First of all, blacks received the right to vote after the civil war,
Posted By: Lu on 2008-11-05
In Reply to: Those of us that aren't black could - sweetpea
try 140 years ago (NOT 40) when the Reconstruction Ammendments were passed between 1865 and 1870. Women received the right vote with the 19th Ammendment in 1920 (88 years ago).
I think history has established that slavery is wrong. I refuse to believe that I, as a white person, must continually apologize to the black man or woman for slavery that happened to their ancestors centuries ago! I personally have never codoned or owned slaves and they personally have never been slaves. So I ask you, what does slavery have to do with Obama being elected president? What does slavery have to do with his compaign and this election? Who is making race an issue here? I'll answer the last one, YOU are by insinuating that Obama and all African-Americans deserve special accolades just because they are black. They did not suffer as slaves. They did not have to overcome slavery. And today's African-Americans receive more rights and more governmental assistant, then any white person I know. Just look at affirmative action for crying out loud!
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
This is what I found on the civil rights vote.
House Debate and Passage
The House of Representatives debated the bill for nine days and rejected nearly one hundred amendments designed to weaken the bill before passing H.R .7152 on February 10, 1964. Of the 420 members who voted, 290 supported the civil rights bill and 130 opposed it. Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34; Democrats supported it 152-96. It is interesting to note that Democrats from northern states voted overwhelmingly for the bill, 141 to 4, while Democrats from southern states voted overwhelmingly against the bill, 92 to 11. A bipartisan coalition of Republicans and northern Democrats was the key to the bill's success. This same arrangement would prove crucial later to the Senate's approval of the bill.
I thought after reading your post that there was something wrong with that statement, Republicans passed the civil rights act; Huh?? Then I remembered at that time the south was predominantly Democratic and I believe those elected officials were voting more on their constituents' demands than on the platform of the Democratic party. That also explains why Johnson said, **As of today, Democrats have lost the south.** and he was right. It looks to me like a bipartisan deal. I got the above information from the Everett Dirksen Library Archives.
This also demonstrates to me how a party can change or evolve its platforms. The Democratic south was once **the little people, the working class, the most good for the most people party.** After the civil rights act the south became predominantly Republican and remains so. In 1964 the south did not want equal rights for women, blacks, religions. They wanted things to stay the way they were. I think the Republicans provided that for them. In 1964 I think it safe to say that WASP was pretty much the bulk of the Republican party and that appealed to the south who were being forced at gunpoint to change.
I don't know about the suffrage movement but I always wonder if they caught the same flack then that NOW gets now. I am going to look that up though.
More blacks are in prision because more blacks are poor in this country...sm
If you can't afford a get out of jail free card, you spend the time.
The legal system is a poor excuse. If you have money you can buy your way out. If not you're screwed. This is not even a black or white issue, except that most blacks can't afford to pay off the legal system.
more blacks in prison...why?
Your post is a racist post. Tell me, why do blacks make up the majority in prison? Could it be bad cops sending innocent black people to prison..you bet..could it be no opportunites for blacks, you bet..Your statement trying to defend Bennetts undefensible comments make me wonder.
Blacks in Alaska.......
Well, I have several long-time very close friends who have lived in Alaska for 28+ years. My best friend married a native Alaskan. That conversation did come up one time and you know what her husband told me (this is a man who worked on the north slope for dozens of years). He said the blacks in Alaska are some of the most hard working people he has ever met. Blacks and whites work alongside one another on the slope and other hard jobs. He said many blacks came to Alaska to get higher paying jobs. The comments he would hear would be how they detested their black relatives/friends who sat on their butts and took government (taxpayer)handouts and used their color as an excuse not to better themselves. Their children all went to school together, played together, and helped one another. He also told us that a close friend of his who was from black/Alaskan heritage had told him he couldn't understand with all the advantages his generation and those still to come have, why they don't take advantage of them and why they continue to kill one another in gangs and spend so much time hating one another and "whites", blaming whites for all their problems. Now, this comes from a black man in Alaska. He said many of his friends came up after he suggested they could find higher paying jobs. They were hard working people who just wanted a better life and they refused to raise their children thinking they had to have handouts and they didn't want them "around" other blacks who were drug pushing and calling each other the "n" word in their schools. It wasn't the Republican whites they were trying to get away from. By the way, he thought social programs were a joke!! He felt social programs were one of the biggest problems in black society and that they encouraged handouts and free rides without offering a solution.
I have several black neighbors and we are in the south, that will not hesitate to tell you they "hate" social programs, they are sick and tired of paying for them, and suggest those that like them so much be the only ones who pay for them. They are hard working people like us who want to actually keep their money. One couple put two of their daughters through medical school without a single social program in their lives. They detest being taxed to pay for all these social programs when we can see in our own communities they are just unjustified, just throwing more money into a big pit.
