Progressive Racism and Stupidity Know No Bounds

The attack on the Romneys and their newly adopted family member, little Kieran James Romney, truly exemplifies the worst of Progressivism and the worst in the mainstream media! It is Progressive (reverse) racism, stupidity and anti-conservatism all rolled into one!

2013

2012

By Marion Algier – AskMarion

Each year the Romneys, like many families, take a family photo for their Christmas cards.  Sometime the photo includes the whole family, kids and grandkids, sometimes just the Mitt and Ann Romney with the grandkids.

MSNBC’s (Reverse) Racist Progressive Anchor Melissa Harris-Perry Strikes Again

For me the yearly photo is inspirational, showing a beautiful loving family that should be a model and inspiration for anyone… everyone.  But the leftist hate-mongers and race-baiters like Melissa Harris Perry, the MSNBC host that started the whole white Santa/white Jesus debate, in an attempt to stir the racism pot, and playing out in an attempt to make newest Fox primetime anchor Megyn Kelly look like a racist… because she said Santa and Jesus were white.  And yes, this is the same MSNBC where anchor Martin Bashir made the disgusting remarks about Sarah Palin which ultimately led to his resignation. 

Video: Melissa Harris-Perry MSNBC Panel Mocks Mitt Romney and Black Grandson

Melissa Harris-Perry Panel Mocks Black Romney Grandchild As Token:

The MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry concluded the "What's So Funny About 2013?" segment of her Sunday show with a chorus of laughter at the black grandson pictured in former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's family Christmas photo. The chuckles were directed at baby Kieran - who was adopted by Romney's son Ben and his wife Andelynne in September.

"One of these things is not like the others, one of these things just isn't the same," panelist Pia Glenn offered as a caption for the photo, which the Romneys tweeted on Christmas Eve. (Lyrics of the original "Sesame Street" song are, "One of these things just doesn't belong.")

"And that little baby, front and center, would be the one," Glenn said.

It continued with:

The host then mused at the possibility of a marriage between Kieran Romney and North West — child of Kim Kardashian and Kanye West.

“Can you imagine Mitt Romney and Kanye West as in-laws?” she asked.

“I think this picture is great,” comedian Dean Obeidallah chimed in. “It really sums up the diversity of the Republican party and the RNC, where they have the whole convention and they find the one black person.”

Conservative bloggers alerted by the Right Scoop and decent people with a heart and common sense everywhere were appalled. As Dana Parino of Fox said on The Five, “Thank God for the Right Scoop, one of the few who watch MSNBC to alert the rest of us”. Jessie Waters, as part of a panel discussion on ‘The Five’, added that his uncle adopted a black baby, who is now grown, that everyone loves and always accepted as part of the family without thought or question and felt that this was actually an attack on baby Kieran as much as on Mitt Romney.

Ironically, the segment ends by teasing in the next block, an annual "'Look Back in Laughter' tradition of asking 'Hey - Was That Racist?'"

Obeidallah later apologized in a statement to CNN, saying: "Occasionally my jokes have been known to 'cross the line' and I can assure you that in the future some of my jokes will do that again. My joke on MHP was not intended in any way to mock the Romney family or the baby they adopted. Rather it was a joke about the lack of racial diversity that we see at the Republican National Convention. I apologize to the Romney family and especially the baby if any of them were offended by that joke."

Glenn apologized for the controversy on Twitter, writing, "In a spontaneous reaction to a photo, my disdain for Mitt Romney's political platform led me to inadvertently insult adoptive families ... I can say all day what I 'meant,' but my intentions do not negate the very real pain I have caused. I sincerely apologize.

These days Republicans and anyone to the right of the Progressive media are damned if they do and damned if they don’t…

And from all reports, Mitt and Ann Romney are generous, loving and spiritual people who are family oriented and love all their kids and grandkids without question and are also always the first to volunteer to help anyone in need. Sounds like a great family for Kieran or any child to be a part of!

It is time to look at which side of the aisle the racism is really coming from plus time to look at what lengths Progressives are willing to go to discredit and attack Conservatives, Republicans, people in the Faith Community and even their children… regardless of the truth; just like they did the toddlers of Sarah Palin and Rick Santorum, both special needs kids. Palin slammed MSNBC’s mockery of the Romney grandchild saying, 'Holy Unbelievable'…!!

Nobody said a word when Hollywood liberal Sandra Bullock adopted a black baby as a single mom following her hit movie The Blind Side [Blu-ray], which coincidentally follows the theme of that movie, or when liberals Angelina Jolie or Madonna adopted non-white children.  And newly elected self-avowed Marxist Mayor of New York Bill de Blasio is looked at as a progressive thinker for having a black wife and mixed race children.  Oh and then there is MSNBC anchor Melissa Harris-Perry herself a product of a mixed marriage. Was her life a joke or a mistake?  I guess if you are a liberal you are a hero if you adopt a minority child or have an interracial marriage, but if you are a religious Republican family like the Romneys or Arizona Senator John McCain who also adopted a child of a different race after his wife Cindy brought daughter Bridget home after a cyclone relief trip to Bangladesh in 1991, you are trying to score political points or are somehow insincere in your intentions at best? 

Perhaps this is also a good time to look at the real history of Racism in the Democrat party, remembering that Lincoln was the first Republican president and that most blacks were Republicans until ‘the powers that be at the time’ cut a deal for their vote with MLK and other civil rights leaders in exchange for the civil rights legislation passed under LBJ, but actually originally proposed by Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower.  Time to look at the intolerance of Progressives in action; far different from their words.  And perhaps its even time to ponder the affects of the left’s Holy Grail: Unfettered Abortion Rights that have killed millions black babies, a larger percentage much larger than of any other race or ethnic group in the U.S.; something that would make eugenicist founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, smile. 

Because of the outrage, Melissa Harris-Perry finally was forced to apologize for this segment, as well, but there is a pattern here… perhaps it is time for Harris-Perry to follow Martin Bashir out the door, or is the true problem MSNBC needing a scrubbing of conscience, an injection of common sense, a lesson in journalism and a major overhaul?  Progressives in D.C. and the media have been manipulating, indoctrinating and slanting the news as well as the opinions of average Americans for far too long!! 

Kieran James Romney (right) is the newest addition to Mitt Romney's ... pictured with his mom and sister

Technorati Tags: Romney,Racebaiters,MSNBC,Hatemongers,Racism,Liberals,Progressives,Progressivism,Haters,Palin,Adoption,Real-Racism,Megyn Kelly,Anti-Conservatism,Love,Margaret Sanger,Special Needs,MLK,Democrats,Republicans,MSM,Liberal Bias Media,True-Colors,Double Standard,Intolerance

Race and Religion in Obamaland…

Blacks' Dilemma With Obama

Election of our nation's first black president is delivering an unexpected message to our black population.

Blacks are discovering that what a man or woman does -- their actions -- is what matters, not the color of their skin.

It seems ridiculous to point out that this was supposedly the point of the civil rights movement. Purge racism from America.

But blacks themselves have been the ones having the hardest time letting it go.

It is not hard to understand why black Americans were happy that a black man was elected president of the United States. It was kind of a final and most grand announcement that racism has finally been purged from America.

But for the highly politicized parts of black America this was certainly not the only message. Because for the highly politicized parts of black America, the point has always been to keep race in American politics.

For black political culture that dominated after the civil rights movement, the point was not just equal treatment under the law, but special treatment under the law. Plus the assumption that more black political power -- defined by more blacks holding office -- would mean that blacks would be better off.

In other words, post-civil rights movement black political culture embraced an agenda exactly the opposite of what the civil rights movement was about. Its agenda was to get laws and policies that were not neutral but racially slanted and to put individuals in power based on their race and not on their character and capability.

