[mpen-dayton4] FW: "Press Release in Support of Cincinnati Police Officer Kim" & FW: "Homegrown Extremists Tied to Deadlier Toll Than Jihadists in U.S. Since 9/11" & "SCOTUS ruling on ACA" and more

FYI.   Best, Munsup

P.S. "He who dares not offend cannot be honest" - Thomas Paine
P.P.S. Please reply back to me with 'unsubscribe' on the subject line if you no longer want to receive my e-Newsletters. The convenient link to unsubscribe is no longer available due to security reasons.

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

Press Release in Support of Cincinnati Police Officer Kim

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

·         FW: SPLC exposes police officers who were members of hate group

·         FW: Hyundai: Protect the Workers in your Supply Chain

·         FW: Homegrown Extremists Tied to Deadlier Toll Than Jihadists in U.S. Since 9/11

·         FW: SCOTUS ruling on ACA

·         FW: The Medicare solution  &  The last video in our series

·         FW: Some Republicans Are Cowards on Race

·         FW: The Confederate Flag & the Cowardly GOP Candidates

·         FW: A reader's response to "FW: "The Confederate flag in every form must come down"

·         FW: Walmartization of public education

·         FW: No Sanctuary in Charleston

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

From: Xuan, Tessa
Subject: Press Release in Support of Cincinnati Police Officer Kim

PRESS RELEASE (For Immediate Release)
(See the attached for the list of endorsing organizations and their representative!)

Contacts:
Hyunjin Lee, hyunjinlee4@gmail.com, (513) 488-4796
Gwendolyn Yip, Gwendolynyip@aol.com, (404) 769-7364
Alex Song, Alexksong@gmail.com, (909) 455-6064
Tessa Xuan, Tessa.xuan@gmail.com, (513) 515-6241

Statement in Support of Officer Sonny Kim

We, the undersigned representatives of a broad spectrum of Asian American organizations in Southwest Ohio, hereby convey our heartfelt condolences to the family, friends, and colleagues of Cincinnati Police Officer Sonny Kim.

Officer Kim made the ultimate sacrifice in serving his community. The outpouring of support from the public reveals a great deal about his character, as well as the character of Greater Cincinnati as a whole. He was a Cincinnatian through and through. He was also a respected member of the Asian American community.

We, as Asian Americans living in Greater Cincinnati, are proud to have considered him one of our own. We mourn this tragic loss and stand together to honor his life, and thank him for his dedicated service in protecting our great city. A hero like Officer Kim deserves no less. He serves as a role model not only for Asian Americans, but for all Americans.

 

 

From: Southern Poverty Law Center; FIGHTING HATE // TEACHING TOLERANCE // SEEKING JUSTICE
Subject: SPLC exposes police officers who were members of hate group

SPLC prompts removal of Alabama police officers with hate group ties

Two lieutenants were forced out of the Anniston Police Department in Alabama after we exposed their membership in the white supremacist League of the South. We uncovered a video showing one of the officers speaking at the group's national convention two years ago, saying he would "choose the League" if ever forced to pick between his job and the hate group. READ MORE

Share:     

 

 

From: MARGARET PETERS
Subject: Hyundai: Protect the Workers in your Supply Chain

Hi, I signed a petition to David Zuchowski, President and CEO of Hyundai Motor America which says:

"We urge Hyundai to acknowledge there are ongoing safety issues in the Selma plant that makes their foam seat cushions, and insist that Lear work to fix the problems, not silence the workers who raised these concerns."

Will you sign this petition? Click here: http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/hyundai-protect-the-workers?source=s.icn.em.mt&r_by=315978 Thanks!

 

 

From: NYTimes.com
Subject: Today's Headlines: Homegrown Extremists Tied to Deadlier Toll Than Jihadists in U.S. Since 9/11

Homegrown Extremists Tied to Deadlier Toll
Than Jihadists in U.S. Since 9/11

By SCOTT SHANEJUNE 24, 2015

A count by a research center found that non-Muslim extremists have been far more lethal than
Islamic militants on American soil since Sept. 11, 2001, running counter to public perception.



