mess. Are you surprised? I’m not.

I could have told you ACORN is unorganized and completely unreliable after they provided “housing counseling” for me during the purchase of my first home. Following my brief interaction with the organization, I was willing to sum up their service with one word: Ghetto.

So relax right-wing. ACORN is far from an undercover Obama-led conspiracy project. I can assure you, if Barack Obama had ANYTHING to do with ACORN, they’d be ten times more professional. Just ask the campaign headquarters that sprung up one block from my home a few short weeks before Election Day.

Yet James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles have managed to point out one thing: the tremendous disparity between middle America and da ‘hood. Yes, white people, they sell cigarettes out of the package in the hood. And food stamps. And unreleased movies on DVD – 2 for $15. And we “play in the fire hydrant”. And ‘hood people occasionally patronize a host of other “illegal” ventures - it’s usually called a “hook up”. Holla if ya here me.

Pass The Mic!

It’s wonderful that Americans are engaged in a sorely needed discussion about healthcare reform. Yet the voices of reputable professionals have been notably diminutive in this debate. The opinions of physicians, nurses, scientists, public health policy experts, etc., are infrequently solicited, perpetuating the ignorance of the masses to larger, potentially more deleterious issues.

For instance, reasonable individuals identify inefficiencies in our current healthcare system as problematic; still we fail to have proper discussions about the nature of those deficiencies and how to correct them. It’s painfully evident to me as a scientist that there is a glaring inefficiency in the government’s return-on-investment for the $30.5 billion it spends annually on biomedical research. Much of that research is conducted in academia on rare diseases for which there is no available treatment. Often, these are the same diseases for which pharmaceutical companies have little to no financial incentive to investigate. As academicians are seldom concerned with profit, much of the $30.5 billion ends up in publication oblivion. In other words, huge potential for therapeutic discovery is lost between the academic’s thirst for knowledge, and industry’s requisite for profit. This isn’t an unfamiliar phenomenon to biomedical scientists. In fact, we often mock the gap between academia and industry by describing the collaborative effort to communicate ideas between the two as “throwing it over the fence”. This problem is far from beyond repair. Easily, the government could offer enticements that would promote collaboration between academia and industry, thereby encouraging the translation of a larger chunk of that $30.5 billion into tangible therapeutics.

That’s plainly obvious to me, and I’m just a Ph.D. candidate. Imagine what a Nobel Prize winning biologist could add to this discussion.

I don’t hesitate to place blame on healthcare professionals for allowing their voices to be muted. Yet, I also recognize that we as a people effectively silence the commentaries of those which are most desperately needed. We are magnetized to sensationalism, rather than verity. Resultantly, “Joe The Plumber” becomes a household name, while in the midst of a storm of controversy around healthcare reform, few can identify the current Surgeon General.

If we want real solutions, we must engage those who have been most aptly trained to provide them. So the next time somebody wants to discuss Bill Maher and Sarah Palin’s position on some aspect of healthcare reform, you should ask them about Steve Galson and Regina Benjamin’s stance on the same issue...they’re the acting and prospective Surgeon General (I figured you might need to know who they are).

Often, those with the loudest voices are the least worth listening to.

What’s Really Wack About “Basic Bitch”

If you haven’t been privy to the latest phrase in feminine degradation, don’t worry, you will be. Comedian Lil’ Duval has popularized the slang term “basic bitch” as a colorful descriptor for what we’ve commonly referred to as a “hood-rat” – a female of pitiable stature who has failed to recognize or rise above her underprivileged upbringing (see video below). As the comedian Spank pointed out, it’s not the “bitch” part that’s troublesome (women are immune to that one), but it’s that word “basic” which really burns our bums.

It didn’t bother me at first, because the phrase obviously doesn’t apply to me. But then I thought about the subliminal message that’s sent when we attach negative connotation to a term that literally implies simplicity and fundamentalism, and then use it to degrade women.

Our society debases independence and assertiveness in women and celebrates mediocrity. We exalt women for their physical perfection, not their intelligence, ambition, eloquence, leadership, or even education (so what if perfection includes a few nip-tucks here, or augmentations there). We go so far as to tell independent women with standards that they’re “stuck-up bitches”. We even punish them with isolation and ridicule.

