...

Yeah, no title for this one. There's been some unequal distribution of entries on my blog, as my "Preaching To The Choir Boy" section-which is basically parables about my life- hasn't seen a new entry in quite some time. And I don't think there is a better time than right now to write in this section. The past few days, and maybe even month, has been very trying and taxing for me. I've been emotionally precarious so much lately that I needed something to calm my feelings. So I decided to relax, listen to some cathartic music and sleep my problems away. Although I'll have to come back to reality, it temporarily makes me feel better.

One of my biggest problems, which I can now say has turned into a full blown personal quagmire, is my devotion to "making a difference". What's funny about it, is that it shouldn't really be a problem, but for me it is and has been. And I think it's becoming worse. I'm working for this program now where I'm helping rising high school seniors develop their college applications. They come to a host site (the site is a college campus where the program uses the facilities as a venue) and spend four days working on the nuances of the college application process. Well, being the person that I am, I came into my last workshop with an expectation to magically change the kids over four days because I knew what backgrounds they were coming from. By the end of the workshop, I was left hopeless and frustrated. I was so frustrated and disappointed with what I had endured that it put me in tears. What kills me the most, is that I care that much. I feel like the more I learn and see the potential for those around me to have their consciousness raised, the more my passion thickens and I try harder to drastically change everything about them in an effort to make them better people. My mother had to console me. She told me there's no way I can save them all and I should concentrate on the ones who show the most potential, and guide them for the time that I have them and make an impact on their lives.

I just have this hankering for "make a difference" so bad that it impedes my ability to actually do it. I think I've completely lost patience at this point, although I'm trying to improve that. For example, during the workshop while we were having a session, I had asked all the young men in the room to stand. I instructed them all to pull their pants up to waist level. Subsequently, I spoke at length about why that was important, going on about how no matter where you're at, you're always on display and as young aspiring college students and also just people, you should develop a sense of respect for yourself and others, so on and so forth. The next day, at least half of them were wearing their pants off their a**es again. I lost my patience, and for the rest of that day I had a miserable disposition, and that wasn't good for the students. I think I've fallen in love with this "affecting change" thing. But the relationship just isn't working out. It's not that I want to give up on helping people, it's just that I have to use my discretion a little more. My mother told me that I'm not going to get to people as I am right now. But when I get to where I'm going (meaning as a prominent filmmaker), I'll be able to affect people a little more. All hope isn't lost though. I think I may have gotten to a few of them. And that matters. I think I'm just too concerned with trying to get through to everybody. It's a wonderful passion when you want to always be of service to your fellow (wo)man, but it cannot be so strong that you're stressed and unable to get through your days without feeling hopeless. And that's how I felt. I think this part of my personhood is what I need to try and work on the most, more specifically, my patience. I can't save the world, who can? I just have to learn that change happens by watering one plant at a time, not showering the lot with a hurricane.

There were some things that I found really disturbing though. One day, I had to help a young woman develop her personal statement for her college application. Honestly, it was one of the most painful experiences I ever had. I spent an hour and a half helping her with simple grammatical errors that she should have learned in the fourth grade. I'm not trying to condemn her, but that reality really just bothered me. And after reading a few other papers, it seemed as though almost all of them were writing on a level that they should have surpassed years ago. Her and other papers were extremely depressing. They constantly write how they talk; writing colloquially. For someone else, that experience might have rolled off their back, but for me its unsettling. These are the kind of things that I want to quell, but at times it seems so helpless that it hurts. That's one of those things that just put me in such a depressing mood that I couldn't smile and when I did, it was a sullen act. Sigh... I know there are programs that aim to help these kids who are coming from the worst socio-economic backgrounds, just like I did. But with today's generation, and how poorly they are being guided by the worst facets of society (two being mainstream hip hop culture and poor parental tutelage), it seems as though they're hopeless. But we can't accept that right? We can't... And that's exactly what bothers me so much. Seeing what the reality is and knowing what it could/should be. I guess I'll have to just let it go. I don't have a choice really. Patience.......patience..........

Another experience that emotionally affected me was a surprise call. I consider myself an only child because I was raised only by mother for most of my life and I didn't have any siblings. But the truth is, is that I have a younger brother. Although he's my half brother because he was born of a woman who is not my mother, he's still my brother. And he called me today... When I heard him tell me over the phone it was him, I was completely shocked. It was one of the rare moments in my life where I didn't know what to say. What could I say? I asked him how old he was now, and he told me he was thirteen. I'll be nineteen in a few weeks, and that means I haven't spoken to him in over six years. My family ties were severed because of past conflicts, so I never had a relationship with my younger brother. But I spoke to him for the first time in over six years. The call was brief. He was actually calling to tell me that he was moving to Atlanta, Georgia on Wednesday. Another blow... My one and only brother finally calls me and what he has called me about only means that a significant relationship that I could have with him is now a dwindling possibility. That totally sucks. I was just so shocked that I told him I was going out soon and that he could give me a call anytime. I absolutely have no idea how this is going to progress. He's entering high school now. Wow.... All I know is, he has my number, and if he calls, I'll be there for him.

My brother's phone call instantly made me think of my father, who I actually heard speaking through the phone. And anytime I think about my father, I get angry. It's amazing to me, really. After growing into a respectable, decent young man and human being, surviving one of the worst high schools in New York City while graduating the top of my class and being admitted into one of the best higher education institutions in the country, developing a core set of mores that I carry with me everyday, achieving a bevy of milestones in my early years and devising passionate aspirations to be something rare, all without the help of my father; I still have strong feelings about him. I appreciate my stepfather for being the auxiliary paternal figure in my life because he has helped with my personal development a lot. But no matter what I do in life, the thought of my father just disturbs me. I guess I'll never get over that feeling of abandonment and accepting that the person who helped create me consciously decided to not want or take care of me. That's always going to hurt, I guess. Honestly, if my father had gotten on the phone, I would've hung up. Period. I really don't want to speak to him. I have so much to say to him that I could have a stroke getting through my first sentence. But I know that the time will come when we'll have to meet and settle things. He and I are getting older, and it's only a matter of time before his conscious shadows him so much that he'll come running after me and then I'll have decide if I want him back in my life. I really don't know the answer to that question right now. Just the thought of it depresses me, which adds to the emotional roller coaster, or should I say water tide, that I've been on.

