20/20 ABC News: Video Of Kids Picking White Male Criminals Over Good Black Men

You've got to see this video. It is from an ABC News 20/20 segment and shows mostly white kids picking a White Male Criminal -- Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVey -- over a standard, athletic looking Black man, with the idea that the White man was "nice" and a "teacher" where the Black man looked "mean" and "bad."

Where do you suppose they learn those ideas from? It's from home, and parents don't teach their kids how to better think about people and the World around them. Thus, racism is allowed to grow and fester and becomes expressed in paranoid delusion -- a mental illness that must be stamped out.

Racism's Alarming Spread On YouTube

This video below shows on YouTubers concern over the rampant spread of racism on YouTube. It comes out in comments on certain videos and is so prevanlent one has to ask if YouTube is safe. I personally think so, but I do think this issue should be adressed before a crisis sets in.



And this is another video expressing concern.



We need a reminder that racism is mental illness and should not be tolerated or spread on any medium like YouTube.

Jena LA, Now New York, NY - Hangman's Noose Is Criminal and Racist Symbol

When is anyone going to realize that a hangman's noose is no joke. It's a criminal act implying someone's desire to murder someone else because they're different and historically because they're Black.

This was just done in New York at Columbia University , but totally unlike the town of Jena, LA and its terrible district attorney , the people at Columbia called a town hall meeting on the issue.

I hope they catch the person who did it and jail them for a good long time.

The main problem is we don't teach young people that this is wrong or that diversity is good and racism is bad. So with each passing generation, we're doomed to see the same mistakes we made in the past as a culture.

I hope I'm wrong on this.

Ron Paul and Racism - CNN/YouTube Republican Debate Question

This question for the CNN/YouTube Republican Debates is based on an article I found in the Houston Chronicle and dated May 23, 1996. In the article, which I present below and has this link: Houston Chroncle Ron Paul Article .

9:16 PM 5/22/1996
Newsletter excerpts offer ammunition to Paul's opponent
GOP hopeful quoted on race, crime
By ALAN BERNSTEIN

Copyright 1996 Houston Chronicle Political Writer
Texas congressional candidate Ron Paul's 1992 political newsletter highlighted portrayals of blacks as inclined toward crime and lacking sense about top political issues.

Under the headline of "Terrorist Update," for instance, Paul reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and commented, "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

Paul, a Republican obstetrician from Surfside, said Wednesday he opposes racism and that his written commentaries about blacks came in the context of "current events and statistical reports of the time."

Selected writings by Paul were distributed Wednesday by the campaign of his Democratic opponent, Austin lawyer Charles "Lefty" Morris.

Morris said many of Paul's views are "out there on the fringe" and that his commentaries will be judged by voters in the November general elections.

Paul said allegations about his writings amounted to name-calling by the Democrats and that his opponents should focus instead on how to shrink government spending and reform welfare.

Morris and Paul are seeking the 14th Congressional District seat held by Greg Laughlin of West Columbia. Laughlin lost the Republican primary to Paul, a former congressman and the Libertarian Party's 1988 presidential candidate.

Paul, writing in his independent political newsletter in 1992, reported about unspecified surveys of blacks.

"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action," Paul wrote.

Paul continued that politically sensible blacks are outnumbered "as decent people." Citing reports that 85 percent of all black men in the District of Columbia are arrested, Paul wrote:

"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal," Paul said.

Paul also wrote that although "we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."

A campaign spokesman for Paul said statements about the fear of black males mirror pronouncements by black leaders such as the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who has decried the spread of urban crime.

Paul continues to write the newsletter for an undisclosed number of subscribers, the spokesman said.

Writing in the same 1992 edition, Paul expressed the popular idea that government should lower the age at which accused juvenile criminals can be prosecuted as adults.

He added, "We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such."

Paul also asserted that "complex embezzling" is conducted exclusively by non-blacks.

"What else do we need to know about the political establishment than that it refuses to discuss the crimes that terrify Americans on grounds that doing so is racist? Why isn't that true of complex embezzling, which is 100 percent white and Asian?" he wrote.

In later newsletters, Paul aimed criticism at the Israeli government's U.S. lobbying efforts and reported allegations that President Clinton used cocaine and fathered illegitimate children.

Stating that lobbying groups who seek special favors and handouts are evil, Paul wrote, "By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government" and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to stifle criticism.

Relaying a rumor that Clinton was a longtime cocaine user, Paul wrote in 1994 that the speculation "would explain certain mysteries" about the president's scratchy voice and insomnia.

"None of this is conclusive, of course, but it sure is interesting," he said.

------------------------

Someone wrote that his statements were "true." Well, that's not so at all. The studies Paul reffers to are unidentified and anyone believing this is looking for some "emprirical" reason to hold a racist viewpoint. Racism is a mental illness that must be treated and eliminated. Congressman Paul must deal with this question of racism because it's based on material produced by him and his campaign.

Moreover, Paul has White Supremacist David Duke as a supporter and gives interviews to the John Birch Society. Yikes.

Vernon Jordan Says Republicans Have Whites Only Sign Up

Well, the battle-lines are drawn both in Jena, LA, and in the 2008 Presidential Race. I've come to believe racism is both mental illness and un-American. Here's Vernon Jordan's take.

The candidates for the Republican party's presidential nod are building quite a track record--of snubbing prospective voters. This week the four leading candidates--Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, Rudolph Giuliani and John McCain--added the PBS-sponsored debate at Baltimore's historically-black Morgan State University to their "I'll-pass" list. That list now includes the National Urban League, Univision, the Spanish-language television network, the National Association of Latino Elected Officials and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. It's getting to be a long list.

But perhaps it's those of us who are dismayed by these displays of camapign cowardice that just don't get it.

Perhaps the GOP candidates are following the same script the Bush administration has used for governance: be irresponsible.

