After parking my car, we went into a pizza restaurant. Jason told me he was arrested 10 years ago after getting caught with his friend who was selling drugs.  I asked him what his plans were now that he is out, and he said he is working on finding employment since he has temporary housing.  While serving time, he worked in the kitchen and told me he is an aspiring cook.  I warned him how difficult it would be for him to find employment because of the current economic climate.  I also told him not to get discouraged because of the stigma associated with being an ex-convict.

He smiled and said, “I know. I’m so happy to be out that I’ll do whatever it takes to make it and not go back into prison.”  I suggested that he be realistic and find employment, but eventually work towards opening his own restaurant since he had such a proclivity for culinary arts.  He hadn’t eaten all day so I bought him pizza, gave him 20 dollars, and I thanked him for sharing his time with me.

Currently, approximately 2 out of every 3 former inmates return’ to prison within three years of release.  Helping inmates find and sustain employment immediately after release diminishes their chances of recidivism.  Working towards a reduction in recidivism is important because keeping offenders from re-entering the penal system means less crime and less tax dollars (which can be saved and/or reinvested by the tax payer).

Most of the aid that offenders receive are through public funds from the federal government and philanthropic organizations which donate monies to non-profits and state agencies to help defray re-entry costs.  Ex-convicts are typically placed into low-wage jobs and often quit due to the patience required for delayed gratification through legal work and/or lack of familial support.

While public-private dollars are spent on employability skills and other social skills needed to rehabilitate them into productive civilian life, not enough emphasis is placed on entrepreneurship skills (self-employment).  Unbeknownst to many of them, convicts who enter the penal system for dealing drugs procure many transferable business skills.   By proxy they learn concepts such as: monopoly, market competition, oligopoly, marketing, re-investment, and dividend payments.  In order to reduce recidivism, emphases should be placed on ex-convicts channeling those same skills towards legal activities.

State-sponsored re-entry programs typically don’t have information on investment skills, emerging markets, and venture capitalist firms for small business development.  If more Ex-convicts became business owners, we have an additional tax base and potential mentorship of others who are re-entering civilian life.  Former convicts would also become cognizant of how high crime rates affect local/state taxes (thus derailing their chances of committing and/or abetting criminals), and entrepreneurship would also spur economic activity because these businesses would potentially be in or around the cities where they reside.  An added benefit could also come from these new business owners contracting with the state and local agencies to employ other parolees exiting the penal system.

While I’m fully aware that not every ex-convict is going to be successful at self-employment, I do know that there is indeed human capital locked up in our penal system.  Regurgitating textbook conservative talking points means nothing if we aren’t active with alternatives and solutions for the communities we purport to care about.  While I’m not certain that state governments have enough resources or the impetus to help with promoting entrepreneurship, this is a task that Urban Conservatives and/or Conservatives with a heart for inner city constituents can spear head.

While social conservatism may appeal to a very small percentage of Black people who are willing to hold the their noses as they cast their ballots or turn the lever for a  Republican, the social conservative platform shouldn’t be the only ticket that Republicans use to garner entry into the hearts and minds of the average Black voter.

Besides, much to my chagrin, our culture is moving significantly more and more to the left. “Traditional” values that were once at the epicenter of the American fabric are now being supplanted by progressivism clothed in “moral relativism” (a concept I am vehemently opposed to).  Moreover, because of the demographic changes that we know are going to happen in the next few decades, Republicans need new and innovative ways to target unlikely constituencies. 

One of those initiatives is called “Urban Enterprise Zones/Communities.”  The first economists to theorize on this avant-garde concept are British urbanist Peter Hall, and British politician Geoffrey Howe.  They both posited that in order to foment economic activity in depressed areas, a reduction in bureaucratic red tape (i.e. reduced regulation), lower taxes, and other financial incentives were necessary.  They believed the aforementioned initiatives would attract businesses, create low-wage jobs, and spur economic growth.

