Sarah Palin seems to be OK with the word "nigger" but is not so cool with people saying the word "retarded" because it is offensive line "nigger" is to people. Huh?Palin, posing as a constitutional scholarDr.Laura:don’t retreat…reload! (Steps aside bc her 1st Amend.rights ceased 2exist thx 2activists trying 2silence”isn’t American,not fair”)
Dr.Laura=even more powerful & effective w/out the shackles, so watch out Constitutional obstructionists. And b thankful 4 her voice,America!
That Dr. Laura is quite the sweetheart, eh? Sarah sure knows how to pick 'em, huh?I’m stunned – couldn’t the Republican Party find one competent female with adult children to run for Vice President with McCain? I realize his advisors probably didn’t want a “mature” woman, as the Democrats keep harping on his age. But really, what kind of role model is a woman whose fifth child was recently born with a serious issue, Down Syndrome, and then goes back to the job of Governor within days of the birth?
At an August strategy session of liberal groups and White House aides, the Wall Street Journal recently reported, Emanuel told liberals they were "F-ing retarded" for planning to air attack ads against conservative Democrats opposed to health care reform.Obviously, not good on Emanuel's part in this kind of a politically correct climate. Once upon a time, it might have been OK to use that word in that context, but not anymore (not in his kind of a high-profile position).
"Just as we'd be appalled if any public figure of Rahm's stature ever used the 'N-word' or other such inappropriate language, Rahm's slur on all God's children with cognitive and developmental disabilities – and the people who love them – is unacceptable, and it's heartbreaking," Palin wrote."Heartbreaking," to Palin, is saying "retarded" in a way she sees as hurtful, but it's not apparently "heartbreaking" for "nigger" to be used in a way that is hurtful - if you're Sarah Palin.
The New York Times has a story written (based upon recently-released tapes) that give insight to former President Richard Nixon’s views about abortion and about abortion related to interracial relationships and rape.
Nixon worried that greater access to abortions would foster “permissiveness,” and said that “it breaks the family.” But he also saw a need for abortion in some cases, such as interracial pregnancies.
“There are times when an abortion is necessary. I know that. When you have a black and a white,” he told an aide, before adding: “Or a rape.”
What an appalling comment.
New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/us/politics/24nixon.html?_r=1
Mildred and Richard Loving
We have so many things we take for granted every single day of our lives.
Seeing an interracial couple still today, now and again, can occasionally make a person turn and do a bit of a double take. These days, however, reactions to interracial marriage are not what they were 10 years ago and certainly not what they were 20 or 30 years ago. However, through the 1950s and 1960s, interracial marriage was not only frowned upon, but it was illegal and downright dangerous. This is where a married couple, Richard Perry Loving and Mildred Loving, enter this issue. You see, Richard Loving was a white man while Mildred was a woman with of both black and Native American heritage. Maybe you could be friends, but certainly nothing more than that. It’s amazing how far we’ve come in our society, even if we still have a ways to go as we learn to appreciate each other.
First, here is some background on the Lovings and their case from Wikipedia:
The plaintiffs, Mildred Loving (Mildred Delores Jeter, a woman of African and Rappahannock Native American descent, July 22, 1939 – May 2, 2008)[2][3][4] and Richard Perry Loving (a white man, October 29, 1933 – June 1975),[5] were residents of the Commonwealth of Virginia who had been married in June 1958 in the District of Columbia, having left Virginia to evade the Racial Integrity Act, a state law banning marriages between any white person and any non-white person. Upon their return to Caroline County, Virginia, they were charged with violation of the ban. They were caught sleeping in their bed by a group of police officers who had invaded their home in the hopes of finding them in the act of sex (another crime). In their defense, Ms. Loving had pointed to a marriage certificate on the wall in their bedroom. That, instead of defending them, became the evidence the police needed for a criminal charge since it showed they had been married in another state. Specifically, they were charged under Section 20-58 of the Virginia Code, which prohibited interracial couples from being married out of state and then returning to Virginia, and Section 20-59, which classified “miscegenation” as a felony punishable by a prison sentence of between one and five years. On January 6, 1959, the Lovings pleaded guilty and were sentenced to one year in prison, with the sentence suspended for 25 years on condition that the couple leave the state of Virginia.
It’s almost unthinkable people had to go through this brand of bigotry. But, do we celebrate what Richard and Mildred Loving went through and sacrificed to make things better for us today? We don’t celebrate to the degree we should.
I pulled this excerpt from the That Minority Thing:
The Lovings spent time in jail for the high crime of being married to each other, were forced to move from Virginia. Then, on June 12 of 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Lovings’ criminal convictions and struck down all laws against interracial marriage.
Now there’s something like 4.3 million mixed-marriage couples in the United States. And the son of one such union is our President.
It’s easy to get discouraged – if not downright fearful – when the race baiters dial their spew up to “11,” and their reactionary puppets respond with violence. But take a moment on this June 12th to look at where our nation once was and where we are now, and take solace in knowing that we are headed in a better direction.
For some people, that makes June 12 Richard and Mildred Loving Day. The pain and suffering Richard and Mildred Loving endured, the excruciatingly high price they paid for love and for those after them to be able to love, should not soon be forgotten. Hopefully people of all backgrounds can continue to come together and celebrate this historic and (sadly) largely ignored historic day in the United States. Not only is the day mostly ignored, but so too are Richard and Mildred Loving.
From Loving Day:
The Loving’s case not only won them their freedom to love, but it also granted the same freedom to every interracial couple in every state in America. At the time of the Loving decision, sixteen states from Delaware to Texas had laws banning interracial couples. Loving v. Virginia (1967) made it illegal for these states to enforce those laws. This ended a long era of laws that were enforced in forty-two states over the course of American history. These laws did not only apply to black people and white people; many states also restricted relationships with Asians, Native Americans, Indians, Hispanics, and other ethnic groups.
The freedom to love is something most of us take for granted. Like many other freedoms, the right for interracial couples to be together was fought for and won as a part of our civil rights. Many people see this as the longest-lasting part of the legal segregation that used to rule our nation. The Lovings, like Rosa Parks, played an important role in freeing us from laws that punished people for no other reason than the color of their skin.
That is a great description.
Have a happy Loving Day!
Loving Day:
http://lovingday.org/