Or perhaps, they're developing a new paradigm for how a political party contests elections. Perhaps they want to test that you actually improve your chances of winning by snubbing entire groups of voters, and that in a nation whose voting pool is becoming more and more diverse, you make it clear you want just the votes of whites.

Republicans love to talk about Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan, presidents whom they hold up as having met the tests of greatness. Is this what Abraham Lincoln would do? Is this what Ronald Reagan would do?

Republicans also used to talk about their welcoming all Americans into the party of the "big tent." But actions speak louder than words. The actions of the Republican candidates make it clear the big tent has a whites-only sign over the entrance.

CNN Susan Rogerson Missreporting Of Jena 6 Issue Fuels Racial Tension

I'm watching CNN, and Susan Rogerson tells me that I'm supposed to feel soory for Justin Barker -- the white student who was beaten up after racially taunting Black students in Jena, Louisiana, and attended a social function after supposedly being beaten so hard.

She says "What about him?" WHAT? Is CNN nuts? Look, this story started because a Black student wanted to sit under a tree supposedly just for White students -- which is totally crazy itself. Then when he did, White students hung nooses on the tree. Black students were beaten up by White students -- but charges never filed.

Now, I've got to hear CNN's Rogerson talk about this idiot like he's the victim, and then hear this racist Jena D.A. down there back him? Come on! Racism is a mental illness, and that town's got a problem.

Jena's a nutso place it seems. But CNN's fueling racial tensions by the way it's reporting the issue. For a totally great explanation of what happened down there, watch this video:

Public School Racial Segregation Increasing - Must Change This

This is not the direction America should go in. We must go back to desegregation as a policy and stick with it. It's the best combatant to racism, which is a mental illness.

ATLANTA (Reuters) - Public schools in the United States are becoming more racially segregated and the trend is likely to accelerate because of a Supreme Court decision in June, according to report published on Wednesday.

The rise in segregation threatens the quality of education received by non-white students, who now make up 43 percent of the total U.S. student body, said the report by the Civil Rights Project of the University of California in Los Angeles.

Many segregated schools struggle to attract highly qualified teachers and administrators, do not prepare students well for college and fail to graduate more than half their students.

In its June ruling the Supreme Court forbade most existing voluntary local efforts to integrate schools in a decision favored by the Bush administration despite warnings from academics that it would compound educational inequality.

"It is about as dramatic a reversal in the stance of the federal courts as one could imagine," said Gary Orfield, a UCLA professor and a co-author of the report.

"The federal courts are clearly pushing us backward segregation with the encouragement of the Justice Department of President George W. Bush," he said in an interview.

The United States risks becoming a nation in which a new majority of non-white young people will attend "separate and inferior" schools, the report said.

"Resegregation ... is continuing to grow in all parts of the country for both African Americans and Latinos and is accelerating the most rapidly in the only region that had been highly desegregated -- the South," it said.

The trend damages the prospects for non-white students and will likely have a negative effect on the U.S. economy, according to the report by one of the leading U.S. research centers on issues of civil rights and racial inequality.

Part of the reason for the resegregation is the rapidly expanding number of black and Latino children and a corresponding fall in the number of white children, it said.

Contrary to popular belief, the surge in the number of minority children in public schools was not mainly caused by a flight of white students into private schools.

Instead, it said, the post-"baby boom" generation of white Americans are having smaller family sizes.

"During the desegregation period there was a major decline in the education gap between blacks and whites and an increase in college entry by blacks .... That gap has stopped closing," Orfield said.

TRIPLE SEGREGATION FOR LATINOS

The record of successive administration reforms such as the Goals 2000 project of former President Bill Clinton and Bush's "No Child Left Behind" in 2001 "justifies deep skepticism," the report said.

Those changes focused pressure and resources on making the achievement of minority children in segregated schools equal to children in schools that were fully integrated.

School desegregation is a sensitive issue in the United States because of resistance to it from white leaders in the decade after a 1954 Supreme Court decision saying segregated public schools were unconstitutional.

One of the chief complaints of the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s was that black-only public schools were inevitably starved of resources by local government with the result that black children received inferior education.

Latinos are the fastest growing minority in U.S. schools and for them segregation is often more profound than it was when the phenomenon was first measured 40 years ago, according to the report, "Historic Reversals, Accelerating Resegregation and the need for new Integration Strategies."

"Too often Latino students face triple segregation by race, class and language," it said.

Americans Believe Other Americans Are Racist; Gay President OK, Muslims Terrorists, Republicans Warmongers - Zogby Poll

This is from the Zogby website, which you can visit with a click on the title of this post. It's their report card on prejudice and it's eye-opening. If racism's a mental illness, then it's the number one mental illness problem in America.

Report Card on Prejudice in America

New Zogby/GSN Survey Reveals That:

A Racist Lives Next Door - Most Americans believe they don’t make decisions based on race…but think their neighbors do
A gay President is OK, but most Americans wouldn’t sanction his or her marriage
They also think most Americans believe:

Republicans are most responsible for many of the world’s ills
Muslims are most likely to engage in terrorism
People least want to work with the morbidly obese

Most Americans believe their fellow citizens hold strong biases against minorities, according to a landmark poll by Zogby International commissioned by GSN. The survey of 10,387 American adults, one of the most comprehensive ever conducted on prejudice, according to Zogby, explores attitudes about race, religion, age, sexual orientation, gender, physical appearance, and politics. The poll’s margin of error is +/– 1 percentage point.

The “Report Card on American Prejudice” is part of a wide-ranging effort by GSN to spur a national dialogue on intolerance and bigotry. The survey’s release provides a powerful follow-up to the July 17th premiere of the groundbreaking new television series, “Without Prejudice?” – which airs Tuesdays at 9 pm (EST) on GSN.

