OK - Racism = disagreement

A lot has been made of Republican Rep. Joe Wilson's decision to yell "You lie" at the President during the joint session to Congress this week regarding the potential health care coverage of illegal immigrants. Sure it was a breach of decorum that all the pundits want to remind the American People of. But was it racism?

Fox News has a story entitled "Black Publishers Cry Racism Over Wilson Outburst, Join Boycott of South Carolina" found here. The money quote from the story states that the National Newspaper Publishers Association (NNPA) Chairman Danny J. Bakewell Sr. said. "Rep. Wilson's remarks were racist, disrespectful, and a disingenuous violation -- not only of President Obama -- but to the institution of the presidency and only solidified our position and the importance in not spending black dollars where black people are not respected."

You have got to be kidding me. Do Obama's supporters really believe this is racist? Has that word gotten to be so overused that it has lost all meaning? The NNPA should be ashamed of itself for slurring Rep Wilson with such a label. This is another insidious attempt by the left and by race baiters to use the specter of racism to squelch legitimate debate and the Republicans should not support any sort of censure movement against Rep. Wilson. He has apologized and it should be left at that. Can you imagine if a black Representative had done that to President Bush and some right wing group charged the Representative with racism? Can you imagine the left's caterwauling and shouts of righteous indignation?

Tks to Rush Limbaugh I was reminded of how the Democrats booed President Bush during his 2005 State of the Union address. Here is a link to the RealClearPolitics story and video. You can audibly here the boos and heckles from the Dems. What about this breach of protocol?

BTW - I have read a number of Main Stream Media outlets who rile against the Internet and the mis information that is out there but I think the ABC/CBS/NBC world actually don't like the competition. For example I looked at the ABC News Site and found a story entitled "Heckling of President Is Rare in American History". President Bush is mentioned only in passing and the specific example discussed above is not mentioned at all. Props to CBS News for at least covering the 2005 heckling.

As for the NNPA - I thought dissent was patriotic?

Outspoken Roman

Duke case - again

Fox News is reporting that the woman who accused (falsely) three Duke Lacrosse players of raping her is writing a memoir.

The story quotes from the official release:

The press release for the memoir says that Crystal Gail Mangum has been "called an exotic dancer and a prostitute, and the public was led to believe she wanted to frame some 'good college students' from Duke and put them in jail. ...

Uhh - didn't she accuse three innocent students of rape? What was her intention? Wasn't she an exotic dancer (the reason she was at the Duke Lacrosse party to begin with)? This really takes gall to come out now and tell this story.

The press release (that you can see up at Free Republic) states that 'she never spoke publicly, that is until now. ' and why is that? Why would someone stand on the sidelines and let three innocent students get pilloried in the press, get attacked by professors at Duke and forced to defend themselves against bogus charges?

The press release notes that "Crystal Magnum is donating one dollar from the purchase of each book to help battered women. " How about donating the money she makes to the three students who suffered because of her? Too harsh? How about donating the money she makes to the police who had to handle her bogus claims rather than pursue real crime? Again, too harsh? How about donating the money to Duke University so it could run a seminar on how not to "pre-judge" just because the accuser is black and the defendants are white. I suppose I am beating a dead horse here.

The real crime of this issue is that it is off the front page but we have learned nothing from it.

OS

What is the State of the Black Union?

It is time to go back to talking about Culture and the craziness that currently passes for race relations. There really is no winning this one currently as there are too many people who benefit from promoting racial discord. I had an excellent post on this about Katrina a while back here (in my humble opinion at least). If Obama gets the nomination for the Democratic candidate for Presidency and doesn't win, the analysis from CNN, MSNBC and the Boston Globe will be that he lost because of his race (America wasn't ready for a black president, etc.) not that the American people rejected his extreme liberal positions on the issues facing America and his empty rhetoric (Change for change's sake and all that).

So I was reading CNN's website and saw the following story - "Obama takes heat for skipping State of the Black Union". So what is the State of the Black Union. Well thanks to Google I found out that the State of the Black Union is is an annual event which is held in a selected city in the United States (2008 found the conference in Post-Katrina New Orleans) and focuses on topics close to the African American community. The topic this year was "Reclaiming Our Democracy, Deciding Our Future", the website can be found here. The obvious question has to be - what would be the uproar if there was a state of the White Union (I checked Google and Wikipedia - no such event is planned).

The continued emphasis on defining some people by the color of their skin and allowing "issues" that are only of a concern for a segment of the population (Gay issues, Black issues, Hispanic issues, etc.) will continue the disunity and balkanization that apparently is still accepted as the norm by so many in this country (note the story I quoted from was CNN). The issue with Obama not going to this conference is small compared to the sad state of affairs that a conference like this reveals about the current climate of race relations in America. Read the Covenant with Black America (http://www.covenantwithblackamerica.com/) and replace many of the "covenants" with a different race - Education, Health Care, Economic Prosperity - aren't these issues of concern to all races?

The Covenant with Black America states on its website:

The Covenant with Black America is a national plan of action to address the primary concerns of African Americans today -- from health to housing, from crime to criminal justice, from education to economic parity. The frustration and angst felt by Black Americans post-Hurricane Katrina, from California to the Carolinas, is palpable. As we move toward the national elections of 2006 and 2008, Black Americans are entitled to have questions answered and visions shared of where our leaders want to take this country and a blueprint for how we get there.

I would add that any American is entitled to have questions answered and visions shared with the leaders of this country regardless of race. It is a shame that the supporters or members of this Covenant feel that the focus always come from a racial perspective. Why don't other ethnicities feel the need for a conference such as this (State of the Asian Union, State of the Hispanic Union?).

Until we can move away from issues that are "Black" or "White" or Purple, the original vision of the United States seems distant. Does this bother anyone else?

OS