Monday, November 24, 2008
The Black Mafia’s Shakedown of Michael Richards
2006-11-28 at 7:27 am · Filed under Vox Populi
What Michael Richards of Seinfeld fame did and said was wrong. The way the African American Community is handling it, even more wrong then the action itself!
The NAACP, a racist organization in its own right along with some other Racial oriented groups, now want to “SHAKEDOWN” Michael Richards for millions of his dollars saying that if he were to donate Millions of his dollars to their childrens charities, then all would be forgiven.
Two men who were at the comedy club when “Kramer” went on his racial tirade are using the help of attorney Gloria Allred to shakedown Richards and separate him from millions of his dollars that he earned.
Allred would like Michael Richards to go not before a judge, but a retired judge of her choosing so that Richards can apologize and then the judge can decide whether or not Richards should poney up the dough to the two men who are visually upset to the point that they see dollar $ign$.
Of course where the microphones and cameras are, you are more then likely bound to see the Shakedown King of Racism himself, Jesse “Whose Your Daddy” Jackson, who is also trying to cash in on Richards’ slip of the tongue.
The group of Politically Correct idiots have now come out of the woodwork calling for censorship by banning the N word.
I don’t defend the behavior or the words, but I defend the right of someone to be as big an idiot as they want to be and say those words.
I am not saying what Richards did wasn’t wrong, it was without a shadow of a doubt wrong as hell, but to cash in on what he did and said, is even more wrong. A$$holes like Jackson and Sharpton are always extorting money from people and businesses in the name of their race, although the only ones benefiting from the ill gotten dollars are crooks like Sharpton and Jackson.
What’s next, banning of the Muhammad Cartoons? Not on my watch.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Sunday, August 17, 2008
• "... Talk about how Oppenheimer in South Africa sends diamonds straight to Tel Aviv and deals with the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights. The issue is not
anti-Semitism; the issue is apartheid. ... All we want to say is what Jesus said: If you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for it. No compromise, no meetings, no kaffe klatsch, no skinnin' and grinnin'. Pay for your deeds."
• "White folks was in caves while we was building empires... We taught philosophy and
astrology and mathematics before Socrates and them Greek homos ever got around to it."
LIP FLAPPING SPIKE LEE:
On Trent Lott:
• "...card-carrying member" of the Ku Klux Klan."
On Interracial couples:
• "I give interracial couples a look. Daggers. They get uncomfortable when they see me on the street."
On Clarence Thomas:
• "A handkerchief-head, chicken-and-biscuit-eating Uncle Tom."
NO-NAD HILLARY CLINTON
• "You f*cking Jew b@stard." - To political operative Paul Fray.
ETHNOCRAT CHARLES BARRON, N.Y.C. COUNCILMAN
During a reparations rally:
• "I want to go up to the closest white person and say: 'You can't understand this, it's a black thing' and then slap him, just for my mental health."
MARY FRANCES BERRY, CHAIRWOMAN, US COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS
• "Civil rights laws were not passed to protect the rights of white men and do not apply to them."
ETHNOCRAT SAN FRANCISCO MAYOR WILLIE BROWN
• "The old white boys got taken fair and square."
JULIENNE MALVEAUX, USA TODAY COLUMNIST
• "There's no great, white bigot; there's just about 200 million little white bigots out there."
ETHNOCRAT ZACK WEBB, NAACP
• "Reparations are a really good way for white people to admit they're wrong."
Getting back to Al Sharpton:
Uncle Sam To Sharpton: Pay Up, Deadbeat
Source: MSNBC [05/10/08]
Uncle Sam calls it balancing his books. Reverend Al Sharpton calls his header into the IRS’s bull’s-eye something else:
"Whatever retaliation they do on me, we never stop," Sharpton said. "I think that that is why they try to intimidate us." (MSNBC)
If you have any residual doubts that race card waving is an enriching endeavor, get over it. Over a number of years, Rev. Al has racked up an impressive tally of unpaid taxes:
* He owes New York City $365,558 in back taxes.
* He owes Uncle Sam $931,397 in back taxes.
* His for profit company, Rev. Al Communications, owes the state of New York $175,962.
Rev. Al has been fending off these claims, for several years, by using his nonprofit cabal,the National Action Network as a smokescreen. Bad bookkeeping, misunderstandings, and the like, are at the top of the excuses list. So far, it seems to be working, but Uncle Sam won’t be patient forever. For example, the relevant bean counters are especially annoyed over the failure of Rev. Al’s do-gooder cabal to meet their workers compensation and unemployment insurance obligations.
