|
Banned
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
The only interesting issue to me are the apologists hypocrisy.
If a Republican hung out with a white supremacist of the same flavor he wouldn't stand a chance of surviving politically. If it were to happen after an election, the same people saying its not a big deal in Obama's case would be calling for his resignation, loudly.
|
Pssst....Ustwo, I've got plenty of support for my opinion that the republican party is the party of white supremacists.....in this era....non-stop since Saint Ronald was our national leader.....and according to the late Lee Atwater, back into the 1950's:
Quote:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/17532.html
Was campaigning against voter fraud a Republican ploy?
By Greg Gordon | McClatchy Newspapers
* Posted on Sunday, July 1, 2007
........Rogers, a former general counsel to the New Mexico Republican Party and a candidate to replace Iglesias, is among a number of well-connected GOP partisans whose work with the legislative fund and a sister group played a significant role in the party's effort to retain control of Congress in the 2006 election.
That strategy, which presidential adviser Karl Rove alluded to in an April 2006 speech to the Republican National Lawyers Association, sought to scrutinize voter registration records, win passage of tougher ID laws and challenge the legitimacy of voters considered likely to vote Democratic.
McClatchy Newspapers has found that this election strategy was active on at least three fronts:
* Tax-exempt groups such as the American Center and
the Lawyers Association
were deployed in battleground states to press for restrictive ID laws and oversee balloting.
<h3>* The Justice Department's Civil Rights Division turned traditional voting rights enforcement upside down with legal policies that narrowed rather than protected the rights of minorities.</h3>
* The White House and the Justice Department encouraged selected U.S. attorneys to bring voter fraud prosecutions, despite studies showing that election fraud isn't a widespread problem.
Nowhere was the breadth of these actions more obvious than at the American Center for Voting Rights and its legislative fund.
Public records show that the two nonprofits were active in at least nine states. They hired high-priced lawyers to write court briefs, issued news releases declaring key cities "hot spots" for voter fraud and hired lobbyists in Missouri and Pennsylvania to win support for photo ID laws. In each of those states, the center released polls that it claimed found that minorities prefer tougher ID laws.
Armed with $1.5 million in combined funding, the two nonprofits attracted some powerful volunteers and a cadre of high-priced lawyers.
Of the 15 individuals affiliated with the two groups, at least seven are members of
the Republican National Lawyers Association
, and half a dozen have worked for either one Bush election campaign or for
the Republican National Committee.
Alex Vogel, a former RNC lawyer whose consulting firm was paid $75,000 for several months' service as the center’s executive director, said the funding came from private donors, not from the Republican Party.
One target of the American Center was the liberal-leaning voter registration group called Project Vote, a GOP nemesis that registered 1.5 million voters in 2004 and 2006. The center trumpeted allegations that Project Vote's main contractor, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), submitted phony registration forms to boost Democratic voting.
In a controversial move, the interim U.S. attorney in Kansas City announced indictments against four ACORN workers five days before the 2006 election, despite the fact that Justice Department policy discourages such action close to an election. Acorn officials had notified the federal officials when they noticed the doctored forms.
"Their job was to confuse the public about voter fraud and offer bogus solutions to the problem," said Michael Slater
, the deputy director of Project Vote, "And like the Tobacco Institute, they relied on deception and faulty research to advance the interests of their clients."
<h3>Mark "Thor" Hearne, a St. Louis lawyer and former national counsel for President Bush's 2004 reelection campaign, is widely considered the driving force behind the organizations.</h3> Vogel described him as "clearly the one in charge."
Hearne, who also was a vice president and director of election operations for the Republican Lawyers Association
, said he couldn't discuss the organizations because they're former clients.....
|
Quote:
http://newsroom.bankofamerica.com/in...eches&item=138
Remarks at the Governor's Emerging Issues Forum
Hugh L. McColl, Jr., Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Bank of America
Remarks at the Governor's Emerging Issues Forum
Hugh L. McColl, Jr., Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Bank of America
“What Is, and What We Hope For”
February 24, 2000
Raleigh, North Carolina
...Finally, I'd like to say a few words about why diversity matters ... and how racial discord continues to haunt our children's educational experience.
