• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

America’s Only Black Senator Not Invited To MLK Event Because He’s A Republican…

the people telling them how poor and pathetic and incapable they are of finding success without their democrat party saviors

No one actually says that. No left platform ever involves making people dependent. It never strives to make the least powerful among us less powerful. It is not built upon the idea that poor people are pathetic and incapable of being successful. Nor does it ever attempt to convince the poor that they are those things. It just says that we all need a little help sometimes, and so we'll help out our fellow Americans, because we know that they would return the favor if our needs were reversed. And some people balk at that last bit. But if you help and keep helping, it becomes true.

Liberal policies are all about giving a helping hand up. That is always their intent. Maybe they get twisted by bureaucracy. Maybe they get twisted because they have compromise with conservatives to get those policies passed. But there is absolutely no left wing desire to maintain the poor as a dependent underclass. None. Literally no one advocates this nor pushes policy aimed at achieving such an end.
 
No one actually says that. No left platform ever involves making people dependent. It never strives to make the least powerful among us less powerful. It is not built upon the idea that poor people are pathetic and incapable of being successful. Nor does it ever attempt to convince the poor that they are those things. It just says that we all need a little help sometimes, and so we'll help out our fellow Americans, because we know that they would return the favor if our needs were reversed. And some people balk at that last bit. But if you help and keep helping, it becomes true.

Liberal policies are all about giving a helping hand up. That is always their intent. Maybe they get twisted by bureaucracy. Maybe they get twisted because they have compromise with conservatives to get those policies passed. But there is absolutely no left wing desire to maintain the poor as a dependent underclass. None. Literally no one advocates this nor pushes policy aimed at achieving such an end.
Horse****. Liberal PARTY policies are all about keeping people right where they are. Dependent, stuck, and voting democrat. They have them stuck and right where they want them. All that EVER gets offered is another giveaway program...more handouts, and lots and lots of excuses.

You know better. You KNOW better. You know what it takes to succeed. You know what it takes to earn a degree...hell...an ADVANCED degree. No one chirping in your ear about how unfair it is that it is so hard. No excuses for failure. Its ironic that you can EASILY identify for yourself what it takes to succeed and then ignore that reality for minorities. Hows that working out again? Hows that literacy rate? Graduation rate? Dropout rate? Crime rate? Murder rate? Unwed mother rate?
 
Hmm..., I thought the anniversary was all about American Freedom and Civil Rights. Where was that afforded Senator Scott? BTW it was the overwhelming support of Republicans that passed the Civil Rights Acts of Eisenhower and Johnson. Not the Democrats.

Actually, that is not accurate. When broken down, the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was done because of NORTHERN support. In fact, considering the sectional nature of the division, Democrats supported the Act MORESO than did Republicans.

Here are some examples:

7 Southern Democratic Representatives supported the act (7%). NO Southern Republican Representatives supported it (0%).
9 Northern Democratic Representatives voted against the act (6%). 24 Northern Republican Representatives were against it (15%).

1 Southern Democratic Senator supported the act (5%). NO Southern Republican Senator supported it (0%)
1 Northern Democratic Senator voted against the act (2%). 5 Northern Republican Senators voted against it (16%)

As is evident, beyond being passed because of Northern support, it was DEMOCRATS that helped push this through more than Republicans.

Your error is what happens when one's partisanship prevents them from assessing the accuracy of the numbers.
 
Last edited:
You know why some black people in this county are successful and some people not? Because they WORK for it. They teach values. They dont procreate like rabbits and have kids they can't afford. The go to school, have career goals and visions just like every other successful person regardless of their skin color.

Or...you know...Ronald Reagan.

"Some black people." So a handful of blacks had good role models and more opportunities than most and that somehow justifies incarcerating half the black population for non violent drug offenses diminishing their chances for success permanently? Really?





What makes you think most blacks don't want to WORK?

Unemployed Black Woman Pretends to be White, Job Offers Suddenly Skyrocket | Techyville
 
Does any one else find it amusing that the conservatives in this thread think some one should be an invited speaker simply based on the color of his skin?
 
