Democrats And Race

If you're a conservative, or a civil libertarian, I doubt you'll need to go beyond the opening question and responses from last night's debate to know that the Democrats aren't for you. Check this out: I'm quoting from all responses in brief

Q: In 1903, the noted intellectual W.E.B. DeBoise said the problem of the 20th century is the problem of the color line. Is race still the most intractable issue in America, and especially, I might add, in light of today’s U.S. Supreme Court decision which struck down the use of race as a factor in K through 12?

Hillary:

You can look at this stage and see an African American, a Latino, a woman contesting for the presidency of the United States. But there is so much left to be done. ... You can look at the thousands of African-Americans left behind by their government with Katrina. You can look at the opportunity gap, the Cradle to Prison Superhighway that The Covenant talks about, and you can look at this decision today, which turned the clock back on the promise of Brown v. Board of Education, that was resting on the fact that children are better off if they are a part of a diverse, integrated society.

I'd argue that if minorities can contest for President, what is it exactly they cannot achieve in America? And let's not forget some we didn't leave behind in Katrina ... they went on to initiate a murder crime wave in Houston. Is that the government's fault? Did we bus them there on that prison super highway?

Biden, who was obviously bused to a bad school in his youth. Last I checked the Supreme Court doesn't have a President.

The minority stated, had the rationale that was applied by the majority been applied the last 50 years, we would have never, never overcome the state’s effort to ignore Brown versus the Board.

But we can do something about it, and the place to start is through the next president of the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

Richardson:

Race is a major issue in this country, and the next president has to talk about it....

And I believe very strongly that the next president is not just going to have to pass laws and take the steps necessary to reaffirm affirmative action and take steps to make sure that our schools are integrated, but also the next president is going have to lead and speak passionately about a dialogue among all people.

What a git 'er done attitude, ay? Politicians accomplish so much when they talk about it, don't you think? How about allowing Americans to talk about what they want to talk about, as opposed to leading some national group therapy session as Prez, Bill? Yawn ....

Edwards, who hasn't uttered a non-demagogic word since he started running:

These two Americas that I’ve talked about in the past -- man, they are out there thriving every single day. We have two public school systems in America -- one for the wealthy, one for everybody else. ... And by the way, also making sure that every single American, including people of color, are allowed to vote and that their vote is counted in the election.

Obama ... who apparently lived in the wrong America for Edwards. Along with attending school overseas, he graduated from: Punahou School, formerly known as Oahu College, is an exclusive[2] private, co-educational, non-sectarian college preparatory school located in Honolulu in the U.S. State of Hawaii. What, did Marshall write him a recommendation to there and Harvard?

You know, this is where Thurgood Marshall and the team from Brown crafted their strategy. And if it hadn’t been for them, I would not be standing here today. 

Kucinich remains a collectivist to the very end, he goes on to state he wants day care for 3 - 5 year olds installed as a Constituional right.

I want to share the remarks of Barack Obama, ... the judicial branch of government, because they go out and tell people, "Pull yourselves up by the -- by your bootstraps," and then they steal their boots. (Laughter.) And finally, we need to take the resources away from war and military buildups and assure that every child should have a chance for a quality college education as well.

Gavel - who says racism will always remain, so let's at least do away with the war on drugs in the meantime. How did he get in the room?

Let me add that racism was here with us at the beginning of this country. It was here in the last century, and it’s going to be with us in the 21st century. And one of the areas that touches me the most and enrages me the most is our war on drugs that this country has been putting forth for the last generation.

This group has nothing positive to offer America on race relations, or anything else, as far as I'm concerned.

Comments

[nowingker]

It's enough to make you want to move to Japan. The Dems will never learn, both parties are totally worthless and incapable of addressing in any rational or successful way the issues facing this country all they do is give a sop to the base whenever they can. Ridiculous.

Where is the data that 'diversity' in and of itself improves anyone's education? Does that mean if you bus in white kids to a crap inner city school, rampant with corruption and incompetance that the presence of the white students will miraculously improve everyone's education?

Jesus Christ, even Thurgood Marshall says he never intended Brown to be about instituting racial quotas in the classroom but about forcing society to improve black schools. Dumb, dumber dumbest.

[Phoenix]

If one of them had been smart, he'd have said: "I plan to deport Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to the Gulag Archipelago, and to make sure no child has to ride a bus longer than ten minutes to get to school. And inner-city school teachers will get hardship-duty pay and a guaranteed firing if they don't bring up student scores."

They might even have garnered a few republican votes. :)

[nowingker]

Truthfully, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have power becuase it is given to them by the black community and it can only be taken away by the black community. They're another example of how lies, propaganda and feel good rhetoric that blames somebody else for your shortcomings is extremely effective, more effective than truth telling. I'm sure getting Don Imus fired has brought huge opportunities to black children all across the country, raised test scores and helped tamp down gang activity!

[IslamoLlama]

Nowingker, the school system in Seattle was designed with a failsafe to make sure that if ten white kids and ten black kids with the same grades/etc applied to a school, five white kids and five black kids would get in. All other things being equal, why wouldn't five white kids and five black kids get in?

Race was a factor, but not the only factor, in determining admittance. Personally, I'm of the opinion that race is a silly criterion to use. If the problem is that too many black people are impoverished and too many impoverished students aren't making the cut, then give poor kids a leg up. Then the system scales to the true needs of the public, not the needs of the day.

That said, Dan's racism seems to be shining through once again, as he cavalierly rips on everyone minority individual who didn't reach Obama's level of prestige, then turns around and rips on Obama for living a privileged life, then rips on Obama again for suggesting that the civil rights movement have had a hand in his success. That Dan just really doesn't like Barak Obama - for no reason he's bothered to articulate - is abundantly clear. And lest anyone think Dan just doesn't like rich famous black people, he disabuses us of that notion by once again flogging the Hurricane Victims of Katrina, calling them all criminals.