Other parts of my life seem empty as well, especially with women. I think I've created these standards that are so rare to find in people, or at least a significant combination of them, that I haven't really ran into someone I genuinely like. And the females that I do like, I haven't been able to get to. I think the characteristics that I'd like in a female are comparable to that of a 56 year old woman with a Ph.D.. who often frequents cultural venues. Yet again, that's depressing. But that's not it really. I'm not really big on having a lot of friends, because I'm really concerned with who I keep around me.

"Who you keep around, let's you know who you are" From the screenplay of The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift

So I often find comfort in a select group of people. But the best possible situation for me is to consistently enjoy the company of another person. I haven't found that person. I've had a few, but the 'relationships' went down the toilet. And I've lost that balance. When I get into these lulls of dejection, I don't have anyone to trust to help me get out of them because I usually just convene with one person who I know is close to me. But I don't have that right now, which is probably why all of these things are seemingly consuming me right now. I'm not even finding the urge to fraternize. Hopeless... But here again comes this issue of patience. I have time. I know I do. Someone will come along. Hopefully. Again, I really don't have a choice but to wait.

There are more things that I'm going through, but I've seemed to exhaust this blog entry. Sigh... I'll be fine though. I'll be seeing the next batch of students in the coming days so I'll have to put on my happy face so I can try to be of service. Patience....I know.

Parting Thoughts:
Charlie Rose's show has become somewhat of a muse and therapeutic for me. I often watch the episodes where he sits down with people I admire and aspire to emulate. It makes me feel good watching and hearing others attest to the dream that I want to come true. Here I am, constantly immersed in my own reveries about what I want to be, and there are many others who are the manifestation of what I envisage for myself. For all who say certain aspirations begin and end with dreams, I'd implore them to study those who have already made those dreams come to fruition. And what I hear them saying, is that when they dreamed when they were younger, the only thing that mattered was what they felt in their heart and what they thought. I also watched Will Smith say that you have to be somewhat delusional to actually go for the seemingly impossible.

It will happen Kuamel, it will.

Oh yeah,
I can finally say that my music library is eclectic. I think I have at least 25 songs in about 11 different genres of music. While alternative rap and jazz dominates my library, I have world/folk music, electronic/electronica, Rap (old school and new), Soul, Rhythm & Blues, Classical, mainstream/pop, comedic, Neo-Soul, rock (alternative and soft) and reggae. My song count has crossed the 1925 mark. That's big for me because my music ear is really hard to please. Now if I could just get an iPod....

Like the The O'Jays said, "I love music".

Gauging Religion

Alright, I've learned that it isn't exactly congenial to ask people to discuss their religion or religious beliefs because religion is very personal. Religion seems to be like another one of those entities (such as class and race) in America that most people do not like to talk about at length. I think one of the reasons for that is, anyone who is a staunch believer in their religion would not want to have their faith challenged, especially if they're sincerely invested it, which is understandable. I've developed my own ideas about religion. I'm not going to argue who is the real god or discuss any other deities because from my understanding, God is universal. And I believe in that. As of now, I maintain a heretical position towards religion because I don't want to conform to any set of beliefs whose power rests on faith. I'd rather be spiritual and develop my beliefs and ideas based on what I experience here on Earth. Before I begin to indulge, I would like to say that the ideas that I have now are considerably nascent and therefore could be subject to change as I grow (in age and in wisdom) and learn more. Oh, and my commentary here is mostly going to involve Christianity since it has been the faith that I have been most exposed to in my young life.

To commence my thoughts, I'll begin with a brief anecdote. I remember coming home for my first break during freshman year and I told my mother that I wasn't a Christian anymore. I even vowed to take the small cross off of my neck that I had worn for nearly three years, which I eventually did. As expected, my expressions did nothing but raise the ire of my mother and she vehemently exclaimed to me that I was a Christian, no matter what I said. I don't proscribe to any particular religion because I think there are too many complicated questions and issues that surround religion which makes it hard for me to actually put sincere and genuine faith into it.

For one, no matter what religion it is, the beliefs of that religion is going to conflict with your politics, and I think that's veritable for everyone. It could be issues of gender, race, sexuality, political or even philosophical ideology, there are bound to be conflictions. I don't like the fact that, especially in this country, religion is covertly implemented in politics. The essence of the abortion and death penalty debate is often carried by religion. One of the more interesting things about those two topics for those conservative Christians, it seems very hypocritical to me to believe that abortion is murder and capital punishment is not. But above that (on the topic of the death penalty), the Christian fundamentalist arbiters of our government are the ones who are the most in favor of capital punishment while being adverse to abortion. That's amazing. In addition, I think there are a lot of things that the American government does, that does not coincide with the dominant faith in this country, which is Christianity. For example, and I truly and honestly believe this, I don't think capitalism is favored by God. I don't think that an ideological ploy that is aimed to distinguish human beings socio-economically from one another based on the value of a natural resource converted into thin sheets of colored green paper is something God smiles upon. Think about it. The nature of capitalism, is to manipulate or exploit another person so that you may profit. Subsequent to that profit, you earn money, and if you get enough of it, you'll be able to distinguish yourself socio-economically from other human beings based on thin sheets of paper. The idea that some of our lives are more 'valuable' than others because of money does not seem God-like to me. People starve on this planet because of money. People receive poor education, are vulnerable and prone to violence in their neighborhoods, lack medical care and are tossed to the bottom of the class system all because of money, thin... sheets.... of paper. And God embraces that? Come on.

Another thing that I really don't like about religious patrons are those who just wear their religion for protection and not true belief. Going to college in what may be the heart of the Bible Dome, I've seen many people indulge in the most sinful acts, but dress up for Sundays and rejoice in the name of the lord. In the Bible, it says that the body is the temple. Many people in and outside of college degrade their own bodies and others by making very poor choices. Alcoholism, tattoos, profanity, degradation, and drug use are all detested in the Bible. But then comes that saying, "We all live in sin". And I think a lot of people use that phrase as protection. As if its alright to make the decisions that we make, whether it be the way one eats, treats others and themselves, because they can always repent. That's a self-destructive attitude. Instead of striving to be the best person one could/can be, people make poor choices because they know there is a time and place that they can repent for it knowing fully that there will be no consequence barring some supernatural event that could affect them. That's clearly a case of people only using religion as protection. And that also makes me question the faith. I think its extremely convenient, that a particular religion states that all you have to do is repent and you will be forgiven for your sins when we live in a world that is rife with opportunities to sin.

