Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Desegregation, Before Brown

Thursday, May 2nd, 2013

The Supreme Court’s 1954 decision in Brown v. Board of Education is one of the great landmarks of American history. It is also a good example of the fact that the law is not about the law. Maybe one in 500 college students ever has read the decision, and probably very few Americans could tell you much about the legal questions involved in Brown, but the moral question at the heart of the case—whether an apartheid regime of “separate but [formally] equal” would be allowed to stand in these United States—is well understood. It was well understood by the Court at the time, too: Remarkably, that contentious issue was settled in a unanimous decision. Even Hugo Black, a member of the Ku Klux Klan named to the Supreme Court by Franklin Roosevelt, was on board—but, in all fairness, Justice Black had not joined the Klan because he hated blacks: He had joined the Klan because he hated Catholics.

{snip} It was in all likelihood death that made that unanimity possible: Chief Justice Fred Vinson, appointed by Democrat Harry S. Truman, had been hostile to overturning segregation without an act of Congress calling expressly for that. He died before Brown was decided. His replacement, Earl Warren, appointed by Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, was eager to repeal segregation: He had been involved in fighting segregation in the California schools for some years, and as governor had signed the repeal of the last of the state’s segregation statutes.

{snip} Had it not been for segregation, Miss [Linda] Brown would have attended Sumner Elementary, named for the great abolitionist Republican; instead, she was consigned to a segregated school named for Virginia slaveholder and proto-Democrat James Monroe. Sumner Elementary would later be closed by Topeka’s authorities—as part of a legally mandated desegregation plan necessitated by post-Brown litigation.

Everybody knows what happened in Topeka. Nobody knows what happened in Phoenix. And that is both odd and unfortunate.

When Earl Warren was working to undermine segregation in California, a number of his legal colleagues fanned out across the Southwest hoping to challenge segregation both in the courtroom and in the statehouses. We often forget that segregation was not for the most part something cooked up by wicked proprietors of theaters and restaurants (though there were those, too, to be sure), but was in the main something imposed on them by state and local governments. California had attempted to liberalize segregation by adopting a law making it voluntary, its enforcement optional. While that law would later be ruled unconstitutional, it was popular for a time as one possible model for letting a little daylight into the darkness of American race relations. One of the places that was tried was Phoenix.

Here, Barry Goldwater enters the story. Goldwater was a department-store proprietor and a member of the Phoenix city council. He was a very conservative Republican, something that was not at all at odds with his membership in the NAACP, which was, in the 1950s, an organization in which Republicans and conservatives still were very much welcome. The civil-rights community in Phoenix, such as it was, did not quite know what to make of Goldwater. It was already clear by then that he was to be a conservative’s conservative and a man skeptical of federal overreach; while he described himself as being unprejudiced on what was at the time referred to as “the race question,” the fact was that he did not talk much about it, at least in public. His family department stores were desegregated under his watch, though he was not known to hire blacks to work there. But when the Arizona legislature was considering making segregation voluntary in the public schools, Goldwater was lobbying for it behind the scenes. And, perhaps more important, he organized a group of well-known white conservative leaders to do so as well. He did so on the advice of his friend Lincoln Ragsdale.

Lincoln and Eleanor Ragsdale were the first couple of civil rights in Arizona at the time. Lincoln had joined the Tuskegee Airmen in 1944, but the worst injury he ever got during his time in the service was a near-lynching at the hands of a gang of Alabama police officers after he was insufficiently deferential to a white gas-station clerk. One of the cops had intended to kill him, but the others objected on the grounds that he was wearing a military uniform. (Alabama had a very strange sense of patriotism at the time.) Lincoln was kind of a bad-ass: When he and his wife moved into a white neighborhood in Phoenix, vandals painted the word “NIGGER” in two-foot-high letters on the front of his house. Rather than paint over it, Lincoln left it there for all to see: “I wanted to make sure that the white folks knew where the nigger lived,” he later explained. Neighbors offered to buy him out, sparing him and the neighborhood the friction of his presence. He stayed put. {snip}

