Oh, Where Art Thou Eric Holder?

During the Wisconsin State Fair in Milwaukee mobs of young African-American males randomly assaulted white attendees. In no way is this indicative of a general problem; the majority of African-Americans are good, law abiding citizens. However, we can be certain if the situation was reserved, if a mob of hateful, unruly whites assaulted black attendees, Mr. Holder and quite possibly President Obama would hold a press conference and conduct an investigation. Oh, where art though Eric Holder? Thine cat has taken thy tongue?

Oh Where Art Thou Jesse Jackson?

The Duke Lacrosse Case, in which an African-American woman (falsely) accused several white lacrosse players of rape generated a huge amount of media coverage and of course the obligatory visit by Jesse Jackson. So, it comes as a surprise that a recent case in which a Latino street gang that sought to ethnically cleanse African-Americans from a town in southern California has generated very little media attention, no protests, no "dialogues on race and racism" and of course no visit by the good Reverend Jesse Jackson. Could this be that incidents of racism that do not conform to progressive narratives, i.e. white perpetrators and minority victims do not excite progressive and the civil rights cartel? While I am certain that these despicable racists do NOT represent ethical and culture norms in Latino communities, the incident does present the possibility that contrary to progressive narratives, the increase of diversity (and the decline of white demographic dominance) in Southern California and other regions may result in greater racial tension.   A worthwhile question to explore, but one that we are unlikely to here in the mainstream media and university campuses.

Azusa 13 Bust: Latino Gang Charged With Terrorizing City's Black Residents

06 / 7 /2011

LOS ANGELES — A Latino gang conspired to rid a Southern California city of its black residents through intimidation, threats and violence dating back to the early 1990s to exert its influence and show its loyalty to the Mexican Mafia prison gang, according to a federal racketeering indictment unsealed Tuesday.

More than 50 people were charged as authorities made early morning raids targeting the Varrio Azusa 13 gang. Federal prosecutors said the gang, which has about 400 members or associates, engaged in a host of crimes ranging from drug trafficking to hate crimes that have hobbled Azusa, a city of about 45,000 residents near Los Angeles.

"We hope that this federal case will signal the end of this racist behavior and will help vindicate all of the victims who have suffered over the years," U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. said.

Sixteen of the people named in the indictment were arrested Tuesday, while another 23 were already in custody, U.S. attorney's spokesman Thom Mrozek said. Authorities were seeking another 12 suspects.

The crackdown is the latest effort by law enforcement to cripple Latino gangs that have targeted blacks in the Los Angeles area.

In 2009, more than 140 members and associates of the Varrio Hawaiian Gardens gang were charged in connection with waging a racist campaign against black people. Four years ago, authorities arrested dozens of members of South Los Angeles' Florencia 13 gang in connection with the killing of blacks because of the color of their skin.

Tuesday's charges mirrored a similar effort taken by federal prosecutors against The Avenues, a gang from the Highland Park area northeast of downtown Los Angeles, where four gang members were convicted in 2007 of hate crimes for killing a black man.
In Azusa, six people have been charged with civil rights violations for allegedly harassing, and in some cases attacking, African Americans to drive them out of the city or to prevent them from relocating there. Most of the defendants named in the indictment face a minimum 10-year prison sentence.

More than two-thirds of Azusa is Hispanic, while roughly 3 percent is black. The city has tried to address the racial problem after the number of hate crimes peaked at 17 in 2000 then dropped to about one a year since 2006, said Azusa Police Chief Robert Garcia.
City officials have also created a human relations commission in the wake of the gang's attempt to drive black residents from Azusa.
"Crimes based upon hatred are intolerable in our society and represent the worst in human behavior," Garcia said.

The Rev. Logan Westbrook, who has been on the commission since its inception in 2001, said fear has subsided somewhat since 2000, when about a dozen parishioners concerned about the racially motivated violence opted not to follow him when his church moved to Azusa from nearby Monrovia.

Some black residents still worry about going out at night and feel trapped because they are unable to move out of town, he said.

"Those who are living there, if they get an opportunity to move on they would, but given the economic conditions, they haven't," Westbrook said.

Resident reaction to the gang bust "will be a big, big sigh of relief," he added.

In the indictment, prosecutors said Marty Michaels, known as "Casper," and another Varrio Azusa 13 member punched a black man in January 2000 while using a racial epithet. In April 2010, Manuel Jimenez yelled a racial slur at a black high school student returning home from a track meet, the document said, noting Jimenez and another man hit the student, chased him down the street and stole his items, prosecutors said.

Gang member Ralph "Swifty" Flores was sentenced to death in 2008 after he was convicted of four murders. A judge imposed three death sentences for three murders between 2002 and 2004 as well as a sentence of life without parole for the racially motivated murder of black teen Christopher Lynch in 1999. Flores was 17 at the time of the murder and not eligible for the death penalty because he was a minor.

Authorities also said the gang extorted payments from drug dealers to let them keep working in Azusa. The gang also drew up a business plan to monopolize the drug trade in the city, which included stockpiling an arsenal of weapons and plotting to kidnap relatives of wayward dealers, the 24-count indictment said.

Drug proceeds were then funneled to members of the Mexican Mafia who wielded control over the gang. The "13" in the gang's name – much like others in Southern California – stands for the letter `M' and shows the affiliation with the notorious prison gang

Problems With Federal Hate Crime Legislation (part II)

Even well intentioned laws fail when they are selectively administered. This will almost certainly be the case with federal hate crime legislation. Instances that defy popular narratives of race and racism, have been largely ignored by the federal government. An example of this is seen in hate crimes committed against Hawaii's white minority, which much to its credit, have been documented by the progressive Southern Poverty Law Center. To the best of my knowledge, these attacks have received zero attention from the Obama Administration and major media outlets. While native Hawaiians do have historic grievances against the United States, verbal and physical assaults an individuals because of their race or culture is never justified, especially when they are carried out against children.

Intelligence Report, Fall 2009, Issue Number: 135

Prejudice in Paradise

Hawaii Has a Racism Problem.Roots of Resentment Go Way Back.

By Larry Keller

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.

"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%.

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

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 "Kill 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.

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."

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2009/fall/prejudice-in-paradise#

Problems With Federal Hate Crime Legislation

Attorney General Eric Holder: Wrong Again!

As a Jew I am naturally appalled by acts of racism and hatred, but for a multitude of reasons I do not support federal hate crime laws. With an initial glance they appear to be quite favorable, but a serious analysis reveal that they pose problems, both in theory and in practice. They demonstrate the problematic race-ism that underlines the modern progressive vision. This became apparent during a senate hearing in which Attorney General Eric Holder was questioned about new hate crime legislation proposed by the Obama Administration.

The first problem with hate crime laws is that they in-effect create special classes of victims and perpetrators. If an individual is (G-d forbid) assaulted for their identity, is their suffering any less than than an individual who is assaulted in a standard robbery? And even more troubling is that the progressive narrative of hate crimes would most likely exclude victims who are not members of "protected classes." For example, the brutal rape, robbery, torture, murder and mutilation of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom by several African-Americans was not prosecuted as a hate crime. And local and federal officials did not consider it a hate crime when a white family in Akron Ohio was assaulted by a group of African-Americans shouting "this is a black world." We can be certain that if the victims of the said assaults were members of a protected class, these incidents would have been prosecuted and widely publicized by the media as hate crimes. When Attorney General Eric Holder was questioned by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) if a fatal assault on a soldier (that transpired in the United States) by a Muslim constituted a hate crime, Mr. Holder responded in the negative. During the course of that hearing, Mr. Holder made it clear that the hate crime legislation in question only applied to "historically oppressed minorities."

