Fox News’ Bolling Continues To Draw Racial Lines In The Sand With President Obama

“They’re brothers … they’re happy and they’re singing and they’re colored.” — The Wayans Brothers opening.

That was the joke opening from the old television show, but it could be thought of as the way some on Fox News Views sees President Barack Obama.

Here are some words from bigoted Fox News Views anchor Eric Bolling, who has a comforting environment at a network that is often hostile to black folks.

“So what’s with all the hoods in the hizzy? A month after the White House hosted the rapper Common, who glorifies violence on cops, the president opened his doors to one of Africa’s most evil dictators. Here’s Ali Bongo, the Gabonese president, who’s been accused of human rights violations and plundering billions of his country’s dollars.”

The words “hizzy” and “hood” should give you a major clue about where his heart and mind are with respect to black people.

This is beyond mere partisan politics, here. The message is a window to what is in the heart of Eric Bolling, a man who seems hostile to black people on Fox News Views. Bolling knows that when he says “hoods” to his audience they think of undesirable black people. This is all beyond the scope of mere coincidence.

During the segment, Human Events editor Jason Mattera declared that “Barack Obama likes to defecate on American allies,” and Bolling had this exchange with Fox Business reporter Sandra Smith:

REP. JOHN GARAMENDI (D-CA): There are good guys. There are bad guys out there. We’ve got to stay engaged.

SMITH: We don’t have to have them at home, though.

BOLLING: Thank you, Smitty.

SMITH: We don’t have to have them in our White House and entertaining them.

BOLLING: Where? Where? Where? Go ahead, say it. Where?

SMITH: In the hizzy.

BOLLING: In the hizzy. Thank you, Smitty.

SMITH: Do we really have to have them in the White Hizzy?

“Hizzy,” as I said before, is a way of reminding you that President Obama is black and he is turning the precious White House into, as Smith describes it, the “White Hizzy.”

What is the real message, here, to Fox News Views watchers? They want their viewers to vote his black ass out of their precious White House.

“Barack Obama likes to defecate on American allies,” was a line from Mattera. That is absolutely disgusting and indicative of the hatred toward Obama coming from the far right.

Sorry to put it that harsh and real, but the message from some of these individuals at Fox News Views is unmistakable.

Source: Media Matters for America

Common Controversy Makes It Easy To Ask Questions About Racism Regarding Some At Fox ‘News’

Common

The whole Fox News-generated overblown controversy regarding the rapper and poet Common is one that I’d like to say I find interesting and surprising, BUT … I don’t.

I’d like to say say that the Fox News hysteria over Common’s performance at the White House was strictly related to the network’s misguided belief that he is some sort of a gangsta rapper … or something along those lines.

Frankly, I am not going to go into a long explanation of how ignorant this whole issue is (which is pretty much a given coming from Fox News).

But, I will offer the obvious … this clearly is racially tinged (even if somewhat coded). Once again, Fox News is taking an opportunity to try and portray President Obama as some kind of black nationalist or racist (or someone who sympathizes with black nationalism or anti-white racism). To normal people, this is utterly ludicrous, but to call most of the people at Fox News normal is to borderline defame real normal people.

This whole issue with Common is largely based on race and trying to portray President Obama as an angry black man who is “not really one of us” to the highly conservative Fox News audience. This is the strategy of people like Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity and Sarah Palin. This is why they attack Common and excuse Ted Nugent.

Hannity, and this is no surprise coming from him, was comfortable with this attack on a black man (that is never a surprise from this man) and a woman running for President of the United States of America.

Nugent’s comments were OK, to Hannity, but the Fox News bigots jumped all over Common and took every shot possible at someone who has a high level of integrity and is quite the conscientious man with very positive messages.

Coming from Fox News, this is no surprise … in fact, it is ironically common.

Whitlock’s Anti-Fab Five Column Proves One Thing … He Is A Bitter Buffoon

I’ve never been much of a fan of controversial columnist Jason Whitlock, who has positioned himself in the national spotlight by taking contrary positions on race … I believe strictly for the purpose of notoriety.

Whitlock, who shows his narrow-minded prejudice in the very beginning of this column, is back at it with a column taking shots at the Fab Five ESPN documentary (this is not at all unexpected considering his past connections to the Fab Five of Chris Webber, Jalen Rose, Ray Jackson, Juwan Howard and Jimmy King, and my comments above).

So, I will lay out some of the points Whitlock has made and make rebuttals.

Whitlock point:

With the help of the Worldwide Leader, Rose took baggy shorts, black socks, bald heads and trash talk and created the illusion the Fab Five were some sort of transcendent, revolutionary freedom fighters cut from the same cloth as Jackie Robinson, Jim Brown, Arthur Ashe and Muhammad Ali.

Rebuttal:

This is a classic case of gross overstatement to set the stage to tear down the product. By insanely invoking Jackie Robinson, Jim Brown, Arthur Ashe and Muhammad Ali, Whitlock reveals himself as more of an irrational buffoon. This is less of a commentary on Jalen Rose (executive producer of Fab Five) and more of a statement about the lack of credibility coming from Jason Whitlock.

Whitlock point:

The legacy of the Fab Five is that they were on the cutting edge of America’s unashamed embrace of style over substance.

When Rose ended the documentary waxing about how no one knows the names of the starters on North Carolina’s 1993 national championship team and everyone remembers Rose, Webber, Howard, King and Jackson, it dawned on me the Fab Five were the original Charlie Sheen.

 

Let me make this clear: I do not dislike the Fab Five. I made my bones as a journalist covering the Fab Five for the Ann Arbor News.

Rebuttal:

The last part is akin to “I’m not racist … I have black friends.” Whitlock’s entire column reveals a dislike for the Fab Five or some aspect of the Fab Five he never truly reveals (either by ignorance or cowardice). By the way, Whitlock never challenges the truth of the point about the naming of the starters.

Whitlock point:

The Fab Five are taking credit for the real accomplishments of John Thompson’s and Patrick Ewing’s Georgetown Hoyas.