Jack Kemp, the man we credit with the supply-side economics revolution of the 1980s fully supported Enterprise Zone legislation that went largely ignored until Bill Clinton signed the Federal Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1993 that provided tax credits and other incentives for “Empowerment Zone/Enterprise Communities”.  Incidentally, Jack Kemp was openly critical of the version approved by Clinton.

More importantly, Jack Kemp didn’t ignore the inner city like to many Conservatives and Republicans du jour.  Jack Kemp didn’t let right-wing rhetoric blockade legislative attempts, grounded in conservative principles, to help “the least of these”. Kemp unequivocally cared about Black America and the stakeholders in the inner city-fortunately- not in the paternalistic way that Liberals show they “care”.  As Director of HUD (Housing and Urban Development) between 1989-1993, he attempted, but failed to push for residents in “Projects” (inner city low-income housing units) to partially own the housing developments that they lived in because Kemp argued that, “When people lack jobs, opportunity, and ownership of property they have little or no stake in their communities.”

I’m not exactly sure why the GOP doesn’t run with this concept.  It seems like a winner to me-especially considering how the left usually calls for MORE regulation and HIGHER taxes which are unequivocally correlated with HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT.

Yes, families “values” are important, but the libertarian in me knows that we can’t legislate mores. More importantly, the GOP needs to assert their positions in cities where there is a dire need for a paradigm shift- what I've called an "urban conservative" resurrection.

“Low-skilled jobs typically held by minorities in the inner city are being outsourced, yet let’s continue to support/vote for Democrats so they can raise taxes on the rich to close the economic gap.”

Leftists call it “greed,” I call it “common sense”. Most corporations get into business to make a profit and share the dividends of theirs profit with their shareholders.  In the midst of making money allocating scarce goods and resources (capitalism), these corporations hire people giving these employees means of economic subsistence.  Since the 1960s, because of increased labor costs, many corporations have outsourced their companies into countries where the cost of operating is cheaper.  In other words, as prices to operate business in America go up, profit margins go down-so it only makes sense that these businesses harbor in places that will help increase their profit margins.  That’s not greed, that’s Business 101.

During the Great Depression, whatever toils experienced by White America were felt at least two-fold by those in the Black community.  The same holds true today.  While the national unemployment rate hovers around 10 percent, it’s over 50 % higher in the Black Community.  Understanding how tax policy and regulation can have a retardant or stimulative effect on the economy is pivotal. Hence why Conservatives like Jack Kemp wanted the Federal Government to play an integral part in “Enterprise Zones/Communities”.  In Enterprise Zones/Communities, states and federal taxes are lowered temporarily. Moreover, regulation that would otherwise be confiscatory is lifted in order to foment economic activity and increase employment in areas with high poverty and other social maladies that are often correlated with decrepit social conditions.

I always ask my liberal brothers and sisters to explain the contradictory nature of complaining about lack of jobs and opportunities when they support a political ideology that supports raising taxes and increasing the regulatory burdens placed by bureaucrats--which has an inevitable effect on employment opportunities.  So, if low employment opportunities are a huge problem, why support politicians who are for hurting the small business owners who are most likely to employ low-skilled workers who disproportionately represent the inner city cohort?

Moreover, many business owners assert that since demand is low due to the recession, the temporary “tax-credits” that are being offered by the Obama administration aren’t going to be enough of an incentive for small businesses to hire new workers.

Black Conservatives and Republicans are “sell-outs”, but the criminals involved in the penal system aren’t?

After years of working in the inner city, some people who have come to know me through my writings have called me a “sell-out” by virtue of not identifying with the Black monolith, politically.  As unabashed Black Conservatives and/or Republicans, it’s just the name of the game that we have to deal with.  I must admit, it’s growing on me (like fungus would grow on a host)-albeit very uncomfortable since I pride myself in being a “conscious” (semi-afrocentric) Conservative...never mind the fact that I'm in the trenches everyday...

