Black Conservatives React to Obama Speech on Iraq

by Tom Remington

Washington, D.C. – With President Barack Obama’s announcement tonight of what he considers to be the end of combat operations in Iraq, members of the Project 21 black leadership network are speaking out about this administration’s approach to operations in the Iraq theater and the debt of gratitude owed to our nation’s armed forces.

Coby Dillard: “As a Navy veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom, no one is prouder than I to see our troops return from combat. However, President Obama made his speech tonight more about the fulfillment of a campaign promise than about the brave, honorable and victorious service of our fighting men and women. It is unfortunate to see him attempt to lay claim to a victory that his brief voting record in the Senate and remarks as a presidential candidate shows he didn’t support and whose end was negotiated by President George W. Bush — the same Bush whose policies and actions Obama routinely speaks of as ‘failed.’

“Instead, the victory belongs to the legacy of the 4,416 service members killed in Iraq and the millions more who served and returned safely home.

“Having secured a military victory in Iraq, our efforts there now turn to ensuring that a lasting peace is won. As the Iraqi government and people continue to take the lead on the road to prosperity and freedom, we as Americans should restate our commitment to this young democracy that many of our countrymen gave their lives to establish.” (Coby Dillard is a member of the Project 21 black leadership network, a tea party organizer in Hampton Roads, Virginia and a Navy veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom.)

Kevin Martin: “While President Obama says combat operation are officially ended in Iraq, this turn of phrase will not change the fact that the remaining American troops will continue to battle remaining rouge elements as Iraqi forces work to get a handle on things.

“At the time, Senator Obama — along with many of his liberal allies — claimed the surge of troops into Iraq would fail before it even started. Now that he commands these same troops, will he have the courage to admit he was wrong and apologize to those who have given their all to bring forth a mostly stable Iraq?

“President Obama needs to give credit where credit is due, and that goes to the fine men and women who put on the uniform and carry out their duty no matter the odds and no matter what burden they may face as politicians simply seek to score points with voters.” (Kevin Martin is a member of the Project 21 black leadership network, has participated in many pro-troop rallies in the Washington, DC area and is a Navy veteran formerly detailed to Bosnia.)

Black Conservatives Compare 1964 King March to 2010 Beck Event

by Tom Remington

Goals of Events Similar

Washington, D.C. – Black conservatives from the Project 21 leadership network do not see much of a difference in the goals of the August 28 “Restoring Honor” rally talk show host Glenn Beck is organizing at the Lincoln Memorial and the 1963 March on Washington that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. held there 47 years earlier.

Project 21 members contend that the stated purpose of the Beck event is along the same lines as the values of the 1963 rally and the alleged goals of Beck’s critics.

According to Beck’s wesite, the rally seeks to “celebrate America by honoring our heroes, our heritage and our future.” Political activism is being discouraged at the event. Beck, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, Dr. Alveda King (niece of Dr. King and a member of Project 21) and decorated Navy veteran Marcus Luttrell are listed among the scheduled speakers.

Because Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally takes place at the Lincoln Memorial on the 47th anniversary of the March on Washington, members of the establishment civil rights lobby are sharply critical. National Urban League president Marc Morial, for instance, calls the Beck event “insulting” and “deliberately trying to poke a stick in our eye.” Al Sharpton says Beck is trying to “hijack Dr. King’s dream.”

Project 21 member Coby Dillard said: “The dream of Dr. King — that every person be judged by their character rather than their color — is one of the tenets that makes our nation honorable in the minds of people around the world. Dr. King’s legacy is a gift to us all, and no one person or organization holds claim to his work and his message. I can think of no better way to honor him by renewing our shared commitment to uphold those principles that have held our country together throughout history.”

Dillard, who is planning to attend the Beck event, added: “As black conservatives, we will continue to work to restore honor not just across our nation but in our communities as well. We will not ‘drink from the cup of bitterness and hatred’ that those who seek to denigrate our efforts share. We will continue to stand with those across this country who realize, as Dr. King said, that our destinies and freedom are eternally bound together.”

