Administration Seeks Change In Crack Sentences

The Obama administration joined a federal judge yesterday in urging Congress to end a racial disparity by equalizing prison sentences for dealing and using crack versus powdered cocaine. "Jails are loaded with people who look like me," U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton, who is black, told a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing.

Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer said the administration believes Congress' goal "should be to completely eliminate the disparity" between the two forms of cocaine. "A growing number of citizens view it as fundamentally unfair," Mr. Breuer testified.

It takes 100 times more powdered cocaine than crack cocaine to trigger the same harsh mandatory minimum sentences.

Sen. Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat who chairs the subcommittee, said more than 81% of those convicted for crack offenses in 2007 were African-American, although only about 25% of crack cocaine users are African Americans. Congress enacted the disparity during an epidemic of crack cocaine in the 1980s, but the liberal Democrat said lawmakers erred in assuming that violence would be greater among those using crack.

Mr. Breuer said the best way to deal with violence is to severely punish anyone who commits a violent offense, regardless of the drug involved.

Booker Rising response: I agree with the Obama administration. A long overdue action. Actually, I'd go a step further and legalize drugs for adults altogether. The government has no business telling consenting adults what they can or cannot do with their own bodies. The monies spent on the War On Drugs should be spent on locking up violent offenders.

Keeping Conservatives On Trial

Constructive Feedback, a black conservative, on a liberal & leftist tactic: "In my observation of how Progressives work - the fundamental tactic that they use is to KEEP CONSERVATIVES ON TRIAL. Thus all of the problems that they point to are the fault of the conservatives who either FAILED when they were in power or BLOCKED more progressive policies for change when the Progressives were in power. Please keep in mind that despite the total control that the Democrats now have in the federal government, without any Republican ability to stop them COUPLED WITH, in so many areas, the domination of local Progressive forces - THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BLAME THEIR OWN IDEOLOGY if and when things implode in several years as the debt burden and unworkable tax burden may prove to be the case."

He continues: "The only way to defeat this progressive tactic of 'Keeping Conservatives on trial' is to go directly to the people and remind them of their own PERMANENT INTERESTS. If the people aren't made to pursue their own permanent interests EVEN IF it means taking bad tasting medicine they indeed are going to prefer the sugar coated pill which is hollow inside. Ironically I am attacked for simply demanding that people who are otherwise ideological bigots to remember what they were promised when they agreed to put the regime that they favor into power."

Three Abandoned Americans

D.C. Thornton takes the Obama administration to task for its handling of the kidnapping of three captured American journalists by Iran and North Korea. The black libertarian Republican blogger writes: "While President Obama celebrated his first 100 days in office, there was no celebrating amongst the relatives of three American journalists — all women of color — being held hostage by the terrorist regimes of Iran and North Korea....The Norks also plan to 'try' Ling and Lee in kangaroo court, as NOBODY in the Obama administration dares to lift a finger in protest....Joe Biden was right: President Obama is being tested, and he is willfully failing the country. I wouldn’t trust him as much as to make a fist to defend the lives of his own two children. Pray for the safety of Roxana Saberi, Laura Ling, and Euna Lee. May God deliver them from evil, given the harsh reality that Obama doesn’t give a damn about them, let alone the rest of us."

Davis Promises Help For Black Farmers

Rep. Artur Davis reassured black farmers yesterday that Congress and the Obama administration will deliver on a promise to compensate them for past discrimination by the Department of Agriculture. "We are going to put more money on the table," the moderate Alabama Democrat told a group of black farmers. "This is a starting point."

Black farmers, mostly from Southern states, were in Washington, D.C. this week to press Congress and the Obama administration to increase the $100 million set aside in the 2008 farm bill to pay farmers as part of a 1999 settlement of a discrimination case. Farmers also complained that payments have yet to be disbursed.

Thousands of black farmers received $50,000 payments as part of the settlement with the USDA, known as the Pigford case. Rep. Davis and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus, pressed to get extra funding in the farm bill to pay late filers whose claims were rejected. President Obama, then a U.S. Senator for Illinois, also pushed the legislation and later campaigned on the issue. "The $100 million was a placeholder," said Rep. Davis, adding that the bill allows Congress to increase funding each year. "It was not meant to be a cap of any sort."

Justice Department officials recently filed a motion arguing that the fund is "demonstrably inadequate to resolve the claims of the current plaintiffs, let alone all of the potential claimants under the act." It estimates that 65,000 black farmers could file claims that could total about $4 billion. At that rate, it said, the fund would run out after the first 1,600 successful claims.

Armstrong Williams on Beliefs Without Convictions

The conservative Republican commentator, on President Barack Obama: "President Obama was elected with a multitude of beliefs ranging from health care and climate control to Guantanamo Bay detainees and the war in Iraq. But he entered the White House with two radical convictions which guide his beliefs and for which he would subordinate political maneuvering or optics. His first conviction is that politicians and bureaucrats can run the economy and redistribute income better than the invisible hand of the American laissez-faire capitalist system. His second conviction is that America’s foreign policy should be determined by an international leftist academic and media elite and not by the interests of the American people. Beliefs have short shelf lives. Convictions are forever and justify risking political defeat in defense of principles that live for the ages."

Calling him the political Bernie Madoff intent on destroying America, Mr. Williams highlights areas where President Obama has flip-flopped: "He was for public financing of his general presidential campaign, until he was against it when he realized he had discovered a fund-raising juggernaut. He was against an individual Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, until he was for it to expand his political base and to throw his arms around a decision of the United States Supreme Court. He was an opponent of the death penalty for child rapists, until he was for it to appeal to social conservatives. He was against the state secrets doctrine to block litigation alleging government complicity in torture, illegal surveillance or arbitrary y detentions, until he was for expanding the doctrine beyond the dimensions of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. He was against spying on Americans without individualized warrants to gather foreign intelligence, until he was in favor of group warrants and retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies implicated in criminal and civil violations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. He was against presidential power to detain citizens or residents indefinitely without accusation or trial in the war on international terrorism, until he was for it after entering the White House. He was against detentions of 'enemy combatants' at Guantanamo Bay for nebulous associations with al Qaeda, until he was for it as long as the pejorative label was dropped. He was against maintaining U.S. troops in Iraq after 2011, until he was for 50,000 (a greater number than are stationed in Japan or South Korea) if they could euphemistically be described as 'non-combatant combatants.' He was against unchecked presidential power, until he was in favor of acting as the nation’s economic czar empowered to pick and choose winners and losers by decree. He was against lobbyists serving in his Cabinet, until he was for it by granting a waiver for his Deputy Secretary of Defense. He was in favor of Tom Daschle’s nomination as Secretary of Health and Human Services despite glaring income tax dereliction, until he was against it when the nomination fell into disfavor. He was in favor of whistleblower protection for intelligence agency employees, until he was against it. He was against a president’s failure to fulfill his duty to faithfully execute, not circumvent the laws, until he was in favor of it after he occupied the White House and confronted evidence of torture authorized or practiced by Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, their subordinates and lawyers in the Department of Justice."

Chrysler Files Chapter 11

Patrick Edaburn over at The Moderate Voice, a moderate-liberal blog, writes: "News breaking this morning that Chrysler has filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy, the first automaker to do so since 1933. Details at this point are sketchy but it seems likely that some form of company will emerge from the process, although it is likely to be in a very different form. The New York Times has a primer on the process and the reports seem to suggest this will be a fairly short case, which means pretty much everyone has agreed on what is going to happen but they need to [go to] court to authorize everything. Under Chapter 11 the court, in cooperation with the company and the creditors works to restructure things to make a new company which remains viable. This will likely mean that they will be selling assets in order to raise funds, restructuring and probably cancelling debt and probably making changes in payroll and benefits."

He continues: "Since unions seem to be on board with the bankruptcy my guess is that they have an agreement to minimize the cuts relating to union members, which means middle management is more likely to take a hard hit. The company will also be able to ‘fire’ any dealers who they want to (the dealers can object but the court would likely reject those objections in order to keep the case workable). This is going to be a major event in the economy as the big hits will be taken by banks and other lenders who have given loans to the company."

Love The Cards, Hate The Card Issuers

Doug Bandow at the libertarian Cato Institute, on President Obama's goal to make credit card rules "fair": "There are lots of reasons to criticize the practices of credit card companies, but many of the rules are simply mechanisms to charge riskier borrowers more. If you pay off your bill every month, you don’t pay the extra fees and interest. If you are more disorganized, short on cash, or both, you pay more. Higher charges make it possible to provide more credit to more people. Of course, politicians believe in the latter but not the former. Banks should provide credit cards, make loans, and issue mortgages to everyone, irrespective of credit standing, at rates akin to those charged Bill Gates. Anything more is viewed as a variant of 'predatory' lending deserving condemnation. Maybe it would be best for some people not to buy so much on credit, but that isn’t — at least so far — the government’s decision. However, it would be more honest if government branded people with the Scarlet C and banned them from borrowing than prohibiting companies from charging higher rates and fees to reflect higher credit risks."

