Wednesday, April 4, 2012

Modern Conservatism = Rightwing Progressivism?

"Conservatives often cheer on the presidencies of Teddy Roosevelt -- a progressive if ever there was one -- and New Dealers like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. They also defend a leviathan different from that envisioned by the progressive left more as a matter of degree than of kind. On economics, all too many conservatives have embraced the national welfare state, and although they are still more attuned to traditional limits on state power in this arena, they are often worse than the other side when it comes to policing and warfare issues. All in all, both wings of the modern spectrum have been different flavors of the progressive ideology that completely conquered the Republican Party a century ago, and then overtook the Democrats and modern liberalism as well. Many of the features of "conservatism" from the Cold War to George W. Bush -- militarism, national statism, welfare statism with paternalistic garb, police statism, anti-immigration sentiment, cozying up to big business while expanding the regulatory state -- have clear origins in the progressive presidencies of Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and even Woodrow Wilson. Thus I find the question as to whether Bush was a conservative or a progressive to be a trick question. He was both."

Modern Conservatism = Rightwing Progressivism?
By Anthony Gregory | Monday April 2, 2012 at 11:08 AM PDT

Mary's post perfectly exposes the key problem with these progressives. No objective moral standards. No basic respect in human dignity.

One thing that troubles me about the political climate is just how extensive this moral bankruptcy is. Glenn Beck did a service in demonstrating the collectivist ethical situationalism of progressives to a whole generation of fans. Unfortunately, many Americans have fallen under a spell of modern conservatism that is itself simply another flavor of progressivism, and at times a particularly nasty one.

On the health care debate before the Supreme Court, the liberal justices during oral argument sounded much more dedicated to the malleable nature of the law and moral standards. Yet another case before the Supreme Court has shown just how bad the other "side" can be when it comes to a different set of political questions. As the New York Times reports:

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband.

Consider that horror. One of the most liberal justices pointed out that such searches were "a serious affront to human dignity and to individual privacy" that should not be legitimized so broadly. But every single so-called conservative on the bench­Thomas, Scalia, Roberts, Alito, and swing-voter Kennedy­voted to uphold this complete evisceration of basic human dignity even when law enforcement has no particular reason to suspect anything illegal will be found and no one has been proven to have committed a crime.

This only serves to remind us that there are no good justices on the Supreme Court. There are those who believe the national government has unlimited power to regulate the economy­which is to say our very lives­and there are those who believe that in the name of domestic and foreign security, there are no limits on state power in the most intimate and personal of areas: our rights not to be strip-searched, our rights not to have our property ransacked, our rights not to be detained indefinitely at the whim of the president. While Kennedy has been at times better than either the conservatives or liberals on the Court, his vote on Kelo, upholding eminent domain for the sole purpose of expanding the corporate state, and Raich, upholding the federal government's right to jail sick people who used medicine legal under state law, remind us that he too often sides with collectivist violence against the individual without any principled hesitation at all.

The Court is perhaps an interesting proxy for the political spectrum, since it features modern liberalism and modern conservatism at its most thoughtful and sophisticated. It also proves that progressivism has won the day across most of that spectrum.

Conservatives often cheer on the presidencies of Teddy Roosevelt-- a progressive if ever there was one -- and New Dealers like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. They also defend a leviathan different from that envisioned by the progressive left more as a matter of degree than of kind. On economics, all too many conservatives have embraced the national welfare state, and although they are still more attuned to traditional limits on state power in this arena, they are often worse than the other side when it comes to policing and warfare issues. All in all, both wings of the modern spectrum have been different flavors of the progressive ideology that completely conquered the Republican Party a century ago, and then overtook the Democrats and modern liberalism as well. Many of the features of "conservatism" from the Cold War to George W. Bush -- militarism, national statism, welfare statism with paternalistic garb, police statism, anti-immigration sentiment, cozying up to big business while expanding the regulatory state -- have clear origins in the progressive presidencies of Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and even Woodrow Wilson. Thus I find the question as to whether Bush was a conservative or a progressive to be a trick question. He was both.

This only bolsters the point Mary makes at the end of her blog. Because when the rightwing progressives recapture government, we can hardly expect them to be any better than the progressive leftwingers who now run the show.

Re: Holder's Revenge

The thing holding them
back is their constant and absolute belief that their problem is their
color
---
that's what they've continually been told by the aclu, naacp, splc,
adl and similar orgs

