Connect with us

Politics

Keystone Veto: Can Obama, GOP Compromise on Anything?

Published

on

In this Jan. 10, 2015 file photo, demonstrators stand in front of the White House in Washington, during a rally in support of President Barack Obama's pledge to veto any legislation approving the Keystone XL pipeline. Supporters of the Keystone XL pipeline say the privately-funded, $8 billion project is a critically needed piece of infrastructure that will create thousands of jobs and make the U.S. dependent on oil from friends, rather than foes. Critics claim it will be disastrous for the pollution blamed for global warming and put communities along its 1,179-mile route at risk for an environmentally-damaging spill, all for oil and products that will be exported anyway. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

In this Jan. 10, 2015 file photo, demonstrators stand in front of the White House in Washington, during a rally in support of President Barack Obama’s pledge to veto any legislation approving the Keystone XL pipeline. Supporters of the Keystone XL pipeline say the privately-funded, $8 billion project is a critically needed piece of infrastructure that will create thousands of jobs and make the U.S. dependent on oil from friends, rather than foes. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

JOSH LEDERMAN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — A looming veto by President Barack Obama of a Republican-championed bill foreshadows a key question for the White House: whether the president and Republicans can find areas to work together, even as Obama strikes down many of their top priorities.

Since Republicans won full control of Congress three months ago, Obama has issued a flurry of veto threats to Republican bills. Obama hasn’t had to make good on those threats, but now a bill forcing approval of the Keystone XL pipeline is headed to his desk.

Although Obama’s intentions to reject the Keystone bill are well known, the veto nevertheless marks a turning point in Obama’s presidency, as he braces to fend off an onslaught of GOP attempts to reverse actions he has taken.

“This upcoming veto could serve to crystalize the situation on Capitol Hill,” said Jim Manley, a former top adviser to Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid. “Either Republicans are going to have to figure out a way to compromise, or they’re not going to be able to get anything done the next two years.”

That’s critical, Manley and other Democrats said, because Republicans eyeing the 2016 elections need to show they can govern successfully when in power.

The Keystone bill, passed by the House on Wednesday on a 270-152 vote, capped weeks of debate on an infrastructure project that Republicans declared their top priority after they took control of Congress. A group of 24 Republican governors wrote to Obama on Thursday urging him not to veto the bill.

Although it’s been six years since the oil pipeline was proposed, Obama has said the U.S. is still determining whether it’s in the national interest. He vowed to veto any attempts by lawmakers to usurp his authority to make the call.

Republicans, emboldened after having passed a bill they never could get through a Democratic-run Senate, planned a triumphant signing ceremony at the Capitol on Friday. Yet GOP leaders were expected to wait to send the bill to the White House until after lawmakers return from their recess later this month.

That way, when Obama vetoes the bill, Republicans will be on hand to blast the president for nixing a project they say will spur jobs and economic growth.

“The more public attention it gets, the better,” said Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., a staunch Keystone supporter.

White House officials haven’t yet decided whether Obama will veto the bill in private and announce it in a simple statement, or whether he’ll do it publicly in grander fashion, a move that would show defiance against Republican attempts to undercut him. During his administration, President Bill Clinton took that approach when he vetoed a tax-cut bill in the Rose Garden, serenaded by a brass band.

“For us, this is not filled with a lot of drama or anticipation because the president’s views on this are well known,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said in an interview. “We’re mostly interested in not letting these areas of disagreement become obstacles for working together with Congress on other issues” such as trade, tax reform and a war powers resolution.

Republicans too seemed eager not to let their Keystone poison opportunities to cut deals with the president in other areas. They pointed to a bill addressing suicide among veterans — it passed with broad bipartisan support and Obama signed it into law Thursday.

“Republicans are offering dozens of solutions to make a difference for American families and we always welcome the opportunity to work with the president on areas of common ground,” said Cory Fritz, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

In his first six years in office, Obama wielded his veto pen only twice — far less often than his predecessors, and both in minor circumstances.

Obama’s veto threats have been piling up rapidly — more than a dozen so far this year, including a new threat Thursday to kill a bill restricting transfers of prisoners out of the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Obama has also said he won’t permit legislation that would roll back his executive actions on immigration, undermine his health care law or gut his environmental protections.

