RFFM.ORG

Anthony Sowell, John Muhammad: Serial Killers Not Just White Males Any Longer

Media & Authorities Slow or Reluctant to Acknowledge Mass Murderers Come in All Colors:  Playing the Race Card:  Does it Apply When Not Politically Correct? 

 

by Daniel T. Zanoza, Executive Director

 

According to FBI statistics, at any given time there are 30 to 50 serial killers roaming the United States, seeking out their prey.  76% of all serial killers worldwide perform their dark and evil murders in the United States.  Europeans represent 17% of the world's serial killers.  In totality, the United States and Europe combined make up 93% of all mass murderers internationally. 

 

In the U.S., California holds the dubious distinction of the most homicidal maniacs, followed by Texas, New York, Illinois and Florida.  There have been no reports of serial killings in the state of Maine.  According to a web site called Fortune City, http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/streiber/273/inf_stats.htm, 84% of American killers are Caucasian and 16% are black. 

 

Not long ago, FBI profilers identified those who committed senseless random multiple murders as being white males, most likely middle-aged, living at home with a dominant mother.  In recent years, the FBI profile for serial killers now includes a greater number of individuals of color, including women. 

 

The case of Anthony Sowell, a serial killer who murdered at least 11 women in Cleveland, indicates growing numbers of black men involved in mass murder.  However, Sowell seemingly killed at will in Cleveland, but questions must be raised regarding why the media and authorities did not make public a rash of African-American women who were reported missing in Ohio's largest city.  Imagine, if there were cases of women missing in Beverly Hills, California or an affluent area of Long Island, New York or Chicago's famous Gold Coast.  It's safe to say, any of these areas--populated by wealthy mostly white residents--would have received national attention from the press and local, state and federal authorities would have put together task forces to investigate these crimes, in order bring the killer to justice. 

 

Sowell was murdering African-American women for years with impunity.  Indeed, reports made to the Cleveland Police Dept. regarding a foul smell emanating in the area of Sowell's home for months were dismissed and attributed to a rendering plant which processed head cheese.  The truth is those familiar with the smell of decaying human remains say there is nothing else like it.  Those who made reports to the Cleveland Police, who lived in the area, were either former members of law enforcement or the military who say the odor of human death is something they will never forget or mistake for something other than what it is. 

 

The question that begs to be answered is:  Why was the rash of missing African-American women in Cleveland not reported to the press by authorities?  Obviously, there was a serial killer on the loose.  Yet it took a report from a black woman who was raped by Sowell--a noted sex offender and convicted rapist--to draw attention to the alleged mass murderer.  The woman escaped death, but many did not,  before police officials seriously looked into what had taken place in what can truly be called a Chamber of Horrors. 

 

Tonight, John Allen Muhammad, the "Washington Sniper," another African-American serial killer, is scheduled to be executed in Virginia for killing ten individuals across multiple states.  Muhammad, a convert to Islam, had a juvenile accomplice named Lee Boyd Malvo who escaped the death penalty by becoming a witness for the state and testifying against Muhammad.  Malvo was sentenced to life in prison for his role in the mass killings which terrorized people residing in Washington, D.C., Maryland and Virginia over a period of months. 

 

One of the first African-American serial killers on record was Wayne Williams who murdered 27 young black boys in Atlanta, Georgia from October 1979 to May 1981.  At the time of Williams arrest, authorities were shocked because the killings were supposedly being committed by a group of white supremacists, possibly associated with the Ku Klux Klan.  The media was certain these murders were racially motivated, but Williams, a black man, is now serving multiple life sentences for his crimes. 

 

Between 1989 and 1990, new ground was broken regarding serial killers when Aileen Carol Wuornos killed at least seven men.  Wuornos, a known prostitute, was eventually executed in October of 2002.  Wuornos' lesbian lover and accomplice, Tyria Moore, assisted in the prosecution of the woman who was then called the "Damsel of Death."  Wuornos was the first known female serial killer in the annals of crime. 

 

More recently, there has been a rash of murders that would not be classified as serial killings, but were equally shocking.  Earlier this year, a Sunday school teacher, Melissa Huckaby, allegedly sexually abused Sandra Cantu, before murdering the eight year old and stuffing her lifeless body into a suitcase.  Cantu's remains were found in a shallow pond mere miles from her home.  Tracy, California police had been concentrating on local registered male sex offenders.  However, the nation was shocked to learn Cantu was most likely killed by a 28 year old woman. 

