As anticipated, yet another effort at putting a black race pimps face on racism…
As anticipated, yet another effort at putting a black race pimps face on racism…
This one was a shot, probably missed by many in the audience and public, at black conservatives being used as front men in politics and some corporations, the fake “Diversity” efforts of tech firms an the media, and the lack of sincere effort by white dominated industries (including Hollywood).
Slate picked it up for the culturally uncognizant –
At Sunday’s Oscars, Stacey Dash popped onstage with Chris Rock—as the “new director” of the Oscars’ “Minority Outreach Program”—to say one thing: “I cannot wait to help my people out. Happy Black History Month.” If you were left scratching your head, here’s a quick explanation.
It all started in January, when, in response to the #OscarsSoWhite controversy, Dashtold Fox & Friends that the BET Awards and Black History Month should be done away with:
Because we have to make up our minds. Either we want to have segregation or integration. If we don’t want segregation, then we need to get rid of channels like BET and the BET Awards and the Image Awards, where you’re only awarded if you’re black. If it were the other way around, we would be up in arms. It’s a double standard.
When they added ME to increase the diversity, I’m sure many black people rolled their eyes. I’m not “black enough,” they say. But guess what? I’ve heard that all my life. I would rather be a free thinking, black than a cookie cutter black who thinks—and votes—just like all my friends.
Backstory aside, Dash’s appearance at the Oscars was a joke that, for the most part, those outside the sphere of Black Twitter might not have understood. In some ways, bringing Dash into the fold for a joke the white audience wouldn’t necessarily understand might have been Chris Rock’s biggest coup so far.
Amazing what no longer being required to have his nose up Scalia’s derriere has done for the man. He can actually take a breath and say something…
For 10 years, Justice Clarence Thomas has sat on the bench of the Supreme Court through innumerable oral arguments without asking a single question. That all changed today.
On Monday morning, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Voisine v. United States, a complex and arcane case involving domestic violence and gun ownership. The case initially seemed to revolve around a technical question of criminal intent. Stephen Voisine was convicted of “intentionally, knowingly, orrecklessly caus[ing] bodily injury or offensive physical contact” to his girlfriend following a domestic dispute. As a result, he was stripped of his ability to own a gun, because United States federal law indefinitely bars individuals convicted of “a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” from owning firearms. Voisine now argues that “recklessly” causing violence—as opposed to knowingly or intentionally—shouldn’t disqualify him from possessing a gun under federal law.
Arguments were somewhat dry until the last few minutes, when Ilana H. Eisenstein, an assistant to the solicitor general representing the federal government, was preparing to finish up and take her seat. Just before she left the lectern, Justice Clarence Thomas spoke up, asking his very first question from the bench in a decade. The entire court perked up. Everyone shifted forward in their seats, and there was a look of shock on many spectators’ faces. We in the press section nearly fell out of our seats, though the other justices kept admirably cool, with only Chief Justice John Roberts swiveling his head in evident surprise.
Thomas noted that a conviction under the federal statute in question “suspends a constitutional right”—the right of individuals to own guns, as established in 2008’s decision, District of Columbia v. Heller. The government argues, Thomas explained, that “recklessness” in using physical force against an intimate partner is “sufficient to trigger a misdemeanor violation that results in the suspension of what is at least as of now still a constitutional right.” (Thomas appeared to be extremely aware that Hellerwas a 5–4 decision, authored by Justice Antonin Scalia, which could be on the chopping block if the balance of the court shifts to the left.)
The justice, speaking calmly but forcefully, then pointed out that under the federal law, a domestic abuser doesn’t actually have to use a gun against his partner to lose his gun rights. He need only commit some form of domestic abuse, with a firearm or without it. Thomas struck a tone of puzzlement with a tinge of irritation. “Therefore,” he said, “a constitutional right is suspended—even if [the domestic violence] is unrelated to the possession of a gun?”
Eisenstein retorted that individuals who have previously battered spouses have an exponentially higher risk of injuring their spouse with a firearm in the future. But Thomas dug in, asking whether any other law indefinitely suspended an individual’s constitutional rights for recklessly committing a crime. What if “a publisher is reckless about the use of children in what could be indecent displays?” he asked. Could the government “suspend this publisher’s right to ever publish again?” Is suspending First Amendment rights substantively different from suspending Second Amendment rights?