Project 21 member Bishop Council Nedd II said: “Glenn Beck is organizing a nonpartisan event to highlight that ‘our freedom is possible only if we remain virtuous.’ Can’t we agree that virtue is something we need more of in America these days? Can’t we agree that any threat to our freedom is a clear and present danger to all of our civil rights? People such as Al Sharpton and Marc Morial would be wise to embrace these ideals, but their intolerance toward the messenger is creating the perception that they are against them.”

Project 21 Members Outraged By Rev. Fauntroy KKK Comments

by Tom Remington

Accuse Media of Biased Reporting About Conservative Grassroots

Washington, D.C. – In covering the Glenn Beck ‘Restoring Honor’ rally at the Lincoln Memorial, “the professional news media is doing what it does best: select and disseminate the news they agree with and tarnish those they don’t,” says Project 21′s Bob Parks.

Project 21 members are critical of extensive media coverage given to Rev. Walter Fauntroy, who represented the District of Columbia as a non-voting Delegate to Congress from 1971-1991 and who is a past chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, for comparing Tea Party attendees to KKK members.

Some Project 21 members point to an event at the National Press Club three weeks ago featuring prominent black conservatives who defended the Tea Party movement. “That press conference lasted close to two hours, yet one sentence by Tea Party Express activist Selena Owens was all that made the airwaves. Six seconds out of 111 minutes,” Parks said.

Counter that, says Park, against media coverage of a news conference held yesterday, also at the National Press Club. Rev. Fauntroy, a past chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, stated, “We are going to take on the barbarism of war, the decadence of racism, and the scourge of poverty, that the Ku Klux – I meant to say the Tea Party…. You all forgive me, but I – you have to use them interchangeably.”

Parks says, “ABC treats this as breaking news.”

Mychal Massie, Chairman of Project 21, adds: “I find it indefensible that the mainstream media gives the appearance of eagerly commenting the malevolent and divisive diatribes of Fauntroy and the like; but is glaringly absent in the reporting of conservative Americans of color.”

Lisa Fritsch, a national TV and radio commentator, writer, political strategist and Project 21 member, says Rev. Fauntroy’s comments are “evil and disgusting.” She adds, “Shame on the media and Rev. Fauntroy for comparing the tea party with the KKK. For the first time I am deeply ashamed of their tactics, not as a black person, but, in the name of humanity. To resort to inciting hatred and discord amongst our American brethren is an evil heartbreaking act. I don’t think even they understand the depths of the evil they are projecting…”

Massie is equally disgusted. “The words and complaints of Walter Fauntroy and company are the apoplectic knee-jerk hysteria of those seeking to foment discord where none exists. They are a disgraceful and morally opprobrious but obviously not out of character for either Fauntroy or his kind.” Massie challenged Fauntroy by inviting him to an open debate about the Beck rally, the comparisons made to the KKK and the allegation that Beck’s rally defames Dr. King. “Let’s see if he has the courage to defend his allegations,” Massie says.

Joe R. Hicks, the host of PJTV.com ‘s “The Hicks File” and a Project 21 member who once headed the Los Angeles office of the SCLC that Dr. King founded, doesn’t understand why some black leaders are so upset about the “Restoring Honor” rally. “Glenn Beck says his planned rally this Saturday on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, 47 years after Dr. King’s ‘I Have a Dream Speech,’ will not be about politics, but is being organized to ‘honor the troops and unite the American people under the principles of integrity and truth…’ If this is the case, why are some black leaders like the National Urban League’s Marc Morial and the Reverend Al Sharpton hopping mad over the event?”

Hicks continues, “And now the Reverend Walter Fauntroy, a former colleague of Dr. King, has crossed the line of sanity and equated Tea Party activists who may attend Beck’s rally with Ku Klux Klan. The attempt by liberal black leaders to paint those they disagree with as ‘racists’ has become a shop-worn, transparent tactic. But even more outrageous, the nation’s liberal mainstream media gleefully afforded Fauntroy, the buffoonish former elected official from Washington D.C., with a platform to make his cartoonish comments.”