How is it that the criminals and the street thugs who terrorize their neighborhoods aren’t considered “sell-outs”?  I’ve grappled with this for a while.  I’ve read the writings of other black/urban conservatives lamenting on this very issue. I can’t seem to understand how my “blackness” is constantly questioned, but those who kill, maim, and get people who look like me addicted to drugs aren’t ever really questioned about their allegiance to the Black community?  What’s even more ironic is how rappers who glorify the “thug life” (who have helped in part produce a generation of what I call the “un-conscious”) rarely have their “blackness” questioned.  I find most disheartening the members of the Black Intelligentsia who defend these culprits involved in the penal system as “victims”—when the people who they oppress by their actions are really the ones we need to worry about.

“Despite centuries of oppression that only ended in the past few decades, Black people are incredibly resilient BUT the proverbial “system” has enough power to hold us back?

The resiliency of Black folks is something that should never go unspoken.  With over 250 years of chattel slavery, and decades of Jim-Crow- the Black family managed to stay virtually intact (until the 1960s) ONLY through faith in Christ, and self-sufficiency coupled with mutual aid networks.  The fact that the “Black Wall Street” (Greenwood, Tulsa Oklahoma) was rebuilt to bring about another economic resurgence in the 1950s after it was burned by angry White men in the 1920s (who envied the economic prosperity that the free markets and capitalism brought to blacks) is also testament to that fact.

If we are such “victims” of a purported establishment, why were we able to accomplish so much before it became politically opportunistic to help us? I’m not in any way diminishing the role of Government when it came to acting as a fiduciary for Black civil rights.  What I’m saying is, what excuses do we really have in 2010 when there are hoards of programs in higher education actively (to the point of frivolous lawsuits) seeking more and more members to add to the growing numbers of the Black Intelligentsia?

In addition to many minority recruitment initiatives, when it comes to small business development, there are special set asides for minorities to start their own businesses. The fact is that our progenitors who opened up their own businesses didn’t have the opportunities that we have today.

Moreover, if we are indeed resilient how can we believe that our economic, social, and political achievements can be stifled…in 2010?  I’m not deluding myself about there being barriers to success; I just refuse to believe that those blockades can stop us (in theory and in practice).

Unfortunately, any attempts to say “Enough is enough” are clouded by culture apologists who are more comfortable with the status quo because it cements their position as power brokers and “leaders” in the Black community. While I don’t necessarily automatically discount the validity of some of the views I feel are contradictory to our objectives as people of color, I think it’s important to shine light on these blatant contradictions for the sole purpose of our social advancement.  As an urban conservative, I experience first hand how the liberal side seems to dominate the dialogue and thus the agenda. That needs to stop.

Alvin Greene isn’t an embarrassment because he’s an inarticulate veteran who faces felony charges for procuring and disseminating obscenity to an 18 year old college student. Although winning the Democratic primaries for a State Senate seat representing South Carolina, Alvin Greene isn’t an embarrassment because he cannot articulate his platform in a cogent manner.

Alvin Greene’s story should be an embarrassment to people, especially Black people everywhere because a man with his credentials, or lack there of, could garner the votes of 102,463 constituents, the majority of which were Black Americans.  As if his background weren’t embarrassment enough, most of the voters unabashedly admitted that they knew nothing about him prior.

As a Conscious Conservative Republican, I chuckled at several interviews I saw of Mr. Greene.  As a staunch supporter of this little thing called “research”, I guess one would assume that I was smiling because Alvin Greene’s victory is a testament to how too many Black people vote.

