YES! As in "duh - uh". All "Professional Blacks" are con-men. Consider Jesse Jackson too. And "son of Jesse Jackson". What have any of them constructively done for Black people. Trump improved Black employment beyond a statistic difference but to reality yet they beat their tribal drum. Professional Black enrich themselves. Nothing more. Moi Opposed to the Black candle significance of Kwanzaa.
Huey Long is a saint in my book. The people got paved roads, schools with free textbooks, hospitals and many social benefits. The difference between the Democrat Clinton and Obama and the Republican Bush, Jr. Minimally not as corrupt as his predecessors for over 50 years who never let profit be shared with the people. Huey Long shared, even with Black people. And that boys and girls is why "they" killed him. What did any "professional Black" ala Sharpton, Jackson one or two, or Obama do for Black people or anyone? They enrich themselves selfishly. Moi
Significantly, a great many of his liberal donors are Jews and other white liberals. That sure answers the claims that he and his followers are Jew haters and racists.
Again, a very thoughtful post though you failed to address the matter of Hoosier putting all Democrats in the same boat and accusing them of being anti-USA. Perhaps you are too afraid of answering his unwarranted generalization or perhaps it is just your understanding that this is a patently absurd comment unworthy of a reply. I do like your note on enlightening people of both sides. I try to do so as well. Note how many times I have gone against the leftie view on guns and the 2d Amendment - in fact, my views on them often go further right than do the views of the far right on this forum. But when I have called for the public demonstration of these rights against police because of their brutality, especially against minorities, the far right suddenly gets quiet on this forum rather than endorse my view. When I challenge them on their hypocrisy and double standards about this, they go silent when they should be applauding. Re foreign policy, yes, there has been considerable speculation on a future conflict with China - not just the USA vs that empire but the entire West against it. As with all conflicts, it is avoidable. My solution: take all the profit out of war and there will be no more war. "Liberals too soft on crime and communism" - this has been addressed innumerable times on this forum. Once again: it is the right wing that financed Marx, Hitler, and the Bolsheviks. See all of my references to the writings of CONSERVATIVE Antony Sutton for proof. Thus it is not the left that is soft on those elements. It is the right wing who finance and empower them for political and profit gain. Not words or ideas from me but the ideas proven by Sutton and the like who are conservative and, theoretically, should be endorsed by the right if they had any principle at all. As for crime, righties ignore white collar crime which costs society FAR more than does street crime. Nobody is softer on that than is the far right. Further, the right ignores the proven fact of selective enforcement of the law when it comes to street crimes. This is a matter address by Al Sharpton and the like. You say, "We strongly disagree on the causes of problems for America's minorities "of color". But it's a separate issue." -- In fact, it is the real issue here because the thread is about Sharpton. The solution to the problems minorities face in this society can largely be found by a uniform (as opposed to a selective) application of the law. We can stop pretending affirmative action has been of any benefit to minorities when we all know it is whites who are its primary beneficiaries. We can also stop focussing on foreign issues such as Israel and the Middle East and, instead, direct our energies towards fixing domestic problems. Al Sharpton has addressed those matters as well. Righties tell us government needs to keep itself out of domestic issues because government is not the solution, it is the problem. Those same critics, however, tell us government is the exclusive solution to overseas problems and that this is why we need to intervene in the ME and elsewhere. This is hypocrisy of the worse sort. And it is un American (consider Washington's views on it). If you have read my posts you have seen numerous references to our Founding Fathers who advocated government intervention in society to solve problems such as medical issues, building infrastructure, free education, and other issues. In each instance I back up what I say with historical documentation thereby proving these solutions (ironically enough, solutions endorsed by today's lefties while disdained by the right) have been advocated and practiced by pols whose aims are constructive. This in contrast to those who say Democrats and lefties are anti USA. Thus, I and other patriots have repeatedly proven that it is the left that is patriotic and constructive in its political aims and policies. Certain members of the right on this thread continues to deny it but fail to supply so much as an iota of proof to support their claims. One last thing - certain instances of Dem party corruption were listed above. I can create a far longer list of Republican corruption. One that could fill up an encyclopedia. But as that does not involve Sharpton, I will not do so as someone will accuse me of trying to change the subject.
