- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 35,963
- Reaction score
- 26,457
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Stinger said:ROFL hardly. They would still be Republicans.
There is no "if" about it, Republicans fought for and voted overwhelmingly for the Civil Rights act while Democrats opposed it.
Who have they denied?
I tell you what, you ask me what I think and then I will tell you, if you believe you know what I think and that is what you will argue against then I can just sit back and watch as you type both sides. But what I think is certainly not as you would try to frame it as your own arguements go down in flames.
Born in Tennesse raised in and still live in Alabama with family in Arkansas and having spent quite a bit of time in Arkansas. My Grandfather was quite well known in the state.
The race issue being what issue? And cite some examples of bills.
Except for the race part which had nothing to do with it.
SouthernDemocrat said:If the Republicans are such a party of civil rights and racial inclusion, then why is it, that your party, the party in power in all three branches of Federal Government, will not put the money and resources behind one African American to get them elected to Congress?
SouthernDemocrat said:Johnson reduced the poverty rate in half in just 4 years with his Great Society programs.
Scarecrow Akhbar said:Isn't the test not the color of the man's skin but the shape of his ideas?
While you may have a perfectly valid point here, what you need to do is find the cases where black candidate that supported the Republican platform was rejected over a white candidate that did not.
Alternately, and yeah I know this information isn't accessible, but you should try to find black GOP candidates who were rejected in favor of whites by the RNC even though projections at the time indicated the black candidate had a higher chance of defeating the Democrat.
Navy Pride said:I personally would like to see a complete reform in the welfare system where the only people that get assistance acctually get it......I have a friend who is a mail carrier and he has been delivering a welfare check to the same mail box for 3 generations...
Unwed mothers should not be rewared with more money for having more babies.....
Scarecrow Akhbar said:That's misleading. With Jim Crow, before the Great Society, black families were intact, young black males were taught a solid work ethic, and the inner cities weren't devastated by crime and drugs.
After the Great Society, the black family is practically gone, unwed and single black mothers is the norm, a sense of entitlement stifles self-reliance, and gang violence and drug trafficking have reduced black neighborhoods to war zones.
And yeah, I blame it on the government's "Great Society". Effect follows cause.
SouthernDemocrat said:Poverty rates were falling before welfare was cut (I agree with cutting it).
Johnson reduced the poverty rate in half in just 4 years with his Great Society programs.
SouthernDemocrat said:See I don’t think its some overt racism on the part of the Republican Party. Instead, I think the problem is that the policies that Republicans advocated, and the Party Platform, are not at all attractive to the vast majority of African Americans. That is the problem. If you want to get more black votes, you have to realize that it is the party platform that would have to be moderated to get those votes.
SouthernDemocrat said:Democrats targeted black votes in the 70s, 80s, and 90s, by pushing a platform that was attractive to black candidates and voters because it addressed the issues that black candidates and voters are concerned about.[\quote]
Yes, they've been playing the race card at every opportunity. Look at the recent nonsense about the government's slow response to the Katrina disaster being racist.
This has been the Democrat campaign strategy in a nutshell:
1) Republicans are racist.
2) We'll give you money.
3) Republicans are racist.
4) We'll protect black employment and contract quotas.
5) Republicans are racist.
6) You don't have to do anything for yourself, it's racist to even suggest it.
7) Republicans are racist.
Note the NAALCP anti-Bush ads in 2000 involving that Texas truck dragging incident as just one example.
SouthernDemocrat said:Republicans targeted white southerners during that time by baiting them with affirmative action, making false and misleading characterizations that affirmative action could result in disaffected white southerners loosing their jobs or their children not getting into college because of it.
What do you mean, "false"? Affirmative Action is nothing except reverse racism. People not in the preferred minority are denied access to college, to jobs, to loans, solely on the basis of their heritage. Affirmative Action institutionalizes racism to combat institutionalized racism. Racism isn't a forest fire, and all that tactic does is preserve racism.
I say the if the blacks want independence and self-reliance, they'll stop voting for parties that promise them a lifetime of servitude and denigration.
Scarecrow Akhbar said:Oh, hell. Those people don't deserve a dime of public money.
The government's not supposed to spend tax dollars on charity.
