Updates from June, 2013 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • RuralRebel 11:01 pm on June 22, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Paula Deen 

    In the South, Many Are Willing to Forgive Deen’s Racial Misstep
    image
    People lined up Saturday outside Paula Deen’s restaurant in Savannah, Ga. Many were angry that Food Network had dropped Ms. Deen.
    By KIM SEVERSON
    June 22, 2013

    SAVANNAH, Ga. — The line of Paula Deen fans waiting for her restaurant here to open grew throughout the hot, muggy morning Saturday.

    They discussed what they might select from the buffet inside The Lady and Sons, her wildly popular restaurant in the heart of Savannah.

    But they also talked of boycotting the Food Network, which dropped their beloved TV chef on Friday after she awkwardly apologized for having used racial slurs and for considering a plantation-themed wedding for her brother, with well-dressed black male servants.

    The predicament that Ms. Deen finds herself in began when a former employee — a white woman who is now managing restaurants in Atlanta — filed a discrimination lawsuit in March 2012. She claimed that racial epithets, racist jokes and pornography on office computers were common while she managed Uncle Bubba’s Oyster House, one of the restaurants in Ms. Deen’s empire. Forbes has estimated her net worth at $17 million.

    Most of the diners in line on Saturday morning were white and more than ready to defend one of their favorite cooking stars. But at the very front was Nicole T. Green, 36, an African-American who said she had made a detour from a vacation in New Orleans specifically to show up in support of Ms. Deen.

    “I get it, believe me,” Ms. Green said. “But what’s hard for people to understand is that she didn’t mean it as racist. It sounds bad, but that’s not what’s in her heart. She’s just from another time.”

    The strong reaction to Ms. Deen’s pickle reflects a simple truth: race remains one of the most difficult conversations to have in America. And here, where antiseptic nostalgia for the antebellum South is not uncommon, the conversation is even more complex.

    “The memory of slavery and Jim Crow and civil rights is still very much alive,” said William Ferris, a University of North Carolina folklorist and an editor of the Encyclopedia of Southern Culture. “We carry those burdens through our lives. How we deal with them measures who we are. It’s always there lurking over our shoulders.”

    Ms. Deen, 66, many say, did not carry her burden well. “Deen is inarticulate about race because she doesn’t have to be articulate,” said Roxane Gay, a writer who explored the cultural conditioning behind Ms. Deen’s comments in Salon. “She hasn’t had to have any critical awareness.”

    But in other circles, the cultural outcry and Food Network’s decision seemed overblown.

    The Food Network’s Facebook page swelled with Deen supporters who disagreed with the punishment meted out by network executives.

    “Everybody in the South over 60 used the N-word at some time or the other in the past,” wrote Dick Jackson, a white man from Missouri.

    “No more ‘Chopped’ for me, and I suspect thousands like me,” he said, referring to a popular Food Network show.

    In the line Saturday, some pointed out that some African-Americans regularly used the word Ms. Deen had admitted to saying.

    “I don’t understand why some people can use it and others can’t,” said Rebecca Beckerwerth, 55, a North Carolina native who lives in Arizona and had made reservations at the restaurant Friday.

    Tyrone A. Forman, the director of the James Weldon Johnson Institute for the Study of Race and Difference at Emory University, said the use of derogatory words can mean different things to different groups.

    “People take a term that was a way to denigrate or hold people in bondage for the purpose of continuing their subordination and turn it around as a way to reclaim it,” he said.

    But that kind of subtlety is often lost in a discussion of race.

    “That nuance is too much for us,” Mr. Forman said. “We have a black president so we’re postracial, right? Someone uses the N-word? That’s racist. But the reality is there is a lot of gray.”

    Some who thought Ms. Deen’s words were hurtful gave her a pass for her apparent inability to articulate her evolution on race and her awkward apologies, which she offered in a series of three videos on Friday.