 

Only weeks ago, a nine year old girl from Missouri was reported missing.  Once more, local authorities were concentrating on registered male sex offenders, only to discover the likely murderer of Elizabeth Olten was a 15 year old minor female who, during questioning by police, admitted to knowing the whereabouts of the young girl's body.  Authorities have charged the minor, whose name has not been released, in the death of Olten.

 

The above stories disprove a number of myths.  It is clear the FBI's profiling handbook must be re-written.  Our society is now producing killers of all races, creeds and genders.  Also, women are proving to be as capable of committing evil acts--which once were the purview of men.  Twenty years ago, the dominant media almost seemed gleeful in reporting that serial killers were predominantly white males.  Today facts indicate this is not the case.  Although white males still make up a significant majority of psychopathic killers, our culture is now cultivating murderers which fit no particular profile or category. 

 

And here's a fact you will definitely not see reported by the dominant press:  Though homosexuals claim to represent 10% of American society (which numbers are highly inflated according to many), 14% of all serial killers worldwide are reported to be homosexual.

 

 

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact:  Dan@rffm.org    

 

NOTE: Comments to RFFM.org's blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected.  No hyperlinks allowed.

Obama Used Race To Get Elected: Critics Racist? I Don't Think So

by Daniel T. Zanoza, Executive Director

 

It is clear the dominant media is attempting to inject race into the discussion over President Barack Obama's political agenda.  I find it interesting the mainstream media never applies the same standards to those who oppose African-Americans on the political right.

 

For example, during U.S. Supreme Court Clarence Thomas' contentious confirmation process he was called everything from an unqualified jurist to a sexual predator.  Yet the left faced no charges regarding racist motivations concerning their verbal assaults on Thomas.  Other victims of vicious attacks from liberals include Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and current Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele.  In Rice's case, political cartoons often portrayed her as an Aunt Jemima-type character.  The depictions were clearly racist and over the top.  Steele is called an Uncle Tom by those on the left and the media give his attackers a pass as well. 

 

Many Americans celebrated the fact Obama was the first African-American president elected into office.  Though Obama himself claimed America was a post-racial society, he played to the issue of race when it served him best.  Imagine if George W. Bush was referred to as the 43rd white American president.  Of course, this would have been inappropriate.  Barack Obama is President of the United States and nothing more.

 

To say the critics of "President" Barack Obama's policies are racist would deny the results of the election.  Millions of white Americans voted for Obama.  In fact, more whites voted for Obama than John Kerry in 2004 or Al Gore in 2000.  The far left uses the race card when things aren't going their way.  Perhaps the laundry list of Obama's policies--which flirt with socialism--is the reason why the same people who voted for him now question his leadership.

 

Multi-billion dollar bail-outs of the banking industry, the government takeover of the auto industry, a government plan to take over one-sixth of the U.S. economy related to health care reform, card check, comprehensive immigration reform, homosexuals in the military and the assault on the innocent unborn are all parts of Obama's plan for America.  If Obama were white and advancing this radical political agenda, he would be facing the same resistance from those in the conservative media and Americans themselves. 

 

However, it is almost a natural progression to go from celebrating a president because of his skin color to defending him for the same reason.  It is not only flawed thinking, it is dangerous.  But Democrats don't care about race relations in the United States.  They give the cause of racial harmony lip service, but use the issue of race to divide the country when it serves them best. 

 

Barack Obama could stop this liberal strategy, if he wanted to.  He could strongly state that anyone who tries to use race to gain political advantage in America is not a patriot. 

 

I don't expect Obama to do any such thing in the future.  There are racists in America of all colors.  Yet Obama continually refers to his heritage which makes it impossible for anyone to forget he's a black president, not simply the president. 

 

It is Obama's policies which are generating the heated rhetoric surrounding his presidency.  Americans are hard-working, independent people.  We celebrate a legacy handed down to us from our nation's Founders.  Obama's "hope and change" turned out to be a direct assault on the principles which made this nation great.  That is the reason for heated Town Hall meetings, exuberant Tea Parties and why millions gathered in Washington, D.C. a short time ago.

 

The left is trying to give cover to policies the American people are rejecting in greater numbers every day by injecting race into the issue.  Sadly, they may achieve their goals and set America back twenty years or more regarding which seemed to be a fading remnant of the past.

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact:  Dan@rffm.org

NOTE: Comments to RFFM.org's blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected.  No hyperlinks allowed

Coulter Says Obama Used Racial Victimization: She's Right, But There's More

From the Perspective of a Blind Man Who Refuses to Play Victim

Commentary by Daniel T. Zanoza, Executive Director

I could probably count on one hand how many times I have mentioned the fact I am totally blind in my writings.  And the reason I did mention my blindness was due to the fact it was germane to the issue I was writing about.

