Category Archives: Racism

Arizona’s Religious Boat People.

Posted on by

For those of you who live outside the state, here’s a story that will give you some idea of the lunacy that is Arizona. Sure, you may know about our famous “dry heat” (like living in a sauna for 5 months out of the year), our Grand Canyon, our version of the Iron Curtain, our racist anti-immigrant law SB 1070, our finger-wagging governor and our famously right-wing politics.

But how much do you know about our anti-UN, anti-federal government, anti-science, anti-education, anti-evolution religious nuts?

As an example, I give you the family who attempted to relocate from the US to a tiny island in the island nation of Kiribati because of the parents’ belief that the US was interfering with their religious freedoms. Prior to loading their small children in a boat and setting sail, the father filed numerous documents in Yavapai County rejecting federal authority. In 2006, he signed a “Declaration of Citizenship” swearing allegiance to the Arizona Republic, claiming status as a “natural-born state citizen” and stating that he is “not a federal citizen of the United States.”

He described himself as a “non-resident alien of the White Race.” He renounced his Social Security number and failed to pay federal income taxes, owing the IRS $9,963 in back taxes.

When the family’s boat began to break apart in a storm, the family was rescued by a Chilean fishing vessel, transferred to a cargo ship and taken to Chile. They then asked the government that they had previously renounced to loan them $10,000 to transport them back to Arizona.

How nice! You denounce and renounce the US. You refuse to pay your taxes. Then when you need help, you come to the US with your hand out. Actually, you fit right in to Arizona. After all, many in the state hate the federal government and have tried to claim sovereignty over all federal lands within its borders, including the Grand Canyon. Yet Arizona gets far more in federal funding than it pays in federal income taxes.

So welcome back to Arizona. The other idiots have probably missed you.

GOP Is Racist? How Racist Of You To Bring It Up!

Posted on by

The right wing megaphone that is Fox News Channel and talk radio is in full throat defending the rodeo clown who appeared wearing an Obama mask. “It was just entertainment.” “The real racists are those who can’t take a joke,” say the wingnuts.

Really? It’s now racism for pointing out obvious racism?

Let’s review. The GOP committed to the Southern Strategy after President Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law. The whole idea was to appeal to white voters in the South who were angered by the end of Jim Crow.

Many Republicans have refused to accept that President Obama was born in the United States and claim that he is, therefore, not eligible to hold the office. In 2009, every Tea Party rally displayed racist signs such as “Send Obama Back To Kenya.”

In 2012, signs and bumper stickers were distributed saying “Put The White Back In The White House” and “Don’t Re-N—– in 2012.” During the Republican primaries, presidential candidates offered “self-deportation” as the only viable immigration reform. Some suggested that the border fence be electrified. And, at the RNC national convention, some Republican attendees threw nuts at a black cameraman who was covering the event.

Even worse, Republican-controlled states have passed a variety of new laws aimed at suppressing the votes of minorities and students even though there have been only a handful of documented cases of voter fraud nationally.

Across the country, there have been numerous examples of blatant racism displayed by Republican elected officials, such as Arizona State Representative Bob Thorpe who called the rodeo clown “crowd pleasing.” He also tweeted “Why is Holder now soft on crime? Perhaps: blacks = 12%-13% US population, but make up 40.1% (2.1 million) of male inmates in jail or prison!”

Being all too familiar with Thorpe, I can assure you the tweet was intended to demean African-Americans. But, in a way, Bad Bob demonstrates the consequences of racial discrimination by law enforcement and the courts. New York City’s “Stop & Frisk” program is far from unique, as most cities have similar, but unofficial programs. (Ask any African-American how often they have been stopped for “driving while black.”)

If the GOP and its Tea Party parasites want to shed the label of racism, it’s easy. All they have to do is stop doing and saying racist things!

Stop & Frisk Old White Men.

Posted on by

Since dimwits like Bill O’Reilly think the NYC Stop & Frisk program is so great, I propose it be redirected for a year or so. Instead of targeting minorities, let the police target white guys around Wall Street. After all, they have been responsible for far greater crimes than minorities, having stolen trillions of dollars over the past 30 years.

The bad guys are easy to spot. Instead of hoodies, they wear expensive suits and lounge in the back of black limos.

I, for one, would love to see them forced to spread their legs and arms, patted down and asked what they’re doing in the neighborhood and where they’re going. Then, if they object, they could be slammed to the ground, cuffed and taken to jail to be booked for obstructing an officer in his, or her, duties. Let them be held overnight and assigned a public defender (no overpaid Wall Street attorneys allowed).