Police officers outside a Walmart in Las Vegas after a shooting last year involving suspects with antigovernment and
neo-Nazi views. Since Sept. 11, 2001, 48 people in the United States have been killed by non-Muslim extremists,
compared with 26 by self-proclaimed jihadists, according to the research center New America.
Credit Steve Marcus/Reuters

WASHINGTON — In the 14 years since Al Qaeda carried out attacks on New York and the Pentagon, extremists have regularly executed smaller lethal assaults in the United States, explaining their motives in online manifestoes or social media rants.

But the breakdown of extremist ideologies behind those attacks may come as a surprise. Since Sept. 11, 2001, nearly twice as many people have been killed by white supremacists, antigovernment fanatics and other non-Muslim extremists than by radical Muslims: 48 have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, including the recent mass killing in Charleston, S.C., compared with 26 by self-proclaimed jihadists, according to a count by New America, a Washington research center.

The slaying of nine African-Americans in a Charleston church last week, with an avowed white supremacist charged with their murders, was a particularly savage case.

But it is only the latest in a string of lethal attacks by people espousing racial hatred, hostility to government and theories such as those of the "sovereign citizen" movement, which denies the legitimacy of most statutory law. The assaults have taken the lives of police officers, members of racial or religious minorities and random civilians.

Non-Muslim extremists have carried out 19 such attacks since Sept. 11, according to the latest count, compiled by David Sterman, a New America program associate, and overseen by Peter Bergen, a terrorism expert. By comparison, seven lethal attacks by Islamic militants have taken place in the same period.

If such numbers are new to the public, they are familiar to police officers. A survey to be published this week asked 382 police and sheriff's departments nationwide to rank the three biggest threats from violent extremism in their jurisdiction. About 74 percent listed antigovernment violence, while 39 percent listed "Al Qaeda-inspired" violence, according to the researchers, Charles Kurzman of the University of North Carolina and David Schanzer of Duke University.

Homegrown Terrorism

In the United States since Sept. 11, terrorist attacks by antigovernment, racist and other nonjihadist extremists have killed nearly twice as many people as those by Islamic jihadists.

"Law enforcement agencies around the country have told us the threat from Muslim extremists is not as great as the threat from right-wing extremists," said Dr. Kurzman, whose study is to be published by the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security and the Police Executive Research Forum.

John G. Horgan, who studies terrorism at the University of Massachusetts, Lowell, said the mismatch between public perceptions and actual cases had become steadily more obvious to scholars.

"There's an acceptance now of the idea that the threat from jihadi terrorism in the United States has been overblown," Dr. Horgan said. "And there's a belief that the threat of right-wing, antigovernment violence has been underestimated."

Counting terrorism cases is a subjective enterprise, relying on shifting definitions and judgment calls.

If terrorism is defined as ideological violence, for instance, should an attacker who has merely ranted about religion, politics or race be considered a terrorist? A man in Chapel Hill, N.C., who was charged with fatally shooting three young Muslim neighbors had posted angry critiques of religion, but he also had a history of outbursts over parking issues. (New America does not include this attack in its count.)

Likewise, what about mass killings in which no ideological motive is evident, such as those at a Colorado movie theater and a Connecticut elementary school in 2012? The criteria used by New America and most other research groups exclude such attacks, which have cost more lives than those clearly tied to ideology.

Some killings by non-Muslims that most experts would categorize as terrorism have drawn only fleeting news media coverage, never jelling in the public memory. But to revisit some of the episodes is to wonder why.

In 2012, a neo-Nazi named Wade Michael Page entered a Sikh temple in Wisconsin and opened fire, killing six people and seriously wounding three others. Mr. Page, who died at the scene, was a member of a white supremacist group called the Northern Hammerskins.

