Posted: 01 Aug 2008 12:07 PM CDT
The Barack Obama campaign cannot accuse the people that heckled him at a during a town hall gathering in St. Petersburg,Florida, of being racist because they were six black members of the International Peoples' Democratic Uhuru Movement which is an international African socialist group.
After handing their banner over to a an Obama staffer, they started heckling him again with Obama supporters trying to drown them out.
According to Top of the Ticket, in an update, Diop Olugbala, 31 (the man that was allowed to ask the question in the video above), he says about Obama in an interview, "He falls short with the black community."
The chair of the organization is Omali Yeshitela, who created a YouTube video which denounces Obama in video called "white power in black face."
For a party of proclaiming such "unity" it seems that the Obama and the Democrats are having trouble actually uniting.
From a large number of Hillary Clinton supporters, to this group which is made up of blacks, it seems that no one portion of the party is unified.
I give it to this group though because while possibly being misinformed about certain topics, they had the courage to stand up publicly and speak out.
Compare that with Jesse Jackson who "privately" but with an open mike, said he would like to cut Obama's nuts off, yet publicly stood in support of him, this group is at least being honest, publicly, about their concerns.
Posted: 01 Aug 2008 11:23 AM CDT
Hillary Clinton will not be filing a request to have her name nominated at the Democratic National Convention even though her supporters are still circulating petitions.
Her strong supporters may vote for her anyway but she will not be signing a request to have her name added.
"She is not going to submit the signed request," the insider told the Daily News. "People are still circulating petitions on her behalf, but this is a done deal."
Sources have told the Daily News that Clinton may also release her delegates to Barack Obama during her speech on the convention floor.
"Depending on the dynamics, hundreds of delegates might decide to demonstrate their support and affection," a Clinton source speculated.
Perhaps this is meant as a way to close out the one hope that Clinton supporters have kept alive during this process and no one is clear if they will "fall in line" now or if they mean what they say when they claim they will never vote for Barack Obama because they feel he is too inexperienced and does not represent them.
Posted: 01 Aug 2008 09:49 AM CDT
Bruce E. Ivins, a scientist who helped the FBI investigate the 2001 mail attacks, was about to face criminal charges and has been found dead of an apparent suicide.
A top government scientist who helped the FBI analyze samples from the 2001 anthrax attacks has died in Maryland from an apparent suicide, just as the Justice Department was about to file criminal charges against him for the attacks, the Los Angeles Times has learned.
Ivins took a massive dose of prescription Tylenol mixed with codeine and was pronounced dead at the Frederick Memorial Hospital.
The extraordinary turn of events followed the government's payment in June of a settlement valued at $5.82 million to a former government scientist, Steven J. Hatfill, who was long targeted as the FBI's chief suspect despite a lack of any evidence that he had ever possessed anthrax.
Authorities were more careful this time after the chaos with Hatfill but they initially focused on the wrong man.
Ivins had the means and opportunity and admitted that he had failed to follow the appropriate procedures when cleaning, checking, re-swabbing contaminated areas and reporting contamination to his superiors.
More at LA Times.
Posted: 01 Aug 2008 09:39 AM CDT
Wal-Mart believes that if a Democrat were to win the presidency the Employee Free Choice Act, which would make it easier for employees to unionize, would be signed into law and they have started calling meetings with store managers and department heads to warn them of the consequences.
Some Wal-Mart store employees are accusing the officials of the company of trying to influence their votes by warning them what could happen if a Democratic candidate becomes president.
According to a number of employees, these meetings include Wal-Mart officials warning of hefty union dues, possible strikes without compensation and fewer jobs as labor costs rise.
Although the resource managers heading these meetings do not specifically tell the employees how to vote, they make it clear that it is their belief that if a Democrat wins in November, that would be "inviting" unions in.
The Employee Free Choice Act:
To amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish an efficient system to enable employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to provide for mandatory injunctions for unfair labor practices during organizing efforts, and for other purposes.
This bill was introduced in both the House and Senate during the 108th, 109th, and 110th Congress. It passed in the House on March 1, 2007 for the first time, but was filibustered by Senate Republicans in June 2007.
Unions consider the Employee Free Choice Act as vital to their survival because of years of declining union membership. They currently currently represent 7.5 percent of private-sector workers, which is only half the percentage they represented 25 years ago.
