The Democratic Party: The Last Plantation In America

This is a LaShawn ditto and very interesting point of view. The article entitled Last Plantation In America is from the Las Vegas Sun and follows the reaction to Clark County Commissioner Lynette Boggs McDonald comments concerning the Democratic party. Here is a clip.

Some local black Republicans said they understand why Clark County Commissioner Lynette Boggs McDonald last week called the Democratic party the “last plantation in America.”

Democrats quickly held a press conference Friday to call for an apology from Boggs McDonald, saying it was “unconscionable” and “inexcusable” to use slavery – one of the nation’s darkest periods – in political campaigns.

“To invoke the comparison is irresponsible,” said Clark County Commissioner Yvonne Atkinson Gates.

But the Republican party is increasingly using powerful language to say that Democrats take blacks for granted and aren’t doing enough to empower the black community…

[E]qual opportunity, school choice, tax relief and faith-based organizations that help the community…."Those are the things that matter most to my family and why I’m supporting our leaders in Congress and President Bush,” she says.

Local black Republicans said they agree that the Democratic Party pays lip service to blacks during election season but does little to bring blacks to the table when it comes to setting policy….

“African-Americans have to look more toward self reliance, less government and being able to create more opportunities for themselves….We’re dealing with the remnants of the ’60s,” [Cornell] Clark said. “But these young, so-called upwardly mobile people — they’re open minded. They don’t think like the old crowds."(my emphasis)

Any chance I get to expose the liberals for who and what they really are I am going to jump on it. Check out the response from the democrats:

Democrats quickly held a press conference Friday to call for an apology from Boggs McDonald, saying it was "unconscionable" and "inexcusable" to use slavery -- one of the nation's darkest periods -- in political campaigns.

"To invoke the comparison is irresponsible," said Clark County Commissioner Yvonne Atkinson Gates.

Ok fine. But really, let's be honest. Is it not the democrats that every four years whip out the race card to scare the mess out of potential black voters? Isn't it the DNC and their lib buddies that constantly label conservatives as racist and bigots? The libs can dish it but they sure as heck can not take it.

The fact is that it has been the 30 plus years of liberal policies that have kept African-Americans from reaching our full potential. And we as a people are beginning to see that. Black power indeed.

It Could Be All Over for Democrats

I think I know why the libs hate George W. Bush so muuch. I think I am beginning to see why the democrats are in a near panic mode. Their days may numbered. As Grover Norquist writes, and this is in the Washington Monthly article:

The modern Democratic Party cannot survive the reelection of President George W. Bush and another four years of Republican control of both Congress and the White House.

No brag. Just fact.

Now that's an attention grabber. He goes on to say:

The modern Democratic Party is the party of government. Its growth is the health of the state--and vice versa. Over time, all the party's building blocks are dependent on continuous support and reinforcement by the power of the central government. Trial lawyer money is now a major part of the Democratic Party, but it is wholly dependent on legislators and courts maintaining the present tort laws that allow lawyers to interject themselves into any and all contracts and relationships.

Now that I have your interest. Read the rest of the article.

Hey Libs! 9/11 Changed Everything!

Sorry libs, I aint forgetting...

It's 9/11 stupid. That's all you have to say to the next liberal that has anything to say to you about supporting George W. Bush. I was one of them. I still have a hard time dealing with the fact that I voted for Gore. I plan to make up for that bone headed mistake the best way I know how...by shedding the light on these weak knee-nimrods.


This is Ronald Brownstein in the Los Angeles Times today. According to Mr. Brownstein and the LA Times, the liberals are just realizing that 9/11 changed everything. "Has Sept. 11 tipped the 50-50 nation toward the GOP?"


This article is full of a bunch of false assumptions. One of the assumptions is that we live in a 50-50 nation. It's not a 50-50 nation. It's not even 50-50 when you look at voter registration, party by party. It's not 50-50 if you look at ideological distribution. The only way you can say it's 50-50 is by virtue of the closeness of the race in 2000. But you look at the way people live their lives, you look at the way people think and the way they act and you will not find anywhere near half this country is liberal. If half this country was liberal, it wouldn't even be a close contest because the number of Democrats that are registered to vote would be twice what it is. The biggest secret in the world is that liberals can't even admit that they're liberal. They don't dare admit they are liberal because it's a death knell. How the hell can this be a 50-50 country when half of it has to lie about who they are? If half of them have to lie about who they are it can't be 50-50. There's just no way.