The Ragsdales worked with the NAACP and the Arizona Council for Civic Unity/Greater Phoenix Council for Civic Unity to fight segregation in restaurants, theaters, and other public places in Phoenix, but the schools were the biggest target. When Lincoln was working to raise money for the NAACP for a lawsuit to integrate the schools, he turned to every possible source he could think of, including the conservative city councilman Barry Goldwater. To his surprise, Goldwater responded with a large check. What surprised him further was that Goldwater became a personal friend and political colleague of the couple, a “great inspiration,” in Lincoln’s words. The Ragsdales, Lincoln said, became the people to whom Goldwater brought “questions about how we felt about certain things, and we’d try to give him a very honest appraisal of it.” Goldwater supported most of the civil-rights legislation that preceded the famous 1964 act, which he opposed as unconstitutional. But as Ragsdale points out in Race Work, he also “helped make Tuskegee airman Chappie James a four-star general while he was in the Senate,” funded the school-integration lawsuit, and raised money to keep the Urban League solvent when it was on the verge of dissolution.

But funding the lawsuit may have been the most important thing Goldwater did in his civil-rights career. As the historian Quintard Taylor of the University of Washington puts it: “Most historians characterize the 1954 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Topeka Board of Education as the death knell for de jure public school segregation. Yet a little-known legal victory by . . . the Arizona NAACP before the Arizona State Supreme Court in 1953 provided an important precedent for the ruling by the highest court in the land.” The NAACP had not been getting very far suing on behalf of black students, but it had made some progress with suits on behalf of Mexican-American students: A 1951 decision had outlawed segregating Hispanic students in the Tolleson School District, and Phoenix refused to comply with the new legal standard, so it was targeted for a lawsuit, too: one that would have ended racial discrimination against any student. {snip} With the support of Goldwater and others, the NAACP sponsored a series of rallies, protests, and fund-raising efforts in support of its litigation.

The NAACP’s federal lawsuit went nowhere. Federal judge David Ling, another FDR appointee, threw the case out on the grounds that the state courts rather than the federal courts were the proper channel for the challenge. New litigation was filed in Maricopa County Superior Court, seeking an end to racial discrimination against any student, and in 1953—a year before Brown—segregation was declared illegal in Phoenix, with the presiding judge declaring: “A half century of intolerance is enough.” But Phoenix was the last major city in the west to end segregation of its own accord.

Barry Goldwater was not the most important opponent of racial segregation in Arizona, nor was he the most important champion of desegregating the public schools. What he was was on the right side: He put his money, his political clout, his business connections, and his reputation at the service of a cause that was right and just. While he was doing all that, his eventual nemesis, Lyndon Baines Johnson, a low-rent practitioner of the most crass sort of racist politics, was gutting anti-lynching laws and assuring Democrats that he would offer those “uppity Negroes” “just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

For more than a century, the Republican party had been the party of civil rights, of abolition, of emancipation, the party of Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass. Barry Goldwater of Arizona and the NAACP did not represent a break from that tradition, but a continuation of it.

 

The problem for Republicans is that reclaiming their reputation as the party of civil rights requires a party leadership that wants to do so, because it cherishes that tradition and the values that it represents.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/346861/desegregation-brown

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Defense Attorney: Prosecution of Gosnell Is ‘Elitist, Racist’

Thursday, May 2nd, 2013

Defense lawyer Jack McMahon delivered his closing argument on behalf of abortionist Kermit Gosnell on Monday, accusing  prosecutors of “manipulating” the case to engage in an essentially “racist” prosecution of the man charged with four counts of first-degree murder, killing babies born alive during abortions by snipping their spinal cords with surgical scissors.

“Never have I seen the presumption of innocence so trampled on, stomped on,” said McMahon in court today, adding that the Philadelphia district attorney’s office “tried to manipulate everybody” and was pursuing an “elitist, racist prosecution.”

“Dr. Gosnell is not the only one doing abortions in Philadelphia,” McMahon said, “but he was an African American singled out for prosecution.”

“We know why he was targeted,” he said.  “If you can’t see that reality, you’re living in some sort of la-la land.”

Speaking for nearly two hours before the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, McMahon painted Gosnell as a doctor who cared for his community “providing a service” to vulnerable young girls.

He talked about 13-  and 14-year-old “desperate young girls.”

“And who comes to help them?” McMahon asked.  “Dr. Gosnell.”

“He gave them a solution to their problem,” he said.  “They went in for a service and Dr. Gosnell got it done.”