So whatever may be said of the Supreme Court, Presidential Candidates, Brown v Board, or the public school systems, it seems pretty clear to me that Dan Riehl doesn't like black people. Happy Birthday.

[Phoenix]

I wonder, Nowinger. If what you say is true, that means all black people are stupid pushovers. I don't believe it. I think Jackson and Sharpton are everything you said, plus, they're thugs and powerful enough with their bullying to keep whites and blacks from challenging them. What disgusting characters.

[Phoenix]

What about me, IL? You called me a racist, I asked you to cut & paste any racist remarks I made, and you didn't. Want to prove it now?

[rwilymz]

"All other things being equal, why wouldn't five white kids and five black kids get in?"

Because "all things" are never equal. Attempts to make them so are hamfisted and chock full of presumption and convenient hypocrisy.

"Personally, I'm of the opinion that race is a silly criterion to use."

Then you wouldn't be ankle-biting a guy who says that race is a silly criterion to use.

"That Dan just really doesn't like Barak Obama - for no reason he's bothered to articulate - is abundantly clear."

Dig it. He doesn't need to. Personally, I voted for the guy myself. And it wasn't because of who he was up against. "...although that was a factor" in your "rationalize-speak".

[nowingker]

Phoenix,

My view is that black America is more segregated than white America by a long shot. Blacks who are successful, who graduate from high school, go to college, get jobs, speak proper english, don't belong to gangs, etc. have very little in common with the black underclass in urban areas other than the misplaced loyalty that makes them blame white society for all the ills of the inner city poor. Where do these black intelligensia/middle class successful folks live? Not in the urban black areas that's for sure.

Llama,

Why should race be the tie-breaker rather than proximity to the school? Why do we have to have 'failsafe' methods to ensure a rigid quota based on race? Why should race be a factor at all? The whole point, that everyone has forgotten about Brown was that the 'separate but equal' schools were separate but NOT equal and that the separation was a legal one imposed by the state not a natural outgrowth of where people chose to live. Several decades later the racial patterns in housing have not changed much, we still have predominantly white, black and hispanic neighborhoods despite all the laws designed to prevent discrimination in housing sales and rentals.

How does 'diversity' improve a school? This idea that we have to attend racially balanced schools to 'prepare' us to function in a racially diverse society is fucking idiotic.

The implementation of "Brown" was the single most destructive thing ever to occur in public education. Talk about unintended consequences. Instead of perhaps, slowly phasing out black schools and white schools and integrating them over time, doing a pilot program here and there, educating parents we flipped a freaking switch demanding total integration over night. What happened? White simply moved to towns where there weren't enough minorities to make integration an issue. White flight out of the inner city INCREASED geographic segregation and left only the most poor and unskilled in the inner city, eviscerating the tax base and the urban small businesses along the way. Whites who couldn't move to the suburbs put their children in Catholic schools, with the same result: the lowest common denominator was left in the public schools, which is why today most inner city schools are 80-90% black. The law of unintended consequences was deadly. Lastly, the students from the vastly underfunded black schools were unable to compete with their white counterparts who had attended well funded all white schools, further exacerbating racial prejudices since the blacks thrown into the white schools often couldn't compete. A disaster all the way around.

[IslamoLlama]

"Why should race be the tie-breaker rather than proximity to the school? Why do we have to have 'failsafe' methods to ensure a rigid quota based on race? Why should race be a factor at all?"

I agree. We've already got zoning laws and school districting to direct the flow of student traffic. If we've got to add some social factor to the equation, it should be economic class not racial class.

That said, xenophobia is bred in the sort of closeted and hyper-sheltered institutions that segregation creates. "Diversity" blows a breath of fresh air into walled-off systems. The idea that we have to attend racially integrated schools in order to prepare ourselves for a racially diverse society is common sense.

Do you think we'd have as many rampant raving fear-mongers, selling the Mexican Invasion guff, if more of us actually lived and worked alongside mexicans? Do you think people would still be horrified at the sound of the Spanish language? Or the smell of a burrito? You've got an army of crazied red-necks camping out on a football-field's worth of border in New Mexico because they're absolutely terrified of a hispanic neighbor. I don't think they'd be acting so irrationally, if they'd known a few brown people growing up in grade school.

[rwilymz]

"The implementation of "Brown" was the single most destructive thing ever to occur in public education."

I can actually say I like your response.

Brown's long-term implementation was pinioned upon the lone statement from the opinion "separate is inherently unequal", which is a monumentally dishonest and ludicrous thing to say. I live in IL, you live in [wherever] -- we are separate and have separate state laws to govern us. Ergo -- to believe Brown -- one of us is "unequal". I hope it's me, personally, be experience, not to mention Civil Rights Laws, means that being a member of a "suspect class" [in this case, a resident of IL] brings with it a whole shitpot full of goodies that you don't have to work for.

What was "unequal" in Topeka was the manner in which the school board divvied up the assets to their black schools and their white schools. As a result, the grades in the black schools were nearly non-existant. If you can't equalize the assets in your separate but EQUAL, then you can't have separate.

Grades would come out of that.

But then white flight [it had already been going on, but accelerated] left many big-city schools with a predominantly black student base, and school boards beholden to black voters, so the old "separate but equal" constraints did not apply. But the grades were still lower. And *that's* when the rationalistic fops decided that, oh, well, it must be the integration thing. Self-directing your own assets and learning to prioritize local governance isn't as important as making sure you have enough blacks and whites to make gray. Two generations after Brown, many blacks' GPAs are as poor as ever, but the NAACP [et al] is after side issues instead of education.

[nowingker]

Sorry, I disagree. I live in a racially diverse area and see an an unending stream of hispanic cashiers, waitresses and others in the 'service' industry who can't speak English and these are people in visible jobs, not in the back room at a restaurant or in construction. I see the damage that illegal aliens and immigrants who are not naturalized is doing firsthand and it isn't limited to Mexicans, my area is full of Pakistani taxi drivers who can't communicate with their fares at all, ridiculous. Shouldn't my taxi driver/waitress/server be able to at least communicate with me in English? And why should my desire to transact my business in the US in English be any sign of racism or xenophobia?

