Saturday, October 25, 2014

Obama Annihilates the Future of the Black Community

Is it not enough that the president is the most public supporter of abortion to ever sit in the Oval Office?  

Since 1973, legalized abortions have taken 16 million black babies from their destiny in a secular culture that devalues life.   To compound what seems to be an agenda ambivalent to the need to empower the black community, it is now clear that the president is planning a massive immigration policy change without Congress that will decimate the poor black working class. 

Breitbart News reported earlier this week that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued a request for proposal  (RPF) furthering a not widely known move to legalize the millions of illegal immigrants currently in the U.S.  The RFP  indicates "the guaranteed minimum for ordering period is 4,000,000 cards.  The estimated maximum for the entire contract is 34,000,000 cards."  This is a massive move whereby the administration is preparing to buy the materials needed to construct both Permanent Residency Cards (known as green cards) and Employment Authorization Documentation cards.  "This is a new program of remarkable breadth," said Jessica Vaughn a former State Department official, Breitbart reported.

While polls show that black confidence in the president has eroded since 2012, some black leaders are vocally disappointed with the president's performance.  Cornel West, a professor of philosophy and Christian practice at Union Theological Seminary said in an interview with, "He posed as a progressive and turned out to be counterfeit." While West is disappointed with the president for reasons that differ from my own, this is as strong a criticism of the president I've heard from so-called black leadership.  However, most continue to miss the train that is coming that will wipe out the working poor in the black community.

The influx of as many as 34 million newly legalized and voting immigrants puts the working poor in the black community out of business (literally) and redefines the term marginalized.  If the current unemployment rate for blacks today is twice the national average, the disparity will soar once the president has his way through executive order essentially providing amnesty for as many as 34 million.  Working poor blacks will be perpetually unemployed and officially wards of the state while the new voting bloc will make the black vote irrelevant.  When this happens, the idea of black empowerment will become unattainable.

As I recently shared,  illegal immigration is one of the largest threats to the black community and is one of the largest contributing factors for the decline in the labor force participation rate, according to Peter Kirsanow from the U.S. Civil Rights Commission.  The participation rate was 12% for blacks and 80% for whites according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

In 2008 the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights examined the impact of illegal immigration on blacks.  The Commissions’ witnesses were unanimous that illegal immigration has an adverse impact on black employment, reducing job opportunities and depressing wages especially for black men.There is an existential threat to the black community.  The threat to the nuclear black family used to be absentee fathers but now the greatest threat is immigration for which we have no direct control.   Where are all the liberation scholars, pastors, and elected officials while the future for blacks evaporates?  We need help.

Saturday, October 18, 2014

Liberalism Threatened

 Will Liberals succeed at silencing pastors and prevent Christian mobilization?

Since the founding of the country, there were no restrictions on churches with respect to endorsing or opposing political candidates from the pulpit.  Churches came under attack only after the Southern Democrat LBJ ran and won his U.S. Senate seat.  In 1954, Johnson was opposed by a nonprofit organization; after he won his seat he proposed legislation to amend the Internal Revenue Code to prohibit nonprofit organizations, including churches, from endorsing or opposing political candidates.  The IRS Code was amended in 1954 without any debate regarding the impact of the bill and the LBJ political payback has tied the hands of pastors ever since.  The IRS now prohibits churches from directly endorsing or opposing political candidates or participating in partisan politics by threatening the revocation of tax-exempt status.

Not all pastors care about the IRS restriction because not all pastors are socially or theologically conservative.  Alternatively, not all pastors are political like those that led the nation in passing civil rights legislation in the 60’s.  However, some are political and have pushed back against the IRS restriction since the code does not limit a pastor from having a personal opinion.  Rev. Jerry Falwell who founded the Moral Majority Coalition and Liberty University was “the religious Right,” a vocal proponent of Republican candidates and his movement was credited for electing Ronald Reagan in 1980.  Liberals have not forgotten the impact Falwell had on elections.  He died in 2007.  The influence of Falwell was a powerful example of what a unified religious community can do to promote a biblical worldview; that influence also threatens national unity for Liberals on social issues like same-sex marriage; it is a threat liberals take very seriously.

Because of that threat, a new and aggressive standard is now emerging against the church.  Houston is ground zero.  A Houston city ordinance passed in May that bans anti-gay discrimination among businesses that serve the public, private employers, in housing and in city employment and city contracting. With an openly lesbian mayor leading the charge, five pastors were subpoenaed for their sermons in a lawsuit against the city not as litigants but because they stood in their pulpits and publically supported an effort to repeal the ordinance that, among other things, extended rights to the transgender community to file suit over access to bathrooms.

In response to the national outcry, Mayor Parker rescinded the sermon subpoenas yesterday.  However, the city’s effort must not be ignored.  This is only the beginning of the assault on churches and ultimately their tax-exemption (a meaningful factor in the charitable contributions churches receive). 

As reported by the Blaze, in July 2014 the IRS settled a lawsuit brought by an atheist activist group Freedom from Religion Foundation and reportedly agreed to adopt standards for determining and investigating whether churches and religious organizations have violated restrictions on political activity.  The atheist cannot win the argument so they intend to end the discussion in corroboration with the federal government.

Whether you are a Christian or not the attack on churches is real and must not be ignored.  Think on this:  “First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Socialist.  Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Trade Unionist.  Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.  Then they came for me---and there was no one left to speak for me.” (Martin Niemöller)

Friday, October 10, 2014

Disease and Race

Is it racist to restrict flights from Western Africa as a precaution against an incurable disease or is it racist to let 3,000 African children die daily from a preventable disease?