One of the more primal reasons I don't have a religion is the fact that so many exist. I've always thought to myself, what percentage of this world practices Islam, or Judaism, or Catholicism? With all of the different religions, denominations, and historical text renditions, how can you be sure that the particular religion you're committing to is the right one? This idea bothers me. Let's say that one of the religions on this planet that exist is the actual religion of God, say Christianity. Well, according to Christianity and the Bible, if you are not "saved" (born again) in the name of Jesus Christ then you will be dammed to hell. Well, what about the people who are growing up in places where Christianity hardly exists? What about those people who live their entire lives there and are never exposed to that religion? When it is time to be "judged" by God, is it fair for someone who was never exposed to religion of God to be sent to Hell because of their inherit geographical location? This is one of the many reasons why I can't commit to a faith. After studying the history of humanity and all that is has done to its race for selfish and ill-mannered reasons, it is hard for me not to believe that religion is just another contrived societal institution by man to obtain power over people. And there's even evidence of that. There is literature that attests to human beings utilizing religion to pervade certain ideas into their communities that led to unparalleled control over the society. Who's to say that that same power struggle isn't continuing today via religion? Human beings are just too fickle for me to whole-heartedly commit to something, that if I commit to holistically, will affect every area of my entire life including behavior, choices, aspirations, political ideas, and much more.

I also think, that it is truly irresponsible for someone to grow up in a faith and not to study it to see if it is really for them. Growing up in Brooklyn and going to church, I now wonder how many people actively cited their religion, gauged it, and decided that it was right for them opposed to just inheriting their faith just because their parents believed in it. If someone only believes in something because they were raised in it, I think that's extremely unfortunate. I think by doing that, one is taking away their own autonomy. There are resources in this world, with the most vital one being your own brain. Think about your faith, morals, ethics and politics before you decide to commit the rest of your life to a faith that you only believe in because your parents made you go to church with them (however frequent that was) for 18 years.

As a Black person, I think its very important for Black people to know the circuity between their history and Christianity. It is a fact, that Christianity was not our religion and our ancestors were more spiritual than anything else. Now, I'm not mentioning that to deter anyone from their religion, it's just important to know and understand the history. Christianity was adopted by African slaves in the south from their white counterparts. Slavemasters told slaves that because their lives were so miserable (as slaves) on Earth, they should become God-fearing Christians so that when they died, they could rejoice in Heaven. This is coming from the same men who pillaged the Africans' native land and made concerted scientific, psychological and philosophical efforts to prove that those in the African Diaspora were innately inferior to the white man. That's history.

Another thing with religion is that, especially in America, it is very tied in with money. And this goes back to my capitalism idea. I don't understand why there are religious television evangelist who seek to manipulate people on late night paid programming by selling them items that supposedly guarantee miraculous experiences that would significantly change their lives. I seriously question, what is the difference between them and religions figures who hold government offices? Bottom line is, just like in ancient times, religion is used to manipulate the masses, whether you believe it or not. Christmas is one of the prime examples with its origin being traced by the horrid customs of the pagan holiday of Saturnalia. Whether you think the most important thing about Christmas is the birth of Christ, the fact is, the birth of Christ is a Christian belief. And here in the United States, Christmas in a national holiday where children and parents alike get time away from school and work to participate in the customs that have been taught to them through folklore. But then our body of law says we separate Church from state. If that's not a way of manipulating the masses through religion, I don't know what is.

And lastly, the antipathy that comes out of religion pains me. There are wars occuring on this planet because of religious beliefs. Look, I don't know the exact statistics, but I don't think that there is one faith on this planet that holds more than 15% of the total population of this Earth. If you ask me, I don't think God put billions of people on this planet and less than 15% of them are destined to be with him in his "Kingdom". I always think that if there was universal solidarity in this world about the true and right meaning of the quality of life on this planet, then we would be all acting truly as God's children. But that isn't the reality, unfortunately. The reality is, is that there are an innumerable amount of faiths, religions, denominations, and sects who are competing to be God's children based on what their, dare I say man-made religion, says. It is what it is.

I want to end this blog with a piece that I like very much performed by Talib Kweli. I thought it was much more important to put the lyrics on this blog because of what he's saying. But I'll also provide the video as well.

Hell by Talib Kweli
Every Sunday waking up, catching gossip at its worst
Couldn't see the difference in the Baptist and the Catholic Church
Caught up in the rapture of the first chapter and second verse
If we all God's children then what's the word of the reverend worth?
Taught early that faith is blind like justice when you facin' time
If we all made in God's image then that mean his face is mine
Wait........ or is that blasphemy? it's logical, it has to be
If I don't look like my father then the way I live is bastardly
Naturally that's confusion to a youngin' tryna follow Christ
Taught that if you don't know Jesus then you lead a hollow life
Never question the fact that Jesus was a Jew and not a Christian
Know that Christianity was made law by politicians
And Who was King James?.........
And why did he think it was so vital to remove chapters and make his own
version of the Bible
They say Hell is underground
Heaven is in the sky
They say that's where you go when you die but how they know?

I've been to many churches
I've quoted many verses
I've dealt with my base self, I controlled my many urges
I used to study my lessons
That was a blessing not a curse
I found out that Heaven and Hell exist right here on Earth, word.
Studied with Rastafarians
Found out from the dreads that Hell is called Babylon
And that's where the crazy boarheads dwell
They got us thinking that Muslims like to make bombs

But real Muslims believe in paradise and resist the Shaitan
So, it all sound the same to me
But when they say one's right and the other is wrong it just sound
like game to me
It's like God skipped past the church and came to me
No that ain't vain to me
It's just a particular way that I came to see
The difference between those that claim to be
Religious and those that say they spiritual
And recognize that life is full of miracles
You could see the flow is divine
I glow when I rhyme 'cause it coincide with a grow in the time that those who
looking for God knowin' to go inside

Looking for absolution

Living in mass confusion

The gas seducing and psychopath creatin' a last solution

Based on his interpretation of what the words are saying

Lookin' for God but ended up doing the work of Satin
Religion create division
Make the Muslim hate the Christian
Make the Christian hate the Jew
Make up rules of faith
That you condition to and gotta follow
God forbid you go to Hell
But if you ever been through any ghetto then you know it well



Parting Thoughts:
I'll end this blog with some of my favorite "religious" quotes.

