I've been kind of lazy for Black History Month...

So I'll present a little about this post from Chicagoist. There is a lot of good information in this piece. Here's a good paragraph...

Of course designating a specific month to the history of a group demarcated by their racial lineage and skin color doesn't come without controversy. Difficult questions about what it means to be black in America, what role and responsibility white people have in that history, and the usefulness and dignity of such an event are generally debated each year, as well. Chicago writer Salim Muwakkil, for example, argues eloquently for the importance of Black History Month, while Major W. Cox argues just as forcefully for an end to the institution. Lumping the history of people of color into one group raises other, more difficult questions. Where do other notable black people fit into Black History Month? Can we, as a culture and society, designate February as the time to learn about Mae Jemison? Condoleezza Rice? Can the children of generations of African diaspora simply be rolled up into the term "African American" and then conveniently studied once a year, lumping such different people as Crispus Attucks, Tiger Woods and Barack Obama together? What about people whose identity isn't easily classified, such as Bayard Rustin and Charles Pugh?

Yeah there are those who think having a month dedicated for a racial/ethnic group is racist, but I see is as an opportunity for people black or white to see the other contributions that aren't always recognized by racial minorities in this country. Blacks have made contributions in many ways especially in culture. This post even made a good catch. Who would have know there were two Bobby Rushes? One in the US House of Representatives and another who is a singer.

And on a final note a quote from Morgan Freeman during his 60 Minutes interview...

"I don't want a black history month. Black history is American history."