Being so out of touch should be grounds for immediate termination.  On MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry Show this past weekend, criticizing those on Capitol Hill who want to suppress the Ebola virus by limited flights into the United States, Laurie Garrett, Sr. Fellow for Global Health for the Council on Foreign Relations, said,

"I was on Capitol Hill yesterday. I spoke to lot of the political leadership of the United States and I have to say I was stunned by how many felt the solution was to completely cut off Africa. no visas. no travel. Keep them out. And this is completely missing the point. The hysteria should not be about one person in Dallas. What the world should be hysterical about is that Africa is facing its greatest catastrophic crisis arguably since the days of slavery. This could turn into carnage across a whole region if the world does not assist immediately."

In the first instance, several African nations disagree with Garrett.  In fact, Kenya Airways, British Airways, Air Cote D’Ivoire and Nigeria's Arik Air have suspended flights from the countries.  I think the point that is not well articulated is that the restrictions should apply to commercial travel.  No one would suggest that aid workers should not be able to get in and out of the country to help suppress this epidemic.  Such a restriction would be counter-productive.  But to call a commercial travel ban from the West Africa countries responding to this epidemic racist as Garrett did over this past weekend or to say that a “ban is not an optimal measure for controlling the import of the Ebola virus disease,” as did Stephanie Dujarric from the UN, is absurd on its face.

Moreover, Garrett’s claim that Africa is facing its greatest catastrophic crisis since slavery is just embarrassing.   The stupidity of Garrett’s statement reminds me of Rosie O’Donnell on The View when she said, in support of her conspiracy theory that 911 was an inside job, “This is the first time fire ever bent steal!” What’s worse, no one corrected her when she made the moronic declaration.

Note to Ms. Garrett:  While 3,865 have died from Ebola since March, 3,000 black African children die every day from malaria in sub-Saharan Africa.  It was not so long ago that vital aid was provided to Africa with the pesticide dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane (“DDT”).  DDT wiped out malaria here in the U.S. and was impacting the malaria epidemic in Africa until environmentalist Rachel Carson wrote Silent Sprint in 1962.  The pesticide was banned globally in 1996 on the basis that it is a probable (but not proven) human carcinogen. 

Because of liberals like Garrett in the “racist” environmental movement, the world sits back and watches as 90% of the 50 million malaria cases per year occur in Africa; 1 million people die of malaria each year, and nearly 3,000 African children die DAILY from malaria because of the ban on DDT.  This should put Ebola in an interesting perspective.  The number of deaths in Africa from malaria is an epidemic that is curable and has gone untreated by DDT.

Since Garrett is so upset about how we propose to treat Africa in this Ebola age, perhaps she could turn her attention to saving 3,000 children who die EVERY DAY in Africa.  If she doesn’t, does that make her a racist?


As of October 5, 2014, there have been 8,033 cases of Ebola with 4,461 confirmed cases by laboratory and 3,865 deaths across Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Nigeria, Senegal and the United States. This is the largest Ebola epidemic in history which began in March 2014.

Friday, October 3, 2014

Right Baby, Wrong Color

Is an unintended black child a blessing or a curse to a white mother?

Apparently a white lesbian didn’t get the memo about avoiding the appearance of racial intolerance because she is suing a sperm bank for $50,000 for inseminating her with sperm from a black man.  

Jennifer Cramblett of Ohio sued Midwest Sperm Bank in Chicago this past Monday for wrongful birth caused by a clerical error that resulted in the insemination by Donor 330 and not Donor 380 as intended.  This error resulted in the birth of a biracial girl named Payton who is now two years old.  Cramblett’s basis for her suit is that Payton would have to grow up in Cramblett’s racially intolerant community where she has to be driven out of the community to a “black neighborhood” to get her hair cut and where Cramblett decries she is not welcome.  It seems Cramblett is angling for relocation expenses.

While Cramblett may have a legitimate contract or warranty dispute with the sperm bank, there are larger implications that seem to be ignored by her legal action.  The heart of her grievance feels like the rejection of her biracial child although she professes her love.  (I don’t question her love for her child.) However, instead of leading her community in the tolerance she likely preaches for her same-sex relationship, she is getting out of town.  While she desires to relocate for Payton’s benefit to a more diverse community where Payton will fit in, Cramblett admits she lives in an all-white rural town and only met blacks when she went to college and therefore Cramblett will have her own psychological hurdles in this new diverse environment I assume.  How does that work-out for Payton?

This is a story because of its oddity but it also highlights the balkanization of our society.  We have a mother apprehensive of raising a biracial child as if that’s new in America.  We live in groups and categories; we wear labels that neatly fit us all in our own neat little box.  We’re either gay or straight, black or white, rich or poor, white in a white neighborhood and black in a black neighborhood-right where we all belong-separated.  The problem with these categories is that they are meaningless.  There are only two kinds of people: good and evil.  Notwithstanding cultural differences which exist and which should be celebrated, it’s time to know one another based on our character, contribution to community, and beneficence.  Cramblett can lead the way!

For Cramblett, living in controversy as she does in her same-sex relationship is nothing new.  White people are adopting and raising black children through local and international adoption agencies from various African nations all day long.  Cramblett may tap into the various adoptive parents who have traveled the road she is on.  Notwithstanding the elephant in the room that stands against same-sex adoption, Payton is here now.  I pray her mother gets it right and that Payton will feel accepted wherever she lives.