Sunday Open Thread

Timothy Wright (June 17, 1947 – April 24, 2009)[1], generally credited as Rev. Timothy Wright or Reverend Timothy Wright on recordings, was an American gospel singer and pastor.

Wright started on piano at age 12, and sang and composed for his church choir as a teenager at the St. John’s Fire Baptized Holiness Church of God in Brooklyn.[2] He played piano for Bishop F. D. Washington and Isaac Douglas in the 1960s and 1970s, including on recordings, and he formed his own gospel ensemble in the mid-1970s, the Timothy Wright Concert Choir. He eventually became pastor of the Pentecostal Grace Tabernacle Christian Center Church of God in Christ located in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, and issued albums regularly from 1990.[2][3]

Wright’s 1994 album Come Thou Almighty King, with the New York Fellowship Mass Choir, made Billboard’s Top 20 chart for gospel albums and was nominated for a Grammy Award for Best Traditional Soul Gospel Album, as was his 1999 release Been There Done That.[4][5]

On July 4, 2008, Wright was critically injured in a car crash on Interstate 80 in Pennsylvania, a crash which killed his wife and grandson as well as the driver of the oncoming car.[4] He died April 24, 2009 as a result of these injuries, at the age of 61.

About SouthernGirl2

A Native Texan who adores baby kittens, loves horses, rodeos, pomegranates, & collect Eagles. Enjoys politics, games shows, & dancing to all types of music. Loves discussing and learning about different cultures. A Phi Theta Kappa lifetime member with a passion for Social & Civil Justice.
This entry was posted in Celebrations, Christianity, Current Events, Good News!, Gospel, Honor, Inspiration, Love, Music, Open Thread, Politics, Religion, Spirituality, Tribute, Worship and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Sunday Open Thread

  1. dannie22 says:

    Good afternoon all!

  2. rikyrah says:

    The Obama doctrine: The limits to American power
    Mark Mardell | 20:52 UK time, Friday, 18 March 2011
    There was a recurring rhythm to President Barack Obama’s speech about the no-fly zone over Libya. But it wasn’t a drum beat of war – it was a chorus about consensus, an insistence on internationalism.

    Sure, there was an ultimatum, the threat of military action. Those are the headlines. And there was an explanation why America might have to fight.

    Left unchecked, we have every reason to believe that Gaddafi would commit atrocities against his people. Many thousands could die. A humanitarian crisis would ensue. The entire region could be destabilised, endangering many of our allies and partners. The calls of the Libyan people for help would go unanswered. The democratic values that we stand for would be overrun. Moreover, the words of the international community would be rendered hollow.

    But the subtext is more important. Read the last sentence in that quotation again. In a speech of just over three pages he repeats this point. Not once:

    The US has worked with our allies and partners to shape a strong international response.

    Not twice:

    The US is prepared to act as part of an international coalition. American leadership is essential, but that does not mean acting alone.

    Not three times:

    It is not an action that we will pursue alone. Indeed, our British and French allies, and members of the Arab League, have already committed to take a leadership role.

    But more:

    So I have taken this decision with the confidence that action is necessary, and that we will not be acting alone.

    So you might have gathered, the US is not going it alone. Throughout his declaration Mr Obama makes it clear how different this is to the Iraq war. Not only the international consensus, but the limits on action.

    I also want to be clear about what we will not be doing. The US is not going to deploy ground troops into Libya. And we are not going to use force to go beyond a well-defined goal — specifically, the protection of civilians in Libya.

    The limits he sets out are not just practical, they are limits to ambitions and objectives.

    I want to be clear: The change in the region will not and cannot be imposed by the US or any foreign power; ultimately, it will be driven by the people of the Arab World. It is their right and their responsibility to determine their own destiny.

    Mr Obama is only a reluctant convert to action, and you could argue he’s merely disguising his feet-dragging with noble rhetoric about the international community. It’s certainly noticeable that he didn’t mention the killings in Yemen (although he earlier issued a statement condemning them) or the unrest in Bahrain, stiffer tests of American power and resolve.

    But I think we are seeing something new. He is using a crisis thrust upon him to set out an Obama doctrine of sorts, to make a statement about America’s relationship with the world. While he is in charge, he is saying, America will not go it alone, will set limits on what it does, and won’t impose its will. Some will not like this,
    and the world will find it difficult to adapt to a president who almost seems determined to lead from behind.

