American Renaissance
Previous Story       Next Story       View Comments       Send This Page       Date Archives       Category Archives

Black Caucus Rejects Membership of White

More news stories on Anti-White Discrimination

Seth Blomeley, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Fayetteville), February 10, 2009

Rep. Richard Carroll of North Little Rock, Arkansas’ only Green Party legislator, asked to be a member of the Arkansas Black Legislative Caucus but was rejected because he’s white.

{snip}

Caucus Chairman Rep. Nancy Duffy Blount, D-Marianna, likened the situation to a man wanting to be part of the Legislative Women’s Caucus.

“With men, there are some things that men can understand and share and there are some things they can’t because they’re not women,” Blount said. “Same thing here.”

Carroll represents District 39 in southern and eastern North Little Rock. The historically Democratic district has a black population of 65 percent, according to 2000 census data used to draw the districts in 2001.

{snip}

Carroll, 52, said he wanted to be a caucus member to better represent and understand the views of his constituents. He said he could ask his wife, who is black, for her thoughts, but that she would only be one person.

{snip}

“You have to be an elected legislator and you have to be black,” Blount said.

{snip}

The latest bylaws for the caucus on file at the Bureau of Legislative Research give no race requirement for membership.

It says that the membership “shall consist of any current member of the Arkansas General Assembly who pays an annual membership.” But the bureau staff didn’t know whether those bylaws were current.

{snip}

She said she doesn’t have a copy of the bylaws but based her understanding of the membership requirements on “common sense” and from what caucus vice chairman, Sen. Tracy Steele, D-North Little Rock, told her the bylaws said. Steele later said he had “no idea” what the bylaws said about membership.

{snip}

Another caucus member, Sen. Joyce Elliott, D-Little Rock, said Carroll’s interest in the caucus is “commendable” but “since it’s called the ‘black caucus’ he can’t be a member. It is a caucus defined as being black. All discrimination is not bad. You can discriminate about whether you are going to drink four beers or 10 beers. I would say that’s good discrimination.”

Elliott said excluding whites is a legitimate form of discrimination because black legislators need to join with others of “common cause.”

{snip}

Rep. Darrin Williams, D-Little Rock, said, “Anyone who has the concerns of the caucus ought to be a member of the caucus.”

But he said he didn’t know whether Carroll should be a full member or have some sort of auxiliary membership instead.

{snip}

Original article

(Posted on February 11, 2009)

     Previous story       Next Story       Post a Comment     Send This Page      Search

Comments

1 — Alexandra wrote at 6:01 PM on February 11:

Yeah, not all discrimination is bad…unless you’re black and trying to get away with something. Isn’t that about how it goes?

2 — Tony Soprano wrote at 7:01 PM on February 11:

Does that also include Mulllatos who pass for white. How about Dravidians from south india who have really black skin. Does that mean I no longer need to be ashamed of myself for no voting for Barack Obama because he is black. Should I also quit the republican party because the new chairman is Black. FYI a few years ago a white congressman by the name of Cohen was also rejected by the united states congressional black caucus because he was white.

3 — Cogitator wrote at 7:15 PM on February 11:

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” George Orwell in Animal Farm.

A few years ago at the University of Florida, some students tried to start a White Student Union. They copied the charter of the Black Student Union, just changing black to white. You would have thought they advocated homicide. Blacks and the liberals went ballistic, and it was not allowed.

Orwell had it right.

4 — Anonymous wrote at 8:45 PM on February 11:

By way of extension, one could surmise that the black caucus members would approve of a white caucus that excludes blacks.

I wonder, just what do the black caucus members talk about that a white member wouldn’t understand? Or offended at?

5 — liberal on most issues but race wrote at 8:54 PM on February 11:

In Jared Taylor’s book Paved With Good Intentions there was an entire chapter about double standards. On issues of race in America you could easily fill an entire book, or for that matter fill an entire library with books about double standards concerning race relations.

Can you just imagine a White Legislative Caucus rejecting a black from membership? The Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, the NAACP, Southern Poverty Law Center, ADL, ACLU, et al., would all be lining up to sue the White Caucus into non-existence. Don’t hold your breath expecting any of said organizations to battle discrimination against whites. We all know they won’t lift a finger or spend a dime on this one. All we can expect is silence. How typical. Such sickening hypocrisy.

6 — danjack wrote at 10:37 PM on February 11:

this man carroll should sue and make a case of it. use the same methods they did. but this man carrol is just another sorry white, i am glad he got what he deserved for pandering to blacks all the time. maybe he has learned something here and will come out of his state of denial.

7 — Trisket wrote at 10:40 PM on February 11:

When you are dealing with low IQ’s, what do you expect?

8 — Awakened wrote at 10:50 PM on February 11:

“In Jared Taylor’s book Paved With Good Intentions there was an entire chapter about double standards. On issues of race in America you could easily fill an entire book, or for that matter fill an entire library with books about double standards concerning race relations.

Can you just imagine a White Legislative Caucus rejecting a black from membership? The Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, the NAACP, Southern Poverty Law Center, ADL, ACLU, et al., would all be lining up to sue the White Caucus into non-existence. Don’t hold your breath expecting any of said organizations to battle discrimination against whites. We all know they won’t lift a finger or spend a dime on this one. All we can expect is silence. How typical. Such sickening hypocrisy.”

Posted by liberal on most issues but race

- And you know what? You think it’s bad now. It’s gonna get worse. A whole lot worse. White’s are like the person getting backed into the corner by an attacker. It’s going to come to a point - whenever it comes - that we’re either going to have to fight or relinquish our existence.

9 — Michigan Patriot wrote at 12:28 AM on February 12:

” Racism ” at its hypocritical worse or is it best ? May the ” black caucus ” members eat copious amounts of George Wahington Carver’s peanut butter from the ” in the news ” Georgia plant.

