“Our Father, Who Aren’t in Washington” by Lisa Fritsch

Op-ed submission by Project 21 

Conservatives argue that the liberal social programs of the 1960s destroyed the black family as the notion of the black man as the patriarch of his family took a beating. In just a few generations, an intact black family became so hard to recognize that blacks ridiculed the 1980s family sitcom “The Cosby Show” as unrealistic. Today, however, we have flesh-and-blood proof of the existence and the benefits that come from a strong black family — America’s first black President.
 
President Obama can help black Americans succeed by asking them to follow his example when it comes to fatherhood and family. Obama should embark on a national campaign to bring fathers back into their homes. A family with two working parents, with the father in the home, is less likely to live in poverty. Thus far, however, President Obama has not answered this call.

Unless our families can be saved and we can get back on track, black America is doomed to recycle mistakes. But is that the plan? It sometimes seems this destruction is intentional rather than a byproduct of misguided policies. After all, if the family remains in a constant state of dissolution, there will never be a change of opinion with regard to the size of government. A loyal voting bloc.

There’s also a historical precedent. Family devastation was one of the most damning aspects of slave-owning society. A constant pain to the slave was not having “relations.” This broken human link weakened the resolve of slaves to fight for freedom, giving slave masters greater power.

Today our very own government plays the role of master. The advent of public housing and public assistance programs landed our community in peril. As the government replaced fathers with welfare checks and food stamps, out-of-wedlock births in the U.S. went from five percent in 1960 to 38.5 percent as of 2005 among the entire population. For the black community, the statistics are worse — up 70 percent today.

It gets worse as government seeks to expand its grip on society and render the family obsolete and insignificant in every racial, social and economic demographic. Every recent legislative arrow seems aimed at the family: same-sex marriage legislation, publicly funded abortion and health care reform. Even climate change is about having Americans identify with a global family rather than their God-given one.

Unfortunately, despite all this interest in defining itself as America’s overarching head-of-household, government is a lazy parent. Government-as-parent doesn’t care for the health of the soul of its children. It craves only submission, homogenous obedience and dependency.

Family structure is vital to an individual’s prosperity and success. Government will have people believe that those 70 percent of black children born out of wedlock are safe as long as there are enough food stamps, public schools and universal health care to go around. But some of us know better. We know that a Government and a President is no substitute for one’s very own father, mother, sister and brother — united as a family under God’s guiding hand.

History confirms that blood is thicker than water. The first order of business in destroying a people or insuring their rapid decline and submission to the government is to break down the family. Survivors of the Great Depression survived not because of the New Deal as much as their reliance on family. Immigrants survived by coming over in families or by forming communities in which family was the nucleus. The first order of business for a slave or immigrant gained stability or freedom was to find or send for family. The strength and love of family dilutes the power of failure and setback.   

Our government master knows that without family, the individual motivation is weakened. The God-given father is a protection against falling prey to the Master. In our God-given fathers rest our dignity, tradition of heritage and the glorification of our heavenly one. The government-as-master has neither the desire nor the capacity to support this. In fact, it is in master’s best interest to abate these traditions of generational influence on the individual self.

Our First Family is a beautiful example of a strong black family. Don’t the 70 percent of black children deserve the same chance as the Obama’s own children?

All children require this fertile place, their father’s, to dwell.

Lisa Fritsch is a member of the national advisory council for the Project 21 black leadership network and a writer and radio talk show host in Austin, Texas.

“Are You Serious? MDG in Africa!” by Patrick-Bernard

Repost from CRY ME AN ONION

The UN is prone to throw challenges here and there to the world. One of the challenges lingering from its start in 2000 is the Millennium Development Goals (MDG). All UN Members ceremoniously enlisted for this homework.

The aim of the MDG is to meet 8 poverty reduction goals by 2015. It is grand, laudable but utopian and unachievable. I believe that such goals, assuming the world is serious, requires government ethics, accountability and transparency at all levels. I am sorry, that does not exist in Africa and please let us not generalize on exception.

Furthermore, in general, UN decisions are not binding on its member states. That’s convenient and the core reason of the UN longevity. Country’s leaders want to be “accountable” to their citizens and not to the world. The General Assembly is a good venue for world leaders to get acquainted, visit NY and enjoy good food. They talk but rarely solve issues of extraordinary importance.

