One of the most remarkable, and least respectable, behaviors of the allegedly responsible people behind the effort to preserve racial preferences in Michigan — people like University of Michigan president Mary Sue Coleman and Governor Jennifer Granholm — is that they, without any apparent embarrassment or shame, have turned over leadership of the opposition to BAMN, an organization whose very name promises disregard for rules and even threatens violence, a threat that its past behavior in Berkeley shows is not idle.
Surely one of the low points in the history of this low organization came this week in Lansing, Michigan, however, when students whom it has bussed in from Detroit to demonstrate during the Board of Canvassers consideration of the MCRI ballot petitions ransacked and stole over $200 worth of goods from a concession in the state building licensed by an organization to help the blind and in fact staffed by a blind person.
According to an article from the Michigan Information and Research Service sent to me by Jennifer Gratz (access to full text requires a subscription):
BAMN Crowd Swarms HOB
Busloads of students recruited by pro-affirmative action group “By Any Means Necessary” swarmed the House Office Building (HOB) today, reportedly lighting off a firecracker that damaged a car and allegedly pick-pocketing as much as $200 in pop and candy from the State Plate….
The biggest complaint came from Patrick McGLINCHEY, owner of the privately-run State Plate inside the HOB. He said a majority of the kids who visited his eatery today were polite and orderly, but about 20 or so walked off with about a couple hundred dollars of soda and candy before he could put a call into the Commission for the Blind at the Victor Building to send re-enforcements to help him monitor the crowd.
McGlinchey is the independent owner of the eatery, but his contract goes through the Commission of the Blind. He said he’s caught students from visiting school groups in the past trying and make off with food, but today’s swarm was the first of this magnitude.
If anyone hears of BAMN offering to reimburse Mr. McGlinchey for his loss, please let me know.
That was not the only low behavior that day. Lyn Bankes, one of the two nominally Republican members of the Board of Canvassers, told Jennifer Gratz that the slogan on her tee-shirt, “End Race Preferences!” was “un-American.”
The Board’s behavior was so irresponsible that, again according to MIRS, some members of the legislature are expected “to introduce legislation soon to take the State Board of Canvassers completely out of the citizen petition process.”
On a personal note, I have just returned from a meeting organized by Ward Connerly to discuss these and other matters, and I am happy to report that Jennifer Gratz is as charming and impressive in person as she is in public as executive director of MCRI. All those who care about putting an end to state-sponsored racial discrimination should be thinking about what we can do to support her efforts in Michigan.
UPDATE
Jennifer Gratz sends links to the following editorial reaction to the mess the Michigan Board of Canvassers has made of its responsibility to certify, or not, the 450,000+ signatures submitted by MCRI (317,000 are needed).
The Board of State Canvassers proved again this week why it is a superfluous piece of Michigan government….
The Michigan Board of State Canvassers has once again overstepped its authority and failed to do its job, forcing the folks who circulated a petition to end affirmative action programs to go to court for a spot on the 2006 ballot, which they will very likely get….
And this from a paper that believes “The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative is a bad idea and is deceptively named.”
MCRI would bar the state from discriminating against, or giving preferential treatment to, any individual on the basis of race. Thus it is “deceptively named” only if “civil rights” require racial discrimination. Of course, that is, alas, exactly what defenders of racial preferences unfortuntely believe.
I think the term “equal opportunity” is false, misleading and Orwellian. Remember “Animal Farm”?
“Some animals are more equal than others.”
Isn’t that the definition of affirmative action?
Cicero writes:
>>>I think the term “equal opportunity” is false, misleading and Orwellian. Remember “Animal Farm”?
“Some animals are more equal than others.”
Isn’t that the definition of affirmative action?”
Actually, it’s more descriptive of the originalist intent of the exclusively white male Founding Fathers and framers of the Constitution. I take issue with their mindset on race. Affirmative Action is neccessary in America today because, unfortunately, there seems to be a nostolgia for that 18th century mindset when it comes to hiring, promotion, and contracts.
–Cobra
>>>”That was not the only low behavior that day. Lyn Bankes, one of the two nominally Republican members of the Board of Canvassers, told Jennifer Gratz that the slogan on her tee-shirt, “End Race Preferences!” was “un-American.””
Interesting. According to Jennifer Gratz’s tee-shirt, “race preferences” should be ended. Does this apply to ALL “RACE PREFERENCES”, or just those practiced by government to counteract “RACE PREFERENCES” in American society, which neccessitated their implementation in the first place?
Just curious.
