Graphic examples of the racially-based social caste system

Regular readers here know that society at large has no problem condemning the overt and obvious acts of hate and bigotry; but that's like acknowledging that the sun rises in the east, the sky is blue, water is wet, and the Pope is Catholic. All no-brainers.

Please post here articles and stories of graphic examples of where being not-white overshadows one's professional or academic credentials. This is to show that even in the 21st Century, the past roughly 400 years of bad attitudes didn't magically disappear with the Brown vs. Board of Education court ruling, the "I Have A Dream" speech, and the signing of the Civil and Voting Rights Acts.

I'll start with My Black Skin Makes My White Coat Vanish

is the first person and situation that came to my mind. There are many, many examples (on DU) showing that despite all she has done for her constituents, one incident has overshadowed her achievements.

I'm waiting for a particular thread to make it to the archives. When it does, I will post a link to it here. :hi: I had linked it to my Best of DU thread prematurely, and it was deleted. Once it made the archives I was planning on adding it to my "Best of DU" thread, but I'll place it here instead. :)

Separate and Unequal
On the Mideast controversy, Georgia Democrat Cynthia McKinney and our (Orange County, CA) own Dana Rohrabacher are virtually identical. So why'd the media roast McKinney and let Dana walk?
http://www.ocweekly.com/2002-10-03/news/separate-and-unequal/

I think Al Gore and John Conyers should rectify that injustice.

The presidential mansion had been previously called "President's Palace", "President's House" or "Executive Mansion". In 1798, during construction, it was made white by a protective lime-based whitewash. It's likely that "White House" became one of the mansion's nicknames before the damage done during the War of 1812.

In 1901, right after Theodore Roosevelt was sworn in as President after the death of President William McKinley, he invited Booker T. Washington of the Tuskegee Institute to the White House for a meeting. The meeting ran late, and TR invited Mr. Washington to dinner. This was the first time that an African-American was entertained at the White House as a guest.

When news of the dinner got out, Northern newspapers politely and quietly applauded the president, African-Americans reacted with joy and anticipation, and Southerners were sent into a paroxysm of rage that evoked memories of 1860. Roosevelt’s temerity in entertaining a black man at the same table as his genteel wife was enough to evoke fury from all levels of Southern white society. Southern newspapers rained rarely-printed racial epithets at Roosevelt. A river of hate mail and death threats flooded the White House. Senator Benjamin Tillman of South Carolina threatened open violence against blacks in retaliation for the dinner. The outcry was so great that Booker T. Washington would never receive another dinner invitation, although he would continue to attend regular meetings during business hours. Also, later in 1901, President Theodore Roosevelt made "White House" the official name of the presidential mansion. It has supposed that Roosevelt did that to quell his Southern critics. Considering the incredible rage over the dinner with Booker T. Washington, the timing cannot be ignored. None of the cited websites make the connection, only author Clarence Lusane says it out loud.




http://www.aviewoncities.com/washington/whitehouse.htm
Book: Black History of the White House by Clarence Lusane
http://www.theodoreroosevelt.org/life/firsts.htm
http://blog.aurorahistoryboutique.com/president-theodore-roosevelt-invites-booker-t-washington-to-dinner/

by the late Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray. The fact that this denounced and debunked load of statistical garbage was published AND a best seller speaks loads about US society. A counterpart book by a black author would never be published.

...but I'm glad to see there is actual proof of it, too. Interesting too, considering the fact if one was to mention such a thing, everyone would jump on them saying this is nonsense. Yeah,...right. :eyes:

There was a study done on this, but I'm too tired right now to find it.

entitled "Are Greg and Emily more employable than Lakisha and Jamal?"
http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/mullainathan/papers/emilygreg.pdf

In Job Hunt, College Degree Can’t Close Racial Gap

From the article: Johnny R. Williams, 30, would appear to be an unlikely person to have to fret about the impact of race on his job search, with companies like JPMorgan Chase and an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago on his résumé.

But after graduating from business school last year and not having much success garnering interviews, he decided to retool his résumé, scrubbing it of any details that might tip off his skin color. His membership, for instance, in the African-American business students association? Deleted.

“If they’re going to X me,” Mr. Williams said, “I’d like to at least get in the door first.”

Similarly, Barry Jabbar Sykes, 37, who has a degree in mathematics from Morehouse College, a historically black college in Atlanta, now uses Barry J. Sykes in his continuing search for an information technology position, even though he has gone by Jabbar his whole life.

“Barry sounds like I could be from Ireland,” he said.

That race remains a serious obstacle in the job market for African-Americans, even those with degrees from respected colleges, may seem to some people a jarring contrast to decades of progress by blacks, culminating in President Obama’s election.

But there is ample evidence that racial inequities remain when it comes to employment. Black joblessness has long far outstripped that of whites. And strikingly, the disparity for the first 10 months of this year, as the recession has dragged on, has been even more pronounced for those with college degrees, compared with those without. Education, it seems, does not level the playing field — in fact, it appears to have made it more uneven.

College-educated black men, especially, have struggled relative to their white counterparts in this downturn, according to figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The unemployment rate for black male college graduates 25 and older in 2009 has been nearly twice that of white male college graduates — 8.4 percent compared with 4.4 percent.

Various academic studies have confirmed that black job seekers have a harder time than whites. A study published several years ago in The American Economic Review titled “Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal?” found that applicants with black-sounding names received 50 percent fewer callbacks than those with white-sounding names.

A more recent study, published this year in The Journal of Labor Economics found white, Asian and Hispanic managers tended to hire more whites and fewer blacks than black managers did.
________________

Farther into the article, the shocked looks of interviewers show that President Obama's election didn't change much. :(

The most noted one was in January, 2000 when Sgt. Cornel Young, Jr. was shot and killed in Providence, RI trying to break up a fight while off-duty. http://www.browndailyherald.com/media/storage/paper472/news/2005/11/08/Metro/Trial.Begins.For.Police.Accused.Of.Killing.OffDuty.Officer-1049353.shtml?norewrite200609080828&sourcedomain=www.browndailyherald.com

There's a later incident in May, 2006 when Officer Seneca Darden in Norfolk, VA was on a plainclothes assignment and killed by a white officer. http://epilot2.hamptonroads.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VmlyZ2luaWFuUGlsb3QvMjAwNi8wOC8wMyNBcjAyNzA0

Here's an earlier incident in August, 1994 of NY transit officer Desmond Robinson being shot and wounded by a white NYC officer. http://www.emergency.com/nypdcnge.htm

All of the victims above were black, the shooters were white.

Here's an incident in May, 2001 in Nashville when distraught and armed white officer Mark Nelson held off his fellow officers for 4 hours and was taken into custody even after firing on his colleagues multiple times! http://www.mustbme.com/metro-police-sergeant-mark-nelson-sentenced-to-probation-and-community-service.html

What's overlooked is that the black officers were armed but didn't fire their weapons.

In the Nashville incident--all were white, and the police showed great, almost saintly, restraint for one of their own. In the black-white incidents, it's been argued that the plainclothes officers didn't properly identify themselves, the situation was confusing, etc. The usual song and dance, but it goes back to the basic premise from the bad ol' days: Any armed black man is dangerous, period. Shoot first, ask questions later.

For those that want to say that race has nothing to do with it, here's a study from the University of Washington that says otherwise. According to the study, blacks are more likely to be shot than whites while holding harmless objects. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-07/uow-bml070803.php

I could find no incident of a white plainclothes officer shot by a black uniformed officer.

Mount Vernon, NY police officer Christopher Ridley killed in January, 2008 http://www.whiteplainscnr.com/article6362.html

NYC police officer Omar Edwards killed in May, 2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/nyregion/29cop.html

I actually went to high school for a couple of years with the cop who shot him...We were teammates on the baseball team...

I could easily fill this post with the cries and whines about how "those people" were so stupid and/or poor to get away and the mayor and governor didn't use their infinite powers to divert the hurricane and how it was their fault that the levees broke and drowned everyone and the federal government sat on its hands and on and on. I will sum it up simply:

White people "find", black people "loot".




I will cover another point the ignorant and stupid like to harp on: It is true that New Orleans' elevation is below sea level, but New Orleans is NOT on the sea, it's on the river!

one of the legends of bodybuilding, and the only one to beat Arnold's record of 7 wins. He has little recognition outside of bodybuilding, but Arnold is a household name. :shrug:

My dad use to do Lee's workout video. He told me about how he never got the recognition he should have.

the great double standard. A basic search will show the extreme hatred held against rap and hip-hop by the majority posters. The misbehaving lyrics of a lot of pop and rock songs are just overlooked (peruse the lyrics of "Excitable Boy" by Warren Zevon or "Maxwell's Silver Hammer" by The Beatles or "Tom Dooley" by The Kingston Trio, or "Sugar Walls" by Sheena Easton).

The only reason that I can think of is that rap/hip-hop is the only major music genre that has not been usurped by white artists. You'll note that the very few successful white artists (Vanilla Ice, Eminem, Bubba Sparxx) get media coverage out of proportion to their presence.

see threads about the Don Imus and Michael Richards incidents. "We're not really racists, we can use those words because the rappers do!" The "Stevie did it, too!" excuse--how original, NOT! :eyes: I dare one of those guys to name a current rapper.

In the Imus incident, a survey of lyrics shows that the phrase "nappy headed ho's" does NOT appear. Never happened! Closest was a Stevie Wonder song, and the phrase was "I was a little nappy-headed boy" from the song "I Wish".

There appears to be a difference in rants against rap and hip-hop between different races. I've notices that when black people rant about rap or hip-hop, it is for a specific reason, i.e., a rapper did this or said that. When white people rant about it, it's a general broadbrush rant, i.e., it isn't music, or it isn't real music, or it's homophobic, or it's misogynistic, etc.

NPR did an article on how rap mirrors world politics http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106857447 The paper on which the article is based was written by Marc Lynch, a professor at George Washington University and Director of the Institute of Middle Eastern Studies, and a rap fan. The work and research were well done, but that didn't matter to the listenership. You can read the comments section and the next day's letters. It doesn't matter, just say rap around white people and watch most of them go insane with distain and/or disgust. :eyes:

In so many of our cities we see a large amount of the black population pushed to one part of town that is isolated from all economic activity and is the worst in the city. Cities like Chicago are trying to rise above that, but there are still countless cities with this problem.

http://www.pbs.org/race/006_WhereRaceLives/006_00-home.htm

Click on the "Downward Spiral" bar and you'll see how a neighborhood "magically" transforms. It's not who comes in, but who leaves.

The worse part is that the transformation doesn't require malicious intent. Simply that the normal majority thinking pattern about "those people" allows for rationalization and marginalizing them. Remember, to white people, intent is critical. If you didn't "intend" to hurt them, it's okay to leave. It's business, it's not personal.

Even though it can be argued that a high-end brand is being image conscious, and race has nothing to do with anything, (of course not! for white people, it's NEVER about race :eyes:) the related posts of hate and vitriol would never be leveled at a white artist. Neither would comments of "he should be doing something more productive" and similar comments.

Example of commments can be seen at:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/06/15/rapper-jayz-boycotts-ra_n_23112.html or http://www.tmz.com/2006/06/21/jay-z-escalates-cristal-boycott-krug-life/

:hi:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6284923

These are the steamy bedroom clothes off, bodies intertwined scenes, not the standard standing hug 'n' kissing scenes. Hollywood (and the majority society) don't discriminate, male Latinos and Asians need not bother, either. The usual SOP--not white, not allowed.

Jayson Blair in 2003 (New York Times) and Jack Kelley in 2004 (USA Today). Reading some articles on the Jayson Blair scandal, it seemed that Blair was an example of affirmative action run out of control. He was hired--because he was black; he was promoted--because he was black; he was given too much leeway and not reprimanded--because he was black. Blair's actions extended beyond him to all black journalists and "verified" the bigotted circular argument that there are so few senior black journalists because they aren't qualified to begin with ("because they are black" but they won't say that out loud.) This story was out front for months.

Note how the Jack Kelley scandal got swept off of the front page and buried in a hurry. Kelley's race isn't mentioned, where it's front and center in the Blair case. (Also, white is the default race for USA society, so that really isn't needed.) Kelley only represents Kelley, he's not an indictment of the "good ol' white boys" network or that the bad act of one white male journalist doesn't put the acts of all white male journalists under scrutiny.

The poor performance of Blair went on for at best a couple of years; Kelley's fabrications went on for over a decade.

One can run a google search on each individual and find the various articles, columns, and blogs relating to each and see the very different take on each case. Even the Wikipedia entries are so much different. (Another among many reasons I won't cite or use Wikipedia as a linking source) I leave it to the reader to review those at their convenience and see the difference.

cited statistics by Tim Wise in his article http://www.alternet.org/story/11330/ black people are more likely to be (mainly because of skewed racial perception) arrested and prosecuted for drug possession although not in the population of drug users. Add to that the draconian sentencing rules, esp. for powder vs. crack cocaine, and the racial bias is glaring.

http://www.drugpolicy.org/law/police/tulia/index.cfm

This unjust and incredibly racist investigation arrested and incarcerated about 15% of the town's black population. A similar action would never have targeted a majority white section and the municipality in question would NEVER have allowed black law enforcement officials that much unchecked power. The defendants were convicted solely on the testimony of a corrupt (white) investigator, a travelling cop, without corroborating evidence. It's very doubtful that a black investigator's word alone would win a conviction.

The defendants have since been freed, thanks to intervention by the governor, and settlements have been paid.

http://www.csdp.org/news/news/tulia.htm

All of the defendants have been pardoned and will split a $5M settlement.

The corrupt cop, Tom Coleman, was convicted of aggravated perjury, but did not get any jail time. On a bright note, the federally-funded regional task force was disbanded.

Note: As of this entry, no local area law enforcement officials have been investigated or punished for official misconduct. Former D.A. Nifong, infamous for the Duke lacrosse team scandal, received a harsher punishment, and none of the suspects went to trial, much less jail. Who says that race doesn't matter?

What is this monolithic "black community" that white people like to rail about when they're feeling threatened? There's no more a monolithic "black community" than a monolithic "white community". That rant appears when black people are the news story, and usually in an unfavorable light.

covered here by Tim Wise http://www.lipmagazine.org/~timwise/PersonalResponsibility.html

He makes a few telling points, esp. the acceptance of his rant by the white majority. Notice that years earlier, the statements Cosby made, including the one by his wife in which she noted that America had taught her son's Russian killer to hate blacks. White America went ballistic at him. As long as the finger of blame is pointed away from the majority, you're accepted and life is good.

During my time at my alma mater, Georgia Tech, homecoming queens were chosen by popular vote. Organizations posted the photos of the candidates at the Student Center. GTAAA (Ga. Tech Afro-American Assoc.) put up their candidate and we voted for her. Not only did Ga. Tech elect its first non-white Homecoming Queen in its history in 1983, but again in 1985. Twice in three years. The majority was unthrilled the first time, but they were PISSED the second time--which for quite a few was twice too many. LTTE's to the school paper let that be known. (Sorry, they aren't on line, but I have old papers that I haven't surveyed.) To give the population stats, black people were 6% of the undergrad population. So that couldn't happen again, the selection was changed to a pagent format. I haven't yet found a listing of homecoming queens, so I don't know how black candidates have fared since then.

The usual SOP, rules are written to lock out any minorities; the rules are changed when they figure out how to defeat those rules. Is anyone surprised? :eyes:

I can't wait to hear this.

did I leave something out of the above example?

a popular vote to a pageant format. Does it mean they have judges instead? That figures. It's like our national election. They don't trust the popular vote, so they go with the electoral college.

specifically in NBA basketball. They want to "clean" up the image by making the players dress in sportcoats and ties instead of how they want, i.e. the baggy clothes and "bling" gold chains. It wouldn't seem so hypocritical except for the fact that this is a recent change. Why was it not so important 20 years ago when the fad was starting? The NBA fought policy and the courts for the right to draft players right out of high school--the "bling" demographic. Why's the NBA the only major sport to do that? In addition, the NBA is approximately 85% black.

Hockey fights still go on, but hockey is approximately 95% white. No problem here, nothing to see. Move along.

The little known, and less cared about, fact that NASCAR was started by bootleggers racing their modified cars (to carry loads of illegal booze without attracting police attention, and being able to get away if they do) in empty fields when not on bootlegging runs. A sport started by white criminals gets little or no outcry, other than environmentalists.

Here's a real life incident for me. I'm a Georgia Tech alumnus, and on rare occasion I get questioned about my choice of college. In one incident, I was at a party in the early 90's and one of three having a conversation with two other people, one male, one female, both white. When the topic of colleges came around, He said that he went to North Georgia College. I said that I went to the basketball school in Midtown. The guy said, "Really? Did you go to Clark? Morris Brown? Morehouse?" I cocked my brow, as if say, you must be kidding. I turned to the young lady and she said, "Georgia Tech." The guy looked shocked for a second. He had named ONLY the area HBCU's, as if to say that black people would only go to HBCU's. I know black people that are HBCU grads and some that are not.