Of course, I could have played victim, but I chose the wrong political philosophy and the wrong political Party to make hay out of taking that route.

I have been published in major magazines, my work has also appeared in text books as examples for student writers to follow, but without a doubt, if I were a liberal, my writing career would be far beyond where it is today.  However, I'm perfectly fine with the lot I have in life and the principles I have tried to adhere to in my journalistic career over the past 15 years.

You see, if I were a liberal and claimed victimhood, the mainstream media would have portrayed me as courageous.  I would have had special interviews in the local newspaper when I lived in Chicago's near southwestern suburbs.  There would have been television spots talking about how I didn't let my blindness interfere with my life goals.  You know the spiel.  It's been played out so many times in the press we could write the script blindfolded, please excuse the pun.

Ann Coulter's latest best-seller titled "Guilty" explains the culture of victimization perfectly in one of the book's early chapters.  Coulter uses individuals like President-elect Barack Obama and movie star Halle Barry to illustrate her points on the subject.  Coulter says Obama prefers to link himself with the black father who abandoned him for a reason.  The author of "Guilty" says many who are multi-racial prefer to identify with their African-American roots because it will give them an advantage in America's present day society where victims are celebrated to a point of absurdity.

Coulter hits the nail right on the head with her assessment of this cultural phenomenon.  While Obama and Barry grab on to their black heritage, they essentially throw the white women who raised them under the bus.

From the beginning of Obama's presidential campaign, he made it clear he was a black man.  However, in doing so, Obama acknowledges and gives credence to the racism which plagued the United States for nearly 200 years.

In the Jim Crow south--as in the west beyond the Mississippi--when it came to race, the parameters were drawn in very stark racial lines.  If an individual had one drop of black or Indian blood, that man or woman was not white.  These were racially-motivated guidelines, akin to the idea of Arian purity which we saw advanced by Adolf Hitler in Nazi Germany.  Even though Hitler, Himmler, Goebbels and their henchmen demonstrated few of the physical traits they associated with Arian purity, the "model" which allowed human beings to fit into this "privileged group" was set.  Blond hair and blue eyes gave an individual an advantage in what Hitler hoped would be his thousand year Third Reich.  The same mindset, though to a vastly lesser extent, existed in the Jim Crow south and the American west with regard to the native Indians.

This is what Coulter failed to address in her writings on the culture of victimhood.  Individuals like Obama and Barry play into the ugly history of racism when they play up their African-American heritage and deny the other ancestry which makes up their DNA.  Of course, as Coulter does affirm, the trade-off has value to individuals who would rather promote their personal agendas than right cultural wrongs.

This is exactly what Obama was doing with the writing of "Dreams of my Father".  In actuality, he had only met his biological father once before authoring his manuscript.  Clearly, Obama not only played the victim card, but he played the racist card as well by identifying with a man whose actions mirror one of the great failings of the African-American cultural zeitgeist which dominates black America today.

If Obama would have called himself what he is, a multi-racial American, the President-elect would not be entitled to many of the societal perks which the dominant media ascribes to selected groups.  So Obama, like many others, not only accepted the racist labels of the past, but embraced them for what they could do for his career.  To Obama's benefit, the headlines read:  "The black man who overcame racism", "the first African-American President", "Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s Dream fulfilled" and a litany of victim-filled descriptions which provided Obama with an historic motif which, in reality, he is not entitled to nor should he want to accept.  In an even more sadder sense, I'm sure Dr. King would not be happy with the politics of victimhood.  King's words--about a culture which looks at a man or woman, not for the color of his or her skin, but for the content of their character--has been totally rejected by American society in the early 21st century.  Perhaps we have not come very far regarding the issue of race after all.

As usual, though she lacks tact and her message often gets lost because of this fact, Coulter's book speaks of some important truths regarding our nation and where we are headed.  If being the victim brings us success, it sets a low bar of achievement for our children to reach.  This mindset also diminishes the accomplishments of those who don't play the victim card in their lives while inflating the accomplishments of those who do.  Sadly, human beings, like water, seek the point of least resistance.  If a man or woman can go further by claiming victimhood, many will indeed claim victimhood.  It's part of human nature.  Subsequently, it will take something more than Ann Coulter or this humble author to right a ship which in the view of many is floundering.

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact:  Dan@rffm.org

NOTE: Comments to RFFM.org's blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected.  No hyperlinks allowed.

Michelle Obama's College Thesis: An Early Exercise In Blame and Anger

EDITORIAL

 

A member of my staff spent far too much time locating a copy of Michelle (LaVaughn Robinson) Obama's 1985 college thesis, titled "Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community".  The paper which is 217 typed pages (double-spaced) and contains 17, 524 words was definitely not worth the trouble it took to find and download.

