Republicans and Black People

Because on one of his vacations, he and his wife stopped through Old Saybrook Connecticut, and inquired about some properties.

Katherine Hepburn was from Old Saybrook and it's very beautiful. I would think he'd want a change of scenery after the Whitehouse and not necessarily want to go back to Chicago because of: (been there done that syndrome)

Time will tell, we'll see....................

 

Oh for Crying Out Loud!!!

The President was born in the U.S.

If an equal number of people placed in groups of Black, White, Hispanic...etc...were all born and raised under the same control of equal education, upbringing, love, and parents that instilled a work ethic into all....each group would have about the same percentages of High IQ, Medium IQ and Low IQ.

AboveAlpha

 

Ok, so if you mean by your statement: “maybe it’s time to give the party that gave them equal rights another chance”……………..the republican party, I would beg you, not ask you, but beg you to do some research and revisit your history.

If you’re talking more about the party that gave them their freedom from slavery I would say again, do some digging.

I think you’ll be quite surprised at what you learn regarding the truth behind what caused the civil war, Abe Lincoln’s motives & intentions, and why it all went down.

I had a wonderful history teacher in high school that would always throw the administrations books in the garbage (that all came from Texas even though we were in NJ) and teach us the real history of this country.

How about this, how about we stop talking about black people as if their children who can’t make up their minds or need to be told what to do or how to think, stop spending so much time being bewildered at their choices as if their children who can’t seem to think for themselves, and just accept the fact that blacks vote for who they like, root for who they like, and dance to who they like. (the way every other nationality does)

How about we all just concentrate on that and let the rest go????

 

First, come back to earth long enough to read this post, and then if you like, you can go back to pushing the shopping cart down the street and resume wearing the tin-foil hat.

That statement you made alone puts you in the tin-foil hat category and I’m afraid the penalty is having to sit in the corner until we can talk some sense into you.

Do you honestly believe what you wrote; do you honestly believe that the president is some sleeper mole agent, Get Smart, James Bond, Manchurian Candidate that was sent here by Hezbollah to destroy America?

Wow…………………just…………………..Wow

Please, turn off Limbaugh, stop watching Hannity, and seek help as fast as humanly possible because you’ve been completely consumed by the insanity of the extreme right-wing and it’s not good my friend, it's seriously not good.

 

Please provide the time stamps of these alleged gaps of time for me, seriously I’d like to know.

I remember while researching the president finding tons of information on him and “if” you would have bothered to read either one of his books (that he wrote and not a ghost writer) you would see all the dots connect and line up with guess what…………………………………lots of pictures.

Smartmouthwoman, really, I'm disappointed in you, I didn’t have you pegged as one of “those”

 

I AM educated, and I refuse to vote Republican. You should too.

 

I didn't think the corporate world had much to do with that particular post. Given the opportunity, Republicans would merge with the "corporation" and enslave all except the 1%. Yup...sour grapes.

 

The GOP happily represents the super wealthy, and we all know that. What party represents the average person? Therein lies most of the problem.

 

Why do you think there is a clause which mandates that a POTUS be a natural born citizen?

It is to prevent someone with alien ideas and sensibilities from injecting their "alien agenda" into our lives and to prevent them from doing it legally and with as much power and authority as there could be.

Many of US believe that Obama's upbringing, in his formative years that he did live abroad, had him exposed to those Third World, Banana Republic sensibilities while living within the local political, economic, social, revolutionary, Islamic and Communist miasma.

So, maybe we should re-examine that clause to make it less likely someone like him never sneaks in under the radar again.

- - - Updated - - -

I thought it was all about slaves, Slave Man!

 

I am neither Republican or Democrat but I can tell you that Obama's health care plan is a REPUBLICAN PLAN developed by Mass. Governor Mitt Romney.

I see very little difference between Obama and any other U.S. President.

AboveAlpha

 

I heard somewhere that provision was added in direct response to some trying to sell the kingship of the colonies to the Prussians, but I don't have a source for that.

Regardless, the GOP needs to get rid of the Tea Party stranglehold on them. I heard that the Tea Party pulling a switcheroo from primaries to caucuses was how they put Cuccinelli as the nominee for Governor of Virginia. He is down like 5 points against a complete idiot democrat when it is believed the other guy--a moderate republican-- would have been up 6-8 points at this point and doesn't have scandal hanging around his neck.

I have no problem with run of the mill people who align themselves with the Tea Party, but there is something sinister going on behind the scenes for their "leaders" to have this much power within the GOP.