One Wal-Mart customer-service supervisor from Missouri recounts the meeting and says, "The meeting leader said, 'I am not telling you how to vote, but if the Democrats win, this bill will pass and you won't have a vote on whether you want a union. I am not a stupid person. They were telling me how to vote."
A Wal-Mart spokesman, David Tovar acknowledges the meetings are taking place but denies that they are trying to tell people how to vote and states, "If anyone representing Wal-Mart gave the impression we were telling associates how to vote, they were wrong and acting without approval."
Tovar continues to speak of the Employee Free Choice Act, "We believe EFCA is a bad bill and we have been on record as opposing it for some time. We feel educating our associates about the bill is the right thing to do."
This is a slippery slope for Wal-Mart, legally speaking.
According to Federal Election rules, Wal-Mart may politically advocate political candidates to its executives, stockholders and salaried managers but they are forbidden from doing so with hourly employees, which is the category that department supervisors fall into.
On the other hand, an attorney and expert on election law, Jan Baran, says employers do have a certain amount of leeway to "disseminate information about candidates' voting records and positions on issues."
Wal-Mart is not the only company that is making this case to their workers.
Another company that is used as an example is Cintas Corp., who recently relaunched a website called CintasVotes, which instructs people to contact Congress and urge them to vote against the Employee Free Choice Act.
Under their top issues tab, they have the Employee Free Choice Act, to which states "Cintas does not support this legislation because we believe all workers should keep their democratic right to decide for themselves with a secret-ballot vote, whether or not they want a union.
They show how unionization works presently, then they show what they changes would be if the Employee Free Choice Act were signed into law.
Current procedures for choosing unions: Under current NLRB procedures, a union representation election typically takes place after the union has demonstrated to the NLRB that at least 30 percent of those it is seeking to represent wish to have an election. When an election is held, employees cast votes privately under the supervision of the NLRB a U.S. government agency.
A Cintas spokeswoman, Heather Trainer, says, "We feel it's important that our employee partners fully understand the implications that the Employee Free Choice Act could have on their work environment and benefits."
Other business backed groups, including the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace, which counts several hundred industry associations as members and Employee Freedom Action Committee, are putting $50 million into ads geared to oppose the legislation.
Separately the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has made defeat of the legislation a top priority, creating their own ads which are running in Minnesota and they plan to run ads in other states.
The The AFL-CIO and the United Food and Commercial Workers are campaigning for the new legislation.
Obama co-sponsored the legislation and has indicated he would sign it into law and McCain opposes it.
Pro-union groups have pledged to spend up to $300 million on the elections to assure the passage of the bill and those opposed will spend just under $100 million, with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce focusing on the Senate where labor needs eight more supporters of the legislation to reach the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.
The employees do need to know the differences between current practices and what would happen if the new legislation is signed into law, but Wal-art has to be careful about how they distribute such information.
Perhaps a standard for letter would assure them that individual meeting leaders were not straying from the script and bring them into gray areas of the law.
Posted: 01 Aug 2008 09:37 AM CDT
Back in March it was reported that a child's skeleton had been found at a children's home in Jersey and that almost 97 separate allegations have been made by victims of child abuse at the Haut de la Garenne youth hostel from 1940 to 1980.
Five skeletal partial remains, 100 human bone fragments and 65 teeth have been found in the search of the underground rooms at the Haut de la Garenne. Authorities believe that even with this evidence, justice may never be served.
In March a massive investigation in the Bailiwick of Jersey, which is a British Crown dependency off the coast of Normandy, France, started into allegations from dozens of prior residents at the youth hostel came to light. The allegations were that children were tortured and killed at the hostel from 1940-1980.
When they first started investigating, they found the room that the victims had described, a child abuse cellar, with a large concrete bath with blood in it and words scrawled into the wooden beams which said, "I've been bad for years and years."
In total the authorities found four cellars, referred to as "punishment rooms" by some victims.
After months of investigating, authorities have recovered at least 100 bone fragments which are the partial remains of at least 5 children.
The bone fragments and teeth were from children between 4 and 11 years of age.
In addition, a member of the public said that he had been told by staff to dig two holes near the boys' dormitory, and police have found in one of them a large amount of lime at the bottom. That is certainly enough to prompt the reasonable suspicion that horrific crimes, including murder, have been committed at the home.
New reports show that those victims as well as the living victims that made the allegations that led to this investigation, may never have justice as the crimes are so old and the remains found were burnt, so no carbon dating can be done, and the evidence so thin, police may not be able to bring murder charges against anyone.