This isn’t the first time that Rev. Al has run afoul of the authorities. As recently as 2004, the IRS and FBI tried to pin him to the mat over irregularities associated with his Oval Office candidacy. A decade early, Rev. Al was acquitted of tax fraud and charges that he stole from one of his charities. In other words, Rev. Al isn’t as dumb as he looks, and will, in all likelihood, elude the forces of ‘injustice’ this time, too.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
CHICAGO - The Rev. Jesse Jackson used the N-word during a break in a TV interview where he criticized presidential candidate Barack Obama, Fox News confirmed Wednesday.
The longtime civil rights leader already came under fire this month for crude off-air
comments he made against Obama in what he thought was a private conversation during a taping of a "Fox & Friends" news show.
In additional comments from that same conversation, first reported by TVNewser, Jackson is reported to have said Obama was "talking down to black people," and referred to blacks with the N-word when he said Obama was telling them "how to behave."
Though a Fox spokesman confirmed to The Associated Press that Jackson used the slur, the network declined to release the full transcript of the July 6 show and did not air the comments.
Jackson - who is traveling in Spain - apologized in a statement Wednesday for "hurtful words" but didn't offer specifics. "I am deeply saddened and distressed by the pain and sorrow that I have caused as a result of my hurtful words. I apologize again to Senator Barrack Obama, Michelle Obama, their children as well as to the American public," Jackson said in a written statement. "There really is no justification for my comments and I hope that the Obama family and the American public will forgive me. I also pray that we, as a nation, can move on to address the real issues that affect the American people."
A spokeswoman for Jackson's civil rights organization, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, said she could not confirm that Jackson used the slur.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be
published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed
Let's see if they run Jackson out of town on a rail like they did Don Imus or will the civil rights crowd cover for Jackson like they always do. If Don Imus or another white male said this they would demand his hide but since it's Jackson look for a cover-up which is typical for this group.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Using food and crop residues, a new breed of entrepreneur looks to cut waste and create energy
By Laurent Belsie and Mary Wiltenburg Staff writers of The Christian Science Monitor
ST. LOUIS AND BOSTON –
Forget Iraq, OPEC, and that Alaskan wildlife refuge for the moment. Some of the clues to the world's energy future may lie on your dinner plate.
The plants that grew the rice you're eating also produce rice straw, which is mostly burned today but could be turned into fuel. Corn already produces ethanol, but stalks left in the field have energy potential. And all the country's millions of pounds of leftover chicken and turkey bones could produce millions of barrels of crude oil. The turkey experiment is already under way.
For decades, scientists have worked to turn trash into energy: wood into gasoline and municipal waste into industrial fuel. Some ventures worked; others proved too expensive or unwieldy. Now, a new generation of entrepreneurs is trying to turn the nation's muck into black gold. Armed with better technology and understanding, they're making promising starts.
These conversions, if done correctly, could not only bolster the United States' energy reserves, they could cut its leading sources of waste, starting with the nation's farms.
"We're held hostage by troubles in Venezuela, by uncertainty in Kuwait," says Brian Appel, CEO of Changing World Technologies (CWT), a New York environmental technology company. "Let's take advantage of all this waste and make a product we really need."
CWT has made perhaps the biggest splash by teaming up with food production giant ConAgra Foods Inc. Later this month CWT's $25 million turkey-to-oil processor will start turning wastes from ConAgra's Carthage, Mo., plant into light crude oil and other products.
Jeff Tester, a chemical engineering professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, has visited a CWT pilot plant in Philadelphia and is intrigued by the technology's potential. "This is a good example of a win-win situation," he says. "It's not necessarily the holy grail, but it's an innovative idea."
Using a process called thermal depolymerization, which breaks down organic compounds with water and heat, CWT can make fuel from fowl - or corn waste or municipal sludge, for that matter. The Carthage plant, which will process about 200 tons of animal waste daily, is expected to pump out some 7.6 million gallons of bio-derived oil in its first year.
That's tiny - about the size of a Texas wildcatter's well - even compared to the 2.7 billion gallons of ethanol the US expects to produce this year, largely from corn. But that industry receives government subsidies - something Mr. Appel doesn't receive. At the moment, it costs $15 per barrel to produce oil from the Missouri turkey plant, and costs could drop below $10 as more plants go up, he says. That would put his reprocessed oil on par with conventional drilling costs, roughly between $5 and $13 a barrel.
"Right now the margins are tight," Appel says. "If we really want to reduce [US] dependence on [foreign] oil, we need help to grow more quickly."
The company is also negotiating contracts to recycle municipal sludge, solid waste, and other materials.
Meanwhile, DDS Technologies, a European environmental technology company, is bringing another new waste-recycling system to the US. Already in use by several major Italian companies, the process reuses all the elements of the material it recycles, making it much more efficient than most primary food processors.
"When I look at some of the processes we use to make foods, they're archaic," says the company's COO Kerin Franklin. "The process for making soy milk, it must have been invented by a couple of hippies 20 years ago. You wind up throwing a lot away."
