Thanks to the Baptist preacher whose life we celebrate on today’s national holiday, America overcame racist Jim Crow laws that prevented millions of Blacks from voting, otherwise exercising their civil rights under the Constitution and from pursuing happiness via economic Liberty.
Nearly fifty-one years ago President Lyndon Baines Johnson repeated the title of the anthem of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King’s movement, “We Shall Overcome”, before a joint session of Congress when he proposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act.Almost fifty years ago this year that anthem would be sung again at Selma, Alabama when King, Atlanta’s John Lewis and other non-violent marchers for the right to vote would be attacked by police on “Bloody Sunday.” The 1965 Voting Rights Act was passed later that year, thus overcoming yet another obstacle to equal treatment under the laws.
Moreover, much of Dr. King’s dream of integration beyond the realm of legalities has also been realized.Continue reading
Given Juan’s own Enough book bemoaning Jackson and Sharpton-style victimology, no way he can believe what he has written concerning alleged “racial politics in plain sight” exercised by Republicans in the last election. It used to be beneath Mr. Williams to stoop to such baseless conjecture.
It is Democrats that proudly favor and pass race-based Jim Crow laws today and since just after the ink on the the 1965 Voting Rights Act was passed 50 years ago and for the 100 years before said ink was dry on the 1964 Civil Rights Act when signed 49 years ago.
In his post-election missive Williams cites a liberal immigration advocate and Democrat congressman’s “suspicions” that conservatives and Republican’s “resent a black man’s presence in the White House”. Based upon what? That past presidents have exercised “prosecutorial discretion”, advocacy of voter-photo identification cards, innocuous statements by Rush Limbaugh and a Republican congressman’s characterization of the Obama Administration as waging a “war on whites”.Continue reading
A properly blindfolded Lady Justice wouldn’t know if a corpus delicti looks like President Barack Obama’s imaginary son and wouldn’t weigh empathy in the scales of justice.
Unless one accepts the default assumption of “Civil Rights” industrialists, including the Attorney General-dubbed “anti-race cowards” law firm of Obama, Holder, Sharpton, Jackson, Lee & Nzinga, that White America (including so-called “white Hispanics”) circa. A.D. 2012 is a monolithic Jim Crow or that George Zimmerman’s heart, mind and soul is uniquely readable; there is no reason to suspect that the shooting of Trayvon Martin had anything to do with racism.
Rather than accept “Reverend” Jesse Jackson’s conclusion that “Blacks are under attack” in America and proceed to heed Cheif Magistrate Obama’s admonsihon to “search our souls”, why not first listen to the 911 tape, which reveals the following:
We’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood and there’s a real suspicious guy. It’s Retreat View Circle. The best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle.
This guy looks like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around looking about. [00:25]
OK, is he White, Black, or Hispanic?
He looks black.
Did you see what he was wearing?
Yeah, a dark hoodie like a gray hoodie. He wore jeans or sweat pants and white tennis shoes. He’s here now … he’s just staring. [00:42]
Apparently the 6’2″ teen wasn’t singing in the rain and, like Gene Kelly, apparently wasn’t up to no good either; but most folks reserve leisurely strolls for non-stormy weather. All things being equal, including skin pigmentation, walks in the rain sans umbrellas can be seen as “suspicious” on some level.
We can’t read the hearts of John Does, Trayvons or Zimmermans, but what we do know is that the race of the unarmed man was only brought up by the 911 dispatcher, not the armed neighborhood watch volunteer who ended up injured about his face and head, but alive, after his confrontation that he claims ended with an exercise in the right of self defense.
The Palmetto State’s new law actually provides free state-issued photo identification cards to all that need them just like the laws of all the other states with such laws that the Department of Justice either pre-cleared or decided not to contest.
So what is the difference between the South Carolina law as opposed to the laws of Georgia (also upheld by their state’s highest court), that DOJ approved and Indiana (also upheld by the nation’s highest court) that DOJ declined to contest?
It is not the language of the respective laws, all of which avoid any semblance of a Jim Crow-style poll tax by, not only providing for the issuance of free photo ID voter registration cards, but also by authorizing a proactive educational campaign as well as allowing for non-photo ID voters to cast provisional ballots on Election Day that can be authenticated later with photo IDs obtained after Election Day.
Despite the above, no less than former President Bill Clinton has characterized photo ID laws as a “return to Jim Crow”, but I digress. I defer:
The court’s liberal lion, then-Justice John Paul Stevens, wrote for the majority that Indiana’s law “is unquestionably relevant to the State’s interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.” Indiana offered free voter ID cards to all citizens, so the inconvenience of picking up an ID at the Department of Motor Vehicles wasn’t an undue burden and was reasonably balanced by the state’s interest in reducing fraud, Justice Stevens wrote.
So, could it be that South Carolina’s sin was the passage of their law too soon after the failure of President Barack Obama’s economic policies became apparent and too soon before his re-election bid?
Holder’s assistant deputy AG in the Civil Rights Division claims in his pre-clearance denial letter that the new law “abridges” the right to vote of an alleged 81,938 “minority citizens who are already registered to vote [in S.C.] and who lack DMV-issued identification”, thus rendering them “effectively disenfranchised”; and that the state has not yet finalized the proposed procedures to implement the issuance of free photo IDs and an education campaign necessary to “mitigate” the new law’s “discriminatory effects”.
OK–we’ve all seen small children put their hands over their ears and wail when they are told something that they don’t want to hear, like “eat your vegetables” or “take your medicine”. However, this is quite strange behavior to behold in adult journalists who work for mainstream media outlets. Now granted, anyone who reads newspapers, and doesn’t live under a rock, is somewhat aware that there is a left-wing tilt to the MSM. For instance, there have been the recent embarrassments involving the infamous JournoList–a sophomoric clique of left-wing journalists and bloggers. And, most people are aware that the MSM has a tendency to throw a fit whenever anything negative is said about President Obama or his Administration.
But now, it’s come to this. A few days ago, Megyn Kelly broke a huge story on Fox News where she interviewed former Department of Justice attorney, J. Christian Adams. Adams has blown the whistle on the Obama Administration’s DOJ for dismissing the infamous voter intimidation case against the Black Panthers, after he had already won the case (the Black Panthers never even showed up in court to answer the charges). Adams claimed that the main reason why the DOJ didn’t want to prosecute the Panthers was for racial reasons. Now, one would think that this would be an explosive story and that the mainstream media would be all over this, but instead they are like a toddler putting his fingers in his ears when he is told to eat his vegetables.