It was Thompson’s all-black, Ewing-led teams a decade before the Fab Five that shook the foundation of college basketball, changed the complexion of starting lineups across the country, opened coaching doors that had previously been closed to blacks and paved the way for black sportswriters at major newspapers.

It’s easy to forgive Rose for his lack of self-awareness. It’s America. In this country, self-awareness and common sense are our most rare commodities.

Rebuttal:

Whitlock thinks it’s all about race. It’s not all about race, Jason. This was as much about culture, hip-hop, rap music, etc. It’s not all about race, Whitlock. It’s not easy to forgive Jason for his lack of self-awareness. It seems that Whitlock is stuck on the race aspect of it and misses the point of the influence the Fab Five had … stunning considering he was actually there, supposedly.

Whitlock point:

Five super-talented black kids enrolled at a prestigious, white university to play for an inexperienced, piss-poor-at-the-time white coach and, 20 years later, had the audacity to embark on a media tour preaching about black Duke players being Uncle Toms.

Are you kidding me?

Are we really this lost as a people?

Let’s end the facade that Rose’s words about the Duke players are being taken out of context.

Rebuttal:

Here’s Whitlock playing the so-called race card. He takes a shot at Steve Fisher who took the Fab Five to two Final Fours and won a national championship. All that and the guy was a “piss-poor-at-the-time white coach. Sounds racist, huh? I guess I will have to watch the documentary again because I thought the Uncle Tom thing (not that I condone it) was in reference to how they perceived Duke when they were college freshmen.

Whitlock point:

The Fab Five clearly believe Coach K and Duke didn’t and don’t recruit inner-city black kids, and they believe race/racism/elitism are the driving forces behind the philosophy.

Rebuttal:

I believe this is a micharacterization of what the Fab Five guys were talking about in the documentary. It wasn’t about race or racism … maybe elitism. I think it was more about classism and trying to project a certain kind of image that appealed to the kind of audience that likes Duke … an elitist largely white audience (truth be told). People felt this way when the Blue Devils played against UNLV.

Whitlock point:

During the three-year run of the Fab Five (one season without Webber), Duke beat Michigan all four times the schools met while winning two ACC titles and one NCAA title. During the same span, Michigan won zero conference or national titles. In addition, Webber’s interactions with booster Ed Martin put the program on probation and caused Michigan to forfeit all its games.

Rebuttal:

True, but Duke should have beaten the Fab Five. Duke had more experienced teams with about as much talent. The Fab Five were freshmen and sophomores. The Webber-Ed Martin thing is well-documented for the harm it caused Michigan and Webber.

Whitlock point:

Coach K probably thought the same thing I thought watching the Fab Five play: They’re immature, arrogant, interested in playing for a coach they could ignore and incapable of putting together the consistent focus and effort necessary to win a conference championship.

Two teams consistently beat the Fab Five — Duke (4-0) and Indiana (4-2).

Let me translate that for you: Structured, disciplined, well-coached teams beat Michigan.

Rebuttal:

If Coach K thought that then he was an idiot like you. He would have been disrespectful of how good Ohio State and Indiana were at the time. He also would have been too ignorant to realize how amazing it was for five freshman to accomplish what these guys accomplished. Two teams consistently beat Michigan, Whitlock writes. He cites structure, discipline and coaching. What this moron doesn’t cite is experience. Is that an accident? If it is then he is a complete tool. If not then he is corrupt as a journalist.

Whitlock point:

While making money for their white university and allowing their incompetent, white coach to learn on the job, the Fab Five were not man enough to harness the courage and focus to outduel — in their minds — inferior, racist teams.

Rebuttal:

Steve Fisher was a lot of things, but he has proven over the long haul that he is a pretty damn good coach. His accomplishments stack up nicely against a lot of other coaches. Is Whitlock to stupid to realize that these guys were freshmen and sophomores? This last comment from Whitlock shows how much of an idiot he is as a writer and analyst.

Glenn Beck; President Obama Is Sympathetic To (Terrorists) Cause

Glenn Beck

Normally, I tend to avoid writing much about Glenn Beck because I see him as one of two things: a con man using racial politics and nutty extremism to get an audience of crazies or a freak.

I suppose he could be a little of both.

Anyway, here is the latest craziness coming from Beck that I found particularly disturbing even by his pitiful standards of human decency.

From Media Matters for America:

GLENN BECK: The Japanese government has no plans to expand the 12 mile evacuation zone. Meanwhile, we’re loading up all of the diplomats from the State Department and getting out of there. Also something that I’m going to do tonight, I’m going to give the speech that the President should give in the Oval Office that he hasn’t, and I don’t know why. Our donations are way, way down for Japan. I don’t see Hollywood mobilizing. So, we will. The speech from my Oval Office, tonight. It’s amazing what’s going on, and I don’t really understand why yet I haven’t figured it out yet.

There’s another story that is very disturbing. And this just came in, it’s an alert from the Wall Street Journal. The Obama Administration is seeking an United Nations security resolution that would authorize a wide range of possible military strikes against the forces of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi. It is aimed at preventing them from overrunning the rebels and civilians in the country’s east. In discussions with other Security Council members, the Obama administration is making the case that a no-fly zone is not enough. It would be insufficient to save the rebel capital in Eastern Libya. So the U.S. is seeking a broad UN authorization for strikes aimed at holding back Libyan ground and air forces with the aim of protecting the rebel capital and avoiding a humanitarian crisis there. Military operations could include a no-fly zone but wouldn’t be limited to that.

Holy cow. What does this mean? You know we’ve been saying that – where is the President on Libya? Tonight, I lay out the case, and it’s not a smoking gun, and it’s not an open and shut case, but it is something that I haven’t found the right people yet, or the right evidence to link it all together, but I can feel it, that there’s something wrong with this Libyan thing. We were talking about it this morning, Pat. That the time to have a no-fly zone is not now.