On Race: While 67% of respondents claimed to have no preference themselves between a white, black or Arab clerk in a convenience store, 71% said, “most Americans” would seek out the white clerk. Just 1% said Americans’ first choice would be to approach a black clerk, while less than 0.5% said the same for an Arab clerk. And yet, ironically, 55% of respondents said race relations have improved over the past 10 years. Other results on race (where respondents picked from among several races):
73% said in the event of a shooting, most Americans would expect African Americans to be involved
55% said in the event of a drug bust, most Americans would expect African Americans to be involved
53% said in the event of identity theft; most Americans would expect whites to be involved
70% said in the event of insurance fraud, most Americans would expect whites to be involved
On Political Affiliation: When asked which political party most Americans believe to be responsible for many of the gravest problems facing the world:
War: 62% blamed Republicans vs. 14% Democrats
Global Warming: 56% blamed Republicans vs. 10% Democrats
Prejudice: 52% blamed Republicans vs. 22% for Democrats
Poverty: 49% held Republicans accountable; 29% Democrats
Corruption: 47% blamed Republicans vs. 31% Democrats
Crime: On this issue, respondents reversed the trend, with 42% blaming Democrats vs. 23% Republicans
On Religion: By a wide margin, respondents believe Americans think Muslims are the most likely to engage in terrorism (83%). Moreover, 42% believe Americans would be most concerned about their child dating a Muslim; followed by an atheist (17%), and a Mormon (14%).In addition:
37% believe Americans think Catholics are most likely to be involved in sexual abuse – far more than any other religious group
The poll turned up relatively few instances of Americans believing their neighbors have negative views toward Jews
On Sexual Orientation & Gender: 62% said they believe Americans oppose same-sex marriages. Yet 58% would elect a gay person for President – about the same as for an Arab-American (57%), and more than for a person over age 70 (51%), or for an atheist (51%). On gender, 93% think Americans believe men are most responsible for crime, extra-marital affairs (82%), and sexually transmitted diseases (72%).
On Disability: When asked to choose whom they believe most Americans would least want to work with, 26% of respondents said someone who is morbidly obese. Twenty-two percent said someone with a facial disfigurement. Respondents thought Americans would object much less to deaf (3%) and blind (1%) co-workers.
Pollster John Zogby said, “Over my years of polling, I’ve learned that Americans tend to offer socially acceptable responses when questioned on their own views about race and prejudice. That’s why in this poll we predominantly asked people about “most Americans’” views on race and prejudice. We believe this provides a far more accurate window into how people really think about these issues. Americans are more forthcoming when discussing the problem in the context of their neighbors’ lives than in the context of their own lives.”

Dena Kaplan, GSN’s Sr. Vice President for Marketing, said, “Our network is proud to sponsor the Without Prejudice Project. This pioneering effort – which includes the poll, partnering with leading advocacy groups, and the broadcast of our new game show, ’Without Prejudice?’ – will help provoke a constructive national conversation about our inner-most feelings toward race, religion and other issues that define the way we, as Americans, treat one another.”

New York Times' Kit Seelye Can't Get Her Black Guys Straight - I'm Referenced and Linked Twice In The Same Article!

Katharine Seelye a reporter for The New York Times wrote an article about tommorrow's CNN / YouTube Debates where she links to two of my videos twice in paragraphs close to each other, but fails to identify me as the same person!

This is both sad and funny. But it's mostly sad and not that funny. Here's the part of the article I'm writing about:

" Another asks the candidates if they would put their friends in important government jobs. “Or are you going to hire the best and the brightest?” he asks. “Or are you prepared to tell us that your friends are the best and the brightest?”

A black man standing in front of a check-cashing store asks the candidates how they would stop predatory lending in low-income neighborhoods. A college student wants to know if the candidates would lower the legal drinking age to 18 from 21.

Now if you click on each link, you'll discover that both lead to videos of me asking questions. In other words, she sourced the same person for two different points of information, but to the lazy eye and finger that would not bother to click on the links -- yeah, right, -- it looks like she's writing about two different people.

Nope. She's not.

Katharine, what's the deal? I've just got to ask why you would reference me twice in this way, one paragraph after the other? And why "A black man standing in front" of a check cashing center, when I wasn't even STANDING IN FRONT OF A CHECK CASHING CENTER. THAT'S A BANK OF AMERICA ATM!"

It just goes to show you how stupid racism is, in this case, institutional racism, where the person thinks they're doing no harm at all in reaching for a stereotype, even if the stereotype tells the story incorrectly.



Wow, this is terrible!

Now, you might be saying "Hey at least she noticed your videos." But that's not the point. It's the principal of the way "Kit" Seelye (as she's called) did it. The best way -- the most direct way -- would have been to write something like "And Zennie Abraham, a YouTube vlogger, has two provacative questions, ..."

Think about it. Read the story. She wrote the article as if I were two different people, rather than the same person. I can't help but wonder what was rolling around in her head.

Geez.

Institutional Racism: Fox News Can't Tell One Black Person From Another

This is stupid, and is a great example of why diversity in society is so important. Fox News showed a clip of Representative John Conyers but reporting that he's indicted Representative Bill Jefferson. Here's a video on the error by TPMtv..:

NBA Officials Call Fouls On Black Players More Than White Players - NY Times

This is a terrible revelation, but logical considering the nature of prejudice.

May 2, 2007
Study of N.B.A. Sees Racial Bias in Calling Fouls

By ALAN SCHWARZ
An academic study of the National Basketball Association, whose playoffs continue tonight, suggests that a racial bias found in other parts of American society has existed on the basketball court as well.

A coming paper by a University of Pennsylvania professor and a Cornell University graduate student says that, during the 13 seasons from 1991 through 2004, white referees called fouls at a greater rate against black players than against white players.

Justin Wolfers, an assistant professor of business and public policy at the Wharton School, and Joseph Price, a Cornell graduate student in economics, found a corresponding bias in which black officials called fouls more frequently against white players, though that tendency was not as strong. They went on to claim that the different rates at which fouls are called “is large enough that the probability of a team winning is noticeably affected by the racial composition of the refereeing crew assigned to the game.”