Gosnell, 72, is facing four counts of first-degree murder for the killing of babies born alive after abortions, and a third-degree murder charge in the anesthesia-overdose death of a mother, Karnamaya Mongar, at his clinic the Women’s Medical Society in West Philadelphia.

He is also charged with infanticide, conspiracy, abortion at 24 or more weeks, theft, corruption of minors, solicitation and other related offenses.

The grand jury report presented in the case asserted that Gosnell killed “hundreds” of babies over the years, by cutting their spinal cords with scissors after they survived late-term abortions.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/defense-attorney-prosecution-gosnell-elitist-racist

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Stop White Genocide–Swing Dancing

Wednesday, April 24th, 2013

Stop White Genocide–Swing Dancing

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Immigration Reform Could Be Bonanza for Democrats

Wednesday, April 24th, 2013

The immigration proposal pending in Congress would transform the nation’s political landscape for a generation or more — pumping as many as 11 million new Hispanic voters into the electorate a decade from now in ways that, if current trends hold, would produce an electoral bonanza for Democrats and cripple Republican prospects in many states they now win easily.

Beneath the philosophical debates about amnesty and border security, there are brass-tacks partisan calculations driving the thinking of lawmakers in both parties over comprehensive immigration reform, which in its current form offers a pathway to citizenship—and full voting rights—for a group of undocumented residents that roughly equals the population of Ohio, the nation’s seventh-largest state.

If these people had been on the voting rolls in 2012 and voted along the same lines as other Hispanic voters did last fall, President Barack Obama’s relatively narrow victory last fall would have been considerably wider, a POLITICO analysis showed.

Key swing states that Obama fought tooth and nail to win—like Florida, Colorado and Nevada—would have been comfortably in his column. And the president would have come very close to winning Arizona.

Republican Mitt Romney, by contrast, would have lost the national popular vote by 7 percentage points, 53 percent to 46 percent, instead of the 4-point margin he lost by in 2012, and would have struggled even to stay competitive in GOP strongholds like Texas, which he won with 57 percent of the vote.

The analysis is based on U.S. Census and Pew Research Center estimates of illegal immigrant populations by state, and presidential exit polls showing how Obama and Romney performed among Latinos.

To illustrate the potential voting shifts once immigrants are able to vote, look at Texas, Arizona and Georgia. The total undocumented immigrant population in each of those states exceeds Romney’s margin of victory.

Texas, where the unauthorized immigrant population is second only to California’s, had an estimated 1.65 million undocumented immigrants in 2010, according to statistics from the Pew Hispanic Center. Romney won the state in 2012 by just under 1.3 million votes.

In Arizona, Romney won by 212,000 votes — and there are an estimated 400,000 undocumented immigrants in the state as of 2010.

Even Georgia, which isn’t a border state and doesn’t immediately come to mind when thinking of immigrant-heavy states, would be affected: Georgia had an estimated 425,000 undocumented immigrants in 2010, per Pew Hispanic Center’s estimates, and Romney won there by 308,000 votes.

If all those immigrants had voted in 2012 and President Obama had won 71 percent of them—the percentage he won among Latinos nationally—he would have come in less than 50,000 votes short in Arizona, within about a half-million votes of winning Texas and 125,000 votes shy in Georgia.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/immigration-reform-could-upend-electoral-college-90478.html

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Homeland Security Approves Seizure of Cell Phones and Laptops within 100 Miles of Border; Report Remains Secret

Friday, March 15th, 2013

Americans have no Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures if they happen to be within 100 miles of the border, according to the “Executive Summary” of a still-secret report by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). As the ACLU-created map above shows, nearly 2/3 of Americans (197 million people)—including the entire populations of Florida, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Washington, DC, and Michigan—live in this “Constitution free” zone, as do the residents of the nation’s five most populous cities: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia.

The secret report is DHS’s response (two years late) to critics of its policy, in place since at least 2008, of allowing border control agents, without a warrant or even a suspicion of wrongdoing, to search any travelers’ electronic devices (laptops, cell phones, tablets, cameras, etc.) and seize data they find. According to a Freedom of Information Act request (FOIA) filed three years ago by the ACLU, DHS subjected more than 6,500 travelers—nearly half of them U.S. citizens—to searches under this policy between October 2008 and June 2010.