DDS takes all that trash and breaks it down into small enough bits to render it useful on many levels. Take pomace, the stuff left over when oranges and other fruit are squeezed for juice. Currently, fruit processors pay roughly $40 a ton to other companies to haul away the pomace, which they turn into livestock feed. DDS can take the same waste and harvest pectin (used in yogurt, gelatin, marshmallows, and fruit snacks), flavor substitutes (used in baking and animal feed), fiber (used in cosmetics production), and essential oil of orange (used as a flavoring). "Our goal is zero left over,"Ms. Franklin says. "The entire waste stream is utilized."
The US branch of DDS, based in Boca Raton, Fla., hopes to start making use of its innovative air-pressure technology later this year. By accelerating particles of matter then suddenly stopping them, DDS can separate their components much the way a speeding motorcycle, suddenly stopped, would send first the rider's helmet, then the rider, then the bike itself flying through the air.
The company is already working with a major US cityto handle its municipal sludge, and has just signed a 10-year joint venture with biomass-to-ethanol company Xethanol to convert sewage into the sugars used in ethanol production. Because DDS's process uses air and not physical contact with the material, Franklin says, it can assure a higher level of purity than other systems.
While reprocessing agricultural waste has huge potential, no one knows how huge. In a Foreign Affairs article earlier this year, Timothy Wirth, president of the United Nations Foundation, and two coauthors estimated that available agricultural waste could produce 10 times the ethanol that corn does today. But it's unlikely all of it will be reused for energy. Every year some of it gets plowed under, some gets burned, some gets thrown away. Much of the rest - 45 million tons, enough to cover the entire Washington, D.C., area in 17 inches of muck, according to the American Feed Industry Association - is reprocessed into animal feed.
Clearly, if environmental rules continue to stiffen, farmers will be casting about for new solutions. For example: federal regulations ban the burning of rice straw (the detritus left over after harvest) by mid-decade. So the industry is looking for ways to reuse the straw, including ways to process it into energy. Entrepreneurial firms such as CWT and DDS see potential. But some analysts believe such efforts will require federal help to blossom. "There's the potential to accelerate this much, much faster, if this country applies the same sort of aggressive approach we've taken to finding oil," says Dr. Tester of MIT. "But you have to learn by doing it."
Sunday, April 13, 2008
By Adrian Wojnarowski, Yahoo! Sports
Apr 9, 6:36 pm EDT
EL SEGUNDO, CA - MARCH 25: DJ…
Kobe Bryant hasn’t always been the best person, the best teammate, the best ambassador for the National Basketball Association. This is the reason so many voters are searching for someone else to vote Most Valuable Player. For this, Bryant can blame himself. This is the price paid for petulance.
Still, Bryant is an MVP. He’s been the best player, a three-time champion and voters must ask themselves: If I don’t vote for him this year, what will it ever take? His talent, his accomplishments, his place in history, command multiple MVPs. This has been a season when everything has come together to make his candidacy unimpeachable.
His time, his trophy.
“You can’t just continue to take what Kobe is doing for granted,” Pistons president and Hall of Famer Joe Dumars said. “The guy is one of the truly great players and he should be recognized as such.”
No one needs historical context to make the case for Bryant this year. His season stands on its own. At 29, this isn’t a lifetime achievement award. Kobe is still the best of the best. MVPs, however, are never won overnight in the NBA. Mostly, it takes constructing credibility over the years. He’s been so great, for so long that Dumars is right: People do take him for granted.
As Mark Heisler’s informal poll in the Los Angeles Times showed, the MVP race appears to be down to Bryant and New Orleans point guard Chris Paul. Someday, Paul is going to be an MVP, a champion. He has saved basketball in New Orleans, passing Steve Nash and Jason Kidd as the best point guard on the planet. There isn’t a player in the league that I love more to talk with, that I love more to watch play, than Paul.
Yet, he will have to go No. 2 on my ballot. He hasn’t been first-team All-NBA. He still hasn’t played in the postseason. His time is coming, and coming fast, but there’s time for Paul. Before Paul and LeBron James and maybe Dwyane Wade are 29 years old, they’ll probably have MVP trophies. Bryant’s wait has been long enough.
AP - Apr 9, 2:09 pm EDT
Those who believe in Bryant’s greatness are forever ripping the voting process, saying it’s a joke that he’ll never been named MVP. Normally, they don’t tell you what year that should’ve happened, who should’ve lost out. Once Tim Duncan had won his two MVP awards, Nash and Dirk Nowitzki were winning, the Lakers losing, and Bryant lost three straight times in his prime. In those years, the mediocre Laker teams crushed his candidacy.
