Response to Benjamin's comment on Grambo's "Cab in Boston" post

I don't know about that. I would say racist city. Obviously a city cannot keep racist people out of it, so like you said racist people live there. However, the ethnic enclaves in which the article Grambo posted describes, are pretty bad. You can take the T in Boston and go from a relatively safe college neighborhood and in 20 minutes be in an extremely dangerous, poverty stricken community. And the difference between Boston and New York in that manner is that in Boston you can tell the difference by the cleanliness of the stations. In New York, they're all dirty... besides the ones with heavy traffic like Times Square which gets cleaned daily.

The mind of a racist can also exclude celebrities and athletes. Big Papi and KG can be their favorite ball players and they can still turn right around and call you a nigger.

Also all people can try to pull a fast one; it is not an inherently black thing to try to not pay a taxi driver. In this instance, I don't blame the taxi drivers. As a people, I mean American people this time, we have been flooded with thoughts of blacks being dangerous, evil, stupid criminals. Check out Malcolm Gladwell's book Blink, (Grambo's reading it right now). It goes into our unconscious first thoughts in particular situations such as accessing personalities.

I don't know how we go about handling this situation or racism in general for that matter.


That's why I let white girls get me taxis.

--

Here's Grambo's original post below. Read more!

Response to Grambo's 'single-issue voter' post

I see the problem as people are reflecting their political party's view rather than their party reflecting their view. The party picks a solid stance on an issue and their stance has to (unfortunately) do one or two things. First, it has to derive from conservative/liberal thoughts so that it can be in accord with the respective party's people. To clear that assertion up, I do not mean that the party must reflect it's people's views, but that the party's stance must take little convincing to that party's people. I believe that the party must be able to present their stance minimally at a threshold; a threshold in which they can easily usher in many of their people by altering truths and making empty promises. Second, but not always true, the party's views must oppose the other major party's stance on the subject. This puts both major political parties in a horrible competition where sometimes the majority of our countries people get screwed with the minority voters' party taking rule, i.e. the 2000 presidential election. I really hate these strict and restraining rules of politics. Rules that stem from old, white male run government. Rules that did not include people of color, immigrants and women.

Obama is reaching out to voters who are seeing right through this type of old political system. For example, not many people believed that Obama could defeat Clinton in the primaries but he did. Clinton loss because she held onto her staunchly 'democratic' morals in a race that was being flooded with new voters... with new ideals. Near the end of her run, she began altering some of her views to appeal to these voters. Unfortunately for her, it was little too late.

This system is soon on its way out the door with progressive politicians such as Obama; progressive in his take on the system not necessarily his views.

The only positives I have about this system is that it makes for good television.

For Grambo's original post, see below.

Stay tuned for my upcoming weekly specialty called "Tell 'Em Why You Mad, Perf".


two times. Read more!