This graph is so true it is funny. Or should I say it is so funny it is true? It doesn’t matter what a white person says or does, the American liberal race-baiter takes issue with it. It may be different among conservative black Americans, but I haven’t been around enough of them to be able to make that judgement.
In my experience, a white person in the workplace who is in a supervisory position cannot even criticize a black subordinate without the race card coming into play. They flat cannot take criticism from a white person. You automatically hear the reply, “Oh you’re just criticizing me because I’m black.” No, I’m criticizing you because of the quality of your work.
American blacks at large are the most entitled, bigoted people on the planet, yet they’re the ones causing the huge racial divide between us; largely because of the fact they cannot take criticism from anyone not of their own race. Doubtless they will ever get over it in my lifetime, because I’ve witnessed it over and over again since I was in my early 20’s and I am now in my early 60’s.
I occasionally write for a syndicated op/ed aggregator, and they frown upon using memes within the context of the the post. I take issue with this because memes are the 21st century equivalent of the political cartoon we once saw in the Saturday Evening Post and most other printed magazines. Today political cartoonists have a tough row to hoe because printed magazines have all but ceased to exist, and the new media doesn’t appreciate them. That is too bad, because these graphic illustrations, often in the form of parody; call attention to the ludicrosity of the American lifestyle across all demographic boundaries. That said, the memes on this post do just that.
Consider the undeniable fact that Barack Hussein Obama has done more to reverse all of the progress made in racial equality than any president or citizen in the history of race relations. His administration effectively negated everything that brought us together over the course of the last 50 years. Barack Obama was the first black president. He was also the first openly RACIST president. Oh, and don’t tell me blacks can’t be racist. In my honest opinion American blacks are the most racist group in the history of America.
And speaking of race-baiters, let’s not forget about these two:
And last but not least, is the undeniable fact that as a white American cannot reason with an entitled black American, we also cannot reason with a so-called “progressive’ socialist Democrat. It is an exercise in futility and explains why Democrats and Republicans cannot get anything accomplished in Congress. As Thomas Paine once wrote,
“To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.”
The Republican Party is the party of racism? I think both Amber Randall and Minnesota Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison need a history lesson. The Nazi party was a socialist party just like the American Democrat party. The word “Nazi” stands for National Socialism, yet left wingers call conservatives Nazis? How do they figure? Both the socialist communist party and the Nazi party are two wings of the same bird. Both are left wing. Republicans abhor both.
You won’t find any Nazis among Republicans. Why do you think Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican, dummy?
Democrat George Wallace was a racist
Democrat President Lyndon Johnson using the “N” word
Hillary slams “KKK” Trump but her “friend and mentor” was KKK leader Robert Byrd
The Squad car dashcam video of the July 6, 2016 traffic stop of Philando Castile in Ramsey County, Minnesota has just been released.
The police officer who shot and killed Philando Castile in Minnesota has just been acquitted, and many people in the community are upset with the situation. Castile is black, the police officer is Hispanic; yet race-baiters are making it out that the officer was white.
Officer Jeronimo Yanez’s dashcam video puts the event into a completely different perspective the claims by the victim’s girlfriend that the he was only reaching for his drivers’ license. The victim told the officer he had a gun in the vehicle. When the officer told him to not reach for it, he continued to do so.
(What part of the name Jeronimo Yanez is it that Liberals cannot understand is hispanic?)
Oh, that’s right, they’re under-educated snowflakes. We can’t expect them to understand that. Race-baiters are jumping on this case once again in an attempt to fan the flames of racism, when it is far from a race issue. It is all about an officer’s ability to protect themselves.
The dashcam footage on Officer Yanez’s squad car was the primary deciding factor in the officer’s acquittal, as it was played numerous times to jurors who all unanimously decided Officer Yanez innocent of charges against him.
Officer Yanez stated that the victim matched the description of a robbery suspect from a few days prior to the incident.
Knowing the anti-law enforcement bias of the lamestream Liberal media, had the officer been killed by Castile, they would never have issued a blurb about it in the news.