Now, I'm not sure where you get your info from, but all republicans are not white...matter of fact the above mentioned blacks vote republican and think the democrats are the problem for the plight of the black man. Keep giving them handouts and making them believe they "need" help, can't do without the government, can't make their own decisions, and you will have nothing but a welfare state before long.
Rich republicans don't pay taxes? Who in the h*ll do you think pay for all those social programs now.....you? The 1% of rich republicans as you put it are the ones in the highest tax brackets, pay the most taxes, and fund the greatest majority of your social programs. Taxation is relevant to your income, not your political party. You make more, you pay more in taxes. How do you think they made more money....it fell from the skies? Yes, there are those who inherit a lot of money and have done nothing to deserve it (even though those they inherited it from worked their butts off for it), but in a free country, they are free to inherit it if it is given to them. I don't feel negative towards them for that. And there are those who have made fortunes from hard work, not coming home at 5, and have pretty much given up any life of their own to succeed to the level they feel they want to be. You say rich like it's a bad word. Should we fault people for being hard working and succeeding financially in life and making more than us? I know people who have lots of money and they have sacrificed a LOT to get there.
I feel pretty certain if you had lots of money you would certainly lavish it on your children. That would be your right. And you probably wouldn't want it taken from you to give to everyone else when you can make the decision to donate/give as you see fit.
Our government, however, feels they have the right to have death taxes, which by the way, Whoopie Goldberg, detests and thinks that is wrong (she's black and rich)and why does she think that's wrong? Because she wants to give her wealth to her family when she dies and that's how it should be, without government interference. They have no right to take it....they didn't make it. I don't hear her jumping on the bandwagon saying TAKE MY MONEY, PLEASE, and give it to anyone you want and pay for hundreds of social programs with it. After all, she made it and should give to those as she sees fit, not as our government sees fit. Matter of fact, I don't hear any rich blacks screaming take my money. I hear some of them backing Obama and say they believe in what he wants for this country, but they just don't want to pay for what he wants. Make up your mind...can't have it both ways!
Well, for ACORN it is about race....the more blacks
The blacks that have been truthful have spoken out and said that the corrupt group ACORN has PUSHED them to vote for Obama, telling them how much better their lives would be, etc., etc., and they will get a big 'ole check every month, courtesy of the hard working folks. And all they gotta do is sign on the dotted line. These are black people speaking out because they know something is very wrong with this picture.
Too bad the O lovers don't see anything wrong with this picture.
Current-day blacks are not slaves and never were.
nm
Why blacks voted for Prop 8
Interesting column from the Times, written by a black. I bring this here just as a matter of interest. I found it to be quite interesting.
Op-Ed Columnist
Gay Marriage and a Moral Minority
By CHARLES M. BLOW
Published: November 29, 2008
We now know that blacks probably didn’t tip the balance for Proposition 8. Myth busted. However, the fact remains that a strikingly high percentage of blacks said they voted to ban same-sex marriage in California. Why?
There was one very telling (and virtually ignored) statistic in CNN’s exit poll data that may shed some light: There were far more black women than black men, and a higher percentage of them said that they voted for the measure than the men. How wide was the gap? According to the exit poll, 70 percent of all blacks said that they voted for the proposition. But 75 percent of black women did. There weren’t enough black men in the survey to provide a reliable percentage for them. However, one can mathematically deduce that of the raw number of survey respondents, nearly twice as many black women said that they voted for it than black men.
Why? Here are my theories:
(1) Blacks are much more likely than whites to attend church, according to a Gallup report, and black women are much more likely to attend church than black men. Anyone who has ever been to a black church can attest to the disparity in the pews. And black women’s church attendance may be increasing.
According to a report issued this spring by Child Trends, a nonprofit research center, weekly church attendance among black 12th graders rose 26 percent from 1993 to 2006, while weekly church attendance for white 12th graders remained virtually flat. In 2006, those black teenagers were nearly 50 percent more likely to attend church once a week than their white counterparts. And it is probably safe to assume that many of them were going to church with their mothers since Child Trends reported that around the time that they were born, nearly 70 percent of all black children were born to single mothers.
(2) This high rate of church attendance by blacks informs a very conservative moral view. While blacks vote overwhelmingly Democratic, an analysis of three years of national data from Gallup polls reveals that their views on moral issues are virtually indistinguishable from those of Republicans. Let’s just call them Afropublicrats.
(3) Marriage can be a sore subject for black women in general. According to 2007 Census Bureau data, black women are the least likely of all women to be married and the most likely to be divorced. Women who can’t find a man to marry might not be thrilled about the idea of men marrying each other.
Proponents of gay marriage would do well to focus on these women if they want to win black votes. A major reason is that black women vote at a higher rate than black men. In the CNN national exit poll, there were 40 percent more black women than black men, and in California there were 50 percent more. But gay marriage advocates need to hone their strategy to reach them.
