Monday, April 30, 2012
Friday, April 27, 2012
Texas Systematically Removing Black Males From Public Schools
African Americans have traditionally valued and reinforced the importance of education, but recent generations serve to show the opposite. Not to abrogate personal responsibility for the lack of many African Americans noting the significance of reading and math, or even having a semblance of comprehension of the economic crisis confronting the nation, the reality is that young African American males are disproportionately the target of systematic forms of exclusion. The state of Texas provides a prime example of this and is a general reflection of practices prevalent across the nation.
The Council of States Government Justice Center just released a report on outcomes of disciplinary procedures in the school systems across the state of Texas. The results are alarming. In Texas, 6 out of 10 students across the state were suspended or expelled at least once between seventh and 12th grades. Specifically, African Americans, other minorities and students with disabilities were statistically more likely to be removed from class than white students.
More problematic was the observation that approximately 83 percent of African American males had at least one suspension or expulsion and were more often given harsher out-of-school suspensions, compared to in-school suspensions, even for their first infraction. This was the case despite the fact that larger studies with representative samples provided evidence that African American students are no more or less likely to commit offenses that require their removal from school.
When such practices are unchecked, they contribute negatively to the community in general, often resulting in African American males being held back and more likely to end up involved with the criminal justice system, especially during the year such suspensions occur.
Yes, the school systems are not servicing the needs of African American males as effectively as other ethnic groups. Many years ago, a black man who knew how to read was a threat to mainstream America, and during slavery such a skill was punishable by death. Now, education is no longer considered as a valuable, revolutionary act and we eventually victimize ourselves, just as much as the school systems our students attend.
The Council of States Government Justice Center just released a report on outcomes of disciplinary procedures in the school systems across the state of Texas. The results are alarming. In Texas, 6 out of 10 students across the state were suspended or expelled at least once between seventh and 12th grades. Specifically, African Americans, other minorities and students with disabilities were statistically more likely to be removed from class than white students.
More problematic was the observation that approximately 83 percent of African American males had at least one suspension or expulsion and were more often given harsher out-of-school suspensions, compared to in-school suspensions, even for their first infraction. This was the case despite the fact that larger studies with representative samples provided evidence that African American students are no more or less likely to commit offenses that require their removal from school.
When such practices are unchecked, they contribute negatively to the community in general, often resulting in African American males being held back and more likely to end up involved with the criminal justice system, especially during the year such suspensions occur.
Yes, the school systems are not servicing the needs of African American males as effectively as other ethnic groups. Many years ago, a black man who knew how to read was a threat to mainstream America, and during slavery such a skill was punishable by death. Now, education is no longer considered as a valuable, revolutionary act and we eventually victimize ourselves, just as much as the school systems our students attend.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Will our Next War Be in the South Pacific With China?
Okay, I didn’t want to but I feel as if it is my duty. Reason waits for no one to present timely analysis in a world in which billions of dollars are spent to wage war on emotions such as terrorism in places like Somalia alone, when poverty continues to expand and metastasize by leaps and bounds her at home. Nor could I wait for common televised media outlets to present breaking news, seeing they are two days behind print media, which is two days behind the internet. Not to mention it is obvious the
televised media’s goal is identical to the rule of oppression, based on the incessant rash of treatments inundated with coverage of George Zimmerman, the secret service and any one of several reality shows purporting to display talent, it is unthinkable that the presentation of actual news content is important or possible.
televised media’s goal is identical to the rule of oppression, based on the incessant rash of treatments inundated with coverage of George Zimmerman, the secret service and any one of several reality shows purporting to display talent, it is unthinkable that the presentation of actual news content is important or possible.