In another case, in June 2014, Jerad and Amanda Miller, a married couple with radical antigovernment views, entered a Las Vegas pizza restaurant and fatally shot two police officers who were eating lunch. On the bodies, they left a swastika, a flag inscribed with the slogan "Don't tread on me" and a note saying, "This is the start of the revolution." Then they killed a third person in a nearby Walmart.

And, as in the case of jihadist plots, there have been sobering close calls. In November 2014 in Austin, Tex., a man named Larry McQuilliams fired more than 100 rounds at government buildings that included the Police Headquarters and the Mexican Consulate. Remarkably, his shooting spree hit no one, and he was killed by an officer before he could try to detonate propane cylinders he drove to the scene.

Some Muslim advocates complain that when the perpetrator of an attack is not Muslim, news media commentators quickly focus on the question of mental illness. "With non-Muslims, the media bends over backward to identify some psychological traits that may have pushed them over the edge," said Abdul Cader Asmal, a retired physician and a longtime spokesman for Muslims in Boston. "Whereas if it's a Muslim, the assumption is that they must have done it because of their religion."

On several occasions since President Obama took office, efforts by government agencies to conduct research on right-wing extremism have run into resistance from Republicans, who suspected an attempt to smear conservatives.

A 2009 report by the Department of Homeland Security, which warned that an ailing economy and the election of the first black president might prompt a violent reaction from white supremacists, was withdrawn in the face of conservative criticism. Its main author, Daryl Johnson, later accused the department of "gutting" its staffing for such research.

William Braniff, the executive director of the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism at the University of Maryland, said the outsize fear of jihadist violence reflected memories of Sept. 11, the daunting scale of sectarian conflict overseas and wariness of a strain of Islam that seems alien to many Americans.

"We understand white supremacists," he said. "We don't really feel like we understand Al Qaeda, which seems too complex and foreign to grasp."

The contentious question of biased perceptions of terrorist threats dates back at least two decades, to the truck bombing that tore apart the federal building in Oklahoma City in April 1995. Some early news media speculation about the attack assumed that it had been carried out by Muslim militants. The arrest of Timothy J. McVeigh, an antigovernment extremist, quickly put an end to such theories.

The bombing, which killed 168 people, including 19 children, remains the second-deadliest terrorist attack in American history, though its toll was dwarfed by the roughly 3,000 killed on Sept 11.

"If there's one lesson we seem to have forgotten 20 years after Oklahoma City, it's that extremist violence comes in all shapes and sizes," said Dr. Horgan, the University of Massachusetts scholar. "And very often, it comes from someplace you're least suspecting."

 

 

From: Donald Nguyen
Subject: SCOTUS ruling on ACA

What a day for a huge celebration for Americans and patients. I was behind the time a tad since I was seeing patients in clinic early today, and then, the news broke and SCOTUS ruled amazingly 6-3 for the provision of the ACA that provides tax credits or subsidies to the working poor American families in ALL states, irrespective of whether the health market places were run or set up by the state or federal government. SCOTUS now has spoken twice! Both, in favor of the ACA.

I have submitted the following Op-Ed piece to the Dayton Daily News and so enjoy! But, make no mistake, Ohioans can now stay with their insurance plan and not worry about losing their subsidies, but a larger battle looms in the state budget as the Republican House and Senate try to introduce the most despicable rules pertaining to Medicaid patients: premiums, co-pays and penalties. For Medicaid patients, they are asked to have more skin, or in this case, more flesh and bones in the game. Shame on Mr. Butler, House Representative, (R) - from Oakwood. I will have more on this topic at a later date, but, today, we celebrate the biggest victory, yet, of the Affordable Care Act!

Op-Ed Article: THE US SUPREME COURT RULED
IN FAVOR OF PATIENTS IN KING V. BURWELL

On June 25th, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled 6-3 on King v. Burwell and emphatically declared the Affordable Care Act is here to stay. It upheld the provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that provides subsidies to millions of Americans in the 36 states, including Ohio, where the Health Insurance Marketplaces are set up by the federal government.

