Word For It. . .

2Chronicles7:14-“If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.”

Archive for the ‘racism’ Category

Obama and the Drive for Slavery Reparations

Posted by wordforit on April 23, 2008

CL-Please read all of the information provided and continue to educate yourself. This is a serious matter and another reason to vote against Obama the non-unifier. ~WordForIt

Cliff Kincaid AIM

AmericanDaily

[. . .] One of Barack Obama’s mentors, Frank Marshall Davis, was a member of the Communist Party USA and filled a young Obama, before he went off to college, with anti-American thoughts and ideas.

[. . .] Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has endorsed Obama for president.

Conyers’ bill to create a “Commission to Study Reparation Proposals for African Americans” was first introduced in 1989. He praised N’COBRA in a statement he issued in 1999 and sponsored a subsequent event, “Capitalizing on Our Strength Empowering the Reparations Movement,” featuring a representative of N’COBRA.

The issue became so big that the CBS Evening News, then hosted by Dan Rather, did a story about the controversy, highlighting the fact that the Chicago City Council had become the fourth major city to pass a resolution calling for reparations. 

Randall Robinson, the director of the group known as Trans Africa, wrote a book, The Debt, on the subject, and hosted a conference on reparations featuring such luminaries as actor Danny Glover.

One thing is certain: Carruthers is hoping for an Obama win. Federal Election Commission records show that she gave his Illinois Senate campaign $500 and his presidential campaign $2,300. 

Another thing is certain: The Hill newspaper reports that Conyers hopes to move his reparations commission bill when Obama is in the White House. The paper said, however, that Conyers “has not called on the senator to endorse his measure because ‘I don’t want to put him on the spot.'” The Hill said that Obama’s campaign “did not respond to requests for information about the senator’s position on the bill.”

Read Entire Piece here or here

            ***************

Further Study:

Library of Congress~ H.R. 40

H.R. 40: Commission to Study Reparation Proposals for African-Americans Act **Links to above Library of Congress page. “Citizen Joe” site—Recommended!

            ***************

Slavery Reparations – The Ultimate Prize 

 Elizabeth Wright Issues & Views

Global Politician

What are black youth to make of the adults around them who insist that their life chances are “limited” due to the enslavement of their ancestors, the segregation of their ancestors, and the mistreatment of their ancestors? Should they assume that all the black men and women who have lived since those troublesome times were powerless to construct productive lives beyond those past ordeals? Should they assume that they too are just as powerless to move beyond this past adversity, unless and until bundles of money, this time in the form of official “reparations” for the labor of those ancestors, are delivered to them?

As readers have learned from the pages of Issues & Views, in the years much closer to slavery than we now live, blacks founded and ran their own towns, owned and prospered on millions of dollars worth of land, formed so many successful businesses that it necessitated formation of the National Negro Business League, directed their own schools and colleges–all of this long before the 1950s. [. . .] 

Read Entire Piece

Elizabeth Wright is an African-American writer and editor of the Issues & Views Magazine and blog. Her articles were also published in Issues & Views.

             ****************

Black Slaveowners  

Robert M. Grooms

AmericanCivilWar

[. . .] In the rare instances when the ownership of slaves by free Negroes is acknowledged in the history books, justification centers on the claim that black slave masters were simply individuals who purchased the freedom of a spouse or child from a white slaveholder and had been unable to legally manumit them. Although this did indeed happen at times, it is a misrepresentation of the majority of instances, one which is debunked by records of the period on blacks who owned slaves. These include individuals such as Justus Angel and Mistress L. Horry, of Colleton District, South Carolina, who each owned 84 slaves in 1830. In fact, in 1830 a fourth of the free Negro slave masters in South Carolina owned 10 or more slaves; eight owning 30 or more (2).

[. . .] In 1860 William Ellison was South Carolina’s largest Negro slaveowner. In Black Masters. A Free Family of Color in the Old South, authors Michael P. Johnson and James L. Roak write a sympathetic account of Ellison’s life. From Ellison’s birth as a slave to his death at 71, the authors attempt to provide justification, based on their own speculation, as to why a former slave would become a magnate slave master

 [. . .] Although lawmakers of the time could not envision the incredibly vast public welfare structures of a later age, these stipulations became law in order to prevent slaveholders from freeing individuals who would become a burden on the general public.

