Posted on

The Break: The Plight of the MLK Party Flyer (PODCAST)

We won’t front folks – the fam had some pretty strong opinions about this matter and we come off sounding very much like the elitist talented tenth crew in this episode – but are there no limits? We found the humor in the party flyers that circulated this past MLK holiday weekend, but definitely felt there was something to be said for some of the ways Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was depicted. Podcast guests include Chris Lehman, Malcolm Darrell, Toria Williams, and John and Triawna Wood. Enjoy!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Android | RSS

Posted on

The Reverend Fred Luter, Jr.

As the black community overwhelmingly celebrates the re-election of our first black President, I’ve been surprised to note how few of us are aware of another groundbreaking rise to higher office achieved by one of our own. This office is pastoral, not political, yet the social implications of this occurrence are perhaps no less significant than that of President Obama’s election to the office of President of the United States. I’m talking about the Reverend Fred Luter, Jr. and his own election as president of the Southern Baptist Convention.

The Southern Baptist Convention, (S.B.C.), for those who don’t know, is the largest body of Baptists in the entire world. It is the second largest Christian body in the United States with 16 million members, second only to the Catholic Church. Given that most American Christians are Protestant, you could argue that Fred Luter, Jr., a 56-year old black man from New Orleans, stands as the most powerful religious figure in America. This is a significant fact in its own right. But it’s all the more amazing when you consider the history of the Southern Baptist Convention.

The S.B.C. has an old and venerable history in the United States, and particularly in the south. But to say that the S.B.C. has a questionable history with respect to race would be putting it mildly. It became the Southern Baptist Convention in the first place in 1845, having split with the northern Baptists because it refused to prohibit slave holding churches from sending out missionaries. Though the Baptist community even in the south had a history of racial tolerance and acceptance towards blacks throughout the 1700’s (even allowing blacks to be preachers in the south and opposing slavery), the southern Baptists gradually changed their attitude towards slavery as their membership expanded among the elite, wealthy planter class of the Southern Gentry. (Perhaps ironically, conversions of blacks in the south increased significantly as well during this time, especially among the slaves. Black Baptists formed their own organizations after the Civil War, most notably the National Baptist Association.) From that time onward, and even after the Civil War, the attitudes of Southern Baptists with regards to civil rights closely tracked that of white Southerners generally. Conservative Southern Baptists would support Jim Crow laws (though there was a moderate faction that favored desegregation) and were generally not allies of the Civil Rights Movement.

All this of course makes the election of Fred Luter, Jr. to the presidency of the S.B.C. (he was elected unopposed by the delegates at the convention; itself a first in S.B.C. history) all the more striking. A jovial yet fiery personality behind the pulpit, the senior minister of the Franklin Avenue Baptist Church in New Orleans Reverend Luter was born the third of five children and raised by his divorced mother who made ends meet as a seamstress and as a surgical scrub assistant. He turned to God at the age of 21 after a motorcycle accident nearly killed him, leaving him with a head injury and a compound fracture. He began as a street preacher and ultimately found his way to Franklin Avenue in 1983, ultimately leading the growth of the church to 7,000 people prior to Hurricane Katrina in 2005; after which Reverend Luter was noted for his leadership in rebuilding the congregation following unparalleled devastation left in the Hurricane’s wake, rebuilding a crushed and demoralized congregation back up to a membership of 5,000 as of his election to the presidency of S.B.C in June of last year. He finishes his one year term in June of this year.

If it is a testament to the degree to which minds and hearts have changed over the many generations of this country’s racial history unto now that Revered Luter could be elected President of a body of primarily white Christians with roots deep in slavery and segregation, it is also perhaps a testament to the power of the Christian message of love and forgiveness, even when articulated across the boundaries and tensions of the color-line. Reverend Luter recalled having been invited to preach at a Baptist church in Crowley, Louisiana, in the early ’90’s (the first time he preached outside of New Orleans). It was a strictly white congregation, and the pastor who invited Reverend Luter to speak had become nervous about how his congregants would react to a black preacher.

“Just don’t put my picture up,” Luter instructed him, preferring to leave it a surprise. Indeed his audience was silent and tense when Fred Luter astonished them with his presence. But then he spoke of the grace and the goodness of God in the warm, approachable manner for which he is known. Their attitudes changed even that night. One woman from the crowd would approach Reverend Luter afterwards, admitting to him that she had begun by feeling angry that a black man was preaching at her church…and ended by thanking God he came.

