Why Results Can Quietly Work Against You 

Most people are taught to focus on results. Set a goal, measure the outcome, and evaluate success based on whether you achieved it. This approach sounds logical, but it has a hidden flaw. 

Results are delayed. 

You can put in consistent effort for weeks or months without seeing a clear outcome. During that time, it becomes easy to lose motivation. If progress is not immediately visible, your brain starts questioning whether what you are doing is working at all. 

This is where frustration builds. Not because the system is broken, but because the feedback is too slow. 

Shifting your focus from results to systems changes that experience. Instead of waiting for a final outcome, you start paying attention to what you are doing every day. 

This creates a different kind of progress. One that is visible, immediate, and easier to sustain. 

You can see this in practical situations as well. When someone begins organizing their finances or exploring structured solutions like National Debt Relief, the end goal may feel far away. But focusing on the daily system, reviewing expenses, following a plan, and staying consistent, creates a sense of movement long before the final result appears. 

Systems Give You Something You Can Control 

Results depend on many variables. Some are within your control, but many are not. Timing, external circumstances, and unexpected changes can all influence outcomes. 

Systems are different. 

They are built around actions you can repeat consistently. Writing for a set amount of time each day, reviewing your budget weekly, or practicing a skill regularly are all examples of systems. 

When you track systems, you are measuring what you can directly influence. This reduces uncertainty. 

According to research summarized by the Stanford Behavior Design Lab on habit formation, consistent behaviors are more reliable drivers of long term change than focusing solely on outcomes. Systems create stability, which makes progress more predictable. 

Why Systems Build Momentum Faster Than Goals 

Goals often create a start and stop cycle. You work toward something, reach it, and then pause. After that, you need a new goal to regain momentum. 

Systems remove that cycle. 

They are ongoing by design. There is no finish line for a system. You continue because the process itself becomes part of your routine. 

This continuity builds momentum. 

Instead of relying on bursts of motivation, you create a steady rhythm. Each day you follow your system, you reinforce the behavior. Over time, this becomes easier and more automatic. 

Momentum, in this sense, is not something you chase. It is something that develops naturally through repetition. 

The Psychological Shift From Outcome to Process 

Focusing on systems changes how you experience progress. 

When you are focused on results, your attention is always on the future. You are thinking about what has not happened yet. This can create pressure and impatience. 

When you focus on systems, your attention shifts to the present. You are focused on what you are doing right now. 

This reduces stress. 

Research highlighted by the American Psychological Association on goal setting and behavior shows that process-oriented thinking can improve persistence and reduce performance anxiety. When you are engaged in the process, you are less likely to become discouraged by slow results. 

Tracking Systems Makes Progress Visible Immediately 

One of the biggest advantages of tracking systems is that it creates immediate feedback. 

Each time you complete a part of your system, you have something to record. This could be as simple as checking off a task, logging time spent, or noting consistency. 

This feedback loop is important. 

It gives your brain evidence that you are moving forward. You do not have to wait for a large milestone to feel progress. You can see it in small, consistent actions. 

Over time, these small actions accumulate into significant results, but you are not dependent on those results to stay motivated. 

Adjusting the System Instead of Blaming Yourself 

When results do not match expectations, it is easy to take it personally. You might assume you are not working hard enough or that something is wrong with your approach. 

Tracking systems shifts that perspective. 

If something is not working, you adjust the system. You change the process, refine the steps, or experiment with a different approach. The focus stays on the method, not on self judgment. 

This creates a more constructive feedback loop. 

You are continuously improving how you operate, rather than questioning your ability. 

Why Systems Are More Sustainable Over Time 

Results based thinking often leads to burnout. The pressure to achieve a specific outcome can create stress, especially if progress is slow. 

Systems distribute that pressure. 

Because the focus is on consistent action, the workload becomes more manageable. You are not trying to achieve everything at once. You are building it over time. 

This makes it easier to sustain effort. 

Instead of pushing yourself in short bursts, you create a pace that you can maintain. This is what leads to long term success. 

Turning Systems Into a Personal Framework 

To make this approach work, you need to define systems that fit your goals. 

Start by identifying the actions that contribute to your desired outcome. Then turn those actions into repeatable steps. Make them specific and manageable. 

Track these steps consistently. The goal is not perfection, but continuity. 

You can also review your system regularly. Look at what is working and what is not. Make adjustments as needed. 

This turns your system into a flexible framework rather than a rigid plan. 

Letting Results Become a Byproduct 

The most interesting part of focusing on systems is what happens to results. 

They still matter, but they become a byproduct rather than the primary focus. 

When your system is consistent and effective, results tend to follow naturally. You do not need to chase them as aggressively because they emerge from the process. 

This creates a more stable and less stressful way to achieve your goals. 

You are no longer waiting for success to validate your effort. Your effort is already structured in a way that leads to progress. 

