By any measurement, it’s been a helluva week for The Black Commentator. Our visitation numbers soared, astronomically – mostly, our logs show, from traffic generated by progressive web sites. It appears that less than a quarter of the tens of thousands of new visitors were soldiers in Sen. Orrin Hatch’s National Review, Free Republic or Right talk show battalions. However, the enemy did fire off barrages of malodorous mail, much of it cc’d to the White House or their favorite rightwing rantcasters.

Click to view entire Female Clarence Thomas cartoon

We immediately deleted the bulk of the white Right writers. (Yes, they really do almost all write alike.) A relatively small proportion of the mail came from irate African Americans, some of whom were under the suggestion-induced delusion that the fright wig-wearing character in our September 4 cartoon – the one given multi-media exposure by Hatch at Janice Brown’s DC Court of Appeals nomination hearing – was intended as a caricature of the physical Janice Brown. Orrin Hatch had told them so, so it must be true, the evidence of their own eyes notwithstanding. Hatch’s Svengali act convinced most of the press and at least a few of the Democratic Senators on the Judiciary Committee that our Clarence Thomas in a fright wig, standing next to an identical Clarence Thomas without a wig, was in fact a gross distortion of Janice Brown’s facial features and physique.  

It is apparent that you did not really "see" what you were looking at - although you might not have been amused, anyway.

The caricature is of Clarence Thomas. We put a fright wig on our cartoon of him and called it Janice Brown, as in Janice Brown = Clarence Thomas. If you hadn't had a preconceived notion of what you were looking at, you would have noticed that both Clarence Thomases are exactly alike, except for clothing and coif. The two Thomases are right next to each other, placed that way so that it would be clear they are the same character. Bush first addresses the fright-wigged Clarence as "Mr. Clarence..." The caption refers to a "Clarence-like conservative." The September 4 cartoon was placed on a page with the headline, “A Female Clarence Thomas for the Federal Bench?"

Now, you may not like the Clarence cartoon. But there is no "mammy-like" caricature of Janice Brown. The "mammy" image was in your head, causing you to fail to see what was plain and obvious on the screen. You may also have been influenced by Orrin Hatch, who kept insisting that the cartoon was a caricature of Brown, when it clearly was not. He had a motive. You, on the other hand, saw what your mind expected.

Clarence will not have to wear the fright wig, anymore. Next issue, Janice Brown gets her own caricature. We’re sure we'll find lots of use for it.

You’ve hit the big time!

Congratulations!!!!! You guys just earned the condemnation of Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah. I'm watching this on C-Span right now as I'm sure you are (HAH! HAH!). The little fascist actually held up the cartoon from your website concerning Justice Brown. You all are truly bad mofo's! SOUL! PEACE! AN' HAIRGREASE!

Are you paying Senator Hatch to provide publicity for the Commentator?  If so, it is money well spent.

Your cartoons are just what the doctor ordered to raise the consciousness of the black soul!  Keep up the good work.

WHAT?  How can this BE?  A cartoon that STEREOTYPES its subjects? What has HAPPENED to the fine art of cartoonship?

Don't people understand that stereotyping is at the very root of cartooning? What is wrong with the Senate?  Why did they play an invalid race card? Obviously to take attention away from the record of Janice Brown and – along the way – try to create a sympathetic figure who is the "victim" of the very philosophy she embraces.

Orrin Hatch was absolutely gleeful that he could slap you folks upside the head and have others tut-tutting about the slander of poor Ms Brown.  It's a totally transparent ploy; however, I fear most people just don't get it.

The Repubs should be reminded of the cartoons they snickered over – Bill Clinton cartoons come readily to mind. The R's never expressed anguish over the fact that Clinton was (gasp) stereotyped.  Just one more double standard from the right wing double speakers.

Gratitude for your attitude.

I watched the hearings on Wednesday. And as I listened to quotes from her opinions, I was appalled. Janice Brown is frightening! Your cartoon was quite appropriate.

Congratulations to The Black Commentator for so shaking up the Rightwing with their cartoon condemnation of the Bush family’s latest tame counterblack – Judge Janice Brown (who is apparently even worse than Clarence) – that Republican Congressmen denounced it in a Congressional session.