Goal 1 – Eradicate extreme poverty and Hunger
The poorest countries are in Africa and the consensus, and mine, is due to endemic corruption and bad governance. Africa unscrupulously loot donors and itself. It is estimated that over all corruption cost in Africa alone is US $150 billion per year while donors gave sub-Sahara US $22.5 billion in 2008.

Africa not only robs its constituents but as well the nationals from the largest donor countries such as the USA, Germany, UK, France and Japan. Gullible countries like Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden give more than 0.7% of their Gross National Income target set up by the United Nations from member states.

I am wrong! The aforementioned countries do not lose so much. A big chunk of the stolen money is recycled in the bank accounts of the richest countries. Also, notice that China is scrupulously not among these countries. Simple! They use the well documented colonial methods of direct funding to corrupt African Nations; “That’s for you … Now, give me the resources that I need and you can starve or kill you people for all I care!” This is their bit in eradicating poverty and hunger.

Africa food import is about US $22 billion per year or 1/6 of what is misappropriated via corruption.

Africa starves its own people!

Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education
Some African countries have been quite avant-garde in providing free primary education. That’s nice, considering that 40% of African children never attend primary school. The élite educate their children in expensive schools and foreign universities to acquire the baggage to perpetually lobotomize the small earnings of the uneducated mass.

Who cares about free primary education! When schools are non-existent or dilapidated, teaching materials are in tatters or out of date, school children are subjected to corporal punishment and under age girls are raped and impregnated by their underpaid teachers. In many cases donor fund provided for education are out rightly stolen by the government, its elites and cronies and the ministries involved.

A nice free primary educations system isn’t? Good for nicely covered reports, full of figures and nice graphs to satisfy the world community. Wow, you are doing so good, congratulations!

Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women
Women are second class citizen in the African culture, a way of life and a state of mind from time memoria. A change of a cultural mentality is a long and tedious gradual process and categorically impossible to meet by 2015.

The women’s right to vote in the USA was attained after a 70 years wait, in 1920 in the USA, 1928 in the UK, 1944 in France and 1971 in Switzerland. Who in their right mind can think that’s such process can be effected by year 2015 in Africa?

The culture in general transfers inheritance to sons and not daughters. In Swaziland the king must marry a woman of each tribe, in South Africa President Zuma wants a sixth wife, Senator Ahmed Sani Yerima of Nigeria married a 13 years old girl and I have an educated Kenyan acquaintance who has two sisters as wives.

Yes, you can “empower” women by setting a certain amount of post in a government. The result will be only cosmetic, again to satisfy the nicely covered reports and these women will come from the élite, as usual, to satisfy nepotism.

Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality, Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health and Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other diseases.
In Africa poor do not have access to medical facilities. When available they are emptied of medicine and skilled staff. Donated medical equipment can collect dust for years for lack of competent staff to use them. Patients lay two in a bed or can rest on floors.

The medical sector of many African countries is a land mine of probes and scandals. This is a looter’s paradise “par excellence” since donor country like to pour funds in this bottomless pit. Due to poor governance and lack of public expenditure management, rural Africa gets almost no money to ease child mortality and improve maternal health. Idiotic Governments’ policies “genocides” children dying of preventable diseases.  A woman in labor can walk kilometers to reach a medical facility.

I hope you understand, now, why more than half of the children are delivered at home! How can you pay for medical care or buy condoms on an income of slightly over one dollar per day? Any improvement in this sector is due, in great part, to the direct involvement and the work done on the field by trusted NGO or benevolent organizations. These guys deserve the medals.

President Yahya Jammeh from Gambia claims he cures AID, not more than ten patients per day, and that’s what he does besides running his Government. Can’t the international community stop this quack?

Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability
In Africa, according to statistic, 42% lack access to clean water and 64% have little or no sanitation. Do you know that Africa, as a continent, holds the second largest capacity of fresh water in the world? Also, it suffers from a depletion of agricultural and natural land areas and unmanaged exploitation of natural resources. 

The answer for that is again and again bad governance and corruption.

Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development
Africa is loaded with natural resources. You don’t know! Then ask China!

A Global Partnership for Development is last because of its monstrosity, that’s the coffer African statesmen want to loot. It is a vicious circle and will offer no good result unless effective good ethic and governance is implemented.

I see peculiar similarities between the Dodo bird and the MDG.  The MDG will push lots of Dodo dropping called documents, reports, statistic and specialized papers about causes and effects.  The Dodo is extinct and the other will follow a similar fate.

