Chick-fil-WHO?

That's my response to the above caption of Atlanta-based, Chick-fil-A president, Dan Cathy's comments on marriage equality in the US.  He wants to say "NO" then I have to say "uh yeah, I haven't ate at your restaurants in years...".   The Monotheistic God/Allah/The Creator/Holy One would be cosigning on your ignorance because it doesn't affect you personally, so why would you are so bothered by marriage equality coming to the forefront?

Also know that the "friends" will be out in full force to shut down your 11 "Dwarf House" locations in Metro Atlanta. ;)

THE END AND THAT IS ALL HE WROTE ABOUT THAT NON-MUTHAFUCKIN' FACTOR!

What is really hurting TV News?

Gallup published a new poll that says that most Americans are losing faith in the US media.

I can sum it up quite simply.  The majority of the US media panders towards protecting the right-of-center and it has become even more obvious after Joe Williams, formerly of Albritton's Politico, last month.  He accurately pointed out that generally speaking the US news media does play a game of distraction and pandering to the those right-of-center since that is the "swing voters" and eyeballs that captivates the pallid of  advertisers.

Meanwhile, I have few words for what can be done other than people waking up.  You have to stressed that people do need to wake up about what is going on in this country.  The right wing-led Congress are the ones holding up economic progress of the US from being so corporate welfare-based capitalism towards a more socially democratic one.

I always remain objective and this is the truth, there is a lot of bullshit being perpetuated by the US media and until then I will continue watching the BBC World News and PBS Newssource for a more accurate and objective perspective of news worldwide.

Good Luck on Voting come next year especially if you are non-white, lower income, or elderly

 
I actually had high hopes that US Attorney General Eric Holder was going to announce the issuance of stay or motion in federal court that would place a hold on the voter suppression laws that have been passed across the nation, but primarily in the South by GOP-led state legislatures. 

Instead US AG Holder did a speech today in Austin on the discussion summed up in the quote "don't take voting rights for granted."  Well, that is comforting but has no legal teeth behind it.  It seems like AG Holder is holding back on doing anything or is the US Justice Department although voter suppression will be widespread come next year.  He also expressed there are ongoing investigations involving some cases of voter suppression but no specifics. 

Le sigh!  I guess it will be another episode of rewind that has been orchestrated by the social regressives/conservatives that love to expressing their false accusation of voter fraud when the real agenda is to block the ability to vote of those unconventional citizens such as non-whites, college/graduate students, and seniors. 

Also I find it sad that the case of Dorothy Cooper, the 96-year-old black woman from Chattanooga, was swept under the rug in October after the state of Tennessee passed a new law that requires voters to have a photo ID to certify voter registration.  In Mrs. Cooper's case, she needed her marriage certificate along with other documents including her birth certificate, rent receipt, copy of her lease, and voter registration card to verify herself to get a photo ID from the Tennessee Drivers Service Center in east Chattanooga, but was denied anyway.  The new law creates this situation where all documents including documents verifying name changes, in case of marriage, has to be present when registration occurs.  Obviously, Mrs. Cooper was prepared because she had all the aforementioned document in a sealed Manila envelope with the exception of her marriage certificate.   Mrs. Cooper never learned to drive so she didn't have a Tennessee Drivers' License, but prior to was able to vote in every election except 1960. Instead the Hamilton County Administrator of Elections, Chattanooga's home county, told her to vote with an absentee ballot, and that is the provision is the thing allowing the federal courts to uphold this regressive law in TN as well as Indiana (no surprise considering how non-whites are pretty much in Chicago suburbs of NW Indiana and Indianapolis).

What has gotten me about this whole situation is the fact it took the voter suppression of a 84-year old elderly white woman, Ruthelle Frank, of Brokaw, Wisconsin being forced to pay $200 to get a birth certificate in response to the new law in Wisconsin requiring such to register to vote.  The ACLU of Wisconsin along with the National Law Center on Homeless and Poverty is filing a lawsuit in federal court against the state due to the hardship it causes for those.  The suit names embattled Wisconsin governor Scott Walker among the defendants.

Le sigh!  It's a good thing this problem has been exposed and I'm socially egalitarian and all for the fight for the everyone to have a fair and equitable society.  However, why does it take even in 2011 (almost 2012) the suffering of whites to spotlight the oppression of the 'undesirables' in our society including non-whites?  That's all I'm asking, why are we still a myopic society where this still occurs? 

People and things that needs to get got...

Let's see, I said back in the summer of 2007 when the Democratic presidential primary season was already in a very early full swing that Hillary Clinton was going to "get got" because of the fuckery she was pedalling towards then-Illinois U.S. Senator Barack Obama.  In 2011, well I have to say another person is going to "get got" if they don't STFU soon.  That person is Minnesota's 6th District Congresswoman, Michelle "Chickenhead" Bachmann.