Parks believes some reporters “want racial violence. It’ll be a great story; it’ll help their chosen political party, and maybe even discredit some conservative talkers.”

Ultimately, warns Parks, “the media elite are playing a very dangerous game just to further a political agenda… While they sit back in their make-up chairs, hoping for violent footage to codify their assertions of conservative racism, real people are at risk.”

Knee-Jerk Criticism From Civil Rights Lobby Hurts Race Relations

by Tom Remington

Black Conservatives Question Criticism of Beck Rally

Washington, D.C. – Members of the Project 21 black leadership network question the sincerity of establishment civil rights leaders opposing talk show host Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally at the Lincoln Memorial August 28.

That date is the 47th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech at the Lincoln Memorial.

“If this place and time is so sacred, why didn’t Al Sharpton or the NAACP already have a permit to use the Lincoln Memorial that day before Beck ever sought one?” asked Project 21 member Lisa Fritsch. “Beck’s critics will surely fail if their goal is simply to criticize him for celebrating spirituality and love of country. They may be envious of Beck and scratching their heads that they didn’t think of it first, and that’s something they’ll have to look into their own hearts to figure out.”

According its web site, Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally is intended to “celebrate America by honoring our heroes, our heritage and our future” and “pays tribute to America’s service personnel and other upstanding citizens who embody our nation’s founding principles of integrity, truth and honor.” Political signs are discouraged from the event. Beck, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, Dr. Alveda King (niece of Dr. King and a member of Project 21) and decorated Navy veteran Marcus Luttrell are among the scheduled speakers.

While Beck stresses a positive and apolitical message, the civil rights lobby apparently refuses to exhibit the tolerance it demands of others when it comes to the “Restore Honor” rally. This concerns many Project 21 members, who see these special interests as actually harming race relations in the long term.

“Liberals are quick to ask for tolerance when it comes to putting a permanent mosque next to Ground Zero, but they were quick to oppose Beck using the Lincoln Memorial on the King anniversary or possibly ever. It’s a double-standard,” said Project 21 member Jimmie Hollis, who plans to attend the August 28 event.

Project 21 fellow Deneen Borelli, who is also planning to be at the Beck event, added: “During these trying times of economic uncertainty and high unemployment, Americas need to rally behind core principles of truth and honor. We need to break away from the race-baiting antics and grand standing from Al Sharpton. Glenn Beck’s ‘Restoring Honor’ rally is a great way to bring freedom-loving Americans together to instill hope and promote our core values that made America great.”

Same Rights That Protected Civil Rights Leaders Also Protect Talk Show Host

by Tom Remington

Black Conservatives Support Glenn Beck Event on MLK Anniversary

Washington, D.C. – Black activists with the Project 21 leadership network support the right of talk show host Glenn Beck to hold his “Restoring Honor” rally at the Lincoln Memorial on August 28, 2010. Because Beck’s event takes place on the anniversary and at the location of Dr. Martin Luther King’s 1964 “March on Washington” rally, leaders of the establishment civil rights groups oppose the event.

“It’s my understanding from reading the Constitution that the First Amendment applies to all. And nothing better exemplified that than when Dr. King exercised his First Amendment rights nearly 50 years ago,” said Project 21 Chairman Mychal Massie. “This isn’t about Dr. King or the day and venue itself. It is about a contempt for the message. It is about those who trade on race as a means of notoriety and income fomenting discord for the sake of keeping those who are loathe to realize they are free imprisoned on a plantation of resentment and bitterness.”

Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally is described on its web site as a way to “celebrate America by honoring our heroes, our heritage and our future.” It also states that it is a “non-political event that pays tribute to America’s service personnel and other upstanding citizens who embody our nation’s founding principles of integrity, truth and honor.” Speakers include Beck, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, Dr. Alveda King (niece of Dr. King and a member of Project 21) and decorated Navy veteran Marcus Luttrell.

Among the restrictions on the event, Beck wants no political signs because “they may deter from the peaceful message we are bringing to Washington.”