 

I wasn't prepared to read the entire draft, but excerpts from Mrs. Obama's effort certainly gave me a peak into her developing mind.  The bottom line is her thesis represents the feelings of a young angry African-American woman of priviledge.

 

The seeds of some of the statements attributed to Mrs. Obama during her husband's presidential campaign can definitely be found in the paper.  Including references to black liberation theology which caused a considerable controversy concerning Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama.

 

The major focus of the thesis is on race and may be considered a naive effort at best. 

 

To read or download the entire thesis go to: 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2305083/PrincetonEducated-Blacks-and-the-Black-Community?query2=copy%20michelle%20obama%20doctoral%20thesis 

 

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact Dan@rffm.org

Comments to RFFM.org's blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected. No hyperlinks allowed.

Obama Hurting Democratic Party: Worse Yet, Obama/Wright Hurting America

Obama's Pastor, Jeremiah Wright, May Be Setting U.S. Race Relations Back 20 Years

RFFM.org Commentary by Daniel T. Zanoza, Executive Director

You will never see these sentiments expressed in the dominant media.  You won't read such an editorial in the pages of Newsweek.  You won't hear such views voiced on ABC's World News Tonight.  You will not come across such perspectives in a Sunday edition of the Washington Post.  You see, the dominant liberal media in America still loves Barack Hussein Obama and he is under a clock of protection that even Hillary Rodham Clinton envies.

And, no, I won't shy away from using the word Hussein when speaking of the Democrats leading presidential candidate.  There was John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Lyndon Baines Johnson and Richard Milhous Nixon after that.  Both Presidents Bush middle names were frequently used and so was that of William Jefferson Clinton.  Or is there something we aren't supposed to think of when we hear the name Barack Hussein Obama?  I will leave that up to the ears of the beholder.

But, as far as my assertion that Mr. Obama gets special treatment from the press, someone needs to speak with Hillary Clinton in a candid moment about that subject.  But, for a moment, let me speak for her.  For nearly a month, the junior Senator from Illinois has been trying out nearly every story in the book on Americans regarding his relationship with Jeremiah Wright, the former Pastor of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ.  During that time, Obama has fallen dramatically in the polls.  A man who once seemed like he had the presidential nomination for the Democratic Party in his hands is now considered an albatross by some political observers who predict a sure victory for Republicans--if Obama is indeed the Democratic presidential nominee.  No, they won't say that on the NBC Nightly News, but there are serious questions of whether Obama is electable.

It has been an amazing turn of events and I never thought I would find myself saying what I'm about to say.  Hillary Clinton has not received a fair shake from a media which is still holding to a fleeting call for "hope" and "change".  In recent days, Mrs. Clinton has had to answer questions about whether she had to duck from sniper fire in the late 1990's during a visit to Kosovo in her duties as First Lady.  Mrs. Clinton over-exaggerated the danger she was in and, being a man, I truly understand the tendency.  However, the media's darling, Barack Obama, was under relentless political fire for his failure to kick Jeremiah Wright to the curb for his outlandish hate-filled statements while he was willing to throw his own grandmother under the bus that was leaving that curb.  In no way did the Clinton faux pas match the severity of Obama's problems.  The former First Lady didn't say she was dodging gun fire for 20 years.  Mrs. Clinton didn't say she had to throw her body over her daughter's to protect Chelsea from an errant grenade.  Sen. Clinton simply did what most politicians do and exaggerated a bit--no harm, no foul.

In contrast, Sen. Obama may have set race relations back in the United States by 20 years.  His spiritual leader says America got what she deserved on September 11, 2001.  His spiritual leader said the U.S. government was intentionally infecting blacks with AIDS.  Obama's spiritual leader damned the United States and demonstrated a devilish pride while doing so.

Obama claims he didn't know Wright held such radical views.  Well, Obama has changed his story a number of times regarding Wright and, while doing so, he used the words "typical white person" while backing the bus over his poor grandmother again.

There was a type of suspension of disbelief going on in America, before the Wright controversy came to light.  The mainstream media was trying to fool itself into believing race would not play a role in the election, if Obama were the Democratic presidential nominee.  It's as though the dominant press was in denial of a reality which lurked just below the surface of everyday life.  Sadly, it was Obama himself who put the issue of race front and center in his quest for the presidency and the press could not blame the usual suspects.  No, they won't be able to blame an Obama failure on so-called white bigots from Mississippi.  No, they won't be able to blame an Obama defeat on so-called unsophisticated steel workers from Ohio either. And, no, they won't be able to blame an Obama loss on the Hispanic voting bloc.