Further reports bring eyewitness accounts of the abuses that the children in the youth hostel suffered with the police summary of the case stating, "Among the victims were a few who said that children had been dragged from their beds at night screaming and had then disappeared. Two others said they had knowledge of human remains at the location but were not specific. A local advocate also came to police and said he had a client who knew there were human remains buried at the home."
The summary says that burnt clothing, toys and bed sheets have also been recovered. According to pathologists, most of the 65 teeth found in the cellars beneath Haut de la Garenne were not milk teeth, but had come from corpses of up to five children. Police searchers also found bone from a child's ear and a child's tibia.
Further complicating the identification process is that many of the children that were housed at the Haut de la Garenne were illegitimate, unwanted or were listed as simply having left for the mainland, so there are no records of their stay there to connect them to the skeletal remains.
Lenny Harper, Jersey's deputy police chief, admits that a homicide inquiry is not likely given the difficulties although he has not ruled it out completely as he says, "If the dating remains as inconclusive as what we have had so far, a homicide inquiry is unlikely. If the dating is more specific, a homicide inquiry is a possibility."
He continues on to say, "We cannot get away from the fact that we have found the remains of at least five children there."
There are 97 standing allegations, approximately 100 suspects, some said to be members of the island's "political and social elite." They have 18 suspects they refer to a "priority" suspects.
As of now, six people have been arrested, thee, including the former warden at Haut de la Garenne have been charged with child abuse and have appeared in court and three have been released on bail pending further investigation.
The report shows that a new victim has come forward recently making allegations against one of the 18 priority suspects.
Posted: 31 Jul 2008 09:57 PM CDT
Cross posted from Radarsite
From The Secret of Samson's Hair: Hollywood and the Demasculinization of America by Roger W. Gardner
On May 20, 1927, Charles Augustus Lindbergh became the first aviator to cross the Atlantic Ocean in a solo flight. After a harrowing 33.5 hour flight, the tiny single-engine "Spirit of St. Louis" touched ground at Le Bourget Airport outside Paris and the astonished Lindbergh was immediately overwhelmed by an hysterical ecstatic crowd, estimated at over 100,000 people. He had conquered the Atlantic alone and had become an instant celebrity of unprecedented renown. The following day, the President of France presented him with the prestigious Legion of Honor. On his return to the U.S. he was welcomed by President Calvin Coolidge who bestowed upon him the Distinguished Flying Cross.
His subsequent reception in New York City was the wildest in that city's history. Mayor Jimmy Walker gave him a ticker tape parade, at which an estimated 4 million people lined the parade route just to get a glimpse of him. Shortly thereafter, the Guggenheim Fund sponsored him on a three month nationwide tour. Flying the "Spirit of St. Louis", he touched down in 49 states, visited 92 cities, and gave 147 speeches promoting aviation. He followed this with a goodwill tour of Latin America where he met his future bride, the daughter of the American Ambassador, writer Anne Spencer Morrow. On March 21, 1929, President Coolidge presented him with the nation's highest honor, the Congressional Medal of Honor.
In an incredibly short period of time, Charles Lindbergh had achieved a remarkable level of international adulation. He represented to the world a shining ray of hope and promise in an otherwise rather dismal decade. Standing on a pinnacle of fame, which in today's world would rank him somewhere perhaps between a movie star and an Astronaut, with his all-American good looks, his boyish smile, and his (deceptive) air of modesty, Charles Lindbergh seemed the epitome of the perfect American Hero.
Wealthy, world-famous, respected and admired, "Lucky Lindy", as he had now come to be known, eventually settled into his spacious New Jersey estate with his lovely new wife to begin what promised to be an idyllic life. On June 22, 1930, their son, Charles A. Lindbergh, Jr. was born and instantly became the most famous baby in the world. They had become the true First Family of America and an adoring public followed their every move. For the Lindbergh family the future appeared filled with unbounded hope and promise -- until March 1, 1932, when baby Charles was reported missing from his crib.
Needless to say, the "Lindbergh Kidnapping Case" quickly became the most notorious kidnapping case in history. Hundreds of international reporters descended on the small New Jersey town to feed the voracious appetite of an obsessed worldwide public, covering every nuance of the investigation, trial, and the subsequent sentencing and 1936 execution of the convicted perpetrator, the somber German-American Bruno Richard Hauptmann. There is no need here to reiterate the convoluted facts and innumerable controversies surrounding this historic case, except perhaps to take note that, in some sense, the case still remains open. Articles about the Lindbergh Kidnapping Case are still being printed, websites are still being opened, and books are still being written espousing endless theories and conjectures about the guilt or innocence of Hauptman -- some even implicating Lindbergh, himself, in the infamous affair.