Why are doctors involved in this fight? Doctors are in the front line of fire and we care that patients have coverage and access to care. For those who do not have health insurance through their workplace or through Medicare, the ACA provides two options. There is Medicaid for the very lowest income citizens and there are competing private health insurance plans available for purchase from health insurance exchanges, also called marketplaces. Thanks to the ACA, last year 8.8 million Americans received health coverage through health exchanges and over 16.4 million remarkably have signed up as of 2015.  A key strategy of the ACA's goal of expanding coverage, especially to the working poor, is to use a sliding scale to  subsidize the cost of premiums for the private plans purchased through the exchanges.  

In King v. Burwell, King claimed that the ACA requires such subsidies only in state health care exchanges. Thirty six states, including Ohio, declined to set up their own exchanges and instead decided to let the federal government set up exchanges for their states. Most legal experts agreed that King v. Burwell is about semantics.  It is clear from the rest of the ACA that the law means to provide subsidies to Americans in states such as Ohio where the exchange was created and is run by the federal government as well as to provide subsidies in states such as Kentucky that set up their own exchanges. This case is about focusing on a few words in one sentence of the law and ignoring the clear intent of the rest of the law. This case is about hurting those who need health care and who would lose their health insurance without a tax credit. Because King v. Burwell was not upheld by the Supreme Court, over 8 million Americans can stay with their insurance and 10,000 would not have to die annually because of lack of health coverage.

Our country has struggled for over 100 years to find a way to make sure that patients don't die because they don't have enough money. We have made progress we can all be proud of. In 1965, the Medicare and Medicaid Act was signed into law and thousands of lives are saved every year because of it. On March 23, 2010, the landmark ACA was passed. For the first time in American history, our country can say that it will no longer accept anyone dying for lack of money. The 6-3 ruling confirmed and reaffirmed that the ACA is about improving health and saving lives, not to worsen or destroy them. The SCOTUS has now spoken twice! The ACA is the law of the land, and it is here to stay. So, let's stop the frivolous repeal attempts, let's work on expanding Medicaid to the rest of the nation, and build on the success of countless benefits and protections of millions of Americans.

As a physician, I am proud of my profession and thank you to the US Supreme Court for siding with my patients.

Donald Nguyen, MD
Beavercreek, Ohio
Ohio State Co-Director for Doctors for America
Private Pediatric Urologist in Dayton, Guest Columnist

 

 

From: Robert Reich via MoveOn.org Civic Action
Subject: The Medicare solution  &  The last video in our series

Every single thing we care about depends on us getting big money out of politics. Now.

The Medicare solution

The best shot we've got at saving our broken health care system is to expand Medicare for all Americans.

But first, we have to make something very clear: Medicare critics are wrong. They say that Medicare is a problem. In fact, Medicare is more efficient than private health insurance. It's the solution.

Please watch and share The Medicare Solution to spread the word about what we can and must do to secure Medicare for all.

The Medicare Solution is the latest video in the "Big Picture" series I'm working on with MoveOn.

Here's the bottom line: Allowing all Americans to buy into Medicare through the exchanges set up by the Affordable Care Act would strengthen Medicare and improve American health care, saving all of us money while boosting health outcomes. If you're like me and you're ready to reject partisan lies and tackle rising health care costs head-on, please watch and share The Medicare Solution now.

The last video in our series

Big News: Tuesday night, I'll be on a special call with Anna Galland and fellow MoveOn members like you to talk about what's next for The Big Picture: Ideas to Save the Economy and our upcoming national teach-ins. Click here for information and to RSVP.

Now for our last video in this series!

Saving our economy—and, in fact, our democracy—rests on our ability to get big money out of politics.

Big money in politics affects everything we care about—from forcing polluters to pay for poisoning our environment to securing debt-free higher education to busting up the biggest banks. Everything.

The 2016 elections are gearing up to be the most expensive in history. Candidates from both political parties and at all levels—national, state, and increasingly even local—will be dependent on wealthy donors to rise above the fray. And even candidates with good intentions will have to repay campaign donations with access and favors. It's a broken system that needs fixing. And we must move quickly.