First, comparing the struggles of legalizing interracial marriage with those to legalize gay marriage is a bad idea. Many black women do not seem to be big fans of interracial marriage either. They’re the least likely of all groups to intermarry, and many don’t look kindly on the black men who intermarry at nearly three times the rate that they do, according to a 2005 study of black intermarriage rates in the Wisconsin Law Review. Wrong reference. Don’t even go there.
Second, don’t debate the Bible. You can’t win. Religious faith is not defined by logic, it defies it. Instead, decouple the legal right from the religious rite, and emphasize the idea of acceptance without endorsement.
Then, make it part of a broader discussion about the perils of rigidly applying yesterday’s sexual morality to today’s sexual mores. Show black women that it backfires. The stigma doesn’t erase the behavior, it pushes it into the shadows where, devoid of information and acceptance, it become more risky.
For instance, most blacks find premarital sex unacceptable, according to the Gallup data. But, according to data from a study by the Guttmacher Institute, blacks are 26 percent more likely than any other race to have had premarital sex by age 18, and the pregnancy rate for black teens is twice that of white teens. They still have premarital sex, but they do so uninformed and unprotected.
That leads to a bigger problem. According to a 2004 report by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, black women have an abortion rate that is three times that of white women.
More specifically, blacks overwhelmingly say that homosexuality isn’t morally acceptable. So many black men hide their sexual orientations and engage in risky behavior. This has resulted in large part in black women’s becoming the fastest-growing group of people with H.I.V. In a 2003 study of H.I.V.-infected people, 34 percent of infected black men said they had sex with both men and women, while only 6 percent of infected black women thought their partners were bisexual. Tragic. (In contrast, only 13 percent of the white men in the study said they had sex with both men and women, while 14 percent of the white women said that they knew their partners were bisexual.)
So pitch it as a health issue. The more open blacks are to the idea of homosexuality, the more likely black men would be to discuss their sexual orientations and sexual histories. The more open they are, the less likely black women would be to put themselves at risk unwittingly. And, the more open blacks are to homosexuality over all, the more open they are likely to be to gay marriage. This way, everyone wins.
I received that as well.
nm
You hate blacks AND gays? You think Fox is the news..
I am not answering any more of your racist, rude dumb posts. Talk to yourself, all 3 or more of your selves that you are posting here so obviously.
You're right, most blacks have voted democrats
nm
First of all blacks AND whites live in Harlem
The ignorant comments you refer to came directly out of Harlem and was played for anyone and everyone to hear. Did you not hear the comments made by citizens there? Don't call others names if you don't know what we're talking about.
It's time for blacks to have a little celebration WHY DO YOU CARE? sm
White people never will understand, and I am white, what the blacks went through and still go through. Not only do we now have a brilliant loving, honest president, but he happens to be black. It is MAJORLY symbolic. Why do you rabids pick apart every good and loving thing that the rest of us are celebrating today. Go write a love letter to Anne Coulter!
BYEEEEE hahahah Obama WON.
Received a call for a
a political survey. I went Obama all the way. I love to respond to telephone surveys, but wish I knew who was gathering the data. They asked me if I was borned again.
E-mail I received.
Below is a copy of an e-mail that was sent to me by a friend. The friend who sent this to me is an independent and very impartial. She is a lawyer and almost always researches things before she sends them. I checked it out on snopes.com and it lists it as true. It is information and opinion on Palin written by a woman who knows her from Wasilla.
Here is the snopes.com link if you would like to check it out.
www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/kilkenny.asp
Dear friends,
>
> So many people have asked me about what I know about Sarah Palin in the last 2 days that I decided to write something up . . .
>
> Basically, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have only 2 things in common: their gender and their good looks. :)
>
> You have my permission to forward this to your friends/email contacts with my name and email address attached, but please do not post it on any websites, as there are too many kooks out there . . .
>
> Thanks,
> Anne
>
> ABOUT SARAH PALIN
>
> I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992. Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her
> father was my child's favorite subst itute teacher. I also am on a first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the
> residents of the city.
>
> She is enormously popular; in every way she's like the most popular girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and won't vote for her can't quit smiling when talking about her because she is a 'babe'.
>
> It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents for seven months.
>
> She is 'pro-life'. She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby. There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby.
>
> She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym.
>
> She is savvy. She doesn't take positions; she just 'puts things out there' and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit. Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin's kind of job is highly sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything like that of native Alaskans.
>
> Sarah and her whole family are avid hunters.
>
> She's smart.
>
> Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000 (at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about 670,000 residents.
>
> During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had
> gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had give n rise to a recall campaign.
>
> Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a 'fiscal conservative'. During her 6 years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over 33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation (1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they benefited residents.