I believe public school desegregation was the single most important step we've taken in this century to help our children. Almost immediately after we integrated our schools, the Southern economy took off like a wildfire in the wind. I believe integration made the difference. Integration -- and the diversity it began to nourish -- became a source of economic, cultural and community strength.
That said, our experience with desegregation has not been entirely without struggles, missteps and bad feelings......
....In Charlotte, we recently reopened these wounds in our court case on busing. In that case, some argued that the benefits of neighborhood schools now outweigh the benefits of racially diverse classrooms. Others argued that de facto "separate but equal" schools are inherently unjust, and that busing should continue. No one argues that neighborhood schools are inherently bad. Nor does anyone argue that diversity is inherently bad. But we seem resigned to the idea that we can't have both.
This is what I want to know: if diversity is such a great thing, why do we put the burden on our children to achieve it? Why should a seven-year-old sit on a bus for 45 minutes to go to school in the name of diversity when the adults in her life won't buy a home in a racially or economically diverse neighborhood? Is diversity more important for children than for adults?
These are questions we must ask ourselves, and, frankly, I don't think the economic excuse holds water. Sure, our neighbors at the very bottom of the ladder have limited choices about where to live. <h3>But the rest of us segregate ourselves at every income level.</h3>
My own judgment is that diversity is vitally important, and that <h3>we should continue busing as long as it is the only way to achieve diverse schools.</h3> But I also believe that when adults choose to self-segregate based on race, our rhetoric rings hollow, and we reveal ourselves to be less enlightened than we think.....
|
Back in 1984, here was "Ron the uniter", declaring the exact opposite of what BofA CEO McColl said, above:
Quote:
http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archive...84/100884a.htm
Remarks at a Reagan-Bush Rally in Charlotte, North Carolina
October 8, 1984
The President. Thank you all very much.
Audience. Reagan! Reagan! Reagan! ......
....They favor busing that takes innocent children out of the neighborhood school and makes them pawns in a social experiment that
nobody wants. We've found out it failed. I don't call that compassion....
|
Quote:
http://openweb.tvnews.vanderbilt.edu...-20-CBS-7.html
CBS Evening News for Monday, Apr 20, 1981
Headline: Charlotte / Busing
Abstract: (Studio) Report introduced
REPORTER: Dan Rather
(Charlotte, North Carolina) Success of busing for school desegregation here examined. <h3>[November 11, 1980, Ronald REAGAN - calls
busing a failure.]</h3> Beginning of busing concept for United States recalled occurring here; details given. [1971 school board member
Jane SCOTT - thinks city was committed to making it work.] [Civil rights attorney Julius CHAMBERS - praises leaders] Current
situation outlined; carryover of busing into integration of neighborhoods noted. [William POE - thinks city has adjusted well.]
Poe's opposition to busing 10 years ago recalled. [POE - praises program.] Continued hope of antibusing proponents discussed.
[Senator Jesse HELMS - calls busing a folly.] [Dr. Carlton WATKINS - responds.]
REPORTER: Ed Rabel (WBTV file film)
|
Quote:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...57C0A964958260
Busing Is Abandoned Even in Charlotte
By PETER APPLEBOME,
Published: April 15, 1992
...Charlotte, or the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, as the city-county district is known, holds a distinctive place in American public education. During two decades when court-ordered busing was fiercely opposed in many places, this was a community that took enormous pride in the racial harmony and integrated schools that its busing produced.
Dead Silence for Reagan
"I remember when Ronald Reagan made a speech here and described busing as a social experiment that has not worked, and he was met with dead silence," said Jay M. Robinson, the school superintendent from 1976-86. "What happened in Charlotte became a matter of community pride." ...
|
Quote:
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,951327,00.html
Monday, Oct. 22, 1984
Charms and Maledictions
By LANCE MORROW
After Louisville, a national pageant takes on new possibilities
Searching for a street-level reading of the nation 's political mood, and the nuances of its shifts, Senior Writer Lance Morrow traveled with the Reagan and Mondale campaigns for 2½ weeks, before and after the presidential debate. His report:
...It was not merely that Mondale was something of a lusterless and dispiriting alternative to a personally popular sitting President in a period of peace and economic recovery. A more mysterious and complex process was occurring in the American psyche. Americans considered Mondale with a merciless objectivity. But many of them came to absorb Ronald Reagan in an entirely different and subjective manner. They internalized him. In recent months, Reagan found his way onto a different plane of the American mind, a mythic plane. He became not just a politician, not just a President, but very nearly an American apotheosis. The Gipper as Sun King.