Marc Morial of the National Urban League, a fierce critic of the Beck event, calls it “insulting” and a “hijacking of the imagery and symbolism of August 28 and the Lincoln Memorial.” Reverend Al Sharpton is planning a “Reclaim the Dream” rally and march that is supported by the NAACP and NUL that will end at the site of the under-construction King Memorial within several hundred feet of the Lincoln Memorial.

Project 21 members question the goals and wisdom of the Sharpton-led event.

“So, Al Sharpton essentially wants to crash Beck’s event. Has anyone noticed how the left loves to invite themselves to things for the sole purpose of smearing them? Just because the good reverend says he doesn’t plan on confrontation, would he explain the provocation of having his marchers be turned loose within yards of Beck’s rally?” asks Project 21 member Bob Parks. “You might want to ask the families of those who suffered — and died — in the 1991 Crown Heights riot or the Freddy’s Fashion Mart firebombing in Harlem in 1995 about how Sharpton’s brand of non-confrontation is working for them. The only reason for bringing marchers that close to the Glenn Beck rally is to start something.”

“Groups such as the National Urban League must realize that Martin Luther King had no monopoly on the public square — or the Lincoln Memorial. Holidays and special events are shared at various sites and on the same day,” said Project 21 member Emery McClendon. “Check the record. Find out that Glenn Beck is holding his event on this day to honor Dr. King as well as to remind all Americans that God alone can heal our Republic. It is an event aimed at restoring honor.”

The Accurate And Politically Incorrect Response To Building GZ Mosque

by Tom Remington

Obama Condemns Corporate Money While Using It To Promote Agenda

by Tom Remington

President Obama’s Radio Address “No Corporate Takeover of Our Democracy” Exposes President’s Double Standard Regarding Corporate Influence

Big Business Played a Major Role In Passing ObamaCare and the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade Legislation, says the Free Enterprise Project

Washington, D.C. – The Free Enterprise Project is charging President Obama with having a double standard on corporate money and influence.

“After using big business to advance his political agenda, suddenly President Obama is expressing concerns about corporate money in the political process. The fact is corporations played a crucial role in making ObamaCare law and getting the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill passed in the House of Representatives,” said Tom Borelli, Ph.D., director of the National Center for Public Policy Research‘s Free Enterprise Project.

During his radio address Saturday, President Obama expressed fear that the Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case would allow corporate special interests to spend unlimited amounts of money to sway elections. The president warned that companies could “hide behind a phony name like ‘Citizens for a Better Future,’” since a business entity paying for TV advertising is not required to disclose its name. The president added that the business could be a foreign corporation: “You don’t know if it’s BP,” said Obama.

Borelli notes that President Obama was the sole spokesperson in a television advertisement touting the benefits of his health care plan — an advertisement sponsored by Americans for Stable Quality Care, an organization funded by the drug industry and SEIU, the service employees’ union. In addition, Politico reported that PhRMA, the drug industry trade group, at one point planned to spend “as much as $150 million for advertising and grass-roots activity to help pass the president’s plan.”

“President Obama’s selective outrage about corporate influence is alarming. It’s ironic that the president himself appeared in a TV advertisement sponsored by what he now calls “shadowy groups with harmless-sounding names,” added Borelli.

“The President’s reference to BP is also disturbing. While Obama is trying to frighten the public by depicting BP as a ‘foreign-controlled corporation,’ he failed to mention the company was an ally in lobbying for his cherished cap-and-trade legislation. BP was a founding member of the United States Climate Action Partnership – a lobbying group that was largely responsible for passing the Waxman-Markey bill in the House of Representatives in 2009,” said Borelli.

Borelli notes that corporate interests such as General Electric have been a key ally of President Obama: “GE CEO Jeff Immelt has been a cheerleader for Obama’s political plan including the president’s green energy agenda. Immelt has partnered with Obama in seeking the so-called green energy economy and the company has aggressively lobbied for the president’s $ 787 billion stimulus plan. Hundreds of millions of dollars of the stimulus money was subsequently steered to GE’s customers. It’s disingenuous for the president to challenge corporate influence when he has actively partnered with big business when it served his political purposes,” added Borelli.