    “I was wrong, yes, I’ve worked hard, and I have made mistakes,” Ms. Deen said, “but that is no excuse and I offer my sincere apology to those that I have hurt, and I hope that you forgive me because this comes from the deepest part of my heart.”

    Lawanda Jones, 62, who drove two hours with some friends to celebrate birthdays at The Lady and Sons, said many people in the South have worked hard to overcome its racist past.

    “We have lived with each other and loved each other here for a long time,” said Mrs. Jones, who is white. “Sometimes I think there is more prejudice in the North than there is in the South.”

    Ms. Deen, who was born in Albany, Ga., in 1947, is simply a product of her era, she and others said.

    Ms. Deen’s great-grandfather had owned at least 30 slaves and she was born when Jim Crow laws meant cruel divisions even at the simplest levels. In Georgia, a black barber could be jailed for cutting a white person’s hair.

    Students of Southern culture say that people like Ms. Deen learned a quiet, crippling system of polite etiquette to smooth the edges of segregation. While overt shows of racism are rare, it still persists.

    “You still hear people talk that way if people think they are in a group of like-minded people,” said Richard Hattaway, 56, who lives just outside Savannah.

    He said his grandfather used the word often and without rancor in referring to African-Americans. But Mr. Hattaway’s own parents forbade its use. It is an evolution common to many white families in the South, he said.

    “She obviously didn’t get it but I think they are kind of blowing this up,” Mr. Hattaway said.

    He was particularly bothered by a commentator on a national news program who suggested that Ms. Deen should have atoned for the pain of slavery, given credit to African-Americans who helped influence some of the country food that made her famous and offered a stronger statement against racism.

    “She’s a cook,” Mr. Hattaway said. “She’s not a Harvard graduate.”

    Advertisements
     
  • RuralRebel 6:16 pm on June 22, 2013 Permalink | Reply  

    Feds want to force YOU to work with CRIMINALS! 

    Feds file civil rights suits on companies using criminal background checks for hires
    By Joseph Weber
    Published June 22, 2013