A More Reliable Way to Move Forward 

Tracking systems instead of results changes how you measure success. 

Success becomes about showing up, following your process, and making consistent improvements. Results still matter, but they are no longer the only indicator of progress. 

This approach creates a stronger foundation. 

It allows you to keep moving forward even when results are delayed. It reduces frustration and builds momentum through repetition. 

And over time, it leads to outcomes that are not only achieved, but sustained. 

Staff Writer; Peter Wall

Thus, I find it strange — and hypocritical — that McWhorter suggests that racism does in fact keep Blacks from being acknowledged for our achievements. However, McWhorter makes this argument differently than most of us do. The following is from the column that I referenced:

“McWhorter goes on to criticize Dr. Gay’s lack of scholarly output — as defined by academic articles and books written — in comparison to some of her predecessors. In short, he believes that Gay’s relative dearth of academic bona fides, especially in light of allegations of plagiarism, suggest that she was selected for her role due to her race rather than her qualifications.”

I wrote this in the context of McWhorter speaking out against Claudine Gay, the first African American, and second woman, to be selected as president of Harvard University. McWhorter strongly favored Gay resigning her role, which she eventually did. As he often does, McWhorter gave cover to racist presuppositions regarding alleged Black inferiority. But he is a hypocrite.

McWhorter is silent regarding mediocre white Americans who assume lofty leadership roles. As far as I am aware, he has said nothing about the menagerie of President Donald Trump’s appointees, many of whom do not come anywhere close to having the qualifications of their predecessors. These include Pete Hegseth, Linda McMahon, Robert Kennedy, Jr., Pam Bondi, Stephen Miller and many others.

Where is McWhorter’s outrage in those instances? To his “credit,” Trump frequently doesn’t even bother to pretend that his appointees are, by historical standards, qualified to hold their positions. Indeed, the only prerequisite is blind fealty.

I raise this issue after having read McWhorter’s recent essay titled “What A.I. and DEI have in common.” His argument is that AI casts a cloud of suspicion over students, causing professors, of whom McWhorter is one, to wonder whether their work is authentically theirs. He writes:

“A.I. will put artistic and intellectual achievement under a cloud of doubt, a sense that the creator did not do it all on their own, and possibly could not have. And this is the burden that D.E.I. policies often saddle its intended beneficiaries with. Call it diversity, equity and inclusion or affirmative action or racial preferences, it is rooted in a quest to give people an opportunity to compete more easily against straight white people, especially men.”

McWhorter doesn’t stop there, writing:

“Adjusting standards for admission or hiring in view of a group’s past handicap is a unique moral advance. But it should be applied for as limited a time as possible because of the side effects. Under a policy that allows certain people to be judged even partly on who they are rather than what they bring to the table, people of color are often suspected of being ‘D.E.I. hires,’ brought on with lesser qualifications than their white equivalent would be permitted to have.”

I have to point out the glaring logical flaw in this argument. McWhorter is so hyper-focused on policies that are intended to attenuate historical racial discrimination that he ignores the reality of contemporary discrimination against people of color.

And, more to the point, he ignores the unfair advantages that wealthy (most often white) people take advantage of without any concern whatsoever that they did not earn their privileges. Consider, for example, the scandal that erupted a few years ago when several elite schools were found to have admitted children of the wealthy and famous — children who would not otherwise have been admitted. The scandal included Stanford University, an alma mater that McWhorter and I have in common.

McWhorter also writes:

“D.E.I.’s good intentions come with the cost of a kind of benevolent overstep, which will inevitably leave onlookers skeptical of Black competence in general, as a mere five minutes on X can illustrate. Black college students often complain that their white and Asian peers assume they were admitted on the basis of affirmative action. And despite the Trumpian quest to eliminate D.E.I., my guess is that its basic imperatives, to even the playing field for people who aren’t white or male, are too ingrained in blue America’s DNA to fall completely by the wayside.”

Why should such efforts “fall completely by the wayside” given that the racism that gave rise to such efforts hasn’t done so? I am constantly astounded by how the concern about Black people being “qualified” does not extend to whites who benefited from power, proximity and privilege. If white people don’t feel guilty about taking advantage of such opportunities, why should Black people? Though, to be crystal clear, I am not arguing that DEI and affirmative action constitute discrimination against white people.

In effect, McWhorter, and countless others, are arguing that Black people are at fault for accepting corrective measures that were created to combat the racism that we still experience — nearly always from the people who oppose said corrective measures. This is a nonsensical tautology that inevitably results in aiding and abetting racial discrimination. It is pure fantasy to believe that centuries of racial discrimination will vanish when the policies that address said discrimination are dismantled.

I will never accept that the way to combat racial stereotypes is by giving in to those who perpetuate them.

