OUR VIEW

On the morning of Sept. 28, moralist William Bennett, former U.S. Secretary of Education, federal “Drug Czar,” had what we call a “moment” on his conservative morning talk show Morning in America (Salem Radio Network).
A caller addressed concerns about Social Security policies and its ties to Roe vs. Wade since 1973. Not one word about blacks and crime rates was mentioned. However, Bennett found a way to pull the racial rabbit out of his hood and get the black populace involved by making a vicious suggestion that the solution to America’s crime problem lies in the elimination of black babies.
In the exchange with the caller, Bennett stated that, ” – if you wanted to reduce crime, you could – if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down – ”
The mere idea of Bennett to suggest the aborting of America’s black youth as a possible solution to the nation’s reduction of crime exhibits a blatant disregard for the welfare of a people that have contributed so greatly to the growth of this country from the beginning.
Even though he stated his remarks were hypothetical and the act of aborting a black baby would be “morally reprehensible,” the question remains: Why even hypothesize such a horrible thing?
Killing every white baby in this country would also be reprehensible, but so would killing every Hispanic child, Asian baby and every American Indian baby.
It has been opinionated nationally by “ignorant intellectuals” that blacks do not have the aptitude of whites. After all, wasn’t that one of the “intellectual foundations” for slavery? But if this is true, why not abort every white baby so there would not be more crimes on Wall Street or “white” collar crimes? It’s merely a suggestion (and one without merit) that blacks don’t have the intellect to perform the day-to-day operations required to effectively keep the nation running-unless it’s by putting a bale on their backs and pricking their fingers while picking cotton.
The ironic thing about Bennett’s malicious suggestion is that he claims to be an advocate of morality. If in fact, he is such an authority on moral standards, why did he admit in 2003 that he had a gambling problem after losing millions of dollars in casinos? Yet, he wants to talk about lowering the crime rate.
Simply put, crime would have gone down considerably had Bennett not been the nation’s first drug czar or lead superintendent.
As the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy in 1988, Bennett did little to help those in rural or urban areas. Instead, his plans were conceptualized to help middle-class America — a class most blacks don’t identify with.
Prior to that appointment, President Ronald Reagan appointed him as secretary of education in 1985.
It is now 2005. It was 20 years ago when Bennett became secretary of education. Four years later, he became drug czar. With the estimation that the average five-year old started his educational career in 1985, that same child would be 25 now. Back then, the incarceration rate for adults (18 year olds and over) in the nation was 718,600. As of last year, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, that number rose to 1,551,500.
Most of them fit right in that age bracket.
Had he actually done his job as lead educator and later, done his job as the country’s lead drug enforcement guru, would the nation have a crime problem so prevalent?
Bennett shouldn’t blame black babies for America’s crime rate. Bennett should blame himself and the executive branch of the United States government for their role in America’s socioeconomic dilemma.
Bennett expressed his true feelings on crime and the black population when he responded to that caller. By equating every black birth to criminality and the upsurge of civic deterioration, Bennett displayed just how skewed his views on race and political issues really are.
The bottom line is that crime is a colorblind socioeconomic problem. The reason that this problem exists is because, in this country, the “have-nots” outweigh the “haves.” Not because a baby is born with black skin.
Black babies don’t pull triggers, embezzle money or own planes and boats that are used to import illegal drugs to be sold in inner cities. The notion that their termination would result in a safer America is ludicrous.
Why not attack the root of the problem by aborting poverty in America? Instead of further wasting resources on a fruitless campaign in Iraq and sending black babies, Hispanic babies and poor white babies to fight a futile war, why not use the billions of dollars spent to finance bloodshed overseas to build up poor communities and improve the educational system?
The truth is black babies are not the perpetuators of America’s crime problem, black babies are the scapegoats.
Bennett’s comments aren’t surprising or shocking. His statement is a prime example of the racial bigotry that still pumps in the hearts of white America.