Tuesday 7/1/2008 DAILY NEWS DIGEST
Birmingham News – State set to resume executions on July 31st.
Birmingham News – Study shows UAB failing to adequately prepare education students to teach math.
Birmingham News – Rural Alabama site loses out on bid for auto assembly facility, but effort among cities and counties to pool resources draws praise from industrial recruiters.
Birmingham News – The Birmingham News likes new policy that increases frequency of formal evaluations for state’s postsecondary system staff.
Mobile Press-Register – Department of Corrections’ farm land remains idle in spite of rising food costs while efforts at selling property to meet budget needs continue.
Mobile Press-Register – Alabama Power Company gets approval to use $120 million in GO Zone bonds for pollution control work.
Montgomery Advertiser - Moratorium on implementation of new federal Medicaid rules expected to save state millions.
Montgomery Advertiser - Commentary by Tuscaloosa physician calls for state to end payday lending as a protection to consumers.
Tuscaloosa News – Sentencing for former Rep. Bryant Melton in Fire College fraud scheme delayed for seventh time.
Tuscaloosa News – Lawyer asks jury to award state $800 million in case alleging overcharging of Medicaid by pharmaceutical companies.
Tuscaloosa News – The Tuscaloosa News finds irony in the allegations of vote selling in counties that were in the forefront of the battle for voters’ rights a generation ago.
Tuscaloosa News - The Tuscaloosa News praises Postsecondary Chancellor Bradley Byrne.
Times Daily - Alabama Criminal Justice Information Center to offer employee background checks to state’s businesses.
Reuters - U.N. envoy finds Alabama executions “highly problematic.”
Chattanooga Times Free Press – Huntsville site in the running for Volkswagen facility.
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review - House Judiciary Committee issues subpoena to Department of Justice for documents relating to Siegelman prosecution.
>>One of the greatest ironies of all is that some of the very people the movement enfranchised now may be selling those rights for a load of gravel or a fistful of dollars.
In war, the winners get to write the history. In the Civil Rights movement, the losing side has always been tagged with no motive other than pure, unadulterated racism. In reality, there were some valid concerns expressed by those who lost in the Civil Rights battles.
It is human nature to claim that ALL who oppose me are motivated by very unflattering reasons. Civil Rights oponents, WWII Germans, WWII Japanese, Islamics, etc. In many cases, they have valid concerns.
I am not claiming that ANY of those are (or were) completely right, or worthy of winning their struggles. (I think NONE of them should have prevailed.) Just that we lie to ourselves when we impute evil motives to all of our opponents.
Comment by Onelife — July 2, 2008 @ 6:21 am
Onelife, will share with us those “valid concerns” of those who fought the Civil Rights movement?
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 7:09 am
Onelife, will share with us those “valid concerns” of those who fought the Civil Rights movement?
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 7:09 am
Larry Langford and company
Comment by Zorro — July 2, 2008 @ 7:41 am
>>Onelife, will share with us those “valid concerns” of those who fought the Civil Rights movement?
I guess you couldn’t figure out that my comment actually related to the article that I was commenting on. Too big a logic leap for you.
Some people may have been concerned that poor, uneducated, illiterate people would be more subject to vote fraud, intimidation and manipulation. (i.e. What this article was about.)
I said:
(I think NONE of them should have prevailed.)
Those who opposed civil rights SHOULD NOT have prevailed. But only a simpleton would say that none of their stated concerns have come true.
Comment by Onelife — July 2, 2008 @ 9:42 am
Onelife - I don’t think you have any logic in your comments. Look at your statement: “In reality, there were some valid concerns expressed by those who lost in the Civil Rights battles.” I merely asked that you identify valid concerns raised by those who lost in the Civil Rights battles. You may have intended for your comment to reflect on the content of the article, but that’s not what you said. But, as always, you find some way to deflect any question or challenge to your opinions.
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 10:13 am
And furthermore, I guess you’re saying that if only “those who fought the Civil Rights movement” had prevailed, then we wouldn’t be worried about “poor, uneducated, illiterate people” being subject to fraud, intimidation, and manipulation. Then just us white folks could all the decisions and not worry the poor those other uneducated, illiterate folks with mundane tasks like voting.
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 10:31 am
The Civil Rights Movement (to my knowledge) did not overturn any laws that said “Black folks can’t vote.” It overturned policies that supposedly had to do with avoiding ill-informed or fraudulent votes, but in actuality had disparate impact on minority voters.