On Apr 4, 12:17 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "The question is not when does it end, but when does it begin[.] ...
> When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are
> entitled?"*
>
> As soon as it is earned. Just like anyone else. The thing holding them
> back is their constant and absolute belief that their problem is their
> color when it is simply their attitude.
>
> On Apr 4, 10:57 am, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I agree.
>
> > today I noticed a huge sign that said Anybody But Obama had been
> > repaired.
> > Somebody had actually pulled over on the side of the interstate, waded
> > through fences and b-wire to destroy his sign.
> > Thankfully he's persistent.
>
> > On Apr 3, 5:03 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Holder's remarks are but one more reminder of why it is imperative that
> > > President Obama be defeated in November.  Our Nation will be unrecognizable
> > > if this charade is allowed to continue another four years.
>
> > > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 5:20 PM, plainolamerican
> > > <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > > When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are
> > > > entitled?
> > > > ---
> > > > slave mentality
>
> > > > On Apr 2, 4:16 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > ** **
>
> > > > >   ****
>
> > > > > Return to the Article<
> > > >http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/holders_revenge.html>
> > > > > ****
>
> > > > > April 2, 2012 ****
> > > > > Holder's Revenge****
>
> > > > > *By* *John T. Bennett* <http://www.americanthinker.com/john_t_bennett/
> > > > >****
>
> > > > > Reverse discrimination against whites has just begun, according to
> > > > Attorney
> > > > > General Eric Holder. Now, the exploitation of Trayvon Martin's death has
> > > > > thrown the cycle of racial resentment and favoritism into overdrive.****
>
> > > > > There has been much poisonous rhetoric following Trayvon Martin's death,
> > > > > and more is sure to come. It is hard to imagine that any other current
> > > > > topic could result in racial madness exceeding that tragedy. Nonetheless,
> > > > > an exceptionally ominous and instructive remark was recently made by
> > > > > Attorney General Eric Holder -- a remark more outlandish than any heard
> > > > so
> > > > > far in our national conversation about Martin.****
>
> > > > > Attorney General Holder recently addressed the question of affirmative
> > > > > action, and for how long it would be required. He answered, stunningly,
> > > > > that reverse discrimination has only just
> > > > > begun<
> > > >http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2012/02/24/holder-talks-financial-cr...>:
> > > > > "Affirmative action has been an issue since segregation practices,"
> > > > Holder
> > > > > said. "The question is not when does it end, but when does it begin[.]
> > > > ...
> > > > > When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are
> > > > entitled?"*
> > > > > ***
>
> > > > > We see in these remarks the soil out of which rises the bitter fruit of
> > > > > racial resentment. Holder's attitude is best summed up as the elite
> > > > victim
> > > > > mentality. The belief is one of perpetual entitlement, fueled by
> > > > > bitterness, and given the stamp of official approval by politicians at
> > > > the
> > > > > highest levels of national office. The Trayvon Martin upheaval is made
> > > > > possible by this carefully cultivated attitude, which exists within all
> > > > > income levels. Whether it's under the guise of injustice, inequality,
> > > > > underrepresentation, or white
> > > > > supremacy<
> > > >http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/03/critical_race_theory_a_cult_of...>,
> > > > > the effect of the attitude is the same: sheer resentment towards the
> > > > > majority and its institutions. ****
>
> > > > > Not all minorities share this attitude, while many non-minorities do. For
> > > > > instance, Professor William B. Eimicke of Columbia University supports a
> > > > > lawsuit<
> > > >http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/nyregion/a-fire-department-under-pr..
> > > > .>against
> > > > > New York City because the city doesn't have enough black
> > > > > firefighters. Eimicke, who is
> > > > > white<http://www.sipa.columbia.edu/academics/directory/wbe1-fac.html>,
> > > > > says, "The reality is the [fire] department should look like the city it
> > > > > serves." In other words, the fire department has something wrong with it
> > > > > because there are not enough blacks employed. This is an example of an
> > > > > educated, mainstream leader promoting an arbitrary standard of
> > > > > underrepresentation. Such standards will only fuel more demands for
> > > > special
> > > > > treatment, and more resentment when the arbitrary standard proves
> > > > > predictably impossible to meet.****
>
> > > > > Take the example of Eimicke's fellow Columbia faculty. Of the 70 core
> > > > > faculty members<
> > > >http://www.sipa.columbia.edu/academics/directory/browse_core_faculty...
> > > > .>in
> > > > > Prof. Eimicke's department, there are 3 blacks. Seventy-five percent
> > > > > of
> > > > > the faculty is white, and 4% is black, whereas New York City is 45% white
> > > > > and 27% black. Presumably, the principle that a fire department "should
> > > > > look like the city it serves" also applies to the faculty of a tony
> > > > > university. If the faculty "should look like the city it serves," then
> > > > > Columbia needs to expedite the removal of white professors. Will Eimicke
> > > > > enlist in the righteous cause of minority representation and quit? Or is
> > > > > that a sacrifice he prefers to delegate to students or middle- and
> > > > > working-class whites? We all know the answer: elite liberal hypocrisy
> > > > > protects many academics and politicians from the application of their own
> > > > > dogmas. Columbia's faculty will never match the ethnic makeup of New York
> > > > > City because professors are typically protected from purported racial
> > > > > favoritism, while firemen are fair game.****
>
> > > > > As the attorney general's remark shows, the cycle of elite liberal
> > > > > hypocrisy and racial favoritism will never end, so long as liberals
> > > > control
> > > > > racial discourse.****
>
> > > > > In the meantime, the results will become increasingly absurd. The
> > > > attorney
> > > > > general's daughters, and each successive generation, will continue to
> > > > > benefit from affirmative action to the same degree as truly disadvantaged
> > > > > minorities. This incongruity grows more and more evident, as Democratic
> > > > > Senator James Webb pointed out in his famous *Wall Street Journal*
> > > > > editorial<
> > > >http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870372410457537963095230..
> > > > .>piece.
> > > > > Sen. Webb noted that affirmative action policies have "expanded so
> > > > > far beyond their original purpose that they now favor anyone who does not
> > > > > happen to be white." Racial preferences extend to business startups,
> > > > > prestigious academic admissions, job promotions, and expensive government
> > > > > contracts. Many of these preferences have no relationship to
> > > > > discrimination, oppression, or even socioeconomic class level; they even
> > > > > benefit recent immigrants whose ancestors never faced discrimination in
> > > > > America. Instead, we are actually creating a government-sanctioned
> > > > nobility
> > > > > -- a favored class of citizens with officially endorsed, race-based
> > > > > hereditary privileges.****
>
> > > > > Under the sway of of identity politics and racial grievance, even the
> > > > most
> > > > > privileged members of our society will hold onto petty gripes. In a 2009
> > > > > commencement address, the First Lady complained about her childhood
> > > > > experience with the University of Chicago. Recalling that she grew up
> > > > right
> > > > > near the campus, she
> > > > > stated<
> > > >http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/05/michelle_obamas_early_alienat...>
> > > > > :****
>
> > > > > [T]hat university never played a meaningful role in my academic
> > > > > development. The institution made no effort to reach out to me -- a
> > > > bright
> > > > > and promising student in their midst -- and I had no reason to believe
> > > > > there was a place for me there.****
>
> > > > > That she felt entitled to be "reached out to" in the first place is
> > > > > astonishing. The egomaniacal sense of entitlement contained in her
> > > > remarks
> > > > > will strike most people as utterly foreign. Yet this way of conceiving of
> > > > > one's own position in society is commonly shared. Amongst the lower
> > > > class,
> > > > > this attitude takes the form of demands for "Obama
> > > > > money<
> > > >http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/18/a-pelosi-maher-go-to-nyc-welfare-of...>"
> > > > > and other such hilarity <http://youtu.be/P36x8rTb3jI>. ****
>
> > > > > Perhaps Michelle Obama should have made an effort at some point to
> > > > > understand why young white students, many of whom were not from Chicago,
> > > > > would have been reticent about venturing out into the South Side of
> > > > > Chicago. The reasons are not hard to discover. Immediately after their
> > > > > report on the First Lady's address, CNN aired a segment on violent crime
> > > > on
> > > > > the South Side. Chief Ernest Brown of Chicago's Organized Crime Division
> > > > > explained the high rate of youth violence by saying that "their
> > > > > behavior<http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0905/16/cnr.04.html>is
> > > > > just inconsistent with civility." With that in mind, many students --
> > > > > of
> > > > > all races -- may not feel that it is their place to step into another
> > > > > community and attempt to help its youth. In fact, not even Dr. Martin
> > > > > Luther King and his family stayed in urban Chicago for long after
> > > > starting
> > > > > to work in the city in 1966. Cohen and Taylor write that Coretta Scott
> > > > King
> > > > > was concerned about violence in the neighborhood, and the Kings spent
> > > > > little time there
>
> ...
>
> read more »

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Mitt Romney Donated to Hate Group NOM, NOM Implodes in Race-Bating Scandal

Hey Mark!
 
Kind of like Rush Limbaugh, who after the the far left extremists'  hate filled attacks against him,  his sponsors have fruitfully,  and listenership has gained double digits;  the  "National Organization For Marriage";  ("NOM")  is stronger than ever! 
 
 
Americans see through the hate,  virulent spin and Anti-American rhetoric by far left media, and the hate groups that Tom belongs to.......Other than Tom and his hate filled compatriots.
 


 
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 1:28 PM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
So now you are trying to silence these people because they have an
opposing viewpoint??

That is indeed the worst kind of hate speech... censorship and the
denial to post your opinions to the public.