    FILE: June 11, 2012: People participate in a job fair in New York. N.Y. (REUTERS)
    The Obama administration is suing Dollar General and a BMW facility in South Carolina for the alleged unfair use of criminal background checks for job applicants, months after warning companies about how such screenings can discriminate against African Americas.
    The suits were filed June 11 by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which last year issued new guidelines that cautioned against rejecting minority applicants who have committed a crime and recommended businesses eliminate policies that “exclude people from employment based on a criminal record.”
    The suits have re-ignited concerns over such issues as potential federal overreach, the overlap of state and federal law and companies losing their rights to protect customers, workers and assets while trying to adhere to fair hiring practices.
    “Employers are unsettled over the EEOC’s questionable practices and its litigation tactics,” Kevin Connell, chairman of the Florida-based employment and tenant screening company AccuScreen.com, told FoxNews.com on Friday night. “I am fed up with the EEOC’s arrogance and their ‘sue first, ask questions later’ mentality. … The EEOC has already tried re-writing the rules that they are charged with enforcing, so we have the hiring police, the EEOC, writing, revising very confusing rules and regulations with their infamous (April 2012) update.”
    BMW spokesman Kenn Sparks said the company cannot comment on the specifics of pending litigation.
    “However, BMW believes that it has complied with the letter and spirit of the law and will defend itself against the EEOC’s allegations of race discrimination,” he said.
    Dollar General responded to the suit by saying the discount retailer prohibits discriminatory hiring in its employment practices but its criminal background checks are “structured to foster a safe and healthy environment for its employees, its customers, and to protect its assets in a lawful, reasonable and nondiscriminatory manner,” according to The Wall Street Journal.
    The EEOC alleges Dollar General violated the civil rights of two applicants. In the one case, the person allegedly was denied employment even though a felony conviction was incorrectly attributed to her. And the commission alleges BMW’s policy doesn’t consider the nature of the crimes or how old they are.
    EEOC alleges that when BMW required contract employees at the South Carolina plant to reapply for their jobs in 2008 a disproportionate percentage of those terminated were black, including some who had already worked for company contractors.
    “The BMW plant in South Carolina employs thousands of people, and providing a safe work environment is one of the company’s highest priorities,” Sparks said.
    All of the claimants are black, and both cases are filed in federal court, according to the EEOC.
    The EEOC said upon updating the policy that civil rights laws already prohibit different treatment for job applicants with different ethnic backgrounds but identical criminal histories.
    However, the update was issued out of concern that employers might disproportionately exclude minorities from getting hired because more African Americans and Hispanics are getting arrested and going to prison, according to the guideline report.
    While the percentage of working-age Americans with a criminal record has increased significantly over the past 20 years, African Americans and Hispanics are arrested two to three times as much compared with the rest of the U.S. population, according to a commission report at the time of the vote.
    The guideline, though not legal binding, direct employers to consider the crime, its relation to an applicant’s potential job and how much time has passed since the conviction. Employers should review each case individually and allow applicants to show why they should be hired despite a conviction, the guidelines state.
    Strong objections to the policy changes began when the five-member commission approved them last April.
    “The only real impact … will be to scare business owners from ever conducting criminal background checks,” said Commissioner Constance Barker, who cast the lone nay vote and was one of two George W. Bush appointees on the Democrat-controlled commission at the time.
    She also said the EEOC in making the change “far exceeded its authority.”
    Carol Miaskoff, the commission’s acting associate legal counsel, said the 4-1 vote proved, at least for the four commissioners voting yes, that they had not overstepped their authority.
    Because the commission is not a regulatory commission, the outcome of the court cases will be a key first test for whether the guidelines will have teeth.
    “The lawsuits are certainly a very public demonstration” of the EEOC’s decision to change the guidelines, Elizabeth Milito, of the National Federation of Independent Business, told FoxNews.com. “Background checks are essential to businesses large and small. And now they feel like they are in a no-win situation.”
    Milito lays out the dilemma in which a company does not run a criminal check and risks having a new hire with a violent criminal history assault a co-worker, or run a check and face a federal lawsuit.
    “People are confused, afraid and saying I could get sued either way,” she said.
    Milito did not want to speculate on the outcome of either case but argued the commission, not exactly awash in resources, clearly picked cases it thought it could win and “two very big employers.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/22/obama-administration-files-suits-against-businesses-using-criminal-background/#ixzz2WyDJVP4R

     
  • RuralRebel 4:55 pm on June 22, 2013 Permalink | Reply  

    Another…”Registered” SEX Offender kills….. 

    How many children will we allow to be raped and killed…because Lawyers and Judges have decided that registering a pervert…will somehow protect a community…well the fact that they are registered gives them MORE reason to kill their victims….no talking now…

    It is time to hold the lawyers and the judges who release these vermin into our communities responsible…  as an aside here…how to he@@ could the mother have allowed this person to take her child for a snack???

    Police: Body of Florida girl abducted from a Wal-Mart found at church; sex offender in custody
    Published June 22, 2013
    Associated Press
    JACKSONVILLE, Fla. – Authorities say the body of an 8-year-old Jacksonville girl abducted from a Wal-Mart has been found at a church.
    Charish Perriwinkle had been shopping with her mother Friday night at the northeast Florida store. Sgt. Lonnie Mills of the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office tells The Florida Times-Union (http://bit.ly/10GLksY ) that the pair was befriended by a man who offered to take Charish to buy a snack.
    The man is a registered sex offender. Sheriff’s office spokesman Shannon Hartley said Saturday that the 56-year-old man had been taken into custody after officers surrounded his van.
    The sheriff’s office Facebook page says authorities are beginning a murder investigation.
    About an hour later, the girl’s body was found at a church.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/22/police-body-florida-girl-abducted-from-wal-mart-found-at-church-sex-offender-in/#ixzz2WxsBfAlw

     
  • RuralRebel 4:37 pm on June 22, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Ameriphobia, Ameriphobic   

    ABC…the Ameriphobic! 