Much of the South's wealth was built on the free labor of slaves. So in essence, the slaves were robbed to pay Paul. MLK advocated social justice for the descendents of slaves. What do you think he had in mind?
That sort of "justice" for the descendants of slaves could only come at the expense of an injustice to the descendants of non slaves. The south doesn't have wealth, individuals have wealth. So what you are saying is that some white guy making $50,000 per year has some obligation to fork over some percentage of that income as restitution for an injustice he had no part in to some black guy who was never held in slavery for what, for ever? Surely you grasp how labeling such a practice as "justice" would be absurd. What you/he are advocating is creating a whole nother act of gross injustice on a whole nother generation of innocents in the name of justice. Its would be funny if it weren't so outrageous.
 
tim-scott-550x275.jpg

These people should be ashamed of themselves.

Via Red Alert Politics:

Noticeably absent from the speaker line-up at the Let Freedom Ring event commemorating the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington today: the nation’s only black Senator, Tim Scott.

Scott, a Republican Representative appointed by S.C. Governor Nikki Haley earlier this year to fill former Sen. Jim DeMint’s seat in the U.S. Senate after he retired, was not invited to participate in the historic event, a spokesperson for the Senator confirmed to Red Alert Politics in an email.

African-American leaders who did receive an invitation to speak at included Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) – who participated in the original March – Martin Luther King III, MSNBC host Al Sharpton and movie stars Jamie Foxx, Oprah Winfrey and Forest Whitaker.


Read more:
America’s Only Black Senator Not Invited To MLK Event Because He’s A Republican… | Weasel Zippers

Hmm..., I wonder why Senator Scott was not invited to speak?

Probably for the same reason Clarance Thomas wasn't asked to speak.
 
That sort of "justice" for the descendants of slaves could only come at the expense of an injustice to the descendants of non slaves. The south doesn't have wealth, individuals have wealth. So what you are saying is that some white guy making $50,000 per year has some obligation to fork over some percentage of that income as restitution for an injustice he had no part in to some black guy who was never held in slavery for what, for ever? Surely you grasp how labeling such a practice as "justice" would be absurd. What you/he are advocating is creating a whole nother act of gross injustice on a whole nother generation of innocents in the name of justice. Its would be funny if it weren't so outrageous.
That's because taking it from wealthy descendents of former slave owners and corporations would be called socialism by a certain, loud parroting Fox News watching segment of this great country.
 
I honestly don't know what the big hullabaloo is --so MLK made a speech... He had a dream that one day people will be judged not by the color of their skin but the content of their character. Too bad too many political characters today want to promote advancement based on the color of skin.
 
Actually, that is not accurate. When broken down, the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was done because of NORTHERN support. In fact, considering the sectional nature of the division, Democrats supported the Act MORESO than did Republicans.

Here are some examples:

7 Southern Democratic Representatives supported the act (7%). NO Southern Republican Representatives supported it (0%).
9 Northern Democratic Representatives voted against the act (6%). 24 Northern Republican Representatives were against it (15%).

1 Southern Democratic Senator supported the act (5%). NO Southern Republican Senator supported it (0%)
1 Northern Democratic Senator voted against the act (2%). 5 Northern Republican Senators voted against it (16%)

As is evident, beyond being passed because of Northern support, it was DEMOCRATS that helped push this through more than Republicans.

Your error is what happens when one's partisanship prevents them from assessing the accuracy of the numbers.
Just a little disingenuous, There were almost no southern Republicans in congress in 1964.
88th United States Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
So much twilight zone music going on, no wonder nothing will ever get fixed, they let these people actually vote even though they show such pride in their consistent ignorance of reality.
 
"Some black people." So a handful of blacks had good role models and more opportunities than most and that somehow justifies incarcerating half the black population for non violent drug offenses diminishing their chances for success permanently? Really?





What makes you think most blacks don't want to WORK?

Unemployed Black Woman Pretends to be White, Job Offers Suddenly Skyrocket | Techyville
Thats just...stupid. Your argument doesnt even make the tiniest amount of sense. No...SOME black people succeed through the same means others employ. One has nothing to do with the other. Anyone that commits a crime should be punished, regardless of their race. Bust your ass and there is a good likelihood you will succeed (millions of immigrants illegal and legal manage to do so every year). Commit crimes you go to jail. As for your completely disconnected 'work' comment...well...again....thats just so...moot.
 
Horse****. Liberal PARTY policies are all about keeping people right where they are. Dependent, stuck, and voting democrat. They have them stuck and right where they want them. All that EVER gets offered is another giveaway program...more handouts, and lots and lots of excuses.