He continues: "The credit card debate is stranger than most in Washington. Listening to critics you’d think that the card companies were dragooning people off the streets, forcing them at gunpoint to sign up for cards, and demanding that they spend money else their children will be kidnapped and sold into slavery. Precisely who was forced to accept and use these terrible cards with their terrible terms? No one. Instead of posturing as defenders of the body politic, crusading politicians should, as my friend Don Boudreaux of George Mason University suggested, give up their day jobs and start credit card companies. These entrepreneurs then could offer consumers better cards with less onerous terms, making everyone better off. Any takers?"

Mychal Massie: "Anti-Gun Laws Favor Criminals"

Asserts the conservative Republican commentator: "The corner grocer, bank tellers and law enforcement officers do not fear legitimate, responsible gun owners - they fear criminals with guns. Legislatures can pass all the anti-gun legislation they want, but criminals will unfortunately still get guns and will still use them. That’s the point. Lawmakers, urged on by the malevolent cacophony of anti-gun ownership groups, have it backwards. America doesn’t need to further oppress the innocent - they need to direct their energies at getting criminals off the streets. They need to deglamorize the criminal use of firearms."

Mr. Massie continues his commentary: "It’s also easy for the anti-gun groups to blame conservative commentators for being responsible for gun violence based on their support of the Second Amendment. This, however, is a crude banausic idiocy based on agenda-driven contempt for any and all who disagree with them. To that point, how many anti-firearm groups contribute to charities that help the families of slain officers? How many funerals of the same slain officers have Susan Sarandon, Rosie O’Donnell, Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton attended? Mumia Abdul-Jamal is given hero status for supposedly being politically prosecuted for his cold-blooded murder by gun of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner. New York undercover officers James Nemorin and Rodney Andrews were murdered execution-style as they tried to rid New York City streets of machine guns and the gang-bangers who possess them. It’s not clear how passing more restrictive laws or taking guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens would have prevented the murders of these officers."

More: "If legislators and anti-gun groups were serious about reducing - and possibly even ending - gun crimes, they would turn their scorn toward the criminals instead of finding criminality in legal gun ownership. They would direct their attention toward constructive ways to take guns out of the hands of thugs, gangs and abusive spouses that protects the innocent. As it is, their efforts are not the solution to gun crimes - they are part of the problem."

LARRY ELDER COMMENTARY: The 100-Day Assault On America

Is how the libertarian Republican commentator views President Obama's actions thus far: "Aided by an eagerly compliant Democratic-controlled Congress, a sycophantic media, and a bunch of squishy Republicans, President Obama has taken the country on a radical, mind-boggling leap into collectivism. Obama -- to use one of his favorite expressions -- doubled down, no, tripled and quadrupled down on Bush's 'stimulus' and 'rescue' packages, spending trillions of dollars to 'bail out' financial institutions, too-big-to-fail businesses, and even deficit-running states. Obama promises to use taxpayer money to rescue 'responsible homeowners' -- whatever that means -- from foreclosure, thus artificially propping up prices that shut out renters who would love to buy now-much-cheaper houses. Obama proposes spending billions (or trillions?) more on 'creating or saving' -- whatever that means -- 4 million, 3.5 million or 2.5 million jobs. Pick a number. Given the government's vast business expertise, Obama proposes spending gobs of money to 'invest' in green jobs. And he's just warming up. He wants taxpayers to guarantee, presumably to all who request it, a 'world-class education' -- whatever that means. Firmly in charge of much of the domestic car industry, Obama effectively fired the CEO of General Motors. He threatens to fire still more executives in the parts of the financial services industry currently under the management, direction or control of Uncle Sam -- that eminent, well-regarded banker."

He continues his commentary: "Did the President, after campaigning against pork and earmarks, really sign bills that include both? Yes. Will the President's new budget really triple and quadruple the annual deficit? Yes. Will the President's budget really double the national debt within a few years and then increase still more beyond that? Yes. Do the President and members of Congress, many of whom never operated so much as a T-shirt concession booth, really believe that they can 'modernize' health care, thus 'saving' taxpayers buckets of money? Yes. America traditionally represents the greatest possibility of someone's going from nothing to something. Why? In theory, if not practice, the government stays out of the way and lets individuals take risks and reap rewards or accept the consequences of failure. We call this capitalism -- or, at least, we used to. Today's global downturn reflects too much borrowing and too much lending. But would borrowers and lenders -- at least in America -- have engaged in the same kind of behavior but for artificially low interest rates under the Federal Reserve System? Would borrowers and lenders have acted as precipitously but for the existence of Fannie and Freddie, which bought up their mortgages? Would banks have so readily lent money to those who clearly could not repay it but for the Community Reinvestment Act? That law pressured banks into relaxing their normal lending standards to help low-income borrowers."

More commentary from Mr. Elder about the Obama administration: "Now let's turn to Job No. 1 -- national security. We no longer call the War on Terror the 'War on Terror.' We no longer call Islamofascist enemy detainees 'enemy detainees.' The President embarked on an I'm-not-Bush and we're-sorry-for-being-arrogant international tour. To the receptive, admiring G-20 nations, the President flogged America, calling us domineering and overbearing. What did the swooning leaders give in return? Virtually nothing. He wanted more assistance in fighting the war in Afghanistan. The NATO members offered more advisers and trainers, all, mind you, out of harm's way and only on a temporary basis. The President offered a new relationship with Iran, provided Iranians 'unclenched their fist.' The President even sent a shout-out video to the Iranians on one of their holidays. What did he get in return? Iran promised to continue its march toward the development of a nuclear weapon and called Israel the 'most cruel and racist regime.' Obama offered North Korea a kinder, gentler foreign policy. What did he get in return? The North Koreans, in violation of a United Nations resolution, attempted to launch a long-range missile. The President condemned the act. The United Nations Security Council convened an emergency session. What happened? Nothing. Well, not exactly nothing. North Korea kicked out the U.N.'s nuclear inspectors and announced the resumption of its nuclear weapons program. And North Korea, along with Iran, arrested and imprisoned American journalists."

Booker Rising Poll: Obama's First 100 Days

ELLIS WASHINGTON OP-ED: Dump The Exclusionary Rule!

The law professor and conservative Republican argues against the Supreme Court's ruling on warrantless searches: "Last week the Supreme Court handed down a decision further narrowing the limits of warrantless car searches. In a 5-4 split decision, the Court ruled that a warrantless search of a car incident to an arrest is legal provided that the police officer is within reaching distance of the vehicle, or the officers have reasonable belief that 'evidence of the offense of arrest might be found in the vehicle.' The decision in Arizona v. Gant overturned a 30-year rule established in New York v. Belton (1980), where the Court held that 'when a policeman has made a lawful custodial arrest of the occupant of an automobile, he may, as a contemporaneous incident to that arrest, search the passenger compartment.' The Court upheld the Arizona Supreme Court ruling for the defendant, Rodney Gant, on whom police found cocaine in his jacket pocket in the back seat of his car during an arrest for driving with a suspended license. The state court held that Gant could not have reached his car during the search and posed no safety threat to the officers, making a vehicle search unreasonable under the 'reaching-distance rule' of Chimel v. California (1969), as applied to Belton. When I viewed the names of the majority justices – Stevens, Ginsburg, Souter, Scalia and Thomas, a rare and bizarre mix of strict constructionist with liberal social activist jurisprudence – it appeared to me like the fix was in against the police as the sentinels against societal anarchy, against the original intent of the Constitution's framers and against a rational judicial decision-making that will protect law-abiding citizens from being preyed upon by criminals cunning enough to get off on a technicality."

Professor Washington continues his commentary: "Justice Cardozo was right that the essence of the exclusionary rule is that, the criminal is to go free because the constable has blundered. Surely it can be understood that no rational society that follows the rule of law can continue to exist where criminals (through the aiding and abetting of judges) are essentially given the key to their own jail cell via the exclusionary rule. This is sheer madness. I do not celebrate the bipartisan decision of Arizona v. Gant because it has given credence to this diabolical, unconstitutional exclusionary rule. Let us return to electing faithful and wise presidents and governors who will appoint judges that will interpret the law according to the black letter text of the Constitution and the original intent of the framers, rather than legislating from the bench by aborting Reason and morality and deifying their own judicial personal policy preferences."