 

Slaves...corporate fat cats. All the same thing, my portfolio bursting friend!

 

I'm not talking about freeing slaves. Last time I checked, blacks didnt get equal rights until the 60's when Repubicans outvoted Democrats to pass civil rights legislation.

Like I said, maybe it's time to give the party who fought the hardest for equal rights another chance.

 

Time to go to school, here’s some light reading for you in your spare time. It was sourced from an article in the Guardian.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/08/...eally-the-party-of-civil-rights-in-the-1960s/

Mind you this is just one article on this subject of which there were many.

I have enough faith in you that you’ll read it all and get back to me, where I am uncertain is whether you’ll have the courage to concede the point.

It’s lengthy but very educational, please read it when you can.


“Once you control for region, it turns out that Democrats were actually more likely to support the 1964 Civil Rights Act

With Republicans having trouble with minorities, some like to point out that the party has a long history of standing up for civil rights compared to Democrats. Democrats, for example, were less likely to vote for the civil rights bills of the 1950s and 1960s. Democrats were more likely to filibuster. Yet, a closer look at the voting coalitions suggests a more complicated picture that ultimately explains why Republicans are not viewed as the party of civil rights.

Let’s use the 1964 Civil Rights Act as our focal point. It was arguably the most important of the many civil rights bills passed in the middle part of the 20th century. It outlawed many types of racial and sexual discrimination, including access to hotels, restaurants, and theaters. In the words of Vice President Biden, it was a big “f-ing deal”.

When we look at the party vote in both houses of Congress, it fits the historical pattern. Republicans are more in favor of the bill:

80% of Republicans in the House and Senate voted for the bill. Less than 70% of Democrats did. Indeed, Minority Leader Republican Everett Dirksen led the fight to end the filibuster. Meanwhile, Democrats such as Richard Russell of Georgia and Strom Thurmond of South Carolina tried as hard as they could to sustain a filibuster.

Of course, it was also Democrats who helped usher the bill through the House, Senate, and ultimately a Democratic president who signed it into law. The bill wouldn’t have passed without the support of Majority Leader Mike Mansfield of Montana, a Democrat. Majority Whip Hubert Humphrey, who basically split the Democratic Party in two with his 1948 Democratic National Convention speech calling for equal rights for all, kept tabs on individual members to ensure the bill had the numbers to overcome the filibuster.

Of course, it was also Democrats who helped usher the bill through the House, Senate, and ultimately a Democratic president who signed it into law. The bill wouldn’t have passed without the support of Majority Leader Mike Mansfield of Montana, a Democrat. Majority Whip Hubert Humphrey, who basically split the Democratic party in two with his 1948 Democratic National Convention speech calling for equal rights for all, kept tabs on individual members to ensure the bill had the numbers to overcome the filibuster.

Put another way, party affiliation seems to be somewhat predictive, but something seems to be missing. So, what factor did best predicting voting?

You don’t need to know too much history to understand that the South from the civil war to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 tended to be opposed to minority rights. This factor was separate from party identification or ideology. We can easily control for this variable by breaking up the voting by those states that were part of the confederacy and those that were not.

You can see that geography was far more predictive of voting coalitions on the Civil Rights than party affiliation. What linked Dirksen and Mansfield was the fact that they weren’t from the south. In fact, 90% of members of Congress from states (or territories) that were part of the Union voted in favor of the act, while less than 10% of members of Congress from the old Confederate states voted for it. This 80pt difference between regions is far greater than the 15pt difference between parties.

But what happens when we control for both party affiliation and region? As Sean Trende noted earlier this year, “sometimes relationships become apparent only after you control for other factors”.

In this case, it becomes clear that Democrats in the north and the south were more likely to vote for the bill than Republicans in the north and south respectively. This difference in both houses is statistically significant with over 95% confidence. It just so happened southerners made up a larger percentage of the Democratic than Republican caucus, which created the initial impression than Republicans were more in favor of the act.

Nearly 100% of Union state Democrats supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act compared to 85% of Republicans. None of the southern Republicans voted for the bill, while a small percentage of southern Democrats did.

The same pattern holds true when looking at ideology instead of party affiliation. The folks over at Voteview.com, who created DW-nominate scores to measure the ideology of congressmen and senators, found that the more liberal a congressman or senator was the more likely he would vote for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, once one controlled for a factor closely linked to geography.

That’s why Strom Thurmond left the Democratic party soon after the Civil Right Act passed. He recognized that of the two parties, it was the Republican party that was more hospitable to his message. The Republican candidate for president in 1964, Barry Goldwater, was one of the few non-Confederate state senators to vote against the bill. He carried his home state of Arizona and swept the deep southern states – a first for a Republican ever.