Diversity is a noble goal with many benefits, but it is NOT necessary to function in a racially diverse society. Good grief, by that yardstick neither the Japanese or the Chinese would be able to compete economically since their countries lack any racial diverstiy at all. We have confused 'good' and 'beneficial' with 'necessary'...

I agree, everything should be strictly based on economics, if you are poor, you get a leg up, doesn't matter what your ethnicity is.

[rwilymz]

"The idea that we have to attend racially integrated schools in order to prepare ourselves for a racially diverse society is common sense."

How many b..b..billions of dollars a year are you willing to pay for that fresh air common sense?

"Do you think we'd have as many rampant raving fear-mongers, selling the Mexican Invasion guff, if more of us actually lived and worked alongside mexicans?"

According to many, "they" already do work along side Mexicans. And hire them. And those whom you'd call "rampant raving fear-mongers" others are calling "normal folks who are tired of laws not being enforced by those we're paying [a fucking hell of a lot] to enforce.

"Do you think people would still be horrified at the sound of the Spanish language?"

Don't know anyone who's "horrified" at the sound of Spanish. Know a lot of people who are horrified at hearing how much it costs [b..b..billions] each year to print up instructions for government services in two languages all for people who are largely not supposed to be here in the first place.

"Or the smell of a burrito?"

Mmmmmm. Burritos!

"You've got an army of crazied red-necks camping out on a football-field's worth of border in New Mexico because they're absolutely terrified of a hispanic neighbor."

You're throwing a whole bunch of presumption around.

"I don't think they'd be acting so irrationally, if they'd known a few brown people growing up in grade school."

You're just full of presumption.

[IslamoLlama]

"I see the damage that illegal aliens and immigrants who are not naturalized is doing firsthand and it isn't limited to Mexicans, my area is full of Pakistani taxi drivers who can't communicate with their fares at all, ridiculous. Shouldn't my taxi driver/waitress/server be able to at least communicate with me in English? And why should my desire to transact my business in the US in English be any sign of racism or xenophobia?"

I think I've got to point you towards good old "market forces" then. If you can't stand a waitress or a taxi driver who can't speak English, then clearly a market exists for those that do. Guys like you will patron people who speak your language, and the problem will fix itself with good old fashioned capitalism.

[templar knight]

"You're just full of presumption."

Why, yes, rwilymx, he is. And he's full of something else, too, I believe you already know what that is. And I'm one of those "crazed rednecks" who will be hanging out at the border this weekend. I'll be heading that way at 5:00, so wish me good luck in spotting some illegals. And alerting the border patrol, so they can DO THE JOB THE GOVERNMENT IS SUPPOSED TO DO PROTECTING OUR BORDERS. It's a damn shame I have to spend my time and money doing the federal government's job. Bye.

[nowingker]

"Market forces' brought us child labor, wholesale environmental degradation, the savings and loan flop, gas guzzlers, the Great Depression, Paris Hilton and will soon bring the collapse of the US housing market due to the proliferation of subprime loans....so forgive me if I don't have confidence that 'market forces' are the solution to the country's problems on immigration or anything else.

[templar knight]

And I will leave this issue in very capable hands. Thank you, nowinger and rwilymx.

[rwilymz]

"'Market forces' brought us child labor"

Child labor predated the free market by about 10,000 years. The free market is predicated on an expansive working class, not on free labor, and so needs an educated work force. Child labor and educated workers are in direct conflict. Market forces won.

"wholesale environmental degradation"

And the ability to overcome same. If "the environment" is so important to you, then buy it. Many people already have. And they control the exploitation of it so that they can simultaneously
1] profit from it, and
2] make sure it's still there for their kids.

I bought 5AC of it, planted trees and raise livestock for sale and pleasure.

"the savings and loan flop"

And non-market forces have done wonders fixing it, too...

"gas guzzlers"

And the response to same. See "environment".

"the Great Depression"

And the rampant prosperity of the 90s.

"Paris Hilton"

TAKE off them panties!

"and will soon bring the collapse of the US housing market due to the proliferation of subprime loans."

It's only a "collapse" if you're a seller. Frankly, as a rural dweller who's sick and tired of pretentious city slickers moving into the soybean field [corn this year; thank ethanol] across the road and putting up 3,000 sq' houses and privacy fences that only protect their privacy, and altering the landscpae so that the water table is drained off and my well runs dry in August and stays dry until December, I'm all for a housing slump. Fuck 'em. Stay in the cities. Don't move to the country and kill it.

"...so forgive me if I don't have confidence that 'market forces' are the solution to the country's problems on immigration or anything else."

The free market creates wealth and distributes it widely among the people who live in it. It doesn't distribute it evenly; nothing distributes it evenly, even -- and especially -- economic systems created to do so. But widely. More people have money under capitalism, the money to buy "luxuries", than ever before. That wealth creation is capable of accomplishing many things, depending on the collective priorities of those who hold it. Thus far it's been used for largely selfish reasons -- as might be expected; we are a selfish species. But it doesn't need to be.

If enough people are willing to pay a dollar more to buy a hamburger from the joint in your neighborhood who only hires red, white and blue-blooded Merkans and not from the McDs, who hires whomever fills out the application first, then McDs will close [locally].

Hey, don't laugh. All the Wendy's in my area are bankrupt, except for the one independently owned one.

[nowingker]

Sorry, I'm not buying it.

We got rid of child labor when laws were passed making it illegal.

We got rid of wholesale environmental degradation when laws were passed that put in place rules about record keeping on pollutants.

We changed the laws on how savings and loans were regulated so the same exact flop won't happen again...the next financial flop will be in a new UNREGULATED area like hedge funds.