This fool just doesn't quit.  Let's see, she hates LGBT/SGLs, she thinks black children were better off under slavery, she thinks the White House is joking about defaulting on its debt payments, and the list goes on and on an on.  Everyone that keeps up with politics can tell she is (or has) been gunning for the "ranting white lady spot" that Sarah Palin's ass kept in herself in.

Also in Alabama State Senator, Scott Beason, of Gardendale needs his ass to be gotten for sure.  He is not only a racist that doesn't think much of black Alabamians, but an all-around bigot.  He is trying to defend his asinine bill-turn-into-law on immigration in Alabama before the world.  It's like a horrible episode of some idiotic sitcom from the 1950s running-a-mok.  This eurocentric bullshit is what is contributing to the breakdown of civility in our society.

However when it comes to Beason,  the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), ACLU, and others organizations are fighting back.  Today, a lawsuit was filed in federal court against this regressive Alabama law  that basically gives the A'OK for law enforcement to racially profile anybody that isn't white.

(h/t to Left in Alabama)

The decline of Jefferson County, yet again

As of yesterday (June 18th), Jefferson County placed 547 employees on administrative leave without pay, i.e., they are laid off.  It's another sad chapter in the history of the most populous county in Alabama.  It seems the same character that produced one of the most bigoted pieces of legislation in modern history, has single-handedly blocked any chance of the citizens of Jefferson County any opportunity to vote upon their own future.  Instead of proving a point, he is going to cause his own constituents that reside in unincorporated Jefferson County irreparable harm via lack of basic services following a natural disaster, public protection, or reduction of public nuisances.

It's funny how history repeats itself with this place and why I'm not longer a resident of Alabama or Greater Birmingham.

In related news, Scott Beason, the bastard that is the cause of both the racially bias Alabama immigration law and Jefferson County government's decline, proved that he is also a rabid racist, whom harbors personal animus against blacks, especially the ones that votes and likes to gamble at electronic bingo casinos.  During the federal corruption trial involving a number of current and former Alabama Legislative officials, audio from Beason himself where he called blacks "Aborigines" and said they are so illiterate and ignorant they have to be bussed to the polls and enticed to vote with free food and entertainment.  


It's obvious that asshole doesn't like blacks or other people of color, so the question is will the constituents in Alabama's 

Don't Ask Don't Tell is done

The US Senate voted with 65-31 vote to end the Clinton administration era policy against LGBTs serving openly in the military.  I'm surprised by the gain of a couple of GOP votes like Mark Kirk of Illinois, Susan Collins of Maine, Scott Brown of Massachusetts, etc.  However, it is done, so the LGBT bloggers should stop whining about how President Obama hasn't fulfilled his promise of repealing it.  It's obvious since the Republicans will be taking over the House and a few more Republican senators in the US Senate next month that anything else socially progressive for LGBTs won't be going down anytime soon.  Now let's rejoice and enjoy the holiday season...

IN RELATED NEWS: In one his last votes as a congressman, when the House voted again on the repeal DADT, Artur Davis voted against it.  It is what it is.  I've always been like "kanye shrug" at Davis when he steps outside of the progressive mode because he is a moderate.  However, the sycophant of Shelia Smoot whining on Martin Weinrib aka "gradyw" of  Left in Alabama and "MartinW" of Progressive Electorate about it.

Tom Cuccinelli is at it again, but this time causing problems involving the enforcement of healh care reform in Virginia

Virginia's controversial, foolish attorney general, Tom Cuccinelli, has gotten his wish of repealing the enforcement of some of the Federal Affordable Care Act.  The portion in particular is the mandate of requiring citizens to buy some form of health insurance.  The U.S. District Court Judge, Henry E. Hudson, known for his conservative stances and dabbling in anti-healthcare reform lobbying as well, ruled today that portion of the Affordable Care Act was unconstitutional.

"Neither the Supreme Court nor any federal circuit court of appeals has extended Commerce Clause powers to compel an individual to involuntarily enter the stream of commerce by purchasing a commodity in the private market," he wrote. "In doing so, enactment of the [individual mandate] exceeds the Commerce Clause powers vested in Congress under Article I [of the Constitution.]"

The kicker is why this justice ruled in Cuccinelli's favor was because the Republican-dominated Virginia General Assembly passed a state law prohibiting any type of mandate against requiring a health insurance for citizens.  (Of course, the same logic could be drawn from the mandating of certain states requiring drivers to have automobile insurance, but that another conversation).  Cuccinelli feels embolden now since he got his way and even Virginia Republican Congressman Eric Cantor want to even have the case sent directly to the SCOTUS (U.S. Supreme Court).  Oh yeah, the mandate isn't exactly unenforceable because it will be still be allowed while its going through the appeals process.

However, this whole situation is first shot of the GOP and anti-healthcare reform sycophants to strip this delicately constructed law allowing many whom couldn't receive health care including many of my fellow Gen-Y peers as well as those whom are over the poverty line but can't afford it either (also known as the "in-between").   Oh yeah, let me not forget about the other 20 states including Alabama and Georgia, stirring the pot on this law.  This whole fiasco is another reason why anyone with common sense should be against this craziness rather than promoting it...