PAT GRAY: Yeah, right at the beginning. Right at the beginning. Seriously, I mean, it’s progressed way too far just to do a no-fly zone.

BECK: Now it’s going to be a civil war. Now, now, this would be – think of this America, this would be the third country that America has ground forces or air forces or sea, that is in battle and engaged in a Muslim country. That’s insanity.

GRAY: Mmhmm.

BECK: And the time to support the rebels was at the very beginning when the momentum was there. There’s no momentum now. The momentum is the other way. I’m not saying we don’t do something to protect these people, but I’ll tell you, it’s very disturbing to me that our military could be engaged in yet another war in the Middle East.

GRAY: I think if you would have done this at the beginning, you would have been far less likely to have any kind of confrontation. You remember 1989 when we had that little run-in with the MiGs, the Libyan MiGs? And our -

BECK: – our guys

GRAY: Our F-14 tomcats took ‘em down.

BECK: Yeah.

GRAY: And there was not a peep out of Libya for the next 20 years. Libya didn’t make a sound. Well -

BECK: Yeah. [unintelligible]

GRAY: I mean, they had the couple terrorist activities. But, for the most part, Moammar Gadhafi was pretty quiet after that point.

BECK: Oh yeah. We were bombing his tent.

GRAY: Yeah.

BECK: There’s no – there’s, I mean, now, this is the problem with this president, it’s the same thing. Look at his pattern, the BP oil spill. This is the thing that bothers me. And it’s always patterns. The BP oil spill – we all know he used that to his advantage – never let a good crisis go to waste. And so what did he do? He wasn’t there – he was engaged, of course he talked about it, but he wasn’t engaged. Until it started getting out of control, and all of us were saying, where is the government?

GRAY: Mmhmm.

BECK: Where is the president on this? And he was strangely absent.

GRAY: Hasn’t it been like that with every crisis -

BECK: Everything. Every crisis.

GRAY: The Fort Hood – the Fort Hood shooting. He wasn’t really out front with that, and that was, you know, 13 U.S. soldiers being killed on their base. And then when he finally did make the statement, he comes out and talks about the – the Indian medicine man first -

BECK: Right. OK.

GRAY: – for two minutes before he even got around to the mention.

BECK: But here is – here is the point on that. I believe that’s because he just sees us as the oppressor nation. He just sees us as a nation who is and has oppressed the Native Americans and, and the Muslim communities around the world. And so he’s – he’s – he’s not with the terrorists, I’m not saying that, but he is sympathetic to their cause, which slows people down. You know what I mean?

GRAY: Mm.

BECK: You agree with that or disagree with that?

GRAY: Well, I don’t know if sympathetic to the cause is the right -

BECK: Sym -

GRAY: – phrase.

BECK: Sym – oh, uh – wait a minute, I’m not saying that he’s sympathetic with people blowing people up.

GRAY: Yeah.

BECK: I’m saying -

GRAY: I just wanted to make sure -

BECK: Yeah, yeah.

GRAY: – that people know that you’re not saying that.

BECK: He’s sympathetic, he’s sympathetic [unintelligible]

GRAY: Well I think he sympathizes that America has done some bad things -

BECK: Yeah.

GRAY: And, and so – [unintelligible]

BECK: The Palestinian plight.

GRAY: Yes.

BECK: The Palestinian plight – only like 23 percent of Americans agree with the Palestinians. But he is, I believe, he’s probably one of the 23 percent.

GRAY: Well, his pastor said it best, didn’t he, when he said America’s chickens have come home to roost.

BECK: Yes.

GRAY: Maybe he has a little of that sentiment -

BECK: Yes.

GRAY: – I don’t know.

BECK: Yes, yes. I’m not saying that he’s in league with the terrorists, I’m not saying that he agrees with bombings like that. But he is slower to react because he is a guy who is sympathetic to something that most Americans are not. We don’t – he has said it himself over and over, I’m tired of Muslim-Americans being rounded up in the middle of the night. That’s never happened. And if it has, show it to me, Mr. President because I will be with you on that. I agree with you that that shouldn’t happen. So show me the evidence, and I will stand with you.

But what’s disturbing about the BP oil crisis is it worked to his favor, it worked to his advantage by leaving it go for a while and not capping it, he had to have a massive disaster to be able to do what he did. Now is this what’s happening in Libya? Because the time for that, I mean, even France is leading this. Nobody, is – and the people are crying out, America. And everybody knows we’re the only one that can do it. We have the carriers right there. I’ve been on the aircraft carriers in the fifth fleet – 90 miles off the coast of Libya. We have them. We can do it. But the time to do it was when we had momentum and now, what’re we gonna – we have more troops going someplace? The possibility of it? We’re going to engage people with our military? What’re – what – we’re going to get involved in another war? What are you, out of your mind? It doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t make sense.

And here’s the other thing that I just want to share with those who think that the workers of the world can unite. What is happening in the world right now is exactly what happened in the 1920s and early 1930s in Europe, and it is the communists, and the socialists, and the Marxists that believe in one global order, and they believe that if the workers will unite – I mean, the people who took out the permit for the unions for the American Dream Act in Washington D.C., they say it clearly on their own website, the International Socialist Organization, that they believe that only the workers uniting will actually cause the revolution to happen.

Well here’s where they go wrong. If you look at what’s happening in Japan right now and you look at the spike of the yen, that is because people love their country and they are selling their stuff, and they are getting out of gold or whatever it is, and they are buying their own dollar, their yen, and they are going to invest it in their own country. When the whole world melts down, when America begins to fall on real hard times – and I mean, I – I hope I’m discredited on this, but I believe it’s coming. And when we fall on real hard times, they will say workers of the world unite, and they will unite all of the workers, but at some point the unions – the union workers will say, wait a minute, how are you going to balance the world, you’re giving our jobs to India, or Mexico, or whatever. And people become nationalists, that’s what’s happening in Japan. There’s no – I’m not saying it’s communist or anything else, I’m just talking about the yen – they’re becoming nationalists. We did it after 9/11. We protect our own countries.