Interestingly, considering today’s accounts of life under slavery, authors Johnson and Roak report instances where free Negroes petitioned to be allowed to become slaves; this because they were unable to support themselves.

[. . .] Ellison was so successful, due to his utilization of cheap slave labor, that many white competitors went out of business. Such situations discredit impressions that whites dealt only with other whites. Where money was involved, it was apparent that neither Ellison’s race or former status were considerations.

Read Entire Piece

               ***************

“Slavery reparations” brings to mind the bitter ex-spouse who typically cannot stop hating and continues to cling to all the wrongs committed in a relationship turned sour. They are the ones who will attempt to project hatred of the other parent to their children, too self-absorbed to recognize the poison of self-loathing being instilled. I have seen circumstances in which they continue to harass and sue until a wise judge puts a stop to the insanity and tells them to take responsibility for themselves and move forward.  

The ones pushing the reparations agenda are now claiming “Post-Traumatic Slavery Syndrome”. We do not have to look any further than places like Obama’s church to find the origins of this so-called trauma—it’s called perpetuating hate! ~WordForIt

                 ***************

 

 

Advertisements

Posted in Hillary Clinton, McCain, obama, politics, racism | Tagged: | 2 Comments »

Racial-Preference Ballots Go National

Posted by wordforit on April 22, 2008

By Harry Stein

FrontPageMagazine 

With race looming as a key issue in the fall elections-perhaps a pivotal one, assuming that Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee-diehard defenders of the racial status quo are going to unprecedented lengths to prevent voters from having their say on government-sponsored racial preferences. Leftist activists are lining up to fight four state ballot initiatives that, if passed on November 4, will outlaw preferential treatment based on race, gender, and national origin in public university admissions as well as government hiring and contracting. Knowing that such anti-preference initiatives enjoy strong public support-in fact, they have already passed overwhelmingly in three of the nation’s bluest states-the activists have zero interest in waging these fights on the merits. Rather, their goal is to keep the initiatives off the ballot by any means necessary, up to and including political chicanery and outright physical intimidation.

The states where anti-preferences forces are aiming to be on the ballot are Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, and Nebraska. Leading the campaign, dubbed “Super Tuesday for Equal Rights,” is California businessman Ward Connerly, long the nation’s leading advocate for colorblind government policies. In 1996, Connerly launched the first such measure, the California Civil Rights Initiative, or Proposition 209; he was drawn to the issue by his realization, as a trustee of the state’s university system, that race was routinely the key determinant in whether a student was accepted or rejected at California’s public colleges. Following a bruising campaign, marked by Prop. 209 opponents’ relentlessly attacking supporters as racist, the initiative passed by 8 points. Two years later, a near-identical measure won by 16 points in Washington State. And in 2006, despite a powerful Democratic tide, the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative likewise passed by a decisive 58 to 42 percent.

In fact, so powerfully does the issue resonate with voters as a matter of elementary fairness that its support everywhere cuts across traditional party lines. In liberal Washington State, for example, the anti-preferences initiative was backed not only by 80 percent of Republicans and 62 percent of independents, but by 41 percent of Democrats; this in the face of liberal opposition that-abetted by such local corporate behemoths as Eddie Bauer, Microsoft, and Starbucks-massively outspent supporters of the measure. The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative similarly passed despite the fierce opposition of a liberal-left coalition of 180 groups, ranging from the League of Women Voters and the United Auto Workers to the Arab-American Institute. After the Michigan initiative’s passage, the leader of the most radical of the opposition groups, By Any Means Necessary, declared that the only way to stop anti-preference measures was to ensure that they never reached the voters.