Well, there is some truth to this, but a lot more misconceptions to this

I just read the article by Josh Kraushaar in the National Journal discussing the diversity problem associated with the Democratic Party.  While there is some truth to this notion because I've been saying this for a while now that there is a humongous problem within the DNC that involving viable black politicos whom are electable to pluralistic, statewide offices such as the U.S. Senate and governorships.  I've said time, time, and time again that there needs to be more pluralistic candidates promoted to candidacy for statewide offices across the South, but there is those whom are vehemently against this.  Yet, some blacks do wonder why the lack of viable black candidates continues persist in the South. 

On the other hand, there is way more young and non-white voters willing to vote for Democrats over Republicans.  The reasoning is quite obvious T.E.A. twits, Dixiecrats, anti-progressive stance will likely be the Republicans undoing. 

Now, the elections of Bobby Jindal, Nikki Haley (ironically both Indian Americans) to the governorships of Louisiana and South Carolina respectively is impressive.  However, notice they aren't electing any blacks or Meso-American Hispanics to the statewide offices because they know it won't fly in the South.  The few blacks elected in the South are always in majority white districts and extremely socially conservative, i.e. Allen West of Florida and Tim Scott of South Carolina.  This individuals aren't reflective of a "pluralistic" candidate rather an anti-thesis of pluralism because they have subjectively refuted an inclusive platform that is very reflective of their congressional districts.  This alone shows anyone with a strong critical analysis skill will notice about this situation of "diversity" in the Republican party.  It also will come back to haunt the GOP because most non-whites see through the overt non-inclusive nature of the current Republican party. 

So if the T.E.A. Party had their way then nobody that didn't own property would vote?

It's no surprise that the T.E.A. twats are still peddling their aversive bias and classist agenda across America.  It so ironic the same group of people have screamed, "We want our country back!" by verbatim would allow another one its "leaders" venture into this territory again.

Well, Judson Phillips of Nashville-based "Tea Party Nation" said on his internet radio show of the same name that went along the lines of defending the original laws that only allowed property owners the right to vote:

The Founding Fathers originally said, they put certain restrictions on who gets the right to vote. It wasn't you were just a citizen and you got to vote. Some of the restrictions, you know, you obviously would not think about today. But one of those was you had to be a property owner. And that makes a lot of sense, because if you're a property owner you actually have a vested stake in the community. If you're not a property owner, you know, I'm sorry but property owners have a little bit more of a vested interest in the community than non-property owners.

Thanks to the gigantic ponzy scheme orchestrated by the U.S. government (primarily under the Bush administration) and financial industry, nearly 1/3rd of US residents are ineligible for homeownership. 

David DeGerolamo, a North Carolina tea party leader and founder of NC Freedom, a state-wide tea party umbrella group went even further saying he wants the 14th Amendment repealed.  

It's like Rand Paul and his bullshit all over again.  Now I'm awaiting the "strict constitutionalists" come out the gate defending this bullshit.  We live in some sad time in this nation when racist and classist bullshit can be defended.

(h/t to the Institute for Southern Studies) 

Why Southern Democrats are on the skids...

I will dedicate this blog post to the truth as to why Southern Democrats are on the skids.  It has all to do with the miraculous cloaking of so many leftover Dixiecrats in many positions of these state parties. Like YouTube sensation, Cadillac Kimberly said, "I don't go IN on anybody.  If I was going IN then I would put on a Teflon vest.  I speak the truth".

Most Southern white Democratic politicos aren't shit. It started with the American Civil Right Movement and the fight for equal rights, liberties, and protections for people of color (non-whites) under the law.  Most Southern states until the 1970s were dominated by Democrats.  Due to the Democratic party history of aligning itself with the New Deal programs championed by Franklin D. Roosevelt that benefited a great deal since it provided electricity and other modern amenities that others in the Northeast and Midwest had for a couple of decades.  However, this whole allowing "others" equal treatment and rights just didn't (and still doesn't sit well with most white Southerners).  These voters are called a love term known as Dixiecrats.  Oh yeah, don't let the dissolution of the "party" fool you at all, they still exist but are more covert about their ways...

In the South, many state Deep Southern Democratic parties like Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Georgia have coddled these type of voters with "Yellow Dog", "Blue Dog", or just plain conservative Democrats to conserve their partisan majority of their state legislatures.  This was at the advantage of productive socially progressive and many times fiscally sound decisions to better their respective states.  However, by the "1994 Wave" in states like Georgia, Democrats lost both houses of state legislature due to this persistent of coddling of a group of voters in areas where you know the white voters will associate Democrat label to "bettering others over them".   Now this "wave" has finally come to Alabama in form the same occurring nearly 15 years after neighboring Georgia.

