Some time ago I wrote an article on HUD’s latest racially biased regulation requiring that in any case involving housing discrimination, statistics alone, not intent to discriminate, are sufficient to prove race discrimination. Basically what this means is that lenders, insurers and landlords must impose a racial quota on who they lend to, who they insure and who they rent to.
HUD (US Department of Housing and Urban Development) and its employment-sibling EEOC (US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) have been blatantly racist for decades, and the public has sat silently by seeming not to care, but now the Obama administration has gone even further by promoting Tom Perez, from Eric Holder’s “Civil Rights Division,” to head HUD. Perez is notorious, among other things, for suing under this quota theory, then persuading the defendant to discontinue the case when it was scheduled before the U.S. Supreme Court. Perez feared he would lose and his quota regulation would be stricken down. Having engineered that near-miss at the Supreme Court, Perez is now free at HUD to impose his new racist regulation.
The insurance industry is suing to challenge this regulation claiming “the rule would require insurers to provide and price insurance in a manner that is wholly inconsistent with well-established principles of actuarial practice and applicable state insurance law.” Wall St. Journal, “Challenging HUDs Racial Quotas,” July 17, 2013, A14.
This short, elegant statement of what is wrong with HUD’s race-based regulation is a good summary of what is wrong with every racially-based formulation promulgated by the federal government.
Well-established principles of hiring require that the employer hire the person best qualified for the job, except for blacks. Well-established principles of promotion require that people who have done exceptional work get promoted, except for blacks. Well established principles of admission to college and professional schools require that schools admit those most likely to succeed, i.e., those with the highest academic credentials, except for blacks. Well- established principles of lending require that lenders loan money to those most likely to pay it back, except for blacks. Well-established principles of renting require that landlords rent properties to those most likely to care for it and pay the rent, except for blacks. And well established legal principles require that when a jury has rendered an acquittal in a criminal matter, it is concluded, unless there is a black victim.
These exceptions to well-established principles and common sense are a national disgrace.
It is tempting to say that this pervasive racial preference in favor of blacks was invented by well-meaning whites and leave it at that, but we have suffered through it for at least fifty years, and the damage to whites, to the concept of fairness, to confidence in the government, to race relations, and to blacks themselves is overwhelming. Not only that, but it hasn’t worked.
Now we have a black president who has appointed a black attorney general who, like HUD’s Perez, came from the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. And lest you misunderstand what the “Civil Rights Division” is, “civil rights” does not mean the rights guaranteed all Americans, it means “black rights.” That black-centered operation is where Holder came from and that’s where Perez came from. When you reflect on how “civil rights” has come to mean only “black rights,” that whites have been disenfranchised in their own Justice Department, you get an idea of how pervasive, how universally accepted black favoritism is.
In fact, Holder, with a straight face, has described the “Civil Rights” division of the Justice department, “under [his] leadership” as “the conscience of the nation.” Ignoring the words of the federal hate crime statutes, he proudly states he will prosecute hate crimes only when the victims are those who have historically suffered discrimination: i.e., blacks but not whites. But here is what the statute says:
“(a) In General.—
(1) Offenses involving actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin.— Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person—”
Clearly, the statute applies to anyone (“whoever” and “race”), white or black, and Holder is wrong. But Holder’s office, “the conscience of the nation,” the highest law enforcement office in the land, protects only blacks.
Without any doubt, if white Americans, who have been busy moving to the suburbs and ignoring anything to do with race, became aware of the extent to which the government has promulgated racial preferences for blacks and the extent to which this bias has become embedded in our culture, they would literally storm Washington. If you are a person who believes in fairness, it is frightening.
Don’t forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.
You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.