Republicans (Sort of) Get a Clue

Funny! From the American Prospect Magazine no less…

Ringside Seat: The Angry Whites Liquidation Sale

Let it not be said that the GOP doesn’t know it has a problem. As Senator Lindsay Graham said last year, “We’re not generating enough angry white guys to stay in business for the long term.” And in the November election, that became vividly clear. Mitt Romney lost Latino voters by 44 points, Asian-American voters by 47 points, and voters under 30 by 23 points. So in the months since, the Republicans have been racking their brains to come up with ways to appeal to voters who do not happen to be older white men.

So how’s it going? Well, this week, not so great. First you had Ben Carson, the Baltimore neurosurgeon who, as a black conservative, has become a hero to the right, getting a bit too frank about marriage in an appearance on Fox News. Heterosexual marriage, he said, is “a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality—it doesn’t matter what they are. They don’t get to change the definition.” When people became somewhat displeased with this rhetoric, Carson said, “I think people have completely taken the wrong meaning out of what I was saying.” Yeah.

Cut to Alaska congressman Don Young growing wistful about the old days: “My father had a ranch; we used to have 50-60 wetbacks to pick tomatoes.” Like Carson, he apologized if anyone got offended.

And there’s the Republicans’ problem: It’s one thing for party leaders to say, however sincerely, that they want to reach out to minorities. But if people in your party keep popping off with statements like those, you aren’t going to get anywhere.

They missed

Republican Rep. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota  said he didn’t feel safe on Native American reservations because of a provision in the Violence Against Women Act that allows tribal courts to prosecute non-Native American individuals for sexual and domestic violence crimes committed on tribal land. The congressman also berated tribal leaders for being “dysfunctional” and said he wanted to “ring the Tribal council’s neck and slam them against the wall.”

Michigan Republican Dave Agema says he is refusing to resign after promoting an article that said “part of the homosexual agenda is to get the public to affirm their filthy lifestyle.”

Arizona Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) on Monday vowed to continue to use the slur “illegal” to refer to undocumented immigrants. At a town hall meeting in Phoenix, a 25-year-old dreamer asked the former Republican presidential nominee to “please drop the i-word,” according to The Arizona Republican.“Someone who crosses our borders illegally is here illegally,” McCain replied. “You can call it whatever you want to, but it’s illegal. I think there’s a big difference between someone who does something that’s illegal and someone who’s undocumented.”  “I’ll continue to call it illegal,” he insisted.

Rick Perry, miffed at Madonna’s comments about the Boy Scouts …Said Perry, in On My Honor:

…”Even if an alcoholic is powerless over alcohol once it enters his body, he still makes a choice to drink…And, even if someone is attracted to a person of the same sex, he or she still makes a choice to engage in sexual activity with someone of the same gender.”

And we don’t even talk about the Kumbaya at CPAC.

On the good side –  Michael Steele Calls Reince Priebus ‘Numbnuts’ (AUDIO)

The New- Old Jim Crow – “Fear of a Black President”

 

Great article by Ta-Nehisi Coates about the right wing’s reaction and vitrol against President Obama.  The roots of this go back generations, illuminated by the America’s rejection of Jesse Owens after the 1938 Olympics (It wasn’t Hitler who refused to shake Owens hand and congratulate him – if was Owen’s fellow Americans). That hasn’t changed much – as the American segregationalists just changed political parties, and now couch their racism in more “palatable” terms…

Even more interesting is the impact of President Obama’s achievement of black Republicans like Artur Davis.

Fear of a Black President

The irony of President Barack Obama is best captured in his comments on the death of Trayvon Martin, and the ensuing fray. Obama has pitched his presidency as a monument to moderation. He peppers his speeches with nods to ideas originally held by conservatives. He routinely cites Ronald Reagan. He effusively praises the enduring wisdom of the American people, and believes that the height of insight lies in the town square. Despite his sloganeering for change and progress, Obama is a conservative revolutionary, and nowhere is his conservative character revealed more than in the very sphere where he holds singular gravity—race.

Part of that conservatism about race has been reflected in his reticence: for most of his term in office, Obama has declined to talk about the ways in which race complicates the American present and, in particular, his own presidency. But then, last February, George Zimmerman, a 28-year-old insurance underwriter, shot and killed a black teenager, Trayvon Martin, in Sanford, Florida. Zimmerman, armed with a 9 mm handgun, believed himself to be tracking the movements of a possible intruder. The possible intruder turned out to be a boy in a hoodie, bearing nothing but candy and iced tea. The local authorities at first declined to make an arrest, citing Zim­mer­man’s claim of self-defense. Protests exploded nationally. Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea assumed totemic power. Celebrities—the actor Jamie Foxx, the former Michigan governor Jennifer Granholm, members of the Miami Heat—were photographed wearing hoodies. When Rep­resentative Bobby Rush of Chicago took to the House floor to denounce racial profiling, he was removed from the chamber after donning a hoodie mid-speech.