At that point, Justices Anthony Kennedy and Stephen Breyer jumped in to help Eisenstein. (Kennedy joined Heller but isn’t a Second Amendment absolutist like Thomas; Breyer dissented from Heller.) Kennedy mentioned laws that indefinitely regulate sex offenders’ liberty, though it was a weak example, because those laws do not suspend any fundamental rights absolutely and indefinitely. Breyer veered away from Thomas’ question, noting that Voisine wasn’t directly arguing that the federal law violated his Second Amendment rights. (He had argued that earlier, actually, but the Supreme Court refused to consider that question when it agreed to hear the case.) Instead, Voisine pushed the doctrine of “constitutional avoidance”—essentially arguing that the federal law might infringe upon his right to bear arms, and so the court should rule for him on other grounds to avoid having to decide that vastly more monumental question.
Perhaps I am a bit too cynical, but HTF does funding yet another cabaret make jobs for underemployed, and unemployed black tech workers?
And HTF is it that with 12% of the graduates in Computer Engineering being black, there is a “shortage in the school pipeline”?
The way things are done in the tech business is you hire some competent recruiters (“headhunters”) to go and get what, and who you want to hire. There is no shortage of minority middle managers, tech staff, and senior tech staff – although you may have a hard time getting them to move to the West Coast whitopias anymore. That shouldn’t be an issue – because most of these companies have data centers and offices all over the east coast, and a lot of companies hire “virtual” workers…
I been in this business over 20 years, working in senior positions for startups, as well as big players and hold patents in the technology…I haven’t heard jack shidt from these people – although I do get calls from big eastern based companies.I know a couple of guys who read my blog are senior techies like myself…When exactly was the last time you got a recruiting call from Google or Amazon?
But I guess it is just easier to buy off the CBC with a couple of parties.
Some of Silicon Valley’s biggest tech companies are quietly funneling money to minority groups in Washington, including those affiliated with black and Hispanic lawmakers — a move that comes as the firms face growing criticism about the lack of diversity in their workforce.
The donations, known as “honorary expenses,” fund events like dinners and cocktail receptions where members of Congress and federal regulators are the guests of honor. The leader of the pack is Google, which spent a record of more than $490,000 on such expenses last year — devoting most of it to minority groups like the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, according to newly filed federal ethics reports.
Apple chipped in $1.2 million for an awards gala for the Thurgood Marshall College Fund, and Uber wrote a $10,000 check to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute, the disclosures show. It marked the first time either Apple or Uber reported any honorary expenses.
The recent uptick in these donations coincides with growing political pressure on the tech industry over diversity, as companies struggle to address complaints that their employees are largely white and male. The debate has taken root in Washington, including with members of the Congressional Black Caucus, which sent a delegationto Silicon Valley in August to demand that the industry recruit more African-Americans.
The tech industry’s newest tactics don’t appear to have quelled the outcry from Capitol Hill, and they don’t sit well with some diversity advocates.
“We’ve had years now of campaigning and advocacy around the diversity problem … [but] the only thing that’s gotten better with these companies are their talking points,” said Rashad Robinson, the executive director of ColorofChange, a nonprofit that works on civil rights issues. The problem, he added, is “not going to be solved by throwing money at the CBC and other institutions.”
Asked about their spending, Apple and Uber declined to comment for this story. A Google spokeswoman said the company believes it’s important to “help policymakers understand our business and the work we do to keep the Internet open and encourage economic opportunity.”
The Congressional Black Caucus Foundation and Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute serve as the educational and policy arms of their respective caucuses on Capitol Hill. While they’re technically separate organizations, many black and Hispanic lawmakers serve as board members for the nonprofit groups. The Thurgood Marshall College Fund, meanwhile, is a nonprofit that provides scholarships and other support for African-American students at historically black colleges and universities.