In both states cases, the state Democratic party leadership has spent so much political capital trying to keep Democrats whom would turn on their own in a heartbeat in their ranks.  Now as a political independent, I'm all for fighting for your constituency, but there is a thin line between being a champion of the people and a selfish bastard. The recent episodes in Alabama and Georgia has shown that these types can play-pretend to care about the people but still get away for bloody murder in a gerrymandered or racially imbalanced district.

Many of these types are the latter because the now curious case of soon-to-be former Florida congressman, Alan Grayson, stood to the very end as a champion of the people and socially progressive leader although a number of the foolish asses in Florida's 8th congressional district that will listen to the sound of water boiling and think it's a platform.  (Interesting side note, FL-8 is a district that includes the eastern and northern portions of the city of Orlando, which are both predominately white, whereas the western side and more racially diverse side of the city is in another district.  This is all while the majority of FL-8 is west of the city of Orlando itself.  Another case of gerrymandering...)

What needs occur from here on out is Democrats realize that any white politico that spends more time basically speaking in cues about blocking social progress especially those that benefit non-whites and lower class shouldn't be trusted.  It seems more like these types have a demographic, mostly white males over age 50 years.  That can be traced back to the fact that they were born during or prior to the Civil Rights Movement and doesn't seem to have actual respect for the rights of those different than themselves.  It's time for them to take out the trash and make sure it doesn't stick around for more issues.

Oh yeah, let's not confuse these types with moderate Democrats, whom will actually support socially progressive stance, but show resistance to somethings on fiscally sound grounds.  Those types aren't a part of the problem because when push comes to shove involving social progress they tend to be on the right side of history.

NPR fired Juan Williams ***YAWN***

I am so over the talk about National Public Radio (NPR) terminating Juan Williams position as a political commentator for their organization.  He opened his mouth and said something quite derogatory towards Muslim Americans, and he paid the piper with his job.  If I had a job as a political commentator with organization A and then went on a national news network or propaganda organization (You Decide, hint, hint) and said that all the white people involved in the T.E.A. twats gatherings made me uneasy because I know they are aversive racists then I got terminated from organization A.  Well, I would deserve it, period.  I wasn't being an objective commentator on politics anymore because I felt the need to explain my personal feelings and insulted an already controversial group on national television.  Clearly it's a conflict of interest as NPR ombudsmen Alicia C. Shepard elaborated in her column on Williams' termination.

Meanwhile, Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, and rest of the vindication for their bullshit crowd are harping about stripping the federal funding from NPR because of this.  Yet, NPR receives less than 2% of funding from the federal government.  This is a textbook example of hypocrisy on the part of the socially conservative and narrow-minded faction that exists in this nation.  Nobody was saying a peep about the antics of the commentators of the mostly socially regressive Clear Channel syndicated talk radio shows or NewsCorp (FOX's parent company) founder and CEO Rupert Murdoch donating millions to the Republican Governors Association.  Instead, it's oh so convenient to pick and choose their controversies and battles of "objectivity".

Now, NPR might appear a little left leaning, but that's because most of the time they do objective reporting of most major news stories that occur regardless of political ideological stances.  If that is considered "liberal" or "left-leaning" then I guess the assumption of the "liberal mainstream media" does exist. (only in the minds of the paranoid and eurocentric oriented social conservative individuals)...

Things about the black religious fold to think about...

Earlier this week, Gallup released a poll on the popularity of allowing openly homosexual or bisexual members of the armed forces to serve as well as the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and same-sex unions.  The poll compares from 2008-2009 to 2010.  Well, apparently "folk" ain't down with either when compared to other ethnic groups.  ***SIGH***

Sometimes I just don't know what to say about why folk are so sanctimonious about LGBT/SGLs when there are plenty of other fires that need to be extinguished.  One of the fires is the likelihood of contracting an STI, 1 in 22 black Americans are likely to contracted HIV.  There are so many things going on, but folk want to hate on the LGBT/SGLs and them living their lives.

Surprisingly, black LGBT blogger Son of Baldwin wrote a lively list of likely reasoning behind the hypocritical and sanctimonious nature of folk when it comes down to it:

1. Religion.  Black Americans (or maybe ALL Americans) are among the most superstitious people on the planet. They have taken what was once their slave masters' religion and used it to liberate themselves from the tyranny of antebellum slavery.  However, we've yet to be ingenious enough to remove what is perhaps the inherent flaw in any organized religion: the need for an enemy.  Religion simply cannot function without an Other to demonize.  Throughout history, women, Pagans, Native Americans and blacks have found themselves the targets of religious terrorism.  Gays are simply the latest in a long line of subjects who are held up as scapegoats onto whom all the sins and vices of the society can be poured.  What makes black homophobia super egregious, however, is that having been the sacrificial lambs themselves, one would think that blacks would be more sympathetic to gay rights.  Instead, like the whites before them who said, "I may be poor, but at least I'm not black," blacks find shelter and solace in "I may be black, but at least I'm not gay."