Then the laughter turned into anger and quite frankly shame. The leftists in the media can’t possibly understand how Greene sealed the nomination with people knowing virtually very little about him.  Sounds eerily familiar, doesn’t it? So, naturally, instead of stating the obvious, which is that the people who voted for him didn’t investigate and voted SOLELY  on PARTY RECOGNITION—they blame Republicans. When all else fails, blame the Republicans.  Although, in all fairness, I have read that some say they voted for him because his name sounded like "Al Green"--the singer.  Yeah, that makes it a little more palatable. But, let’s say for the sake of argument that he is a “Republican plant”, how on earth did Republicans possibly get over one hundred thousand voters to cast their ballots for a man that barely campaigned, didn't have a campaign website, and didn’t mail any literature?  How would the constituents know to vote for an alleged plant?

But, that’s not even what makes me the angriest.  Is this really what our forefathers fought for? In 1868 a Black Republican by the name of Robert B. Elliot, an attorney, was elected to the United States Congress representing South Carolina.  In addition to delivering a speech in favor of the Civil Rights Act of 1875, post his tenure in Congress- he made it his mission to fight political corruption in South Carolina (go figure).

Another notable Black Republican by the name of Robert Smalls, who started off as a slave, ended up fighting in the Civil War and managed to convince president Abraham Lincoln to allow Black American soldiers to fight in the Union army.  Ironically enough, Mr. Smalls was the last Republican to represent South Carolina’s 5^th congressional district.

Then there was Joseph H. Rainey who was the first Black Republican to serve in the United States House of Representatives. Although he was born to slave parents, his father was able to purchase his family's freedom because in addition to being a full-time slave, his father owned and operated a very profitable barber business. 

Excuse me, if I’m a little disgusted that our Black Republican forefathers were the antithesis of the caliber of politicians and community “organizers” that we have today.  I guess the lesson in all of this is that it is incumbent upon all of us to educate ourselves--- copiously--- before turning the lever for a person and/or a party member we expect not to embarrass our democratic process.  I’m crossing my fingers, and hoping and praying that maybe this will be a wake up call for Black Democrats.

Writing is a socially acceptable way of dealing with stuff.  I started this blog when Black people told me in order for me to be on the “right” side of history-I had to vote for Obama. 

Oh please.

 I would encourage my detractors to spend hours reading about failed fiscal remedies for a recession-- the way I did before I made the decision to vote for McCain.

Anyways, Black Republicans who actually care for the Black community have to deal with vituperation from all angles.  If it’s not ideological brethren who think that race should have no place in political discourse or else you’re a “liberal”-- it’s Black liberals who ruthlessly and unfoundedly question our allegiance to the “Black cause”.

As of late, I’ve been trying to find my political equilibrium. When should I talk about race? When do I need to challenge Black liberals? My unrelenting support for unborn children to have civil rights, educating parents about educational choice vouchers, and staying after hours at work to help parents who have returned to college finish power-point presentations warrants such vitriol ---all because I champion “right-wing” causes like limited government and free enterprise (silver rights) as means for poverty reduction. Oh yeah, unlike most Blacks, I actually vote the way I think.

I get it. This is how the game goes: You can only be fully “black” (no matter what you’ve done in the community) if you walk lockstep with the Democratic Party.  The moment you DARE question anything, regardless of your resume, you are a pawn for the right-wing establishment.  These same people who repeatedly parrot liberal rhetoric can’t possibly be pawns for the left-wing establishment—OH NO--that’s just a conservative domain.  They’re the “enlightened” class. Once again: oh please.

The bottom line is: I don’t deal well with ideological chains.

I attended a Tea Party today in Morristown NJ.

Most of the people were welcoming and very friendly. As far as I could see there were approximately 1000 people and about 5 visible Black faces (myself included).

I personally spoke with a few of the organizers who didn’t fit the stereotypical imagery of the ignorant, angry tea party protestors that the mainstream media loves to portray.  The organizers seemed highly intelligent, and genuinely concerned about the direction of the country. I expressed my reticence to one very nice lady concerning the movement, and we had an interesting dialogue.

