Rampant Racism, Part 2...

First, more on the Sean Bell case...

Let's see, how to fight perceived racism...

With violence? And relieving oneself of blame before the violence even begins?...

That doesn't sound like a reasonable, viable option, does it?...

But it is, according to NYC Councilman Charles Barron. He's been quoted as saying "...don't blame me if there's an explosion in our community" and "I'm not asking my people to do anything passive anymore....We're not the only ones that can bleed."

Who are "his people"...I wonder...those who instigate and perpetuate violence and absolve themselves of wrongdoing or responsibility? Are those "his people"?

Maybe it's people who believe in reparations. Millions for Reparations.

Barron submitted a "resolution" back in 2002 to the New York City Council proposing the creation of a Reparations Commission. (See this on his website as well - under "Track Record") Also, here's the text of a resloution he co-sponsored in 2005 for two separate reparations claims.

The reparations site's slogan: "They Stole Us, They Sold Us, They Owe Us! Reparations Now."

A quote from Malcolm X, taken from the website (assuming this is a philosophy of the organization):

"If you are the son of a man who had a wealthy estate and you inherit your father's estate, you have to pay off the debts that your father incurred before he died. The only reason that the present generation of white Americans are in a position of economic strength...is because their fathers worked our fathers for over 400 years with no pay...We were sold from plantation to plantation like you sell a horse, or a cow, or a chicken, or a bushel of wheat...All that money...is what gives the present generation of American whites the ability to walk around the earth with their chest out...like they have some kind of economic ingenuity. Your father isn't here to pay. My father isn't here to collect. But I'm here to collect and you're here to pay."

Is this broad enough for anyone? I didn't realize every white person in America today is a descendant of a slaveowner, and every black person, the descendant of a slave. I'd like to see the proof of that...

What is provable is that black people owned slaves, too.

Millions for Reparations also exploits its own cause by enabling viewers to download images of slaves to use as tools of propaganda - isn't that great?

Here's a reasonable take on the reparations issue from Thomas Sowell.

Enough about Barron. Let's move back to the Bell case...

Also representing the Bell family is Al Sharpton, notorious for popping up whenever black people are victimized. Debbie Schlussel reminds us of his penchant for inciting violence and racist beliefs. His partner in crime, Jesse Jackson, claims this was a "civil rights violation." (Schlussel comments on him as well).

If these are the people the Bell family want representing them, that's fine. But here's what Bell's father has to say:

"Bell's father, William, spoke to NY1 Tuesday night. He says while his son's death has left him shattered, he doesn't think the shooting was racially motivated.

'"I want to make sure that's clear, Color has nothing to do with it. It's the human being that got lost, not the color of his skin,' he said."

Amen to that.

Who knows, maybe Sharpton, Jackson, and Barron will surprise me. If their pasts are any indication, they won't. But I can hope...

Mind you, I'm not against a review of this case - far from it. Fifty shots seems excessive, especially if reports are true that the men were unarmed. But much controversy surrounds this case, including the actions of the victims with police before the shooting, as I noted earlier. Let's not let accusations of racism cloud the job that should be done here - an investigation of this specific case, absent of color.

Third stop: Boston. Boston University's College Republicans are stirring up controversy with a schloarship for white students...

Here's what the student body president has to say:

"Brooke Feldman, student body president at BU, said that the Student Union would not move to censor the College Republicans, but that it would probably hold a forum next month on race-based programs that includes representatives from all sides of the issue.

'"I don't believe we have a right to endorse or censor a group,' she said. 'We want to have an open discussion on the implication of the scholarship and a larger conversation on affirmative action.'"

I wonder what that conversation on affirmative action would include - maybe, that it's wrong? That it's racist? That it's not really about "redressing past wrongs" but about "lowering standards"???

Probably not.

It does seem that people around the U.S. are taking notice, however, of the wrongs of affirmative action. Here's the result of a Michigan ballot initiative to ban the consideration of race and gender in "college admissions, public hiring and contracting." And Roger Williams University offered "white" scholarships before BU, back in 2004.

I understand some Republicans have distanced themselves from supporting the BU scholarship. I don't personally think the scholarship is a good idea. But if it results in ignoring racial factors altogether, then I can say it was worth it.

Thoughts?