The Truth Lies Before Us If We Only Take the Time to Accept It

This past Saturday morning at a gathering of Georgia Republicans; congressman and candidate for governor Nathan Deal introduced the GOP's latest 'hate speech' when he spoke of "Ghetto grandmothers," who lack birth certificates as just another cynically framed phrase that easily traces it's lineage back to the Reagan era and it's holier than thou reference to "welfare queens."

Ronald Reagan, the godhead of modern conservative politicians

Both terms are despicably aligned to sustain a politics of an us versus them mentality that fractures the American public and employs all of the sophistication of a club indiscriminately used against the Democratic opposition.

But lets return to our latest purveyor of hit and run hate speech, Nathan Deal, who said just a few days ago: “We got all the complaints of the ghetto grandmothers who didn’t have birth certificates and all that. We wrote some very liberal language as to how you can verify it. My mother was born in 1906 and she didn’t have a birth certificate. They didn’t give birth certificates back then. But we got her one, because you can do it under the proper procedures of your state.”



Republican hate speech extends beyond bashing ghetto grandmothers and regularly seeks out opportunities to attack gays. Oklahoma State Representative, Sally Kern has made her contempt well known



and identifies with the true Republican party, also known as the Party of Jesus.

Perhaps Paul Krugman sums it up best when he reflects on today's Republican Party and its all out war against President Obama as he remarks: "How did one of our great political parties become so ruthless, so willing to embrace scorched-earth tactics even if so doing undermines the ability of any future administration to govern?

"The key point is that ever since the Reagan years, the Republican Party has been dominated by radicals — ideologues and/or apparatchiks who, at a fundamental level, do not accept anyone else’s right to govern.

"Anyone surprised by the venomous, over-the-top opposition to Mr. Obama must have forgotten the Clinton years. Remember when Rush Limbaugh suggested that Hillary Clinton was a party to murder? When Newt Gingrich shut down the federal government in an attempt to bully Bill Clinton into accepting those Medicare cuts? And let’s not even talk about the impeachment saga.

"The only difference now is that the G.O.P. is in a weaker position, having lost control not just of Congress but, to a large extent, of the terms of debate. The public no longer buys conservative ideology the way it used to; the old attacks on Big Government and paeans to the magic of the marketplace have lost their resonance. Yet conservatives retain their belief that they, and only they, should govern.

"The result has been a cynical, ends-justify-the-means approach. Hastening the day when the rightful governing party returns to power is all that matters, so the G.O.P. will seize any club at hand with which to beat the current administration.

"It’s an ugly picture. But it’s the truth. And it’s a truth anyone trying to find solutions to America’s real problems has to understand."

Mary Frances Berry Calls for a New, Independent Human and Civil Rights Commission

MARY FRANCES BERRY argues that the current "anxiety over the legal status and rights of gays and lesbians is growing." She points this out in a commentary in the New York Times by explaining that: "Barack Obama’s invitation to the Rev. Rick Warren, an evangelical pastor who opposes same-sex marriage, to give the invocation at his inauguration comes just as the hit movie “Milk” reminds us of the gay rights activism of the 1970s. Supporters of gay rights wonder if the California Supreme Court might soon confirm the legitimacy of Proposition 8, passed by state voters in November, which declares same-sex marriage illegal — leaving them no alternative but to take to the streets." As a beneficial remedy: "To help resolve the issue of gay rights, President-elect Obama should abolish the now moribund Commission on Civil Rights and replace it with a new commission that would address the rights of many groups, including gays." Ms. Berry points out that: "Federal Social Security and tax benefits from marriage that straight people take for granted are denied to most gays in committed relationships. And because Congress has failed to enact a federal employment nondiscrimination act, bias against gays in the workplace remains a constant threat." Ms. Berry expresses her concern that Congress has so far failed "to enact a law that would increase the punishment for hate crimes against gays and lesbians is going nowhere." Ms. Barry explains that individuals' rights to gay marriage face huge obstacles, while legal in Connecticut and Massachusetts a mish mash of legalities exist elsewhere in the United States, for example Ms. Berry points out that: "New York acknowledges marriages from those states and from other countries, despite the federal Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, which was meant to allow other states not to recognize gay marriages performed elsewhere. Vermont, New Jersey and New Hampshire permit civil unions, which provide gay partners the rights, protections and responsibilities of marriage. On the other hand, a referendum that just passed in Arkansas goes beyond banning gay marriage to prohibit the adoption of children by unmarried couples. Mississippi, Florida and Utah have similar bans. And many Americans believe their religion forbids gay marriage or even civil unions." Ms. Berry looks to events in our nation's past to remind us that questions and concerns having once created a great deal of contentious debate over "negroes" in the 1950s, Berry reminds us "that Congress, in 1957, granted Eisenhower’s request for an independent civil rights commission to “put the facts on top of the table.” Ms. Berry explains that: "The commission conducted interviews and public hearings, prepared detailed reports and recommended new protections that would ultimately be passed in the form of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. These laws embodied the goals of the protestors who marched, went to jail and died to end racial discrimination." Eventually, Ms. Berry points out: "The commission became what the Rev. Theodore Hesburgh, who was the chairman from 1969 to 1972, called the “conscience of the government” on civil rights issues." Berry praises Hesburgh's remarks but describes the tenure of the commission as having had too short of an existence to continue in the enactment of much needed change. Berry laments that: "The Commission on Civil Rights has been crippled since the Reagan years by the appointments of commissioners who see themselves as agents of the presidential administration rather than as independent watchdogs." Ms. Berry has the appropriate background to make her observations because Ms. Berry, was the chairwoman of the Commission on Civil Rights from 1993 to 2004. To take the place of the moribund commission, Ms. Berry suggests: "The creation of a new, independent human and civil rights commission could help us determine our next steps in the pursuit of freedom and justice in our society. A number of explosive issues like immigration reform await such a commission, but recommendations for resolving the controversies over the rights of gays, lesbians and transgendered people should be its first order of business." I fully support Ms. Berry's opinions concerning the problems faced by gays and lesbians and the need to create "a new, independent human and civil rights commission" that would be empowered and fully supported by the federal government in order to begin to right the many wrongs visited upon the gay and lesbian citizens of the United States.