The reaction to the tragedy was, at first, trans-partisan. Conservatives either said nothing or offered tepid support for a full investigation—and in fact it was the Republican governor of Florida, Rick Scott, who appointed the special prosecutor who ultimately charged Zimmerman with second-degree murder. As civil-rights activists descended on Florida, National Review, a magazine that once opposed integration, ran a column proclaiming “Al Sharpton Is Right.” The belief that a young man should be able to go to the store for Skittles and an iced tea and not be killed by a neighborhood-­watch patroller seemed un­controversial.

By the time reporters began asking the White House for comment, the president likely had already given the matter considerable thought. Obama is not simply America’s first black president—he is the first president who could credibly teach a black-studies class. He is fully versed in the works of Richard Wright and James Baldwin, Frederick Douglass and Malcolm X. Obama’s two autobiographies are deeply concerned with race, and in front of black audiences he is apt to cite important but obscure political figures such as George Henry White, who served from 1897 to 1901 and was the last African American congressman to be elected from the South until 1970. But with just a few notable exceptions, the president had, for the first three years of his presidency, strenuously avoided talk of race. And yet, when Trayvon Martin died, talk Obama did:

When I think about this boy, I think about my own kids, and I think every parent in America should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this, and that everybody pulls together—federal, state, and local—to figure out exactly how this tragedy happened …

But my main message is to the parents of Trayvon Martin. If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon. I think they are right to expect that all of us as Americans are going to take this with the seriousness it deserves, and that we’re going to get to the bottom of exactly what happened.The moment Obama spoke, the case of Trayvon Martin passed out of its national-mourning phase and lapsed into something darker and more familiar—racialized political fodder. The illusion of consensus crumbled. Rush Limbaugh denounced Obama’s claim of empathy. The Daily Caller, a conservative Web site, broadcast all of Martin’s tweets, the most loutish of which revealed him to have committed the un­pardonable sin of speaking like a 17-year-old boy. A white-­supremacist site called Stormfront produced a photo of Martin with pants sagging, flipping the bird. Business Insiderposted the photograph and took it down without apology when it was revealed to be a fake.

Newt Ging­rich pounced on Obama’s comments: “Is the president suggesting that if it had been a white who had been shot, that would be okay because it wouldn’t look like him?” Reverting to form,National Review decided the real problem was that we were interested in the deaths of black youths only when nonblacks pulled the trigger. John Derbyshire, writing for Taki’s Magazine, an iconoclastic libertarian publication, composed a racist advice column for his children inspired by the Martin affair. (Among Derbyshire’s tips: never help black people in any kind of distress; avoid large gatherings of black people; cultivate black friends to shield yourself from charges of racism.)

For the rest of the article - go here.

Jeremy Lin – Race Matters

Growing up in the 60′s I was pretty comfortable in my ignorance about Asian people. They were short, small folks weren’t they? During segregation black folks didn’t much socialize with Asians, as the few Asian kids that were here went to the white schools. That comfortable ignorance was shattered my freshman year of college when I went to the Penn Relays and a friend introduced me to a 7′ tall Chinese High Jumper, who educated this poor brainless twit to the fact that Asia is huge, and peopled by a lot of different folks…

With the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 eliminating racial quotas and restrictions on immigration (not to mention putting us all in the same schools in more enlightened parts of the country) – you would think folks would have learned a hell of a lot about each other by now.

I guess not in the last bastion of bigotry – Sports.

Jeremy Lin - The Kid's Got Game, Y'all

Opinion: Man to man defense

Last Friday, Jeremy Lin – the Knicks’ sensational out-of-nowhere superstar – finally sealed the deal.

Despite his record as one of the most exciting talents to come out of the Bay Area in years, leading Palo Alto High to a stunning 32-1 record in his senior prep year, he was recruited by none of the top basketball schools, finally opting to attend Harvard University after being offered a guaranteed spot on their team.

He subsequently dominated the Ivy League, and put up numbers in his senior year that should have gotten any NBA scout excited, becoming the only player in the NCAA’s Division 1 to rank in the top 10 in virtually every performance category.

And yet Lin went undrafted, finally accepting an offer of a deep backup slot on his hometown team, the Golden State Warriors – who gave him a handful of garbage minutes, shuffling him back and forth between the bench and the NBA’s development league, before finally releasing him in December.