What is, however, relevant to our purposes is that after the kidnapping and during the highly-publicized investigation that followed, much to his adoring public's surprise, a darker side to Lucky Lindy's personality began to emerge. Arrogant, authoritative, domineering, he began almost immediately to take over complete control of the investigation, issuing orders to the local and State Police, controlling the news conferences, even interfering with the Federal Agents assigned to the case.
This was the first chink to appear in Charles Lindbergh's shining armor. The second would prove to be immensely more important and involve more than just the particular idiosyncrasies of his unique personality: his well-publicized, anti-war, pro-Fascist and -- though he would later try to deny it -- overtly anti-Semitic speeches, coupled with his high-profile involvement with the America First Committee.
The America First Committee was established in September of 1940 by Yale law student R. Douglas Stuart, Jr., along with several other students, including future President Gerald Ford. Supported by a group of prominent businessmen and a few well-known Senators such as Burton K. Wheeler and Gerald P. Nye, and some famous literary figures like the novelist Sinclair Lewis, poet E. E. Cummings and author Gore Vidal, the Committee launched a petition "aimed at enforcing the 1939 Neutrality Act and forcing President Franklin D. Roosevelt to keep his pledge to keep America out of the war. [Read more]
Posted: 31 Jul 2008 08:55 PM CDT
Tonight on Fox News' Hannity and Colmes, Michael Brown, accused anyone who called Barack Obama arrogant of being racist, because apparantly only black men are called arrogant.
All over the internet the race card has been flashing. Every time Barack Obama is labeled with a negative trait the populous howls "racism." If you call him arrogant, you are a racist; if you call him elitist, you are a racist; if you call him pompous you are a racist. Basically, if you address any negative trait you think will make Barack Obama a less than effective president, you are a racist!
What the Hell is going on in America?!? Are anti-white groups going to try to drive whites into a guilt ridden submission to vote for Barack Obama? Do these people who accuse others of being racist at the drop of a hat really think that this constant barrage of accusations are going to continue to inspire fear? Oh they are mistaken!
The anger I feel when I hear people being called racist for absolutely no reason has pretty much reached the limit. What is it about the word racist that makes people sniveling little cowards? I do not put up with that word being thrown about so frivilously, nobody should.
Lets get one thing straight. I think Barack Obama is a fork-tongued, two faced, lying, manipulative, weasle. Go ahead call me a racist, cause frankly I am getting to the point of taking people to court over it for defamation of character. I do not think this because he is black, no matter what insecure babies with the victimization mentality want to say. I say this because of all the evidence to prove it, and that was not put together because he was black.
So to everyone in the anti-white community wisen up! Barack Obama has decided to run for President of the United States, the most scruitinized political position in the world. He is going to be put through the ringer, and that is just Greek Week folks. Every politician goes through it. The black community is proud of Barack Obama's accomplishments so far, as they should be, but now it is time to embrace reality. People are not going to pat him on the head and put him to the front of the line. Why is that expected? He is going to go through the same thing everyone else is.
Here you want to hear something that you can take as racist? There is no"affirmative action" when it comes to representing a whole country! There, now you can call me racist because I associated a black man with affirmative action. But let me give you all a hint, I am doing this because for some reason people are acting like he should not be challenge and just given a free pass because of his race. I do not support this type of attitude.
I want the anti-white portion of the black community to consider something. Would you rather be proud of a man who was elected to represent a nation because people beleive in him, or because he is black? You can not have it both ways. When I hear there are politicians seriously considering voting for Barack Obama simply because he is black and it is "historical," I get very upset.
Look I don't want a President who needs his bottom powdered or his diapers changed everytime he gets a bit upset. Barack is not a victim here, he is a politician, he is a big boy, so let him handle it without dragging race into it!
Posted: 31 Jul 2008 06:41 PM CDT
Back in January of 2008, Bill Clinton was accusing Barack Obama of playing the race card by throwing accusations around saying that Clinton was using race as an issue.