Written by Larry Smith

I am a graduate of several schools popular for their sports teams.  Among them UCLA when Kareem Abdul-Jabbar was there; and the University of Southern California when O.J. Simpson was there. I didn’t graduate from the University of Michigan, but I did study there and follow football. However, I attended and graduated from Grambling University in Louisiana, and Grambling wasn’t as big as those schools, but in my heart, Grambling was always the greatest when it came to sports.

You see, Grambling had not only the great band, the great speech and dramatic arts department, the great basketball team and baseball team, but Grambling had the best coach anybody could ever wish for–young men and young women. Obviously, I’m remembering the one and only great Eddie Robinson who began working at Grambling before I was born and remained for 57 years. Despite our age difference, he became one of my best friends and advisors.

Coach Robinson inspired so many young people–especially young men to be their best in sports. Among them are many others, such as Doug Williams, Tank Younger, Everson Walls, James “Shack” Harris, Trumaine Johnson, Larry Wright, Willis Reed, Rich Johnson, Aaron James, Bob Hopkins, Fred Hilton, Charlie Hardnett, Rex Tippitt and so many more, who became friends and one of them who introduced me to professional football was the late Willie Davis.

As I watched the recent NFL Draft, I thought of all the young men who now have great opportunities before them–especially young Black men.  As their names were called because they were the greatest in their chosen sport, most of their families and friends were there to rejoice about the great opportunity with which they were being presented.

If Coach Robinson were there with them, along with the opportunity for which they were selected, he would have told them about the great responsibility before them. Everybody can’t be the greatest educator, the greatest doctor, the greatest lawyer, but their talents have already shown they can be the greatest in their chosen profession, and their responsibilities are no less as an athlete than those in other professions. Especially young men who have not yet succeeded in anything because of a lack of opportunity can and do look up to successful athletes!

I pray that the happiness, the glee, the great and determined attitude and the emotion I saw in the draft will remain with them as they make us proud and inspire and help other young people in sports to follow in their footsteps.

Bud Clark, from my hometown in Alexandria, Louisiana was just drafted by the Seattle Seahawks and I have the same hope for success for him. At the close of this article, I was still waiting and pulling for Jacobian Guillory, also from my hometown in Louisiana, will be successfully drafted.

With Mother’s Day coming up soon, I want to congratulate all the Black women who were right there with their sons cheering them on from day one. I don’t disregard the fathers who were there, too, or who for whatever reason were not there at the Draft, but I now understand when young men do well in any sport, at the end, they shout out, “Hey Mom” or send a loving signal to her. I congratulate all the Moms who sacrificed so often alone to get their sons to where they are now, and it’s on these young men to make Mom, Dad and the family proud during their career in the National Football League! I will tell them what else I wish for them when I see them at the dugout after a game!

Written By Dr. E. Faye Williams

Official website; https://x.com/DrEFayeWilliams

This matters whether you are attending a community college, a public university, a private school, or pursuing a degree in healthcare administration online. The smartest students are not always the ones who get the biggest aid packages at first. They are often the ones who learn how to read those packages clearly, maximize free aid, and borrow only when borrowing still makes sense. 

That shift in mindset is important. Financial aid should not be treated like a pile of money to accept as quickly as possible. It should be treated like a tool kit. Some parts of that tool kit help you. Some can cost you later. The goal is not simply to cover the next semester. The goal is to get through school without creating a financial problem that follows you for years. 

Start by chasing free money before borrowed money 

One of the most effective ways to minimize debt is also one of the most obvious, but it gets ignored all the time. Start with aid you do not have to repay. That means grants, scholarships, and any school-based aid that lowers your actual cost without turning into a future monthly bill. 

Students often move too quickly to loans because loans feel straightforward. The money is offered, the paperwork is clear, and the urgency of tuition makes the decision feel simple. But money that has to be repaid should not be your first solution if free aid is still on the table. Federal Student Aid’s overview of the different types of student aid is useful here because it shows the larger picture. Aid is not one thing. It comes in layers, and some layers are much safer than others. 

That is why completing the FAFSA each year matters so much. Even students who think they will not qualify for much should still apply, because grants, work study, and school based decisions often start there. Skipping the form can mean missing money before you even know it existed. 

Read the aid offer like a contract, not like a gift 

A financial aid offer can look generous at first glance, especially when the total number is large. But that total can be misleading if you do not break it apart. Some of it may be grants or scholarships. Some may be work study. Some may be federal loans. Those are not equal, even if they are all listed together. 

This is one of the biggest mistakes students make. They celebrate the full package without asking what part of it is actually reducing cost and what part is simply postponing payment. A grant lowers what you owe. A loan delays it. Work study may help, but it is not the same as tuition already being covered. You have to know which is which. 

That is why it helps to compare net price, not just the advertised scholarship amount. A school that offers a bigger total package may still leave you owing more than another school with a smaller headline number but better grant support. The real question is simple: after free aid is applied, how much is still left? 