The Executive Summary of the secret report, which DHS is allowing the public to see, sets forth its conclusions without even summarizing the reasoning underlying them. Thus it asserts that “imposing a requirement that officers have reasonable suspicion in order to conduct a border search of an electronic device would be operationally harmful without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefits,” but is silent on how DHS defines “civil rights/civil liberties benefits” or how it balances these against its institutional needs.

The ACLU, which has already filed an FOIA request demanding the full report, released a statement arguing that “allowing government agents to search through all of a traveler’s data without reasonable suspicion is completely incompatible with our fundamental rights: our Fourth Amendment right to privacy—and more specifically the right to be free from unreasonable searches—is implicated when the government can rummage through our computers and cell phones for no reason other than that we happen to have traveled abroad. Suspicionless searches also open the door to profiling based on perceived or actual race, ethnicity, or religion. And our First Amendment rights to free speech and free association are inhibited when agents at the border can target us for searches based on our exercise of those rights.”

http://www.blacklistednews.com/Homeland_Security_Approves_Seizure_of_Cell_Phones_and_Laptops_within_100_Miles_of_Border%3B_Report_Remains_Secret/24167/0/0/0/Y/M.html

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

HUNDREDS TURN OUT TO SEE FURNESS VIKING COLLECTION

Friday, March 15th, 2013

The “Stone Age, Blood Axe, Conquest” gallery – which houses the precious Furness Viking hoard – opened to the public on Saturday.

The 92-piece collection, which includes fragile coins, ingots and bracelets, was discovered under a rock by a metal detectorist near Stainton quarry in 2011.

A community fundraising campaign raised not only the £49,500 needed to purchase the treasure from the Crown, but enough to build the gallery in which it is now displayed.

Walney residents Dennis and Wendy Currie popped in for their first look at the collection and were suitably impressed.

They predicted it would be very popular with the Danish residents working on the windfarms off Walney. Mrs Currie said: “It’s very good. I think it will be a tourist attraction and it’s great that it was able to remain in Furness.”

Re-enactment group the Herlid Vikings, which helped raise a substantial amount of money towards establishing the gallery, was again present to thrill children with their exploits.

Terry Harvey-Chadwick – aka Bjarni Thorvaldrson – said he was delighted to be able help keep the hoard in Furness for locals and visitors alike to enjoy.

“It looks really nice,” he said. “The Viking hoard is of huge historical significance and it’s a real bonus to have it displayed here.”

Eleven-year-old Marcia Dougan, of Barrow, was just one of dozens of youngsters to turn out to watch the Herlid Vikings in battle.

“It was pretty scary,” she said.

http://www.nwemail.co.uk/news/hundreds-turn-out-to-see-furness-viking-collection-1.1034323?referrerPath=news/#.URlg-vABLUY.twitter

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Pew: For Every 10 Americans, Only 3 Trust the Government

Thursday, March 14th, 2013

The Pew Research Center in Washington, D.C. has found that fewer Americans than ever trust the decisions made by the government.

Data collected from a survey taken in January of this year indicates that all demographics and partisan groups experienced an increasing lack of faith in government leadership, according to a release posted on the Pew Research website late last week.

“However, there are disparities,” the official summary noted. “[M]ore than twice as many Hispanics as whites (44 percent vs. 20 percent) trust the federal government, and more blacks (38 percent) than whites trust the government.”

Researchers additionally observed that younger Americans trust the government more than their older counterparts, and that more liberals believe in the administration of President Barack Obama than either independents or Republicans.

Conversely, distrust of federal government is presently at 73 percent. Earlier on in the Obama administration, it reportedly hit a record high of 80 percent, according to a graph constructed and presented by researchers at Pew.

According to Pew, almost 60 percent of people in the United States had confidence in the federal government before President Bill Clinton left office. When Bush left, national trust was down to about 25 percent of the nation’s people.

 

PewTrust

 

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/03/11/pew-for-every-10-americans-only-3-trust-the-government/

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Rabbit Statue, Wallet Reported Missing in Separate Hamilton Mill Incidents

Thursday, March 14th, 2013

A thief reportedly entered the backyard of a Hamilton Mill home and absconded with a rabbit statue sometime between 8 a.m. on March 2 and 8 a.m. on March 3.