–Cobra
Cobra;
>>Actually, it’s more descriptive of the originalist intent of the exclusively white male Founding Fathers and framers of the Constitution.
The term “white male” is deceptive and intellectually dishonest, as I’ve repeatedly written. For example, how many “white male” people of Italian ancestry signed the Declaration of Independence?
Answer: NONE.
So much for their “white male” privilege…
Keep beating that dead horse, Cobra.
Cicero,
The absence of Italians at the Constitutional congress doesn’t alter the all white male status of the signators.
–Cobra
It is true that all the signers of the Declaration where white, but they were not all in agreement on slavery. Many were vehemently opposed and wanted slavery abolished, many were slaveholders and wanted slavery to continue. Others may have been against slavery, but believed that independence was a more pressing issue. The result was the unfortunate constitutional compromise that all but assured the coming Civil War.
This is where the term ‘white male’ becomes disengenuous, as it tries to portray white men as monolithic in their thinking. It also attempts to diminish their status as men. While it is nowhere near as offensive as the common epithet for blacks and doesn’t carry the historical burden of pain and oppression, it is nonetheless somewhat offensive to some.
I don’t think it would detract from its descriptive power to use ‘white men’ in its stead, unless the intent is some sort of rhetorical payback, a polite form of ‘white boys’ or ‘honkies’. That it serves the feminist as well as racialist agenda is no accident. It is devisive and doesn’t further constructive debate as can be seen in this thread.
“Un-American”?
If Governor Granholm had seen the shirt, Gratz might have been accused of treason.
Nobody Important writes:
>>>That it serves the feminist as well as racialist agenda is no accident. It is devisive and doesn’t further constructive debate as can be seen in this thread.”
What phrase or terminology would you use to describe 18th Century American hiearchy, which was in fact, bereft of female or minority representation?
–Cobra
According to Jennifer Gratz’s tee-shirt, “race preferences” should be ended. Does this apply to ALL “RACE PREFERENCES”, or just those practiced by government to counteract “RACE PREFERENCES” in American society, which neccessitated their implementation in the first place?
Actually, it was race preferences in government, not in “society,” which necessitated their implementation.
But in any case, the answer is that all race preferences are lousy, but in a free society people have the right to do lousy things if they want. But government has the responsibility to treat everyone equally.
David writes:
>>>But in any case, the answer is that all race preferences are lousy, but in a free society people have the right to do lousy things if they want. ”
And if “people” control the government, then their same desire to do lousy things may rear it’s ugly head, right? “People” also control the courts, and that “lousy things” issue may pop up again, especially through creative interpretation of law, and political appointment gratitude.
“Lousy things” people choose to do is the history of America in regards to race. Eliminating Affirmative Action just makes things a bit more “lousier” for folks who look like me.
–Cobra
And yes…I know “lousier” is NOT a word.
–Cobra
“What phrase or terminology would you use to describe 18th Century American hiearchy, which was in fact, bereft of female or minority representation?”
I would say that the 18th Century American hierarchy was composed of white MEN and specifically land owners. Unlanded men such as my ancestors (aka swamp yankees) had no political power. White males can be horses, rats, dogs, boys. White MEN, on the other hand, is clearly more specific; it identifies said heirarchy as being mature, adult human beings who happen to be white, persons of pallor if you will.
In addition, the term minority was probably not used in the same way in the 18th century. Blacks at that time, as I am shamefully and you are painfully aware, were not considered by most white men as fully human and thus not part of the political context. In that sense, non-Anglo-Saxons, were the minority and were included in the American hierarchy (Scots, Dutch, Irish (few), German, etc).
Steven Jens;
You’re aware of the Governor’s calling of a state rep. treasonous for his anti-tax position? It is very indicative of the McCarthyist tone of the current Democratic establishment — wearing a T-shirt expressing one’s belief is “un-American” (too which Jennifer responded, that it was un-American to support race preferences) — saying your against a particular tax is “treasonous.” It was suggested to me that I didn’t have a right to videotape the chairman of the Democratic Party giving orders to the two Democratic Canvassers. In addition to that making me an “a**hole” I was “uneducated” (for rolling video, or supporting MCRI, I’m still not sure).
Once again, how are race preferences “un-American” when there is practically NO part of American History where racial preferences are absent?
–Cobra
Stealing candy and pop BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY!
I hadn’t heard about this little gem of a story: Some of the 400 or so Detroit students who attended a boisterous rally at the state Capitol for affirmative action came away with more than a civics lesson last…
[…] Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary, an organization whose rowdy followers have literally stolen from the blind and violently disrupted official state agency meetings (“The testimony table was knocked down. […]