And that’s what the Soviet Union, that’s where Lenin and Marx and Stalin all went wrong – is they think they can unite the whole world with the workers. But the first step where it starts to go wrong is people start to protect themselves and their own communities that they understand as communities. And the world does not accept this global order, it doesn’t, and when things get better in India or jobs go to India instead of here, they will not listen to a socialist saying, “workers of the world, unite” what they will listen to is a national socialist, somebody who says take care of America first, workers, you’re already unionized, you’re already together right? It’s them that is the problem, and they become national socialists, not international socialists. International socialism will not work, and it will turn the world to national socialism, which is the Nazi regime.

I don’t know how people don’t understand the logic of this, but it is true, and it happens the same way every time, and governments, and they, the, governments, or the people, that the radicals, they use the youth – which is happening, and they also use giant corporations. And they get giant corporations, some of them willingly, and some of them just acquiesce because they say, I’ll just get, ’cause they’ll let me survive, and I’ll be part of the survivors. You do not want to be part of those survivors, because in the end, they do not survive, because they always end the same way, always. Whether it’s Mao, Stalin, Hitler, or Mussolini, they always end the same way.

Beck, no one knows what you mean because you’re a freak.

One expects insane rants from Beck, but some of the stuff in here, with regards to terrorism and President Obama is disgraceful.

Interesting Case Of Racial Allegations Coming Out Of Cleveland Against Basketball Coach

This is a case I found kind of interesting as a white basketball coach is being accused of using racial slurs against black basketball players.

The team is undefeated, 15-0, and these charges have thrown the Cleveland area community into the spotlight in the wrong way.

Here is a portion of the story from the television station website:

RICHMOND HEIGHTS — Racial tensions between a coach and his players have an undefeated high school basketball team threatening to boycott the rest of the season.

The Richmond Heights basketball team is 15-and-0, but the team planned to sit out Tuesday night’s game, unless their coach was fired.

Monday, parents sent the school superintendent a letter, claiming he uses racist and degrading comments.

“Everybody in this room are responsible for these children, it’s time to stop,” said parent Nneka Slade Jackson, during a heated school board meeting Monday night.

“They been dealing with this for months (years), this ain’t something that just started yesterday,” said parent Alvin Fulton.

The parents are demanding the superintendent, Dr. Linda Hardwick, remove high school varsity basketball coach Jason Popp, alleging he uses inappropriate language, as well as racist comments towards his players.

Here is the full version of the story: http://newsone.com/entertainment/sports-entertainment/casey-gane-mccalla/team-may-boycott-hs-basketball-coach-jason-popp-for-racist-comments/

Due diligence must be taken to investigate the very serious allegations, but if true then the words of this coach would be very disturbing for a person entrusted to lead a group of young men.

Kelley Williams-Bolar Case A Disturbing One That Color Of Change Is Following

Here is a letter from ColorofChange:

Kelley Williams-Bolar wanted to give her children a better life by sending them to school in the nearby majority-White school district where her father lives — and she went to jail for it. Now, as a convicted felon, helping her children will be even harder — she had been studying to become a teacher, but that dream may have ended as well.

Real justice requires that the punishment fit the crime; by any measure, this is cruelly unjust.

Please join us calling on Governor Kasich to take a public stand and do everything he can to right this injustice (including making sure that Williams-Bolar has the opportunity to become a teacher in Ohio). And please ask your friends and family to add their voices as well — it takes just a moment:

http://act.colorofchange.org/sign/ohioschools

Kelley Williams-Bolar is a single mother of two daughters, and she is a teacher’s aide in Akron city schools who has been studying to become a teacher. According to Williams-Bolar, after their home in a housing project was burglarized, she decided to protect her daughters’ safety by sending them to school in neighboring Copley Township, where her father lives.¹

Williams-Bolar claims that she maintained a part-time residence at her father’s home, but the school district didn’t see it that way. Neither did County Prosecutor Sherri Walsh, who charged Williams-Bolar with grand theft and falsifying records — a third-degree felony. The judge presiding over the case recognized the harshness of the felony charge and encouraged Prosecutor Walsh to offer a plea bargain for a lighter charge — but Walsh flatly refused.²

Williams-Bolar was convicted on the felony charge, and sentenced to 5 years in prison. The judge suspended all but 10 days of the jail time, instead ordering 2 years of probation and 80 hours of community service. She’s out of jail now, but the repercussions could last a lifetime: unless the felony is eliminated from her record, Williams-Bolar may be unable to earn her teaching certificate under Ohio law. Williams-Bolar is only a few classes away from earning her teaching certificate.³

Any parent could understand why Kelley Williams-Bolar did what she did to try to give her children access to opportunity. It’s tragic that families around America must make choices like this every day in order to ensure their kids are safe and well-educated. And it’s tragic that this family’s opportunity to succeed stands to be limited because a single mom chose to put her kids first.

With just a moment of your time, you can make clear to Governor John Kasich that you expect him to lead in ensuring real justice that’s proportional to the facts of the case. By speaking out, you’re not just standing with Williams-Bolar — you’re standing with every parent who doesn’t have access to great schools, and who must make difficult choices.

Please join our call for justice for Kelley Williams-Bolar. And when you do, please ask your friends and family to do the same.