Hot Topics In The Black Center-Right Blogosphere

Craig Bardo, conservative Republican blogger, compares Sen. Arlen Specter and President Obama to characters in the movie "300": "The Persians defeated the Spartans at Thermopylae in large part because Ephialtes (Arlen Specter) a Greek traitor, led the Persians to a goat path that would allow the Persian Immortals to get behind the Spartans and surround them. But it was a pyrrhic victory for Xerxes (the One). King Leonidas and 300 Spartans led a lo[o]se confederation of free Greeks from allied Peloponnesian city states totaling perhaps 2,000 and held off Xerxes' million man army for 3 days before succumbing. Their valor rallied and united the formerly fragmented Greek city states and less than a year later they defeated the Persians at the battles of Plataea and Mycale which turned the tide in the Greco-Persian wars."

Citing gay marriage, conservative pastor Raymond Dix Jr. argues that legal activism is a danger to democracy: "Again, supporters of same sex marriage argue that cases that outlawed discrimination against blacks are akin to their fight for equality. I disagree wholeheartedly and feel some degree of insult that the gay rights lobby compares their effort to the Civil Rights Movement in America. Since I am definitively black by birth, any discrimination toward me based on this would be beyond my control to correct. The Courts of this country must recognize that their duty to protect liberty and justice should not be subject to rhetoric based on feeling and emotion, or even the prevailing winds of social activism. The court must rule on law based in the right moral choices. Whether or not we support it, the basis of all law is moral code to some degree. Laws against murder, thievery, perjury and personal property have their root in a moral code defined by our Creator. I support the right of people to do as they choose with their lives, but we demonstrate real intolerance when we ignore the right of the majority to disagree."

Sophia Nelson, a moderate Republican pundit, gives the Obama administation a B- on its first 100 days. Like me, Ms. Nelson gave Obama a D on national security for the CIA memos release. However, she ranks the administration higher than I did on the foreign affairs front, giving it a B-. President Obama gets an A from Ms. Nelson on domestic policy, the environment, and on leadership. She says the jury is still out on the financial crisis. However, she gives President Obama an F on urban affairs & issues dealing with the poor, arguing that various black leaders' critiques of the president in this area are correct.

Ripclawe, a conservative Republican blogger, has advice for his party: "Why can't you do both and tie Obama to [R]eid/[P]elosi? 2010 is all about the Congress, start working on that with a unified national message which should have been the standard years ago. Look if you want a cheat sheet then look at what the Dems did the moment Bush stepped into office and after the 2004 election. Cuts by a thousand slices and just kept hammering on the same themes. Obama's numbers are high but not unstoppable if you point out the basic flaws of his ideas. #1 being he is running this country into a bigger hole than Bush ever did with his credit card spending budget plans. The other is stop for the love of holy trying to make the MSM [mainstream media] more friendly to you. They are in love with Obama and share the same political ideology. You better get tougher with them and stop being put on the defensive on everything."

Shermichael Singleton, head of the Young Republican Club at Morehouse College, urges the GOP to reach out to black voters: "We have allowed ourselves to be marginalized in our discussions and relegated to single cultural wedge issues - our party at its best is one that promotes ideas that affirm life, freedom, safety, and justice. For those principles to reach our communities we much have proactive outreach. Reaching out to minorities on the collegiate level is something that we in the Republican Party has neglected to do-reaching out to Historically Black Colleges and universities are a necessity. It will be a difficult process but if we are to have progress and reach uncharted courses with a message of conservatism - this is what has to be done. For far too long the Republican Party has allowed Democrats to monopolize the black community. Simply because we think that we cannot get the minority vote - that sentiment has to change, if we were to come up with an action plan that specifically targets urban communities we can begin to see progress. Every vote counts, even those we think we can’t get."

D.R. Tucker, a conservative Republican blogger, on Sen. Arlen Specter's defection to the Democratic Party: "Perhaps Maine Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins will also hear voices encouraging them to leave the GOP for the Democrats. They should listen to those voices. Snowe and Collins are simply not conservative enough for the Republican Party; they are throwbacks to the Bob Michel era, an era that few conservatives miss. Granted, the GOP will not survive if it engages in an overly broad ideological purge. The party needs its centrists; a political organization that demands ideological fealty to every last issue is a political organization that is doomed. However, centrists and moderates are two different creatures. A centrist is someone who agrees with the lion’s share of a given party’s views but dissents on one or two issues: someone like former McCain campaign adviser Steve Schmidt fits this description, because he lines up with the GOP on most of the major issues (except for same-sex marriage). A moderate, on the other hand, is someone who is technically a member of a given party, but has no real ideological connection to that party. That’s what Specter is—or was."

VIDEO: Dambisa Moyo: "How To Incentivize African Governments And End Aid Dependence"

It's a three-minute clip from my favorite Zambian-born bookerista's recent appearance at a forum sponsored by the conservative American Enterprise Institute.



The libertarian economist, who is based in Britain and whose book Dead Aid is a New York Times bestseller, continues her critique on her Twitter page: "Having an exit strategy is key. When we have open ended commitments countries view aid as permanent income".

Ms. Moyo tells one reader that "...removing the protectionist policies of the US & EU would do more for Africans than endless foreign aid". She is singing my song, as I've made that argument for five years on this very blog!

Obama's Job Approval: What The Media Won't Tell You

Figures provided courtesy of Gallup. The visual is compliments of RealClearPolitics.

The liberal media would have you believe that President Obama is the most popular president of all time. Conservative media like Fox News Channel and the Washington Times claim that he is the second-least popular president of the modern era. Neither assertion is the case. President Obama is ahead of his past four predecessors at this time in his presidency, posting an average first-100-days approval rating (63%) not seen since President Jimmy Carter (68%). However, he is in the middle in terms of average First 100 Days popularity since President Eisenhower.

Most surprisingly, President George W. Bush's approval rating on his 100th day (62%) is almost on par with that of President Obama on his 100th day (which, based on Gallup's figures, should read 65%, and not 63%...but he is still in 6th position). The mainstream media sure hasn't mentioned that point.

Bottom line: President Obama is certainly off to a good start on the job approval front with the American public. However, he is in the middle-tier when it comes to presidents of the past 40 years...on both average approval during the first 100 days and approval rating on the 100th day.

Nor is the area where President Obama leads the pack discussed by the mainstream media: despite the bipartisanship rhetoric, President Obama is the most politically polarizing president at this point in his presidency. Pew Research Center also found that to be the case in their poll.

What's interesting is how these men fared over the course of their term(s), compared to their first 100 days. President Clinton's first-100-days average and his presidency average are the same. President George H.W. Bush achieved a higher presidency average than his first-100-days figure. Everyone else went downhill. Will President Obama succumb to history, or beat the odds?

White Conservative: "Only White Voters Count In Evaluating Obama"

Check out Byron York's recent piece in the Washington Examiner (hat tip: The Moderate Voice). While Mr. York's article is good in delineating the racial divide among black and white Americans regarding the Obama administration and its policies in a recent New York Times/CBS News poll, I must take issue with the lead paragraph: "On his 100th day in office, Barack Obama enjoys high job approval ratings, no matter what poll you consult. But if a new survey by the New York Times is accurate, the president and some of his policies are significantly less popular with white Americans than with black Americans, and his sky-high ratings among African-Americans make some of his positions appear a bit more popular overall than they actually are."

It's the "than they actually are" part which jumped out at me, and where I take offense. Was there some oversample of black voters in said poll, which would justify such a statement? Nope. It is very existence of black voters that Mr. York excludes. Black Americans are just as much American citizens as white Americans, so what the hell does that phrase mean?! Surveying the American population - which is racially diverse, mind you - is the "actually are" part! In a country that is almost 30% not white, that nonsense just doesn't fly (and we won't get into Mr. York's exclusion of Hispanics and Asians in his piece). Yet Mr. York not-so-subtly equates only white Americans as reflective of "real" American opinion. He thus places whites - and only whites - as the baseline of U.S. opinion. I guess my black ass and that of my family - who has been in this country for at least nine generations, longer than most white folks' families - just don't count as "real" American opinion. Can I get my tax dollars back?

Mr. York is making no logical sense here. During the Bush administration, one could've argued that but for the views of whites or evangelical Christians, he would've been less popular. Are we now taking whole demographics out of assessment?

Ripclawe: "House Passes 'Hate Crime' Bill"

The black conservative Republican blogger reacts to the U.S. House passing an expansion of hate crimes law, broadening it to include sexual orientation, gender identity or physical disability: "As with any hate crime bill I ask why should someone get a larger sentence or more resources given to investigate based on why they attacked/killed someone else? The motivation even based on race/sex/sexuality should be a non issue while you up the punishment overall."