As a former law-enforcement officer myself, I can tell you how to keep from getting shot in a traffic stop:
#1. Keep your hands on the steering wheel until the officer asks you to get your drivers license, registration, and proof of insurance.
#2. Keep all that information on your person,NOTin the glove box or console of your vehicle where a gun could be hidden.
#3. Once you have given the officer what he has requested, put your hands back on the steering wheel and leave them there until the officer instructs you to doANYTHINGelse.
Blue Lives Matter!
They lay their lives on the line every time they go on duty!
Simply click on the following link while your are logged into your Facebook profile or click on the link , then login to your account. Membership is limited to American citizens ONLY, with very few exceptions. Our group is Moderated, so if you are not an American citizen, you most likely will not be approved.
Lately, we’ve seen demands by S.W.I.N.E. (Students Wildly Indignant about nearly Everything), also known as ANTIFA; to be segregated from conservative students. So where is the tolerance?
It never ceases to amaze conservatives how intolerant the left-wingers are of anything patriotic or for standing up for good old fashioned all-Americanism.
Let’s take a step back in time when George Wallace, one of the most controversial politicians in U.S. history, was elected governor of Alabama in 1962 under an ultra-segregationist platform. In his 1963 inaugural address, Wallace promised his white followers: “Segregation now! Segregation tomorrow! Segregation forever!” However, the promise lasted only six months. In June 1963, under federal pressure, he was forced to end his blockade of the University of Alabama and allow the enrollment of African American students.
Wallace was (you guessed it, a southern Democrat) a segregationist, and an avowed racist.
Since that time, Democrats have tried to rewrite history and would have America believe that it is Republicans who are racists. So who was it who freed the slaves? Not Democrats.
Democrat Lyndon Baines Johnson, who succeeded JFK upon his assassination, once stated, “I’ll have those niggers voting Democratic for 200 years.”
And Johnson was successful after adding entitlements for welfare families that kept non-working blacks on the welfare dole for decades. It encouraged them to stay home and crank out fatherless children with no positive male role models in their lives which ultimately led to high crime rates in the African-American communities and more black-on-black violent crime than anywhere else in the world.
Campus Conservative Group Rejected By Liberal Students
As part of his quest to overhaul the American justice system, liberal billionaire George Soros is targeting local prosecutor races like the one in Harris County, a large jurisdiction that includes the city of Houston.
Morris Overstreet, a former judge who was the first African-American elected to statewide office in Texas since Reconstruction, was one of the beneficiaries. Overstreet received $100,000 from Soros in the race for Harris County district attorney.
But in a rare lost bet for Soros, Overstreet was defeated easily in the Democratic primary in March by Kim Ogg, a white woman from a prominent political family who has practiced law in Harris County, where she was born, for nearly 30 years.
Ogg had condemned the Soros donation to Overstreet intended to defeat her, calling it “a last-minute money dump to try to buy the nomination.”
Today, Ogg is the Harris County district attorney-elect after going on to beat the Republican incumbent, Devon Anderson. She won the general election with the aid of about $878,000 from the Soros-funded Texas Safety and Justice PAC.
Soros pledged allegiance to Ogg after his preferred candidate lost.
The money helped buy television ads accusing Anderson of botching a case in which the district attorney’s office ordered a rape victim jailed to guarantee she would show up in court to testify against her attacker.
Associates of Soros helped craft the message of the ads, Ogg’s campaign confirmed to The Daily Signal. The campaign said Soros’ contributions to Ogg equaled more than half of the $1.5 million she raised in total.
This past week, less than a month before she takes office, Ogg expressed a different view of Soros’ campaign contributions.
“Before, I was dismayed he was buying the election,” Ogg said in an interview with The Daily Signal, adding:
It was a last-minute dump [of funds supporting Overstreet]. In my instance, his people came to talk to me after I won the primary, so it was not a last-minute dump. Soros is only half of the story here. My agenda and platform was really set before he spent money in my race, but I am appreciative of the money, as I was with every other dollar.
On Jan. 1, Ogg will begin to try fulfilling the vision she ran on, promising a “significant culture change” defined by taking a more lenient approach to marijuana possession cases, focusing tax dollars on punishing violent criminals, and making it easier for defendants to get out of jail on bond in a county where 70 percent of inmates cannot afford to free themselves before trial.
