No black man in America is safe - because of me

The amount of overblown, wingnut-like hyperbole flying around in the so-called "progressive" American blogosphere over the arrest of Henry Gates has risen to such hysterical levels that it isn't even possible to discuss the facts in a rational manner.

Take this exchange:

Amen (13+ / 0-)

seems to me that this idea of not placing all the blame on the officer sounds alot like the attitude back in the 70's of women who were raped or beaten that perhaps they were to blame

by Bluerall on Sat Jul 25, 2009 at 08:34:05 AM MDT



*
that's asinine (0+ / 0-)

The comparison doesn't even compute.


by catnip on Sat Jul 25, 2009 at 11:03:36 AM MDT


o
* [new] no you are assine (0+ / 0-)

the safety of people in their own homes and black men especially in their own homes should be inviolate.

gates should have been able to say anything he damn well pleased in his own home at any decibel level that did not disturb neighbors who, by definition, cannot be disturbed by noise at high noon.

gates has a documented upper respiratory infection which prevented him from making undue noise.

no black man in america is safe because of attitudes like yours.

and if you think i am calling you a racist, go ahead.

racist is as racist does.

i am not backing down on this one. not. one. inch.


by fernan47 on Sat Jul 25, 2009 at 11:09:09 AM MDT


get off your pulpit (0+ / 0-)

Comparing what happened to Gates to what happens to rape victims is asinine. Period.

no black man in america is safe because of attitudes like yours.

Pathetic. Absolutely fucking pathetic.


by catnip on Sat Jul 25, 2009 at 11:14:46 AM MDT


#
* you are pathetic (1+ / 0-)


and apparently structurally a racist.

as a women of color.

as a women aware of sexual victimization to the max.

you are the asshole in this scenario.

what makes you think what you think of my pulpit of the least importance to anyone, anywhere?

by fernan47 on Sat Jul 25, 2009 at 11:21:08 AM MDT

Oh, I'm used to being called a racist. You couldn't criticize Obama during his campaign at sites like Daily Kos without expecting that someone would throw that at you. But let's get serious here - if people want to hold up Gates as the poster boy for racial discrimination they have to look at his behaviour and how it contributed to the situation. Thus, the comparison to what happens to rape victims who aren't believed definitely is asinine and it's an insult to those rape victims.

Tale a look at this quote and tell me that Gates doesn't need a reality check and that his victimization allows him to be blameless:

My driver is a large black man. But from afar you and I would not have seen he was black. He has black hair and was dressed in a two-piece black suit, and I was dressed in a navy blue blazer with gray trousers and, you know, my shoes. And I love that the 911 report said that two big black men were trying to break in with backpacks on. Now that is the worst racial profiling I’ve ever heard of in my life. (Laughs.) I’m not exactly a big black man. I thought that was hilarious when I found that out, which was yesterday.

It looked like someone’s footprint was there. So it’s possible that the door had been jimmied, that someone had tried to get in while I was in China. But for whatever reason, the lock was damaged. My driver hit the door with his shoulder and the door popped open.

The bottom line - based on the facts - is that everyone overreacted here: Gates, the police officer and Obama. And if people really want to have a discussion about racial discrimination in America, I can think of so many other examples that could suffice as a jumping-off point. Placing Gates up on some pedestal as an example is hardly the best place to start. And if you want some real insight into village behaviour, look no further than the torches and pitchforks being carried at some so-called "progressive" sites against people like me who believe that facts, not emotions, should be driving this discussion. After all, it was the emotions of both men involved - Gates and Crowley - that escalated this story in the first place.
 

Aboriginal Affairs: Tone Deaf Conservatives

During Thursday's question period Chuck Strahl, the minister of Indian and Northern Affairs, called the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples an "aspirational document" which is rather similar to Alberto Gonzales calling the US constitution "quaint". While it's true that the declaration not legally binding, the Conservatives refused to vote for it because they said it was in conflict with our Charter - an obviously hollow excuse. It seems to me that if it was only "aspirational", there shouldn't have been any legal conflict whatsoever.