    The Obama doctrine is a tightrope walk: Acting, but within limits, leading only as a first among equals.

    • Ametia says:

      This is sure enough a European and Arab deal. I sincerely hope America does not get stuck holding the War tag.

  3. rikyrah says:

    Credit Card Debt’s Mighty Grip on Black America

    March 10, 2011 06:14 AM

    By Steven Barboza

    Some ringing cash registers indicate an economy on the mend. Others signify nosedives into the black hole of debt for more and more African Americans.

    Studies show that black people are shouldering a disproportionate burden of the nation’s credit card debt, and thus are among those consumers who contribute the most to credit card industry profits.

    Several years ago, study data found that black cardholders who carry balances on their accounts are more than twice as likely as whites to pay high interest rates.

    “About 15% of African Americans and 13% of Latino cardholders pay interest rates greater than 20%,” said Jing Jian Xiao, professor of consumer finance at the University of Rhode Island, who compiled a study in 2004 using data from the Federal Reserve and CardData, an online database of industry information. “Only 7% of white cardholders pay interest rates higher than 20%.”

    Last month, another study, “Credit Card Ills,” which analyzed racial disparities in industry practices, reported that credit card companies are reaping billions of dollars in profits from the inability of black and low-income consumers to match their monthly incomes with their expenses.

    The companies use a variety of practices to boost profits, from mailing out “pre-approved” credit cards to offering cards with zero-interest teaser rates that later shift to punitively high annual percentage rates (APRs) and excessive fees, the study notes. These offers can be tempting to barely solvent consumers during the aftermath of the Great Recession.

    “Credit card companies have zeroed in on this struggling population because it contains the people most likely to revolve balances for the longest periods of time, representing the sweet spot of the market, below convenience card user but above the individual in bankruptcy proceedings,” notes Andrea Freeman, author of the study, the first analysis of racial disparities in legal scholarship.

    Credit cards for these people and others serve as a “plastic safety net,” providing a means for people to fill a gap between falling incomes and the bills they must pay in order to survive financially, at least temporarily.

    In the key findings of yet another study, nearly 60% of African Americans held a credit card, and nearly 84% of these cardholders carried a month-to-month balance in 2004.

    Also, nearly one out of five card-indebted African Americans earning less than $50,000 was in debt hardship, meaning 40% of their income was being spent on debt service payments. In many cases, debt spiraled out of control for this population during the latest recession. The study was part of a series of briefing papers titled “Borrowing to Make Ends Meet.”

    The study found that African Americans are more likely to fall victim to high cost financial services because many predatory lenders open offices and market aggressively in their communities, providing illusory solutions but contributing to worsening household finances.

    One explanation offered for the widening debt gap between African Americans and whites is the wealth disparity among racial and ethnic groups. Just 10 years ago, African Americans held only 10 cents for every $1 of white wealth. Just five years ago, less than half of African American households owned their homes compared to three quarters of white households who enjoyed home ownership.

    Today’s financial realities have resulted in two types of credit card users, according to Freeman, who teaches at California Western School of Law. “I identified one type as a ‘subsistence user,’ someone who relies on credit cards to pay her electricity and gas bills and to purchase necessities such as groceries and diapers. Without a credit card she lacks the means to support herself and her family because of stagnant real wages.”

    “The other major type of credit card user, the ‘lifestyle user,’ can purchase basic necessities without borrowing, but uses credit cards to enhance her lifestyle, whether that means purchasing movie tickets, birthday gifts, or work clothing.”

  4. rikyrah says:

    Why So Many White Men Still Don’t Like President Obama

    March 06, 2011 07:43 PM

    The latest Pew Research Center survey found a lot of things that should cheer President Obama. Voter anger against government even among those that identify as Tea Party backers is down, the Wisconsin union standoff hasn’t stirred any widespread anti-labor backlash, and there’s more tolerance than ever for same sex marriage. But the poll also found a troubling note, a continuing troubling note for the White House, and a happy one for the GOP. White males still by big margins either disapprove or strongly disapprove of the president’s job performance. The continued high disapproval ratings among this group is even more glaring since it comes at the point where more Americans than in the past year say they like the job Obama’s doing. That is again all except, a majority of white males. The temptation is to chalk the continued skepticism and downright hostility to Obama of many white males up to the stereotypical gun rack, beer guzzling, white blue collar Joe. Many of those that don’t like Obama do fit that image. But many don’t. A significant percent in the Pew Center survey are middle to upper income, college educated, and live in a suburban neighborhood.