(Aside: To those not familiar with the neighborhoods of Atlanta, Georgia Tech is in Midtown; the AUC colleges are in West End. Georgia Tech's men's basketball team had the winning record and was regularly covered on TV news and in the local sports pages. As illustrious as they are, the AUC sports teams aren't Division I-A and don't get regular press coverage.)

Could he have not known? Maybe. Having gone to a nearby college, total ignorance is not possible. This is not the same as someone from across the country making the mistake of calling the Georgia Tech team the Bulldogs or UGA's team the Bumblebees, or the expected gaffes by someone not from around here.

Another incident I was in at a party, the conversation came around to colleges, and I said that I went to Georgia Tech. The guy said, "Really? How'd you get into Georgia Tech? Affirmative Action?"

I said, "Is it too much to expect that I'd actually be QUALIFIED to get into Tech? My SAT score was 1170 (1200 was the average then) and I had a 3.85 GPA, 2 varsity letters in soccer, secretary of the drama club, member of the school social studies team, AP chemistry and AP English classes, advanced math and calculus classes, 4-year Navy ROTC scholarship…need I continue?"

To which he said, "Your SAT and GPA are better than mine. I couldn't get into Tech. You're way more qualified than me."

It's as if the thought that I, or anyone else black, could actually be qualified for a position never crossed his mind. :eyes:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10003803

by Kamaal Majeed, HS junior in Waltham, MA (Boston metro area)

Excerpt: Since my middle school years, I've been asked this question more than any other. It seems to me that too many people have let society program into their brains what should be expected of me, a black person, before ever interacting with me. But I believe in being who I am, not who others want me to be.

On my first day of high school, going into math class, two of my classmates pointed and laughed at me. I initially thought my fly was open, or that something was stuck in my teeth. But as I took my seat, I heard one of the students whisper, "Why is a black person taking honors?" So my fly wasn't open. An honors-level class had simply been joined by a student whose skin was an unsettling shade of brown.

---------------------
I know the feeling. I still get those looks that say "people like you aren't supposed to be here", regardless of your qualifications, and my HS days were many years ago. Those looks aren't generally from black people. (Black people are 4.4% of Waltham's total population-- www.census.gov) Unfortunately, it's not going to change anytime soon. :(

After just listening to the TV Guide channel Top 10 list of Hollywood's summer hunks and babes, the various commentators have used "all-American looks" on more than one occasion throughout the article. All of those that fit that particular description have been fair-haired white people. It may have been used for someone white and dark-haired, but I've never heard that applied to anyone that wasn't white.

So, only white people have that "all-American look". Who would have figured? :crazy:

esp. if guns are involved. Notice that there's no problem if white movie characters are shown holding guns, but if black movie characters are, then it's "promoting violence". The last big brouhaha was the movie "Get Rich or Die Trying" starring 50 Cent.

Notice there's no problem showing James Bond holding a gun or in ads for The Sopranos where the "r" is the silhouette of a .45 pistol. Talk about a double standard. :eyes:

that illustrates that point: http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=248&Itemid=43

http://www.pbs.org/unforgivableblackness/knockout/
http://law.jrank.org/pages/8420/Mann-Act.html

The Mann Act (1910) came about during the "white slavery" hysteria of the turn of the 20th Century. During that time, the Industrial Revolution was bringing rapid changes to US society, along with urbanization, immigration, the changing role of women, and evolving social mores. Moral purists decried declining morals (note: as much as things change, they stay the same. :eyes: ) as young women left home for the city and away from the "time-honored" and family-centered traditions of courtship and marriage. 19th Century muckraking journalist George Kibbe Turner called prostitution "white slavery" and coined the term. Unfettered immigration provided an endless supply of both foreign prostitutes and foreign men who lured American girls into immorality. Muckraking journalists fueled the hysteria with sensationalized stories of innocent girls kidnapped off the streets by foreigners, drugged, smuggled across the country, and forced to work in brothels.

Although no evidence was ever found for "white slavery" rings, it didn't stop Congress from doing something about it. Representative James R. Mann of Illinois, head of the Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, drafted the Mann Act of 1910 which made it a crime to transport women across state lines "for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose." The first application of this law was against boxer Jack Johnson (convicted). Other noted individuals prosecuted under the Mann Act were Chuck Berry (musician, convicted), Charlie Chaplin (actor, charges dropped), Rex Ingram (black actor, convicted), William Thomas (sociologist, acquitted), Frank Lloyd Wright (architect, charges dropped), and Charles Manson (cult leader, charges dropped). Note that only the black men actually went to prison, although the white men had their professional reputations tainted (except Manson, of course). In the case of Thomas, he was targeted by the FBI for his political views. There is no record of any arrest related to the Mann Act with a black woman victm.

This is an excellent illustration of the power of the racial caste system. Congress makes a law that stops a non-existent problem that scares white people (the upper caste), while race riots and lynchings against black people, in addition to land and consumer fraud, are occurring with alarming regularity. All of those crimes did ACTUALLY happen and were (and still are) ACTUALLY illegal, and the halls of government at ALL levels are silent. Black people can't make their pain and fear into government regulations, corporate policies, and front page news.

Or "The Black Kid was Driving"

From the article: "If Atlanta Falcons player Michael Vick really was an impresario in arranging for dogs to fight to the death, then he is not a nice person. However, in the American racial equation, Vick's alleged animal abuse appears to rate far higher on the scale of infamy than the murder of human beings. Music producer Phil Spector's seemingly endless trial on charges of shooting a woman in the mouth doesn't even make the newspapers - but Michael Vick's alleged transgressions against dogs has the nation in an uproar. Meanwhile, crazed, young, talentless white female celebrities flaunt their lawlessness and amorality with abandon."

I can appreciate the NAACP saying that due process should take its course before he's executed in the court of public opinion. Note the threads and posts that defended Imus or the Duke Lacrosse suspects.


http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=298&Itemid=43

I've read of some articles and blog entries (by admitted white writers, of course. :eyes: ) that say that dogfighting is integral or epidemic in urban areas or a big deal in the hip-hop community. Earl Ofari Hutchinson highlights this assertion here at http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/57682/ You can google at your convenience for others. I don't know where they got that idea, but it doesn't pass the smell or logic tests.

I grew up in a black suburban neighborhood. If the topic ever came up, which was very rarely, dogfighting was always out in the mountains or farm country. Nowhere near the city.

Now for a few facts: Animal sports are the provence of the rich and well-off. Most black people that live in the inner-city (code word for "black and poor") do not have the disposable income for the care and feeding of a large-sized fighting dog. If you thought feeding a teen-ager was expensive, try the care and feeling of a large dog. We won't get into veterinarian bills.

Space is needed. Both for the dog's comfort and for the arena and spectators. That much free space is in short supply in the urban city, and even suburban areas. Add to that, dogfighting is illegal in the USA. Where can an illegal and rather noisy activity involving animals and lots of spectators be held without attracting unwanted attention? Someone's backyard? :silly: The police get called for loud parties all the time; why would this be any different? Add to the mix the secrecy needed to keep a people-intensive illegal activity away from prying eyes and law enforcement. This validates the above statement of stories of dogfights out in the boonies.

Now for the obvious: pet owners love their pets. I don't know of any pet owner, regardless of race, that would allow their pets to come to harm. Doesn't happen.

A survey of hip-hop lyrics shows only one song (Dog Match by Eve /w DMX) that has any reference to dog fighting--and they aren't talking about the 4-legged furry ones.

This is another urban legend perpetrated by white-owned media to show that "those people of color are just as bad". Is dogfighting in the city impossible? No, but highly unlikely, and hardly some sort blacks-only epidemic or habit. The resources required for this is something that the people who live in urban areas, meaning black and poor, just don't have.

as of this entry. That case is more far reaching and destructive to the integrity of the NBA than Vick's dogfighting case is to the NFL. But note that anytime a black person does ANYTHING to piss off white america, the long knives come out.

It's okay, the ref was white.

the fascist elites' weapon of mass distraction. The MSM pounded the drums without stopping on the Michael Vick case, but listen to the crickets regarding the lies the administration used to start the invasion of Iraq. Same for the casualties, both US and Iraqi. Don't forget the coffins returning to the US will never be shown, or the suffering of the families of the dead and wounded.

But Bush* and company just dance away, stealing all the way.

Black people loot, white people find. Any questions?

http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sports/falcons/stories/2007/09/12/vick_0913.html

According to the article, they can file legal briefs, but cannot actively participate. As I understand, special interest groups normally do not get to participate in a court case. Why is there an exception here? Hmmm.... :crazy:

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/14197205/detail.html

From the article: The development could threaten to end Vick's football career.

If he's found guilty, Vick could be sentenced to 10 years in prison on the new charges. The state sentence would be served separately from any time in federal prison.

A grand jury in Richmond Tuesday indicted the suspended Falcons quarterback and three co-defendants on two charges of dogfighting.

The panel refused to indict the men on eight counts of killing animals.

Surry County Commonwealth's Attorney Gerald G. Poindexter presented the charges against Vick, Quanis Phillips, Tony Taylor and Pernell Peace to the grand jury.

:eyes:

Like the comic's line: Why not kick a man when he's down, that's the best time to do it!

entitled Replying to those e-mails about Vick http://www.miamiherald.com/living/columnists/leonard_pitts/story/199338.html

From the column: Frankly, I doubt Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, Whitney Houston, Tim Hardaway, Isaiah Washington, New Orleans DA Eddie Jordan, Ray Nagin, the NAACP, Ice Cube, 50 Cent, Ludacris, the family of Martin Luther King, Jr. and other black folk who have been ripped and ridiculed in this space would agree that I give black folks a free ride. But again, we're not talking about facts here. For that matter, we're not talking about me, nor even about journalism.

No, what we're talking about is that some white people -- emphasize: some -- seem to feel they have a perfect right to demand, overtly and repeatedly, that a black professional prove himself to them. We're talking about the realization, as a black professional, that for them, you will forever be on probation, your mastery of your profession, your right to be there, constantly subject to demands for verification.

We're talking about the black lawyer second-guessed by the client who never spent a day in law school. About the black money manager whose clients won't accept her advice until it is seconded by her white partner. About the black cardiologist whose diagnoses are rejected by patients unwilling to accept them from a doctor of her gender and race.

And yes, I know some people would argue that this is only to be expected, that the very existence of affirmative action entitles white people to question the competence of black ones. That's a cop-out. I've said it before, I'll say it again: If affirmative action is defined as giving preferential treatment on the basis of gender or race, then no one in this country has received more than white men.

Still, though the rationalization is lame, it serves a purpose: It deflects us from thinking too hard how it must feel to learn that, even after years of education and apprenticeship, after the hard slog of working your way up and waiting your turn, some people will still find it problematic to accept you as a professional. Will still raise a hoop and regard you with an expectant stare.

They think I should prove myself to them by trashing Michael Vick? No.

I could not prove half as much in honoring that request as they prove in making it.


He hit the topic on target! Not to mention that even sports figures, esp. black ones, in legal trouble are entitled to due process and are considered innocent until proven guilty.

http://www.civilrights.org/publications/reports/cj/

From the executive summary: Today, our criminal justice system strays far from this ideal. Unequal treatment of minorities characterizes every stage of the process. Black and Hispanic Americans, and other minority groups as well, are victimized by disproportionate targeting and unfair treatment by police and other front-line law enforcement officials; by racially skewed charging and plea bargaining decisions of prosecutors; by discriminatory sentencing practices; and by the failure of judges, elected officials and other criminal justice policy makers to redress the inequities that become more glaring every day.

Racial disparities affect both innocent and guilty minority citizens. There is obvious reason to be outraged by the fact that innocent minority citizens are detained by the police on the street and in their cars far more than whites. Those stops involve inconvenience, humiliation and a loss of privacy that is heightened when the rationale for the police action is the color of a motorist’s skin or a pedestrian’s accent. But there must also be outrage about the disparate treatment of minority citizens who have violated the law. A defendant surrenders many civil rights upon conviction, but equal protection of the laws is not one of them. It is an affront to all minority citizens – including the innocent – when a minority defendant is treated unfairly by the police, or by prosecutors, or at sentencing, because of his race or ethnicity.


The report is very comprehensive covering topics including police conduct, prosecutorial discretion, and race and juvenile justice. This is excellent reference material.

http://www.alternet.org/rights/146550/study_settles_it:_shocking_black_&

Study Settles It: Shocking Black & Latino Imprisonment Rates the Result of Racist, Punitive Impulse

From the article: For decades, journalists, scholars and activists seeking to understand the soaring number of people locked up in U.S. prisons over the past 40 years have uncovered -- or just looked clearly enough to see -- overwhelming evidence of systemic racism at every level of the criminal justice system. Yet, there has been a wide reluctance to name racism as one of the primary factors fueling the prison boom; as sentences have gotten longer and parole granted less often, even the starkest racial statistics -- like the fact that African Americans and Latinos make up 70 percent of the incarcerated population -- have often been treated as an unfortunate byproduct of the war on drugs.

Now, two criminologists have concluded, in a new study investigating public attitudes behind harsh sentencing, that the warehousing of African Americans and other minorities is no accident. Rather, "racial resentments are inextricably entwined in public punitiveness." In other words, racism and the rise of "tough on crime" policies go hand in hand.

James Unnever of the University of South Florida-Sarasota and Francis Cullen of the University of Cincinnati acknowledge the "lengthy roster" of previous studies on race and the U.S. prison system; yet theirs manages to contribute something crucial to the current debate: "… iven the large body of research that documents a substantive association between punitiveness and racial animus," they write, "it is somewhat disconcerting that theories of the mass-incarceration movement do not place race and racism at the center of their explanation for why the United States imprisons so many of its citizens."

When 25% of the total population make up 70% of the prison population, it's glaringly obvious that segment of the population has been deliberately targeted.

http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dcarney/MS.3795.JGIM.Green.Carney.Final.Revised.3-16-07.pdf

"Implicit Bias among Physicians and its Prediction of Thrombolysis Decisions for Black and Whites Patients" Though limited in scope, here's the actual report of medical bias and difference in treating black and white heart patients.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/health/jan-june08/cardiac_01-03.html

Study: Hospital Response Slow in Cardiac-Arrest Cases

Black patients were also more likely to get delayed treatment, although the researchers said that difference was probably due to differences in the types of hospitals where black and white patients were admitted.



http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/92869.php

White Patients More Likely To Receive Opioids In Emergency Department, USA

Over the 13 survey years, the researchers found that

-- 31% of whites received an opioid prescription for pain related visits
-- 23% of blacks received an opioid prescription for pain related visits
-- 24% of Hispanics received an opioid prescription for pain related visits
-- 28% of Asians and other ethnic/racial groups received an opioid prescription for pain related visits

The differences in opioid prescribing were present, consistently, across different kinds of pain, pain severities, for visits in which pain was the first/second/third reason for the visit, as well as two specific painful diagnoses - long-bone fracture and kidney stones. In fact, as pain severity increased the difference in opioid prescribing between whites and non-whites was larger. For example

-- 48% of whites got an opioid prescription for back pain
-- 36% of non-whites got an opioid prescription for back pain

-- 35% of whites got an opioid prescription for headache
-- 24% of non-whites got an opioid prescription for headache

-- 32% of whites got an opioid prescription for abdominal pain
-- 22% of non-whites got an opioid prescription for abdominal pain

-- 40% of whites got an opioid prescription for other pain
-- 28% of non-whites got an opioid prescription for other pain

Even after making statistical adjustments for pain severity, and some other factors, the differentials still remained.

Compared to a white patient,

-- a black patient is 34% less likely to get an opioid prescription
-- a Hispanic patient is 33% less likely to get an opioid prescription
-- an Asian/other patient is 21% less likely to get an opioid prescription

See article http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2008-06-04-amputee_N.htm

From the article: Edna sits on an examining table ready and alert -- she wants answers about the lump in her breast.

For each of the 21 medical students who enter the room, Edna's fears are still to be discovered.

They each see the same 55-year-old woman, each meet with the same brown eyes. They all hear the same Southern twang in her voice and the same tremor of fear when she asks if she could have cancer.

The only difference is that 12 of the students see a dark-skinned version of Edna, and the other nine students see a light-skinned version.

Edna is a computer-animated image projected life-size on the side of a white wall, and she is used in a study monitoring the interactions of medical students with virtual patients. The study, which has three of five authors from UF, found white medical students were less empathetic toward black virtual patients in one-on-one interviews.

"Bias in the real world is translating to the virtual world," said Benjamin Lok, an author of the study.