A dispassionate witness may say that it was all done with mirrors and manipulation, with artfully patriotic rhetoric and Olympic imagery, the Wizard of Oz working the illusion machine. But that does not entirely do credit to the phenomenon. In an extraordinary way, Reagan came in some subconscious realms to be not just the leader of America but the embodiment of it. "America is back," he announced with a bright, triumphant eye. Back from where? Back from Viet Nam, perhaps, and Watergate and the sexual revolution and all the other tarnishing historical uncleannesses that deprived America of her virtue and innocence.
Partly by accident of timing, partly by a kind of simple genius of his being, Reagan managed to return to Americans something extremely precious to them: a sense of their own virtue. Reagan-completely American, uncomplicated, forward-looking, honest, self-deprecating- became American innocence in a 73-year-old body. (The American sense of innocence and virtue does not always strike the world as a shining and benign quality, of course.)
Whatever the reasons, the campaign of 1984 did not stack up exactly as an equitable contest. Until last week, Reagan's aura purchased him surprising immunities. The polls showed a majority of Americans disagreeing with him on specific issues but planning to vote for him anyway.
Not long ago, Reagan went to Bowling Green State University for a political appearance that looked and sounded like every Big Ten pep rally of the past 20 years compacted into an instant. Reagan's helicopter, deus ex machina again, fluttered down onto the grass outside, visible to the waiting crowd through a great window, and the students erupted in an ear-splitting roar, waving their Greek fraternity letters on placards. REBUILDING AN AMERICA THAT ONCE WAS, said one sign. <h3>The young these days seem prone to a kind of aching nostalgia for some American prehistory that they cannot quite define, but sense in Reagan. The chant of "We Want Ron!" elided into the Olympic chant, "U.S.A.! U.S.A.!" To some extent, they were merely exuberant kids making noise, but their identification with, their passion for, a 73-year-old President was startling.</h3> And so was their equation of the man with the nation he leads. Who would have thought that an aged movie actor would be, for so many of the young, the man for the '80s? ....
The day after the Louisville debate, the White House "spinners" were hard at work on the press plane, on the buses. The President was heading to Charlotte, N.C., for an appearance with Senator Jesse Helms and then to Baltimore. The spinners, a patrol of top White House staff members, have the task of chatting with the press and trying to get a favorable spin on stories. They were working that day at damage control.
The debate was a sudden deflation. One could hear the air rushing into the vacuum. Now Reagan seemed flat and disconcerted and, weirdly, somehow a stranger to himself. <h3>In Charlotte, a city that takes pride in having made its busing program a model for the rest of the country, Reagan denounced the practice of busing and was greeted with silence.</h3> The Baltimore event was curiously disheveled. Reagan was there to unveil a statue of Christopher Columbus at the Inner Harbor. The crowd was dotted with protesters ("No More Years! No More Years!") and anti-Reagan signs (DEAD MARINES FOR REAGAN.) Back on the press bus, Donaldson bellowed to his constituency: "Big Mo ain't here today!" ...
|
...and just to be sure he had his way, ole Ron appointed to the federal bench, a lawyer named Robert Potter, on record as a critic of busing. Potter, at no one's request, took the law into his own hands:
Quote:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.c...95bc5ee207d189
Case key to magnet schools' future
By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY
April 20, 1999
...Presiding over the trial will be Senior U.S. District Judge Robert Potter, a Reagan appointee.
A public opponent of busing before his appointment to the bench, Potter unsettled black parents
during a court hearing last month. He said, on his own initiative, that he would consider releasing
the school system from all court supervision if he found that the lingering effects of segregation
are gone. His announcement was unusual because none of the parties had requested such action. ....
|
Quote:
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-8479694.html
The Boston Globe
Date:
April 14, 1998
Author:
Michael Grunwald, Globe Staff
More results for:
"charlotte reopens book" on court ordered busing
See more articles from The Boston Globe
CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- This is not just the city where court-ordered busing began. Charlotte is also known as the city that made court-ordered busing work.