N.B.A. Commissioner David Stern said in a telephone interview that the league saw a draft copy of the paper last year, and was moved to do its own study this March using its own database of foul calls, which specifies which official called which foul.

“We think our cut at the data is more powerful, more robust, and demonstrates that there is no bias,” Mr. Stern said.

Three independent experts asked by The Times to examine the Wolfers-Price paper and materials released by the N.B.A. said they considered the Wolfers-Price argument far more sound. The N.B.A. denied a request for its underlying data, even with names of officials and players removed, because it feared that the league’s confidentiality agreement with referees could be violated if the identities were determined through box scores.

The paper by Mr. Wolfers and Mr. Price has yet to undergo formal peer review before publication in an economic journal, but several prominent academic economists said it would contribute to the growing literature regarding subconscious racism in the workplace and elsewhere, such as in searches by the police.

The three experts who examined the Wolfers-Price paper and the N.B.A.’s materials were Ian Ayres of Yale Law School, the author of “Pervasive Prejudice?” and an expert in testing for how subtle racial bias, also known as implicit association, appears in interactions ranging from the setting of bail amounts to the tipping of taxi drivers; David Berri of California State University-Bakersfield, the author of “The Wages of Wins,” which analyzes sports issues using statistics; and Larry Katz of Harvard University, the senior editor of the Quarterly Journal of Economics.

“I would be more surprised if it didn’t exist,” Mr. Ayres said of an implicit association bias in the N.B.A. “There’s a growing consensus that a large proportion of racialized decisions is not driven by any conscious race discrimination, but that it is often just driven by unconscious, or subconscious, attitudes. When you force people to make snap decisions, they often can’t keep themselves from subconsciously treating blacks different than whites, men different from women.”

Mr. Berri added: “It’s not about basketball — it’s about what happens in the world. This is just the nature of decision-making, and when you have an evaluation team that’s so different from those being evaluated. Given that your league is mostly African-American, maybe you should have more African-American referees — for the same reason that you don’t want mostly white police forces in primarily black neighborhoods.”

To investigate whether such bias has existed in sports, Mr. Wolfers and Mr. Price examined data from publicly available box scores. They accounted for factors like the players’ positions, playing time and All-Star status; each group’s time on the court (black players played 83 percent of minutes, while 68 percent of officials were white); calls at home games and on the road; and other relevant data.

But they said they continued to find the same phenomenon: that players who were similar in all ways except skin color drew foul calls at a rate difference of up to 4 ½ percent depending on the racial composition of an N.B.A. game’s three-person referee crew.

Mark Cuban, the owner of the Dallas Mavericks and a vocal critic of his league’s officiating, said in a telephone interview after reading the paper: “We’re all human. We all have our own prejudice. That’s the point of doing statistical analysis. It bears it out in this application, as in a thousand others.”

Asked if he had ever suspected any racial bias among officials before reading the study, Mr. Cuban said, “No comment.”

Two veteran players who are African-American, Mike James of the Minnesota Timberwolves and Alan Henderson of the Philadelphia 76ers, each said that they did not think black or white officials had treated them differently.

“If that’s going on, then it’s something that needs to be dealt with,” James said. “But I’ve never seen it.”

Two African-American coaches, Doc Rivers of the Boston Celtics and Maurice Cheeks of the Philadelphia 76ers, declined to comment on the paper’s claims. Rod Thorn, the president of the New Jersey Nets and formerly the N.B.A.’s executive vice president for basketball operations, said: “I don’t believe it. I think officials get the vast majority of calls right. They don’t get them all right. The vast majority of our players are black.”

Mr. Wolfers and Mr. Price spend 41 pages accounting for such population disparities and more than a dozen other complicating factors.

For the 1991-92 through 2003-4 seasons, the authors analyzed every player’s box-score performance — minutes played, rebounds, shots made and missed, fouls and the like — in the context of the racial composition of the three-person crew refereeing that game. (The N.B.A. did not release its record of calls by specific officials to either Mr. Wolfers, Mr. Price or The Times, claiming it is kept for referee training purposes only.)

Mr. Wolfers said that he and Mr. Price classified each N.B.A. player and referee as either black or not black by assessing photographs and speaking with an anonymous former referee, and then using that information to predict how an official would view the player. About a dozen players could reasonably be placed in either category, but Mr. Wolfers said the classification of those players did not materially change the study’s findings.

During the 13-season period studied, black players played 83 percent of the minutes on the floor. With 68 percent of officials being white, three-person crews were either entirely white (30 percent of the time), had two white officials (47 percent), had two black officials (20 percent) or were entirely black (3 percent).

Mr. Stern said that the race of referees had never been considered when assembling crews for games.

With their database of almost 600,000 foul calls, Mr. Wolfers and Mr. Price used a common statistical technique called multivariable regression analysis, which can identify correlations between different variables. The economists accounted for a wide range of factors: that centers, who tend to draw more fouls, were disproportionately white; that veteran players and All-Stars tended to draw foul calls at different rates than rookies and non-stars; whether the players were at home or on the road, as officials can be influenced by crowd noise; particular coaches on the sidelines; the players’ assertiveness on the court, as defined by their established rates of assists, steals, turnovers and other statistics; and more subtle factors like how some substitute players enter games specifically to commit fouls.

Mr. Wolfers and Mr. Price examined whether otherwise similar black and white players had fouls-per-minute rates that varied with the racial makeup of the refereeing crew.

“Across all of these specifications,” they write, “we find that black players receive around 0.12-0.20 more fouls per 48 minutes played (an increase of 2 ½-4 ½ percent) when the number of white referees officiating a game increases from zero to three.”

Mr. Wolfers and Mr. Price also report a statistically significant correlation with decreases in points, rebounds and assists, and a rise in turnovers, when players performed before primarily opposite-race officials.