10 — A Reader wrote at 1:08 AM on February 12:

We need to learn something from blacks.

Let’s not vote, under any circumstances, on any black candidate just because he is black and likely to join a group of other blacks in their anti-white “unity”.

11 — rational thinker wrote at 1:40 AM on February 12:

The black caucus is totally unnecassary and does very little benfit the black community let alone America as a whole. They complain and whine which will ultimately make blacks look bad infront of America. I wouldnt sweat it they are unimportant to their cause all they care about is make themselves look good while getting payed. Some members are good and dont hold prejuides but they still need to shut down that organization because it serves no purpose in the progress of our country.

I support blacks when their right but on this one they wrong.

12 — Anonymous wrote at 2:47 AM on February 12:

A better example cannot be had.

Clear evidence of the corruption and dishonesty of the judiciary.

13 — abc wrote at 5:44 AM on February 12:

A crowning acheivement in the career of a liberal politican, becoming a member of the Black Caucus, its a bizarro world.

14 — Anonymous wrote at 7:02 AM on February 12:

“…excluding whites is a legitimate form of discrimination because black legislators need to join with others of “common cause.””

Hmmm… Then I guess excluding blacks is a legitimate form of discrimination because White legislators need to join with others of “common cause.”

Oops! That’s Racist Hate Speech, isn’t it?

15 — HH wrote at 7:20 AM on February 12:

Those atonishingly candid quotes regarding discrimination by Sen. Elliot should be etched into the memory of every racially aware White person, and perhaps placed right on the AR home page for perpetual future reference! Hypocrisy just doesn’t get any more blatant and shameless than that!!

16 — Anonymous wrote at 7:39 AM on February 12:

“You can discriminate about whether you are going to drink four beers or 10 beers.”
- Sen. Joyce Elliott, D-Little Rock

Really? Wow. I’d love to hear her try to explain this. This one is as dumb as a brick.

(To discriminate is to make a distinction in favor of or against a person or thing on the basis of the group, class, or category to which the person or thing belongs rather than according to actual merit.)

- Realist in Atlanta

17 — T Rexx wrote at 8:16 AM on February 12:

Here is the problem (blacks) have not TAKEN anything from us, WE have served it up to them on a silver platter, WHY I am not sure but they do NOT have the power on their own to do this. So in my opinion we are getting exactly what we deserve with all these Invaders, Intruders and Free Loaders? Will we change? I really don’t know anymore? Is is too late for us to reclaim what is ours?

18 — Anonymous wrote at 10:11 AM on February 12:

“need to join with others of common cause”

Therein lies the great truth. What “common cause” do whites have left?

19 — Anonymous wrote at 11:32 AM on February 12:

THIS GOES ON WITH THE CBC as well , remember Pete Stark or Steve Cohen

20 — Anonymous wrote at 2:04 PM on February 12:

Blacks and the liberals went ballistic, and it was not allowed.

But whites need to fight it in court. By now whites should know the routine of blacks and liberals going balistic, shouting, rantiing. And whites should also be well acquainted with school officials immediately kowtowing to black anger.

My response would be so what if they go balistic. Let them engage in their balistic posturing, the real fight begins in court. You sue the university for violating your civil rights, for causing you emotional distress, for creating an environment of harrassment and intimidation, etc. You find a way to sue for $50 million. That will sober them up and make them rethink their position. And when you sue for $50 million that will get the attention of skilled lawyers who are looking for a case.

21 — Anonymous wrote at 3:53 PM on February 12:

Neat, if this form is discrimination is alright once again, I take it we can have white only clubs, bars and schools again? After all, the Black Caucus just banned whitey from joining their club.

22 — John wrote at 5:28 PM on February 12:

What I find most astonishing is that little passage about caucus chairwoman, one Nancy ‘Duffy’ Blount, being unable to find a copy of the bylaws regarding membership. Furthermore, the vice chairman Steele admitted “he had no idea” what the bylaws said about who is allowed to join and who is not. I am bewildered: Aren’t those two supposed to be the brains of the whole caucus operation?

What’s next? The caucus being able to find somebody who’s able to read its own bylaws?

23 — Anonymous wrote at 5:30 PM on February 12:

But he said he didn’t know whether Carroll should be a full member or have some sort of auxiliary membership instead.

Make him a second class member. Use him as a gopher when you need ice, beer, chips, etc. He wants to be a lapdog; i say let him be a lapdog. It would do whites good to know who he is serving.

24 — Sunder wrote at 6:34 PM on February 12:

Does anyone know the location of that definition of racism that basically states that whites, because they are in power, cannot be not racist, and that blacks, because they are not in power, can never be racist? I can’t remember where it is, and it would be good to have it posted here, because it is exactly the justification used for the many instances of this or that being allowed to be all black but forbidden to be all white.

25 — Too Late wrote at 4:34 PM on February 13:

There was a time when politicians, ministers, police, teachers, the military command and others were on the same page as far as preserving our way of life. For the last 50 or so years each of those groups have been picked off one by one and re-educated as to their role. We are told that this country no longer belongs to those of European heritage or Christian beliefs. What is the end game? We see it now. White people full of loathing for their own race and religious beliefs, horrible crimes committed against white people, their property, and heritage. So naturally, the use of phony quotas to push whites out of places of education, business, and politics is our just punishment. One only needs to look to Zimbabwe for our future where whites are deprived of their lives as if they are mere animals. To turn this around in the USA is almost impossible. At least one third to one half of our own race are our own worse enemies. Then there is the increasingly larger, non-white and ever hostile population that is coaxing us down the road to extinction. I see no way out. We have committed ourselves to the ash heap of history.


Home      Top      Previous story       Next Story      Send This Page      Search