DEBATE: Should Public Employees Be Required To Buy American Products?

Jim Fouts, mayor of Warren, Michigan (big suburb of Detroit, where many auto workers live) has a directive strongly recommending that his 40 or so political appointees buy American-made cars from one of the Big Three companies. The mayor's reasoning? Warren is the site of several General Motors and Chrysler manufacturing and assembly plants, as well as GM’s Tech Center. Thus, they are Warren’s two biggest taxpayers and deserving of the city’s support:



Right Democrat blog says yes: "Mayor Fouts is right. It is time for all Americans, especially those on the public payroll, to practice economic patriotism."

BOOKER RISING COMMENTARY: 1st 100 Days: Mrs. Obama's Job Performance

I figured, why not? I did a report card for President Obama earlier today (see below), so I decided to do one for Mrs. Obama as well.

Her Team: A. Mrs. Obama has made a dramatic political transformation. Last year, she was being cast as "Angry Black Woman". Now, she's posting popularity numbers not seen for a First Lady since Nancy Reagan. Hell, unlike her husband, her appeal even crosses party lines: 94% of Democrats approve of her, only 1% disapprove. Even among Republicans, her approval rating is 64%-17%. Her team's "Operation Softer Michelle" project did its trick. The "Mom In Chief" promotion was a good touch. Her team (since the White House Social Office is in the East Wing, under Mrs. Obama's realm) got off to a rough start with gifts to world leaders - the only reason why they don't get an A+ - but has thankfully improved on this front.

Policy Agenda: A-. Other than Big Ag, who can hate on an agenda focusing on military families, organic gardening, and improving morale at federal agencies? I like how Mrs. Obama is opening up the White House, so regular folks can also access events. While I disagree with how she defines "national service", I agree that Americans should volunteer more. Obviously having learned from Mrs. Clinton's missteps, Mrs. Obama is quietly but surely pursuing policies through her office's policy arm. I'd argue that Mrs. Obama should focus more on youth issues. As we saw during her speech at that London school, youth are drawn to her.

Representing The USA: A+. No embarrassing situations, no unpatriotic comments. Sure, Mrs. Obama had that touchy-feely moment with the Queen Of England - it's unclear who touched who first - that was analyzed the world over, but I don't feel like we should cater to British royalty anyway. Mrs. Obama even got the Queen to do an apparently unprecedented move. Hey, at least she didn't bow before the Saudi king...

Being The First Cheerleader: A+. One thing that First Ladies do is back their man, and Mrs. Obama has done so. She's even (thankfully) stopped publicizing her husband's minor faults and quirks. It got irksome when she did it on the campaign trail, and only helped reinforce the "Angry Black Woman" tag. When the president signs major bills, she's there. She also provided support to him on his first overseas trip.

Fashion: B+. She has had some missteps (oh, why does she wear those huge bows, those brooches?). However, compared to the past three First Ladies - who were fashion blah as hell - Mrs. Obama is lightyears ahead. She's already turned the sleeveless dress and belted sweater into her signature looks. She gets kudos for putting American indie designers on the map, and for mixing high fashion with affordable gear. More kudos for subtly telling big-name designers that if they want to dress her, they had better hire more black models. But for the fact that Mrs. Obama has worn very few black designers, she'd have gotten an A from me.

Overall grade: A

Mrs. Obama has been almost flawless in her execution of her First Lady duties thus far. If she stays the course, she will continue to remain popular.

Dissident Republicans To Mike Steele: "You May Be HNIC, But Not Over The Cash Flow"

Washington Times breaks the news that a battle over control of the party's purse strings has erupted at the Republican National Committee, with defenders of Chairman Michael Steele (pictured) accusing dissident RNC members of trying to "embarrass and neuter" the party's new leader. Randy Pullen, the RNC's elected treasurer, former RNC General Counsel David Norcross and three other former top RNC officers have presented the moderate-conservative Republican leader with what they call a "good governance" resolution, calling for a new set of checks and balances on the chairman's power to dole out money. The powers include new controls on awarding contracts and spending money on outside legal and other services.

Steele backers accuse Mr. Pullen and his allies of trying to undermine the chairman - in an unprecedented and historic move - and strip him of his rightful authority to spend donors' money as he sees fit. However, the resolution's sponsors argued that it would help RNC officers identify and head off questionable financial actions and, thus, insulate party officials from any possible federal prosecution for financial misdeeds done under the aegis of the RNC.

MSNBC reports on the Washington Times story: "There is a lot of grumbling in the GOP consultant community about Steele's relationship with certain consultants and there clearly is a movement to try and curtail how much power these consultants have in the party. Right now, Steele shares the same consultants as the NRCC's Pete Sessions meaning these folks could end up cornering the GOP market and other consultants being left out of the contract world want a piece of the action. But they also believe it's a way to create a check on the party and make sure not just ONE firm controls everything in the party."

Booker Rising response: Does this have something to do with those allegations of him kicking funds to his sister's old company during his failed U.S. Senate bid? I'm surprised none of the media reports that I've seen have even mentioned it.

VIDEO: Black People Angry Over Popeyes Chicken

Last Wednesday, Popeyes offered a "Pay Day" 8-piece special for $4.99, or half price (hat tip: Afronerd). In the Rochester, N.Y. area, they ran out of chicken. The promotion was so popular that cars filled the parking lot and spilled out onto the street. Folks went to another location, which also ran out. It led to some upset Negros, after franchises closed due to the shortage:



The black woman in an SUV complaining about not being able to feed her children because Popeyes ran out of chicken is hilarious. However, the upset customers did have a point about the franchises not preparing in advance for the nationally advertised deal.

An 8-piece for under $5? Say what?! They should've known black folks - as you can see, blue-collar coloreds to business-suit coloreds - would be all over this special LOL. On Long Island, N.Y., police were called in after chicken-related traffic caused problems during rush hour.

BOOKER RISING OP-ED: Obama's 1st 100 Days: Report Card

Today marks President Obama's 100th day in office. Here is Booker Rising's assessment of his policy-related job performance thus far:

The Administration: C-. The poor vetting of senior officials stands out, with about seven folks with tax problems. The administration still needs to fill key spots. There's the poll showing President Obama is even more politically polarizing than President Bush (despite the bipartisan rhetoric). He broke his campaign promises to not have lobbyists in his administration, and to wait five days for public comment before signing a bill...two things that I liked about the president.

National Security: D. There's been no attack, so I think the F grade that I've seen others give the president is unfair. Even though he is closing Gitmo, I do agree with President Obama on Bagram so there is a little light at the end of the tunnel. It was the politically-motivated release of the CIA "torture" memos and pushing for America's nuclear disarmament - both of which endanger America's security - which pushed him from a C to a D with me.

Foreign Policy Issues: C-. President Obama's European tour and the Americas summit garnered little for the U.S. I've been displeased with him apologizing everywhere for America's greatness, and that bow to the Saudi king really ticked me off. He even reneged on a campaign promise to label the genocide of Americans in Turkey a genocide. He's also not engaged black countries. He's promoting other countries' interests before America too much for my taste. President Obama is correct, however, on normalizing relations with Cuba. Even though he was too indecisive in the beginning, he eventually did the right thing re: the Somali pirates.

Economic Issues: F. By far, this is the arena where President Obama and I will always have the most disagreement. I was adamantly opposed to the corporate welfare, aka bailouts. The government takeover of the auto industry was gangsta. President Obama campaigned on a promise to battle pork barrel spending, and then signed an "economic stimulus" package containing 9,000 such earmarks. That bill alone broke several of his campaign promises! His spending is already out of control, making even President Bush look restrained. The $100 million in budget cuts (.003% of the total federal budget) as a sign of fiscal restraint is a joke.

Social Issues: B. This is the arena where I'm likeliest to agree with the Obama administration. President Obama hasn't really misstepped here, but hasn't wowed me either.

Overall grade: C-

Hopefully, President Obama's next 100 days will be better because his first 100 days have been somewhat below average. However, he is not flunking. If he makes some adjustments here and there and quit apologizing for America's dominance, he could earn a B from me in the future.

Michael Steele: "Arlen Specter Is An Opportunistic Quisling"

The moderate-conservative head of the National Republican Committee on Sen. Arlen Specter's (R-Pa.) defection to the Democrats, in a statement that landed in Booker Rising's email box. He accuses the moderate of joining "President Obama's efforts to change America into a European Welfare State": "First--Specter claimed it was philosophical--and pointed his finger of blame at Republicans all over America for his defection to the Democrats. He told us all to go jump in the lake [yesterday]. I'm sorry, but I don't believe a word he said. Arlen Specter committed a purely political and self-serving act today. He simply believes he has a better chance of saving his political hide and his job as a Democrat. He loves the title of Senator more than he loves the party--and the principles--that elected him and nurtured him."