Obama has one factor working in his favor: math. To override his veto, Republicans would have to muster a veto-proof majority of two-thirds in both the House and Senate, which means they’d need some Democratic votes. So far, Republicans haven’t shown they can get to 67 votes in the Senate.

___

Reach Josh Lederman on Twitter at http://twitter.com/joshledermanAP

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of July 1 – 7, 2026

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of July 1 – 7, 2026

Published

on

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Continue Reading

Activism

NPRC Joins National Grand Jury Proceedings Seeking Accountability, Constitutional Restoration

Organizers state that testimony will explore historical and political developments that they believe have contributed to the expansion of corporate influence over public institutions and governmental decision-making. Participants are expected to discuss concerns regarding constitutional governance, individual liberties, property rights, and the protection of vulnerable populations, including seniors and persons with disabilities.

Published

on

Photo by Billie Powers.
Photo by Billie Powers.

Special to The Post

The National Probate Reform Coalition (NPRC) has joined Toll and Roll and a growing coalition of advocacy organizations, victims, whistleblowers, and citizen groups in support of a nationally broadcast People’s Grand Jury proceeding scheduled for July 1 and July 7.

Organizers describe the event as a public forum designed to examine allegations of government abuse, judicial misconduct, legislative failures, and the erosion of constitutional protections affecting millions of Americans.

The proceedings will feature testimony from victims, families, advocates, and organizations from across the country who contend they have experienced harm through government actions, institutional neglect, and failures of oversight.

According to organizers, the People’s Grand Jury will focus on concerns involving probate courts, guardianships, conservatorships, child welfare systems, property rights, civil liberties, and what participants view as a growing disconnect between government institutions and the constitutional rights of the people they are sworn to serve.

NPRC is participating because many of the issues being examined mirror the concerns raised by advocates, victims, and families who have participated in its monthly town halls. For years, families have reported cases involving exploitation of elders, questionable guardianships, estate depletion, denial of due process, and a lack of meaningful oversight within probate court systems.

“This proceeding gives victims and advocates an opportunity to place their experiences on the public record,” said Tanya Dennis, lead facilitator of NPRC. “For too long, families have struggled to have their voices heard regarding elder abuse, probate exploitation, and government inaction. This forum allows those stories to be shared before a national audience.”

Organizers state that testimony will explore historical and political developments that they believe have contributed to the expansion of corporate influence over public institutions and governmental decision-making. Participants are expected to discuss concerns regarding constitutional governance, individual liberties, property rights, and the protection of vulnerable populations, including seniors and persons with disabilities.

In keeping with principles of transparency and fairness, invitations have been extended to legislators, members of the judiciary, law enforcement representatives, and other public officials who may wish to respond to concerns raised during the proceedings or defend actions taken by their respective institutions.

One of the primary outcomes sought by organizers is public consideration and support for the People’s Remedy and Restoration Act, a proposed legislative framework that advocates believe would strengthen oversight, increase accountability, provide remedies for victims of governmental abuse, and restore constitutional protections.

The proceedings are expected to be broadcast nationally, providing citizens throughout the United States an opportunity to observe testimony, review evidence presented, and participate in an ongoing conversation regarding government accountability and the protection of individual rights.

Advocates hope the hearings will encourage meaningful dialogue, legislative reform, and renewed public engagement in the democratic process.

Individuals, organizations, public officials, and members of the media interested in attending or obtaining access information may contact the organizers at tollandroll2025@gmail.com.

As Americans continue to debate the future of constitutional governance, judicial accountability, and the protection of vulnerable citizens, the July proceedings are expected to serve as a significant forum for public testimony and civic engagement. For more information, go to https://tollandroll.com

Continue Reading

Activism

Local Civil Rights Attorney, Activist Walter Riley Reveals Life Lessons from 70 Years in the Movement

Widely known in Oakland for his unifying leadership on issues of social justice and human rights, Riley is also recognized for his famous son, Raymond “Boots” Riley, a rap artist, political activist, and successful filmmaker, whose latest film, “I Love Boosters,” is now in theaters and capturing national attention.