The second problem is that hate crime legislation takes away focus from the most pressing crime problems that "protected classes" and other communities face. In 2008 only 0.0430% of murders and manslaughter (7 out of 16,272) and 0.12% of assaults (1,025 out of 834,885) were classified as hate crimes. So, as detestable as hate crimes are, relative to other crimes they hardly constitute an epidemic. African-Americans are nearly 400% more likely to be victims of murder, but with 93% of their assailants being of the same race, "hate crimes" hardly appears to be the most pressing problem that they face.


Some essential questions that we must ask are: should hate crimes be a federal matter, are they not being addressed on a state level?" To start off, I see no evidence that they fall within the constitutional jurisdiction of the federal government. And 45 states and the District of Columbia already possess the said legislation. Then perhaps these states are failing to enforce the hate crime laws that are already on the books? When asked by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) if there is evidence that justice was not being served on a state and local level regarding bias motivated crimes, he deflected the question. And when Senator Coburn (R-Oklahoma) asked "do we have statistics that say that the states are failing?" and "which states are regularly or systematically failing to enforce their laws punishing crimes of bias?," he was unable to answer. So, as odious as hate crimes are, the Obama Administration's current efforts constitutes an undue interference of the federal government in state and local affairs.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=102895

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murders_of_Channon_Christian_and_Christopher_Newsom

http://www.ohio.com/news/50172282.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOABBn5Tnm0

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20203888/ns/us_news-life/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuA_Rzae5-g

Equality & Accountability (part II)

Pictured Above: George Lopez, Racist and Unfunny In Any Language.

In the United States, large segments of academic, government, media and corporate institutions are "race-ists," which does not imply hatred of any groups, rather it signifies an obsession on race, a belief that race is the great social and economic determinant." This vision is especially prevalent in universities, in which race and ethnicity effects virtually every aspect of their policies from: preferential admittance policies, ethnic-specific academic advisers, to curriculum and even the funding of segregated student housing.

The great irony is that disciples of "race-ism" seek constant dialogues on race, yet they are incapable of transcending empty mottoes and engaging in intellectually honest exchanges of ideas with individuals with differing beliefs. This means that they rarely see the blatant contradictions in their positions. The most obvious contradiction is that "race-ists" are obsessed with real and imagined white racism, while they turn a blind eye to expressions of racism of non-white individuals. Another major contradiction is the manner in which race-ists address ethno-political assertions of different groups. African-Americans, Latinos and other groups are encouraged to vote for their (perceived) narrow, group interests and to vote for their ethnic compatriots. Whites are expected to approve of these ethno-political expressions and to promote broad national interests, but never their own (perceived) group interests. In other words, not all groups are held equally accountable for their racism and ethno-chauvinism. This implies that progressives hold whites up to standards of objectivity and believe that minorities are not capable of or willing to transcend their own ethno-subjectivity.

This is seen in the manner in which public figures, approach the comedian George Lopez, including President Obama, who recently appeared on a TV commercial to promote Lopez's new show. This is surprising considering Lopez's repeated use of the term "mayate," which in Mexican slang is a derogatory term against African-Americans and gays. We can be certain that President Obama would not take a white comedian's use of a racial slur so lightly. But, because this is a non-English term we can (reluctantly) give Mr. Obama the benefit of the doubt. Prior to this commercial, Lopez appeared at an election rally with Obama and stated:

"It is the time of the Latino, your time to step up, your time to take this country over...But si se puede (yes you can) doesn't mean anything unless you go out and make it happen."

And during his stand up routine Lopez stated:

"This is a new America...While you were out playing sudoku, we've taken over the country."

Imagine what would happen if a white comedian declared at a political rally"

"it's time for us (whites) to defend our political hold and vote for their ethnic interests..."

Of course, the media, political and academic elites would justifiably be up in arms and demand that the said comedian rescind their call for white ethno-nationalism. This brings up a host of questions, such as: Why don't race-ists or the general public denounce Lopez's ethno-chauvenism? Why do race-ists unabashedly support the ethno-political assertions of Latino and African-American communities, yet are horrified when whites do the same? Why do race-ists promote the idea that minorities should unabashedly vote for the (perceived) interests of their communities, yet the white majority is asked to vote for the (perceived) general good, even when it is against their own self interests?

Before we continue I must emphatically state that I am NOT encouraging reciprocal white ethno-political activism. Quite the opposite, I would like to see all Americans pursue the greater good of the United States rather than their narrow ethnic, economic and regional interests. I would like to see all Americans participate in civil society and political life as individuals and as local communities, rather than ethno-political lobby groups competing at the troughs of a bloated spoils system.

Rather than encourage his fans to vote for the "Latino Agenda," I would like to see Mr. Lopez encourage them to vote to advance the economical, social and environmental welfare of all Americans. I am deeply concerned that the asymmetrical expression of ethno-political identity is unsustainable and will inevitably lead to a resurgence of ethno-political identity politics among European-Americans, which will certainly not lead to the "more perfect union" that President Obama desires. Until now, tarring and feathering individuals with the label of "racist" has been effective at silencing white ethno-political expressions, but increasingly more people are balking at the double standard. Perhaps, when whites were an absolute majority, this may have been sustainable, but with an increasing number of minority-majority cities and states (like California and Hawaii), the logic and incentives of whites to openly lobby for their ethno-political interests, like any other group, is growing. If we want to maintain a peaceful and prosperous union, the only answer is to hold all Americans equally accountable and to emphatically declare that a Black or Latino Congressional Caucus is just as revolting and un-American as a White Caucus. And let's all declare that George Lopez is unfunny and bigoted in any language.

http://www.mediatakeout.com/2009/20602-comedian_george_lopez_pulls_a_kramer_uses_racial_slur_against_black_people.html

Bottom of the Barrrel

When progressives accuse their opponents of "racism," they are almost always scraping the bottom of the intellectual barrel and substituting fear for facts and ad hominem attacks for ideas.

Race Baiting Versus Reality

By Larry Elder

Nov 9, 2010

“White America does not like having a black president.”

Thus pronounced Michael Moore in an appearance on “Real Time with Bill Maher.” And Maher agreed, “That is the truth.”

“The statistics don’t lie,” Moore plowed ahead. “I’m not talking about polls. I’m talking about that the young people in ‘08 was the only — do you know this? — it’s the only demographic — white demographic — that Obama won, 18- to 29-year-olds. Every other demographic, over 29, Obama lost the white vote. Every single one.”

Crime solved. Case closed. Book ‘em, Danno. Except for one minor detail: No Democratic presidential candidate has won the “white vote” since 1964.

Add Obama’s name to a long list of white Democrats who lost that demographic: Humphrey in 1968; McGovern in 1972; Carter in 1976 and 1980; Mondale in 1984; Dukakis in 1988; Clinton in 1992 and 1996; Gore in 2000.

In fact, white voters preferred Obama to Sen. John Kerry — who lost the white vote by 17 points in 2004, while Obama lost it in 2008 by “only” 12 points. Obama improved on Kerry’s share of the white vote in every age demographic, including the 18- to 29-year-olds (which Kerry lost).

Did “white America” temporarily forget Obama’s skin color, only to remember just in time for the midterm elections? This, perhaps, explains why Obama’s approval rating, postelection, shot up to over 70 percent before coming down.

Obama’s approval rating now stands at the low- to mid-40s. So, presumably, “white America” reverted back to its historical racism. But how does Moore explain whites like Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, with an approval rating at less than 30 percent, and Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at 25 percent?

