Back to the top

Nadir Omowale

Rest In The Funk – Gil Scott-Heron

“You will not be able to stay home, brother. You will not be able to plug in, turn on and cop out. You will not be able to lose yourself on skag and skip out for beer during commercials, Because the revolution will not be televised.”

Gil Scott-Heron made his transition on Friday afternoon, May 27. He was 62 years old.

He is a Godfather of Hip Hop, and the father of socially, politically conscious and revolutionary minded poets, singers and musicians.

“Home is where I live inside my white powder dreams. Home was once an empty vacuum that’s filled now with my silent screams. Home is where the needle marks try to heal my broken heart, and it might not be such a bad idea if I never, if I never went home again.”

His best work challenged an often superficial, materialistic, uncaring America, while turning a light on the trials, tribulations, and triumphs of regular people.

“A rat done bit my sister, Nell, and whitey’s on the moon. Her face and arms began to swell, and whitey’s on the moon.”

Gil Scott-Heron is inspirational. His poetry, his songs are important because of his ability to frame complex political questions in simple everyday language.

Rest in the Funk, Gil Scott-Heron.

Raw Story: Liberal Activists Pledge to Oppose Obama in 2012

What do you think about this article from The Raw Story:

Hundreds of liberal organizers and anti-war activists have signed a petition pledging to oppose President Barack Obama’s renomination in 2012 unless he reverses course in Afghanistan and pushes for significant cuts to military spending.

“We vow not to support President Barack Obama for renomination for another term in office, and to actively seek to impede his war policies unless and until he reverses them,” the pledge reads.

Veteran activist and lobbyist David Swanson “…added that there’s something ‘incredibly dishonest’ about criticizing President George W. Bush’s war and military policies without applying those same standards to Obama.”

Many of these same activists supported Obama’s 2008 presidential bid even though candidate Barack made it very clear that his intention was to shift the focus of war from Iraq to Afghanistan. The argument then was we couldn’t afford another four years of Bush, and that McCain would be a continuation of the same failed policies.

While Obama is different from Bush, and isn’t as bad as Republicans make him out to be, the president’s continuation of Bush era policies – continued domestic spying, no closure of Guantanamo, the sanctioning of torture, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention Wall Street bailouts and pandering to corporate America – are indefensible.

But is this a wise move? Certainly there are other candidates who would be more acceptable to liberals (Alan Grayson and Russ Feingold are mentioned), but could they gain the political (and financial) capital needed to mount a credible opposition?

What about the ever present Green Party? Could they make a serious push in 2012 with backing from big name liberals who oppose Obama’s wars?

Is this struggle for the soul of America worth the risk of a President Romney or President Gingrich or a President Palin?

At what point do you sacrifice “standing on your principles” and “doing the right thing” for “political pragmatism and expediency?” Well, ok. Liberals have been doing that for years with support of the Democratic party. When will it stop? If not now, when?

The Raw Story: Hundreds of liberal activists pledge to oppose Obama in 2012

Raw Story: Liberal Activists Pledge to Oppose Obama in 2012

What do you think about this article from The Raw Story:

Hundreds of liberal organizers and anti-war activists have signed a petition pledging to oppose President Barack Obama’s renomination in 2012 unless he reverses course in Afghanistan and pushes for significant cuts to military spending.

“We vow not to support President Barack Obama for renomination for another term in office, and to actively seek to impede his war policies unless and until he reverses them,” the pledge reads.

Veteran activist and lobbyist David Swanson “…added that there’s something ‘incredibly dishonest’ about criticizing President George W. Bush’s war and military policies without applying those same standards to Obama.”

Many of these same activists supported Obama’s 2008 presidential bid even though candidate Barack made it very clear that his intention was to shift the focus of war from Iraq to Afghanistan. The argument then was we couldn’t afford another four years of Bush, and that McCain would be a continuation of the same failed policies.