From wiki:

Canada said that while it supported the spirit of the Declaration, it contained elements that were "fundamentally incompatible with Canada's constitutional framework".[5] In particular, the Canadian government had problems with Article 19 (which appears to require governments to secure the consent of indigenous peoples regarding matters of general public policy), and Articles 26 and 28 (which could allow for the re-opening or repudiation of historically settled land claims).[12]

Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development Chuck Strahl described the document as "unworkable in a Western democracy under a constitutional government."[13] Strahl elaborated, saying "In Canada, you are balancing individual rights vs. collective rights, and (this) document ... has none of that. By signing on, you default to this document by saying that the only rights in play here are the rights of the First Nations. And, of course, in Canada, that's inconsistent with our constitution." He gave an example: "In Canada ... you negotiate on this ... because (native rights) don't trump all other rights in the country. You need also to consider the people who have sometimes also lived on those lands for two or three hundred years, and have hunted and fished alongside the First Nations."[14]

The Assembly of First Nations passed a resolution in mid-December to invite Presidents Hugo Chávez and Evo Morales to Canada to put pressure on the Conservative government to sign the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, calling the two heads of state "visionary leaders" and demanding Canada resign its membership on the UN Human Rights Council.[15]

So why are you really afraid of an "aspirational document", Strahl?

*************
Before question period began Pierre Poilievre, who has been under fire from the public for his racist remarks against first nations people on Wednesday (audio), attempted to fend off much-deserved criticism in the house by issuing a pre-emptive apology. It didn't work. Opposition members called for Steve to fire him. I'll let you guess what happened.

For all of their holier-than-thou blustering about how the Conservatives are now, supposedly, the champions of human rights for first nations people in this country, it's obvious that they're simply paying lip service to the horrendous circumstances too many aboriginals still face.

As so many people said on Wednesday, words are not enough, and the attitudes of people like Strahl and Poilievre are yet another reminder that real, effective action cannot be taken while bigotry and ignorance still exists.
 

Quote du Jour: Poilievre's Racism

Ignorance on parade. Why not pull out the "lazy Indian" stereotype on the day your prime minister is apologizing for the residential schools abuse? Might as well signal to all of those racists out there who vote for your party that you're still on their side, right?

Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre, who represents the Ottawa-area riding of Nepean-Carleton, appeared on a lunch-time program on CFRA News Talk Radio in the capital Wednesday.

It was just hours before Harper stood to atone on behalf of all Canadians for generations of abuse in once-mandatory native residential schools.

"Now along with this apology comes another $4 billion in compensation for those who partook in the residential schools over those years," says Poilievre, in a clip circulated by the Liberal opposition.

He was apparently unaware that students were once forced to attend schools meant to assimilate them, as his boss would later rise to say in Parliament.

Poilievre then questioned the wisdom of related compensation payments.

"Now, you know, some of us are starting to ask: 'Are we really getting value for all of this money, and is more money really going to solve the problem?'

"My view is that we need to engender the values of hard work and independence and self reliance. That's the solution in the long run - more money will not solve it."

That's exactly the kind of "white supremacy" Phil Fontaine railed against in his statement in the house on Wednesday.

It's not up to you, Mr Pierre 'PMO Talking Points Coming Out of My Ass on a Daily Basis' Poilievre to "engender" anything on our first nations people. Do you not realize that that's exactly why residential schools were set up in the first place?

Oh, but he didn't stop there:

Poilievre also told CFRA that aboriginal chiefs have too much control.

"That gets to the heart of the problem on these reserves where there is too much power concentrated in the hands of the leadership, and it makes you wonder where all of this money is going.

"We spend $10 billion dollars - $10 billion dollars - in annual spending this year alone now, that is an exceptional amount of money, and that is on top of all the resource revenue that goes to reserves that sit on petroleum products or sit on uranium mines, other things where companies have to pay them royalties.

"And that's on top of all that money that they earn on their own reserves. That is an incredible amount of money."

It's their money and their resources, you fool.

You think living on a reserve is heaven? I'd suggest you take a field trip for about a year and get back to the rest of us on that. I'll tell you what: I'll even raise the money to get you to Hobbema here in Alberta. I dare you. Tough it out for a year (if you can last more than one week) and then tell us what it's really like if you can manage to even sputter by then.