If we left things to 'market forces' and nothing else we would still be clear cutting old growth forests, spraying everything with DDT, hiring 10 year olds for factory work, tralling the oceawn bottom with 5 mile long nets, and there would be no emissions standards or zoning standards or worker safety standards, ditto on drug and food safety laws.

ALL of these regulations were rejected by industry aka the free market and were imposed by government.

It is to our everlasting shame that the 'free market' has simply outsourced much of the work to countries that have no standards on worker safety, child labor laws, or enviromental laws allowing us to 'feel good' about laws in our own country while still reaping the benefits of cheap imports from countries that have no standards.

Expecting the consumer to ever exert enough influence to make these kinds of changes w/out any government or regulatory support is a fools errand, it will never happen, people individually are too selfish, uniformed and greedy.

[nowingker]

PS,

Double ditto on the exoburbs, that is your free market at work.

Nobody is forcing people to sell their farmland for housing developments, nobody is forcing cities and towns to have liberal zoning laws that allow any and all development that might bring in a tax dollar or to let developers put up crap/substandard/overly dense housing developments OR to fill in wetlands and cut down trees.

The free market on its own is always going to go too far in search of ultimate profit...the free market will take a beautiful area, over develop it with hotels, shops, highways and eventually, it won't be a tourist destiniation any longer and everyone will wonder what happened.

The truth is, people are small minded and greedy, that is what we have a government for, to reign in the greed and stupidity of the masses and slow things down enough for rational deliberation.

[rwilymz]

"Sorry, I'm not buying it."

Doesn't matter. Reality rules.

"We got rid of child labor when laws were passed making it illegal."

How long had it been around? C'mon. Was it born in the shadow of Adam Smith?

Why were laws passed banning it? Because it no longer worked. Doesn't get simpler than that.

You don't get to hop in a Wayback Machine and mix-n-match historical causality to suit your prejudices.

"ALL of these regulations were rejected by industry aka the free market and were imposed by government."

And who were they NOT rejected by?

Come on. Do. The. Math.

They were not rejected by ... Congress.

Who is elected by ... WE THE FUCKING PEOPLE. The ones who have the welath -- and the votes -- to work the system from two ends.

Is it perfect? did it take a while for both
1] us to realize we didn't like certain things, and
2] Congress to realize we were serious
?

No, it's not perfect; yes, it took a while to finally comprehend. But it's the best system yet devised.

"It is to our everlasting shame that the 'free market' has simply outsourced much of the work to countries that have no standards on ..."

Whine whine whine.

How in the hell do you think *we* finally figured it out? What do you think will get the rest of the world to do it?

Not being commanded by self-righteous world-savers, that's for sure.

And, by the way, DDT, in moderation, is one of the best things that's ever happened.

[nowingker]

What do you think will get the rest of the world to do it?
------------

Nothing. As has been said time and time again, the rest of the world doesn't have the same values as the "West" nor do any governments outside of the US and the EU have governments that are robust or transparent enough to make changes.

This idea that capitalism somehow magically creates a middle class everywhere the free market is given free reign doesn't seem born out by post WWII history. Most of the world, having embraced capitalism, is still segregated into the 1-5% with all the money and the 95% living in poverty.

[rwilymz]

"Most of the world, having embraced capitalism, is still segregated into the 1-5% with all the money "

Okay, well, then, they're guaranteed to win.

Wealthy people don't fight. Poor people do.

[IslamoLlama]

"This idea that capitalism somehow magically creates a middle class everywhere the free market is given free reign doesn't seem born out by post WWII history. Most of the world, having embraced capitalism, is still segregated into the 1-5% with all the money and the 95% living in poverty."

It's because the theory is backwards. A middle class makes capitalism possible, but capitalism without a middle class is just rich people trading money while poor people do all the work. Walmart and Best Buy wouldn't exist in a world of $1/hr wages and company stores. Google wouldn't exist in a world where only a million people could afford to own a computer. Simply installing business in a region doesn't magically create trade, but raising the poverty line and creating middle class jobs does create a marketplace to do business.

Dan Riehl style "Capitalists" just pimp mega-corps that rape the economic landscape. Then they scratch their heads and shrug their shoulders when the national economy goes all loopsided.

[nowingker]

Wealthy people don't fight. Poor people do.

------------------------------------------

Really? Is that why both World Wars were started in Europe, which at the time had a higher standard of living than the rest of the world or why we--allegedly the richest country on the planet--started a war with Iraq? You are making the same gross generalizations that you criticize others for.

[rwilymz]

"Really? Is that why both World Wars were started in Europe..."

You don't realize what was going on in the rest of the world?

Wars.

Just not publicized. Because they were "trivial". Unimportant. "Restless natives".

Supply your own dismissive.

[nowingker]

Seems more accurate to say that wars are fought over wealth and that the wealthy, whether individuals or nations are better able to wage war, while the poor can only try for 'revolution.

[Phoenix]

Nowinger - Way up... there is more racism within the black population than in the white... So true. Promulgated non-stop by Jackson and Sharpton whenever they get the chance. I still want to scream about the Imus affair and that coach who had the perfect opportunity to set racism and its pretenders back on their heels for a long time. She should have said something to the effect - 'We're not offended. We know Mr. Imus had no malice towards us. He was just using ghetto-speak thinking it would be funny. My girls and I want him to get his job back.' Because 'We are better than victims.' (I wrote about it here when it happened.)

Nothing to add to the rest other than my town used to have very strict zoning laws. Lots of farm acreage now developed, but one in particular developed huge houses at the edge of town. The development has covenants, but as it turns out, several of the houses house five to six Mexican families. One comes in to buy - the rest follow. Needless to say, those who paid big money to live in a nice neighborhood, nice house, are out of their minds with fury.

Have read that few countries that lived under imperialistic rule are better off after gaining independence. Most devolve. Am reading a book about WWII - fighting in the Pacific theater, and the author made the statement that most islanders would have been far better off had they never known the 'power', mechanistic 'wonders', and riches of the west. He fought there and went back after 35 years. Now I know why The Greatest Generation was also the silent generation. Whew! Heartbreaking.

