1991-1995

 Day 71
1991: David Duke- KKK Leader, White Supremacist, and Neo-Nazi- Loses Election For Governor But Wins 55% of White Votes By Preying On Racial Fear

When I read this article, I could not believe it. This was written in 1991. I honestly have no words- so I will let the article speak for itself and let you draw your own conclusions about how this is playing out right now and leave my commentary for the comments.

From The Baltimore Times, November 18, 1991

NEW ORLEANS -- For the first day in a month, Louisianans could breathe easily yesterday. David Duke would not be their next governor after all.

But behind the lopsided returns in Saturday's election lay a sobering fact: A majority of the state's white voters -- about 55 percent -- had cast their ballots for the former Klansman and neo-Nazi.

Despite an unprecedented and wildly successful negative ad campaign aimed at stopping him, Mr. Duke got 75,000 more votes than he received in his U.S. Senate bid last year.

Although he lost by 61 percent to 39 percent Saturday, he received a majority of the Republican vote and 40 percent of the white Democratic vote, according to a network TV exit poll.

That so many had been willing to overlook his hate-filled past was in part a reflection of their low regard for Gov.-elect Edwin W. Edwards, who was seen as corrupt by three out of five Louisiana voters, according to polls.

But the 680,000 Duke votes were also the most chilling measure yet of the discontent raging among working-class whites.

"Perhaps the messenger was rejected in this state of Louisiana, but the message wasn't," Mr. Duke said yesterday. "The people believe in what I believe. The polls all show that."

With the presidential race about to begin in earnest, both parties are urgently trying to come to grips with the white anger and distrust that has nurtured Mr. Duke's political rise.

How Mr. Duke figures into the unfolding battle for alienated white voters is not yet clear, but he is sure to try.

His term as a state legislator expires in January, and he said yesterday that he hoped to become a national spokesman for the anti-government ideas he has been espousing in his campaigns. He also said he had not ruled out a 1992 presidential run.

On election night, Mr. Duke indicated that he might throw his support to conservative columnist Patrick J. Buchanan in New Hampshire's Republican presidential primary next February. Local Republicans believe that his first move will be a takeover of the Louisiana Republican Party organization.

Whatever tack he takes is likely to receive national attention, to the considerable displeasure of the man who defeated him.

"Looky here, enough is enough," Mr. Edwards said yesterday after being informed by one of the TV networks that it was more interested in having Mr. Duke on its Sunday talk show. "Look, I'm the guy who got elected," he protested.

Yesterday, Mr. Edwards and other politicians in both parties were attempting to write Mr. Duke's political obituary.

But at the same time they scrambled to convey to Duke voters that they understood their concerns.

Vice President Dan Quayle noted that Mr. Duke's agenda of "anti-big government, get-out-of-my-pocketbook, cut my taxes, put welfare people back to work [is] a very popular message."

But Mr. Quayle said on ABC that Mr. Duke has been "thoroughly defeated" because the people of Louisiana have "seen through" him.

Sen. John B. Breaux, D-La., warned that Duke-like candidates would emerge "in every other state unless politicians and elected officials offer programs to respond to the concerns that he's raising."

Mr. Breaux heads the Democratic Leadership Council, a centrist group that wants to lure working-class whites back to the Democratic Party with ideas that address their frustrations.

"Middle-class Americans . . . think government doesn't serve their needs. They're concerned about government programs that spend more than we can afford, and they want somebody to address it," the senator said. "David Duke has raised some important questions."

Mr. Edwards tried to reassure white Louisianans that he, too, had heard their cry, while also criticizing the racial scapegoating at the heart of the Duke message.

"America needs to be on guard," the governor-elect said at a news conference.

"Unfortunately, when times are bad, it is possible for people to prey upon the fears and frustration and anger of some. . . . Our solutions do not lie in making things worse for those who are already in bad shape. Our solutions lie in making things better for everybody."

Mr. Duke's candidacy has embarrassed President Bush and the Republicans and raised the specter of a third-party challenge by Mr. Duke that could hurt the president's re-election chances, analysts say.