Just for good measure, the police should also patrol the neighborhood of Fox News. After all, it has been the center of crimes against reality and facts. And don’t forget to include balding, angry white guys in the profile. Then they would be certain to catch O’Reilly in the dragnet.

Seriously, why not?

It would do the nation a lot of good, and it would almost certainly put an end to other senseless, racist measures. And as long as we’re on the subject let’s force cavity searches or similarly invasive procedures on all white male legislators. That might give them pause before voting for more mandatory invasive procedures on pregnant women.

Finally, let’s limit voting centers and voting hours in wealthy white neighborhoods forcing voters to stand in line for six, seven, eight hours or more. Then when they eventually get to the head of the line, they could have their IDs questioned and given a provisional ballot that may or may not be counted.

Who Says The Tea Party Is Racist?

Posted on by

Well, actually the Tea Party does.

When President Obama recently visited Arizona, he was met by a demonstration organized, in part, by the Tea Party. In addition to the inevitable “Obama is a Fascist” and “Impeach Obama” signs, the protesters sang “Bye Bye Black Sheep.” They carried signs that read “Impeach the Half-White Muslim” and “47 Percent Negro.” They shouted that our president is “un-American;” that he’s “destroying American values.”

These pathetic morons are cut from the same cloth as the rodeo clown who mocked our president by wearing an Obama mask at the Missouri State Fair.

At least the clown was told he could never work at the fair again. Apparently the same punishment was not meted out to the obnoxious public address announcer who asked how many wanted to see Obama run down by a bull, the clown who played with the mask’s lips, or the rodeo organizers who likely knew about the plans in advance.

It’s nothing new to see detractors protest a president or make fun of a president. But it crosses the line when those detractors veer into racial taunts. Such taunts do more to offend others than the president himself.

It should come as no surprise to the old white men controlling the Tea Party that African-Americans and other minorities identify with President Obama; that they view him as a role model; that his success is a source of great pride to young African-Americans and for whites who stood alongside blacks during their fight for civil rights.

Here’s some free advice for the Republican Party and your Tea Party parasites. Your racist slogans and taunts will not harm President Obama. They will not change his policies. They will not cause him to be impeached or leave office early. Your behavior simply galvanizes minorities (soon to become the majority) against you.

Therefore, your offensive, demeaning and divisive behavior will only ensure your future failure at the polls. It will only result in future presidents who oppose your so-called values. And those presidents may not be as inclusive and as tolerant as President Obama.

Race Or Economics?

Posted on by

Following the acquittal of George Zimmerman and the ensuing discussion of race by President Obama, conservative race-baiters have gleefully blamed the victims. “It wasn’t Zimmerman’s fault. Trayvon Martin was a young, black thug high on marijuana who had it coming. There’s no race problem. The real problem is the black culture of dependency. Black people are violent…just look at black-on-black violence. Obama is playing the race card to distract people from his failures. Yadda, yadda, yadda…”

Yes, there has been a breakdown of the African-American family unit…just like the breakdown of the white family unit. More and more people are having children out of wedlock, and more married couples are getting divorced.

Still, the race-baiters have a point. According to a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 73 percent of African-American babies are born out of wedlock as compared to 29 percent of non-Hispanic white babies. On the surface, those numbers would seem to support racist loudmouths like Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh. But if you delve deeper, you learn that 66 percent of Native American children and 53 percent of Hispanic children are born out of wedlock, while just 17 percent of Asian children are born outside of a traditional family.

Hmmmm…

That would seem to disprove the right wing talking point that the problem is a lack of Christian values. After all, Hispanics and African-Americans tend to be the most devout Christians of the lot, while Asians tend to represent other faiths, such as Buddhism and Hinduism.

So if the problem isn’t religion, what next?

Right wingers suggest that the issue is IQ. You may remember that Teapublicans recently seized upon a Heritage Foundation “study” that claimed Hispanics have lower IQ than whites. The “study” was the basis of a report that assimilating such low IQ people into the US would cost us trillions. Then some academics examined the “study” and found that its racist conclusions were completely fraudulent. Not only is there NOT a difference in IQ, the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) found that the Senate immigration bill would shrink the nation’s deficit by $897 billion over 20 years.

That leaves only one possible conclusion from the birth data…economics. The cultures with the highest percentage of single-parent households are the cultures that were systematically destroyed by the Euro-American concept of Manifest Destiny; that caucasians were destined to rule; that white people were superior to people of color; that people of color were incapable of taking care of themselves.