It’s a set of goals that would seem to match Soros’ preference for how prosecutors do their jobs, using their powerful roles and vast discretion not only to protect public safety but also reduce prison populations and repeat offenses.
Despite these overlapping interests, Ogg insists she doesn’t have a mandate from Soros. In fact, she says she’s never spoken to or met with him.
“I don’t know George Soros,” Ogg said, then repeated: “I don’t know George Soros.”
“I made no promises to Soros or his supporters. The money that helped expose issues here is always a benefit, but I believe voters made their decision not based on the name or identity of a contributor, but on the poor policies and public safety record of my opponent. Plus, I have my own reputation here. In cases of David vs. Goliath, I often represent David. I believe my reputation is intact.”
‘Staggering Amount of Money’
Soros, 86, an American hedge fund manager and philanthropist, is No. 22 on the Forbes list of the world’s billionaires, with a net worth estimated at $20 billion. He finances a variety of liberal political causes, including ones related to education, immigration, climate change, and the environment.
Soros’ philanthropic network, the Open Society Foundations, has spent more than $13 billion over the past three decades on initiatives to defend human rights abroad and shape the democratic process in Eastern Europe.
Soros gave an unprecedented $27 million to various 527 groups trying to defeat President George W. Bush in his 2004 re-election campaign, describing the effort as a “matter of life and death.”
Soros also helped launch the Democracy Alliance, a group of major liberal donors seeking to advance progressive policymaking by investing in organizations such as Center for American Progress, Media Matters for America, and Organizing for Action, which was set up to advance the agenda of President Barack Obama.
Soros has not personally spoken with or met any of the candidates he supported in district attorney races this year and last, his advisers say.
In most of the dozen prosecutor races he helped finance, Soros did not coordinate at all with the candidate he supported, they said. Instead, he operated independently by giving money to various state-level political action committees (PACs) and a national “527” unlimited-money group, each identified by a variation on “Safety and Justice.”
The form of his contributions depended on local and state campaign finance laws, Soros’ advisers say, and in some cases, as in Harris County, the collaboration was more direct.
“The amount of money we are talking about is STAGGERING.”
Joshua Marquis, National District Attorneys Association
Soros’ efforts are part of a new, broader push by progressives to locate, prepare, and fund challengers to unseat incumbent prosecutors. Such upsets are notoriously difficult to achieve in local district attorney races, where name recognition and outside interest are usually low and voters give deference to the candidate with a record.
“Criminal justice reform efforts must take many forms,” Whitney Tymas, an adviser on Soros’ project challenging sitting prosecutors, said in a statement to The Daily Signal. Tymas added:
Changing laws and redirecting funding streams is critical. Because of the enormous discretion vested in those who enforce the laws, including prosecutors, it is also important to elect officials who are committed to public safety and equal justice. These officials are a key leverage point in a complicated system.
David Alan Sklansky, a Stanford University professor and former federal prosecutor, told The Daily Signal that only a “handful” of races for the 2,500 district attorneys’ offices nationwide included candidates with “reform-oriented” agendas, and of those that did, most did not involve contributions from Soros.
“In a number of high-visibility district attorney races around the country, incumbents this year were unseated by challengers who promised a more moderate approach to criminal justice, backing away from a simple ‘tough on crime’ agenda and paying more attention to fairness, proportionality, and equity,” Sklansky said. “Many of these successful candidates also pledged to improve the investigation of police shootings, to rein in prosecutorial misconduct, and to be more vigilant in avoiding and correcting wrongful convictions.”
Still, Soros’ role in local prosecutor races is significant. It touches counties big and small, urban and rural; northern, southern, western, eastern, and midwestern. In total, Soros spent nearly $11 million on 12 district attorney races this election cycle, campaign filings show.
A Democrat candidate supported by Soros ultimately won in 10 of the 12 races.
The trend of outside funding worries opponents of Soros’ tactics, including veteran district attorneys who say the outsize contributions threaten prosecutorial independence, which is especially important in a role as powerful and all-encompassing as theirs.