What am I speaking of, well it deals with China and the Philippines and a possible new war on the horizon between the US and China. I have been leery of this possibility for sometimes. Specifically ever since President Obama decided to ramp up U.S. alliances and bases across Asia and in the Pacific. The President basically asserted that the US start to focus on Asian security risks including China and North Korea, which have over the past decade taken a back seat to Iraq and Afghanistan. From this perspective, the United States will maintain large bases in Japan and South Korea and deploy U.S. Marines, navy ships and aircraft to Australia's Northern Territory. It also deals with, if necessary, to be in a position to counter possible efforts by China and Iran to block U.S. capabilities in areas like the South China Sea and the Strait of Hormuz. In essence, this was Obama’s presentation at a special trip to the Pentagon this past January. It was basically his post-Iraq, post-Afghanistan defense strategy.
During his Asian tour, Obama signaled the opening of a military base in Darwin and possibly one in the Philippines. Although we have solid ballistic missile defense co-operation with Japan is well advanced, this has more to do with North Korea and China.
Now things are increasingly becoming more on edge. Just this week the Philippines announced it would be seeking add
itional US military help during top-level talks next week, as it becomes more involved with China over a territorial dispute. Calling on a treaty signed in 1951, Philippines Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario indicated the desire for United States to help it achieve a “credible” defense system. The treaty calls on both sides to come to each other’s aid in times of external attacks. Currently the island nation is in disagreement with Beijing over rival claims to the West Philippines Sea (South China Sea). China claims all of the West Philippine Sea as a historic part of its territory, even waters close to the coasts of the Philippines.
Over the past few weeks, armed vessels from the Philippines and China have faced off at the Scarborough Shoal. The consequences for the US if this occurs would be another undeclared war we would be dragged into; especially if Manila gets its way and obtains the coast guard vessel and F-16 fighter jets it recently requested. The Philippines is leading a push within the 10-member Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) to take a united stand over regional maritime disputes, including the Spratly Islands, an archipelago in one of the world’s busiest stretches of water.
Then there are other geopolitical concerns involved. The Philippines' Malampaya and Camago fields are estimated to hold 4.4 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and are in waters currently claimed by China. To top it off, as you read this, the US and the Philippines are engaged in annual joint military exercises that have involved 4,500 U.S. soldiers and 2,500 from the Philippines.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced these intentions a week before the start of April, which he said showed US commitment to the strategically vital Asia-Pacific region. But such was in the work as early as last December when the Obama Administration signaled plans for the deployment of 2,500 Marines to Darwin, Australia. Darwin is also an intriguing choice since it is part of a growing energy hub where companies including Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSA) are planning to spend more than a $150 billion ($156 billion) to develop offshore natural gas fields.
Given all of the aforementioned, it may not be farfetched to suggest a possible future military conflict with China. Already the Chinese state media has advanced that President Barack Obama is doing all of this to distract from US economic woes, which is logical seeing that the Pentagon is placing more troops in the region than at any time since World War II, with military outpost surrounding all of China’s eastern border (the U.S. is sending 4,700 Marines to Guam, creating the largest deployment of troops to the Pacific since World War II). Meanwhile, China is rapidly expanding its naval power and increasing its presence in the South China Sea.
/div>
Moreover, an ironic observation is that China is also increasing its naval power and their new the refurbished Soviet aircraft carrier Varyag is almost fully operational. In concert with a new seaport being built by the Philippine government in the Spratly islands, in which such would be the first step in creating a mini-naval base for U.S. and Philippine troops, we could see more action sooner than later. In particular with Vietnam and the Philippines beginning to develop stronger military ties with the US.
Last year Chinese ships confronted a Philippine oil-exploration ship as well as cut a Vietnamese oil-exploration vessel’s survey cable. In response, Vietnam later conducted a live-fire naval drill in the area. China has also expressed its concerns over statements made by the US chief of naval operations, Admiral Jonathan Greenert, that China’s rising capability could limit US access to the South China Sea and that Washington would continue its efforts to ensure freedom of navigation there. The comments were interpreted by some observers as confirming that the US has sided with the ASEAN claimants.