>
> The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration weren't enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece of property that the City didn't even have clear title to, that was still in litigation 7 yrs later--to the delight of the lawyers involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing.
>
> While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office redecorated more than once.
>
> These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.
>
> As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state. In this t ime of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today's surplus, borrow for needs.
>
> She's not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas or compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren't generated by her or her staff. Ideas weren't evaluated on their merits, but on the basis of who proposed them.
>
> While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the Librarian are on her enemies list to this day.
>
> Sarah complained about the 'old boy 's club' when she first ran for Mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of 'old boys'. Palin fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the City and as Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people, creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally grateful and fiercely loyal--loyal to the point of abusing their power to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the case of pressuring the State's top cop (see below).
>
> As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla's Police Chief because he 'intimidated' her, she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska's top cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure and she had every legal right to fire him, but it's pretty clear that an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn't fire her sister's ex-husband, a State Trooper. Under investigation for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than 2 dozen contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she later fired,pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew her support.
>
> She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. She abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who didn't like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness.
>
> Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything publicly about her.
>
> When then-Governor Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got the best, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: one of the few jo bs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no background in oil & gas issues. Within months of scoring this great job which paid $122,400/yr, she was complaining in the press about the high salary. I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this Commission (who was also the State Chair of the Republican Party) engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as a gutsy fighter against the 'old boys' club' when she dramatically quit, exposing this man's ethics violations (for which he was fined).
>
> As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from Senator Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the 'bridge to nowhere' after it became clear that it would be unwise not to.
>
> As Governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget guidelines, then made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative action restored most of these projects--which had been vetoed simply because she was not aware of their importance--but with the unobservant she had gained a reputation as 'anti-pork'.
>
> She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The State party leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a fiscal
> conservative.
>
> Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah. They call her 'Sarah Barracuda' because of her unbridled ambition and predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made point guard on the high school basketball team.
>
> When Sarah's mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her.
>
> As Governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package of legislation known as 'AGIA' that forced the oil companies to march to the beat of her drum.
>
> Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to global warming. She campaigned 'as a private citizen' against a state initiaitive that would have either a) protected salmon streams from pollution from mines, or b) tied up in the courts all mining in the state (depending on who you listen to). She has pushed the State's lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior's decision to list polar bears as threatened species.
>
> McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be a heartbeat away from being President. There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more knowledgeable and experienced than she.
>
> However, there's a lot of people who have underestimated her and are regretting it.
>
> CLAIM VS FACT
> - 'Hockey mom': true for a few years
> - 'PTA mom': true years ago when her first-born was in elementary school, not since
> - 'NRA supporter': absolutely true
> - social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships (said she did this because it was unconsitutional).
> - pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to promote it.
> - 'Pro-life': mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life legislation
> - 'Experienced': Some high schools have more st udents than Wasilla has residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska. No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city administrator to run town of about 5,000.
> - political maverick: not at all
> - gutsy: absolutely!
> - open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at explaining actions.
> - has a developed philosophy of public policy: no
> -'a Greenie': no. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.
> - fiscal conservative: not by my definition!
> - pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built streets to early 20th century standards.
> - pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on residents
> - pro-small government: No. O versaw greatest expansion of city government in Wasilla's history.
> - pro-labor/pro-union. No. Just because her husband works union doesn't make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim that she is pro-labor/pro-union.
>
> WHY AM I WRITING THIS?
> First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting programs in the schools. If you Google my name (Anne Kilkenny + Alaska), you will find references to my participation in local government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.
>
> Secondly, I've always operated in the belief that 'Bad things happen when good people stay silent'. Few people know as much as I do because few have gone to as many City Council meetings.
>
> Third, I am just a housewife. I don't have a job she can bump me out of. I don't belong to any organization that she can hurt. But, I am no fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will cost me somehow in the future: that's life.
>
> Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100 or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah's attempt at censorship.
>
> Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.
>
> CAVEATS
> I am not a statistician. I developed the numbers for the increase in spending & taxation 2 years ago (when Palin was running for Governor) from information supplied to me by the Finance Director of the City of
> Wasilla, and I can't recall exactly what I adjusted for: did I adjust for inflation? for population increases? Right now, it is impossible for a private person to get any info out of City Hall--they are swamped. So I can't verify my numbers.
>
> You may have noticed that there are various numbers circulating for the populat ion of Wasilla, ranging from my 'about 5,000', up to 9,000. The day Palin's selection was announced a city official told me that the current population is about 7,000. The official 2000 census count was 5,460. I have used about 5,000 because Palin was Mayor from 1996 to 2002, and the city was growing rapidly in the mid-90's.