"Why I gotta have religion if I believe in God"- Common

"...And why is Jesus never played by black actors?"- Nas

"[My] belief has nothing to do with the God-fearing person who wants to practice his or her religion. That’s why I don’t believe in me picking up a religious belief and just wearing it for protection and not being into it. You have a lot of people that hide behind the shield of religion because it protects, especially in this country, without true belief."- Chuck D

"The Lord is my shepherd I shall not want
Just because the lord is my shepherd don't mean I gotta be no sheep
You feel me?
More blood is spilled over religion than anything in world history"- Talib Kweli

Question: Jesus said I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man cometh unto the Father but through me. Do you believe this and do you think Islam is a way to Salvation?

Answer: Jesus also said, other sheep have I, who are not of this sole. -Reverend Jeremiah Wright

Peace, always.

Oh yeah,
If you believe in something, make sure you're true to it because you sincerely believe in it, and not because its convenient for you. Remember, God knows our hearts.

The Left continues to split and the Right relaxes

Just when you may have thought that there would be jubilation by many subsequent to Barack Obama's historic and unprecedented win of the Democratic Party nomination, the liberal constituency of the nation is yet again facing adversity. Senator Clinton has finally suspended her campaign although she has not fully conceded. The public conversation has now shifted towards who will Barack Obama choose as his Vice President and the pressure on him to exercise his discretion has been mounting every minute since he made his speech in Minnesota. Of course, the leading candidate in discussion is Senator Clinton and the banter throughout the debates have been fairly divided. The Obama lovers, as they have been dubbed by the media, have vehemently expressed discontent for Senator Clinton with the reasoning most likely being the level of antagonism displayed in her campaign throughout the Democratic race. And then on the other side, the Hillary mourners-another moniker coined by the media- have been feverishly expressing their want for Hillary Clinton to be on the ticket for the general election in November. So, while the country has accomplished one of the greatest feats in American history by nominating the first African American to run for the Presidency, more turmoil surfaces which leaves the Obama camp with more to worry about.

There are arguments both ways for why Senator Clinton should or should not be on the ticket. Those who want this proposal to come to fruition, which are mostly the Hillary mourners, know that with Hillary, comes the record number 18 million votes and the demographics that Senator Obama struggled to accrue votes from during his campaign. Those demographics include middle-aged women, Hispanics, blue collar workers, and older white men. Also, Senator Obama has been criticized for a lack of political experience and Senator Clinton would surely help that area with her incredibly dense resume in politics. Lastly, putting Senator Clinton on the ticket would undoubtedly unite the party, and the 36 million + voters that the two candidates secured between them in the general election.

But, the nay-sayers to an Obama-Clinton ticket have provided strong arguments as to why Senator Clinton should not get the vouch for the Vice Presidency. One of the biggest concerns is that if Barack Obama endorses Hillary as VP, he would take a significant PR (public relations) hit. He has fought a long and tedious battle with the most lauded political machine in the Clintons, who have publicly bashed him and his ideas throughout their campaign. One can only wonder if Barack Obama is placable at this point after experiencing all of the 'Bama bashing the Clintons engaged in just to earn political points. But the more intriguing idea is, if Barack Obama does appoint Senator Clinton as his Vice President, would he seem feeble? That is where is PR would take a blow. The Obama supporters at this point do not want Hillary anywhere near him right now and the clairvoyance here says that if Hillary does get the vouch for VP, Obama would lose his most staunch supporters. Also, with Hillary being the VP, there could be a huge power struggle in the white house. You would have a former President who has had his own share of publicly displayed ego-trips historically and in this campaign, being the husband to the Vice President. A lot of people were leery that Bill Clinton was controlling Hillary's campaign and one can only think that if he gets in the White House once again, he's going to want some kind of clout. Bill Clinton also has his own problems with scandals being leaked about his international affairs and he would be obliged to submit statements about those incidents if he is in the White House. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton could be the worst threesome the White House has ever housed and we could possibly see more debates in Washington amongst the three after all of the elections are over! Senator Clinton certainly does come with baggage.

Aside from Barack Obama's highly anticipated decision about the Vice Presidency, John McCain has challenged the Democratic nominee to a series of townhall debates. I think this is great for Barack. Since they differ significantly on the issues, I think these potential debates are rife with opportunities for Barack to show why he is the better candidate policy wise. And that would give him a head start going into November. Most of the pundits are saying that if Barack accepts McCain's challenge, then he should limit them and not be involved in so much activity throughout the summer. They're probably right.

There has also been an increase in the conversation about Barack Obama being an elitist. You have to think that is going to be a focus of the Republican Party. They are looking to connect him to Reverend Wright yet again and all of the radical organizations that he separated himself from during his campaign for the Democratic nomination. People are still questioning whether or not Senator Obama is Pro-America. As asinine as I think that question is (because, how can a person who is running for the highest office in America, not be pro-America?), the legitimacy comes with Barack's ties to radical organizations. We'll see how that plays out. And also, another big hit Senator Obama is taking is that he has yet to define who he is throughout his campaign. I really don't agree with that one either but the pundits are saying that the general public does not really know who Barack Obama is and where he stands. Sure...

To get back to the title of the entry, it seems like yet again that the liberals are fighting against one another instead of coalescing so we can move forward. The most interesting thing is, with the exception of Health Care, Senator Obama and Senator Clinton held the same position on every issue. You would think that no matter what candidate won the Democratic election, that the losers' voting base would vote for the other because of the policy. Unfortunately, that isn't the case. Instead, people are voting on the candidates and not the issues. We are getting too immersed in the popularity contest instead of what we should all be focusing on as part of the Left Wing. We should be concentrating on getting the White House back under the control of the Democratic Party. The Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton partisanship is not helping anyone. Senator Clinton has lost. That's over with. The liberals who supported Senator Clinton should be voting for Barack because of the issues. One of the most interesting things I read today was that Hillary supporters are threatening to vote for McCain if Senator Clinton is not placed on the ticket. So, instead of accepting defeat, setting aside their differences and embracing the Democratic Party they'd rather vote for pro-life, which Senator McCain is. It's funny how democracy, which is a liberal ideology, seems to be the worst thing for liberals right now.