“The amount of money we are talking about is staggering,” said Joshua Marquis, the district attorney of Clatsop County, Oregon, since 1994 and a board member of the National District Attorneys Association.
“And it’s amplified because it’s extremely difficult to raise money as a prosecutor,” Marquis told The Daily Signal, adding:
To ask for money when you are a prosecutor, there is something inherently icky about all of it. The argument on one side is this is good, and it’s just turning on a searchlight and looking at these issues. But that’s naive in the extreme because it’s the money that is funding debates and actual discussions. If you are able to pay for and tell your side of the story over and over again on television ads, you are going to win.
Matthew McCord faced an uphill challenge to counter his Soros-backed opponent.
McCord, a Republican who ran for district attorney in Henry County, Georgia, was not an incumbent and did not have a prosecutor’s record to run on.
He had $60,000 in his campaign fund and a supportive family, but in September he decided that wasn’t enough. McCord dropped out of the race after learning Soros had contributed $100,000 to a political action committee supporting his opponent, Democrat Darius Pattillo.
“The joke was people were saying to me, ‘You need to fight to the death,’ and I said, ‘To whose death, mine?’” McCord told The Daily Signal in an interview. “Soros apparently had a single-minded mission to make sure I was not successful. I couldn’t compete.”
McCord, a municipal judge and local lawyer, said he ran on a platform similar to Pattillo, a deputy chief assistant district attorney in nearby DeKalb County. McCord said both candidates called for relieving overburdened courts and crowded jails by providing more alternatives to prosecution for low-risk offenders as well as better community outreach.
Pattillo did not respond to a request for an interview from The Daily Signal.
“I am viewed as a fairly centrist conservative,” McCord said. “I don’t know there was much difference between my approach to justice and his [Pattillo]. When did progressives and liberals get a monopoly on the idea of criminal justice reform? Soros doesn’t even know me. He didn’t ask me what my views were or what I would do.”
Soros so far has backed only Democrats in district attorney races, but his advisers insist his support for candidates isn’t based on political party and say Soros would consider making a large contribution to a “reform-minded” Republican prosecutor.
McCord said he doesn’t know if he will run again for district attorney—his dream job. But he said he knows what would stop him from trying.
“I’d rather be a private citizen doing the right thing than be a bought man,” McCord said.
‘A Little Bit of Love’
Prosecutors drive critical decisions in the criminal justice system, choosing when, whether, and against whom to bring criminal charges, as well as making recommendations for sentencing and setting the terms of plea negotiations.
These decisions are receiving more scrutiny at a time where there is a growing bipartisan consensus around the need to reduce incarceration, provide more alternative punishments, and expand rehabilitation opportunities for low-level drug offenders.
As part of this effort, Soros, along with progressive groups advocating racial justice and gender equality, is trying to elect more minority prosecutors in response to what he sees as an insufficient response by incumbent district attorneys to the fatal shootings of black men by police officers.
Several candidates who Soros backed are members of minority groups.
The Reflective Democracy Campaign, an arm of the progressive Women Donors Network, found in a 2015 study that 95 percent of elected local prosecutors were white.
“Of course, what was happening with Black Lives Matter and police shootings was a huge wake-up call [for progressives, who began] realizing how much power these offices have and the need for us to be focused on getting great people elected,” Andrea Dew Steele, president of Emerge America, a candidate-training organization for Democratic women, said in an interview with The Daily Signal.
“District attorney races have historically just been completely ignored, like most down-ballot races, in the progressive and Democratic community,” Steele said. “I am just thrilled to see that if you give a little bit of love to these races, a small investment yields a huge outcome.”
In Chicago’s Cook County, Soros funded one of several groups that helped Kim Foxx, who is black, defeat the incumbent state’s attorney, Anita Alvarez, in the Democratic primary. Foxx then easily beat her Republican general election opponent.
Alvarez drew widespread criticism for her handling of the 2014 fatal police shooting of Laquan McDonald, a black 17-year-old. She took 13 months before charging the Chicago police officer who shot and killed McDonald, a delay that sparked protests.