So, according to the script of this political culture, election of a black man as president meant more than an end to racism. The conclusion had to be that if the man holding the highest political office in the nation was black, it must follow that blacks would be better off.

Now blacks have a dilemma. We have a black president and blacks are worse off. Not just a little, but a lot worse off.

In the words of longtime Congressional Black Caucus member Maxine Waters, D-Calif., "Our people are hurtin'.."

Blacks now grapple with two possible conclusions.

One, our black president is a traitor to his race. Our struggles put him in power and now he's not taking care of his folks. He's become, in the words of left wing professor and activist Cornel West, a "mascot" of Wall Street.

Or, two, that the man's performance reflects his views and his capability, not his race. He's not delivering for anyone. Blacks are hurting more because they were already in worse shape when Obama got elected. Bad policies hurt the weakest the most.

And it happens that the bad policies that have always failed are the big government liberalism that has defined modern black politics.

With further thought, blacks might realize it's this same flawed idea -- that growing government and electing black politicians would make blacks better off -- that explains why blacks have remained disproportionately "hurtin".

Take the Congressional Black Caucus itself. The average poverty rate in Black Caucus districts is almost 50 percent higher than the national average. Yet, these black politicians have 100 percent re-election rates.

Maybe a real bonus that will have come from electing a black president is that blacks will take seriously Dr. King's dream that we judge men by their character and not their color.

The Civil Rights Movement took blacks to the edge of the Promised Land. But political activism can only remove barriers to freedom.

It's up to the individual to embrace freedom and take on the personal responsibilities that go with it.

Maybe blacks will realize that they should blame Barack Obama. Not because he is black, but because he is a liberal. And because he has grown government to the point where the oxygen necessary for freedom and prosperity is being squeezed out of our nation.

Star Parker  -  founder and president of CURE, the Center for Urban Renewal and Education, a 501c3 think tank which explores and promotes market based public policy to fight poverty, as well as author of the newly revised Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can do About It  -  Posted at Townhall

 

Black Tea Party Leader Demands Apology from Maxine Waters

Contact: 323-556-2623

LOS ANGELES, Aug. 23, 2011 /Standard Newswire/ -- South Central L.A. Tea Party Founder and President, Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson is demanding an apology from Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), for her remarks that the "tea party can go straight to hell." Rep. Waters made her comments last Saturday at a forum in Inglewood, Calif., while vowing to push Congress to focus on creating more jobs. "I'm not afraid of anybody," said Waters. "This is a tough game. You can't be intimidated. You can't be frightened. And as far as I'm concerned the 'tea party' can go straight to hell." According to reports, Waters comments were met with cheers from the audience, which included SEIU members. Newly released figures indicate that California's unemployment rate last month went up to 12%, from 11.8%. California now has second-highest rate of unemployment in the nation, trailing only Nevada at 12.9 %.

"Scapegoating the tea party for the wasteful liberal social policies which are destroying the U.S. economy is wicked and irresponsible," said Rev. Peterson. "On behalf of millions of patriotic Americans we demand that Waters apologize! The tea party is the solution, not the problem. I'm sure Maxine Waters would like her attacks on the tea party to distract from her failures and serious ethics issues."

The House ethics committee is investigating Congresswoman Waters for allegations that she improperly tried to obtain a federal bailout for a bank where her husband owns stock. Last week, the committee announced that it has named Washington Lawyer Billy Martin as an outside counsel to investigate the embattled California lawmaker. Waters, a senior member of the Financial Services Committee, has denied wrongdoing.

Rev. Peterson said, "Maxine Waters helped cripple the U.S. economy by pushing home loans to people who couldn't afford them." He added, "Waters rant damning the tea party is an attempt to fire up her base and shore up support since the committee will not dismiss her case."

The South Central L.A. Tea Party (SCLATP) motto is "Power to the People!" It is open to patriotic American men and women of all races. SCLATP was formed in 2011by Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, who is the Founder and President of BOND Action, a 501 (c) (4) nonprofit organization dedicated to "educating, motivating, and rallying Americans to greater involvement in the moral, cultural and political issues that threaten our great country." The SCLATP recently held a successful rally to expose NAACP lies about the Tea Party, click here to watch report. For information visit www.bondaction.org.

EDITORIAL: Obama: Whites need not apply

The White House issued an executive order on Thursday titled “Establishing a Coordinated Government-wide Initiative to Promote Diversity and Inclusion in the Federal Workforce.” The purpose of the order is “to promote the federal workplace as a model of equal opportunity, diversity and inclusion.” In other words, it would be better for the government if public-spirited white workers sought employment elsewhere. Lost amid all the politically correct box-checking is the principle that the most qualified person should be hired for a job.

President Obama’s new order instructs federal agencies to design new strategies for hiring, promoting and keeping workers of “diverse” backgrounds. The diversity the government is seeking is not diversity of ideas, outlooks or work experiences. In contemporary political parlance, “diversity” refers primarily to the color of one’s skin and not the content of one’s character. The executive order says the federal government “must create a culture that encourages collaboration, flexibility and fairness to enable individuals to participate to their full potential.” In the name of “fairness,” however, the government will intensify programs that discriminate against white Americans by extending special privileges to everyone else. The order also says that “attaining a diverse, qualified workforce is one of the cornerstones of the merit-based civil service,” though merit and ability are not the metrics of choice when measuring success in diversity-driven career programs.

The order states that by law, the federal government’s recruitment policies should “endeavor to achieve a workforce from all segments of society” and that “as the nation’s largest employer, the federal government has a special obligation to lead by example.” In that respect, the government could largely declare mission accomplished. A quick look at the demographic breakdown of the federal payroll shows that “diversity” goals have been more than met. According to the Office of Personnel Management, federal employees in fiscal 2010 were 66.2 percent white, 17.7 percent black, 8 percent Hispanic, 5.6 percent Asian and Pacific Islander and 1.8 percent American Indian. Compared to the general U.S. population, the federal force is a bit too diverse. Blacks are overrepresented by 6.9 percent compared to the civilian work force, Asians and Pacific Islanders by 1.2 percent, and American Indians are more than double their proportion of the population at large. White Americans, who make up about 70 percent of the work force, are underrepresented by around 4 percent. Hispanics are also underrepresented despite the Clinton-era executive order 13171, “Hispanic Employment in the Federal Government.”

During the 2008 presidential campaign and in the initial months of the Obama presidency, there was great enthusiasm for the concept of post-racial America. Mr. Obama’s historic election was viewed as a watershed for the issue of race relations. People thought that finally a national dialogue could be commenced on the issue free of guilt and recriminations. This promise stumbled with the July 2009 Rose Garden “beer summit” between Mr. Obama, black Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr., and white Cambridge, Mass., police Sgt. James Crowley, who had arrested Mr. Gates for disorderly conduct. At the time, Mr. Obama called it a “teachable moment,” but that White House photo-op was the last anyone heard about the national dialogue on race. Mr. Obama has squandered his chance to lead America away from the divisive racial politics of the past. This executive order tells America that in the Obama administration, race-based preferences are still business as usual.

FBI list: You might be a domestic terrorist if . . . You Are White and or a Christian

· Ridiculous FBI list: You might be a domestic terrorist if . . .

...Sadly this is part two and not a You-Might-Be-a-Redneck-If-type joke as there is more proof that you might be a domestic terrorist if you actually believe your Constitutional Rights, or if you express concerns about Big Brother, or even if you have ever discussed the apocalypse online and your 'radical' Christian beliefs. When it comes to disasters, if your plan is to "be prepared" like the Boy Scout motto, then guess what? Be prepared to be suspicious and end up on a watchlist as a domestic terrorist...