While Connerly’s troops have gone about the difficult and costly process of placing the state initiatives on the ballot this November, preference defenders have seized on unprincipled strategies to block them, focusing in particular on two swing states with large minority populations: Colorado and Missouri. In Colorado, the pro-preference side first mounted a series of challenges to the legal basis of the Colorado Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI), alleging that it deceptively misappropriated the term “civil rights” and also claiming that “preferences” did not in and of themselves equal “discrimination”-so that in seeking to outlaw both, the measure supposedly violated the state’s “single-subject” rule governing ballot initiatives.

When these arguments failed to pass muster with the electoral commission and state courts, preference defenders tried an even more novel approach, deceptive in intent yet heavy-handed in execution: a ballot initiative of their own, a shadow version of the anti-preference measure clearly intended to confuse voters. Indeed, its first sentence is identical to that of the anti-preference measure: “Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado Constitution concerning a prohibition against discrimination by the state, and, in connection therewith, prohibiting the state from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, and public contracting?” But as Connerly notes, “it proceeds in the second sentence to say that, notwithstanding the first sentence, any public agency in Colorado would be free to leave preferences intact.”

After considerable back-and-forth, the state’s title board disallowed the language in the shadow amendment, and preference supporters are currently trying to come up with alternative wording. But given the need to submit upward of 76,000 valid signatures to place an initiative on the state ballot, the clock is running out. Meanwhile, CCRI supporters have already submitted 50,000 more signatures than required, so the genuine anti-preferences initiative will definitely be on the ballot.

So, almost certainly, will the measures in Nebraska and in John McCain’s home state of Arizona. Connerly remains confident about Missouri as well, though the opposition there has been even more aggressive in its tactics. Democratic secretary of state Robin Carnahan, charged with what is normally the routine certification of ballot measures, instead went to work on this one, eliminating its straightforward language, derived from that of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and substituting wording that pleads the other side’s case. The question, as she wanted to pose it to voters, was whether to amend the state’s constitution to “ban affirmative action programs designed to eliminate discrimination against, and improve opportunities for, women and minorities in public contracting, employment and education.” So egregious was this subterfuge that a liberal county circuit judge took the unprecedented step of throwing out Carnahan’s rewrite and reinstating the original language almost intact.

Still, as Connerly observes, “all the forces of the Left are converging in Missouri-Acorn and the rest of the race industry, the feminists, the unions, the contractors who feed off this stuff-and George Soros is providing a lot of the funding. They’re enlisting the whole vast left-wing conspiracy-and, believe me, it’s a lot vaster than the supposed right-wing one.” The ugliness is most evident on the streets, where supporters of the ballot initiative are busy gathering signatures. Opponents’ chief tactic is to use “blockers”-often burly union men-to shadow signature gatherers and scare off potential signers by charging not only that the initiative is racist and has the support of the Ku Klux Klan, but also that the signers risk identity theft. In addition, the pro-preferences sources have dispatched their people to sign petitions with false names and addresses, so that they will be invalidated later.

Earlier this year, such methods took their toll in Oklahoma, which was to be the fifth state holding such an initiative and where, with the measure polling at close to 90 percent, it would surely have won. In the end, though, the number of signatures gathered exceeded the required number by only a few thousand. Since typically only 72 percent of any petition’s signatures are valid, and since the ACLU and NAACP were importing teams to challenge every one, Connerly chose not to proceed. “We had a choice of spending a quarter of a million dollars to defend the signatures we had, with the likelihood of not succeeding,” he says, “or fight another day. Eventually we’ll have to sue to change that process.” But Oklahoma is a special case, with the toughest ballot requirements anywhere: all signature gatherers must be state residents, and they have a mere 90 days to get an unusually high number of signatures.

Connerly is taking no chances in Missouri. The fight against Carnahan’s rewrite of the initiative ate up considerable time, and with a May 4 deadline looming, he has put out a call for opponents of racial preferences to come to the state over the next few weeks and lend a hand. “I don’t blame the Democrats for being scared of these initiatives,” he says with understatement, “especially on the heels of Jeremiah Wright.”

