House Of Public Discourse
Is an area in social life where individuals can come together to freely discuss and identify societal problems, and through that discussion influence political action.
One of the biggest things this writer has noticed living in the same city Houston, Texas as Joel Osteen's Lakewood mega-church is that it's totally isolated from the community. Our research here in the House of Public Discourse has found this isolation is not unlike all mega-churches around the nation. They do not reach out to other denominations. They do not reach out to the public schools. They could care less about local officials. The only two groups we found them to reach out to were law enforcement and the military.
U.S. Marine Corp appreciation day. State Trooper Sunday. Our source reports they would bring these people in and praise them for their Christian service. It is the position of the House of Public Discourse they know full well what they are doing. These forces of coercion within a society are fundamental if any radical movement is going to succeed. Over the last several decades in America, our governance has been overrun with radical right Christian extremism. These religious groups and organization not content with religious matters have holy-rolled themselves into the public sphere of government. They have brought this to materialization through deeply funded media outlets and expounded their rhetoric through networks like the 700 Club, TBN, CBN, and others.
There is no greater example of Christian extremism finding its way into our politics than televangelist John Hagee. Pastor Hagee proclaims the U.S. must join Israel in a preemptive military strike against Iran. The nitwit overweight pastor says GOD ordains it himself and it would be the fulfillment of an end -time Biblical prophesy. This confrontation with Iran will lead to the Rapture and the second-coming of Christ.
Watch Pastor Hagee Stink His Nose Where It Does Not Belong.
So, What Do These Self-Proclaimed Christians Really Want?
Political Religion is what these people want. Political Religion is a non-church religion that has a spirituality aligned to combat and struggle. While it may employ democratic means to achieve its goals it frequently resorts to violence, and so generates fear in the communities it targets. Religions infiltration into our 21st century politics is the greatest problem facing our country and world. See, in short, if we did away with religion no one would have a reason to kill and die for. Modern day science professional have been advocating this for many years. This becoming a reality, however, is far-fetched. The problem with religion is not what people believe personally. Political Religion becomes dangerous when this personal belief system becomes involved in political decision-making.
The founding fathers of America particularly Jefferson and Madison were insistent that one's faith in GOD was of a personal nature and not a matter of the state. The issues lie in dogma and the interpretation from that point of view. The problems come into play when these dogma's begin to influence laws, judicial issues, and when people aren't discussing these issues based on 21st century attitudes. Political Religion becomes even more dangerous when religion and nationalist views coalesce so that it forms a political ideology.[See: James Madison On Church and State]
We The People are already seeing how these ideas have created a political divide in America and have cause some unstable individuals to act out in violence. What is missing in this equation is the lack of critical thinking at least from the American political right who shun intellectualism and have been for a dumbing down of America since the Reagan years. What the facts are is these radical Christian zealots like the Dominionist don't use critical thinking whatsoever they use mystical superstition thinking. This thinking and its infiltration into our political process is the biggest danger this country and world faces today.
One might ask why this is dangerous? It's dangerous cause World War III could be the result not of some mythical Bible story but due to a lack of critical thinking.[See Source]
It is the view of the House of Public Discourse that Americans need to stop fuzzing over taxes, economics, and social issues. We should draw a line in the sand on our countries future and rebuke these mystical thinkers who beat the drums of war to their dumb downed minion. Political hacks like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul and this real nutcase Ben Carson, while highly educated themselves they are playing to the least common denominators of our society for support.[See: Why Do Poor Uneducated White People Vote Republican?]
The attitude of "American Exceptionalism" and this horrid belief system that somehow America was a nation founded on Biblical principles could be the primary factor in our nation's demise.
It seems like decade's but just a couple years ago new GOP Presidential hopeful Ted Cruz led a GOP charge to shut down the Government over the Affordable Care Act.[ACA] Cruz claimed it would run up the deficit and that nobody wanted it. Well just a day prior to his announcing a run for the highest office in the land a very favourable report on the ACA was released. Most anyone who follows politics knows that Ted Cruz is a favorite of the Tea-Party Crowd. It does not surprise the House of Public Discourse that this GOP nut-case was the first to throw in his hat for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination. . If Cruz's position on the ACA is any indication of his political mind and savvy, the Democrats are salivating for this political charlatan to win the GOP bid.
