A few words from the late mayor of Atlanta, Maynard Jackson

For those of you who don’t know who Maynard Jackson is, he was the first African-American mayor of a major Southern city (Atlanta).

A few days ago I watched a segment of the PBS Series, Eyes on the Prize: America’s Civil Rights Movement, and found something that Maynard Jackson said to be very pertinent in todays social and political climate:

“Being the first black mayor is what you wish on your enemy. I say that with tongue in cheek… a great pride to be mayor of Atlanta. And every black mayor who’s been the first black mayor I’m sure has felt the same thing, but it truly is part hell…”

“First of all start with exaggerated black expectations… heaven will come on earth, and it’s all because the black mayor’s been elected, and things just don’t work that way. The obligation that I felt was to try with everything in my power, in every legal and ethical way that I could, to move things as quickly as possible in that direction.”

Maynard Jackson

First Black Mayor of a Major Southern City (Atlanta)

Terms: January 1974 – January 1982, January 1990 – January 1994

Source: Episode 13 Eyes on the Prize America’s Civil Rights Movement

Upon hearing his statement I could not help but think about our newly elected President, Barack Obama, and the high expectations placed upon him by many blacks. I believe that people ought to stop looking for a savior and save themselves.

As a point of clarification, I am not saying that people should not look to their leaders for guidance, but instead that they should understand that change does not occur based on the will of the leader alone. There are no shortcuts, and people will have to take change into their own hands on an individual basis. Until they do this, the will continue to look for a savior in each promising leader within the community.

I’m interested in reading your thoughts on this one…

Filed under: Barack Obama, By Cheri Thomas, Maynard Jackson, politics

Bush grants pardons on a variety of offenses

I’ve always wondered how it’s determined who will receive a pardon or not. I came across this amusing list of recent Bush pardons, which have excuse a wide variety of crimes:

_Obie Gene Helton of Rossville, Ga., whose offense was unauthorized acquisition of food stamps.

_Carey C. Hice Sr. of Travelers Rest, S.C., who was convicted of income tax evasion.

_Geneva Yvonne Hogg of Jacksonville, Fla., convicted of bank embezzlement.

_William Hoyle McCright Jr. of Midland, Texas, who was convicted of bank fraud.

_Paul Julian McCurdy of Sulphur, Okla., who was sentenced for misapplication of bank funds.

_Robert Earl Mohon Jr. of Grant, Ala., who was convicted of conspiracy to distribute marijuana.

_Ronald Alan Mohrhoff of Los Angeles, who was convicted for unlawful use of a telephone in a narcotics felony.

_Daniel Figh Pue III of Conroe, Texas, convicted of illegal treatment, storage and disposal of a hazardous waste without a permit.

_Orion Lynn Vick of White Hall, Ark., who was convicted of aiding and abetting the theft of government property.

Bush also commuted the prison sentences of John Edward Forte of North Brunswick, N.J., and James Russell Harris of Detroit, Mich. Both were convicted of cocaine offenses.

Under the Constitution, the president’s power to issue pardons is absolute and cannot be overruled. Source: Huffington Post

Okay so here’s my question, why should any of these people be granted a pardon at all?

Filed under: Bush Pardons, By Cheri Thomas, President George W. Bush

Failing foster care system: Family members fight at funeral of 13-month old Christopher Thomas, murdered in foster care

Another child has become the victim of a failing foster care system in this country, and that is not the worst of this tragic story:

The 13-month-old Thomas died as a result of severe child abuse in a Milwaukee foster home.

His foster mother, Crystal Keith, who is also his aunt, is charged with murdering him. […] Case workers are also required to pay monthly visits to foster homes, but in this case, 48 days went by without a visit. Keith told police she’d been abusing the boy for months. Source: TMJ 4 Milwaukee

It appears as if everyone failed this child. Those who should have protected him, his parents, his extended family, the foster care system, allowed this child to be murdered.

To make matters worse, the family broke out in a fight at the child’s funeral (see video below of the fight) as raw emotions got the best of the mourners. I want to make it absolutely clear that I have absolutely NO sympathy for the family members who allowed this child to be bounced around, and ultimately murdered. Perhaps if they had fought over the child in life as they did after his death, he might still be alive today.

Another interesting detail of this story is that little Christopher was wanted by another family who was denied multiple adoption requests. I can’t help but wonder if the fact that the family who wanted the child was white had anything to do with the rejection. It should be clear that any loving family (regardless of race) is better than an abusive family or institutionalization for the child.

I have no doubt that Christopher would be alive today if he had been placed with the white adoptive family that loved him and wanted him. What a tragedy!

