Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Obama’s Justice Department asserts power in Kinston

The Obama Administration is furthering partisan politics while exerting federal power over local politics. A letter was sent this past weekend to Kinston City Attorney James Cauley III that stated, "Removing the partisan cue in municipal elections will, in all likelihood, eliminate the single factor that allows black candidates to be elected to office" (http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/55818). Last year Kinston voters approved, with 65% of the vote, to make city council elections nonpartisan by removing party affiliation from the ballot.

The letter further stated, written by Assistant Attorney General Loretta King, that, "In Kinston elections voters base their choice more on the race of a candidate rather than his or her political affiliation, and without either the appeal to party loyalty or the ability to vote a straight ticket, the limited remaining support from white voters for a black Democratic candidate will diminish even more. Numerous elected municipal and county officials confirm the results of our statistical analysis that a majority of white Democrats support white Republican over black Democrats in Kinston elections. At the same time, they also acknowledge that a small group of white Democrats maintain strong party allegiance and vote along party lines, regardless of the race of the candidate."

Now Kinston is 2/3rd black and 1/3rd white so the assertion that King makes that black candidates, I mean black Democrat candidates will see their chance diminish is ludicrous. If people in Kinston voted on racial lines, black candidates – regardless of party – would always win. The simple fact that the Obama Administration is allowing the Attorney General's office to exert unconstitutional powers upon Kinston only fuels partisan politics and heightens the concept of race tension. As Americans we ought to be looking at candidates and evaluating them based on what they stand for, what they have done, and what they hope to accomplish instead of voting because of race, gender or party affiliation. Part of the reason why a third party candidate struggles to gain a foothold is due to partisan voting and the belief that we as Americans have only two viable candidates to choose from. How is this working for most Americans?

Now does this type of heavy-handedness by the Obama Administration and the assertion that if you are black you are a Democrat being picked up by mainstream media; no. A quick search of the internet will show only conservative sites are reporting the abuse of power by Obama's Department of Justice. The Department of Justice points to the Voting Rights Act to protect the black voters of Kinston. Abigail Thernstrom, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights appointee, argues, "The Voting Rights Act is supposed to protect against situations when black voters are locked out because of racism. There is no entitlement to elect a candidate they prefer on the assumption that all black voters prefer Democratic candidates" (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/20/justice-dept-blocks-ncs-nonpartisan-vote/print/).

The Washington Times story also stated that "Ms. King's letter in the Kinston case states that because of the low turnout black voters must be 'viewed as a minority for analytical purpose', and that 'minority turnout is revelevant' to determine whether the Justice Department should be allowed a change in election protocol." Let me get this right. The Department of Justice is saying that black voters in Kinston are dumb and lazy? Although I am not black, I am appalled for blacks in Kinston that Obama's Justice Department feels that black candidates are not strong enough to stand on their own principles; rather they need to be labeled Democrat to get elected. How does this stance further bi-partisan politics and remove the "second class" citizenship for blacks?