Always, it was this: In the post-Shaq era, Bryant had to be playing for a contender. This was the voter’s mandate. As much as anything, Nowitzki was the best player on the 67-win Mavericks a year ago and it was declared his window, his time. To hear people say that they want to hold off voting to see who finishes the Western Conference with the better record – New Orleans or Los Angeles – is missing the point here.
Bryant doesn’t need the Lakers to finish with the best record in the regular season. When the Lakers are together, yes, they are the most talented team in the NBA. Only, they haven’t been together this season. The Lakers are still fighting for the No. 1 seed with Andrew Bynum out since the middle of January and Pau Gasol arriving in February and missing nine games in March.
The idea that an MVP has to do more with less is nonsense. For coach of the year, it’s a fairer argument. When Magic Johnson and Larry Bird were winning MVPs in the 1980s, who held their rosters against them?
No one ever made Nash reach a conference final – never mind win a title – to give him his first MVP. He came on late in his career to transform himself, but that was never necessary with Bryant. At 29, he’s been great for most of a decade. He’s paid his price for petulance. Joe Dumars is right: No more taking Bryant for granted.
His time, his trophy.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Friday, March 28, 2008
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
RIVERHEAD, New York (AP) -- A black father was sentenced to two to four years in prison Wednesday for fatally shooting an intoxicated white teenager during a racially charged confrontation with two carloads of young people at the end of his driveway.
Parents Joanne and Daniel Cicciaro said they were unhappy with the sentence.
3 of 3 The parents of victim Daniel Cicciaro Jr., 17, were irate after learning that John White did not receive the maximum sentence of 15 years in prison.
White, 54, was convicted in December of second-degree manslaughter and a weapons charge.
"Nice message it sends to society that as long as you're black and there's a problem at the end of your driveway you can grab an illegal handgun and shoot someone in the face and get away with it," an infuriated Daniel Cicciaro Sr. told reporters while dozens of supporters sobbed nearby.
"Well, let's see what happens when Aaron White gets shot, and see how the laws are," Cicciaro said, referring to White's 19-year-old son.
Defense attorney Frederick Brewington said Cicciaro's remarks appeared to be a threat and demanded an investigation. Prosecutor Thomas Spota said the matter was referred to police, and the Whites were assigned extra protection at their home.
White was led away in handcuffs, but his attorneys planned to seek approval from a higher court to let him remain free pending appeal.
"I've always remained remorseful about this incident," White told the judge.
At the trial, the defense invoked the nation's violent racist past in arguing the shooting was justified, referring to the teenagers as a "lynch mob."
White testified that he was trying to protect his family on a hot August night in 2006 when he got an unregistered pistol from his garage after a group of angry white teenagers turned up at his house late at night to fight his son. He claimed the handgun discharged accidentally, killing Cicciaro.
The conflict was fueled by a bogus Internet posting claiming Aaron White wanted to rape a female friend of one of the white teens.
Cicciaro, who had a blood-alcohol reading above the legal limit for driving, was just 3 inches from the pistol when he was shot in the face, a medical examiner testified.
White said Aaron had wakened him around 11 p.m. to tell him he had been feuding with other teens after being asked to leave a party and a group of the teens was headed to their house in Miller Place, a predominantly white community on eastern Long Island.
White, a construction worker, testified that he grew up in Brooklyn hearing stories about how the Ku Klux Klan torched his grandfather's business in Alabama in the 1920s and that he feared a similar attack was about to happen.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Thursday, March 13, 2008
WASHINGTON - The House held a closed session Thursday for the first time in 25 years to discuss a hotly contested surveillance bill.
Republicans requested privacy for what they termed "an honest debate" on the new Democratic eavesdropping measure that is opposed by the White House and most Republicans in Congress.
Lawmakers were forbidden to disclose what was said during the hour-long session. The extent to which minds were changed, if at all, should be more clear Friday, when the House was expected to openly debate and then vote on the bill.
Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas said she didn't believe anyone changed positions but that the session was useful because no one would be able to complain on Friday that their views had not been heard.
"We couldn't have gone more of an extra mile to make sure we're doing the best for national security," she told The Associated Press.
Rep. Pete Hoekstra of Michigan, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said in an interview that he read aloud the titles - but not details - of intelligence reports "that shows the nature of the global threat and how dynamic the situation is, and how fluid."
Hoekstra said the House discussed the procedures intelligence agencies use to protect the identities of innocent Americans whose calls and e-mails are incidentally intercepted in wiretaps.
Hoekstra said three Democrats spoke as did eight or nine Republicans.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said "there was nothing new, nothing that wasn't public, nothing that can't and shouldn't be debated on the floor tomorrow in open session."
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said he heard nothing new that would change his mind about the bill.
"Tomorrow, I will urge members on both sides of the aisle to vote for this legislation," Hoyer said.