Posted on

Sandy Hook Elementary: Where Does The Fault Lie?

Let me preface this post by saying that I am devastated by the loss the families of Sandy Hook Elementary School are currently sustaining. No parent can imagine when they wake up any given morning that that will be the last day they see their child alive. Further, one of the last places one expects their child to be a victim of gun violence is within their school classroom. Our prayers are with the families in Newtown, CT in the hard days ahead.

At the podcast table we’ve discussed both gun control and mental illness as it pertained to issues within the Black community; however the devastation of mass murders in this country at the hands of extremely mentally ill people with access to assault weapons makes it a necessity to broaden our scope. In an article written on Gawker by Liza Long, the mother of a mentally ill son, “since 1982, 61 mass murders involving firearms have occurred throughout the country. Of these, 43 of the killers were white males, and only one was a woman.” Most of these killers obtained their firearms by legal means. Social media networks are ablaze with pointing the blame, and every suggestion in the book from banning firearms in entirety to locking up the mentally ill has been posted online. Gun enthusiasts and NRA supporters argue vehemently that “guns don’t kill people; people kill people”, and honestly believe that argument will convince the rest of us that no laws controlling guns are required in the U.S. So what then is the answer?

At this point, I don’t see there being a clear cut answer to it all, but during a vigil in Newton on Monday President Obama certainly alluded to the fact that we will see some change in policy in the days ahead. We need not lose another child, be they 5, 15, or 25 to unnecessary gun violence. Further our youth, be they mentally ill or not, should not see guns and death as a resolution to solving problems or ending disagreements. The average person needs only limited access to firearms to avoid being either a victim or culprit. Additionally, people who struggle with extreme cases of mental illness and their families need more assistance. Too many families live in fear of what their loved one might do. Since Friday, news reports of the severity of Adam Lanza’s illness have come across our computer and television screens hourly and they beg the question – was there anything that could have been done to keep him from executing this awful tragedy?

There’s not much more to say about this except my heart is heavy with grief for the families that lost their loved ones last Friday. I hope in the days ahead they find a bit of peace and I sincerely hope our nation does not sit on its laurels and let another tragic incident like this occur before making changes to the law. Freedom is an amazing right to have when exercised properly, but these killings are a prime example of freedom gone awry.

 

Posted on

Black Is: Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Inc.

I won’t pretend to know everything there is to know about Greek organizations; I quietly use to giggle at some of them since from an outsider perspective, it looked like organized gang affiliation. However, I married into a Greek family: Chris comes from a line of Alphas on both sides and his mother is an AKA. My experiences in this family over the last 12 years changed my perspective completely, and none more than spending time with Alpha men themselves.

This past weekend I celebrated with Chris and BI family members, Malcolm Darrell and Darius Gray, the 106th year of the founding of the Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Inc. What I was reminded of was the fact that the seven men who are considered the founding fathers or “jewels” of the fraternity were mavericks in their time. They were students at an Ivy League college (Cornell University) at the turn of the century, a mere 41 years after the abolishment of slavery, creating a secret society for Black men. What nerve it took to take on such an endeavor, and 106 years later the Alphas stand proud as the first of many Greek organizations that remain leaders in the Black community.

I can run off a long list of prominent Black men who were Alphas over the last 106 years, but what I’m impressed with most are the ones I interact with regularly. There is a standard of excellence these men subscribe to for themselves, a personal commitment to be at their very best at all times, and even more a commitment to lift each other up that is unlike anything I’ve seen amongst Black men in various organizations. In a room of Alpha men, there is no sense of competition, but a feeling of oneness in brotherhood and excellence.

On this Founder’s Day, I salute all Alphas around the world, and give a special shout to my brethren Chris, Malcolm, and Darius. Thank you all for being the exception to the rule.

Posted on

Having Our Cake and Eating It Too

It was brought to my attention recently the influx of the current desire of society to want to have its’ cake and eat it too. Humans have the tendency to want to spice things up by trying new things – it’s natural. There’s been a recent spice that has been getting a lot of attention in the old spice cabinet in regards to dating: friends with benefits.

Since the box office hit Friends With Benefits featuring Mr. Timberlake and his beautiful costar Ms. Kunis, the idea has been haunting minds. Is this possible? Sure we are attracted to many different people sexually and sure we manage to stay friends with people who we are attracted to; however can we maintain that same relationship with someone who’s a friend with all the extra fun benefits? The whole idea in and of itself is complex. Does friends with benefits come with sexual monogamy? Do people become friends with benefits because they want to settle sexually & not emotionally? Do they engage in the relationship because they want to test drive before going all in? Or is it an excuse to have sex and think you’re not going to have feelings?

