he made valid points and looked a fool with others,,,

Im glad he has youtube for his 15 minutes of fame. The usual tunnelvision that if it don't happen to him it doesn't happen and putting down others attempts with no real relevant suggestions of his own

he obviously isn't in the NAACP or involved in civil rights groups because they are constantly addressing these things he claims they are 'nwhere around for',, he lets the media mold his beliefs,, unfortunately

I don't support rioting either, and its not something just black folks do. And, wouldn't you know, since he aired his meltdown, things have considerably calmed down.

The idea that if we become more Godly it will make things change is BS. As a Christian, slaves were VERY Godly, but that didn't change the nature of those who were demonish and able to subjugate them to less than human, and that's real talk


so yeah,, self reflection and improvement is an AIM in any demographic and with any individual, but that alone doesn't CHANGE injustice done to others,,,

the usual kewl youtube activism,,,good entertainment,,,

Msharmony, you have mischaracterized Dr. Ben Carson, Alan West, Dr. Alan Keyes and Herman Cain.

not really,,,

none of these men address racial injustices on any regular basis except during election cycles, when they mostly steer clear of addressing it in any direct way and instead result to the clich�s that imply that all that matters is what the individual thinks and believes,,,,,


there may be isolated incidents when they have spoken up, but their main and consistent message is focused on the individual and rarely the demographic history or effects,,,,

and that's ok, cause their careers are about political achievement so they have to speak to a broad base to keep their jobs

but its also ok, for civil rights activists and public figures to speak to THEIR base, and keep THEIR jobs,,,

Black economists Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams have frequently talked about the political policies that hurt black Americans. Yet, their comments are often dismissed by Democrats because the aforementioned political policies are Democrat policies.

yes, they say helping the impoverished hurts blacks,, that's non threatening to most republican supporters so they aren't seen as 'race baiting' or 'divisive'


and it is STILL not addressing Racial Injustice,,,,since that help is available to blacks and whites alike,,,,,


the 'uncomfortable' topics, like police brutality, or job discrimination, or educational disparity,,etc,, are not addressed,, just matters that speak to making sure constituents can keep more of their money,, and feel like its actually HELPING others to do so,,,




an economist is not the same as an activist

Those two African-American economists present facts that Democrat activists don't want to acknowledge.

Sharpton is nothing more than a tool in the box of the white liberal elite.

Anytime they want to ratchet up a controversy they pull him out of the box.


The last thing the white liberal puppet masters want is for local community leaders to be heard on the national stage of 24 hour cable news channels..

It is controlling the message..

http://conservativetribune.com/ferguson-mayor-to-sharpton-stop-inciting-racism/

........Unfortunately, what Ferguson got was MSNBC host and professional race-baiter Al Sharpton, who once again is using a local tragedy to sow his seeds of racial division and animosity.

But Sharpton isn't exactly being welcomed with open arms in Ferguson. He has been heckled more than once, with references to his corrupt past. The Ferguson Mayor, along with several other community leaders, really don't want him there anymore, according to Newsmax.

There's a lot of concern among a lot of the African American leaders here,Mayor James Knowles said on Wednesday.

Knowles continued,I have the concern that we'll lose sight of this young man and the tragedy and become clearly a national spectacle, instead of focusing on this young man and the issues at hand. Sometimes star power is not always a good thing.........

The good that Rev. Sharpton has done in Ferguson is ...

they share opinions about the economy that have no uniform consent amongst the economic community,, that is their job, addressing economic issues

activists address injustices,,,,

showing UP,, its a means of being supportive,,,,

bringing attention to the situation

the same 'good' that any newscaster or news personality does when they cover a story,,,,,

and Im sure that HE, his organization and his broadcast will be around to support and shine light on this community and these families,,,,

Every time I hear Sharpton mention MLK, I wince. He should take a page from King, and actually try to make a positive difference in this country.

They tried to say that being gay is a sin, and I said that adultery is a sin. Adultery is responsible for breaking up more marriages, but do we put that in the Constitution? It’s absurd. Remarks announcing the National Action Network anti-homophobia campaign, quoted in Jamal Watson (3 August 2005) "Sharpton Pledges Fight Against Homophobia Among Blacks" New York Sun


Jim Crow is old. That's not who I'm mindful of today. The problem is that Jim Crow has sons. The one we've got to battle is James Crow Jr., Esq. He's a little more educated. He's a little slicker. He's a little more polished, but the results are the same. Remarks at the funeral of Rosa Parks (3 November 2005)[citation

I'm projected as an ambulance chaser, but I'm more the ambulance. People call me because they know I will come.… I have never fought a case where they didn't ask me to come. People have this picture like I'm sitting up in bed at night with a walkie-talkie. "You hear anything? Oh, let's run! It's Virginia today!"… Every victim calls us.… "Who put Sharpton in charge?" The victim! Interview by David Shankbone (3 December 2007

he actually does try,,,,

We constantly spoke about black figures involved in politics and history. But we acknowledged them as people and by their ideas, and not by the color of their skin, which is what some people still do beyond comprehension.

I don't see how Al merits any form of serious discussion when he is no different than Joel Osteen in terms of where he "sells" his opinions. Which are entirely and exclusively based on religious beliefs and ideals. Most of which should always be extracted from politics. His faith bleeds into his politics one too many times, it's a liability.

so the objection is to morals when they can in any way be attributed to 'religion',,,,those standards and morals have no place ANYWHERE but in church?

,,,ok, Im used to that I suppose

but back to his relevance,, like a sportscaster speaks about SPORTS to SPORTS fans

like a pastor speaks about the bible to the relibious

he is a civil rights activist who speaks about civil rights to the audience that is interested in listening

no one forces the causes or interests to touch people, and those causes and interests only have to be relevant to the audience which seeks to listen or learn about them

He is a campaigner of religion for everything he does in the public eye. I never understood his image to be anything other then being just another product of distracted thinking. You can't possibly conclude the multitude of his ideas are secular. He is so far removed from that notion it's comical.

well, its not very 'religious' to take up gay rights

and the quest for justice is also not a 'religious' concept in any strict sense

the quest to diminish violence is not a strictly 'religious' concept

the quest to diminish discrimination is also not a strictly 'religious' concept

so yeah, I can actually conclude quite logically that the multitude of his CIVIL RIGHTS work is human,,, which includes both humans that happen to have values deemed 'religious' and those who don't


martin luther king was likewise a 'religious' man,,

as a Christian, I easily recognize most of his methods as direct expressions of the doctrines of forgiveness and turn the other check,

so his 'religious' values no doubt couldn't be completely separated from what he considered right/wrong, or just/unjust,,, but that doesn't mean his messages weren't applicable to religious and 'secular' alike,,,,

He has no choice but to support the liberal agenda..

Who do you think funds his National Action Network?

The Michael Browns of the world or the white liberal elites?

yes, funding means no choice, as only one side can make donations....


or could it be, that If I am say, against abortion, I would likely SEEK out and be sought out by those who also don't agree with abortion

my CHOICE of which side to fall on kind of predicates the funding I will receive when starting these things up

not the other way around