The Greenside Court homeowner called police on March 3 after realizing the statue was missing. The statue — of a rabbit wearing a coat — was described as being gray in color. There are no known suspects. The case is listed as active.

Also on March 3, a Hamilton Mill resident reported a thief broke into her vehicle while it was parked in the driveway of her Highland Forge Trail home. The woman said someone took her wallet out of the car during the overnight hours of March 2. The woman said the vehicle had been locked and there were no signs of forced entry.

The wallet contained the woman’s driver’s license, several credit cards and a student identification card. The case is listed as active.

http://dacula.patch.com/articles/rabbit-statue-wallet-reported-missing-in-separate-hamilton-mill-incidents

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

Two Syracuse University Football Players Charged in Burglaries

Friday, March 8th, 2013

Two Syracuse football players are among four university students charged with campus burglaries.

Syracuse police say junior defensive end Markus Pierce-Brewster and junior defensive tackle Davon Walls were charged with felony burglary and misdemeanor petit larceny in connection with the burglary of an apartment Feb. 23. Both players are accused of stealing a flat screen television, an Xbox gaming system, two iPods and Xbox games while students were asleep inside the apartments.

 

Pierce-Brewster transferred into the program before last season from City College of San Francisco and appeared in 12 games, recording 30 tackles, one sack and one fumble recovery.

Marcus Pierce-Brewster

Marcus Pierce-Brewster

Walls, from Brooklyn, appeared in three games last year after transferring from Coahoma Community College in Mississippi.

Davon Walls

Davon Walls

http://www.pressconnects.com/viewart/20130306/SPORTS03/303060041/Two-Syracuse-University-football-players-charged-burglarIes

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share

H-1B Visa Program Is Not Attracting the Best and Brightest Workers, New EPI Paper Finds

Thursday, March 7th, 2013

H-1B guest worker visas are not a useful way to drive U.S. innovation, a new EPI paper finds. In Are foreign students the ‘best and brightest’? Data and implications for immigration policy, Norman Matloff, a professor of computer science at the University of California, Davis, discusses the H-1B program, which allows employers to temporarily hire foreign STEM workers.

H-1B visas are often described as a way to attract the “best and brightest” to American shores, but many employers use the H-1B program as a source of cheap, compliant labor.

Contrary to the claims of industry lobbyists, H-1B workers are no more distinguished than their U.S. peers. Instead, employers prefer to hire foreign workers over similarly qualified U.S. workers, because legal loopholes in how the “prevailing wage” is calculated let them save on labor costs. The H-1B visa also ties workers to their employer, effectively rendering them captive for the duration of their visa. The H-1B program does not encourage U.S. employers to hire outstanding talent or the best and brightest workers.

For example, Matloff finds that by several measures, foreign students in computer science now working in the U.S. are on average less talented than Americans. Compared to Americans of the same age and education level, the foreign students filed fewer patent applications, attended less-selective U.S. universities and were less likely to work in research and development positions.

“Ironically, the biggest victims of the industry obsession with H-1B visas are the technology companies themselves,” said Matloff. “Their ‘penny wise, pound foolish’ policy means they are often not hiring the best talent.”

Proponents of H-1B visas argue that tech firms are unable to find qualified U.S. applicants for STEM positions, but stagnant wages in these fields refute claims of a labor shortage. Indeed, flat wages are discouraging talented U.S. workers with STEM degrees from pursuing graduate study or even careers in the field—causing an internal “brain drain.” Since the foreign workers displacing U.S. workers are not more talented, this internal brain drain endangers the country’s ability to retain its worldwide lead in technological innovation.

Current reform proposals to grant special visas and green cards to all foreign STEM graduate students at U.S. schools would exacerbate this internal brain drain. Instead, the federal government must ensure that programs like the H-1B visa are truly attracting the best and brightest or remedying genuine labor shortages. Reform must change the way prevailing wages are calculated so that H-1B visa holders are paid a genuine market wage for their education and skill sets. At the same time, policymakers could expand the EB-1 and O-1 visa programs (for workers of “extraordinary ability”) as a means of more reliably attracting the best and brightest workers without crowding out U.S. graduates.

http://www.epi.org/press/1b-visa-program-attracting-brightest-workers/

Enhanced by Zemanta
Share on Facebook
Share