Borrow with a job in mind, not just a semester in mind 

One useful way to think about student debt is to connect it to the income you are likely to earn after graduation. That does not mean college should be reduced to money alone, but it does mean borrowing should be tied to reality. If the likely earnings in your field do not comfortably support large monthly loan payments, then borrowing more should feel like a warning sign, not a normal step. 

This is where the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s guide to choosing the right student loan can be helpful. It encourages students to explore federal options first and be cautious with private loans, especially because the more you borrow now, the more pressure you create for yourself later. 

That bigger picture matters because debt is easy to underestimate when repayment still feels far away. Students often think in terms of this term, this year, or this deadline. A better strategy is to ask what the loan decision will feel like when school ends and the bills start arriving. 

Use federal loans carefully before even thinking about private loans 

If you do need to borrow, federal loans are usually the place to start. They often come with better borrower protections, more flexible repayment options, and fewer barriers than private loans. That does not make them harmless, but it does make them generally safer than jumping straight into private lending. 

Private loans can be riskier because they may require a co signer, offer less flexibility if life goes sideways, and sometimes carry terms that are harder to manage. Students who treat private loans like just another form of aid can end up making a much more expensive choice than they realize. 

The key point is not that all borrowing is bad. It is that loan types matter. If you have to borrow, borrow in the order that gives you the strongest protections and the clearest path to repayment. 

Keep college costs low in ways that actually compound 

Minimizing debt is not only about aid forms and loan choices. It is also about controlling the cost side of the equation. Small savings add up when they repeat every semester. Textbook strategies, housing decisions, meal planning, transportation choices, and class scheduling can all affect how much money you need. 

A student who reduces living expenses, takes advantage of used books or digital materials, and avoids unnecessary fees may borrow less without ever feeling like they made one huge sacrifice. That is important because sustainable cost control works better than dramatic short term budgeting that collapses after a month. 

It also helps to think about time to graduation. Every extra semester can mean more tuition, more fees, more living costs, and possibly more debt. Staying on track academically is not just an academic win. It is a financial one. 

Renewable aid deserves as much attention as first year aid 

Another thing students often miss is that some scholarships and aid awards come with renewal requirements. A package may look excellent for year one, but the long term value depends on what it takes to keep it. GPA rules, enrollment minimums, and program specific conditions can all affect whether aid stays in place. 

That means financial planning should never stop at the first offer letter. You also need to understand what keeps the package stable. If one difficult semester could put a key scholarship at risk, that should be part of your decision making from the start. 

Long term affordability matters more than first impression affordability. 

Treat work study and part time work as strategy, not rescue 

Work study and part time jobs can help reduce borrowing, but only when they fit your academic life instead of crushing it. A job that supports your budget without wrecking your schedule can be useful. A job that forces you to fall behind, repeat courses, or stretch your degree longer may cost more than it saves. 

The right balance depends on the student, but the bigger point stays the same. Income during school should support the degree plan, not quietly sabotage it. Managing aid well means looking at the entire system of school, work, and time, not just the paycheck. 

Review your aid every year like it is new 

Financial aid management is not a one time skill. It is a yearly habit. File FAFSA again. Reapply for scholarships where needed. Check deadlines. Read the new offer closely. Compare changes from the prior year. If family finances shift, talk to the financial aid office instead of assuming nothing can be adjusted. 

This kind of review helps because aid packages can change, and students who pay attention are more likely to spot both opportunities and problems early. 

The proven strategy is clarity and restraint 

Tips for managing financial aid and minimizing debt really come down to a few powerful habits. Maximize free aid first. Understand every part of your award before accepting it. Borrow only after you know the remaining gap. Use federal loans before private ones when borrowing is necessary. Keep costs down in repeatable ways. Pay attention to renewal rules. Reassess everything each year. 

The hidden advantage in all of this is not perfection. It is restraint. Students who minimize debt are often not the ones with magical circumstances. They are the ones who pause before accepting money, ask better questions, and make choices with both graduation day and repayment day in mind. 

That kind of planning may not feel exciting in the moment, but it can protect your freedom for years after college is over. 

Staff Writer; Carl Jacobs

So what does the King do when things are spinning out of control? Usually, we’d be worrying about him starting a war, but he’s already done that and while it might have distracted from the Epstein of it all, rising gas prices more than made up for that. So if you can’t start a new war and you’re having trouble winning the war you did start, what do you do?

Attack. What else explains the president’s decision to unload, again, on Sen. Mark Kelly, the former astronaut who flew 39 combat missions in Desert Storm and had the audacity to make a tape, with other veterans in Congress, telling the military and intelligence communities that they should not follow illegal orders? Holocaust Studies 101. Not to Trump, who called it treasonous at the time. Not to Hegseth, who moved to strip Kelly of his military pension and demote him; that’s in federal court right now, where Kelly will certainly win.

