In The Year 2100, Blacks Will Only Be Seen in Museums

I know that the title is unsettling.  I heard my father say that recently. He said that at the rate black people are destroying their communities, that 100 years from now we won't even exist.  Think about that for a second. That's a strong statement!

If you're not black, then you may feel uncomfortable agreeing with that thought or speaking on it. If you are black, then you should feel uncomfortable in knowing that although it may not be true, you can understand the concept.

Here in Jackson, MS, a 15 year old girl was shot outside of Wingfield High School after a fight. She died later at the hospital from a gun shot wound to the chest. Shortly after this tragedy occurred, videos surfaced showing multiple fights at that high school from this year and last year. At least eight videos ranging from classroom brawls to outside gatherings.

Kids fighting is nothing new.  It happened when I was in school, too.  I think that the difference is today is that it's glorified on an entirely new level in 2013.  Teachers no longer have control over classrooms due to the policies put in place that restricts them.  Parents have no control over kids at home because most of them are either single parents or too immature to be a parent.

So, if kids are steadily engaging in acts of violence and parents don't know how to guide them to behave like human beings, then why shouldn't my father feel the way that he does?

Nelson Mandela just passed away a few days ago.  He represented something we may never see again in any leader, regardless of color: restraint.  Mandela could have easily lashed out against white people for putting him in jail for almost 30 years.  But, he decided that it wasn't worth it.  He spent the remaining years of his life trying to install peace into society instead of the opposite.  Sometimes your worst enemy will learn to love you if you show compassion.

For every Mandela, there seem to be 10,000 non-Mandelas born each day.  Black people who just don't believe in leaving the world in a better place than how they found it.  My generation (70's babies) were the cause of that.  We were the generation that decided that we would allow our kids certain freedoms that our parents wouldn't allow us.  Now we have a generation of kids who only want what they want regardless of the end result.

It's that mentality that makes being violent feel like option number one instead of a last resort.  It makes taking care of your kids seem like a burden instead of a responsibility.  It makes dating the opposite sex seem like a game instead of an opportunity to find someone to share your life.

How can a race of people possibly survive against those odds?  Maybe my father was right.  Neither one of us will be here to verify in the year 2100, but maybe this blog post will serve as notice to those who will.

Me and Ms. Smith

I saw my elementary school principal, Ms. Ann Smith, and my 3rd grade teacher, Mrs. Crawford, at McAllister's Deli a few days ago.  Do you know that Ms. Smith still remembers me, my mom and my brother (who is 6 yrs older) and I haven't been her student since 1978?  Her recall is amazing!

It was so nice to see her again.  I remember the days when I was always on my best behavior in elementary school because of the level of respect I had for my teachers and Ms. Smith.  I stayed out of trouble because on top of upsetting my parents, the last thing that I wanted was to disappoint my teachers or Ms. Smith.

Parents, please teach your kids how to respect others.  Things were so simple back then, but today's parents tell their kids, "you only need to listen to me" and that's so far from the truth.  It truly takes a village to raise a child and I'm a product of that.  I can list a number of adults who helped mold my life because my parents allowed them to do so.

My parents allowed responsible adults to discipline me in any way that seemed fit and I'm better for it.  Stop telling your kids that you're the only authority in their life or their school principal will remember them for all of the wrong reasons instead of the right ones.

What can parents do to get kids back on the right track of respecting others?

What's Wrong With A Yellow Dog?

Yellow dog - A slang term referring to a school bus.

Okay, this is another one of my rants about when I was young, we did things this way type of deals. When I was young, (stop laughing), I would guess that 85% of the students in my school rode a bus. We would get up early, make our way to the bus stop, hop on and sit two-to-a-seat on the way to a day of school. This was done to-and-from school for 10 years for me. Eventually, I got old enough to drive and chauffeured myself the last two years of high school.

Fast forward to 2011. I have no way of verifying this, but based on what I'm seeing, I think it's safe to say that 85% of kids don't ride the bus these days. How do I know? Because every day, I sit behind a line of cars and minivans dropping off their kids at a nearby elementary and middle school.

(start rant here)

What's wrong with the bus? Is your child too good to ride the bus? Are you one of those parents who think that removing your child from the real world is some how protecting them? Now, if your bus happens to be over-crowded, then I can understand not subjecting your kid to that. But, don't think that it won't some how cause some animosity with the kids who do ride the bus. Kids will hate on other kids who are different. Bullies may ride the bus, but they will still see your child at school and could harass them for being too good for the bus.

Can someone explain to me, a non-parent, why so many kids don't ride the bus?