I told her that calling Obama a Socialist and saying that he’s ruining the country doesn’t resonate with Black people.  I told her that I think it’s important to package the conservative message in a way so as not to turn people away.  I also told her that instead of calling Obama a “socialist” who’s “ruining America for ‘our’ children” we should be explaining how Obama’s economic prescriptions have a retardant effect on job creation and the overall economy.  I also expressed to her that I was more concerned about solutions-- instead of criticism and that through my research I’ve found that the relationship between Blacks and government is not as simplistic right-wing talking points…. 

The speakers were very effective at galvanizing the crowd.  The speakers included the Author of “Obama Zombies”, a NJ Assemblywoman, and Mychal Massie.

There weren’t any overtly racist comments or signs as far as I could see.

While I think it’s our God given, American right to protest against the government-I’m not sure The Tea Party Crowd is for me. I really respect the people there-who I spoke to-- with the exception of one idiot who was so bothered that Obama decorated the White House as he saw fit.  I guess the national debt, the profligate spending, confiscatory taxation, and overregulation didn’t vex him as much as Obama decorative tastes.  Instead, this dimwit actually said, “I don’t care if Obama is pink. I’d like to put Obama, Michele, and those two kids in a spaceship with half a tank of gas. The dog can stay.”

When the shock wore off, I actually chuckled a little.  There are some STRANGE people out there. LOL.

Finally, it was an experience. Will the Afroconservative be back to a Tea Party…? Probably not. I’m actually working on some “community oriented conservatism” initiatives that I’m going to share with you all soon. 

If you haven’t been to a tea party, please don’t let my opinions dissuade you. Go and check it out for yourself. There’s really good people there.

If you do attend tea parties---keep on keeping on---we all have different torches to carry all under the banner of Freedom from oppressive government.

 
(from the left) Donald Scoggins of Republicans for Black Empowerment
Afroconservative (yours truly)
Mychal Massie, Project 21
Charles Butler (Attorney, Conservative Radio Host)


Mychal Massie from Project 21 has invited me to the Morristown Tax Day Tea Party in Morristown, NJ.  He is one of the keynote speakers.  I sat with him on a panel at the Frederick Douglass Leadership Summit a few weeks ago in Washington, DC.

Now, for those of you who've read my blog, as of late, I've been critical of the movement. I'm not the only black conservative who's a skeptic.  I've had my white brothers and sisters email me some of the shady stuff they've encountered at said events.

Part of my er, reticence, is with the hackneyed rhetoric, and the racist overtones such as confederate flags, and the relentless referencing of Obama as a primate amongst a laundry list of things....  They insulted Bush's intelligence that way too, but given the historical context of viewing Black Americans are less evolved than their White counterparts--it just doesn't register the same. 

Also, Obama is not the first president who is expanding government. Bush signed the Medicare Act of 2003 that will cost 400 billion over the first 10 years. Moreover, most, if not all of Obama's Democratic and Republican predecessors expanded government.  So, why is there all this outrage NOW?

A coinkydink? There are many plausible theories...

Just some thoughts that I have regarding this topic.

I am trying to be objective about it. I ain't perfect....

But, in the spirit of intellectual honesty, and openness, I was thinking, "......Vanessa, you should  actually go to one instead of being critical from a distance........."

So, despite what some of you perceive about all my "race talk"-- the Afroconservative is pretty rational.

An opportunity has presented itself, so there are no excuses.   I will post about it tomorrow evening.

Peace and Favor Everyone!!

It’s human nature to idolize, worship, and blind ourselves to certain things for political convenience. I know all too well that cognitive dissonance isn’t a pleasant feeling.

At one time in my journey, I venerated members of the black intelligentsia.  At another time, I idolized members of my faith, assuming that they were the sole arbiters of truth.  When I first became a Conservative Republican, the honeymoon phase of enlightenment clouded my abilities to see some really shady things on this side.  I was so angry about the abject failures of liberal policies, I couldn’t even fathom Republicans ever being wrong about anything.