Thanks and Peace,

– James, Gabriel, William, Dani, Natasha and the rest of the ColorOfChange.org team
January 28th, 2011

References:

1. “Ohio Mom Kelley Williams-Bolar Jailed for Sending Kids to Better School District,” ABC News, 1-26-2011
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/703?akid=1876.868165.A8JX3O&t=7

2. “Kelley Williams-Bolar leaves jail but public outcry escalates,” The Beacon Journal, 1-26-2011
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/704?akid=1876.868165.A8JX3O&t=9

3. See Reference 1

Color of Change Takes On For-Profit High Education Programs

It’s a dangerous situation so many people find themselves trapped in as you will see described below by Color of Change:

Hundreds of thousands of people go into debt every year enrolling in for-profit higher education programs like DeVry and Argosy — sold on the idea that they’ll graduate with skills that will lead to opportunity and a better life. In reality, many come out with a mountain of debt they can’t pay back and no better prospects at employment.¹

Thankfully, the Obama administration is trying to rein in this industry, which preys on low-income Americans. Their plan is to stop federal financial aid from going to higher ed programs that don’t actually help students get jobs and pay off their debt.² Not surprisingly, the industry is fighting back hard, despite its atrocious record: their students make up 10% of those in higher ed but 40% of students who stop making payments on their loans.³

The Department of Education will make a decision soon on how to regulate this industry — and they’re under huge pressure from industry lobbyists. Please join us in calling on Education Secretary Arne Duncan and Congress to stand strong and protect low-income students. It only takes a moment:

http://act.colorofchange.org/sign/studentdebt

Taking time away from work to get a traditional college education can feel like an impossible proposition for many Americans, and for-profit colleges seem like a quick, flexible way to get ahead. They promise low-income folks the job training it takes to escape poverty.

There’s a catch with these so-called career education programs. Recruiters say the certificates they offer will prepare students for good jobs if they’ll take on huge student loans to enroll. But the schools often leave people deep in debt and with credentials that employers don’t take seriously.⁴ Students think they’re doing what it takes to escape minimum wage jobs. They’re actually getting deeper into financial trouble.

It’s an issue that disproportionately affects cash-strapped Black folks who work long hours and for whom higher education at public universities or private, non-profit colleges feels impossible. A quarter of Black Americans with associate degrees get them from for-profit colleges, and 40% of these schools’ alumni are people of color.⁵

When Black folks decide to pursue post-secondary schooling, we’re often the first in our families to do so. And we typically have to navigate a complex process on our own and with limited information. For-profit colleges have been caught preying on this fact — misleading students, using deceptive practices, and even encouraging applicants to enter false information on their financial aid forms.⁶ Statistics show that people who enroll at for-profit schools are much less able to manage their debt than those who go to non-profit schools.⁷

The Obama administration’s proposed “gainful employment” rule would make sure that students who use federal financial aid to pay for school are able to get jobs after graduating that will allow them to repay their debt. In practice, it would force many for-profit institutions to either lower their tuition or improve their programs. But industry lobbyists are trying to kill the Obama administration’s proposed rule. They argue that for-profit colleges will be unfairly targeted by the regulation — a position that doesn’t hold water. The truth is that certificate programs at both for- and non-profit colleges will be subject to the rule.⁸

Some legislators, including several members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) who you’d expect to be protecting the interests of low-income Black folks, are backing up the industry’s claims.⁹ They put forth a blame-the-victim argument that says the problem isn’t the programs, its students’ impoverished backgrounds and inability to manage their finances. It’s infuriating, and thankfully that logic is being called out by CBC members Reps. Gwen Moore (D-WI) and Maxine Waters (D-CA) and civil rights organizations including the NAACP, Rainbow PUSH Coalition, the United Negro College Fund, the Thurgood Marshall College Fund, LULAC, National Council of La Raza and United States Hispanic Leadership Institute.¹⁰

You can help, too — with your voice. Can you take a moment to call on the Obama administration and Congress to resist industry pressures and regulate higher education programs that don’t serve our communities? After you do, please ask your friends and family to do the same:

http://act.colorofchange.org/sign/studentdebt/

Thanks and Peace,

– James, Gabriel, William, Dani, Natasha, and the rest of the ColorOfChange.org team
January 27th, 2011

References:

1. “Student Loan Default Rates Increase,” U.S. Department of Education press release, 9-13-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/686?akid=1871.868165.IasvPT&t=7

2. Fact sheet, Coalition to Protect Students and Taxpayers
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/687?akid=1871.868165.IasvPT&t=9

3. See reference 2.

4. “The Newest College Credential,” The New York Times, 1-7-11
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/688?akid=1871.868165.IasvPT&t=11

5. “Minority Leaders Oppose “Gainful Employment” Rules for For-profit Colleges,” Diverse Issues in Higher Education, 9-20-10 (NB: Rainbow PUSH has reversed its position and now supports the DOE’s proposed rule)
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/689?akid=1871.868165.IasvPT&t=13

6. “For-profit colleges fight negative federal report,” Chicago Tribune, 1-10-11
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/690?akid=1871.868165.IasvPT&t=15

7. See reference 2.

8. Q&A on Gainful Employment, Coalition to Protect Students and Taxpayers
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/691?akid=1871.868165.IasvPT&t=17

9. “For-Profit Schools Donate to Lawmakers Opposing New Financial Aid Rules,” ProPublica, 9-17-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/692?akid=1871.868165.IasvPT&t=19

10. Comments in support of rules, Coalition to Protect Students and Taxpayers
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/693?akid=1871.868165.IasvPT&t=21

Additional resources:

“For-Profit Schools File Lawsuit to Stave Off Regulations,” ColorLines, 1-24-11
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/694?akid=1871.868165.IasvPT&t=23

“For-profit colleges spend big on lobbying,” Bloomberg News, 12-24-10
http://act.colorofchange.org/go/695?akid=1871.868165.IasvPT&t=25

Stand Strong Against Birthers On NBC’s ‘Meet The Press’

I watched a video clip of Republican House majority leader Eric Cantor being interviewed on NBC’s “Meet the Press” and thought he was largely evasive in his willingness to take on the birthers on his side of the political mainstream.

Sure, he laughed them off, but seemed unwilling to strongly denounce the crazy talk.

From Huffington Post:

The new Republican House majority leader says he doesn’t think questions about President Barack Obama’s citizenship should play a role in the discussion of policy matters.Two years into the Obama administration, so-called birthers continue to argue that Obama isn’t a natural-born citizen and that he hasn’t proved he’s constitutionally qualified to be president. Birth records in Hawaii haven’t dissuaded them.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor says he believes Obama is a citizen and that most Americans are beyond that question.