If I'm barking up the wrong tree on this, then tell me. I can admit when I'm wrong and I know that there are exceptions to every rule. But, I just don't see why half of my hometown sits in front of the school, blocking traffic, as I go to work daily.

Shut Your Pie Hole!

Back in December, I recommended that some parents "Bring Back The Shame." Well, this kid's parents did it. Boy, did they do it.

Here's the story I saw on online:

Corner punishment is working, Mom says: MyFoxTAMPABAY.com

Now, I have no problem with what the mom did. In fact, I applaud it. So, why the title of the blog post? The idiot (or idiots) who reported this woman and said she was in some way mentally abusing her son.

Shut your pie hole! I'm so sick of these chumps who don't have the guts to do anything that may hurt their kid's feelings. Your child is not your friend. Let me repeat. Your child is not your friend!

Besides, every child is different. What may work for one person's child won't work for another. Now, although we don't know what efforts the mother made to truly turn her son around, we can't argue that although extreme, her desire to "bring back the shame" can be effective. It was very effective when I was growing up. Just the threat of being humiliated by my parents was enough for me to "straighten up fly right" for most of my childhood. Maybe a haircut may have been a start for this kid, but to each their own.

Why is it when someone does something of "shock value" to let their kid know they're not playing, another person has to call Child Protective Services?



People complained about the "Tiger Moms" and how they raise their kids. It's not up to us to determine if someone's culture is effective or not if there is no physical harm being done to the child. Obviously the "Tiger Moms" are very effective in what they do since China runs rings around Americans in pretty much everything except gym class. Their kids won't be asked to the prom, but the Prom King and Prom Queen will probably be working for those "Tiger Cubs" 10 years after Prom Night.

Look, it's okay to voice your opinion. That's why I blog in the first place. So, I'm not saying that a person doesn't have a right to vocally disagree with what Rhonda Holden did or what "Tiger Mom," Amy Chua, has suggested.

But, that's all you should do: vocally disagree. Without any signs of physically harming her child, I wouldn't call CPS on them any quicker than I would call CPS on one of you for taking your child's cell phone or Xbox 360 away. Sure, children can be emotionally damaged, but in order to build anything, you have to test it first. A parent should know the limits of their children's emotionally stability. You can't say that taking your kid's cell phone is any more stressful on the child than standing on the corner holding an "I'm A Dummy" sign.



Besides, isn't raising a child about preparing them for life? No one goes through life without bringing something on themselves. How we recover from it is what makes us who we are in life. Rhonda Holden may not have the means to be a stay-at-home mom. Her son may not be able to go to a nice private school. Just like the mentor said, this may just be a "cry for help."

Shouldn't we meet cries for help with assistance instead of resistance?

Bring Back the Shame

The Mrs. and I were talking over Chinese food today about kids and how they are at school these days. We hear all kinds of horror stories because we have a friend who is a high school teacher.

The Mrs. made a very important point to me that I had not considered: kids no longer have shame.

Basically, it means that the things that made me so embarrassed, that I got my act together and did better, don't affect today's child.

I remember being in 1st grade and having the messiest desk in the room. I'd stuff papers inside the cubby hole of my desk and think nothing of it. One day, my teacher came by and said, "Quincy, you have the messiest desk in the school."

I was hurt. I didn't want to be the messiest desk in the school. As I slid out of my desk and squatted down to collect the papers from inside of it, I can remember the other kids just staring at me.

After that day, my desk was never messy again. Why? Because the shame I felt prompted me to want to do better/not be in that situation again.

It starts at home. Doing something stupid wasn't rewarded in my parents' home. There were consequences to what I did. My parents knew how to embarrass me. I knew that if I did something really dumb that it would result in my mom taking a day off work and sitting in my classroom to make sure I acted correctly. Now, that never happened, but the thought of my mom sitting in my classroom and humiliating me in front of my friends terrified me.

Do parents threaten to do that today? I wonder.



Today's child seems immune to shame brought on by criticism. Why? Maybe it's because we reward even last place in competitions. Maybe it's because we use "pleasant" colors to grade homework instead of a big, harsh, red "X" that I received on mine as a child. Maybe it's because behavior levels at school are like terror alerts. "Little Jeffrey is on 'red' today." Garbage. How about "Little Jeffrey is bad and needs some discipline!"

We're too nice to kids. We focus so hard on not hurting their feelings that when they should be hurt, they don't even know it. Kids on sitcoms talk back to their parents and the laugh track plays. You don't think children see this? You don't think they feel as if they're able to say what they're thinking without consequences?

Not in my household! I learned at a very early age that TV was fantasy thanks to "The Brady Bunch". Yes, "The Brady Bunch". That wholesome show got me in a load of trouble as a youth from one particular episode. The episode when Greg called Mike and Carol by their first names instead of Mom and Dad did me in. I tried to call my parents by their first names and my father went off on me like I had called him an expletive.

So, I'm not saying that you have to scream your child down with profanity a la Kenny Powers from "Eastbound and Down". Nor am I saying that you have to break out the belt like James Evans did in the 70's on "Good Times". I am saying to you, no, I am begging you, that you do something to let the child know, "hey, that's no okay that you did that!"



It's time to bring back the shame... hardcore to the brain.

School Board Shenanigans

First, I lay out the story for you and then I proceed to rant afterwards...

I was reading yesterday's newspaper and an article about iPads caught my attention. The Rankin County School District spent $25,000 on iPads (50 iPads) for principals, school board members and district department heads. District officials say the new technology will help educators "stay mobile and abreast of new technology".

The deputy superintendent of elementary programs in Rankin stated that the world is so technologically advanced that the iPads will help them "stay on the cutting edge".

The first few iPads were bought with Parent-Teacher Organization money for a few principals, but then more principals wanted one. After receiving a federal grant for $116,000 to improve internet connections and related infrastructure, $25,000 of that money was use to be more iPads for principals.

The plan is to get iPads for the teachers and high school students within the next few years. The reasons given are:

"There are educational games on the iPad."
"Principals can use the iPads to do teacher evaluations and give instant feedback."
"They also can use the devices to quickly look up student information without having to return to their offices."

Some parents have even chimed in to support the purchase of iPads in the schools. "Book bags are really heavy for the kids, and if they can eliminate the books and condense them onto an iPad, it would be beneficial."

Okay, now here comes my cynical view of this garbage. I think I've held my tongue long enough to give you an overview of everything.

(clears throat) To the lady who stated iPads are easier to carry than books: how sorry must your children be to not be able to carry books? Books have been carried to school for decades and now all of a sudden they're "really heavy"?

It's parents like that who make me wish a license was required to even have children. It's the "punkification of America". Parents babying their kids so much that we wind up with a bunch of Lindsay Lohans in the world. But, that's a story for another blog.

Sorry, but I got a bit off-track. iPads for upper-level administration is supposed to be for the improvement of the school system? Really Rankin County? My god kids' mom is a high school teacher in the Rankin County school district. I can't count how many times she's had to come out of her pocket for every day school supplies for her kids and now her principal is trekking around the office setting up his iTunes playlist.

So, upper-level admins (whose jobs are mostly made up) can get $500 toys while the students don't even have the necessary items that they need to participate in a normal school day. And the reason I say most upper-level admins are "made up" positions is because the Department of Education has a superintendent or bureau director for every single thing in school:

Bureau Manager of Healthy Schools, Bureau Director II Child Nutrition, Bureau Director II Innovative Support, Bureau Director II Conservatorship... Do I need to continue? Conservatorship isn't even recognized by my spell checker so how in the world is it a legitimate position? LOL! The MS Dept. of Education hiearchy chart looks like a family tree that dates back to the Mayflower.

MS ranks at the bottom in education every year because these losers are destroying the budget by creating these fake jobs for their friends and buying company vehicles and toys. Stop pissing on the people's legs and telling us that it's raining.

Corruption isn't just on Wall Street any more. It's every where. Everything is a business now. Hospitals have to keep their rooms full. Can't make money if people aren't sick. Prisons have to keep their jail cells fulls. Can't make profits off of cheap labor without someone to work it.

Add our school system to the list of corrupt businesses. We have to deal with school board shenanigans simply over one reason: because there is money in it. That money should be for the kids, not the fat cats who probably haven't stepped on campus in months.

Parents are blaming teachers for their kids not learning, but low wages and lack of supplies isn't helping the situation. Do you really think those kids are going to get iPads in a few years? Or even the teachers?

I hate to play the role of Conspiracy Brotha, but some one has to say something. I work with so many people who complain about some of the same things I do, yet they don't ever do a thing about it. They don't vote. They don't attend meetings at City Hall. They sit back and fuss as if that alone will change things. Guess what? It hasn't!

In the words of my 6th grade teacher, Mrs. Ellis, "get off of your rusty dusty (translation: butt) and do something about it!"

What Would You Do?

Please watch the video below and tell me what would you do?

How would you handle this situation?

Please list all of your comments below.

R.I.P. Rhythm and Blues :(

What has happened to my R&B? My beautiful genre in which I could always rely on to take me through a range of emotions from listening to one mix tape/CD. Gone are the days when I could get into my car, turn on my radio, and not have to change the station until a commercial break. Now, I'm scanning through 10 presets in my car and I'm struggling to find something worth listening to for more than a few minutes.