The existence of racial partiality in the medical field is a problem acknowledged since the 2002 government study "Unequal Treatment."

"We're not claiming that we have found any new bias," said Lok, an assistant professor in UF's Department of Computer and Information Science and Engineering.


Source Note: Jessie Coleman is a writer for the Independent Florida Alligator, the leading news source for the University of Florida. This article was brought to CNN.com by UWIRE, the leading provider of student-generated content. UWIRE aims to identify and promote the brightest young content creators and deliver their work to a larger audience via professional media partners such as CNN.com. Visit UWIRE.com to learn more.





http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/07/09/virtual.patient.bias/index.html

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120985060

A few of the comments (the few that there are) seem to get it right, but you can almost sense the discomfort when they admit that society could have a lot to do with those statistics.

Yes, it's the racism, stupid! :banghead:

The poor whites, also known by various epithets, do have a lot in common with black people in that they are also oppressed by the powers-that-be (PTB). In their affinity for/with us, they overlook one critical point--they are still white and still get the corresponding rights and privileges. Look at the history of labor and unions. All the poor whites have to do is get properly groomed, get decent clothes, get a degree, get a place in the high-rent zipcode, and their rights are restored and they are no longer looked down upon. Studies have shown that a black male with a college education and white male with a criminal record have equal chances at an interview. For them to claim that all things are equal is a farce.

Chris Rock said in his routine, an old white bum wouldn't trade places with me, and I'm rich!

Regardless of how expensive my wardrobe is, I'm black.
Regardless of how advanced my education and degrees, I'm black.
Regardless of how many awards on my wall, I'm black.
Regardless of my address, I'm black.
Don't think so? Remember--black people loot, white people find.

Where they tried to get Yaphet Kotto a cab in NY, in vain. Cabbies routinely passed him by to pick up a convicted white felon.

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/deathpenalty/dayone/dpdayone1.html

On average, the likelyhood of the prosecution seeking the death penalty increased if the murder victim was white. You can read the comments at the end.

In the various outdoor and knife mail-order catalogs I get, there's usually some WWII German items. On that page, there's a disclaimer that says, "This firm holds no sympathetic regard toward Nazis, fascists, or other neo-political parties, past or present. These products are designed for historical purposes only."

They also sell Confederate items, like belt buckles, watches, pen knives, even flags to name a few, but there's no disclaimer saying that this firm holds no sympathetic regard toward white supremacists, skinheads, KKK, historical revisionists, and other racist organizations. For historical purposes only.

From the article:

The story of the Jena 6 highlights the problems facing black youth across the nation in the criminal justice system. A system initially designed to help turn young people from a life of crime to productivity consistently has failed many young blacks. Instead it is designed to punish them rather than help them.

That is the conclusion of experts and studies done on the problems that black youth face within the criminal justice system.

The Department of Justice's Office of Justice Programs released a report, "Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report" which analyzed the problems that black youth in the criminal justice system face.

Among its findings were:

*In 2002, blacks were 16 percent of the juvenile population but 29 percent of the delinquency caseload;

* While white youth accounted for the largest number of delinquency cases, they were the least likely to be detained. For instance, whites made up 71 percent of those arrested but only 39 percent of those placed in custody. Blacks made up 29 percent of those arrested but made up 38 percent of those in custody.

*The 2003 black custody rate was highest for black youth, with 754 per 100,000 as opposed to rates for Asians (113), white (190), Latino (348) and Native American (496).

The findings are complemented by a study, "Cradle to Prison Pipeline" conducted by the District-based Children's Defense Fund. The study said that black juveniles are about four times as likely as their white peers to be incarcerated and that blacks are five times as likely to be incarcerated as white youth for drug offenses.



http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=38421133be17fbeae318a0c8a2d54c67

and i have two. in fairness, she does have a vast amount of experience in non-profit management and finance, and honestly i don't...fair enough. she is a knowledgeable person, she respects my knowledge...so we work fine.

however, i don't think a black person without a degree would have ever been considered for the position.

and then there's her boss...the CFO. this guy knows nothing about accounting, finance or IT, all the departments he oversees, yet he supposedly runs them. and how does he do that, you might be asking, well, he does it in the only way he knows how, like an amatuer.
our accounting system is a complete diaster, and every accountant who sets foot in here tells him that, but he refuses to change because it is the only accounting system he understands...because: he's not an accountant.

likewise, the IT department is in the dark ages: some people are still using Eudora, for pete's sake, and he is barely computer literate.

and the kicker: this guy retired from his main career already.
so...he is here, earning six figures, and HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT HE'S DOING. of course, he is white, of course he is privileged, and of course very few people see what is wrong with this picture...it's business as usual.

here we have a man who doesn't need the money, taking a huge salary (by this organization's standards), who hasn't the slightest clue how things he is "in charge of" are supposed to work for the good of the organization, he just knows how they work to suit him. here is a guy who can write a $50,000.00 check to cover payroll, but who only approved a $2,000.00 raise for me after i completed a $500k billing project that had not been done in 4 years. and of course, other people were paid to not do that project. they routinely hire consultants who don't do the work they contracted for, then of course he gives them great references. great.

this guy has cost the organization hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines, overbilling, overpayments, bad leasing deals, and just sheer incompetence...and i am not embellishing just to prove my point. it really truly is as ridiculous as i describe.

this guy is wealthy, so he has no sense of fiscal restraint. he allows departments heads to spend money like water, then we have trouble meeting payroll. he double-bills our funders, and he grossly over-inflates revenue and the board continues to let him do it. it's all a big game to him...but this is our livelihood. it's ALL so sickening.

the only saving grace in this situation is that my supervisor is way cool, and she gets it too, and the other bloated incompetent, the CEO is departing soon. We hope the new CEO will come in and make some heads roll...starting with the CFO.

this is my current nightmare.

she's the white, young (just turned 30) un-degreed supervisor of 4 black females (all older, but not by much) in the accounting section in her company. She had said that she had conflicts with her co-workers, but that fact had not been mentioned. (Her best friend told me later about her lack of college diploma). I don't know the educational level of her reports. I was thinking to myself that if the situation does not improve, she may have to consider leaving. You can't beat respect into anyone.

I found that she has been fired. I don't know all of the gory details. :(

i was initially hired as a contractor, which was fine with me. after much foot-dragging, the incompetent CFO hired me after about 9 months. i was diagnosed with breast cancer in Nov07 (i am fine now), and needed to take some time off. because i'd only been officially employed there for a few months, i had no sick time. i needed time off for surgery, and possibly treatment. my coworkers kindly donated a week of pto for me to recover from the surgery.
after i got my results, i did radiation and continued to work through most of it to complete some projects and prepare for two months on disability.

as it turned out, because i hadn't officially worked there for six months, the HR department told me i did not qualify for FMLA, and i would have to pay my health insurance premiums, this while on disability at 60% of my regular salary. that was the last straw. i politely informed them that i never should have been hired as a contractor, and if they did not figure out my situation pronto, i would file form ss-8 with the IRS which would force them to hire me retroactively, and face whatever penalties the IRS determined they should pay. needless to say, that got their attention, so they did the right thing.

a week after i got back from leave, the incompetent CFO decided to retire.
we have an interim CFO who is very competent. still, the management is practically lily-white, but at least they are competent.

According to her, my mother's manager from years ago resented the fact that some black people received something that he didn't. My brother and I are Georgia Tech graduates, as well as the above mentioned manager. During our freshmen summer, we qualified for the Challenge program, a 6-week introduction to college life for minority students. This was started because more than half of minority students didn't return for their sophomore year, as opposed to roughly one-quarter of white students. The manager absolutely resented that fact because he received no academic help during his college years. Six weeks out of four years, and the work has to be done to stay in and graduate.

Another is that my father (another "undeserving black man" according to the caste system) worked for IBM for many years. The above-mentioned gentleman and his brother-in-law had applied and could not get hired permanently by IBM. Those facts also annoyed him greatly. Again, the fact that someone black got something that he didn't caused his WASP hackles to rise. My mother actually secretly enjoyed his chagrin. For all of his qualifications and other accomplishments, the fact that "those people" got something he didn't seemed to gnaw at him.

The fact that he could be so angry and resentful in light of actual and historical facts of US history goes back to a basic fact of a racial caste system--the sense or right of entitlement. One of the unspoken beliefs held by too many, even too many on the left/liberal/progressive side of politics. It's not that being white makes one worthy, but being black (or not white) makes one unworthy. The upper caste is automatically "qualified" for any and every position. Members of the lower caste can't possibly be qualified and should just be pushed aside, regardless of actual qualifications.

The leading Democratic Party candidates are Clinton, Obama, Edwards. Note that the first two have to temper their messages else alienate a large percentage of the base. Senator Clinton can't talk TOO much about women's issues, else be accused of "pandering" or some such bogus bogusness. Senator Obama can't talk TOO much about black peoples' issues, or be accused of the same thing. But the only one that can talk about everybody's issues and not be accused of "pandering" is--guess who--the white male candidate, Senator Edwards. :crazy:

no one can attack obama because he is black. then they commence to attack. they also used the can't attack hillary because everyone will say you're sexist. they are ripping hillary a new one-sexism and all. but don't worry the nat'l enquirer says edwards has a campaign worker knocked up. i loooove politics!!!!!!!

another BS term coined by white people. It's not is he "black enough", it's pretty obvious. It's is he "too black", i.e., will he talk about issues that affect black people and not talk around those issues? That would scare and piss off a lot of white people, like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton in their presidential campaigns.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90483754
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/05/13/ST2008051301359.html?sid=ST2008051301359 (article)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/13/DI2008051301357.html (on-line discussion)

and other glaring examples of how far this country has not advanced. This was on NPR just yesterday. You can listen to the article and read the Post article for yourself. The Obama campaign is downplaying these to avoid race. Newsflash--race has ALWAYS been an issue, and not talking about it won't make it go away or magically change the attitudes of white people. Like a pest problem in one's house, ignoring it doesn't solve the problem.

The signs of segregation came down off of America's walls, not off of America's heart.

Here's the link: http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-obama-race

According to the survey, 40 percent of all white Americans hold at least a partly negative view toward blacks, and that includes many Democrats and independents. This is hardly late-breaking news, as the terms "Bradley/Wilder effect" or "voting booth conversion" have entered the lexicon. What I found a surprise was the continued ignorance, candor, and vitriol against Obama and black people in general in the 21st Century. That poll could have easily been from 50 years ago and there'd be little difference. As other posters have said out loud, if Obama were white, there wouldn't be a contest.

RETARDED:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x7319564

Please be sure to read the OP to which he refers in his complaint first.

ARTICULATE:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=2584921

Fortunately, that doesn't happen often. Most of the time it seems, in my experience, that it's often asked by an older white person. I was asked that a couple of days ago leaving the MARTA train station by an old white woman. I wasn't wearing a uniform with logo or anything that would lead anyone to believe that I worked for the mass transit company. She saw my work ID and apologized and walked past. I was thinking, This is the 21st Century and they STILL see black people (or most non-whites) as servants. :wtf:

More leftovers from the bad ol' days. Faulkner was right.


OMG, I'm shocked that this hasn't been posted earlier.

http://www.newsday.com/sports/golf/ny-spgolf105532268jan10,0,4034413.story

Under the glare of attention (well done, Reverend Al!) the Golf Channel changed their minds and suspended Kelly Tilghman. This is here because Woods' agent (and by extension Mr. Woods) felt obligated to downplay the incident. The fact that Woods felt the need to downplay this in spite of the fact that that is one of the most offensive things anyone white could EVER say in the direction of ANYONE black. Not to mention that just because Woods downplayed it, doesn't make it any less offensive. To add, in a legal sense, could be considered a terroristic threat or incitement to violence.

Looks like Ms. Tilghman made the mistake of saying OUT LOUD what she really thought. IMO, she's lucky she got suspended; she should've been fired on the spot.

Unfortunately, Mr. Woods does not get to say what he really thinks. Can't have the angry black guy scaring and pissing off the white audience. See Arsenio Hall if you don't think that can't happen.

I guess that means that regardless of what Tiger, or anyone else black, wants to call themselves, to the rest of US white society, you're black.


P.S. I found that this fell so fast in GD that I never saw it.

http://www.eonline.com/news/article/index.jsp?uuid=278f9c5b-e5f3-410d-b349-8cde7a36f88d

Isaiah Washington (Preston Burke on ABC show Grey's Anatomy) had his contract not renewed, i.e. fired, for the remark and subsequent outrage. Kelly Tilghman said a LOT worse, and was only suspended. Reports show that black people receive harsher punishment than white people for similar incidents.

he hasn't figured out he's black and obtuse about race issues. He's in for a rude awakening at some point in time.

And in Thailand, he is hailed as the great Thai golfer. Perhaps his tetra-racial status (1/2 Thai, 1/4 black, 1/8 white, 1/8 Native American) makes race not an easy distinction for him. His mother was native Thai and perhaps he thinks of himself more that way. It's hard to say.

A classic example of a divided city. After all these years this shouldn't surprise or sadden me.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hVvMfgvocE

in the Fortune 1000 listing of major US corporations, there are 5 as of this entry. They are:
Aylwin B. Lewis (Sears Holdings Corporation, #33)
Kenneth Chenault (American Express, #69)
Ronald Williams (Aetna, #91)
Clarence Otis (Darden Restaurants, #409)
John Thompson (Symantec, #672)

That is 1/2 of 1% of the Fortune 1000.

Black Enterprise has a current list of the Top 75, but you have to register with the site to see it. I think there are more than five, from looking at this list.

http://www.blackenterprise.com/lists/listpeopcorp.aspx?sortby=title&sortdir=ASC

You'll notice that one can be part Indian, but there's no mention of tribe/nation (IMO, if you or your direct ancestor aren't from the reservation or can trace the lineage, you aren't part Indian--even if it sounds cool.), part European, part Asian, even part Hispanic, but you can't be part black. Based on the USA's racial caste system and the "one-drop of black blood" rule (which was codified in a lot of state laws) one is or inn't black. There is no option.

If he was just Joe Black Guy, Tiger Woods would run the risk of being discriminated against, just like any other person of color. Sorry, Mr. Woods. :shrug:

that is a true statement, but it shows the glaring effects of the racial caste system and majority's need to eradicate "blackness" in high-achieving individuals. To them, high achievers can't be black or be associated with being black. On the board, there will always be someone that will remind everyone that Obame is "half white". :crazy:

You'll notice that light-skinned black crime suspects aren't called "half white" or "part black". Black people are just as black and racially profiled regardless of skin tone; cops see "white" and "not-white", they don't see "half white"--this ain't Brazil.

esp. for those of confirmed mixed ancestry, like Tiger Woods, Halle Berry, Mariah Carey, and Barack Obama. Notice how they've become "bi-racial" or "multi-racial". Even on the board, there'll be comments about Obama and how he's "bi-racial" and the white half of his ancestry shouldn't be left off.

Without celebrity status, they'd be subject to the same prejudice and ignorance and hurt, just like any other person of color.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2914525#2914807

I HATE THIS PICTURE. The poster is a fabulous old-timer whom I adore but I FUCKING HATE THAT PICTURE. I have a visceral reaction to it and have considered PMing her, hitting ignore till the month is over ANYTHING to get it off my screen. Can someone PLEASE talk me down?

and explained my reaction to the shot and NOW IT'S GONE!!! POOF!!!

I missed the photo in question, but I'm glad you feel better. :hi:

was of 2 babies, one black and one white facing each other, a professionally posed and lit shot. The white blond was recognizable in detail as a cute kid. The black baby was reaching out, touching the white one, but was nothing more than a dark silhouette. No detail, no identity. I finally lost it when I saw a thread on LBN where a Saudi man dressed in white was photographed taking a picture of 5 completely black-shrouded women. You can easily imagine the comments.

I WAS that black child who became nothing more than a dark spot on a professionally photographed shot, wrapped in a chador of lighting that stripped me of any identity, any detail, anything recognizable. A black blob with perfect white teeth. Just as the baby in that photo was nothing more than a shadow. I was a teenie (1st and only black) J.V. cheerleader at Annapolis High and when the picture was printed in the school paper I just wanted to kill myself. I re-lived that humiliation EVERY TIME I saw that photo.

I didn't contact the poster earlier due to my view that is was MY PAIN and MY PROBLEM; she's really a dear. Then I just lost it...

I open my monthly credit union statement, and there is a flyer for mortgage services. On the front is a young (20-something) white couple on the porch holding each other. Okay, no big deal. Opening the flyer, there's a pic of another young white couple unpacking boxes. On another page, there's an older black couple (salt and pepper hair on both is a dead give-away) at a table reading a folder.

I'm sure to most, there wouldn't be any problem, but why aren't there any young black/asian/other couples that appear to be buying/moving/packing/unpacking?