Please, smell the coffee!  The obvious result will be the widening of the divide between the poor and the rich. Maybe fading sparks of hope will be achieved here and there but nothing substantial. 

Coluche was right when he stated that “God said: I will share in two; the food shall be for the rich and hunger for the poor”.

The Business of Poverty

Jesus stated: “The poor you will always have with you…” and there are those who want to ensure that these words will always ring true.

Last week, from 20-22 September, there was an U.N. summit regarding the progress of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). For those unfamiliar with what this is all about, in 2000 the world leaders came together at the United Nations and adopted 8 “measurable” goals, (measurable by 18 targets complemented by 48 technical indicators) to reduce extreme poverty worldwide by 2015 (see here).

While these world leaders, political as well as business leaders, predominately western, white and male, were assessing and refining their plans for the future of the black and brown peoples, who are the majority of the world’s population, there was little or no coverage, nor interest by the AfroSphere. There was some interesting commentary for example by MsAfropolitan, based in London and Lagos that I read, while the African-American blogging community was wholeheartedly and rabidly committed to arguing about the (alleged) Bishop Eddie Long sex scandal. What the “African”-American community fails to realize is that these plans (I mean “Goals”), which appears to be directed at the so-called “third world”… you know those “other black and brown people” across the Atlantic… directly affects their quality of life in America. I remember reading somewhere that black people worldwide are either victims of capitalism or imperialism, which are two sides of the same coin.

On the surface the MDGs, with it’s objective to reduce extreme poverty, seems to be based on good intentions. However as the saying goes: “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.” Although it has been long concluded, by their own targets and indicators, that the MDGs will never be met, there is enough perceived successes to make the interested parties feel good about themselves, while shifting blame for the failures on the black and brown peoples, their corrupt leaders and their own economic mismanagement. These illusions of success, coupled with blaming the victims of neocolonial exploitation, perpetuates the international status quo and as we can see, for those who care to look, that means it’s business as usual. The rich get richer and the poor… well Jesus did say that they will always be with us… so blame God.

Here is an article and video at Aljazeera discussing the MDGs called: Scoring Goals

Interestingly, the business of poverty is apparently just as profitable in the world of rock and roll. Ironically, at the same time that the MDGs summit was commencing, there was also a news report last week involving the charity ONE, co-founded by U2 frontman Bono, who is an outspoken advocate for the Millennium Development Goals. According to its’ 2008 tax records, ONE took in close to $15 million in public donations, paid over $8 million on executive and employee salaries, while only $184,732 was distributed to three charities! Although ONE doesn’t actually deny the media reports, in the interest of fairness, here is a link to their response. 

Now I know Bono doesn’t handle the day to day operation of the charity, as his role appears to be jet-setting around the world fraternizing with these world leaders, lobbying for debt relief and more aid for Africa… but the question I ask is this: how committed is he to his own cause? Well I’ll probably never get an audience with him to ask, so the next best thing is to look at his own actions.

Bono’s fashion company Edun, which according to it’s mission statement, he and his wife founded “to create sustainable trade and promote local economic opportunities in Africa”, is now moving most of it’s production to China. Why? Profits over Poverty of-course! (read here)

He is forever calling for western governments to spend more money on aid, which in reality is taxpayers’ money, but he and U2 decided to move part of their business interests from Ireland to The Netherlands in 2006, because the government put a cap on the amount of tax-free earnings available to artists (read here). Now I am one who does whatever I can to lessen my tax burden (legally of-course), but the fact is that tax revenue, especially from the rich and corporations (Bono is both), is needed to sustain social services for the less fortunate in society. This is why there is a sense of disgust when we see them take advantage of the loopholes and tax havens to avoid their civic, corporate and humane responsibilities to their fellow human beings. Therefore, if Bono doesn’t care about the less fortunate in the country where he resides, Ireland, then why would he really care about a bunch of Africans?

MsAfropolitan cleverly titles her above post about the MDS: “Friends with Benefits”, to accurately describe Africa’s relationship with the West. Speaking from personal experience, the one who becomes dependent and emotionally committed to this type of arrangement, is at a disadvantage and gains no “benefits” whatsoever. However in the short term they may fool themselves into actually believing that they do, mainly because of the “sweet nothings” that are being whispered into their ears… while they’re being fucked.