On Apr 4, 10:51 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Mitt Romney Donates to Hate Group NOM
>
> NOM's Implosion: The Ripple Effect
>
> By now, most people have heard about the National Organization for
> Marriage's explosive documents that lay out a disturbing strategy of
> divisive race-baiting and using children as political pawns. NOM's
> internal memos, made public through an investigation in Maine into the
> anti-gay organization's attempts to circumvent campaign finance and
> disclosure laws, show a shocking and cynical plan to drive a wedge
> between people of color and the LGBT community, as well as use
> incendiary claims of "protecting children" against gay people. The
> fallout from NOM's bigoted $20 million dollar 'Strategy for Victory'
> has come fast and furious, shining a spotlight on the anti-equality
> movement's plan to divide our country using race, religion, and bias.
>
>  (Image/CNN: Maggie Gallagher, the former president and co-founder of
> the National Organization for Marriage, was the face of NOM when the
> controversial internal memos were circulated)
>
> As discussion of NOM's divisive strategy spreads further, it appears
> that the organization may actually have the exact opposite effect on
> the public discourse around equality as their plan intended-- they are
> bringing communities together in solidarity against bigotry. By having
> their wedge-based plan exposed for all to see, and in such stark
> terms, NOM has stirred a sense of commonality among the very minority
> groups they sought to divide. Being demonized for crass political
> expediency, it turns out, is something that many groups can relate to.
>
> "This memo only reveals the limits of a cynical agenda," NAACP
> President and CEO Benjamin Jealous said of the memos. "The truth is
> that no group, no matter how well-funded, can drive an artificial
> wedge between our communities. People of color understand what it is
> like to be the target of discrimination. No public relations strategy
> will make us forget that."
>
> Sharon Lettman-Hicks, Executive Director and CEO of the National Black
> Justice Coalition, also blasted NOM, saying, "These documents expose
> NOM for what it really is—a hate group determined to use African
> American faith leaders as pawns to push their damaging agenda and as
> mouthpieces to amplify that hatred."
>
> NOM's exposed strategy has had the effect of forever linking them, and
> the entire anti-equality movement, to blatant bigotry. Eric Rodriguez,
> Vice President of Policy for the National Council of La Raza laid out
> the galvanizing effect of the NOM scandal:
>
> "Even by Washington standards, the National Organization for
> Marriage's unmasked strategy to drive a wedge between Blacks and
> Latinos and the LGBT community is stunningly cynical... Fortunately,
> this truly offensive idea has completely backfired. The documents
> reveal an organization rife with bigotry, willing to do anything to
> advance intolerance in our society. If anyone wondered if Black, LGBT,
> and Latino leaders have woken up to realize that we have common
> enemies that seek to divide us, these revelations and reactions from
> civil rights leaders this week show that we have and are ready to work
> together to defeat those enemies."
>
> Yet the ripple effect, and the long term consequences of having
> documented proof of NOM's race-baiting and bigoted goals, still isn't
> over. In fact, the ever-growing NOM scandal has begun to drag down
> political figures that support them as well.
>
> Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner has been facing outrage
> from all sides after appointing NOM's co-founder and former Chairman
> Dr. Robert George to the United States Commission on International
> Religious Freedom (USCIRF). While Boehner is still sticking by Dr.
> George, the increasing pushback from not just the LGBT community but
> communities of faith as well are making things uncomfortable for the
> Speaker. This comes on the heels of Boehner tripling the
> taxpayer-funded budget for defending DOMA in court from $500,000 to
> $1.5 million. These extreme stances, and support of race-baiting
> organizations like NOM, have given political opponents and equality
> advocates, like Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer, even
> more of a target, further weakening the embattled top Republican in
> congress.
>
> And Speaker Boehner is by far the only top GOP political figure
> entangled by NOM's ever-widening scandal. Presumptive GOP presidential
> nominee Mitt Romney is also seeing his connections with the
> organization examined and criticized. New information released by the
> Human Rights Campaign (HRC) reveals that Romney secretly donated money
> to NOM-- some $10,000 in 2008. "It's clear now that Romney was a major
> financial donor to Prop. 8," said Fred Sainz, HRC's vice president for
> communications. This large donation, as well as Romney's own
> flip-flopping statements on basic equality for LGBT people, has real
> ramifications in the general election, where a majority of voters of
> every stripe find such divisive culture war issues distasteful. While
> Romney is sure to try to move away from the extreme stances he's taken
> in the GOP primary, this much older donation to NOM (especially in
> light of the organization's horrendous tactics), are sure to follow
> him as he tries to sell himself as "moderate."
>
> The pressure to distance the GOP from NOM is even coming from within
> the party faithful itself. Head of the Log Cabin Republicans R. Clarke
> Cooper blasted the organization in a recent article the Washington
> Times, saying, "Putting aside NOM's callous disregard for LGBT
> families, my party, the Republican party, cannot afford to be
> associated with an organization that arrogantly seeks to manipulate
> African American and Latino voters... Crude identity politics has no
> place in today's conservative movement."
>
> The fallout from NOM's internal memo's is far from over. Poll after
> poll shows that Americans' views on LGBT people and their
> relationships are rapidly evolving, with the majority now support full
> marriage equality. Having the cynical and divisive plan of a major
> player in the anti-equality game like NOM spotlighted helps in every
> fight we have as we push for progress even beyond marriage equality--
> from bullying protection to employment anti-discrimination laws.
> Having the anti-equality movement crippled by their own words only
> moves us faster towards full equality as organizations like NOM
> delegitimize their own cause and strengthen the resolve of fair-minded
> Americans disgusted by such divisive and bigoted tactics.
>
> More:http://chicago.gopride.com/entertainment/column/index.cfm/col/994
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Mitt Romney Donated to Hate Group NOM, NOM Implodes in Race-Bating Scandal

So now you are trying to silence these people because they have an
opposing viewpoint??

That is indeed the worst kind of hate speech... censorship and the
denial to post your opinions to the public.