Will you watch and share Get Big Money Out of Politics for a short list of what we can and must do right now to save our democracy and our economy? 

Get Big Money Out of Politics is incredibly timely: President Obama is considering an executive order that would require federal contractors to fully disclose political spending—an idea I discuss in the video and one that has spurred MoveOn member action. Just this week, 26 senators and 104 representatives sent a letter to the president urging his immediate action.

Look, this one is a biggie. If you're like me and you're ready to elevate the growing call to get big money out of politics, please watch and share this video right now.

P.S. Don't forget to RSVP for the call on Tuesday, June 30. Space is limited, so please sign up right away.
Want to support our work? We're entirely funded by our 8 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Start a monthly donation here or chip in a one-time donation here.

 

 

From: Raynard Jackson
Subject: Some Republicans Are Cowards on Race

Some Republicans Are Cowards on Race

On June 23, 2015; By Raynard Jackson, Columnist

Of February 18, 2009, then U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder gave a Black History Month speech to the employees at the Department of Justice.  He said in part, "Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards."

I think the same thing can and should be said about our Republican candidates for president.  These candidates are too busy listening to their all white staffs and all white pollsters who tell them not to come out and say remove the confederate flag from flying in South Carolina for fear of angering Southern white folk.  And they wonder why Blacks want nothing to do with this party or their candidacies?

I am thoroughly embarrassed by their total lack of conviction.  These same candidates that say flying the confederate flag is a state issue want states to have no say so on an issue like abortion.  Are they really for states' rights or just when they don't want to take a principled stand on an issue?

If someone refuses to support your candidacy because you are trying to move America beyond its racist past; should that not be a badge of honor for you?

But these candidates are giving all their attention to a shrinking base (white voters), versus giving some of their attention to a growing base (Black voters).

I am not personally bothered by the flying of the flag at all.  Support for the flag does not automatically equate to being a racist or supporting the enslavement of Blacks. 

I think Blacks have more important issues to deal with, but the optics are horrible for Republicans simply because over the past 50 years Republicans have absolutely no standing within the Black community.

I am equally as embarrassed by Black Republicans on issues dealing with race.  Of the few Black staffers working throughout our party, most are totally incompetent in dealing with these issues.  You rarely, if ever, see them in the media with anything meaningful to say.  They have no insight that would resonate with the Black community.  They are more interested in being patted on the head by whites within the party, as opposed to finding a way to bring some perspective to the issue.

Why is the party not utilizing people like Bob Brown, Bob Woodson, Shannon Reeves, Mike Gunning, Sean Moss, Allegra McCullough, and Greg Griffin? 

I will tell you why.  Because most in the party have no idea who these people are.  These are the Blacks with standing and credibility within the Black community.  These are the Blacks who are media savvy and have institutional memory of the Black struggle and of the party. 
These are the Blacks that will not just say what the party wants to hear; but will say what needs to be said.

The Republican Party has never had a real surrogate program for Blacks, but one is desperately needed with the above mentioned people.  Where are the Black entertainers and athletes?

Amazingly, some Republicans do actually get it.

Mitt Romney has been consistently opposed to the flying of the flag.  There is absolutely no ambiguity in his position.  Romney has a great deal to contribute to the discussion of race relations relative to the Black community and I hope he will engage more directly with the Black community so that his voice can be heard, unfiltered by the media.

Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee, is another person who gets it.  Yesterday he unexpectedly flew to South Carolina to be with their governor, Nikki Haley and their two U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott as she gave her support to removing the flag from being flown on the grounds of the state capitol.

Priebus reached out to me when the tragedy happened in South Carolina; but before he asked me my thoughts on how he should respond, he insisted on giving me his thoughts first.  What I find amazing about Priebus is that every time he has reached out to me on an issue specific to the Black community, we basically agree with each other.  We may disagree somewhat on tactics, but on substance, no.