2. Envy, entitlement, indifference and practicality.  On completely self-serving and emotional levels, blacks feel, quite simply, that since we don't yet have all the rights and privileges entitled to us (perhaps on paper, but certainly not in practice), gays shouldn't have theirs yet, either. In other words: Wait your turn! Blacks also feel that the right for gays to marry isn't as important as, say, the right not to be murdered in cold blood by police officers or the right to be able to properly feed and educate one's children or other immediate, tangible concerns. Apparently, everything is mutually exclusive when it comes to civil rights.

3. Racism in the gay community.  To most black people, white gays are indistinguishable from the white, often affluent society that they perceive as oppressors.  Unfortunately, the gay community has given blacks ample justification for this position.  Thus, blacks are adamant about not supporting any cause that will give whites--gay or straight--greater license to oppress them.  And gayness, in the minds of ignorant blacks, is most certainly a white thing.

4. Closeted black homosexuals. Since a great many black homosexuals are afraid to come out of the closet because of the rampant homophobia in black society (especially the black church), there are relatively few voices from within the community to combat the rhetoric and relatively few individuals to put a face on the specter.  Therefore, the ignorance remains largely unassailable.

SMH! I have no words for the craziness

 
There seems to be a coup amongst Southern rural white Democrat reps to down right sabotage any efforts to maintaining sanity in the region.  Let me see, there is Bobby Bright in Alabama's 3rd congressional district trying his damnedest to make sure his gullible (predominately white) constituency that he is an "conservative independent, gun-totting, down-to-earth type of guy".  Uh yeah, that'll work in the long, Bobby...

The curious case of déjà vu for Alabama's 5th congressional district (you know the place where current sitting representative Parker Griffith switched sides from Democrat to Republican because he felt it would help him get reelected), with their "Democratic" nominee (I used that term lightly), Steve Raby is basically playing from the same book of ambiguity as Griffith.  This is just Alabama.

Meanwhile in Georgia, there is their 8th congressional district (middle Georgia around Macon), their sitting representative, Jim Marshall, saying he is a "conservative, gun-totting, fighting against Washington conservative".  It seems like the same script, different cast all over the South with rural, white Democratic representatives.  They seem to want to be associated with this culture of hokey bullshit (yeah, I went there), so they can go back and repeat the same thing they did before (nothing that I can see other than be a placeholder).

This is bull is the textbook reason why I don't fool with rural politics because it's all about being very hokey and WASPy along with be very vague on platform details other.  The ad populum fallacy of this crap is they aren't progressing their constituents' interests nor are they being a leader at all rather jumping on the bandwagon of mediocrity.

I'm an independent, but have hardline stances that are represents social progression and fiscal responsibility.  Meanwhile, other constituents in their respective districts that maybe socially moderate, progressive, liberal, or non-white are left in the dust and having their loyalties to taken advantage of because they have a "D" behind their name.  This type of dysfunctional political behavior is the reason why most non-whites and socially progressive whites leave these areas.  These so-called "independent" Democrats are Tagalogs of the southern, closed-minded culture that has retarded this portion of the country as a whole.  My advice to them is position yourself as a social moderate and attempt to reach out and inspire the base to vote rather than chasing after the fickle and socially conservative whites, whom by default tend to vote for a Republican.

(Photos courtesy of Left in Alabama)

When will this sh*t end????

This ongoing propaganda war that the racially aversive, predominately white, social conservatives are attempting to wage on those with conscientious lore of our society.  Now there is a new twist to the tit for tat of the past 2 weeks, and this time it to place their aim at Shirley Sherrod's husband, civil rights activist, Charles Sherrod.  Now this video from him speaking at the University of Virginia questioning if he is "racist" according to the aforementioned latter group in the first sentence.  Let's not forget the proverbial question of how did Shirley Sherrod wind up working for the same organization that her family with others filed a class action lawsuit (and later won) against.

I'm beyond TIRED of this convoluted attempt to diverse the attention from what has been occurring in this nation for centuries and the institutionalized bias and impediments for non-whites for decades for economic empowerment or quality of life.  They need to stop trying to beat a damn dead horse because it's getting to a point of absurdity as those whom seem to be reaching for ANYTHING to cling to yet refuse to address the elephant in the room, institutionalized racism...

GEEZ!!!

Heretic of the year...Laura Bush

She supports same sex unions, but she said it in her book and in the recent interview with Larry King on CNN on Monday.  It's the oldest trick in the (socio-political) book: you don't say anything when you could have done something, so you say anything when you can nothing.  Hence, why I call Laura Bush the "Heretic of the year" for 2010 because she sat by and let her idiot for a husband push dogmatic and demagoguery from the legislative process to appease the ignorant and reactionary. 

***KANYE SHRUG***

Thoughts on the "Great Division" proposed for Fulton County (Georgia)

I've been wondering and contemplating about this topic for months now.  For the life of me, I still don't fully understand the fundamental logic behind the desire to create or recreate the 160th county in Georgia, Milton County. 