Where The WMDs Are...

Cross post from Blogs for Bush

Where The WMDs Are...

Kevin McCullough heard Retired Lt. General Michael "Rifle" DeLong (USMC) (who was the No. 2 man in CentCom under General Tommy Franks) on New York talk radio today. Kevin wrote that DeLong said that "U.S. Military Intelligence had been able to determine that WMDs were smuggled out of the country as U.S. military forces were preparing to liberate Iraq."

Kevin recorded and transcribed DeLong's remarks, which you can check out by clicking here...

I wonder how the Kurds feel about all of this.

Kerry's Sister Betrays US, Undermines Aussie Support

Look folks. It's bad enough that Kerry:

• Supported and met with Daniel Ortega (the Nicaraguan communist Sandinista dictator)
• Went to Paris (twice) to meet with the Viet Cong
• Trashed the U.S. military coming back from Vietnam
• Voted against or opposed countless weapon systems while he was a senator
• Voted against funding for the CIA
  

Now his sister is in Australia undermining support for the U.S.

Well I guess being a traitor runs in the family.

Does it concern anyone that the only winning team that Kerry has ever been on the side of is the VietCong?

Green Kerry Elitists (Bigots) Screwing Africa

Here is a perfect example that reflects that the envirmmental wackos don't really give a hoot about people.

Green versus Black

Among the many luxuries that wealth can buy is insulation from reality -- the most dangerous luxury of all. Another dangerous luxury is a sense of being one of the wonderfully special people with superior wisdom and virtue. Environmental extremism flourishes among those who can afford both luxuries.

Did you know that people in the wealthy San Francisco suburb of Sausalito, across the bay, own 80,000 acres of land in Kenya? What are they doing with it? They are setting it aside as a nature preserve, in order to keep poor people in Kenya from hunting animals for food on those 80,000 acres.

There are laments from Wildlife Works of Sausalito, the owners of the land, that poachers are hunting in this sacrosanct wilderness anyway and that 20 percent of the meat sold in Nairobi comes from animals killed in this preserve. According to the San Francisco Chronicle: "With half the population living below the poverty line, the temptation to poach for bush meat is strong."

What are rich people doing, in the first place, trying to stop poor people on the other side of the world from getting something to eat? They are feeding their own egos by hindering poor Africans from feeding themselves.

It's not a racial thing. The green zealots would stop anybody from doing anything they don't approve of. They talk grandly about "protecting" this, "preserving" that, or "saving" something else.

From what? From other people. Nor is this just a matter of buying up things to keep them out of other people's hands. Far more often, green zealots want the government to deprive other people of the right to use land or resources for their own purposes, rather than for the recreational or other purposes preferred by the green zealots.

They want bans on the building of housing under "open space" laws. They want "historical preservation" laws to keep old buildings -- even an old racetrack -- from being torn down, because that could be a prelude to building homes for other people.

In the United States, those other people have just as much right to the "equal protection of the laws" under the Constitution. But what is the Constitution when the green zealots are on a crusade?

Denying other people the same rights that you claim for yourself is the essence of bigotry. People who call themselves environmentalists could more accurately be called green bigots.

Selfishness is never a pretty thing but it is at its ugliest when it masquerades as some kind of lofty nobility. That pose not only gets the green bigots good press, it also helps recruit the young and uninformed to their movement -- especially the young who have been misinformed on college and university campuses.

There is another selfish aspect of the green bigots that the media never seem to discuss: Restrictions on the building of new housing raises the value of existing housing -- and the leaders of the environmental movement usually already have theirs.

As David Whelan of Forbes magazine put it: "They preserve their 25 percent annual appreciation by extending everyone else's commute."

Every community has to have nurses, teachers, and policemen, but people in these occupations are seldom paid enough to be able to live where they work when local housing prices skyrocket because of laws banning the building of homes on most of the local land. That means commuting from far enough away to be able to afford a house or an apartment.

It is not just the poor who cannot live in the places where affluent environmentalists have political clout. People making a hundred grand a year often cannot afford to live in Palo Alto, adjacent to Stanford University, or in much of Marin County or San Mateo County, adjacent to San Francisco. Especially if they have a family to support.

These are all enclaves "protected" by the green bigots.

People with children are being forced out of these places so much that schools are being shut down for lack of students. The black population of these places is also declining, even though the total population is rising. But green trumps black.