I find his instinctual ability to pick up on many of the nuances of the Black community amazing for someone who grew up in a state like Wisconsin.  My only criticism of Priebus is in the area of not allowing this instinctual understanding to be seen in the media, especially the Black media. 

The media has no idea of how Blacks respond to him and his message for the Black community. 

I would love to see Republicans like Romney and Priebus engage more with the Black community on a more substantive level.

They both have great stories to tell relative to the Black community; they just need to have a media narrative created in a way that resonates with the Black community and advances the party. 

Reasonable men can argue whether America is a nation of cowards when it comes to race; but there is absolutely no arguing that Republicans who are running for president are a bunch of cowards when it comes to race and the Black community.

Raynard Jackson & Associates, LLC is an internationally recognized political consulting, government affairs, and PR firm based in Washington, DC.  Jackson is an internationally recognized radio talk show host and TV commentator.  He has coined the phrase "straticist."  As a straticist, he has merged strategic planning with public relations.  Visit is website at:  www.raynardjackson.com.

 

 

From: tbacane
Subject: The Confederate Flag & the Cowardly GOP Candidates

We have all seen the horror, terror and murder that was inflected upon the AME Church in South Carolina against nine black members of that church and the entire community.  That act of murder and terror was committed by Mr. Dylann Roof, the same person who stated that he wanted to start a 'Race war'.  He was also photographed with the "Confederate flag" burning the American flag and holding and automatic pistol.  He is alleged to have written a manifesto wherein he stated his hatred of blacks, Jews and other minorities.  It is obvious that Roof had become radicalized by someone or something.  His seemingly endearment to the Confederate flag must be one of the symbols that led to that "Radicalization".  Many Americans (including GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney) have called for the removal of the Confederate flag from the grounds of the South Carolina state capital.  Sadly however many if not all of the current GOP candidates were to cowardly to take a stand on what should be a national issue not a state of South Carolina issue, and that is the Confederate flag.  The Confederate flag is a symbol of terror as well as one used to promote division among Americans which could and may eventually lead to a second civil war.  Therefore any person seeking to be President of the United States must show that they have the intestinal fortitude to stand up for our country rather than surrender to the flag of a cause that was lost when the civil war ended.

The issue of the Confederate flag poses the question of national security in many ways.  For instance if we allow the flying of the Confederate flag we encourage more Dylann Roofs to take arms and commit acts of terror, and those acts may eventually provoke a violate reaction.  Our military is deployed in many countries allegedly in support of democracy but what if radicals are flying the Confederate flag while other radicals are murdering members of minorities at home?  That would easily break down unit cohesion and morale thereby affecting national security.  If a state or community opted to fly an ISIS or a Nazi flag would we not object and prevent such, of course we would so why are the GOP candidates for President being so cowardly?  If they can't take the logical stand on this issue they need to close their campaign now.  Innocent members of a church were murdered by a terrorist whose radicalization included the Confederate flag.  Will the next be a Jewish or possibly a Catholic church, and if so when if ever will the GOP cowards speak out instead of hiding behind weasel words?

Thanks President Obama, Secretary Clinton and Governor Mitt Romney for having the courage to address the issue of the Confederate flag and for identifying this situation for what it was a "Terrorist attack based on racial hatred"!  I encourage all people of goodwill no matter what race to speak out against hatred and racial division.  This is not an issue for more gun control, but one of identifying and preventing radicalization among our citizens that is based on racial hatred.

 

 

From: Everett Smith
Subject: A reader's response to "FW: "The Confederate flag in every form must come down"

Munsup,

Why were the Confederates not branded as "traitors" against America. Far too long the Confederate flag has been waved and worn as a badge of honor when it represents people whose values and judgment were against the United States. A CONVERSATION on this topic needs to be started to identify and rebrand the flag and its followers for what they represent – TRAITORS.  THE CONFEDERATE FLAG CONVEYS AND IMPLIES THE SAME MEANING AND FEELING OF THE "SWASTIKA". Every time it is used the media reports on it and how it represents hate and fear. Why isn't the same done for the Confederate flag. Identifying the Confederate flag for what it is and what it represents (like the SWASTIKA) is the only way we will move forward to remove the Confederate flag as a symbol in this country from all state, city and local community offices and buildings.