This is my bottom line. I could care less about the personal antipathy that Senator Obama and Senator Clinton have for one another right now. We have a country that needs saving from the Mortgage and Health Crisis, War in Iraq, Energy failure, Economic recessions and Education al plummets. Both of these Senators agree, for the most part, on all of these issues. They're personal matters should not matter at this point because they both represent something bigger than themselves. That's why I'm advocating for an Obama-Clinton ticket, because I'm voting for the policy, not the people. And together, they are the quintessential form of the hope and rescue that both of them have been harping about for the length of their campaign. From what I've read and watched, it does not seem to me that Senator Obama would put her on his ticket. I think that's unfortunate because there are 18 million people who were just as emotionally invested in Hillary's campaign just like I, and many other Obama supporters were emotionally invested in Obama's campaign. And there's no doubt, however wrong it is, they'll feel hopeless without seeing her on Obama's campaign. I think that he needs to embrace her somehow on his campaign. Even if isn't for the Vice Presidency, she needs to become an integral part of his run to the White House so he can secure those 18 million votes and get to the oval office. I think it would be very sad, that two of the finest candidates that politics has ever seen, wouldn't be able to save this country from the nadir of its history because of child-like antics, quarrels, and deep rooted dislike of one another. No one's will should be put over the country's right now. Everyone should do what's best for the Democratic party to get into the White House. It does not matter whether or not it will be a ceaser sitting atop a black face, or breasts and a vagina is in the White House. It's about the policies in Washington that will affect this country and the all steps necessary to progress the Democratic agenda should be placed above all else right now.

Parting Thoughts:
I hope I get the opportunity to be on Charlie Rose one day discussing my first feature film.
Game 1 of the NBA Finals starts tomorrow and my team isn't in it, again. =(
But, there's a strong chance that UNC will be rated the number 1 team in the polls.
National Championship sophomore year?
......I think it's overdue anyway because of the way we lost in my freshman year.
I'm starting the Invisible Man tomorrow.

Over and Out

Oh yeah,
For you left wingers out there, you should watch Fox News even though its extremely conservative. It's always good to know what the opposition is thinking and saying.

Why Obama and the Obamicans need Hillary more than ever

Before I get into the dense part of this entry, I first want to say congratulations to Barack Obama and his constituency for prevailing at the final democratic primary and winning the electorate for the democratic party nomination. I, like many others in this country, am a staunch Barack Obama supporter and I have sported the 'yes we can' phrase for some time now in support of the Obama campaign. I wasn't really involved in politics throughout high school and it wasn't until November that I took a conscious and vested interest in the presidential campaign and the preceding party elections. I was/am elated about the victory for Barack Obama as many others are and I think this triumph results in a giant milestone for not only African Americans, but also for the consciousness of this country. For the first time in American history, an African American will hold a political party nomination and that is absolutely beautiful. I also want to congratulate Hillary for running an excellent campaign, as she was and will continue to be a very worthy candidate for the democratic party.

I do not believe Hillary lost this election because of the issues, where mostly her and Senator Barack Obama held somewhat of the same positions, but rather she lost to the extreme charisma, affableness, and rare combination of inspiring oratory and articulation that comprised of Barack Obama's personhood. Senator Clinton has devoted her life to public service and she has done wonderful things for every community that she has fought for, and it is because of those things, she will always be worthy of a democratic nomination. However, as the country stands in the aftermath of 8 years of the worst presidential term in our nation's history, Barack Obama could not have been anymore punctual in showing up for running for the President of the United States. For a significant amount of people in this country, Barack Obama is viewed as the antithesis of George W. Bush Jr, and it is/was completely timely for the senator from Illinois to rise like a phoenix in the midst, or the end I should say, of the turmoil that has severely damaged this country during the past 8 years.

However, I implore the Barack Obama supporters to not become over-enthused because of the recent victory, now that 'Day 2' of this election has commenced. Barack Obama's adversary will be the senator from Arizona, John McCain, and his party has had the convenience of preparing every possible paradigm for the fall while the democratic constituency incurred a seismic split because of the battle between the two great candidates, Barack and Hillary. After watching and reading what the opposition (Republican party) has been saying about Senator Obama, it seems clear to me that now is the time for both Barack and Hillary to unite the party and for both to be on the same ticket for the general election in November. And here's why....

There will be a number of strategies that the republican party will use to target Obama and I believe a lot of them will be dead on. The biggest question about Barack Obama is, can he really deliver what he is saying in his speeches or is he just a hot air balloon filled with inspiring, but empty promises that is on the verge of becoming combustible by the fiery poke of the republicans who aim to separate his rhetoric from reality? Barack Obama has undoubtedly painted himself as a visionary throughout his campaign, but is what he saying just a vision? While Barack Obama has been extolled for his exceptional oratorical ability, he has been condemned of filling those orations with empty substance that isn't at all realistic. I was watching Fox News (Conservative/Right Wing) subsequent to Obama's winning night in Minnesota and one of the political pundits pointed out that in his speech, Barack Obama professed that when he becomes President, that the oil companies oversees will pay for their pollution with the revenue from their profits and invest in a plan that would allow for America to become energy independent. To make this more reductive, Barack Obama is simply saying that when he's president, the U.S. government is going to tell these companies what to do with their money, which seems completely ridiculous. This is just one of many examples that they cited in Barack's speech that seems great to the ear upon first listen for the sake of hope and excitement, but after breaking it down, it doesn't seem plausible at all. I think undoubtedly that many of us, even the opposition, has been immersed in the rhapsodies of Barack Obama. However, the speech that Barack Obama made tonight will be his last, and one can only wonder, how will he galvanize his supporters once again for this last stretch without the advantage of riling them up without delivering a speech that will evoke an immense hope that has compelled people to vote for him in the past? The charisma that Barack Obama could display in a speech, beating the dry, monotone, and disengaging McCain has been eliminated from the race and is now irrelevant. I think that hurts Obama...

The Republican party will also be targeting Barack Obama's experience, just like Clinton did in the democratic election, however this time they will attack Senator Obama with more voracity. One of the biggest disadvantages that Barack has, is that his resume is painfully thin while McCain's track record in the political arena could swallow Obama's track record whole. The Republican party will also magnify Barack Obama's ties with radical leftist organizations. In this country, radical is never a good thing, especially if someone is vying for votes from the masses. McCain said tonight on Fox News that he is looking forward to debating with Barack Obama because Obama has been a steadfast liberal throughout his political life and has tenure in radical organizations. He believes that Barack Obama is so far to the left, that in a political debate he can anger the senator from Illinois and lure him into saying something that would be very unsettling for Americans. I don't know about that one. From what I've seen, it's clear that Barack Obama is a liberal just as any other member of the Democratic party, but I haven't had any inklings of him being an extreme leftist. While that remains to be seen, what Senator McCain has working for him is that he has engaged in many by-partisan efforts. He's worked across parties. That fact alone that McCain has worked with more than just his own constituency trumps Barack's history of only working with liberal organizations. That notion could encourage liberals to vote for McCain because he's more versatile politically than the monolithic Obama is.