Comment by Onelife — July 2, 2008 @ 11:13 am
I’m not sure where you lived (or even if you were around) during the civil rights struggle, but let me assure you that even though there may have not been specific laws that said Blacks could not vote, that was the impact of most of the public policies of that time. Whether we were requiring payment of a poll tax, testing procedures to determine eligibility for registration, or economic sanctions against those who did try to claim their right to vote, I can assure you that the impact was the denial of voting rights. If you can say that the civil rights struggle was geared toward overturning policies that had to do with “avoiding ill-infomred or fraudulent votes”, it was the white majority’s ill informed or fraudulent votes that worked to deny equal rights to all of our citizens.
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 2:06 pm
>>I’m not sure where you lived (or even if you were around) during the civil rights struggle,
I wasn’t.
>>but let me assure you that even though there may have not been specific laws that said Blacks could not vote,
I said that.
>>that was the impact of most of the public policies of that time.
I said that.
>>Whether we were requiring payment of a poll tax, testing procedures to determine eligibility for registration, or economic sanctions against those who did try to claim their right to vote, I can assure you that the impact was the denial of voting rights.
I said that (but with different specifics).
>>If you can say that the civil rights struggle was geared toward overturning policies that had to do with “avoiding ill-infomred or fraudulent votes”, it was the white majority’s ill informed or fraudulent votes that worked to deny equal rights to all of our citizens.
I’m not sure about this. Ill-informed - Probably. Fraudulent - Not if some registered red-neck voted his inbred convictions one and only one time. That is not fraud.
My only point was that it is not possible to say that every person who supported a poll tax, testing procedure or picture ID requirement did so (or does so) purely for the negative impact on minorities. Those things also may have had (and have) legitimate functions in preventing fraud. We also do not allow children or mentally impaired people to vote. A (fairly administered - They WERE NOT typically)literacy test is not dramatically different than that current requirement.
Comment by Onelife — July 2, 2008 @ 2:26 pm
Then if you understand that public policies denied the access to the vote by minority groups, I still don’t understand your contention that the loosers in the struggle had “valid concerns.” You certainly take a paternalistic view of those who fought against civil rights - all they were doing was trying to protect minorities? And I would say that the efforts at denial of the right to vote WAS fraudulent - they were manipulating public policies that you are now defending (poll tax, testing, etc) to deny voting rights. And, apparently you equate the denail of voting rights to Blacks in Alabama as the same as denying the vote to children or the mentally impaired?
Onelife, the more talk the deeper you get.
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 2:36 pm
>>And, apparently you equate the denail of voting rights to Blacks in Alabama as the same as denying the vote to children or the mentally impaired?
Not at all. I specifically equated the voting rights of illiterates to the voting rights of children or the mentally impaired. And I specifically stated that those tests were used UNFAIRLY against minorities.
Comment by Onelife — July 2, 2008 @ 3:41 pm
But yet you defend those who fought against such injustices, by defining who fought to maintain them as “having valid concerns.”
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 3:45 pm
>>But yet you defend those who fought against such injustices, by defining who fought to maintain them as “having valid concerns.”
I don’t think you mean what you wrote. You wrote it backward.
Simpletons see the world in black and white.
“If you disagree with me, you must be evil.”
I don’t.
If laws that were meant to ensure the validity of the ballot were misused to deny the vote to certain people, should all laws to ensure failr elections be repealed? Should everyone who wants fair elections be accused of being racist?
I mentioned Hitler (Germany in WWII) as well. He had valid concerns. Why does that get lost in the discussion?
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 5:54 pm
You’re right - I had it backwards.
I don’t think that because you disagree with me you’re evil.
I think you’re dead wrong (not necessarily evil) because you try to justify those laws that denied people access to the ballot. I agree we need to enforce fair elections, but I don’t see that the heroic efforts of the leaders of the civil rights movement to overcome laws which served to deny them the vote should be trivialized, nor do I see how anyone who has an understanding of Southern history would even begin to try to justify the use of poll taxes, literacy tests, etc. The record of how these processes were used to deny voting to African Americans is not really subject to debate - it’s a clearly documented fact.
Comment by Anonymous — July 2, 2008 @ 6:03 pm
>>The record of how these processes were used to deny voting to African Americans is not really subject to debate - it’s a clearly documented fact.
I don’t disagree.
I think we have both stated our points ad-nauseum. We could go on an on restating them, but I think anyone reading the thread can accurately gauge our arguments.
It was a fun, mostly civil argument. I had a somewhat snarky comment near the top, but I’m working on that…
(Oh, and by the way, I was right.)
Comment by Onelife — July 2, 2008 @ 6:26 pm