No, it just testifies to the naivite of those particular followers. I'm sure you've read the late Tom Wolfe's novel The Bonfire of the Vanities? Do you remember the Reverend Bacon, and how he responds to the gullible white liberal who timidly asks where all the money donated to 'the cause' has disappeared to? That's Sharpton and his naive followers. In the last Pew poll that I read on the subject, about 10% of whites were anti-Semitic -- whatever that means. And about 35% of Blacks were. Do you remember when Jesse Jackson -- a milder form of Sharpton -- slipped and called New York "Hymietown". Liberals fell all over themselves to accept his 'apology' -- "God hasn't finished with me yet." Don't let Mr Trump try that, of course. Black anti-Semitism, shored up by the faux-Muslim nonsense, is especially reprehensible, because it has been Jews, above all others among whites, who have fought for their rights, long before it was fashionable to do so. The sophisticated anti-Semites, like Kevin Macdonald, have even elaborated a whole psudo-Darwinian theory for this: it's all part of the Jewish plot to dominate the world, you see. I recall when Chaney, Goodman and Schwerner were murdered in the summer of '64 -- two Jews and Black, and then talentless fake Black Nationalist 'poet' Leroy Jones, or whatever he calls himself now, said he didn't care about those white boys ... they were, in his words, 'just artefacts'. Sharpton is not about to cut off a lucrative supply of moolah.
I treat it as overheated rhetoric of the same sort as Lefties calling my side 'fascists' and 'white supremacists' -- the latter label, I note, was used without contradiction by an essayist in the leftwing Boston Review recently to refer to Charles Murray. But for the record, @Hoosier is mistaken. At least two of the contenders for the Democratic nomination for President have honorable records of service in combat zones. Can't say that for Mr Trump or John Bolton. He has correctly determined the direction of motion of the Democratic Party, but has anticipated too much. At the moment, open members of the Communist Party can be, say, Precinct Chairmen of the Democratic Party, but higher office is for the future. Well, you've got to start somewhere. . Yes, you would probably like the sentiment of one of my favorite Russians, that our job is to open men's eyes, not tear them out of their heads. (Until absolutely necessary, of course, since in the end, all serious questions are settled by blood and iron, to quote one of my favorite Germans.) On guns. Not sure what you mean here -- I probably haven't followed the gun-control debates closely -- there is never anything new said on either side. I am all for contesting police brutality, including when necessary, with the prudent and deliberate use of arms. You probably didn't follow that thread in which I detailed my own role, long ago, in raising money on my campus to buy ammunition for the Deacons for Defense and Justice, and then delivering it in person to their head in Bogalusa Louisiana. Not that I believed, then or now, that people should seek out a confrontation with the police -- rather, an armed citizenry is treated with more respect by them. And as I recall, the Blacks of Bogalusa began to get more police protection from the Klan, under pressure from the Federal Government, once the prospect of a serious shootout there became possible. Police misconduct in the Black community today is caused by the high level of crime and social disorder there. You see the opposite behavior when police deal with the Japanese, who apparently are forgiven minor driving infractions because they contribute nothing to the crime rate, at least according to ex-policeman novelist Joseph Wambaugh. Non-criminal Blacks are victims of "statistical prejudice". You cannot help but treat Blacks, especially young Black males, differently than you would treat, for example, young Japanese males (in America today, not on Iwo Jima 74 years ago). The same sort of calculation that you would make, were you walking down the street at night, heard footsteps behind you, turned around ... and felt a sense of relief that the young men behind you were not Black. My own solution: withdraw all white policemen from Black areas. The problem is ... who goes first? It's the disarmament question in general. Unless both sides do it, there will be no change. You could nationalize the arms industry in the US, and the only change would be, we would have lower quality weapons systems. Weapons are an effect, not a cause (or not a primary cause) of national conflict. We have to address the question of national conflict first ... or so I think. Dear God. There are all sort of lunatics 'on the Right', some of them quite sinister, and some of their views dovetail nicely with, even overlap, those of lunatics on the Left. Sutton was not a lunatic, exactly -- I think some of his work has value. Yes, capitalists will sell to communists, the rope the communists intend to hang them with. 