And: "Second--and more importantly--Arlen Specter handed Barack Obama and his band of radical leftists nearly absolute power in the United States Senate. In leaving the Republican Party--and joining the Democrats--he absolutely undercut Republicans' efforts to slow down Obama's radical agenda through the threat of filibuster. Facing defeat in Pennsylvania's 2010 Republican primary due to his left-wing voting record, and an end to his 30 year career in the U.S. Senate, he has peddled his services--and his vote--to the leftist Obama Democrats who aim to remake America with their leftist plan. As recently as April 9th, Senator Specter said he would run in the Pennsylvania primary next year as a Republican. Why the sudden change of heart? Clearly, this was an act based on political expediency by a craven politician desperate to keep his Washington power base--not the act of a statesman. His defection to the Democrat Party puts the Democrats in an almost unstoppable position to pass Obama's destructive agenda of income redistribution, health care nationalization, and a massive expansion of entitlements. Arlen Specter has put his loyalty to his own political career above his duty to his state and nation."

JAMES SHIKWATI COMMENTARY: Jacob Zuma: People's President But...!

The Kenyan libertarian commentator writes: "South Africans are grappling with political independence for blacks who control less than 10% of the economy. That explains in part why voters chose to vote for 'Lethu Mshini Wami' (Bring Me My Machine Gun.) To them; the struggle is far from over. The obsession with whether Africa National Congress garnered a two thirds majority or not by Western media is driven by the apprehension of what might befall the population that controls 90% of South Africa's economy should Jacob Zuma opt to make use of his 'Mshini.' Africa National Congress is said to have used the philosophy of 'each-one-teach-one' during the struggle against apartheid to ensure that the blacks who went to school taught those who were out fighting. In post apartheid era, the black elites supposedly led by Thabo Mbeki, 'forgot' their brothers in the struggle. Last year's push by black South Africans to evict other Africans from their country was driven by the quest to access the economic pie through jobs and business. Many firms in South Africa opt to employ educated Africans from neighboring countries and find it difficult to absorb the 'uneducated' freedom fighters - leading to an army of angry youth that view foreigners as their economic enemy. Who else would have been their best candidate other than the one asking for a machine gun!'"

Mr. Shikwati continues his commentary: "Last year, I participated in a closed door session with Jacob Zuma, now South Africa's President elect. He struck me as an individual who is very much aware of the challenges that the black majority face in his country. I am however afraid that he will soon find himself walking over hot coals - something that will create a false impression that he is a dancing president! It is not going to be easy for the minority that control 90% of the economy to cede ground to allow for economic freedom that will facilitate free participation in growth of South Africa's economy. For long term purposes, it will be strategic for those who fear a Jacob Zuma presidency to review the law and draw the majority into the productive sector. Such a move will guarantee the elites peace as they sip evening tea at their verandah. To ignore Africans who have been disenfranchised by the global market order is to breed anarchy. The most urgent agenda for leaders on the continent ought to be to increase productivity among its people devoid of World Bank controlled development experimentations on Africans. Zuma's 'Lethu Mshini Wami' must protect all."

SOPHIA NELSON COMMENTARY: Specter Says Moderate Or Die

The moderate Republican insists: don’t buy the public bravado. Republicans are hurting over Sen. Arlen Specter’s defection to the Democrats. The political party's pain is self-inflicted, she argues: "No matter how you slice this, Specter did not leave the GOP on principle as much as he did for political expediency. Frankly, that is beneath someone of his stature and dignity. Whatever happened to when the going gets tough…? Guess those old adages of loyalty no longer apply in our modern-day politics. What the GOP needs right now is for solid and sensible Republicans such as Sen. Specter, Chairman Steele, Sen. Olympia Snowe, Sen. Susan Collins, former New Jersey Gov. Christine Whitman, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, Sen. John McCain, Gen. Colin Powell, Rep. Eric Cantor, Gov. Bobby Jindal, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and my good friend Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin to work to bring the GOP back to the center and work with their conservative colleagues to build a new unified GOP coalition dedicated to national security, smaller government and fiscal responsibility. Only when this happens will the GOP become a 'big tent' national party."

She continues her commentary: "The Republican Party, according to national news reports, is at its lowest level of party identification and registration since 1983. After the 2008 election, the GOP has been viewed as a contracting regional party that is mostly white, Southern, Christian and male. The 2008 election campaign showed the GOP’s weakness in its inability to attract young, black and Hispanic voters as well as voters who live outside of the south and southwest."

More: "For many black Americans, Specter’s shift is yet another signal of the party’s distance from them. It is a further sign that the moderate Republicans like the great Everett Dirksen (GOP Senate Minority Leader during the civil rights era who helped pass the Civil Rights Act), and men like Arlen Specter who have supported affirmative action, urban reforms and civil rights for the most part are becoming extinct. There may be a cluster of conservative-leaning black voters who align with the GOP on issues like faith, gay marriage and low taxes, but the GOP has no sound strategy to reach them. The Republicans’ problem in widening their tent is even more grave when you consider that the party is no longer viable in places like Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Maryland where blacks make up large population blocks."

Walter E. Williams on Laws Vs. Moral Values

The libertarian economist argues that the failure to fully transmit values and traditions to subsequent generations represents one of the failings of the so-called greatest generation: "Behavior accepted as the norm today would have been seen as despicable yesteryear. There are television debt relief advertisements that promise to help debtors to pay back only half of what they owe. Foul language is spoken by children in front of and sometimes to teachers and other adults. When I was a youngster, it was unthinkable to use foul language to an adult; it would have meant a smack across the face. Back then, parents and teachers didn't have child-raising 'experts' to tell them that 'time out' is a means of discipline. Baby showers are held for unwed mothers. Yesteryear, such an acceptance of illegitimacy would have been unthinkable. To see men sitting whilst a woman or elderly person was standing on a crowded bus or trolley car used to be unthinkable. It was common decency for a man to give up his seat. Today, in some cities there are ordinances requiring public conveyances to set aside seats posted 'Senior Citizen Seating.' Laws have replaced common decency. Years ago, a young lady who allowed a guy to have his hand in her rear pocket as they strolled down the street would have been seen as a slut. Children addressing adults by first names was unacceptable."

He continues his commentary: "You might be tempted to charge, 'Williams, you're a prude!' I'd ask you whether high rates of illegitimacy make a positive contribution to a civilized society. If not, how would you propose that illegitimacy be controlled? In years past, it was controlled through social sanctions like disgrace and shunning. Is foul language to or in the presence of teachers conducive to an atmosphere of discipline and respect necessary for effective education? If not, how would you propose it be controlled? Years ago, simply sassing a teacher would have meant a trip to the vice principal's office for an attitude adjustment administered with a paddle. Years ago, the lowest of lowdown men would not say the kind of things often said to or in front of women today. Gentlemanly behavior protected women from coarse behavior. Today, we expect sexual harassment laws to restrain coarse behavior."

More commentary from Professor Williams: "During the 1940s, my family lived in North Philadelphia's Richard Allen housing project. Many families didn't lock doors until late at night, if ever. No one ever thought of installing bars on their windows. Hot, humid summer nights found many people sleeping outside on balconies or lawn chairs. Starting in the '60s and '70s, doing the same in some neighborhoods would have been tantamount to committing suicide. Keep in mind that the 1940s and '50s were a time of gross racial discrimination, high black poverty and few opportunities compared to today. The fact that black neighborhoods were far more civilized at that time should give pause to the excuses of today that blames today's pathology on poverty and discrimination. Policemen and laws can never replace customs, traditions and moral values as a means for regulating human behavior. At best, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. Our increased reliance on laws to regulate behavior is a measure of how uncivilized we've become."

Quote Of The Day

"[In her speech earlier this month at a school for underprivileged girls in north London, U.S. First Lady] Michelle Obama had no intention of being a role model; she simply wanted to lay down the facts as she saw them. With regards to her own role models, her father and strong women in the community inspired her - people who knew and helped to raise her. There was no mention of celebrities or any government-run role model schemes. There was no relying on the state to provide bogus people to announce that they were suddenly to become a hero for the lost children....Michelle Obama was clear, she said forget those who keep on about being held back by institutional racism. What she saw was a gate, which was not always open. It was now up to black people to rush in and fulfil their ambitions. For her and Barack it was the big prize of the White House.




