Some racists and radicals considered Condoleezza Rice to be like an "Aunt Jemima (http://radio.about.com/b/2004/11/19/radio-host-calls-condoleezza-rice-aunt-jemima.htm)" under GWB, because to be a "true black", you have to be a leftist and not working with the GOP.

So by their "philosophy" above, what does that make whites that would work under Obama if he become president ?

what does that make whites that would work under Obama if he become president ?

Radical leftists of course Cazzo - what else?

Um, normal?

It's sad how racist the Democrats are. I would say it's laughable if it wasn't so shameful.

Jesse Jackson etal:

Fox: Jackson used slur in crude off-air remarks
|
CHICAGO (AP) — The Rev. Jesse Jackson used the N-word during a break in a TV interview where he criticized presidential candidate Barack Obama, Fox News confirmed Wednesday.
The longtime civil rights leader already came under fire this month for crude off-air comments he made against Obama in what he thought was a private conversation during a taping of a "Fox & Friends" news show.

Arrest in racial slurs case (Dirty Dem trick exposed)
Times-Herald.com ^ | 1/20/07 | MARGARET GIBBONS

Posted on Sunday, January 21, 2007 12:06:38 AM by LdSentinal

COURTHOUSE - Democratic poll worker Jacqueline A. Kilroy, accused of lying to detectives when she claimed that she heard Republican state House candidate Jay R. Moyer make racial slurs against Democratic challenger Netta Young Hughes, is now in custody.

And authorities now believe that the 41-year-old Kilroy was responsible for a second racial complaint filed in connection with that campaign.

"We believe that Jacqueline Kilroy is responsible for the racial text messages," said county District Attorney Bruce L. Castor Jr.

"Jay Moyer and his campaign workers had absolutely nothing to do with either incident," Castor emphasized. Authorities last Friday had issued an arrest warrant for Kilroy, charging her with a misdemeanor charge of making false reports to law enforcement officers.

Racial Slur Causes Political Turmoil for Democrats in Northwest

Published: May 8, 1994
A racial slur directed at Asians 18 months ago has turned into political quicksand for this state's Democratic Party, which has been sucked into deeper trouble with every effort to extricate itself from the controversy.

The uproar began in November 1992, when members of the board of the Spokane County Democratic Central Committee were discussing where to hold a fund-raising event for Mike Lowry, the newly elected Governor. One suggested Spokane's landmark Davenport Hotel, which is owned by Hong Kong investors.

Several of the 22 people present said a longtime party worker, Marge Davis, referred to the owners as "those chinks." Others in attendance said the slur was repeated by John Workland, an official of the Hotel and Restaurant Workers Union.

Susan Strauss, a 57-year-old businesswoman from Spokane, says she immediately objected to the term but was rebuked. She told Carl Maxey, a Spokane lawyer long active in civil rights causes, about the incident, and he called on Governor Lowry to intervene.

OMAHA, Neb. -- A Nebraska Democrat is under fire. Barry Rubin is executive director of the state party and is accused of using a racial slur.

Rubin used a Spanish phrase meaning "Uncle Tom" when he wrote about Douglas County Election Commissioner Carlos Castillo in a blog on the Nebraska Democrats Web site. The comment has been removed from the site, but the war of words is not over. Video

Video: Castillo Upset By Blog

Rubin called Castillo a "Tio Tomas," or Uncle Tom in Spanish.

In an e-mail Tuesday, College Democrats President Ashley Bell, a law student at Louisiana State University, informed students of the upcoming governor's election between Democrat Lt. Gov. Kathleen Blanco and former Bush administration official Bobby Jindal, who was born a Hindu.

"On Saturday - we nominated Kathleen Blanco the Lt. Governor to be our nominee to take on Bush's personal 'Do Boy' Bobby Jindal," Bell wrote. "Jindal is Arab American [sic] and the Republicans [sic] token attempt to mend bridges long burnt with the Arab American community."

Yes, the Democrats are so sensitive over the feelings of minorities.

Jesse Jackson etal:

Yes, the Democrats are so sensitive over the feelings of minorities.

Those are all perfect examples of "you aren't a true minority unless you're a leftist".
I feel sorry for minorities, the way leftists use them.

Yes, isn't it amazing that it was the Democrats in South that fought the Civil War for slavery.

And it was a Republican that set the slaves free, Lincoln was a Republican.

Don't you remember the attacks on Clarance Thomas?