When Boston's busing wars were raging, students from Charlotte came north to spread the word that peaceful integration was possible. In a federal study of the nation's 125 largest school systems, Charlotte-Mecklenberg was rated the most integrated. When President Reagan attacked busing during a campaign speech in Charlotte, his own supporters responded with stony silence. The next day, the Charlotte Observer replied with an editorial titled "You Were Wrong, Mr. President," calling school desegregation the city's "proudest achievement."
But history may be turning in its tracks. Last month, a federal judge here reopened Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg Board of Education, the landmark desegregation case that launched the nation's busing experiment. Now the city where race-based busing was ruled the law of the land may become the city where race-based busing is ruled illegal, even though the mixing of black and white schoolchildren has evolved into a point of civic pride here, as knitted into Charlotte's fabric as banking or auto racing.
"It's an extraordinary situation," said Harvard education professor Gary Orfield, the author of "Dismantling Desegregation." "The Charlotte schools became a national model for desegregation after the courts forced them to do it. Now the courts might come in and say they can't do it anymore."
The danger, critics like Orfield say, is that the end of busing and other race-based assignment policies may mean a return to segregated schools. But in the new legal landscape, as the Supreme Court tilts toward color-blindness and away from race-conscious policies on issues like affirmative action and congressional redistricting, many school boards are finally being released from strict federal desegregation orders. The Charlotte-Mecklenberg school board does not even want to be released from the Swann order, but it might not have a choice.
The lawsuit that could stop the buses was filed by Bill Capacchione, a white parent and neighborhood school activist who asserts that his daughter Cristina was denied admission to a Charlotte magnet school because of unconstitutional race-based assignment policies. Similar cases are under way in Boston, over Boston Latin School, and in several other cities, but specialists say Charlotte may be the national test once again. Role reversal
One reason is that the case has landed before Judge Robert Potter, a conservative Reagan appointee and former anti-busing activist who drew up a petition protesting the Swann ruling nearly 30 years ago. (The petition attracted more than 10,000 signatures in two days.) At a preliminary hearing last month, Potter stunned the schools' attorneys by reopening the Swann case even though no one had asked him to do so. And he quickly put the onus on the school board to come up with a compelling reason why it still needs a court order to run a discrimination-free system.
For a case brimming with ironies, none is more telling than this role reversal: In the legal and racial climate of the '90s, it is now the longtime desegregationists in Charlotte who clamor for local control of schools and grumble about activist judges. And it is their opponents who simply point to the law, to the Constitution, to the direction set by the Supreme Court....
|
[quote]
http://books.google.com/books?id=FF4...cR04#PPA331,M1
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Southern_strategy
...In American politics, the Southern strategy refers to the focus of the Republican party on winning U.S. Presidential elections by securing the electoral votes of the U.S. Southern states.
The phrase Southern strategy was coined by Nixon strategist Kevin Phillips.[1] In an interview included in a 1970 New York Times article, he touched on its essence:
From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner <b>the Negrophobe</b> whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats."[2]....
In this opinion piece:
Bob Herbert expounded on what was contained in this book:
http://books.google.com/books?id=eqf...fFTWc#PPA61,M1 (lower page 61 to upper page 62:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...04&btnG=Search
Atwater: As to the whole Southern strategy that Harry Dent and others put together in 1968, opposition to the Voting Rights Act would have been a central part of keeping the South. Now [the new Southern Strategy of Ronald Reagan] doesn’t have to do that. All you have to do to keep the South is for Reagan to run in place on the issues he’s campaigned on since 1964 . . . and that’s fiscal conservatism, balancing the budget, cut taxes, you know, the whole cluster . . .
Questioner: But the fact is, isn’t it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps . . . ?
Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, 'Nigger, nigger, nigger.' By 1968 you can't say 'nigger' - that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.
And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me - because obviously sitting around saying, 'We want to cut this,' is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than 'Nigger, nigger.'....
|
|