Tag Archives: NAACP

For the climate: Tax on big Portland retailers will likely make November ballot

redistribution

They tried this tactic in 2016 and voters rejected it. But they want your money so try, try again.

From Oregon Live: Supporters of an initiative to increase business taxes to pay for eco-related causes say they have gathered enough signatures to put it on Portland ballots this November.

If they earn a spot on the ballot, supporters of the Portland Just Energy Transition Initiative, officially called PDX 04, would likely ignite a fierce and expensive campaign against businesses that would pay the tax.

The tax would apply a 1 percent surcharge to all Portland sales by businesses with at least $1 billion in annual revenue, at least $500,000 of which must be made within city limits. Money raised would be set aside for eco-friendly building and energy projects and job training for women and people of color.

Supporters say the tax would raise about $30 million annually. Most groceries and medicines would be exempt.

If approved, Portland businesses would be taxed under a mechanism similar to the one proposed in Measure 97. Oregon voters soundly rejected that measure, which proposed a statewide tax on certain business’ income, in 2016 — but only after the most expensive ballot measure campaign in state history.

It’s likely supporters of PDX 04 have gathered enough signatures. During a press conference on the steps of City Hall, sponsors of the initiative announced Thursday that they have collected more than 60,000 signatures — far more than the 34,156 required to get on the ballot.

Proponents said they are prepared for a hard-fought campaign and expressed their confidence that Portland’s electorate will vote in their favor. “We can do this,” the Rev E.D. Mondaine, a chief sponsor of the initiative, said to a cheering crowd outside City Hall.

Campaign finance records show tax supporters have raised more than $110,000, with contributions of $25,000 each from the Sierra Club and Green Advocacy Project, a group led by Michael Kieschnick (who has ties to George Soros), a California entrepreneur whose companies give a percentage of their earnings to progressive causes.

Opposite them is the anti-tax contingent of Portland’s business community, which was able to unite against Measure 97. It was during that campaign that Portland businesses and residents contributed more than $5.3 million to the successful campaign against the tax.

A new business-oriented group called Keep Portland Affordable has emerged to fight PDX 04. Its spokesman, Rick Thomas, said Thursday that local consumers will pay higher prices at checkout if the tax passes. Portland leaders should instead work to address the housing and homelessness crisis, Thomas said.

Keep Portland Affordable has opened a fundraising committee, registered at the address of the Oregon Business Council, an advocacy group for Oregon’s biggest employers. The committee lists a single $40,000 contribution filed Monday from the campaign that spent more than $26 million to defeat Measure 97.

According to a commentary on Street Root News:

The NAACP’s Portland branch, Native American Youth and Family Center, the Asian Pacific American Network of Oregon, Portland 350 and Verde all back the measure. 

JoAnn Hardesty, the local NAACP president and a candidate for City Council, said the intention is to create a response to climate change that’s rooted in fairness. Hardesty said the measure would tax only the largest of Portland’s box stores, those with global retail sales of $1 billion or more and Portland revenue of at least $500,000 per year.”

DCG

Rachel Dolezal faces felony charges for welfare fraud

Rachel Dolezal

A woman who lies about her race caught in more lies. Shocker, not.

From Yahoo (via HuffPo): Rachel Dolezal, the former president of NAACP’s Spokane, Washington, chapter who was outed as a white woman pretending to be black , is facing felony charges of welfare fraud, perjury and false verification for public assistance.

NBC News affiliate KHQ-TV was the first to report on the charges made this week against Dolezal. KREM 2, a CBS news affiliate, later confirmed the charges with the Spokane County prosecutor’s office. If convicted, Dolezal could face up to 15 years in prison.

Dolezal came to national attention in 2015 after her family revealed she’d been presenting herself as a black woman for years, even though they said she was born white. At the time, Dolezal was president of the Spokane chapter of the NAACP and worked as a part-time instructor of Africana studies at Eastern Washington University.

The revelation forced Dolezal to resign from the NAACP. She also stopped teaching at EWU. In 2016, Dolezal, a mother of three, officially changed her name to Nkechi Diallo, though she still uses her former name on her art website and social media pages.

Washington state’s Department of Social and Health Services began investigating Dolezal in March 2017 after learning that Dolezal, who was receiving public assistance from the department, had published a book.