On Apr 4, 10:51 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Mitt Romney Donates to Hate Group NOM
>
> NOM's Implosion: The Ripple Effect
>
> By now, most people have heard about the National Organization for
> Marriage's explosive documents that lay out a disturbing strategy of
> divisive race-baiting and using children as political pawns. NOM's
> internal memos, made public through an investigation in Maine into the
> anti-gay organization's attempts to circumvent campaign finance and
> disclosure laws, show a shocking and cynical plan to drive a wedge
> between people of color and the LGBT community, as well as use
> incendiary claims of "protecting children" against gay people. The
> fallout from NOM's bigoted $20 million dollar 'Strategy for Victory'
> has come fast and furious, shining a spotlight on the anti-equality
> movement's plan to divide our country using race, religion, and bias.
>
>  (Image/CNN: Maggie Gallagher, the former president and co-founder of
> the National Organization for Marriage, was the face of NOM when the
> controversial internal memos were circulated)
>
> As discussion of NOM's divisive strategy spreads further, it appears
> that the organization may actually have the exact opposite effect on
> the public discourse around equality as their plan intended-- they are
> bringing communities together in solidarity against bigotry. By having
> their wedge-based plan exposed for all to see, and in such stark
> terms, NOM has stirred a sense of commonality among the very minority
> groups they sought to divide. Being demonized for crass political
> expediency, it turns out, is something that many groups can relate to.
>
> "This memo only reveals the limits of a cynical agenda," NAACP
> President and CEO Benjamin Jealous said of the memos. "The truth is
> that no group, no matter how well-funded, can drive an artificial
> wedge between our communities. People of color understand what it is
> like to be the target of discrimination. No public relations strategy
> will make us forget that."
>
> Sharon Lettman-Hicks, Executive Director and CEO of the National Black
> Justice Coalition, also blasted NOM, saying, "These documents expose
> NOM for what it really is—a hate group determined to use African
> American faith leaders as pawns to push their damaging agenda and as
> mouthpieces to amplify that hatred."
>
> NOM's exposed strategy has had the effect of forever linking them, and
> the entire anti-equality movement, to blatant bigotry. Eric Rodriguez,
> Vice President of Policy for the National Council of La Raza laid out
> the galvanizing effect of the NOM scandal:
>
> "Even by Washington standards, the National Organization for
> Marriage's unmasked strategy to drive a wedge between Blacks and
> Latinos and the LGBT community is stunningly cynical... Fortunately,
> this truly offensive idea has completely backfired. The documents
> reveal an organization rife with bigotry, willing to do anything to
> advance intolerance in our society. If anyone wondered if Black, LGBT,
> and Latino leaders have woken up to realize that we have common
> enemies that seek to divide us, these revelations and reactions from
> civil rights leaders this week show that we have and are ready to work
> together to defeat those enemies."
>
> Yet the ripple effect, and the long term consequences of having
> documented proof of NOM's race-baiting and bigoted goals, still isn't
> over. In fact, the ever-growing NOM scandal has begun to drag down
> political figures that support them as well.
>
> Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner has been facing outrage
> from all sides after appointing NOM's co-founder and former Chairman
> Dr. Robert George to the United States Commission on International
> Religious Freedom (USCIRF). While Boehner is still sticking by Dr.
> George, the increasing pushback from not just the LGBT community but
> communities of faith as well are making things uncomfortable for the
> Speaker. This comes on the heels of Boehner tripling the
> taxpayer-funded budget for defending DOMA in court from $500,000 to
> $1.5 million. These extreme stances, and support of race-baiting
> organizations like NOM, have given political opponents and equality
> advocates, like Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer, even
> more of a target, further weakening the embattled top Republican in
> congress.
>
> And Speaker Boehner is by far the only top GOP political figure
> entangled by NOM's ever-widening scandal. Presumptive GOP presidential
> nominee Mitt Romney is also seeing his connections with the
> organization examined and criticized. New information released by the
> Human Rights Campaign (HRC) reveals that Romney secretly donated money
> to NOM-- some $10,000 in 2008. "It's clear now that Romney was a major
> financial donor to Prop. 8," said Fred Sainz, HRC's vice president for
> communications. This large donation, as well as Romney's own
> flip-flopping statements on basic equality for LGBT people, has real
> ramifications in the general election, where a majority of voters of
> every stripe find such divisive culture war issues distasteful. While
> Romney is sure to try to move away from the extreme stances he's taken
> in the GOP primary, this much older donation to NOM (especially in
> light of the organization's horrendous tactics), are sure to follow
> him as he tries to sell himself as "moderate."
>
> The pressure to distance the GOP from NOM is even coming from within
> the party faithful itself. Head of the Log Cabin Republicans R. Clarke
> Cooper blasted the organization in a recent article the Washington
> Times, saying, "Putting aside NOM's callous disregard for LGBT
> families, my party, the Republican party, cannot afford to be
> associated with an organization that arrogantly seeks to manipulate
> African American and Latino voters... Crude identity politics has no
> place in today's conservative movement."
>
> The fallout from NOM's internal memo's is far from over. Poll after
> poll shows that Americans' views on LGBT people and their
> relationships are rapidly evolving, with the majority now support full
> marriage equality. Having the cynical and divisive plan of a major
> player in the anti-equality game like NOM spotlighted helps in every
> fight we have as we push for progress even beyond marriage equality--
> from bullying protection to employment anti-discrimination laws.
> Having the anti-equality movement crippled by their own words only
> moves us faster towards full equality as organizations like NOM
> delegitimize their own cause and strengthen the resolve of fair-minded
> Americans disgusted by such divisive and bigoted tactics.
>
> More:http://chicago.gopride.com/entertainment/column/index.cfm/col/994
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Fwd: They Don't Like Black People - David Brock, Media Matters for America



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Bruce 


Check out this video on YouTube:

They Don't Like Black People - David Brock, Media Matters for America


Sent from my iPad

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Holder's Revenge

"The question is not when does it end, but when does it begin[.] ...
When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are
entitled?"*

As soon as it is earned. Just like anyone else. The thing holding them
back is their constant and absolute belief that their problem is their
color when it is simply their attitude.