What "protecting," "preserving," and "saving" mean is using the law to impose the will of the green bigots on others.

Real Women want to vote for a Real Man

I have always said that because of 9/11, women this year will want a president that is going to stand up for them. They will want leaders who will protect them and their children. They do not want wimpy, indecisvive, girly men. This is evident in the lastet pollings where we see Bush gaining considerable ground on Kerry.

With time running out, Kerry has much important work to do in his campaign, the AP-Ipsos poll suggested.

Bush holds a 17-point lead among men. And Bush and Kerry are tied among women, a traditionally Democratic group that now favors Bush on protecting the country.

Democrat Al Gore won the women's vote by 11 percentage points in 2000, while Bush won men by a similar margin.

Betsy Bodenhamer, a 33-year-old teacher's aide and mother of two from Galesburg, Ill., says she has always voted for Democrats in recent presidential elections. This year, she's leaning toward Bush.

"I think if Kerry gets elected, he's going to pull everybody out of Iraq and they'll have to fend for themselves," she said. "Situations like 9/11 will happen again and again."

Don't believe me? Well seeing is beliving...

Any questions?

Kerrynomics: An Agenda for Calamity

Columnist and professor Ralph R. Reiland today looks at a new study which finds that a Kerry presidency would be disastrous for America’s small businesses. Small businesses account for 99.7 percent of all employers in the U.S. and create 75 percent of the net new jobs.

Without the small business sector of the economy, America would be flat on its back -- economically, politically, and militarily. And presidential hopeful John Kerry has consistently taken positions over the past decade that are a direct threat to the strength and survival of entrepreneurial activity and small businesses in this country.

That's the ominous conclusion of a new report from the D.C.-based Small Business Survival Committee, "Bigger Government on the Way? Senator John F. Kerry's 10-Year Voting Record on Key Small Business Issues."…

Overall, on an array of matters that impinge directly on the bottom line of the nation's key source of new employment, SBSC reports that Kerry voted on the side of small business "a mere 13 times out of the 101 votes that SBSC rated during the past decade, giving him a weak 13 percent rating on key small business issues."

Year after year, on issue after issue, Kerry's votes on small business issues reveal an approach that time and again threatens to undermine the strength and vitality of the precise sector of the American economy that's now shouldering the greater part of job creation and innovation.

"Senator Kerry voted against small business 94 percent of the time on tax-related legislation rated by SBSC," says research associate Chris W. Myers. "Given 34 opportunities to support business on tax issues, Kerry chose to do so on only two occasions."…

On regulatory reform, SBSC reports that Kerry voted against small business 25 out of 30 times…

On votes over the past 10 years in the area of legal reform, the SBSC analysis shows Kerry voting in opposition to small business 90 percent of the time…

On health coverage issues, "Senator Kerry voted against the interests of small business 100 percent of the time," reports SBSC.

The list goes on and on. Read the whole article for a full report on Kerry’s “agenda that's the perfect prescription for fewer business start-ups, more bankruptcies, less entrepreneurship, less economic growth, more unemployment, slower income growth, smaller take-home pays, more poverty, more regulators, more lawyers and bigger government.”

Hey Libs! A Great Tax Lesson of Oprah's "Free" Cars

They're not happy at the Oprah Winfrey Show. Well, some of the audience members have got those cars. This is a great tax lesson . They're upset. These people that got "free" cars? Basically it's going to cost them over $7,000 each to get the free car, because the cars are worth about 30 grand. So that 30 grand is going to be added to their income this year. That's 30 grand in addition to whatever they make at their jobs, or if they don't work it's 30 grand of income, period. They have to pay income taxes going to bump them up into a higher bracket more than likely, then there's the sales tax. So these freebie cars are going to cost these people, some of them are upset about this, and some people are saying, "Well, where am I going to get $7,000 to pay taxes?" That's exactly what I think every taxpayer needs to face.