“Player-performance appears to deteriorate at every margin when officiated by a larger fraction of opposite-race referees,” they write. The paper later notes no change in free-throw percentage. “We emphasize this result because this is the one on-court behavior that we expect to be unaffected by referee behavior.”

Mr. Wolfers and Mr. Price claim that these changes are enough to affect game outcomes. Their results suggested that for each additional black starter a team had, relative to its opponent, a team’s chance of winning would decline from a theoretical 50 percent to 49 percent and so on, a concept mirrored by the game evidence: the team with the greater share of playing time by black players during those 13 years won 48.6 percent of games — a difference of about two victories in an 82-game season.

“Basically, it suggests that if you spray-painted one of your starters white, you’d win a few more games,” Mr. Wolfers said.

The N.B.A.’s reciprocal study was conducted by the Segal Company, the actuarial consulting firm which designed the in-house data-collection system the league uses to identify patterns for referee-training purposes, to test for evidence of bias. The league’s study was less formal and detailed than an academic paper, included foul calls for only two and a half seasons (from November 2004 through January 2007), and did not consider differences among players by position, veteran status and the like. But it did have the clear advantage of specifying which of the three referees blew his whistle on each foul.

The N.B.A. study reported no significant differences in how often white and black referees collectively called fouls on white and black players. Mr. Stern said he was therefore convinced “that there’s no demonstration of any bias here — based upon more robust and more data that was available to us because we keep that data.”

Added Joel Litvin, the league’s president for basketball operations, “I think the analysis that we did can stand on its own, so I don’t think our view of some of the things in Wolfers’s paper and some questions we have actually matter as much as the analysis we did.”

Mr. Litvin explained the N.B.A.’s refusal to release its underlying data for independent examination by saying: “Even our teams don’t know the data we collect as to a particular referee’s call tendencies on certain types of calls. There are good reasons for this. It’s proprietary. It’s personnel data at the end of the day.”

The percentage of black officials in the N.B.A. has increased in the past several years, to 38 percent of 60 officials this season from 34 percent of 58 officials two years ago. Mr. Stern and Mr. Litvin said that the rise was coincidental because the league does not consider race in the hiring process.

Mr. Wolfers and Mr. Price are scheduled to present their paper at the annual meetings of the Society of Labor Economists on Friday and the American Law and Economics Association on Sunday. They will then submit it to the National Bureau of Economic Research and for formal peer review before consideration by an economic journal.

Both men cautioned that the racial discrimination they claim to have found should be interpreted in the context of bias found in other parts of American society.

“There’s bias on the basketball court,” Mr. Wolfers said, “but less than when you’re trying to hail a cab at midnight.”

Pat Borzi contributed reporting from Minneapolis and John Eligon from East Rutherford, N.J.

Bill O'Reilly Is A Sick Man - Ok's Tommy Thompson's Anti-Semetic Remark

Tommy Thompson made a dumb comment. So why is Fox's Bill O'Reilly protecting him?

This is sick! O'Reilly defends this politician because he's White and Catholic. And he does this in the face of the Virgina Tech murders, where it's clear that the killer has problems that were brought to the surface by racial isolation.

I dream of the day O'Reilly's taken off the air. He spreads hate amoung those who are White who can be swayed by him.

Thompson says making money 'part of Jewish tradition'
Republican presidential candidate later apologizes

WASHINGTON — Republican presidential candidate Tommy Thompson told a Jewish group Monday that earning money is "part of the Jewish tradition," a remark for which he later apologized.

"I'm in the private sector and for the first time in my life I'm earning money," Thompson told the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. "You know that's sort of part of the Jewish tradition. ... "

Later, he added: "I didn't (by) any means want to infer or imply anything about Jews and finances. ... What I was referring to ... is the accomplishments of the Jewish religion. You've been outstanding business people and I compliment you for that."

Thompson spokesman Tony Jewell said the former Wisconsin governor, who is Catholic, was sorry.

Don Imus - Problem Of White Racism Masked By Talk About Black Rappers

The Don Imus matter has opened a sore in American society and demonstrated to me that racism still exists and more to the point White Racism. In fact, this form of mental illness is so persistent that those who either practice is or support those who do have worked to steer the focus away from the identification of and reduction of White Racism and on to ....Black rappers.

Wow.

What's all the more upsetting is that Jason Whitlock and Carol Swain -- both Black writers -- have allowed their own self-hate of Blacks to spill over into their appearance on CNN and The Today Show to talk not about White Racism but Black Rappers.

And in Jason's case, his Black self-hatred even caused him to treat a Black family at the Las Vegas Airport like they were animals to be feared and challenged, rather than people who deserved respect.

I'm really disppointed in them. But the task remains -- Racism is a mental illness and White racism must be stamped out. Now, since Whites are the majority and have majority economic power, any talk of Black racism in some weird attempt to even the argument is plain nuts. Plus, Whites are 77 percent of the U.S. population. That's almost eight of every ten people. You can't argue that racism is an "equal" problem if there are more Whites and Blacks, or anyone else!

Plus, the decades past since the passasge of the civil rights amendment have seen African Americans struggle with an inferiority complex that says "You're not good enough because you're not White and were enslaved."

Both ideas are not true, but they're borne of the extreme prejudice that Blacks in America have suffered; a prejudice that comes from White Racism. It's not a Black problem or a White problem; it's our problem.

Lest you think this division between Black and White views is not along color lines, research Technorati by typing in "Jason Whitlock" and reading the difference. Many African Americans don't like what Jason wrote, whereras many Whites do. It's a wake up call for those who think America's grown. It's got a long way to go. Also, it's was shown in a recent study that Whites react more negatively to Blacks than to Whites.

The seeds of what drive Don Imus to make the comment he did, are right there. This pattern of thinking must be unlearned or the problems that stem from it will continue.

