THE CASH STUFF FOR THURSDAY, JUNE 2, 2022

VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS

                                                          LT. GOV. MARK ROBINSON

BLACKS ON BOTH

SIDES OF 

GUN CONTROL ISSUE

By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

On Saturday, May 28th, the last of ten African-Americans killed in a racist gun massacre by a white teenager armed with a AR-15 semi-automatic rifle at Tops Supermarket in Buffalo, NY. two weeks earlier, was memorialized and buried. 

Friends, family, and even civil rights leaders led by the vice president of the United States, all came together at the funeral of 86-year-old Ruth Whitfield, the oldest victim, to say that something must be done about the wanton gun violence that has strangled the sensitivities of the nation once again.

“Enough is enough,” proclaimed Vice Pres. Kamala Harris to the congregants, later adding to reporters, “An assault weapon is a weapon of war with no place, no place in civil society.”

Harris wants a national assault weapons ban.

The cry also came after 21 people, including 19 children, were also senselessly murdered by a crazy 18-year-old gunman with a AR-15 at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas just days earlier.

Just one day after the Tops Supermarket massacre, North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, a Black Republican many say wants to be the state’s next governor, reportedly told a Nash County church that he owns two AR-15 semi-automatic rifles so he can fight back “in case the government gets too big for it’s britches.”

“Cause I’m gonna fill the backside of them britches with some lead,” Robinson bellowed, the nation still in shock in the aftermath of the Tops massacre.

Two weeks later, this time after the mass murder in Uvalde,  Robinson - who rose to fame because of his gun advocacy stance -  told attendees at the National Rifle Association’s annual convention in Houston last weekend that he ‘cried’ upon hearing about the murdered children of Uvalde, but his position remained unmoved. “Secure our schools,” he said, which echoes the common Republican talking point of more guns, less school shootings.

Two high-profile Black leaders, two diametrically opposed views on high-powered weapons, with a traumatized African-American community in the middle.

Generally, most African-Americans, if not most Americans, favor a semblance of national gun control, seemingly to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. 89% of Americans in recent polls are in favor of background checks, for example before a weapon is sold by a gun dealer.

But most African-Americans are unaware that originally gun control laws were fashioned to keep guns out of Black hands then faced with threats from the Ku Klux Klan.

Well many today are feeling threatened again.

A recent Washington Post-Ipsos poll which surveyed 806 Black adults between May 18-20 found that 75% are worried  about being physically attacked because of their race, with almost half saying that they are “very” worried.

According to Politico, thanks to pandemic shortages, George Floyd’s murder, and  the increasingly toxic political atmosphere gripping the nation, many Americans are arming themselves for protection.

But add on controversies like the movements against Critical Race Theory, Black Lives Matter and so-called “wokeness,” fueled by conservative politicians eager to spread fear, and many blacks have decided not to sit still any longer when it comes to gun ownership.

As there were reports of many whites purchasing guns and ammunition after the election of Barack Obama as the nation’s first Black president in 2008, there are reports now of many Blacks arming themselves in the aftermath of the Trump Administration, the January 6th Capitol siege, and the extreme rightward turn of the nation. 

“The days are over of African Americans sitting around singing Kumbaya and hoping and praying that somebody will come and save them. We’re gonna save ourselves,” one Black gun owner.activist told the Associated Press.

“We’re not going to be sheep anymore.”

  Editor’s note - Next week, how racism plays into the gun control debate.

                                                               30-

REV. DR. CARDES H. BROWN JR.

                                                    DERRICK JOHNSON

EXCLUSIVE

JUSTICE COALITION RAISES

SERIOUS QUESTIONS

ABOUT NAACP HEAD

BY Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

If there is one thing Rev. Dr. Cardes H. Brown Jr., Lifetime member of the NAACP, wants everyone to be sure of is, neither he nor any of  50-plus member NAACP Justice Coalition have any interest in destroying or tarnishing “the oldest, boldest and most feared” civil rights organization in the nation.

But Dr. Brown insists that the current administrative leadership of the organization he gave his life and soul to many years ago are the ones set to destroy it, and it’s purpose, unless those who know and care stand up to them and their alleged questionable deeds.

He points the finger squarely at NAACP Pres/CEO Derrick Johnson, who took over leadership in 2017, outgoing Board Chair Leon Russell, and Tennessee NAACP Pres, and Board member Gloria Sweetlove.

And if anyone questions his allegations, Dr. Brown also points that same finger to the NAACP Justice Coalition website (https://naacpjusticecoalition.org), which features a breakdown of their initial Article 10 complaint after the questionable Oct 23rd, 2021 Executive Committee elections that saw incumbent NC NAACP Pres. Rev. Dr. T. Anthony Spearman lose to challenger Deborah Dicks Maxwell, president of the New Hanover County NAACP Chapter, along with other incumbent officers.