Those girls were surely inspired by Michelle’s words, but until we cut ourselves away from a leadership that doesn’t believe we are all-powerful, nothing will change. We need to unlearn the bondage of the seventies-style politics of race. It lines up jobs for those who want to wallow in sorrow and blame. We have lacked confidence, not because white people have been in the way but because the old style politics has kept us from taking on the world. Michelle Obama is a tough girl from the south side of Chicago. This is gangster territory, a far cry from the Windsors. She not only had the confidence to put her arm around the minute figure of the Queen, she knew that they were on equal terms. We all need to metaphorically put our arms around our white queen to show that she is no longer on that obsessive pedestal. It shows that we are ready to take the spoils and no one can stop us. Perhaps there was a message for black girls there too: you can one day be queen of Britain." — Tony Sewell, British black moderate educator

Poll: Race Relations Considered Good

Two-thirds of Americans say race relations are good, according to a New York Times-CBS News poll. However, about half of blacks said whites have a better chance of getting ahead.

Blacks remain President Barack Obama's staunchest supporters, with 70% of black respondents saying the country is moving in the right direction, compared to 34% of whites.

Noting that the poll, for the first time, shows a majority of black American respondents saying that race relations between blacks and whites are good, black conservative blogger Cultural Strategist writes: "When you have a group of people with ARBITRARY opinions about the racial state of the nation about their views and in 6 months their views jump from 29% positive to 51% positive IT IS NOT THE NATION that has CHANGED so abruptly in this span of time. It is THOSE PEOPLE who have CHANGED their subjective views. In this case they GOT WHAT THEY WANT and thus they are happy. The condition of RACISM did not increase or decline during this interval. This is why polling for OPINION is so unreliable."

AK'BAR SHABAZZ OP-ED: World Peace Comes Through Strength

Asserts the conservative Republican and advisory council member for Project 21, a national black conservative group: "Even though North Korea - a rogue nuclear power - recently tested a missile that can hit Hawaii and Alaska, President Obama wants to reduce spending on our missile defense program by 15 percent. Although Iran is gearing up to be a nuclear power, we are cutting key programs giving us with a key strategic military advantage. The Russians and Chinese have long been displeased with our missile defense program. Although both are nuclear powers, they lack the missile defense technology we have that could render their weapons ineffective. Anti-missile efforts, begun under President Reagan, are a factor in the collapse of the Soviet Union. Now, placement of our missile defense technology in Eastern Europe reduces Russian influence. American anti-war activists, curiously, have also been against missile defense - which ended the Cold War - since its inception. They don’t seem to like our nation’s position as the dominant world power, and it appears they would like to see our military and its influence reduced to be on par with the rest of the world. Missile defense, however, has a proven record of success and a world-changing impact without even being fully deployed. Why is it being thrown away at a time when it may be needed now more than ever?"

He continues: "To mend fences with foreign governments, the Obama Administration has sought to 'reset' its diplomacy. This should not come at the expense of national security. It’s preferable to be the dominant world power that other countries may hate, envy and imitate than being a well-liked country unable to defend itself or its interests."

More commentary from Mr. Shabazz: "It’s nice to have international friends. It’s nice to get together with governments we are at odds with to find common ground. It’s nice to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony. But it’s also nice to know the United States can do so from a position of strength. It’s not in our best interest to destroy our nation’s strategic advantage for the same reason we cannot give criminals a ballistic advantage over the police."

14-Year-Old Surgeon Wows Medical Professionals

A medical researcher in Jacksonville, Florida has developed a new stitching technique that could possibly transform surgical procedures around the world. Perhaps the most fascinating detail is the researcher is a 14-year-old high school freshman.

Tony Hansberry II (pictured in red) has created a new way to sew up hysterectomy patients in efforts to reduce the risks of post surgical complications and simplify the delicate procedure for less experienced surgeons. So far, the young man has only performed the surgery on dummies but has managed to fascinate the medical community enough to peak the interests of seasoned surgeons. On April 24, Mr. Hansberry presented his findings in the University of Florida's medical auditorium packed with board-certified physicians, with established practices older than Mr. Hansberry, eager to see what medical phenomenon awaits.

Mr. Hansberry, whose mother is a nurse, attends Darnell-Cookman Middle/High School - a magnet school focusing on medical studies. Last summer, he interned at the University of Florida's Center for Simulation Education and Safety Research, where he began his research.

He aspires to attend University of Florida, and become a neurosurgeon.

Dem Leaders Target Spending To Mollify Centrists

U.S. House Democratic leaders are shoring up centrists' support for the $3.5 trillion budget by pressing the U.S. Senate to adopt a new law restricting future spending. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said that they won't support major tax policy shifts unless the Senate adopts a new pay-as-you-go law that requires new spending to be offset with tax increases or reduced spending in other areas. Speaker Pelosi and Rep. Hoyer's push is mollifying Blue Dogs - moderate and conservative Democrats - rebuffed during budget talks by senators who resisted their entreaties to adopt the statutory "pay-go" measure.

Speaker Pelosi and Rep. Hoyer wrote in a letter to Senate and House budget negotiators that they'll attach pay-go legislation to future bills involving middle-class tax cuts, the estate tax, the Alternative Minimum Tax and Medicare payments to doctors. They also wrote that the House won't consider any Senate legislation on those issues unless the legislation comes with offsets to its cost, includes a pay-go bill or if the Senate has already passed a pay-go law.

President Obama said last weekend he wanted Congress to pass a pay-go law "that would help return the nation to a path of fiscal responsibility," the letter noted. Speaker Pelosi also said yesterday that the House will begin working on it as soon as the budget is approved.

First 100 Days: More Of The Same

Asserts Tad DeHaven, a libertarian blogger over at the Cato Institute's blog: "President Obama campaigned on a promise of change. But the first 100 days of his administration have seen a continuation of the Bush administration’s irresponsible fiscal policies: more bailouts, higher spending, and mounting debt. The president has already signed a tax hike that disproportionately hurts lower-income people, and is seeking additional tax increases to fund a transition to a more centrally-planned, European-styled economy. Just as previous administrations have done, the president is using the current economic ‘crisis’ to justify further government encroachment upon the private sector. In doing so, dangerous precedents are being set that could have negative repercussions for future economic growth and individual liberty."

Black Farmers Press For Settlement Payout

With Congress bailing out the auto industry and financial institutions, black farmers are pressing the federal government to pay money owed to thousands of black farmers as part of a discrimination settlement with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. “This is an issue that has been going on for years,” said John Boyd Jr., president of the National Black Farmers Association. “(The government) ought to pay the black farmers what you owe us.”

About 200 black farmers, mostly from Southern states, protested today in front of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, calling on lawmakers, President Barack Obama and federal agriculture officials to live up to a promise last year to pay black farmers $100 million for years of discrimination by the agency.

“This is just a drop in the bucket for what we’ve suffered,” said James Burrell, a 66-year-old farmer from Oak Grove, Louisiana. Mr. Burrell said that for years, the USDA denied him loans while granting white farmers loans for new equipment and cattle. Mr. Burrell was part of a successful class-action discrimination lawsuit against the agency and one of thousands of black farmers who each received a $50,000 payment as part of a 1999 settlement. Mr. Burrell joined the protest today because he said many other black farmers have yet to be paid from the $100 million Congress set aside in a farm bill last year.

After the class-action lawsuit was settled, lawmakers — including President Obama, then a U.S. Senator from Illinois — pushed legislation to allow black farmers who missed the deadline for the lawsuit to file claims. Funding for that provision was included in the 2008 farm bill. But black farmers say it has been more than a year since Congress passed the bill.

Specter Switches - Dems Filibuster Proof

Craig Bardo says good riddance. The black conservative Republican, on the moderate U.S. Senator: "Arlen Specter switches parties to caucus with Democrats. If only Collins and Snowe would join him, then almost all of the dead weight would be gone and the illusion and angst over having moderates vote with the GOP would be eliminated. The good thing now is that Democrats and particularly, Obama owns it."

Magic Negro Watch, a black conservative Republican blog, also says good riddance to Sen. Specter: "GOOD, Don’t let the door hit ya, jackass!!! He was a closet f__n Democrat anyway."

Coby Dillard pens an ode to what he calls the soon-to-be-former Sen. Specter. The black conservative Republican blogger opines: "It would be one thing if you decided, 'you know, maybe I should just become an independent. I may still lose, but at least I could have shown that I had some principles.' Alas, you decided it was in your best political interests to switch parties altogether. Guess we have to wait and see what you get out of the deal before we see just how much of a whore you are. Kick rocks."