What If Ted Cruz Would Have Got His Way?
Estimated 16 million gained insurance since health law took effect.
For starters, these 16 million Americans would not have become insured and to this very day Cruz and the rest of the seditious, traitorous , and law breaking Republicans are trying to shut it [ACA] down. When it comes to matters of politics people, tend to have short memories. At the time of this heated debate back in 2010-11 there were an estimated 49 million Americans uninsured.That number has decreased significantly to about 35 million no thanks to Ted Cruz and the rest of the GOP sloth.
The implementation of the Affordable Care Act has made it illegal for Insurance companies to ask about someone's medical history. Before, and if Ted Cruz would have had his way Insurance companies could deny coverage based on this history or charge higher premiums. And, now he wants to be president. If Ted Cruz would have had his way millions more Americans would have to rely on Emergency Room care which is often ineffective and expensive. More times than not the taxpayers foot the bill, and this gives these vulture capitalist insurance companies the excuse to raise rates on those who do pay for private insurance. Scam 101.
The GOP Health Care Plan
Now, under the ACA the law requires nearly all Americans to have health coverage. This provision works very much like the law requiring people to have automobile insurance. Now, that the Republicans have gained control of both the House and Senate due to lack of involvement of the Democratic base in both 2010 and 2014 mid-terms the Affordable Care Act is in danger. If Ted Cruz wins the election, you can all but kiss it good-bye. We in the House of Public Discourse will do whatever we can to see this doesn't happen. This message can be a winner for the Democrats. But, for that to be a reality we must clarify to the casual observer of politics why repealing Obamacare would be a step back for America and more importantly Americans.
Before, Obamacare losing health coverage was a way of life for young Americans who were routinely dropped from their parents coverage by insurance companies. Now, these same young Americans can remain on their parent's plan until the age of 26. If Ted Cruz would have had his way this would not be the case. Ted Cruz and the rest of the Republican Party advocate buying your own health insurance at full cost which makes health insurance out of reach for most Americans and the 49 million who were without health insurance before Obamacare is proof positive of this factoid. Now with the health care exchanges through the Affordable Care Act Americans can purchase subsidized health coverage. These are the very exchanges that now presidential hopeful Ted Cruz said nobody wanted and were obstructed and sabotaged by the GOP and the rouge Supreme Court.
Republicans and their followers are political " ScrewBalls."
Unlike known idiot Sara Palin, Ted Cruz has made a name for himself for being a Harvard-educated political nitwit. He[Ted Cruz] like Sara Palin created a furor in the uneducated poor white voter base known as the Tea-Party and these so-called Christian organization that the ACA would create death panels. However, the reality is that Medicare is considering a regulation to allow payment for end-of-life counseling and is asking for public comment. This counseling would be voluntary, and the idea has broad support in the medical community.
In closing, before President Obama even signed the Affordable Care Act into law the Republicans led by now presidential hopeful Ted Cruz were preparing a constitutional challenge to the " must have coverage" mandate in this law. A divided Supreme Court upheld the order with the position that the fines for not having insurance worked like a tax. However, the high court decision to not force states to extend Medicaid Expansion, in fact, is the only thing close to a death panel and its because of the Republican Party led by its now 2016 presidential hopeful.
Unbiased Research Tells The Real Truth About Israel
To Coin A Republican Phrase To The Poor, Go Fend For Yourself! If you are reading here expecting a balanced accounting of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, stop now because you will be sorely disappointed. As a researcher and writer of politics, I take pride in reporting what the facts are and not the hyperbole. I say this because the events surrounding this conflict, when told from a non-bias perspective, will be difficult to absorb if all you know about this issue is from mainstream media outlets. I say don't expect a balanced accounting because this conflict is one of imbalance, and there can be no equilibrium when facts reveal there is severe civil injustice prodded by a people upon another people, which is the case in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.
Granted the American people have strong opinions about this conflict one way or the other. However, opinions do not equate to facts. For anyone to claim that there is or ever was balance in this conflict, he is either misinformed or in denial. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is covered in so much myth and double standard. For example. In PM Netanyahu's 2012 speech at the UN, you get a clear indication of the myth and double standard.
