Last Thursday, the rabidly anti-immigrant and racist Tom Tancredo, a former Colorado Congressman, delivered the opening remarks at the national “Tea Party” convention. Like a deranged, gun-totting border-patrolling Minuteman, Tancredo declared: “…..First, we should have a ‘civics literacy test‘ before people are allowed to vote. Second, ‘People who could not even spell the word vote or say it in English put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House whose name is Barack Hussein Obama.’”
Notes: A literacy test, in the context of United States political history, refers to the government practice of testing the literacy of potential citizens at the federal level, and potential voters at the state level. The federal government first employed literacy tests as part of the immigration process in 1917. Southern state legislatures employed literacy tests as part of the voter registration process as early as the late nineteenth century.
As used by the states, the literacy test gained infamy as a means for denying suffrage to African-Americans. Adopted by a number of southern states, the literacy test was applied in a patently unfair manner, as it was used to disfranchise many literate blacks while allowing many illiterate whites to vote.
The literacy test, combined with other discriminatory requirements, effectively disfranchised the vast majority of African-Americans in the South from the 1890s until the 1960s. Southern states abandoned the literacy test only when forced to do so by federal legislation in the 1960s.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 provided that literacy tests used as a qualification for voting in federal elections be administered wholly in writing and only to persons who had not completed six years of formal education.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 suspended the use of literacy tests in all states or political subdivisions in which less than 50 percent of voting-age residents were registered as of 1 November 1964 or had voted in the 1964 presidential election.
In a series of cases, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the legislation and restricted the use of literacy tests for non-English-speaking citizens. Since the passage of this legislation, black registration in the South has increased dramatically.
The point is not so much public gaffes as it is the creation, support, and maintenance of systemic and structural inequalities. This is why Trent Lott’s wistfulness about a Strom Thurmond presidency is in a different class than Reid’s comments. Lott was longing for a bygone era when structural barriers and entrenched inequality were the norm. Reid was enthusiastic that the same barriers were lessening and that America was ready, albeit with caveats, for a new racial reality.
[ By: Melissa Harris-Lacewell ] Joe Biden once remarked that Barack Obama was “clean” and “articulate.” He is now Vice President. During the Democratic primaries Hillary Clinton invoked Robert Kennedy in a way that implied Barack Obama’s assassination was imminent. She is now the Secretary of State. It is foolish to suggest Senator Harry Reid should step down as Senate majority leader because of his 2008 assessment that Barack Obama’s election was more likely because he is “light-skinned” and free from “Negro dialect.”
If President Obama has demonstrated anything at all, it is that he unperturbed by the racially awkward outbursts of his fellow Democrats.
Republicans hope that reports of Reid’s old gaffe might derail his leadership of the health care reform package. But watching Michael Steele go after Reid is more bizarre than convincing. Steele seems to pride himself on the liberal use of black discursive patterns. It’s hard to take seriously the moral outrage of a self-professed “hip-hop Republican” who explains his tenure as GOP chairman saying “brother still here.”
President Obama may be unconcerned and the GOP may be transparently race baiting, but Reid’s comments did create a legitimate queasiness among many Americans that is worth exploring.
President Obama is a forgiving, beer summit kind of leader, but I am less likely to give Democrats a free pass on issues of racial bias. As I wrote a few months ago here on The Notion, any implication that racism is the sole purview of the Right obscures the continuing and troubling realities of racism within the Democratic Party and progressive political movements.
Still, I remain entirely uninterested in a racial McCarthyism that plays “gotcha politics” with elected officials public utterances. Yes, public officials should be particularly careful when talking about race to media (on or off the record). The opportunities for misunderstanding, divisiveness and assumption of ill intent are heightened in this area of political discussion.
But let’s be honest, if we weeded out every public official guilty of racial insensitivity, the halls of Congress would echo with utter emptiness. The point is not so much public gaffes as it is the creation, support, and maintenance of systemic and structural inequalities. This is why Trent Lott’s wistfulness about a Strom Thurmond presidency is in a different class than Reid’s comments. Lott was longing for a bygone era when structural barriers and entrenched inequality were the norm. Reid was enthusiastic that the same barriers were lessening and that America was ready, albeit with caveats, for a new racial reality.
Rather than being worked up about Reid’s awkward assessment of these barriers, we should be asking whether these structural biases actually make academic and political accomplishments easier for light-skinned African Americans. NC State University historian Blair LM Kelley makes this argument in her piece on Salon.com. She points out skin color bias in the 21st century should alarm us. It shouldn’t be a matter of breezy acceptance, as many Sunday morning pundits seemed to suggest. “Accepting this as a matter of course degrades the quality of our democracy.”