The NAACP Justice Coalition maintains that the entire election process was flawed and improperly managed by Administrator Sweetlove contrary to the NAACP Constitution and Bylaws. The coalition has demanded that the election be held again per the bylaws, but Johnson has dismissed their complaint, and suspended all NAACP Justice Coalition members, including Rev. Spearman and Dr. Brown.

Rev. Spearman, in turn, has indicated his intention to sue the national NAACP office, if not Derrick Johnson and others specifically.

During the course of this entire controversy, the coalition has uncovered what it says is documented evidence that raises questions about Johnson’s direction and leadership. For example, in March 2019, in documents uncovered by the coalition and independently verified by this reporter, Derrick Johnson had the name of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) legally changed to NAACP Empowerment Programs Inc., also changing the federal tax status of the NAACP from 501(c)3 to 501(c)4.

The NAACP Empowerment Programs, Inc. is now the 501(3) tax deductible corporation. Both are still nonprofits, but there’s no tax deduction if you donate to the NAACP or any of it’s branches.

The question is why? What was so special about 2019 that this change  had to happen?

One clue is that as a 501(c)4, the NAACP shares the same “social welfare organization” IRS designation as right-wing politically oriented  nonprofit groups, like Club for Growth and Americans for Prosperity that routinely produce campaign advertising against liberal candidates for office.

The NAACP can now to the same thing against any candidates it chooses.

According to a November 27, 2018 article in The Atlantic Magazine

titled, The Tax-Code Shift That’s Changing Liberal Activism, “nonprofit groups that used to focus their energies on litigation and education are increasingly structuring themselves to be political players [too].”

The Atlantic reported, “…long-standing civil-liberties and civil-rights groups are reallocating resources to (c)(4) arms. In fiscal year 2017, for example, total assets of the American Civil Liberties Union’s (c)(3) grew 17 percent. Total assets of its (c)(4), on the other hand, grew 89 percent. This past June, the Southern Poverty Law Center spun off a (c)(4), the SPLC Action Fund. The NAACP went further and transformed itself entirely last year from a 501(c)(3) into a 501(c)(4). This restructuring was necessary, the incoming president (Derrick Johnson) explained, for the NAACP to “have the collective voice and impact that a civil-rights organization in 2017 and forward should have.”

Reportedly, the NAACP Empowerment Programs, Inc. is among the many social justice groups to receive tens of millions of the billions of dollars donated by Corporate America and Wall Street in the aftermath of George Floyd’s police murder. It can be speculated how much of those ten of millions were shifted over to or from it’s tax exempt counterpart.

For instance, evidence was found of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation granting $75,000 in August 2021 to the NAACP Empowerment Programs, Inc., “ to support the adoption of an equitable funding formula and encourage the development of statewide exemplars in data systems to improve educational opportunities for K-12 students in Tennessee., said the Gates Foundation website.

As indicated before, Gloria Sweetlove is the Tennessee NAACP Conference president.

A financial statement 2020 for NAACP Empowerment Programs, Inc. 501(c)3 total assets in 2020 was $60.3 million, as opposed to just $19.5 million in 2019.

Total assets for the 501(c)4 NAACP in 2020 was $21.9 million (with over $1.9 million “due from Empowerment Programs).

As said, that is one clue. Another could be the Jasymine Childs case in 2017, where the former Youth Director of the NC Director of the NC NAACP alleged that she was sexually harassed by then supervisor Rev Curtis Gatewood.

After an internal investigation confirmed her allegations, the national office under Johnson allegedly did nothing for two years because it had no sexual harassment policy. In February 2020, Childs filed a $15 million lawsuit in Durham Superior Court against the NAACP, later amended to a $20 million suit when Johnson was added on for allegedly publicly lambasting Childs at the 2019 NC NAACP convention in Winston-Salem.

Johnson has not been available for comment, but the fact remains, many rank-and-file NAACP members have no idea that there are two parent incorporated organizations to which their membership dues are partially going to.

A branch membership table shows “a portion of your membership dues is passed on to the NAACP National organization and these payments are tax deductible.”

So per a regular annual $30.00 NAACP adult membership, $11.85 is tax deductible, and goes to the NAACP Empowerment Programs, Inc., while the remainder is not and goes to the NAACP national and the branch.

And what does the NAACP Empowerment Programs, Inc. do?

On the national NAACP website, it says, “Through NAACP Empowerment Programs, our 501(c)3 are, we’re working to build inclusive criminal justice policies, healthcare systems, economies and classrooms in 2022.”

         It continued, “With your support, NAACP Empowerment Programs will continue to lead the charge in fighting back against voter suppression and unfair redistricting; fighting back against the spread of COVID-19 misinformation; Advocating for economic policy to assist Black entrepreneurs and workers; fighting fo reimagined policing; holding corporations accountable.”

No one who is committed to social justice can argue with that agenda, but the fact remains, when did NAACP Pres./CEO Derrick Johnson tell the membership that the NAACP they all supported since 1909, the year it was founded, was changing to a new entity, and why? Have many of the millions of dollars in assets of the NAACP 501(c)4 been shifted over to the NAACP Empowerment Programs Inc. 501(c)3, and why?