The Myth
PM Netanyahu begins his remarks with the assertion that Jews lay claim to the land based on a decree from King David some 3000 years ago. The Jews call it the "right of return." It's important to point out that these Jews marked for return were not the same Jews who were expelled some centuries ago by, if you know your Bible, GOD himself. See, if you know your Bible, this was not the first time GOD past judgment on these stiff-necked people (Bible's description, not mine). Also, these Jews who were earmarked for return were not descendants either. Calling these Jews descendants would liken me to calling myself the offspring of the Pilgrims . I make this point because what Jew is a descendant of Jesus? Oh, I forgot the Jews are just like the Muslims, they don't believe in Jesus. In actuality, the Jews claim some heritage to the land based on a Book more and more people today find suspect. The claim is Zionism, in a nutshell. You would expect that if a people[Jews] felt entitled to the land based on heritage they would accept that as a principle across the board.
You never hear a Jew or the American media expound on the " right of return," of the Palestinian people and if you do, it pales in comparison to the Jews in the biased American media. Then based on our source here in the House of Public Discourse you hear, in fact, Jews proclaiming that the Palestinians don't have the same rights. Hence, the " double-standard."
What's interesting about this double standard is in creating a land for one group of people [Jews]we created refugees out of another.[Palestinians] The major question in this issue you never hear asked or reported on is: Who were the indigenous people of the land historically, and which group of people were forced from their homes? In the Israeli -Palestinian Conflict, the people with the " Keys and the Deeds," were kicked out of their homes and forced to live as nomads. Our source explained there are Palestinians still living today who can show you where their family living area [Family Farm] was that is now an Israeli highway.
With this said, the reality is a small group of people denied rights to a large group of people and with such a case self-evident violence is a given. Conflict is a given. Civil-Injustice is a given.
This conflict is the granddaddy of all double standards. In the 2012 UN speech, PM Netanyahu relied on the Bible account of King David as the Jews claim to a heritage. However, many researchers and academia through exhaustive study question if he ever existed. King David to many is nothing more than a Jewish myth. Quoting the Bible may work fine in some circles but in this world today quoting the Bible as a source of authority is nothing more than the Dominionisism we have been following in our House blog.[See Source] [Read: The Counterfeit Promise Of Dominionism Doctrine]
We report this because archaeologists have dug up the Holy Land trying to find evidence and have turned up nothing on this great King David of the Bible.
Here is the reality. Right now! This minute! Palestinians are being kicked out of their homes and forced into exile by the use of force in order to prove that this mythical figure existed.[Palestinian Point of View]
America's attitude is changing on this. America's Fed Up With Israel.
Now, in the present, we have these 47 traitors from the Republican Party have us clamoring for war once again. Their behavior is nothing new. It's their obstruction and sedition made ready by gerrymandered safe zones.[ Read: Has Liberty Given Way To Gerrymanding?] We should get our perspectives aligned with the truth and balance on this issue that is clearly unbalanced.
Many feel it's way past time for America to revisit its foreign relations with Israel. This relationship and the need for support from the [Jewish Lobby] has driven U.S. policy in the region long enough.
Israel has had such control over our foreign policy in the area we should be in " let's start over mode." Millions upon Millions are at stake in campaign contributions. You factor in the Jewish owned Press, and we see where this imbalance originates. Sincerely.
Both parties need to reevaluate attitudes based on the fact that growing numbers of Americans are asking legitimate questions about why we spend so much of our money on Israel. [See Source]
The poll echoes a Gallup survey from last week.Gallup asked Americans whether they thought Israel's recent actions were justified. While older Americans clearly sided with Israel, 18 to 29-year olds said by a two-to-one margin (51-25) that its actions were unjustified. No other group was as strongly opposed to Israel's actions.
The National Journal's Ron Fournier had this take on the demographic split: "...it's a warning that Israel's decades-old public relations and political dominance is coming to an end unless the nation's leaders change the narrative and reset their strategic position with moderate Palestinians."
