Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
04.14.2008 9:00 pm

Carpetbaggers wanted

  • Email this
  • Print this

Ward Connerly, the California-based anti-affirmative action crusader, is looking for “circulators” willing to travel to Missouri “to earn big bucks” collecting signatures on his petitions to end affirmative action programs here.

In an e-mail posted Friday in a blog on the National Review Online, Mr. Connerly says opponents of his deceptively named Missouri Civil Rights Initiative “are going to extremes to stop petitioners; including intimidation, screaming and stealing petitions.” He asks that anyone wanting to help the petition drive “call to find out how you can have your travel expenses covered. Circulators have the potential to earn $1,000 per week (going rate $1.25 per signature collected).”

Boy, there’s a grass-roots effort for you. A guy from California e-mails a New York-based conservative website trying to recruit a couple dozen more carpetbaggers to join his false flag operation. Things must not be going too well. Good.

Mr. Connerly, an African-American business executive, rose to prominence in 1995 when, as a member of the University of California Board of Regents, he led a successful anti-affirmative action drive in his home state. Since then, he has tried, with varying degrees of success, to expand his efforts into other states. Missouri was one of five states targeted this year. Last week, the organization dropped its effort in Oklahoma when the secretary of state’s office there found too many duplicate signatures on petitions.

To get his amendment on the ballot in Missouri in November, Mr. Connerly must collect about 140,000 valid signatures across at least six of the state’s nine congressional districts before May 4.

Mr. Connerly’s effort in Missouri is opposed by a coalition of good government, civil rights and business organizations. They say that his group not only is deceptively named, but that it also would cause great harm to the state’s business climate. Affirmative action doesn’t guarantee anyone a job, merely the chance to compete fairly for a job.

If one of Mr. Connerly’s carpetbaggers asks you to sign a petition “ensuring civil rights,” just say no and wish him a nice trip back to wherever he came from.

13 comments

Comments are closed.

it’s just the law in Missouri, Holmes, you have to be registered voter to circulate petition on state ballot in most states, have to be resident to be voter; no one’s even been dumb enough to challenge the law constitutionally (until now? :) ); I dont make them, I just report them, and their violations;
and paid circulators should be illegal, period! and that will survive constitutional challenge, also.

— Bill Haas
12:38 am April 16th, 2008

Mr. Haas…. How about a trade off, Holmes? We agree to enforcement of residency for petitioners and you guys agree to enforcement of immigration law. Deal?

— Bb
10:48 am April 16th, 2008

I’m a Caucasian-American (just call it plain American) who has made an effort to advance the cause of Afro-Americans for most of my life. Dad set that example during his long career with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Dwight Eisenhower, whom he worked for during WW2, did the same, both as a commanding general officer and later as President.

Both Dad and I experienced a problem in trying to hire or promote Afro-Americans. Many simply weren’t sufficiently educated or experienced for anything above common laborer status. That situation is gradually improving, and the next two generations of my family have already proved that they will help too, whenever possible.

By the way, Dad voted Republican, and so do the next three generations.

Now, on the other subject that has bben mentioned:

EMBRYONIC stem cell research was the point of the blatantly unfair “constitutional amendment #2″. UNFAIR because no constitutional amendment should EVER be allowed to pass by a simple majority vote: UNFAIR because it was almost totally supported financially by ONE organization that hoped to be the prime beneficiary: UNFAIR because it was presented in such a long-winded and poorly written manner that many physicians admitted that they hadn’t read it, hadn’t understood it, and wouldn’t have voted for it if they had understood its real purpose.

Science has now shown pretty definitively that EMBRYONIC stem cell research is probably unnecessary, and it is still so controversial that many experimental labs have avoided it. To the best of my knowledge, they have not even spent the federal money that was authorized long ago by President G.W. Bush for work on the original 20 lines of embryonic stem cells.

— Bob H
12:17 pm April 30th, 2008

Pages: « 1 [2] Show All