'We' were selling scrap metal to Japan in the 1930s (and they kindly returned some of it to us at Pearl Harbor.) It's a famous observation. And Americans loved to hear that those stupid Russian peasants couldn't invent anythng on their own, especially not under communism. No doubt some of it is true. Individual capitalists are driven by the need to make a profit, and will not sacrifice for the overall good of their system. That's why we have the state, and in particular, Trading with the Enemy Acts. But it's a huge leap from that rather obvious observation, to the conspiracy theory view that sees the Bolshevik Revolution, even Karl Marx[!], as financed by a shadowy group of capitalists (and Mr Sharpton in a candid moment can tell you exactly who those capitalists are). As for Mr Sutton, he was a devotee of 'Cold Fusion'. Enough said. Leave out 'far', and add 'those who donate to the Republican Party', and I would say that there is some truth to that. But it's the public, not 'the far Right', who get exercised over violent crime, as opposed to non-violent white collar crime. A woman who has just been raped but not robbed isn't going to feel that she should really be angry at the insurance company which has overcharged her by 5%. I believe that there is 'selective application' of the law, a matter of both color and class prejudice. A Yale student caught with some coke is going to be treated differently than a semi-literate Black kid of the same age. But this is greatly exaggerated by the Left, who want to look away from the absolute depravity and violence of the Black underclass, who kill each other in numbers far, far greater than the police do. I recommend to anyone interested in this, Roland Fryer's study of police use of force . I've never heard of that one before. Could you elaborate? How do whites benefit from being discriminated against, except in the problematic sense that we need a certain number of Black college graduates from elite schools to prove how we're not racists and since they can't get in on merit, we have to admit some on race. Of course, he's probably jealous of his co-thinkers who run African states and who have enriched themselves from such programs. Here we might be in substantial agreement, except that Leftist patriotism is an oxymoron. However, the devil is in the details. Do note that when Republicans denounce the state in general, most of the time they do not really mean it. It's like Christians and adultery. When they have controlled the state, they haven't dreamed of shutting down the FDA, Social Security, etc. Sometimes they have de-regulated things like transport, and it's mainly been for the good, as many liberals have acknowledged when they have come to power and declined to reverse the de-regulation. As I keep repeating, many social conservatives are 'economic liberals'. As for the Founding Fathers, there were things that they did and said which both liberals and conservatives today can draw on. But things have changed so much that it's just humbug to expect any detailed guidance on, say, whether we should have gone abroad to destroy the fascist monster, or build a transcontinental highspeed rail. Anyway, liberals ought to be worrying abou the increasingly-influential Hard Left, who want to paint over the Founding Fathers. I wouldn't want to bet on which party has been more corrupt, especially as you go back in time. I think it's best for both liberals and conservatives to see the Democratic and Republican parties, respectively, as imperfect tools to carry out their programs. I don't know any ordinary Democrat or any ordinary Republican who is in favor of corruption.
Wolfe the famous white lib. The only book of his that I read was Only the Dead Know Brooklyn - and that was so long ago I've forgotten its plot. Because of that I cannot answer your point about it. Please post a link to that poll as I never heard of it or those numbers. Black anti-semitism? We hear a lot about that but everybody likes to overlook the alliance between these groups. Again, nobody exemplifies that more than Sharpton many of whose patrons and on field workers are Jewish. None of those Jews have any trouble with appearing on stage with him. Reminds me of Jewish Mayor Frey in Minneapolis who won a close race thanks to the black vote. I hope you are not attributing Leroy Jones's words or attitude to all blacks because as you know or should know, those three civil rights workers are and have always been viewed as martyrs to the civil rights cause. As always, certain people like to view Sharpton as a Jew hater. but it is only the right wing that does. Lefties and Jews do not do so and for good reason.