“Madness and self seeking in the name of God” by Nkwazi Mhango

Recent stand-off-cum-threat by American quack Terry Jones to enflame 200 copies of Koran gave us many lessons. The biggest lesson we got is some Muslims and politicians proved to be mad and awkward thanks to their lush and myopia. For many people in various “Muslim” countries took to the streets to protest the kindling of the Koran.

Jones succeeded in using and abusing goofy Muslims to reach his nugatory goal-fame. So too, he unearthed another anomaly in that many people are idolatrous and blind. For they value a book (material) more than humans, as opposed to spirituality. Refer to the deaths of two demonstarors in Afghanistan or deaths of many people who memorized the whole 114 chapters (Surat) of Koran (Hafidh al Qur’an) in Darfur, Sudan.

One wonders how people could die for something material, the thing that even Muhammad (SAW) himself did not authorize its application and compilation? To know what this means, refer to the genesis of the Koran that was authorized by Caliph Othman. That’s why there are many versions of the same such as Othmanic codex, Othmanic recension, Samarkand codex, Samarkand manuscript and Tashkent Qur’an. Also one can refer to the fact that the Koran was compiled after the death of prophet Muhammad. He left it as scripta defectiva, incomplete and instructed his disciples (Ṣaḥābah ) to memorize it and not to write it as they contrary did.

Interestingly though, many Somalis took to the streets to condemn this stupidity-cum-insanity. One, however, wonders. How can Somalis that have, for long, been hijacked by warlords (they’ve nary demonstrated to condemn), do this?

This reminds me of Sudanese who in 2007 blindly took to the streets to condemn, whilst others wanted the neck of English teacher Gillian Gibbons, simply because she scribed the name Mohammed on a bear toy that she gave as a gift to her student whose name is Mohammed. This act was wrongly and maliciously taken as blasphemy to prophet of Muslims, Mohammed. Many still wonder. When Sudanese were baying for the blood of an innocent teacher with machetes and clubs for the blood of poor Gibbons, they’re protecting Ahmad Harun who was implicated by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for committing genocide in Darfur. It is sad and shameful for Sudanese and Middle East so-called Muslims to not take to the streets condemning Sudanese government that is butchering poor and innocent Darfuris among whom there are many Hafiz. Where does Khartoum get money to run its day-to-day business and financing janjaweed if not the Middle East? Refer to many countries in the region to not sign international instruments or honour and meet their obligations thereby enabling swift movement for Sudanese butcher Omar Bashir as he once boasted when he visited Qatar. Even other Africans are to blame for this. For after warrant to arrest Bashir was issued he was able to visit Egypt, Libya, Eritrea, Kenya, and Ethiopia without being arrested.

More so, how many Muhammads’ are rotting in prisons for committing rape, robbery, drug trafficking, theft and what not? Why don’t those “Muslims” demonstrate to condemn the parents of these criminals with the name Muhammad, for naming them after the prophet? Why didn’t we see these good Muslims demonstrating when US invaded Iraq, where many copies of Koran were burned or destroyed when mosques and homes were bombed? Isn’t demonstrating against the burning of Koran only hypocrisy and shirk?

There is no need for humans to lose or endanger their lives just fighting for something material. Koran is a concept. Nobody can burn or destroy it. Now look. After the dust of the attempt to burn the Koran settled, one Australian lawyer Alex Stewart smoked two pages one from the Koran and another from the bible.

Suppose, were copies of the Koran torched, would the sun fall down or  the world come come to an end? Nothing would happen given that those that wanted to torch the Koran used it to get cheap popularity. And indeed, they succeeded in hoodwinking Muslims and politicians who goofed and fell in the trap easily and blindly.

Given that the source of all fracas was the intention of building a memorial mosque at ground zero, this thing should be given much thoughts. Why building the mosque there? To commemorate the terrorists that brought down WTC?

Another madness we witnessed is the torching of American flag that was done by demonstrators. Why should one defend his rights by abusing those of others? If the Koran is holy for Muslims, US flag is the symbol of the nation. It is holy to them too.

Nkwazi Mhango is a Tanzanian living in Canada. He writes regularly for “The African Executive” and also has a blog entitled “Free Thinking Unabii”. He is a regular contributor to AfroSpear.

sat’day riddymz

Let me thank Patrick-Bernard for introducing me to this. 

More on l’Orchestre Symphonique Kimbanguiste

The Man Who Murdered Jimi Hendrix?