If in fact the setup comes with sexual monogamy then how is that any different from being in a relationship? Friends with benefits is having a relationship without really having a relationship and what comes with relationships? FEELINGS. Feelings are the very basic thing that separates humans from animals. They are inevitable and thus will appear in any situation.

Lets take a second to examine the reasons why either sex would engage in a friends with benefits relationship. Obviously there’s an enticing sexual benefit however how is this benefit any different from sleeping around with different people if there isn’t sexual monogamy? This is a ploy to get guys more play by acting as if they care more than they do. Females are the more emotional of the two and therefore are more inclined to take this title more seriously.

We have this unhealthy fascination with wanting to have our cake and eat it too. The fact is humans were made to feel. We cannot help but to feel so whether it’s the feeling of wanting more than sex with that person or a feeling of jealousy and replacement when that person moves on this can affect the friends with benefits relationship.

However this article begs the question, is friends with benefits controversial because it pushes the definition of relationships outside the box humans have worked years to define?

Posted on

My Message to the GOP

On Tuesday, November 6th an over-confident Republican Party had it’s world shaken and it’s bubble burst when President Barack Obama won re-election in an electoral college landslide and the Democratic party strengthened it’s hold on the Senate in a decisive victory. The GOP did hold onto the House of Representatives, yielding nine seats to the Democrats (black conservative Florida congressman Alan West bids us goodbye) but still retaining a large majority, as well as picking up a governorship in North Carolina. And of course, while President Obama won big in the electoral college he only won in the popular vote by a respectable, but not a dramatic, margin of just under 3 million votes. But given the passions and the critical importance both sides put upon this election, (and given the near certainty with which many GOP elites like Karl Rove and Dick Morris predicted President Obama’s downfall), this election can only be seen as a disaster for the Republican Party.

President Obama’s victory reflects a tireless discipline on the part of he and his campaign to maximize voter turnout in the face of a bad economy,  and aggressively and effectively attacking the opposition, defining Governor Romney more than Romney was able to define himself in the eyes of the American people. The Democratic Party and the Obama team deserves credit for the unparalleled efficiency of their organizing, both this year and in 2008. But there is something else at work in America that accounts for President Obama’s victory, and that should serve as a reality check for the GOP. That is that the demographic makeup of the American electorate is changing, and is changing for good. When all is said and done, Mitt Romney won big with one very broad group of voters and that is white voters; particularly among older whites and male whites at that. Now in the past, seeing as white people represent by far the largest racial group in the country, a presidential candidate who carried a large majority of white voters stood a very good chance of winning the presidency. But since 2004 the white share of the electorate has decreased four percentage points while the minority share has increased about the same amount. President Obama won enormously among blacks (93-6), but also among Hispanics (71-27) and Asians as well. The age and gender gaps favored the president too. He won female and young voters by significant margins. What confused Republican strategists was not that the President won these groups; they always expected him to. What confused Karl Rove and others was that the turnout among these groups was anywhere close to the levels they were at in 2008. The GOP intelligentsia thought that 2008 was an anomaly, that minority voters and young voters would not return to the polls in the record breaking numbers they did in 2008 in 2012, now that the excitement over the Obama candidacy had faded across almost four years of economic struggle and political difficulty. But they were wrong. The Democrats seem to have a new coalition, and if the Republicans cannot make inroads with these groups (all of which represent growing portions of the electorate) they will likely cease to be competitive in the future. Thus begging the question, where does the GOP go from here?

My feeling is that, while I believe the Republican Party is more right than it is wrong on the fiscal and economic issues that are so important to the American people today (Mitt Romney won over Barack Obama in the exit polls on the question of who would best manage the economy) the GOP is nevertheless on the wrong side of many issues that are important to the individual ethnic, gender, and age groups that swung this presidential election and the last to Barack Obama and the Democrats, and threaten to make the political future of America one that might be dominated by the left wing. In short, the problem is that the Republican Party, founded as the party of civil rights, has in recent years abandoned the civil rights argument, and has ceded it almost wholly to the Democrats. I must therefore argue, and insist, that the GOP gets back to it’s roots as not just being the party of Reagan and Goldwater and small government, but the party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, King and civil rights.