On Apr 4, 10:57 am, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree.
>
> today I noticed a huge sign that said Anybody But Obama had been
> repaired.
> Somebody had actually pulled over on the side of the interstate, waded
> through fences and b-wire to destroy his sign.
> Thankfully he's persistent.
>
> On Apr 3, 5:03 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Holder's remarks are but one more reminder of why it is imperative that
> > President Obama be defeated in November.  Our Nation will be unrecognizable
> > if this charade is allowed to continue another four years.
>
> > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 5:20 PM, plainolamerican
> > <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are
> > > entitled?
> > > ---
> > > slave mentality
>
> > > On Apr 2, 4:16 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > ** **
>
> > > >   ****
>
> > > > Return to the Article<
> > >http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/holders_revenge.html>
> > > > ****
>
> > > > April 2, 2012 ****
> > > > Holder's Revenge****
>
> > > > *By* *John T. Bennett* <http://www.americanthinker.com/john_t_bennett/
> > > >****
>
> > > > Reverse discrimination against whites has just begun, according to
> > > Attorney
> > > > General Eric Holder. Now, the exploitation of Trayvon Martin's death has
> > > > thrown the cycle of racial resentment and favoritism into overdrive.****
>
> > > > There has been much poisonous rhetoric following Trayvon Martin's death,
> > > > and more is sure to come. It is hard to imagine that any other current
> > > > topic could result in racial madness exceeding that tragedy. Nonetheless,
> > > > an exceptionally ominous and instructive remark was recently made by
> > > > Attorney General Eric Holder -- a remark more outlandish than any heard
> > > so
> > > > far in our national conversation about Martin.****
>
> > > > Attorney General Holder recently addressed the question of affirmative
> > > > action, and for how long it would be required. He answered, stunningly,
> > > > that reverse discrimination has only just
> > > > begun<
> > >http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2012/02/24/holder-talks-financial-cr...>:
> > > > "Affirmative action has been an issue since segregation practices,"
> > > Holder
> > > > said. "The question is not when does it end, but when does it begin[.]
> > > ...
> > > > When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are
> > > entitled?"*
> > > > ***
>
> > > > We see in these remarks the soil out of which rises the bitter fruit of
> > > > racial resentment. Holder's attitude is best summed up as the elite
> > > victim
> > > > mentality. The belief is one of perpetual entitlement, fueled by
> > > > bitterness, and given the stamp of official approval by politicians at
> > > the
> > > > highest levels of national office. The Trayvon Martin upheaval is made
> > > > possible by this carefully cultivated attitude, which exists within all
> > > > income levels. Whether it's under the guise of injustice, inequality,
> > > > underrepresentation, or white
> > > > supremacy<
> > >http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/03/critical_race_theory_a_cult_of...>,
> > > > the effect of the attitude is the same: sheer resentment towards the
> > > > majority and its institutions. ****
>
> > > > Not all minorities share this attitude, while many non-minorities do. For
> > > > instance, Professor William B. Eimicke of Columbia University supports a
> > > > lawsuit<
> > >http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/nyregion/a-fire-department-under-pr..
> > > .>against
> > > > New York City because the city doesn't have enough black
> > > > firefighters. Eimicke, who is
> > > > white<http://www.sipa.columbia.edu/academics/directory/wbe1-fac.html>,
> > > > says, "The reality is the [fire] department should look like the city it
> > > > serves." In other words, the fire department has something wrong with it
> > > > because there are not enough blacks employed. This is an example of an
> > > > educated, mainstream leader promoting an arbitrary standard of
> > > > underrepresentation. Such standards will only fuel more demands for
> > > special
> > > > treatment, and more resentment when the arbitrary standard proves
> > > > predictably impossible to meet.****
>
> > > > Take the example of Eimicke's fellow Columbia faculty. Of the 70 core
> > > > faculty members<
> > >http://www.sipa.columbia.edu/academics/directory/browse_core_faculty...
> > > .>in
> > > > Prof. Eimicke's department, there are 3 blacks. Seventy-five percent
> > > > of
> > > > the faculty is white, and 4% is black, whereas New York City is 45% white
> > > > and 27% black. Presumably, the principle that a fire department "should
> > > > look like the city it serves" also applies to the faculty of a tony
> > > > university. If the faculty "should look like the city it serves," then
> > > > Columbia needs to expedite the removal of white professors. Will Eimicke
> > > > enlist in the righteous cause of minority representation and quit? Or is
> > > > that a sacrifice he prefers to delegate to students or middle- and
> > > > working-class whites? We all know the answer: elite liberal hypocrisy
> > > > protects many academics and politicians from the application of their own
> > > > dogmas. Columbia's faculty will never match the ethnic makeup of New York
> > > > City because professors are typically protected from purported racial
> > > > favoritism, while firemen are fair game.****
>
> > > > As the attorney general's remark shows, the cycle of elite liberal
> > > > hypocrisy and racial favoritism will never end, so long as liberals
> > > control
> > > > racial discourse.****
>
> > > > In the meantime, the results will become increasingly absurd. The
> > > attorney
> > > > general's daughters, and each successive generation, will continue to
> > > > benefit from affirmative action to the same degree as truly disadvantaged
> > > > minorities. This incongruity grows more and more evident, as Democratic
> > > > Senator James Webb pointed out in his famous *Wall Street Journal*
> > > > editorial<
> > >http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870372410457537963095230..
> > > .>piece.
> > > > Sen. Webb noted that affirmative action policies have "expanded so
> > > > far beyond their original purpose that they now favor anyone who does not
> > > > happen to be white." Racial preferences extend to business startups,
> > > > prestigious academic admissions, job promotions, and expensive government
> > > > contracts. Many of these preferences have no relationship to
> > > > discrimination, oppression, or even socioeconomic class level; they even
> > > > benefit recent immigrants whose ancestors never faced discrimination in
> > > > America. Instead, we are actually creating a government-sanctioned
> > > nobility
> > > > -- a favored class of citizens with officially endorsed, race-based
> > > > hereditary privileges.****
>
> > > > Under the sway of of identity politics and racial grievance, even the
> > > most
> > > > privileged members of our society will hold onto petty gripes. In a 2009
> > > > commencement address, the First Lady complained about her childhood
> > > > experience with the University of Chicago. Recalling that she grew up
> > > right
> > > > near the campus, she
> > > > stated<
> > >http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/05/michelle_obamas_early_alienat...>
> > > > :****
>
> > > > [T]hat university never played a meaningful role in my academic
> > > > development. The institution made no effort to reach out to me -- a
> > > bright
> > > > and promising student in their midst -- and I had no reason to believe
> > > > there was a place for me there.****
>
> > > > That she felt entitled to be "reached out to" in the first place is
> > > > astonishing. The egomaniacal sense of entitlement contained in her
> > > remarks
> > > > will strike most people as utterly foreign. Yet this way of conceiving of
> > > > one's own position in society is commonly shared. Amongst the lower
> > > class,
> > > > this attitude takes the form of demands for "Obama
> > > > money<
> > >http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/18/a-pelosi-maher-go-to-nyc-welfare-of...>"
> > > > and other such hilarity <http://youtu.be/P36x8rTb3jI>. ****
>
> > > > Perhaps Michelle Obama should have made an effort at some point to
> > > > understand why young white students, many of whom were not from Chicago,
> > > > would have been reticent about venturing out into the South Side of
> > > > Chicago. The reasons are not hard to discover. Immediately after their
> > > > report on the First Lady's address, CNN aired a segment on violent crime
> > > on
> > > > the South Side. Chief Ernest Brown of Chicago's Organized Crime Division
> > > > explained the high rate of youth violence by saying that "their
> > > > behavior<http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0905/16/cnr.04.html>is
> > > > just inconsistent with civility." With that in mind, many students --
> > > > of
> > > > all races -- may not feel that it is their place to step into another
> > > > community and attempt to help its youth. In fact, not even Dr. Martin
> > > > Luther King and his family stayed in urban Chicago for long after
> > > starting
> > > > to work in the city in 1966. Cohen and Taylor write that Coretta Scott
> > > King
> > > > was concerned about violence in the neighborhood, and the Kings spent
> > > > little time there [1].****
>
> > > > Our own attorney general, ostensibly committed to even-handed enforcement
> > > > of the nation's laws, referred to blacks as "my
> > > > people<
> > >http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0311/Eric_Holder_Black_Pan..
> > > .>."
> > > > Strangely, it is socially acceptable for only certain groups to proudly
> > > > claim ethnic group membership. If similar tribal loyalties were publicly
> > > > boasted by a white ethnic, that would be seen as sinister. Just imagine
> > > the
> > > > reaction if a President Bush had identified -- *on the basis of race -*-
> > > > with a victim of minority-on-white crime by saying, "Channon
> > > > Christian<http://www.wate.com/Global/story.asp?S=10968229>looks like
> > > > my daughters."
>
> ...
>
> read more »

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: opinions wanted: what is this guy's motivation ...

He's just another loser punk that joined the Military because no one
else wanted his smartassed attitude.

On Apr 4, 10:58 am, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bored, young soldiers.....No harm, no foul.
> ---
> come on ... think
>
> what would make him go half way around the planet to defend democracy
> among people he considers idiots?
>
> On Apr 3, 4:48 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I agree with Bear.   Bored, young soldiers.....No harm, no foul.
>
> > On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:27 PM, plainolamerican
> > <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > wrong answer but thanks for the opinion
>
> > > On Apr 3, 12:23 pm, Bear Bear <thatbear...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > He just a bored soldier bitching and having a laugh. As soldiers have
> > > > been doing since time began.
>
> > > > Not everything has to be seen through the prism of politics.
>
> > > > Bear
>
> > > > On 2 April 2012 15:11, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > > to be a soldier?
>
> > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKKiVxYC-8Y&feature=related
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > > --
> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: opinions wanted: what is this guy's motivation ...

Bored, young soldiers.....No harm, no foul.
---
come on ... think

what would make him go half way around the planet to defend democracy
among people he considers idiots?