Filed under: By Cheri Thomas, child abuse, Christopher Thomas, Crystal Keith, foster care, Murder, Social Commentary

Bill proposed that would prevent Bush for issuing Presidential Pardons to senior members of administration during final 90 days of his term in office

Obviously there are things that have transpired in the Bush Administration that people need to be held accountable for:

The concern is that a Bush pardon would frustrate forever any attempt to make his administration accountable. If you share that concern then you should contact your representatives and ask them to support Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) who introduced H.RES. 1531, which states, as follows:

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the President of the United States should not issue pardons to senior members of his administration during the final 90 days of his term of office.

Whereas Article II, section 2, clause 1, of the Constitution of the United States provides that ”[t]he President . . . shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment”;

Whereas Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist #74, stated, ”[a]s the sense of responsibility is always strongest, in proportion as it is undivided, it may be inferred that a single man would be most ready to attend to the force of those motives which might plead for a mitigation of the rigor of the law, and least apt to yield to considerations which were calculated to shelter a fit object of its vengeance”;

Whereas the Supreme Court has observed that ”[a] pardon reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offence and the guilt of the offender; and when the pardon is full, it releases the punishment and blots out of existence the guilt, so that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the offence. If granted before conviction, it prevents . . . the penalties and disabilities consequent upon conviction from attaching; if granted after conviction, it removes the penalties and disabilities, and restores him to all his civil rights; it makes him, as it were, a new man, and gives him a new credit and capacity.” Ex Parte Garland, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 333, 380 (1866);

Whereas during the Constitutional convention, George Mason expressed the concern that a president could abuse his pardon power to ”pardon crimes which were advised by himself” or, before indictment or conviction, ”to stop inquiry and prevent detection”;

Whereas James Madison responded to Mason’s concerns by stating that ”[i]f the President be connected, in any suspicious manner, with any person, and there be grounds [to] believe he will shelter him, the House of Representatives can impeach him; they can remove him if found guilty”;

Whereas although not constitutionally binding, the Pardon Attorney’s regulations governing the granting of presidential pardons states ”[n]o petition for pardon should be filed until the expiration of a waiting period of at least five years after the date of the release of the petitioner from confinement or, in case no prison sentence was imposed, until the expiration of a period of at least five years after the date of the conviction of the petitioner. Generally, no petition should be submitted by a person who is on probation, parole, or supervised release.” 28 C.F.R. 1.2 (2000);

Whereas on President George H.W. Bush granted a full, complete, and unconditional pardon to Elliott Abrams, Duane R. Clarridge, Alan Fiers, Clair George, Robert C. McFarlane, and Caspar W. Weinberger for all offenses charged, prosecuted, or committed in connection with the Iran-Contra Scandal in which he was alleged to have been involved;

Whereas in a press conference on February 22, 2001, President George W. Bush stated, ”Should I decide to grant pardons, I will do so in a fair way. I will have the highest of high standards”;

Whereas investigations by Congressional committees, and press reports, raise serious concerns that senior officials of the administration of President George W. Bush may have committed crimes involving the mistreatment of detainees, the extraordinary rendition of individuals to countries known to engage in torture, illegal surveillance of United States citizens, unlawful leaks of classified information, obstruction of justice, political interference with the conduct of the Justice Department, and other illegal acts;

Whereas President George W. Bush has been urged to grant preemptive pardons to senior administration officials who might face criminal prosecution for actions taken in the course of their official duties; and

Whereas pardons issued during the lame duck period of a President’s term would not be subject to the judgment of the voters; Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That–

(1) it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the granting of preemptive pardons by the President to senior officials of his administration for acts they may have taken in the course of their official duties is a dangerous abuse of the pardon power;

(2) it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the President should not grant preemptive pardons to senior officials in his administration for acts they may have taken in the course of their official duties;

(3) it is the sense of the House of Representatives that James Madison was correct in his observation that ”[i]f the President be connected, in any suspicious manner, with any person, and there be grounds [to] believe he will shelter him, the House of Representatives can impeach him; they can remove him if found guilty”;

(4) it is the sense of the House of Representatives that a special investigative commission, or a Select Committee be tasked with investigating possible illegal activities by senior officials of the administration of President George W. Bush, including, if necessary, any abuse of the President’s pardon power; and

(5) the next Attorney General of the United States appoint an independent counsel to investigate, and, where appropriate, prosecute illegal acts by senior officials of the administration of President George W. Bush.

Source: Huffington Post

I really hope to see this bill pass because I desperately want to see the Bush Administration pay for their unethical behavior. If you agree, then I encourage you to contact your representative and ask them to support Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) who introduced H.RES. 1531.

If you do not know who your congressman is, you can look them up in this listing on the U.S. House of Representatives website.

Filed under: Accountability, Bush Pardons, By Cheri Thomas, George Bush, George Bush Pardons, government corruption, Politics News, President George W. Bush, Presidential Pardon, Representative Jerrold Nadler

How can change occur if the Obama Administration puts Washington insiders in most Cabinet positions?