Our President
President Obama's diplomatic efforts with Iran are totally within his sphere of authority, moreover, represent the attitudes of the people who voted him into office. As of the rendition of this writing, some untold thousands and growing daily have signed a petition to bring these senators to trial. The letter these 47 Senators sent to Iran was not only the biggest example of congressional overreach but also it was a national embarrassment and disgrace and clearly obstruction of justice for lack of term. It is clear as the nose on one's face they[GOP] were trying to undermine our president's role and duty to carry out foreign policy deemed in the best interest of the people who elected him. How American! Based on the petition circulating there is a growing pulse for Civil Justice in this case. There should be a case. [Johnny Hill-House of Public Discourse]
There is much distrust in American foreign policy globally. Unfortunately, we are not that shining city on the hill President Reagan spoke. The Bush Administration has seen to that. What we do not hear much about is the impact of this letter and why this effect reaches the level of treason. This stunt by the GOP may be one of the dumbest, most criminal acts done with malice and aforethought with an arrogance that " Act of Treason," is a valid question. Hypothetically, harken back to the 1960's when President Kennedy[JFK] and Russia were staring each other down and people were constructing fallout shelters. What if a bunch of GOP Senators had written a letter to Russia telling them that negotiating with President Kennedy was in vain?
Moreover, think about it. What this letter said to Iran was no matter what you and Obama work out we going to bomb you in two years when we take the White House.
The effect has been to throw a wrench into the possible peaceful resolution to a 30-year-old conflict. Moreover, there is this American arrogance that suggests we hold the high ground in the issue internationally. Russian and China, to name a few, are doing business with Iran in spite of Israel and America. Its imminent focus to sabotage the talks has failed, but it gives Iranian officials a moment of pause on the political future of America. This letter is proof positive that the Senate can't be trusted with diplomatic issues. The Logan Act got it right.
Thereis a rolling tide of disgruntled citizens in America today. We have the Southern Nationalists in South Carolina. There is another group called the “Indomitables.” this Neo-Confederate group advocates leaving the Union by any means possible and training for the coming conflict as of the rendition of this article. [See Article]
These Groups Want To Take This Country Back To The Days Of The Civil War!
” The league believes the “godly” nation it wants to form should be run by an “Anglo-Celtic” (read: white) elite that would establish a Christian theocratic state and politically dominate blacks and other minorities.[The LOS]
The LOS was formed by a group of Southern University professors but don't let that fool you. This organization is run rampant with racist, poor, uneducated white people who denounce the Federal Government, Northern, and Coastal States as part of the 'empire.' To these right-wing radicals, if you are not with them, you're constituted as nothing more than a perverted ungodly minion of society.[See Source]
Mike Hill[LOS]
“If the scenario of the South (and the rest of America) being overrun by hordes of non-white immigrants does not appeal to you, then how is this disaster to be averted? By the people who oppose it rising up against their traitorous elite masters and their misanthropic rule. But to do this we must first rid ourselves of the fear of being called ‘racists’ and the other meaningless epithets they use against us. What is really meant by the [anti-racist] advocates when they peg us as ‘racists’ is that we adhere to ethnocentrism, which is a natural affection for one’s own kind. This is both healthy and Biblical. I am not ashamed to say that I prefer my own kind and my own culture. Others can have theirs; I have mine. No group can survive for long if its members do not prefer their own over others.”
— Mike Hill, Web essay
Where Did This Hate Come From And Who's Behind It?
One might ask where did all this hate come from? Back last year here in the House of Public Discourse we answered that question. [Read:Why Do Poor Uneducated White People Vote Republican?] In short, the rise in right-wing hate is why! These so-called secessionists have simpleton minds. You factor in a dedicated decades-long media strategy with the 30 plus-year-old political device known as the Southern Strategy and what results is ' loony tunes' wanting to play army in the woods and re-fight the Civil War. These self-proclaimed defenders of the American way are nothing more than self-absorbed deluded people with an ax to grind for their shortcomings. [ See:Personality Traits Of The Right Wing Extremist] Factor in cognitive dissonance and a heaping tablespoon of " Right-Wing Authoritarian Followers Syndrome," and what we have is a multitude of Timothy McVeigh's running around now with the go-ahead to open carry their weapons.
Right-Wing Authoritarianism Explained
Persons of color, immigrants, and liberal-minded Americans are all perceived to be part of the out-groups destroying the American way. This reality has been promoted in right-wing hate talk radio, and news organizations like Fox News. These fringe groups and mindsets have always been prevalent in American culture. However, with America electing a person of color as president, these subversive groups have escalated. In fact, hate crimes are becoming so common in America today it barely gets any media attention at all. The reason for this as these crimes become more common most people tend just to tune them out like we do those car salesman ads. What the problem is, is that these racist right wing haters listen to these media outlets, and the results have been deadly. This message of hate has proven to cause dull-witted individuals to act out their hate towards what the individual perceives to be a violation of the American way.