“Soros’ funding was a big factor in my loss, obviously,” Alvarez, the first female and first Hispanic candidate to be elected as Cook County’s top prosecutor, said in an interview with The Daily Signal. “Some people want to say I lost my election simply because of the McDonald video, but I felt this movement prior to my charging that officer. When you have these outside influences, it’s scary because they don’t know the climate—that Chicago has a serious violent crime problem, a serious gun problem.”
In Chicago’s Cook County, incumbent State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez was defeated by a candidate who received support from George Soros. (Photo: Abel Uribe/MCT/Newscom
Under Alvarez’s leadership, Cook County created a nationally recognized pretrial diversion program. Diversion is intended to promise low-risk defendants a second chance. Eligible individuals are not prosecuted, but instead receive supervision services such as counseling and job training, and can have their criminal record expunged.
Such diversion programs exist in almost every state, but Cook County’s is considered especially innovative because defendants pay no fee to participate, meaning poorer individuals can benefit from the services.
“It would have been a wonderful thing if George Soros actually would have looked at my record,” Alvarez said. “He probably would have liked what he saw.”
Soros’ money also helped Aramis Ayala upset incumbent Jeff Ashton in the Democratic primary for Florida state attorney for Orange and Osceola counties.
The Soros funding paid for TV ads and mailers accusing Ashton of carrying out racially disparate policies—a claim he denied.
Ayala, a black woman, became the first African-American elected as a state attorney in Florida.
“Race does not explicitly play a role, but in seeking candidates who understand the injustices of the current system, many of them turn out to be African-American or Latino, because it is people of color who have been disproportionately affected by those injustices,” Tymas, the Soros adviser, told The Daily SIgnal.
‘Couldn’t Stop Them’
Last year, Scott Colom took a risky approach to his run for district attorney in a four-county stretch in Mississippi.
Colom, who is black and a Democrat, promised voters he would promote more rehabilitation and less incarceration for drug offenders, especially young people—although he also said he’d be tough on violent criminals.
Voters validated Colom’s agenda. It also was backed by Soros, who gave almost $400,000 to a Mississippi PAC supporting Colom’s campaign to defeat a long-entrenched incumbent, Forrest Allgood, an aggressive prosecutor whose record had been heavily criticized.
That PAC also backed the re-election campaign of another local prosecutor, Hinds County District Attorney Robert Shuler Smith.
Colom now has served a year as district attorney of Mississippi’s 16th District. He has implemented some of his proposed policies, including expanding eligibility for pretrial diversion to defendants arrested for offenses such as selling marijuana.
In an interview with The Daily Signal, Colom said personal experience shapes his worldview. He grew up in Columbus, Mississippi, and watched high school classmates go to prison.
While in law school, Colom interned with the chief prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in Arusha, Tanzania, witnessing poverty and gaining an understanding of how government policy can hold people back.
“I had the courage to run on this criminal justice reform message based on my own personal convictions, before I had any idea there would be any national money, or a George Soros, supporting me,” Colom said. “I decided to run this way having no idea on how it polled. This is how I believed I should be elected.”
Colom, like Ogg in Harris County, said he didn’t know how Soros learned about who he is and what his positions are.
Colom said he never has been in contact with Soros, or anyone associated with him—and does not plan to connect with him now. He said he learned about Soros’ contribution only after seeing and hearing television and radio ads supporting his election.
Colom said the nearly $400,000 in outside money likely helped him, but that he also raised $150,000 on his own and knocked on doors every day from 3 to 7 p.m. during campaign season.
“This was a trying experience,” Colom said. “The most difficult thing I have done was to run for this office. It is important people get the whole picture of how I ran, not just one aspect of it.”
I don’t know George Soros. Do I think his spending money to spread my message helped me? I think any time your message spreads to more people, that helps that candidate get their message out. But what I emphasize is, the message has to be something someone agrees with. The people agree with my message. The people understand if you can avoid sending someone to prison and avoid the scar of a felony record, you should do that.
Colom’s candidacy for attorney general in Mississippi’s 16th District was one of the first such races that Soros has supported. As the Soros effort spreads, Colom says, it’s a difficult thing for candidates to counter.