And were members advised of any or all of this before or as it was happening, and when?

Rev. Dr. Cardes Brown Jr. and the NAACP Justice Coalition want the answer to these questions and more, and they believe that every NAACP member has the right to know as well.

-30-

THE CASH STUFF FOR 5-26-22

CHERI BEASLEY

                                                                   REP. TED BUDD

BEASLEY VS. BUDD:

NC’S BIG SENATE RACE

BEGINS

By Cash Michaels

An analysis

As expected in the aftermath of last week’s big primary contests, former NC Supreme Court Chief Justice Cheri Beasley, a Democrat, and  U.S. Congressman Ted Budd, a Trump-endorsed Republican, came out of their respective party’s races victorious, and will face each other in the November 8 midterm general election for the U.S. Senate.

The Beasley-Budd showdown is one of  the most closely watched Senate races in the country, and could decide the balance of power in an evenly split US Senate.

Both are competing to succeed outgoing Republican three-term incumbent Sen. Richard Burr.

Between now and November, observers say watch how Beasley and Budd will try to define each other, and themselves, to attract the largest number of undecided voters in the state. That’s key, because assuming that Democrats and Republicans have good turnouts respectively, unaffiliated voters will tip the scale and make the difference in a close contest.

All Cheri Beasley has to do is get a maximum turnout of Democrats, as many Republicans as she can convince to vote for her (effectively taking them from Ted Budd), and a majority of the undecided. Thus far, she has been trying to define herself in the minds of voters before Ted Budd does it,  as a middle-of-the-road moderate Democrat who supports a woman’s right to choose, working families and law and order.

A Republican group supporting Budd, on the other hand,  tried to define Beasley in campaign ads four days before  primary night, as a former justice who was soft on hard criminals, and can’t be trusted to fight crime. Beasley has countered this strategy by denying the charge, explaining that she has followed established law in every legal opinion.

And while Beasley should, when practical, defend her record, that’s what she must be careful not to spend too much time doing, political observers say..

The Budd campaign might employ the old Jesse Helms tactic of forcing an opponent to spend more time and resources defending themselves, than attacking and defining the attacker. So if Budd claims that Beasley is soft on crime, he forces Beasley to expend energy on defending that, while Budd then pulls out other charges, forcing Beasley to be on the defense 24/7. 

If Budd is to be successfully attacked, the Democratic Party and other outside groups will have to do it for Beasley. 

The Beasley campaign may also want to study how Bud won his Republican primary. His closest rival for the GOP nomination was former NC Gov. Pat McCrory.

McCrory, a former mayor of Charlotte, had prided himself on being a well-liked moderate, but saw the need to move further to the right politically in the primary in order to attract more Trump supporters. But in a visit to the state last June, the former president shocked McCrory, then the Republican frontrunner, by endorsing the least known GOP Senate candidate at the time, Budd.

It didn’t help that the Budd campaign defined the former Republican governor as catering to “liberal” Democrats while in office.

Budd, a conservative congressman elected in 2017 to the 13th Congressional District and a gun shop owner from Advance, continued to hammer McCrory, all the while staying out of public debates as to not allow the field of 14 primary opponents a chance to challenge or define him.

Budd stayed on the attack to win. Now that he’s up against a distinguished former chief justice of the NC Supreme Court who is also a Black woman. Cheri Beasley’s other strength is that she has raised more money for her campaign than any other Senate candidate of either party this year.

And she proved that she can run in a statewide race when she fell only 401 votes shy out of over 4 million cast last November, losing her seat on the NC Supreme Court.

But running for the state’s highest judicial position, and running for a U.S. Senate seat, are two different things.

Beasley already has the support of urban voters across the state. She must be able to convince the rural voters of North Carolina that she also shares their values if she’s to defeat Ted Budd.

In short, Cheri Beasley will not win North Carolina’s U.S. Senate seat by just the Black vote alone, though that is important.

She must make inroads into Ted Budd’s white conservative territory, in order to become North Carolina’s first African-American U.S. senator.

To beat Beasley, Budd must hope that rural Republicans and GOP leaning independents turnout just as strong as they did in November 2020.

-30-

                                                       DEBORAH DOCKS-MAXWELL

                                          REV. DR. T. ANTHONY SPEARMAN

EXCLUSIVE

FORMER NC NAACP PRES.

SUSPENDED; VOWS TO SUE

By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

There’s a new chapter in the ongoing saga of the controversial NC NAACP executive committee elections from October of 2021 where incumbent President Rev. Dr. T Anthony Spearman was ousted from office by New Hanover County NAACP Pres. Deborah Dicks Maxwell.

Rev. Spearman says he’s in the process of filing suit against the national NAACP because it apparently has suspended him from membership. As reported exclusively before, Rev. Spearman is part of a North Carolina group now called “NAACP Justice Coalition” led by Rev. Dr. Cardes Brown of Greensboro, that filed an Article 10 complaint about alleged election violations that occurred last October.