You might be a domestic terrorist if you pay cash or if you "insist" on privacy when, for no reason, you are asked to show your identification. Sadly this is part two and not a You-Might-Be-a-Redneck-If-type joke as there is more proof that you might be a domestic terrorist if you actually believe your Constitutional Rights, or if you express concerns about Big Brother, or even if you have ever discussed the apocalypse online and your 'radical' Christian beliefs. When it comes to disasters, if your plan is to "be prepared" like the Boy Scout motto, then guess what? Be prepared to be suspicious and end up on a watchlist as a domestic terrorist. Prepared Girl Scouts are not safe either.

Oath Keepers posted [PDF] a "communities against terrorism" brochure that the Colorado FBI handed out as a potential indicator of terrorist activities to military surplus stores. The alarming list suggests that suspicious activities includes insisting to pay with cash or if the "suspect" demands "identity privacy." If you went into a military surplus store previously, don't alter your appearance such as by shaving, changing your hair color, or your style of dressing because that too may make you a domestic terrorist. Don't go buying items there as an intended gift because possessing "little knowledge of intended purchase items" makes you a potential extremist to be reported. Better shower well or use cologne/perfume because if you smell strange? You guessed it, you potential terrorist you.

That's not nearly all the "suspicious activity" that might get you labeled as a domestic terrorist. What if you are trying to follow disaster preparedness guidelines as suggested by other government agencies like DHS or the CDC? Not too long ago, the CDC compiled a "Zombie Apocalypse" disaster preparedness list that was such a viral social media hit that it crashed the servers. Well you might be suspicious and a domestic terrorist if you purchase meals ready to eat, weatherproofed ammunition or match containers, night vision devices, night flashlights or gas masks. Examiner journalist Kurt Hofmann pointed out that purchasing such items makes you a "suspected terrorist" but not purchasing the CDC's survival preparedness items means you will be devoured by zombies? Hofmann also says that ironically Homeland Security suggests that citizens have disaster preparedness supplies on hand.

It began when the White House announced a community-based approach to fight domestic terrorism and published "Empowering local partners to prevent violent extremism in the United States" [PDF]. The strategy is to strengthen cooperation between law enforcement, communities and the federal government. Among other things, it will help "communities to better understand and protect themselves against violent extremist propaganda, especially online." No big deal, you aren't an extremist? In what seems almost to be talk out of both sides of the same mouth, the document states, "Though we will not tolerate illegal activities, opposition to government policy is neither illegal nor unpatriotic and does not make someone a violent extremist." That is, it's not yet officially rubber-stamped to get your name on a watchlist. While it recommends peaceful means, and I'm all for peace, we've seen how officially or not, members of peace groups have ended up on watchlists like they might be terrorist scum because domestic spying is nearly at Cold War levels!

Another White House proposed community-based strategy is a comprehensive gang model, but law enforcement has long been hunting for gangs and terrorists who utilize Xbox and PS3 and warned the gaming realm like World of Warcraft is allegedly used to recruit and to plan chaos. Also, now the NYPD has formed a new social media unit to data-mine Facebook and Twitter for mayhem.

"Under the logic of this most recent handout, the Boy Scouts should be reported as 'suspicious',"wrote Oath Keepers. "Funny thing is, who exactly do the authors of these handouts think they are talking to when they ask gun store and military surplus store owners and staff to spy on their customers and serve as a network of government snitches?"

The flyers have also been handed out in Wyoming and similar brochures were passed out in gun stores from Utah to Connecticut. Authorities in Denver confirmed the suspicious activities document is "going to surplus stores, hotels and motels, farm supply companies that handle fertilizer and gun shops," Oath Keepers reported. "The answer to the government's silly lists is to make the lists so damn long they end up including every able bodied American (who is supposed to be the militia anyway), and thus the damnable lists become useless."

According to WND, a DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis included "right-wing extremism" in the U.S. as "divided into those groups, movements and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups) and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."

You might be a domestic terrorist if you are supporter of Ron Paul for president. Missouri law enforcement has been encouraged to report such suspicious behavior as having a bumper sticker that supports Ron Paul. A Missouri Information Analysis Center report also "warned law enforcement to watch out for individuals with 'radical' ideologies based on Christian views, such as opposing illegal immigration, abortion and federal taxes."

God help you if you are a hacker, in the sense of modding whatever it is you plan to buy, cause that too is suspicious, you potential terrorist you. Although I'm joking so that I don't cry, I'm angry about all these &$#%*! ridiculous lists of what I consider innocent behavior being treated like it allegedly equals suspicious behavior. Guard your privacy and you are suspicious enough to be reported as a potential domestic terrorist? Why should a person be required to show identification if what they are purchasing is with cash and does not require ID? Homeland Security already has massive databases of secret watchlists! I'm a bit afraid to ask what's next? That online articles disagreeing with such asinine lists could be construed as civil unrest needing squashed?

Sadly my friends… this is the hope and change…

People Are Reporting Mass Military Movement Around Country & Ron Paul on FEMA Camps

Also: Check out MLK Memorial Made in China

Social Degeneration (Parts 1 & 2)

Someone at long last has had the courage to tell the plain, honest truth about race.

After mobs of young blacks rampaged through Philadelphia committing violence -- as similar mobs have rampaged through Chicago, Denver, Milwaukee and other places -- Philadelphia's black mayor, Michael A. Nutter, ordered a police crackdown and lashed out at the whole lifestyle of those who did such things.

"Pull up your pants and buy a belt 'cause no one wants to see your underwear or the crack of your butt," he said. "If you walk into somebody's office with your hair uncombed and a pick in the back, and your shoes untied, and your pants half down, tattoos up and down your arms and on your neck, and you wonder why somebody won't hire you? They don't hire you 'cause you look like you're crazy," the mayor said. He added: "You have damaged your own race."

While this might seem like it is just plain common sense, what Mayor Nutter said undermines a whole vision of the world that has brought fame, fortune and power to race hustlers in politics, the media and academia. Any racial disparities in hiring can only be due to racism and discrimination, according to the prevailing vision, which reaches from street corner demagogues to the august chambers of the Supreme Court of the United States.

Just to identify the rioters and looters as black is a radical departure, when mayors, police chiefs and the media in other cities report on these outbreaks of violence without mentioning the race of those who are doing these things. The Chicago Tribune even made excuses for failing to mention race when reporting on violent attacks by blacks on whites in Chicago.

Such excuses might make sense if the same politicians and media talking heads were not constantly mentioning race when denouncing the fact that a disproportionate number of young black men are being sent to prison.

The prevailing social dogma is that disparities in outcomes between races can only be due to disparities in how these races are treated. In other words, there cannot possibly be any differences in behavior.

But if black and white Americans had exactly the same behavior patterns, they would be the only two groups on this planet that are the same.

The Chinese minority in Malaysia has long been more successful and more prosperous than the Malay majority, just as the Indians in Fiji have long been more successful and more prosperous than the indigenous Fijians. At various places and times throughout history, the same could be said of the Armenians in Turkey, the Lebanese in Sierra Leone, the Parsees in India, the Japanese in Brazil, and numerous others

There are similar disparities within particular racial or ethnic groups. Even this late in history, I have had northern Italians explain to me why they are not like southern Italians. In Australia, Jewish leaders in both Sydney and Melbourne went to great lengths to tell me why and how the Jews are different in these two cities.

In the United States, despite the higher poverty level among blacks than among whites, the poverty rate among black married couples has been in single digits since 1994. The disparities within the black community are huge, both in behavior and in outcomes.

Nevertheless, the dogma persists that differences between groups can only be due to the way others treat them or to differences in the way others perceive them in "stereotypes."

All around the country, people in politics and the media have been tip-toeing around the fact that violent attacks by blacks on whites in public places are racially motivated, even when the attackers themselves use anti-white invective and mock the victims they leave lying on the streets bleeding.

This is not something to ignore or excuse. It is something to be stopped. Mayor Michael Nutter of Philadelphia seems to be the first to openly recognize this.