On Wednesday, Trump took to Truth Social, posting that Kelly should be imprisoned. “Lock him up,” was the phrase he used. An American hero.

It’s the playbook of this administration. Look at Kash Patel. He should be the former Director of the FBI by this point. The fact that he’s not is only testament to how many loyalty points he’s won for targeting Trump’s targets. And his own. including The New York Times reporter who had the audacity to write a piece about how taxpayer-funded security teams were escorting Patel’s girlfriend to her beauty appointments. So what did Kash do? According to The New York Times, he had the FBI investigate the reporter for possible “stalking” because she talked on the phone with the girlfriend once and, following standard reporting techniques, asked her for names of those she should speak with and made her own calls. Since when is reporting stalking? When it’s done to a Trump insider.

At least Fed Chair Jerome Powell is off the hook. They were after him too; the minions at the FBI and the Justice Department were determined to punish him for standing up to President Trump when some Republican senators got in the way to make clear that dropping the trumped-up investigation was the only way to get Powell’s successor confirmed.

That these trumped-up investigations — of Kelly, for instance, or The New York Times reporter, or an earlier search targeting a Washington Post reporter — run into obstacles in the form of federal judges, grand juries, or even members of Congress does not mean that they are harmless. They denigrate all those involved and have a chilling effect both inside and outside the government. Knowing that you can be fired for not following the president’s political agenda undercuts the security that civil service should protect. Career prosecutors get fired for taking on the president and his men, or not taking on their baggage. Reporters get investigated for doing their jobs as reporters. The New York Times has the will and the resources to fight back when its reporter is threatened. The Atlantic, which Patel has now hopelessly sued in a stunt filing that will likely go nowhere, will fight back. But the damage is done.

President Trump is scheduled to break bread with the press corps he detests at Saturday night’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner. It will be a difficult night for the president, not because the organization is out to embarrass him (they invited a mentalist, not the usual comedian, to host, sparing the president his own version of Saturday Night Live), but the temptation for him to attack, with all those enemies in the room, will likely be more than he can resist. It’s not that it’s smart politics. It’s not. It’s just his nature.

Written by Susan Estrich

Unfortunately, these murders aren’t happening in a vacuum. Stories of angry, despondent men violently killing their wives, girlfriends, and children are occurring in our community at an alarming rate. And far too often, we’re left asking why.

In the mass shooting in Shreveport, the nation’s deadliest since 2024, the family of the shooter, Shamar Elkins, stated he was struggling with his mental health in the midst of a divorce before killing his family. Former Lt. Governor of Virginia Justin Fairfax was also said to have been experiencing isolation and depressive episodes before killing his wife and himself days after being requested to appear at a divorce hearing. And after murdering his wife, Nancy, Stephen Bowen told his uncle that he “couldn’t take it anymore.”

The disturbing pattern in each of these cases is a group of men not just struggling with mental health, but a general lack of value for the lives of their loved ones. Taken together, these cases reveal something larger than individual tragedy; they reveal a crisis hiding in plain sight.

Researchers have documented the rise of a male loneliness epidemic that was sweeping the country, and its effects on emotional stability, ability to connect with others, and even how men perceive reality. Researchers also found that in the absence of meaningful relationships, men who spent more time online often found themselves targeted by algorithms that promote toxic podcasters and influencers who spout negative tropes and stereotypes about women. This world, called the “red pill,” encourages men to dehumanize and assert power over women socially, at home, and in the workplace.

While there’s no direct correlation between these tragedies and toxic internet culture, the risks of isolation and the inability or refusal to engage with mental health supports are evident. But for many men of color, accessing mental healthcare isn’t easy.

There are financial barriers that keep Black men out of care. Stigmas associated with therapy, like being labeled “crazy” or “weak,” encourage men to compartmentalize and use self-soothing tactics like drinking or substances that raise the risk of violent outbursts. And with only 4 percent of mental health professionals being Black, finding professionals that men can connect with is also a challenge.

The combination of feeling like finding help is impossible, compartmentalizing that leads to isolation, and predatory algorithms that spew hatred towards women has created a perfect storm for violence and self-harm. According to the National Library of Medicine, suicide has become the third leading cause of death among Black people, and for younger men, most vulnerable to alienating internet culture, rates of mental health decline are rising.

Tackling this crisis that is tearing our families and community apart will take acknowledging the structural issues that are breaking down the mental health of Black men while holding men accountable for their actions.

Making mental health the center of these stories risks minimizing the decisions that these men made to take the lives of their loved ones. And imposing accountability without investing in preventative measures to ensure that these acts of violence don’t happen again is also short-sighted.

This means calling it what it is: a structural decline in the value of human lives. And these cases, in our community, are examples of the devaluing of Black lives.