Using this despicable philosophy, whites enslaved blacks. Whites committed genocide on Native Americans, leaving them defeated, broken and poor. And whites have routinely discriminated against all other races, denying them the vote, good-paying jobs, safe neighborhoods, and respect. Such conditions have a negative impact on all races. For example, where there are large concentrations of impoverished white people, the percentage of white, unwed mothers dramatically increases, along with violence.

People of color didn’t choose to live in poverty. They didn’t choose to work at meaningless, minimum wage jobs. They didn’t choose to live in slums, poor barrios and on reservations. They didn’t choose to send their children to under-financed schools. They didn’t choose to have greedy gun dealers import weapons into their communities.

They didn’t choose these things anymore than Trayvon Martin chose to take on a gun-toting vigilante with nothing more than a bag of Skittles.

Playing The Race Card!

Posted on by

On Friday, President Obama held an unannounced press conference during which he spoke personally and sensitively about race in hopes of generating an adult conversation about racism in the US. Of course, his remarks were met with derision and anger by many conservatives and their media mouthpieces. (I’m looking at you, Rush Limbaugh and anyone who has ever worked at Fox News Channel!)

Keep in mind that our nation just watched a white adult who had stalked and murdered an unarmed black teenager be acquitted of all charges. Despite the verdict, Trayvon Martin’s parents have handled themselves with class…much more class than the conservative pundits who have pilloried the young man who was murdered.

Not content with accepting the verdict and hoisting George Zimmerman onto their proverbial shoulders, the right wing nitwits have attacked those who took to the streets to protest the verdict. They have also seemed to delight in attacking Martin’s character. “He shouldn’t have been walking through the neighborhood at night. He shouldn’t have been wearing a hoodie. He was smoking pot earlier in the day. He called Zimmerman a cracker during his phone conversation with a friend. He shouldn’t have defended himself against Zimmerman. Etc., etc., etc.”

These are the very same people who have glorified the Tea Party parasites who carry signs with racist depictions of our president. The same people who have questioned the president’s birthplace and eligibility to be president. The same people who applaud the Supreme Court’s decision to eviscerate the Voting Rights Act that protected minority votes. The same people who applaud legislative bills that would suppress African-American and Latino votes then accuse those who object of “playing the race card.”

Following the Zimmerman verdict, the president was not only justified in raising the subject of race. He was obligated to do so.

Anyone with dark skin, or anyone with a friend or relative who has dark skin, understands the problems. And they absolutely must be addressed! I have personally seen black people unlawfully beaten by police. I have seen a white cop set fire to an apartment building then blame it on his black neighbors. I have seen a cop chain his dog in a black neighborhood, so that it could attack any unsuspecting man, woman or child who walked down the sidewalk. Every one of my black friends has been repeatedly pulled over by police for driving while black. A young, black male co-worker and close friend was stopped by police, guns drawn, just for walking down the street.

I have seen the statistics showing the disproportionate number of black men and women in prison. I’ve seen how differently black people who become addicted to crack cocaine are treated compared to white people who are addicted to powder cocaine. I’ve seen how the War on Drugs is used to harass and imprison minorities. I’ve listened to conservative politicians call Latinos dirty, stupid and disrespectful of our culture. And I’ve seen young white men parade through the streets with Confederate flags following President Obama’s election.

There are thousands of George Zimmermans out there, some in uniforms, who are armed and assume everyone with dark skin is a criminal or a welfare moocher, living off the hard work of others. That image is perpetuated by loudmouths like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and others. And even though race wasn’t mentioned, it was most certainly implied by Mitt Romney in his off-the-record comments about the 47 percent.

Certainly, not every right winger is going to act on their misguided beliefs. But a few armed racists will undoubtedly be encouraged to act as vigilantes thanks to the insane Stand Your Ground law that the NRA and ALEC have pushed through legislatures throughout the country – especially in the South.

Yes, President Obama needed to talk about race. Race has been an issue in our country for 3 centuries. It’s long past time for us to learn how to live with each other, treating all of our neighbors with dignity and respect.

The issues facing our nation have never improved by refusing to discuss them.

Getting Away With Murder.

Posted on by

George Zimmerman isn’t the first person that the courts have allowed to get away with murder. But he is one of the few to be acquitted after admitting to intentionally shooting an unarmed person. Zimmerman can thank Florida’s ill-conceived “Stand Your Ground” law for that, along with an inept prosecution and seemingly naive jurors.