Although I will reserve my final judgment until at least 100 days after Obama has taken the oath of office, I must admit that I am not happy with what I’m seeing with the Cabinet picks:

Obama is enlisting former Senate leader Tom Daschle as his health secretary. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a well-known Washington personality, seemed more likely than ever to be his secretary of state. […] Obama is ready to announce that his attorney general will be Eric Holder, the Justice Department’s No. 2 when Clinton’s husband was president. Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s chief of staff, is another veteran of the Clinton White House. […]

Republicans sniped at what they saw as an unwelcome trend. Alex Conant, spokesman for the Republican National Committee, said, “Barack Obama is filling his administration with longtime Washington insiders.” Source: Associated Press

I voted for Obama, because I preferred him over Hillary Clinton. If I wanted to see a Cabinet full of Washington insiders with Clinton Administration connections, I would have voted for Hillary Clinton. It is a disappointment that these appointments seem to be political paybacks, rather than what would be best for the country.

I’ve said many times before that I would have loved to see a Presidential Cabinet made up of names I’ve never heard before. Couldn’t we find somebody more qualified that these same tired old names that have been in Washington forever?

As I stated earlier, I will reserve my final judgment until after I see the first fruits of the Obama Administration. Until then, I plan to watch the how the remainder of appointments go and will weigh in as they happen. For the record, I still stand by my decision to vote for Barack Obama because the hope of him bringing change to Washington was much better than the guarantee that McCain would allow things to continue on the path of the previous eight years.

So my question is do you think that these Obama Administration Cabinet picks represents real change in Washington, or do you feel that it indicates Washington politics as usual?

Filed under: Barack Obama, By Cheri Thomas, change you can believe in, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton, National Republican Committee, Obama Administration, Rahm Emmanuel, Tom Daschle

Survey says that half of primary care physicians would leave medicine if they could

I think that it would be prudent to pay attention to what half of the physicians who responded to the survey had to say:

In the survey, the foundation sent questionnaires to more than 150,000 doctors nationwide. Of the 12,000 respondents, 49 percent said they’d consider leaving medicine. Many said they are overwhelmed with their practices, not because they have too many patients, but because there’s too much red tape generated from insurance companies and government agencies.

And if that many physicians stopped practicing, that could be devastating to the health care industry. Source: CNN

This should serve as another indication that we need to reform the entire healthcare system, including the insurance industry:

So what to do? Physicians don’t have a lot of answers. But doctors say it’s time to make some changes, not only in the health care field but also with the insurance industry. And they’re looking to the new administration for guidance. Source: CNN

After reading this article, I wonder if a universal healthcare system would eliminate some of the complexities of the current system.

What do you think?

Filed under: By Cheri Thomas, half of physicians want to quit, Physicians' Foundation

While the U.S. is busy minding everyone else’s business, child hunger rose 50% In 2007

You know, they say that charity starts at home, and the measure of a society can be seen in how they care for the least among them; their poor, their elderly, their sick, and their mentally challenged.

The [U.S. Agriculture] department’s annual report on food security showed that during 2007 the number of children who suffered a substantial disruption in the amount of food they typically eat was more than double the 430,000 in 2006 and the largest figure since 716,000 in 1998. Overall, the 36.2 million adults and children who struggled with hunger during the year was up slightly from 35.5 million in 2006. […]

The findings should increase pressure to meet President-elect Barack Obama’s campaign pledge to expand food aid and end childhood hunger by 2015, said James Weill, president of the Food Research and Action Center, an anti-hunger group. Source: Newsnet5.com

So what does this say about the United States of America when child hunger rises 50% in one year? It says that we are not nearly as civilized as we think we are.

These statistics clearly illustrate that poverty has not been a priority in this country, and that needs to change. For all the talk of the waning middle class, we have heard very little about the condition of the poor in this country. If the middle class has been relegated to struggling for survival, where does that leave those who’ve already been struggling to survive?

One of the things that I would like to see addressed by the Obama administration are issues facing the poor. Obama’s “to do” list gets longer by the day, but we cannot ignore the issue of child hunger in our own country.

So I ask you, do you feel that child hunger should be a priority for the Obama Administration?

Filed under: Barack Obama, By Cheri Thomas, hunger, Obama Administration, Poverty, Social Commentary

Sen. Ted Kennedy to submit bill: Universal healthcare may become a reality in the U.S.