The installation in the Spratly islands could also be used as a jumping-off point for counterterrorism operations in the Palawan region of the southern Philippines. The area is home to the Abu Sayyaf, an Islamic terror groups with ties to al Qaeda. Some early reports from France suggest the new facility on Pagasa Island will be the new home for thousands of U.S. Marines scheduled to leave Okinawa within the next two years.
All of this sounds similar, a military buildup in the name of counter acting emotion in the name of terrorism; making enemies we don’t need, with a nation that hold the largest portion of U.S. debt, 68 cents for every dollar or about $10 trillion; and a currency battle that is still in the frying pan, all makes sense to me – our next war will probably in the South Pacific.
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
FBI and Reporters Team to Solve Murders during Civil Rights Era
It is not often that we can look at the Martin
Luther King Jr. celebration within the context of crime. However, there still are many unsolved
murders that occurred during the civil rights era that remain. In 2007, the FBI presented a list of unsolved civil rights murders that they were going to re-open and investigate.
In fact, they have released the names of some of the victims of murders that occurred before
1969. This includes more than 100 unsolved murder cases
are under review through the Civil Rights
Era Cold Case Initiative, a 2007
partnership between the FBI, civil
rights groups, and federal, state and
local law enforcement agencies.
At the end of
last year, The
FBI reopened investigations into three more Alabama slayings from the 1960s,
including one case involving a former state trooper charged in 2007 with
another civil-rights era murder.
The cases included the May 1966 killing of a black motorist at the Alabaster police station by James Bonard Fowler,
the former trooper charged in 2007 with two counts of murder in the 1965 shooting of Jimmie Lee Jackson in Marion and the September 1963 shooting by Birmingham police officer Jack Parker
of a black teenager on the day of the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church bombing.
Now a writer for a small Louisiana Newspaper has
revealed information that may lead to the arrest and conviction in the
arson/murder of Frank Morris on December 10, 1964 in Ferriday, LA. Morris was a business owner who allegedly was
the target of the Ku Klux Klan. Stanley Nelson, a writer for the Concordia
Sentinel has uncovered that a Richland Parish truck driver who was a member of
the Ku Klux Klan told them he participated in the arson that killed Frank
Morris. In total, three people including the suspects’ son and truck drivers
former wife have provided credible eyewitness report s that placed the truck
driver at the scene of the arson when the fire was ignited more than 46 years
ago. The suspect, Arthur Leonard
Spencer, 71, of Rayville. Has yet to be
charged but is expected to be targeted by FBI soon.
Monday, April 23, 2012
America: Where Pulling a Thomas Jefferson Isn’t As Bad as Tiger Woods
Now I must admit that democrats are not immune to
this, just ask former Presidential candidate John Edwards. But if it is not
political affiliation, one thing certainly stands out, is that the treatment the
aforementioned have received for their foibles was not as severe as the
ridicule thrown at professional golfer Tiger Woods, who did not even have a
child out of wedlock.
This seems to be rather inconsistent. When Woods admitted his cheating ways,
everyone, in particular mainstream media threw everything at him including the
proverbial “kitchen sink.” But Governor Schwarzenegger
has yet to be vilified, which brings me to ask if race has anything to do with
this?
On the surface I would say yes, and would add that
it seems athletes seem to be held to a higher moral standard for playing a game
than politicians who deal with the overt needs of their electorate. It is as if
famous white men are given a pass for behavior that would condemn a black man
of equal status and fame. The problem is the blatant difference with which
Wood’s family issues were paraded across the media and how many of these same
outlets are intentionally not speaking out against Schwarzenegger.
It is obvious that this
double standard will continue and that African American men will, from this
nation’s history of perceiving us as being less than human, always be held to a
higher standard than white Anglo Saxon Protestants, even if they hail from
Austria.