    Their numbers are big and their political influence potent. The current crop of GOP presidential candidates know that, and bank on them to once more be the driving force in the 2012 presidential election. There’s some reason for that expectation.

    In 2000, exit polling showed that while white women backed Bush over Democratic Presidential contender Al Gore by 3 percentage points. White men backed Bush by 27 percentage points. Without the big backing of Southern white males for Bush in 2000, Gore would have easily won the White House, and the Florida vote debacle would have been a meaningless sideshow. In the 2004 election the earlier polls that showed Bush getting sixty percent of the white male votes nationally were totally accurate. In the South, he garnered more than 70 percent of their vote. Four years later the margin was 26 points for Bush over Democratic presidential rival John Kerry among white males. Bush swept Kerry in every one of the Old Confederacy states and three out of four of the Border States. That insured another Bush White House.

    In 2008, GOP Presidential candidate John McCain got nearly sixty percent of the white male vote. Though this was down slightly from prior presidential years, it still was high enough to keep McCain relatively competitive.

    The intense and unshakeable loyalty of a majority of working and middle class white men to the GOP is not new. The gender gap was first identified and labeled in the 1980 contest between Reagan and Carter. That year Reagan had more than a 20 percent bulge in the margin of male votes he got over Carter. By comparison, women voters split almost evenly down the middle in backing both Reagan and Carter. Men didn’t waver from their support of Reagan during his years in office. In fact, many of them made no secret about why they liked him. His reputed toughness, firmness and refusal to compromise on issues of war and peace fit neatly into the often times stereotypical male qualities of professed courage, determination, and toughness.

    Though the penchant for white males to back Republican presidents gave Bush the electoral edge in the race against Gore and Kerry in 2000, Gore won the popular vote as well as the electoral votes in more than a dozen states and women voters provided the margin for victory in those states for him. The GOP’s grip on male voters, however, could have even spelled doom for Bill Clinton in his reelection bid in 1996.
    If women had not turned out in large numbers and voted heavily for Clinton, GOP presidential contender Robert Dole may well have beat him out. While men rate defense, a strong military, the war on terrorism, and national security as high on their list of concerns, women say abortion rights, education, social security, health care, equal pay and job advancement, and equal rights are highest on their list of concerns.
    While racial, gender, and economic tensions and fears are major forces behind white male devotion to the GOP; they’re hardly the only reason for their political love affair with the party. Republicans have also played hard on the anger, frustration, and hatred that many males harbor toward government and their swoon over military toughness. The Tea Party, Palin, the Fox News Network and the shrill pack of right wing bloggers and talk show hosts have fanned and inflamed the anti-government and borderline racism of many white males to power their movement. This paid big dividends in the November mid-term elections. And for four decades before that it has been the trump card for winning GOP presidents and even losing GOP presidential candidates, like McCain.

    Win or lose, the GOP still banks heavily that that vote will be there for whomever emerges from the GOP presidential contender pack again. The Pew Center Survey simply confirmed it’s not a fawn hope.

    Earl Ofari Hutchinson

  5. Wyclef Jean Shot In Haiti

    PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti — A spokesman for Wyclef Jean says the hip-hop star has been released from a hospital after being treated for a gunshot wound to his hand.

    Joe Mignon, senior program director for Jean’s Yele Foundation, says Jean was shot in the hand after 11 p.m. local time Saturday in the city of Delmas, just outside Port-au-Prince.

    Jean’s brother, Samuel, confirmed the musician was shot. Neither he nor Mignon had additional details.

    The shooting comes on the eve of presidential elections in Haiti. Jean is supporting fellow musician Michel Martelly.

    A spokesman for the Haitian National Police could not be immediately reached for comment.

  6. The Church Without Walls, Houston TX: LIVE WORSHIP SERVICE (ELDRIDGE CAMPUS)

    Shout out to Linda Harris!

Leave a Reply