You know better. You KNOW better. You know what it takes to succeed. You know what it takes to earn a degree...hell...an ADVANCED degree. No one chirping in your ear about how unfair it is that it is so hard. No excuses for failure. Its ironic that you can EASILY identify for yourself what it takes to succeed and then ignore that reality for minorities. Hows that working out again? Hows that literacy rate? Graduation rate? Dropout rate? Crime rate? Murder rate? Unwed mother rate?

Yes, I do know exactly what it takes. One thing it takes is being born into a comfortable middle class household where I could afford to spend the last three years spending money instead of earning it. The same with my four years of undergrad. It never came down to just how badly I wanted it or how badly I was willing to work for it. It took a lot of good fortune. Maybe I could have done all that taking night classes and working full time, but it would have been much harder and taken a lot longer. And I might not have been able to afford it. So it may have taken even longer since I would have had to spend more time between schooling working to save up. And I would have had far fewer hours in the day to spend studying and writing for school. So maybe I would have had the same degree four years later, but I wouldn't have likely done as well and thus wouldn't have learned as much. I'm fortunate enough that I've been able to live almost for free for the last several months, so that I could devote all my time to preparing for the bar. If I weren't so comfortable financially, I'd have been working instead of studying, so maybe I wouldn't have done as well on the bar, and would have to take it several more times, which means even longer until I'm able to start profiting from it.

So yes, it is certainly possible to obtain an advanced degree or succeed in other ways despite being poor. But it is a hell of a lot harder and takes a lot longer, and there are far more places along the way where one can stumble. I have a safety net so I didn't fall too far the couple of times I did stumble. And that is the real difference between liberal and conservative platforms for the poor. Conservatives are all about taking away that safety net if one should stumble. It is presumed that if you stumble, you don't deserve to have help to get back on your feet.

Your characterization that left wing policies are about keeping people stuck in poverty is completely ignorant of basically every policy that the left supports. The dependency angle is a fiction that has never squared with reality at all. There is definitely a reason that minorities overwhelmingly support the left. And it's not, as conservatives claim, that they're too stupid to realize they've been duped. It's because they're smart, and see what the score really is, and are voting for the side that is going to help their children live better lives. Conservatives like to pretend that their way is the perfect way for everyone. But no one who isn't already well off is buying it. I wish you could all get over this fiction.
 
They didn't invite my black friend John to their party either. How dare they! He deserves to be there because he's black!
 
That would seem to be the somewhat limited logic of the OP...
 
Yes, I do know exactly what it takes. One thing it takes is being born into a comfortable middle class household where I could afford to spend the last three years spending money instead of earning it. The same with my four years of undergrad. It never came down to just how badly I wanted it or how badly I was willing to work for it. It took a lot of good fortune. Maybe I could have done all that taking night classes and working full time, but it would have been much harder and taken a lot longer. And I might not have been able to afford it. So it may have taken even longer since I would have had to spend more time between schooling working to save up. And I would have had far fewer hours in the day to spend studying and writing for school. So maybe I would have had the same degree four years later, but I wouldn't have likely done as well and thus wouldn't have learned as much. I'm fortunate enough that I've been able to live almost for free for the last several months, so that I could devote all my time to preparing for the bar. If I weren't so comfortable financially, I'd have been working instead of studying, so maybe I wouldn't have done as well on the bar, and would have to take it several more times, which means even longer until I'm able to start profiting from it.

So yes, it is certainly possible to obtain an advanced degree or succeed in other ways despite being poor. But it is a hell of a lot harder and takes a lot longer, and there are far more places along the way where one can stumble. I have a safety net so I didn't fall too far the couple of times I did stumble. And that is the real difference between liberal and conservative platforms for the poor. Conservatives are all about taking away that safety net if one should stumble. It is presumed that if you stumble, you don't deserve to have help to get back on your feet.

Your characterization that left wing policies are about keeping people stuck in poverty is completely ignorant of basically every policy that the left supports. The dependency angle is a fiction that has never squared with reality at all. There is definitely a reason that minorities overwhelmingly support the left. And it's not, as conservatives claim, that they're too stupid to realize they've been duped. It's because they're smart, and see what the score really is, and are voting for the side that is going to help their children live better lives. Conservatives like to pretend that their way is the perfect way for everyone. But no one who isn't already well off is buying it. I wish you could all get over this fiction.
Oh yes...you are right...it WOULD have been much harder...and it is what it TOOK. I know...and so do many others.