Yet when a woman gives you exactly what you requested, you demean her by calling her a “basic bitch”.

Silly me. I thought men appreciated qualities like natural beauty, politeness, and traditionalism in women. I thought being pleasant and easy to please was a feather in a woman’s cap.

The fortunate thing about this term is that women will indubitably rebel against it. They’ll position themselves as such that they can only be described as something other than “basic” - which will unfortunately create more disparities between the sexes in the African-American community where the idiom originated.

Men who throw this expression around really need to check themselves. Real talk fellas, if you degrade women for being simplistic or conventional, you’re probably going to transmogrify them into something you really don’t want to deal with – AGGRESSIVE BITCHES! Just like how y’all turned “suck my d*ck” into a derogatory phrase...and then wonder why black woman have an aversion to oral sex. Gag me with a spoon.

Just sayin’…

What if women as a whole demanded more from men as a whole? What if we refused to spread our legs for anything less than an educated brother, pulling down a comfortable salary, and demonstrating lucid potential for a successful future?

Could you imagine what the world would be like?

This is not an unexplored concept for me. As one of my best friends frequently points out, this strategy is doomed from the start. There will always be some hoe-rat that thinks she can make a man fall in love by breaking the rules, not realizing that the rules are actually orchestrated for her protection.

I commented yesterday that “p*ssy is power”, and you know what was thrown back at me? “All women don’t have to use their p*ssies to get what they want.” *sigh* Clearly this individual has misconstrued the raison d'être for this phrase. The point is, the longer you keep your legs closed, the more you present a challenge (within reason, of course). When you present yourself as a challenge, a man will either rise to meet your expectations, or kick rocks. Ladies, don’t be deceived into thinking you can put something on him that’ll make him love you. Generally, male minds don’t work like that – ours do. I guess what I’m saying is, giving it up too soon is completely counterproductive. For everybody (you’re ruining it for everybody!! (insider) lol). Remember when it brought shame upon a woman, her father, and her family name to engage in sexual intercourse before marriage? Remember that thing called chivalry? Just sayin’…

Why am I not surprised?

You’re probably aware that Pat Buchanan (senior advisor to Nixon, Ford, and Reagan, and former Republican presidential candidate) has been on a tirade this past week, hurling his racist views, and charging that Sonia Sotomayor is unqualified to be a Supreme Court Justice. He claims that she is merely an “affirmative action appointment” - never mind that she graduated summa cum laude from Princeton, attended Yale Law, or that she has more judicial experience than any nominee in the past 100 years. Nope. Not according to old Pat B. There’s no way that any of Sotomayor’s accomplishments were merited in accordance with anything other than her race.

That bothered me, but not as much as the response - NADA. No, Not from liberals - they’ve launched the obligatory counter-attack. But the silence from the G.O.P. leadership, in my eyes, echoes their agreement.

I googled the names of prominent republicans, curious if any of them denounced Pat B.’s comments with the realization that his statements are destructive to party progress. Not surprisingly, my searches didn’t turn up any hits. Not even when I cross checked Pat B.’s name with -- (drum roll please) -- Michael Steele. Was I really expecting something else? **sigh**

Steele has become a symbol of all that’s wrong with the Republican Party. Seriously.

1. He sounds ridiculous. Like most republican leaders of today, his rhetoric rarely makes sense. I hate to break it to you Mr. Steele, but minorities aren’t going to be drawn to the Republican Party by you saying “y’all come”. And you can keep your fried chicken and potato salad. Uncle Barack is barbequing on the white house lawn next week.

2. He looks ridiculous. As John Stewart pointed out, very reminiscent of the Angry Customer from Sesame Street. Lemme think, what else looks ridiculous? How ‘bout that squirrel on Sarah Palin’s head? Or Mitt Romney’s forced smile? Mark Sanford’s alligator tears? Or hell, just plain old Rush Limbaugh...