Must have been a good shot. I love to see them wiggle.

I don't know how I missed the Senate hearing Wednesday, but reading about it tonight has made my night!  We should make bumper stickers and mouse pads out of the cartoon!  Great job Khalil!  Four Thumbs Up!

I just wanted to say keep up the good work! You know you have made it when the Senate has your work on TV. There was nothing racist about what you wrote. The truth just hurts. 

So Bush got his cake and ate it too:  Another Black to make his quota and one that will most likely agree with everything that he puts on the table.  Another Clarence Thomas token.  That's all we need as the Black race.  Another Black on the Supreme Court that looks at us as the White man does.

I loved your cartoon about Ms Brown. I read the story about Ms Brown and was disturbed by her views. Even though she is black and a woman, any intelligent person knows where she is coming from.  She did not come across as a good candidate for black people.

Congratulations! You have made it to the big time with that latest cartoon displayed on c-span. Though you are catching a lot of flack, I agree with your "take" on GW's appointments. Hatch and his ilk try their best to make everything a matter of ethnicity or religion when thinking people know Bush is proposing people for high office who are completely out of the mainstream philosophically.

I listened to some of the hearing on Judge Brown yesterday afternoon, and she has a deceptively gentle way of expressing her opinions. But I think Senators Schumer and Durbin were able to elicit some of her radically right views while under questioning. I am sure it is not without strong reason that she is opposed by people of color and liberal activists.

I wish Orrin Hatch (R-Religion Abuser) would say that about my cartoons. Please let your cartoonist know I say, kudos for irritating the Hatchetman. Keep fighting the fight. The bad news is Hatch is playing the race card.  The good news is he brought many new viewers to your website, including me. Thank you for the work your site does.

Love this cartoon. It drives the message home. Keep up the good work. You are # 1 in the Senate hearing for Ms. Brown. The cartoon has led me to your web site. Thanks.

Congratulations on having an effect on the confirmation hearings for Janice Brown to be appointed as a DC circuit court judge.  It seems as though the Republicans think they can use your cartoon to stave off further criticism of the 'poor' judge.  I hope the Democrats follow your lead and use this opportunity to make sure future appointees have some appeal to the Democrats and independents in this country. Thanks and keep up the good work!

I deeply appreciate your excellent sentence strings, consistently woven each week.  Intelligent prose, fiery volleys and inciting arrows.  Slay the dragon, Sir!

It is especially gratifying to witness national recognition of your talent displayed by boobs in the Capitol. Just like the boost Al Franken received from the lame-assed [Bill] O’Reilly, I hope your time in the spotlight may be blessed with immortals like our original patriotic revolutionaries.

The Constitution: words worth fighting for.

I just discovered your website after reading the Janice Brown article in the New York Times. I was greatly cheered up when I visited your site. The growing rightward shift by many people in the African-American community has been leaving me quite depressed, almost like being trapped in some strange parallel universe. I am glad that forums like yours have caught the attention of scum like Sen. Orin Hatch. I will be mentioning your site to all of my like-minded friends. I will definitely be logging on every week for your reports, commentary and insight.

On re-reading Mr. Nieuwendam’s letter, we suddenly realized that we haven’t provided much insight so far in this e-Mailbox column – preferring instead to bask in the glow of Hatch’s arson. For ’s analysis of the consistently social democratic nature of African American political behavior and thought, we refer the reader to our November 21, 2002 analysis, “Poll Shows Black Political Consensus Strong.” The data show there is no rightward trend among African Americans; that’s just another fiction invented by the same people who attempt to foist on Black America such “leaders” as – Janice Brown.

The opposition

I am outraged by the way your cartoonist portrayed Judge Brown in a recent cartoon! How could people who say they speak for the black community and diversity slander and humiliate another black person who has had the courage to be a nominee for a public position in our government.

You do not support the black community and our efforts to elevate ourselves by taking shots at blacks who do not think the way you do! Diversity and free speech cannot be expounded on in one breath and then say "but not for you since you disagree with me!"

Shame on you all!