Many Republicans seem to think that Civil Rights as a legitimate issue set ended with the passage of the Civil Rights Act in ’64, and that talk of broad civil right’s issues now is just so much race-baiting and class warfare brought about by cynical liberals. And sure, plenty of it is. But there are many civil rights and minority-specific issues that are not. The issue of fair pay for women, for instance, is a legitimate civil rights issue, and the fact that our party and it’s nominee could not get it together to support the Lilly Ledbetter Act (allowing women more time to sue for pay discrimination) is a mark against us that hurt us with the female vote, and rightfully so. We don’t have to infringe upon the civil rights of religious groups (the one group conservatives seem quick to take a civil rights stand on behalf of) as many Democrats see fit to do by demanding that they provide women with contraception against their will, but the issue of fair pay should be a no-brainer. Likewise with Hispanics and immigration reform. George W. Bush and Newt Gingrich were right: we cannot deport 12 million immigrants from this country even if they are illegal. It is neither practical nor humane. Mitt Romney and his notion of “self-deportation,” were wrong. We do not need to do as some Democrats and self-serving business interests would do and imperil our country by advocating an open border. We must secure the border, and as George W. Bush tried to do we must tie that effort to the effort to legalize and integrate the law-abiding illegal immigrants who are already here. Republicans would not work with President Bush on that issue; hopefully they work with President Obama.

With respect to gays I cannot go so far as to say the Republican Party must endorse gay marriage. I define marriage as being between a man and a woman and that is an issue for the conscience of the individual to decide. But there must still be a basic level of respect for gays and for where they are coming from. It was disgraceful to hear a large part of the audience at a Republican Primary debate boo a gay soldier who asked a question of the candidates, even more disheartening to see that not Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich or any of the candidates stood up for him. On the other hand it was good to see that a large number (though still not a majority) of Republicans voted for the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, which was indeed a genuine civil rights issue for gay Americans. It was a bipartisan victory for America that that was undone. With respect to African-Americans, I don’t expect the Republican Party to undergo a radical transformation on the issue of Affirmative Action, but they can at least not do things to pro-actively hurt their chances with blacks. I did not consider the voter I.D. initiatives to be racist exactly (they’re likely to affect as many whites as blacks ultimately) but they we’re unnecessary and politically motivated, and allowed hysterical commentators on the left to claim that we had reentered the days of Jim Crow.

Ultimately the most important thing the Republican Party can do with respect to restoring it’s reputation among minorities and women is to simply not be afraid to speak directly to the issues that concern them. It is my belief that free market oriented policies are more likely to bring prosperity and social mobility to all Americans, including blacks and Latinos, women and gays, etc. The GOP is good at saying this, but cannot go beyond that to address the other issues beyond jobs and the economy that concern women and minorities. Barack Obama, on the other hand, actively empathizes with all of these groups. Conservatives can call it pandering, but it is better than seeming not to care. And so the issue is as much one of emphasis, tone and awareness as it is one of adopting sensible policies. The Democrats have a bad habit of seeing discrimination when it isn’t there. But Republicans have a bad habit of not seeing discrimination when it is there, and that tarnishes our ability to promote our policies on the wide range of issues where we could do minority and female Americans a lot of good. It’s time for Republicans to take a wider scope. The GOP does not have to abandon it’s principles of smaller government and individual liberty to move forward competitively into the America of the 21rst century. It just has to reclaim it’s old principles of inclusiveness and equal opportunity. Do that, and there’s no political battleground upon which the GOP will not be able to fight in the future.

Posted on

Culture Connection – Alex Cross: Deciphering Tyler Perry’s Action Star Fail

So, I went to see Alex Cross a couple of weeks ago with one big question in my mind: can Tyler Perry play an action star? Is he a good enough actor to go beyond his roots as a comedic, cross-dressing cultural icon, beyond his expanded repertoire of competent (non-Madea) dramatic roles like he played in Good Deeds, to succeed in a role altogether different? Can he take his already ubiquitous brand to even greater heights, opening up a whole new world of Tyler Perry murder-mystery roles that could lead him to be more than Tyler Perry, to be an actor of the caliber of a Morgan Freeman or Denzel Washington in the categories of thrillers and suspense? These things I wondered. And after seeing Alex Cross, I came away with the most disappointing answer possible: I don’t know. And I don’t think we’ll ever find out.