Now for those that don't know, Milton County used to exist until 1932 when the Great Depression forced the county dissolve and merge into Fulton County.  The original boundaries of it was pretty much all of northern Fulton County from the Chattahoochee River and northward with the exception of a triangular shaped strip of land stretching from original Roswell land area including downtown to Chattahoochee River was originally apart of Cobb County.  Also Fulton County obtained the land north of present-day Dunwoody Club Road to the Chattahoochee from DeKalb County whose northern border was originally the river as well.  Regardless, the original Milton County went broke because of the disaster number of season of cotton harvest due to boll weevil devastating the crop.  However, the recent push as early as 2006 after a spring of municipal incorporation of Sandy Springs, John's Creek, Milton, and Mountain Park in northern Fulton County, the overwhelmingly Republican Georgia General Assembly delegation has pushed to sever Fulton County.  Interestingly enough, the "new" Milton County would include Sandy Springs, which was originally a part of the original Fulton County.  But, the recently-incorporated Sandy Springs is majority white (77% to be exact) and very Republican.  The 2010 general session of the General Assembly, the newly appointed House Speaker Pro Tempore Jan Jones has been pushing this HARD to secede northern portions from the rest of Fulton County.

The real question is it racially motivated?  Could very well be...  According to the 2000 Census data, the majority of the municipalities and former CDPs (that's census-designated places for those who don't know the statistical lingo) in northern Fulton County were on average 75% white and no more than 25% non-white.  It seems like a case where racial identity and partisanship politics meets and becomes quite ambiguous in definition.  The argument has been for years according to some is that the current Fulton County government is "too bloated and ineffective in providing services".  On the other hand, the proponents of keeping the now 1 million + inhabitant Fulton County unified hasn't really helped themselves with the site http://www.onefulton.org, but they do have some points as well.  The northern communities were given in recent years 3 new libraries from the Atlanta-Fulton County Library System with state of the art facilities and resources; whereas, the communities in the southern portions of the county aside from the locations in Buckhead and main branch in downtown Atlanta itself are still half-assed at best.

Now, this is my opinion on this since I have lived in another ineffective urban county, Jefferson County.  The efforts by the Republican delegation in the Georgia General Assembly is aversively bias in intent because they don't want to deal with the overwhelmingly non-white and politically different demographic groups of the rest of the county.  It is ineffectively pointless to secede from Fulton County when you could just write legislation to reform the county government to fix whatever issues ails the communities.  However, I've come to the conclusion this is another case where some socially conservative whites will walk and run around the main point here and that is "they don't want to be involved in anything where they feel they can't control or orchestrate on their grounds".  It's a shame that some whites will think this way and act that they should just sever an urban county because it doesn't represent them directly or politically, and you don't see too many non-whites or social progressives attempt to enact an usurp of power or government when we don't control things.  It's quite self-destructive and leads to further strife between the socially conservative whites against non-white and other non-WASP demographic groups in Metro Atlanta.  Nevertheless, it just shows that Atlanta is just as screwed up as Birmingham in a more ways than none.

A moment to speak on Arizona...

Well since Arizona is apart of the Sunbelt, in my humble opinion a de facto extension of the South, so I'll speak on the Florida-esque state where they recently passed one of the most racebaiting laws in modern history against Hispanics in particular.  (Don't act all brand new, come on you know they were aiming for them...)

I just love the quotes of the Arizona's appointed governor, Jan Brewer, who was put in place last year after Janet Napolitano became Homeland Security secretary said:

"We in Arizona have been more than patient waiting for Washington to act, but decades of inaction and misguided policy have created a dangerous and unacceptable situation."

Now I will say the immigration situation has gone on for far too long, but remember the under the 8 years of the Bush administration nothing occurred either.  The pragmatic part of me says "yeah, I agree Gov. Brewer", but the rational socially alert practical side of me sides "Uh, this heifer just gave the A'OK to racial profiling by responding to conservative white ignorance to preserve her seat in office for a full term come election time."  This law is so poorly written that even municipal police chiefs including the former chief of Phoenix suburb, Mesa, are against it, and that says A LOT.

I just love that good ol' anti-Washington sentiment where the talking conservative dittoheads do their dirty work blaming everybody but their own conservative representatives in Congress (HUH, John "I talk out of both sides of my mouth on everything" McCain, John Kyl, and the rest of the Congressional Republican brigade from AZ!).  Anyways, it gets even better when she said this:

"This bill strengthens the laws of our state, protects all of us, every Arizona citizen...  It does so while ensuring that the constitutional rights of all remain solid, stable."

Aww, how cute!  You are feeding the fodder for the alarmist crowd with the notion "we are now safe, now don't worry your pretty white head about those god-awful Mexicans".  A recent poll published in the Arizona Republic shows that the majority of the (white) Arizonians support this fuckery by 70%.  Yeah, this is bullshit at it extraordinarily worst, and we can see some white people will give life to ANYTHING and the foolish in the GOP (and to certain extension the Democratic Party) will feed into their ignorance to stay in office.  Yet the entire state of Arizona was a part of Mexico once upon a time, so the whites pushing this law are not only racist but subjecting those whose families may have a long history with the land than there was a state known as Arizona to racial profiling because of their paranoia.  TISK, TISK, TISK....