The group maintained that these alleged election improprieties violated the NAACP Constitution and Bylaws, and should invalidate all new NC NAACP officers elected.

Derrick Johnson, NAACP president/CEO, however, dismissed the Article 10 complaint from Spearman and the coalition in December, saying it “lack of merit.”

Weeks later, Dr. Spearman says he was informed that he had been suspended in a letter dated February 7, 2022 from national NAACP Pres./CEO Derrick Johnson. Someone gave him a copy of the letter that allegedly had been sent out, but not to him, due to his not receiving it.

A copy of the letter reviewed by this reporter notes that it was sent “Via Regular Mail and Email,” not by standard certified mail important business documents are normally sent by, to Rev. Spearman at a Greensboro address, followed by  “Re: Suspension Letter.”

From there the NAACP letter from Johnson alleges in detail that Spearman, “ ..despite repeated requests from President Maxwell and the NAACP Office of the General Counsel, you have failed to return the state Conference’s property.”

The NAACP letter goes on to quote from the NAACP Bylaws the requirements for members to return property of the branch within 30 days after an election. The missive also warns Spearman that “…continued recalcitrant conduct will cause irreparable harm to the Association and the State Conference. Specifically, your failure to comply is disrupting the orderly transition in leadership and interfering with the State Conference’s ability to conduct its business affairs. Moreover, this ongoing dispute is tarnishing the reputation of the Association and has made it difficult for the State Conference to represent the interests of our members.”

Later in the NAACP letter from Pres./CEO Johnson, it says, “ In light of the potential adverse impact on the State Conference, your continued membership in the Association presents a danger of harm to the NAACP and the State Conference. Accordingly, action is necessary to prevent or mitigate that harm. Accordingly, I hereby suspend your membership in the Association, effective immediately, pending investigation and a full hearing (if you so request) regarding the allegations contained 

in this letter. 

Ironically, Johnson writes that Rev. Spearman is entitled to a hearing if requested in writing that “…must be sent by certified mail.”

“You are directed to cease and desist immediately from holding yourself out as a member of the NAACP and as the State Conference President.,” Johnson concludes.

Pres. Johnson’s letter to Spearman is copied to the chair of the National NAACP Board of Directors, and Deborah Maxwell, NC NAACP president.

In his lawsuit, Rev. Spearman will undoubtedly note that the National NAACP Constitution and Bylaws maintain that where there is an election dispute, all previous officers are to stay in place until a resolution has been reached, and he was in his rights to hold onto the property of his office as state conference president until resolution of the complaint had been satisfactorily reached.

The NAACP Justice Coalition says resolution was not reached, despite Derrick Johnson saying that it’s Article 10 complaint was without merit.

Sources also tell this reporter that at a national NAACP meeting last weekend, all members of the NAACP Justice Coalition had been suspended. Rev. Dr. Brown confirmed that as of Monday, none had received letters of confirmation.

-30-

 

    

 

                    ALLEGED BUFFALO KILLER PAYTON GENDRON (courtesy ABC6)

COULD A RACIAL MASSACRE

LIKE BUFFALO, NY HAPPEN

HERE? NO QUESTION, IT CAN

By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

Could a racial massacre similar to what tragically happened last Saturday in Buffalo, NY where an 18-year-old white gunman allegedly shot 11 blacks and two whites, killing 10 blacks, happen in North Carolina?

Remember the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church racial massacre of June 17, 2015 in Charleston, South Carolina, where a 21-year-old white supremacist named Dylann Roof murdered nine black members of a Bible-study group?

In both cases, the white gunmen travelled hours to, and researched the locations of their crimes (in the Buffalo, NY case, a Tops Supermarket in a predominately black section of the city) because they were deliberately targeting black victims. In Dylann Roof’s case, he was seeking to start a race war.

Payton Gendron, the suspect in the Buffalo, NY massacre, was allegedly acting out of concern from an infamous white supremacist meme - the Great Replacement Theory (GRT). They say he allegedly planned to a racial shooting at his high school last year, and if he escaped Saturday’s massacre, do it again elsewhere until he was stopped. Fortunately, Gendron was captured in Buffalo.

Investigators there say Gendron had issued a 180-page racist manifesto expressing concern that blacks, immigrants and other people of color were slowly but surely replacing whites in the general population in an effort to completely take over the country.  

“[Jews] can be dealt with in time, but the high fertility replacers will destroy us now, [so] it is a matter of survival we destroy them first,” Gendron purportedly wrote.

Ironically, GRT is also something embraced by mainstream Republican politicians and Fox News commentators when they express reasoning to vehemently oppose the immigration of illegal Mexicans across the US-Mexican border, or validation of black voting rights.

“This [Democrat] administration wants complete open borders. And you have to ask yourself, why?” U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) once asked. “Is it [that] really they want to remake the demographics of America to ensure that they stay in power forever?”