There is no question in this writer's mind that hate radio and commentators like Rush Limbaugh and Fox News Sean Hannity and others have radicalized the American right.
Then Along Comes Known Racist and Nut-Case Ron Paul Encouraging Secessionist Groups.
Former U.S. Congressman Ron Paul from Texas told the National Journal that there should be more secessionist movements in America.
Ron Paul
"It's something that I think is going to grow because the failure of the federal government is going to get much worse," he said. "When the bankruptcy evolves, and maybe some of these pension funds are confiscated, and the wars never end, and bankruptcy comes forth, people [will say], 'Hey, we're getting a bad deal from this. Why don't we leave?' "
Paul went on to say.
"I think what is most important is we have a concrete right to secede," Paul said. "Even if we never had any secession, or any state declare independence, we would be so much better off because there would always be this threat. Once the threat of a state leaving was removed, it was just open-door policy for the federal government to expand itself and run roughshod out over the states because the states couldn't do much."
The Apple Doesn't Fall Far From The Tree!
There is little doubt that potential 2016 presidential candidate Rand Paul(R-KY) thinks like his father on this issue like many others. What perplexes the House of Public Discourse is that unlike his whack father, Rand Paul has a far greater chance of getting the GOP nod than his father ever did! I would like to be a fly on the wall hearing these two " peas in a pod," discussing this radical position with which the elder Paul has taken and gone public. See, as reported by the House of Public Discourse, Rand Paul has made a science of " talking out of both sides his mouth," and " wearing two faces under one hat."
What a prospect. We have a GOP front runner that comes from the land of secession, Texas, who very well could be one low voter turnout away from the presidency.
This article is part 2 of a series of articles we are researching and writing here in the House of Public Discourse. [Join Our Facebook Group] In part one we posed the question, The American Experiment Is Under Crisis! The fact that these secessionist groups and the subsequent domestic violence associated with it are growing by the day is proof positive that our nation is in a crisis. In part 3 we will look at how sectionalism is rearing its nasty head again and is very much a root-cause for our nation's current polarization.
Is the American experiment under crisis? Today you can ask five people their interpretation of any given constitutional question, and chances are you will get five different viewpoints. Our founding fathers gathered themselves in a small room in Philadelphia to hash out what at the time was nothing more than a governmental experiment, to form a new type of government for a new country they would call the United States of America. Not only were there no assurances that it would work but history at the time told them it wouldn't. In their day, nations were ruled by rulers, not rules. Kings told everyone else what to do. A government run by the people themselves was an old idea; however, it had never worked. People fight with each other. It's human nature. People are messy, they have their interests, and they disagree. Rulers knew it took armies to keep people under control. These men [Founding Fathers] believed it took a constitution. They felt they could create institutions that would let conflict occur, then deal with it and that people would accept the outcome. That is, in fact, what they believed. In the Spring of 1787 it was time to deliver. There was much indecision as to whether they could. The Constitution was written in a time of crisis. Our founding fathers at that moment knew if they failed, their country would fail. They responded by starting a nation in a small room with just a handful of ideas.[See Sources]
Many of the images and ideas we have of our founding fathers comes from 19th-Century historians. These historians advocated GOD himself handed down the Constitution.
Thomas Jefferson was a founding father. Jefferson wrote the " Declaration of Independence." Jefferson called the men who wrote the Constitution demagogues. So what did this make Thomas Jefferson? Our founding fathers are the equivalent to " Greek Gods" in America. We The People have transformed these men into larger than life figures. We have written untold books about them and have cast them in bronze. We have made educational films about them with many of those films' facts being entirely unsubstantiated. The average school child in America has been taught to speak of these men in a hushed whisper. These men were going to be whisked straight to heaven. These were real men that faced real challenges, but they were not gods. Our research here at the House of Public Discourse has found several who did not believe in God period. These men knew they were not gods. In fact, they were in fear of any man who would march himself a god. King George II ring a bell? Our research found these men would be disgusted at the reverence "We The People," pay these men. Some of them would for sure. We should admire these men by all means but to give them GOD status is over-the-top. We should find solace in that these men were not " Supermen. " They were just ordinary men involved in an extraordinary ordeal of forming and shaping a new country, a new nation that the world had never experienced before: the'' American Experiment."