However, there is a more!  Arizona State House passed a bill about 2 weeks ago that requires the subjective declaration that Presidential candidates are native-born American citizens and want to see proof of their birth certificate shown to the Arizona Secretary of State, who handles candidates who appear on the ballot and other electoral issues.  In other words, they want to require the current sitting president, Barack Obama, proof of natural born citizenship before he can be placed on the ballot in 2012.  Yeah, these idiots are UNBELIEVABLE in Arizona, but at least they are now topping Virginia these days for once.  However, we are seeing the retrograding of previously pseudo-progressive or forward-thinking states, but Arizona has always been more conservative since it's high older white retiree population like Florida.  Also let's not forget it was the last 2 states (along with New Hampshire) to recognize Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday as a state holiday in 1990 (co-thanks to John McCain and then-sitting AZ governor Evan Mecham)...

The fallout is widespread from San Francisco city attorney is calling for a boycott of Arizona to Congressional Democrat, Raul Grijalva, from Arizona actually calling of a boycott of his own home state to tourism and economic development officials are worried to a refried bean swastika being painted on the windows of the Arizona State Capitol building in Phoenix. 

All this history of Arizona and its fuckery is enough to definitely hamper their economic development ventures among other things.  What ashame!  I once upon a time wanted to move to Phoenix, but after learning all this about Arizona and its socially conservative and aversive racist history and mindset, NOPE! 

Another lesson for those who are overtly partisan and delusional in Alabama politics (to a certain extent Southern politics)

I'm so sick and tired of talking about the whole hoopla over the ANSC endorsement of Alabama Democratic gubernatorial candidate Ron Sparks over Artur Davis.  First thing first, at this point I honestly don't care either way since I'm absolutely convinced that the Alabama Democratic Party (ADP) is well on its way to collapse.  Secondly, I'm moving out of Alabama (likely to Metro Atlanta soon), so it is what it is in my opinion of how effective or aligned to the interests of certain groups either candidate is.  However, it seems like it is time (yet again) for another rant on partisanship over pragmatism along with other elements at work.

Let's get one thing straight, although I do agree with some things in principle on Artur Davis' positions, I don't care to vote for him because he is who he is, a politician and lawyer.  Now let's get to the point.  Davis is a pragmatist who knows that within the toxic political culture of Alabama you must be a Democrat yet not a typical Democrat.  Also if you are a black politician then you must not be a typical black politician, thus his positions and opinions on individual issues and items may differentiate in a variety of ways.  Regardless, a pragmatist in principle will take the realist approach to things on issues and vote with their head with conscientous influenced decisons.  When examining Davis from an objective perspective, the man is a moderate black politico with progressive leanings on certain issues.  His evolution into this wasn't subtle nor overt, but he has always been a moderate, but his progressive leanings exist only in a political vacuum where his record isn't the only spotlit upon.  I disgress, Davis has more likelihood of making it in the Alabama Gubernatorial General Election over Ron Sparks.  For the record, Sparks is very conservative Democrat, whose pragmatism is virtually nonexistant since he talks out of both sides of his mouth and doesn't seem to show a true stance on any political issues aside from ones already laid out by Davis or hot topic ones such as gambling, which has been the talk of Alabama for nearly year now.

The partisanship issues within the ADP isn't one unique to any Southern state, but it is one that is very problematic.  Alabama has one of the highest number of black politicos in proportion to its black population, yet most of those black politicos are pseudo-progressives and the rest flat out conservative black Democrats.  They are all products of the Alabama Democratic Coalition (ADC) and the more recent additions are products of both ADC and ANSC (Alabama New South Coalition).  These groups maybe increment in reaching certain segments of the black population who doesn't follow politics as closely as myself, they are reluctance to show any real fortitude to work towards making the state a more progressive environment.  Instead they hold their power over the heads of the majority of Alabama black legislators and politicos, thus telling them to fundamentally "waiting their turn" to make waves in the water.  It shows what is really wrong with them.  The few who doesn't show any allegiance are practically invisible outside of their respective districts since they would rather enjoy making it to the Alabama Legislature and its fringe benefits than making increment changes during the regular legislative sessions annually needed to move the state forward. This holds back black politicos who are more progressive and willing to take a chance and attempt make major strides towards producing a more progressive and fiscally conservative Alabama

Even further within that partisanship void lays 2 additional problems: racial identity and stance on social issues.  Overall, the ADP is a rural-oriented, socially conservative group of individuals that are mostly white.  However, with even further examination on that, the racial dynamics of the party is horrible to say the least.  In a recent vote to Alabama to block the enforcement of the federal health care reform law, the vote was clearly racial with all the white Democrats voting for it and all the black Democrats voting against. It shows the sift within the ADP on racialized issues such a health care reform, removing racist language from the state's archaic state constitution among other things.  Social issues within Alabama (and the rest of the South) are very racialized due to the whole "welfare queen" mantra.  Most white Democrats are still those who fall into this void of being manipulated by these issues and will vote against their own economic and social interest all due to this racialized undercurrent.  What's even more embarrassing is the notion that black Democrats will do this as well (with those aforementioned groups of ADC and ANSC) by playing up the notion of an outsider is not to be trusted and have malevolent intentions of obtaining public office in a predominately black district. This sift is clear and obvious to the most objective and attentive analysts of political and social issues.