The investigator found that Dolezal’s book publisher typically offers contracts that include payments of $10,000 to $20,000 ― but a review of her records revealed that she’d only reported an income of $300 per month in the form of gifts from friends, according to court documents published by KHQ-TV.

The Spokane County prosecutor’s office accused Dolezal of being overpaid a total of $8,847 for food assistance and child care assistance from the state’s Department of Social and Health Services between Aug. 1, 2015, and Nov. 30, 2017.

During that period, according to the investigation, an estimated $83,924.96 had been deposited into Dolezal’s bank account in monthly installments.

Despite the controversy surrounding her racial fabrication, Dolezal still identifies as a black woman. She wrote about her experience in an autobiography, In Full Color: Finding My Place in a Black and White World, and was featured in a Netflix documentary this year.

Critics have taken particular exception to Dolezal’s widespread media exposure in light of the ongoing racial injustices that black Americans experience day-today.

“We’ve probably all been guilty of sharing Dolezal’s story, or at least parts of it, at some point ― but we must recognize that it is distracting, counterproductive and unnecessary,” Lilly Workneh, then the senior editor of HuffPost Black Voices, wrote in March 2017. “Let’s return our focus to more pressing matters affecting marginalized, overlooked and misrepresented communities of color.”

See also:

DCG

Minnesota school district removes “To Kill a Mockingbird” to protect students’ dignity

to kill a mockingbird

If the n-word is so hurtful and oppressive then why do rap musicians continue to use it in their lyrics?

From Fox News: A Minnesota school district removed classic novels “To Kill a Mockingbird” and “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” from its required reading lists due to the novels’ use of a racial slur.

Michael Cary, the director of curriculum and instruction for Duluth School District, announced the two books were removed due to the n-word being used throughout both novels.

“We felt that we could still teach the same standards and expectations through other novels that didn’t require students to feel humiliated or marginalized by the use of racial slurs,” Cary told the Duluth News Tribune.

The two books would be available in school libraries if students were interested in reading them on their own, FOX 21 Online reported.

Cary said the books were removed in order to be “considerate of all of its students.”

Stephan Witherspoon, the president of NAACP’s local chapter, said he welcomed the decision. He called the novels “hurtful” that “use hurtful language that has oppressed the people for over 200 years.

“It’s wrong. There are a lot more authors out there with better literature that can do the same thing that does not degrade our people. I’m glad that they’re making the decision and it’s long overdue, like 20 years overdue,” Witherspoon said. “Let’s move forward and work together to make school work for all of our kids, not just some, all of them.”

Harper Lee’s Pulitzer Prize-winning novel is listed at No. 21 on the American Library Association’s most “banned or challenged books list in the last decade.” The novel, published in 1960, followed the adventures of a girl and her brother and the racial inequality that existed in their small Alabama town.

Last year, administrators at the Biloxi School District in Mississippi removed the book from the curriculum.

“The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn,” published in 1884 by Mark Twain, follows the adventures of a poor white boy and a slave. The novel also made the list of “most frequently challenged books” in 2015, The Washington Post reported. Both novels use the n-word throughout.

Cary said the school’s administrators and teachers were working on introducing new books to the curriculum. “The decision to protect the dignity of our students seemed like a reasonable and easy one to make that didn’t require teacher input. But in terms of making sure that we select excellent novels that serve the same purpose, that definitely needs teacher feedback and their help in making that decision,” Cary said.

DCG

Today’s outrage: Shooting range billboard says “the only time we take a knee…”

jersey shooting range billboard

Rather Annoying Communist Inspired Silencing Tactic.

From Philly.com: A  gun range in Camden County is resisting calls to take down two billboards that activists say aggravate racial tensions and mock NFL players who take a knee during the national anthem.

“It has absolutely nothing to do with race,” said Wesley Aducat, owner of the South Jersey Shooting Club in Winslow Township, which put up one of the billboards several weeks ago near Route 73 in Voorhees Township. The second appears on a digital sign near Routes 73 and 130 in Pennsauken. “It’s just support for our veterans.”

The signs say: “The only time we take a knee…” and show the silhouette of a person shooting a rifle, with the website of the club at the bottom.

Aducat said he supports the right to protest but doesn’t agree with kneeling during the anthem, particularly since many of the club’s members are veterans. He said he has no plans to remove the billboards.

