DOJ: Racialist Educational Policy OK

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by PoliticalChic, Oct 23, 2011.

  1. PoliticalChic
    Online

    PoliticalChic Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    36,804
    Thanks Received:
    9,783
    Trophy Points:
    462
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +10,714
    1…. hiring practices of the Civil Rights Division at the Obama Justice Department. Today’s installment relates to the Education Section: this Section has enormous power over issues such as race-based preferences in college scholarships, decades-old desegregation orders, and the federal response to racially motivated violence that plagues American schools. Recently, the Obama administration concluded that school discipline is often racially discriminatory merely because black students are disciplined at rates higher than their overall percentage in the population. The division has launched a campaign that undermines basic American traditions of right and wrong by attacking school discipline. When you read the radical backgrounds of lawyers in the Education Section below, you’ll see why.


    2. …every single one of the career attorneys hired since Obama took office has a fringe leftist ideological bent and nearly all have overtly partisan pasts. Every single one. The left still doesn’t get it: they brazenly think this is perfectly acceptable….Acting Assistant Attorney General Loretta King rewrote hiring guidelines in 2009, resulting in hiring committee members being forced to toss any resume that did not describe a radical background.


    3. Anurima Bhargava was hired as the new chief of the Section after working for the previous six years at the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund….During her tenure at the NAACP LDF she litigated cases across the country seeking to defend and expand the use of racial preferences and racial quotas in public secondary schools and universities. One of the highlights of her work was her coordination of the filing of amicus briefs and other advocacy efforts in support of two Supreme Court cases in which liberal coalitions insisted that local schools be permitted to assign public students to different schools on the basis of race. Fortunately, the Supreme Court rejected this argument as unconstitutional.


    a. In remarks to the United Nations Forum on Minority Issues just before joining the Justice Department, Ms. Bhargava described how imperative it was for schools to promote “integration and social cohesion” by considering race, language, immigration status, and religion in placement decisions….This woman is running the Education Section.


    b. When it comes to the rights of non-traditional minorities, like whites, Ms. Bhargava’s ideology of inclusion begins to crumble. Indeed, after the Bush Civil Rights Division negotiated a consent decree with Southern Illinois University to end racially discriminatory paid fellowships for which white graduates were told they were not eligible based on their skin color, Ms. Bhargava publicly blasted the decision as “hinder[ing] the legitimate efforts of colleges and universities to create equal educational opportunity.” [She has been] honored for her aggressive battles to prevent state referendums (i.e., real democracy at work) opposing racial preferences.

    Pajamas Media » Every Single One: The Politicized Hiring of Eric Holder


    Is this the face of 'Liberalism'?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. Full-Auto
    Offline

    Full-Auto Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    13,555
    Thanks Received:
    1,614
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,614
    The color blind society......................

    IF YOURE NOT OF COLOR YOU ARE ROBBED BLIND.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  3. Tipsycatlover
    Online

    Tipsycatlover Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    1,450
    Thanks Received:
    184
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +295
    This whole bunch has to go.
     
  4. PoliticalChic
    Online

    PoliticalChic Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    36,804
    Thanks Received:
    9,783
    Trophy Points:
    462
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +10,714
    November 2012 can't come soon enough.
     
  5. freedombecki
    Offline

    freedombecki Let's go swimmin'! Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    23,683
    Thanks Received:
    5,894
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +5,894
    This is an awful issue because it forces yokes on a free people they don't deserve.

    I don't think this is "liberalism" as it was once defined. Where the left went wrong was adopting Saul Alinsky as a panacea for the ills of some, but not all of the people.

    The left has discarded majority vote as the rule of thumb in society and embraced petty minority desires over the wishes of the people.

    To freedom, the unthinkable behaviors being applied to the voting process that favors liberalism and disfavors conservatism are antithetical, and we are seeing many lawsuits following voting days to attempt to rein in the fruits of erroneous leftist thinking which goes over the line with America's former adherence to the rule of law.