If you or a loved one needs support with anxiety, depression, or thoughts of self-harm or harm against others, call or text 988 for help today.

Written by Marc Morial

Official website; http://twitter.com/MARCMORIAL

That was just the first of several other things about him that made little sense given the magnitude of his alleged planned assault. He was an engineer. He was a top-flight tech programmer. He was a top-rated teacher of the month. He looks almost regal in his cap and gown graduation picture from Cal Tech where he got a degree in mechanical engineering.

Then there was one of his known residences, Torrance. That’s an upscale bedroom city that until relatively recent years has been off limits if not downright hostile to Blacks trying to buy or rent there.

And he was Black. So, for the moment anyway I’ll set aside any of the swirl of dark plots, conspiracy, and Manchurian Candidate theories about his alleged act. That leaves me puzzled and perplexed over how a guy like this, who seemingly had everything going for him could wind up on the ground cuffed and hogtied by a phalanx of police, secret service, FBI and other law enforcement outside of the Correspondents Dinner and charged with trying to wipe out Trump and others in his administration.

Allen certainly defies all the stock stereotypes and negative type casting of young African American males. There’s absolutely no crime, drug, gang, dysfunctional home education derelict tag that can be slapped on him. He only made one reference to race in his alleged manifesto. He alluded to himself as half Black and half white.

Even the alleged manifesto he allegedly penned is not the usual disjointed rambling muddle of other manifestos written by mass killers.

Allen had a head on his shoulders and a brain in it that indicated he was a thinker. That combined with his academic and professional accomplishments all add up to someone who potentially could rise to the top in any corporate or academic setting.

The answer to the question of why he allegedly did what he tried to do lay precisely in his acumen and accomplishment. That in itself has bred anger and frustration in legions of well-educated Americans. That was plainly in evidence in the throngs that repeatedly turned out for the No Kings Rallies nationally. He was one of the protesters at one of the rallies.

If what is reported about Allen is true, he is one of those multitude of angry and frustrated Americans at everything that Trump says and does. Trump, of course, is the supreme ringmaster that has bred and orchestrated much of that anger, frustration, and discontent.

Allen then is both a product of and symptom of that perversion.

Let’s hope there aren’t more terrifying products of that perversion like him.

Written By Earl Ofari Hutchinson

One can find more info about Mr. Hutchinson over at the following site; TheHutchinson Report.

Also feel free to connect with him through twitter; http://twitter.com/earlhutchins

He is also an associate editor of New America Media. His forthcoming book is From King to Obama: Witness to a Turbulent History (Middle Passage Press).

Everybody wants happiness and yet few find it.

The plain truth is that happiness, when properly understood, is the only state of life that allows a human being to be at peace with himself and his environment.

When you are happy you think all is well and there is a deep feeling of contentment.

Many people desperately want to live happily and to die the same. But, alas, so many end up in deep misery, with lots of regrets and tons of bitterness.

This should not be so, and more importantly, God did not intend for us to be unhappy.

Adam and Eve were quite happy. They bestrode the grounds of their habitation without a care in the world. Everything pleasant came to them naturally. They had no fears, no anxieties, no worries of any kind. They enjoyed an Edenic beauty, and pleasing lifestyle, that following generations could only dream of and imagine.

Yet unhappiness seems to engulf humanity like the atmosphere engulfs the earth. There seems to be no escape, no hiding place, no sanctuary from its ugly embrace.

Some people get to the state of such deep unhappiness and abject misery that they murder themselves, terminate their own life to escape the pestilential gloom. In common parlance they commit suicide to end it all.

Yet from all that you hear, observe and from your own experience it should be absolutely clear that happiness is not just imaginary. Old people think the young are happy, the young think the old is happy; the poor think the rich is happy and the rich think how happy it is to be without the burden of wealth. Everyone thinks everybody else is happy.

Lots of married people think they gave up happiness when they got married; and lots of single people decry their unhappiness and desperately want to get married so that they can be happy.

So where lies the truth?

Happiness is not like being a householder, it cannot materialise in similar fashion. If you want to be a householder, and be classified as such, then you look around and buy a home, or buy land and build a house, and presto, you are a householder.

Happiness is never like that.

There is a fleeting happiness that comes from events. Some people get happiness when they attend parties, or have drinks with friends, or go dancing or such other entertaining, festive activities. But this kind of transitory happiness lasts for the duration of the activity, then the norm ensues until some such activity is undertaken again.

This kind of spasmodic happiness can sometimes highlight, and bring to the surface, the deep-seated and overwhelming discontent consuming an individual.

It is this very same discontent that causes some individuals at parties to drink themselves into a state of stupor. It is as if the very drinking that makes them happy drives them into a state of forgetfulness so that they can be at peace with themself.

But God never intended for humans to be unhappy.