In a radio address last year, Obama cited the important role corporations were playing in pressing for cap-and-trade, saying, “Utility companies and corporate leaders are working with environmental advocates and labor leaders to find a way to reduce dependence on foreign oil, to fight climate change, and to create millions of new jobs in America.”

Borelli concludes, “Corporate special interests such as GE and the drug industry can be as much as a risk to liberty as progressive politicians. This is especially true when the agenda of big business aligns with progressive elected officials and labor unions. This is why Tea Party activists need to challenge politicians and business leaders.”

EEOC Warns Employers: If You Don’t Want to Hire Felons, You Need a Good Reason

by Tom Remington

Washington, D.C. – The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is warning employers that it is illegal to use a prospective employee’s past conviction records, even for serious felonies, as an “absolute measure” as to whether they should be hired because this “could limit the employment opportunities of some protected groups.”

This is, the EEOC says, because blacks and Hispanics are over-represented among felons.

“Blacks and Hispanics also have an unfortunate higher high school and college dropout rates than whites and Asians — surely this could be determined to be a disparate impact. Does that mean the EEOC could mandate that employers cannot consider an applicant’s education? Where will it stop?” asks Justin Danhof, general counsel of the National Center for Public Policy Research. “It is unfortunate that the EEOC is placing outdated racial politics ahead of the American workforce at a time when employers should be encouraged to hire, but this mentality will likely make businesses think twice about plans for expansion. Employers should be free to consider the full content of an applicant’s character when making hiring decisions.”

“Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex and national origin,” said Amy Ridenour, president of the National Center for Public Policy Research. “It does not ban discrimination based on character. Furthermore, it’s odd that an agency charged with stopping racism and sexism in hiring has adopted a policy that will help more white males than members of any other group.”

“The EEOC should not be trying to micromanage private hiring decisions beyond the authority given to it by Congress,” added Ridenour, “which this wrongheaded policy surely does. And pity the poor employer, fearful on the one hand of being charged with racism if he does not hire a felon — white though that felon might be — but fearful on the other of being sued by his other employees, should that felon commit a crime at the workplace that harms them. Certainly employers should be permitted to hire felons; even applauded when appropriate, but they should not be made to feel they could be asked to defend themselves in court if they do not.”

Federal Agency Thinks Background Checks Can Discriminate Against Blacks, Hispanics

by Tom Remington

Convicts as a Protected Class?

Washington, D.C. – Attorneys at the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission believe new technology that makes it easier for employers to check the criminal and credit histories of applicants also makes it harder for blacks and Hispanics to find jobs. Members of the Project 21 black leadership network fault this position, noting that it unjustly interferes with the ability of employers to build a trusted and coherent workforce.

“Background and credit checks are legitimate hiring and recruitment tools,” said Project 21 member Horace Cooper, a former visiting assistant professor of law at the George Mason University School of Law. “There is no federal law making a refusal to hire convicted felons a crime, and felon status is not a protected class under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Especially in the midst of a recession, suits like these — which charge racial discrimination — falsely serve to only make hiring decisions unnecessarily harder and lessen the impact of real allegations of racism.”

Adrienne Hudson filed a lawsuit against First Transit after she was fired from a bus driver position with the company. She alleges her firing was due to her prior conviction for welfare fraud, and that First Transit discriminates against blacks and Hispanics when it does background checks because these minority groups have higher rates of arrest and convictions than whites. First Transit representatives would not comment.

The AP reports the EEOC believes background checks can have a disparate impact on blacks and Hispanics, and quotes EEOC assistant legal counsel Carol Miaskoff saying “the problem is snowballing because of the technology” that is making it easier to do such checks.

Last fall, the EEOC filed a class-action lawsuit against the Freeman Companies event-planning company that claimed the company’s background checks discriminated against blacks, Hispanics and men.