On Apr 3, 4:48 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree with Bear.   Bored, young soldiers.....No harm, no foul.
>
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:27 PM, plainolamerican
> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrong answer but thanks for the opinion
>
> > On Apr 3, 12:23 pm, Bear Bear <thatbear...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > He just a bored soldier bitching and having a laugh. As soldiers have
> > > been doing since time began.
>
> > > Not everything has to be seen through the prism of politics.
>
> > > Bear
>
> > > On 2 April 2012 15:11, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > > to be a soldier?
>
> > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKKiVxYC-8Y&feature=related
>
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Holder's Revenge

I agree.

today I noticed a huge sign that said Anybody But Obama had been
repaired.
Somebody had actually pulled over on the side of the interstate, waded
through fences and b-wire to destroy his sign.
Thankfully he's persistent.


On Apr 3, 5:03 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Holder's remarks are but one more reminder of why it is imperative that
> President Obama be defeated in November.  Our Nation will be unrecognizable
> if this charade is allowed to continue another four years.
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 5:20 PM, plainolamerican
> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are
> > entitled?
> > ---
> > slave mentality
>
> > On Apr 2, 4:16 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > ** **
>
> > >   ****
>
> > > Return to the Article<
> >http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/holders_revenge.html>
> > > ****
>
> > > April 2, 2012 ****
> > > Holder's Revenge****
>
> > > *By* *John T. Bennett* <http://www.americanthinker.com/john_t_bennett/
> > >****
>
> > > Reverse discrimination against whites has just begun, according to
> > Attorney
> > > General Eric Holder. Now, the exploitation of Trayvon Martin's death has
> > > thrown the cycle of racial resentment and favoritism into overdrive.****
>
> > > There has been much poisonous rhetoric following Trayvon Martin's death,
> > > and more is sure to come. It is hard to imagine that any other current
> > > topic could result in racial madness exceeding that tragedy. Nonetheless,
> > > an exceptionally ominous and instructive remark was recently made by
> > > Attorney General Eric Holder -- a remark more outlandish than any heard
> > so
> > > far in our national conversation about Martin.****
>
> > > Attorney General Holder recently addressed the question of affirmative
> > > action, and for how long it would be required. He answered, stunningly,
> > > that reverse discrimination has only just
> > > begun<
> >http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2012/02/24/holder-talks-financial-cr...>:
> > > "Affirmative action has been an issue since segregation practices,"
> > Holder
> > > said. "The question is not when does it end, but when does it begin[.]
> > ...
> > > When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are
> > entitled?"*
> > > ***
>
> > > We see in these remarks the soil out of which rises the bitter fruit of
> > > racial resentment. Holder's attitude is best summed up as the elite
> > victim
> > > mentality. The belief is one of perpetual entitlement, fueled by
> > > bitterness, and given the stamp of official approval by politicians at
> > the
> > > highest levels of national office. The Trayvon Martin upheaval is made
> > > possible by this carefully cultivated attitude, which exists within all
> > > income levels. Whether it's under the guise of injustice, inequality,
> > > underrepresentation, or white
> > > supremacy<
> >http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/03/critical_race_theory_a_cult_of...>,
> > > the effect of the attitude is the same: sheer resentment towards the
> > > majority and its institutions. ****
>
> > > Not all minorities share this attitude, while many non-minorities do. For
> > > instance, Professor William B. Eimicke of Columbia University supports a
> > > lawsuit<
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/nyregion/a-fire-department-under-pr..
> > .>against
> > > New York City because the city doesn't have enough black
> > > firefighters. Eimicke, who is
> > > white<http://www.sipa.columbia.edu/academics/directory/wbe1-fac.html>,
> > > says, "The reality is the [fire] department should look like the city it
> > > serves." In other words, the fire department has something wrong with it
> > > because there are not enough blacks employed. This is an example of an
> > > educated, mainstream leader promoting an arbitrary standard of
> > > underrepresentation. Such standards will only fuel more demands for
> > special
> > > treatment, and more resentment when the arbitrary standard proves
> > > predictably impossible to meet.****
>
> > > Take the example of Eimicke's fellow Columbia faculty. Of the 70 core
> > > faculty members<
> >http://www.sipa.columbia.edu/academics/directory/browse_core_faculty...
> > .>in
> > > Prof. Eimicke's department, there are 3 blacks. Seventy-five percent
> > > of
> > > the faculty is white, and 4% is black, whereas New York City is 45% white
> > > and 27% black. Presumably, the principle that a fire department "should
> > > look like the city it serves" also applies to the faculty of a tony
> > > university. If the faculty "should look like the city it serves," then
> > > Columbia needs to expedite the removal of white professors. Will Eimicke
> > > enlist in the righteous cause of minority representation and quit? Or is
> > > that a sacrifice he prefers to delegate to students or middle- and
> > > working-class whites? We all know the answer: elite liberal hypocrisy
> > > protects many academics and politicians from the application of their own
> > > dogmas. Columbia's faculty will never match the ethnic makeup of New York
> > > City because professors are typically protected from purported racial
> > > favoritism, while firemen are fair game.****
>
> > > As the attorney general's remark shows, the cycle of elite liberal
> > > hypocrisy and racial favoritism will never end, so long as liberals
> > control
> > > racial discourse.****
>
> > > In the meantime, the results will become increasingly absurd. The
> > attorney
> > > general's daughters, and each successive generation, will continue to
> > > benefit from affirmative action to the same degree as truly disadvantaged
> > > minorities. This incongruity grows more and more evident, as Democratic
> > > Senator James Webb pointed out in his famous *Wall Street Journal*
> > > editorial<
> >http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870372410457537963095230..
> > .>piece.
> > > Sen. Webb noted that affirmative action policies have "expanded so
> > > far beyond their original purpose that they now favor anyone who does not
> > > happen to be white." Racial preferences extend to business startups,
> > > prestigious academic admissions, job promotions, and expensive government
> > > contracts. Many of these preferences have no relationship to
> > > discrimination, oppression, or even socioeconomic class level; they even
> > > benefit recent immigrants whose ancestors never faced discrimination in
> > > America. Instead, we are actually creating a government-sanctioned
> > nobility
> > > -- a favored class of citizens with officially endorsed, race-based
> > > hereditary privileges.****
>
> > > Under the sway of of identity politics and racial grievance, even the
> > most
> > > privileged members of our society will hold onto petty gripes. In a 2009
> > > commencement address, the First Lady complained about her childhood
> > > experience with the University of Chicago. Recalling that she grew up
> > right
> > > near the campus, she
> > > stated<
> >http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/05/michelle_obamas_early_alienat...>
> > > :****
>
> > > [T]hat university never played a meaningful role in my academic
> > > development. The institution made no effort to reach out to me -- a
> > bright
> > > and promising student in their midst -- and I had no reason to believe
> > > there was a place for me there.****
>
> > > That she felt entitled to be "reached out to" in the first place is
> > > astonishing. The egomaniacal sense of entitlement contained in her
> > remarks
> > > will strike most people as utterly foreign. Yet this way of conceiving of
> > > one's own position in society is commonly shared. Amongst the lower
> > class,
> > > this attitude takes the form of demands for "Obama
> > > money<
> >http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/18/a-pelosi-maher-go-to-nyc-welfare-of...>"
> > > and other such hilarity <http://youtu.be/P36x8rTb3jI>. ****
>
> > > Perhaps Michelle Obama should have made an effort at some point to
> > > understand why young white students, many of whom were not from Chicago,
> > > would have been reticent about venturing out into the South Side of
> > > Chicago. The reasons are not hard to discover. Immediately after their
> > > report on the First Lady's address, CNN aired a segment on violent crime
> > on
> > > the South Side. Chief Ernest Brown of Chicago's Organized Crime Division
> > > explained the high rate of youth violence by saying that "their
> > > behavior<http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0905/16/cnr.04.html>is
> > > just inconsistent with civility." With that in mind, many students --
> > > of
> > > all races -- may not feel that it is their place to step into another
> > > community and attempt to help its youth. In fact, not even Dr. Martin
> > > Luther King and his family stayed in urban Chicago for long after
> > starting
> > > to work in the city in 1966. Cohen and Taylor write that Coretta Scott
> > King
> > > was concerned about violence in the neighborhood, and the Kings spent
> > > little time there [1].****
>
> > > Our own attorney general, ostensibly committed to even-handed enforcement
> > > of the nation's laws, referred to blacks as "my
> > > people<
> >http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0311/Eric_Holder_Black_Pan..
> > .>."
> > > Strangely, it is socially acceptable for only certain groups to proudly
> > > claim ethnic group membership. If similar tribal loyalties were publicly
> > > boasted by a white ethnic, that would be seen as sinister. Just imagine
> > the
> > > reaction if a President Bush had identified -- *on the basis of race -*-
> > > with a victim of minority-on-white crime by saying, "Channon
> > > Christian<http://www.wate.com/Global/story.asp?S=10968229>looks like
> > > my daughters."
> > > ****
>
> > > Identifying with an ethnic group as one's own "people" will lead in most
> > > cases to in-group favoritism. Cultural pride is one thing, but
> > proclaiming
> > > exclusive ethnic group affiliation while occupying a position of public
> > > trust is another. This tendency is too often written off as a harmless
> > > cultural tic or a healthy form of therapeutic identity formation. The
> > > trouble is that there is a worldview lying beneath the "my people"
> > language.
> > > ****
>
> > > In his remarks, the attorney general has provided the most explicit
> > > statement of ethnic favoritism and racial grievance by a high public
> > > official in American history. And the racket has just
> > > begun<
> >http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2012/02/24/holder-talks-financial-cr...>:
> > > "When do people of color truly get the
>
> ...
>
> read more »