Why is that a problem? The general population doesn't get to see non-whites doing everyday things, thus, non-white doesn't become normal/familiar/the usual/okay. As long as white stays the default norm, then discrimination continues to be okay because not-white remains different/not normal, along with the mental images that creates.

Published in 1999, the study showed substantial discrimination in employment practices aimed at women and racial minorities.

The text is found here at http://www.eeo1.com/press/prfl1999.pdf

by The Sentencing Project. This very recent study shows the racial disparity in the states' justice systems. People of color are being incarcerated well out of proportion to their population percentage. The study has all of the data for the 50 States, and the numbers are troubling. :scared:

http://www.sentencingproject.org/Admin/Documents/publications/rd_stateratesofincbyraceandethnicity.pdf

Two cases: The Tulia, TX drug sting and the Duke Lacrosse team scandal. Both incidents of an justice system run amok.

Tulia, TX: 46 people, of which 40 were black, were convicted and sent to prison based on phony/false testimony by a single rogue (white) investigator.
Result: All were eventually released and a $5M settlement was paid. The investigator was fired, fined, but not jailed. No public officials suffered any official punishment or censure.

Duke Lacrosse team: Three (white) team members were accused of rape by a stripper hired for a party. Durham Co. District Attorney Mike Nifong pressed for trials in spite of weak and false evidence.
Result: DA Nifong was fired, disbarred, and actually jailed (24 hours) for official misconduct and criminal contempt.

One can see the relative value of the accused in a racial caste society.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/23/AR2008032301417_pf.html

Excerpt from the article: Social psychologists Philip Mazzocco and Mahzarin Banaji once asked white volunteers how much money would cover the "costs" of being born black instead of white. The volunteers guessed that about $5,000 ought to cover the lifetime disadvantages of being an average black person rather than an average white person, in the United States. By contrast, when asked how much they wanted to go without television, the volunteers demanded a million dollars.

Mazzocco and Banaji were taken aback: The average black person in America is 447 percent more likely to be imprisoned than the average white person, and 521 percent more likely to be murdered. Blacks earn 60 cents to the dollar compared with whites who have the same education levels and marital status. The black poverty rate is nearly twice the white poverty rate. Blacks tend to die five years earlier than whites; the infant mortality rate among black babies is nearly 1 1/2 times the rate among white babies. And because of long-standing patterns of inheritance, blacks and whites begin life with substantial disparities in family wealth.

"The point we were making is, whatever the cost of being black might be, whites are vastly underestimating it," said Mazzocco, of Ohio State University at Mansfield. "You throw in the 5-to-1 wealth gap . . . if you wanted to put a dollar-and-cents value on the difference, you would come up with a number much larger than $5,000."

The unusual experiment is one of dozens that have found that whites tend to have a relatively rosy impression of what it means to be a black person in America. Whites are more than twice as likely as blacks to believe that the position of African Americans has improved a great deal. Blacks are more than twice as likely as whites to believe that conditions for African Americans are growing worse.

This follows the same reasoning Tim Wise found in his article "Why Whites Think That Blacks Have No Problems" www.alternet.org/story/11192. This goes back to the basic premise that racism, to white people, is a personal problem at the individual level, not a social problem. Most have no concept of the systemic and institution racism that actually exists, regardless of the reports and studies. Add to that the mythos of the USA as land of opportunity for all and the ignorance of history, and that leads to the incredible ignorance and delusion most white people have about race.

Thanks for that. Very enlightening.

I would guess that a white person, in imagining themselves black, carries along in their minds the sense of privilege and entitlement they have as a white. They must imagine themselves with a black skin, but retaining white privilege. They would be a "good black" then, I suppose, and couldn't imagine themselves being vulnerable to any of the challenges that blacks face. Amazing, isn't it? $5.000??? To say that whites are vastly underestimating "the cost of being black" is itself an understatement. Think about what that says about the lack of understanding about racism.

Thanks again for your great work here, Lurking_Argyle. Much appreciated.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122609614

Noted in the article, we are far from post-racial. The governor noted, quite aptly, that there won't be a photo op for all 3 any time soon.

This entry is to note that the teaching of the history of minority groups in America, black people in particular, is sorely lacking. When the interviewer talks to the high school students, the awkwardness of the white students in talking about race and the stereotypes of black people are still present. The present one is that is that black college applicants have a better shot of getting into the college of their choice than white college applicants. Not only is that ancedotal, and clearly untrue when the numbers are crunched. To note, the major flagship state universities undergrad classes are at least 90% white, black undergrads average 4-7% of the total. It goes back to the premise that "whites think that blacks have no problems", esp. that there is now a black president.

Topics covered include: Appearance of Trustworthiness, Likelihood of Friendship, Treatment Based on Race.


http://www.zogby.com/gsn/GSNReport.pdf

Joshua Solomon, a white student at the University of Maryland, darkened his skin to recreate John Howard Griffin's sojourn as a black man in segregated America in the late 1950's. Solomon, like too many other whites, think that racism is a thing of the past and/or an excuse too often used. He gets slammed with the clue-by-four harder and more often than he's ever known and can't take the pain anymore. He returns home after 2 days as a black man.

www.mdcbowen.org/p2/rm/white/solomon.html

Writer's Note: Black Like Me by John Howard Griffin was a best seller. Black authors had been writing about the black experience for decades, but a white man does the same thing, and NOW it's a big deal. :eyes:

best known for the black power salute on the medal stand. They were expelled from the US Olympic Team for their display--and that was the least of their worries. The stress and pressure put on their families was incredible, and would never have been done to a white athlete. Because of the pressure and hate mail and death threats, Carlos got divorced, Smith's brothers were kicked off of their high school football team and his brother in Oregon lost his scholarship. Smith's mother died of a heart attack due to the hate mail sent to her. Another example of white America's intolerance of black people standing up for and telling the truth about itself.


http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1020-28.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/17/newsid_3535000/3535348.stm

In the case of Zimbabwe (and other places where whites are the numerical and now political minorities), white people scream about the "rule of law" if white farmers are kicked off of their land. Note that no one has anything to say about history where the colonizing powers kicked the original inhabitants off the land are arbitrarily drew/re-drew borders without regard to natural or tribal boundaries.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88708253

From the article: One night, Noone was painting her fingernails when her great-grandmother said, "You know, there was a time we couldn't wear no fingernail polish."

To explain, Powell told a story from when she was a girl. Around 1910, Powell lived on a plantation in Lowndes County, Ala., where "she would wash and iron for this white woman."

"One day the lady had thrown away some of her old perfume and nail polish that had dried up. So took it home and added some ingredients to the nail polish that made it pliable," Noone says. "Well, when Sunday came, she got all dressed up and painted her nails and put on that perfume and went to church.

"On Monday, she went to the general store, and when she was ready to check out, the white owner asked her, 'What are you doing with your nails painted up like a white woman?' He proceeded to pick up a pair of pliers and he pulled out my grandmama's nails out of its bed one by one."

Noone, 65, says she often wondered as a child why her great-grandmother's nails were so deformed.

"Every time I look at enamel red finger polish, I have a flashback, and I see red," Noone says. "I still have that anger inside of me that someone would have that control over one person just because they wanted to feel like a woman."


Writer's Note: Because of the racial caste system that has been in place for centuries, whites not only have an unearned sense of power, but also control. Even in the 21st Century. I have friends that have a band (5 guys, 2 black, 3 white), and earlier this month, they played a festival in Tennessee, roughly 35 miles NW of Chattanooga. Severe boonies, where most people of color would fear for their safety (me, too!) even in the present. The story continues--after threading their way along the mountain road, they stopped at a gas station to take a break. The clerk, an older white woman, was outside near the door smoking. The van and the car park and 2 of band members, both black, step out of the van. The clerk got a shocked look on her face, dropped the cigarette, ran inside and put up the CLOSED sign. Now, the rest of the entourage is white (the remaining band members, 2 wives, and the manager) but that obviously didn't matter. There's no doubt if the first people seen by the clerk out of the van or cars were white, there'd be no problem. A white person would NEVER disrespect another white person, esp. in the presence of black people. If nothing else, just to show who runs the place and who doesn't.

and it distressed me for the rest of the day.

Even disasters and those involved are subject to bias. One can see the incredible and obvious differences in public opinion and sympathy in the follow examples: Hurricane Katrina disaster, Southern California wildfires, and blizzards in the Great Plains states.

Remember the coverage during Katrina. Gunshots, murder, rape, bodies piled up. All later proven false, but the racial caste system is so pervasive that the press and the majority population had no problem accepting unsubstantiated rumor as fact because THOSE PEOPLE ARE LIKE THAT! One can search for coverage of the other disasters and see the difference in coverage.

Black people loot, white people find.

takes on this ugly double standard. From the article: And on the other hand, there's Rush Limbaugh, who has decided to use the flooding in Iowa not to demonstrate compassion, but as an opportunity to make derogatory statements about poor black folks: specifically those caught by the flooding in New Orleans after Katrina in 2005.

This week, as Iowans and some in Illinois watched flood waters rise ever higher, Limbaugh took to the air to contrast these supposedly good and decent people who have joined forces to help each other, with the presumably evil, lazy and violent folks of New Orleans, who we are told, did nothing but foment criminality and wait for the government to save them during flooding there in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

Thus, we have his statement of a few days ago, in which he noted that in the midst of the devastation in the Midwest:

"I see people working together. I see people trying to save their property...I don't see a bunch of people running around waving guns at helicopters. I don't see a bunch of people running shooting cops. I don't see a bunch of people raping people on the street...I see the heartland of America. When I look at Iowa and when I look at Illinois, I see the backbone of America."

Sadly, it isn't only Limbaugh who has been making those comparisons. Millions of us have also been subjected to the e-blast missives making the rounds, which seek to contrast the law-abiding, God-fearing, and (let us not forget) mostly white farming folks of the Midwest to the black, urban, and congenitally defective folks of the Big Easy. If you haven't received something like this from a friend, relative or co-worker yet, just wait, because you probably will soon.


http://www.counterpunch.org/wise06212008.html

usually by white people that whine about "political correctness", which often boils down to "why can't I call those people n***** like I could years ago?" The latest cry of "double standard" is that approximately 90% of black voters voted for Senator Obama. Why is that so bad? Up to and including the present day, black people have had only white candidates as voting choices. White people didn't have a problem with that.

The whines of "double standard" ring rather hollow when the facts are shown in their gory detail. Recent reports and surveys have shown that in most categories across the board, incl. social, economic, governmental, and judicial, people of color suffer regular discrimination. Notice there are no cries of "double standard" by white people regarding those conditions.

http://www.princeton.edu/~pager/ajs_quillian&pager.pdf

The report titled Black Neighbors, Higher Crime? The Role of Racial Stereotypes in Evaluations of Neighborhood Crime by Lincoln Quillian and Devah Pager of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. One of the things I got out of report is the banality of the white-favored social racial caste system. Legal segregation had been in place for decades, keeping the races separate. When it became illegal, most white people would never live in a neighborhood with a significant percentage of non-whites. They could cite reason after reason without having to say what they REALLY meant: We don't want black neighbors.

For most white people, diversity is fine, as long as it doesn't move next door or into the neighborhood.

From the article:

As Sen. Barack Obama opens his campaign as the first African American on a major party presidential ticket, nearly half of all Americans say race relations in the country are in bad shape and three in 10 acknowledge feelings of racial prejudice, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Lingering racial bias affects the public's assessments of the Democrat from Illinois, but offsetting advantages and Sen. John McCain's age could be bigger factors in determining the next occupant of the White House.

Overall, 51 percent call the current state of race relations "excellent" or "good," about the same as said so five years ago. That is a relative thaw from more negative ratings in the 1990s, but the gap between whites and blacks on the issue is now the widest it has been in polls dating to early 1992.

More than six in 10 African Americans now rate race relations as "not so good" or "poor," while 53 percent of whites hold more positive views. Opinions are also divided along racial lines, though less so, on whether blacks face discrimination. There is more similarity on feelings of personal racial prejudice: Thirty percent of whites and 34 percent of blacks admit such sentiments.

(break)

The poll was conducted by telephone June 12 through June 15 among a national random sample of 1,125 adults. The results from the full poll have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points. The error margin is larger for subgroups; it is four points among whites and seven points among African Americans.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/21/AR2008062101825.html?wpisrc=newsletter

From the article:

Sen. Barack Obama's historic victory in the Democratic primaries, celebrated in America and across much of the world as a symbol of racial progress and cultural unity, has also sparked an increase in racist and white supremacist activity, mainly on the Internet, according to leaders of hate groups and the organizations that track them.

Neo-Nazi, skinhead and segregationist groups have reported gains in numbers of visitors to their Web sites and in membership since the senator from Illinois secured the Democratic nomination June 3. His success has aroused a community of racists, experts said, concerned by the possibility of the country's first black president.

"I haven't seen this much anger in a long, long time," said Billy Roper, a 36-year-old who runs a group called White Revolution in Russellville, Ark. "Nothing has awakened normally complacent white Americans more than the prospect of America having an overtly nonwhite president."

Such groups have historically inflated their influence for self-promotion and as an intimidation technique, and they refused to provide exact membership numbers or open their meetings to a reporter. Leaders acknowledged that their numbers remain very small -- "the flat-globe society still has more people than us," Roper said. But experts said their claims reveal more than hyperbole this time.





http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/21/AR2008062101471.html?sid=ST2008062200049

You note that there are very few senior state and no federal level elected black republicans. The last federal level one was J.C. Watts, Jr., Member of the House of Representatives from Oklahoma, who served from 1994 until 2003; he chose not to run for re-election in 2002. He didn't run "to spend more time with his family", which tends to be republican-speak for being forced out. He has complained of ill-treatment by his republican colleagues in some post-Congress articles.

The republican "southern strategy" and its variants, which is dependent on blaming black people for all the country's problems for political gain, can't function if they recognize the humanity of the people they denigrate and marginalize.

From the article: Residents of a mostly black neighborhood in rural Ohio were awarded nearly $11 million Thursday by a federal jury that found local authorities denied them public water service for decades out of racial discrimination.

Each of the 67 plaintiffs was awarded $15,000 to $300,000, depending on how long they had lived in the Coal Run neighborhood, about 5 miles east of Zanesville in Muskingum County in east-central Ohio.

The money covers both monetary losses and the residents' pain and suffering between 1956, when water lines were first laid in the area, and 2003, when Coal Run got public water.

The lawsuit was filed in 2003 after the Ohio Civil Rights Commission concluded the residents were victims of discrimination. The city, county and East Muskingum Water Authority all denied it and noted that many residents in the lightly populated county don't have public water.

Coal Run residents either paid to have wells dug, hauled water for cisterns or collected rain water so they could drink, cook and bathe.

"As a child, I thought it was normal because everyone done it in my neighborhood," said one of the plaintiffs, Cynthia Hale Hairston, 47. "But I realized as an adult it was wrong."


Writer's Note: That's 47 years for the area to get running water, considered a basic necessity and right, denied those whose only fault was having the wrong skin color.






http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/11/civil.rights.water.ap/index.html

From the article: More than a year ago, an unidentified woman's body was found on a road, her dark hair shorn off, a plastic bag taped around her head, her hands severed. She had been strangled and tossed away by her killer.

Today, the crime remains unsolved, the murder victim's name is still unknown and efforts to bury her have set off controversy in Waller County -- a rural area just west of Houston that is long roiled by racial divisions.

The victim is white, while the funeral home and cemetery that a justice of the peace initially chose to handle her burial in Hempstead are historically black.

But Waller County Commissioners Court balked at paying for that burial. When activists started raising questions about the county's hesitation at burying the woman in a black cemetery, the commissioners asked a white-owned funeral home in Waller to handle arrangements.

That outraged Walter Pendleton, a local black minister who filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Hempstead that forced it to integrate its public cemeteries.

"I'm just appalled right now. I can't believe this county stooped that low," he said. "The county overstepped its boundary to get a white funeral home to pick up the body so that it could not be buried in a black cemetery."

The victim would be the first known white person buried in a black cemetery in Waller County. Since March 25, Waller County has paid neighboring Harris County $50 a day to store the body.

"I have never seen such defiance and determination to protect a segregated system," said DeWayne Charleston, the Waller County justice of the peace who first ordered the black funeral home to handle the arrangements.

Judge Owen Ralston, the county's top elected official, denied that racial issues were at play. "I didn't know if the victim was black or white, and I didn't care," Ralston said.







http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/02/burial.dispute.ap/index.html

From the article: The American Medical Association, the nation's largest organization of physicians, apologized Thursday for its history of discriminatory policies toward African-American physicians, including those that effectively restricted membership to whites.

"We are apologizing for policies and practices that we had that ... are offensive to AMA leaders today," the organization's immediate past president, Dr. Ronald M. Davis, told CNN. "Our major goal in this matter is to confront the past to build a better future."