Now, it wasn’t that the Civil Rights Act was what turned the South against the Democrats or minorities against Republicans. Those patterns, as Trend showed, had been developing for a while. It was, however, a manifestation of these growing coalitions. The South gradually became home to the conservative party, while the north became home to the liberal party.

Today, the transformation is nearly complete. President Obama carried only 18% of former Confederate states, while taking 62% of non-Confederate states in 2012. Only 27% of southern senators are Democrats, while 62% of Union state senators are Democrats. And 29% of southern members in the House are Democrats compared to 54% in states or territories that were part of the Union.

Thus, it seems to me that minorities have a pretty good idea of what they are doing when joining the Democratic party. They recognize that the Democratic party of today looks and sounds a lot more like the Democratic party of the North that with near unity passed the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 than the southern Democrats of the era who blocked it, and today would, like Strom Thurmond, likely be Republicans.”

 

Geesh, I read the article then come back and read your book. You owe me 2 two-liners.

I concede... the bill was basically supported by northerners of both parties and rejected by southerners of both parties.

Or as Sen. Richard Russell (D-GA) put it, "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." 11

The names & faces have changed. But there are still plenty of good ole democrats like Sen Russell.

Remember Biden's line describing the new guy, Barack Obama? "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean ..."

Name & faces have changed... attitudes are pretty much the same. Not all... but enough to keep the focus off the problems of black communities.

I could be wrong, but so could you. I've got current economic indicators on my side. You've got the past.

 

The word is indoctrinated.

 

1957 civil rights act, 1868 etc...

Democrats support racial discrimination today. Always have. They profit off of tribalism.

Race riots almost always occur in cities run by democrats because of their tribal campaigning. You can't even think of one in a republican town, or at least not one per 15 I can cite in democrat districts

All the worst cities for blacks are run by democrats.

All the worst schools blacks are in have democrat school boards. They block vouchers and school choice and blame the parents for failure in their school system. Apparently blacks make bad parents a voting to the teacher unions

All the most dangerous towns to be a black person in are run by democrats.

Why would anyone vote for them? Not enough time yet? Crazy.

 

Republicans would be very wrong to give any kind of "Special" Attention to Black Americans.

If Republicans make an appeal to Black Americans at all, it should simply be in the process of making an appeal to ALL Americans without any regard at all to the fact that some of them are Black!

To do anything else, would truly be RACIST!

The Democrats are Racist all the time, that doesn't mean that the Republicans should join into that self-destructive game.

We know that Jeffry Immelt, Valerie Jarret, Eric Holder, Robert Riche and Shamir Shabazz have profited greatly from the Obama Administration.

But in reality, it has been a very small percentage of Americans who have actually benefited, not just accepted empty promises, from the Obama Administration.

After all, how well has voting for Obama worked out for 99% of Americans?

So Ask EVERYONE, regardless of Race, how has voting Democrat worked out for you?!

-

 

Finally……………………………..

Now I’ll give you one…

I will be the first to admit there are certain folks in certain communities, who aren’t very educated, don't know their history, don't know politics or their facts, and don't care to get off the couch.

The people I’m talking about are the small percentage of the people that recieve government assistance (not all). They are comprised of a healthy mix of all races, and yes………… they vote Democrat because of their “perceptions“ of what the Democratic Party stands for, and what it will mean to them in the way of entitlements.

There numbers are not in the millions however, they make up a fragment of our population, and an even less percentage in people who actually go out & vote.

I personally do not vote Democrat because of a misplaced perception or correlation tying entitlements to democrats.

I vote Democrat because of their core values and platform which is more skewed be an all-inclusive party where the Republican Party (and you know this is true) is a big boys club filled, mostly with old rich white guys that are clinging on to 1957 for dear life, don’t want to see anything change, and most of all don’t want their status in the US or their demographics to change.

Thank you for being patient, and thank you for reading the article (which I copy pasted off the web site so they were the same)

Maybe one day in the future I can get you to see that the president isn’t the evil incompetent boob the right has unjustly painted him to be.

I’ll work on shortening these reply’s up, I promise…….

 

I agree, but we must specifically enter and talk to the black community because in black districts politics is done close up and personal. Watch the movie "street fight". About Corey bookers fight against the left. I helped a black republican run in a blue district. He got that kind of treatment and worse. People said he robbed his people etc... Meanwhile he gave millions of his own money building them a clinic and was a doctor that did a lot of unpaid work there etc... A real decent human being - he lost in a landslide. That community has continued to decline, his opponent was later convicted of embezzlement.