(NBC: Recipients In Oprah's Car Giveaway Face Hefty Taxes)
(Chicago Sun-Times: Oprah's car giveaway not totally 'free')

One of my points always has been that most people don't know what they're paying in taxes. I do this test all the time. I go ask somebody that seems to be doing well, "Do you know what you're paying in taxes?" No, I usually get a refund. You what? "Oh yeah, I get a big refund. I get a big refund every year." Well, you don't know how much you're paying in taxes? "No, it's withheld from the check. I'm doing okay." So you don't even know how much you're paying in taxes? No wonder when tax cuts come along people don't get revved up about it because they don't even know -- and especially if they're goofing up, and I do mean "goofing up," if they're goofing up arranging their affairs so they get a big refund, they really have no idea how shafted they're getting, or being. I've run into so many people get a big refund check. "I can't tell you how I'm screwing the government. Look at my refund! Ha-ha! Look what they have to give me back." The truth is, look at how much of your own money they kept all year, and they gave it back to you with no interest, and you think you screwed them? You try not paying them for one month and find out what the interest is gonna be. You don't pay 'em for a month. You think you're screwing the government, you're getting shafted by the government in more ways than you can count on Sunday.

Black, Gay Republicans for Bush

Bush picked up another huge endorsement yesterday. It seems as though the libs are losing their monopoly on their core base of disenfranchised constituents.

Black Gay Republicans Break with Log Cabin Republicans, Endorse Bush

The ALBRC was co-founded by Don Sneed, a member of the Log Cabin Republicans, to address the political issues and needs of young Black gay Republicans, who he says: "Our voices are never heard, yet we exist and are growing in numbers." The endorsement was fueled by the Log Cabin Republicans' refusal to endorse President Bush. "We think that the 'Republican Tent' is inclusive and there is room for differences, but one does not pick up their marbles and go home if there are a few points of disagreement," stated Anthony Falls, Republican Precinct Chairman

The article goes on to say...

"With this election as close as it is, especially in the battleground states, any movement of the Black vote towards President Bush, could make a significant difference," stated Sneed. "We are determined to use whatever resources we have to get the word out, especially to Black voters of why a vote for Bush is a vote for economic, social and political self- upliftment."

The dems are digging their own grave by lining up with the wacko left fringe. I say more to ya! You are just making our job easier.

Rev. Peterson Announces Campaign To Expose Leftist Black Entertainers

Spike Lee, Danny Glover 'Black' Listed; Rev. Peterson Announces Campaign To Expose Leftist Black Entertainers

LOS ANGELES, Sept. 22 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, author of SCAM: How the Black Leadership Exploits Black America, announced today the start of The "Black" List Campaign, a campaign to expose Hollywood's most anti-American black entertainers who are viciously criticizing the U.S. war on terror and lying to black Americans. Celebrities on the list include: Spike Lee, Danny Glover, Whoopi Goldberg, Harry Belafonte, Sean "P. Diddy" Combs, Will Smith among others.
Rev. Peterson said, "I'm sickened by black entertainers who drive $350,000 Bentleys and still cry 'racism.' Americans of all colors pay to see their movies, and they have the nerve to bash the U.S.? American servicemen and woman watch their shows; yet, they travel to foreign lands and badmouth our forces? Enough is enough! The goal of The "Black" List Campaign is to expose these people so they can no longer deceive the American public."
As an example, Rev. Peterson mentioned actor Will Smith, who in a recent interview with a German newspaper, responding to a question of whether 9-11 had changed anything for him, said: "When you grow up black in America you have a completely different view of the world than white Americans. We blacks live with a constant feeling of unease. And whether you are wounded in an attack by a racist cop or in a terrorist attack, I'm sorry, it makes no difference."
Will Smith is not the only black celebrity downing America. Actor Danny Glover has charged that President George W. Bush is a "racist." Whoopi Goldberg, Harry Belafonte, and Director Spike Lee have also joined the anti-American rant. Lee's latest movie, "She Hate Me," aims to smear American business and President Bush. Lee said: "I'm very nervous about this election, because we're all going to hell if George Bush wins."
Rev. Peterson said, "Our campaign seeks to educate Americans about the beliefs, statements and actions of these entertainers. The more the American people know, the less likely they are to support or believe these people." For more information go to http://releases.usnewswire.com/redir.asp?ReleaseID=36692&Link=http://www.bondinfo.org
http://www.usnewswire.com/

Young Black Woman for George W. Bush

This was aired yesterday on the Rush Limbaugh show
Young Black Woman for George W. Bush (membership required)

It's good to see that there are young African-Americans out there that can think critically. Hope is indeed on the way. It is in the form of new black conservatives.

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT RUSH: Here's Quinesha. Quinesha in Columbus, Georgia.

CALLER: Hi, how are you, Rush?

RUSH: Thank you. Great. How are you?

