Black People

Regarding the recent column by Susan Reimer ("Rage and resignation at the gun control town hall," Feb. 7), it has got to be the worst piece of racist diatribe I have read in years. In her view, because I am a white male who owns a firearm, I am a racist? There is absolutely no logic in her argument nor any basis in fact. But, I suppose in her mind, anyone who does not parrot her own view on life is automatically deemed to be of despicable character and lacking in sound judgment.

As a black man, I was appalled by the thinly veiled racism in former Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.'s commentary about African-American attitudes toward President Obama ("From pride to disillusionment: a black leader sours on Obama," March 17). All black people are not of one mind, nor are Hispanics, Asians or whites. Mr. Ehrlich's proposition that a black man who once supported the president no longer supports him as strongly today is worthy of comment make sense only if the author believed that we all march to the president's drum, no matter what he says.

City officials in Vidor, Texas, screamed foul when news broke that their town was once one of America's notorious "sundown towns" for blacks. In the segregation era, that was the town fathers' not-so-discreet way of warning black people that they would be jailed, assaulted or worse if they were caught in town after dark. Vidor officials vehemently insisted that they have long since disavowed that naked, in-your-face racism. They contend that the press latched onto the town's woeful past to grab cheap, sensationalist headlines.

The Census Bureau announced last week that it is dropping the use of the term "Negro" to describe black Americans in its population surveys. I suspect few will mourn the word's passing. Today Americans of African descent, especially younger ones, almost universally prefer to be called African-American, people of color or simply black. The bureau reports that the number of blacks who self-identify as Negroes has dwindled to fewer than 50,000, most of them older people living in the South.

I suddenly find myself concerned about my blackness. It had never occurred to me to worry about it before. Then came the incident last month on ESPN's "First Take" program that initially got commentator Rob Parker suspended and then, last week, fired outright. It seems Mr. Parker, who is African-American, analyzed what he saw as the insufficient blackness of Robert Griffin III, rookie quarterback for the Washington, D.C., football team that is named for a racial slur. Having returned their team to relevance for the first time since the Clinton era, RG3, as he is known, can do no wrong in the eyes of Slurs fans.

NEW YORK -- I have been writing for some time about the problems of public education. I also have been highly critical of the elements in popular culture that encourage young people toward illiteracy, brutishness, hatred of women, whorishness and mindless materialism. Now we find that these troubles are combining in yet another way: as obstacles that prevent black kids from doing well in society. It is often difficult to talk about these things, because those who function on the racist circuits of our nation describe poor academic performance by black kids as proof of inherent inferiority, the intellectual quicksand of bad genes.

In 1926, Carter G. Woodson, through his organization, the Association for the Study of Negro Life and History (later renamed the Association for the Study of African American Life and History), founded and promoted Negro History Week. He selected February because Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass' birthdays fell during this month. His desire was for Americans to recognize and celebrate the achievements and accomplishments of black people. The response was overwhelming, as black schools, black churches and black and white community leaders around the country rallied behind this call and pushed Negro History Week to the forefront.

The CEO of Chick-fil-A did more than express a view denigrating gay relationships ("Fast food activism," Aug. 1). The company spends millions to attack the very lives and security of people in same-sex relationships. As a result of anti-gay legislation like the Defense of Marriage Act, insurance companies do not offer private annuity contracts to same-sex couples who want to provide for their retirement. Social Security benefits do not extend to survivor relationships in same-sex unions.

As a black man, I was appalled by the thinly veiled racism in former Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.'s commentary about African-American attitudes toward President Obama ("From pride to disillusionment: a black leader sours on Obama," March 17). All black people are not of one mind, nor are Hispanics, Asians or whites. Mr. Ehrlich's proposition that a black man who once supported the president no longer supports him as strongly today is worthy of comment make sense only if the author believed that we all march to the president's drum, no matter what he says.

I noticed that one of your letter writers took umbrage at Dan Rodricks ' characterization of opposition to marriage equality as an "irrational fear" ("Is half the country gripped by 'irrational fear?" Sept. 14). I don't agree that because half the country hates gay people, that somehow makes it less irrational. How would someone who makes such a dubious claim prefer his motives be described? Irrational hatred? Irrational prejudice? I'd be interested in knowing. When you get down to the crux of the issue, it doesn't really matter what word you use to describe prejudice against gay couples.