Saturday, April 21, 2012
GOP Morality is Stuck Between $100 Bills
A few months ago on the camp
aign trail, while giving a television interview following his Florida primary win, Presumptive Presidential Candidate Willard “Mitt” Romney said: ''I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there.''
Although many considered this a gaff, it is more reflective of republicans than many – including those in the GOP would like to believe. It is not by accident that they GOP consistently try and place the growing poverty across America at the feet of President Barack Obama. However, it will be hard for them to abrogate themselves from the fact that the most impoverished states in the nation are places like Mississippi, South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia, Louisiana, Alabama and North Carolina – all solidly republican strongholds and under GOP executive leadership.
It is clear that poverty is not a concern for the GOP but as well that it provides target practice for their political folly. Across the nation, like bungie jumping in the past, GOP are excited with the unmitigated expectation of passing or trying to pass legislation on immigration, drug testing for welfare reform and voting ID restrictions. None of which do anything to improve the US economy or grow jobs. As if the GOP want to be known for being the bullies of the poor and struggling. Just this past January, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett indicated that he was formulating plans to start restricting eligibility to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program via an “asset test” that would mandate that anyone under 60 years old with savings of more than $2,000 would no longer be eligible for assistance. In Iowa, GOP senators have proposed that people submit to drug testing before they can receive their unemployment checks. They also wanted to force those collecting from state welfare programs to undergo drug tests. A measure introduced by Iowa State Sen. Mark Chelgren that would have required parents receiving child support to submit to drug tests at the request of the person making the payments was just defeated.
In Arizona, the Senate passed a measure that would require the jobless to pee in cups in order to receive unemployment insurance, along with more than a dozen other GOP dominated states which have also considered unemployment drug testing laws. Florida Gov. Rick Scott was one of the first to sign such a law into place, requiring drug testing for welfare benefits.
Republicans in Oklahoma and Georgia have also passed similar laws that force welfare recipients to take a drug test, but both voted against amendments that would require state elected political figures to be required to take drug test to receive their payment. Add to the fact that according to the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 1973gg-5(a), (b)) which mandates that states must register all eligible welfare applicants to vote, the state of Georgia were not weren’t giving welfare applicants/recipients access to voter-registration materials as required by federal law. As a consequence, the state was recently forced to settle a law suit that demonstrated that “Shortly after Congress passed the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, Georgia reported getting 100,000 registration applications in a two-year period. In 2010, just 4,430 registered while the state was getting nearly 70,000 Food Stamp applications each month.”
In Florida, since the law requires that applicants who pass the test be reimbursed for the cost, an average of $30, the cost to the state was $118,140 - more than would have been paid out in benefits to the people who failed the test. I just don’t get it. The GOP put in place laws that punish the less fortunate for the benefit of a few, which happen to be mainly fellow republicans. The middle and lower classes in America, of which the GOP do not belong, have had it the hardest, regardless of race, creed or political affiliation. Increasingly, gains in income are mostly concentrated at the top; Based on 2010 data, 37 percent of all income gains went to the top 0.01 percent of all income earners and 56 percent of all income gains went to the rest of the top 1 percent. Only 7 percent of all income gains went to the bottom 99 percent.
According to Forbes, the 400 wealthiest Americans have more wealth than the bottom 150 million Americans combined. Not to forget that the wealthiest 1 percent of all Americans own more wealth than the bottom 95 percent combined compared to the 50 percent of all Americans collectively own just 2.5% of all the wealth in the United States. How can someone say they desire to save cost but produce and implement programs that increase cost and tend to punish the poor and children in particular? If they want to do something test the cooperate executives who get more state and federal money than average citizens. About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs compared to $92 billion on corporate subsidies annually. Meaning that the Federal and state governments spent 50% more on corporate welfare than on food stamps or any other social assistance programs combined.