The Republican party will also aim to depict Barack Obama has considerably indecisive as he voted 'present' on a record number of bills as Senator of Illinois. And that's a fact. Lastly, during the Democratic election, Barack Obama struggled to get the blue collar voters in the rural states and Hillary trounced him in those parts of the country where that demographic was prominent. Also, Hillary Clinton was able to get a record 18 million votes in the Democratic election which is the most ever for the runner-up or loser of a party election. Hillary Clinton said in her final speech, "I want those 18 million voters to be respected". If Barack Obama does not endorse Hillary Clinton as his Vice President, those 18 million voters will feel abandoned because they vested their hope in Hillary and they will either not vote or vote for McCain. However, if he does accept Hillary Clinton as his Vice President, he will not only acquire those 18 million votes, but he will also garner the support of the female populace in America along with the blue collar voters that were absolutely adverse to him. I believe that Hillary's pedigree as a political legend and public servant would suffice for Barack Obama's shortcomings in experience. I also think that if Hillary and Obama were placed on the same ticket, not only would it completely unify the Democratic party which is in shambles, but it will also synchronize the millions of voters who were miserably torn between the two desirable candidates. I'm not being cynical or pessimistic about Barack Obama's chances with another running mate, nor am I saying that Hillary is without fallacy. But, I think without her, Barack's campaign can be fairly dubious and her being there can only strengthen their chances of molding this country into that great vision that they and the people at large believe in. I think that if Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are on the same ticket, they will transform the greatest rivalry in the history of American politics into becoming shades of the '90's Chicago Bulls, 2008 New England Patriots, the '70's UCLA Bruins, the 1992 American Olympic basketball team, '70's Pittsburgh Steelers and the 1990's New York Yankees. They would simply become the dream team.

That would be change I could believe in. And hopefully Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton would both say, Yes WE Can.

Parting Thoughts:
Stew Chicken is off the hook!
The Strangers was so disappointing. I'm glad I saw it for free.
The film, 'World Trade Center', is the biggest piece of propaganda garbage I've ever seen.
I'm tired.....
I'm going for Kobe in the NBA finals.
Oh, and I just recently learned that what helped shape the legacy of the great rivalry between Magic Johnson and Larry Bird was the racial element. It was the heavily maligned "jungle ball" of the showtime Lakers and Magic Johnson versus the blue collar fundamental basketball of Larry Bird and the Celtics. Nothing like a racial undertone to hype up a basketball game.

Oh yeah, Obama (and hopefully Clinton) 08!

Graf-Art brings Smiles and Grief for Harlem

Art Form: Graffiti/Photography
Genre/Type: The only type Graffiti-Art could be: Conscious

I actually stumbled upon this photo on a BET blog site, which seems weird to me because BET has never shown that they'd make an effort to display true art apropos of its history. Nevertheless, this picture is a great shot of 116th and Lenox in Harlem, NY. I like it because it culminates different attributes of the culture of Harlem. Now, it doesn't feature everything about the customs of Harlem because it doesn't have any depictions that allude to jazz , zoot suits, or speakeasies which is more of the 'ancient' stuff, dating back to the early 20th century. However, it does depict the volume of the contemporary culture in Harlem with the infamous Apollo sign hovering over the sneakers that are suspended from the traffic light wiring. I researched what that custom is about and I learned that shoes hanging from wires is a an urban semiotic that alerts passer-bys that drug trafficking is prevalent in the area. Even though we'd all agree that's not a good thing, the depiction in the photo informs us; just like a photo and a caption in a World History textbook would (and they said there's nothing educational about 'da hood'). I know that for Black people, and more specifically for the Black people native to Harlem, graffiti-art, like the one shown above, tells it's own story about the history and culture of the area. My favorite part about this picture is the family. I like the male in front seen leading his family with the afro and his face littered in different color variations and hues. And then, sidled next to him is who I would presume to be his wife, with her natural hair, and child. Beautiful.

It's pretty rare to see Graffiti-art anymore. That's due to the intensified police activity in the areas where people are most likely to tag up walls, which is 'da hood'. You'll mostly see a lot of graffiti-art in the depths of train station tunnels. But the trains go by so fast, you can barely get a look at it. Though, it is nice to see something like this photo attempting to revive a sub-culture of the original Hip Hop and resuscitating a discourse that used be about informing other people. Graffiti-Art is still done all over the world, and I'd imagine anyone who was leading a life that was similar to the lives the original graffiti-artists were leading in 1970's Bronx, then they'd be tagging up anything they could fine just to get their stories out. I really hate when the arbiters of local governments say that graffiti-art is merely illegally applying a medium to a surface. They would be the ones to spin the language and it make sound ominous. And I find it funny that we live in a country where freedom of speech is valued, but rarely is it tolerated. On one of my older blogs, I ended with, "Get your ideas out, By Any Means Necessary". That's exactly what these, artists, are doing.

Lastly, and here's where the grief comes in, the picture does make me think about what is now happening in and to Harlem. As it is now become more and more evident, Harlem will undergo an imminent and immense overhaul. Local officials have decided that the area is ripe for revenue and the buyouts have already begun. Potential franchise owners are seeking to transform what is now a cultural haven for Harlem natives, into another New York epicenter for shopping and consumption. And just when you thought capitalism couldn't get any worse. Gentrification is definitely going to be a product of the new city plans as Harlem residents will be compelled, or coerced I should say, to emigrate from their homes because the value of these neighborhoods will rise above their living means. It's very sad. And I've had a few conversations about what's going on in Harlem and about the gentrification that is and will continue to take place. And there are two good arguments here.

One, gentrification is horrible. Knowing the essence of what is, it seems completely unscrupulous to actually do this to people just for profit. It isn't fair to the residents who will be living in the area. The situation is almost comparable to the, "refugees" (as they called them) indigenous to New Orleans who were just shipped to another part of the country against their will after the calamity of Hurricane Katrina. Granted this isn't the same situation in Harlem, but isn't this the same level of covert collusion that will afford Harlem natives and residents to leave against their will because they won't be able to afford to stay? Sure it is. What happened to the right to vote? Shouldn't the people of Harlem be able to have a say in what happens to their neighborhoods? Well, exercising that right would be to no avail here because the corporate barons who are coming in have the money to commence a new economic cycle in Harlem and that fact is what appeases local government officials. So even despite the potential pleas and bargaining by Harlem residents, their actions would be futile.