Though the racial-preference ballot measures are officially nonpartisan, they stand to make a dramatic impact on the fall campaign. With the question of racial preferences effectively nationalized by its presence on multiple state ballots, neither party’s presidential candidate will be able to evade the issue. While this might pose a dilemma for McCain-who, like most Republicans, has long shied away from the topic and might worry about jeopardizing Hispanic support-it could be catastrophic for Obama. As Connerly says, “This is a guy who’s tried awfully hard for a long time not to appear what he is-just another left-winger who supports preferences.”

 

                        *****************

This is one of the topics of which we cannot seem to get straight answers! Why do we have to ‘shy away’ from something that has been misinterpreted, misused, abused and created the very type of discrimination it was intended to eliminate? Anyone who wants to can understand the racism of affirmative action as it is today! 

With the Obamas as examples of the arrogance and ingratitude it foments, all the more reason to remove preferences. If you do something to elevate me and all I glean is that you consider me incapable on my own, what good has been done for either (except for my large paycheck)? 

It’s bad enough that schools are attempting to indoctrinate students with racial dicta;, we don’t have to give validation.

As for jobs or any other arenas where unqualified individuals benefit, what happened to earning a ticket? No excuse for expecting or accepting less.  

Thank you, Mr. Connerly! ~WFI

                        ********************

Posted in Hillary Clinton, McCain, obama, politics, racism | 2 Comments »

Obama’s Racist Rejection of His White American Family

Posted by wordforit on April 19, 2008

by Mary Mostert (author homepage)

Source:AmericanDaily

Barack Obama and I have a lot in common, in some ways. Both of our fathers were from Africa. Barack’s father was a Kenyan and my father was a South African. Both of our fathers came to the United States for their college educations and both of our fathers married American women they met in college. Both of us were abandoned by our fathers at a very early age, when they returned to Africa to our wealthy grandfathers. I was 14 months old and Barack was 2 years old when our fathers returned to their homelands. And, both of us have half brothers and sisters in Africa.

However, I found we also have some very profound differences when I bought and read his books. In his introduction to his autobiographical “Dreams From My Father” which he wrote in 1995 he stated “I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of twelve or thirteen” because she was white..”

That is a breathtakingly racist statement! After all, it was his white mother and his white grandmother and grandfather, who raised him and who helped him to get a good education that enabled him to be accepted and access scholarships to prestigious universities, after his father abandoned him at age two . Yet, he recently identified his white grandmother as “racist” when she asked her husband for a ride to work after being harassed by a black man she thought was about to hit her. And, he has written two books that, in effect, are mostly about race. He states that he is convinced that “almost every single socioeconomic indicator, from infant mortality to life expectancy to employment to home ownership” among blacks “continues to lag far behind their white counterparts” because of “racial attitudes.”

Yet, it isn’t “racial attitudes” of others that cause infant mortality, shortened life spans and failure to own one’s home. All are largely caused by personal and individual choices. The reason for a higher percentage of black babies dying in their first year isn’t race, but their Mother’s choices. The #1 Cause of death among babies is low birth weight, mostly caused by pregnant women smoking. Statistics show that black women are more apt to smoke during their pregnancies than white women.

Also, babies exposed to drugs or alcohol are at high risk for low birth weight, premature birth and death. Statistics show that black women are approximately four times more likely to use drugs or alcohol during pregnancy than white women.

The 2008 Presidential race has revealed some surprising double standards in the media. For example, frequent polls were conducted last year about Mitt Romney to determine if people would vote for a Mormon for president . The Associated Press, Fox News, CBS News and many other media sources showed such interest in this subject that it considered it newsworthy to point out that Romney’s “great-grandmother, Hannah Hood Hill, was the daughter of polygamists.”

Romney was urged repeatedly to “explain” his religious beliefs by the media, in spite of the fact, as his wife pointed out, he actually was the only Republican candidate running who only had had one wife!