Heres the thing...I believe you CARE...I just think you are an ideologue. Rather than attack the PROBLEM, you blame anyone NOT YOU. You CANT attack the problem. I mean...lets get real. How well does it flyu when you go into black communities and 'help' them? It doesnt and you KNOW that. So instead you demonize everyone else and weeee! Look at me! I cares! Sure...you 'care'....you just arent DOING anything. You are no different than the people that see the massive gun deaths and violence in this country, KNOW who is committing the acts and in what communities they are occurring, and instead of dealing with that problem scream NRA! NRA! and attack LEGAL gun owners. Because...you know...you 'care'. And you CANT/WONT do anything about the people with the problems so instead...well...its rinse, lather, repeat.

You want to blame conservatives and republicans for the failings in the balc community. Convenient. If you told the black community they had to come from a...how did you put it..."being born into a comfortable middle class household where I could afford to spend the last three years spending money instead of earning it. The same with my four years of undergrad. It never came down to just how badly I wanted it or how badly I was willing to work for it. It took a lot of good fortune. Maybe I could have done all that taking night classes and working full time, but it would have been much harder and taken a lot longer."

You know how you get born into a comfortable middle class family? You can actually name who your father is. Your mother doesnt have 5 kids from 5 different baby daddies. Both of your parents went to highschool and thought about their future. Your family prepares a path for you. And when you dont HAVE that, you dont ****ing cry about it or blame others, you create it for yourself and YOUR family like so many of US did.

Or...you know...not. Keep making excuses, keep blaming others, and since it has been working SO swimmingly for you, keep voting democrat. You know...because they...care.

Heres the 'edit'...way to downplay your 'hard work' in law school'. And...just out of curiosity...why DID you go to law school? So you could remain comfortably wedged in that middle income life or to celebrate what you had and build an even greater future for yourself and others?
 
Last edited:
Heres the thing...I believe you CARE...I just think you are an ideologue. Rather than attack the PROBLEM, you blame anyone NOT YOU. You CANT attack the problem. I mean...lets get real. How well does it flyu when you go into black communities and 'help' them? It doesnt and you KNOW that. So instead you demonize everyone else and weeee! Look at me! I cares! Sure...you 'care'....you just arent DOING anything. You are no different than the people that see the massive gun deaths and violence in this country, KNOW who is committing the acts and in what communities they are occurring, and instead of dealing with that problem scream NRA! NRA! and attack LEGAL gun owners. Because...you know...you 'care'. And you CANT/WONT do anything about the people with the problems so instead...well...its rinse, lather, repeat.

Not doing anything? I represented poor kids with learning disabilities to get them the special education they're legally entitled to. I wrote legislation for the DC council to curtail the abuses of banks and lending corporations that are kicking people out of their homes. I worked with a lobbying group to get an anti-SLAAP bill through congress to protect people from harassing lawsuits. I'm in the process of getting work with civil rights organizations. I'm big on the doing of stuff.

You know how you get born into a comfortable middle class family? You can actually name who your father is. Your mother doesnt have 5 kids from 5 different baby daddies. Both of your parents went to highschool and thought about their future. Your family prepares a path for you. And when you dont HAVE that, you dont ****ing cry about it or blame others, you create it for yourself and YOUR family like so many of US did.

And you blame people for having the misfortune to not be successful like you. Most poor families aren't ones with missing fathers and baby daddies. Only a small portion that's always in the popular narrative is. It's just a moral outrage on your part, and a prejudice to attribute the shortcomings of a small part of poor families to all of them. I did nothing to earn a stable and wealthier family that someone else didn't. Who your parents are shouldn't matter. But that seems to be a continuing talking point from conservatives. Poor kids deserve to be trapped in poverty because their parents were sexually promiscuous.

Heres the 'edit'...way to downplay your 'hard work' in law school'. And...just out of curiosity...why DID you go to law school? So you could remain comfortably wedged in that middle income life or to celebrate what you had and build an even greater future for yourself and others?

I don't downplay my hard work. I just also don't downplay the good fortune I had to get me to where my hard work mattered. To succeed, you need both. Conservatives like to pretend that you only need hard work, and for some reason to pretend that liberals don't think you need hard work.
 