The reason Romney is the likely challenger to Barack Obama is because he is out of touch with the average person and reflects the best interest of corporate plutocrats (something Obama does well also). America's poverty rate is now 15.1 percent (the worst since 1993), with over 46 million people are living in poverty, 2.6 million more than in 2009. Republicans have to understand that folk don’t become poor at the drop of a dime and that drug testing and doing all you can to disenfranchise the people via voting, starving children and abrogating access to health care is a no win for America.
Romney is the face of new American Republicanism. On welfare and regulation, Romney said, “Dependency is culture killing.” In his autobiography, asserts that women should have a choice to work or to stay at home with the kids but makes it luminous that the same is not true for poor women who receive government assistance. Romney states this inconsistency suggesting that poor women should work. His desire is to “increase the work requirement” for mothers who receive welfare. In his book “No Apology: The Case For American Greatness” Romney suggest that the children of “nonworking parents” will grow up to have “an indolent and unproductive life” when their mothers do not work. Strange, since a reduction of his argument would proffer the query, if mothers on welfare produce “indolent and unproductive” children, if they do not work, then why doesn’t the same hold true for women such as Romney’s wife Ann?
Yes Romney is the poster child for basic republican beliefs that suggest people are poor because they are lazy and don’t work hard when the reality is that poor people aren't lazy and on average work longer and harder the most republicans. I don’t think anyone in the GOP can work a field like the immigrants they are targeting and desire to leave the country. I’m sure they would have a hard time delivering packages like delivery personnel and would know what to do If they had to work 40 hours a week. Only in politics can you play golf all day, get paid, drink with lobbyist and get paid, And work only 3 days a week and get paid a full salary.
Maybe Kanye West was a little off when he said George Bush didn’t like black people. However it may be another thing all together and more accurate to suggest that the GOP has no affinity for the poor. Across the nation, Republican legislators via their actions indicate that they value their corporate affiliates more than families. The push for being against contraception and abortion but are nowhere to be found when it comes to a desire to take care of the children produced as a consequence of right to life policies. Instead they punish and criminalize those who bring the very life into the world they fought to protect.That’s what I describe as the GOP morality, a morality that is stuck between stacks of hundred bills.
Although many considered this a gaff, it is more reflective of republicans than many – including those in the GOP would like to believe. It is not by accident that they GOP consistently try and place the growing poverty across America at the feet of President Barack Obama. However, it will be hard for them to abrogate themselves from the fact that the most impoverished states in the nation are places like Mississippi, South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia, Louisiana, Alabama and North Carolina – all solidly republican strongholds and under GOP executive leadership.
It is clear that poverty is not a concern for the GOP but as well that it provides target practice for their political folly. Across the nation, like bungie jumping in the past, GOP are excited with the unmitigated expectation of passing or trying to pass legislation on immigration, drug testing for welfare reform and voting ID restrictions. None of which do anything to improve the US economy or grow jobs. As if the GOP want to be known for being the bullies of the poor and struggling. Just this past January, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett indicated that he was formulating plans to start restricting eligibility to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program via an “asset test” that would mandate that anyone under 60 years old with savings of more than $2,000 would no longer be eligible for assistance. In Iowa, GOP senators have proposed that people submit to drug testing before they can receive their unemployment checks. They also wanted to force those collecting from state welfare programs to undergo drug tests. A measure introduced by Iowa State Sen. Mark Chelgren that would have required parents receiving child support to submit to drug tests at the request of the person making the payments was just defeated.
In Arizona, the Senate passed a measure that would require the jobless to pee in cups in order to receive unemployment insurance, along with more than a dozen other GOP dominated states which have also considered unemployment drug testing laws. Florida Gov. Rick Scott was one of the first to sign such a law into place, requiring drug testing for welfare benefits.