CALLER: I am absolutely wonderful. I just want to tell you thank you so much for all you do, and I can honestly say I started listening to your program about a year ago, had some people in my family, and I will tell you that just your insight on everything -- just like the previous caller said -- is amazing. I'm a black American. I'm in my twenties. I will tell you that I have chosen to change the party that I belong to because I can follow someone with character like our president, and I just want to tell you that things are changing in the black community. I had a quick comment about the UN address.

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: I thought it was awesome, Rush. I'll tell you that just to hear him stand firm and not worry about the criticism, you know, to say, "We can't leave until the job is done," and I'm a veteran, and I can stand behind that, and (laughs) Kerry is just running around saying a lot of the same things that the president is saying about his plan, and to me none of these countries in the UN can fund the war, never have they put their troops and their money where their mouth is. I mean, didn't we do this in Somalia? RUSH: Oh, exactly. Not only that, Quinesha. I asked this earlier in the program. Terrorism is what it is. It is the taking and the threatening and the frightening of innocent people. You would think that all these nations who profess to have a concern for human rights would be rising up in righteous indignation that it is occurring in their countries, on their soil, or in neighboring countries and would be hell-bent on destroying it --

CALLER: Exactly.

RUSH: -- and yet we, the ones who take the lead in this are considered the ones to be causing all of this. It's outrageous! It's incomprehensible -- unless you understand the mind-set of the left. So when you see Bush, here's aaaaall this criticism. I don't know if you saw some of the networks today doing the prelude to his appearance. Now, they're all given the speech as many advance, some of it in advance, but they all were speculating, "Will Bush pull back? Will Bush express his regrets? Will Bush admit mistakes?" and what does Bush do? Comes down and just hammers them and says, "I haven't made any mistakes. Mistakes? We're not talking about mistakes. We've got difficulties. Difficulties always occur when you're trying to do things right against such odds, but we're going to stay the course." That's why I wanted everybody to hear this because it is inspiring, and it is such a contrast to what we're hearing from the left in this country.

CALLER: Well, I feel that Democrats and liberals in the UN, what they want is they want freedom when it comes to the ACLU, and anything-goes mentality in this country, but when it comes to freedom of other countries and other people, it seems like they're selective and they want to pick and choose who can be free to say what they want to say, to do what they want to do, and it seems like if you're a Republican or Christian or anything like that or you have values, that you are attacked and you're told, "You can't believe what you want to believe, how you want to believe."

RUSH: Why do you think that is?

CALLER: Well, I really justly believe it's just a lack of standards. It's a lack of standards. I heard -- RUSH: No, no, no, no, no. It's not. There is that, but there's a bigger reason. It's called fear.

CALLER: Oh, yeah. That's true.

