Today's racist post

How would you feel if you were a black man running for election, and angry protesters did things like throw Oreo cookies at you, call you Uncle Tom, make cartoons of you depicting you as a black-faced minstrel, and (apparently because all of "you people" aren't trustworthy) illegally obtain your personal credit report?

Well, if you were a REPUBLICAN black man, this would be par for the course... especially since it's all coming from black democRats.

Tell me again why so many blacks are convinced that the democRat party is THEIR party?

Let's review:

The first democRat, Thomas Jefferson, was a slave owner who (it is believed) raped his black slave and had illegitimate mixed-raced children, children who grew up without any of the benefits one would expect the children of a President to have.

The first Republican, Abraham Lincoln, went to war to free the slaves and issued the Emancipation Proclamation.

After the Civil War, democRats in the South formed the Ku Klux Klan, instituted Jim Crow laws, kept blacks from voting, created "separate but equal" schools for the colored people, lynched blacks who tried to change the system, and made Rosa Parks sit in the back of the bus.

It was a democRat Governor who ordered the National Guard to stop blacks from entering a white school.  It was the Republican President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, who sent the 101st Airborne to enforce the law and prevent the Guard from stopping integration.

It was a democRat Governor who ordered fire hoses be used on black protesters and had the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King, Jr., arrested.

Meanwhile, Illinois Senator Everett Dirksen, a Republican, sponsored the Civil Rights Act.  The Act eventually passed, but only because a majority of Republicans combined with a minority of democRats to put it on L.B.J.'s desk.  This success came despite the best efforts of democRats like Robert Byrd (a former officer of the KKK), who filibustered civil rights for blacks.

Granted, Strom Thurmond, the former democRat and racist Dixiecrat, later became an "evil" Republican.  But he also accepted that the prejudice of his youth was wrong, and as one of the first Republican Senators from the South, became the first Southern Senator of any party to have blacks on his own staff.

George Wallace, the former racist democRat, also became a Republican.  He did so after accepting that his prejudices were wrong and apologized to the black community.  Towards the end of his life, the Republican George Wallace was one of the most popular politicians among Southern blacks.

Meanwhile, our current President, George W. Bush, has done more to promote blacks within his administration than any other President.  He gave us the first black Secretary of State, the first black National Security Adviser, and the first black Secretary of Education, among many other high-profile appointments given to minorities.  He named Janice Rogers Brown, a black woman, to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

And yet, today, democRats have not just the majority support of blacks, but near unanimous support!

If you are black and call yourself Republican, you may as well put on white sheets as far as the so-called "black leadership" is concerned.

But I don't think that a majority of blacks would have this same animus if their so-called "leaders" were honest.  Most of the blacks I have known have been conservative God-fearing people with a deep sense of family values.  Are these the qualities found in the democRat party today?  Not hardly.

Perhaps the candidacy of Michael Steele will be a turning point.  Maybe once he is elected, and has a national podium from which to counter the lies of the Jacksons, Sharptons, and Wrangels, black America will realize that there is an alternative to the 150-year hegemony of the democRats in black politics.

Maybe.

Comments

[Jeff]

I'd feel a lot more optimistic if JC Watts had had any real effect on the black vote.

But I didn't see it happening.

It is said:
"DemocRats hire/nominate minorities because they are minorities. Republicans hire/nominate minorities because they are qualified."

[Gullyborg]

J.C. Watts was a Representative, not a Senator. That makes a HUGE difference when it comes to face time in the press. Also, as he was from Oklahoma, he was largely ingnored as just another redneck from flyover country. Contrast this with Maryland: a combination of East Coast liberal elitism and the nation's seat of power in D.C. If Steele is elected Senator from Maryland, it will be HUGE in comparison to Watts.

[Rivrdog]

Allow me to point out some institutional racism here: The worst public displays of racism that are seen come from the black race pimps, not white activists.

We can discount the Aryan Nations types, they are not representative of anything except a tiny splinter of the community, a few hundredths of a percent of the electorate.

My challenge to anyone is to tell me why black-on-white racism is OK, but the reverse (which hasn't been seen in years) isn't?

Why does Operation Push and Jesse Jackson get away with waltzing into corporate boardrooms and demanding that black executives be hired and the penalty for not hiring them soon enough is payable to Operation Push in US greenbacks?

I could go on, but it's not necessary. I've made my point.

Actually, why do we have to have black leaders as counterpoints to the black racist pigs? Why can't we just get rid of the black racist pigs?

[Jeff]

Jesse & Al are protected, and well protected, by the victimization cult they've created.

You move against them on _anything_ and it's just more of the "man keeping the black man down" nonsense.

The benefits don't outweigh the political (and other) costs.

[Heartless Libertarian]

It's not a 150-year-old hegemony. A black man in Alabama in 1890 would have screwed his own daughter before he voted Democrat.

That hegemony is only 40 to 70 years old. FDR and LBJ bought those votes, and the MSM continues to make payments for them.

[FMIL]

Wow ... powerful comments, all! It is one of my fondest hopes that people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton will one day be seen for the race-bait mongers they are and that people like Jesse Lee Peterson and Star Parker (no, not Star Jones) will be seen for the truth tellers they are, instead of the way the black community sees them all now, in total role reversal. However, as I sit and wait for that day to come, I join y'all in trying to use the truth and logic ... and take my blood pressure medicine as I listen to the idiots on "Uncle Sam's Plantation" (i.e. national-level DemocRATs) try to paint us all as "wanting to kill Whitey" as recently expounded by Kamau Kambon. BTW, I gave a copy of that speech to my daughter to give to her Afro-Am Studies teacher and haven't heard a word about it yet ... still waiting.

[Lornkanaga]

You wrote:
"The first Republican, Abraham Lincoln, went to war to free the slaves and issued the Emancipation Proclamation."

Actually, Lincoln despised the abolitionists but needed their support in order to unify the industrial north against the agricultural south.

The war was about states rights, not slavery. Prior to the war, our country was referred to as "these United States" and individuals referred to themselves as Pennsylvanians, Virginians, etc. Many southerners who fought against the north despised slavery.

BTW, keep an eye on Canada--the rural, more conservative, west is getting tired of providing for the industrial, heavily liberal, east.

[Gullyborg]

Of course, we know the war between the states was about more than slavery, that states rights was the real issue. that is not the point. the point is that as a direct result of the war, slaves were made free by... A REPUBLICAN! But democRats would have us believe that all Republicans are a bunch of evil white european males, the rich offspring of all those evil dead white european males, who want all blacks put back in their places at the back at the bus. History shows us otherwise.

[Laurence]

RE:The Act eventually passed, but only because a majority of Republicans combined with a minority of democRats to put it on L.B.J.'s desk.

I liked your post but this statement is in error. A majority of senators from both parties voted for the act. The percentage of Republican voting was much greater than that of the DimRats. At the time, there were so many more Dims that they could mislead on the issue by just presenting the raw number of each party who voted for the act, ignoring the percentages. Kind of like the tactic they use when talking about tax cuts.