The Houston Rockets, who’d lost center Yao Ming to retirement the previous season, briefly picked up Lin as a potential ploy to retain their substantial Asian fanbase, but dropped him a few weeks later – on Christmas Eve.

The Knicks, ravaged by injuries to all their big-name, big-ticket stars and reeling in the standings, picked him up to ensure they could field a full team on the floor. In the past week, Lin has led New York to a string of victories with a set of incredible individual and team performances.

And last Friday, after dropping 38 points on an elite Los Angeles Lakers squad, he convinced his remaining critics and doubters that they’d been wrong all along.

Most of them.

Minutes after Lin’s amazing game, with the streets of midtown still in the throes of LINsanity, Fox Sports News personality Jason Whitlock issued a flip, ostensibly satirical tweet that probably can not be reprinted in full here. Suffice it to say that it suggested that Lin would be celebrating his victory by entertaining “some lucky lady,” while also reiterating an ugly and cliché stereotype about Asian anatomy.

Why Jeremy Lin’s race matters

After heavy pressure from a range of sources, particularly the Asian American Journalists Association, on Sunday, Whitlock apologized for the joke, calling his remark “immature [and] sophomoric” and one that “debased a feel-good sports moment.”

While many people, including, apparently, Fox Sports News’s leadership, have been willing to let things go based on this act of contrition, I think Whitlock dodged addressing the larger cultural context behind his statement.

I think that’s unfortunate, especially in light of a few other recent in-the-news events.

The first is another offhand tweet by a television personality. Roland Martin, a commentator for the news channel behind this blog, CNN.

Just a week before Whitlock’s unfortunate gibe, as the Giants were headed for a shocking Super Bowl victory over the Patriots, Martin blurted a response to H&M’s sexy underwear commercial featuring David Beckham – suggesting to his followers that any men expressing enthusiasm for the ad should be slapped upside the head. The remark drew a firestorm of backlash from LGBT activists, who interpreted it as an anti-gay statement. Martin was subsequently suspended “indefinitely” from CNN appearances.

There is a connection between the two incidents, and it’s not just that they both related to prominent news figures caught out on social media. Both Whitlock and Martin are African-American men. And both were speaking from a position that illustrates a particular entrenched attitude among men of color about masculinity.

This isn’t the place to go deep into the record of how sexuality, gender and race have intersected in black, Latino and Asian American history, with tragic and sometimes horrific results. Suffice it to say that as a consequence of that history, within each of these communities, manhood – its definition, its expression and yes, the defense of it against those who would question it – plays an outsized role.

Whitlock’s joke said more about his own male insecurities, reinforced by mainstream culture’s stereotypes about black men, than it did about Lin’s anatomy.

And Martin’s joke was ultimately less of an attack on homosexuality than it was a rejection of “sissyhood”: Beckham has long been held up as an exemplar of the “metrosexual male” – the sensitive, fashion-forward guy who, gay or straight, presents an image that runs counter to the rugged and bellicose sensibility of organized team sports, particularly football.

As NFL cornerback turned sportswriter Alan Grant noted in an essay some years back for ESPN.com, “the athletic world – that realm of all things male, musky and aggressive – is the final frontier of masculinity,” which is why it’s so frequently a cesspool for, as he put it, “crude, old-fashioned, sophomoric statements about sexuality.” Like Whitlock’s. And Martin’s.

Whether they intended to or not – and even if they’re oblivious to the fact – with their comments, Whitlock and Martin injected themselves into a much larger conversation of what it means to be a “real man” in an era where manhood is constantly perceived to be “under attack.”

But maybe the particular male archetype that Whitlock, Martin and many others have held up as a benchmark is one that deserves to be under attack.

It celebrates physical parameters that few men can reach – certainly not Whitlock or Martin, or me, for that matter: Big, burly, massively muscled, inhumanly endowed. It reinforces the notion that manhood is best expressed through violence – giving women “pain,” per Whitlock, or “slapping the ish” out of someone, per Martin.

It is, quite frequently, accompanied by words and actions that are deeply misogynist or nastily homophobic, or both.

It presents manhood as the fruit of harsh treatment and abuse – as exemplified by the viral video of the so-called “Eagle Dad,” Chinese businessman He Liesheng, forcing his four-year-old son to run around Central Park in the snow in his underwear to make him more manly: “When the old eagle teaches its young, it takes the young eagles to the cliffside, beats them, and pushes them to teach them to use their wings,” explained He.