For a long portion of the organization's history, the AMA required that its members belong to a state or local medical society, groups that in some states did not allow African-Americans as members, Davis said.

"AMA declined to take actions against those societies," he said, and "few African-Americans ... were able to become members of AMA for that reason."




http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/07/10/ama.racism/index.html

or "why you're sitting next to a white kid to learn."

After listening to the interview with Joseph C. Phillips (a RW lawn jockey) on being black in America, I had to note where Mr. Phillips was wrong, which was often, but this one stuck out like a sore thumb. He said, "...that you don't have to sit next to white kids to do well in school." That's accurate, but not totally true.

Brown vs. Board of Education didn't automatically make a racist society wake up enlightened and say that all money and resources for schools will be distributed evenly and we'll fix neglected schools and make everyone equal. There has been progress, but it's still in progress. Mr. Phillips makes the standard line that black parents want their children going to integrated schools, or "sitting next to white children" because it will make black children smart. Not so--those parents want their children "sitting next to white children" because that is where the money and resources will go. Past history has shown that money will not be spent on majority-black schools, but on majority-white schools. This was the basis of the Brown vs. Board of Education argument. The assumption is that the county school board will not sacrifice white children for a few black children. They may grumble that "those kids" are benefiting along with their white counterparts, but they'll spend the money. One point where Mr. Phillips is correct--on a even learning field, differences between races disappears.

One of the few very times that G.W. Bush* was correct was his statement of "We are challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations" in regards to education. In a racial caste system, the upper caste members are driven toward success, while the lower caste members are expected to fail--low expectations. When there's low expectations, there's no incentive to give money for improvement because "those people" can't improve anyway. The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference.

As various writers have noted, politicians (esp. GOP types) will scream bloody murder over money for social programs that will help children, esp. minority children, stay in school or do better in school and be ready for college. They won't think twice about spending factors MORE money for prisons. It's a lot cheaper to spend, say, an extra $3500 per child per year for a school program that can prevent said child from becoming a ward of the state as a $60,000 per year prisoner. When there's a demographic group that is EXPECTED to fill prisons, and prisons and corrections are a huge business, there's no incentive to change. Greed overrides common sense. Multiple studies have shown that on an even learning field, properly funded, there are no differences in learning between children of different races.

where would we get the new slave labor?

Obviously I'm being facetious but I think that's an apt description of the rather disgusting attitude of those types.

From the article: Tillman is one of at least 24 African-American men that the People's Law Office in Chicago claims are still serving sentences for crimes they say they confessed to only after enduring hours of torture at the hands of Chicago police officers under Commander Jon Burge between 1972 and 1992. Although 10 of Burge's victims have been pardoned or given new trials after their illegally obtained confessions were exposed, the vast majority of the 100-plus cases have yet to be reviewed by the state of Illinois. Those men have either served out their sentences, died in custody or, like Tillman, continue to live their lives behind bars, hoping that one day they will have a fair trial.

According to Tillman's 1986 trial testimony, when he arrived at the Area 2 police station in the predawn hours of July 21, 1986, Detectives Ronald Boffo and Peter Dignan took him to a second-floor interrogation room and pressed him for information about the murder of 42-year-old Betty Howard, whose body was found the day prior in the apartment building Tillman oversaw. When he told the detectives that he knew nothing about the murder, he says that Boffo and Dignan, along with three other officers, became abusive. Without ever reading him his Miranda rights, he says they handcuffed him to the wall, hit him in the face and punched him in the stomach until he vomited blood. During the course of what appeared to be three days, rotating pairs of officers brought him to the railroad tracks behind the station and held a gun to his head, suffocated him repeatedly with thick plastic bags, poured soda up his nose and forced him into Dumpsters outside of the apartment building, ordering him to search through the rubbish for a murder weapon until, according to Detective John Yucaitis, Tillman confessed to the crime.



http://www.alternet.org/rights/92374/how_scores_of_black_men_were_tortured_into_giving_false_confessions_by_chicago_police/

Writer's Note: I'm compiling evidence to show those ignorant, "oppressed" and "out-numbered" white people, and their lawn jockey friends, that US society has some more distance to go to true racial equality.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127020916

From the article: A one-time Chicago police commander who officials say oversaw the torture of more than 100 black men goes on trial Monday.

The first allegations date back 40 years, but former Chicago police Cmdr. Jon Burge has avoided prosecution until now.

Prosecutors say detectives under his command on the city's South Side tortured suspects until they confessed to crimes they may or may not have committed.


Again, the racial caste system shows its fundamental disrespect and disregard of black people. The outcry from the local black community was simply ignored. White people don't worry because they know that they would never be subjected to such treatment. When you don't have to worry, you don't have to care; when you don't have to care, you don't care. When you don't care, you don't speak out.

From the article: CHICAGO — As a decorated Chicago police lieutenant, Jon Burge prided himself on sending bad guys to prison by getting them to confess to terrible crimes — and by committing terrible crimes himself in the process, prosecutors say.

Now, having been convicted in June of lying about the violent means he and his men used to get confessions, it is Burge's turn to face prison time.

Two men testifying Thursday as Burge's sentencing hearing opened accused Burge of torturing them into confessing to crimes decades ago. They said they still have nightmares about the abuse.

Melvin Jones and Anthony Holmes said they're haunted by memories of being suffocated and electrically shocked by Burge and his men, and then not believed for years.

And both men said their lives and families were changed forever by the abuse and their wrongful convictions.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41169778/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts

http://www.suntimes.com/news/3425666-417/burge-lefkow-torture-police-attorney.html

He was convicted of perjury, the statute of limitations had run out on the more serious accusations. It's sad that he gets a light sentence for the pain that he has caused. Considering how bad cops are allowed to run rampant and most won't even get indicted, esp. if the victims are people of color, much less convicted. This will cause the city and police force to review their policies, so this is a win, albeit a small one.

At my club meeting last night, in which I'm the club VP and meeting MC, I was at the desk with the other club leaders helping to set up for the meeting, and a young lady, that happens to be black, approaches the table. We stand aside to let her pass, and the secretary asks me, "did you invite her?" "No," I answer, without getting to say, "now what would make you say that?"

That, and other like questions imply that all black people know each other. Most white people seem to think that, esp. in a majority-white setting. It seems a rather harmless question, but, not really. It is a question that the white default majority will ask, and feel entitled to do so, because it goes to exclusiveness. As if said not-white person could not have found the place/meeting/event without assistance of another not-white person. However that person acquired the information is immaterial, it is the implication that is maddening. It's another dig that white people get to get away with because it's without intent to harm. Also, it's a question that a white person wouldn't ask another white person.

"No, I do not know that (black) person, do you?"

From the Time Magazine article: ...But a major study to be released in December in The Urban Review journal squarely shows the opposite. Russell Skiba, an associate professor of educational psychology at Indiana University, charted the discipline patterns of 11,000 middle-school students in a major urban district in Indiana, in which black students were more than twice as likely as their white peers to be sent to the principal's office or suspended — and four times as likely to be expelled. When Skiba factored in the financial status of the students and their families, the discipline gap did not budge. But a second finding smacks more overtly of discrimination: while white students were typically reprimanded for behaviors like smoking and vandalism, black students were more often disciplined for nebulous infractions like excessive noise and disrespect. "It's pretty clear that black students are referred for more subjective behaviors," he says. "You can choose not to use the word racism, but districts need to look seriously at why this is going on."

The more closely districts look, the less transparent the diagnoses. Beginning last year, Texas' Austin Independent School District began requiring principals to track discipline data by race to discern if any specific teachers were using a heavier hand with black students. The answer was yes, but the reasons were far from straightforward. Cornel Jones, principal of Austin's Oak Springs Elementary School, does not blame racism but chalks the problem up to "cultural misunderstandings" between his white teachers and the 97%-minority student body. One insidious source of confusion: When a teacher scolds a black or Latino student for a simple matter like talking out of turn, Jones says, that student typically looks away out of respect. Feeling her authority challenged, the teacher may send the student to the office. "It cycles up into a big monster, and then nothing the child can do is right," says Jones.

But when does misunderstanding slip over the line into prejudice? "There are racial misunderstandings, but there is also racial paranoia," says Beverly Cross, an associate professor at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee School of Education. "We see this a lot with black boys who are cute until about the fourth grade, and then teachers start to fear them." Linelle Clark, Austin's dropout-prevention coordinator, sees some evidence of this in her district. She recalls that "one principal noticed a teacher with a pattern of sending the same black kid to the office, and when he called her on it, she said, 'I'm scared of that child.'"


From the Chicago Tribune: In the average New Jersey public school, African-American students are almost 60 times as likely as white students to be expelled for serious disciplinary infractions.

In Minnesota, black students are suspended 6 times as often as whites.

In Iowa, blacks make up just 5 percent of the statewide public school enrollment but account for 22 percent of the students who get suspended.

Fifty years after federal troops escorted nine black students through the doors of an all-white high school in Little Rock, Ark., in a landmark school integration struggle, America's public schools remain as unequal as they have ever been when measured in terms of disciplinary sanctions such as suspensions and expulsions, according to little-noticed data collected by the U.S. Department of Education for the 2004-2005 school year.


Maybe that should be learning in spite of being black.


http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,238611-1,00.html
http://www.chicagotribune.com/services/newspaper/printedition/tuesday/chi-070924discipline,0,5751354.story

http://www.ferris.edu/htmls/news/jimcrow/question/

Above is the link to the Question of the Month section of the Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia. Some links are enlightened, some are not. Those that are not are the usual "why do you talk about race so much?" or "you're a racist because you talk about race!" or "white people participated in the Civil Rights Movement" or the "why are you sleeping with 'the enemy'", etc. You don't need to call Psychic Friends Network to guess who wrote those letters.

The point is to show that as long as racism is only considered one of many shortcomings of ignorant individuals without regard to the institutional structure of the racial caste system that absolves responsibility and accountability, US society will go nowhere. :(

IRT the general personals sites, like match.com or yahoo.com. The majority of the posters are white, and they generally outnumber non-white at least 3 to 1. The US population percentages are white 70%, black 12.5%, Hispanic 12.5%, Asian/Pacific Islander 4%, North American Indian/native 1%. The vast majority of majority seekers are looking for those in their own demographic group, but there is a sizable percentage that are ABB, anybody but black. Why? The chances of meeting an Asian or American Indian are rather slim. Having lived in the barrio for a few years, most Hispanic guys I've seen don't look like Ricky Martin or Antonio Banderas.

In a racial caste system, members of the lowest caste are deemed unworthy regardless of economic status. Add to that the pressure that would be put upon the white young lady crossing THAT color line. Apologies to Malcolm X--what do you call a black man in a 3-piece suit, with a Ph.D and a corner office? A n--"

from Time Magazine http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1963768,00.html and related thread on this topic was very telling. To simply say that one's preferences are "just the way it is" without consideration of this country's poorly-told and mostly-forgotten history of race and race relations is grand ignorance at best, and intellectual dishonestly at worst.

As one poster so elegantly put it, "It saddens me to see so many people who prefer to defend their stereotypes rather than do some self-questioning."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7708260#7709832

Join the club!

I passed on that one. So much of the same garbage dumped, so many of the same lame excuses. It was like nothing changed. Any question of "post-racial" was answered.

From the article: A federal judge yesterday tentatively approved a historic agreement requiring the Department of Agriculture to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to black farmers who say they were denied government loans and other assistance because of their race.

The agreement settles a class action lawsuit filed in 1997 by more than 1,000 black farmers and marks the first time that the government has agreed to compensate them as a group for racial bias that has been documented by various federal officials for years. Discrimination by USDA officials has been cited by civil rights advocates and others as a major reason why the ranks of black farmers have dwindled at three times the rate of white farmers. Blacks now account for less than 1 percent of the nation's farmers.

The deal is one of the largest racial discrimination settlements in federal history and puts to rest an issue that has long been a major embarrassment for the Agriculture Department. The vast agency is derisively referred to as the "last plantation" by many black farmers and by many of the department's own minority employees who see it as a bastion of racial prejudice.

In the end, the agreement could cost the federal government $400 million or more, depending on the number of farmers who step forward with claims. Plaintiff attorneys said that as many as 4,000 claimants roughly one in four of the nation's black farmers could end up taking part in the deal, although USDA officials dispute that figure.



http://www.fs.fed.us/people/aasg/correspondence/wp_farmers.html
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B01E4DC143EF936A35752C0A96F958260

The fact that white intellectual lightweights like George W. Bush* and Sarah Palin are graphic examples of this. Bush* became president and Palin was candidate for VP shows this to be more than anecdotal. Freepers and other Bush* supporters say that "I'd like to have a beer with him. He's not much different than me." Sarah Palin "brings energy to the campaign" and "I agree with her values" while, like most freeper ilk, hardly live up to those "values". :eyes:

These are but two examples of acceptance and denial of white mediocrity by white people. Notice that both aren't ever described as smart, intellectual, or intelligent, while people of color have to work twice as hard to be considered half as good. Questions of their qualifications are quickly swept away, while qualifications of people of color are regularly questioned.

Looks to me that being white is more important than being qualified.

looking at the credentials of the "skinny black kid with the funny name", one can see that they're impressive--which is the point. Anyone that isn't white has to be twice as good to get half the respect. The double standard is still very much present.

:woohoo:

as a lot of white people are breaking arms and backs patting to congratulate themselves. What a lot want to say, and have said, that black people are now equal, so quitchurwhining! You got a black President!

Nothing has changed, much.

Black people are still being incarcerated at disproporationate levels and uneven sentences. Black people are still discriminated against in the areas of employment, services, housing, loans and banking, etc., regardless of income level. Oprah didn't have her face on in Paris and was poorly treated at Hermes. White people were beside themselves angry blaming Oprah for suffering discrimination and not keeping quiet.

The exception is not the rule.

of comitting crimes (i.e. the term black on black crime), not supporting their own people/culture (i.e term black homophobia), so much more so than ANY other culture that terms/phrases are created by the media to address these issues.

There are no phrases for white on white crime, brown on brown crime, yellow on yellow crime, etc.--why is that?
Also no phrases representative for other cultural groups being homophobic (i.e. white homophobia, asian homophobia, greek homophobia, etc.)

The availability of these terms allows people to fall into the convenient trap of believing that these issues are more prevalent among blacks than in other cultural groups. I see it all over the board, everytime certain issues are presented through a particular news item. Many can't wait to show how "informed" they are, by trotting out "statistics" that show how much "more likely" this group is to do....whatever the news is sharing 'blacks' did.


A bit off topic, but in support of what I've said above:
I've noticed that most "polls" are only specific to certain minority groups--groups that the powers that be have a vested interest in "controlling." For example, I routinely encounter incredibly sexist, gender biased "studies" on msn. Similar studies about blacks being less intelligent, and more athletically inclined than other groups.

It would be really nice to visit this board, and not see aspects of my identity slurred so frequently. One day it's women, another day it's people of color. (sigh) I believe these behaviors would die, if so many weren't so eager to buy into biased reports and studies. Of course w/out the studies, there's always the ever helpful fellow who "just talked to their friend"...(guess the friend's ethnicity?) :eyes:

Kanye West was right, repubs really don't like black people, found here at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/29/AR2006012900642.html

Rather than enter excerpts from the article, readers can draw their own conclusions. :think:

esp. Sharpton, Jackson, and their latest target, Wright. A review of the "Best of" threads will show quite a few. You'll note that white preachers, even the severe RW'ers, aren't subject to the regular spew of hate and vitriol reserved for black preachers, esp. those that call out racist US society and remind it of its regular and frequent failures to live up to its treasured ideals.

In my experience, most white people term neighborhoods as "nice", i.e. majority white, and "rough", i.e. majority non-white. This seems to be regardless of relative perceived income of said area, unless the area is in obvious disrepair. Black people seem to term neighborhoods as majority white or majority non-white. Terms for "good" and "rough" neighborhoods refer to the visual state of the area rather than the race of those who live there.

From the article: A New York Civil Liberties Union analysis of recently released New York Police Department data about police stops and frisks of New Yorkers reveals the black community in New York continues to be the target of improper stops and frisks by police officers.

That analysis, some of which was presented in an op-chart published in yesterday’s New York Times, comes the week before the anniversary of the Sean Bell shooting and on the eve of the expected release of a RAND Corporation report commissioned by the NYPD to examine its stop-and-frisk practices.

The NYCLU analysis looks at stop-and-frisk activity from January 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007, during which time police officers reported 867,617 stops. Though blacks represent far less of the New York City population than do whites, police stopped 453,042 blacks as compared to only 94,530 whites during the period. Similarly, though only 83,452 whites were stopped without being arrested, police stopped 402,943 blacks without making arrests.