Reid’s assertions about “Negro dialect” also should raise structural justice questions far more important than his offensive use of an antiquated term for black Americans. Because of generations of lower class status and legal barriers to quality education, black children are far more likely than their white counterparts to be raised by parents with inadequate literacy skills. But rather than acting as a leveling ground, many public schools only reinforce these disadvantages. These are the same children relegated to schools with fewer expert teachers, larger classroom sizes, fewer educational resources, and fewer literacy support tools.
This is the racism that should worry us: millions of black American children attend and graduate from public schools that leave them utterly unqualified for public office for their entire lives. As adults these children will always be second-class citizens, unable to participate as rule makers rather than simply rule followers in their own country. Not only does this deprive whole group from full participation in government, it also deprives our country of the skills, talents, and ideas that these citizens might have offered, had we not initially deprived them of the capacity to communicate their ideas effectively in the public realm.
Political theorist Nancy Fraser’s describes imagines justice as “a difference-friendly world, where assimilation to majority or dominant cultural norms is no longer the price for equal respect.” Creating that world is an important task for combating racism.
About The Author: Melissa Harris-Lacewell — is Associate Professor of Politics and African American Studies at Princeton University. She is the author of the award-winning book, Barbershops, Bibles, and BET: Everyday Talk and Black Political Thought, (Princeton 2004). And she is currently at work on a new book: Sister Citizen: A Text For Colored Girls Who’ve Considered Politics When Being Strong Wasn’t Enough. (Forthcoming Yale University Press)
Her academic research is inspired by a desire to investigate the challenges facing contemporary black Americans and to better understand the multiple, creative ways that African Americans respond to these challenges. Her work is published in scholarly journals and edited volumes and her interests include the study of African American political thought, black religious ideas and practice, and social and clinical psychology.
Professor Harris-Lacewell’s creative and dynamic teaching is also motivated by the practical political and racial issues of our time. For example, her course entitled Disaster, Race and American Politics explored the multiple political meanings of Hurricane Katrina. Professor Harris-Lacewell has taught students from grade school to graduate school and has been recognized for her commitment to the classroom as a site of democratic deliberation on race.
Professor Harris-Lacewell appears regularly on MSNBC. She regularly provides expert commentary on U.S. elections, racial issues, religious questions and gender concerns for both The Rachel Maddow Show and Countdown with Keith Olbermann. Professor Harris-Lacewell is also a regular guest on other television and radio. Her writings have appeared in newspapers throughout the country and she is a regular contributor at TheNation.com.
She travels extensively speaking to colleges, organizations and businesses in the United States and abroad. In 2009 Professor Harris-Lacewell became the youngest scholar to deliver the W.E.B. Du Bois Lectures at Harvard University. Also in 2009 she delivered the prestigious Ware Lecture, becoming the youngest woman to ever do so.
Professor Harris-Lacewell received her B.A. in English from Wake Forest University , her Ph.D. in political science from Duke University and an honorary doctorate from Meadville Lombard Theological School. She is currently a student at Union Theological Seminary in New York.
She lives part-time in New Orleans. Her partner, James Perry, is a candidate for mayor of the city of New Orleans in 2010.
She is also the mother of a terrific daughter, Parker Lacewell.
Politico: In a direct address to black America, President Barack Obama said that while “there’s probably never been less discrimination in America than there is today… the pain of discrimination is still felt” by Latinos, Muslims and gays, as well as African-Americans.
In New York on Thursday to mark the centennial of the NAACP, Obama delivered a sweeping speech outlining his domestic policy, and recalling America’s journey from slavery to freedom. He praised civil-rights activists, saying, “because of what they did, we are a more perfect union.”
Yet, he said, in spite of the many strides, there is still work to be done in ending discrimination and closing the racial gaps in employment, education, health care and incarceration rates. [ READ MORE ]
NATIVISTPatrick Buchanan has “no problem” with legacy systems, says “working class whites” are “the ones discriminated most today“. He declares white firefighters victims of “Jim Crow liberalism,” admits he “may have” opposed 1964 civil rights act
Scenario: In 2004 John Kerry won Michigan by 165,437 votes. Since last year, roughly the same number of homes have been foreclosed in Michigan, mostly owned by low-income African Americans.
Michigan is among states leading in new home foreclosures. A record 9 percent of American homeowners with a mortgage were either behind on their payments or in foreclosure at the end of June, as damage from the housing crisis continues to mount, the Mortgage Bankers Association said on Friday, September 5, 2008.
