This is the most powerful part of her testimony, to me. All that she has ever sought to achieve was equality. Like the whites, she simply wanted the right to vote, and live a peaceful life. She did not ask to be harassed, threatened, and brutalized simply for her sex and color. Instead, she took these horrid experiences and turned them into a lifelong commitment to equality.

Mrs. Hamer carried the physical evidence of this brutality for the rest of her life. Her firsthand account of the viciousness of her attack along with the physical scars had to have broken through to those at the DNC. It had to be impossible for them to sweep her testimony under the rug with her disabilities staring them in the face.

The giving of her full, legal name and address stands out to me as a bold, nothing-more-to-loose move on Mrs. Hamer's part. When she later goes on to tell of the times and homes that she had been shot at, and having to sleep with her phone off of the hook due to threatening calls is a testament to her strength and fortitude in the face of discrimination.

These are pretty strong words aimed toward the millionaires of that time. On the other hand, I can imagine the disdain for the millionaires that this statement drummed up from those living in poverty. I imagine that many of those living meagerly probably never thought of their status from this point before.

I can see both sides of this argument. Growing up in poverty I would have loved for a politician to bestow thousands of dollars upon my family, but I can also see where those who hold those millions would be hard pressed to let go of any of it.

This has to be why Huey Long was assassinated. When you are publicly discussing cutting the wealth of the wealthiest individuals in the world, you easily attract the attention of not only those who do not agree with your plans, but also have the means to stop you in your tracks. Although I see the value in his plan, I can't help but to think of modern day millionaires and what extent they would go to in order to protect their assets. To someone who has over $50,000,000 they automatically have the motive and the means to stop the threat to their wellbeing at literally any cost. I did not take the time to research the facts behind his assassination, but I'd be willing to bet it was orchestrated by one of the mega wealthy of his time.

Mr. DuBois makes it known that although Mr. Washington was a well-respected leader, his passive approach to equality eludes to the acceptance of inferiority for blacks.

Here, Mr. DuBois is clearly drawing a line between Mr. Washington's views and his own. He is already laying the groundwork to show that his stand will not take such a passive, "submissive" approach to equality.

I cannot help but wonder if this is truly how the former slaves felt. How can Mr. Washington assume and make broad sweeping statements such as this without fear of retribution. Surely he must understand that there may be one or two (or hundreds) of black "neighbors" that feel a little resentful for being enslaved.

Again, Mr. Washington is attempting to educate the whites to the necessity of the labor and skills possessed by the blacks. He states that one skill - tilling the fields, should not be celebrated any less than the skill needed to pen a poem. Although the poem was created with much less sweat equity, it is no more honorable or valuable that the field that has been tilled and will bring forth food to nourish a body - regardless of race.

I really like this part of Mr. Washington's speech. I think it speaks volumes by drawing attention to the fact that yes, many's history was rooted in slavery, yet the skills that they possessed as a result are valuable and should be exalted instead of looked down upon. Hard labor is honest, needed, and valued work but during this time it was exceptional to have a dignified leader bring attention to it, and it's importance.