>
> Anne Kilkenny
> annekilkenny@hotmail.com
> August 31, 2008
Obama received $ from them, he was #2
after Senator Dodd. Do your research.
How many people have every received
I got a few months of unemployment during the 1990s recession. My stepdaughter, however, has qualified for public housing, food stamps, WICK, and Medicaid. My sister has gotten some discounts for being a single mom with her daycare bill and some Medicaid. Anyone else?
Those tax rebates you received were
essentially bribes to keep you content and quiet. And sadly, you bought into it. Economic stimulus without a plan for long-term economic overhaul is nothing more that borrowing from the future. You and your children will be paying that all back to the government for years to come thanks to GWB and his cronies. Glad you were happy for a while though.
Exactly where do people think the government gets the money to support its functions? I would gladly pay in taxes to an efficient and effective government, if only we had one.
The response you received......(sm)
was equivalent to the response you gave, which was nothing more than whining like a 4 year old -- hence, the simplicity of my response.
Just received this by email
http://www.countryfirstpac.com/petition/economic.aspx
petition to sign to VOTE NO ON THE STIMULUS PACKAGE.
*blacks* not blanks. Been working too long today! nm
x
No surprise that he received such applause!
Did you read the other story on that page regarding the U.S. plans to invade Venezuela? Is the administration so stupid to think that people will actually believe that troops were sent there for R&R? Gimme a break!
It's really a shame when a socialist leader has more honesty and integrity than an American president. Given the choice, who would you believe, Bush or Chavez? Not much of a contest, is it?
It is quite possible with all the hype about the letter he received...
which at the time no one knew a white supremacist had written...the hype was still there, and perhaps he is being targeted now because people know him and know his face. Best way to get publicity is to target someone the public is familiar with. He is obviously an activist on the other side and will be at some of the same events in counterprotest...people know who he is so he is targeted. It happens to people who are known, no matter what their political affiliation. I am saying that so I do not get accused of saying only liberals target people. It is a human nature reaction, not a political one. That is why causes like to have a face on them that everyone knows...so people will pay attention, i.e. the Hollyweird bunch.
I received this too. Nice touch. nm
.
I know I'll get flamed for this but I received
this email from my cousin and there is some truth in it. I don't know where he got it from. Has anyone else received something like this?
Fw: Racist thoughts
I have been wondering about why Whites are considered racists, and no
other race is. Proud to be White.
Michael Richards makes his point...Michael Richards better known as Kramer from TVs Seinfeld does
make a good point.
This was his defense speech in court after making racial
comments in his comedy act.
He makes some very interesting points...
Someone finally said it... How many are actually paying attention to
this?
There are African Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, Arab
Americans, etc. And then there are just Americans.
You pass me on the street and sneer in my direction. You call me 'White
boy,' 'Cracker,' 'Honkey,' 'Whitey,' 'Caveman' .. and that's OK.
But when I call you, Nigger, Kike, Towel head, Sand-nigger, Camel
Jockey, Beaner, Gook, or Chink ... You call me a racist.
You say that whites commit a lot of violence against you... so why are
the ghettos the most dangerous places to live?
You have the United Negro College Fund. You have Martin Luther
King Day. You have Black History Month. You have Cesar Chavez Day. You
have Yom Hashoah. You have Ma'uled Al-Nabi. You have the NAACP.
You have BET...
If we had WET (White Entertainment Television) we'd be racists.
If we had a White Pride Day, you would call us racists.
If we had White History Month, we'd be racists.
If we had any organization for only whites to 'advance' OUR lives we'd
be racists.
We have a Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, a Black Chamber of Commerce, and
then we just have the plain Chamber of Commerce.
Wonder who pays for that??
A white woman could not be in the Miss Black American pageant, but any
color can be in the Miss America pageant.
If we had a college fund that only gave white students
scholarships...You know we'd be racists.
There are over 60 openly proclaimed Black Colleges in the US .
Yet if there were 'White colleges' That would be a racist college.
In the Million Man March, you believed that you were marching for your
race and rights.
If we marched for our race and rights, you would call us racists.
You are proud to be black, brown, yellow and orange, and you're not
afraid to announce it.
But when we announce our white pride, you call us racists.
You rob us, carjack us, and shoot at us. But, when a white police
officer shoots a black gang member or beats up a black drug-dealer running
from the law and posing a threat to society, you call him a racist.
I am proud...But you call me a racist.
Why is it that only whites can be racists??
There is nothing improper about this e-mail...
Let's see which of you are proud enough to send it on.
I sadly don't think many will. That's why we have lost most of
OUR RIGHTS in this country. We won't stand up for ourselves!
Where on earth in this post do you get I hate blacks, Dems, or the poor?
I was quoting the mayor of New Orleans, Ray Nagin..who is black, and a Democrat, though not poor. Did I say I didn't like mayor Nagin? I am just saying he is acting a whole lot differently than he did during Katrina. And from that you get that I hate blacks, dems, and the poor? The dem talking points don't really fit this post...??? Now I am confused.