While Obama is different from Bush, and isn’t as bad as Republicans make him out to be, the president’s continuation of Bush era policies – continued domestic spying, no closure of Guantanamo, the sanctioning of torture, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention Wall Street bailouts and pandering to corporate America – are indefensible.

But is this a wise move? Certainly there are other candidates who would be more acceptable to liberals (Alan Grayson and Russ Feingold are mentioned), but could they gain the political (and financial) capital needed to mount a credible opposition?

What about the ever present Green Party? Could they make a serious push in 2012 with backing from big name liberals who oppose Obama’s wars?

Is this struggle for the soul of America worth the risk of a President Romney or President Gingrich or a President Palin?

At what point do you sacrifice “standing on your principles” and “doing the right thing” for “political pragmatism and expediency?” Well, ok. Liberals have been doing that for years with support of the Democratic party. When will it stop? If not now, when?

The Raw Story: Hundreds of liberal activists pledge to oppose Obama in 2012

What We Can REALLY Learn From China

Chinese president Hu Jintao has almost completed his 4-day hang in DC with President Barack Obama. The two of them inked a snazzy little $45 billion trade agreement that won’t do much for working Americans, but will help both leaders improve their image with US consumers and job seekers.

Here’s a great post by former Secretary of Labor, Robert Reich, that explains exactly why this big deal isn’t a very big deal. Read the whole thing when you get a chance, but here is the part that resonated most with me.

China has a national economic strategy designed to make it, and its people, the economic powerhouse of the future. They’re intent on learning as much as they can from us and then going beyond us (as they already are in solar and electric-battery technologies). They’re pouring money into basic research and education at all levels. In the last 12 years they’ve built twenty universities, each designed to be the equivalent of MIT.

Their goal is to make China Number one in power and prestige, and in high-wage jobs.

The United States doesn’t have a national economic strategy. Instead, we have global corporations that happen to be headquartered here. Their goal is to maximize profits, wherever they can make the most money. They’ll make things in America for export to China when that’s most profitable; they’ll make it in China and give the Chinese their know-how when that’s the best way to boost the bottom line. They’ll utilize research and development wherever around the world it will deliver the biggest bang for the dollar.

Meanwhile, Republicans and deficit hawks are cutting publicly-supported R&D. And cash-starved states are cutting K-12 education, and slashing the budgets of their great public research universities, such as the one I teach at.

The bottom line? China has a national economic strategy that is based in the understanding that education will make them the economic powerhouse of the present and future. The US has no national economic strategy, and is cutting investments in education to the detriment of its middle and working classes.

When are we going to learn that investment in education is our best ticket out of this economic quagmire? Never if we keep closing schools and cutting higher ed spending.

What We Can REALLY Learn From China

Chinese president Hu Jintao has almost completed his 4-day hang in DC with President Barack Obama. The two of them inked a snazzy little $45 billion trade agreement that won’t do much for working Americans, but will help both leaders improve their image with US consumers and job seekers.

Here’s a great post by former Secretary of Labor, Robert Reich, that explains exactly why this big deal isn’t a very big deal. Read the whole thing when you get a chance, but here is the part that resonated most with me.

China has a national economic strategy designed to make it, and its people, the economic powerhouse of the future. They’re intent on learning as much as they can from us and then going beyond us (as they already are in solar and electric-battery technologies). They’re pouring money into basic research and education at all levels. In the last 12 years they’ve built twenty universities, each designed to be the equivalent of MIT.

Their goal is to make China Number one in power and prestige, and in high-wage jobs.

The United States doesn’t have a national economic strategy. Instead, we have global corporations that happen to be headquartered here. Their goal is to maximize profits, wherever they can make the most money. They’ll make things in America for export to China when that’s most profitable; they’ll make it in China and give the Chinese their know-how when that’s the best way to boost the bottom line. They’ll utilize research and development wherever around the world it will deliver the biggest bang for the dollar.