Published

on

Walter Riley. Courtesy photo.
Walter Riley. Courtesy photo.

By Ken Epstein

Prominent civil rights attorney and activist Walter Riley recently went on radio station KPFA 94.1 to discuss his new book co-authored with local veteran organizer Jesse Strauss: “Civil Rights and Structural Attacks: Conversations with Walter Riley.”

Widely known in Oakland for his unifying leadership on issues of social justice and human rights, Riley is also recognized for his famous son, Raymond “Boots” Riley, a rap artist, political activist, and successful filmmaker, whose latest film, “I Love Boosters,” is now in theaters and capturing national attention.

Born in North Carolina, Riley has lived in San Francisco, Chicago, and Detroit, but his longtime home is Oakland, California.

Over the years, he was a leader in the South against Jim Crow, participated as a student in the historic 1968 San Francisco State University strike that created Black Studies and Ethnic Studies in the U.S. and scored victories in the fight for open college admissions.

He was also a labor organizer and was involved in early Black Panther Party formations, anti-war protests, and was a leader of the Progressive Labor Party, a pro-Mao, Marxist Leninist party.

In an interview on KPFA’s “Upfront” with host Brian Edwards-Tiekert on June 18, he discussed some of his formative experiences, born in 1944 to a family of sharecroppers who worked on a tobacco farm near Durham, North Carolina.

“I came from a farming family, the ninth child of 11 children,” Riley said. “My mom and dad got married as teenagers, and they were together for their entire lives. Growing up in this large family, we had to deal with various aspects of what it meant to live in an economically depressed area with parents who had come through what they called “Hoover times” (the Great Depression) in the South.

“They were proud of every one of their children when they took some stand, to develop and show some sense of dignity,” he said.

In his neighborhood, slavery was not a distant memory. There are many people “who knew firsthand what it was to have family members that had lived as enslaved people and lived in communities where enslaved people had lived.

“(Under tenant farming), the landowner negotiated for the entire family: the farmer, the wife, the children – everybody was involved on the farm. Kids were often engaged. We had to shovel, hoe tobacco to keep the weeds from taking over, to make sure that tobacco worms didn’t eat up the tobacco. If a child was old enough to plow, they would walk behind a horse or mule and plow a field, working from sunup to sundown,” he said.

The houses did not have indoor bathrooms, running water or electricity. “A lot of the names in the Black community were the same names as these slave owners. We could see the names of folks on the streets, street names of people who had enslaved people, and they were symbols to me of a world that did not see me as a human being, that has not treated my ancestors as humans, has treated us as chattel to be sold, to be owned, to be property,” Riley said

“When we were counted by our government, we were counted only for the purposes of allowing white people, white men, to have a vote.”

By 1950, when he was 6 years old, his family moved to another house, leaving tenant farming. His father took a job in construction.

“My parents wanted the younger kids to have education,” he continued. “The older kids had to work on the farms. By the time I came along, I was the second child born in a hospital. “My parents looked forward to younger kids to have more sense of independence from the economic and social depravities that they saw around them.”

Watching television, he became aware of the suffering under Jim Crow, including the lynching in Mississippi of Emmett Till in 1955 and Mack Parker in 1959.

When he was 13, he joined a picket line in town in front of a variety store chain that did not hire Black people and became active in the Civil Rights Movement. By time he was in high school, he had become a leader in the local chapter of the NAACP and met Malcolm X and later Medgar Evers, leaders who were both assassinated.

Married and with a child, he moved with his family in the early 1960s to San Francisco, attending San Francisco State University while working full time.

He participated in the San Francisco State University strike, the longest student strike in U.S. history, where students and their supporters prevailed in the face of mass arrests and daily violent police attacks.

While many people remember the strike for its historic victory – the creation of the first Black Studies and Ethnic Studies programs in the country. “But open admissions was the thing,” he said. “Open admissions had to do with people being able to go to school for free. People should be able to go to school just because they come here and say, ‘I want to go to school. I want an education’ (because) we live in a rich country.”

Studying Marxism, including dialectical materialism, he gradually began to understand structure of the system that needs to be changed, he said. “It requires a lot of study, and it still does.”