If “white America” dislikes having a black president, why does “white America” — in the South, no less — tolerate a black congressperson?

Allen West, a black Republican former lieutenant colonel, won Florida’s 22nd Congressional District. Its racial demographics are 82.3 percent white, 3.8 percent black, 1.7 percent Asian, 10.7 percent Hispanic, 0.1 percent Native American and 0.2 percent other.

Tim Scott, a black Republican candidate, won South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District. Its racial demographics are 74.8 percent white, 21.1 percent black, 1.3 percent Asian, 2.5 percent Hispanic, 0.4 percent Native American and 0.2 percent other.

Worse, Scott was backed by what the NAACP calls the “racist” tea party! The civil rights organization commissioned a study that purported to unmask the tea party’s racism.

But NAACP CEO Ben Jealous encountered unexpected skepticism when he appeared on Anderson Cooper’s CNN show.

Cooper asked why the NAACP selected a “clearly left-wing group — which is opposed to the tea party” — to conduct the study. He said the report “does seem to use a lot of innuendo and a lot of guilt by association.” Cooper played a montage of video clips showing prominent Democrats — from the President on down — campaigning with the mantra that it’s time to “take our country back!” “Why is it when Democrats say ‘take our country back,’” said Cooper, “no one says that’s extreme nationalism, but when tea party supporters say it, it’s ominous and racism in disguise?” Jealous stammered, stumbled and fumbled. Painful to watch.

Actor/producer/director Rob Reiner says the Tim Scott-supporting tea party is not merely racist. It is also fascist. In an appearance on Bill Maher’s show, Reiner worried whether a Hitler-like charismatic leader might emerge to lead the party:

Reiner: You never get into a political discussion unless you bring the word Hitler in. You have to have Hitler, so let’s put Hitler out there. Here’s Hitler, OK? You have bad economic times, right? Hitler, by the way, never got more than 33 percent of the vote ever in Germany. You have bad economic times—

Maher: Well, he only had that one election, let’s be honest. … There was no 1937 election.

Reiner: He wasn’t a majority guy, but he was charismatic and they were having bad economic times, just like we are now. People were out of work. They needed jobs, and a guy came along and rallied the troops. My fear is that the tea party gets a charismatic leader, because all they’re selling is fear and anger, and that’s all Hitler sold.”

Not a “majority guy”? President Bill Clinton not only twice lost the white vote but also, like Hitler, never won the majority of the electorate — 43 percent in 1992 and 49 percent in 1996. And the point is? Well, there is no point — at least none one might call coherent.

A 2008 Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll asked likely voters whether they would refuse to vote for a black presidential candidate. Only 4 percent said yes — a smaller number than would refuse to vote for a woman or a Mormon.

It’s not about race. The reality is simple, if less comforting to Mr. Moore. “White America” does not even like voting for a whitepresident — if he is a Democrat.

http://frontpagemag.com/2010/11/19/race-baiting-vs-reality/

Equality & Accountability

Pictured above: Loretta Sanchez (D-CA), Ethnic Chauvinist

Much to their credit, progressives have traditionally championed equal opportunity and have challenged white racism. But far too few progressives promote equal accountability for all Americans. In other words, they do not always hold all individuals and groups equally accountable for their bad behavior. A recent example is seen in the California House Race between the Democratic candidate Loretta Sanchez and her Republican opponent, Van Tran. During an interview on Univision she stated that:

"The Vietnamese and Republicans were trying to seize power from US (Hispanics)...and trying to take away this seat, this seat that we have done so much for our community..."

Sanchez goes on to tar Tran with accusations of being "anti-immigrant," in spite of the fact that he came to the United States as a poor refugee from Vietnam.

Progressives would (rightfully) howl in protest if a white politician were to voice similar sentiments regarding a diverse opponent and if they implied that a political seat belonged to whites. Yet, few if any progressives have held Sanchez accountable for her ethnic chauvinism and reminded her that political districts belong to all citizens, regardless of race, color or creed. In spite of their rhetoric, these progressives clearly do not hold diverse Americans in high regard, because when you truly view someone as your equal, you will hold them equally accountable for their actions.

Loretta Sanchez and Van Tran: Ethnic Flare-up Roils California House Race

2 months ago

ORANGE, Calif. -- Rep. Loretta Sanchez was a powerful symbol of Latino pride and empowerment when she ousted conservative veteran Bob Dornan in 1996. Now this Southern California House district is back in play, fueled by an anti-Democratic national tide and an impolitic remark Sanchez made in a Spanish-language television interview last month.
Sanchez gave Republican rival Van Tran a political gift when she warned on Univision that Vietnamese and Republicans were trying to seize power from "us" -- the implication being Hispanics and her. Tran, a state assemblyman, is using the interview to try to energize conservatives and consolidate support from Vietnamese-American voters.

About 44 percent of registered voters in the district are Hispanic and 15 percent are Vietnamese, according to Allan Hoffenblum, publisher of The California Target Book, the state's bible of congressional and legislative races. Sanchez has been winning every two years by huge margins. Still, all signs point to a very bad Election Day for Democrats, and ergo, a shot for Tran.

The only public poll of the race, done by Republican Whit Ayres in August, showed a statistical dead heat -- Sanchez 45 percent, Tran 43 percent. A Republican strategist familiar with the district said it is still a single-digit race, though not as close. (Update: The Tran campaign on Sunday night e-mailed me a new poll, conducted Oct. 13-14 by the Republican firm Public Opinion Strategies, that showed the candidates tied at 39 percent each).

National Republicans have named Tran to their "Young Guns" program for up-and-coming House candidates. They haven't given him cash, but are keeping the option open. Famous names, meanwhile, are descending on the area. Bill Clinton held a rally Friday in Santa Ana for Sanchez and Sarah Palin headlined an event for Tran and other California Republicans on Saturday in Anaheim.

The Univision stumble has launched Sanchez on what Tran calls a "let-me explain-it-this-way tour" of Vietnamese TV and radio. Her actual words, according to a captioned translation, were: "The Vietnamese and the Republicans are -- with an intensity -- trying to take away this seat, this seat that we have done so much for our community, take away this seat from us and give it to this Van Tran, who's very anti-immigrant and very anti-Hispanic." If she had a do-over, she said in an interview, "I guess what I would say is Van Tran supporters are going after this seat. That's what I would change."

Sanchez is co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on Vietnam, has visited Vietnam three times and says she has worked "side by side" with Vietnamese in her district for 14 years. "He's really not going to win," she said of Tran. "He can't pull his own base vote, which is Vietnamese. We poll and we know...I think his own community won't be voting for him."

Tran laughed and told me that's not what his polling shows. He said Sanchez's comment on Univision was an extension of what she says about her seat to Latino audiences -- "that it belongs to her and that she's working so hard for them despite everybody else trying to get her. But this time she just got caught on national Spanish language television."

The LiberalOC blog, in a piece re-posted on the Sanchez campaign website, said a major Tran talking point to the Vietnamese community is that only Vietnamese "can have sympathy and...can understand our concerns. Only we will truly care, protect the true interests of the Vietnamese community." The blog called Tran "the real race-baiter" in the contest.

Not pretty, to be sure, and yet there are inspirational aspects to this ethnic clash. The ethnic friction here is due to positive developments -- Hispanic gains and the growing political engagement and influence of the Vietnamese community. And the candidates themselves embody the American Dream, the core ideal that makes us so proud of who we are.