SouthernDemocrat said:I am writing this in bold because I really want to hammer home a point here. To all you guys in the Republican Party who are not racists and not bigoted, and you just can’t understand why hardly any Blacks vote Republican.
This guy and his response here is exactly why they don’t. He represents a significant voice in your party when he says that with JIM CROW, blacks were better off than they are now.
The problem with this post is that there are no Republicans that "can't understand why hardly any Blacks vote Republican"...we all know the reason...SouthernDemocrat said:I am writing this in bold because I really want to hammer home a point here. To all you guys in the Republican Party who are not racists and not bigoted, and you just can’t understand why hardly any Blacks vote Republican.
This guy and his response here is exactly why they don’t. He represents a significant voice in your party when he says that with JIM CROW, blacks were better off than they are now.
Stinger said:Really
The wel-fare reform act was signed on Aug. 22 1996, pledging to retract it as he signed it and later at the nominating convention again running on his pledge to turn it over and get rid of it.
Now go here: http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/04statab/income.pdf
And tell me why you claim poverty was on a downward trend before he signed, against his will, the welfare reform act.
Or just look at these numbers from the Cenus buruea
Sorry tables don't past correctly but it's Individuals first group Families second and you can see the rates
2003...... 287,699 35,861 12.5 238,903 25,684 10.8
2002...... 285,317 34,570 12.1 236,921 24,534 10.4
2001...... 281,475 32,907 11.7 233,911 23,215 9.9
2000 12/.. 278,944 31,581 11.3 231,909 22,347 9.6
1999 11/.. 276,208 32,791 11.9 230,789 23,830 10.3
1998...... 271,059 34,476 12.7 227,229 25,370 11.2
1997...... 268,480 35,574 13.3 225,369 26,217 11.6
1996...... 266,218 36,529 13.7 223,955 27,376 12.2
1995...... 263,733 36,425 13.8 222,792 27,501 12.3
1994...... 261,616 38,059 14.5 221,430 28,985 13.1
1993 10/.. 259,278 39,265 15.1 219,489 29,927 13.6
1992 9/... 256,549 38,014 14.8 217,936 28,961 13.3
1991 8/... 251,192 35,708 14.2 212,723 27,143 12.8
1990...... 248,644 33,585 13.5 210,967 25,232 12.0
And when Johnson sign the Great Society bill, actually the Economic Opportunity Act, the poverty rate had been falling for a number of years from 20.8% in 1959 to 15.8% in 1965 the year it went into effect.
Again I ask where do you get this stuff?
And they know the easiest way to bring more black folks into the party is to have other Repubicans say things that will offend black people! Genius!cnredd said:The problem with this post is that there are no Republicans that "can't understand why hardly any Blacks vote Republican"...we all know the reason...
When you have politicians that continue to give entitlements to keep them in check, and when you have groups like the NAACPETCPWDTLU snug firmly in one political party's grip, Republicans know full well what they're up against...
aquapub said:What Bennet said is true. Blacks make up only 12% of our population, yet they commit 72% of the crimes.
Beside that, pro-abortionists have used the argument for years that abortion is justified because it prevents a lot of poor people from existing, and would therefore reduce crime dramatically. It is a reprehensible "ends justify the means" argument, but it is true...
Commiting genocide against blacks, poor people, and liberals would all but eliminate crime according to the statistics.
Scarecrow Akhbar said:1) Republicans are racist.
2) We'll give you money.
3) Republicans are racist.
4) We'll protect black employment and contract quotas.
5) Republicans are racist.
6) You don't have to do anything for yourself, it's racist to even suggest it.
7) Republicans are racist.
SouthernDemocrat said:You know, I am very glad that you are Republican. I really hope that you identify yourself as a Republican and tell everyone you meet just what you have written on here. Make sure that you always tell them, after you tell them that you are a Republican, that while it would be wrong, " Committing genocide against blacks, poor people, and liberals would all but eliminate crime according to the statistics."
Please, just stand behind your convictions, don't candy coat your words at all, and tell everyone one you ever see on the street just that.