The CBC Foundation, for one, stressed that the tech industry’s donations have gone to a good cause. They’ve allowed for “professional development briefings for our interns offering them real-world, first-hand exposure to careers” in key tech fields, Shrita Sterlin-Hernandez, a spokeswoman for the group, said in a statement. The Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute and the Thurgood Marshall College Fund did not comment for this story.
But the checks can also double as powerful forms of leverage in Washington, where influence often is measured in dollar signs. “There are many ways companies and other organizations can establish a presence in Washington, and gain access to politicians. And one way to do that — that some people pay less attention to — is by giving money to a charitable cause that a politician is associated with,” said Viveca Novak, a spokeswoman for the Center for Responsive Politics.
Such contributions are a “well-trodden path,” in the words of Novak, for established industries in Washington, from big tobacco companies to telecom giants like AT&T and Comcast. The donations, in addition to supporting nonprofits, provide lobbyists with greater access to lawmakers and regulators.
And Silicon Valley certainly could use more allies in Washington when it comes to diversity issues.
Apple is almost 70 percent male globally and 54 percent white in the U.S., according to the company’s most recent diversity report, though the company emphasized that many of its new hires have been women, Asian, Hispanic and African-American. Google’s workforce is also 70 percent male globally and 60 percent white in the U.S., despite its own efforts to diversify. Uber, for its part, has not released a report detailing the composition of its employees.
Those poor report cards prompted the Congressional Black Caucus last May to launch an initiative dubbed Tech2020, hoping to pressure tech companies to add more African-Americans to their ranks. The CBC later dispatched top lawmakers to the Valley — including its chairman, Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.) — to make that point directly to executives at Apple, Google, Intel and other firms.
Butterfield sounded the theme again in September at the CBC Foundation’s annual legislative conference, where he warned that “talk is not enough. And we need more than an amen from the choir. … We want to see results.”
Tech companies have pledged to fix the problem, but as they invest in hiring initiatives, they’re also pumping big money into Washington. Over the course of last year, Google covered $150,000 in honorary expenses for the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, and provided an additional $95,000 in multiple checks to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute, according to an analysis of the ethics records.
Another roughly $150,000 in spending went to “various vendors” that aided events with women, black and Latino lawmakers, the records indicate. At the CBC Foundation’s annual legislative conference in September, Google played a key sponsorship role at a reception that featured FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, according to an invitation for the event.
Google has donated to the CBC Foundation before, but its “honorary expenses” for the group and other minority organizations have increased in recent years. Asked whether this amounts to a form of lobbying, the CBC Foundation stressed in a statement that the support benefits the organization’s mission: “Our sponsors and partners provide support to our organization because they share our goals of providing important opportunities for the communities we serve.”…More…
Dayton Rev. William Schooler was shot dead by his brother during the Sunday service…More shocking is the identity of the killer.
The Rev. William Schooler turned over Sunday service at his Ohio church to the choir director and headed to his office.
Then, as the choir sang, Schooler was shot and killed, the Dayton Daily News reported.
“We heard pow, pow,” St. Peter’s Missionary Baptist Church member Beulah Booker-Robertson told the newspaper. “The usher at the door said ‘everybody get down, everybody get out.’”
On Sunday, police arrested Schooler’s brother, Daniel Gregory Schooler, on murder charges. He was expected to be formally charged Monday, the Associated Press reported.
Jail records do not list attorney information for Schooler; his first court hearing is scheduled for Monday afternoon.
Sgt. Richard Blommel described the shooting as a “domestic incident,” NBC News reported.
Reports paint a chaotic scene at St. Peter’s Missionary Baptist Church in Dayton. About 20 people were in the congregation during the shooting, and William Schooler was pronounced dead at the scene, WDTN reported.
“I just got everybody out of the church and we just kept hearing shooting and shooting,” parishioner Alberta Blayth told the Dayton Daily News.
A parishioner who called 911 told the emergency dispatcher, “We were still having church services when he started shooting,” according to audio obtained by WDTN-TV.
The pastor, 70, was shot multiple times, police told the newspaper.
“I can’t believe it,” church member Vonette McGraw told the station. “I can’t believe that my pastor is gone.”