One of the things that’s most incredible about the Jeremy Lin phenomenon isn’t just that he’s had so much success, but that he’s done so without relying on or embracing the tenets of raw, rugged, roughneck notions of manhood…

Fear of a Brown America – Pat Buchanan and “Suicide of a Superpower”.

Pat Buchanan slouches back into bigotry, with an extremely friendly interview from soul-bigot Sean Hannity…

Pat gets into his racial theories here, with “The end of white America” -

Herman Cain Feigns Shock!

The Washington Post did an article yesterday on Republican Presidential Candidate, and Texas Governor Rick Perry’s owenership (long term lease)  of a property in West Texas named Niggerhead Ranch…

Apparently nobody got around to removing the sign to the ranch until 2006, according to one account by a worker there.

Perry used this Ranch to wine and dine fellow Republicans on “hunting trips” and other various outings, apparently without seeing the need to change the name.

Here is Herman Cain of fellow Republican and fellow Tea Party member Rick Perry…

Notice Cain never says the ranch’s name was “insulting” to him. And if you recall, Cain buckdanced to the national media on a number of occasions claiming there was no “racism” in the Tea Party.

This isn’t the first time a Republican Presidential hopeful has melted down on the race issue. Republican former Governor and Senator from Virginia, George Allen uttered the now infamous “Macacca” word, ending his Senatorial and immediate Presidential hopes. What is less publicized about Allen outside of Virginia is the fact he kept a hangman’s noose and confederate flag hanging in his office as a sign of “Southern Pride”. George Allen is running again for the Senate this year, apparently buoyed by the Tea Party emergence and change in climate which elected a Republican Governor and Attorney General in the State in 2008.

Now – just owning a ranch – especially in that part of the world, with a racially pejorative name isn’t enough to say that Rick Perry is a bigot…

That part of Texas where Perry’s ranch is located has never been too “Minority Friendly”. I seriously doubt Perry actually even saw a black person much before he was 12 or 15 years old, where he grew up.

But what it does do, is speak to the “Wink…Wink…Nod…Nod…” relationship between Republican politicians and bigots, and their easy acceptance of bigotry.

As to George Allen – he’s a flaming racist ass. Hopefully Cain gets to meet him soon.

Hey Herman!

 

Bigots “R’ Us

An interesting look at the soft (and sotimes hard) bigotry of the republican candidates in the Presidential Primary…

In Spain they have “the running of the Bulls”…

Here, we have “The running of the rejects”.

The Definitive Guide to Bigotry in the 2012 Republican Primaries (So Far)

…Faulty as the Democrats may be, read this guide and remember that liberals still believe abolishing slavery was a good idea and that women should not be confined to the kitchen—which is not something you can say about all of the Republican contenders.

Rick Santorum, Former Senator from Pennsylvania

In 2003, then-Sen. Santorum conflated being gay with bigamy, incest and having sex with farm animals, then said, “That’s not to pick on homosexuality.” Really?

Later, Sen. Santorum actually copped to his prejudices, but spun them as a positive trait. “You can say I’m a hater, but I would argue I’m a lover,” Santorum said. “I’m a lover of traditional families and of the right of children to have a mother and father…. I would argue that the future of America hangs in the balance.” Sounds like a hater to me.

In 2008, Santorum tried to manufacture liberal angst about then-candidate Barack Obama, saying Democrats feared Obama “may go to Indonesia and bow to more Muslims.” That’s not to pick on Muslims, right? Still, the one thing I can say about Santorum is at least he’s openly and consistently bigoted. There’s something oddly old fashioned about that.

Michele Bachmann, Representative from Minnesota

Bachmann signed the infamous “black kids were better off under slavery” pledge and ushered in a real high point in the campaign season as pundits struggled in-artfully to talk about the nation’s ugly racial history. Then Bachmann demeaned President Obama’s economic policies by alleging he’s tying the U.S. economy to Zimbabwe.

But Bachmann is not all rhetoric—she takes it to the streets. In 2006, then State Sen. Bachmann hid behind a bush to spy on a gay rights rally, crouching with her husband Marcus who runs a cure-away-the-gay reparative therapy organization of which she is “extremely proud.”

Speaking of her husband, Bachmann’s gender does not make her a feminist. She once told wives “to be submissive to your husbands” like she was when Marcus told her to go to grad school and run for Congress. “I was going to be faithful to what I felt God was calling me to do through my husband,” Bachmann said.