This is exactly why you will never see a black Republican running for president.

Dr. Rice is too scared of what these bigots will do to her, and that is why she refused to run for president, also why she talks about why she won't allow for her name to be on the VP list.

Yes, isn't it amazing that it was the Democrats in South that fought the Civil War for slavery.

And it was a Republican that set the slaves free, Lincoln was a Republican.

Lincoln fought to deport the blacks that he said were inferior creatures.

Also funny is that Lincoln didn't set a single slave free, else slavery in places such as Maryland, Kentucky, West Virginia, etc. would have ended in 1861 and not 1865.

Lincoln fought to deport the blacks that he said were inferior creatures.

Also funny is that Lincoln didn't set a single slave free, else slavery in places such as Maryland, Kentucky, West Virginia, etc. would have ended in 1861 and not 1865.

Like everything else, the Emancipation Proclamation took time to come about, there was a war going on, why? because the Democrats of South decided that it wanted slavery as a institution, the war had to be won first before any thing else could be accomplished.

Even today if you watch the Democrats in action, the Blacks are treated as part of the Plantation, and kept in line with overseers like Jackson, and Sharpton, and Farrakhan, rather than as full Democrats.

It took the Republicans to pass the Civil Rights Bill, because many Democrats wouldn't support it.

The Democrats only pay attention to blacks when election time comes around, the rest of the time it back of the Bus.

In the end, President Lincoln was the one responsible for ending that peculiar institution of slavery in this country.

What's even more amazing is all of you and your lack of understanding of history, bullshit echo chamber Republican playbook talking points, and projection that could keep a therapist busy for years.

Like everything else, the Emancipation Proclamation took time to come about, there was a war going on, why? because the Democrats of South decided that it wanted slavery as a institution, the war had to be won first before any thing else could be accomplished.

Even today if you watch the Democrats in action, the Blacks are treated as part of the Plantation, and kept in line with overseers like Jackson, and Sharpton, and Farrakhan, rather than as full Democrats.

It took the Republicans to pass the Civil Rights Bill, because many Democrats wouldn't support it.

The Democrats only pay attention to blacks when election time comes around, the rest of the time it back of the Bus.

In the end, President Lincoln was the one responsible for ending that peculiar institution of slavery in this country.

Why not try answering any of the points in my post next time?

I've NEVER heard anyone call Condolezza anything but her name in any of the circles I'm associated with nor have I read anyone calling her any names like you say they have. Can you provide a link to your accusations please or else I will believe you just make this crap up just to stir the pot.

I've NEVER heard anyone call Condolezza anything but her name in any of the circles I'm associated with nor have I read anyone calling her any names like you say they have. Can you provide a link to your accusations please or else I will believe you just make this crap up just to stir the pot.

Maybe you should try clicking on the link in the OP?

My point was that I never heard it mentioned, that doesn't mean one time it was stated again just to stir the pot.

It took the Republicans to pass the Civil Rights Bill, because many Democrats wouldn't support it.



This is misleading.

The original House version:

* Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
* Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)

* Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)
* Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)

The Senate version:

* Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5%-95%) (only Senator Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
* Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%) (this was Senator John Tower of Texas)
* Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%) (only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the measure)
* Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%) (Senators Bourke Hickenlooper of Iowa, Barry Goldwater of Arizona, Edwin L. Mechem of New Mexico, Milward L. Simpson of Wyoming, and Norris H. Cotton of New Hampshire opposed the measure)
Obviously many Republicans did support it, but in lower %ages than Democrats.

Why not try answering any of the points in my post next time?

I did, I can't help it that you have a comprehension problem.

I did, I can't help it that you have a comprehension problem.

You never did talk about Lincoln's deportation plans, nor did you talk about why slavery in places such as Maryland, West Virginia and Kentucky didn't end in 1861 instead of 1865.

Some racists and radicals considered Condoleezza Rice to be like an "Aunt Jemima (http://radio.about.com/b/2004/11/19/radio-host-calls-condoleezza-rice-aunt-jemima.htm)" under GWB, because to be a "true black", you have to be a leftist and not working with the GOP.

So by their "philosophy" above, what does that make whites that would work under Obama if he become president ?


True, allot of Blacks will apply the Uncle Tom or Aunt Jemima term to anyone they deem "not black enough". That's why 90% of the Black Caucus was supporting Hillary.

