Tuesday, December 23, 2008

What's the difference, really?

It seems the US has let its bigotry seep through once again, in refusing to sign a UN resolution against it:

According to some of the declaration's backers, U.S. officials expressed concern in private talks that some parts of the declaration might be problematic in committing the federal government on matters that fall under state jurisdiction. In numerous states, landlords and private employers are allowed to discriminate on the basis of race; on the federal level, blacks are not allowed to serve in the military.

Carolyn Vadino, a spokeswoman for the U.S. mission to the U.N., stressed that the United States -- despite its unwillingness to sign -- condemned any human rights violations related to race.


EDIT: After copying this, I noticed that there may have been a couple of transcription errors in the quote. I apologize for any factual errors, but I do not apologize for the overall message, which remains unchanged.

Hat tip to Ed Brayton for bringing this to my attention.

4 comments:

Akusai said...

I'm tempted to say something smartassed about choosing to be black or something, but it's all played out; this shit is just tired and ridiculous at this point.

TheBrummell said...

In numerous states, landlords and private employers are allowed to discriminate on the basis of race; on the federal level, blacks are not allowed to serve in the military.

Am I missing something, some back story here? Blacks are not allowed to serve in the U.S. military? What? General Colin Powell must be quite surprised.

What am I missing?

Infophile said...

Try following the link to where I got this from. That should help make it clear.

the health care bill said...

I like the work very much. nice done !