We don't care what Janice Brown thinks; we oppose what she does in her role as a political/legal soldier in the Hard Right's offensive against social justice. We encourage others to heap scorn on her actions and her alliance with the enemies of the long-standing political consensus in Black America. (You may be outside this general consensus, but we are certain that we are not.) Our job is precisely to take shots at Blacks such as Brown and Thomas. That's our responsibility.

A ranking attorney in the St. Louis city government wrote:

The cartoon caricature of the Hon. Janice Rogers Brown, as featured on your web site, was outrageous and clearly offensive.  I say this as an African American and the member of the Bar in the State of Missouri. While we may choose to disagree or agree with Judge Rodgers Brown, no one has the right to denigrate the humanity and ethnicity of another person. 

You claim your "focus is commentary, analysis and investigation, elements of political dialogue that are absolutely essential to the creation of movements for social change."   I fail to see how such a caricature achieves that more worthy goal.

I am appalled at this cartoon. I am a 43 year-old African-American woman. This was not funny.

Had some conservative publication/person made a cartoon of, let's say Maxine Waters, looking "buffoonish" and "mammy-like", you, and publications like yours, would have spit nails. Heads would have had to roll. "How racist," would have been the battle cry….

I will. I don't like that depiction either, despite how I feel about him.  It's still racist because you are depicting him as a black woman.  I think you missed the point. End of story.

The cartoon you published about Judge Janice Brown is the most disgusting thing one African can do to another. It's cruel and degrading to the African race. If you have political or philosophical disagreements with the judge, address the issue, not dehumanize another person. I'm sensitive to such things because I've first hand experience in how powerful politicians in my country demonize and brutalize people who disagree with them. I didn't expect to find such cruelty being committed in this country by a person of African descent against another.

There is a long history of political cartooning in this country, including aggressive social commentary cartooning in the Black press. We see no reason to relinquish this form of political combat, certainly not while others are not asked to do so.

If your complaint is about this particular cartoon, then state it plainly. Our message is clear: Janice Brown is a female Clarence Thomas, who is for many very good reasons the most hated Black man in Black America. Janice Brown is depicted as Clarence Thomas in a fright wig. (We have created no caricature of Janice Brown – yet.) The two characters are identical. Do you object to the caricature of Thomas? (Or of Rice, or Powell, or Bush?) If so, state why. Or do you object to caricature of Black people by other Black people, under any circumstances? Or to caricaturing, in general?

In terms of addressing the issues, we do that in abundance, in the text of the accompanying stories. We have written many tens of thousands of words on Thomas, Rice and Powell. The Janice Brown file is growing.

You have every right to be disgusted at anything that you find repugnant. We are determined to express our disgust at political behavior that we find repugnant, employing all the tools at our disposal. Cartoons are standard components of political discourse in the U.S.

The last thing that the left will tolerate is the success of a conservative minority that would serve as a role model for other minorities and as an inspiration to others to lay aside the "victim mentality" and march through the doors that are wide open….  As a white person, I have come to the firm conclusion that black conservatives are the most intellectually stimulating - and morally courageous people that this country has to offer.  They have a voice that needs to be heard.

That's right, we will not tolerate the Black favorites of white conservatives like yourself being held up as role models for our communities.

The Senate hearings for Justice Brown was made a mockery by your racist cartoon.  Good thing you aren't a white organization or you'd have been shut down.

Chairman Orrin Hatch made a mockery of the hearings, not us. did not ask to testify at the hearings. Neither did anyone on the panel ask us to appear or send an exhibit.  Our cartoon was displayed on the whim of the chairman, who snatched it from the Internet for his own purposes, even though it had no relevance to any legal question at hand.

Do you think the hearing was a proper place for a political cartoon, ours or anyone else's? If not, then why don't you blame Hatch?

I saw the "Female Clarence Thomas" cartoon dated October 23rd. You people are racist assholes and I hope all of you have shit smeared in your rotten, sick faces. You nasty, wicked liberals deserve to be bombed by the Jew and Christian-hating Nation of Islam domestic terrorists headed by your leftist friends, Calypso Louie FarraCON and Jesse the Jackson.

