Former policies, current party rhetoric indicate marginalization of minorities

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 effectively cemented the Democratic Party as the party of racial progress in the minds of an overwhelming majority of African-American voters. In the years since 1964, approximately 90 percent of the African-American electorate has self-identified as Democrat. Republicans justified their opposition to the Civil Rights Act by characterizing it as the federal government overstepping its authority. The United States Constitution, however, was drafted by slave-owning politicians who, given their background, would most likely oppose any legislative progress for minorities.

Recent killings across the nation reeking of racial stigma lead me to question the glaring absence of hate crime legislation in the state of South Carolina. Killings of African-Americans in Tulsa, Okla., Jackson, Miss., and Sanford, Fla., highlight the importance of existing laws that severely punish hate-criminals. Predictably, it is the Southeastern states that are lagging behind the rest of the U.S. in hate-crime legislation. South Carolina is one of only five states in the country that have yet to approve a single hate crimes law. Unfortunately, it is South Carolina and its neighbors that need these laws the most.

Palestine's acceptance puts end to U.S. support

An outrageous U.S. law passed in the early 1990s is the reason a child in Gabon will never read a book. Because of this law, someone in Iraq is drinking contaminated water when we could have purified it and domestic forces in Afghanistan struggle to provide their people with security. Because of this law, efforts to improve health and education in the world’s most destitute nations will come to a halt.

"Stand your ground law does not protect, condone violent attack on teenager 

A 17-year-old Florida teen named Trayvon Martin was walking to his father’s house, hoping to watch a basketball game after having purchased some Skittles at a nearby gas station. George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain armed with a handgun, spotted Martin on the sidewalk and decided the youngster was up to no good. Zimmerman followed Martin, even though he had done no wrong. He was African-American and wearing a hoodie. That, apparently, was all the evidence Zimmerman needed to begin a pursuit that, despite the opposing accounts, ultimately led to Martin’s death.

According to Clooney, South Sudan peace could foster major economic benefits

George Clooney is making headlines, and not for his role in a new blockbuster film. At a special congressional hearing last week, Clooney testified on evidence he gathered during a trip to South Sudan, evidence he claims is being marginalized by the international community.

Romney's military plans will worsen Iran standoff

The U.S. government must take necessary precautions to prevent the possibility of Iran attaining nuclear weapons, even if those precautions eventually evolve into military action. That being said, it is hazardous and irresponsible to begin talk of war or physical confrontation with the Islamic Republic, as Mitt Romney recently did. Romney slammed President Barack Obama, claiming his stance will enable Iran to attain nuclear weapons. He outlined his own plan, which only differs slightly from the president’s, but beats the war drum louder and stronger than is prudent.

Republican claims skew actual numbers of economic impact, potential jobs

Last month President Barack Obama vetoed a congressional bill that would have authorized production of the Keystone XL pipeline. The veto caused mass hysteria, rallying both sides of the aisle around their polarized positions on the issue. Though temporarily stalled, the battle over the pipeline’s future is far from over. TransCanada and its congressional puppets have both vowed to push forward on the project, and there is another almost identical bill currently awaiting a vote. The harsh criticisms directed at the president for his veto are both politically-motivated and phony. Obama stood up to big oil and did what was best for the American people.

Debate over "true Christian values" has no place in candidates' platforms

The recent emergence of Rick Santorum as the front-runner for the Republican nomination has rejuvenated the hopes of conservatives that their particular brand of religion will once again dominate the political sphere. Candidates like Rick Perry and Santorum make their religious views centerpieces of their platform in an effort to galvanize the evangelical vote while diverting attention from their inadequacies in areas of public policy. Many conservatives would rather vote for a man who goes to church (and loudly proclaims that fact) than  one who views religion as a personal, not political, element and takes logical stances on the issues without invoking the Bible for legitimacy.

New position betrays earlier principles

President Barack Obama announced to his campaign supporters Monday that he would publicly support Priorities USA Action, a left-wing super PAC he hopes will give his re-election campaign a much-needed boost to keep up with the amount of cash flowing into conservative PACs. Though the president has consistently opposed the existence of super PACs like Priorities, the Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission poses an interesting dilemma for his 2012 campaign, one that has already led him to ideological compromises. Nothing would have empowered Obama supporters more than the president sticking to his guns, rising above all the corruption and crookedness created by PACs and turning the spotlight back on the party that welcomed with open arms the Supreme Court’s classification of corporations as individuals. But as of February 2012, the president concluded that compromising his ideology in favor of raising money would garner him more votes than remaining true to it. This is simply not the case.

Last week’s vitriolic article castigating our great university for pregame prayer could not be more disappointing or poisonous.