I am beginning to think Melissa Harris Perry (MHP) is living in an alternate universe. I mean, MSNBC isn’t exactly known for standing behind their people. Indeed the Network’s history as at deserting their staff at the least whiff of controversy is well established… I’ve long suggested they got the wrong bird as their logo. It should have been a chicken.
So why would our girl start a public spat with the cowardly peacock? Definitely a career limiting move.
Melissa Harris-Perry will not be back on MSNBC.
On Sunday morning, two days after the host’s private fight with management went public, an MSNBC spokesman confirmed that the channel is “parting ways” with her.
Earlier in the morning, Harris-Perry posted a photo on Twitter and said “Farewell #Nerdland,” a nickname for her weekend show, “Melissa Harris-Perry.”
“Inviting diverse new voices to table was a privilege,” she tweeted. “Grateful for years of support and criticism.”
Harris-Perry confirmed to CNNMoney that her representatives are in talks with MSNBC about an exit deal.
Harris-Perry had felt for months like MSNBC was trying to squeeze her off the air and take away her editorial point of view.
On Friday, she spoke out about the treatment, saying she had been “silenced” by MSNBC and placed in a form of cable news purgatory, having been pre-empted for two weekends in a row.
“Our show was taken — without comment or discussion or notice — in the midst of an election season,” she wrote in a letter to staff that was shared with her fans.
MSNBC and its rivals are all trying to squeeze higher ratings out of the chaotic primary season. The channel pre-empted her for campaign coverage with a “Place for Politics” title.
The same thing has happened to other shows, too, MSNBC said in a statement responding to her letter on Friday. The channel called her reaction “surprising, confusing and disappointing.”
But Harris-Perry said the February pre-emptions were merely the most visible manifestation of the channel’s marginalization of her show.
In the letter, she said “no one on the third floor,” where MSNBC’s executives work at 30 Rockefeller Center, “has even returned an email, called me, or initiated or responded to any communication of any kind from me for nearly a month.”
I could debate about the punishment that would be appropriate for the miscreants – and whether locking them up, or giving them some serious community service time would be more effective. I think about 30 days in jail, followed by 4-6 months of working community service in a poor section of town might do wonders.
Donald Williams Jr.’s parents were shocked to find a the Confederate flag posted in the common room of their son’s dorm. It was accompanied by a white board that featured the N-word and a swastika. But that wasn’t the worst of what Williams endured as a freshman at San Jose State University.
In September of 2013, one of his seven white roommates came up behind him and placed a U-shaped bike lock around his neck. Williams struggled to be released for five minutes before his roommate finally gave him the key. A week later, three of his other roommates attempted to do the same thing but failed when Williams engaged in a scuffle.
There was also an incident when Williams, who is reportedly claustrophobic, was locked inside a closet. His roommates assigned him nicknames such as “three-fifths” and “fraction,” which referenced how the Constitution once counted black slaves.
Despite the racially charged and abusive behavior, which were pieced together by police statements and an independent investigation, an all white jury deadlocked on the hate crime charges and ultimately failed to convict the suspects. Instead, Colin Warren, Logan Beaschler and Joseph “Brett” Bomgardner were found guilty ofmisdemeanor battery after “offensively touching” Williams during the bike-lock prank, the San Jose Mercury News reported.
Sentencing is set for March, and the students face a maximum of six months in jail. According to the Washington Post, they’re unlikely to serve any time due to the absence of a hate crime conviction. They’re likely to get off easy with community service instead.
Ultimately the jury believed that the actions taken by the students were just pranks that went too far as opposed to hate crimes. But the fact that the students forcefully put a bike lock around Williams’ neck and didn’t deal with felony assault charges is ludicrous.
The Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen disagrees that what Williams went through was nothing more than pranks, and is considering pursuing a retrial.
“Prejudice is not a prank,” Rosen said. “This violence did not happen in a historical vacuum. This violent act was done to a young black college student by five white men, an injustice inflicted upon him because of the color of his skin.”
Often times when debates about white privilege come about, white individuals believe it’s a denial of their own struggles and the hard work they put into their success. But white privilege is simply getting the benefit of the doubt by those in authority and the community.