The only one to blame was--and is--Obama himself.  And there are still questions that need to be asked and answered by the Illinois Senator.  How much impact did Jeremiah Wright, Obama's spiritual role model, have on him for 20 years?  What views of Wright's does Obama embrace and what views of Wright's does Obama reject?  With these questions still unanswered, if Americans had doubts about Obama's true feelings concerning his country, could you blame them?  Thought the dominant press won't go there, the flap over Jeremiah Wright has hurt this nation deeply.

A man who was supposed to be beyond race has left a nation's people questioning whether all African-Americans share Wright's opinions.  Obama's refusal to unequivocally reject Wright and his teachings have raised doubts about blacks that should have been put to rest long ago.

I personally do not believe most African-Americans share the hate-filled opinions voiced by Jeremiah Wright.  Many African-Americans have fought and died for their country, while Wright sprayed his venom over his congregation like a poisonous snake saturating its prey.  Hopefully, Wright's views will only be seen as the ridiculous rantings of a hateful man.  If Barack Obama is not politically intelligent enough to totally divorce himself from Wright, he doesn't deserve to be president.

But Obama should put his political aspirations aside for a moment.  Obama should think about sacrifices made by men like Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.--men who knew there were injustices in the past, but individuals who saw hope for the future, not hate. 

It's time to stand up, Mr. Obama.  It's time to put politics aside and think about the welfare of your country and all its people--no matter what their color.  Maybe then your wife could be proud of the United States--for a second time in her life.

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact Dan@rffm.org.

Obama's spiritual leader Jeremiah Wright criticized by some African-American clergy

For more on the Obama / Wright controversy read Rev. L. Dowell's comments at:
http://rffm.typepad.com/republicans_for_fair_medi/2008/03/obama-controver.html#comment-108018892  and then read Dr. Frank Joseph's comments at: http://rffm.typepad.com/republicans_for_fair_medi/2008/03/obama-controver.html#comment-108053592

Obama Controversy: How Many African-American Churches Are Like Jeremiah Wright's?

Beyond Politics: Black Liberation Theology, America and the Question of Race   

RFFM.org Commentary by Daniel T. Zanoza

For a while, I had decided not to write anything on the Jeremiah Wright/Barack Obama controversy.  After all, it's all been said, hasn't it?  Every newspaper had the story on its front page and the commentary sections overflowed with all too wise speculation on the issue.  Why would Barack Obama attend a church where such hate was fomented from the pulpit for 20 years?  Did Obama allay concerns many had with him, after the junior senator from Illinois gave his speech on the issue of race?

The responses were typical.  After Obama's speech, the Left fell all over itself in praise of the Democratic presidential frontrunner almost to the point of hilarity.  Conservatives said Obama left many questions to be answered regarding the hateful words of Rev. Wright.  The fact is, I'm uncomfortable even referring to the man as a Reverend.  After all, the word reverend is a noun and an adjective.  I'll leave this debate for linguists and philosophers, but I do know what a man of God should be saying from a Christian pulpit.

That's why I decided to write this column.  The controversy over Wright introduced me to a new phrase, black liberation theology.  I did not know there was such a thing.  I was fully aware that ministers, or supposed men of God of all colors, use their position in God's church to spew hatred.  After all, the Ku Klux Klan claims it is doing the Lord's work in the evil that organization has espoused for nearly 150 years.  However, I didn't know men like Jeremiah Wright were spreading their anger in African-American churches and, to this point, I don't know how many men like Wright there are across America.

But Wright certainly answered some questions I had about why the issue of race never seems to go away in the United States.  Well, let me take that back.  Among most Americans, race has become less of an issue of contention than it was forty years ago.  Most Americans are not racist.  They see discrimination as an ugly thing and the people of our nation, for the most part, would like to see racial unity become a reality and not just a dream.

But imagine for a moment, it is 1988 and you are sitting in a church where black liberation theology is coming at you in waves from the dais.  Now imagine you are five years old and you hear this hateful rhetoric every Sunday for the next 20 years.

Suddenly, things became clear to me.  No wonder we cannot get over the race issue in this country.  Individuals like Mr. Wright continually throw gasoline on the simmering embers of racial hatred which does exist in this country in dark, dank places.  These fires burn into the minds of thousands of African-Americans.  Or is it millions of African-Americans?  What is the answer?  How many Jeremiah Wrights are out there?  I don't know, but I shudder when I think about the possible answer.