Mr. Edwards suggested in his post-election session with reporters that Mr. Duke may have unwittingly forced the GOP to end its successful use of racially polarizing issues.

In recent decades, Republican presidential candidates have switched millions of white voters to the GOP, particularly in the South, at least in part by stressing quotas, school busing, crime and other issues that subtly play on racial fears. Mr. Duke has linked these issues explicitly to racism in the minds of many Americans, including some Republicans.

"The Ronald Reagans and the George Bushes, [who] set the stage for this, in a more subtle, a more distinguished way, realize the error they have made," said Mr. Edwards. "I think the days of Willie Horton are behind us. Hopefully, the nation has learned that."

Sources/Comments:

-Why did I include this in my quest to uncover the Black Experience, you may ask? I believe this shows how much we as whites will stoop to vote for someone so disgusting in every way- a well known white supremacist and KKK member- to ensure our own white interests. Being a member of the KKK, an avowed racist, should have automatically killed any and all political ambitions. But, no. Not when he feeds on our own racist white anger- how dare we bus people? How dare we give welfare checks to black people (never mind that millions more whites than blacks receive welfare checks)? We can’t have those things- so in order to stop them, we’ll elect a white supremacist- he speaks our language! Seriously friends, SERIOUSLY?!?!?!?!

-I do not speak in any way, shape, or form for the black community- AT ALL. This truly is just me doing my own personal research on my quest to try and gain understanding.

But, I imagine if I was black living in Louisiana and my white neighbors just voted for a white supremacist, I would be scared out of my mind.

Click HERE

Day 72
1992: 15-Year-Old Murdered Over Orange Juice

Latasha Harlins was a 15 year old girl when she walked into a neighborhood convenience store in LA in 1991. This neighborhood was dealing with high racial tensions, especially between blacks and Koreans. This particular store was owned by Soon Ja Du, a 51-year-old Korean woman.

Latasha’s grandmother always warned her to not go to this convenience store unless she was planning to buy something.

On March 16th, Latasha went in to buy some orange juice. She had the $2 in her hand to pay the $1.76 for juice. She put the orange juice into her backpack, with some of it sticking out, and headed to the cash register. Soon Ja Du yelled, “You b---, you are trying to steal my orange juice.”

Harlins responded by lifting up her hand, which contained two dollar bills, and explained that she intended to pay. Du, however, grabbed the girl by the sweater, and the two began to fight.

Harlins knocked Soon to the ground, left the orange juice on the counter, and began to walk out the door. Soon grabbed a gun and shot Harlins four times in the head.

Later, Soon would be found guilty of manslaughter, which carried a 16 year maximum sentence. The white judge, however, went lenient- giving her 400 hours of community service, probation, and a $500 fine.

Regardless of how you feel about this, it incensed the black community. The murder of Latasha was on video, the evidence was clear, but they believed no justice was done. They simmered in anger- anger from Operation Hammer, anger for Latasha’s murder, anger at a million pieces of racial injustice that was continually thrown at them.

Then, on April 29th, 1992, the police who severely beat Rodney King were acquitted. By all accounts, Operation Hammer and Latasha’s murder played into the fury of the riots. All of the rising tensions of the past several years of racial injustice boiled over and the riots ensued. Soon’s convenience store was burned to the ground and never rebuilt.

Sources/Comments:

Latasha’s murder had a major impact on the black community--and yet, if you're white like me, I'm guessing you have never even heard of her until now.

TuPac dedicated his track, “Keep Ya Head Up,” to the 15-year-old girl, and put her name in many of his other songs. On “Something 2 Die 4,” he sings, “Latasha Harlins, remember that name, ‘Cause a bottle of juice ain’t something 2 die 4.”

Click HERE

-Obviously, the LA riots after the acquittals were horrifying. But, are we really surprised that protests are still happening when the changes that have been needed for so long have still not been addressed? Until we stop the senseless killing of black citizens, the protests will continue. Can we please stop blaming and fighting, and just listen to what the black community is telling us for once?