Your hatred and bigotry are nothing short of astounding. Enjoy the flames you'll get in parliament and from the public for this amazing display of absolutely pathetic ignorance. You're a disgrace.

And your party wonders why so many first nations people didn't take the apology seriously. If you have a problem with the amount of money your party has decided to spend on aboriginal affairs, take that up with your boss. And while you're having that chat with him, ask him why he ditched the Kelowna accord - the first slap in the face towards first nations people perpetrated by your Conservative party when you won minority status. Oh yes, that involved too much money too, didn't it? How would you like it if I stole your land, gave you smallpox, kidnapped your children, abused them in every possible way and tried to turn them into what I deemed "acceptable"? Just how much money do you think you'd deserve as compensation for those crimes?

I, for one, am extremely grateful that you only have minority status. Enjoy the tiny bit of power you have while it lasts. Thankfully, we've all been saved by what surely would have been a destructive bull in a china shop style of government had you actually won a majority. Your party's actions have proven that you don't deserve to govern.

Never again will this House consider us the Indian problem just for being who we are.
- Phil Fontaine

When are you going to learn that, Poilievre, or are you now leading the campaign to prove him wrong?

Want to give Poilievre a piece of your mind? Here you go: PoiliP@parl.gc.ca


(h/t Far and Wide)
 

The Angst of Privileged White Men

Just how much personal resentment and anger does a person like Don Martin carry around inside of him to have the audacity to call the upcoming apology to first nations victims of residential schools "the greatest grovel in Canadian history"?

He continues:

The government, Parliament, indeed every Canadian will be apologizing without exception for every student's experience, be it positive, negative or abusive.

But there are still high-level concerns it won't be enough and, while unlikely, could be rejected by native leaders as a political stunt that isn't sufficiently sincere. One senior government official involved in drafting the apology acknowledged in mid-gulp on an Ottawa beer patio: "Of course, we're still not sure they'll accept it."

Beverage splattered. Excuse me?

No. Excuse me, Mr Martin.

It's absolutely clear that by his inclusion of the word "positive", Don Martin is just plain clueless and vindictive. No one is apologizing for "positive" experiences - whatever few there may have been. And his public angst over the possibility that this apology will not be enough to satisfy all first nations people who lived through and were affected by the horrendous trauma which impacted every single area of their lives - the sexual, physical and psychological abuse, the destruction of their identities and culture, the indoctrination of forced assimilation, the resulting suicides and massive social problems that still reverberate to this day - (and that's not even mentioning the fact that our ancestors stole their land, gave them smallpox, herded them onto reservations like animals to be penned and continue to expect them to live in third world conditions) and Martin bemoans the fact that some people won't see this apology as being enough?

As far as I'm concerned, it isn't.

And let's not be too charitable in giving props to Stephen Harper's government for crafting this apology. Over and over again in the house, he and his cronies have made a point of chastising the Liberals for not properly handling this issue. While it's absolutely true that the Liberals dragged their feet for decades, that type of finger-pointing by such a shallow prime minister shows that there is some political grandstanding involved here. If there weren't, Steve would allow - as has been requested on many fronts - aboriginal leaders and victims the right to respond in parliament. But Steve is so anal-retentive that he stands on the "tradition" excuse ie. that he simply can't allow those voices to be formally heard or recorded in Hansard for all time because it would be an unusual break from parliamentary tradition. Well, Mr Harper, extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures so spare us your angst as well.

Our first nations people have already suffered enough at the hands of policies crafted by privileged white men - government and religious leaders who decided their job was to "civilize" a group of people whose culture they feared and didn't understand. And it seems that fact is still being denied by people like Don Martin and Stephen Harper who would rather re-victimize that population by mocking them and silencing them on the national stage.

Parliament does not belong to privileged white people. It belongs to all of us so, as far as I'm concerned, the people who should really be silenced in all of this are those who have yet to truly come to grips with what our country has done and continues to do to our first nations brothers and sisters. What they most need to do is to listen instead of continuing to be in love with the sound of their own sanctimonious voices. Maybe then they'll actually learn and understand why the wounds this nation, the victims, and all of us who care about the sorriest part of our history cannot be fixed by mere words pontificated on from above.