On the other hand, there are those who say the new city plans (such as Columbia University expanding its property radius) and gentrification occurring in Harlem is actually a good thing, and I totally understand this position. For those who don't know, the city of New York is incurring a mild recession and the city seems desperate to rejuvenate the local economy. The new plans for Harlem is a very viable option that would allow for a jump start. And if the residents of New York City don't want to see state taxes rise in an effort to counter the recession, they should be in favor of the changes that are set to be made in Harlem. Another part of this position is that the city is making a valiant effort to change the culture in that part of the city. Harlem is notorious for its underclass and a physical change to Harlem would mean that that underclass would have to have a change in venue. In one swoop, the city could significantly decrease the amount of crime, violence, and narcotics that supports the informal economy in Harlem. Unfortunately, a whole lot of honest, hardworking Black people are going to have to move because of the actions of a whole lot of other Black People. It's extremely unfortunate, but it's a win-win situation for the government.

Parting Thoughts:
It was brought to my attention that I didn't pay homage to the great, late, Malcolm X as his birthday recently past on May 19th. Well, Happy Birthday brotha Malcolm and I hope you are resting well. Those of us who have been fortunate to study him, know that he was a great father, husband, philosopher, teacher and human being. Aside from the fact that he fought for human rights, what I found riveting about Malcolm was that he went through three significant reformations in his life, embraced them all with diligence by trying to be the best at what he was (at that specific time) and achieve his objectives. I think Malcolm is a great example of the idea that it's never too late to make a change in your life. However untimely, Malcolm did come to realize that his ultimate goal was not to solely raise the consciousness of the masses of Black people so that they could rise above their white counter-parts, but it was to actively pursue bringing every race, color or creed that had a diaspora into Umoja, which is Swahili for Unity. Malcolm X had a significant influence on my way of thinking, not just discerning the lives, strife, and trials that face the masses of black people, but learning how to think period. Above many things, Malcolm was a student and loved to learn. His favorite pastime was reading and one thing he wished he could've pursued more diligently was studying language. I admire a lot of things about Malcolm: his poise, candor, discourse, commitment, disposition, compassion, congeniality, and sage-like aura. Even though I never met him, just seeing videos/film and photographs of him makes me feel his presence. I would encourage all to learn about the great Malcolm X because he is not only important to the history of people in the African diaspora, but he is one of the most important figures for humankind. Peace be unto you, Brotha Shabazz.



Oh yeah,
The city of New York also has the same plans for Coney Island. So, for all you potential tourists out there who want to see the infamous and broken down Cyclone, Keyspan Park, pier, location for Spike Lee's He Got Game and where the annual Nathans hot dog competition is held, make haste!

Oh yeah (part 2),
Ted Kennedy had his brain tumor successfully removed today at Duke University by one of, if not the best, neuro-surgeon in America. God bless him.

Sex Uncovered......somewhat.

Art Form: Film
Type/Genre: Documentary


So, I've been increasingly become nocturnal this summer. What I try to do every night to prevent this spontaneous stretch of insomnia that I'm enduring is watch films. Unfortunately, watching/studying film happens to be a passion of mine and for me, the hour of the day does not coerce me to get some "shut eye" instead of seeing an interesting piece of art that may me woo me so much, that I'll feel compelled to blog/write about it. And so, the next great piece of work that I saw that evoked some concretized rhetoric out of me was film director, Chris Arnold's, The O Tapes. And as you should be asking, what pray tell is The O Tapes and what does it have to do with that picture? Well, the image to the right of this paragraph is actually very pertinent to the documentary and this blog entry because it depicts one part of what the documentary was about: The Vagina. Though, saying that it was solely about the vagina is too reductive. The documentary was a juxtaposition of conducted interviews of only women, answering questions about their sexuality and sexual experiences. The documentary also incorporated a historical perspective with relevant information to each question that was asked (although you never hear the inquiries because that's an intricacy of documentary style editing) and commentary by professors and doctors. There were also a few animated satirical cartoons which I found amusing, but all of them had very good points. Now, I tried to watch something about women purporting information about their sexuality before... The Vagina Monologues. I couldn't do it; it was too much to take. But after being in a women's studies class for four months, I found myself genuinely interested in the film, even though it was at 4 in the morning... Ok, enough of my ramblings, and now to the content.

Orgasms
What I learned (yes, learned) from the film about female orgasms is that they're extremely rare. I really thought that they happened fairly often and that seldom did a woman not have one because it was a natural part of sex. On the contrary, most women do not have orgasms regularly and in fact, many women go decades without having one and possibly not even knowing what it is. Something else that I picked up from the film was a significant distinction from vaginal and clitoral orgasms. The distinction being, vaginal orgasms are much more intense than clitoral orgasms. According to the film, antiquated philosophies of the two orgasms entailed that clitoral orgasms were immature-which was a philosophy of Sigment Freud- and that the only true orgasm was a vaginal orgasm, which is the product of penetration. And here lies the androcentric view of the nuances of the female body. That philosophy allowed for men (pre-Sexual Revolution) to cajole women into believing that having clitoral orgasms was sign of insolence. That mentality only ripened the ego's of men because they believed that they should be the only entities that invoked orgasms in women. This philosophy also discouraged masturbation because clitoral orgasms were a product of masturbation. One doctor in the film said, masturbation is extremely beneficial to women because it allows them to gain an understanding of what their bodies are like. "Back in the days", men used religion, law and philosophy to discourage women from this behavior so that they could sustain that physical and mental hegemonic control over their bodies. Figures... Yay for the Sexual Revolution for knocking that one and many others out of the park.

I knew some of the historical parts of this because of my women's studies course and what I remember the most was Simone De Beauvoir's instrumental contribution to the Sexual Revolution. I remember reading an article she wrote about women who fake orgasms and why faking orgasms counters the sexual liberation of women. She argued that faking orgasms only fattened the psychological strangle men had on women because allowing men to believe they were the sole source of women's pleasure even though they were completely dissatisfied, only led to an evermore swelling ego of the man. Beauvoir said any woman that fakes an orgasm is doing the entire populace of women a disservice because that woman is accepting and embracing sexual bondage in an effort to secure a man's machismo. Any woman who is dissatisfied should communicate with their partners, accost them honestly and if they refuse to or cannot handle the truth, she should be done with them. I agree.