Detroit, a city with a heavy minority population has the highest home foreclosure rate in United States.
Last week it was reported that Republicans plan to use home foreclosure lists to block voters from the polls. James Carabelli, chair of the Macomb County Republican Party, told Michigan Messenger that on election day Republican volunteers will “have a list of foreclosed homes and make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses.” The Republican party will use returned mail to challenge voters based on residency.
Macomb County is part of the Detroit metropolitan area.
The Obama campaign general counsel Bob Bauer said Tuesday that the “lose your home, lose your vote” strategy, even if the challenges are unsuccessful, “creates an atmosphere of intimidation that could drive voters from the polls.” He said even people who aren’t challenged may leave without voting because lines move slower at polling places.
Obama is challenging these Republican goons. In their suit, the Obama team contends that GOP has a history of voter “caging.” The 24-page filing incorporates Michigan Messenger’s report last week that a GOP official in Macomb County cited plans to use such lists to challenge voters in November into a broader narrative based on decades of Democratic complaints about how Republicans seek to limit turnout among low-income and African American voters by compiling information about their mailing addresses.
——————————————-
Intimidation, lies, distortion and blatant racism — is the Republican “Modus operandi.“
You can bet this scheme to steal the election from the Democrats will be going on in every “nook and cranny” of GOP strongholds, all over the United States.
These morons cannot win FAIR — They have to STEAL because they have no message, just RACIST Innuendo and loads of SHIT!
BBC Documentary – How Bush Stole The 2000 Elections
How to RIG an Election: Confessions of a Republican Operative
Product Description: Fresh out of grad school, Allen Raymond joined the GOP for one reason: rumor had it that there was big money to be made on the Republican side of the aisle.
From the earliest days of the Republican Revolution through its culmination in the second Bush White House, Raymond played a key role in helping GOP candidates twist the truth beyond recognition during a decade of crucial and bitterly fought campaigns. His career took him from the nastiest of local elections in New Jersey backwaters through runs for Congress and the Senate and right up to a top management position in a bid for the presidency itself.
It also took him to prison.
Full of wit and candor, Raymond’s account offers an astonishingly frank look at the black art of campaigning and the vagaries of the Republican establishment. Unlike many “architects” of the political scene, the author takes full responsibility for his actions — even as he never misses a trick.
A completely original tale of the disillusioning of a man who enters politics with no illusions, How to Rig an Election is a brilliant and hilarious exposé of how the contemporary political game is really played.
From Publishers Weekly: Republican campaign advisor Raymond achieved some notoriety when he plead guilty in federal court to jamming Connecticut phone lines in a 2002 Democratic get-out-the-vote effort-small potatoes compared to what he had gotten away with for more than a decade, vividly and hilariously chronicled in this outrageous career retrospective.
For 13 years, Raymond worked his way up the ranks of GOP operatives by smearing opponents and worse in campaigns across the country, including the aborted presidential bid of Steve Forbes.
Besides documenting such ingenious strategies as arranging for phone calls during the Super Bowl touting his candidate’s opponent, Raymond witnesses the Republican party’s rise to power in the 1990s, and the effects of that power, in both professional and personal terms. (“Bill Martini’s screaming fits were reaching exciting new heights all the time.“)
Though Raymond appreciates the depravity of his former enterprise (“if you could find two of us Republican operatives who could still tell the difference between politics and crime, you could probably have rubbed us together for fire as well“), his confession often sounds a lot like boasting; naturally, Raymond is charming enough to get away with it, taking a deliciously cynical view of everyone involved (voters especially).
For those who care about the electoral system, this look inside the sausage factory of contemporary campaigning is compelling, arguably essential, reading.
—————————————————
“For those who care about the electoral system, this look inside the sausage factory of contemporary campaigning is compelling, arguably essential, reading.” — Publishers Weekly
“Refreshingly candid about his vindictive motives, Raymond offers a damning chronicle of political hubris.” — Kirkus Reviews
“Paints a picture of the corruption of modern politics that should leave no doubt about the creativity and cynicism of operatives like Mr. Raymond or the need for tough new election-reform legislation.” — Adam Cohen, The New York Times
“Offers a raw, inside glimpse of the phone scandal as it unraveled and of a ruthless world in which political operatives seek to win at all costs.” — McClatchy News Service
“Raymond offers an insider’s look at the world of dirty campaigning and hardball politics. [A]n engaging read…the book is hard to put down.” — Nathaniel French,St. Petersburg Times