GOD DAMN THE SOULS OF THE LIBERAL-DEMOCRAT AMERICA-HATING LEFT STRAIGHT TO ETERNAL HELL.

I'd like to peel the skin off your backs and pour salt into the open, bleeding flesh, then shit in your faces.

J. Baker, Phoenix AZ

Senate Democrats have not said whether they will filibuster Brown, the tactic they have used to hold up confirmation of three other Bush nominees, all of them rated far higher than Brown by the ABA. Hispanic nominee Miguel Estrada finally dropped out of contention. Democratic leadership should respect the wishes of the Congressional Black Caucus, and filibuster Brown. Her nomination is an insult, not a bow, to African American sentiments. Take it from Maxine Waters: Brown’s race “does not mean that any of us would and will give a pass to an unqualified nominee simply because she is a minority candidate."

Should her nomination fail, Janice Brown will henceforth be remembered as Clarence Thomas in a fright wig.  She can thank Orrin Hatch for that.

For that is the biggest white privilege of all: namely, the privilege of remaining oblivious to the real world, ignorant to the workings of your society, enraptured by the fantasy created by your history books, teachers, preachers, parents, Boy Scout leaders and politicians.

It is the privilege to never have to think about the things you don’t want to think about.

It is the ability to live a lie every day, and most of all to insist upon one’s innocence long after that innocence was delivered still-born, and to swear that the baby, so to speak, is still breathing.

It is the privilege of thinking that poverty is a game, precisely because you and yours have rarely if ever had to play it from the inside, have never been the chess pieces moved around by someone else’s hand.

It is the ability to say “lighten up, it’s just a joke,” precisely because the joke is not on you or anyone you know.

That David Chang, himself a person of color, had to play to white prejudices and sensibilities in order to make money as a game-maker is the ultimate proof of the power of whiteness in America, and the ultimate evidence of how the sickness can spread, even to those who ought to know better.

The Americanization of David Chang comes as no surprise to me, since perceptions of African Americans begin to form long before people get here, thanks in part to the cinema, newspapers, CNN and Fox news. Stereotypes do serve their purposes: to provide convenient explanations to complex questions. If David Chang really meant what he said in creating Ghettopoly he would have begun his noble venture with his own ethnic group. Perhaps somewhere in his research he would have learned something about himself in reading the history of Asian people in white America. Instead, he chose to take on the stereotypes of African Americans formed by the larger white society. After all, African
Americans are fair game for everybody writing on the problems of 21^st century America.

Take, for instance, the one-time reigning queen of the tennis court, Martina Hingis of Switzerland. She was overheard making the gratuitous statement that the Williams sisters were given whatever they wanted simply because they were African Americans. It had nothing to do with their talent on the tennis court. Where did these comments come from, spoken by someone who was not even an American? Other whites, of course, some, if not all, of whom were Americans. The pervasive denigration of African Americans infects the wider society like a virus, mimicking an outer appearance of acceptance while hiding insidiously within the body politic, waiting for the most opportune time to spread its deadly toxins. Everybody is subject to become infected by it. David Chang caught it and it's little wonder that seeing America through the eyes of the infected, he never realized that he had it.

To the editors, thank you for publishing the comments of Tim Wise. I would like to offer the following:

I am convinced, as Carter G. Woodson and others have repeatedly reminded us, that a defensive strategy is not sufficient in order for people of African descent to move into a proper position of empowerment.  Accordingly, the rapid backlash against Ghettopoly and its proprietor, Chang, was and is surely a necessary form of protest, yet it is still only half of the equation.

One constructive way to "play offense" as well is to purchase the Life As a Blackman board game.  As you may recall, this game has been featured in national media outlets (Fox News with Greta Van Sustern, Chicago Tribune, NPR, ABC Nightly News, etc.).  The website (www.blackmangame.com) provides links to various articles highlighting the game.  Tavis Smiley also featured this game on NPR and there is a link to this entertaining interview on the website as well.

Summarily, the game is an excellent effort by its creator, Chick Sawyer, to present Black life from a Black perspective in a fun yet thought-provoking way.  With "freedom" as the ultimate prize, Life As a Blackman offers a refreshing form of entertainment.