The jury in the Williams case decided to give the white students the benefit of the doubt by believing that their actions were simply meant to be pranks and nothing more. But if the tables were turned and the races were reversed, does anyone actually think that black students would get the same treatment? Anyone who says “yes” is either incredibly naive or in denial.
Probably the worst clash between the KKK and counter-protesters since North Carolina…
Violence broke out Saturday when Ku Klux Klan demonstrators and counterprotesters fought in Anaheim, California, leaving five people injured and 13 people arrested, authorities said.
Anaheim police spokesman Sgt. Daron Wyatt said the KKK planned a “walking protest” at Pearson Park. The counterprotesters arrived beforehand and attacked when the KKK got out of their vehicles around noon, he said.
Several fights broke out along a city block involving six KKK members — none wearing the traditional KKK robes — and 30 counterprotesters.
Three counterprotesters were stabbed — one with the decorative end of a flagstaff, one with a knife and one with an object the police did not describe, Wyatt said.
The person stabbed with the flagstaff was hospitalized in critical condition and the other two were in stable condition, police said.
Police witnessed one KKK demonstrator being stomped by by two male and a female counterprotesters. Another KKK member told police he’d been stomped and might have broken ribs, Wyatt said.
The first KKK member had minor injuries and was not hospitalized, police said, and the second one was hospitalized in stable condition.
Arrested were six male and one female counterprotesters and five male and one female KKK member, Wyatt said.
The district attorney’s office will decide what, if any, charges will be filed, he said.
Wyatt said anyone with cell phone video of the fight should contract police.
Good conversation here on Bill Maher’s show…Michael Eric Dyson does an excellent job of laying out the case here.
As a youngster, I remember Streetcars running on the streets of Washington, DC. Indeed, somewhere in my collection of trivial things I’ve never thrown out is a DC Capital Transit Fare Token. As a youngster, my Mom and I rode the Subway Car through Georgetown on the last day in 1962, before they shut the system down. The Washington, DC METRO Subway System was built with little regards as to where the people who were actually going to use the system actually lived – or where developers were building huge communities outside the Capital Beltway. As such, an area like Tyson’s Corner, a non-incorporated area near the City – which employs more people than the City of Washington, DC only got access with the addition of the new Silver Line last year. In a number of other fast growing un-served communities in the area, the Streetcar has become a rallying cry – and plans to build at least 6 lines have been underway with varying success over the last few years.
The first of the proposed systems is scheduled to open 2/28/2016, covering he rapidly developing (re gentrifying) H Street corridor in Northeast DC.
While a romantic idea from a bygone era, there are valid questions as to whether such systems are even viable.
The new system?
Times are good over at Lawn Jockeys ‘R US with the Republican candidates actively on the hunt for black buffoons and race prostitutes. Ted Cruz’s Sugar Daddy has found their boy.
“Black Americans for a Better Future” is bankrolled by white billionaire Robert Mercer and has just one apparent member: an extreme-right black political operative.
One of the GOP’s leading billionaire donors is also funding 96 percent of a super PAC named “Black Americans for a Better Future.”
Funny thing is, that donor, eccentric billionaire Robert Mercer, is white.
Two eagle-eyed watchdogs, Derek Willis of ProPublica and Dave Levinthal of Public Integrity, spotted the funding in a recent set of FEC filings, and The Intercept first reported the news. As the filings showed, Mercer has provided $400,000 of the group’s $417,250 donations so far.
Is it odd that an organization that says it’s made up of “Black Americans” is in fact bankrolled by a white billionaire? Sure, but that’s just the beginning.
The organization, “Black Americans for a Better Future,” essentially a one-person shop run by longtime GOP political operative Raynard Jackson.
Jackson is an unusual character. This is clear even on the surface: his slapdash websitelooks like a bad parody of 1998, and is littered with typos and grammatical mistakes. (“Is homosexual entitlements the new civil rights?” “I am also available for speaking engagements also.”)
But the weirdness goes deeper than that.