Also, by writing this, I'm not referring to everyone who's White or Black, so don't even try to water down the argument with that presentation. Anyone an everyone knows there's a problem.

There's not so much Black racism as Black anger over White racism. Thus, when White Racism is eliminated, Black anger too will go away. You can bet on it.

What Don Imus said was pure White Racism. In an effort to deflect the blame from him, he threw up the Black Rapper claim and those who are White jumped at the device Don Imus himself crafted to defend himself. Now they had something to fight back with and turn the matter away from White Racism.

And that's sick, because we're still stuck with the problem of White Racism. The one best way to eliminate it is diversity. Diversity must be a new public policy objective. We must retrain the people of America to expect this, to walk in room full of Blacks or Whites and ask why there are not more different kinds of people in the room? This should be our objective. I certainly know it's mine.

I also know its the objective of many people, White, Asian, Latino, and on. It's just not a matter of national importance and it should be, plus you've got White conservatives like Tucker Carlson launching senceless rants against it when they get the chance.

Now that's one guy I'd love to debate; I'd make him look ridiculous.

Don Imus Fired By CBS Today - CNN.com

This just happened 90 minutes ago

NEW YORK (CNN) -- CBS has canceled Don Imus' radio show, effective immediately, after uproar over his racist and sexist comments about Rutgers women's basketball team.

"From the outset, I believe all of us have been deeply upset and revulsed by the statements that were made on our air about the young women who represented Rutgers University in the NCAA Women's Basketball Championship with such class, energy and talent," said CBS President and Chief Executive Officer Leslie Moonves, in announcing the decision.

The decision by CBS came a day after NBC Universal decided to part ways with Imus, thus canceling the simulcast of his show on MSNBC.

Amid the outcry over his on-air racial slur last week, shock jock Imus said Thursday that he had "apologized enough" and that he will not go on "some talk show tour."

"I'm not going to go talk to Larry King or Barbara Walters or anyone else," Imus said on his flagship station in New York, WFAN-AM, which is owned by CBS Corp. and distributes "Imus in the Morning" nationally.

"The only other people I want to talk to are these young women at the team, and then that's it," Imus said.

He was referring to the members of the Rutgers University women's basketball team, whom he described as "nappy-headed hos" the day after the team lost the NCAA championship to the University of Tennessee. (Gallery: Other controversial comments aired on Imus show)

He has repeatedly apologized for those remarks. Team members have agreed to meet with him privately, but so far no meeting has taken place.

"It gets said. Kids get hurt," he said. "At some point -- I'm not sure when -- I'm going to go talk to the team and that's all I'm interested in doing."

NBC News President Steve Capus, appearing on CNN, said Imus' comments had "touched a nerve" within the organization and firing him was "the only action we could take." (Your e-mails on Imus)

Despite being dropped by NBC, Imus hosted his show from the MSNBC studios in New Jersey. He did not appear on TV.

"As you know, MSNBC folded up yesterday, so we're just on the radio," he said.

Imus was broadcasting his 18th annual radio charity fundraiser, which has pulled in $50 million since 1990. It ends Friday.

"This may be our last radiothon, so we need to raise $100 million dollars," Imus said, chuckling.

According to The Associated Press, Imus raised $1 million in the first five hours of Thursday's fundraiser.

The disparaging remark prompted eight companies to pull their ads from Imus' show: Staples, General Motors, Sprint Nextel, GlaxoSmithKline, Procter & Gamble, PetMed Express, American Express and Bigelow Tea.

Bruce Gordon, a member of CBS Corp.'s board of directors, had called for Imus' firing from WFAN.

Speaking Thursday on CNN's "American Morning," Gordon said that, speaking "as an African-American man in this country, Don Imus violated our community. He attacked beautiful, talented, classy women and when those women showed themselves to the country, I think that those words matched with those images made it clear to America that Don Imus was wrong."

Gordon is a former president and CEO of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

At a rally outside CBS's New York offices Thursday, civil rights activist Al Sharpton pressured the network to cancel Imus' morning show.

Rain cut attendance at the rally -- another has been scheduled for Saturday afternoon -- but Sharpton, joined by the father of a player on the team, spoke to the media.

"NBC has done in our judgment what is right," he said, and CBS must not be "the dam holding back the waters of insensitivity."

Sharpton said he had met with several NBC leaders and planned to meet with CBS leaders later in the day.

Linzell Vaughn, the father of sophomore center Kia Vaughn, said Imus' comments were "like a slap in the face."

"Do not disrespect our children," he said. (Players talk of hurt, seeking understanding)

Sharpton said the airways should not be used to "call children hard-core hos, nappy-headed hos. ... None of us have the right to use the public airways to express our bigotry."

Civil rights activist Jesse Jackson also spoke on Thursday afternoon outside CBS' offices and called for Imus' firing.

"This is not the first time this has happened on this show," he said, and spoke of previous Imus comments that Jackson characterized as racist and sexist.

"'Three strikes you're out' ought to apply to this position," he said.

Copyright 2007 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.

Faulty Reasoning - British Prime Minister Tony Blair Blames Crime Rate On Black Culture

There's a rising tide of faulty reasoning on a great many matters. For example, it's logical that the combination of racial discrimination and poverty would cause an increase in crime. But forgetting this -- British Prime Minister Tony Blair gives in to a kind of racism by just lock-stock-and-barrel blaming the crime problem on Black Culture.

See the pattern:

1) Deny the Black's in an area access and jobs.

2) Segregate them

3) Watch as the crime rate increases.

4) Then blame the group of Blacks for the problem due to the culture formed by item 1.

5) Which causes public policy to continue item 1.

6) Which continues the cycle.

Nuts.

MSNBC Drops Don Imus

After a rowdy and racist comment, which came at the expense of the Rutgers Women's Basketball team, and calling them "Rough Hos'" and "Nappy Headed Hos" and much exhange between bloggers , media annoucers on television and radio, and a sharp exchange between Al Sharpton and Don Imus on Sharpton's show, "Today's Show" host Al Roker calling for his head, then three key sponsors -- Staples, Proctor & Gamble, and Bigelow Teas backing out, MSNBC has elected to drop the simulcast of Imus' radio show.