This needs to be done for the sake of both black and white Americans -- and even for the sake of the hoodlums. They have set out on a path that leads only downward for themselves.

Although much of the media have their antennae out to pick up anything that might be construed as racism against blacks, they resolutely ignore even the most blatant racism by blacks against others.

That includes a pattern of violent attacks on whites in public places in Chicago, Denver, New York, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Los Angeles and Kansas City, as well as blacks in schools beating up Asian classmates -- for years -- in New York and Philadelphia.

These attacks have been accompanied by explicitly racist statements by the attackers, so it is not a question of having to figure out what the motivation is. There has also been rioting and looting by these young hoodlums.

Yet blacks have no monopoly on these ugly and malicious episodes. Remarkably similar things are being done by lower-class whites in England. Anybody reading "Life at the Bottom" by Theodore Dalrymple will recognize the same barbaric and self-destructive patterns among people with the same attitudes, even though their skin color is different.

Anyone reading today's headline stories about young hoodlums turning the streets of London into scenes of shattered and burning chaos, complete with violence, will discover the down side of the brotherhood of man.

While the history and the races are different, what is the same in both countries are the social policies and social attitudes long promoted by the intelligentsia and welfare state politicians.

A recent study in England found 352,000 households in which nobody had ever worked. Moreover, two-thirds of the adults in those households said that they didn't want to work. As in America, such people feel both "entitled" and aggrieved.

In both countries, those who have achieved less have been taught by the educational system, by the media and by politicians on the left that they have a grievance against those who have achieved more. As in the United States, they feel a fierce sense of resentment against strangers who have done nothing to them, and lash out violently against those strangers.

During the riots, looting and violence in England, a young woman was quoted as saying that this showed "the rich" and the police that "we can do whatever we want." Among the things done during these riots was forcing apparently prosperous looking people to strip naked in the streets.

The need to bring people down in humiliation that marked the mass violence against the Armenians in Turkey nearly a century ago, and that later marked the Nazi persecutions of the Jews in Germany, is still alive and well in people who resent those who have achieved more than they have.

A milder but revealing episode in England some time back involved burglars who were not content to simply steal things but also vented their hostility by scrawling on the wall: "RICH BASTARDS."

In the United States, young black thugs attacked whites with baseball bats and took their belongings in Denver, while voicing their hatred of whites. But it is all a very similar attitude to what has been found in other countries and other times.

Today's politically correct intelligentsia will tell you that the reason for this alienation and lashing out is that there are great disparities and inequities that need to be addressed.

But such barbarism was not nearly as widespread two generations ago, in the middle of the 20th century. Were there no disparities or inequities then? Actually there were more.

What is different today is that there has been -- for decades -- a steady drumbeat of media and political hype about differences in income, education and other outcomes, blaming these differences on oppression against those with fewer achievements or lesser prosperity.

Moreover, there has been a growing tolerance of lawlessness and a growing intolerance toward the idea that people who are lagging need to take steps to raise themselves up, instead of trying to pull others down.

All this exalts those who talk such lofty talk. But others pay the price -- and ultimately that includes even those who take the road toward barbarism.

 

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.

 

Related:

Political Correctness

Multiculturalism

High School Principal With Principles

The Left’s Race Card

'A Slippery Character': New Details Emerge About Obama's Father

With a father like this, it is little wonder President Obama did not want to release his full birth certificate.  Barack Hussein Obama, Sr, the root of The Roots of Obama's Rage.

Though the proof that he was actually born in Hawaii may silence some critics, a new, rather more interesting side of his life has emerged - that his father Barack Obama senior was a serial womanizer and polygamist who government and university officials were trying to force out of the country.

Obama senior married Stanley Ann Dunham, a white student from Kansas, not only when he was said to have already been married to a woman in Kenya, but at a time when interracial marriages were still illegal in many parts of the U.S.

Documents obtained from the U.S. immigration service paint a picture of a man who 'had an eye for the ladies' and, according to his file, had to be warned several times to stay away from girls at the university.

Heather Smathers, a investigative journalist with the Arizona Independent, obtained the files through a Freedom of Information request.

A memo from a University of Hawaii foreign student advisor said that Obama senior had 'been running around with several girls since he first arrived here and last summer she cautioned him about his playboy ways. Subject replied that he would "try" to stay away from the girls.'

It also considered his earlier Kenya marriage as a grounds to deny him a visa extension but concluded that 'polygamy was not an excludable or deportation charge'.

'A slippery character': President Obama's father was a serial womanizer who had to be warned to stop his 'playboy ways'

Family portrait: A rare snapshot of President Obama with his father Barack Obama senior who, new documents reveal was a serial womanizer and polygamist

Happier times: Barack Obama senior stands with the President's mother Stanley Ann Dunham at an airport in Hawaii

Heather Smathers, a investigative journalist with the Arizona Independent, obtained the files through a Freedom of Information request.

A memo from a University of Hawaii foreign student advisor said that Obama senior had 'been running around with several girls since he first arrived here and last summer she cautioned him about his playboy ways. Subject replied that he would "try" to stay away from the girls.'

It also considered his earlier Kenya marriage as a grounds to deny him a visa extension but concluded that 'polygamy was not an excludable or deportation charge'.

He is further described as 'a slippery character', and his relationships with 'several women' are discussed and investigated, while questions about his 'marital problems' are repeatedly raised.

Another immigration memo, from June 1964, records that Harvard officials were trying 'to get rid of him' and 'couldn't seem to figure out how many wives he had'.

The documents also specify that he had a child - Barack Obama junior - while he was at the university on August 4, 1961.

The memo also notes that he be 'closely questioned before another extension is granted - and denial be considered'.

Other notes make reference to some kind of campaign to drive Obama senior out of the country and back to Kenya. The memo advised officials to withdraw his funding.

It said: 'Obama has passed his general exams, which indicates that on academic grounds he is entitled to stay around here and write his thesis; however [Harvard] are going to try to cook something up to ease him out.... They are planning on telling him that they will not give him any money, and that he had better return to Kenya and prepare his thesis at home.'

President Obama's mother met his father at a Russian language class at the University of Hawaii in 1960. At the time he was the first and only African student at the university.

When they married, she did not realize that he had a wife and child in Kenya. The couple divorced in 1963 and Ann Dunham struggled as a single mother to bring up her child, just as her estranged husband was at studying at Harvard and reportedly carousing after women.

The pictures have been put up in a 'shrine' in the apartment where Obama grew up

President Obama is honored in the shrine that comprises a host of family photos outside the lobby of an Punahou Circle apartment complex in Hawaii

Meanwhile a collection of pictures collected in Punahou show President Obama with family and friends, depicting a regular childhood in the 60s and 70s as he was looked after by his grandparents, oblivious to his real father's womanizing ways.

The President was raised with help from his grandfather, a soldier, and grandmother who worked in a bank.

The last time President Obama saw his father was in 1971 when he was ten years old. Obama Sr. was killed 11 years later in a car accident in 1982.

Of his early childhood, President Obama has said 'That my father looked nothing like the people around me - that he was black as pitch, my mother white as milk - barely registered in my mind.'

Longtime residents in the Punahou Circle Apartment block have put up the display to honor their former neighbor, who they remember as a 'sweet' child.

They said it was set up to honor the resident turned president and pay homage to his grandparents Madelyn and Stanley.

The pictures show Mr. Obama as a little boy with his family, later as a student receiving an honor and ultimately his official presidential picture and one with his wife Michelle and their two children.

Barack Obama as a student, years before he entered the White House

The politician lived with his grandparents in Hawaii before moving to Chicago

The pictures emerged after Mr Obama was forced to publish his full birth certificate in a bid to quash rumours about his nationality.

The U.S. President said he made the document available because America 'does not have time for this kind of silliness' and has to move on.