The “Stand Your Ground” law was created as “model” legislation by the NRA (National Rifle Association) and ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) then introduced to state legislatures throughout the country. Designed to protect rootin’ tootin’, gun totin’, cowboy wannabes from prosecution, the law removes any obligation for gun owners to back away from a confrontation. If a pistol packin’ nitwit fears that his or her life is endangered or fears great bodily harm (an arbitrary standard as demonstrated by the Zimmerman trial) it appears that it is now legal to blast away.

Without this law, Zimmerman would have been forced to demonstrate that he tried to avoid a lethal confrontation. Without this law, the jury would have been obligated to convict Zimmerman of manslaughter. In other words, the fact that Zimmerman stalked his victim against the advice of a police dispatcher would have been reason enough to find him guilty.

The ensuing comments of juror B37 also demonstrate a lack of understanding of violent confrontations by the all female jury. The jurors apparently do not understand the difference between a fistfight and a life-endangering situation. Zimmerman’s wounds (and I use the term loosely) were consistent with the effects of a single punch. In no way do they meet the criteria of life-threatening or great bodily harm. Almost everyone who has ever been in a schoolyard fight has suffered worse.

There was no evidence that Zimmerman’s head had been repeatedly slammed onto concrete as he claimed. And that was just one of the flaws in Zimmerman’s story exposed during the trial.

The worst was Zimmerman’s claim that, when Martin was on top of him, Martin reached for Zimmerman’s gun. If the situation was as Zimmerman claimed, Martin could not have seen the gun behind Zimmerman’s right hip, let alone reached for it. Moreover, in the situation described, it would have been impossible for Zimmerman to have reached for it. Martin’s lower leg would have blocked access to it. (Having taught martial arts, including ground fighting, I have been in a similar position many times.)

The prosecution failed to clearly demonstrate this critical point. Had they done so, the jury might have reached a very different verdict.

Even more troubling than the outcome of the trial are the inconsistencies of our justice system and the perverse voyeurism of our media. As Zimmerman was getting away with murder, a Florida woman was sentenced to 20 years in prison for merely firing a warning shot to keep her estranged husband from attacking her. No one was shot. No one was hurt. The clear message is that, if you’re going to fire your gun during a confrontation, you better make sure the shot is fatal. And since the woman is black, the two incidents demonstrate the duality of our justice system.

Such inconsistency, especially the appearance of racism, deserves a serious public discussion…one free of the sensationalism demonstrated by media coverage of the “trial du jour.” Unfortunately, in search of ratings, our media would rather treat our judicial system as a series of reality shows.

What’s Wrong With The US? Connect The Dots.

Posted on by

It’s probably self-evident, but our government is no longer of the people, by the people and for the people. A more accurate description would be of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations.

But how did we get here? How have a few powerful multinationals and one percent of the population usurped power from the vast majority of the people? In order to fully understand this, all you need to do is connect the dots.

  • We have allowed a few large corporations to create virtual monopolies, often with the help of government subsidies. These corporations buy out, squeeze out and drive out small businesses.
  • The CEOs of these corporations sit on each others’ Boards and approve each others’ compensations.
  • A portion of CEO compensation is based on the companies’ productivity and share price. That means the CEOs strive to cut costs (employee benefits and salaries) while increasing the price of products and services.
  • Once corporations achieve maximum productivity and profit with US employees, they are encouraged to offshore jobs in order to further reduce labor costs and employee benefits.
  • As corporations expand around the world, it becomes easier to stash profits offshore in order to reduce their tax burden and further increase profits.
  • These increased profits and compensation allow corporations to “invest” millions in the political campaigns of those who will support corporate interests.
  • The campaign contributions by corporations and corporate leaders leads to a massive increase in the cost of running for office, driving away those who might represent ordinary working people.
  • Corporate-financed Political Action Groups and associations, such as the US Chamber of Commerce spend additional millions to support corporate-friendly candidates.
  • Once the corporate-friendly candidates are sworn into office, they pass legislation that benefits their contributors.
  • Corporations and industries finance large lobbying efforts to further impact legislation resulting in large government contracts and subsidies.
  • Eventually, the corporate-friendly politicians nominate and approve judicial appointments that make the courts more friendly to corporate interests (see Citizens United v FEC, Buckley v Valeo and Bowman v Monsanto).
  • Politicians, with help from the courts (see Shelby County v Holder), undermine the voting rights of minorities and others who oppose them. At the same time, they wage war against the poor by cutting education, unemployment benefits and food stamps. They allow corporations to steal their savings, even their homes without repercussions.