Yet, I have not seen a single report in any of the above news sources pointing out that Barack Obama is the son and grandson of polygamists. In fact, Obama’s father, Barack Obama, Sr. whom he idolized in his book “Dreams of My Father” already had a wife and two children back in Kenya when he married Ann Dunham in 1961 while a student at the University of Hawaii. He did not divorce his first wife, Kezia, mother of his oldest son, Roy and only daughter Auma. Barack, the presidential candidate, was born six months after their marriage and when he was two years old, his father left Hawaii and his American wife and child to attend graduate school at Harvard.

When Barack Sr. returned to Kenya, he arrived with Ruth, his third wife, also a white American woman. Ruth gave birth to two sons, David (who died in 1987) and Mark. While still married to Ruth, he also continued his marriage with Kezia. Before his death at the age of 46 in 1982, Barack Sr. fathered two more children born to Kezia. Counting a half sister born to his mother and her second husband, Lolo Soetero, Obama has seven half brothers and sisters resulting from his father’s polygamy and his mother’s second marriage.

Why is polygamy in Romney’s family among adults over 100 years ago newsworthy, but current polygamy in the family of a Democrat running for President of no interest to the media?

Obama did not criticize or condemn the polygamy and the irresponsible behavior of his father. I can understand Obama’s curiosity about his father, since I experienced the same kind of curiosity when I was a teenager about my missing father in Africa. However, I cannot understand what appears to be his emotional attachment to African culture and dismissal of American culture.

He appears to have chosen to identify himself almost entirely in African terms rather than in the culture of his homeland, or his American mother and grandparents. For twenty years he has belonged Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago that describes itself as “a congregation which is Unashamedly Black” and composed of “an African people.”

Where, exactly, does Obama’s choice of African culture over American culture stop? Polygamy is certainly a widely practiced cultural habit in Africa. In fact, Sarah Obama, who is introduced in a YouTube video as his “Kenyan grandmother” was the third wife of his Kenyan grandfather. She was 16 when she was married to Hussein Onvango Obama, who was 43 at the time. She helped care for Obama’s father when his own grandmother abandoned her children.

Today in the USA, as we see from what is happening in ElDorado, Texas, the forced marriage of a 16 year old to a man of 43 is considered child abuse. If Obama’s grandfather lived in Texas today, his African culture of polygamous marriage to a 16 year old would have landed him in jail.

Frankly, it really disturbs me that Obama not only has “ceased to advertise” his white mother’s race, or even her existence, but seems to have adopted his black Kenyan step-grandmother as an important figure in his life and political campaign, while calling his white American grandmother who helped support and raise him as a “typical white person” and “a racist.” I, for one, will forever be grateful to my own American mother who made a very difficult choice back in 1931, to remain in the United States so her four children, including the two born in South Africa, could be raised as Americans, with American values, education and freedoms.

I see Obama’s choices as not only racist choices but as favoring the increasingly chaotic and unsuccessful cultures of the African continent over the amazing opportunities and freedoms we have because our American mothers’ chose to return to the United States after living abroad and seeing the shortcomings of another culture that failed to offer we would have in the United States of America.

BannerofLiberty (Mary Mostert)

                           ****************  

It should go without saying that when we discern the distortions, evasions and insults in Obama’s speech and now the extraordinarily juvenile animations (as in, cartoon character) with his followers’ reaction to believing he was ‘flipping off’ Hillary, we would have had a miserable, whiny four years with such an angry, pessimistic individual. I believe Americans are more intelligent than he allows us credit for and his credibility is ‘shot out’. 

I am none-the-less astounded at the low-class, not to mention immature, exhibition of Obama’s campaign. As memory serves, I think my siblings and I were around 13-15 when we did the ‘scratch the face, flip you off, so Mom won’t notice’ antic. We were too cool. As adults, we are truly cool enough to know “that’s not cool”.

Recently, I came across Mary Mostert’s website and have enjoyed my visits there to read her analyses of international news and “news you probably haven’t heard”. Mary also wrote an excellent piece “Obama Insults Pennsylvanians while Ignoring their Economic Miracle“, among others.  

Definitely a site to expand your mind! ~WfI

                          *****************

 

Posted in Hillary Clinton, McCain, obama, politics, racism | 7 Comments »