The last such session in the House was in 1983 on U.S. support for paramilitary operations in Nicaragua. Only five closed sessions have taken place in the House since 1825.
Four members declined to sign the confidentiality oath required to participate in the closed session, House staff members said.
Many Democrats initially objected, calling it a political ploy by Republicans to delay a vote on the bill. House leaders did in fact push off the scheduled vote until Friday, just before taking a two-week recess. If it passes, the bill would need Senate approval before going to the president.
President Bush has vowed to veto it, saying it would undermine the nation's security.
Bush opposes it in part because it doesn't provide full, retroactive legal protection to telecommunications companies that helped the government eavesdrop on their customers without court permission after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
About 40 lawsuits have been filed against telecommunications companies by people and organizations alleging they violated wiretapping and privacy laws. The lawsuits have been combined and are pending before a single federal judge in California.
The Democrats' measure would encourage the judge to review in private the secret government documents underpinning the program in order to decide whether the companies acted lawfully. If they did, the lawsuits would be dismissed.
The administration has prevented those documents from being revealed, even to a judge, by invoking the state secrets privilege. That puts the companies in a bind because they cannot use the documents to defend themselves in court.
It wasn't clear what information would be presented in the closed session. Just a fraction of Congress has been allowed to read secret documents underpinning the surveillance program, and those who have arrived at varying conclusions.
The Senate Intelligence Committee, after seeing classified material, said the companies acted on the good-faith belief that the wiretaps they allowed were lawful. Democrats on the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees were unconvinced after being presented with the same material.
The surveillance law is intended to help in the pursuit of suspected terrorists by making it easier to eavesdrop on foreign phone calls and e-mails that pass through the United States. A temporary law expired Feb. 16 before Congress was able to produce a replacement bill. Bush opposed an extension of the temporary law as a tactic to pressure Congress into accepting the Senate version of the surveillance legislation. The Senate's bill provides retroactive legal immunity for the telecommunications companies.
Bush said lawsuits against telecom companies would lead to the disclosure of state secrets. Further, he said lawsuits would undermine the willingness of the private sector to cooperate with the government in trying to track down terrorists.
Hoekstra said intelligence was already being lost.
"Each and every day our capabilities are eroding," he said.
Directing his message at the House, Bush said, "They should not leave for their Easter recess without getting the Senate bill to my desk."
Bush predicted the Senate would not pass the House version of the bill, and said even if it did, he would veto it.
At least one Senate Republican said the lawsuits should go forward to determine whether the wiretapping program was illegal. But Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter wants to substitute the government for the phone companies as the defendant in the court cases.
"The president can't have a blank check," Specter said in an interview. "If you close down the courts, there's no check and balance."
He added: "Wiretaps are important for national security. There's no doubt about that. Al-Qaida and terrorism continue to be a major threat to this country. It is my hope that the president will not find it necessary to veto the bill, that we'll be able to work it out."
Associated Press writers Kimberly Hefling and Terence Hunt contributed to this report.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed
Does anybody else have a problem with this? Clandestine government;it is dangerous in that it is responsible to no one. What was discussed in those closed chambers? Aren't the people part of the government? That is what is being sold in schools across the country but is it true? If not anymore than at one time did it? Is bin Laden as dangerous and as a "boogy man" as we are led to believe or is he blown out of proportion by the U.S. government in their effort to find a scapegoat/distraction? He seems to be Bush's obsession or that could be a persona for public consumption to keep the press at bay and on the subject you want to discuss. Not bad considering if you are right of center you are looking at an unfriendly press who will seek to vilify you every chance they can get and I'll bet the White House knows this too. The thing is if we really wanted Osama we would have had him by now so it very possible his infamous notoriety made be a smokescreen. This story featured "oaths to remain silent",were they required to sign these in the representative's own blood? I am a big time libertarian and I take the U.S. Constitution very seriously. If either house of congress can employ "secret sessions",just as the house as done and the senate earlier,to conceal their business what is to stop them from kicking C-SPAN out and declaring everything "secret session"? Especially if anything resulted in an arrestable offense but the public was unaware of it due to it being discussed in a "secret session". This is a slippery slope,America and one we better be careful of.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Monday, March 10, 2008
LAURENS, S.C. - A black civil rights activist is fighting to close a store that sells KKK robes and T-shirts emblazoned with racial slurs. David Kennedy is confident he can make it happen. After all, he says he owns the building.
Since 1996, the Redneck Shop has operated in an old movie theater that, according to court records, was transferred in 1997 to Kennedy and the Baptist church he leads.
"Our ownership puts an end to that history as far as violence and hatred, racism being practiced in that place and also the recruiting of the Klan," Kennedy said. "This is the same place that we had to go up into the balcony to go to the movies before the Klan took it. So there's a lot of history there."