    ABC NEWS FAILS TO FIND HOMOPHOBES IN TEXAS

     
    by JOHN NOLTE 22 Jun 2013, 8:42 AM PDT 12POST A COMMENT

    ABC News displays its own kind of bigotry by setting up their hidden cameras at a famous steakhouse in Amarillo, Texas, to hunt for homophobes. Three child actors dressed as Boy Scouts sit at a community table. One comes out to his friends as gay, and ABC News is there to capture the Southern-fried bigotry.

    Except, all they find is loving Christianity:

    “What Would You Do?” is a regular ABC News feature and probably the most appalling kind of gotcha journalism allowed to broadcast these days. The segments are almost always politically correct (race, homophobia, Muslims, bullying, smoking ), but the targets are not the powerful, the targets instead are everyday American citizens.

    It is Candid Camera for smug, sanctimonious, left-wing elitists — Borat for The Awful.

    If anchor John Quinones had even a hint of moral courage, he would turn that hidden camera on his colleagues who work in the powerful world of media. Wouldn’t it be interesting to see what the media would do in certain situations involving conservatives, Christianity, Barack Obama, oh, and Southerners?

    But Quinones isn’t about afflicting the comfortable; he is a bullying cultural enforcer targeting the powerless.

    And remember, when James O’Keefe does this exact sort of the thing to The Powerful, he is pummeled by the media and is then put out of business by our government during all of Barack Obama’s re-election campaign.

     http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/06/22/ABC-News-Fails-To-Find-Homophobes-In-Texas

     
  • RuralRebel 12:02 pm on June 22, 2013 Permalink | Reply  

    How do we trust anyone??? 

    Corker Amendment Permanently Offers Citizenship to Those Overstaying Their Visa
    by Mike Flynn 21 Jun 2013, 3:35 PM

    Just as public anxiety about the weak border security provisions in the Senate immigration bill was building, GOP Sen. Bob Corker stepped forward with an amendment to “fix” the problem. The result of his efforts, however, has been a “christmas tree” measure, covering items far beyond border security. Breitbart News has learned exclusively that one provision of Corker’s amendment will allow workers who stay in the country past their visa will remain on the “path to citizenship.” 
    Even in the future, breaking the law won’t stop progress on what VP Joe Biden calls the “unfettered path” to citizenship. 

    The Corker Amendment ostensibly addresses measures to beef up border security. It, however, is also likely to be the last amendment considered on the immigration bill. As such, it has become a 1,000+ page amendment to supplant the current proposal and provide multiple new provisions. It has become the vehicle for ObamaCare 2.0.

    Buried within the text of the Amendment is a seemingly innocuous provision:

    (f) APPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN GROUNDS OF INADMISSIBILITY.—In determining an alien’s inadmissibility under this section, section 212(a)(9)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(9)(B)) shall not apply.

    What does that mean? 

    Current law states that those applying for green cards are ineligible if they are either “illegally present” at any point or overstay the terms of their work visa. Such an immigrant, in current law, would have to return to their home country and restart the immigration process. The Corker Amendment wipes away that enforcement mechanism. 

    In the current draft of the Corker Amendment, any worker in the country on a legal work visa for 10 years can get a green card, even if they overstay their visa. The Corker Amendment allows immigrants to break the law in the future and still be eligible for citizenship. It absolves prospective behavior, not simply past mistakes. 

    Prior to the Corker Amendment, the 4.5 million immigrants outside the country on a visa waiting-list were subject to laws restricting their presence in the US. The Gang Senate bill would offer them immediate green cards, as long as they hadn’t violated current US Law. 