Appearing Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Cantor refused to call people who question Obama’s citizenship “crazy,” saying it’s not nice to call anyone crazy.

This article makes it seem as though he was strongly against the birtherism on his side, but I thought he dodged the issue at times and hardly came across as a strong leader against such uncivil talk.

It may not be nice to call people crazy, but it’s also not nice to call people socialist, communist, accuse them of wanting to kill grandma, accuse them of wanting to take over the government, etc.

Cantor had an opportunity to prove himself as a strong leader and instead bowed to the extremists on his wing.

In The Case Of Vick, Fox News Commentator Seems To See A Black Man’s Life Worth No More Than A Dog’s Life

Tucker Carlson

We know that some right-wing commentators at Fox News have a clear disdain for President Barack Obama – a disdain that was illustrated most recently in the case of Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Michael Vick, who had a highly-publicized involvement in dog fighting. Recently, however, President Obama saluted the Eagles for giving Vick a second chance.

Obviously, there had to be at least one commentator at Fox News ready to take a shot at the president over this one.

This all leads me to a little excerpt I read from Dr. Boyce Watkins, who blogged about some very disturbing comments made by right-wing Fox News commentator (I know that is sort of redundant) Tucker Carlson regarding Vick, who has bounced back from his self-inflicted dog-fighting troubles, turned his life around and again is excelling on the football field (and presumably in life).

That’s not good enough for some of the tighty righties at Fox News – like Tucker Carlson.

Here is a portion of what Watkins wrote in his blog regarding Carlson:

“I’m a Christian, I’ve made mistakes myself, I believe fervently in second chances,” Carlson said. “But Michael Vick killed dogs, and he did in a heartless and cruel way. And I think, personally, he should’ve been executed for that. He wasn’t, but the idea that the President of the United States would be getting behind someone who murdered dogs? Kind of beyond the pale.”

First of all, I think that most decent Christians would not believe that Tucker Carlson is a Christian. But then again, most of the original members of the KKK also considered themselves to be Christians, so perhaps Carlson’s delusional behavior actually makes sense. I’d be curious to see if Carlson believes that the hundreds of thousands of deer hunters and members of the National Rifle Association should also be executed for killing animals themselves. After all, killing an animal is the same no matter what, right?

Secondly, Carlson’s insinuation that the life of this black man is worth less than that of a dog is a telling reminder of how the Right Wing is nothing more than a modern-day manifestation of those who’ve profited from slavery and the execution of black men for the past 400 years (they continue to profit from slavery within the prison system – the only place where the United States Constitution allows slavery to take place). If this were 1840, Tucker Carlson would surely be part of the lynch mob that would have dragged Michael Vick out of jail in the middle of the night and murdered him in front of his family.

Like Watkins, I too am deeply disturbed that Carlson seems to suggest that the lives of dogs are sort of an even swap for the life of a black man.

Much like Sarah Palin, Carlson can seemingly resist no opportunity to take a shot at President Obama.

This incident, and the implication of Carlson’s words, are different. This man is acting as if, were he so empowered, would hold himself up as judge, jury and executioner of Michael Vick.

It’s almost Jim Crow-era justice: A black man’s life for a dog’s life.

It shows a dark part of Tucker Carlson’s heart that is chilling. What’s more disturbing is that he has a powerful platform at Fox News where he seems to fit in so well.

Sarah Palin’s Own Words Describe Her Perfectly: Proudly Intolerant

Who knew that Sarah Palin’s own words could describe her as well (or better than) her toughest critic.

From Fox News (Fox Nation), her media relations organizations:

In tonight’s episode of “Sarah Palin’s Alaska,” the former governor showcases the Alaska tundra while caribou hunting with her father. Beyond proving she’s a great shot, the episode is giving Palin an opportunity to “proudly” take aim at “anti-hunting hypocrisy.”

“Tonight’s hunting episode of Sarah Palin’s Alaska ‘controversial’? Really? Unless you’ve never worn leather shoes, sat upon a leather couch or eaten a piece of meat, save your condemnation of tonight’s episode. I remain proudly intolerant of anti-hunting hypocrisy. ” Palin posted on Facebook and Twitter today.

Palin’s pro-hunting posts began on Friday when she urged fans to tune in to “see how we fill our freezers and feed our families with home-grown tundra-roaming Alaskan wild game. We’ll show you how Alaskans hunt. As my friend Sue says, ‘the tundra is the type of landscape that will make a man out of anybody.’ And, PETA…” she wrote on Facebook.

When I think of Sarah Palin I think of proudly intolerant. She was speaking of hunting, but I see it as ideally descriptive of her as a person and as a politician.

Sarah Palin Clearly Wants To Be President … If She Is Willing To Go To Haiti

Frankly, the fact that Fox News celebrity Sarah Palin was willing to go to Haiti, and spend that much time around that many black people, shows me that she is strongly considering running for president of the United States.

I can’t see many other reasons why she would want to be around that many black folks (even if it was a controlled and made-for-television Fox News special).

Detroit News:
http://www.detnews.com/article/20101212/POLITICS03/12120313/1025/POLITICS03/Sarah-Palin-visits-Haiti-under-tight-guard

Bernie Goldberg’s Slobbering Love Affair With The Rich Who Exploit The Poor

Bernard Goldberg, a right-wing analyst who makes frequent appearances on Fox News to spread his far-right messages, thinks the rich are not getting enough from the poor.

In Saddam Hussein-like fashion, Goldberg essentially suggests that the poor should build a monument to the rich as pointed out by News Hounds.