Herman Cain, Former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza

McCain Blames “Illegal Immigrants” For Arizona Fires

Hate to say it, but somehow I haven’t felt one hell of a lot of sympathy for Arizona lately…

Not cheering the disaster which has befallen the state…

But I just find it real hard to work up much sympathy for a bunch of Republicans who have made racism and intolerance the key to their actions. I mean – if Jan Brewer and her merry bunch of bigots and racist burns in the Arizona hellfire…

I really can’t say the country is worse off.

Probably should have listened to the preacher this AM a bit more on that forgiveness and tolerance part.

McCain blames some Arizona wildfires on illegal immigrants

U.S. Sen. John McCain is blaming illegal immigrants for starting some of the wildfires that have scorched hundreds of thousands of acres in Arizona.
“There is substantial evidence that some of these fires have been caused by people who have crossed our border illegally,” McCain, R-Arizona, said Saturday at a press conference. “The answer to that part of the problem is to get a secure border.”
The Arizona senator, however, did not say what the evidence is, prompting a swift rebuke from Latino civil rights advocates.
“It’s easier to fan the flames of intolerance, especially in Arizona,” said Randy Parraz, a civil rights advocate who ran unsuccessfully against McCain as a Democratic candidate in 2010.
Parraz called McCain’s remarks “careless and reckless” but not entirely surprising given the political climate in Arizona. The Latino advocate is co-founder of Citizens for a Better Arizona, a group trying the recall the legislator who authored the state’s controversial anti-illegal immigration law.
Parraz said McCain “should know better” than to make such an accusation without presenting any facts.
McCain said that illegal immigrants set such fires either to send signals, keep warm or distract law enforcement agents. But he did not specify which fires allegedly had been started by illegal immigrants, nor did he identify his sources or provide details of the “substantial” evidence he cited.
Firefighters are currently battling five wildfires that have burned a combined 732,427 acres in Arizona, according to InciWeb, an online interagency database that tracks fires, floods and other disasters. The fires are under investigation and suspects have not been named. However, local media outlets have reported anecdotal cases of fires breaking out in areas where illegal immigrants have been known to cross the border.
Parraz said it is particularly distressing that immigrants are being blamed for destructive fires at a time when many are also being targeted given the state’s unemployment, foreclosure and other economic issues.
“People are looking for someone to blame,” he said, claiming it is too easy and convenient to target what he called one of Arizona’s “most vulnerable populations.”
Angelo Falcon, the president of the National Institute for Latino Policy, criticized McCain for what he called “increasingly blatant” political opportunism.

That’s not “political opportunism” Mr Falcon… That’s just plain old conservative lynch mob racism.

Burn Baby, Burn… Indeed.

Black Cons Leaving Republican Plantation…

To be a Black Republican has always taken a cast iron stomach. The principal function of black conservatives is a front men, to be placed in visible positions for the press to provide plausible deniability to the Republican racism issue.

While both parties have their requisite numbers of hotheads, racists, and morons – the Republican hog has fed at the trough of racial animosity since the days of Raygun. The penalty for that has been the evolution of a Party dominated by small minds, and even smaller morality. If you don’t believe that, look at the assorted weak sisters and mental midgets which now dominate the Republican wannabe President list. The salient point here being “wannabe”.

It’s not about America anymore, it is about special interest groups and “the base”, which in the case of the Tea Party which now dominates the Republican body politic is hardly distinguishable from the Third KKK or the German American Bund.

I think the key point here is that the flocks of folks deserting the sinking ship aren’t suddenly coming to their senses and becoming progressives – what they are becoming is “not-Republicans”. They are holding on to a conservative dream which has been sold down the river so many times…

They are left in an ocean of disappointment.

The latest escapees? Black conservatives, tired of holding that lantern out there on the lawn.

Former "Black Republican", now Independent, Ken Barnes

Viewpoints: Racist cartoon of Obama forces me to leave GOP

I was one of those rare species: a black Republican, the guy willing to spit into the wind of conventional thought, who was often showcased on camera at party events to prove inclusiveness.

But as a proud black man, I can no longer be a member of the Republican Party.

Being a Republican has long been a part of my personal and professional identities, so leaving the party is a difficult and emotional decision.

In 1998, as a young man searching for what I believed were shared values, I cut ties with the Democratic Party and became a Republican. Democrats, in my view, had become unwelcoming to those holding center-right views not in lockstep with the party, and it was my belief that through hard work, the Republican Party could be utilized as a vehicle for improving our community.

For the next 13 years, I dedicated myself to growing the conservative base of the Republican Party, and in the process bound myself in emotion and deed.

During that time, I worked on behalf of Republican candidates at all levels, from presidential and gubernatorial campaigns, on down to local elections.

I have had the pleasure of serving as president of the Sacramento Republican Assembly, a term as a member of the California Republican Party executive committee, and most recently as treasurer of the Sacramento County Republican Party.