So far, the only expenditures for “Black Americans for a Better Future” are Jackson’s own salary of $155,000, travel costs (including, as The Intercept reporting, $5,000 at Morton’s Steakhouse in New York), and the $13,000 cost of its only activity thus far, a November 17 luncheon at the National Press Club.
Jackson himself is a profilic blogger who often takes fellow African Americans to task. His favorite target, unsurprisingly, is President Obama, of whom Jackson says, “He is light skinned, has no connection with the Black community, Ivy League educated, and seems very uncomfortable around Blacks who are not part of the bourgeoisie.”
Jackson is also not fond of Spike Lee, describing Lee’s newest film, Chi-Raq, as a “profanity laced, liberally biased, finger pointing diatribe that blames Republicans and Whites for all the murders taking place in Chicago.”
It’s an odd critique, given that Chi-Raq, a retelling of Aristophanes’ Lysistrata, is about black women demanding that black men stop killing each other (and withholding sex until they do), clearly placing responsibility, for the most part, on black men.
Maybe that’s because Jackson’s “review” is actually a pitch for one of his pet projects.
“It is extremely imperative that Republicans have an active surrogates program,” Jackson writes. “Black Republicans are constantly ridiculed in movies, TV sit-coms, and in pop culture. I have constantly expressed to party leaders the necessity of having a vibrant surrogates program where Black Republicans are seen on TV, heard on the radio, and interviewed in newspapers.”
Who does Jackson like? “Black men need more white women like Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham,” Jackson wrote in a 2014 post. Even though they are conservative media personalities, they have done more to promote the well-being of black males than many of the very women who stridently complain about the lack of ‘eligible’ black men.”
Jackson explains that Coulter’s anti-immigration stance helps black people, quoting her statement that “We owe black people something… We have a legacy of slavery. Immigrants haven’t even been in this country.” As for Ingraham, Jackson quotes her statement that Democrats “turn their heads away from the millions upon millions of black babies slaughtered in the womb over 10 years.… Is that racist?”
Jackson concludes, “We black men need more white women like Coulter and Ingraham, not back [sic] women who will give a pass to a failing black president.”
Of course, it’s not just black women; President Obama received 96 percent of the African American vote in 2012. But Jackson says they are deluded by Black leaders who refuse to criticize the president else they “jeopardize their invitations to the White House’s Christmas party.”
So, Jackson continued, “it’s ok to do specific things for the Black bourgeoisie—private invitations to the White House, rides on Air Force One, private movie screenings at the White House, but [Obama] can’t do things specifically to address the high unemployment rate in the Black community?”
(The black unemployment rate when Obama took office was 12.7 percent; as of June, 2015, it was 9.5 percent. Obama also started the “My Brother’s Keeper” initiative in 2014 to focus on improving the lives of young African American men.)
In fact, the predominant theme in Jackson’s many online screeds seems to be his own resentment at being excluded from such elite circles. In a 2015 blog post, he complained that GOP chairman Rience Priebus stole his idea of giving out a “Black Republican Trailblazer Award” each February.
Most curiously, he complained in 2012 that “My Republican Party Has Abandoned Me” and rebuffed his efforts to attract more black voters. And yet, he wrote in 2012, “twice this year some of these same people have approached me about funding for some election year tricks that they (White Republicans) have conjured up and simply need a Black face to execute the plan. On these two separate occasions, these funders were willing to spend upwards of $20 million to have me organize a national campaign to identify Blacks who would be critical of President Obama.”
But wait, isn’t that exactly what Robert Mercer is paying him $400,000 to do in 2016?…More Here…
I call the Georgia bill, the misnomer “First Amendment Defense Act” the “KKK Bill” because besides supporting LBGT discrimination it provides cover for christian identity (white supremacist groups) to discriminate based on race or ethnicity. Not that a law supporting Jim Crow against LBGT people isn’t offensive enough solely by itself. Here is a background of discrimination racist zealots have tried to promote in the name of religion for the past 100 years. In Employment Division v. Smith the Supreme Court decided that religious exemptions did not trump civil law, and again in Loving v. Virginia. So the Georgia law is on shaky Constitutional ground, and with the fortuitous death of Scalia, the ability for the far right racists to reenact this foundation of New Jim Crow Law is kaput providing another racist doesn’t get appointed to the court.