The book is "Goodbye Darkness" by William Manchester.

[nowingker]

Have read that few countries that lived under imperialistic rule are better off after gaining independence. Most devolve.
-----------------------------------

I agree, look at Africa for god's sake, talk about devolving. But, there wasn't really any template for the repercussions of colonialism or what kind of effect over the long term there would be when migratory, iron age tribal peoples were confronted with an advanced technological society, it seems that cultures that already had some form of top down government, institutions, technology etc. did better--Asia/India--than those that either didn't have any such institutions--Africa--or those where the institutions were completely destroyed--South America/Mexico. Hard to say what exactly happened to the Middle East as far as its culture devolving.

[nowingker]

PS,

I wouldn't take a new construction McMansion in one of those hellish subdivisions if you gave it away to me. I'm all about the pre-war construction, built to last, no short cuts, architectural details, won't fall down the first wind that comes along or start growing mold the first big rain.

[IslamoLlama]

Ah, more softcore hate from the Phoenix. Why oh why does the black person have to get so uppity? That basketball team should have put Jackson and Sharpton in their places by voluntarily moving to the back of the bus.

And how dare those dirty plebs muddy up our proud, beautiful subdivisions? The very idea that a hispanic person can just waltz right in to a neighborhood and buy a house, like he was just another US Citizen? Next thing you know, those brown people are going to want to drink from our waterfountains and swim in our swimming pools. Can you imagine getting into a swimming pool that had a mexican in it? Why, I bet poor Phoenix wouldn't be able to give her house away if the buyer knew there was one of those vile little taco-eaters inside a forty mile stretch. Goodness gracious. You know they all carry lepercy?

[nowingker]

Llama,

What good came out of the Imus debacle? Anyone who had ever listened to Don Imus knows he wasn't a racist, that he had at one time or another slammed every conceivable group and if you listened to the entire exchange it was OBVIOUS that however poorly or in bad taste, they were trying to mimic the hip hop lingo that permeates pop culture.

So, getting Don Imus, who isnt' a racist, who gives away millions to help poor, minority children with health problems, fired from his job most likely in violation of his contract did what? Helped whom? Improved what?

It was a freaking orgy of politcal correctness started by the worst practitioner of race baiting politics in this country: Al Sharpton, who has no credibility on any level. Nevermind now that there are NO LIBERALS at all on talk radio so getting rid of Imus also ceded the airwaves to fucking Rush Limbaugh. Great. Excellent. Smart. Good strategy.

[seekeronos]

Wars are generally fought over power, prestige, or resources. Seldom would it seem that a war would be fought solely to "pump up the economy" (although it does have that effect on the military-industrial complex, I reckon).

The US economy seems big enough today (although this may yet turn out later to be something of a self-deception) to shoulder several concurrent minor wars (and I'll qualify Iraq and A'stan as "small" wars, cf. to WW1, WW2, or even the longer range "Cold War") as we do not spend a more substantial portion of our GDP on guns and ammo and training soldiers as opposed to buying Middle Eastern petrol and cheap trinkets manufactured in Red China or other extremely cheap labour/manufactury pools in the Orient.

To wit, in WW2, we spent upwards of 40% of our GDP on fighting the Axis; today, we are spending not much more than 5%. The (current) war is fought by volunteers, who may come largely from the lower side of the income demographic than average, but who are by no means poor while in the service; I was once such a servicemember during Gulf War 1.

The general trend I've seen is that a free market brings the _most_ value to the ueber rich, it brings a fair amount of value to thhe middle class, and tends to not do too many favours for the poor: trying to support all of the nation's poor would be unprofitable, much less attempting to feed the world.

The middle class tends to support the framework of the free market, and makes it easier for it to exist.

However, the Dickensian vision of a 3.99999 GINI index world where only 60 peopole have 99.999% of the wealth and 6.0 Bn other people share what's left of the remaining 0.00001% is equally untenable, as there would be little growth of such a(n ostensibly) "free" market at that point. It is in the better interest of the free market that the major players show a modicum of restraint in their own avaricious reach for wealth, in order to sustain greater growth, which consequently, should grow the wealth of the middle class more or less proportionately and keep them in the malls and big box stores, as well as the ol' "consumer confidence" index on a high.

And if that degree of self-regulation isn't enough... the West, and particularly the USA, have plenty of checks and regulation against the raw chaos that a truly "Laissez-Faire" free market would result in.

The trouble is balancing those checks so that they (a) do not choke out economic growth thru govt. over interference and (b) do not easily get corrupted, compromised, or bypassed through the collusion of politicians and big businessmen.

[Fred Beloit]

Think you Lefty folks should put Bill Maher on the radio. He is getting to be too ugly for television. It's like the Picture of Dorian Gray IS his face. Rosy would be good also. Joy Behar was on radio talk show for a while in New York. The few people who listened complained about her show and they soon took her off the air.

[seekeronos]

"Nevermind now that there are NO LIBERALS at all on talk radio"

How about Ed Schultz? He's on Sirius, and a few stripes shy of being a Socialist. :P

[seekeronos]

As for the race-baiters, they are of completely no use to thier race.

Generally, the Black race seems to spend as much, if not most, of their time denigrating their own and promoting a popular culture of institutionalized "getting something for nothing", permanent victimhood, thugishness, misogyny, and general cultural regression (along the lines of making the concept of lifting one's self up by their bootstraps and making a success of themselves to be a bad thing, like "becoming like Whitey").

There are a few positive role models for young black men and women out there, but many, many more negative ones who keep propagating a cycle of self-defeat and limited expectations, along with worthless men like Sharpton and Jackson who have effectively leeched away at the Black community's hopes.

I'm not sure, but this may well be something that is rooted in the original tribal culture that lead some African slave-capturing tribes to trade their co-ethnics to Arabian and European slavers; even today, there is a vague sense of tribalism amongst African Americans which race-baiters have tried to alloy via race-hatred toward whites.