This should be done in the name of the "Charleston 9" to galvanize people to make significant changes in our society in their memory and turn this despicable event into a positive movement of change.

 

 

From: Vernellia Randall
Subject: [SchooltoPrisonPipeline] Fwd: Walmartization of public education

Yet another reason NOT to shop at Walmart or take money from their non-profit organizations.

Apparently, the Waltons aren't satisfied with owning the largest low-wage employer in the country and being the richest family in the world.

They've also been working (and by "working" we mean "spending") overtime to undermine America's K-12 education system.

A new report out today from Cashing in on Kids shows the Walton Family Foundation is spending billions to implement a hardcore ideological agenda of replacing public schools with a privatized system that will be open to exploitation by private corporations.

To put it succinctly, the Waltons are hell-bent on the "Walmartization" of public education.

In addition to the billions spent by the Walton Family Foundation in pursuit of this agenda, members of the Walton family have funneled millions of dollars to education-related ballot measures and politicians who back their agenda

Stop the Walmartization of America's public schools.
Tell the Waltons to hold charter schools accountable.
Sign the petition here.

Lest there be any doubt, the Waltons' meddling in education policy seriously threatens America's historic commitment to the principle of free and equal access to public education.

As the new report reveals, the Walton Family Foundation puts their money behind reforms that undermine the promise of universal public education in three key ways:

 

·         By diverting taxpayer dollars from public schools to privately operated schools that are not required to admit and educate all students.

·         By supporting efforts to close down public schools in poor neighborhoods and lay off experienced teachers in order to make room for privately-operated schools staffed by recent college graduates with only 5 weeks of teacher training.

·         By blocking legislation to ensure public oversight and accountability of privately-operated schools funded with taxpayer dollars.

To add insult to injury, the Waltons (who collect $8.5 million/day in stock dividends from low-wage Walmart) claim their education reform agenda will help lift children out of poverty.

Of course, if the Waltons really care about lifting children out of poverty, they can act today – right now – to implement a $15/hour minimum wage at the country's largest private employer, Walmart.

We're waiting...

In the meantime, click here to sign the petition, and share it on social media.
Tell the Walmart heirs to hold charter schools accountable.

LEGAL NOTICE: UFCW and OUR Walmart have the purpose of helping Walmart employees as individuals or groups in their dealings with Walmart over labor rights and standards and their efforts to have Walmart publicly commit to adhering to labor rights and standards. UFCW and OUR Walmart have no intent to have Walmart recognize or bargain with UFCW or OUR Walmart as the representative of Walmart employees.

 

 

From: khalfani718
Subject: FW: No Sanctuary in Charleston

From: L B; Subject: No Sanctuary in Charleston

I met Dr. Lessane shortly after she took the position at the College of Charleston. It was interesting to talk with a fellow sister from the south side of Chicago, and to hear why she left. I also left Chicago for a job opportunity, but I did not feel that leaving Chicago to move to D.C was going to a better place. I am a lot older than Dr. Lessane and do not have children, so I have a different prospective. She wrote an interesting opinion piece for the New York Times. Check it out:

p.s. I forgot to thank K for the piece on the confederate flag. Thank you my brother.
If you want to sign a petition to remove the confederate flag, go to Move On.org:
Symbols of hate have no place in our gov. Add your name: Remove the Confederate flag! http://moveon.org/confederateflag

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

A prayer service for Wednesday's shooting victims held Thursday
at the Morris Brown A.M.E. Church in Charleston, S.C.
Credit Randall Hill/Reuters

CHARLESTON, S.C. — ON Wednesday night, while my son watched TV, I logged on to Facebook to check my friends' updates. Immediately I saw a post about a shooting at Emanuel A.M.E., a historic black church in downtown Charleston that is a stone's throw from my office at the College of Charleston. I made my son turn from his show to the news coverage. We stayed up and discussed what had happened. I prayed that I didn't know anyone who had died, but I did.