The Man Who Murdered Jimi Hendrix?.

A memorial on the 40th anniversary of Jimi Hendrix’s death — Sept. 18, 1970: I pick up my axe and fight like a bomber now, but you still blast me down to the ground.

Before becoming Jimi Hendrix’s manager, Michael Jeffery had been a covert op for British Intelligence. According to one of his original clients, Eric Burdon of the Animals, Jeffery often boasted of his 007 escapades during the Cold War — staging assassinations in Greece, torturing KGB agents, blowing up Russian/Egyptian bases in the Suez.

The Animals’ singer, Jimi’s future close friend, took these stories as drunken tall tales  until, early one morning, the former MI6 agent invited him out to the London harbor where the U.S. Seventh Fleet happened to be trolling for some lost nukes. His manager emerged from the water in scuba gear, holding a black box. Pointing out to the armada, the ex-spy pulled a switch: suddenly the harbor was rocked with underwater explosions.

“Like most people of felonious intent,” Burdon wrote in his memoir, “he was charming, attractive, and sometimes a riot to be around.”

Jeffery had made the transition from demolition and espionage to rock and roll by studying under “The Al Capone of Pop” himself, Don Arden. Also known as “The English Godfather,”Arden, Sharon Osbourne’s father, went on to manage the Small Faces, Electric Light Orchestra, and Black Sabbath. He was known for his old-fashioned business methods – bribery, blackmail, assault, kidnapping. Jeffery proved his own mettle against his mentor when he stole the Animals away from him without losing life or limb.

The retired spy parlayed his MI6 and Arden experience to become a rock and roll Dr. No. “His own mob sprang up around him like morning mushrooms,” Burdon wrote. “… His main enforcer was The Turk, a nasty bastard whose tools of choice were an ax and two highly trained German shepherds.” The singer went on to describe how Jeffery burnt down his Club Marimba for the insurance money, then how he absconded with the Animals’ money.

In the fall of 1966, the Animals’ bassist, Chas Chandler, discovered Jimi Hendrix in New York, flew him to London and introduced him to Jeffery. The two co-managed the guitarist and helped him assemble the Experience. Several years later, Chas and Jimi became estranged due to creative differences. “The window of opportunity was there for Jeffery to scoop it all up,” he said. “I knew that something dodgy was gonna happen. But I never dreamt it would lead to his [Jimi’s] death…”

The Marginalization of Christianity

Lately I have been reading a number of posts about religion and Christianity in particular. This wasn’t planned as it just so happened that the blogs I frequently read had articles about religion. The more interesting ones were: “True values are never at risk” by MsAfropolitan; “I Chose Not To Have A Religion” at Cry Me An Onion; and “I Love The Culture Of The Black Church” by our own Sis. Anna. I highly recommend that you take the time to read them… it’s great stuff!

Last week Pope Benedict XVI, addressed the British parliament and lamented the marginalization of Christianity in western democratic societies. Now let me preface by stating that I am not Catholic and don’t consider the Pope to be “The Vicar of Christ” here on earth. With that being said, I do admire his intellect. I find his discourses interesting in that he provides an intellectual basis for matters of the soul and by extension Catholic Church doctrine. So when I heard that he discussed the marginalization of Christianity in his speech, I was interested in what he actually had to say (see here).

In discussing the central question of “where is the ethical foundation for political choices to be found?”, Pope Benedict states that: “the role of religion in political debate is not so much to supply these norms, as if they could not be known by non-believers – still less to propose concrete political solutions, which would lie altogether outside the competence of religion – but rather to help purify and shed light upon the application of reason to the discovery of objective moral principles.” The main theme of his speech was that ideally, reason and faith are equal partners within the political sphere, each performing its role to compliment each other, with the goal of creating a better society. However, he voices a concern over what he perceives in reality, as the increasing marginalization of religion, especially Christianity, in public life, particularly in the political arena. 

I addressed in this previous post: “Walking the narrow path”, some factors why religion is losing it’s influence in western societies. Added to this, specific to the Catholic Church, is the never-ending revelations about it’s sexual abuse of children, plus now we have accusations that the Vatican Bank is involved in money laundering (see here). Although I agree with the ideals of the Pope’s arguments, what he misses is the reality that Christianity is fundamentally for the marginalized and was never meant to occupy the center of the political arena.