Tran was born in South Vietnam and airlifted out of Saigon by the U.S. Army a week before the city fell. He arrived in the United States at age 10 knowing two English words. He went on to become a lawyer, a Garden Grove city council member and, in 2004, the first Vietnamese-American elected to any state legislature.

Sanchez is one of seven siblings raised by Mexican immigrant parents. Her father was a machinist and her mother was a secretary. Sanchez was in the Head Start program for low-income children and used a Pell Grant for college, according to her campaign biography. She earned a master's degree, became a financial analyst and started her own business before winning her seat in Congress.

The ethnic contrast, it must be said, pales beside the political and stylistic gulfs between these two. Sanchez, arriving the other day at a union hall to give a pep talk to canvassers, wore a sparkly pink blazer, black slacks and black cowboy boots. She jumped into people's arms for hugs, and the hall took on the air of an actual pep rally as she shouted out union names -- "We have pipefitters! We have electricians! We have plumbers! We have operating engineers! How about those ironworkers?" -- interrupted after each one by applause, whistles and cheers.

She sustained that energy level right through an account of her opponent's "bad record" -- he voted against increasing the minimum wage, against sick leave for employees, against banning toxic chemicals in the workplace (boos all around) -- and the specific jobs she and her party had brought to Orange County (cheers for each project). When you knock on people's doors, she exhorted the group of about 100, "You tell them the economy's getting better! There are more jobs to come!"

Tran is a buttoned-down pol given to dry understatement. At an open-air Tea Party rally in Garden Grove last weekend, dressed in a standard suit, he earned some cheers for calling Sanchez "a Nancy Pelosi lapdog" and even evoked a little call and response from the sparse crowd:

"Did you hear what she said on TV?"

"Yes!" they yelled.

"Who does this seat belong to?"

"The people!"

"The American people," he said approvingly.

Tran then trailed off into Washington-speak (denunciations of "cap-and-trade, the stimulus package, TARP, everything else") and boilerplate. This election is not about me, he said, it's about our children, and hope and opportunity. Please help me get elected to stop our march toward "European socialism," he said, and bring back the values of faith, family and freedom.

A Tran victory scenario hinges on Latino voters staying home, Republicans flooding the polls, Vietnamese voters uniting behind him, and independent candidate Cecilia Iglesias draining some Hispanic votes from Sanchez. Local analysts say Iglesias is a minor factor; the race would have to be razor close for her to make a difference. It's also unclear if Vietnamese voters, fragmented by personality, politics and background, will flock to Tran.

But a new Pew poll finds that Hispanics, hard hit by foreclosures and job losses, are not motivated this year. And virtually every poll shows that Republicans are far more enthusiastic than Democrats about going to the polls. As Hoffenblum, the publisher of the California Target Book, put it, "In this climate, any Republican has a chance."


Follow Jill Lawrence on Facebook and Twitter.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/10/16/loretta-sanchez-and-van-tran-in-california-house-race-inspirati/

Implied Progressive Racism? (part I)

During a discussion led by David Horowitz, he asked a Muslim American college student if she was for or against Hezbollah's stated goal that all Jews should gather in Israel so that he wouldn't have to hunt them down globally. In other words, Mr. Horowitz sought to determine if she supported the genocide of Jews. To this she responded she was "for it."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n91ih3_Yy5Y

Can you imagine the protests, condemnations and calls for action if a Christian student called for the genocide of Jews or Muslims? Campus progressives would demand that the university reprimand the individual, make them attend diversity seminars and then investigate the "right wing Christian student groups" that incited them. Clearly not all individuals and communities are held to the same standards.

This hearkens me back to the Los Angeles Riots when mostly African-American and Hispanic mobs plundered predominantly Korean owned shops. Rather than condemn the (small minority of) individuals who chose to steal, a litany of socio-economic explanations were used to absolve them of their crimes. The first problem that we encounter with this narrative is that it fails to take into account the vast majority of African-Americans and Hispanics who chose to address their grievances in an intelligent, constructive fashion. And if one individual is responsible for their wise decisions, is not the other equally responsible for their foolish ones?

In the past when white mobs terrorized African-Americans and other groups, progressives correctly reproached them as individuals who were morally responsible for their abhorrent behavior. So, why then do most progressive narratives present minorities as passive groups, rather than as morally engaged individuals?

I believe that the problem is that many progressive can only conceptualize minorities as victims rather than perpetrators. And when they do acknowledge examples of hate and violence, usually it is explained away a response to socio-economic injustice. Of course I do not deny the existence of racism and injustice, but such explanations fundamentally reduce individuals to passive agents, products of their environment. By failing to treat individuals as active, intelligent moral agents who are responsible for their actions, we negate their individuality and treat them like children, an endeavor which is implicitly racist and demeaning.

Where's Jesse (and the Progressives)?

A few years ago when Kramer (Michael Richards) uttered a hateful racial epitath against African-Americans, his outburst was widely condemned by journalists and politicians. And of course Jesse Jackson thrust himself into the limelight, using this incident to highlight (I paraphrase) the ongoing racism against African-Americans that pervades American Society. So, when I read about racist attacks against Asian-Americans students in a Philadelphia high school that left 30 injured and 7 hospitalized, I was certain that Mr. Jackson and his progressive compatriots would rush to the scene and condemn the attackers. I was certain that a certifiable race riot would be avidly discussed on every major media outlet and used as a teachable moment to address the evils of racism. After all, we can be certain if 30 African-American students were injured in racially motivated attacks, President Obama would hold a solemn press conference and initiate a major federal initiative. But, it wasn't. At first I assumed this was because the perpetrators were not white, they were African-Americans and the victims were not part of an "oppressed group." And I assumed that the lack of widespread progressive indignation stemmed from the fact they implicitly conceive of African-Americans as being passive agents who are not responsible for their actions, but products of their environment. But, then I decided to give Jesse the benefit of the doubt; perhaps he has been too busy chatting with Kramer, George and Jerry over a cup of coffee and tuna sandwich to take notice of a race riot.

Racial violence changes student — and school

By JESSE WASHINGTON

The Associated Press

updated 9/5/2010

PHILADELPHIA — Duong Nghe Ly can't wait to begin his senior year at South Philadelphia High School. A day of violence there last year changed his life, and he wants to learn if his school has been transformed as well.

Last Dec. 3, after years of attacks on Asian immigrant students, something finally snapped.

Fueled by rumors, a group of students roamed the halls searching for Asian victims until one was attacked in a classroom. Later, about 70 students stormed the cafeteria, where several Asians were beaten. About 35 students pushed past a police officer onto the so-called "Asian floor," but were turned back. After school, Asians being escorted home were attacked anyway by a mob of youths.

Almost all the attackers were black — but few observers believe the violence was due to racial hatred. Instead, they cite isolation of different groups within the school, certain students' warped "gangster" values, and for some, simmering resentments over perceived benefits for Asian students.

About 30 Asians were injured that day; seven went to hospitals. Past attacks had been reported to administrators and police, but students say nothing seemed to change.

..Ly (pronounced LEE) was in the lunchroom for what he calls "the riot." Days later, he was followed home from school and punched in the face on his front stoop.

He had arrived from Vietnam two years earlier, speaking nearly no English, the son of poor, uneducated parents. He thought America would be like the "Hannah Montana" TV episodes he had watched in Vietnam. What he found was closer to "The Wire." So he kept his head down, sought silent refuge among his countrymen and tried to make his way through the broken system.

Dec. 3 was a turning point. He realized the system must change — and that he and his fellow immigrants were the ones to make that happen.