I suggest that we build a big bronze and granite monument, a statue to honor some truly American heroes, unsung American heroes… the rich… Try to imagine an America without rich people. Rich people pay the freight for a whole bunch of things that are good, like taking care of poor people who can’t afford to buy food and medicine and sending other kids to college… The top one percent of all wage earners pay almost 40 percent of all our federal income taxes. The top five percent pay 60 percent and the top 10 percent pay 70 percent. Now I’m not saying, Megyn, that these people are selfless philanthropists. I’m not even saying that they need a tax break. But I’ll tell you what they don’t need. They don’t need to be vilified by people like Bernie Sanders and a whole bunch of other liberal Democrats in Congress. …I’m not defending anybody who’s crooked or anybody who sent this economy into a tailspin… There are a lot of people out there who worked hard for their money… Maybe they’re not making a million or a billion dollars but something over $250,000. These people deserve our gratitude. I mean, how many poor – by the way, the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers… pay a paltry 2.7 percent of all the federal income tax. So how many of those people, how many of those people do you think are helping the poor in this country. It’s the rich who are disproportionately paying taxes and disproportionately helping the poor.

We could write a book about Bernie Goldberg and call it, A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (And Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Fox News and the Rich Elitists Who Want to Preserve a Slave-Like Society.

The rich are rich on the backs of hard-working and oftentimes underpaid folks (not too unlike what happened during times of slavery and not too unlike what happens with those who exploit so-called illegal immigrants.

The O’Reilly Sucks Blog Highlights Bill O’Reilly Going Ape S–t Over A Cartoon

I am always amazed at how Bill O’Reilly obsesses about almost every slight (real or perceived) against his precious Fox News.

O’Reilly is like the parent of a serial killer, who says “he/she was such a good kid.” Like that parent, O’Reilly will go to great lengths to take up for Fox News no matter how inaccurate, racist or biased.

These days, O’Reilly has been whining about some shots the hit Fox Broadcasting cartoon “The Simpsons” has been taking at Fox News (see the cartoons below from Steve of The O’Reilly Sucks Blog that I found).

Below is what Steve had:

But of course O’Reilly did not find it funny at all. The Fox News blowhard came to the defense of his network, labeling the cartoon characters as pinheads.

O’REILLY: Continuing to bite the hand that feeds part of it, Fox Broadcasting once again allows its cartoon characters to run wild.

VIDEO from The Simpsons featuring helicopter emblazoned with “Not Racist But #1 With Racists” slogan. As the helicopter lets one passenger off at the statue of liberty, it becomes unsteady and the pilot says, “We’re unbalanced. Its not fair” before crashing.

Pinheads? I believe so.

Even though O’Reilly slammed them, the Simpsons was right back to needling Fox News on last Sunday’s show in which the right-wing network was given yet another alternative slogan, this one reading “Unsuitable For Viewers Under 75.”

Fox Broadcasting and the producers of the Simpsons are not living in fear of Papa Bear Bill O’Reilly.

Player Hatin’ Palin Is Back At It With Her Attacks On Michelle Obama

There has been no shortage of talk about quitter former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s ridiculous and misguided comments attacking first lady Michelle Obama who is leading a national campaign to combat obesity among young people.

You will hear a lot of people say a lot of things about what Palin is doing, but before I get to that lets get to some of what she had to say via Roland Martin on CNN who cited Huffington Post:

“Take her anti-obesity thing that she is on. She is on this kick, right. What she is telling us is she cannot trust parents to make decisions for their own children, for their own families in what we should eat.”And I know I’m going to be again criticized for bringing this up, but instead of a government thinking that they need to take over and make decisions for us according to some politician or politician’s wife priorities, just leave us alone, get off our back and allow us as individuals to exercise our own God-given rights to make our own decisions and then our country gets back on the right track.”

I really think this comes down to one thing: the blind-rage hatred that people like Palin and others on the right have for the Obamas.

This is a reckless and ignorant attack on Palin’s part. Part of it is she is selling a book, but another part of it shows how pathetic it is that people would actually vote for her to be president of the United States.

Palin is driven by blind-rage hatred of anything that does not fit her world view and right-wing self righteousness.

A VERY large number of these extremist right wingers, tea baggers, birthers, truthers, etc. flat out hate President Obama and have ever since summer of 2008 when he emerged as the front runner to represent the Democrats in the presidential election.

CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/11/24/martin.michelle.obama.palin/index.html?hpt=T2

Bitter John McCain Still Attacking President Obama, And Weakly So

Sen. John McCain continues to look like a bitter and petty man any time President Obama’s name comes out of his mouth.

This, from Think Progress, is another example of Sen. McCain attacking President Obama over the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” gays-in-the-military policy:

But McCain remained undeterred. He agreed that decisions about integration should not be held hostage to the opinions of servicemembers, but then insisted that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell doesn’t pose a problem for gay soldiers or the military. He also reiterated that the Service Chiefs — three of whom publicly endorsed the study last week — are still concerned about repeal:

CROWLEY: Doesn’t [Gates] have a point?

MCCAIN: Well, I think he certainly has a point. I would also certainly say that we should remember where this all started. There was no uprising in the military, there was no problems with Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. [...]

It wasn’t a problem because you didn’t have. It’s called ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ Okay? If you don’t ask somebody and they don’t tell and it’s an all volunteer force. [...] The fact is, this was a political promise made by an inexperienced President or candidate for Presidency of the United States. [...]

The fact is, that this system is working and I believe we need to assess the effect on the morale and battle effectiveness of those people, those young Marines and Army people I met.

But, the “inexperienced” line is nothing more than an irrational cheap shot on Sen. McCain’s part. Bitter John McCain again shows that he is and was far from presidential and that he is little more than a typical partisan politician.

More from Think Progress:

McCain’s characterization of President Obama as “inexperienced” is particularly petty, however, since every Democratic president and presidential candidate since President Clinton has come out against the ban.

It’s weak on McCain’s part.

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/11/28/mccain-dadt-letter/

Which Palin Should Be President: Sarah Or Bristol?

Sammon’s Memo Is Latest Evidence Of System Bias In Favor Of Far Right On Fox News

Bill Sammon’s memo to the Fox News staff fighting to shape the health care debate in a pro-Republican way is not really a big surprise.

Sammon, the biased Washington managing editor for Fox News, is a true right winger. As we know, Fox News has been almost 100-percent opposed to health care reform.