Booker Rising response: I've never been a fan of the GOP or Democratic Party seeking to purge moderates out of their ranks. National elections are won with the help of moderates. The GOP would be wise to remember that fact. FYI, Sen. Specter voted with the GOP 50.8% of the time. That means that he voted with Democrats 49.2% of the time. It should be interesting how he is as a moderate Democrat. Will he join Sen. Evan Bayh's centrist Dems group?

Shelly O: "My Girl Sojourner Was The Truth"

First Lady Michelle Obama today reflected on her own family's rise from slavery to the White House as she helped to unveil a statue of abolitionist Sojourner Truth — the first black woman to be so honored at the U.S. Capitol.

"I hope that Sojourner Truth would be proud to see me, a descendant of slaves, serving as the first lady of the United States of America," Mrs. Obama said to loud applause at a ceremony at the Capitol Visitor Center.

An early crusader for women's right to vote and for an end to slavery, Ms. Truth met presidents Abraham Lincoln in 1864 and Ulysses S. Grant in 1870, and delivered her signature "Ain't I a Woman?" speech at a women's rights convention in Akron, Ohio, in 1851. Ms. Truth, a former slave, tried to vote on two occasions, but was turned away both times. She died in November 1883 at her home in Battle Creek, Mich.

Lawmakers, students and actress Cicely Tyson were among those who gathered at the visitor's center to celebrate Truth's legacy and watch Mrs. Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and others unveil the bronze bust of Ms. Truth.

Mrs. Truth's sculpture - which was created by artist Artis Lane and paid for with private money will remain on permanent display in the underground visitor center's main space, called Emancipation Hall in part because slaves helped build the Capitol.

"Now many young boys and girls, like my own daughters, will come to Emancipation Hall and see the face of a woman who looks like them," Mrs. Obama said.

Speaker Pelosi said Ms. Truth wouldn't remain for long the only black woman honored with a statue in the Capitol because a statue of civil rights icon Rosa Parks will soon be placed there.

The National Congress of Black Women, a nonprofit organization dedicated to the development of black women and their families, has pushed for Ms. Truth to be memorialized in the Capitol for almost 10 years. In 2006, President George W. Bush signed into law a requirement that a bust of Ms. Truth be placed in a "suitable, permanent location in the Capitol." Secretary Clinton co-sponsored the measure when she served in the U.S. Senate.

Booker Rising response: Good job honoring Ms. Truth! While we're on this putting-sistas-in-the-Capitol kick, let me just say: the Capitol is incomplete without Harriet Tubman.

Arlen Specter's Switch To The Democrats A Blow To Centrist Politics And Governance

Argues The Purple Center, a moderate blog, responding to the pleased reaction of Democrats - and many Republicans (albeit for different reasons) to the news about Sen. Specter's party switch: "But it's not a good development for the tens of millions of Americans who comprise the vital center of American politics. Those of us who prefer reasonable politics to rabid partisan warfare and smart, pragmatic government to flights of ideological fantasy would rather not see the last check on Democratic Party power -- the Senate filibuster -- become a less tangible threat. For me, this remains true even though it's obvious that Specter has placed his own electoral prospects over all other considerations. I'd still rather have one more moderate Republicans serving as a swing force in the Senate than a further consolidation of one-party power. Specter's move -- and the reasons for it -- has much in common with Joe Lieberman's experience in 2006. Both Specter and Lieberman were attacked by the intensely ideological wings of their parties and challenged in a primary by a more ideologically 'pure' candidate, rendering it impossible to win reelection without running on a different line. Of course, Joe ran and won as an independent and continued to align himself with the Democratic Senate Caucus (notwithstanding his independent backing of McCain for President). That was a more principled course of action than Specter has chosen. Still, both men have been targets of the ideologically driven wings of the two parties, which are intent on imposing their respective brands of purity."

The commentary continues: "This is dangerous stuff. Our politics has already become too contentious and bitter over the past three or four national elections. It is important to remember that since FDR collapsed the Republican ascendancy that prevailed outside the South from the Civil War on, most Presidents have been elected by broad, 'big tent' coalitions. These coalitions constantly shifted so that millons of the same voters who elected LBJ in a landslide also gave Richard Nixon an overwhelming sweep a few years later and handed Ronald Reagan a decisive victory a few years after that. The Specter change is likely to further encourage Democrats, who were already heady with success, to dream of a 'new realignment' of American politics that gives the Democrats a permanent majority. Some caution would do them a world of good. It wasn't long ago that GOP strategists were singing a similar tune -- until voter unhappiness with the Iraq war and the recession combined to give them a hard dose of reality."

DENNIS SANDERS COMMENTARY: The GOP Purity Experiment

The moderate-liberal Republican blogger opines: "Over the last few decades, an experiment has been taking place within the Republican Party. It has been conducted not by party leaders as much as by the rank and file or so-called base. It has been an experiment as to whether a politically pure party can be a viable party. To my knowledge this has never been done before. Over the years, groups such as Club for Growth have sought out those who were considered apostates and targeted them for inter-party challenges. In many cases they have picked off those moderates and have made the party more pure. These groups tend to be inward looking and wary of the outside world. For them, the reason the GOP l[o]st in 2006 and 2008 was because they were not pure enough. George Bush? He spent like a drunken sailor. John McCain? He was too feckless. No, there is no need to change and to expand the coalition, there is only the need to be more faithful and more pure and purge those who don't agree."

He continues: "Arlen Specter's decision to leave the GOP for the Democrats might have many conservative purists shouting Hallelujah today. But it means that they probably have resigned the GOP to a rump status, but hey, at least they are a bit pure than they were before. Will being pure be the winning strategy for the GOP? I'm gonna say this: you can be an ideologically pure party or you can be a majority party, but you can't be both."

MYCHAL MASSIE COMMENTARY: Putting Obama Above God

The conservative Republican commentator argues that beauty queen Carrie Prejean can teach something to Georgetown University and University of Notre Dame: "She did not hide her faith under a bushel. And because she didn't, God is using her situation to encourage others to stand firm and trust Him when facing difficult situations. Carrie showed that God will bring much good from principled stands based on His precepts. That is something Georgetown University should have been aware of when it eagerly caved in to Obama's White House storm troopers' demand that the name of Jesus, along with all identifiable Christian signs and nomenclature, be covered prior to Obama speaking at the University. In short, the university that was founded upon godly precepts denied their God to appease a sinful man. And for what? What eternal value was gained in having a charade speak at the university? Is it the school's intent to use said appearance as a fundraising tool? Is that what they were founded to do, i.e., deny their origins and desecrate their Catholic values so as to host someone who is antithetical to everything the Church stands for? I digress to point out that the Bush White House made no such demands on Georgetown University when first lady Laura Bush spoke from the very same platform. The Obama White House 'wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drapes for the speech,' while conversely, Laura Bush understood that the Name of God/Christ is synonymous with the name America and the flag of same – she did not presume to place herself above God nor deny Him."

He adds: "Which brings me to the University of Notre Dame. What statement for God does that university make when it invites the pro-abortion equivalent of a death camp promoter to speak at a Catholic school whose doctrine vehemently opposes the slaughter of unborn children? It is appalling that a school founded on God and inscribed with the doctrine of honoring Him would so easily capitulate to evil simply because it occupies an oval room. If the staff and graduates of Notre Dame were truly interested in honoring God, they would boycott the graduation. They would let the pro-abortion front man speak to an empty arena. They would honor God by their absence. The colossus institutions that are Notre Dame and Georgetown were founded to be bastions of honor to God, yet today they place the very personification of Erebus above Him. It took a simple act of godly courage by a young woman standing on a national stage to do what they should have done, i.e., honor God the Father, and immeasurably encourage others. Which do you think pleases God more – capitulating to a man who embodies that which God abhors, or a young girl who trusts God and refuses to compromise for an earthly reward?"

Specter To Switch Parties

Ah, nothing like the desire for political survival to spur an action. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) will switch his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat and announced today that he will run in 2010 as a Democrat, according to a statement he released this morning. The moderate politician's decision would give Democrats a 60 seat filibuster proof majority in the U.S. Senate assuming Democrat Al Franken is eventually sworn in as the next senator from Minnesota. (Former senator Norm Coleman is appealing Mr.Franken's victory in the state Supreme Court.)

Sen. Specter said in a statement: "Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans."

President Obama was informed of Sen. Specter's decision, and reached out to the senator to tell him "you have my full support," and we are "thrilled to have you."

Sen. Specter as a Democrat would also fundamentally alter the 2010 calculus in Pennsylvania as he was expected to face a difficult primary challenge next year from former Rep. Pat Toomey. The only announced Democrat in the race is former National Constitution Center head Joe Torsella although several other candidates are looking at the race.