And this view goes beyond one Republican U.S. senator, Fox News  or one alleged white supremacist gunman. According to Vice News, “An Associated Press-NORC poll released on [May 1, 2022) showed that fully one-third of Americans, and almost half of Republicans, believe that “there is a group of people in this country who are trying to replace native-born Americans with immigrants who agree with their political view.”

We may be hearing a lot about GRT now, but experts say it’s been touted online by white supremacist groups for years.

It was August 2017 in Charlottesville, Va.  when white supremacists marched with tiki torches on the campus of the University of Virginia - Charlottesville declaring “Jews will not replace us” and “They will not replace us.”

There’s the August 3, 2019 racially - motivated mass shooting in El Paso, Texas, where a white right-wing gunman issued a white nationalist/anti-immigrant manifesto - based on a similar attack in Norway - when he opened fire in a Wal-Mart store. Twenty-three people were killed, 23 injured. Most were Mexican-American.

Add to that a series of other racial or religious mass murders across the country in recent years, particularly at Jewish synagogues, and the number of mass shootings in North Carolina alone increasing from 11 in 2019, to  20 in 2020, and many observers would agree that the table is set for more racially-motivated mass shootings even here.

Remember, it was 1995 when a group of white supremacist members of the military at Fort Bragg Army base in Fayetteville were smuggling guns for the purpose of a race war they were preparing for before they were caught by federal authorities.

Indeed, according to a USA Today analysis of Gun Violence Archive statistics from 2020, “…mass shootings surged by 47% as many states reported unprecedented increases in weapons-related incidents. In 2020, the United States reported 611mass shooting events that resulted in 513 deaths and 2,543 injuries.”

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, most of those mass shootings occurred among black people because of increasing poverty, COVID-19, etc. But the number of hate crime-based mass shootings, where whites kill a group of people of color, like the March 2021 Atlanta, Ga. spa slayings where where eight Asian-Americans were murdered, are expected to increase.

Note the general definition - a mass shooting is where four or more people are injured or killed in one gun incident. Add widespread white supremacy to the mix, along with GRT, or a stated opposition to CRT - critical race theory (which is NOT taught in primary or secondary public schools despite claims to the contrary) - and a crazed Jan. 6th belief that the country is being “taken over” by people of color, and yes, say many observers, Buffalo, NY could happen again anywhere.

“This gunman intended to inspire others if you read his manifesto,” said NY Gov. Kathy Hochul after Saturday’s racial massacre.

                        -30-

NC HIGH COURT TAKES 

UP EX-FELON VOTING

By Cash Michaels

An analysis

There should be no wonder why Republican legislative leaders dearly want to see GOP justices take over the state’s highest court. They already have a definitive majority of the NC Court of Appeals, and securing a majority on the NC Supreme Court, coupled with maintaining control of the NC General Assembly and hopefully winning the Governor’s mansion with controversial black Republican current Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, would give the GOP the last word on all things political in the state for years to come.

But to do any or all of that with the November 2022 midterm general elections up on deck, and the critical 2024 elections just two years away, it is extremely important for North Carolina Republicans to control events on the ground now.

Stopping 56,000 former felons from getting the right to vote per what some say was a “racist’ 1973 law that justified such, is clearly part of the calculus. 56,000 votes out of an estimated 4.2 million voters statewide may not seem like many, but given how tight many legislative and congressional contests tend to be across the state, as little as a few hundred  in key districts could unravel any plans for total domination by the state Republican Party.

The kind of domination North Carolina Democrats had before 2011 when Republicans took over the NC General assembly.

And that’s why Republican legislative leaders insisted that the Democrat-led NC Supreme Court not take up the case of voting rights for 56,000 former felons several weeks ago, only to have the state’s High Court do exactly that.

It was March 28th when a three-judge Superior Court panel voted 2-1 to give the  56,000 ex-felons the voting rights that they sought. But the N.C. Court of Appeals temporarily blocked that order on April 5.

That forced attorneys for the ex-felons to then immediately petition the NC Supreme Court to take up their appeal from the full 10-5 Republican-led  state appellate court.

Republican legislative leaders countered by asking the state Supreme Court to keep their hands off, and leave it to the appeals court to decide.

“This Court should allow for this case to proceed in the ordinary course. That is particularly so because Plaintiffs offer no valid reason to circumvent that process,” petitioned Nicole Moss, counsel for GOP leaders.

Apparently the five Democrat associate justices of the state’s highest court disagreed, and on Friday, May 6th, ordered the full state appellate court to back-off because they wanted to hear and consider the case.

So now, a decision will be on a normal track to come down before the November midterm elections, exactly what state Republicans did not want to have happen.

Their only hope now is that the High Court’s majority will agree with them, which isn’t likely, and/or that 56,000 more voters this November won’t make a difference as to who goes on to represent the state in Congress, or the legislature.

Republicans also hope that those 56,000 ex-felons, many of whom are black, won’t remember who was trying awfully hard to deny them their right to vote.