We can take back our government, but it won’t be easy. It starts with election finance reform that takes the massive amounts of money out of political campaigns. It ends with politicians who, in the interests of ordinary people, are willing to break up “too big to fail” corporations as President Theodore Roosevelt once did.

A Divided Nation.

Posted on by

I began this blog several years ago with a post “Why We’re Divided.” The point was that our political divide is not merely the result of differing ideologies. It’s the result of differing “facts.”

Never has that been more clearly demonstrated than by two competing advertising campaigns running on this Independence Day. In my state’s largest newspaper, there is an ad bearing the headline “In God We Trust.” Paid for by a company that is owned by a religious zealot, the ad uses a variety of quotes from our Founding Fathers to support the claim that our nation was founded on Christianity.

A few pages later, there is an ad bearing the headline “Celebrate Our Godless Constitution.” Paid for by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, it, too, uses a variety of quotes from our Founding Fathers to support the claim that our nation was built on the principle of separation of Church and State.

This is a classic example of proof-texting – selectively choosing quotes that support a particular point of view. This technique is often used by the religious to justify actions or beliefs. Religious leaders use verses from the Bible to justify war, to rationalize genocide, to discriminate against gays and others, to ignore – indeed blame – the poor for struggling as the result of policies they didn’t create, etc.

No matter how ugly your point of view, you can find a verse in the Bible, the Torah or the Qur’an to justify an action or inaction.

The same is true when it comes to quotes by our Founding Fathers. As Michael Austin writes in his book That’s Not What They Meant! Reclaiming the Founding Fathers from America’s Right Wing, the Founders were so diverse, you can find a quote from one of them to support almost any point of view. Among the Founders were Protestants, Catholics, Quakers, Jews, Deists, Agnostics and Atheists. There were idealists and slave owners. There were farmers, plantation owners, printers, attorneys, inventors, ship owners and many others.

There were Founders in favor of a strong central government and those who believed the power should reside exclusively with the states.

So which ad is correct? Both of them. And neither of them.

Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the Declaration of Independence, and James Madison, who authored our Constitution’s Bill of Rights, strongly believed in separation of Church and State. The majority at the Constitutional Convention agreed. However, many of the Founders spoke of “divine providence” and the “principles of Christianity.”

More important, the ads demonstrate the growing divide between Americans; between the Federalists and those who believe in states’ rights; between the devoutly religious and the agnostics; between science and religion; between those who trust government and those who despise it; between the wealthy and the poor; between red and blue; between black, brown, red and white; between the educated and the uneducated; and between those who believe the US is the greatest nation on Earth and those who recognize its faults and intend to change them.

I think it no exaggeration to write that our nation is at a crossroads, more divided than at any time since the Civil War. Independence Day is the perfect time to consider the consequences of such a divide. Committing to compromise and finding common ground are imperative to the future of our nation.

The New Jim Crow.

Posted on by

When President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law in 1965, everyone thought that would be the end of Jim Crow laws that mandated segregation throughout the South and prevented African-Americans from exercising their right to vote.

Everyone was wrong!

Within days of the Supreme Court striking down the portion of the law that forced many southern states to seek pre-clearance from the Department of Justice before changing their voting laws, the Republican-dominated legislatures in Texas, North Carolina, and Georgia have introduced laws designed to restrict minority voting. South Carolina and Mississippi are also considering changes designed to marginalize minorities.

Thanks to the conservatives on the Supreme Court, minorities in these states no longer have the protection of the Department of Justice. Their only recourse is to file lawsuits. By the time these lawsuits wend their way through the court system, the damage will have already been done.

In other words, the Supreme Court and the GOP have set the Way Back Machine to 1964!

This is at the heart of the new GOP strategy. Following the Romney defeat last November, Republican strategists realized that the party was unlikely to win if Democrats continued to dominate the growing minority vote. Then the more conservative wing of the GOP stepped forward with an alternative strategy. Instead of pandering to minorities, they intend to institutionalize racism by focusing almost exclusively on white voters – particularly those struggling in the new GOP economy.

After reviewing the demographics of the 2012 presidential vote, GOP strategists discovered that there was a sizable portion of white people who didn’t vote. So the new strategy is to maximize the white vote while suppressing the votes of minorities.

If you’re white, uneducated, religious and poor, the GOP wants you.