Last year alone, I donated more than 400 hours of my time to the Republican Party and made financial contributions to a number of Republican candidates.

As of late, however, when I look at myself in the mirror there is one question which perplexes me: Can I, in good conscience, remain affiliated with an organization whose message purveyors of racism and bigotry find attractive?

Discrimination Against Muslims

In the following video, we have the Tea Party’s official Lawn Jockey Candidate, spreading love for Muslims…

This from the DOJ, discussing the impact of Cain’s type of “love”…

DOJ official: Muslims face rising discrimination

American Muslims face a rising tide of religious discrimination in U.S. communities, workplaces and schools nearly a decade after the September 11 attacks, a senior Justice Department official said on Tuesday.

Evidence of growing anti-Muslim bigotry, aired at a Senate Judiciary hearing, poses a challenge for President Barack Obama as his administration works to foster good relations with American Muslims at a time when the United States is threatened by home-grown terrorism.

“We should all agree that it’s wrong to blame an entire community for the wrongdoing of a few. Guilt by association is not the American way,” said Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, who chaired the hearing.

He said Muslims account for less than 1 percent of the U.S. population but more than 14 percent of religious discrimination cases investigated by the federal government and 25 percent of religious discrimination cases involving workplaces.

The Justice Department has investigated over 800 incidents of violence, vandalism and arson against people believed to be Muslim, Arab or South Asian, since the September 11 attacks.

U.S. homeland security officials say the United States faces a home-grown threat from Islamic radicalization, including attempts by al Qaeda to radicalize and recruit U.S. Muslims to carry out attacks here and abroad.

The hearing quickly took on a partisan edge when Durbin responded to criticism from Republican Peter King, chairman of a House of Representatives panel widely criticized for a hearing on radicalization in the U.S. Muslim community less than three weeks ago.

King said on Monday that the civil rights discussion would “perpetuate the myth that there is a serious anti-Islam issue in this country.”

But at the start of the session Durbin shot back: “Inflammatory speech from prominent public leaders creates a fertile climate for discrimination.”

“All of us, especially those of us in public life, have a responsibility to choose our words carefully. We must condemn anti-Muslim bigotry and make it clear that we won’t tolerate religious discrimination.”

Thomas Perez, the assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights, said anti-Muslim bigotry has brought a surge in the number of federal discrimination cases involving zoning boards and other local authorities that have acted to prevent mosques from opening in their communities.

The Justice Department has begun 14 such cases since May 2010, around the time when plans for a mosque near the site of the World Trade Center attack in New York seized media headlines and ignited a national political uproar.

Before last May, the government had pursued only 10 land-use discrimination cases over a decade.

 

 

Rep Keith Ellison at Homeland Security Committee Meeting

Rep Keith Ellison lays out why Rep Peter King’s hearing is a travesty…

Japanese Americans Push Back Against Republican Jim Crow

One of the ugly episodes in our history was the treatment of Japanese Americans during WWII. America operated concentration camps, where Japanse-American citizens, guilty of nothing but their Japanese ancestry were imprisoned for the duration of WWII. Whole familes were carted off to be locked away…

So it is no surprise Japanese would be sensitive to the virulent calls to racism by Tea Bagged Republicans – this time against another group, Muslims. They have seen this slide show before…

Japanese Americans decry Rep. King’s Muslim hearings as ‘sinister’

During the chaotic days after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Basim Elkarra was passing by an Islamic school in Sacramento when he did a double-take: The windows were covered with thousands of origami paper cranes – peace symbols that had been folded and donated by Japanese Americans.

Amid the anger and suspicions being aimed at Muslims at that time, the show of support “was a powerful symbol that no one will ever forget,” said Elkarra, a Muslim American community leader in California.

It was also the beginning of an unlikely bond between the two groups that has intensified as House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter T. King (R-N.Y.)prepares to launch a series of controversial hearings Thursday on radical Islam in the United States.

Spurred by memories of the World War II-era roundup and internment of 110,000 of their own people, Japanese Americans, especially on the West Coast, have been among the most vocal and passionate supporters of embattled Muslims. They’ve rallied public support against hate crimes at mosques, signed on to legal briefs opposing the indefinite detention of Muslims by the government, organized cross-cultural trips to the Manzanar internment camp memorial in California and held “Bridging Communities” workshops in Islamic schools and on college campuses.

Lawn Jockey alert! Alan West Attacks Keith Ellison

The Tea Party’s favorite Lawn Jockey is at it again – this time in an attack against Congressman Keith Ellison for being a Muslim…

Folks down in Palm Beach ready for that Recall Election yet?