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Politics

Keystone Veto: Can Obama, GOP Compromise on Anything?

Published

on

In this Jan. 10, 2015 file photo, demonstrators stand in front of the White House in Washington, during a rally in support of President Barack Obama's pledge to veto any legislation approving the Keystone XL pipeline. Supporters of the Keystone XL pipeline say the privately-funded, $8 billion project is a critically needed piece of infrastructure that will create thousands of jobs and make the U.S. dependent on oil from friends, rather than foes. Critics claim it will be disastrous for the pollution blamed for global warming and put communities along its 1,179-mile route at risk for an environmentally-damaging spill, all for oil and products that will be exported anyway. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

In this Jan. 10, 2015 file photo, demonstrators stand in front of the White House in Washington, during a rally in support of President Barack Obama’s pledge to veto any legislation approving the Keystone XL pipeline. Supporters of the Keystone XL pipeline say the privately-funded, $8 billion project is a critically needed piece of infrastructure that will create thousands of jobs and make the U.S. dependent on oil from friends, rather than foes. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

JOSH LEDERMAN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — A looming veto by President Barack Obama of a Republican-championed bill foreshadows a key question for the White House: whether the president and Republicans can find areas to work together, even as Obama strikes down many of their top priorities.

Since Republicans won full control of Congress three months ago, Obama has issued a flurry of veto threats to Republican bills. Obama hasn’t had to make good on those threats, but now a bill forcing approval of the Keystone XL pipeline is headed to his desk.

Although Obama’s intentions to reject the Keystone bill are well known, the veto nevertheless marks a turning point in Obama’s presidency, as he braces to fend off an onslaught of GOP attempts to reverse actions he has taken.

“This upcoming veto could serve to crystalize the situation on Capitol Hill,” said Jim Manley, a former top adviser to Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid. “Either Republicans are going to have to figure out a way to compromise, or they’re not going to be able to get anything done the next two years.”

That’s critical, Manley and other Democrats said, because Republicans eyeing the 2016 elections need to show they can govern successfully when in power.

The Keystone bill, passed by the House on Wednesday on a 270-152 vote, capped weeks of debate on an infrastructure project that Republicans declared their top priority after they took control of Congress. A group of 24 Republican governors wrote to Obama on Thursday urging him not to veto the bill.

Although it’s been six years since the oil pipeline was proposed, Obama has said the U.S. is still determining whether it’s in the national interest. He vowed to veto any attempts by lawmakers to usurp his authority to make the call.

Republicans, emboldened after having passed a bill they never could get through a Democratic-run Senate, planned a triumphant signing ceremony at the Capitol on Friday. Yet GOP leaders were expected to wait to send the bill to the White House until after lawmakers return from their recess later this month.

That way, when Obama vetoes the bill, Republicans will be on hand to blast the president for nixing a project they say will spur jobs and economic growth.

“The more public attention it gets, the better,” said Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., a staunch Keystone supporter.

White House officials haven’t yet decided whether Obama will veto the bill in private and announce it in a simple statement, or whether he’ll do it publicly in grander fashion, a move that would show defiance against Republican attempts to undercut him. During his administration, President Bill Clinton took that approach when he vetoed a tax-cut bill in the Rose Garden, serenaded by a brass band.

“For us, this is not filled with a lot of drama or anticipation because the president’s views on this are well known,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said in an interview. “We’re mostly interested in not letting these areas of disagreement become obstacles for working together with Congress on other issues” such as trade, tax reform and a war powers resolution.

Republicans too seemed eager not to let their Keystone poison opportunities to cut deals with the president in other areas. They pointed to a bill addressing suicide among veterans — it passed with broad bipartisan support and Obama signed it into law Thursday.

“Republicans are offering dozens of solutions to make a difference for American families and we always welcome the opportunity to work with the president on areas of common ground,” said Cory Fritz, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

In his first six years in office, Obama wielded his veto pen only twice — far less often than his predecessors, and both in minor circumstances.

Obama’s veto threats have been piling up rapidly — more than a dozen so far this year, including a new threat Thursday to kill a bill restricting transfers of prisoners out of the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Obama has also said he won’t permit legislation that would roll back his executive actions on immigration, undermine his health care law or gut his environmental protections.