Christ proclaimed his message was for those at the margins of society: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted; to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind; to set free those who are oppressed…” Luke 4:18. When was asked about his political philosophy, Jesus stated: “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s” Matthew 22:21. When tried by Pilate for treason, he claimed: “My kingdom is not of this world…” John 18:36. Jesus was a political revolutionary in his day because he was apolitical.

Christianity was first moved to the center of political sphere when the Roman Emperor Constantine I embraced it as the official religion of the empire during his reign (312-337 a.d.). The predominance of Catholic doctrine within the political arena of Europe was entrenched during the 11th and 12th centuries. During these periods and throughout history up to the present day, there has always been a tension between official church doctrine, regardless of denomination, which has used Christianity as a political tool for control and exploitation of the masses, and those who wanted to fulfill Christ’s final commission to his followers to “go and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe everything that I have commanded you…” Matthew 28: 19-20. What is this “command”? Simply: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbour as yourself.” Matthew 22:37-39.

Regardless of what religion you practice and where you practice it, living your life by these 2 commandments will propel you to the margins of today’s society. “You mean I have to love God first… and not myself, nor my intellect… and then second love other people… and again not myself, nor my possessions.” This way of thinking does not conform with today’s secular or religous ideology, particularly when it comes to the exercise of political power. 

In contrast to Pope Benedict XVI, I see the marginalization of Christianity in the political process not as a cause for concern, but as a cause for celebration.

“Beck, MLK Both Spoke About Freedom” by Jimmie L. Hollis

 

Commentary submission by Project 21

On August 28, I arrived in Washington, D.C. with a contingent of the Greenwich Tea Party Patriots of South Jersey to attend Glenn Beck’s “Restore Honor” rally at the Lincoln Memorial. We consisted of three packed busloads.

The weather was perfect that day, and I estimate there were between 200,000 and 300,000 people at the rally. Richard Hoch, a radio and television personality from my hometown Millville, New Jersey who came along with us, said he thought that number was actually higher.

Whatever the number, there were Americans of all races and ages there.  Real diversity.

As the rally began, the joyous mood of the crowd escalated. Glenn Beck’s guest speakers were chosen not for politics, but because of their patriotism and desire to make a difference. Critics said Beck was being politically correct because of the diversity of his guests, but “PC” had nothing to do with it. His choices for speakers were people who believed in America, and their messages were perfect for the theme of the rally.

Everyone gave inspiring speeches on the importance of restoring honor to our nation. Yet there were four notable moments when thunderous applause rippled through the crowd like a tidal wave:

•    Beck’s initial appearance on the stage.

•    When Sarah Palin was introduced.

•    When Dr. Alveda King, the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was
      introduced.

•    When a clip of Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech was played.

I was a young man in my 20s when Dr. King was at the height of his struggle. I know many of his speeches well, including his most-famous “I Have a Dream” speech given 47 years ago to the day and in the same place as the Beck event. I was honored enough to be able to hear that speech in person while on leave from the U.S. Air Force.

I believe that, if he were alive today, Dr. King would have been pleased at the Americans of all races who came to the recent Beck rally. Despite the comments of Beck’s detractors, I think Dr. King would have joined hands with Beck —along with his niece, Alveda — to proclaim, “Let freedom ring!”

I also think Dr. King would have told those who have, since his death, distorted and twisted his message that they should stop the divisive rhetoric and bitterness and join with the patriots of this great nation to help restore its honor.

Some of Beck’s critics say that Dr. King would not have liked a constitutionally-limited government. They claim Dr. King wanted big government to protect the rights of blacks and the poor. Instead, I believe he wanted the government to ensure the constitutional rights of all people without discrimination or prejudice. But I don’t think he wanted that same government to re-enslave minorities and the poor (as well as the rest of America) through oppressive taxation and the suppression of self-dignity with over-reaching regulations and nanny-state policies.

At no time, but the way, did I personally witness or hear of any contention, strife, confrontation or negative incidents before, during or after the rally. Quite to the contrary, it was a very civil affair.

As we left the rally, my contingent of New Jersey tea partieres left feeling uplifted and filled with hope. We can now answer Founding Father Benjamin Franklin, who once warned, “We have given you a Republic, if you can keep it,” by saying with deep determination, “Ben, we are resolved to keep it.”

Jimmie L. Hollis is a member of the National Advisory Council of the Project 21 black leadership network.