Keith Ellison’s response to West’s hate fueled diatribe -

I was surprised to hear of Congressman West’s comments because he has never expressed these sentiments to me directly.

Contrary to the views expressed by Congressman West, I work to represent the highest ideals of our great nation – ideals like freedom of worship and respect for all faiths, equal protection under the law as well as a civil and open public discourse.

I call on Americans of all colors, cultures and faiths to turn to each other, not on each other, especially in the renewed spirit of finding a more respectful and productive public dialogue.

Americans across the country want their public servants to reject the toxic and corrosive chatter that yields more heat than light. I hope to have a productive and respectful dialogue with all of my colleagues, including Allen West.

Come on down and get you “Lawn Jockey of the Week Award – Alan West!

Lawn Jockey of the Week Award to Alan West - For his ad hominum racist attack on Congressman Keith Ellison's religion and Patriotism

Kristallnacht in Arizona

On April 6, 1933, the German Students Association’s Main Office for Press and Propaganda proclaimed a nationwide “Action against the Un-German Spirit,” to climax in a literary purge or “cleansing” (Säuberung) by fire. Local chapters were to supply the press with releases and commissioned articles, sponsor well-known Nazi figures to speak at public gatherings, and negotiate for radio broadcast time. On April 8, the students association also drafted its twelve “theses” — deliberately evocative ofMartin Luther — declarations and requisites of a “pure” national language and culture. Placards publicized the students’ “theses,” which attacked “Jewish intellectualism,” asserted the need to “purify” the German language and literature, and demanded that universities be centers of German nationalism. The students described the proclaimed “action” as a response to a worldwide Jewish “smear campaign” against Germany and an affirmation of traditional German values... Welcome to Arizona

A new law is set to take place in Arizona, HB 2281 – which is to ban “Ethnic Studies”. “Ethnic” in this case being any American who isn’t white… The need to  “purify” the American language and literature… Indeed. By 1938 the pogrom had reached fever pitch, and Kristallnacht. About the only difference between the Nazi Kristallnacht and an American Lynching (Tulsa, Rosewood) I can see is the spiffy Nazi uniforms. Same program, different channel. Both were preceded by virulent anti-minority language, with action bolstered by, and given the “seal of approval” of law.

As a child of the 60′s, I ask myself -”What happened to all the hell raisers?” Been looking for a way to shut the whole state down about now… I guess we didn’t have video games.

Arizona Bans Ethnic Studies and, Along With it, Reason and Justice

While much condemnation has rightly been expressed toward Arizona’s anti-immigrant law, SB 1070, a less-reported and potentially more sinister measure is set to take effect on January 1, 2011. This new law, which was passed by the conservative state legislature at the behest of then-School Superintendent (and now Attorney General-elect) Tom Horne, is designated HB 2281 and is colloquially referred to as a measure to ban ethnic studies programs in the state. As with SB 1070, the implications of this law are problematic, wide-ranging and decidedly hate filled.

Whereas SB 1070 focused primarily on the ostensible control of bodies, HB 2281 is predominantly about controlling minds. In this sense, it is the software counterpart of Arizona’s race-based politicking, paired with the hardware embodied in SB 1070′s “show us your papers” logic of “attrition through enforcement,” which has already resulted in tens of thousands of people leaving the state. With HB 2281, the intention is not so much to expel or harass as it is to inculcate a deep-seated, second-class status by denying people the right to explore their own histories and cultures. It is, in effect, about the eradication of ethnic identity among young people in the state’s already-floundering school system, which now ranks near the bottom in the nation.

There’s a word for what Arizona is attempting to do here: ethnocide. It is similar to genocide in its scope, but it reflects the notion that it is an ethnic and/or cultural identity under assault more so than physical bodies themselves. By imposing a curriculum that forbids the exploration of divergent cultures while propping up the dominant one, there’s another process at work here, what we might call ethnonormativity. This takes the teachings of one culture – the colonizer’s – and makes it the standard version of history while literally banning other accounts, turning the master narrative into the “normal” one, and further denigrating marginalized perspectives. America’s racialized past abounds with such examples of oppressed people being denied their languages, histories and cultures, including through enforced indoctrination in school systems.

As if to add insult to injury, HB 2281 barely makes a pretense to hide any of this in its language and intended scope. A close reading of the law lays bare some of the more stark and sinister aspects of its potential application in a state where Hispanic students fill nearly half the seats in the public schools (the domain to which HB 2281 will apply). In particular, there are three primary aspects of the law that merit further investigation as contributing factors to the ongoing erasure of ethnic identities and the further marginalization of people of color in Arizona. (more)

 

Fear Of the Angry Black Man

What is Portrayed By Conservative Media.