We whites of course, tend to fall right along into the trap by acceding to our sense of "white guilt" and political correctness, hoping to "set things straight" for our tragic sin of buying those slaves a long time ago.

Of course, as most of my ancestors were farming potatoes in the Rhineland and being overrun by Napoleon's soldiers - I can't say that I'm overly-whelmed by any sense of this "white guilt", and therefore, I might not be as sympathetic to the largely self-inflicted misfortunes of some folks.

I tend to operate more on the principle of "if you are competent, I'll deal with you as a competent person", and if you are a heel, I'll be more guarded in any dealings I must make with you, rather than simply ruling out interaction by skin colour. That said, that will also be tempered by the realities of not driving unnecessarily through... say, Camden, NJ (supposedly a 75%+ black majority town) at an odd hour to make myself a target for anyone's ill-affections.

Nor would I be thrilled at the next door house being turned into a crack den - but if a black family moves in and they appear to be people just trying to make a living and fit in with the community, then I'll welcome them with open arms.

[Phoenix]

Seek,

"We whites of course, tend to fall right along into the trap by acceding to our sense of "white guilt" and political correctness, hoping to "set things straight" for our tragic sin of buying those slaves a long time ago."

I don't know about this anymore. Some efforts to inflict guilt on people backfires badly. I think this effort has. Everyone can thank Sharpton and Jackson for doing more harm to black people than any white ever did.

This is for Llama and fits into what you said, Seek. If I pay $600K for a house and five Mexican,or Eskimo, or black,or Eurasian,or Chinese,or white American FAMILIES move in next door, I'm pissed. I want to sell my $600K house but no one will buy it because there are 25 PEOPLE living next door in one house.

Dear me. That is sooo racist.

[nowingker]

Oh white guilt is alive and well, thriving even in some areas. Certain enlightened individuals would rather put their children in public schools full of gang members than private schools, they're so enamoured of 'diversity' and afraid of being considered racist. They are the same people who feel sorry for career criminals and are absolutely convinced that the black high school drop out rate is somehow not related to parenting but to white racism. In fact, every Democratic candidate for president is a picture perfect example of white guilt. Why do you think the media doesn't mention race anymore in reporting crime? Do you think its because there has been a shift in who commits inter-racial crime and its no longer young black males? Or that minority neigbhorhoods are no longer the higheset crime areas? Or Don Imus saying nappy headed ho gets as much play as the Iraq war but not a peep about hip hop's glorification of violence, guns, lawlessness and misogyny.

[Correction]

The war on drugs is probably the #1 reason why young black men go to jail at such a higher rate then young white men. Statistically speaking, blacks are much more likely to be poor than whites (although there certainly plenty of whites who are and are being royally screwed by our broken criminal justice system) and thus, less likely to be able to hire a decent lawyer to keep him out of prison. In the suburbs, it's community service. In the 'hood, it's lockdown. Anyone who denies this fact obviously has blinders on (probably the same ones Riehl wears so he can remain in racial harmony la-la land). Even if you aren't concerned about the racial makeup of the INSANE amount of people in prison in the U.S. on nonviolent drug charges, I would assume a civil libertarian at least would be up in arms over the vast amounts of tax dollars wasted to keep people in jail who are only a threat to their country's moral hypocrisy.

Also, Riehl's use of Obama as an example as to why any ol' kid can grow up to be president shows his contempt for his readers' intelligence. Obama-- the son of an AFRICAN man and a white women, raised and brought up in a privileged environment by his grandparents, has lived a life that is a FAR cry from that of the average descendant of slaves, an AFRICAN-AMERICAN. To say that "if Obama can do it anyone can" is dishonest and misleading. He is the exception, not the rule. Public schools in white neighborhoods on average receive WAY more funding than black neighborhoods and it shows on their students' test scores. I'm sure none of this fazes Riehl, though. His explanation for all of this is simply that most blacks are lazy dummies. Actually, that's too kind. Judging by his description of the Katrina victims (who you callin' victim? they brought the storm on themselves!), he probably thinks of them as criminal scum that should be rid off the face of the earth. That makes Riehl kind of a racist, doesn't it? Of course, this would be too un-pc for even Riehl to admit, so he just does what all good conservatives do: deny that racism exists. Genius!

[nowingker]

I agree w/you on the war on drugs, both its disproportionate affect on blacks and its insanity, but not sure you are correct about the $$ spent in white vs. black schools, I believe that on average most urban schools get SIGNIFICANTLY more money from the gov. than suburban schools and that the per capita spending per pupil is much higher in urban schools than suburban ones, it isnt' the $$ spent but how they are spent and who is administering the programs. Also, let's not fool ourselves, a huge number of blacks in prison for drug crimes are ALSO gang members and have also committed violent crimes, which is not the same for the suburban drug users who is doing nothing illegal except chasing his high. Big difference whether you like it or not.

[Purple Mushroom]

This whole race thing is bullshit. It's been class warfare since the dawn of money, and it'll be class warfare till we can all get our own private planets and tell the rest of humanity to screw off.

That said, Seeker raises the bar on "blaming the black man" with his pathetic "all black people are..." line. Statistically speaking, a poor black man and a poor white man (and a poor hispanic/asian/chechnian/whatever man) are all in the same boat. Low wages, bad living conditions, a higher percentage of their wealth going to taxes, and currently no help from the society they help prop up. I mean, I hate to break this to you Seek, but white people make and listen to rape music too. They smoke weed, they do coke, they steal, they cheat, they gamble all their money away, and they generally make a mess of their lives, just like black people.

So, when a conservative talks about tossing civil rights out the window because it's just helping the "black man" who really doesn't need our help anyway, cause he's just too messed up himself, what the general public doesn't realize is that same conservative is dismantling the infrastructure that helps the white man, too. Single mothers don't need welfare - so let's get rid of welfare for everyone. Black people don't need Social Security - let's trash it. We shouldn't be giving asian people scholarship money or educational advances - so make the education system pay-to-play. Too many Mexicans are in our hospitals, so let's close our emergency room doors to anyone who can't put cash down up front.