But legal documents also indicate that the man who runs the store, 62-year-old John Howard, is entitled to operate his business in the building until he dies. Now the dispute may go to court.
Kennedy, 54, has led protests outside the store since it opened but said he's never been able to close it because of the agreement that Howard can run the shop for life.
The reverend envisions the building as a potential future home for his New Beginnings Missionary Baptist Church, which now meets in a double-wide trailer.
Kennedy claims he can't even visit his own property because Howard won't let him in when he appears in the door. But that didn't happen during a recent visit with an Associated Press reporter and photographer.
"Reverend Kennedy, where you been hiding?" Howard shouted when the door opened.
Inside the store, hooded Klan robes hang on the same rack as the racist T-shirts. Pictures of men, women and children in Klan clothing and pamphlets tell a partial history of the organization.
Howard used to own the whole building. When his store first opened, he said, people threw rocks at his windows, spit in his doorway and picketed. A month later, a man intentionally crashed his van through the front windows.
"If anything turns people off, they shouldn't come in here. It's not a thing in here that's against the law," Howard said, adding that he was once the KKK's grand dragon for South Carolina and North Carolina.
To blacks, Kennedy said, the store is a reminder of this region's painful past, which includes the lynching of his great, great uncle by a white mob.
The town of Laurens, about 30 miles southeast of Greenville, was named after 18th century slave trader Henry Laurens.
Some street addresses are still marked with the letter "C" that once designated black homes as "colored." Racial tension was heightened in recent years when two white female teachers were sentenced for having sex with male students - all of them black.
Kennedy has a long history of fighting racial injustice. He protested when a South Carolina county refused to observe the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, and he helped lobby to remove the Confederate flag from the Statehouse dome.
When people in the region allege racism, he rallies attention to the cause. A walk through the neighborhood where he was born shows that he seems a stranger to no one.
"Hey Rev," one man says as he strolls by.
"Pump it up," Kennedy responds with the phrase he uses at his protests.
Mary Redd, who lives across from the house where Kennedy was born, said blacks know to contact the pastor with their problems.
"And he helps them out," added neighbor Deborah Cheeks.
Kennedy said progress has always been slow to come to Laurens.
"There are two powers in the world: the mind and the sword," he said. "In the long run, the sword is defeated by the mind. I want to destroy the concept of hatred."
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed
Has the reverend ever taken on pro-black groups such as the Nation of Islam or the Black Panthers? They mentioned that the property was transferred to the church but they don't go into how the church acquired the property. These people that drove their cars through the front of the shop,was it at the request of the reverend? It seems that the shop owner has a legal standing and the reverend and his group are trying to terrorize him and he is not budging. Do we have a new asshat along with the other two clowns that are reverends and get themselves into trouble.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
WASHINGTON - The former head of the Democratic National Committee said Thursday it was doubtful DNC Chairman Howard Dean would be able to get approval for a plan for do-over presidential nomination contests in Florida and Michigan. "It'll be a hellacious battle," said Don Fowler, a former DNC chairman who sits on the party's rule-making committee.
Before the primaries started, "Howard Dean had enough votes to get most everything he wanted. Now that this thing has gone as far as it has and the lines have formed according to candidates. I'm not sure how that vote would shake out now," said Fowler, who has endorsed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Now, everything is being viewed in terms of how it benefits a particular candidate, not the party or the process, Fowler said.
Nonetheless, Fowler said, something has to be done, "the rules be damned" to seat delegates from states Democrats have to and can win in the general election. "We're going to forfeit those two big states? What kind of fools would we be."
Dean has urged Florida and Michigan party officials to come up with plans to repeat their presidential nominating contests so that their delegates can be counted.
"All they have to do is come before us with rules that fit into what they agreed to a year and a half ago, and then they'll be seated," Dean said during a round of interviews Thursday on network and cable TV news programs.
The two state parties will have to find the funds to pay for new contests without help from the national party, Dean said.
"We can't afford to do that. That's not our problem. We need our money to win the presidential race," he said. The DNC offered to pay for an alternative contest in Florida last summer but was turned down, officials at the party say.
Officials in Michigan and Florida have expressed renewed interest in holding repeat presidential nominating contests so that their votes will count in the epic Democratic campaign.
The Michigan governor, top officials in Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign, and Florida's state party chair all are now saying they would consider holding a sort of do-over contest by June. That's a change from the previous insistence from officials in both states that the primaries they held in January should determine how their delegates are allocated.
Clinton said she's waiting to see what proposal Democratic leaders in Florida and Michigan put forward. She won both contests, but the results were meaningless because the elections violated national party rules.