Alex Cross was a bad movie. I mean, if I had seen it on USA at one in the afternoon on a Monday when I was too sick to go to work and too bedridden to do anything but watch day time television, it would have been passable. But having spent twenty dollars on me and my wife’s tickets I left the theater struggling to think of some justification to ask for a refund. Alex Cross is supposed to be a detective known for piercing insight, an almost unfailing ability to perceive subtle details in mysteries and crimes that those around him miss, making him a formidable adversary and a compelling character. But there was little subtle or compelling about this film. Alex Cross is introduced as a uncannily gifted police detective (the film is a prequel to all the other stories where he works for the FBI). His partner even calls him “Gandalf” as they step onto the first crime scene of the film (and then explains to Alex that it means he’s a “wizard,” as if either he or the audience should need help figuring that one out). To this end one of the opening scenes of the film shows Cross in a cuddly moment with Mrs. Cross (played by the enchanting English actress Carmen Ejogo) where he deduces everything she had done that day by looking at her lipstick, observing the vague marks on her clothes, smelling her perfume, etc. It’s the old Sherlock Holmes routine of course, which would have been fine if it were not the most clever thing Alex Cross did in the entire film. The mystery itself is simple and boring, complete with a killer who leaves pictures at his crime scenes containing clues as to his next victims (they call him “Picasso“) and a wealthy (*spoiler alert*) potential victim of the killer who winds up having been his financier the whole time…(not surprising given that there are literally no other characters in the film who might possibly be the mastermind behind Picasso’s killings, making what was supposed to be a surprise a flat anti-climax).

Worse still however was so much of the dialogue. Most of it was forced. Cross’s monologue to his partner and chief of police (played by John C. McGinley of Scrubs fame; an odd choice for a film that was already at risk of not being taken seriously because of it’s lead actor) analyzing the psychology and the motives of their killer is awkwardly timed and riddled with cliches. His first conversation with the killer (which immediately precedes the most ridiculous sequence of events in the film, which I will leave unspoiled for those who still wish to see it) devolves into a boring and obnoxious exchange alternating between him trying lamely to psychoanalyze Picasso, bragging about his own skill as a detective and then throwing a tantrum, all of which leave the character looking unsophisticated and unimpressive (granted this is supposed to be Cross before he becomes the Alex Cross but his behavior is totally at odds with the way his character is introduced). Other parts of the dialogue just weren’t realistic, not because of the way they were acted, but because the dialogues themselves were nonsensical. Towards the beginning of the film Cross reveals to his partner that he’s been offered a job with the FBI, that comes with a 35% pay raise and a comfortable station behind a desk (hinting at his later station with the FBI). But he’s afraid to tell his wife about this because he knows she won’t like the idea (which a little later she doesn’t). What is the problem that arises when they have the conversation? Despite the fact that her husband would be making a lot more money and, more importantly, would no longer be getting shot at in the line of duty working dangerous city streets, she doesn’t want him to take the job because she doesn’t want to take their kids out of their school in, of all places, Detroit. Yeah, not a realistic conversation.

The film has one redeeming point however; small roles by Jean Reno and Cicely Tyson, great actors, don’t do much to make the film any better, but Matthew Fox actually plays a magnificent villain as Picasso. It doesn’t save the movie, but to the extent that it is watchable it is because the films antagonist actually does manage to be authentically creepy, sadistic and frightening.

But what about Tyler himself? I can’t say that he did poorly, because the film was so poorly written it is hard to know whether it was Perry’s acting or bad scripting that was the problem. He certainly isn’t able to lift this script up, but perhaps with better lines he might have been pushed into really discovering an authentic Alex Cross character. Maybe. But unless Perry is willing to gamble with his own resources to take another shot at it, I doubt anyone else will put up the money to give him another chance.

Posted on

Congratulations Mr. President!

Last night, Mr. Lehman and I sat with friends at one of our favorite restaurants in our community, Post & Beam and watched election results come in. The collective enthusiasm in the space made the reelection of Barack Hussein Obama that much more exciting. The entire BI family wishes him well on his second term and will continue to support him as he works through one of the toughest social and economic times in our country’s history.

What we can’t ignore is how clearly divided our country remains in 2012. The foundation of inequality on which this country is built remains deeply rooted in the soul of the country itself; the response of some to a Black president in office has made that distinction clear. As much as we like to relegate many of the acts that have made the United States infamous as being in the past, like William Faulker said, “The past is never dead. It’s not even past.”

However, last night’s reelection affirms what most people of color know to be true: collectively we are not the minority, but the majority and together we can make our voices heard. This country, and specifically those that cleave to traditions and beliefs of old have much to consider and adapt to, because times truly are a-changin’.