The disparity between whites and blacks is particularly stark when one looks at the number of stops of whites and blacks as a percentage of the city’s white and black populations. Stops of whites, who number about 3.6 million according to recent census estimates, amounted to only 2.6 percent of the white population. By contrast, stops of blacks, who number about 2.2 million people, represented 21.1 percent of the entire black population.


http://www.aclu.org/racialjustice/racialprofiling/33095prs20071126.html

The numbers speak for themselves. :(

From the article: "I, ____, do solemnly swear...that I will bear true faith and allegiance...to the United States of America...that I will serve them honestly and faithfully...against all their enemies whomsoever...and I will obey the orders...of the President of the United States...And the orders of the officers appointed over me...according to the rules and Articles of War."

With this pledge, approximately 250,000 Filipino men joined the U.S. Armed Forces in the months before and the days just after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. For the next several years, they would share the fate of their American counterparts on the battlefield, in prisoner of war camps, and throughout the countryside as part of the guerrilla resistance. Accordingly, Washington promised them the same health and pension benefits as their American brothers. Even after the war, in October of 1945, Gen. Omar Bradley, then Administrator of the Veterans Administration, reaffirmed that they were to be treated like any other American veterans.

But on February 18, 1946, the Congress passed and President Truman signed Public Law 70-301, known as the Rescission Act of 1946. It said that the service of Filipinos "shall not be deemed to be or to have been service in the military or national forces of the United States or any component thereof or any law of the United States conferring rights, privileges or benefits."

This is an absolute travesty! To use the Filipino soldiers to fight for the US, and then deny them benefits and rewards is another glaring example of the US racial caste system. The fact that President Truman would do this and it not bother his conscience nor draw a general outcry of foul shows how little people of color are regarded by the majority population group. It's obvious that behavior or service doesn't matter, appearance does.






http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=100939326
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/macarthur/sfeature/bataan_filipino.html

told by John Hope Franklin before his passing; an incident he experienced as a Boy Scout. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102401101

If the incident itself isn't telling enough, the post-article comments reveal even more.

And I bet they consider themselves "enlightened."

Regards

It was literally in my first week or so having moved to Johannesburg around March 1988, and some friends invited me to a splashy new musical, which I think was Sarafina II (or some sequel to Sarafina).

I can barely remember the setting but the theater space was somewhat strange, almost like a small arena or convention center, so the seats were bleacher type seats.

At the end of the show, as my new (black South African) friends and I were preparing to leave, I heard this little voice from behind me at the top of the bleachers. It was this tiny white lady, about in her mid 30s, and she was saying, "excuse, me? excuse me? can you help me?"

I didn't know what to make of her.

She then called out with a trembling voice saying, something like "I'm sorry, but I'm terrified of heights. I can't get down off these seats without help."

So I went up the bleacher to her and took her arm in mine. She was shaking like a leaf, but she calmed down and we managed to walk to the floor arm in arm.

At that point, I tried to say something reassuring or make conversation, but she wrenched her arm away from me and stormed off -- without a thank you or anything.

It was so bizarre. One of the more bizarre aspects of it was that if she was that racist, what the fuck was she doing watching a performance of Sarafina II -- essentially an anti-apartheid musical?

On edit: just checked wiki and by the dates, it probably was the original Sarafina.

YAOWPT-yet another oppressed white people thread. :eyes:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5496476 Should I Be Offended To Hear Urban Radio Show Hosts Calling White People Honkies? and
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5498527 This is a dedication to all those White People who feel put upon by big mean non-white people.

I thought of putting these in "Best Of...", but these are an example of the usual moral relativity that usually comes up in race-based threads. In the first example, the cries of "oppressed" white people that get picked on by Urban Radio show hosts ring hollow when the wrong-sounding name will insure that you DON'T get an interview, don't get the loan, don't get the house, DO get sidelined, do get segregated, do get shortchanged, do get nothing. Racism and the racial caste system has to be talked about and explained as a total social system of oppression for any one not-white and not continued to be thought of as individual acts of meanness by ignorant people. There's a big difference between having one's feelings hurt and having one's rights, choices, and opportunities limited by skin color. THAT is a REAL double-standard.

The second example shows that there are those that "get it". :thumbsup:

P.S. Those that start YAOWPT threads should get their pepperoni pizza immediately! :grr:

There is actually someone on that thread who said that the pictures should never be shown? It's our history how the hell are we supposed to show how dangerous and deadly racism is if we disappear all the pictures?

I managed to say so before that thread was locked.

Regards

It certainly wasn't the worst I've seen at DU, but it sucked anyway.

:puke:

and one without skills.

one who took "umbrage at being profiled"

yeah, right.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5496476#5496507

A decent conversation can't even be had. :(

Regards

per one of my fave blogs:

http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2009/04/11/internet-gasbag-dedicated-to-ending-discrimination-against-honkys/

penned by a caucasian woman.
wonder if the complainers would find this equally offensive?

we can only hope.

Threads of actual racism and/or discrimination against black people--straight to the bottom.

Threads of events of black people getting something white people didn't and/or white people feeling "oppressed" by people of color--straight to flames.

Equal treatment in the 21st century--sure. :eyes:

The background: the step team from the traditionally white sorority, Zeta Tau Alpha from the University of Arkansas, won a national step tournament sponsored by Coca-Cola, Inc., defeating the team from Alpha Kappa Alpha from Indiana University at the tournament finals held in Atlanta. After angry calls and internet blog comments, the judges later reversed their decision, calling it a "scoring discrepancy", and called it a tie, giving both teams first place.

The controversy aside, I found it interesting that some of the rabid RW, in addition to white people in general on comments' sections, screamed bloody murder about "those racist blacks" for denying the white competitors the victory and just beside themselves that black people had to "play the race card". Most of the white commentors have probably never seen a step routine in their lives (other than the YouTube posts of the routines) and wouldn't know a step routine from tap dance; they just like the idea that a white team beat a black team in a traditionally black field. Some black commentors cried foul saying that ZTA won because they were white and that AKA should have won hands down. Other comments talked about crowd reaction and how loud the crowd was for the ZTA routine, however, crowd reaction has nothing to with judges scores. Some black commentors that were present at the tournament said they were giving props to the ZTA team for doing a good job, not meaning that they should be declared the winners.

One of the black commentators made a compelling point: when white people do well in a traditionally black event or field, they get disproportional press coverage. If a black step team had won, would this have made news at all?

I viewed both routines, IMO, the AKA team did the better job. The ZTA team did a good routine, but it was not better than AKA, although some of the commentators cited below gave the win to ZTA. I also learned that though all of the judges were black, they were celebrities. The judges were: R&B diva Monica, Atlanta-based producer Devyne Stephens, Rozonda "Chilli" Thomas of TLC fame, and Atlanta dancer-choreographer Zack Lee--that doesn't mean that were former steppers or familiar with step routines and really qualified to be judges. I am familiar with step routines and have seen many step shows and competitions in college. With a 1st Prize of $100,000 in scholarship funds at stake, the sponsors should have seen about getting qualified individuals to be judges.

This controversy brought to light that there are still two Americas that still don't get along and post-racial is no time soon.



http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124275557
http://www.thetakeaway.org/2010/mar/05/national-step-competition-sparks-race-controversy/
http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=74134
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/03/AR2010030303895.html?sid=ST2010030403984

The whole thing was ridiculous. There was a thread about it in GD when it happened and I was astounded by the number of white DUers who swore up and down those girls deserved to win even though they probably had never seen a step show in their entire lives and had never even heard of "stepping" until this happened.

Every black person in the thread said, "I've been to many step shows and these girls didn't deserve to win" or even "I've PERFORMED in several step shows and these girls didn't deserve to win" and we were called "haters" or ignorant of our OWN DAMN CULTURE. The girls in ZTA showed infinitely more class than many of their supporters.

They were surprisingly good. I don't think anyone would ever deny that. But considering most of their steps were "borrowed" from other sororities and the presentation was rather uncoordinated at best, they should never have placed higher than second.

I even waded into that one.

Liberty City 7 (Miami) case http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/05/12/liberty.seven/

Fort Dix case http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/08/AR2007050800465.html

Murrah Federal building (Oklahoma City) bombing--Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols convicted

Olympic Park (Atlanta) bombing--Eric Rudolph convicted

Murder of Barnett Slepian, MD--James Kopp convicted

Murder of George Tiller, MD--Scott Roeder accused

Notice who is called a terrorist and who is not.

here http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/22/AR2010062204792.html and NPR's latest series on terrorism, starting here http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130439513&ps=rs shows the double standard of not only who is and who is not a terrorist, but also, the concept and prosecution of terrorism.

Much like the change of the face of poverty in the US over time, the face of terrorism has changed, also. Poverty was dealt with at the governmental levels, with the support of the general public, as long as that face was white. Opposite for the face of terrorism, but it follows the old stereotypes of the dangerous and angry dark-skinned people. Terror acts by dark-skinned people are watched and vigorously prosecuted, while white terror groups are just a bunch of "crazy white guys running around in the woods in camouflage over the weekend".

Pathology (n.)--1: the study of the essential nature of diseases and especially of the structural and functional changes produced by them
2: something abnormal: a: the structural and functional deviations from the normal that constitute disease or characterize a particular disease b: deviation from propriety or from an assumed normal state of something nonliving or non-material c: deviation giving rise to social ills <connections between these pathologies…and crime — Wendy Kaminer>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pathology


In order to justify slavery of the black Africans, a pseudo-psychological concepts were developed to show that black people were mentally inferior had to be enslaved for their own good, and that white people were superior and were obligated to enslave these inferior people.

Some prominent writers of the time, most notably Dr. Samuel Cartwright and Prof. Thomas R. Dew, were staunch defenders of slavery. Dew first published Review of the Debate in 1832. The purpose of this text was to influence the atmosphere, and create a theoretical justification of slavery. It was then later on quoted greatly by Dew’s intellectual successors from William and Mary College. Dew’s intention was to view slavery from a dispassionate approach. Dew’s efforts were mainly to explain what might occur if slavery were to be abolished.

Being a southern physician, Cartwright’s explanation of Negroes' inferiority was regarded as psychological. He saw them as people that who were not capable of performing curtain duties. Cartwright claims this very explicitly in his Diseases and Peculiarities of the Negro Race, and also shows the length to which he would go to defend slavery as a result of a psychological problem in black people. He created and described the condition drapetomania, or the disease that causes Negroes to run away.

These writers, and others, have set the stage for creating the psychological and mentally inferior mindset about those not-white that US society suffers today. It is brought forth whenever a black person, or black people in general, does something that pisses off white America. It can be anything--the prominence of rap/hip-hop music, disproportionate negative news coverage of black people, the prop 8 debacle, Cosby, etc., and the comments quickly appear that "those people" did said action because there's something wrong with them. It's as if there is something wrong with being black. I'm sure that quite a few readers here can attest to being complemented by someone white saying, "I don't think of you as black," and it was sincere! (I've had that happen once.) The response I gave was, "That's mighty white of you." According to NPR's "Bridging the Gap" series, 30% of white people surveyed (2006) still hold negative views of black people.

The recent national newsstories blaming black people for crimes that didn't commit show this disturbing mindset. The list includes: Charles Stewart, Susan Smith, Ashley Todd, and Bonnie Sweeten; runaway bride Jennifer Wilbanks shouldn't be left off, though she claimed she was kidnapped by Mexicans. It goes to blaming those "sick, perverted, twisted people of color".




http://cghs.dadeschools.net/slavery/defense_of_slavery/...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h3106t.html
www.lipmagazine.org/articles/featwise_34.htm

It's as if there is something wrong with being black. I'm sure that quite a few readers here can attest to being complemented by someone white saying, "I don't think of you as black," and it was sincere!

I can honestly say I've never had that happen to me but I've heard it happening plenty of times to people that I've known.

The old "oh, I don't think of you as black" or "I don't see your color" as well as the even more telling "she's pretty for a black girl" or "she was so pretty you could hardly tell she was black." (Oh yes, a friend of mine from undergrad unleashed that last pearl on me about a comment made about a very fair-skinned acquaintance of ours. I almost had a stroke.)

Being black is important to me. I LOVE it and wouldn't want to be anything else. So when someone says "they don't see my color" basically they are saying they don't see a critically important component of my own self-identification and culture. Add to the fact that I don't believe anyone could ever actually do that and I quickly excuse myself from anyone that goes the "I don't see your color" route.

latest in the "blame the black guy" lineup, shot himself in the shoulder and blamed a "black guy with cornrows and tattoos", and put a whole predominately black neighborhood (Overbrook) on lockdown looking for a suspect.

When will it end? :(

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/20100512_Another_black_eye_for_Phila__police.html

Gee what a surprise they'd not bother to charge him. Not!

The latest entry to the "blame a black person" list. She claimed that an African-American woman threw acid in her face in August, 2010, in Vancouver, WA. Fundraisers for medical treatment raised $28,000. The injury to her face was self-inflicted. She has been charged with 2nd-degree aggravated theft.

http://www.kptv.com/news/25152056/detail.html

http://www.alternet.org/rights/141158/the_hidden_health_toll_of_race/

From the article: A self-assured, middle-class Jewish girl from Brookline, Mass., Geronimus shuttled between the extremes of haves and have-nots, eventually spotting a chasm between the theories of Princeton researchers and the experiences of the women she taught.


Geronimus would sit in on the professors' meetings, listening to them discuss how young girls, ignorant of family planning, were ruining their lives with accidental pregnancies. Bearing children at an early age would rewrite these mothers' life scripts, with terrible consequences. The funders behind the academic studies — including those in charge of Planned Parenthood's own research arm — supported the consensus opinion that teen pregnancy was a crucial cause of ghetto poverty and ill health among America's urban blacks. The only question was how to get these girls to stop having babies before they'd come of age.


The girls Geronimus met at Planned Parenthood's alternative school for expectant teens, however, seemed to know exactly what they were doing. When she tried to teach them about contraception — something they supposedly knew nothing about — they laughed at her. The girls in the program told Geronimus they were overjoyed to have children. Far from blundering into motherhood, many were experienced with child rearing, having helped raise siblings or cousins. Some talked about how long they'd been trying to have a baby.


As the months wore on, the professors' belief — that poor childhood health and ghetto joblessness would disappear, if only these girls would stop getting themselves pregnant — started to seem absurd. "What I was hearing in the halls of Princeton was inaccurate," she remembers. "It just didn't fit in, in any way, with what I was seeing."


Though Geronimus didn't understand the discrepancy, she noticed that these girls, even at 15 or 16, had been worn down by tough lives. Compared with her classmates in Princeton's dorms — many of them hailing from America's WASP elite — the poor black girls at the clinic seemed to lack the energy and health of youth. Geronimus couldn't quite put her finger on it, except to say these girls seemed older — and not in a good way.


Writer's Note: This is a very eye-opening article in more ways than one. How Dr. Geronimus came to her conclusions, and how she caught much hell for them, how too many people, esp. white people, have too much invested in the status quo. Society's willful ignorance when it comes to race is absolutely stunning.

It's common knowledge that black people are overrepresented in sports and in music and entertainment. No one talks about why that is. It's easier to "blame the victim", just blame black people for simply not overcoming centuries of deliberate, crushing oppression at the hands of a racial caste society. A society that still practices racism and discrimination and normally refuses to admit something is wrong. :shrug:

I finally saw Save The Last Dance and I read Obama's speech for the NAACP's 100th Anniversary. I cite the movie because it said more about WHY than the speech. The same with the military and public/civil service jobs, black people are overrepresented in fields where race doesn't matter, or fields where they've been traditionally funnelled into. IMO, here are some reasons why black people are overrepresented in sports and entertainment:

Sports and entertainment are the closest to a true meritocracy. The best performance generally wins; the fastest run or longest throw are beyond argument.

Interest--you'll do and practice what you like to do, especially if it can make a lot of money.

Visibility--entertainers are seen on a regular basis. Scientist, engineers, and other professionals aren't.

College costs--if you're a poor black kid, where is the money coming from?

Basic education--without attending decent and well-equipped elementary and high schools, there's no chance at getting into college, much less success there.

Racism and discrimination--these don't go away just because one has a college degree. In general, black people are less than 5% of the total number of professionals in their fields.

The racial caste system--the unequal justice system that funnels black kids into the prison industrial complex rather than higher education. Not to mention that "those people" are here to entertain, anyway.

I don't even know if that's true in a racist society. Elvis, the co-option of jazz and rock and roll by white artists, Madonna, and the blonde-ification of break dancing, hip hop and R&B may be contrary to your point.

I love Madonna. Always have, always will. But I remember when "Holiday" came out. It was played only in black clubs and black radio. The milisecond that the VIDEO came out and everyone could see it was a "blonde" white woman, then suddenly it SKYROCKETED along with her career. Would she have been as successful if she was a black girl from Tennessee named Laquita?? I honestly don't think so.