Christ taught us to love and sacrifice for our neighbor.  He told us to damn no one and forgive everyone, especially our enemies or those who have done us wrong in the past.  These hardly sound like the words of Mr. Wright or perhaps a better name for the man would be Mr. Wrong.

I cannot blame African-Americans if they have a deep underlining mistrust for whites, if this is what they have been taught weekly, since childhood.

Sen. Obama has used a number of excuses regarding his attendance at Mr. Wright's church.  First Obama said he wasn't aware of Wright's controversial statements.  Then Obama said he was never present when Wright took off on one of his hate-filled tangents.  Next the Illinois Senator said he was aware of the controversy surrounding his minister, but leaving the church would have been like leaving a family member, an uncle to be exact.

I have attended many churches in my life.  There have been numerous times where a preacher or church has held views which were not Scriptural.  My first obligation as a Christian was to address these issues with the minister or with the church on the whole.  If the answer to my question did not conform to God's word, my family would leave that church.  Indeed I have left churches before, though never because a minister was damning America or blaming another race for anything. 

The Obama's are an intelligent couple.  They have educations most people in America can only dream about.  But it took 20 years for Sen. Obama to understand that Wright's words were hateful?  Many have written about the issue of Obama's judgment concerning this matter, but is it possible Obama believes in Wright's teachings?  Did Obama stay at the church because Wright's message spoke to him?  After all, Obama's wife, Michelle, claims she had never been proud of her country until recently.  These are some important personal questions which Obama may or may not address.  Yet the bigger issue is whether America can ever come to a state of racial healing, if there are thousands of so-called preachers like Wright across the U.S. 

The Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. did not preach black liberation theology, Louis Farrakhan does.

Obama's speech about race was important, but he had a daunting task in front of him.  Just days after the debate over Wright came to a boil, Obama used the words "typical white person" in reference to his grandmother and the bigotry he has assigned to her.  Perhaps Sen. Obama has bought into the "Reverend" Wright's philosophy.  If Obama has, he should tell us and then Americans could decide whether a man holding these views could be a uniter or a divider.  Indeed, if he believes in Wright's teachings, is Obama qualified to be President of the United States?

You see, the flap over Wright goes much deeper than politics or race.  It speaks to the future of our nation.  From this debate, we get an idea of whether that future will be filled with real hope and change or a never-ending racial divide which will only perpetuate distrust and hate.  This is what's at stake for us all.

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact Dan@rffm.org

A Politically Incorrect, Correct Police Action: Jesse and Al, Where Are You?

RFFM.org Commentary by Dan Gura *

On Saturday, February 2nd, a lone gunman walked into a Lane Bryant clothing store in Tinley Park, Illinois and killed five women execution style.  The suspect was described as a black man with a medium complexion, between 5'8" and 5'10" tall, weighing 230 to 260 pounds, clean shaven, wearing a dark colored jacket, black jeans and a charcoal-gray knit cap.

Incredibly, in this politically correct world we now live in, police have not been criticized for concentrating their search for a subject as he was described.

Early news reports said police stopped at least one Metra bus and ordered several black men who matched the general description to exit.  They were forced, at gunpoint, to lie down in the snow until their innocence could be determined.

At a nearby Target store, police "herded" customers to the front of the store as other officers, with pistols and rifles drawn, searched the premises for black men who matched the general description.

What a novel idea…police targeting men who matched the profile of a mass murderer.  (The PC police said I was supposed to say 'alleged' mass murderer).

Surprisingly, neither of these actions seems to have drawn any criticism from legendary, and oft offended, black leaders Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

Have these long-in-the-tooth race-baiters finally seen the light and recognized it would have been a waste of time for the police to include elderly Oriental women, children under the age of ten, and blonde-haired, blue-eyed men in their dragnet?

Yes, Jesse and Al, there is a time and place for profiling.  When the suspect is a black male, the police should be looking for a black male…and they should warn the public what the perpetrator looks like, be he/she black/white/brown.

Now, I do not know what the men who were ordered off the bus at gunpoint intend to do.  I’m sure they have heard from every pettifogger in the yellow pages offering to file a wrongful something or other lawsuit.  I hope they have more class than that and realize that the police did the correct thing.

Lest ye think that I am just some white guy in the suburbs who doesn't know how it feels to be ordered out of a vehicle at gunpoint, I say think again.  Back in early 1991 my Monte Carlo SS was stolen from a parking lot at the Chicago Stadium.  It was recovered the next day minus the stereo and mag wheels.