 

In 1957 were republicans trying to pass the civil rights act again? Was Ike forcing schools to open to black students? Debt dropping? Median income rising? Infrastructure projects you can point to and made us wealthy getting done efficiently and inexpensively? Republican women taking a victory lap after gaining suffrage and rights in the work place? (Republican women did it by the way, democrat women fought suffrage or didn't say a word). You could have picked a better timeframe to pick on.

 

And surely you can do better than picking at straws...............................

What’s the matter buddy, did I strike a nerve? (as I so often do when I tell the truth about how the “conservative” mind operates)

Funny how out of everything I said, the “1957” line was the only line you chose to comment on. Which by the way I picked out of thin air in trying to make the point that they want the “good old days back”. It doesn't matter what year it was in the 50's or 40" - I was talking about "that" time frame in general.

You know damn good & well what's privately said behind closed doors in this country when most (not all) conservatives and self-described republicans are out of earshot of the cameras & the microphones..............and its ugly, VERY ugly...........

All I’ve ever hear behind those closed doors is: “we have to preserve the white man’s race this & preserve the white man’s race that” including a bunch of other things that would make seasoned Merchant Marines blush.

Oh yeah…………… do me a favor and go preach to somebody else about how much republicans care about the welfare of black people when all I’ve heard my ENTIRE life is the contrary.

All they care about (right now) is getting “their” country back and getting rid of as many darkies as possible, and you want to sit up and preach to me about 1957…..??

Try again champ, I think you've got more in you and you could come a lot stronger if you wanted too……………….

 

I would say that a far more effective long term strategy would be to simply state to Blacks:

And in saying so, you draw a line in the sand; Stop with the Race Card Politics, Demands for special Racial Preferences, and false accusations of Racism, and the Republicans might consider looking at trying to win some of the Black Vote.

Until then, the Republicans are far better served focusing their energies and efforts on the "up for grabs", far more numerous, American WHITE Middle Class.

In short, the Republicans do not need the Black Vote, particularly at the cost that is being demanded.

-

 

I have to wonder, what would happen if everyone in America who is not Black, just decided to ignore the "Black" America completely?

Not do anything to deny them earned benefits, jobs, pay... , just refuse completely to acknowledge their Blackness.

When those who live by their Blackness, and the Liberals who Pimp Race for them, shove it in your face, as they inevitably will... Just refuse to acknowledge their actions, or re-label them into non-race based bad-behavior, and deal with it in a non-racial fashion.

We, as humans, only have a Race, if we decide to see each other that way. So just deny them "Race".

I just wonder how that might work out...

-

 

Here’s the issue in a nutshell without going too far off topic or to the moon.

You all want to know what the disconnect is between most African Americans and the GOP in this country?

You want to know why most blacks don’t vote Republican ?

Well I can tell all of you categorically that it’s got nothing to do with any government assistance program, it’s got nothing to do with welfare, food stamps, section 8, or free cell phones.

It’s got nothing to do with black folks expecting democrats to support them so that they don’t have to work while everybody else rolls up their sleeves.

It’s simple…………….every time you turn the TV on and see some republican on the steps of the capital in Washington, the only thing you hear out of their mouths is:

1. Obama’s an idiot this and Obama’s a fool that……which translates to a complete lack of respect for someone extremely respected and admired by black people.

2. All brown people need to be deported, and no more should be let in because their all useless drags on society……which translates into all of our Mexican brothers & sisters are useless pieces of crap that need to go.

3. Blacks take offense to the constant grief & harassment Mexicans go through while we see thousands of Canadians and other Caucasians from Europe come here illegally every year while NOTHING gets said about it.

4. All women need to basically be home & barefoot having as many babies as the Dugger family because that’s God’s plan, oh and stop complaining about your pay inequality because paying you women the same amount as men would kill the economy.

5. All gays are evil & need to go back into the closet because they tear at the fabric of America and have caused a sick immorality that has diseases us all.

In other words, everything republicans talk about and all of their actions are excruciatingly insultive to just about everybody who isn’t a white male.

Republicans have a world view that is not all-inclusive, hostile towards change, hostile towards ethnic groups, and Neanderthal in scope.

Black people are not brainless children that need any party to tell them: what to do, how to think, how to live, how to behave, how to get handouts (that their not looking for) or what’s best for them.

And frankly this entire thread is very insulting towards black people………