Marc Benioff led the charge to strike down Indiana’s anti-gay law last year. Now he’s taking on a similar bill in Georgia.
Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff is strapping on his boxing gloves again.
Nearly a year after the cloud-computing giant led the charge to topple a law in Indiana that legalized discrimination against LGBT people in the name of religious freedom, Benioff says he is gearing up for a fresh fight against a similar bill in Georgia.
“Nobody wants a discrimination law in America today,” Benioff told The Huffington Post in a phone interview on Friday. “But there are still bigots out there fighting for people to be discriminated against.”
The bill, passed by the Georgia Senate in a 38-14 vote last Friday, allows religiously affiliated groups to refuse to “rent, lease, or otherwise grant permission for property to be used by another person for an event which is objectionable to such religious organization.” Dubbed the First Amendment Defense Act, the legislation actually takes Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act a step further, barring government authorities from bringing civil cases against organizations accused of discrimination.
“The law that was adopted in Indiana was a balancing act, where at least the government had the chance to go to court and make an argument that they should be able to penalize someone for discrimination,” Sarah Warbelow, legal director at the LGBT advocacy group Human Rights Campaign, told HuffPost. “With the FADA, there’s an absolute right to discriminate, and that right is based on your view that marriage is between one man and one woman.”
The law in Indiana was amended last year to include protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people after Benioff launched a scorched-earth media campaign, rallying some of the country’s most powerful executives behind him. Salesforce — the largest tech employer in Indiana — vowed to pay to move any employees at risk of discrimination out of the state. Benioff also threatened to scale back the company’s operations in Indiana unless the law was altered to protect LGBT people.
Salesforce may only have about 1,000 workers in Georgia, but in May it is scheduled to host its annual Connections conference in Atlanta. The event draws about 15,000 Salesforce clients each year for three days. On Friday, Benioff posted a poll on Twitter, asking if he should change the event’s location if the FADA bill becomes law. By early evening, 75 percent of the roughly 2,500 voters supported the move.
“We will bring economic consequences,” Benioff told HuffPost. “We will deliver a rolling thunder of economic sanctions against the state, in this case Georgia, which is waging a war against LGBT people.”
Benioff said he already contacted the chief executives of Home Depot, Coca-Cola, email marketing service MailChimp and shipping giant UPS about the issue. Home Depot spokesman Stephen Holmes said in an email that “we’ve been clear for some time now that we won’t support anything that discriminates.” The other three companies did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
But Benioff plans to bring other corporations into the battle, too.
“Look, this is about providing an environment for our employees and our customers that’s nondiscriminatory, that’s all,” Benioff said. “Come out and say you want equality for all, and we’ll get off your case.”…Read More Here…
The clueless “Stump for Trump Girls” are smoking that crack again…This time taking a below the belt shot schoolboy shot at Rubio’s alleged sexuality while getting their clueless heads handed to them by a CNN Reporter. Think they need to change their screen names to Dumb and Dumber.
Might be cheaper to buy a wig…The Rogaine Renegade strikes again!
Your help is needed in identifying a serial thief. The individual pictured was involved in the theft of $847.00 in Rogaine and Prevagen products from the Walgreen Store located at 7864 Hamilton Avenue, in Mount Healthy. He has also been identified in similar thefts from North College Hill, West Chester, and other locations. It is believed he operates a white jeep. If you can help us identify this individual, please call Mt. Healthy Police at 513-728-3283 – Officer Baird or Crime Stoppers 352-3040.
The male pictured in the photo has allegedly shoplifted merchandise from three locations in our city. He has hit a CVS and two different Walgreens locations. The subject usually steals Prevagen supplements and Rogaine This is the same male that is on video committing similar acts at drug store locations across the tristate and is believed to be responsible for several thousand dollars worth of stolen merchandise. Several law enforcement agencies are looking to identify this person. He has been seen driving a white Jeep Cherokee. Anyone with information on his identity please contact Det Cpl Erik Daniels at 859-334-5562 or firstname.lastname@example.org.