That has upset the NAACP’s Camden County East chapter. It says the signs twist the message of kneeling, which is meant to bring attention to systemic racism and police brutality against people of color.

“We’re talking about police murdering unarmed black people,” NAACP member Keith Benson Sr. said. He called the signs racially divisive and has encouraged people to call the club to complain. “They deserve all the disrespect they’re going to get as a result of putting it up. But they probably thought they were clever. They probably thought they were strong, patriotic Americans.”

South Jersey Women for Progressive Change, a group that formed after the 2016 presidential election to empower women, has also told its members to call the club. Susan Druckenbrod, one of the group’s members, said she recently talked to an employee: “I told them the billboard was offensive, and he said, ‘That’s nice,’ and he hung up.”

Druckenbrod had one word for the billboards: “Racist.”

“We’re living in a very difficult time right now. People are trying to stand up for black and brown people to say, ‘Hey this is not right,’” she said. “That sign really is just mocking the idea of taking a knee.”

The shooting club, which says it is affiliated with the National Rifle Association and requires members to join the NRA, operates along Piney Hollow Road in Winslow, just off the Atlantic City Expressway. (Carmen Console, the club’s membership director, said he had nothing to do with the billboards, despite being named in social media posts as the person to call).

On the club’s Facebook page, people left comments both supporting (“Love the sign on 73!”) and criticizing the signs. One woman wrote, “I’m sure there’s a way to advertise responsible common sense firearm training and use that’s not offensive.”

Read the rest of the story here.

DCG

California NAACP wants ‘Star-Spangled Banner’ removed as America’s national anthem

Some blacks hate this country so much that it’s not enough that Confederate and patriotic monuments are taken down, and NFL players show their disrespect by taking-a-knee, the California chapter of NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) actually wants “The Star Spangled Banner” be removed as America’s national anthem.

Alexei Koseff reports for The (San Luis Obispo) Tribune, Nov. 7, 2017, that the California NAACP last week began circulating among California’s state legislators two resolutions that passed at its state conference in October:

  1. A resolution urging Congress to rescind “The Star-Spangled Banner” — “one of the most racist, pro-slavery, anti-black songs in the American lexicon” — as the national anthem.
  2. A second resolution calls on Congress to censure President Trump for suggesting NFL owners should fire any “son of a bitch” who doesn’t stand for the anthem, and to ask NFL teams find a spot for former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who some believe is blacklisted over having started the “take-a-knee” protest movement among professional athletes against alleged police brutality.

The objections to “The Star-Spangled Banner” are two:

  1. The song’s infrequently-sung third verse that blacks say celebrate the deaths of black American slaves who joined British troops during the War of 1812 to gain their freedom: “Their blood has wash’d out their foul footstep’s pollution. No refuge could save the hireling and slave from the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave”.
  2. Francis Scott Key, who wrote the lyrics of “The Star-Spangled Banner,” was a slave owner and fierce opponent of abolition who may have sparked the first race riot in Washington, D.C.

California NAACP President Alice Huffman, who drafted the NAACP’s resolutions, said: “We owe a lot of it to Kaepernick. I think all this controversy about the knee will go away once the song is removed.” She said Congress, which adopted “The Star-Spangled Banner” as the national anthem in 1931, should find a replacement that is not “another song that disenfranchises part of the American population.”

The California NAACP is looking for legislative sponsors for the resolutions. At least one lawmaker is already opposed. Assemblyman Travis Allen, a Huntington Beach Republican who is running for governor, said in a statement:

“Our flag and national anthem unite us as Americans. Protesting our flag and national anthem sows division and disrespects the diverse Americans who have proudly fought and died for our country. Real social change can only happen if we work together as Americans first.”

Here’s to you, NAACP!

H/t John Molloy and California Political Review.

See also:

~Eowyn

Seattle candidate accused of defrauding tax-payer funded democracy voucher program

sheley secrest

Sheley Secrest

The accusation is, of course, raaaaaaaaaacist.

From Seattle Times: Seattle police are investigating a City Council campaign after an allegation that it tried to defraud Seattle’s first-in-the-nation, taxpayer-funded “democracy voucher” program.