3. He IS ridiculous. I would call him an “affirmative action appointment” - if I thought he was actually QUALIFIED. This man has no appeal with minorities, whatsoever. Consequently, he has no shot at attracting diverse populations of voters. If this is what Republicans think we want, they are sadly mistaken. They haven’t heard a word we’ve said in the past 50 years. We’re already hip to that game and not interested in being bamboozled. But hey, kudos on their ability to effectively swindle Michael Steele.

I concede that Steele is only symbolic of the party’s issues; he himself is far from the problem. The G.O.P. has been flailing around desperately like a deep sea fish on dry land ever since George Bush endorsed John McCain’s presidential bid with a tap dance (no, really – the President was tap-dancing, literally). The longer the fish remains out of water, the more wildly it thrashes. Until, of course, it dies. One could only hope for as much.

The Miseducation of the American

Last Thurday, Barack Obama called the U.S. healthcare system “broken” and vowed not to tolerate “endless delays” in fixing it. I presume that’s what prompted TNT to air "John Q" last week, and Showtime to broadcast "Sicko" this morning. Realizing that my perception of this issue is influenced by my recent reading of Carter G. Woodson’s “The Miseducation of the Negro”, I find myself incensed that the U.S. citizen has allowed himself to be so readily bamboozled.

“John Q” is a story about an average blue-collar worker who resorts to holding a hospital hostage in order to ensure that his dying son receives a $300,000 heart transplant, which his insurance company refuses to cover. Although it’s a fictional account, “John Q” points to glaring deficiencies in the U.S. healthcare system. Patient care is financially focused; an individual is treated in accordance with what he can afford. Furthermore, this system contributes to a culture of arrogance and apathy within the healthcare profession (sorry doctors and nurses, but it’s been my experience that veterinarians are often much more accommodating and sympathetic when it comes to clients that can’t pay - could be because euthanasia is one of our options :-p). At any rate, “John Q” makes a salient point - capitalism may be a fine social model, but perhaps it is not applicable to every aspect of a country’s existence. Surely in a nation as great as the U.S., land of the free, home of the brave, one would not be subjected to choosing between adequate healthcare and the next meal.

Michael Moore brings this point home in his own unique way in “Sicko” . Upon sighting the free healthcare provided on U.S. soil to detainees at Gitmo, he rounds up a few rescue workers who suffer from an inability to afford proper treatment for their post-9/11 afflictions. Surprise surprise, the facilities at Guantanamo Bay deny these U.S. citizens, however they receive adequate diagnostics and medical care at a Cuban hospital – for free. One woman burst into tears when she finds the $120 medication she uses to treat her respiratory condition available in a Cuban pharmacy for around 5 cents.

As Americans, we are misguided. We are so convicted in our belief that there is no way other than democracy and capitalism that we regard communism as a great evil. We label Fidel Castro and the Chinese government as "the devil" because they support Marxist principles. We’re taught this hate and to reverence capitalism more than we are taught the difference between communism and socialism. We are so miseducated as a people, that the average American fails to recognize the socialist elements at play in their own everyday life – SOCIAL security, the FREE library, PUBLIC schools, even the police and fire departments are completely financed by the government.

"When you control a man's thinking you do not have to worry about his actions. You do not have to tell him not to stand here or go yonder. He will find his 'proper place' and will stay in it. You do not need to send him to the back door. He will go without being told. In fact, if there is no back door, he will cut one for his special benefit. His education makes it necessary.” – Carter G. Woodson.

I am appalled that many Americans are outraged by the idea of socialized medicine. It seems to me that those who believe capitalism is the best model for healthcare are simply posturing – capitalism is always good, socialism is always bad. This drone-like mindset contributes to the cause of the wealthiest five-percent, who seek to fatten their pockets without regard to the suffering endured by those beneath them. As a result of their miseducation, the very individuals who are oppressed by the system are not only appreciative of the current structure, but advocate perpetuance of it. Their education makes it necessary.

Barack Obama is certain to face much opposition from conservatives when it comes to healthcare reform, so much so that I fear he will cower away from a true reformative agenda until he has secured a second term. I’m sure that there are appropriate counter-arguments to be made to the socialization of medicine, yet I pray that as a people we become informed to the point that our perspective doesn’t remain as simple and constrained as: America is great because of capitalism, therefore capitalism must be great for healthcare.