His intervention came after the 'birther' debate about his origins and religion had moved from the political fringes to take centre stage.

His birth certificate shows he was born at the Kapiolani Maternity and Gynaecological Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii.

Former DOH Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino Claimed Obama’s Vault Copy Birth Certificate Was Half Handwritten

Mr Obama has been dogged by persistent questions about his citizenship since the election more than two years ago. More than 60 per cent of Americans have told pollsters they are not convinced he was born in the U.S.

If true, this would make the politician constitutionally ineligible to occupy the White House.

Many senior Republicans have tried to distance themselves from the birther movement and some suspect it has been encouraged by the White House in order to discredit the opposition party.

One tenant of Ponahue said of the President: 'He was a great kid and obviously his grandparents did an amazing job of raising him. All we have are fond memories, his grandparents were wonderful people and Barry was a sweet and respectful child.

'Our little lobby tribute has become a must-see tourist destination. It shows a family-oriented Barack surround by love. Who knew that little Barry would become president of the United States?'

Setting record straight: Barack Obama and Michelle chat to Oprah Winfrey last night on a show that will air on May 2

h/t to: dailymail.co.uk, Fox Nation and

Video: Wayne Madison Bombshell: Barack Obama Conclusively Outed As CIA Creation – AJ 1/3

Full  Story in Print: Bombshell:  Barack Obama Conclusively Outed as CIA Creation

Shorebank:  Obama’s Mother and Geithner’s Father…  Hmmmm… Coincidences?

Related:

Obama won’t produce birth certificate because it would reveal TRUE identity of his father: Hawaii senator’s extraordinary claim

--> Former DOH Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino Claimed Obama’s Vault Copy Birth Certificate Was Half Handwritten <--

Obama’s Mentor: Frank Marshall Davis

FBI Destroys File on Obama’s Grandfather

Valerie Jarrett’s Mother and Bill Ayer’s Father

It is looking more and more evident that the question of Obama’s eligibility may come down to his father’s citizenship, his adoption by a non-citizen. Lolo Soetoro and/or his dual citizenship: Barack Obama Running from Barry Soetoro… but there there are always those pesky newspaper and magazine ads from Kenya announcing Kenyan born Barack Hussein Obama Jr. was elected to the U.S. Senate, his Kenyan grandma’s statement that she was at his birth in Kenya and that Kenyan birth certificate that keeps surfacing… but don’t pay any attention to any of that???  There is nothing to see???  Or maybe there is?

“There are non so blind as he/they that will not see!!”

Black Chamber of Commerce Head:  Obama is “Fanatical” & “Marxist”  -  I Only Voted for Him ‘Because He’s Black’… and then there was the “White Guilt”

Will Ignorance Lead to a Second Obama Term??, plus the added components of  Political Correctness, white guilt, ethnic and racial allegiance, and blind liberal Obama media worship?

Related:

MSTSATTOCI: Special Eligibility Edition 

Coil of Rage

NFL Owners Who Use The N-Word And Wet Their Pants On Stage But the NFL Was Worried Rush Was Beneath Their Standards?

And now a word from an NFL owner:

“And the game done chose me to bring pain to niggas and pussy holes, they one in the same.” - I’m Real, co-written by Jennifer Lopez, minority owner of the Miami Dolphins.

Amidst the uproar over Rush Limbaugh having to step aside from his participation in the bid to purchase the NFL’s St. Louis Rams over racially insensitive statements he never actually made, is the fact that current ACTUAL owners of an NFL team have said much worse than the false and the left says nothing.

Fergie: NFL Owner

Jennifer Lopez, whose Sondheim-like lyric genius is on display at the top of this post, holds the same status with the Miami Dolphins as Limbaugh would have with the Rams. And, not only does she have co-writer credit on this offensive drivel, she also recorded and performed it live. She continues to earn money in royalties for her genius use of the “N-Word.” My guess is that those who took issue with Limbaugh’s imaginary racial slur are OK with J-Lo’s actual racial slur because she looks a lot better in tight pants.

Meanwhile, another minority owner of the Dolphins has some controversial issues with public statements as well. Recently, Dolphins minority owner Serena Williams broke quite a few FCC laws by letting loose an “F-word” filled tirade on live television during the US Open. Then she menacingly threatened a side judge and was subsequently disqualified. This kind of behavior and speech seems to be right in line with the NFL’s standards since I missed the press conference from Commissioner Roger Goodell condemning it.

Finally, we get to Fergie, some-time member of the Black Eyed Peas and some-time solo artist. You betcha, she has also been approved as a minority owner of the Miami Dolphins. Fergie is a huge Obama supporter, so I guess the NFL thought it was pretty cool that she just performed her song “Glamorous” at the White House Easter egg hunt… an event for children. Here’s how the DC Examiner reported the event:

Lines like “wear them gold and diamond rings” and “I’m not clean, I’m not pristine” may not be the dream lyrics for their daughters to emulate, but the song’s repetition of the line “If you ain’t got no money take your broke a** home” made a few parents cringe. She did of course edit the curse word from the song Monday — but some of crowd members helpfully filled it in for her.

It gets better. Earlier this week, Goodell said of Limbaugh’s potential ownership, “Divisive comments are not what the NFL is all about.” Is he splitting hairs between “comments” and “lyrics?” Because these lyrics from a 2003 Black Eyed Peas song sounds pretty divisive to me:

Overseas, yeah, we try to stop terrorism
But we still got terrorists here livin’
In the USA, the big CIA …

A war is goin’ on but the reason’s undercover
The truth is kept secret, it’s swept under the rug

Nothing like accusing the CIA of terrorism and our government of lying to bring people together. Goodell also said, “We’re all held to a high standard here.”

Really? Does this meet his high standard?

Whatcha gonna do with all that junk
All that junk inside your trunk
I’ma get get get get you drunk
Get you love drunk off my hump
My hump my hump my hump my hump my hump
My hump my hump my hump my lovely little lumps

How about drinking so much that you wet your pants, mid-song, on stage, in front of a live audience?

This week the NFL did more to silence conservative political perspectives on the radio then liberals and their “Fairness Doctrine” could ever dream of doing. By bowing to shrill political pressure they forced a group of potential buyers of the St. Louis Rams, headed by Dave Checkett, to drop Rush Limbaugh from the ownership team. Forget for a moment that the heinous statements attributed to Limbaugh were never sourced or substantiated and completely false. Also forget that Limbaugh, as a minority owner, would have no actual control or real influence over personnel or management decisions with the team. None of that matters.

The left hates Limbaugh. He had to be stopped.

But Rush will be just fine. They can’t shut him up; he’s too big. And even if they do pass the “Fairness Doctrine,” he will move to satellite radio and finally give Mel Karmazin a healthy balance sheet.

No, the real danger in all of this is the chilling effect it has on the rest of the conservative world. Those of us articulating our points of view and trying to persuade others. Just like Rush has done for over two decades. And now, the seed has been planted. Someday, we might want to own a football team. Hell, we’re capitalists! Will something we say or write now be twisted around or even made up to smear us and keep us from fulfilling our dream?

Yes, the seed has been planted. They’ve done what the intended to do. It wasn’t about stopping Rush… it was done to stop all of us. And they will lie if they have to, to get what they want.

Change? Yes. Hope? Not so much~

by Stage Right

Why is it that left never gets that these types of issues have nothing to do with the person involved... They have to do with freedom and rights in a free society... which we no longer have.

Fergie has a potty mouth. There is a rapper who is a partial owner whose music is filled with profanity and promotes violence. I think Spike Lee is a partial owner and his stuff is as incendiary toward white people as Rush's remarks. There are guys playing for the NFL who beat their wives and girlfriends, have murdered people, and tortured dogs. And the NFL has a policy whereby no matter how henius your crime, nobody can touch your pension, so they are still paying O.J., and neither the Browns or anyone else could garnish that money.