“His support is not even something I can accept or decline,” Colom said. “They spend money independent of me. I couldn’t stop them. Honestly, I wouldn’t know who to ask if I wanted them to stop.”
Overcoming ‘Radical Agenda’
Pete Weir was able to halt Soros’ momentum by winning.
Soros dedicated $1.2 million to defeat Weir, the incumbent Republican district attorney of Gilpin and Jefferson counties in suburban Colorado.
Soros contributed to a PAC running negative ads against Weir in support of Democrat challenger Jake Lilly, a former prosecutor and Iraq War veteran. One mailer said the incumbent “can’t be trusted to keep us safe from sex offenders.”
In an interview with The Daily Signal, Weir said he overcame Soros’ influence by emphasizing his 37 years of criminal justice experience. The record, he said, includes a longtime dedication to reform—the cause that Soros says he is promoting.
“There was a backlash and outrage over the negative ads directed to me and an outrage over the prospect of an East Coast billionaire trying to buy our justice system,” Weir said, adding of Soros: “He knows nothing about our community, and what the criminal justice issues are in our counties. But it didn’t change my tactics or the way we campaigned on a positive message, on my experience. What he could not overcome were the relationships we had built in the community.”
Weir said he spent about $80,000 on his re-election campaign, using that money to spread the message that his office is “progressive,” combining “aggressive prosecution when it’s called for with innovative, problem-solving courts.”
Weir is a member of the Colorado Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice, which has helped pass state legislation reducing prison sentences for drug crimes.
He says he will continue to support reforms as prosecutor, because it’s what residents of Gilpin and Jefferson counties want. Even if he shares some of Soros’ goals, he said, those efforts should be dictated by local officials.
“It sounds immodest to say, but you would be hard-pressed to find another prosecutor in Colorado who has led reform efforts realizing we can do a better job in more areas,” Weir told The Daily Signal. “As a prosecutor community, we realize the system is imperfect and changes can and should be made. But to see some East Coast billionaire who has no idea of local interests acceding to a radical reform agenda at the expense of our democratic process is incredibly dangerous.”
‘Be More Political’
Soros and allied progressive groups say they will continue grooming and supporting prosecutor candidates who share their goals.
Steele, of Emerge America, says she already is looking ahead to the 2018 elections, with plans to recruit and train at least 25 Democratic women to run in district attorney races.
Women, she says, are uniquely sensitive to the consequences of incarceration and, as prosecutors, are likely to use their powers more carefully.
“I am hopeful that Emerge will have women running for district attorney in 2018 and make it onto Soros’ radar screen,” Steele said. “The George Soroses of the world can’t get the outcomes they desire unless you have great candidates. So what we are doing is a critical piece.”
She does not apologize for the aggressive outreach, arguing that because a state’s top prosecutors are elected, the process to become one is inherently political.
“All of these races are political,” Steele said, adding:
You have to run a race in order to win. I would say these races need to be even more political. Because the progressive community wants to see certain outcomes, less mass incarceration, that’s the outcome. In order to see that, we need to win races, and get qualified, good people running for these offices that had previously been uncontested.
Marquis, of the National District Attorneys Association, says he doesn’t doubt the sincerity of Soros and of progressive groups. He emphasizes that many members of the association, which represents state-level district attorneys across the U.S., support reform.
Indeed, the National District Attorneys Association made headlines earlier this year when it endorsed compromise legislation in Congress meant to reduce mandatory minimum sentences for low-level drug offenders in the federal prison system.
Yet Marquis said he worries that despite these efforts, some incumbent members of the association could lose their jobs to better-funded challengers.
“This is the source of great conversation among district attorneys,” Marquis said. “A lot of us are sitting around saying, ‘What if it’s me next? What if I am targeted?”
Who wants that idea hanging over their head all the time? Soros needs to be brought up on Charges and put in Federal prison.
Some of Bundy’s generosity in bestowing money upon others was parochial—in particular a grant of $131,000 to eight members of Robert Kennedy’ s staff in 1969 to help them overcome their grief after Sirhan Sirhan had gunned down their boss. Those grants came under the rubric of “Broadening opportunities for young men and women who might otherwise be unable to develop their abilities.”
