April D. Ryan

What do you think of the latest McCain campaign ad comparing Barack Obama to Paris and Britney?  Is it true or over the top?

The United States House of Representatives approved by voice vote Resolution 194 to apologize for slavery.   The resolution was introduced in February 2007 by Tennessee congressman Steve Cohen who serves a majority black district.  120 congressional leaders signed on as co-sponsors.

Representative Cohen is currently in a tough political fight to keep his congressional seat.  His election is just days away.    Some members of the congressional black caucus are supporting his African American female opponent.

The issue of an apology for slavery is not new.  In 1998, there was an expectation then President Bill Clinton would apologize for Slavery when he toured Senegal’s Goree Island.  He did not. During that period, Clinton was in the midst of holding his conversations on race.  At that same time, then Congressman Tony Hall of Ohio generated the debate about a government apology.

Years later, when President George W. Bush embarked on his African journey, he declined an apology too.

A concern about an apology was its link to costly reparations for descendants of enslaved Africans.

Resolution 194 has no reparation provisions but does express regret in written form through the House vote.   House Resolution 194:

RESOLUTION

Apologizing for the enslavement and racial segregation of African-Americans.

Whereas millions of Africans and their descendants were enslaved in the United States and the 13 American colonies from 1619 through 1865;

Whereas slavery in America resembled no other form of involuntary servitude known in history, as Africans were captured and sold at auction like inanimate objects or animals;

Whereas Africans forced into slavery were brutalized, humiliated, dehumanized, and subjected to the indignity of being stripped of their names and heritage;

Whereas enslaved families were torn apart after having been sold separately from one another;

Whereas the system of slavery and the visceral racism against persons of African descent upon which it depended became entrenched in the Nation’s social fabric;

Whereas slavery was not officially abolished until the passage of the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution in 1865 after the end of the Civil War, which was fought over the slavery issue;

Whereas after emancipation from 246 years of slavery, African-Americans soon saw the fleeting political, social, and economic gains they made during Reconstruction eviscerated by virulent racism, lynchings, disenfranchisement, Black Codes, and racial segregation laws that imposed a rigid system of officially sanctioned racial segregation in virtually all areas of life;

Whereas the system of de jure racial segregation known as `Jim Crow,’ which arose in certain parts of the Nation following the Civil War to create separate and unequal societies for whites and African-Americans, was a direct result of the racism against persons of African descent engendered by slavery;

Whereas the system of Jim Crow laws officially existed into the 1960’s–a century after the official end of slavery in America–until Congress took action to end it, but the vestiges of Jim Crow continue to this day;

Whereas African-Americans continue to suffer from the consequences of slavery and Jim Crow–long after both systems were formally abolished–through enormous damage and loss, both tangible and intangible, including the loss of human dignity and liberty, the frustration of careers and professional lives, and the long-term loss of income and opportunity;

Whereas the story of the enslavement and de jure segregation of African-Americans and the dehumanizing atrocities committed against them should not be purged from or minimized in the telling of American history;

Whereas on July 8, 2003, during a trip to Goree Island, Senegal, a former slave port, President George W. Bush acknowledged slavery’s continuing legacy in American life and the need to confront that legacy when he stated that slavery `was . . . one of the greatest crimes of history . . . The racial bigotry fed by slavery did not end with slavery or with segregation. And many of the issues that still trouble America have roots in the bitter experience of other times. But however long the journey, our destiny is set: liberty and justice for all’;

Whereas President Bill Clinton also acknowledged the deep-seated problems caused by the continuing legacy of racism against African-Americans that began with slavery when he initiated a national dialogue about race;

Whereas a genuine apology is an important and necessary first step in the process of racial reconciliation;

Whereas an apology for centuries of brutal dehumanization and injustices cannot erase the past, but confession of the wrongs committed can speed racial healing and reconciliation and help Americans confront the ghosts of their past;

Whereas the legislature of the Commonwealth of Virginia has recently taken the lead in adopting a resolution officially expressing appropriate remorse for slavery and other State legislatures are considering similar resolutions; and

Whereas it is important for this country, which legally recognized slavery through its Constitution and its laws, to make a formal apology for slavery and for its successor, Jim Crow, so that it can move forward and seek reconciliation, justice, and harmony for all of its citizens: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives–

(1) acknowledges the fundamental injustice, cruelty, brutality, and inhumanity of slavery and Jim Crow;

(2) apologizes to African-Americans on behalf of the people of the United States, for the wrongs committed against them and their ancestors who suffered under slavery and Jim Crow; and

(3) expresses its commitment to rectify the lingering consequences of the misdeeds committed against African-Americans under slavery and Jim Crow and to stop the occurrence of human rights violations in the future.

Just weeks before the November 4, 2008 Presidential Elections, Oliver Stone has a fall release date set for his latest film, “W”. The cast of characters are familiar. What about the timing of the film? Click on the above link to view the trailer.

President Bush has made a very rare move accepting the recommendation from the Secretary of the Army to approve the death sentence for Army Private Ronald Gray after a general court marshal for multiple murders and rapes. The crimes were committed while Private Gray was an active member of the United States Armed Services in Fayetteville, North Carolina between April 1986 and January 1987. Private Gray was convicted of committing two murders an attempted murder and three rapes.