StatsCan released a report on hate crimes statistics today. This country still has a long road to travel before prejudice based on race is anywhere close to being eliminated. One thing is certain: if our government officials and the media refuse to acknowledge their complicity in stirring up resentments against minorities, we are all doomed to suffer those continual injustices with the victims - those of us who actually care, that is.

Do your part. Speak up and act when you can. Compassion is not a vice.

Related:

More Don Martin bigotry. Let him know what you think about his intolerable rants: dmartin@nationalpost.com

Reconciliation goes sour in Canada

Assembly of First Nations

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada

CBC Newsworld will provide complete coverage of the apology and house proceedings on Wednesday as will CPAC where you can watch it online.
 

Obama, Ferraro, Race & the Democrats

Last week, Geraldine Ferraro chose to resign from the Clinton campaign after she made these remarks in an interview with the Daily Breeze:

"I think what America feels about a woman becoming president takes a very secondary place to Obama's campaign - to a kind of campaign that it would be hard for anyone to run against," she said. "For one thing, you have the press, which has been uniquely hard on her. It's been a very sexist media. Some just don't like her. The others have gotten caught up in the Obama campaign.

"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position," she continued. "And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

The outrage from the Obama campaign and his supporters was deafening, so Ferraro retreated.

Now, let's contrast that with what Obama has said about himself. From a 2005 Chicago Tribune article that appears on Obama's senate site:

Obama acknowledges, with no small irony, that he benefits from his race.

If he were white, he once bluntly noted, he would simply be one of nine freshmen senators, almost certainly without a multimillion-dollar book deal and a shred of celebrity. Or would he have been elected at all?

Compare and contrast.

Related:

Have a look at what Obama supporters John Kerry and Clair McCaskill have to say about Obama being a black candidate. Will they be thrown off the train next? Of course not.
(h/t marisacat)

The extreme hyperbole, hysteria and candidate protectionism in this Democratic nomination race has reached epic proportions on the left that I thought I'd only ever see from the right. I was wrong.

While the media have pondered whether America is ready for a black or female president, the real question they should be asking is whether Democrats are ready for either one of those possibilities. From the vile behaviour I've seen in the so-called "progressive" blog community (and the MSM), which too often consists of lies, distortions, personal attacks, and assumptions in order to prop up one candidate over another, my conclusion is that the answer to that question is "no".

It seems that "progressives", who have long been grumbling about the right's dirty tricks a la Karl Rove, have absolutely no qualms about adopting those same tactics against their own. The one reality they seem to miss is that the Republicans are light years ahead of them when it comes to unity based on discipline. Without question, we've all seen how the right has taken that belief to the extreme, but there's no denying that this strategy has worked for them. Meanwhile, Democrats are tearing their party apart - in the name of what, exactly? Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, as the saying goes? That's what it looks like from here.

But, I'm not a Democrat (I'm a small "L", independent Canadian liberal) and I don't support any of the remaining candidates, so I'll just continue to bang my head against the wall as I cringe at the display of simple principles like truth and logic being thrown out the window by the so-called American left which is supporting two centrist candidates while they promise that everything will be better tomorrow, or next month or next year.

Whatever happened to MLK's "fierce urgency of now"?

Democrats have the "fierce" part down pat. What they're missing is the action required "now".

Democrats may win in spite of themselves but, what then?
 

Tabloid Politics

You didn't have to hang around supermarket checkout lines this past week to get your fill of hyperventilated, manufactured claims. The various so-called legitimate pages of the MSM were dishing out sensationalism left and right. No, not about Batboy. But, unless you live in a cave or just haven't been paying attention, the guano being flung around between various surrogates (and people labeled 'surrogates' who were no such thing) of the Obama and Clinton campaigns made people like me don full-sized body condoms for protection. It's been nasty.