For the record, Ben Franklin felt the Constitution would last about ten years.
The Articles of Confederation were a disaster and the primary reason for much of the conflict. So history tells us that the first Constitution of America was a failure. The Articles of Confederation did not bind the new states together into one nation. This document functioned as a " league of friendship." We must remember the populists of that time still had the memories of being ruled and lorded over. The population was wary of any identity that would somehow become too dominant. And as back then as is the order of the day today, people were Virginians, North Carolinian's, Pennsylvanians, and New Yorkers. Sectionalism was rampant. Just like in these modern times these citizens clamored for states' rights. These states saw themselves as sovereign nations. In practice, they kind of, sorta, made an agreement to work together with other states. These arrangements fell apart so quickly that it boggles the mind. One of the biggest problems was there was no power of taxation. Under the Articles of Confederation, the United States government was flat broke. The US could not afford to protect ships on the Atlantic from pirates. They could not protect citizens on the western borders either. Each state printed its money. For example, the state of New York was charging Connecticut and New Jersey an " arm and a leg" for everything coming into its port. So, in turn, these states planned a military attack on New York. The real breaking point was Shay's Rebellion.
WHAT WAS SHAY'S REBELLION?
In closing, Part 1 of this series of articles, do you the reader see where we here at the House of Public Discourse are going? This writer believes that history, in fact, does repeat itself. Sectionalism is on the rise in America. The Articles of Confederation were a complete failure falling prey to sectionalism. Is our great "American Experiment." the Constitution of the United States, destined to go the way of the Articles of Confederation? Today, there is much talk of secession. Sectionalism has risen its ugly face more and more by the day. We are seeing shades of the Shay's Rebellion rearing its head through hate groups, radicalized religious zealots, political corruption, and domestic terrorism just to name a few. " The American Experiment Is Under Crisis," and in part 2 of this series we will investigate the question, "Is Secession Inevitable?" Back in 1987, a woman in the presence of Ben Franklin asked him the question. " Mr. Franklin fine sir, did the Constitution establish a Republic or Monarchy, Franklin replied:
Johnny Hill is a freelance writer who has extensive experience in writing for sales, marketing and advertising. He has a background in radio broadcasting which is showcased in the music mixes he creates for his FB page, "One Nation Under the Groove." Johnny has been an avid and life long student of politics . He is the founder of the House of Public Discourse Political Organization, which he created as a platform for his progressive liberal ideology. You can follow Johnny on Twitter, @hillj60.
Obamacare + Obstruction X Threats of Impreachment= Racism
The answer to this equation is often the understood but not spoken reason for much gridlock in our government today. Upon my reference, I came across an article, Yes, The South Really Is Different — And It’s Because Of Race. Personally, race has no geographical boundaries in my view. However, the point is well taken that in the South, racist tactics meet little to no resistance such as in gerrymandering, voter suppression, and the very common racial profiling.
Republicans Have Attacked Civil Rights Legislation, Implemented Questionable Voter ID Laws, with Regressive Voting Rights Laws Under Federal Review.
The list could go on, and the pushback is starting to rear its ugly head. With all the rigor and rhetoric of the past weeks, we heard many dogs whistle words coming from the politicians, pundits and citizens; words like "obstruction, ransom, hostage," and phrases like ‘Domestic Terrorist.” There have been many people who feel the actions of the principles on the right were, in fact, seditious. Well, that is a gray area, but one thing this episode did reveal is that the practice of institutionalizing racism is alive and well in the South.
What is Institutionalize racism? The Urban Dictionary defines it as, “the process of purposely discriminating against particular groups of people through the use of biased laws or practices.”
Even though the main purpose of the last government shutdown may have been Obamacare, the underlying issue to all the obstruction and gridlock that led to the shutdown was in fact the fight over the overall regressive policies and practices of the radically right controlled Republican Party; which really were nothing more than prime examples of institutionalized racism. Obamacare is a racial slur given to name what is, in fact, the Affordable Care Act. Yes, it's true that individuals host their set of racist feelings that are, in fact, indigenous to oneself. However, one would be remiss not to recognize the role that institutional racism has played in American History and American Culture. Racism in this country would not have thrived if not for institutionalized racism.