Their method? Guided by local activists, and despite reservations from some parents, about 50 Asian students boycotted school for a week.

"Before, I was timid. I didn't really want to get myself into trouble," says Ly, 18. Then he realized, "If everybody's silent, nobody speaks up, the problem keeps going on without being resolved. I feel like I or my friends have to speak up and organize to tell people this is not right.

"We had to fight for it."

___

Duong Ly's parents, ethnic Chinese who grew up in Vietnam, worked 27 years to grasp the bottom rung of the ladder to American success.

His mother, Phung Mac, attended school through the second grade, when her family ran out of money to pay for more. His father, Tu Ly, made it through the sixth grade. In 1981, they submitted their first paperwork to immigrate to the United States.

"You had to have a certain background to go to school, be in the Communist Party," Tu Ly says in Cantonese as his son translates. "Your grandparents had to be a party member for you to get into good schools. Otherwise it cost a lot of money to get an education."

Ly's parents lived in Ho Chi Minh City, eking out a living selling "pho" noodle soup, rising at 5 a.m. and working in their shop until 9 or 10 at night. All extra money went toward school for Duong (pronounced YUHNG) and his older brother, and fees for immigration paperwork. At times they could not pay their rent and were forced to move, but they always made sure their boys stayed in school.

Ly's mother developed painful hip problems. Her younger brother, who had already moved to America, sent money to pay for an operation. It was unsuccessful — the doctor said it was "an experiment. If you want a better ... operation, you need to pay more money," she says in Cantonese.

In 2008, after spending about $20,000 on immigration fees, the family was approved and came to Philadelphia. "We finally achieved our wish: freedom," Tu Ly says. "We finally had a chance for a better education."

South Philadelphia High looms over an entire city block in a poor section of South Philadelphia long populated by descendants of voyagers from Italy, other European nations and the black American South. Asians and Latinos are now coming in greater numbers. Today, the school is about 70 percent black and 18 percent Asian.

During Duong Ly's first year, there were 45 reports of "dangerous incidents" such as weapons possession or assaults at the school of about 1,000 students, enough to earn a "persistently dangerous" label from the state. There also were 326 reports of lesser crimes such as fighting, threats or robberies. The graduation rate was 48 percent. Only 16 percent of students were proficient or better in reading and 8 percent in math, according to state test results.

Within weeks of starting school, Ly was robbed in the bathroom. His older brother was punched in the face. "Our friends told us, 'Just suffer it,'" Ly says.

They didn't report either incident.

___

Duong Ly speaks dispassionately, expressing no racial animosity, when asked to explain how fellow students could commit such vicious attacks.

"Because they live in a violent environment," he suggests. "Maybe their parents have problems and troubles, so they want to express their anger by violence."

His father also declines to condemn the attackers. "In Vietnam," he says, "the original Vietnamese people don't like us because we are a different ethnicity. People from the countryside who move to the city get discrimination from city people. It's the same here. They don't have an understanding about who we are. Discrimination happens in every society."

About a dozen black students were suspended or expelled after Dec. 3. Their names have been kept secret, and they have not commented publicly.

Some other black students show little sympathy for them. "They're just hating on other races. They don't have anything better to do with their lives," says Tyreke Williams, who graduated last June.

Wali Smith makes no excuses for the attacks, but understands where they come from. A community specialist who holds workshops on anger management and conflict resolution in various schools, he witnessed the Dec. 3 violence.

The South Philly native says blacks have always felt marginalized in the neighborhood dominated by Italians and Irish. Now, some students feel an almost unconscious resentment when they see their Asian counterparts studying on their special second-floor sanctuary, which was established to provide language programs and provide a more welcoming environment.

"Those (black) kids feel the majority of the staff there does not care about their education," Smith says. "They see these Asian kids come in and be nurtured, and they want that same kind of comfort."

Then there is a small group of troublemakers with a value system that says, "it's cool to be gangster," Smith says. "But really you're afraid, a scared coward. So you take advantage of weak people."

"It's not based on race, it's based on opportunity," Smith said of the history of violence against Asians. "If they go to the bathroom and take your money, and you don't report it, they'll just keep riding it until the wheels fall off."

___

The Asian students and activists reserve almost all of their criticism for administrators and the school district, which they say consistently failed to protect students.

A school district spokesman did not return a call for comment. Administrators have insisted that they responded to Asian students' complaints and tried their best to combat violence that has become part of the culture for some Philadelphia youths.

"These problems are long-standing and go beyond the school and into the community," district superintendent Arlene Ackerman said a week after the attacks.

A report by a retired judge, which was commissioned by the district, said there were confrontations between a small group of black and Asian students on Dec. 2 that led to the widespread Dec. 3 attacks on random Asians. The report was criticized by Asians who say it failed to account for years of documented violence and that investigators did not interview many student victims and witnesses.

Yet Duong Ly is still enthusiastic about his school. He says the English as a Second Language program is good, the teachers care, there are plenty of computers with Internet access — and it's all free.

"If I study hard I will get a lot of opportunities, scholarships, grants...," he says. "It's rewarding to work hard and study hard here, more than in Vietnam. I can go to a better school, go to college, get a career, then I can take care of my parents. So I like it more here."

He also likes his new home, a narrow, two-story row house bought from his uncle. They are the only Asians on the block.

The front door opens into the living room, where the family's bicycles (they have no car) share space with an old, fat television, couches and a folding table for meals. On the far wall is a handsome curio cabinet of polished wood, ornately carved, holding photographs of ancestors.

Tu Ly works as a cook in an Asian supermarket. His wife is unemployed. The family has permanent resident status and expects to become naturalized citizens within a few years. Recently, Medicaid paid for a hip replacement for Duong's mother.

"We owe this country a lot," Tu Ly says. "The government paid a lot of money for my wife's operation. We will work our best to contribute to society. My children can choose whatever job they like, as long as they do something to contribute to this country."
___

The boycott was not an easy step to take. Some students were afraid of being expelled. Many parents were against it, fearing their children would become even more conspicuous targets. Some said local activists were making the situation worse.

Once it started, though, attitudes changed. "After the boycott, I felt much more confident and powerful because our voices were heard by the people," Duong Ly says.

The district installed 126 security cameras. A "50-50 club" took Asian and black students on group outings. More bilingual staffers and diversity training were added. Principal LaGreta Brown was forced out on the eve of a faculty no-confidence vote after a local newspaper discovered her certification had lapsed.

All eyes are on the incoming principal. Otis Hackney III is 37, a black Philadelphia native, fresh from two years as principal of a mostly white suburban high school. He got the call from Philly one night when he was standing on the sidelines of his school stadium, watching a lacrosse game under the lights.

"My first thought was, you've got to be kidding me," Hackney says during an interview in his new office, the cinderblock walls bare except for a picture of the singing legend Marian Anderson, class of 1921.

Soon, though, Hackney accepted the challenge. His immediate agenda includes building a relationship with the Asian community and creating a group of school stakeholders who meet regularly to set goals.

Hackney says all students should feel comfortable approaching him: "I want to listen more than I speak. Students are often much more honest than adults." He bought a new conference table and spiffed up a room for community meetings: "The message is, this is an important place where we talk about important things." He's getting Asians out of their special floor and into the rest of the building. He's looking at United Nations-style translation headphones for immigrant parents.

He is the fifth principal in six years, and he wants to stick around.

There is much to heal. The Vietnamese embassy has complained to the U.S. State Department. The Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund filed a complaint with the Justice Department, which on August 27 found merit in the claims and advised the district to settle the matter. An investigation by the state Human Rights Commission is pending. The dynamic that exploded on Dec. 3 has not disappeared.