Not doing anything? I represented poor kids with learning disabilities to get them the special education they're legally entitled to. I wrote legislation for the DC council to curtail the abuses of banks and lending corporations that are kicking people out of their homes. I worked with a lobbying group to get an anti-SLAAP bill through congress to protect people from harassing lawsuits. I'm in the process of getting work with civil rights organizations. I'm big on the doing of stuff.



And you blame people for having the misfortune to not be successful like you. Most poor families aren't ones with missing fathers and baby daddies. Only a small portion that's always in the popular narrative is. It's just a moral outrage on your part, and a prejudice to attribute the shortcomings of a small part of poor families to all of them. I did nothing to earn a stable and wealthier family that someone else didn't. Who your parents are shouldn't matter. But that seems to be a continuing talking point from conservatives. Poor kids deserve to be trapped in poverty because their parents were sexually promiscuous.



I don't downplay my hard work. I just also don't downplay the good fortune I had to get me to where my hard work mattered. To succeed, you need both. Conservatives like to pretend that you only need hard work, and for some reason to pretend that liberals don't think you need hard work.
oh no...SUCCESSFUL liberals know ALL ABOUT hard work. They just forget that concept when t comes to the people they 'care' about. That was the point about your school. No one gave you your degree and no professor is going to hear a sob story about how bad they had it in life and let them write a 3 page paper instead of the 20 pager everyone else has to write. And NO...people don't 'deserve' to be in poverty because their parents ****ed up... That's just what we call a 'consequence'. You don't change that or make things better by excusing it, justifying it or blaming someone else for it. You didn't become successful because you had a middle income family (so...NOT a 1% family huh? Go figure!). You didn't (presumably) father a bunch of children out of wedlock and commit a bunch of crimes and fail to go to school. For all the social injustices you pretend to fix, the fax remains hat UNTIL the black community changes NONE of what you do will matter. You can bitch about banks, corporations, the wealthy, and conservatives all you want. THEY aren't making those people poor. And until the community itself changes it will continue to be more of the same. No matter how many briefs you write.
 
You can bitch about banks, corporations, the wealthy, and conservatives all you want. THEY aren't making those people poor. And until the community itself changes it will continue to be more of the same. No matter how many briefs you write.

Yeah, they are. Not just them, of course, but they're making bad situations worse. A whole lot of poor people aren't unemployed by choice. They're unemployed because there are so few jobs for them. You can't live on minimum wage jobs, but that's all that's being offered to them. Force of will alone will not lift someone out of poverty, but the whole conservative narrative relies on that false assumption.

It is certainly incorrect not to hold people responsible for bad decisions they personally make, like having children they can't afford, but it is stupid to then refuse to help them deal with those consequences. By demonizing someone for their mistakes, and leaving them alone to fend for themselves when facing troubles that most of us never have to deal with, you don't inspire someone to strive harder, you simply take away their options and they probably fail. That's what economic stability is about. Having options. Having the resources to deal with your problems.

The rest of your post was basically a rant that grossly mischaracterizes liberal platforms and again falsely lumps a whole lot of poor people into categories they aren't really part of, and focuses on blaming poor people to make yourself look better. Try to look for solutions instead of just complaining about people.
 
Actually, that is not accurate. When broken down, the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was done because of NORTHERN support. In fact, considering the sectional nature of the division, Democrats supported the Act MORESO than did Republicans.

Here are some examples:

7 Southern Democratic Representatives supported the act (7%). NO Southern Republican Representatives supported it (0%).
9 Northern Democratic Representatives voted against the act (6%). 24 Northern Republican Representatives were against it (15%).

1 Southern Democratic Senator supported the act (5%). NO Southern Republican Senator supported it (0%)
1 Northern Democratic Senator voted against the act (2%). 5 Northern Republican Senators voted against it (16%)

As is evident, beyond being passed because of Northern support, it was DEMOCRATS that helped push this through more than Republicans.

Your error is what happens when one's partisanship prevents them from assessing the accuracy of the numbers.

In the mad dash to vilify the Republicans and Conservatives today many have forgotten the fact that it was the Republican Party that was the champion of Civil Rights and freedom for African Americans​

Some Of The Lost History In The Civil Rights Movement​


By Robert Rohlfing
October 1, 2011

Today we are hearing how Republicans and Conservatives are either the party of racists or that they are racists in general, but history proves a different story. This rhetoric is being pushed by those on the left and is being used as a tool to divide people. The real history is no longer taught to our children and so many adults have fallen prey to this rhetoric without actually doing the research to see if it is actually true.