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: TIME: Citizenship ISSUE

we know who O represents

On Apr 4, 4:12 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [image: Citizenship ISSUE]http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/96500/Citizenship-ISSUE--96940.jpg

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Mitt Romney Donated to Hate Group NOM, NOM Implodes in Race-Bating Scandal

Mitt Romney Donates to Hate Group NOM

NOM's Implosion: The Ripple Effect

By now, most people have heard about the National Organization for
Marriage's explosive documents that lay out a disturbing strategy of
divisive race-baiting and using children as political pawns. NOM's
internal memos, made public through an investigation in Maine into the
anti-gay organization's attempts to circumvent campaign finance and
disclosure laws, show a shocking and cynical plan to drive a wedge
between people of color and the LGBT community, as well as use
incendiary claims of "protecting children" against gay people. The
fallout from NOM's bigoted $20 million dollar 'Strategy for Victory'
has come fast and furious, shining a spotlight on the anti-equality
movement's plan to divide our country using race, religion, and bias.

(Image/CNN: Maggie Gallagher, the former president and co-founder of
the National Organization for Marriage, was the face of NOM when the
controversial internal memos were circulated)

As discussion of NOM's divisive strategy spreads further, it appears
that the organization may actually have the exact opposite effect on
the public discourse around equality as their plan intended-- they are
bringing communities together in solidarity against bigotry. By having
their wedge-based plan exposed for all to see, and in such stark
terms, NOM has stirred a sense of commonality among the very minority
groups they sought to divide. Being demonized for crass political
expediency, it turns out, is something that many groups can relate to.

"This memo only reveals the limits of a cynical agenda," NAACP
President and CEO Benjamin Jealous said of the memos. "The truth is
that no group, no matter how well-funded, can drive an artificial
wedge between our communities. People of color understand what it is
like to be the target of discrimination. No public relations strategy
will make us forget that."

Sharon Lettman-Hicks, Executive Director and CEO of the National Black
Justice Coalition, also blasted NOM, saying, "These documents expose
NOM for what it really is—a hate group determined to use African
American faith leaders as pawns to push their damaging agenda and as
mouthpieces to amplify that hatred."

NOM's exposed strategy has had the effect of forever linking them, and
the entire anti-equality movement, to blatant bigotry. Eric Rodriguez,
Vice President of Policy for the National Council of La Raza laid out
the galvanizing effect of the NOM scandal:

"Even by Washington standards, the National Organization for
Marriage's unmasked strategy to drive a wedge between Blacks and
Latinos and the LGBT community is stunningly cynical... Fortunately,
this truly offensive idea has completely backfired. The documents
reveal an organization rife with bigotry, willing to do anything to
advance intolerance in our society. If anyone wondered if Black, LGBT,
and Latino leaders have woken up to realize that we have common
enemies that seek to divide us, these revelations and reactions from
civil rights leaders this week show that we have and are ready to work
together to defeat those enemies."

Yet the ripple effect, and the long term consequences of having
documented proof of NOM's race-baiting and bigoted goals, still isn't
over. In fact, the ever-growing NOM scandal has begun to drag down
political figures that support them as well.

Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner has been facing outrage
from all sides after appointing NOM's co-founder and former Chairman
Dr. Robert George to the United States Commission on International
Religious Freedom (USCIRF). While Boehner is still sticking by Dr.
George, the increasing pushback from not just the LGBT community but
communities of faith as well are making things uncomfortable for the
Speaker. This comes on the heels of Boehner tripling the
taxpayer-funded budget for defending DOMA in court from $500,000 to
$1.5 million. These extreme stances, and support of race-baiting
organizations like NOM, have given political opponents and equality
advocates, like Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer, even
more of a target, further weakening the embattled top Republican in
congress.

And Speaker Boehner is by far the only top GOP political figure
entangled by NOM's ever-widening scandal. Presumptive GOP presidential
nominee Mitt Romney is also seeing his connections with the
organization examined and criticized. New information released by the
Human Rights Campaign (HRC) reveals that Romney secretly donated money
to NOM-- some $10,000 in 2008. "It's clear now that Romney was a major
financial donor to Prop. 8," said Fred Sainz, HRC's vice president for
communications. This large donation, as well as Romney's own
flip-flopping statements on basic equality for LGBT people, has real
ramifications in the general election, where a majority of voters of
every stripe find such divisive culture war issues distasteful. While
Romney is sure to try to move away from the extreme stances he's taken
in the GOP primary, this much older donation to NOM (especially in
light of the organization's horrendous tactics), are sure to follow
him as he tries to sell himself as "moderate."

The pressure to distance the GOP from NOM is even coming from within
the party faithful itself. Head of the Log Cabin Republicans R. Clarke
Cooper blasted the organization in a recent article the Washington
Times, saying, "Putting aside NOM's callous disregard for LGBT
families, my party, the Republican party, cannot afford to be
associated with an organization that arrogantly seeks to manipulate
African American and Latino voters... Crude identity politics has no
place in today's conservative movement."