When the primaries were going strong, Barack Obama accused Bill Clinton of "playing the race card". In the general election campaign Obama has said the GOP will play the race card. The McCain campaign, like Clinton, says Obama is the one playing that card
At that time Clinton said, "This is almost like once you accuse someone of racism and bigotry, the facts become irrelevant."
This continued into April of 2008, where Clinton again defended his comments about South Carolina and the vote in that state being similar to the vote when Jesse Jackson was running, comments which the Obama campaign implied were "using the race card", and Bill Clinton said, "I think that they played the race card on me. And we now know, from memos from the campaign and everything that they planned to do it all along. I was stating a fact, and it's still a fact."
The primaries over and the general election is in full swing and once again reports come out that Barack Obama claims, to a Florida audience, that the GOP "would use his race to scare up votes for John McCain."
"We know what kind of campaign they're going to run. They're going to try to make you afraid," Obama said at the fundraiser. "They're going to try to make you afraid of me. He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black? He's got a feisty wife."
No examples given, just the direct statement that the GOP would use the race card.
On another stop in Springfield, Missouri, Obama continued along that theme and said, "So nobody really thinks that Bush or McCain have a real answer for the challenges we face, so what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me. You know, he's not patriotic enough. He's got a funny name. You know, he doesn't look like all those other Presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He's risky. That's essentially the argument they're making."
Obama critics and John McCain as well as his campaign are leveling the same charges at Obama that Bill Clinton did during the primaries, claiming that it is Obama, in fact, using the race card and not the GOP or John McCain.
McCain campaign manager Rick Davis sends a statement to reporters that states, "Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck. It's divisive, negative, shameful and wrong."
John McCain weighs in saying that his campaign's accusations against Barack Obama using the race card are fair and accurate.
Obama critics believe this a mask that is starting to come off whenever Obama feels threatened, by stating, "It seems clear, therefore, that the race card has become a permanent part of Obama's hand, a wild card to be played whenever the spirit, or the circumstances, so moves him."
Others are suggesting that playing the race card, then denying it is Obama's way of trying to have it both ways.
Obama is covering himself here just a bit by making his accusation predictive -- "going to" -- but this seems to be a pretty clear effort at having it both ways.
In researching this piece the only references to race I have found is Obama predicting what others are going to do, but no actual reference other than the McCain campaign showing examples of Obama bringing up the issue.
Is claiming that the GOP is "going to" do something fair without presenting evidence that they have already done it?
Is this Obama's defense mechanism when polls are down and the media is becoming critical?
Last but not least, was Bill Clinton correct back during the primaries and is the McCain correct now in claiming that Obama is the one using the race card by predicting others will?
Posted: 31 Jul 2008 03:26 PM CDT
Many have defended the comparison of Barack Obama with Paris Hilton and Britney Spears and many have criticized it, but considering that the Hilton family are donors to the John McCain campaign, the next question becomes, wasn't it like biting the hand that feeds you?
There has been much talk about the ad above where the McCain campaign invokes Britney Spears and Paris Hilton by comparing Barack Obama's "rock star" appeal to the two used in the ad, but since the Hilton Family are McCain donors, was it smart?
The Hiltons are the family behind the international chain of full-service Hilton hotels and resorts. There are 533 Hilton branded hotels across the world.
Reports are starting to come out that after the release of the video, the McCain campaign phones were ringing off the hook- the callers being none other than McCain donors from the Hilton family.
Paris Hilton's father, Rick has donated $6,300 to the McCain campaign, her mother Kathy, 2,300 and Paris' grandfather William, co-chairman of the Hilton Hotel chain, and the original owner of the San Diego Chargers, has donated tens of thousands of dollars to the RNC and McCain.
Which explains the reports buzzing around the blogosphere about how Grandpa William was none too pleased with the use of his grand-daughter to compare to Barack Obama in the new ad..
The McCain campaign finally hit on a theme that reports are saying has gained traction, but the use of a member of a very rich, influential family that happens to be supporters of John McCain, could be called not thinking ahead or looking at the big picture by some.
The same comparison could have been made using any number of different people, so one has to wonder why the campaign chose Paris Hilton, knowing that her family are contributors to John McCain and the Republican National committee.
|You are subscribed to email updates from Wake up America |
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.
|Email Delivery powered by FeedBurner|
|Inbox too full? Subscribe to the feed version of Wake up America in a feed reader.|
|If you prefer to unsubscribe via postal mail, write to: Wake up America, c/o FeedBurner, 20 W Kinzie, 9th Floor, Chicago IL USA 60610|