Columnist Susan Reimer writes that the debate over banning assault weapons is really about race and gender ("Rage, resignation at gun control town hall," Feb. 7). Five times in her column she describes opponents of banning assault rifles as white men and the victims of gun violence as African American. She even includes the statistic that 51 percent of people killed by guns are black. Anyone reading this article would deduce that white men are using assault rifles to kill African-Americans in large numbers.

Regarding the recent column by Susan Reimer ("Rage and resignation at the gun control town hall," Feb. 7), it has got to be the worst piece of racist diatribe I have read in years. In her view, because I am a white male who owns a firearm, I am a racist? There is absolutely no logic in her argument nor any basis in fact. But, I suppose in her mind, anyone who does not parrot her own view on life is automatically deemed to be of despicable character and lacking in sound judgment.

I suddenly find myself concerned about my blackness. It had never occurred to me to worry about it before. Then came the incident last month on ESPN's "First Take" program that initially got commentator Rob Parker suspended and then, last week, fired outright. It seems Mr. Parker, who is African-American, analyzed what he saw as the insufficient blackness of Robert Griffin III, rookie quarterback for the Washington, D.C., football team that is named for a racial slur. Having returned their team to relevance for the first time since the Clinton era, RG3, as he is known, can do no wrong in the eyes of Slurs fans.

Timorous after having been hammered for years by cries from the right of leftist bias, and hampered by a simple-minded understanding of objectivity that gives sober attention to cranks and zanies, American journalism often winds up serving a bland gruel. But those cries of political bias (which often boil down to "You're not biased in the direction I prefer") are exaggerated and far from the whole story of the limitations of our journalism. The biases are both more widespread and subtler than is generally recognized or acknowledged.

Author's note: This piece concerns racial healing in America. It is submitted as we continue to mourn the incomprehensible tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. May those families, that community, and the nation that grieves with them know the comfort that only faith can provide. An open letter to Drew and Josh Ehrlich, from your parents: Both of you have children of different races and ethnicities in your schools. They are your classmates, teammates and friends.

I noticed that one of your letter writers took umbrage at Dan Rodricks ' characterization of opposition to marriage equality as an "irrational fear" ("Is half the country gripped by 'irrational fear?" Sept. 14). I don't agree that because half the country hates gay people, that somehow makes it less irrational. How would someone who makes such a dubious claim prefer his motives be described? Irrational hatred? Irrational prejudice? I'd be interested in knowing. When you get down to the crux of the issue, it doesn't really matter what word you use to describe prejudice against gay couples.

Regarding Leonard Pitts' column about the impact of voter ID laws on African-Americans, it's time to squelch the outrage and be sensible ("With its voting rights threatened, black America is silent," July 15). Do we want to continue to proclaim our outrage and, as a result, let those votes be lost? These dastardly laws are in place and nothing can be done about them. So let's move on. Let's make sure that those now without valid photo IDs get them. These are mostly poor black people.

RECENTLY, Christie's, the famed New York auction house, became the target of a decades-old struggle of African Americans: The fight for black cultural survival.After a public outcry, Christie's withdrew from sale several 19th-century slavery documents slated to be auctioned to the highest bidder. Instead, Christie's will donate the items to museums.Equating Christie's aborted sale with cultural exploitation is a continuation of a cultural war that gained momentum among black people after Emancipation.

The CEO of Chick-fil-A did more than express a view denigrating gay relationships ("Fast food activism," Aug. 1). The company spends millions to attack the very lives and security of people in same-sex relationships. As a result of anti-gay legislation like the Defense of Marriage Act, insurance companies do not offer private annuity contracts to same-sex couples who want to provide for their retirement. Social Security benefits do not extend to survivor relationships in same-sex unions.

Regarding Leonard Pitts' column about the impact of voter ID laws on African-Americans, it's time to squelch the outrage and be sensible ("With its voting rights threatened, black America is silent," July 15). Do we want to continue to proclaim our outrage and, as a result, let those votes be lost? These dastardly laws are in place and nothing can be done about them. So let's move on. Let's make sure that those now without valid photo IDs get them. These are mostly poor black people.