I have the game myself.  In my view, if Life As a Blackman doesn't outsell Ghettopoly, it’s really no one's fault but our own for not promoting and capitalizing on resources already contained within our community.

It is important to complete the process here: from rhetoric to protest to self-empowerment.  Lets put our money where our mouths are and purchase Sawyer's game.  Not to overplay the sports analogies here with the references to "offense" and "defense," but in the culture war in which we are engaged we have to bring our "A" game to prevail.

Playboy: “Almost every press report says you are not taken seriously as a presidential candidate. Why?”

Sharpton: “I think that is the media. Most polls have me in the middle. The guys behind me take me seriously, and the guys ahead of me take me seriously because we are gaining momentum. And if I do a sizeable vote, which I certainly will, they are going to have to deal with that. I think it's wishful thinking on the part of some of the mainstream media. I think they are being dismissive of people on the left in general, particularly people of color. The good news is that because they do that, they are going to wake up shocked when I come in with the vote. I bet a lot of pollsters are going to lose their jobs when we get finished with these primaries.”

On Al Sharpton's Playboy interview, I was disappointed that I was disappointed about the limited scope of the Playboy interviewer. After reading the interview, I was mad at myself for having expected an interview with depth from Playboy. 

As far as I'm concerned, Al Sharpton is the only serious candidate on the
Democratic roster because he is the only candidate that is unashamedly courting my vote – as an African American. He is the only one that is not asking me, a member of the Democratic Party 'voting base' to subordinate my needs, rights, fears, hopes and wishes to pacify a hand full of skittish, white centrist swing voters. Unlike the others, Mr. Sharpton will never expect me to sacrifice my right to representation in order to make other folks happy to be among the nappy.

This election year, for the first time since 1965 – I'm black and I'm proud!  And I am just going to act like I have a candidate who cares about me and mine. I expect to finally hear a candidate consistently bring to the political debate matters of relevance to the black community.

I expect Brother Sharpton to address the nationally accepted status quo of BOB – blacks on bottom – and let our multicultural American brothers and sisters know that there is a black constituency over here that ain't trying to have that no mo!

I am glad to have a loud talking brother ready to go one-on-one with the Deans as well as the Bushes about the status of Black America. I want him to tell them that we are tired of being insulted by racist leaders who pretend it's 'just politics as usual' to appoint anti-candidates to roles designed to dismantle the Civil Rights, education, environment, and labor gains of the past 50 years. And he'll let the others know that we are not going to take a back seat to others...we'll win together or we'll lose apart.
 
As most of us black folks know, sometimes you win just by showing up. I believe Mr. Sharpton is the right person at the right time to take the message to America that we have about 350 more years of back pay coming to us. You know what I mean!

I know this is a tall order for one black presidential candidate. But I have no doubt that Al can make a lot of people very uncomfortable in 2004 – which would make me very happy.

Do the Playboy interviewers take classes in how to ask stupid questions, or does the skill just come naturally? Mr. Sharpton is able to answer them intelligently and get much more information out than is indicated by the shallowness of the questions. Wouldn't it be something if the mainstream media gave him some attention, other than negative?

Why do we work? What is the purpose of industry and commerce? Do other peoples have rights that stronger nations are bound to respect? Only Dennis Kucinich and Al Sharpton appear prepared to take part in the evolving global discussion on the central issues facing humanity, Americans included. Other nations have begun fashioning answers to these questions, to the moral, material and physical betterment of their inhabitants. They are reaping the benefits of a long and sometimes bloody debate over humans’ obligations to one another, and the proper uses of wealth and power.

Thank you for the excellent article on Sharpton and Kucinich, very insightful, especially the thoughts pertaining to the vacuous state of public discussion. I am a huge fan of Sharpton's and believe the antiwar/peace movement should be supporting him as their #1 choice.

It is enormously refreshing to find views that so articulately speak truth to power and reflect the values this nation and the world so desperately need.  Hats off to Glen Ford and Peter Gamble.