The Chicago Police Department released the car to an auto body shop recommended by my insurance company, who put it back together.  One week later, around midnight, I was driving home from a Blackhawks game when I was forced off the road.  Two men brandishing pistols jumped out, pulled me out of my car and threw me face down on the snow covered street.  One kept his foot on my back--with his gun to my head--while the other took my wallet.  Naturally, I assumed I was going to die and made my peace with God.  To my surprise and relief, I was informed that there was a paper work snafu and my car was still reported as stolen.  Yes, I was accosted by two plainclothes police officers who actually told me it was my fault that they pulled me over.

Most of my friends said I should hire a lawyer and sue everyone involved.  Others said I should have contacted the now late Pulitzer Prize winning columnist Mike Royko, who often wrote about the plight of the little guy, to tell my story.  I chose to do neither.  Instead, I acknowledged that no matter how heavy-handed the police were, they actually were trying to recover my ride from some ne’er-do-well car thief.

In conclusion, I wonder if Jesse and Al really get it or are they just saving up their racial outrage until after the primaries, so as to not jeopardize Barack Hussein Obama’s presidential bid?  Am I on to something here regarding the silence of Jackson and Sharpton?  I'll let you provide the answer to that question.

* Dan Gura is a contributing editor to RFFM.org

Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact: Dan@rffm.org

60's Liberalism Doomed Black America: But Damage Can Be Undone

Commentary by Daniel T. Zanoza, National Director, RFFM.org

Editor's note: This is the third in a series of columns and articles about the issue of race and race relations in America.

In the mid-1970's, after obtaining my degree in social work, I was employed by an organization which attempted to heal dysfunctional families.  One thing I soon came to learn was a great deal of those children on our caseload were from single-parent households.  Most certainly, there are problems which exist within families where both parents are present.  However, by far, my co-workers and I saw a pattern that was directly related to the fact one parent was missing and, often, that parent was the father.

Children from families where a father figure was no longer present literally clung to the male caseworkers on our staff.  At times, it was painful for those of us who would go home at quitting time because we knew these children could not retreat to a similar refuge.  This does not mean all single mothers are destined to fail as parents.  I am saying all the data indicated the job of parenting became exponentially harder when a parent was absent.  In many circumstances, once problems began within a single-parent household, it was virtually impossible to effectively intervene.

What I learned from my experience as a family therapist has clarified problems which I see affecting the African-American community in the 21st century.  Today statistics indicate over 7 out of 10 black children live in families where the father is no longer present and, all too often, offer little or no support to the family on the whole.  But this social phenomenon is quickly spreading to other racial groups in America.  Nearly 35% of white children are now born out of wedlock.  This cultural epidemic has manifested itself with ever-increasing juvenile crime and teen-age pregnancies.  However, by far, the situation has had its greatest impact on African-Americans.

Sadly, black leaders rarely, if ever, utilize the bully pulpit to discuss this subject from an intellectual standpoint.  The failure of black students to prosper within public education, discrimination by employers and institutionalized racism are seen as primary causes for the poverty and other social ills which impact blacks.  The denial regarding the failure of African-American men to take responsibility for their offspring has only exacerbated the situation and left a culture literally chasing its tail in search of answers that should be obvious to many observers.

The reason for the denial may stem from a lack by some to take the proverbial bull by the horns.  It is easier to blame others for problems within a culture.  However, when the true cause for suffering is overlooked--for any reason--the crisis facing that community may never be resolved.

Ironically, in a way, blacks are not totally responsible for the high birth rate among unwed mothers.  President Lyndon Johnson's Great Society practically encouraged black men to leave their families.  It was more economically sound for the government to pay black and poor white women who had children out of wedlock.  Fathers who stayed home with their families, in many cases, could not match government stipends with low-paying jobs.  Thus the cycle of poverty continued for many years.  Welfare reform which passed in the mid-1990's has begun to wean poor families off of the government dole, but the damage done may take generations to repair.

Also, other cultural factors resulting from the societal revolution of the 1960's helped feed the growth of single-parent households.  Moral standards were relaxed and some feminists actually said male role models were not needed in the home.  Obviously, these ideas were not premised with the health of families in mind.  Many such assertions about what made up a positive environment for children were self-serving and meant to advance political agendas.

Some leaders in the African-American community have stepped up to identify the crisis related to fatherless families, but they have paid the price.  Actor and comedian Bill Cosby has been one of the most outspoken regarding this matter.  At the same time, Cosby has been pilloried by African-American intelligentsia who see his words as capitulation to white America.  Cosby has been called everything from a sell-out to an Uncle Tom by liberal blacks who speak down from their high towers in institutions of higher learning.