I don't hate Dems. I just don't agree with them. And I don't understand how they can say they are the party of the people and want to fight so hard for freedom of choice and individual rights, and then turn on one lone poster like a pack of snarling dogs for disagreeing with them. Don't you think what the party is supposed to stand for and the way theones on this board are acting is even SLIGHTLY contradictory?? lol
Imagine that simple statement being recited by a white man about blacks.
It would have been labeled a racist remark.
McCain received $169K from FMFM
directors, officers and lobbyists for the 2008 campaign. Obama received $16K. Look at all the numbers. These figures are from the Federal Election Commission.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/10/us/politics/10fannie.html?pagewanted=2
graph is on the left hand side of page.
I haven't gotten a video but I have received emails
from people who were kicked off the board. They said seeing as they can't post on the board they decided to email me instead.
article "Frist Received Many Updates From Trustee*
Frist Recieved Many Updates From Trustee
By LARRY MARGASAK, Associated Press Writer Sat Sep 24, 5:33 PM ET
WASHINGTON - Blind trusts are designed to keep an arm's-length distance between federal officials and their investments, to avoid conflicts of interest. But documents show that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist knew quite a bit about his accounts from nearly two dozen letters from the trust administrators.
Frist, R-Tenn., received regular updates of transfers of assets to his blind trusts and sales of assets. He also was able to initiate a stock sale of a hospital chain founded by his family with perfect timing. Shortly after the sale this summer, the stock price dived.
A possible presidential contender in 2008, Frist now faces dual investigations by the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York and the
Securities and Exchange Commission into his stock sales.
Sheldon Cohen, who was the trustee for Democrat Walter Mondale's blind trust when he was vice president, and drafted Democrat Lyndon Johnson's blind trust for Johnson's presidency, said that in the executive branch,You don't tell them how it's composed. He said Frist, like any federal official, absolves himself of conflict by not knowing what he owns.
Cohen said that when Mondale left office, he told Cohen to sell his assets. He had no idea what I was holding, the Washington attorney and former
Internal Revenue Service commissioner said.
Frist spokesman Bob Stevenson said the senator received approval from the Senate Ethics Committee before he initiated the stock sale. All the information Frist received complied with federal law and Senate ethics rules, Stevenson added.
The stock was in HCA Inc., a chain of hospitals founded in the late 1960s by Frist's father and brother. At the time of the sale, insiders also were selling. Shortly after that sale, the stock price dipped because of a warning that earnings would not meet Wall Street expectations.
If, in fact, Frist was actively involved in this decision, he certainly has to supply an explanation of how that's consistent with a blind trust, said Bob Bauer, a Washington attorney who has set up blind trusts for Democratic members of Congress.
Bauer said he has no knowledge of Frist's dealings with the trustees of his investments.
Whether Frist knew too much about his investments, or took advantage of insider trading, is not known. But the potential political damage increased in recent days.
Frist also knows first hand how a Senate leader's career can suddenly roll downhill. His predecessor, Sen. Trent Lott (news, bio, voting record), R-Miss., lost his leadership post after praising the late Sen. Strom Thurmond's segregationist campaign for the presidency in 1948.
Documents on file with the Senate show the trustees for Frist and his immediate family wrote the senator nearly two dozen times between 2001 and July 2005.
The documents list assets going into the account and assets sold. Some assets have a dollar range of the investment's value and some list the number of shares.
The trust is considered blind because eventually, through the sale of transferred assets and the purchase of new assets, the official will be shielded from knowing the assets he owns. The knowledge Frist learned about his holdings potentially makes it more difficult to avoid a conflict of interest.
Frist's 2005 financial disclosure form lists blind trusts valued between $7 million and $35 million.
Fist, a heart surgeon, has been the Senate's leader as the chamber has considered Medicare legislation and many other issues that would affect HCA's hospitals and doctors.
Another political problem for Frist: His own statements suggest he had no knowledge of his blind trust investments.
Asked in a television interview in January 2003 whether he should sell his HCA stock, responded, Well, I think really for our viewers it should be understood that I put this into a blind trust. So as far as I know, I own no HCA stock
Frist, referring to his trust and those of his family, also said in the interview, I have no control. It is illegal right now for me to know what the composition of those trusts are. So I have no idea.
Stevenson, the Frist spokesman, said there limited instances where federal law and Senate ethics regulations call for the disclosure of certain transactions or events to the Ethics Committee and to Senator Frist as the trust's owner.
Except in these very limited instances, Senator Frist does not receive information related to the disposition of his assets under the control of the trustee.