Examples of Institutionalized Racism
Slavery In The United States- [No Commentary Needed] Civil War ring a bell?
Racism In Medicine- In a report posted by Mike LaCon/flickr.com he stated that Racism has influenced U.S. health care in the past and continues to do so today. “The most shameful chapters in American history involve the U.S. government funding studies that allowed poor black men in Alabama to succumb to syphilis or Guatemalan prison inmates, mental health patients and soldiers to be afflicted with the disease and other sexually transmitted infections.”
Racial profiling- People are profiled every single day in this country based on the way they look. People of Middle Eastern and South Asian descent report being routinely profiled at the nation’s airports. In New York City, Black and Latino men have been unfairly targeted by that city's "stop and frisk policy.”
Voting Rights legislation- With the Supreme Court's affirmation that certain aspects of the Voting Rights were no longer relative, there has been an onslaught of voting legislation ram-rodded through. The Republicans help state governments to make it harder for minorities to vote and use other mechanisms that purge the rolls of valid voters, and limit time and access to vote.
Church Sunday- Racism and segregation can be witnessed in no finer fashion than on Church Sunday. Even though there have been more inter-racial Church congregations spring up across the country, most Churches remain segregated and in fairness, what seems to be by choice. The United Methodist Church and the Southern Baptist formally apologized for their support of Jim Crow laws and other racist practices in recent years as well. Despite their efforts to diversify, overall church congregations remain mostly segregated up until this day.
With the actions of the Republican Party and the Libertarian and Tea Party, all radical elements
within those parties are freely exercising institutional racism by using the politics of nullification; the doctrine which holds that the states, singly or in concert, can defy federal actions by declaring them invalid or just ignoring them Don’t expect to see any real change any time soon. In fact, we are seeing emboldened politicians with gerrymandered “safe zones” using nullification to voice the anti-government passions and hate for Obamacare, a fully legally enacted law. We have seen both overt and covert actions to curtail voting, repeal legislation and in the case of President Obama, delegitimize his presidency.
There Is A Strong Sectional Stronghold of Institutional Racism In The South
This reality is an understatement. The force of change brings about fear and suspicion to Southern people. Government is seen as an intrusive force with invasive intentions to do harm to individual and community. However, when you look at all unbiased reports, the Southern States garner the most benefits from the “Big Government,” they so rail on about.
To put this all in perspective, a little history lesson is in order. In practical, these radicalized elements within the Republican party are not new free radicals, they are old radicals nothing more than the old Dixiecrat. The George Wallace Crowd is a group that housed the KKK and other white supremacists within the then Democratic party. You know, the ones who left the party and the Republican Party had no problem embracing when the Democrats adopted both the New Deal of FDR and later the Civil Rights legislation of 1964, which enacted the Voting Rights Acts of 1965.
All of this culminated in a Southern Strategy which is in full force and unlike anytime in history entirely exposed itself since the election of one Barack Obama, the first person of color to the White House and with a foreign name at that. On her nightly show, Rachel Maddow does an excellent job of explaining how this institutionalize racist mechanism has been used for years in the South and moreover, how they won elections using it.
Now that there has been an unveiling of just how some of these racist tactics can be harmful to the overall common good of our citizens, the people are getting a clear view of how right-wing politics is holding back states like North Carolina and Texas and Florida.
Now that there has been a turn on the lights moment when the American people can clearly see how obstruction, voter suppression, and how institutionalized racism has directly caused a government shutdown and legislative gridlock, and the result has been the Republican Party getting the lowest approval rating ever recorded by any political party ever, we can maybe just possibly effect change in the South one voter at a time.
"Republican leadership is breaking the law. The Logan Act prohibits any “Private correspondence with foreign governments” and reads; “Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.” The Supreme Court ruled that Congress cannot and should not conduct foreign affairs; that power rests with the Executive Branch exclusively.[See Source]
What Is The Logan Act?
In the 1936 Supreme Court case, United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp, the Court held “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President." It is given implicitly and by the fact that the executive, by its very nature, is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way that Congress cannot and should not....
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.[See Law]