You’ve heard the term “Angry black man/woman” probably too many times for it to register anymore. Most black professionals run into it personally at one time or another, and it is a common device utilized in political and corporate infighting against black employees.

It is a device, dependent on the ignorance or bias of other white employees and managers, which can cause serious career damage to the accused black employee. Often phrased as “having a chip on the shoulder” when a black employee reacts no differently than a white employee to a situation, or when the employee is a black woman, as having “an attitude”, the false canard is just another of those “black taxes” on the way to that still not reached post-racial nirvana.

This irrational, racially driven bias provides a serious challenge to President Obama’s image.

 

What President Obama Projects…

Obama and the Question of the ‘Angry Black Man’

Dec. 23, 2010 – Since his 2008 campaign, much discussion has been devoted to understanding President Obama’s approach.  At various points Obama’s public coolness has been seen as a plus, while at other points it has been viewed as a real minus.  On those rare occasions when Obama has dared give expression to his ire, he has confronted the “angry black man” issue and any concerns he may have regarding the perception that an “angry black man” has assumed the role of President of the United States of America.

In the last two weeks two friends of mine have written pieces critical of my assertion that part of understanding Barack Obama is to understand his intense fear of being perceived as an “angry black man.” One friend simply stated his disagreement with me, while the other ridiculed my position. Both friends happen to be white.

Before I go any further let me be clear that I do not articulate this analysis as in any way a defense of Obama. As my record shows, I have been highly critical of the President on many issues.  What has me unsettled, however, is how easy it has been for many white leftists and progressives to dismiss the matter of the “angry black man” without fully interrogating the concept and its implications.  In that sense, this is about much more than President Obama.

NAACP vs Tea Party… Part Deux

A few months ago, a relatively mild rebuke by the NAACP brought howls of indignation, and the Tea Bagger Attack Machine into full throttle…

Resulting in the NAACP’s point being proven by Tea Party Express executive Mark Williams, and Andrew Brietbart’s vicious smear of Shirley Sherrod.

In other words, the Tea Party reacted exactly as you would expect the guilty to react after getting their hand caught in the proverbial cookie jar. The problem with Tea Party protestations of innocence is their willingness to provide cover for the scumbags in their midst based on their we versus them, conservatives versus liberals mindset. Making racism a conservative “value”.

Here is the problem – the hundreds of death and terrorism threat received by the NAACP, and those nasty grams and threats received by many ion the black blogsphere – including yours truly – hardly indicates that there isn’t something rotten in Tea Party Denmark. The willingness to call John Lewis a liar in support of a few over-the-top bigots who attached themselves to the Tea Party movement certainly didn’t convince anyone of sound mind that the racism in the Tea Party doesn’t run a lot deeper. The use of professional “Uncle Toms” like Angela McGlowan and LLoyd Marcus as “authentic” black voices hardly endears the Tea Party to minorities.

How do you solve this?

It may be too late this election cycle – BUT, as the Tea Party coalesces into a single organism – it might not be a bad idea to engage with the NAACP this time around…

Instead of ramping up the noise machine. We saw how that worked out last time.

NAACP Issues Report That Links Tea Party Leaders to ‘Hate Groups’

The charge of “racism” is one that the Tea Party movement would like to shake. In the past, it has dismissed the label as only representing a few of its members on the fringe. However, the issue surfaced again on Wednesday when the NAACP — which made news in July when it asked the Tea Party to repudiate racist elements within its ranks – issued a report that details associations between Tea Party organizations and hate groups in this country.

In a conference call with journalists, NAACP President Benjamin Jealous said that while there are policy disagreements, the civil rights group has “no problem with the Tea Party expressing their views in their great debate in our great democracy.” The majority of Tea Party members “are sincere,” and some are also in the NAACP, he said.

“We do however have a problem when prominent Tea Party members” use Tea Party events to recruit people for white supremacist groups, Jealous said. The NAACP is urging leadership and members of the Tea Party movement to take additional steps to distance themselves from those Tea Party leaders “who espouse racist ideas, advocate violence, or are formally affiliated with white supremacist organizations.”He said the expulsion of Mark Williams of Tea Party Express was a step in the right direction, but said that Williams had been making controversial statements long before he was ousted for writing a mocking letter suggesting that blacks preferred life under slavery.Some Tea Party leaders condemned the report, accusing the NAACP of abandoning its civil rights mission and of becoming a mouthpiece of the liberal left.