Obama has one factor working in his favor: math. To override his veto, Republicans would have to muster a veto-proof majority of two-thirds in both the House and Senate, which means they’d need some Democratic votes. So far, Republicans haven’t shown they can get to 67 votes in the Senate.

___

Reach Josh Lederman on Twitter at http://twitter.com/joshledermanAP

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of July 1 – 7, 2026

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of July 1 – 7, 2026

Published

on

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Continue Reading

Activism

NPRC Joins National Grand Jury Proceedings Seeking Accountability, Constitutional Restoration

Organizers state that testimony will explore historical and political developments that they believe have contributed to the expansion of corporate influence over public institutions and governmental decision-making. Participants are expected to discuss concerns regarding constitutional governance, individual liberties, property rights, and the protection of vulnerable populations, including seniors and persons with disabilities.

Published

on

Photo by Billie Powers.
Photo by Billie Powers.

Special to The Post

The National Probate Reform Coalition (NPRC) has joined Toll and Roll and a growing coalition of advocacy organizations, victims, whistleblowers, and citizen groups in support of a nationally broadcast People’s Grand Jury proceeding scheduled for July 1 and July 7.

Organizers describe the event as a public forum designed to examine allegations of government abuse, judicial misconduct, legislative failures, and the erosion of constitutional protections affecting millions of Americans.

The proceedings will feature testimony from victims, families, advocates, and organizations from across the country who contend they have experienced harm through government actions, institutional neglect, and failures of oversight.

According to organizers, the People’s Grand Jury will focus on concerns involving probate courts, guardianships, conservatorships, child welfare systems, property rights, civil liberties, and what participants view as a growing disconnect between government institutions and the constitutional rights of the people they are sworn to serve.

NPRC is participating because many of the issues being examined mirror the concerns raised by advocates, victims, and families who have participated in its monthly town halls. For years, families have reported cases involving exploitation of elders, questionable guardianships, estate depletion, denial of due process, and a lack of meaningful oversight within probate court systems.

“This proceeding gives victims and advocates an opportunity to place their experiences on the public record,” said Tanya Dennis, lead facilitator of NPRC. “For too long, families have struggled to have their voices heard regarding elder abuse, probate exploitation, and government inaction. This forum allows those stories to be shared before a national audience.”

Organizers state that testimony will explore historical and political developments that they believe have contributed to the expansion of corporate influence over public institutions and governmental decision-making. Participants are expected to discuss concerns regarding constitutional governance, individual liberties, property rights, and the protection of vulnerable populations, including seniors and persons with disabilities.

In keeping with principles of transparency and fairness, invitations have been extended to legislators, members of the judiciary, law enforcement representatives, and other public officials who may wish to respond to concerns raised during the proceedings or defend actions taken by their respective institutions.

One of the primary outcomes sought by organizers is public consideration and support for the People’s Remedy and Restoration Act, a proposed legislative framework that advocates believe would strengthen oversight, increase accountability, provide remedies for victims of governmental abuse, and restore constitutional protections.

The proceedings are expected to be broadcast nationally, providing citizens throughout the United States an opportunity to observe testimony, review evidence presented, and participate in an ongoing conversation regarding government accountability and the protection of individual rights.

Advocates hope the hearings will encourage meaningful dialogue, legislative reform, and renewed public engagement in the democratic process.

Individuals, organizations, public officials, and members of the media interested in attending or obtaining access information may contact the organizers at tollandroll2025@gmail.com.

As Americans continue to debate the future of constitutional governance, judicial accountability, and the protection of vulnerable citizens, the July proceedings are expected to serve as a significant forum for public testimony and civic engagement. For more information, go to https://tollandroll.com

Continue Reading

Activism

Local Civil Rights Attorney, Activist Walter Riley Reveals Life Lessons from 70 Years in the Movement

Widely known in Oakland for his unifying leadership on issues of social justice and human rights, Riley is also recognized for his famous son, Raymond “Boots” Riley, a rap artist, political activist, and successful filmmaker, whose latest film, “I Love Boosters,” is now in theaters and capturing national attention.