Let us please stop talking about the standards of the NFL.

I have not weighed in on this whole Rush thing... but the insanity of the unfairness and hate for conservatives just doesn't stop; even when the tired old whacked out liberal lefties like Sharpton have won.

The only good thing about Obamaland is that when they get through taking all our rights we (the people who get it) will get to see the lefties' faces when the 'powers that be' go after them... and they will. Ask anyone who is still around from the Weimar Republic! Sadly though those fleeting moments will be just that in a sea of despair.

And you are right cd, Rush will be fine. It is the average conservative and the Bill of Rights that lost in this battle. And in the end, all Americans lost another battle of freedom, and for capitalism!

And while we are at it... This NFL owners garbage is what our children and grandchildren grew up on. I heard a gal in her twenties on an econ discussion panel rambling on last night about "Why should young people have to pay for health care for a bunch of old (implying useless people); . And you got it... she was a liberal.~ …Ask Marion

Prejudice in Paradise - Hawaii Has a Racism Problem

Hmmm… Add the anti-white racist sentiment of Hawaii’s problems to Obama’s radical black and socialist mentors… and perhaps there is a clue to what is really going on with Barack Obama. Obama is half white and was raised by a white mother and then his white grandparents… so why all the focus on race and his racist reactions to situations even though intellectually he talks about being post racist.

White Americans voted for Obama in large numbers and since the election, except for a couple of crazies on the left fringe like Jeneane Garafalo and TEAM OBAMA itself I have not heard a peep from anyone about race related to President Obama. People do or don’t like Obama, like with all politicians, but his personal popularity has been at the top of the scale with all races. And the people who do dislike or disagree with Obama’s leftist views do so because of the liberalism, not because Obama is black. The race card has been played by the White House… it is not an issue with average America.

Prejudice in Paradise

Celia Padron went on a Hawaiian vacation last year, lured by the prospect of beautiful beaches and friendly people. She, her husband and two teenage daughters enjoyed the black sand beach at Makena State Park on Maui. But a Hawaiian girl accosted her two teenage daughters, saying, "Go back to the mainland" and "Take your white ass off our beaches," says Padron, a pediatric gastroenterologist in New Jersey.

When her husband, 68 at the time, stepped between the girls, three young Hawaiian men slammed him against a vehicle, cutting his ear, and choked and punched him, Padron says. Police officers persuaded the Padrons not to press charges, saying it would be expensive for them to return for court appearances and a Hawaiian judge would side with the Hawaiian assailants, the doctor contends.

Professor Haunani-Kay Trask believes Native Hawaiians have every right to feel hostile toward whites.

"There is no doubt in my mind [the attack] was racially motivated," she adds.

With no known hate groups and a much-trumpeted spirit of aloha or tolerance, few people outside Hawaii realize the state has a racism issue. One reason: The tourism-dependent state barely acknowledges hate crimes. That makes it hard to know how often racial violence is directed at Caucasians, who comprise about 25% of the ethnically diverse state's 1.3 million residents. Those who identify themselves as Native Hawaiian — most residents are of mixed race — account for nearly 20%.

Hawaii has collected hate crimes data since 2002 (most states began doing so a decade earlier). In the first six years, the state reported only 12 hate crimes, and half of those were in 2006. (All other things being equal, the state would be expected to have more than 800 such crimes annually, given the size of its population, according to a federal government study of hate crimes.) There was anti-white bias in eight of those incidents. But that doesn't begin to reflect the extent of racial rancor directed at non-Native Hawaiians in the Aloha State, especially in schools. For example:

• The last day of school has long been unofficially designated "Beat Haole Day," with white students singled out for harassment and violence. (Haole — pronounced how-lee — is slang for a foreigner, usually white, and sometimes is used as a racial slur.)
• A non-Native Hawaiian student who challenged the Hawaiian-preference admission policy at a wealthy private school received a $7 million settlement this year.
• A 12-year-old white girl new to Hawaii from New York City needed 10 surgical staples to close a gash in her head incurred when she was beaten in 2007 by a Native Hawaiian girl who called her a "fucking haole."
• A vocal segment of Native Hawaiians is pushing for independence to end the "prolonged occupation" by the United States and governance by natives.
• Demonstrators shouting racial epithets at whites disrupted a statehood celebration in 2006.

Anti-white sentiments such as these have been more than 200 years in the making. The pivotal event occurred when American and European businessmen, backed by U.S. military forces, overthrew Hawaii's monarch in 1893 and placed her under house arrest two years later. The United States annexed the islands as a territory in 1898, and they became a state in 1959.

Little wonder then that as Hawaii prepares to observe the 50th anniversary of becoming the 50th state on Aug. 21, it will a muted celebration, devoid of parades or fireworks.

Classroom Warfare
Tina Mohr has lived in Hawaii for 25 years. She has Native Hawaiian friends. But in the 2003-04 school year, her twin blond-haired daughters, aged 11 at the time, began getting harassed by Native Hawaiian kids at their school on the Big Island. "Our daughters would come home with bruises and cuts," she tells the Intelligence Report.

One of her girls was assaulted twice in the same day. In one scuffle, she had her head slammed into a wall, and her attacker continued to threaten her. Her daughter suffered a dislocated jaw and had headaches for five weeks, Mohr says.

The torment continued in the summer between 5th and 6th grades. Native Hawaiian girls stalked and threatened her daughters and yelled "fucking haole" at them. Midway through the 6th grade, Mohr began to home-school her daughters.

She filed a complaint with the civil rights division of the U.S. Department of Education in 2004. It was only recently, on Dec. 31, 2008, that the division finally released its report. The report concluded there was "substantial evidence that students experienced racially and sexually derogatory name-calling on nearly a daily basis on school buses, at school bus stops, in school hallways and other areas of the school" that Mohr's children attended.

The epithets included names such as "f*****g haole," "haole c**t" and "haole whore," according to the report. Students were told "go home" and "you don't belong here." Most of the slurs were directed by "local" or non-white students at Caucasians, especially those who were younger, smaller, light-skinned and blond.

The report also concluded that school officials responded inadequately or not at all when students complained of racial harassment. Students who did complain were retaliated against by their antagonists. "They learned not to report this stuff," Mohr says of her own daughters.

The Hawaii Department of Education settled Mohr's complaint with a lengthy agreement in which educators promised to take various steps to improve the reporting, investigating and eliminating of student harassment in the future. Today, Mohr's daughters are again attending the school where they used to have trouble. They haven't been assaulted, but one was threatened on a school bus earlier this year.

Racial Legacies
The resentment some Native Hawaiians feels toward whites today can be chalked up in part to "ancestral memory," says Jon Matsuoka, dean of the School of Social Work at the University of Hawaii. "That trauma is qualitatively different than other ethnic groups in America. It's more akin to American Indians" because Hawaiians had their homeland invaded, were exposed to diseases for which they had no immunity, and had an alien culture forced upon them, he says. Stories about the theft of their lands and culture have been passed down from one generation to the next, Matsuoka adds. (One difference now, of course, is that Native Hawaiians in Hawaii are far more numerous than American Indians are in their own ancestral regions, where the Indians remain politically weak and largely marginalized by the far larger white population.)

Racial violence directed at whites in Hawaii, while deplorable, is minor compared to the larger issues underlying it, Matsuoka says. The Hawaiian spirit of aloha "is pervasive, but you have to earn aloha. You don't necessarily trust outsiders, because outsiders [historically] come and have taken what you have. It's an incredibly giving and warm and generous place, but you have to earn it," he says.