"I think it would be a grave disservice to the voters of Florida and Michigan to adopt any process that would disenfranchise anyone," Clinton told reporters Thursday at a news conference in Washington. "Therefore I am still committed to seating their delegations, and I know they are working with the Democratic party to determine how best to proceed."
She said it would be especially unfair to punish the 1.7 million Floridians who voted in the Democratic primary since the contest's date was moved up by the Republican-controlled state Legislature and the state's Republican governor.
"They clearly believed that their votes would count, and I think that there has to be a way to make them count," Clinton said.
The DNC stripped both states of all delegates for holding the primaries too early, and all Democratic candidates — including Clinton and rival Barack Obama — agreed not to campaign in either state. Obama's name wasn't even on the Michigan ballot.
Florida and Michigan moved up their dates to protest the party's decision to allow Iowa and New Hampshire to go first, followed by South Carolina and Nevada, giving them a disproportionate influence on the presidential selection process.
But no one predicted the race would still be very close at this point in the year.
"The rules were set a year and a half ago," Dean said. "Florida and Michigan voted for them, then decided that they didn't need to abide by the rules. Well, when you are in a contest you do need to abide by the rules. Everybody has to play by the rules out of respect for both campaigns and the other 48 states."
Associated Press Writer Jim Davenport in Columbia, S.C., contributed to this report.
I was watching Bill O'Reilly last night and he was saying this election is going to destroy the Democratic party and I think that is great. Not that I'm a Republican which I'm not but because the democrats are the most misandrist and anti-white racist of the two parties and the most heavily left wing feminist and the most radical of the feminists and multiculturalists. O'Reilly was saying if Hillary wins Jackson and Sharpton will be protesting the results. I was thinking if Obama wins NOW and other feminist groups will do the same. Was a rule violated? Are we being told the truth? Considering this is coming from the democrats it is hard to tell. The recent thing about Obama is that Hillary felt he was getting more favorable media coverage that she was. It didn't help Obama to have Louis Farrakan give him an endorsement,especially at the same time he is trying to court the white male voter. This is a reverse of the 2004 elections in which white males were solidly in the Bush camp,especially those most familiar with the ideals of John Kerry and females,white or not,were the swing voters. Today the feminists and other women are in the Hillary camp and it will be men,white or not,that are the swing voters.
Monday, March 3, 2008
Monday, March 3, 2008
WASHINGTON - Congressional opponents of the half-century-old attempt to isolate Cuba have been emboldened by Fidel Castro's resignation. But people who might be planning their vacation getaway to Havana should also be mindful that while President Fidel may be gone, President Bush, a staunch defender of the embargo, still has a year to go.
For years lawmakers of both parties have been trying to chip away at the Cold War trade, travel and home visit restrictions aimed at undermining a hostile government just 90 miles from U.S. shores. They argue that last month's change in leadership from the ailing Fidel to his brother Raul provides the opportunity to end a prolonged exercise in futility.
"Our policy leaves us without influence at this critical moment, and this serves neither the U.S. national interest nor average Cubans," more than 100 House members, including nine Republicans, wrote Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. "After 50 years, it is time for us to think and act anew." Twenty-four senators wrote a similar letter to Rice.
The embargo, said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., has been an enabler to decades of oppression. "We should not give Raul Castro the same benefits that we gave his brother, Fidel. We cannot continue to be the Goliath to their David."
The Bush administration, however, has been adamant that a new Castro in power doesn't mean a new Cuba, and that changes in U.S. policy hinge on Cuba first improving its human rights record and holding free elections.
"I can't imagine that happening any time soon," said Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte.
That won't stop Congress from making the attempt. The top two trade lawmakers, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., are both pushing legislation to ease trade and travel restrictions.
Acting House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Howard Berman, D-Calif., has scheduled a hearing Wednesday with administration officials to review U.S. policy and discuss the opportunity "to inject creativity and fresh ideas into that policy."
Rep. Jerry Moran of Kansas, one of many farm-state Republicans to oppose the embargo, said he will continue efforts to change Treasury Department rules imposed in 2005 that have been an impediment to agriculture sales. The House in recent years has tried several times to attach anti-embargo measures to annual spending bills, only to have those provisions stripped later under threat of a presidential veto.
Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., said he will try again this year, focusing on restrictions that bar most Americans from traveling to the island and removing those administration regulations that block sales of food and medicine.
"I think there are Republicans who now understand that this country's policy toward Cuba has no grounding in common sense," Dorgan said.
But Republican Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart, a Cuban-born lawmaker and a leader of the fiercely anti-Castro community of south Florida, insisted that power in Cuba has merely shifted to "hard-liners with the most blood on their hands." There may be rumblings in Congress this year to change course, but "there always are and we defeat them," he said.
Jake Colvin, director of USA Engage, a group that opposes economic sanctions as a political tool, predicted there will be some "stage-setting" this year for changes under a new administration next year. "This is a very political year and Cuba is a very political issue."