Brew, what was your reason for mentioning Save the Last Dance?? Having never seen the movie, I'm curious why you mentioned it.

Is it anything like those Step Up movies?? I have made a point of not seeing any of those, which always seem to show virginal white girls doing dances created in the black community and dancing to black music forms in some ghetto with black people always as the backup dancers and never in the lead. I think one of those Step Up movies was actually called "one of the most racist movies of all time" by a reviewer.

but black artists have held their own even in spite of Elvis and the white usurpers. The musicians of delta blues, groups of Motown, funk, soul, disco, to the present, are just as famous, if not more so, than their white counterparts. Not to mention that quite a few, including The Beatles, Rolling Stones, and Clapton in particular, have paid homage to the original blues artists. You'll note that there are very few famous white rappers or hip-hop artists other than Eminem, Bubba Sparxx, Vanilla Ice, and The Beastie Boys--the count all on one hand.

Yes, Save The Last Dance is like the Step Up movies. I mentioned the movie because some of the scenes go to the WHY of why the characters in the movie are spending their time practicing rap or sports instead of studying. They aren't blind. They know that the schools are crappy. Some don't have the resources to go to college if they could even qualify. Some have family obligations that won't let them go to college. They know that they don't want to be drug dealers or gangbangers where they know they may not live to see the next day. They know that they don't want to sweep floors or flip burgers at just above minimul wage. It all goes to the basic concept that they want more in Life and don't want to live in the ghetto all their lives and there's a mean, unforgiving society that likes them just where they are. They're going to do what they can do, and that's sports or entertainment. Though it's just a movie, it has some ring of truth to it.

Lloyd Marcus, on the Tea Party Express, highlighted on NPR http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112423053 and gun-toting black guy, highlighted here http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=258x7747, along with the regular RW media lawn jockeys, get media coverage out of proportion to their presence and influence. Their consistent whines of "I'm not an African-American, I'm an American. Color shouldn't matter." displays either their ignorance of the racially-based caste system, or their knowledge of how to make white people feel good about race by not talking about it. Notice that the lawn jockeys are normally caught in the worst possible light, sounding ignorant and/or doing something stupid and/or acting foolish in front of the camera. The left/liberal/progressive black people of the media don't get that much coverage because they are normally highlighting the unfairness of the racial caste system and making race an issue--which it usually is, which makes white people uncomfortable, and not clowning for the camera.

...don't get that much coverage because they are normally highlighting the unfairness of the racial caste system and making race an issue... which makes white people uncomfortable."

TRUTH. :applause:

when it comes to the police. This entry comes from the recent article of Metro Atlanta clergy and area police organizations coming together to decrease crime. Nothing wrong with that, but they've forgotten that up to the present day that most black people are in as much danger from law enforcement as they are from the criminals. The main reason that no one "snitched" to the police was that no one wanted to be known to law enforcement. The racist element of law enforcement still exists. Too often, if they couldn't find a suspect, they'll make one. News articles are full of incidents of law enforcement vs. people of color, usually people of color are dead or severely injured.

seen here at http://www.gnn.com/article/ex-foster-child-derrius-quarles-now/703891?icid=main|main|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gnn.com%2Farticle%2Fex-foster-child-derrius-quarles-now%2F703891

Read the comments section, Racism is over! and Stop discriminating against white males! and the the usual round of ignorant crap. The exception is the rule. :eyes: It's enough to drive one to drink 'cause we've gone well past madness.

From the article: Much like the powerful images of Tuskegee airmen in full regalia sidled next to their planes during World War II, the image of Shoshana Johnson being escorted to safety after her captivity in Iraq is indelibly imprinted in the minds of television viewers across the world.

It was especially poignant for African Americans, who saw it as a fleeting moment of vindication for a time when blacks in the military were not acknowledged for their service.

Now, years later, Johnson, a former U.S. Army cook has helped change history again for blacks in the military. She was thrust into the spotlight when, in the early days of the Iraq War, she was shot in both ankles as her convoy of mechanics, cooks and disabled vehicles wandered into the city of Nasiriyah, Johnson writes in her newly released memoir, 'I'm Still Standing: From Captive U. S. Soldier to Free Citizen--My Journey Home.'

The wandering convoy touched off a bloody battle that left 11 U.S. soldiers dead and six abducted and held as prisoners of war, including Johnson and her friend, Jessica Lynch, she writes in the gripping memoir released just in time for Black History Month.

"I was shaking," she writes. "I was saying the Lord's Prayer to myself...when someone grabbed my legs and pulled me from my shelter. And like that, I became a prisoner of war."

She became the first female prisoner of war in Operation Iraqi Freedom and the first black female prisoner of war in U.S. history. But the Pentagon peddled Lynch's story, saying she went down fighting. Lynch later wrote a book correcting the story, saying she never fired a shot before being critically injured.

http://blogs.blackvoices.com/2010/02/09/first-black-female-prisoner-of-war-in-iraq/?ncid=webmaildl5


Writer's note: As noted above, military service by people of color is regularly not acknowledged. The Pentagon backed and embellished the story of her (white) friend and fellow POW, Jessica Lynch, and ignored her. BTW, the comments are just as telling.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7804885


capped before it was deleted:


stopthegenocide (1 posts) Sun Feb-28-10 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
10. just the facts ma'am, just the facts
It took some digging but it turns out the rapist was black.
And you say well so what, what does that have to do anything.
People want to ignore the facts.

Over 35000 white women are raped and beaten by blacks every
year in America. (see citation below) The corresponding
white/black number is less than 10.

just the facts, ma'am:
Criminal Victimization in the United States, 2005 table 42
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1095

Rape is one of the more frequently unreported crimes. The
35,000 is conservative and the actual number is probably
twice that number.

The current administration has taken several very public
stances which endorse the murder and rape of white women.
The current Attorney General has stated that he does not
believe that OJ was involved in those murders. Essentially
all white people know he did it, and very few black people
will acknowledge it. When the chief law enforcement officer
in the nation states that OJ did not commit murder, he signals
to the black community that rape and murder is fine as long as
it is a white woman. Further is lets everyone know that he
will not be particularly interested in prosecuting black
rapists.

The current chief of the executive branch in his famous Talk
About Race basically threw his white grandmother under the
proverbial bus. This was the only woman in his life who
cared for him unselfishly. She sacrificed and sweated and
worked for him every day for more than a decade. Then he
mocks her on national television. This was a small frail old
woman. It was dark. It was a relatively small town with few
blacks and so she would probably recognize many of them She
rode the bus route frequently so she would have been familiar
with the regular passengers. So she is confronted with the
choice of being isolated with a hulking transient stranger,
or doing the prudent thing and just go home. Obama's
ridicule of this very sensible prudent action sends a clear
message to America that if you are in a similar situation
that you are expected to stay in that dark vulnerable and
isolated nook with a hulking transient stranger. I am sure
that of millions of women who saw that speech that some were
persuaded by his silver tongued oratory. Some small number
of them were probably presented with a similar situation in
the last year. And I would bet my last dollar that at least
several have been raped as a result of taking Obama's advice.
In essence he is feeding white women to the black rape
machine. This poor girl was one of his victims.


Alert Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

or at the very least, copy and paste the racist crap on this site. I've got about 10 documents of crap that I've seen on DU in the last 12 months.

The "black rape machine," eh? Well, you have to give them a few points for creativity along with their racist hysteria.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/us/07baltimore.html

From the article: Wells Fargo, Ms. Jacobson said in an interview, saw the black community as fertile ground for subprime mortgages, as working-class blacks were hungry to be a part of the nation’s home-owning mania. Loan officers, she said, pushed customers who could have qualified for prime loans into subprime mortgages. Another loan officer stated in an affidavit filed last week that employees had referred to blacks as “mud people” and to subprime lending as “ghetto loans.”

Black people were deliberately targeted for these loans in spite of the fact that many were qualified for standard loan rates. White people were not so targeted.

Other articles are found using search string wells fargo discrimination lawsuit and at:
http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/7162007_NAACP_Subprime_Lawsuit.asp
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124906504187697487.html

US Rep. Candidate Calls Obama 'Buckwheat' ("I wasn't meaning him any harm.")

NORTH MIAMI BEACH, Fla. -- Buckwheat, the Little Rascal from the 1920s series of film shorts called "Our Gang," is now center stage in a foot-in-mouth moment for a South Florida candidate for the U.S. Congress.

Corey Poitier, Republican Candidate for Congress, FL 17th, who is running for U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek's seat, delivered a passionate speech against the health care reform bill Monday night to Broward County Republicans. During the speech, Poitier called President Barack Obama "Buckwheat," reported WPLG-TV in Miami.

"I wasn't meaning him any harm. Maybe it was a little insensitive," Poitier said. "It's a term that my brother and I use. It was kind of a way of saying, 'dummy,' like when I say to my brother, 'Hey, Buckwheat, cut that out.' That's what it was."

Poitier admitted that the comment was not very respectful, but he insisted it was not racial.

"I believe that we have become so racially sensitive that anything can be set off," said Poitier, who is black.


report: http://www.wjactv.com/irresistible/22926449/detail.html

found on YouTube at starting at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZTMaAmvBWA&feature=related is in 14 parts.

The panelists For: John McWhorter, Terence Pell, Joseph C. Phillips

The panelists Against: Khin Mai Aung, Kimberle Crenshaw, Tim Wise


The panelists For and the written comments aside (most of the comments are rather disgusting), I found 2 very important points shown in the debate. One, and the most obvious, were the vote statistics (found at the end of part 14) of the audience before and after the debate. They are:

Votes   Before Debate   After Debate
For           34%              39%
Against      44%             55%
Undecided   22%            6%


Not only did the Against side sway most of the Undecideds in their favor and get the majority of the audience, but it's important to note their major points. The Against side made it personal, i.e. What if this happened to YOU, etc. Much like the flaming racists that changed their ways and feelings when facing their child's betrothed, who is a member of that hated group, or a grandchild or niece or nephew, that has the "wrong" skin tone and/or facial features--it became personal. Basically, racism and the US racial caste system won't end until enough white people have a personal stake in ending it. I think that it's sad that it has to come to this. Doing what's right because it's right and it's for the right reason isn't good enough, because too many have TOO much invested in the status quo.

I left this out of the original entry, but McWhorter and Phillips are regular lawn jockeys, trotted out when the rabid racist RW needs a friendly dark-skinned face; Pell is white.

(cross-posted from the Black History thread)

Affirmative Action has been defined as "any measure, beyond simple termination of a discriminatory practice, adopted to correct or compensate for past or present discrimination or to prevent discrimination from recurring in the future." (U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Statement on Affirmative Action, October 1977.) Affirmative action means taking positive steps to end discrimination, to prevent its recurrence, and to creative new opportunities that were previously denied minorities and women.

Affirmative Action, as it pertains to black people, is not a 20th Century concept, nor is it not, as some critics charge, a uniquely modern concept fashioned by contemporary liberals in defiance of history or tradition. Although the techniques that we now call "affirmative action" are of fairly recent design, the conceptual recognition of the need to take affirmative, or positive legal action to redress discrimination's impact, rather than simply ending discrimination, has been around since the Civil War. During Reconstruction (the period immediately after the Civil War), the Constitution was amended and other federal initiatives, such as the creation of the Freedman's Bureau, were undertaken to establish equal opportunity for the former slaves. These initiatives were at least modestly successful, bringing about African American participation in elections for the first time.

Sporadic efforts to remedy the results of hundreds of years of slavery, segregation and denial of opportunity have been made since the end of the Civil War.

A significant number of African Americans held public office, including two U.S. senators and 20 members of the House, between 1870 and 1900. But when the federal government withdrew its support for Reconstruction in the late 1800s, the gains made by African Americans were quickly stripped away and replaced by a patchwork system of legal segregation (including, in some instances, legal segregation of Latinos, Asians, and Native Americans as well). By 1896, in Plessy v. Ferguson, the Supreme Court had upheld the cornerstone segregationist doctrine of "separate but equal" - i.e., ruling that the Constitution permitted governments to require separation of the races in schools, public transportation, and elsewhere, so long as the opportunities offered the separate races were characterized as equal.

Affimative Action, has its legal basis in the modern era with President Kennedy's Executive Order #10925 of 1961, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and President Johnson's Executive Order #11246.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 703, forbids discrimination by an employer on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

Kennedy's order required not only that federal contractors pledge non-discrimination but that they "take affirmative action to ensure" equal opportunity, that the now-fractious phrase came into popular discourse. Kennedy's order also included penalties -- including suspension of a contract -- for non-compliance. Johnson's executive order directed the creation of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance in the Department of Labor to enforce its non-discrimination and affirmative action requirements. The Executive Order was amended in 1967 to include prohibitions on sex discrimination by federal contractors, along with a requirement that they engage in good faith efforts to expand job opportunities for women. Executive Order 11246 remains among the most effective and far-reaching federal programs for expanding equal opportunity.

As President Lyndon Johnson said in 1965, "You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say you are free to compete with all the others, and still just believe that you have been completely fair."

President Johnson's speech eloquently stated the rationale behind the contemporary use of affirmative action programs to achieve equal opportunity, especially in the fields of employment and higher education.

The emphasis is on opportunity: affirmative action programs are meant to break down barriers, both visible and invisible, to level the playing field, and to make sure everyone is given an equal break. They are not meant to guarantee equal results -- but instead proceed on the common-sense notion that if equality of opportunity were a reality, African Americans, women, people with disabilities and other groups facing discrimination would be fairly represented in the nation's work force and educational institutions.

The continuing need for affirmative action is demonstrated by the data. For example, the National Asian and Pacific American Legal Consortium reports that although white men make up only 48% of the college-educated workforce, they hold over 90% of the top jobs in the news media, 96% of CEO positions, 86% of law firm partnerships, and 85% of tenured college faculty positions. There are studies and reports in the 1990's and 2000's that show regular on-going systemic discrimination against people of color in all major social, economic, scientific, and political areas. The need for it is increasingly pertinent now with the distinct possibility of a non-white male President for the first time in US history. Discrimination will not magically end should Senator Obama be elected President of the US anymore than it did when the Civil War ended, or with the passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, or the Brown vs. Board of Education Court decision. Power will not concede willingly; the Jim Crow era is glaring proof of that.

In the modern era, the concept of affirmative action was reborn on June 25, 1941, when President Franklin Roosevelt -- seeking to avert a march on Washington organized by civil rights pioneer A. Philip Randolph -- issued Executive Order 8802 requiring defense contractors to pledge nondiscrimination in employment in government-funded projects. Two years later, President Roosevelt extended coverage of the executive order to all federal contractors and subcontractors. In a 1947 report, the President's Committee on Fair Employment Practices found that, while African Americans comprised only three percent of the workers in defense industries in 1942, their number had increased to eight percent in 1945. But it also found "the wartime gains of Negro, Mexican-American and Jewish workers . . . began to disappear as soon as wartime controls were relaxed."

Implementation of affirmative action started slowly, with the construction industry the site of one of the first tests. In 1965 the Office of Federal Contract Compliance created government-wide programs to redress the years of discrimination in the construction industry. The series of affirmative action programs was designed to boost minority employment by emphasizing hiring results in federally funded construction jobs.

In the 1970s, The Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Assistance Act of 1972 called for "the preferential employment of disabled veterans and veterans of the Vietnam era ... who are otherwise qualified." The act was amended a year later to require federal agencies and contractors to take affirmative action in employment and promotion for people with disabilities. These changes underscored the use of affirmative action as a balancing of competitive interests. Affirmative action was understood to be the creation of opportunities to compete and not an assurance of outcome or success.

The various programs culminated in the "Philadelphia Plan," implemented under President Nixon. This plan required contractors doing business with the federal government to commit themselves to self-determined numerical goals for minority. By withstanding challenges both in Congress and the courts, the Philadelphia Plan helped establish affirmative action as a way of life for American employers. Indeed, employers often embraced affirmative action as a good business practice, enabling them to tap into larger, more diverse, and more qualified pools of talent.

A key example of business support for affirmative action came early in Ronald Reagan's second term and from what would be considered a very unlikely source -- the conservative National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), which represents 13,500 companies. At issue was a split in the administration over proposals by President Reagan's most conservative appointees to revise and weaken Executive Order 11246 requiring employers with federal contracts to take positive steps -- including establishing goals and timetables -- to include minorities and women in their work force.

NAM, much to the surprise of the administration's conservatives, weighed in on behalf of keeping the executive order intact. In a letter to President Reagan, the business group said it "believes the current executive order provides the framework for an affirmative action policy" and argued that "the business. community is concerned that the elimination of goals and timetables could result in confusing compliance standards on federal, state and municipal levels and a proliferation of reverse discrimination suits."