There are problems with inner-city public schools.  There are cases where institutionalized racism does exist.  There are other factors which need to be addressed by African-Americans who are looking to better the lives of future generations which will make America stronger on the whole and certainly the rest of us need to do our part.  But until those within the African-American community face up to the problem of absentee fathers, we will continue to spin our wheels as a society in a futile search for solutions that stand right before us.

Jena 6 Illustrates Why Hate Crime Legislation is Bad Law

RFFM.org Commentary by Daniel T. Zanoza, National Director

Laws which prosecute individuals who participate in crimes driven by hate may sound like a good idea to the general public.  However, as with any other issue, upon closer inspection things may not be as simple as they seem.  When a hate crime law is violated, motivation is almost impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt and often such laws are not applied equally.

A perfect example of how hate crime laws muddy the criminal justice system can be illustrated by the situation in Jena, Louisiana.  Six African-American males were charged with attempted murder after they assaulted a white classmate.  Justin Barker was knocked unconscious during the attack.  A sixteen year old African-American, named Michael Brown, was the first individual of the six to be charged with attempted murder.  Brown, who has an extensive rap sheet, was prosecuted as an adult and was serving time in a Louisiana prison before an appellate court overturned his conviction.  The court claimed Brown and the five other defendants should not have been tried as adults.  Brown was recently released on bail.

The case has generated national attention.  In September, thousands descended on the small Louisiana town, including civil rights leaders Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.  What once was a local issue left up to those in the community of Jena became a stage on which a debate over race relations in America was being waged.

One of the arguments advanced by Jackson, Sharpton and others regarded the failure by local and state officials to charge white students with violations of state hate crime laws.  Some believe the racial tension in Jena began because of a tree that was on school property.  Allegedly, only white students were allowed to congregate under the tree and when African-American students sat under the tree, therefore, challenging some sort of ridiculous tradition, trouble began.  Three nooses were hung at the site and the white students who were involved were suspended.  The community believed the incident and the turmoil which resulted from it were over.  Yet, in reality, the tumult had just begun.

Civil rights activists wanted a greater penalty for the white students who hung the nooses.  There was a call for the white students to be charged with hate crimes and the mantra was quickly picked up by the national press.  Most certainly it would have been reasonable for the white students to have been charged with intimidation, expelled from school or both.  Nooses and lynching hold a significant meaning for African-Americans in the South, especially those who remember the Jim Crowe years which were in effect in the former Confederacy between 1876 and 1965.  These laws permitted segregation through the implementation of "separate, but equal."  Also, Jim Crow laws prohibited blacks from voting and greatly restricted the civil rights of African-Americans in general.  Subsequently, the reaction of some blacks can be well understood regarding the incident in Jena.  But, from many reports, the community itself was well underway towards healing until outsiders ratcheted up racial tension in the region to the boiling point.

While there was a very boisterous appeal for the whites who hung the nooses to be charged with hate crimes, there was something missing from this argument.  The six black students who attacked their fellow classmate were not charged with crimes of hate.  In fact, there was no discussion by the community itself, civil rights activists or the dominant media of charging the so-called Jena 6 with a hate crime.  Indeed, what is more serious?  The hanging of the nooses or the actual beating of a human being--almost to the point of death?  The lack of consistency here approaches absurdity and it seems impossible that anyone would miss the point.  But it happened and it is still happening today.

Recently, the U.S. Senate passed a version of hate crime legislation, but before the U.S. House of Representatives follows suit and the President signs such a bill into law, some questions need to be answered and soul-searching must be done.

The situation in Jena alone points to the impossible scenarios that can arise concerning the prosecution of hate crimes.  How do we know what is in the mind of those charged with hate crime violations?  Who is protected by hate crime laws?  Are such laws equally applied?  Are there those not protected by hate crime legislation?  Does hate crime legislation lead to prejudice?

Recently in Urbana, Illinois a number of predominantly white churches were vandalized.  Messages of hate were painted and carved into the church signage and the churches themselves.  Swastikas, the numbers 6-6-6, and images of upside-down crosses were part of the desecration which took place.  Clearly, the vandalism was motivated by hate or, at least, one would think so.  However, the Urbana Police did not refer to these crimes as being driven by hate.

The situation in Urbana raises the question; just who determines what qualifies as hate?  If Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would have showed up in Urbana, would the police have approached these crimes in a different manner?  If the churches were predominantly African-American, would the national media have led a crusade citing the prevalence of racial hatred in America?

The Jena, Louisiana case is, and should be, troubling to us all.  However, until the law becomes as color-blind concerning race as we should be as individuals, hate crime laws have the potential to exacerbate racial relations in the United States--instead of heal them.