“Once again, the liberal legal theory of ‘disparate impact’ is trotted out. This time, it is by the bean-counters at EEOC. They are now arguing that if an employer conducts background checks on employees they are, in effect, discriminating against black and Latino applicants. But shouldn’t employers have the right to set standards for those they seek to employ and reject those who have criminal records?” said Project 21 member Joe Hicks, host of “The Hicks File” at PJTV.com “Americans strongly believe in the concept of redemption, but there must be consequences for illegal behavior. To claim otherwise suggests that employers should ignore employment standards and simply hire people based on some ideological concept of ‘social justice.’ The notion that criminal background checks disadvantage blacks and Latinos is based in the reality that blacks are 38 percent of the prison population but only 12 percent of the general population. This shouldn’t be used as an argument for eliminating employment standards, but a reason to understand and combat the dysfunction and violent criminality that’s an all-too-real part of poor black urban life.”

NAACP Asked to Fulfill Pledge to Repudiate Racial Slurs Against Black Conservative

by Tom Remington

Washington, D.C. – The NAACP is being called upon to make good on its pledge to repudiate slurs made against Project 21 Fellow Deneen Borelli simply because she is an outspoken black female conservative.

The pledge was made by NAACP Senior Vice President Hilary Shelton on the July 17 edition of “Geraldo At Large” on the Fox News Channel.

During the broadcast, Borelli asked Shelton if the NAACP would issue a statement condemning those who expose her to race-based abuse:

“Borelli: “I’m a black, female conservative. I’m often targeted by individuals who call me all kinds of names: racist, an Uncle Tom, a traitor – you name it. I’d like to know if the NAACP will issue a statement condemning those individuals who were doing that.”

Shelton: “Why, yes, ma’am… Just give us some details… The very broad answer is… yes, we repudiate anybody calling you a bad name in the political arena.”"

Shelton added that the NAACP repudiated past assaults on Bush Administration cabinet members General Colin Powell and Dr. Condoleezza Rice.

In 2004, then- NAACP President and CEO Kweisi Mfume said, “attacks on Rice by the radio host and political cartoonists who use stereotypes and racial caricatures are just as bad as those who hide under sheets and burn crosses. This is something the NAACP has fought against for more than 95 years and something we will continue to oppose.”

Mfume was understood to be referring to WTDY-Madison radio host John “Sly” Sylvester calling Rice “Aunt Jemima,” cartoonist Ted Rall calling Rice President Bush’s “house nigga,” cartoonist Garry Trudeau calling her “Brown Sugar” and cartoonists Pat Oliphant and Jeff Danziger drawing her with accentuated black features and a rural dialect. Sylvester also called Colin Powell “Uncle Tom” on the air.

In response to Shelton’s request to Borelli for details, a letter from Borelli was delivered to Shelton’s office on July 28. In it, Borelli described some racist statements made against her and other Project 21 members and attached a packet of e-mails and postings on the Internet in which she and other Project 21 members have been called “Uncle Tom,” “Auntie Tom,” “Sambo,” “house negro,” “treasonous,” “black tea-bagging ni**er,” “sell out,” “retarded,” “hypocritical,” “coon,” “Stepin Fetchit,” and a “modern day mammy,” “despicable piece of garbage,” “black cancer” and “black bitch.”

Among the samples of emails sent to Borelli and forwarded to Shelton was this:

“You faggot niggas need to be lynched by the Klan. I pray a nightrider strings up every one of you no count good for nothing niggas, it would serve you right for trying to think that these crackers love you. I hate a house nigga worse than I do a Klansman. Rot in hell you scurvy dogs. I would laugh to see you body strung up. It would save us real brothers the time and trouble to do it.”

Borelli also told Shelton:

“As we both seek a more civil debate, I am sure you are as appalled by these statements and the many others like them as I am. And I once again want to thank you for your on-air agreement on July 17 that the NAACP will specifically condemn the slurs made against me because I am an outspoken black conservative woman. We very much appreciate having the weight and prestige of the NAACP behind an effort to stop this unwarranted, unfair and uncivil treatment of people based solely on their political beliefs and skin color.”

Project 21 is looking forward to the statement of repudiation by the NAACP.

Next Page »