Also, not likely.

-30-

    
 

THE CASH STUFF FOR MAY 12, 2022

NC DEMOCRATS HOPE

HIGH COURT LEAK WILL 

HELP IN THE MID-TERMS

By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

It’s not a word you hear often, but two weeks ago Democrats in North Carolina and across the country were getting used to it…doom.

Thanks to an unpopular presidency, runaway inflation, and overall despair about where the country is headed, Republicans were licking their proverbial chops at their midterm election prospects this coming November.

But last week, “the leak” struck the political world like lightning, and all of a sudden, the GOP were all seen as ogres who’ve worked overtime to not only restrict, but eliminate a woman’s constitutional right to choose.

The governor of Mississippi even got on TV last Sunday promising that he would ban the use of legal contraceptions in his state if necessary.

All of  a sudden, Democrats in general, and particularly those here in North Carolina, are happily leaning hard on a breakthrough issue that they hope will drive women to the polls this November, determined to protect their constitutional right to choose by keeping otherwise lackluster Democrats in office across the board.

The official U.S. Supreme Court decision possibly overturning Roe v. Wade isn’t due until either late June or early July, but that would place it close enough to the November midterms to leave a definite bad taste in the collective mouths of women who believe that neither government, the courts or anyone else has the right to dictate to them what they can do with their bodies.

“A woman’s body is her’s, not the government’s,” NC Attorney General Josh Stein, who is expected to run for governor in 2024, said. “A woman’s right to choose is before North Carolina voters this November and every election to come.”

“There is only one way to protect our reproductive freedom and ensure everyone has the right to make their own health care decisions…” said the North Carolina Democratic Party in a statement, “… electing Democrats up and down the ballot.” 

NC Democratic Party Chairwoman Bobbie Richardson further told reporters, “if the Supreme Court overturns Roe vs. Wade, that decision would be devastating for the millions of people across North Carolina, whose abortion access and control over their bodies now hang in the balance.”

The NCDP chair also promised to “fight like hell’ to preserve a woman’s right to choose.”

Political experts know that Richardson and other Democrats were seeding the political landscape with outrage, hoping that enough of it will stick to give NC Dems a fighting chance to take back the General Assembly, and possibly retain control of the the U.S. House and Senate.

Democrats will be exploiting the Supreme Court leak the same way Republicans have been exploiting rising crime rates across the nation.

On the national scene, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat who is well aware that there are plenty of women who don’t care about abortion rights, wrote in a letter to her Democratic Caucus, “Republicans have made clear that their goal will be to seek to criminalize abortion nationwide. Republican state legislators across the country are already advancing extreme new laws, seeking to arrest doctors for offering reproductive care, ban abortion entirely with no exceptions, and even charge women with murder who exercise their right to choose. These draconian measures could even criminalize contraceptive care, in vitro fertilization and post-miscarriage care, dragging our nation back to a dark time decades into the past.”

The Democrat-led U.S. Senate says it will hold a vote at codify a woman’s constitutional right to choose. Senate republicans run the risk of trying to stop the measure.

And how is the North Carolina Republican Party responding to what clearly is an unexpected turn of events in their political fortunes?

In a carefully worded, reasonably toned statement, the state GOP said  it is “…optimistic that the Supreme Court will overturn Planned Parenthood v. Casey and Roe v. Wade later this summer.”

Later in the NCGOP statement it continued, “Such a decision will highlight the extreme importance of the 2022 election cycle in North Carolina. The North Carolina General Assembly will be called upon to enact legislation protecting the unborn in this state. Radical Progressive Activists will stop at nothing to stop pro-life legislation from being enacted - and will sue immediately if they cannot. The fight for the Sanctity of Life will be fought in Raleigh and other state capitals rather than in Washington, DC.”

Finally, the NC GOP statement ends saying, “The balance of the General Assembly and the Supreme Court in North Carolina has never been more important, and we will continue fighting from now through Election Day and beyond to ensure that we have pro-life majorities as we face a post-Roe future."

Recent published reports say the Republican-led NC General Assembly “…will try to ban or further restrict abortions in North Carolina, legal and political experts say.” But Democrat Gov. Roy Cooper will likely veto any restrictions during the remainder of the 2022 secession.

But if Republicans gain supermajorities in November enough to override a governor’s veto, then most legal experts surmise that that would be the end of legal abortions in North Carolina by next year.

So much still has to happen.

-30-

                                                               PROF. IRV. JOYNER

FOR POOR PEOPLE OF COLOR,

THE GAINS OF THE PAST,

ARE ABOUT TO BE LOST

By Cash Michaels

An analysis

 

He was a black Fayetteville minister who was also a Democratic lawmaker in the North Carolina General Assembly, who strongly supported fully funding a program that allowed poor women across the state to have unfettered access to abortion services.

When asked why, by a reporter, the legislator said he was totally against abortion personally because as a minister he considered it a sin. But as an elected representative of his district, it was his job to make sure that poor women were able to access the same legal, constitutionally protected services that other women had access to.