Republicans in Oklahoma and Georgia have also passed similar laws that force welfare recipients to take a drug test, but both voted against amendments that would require state elected political figures to be required to take drug test to receive their payment. Add to the fact that according to the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 1973gg-5(a), (b)) which mandates that states must register all eligible welfare applicants to vote, the state of Georgia were not weren’t giving welfare applicants/recipients access to voter-registration materials as required by federal law. As a consequence, the state was recently forced to settle a law suit that demonstrated that “Shortly after Congress passed the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, Georgia reported getting 100,000 registration applications in a two-year period. In 2010, just 4,430 registered while the state was getting nearly 70,000 Food Stamp applications each month.”
In Florida, since the law requires that applicants who pass the test be reimbursed for the cost, an average of $30, the cost to the state was $118,140 - more than would have been paid out in benefits to the people who failed the test. I just don’t get it. The GOP put in place laws that punish the less fortunate for the benefit of a few, which happen to be mainly fellow republicans. The middle and lower classes in America, of which the GOP do not belong, have had it the hardest, regardless of race, creed or political affiliation. Increasingly, gains in income are mostly concentrated at the top; Based on 2010 data, 37 percent of all income gains went to the top 0.01 percent of all income earners and 56 percent of all income gains went to the rest of the top 1 percent. Only 7 percent of all income gains went to the bottom 99 percent.
According to Forbes, the 400 wealthiest Americans have more wealth than the bottom 150 million Americans combined. Not to forget that the wealthiest 1 percent of all Americans own more wealth than the bottom 95 percent combined compared to the 50 percent of all Americans collectively own just 2.5% of all the wealth in the United States. How can someone say they desire to save cost but produce and implement programs that increase cost and tend to punish the poor and children in particular? If they want to do something test the cooperate executives who get more state and federal money than average citizens. About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs compared to $92 billion on corporate subsidies annually. Meaning that the Federal and state governments spent 50% more on corporate welfare than on food stamps or any other social assistance programs combined.
The reason Romney is the likely challenger to Barack Obama is because he is out of touch with the average person and reflects the best interest of corporate plutocrats (something Obama does well also). America's poverty rate is now 15.1 percent (the worst since 1993), with over 46 million people are living in poverty, 2.6 million more than in 2009. Republicans have to understand that folk don’t become poor at the drop of a dime and that drug testing and doing all you can to disenfranchise the people via voting, starving children and abrogating access to health care is a no win for America.
Romney is the face of new American Republicanism. On welfare and regulation, Romney said, “Dependency is culture killing.” In his autobiography, asserts that women should have a choice to work or to stay at home with the kids but makes it luminous that the same is not true for poor women who receive government assistance. Romney states this inconsistency suggesting that poor women should work. His desire is to “increase the work requirement” for mothers who receive welfare. In his book “No Apology: The Case For American Greatness” Romney suggest that the children of “nonworking parents” will grow up to have “an indolent and unproductive life” when their mothers do not work. Strange, since a reduction of his argument would proffer the query, if mothers on welfare produce “indolent and unproductive” children, if they do not work, then why doesn’t the same hold true for women such as Romney’s wife Ann?
Yes Romney is the poster child for basic republican beliefs that suggest people are poor because they are lazy and don’t work hard when the reality is that poor people aren't lazy and on average work longer and harder the most republicans. I don’t think anyone in the GOP can work a field like the immigrants they are targeting and desire to leave the country. I’m sure they would have a hard time delivering packages like delivery personnel and would know what to do If they had to work 40 hours a week. Only in politics can you play golf all day, get paid, drink with lobbyist and get paid, And work only 3 days a week and get paid a full salary.
Maybe Kanye West was a little off when he said George Bush didn’t like black people. However it may be another thing all together and more accurate to suggest that the GOP has no affinity for the poor. Across the nation, Republican legislators via their actions indicate that they value their corporate affiliates more than families. The push for being against contraception and abortion but are nowhere to be found when it comes to a desire to take care of the children produced as a consequence of right to life policies. Instead they punish and criminalize those who bring the very life into the world they fought to protect.That’s what I describe as the GOP morality, a morality that is stuck between stacks of hundred bills.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)