"The Oklahoma experience is a difficult one. Life for Native Americans is one built on institutional racism," [Tulsa Indians Against Racism president Louis]Gray said speaking on behalf of TICAR, victims and advocates. "We believe that when it is the goal of the institution to minimize a people, they no longer exist as a real people. If you are not real, the offender believes he can do whatever he wants to you."

I wish to compliment you on your work. I find your online news and comments most interesting and entertaining.

If your comments did not reflect the facts, it would be more humorous.  I compliment you on your ability to "make a laugh" out of bad circumstances. Laughter helps when the situation seem unbearable or intolerable.

One thing that prisoners enjoy more than you and I, is a good joke.

Best wishes in your work.

…less than a quarter of Blacks (23 percent) support Bush's war against Iraq, versus 62 percent of the white public. 64 percent of Blacks surveyed "somewhat or strongly oppose" the planned attack, while 13 percent "aren't sure" what to think.

The bloodthirstiness of white American males is astounding: 68 percent of men surveyed are gung ho, indicating that the white male pro-war cohort soars somewhere in the high seventies. Less than half of all women favor war.

Hispanics polled nearly as warlike as whites. When asked the general question on war, 60 percent support it.

The lack of empathy with Iraqis as human beings marks white American males as a collective danger to the species. Zogby pollsters asked: Would you support or oppose a war against Iraq if it meant thousands of Iraqi civilian casualties? A solid majority of white men answered in the affirmative, as did more than a third of white women. Only seven percent of African Americans favored a war that would kill thousands.

This, to me, as a Latina, is the most important detail of all: we are not bloodthirsty power-hungry war mongerers, as I must say the letter you posted makes us appear.  Many of my Latino people want to get legitimacy from the military, as Blacks did when they fought to desegregate the military.  It would be much more accurate and considerate to put Latino so-called “pro-war” sentiment in this context, as the constant influx of our people into the US seriously cloaks the very strong anti-war sentiment of us Latinos who have been here for quite a while, and who have access to English-language alternative news.

Also, you should take into account that those immigrants who are against the war are not likely to feel free to say so to a pollster (if they are even contacted by a pollster, especially the undocumented immigrants), no matter what the pollster claims about confidentiality, especially in these Patriot Act times.

And, by the way, kindly note that in progressive cities and in agricultural communities around the US, there are radically active progressive Latino groups, with some members that just arrived here recently, that oppose US aggression and US sponsorship of right-wing military governments.  Along with the Chileans, I saw the irony of the 9-11 attack on the very anniversary that the US arranged the overthrow of democratically-elected President Allende in Chile.  Along with the Puerto Ricans (my people), who are still occupied by the US after 105 years, many Latinos see occupation and imperialism for what is.

Hi Margaret,

We here in Australia were quite bemused and outraged at the Tulia false imprisonment/framing.

What I don't understand about it all is why aren't the individuals concerned pursuing a class action suit against the state for lost income, defamation of character, and psychological harm of being locked up while clearly innocent. Also the Tulia media could be liable under sub contempt laws after whipping up an already prejudiced jury and seriously denting the right to a free/objective trial.

Can those involved at least pursue civil action against Tom Coleman? Any kind of legal action, akin to Kasy vs. Nike, will put the issue squarely on the media and, then hopefully, the public agenda.

Maybe money/access is a problem. In Australia, cost is not an issue for such collective law suits, as we have 'no win no fee' based activist lawyers.

"The result is that all of the defendants have been freed and 35 have been pardoned by the governor of Texas."

"Pardoned?" There should be a full apology, compensation and a full review of legal procedure.

Thanks for the great article and hope you can enlighten me as to what legal avenues are available. Good luck with the struggle and we offer solidarity for both liberty and justice.