Also, one thing I've noticed.[b]Anytime a White Woman dates a Black Man, White males are the first ones to pull "YOUR A NIGGER LOVER" card. Because anytime a White Woman dates outside their race, they're considered "Not White enough". And I live in Cali, I would hate to see how bad it is in your neck of the woods.

Some racists and radicals considered Condoleezza Rice to be like an "Aunt Jemima (http://radio.about.com/b/2004/11/19/radio-host-calls-condoleezza-rice-aunt-jemima.htm)" under GWB, because to be a "true black", you have to be a leftist and not working with the GOP.

So by their "philosophy" above, what does that make whites that would work under Obama if he become president ?

Let's say that these blacks perceive Republicans as not promoting justice and fairness and Democrats as doing more of this. Not, as is implicit in your OP, that Rs are pro-white and Ds are pro-black.

So the whites who are voting democrat can, in this schema, be seen as supporting fairness and justice, that the races will get equal treatment and have equal opportunities. Thus they are not 'betraying whites'.

You may disagree with their judgment of Republicans. But your logic in the OP is not damning. In fact it has an implicit strawman in it.

Simon Anders
Registered User (696 posts)
Today, 09:19 AM #16

“ Originally Posted by Buffalo Roam

It took the Republicans to pass the Civil Rights Bill, because many Democrats wouldn't support it.
”

This is misleading.


“ The original House version:

* Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
* Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)

* Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)
* Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)

The Senate version:

* Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5%-95%) (only Senator Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
* Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%) (this was Senator John Tower of Texas)
* Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%) (only Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia opposed the measure)
* Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%) (Senators Bourke Hickenlooper of Iowa, Barry Goldwater of Arizona, Edwin L. Mechem of New Mexico, Milward L. Simpson of Wyoming, and Norris H. Cotton of New Hampshire opposed the measure) ”

Obviously many Republicans did support it, but in lower %ages than Democrats.

The Republicans supported the bill in bigger numbers that the Democrats here are the break downs in numbers.

Desmond King, (1995). Separate and Unequal: Black Americans and the US Federal Government.

By party
The original House version

Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
The Senate version:[7]

Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House

Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)

Passage in the House of Representatives

The bill was sent to the House of Representatives, and referred to the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Emmanuel Celler. After a series of hearings on the bill, Celler's committee greatly strengthened the act, adding provisions to ban racial discrimination in employment. The bill was reported out of the Judiciary Committee in November 1963, but was then referred to the Rules Committee, whose chairman, Howard W. Smith, a Democrat from Virginia, indicated his intention to keep the bill bottled up indefinitely.

The bill came before the full Senate for debate on March 30, 1964 and the "Southern Bloc" of southern Senators led by Richard Russell (D-GA) launched a filibuster to prevent its passage. Said Russell "We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states."[3]

The Democrats were the one blocking the Civil Rights act, and it took the Republicans to get it voted on and passed.

Let's say that these blacks perceive Republicans as not promoting justice and fairness and Democrats as doing more of this. Not, as is implicit in your OP, that Rs are pro-white and Ds are pro-black.

The fact of the matter is Republicans DO promote juctice and fairness for the races, by trying to make a level playing field for blacks and whites. It's the liberals that promote racism by pushing for more and more "affirmative" action.
Your idea of "fairness" is basically giving more social and economic rights to blacks than whites. And anyone that opposes your "fairness" is automatically labeled a "racist"........:rolleyes:

The fact of the matter is Republicans DO promote juctice and fairness for the races, by trying to make a level playing field for blacks and whites. It's the liberals that promote racism by pushing for more and more "affirmative" action. This is another issue. Your OP is trying to say that blacks and white view the Democrats as being pro-black. I think it is more that they view it, those that do, as more just. You disagree. But that is a different topic. Because they are not seeing it as a pro-black at the expense of white party, they are not viewing whites who vote liberal as self-hating.
Your idea of "fairness" is basically giving more social and economic rights to blacks than whites. And anyone that opposes your "fairness" is automatically labeled a "racist"........:rolleyes:
It may feel good to make up a belief and then put a roll your eyes emoticon next to it, but, well, it has nothing to do with me. I think one can be against affirmative action and not be racist. Especially if you are someone who stands up against racism that is systematic or specific but not legislated. In other words if people around you act in a racist fashion or discriminate and you call them on it, be they boss, coworker, family member , etc.
There are people who are against affirmative action but are generally quiet about tacit racism, some even approve of discrimination based on race. And then there are those who have the courage of their convictions. I certainly hope you are one of the latter.