Beyond calling it “Obamacare,” an effort to try and substitute the president’s name for “health,” there is the issue of “public option” vs. “government option” going on these days.

Sammon, who might as well be on the GOP payroll, has made his slant clear as reported by Media Matters for America:

At the height of the health care reform debate last fall, Bill Sammon, Fox News’ controversial Washington managing editor, sent a memo directing his network’s journalists not to use the phrase “public option.”

Instead, Sammon wrote, Fox’s reporters should use “government option” and similar phrases — wording that a top Republican pollster had recommended in order to turn public opinion against the Democrats’ reform efforts.

Journalists on the network’s flagship news program, Special Report with Bret Baier, appear to have followed Sammon’s directive in reporting on health care reform that evening.

Sources familiar with the situation in Fox’s Washington bureau have told Media Matters that Sammon uses his position as managing editor to “slant” Fox’s supposedly neutral news coverage to the right. Sammon’s “government option” email is the clearest evidence yet that Sammon is aggressively pushing Fox’s reporting to the right — in this case by issuing written orders to his staff.

As far back as March 2009, Fox personalities had sporadically referred to the “government option.”

To borrow the famous (some might say infamous) words of Dennis Green, “They are who we thought they were.” He wasn’t talking about Fox News, but it certainly fits.

This is why you can’t trust a lot of what you hear from Fox News without checking it against other reputable and fair media outlets.

Firing Of Juan Williams Illustrates The Bias Of Fox News

Let the Fox News hypocrisy and trend of double standards continue in the wake of the firing of Juan Williams by National Public Radio for his comments about fearing Muslims or people in Muslim garb when he is in airports or on airlines.

Conservatives now are bringing the heat to NPR with threats. Ah, the far-right hypocrisy continues. Many of these are the same people who attack the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the Rev. Jesse Jackson and the Rev. Al Sharpton for using boycotts to fight what they see as injustices.

From Think Progress:

THE DOUBLE STANDARD: ThinkProgress first reported Williams’ comments to highlight the bigoted nature of his remarks. ThinkProgress never called for any specific action to be taken, and NPR’s firing of Williams came as a surprise. Many media figures, including NPR’s own ombudsman, questioned NPR’s decision to fire Williams before providing him with a chance to clarify his statements. As Serwer notes, “firing people for things like this tends to chill the public discourse. Misconceptions should be discussed publicly rather than driven underground.” While arguably premature, the network is within its rights to terminate an employee whose public statements undermine its reputation as a credible news source. According to the announcement, NPR decided to terminate Williams’ contract because his remarks “were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.” As stated in NPR CEO Vivian Schiller’s email to member stations, his comments violated NPR’s long-standing ethics code in which all journalists and contracted analysts like Williams cannot “express views they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist” nor “participate in shows…that encourage punditry and speculation rather than fact-based analysis.” Nor was this the first time NPR admonished Williams on this issue. Last year, after Williams compared Michelle Obama to “Stokely Carmichael in a designer dress,” NPR requested he no longer be identified as affiliated with NPR when appearing on Fox. The radio network’s decision does advance the idea that there shouldn’t be a double standard in what is and is not appropriate rhetoric on the airwaves. CNN host Rick Sanchez and White House correspondent Helen Thomas were fired for insensitive and irresponsible remarks about non-Muslims. CNN also fired Octavia Nasr for comments about a popular Muslim Lebanese leader which were deemed impolitic. If media figures can be fired for anti-Jewish or pro-Muslim comments, then the principle should be applied for anti-Muslim comments as well. But as Fox News proves time and again, anti-Muslim remarks are generally appreciated — if not promoted — on the network.

You see, it’s OK for Fox News to use this kind of tactic or a similar kind of tactic when they want to protect one of their own or to protect an opinion for which they agree.

I don’t feel the least bit sorry for Williams, who has willingly been used as a pawn by people at Fox News to attack black people and to stand in as a fake liberal.

As the excerpt illustrates, where was Fox News when Helen Thomas and Rick Sanchez were fired in high-profile dismissals?

Where were they when Octavia Nasr was let go?

They were silent because they’re hypocrites.

Now, Fox News and others on the far right are calling for NPR funding to be revoked because it stood out against Williams’ bigoted comments:

SELF-RIGHTEOUS: As if to prove the point, conservative pundits and politicians whipped into an apoplectic rage yesterday over NPR’s announcement, with many decrying the termination as a quintessential attack method of the “super-liberal, politically correct goon squad .” An irate Fox News host Megyn Kelly blamed Council on American-Islamic Relations’ (CAIR) Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper– who had called for “swift action” against Williams — for the firing, repeatedly asking “are you happy now?” Right-wing blogger Andrew Breitbart launched a boycott of NPR, declaring, “I refuse to be guest on NPR until Juan Williams is reinstated. I suggest all BIG editors, contributors follow same course.” Former Arkansas governor and Fox News host Mike Huckabee not only joined in boycotting NPR’s “censorship,” but called on the government to “start making cuts to federal spending” by defunding NPR. Despite the fact that NPR gets less than six percent of its revenue from government grants and “receives no direct federal funding for operations,” several more Republicans jumped on the defund bandwagon. “At a time when our country is dangerously in debt and looking for areas of federal spending to cut, I think we’ve found a good candidate for defunding” in NPR, wrote Tea Party maven Sarah Palin. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich called on Congress to “investigate NPR” and “consider cutting off their money,” while House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) said, “I think it’s reasonable to ask why Congress is spending taxpayers’ money to support a left-wing radio network — and in the wake of Juan Williams’ firing, it’s clearer than ever that’s what NPR is.” O’Reilly said he “wanted to take it further than that. I want it suspended today while the investigation takes place.” GOP operative Karl Rove enthusiastically concurred, quipping “our country needs to save money.” Last night, O’Reilly even announced to a distraught Williams that Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) will introduce legislation to defund NPR. “Congress is going to defund NPR,” O’Reilly assured Williams, “and you did it.”

Republican hypocrisy at its dubious worst.