Who All Gonna Be There?

There’s a slang phrase that gets asked almost automatically whenever somebody gets invited somewhere:

“Who all gonna be there?”

Before the date, the time, or even what the event is really about gets a second thought, that question jumps straight to the front of the line.

Now, to be fair, sometimes it’s a legitimate question.

Maybe you’re trying to avoid an ex.
Maybe there’s somebody you truly don’t get along with.
Maybe past experience has taught you that certain combinations of people can turn a peaceful evening into an episode of reality TV nobody asked for.

That part makes sense.

But let’s be honest, most of the time that question isn’t about safety, peace, or avoiding drama.

It’s about measuring the event’s perceived value.

People want to know if the “right” crowd will be there.

Will the popular people show up?
Will there be enough status attached to the room?
Will it be “worth” their time?

In other words, some folks aren’t deciding whether to attend based on the person who invited them.
They’re deciding based on the guest list’s social ranking, like they’re evaluating a nightclub instead of responding to a personal invitation.

And that’s where the common sense part gets lost.

The person inviting you thought enough of you to include you.
Out of everyone they could have called, texted, or told, they thought, I want this person there.

That alone should mean something.

Instead, the first response becomes a quiet judgment: Who else made the cut?

There’s something a little insulting about that.

It subtly tells the host that their invitation alone isn’t enough.
Their presence, their company, and their event only matter if enough “worthy” people are attached to it.

That’s a selfish way to look at relationships.

Sometimes showing up should be about supporting the person who invited you, not auditing the room before you decide if it meets your standards.

Not every gathering needs to pass a popularity test.

Sometimes the real question shouldn’t be “Who all gonna be there?”

It should be: “Do I value the person who invited me enough to show up?”

Cinco de Mayo and the Confederate Blind Spot

I was out celebrating Cinco de Mayo with friends last night and realized something. Most people don't even know what they're celebrating... 

Cinco de Mayo shows up every year dressed as a party holiday, and most people never question it. It’s not Mexican Independence Day. It marks the Battle of Puebla—and that fight quietly worked against the Confederacy during the Civil War.

Here's a brief history lesson (since certain history topics are no longer allowed in schools): On May 5, 1862, Mexican forces led by Ignacio Zaragoza defeated the army of Napoleon III (nephew of the Napoleon we all know). France wanted control in Mexico and influence in North America to gain access to cotton (rare commodity in Europe at the time).

At the same time, the Confederacy was desperate for European support because they needed more weapons. And France was a potential ally.

That Mexican victory didn’t end France’s plans, but it slowed them down—and timing was everything.

• It delayed French expansion in the region.
• It reduced chances of aid for the Confederacy.
• It gave the Union time to strengthen its position and "open up a can" on the Confederacy in Vicksburg and Gettysburg.

If Mexico would have lost the Battle of Puebla, then that would have meant the Confederacy gaining access to more weapons from the French before losing ground in Vicksburg and Gettysburg. But the loss delayed them over a year. That year made a huge difference in the war.

Some people celebrate Cinco de Mayo while romanticizing the Confederacy, not realizing the holiday marks a moment that hurt Confederate chances. That's typical. 

History doesn’t care about modern contradictions. Most people celebrate holidays without any sense of the origin. Americans just want any excuse to drink, right? I bet even ICE agents were tipsy from margaritas last night.

Cinco de Mayo isn’t just food and drinks. It’s a reminder that Mexico’s victory disrupted bigger plans and indirectly shaped the American Civil War.

Enjoy the celebration each and every year, everyone. And "thank you" to that group of Mexican soldiers for doing their thing almost 200 years ago. Had they not, then I might have been in a cotton field today instead of writing this now.

When Accountability Becomes “Hating” or "Racism"

Somewhere along the way, correction started getting mistaken for persecution.

As a 54-year-old Black man, I come from a generation where being checked for how you carried yourself, how you spoke, or how you presented yourself wasn’t automatically labeled as “hate” or “racism.” Sometimes, it was simply accountability. Not every critique is an attack, and not every consequence is oppression.

Too many young people today have been taught that any pushback against their behavior must come from jealousy, hatred, or bias. If someone questions how they act in public, how they dress for certain environments, or how they speak to others, the immediate response is often, “They’re hating” or "You're being racist against me." 

No, sometimes people are responding to conduct, not identity.

And let’s be honest, the fault doesn’t begin with the youth. It starts with the generation that raised them. Parents who replaced discipline with excuses, structure with friendship, and accountability with endless validation helped create this sense of entitlement. When children are taught they should never be corrected, they grow into adults who think every criticism is discrimination.

Common sense used to tell us that freedom of expression doesn’t mean freedom from consequences. Somehow, that lesson got lost.