That state lawmaker/minister from Fayetteville has since died, but if he were alive today, he would certainly have concerns about how last week’s leak of a purported U.S. Supreme Court draft decision overturning the historic 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion ruling will affect poor women of color.

Effectively, if the unpublished decision holds, it would remove a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion, leaving it up to individual states to manage access to abortion services. 

In North Carolina, abortion is legal, with some restrictions. But according to Irving Joyner, law professor at North Carolina Central University Law School in Durham, not just poor women of color , but people of color, are now very much at risk as a result.

“Any restriction on a woman’s freedom of choice will have a heavier impact on African Americans and people of color than anyone else,” Prof. Joyner says.  “The focus of this draft decision is on the rights to privacy, the right to choose and who can control [a] woman’s body. The right to choose does not always result in a decision to abort, which some people object to, but many other decisions about a person’s body and individuality are also implicated.”

“With this extremely radical leaning Supreme Court decision, the license which will be given to legislators is to assert more controls over a person’s choice and the federal constitution should not withdraw these protections from the people.,” Prof. Joyner continued. “If the right to privacy for women can be dismantled so casually, as done in this draft opinion, so can the right to privacy in a person’s home and personal affairs be taken away or curtailed. This is a very dangerous development in constitutional law.”

But it doesn’t stop there, added Prof. Joyner.

The draft proved that this conservative-leaning U.S. Supreme Court was will to buck legal precedent, which hereto now upheld landmark decisions in the past to maintain the legal foundation of jurisprudence and insure legal stability.

“If you simply dispense with this treasured and guarded principle in the abortion context, it can be easily done with other treasured and cherished rights,” Joyner continued. “ Chief among these rights, and these challenges are presently on the Supreme Court dockets, are the rights of racial minorities to be admitted to higher education institutions, the right to vote and the ability of state courts to determine the constitutionality of race-based redistricting decisions by state legislatures. If the Supreme Court can disregard over fifty years of precedents in the Roe v. Wade line of cases, it can and will do the same thing in other areas of the law. This legal drifting back to the “days of old” will not bode well for the presently understood protections which exist for the rights of African Americans, people of color and other minority or disfavored groups in this country.”

Prof. Joyner concluded, “Across the country today and with the emerging political power of ultra-right wing forces who are increasingly controlling most state governments, the rights of African Americans are under attack and now we are in imminent danger of losing critical protections which we have fought for and won with past U.S. Supreme Court decisions regarding our constitutional rights.”

-30-

NC REAX TO STUNNING

ROE v WADE NEWS

By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

North Carolinians, as was the rest of the country, were stunned  by Monday night’s unprecedented revelation by Politico that a majority of the conservative-led U.S. Supreme Court has voted to overturn the controversial 1973 Roe v. Wade decision which gave American women the right to a legal abortion.

Politico’s reporting was based, it said, on a leaked draft of a majority opinion written in February by conservative Associate Justice Samuel Alito. Observers say it is not a final opinion, but given the High Court’s 6-3 conservative majority, it is seen as indicative of the final ruling.

North Carolina political figures, like Democrat U.S. Senatorial candidate Cheri Bealey, immediately reacted to the report.

“If confirmed, this decision is the moment we have feared, warned and fought against. It is terrifying for women across the country,” Beasley, a former chief justice of the NC Supreme Court said in a statement.

Calling abortion “a constitutional right,” Beasley continued, “ This horrifying news -- and Washington's failure to eliminate the filibuster and codify Roe v. Wade to protect our rights -- has shown us exactly what is at stake and it is more urgent than ever that we elect leaders who will stand up for our fundamental freedoms in the U.S. Senate.”

Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper let it be known on Twitter that “Now, more than ever, governors and state legislatures must stand up for women’s healthcare. We know the stakes and must stand firm to protect a woman’s choice and access to medical care.”

Planned Parenthood of South Atlantic NC made it clear that until that Supreme Court draft opinion is published (expected sometime in late June, early July), abortion remains legal in all fifty states.

“We have reached a crisis moment for abortion access,” PPSANC said.

The North Carolina Justice Center said, in part, “The damage to the nation, the Court, and the Constitution this draft opinion portends is so severe and potentially irreparable that we can only hope reconsideration at the Court occurs in the next several months.  No opinion is worth the destructive effects this opinion would usher forth.” 

Democrats, by and large, see this news as jumpstarting their November midterm election chances to attract angry women voters to the polls. Pres. Biden vowed to codify Roe v. Wade, asking voters to make sure they elect pro choice Democrats to do so.

Former Congressman Mark Walker, a Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate tweeted, “Keep praying and speaking for those who cannot speak for themselves.”

And embattled North Carolina Congressman Madison Cawthorne proudly took Twitter to say “Because of Donald J. Trump, Roe v. Wade will be overturned.