Frist sold the HCA stock at a time when insiders in the company also were selling off shares worth $112 million from January through June of this year. Aides to the senator said he acted to avoid a conflict of interest, and that he had no information about the company that wasn't available to the public.
Obama received his undergraduate degree from Columbia...sm
and his LAW degree magna cum laude from Harvard. He did go to Occidental College in Los Angeles for two years. He then transferred to Columbia University in New York, graduating in 1983 with a degree in political science. Hope that explains it.
Putin had just received the baby tigers as a gift.
Don't sweat the small stuff. The country is about to embark on a grim path which very well could include wandering bands of hungry ruthless thieves, heavily armed, raping and pillaging, and the young, old and weak will be their victims.
Do you realize the state of the situation? Do you realize the very real possibilities of the suffering in store for all of us because of fraud and blatent misconduct and mismanagement under the republican administration?
You Americans should feel fortunate to have this man stand up for you.
What is wrong with you people?
I agree neither choice is great, but will vote McCain just as a vote against Obama. nm
x
A vote for Ron Paul is a wasted vote. No chance on Earth he can win. sm
Votes for him only take away from the real candidates.
civil war
During the civil war the rich people, who owned slaves, worked up the poor people, who did not own slaves, into a frenzy about how the north was bossing them around, how they should leave the union and it was an ideological war. All the rich people left their plantations and went north until the war was over. The poor people fought out, brother against brother, without shoes, for an idea. The rich people came back after it was over and kicked the freed slaves off their land, right into the laps of the poor people who had to compete with them now for jobs. The rich stayed rich, alive, and healthy, and all of the poor people were slaughtered.
Are all you republicans rich? Don't fight for them, they are on vacation.
Thank you van - and thank you for being civil
Everyone here gave me a headache I shut it down for awhile. Talk about jumping on and attacking. Heaven forbid anyone should ever put their opinions or beliefs up on this board.
You are correct and I did state in one (if not more) that I was incorrect and he did not lie. But even after saying that they kept attacking and attacking. Then bringing up past posts that had nothing to do with this.
Thank you for posting below all the countries in the Middle East. That helps sort things out.
Like I said, they have every civil right I have.....
--
Political civil war that really does sum it up....sm
And it really is a sad state of affairs.
You raise a good point about bin Laden, I never thought of that. He could have died of natural causes and be buried somewhere. It's not like he was the most vigorous being (healthwise). Who knows?
Catching him two years ago would have meant more politically and *antiterror* wise than it would mean today.
I definitely agree with you - we all need to be civil
Sharing one's viewpoints is one thing. There is no need to call people nasty names. Those other bashings you are talking about came after I posted my message, so I didn't see them.
I hate to quote Rodney King but we all do need to get along. Having one viewpoints is important (it's what makes us human beings), but not everyone will agree with us, and as you stated in your message calling you a d-bag (that has got to be so low class) just because you don't agree with someone? I think I called someone that in high school (but that was over 30 years ago). We will all disagree about issues, but I hope people would be nicer and just say "I disagree and this is why", and leave it at that.
I am sorry you were called all those horrible things. I just want you to know that with our disagreements I in no uncertain terms think you are a d-bag or jerk or anything horrible like that. You are a person just like me. Strong in our beliefs, just different in our ways.
You do Civil War re-enactment?
Politics aside, I feel like I'm meeting some new FRIENDS on this board! By any chance are you going to participate in the Prairie Grove, Arkansas re-enactment the 1st weekend in Dec? We're working to get recognition for the Battle of Cane Hill and hopefully in the next few years we'll have a re-enactment here.
Why have civil defense. NM
x
Civil Defense
civil defense: NOUN: abbr. CD A range of emergency measures to be taken by an organized body of civilian volunteers for the protection of life and property in the event of natural disaster or enemy attack.
Well....civil unions would have
to be something we would do on a country wide basis. I mean...what is the point if you can't leave your state because other states don't accept them. I meant this as a country wide thing. If the whole country recognized civil unions with the same benefits as marriage kind of thing. I guess I wasn't specific enough.
As it goes, same sex marriage is only accepted in the states that allow it. I mean...you have to live in those states to have the rights of marriage...right? Please correct me if I'm wrong on that one because I really don't know.
Good point. I don't vote party, I vote for the
person. Every Democrat is not bad and every Republican good or vice versa.
For someone who "laments" civil debate
you do a fair job of attacking me - it at least feels like one - and I am hardly a Republican... something you obviously hate.
I totally share your disgust of the fascists in power and those who defend them. But if you think for a New York Second the Democrats are much less corrupt you are fooling yourself.
Ask yourself WHY in the face of clear criminal conduct the Democrats have not only successfully challenged bu$h but have HELPED TO ADVANCE THE VAST MAJORITY OF HIS AGENDA (POLICIES).