"If you're that angry and frustrated about something that your behavior manifests itself that way, what are we not addressing as a school, as a community?" asks Hackney. "As African-Americans, we can't forget our own struggle to the point that we become what we fought so hard against."

"That's one side. The other side is, when you have an immigrant population that comes in, what are the skill sets they need to function in this society? It can be very difficult for that child and that family to function in schools. So how do you put all that together? That's my job.

"Part of it is getting people to see the human side in every person, identifying with their struggle. Once people begin to do that, you realize folks aren't as privileged as you think they are. They don't speak the language. They don't have that many advantages over you. You're just not taking advantage of the ones you have."

Duong Ly had a busy summer: An internship at the University of Pennsylvania on Asian health issues; a psychology class at a community college; trips to conferences in Houston and Boston to discuss his new activism; being photographed for a Philadelphia magazine story that labeled the boycotters "heroes." In between, he spent a little time working on his college essays and a lot of time on Facebook.

On Wednesday, he will walk through the battered metal doors of South Philadelphia High to start his senior year at what he hopes is a changed school.

"I'm really looking forward to it," he says.

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39017234

A Teachable Moment, Forever Lost.

Fearing that their attire would be provocative to students of Mexican descent during Cinco de Mayo (May 5th), the principal of Live Oaks High School in Morgan Hill, California demanded that five students turn their shirts inside out. When they refused, they were sent home with an unexcused absence. What offensive image or message did their attire convey? The flag of the United States of America!

As you can imagine this stirred up quite a bit of controversy and groups ranging from the ACLU to the Tea Party came to the aid of the students and the principal was quickly forced to apologize. During interviews the students, two of which were of partial Hispanic descent, emphasized that they fully respected their classmates' rights to celebrate Cinco de Mayo and present the Mexican Flag, they merely wished that their classmates and the administration would respect their first amendment rights.

What followed this incident was even more telling. The following day approximately 200 Hispanic students walked out of class to (apparently) protest the decision of the administration. During the march, they chanted "We want respect" and "Si se puede (Yes We Can)" When asked for her opinion, one of the protesters stated"

"It's kind of disrespectful that they (the students who wore Americans flags ) would do that on this day I mean we don't go around on the 4th of July wearing red, white and green saying "Viva Mexico" because that's disrespectful..."

This was followed by a Tea Party rally in which four of the students received a standing ovation. And much to my pleasant surprise, some thoughtful words and placards were presented by the participants. Jeanine Croft, a graduate of Live Oaks High School stated:

"This is a catalyst for some good discussion," Croft said. "It's an opportunity to discuss this and refocus." Croft said students need to be taught in school to be proud Americans like she was, saluting in the Pledge of Allegiance every morning. "And the Hispanic children should be proud to be Hispanic every day not just on May 5 - but don't ever expect us to put the American flag away."

Indeed Croft is correct, this incident should have served as a catalyst for a much needed discussion or in progressive parlance "a teachable moment." Here are but a few of the many concepts and questions that should have been presented to the students, teachers and general public:

1. If indeed there was a risk that the presentation of the American Flag, or for that matter any cultural symbol could provoke some students to conflict, why didn't the administration
confront the intolerance of those students, rather than curtail the free expression of the five students? Why didn't they emphasize that just as we respect your right to proudly wave the Mexican Flag, you must respect the right of other students to wave any flag of their choosing? The administration could have used this incident to promote the merits of tolerance, pluralism and freedom of expression.

2. Would the same school administrators dared to have asked students to hide symbols of their Mexican Heritage, out of the fear that it may have offended some students? If not, why did they not extend the same courtesy to students wishing to present symbols of the United States? What does this say about the ideology and political culture of the school administrators and academia in general? Is this a product of a worldview that encourages the expression and celebration of all cultures, except shared American culture?

3. Why didn't the school administration confront the 200 students who walked out and ask they what they found so offensive about the American Flag and (presumably) American identity? They should have boldly emphasized that just as the students should be proud of their Mexican heritage, so should they be proud of their American identity.

4. Is their anything in the curriculum or broader academic culture that has encouraged these (or any other) students to be be resentful towards the United States? Is this the end product of educational and political elites who eschew assimilation in favor of diversity? Is this the product of teachers who foment a sense of victimization rather than appreciation for the unparalleled liberty and prosperity that the United States offers their students? To those who say that the school should teach diverse students about their culture and traditions, my response is: parents, religious and community organizations are more than welcome to teach children what it means to be (for example) Jewish, Mexican or Korean, but it's the job of schools to teach students what it means to be American.

5. Why should the school sponsor the celebration of a holiday that pertains to a single segment of the student body? The school administration should treat ethnic holidays, the same way it treats religious celebrations. Even if a segment of the student body is demographically dominant, the school should only officially promote the celebration of holidays that are shared by all students. This does not mean that student clubs should not be allowed to use school facilities to celebrate and educate their fellow students about their holidays, traditions and culture. In other words, it would be inappropriate to have the school promote the celebration of Christmas, Hanukkah or Cinco de Mayo, but it would be perfectly appropriate to allow the Christian, Jewish or Mexican club use the gym or field to host a celebration during lunch time or after school hours.


6. Is this an isolated incident or does it reveal that millions of individuals are not assimilating to American culture. First, keep in mind that assimilation does not mean that they have to reject their ethnic and religious heritage. And second, keep in mind that just because these students speak English and enjoy popular culture, does not mean that they are truly assimilated. When one is assimilated they feel an affection for their nation and it's shared culture and symbols. Clearly the 200 students who walked out of class did not hold great affection for the United States. If educational and political institutions are failing to fully assimilate millions of citizens, what social and political implications does this hold in our increasingly diverse nation?

7. No incidents of white students protesting the celebration of Cinco de Mayo were reported. Is this because anti-racism curricula are based on a vision in which whites are the perpetrators and diverse populations are the sole recipients of racism and intolerance?

Alas, the school administrators tried to sweep this under the rug as quickly as possible and a teachable moment was lost forever.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhpqfoOwQtk&feature=PlayList&p=79059CB4AC2BC91C&playnext_from=PL&index=185

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ib5FlgdwKs&feature=PlayList&p=79059CB4AC2BC91C&playnext_from=PL&index=183


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/07/california-principal-apologizes-forbidding-flag-shirts-mexican-holiday/

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/07/tensions-high-california-high-school-following-flag-flap/

http://cbs5.com/education/rally.american.flag.2.1680060.html

http://www.morganhilltimes.com/news/265549-live-oak-high-school-flag-feud-entices-tea-party-rally

On Anti-Semitism, Misogyny & Diversity.

Most of the goals of progressives are positive, however a central problem in their visions is their inability to realize that many of their aims are contradictory. Rather than make difficult choices over competing goods, most progressives simultaneously pursue both. Nowhere is this more clearly seen than the progressive elevation of cultural diversity. In many instances, the expansion of cultural diversity clashes with other progressives aims such as the abolishment of racism, sexism and ethnic conflict. This is seen in Malmo Sweden, where hate crimes have lead to an exodus of the Jewish community. When we think of Anti-Semitic crime, the first thing that comes to mind is a thuggish skin head, but in the case of Malmo, the majority of perpetrators are Muslim immigrants.