The issue, of course, has been racism. No small topic. But the way it has all been handled has been despicable and that has diminished both campaigns. No matter who you think is to blame for what may or may not have been a coordinated effort to smear one or the other candidate, the fact is that neither Obama nor Clinton ordered an official ceasefire to this war (for those insurgents they actually could control) until late Monday. Neither completely rose above the fray to display what they have been assuring Democrats and other Americans will be their style of governance: change, unity, hope. As a result, they have both let the issue steamroll into an ugly example of tabloid politics ie. any publicity is good publicity. Who's running their campaigns? Paris Hilton?

There can be no doubt that there is a hunger to have a national dialogue about racism and the current status of the civil rights movement in America. No one, it seems, has quite yet figured out how to do that without inflicting casualties - real or metaphorical. It's a hypersensitive reality. Had both candidates grasped this opportunity to come together, despite the fact that they are currently political opponents in the race for president, they could have shown their country what they claim Democrats are capable of doing: ending division, working in partnership for the common good and taking on the tough challenges that face America. On that front, they failed miserably. But, for that to have happened, I suppose you'd have to hang your hat on the belief that Democrats really do stand for such ideals and, considering the extremely low approval ratings of the Democratic congress, it seems much of America hasn't bought the idea that they actually do and the politicians sure haven't acted like it.

What's happened this past week seems to be a reflection of the Democratic party itself: it talks the talk but just doesn't walk the walk when it really matters. And neither do Obama and Hillary. That, in the end, may be the final result of this chapter of this very public family feud. When you strip away the racism issue this has all been lurking behind, you find two people - the Democratic party's most recent stars - who have managed to garner a lot of attention and headlines but who, in the end, have shown very little talent for actually following through on whatever promise their portfolios advertized.

So, what's it going to be, you two (and the MSM that has played right along)? Coverage worthy of the Weekly World News or something a tad more substantial? Reading and encouraging sensationalist Batboy-style diversions might be entertaining but they don't do much to advance world peace, heal racial divides or to put food on the table, now do they?
 

Quote du Jour: Condi on Racist/Sexist Comments

Asked how she handled racist, sexist comments directed her way, Rice laughed and replied: "I'm a big girl. I can take care of myself. And I really don't care because, you know, I'm a mature woman."
link

Let me translate that for you, Condi:

"I'm a big girl. [A bigger girl than those women at Rutgers who Imus insulted, apparently.] I can take care of myself. [Which is why I am surrounded by the secret service 24/7 who track down thugs who utter threats against me so I don't have to deal with them]. And I really don't care because, you know, [I don't even hear about threats made against me because my "people" take care of them so I don't have to worry about them. Did I mention they have guns?] I'm a mature woman. [And obviously I'm much more "mature" than those Rutgers women and every other person who thinks this is all such a big deal.]

Look. I have about this much credibility left and I intend to try to use it, damnit.

Disgusting Bigotry in the US Military

And to top it all off, the person involved is still working for the US military:

(CBS) JERSEY CITY, N.J. An Army recruiter is in hot water after taking part in a war of racial and anti-gay words with a Jersey City resident who had simply posted his resume on a Web site in search of a job. Corey Andrew, an openly gay black man said the heated exchange began in late February after the recruiter responded to his resume displayed on CareerBuilder.com.

U.S. Army recruiter Sgt. Marcia Ramode wrote to Andrew from her official military e-mail address, but after Andrew said he wasn't interested in joining the Army, he did probe the recruiter on the Army's policy on gay and lesbian soldiers. The fireworks set off when he revealed he's openly gay.

Ramode told Andrew that being gay made him unqualified, and that it was "disgusting and immoral."

"In any other corporate structure in America, an e-mail like this going around in an office building would result in termination immediately," Andrew said.

But the message that struck the strongest chord with Andrew was when Ramode wrote: "GO BACK TO AFRICA AND DO YOUR GAY VOODOO LIMBO TANGO AND WANGO DANCE AND JUMP AROUND AND PRANCE AND RUN ALL OVER THE PLACE HALF NAKED THERE. ... THAT'S WHERE YOU BELONG"

To say Andrew, a musician who is a copywriter by trade, was shocked would be an understatement. "I thought she was absolutely out of her mind," Andrew said.