You do a little real research on this and get back to me. Maybe then you'll hve a better idea why I am a recovering Democrat.
Clinton himself said it best: Fool me once (democratic party), shame on you; fool me twice, shame on ME.
They are the first to invoke their civil liberties. sm
And the first to silence others who do not agree with them. They have attempted to bring the office of the Presidency down to their level...disrespectful, unhallowed, a slip shod Animal House with pizza lovers who trash the house when they leave and steal all the W's from the keyboards. Their beloved Clinton sold the Lincoln Bedroom to people who had no awe of anything, much less respect for all who slept there before. They had sex with young interns and said it wasn't sex. They lied under oath and brought their shady cronyism into the White House. Theyrefused background FBI checks and refused to have their medical records made public, both firsts in any presidency. In other words, THEY HAD NO RESPECT FOR THE OFFICE. This from a man who promised the most ethical presidency ever. And those very same people who continue to support Clinton to this day swear it was all about sex post on this very board about following rules. It boggles the mind.
Lincoln and civil rights
Although you are correct that Lincoln was a Republican, in those days, Republican was not what it is today, nor Democrat, no Tory nor Whig, etc. How could it be, the times they have-a-changed. He called himself a Democrat many times during his career and was extremely anti-slavery but did not fall in with the abolitionists. What with Republicans, Democrats, Whigs, Jacobins, etc. it would be really difficult to say one party abolished slavery.People from all sides supported and opposed it. Lincoln just happened to be president and the **War of Northern Aggression** quelled those who had seceded.
Lincoln was very anti-war, did not like the idea at all so the civil war was distasteful to say the least. He did, however, have no problem enlisting and personally fighting in the European versus Sac Indians war which makes him not my most favorite president...but then, everyone makes mistakes. He did that in his younger years.
The civil rights act I have always believed rests with LBJ. He is not my favorite either. In fact, I did not like him much at all, but he did, in his predecessor's memory, carry the civil rights act to fruition. I remember him saying on the day that he signed it, the south is lost to Democrats as of this day. Here is a link of the timeline. It is pretty straightforward, comes from LBJ for kids site so it is not overly lengthy or boring.
http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/lbjforkids/civil_timeline.shtm
Civil Rights Act voting
Actually in the House 100% of the southern Republicans voted against the Civil Rights Act so it seems you may have skewed the results a bit in order to generalize. Actually the vote went by geography rather than party lines as is obvious below.
As far as the Dems having a lot of catching up to do....politics change over time. Democratic affiliation changed with FDR. Perhaps you have a lot of catching up to do yourself!
CIVIL RIGHTS ACT VOTING
The original House version:
- Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
- Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)
- Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)
- Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)
The Senate version:
Not semantics - Law. There was a need for the Civil Rights
movement of the 50s and 60s. That movement did the job and now it is all water under the bridge. Quit whining about slavery and mistreatment. Quit living in the past. That's all African-American's based their votes on in this election, was the past and skin color. It's racism and ignorance pure and simple. The hypocrisy is the democrats/liberals and their message of tolerance. Now it's the whites that are disciminated against and all tolerance is gone.
Currently in Kentucky ther is a civil
trial going on against members of the KKK for beating up someone at one of the county fairs.
You in your view civil rights don't mean anything? (sm)
Civil and political rights are a class of rights ensuring things such as the protection of peoples' physical integrity; procedural fairness in law; protection from discrimination based on gender, religion, race, sexual orientation, etc; individual freedom of belief, speech, association, and the press; and political participation.
So acorrding to you, we should just scrap this whole civil rights thing that would protect those who do not have as large a voice and go for a majority vote?
marriage vs civil union
As a nation, we did not used to spend so much time splitting hairs over words.
What if back when the 19th amendment was enacted, they had said: Women having the right to 'vote' would upset men. So instead of 'voting' we're going to call it 'ballot casting.' That way, women can have the same rights as men, but only men can be 'voters' and won't feel they're losing their special status.
How about if during the civil rights movement, when segregation was eliminated, instead of integration they had called it: 'The right to attend the same schools and go to the same restaurants and ride in the front of the bus'? Calling institutions 'integrated' would upset the southern states.
How about when women began to demand 'equal pay for equal work'? What if they had said: Okay, you can have the money and the responsibility, maybe even the corner office, but only a man can be called VP of Sales. Instead, your title will have to be something else, maybe Sales Coordinator, othewise the men who are VPs will get angry.
I suppose a fair number of women or blacks would have considered this a win, because they were gaining the benefit, if not the exact status of the changes. But a fair number of folks rightly would have said: Huh? Aren't these silly distinctions? A lot of people would have wondered why they didn't just shut up and 'settle.'
If a civil union conveys such benefits as inheritance rights, parental rights, credit rights, insurance rights, the right to make medical decisions for a spouse then, really, what's in a name?
|