    The language in the new Corker Amendment referenced above, however, would remove this restriction. They would become immediately eligible for a green card, even if they lived illegally in this country. The Corker Amendment wipes away any immigration enforcement. It is designed to maximize the number of individuals who qualify for citizenship. 

    The Corker Amendment is an obvious attempt by the DC GOP establishment to find a path to vote for the Senate bill. It throws a lot more money at the border, but it also weakens internal enforcement and controls. The Corker Amendment actually stipulates that, in perpetuity, you can break the law, overstay your visa, and still be eligible for citizenship. 

     
  • RuralRebel 11:57 am on June 22, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Food Network,   

    Honesty doesn’t pay with the leftist taliban “values” police 

    imageThis is what the leftists Taliban “my values” police can do to you

     

    Food Network Won’t Renew Paula Deen’s Contract After Racial Slur Dilemma BREAKING… The Food Network told Deadline just now that it would not renew Paula Deen’s contract when it expires at the end of June. The announcement came following the popular Southern cook’s no-show for an interview on The Today Show and release of a pair of videos apologizing for her use of racial slurs

    slurs…what to heck are slurs???? and N word…I don’t see where she admitted to that?

    including the N-word – stemming from a 2012 discrimination lawsuit  and specifically a May 17th deposition which came under the spotlight when it was filed Monday in U.S. District Court. This follows another Deen controversy when she revealed in 2012 that her high-suger, high-fat, high-calorie cooking had caused her to become a Type 2 diabetic – and then immediately began hawking drugs

    Hawking???guess this writer shows it’s bias…

    for the disease in profitable endorsement deals. But that backlash was nothing compared to the public outrage over this latest scandal. The Food Network did issue a statement on the matter early on, saying the channel “does not tolerate any form of discrimination and is a strong proponent of diversity and inclusion.

    What drivel….

     

    We will continue to monitor the situation.” But today the Food Network did not say why Deen was dropped. But a media frenzy mounted over the revelations in that deposition for the lawsuit filed by a former manager of one of Deen’s family restaurants. in the document, Deen admitted that in her past she used racial slurs in her family life and tolerated racist jokes in the workplace.

    .….TOLERATED!!!! racial jokes…in the workplace….and I bet she had DIVERSE employees..

    She has been scheduled for an exclusive on-camera “open and candid” interview with Today’s Matt Lauer widely prompted by NBC, but then begged off via a publicist citing exhaustion after she flew to NYC. The 66-year-old Savannah, Georgia, became an instant hit on The Food Network when she debuted since then she’s become an empire in publishing, on cable, and in food preparation. She even made The Foot Network into a family affair by installing her two sons into their own shows. But a social media-launched onslaught enveloped Deen over the deposition’s disclosures even though she said that she had not used the N-word in the restaurant

    What spin you use…. IN?

    and that she and her family did not tolerate prejudice. It seemed on the surface to be a survivable scandal – but it clearly wasn’t. Not even when today she posted an emotional 46-second video on YouTube filled with apologies. Then that video was taken down and replaced by a more measured response from her:

     

     
  • RuralRebel 12:15 am on June 22, 2013 Permalink | Reply  

    US Constitution ratified on this day in 1788 

    PHOTO: United States Constitution.
    Getty Images
     
     
    June 21

    1788: The U.S. Constitution Is Ratified

    Set with the task of creating the framework for government, the Constitutional Convention convened in Independence Hall with its leader, George Washington in 1787.

    After fierce debate, the document was signed by 38 of the 41 representatives from the states.

    In order for the new Constitution to go into effect, though, nine of the 13 states would have to approve it. While many states ratified it right away, several states held out because of lack of fundamental rights, such as for freedom of speech, religion and press.

    New Hampshire became the ninth state to approve, with the condition that these amendments would be proposed right away.

    The Constitution was ratified June 21, 1788, and the addition of those rights was fulfilled with the adoption of the Bill of Rights.

    Today, the U.S. Constitution is the oldest written governing document still operating in the world today.

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel