The Tuesday Talking Points
With a nod to Peter Abelard's "Sic et Non," if it's Tuesday, then it's time for the Hobbservation Point's "Yes" or "No" analysis of the hottest headlines.
1. Is “Why do you people make everything about race" a legitimate question of concern from whites to Blacks on social media?
No!
Last Saturday, I drove several hours across North Florida with my mother, Vivian Hobbs, as we headed to a memorial service for one of our relatives. In between checking out CLE podcasts and the ESPN broadcast of the FAMU win over Grambling, I listened carefully as mom went in and out talking about the old plantation in South Georgia where her grandfather, uncle, and male cousins picked cotton as sharecroppers—while her grandmother, mother, and aunts cooked, cleaned, and provided "The Help" well into the 1960s.
While mom and I have had these discussions many times before, these days it seems that her reminisces are more frequent, detailed, and extremely raw as she remembers her elders being cheated out of fair earnings by their white "bosses," being referred to as "boy," "gal," or their first names by white men, women, and even little children, and the part that enrages her male heir and protector, the lustful stares from older white men that would prompt my grandmothers and aunt to tell her and her girl cousins to "get inside" when those potential rapists would come 'round.
Momma's memories typically are interwoven with other reminders of the indignities of the not so distant Jim Crow past, like not being able to try on clothes in stores...or buying food at the back doors of lunch counters and restaurants (when there was enough money to do that)...or receiving hand-me-down and totally disfigured books and supplies from white public schools despite local property taxes being assessed in a "color-blind" manner...or being forced to sit in the balcony of movie theaters despite paying the same admission prices as white patrons.
As I listen to momma still teaching me nearly 50 years after my life began, her words make me resolve to do even more to expose the sophistry of those who know this same putrid history, too, but project the racial biases in America as one being far less pronounced than what it is in this present age. Those who, from Virginia, to Florida, to Texas, are now seeking to hijack public education by subverting the truth both in history and literature classes.
In fact, when I read that today's Virginia governor's race has become a dead heat because Republican Glenn Youngkin has railed in recent weeks about the emotional damage that white kids receive by reading books about slavery, like Toni Morrison's "Beloved," such reminds that instead of telling the truth about white supremacy and systemic racism past and present, some will gladly cry out about "Critical Race Theory," a concept that they neither understand nor will seek to understand, because it is far easier for these types to pretend as if they are not racist—and that systemic racism is a relic of the past—as opposed to reconciling the words of William Faulkner in Requiem of a Nun, “In the South, the past is never dead. It's not even past.”
2. Will the University of Florida reverse field and allow its faculty members to testify as experts in lawsuits emanating from Florida Senate Bill 90, the one that restricts voting access in the Sunshine State?
Yes!
I was pleasantly surprised to see that yesterday's Hobbservations, Has the University of Florida returned to its Jim Crow roots, was shared more than 3,000 times on social media within the first 24-hours, a number that is really good for an independent blog in the news metaverse. Trust, I took no pride in having to write it or address UF President Kent Fuchs for his leadership team’s horrifically tone deaf decision to usurp the free speech rights of faculty members within the school’s employ.
I find it worth repeating that the school’s latest concession, that the professors may testify so long as they do not get paid, is wholly inadequate because UF professors—like professors at other colleges and universities across the country—are allowed to earn income through books, articles, speeches, and yes, serving as expert witnesses in courts of law and before governmental committees.
But my grave concerns are far from alone as yesterday, Dr. Belle Wheelan, the head of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), sent inquiry to UF seeking to learn more about its muting of University faculty members. For those unaware, SACS is the regional accrediting board whose influence could lead to all sorts of issues that could negatively impact the brand that UF has fought to project as a public university ranked only behind UCLA, UC-Berkeley, Michigan, and Virginia in the latest U.S. News & World Report rankings. Issues that were avoidable if UF President Fuchs and his minions were not so busy genuflecting at the altar of Gov. Ron Desantis and Republican legislators who are determined to tilt the electoral playing field in their favor by “hook or crook.”
I will not put on my “Hobbstradamus” hat and speculate what the “end's gone be,” as my church elders used to sing, but I do know that each day that the UF administration refuses to reverse its position is another day when the school earns the derisive name that some opponents call it, “The University of Rosewood,” one which references the deadly Rosewood Massacre of 1923 that left scores of Blacks dead—and thousands of acres of Black owned property stolen—only miles away from Gainesville during the Jim Crow era.
3. Was Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C) right to call for Capitol police to shoot at January 6th rioters last winter?
Yes!
Well, well, well, reports surfaced yesterday that Sen. Lindsay Graham, a staunch ally of former President Donald Trump and frequent critic of January 6th Riot investigations, testily told officers in the Senate chambers last winter that they should shoot any protesters that broke through—only minutes before fleeing to safety on that chaotic day.
This revelation caused Fox News host Tucker Carlson to exclaim on Monday night, “…Shoot American citizens for the crime of trespassing? Really? This is the conservative position? Unarmed protesters show up ... Look, they shouldn't have been there. We never defended that and never would. But kill them? What the hell is wrong with you Lindsey Graham? How long before you're ordering drone attacks on people whose politics you don't like."
Where I struggle with Carlson's questions and commentary is my sincere belief that had those been a group of armed Blacks tearing up the Capitol while screaming “Hang Mike Pence,” that he would have labeled them “Black Lives Matter thugs” or “ANTIFA insurectionists”—and called for their put down by any means necessary. I know this because Carlson railed ad nauseam about largely peaceful (with some relatively marginal violent) protests after George Floyd’s death last summer, so I know that he would have screamed for the streets to flow with blood if “The Blacks” or “The Muslims” or “The Mexicans” had been fomenting anarchy in the Capitol.
But Carlson chose to call the January 6th MAGA rioters “protesters,” like they were peacefully marching, kneeling, and singing “We Shall Overcome” in the Capitol, because their political persuasion (and complexion) provided them a benefit of the doubt that other groups would not get on his platform.
As for Sen. Graham, while I am no fan of his because he rolls with the prevailing winds all of the time instead of taking a stance for righteousness and justice, he was right to remind officers of their duties because that MAGA mob was enraged on January 6th—and well armed—and while a surreal moment, Graham told the officers that their duty was to protect members of Congress up to deadly force if necessary.
For the above stated reasons, Graham may have received Tucker Carlson's pillory, but he will receive the Hobbservation Point's praise for his words on January 6th.
Thank you for subscribing to the Hobbservation Point. Have a great day…