“While approving a sentence of death for a member of our Armed Services is a serious and difficult decision for a Commander-In-Chief, the President believes the facts of this case leave no doubt that the sentence is just and warranted,” White House officials said in a statement Monday evening.

The last President to act on a military death sentence was President Dwight Eisenhower in 1957. It was carried out in 1961. In that case, an Army private was convicted of raping and attempting to murder an 11-year-old Austrian girl. The private was hanged.

The death penalty was banned between 1972 and 1984, when President Ronald Reagan reinstated capital punishment.

In the military justice system a member of the armed forces cannot be executed until the president approves the death sentence. It is the opposite of the civilian justice system where the president may be asked to exercise his clemency authority to stop an execution.

Reports indicate the military is asking President Bush to authorize the execution of Dwight Loving for his conviction of killing two taxicab drivers. Loving was an Army private at Fort Hood, Texas at the time. He has been in prison since 1989.

Six people are currently on death row at a US Disciplinary Barracks in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

What do you think about the Gray execution approval and the potential military death sentence approvals to come?

Fiscal year 2009 will start with a federal budget deficit of $482 billion. Experts believe the shortages will grow beyond that figure. White House officials blame recent stimulus checks for the larger than usual budget debt. Bush administrations officials contend it was more important to help the soft economy than to knock down the deficit. Funding for The War on Terror is also factored into the budget deficit. An economic analyst from The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies finds the projected deficit will create a spike in inflation. The analyst went on to say minority communities would be hit the hardest as they have not gotten over the 2001 recession.

Where do you draw the line to accommodate a worsening economy? Or are you already doing so?

The Sunday news programs delved into Senator John McCain’s war of words against Senator Barack Obama’s Iraq War plan. Senator Obama plans to withdraw American troops from Iraq if he is elected president. McCain contends Obama does not understand the Stakes in Iraq. John McCain’s last weekly radio address makes those assertions. Here is a portion of that transcript.

Good morning. I’m John McCain, and this week the presidential contest was a long-distance affair, with my opponent touring various continents and arriving yesterday in Paris. With all the breathless coverage from abroad, and with Senator Obama now addressing his speeches to “the people of the world,” I’m starting to feel a little left out. Maybe you are too.

Back here in the country that we are competing to lead, a lot folks were having trouble trying to square Senator Obama’s multiple positions on the surge in Iraq. First, he opposed the surge and confidently predicted that it would fail. Then he tried to prevent funding for the troops who carried out the surge. But now that it’s clear that the surge has succeeded, and brought victory in Iraq within sight, Senator Obama can’t quite bring himself to admit his own failure in judgment. Instead, he commits the even greater error of insisting that even in hindsight, he would still oppose the surge. Even in retrospect, he would choose the path of retreat and failure for America over the path of success and victory. That’s not exactly my idea of the judgment we seek in a commander-in-chief.

Oddly enough, my opponent advocates the deployment of two new combat brigades to Afghanistan — in other words, a surge. We’re left to wonder how he can deny that the surge in Iraq has succeeded, while at the same time announcing that a surge is just what we need in Afghanistan. I’ll leave all these questions for my opponent and his team of 300 foreign policy advisors to work out for themselves. With luck, they’ll get their story straight by the time the Obama campaign returns to North America.

What do you think about the Iraq War? In your opinion, who is right?

Monday, former President Bill Clinton begins his yearly Africa tour. He is expected to travel to four nations: Ethiopia, Senegal, Liberia, and Rwanda. In 1998, Clinton conducted what is still thought of as the most comprehensive tour of Sub-Saharan Africa by any sitting president.

Like in the past, agenda items include poverty, global climate change, Malaria prevention, and treatment and prevention of the HIV/AIDS pandemic. Central to the trip is a review of prevention efforts of mother-to-child transmissions of HIV/AIDS. The tour culminates in Mexico City, at the International AIDS Conference. There, he will give remarks on his just concluded trip.

Clinton Foundation sources say the trip could reshape Bill Clinton’s image. They are looking to copy a positive past. Pictures of the trip would show a hands-on Bill Clinton combating social and humanitarian issues world wide. The hope of foundation sources, the trip would distance him from some of his controversial failed attempts to help his wife win the White House. What are your thoughts about former President Clinton’s Africa tour and image?

With a few months remaining until the November General Elections, is the race just black and white or is there some gray area?

There are reports the late Robert Kennedy gave a speech to the Voice of America 40 years ago where he was alleged to have said: Things are “moving so fast in race relations a Negro could be president in 40 years.” Kennedy also is alleged to have said in that same broadcast, “Prejudice exists and probably will continue to… `but we have tried to make progress and we are making progress. We are not going to accept the status quo.’”

The Voice of America confirms Robert Kennedy did an address exclusively for VOA on race relations on May 25, 1961. Major news networks like NBC and ABC have already called asking about it. Unfortunately, the tape cannot be located…nor is there a transcript. The chief librarian of the Voice of America says the quotes can also be found in a book called “Excerpts in Rights for Americans: The Speeches of Robert F. Kennedy”. With that said, as America prepares for the November General elections, what do you think of that Kennedy assessment over 40 years later?

Tim Russert dedicated a segment of Meet the Press to Bobby Kennedy’s prophetic words.