At this juncture in my life, the romanticizing of ideologies and political entities must cease in order for critical thinking to commence.

If it’s not anti-intellectuals on the left who think that “government” is the answer for all social maladies, its anti-intellectual conservatives who take GREAT comfort in histrionics about the current administration-in many cases with an inability to articulate viable alternatives to their liberal counterparts outside of hackneyed “limited government” rhetoric.

A word of caution to my brothers and sisters on the left and right: Always seek to evolve your beliefs. Don’t be afraid to challenge yourself by exposing yourself to different perspectives.

You and I don’t have a monopoly on truth and to make that assumption is just intellectual suicide.

At best, we’re all just trying to figure this thing out.  You may assume malfeasance on the parts of your ideological opponents, but that may not always be the case.

As Conservatives, let’s actively fight against ideological complacency and anti-intellectual banter. What does calling Obama a "Socialist" actually accomplish? We should heed Albert Einstein’s words when he said, “Intellectual growth should commence at birth, and cease only at death.”

Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Bob McDonnell (R) has received inauspicious attention the last few days because of his Proclamation to make the month of April, “Confederate History Month”.  Aside from what most Americans think of when they hear the word “Confederacy”—he’s received criticism from most cognizant, sentient beings because he made no mention of “slavery”.  Prior to the national attention, according to Governor McDonnell, slavery wasn’t really that important enough of an issue to make mention of in the proclamation.

Revisionist history aside, as of late, I've often wondered if some of my ideological brethren really want the GOP to become a big tent party.

I mean, this could have been palatable in a leftist movie plot, or a Saturday Night Live sketch lampooning “out of touch” Republicans.  Had it been solely “entertainment”, I would have probably chuckled because it would have only been a depiction of the hackneyed caricature of the proverbial racist Republican. 

The “Afroconservative” can’t laugh at this one because it’s blatantly disrespectful to the children of slaves whose progenitors built this country.

The deafening silence from Republicans and Conservatives aside, thankfully, Mr. McDonnell, and people like him (on both sides) can’t hold people who look like me back.  

 A Black President, a Black Chairman of the Republican National Committee, a Black Attorney General, and a Hispanic Female Supreme Court Justice? Oh my! Seriously, what more can 'you people' possibly ask for?

 Michael Steele has been increasingly under attack and says that many of his detractors are motivated by his race.  Moreover, 71 percent of “GOP insiders” consider Michael Steele a liability more than an asset.  Apparently, George Bush’s legacy, an already ill-percieved ‘out of touch’ GOP when it comes to race relations, hackneyed right-wing rhetoric, and a lack of Republicans actively seeking to garner attention from the Black constituency isn’t the problem—Michael Steele is. 

Oh please. 

I smell “race” here, and guess what? Shockingly, I’m still a conservative.

Now, there is a fine line.  Liberals use “race talk” to absolve Blacks of personal responsibility. An example of this would be, “You’re not successful because the proverbial ‘white man’ and his racist old boys club left you out of the American dream.”  Conservatives, on the other hand, refuse to acknowledge institutionalized racism and a very real racial profiling phenomena.  Sadly, it seems to me that merely acknowledging the fact that an innocent Black man is more likely to be harassed by the police, in his own neighborhood, causes cognitive dissonance for some of my ideological brothers and sisters. 

Both extreme positions are unequivocally wrong. 

What’s the fine line then Ms. Afroconservative?

My response:

Is Michael Steele under more scrutiny because he doesn’t look like everyone else who has chaired the RNC? Of course.  Death threats against the office of the President have grown exponentially (400%) since Obama’s election.  Is race a prevalent factor? Unequivocally yes. 

Acknowledging race as a motivating force in certain instances doesn’t make you a liberal. Confronting a victim, subservient mindset doesn’t make you an apologist for the system either. It makes you someone, who at the very least, attempts to be an honest observer.  In my case, it makes me an honest (self-loving) Conservative.