Published

on

Walter Riley. Courtesy photo.
Walter Riley. Courtesy photo.

By Ken Epstein

Prominent civil rights attorney and activist Walter Riley recently went on radio station KPFA 94.1 to discuss his new book co-authored with local veteran organizer Jesse Strauss: “Civil Rights and Structural Attacks: Conversations with Walter Riley.”

Widely known in Oakland for his unifying leadership on issues of social justice and human rights, Riley is also recognized for his famous son, Raymond “Boots” Riley, a rap artist, political activist, and successful filmmaker, whose latest film, “I Love Boosters,” is now in theaters and capturing national attention.

Born in North Carolina, Riley has lived in San Francisco, Chicago, and Detroit, but his longtime home is Oakland, California.

Over the years, he was a leader in the South against Jim Crow, participated as a student in the historic 1968 San Francisco State University strike that created Black Studies and Ethnic Studies in the U.S. and scored victories in the fight for open college admissions.

He was also a labor organizer and was involved in early Black Panther Party formations, anti-war protests, and was a leader of the Progressive Labor Party, a pro-Mao, Marxist Leninist party.

In an interview on KPFA’s “Upfront” with host Brian Edwards-Tiekert on June 18, he discussed some of his formative experiences, born in 1944 to a family of sharecroppers who worked on a tobacco farm near Durham, North Carolina.

“I came from a farming family, the ninth child of 11 children,” Riley said. “My mom and dad got married as teenagers, and they were together for their entire lives. Growing up in this large family, we had to deal with various aspects of what it meant to live in an economically depressed area with parents who had come through what they called “Hoover times” (the Great Depression) in the South.

“They were proud of every one of their children when they took some stand, to develop and show some sense of dignity,” he said.

In his neighborhood, slavery was not a distant memory. There are many people “who knew firsthand what it was to have family members that had lived as enslaved people and lived in communities where enslaved people had lived.

“(Under tenant farming), the landowner negotiated for the entire family: the farmer, the wife, the children – everybody was involved on the farm. Kids were often engaged. We had to shovel, hoe tobacco to keep the weeds from taking over, to make sure that tobacco worms didn’t eat up the tobacco. If a child was old enough to plow, they would walk behind a horse or mule and plow a field, working from sunup to sundown,” he said.

The houses did not have indoor bathrooms, running water or electricity. “A lot of the names in the Black community were the same names as these slave owners. We could see the names of folks on the streets, street names of people who had enslaved people, and they were symbols to me of a world that did not see me as a human being, that has not treated my ancestors as humans, has treated us as chattel to be sold, to be owned, to be property,” Riley said

“When we were counted by our government, we were counted only for the purposes of allowing white people, white men, to have a vote.”

By 1950, when he was 6 years old, his family moved to another house, leaving tenant farming. His father took a job in construction.

“My parents wanted the younger kids to have education,” he continued. “The older kids had to work on the farms. By the time I came along, I was the second child born in a hospital. “My parents looked forward to younger kids to have more sense of independence from the economic and social depravities that they saw around them.”

Watching television, he became aware of the suffering under Jim Crow, including the lynching in Mississippi of Emmett Till in 1955 and Mack Parker in 1959.

When he was 13, he joined a picket line in town in front of a variety store chain that did not hire Black people and became active in the Civil Rights Movement. By time he was in high school, he had become a leader in the local chapter of the NAACP and met Malcolm X and later Medgar Evers, leaders who were both assassinated.

Married and with a child, he moved with his family in the early 1960s to San Francisco, attending San Francisco State University while working full time.

He participated in the San Francisco State University strike, the longest student strike in U.S. history, where students and their supporters prevailed in the face of mass arrests and daily violent police attacks.

While many people remember the strike for its historic victory – the creation of the first Black Studies and Ethnic Studies programs in the country. “But open admissions was the thing,” he said. “Open admissions had to do with people being able to go to school for free. People should be able to go to school just because they come here and say, ‘I want to go to school. I want an education’ (because) we live in a rich country.”

Studying Marxism, including dialectical materialism, he gradually began to understand structure of the system that needs to be changed, he said. “It requires a lot of study, and it still does.”

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.