-I was 14 years old when the LA riots from Rodney King happened. Being 14, I believed what the adults were telling me- that “we didn’t see the whole video” and “he was on crack and deserved it” and everything else. Now as an adult, I know neither of those are true, and now after doing this research I realize the riots were only in part about Rodney King. Really, they were about SO MUCH MORE- and I wish the adults had talked about what the riots were really about back in 1992. That’s my intent with these posts- to talk about what the “race issues” in America are really about.

Day 73
1993: Sisters Given Two Life Sentences For Robbery They Didn’t Commit That Netted $11

According to Wikipedia:

“The sisters were charged with orchestrating a 1993 armed robbery in Forest, Mississippi. According to court testimony, the sisters convinced three male teens to assist them in an armed robbery. At a local mini mart, the sisters persuaded two men to drive them to a nearby nightclub and had their accomplices follow them. During the car trip, Jamie Scott complained of nausea. While the car was pulled over, the three teenagers exited the car behind them and robbed the two victims at gunpoint. During this robbery, it was claimed that one of the sisters held the shotgun. The victims testified that both sisters left with the three teenagers. Neither sister testified at the trial, and no one testified in support of their case. When the crime was committed, Jamie was twenty-one years old and Gladys was nineteen years old.

The sisters have denied their involvement in the armed robbery. They claim they were implicated as part of a plea deal by the teenagers, who pleaded guilty to the crime. Published estimates of the take from the robbery range from $11 to $200.

Confessed accomplice Howard Patrick, who was 14 at the time of the robbery, has testified that he was threatened by authorities that, if he did not agree to a plea bargain, he would be sent to a notoriously violent prison where he would likely be raped. Each of the sisters was sentenced to a double life prison sentence. The three males received sentences of eight years and were released after serving two years.”

Back to me talking….

After 16 years, one of the sisters had serious health problems, needing dialysis and a kidney transplant. Because the cost of her treatment was very expensive, and because her sister agreed to donate a kidney, the sisters were released (sadly she was unable to get the kidney transplant and was killed by a drunk driver in an accident).

One of the teenagers who originally implicated the sisters in the crime later wrote a signed affidavit stating they played no role in the robbery whatsoever and that he was coerced into implicating them.

Yesterday I talked about Latasha Harlins. Her killer walked away with 400 hours of community service.

These two sisters got DOUBLE LIFE SENTENCES each for a robbery that was worth $11 and where nobody was injured. Neither of them had any prior convictions or arrests. Between them, they had 5 children- 5 children who grew up without their mothers.

Can we not see that this is abhorrent? That there is something deeply wrong with our justice system that gives blacks severe punishments while others walk free or receive minimal punishment? We see this everyday. Lori Loughlin got 2 weeks in jail for the college admissions scandal, while Tanya McDowell received FIVE YEARS for lying about her address so her son could attend a better school district. Can we not see the unjustness of this?

On average, blacks receive 20% higher jail sentences than whites who commit the exact same crime.

The punishments for whites seem to be about “not wanting to ruin their future” or about “rehabilitation.” The more I research, the punishments for blacks are about destroying lives, families, and any sense of humanity that blacks may achieve.

This is something I truly believe needs immediate reforming.

Sources/Comments:

Click HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE

Day 74
1994: The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act

Starting with Nixon, politicians learned a key to win elections: Being Tough On Crime! What this really means is “incarcerate mass numbers of black people” but what we white people hear is “Law and Order!” and our votes come flocking.

Bill Clinton ran on Law and Order, promising to be tough on crime, and won the presidency. Immediately, he began to fulfill his campaign promise of being tough on crime and The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act passed. In the documentary 13th, the people interviewed said this law did far more damage to the black community than anything else- it was far more damaging than anything Nixon or other presidents passed.

What did it do? It provided the funding and structure to hire over 100,000 more cops, $9.7 billion for new prisons, expanded the death penalty, and removed grants for prisoners to receive higher education while in prison.

Here is what the ACLU says:

“The federal crime bill did not trigger mass incarceration, but it certainly encouraged mass incarceration to grow even further. The 1994 law was the largest crime bill in the history of the United States. It was meant to make a statement, and it did — in at least two ways.