Further fueling the resentment that some Native Hawaiians feel for outsiders are attempts by the latter to usurp entitlement programs given the former to redress previous wrongs. In recent years, non-native residents have used the courts to try and rescind these entitlements on grounds that they are racially discriminatory and violate the U.S. Constitution.

Kenneth Conklin

Retired professor and "anti-sovereign" white activist Kenneth Conklin and others prevailed in a lawsuit in 2000 that challenged a requirement that trustees of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs — OHA — be of Native Hawaiian descent. OHA oversees huge tracts of lands that the United States took from Hawaii when it annexed the islands as a territory, and collects revenues from them for programs that benefit Native Hawaiians.

The state government was going to sell 1.2 million acres of these lands to developers for two state-sponsored affordable housing projects when OHA and four Native Hawaiian plaintiffs sued to stop the deal. A state court sided with the government, but the Hawaii Supreme Court reversed in favor of the plaintiffs. This March 31, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the Hawaii high court erred and sent the case back for further action.

There also was an unsuccessful legal challenge to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, passed by Congress in 1921. The act allows a Hawaiian agency to make 99-year leases at $1 per year to Native Hawaiians (but not other residents) for authorized uses on lands ceded to the United States when it annexed Hawaii. More than 200,000 acres of land were designated for uses such as homes and ranches.

One of the more protracted legal battles involved a lawsuit filed in 2003 by a non-Native Hawaiian student against the hugely wealthy and influential private Kamehameha Schools. Kamehameha operates three campuses for the benefit of children of Hawaiian ancestry. The student's attorneys contended that violates civil rights laws. As the U.S. Supreme Court was about to announce last year whether it would hear the case, Kamehameha paid $7 million to settle it out of court.

'A Hateful Place'
A violent incident with racial overtones in 2007 near Pearl Harbor prompted a good deal of soul searching about race in Hawaii. A Native Hawaiian man and his teenage son brutally pummeled and kicked a Caucasian soldier and his wife near Pearl Harbor after the soldier's SUV struck the other man's parked car. The son shouted "fucking haole" while attacking the soldier. The husband and wife suffered broken noses, facial fractures and concussions. A prosecutor said the assault was a road-rage incident, not a hate crime. But it generated much debate on newspaper websites and blogs about the use of the word haole and whether whites are the targets of racism in Hawaii.

"It is a hateful place to live if you are white," wrote a woman on one Hawaii website's comments section. A Hawaii native who is white wrote, "Racism exists in Hawaii. My whole life I've never really felt welcome here." A sailor stationed at Pearl Harbor added that "this island is the most racist place I have ever been in my life."

Other white residents, however, wrote that they had had no such experiences. And many people maintained that arrogant mainlanders are the most likely to incur natives' wrath. It's their "cultural inability to be humble [that] is a huge contributing factor in a lot of violence against them," one person wrote. "There is a high degree of arrogance and lack of respect that mainlanders exhibit," added another.

A Hawaiian Studies professor at the University of Hawaii, Haunani-Kay Trask, is one of the most caustic critics of whites in the islands. In her 1999 book, From A Native Daughter, Trask wrote: "Just as … all exploited peoples are justified in feeling hostile and resentful toward those who exploit them, so we Hawaiians are justified in such feelings toward the haole. This is the legacy of racism, of colonialism."

In a poem titled, "Racist White Woman," Trask wrote: "I could kick/Your face, puncture/Both eyes./You deserve this kind/Of violence./No more vicious/Tongues, obscene/Lies./Just a knife/Slitting your tight/Little heart."

Trask's opposite number is Conklin, the "anti-sovereignty" white activist who has lived on Oahu for 17 years and says he loves Hawaii's culture, spirituality and history, but is labeled a racist by some of his detractors. He wrote a book entitled Hawaiian Apartheid: Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism in the Aloha State.

"Here in Hawaii, there is no compulsion to speak out on racist attacks. There are all these hate crimes and violent things happening to white people and you don't hear sovereignty activists speaking out against it," says Conklin, who manages a massive website on Hawaiian issues. "The violence has been going on for years and it's always been hush-hush."

State and Race
It's against this backdrop that Hawaii approaches its 50th anniversary of statehood. The non-celebration will consist largely of educational events at various venues. Iolani Palace won't be one of them. Once home to Hawaii's monarchy and where the last monarch was imprisoned after her government was overthrown, the palace is a potent symbol of anti-statehood — and anti-white — sentiment.

Republican state Sen. Sam Slom learned that the hard way. Although Statehood Day is a holiday in Hawaii, there were no celebrations for about 10 years, until he organized one in 2006 at the palace. He and others were confronted by demonstrators shouting racial epithets. Slom, who is Caucasian and has lived in Hawaii since 1960, said the 30 to 40 "hard-core" protesters intimidated a high school band, which left early, as well as some spectators.

The 50-year anniversary events figure to be "soft celebrations" aimed at defusing sovereignty passions, Slom says. "It is a divisive wedge that some people have exploited," he says. "There are people who have made it a racial thing. [But] the vast, overwhelming majority are proud to be United States citizens."

Still, a statehood commission planning commemorative events opted not to re-enact the phone call to the Territorial House of Representatives meeting at Iolani Palace in 1959 informing representatives that Congress had voted in favor of Hawaiian statehood. Commission member Donald Cataluna strongly opposed a reenactment, according to the Honolulu Advertiser, saying he "didn't want any blood to spill."

That won't completely mollify sovereignty activists, Slom predicts. "There will be protests, there's no question about it."

By Larry Keller

Source: Southern Poverty Law Center – Intelligence Report – Fall 2009

• Roots of Resentment Go Way Back - Read More
• Barack Obama's BluePrint for the Chang We Need for Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders

Vote No on Sonia Sotomayor

CONSTITUTIONAL OPINIONS

Absent a miracle, Judge Sonia Sotomayor will take a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. Nevertheless, the Republican minority still has an opportunity to use her nomination to educate the American people about the dangers of politicizing the judiciary.

President Barack Obama made a politically astute pick. Sonia Sotomayor is a competent jurist who symbolizes hard work, personal achievement, and ethnic diversity.

However, as Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) argued during the hearing on John Roberts, "the burden of proof for a Supreme Court justice is on the nominee." Judge Sotomayor has not met that burden.

While talking up her background, Sotomayor's advocates have emphasized her moderate record on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. However, Circuit Court judges remain constrained by the possibility of Supreme Court review -- and the hope of advancing to the high court. Judge Sotomayor's testimony was useless, as intended, in assessing her judicial philosophy. Writing in Slate, Dahlia Lithwick concluded: Sotomayor "dodges, hedges, and evades her way through softball and hardball questions alike." Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) put it more harshly: the Judge was "evasive, lacking in substance and, in several instances, incredibly misleading."

In trying to assess how Justice Sotomayor would behave, we should consider the president's expectations. Then-Sen. Obama, who voted against both John Roberts and Samuel Alito, emphasized the "quality of empathy." While most cases can be decided on the basis of case law and precedent, said Sen. Obama, there remain five percent which "can only be determined on the basis of one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world words, and the depth and breadth of one's empathy." Alas, this latter category, however few in number, accounts for most of the important issues about which we most care and which most divide us.

Sonia Sotomayor's rhetoric and background suggests that she shares the president's general perspective. For instance, she has been involved in ethnic identity activism and politics throughout her college and professional life. She spent 12 years as a board member of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, which promoted the usual ethnic agenda of coerced diversity and multiculturalism as well as the usual liberal agenda including support for abortion and opposition to capital punishment.

Moreover, her rhetoric reflects an extreme judicial vision. Perhaps Sotomayor's most famous comment, repeated in substance on at least seven occasions, came in the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal: "a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." Six years ago in a speech at Seton Hall she declared: "Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, … our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging."