God made humans to be happy, like Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, and that initial intent, though now lost for greater humanity nevertheless remains a desire of all individuals.

Thers is not a single individual, anywhere on earth, who prefers to be miserable rather than be happy; and everyone seeks to be happy and free from distress.

The very sad thing about humans, their perverted nature dominating, is that genuine happiness can be achieved but not the way commonly pursued.

Since God knows us best, then it is logical and reasonable that He knows best how to dispel our unhappiness and restore some of the Edenic happiness that Adam and Eve possessed.

True happiness is a byproduct of godliness; it starts with God, rests on his assurances and is related to pleasing Him and bringing ourselves in compliance with his will.

The Bible tells us a lot about happiness – in many instances the word “blessed” is used and means the same thing – and everywhere it references Almighty God.

“There is no peace, saith the LORD, unto the wicked.” (Isaiah 48:22) Where there is no personal , spiritual peace there is no happiness.

“…and whoso trusteth in the LORD, happy is he.” (Proverbs 16:20) Where there is no trust in God then lasting happiness is elusive. To trust in God is to have a relationship with him through Jesus Christ. This is the beginning of true happiness.

Believers, who are committed to Jesus Christ and serve him faithfully and true, have this deep happiness, some people call it joy, that does not pass away under suffering and persecution, under so much that is regrettable and pitiful in the world.

It is true that we are deeply concerned with the troubles of the world, and oft we groan at humanity’s cruelty and lack of care. But we remain committed and happily endure everything for the sake of Jesus Christ: “Behold, we count them happy which endure” (James 5:11)

The reason so many people are looking for true happiness and never finding it is because they are not seeking it where it is found.

True happiness is serving God, glorifying God and pleasing Him by doing His will not just some times but constantly and fully and cheerfully.

David was alluding to this when he wrote, “But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.” (Psalm 1:2)

This is the way to true happiness; as so many saints of old have found. This is the way the heroes of faith mentioned in Hebrews 11: 4-32 were able to do mighty things for God even though they endured great suffering and trials.

The happiness found in God is not fleeting, tentative and unsure but awesome, deep and very reassuring. It is based on a relationship with Christ in God and will stand the test of time. Just like love it, “…Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things” (1 Corinthians 13:7)

This is true happiness as God intended it for all of us, and if you don’t have it then blame no one but yourself.

Staff Writer; Henderson W.

You can contact this Christian brother at: HWard@ThyBlackMan.com.

Many of the anti “Michael” the film critics are ticked off because it paints a way too sympathetic Michael, and skirts the damaging claims of child molestation, and his long drawn out well-documented legal woes. The fact that the film stopped in 1988 and could not even if there was intent cover the legal charges and allegations because of legal prohibitions didn’t stop the carping.

The film gives huge nod to his conflict with his tyrannical, all controlling father. But for the most part it’s a knockout music and entertainment film.

Still, the film does prompt another look at Michael the man, and yes, the controversy. The instant a promotional screening at the Sundance Film festival of an earlier Jackson film,  Leaving Neverland was announced in early 2019, the Jackson family loudly screamed foul. The family called the film a lie. The “lie” was a fresh claim that Jackson molested two young boys. Jackson’s defenders, along with the family, went down a checklist of facts about the pair that made their decades later claim of abuse seem the “lie” that the family charged it was.

However, the protests of Jackson’s family were maligned bumped up against some bitter facts. One was that it’s not legally possible to sue, shame or slander a dead man. Another was that Jackson was that dead man and he couldn’t speak or fight back.”

The bitterest fact of all, though, was that during Jackson’s life, and in the years after his death in June 2009, legions never stopped believing that Jackson was indeed the child molester that the pair claimed they were victims of. This made it easy to hype the documentary, and their subsequent appearance on a panel of sexual abuse survivors on an Oprah special, made the pair credible, and ensure that the taint on Jackson as child molester would remain firmly emblazoned on his name, dead or not.

The truth is that Jackson has always remained an inviting target of both fascination, speculation, and outright attack in death as in life. While the buzz and controversy around the documentary Leaving Neverland  and to a lesser extent “Michael” would come and go, the controversy around Jackson will not.

The Jackson name and the issue of child molestation would hang heavily as a damning indictment that feeds the gossip mills and gives an arsenal of ammunition to Jackson detractors. This is not a small point. The child molester claim doesn’t rest on Jackson’s trial and clean acquittal on multiple child abuse charges. The claim of Jackson as child molester never hinged as much on the allegations as on the prurient fascination with a celebrity that in life and death took on preternatural stature.

This fascination in turn was fertile ground for any salacious, titillating, morsel of gossip, no matter how disgusting. There’s still more to the latest Jackson beatdown.

No charge stirs more disgust, revulsion, and pricks more emotional hot buttons than the charge of child molestation. The accusation stamps the Scarlet letter of doubt, suspicion, shame, and guilt on the accused. The accused can never fully expunge it.