The “hip-hop worldview” is far from being a viable post-civil rights era message to African-American children and youth. It is seldom a message of self-respect and self-dignity as Black individuals and as American citizens, a message of discipline of one’s emotions, discipline towards education, discipline and respect toward one’s parents, and discipline and respect towards friendship among peers of both sexes – this last being a discipline so badly required to reduce unacceptable levels of violence among African-American youth. It is ironic, in fact, that Black youth in poverty-level and weak working-class families who struggle to design a regime of self-respect and discipline in matters of education and interpersonal friendship, get no assistance whatever in these respects from hedonistic, materialistic, nihilistic, sadistic, and misogynistic ideas and values propagated by most hip-hop entertainers. The cruelty of the irony is compounded because many hip-hop entertainers come from working-class backgrounds, and yet lack awareness of the injury done to the life chances of themselves and their peers by the warped values that are the hallmark of hip-hop. This is truly sad indeed! Truly sad that Professor Todd Boyd can claim that hip-hop represents a new leadership paradigm for African-Americans.

I was reading an article today in the Philadelphia Daily News' new "Hip Hop" section and was instantly incensed. It was all about how, in Professor Boyd's view, Allen Iverson is the ultimate hip hop expression of success and "mainstream" types like Kobe Bryant, lacking "street cred" fall short. I wasn't so much bothered by his celebration of the success enjoyed by today's young black nonconformists - what did bother me was his not-so-subtle put down of those of us who have taken, by desire or necessity, a more mainstream path.

This is why I was so happy to discover your site today and read Dr. Kilson's piece. He was right on target with his critique of Boyd and his ilk. But I would add that not only are their views intellectually and historically bankrupt, they do a true disservice to our children. Hip hop culture as it is played out in the American urban landscape is rarely about million-dollar recording contracts and entrepreneurial dreams coming true; very few of us will ever rap or ball his way to success. Hip hop culture in the real world is more often about violence, drugs, addiction, incarceration, babies having babies, and burying young men before they see the age of 21. Shame on these black intellectuals who lionize "street life" (from the comfort of their ivy-covered, white-folk-subsidized perches, mind you) while putting down the rest of us as deluded Uncle Toms. Our kids can't afford to embrace these dangerous delusions any more.

J.D. Ripley consumed a great deal of before sitting down to type this letter:

You have established the premier news web site for this news junkie. The world wide web was, I think, created precisely for your site.

Your articles are uniformly superior.  I wish I had the time to comment on all of them.  The article on stress (Ref: Proof of Racism, by Margaret Kimberley) will be discussed in the most exacting terms with a dear friend whose blood pressure will prove I fear to be his death warrant.  Stress hormonal surges ebb much more slowly as we age and the effects are potentially much more debilitating. 

Your article re: Racist War in Philippines Revisited kicks in the following thought after reading with revulsion the quotes attributed to the cretin Generals John Kelly, Arthur MacArthur and the Col. Colonel Funston whom in the final only echo the sentiments of their (and our) political masters. 

It seems to your reader that today our soldiers die not for oil as (the American left sometimes argues) or to displace a dictator (as the American right always argues). The world after all is awash in both oil and dictators. The attack on Iraq in the final analysis is the Axis of Chutzpah making a definitive statement of terror to the gulf states and the rest of the world to a shakier extent. The message is a new version of an old colonizing theme.  To wit: The Arabs in particular and Muslims in general best understand their place in the world. Every corpse from the Coalition of the Killing for the sake of truth should be emblazoned with the imperial state symbols – the Star of David and the American Eagle – in order that nuclear duo's ambitions may be more clearly discerned to be either revered or jeered by their citizens based on the merits.   For every soul ever murdered and subjugated (whether they be sliced and diced one way or another as Africans, Indians, Filipinos, Palestinians, Hispanics, Europeans, Men, Women, or by any of the many other thousands of categories we create to distinguish ourselves), we can do no less if we as human beings are ever going to reach a critical mass and begin to honor, (as is my hope,) a sacred march towards universal justice.

I became aware of your internet website from reading a story in the San Francisco Chronicle; and thank God that I have found your source as a voice in the darkness that is the racist mindset of America today, thanks to ShrubCo (bush and company), we are now thrown back in time to the point where our children aren't getting a education, yet are filling up our prisons; our families are defined by the media and the government as a "single mom" family, while they either jail or kill off the men of our race, and we have those of our own race trying to help to place us back even further than that under the guise that we should be a "color blind" society (aka Ward Connerly's attempt to turn California into a Jim Crow era state).

Thank you again for being!

October 30, 2003
Issue 62

is published every Thursday.