Affirmative Action has been under legal assault almost from its inception. Decisions and appeals usually have to go to the Supreme Court for final resolution. The make-up of the Court is critical to the use or amending of affirmative action measures due to the precident set by the case brought before it. Important cases will be in follow-on entries.



http://www.civilrights.org/research_center/civilrights1...
http://www.blackcommentator.com/284/284_btl_will_black_...
http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=97&p...

Arguably the most famous legal challenge to Affirmative Action. This was the case that brought the term "reverse discrimation" into the national lexicon.

The facts--Allan Bakke, a thirty-five-year-old white man, had twice applied for admission to the University of California Medical School at Davis. He was rejected both times. The school reserved sixteen places in each entering class of one hundred for "qualified" minorities, as part of the university's affirmative action program, in an effort to redress longstanding, unfair minority exclusions from the medical profession. Bakke's qualifications (college GPA and test scores) exceeded those of any of the minority students admitted in the two years Bakke's applications were rejected. Bakke contended, first in the California courts, then in the Supreme Court, that he was excluded from admission solely on the basis of race.

The conclusion--Four of the justices contended that any racial quota system supported by government violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr., agreed, casting the deciding vote ordering the medical school to admit Bakke. However, in his opinion, Powell argued that the rigid use of racial quotas as employed at the school violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The remaining four justices held that the use of race as a criterion in admissions decisions in higher education was constitutionally permissible. Powell joined that opinion as well, contending that the use of race was permissible as one of several admission criteria. So, the Court managed to minimize white opposition to the goal of equality (by finding for Bakke) while extending gains for racial minorities through affirmative action.

In short, racial numerical quotas were deemed unconstitutional, but race could still be used as a factor for admissions.



Writer's note: This case coined the term "reverse discrimination", as if to say that discrimination against the dominant demographic group is somehow wrong and must NOT be allowed, as opposed to discrimination against traditionally marginalized people, which can inferred as being the norm. This is an example of the "entitlement mentality" fostered by the racial caste system.


http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1977/1977_76_811 /
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw...

The Facts--In 1983, the City Council of Richmond, Virginia adopted regulations that required companies awarded city construction contracts to subcontract 30 percent of their business to minority business enterprises. The J.A. Croson Company, which lost its contract because of the 30 percent set-aside, brought suit against the city.

The Conclusion--The Court determined that the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment was violated. In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court held that "generalized assertions" of past racial discrimination could not justify "rigid" racial quotas for the awarding of public contracts. Justice O'Connor's opinion noted that the 30 percent quota could not be tied to "any injury suffered by anyone," and was an impermissible employment of a suspect classification. O'Connor further held that allowing claims of past discrimination to serve as the basis for racial quotas would actually subvert constitutional values: "The dream of a Nation of equal citizens in a society where race is irrelevant to personal opportunity and achievement would be lost in a mosaic of shifting preferences based on inherently unmeasurable claims of past wrongs."


Writer's Note: This is one of the lesser known legal assaults on Affirmative Action, but a major case that affected the construction industry. Also, as stated above, the composition of the members of the Supreme Court become critical in the decision. Data found in the findarticles article shows the institution bias that a minority-owned construction firm has to deal with in order to get contracts. That incredible bias, and fact thereof, was cited in the dissenting opinion of the Court.



http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1988/1988_87_998 /
http://law.jrank.org/pages/13101/Richmond-v-J-Croson-Co...
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1365/is_n10_v22/...

Grutter vs. Bollinger is the U. of Michigan Law School admissions case, and Gratz vs. Bollinger is the undergraduate point system admissions case. Lee Bollinger was the President of the University of Michigan at the time and the lead defendant in both cases. Two white women were at the center of the University of Michigan cases. Jennifer Gratz was a top high school student in suburban Detroit in 1995, when Michigan rejected her application. Barbara Grutter, a 49-year-old mother of two, ran her own consulting business. Michigan's prestigious law school rejected her application in 1997. She investigated and found out that African Americans and ethnic minorities who had lower overall admissions scores were admitted. Grutter sued, saying she was a victim of illegal discrimination.

The university acknowledges it has used race as a factor in admissions, relying on a complicated point scale to rate applicants. Grades and academics are most important, but members of "under-represented" racial and ethic minority groups have received extra points, as do children of alumni, athletes and men enrolling in nursing programs. Gratz's lawyers called the points granted for race a "super bonus," equivalent to a full grade point on a student's GPA.

Grutter's lawyers argued that the admissions program at the university's law school was unconstitutional. They based the argument on a 1978 case, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, where the court ruled that a school could take race and ethnicity into account -- but couldn't use quotas. Instead, admissions programs must be "narrowly tailored" to harm as few people as possible.

Grutter and her supporters won the first round in U.S. District Court, but lost in a close decision in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers the states of Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. The majority of appellate court justices sided with the university view that a diverse student body has its own benefits, and that a "points" system for admission that takes the race of the applicant into account in an overall score wasn't a quota. Grutter appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was the eventual deciding vote in Grutter, saying that affirmative action is still needed in America -- but hoped that its days are numbered. "We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today."

In the undergraduate case, Gratz v. Bollinger, the 6-3 majority ruled the points system violated equal protection provisions of the Constitution. Chief Justice William Rehnquist said the use of race was not "narrowly tailored" to achieve the university's diversity goals.


Writer's Note: Notice that not much angers the members of the upper caste, i.e., white people, esp. those with resources, more than their desires are not fulfilled, than not having their desires fulfilled, and a minority person gets what they wanted. Now for a few facts: the major state universities are overwhelmingly white, with black undergraduate enrollment averaging in the range of 5-8%. For the University of Michigan, the freshman class of 5,000 in 2003 was 82% white, 18% non-white. Notice that both plaintiffs did not argue that white students with lower test scores, or extra admissions points, were admitted instead of them. Based on the percentages, a white student was more likely than a black student to be admitted. The 2000 census has the population percentage of Michigan at 80.2% white, 19.8% non-white. According to the admissions point system (http://www.umich.edu/~mrev/archives/1999/summer/chart.h... ), an underrepresented minority got 20 points. Overrepresented white people get added points, too, but those points aren't stated that way. A resident of Michigan got 10 points, a resident of an underrepresented Michigan county got 6 points, a legacy got 4 points--all more than likely white. There are the sections with point ranges, SAT/ACT scores, School Factor and Curriculum Factor. One gets more points for higher SAT/ACT scores, School Factor, and Curriculum Factor--again skewed in favor of majority-white schools that tend to have higher performing schools, better curriculum, and better SAT/ACT preparation. The hypocritical basis of both cases highlights the racial caste system and the sense of entitlement that is often held by members of the upper caste.



http://www.npr.org/news/specials/michigan/index.html
http://www.umich.edu/~mrev/archives/1999/summer/chart.h...
http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/10228
http://www.census.gov /
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/23/scotus.affirmative.ac...

better known as the New Haven Firefighters case.

On the final day of the term, a Supreme Court divided along familiar ideological lines held that city officials cannot decline to certify results of a civil service exam that would make disproportionately more white applicants eligible for promotion.

Four years ago, 19 white firefighters and one Hispanic firefighter filed suit against the city of New Haven, Conn., arguing that they would have been promoted if the city hadn’t tossed out the results of two tests for lieutenant and captain because no black candidates had performed well enough to qualify. Fourteen of the top 15 candidates for the promotions were white, based on scores.

City officials held that the exams were unfair to minority firefighters and the city faced potential lawsuits if promotions were carried out. A trial judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut upheld the city's action and dismissed the case.

In June, a three-judge panel on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal. Breaking from other courts of appeals, the Second Circuit held that a promotion examination’s unintended disproportionate racial results permit city officials to reject successful candidates based on race. The court further held the Equal Protection Clause inapplicable to such actions.

By a vote of 7-6, the full court declined to rehear the case. In a 12-page dissent from that denial, Judge Jose Cabranes wrote that “this court has failed to grapple with the questions of exceptional importance raised in this appeal.” He added: “If the Ricci plaintiffs are to obtain such an opinion from a reviewing court, they must now look to the Supreme Court. Their claims are worthy of that review.”

On June 29, the Supreme Court reversed and remanded the case in a 5-4 opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy.

"Fear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer's reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions," Kennedy wrote.

In an interesting twist, Supreme Court nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, sat on the Second Circuit panel that dismissed the firefighters' claims.

Justice Antonin Scalia filed a concurring opinion. Justice Samuel A. Alito also filed a concurring opinion, in which Justices Scalia and Clarence Thomas joined.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter and Stephen Breyer joined.

In the sharply-worded dissent, Ginsburg noted that the white firefighters "understandably attract this court's sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them."

Question presented: Whether municipalities may decline to certify results of an exam that would make disproportionately more white applicants eligible for promotion than minority applicants, due to fears that certifying the results would lead to charges of racial discrimination.


Writer's Note: This decision puts employers, esp. municial and other govermental organizations, on the defense if they want diversity on the job. This grants an unfair level of legal protection to a demographic group that is not normally targeted for discrimination--white males. To add insult to injury, in spite of the evidence of an obviously flawed exam, the High Court shows disregards the results in favor of "fairness". THIS is a glaring example of judicial activism that the rabid right is so "concerned" about. This also shows the racial caste system at its most malicious. Like the University of Michigan cases, fairness is irrelevant, the point that people of color, black people especially, should be kept "in their place" is the point.




http://onthedocket.org/articles/2009/06/29/divided-cour...
http://www.timwise.org

Ironically called "civil rights initiatives", these are generally state-wide referendums that generally forbid collection of racial data and/or any preferences by race. Listed are the states that have passed anti affirmative action propositions. They are normally under judicial review or have pending lawsuits against them, so their implementation is in question. The propositions are:

Proposition 209 (CA, 1996)
Initiative 200 (WA, 1998)
Proposition 2 (MI, 2006)
Proposition 424 (NE, 2008)


Alaska and Oregon had anti affirmative action bills signed into law in 1997.



http://www.acenet.edu/bookstore/descriptions/making_the...

esp. in the college admissions cases, is the silence for "affirmative action" for athletes, esp. black athletes. If you run fast and can catch a ball and win for our school, you're in! If you want to study and graduate--go away! You're taking space from a more "qualified" student.

In this case, sports, starting here with Clock Almost Striking Midnight For Big Ben by Dave Zirin

From the article: In searching through all the historical and media data at my disposal, I can’t find one solitary example of a professional athlete suffering two entirely disconnected accusations of sexual assault over one eight month period.

Enter Pittsburgh Steelers Quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, our very own Jackie Robinson of misogyny, arrogance and entitlement. This is a man who thought that a night of drunken nightclub bathroom “encounters” in Milledgeville, Georgia, with a 20-year-old Georgia college student – while his entourage blocked the door – was a solid plan.

Ben lawyered up only saying that sexual contact with the accuser “was not consummated.” He declined to submit the DNA that the district attorney’s office requested, and despite described “minor” cuts and bruising on the young woman, the DA decided not to press charges. Ocmulgee Circuit District Attorney Fred Bright, when announcing this decision, said gruffly, “If he were my son, the best way I could answer it is, Ben, grow up. Come on, you're supposed to stand for something.”

That was assumedly supposed to sound tough, but it came off like a paternal scolding: the typical “boys will be boys” defense. That is, if the boys are the right shade of pale. Georgia is the state after all where in 2005 17-year-old Genarlow Wilson (also, incidentally, a high school football star and not so incidentally, African American) was given a mandatory 10-year prison sentence for consensual oral sex with a 15 year old. After two years behind bars, he was released following a 4-3 decision by the Georgia State Supreme Court. The court did not overturn Wilson’s conviction, but ruled that his sentence was “grossly disproportionate". In contrast, Roethlisberger may never have to spend even two minutes in the maximum-security prison that housed Wilson.

But Big Ben’s drama is far from over. He still faces a civil suit from the first round of sexual assault allegations and may possibly in this case as well. It's this kind of behavior that has the Pro Bowl quarterback wearing out his welcome in Pittsburgh. The Steelers organization believes that they are more than just another franchise. They are Steeler Nation and no player is more important than the honor of the brand.

If Coach Mike Tomlin had a hot young quarterback on the bench, Roethlisberger might be trade bait. Without that option the Steelers chose instead to make an example out of their best receiver, 2009 Super Bowl MVP Santonio Holmes. Holmes was traded to the Jets for a pittance (a fifth round draft pick). He was also no stranger to off-field trouble and the fact that the Steelers dumped him to a conference rival so unceremoniously is without question a shot across the bow at Big Ben. But this action as well is raising ethical eyebrows. As Jeffrey Chadiha wrote on ESPN.com, “If they go soft on Roethlisberger, it will appear the organization dumped the black guy with issues while the white guy got a slap on the wrist for his mistakes.”


Writer's Note: The article makes the double standard glaringly clear.


http://www.blackcommentator.com/371/371_big_ben_zirin_guest.php

‘Temporary Custody'
By Jim Kenyon
Valley News Columnist


Hartford Police officials issued a press release on Tuesday announcing they had asked Vermont State Police to investigate whether their response to a 911 call of a “burglary in progress” last Saturday afternoon in Wilder was appropriate.

According to the one-paragraph statement, Hartford police found an “unknown male subject on the third floor” of a Stony Creek townhome who was taken into “temporary custody” before paramedics treated him for a known medical condition.

End of story?

Far from it. The police department's press release lacked critical details about what happened at Stony Creek last Saturday afternoon, facts on which I hope the state police investigation will shed light. Meanwhile, I'll share what I have found.

The unknown male subject found in the home? He was actually the 34-year-old African-American who owns the home and has lived there for four years.

And the part about taking him into temporary custody?

Hartford police neglected to say that in the process he was: blasted with pepper spray; struck with a nightstick; handcuffed, wrapped in a blanket and hauled -- naked -- out of his home, according to a neighbor and what the man says police later told him. When the neighbor tried to tell cops that the handcuffed man on the pavement was the homeowner -- not a burglar — he said he was threatened with arrest for interfering in police business.

--------------------------

After going outside, McKaig spotted a police officer standing on the steps leading into Burwell's townhome. The officer wasn't hard to miss -- he held a high-powered rifle. “I know the man who lives there,” McKaig recalled telling him. “He's a black man with a medical problem who was recently taken by ambulance to the hospital.”

Two officers -- one female -- apparently were already inside Burwell's home. Upon arrival, Cutting said, officers discovered the man inside was unresponsive, and found smoke in the home emanating from a lamp that had been knocked over.

If the officers had stopped on the second floor to look at the pictures of Burwell and his elementary-school aged daughter displayed under the dining room table's glass top, they probably would have had pretty good confirmation that their burglary suspect was in fact the townhome's resident.

While talking with the officer stationed at Burwell's front door, McKaig said he heard a “hell of a commotion” from inside. Minutes later, police brought Burwell outside, McKaig told me, “They dragged the poor guy down the stairs.”

One of the officers carried a nightstick in his hand. Burwell was wrapped in a blanket. (He would later learn from police that the two officers found him sitting naked on the toilet in the bathroom of his home's third-floor master bedroom. Because his low blood glucose had put him in a zombie-like state, he doesn't remember how he got into the bathroom or much of his interaction with police.)

Police set Burwell on the ground outside his home, wrapped in a blanket and still in handcuffs. “His eyes were closed; he couldn't see,” said McKaig, who after 30 years as a cop can recognize when someone is suffering from the effects of pepper spray. He also reported seeing the two officers who came out of the home having their eyes washed out with water from a hose.

“We were trying to get them to understand that Wayne has a medical condition, but they didn't listen to us,” said Betsy McKaig, who had joined her husband outside to observe the commotion.

Bob McKaig said he tried telling the female officer that he was a former cop who could vouch that the man in custody was the homeowner. “Sometimes (other cops) will extend the courtesy of listening to you when you tell them that you're a retired officer. Not this one. She jumped all over me and said I was interfering with police work.

“If you don't leave, ‘I'll lock you up right now,' ” he recalled the officer saying.

----------------

Sitting on the ground, Burwell remembers an officer asking him his name and whether he lived there. After answering, he had a question for the cop: “Can you please take the handcuffs off?”

They were cutting into his wrists. The officer refused. “We need to ask you a few more questions.” (At DHMC, two stitches were needed in his left wrist to close a cut made by the cuffs.)

Roughly 10 minutes after police arrived, paramedics and firefighters pulled into the Stony Creek parking lot. McKaig surmised that paramedics recognized Burwell from an earlier emergency call to his townhome. “They must have figured out who he was.”

Paramedics began treating him for his low blood glucose. He was placed on a stretcher and loaded into an ambulance. A woman from the cleaning service retrieved clothes from his home, so he would have something to wear when it came time to leave the hospital.

Burwell was treated and released from DHMC about five hours later. He was not charged with any crime.

http://www.vnews.com/06042010/6673969.htm

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8506764#8506902