The politicized grants continued after that, as the Ford Foundation, particularly during the Nixon years, came to see itself as a government-in-exile, an engine for social transformation.
Bundy transformed the Foundation into a leading sponsor of left-wing causes such as the expansion of the welfare state, nuclear disarmament, environmental advocacy, and the creation of “civil rights” interest groups that emphasized ethnic identity and ethnic power, or “multiculturalism,” over integration and assimilation into the American culture.
Ford gave as much as $300 million per year throughout the 1960’s to support such causes. Ford’s sponsorship of these radical causes frequently proved destructive to those whom it was intended to help. In 1967, for instance, on the advice of academic radicals in New York, Bundy aligned his Foundation with members of the Brooklyn Black Power movement to establish a community-run set of schools in the borough’s predominantly black Ocean Hill-Brownsville section. Between 1967 and 1968, Ford gave more than $900,000 to fund schools as part of these so-called “community control experiments” in New York City.
In theory, the Ford-funded project was supposed to empower minority communities and improve inner-city education by giving minority parents full control over their school districts. In practice, it was a disaster. The mostly-black school board precipitated a bitter and drawn-out fight with the city’s teacher’s union when the board fired the mostly white teachers as part of the project and the union came to their defense. At the same time, many of the teachers who had been appointed as part of the program were not remotely qualified for the job. Often the Ford-backed schools were staffed with anti-white militants and anti-Semites who fueled racial tensions in New York. A poem by one of the teachers appointed through the Ocean Hill-Brownsville program allegedly read: “Hey Jewboy, with the yarmulke on your head/You paleface Jewboy, I wish you were dead.” (Many of the white teachers in the school district and the New York teachers’ union were Jewish.) Still other teachers were white graduate students with no teaching experience who were drawn to the project for political reasons. As a result, the quality of education at participating schools deteriorated markedly. When the project ended after three years, minority students at Ocean Hill-Brownsville schools actually performed worse on reading tests than they had performed before the project began.
Ford again bankrolled the Black Power movement when it steered grants to the Cleveland chapter of the Congress for Racial Equality (CORE), to support its voter-registration drive among blacks. Indeed, Ford funds paid for black youths to attend classes at CORE’s headquarters. Ostensibly about black history and heritage, these classes actually stoked racial division by teaching what one black councilman described as “race hatred.” Most notoriously, in 1967, Ford grants to CORE helped tip the balance in Cleveland’s mayoral race to elect Democrat Carl Stokes—a politician linked with the radical Black Power movement—as the city’s first black mayor. In what many observers saw as a clearly partisan effort, Ford gave CORE a grant of $175,000, of which $30,000 went toward voter-registration efforts aimed exclusively at black voters. Buoyed by the registration drive, Stokes was able to prevail in a tightly contested race. These registration drives were the seeds that led to the creation of organizations involved in similar efforts nationally, such as the radical group ACORN, which eventually came under scrutiny for massive election fraud in behalf of Democrats in more than a dozen states.
Ford’s “march to the Left” would ultimately provoke a bitter falling out between, on the one hand, the Foundation’s staff and trustees, and on the other, Edsel Ford’s son Henry Ford II, the last member of the Ford family to serve on the Foundation’s board.
In 1976 a disillusioned Henry Ford II terminated his 34-tenure with a protest against the leftward course his family’s Foundation had pursued. In a stinging letter of resignation, Mr. Ford excoriated the trustees for using the Foundation’s funds to support left-wing causes while abandoning the commitment to free enterprise that had made possible the profits from which the Foundation was created. “The Foundation exists and thrives on the fruits of our economic system,” he said. “The dividends of competitive enterprise make it all possible. A significant portion of the abundance created by U.S. business enables the foundation and like institutions to carry on their work. In effect, the foundation is a creature of capitalism – a statement that, I’m sure, would be shocking to many people in the field of philanthropy. It is hard to discern recognition of this fact in anything the foundation does. It is even more difficult to find an understanding of this in many of the institutions, particularly the universities, that are the recipients of the foundation’s grant programs.” Mr. Ford also observed “that the system that makes the foundation possible very probably is worth preserving.”