Meanwhile, Republicans and deficit hawks are cutting publicly-supported R&D. And cash-starved states are cutting K-12 education, and slashing the budgets of their great public research universities, such as the one I teach at.

The bottom line? China has a national economic strategy that is based in the understanding that education will make them the economic powerhouse of the present and future. The US has no national economic strategy, and is cutting investments in education to the detriment of its middle and working classes.

When are we going to learn that investment in education is our best ticket out of this economic quagmire? Never if we keep closing schools and cutting higher ed spending.

Plight of the Black Republican

The Republican-led 112th Congress is now in session. GOP gains during the 2010 election were fueled largely by the inability of the punk Democrats to mobilize their own base.

Logic would suggest that this is a good time to recruit young blacks to the Republican fold. But, as this video demonstrates, being a black Republican isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

http://www.youtube.com/v/P288Tb8pkzU?fs=1&hl=en_US

Plight of the Black Republican

The Republican-led 112th Congress is now in session. GOP gains during the 2010 election were fueled largely by the inability of the punk Democrats to mobilize their own base.

Logic would suggest that this is a good time to recruit young blacks to the Republican fold. But, as this video demonstrates, being a black Republican isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

Nadir Featured on Good Life Radio Mon. Dec. 6

UPDATE: I’m not on until the 10pm hour. Sorry for any inconvenience.

TONITE! Nadir is the featured artist on Good Life Radio with K-Lew, Slim and Fal J at 9pm EST on WHPR 88.1FM in Detroit and live online at www.fm881whpr.com (Windows Media Player).

We’ll watch Nadir music videos, listen to music, perhaps check out some documentaries about Nadir and take your calls. Join the conversation at 313-868-0331 or 313-868-8688.

Budget Hawks Threaten Job-Based Health Care

We’ll see how all those anti-universal heath care conservatives feel when their employers eliminate health coverage.

From Huffington Post:

Budget proposals from leaders in both parties have urged shrinking or eliminating tax breaks that help make employer health insurance the leading source of coverage in the nation and a middle-class mainstay.

The idea isn’t to just raise revenue, economists say, but finally to turn Americans into frugal health care consumers by having them face the full costs of their medical decisions.

Such a re-engineering was rejected by Democrats only a few months ago, at the height of the health care overhaul debate. But Washington has changed, with Republicans back in power and widespread fears that the burden of government debt may drag down the economy.

The dreamers who believe employers would increase pay if relieved of the burden of health care costs are the same dreamers who believe that trickle-down economics has improved life for Americans over the past 30 years.

Yes, Virginia. We may have lost our best shot at universal coverage with the compromise on Obama’s already compromising public option. We may soon lose our health care coverage altogether if budget hawks have their way and tax credits are eliminated.

Read the article HERE – Huffington Post: Job-Based Health Care Threatened

Budget Hawks Threaten Job-Based Health Care

We’ll see how all those anti-universal heath care conservatives feel when their employers eliminate health coverage.

From Huffington Post:

Budget proposals from leaders in both parties have urged shrinking or eliminating tax breaks that help make employer health insurance the leading source of coverage in the nation and a middle-class mainstay.

The idea isn’t to just raise revenue, economists say, but finally to turn Americans into frugal health care consumers by having them face the full costs of their medical decisions.

Such a re-engineering was rejected by Democrats only a few months ago, at the height of the health care overhaul debate. But Washington has changed, with Republicans back in power and widespread fears that the burden of government debt may drag down the economy.

The dreamers who believe employers would increase pay if relieved of the burden of health care costs are the same dreamers who believe that trickle-down economics has improved life for Americans over the past 30 years.

Yes, Virginia. We may have lost our best shot at universal coverage with the compromise on Obama’s already compromising public option. We may soon lose our health care coverage altogether if budget hawks have their way and tax credits are eliminated.

Read the article HERE – Huffington Post: Job-Based Health Care Threatened

Load More
© Nadir Omowale