-30-

                                                                   CHERI BEASLEY

POLLS SHOW BEASLEY

1N TOUGH U.S. SENATE RACE 

AGAINST REPUBLICANS

By Cash Michaels

Contributing writer

With inflation high, gas prices higher, and a train wreck of an economy, polls say Democrats are looking at an electoral bloodbath come the November mid-term elections.

Traditionally, the midterms are when the party in power loses seats in Congress and the state legislature, primarily because Americans aren’t pleased with the direction the country is headed in.

To that end, North Carolina’s marquee midterms race for the U.S. already looks like a tough haul for Democrats, especially U.S. Senate candidate Cheri Beasley, long before even the May 17th primaries. Beasley, a former chief justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court, leads an 11-candidate Democratic field of mostly unknowns going into the primaries. She is better funded, and recently began a slew of campaign television ads to solidify her lead and expected primary win.

On the Republican side, four headliners lead the 14 candidate field - 

the Trump-backed Congressman Ted Budd; former Gov. Pat McCrory; former Congressman Mark Walker and  retired military veteran Marjorie K. Eastman.

Among Republicans, Budd and McCrory remain close at the top, but one thing the polls are showing for November - any of the top three may have an edge over Democrat Cheri Beasley if she, in fact, becomes the Democratic standard bearer headed into the fall.

And it’s not just in her race.

As indicated before, polls of likely general election midterm voters are showing an overall favorability towards Republicans primarily because of disenchantment with Pres. Biden and his policies.

A Civitas poll from the week of April 14-18 shows a 52% GOP favorability across the board, with no signs of that changing.

In the U.S. Senate, where there is a 50-50 tie between Democrats and Republicans, there are 14 Democrat seats and 21 Republican seats up for grabs. Per North Carolina, Democrats are vying for the open seat of retiring U.S. Sen. Richard Burr. Thus, Beasley is key to Democrats at least gaining one seat, as well as holding onto 13 others, in order to retain control of the Senate.

But conservative media is already blunt about Beasley’s chances for victory in November. The Carolina Journal last week wrote, “Any money invested in the U.S. Senate race to elect Cheri Beasley would be a complete waste.”

Republicans are hopeful that voters in North Carolina’s rural areas will continue their rejection of Democratic candidates come election time.

The polls also hold good tidings for legislative Republicans in the NC House and Senate, even with new redistricting maps. Given the polls, it is possible, some observers say, that Republicans could win supermajorities in both Houses, in addition to a majority of the NC Supreme Court.

There’s still plenty of time before the November midterms, but for some, the writing is on the wall.

-30-

PRIMARIES ARE FOR 

CHOOSING YOUR

PARTY’S NOVEMBER

CANDIDATES

By Cash Michaels

        Historically, far fewer people vote in the primaries than the general elections, and during North Carolina’s early voting period for the upcoming May 17th primaries, it’s easy to forget what they are really for.

Party primaries, either Democrat or Republican, are for the sole purpose of choosing from among several candidates who are vying to run for a particular public office come the November general elections. Primaries are usually when the party’s most faithful decide which candidate will represent them in the general election.

So if ten Democrats or Republicans decide they want to be chosen to represent their respective party in the general election, they compete in a primary to attract the most votes in order to be selected, in this case on May 17, for that right.

That means you shouldn’t wait until the November general election to decide whether you like a particular candidate from your party. The time to make your choice as to whom you would like to represent your party in November for a particular public office is now, during the early voting period which ends on May 14th (check your local county board of elections for daily poll opening and closing times, and locations), and on primary day, May 17th.

Hopefully, on May 17th, other voters will agree with your choice in order to garner the most votes to  nominate your candidate to compete in the November election.

But what happens if your primary candidate loses the party primary? Then you research the primary winner, find the areas where you agree, and , if you so deem, support that party nominee in November against the opposing party candidate, whom you should have already determined you don’t agree with.

Primaries are usually when the party’s most faithful decide which candidate will represent them in the general election. Once that’s done, however, most candidates, in an effort to attract as many voters are possible in November, move from the political extreme (right or left) to the middle in order to make their positions more palatable to a wider electorate.

Sometimes this tactic works. Sometimes it doesn’t, and some nominees are then seen as not being true to their word to the party faithful.

That’s why it is important to hold candidates to their word on issues and policies during both primary and general elections. To do that, research your candidates. See if they are making different promises in different parts of town, to different groups.

In short, do you homework about the party candidates placed before you in both the primary and  general elections. Discuss the candidates and their positions with your friends and neighbors. Don’t take your right to vote for granted. It’s too important.

According go the NC State Board of Elections races for this primary include:

         The U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.

The N.C. General Assembly.

The N.C. Supreme Court and Court of Appeals.

           Registered voters across the state can vote in the primary. However

voters affiliated with any political party will be given a ballot 

of candidates for their party. Unaffiliated voters may choose the ballot of 

candidates for any party primary.

           For more vital information on primary voting go to https://

www.ncsbe.gov/voting/upcoming-election.

                                                 -30-