The police inquiry comes after a former campaign manager for Sheley Secrest went to city elections officials to accuse Secrest of putting her own money into the campaign and claiming it was donated by Seattle voters.

The Seattle Times reached five of those voters. All five said they did not give money to Secrest.

“No, I did not make a contribution,” said Jennifer Estroff. “I’m very confident of that.”

“I definitely did not give a donation,” said Robert Carson. “That’s definitely false.”

Seattle police Deputy Chief Carmen Best said that because of the investigation, “it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.”

Secrest, an attorney and vice president of the local NAACP chapter, finished sixth in the Aug. 1 primary, with 4.5 percent of the vote and did not advance to the fall election for City Council Position 8.

Secrest strongly denied the allegation Wednesday, dismissing it as a fabrication by her disgruntled former campaign manager Patrick Burke, whom she said she fired. “I know he’s upset because he was terminated,” she said.

She maintained the campaign did not take any shortcuts or violate any ethics. “Nothing has been filed against me. There have been no complaints,” she said.

She did not have an explanation for why five people listed as contributors on records submitted to the city elections office told The Seattle Times they did not donate to Secrest. “I have absolutely no clue,” she said. She said contributions were collected from all of them.

If the allegations are substantiated, they could deeply bruise Seattle’s novel program, approved by voters in 2015 to give grass-roots candidates a better chance against well-funded campaigns. At the same time, an investigation might show the program’s integrity.

The contributions at issue were crucial to Secrest’s efforts to qualify for potentially more than $100,000 in democracy vouchers. She did not qualify, in part, because some signatures submitted by the campaign were not from Seattle residents and some were not from registered voters, according to elections records.

The voucher program’s rules for qualifying require that a candidate collect 400 small contributions and corresponding signatures from Seattle voters. Elections officials then verify the signatures as a safeguard against fraudulent signatures, which were found in Portland’s public-financing system.

As Secrest got close to qualifying, she reported 56 signatures collected June 23 that might put her over the threshold. Each signature was accompanied by a reported $10 contribution on paperwork submitted to the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission. The commission oversees the voucher program.

Burke, the former campaign manager, alleges Secrest used $560 of her own money to account for the 56 contributions, substituting her own funds for those her campaign said came from Seattle voters. That would be illegal.

Burke said he was sitting in a car with Secrest on June 26 when she took out an envelope full of $20 bills. According to Burke, she said “that’s 560” and filled in a $10 contribution next to each of the 56 signatures. Burke said he asked Secrest where she got the money, and she replied, “off my credit card.”

“I categorically deny all of that,” Secrest said. “That never, ever took place … To say we did something dishonest, that’s offensive.”

She also said, “It’s a shame a white man would lead these attacks.”

Read the rest of the story here.

DCG

NAACP Issues Police Violence Travel Advisory

Who issued a Travel Advisory?

Did your “Spidey sense” tingle at that headline, too? See also:

Travel Advisory Issued for U.S. State of Missouri

11:18 GMT – Trending on EIN Newsdesk
NAACP officials say their recent travel advisory for Missouri is the first that the civil rights group has issued for any state. But the warning follows a recent trend of similar alerts issued by other groups for vulnerable people around the United States. The travel advisory, circulated in June by the Missouri NAACP and recently taken up by the national organization, comes after … (continue reading)


EfficientGov:
The FBI’s 10 Most Dangerous Cities

February 2, 2017 – by Megan Wells

Top 10 Most Dangerous U.S. Cities, by Violent Crimes:

1. St. Louis, Missouri

  • Population: 317,095
  • Total violent crime: 2,781
  • Violent crime rate per 100,000 inhabitants: 877.02

https://efficientgov.com/blog/2017/02/02/fbi-10-dangerous-cities/


About that police violence problem in Missouri

Missouri…  just the kind of place to want fewer police.
Hmmm…

The NAACP fails to acknowledge the fact that mob violence from any demographic, and the deliberate assassination of police officers would force police to act more quickly, sometimes with lethal force. Even if the mobs were a bunch of white Baby Boomers, the police would be forced to act. It’s the behavior, not the color.

PS: Who issues travel advisories?

We are accustomed to travel advisories issued by the State Department. Does the NAACP fancy itself now as a legitimate arm of the US government? The terms, “self-appointed” and “overreach,” come to mind.