    The lawsuits directed at leftist precinct chairmen for cheating and ballot stuffing are causing many of us to lose faith in the vote, as we feel we are being inured into political slavery in the name of "doing what we select and more intelligent liberals think is best for everybody else."
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. PoliticalChic
    Online

    PoliticalChic Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    36,804
    Thanks Received:
    9,783
    Trophy Points:
    462
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +10,714
    1. In his sworn testimony before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, whistleblower Christopher Coates — who then headed the Voting Rights division — testified to a “deep-seated opposition to the equal enforcement of the” law “for the protection of white voters.” J. Christian Adams agreed that the department indicated it would not prosecute cases against a minority defendant on behalf of a white plaintiff. Coates remembered Julie Fernandes, Obama’s Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, telling DoJ employees “the Obama administration was only interested in bringing…cases that would provide political equality for racial and language minority votersJulie Fernandes | Impeach Obama Campaign

    2. United States v. Ike Brown Brown was the head of the Democratic Party in Noxubee County, a majority black county. The party ran the Democratic primaries, which served as de facto general elections, and Brown made no secret about his desire to see every government office in the county held by a black officeholder. “You ain’t dealing with Mississippi law, this is Ike Brown’s law,” was his motto. Brown organized teams of notary publics to roam the county collecting absentee ballots, the notaries regularly cast the ballots themselves instead of the voters.

    a. During one election, teams of federal observers counted hundreds of verified examples of illegal assistance. Brown lawlessly disqualified white candidates from running for office. Ike Brown institutionalized racial lawlessness, and brazenly victimized white voters during the 2003 and 2007 elections. And yet, many in the Voting Section never wanted the Department even to investigate the matter.

    b. Hostility pervaded the Voting Section…Some said that unless whites were victims of historic discrimination, they shouldn’t be protected….Because whites were better off than blacks in Mississippi, no lawsuit should be allowed to protect whites, they argued.

    c. Before the trial, article after article appeared in the New York Times and other newspapers critical of the decision to bring the Ike Brown case. ABC News presented it as a classic man-bites-dog story. Even National Public Radio traveled to Noxubee to do a story suspicious of the Bush administration’s decision to sue Ike Brown. The benefit of hindsight makes the national media effort to demean the case, and the hostility from the civil rights community, look laughable and petty. We won the case, and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision in two historic opinions.
    Pajamas Media » PJM Exclusive: Unequal Law Enforcement Reigns at Obama’s DOJ (UPDATED: Adams Discusses this Article on Fox News) exclusive/4/
     
  7. freedombecki
    Offline

    freedombecki Let's go swimmin'! Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    23,683
    Thanks Received:
    5,894
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +5,894
    I found this link on the Ike Brown case, and I wonder how they let those who pervert the vote go right back to it again:

     
  8. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,448
    Thanks Received:
    1,107
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,144
    This answers the question, "Is it racist to not vote for a black man... just because he's black?"

    Answer: NO, actually, because a black man CAN BE EXPECTED to enforce policies that BENEFIT blacks and HURT whites.

    That simple.
     
  9. PoliticalChic
    Online

    PoliticalChic Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    36,804
    Thanks Received:
    9,783
    Trophy Points:
    462
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +10,714

    ChrisCoates testified to the Civil Rights Commission that many of the lawyers in the Voting Section were opposed to bringing any civil rights cased against blacks in Mississippi until such time as blacks in the state achieved socioeconomic parity with whites. This is an essential question that must be answered: is this a fair outlook in the United States today, or is it a corruption of the voting rights law? Pajamas Media » Bombshell: Defying DOJ Instructions, Christopher Coates Will Testify Friday on New Black Panther Case
     
  10. C_Clayton_Jones
    Online

    C_Clayton_Jones Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    21,429
    Thanks Received:
    4,339
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +5,539
    The problem for the OP - and the anti-Obama right in general - is that in this case there is no evidence that candidates with conservative credentials are being passed over and less qualified candidates selected, as was the case during the Bush administration.

    Under the Bush DOJ, candidates with ‘liberal’ affiliations, such as the Sierra Club or the ACLU, were rejected by Bush DOJ staff for positions.

    In addition, if one is going to hire lawyers dedicated to the mission of the Civil Rights Division, they will more than likely have a ‘liberal’ background:

    Since conservative lawyers are, for the most part, hostile to the concept of defending Civil Rights, and their backgrounds and experience are not in Civil Rights litigation accordingly, it is logical and expected for staff at Civil Rights to have ‘liberal’ credentials.

    Certainly conservatives aren’t advocating the Obama DOJ hire less qualified lawyers to work in the Civil Rights Division, as it’s the responsibility of the AG to hire the best qualified candidates, regardless of partisan background.
     

Share This Page