Among the presidential candidates, Republican Sen. John McCain's views are the closest to those of Bush. Easing the embargo should be linked to evidence of a transition to a free and open democracy, McCain says.
Of the Democrats, Sen. Barack Obama supports easing restrictions on family related travel and money that Cuban-Americans can send to their families in Cuba. He says he would meet with Raul Castro without preconditions. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton says she is willing to respond positively to actions that demonstrate a willingness to change in Cuba.
President Eisenhower imposed a partial embargo on the new Castro government in 1960, and President Kennedy expanded trade and travel restrictions. Barriers to travel were temporarily lifted during the Carter administration but later reimposed.
In 1996, shortly after Cuban fighter jets shot down two private planes operated by a Miami-based anti-Castro group, Congress passed the tough Helms-Burton Act that penalized foreign companies making use of property formerly owned by U.S. citizens but expropriated by the Cuban government.
But in 2000, President Clinton also signed a law allowing the sale of agricultural goods and medicine to Cuba for humanitarian reasons. Since then, agricultural sales to Cuba have risen from almost nothing to more than $440 million last year.
Moran of Kansas said he got into the issue to help his state's farmers, but said it has become "something much broader to me." America, he said, "can bring about additional personal freedom in Cuba by these kinds of activities. Personal freedom follows economic freedom."
On the Net:
USA Engage: http://www.usaengage.org/
I've always found the Cuban situation very fascinating. We traded with the Soviets and Chinese yet never with the Cubans even though all were communists. We have gone to war with China and now we are trading with them. China has neither a decent human rights record nor free elections yet that never comes up when China is mentioned. There has even been talk of normalizing relations with Viet Nam,a country we also went to war with. No American soldiers have stormed the beaches of Cuba,in fact the closest was a group of Cuban expatriates who stormed the beaches in a fiasco known as the Bay of Pigs that resulted in the expatriates being captured by the Cuban military and held until Kennedy assured the Castro government that the U.S. would not invade Cuba and the expatriates were returned to the U.S. I've got to give Castro his due;he has managed to outlive his enemies. He foiled CIA attempts from trying to make his beard fall out to attempts on his life he does seem to foil his enemies. While other dictators have kept their dissidents within their own borders Castro has exported his,he has put an ocean between him and his enemies this way that can't stir up the people into a counterrevolution. There also could be a nostalgic,sentimental reason behind the embargo and that is to preserve the memory of the last president who made it permanent and that is John F. Kennedy.Kennedy was the one who placed the blockade of Cuba to prevent Russian ships from depositing missiles there and it worked the Russians backed down. There are those today are saying close Guantanamo Bay,which would be a big mistake at this time.I doubt the current situation will change with Raul in power considering Fidel still has friends in high places within the Cuban government and Raul could easily be said to be just a puppet. So we'll see.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
What really chaps my hide is these two race baiters. Everytime some black motherfucker and/or bitch gets into trouble these two asshats show up and cause problems and the worse thing is that the liberal media won't hold them accountable for the damage they do. No one in the liberal media holds Jackson accountable for what he said about his own people (Jackson said that if he were alone on a dark street late at night and heard footsteps behind him he would hope the owner of those footsteps was white) and nobody holds Sharpton accountable for allying himself with sexist/racist Tawana Bradley. Speaking of sexist/racist,that reminds me of Crystal Gail Mangum who knowingly made a false rape complaint against the Duke university lacrosse team and Jackson vowed to pay all her expenses. I think the height of hypocrisy came when Jackson had the nerve to console Bill Clinton even though Jackson has had affairs of his own. Black America just bends over and does what these two say and they think nothing about it. Jackson and Sharpton come off like they oppose the "white slavemaster" (whoever that may be these days) but in reality they just want his job. These two just piss all over black America and black America just laps it up like a masochistic whore. These asshats,along with the rap community,foster anti-white racism but if racism comes against them they scream foul. Black America demanded that white America do something about the racists within them and white America has. Now it is time for black America to do the same and that is for black America to disown the racists among them otherwise it is bullshit hypocrisy and not worth it. So my message is clear,black America: do something about the racists among yourselves or shut up about other groups. You've played the vicim for so long and now that is the only role you know and since you know no one blames victims you cling to this role and willfully look the other way when the racist among you make anti-white comments and you try to make it look like you couldn't be racist. Bullshit,you are the world sees it. One of the most recently underreported things in the media is when Shaquille O'Neal made a racist remark about Steve Nash and O'Neal gets away with it,no one cared that he made a racist statement. Contrast that with what happened to Don Imus and that Imus was crucified for the statement he made. Apparently political correctness only works one way and as long as liberals asshat apologists run things it will continue to be that way.