Alabama is held back more predominately due to the Southern influence of covert racial cues used to play up the bases and unsettle the uninformed.  The main culprits of this are Alabama Democrats more so than Republicans because the Democrats control both houses of the state legislative body.  In conclusion, like all other Southern states, Alabama's Democratic Party will have a catharsis of this obviously toxic elements from power within its leadership position since they have brought nothing but status quo.  It's not going to change until that occurs...

Georgia's 1st black female and youngest chief justice is being considered for departing U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens

While I was under the weather for the last few days (literally after I returned from Atlanta), Leah Ward Sears, Georgia's 1st black and youngest chief justice name has popped up on the list of names to replace John Paul Stevens on the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS).  According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

Sears' name now is among more than half a dozen candidates being considered by the president to replace Justice John Paul Stevens, who is retiring this summer.

Well, this is an interesting series of developments involving the foolishness that has been pedaled by Senatorial Republicans at the idea of President Obama appointing another justice to the SCOTUS like Alabama's very own junior senator Jeff Sessions (backwoods, aversive racist asshole).  According to the Mobile Press-Register, Session released a long, yet convoluted statement commending and condemning President Obama if even thinks about attempting to nominate anything other than a social conservative to the post currently held by the clearly liberal John Paul Stevens.  This excerpt is so tale-telling about the double standard that Sessions along with the majority of the Senatorial Republicans on this process:

Justice Stevens' approaching retirement sets in motion an important constitutional process to nominate and confirm the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. In exercising its 'advise and consent' role, the Senate must act on behalf of the American people to carefully scrutinize the nominee's qualifications, prior speeches and writings, and record. Senate hearings are the public's best opportunity to become involved in this process, and it is critical that the Judiciary Committee conduct a fair and thorough evaluation of whomever President Obama nominates for this extraordinary lifetime appointment.

We know from the nomination of Justice Sotomayor last spring that the public is rightly concerned about the future of our judiciary. The product of her confirmation hearing was a near-universal rejection of President Obama's empathy standard, the flawed notion that judges should allow personal feelings, political opinions, and social views to guide judicial decision-making. Senators on both sides of the aisle--and the nominee herself--disavowed the president's standard because it lies contrary to the traditional role of a judge in our legal system. Such an approach opens the door to an anti-democratic abuse of power where unaccountable federal judges set national policy according to their own views and political agendas. That approach is deeply unpopular with the American people, and any nominee who subscribes to it should expect bipartisan opposition.

The courtroom is a place reserved for the search for truth and the fair adjudication of disputes, free from politics. The American people want judges of the utmost integrity who have demonstrated a commitment to the Constitution and a willingness to impartially apply the law to the facts to reach a just outcome, without regard to the parties involved. There is a growing movement that is calling for more fidelity to our constitutional order, not less.

This idiot is telling me that he made sure that Roberts and Alito were properly vetted in the Senatorial approval process?  That one is HIGHLY DOUBTFUL considering how bias on opinions Alito clearly is on rulings moreso than any other justice on the SCOTUS.  I hope that Obama nominates Sears for the SCOTUS since it would bring another open-minded moderate with progressive leanings and bonus of this one would a black female.  On the flip side, according to the Washington Post, Sears is friends with current sitting justice Clarence Thomas, so it would be interesting to see if he will do some backdoor campaigning in her favor. 

This is going to be a three-ring-circus and the Senatorial Republicans of the socially conservative and hyper-partisan ilk are just going to make this one so more dubious and annoying...

Oklahoma bill that would block local law enforcement from assistancing in a federal hate crime investigation is dead

Another thing that occurred while I was away in Atlanta was the death of the bill in the Oklahoma State Legislature that would have blocked law enforcement from assisting in the investigation of a hate crime.  Oklahoma State House Representative Mike Shelton of Oklahoma City, co-chair of the House Judiciary Committee, and member of the Oklahoma Black Caucus took the State Senate bill and being the House sponsor of it and killed it.  Shelton asked specifically for the committee to not hear the bill and essentially killing it.  However, the bill's senatorial author socially conservative Republican Steve Russell also of Oklahoma City said if local law enforcement didn’t object to turning over the information, court approval would not be needed, Russell said.  Also that the law is needed to protect free speech after the passage of a federal law that added sexual orientation or gender identity to the categories protected under the federal hate-crimes law would have prohibited Oklahoma law enforcement agencies from cooperating with any federal agency in the investigation of a federal hate crime.  (Bigoted idiot...  Oh well...)