The fallout from NOM's internal memo's is far from over. Poll after
poll shows that Americans' views on LGBT people and their
relationships are rapidly evolving, with the majority now support full
marriage equality. Having the cynical and divisive plan of a major
player in the anti-equality game like NOM spotlighted helps in every
fight we have as we push for progress even beyond marriage equality--
from bullying protection to employment anti-discrimination laws.
Having the anti-equality movement crippled by their own words only
moves us faster towards full equality as organizations like NOM
delegitimize their own cause and strengthen the resolve of fair-minded
Americans disgusted by such divisive and bigoted tactics.

More:
http://chicago.gopride.com/entertainment/column/index.cfm/col/994

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: *? 2 ALL: FLORIDA LAW REQUIRES GOP TO ALLOW CONCEALED WEAPONS AT CONVENTION - WHAT ARE YOUR COMMENTS?*

FLORIDA LAW REQUIRES GOP TO ALLOW CONCEALED WEAPONS AT CONVENTION
--
responsible people stay armed

On Apr 3, 8:51 pm, Bruce Majors <majors.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *Greg Dempsey*
> Date: Tuesday, April 3, 2012
> Subject: [DailyKos] *? 2 ALL: FLORIDA LAW REQUIRES GOP TO ALLOW CONCEALED
> WEAPONS AT CONVENTION - WHAT ARE YOUR COMMENTS?*
> To: Greg dempsey <gregdemp...@sti.net <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'gregdemp...@sti.net');>>
>
> **
>
> **
> [image: A loaded handgun. Photo: Flickr user crazyad0boy.]
>
> *(image via Flickr user crazyad0boy)*
>
> *Hi Team!*
>
> **? 2 ALL: *
>
> *FLORIDA LAW REQUIRES GOP TO ALLOW CONCEALED WEAPONS AT CONVENTION -*
>
> **
>
> *[image:http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSIW08B_J8V84k0jxPj7CBv6fh9Bo...]
>  *
>
> David Fergusen reports:
>
> "Be advised if you plan on attending the Republican National Convention in
> Tampa, Florida this summer. You can't bring your water gun to the
> designated protest zones, but your concealed pistol? That's just fine,
> according to an article in the *Tampa Bay Times*.
>
> "Under Florida Statute 790.33, local municipalities are forbidden to make
> or pass any restrictions on the 'sale, purchase, transfer, taxation,
> manufacture, ownership, possession, storage or transportation of guns or
> ammunition.' So, when Tampa city officials attempted to regulate gun
> possession with the so-called 'Clean Zones' around the proposed convention
> site, they found that they were already overruled.
>
> "'Even if we tried to regulate it, it would be null and void,' City
> Attorney Jim Shimberg told the *Times*.
>
> "Assistant City Attorney Mauricio Rodriguez said, 'It was just kind of
> common sense. We felt if we're going to regulate people carrying sticks and
> poles, why wouldn't we regulate people carrying firearms, because those
> could pose significant risks to police and other protesters.'
>
> "But, facing disciplinary action by the state, including 'judgments of up
> to $100,000 against local governments that enforce local gun ordinances'
> and action against local officials that could include removal from office,
> fines of up to $5,000, and denial of representation by city or county
> attorneys, Tampa legislators backed down."
>
> [image:http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTPyGoMGOsGLjpFbYJgNKo7wct2Q0...]
>
> *Florida law requires GOP to allow concealed weapons at convention - what
> are your comments?*
> *Greg Dempsey *
> *http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SECULARHUMANIST/*<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SECULARHUMANIST/>
> *Voice of the People*
> **
> ========
> Florida law requires GOP to allow concealed weapons at convention
> By David Ferguson
> Raw Story
> Tuesday, April 3, 2012 14:49 EDT
>
> ...The outlines of the "Clean Zone" have not been set, but it is expected
> to cover all of downtown Tampa, the Ybor City neighborhood, and several
> other areas. Within the zone is the protest area, where demonstrators will
> be screened to keep out weapons and other potentially hazardous items.
>
> The city has placed limits on the size and duration of parades and rallies,
> as well as restrictions as to where and when gatherings can be held. Derek
> Netwon of the Florida ACLU says that the civil liberties group has a number
> of concerns about the city's handling of potential protesters, and that
> ACLU attorneys are looking over the current list of rules.
>
> "We have concerns any time there's an attempt to restrict speech," said
> Newton, and that the organization would make its findings public as soon as
> the legal review is complete.
>
> No firearms except those belonging to on-duty law-enforcement personnel
> will be allowed inside the convention. The U.S. Secret Service has the
> authority to establish and maintain its own secure perimeter within the
> convention area.
>
> The 2012 Republican National Convention will be held August 27-30.
>
>  __._,_.___
>   Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web
> post<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DailyKos/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJycnNoNGF2BF9T...>|
> Start
> a New Topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DailyKos/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJmN3RmaTliBF9T...>
> Messages in this
> topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DailyKos/message/45500;_ylc=X3oDMTM3dG5...>(
> 1)
>  Recent Activity:
>
>  Visit Your Group<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DailyKos;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMnZtdTEwBF9TAzk3M...>
>  [DailyKos]
> A group for readers of DailyKos and other progressive sites.
> Group Email Addresses
> Post message:       Daily...@yahoogroups.com
> Subscribe:       DailyKos-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe:       DailyKos-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
> List owner:       DailyKos-ow...@yahoogroups.com
>  [image: Yahoo!
> Groups]<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlaHUwMGozBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycEl...>
> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of
> Use<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
>    .
>
> __,_._,___
>
>
>
>  ANd9GcTPyGoMGOsGLjpFbYJgNKo7wct2Q06MaXJ19VQO5_O2x-TCHPZHWQ
> 8KViewDownload
>
>  ANd9GcSIW08B_J8V84k0jxPj7CBv6fh9BouCzxR31IrxmHApT6ofrTAZew
> 8KViewDownload
>
>  loadedgun-flickrusercrazyad0boy-615x345.jpg
> 29KViewDownload

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Why Nations Fail


     Sans Serif
     Serif

Share with your friends:

ShareThis

Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty
Crown Business, 2012

BOOK FORUM
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
4:00 PM (Reception To Follow)

Featuring the coauthor Daron Acemoglu, Killian Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; with comments by Karla Hoff, Senior Research Economist, Development Economics Group, World Bank; moderated by Ian Vasquez, Director, Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity, Cato Institute.

The Cato Institute
1000 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001

Add event to Google CalendarAdd event to Microsoft Outlook CalendarAdd event to iCalAdd event to Yahoo Calendar

If you can't make it to the Cato Institute, watch this event live online at www.cato.org.

Institutions — not geography, culture, or other factors — explain why some nations succeed and others fail. So says Daron Acemoglu in an ambitious new book drawing evidence from thousands of years of human history and from societies as diverse as those of the Inca Empire, 17th century England, and contemporary Botswana. Inclusive political and economic institutions, influenced by critical junctures in history, produce virtuous cycles that reinforce pluralism in the market and in politics. Acemoglu will contrast that pattern of development with that experienced under extractive institutions. He will also describe the conditions under which institutions favorable or inimical to development tend to arise. Karla Hoff will provide critical comments.

Online registration for this event is now closed. If you are interested in registering for the event please emailevents@cato.org.

 Printer Friendly Version

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.