I know some of my younger peers are saying to themselves, "Man, you've just reached that age when you think your music is the end-all, be-all". Well, that's kind of true, but only to a certain extent. Sure, I do think the 70's and 80's are the two best decades of music, but that's not why I am no longer feeling today's R&B.

I'm off the R&B bandwagon now because it's so unrecognizable from what it used to be. Today's R&B shouldn't be classified as such. I think it's time a new genre is created. For one: you don't even have to know how to sing because your voice can just be auto-tuned. Keith Sweat couldn't sing, but that didn't stop him from trying. LOL! He was even so bold as to join forces with Gerald Levert and Johnny Gill, two of the best singers of their era. That's "confidence" defined right there. Or "clueless". But, I digress.

Usher and Will.I.Am have the "OMG" song and John Blu is "In Love With Yo Booty". I won't lie to you, but I actually like both songs. I wonder if Roger Troutman's estate is receiving royalties from them and T-Pain for these computerized voices? If they only had iPhone apps when he was alive...

Anyway... Secondly, and most importantly: R&B no longer makes me think in the abstract. It doesn't paint a picture. Now, it's in-your-face. Nothing to the imagination, just "boom", here it is.

No one is finding "Love on A Two-Way Street" any more like Stacy Lattisaw once did. Or finding "One Hundred Ways" to please their woman like James Ingram. Jonathan Butler once sung about a woman named "Sarah" that he missed so badly. He loved her so much that he said her name twice and asked, "what happened to you and I?" and "how did the fire die?". That's emotion. (I just took some people back with that "Sarah, Sarah" reference. Yeah, you're smiling right now if you're old school). That's putting something on a listener's mind and taking them back to a place in time to where they lost someone. And even if you were too young to have experienced love yet, you knew how serious it was because of the soulful lyrics you heard from the crooners and divas.


Nope. Not these days. In fact, this week, I heard the following songs during my 12 minute commute to work: Trey Songz's "Neighbors Know My Name" which is basically about a guy who's so good in bed the neighbor's know him by name from his woman screaming it. Then I heard The Dream's "Make-Up Bag" which is about a guy who stayed out late and is in his woman's dog house, so he leaves $5,000 on her make-up bag to keep from hearing her mouth. Next was "Lil' Freak" by Usher and some female which is about a menage a trois, I think. I know he mentions girls kissing and putting their hands in each other's pants or something. I can't say for sure because at this point, I've changed the station to 105.9 for sports talk during my last few minutes of the ride to work.

Not one song left anything to the imagination. One was about a man with skills so good the neighbors hear him having sex. The second is about a guy who stayed out too late, but doesn't care because he can buy his woman's affection with five grand. The last is about a guy going out and picking up two women who are tongue wrestling in the corner of the club.

No songs about heartache like "How Can You Mend A Broken Heart?" by Al Green or Lisa Lisa and Full Force being "All Cried Out". No songs showing appreciation for a love like Larry Graham's "One In A Million" or Atlantic Starr's "Masterpiece".


Just songs about either having sex, paying a woman hush money, and three-way sex. Wow. Less than 12 minutes of radio.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not necessarily knocking the songs. They're not my cup of tea, but that doesn't mean these artists don't have a right to perform these songs. My question is: is this R&B? I'm guessing the average teen doesn't even know what "R&B" stands for. Not "Rims & Bentleys". Not "Racks & Booty". Not "Reefer & Blunts". "R&B" stands for "Rhythm & Blues". It was a combination of jazz and blues that started in the 40's. Over time, it has been generalized as a genre.

Think of old school R&B as a tree. Back in the day, there were branches that stemmed from the root of R&B. There was Funk: Cameo, Brothers Johnson, and George Clinton. There was Disco: Donna Summer, Gloria Gaynor, and A Taste of Honey. There was Soul: Ray Charles, James Brown, and Aretha Franklin. There was New Jack Swing: Guy, Bell Biv Devoe, and Tony Toni Tone'!

Maybe it's time we create a new branch of R&B for today's sound. Sex Anthems? Grindin'? Dip & Sip? (referencing dancing and drinking in a club)

Hey, I'm just trying to help the young school find something to call their own. And before you under-30 people start hating on this blog, I want you to think of the last wedding you attended and think of what was sung during the ceremony. Was it "Spend My Life With You" by Eric Benet and Tamia? Was it Mul-ty's "Looking For Love"? Yeah, admit it. You need us over-30 people :)