There is simply no defense against it. Under the hyper intense media glare and spotlight that Jackson constantly in life remained under, the allegation no matter how bogus would have been endless fodder for the public gossip mill. This would have wreaked irreparable damage to Jackson’s ever shifting musical career and personal life.

Many will thrill at the phenomenal, patented Jackson song and especially dance movements, as I did, in the film, “Michael..” They will applaud the sterling performance of Jaafar Jackson as Michael, as I do. However, that won’t quiet the whispers, doubts, and hostility that the name Michael Jackson still raises with many. No film no matter how entertaining on Jackson will ever silence that.

Written By Earl Ofari Hutchinson

One can find more info about Mr. Hutchinson over at the following site; TheHutchinson Report.

Also feel free to connect with him through twitter; http://twitter.com/earlhutchins

He is also an associate editor of New America Media. His forthcoming book is From King to Obama: Witness to a Turbulent History (Middle Passage Press).

Not casually Catholic. My mother was the kind of Catholic who went to Mass every day. Faith was not something she talked about; it was something she did. In our aqua-blue kitchen, she had the lyrics, in white paint, “Holy Mary, dressed in blue, teach me how to pray.” She prayed without ceasing, and her prayers were deep and strong.

I went to a Jesuit college, Boston College, where faith was woven into the intellectual life—questions of justice, responsibility, and what it means to live a life of purpose. It wasn’t always comfortable, but it was always present.

So when I hear people arguing about the pope as if religion were a political sport, I find myself out of step with the conversation, because that’s not the faith I knew.

The noise is everywhere. Commentary about Pope Francis—what he said, what he meant, who agrees, who doesn’t—fills panels and social media feeds, turning belief into a series of takes. It is loud and, for the most part, unhelpful.

We have developed a habit of treating religious figures like political ones, as if they occupy the same space. They don’t. Political leaders govern behavior, while religious leaders, at their best, try to speak to conscience. But we have grown so accustomed to spectacle that even conscience has to compete for airtime.

The numbers tell us something is changing. Church attendance in the United States has been declining for years, and fewer people claim formal affiliation. Yet nearly nine in ten Americans say they believe in God or some higher power. Many are no longer sitting in pews, but belief persists. We measure what is easiest to count—attendance, affiliation, participation—but not what is harder to see: practice, discipline, belief.

Faith, as I understood it growing up, was never about being seen.

My mother did not go to Mass every day so someone could check her attendance. She went because that was how she ordered her life—discipline, gratitude, and a quiet insistence that there was something larger than whatever the day might bring.

My own relationship with Catholicism has been more complicated. I don’t come to this conversation as a defender of the Catholic Church; I come as someone shaped by it, challenged by it, angered by it, and still, in some ways, holding onto it.

As soon as I learned about the Church’s historical role in sanctioning enslavement, I was repulsed—and I made my opinion known, quite vocally: skipping Mass, arguing with priests, and sometimes embarrassing my mother. Sexual abuse in the Church repulses me. The betrayal of trust, and the lengths taken to conceal it, stand in painful contradiction to the values the institution professes. The codified inferior role of women has never sat easily with me either.

It is undeniably an imperfect church, but its imperfections do not diminish its relevance.

Years ago, I wrote about the patriarchy embedded in the Church, and one of my small, symbolic protests has been ending prayers with “amen, a-woman, and ase’.” Inequality does not disappear simply because we believe in our Creator. A mentor once asked whether I could point to any institution entirely free of racism or sexism. I could not.

When I hear that we are created in the image and likeness of God, I find myself looking for a stained-glass window with a pecan-colored woman with gray dreadlocks. I haven’t seen one yet.

And still, the quiet, practiced kind of faith does not lend itself to commentary, nor does it disappear simply because fewer people are sitting in church. There are still people who pray before the day begins, give thanks before they ask, and show up for others not because it is convenient, but because it is right.

It is also worth noticing the signals we choose to see. Pope Francis has chosen to live in modest quarters rather than the traditional papal apartments, a small but visible gesture in an institution known for grandeur. In a world accustomed to power on display, that kind of restraint stands out not because it is dramatic, but because it is not.

My grandmother used to say that some people come to God with their hands out and their mouths open. It was her way of reminding us that faith is not only about asking, but about recognizing, giving thanks, and showing up with something other than need.

We don’t talk much about that kind of faith anymore. It doesn’t fit neatly into our arguments or produce a headline, but it may be closer to what faith actually is.

If nearly all of us believe in something beyond ourselves, then the question is not whether faith is disappearing, but whether we have misunderstood where it lives. It may not be in the noise we amplify or the arguments we keep having, but in the quiet, daily practices that go largely unseen.

Written by Julianne Malveaux

Official website; https://www.juliannemalveaux.com