Women are Men......just the other way around.
Another interesting archaic theory given in the film was that women are men turned inside out. Incredible. So I guess Eve was the antithesis of Adam? Right. One of the ideas behind the theory was that the both men and women secrete seamen. However, men omit from their testicles, which are outside, and women from their ovaries, which are inside: hence, the idea that women are men turned inside out. Another idea underlying the theory was that the clitoris was a modified version of the penis. Seems like the philosophers were fishing with this one. So breasts are the asymmetrical versions of pectoral muscles? Hmmm.... I wonder why our eyes, noses, mouths, ears, faces, arms, legs, torso, and feet are all in the same places. I guess if the knees of women were to be the inverse of the knees of men then they'd be horses. And that's not good for humankind.

Sizing 'em up
Definitely one of the more interesting questions and probably one of the more popular ones: Does size matter? The answer to this question is probably relative, depending on the preference of the woman, but, there seemed to be a census from the interviews of the women in the documentary. Almost all said that size actually doesn't matter that much, but, there are certain exceptions. For example, what I got from the film is that "short and thick" beats "long and thin". Also, larger penis' tend to force contact with "G Spot" more often than smaller ones . Interesting thing about the G Spot, most women don't even know where it is. And I get to dispel the myth that men were the only ones ignorant about the mysterious "G Spot" . It's a tissue found 3 quarters of the way through the vagina that swells when it has incurred enough abrasion. For the curious folk out there, what I got is that thickness is more important than length. But if a guy is too big, it hampers the sexual pleasure for both partners. And we already know what the result is of a guy who's too small. Funny, all of them women said that if a guy was too small, they could make up for it by expanding their sexual prowess to compensate for the "shortcoming". I tend to think telling someone that, is as equally discouraging as visually seeing a woman being displeased because of your anatomy.

Maintaining the Position(s)
Yeah, the question was asked of all the women, what is your favorite position? Another question with a relative answer as it applies to the world at large, but I got some interesting facts. The "Doggy Style" position allows for the most penetration out of all the ones you may have seen in the heralded PalmaSutra. Another census amongst the women was the answer to the question, which positions allows for the most intimacy? All said the "Missionary" position because of the angle and the eye to eye contact. Hmmm..., quick digression here, I think eye to eye contact is one of the easiest ways to tell if someone likes you. And I also think there's a direct correlation between casual eye to eye contact and eye to eye contact in sex (when you begin to talk about "making love").

More interesting though, was the answers to the succeeding question. What kind of raunchy sex have you had? The retorts were unbelievable. Even though I knew some of them existed, it was shocking for me to hear a fair amount of women profess them as if that kind of sex is common. And if it is, I'm just glad human beings are creative. I also hope that they're safe. Here's the list of the types of 'raunchy sex' that I jotted down while watching the film:
Orgy/Manage Twa
Role Play
Public Sex
Dirty Talking
Sex Toys
Impulsive Aggression

I had to throw a red flag on the last two: Bondage and Strangulation
Are you kidding me? Isn't that against the law in about............48 conterminate states plus two more! Shocking...

(Be)Fore[we begin to]Play
The film is about sex, so of course they asked the women about foreplay. And most of them said, interestingly enough, foreplay is the most important part of achieving an orgasm. Now, after I heard a few of them say that, I was pretty shocked. But, I was only astounded because my purview of foreplay was very limited. The women said that foreplay could be anything. One said that honest conversation is a form of foreplay for her. While I thought foreplay was exclusive to kissing and touching, I was missing the essence of what foreplay was, which was clarified in the film. It's what happens that stimulates the desire to have sex. So, foreplay could really be anything. From having dinner, discussing politics, to watching a woman try on outfit's.... anything could stimulate that potential desire.


What I also got from the documentary was that foreplay for men and women work very differently. While the need for foreplay for men is minimal, it's absolutely necessary for women. One woman exclaimed in the film, that a man's sexual organ is outside of his body and because of that, it's always rubbing against his pants or boxers or what have you, and he's constantly reminded of his sexuality while a woman is "folded up inside" and cannot manipulate herself the way or as easily as a man can. That's why for almost all of us, foreplay is necessary. True.


Fighting the Sexual Fight.......I mean, the good fight.
One woman mentioned in the film was Ida Craddock who authored The Wedding Night. The book advised married couples to appreciate their bodies as a part of nature and they should be respected by both parties. This book was authored many centuries ago, and as it comes as no surprise, the power hungry men of the era did not take too kindly that Craddock was telling men to respect the bodies of women. Check this, they arrested her , charged her, and found her guilty of "distributing garbage through U.S. Mail". Un-freakin'-believable. Was the control of women's bodies really that serious? I guess it was. Well, Ida didn't give the judicial system the satisfaction and she committed suicide. That's a shame. She was put in a corner for not only fighting for what she believed in, but for something that is always right; equality. She was and forever will be touted as the first hero of the Sexual Revolution, and rightfully so.

My Thoughts
I thought the documentary was very informative, funny and beneficial. I learned a lot from it. But knowing this stuff kind of confuses me, because, by knowing some of these things, does it make one more hesitant to engage in sexual behavior or more confident? It could probably go either way. What I do know, is that as a male it was good to actually learn some of this stuff. And I'd say for any debutante or just, all women to actively pursue information about their bodies, especially when it comes to sexual behavior. Men need to learn these things as well. Like my man Common said on the commercial, "Knowing is Beautiful".

Here's a few interesting quotes and one fact I thought I'd share from the film:


"If we don't teach women about their bodies, and their male partners, it would be like playing with toys that we didn't read the instruction's manual to."


Approximately 20% of women ejaculate about 20% of the time.


"I've actually been suspended by my breasts" (answering question about raunchy sex)


"Men need to learn about us, so that we can help them and then everybody can be happy"


"You know, there's a four letter word that is relevant to sex and ends with the letter K.................and that word is= Talk"


Parting Thoughts:

I cannot wait to begin to work.
A New Refutation of Time and Space is one of the best albums I've ever heard.
"Why I gotta have religion if I believe in God?"-lyric from Common's verse of Jadakiss' Why?
I've begun to listen to electronic music. And after paroosing through my music library, I've found that I really like jazz fusion and rock.
I'm going to start reading Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man in a few days. I've read that there's some rhetoric about Karl Marx in the book. Ralph's already got my vote.
Why doesn't Hillary just give up already? Sheesh.


Over and Out.


Oh yeah,
Nappy/natural hair is nothing to be ashamed of. Somebody tell these corporate a**holes to get a clue.