The typical left wing narrative presents racism, hatred and intolerance as phenomena directed against diverse populations by whites. While deplorable white supremacist organizations continue to exist, increasingly we see that western cultures have become more tolerant, while Islamic cultures have largely stagnated or even regressed regarding issues of tolerance and diversity. If you doubt this, I encourage you to converse with any one of the millions of Jews, Christians, Baha'is and Hindus that have fled the Muslim world in the last 50 years. So, we paradoxically see that demographic changes engendered by progressive immigration policies have in some instances eroded tolerance and pluralism. And paradoxically, areas that have remained less diverse, i.e. dominated by western culture, are usually more tolerant of diversity.

The phenomena of diversity eroding tolerance and pluralism is most clearly seen in the case of women's rights. In Europe, few progressives are able to see the inherent contradiction in their support of high levels of (Muslim) immigration and their push to further women's rights. A telling anecdote is seen in the mostly Muslim suburb of Courneuve, France, where 77 % of the veiled women carry veils reportedly because of fear of being harassed or molested by Islamic moral patrols. In no way am I saying that the majority of Muslims are intolerant misogynists and Anti-Semites, however it is clear that a high density of unassimilated Muslims is not conducive to the rights of women, religious minorities and gays.

Most egregious is the growth in rape and domestic violence seen in Sweden and neighboring Scandinavian countries. The Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet reported that in Oslo, 65% of rapes of Norwegian women were performed by non-western men (a group that is composed mostly of Muslims), even though they only make up 14.3% of Oslo's population. Statistics from Sweden’s National Council for Crime Prevention show that the number of reported rapes against children is on the rise with the majority of perpetrators being non-western. The figures have nearly doubled in the last ten years: 467 rapes against children under the age of 15 were reported in 2004 compared with 258 in 1995. And in neighboring Denmark, an Islamic Mufti in Copenhagen sparked a political outcry after publicly declaring that women who refuse to wear headscarves are “asking for rape.”

Rather than view the upsurge in violence against women as a clear sign of the need to encourage the cultural assimilation of Muslim immigrants, the upswing in misogynistic violence has even encouraged some European progressives to further embrace an extreme form of multiculturalism. During a 2001 debate, Unni Wikan, a female anthropologist of the University of Oslo stated "I will not blame the rapes on Norwegian women, but Norwegian women must understand that we live in a Multicultural society and adapt themselves to it." "Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these rapes." For example, by not inviting into their homes Muslim men with little knowledge of Norwegian culture." I never imagined that I would hear a highly educated woman basically imply that rape victims were "asking for it," indeed the ghost of Vidkun Quisling is alive and well in Norway.

Hate crimes force Jews out of Malmo

Anti-Semitic threats come from Muslim community

By Karl Ritter ASSOCIATED PRESS

3-2010

Marcus Eilenberg is a Swedish Jew whose family roots in Malmo run deep. His paternal grandparents were Holocaust survivors who found shelter in this southern Swedish city in 1945. His wife's parents fled to Sweden from communist Poland in the 1960s.

Now the 32-year-old law firm associate feels the welcome for Jews is running out, and he is moving to Israel with his wife and two children in May. He says he knows at least 15 other Jews who are leaving for a similar reason.

That reason, he says, is a rise in hate crimes against Jews in Malmo, and a sense that local authorities have little desire to deal with a problem that has exposed a crack in Sweden's image as a bastion of tolerance and a haven for distressed ethnic groups.

Anti-Semitic crimes in Europe have usually been associated with the far right, but Shneur Kesselman, an Orthodox rabbi, says the threat now comes from Muslims.

"In the past five years I've been here, I think you can count on your hand how many incidents there have been from the extreme right," he said. "In my personal experience, it's 99 percent Muslims."

Sweden prides itself on having taken in tens of thousands of the world's war refugees. About 7 percent of Malmo's 285,000 people were born in the Middle East, according to city statistics, and the city has large numbers from the Balkans, including the Macedonian who heads the city's largest mosque. After the Holocaust, it took in many Jews who survived the World War II Nazi genocide.

Malmo police say that of 115 hate crimes reported in 2009, 52 were anti-Semitic. Bejzat Becirov, the mosque head, estimated there are about 60,000 Muslims in Malmo. But the number of Jews is about 700 and shrinking - it was twice as big two decades ago, according to Fredrik Sieradzki, a spokesman for the Jewish community.

Last year at least 10 of the hate-crime complaints were filed by Mr. Kesselman, from the Brooklyn-based Chabad-Lubavitch movement, whose black fedora and long beard single him out as he moves around the city.

Walking home from the Jewish community center on Malmo's snow-flecked streets, the 31-year-old rabbi recalls some of the worst incidents: a young man who shouted "Heil Hitler" and chased him off a city bus; a car that suddenly reversed and almost hit him on the crosswalk by the opera house.

"A typical situation is I'm walking in the streets and a car with Muslim youth between 18 and 30 will roll down the window and yell '(expletive) Jew,' give me the finger and shout something in Arabic," he said.

Malmo's Jewish community is mostly secular and long felt safe because few display Jewish symbols that would distinguish them from other Swedes. But things changed after a series of fierce anti-Israel protests and a spike in anti-Semitic hate crimes after Israel's assault against Hamas-run Gaza last year.

Tempers flared when Jews held a peaceful pro-Israel rally outside City Hall a week after the offensive ended. A bigger crowd waving Palestinian flags threw bottles, eggs and firecrackers.

Tensions rose again two months later when Malmo authorities, saying they couldn't guarantee security, forced Sweden and Israel to play their Davis Cup tennis matches in a near-empty stadium as police held off rock-throwing anti-Israel activists outside who wanted to stop the competition completely.

Mr. Eilenberg said it was a wake-up call - "a degree of hate that none of us - except those who survived the Holocaust - had experienced before."

Jewish groups say anti-Semitic attacks increased in several European countries following the Gaza war, notably the Netherlands and France.

Across the narrow Oresund Strait, Jews in Copenhagen say they have also felt a rise in Muslim anti-Semitism but are less worried, said Yitzchok Loewenthal of the Jewish International Organization in the Danish capital.

"The fundamental difference is that here in Copenhagen, Jews feel that the police, state and authorities take the issue very seriously and are on top of the situation, while in Malmo the Jewish community feel unsafe because the political will is not there," he said.

Malmo's Jews say they feel little support from Mayor Ilmar Reepalu, a left-winger who told a Swedish newspaper in January he thought the anti-Semitism was coming from extreme-right groups. He also drew criticism for blaming Malmo Jews for not distancing themselves from the Israeli campaign in Gaza.

"Instead they choose to hold a demonstration ... which can send the wrong signals," Mr. Reepalu was quoted as saying by Skanska Dagbladet.

Jewish leaders sensed a blame-the-victim attitude. Mr. Reepalu has since spoken out against anti-Semitism and claims the media twisted his comments.

In an interview aired by Danish broadcaster TV2 this month, Mr. Reepalu said he was being misrepresented by "the Israeli lobby who aren't interested in what I say and believe."

Mr. Reepalu didn't respond to repeated requests for an interview with the Associated Press.

The city recently appointed an anti-hate-crimes coordinator, Bjorn Lagerback, who said Mr. Reepalu has sent a letter to the city's 20,000 employees denouncing all attacks against minorities in Malmo, though without specifically mentioning Jews.

Asked whether Jews were particularly targeted by hate crimes in Malmo, Mr. Lagerback said anti-Semitism had become "more explicit." He added that "we also have discrimination against women who wear a hijab. They are also exposed to various kinds of insults."

Mosque leader Mr. Becirov spoke similarly, saying he feels "great sympathy for the Jewish community" and knows what it's going through because "the Muslim community, too, is exposed to Islamophobia."