The beautiful thing about racism is that it's just a means to an end. Play everyone off against each other and rake in the profits.

That said, people like Imus, who makes a living off of getting people pissed off at each other for no reason at all, can blow me. I mean, Jackson/Sharpton can blow me too. But it's hard to feel bad for one when they're all a bunch of whiny wackos.

[rwilymz]

The war on drugs is probably the #1 reason why young black men go to jail at such a higher rate then young white men.

War on drugs ... property crime to support drug habits that are being warred on ... what's the diff, eh?

If it weren't for the misbegotten war on drugs, those property crimes would be okay.

"Even if you aren't concerned about the racial makeup of the INSANE amount of people in prison in the U.S. on nonviolent drug charges"

The "insane" numbers of people in prison on nonviolent drug charges are almost completely confined to federal prison.

"Obama-- the son of an AFRICAN man and a white women, raised and brought up in a privileged environment by his grandparents..."

Yet, if we are to believe the purveyors of "standard racism", being a half-black boy -- and it would've been "boy" -- in "white privilege" doesn't exist.

So which is it? Is racism rampant and unchanged from the 50s? If so, Obama isn't the product of "privilege", white or otherwise.

Is the racism that is continually being harrangued about virtually nonexistant? Then anyone can do it.

In either event, you're arguing circular nonsense.

"Public schools in white neighborhoods on average receive WAY more funding than black neighborhoods and it shows on their students' test scores."

Incorrect. The difference in funding largely goes to such things as olympic-sized swimming pools, and modern track facilities, and skylights. If you'll track the GPAs of those white schools over the course of this whole tempest in a pisspot, you'll notice that the more funding the white schools got the more their GPAs stayed statistically the same.

There comes a point at which more funding does not translate to better grades. At some point, there is "enough" funding to achieve grades, and it becomes a function of:
1] the responsible use of that funding, or
2] parental influence and involvement in the public education.

"I'm sure none of this fazes Riehl, though. His explanation for all of this is simply that most blacks are lazy dummies."

Parents are, most likely.

"he just does what all good conservatives do: deny that racism exists. Genius!"

Or, you could do what all good liberals do: assert that racism not only exists, but it exists in the same form as id did a half century ago, and provide bupkus to support it.

Either way, it's good for entrenching ideology, idnit?

[seekeronos]

"I hate to break this to you Seek, but white people make and listen to rape music too. They smoke weed, they do coke, ... etc. ... and they generally make a mess of their lives, just like black people."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course they do. But even a casual glance at the numbers suggests that the whites so making a mess of themselves tend to be outnumbered significantly by blacks, latinos, and certain sub-groups of Asians (particularly S.E. Asian immigrants and/or their children).

The thing I'm looking at is the cultural influence that propagates certain attitudes: sure, some whites do infuse themselves into the hip-hop/thug/drug culture. And they lose, in the long run. However, there is no race-wide impetus to _stay_ in this state of misery amongs whites, Asians, or Latinos.

A black man has a much harder time of overcoming his circumstances when he has to fight not only against actual injustices against him on account of his racial origin and economic background, but against his own racial culture, the worst of which is epitomized by an attitude of "getting something for nothing" or getting it through sociopathic behavior.

Latinos face a similar situation, but minus the self-destructive cultural inertia. Rather the opposite: they know that if they want to get somewhere, they must work hard for it. Notwithstanding the immigration problem (which is failing to filter to filter criminals from noncriminals as much as restrict the flow of incoming migrants), the Latinos who do come here legally are as much filled with a desire to achieve the American Dream as the next person.

It is similar for Asian migrants here as well - stereotypes notwithstanding, they and especially their children, do very well in America.

Now as for the "war on drugs"... that has turned into a farce, somethng I believe is meant to keep the prison manufactury industry going in some areas, or the towns that are economically dependent upon the jobs provided by the facilities.

Personally, I'd rather see a more progressive system of punishments for minor crimes, sterner punishments (flogging/caning perhaps) for more serious crimes, and the death penalty for the most serious crimes (manslaughter/murder, rape, arson, child predation, etc.)

Empty out the prisons except for those county jails used to hold people (at risk of running away) for trial.

But for the doper or drunk, a thorough beat-down with a cane, or some time in the stocks would go much much further than warehousing him away in a prison to get raped by the more hardened criminals, only for him to be released to do more and greater crimes.

[nowingker]

Why can't we just leave the doper or the drunk alone unless and until they commit a crime OTHER than doing drugs, buying drugs or selling drugs? I have no problem being harsh with the drug addict that robs a house/store to pay for his drugs, but unless he's committing that kind of crime, who cares if he lays in the gutter all day and all night? If he can pay for his drugs or booze and does NOT need to rob or steal to get his drug money, why should we be locking him up? Waste of resources considering there are so many violent criminals out there getting away with it and/or getting early parole or light sentences because the jails are full of coke heads and pot growers.

[nowingker]

The thing I'm looking at is the cultural influence that propagates certain attitudes: sure, some whites do infuse themselves into the hip-hop/thug/drug culture.
-------------

That's true, and we don't know what the sum total negative effects will be on young non blacks, but we DO KNOW that suburban white kids decked out in hip hop regalia listening to rap music are NOT KILLING EACH OTHER over parking spaces, girls at dances or any other minor instance of disrespect.

Statistically speaking, the overwhelming majority of homicides in this country are committed by young black men against other young black men using guns. Period.

Logically, that means that poverty alone isn't the driving force behind violent crime, if that were the case we would see similar percentages of homicides among poor whites as we do among poor blacks and that is simply not the case. What we see is a huge disparity in violent crime committed by blacks vs. any other race, with young African American males committing a disproprortionate share of all violent crimes. That is the reason why there are so many more blacks on death rown and in prison than other races, becuase statistically speaking a larger percentage of the black population is committing violent crime.