Andrew admits he lost his cool at times during the exchange and shot back at Ramode, taking shots at her for spelling and grammatical errors, but also told her after he'd found she was Native American to "take that to your next rain dance."
[...]
Officials say for now Ramode is still working in the military, but not in recruiting. Andrew is hoping she'll be removed from the post for good, especially for violating the Department of Defense's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy in which recruiters are barred from asking applicants about their sexual orientation.

This is just disgusting all the way around and Andrew obviously didn't do himself any favours by striking back with a racist slur either, however, the fact that this woman is still employed by the US military when proof of this exchange exists is inconceivable.

Then again, if General Peter Pace can get away with calling homosexuality "immoral" while neo nazis have become acceptable recruits, what can anyone expect from the US military establishment anymore when it comes to respecting civil and human rights?
 

Random News & Views Roundup

- Springtime Subpoena Fest! Better than a hot dog-eating contest by a country mile.

- Albertans slacking on environmental actions:

Fifty-seven per cent of Quebecers polled said they are promoting better behaviour toward the environment, while only 36 per cent of Albertans said they are doing the same.

Well, why bother? All of that pollution coming out of the oilsands projects is going to kill us anyway. /snark

- Did you know that today is World Water Day? This year's theme is water scarcity.

- With all of the political sparring in Canada lately over the treatment of detainees in Afghanistan, one thing I haven't heard an opinion about from our prime minister (unlike, say the Netherlands foreign minister and representatives of the US and UK) is what he has to say about Italy cutting a deal with the Afghan government to free 5 jailed Taliban commanders in exchange for one of its citizens.

- By the way, if our prime minister doesn't care about the fate of detainees in Afghanistan (and they are not all confirmed members of the Taliban), then why does he even bother with the Geneva Conventions or agreements to protect their rights? His attitude endangers our troops. Period. Did he even notice the fallout from the Abu Ghraib scandal? Disrespect human rights and you place soldiers' lives in even more peril.

- From the "why did Gates say that?" file:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Robert Gates cautioned on Thursday the Army would face problems without emergency funds but insisted U.S. forces could fight a third war despite being stretched in Iraq and Afghanistan.

- Meanwhile, the UN Security Council is scheduled to vote on tougher Iran sanctions on Saturday.

- College Republican groups in the US are holding blatantly racist anti-immigrant events:

This week, Boise State University College Republicans have joined the list of College Republicans who have held anti-immigrant "games" by creating a despicable ad to promote a conservative speaker on campus. The ad advertises a food stamp drawing and a free meal at a "Mexican restaurant" for students who "climb through the hole in the fence" and submit illegal identification. This recent derogatory stunt comes on the heels of national news reports that confirm the rise in hate groups who are feeding off of anti-immigrant sentiments. Sadly, while these activities continue on America's campuses and while Republican presidential candidates use harsh words on immigration for political gain, the national Republican Party has remained quietly on the sidelines.

It has been three weeks since Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and DNC Hispanic Caucus Chair Ramona Martinez sent a letter to RNC General Chairman Mel Martinez regarding the despicable conduct of College Republicans. The Republican Chairman has yet to respond.

Sick, sick people.

- LA's Vicious War on the Homeless:

On the morning of February 8, a white hospital van stopped a few feet from a curb in Los Angeles' skid row area. According to witnesses, a man wearing a soiled hospital gown fell through the doors, and the van, later connected with Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center, drove away.

The man, a paraplegic, began crawling down the street, a bag of his belongings clutched in his teeth and a colostomy bag dragging behind him. Other homeless people helped the disoriented man into a nearby park, just before police called an ambulance.

This horrible scene came just three months after the city attorney's office filed an indictment against Kaiser Permanente for dumping a 63-year-old patient on the streets of skid row in her socks and a hospital gown last year, an incident that was captured on videotape.

Patient dumping has become so widespread there's a bill in the California State Senate to criminalize the practice.

But these practices go deeper than a few isolated incidents. They are part of a system of abuse against LA's poor and homeless population.

- John Bolton: neocon warmongering monster:

Former US United Nations Ambassador John Bolton told the BBC today that he was “damned proud” of how the U.S. intentionally blocked efforts to achieve a ceasefire last summer when Israel was bombing Beirut and many other locales in Lebanon.