If you look though the history books that are presented to our children. If you listen to politicians and pundits. If you talk to your neighbors or friends. Most, would not even believe many facts of the lost history in the Civil Rights Movement. This is a travesty of truth, and the people that have been most afflicted by this have been the African American community for not really understanding the truth about the Democrat Party and how they have buried the truth about their past.

Were you aware that even under FDR’s “New Deal” program that was to benefit lower income segments of the population, African Americans were still segregated in Soup Lines and Bread Lines?
In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes.

It was not until Truman used the executive order that the military finally became desegregated. It should also be noted that LBJ was not the great Crusader of Civil Rights. President Johnson made a 360— turn in his civil rights position when he became President, from 1940 to 1960 Johnson voted with the South 78% on civil rights issues. Prior to 1957, Johnson voted with the South 100% on civil rights issues. He also voted against the C.R.A. of 1957 and 1960.
Were you aware that in order to break the racist ways of Southern Democrats, it was Republican President Eisenhower who sponsored both Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act and it was a LBJ lead Senate who fought tooth and nail against them?

Read more:
Some Of The Lost History In The Civil Rights Movement

So no matter how you try and hide the facts. Democrats have fought against Civil Rights for over two hundred years and lyingly taken on the mantle of Civil Rights leaders.
 
Yeah, they are. Not just them, of course, but they're making bad situations worse. A whole lot of poor people aren't unemployed by choice. They're unemployed because there are so few jobs for them. You can't live on minimum wage jobs, but that's all that's being offered to them. Force of will alone will not lift someone out of poverty, but the whole conservative narrative relies on that false assumption.

It is certainly incorrect not to hold people responsible for bad decisions they personally make, like having children they can't afford, but it is stupid to then refuse to help them deal with those consequences. By demonizing someone for their mistakes, and leaving them alone to fend for themselves when facing troubles that most of us never have to deal with, you don't inspire someone to strive harder, you simply take away their options and they probably fail. That's what economic stability is about. Having options. Having the resources to deal with your problems.

The rest of your post was basically a rant that grossly mischaracterizes liberal platforms and again falsely lumps a whole lot of poor people into categories they aren't really part of, and focuses on blaming poor people to make yourself look better. Try to look for solutions instead of just complaining about people.

I'm all about 'solutions'. Those solutions require a complete change in mindset. Pasch...it is an absolute and undeniable fact that people of ALL races come here to this county every day often with less than nothing and manage to succeed. They don't have the luxury of 'excuse'. Thy dont have people telling them it's not their fault. We have direct evidence of what has happened to the black community over the last 50-60 years. Funny how many manage to succeed where others can't. The difference is invariably foundation. Family. Community. Change will come from within or not at all. No policy is going to change literacy rates. No policy is going to change dropout rates. No policy change is going to prevent unwed mothers and generations of kids growing up without fathers.
 
Why didn't the GOP leaders attend?
 
Wait, is the OP complaining because, in this instance, the liberal group decided to judge him based on their perception of the content of his character rather than the color of his skin?!?!?!?!
 
I'm all about 'solutions'. Those solutions require a complete change in mindset. Pasch...it is an absolute and undeniable fact that people of ALL races come here to this county every day often with less than nothing and manage to succeed. They don't have the luxury of 'excuse'. Thy dont have people telling them it's not their fault. We have direct evidence of what has happened to the black community over the last 50-60 years. Funny how many manage to succeed where others can't. The difference is invariably foundation. Family. Community. Change will come from within or not at all. No policy is going to change literacy rates. No policy is going to change dropout rates. No policy change is going to prevent unwed mothers and generations of kids growing up without fathers.

You're always talking about excuses. The issue is not to harp on how much more moral you feel than people with bastard children. The issue is to help people escape from poverty. You can complain about people's mindset all you like, but complaining at people and telling them how bad they are doesn't change things. All it does is let you feel superior. Rather than whining that you don't think people deserve financial stability until they have what you think is a more healthy sexual habit, how about you support policies that will keep people out of poverty, since middle class people tend towards the sexual habits you want. You're putting the cart before the horse.
 
Back
Top Bottom