Congratulations Obama – we still believe in you.

 

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Posted on

A Disloyalty to my Race

A young African American woman was accepted into the University of Southern California. One thing she does look forward to when she starts at her new school, as any girl would, would be the different market of men on the USC campus. The African American males at her previous college made rude catcalls as she walked across campus, called each other “niggas” and did not attend their classes. What woman wants that? Attending USC will be a game changer simply because she’ll be around guys with a sense of direction and educational focus. The only problem is that these educational driven men at USC aren’t all black. While her preference in men has always been African American, there are only a handful of them that aren’t athletes at USC, the majority being Caucasian and Asian. If she were to walk down to Starbucks with her Caucasian, Asian, or even Hispanic boyfriend she meets at USC, is she being disloyal to her race?
The reality of the situation for African American women in college is that most men in our race are not exactly striving for educational success. Single black women with college degrees outnumber single black men with college degrees almost 3 to 1 in major urban areas such as Washington, according to a 2008 population survey by the U.S. Census Bureau. Where does that leave single, educated African American women? Waiting. While young black women continue to excel and hang out with their girlfriends, they are still waiting on the “good” black man to come with the same educational level and marry them.
As African American young woman, I see a problem with this equation. Black women dating interracially should not equal disloyalty. We should not be discouraged from dating interracially if there is not anyone who looks like her with not only goals but the drive and effort to make something out of themselves. Although there are some black males who have an education and there are women who have found those males, this doesn’t mean a woman should be forced to wait for them to appear, especially if there are not a lot to begin with. When 73% of interracial marriages were between black men and white women in the past decade according to the population survey in 2008, black women who decide to date out of their race should not only be culturally accepted but encouraged if the heart desires. Ultimately, it’s about young black women celebrating themselves. When men are not up to our standards, we shouldn’t lower them or compromise, but stay strong. Just like any other women, young, black and educated women deserve men who will love them despite the skin color.
If the young African American woman is walking to Starbucks with her Caucasian boyfriend on the USC campus, is she being disloyal to her race? No, she is not. It’s not like she did not attempt to seek out African American males at either schools. Both pools of African American male college student were either rude, had no home training, or no real aspiration, or were slim to none as far as population is considered. When I start USC in the next couple of months, I am aware of the handful of students that will look like me when I walk across campus. Although the dating market for African American men will be pretty slim, like on most California university campuses, I feel no pressure to date within my race. I celebrate myself as a young black women who deserves someone who respects and likes me despite my complexion.

Posted on

Excellence Personified: Gabby Douglas

Gymnastics is one of those sports that I won’t miss during the Olympics, and this year with 16-year old Gabrielle Douglas on the American team, I’ve been glued to the television for their performances. We all watched with bated breath as on July 31st, Douglas and her teammates, McKayla Maroney, Aly Raisman, Kyla Ross and Jordyn Wieber, won the team all-around gold medal at the 2012 Summer Olympic But yesterday, August 2nd, was the cherry on top as Douglas won the gold medal in the individual all-around, becoming the first African-American woman and first woman of color to win the event. She is also the first American gymnast ever to win both the team and individual all-around gold at the same Olympics. Perhaps the best is still to come, as Douglas is scheduled to take part in the finals of uneven bars on August 6th and balance beam on August 7th.

What does this tell us about excellence? Truthfully, that it stands within our reach, and any reason for not trying to make contact with it lives as an excuse. Gabby Douglas doesn’t come from a remarkable background; there is no indication of her family being superior in wealth or education. What we do know is she had the type of familial support that encouraged, sacrificed, and rallied around her talent and desire to become who she stands as today. In addition to that, Gabby’s determination and focus on her own goals have her in the midst of an elite group of athletes at the age of 16. She has nowhere to go but up. 

I see Gabby Douglas as an example to myself as a parent and educator to continue to support and encourage all children to strive for excellence. Our backgrounds, culture, and race do not define or provide limits to our abilities. It is our ability to dream that determines our futures really, for it we can see where we want to be we can create that life for ourselves.

Today, I won’t concentrate on the ignorant portrayals of Black women specifically in mass media because beyond them stands a girl, Gabby Douglas, whose light is so bright it blocks all else out. Gabby, we are proud of your for setting an example for us, and for making history out of your passion. Thank you for reminding us that in order to be excellent, all we need to do it go for the gold.