Not only did Ford Foundation’s executives not heed Henry Ford II’s warning that its social investments were undermining the very system that underwrote its philanthropy, but they moved aggressively to create a network of progressive groups who would use their non-profit tax status to promote radical agendas.
Under McGeorge Bundy’s leadership, the Ford Foundation made it a priority to support what it considered “civil rights” causes, but which in fact were politically left-wing agendas within the civil rights movement. That task fell to Sanford Jaffe, the director of the Ford Foundation’s Government and Law Program from 1968-83. Prior to his appointment, Jaffe had served as executive director of the “Select Commission on Civil Disorder,” established in 1968 by New Jersey’s governor, Democrat Richard Hughes. Publishing a study that examined the underlying causes of the violent riots that had erupted in the predominantly black inner-city section of Newark in the summer of 1967, this Commission made policy recommendations for dealing with the problems facing inner-city communities. Like the “President’s Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders” initiated by President Lyndon Johnson, the New Jersey commission concluded that white racism and systemic inequities were the primary causes of the Newark riots. As Jaffe later put it, the riots had been sparked by “the inattention to the needs and aspirations of the black community, and the absence of opportunities available across the board.”
The Commission’s report, blaming the riots on poverty and racism, reflected a rapidly forming consensus on the left. Its prescriptions were of a similar cast, proposing vast increases in government welfare programs as a “solution” to the “root causes” of the violence — in particular lack of income. That both the riots and the poverty might have been the result of disintegrating family and community structures in the inner city, as warned by the Moynihan Report, a groundbreaking 1965 study of the African American family, was not part of the new political calculus.
The challenge faced by Jaffe and the other progressives at the Ford Foundation was to promote agendas favored by liberals and Democrats while camouflaging its political nature, so as to conform to the legal requirements of a tax-exempt organization. Aware that this was uncharted territory and legally problematic, Jaffe wondered how he might insulate the Foundation from “criticism both from some people on the Ford board and a lot of people from the outside?” The strategy he devised was to form a Public Interest Law Advisory Committee. Consisting of four ex-presidents of the American Bar Association, this Committee would assess the Foundation’s grants and lend the stamp of non-partisan prestige to an increasingly political grant-making strategy. When the Foundation’s grants then came under attack for their political nature, Jaffe could tell the Foundation’s board, “Look, I got the advice of these four people.”
The strategy was so successful, that it initially helped diffuse opposition even from critics on the board like Henry Ford II. In order to win Ford’s approval, Jaffe made William Gossett, Ford’s general counsel, one of the members of his Advisory Committee. As Jaffe would later recall, “That became a key element to say to Henry Ford if he had a problem, ‘Well, Bill Gossett, your lawyer, thinks that this is a worthwhile enterprise, he’s joining us in looking at it.”
Jaffe’s approach cleared the way for the Ford Foundation to fund the creation of left-wing public interest law firms when otherwise the Foundation’s board might have been reluctant to endorse such nakedly partisan grants. As further insurance, Jaffe made sure that every firm would have a “litigation committee” comprising the kind of white-shoe lawyers that served on Ford’s board. That way, if the firms which Ford backed endorsed partisan liberal causes, Jaffe could claim that it was all approved at the highest levels: “We’d say, ‘Now, wait a minute, they have a distinguished board and besides that they have a litigation committee and they cannot file a lawsuit unless the litigation’s committee’s approved it.’ Now look who’s on the litigation committee. Arthur Goldberg, you know, was a former Supreme Court justice, this person and that person are all senior partners at law firms.” As one critic notes, “The program’s officers did all they could to give this potentially explosive program a smooth, establishment veneer.”
Despite its authorization as a tax-exempt entity intended to promote the general (non-partisan) welfare, the Ford Foundation would go on to create an army of progressive “public-interest” law firms, designed to advance the agendas of the Left. In time, these groups would become a Shadow Party for the political Left, shaping policy and politics in America while disenfranchising the very groups they were created to represent. Among the most influential of these tax-exempt advocacy groups were the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), the National Council of La Raza(NCLR),