He listed a range of incidents, including an anthrax letter sent to him after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in New York, and several arson attacks against his mosque.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/29/hate-crimes-force-jews-out-of-malmo/?page=2

http://hinduvoice.net/cgi-bin/dada/mail.cgi?flavor=archive;list=NL;id=20050428200924

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unni_Wikan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quisling

A House Divided?

As most Americans are aware, Obama's approval rating has fallen to 48% and his disapproval rating is 47%., but when we dig a little deeper and look carefully at the break down of the numbers, we encounter some fascinating information that reveals deep political and philosophical divisions among ethnic lines.

Obama's approval rating among African-Americans: 85%
Obama's approval rating among Hispanics: 76%
Obama's approval rating among Whites: 37%

Obama's disapproval rating among African-Americans: 12%
Obama's disapproval rating among Hispanics: 14%
Obama's disapproval rating among Whites: 58%

African-Americans who support Obama's health care reform: 67%
Hispanics who support Obama's health care reform: 62%
Whites who support Obama's health care reform: 31%

Here are several factors that may account for this stark divergence:

White Racism: I do not believe that this is the dominant factor, given the fact that Obama experienced a notable drop in support even among whites who voted for him.

African-American & Latino Racism: Antipathy towards whites is not a significant factor, however, race and ethno-identity-politics plays a far greater role in the voting decision of African-Americans and Latinos than it does among whites. And for reasons that I consider irrational, it is perfectly acceptable for African-Americans and Latinos to publicly declare that they should vote for the political and economic interests of their ethno-communities, while a white would be labeled an incorrigible racist for doing the same.

I consider this factor disheartening because the growth of ethno-identity politics does not bode well for the health of our republic. Ideally we want people to vote according to what they believe will promote the broadest public good for all Americans and not just the narrow interests of their ethnic groups. I would like to see more African-Americans and Latinos politically engaged as individuals and as members of geographic communities, but not as racial groups.

For example, individuals working together to pursue environmental and educational policies that benefit all the residents of their neighborhood is an example of positive civic involvement. But, when individuals lobby for the government to set aside public jobs and government contracts solely for members of their ethnic group, it's an example of an ethnic spoils systems. The implicit belief in the said system is demonstrated when political commentators on Univision frequently declare that Obama should push forth immigration reform because the majority of Hispanics supported him, not because it broadly benefits Americans of all races. The problem with this is that the growth of an ethno-political spoils system will encourage the growth of reciprocal identity politics among whites, a prospect that I do not look favorably upon.

Overlap of Class & Race: My first instinct was that was that most African-Americans and Latinos support Obama not because of race, but because as members of groups with a disproportionate number of poor and uninsured individuals, his health care proposals appealed to them. While this is a valid factor, we must not overplay it, because even among upwardly mobile minorities, Obama enjoys overwhelming support. And conversely, the poor and working class whites who comprise a notable portion of some red districts are generally not supportive of Obama.

Flawed Marketing by Republicans: Several years ago that may have been true, however during the last presidential election McCaine went out of his way to reach out to Latino voters, yet he lost to Obama by a land slide.

Divergence of Political Values & Visions: With some notable exceptions, support for limited government, free markets, economic & social liberty is less prevalent among African-Americans and Latinos. Unfortunately (from my libertarian perspective) the one element of the conservative tent that holds a wider appeal for minorities is religious conservatism, as demonstrated by the comparatively low support among Latinos for gay marriage and reproductive rights. Why these other aspects of conservatism do not hold wide appeal for the said groups is a long and complex topic that will be explored in future posts.

As a conservative who places tremendous stock in culture, values and visions and not race, the significant demographic changes that the United States is undergoing does not trouble me in itself. What made the United States the freest, most peaceful and prosperous nation in history was not race, but the philosophical and constitutional foundation laid down by the founding father. To a tremendous degree this foundational core is reflected in the values, vision, customs and culture adopted by Americans of different colors and creeds, which I refer to as the "American Way." While I do acknowledge that there is philosophical diversity within the American Way, there are some core tenants and parameters, which relative to other philosophical and political streams, conservatives are generally aligned towards.

Diverse individuals have maintained their separate cultures and traditions while still embracing these core American values. African-Americans such as Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams and Larry Elder are among the most brilliant, patriotic proponents of the American Way, so of course I consider them more American than a white, socialist douchebag like Dick Durbin. If the color and composition of the United States significantly changes, but its core values and vision remained, American will continue to be the greatest nation on earth. However, with the large number of African-Americans and Latinos embracing the expansive statism and sense of entitlement that the democratic party actively promotes, the projected demographic change holds troubling implications. And even though democrats and progressives will receive a political boost from these changes, they too should be troubled that the growing political polarization that we are experiencing is occurring along racial lines. Unity through Diversity is a great philosophy that unfortunately does not always hold true in real life.

Eric Holder Anagram

Eric Holder stands for "Equal Rights Ignore Color, Hopelessly Outdated Liberal Dogmas Encourage Racism"

In other words, Mr. Holder's promotion of affirmative action and hate crime laws do not encourage a free and color blind society.

Tyranny of the Majority (part I)

The great Tocqueville warned democracies of the danger of developing a tyranny of the majority. This form of tyranny is based on the belief that democracy simply equalled the electoral majority's right to enforce their will on any minority group. An obvious example being the historic abuses of African-Americans.

Tocqueville believed that in a developed democracy the tyranny of the majority could be manifested in more subtle forms, that "might result when the people seek to use government to protect them in their mediocrity by restricting the freedom of any who might challenge or endanger them. This could lead to a kind of sterile suffocation of talents or ambitions, and the utter surrender of freedom in exchange for equality (of outcomes)."

Clearly this refers to the hostility that demagogic politicians foster against successful individuals and enterprises. Such politicians blame any economic and social difficulties on these individuals and organizations, rather than acknowledge the inherent challenges in achieving equitable economic and social outcomes in a world in which individual ability, efforts and fortunes so dramatically differ.

And sadly, envy, the flight from personal responsibility and blaming others for your misfortunes are parts of human nature. Only through a strong individual or cultural commitment can these impulses be moderated. But, unfortunately these dark elements of human nature makes ideologies of resentment and redistribution attractive to many people. And of course the politicians who promote this ideology are usually rewarded by votes.

The logical extension of this world view is the belief that the state has an almost unlimited right to seize or control the assets of one group of individuals and enterprises and transfer it other less successful and less politically influential individuals and groups. The implied belief in the almost unlimited right of the state to seize the wealth of its citizens is seen in the language that "progressives" use to discuss tax cuts, in which they complain that "the government is giving back too much to the rich." This implies that citizens may keep a portion of the product of their labor only by the good grace of the state, rather than the fundamental principle that the state may seize the wealth of its citizenry only by their grace of the people.

By now my "progressive" critics are most likely striking at the straw-man and stating "oh yeah, how will we pay for roads, police, firemen and teachers?!?" All but the most radical of libertarians will acknowledge that the purpose of the state is to provide for the broad welfare of its citizens, which of course includes the said services. But seizing the majority of the wealth of a narrow group of citizenry to give to other groups via subsidies and entitlements is another story. As the said programs and policies expand, so will their voracious appetite for capital. But as the state's appetite outstrips the productive capacity of the wealthy, we can be sure that the definition of the wealthy will greatly expand to include large segments of the middle class. But, regardless of how small or large the targeted minority, the belief that your electoral majority entitles you to their wealth is at its core majoritarian tyranny. And the only remedy is a limited, constitutionally bound government that guards the personal and property rights of individuals and groups.