Here's the report from MSNBC:

MSNBC staff and news service reports
Updated: 1 minute ago
NEW YORK - MSNBC said Wednesday it will drop its simulcast of the “Imus in the Morning” radio program, responding to growing outrage over the radio host’s racial slur against the Rutgers women’s basketball team.

In a statement, NBC News announced "this decision comes as a result of an ongoing review process, which initially included the announcement of a suspension. It also takes into account many conversations with our own employees. What matters to us most is that the men and women of NBC Universal have confidence in the values we have set for this company. This is the only decision that makes that possible."

The network statement went on to say, "Once again, we apologize to the women of the Rutgers basketball team and to our viewers. We deeply regret the pain this incident has caused."

(MSNBC TV is wholly owned by NBC Universal. MSNBC.com is a joint venture between NBC Universal and Microsoft).

The network’s decision came after a growing list of sponsors — including American Express Co., Staples Inc., Procter & Gamble Co., and General Motors Corp. — said they were pulling ads from Imus’ show for the indefinite future.

But it did not end calls for Imus to be fired from the radio portion of his program. The show originates from WFAN-AM in New York City and is syndicated nationally by Westwood One, both of which are managed by CBS Corp. For its part, CBS has not announced plans to discontinue the show.

Before the announcement was made, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) had appeared on the MSNBC program "Hardball," where host David Gregory asked the senator and presidential candidate if he thought Imus should be fired.

Controversy continues to swirl around radio host Don Imus after his controversial remarks on-air.

"I don't think MSNBC should be carrying the kinds of hateful remarks that Imus uttered the other day," Obama said.

He went on to note that he and his wife have "two daughters who are African-American, gorgeous, tall, and I hope, at some point, are interested enough in sports that they get athletic scholarships. ... I don't want them to be getting a bunch of information that, somehow, they're less than anybody else. And I don't think MSNBC should want to promote that kind of language."

Obama went on to say that he would not be a guest on Imus' show in the future.

Team wants to question Imus about remarks
On his April 4 show, Imus and his producer had referred to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos."

The 10 members of the Rutgers team spoke publicly for the first time Tuesday about the on-air comments, made the day after the team lost the NCAA championship game to Tennessee.

Some of them wiped away tears as their coach, C. Vivian Stringer, criticized Imus for “racist and sexist remarks that are deplorable, despicable, abominable and unconscionable.” The women, eight of whom are black, called his comments insensitive and hurtful.

Don Imus Loses Sponsors - Staples, Proctor & Gamble, Bigelow Tea Pull Adds From Don Imus On MNBC

This is a sure signal of positive social change. According to Bloomberg and CNBC, Staples, Proctor & Gamble, and Bigelow Tea have pulled their ads from radio host Don Imus's morning show to protest his racially charged remarks about the Rutgers University women's basketball team.

Proctor and Gamble's one of the largest advertisers in the World, and they've pulled their ads from all of MSNBC Daytime.

I love it. It's a great change and it is a path toward a better World, and certainly an improved America. It's also a sign to the shock-jocks who think it's OK to insult people based on ethnicity. It's not. It also sends a warning to those who would think it's open season on someone because they're Black.

No way.

Don Imus Racism Does Not Compare To Rappers - Integrationists v. Segregationists

What's interesting about this time in the maturation of our society is the conflict between what I will call integrationists and segregationists. Integrationists have friends of different skin colors and backgrounds and prize diversity. Segregationists don't have friends of different colors and are at best luke warm about diversity. (And when I mean friends, I'm referring to people you invite over to your house, not people who you run into who are acquaintences.)

The Integrationists to a person denounce what Don Imus said and call for his outright ouster. The Segregationists -- here's another example -- don't think this is a big deal what he said and that he's using free speech. It's also distubing that the vast majority of Segregationists bloggers -- at least according to their Imus reactions -- are white and male according to my Technorati tour. Not surprisingly, the Integrationists are White, Black, Latino, Asian, male, female, etc...

I'm an Integrationist.

What Don Imus said are the words of a Segregationist. A person who sees people as apart due to skin color and doens't want to get to know anyone who looks different from them. What Don Imus said in referring to Black Women as "Nappy Headed Ho's" are the comments of someone who is not in the company of Black Women, and doens't want to be. That's the sickness of it all. He's -- in one fell swoop -- denounced an entire group of people. What's more, anyone tunes in to CNBC is forced to here Imus' crap when he's on. His show's supported by corporations who purchase ads, which is a way of saying "We love your content."

Wow.

Now how that compares with -- as one Blogger put it "Black Rappers" -- is a question only a Segregationist would come up with because only they would stereotype rappers as being first Black and then racist. Of course Integrationists know that there are rappers like LL Cool J who don't use hate speech.

But on top of that, every Integrationist knows that one can simply chose not to buy a certain rap record. Look at the whole matter of "Prussian Blue" - Lamb and Lynx Gaede, those 13-year old white girls who made racist records, yet gain fan mail from nutos as far away as Germany and who are concerned about "The White Race." (No kidding about that.) Did any of the Segregationist bloggers call for their "firing" or for that matter, their parents?

Nope.

But they didn't hit the top ten lists either, and several of their planned concerts were cancelled. Why? Because they advance the same kind of race hate tha Imus' comment would seem to imply. You could take his statement, install it in a Prussian Blue song, and their sick Segregationist fans would love it.

Why not include them and compare them to Don Imus? Why focus on Rappers who are Black? I'll tell ya why. Because Segregationists are looking for every reason not to -- integrate. They don't want diversity and loved it when things were divided and Whites were on top.