@Doug Erratum above: you mentioned Tom Wolfe. I mistakenly replied re Thomas Wolfe. BBL to answer the rest of your reply.
Here you go. [ SOURCE ] You've probably heard of the Marxist aphorism that "Anti-Semitism is the socialism of fools."
My point was that the Democrats are not intolerant of corruption, not that corrupt politicians do not accomplish good things.
By unethical methods. It comes down to whether or not the ends justify the means. Is it ethical to enrich yourself and your friends while doing (admittedly) good things?
No " ? " about it. Study up and stop masking statements as questions Huey Long did Great Things for the poorest of the State of Louisiana. The quote was regarding the corrupt cannot, etc. and what not. see above
If you knew my question was rhetorical, why didn't you treat it that way? Who's truly being intellectually dishonest? Very well. The undeniable good that Mr. Long did was negated by the means he used. Finding a means to enrich oneself while masking the corruption of one's actions does not negate that corruption.
your source uses this as its footnote: https://www.adl.org/antisemitism_survey/survey_print.asp Not Found The requested URL "https://www.adl.org/antisemitism_survey/survey_print.asp" was not found on this server. I have no other reference or "proof" at all of the claim that blacks are likelier to hate Jews than anyone else.
Okay -- that wasn't actually where I read the original report. I'll dig around and see if I can come up with a source you can believe.
- overheated rhetoric of the same sort as Lefties calling my side 'fascists' and 'white supremacists' - I have yet to see any leftie on this forum refer to ALL righties as racist, fascist, or white supremacist. But just about every day we see righties referring to all lefties as anti America, racist, anti semitic, etc. Thanks for saying Hoosier is in error. Let's see if the board agrees and imposes sanctions for that misconduct. - two of the contenders for the Democratic nomination for President have honorable records of service - I always find it interesting how so many of today's right wingers overlook the fact that what was called the Greatest Generation (including my patriotic dad and uncle) was almost exclusively Democrat. If it hadn't been for them, today's generation would be walking in goose steps and making the Roman salute to a foreign power. How lucky they are that Democrats saved their sorry butts from the fascists and commies who had been financed by Republicans on Wall Street. - Bogalusa - Nope. Don't know about that and cannot comment. - Police misconduct in the Black community today is caused by the high level of crime and social disorder there. - That is incorrect. It is police abuses and society's tolerance for their crimes that cause it. Of course, the easy solution is to disarm the police and to arm the people. As Jefferson was reported to have said "when people fear the government, there is tyranny. When government fears the people, there is liberty". It is time for right wingers to admit they have been hypocrites in this regard as they only want guns in their homes but not in the ghetto where people can protect themselves from criminally tyrannical government police. All 2d Amendment rights advocates should applaud that statement. - We have to address the question of national conflict first - Easy. Just do as Washington said: withdraw from ALL foreign entanglements. That isn't communism, that Founding Father principle. - A Yale student caught with some coke is going to be treated differently than a semi-literate Black kid of the same age. But this is greatly exaggerated by the Left - My best pal in law school was a conservative up until the day he became a law school student and practitioner. All too often he saw black kids get thrown in jail for minor drug offenses while privileged white kids got sent to rehab centers despite committing major drug offenses. And he wasn't alone. The experience of seeing selective enforcement of the law made many a conservative into a lib. Ditto for certain white cops I have known over the years. - affirmative action - Re affirmative action we have had multiple dozens of threads on the subject which prove white women are the principle beneficiaries of AA. They in turn have white husbands so that it is these white couples who are the biggest beneficiaries. Since we have gone over this before, I'll just post this: https://tinyurl.com/yxr6ouw2 - disarmament - Our Founder demanded NO STANDING ARMY. Enough said. As it is we