Again, logically, it would seem more likely that this is due to a pathology in the black community, since it is replicated in city after city, state after state, Red States and Blue States, the South and the North and the East and the West and not due to racism in the police departments [now with significant numbers of black officers] or the court system.

But, this simple and obvious truth is too painful for African Americans to address head on and comes too close to previous stereotypes of blacks as 'animals' who cannot, as opposed to will not, control their impulses and so, for the most part, its the elephant in the room. Everyone knows where most violent crime occurs, everyone in LE knows who is committing most of these crimes, but nobody wants to look at the cultural component of why poor blacks commit so many more crimes than poor whites/asians/hispanics....its too unsavory to even contemplate that there is more than pure poverty at work.

And so, nothing changes. The situation for poor blacks doesn't improve unless they leave the black community and its violence behind them.

[Phoenix]

Nowinger,

I never figured the 'white guilt' thing as you so graphically described. My first reaction was repulsion at that outrageous stupidity. What goes through people's minds? ugh. I'll admit to some naivete on the issue as I saw little of that when I taught. Though, come to think of it, there were plenty of students home-schooled or sent to our two Christian schools. I'm also not in an urban setting and I am in a red state - right at the line where it turns blue - Northern Virginia. Who knows what goes on now. It's been five years since I left. Probably a good thing. Although, I wouldn't hesitate to teach in a poor, urban school. What a great challenge.

Correction,

Dan is no racist. He uses hyperbole and satirical commentary a lot. Those of us who have been here a long time know that. As for the war on crime, I don't think our government has any intention of winning it. There's a reason they barely control it and I think it has everything to do with money and keeping the underclass 'employed'. As for those imprisoned for minor drug violations - there is the real crime. Stick those guys in the military for four years.

Purple Mushroom,

I don't know about the 'profits' of the conquer & divide mentality of the Sharptons and Jacksons. It's a cost.

I think 'racism' is over-used as most people just get mad at the system - not the people. Look at the fury over the immigration bill. It was not because Mexicans were the subject, it was because the government was giving short shrift to law. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think racism is the cause of everything. It's how we handle people. Using the race card impedes, via PC, the ability to do what's right a lot of the time. We are literally shackeled by PC.

[nowingker]

White guilt is alive and well in Blue America. As far as teaching, a friend of mine taught at an urban public school in the South, young kids 5/6/7 years old, she says that many of her students are dead, she says it was obvious from that age which ones had a chance and which ones didn't, that their parents overwhelmingly were not involved and more interested in doing drugs than dealing with their children or their behavior problems, that the whole intervention was more or less pointless. She finally got tired of it and moved to a private school.

[rwilymz]

"Why can't we just leave the doper or the drunk alone unless and until they commit a crime OTHER than doing drugs"

I'm all for that.

Smoking pot is fine unless you do it in a no smoking section. Drunk driving is fine unless you run over someone.

Harder drugs are fine unless you have to rob people in order to pay for it...

One of the things that's lost is that when local prosecutors and the cops go on drug-enforcement binges, the side effect of that is that they reduce street and property crime.

As the other whiner said: in the suburbs they get community service. And yes they do. Because in the suburbs, they support their drug habits by working for wage. In the inner city they support their drugs habits largely by dealing, or by prostitution [which is a legal activity made illegal by the transference of money], or by street and property crime.

[nowingker]

You're wrong, at least in my experience. For example, the City of Boston spends more per pupil than almost any other city in the state, including cities like Brookline, Newton and Cohasset, full of rich, white people.

How? They get A LOT of federal and state money to offset the property tax base.

I suspect if you compared $$ per pupil for NYC public school children vs. Westchester or Purchase you would find exactly the same thing...the raw $$ figure is higher in NYC than in these leafy, rich suburbs because of all the grant money, etc.

It is NOT an issue of money, we've tried waiving a magic money wand over the public schools for 40 freaking years and gotten nowhere.

[nowingker]

PS,

It is VERY VERY disingenious to bring up a supreme court case from 1973, we've had 30 years of block grants, federal grants, state grants, special education grants, diversity grants and every other kind of grant you can think of to address the raw $$ disparity based on property tax.

[nowingker]

But those numbers are three years old. The regional per-pupil spending average has jumped to $18,901 in the current school year.

Next year, as Gov. Eliot Spitzer's big boost in state aid kicks in, the average spending per student is projected to go even higher, to $20,334 across the region.

---------------------

I can guarantee you that if someone gave me $20K per student per year I could get them college ready. That is a ridiculous amount of money considering that NY is nowhere near the top in graduation rates or test scores.

MONEY is not the problem with the public schools, that has been the easy answer, like everything else in America, we throw money at the problem.

The problem with inner city schools is not the schools, the text books, the teachers, the per pupil spending rate or the crime rate it is the PARENTS who do not take an interest in their children's education and do not consider graduating from H.S. as anything important, let alone getting good grades or studying. Certainly, it is exacerbated by the fact that any family who does care about education is going to get their child into a charter school or try for a scholarship to a private school and so the inner city is left with the most troublesome, least intelligent, least motivated....that is why they get so much extra money from the government and they appear to piss it away on administration costs and programs that have no discernable value.

The public schools today are like welfare was before reform in the 1990s....a ton of vested interests that cry and scream about how necessary it is and the terrible consequences of making a change and expecting people to perform in any way, who are wedded to a system that fails on every metric.

What we have been doing since the 1970s has failed, totally, miserably and that includes desegregation and affirmative action as well as the proliferation of special needs crapola for students who are not, in reality, special needs just difficult. We need a wholesale change of philosophy in the public schools that starts with money for results and nothing else and ends with the reality that not every student belongs in college or will succeed at college, some belong in vocational programs or prograsm to teach them business support skills that will lift them out of the service sector.

However, until the parents bother to make their kids attend school and study not even a solid gold classroom and teacher for every student will solve the problem.