I am a proponent for universal healthcare in this country, because I have seen first hand what can happen when people don’t have access to healthcare when they need it. Consequently, I’m glad that Senator Ted Kennedy plans to do something about it:

Kennedy has a head start on them all. Despite his illness, he directed his staff months ago to begin work on legislation that would vastly expand health coverage, a career-long goal of his. […]

“There’s some major issues, obviously, the economy and also environmental issues,” Kennedy said on his way to a staff meeting, where he was greeted with cheers. “But the president-elect has indicated that this is going to be a priority, and I certainly hope it will.” Source: Washington Post

I completely understand the many concerns that people have about moving to universal healthcare. In spite of this, I still think that we will be better off in the long run.

The health insurance industry in this country is a racket, and this needs to be changed. People can pay their insurance premiums for years, and when they need their insurance company to be there for them, the company does everything they can to cheat them out of their benefits.

For those people who would prefer not to participate in universal healthcare, they should have the option to purchase private insurance. Of course, the purchase of private insurance shouldn’t mean that they don’t have to pay into the system via taxes.

After all, even if your children go to private school, or if you don’t have children, your property taxes still go toward the public school system. People seem willing to accept this concept when it comes to the public schooling systems in this country, so why not with healthcare?

Filed under: Barack Obama, By Cheri Thomas, health insurance, healthcare, Politics-Economics, Senator Edward Kennedy, Universal healthcare

The real cost of the war in Iraq; the one that you can’t put a price tag on

I know this photograph is disturbing; it is MEANT to be disturbing. Look at this child, this baby, and DO NOT turn away. We all need to see the price of war, the one that doesn’t have a dollar sign attached to it.

As I look upon the face of this innocent young child, whose life was lost in a car bombing, I weep. I weep for all of the lives lost, but especially the innocent young children who have had their lives snatched before they had barely begun.

Thank you Andrew Sullivan for posting this image, and I agree with your decision to post it:

We need to see the evil that we unwittingly unleashed in Iraq and the evil that will doubtless take hold the minute we leave. It is part of the moral equation in deciding what must be done now. And it is not easy. As an advocate for withdrawal, I do not want to deny the moral costs it may involve. Source: Andrew Sullivan ~ The Atlantic

I am an advocate of pulling our troops out of Iraq, however it is also up to us to help clean up this mess that we have caused. Yes, I am saying that WE, the United States has cause a huge mess in another country that we invaded under false pretenses.

Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people have been killed because of an occupation that never should have been. Even though it will probably never happen, I really wish that George W. Bush and his cronies could be tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

God help us and forgive us all for our part in all of this…

Filed under: By Cheri Thomas, car bomb, Iraq war, Politics-Economics, President George W. Bush, Social Commentary

Race threats and crimes soar across America after Obama elected President

I hate to say I warned you folks, but the festering wound of racism in America appears to have had its scab ripped clean off by the election of Barack Obama as the nation’s first African American President:

Cross burnings. Schoolchildren chanting “Assassinate Obama.” Black figures hung from nooses. Racial epithets scrawled on homes and cars. Incidents around the country referring to President-elect Barack Obama are dampening the postelection glow of racial progress and harmony, highlighting the stubborn racism that remains in America.

From California to Maine, police have documented a range of alleged crimes, from vandalism and vague threats to at least one physical attack. […] There have been “hundreds” of incidents since the election, many more than usual, said Mark Potok, director of the Intelligence Project at the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors hate crimes. Source: Huffington Post

Houston, we have an effing problem! I feel like I have traveled back in time 50 or 60 years with all of these reports I’m hearing. This is also the first real acknowledgment by the mainstream media that these hate crimes are not mere isolated incidents, although ALL of the black bloggers I know have been covering these reports as they happened.

I still am in awe that is has come to this. Now even 2nd graders are calling for Obama’s assassination? What is wrong with these people? Mark Potok, director of the Intelligence Project at the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors hate crimes, tries to explain:

Potok, who is white, said he believes there is “a large subset of white people in this country who feel that they are losing everything they know, that the country their forefathers built has somehow been stolen from them.“ Source: Yahoo News

I believe wholeheartedly that this is what the whites who are acting out are feeling right now. However, I am disgusted by this sense of entitlement simply because they are white. Let us not forget that this country was built on the backs of African slave labor.

People always get pissed off when you bring up slavery, however I cannot for the life of me understand how on earth these folks think that this country that their forefathers basically stole from Native Americans, and built on the backs of African slave labor entitles them to anything. And to further suggest that was was not rightfully theirs in the first place has been stolen from them is ludicrous!

And so now I am supposed to excuse the acts of these racists because they are frustrated about their perceived loss of white privilege? Hello people! It NEVER should have been that way in the first place.

All I can say is these racist people are exactly who we always thought they were. News flash–this is just the beginning of their B.S. Mark my words…

Filed under: Barack Obama, bigots, By Cheri Thomas, cross burning, hate crimes, Issues of race and diversity, KKK, Politics-Economics, racial slurs, Racism in America