Today Charleston, nicknamed the Holy City, is in mourning. We are still dealing with last month's shooting of an unarmed black man in a northern suburb, and in the hours since this latest shooting, many of us in the African-American community were left asking: Is there any sanctuary left?

Five years ago, my ex-husband and I jumped at the chance to leave the violence of Chicago's South Side to forge a life in a safer, culturally rich community. In hopes of a better life, we eagerly joined the numbers of other African-Americans "returning" south in a wave of reverse migration.

And for a while things were good. But then Trayvon Martin was gunned down in Florida, and almost instantly black people seemed to be under attack. Then came the police shootings of Michael Brown, Tamir Rice and Walter Scott — just a few miles away, in North Charleston — revealing the threat of violence we face every day. And this month we saw the footage of teenagers being manhandled by the police in Texas and Ohio.

Churches have historically provided a bulwark against such violence, especially here in the Deep South. From the "hush harbors" where enslaved Africans would steal away to worship, to the spirited praise houses that were once the spiritual cornerstone of Charleston's Gullah community, to the hidden passageways on the Underground Railroad, to the church basements that doubled as strategic operation centers during the civil rights movement, the black church has always been the one place where we most often felt protected and nurtured.

Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church played all those roles in Charleston. From my office every day I see people coming in and out, not just to pray but to organize, to support the community. Called the Mother Church, it was founded in 1816 and was an important site in black Charleston's struggle for liberation.

Yet even this church couldn't provide sanctuary from hate.

On Wednesday, Mother Emanuel lost its leader, the Rev. Clementa Pinckney, and eight of its members. Not since the bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Ala., almost 52 years ago, which left four little girls dead, have we experienced such pain and loss on this level at one of our churches.

I can't help but think of this senseless act of terror, the largest mass shooting in the country since 2013, within the historical context of the Birmingham bombing, but also within the very current context of the increasing terror we African-Americans face on a daily basis.

The shooter's reported words to his victims reflect a deep-seated hatred for, and fear of, black people by many Americans. These vitriolic sentiments underscore the way we are stereotyped in the media, demonized and dehumanized by right-wing pundits, policed by law enforcement and terrorized by those who use Stand Your Ground to cut us down without a second thought.

For me, last night's events signal several visceral truths. One, that we African-Americans have no sanctuary. Charleston is a wonderful city, but in some very real ways, my children are no safer here than they were in Chicago.

This daily threat of terror does not exist within a vacuum. It looms within the growing prison-industrial state, against the backdrop of school-reform debates, our slow movement toward gun reform and the political maneuvers by Republicans to make it increasingly more difficult for poor people and minorities to vote. The reality that our civil rights are under attack is just as heavy as our fear for our lives.

I didn't go to the office yesterday, nor did many of my friends. Instead we talked, in person and online, about what comes next. We must, of course, honor the spirits of Clementa Pinckney and of my friend Cynthia Hurd, a veteran librarian who loved books and encouraged all children to read, and of the seven other victims.

We must also resist the comfortable fiction that, whatever racial turmoil exists elsewhere, genteel Charleston is a place of calm. The killing of Walter Scott showed otherwise; Wednesday's mass murder must spur us to action. We must do more than acknowledge the fact that, for all our legal advances, I can walk into any number of Charleston's finest restaurants and not see anyone who looks like me.

That means committing ourselves, as the black community, to fixing the systemic barriers — in education, employment and housing — to black upward mobility that make it virtually impossible for poor African-American children to ever catch up with their white counterparts.

This is our collective problem. We all have to own it. We all have to fix it. Until then there is no sanctuary for any of us.

Patricia Williams Lessane is the director of the  Avery Institute of Afro-American History and Culture at the College of Charleston.

 

End of MPEN e-Newsletter