This is another issue. Your OP is trying to say that blacks and white view the Democrats as being pro-black. I think it is more that they view it, those that do, as more just. You disagree. But that is a different topic. Because they are not seeing it as a pro-black at the expense of white party, they are not viewing whites who vote liberal as self-hating.

No I don't see the Democrats as being pro-black, I see them as maintaining the Plantation.

It took the Republicans to get the Civil Rights Bill passed, and they supported it in larger percentages that the Democrats, and just exactly what have the Democrats done for the Blacks?

From what I read and heard, there has been no change for the Black's and they are still discriminated against, and shoved to the back of the bus, I hear it all the time from the likes of: Jess (the Field Boss Jackson), Al (the House Boy) Sharpton, (Cold Cash) John Conyers, and Charles, (make it up as I go along), Rangle.

To here them nothing has changed since 1964, but the one biggest change under the Democrats that I have seen is the destruction of the Black Family, with the welfare system, and the blacks still vote for the Democrats?

This is another issue. Your OP is trying to say that blacks and white view the Democrats as being pro-black. I think it is more that they view it, those that do, as more just. You disagree. But that is a different topic. Because they are not seeing it as a pro-black at the expense of white party, they are not viewing whites who vote liberal as self-hating.


That's not what I was trying to convey. What I was trying to convey is that some racists and leftists try pushing the stereotype that a black isn't a "true black" unless they're a leftist. So it's basically a form of peer pressure from the left to try keeping blacks on their side.

That's not what I was trying to convey. What I was trying to convey is that some racists and leftists try pushing the stereotype that a black isn't a "true black" unless they're a leftist. So it's basically a form of peer pressure from the left to try keeping blacks on their side. Well, if it's white leftists telling blacks this, I doubt they are received very well. I'd also need to see some back up for this claim of yours. First that a significant number of white liberals are doing this and second that it has any effect. I doubt either of these are true.

Besides, Republicans openly or indirectly imply that voting for them is more patriotic. That it is to some degree unamerican not to vote for them. I think the people who fall for this believe it already. So really they haven't fallen for it.

Unless you think black people are stupid, I don't think you have anything to worry about.

No I don't see the Democrats as being pro-black, I see them as maintaining the Plantation. I was responding to the OP. I don't see the Democrats as pro-black either, though probably from a different perspective.

From what I read and heard, there has been no change for the Black's and they are still discriminated against, and shoved to the back of the bus, I hear it all the time from the likes of: Jess (the Field Boss Jackson), Al (the House Boy) Sharpton, (Cold Cash) John Conyers, and Charles, (make it up as I go along), Rangle. Sounds like you are angry at those blacks.

To here them nothing has changed since 1964, but the one biggest change under the Democrats that I have seen is the destruction of the Black Family, with the welfare system, and the blacks still vote for the Democrats? Not sure what the question is here. Sounds like you should meet with blacks and discuss the issue.

I suppose the tremendous reductions in the Welfare System under Reagan Bush and Clinton should have made them happy and they should be doing well now. I suggest you meet with members of black organizations and tell them they should stop voting for Democrats. You clearly think they are easily fooled or something. I look forward to hearing how your light bringing goes for you.

I was responding to the OP. I don't see the Democrats as pro-black either, though probably from a different perspective.

Correct, the liberal plantation mentality, keep em' with just enough money to keep em' quite, and that they vote for you.

Sounds like you are angry at those blacks.

No I am using the descriptions that many of my friend who are Black have used to describe these so called Black Leaders.

I find it amusing that so many Blacks let themselves be lead around by their emotions by these clowns.

Not sure what the question is here. Sounds like you should meet with blacks and discuss the issue.

20 years in the Military, and 57 years on this world, I have met and broke bread and shared drink with many of the Black community.

I suppose the tremendous reductions in the Welfare System under Reagan Bush and Clinton should have made them happy and they should be doing well now. I suggest you meet with members of black organizations and tell them they should stop voting for Democrats. You clearly think they are easily fooled or something. I look forward to hearing how your light bringing goes for you.

Actually yes, it isn't the federal governments job to use, government charity forced by taxes.

I am, and should be the only one, who should decide who is worth of my charity.

Dictionary.com Unabridged

char·i·ty Pronunciation[char-i-tee]
–noun, plural -ties. 1. generous actions or donations to aid the poor, ill, or helpless: to devote one's life to charity.

Government welfare is nothing more than buying the votes of those who receive such welfare.