RUSH: When you start talking about "right and wrong," "good and evil," and so forth, what you're doing is saying that there are such thing as moral absolutes, and this just scares them. CALLER: It does, and I heard something this past weekend on one of the radio shows. They said, you know, "Liberals make decisions based on emotion and conservatives make decisions based on facts," and I just actually sat and watched all the different things that Kerry said, and he blatantly lies about the facts in what he said two days ago, and that scares me to think that he has no plan, and he's just going to go by what the polls say, and I'm not going to bow to France, you know? That's what makes our country great. We've always taken the lead because that's just the position and the responsibility that we've taken in history and I just feel like, you know, the question I want to ask people that are out there as liberals is: Who do you think Osama bin Laden wants as president? That's the biggest question that scares me. RUSH: Well, Bill Gertz has a story in the Washington Times. He's also has a great book out, by the way, Bill Gertz's book on "Treachery," about how our supposed allies undermined us and continue to do so. Bill Gertz: the name of the book is "Treachery." He's got a piece in the Washington Times today that basically says the U.S., U.S. officials are ramping up their preparedness for a heightened terror season based on our election all the way through to the inauguration, taking it very seriously. One thing also, Quinesha, that when you talk about John Kerry's speech yesterday that you never, ever hear John Kerry talking about -- and I want to make a little point about this. I've been saying this for years. You never hear John Kerry talk about victory. You never hear him talking about prevailing in this. John Kerry's strategy is getting us out of there. The hell with what happens after we leave -- somewhat similar to his beliefs in Vietnam. Now, beginning in the early 90s, mid-90s, those of you who have been with me that long, you may recall that I have said: You can't avoid this. We're always in the midst of generational shifts and generational evolution in this country, and because of the aging of the World War II generation, we have arrived or are very near arriving at a point where presidential candidates will come from generations that will have no memory of a U.S. victorious in war. Which I think is, frankly, unfortunate. It is crucial I think that we have people who seek to lead this country who have memory, experience, belief in a victorious America -- and that of course must coincide with a belief that America is good and just and decent. Well, here we have an aspect of this coming to fore in the reverse. We have the Vietnam generation, which for the last ten years and perhaps who knows how many years more, ten more, will produce candidates for leadership whose only memory is of a U.S. that was immoral, ignoble, criminal, and defeated in war. That's their experience with it. That is what they think the U.S. is good for: criminality, ignobility, worthlessness and defeat, and that's what we deserve and the reason they think this is because that's what they believed when they were young during the war itself, the war in Vietnam, and their protest of that war gave them their identity and they don't want to look back on their youth as wasted days and so they have to validate what they did. They have to validate their views, so they animate their current lives with those same views applied to today's U.S. military -- and ergo, we have John Kerry. We have a presidential candidate with no memory of an America victorious at war and it's no coincidence, therefore, that we don't hear John Kerry talk about victory in war. We hear him talk about defeat, staving off defeat. We hear him talking about leaving, retreating, getting out. We hear him talk about the doom and gloom that results from engaging in these great causes. So this is important stuff. Another reason why this war is important: This was a war brought to us, let us not forget. A war brought to us, not on September 11th. That's just the most recent example and the deadliest, but it was brought to us on countless previous occasions. Only now do we have a leader willing to do something about it because during the nineties we had a 60s generation president who did not have any experience with America victorious at war, just the opposite. So it is important that this prevail and that we prevail and that this generation thus produce leaders who remember an America victorious and just, moral and good in times of war, because this is a world governed by the aggressive use of force, folks. You can have all the UNs in the world you want, all the UN charters and all of these agreements and conventions and whatever you want to call them and all these treaties -- and they don't mean diddly-squat, because this is a world governed by the aggressive use of force. END TRANSCRIPT

Gates And Race Politics

The Following is posted on LaShawnBarber.com
Permalink

The last time I mentioned Henry Louis Gates, it was in reference to skin color preferences at Harvard University, where Gates is a professor. See this post.

In July, he and Lani Guinier (Bill Clinton’s “Quota Queen") wanted to commission a waste-of-time-and-money study to determine why black immigrants outnumbered and outperformed black Americans at the Ivy League school. Clarence Page, who is no conservative, offered a possible explanation: “Immigrant kids work harder.”

I don’t care too much for Gates’s ideas (that blacks need extra help to succeed), but I wanted to blog about his article, “Swallowing the Elephant.” He offers the usual explanation why blacks vote for Democrats and will continue to do so. From the New York Times (registration req.):

The moment when the Republican Party lost black America can be given a date: Oct. 26, 1960. Martin Luther King Jr., arrested in Georgia during a sit-in, had been transferred to a maximum-security prison and sentenced to four months on the chain gang, without bail. As The Times reported, John F. Kennedy called Coretta King, expressing his concern. Richard Nixon didn’t.

This is true. While doing research for a column titled “Why Courting the Black Vote Won’t Work", I found pretty much the same thing. I wrote: “So why did blacks switch from voting for Republicans in large numbers to voting for Democrats? Some say it was President John F. Kennedy’s perceived sensitivity to the oppression of minorities that endeared him and the party to black Americans, and they’ve been voting for Democrats in droves ever since.”

Current Electorial College Projection

Election 2004 Projections
Last Updated: 09/19/04

EV's: Bush 328, Kerry 210

Pct: Bush 51.1%, Kerry 47.1%

Latest Changes: 09/19/04

New Polls:
CBS - New York Times, Gallup
Annenberg, New Democrat, Zogby,
Democracy Corps, Pew Research

National Margin
+4.0% (down from +4.1%)

Bush gains Wisconsin!
Bush gains Pennsylvania!
Bush gains Oregon!
Bush gains New Mexico!

Who is really supressing the black vote?

Over the weekend 2 weeks ago Senator Kerry was in panic mode. He played the race card way earlier than most Democratic presidential candidates flip that card. Normally they wait till the last week of the election. Kerry flipped it out with this baseless, panicked, obscene, outrageous charge that the Republicans "have plans to suppress a million black votes this year."

Just a question. How would if you could, suppress the black vote? Your quess is as good as mine.