Because of the shrinking Republican vote in the Democratic-leaning state, Sen. Specter was seen as a dead man walking politically in the primary with polling showing him trailing Rep. Toomey by ten or more points. The bar for Sen. Specter to run as an independent was also extremely high due to the rules governing such a third party candidacy. That left a Democratic candidacy as his best option if he wanted to remain in the U.S. Senate beyond 2010.

Avery Tooley on Fightin' Words

The moderate-conservative blogger writes about how last week, an 11-year old boy committed suicide — hanged himself — because of homophobic bullying, the second in two weeks: "I have several problems with this, although it’s not so much with the bullies. What they did is wrong, but it’s not abnormal. Nothing I’ve read, and I’ve looked at a few different sources about this, seems to indicate that it’s any more severe than the normal garden-variety teasing that goes on all the time. Which is not to say that it should be winked at or tolerated, but it is to question a more important variable. While the kids were wrong, the adults in the picture were more wrong. Of course the teachers and school personnel should have intervened. By all means, they should have. I find it kinda hard to believe that the kids at school could’ve been riding these boys enough to make them think that life wasn’t worth living without any adult being aware of it. I know when I was teaching, I heard about one of my students messing with another student in another class, and I stepped to the bully about it. And I never even saw it. Somebody had to have heard something. But I’m really looking at the parents here. Two things:

1) How does an 11-year old get the idea that suicide is even an option? I’m not at all suggesting that the parents were the source of the ideas, but it just strikes me as very odd that a child would even seriously consider committing suicide, let alone go through with it. There’s something seriously wrong there.

2) Which means that the parents should’ve noticed. Maybe it’s just my mother (and I know it ain’t), but from childhood to adulthood, even when I’m not necessarily willing to talk about it, she’s known about 94% of the time when somethin was wrong. She might have guessed wrong on the cause from time to time, but she could tell when somethin was just off. And I’ve never been close to suicidal. It staggers my mind to think that a custodial parent would not know when a child was psychically/spiritually distressed enough to be on the threshold of suicide."

Davis Expects Close Democratic Primary

Announced gubernatorial candidate Artur Davis yesterday predicted a "lively" 2010 Alabama Democratic primary that he said could include additional well-known Democrats. Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks already said he is running for governor, but the field may grow.

"I expect that either (state) Sen. Roger Bedford or Chief Justice Sue Bell Cobb will soon be entering the race," Rep. Davis said in his weekly campaign e-letter. "Both are good people who have served our state and the Democratic Party with skill."

There is no incumbent in 2010 since Republican Gov. Bob Riley cannot seek re-election based on state law that restricts governors from serving more than two consecutive terms.

Several Republicans are considering primary races.

Rep. Davis, a four-term U.S. congressman from Birmingham and moderate Democrat, filed gubernatorial campaign papers earlier this month. He seeks to become the first black governor of Alabama. "If you are a spectator, a lively, close race is in store," Rep. Davis said.

David Lanoue, chairman of the political science department at the University of Alabama, said multiple primary candidates could help Rep. Davis."In general, it's probably better for Artur Davis to have more candidates in the race, if he's able to lock down the African-American vote, because it's about splitting the remaining vote," Mr. Lanoue said.

THOMAS SOWELL OP-ED: Survival Optional

The conservative economist opines: "It used to be said that self-preservation is the first law of nature. But much of what has been happening in recent times in the United States, and in Western civilization in general, suggests that survival is taking a back seat to the shibboleths of political correctness. We have already turned loose dozens of captured terrorists, who have resumed their terrorism. Why? Because they have been given 'rights' that exist neither in our laws nor under international law. These are not criminals in our society, entitled to the protection of the Constitution of the United States. They are not prisoners of war entitled to the protection of the Geneva Convention. There was a time when people who violated the rules of war were not entitled to turn around and claim the protection of those rules. German soldiers who put on U.S. military uniforms, in order to infiltrate American lines during the Battle of the Bulge, were simply lined up against a wall and shot. Nobody even thought that this was a violation of the Geneva Convention. American authorities filmed the mass executions. Nobody dreamed up fictitious 'rights' for these enemy combatants who had violated the rules of war. Nobody thought we had to prove that we were nicer than the Nazis by bending over backward."

He continues: "Even under the Geneva Convention, enemy soldiers have no right to be turned loose before the war is over. Terrorists -- 'militants' or 'insurgents' for those of you who are squeamish -- have declared open-ended war against America. It is open-ended in time and open-ended in methods, including beheadings of innocent civilians. President Obama can ban the phrase 'war on terror' but he cannot ban the terrorists' war on us. That war continues, so there is no reason to turn terrorists loose before it ends. They chose to make it that kind of war. We don't need to risk American lives to prove that we are nicer than they are."

More commentary from Mr. Sowell on the War On Terrorism: "Does nobody think ahead to what this will mean -- for many years to come -- if people trying protect this country from terrorists have to worry about being put behind bars themselves? Do we need to have American intelligence agencies tip-toeing through the tulips when they deal with terrorists? In his visit to CIA headquarters, President Obama pledged his support to the people working there and said that there would be no prosecutions of CIA agents for prior actions. Then he welshed on that in a matter of hours by leaving the door open for such prosecutions, which the left has been clamoring for, both inside and outside of Congress. Repercussions extend far beyond issues of the day. It is bad enough that we have a glib and sophomoric narcissist in the White House. What is worse is that whole nations that rely on the United States for their security see how easily our president welshes on his commitments. So do other nations, including those with murderous intentions toward us, our children and grandchildren."

Quote Of The Day

"Suppose the Obama administration makes all the right moves during the first 100 days in office. What would people think if for the next 4 years - 100 days, his administration makes one blunder after another after another? Would the first 100 days make a difference? Give the man's administration the full term or terms before rating it. This 100 day mark is complete nonsense." — DarkStar, a black moderate blogger

STAR PARKER COMMENTARY: Obama Middle East Policy Shows Change In Values

The conservative Republican opines: "Barack Obama's obvious comfort level with leaders of un-free countries shouldn't surprise anyone. He is not only our first black president. He is also our first president who doesn't like the free country he was elected to lead and feels his job is to change it. Obama's cordial encounter with Venezuelan thug Hugo Chavez, his bow of deference in London to the Saudi Arabian king, are extensions of behavior we have always seen on the black left. Jesse Jackson openly embraced Chavez, as well as having maintained relations with the likes of Libyian dictator Muammar Qaddafi and Yasir Arafat. This should be kept in mind as our president now makes his own effort to bring peace to the Middle East. It should be clear to anyone conscious and watching that central to Obama's Middle East strategy is to disabuse the long held notion that there exists a 'special relationship' between the United States and Israel. The sense of unique kinship between our country and the Jewish state has existed since Israel's founding just 60 years ago. The Arab world has always resented the US-Israel connection and has felt that because of this, Americans would never be an honest broker in Arab-Israeli negotiations. Obama is out to change this. His first hundred days, from his very first television interview -- given to an Arab television network -- have focused on warming up our relations with Islamic nations and cooling down our Israeli ones. We should appreciate that this shift is more than a technical change in diplomatic strategy. It reflects a change in values."

Ms. Parker continues her commentary: "The 'special' American-Israeli relationship has always reflected the shared values and traditions of the two countries. A commitment to freedom sustained by traditional Judeo-Christian core values. Freedom House is a widely respected non-partisan organization that publishes annual reports on the state of freedom around the world. They rate the state of freedom on a scale of 1-7, with 1 being most free. According to the latest Freedom House data, released this past January, in the area of 'political rights', Israel rates a 1. On 'civil liberties', Israel gets a 2. And Israel's Arab neighbors? On 'political rights', Egypt ranks 6, Jordan 5, Syria 7, and Lebanon 5. On 'civil liberties', Egypt ranks 5, Jordan 5, Syria 6, and Lebanon 4. Oil rich Saudi Arabia, to whose king the President of the United States bowed deeply at the waist, ranks 7 in 'political rights' and 6 in 'civil liberties.' Freedom House also reports on freedom of the press. Of 18 countries in the Middle Eastern/North African area, they report only one country with a free press. Israel. Eleven of these countries have no free press, including Jordan, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. Egypt and Lebanon are rated partly free. Despite being the youngest country in the region, Israel's per capita gross domestic product is five times higher than the average of all its neighbors. Also, despite having no great endowment of natural resources, its GDP per capita, at $24,097, is higher than Saudi Arabia's, $22,296, which has, by far, the world's largest oil production and reserves."

More: "Should we denigrate Arabs and Muslims? Certainly not. But anyone who thinks that peace and prosperity will come from abandoning those very values that got us to where we are, and along with this our friends who share those values, is deeply misguided."