She returned to this theme many times: "My experiences will affect the facts that I choose to see as a judge." Moreover, "there is no objective stance, but only a series of perspectives -- no neutrality, no escape from choice in judging." Indeed, "our experiences as women and people of color affect our decisions. The aspiration to impartiality is just that."

There's more, however. She also believes that judges are to change the law. For instance, she complained: "The public expects the law to be static and unpredictable. The law, however, is uncertain and responds to changing circumstances." Of course, changing the law cannot be left to legislators: "Our society would be straightjacketed were not the courts, with the able assistance of the lawyers, constantly overhauling the law and adapting it to the realities of ever-changing social, industrial, and political conditions."

Indeed, "A given judge (or judges) may develop a novel approach to a specific set of facts or legal framework that pushes the law in a new direction."

After all, she contends: "change -- sometimes radical change -- can and does occur in a legal system that serves a society whose social policy itself changes. It is our responsibility to explain to the public how an often unpredictable system of justice is one that serves a productive civilized but always evolving society." As she declared in a videotaped talk, the "Court of Appeals is where policy is made" and where "the law is percolating."

One need not have an idealized vision of the law to find these sentiments profoundly disturbing.

Empathy has its place -- perhaps in a trial judge understanding a defendant's motivations, and passing sentence. However, empathy is a dubious guide to statutory and constitutional interpretation. Some of the most important cases either revolve around a party with whom empathy is impossible or involve multiple parties who all deserve empathy.

Diversity has value, but Sotomayor did not argue diversity would improve collective decision-making. She said that her ethnicity and gender would improve her decision-making.

Moreover, stereotypes can be seriously misleading. Nine white men delivered the death blow to racial segregation in Brown v. Board of Education. One of the New Haven firefighters who challenged the city's "pro-minority" employment policy in Ricci v. Destefano was Hispanic Ben Vargas.

No one would disagree that as society changes, so must laws and practices. That is why the Constitution allows amendments and legislatures exist. Our political system leaves most decisions on "change" up to the legislative and executive branches. Turning a group of nine jurists, irrespective of how diverse and empathetic, into a continuing constitutional convention puts all liberties at risk.

WHICH BRINGS US BACK to the question: what kind of justice would Sonia Sotomayor make?

Her overall judicial record may look moderate, but her opinions in several critical cases -- President Obama's five percent -- cause real concern.

There is Ricci v. Destefano, for instance, the much noted case in which New Haven tossed the results of a carefully created promotion test for firefighters because it did not like the racial composition of those who passed. The 2nd Circuit, in an opinion joined by Judge Sotomayor, perfunctorily affirmed the verdict for the city. Yet without question the city had acted in a racially discriminatory fashion. And the city appeared to base its decision on political considerations, not any reassessment of "business necessity."

Sotomayor's opinion was even worse on procedural grounds. Her one paragraph dismissal seemed intended to limit the likelihood of Supreme Court review. Yet Judge Jose Cabranes, a Clinton appointee, complained that the controversy involved "significant questions of unsettled law," and was a case of first impression with no relevant Supreme Court precedent. The high court took the case and the majority of five ruled for the firefighters. The minority of four also disagreed with Sotomayor's opinion, indicating that the case should have been remanded for trial to assess the city's conduct.

Another worrisome case is Didden v. Village of Port Chester (New York), in which Judge Sotomayor demonstrated her disdain for property rights. In 1999 the city created a "redevelopment" area and designated a developer to handle all land seized by Port Chester. In 2003 he asked the property owners who planned to build a pharmacy on their land for either $800,000 or a half interest as partner in the project. They refused, and the next day the city condemned the property, transferring it to the developer so he could build a Walgreens. Sotomayor dismissed the owners' claim in six paragraphs.

Judge Sotomayor said the statute of limitations for the redevelopment law expired in 2002 -- a year before the disputed taking occurred. She went on to uphold the extortionate seizure of property as required by the Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London. Yet the majority in that case warned: "the mere pretext of a public purpose, where its actual purpose was to bestow a private benefit," was not a "public use" as required by the Constitution. And what could be a better example of the use of eminent domain for private benefit than a well-connected developer getting the city to back his attempt at private extortion?

Then there is Maloney v. Cuomo, which involved a challenge to state gun restrictions after the Supreme Court voided Washington, D.C.'s gun ban in District of Columbia v. Heller. Judge Sotomayor dispensed with the claim in an 11-word conclusion relying on an 1886 case (Presser v. Illinois) which applied the 2nd Amendment only to the federal government. However, Presser did not address the so-called "incorporation" doctrine, by which the Bill of Rights was applied to the states through the 14th Amendment (the "incorporation" process did not begin until decades later).

Moreover, in Heller the Supreme Court for the first time affirmed an individual right to own firearms. The Court distinguished Presser and indicated that an inquiry into incorporation would be necessary in the future. In fact, the liberal 9th Circuit confronted the challenge, ruling in April that the 14th Amendment did "incorporate" the right to own firearms. Judge Sotomayor apparently relied on ancient precedent to avoid having to make a pro-gun ruling.

In Hayden v. Pataki Judge Sotomayor ruled that the Voting Rights Act did not bar states from disenfranchising felons. Indeed, the 14th Amendment explicitly authorized states to do so. In three short paragraphs the judge asserted that the law was clear -- after the majority spent 36 pages detailing evidence on why the VRA did not intend to overturn a nondiscriminatory process predating the sort of discrimination the VRA was passed to combat.

Perhaps most important is the case which received little attention but which underlies every Supreme Court nomination: Roe v. Wade. Judge Sotomayor has said nothing about the issue and her few rulings on the issue shed little light. However, the White House has assured its supporters on the issue. Moreover, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund in which she was active was a leading proponent of abortion.

The issue is not whether one believes abortion should be legal. But Roedoes not deserve to be called constitutional law. Rather, it is an act of judicial usurpation, unsupported by constitutional purpose, original intent, and legal precedent. For a nominee for the high court to embrace Roe suggests that they will not carry out their duty to faithfully interpret and apply the Constitution.

ONE FINAL ISSUE OF NOTE is the use of international law to interpret the U.S. Constitution and law. No doubt, thoughtful legislators will consider foreign experiences in assessing social problems and deciding how to resolve them.

But as Steven Groves of the Heritage Foundation detailed, Judge Sotomayor appears to believe that foreign cases should be used by judges -- and justices -- to shape U.S. law through judicial interpretation, never mind what the American legislators who passed the law believed.

Earlier this year Judge Sotomayor opined: "international law and foreign law will be very important in the discussion of how to think about the unsettled issues in our legal system." She also declared: "unless American courts are more open to discussing the ideas raised by foreign cases, by international cases, that we are going to lose influence in the world." That's a dubious claim, but even if true, why should the judiciary worry about America's international influence?

Judge Sotomayor tried to walk back her earlier remarks when she testified. Nevertheless, her basic beliefs seem clear. In her foreword to The International Lawyer, published in 2007, she said: "the question of how much we have to learn from foreign law and the international community when interpreting the Constitution is … worth posing." [Emphasis added.] It is not xenophobic to ask: why should international cases have any role in interpreting the Constitution?

The interpretation of the U.S. Constitution and law should be based on the intentions of the Americans who drafted and approved the measure at issue.

Sonia Sotomayor appears to be a decent person and a capable jurist. But her oft-expressed radical ideas and dismissive treatment of fundamental liberties suggest that she is likely to be a less measured justice than judge. The rule of law, and thus the original constitutional system based on individual liberty and limited government, would suffer. Average Americans of all backgrounds would be the ultimate victims.

Judge Sotomayor has not met Sen. Durbin's burden of proof. The Senate should vote no on her appointment.

By Doug Bandow on 7.30.09 @ 6:08AM

Mr. Bandow is a graduate of Stanford Law School and a member of the California and D.C. bars. This article is adapted from a talk for the Federalist Society.

Posted: Daily Thought Pad