In fact, I call on all Republicans to stand behind your convictions and tell everyone that you are a Republican and exactly what Aquapub just wrote. Please do, in fact, I bet I could get some left leaning organizations to pay for your travel so you could tell as many Americans as possible especially if you could get the word out sometime in the weeks just prior to November 2006.
Stinger said:And thanked the Republicans who fought the Democrat filibusters, all three of them, and finally got it passed.
"Odds" they place upon themselves.
Then why are there so many successful blacks?
And what specifically do you believe the problem is and how is it to be solved?
And that is factually incorrect. The Republicans by far voted overwhelmingly for the civil rights and voting rights legislation while the Democrats fought to block both.
Not based on civil rights and he would probably have opposed affirmative action with it's race based policies.
DeeJayH said:aquapub said BASED ON THE STATISTICS
debate the statistics all you want, not the reasonble conclusions drawn from them
You may want to read the book FREAK-O-NOMICS by an award winning scientist
it is what Bennet was referring to when he made the comment
He was just stating what was already said in the above mention book
the conclusion will never be done, much less condoned by any reasonable person
but the majority of Abortion on demand is done by the POOR
the overwhelming majority of Crime is done by the Poor
SouthernDemocrat said:Do the statistics say that all criminals are liberal??? The guy is a hatemongering biggot.
First, when we had those record surpluses during the nineties, the poverty rate dropped every year Clinton was in office.
The Great Society brought on the fastest and largest drop in the poverty rate in our nations history. No programs before or since have been as successful. By the way, the welfare reform of the ninties (which I think was long due) was first proposed by LBJ as part of the great society. Liberals and Conservatives at the time rejected it.
Finally, Bingo. My point all along. The problem with high abortion rates and high crime rates is not Blacks, its poverty and ignorance. That is the root of the problem. As poverty rates fell in the nineties, abortion rates went down. As poverty rates have increased since Bush took office, abortion rates have increased as well. If locking people up were the solution to crime, then with the highest per capita prison population of any industrialized nation on earth, it would have worked by now. Until we address as a society the poverty and ignorance in our society again like we did in the 50s, 60s, and into the Nixon Adminstration, then we are not going solve those problems.
The point of the Great Society, the Fair Deal, and the New Deal along with Nixon's anti-poverty measures was not a hand out, it was a leg up. If you want to do something about poverty and ignorance, you have to make some investments in society to prime the pump.
Since the beginning of civilization, up until the New Deal, we tried the strictly "individual responsibility" way. It did not work. I am not saying that big government is the answer to everything, but I am saying that you have to make investments as a society in a societies future in order to progress. In order to progress, we have to realize that we have a responsibility to each other as well as just ourselves.
There will always be poverty in America. There will always be a very small segment of the population who is just unwilling to try to better themselves. However, right now we have the highest poverty rate of any modern industrialized nation on Earth. We can do better.
Nor can any other rational person. I suspect that Bennet would use another example (ANY other example) of something that is morally reprehensible if he had it to do over again. I wish he had said "white babies" as (for some reason) far fewer people would take it out of context.Hoot said:I'm a liberal...at least since the way I saw republicans act when Clinton was in office, but that's another story...
I don't think anything Bennet said was racist and it certainly does not deserve an apology.
I think the problem is, alot of listeners are not used to hearing an intelligent man speak....the guy qualified his statement by saying it was "morally reprehensible."
That should settle it for anyone with a high school education, or above...I cannot believe the outcry over this?!
DeeJayH said:the Great Society was/is a failure
think what you want
throw as much money as you want at it
but until people, of all races in poverty, take responsibility for their lot in life
poverty will always exist, no matter what we do to help them
some cant be helped
others dont want to be helped
and to hell with both of those groups because they live off of the government handouts
the rest, take the help and get back on track and move on with their lives
as it should be
as far as the high poverty rate. TOO BAD
we have a much lower UNEMPLOYMENT RATE which is much more important and relevant
the only reason others poverty rates are not so high is because of their socialistic cradle to grave entitlements
They dont have 'poverty' because the tax the hell out of the working class and give the losers of the country a comfortable living without working for it
If you dont work, you dont eat. PERIOD
if you fall on hard times, the government has programs to get you back on track
but we do not support you for life. Make your own life
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?