First, the 1994 crime bill gave the federal stamp of approval for states to pass even more tough-on-crime laws. By 1994, all states had passed at least one mandatory minimum law, but the 1994 crime bill encouraged even more punitive laws and harsher practices on the ground, including by prosecutors and police, to lock up more people and for longer periods of time.

Second, the 1994 law shaped Democratic Party politics for years to come. Under the leadership of Bill Clinton, Democrats wanted to wrest control of crime issues from Republicans, so the two parties began a bidding war to increase penalties for crime, trying to outdo one another. The 1994 crime bill was a key part of the Democratic strategy to show that it can be tougher-on-crime than Republicans.

While Republicans continued their Willie Horton-style fear-mongering that pushed for more punitive policies in the states, the official 1996 Democratic Party platform, which was meant to provide a vision for the Democratic Party nationwide, relied heavily on the 1994 law to display their tough on crime credentials. An entire section in the platform is dedicated to "tough punishment," taking pride in the fact that the Democratic Party passed tougher sentencing laws and provided more federal funding for prisons in the states.

The platform encouraged states to pass truth-in-sentencing laws, bragged about instituting the death penalty for nearly 60 more crimes, and even encouraged the prosecution of young people as adults. This platform remained largely in place until 12 years later, when in 2008, the tone and substance began to change under new leadership in the party. Coincidentally, incarceration rates peaked in 2008.

The right way to view the 1994 crime bill is as the moment when both parties, at a national level, fully embraced the policies and political posturing that exacerbated the mass incarceration crisis we are trying to fix today.”

I have listened and read from many people on both sides of the aisle. There is a growing consensus among both parties that the “tough on crime” policies went way too far as each side kept trying to one up each other. There are thousands of blacks still in jail today because they had a couple of ounces of marijuana in their car in the 1990’s (blacks are the overwhelming loser in this story as they were the ones arrested and given heavy handed sentences while whites were barely touched for the same crimes). Many red and blue states are now revisiting these harsh punishments and letting people out of prison early.

Sources/Comments:

Click HERE and HERE

Day 75
1995: Two Brothers Spend 24 Years In Jail For Crime They Didn’t Commit, After Police Pay For and Force Witnesses

From The Washington Post:

The Maryland Board of Public Works voted unanimously to pay Simmons and McPherson eight payments each totaling $1.9 million through July 2025.

The two men were in their early 20's when they were convicted in 1995 of conspiracy to commit murder and sentenced to life in prison.

An official at the New York-based Innocence Project, which worked on their release, said police coerced a 13-year-old into identifying Simmons and McPherson in connection with the killing of Anthony Wooden in Baltimore.

The boy, who originally told officers that the brothers were not involved, later said they were. He recanted his taped testimony during trial.

Another witness was a paid informant who said she saw the pair, even though she lived a block away from the shooting.

The Mid-Atlantic Innocence Project, the University of Baltimore Innocence Project Clinic, and the Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Conviction Integrity Unit opened a joint investigation that proved the brothers did not commit the crime.

After Baltimore City State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby (D) signed a writ of actual innocence, the charges were dropped, and the brothers were released from prison in May 2019.

Simmons, now 49, said in an interview that while he is appreciative of the action taken by the Board of Public Works, no amount of money will take away the pain of his past.

“My mother died in ’09, and I can’t get that back,” said Simmons, who sees a psychotherapist and takes three different medications to deal with sleeplessness and anxiety. “Money can’t fix the time I got jumped on and [guards] would beat me and put me in the hole. Money can’t fix that.”

Lt. Gov. Boyd K. Rutherford (R), who sits on the board with Comptroller Peter Franchot (D) and Nancy K. Kopp (D), said the compensation “is really so small when it comes to 24 . . . years taken from you.”

Kopp apologized and called for reforms in the justice system that would put a stop to innocent people being incarcerated for crimes they did not commit. “We owe these gentlemen not only financial payment, which we are making, but our sincere apologies and resolution to oversee changes in the system to prevent this from happening in the future,” she said.

Sources/Comments:

Click HERE