Am I saying that Segregationists are all White? No. Some are not, and yet can't see a society where there's true balance and real equal opportunity as well as constant integration. It's a new concept to thos who are -- well, mentally enslaved.

Don Imus Made Racist Remarks Before - Staff Should Be Fired

First, this matter of someone making fun of someone else because their skin and hair are different from that person should be such that we're punishing people for doing it. It's not funny at all.

Now, Don Imus fears for his job after making one of the most terrible on air comments about someone else and based on their skin color in history, in this case, the Rutgers Women's Basketball team.

This Fair.org's discussion of the Imus matter, thanks to Sharon Cobb:

Racism Is to Be Expected From Don Imus
CBS, NBC, media pundits complicit in talk host's bigotry

4/9/07

In the wake of the latest racial slur broadcast on Don Imus' show, the question is not whether Imus is a racist—the man, after all, admitted to hiring one of his co-hosts to do "nigger jokes" (60 Minutes, 7/19/98)—but why CBS, NBC and top media pundits seem to feel no embarrassment over associating with his racism.

The Imus in the Morning radio show is aired on CBS-owned radio station WFAN, and is syndicated nationally by CBS-owned Westwood One. It is simulcast daily on MSNBC, a cable news channel in which GE subsidiary NBC Universal holds a controlling interest. Top media pundits like Tim Russert, Howard Fineman, Frank Rich and Maureen Dowd are frequent Imus guests. The show has also been a conduit for televised racism and other bigotry for years.

FAIR and others have documented numerous instances of Imus and his on-air colleagues expressing overt racism and other forms of bigotry. Imus himself has referred to African-American journalist Gwen Ifill as "a cleaning lady," to New York Times sports reporter Bill Rhoden as "quota hire" and to tennis player Amelie Mauresmo as "a big old lesbo." Imus called Washington Post reporter Howard Kurtz a "boner-nosed... beanie-wearing Jewboy," referred to a disabled colleague as "the cripple," and to an Indian men's tennis duo as "Gunga Din and Sambo." In Imus' words, the New York Knicks are "chest-thumping pimps."

Imus' on again/off again sidekick Sid Rosenberg was temporarily fired in 2001 for calling tennis player Venus Williams an "animal" and remarking that the Williams sisters—Venus and her tennis player sister Serena—would more likely be featured in National Geographic than in Playboy. Rosenberg insisted to New York's Daily News (6/7/01) that his comments weren't racist, "just zoological." In 2004, MSNBC had to apologize when the rehired Rosenberg referred to Palestinians as "stinking animals."

In May 2005, MSNBC let Contessa Brewer out of her short stint as a news reader on Imus' morning show after Imus had made a daily game of crude personal attacks against her, calling her a pig, a skank, dumber than dirt and other similar felicities, all on air. MSNBC claimed they "expressed their displeasure" to the host (New York Post, 5/1/05), while noting that his "humor" was "often brilliant and provocative."

In his most recent racist outburst, on April 4, Imus called the Rutgers women's basketball team "nappy-headed hos," just moments after sidekick and executive producer Bernard McGuirk (the "nigger jokes" hire) called them "hard-core hos." The Rutgers team, which recently played in the national championship finals, is made up of eight African-American women and two white women.

On April 6, Imus issued an apology for the slur of the Rutgers team. It was the latest in a long line of apologies for bigotry on his show. Past apologies have served to take pressure off Imus, but haven't resulted in a change of behavior by the host or his colleagues.

Neither has Imus' history of bigotry dissuaded prominent journalists and pundits, more after publicity than principle, from appearing on Imus' show. Friday's show, in addition to Imus' apology, featured an interview with NBC's Meet the Press host Tim Russert.

In an exceptional report on April 9, New York Times reporter David Carr noted Imus' history of racism and the parade of media luminaries who have appeared on his show, who have rarely raised questions about the show's bigotry. Carr noted that, even in the aftermath of the latest Imus slurs, Newsweek editor Evan Thomas defended appearing on the show, explaining: "I am going on the show, though. I think if I didn't, it would be posturing. I have been going on the show for quite some time and he occasionally goes over the line."

It's time for CBS and NBC to acknowledge that Imus is unlikely to ever rein in his bigotry, that the crude and hateful insults are a key part of his routine: Like the cowboy hat, they provide an air of "edginess" to what is often otherwise a dull exercise in Beltway insider back-scratching.

A media company that chooses to run such a show has two choices: It can declare, explicitly or implicitly, that calling people "nappy-headed hos" and "beanie-wearing Jewboys" is an acceptable part of the national discussion. Or it can end its affiliation with said program.

The Russerts, Finemans and the like who elect to appear on Imus' show have a similar decision: Are you down with "nigger jokes" or aren't you?

Rosie O'Donnell Responds To Fox's Nigel Lythgoe Re: "Idol Racism" - "blah blah blah blha"

Not one to be "one-upped" The View's Rosie O'Donnell used her -- called the "r blog" (in lowercase) -- to respond to Fox Television's Nigel Lythgoe, Executive Producer of AMERICAN IDOL denouncing of her call of the shows actions with respect to the exhibitionist leanings of contestants Antonella Barba and Frenchie Davis, and the very different way the White singer was treated versus the Black Ms. Davis.



Nigel says "“Without wishing to add to the obvious self-promotion of Ms. O’Donnell, I feel as though I must refute her absurd and ridiculous claims that AMERICAN IDOL is racist and/or weightist.

“Ms. O’Donnell has, once again, spoken without thought or knowledge. Viewers need only look at the show tonight to realize that AMERICAN IDOL constantly confirms to America that talent has nothing to do with weight or color.”

Nigel Lythgoe, Executive Producer, AMERICAN IDOL"

In the blog, O'Donnell says "well…what can u say really from the coca-cola red couch

i call it as i see it nigel l - sam r same same same 1985 - 2007, blah blah blah blha
blha blha blah blha"

I love Rosie. Her blog's the bomb, too!