have enough weaponry to bring about overkill many times over. Military wastage is what is causing the national debt while the corporate welfare queens rejoice. Thus when you say "Leftist patriotism is an oxymoron" you are incorrect. Say instead, rightie patriotism is illusory. That is far closer to the truth. - liberals ought to be worrying abou the increasingly-influential Hard Left, who want to paint over the Founding Fathers. - On the contrary as I have proven, just about everything the left stands for, whether it be building up the infrastructure, free college, universal health care, social security, UBI -- ALL were conceived of by the Founders. Not by Marx who wasn't even born at the time they came up with these ideas. It is the lack of patriotism and the lack of historical knowledge which prompts the far right to pretend any of these ideas are Marxist. - corruption - Mebbe if Trump hadn't given blanket pardons to criminals like Arpaio and others his party wouldn't be accused of so much corruption. And while such misconduct is not exclusive to the GOP that arty is definitely far more inclined to corruption than anyone else. Again, what has all this to do with Sharpton? Well, he has called for equal justice for all, condemned social violence, and brought about peace in the streets of Brooklyn (my original hometown). Where was Trump to quell violence? He was nowhere to be seen. On the contrary he applauded and still defends racist white cops in the Central Park Five matter. Those criminal cops are retired now laughing and living on fat pensions while taxpayers finance the victims for the suffering they endured. None of this is necessary, just obey the law and apply it uniformly. This is what Sharpton has called for while Trump continues to defend racist cops. So who is the real con man? The answer is only too obvious.
Here is some information on Black anti-Semitism. [ SOURCE ] As I'm sure you know, all public opinion surveys have to be taken with several pinches of salt. The results they get are highly sensitive to how questions are worded, the context in which they are asked, how they are asked (in particular, is there anonymity?), not to mention sample size and representativeness. In particular, I am very suspicious about that drop in Black anti-Semitism from 29% to 20% in two years. The survey I remember, from the 1990s, had white anti-Semitism at 10% and Black anti-Semitism at 35%, but of course that was 25 years ago, and it may have had a broader definition of anti-Semitism than this survey (which talks about 'strong' anti-Semitism, I assume of the Louis Farrakhan type, "Jews are devils" etc. Of course Farrakhan is shunned in the Black community.) Anyway, I'm surprised that this is a question you dispute: no one disputes the very high Black crime rate -- 50% of all murders, etc. You no doubt assign the blame for this to white people, so why not just accept that Blacks are more anti-Semitic than whites, just as they commit more violent crime, but blame whites in this case as well?
Not much of a survey with only 1,200 people representing millions of people from all walks of life. And for 26% of those polled still believing Jews are responsible for the death of Jesus, well, that's just plain sick. That assuming the poll is accurate and not some fabrication. As for homicides, those same sources tell white on white crime is the reason for the majority of homicides among whites. I imagine you are blaming blacks for that, am I correct? Let's not be silly here. As our Founding Fathers said over 200 years ago, it is the lack of justice that causes disorder in any society. This they gleaned from the writings of Erasmus, from Cicero, and from the Bible which teaches, "no justice, no peace" - Isaiah 59:8. If there is crime, anarchy, and disorder in any society, it is because that is an unjust society. The Founders weren't kidding anybody. They were willing to die for that belief. The problem with our society today is that we continue to stray from their teachings. If we ever learn to heed their message and apply the principles they expounded such as UBI, social justice for all, free education, and universal health care, then we will greatly improve as a society, have justice, and order will finally prevail. That is what Sharpton has always stood for. That is why he is defended by Jews, by white liberals, and by people who are interested in a more wholesome society. If forum righties and the rest of society did the same, this would be a better place to live in for all.