The Democrats have figured out how to do it because they're the ones that always have done it. The Democrats have always suppressed the black vote. The history of voting rights in this country is that the Bull Connors and the George Wallaces of the world are the ones that did it. We have to go back and read their biographies to figure out how to do this. It was the Democrats in Florida during the gubernatorial primary suppressed the black votes down there while they tried to get out the convict felon vote.

Kerry goes on to say in a ,story (9/14) in the Washington Times.

"Sen. John Kerry is losing the interest of black voters after spending several weeks defending his Vietnam service records and responding to attacks from fellow swift boat sailors, but black lawmakers said the Democratic challenger needs to get back to his domestic-policy ideas in order to boost black voter turnout on Nov. 2."

What the Congressional Black Caucus leaders are saying is, "You better start telling people what you're going to give them if you expect them to come out and vote for you, because if you don't start telling them what you're going to give them, if you keep harping on your service over there, that ain't what they're caring about."

Representative Elijah Cummings, Maryland, Democratic, chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) said,

"He cannot let himself get sidetracked and taken off focus by Swift Boat ads. He must stick to the issues affecting African-Americans," said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland Democrat and chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC). By and large, he said, "We don't care about swift boats."


"The CBC held its 34th annual legislative conference last week, hosting hundreds of black state representatives, city council members and mayors from across the country. Most shared Mr. Watt's position on Mr. Kerry, saying he has "100 percent" of their support, but not necessarily their enthusiasm."

It sounds like from this that it's Elijah Cummings that's talking about suppressing the black vote. Does it sound like the leaders of the Congressional Black Caucus are threatening Kerry? That the dems are saying, "You better tell us what you're going to give away or we aren't going to show up and vote for you"?

So who is really supressing the black vote? Sounds to me many like it's Elijah Cummings of the Congressional Black Caucus. I don't see any Republicans at this meeting, and I don't see any Republicans at this meeting telling Kerry what he better do or not do to get the black vote. It does seem to me that any talk of suppression of the black vote is coming from the Democratic side of the aisle.

527s Split Democrats from Civil Rights Coalition

Ladies and gentlemen. The black dems are fighting over the money. This article highlights how divided the party has become.

Division is growing between Democratic-leaning 527 groups and black civic advocacy groups over funding and control of the issues and messages targeted toward the black community in the November presidential election.
The 527 groups — tax-exempt, private political groups named for their Internal Revenue Service filing code — have positioned themselves as powerful players and are siphoning contributions from black voter mobilization organizations that historically have enjoyed a boost during presidential elections.

Link:
Black voter groups lose money, control to 527s

Black liberals beginning to see the light

Blacks for Bush have won my respect

This Chicago Sun-Times editorial is a great article to send to your liberal buddies. While it will not convice the liberal masses, it will convey an honesty and sincerety conveyed by the author. I really don't think that the vast majority of African-Americans identify the values of the Repulican party with their own.

"I was raised in a Democratic household," actor Joseph C. Williams told me. Williams, who appeared on the "Cosby Show," "General Hospital" and "The District," was the co-chairman of the "African Americans for Bush" steering committee. "The Republican values are the same values that are in most African-American homes. This party reflects those values much more than the opposition."

Let's take education. Mary Mitchell mentions existing problems in school districts that don't seem to have the children's best interests in mind.

"I lived in a school district that had the lowest test scores in the state of Pennsylvania, and the population was about 99 percent African American. We fought so hard to bring in a company as a consultant to improve one of our schools, but we had a teachers union that fought us every step of the way. I decided then that I didn't need to be part of a party that continued to say that they are for education, health care and jobs in our community and they do not support the very essence of our community, which is our children."

She further disspells the myths of No Child Left Behind.

Although Democrats bash Bush's No Child Left Behind Act, those same Democrats rarely mention that one of the architects of the plan is Rod Paige, an African American who was appointed Education secretary in the Bush administration. Having attended segregated schools in his youth, I'm convinced that despite the act's shortcomings, Paige is committed to challenging what the Republicans call the "soft bigotry of low expectations."

I salute you Mrs. Mitchell. You may end up voting for Kerry, but at least you are fair and honest in looking at both sides.

Welcome to The Black Man for Bush Blog!

I was featured in the Winston-Salem Chronicle this past Summer. You may read that article here (you need to click on the picture)

This blog will feature posts that are relevant to the opposition (Kerry) as well as support for our President. Hopefully this will promote dialog among both sides and further promote the spread of truth in this expanding New Media.