Have I told y'all...

[Yonivore]

...I'm a Cracker for Cain!

B_suSTi4BAs

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You get your ideology from Fox TV News. WAY TO GO!!!!

[Winehole23]

Yes. At least four times.


Search: (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/search.php?query=cracker&searchuser=Yonivore&exactname=1&starteronly=0&forumchoice[]=8&childforums=1&titleonly=0&showposts=1&searchdate=0&beforeafter=after&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending&replyless=0&replylimit=0&searchthreadid=0&saveprefs=1&quicksearch=0&searchtype=0&nocache=0&ajax=0&userid=0&) Keyword(s): cracker ; Posts Made By: Yonivore (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=48) ; Forum: Political Forum (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=8)

[Yonivore]

Yes. At least four times.
Just checking. Hey, thanks for counting.

[Winehole23]

Hey, you don't need to repeat yourself so much.

[ElNono]

Fox News loves Cain, and so does yoni. Who would've thought?

[Yonivore]

Hey, you don't need to repeat yourself so much.
Hey, Winehole. I'm a Cracker for Cain.

[Winehole23]

So I've heard.

[SnakeBoy]

Hey Winehole. Which GOP candidate would you like to see get the nomination? And why?

[Winehole23]

God, what a dismal prospect. The candidates I like (Gary Johnson and Ron Paul) have zero chance of nomination, would be unelectable if nominated and if elected, would be totally ineffective.

The supposedly electable men are basically disagreeable to me. Romney is a shell without a soul, without any fixed principles and ruthlessly opportunistic: he'll say anything to please anyone. Perry is a low wattage version of the same. I confess to being basically ignorant of GOP flavor of the month Herman Cain -- it remains to be seen whether he can ride his recent surge all the way to nomination.

[Winehole23]

Like Laura Ingraham said, it'd be neat to have a black president for the very first time in America.



(You know, one who's "really" black.)

[Winehole23]

Sorry about Sarah Palin, btw.

[mingus]

i'm on board with Cain as it stands. still early though. lets see if he cracks under pressure. next debate will probably be the first time he'll be under any kind of a microscope. if his recent interviews are any indication i think he'll perform well and make whichever hack cnn interviewer puts out there look like an idiot.

[ChumpDumper]

You guys clearly haven't heard Cain say anything.

[Blake]

...I'm a Cracker for Cain!


After he bows out to Perry or Romney, I'm sure Cain will proceed to thank you for the support you gave, Cracker.

[Wild Cobra]

I'm simply surprised I haven't heard any liberals call him an Uncle Tom yet.

[Insomniac]

you guys clearly haven't heard cain say anything.

9 9 9

[cheguevara]

"when I think about wether sending our children to Iraq is worth it or not, I will think back when I had to decide wether it was worth it to send my pizza delivery boys to a rough neighborhood"

:lmao

[Bartleby]

Like Laura Ingraham said, it'd be neat to have a black president for the very first time in America.



What about Clinton?

[Winehole23]

Too black.

[Agloco]

9 9 9

Mediocre pizza deals non-withstanding.

At least we all know who to blame when he bows out of the race.

[Trainwreck2100]

if they insult themselves racially when they support him it opens the door for them insulting him racially

[boutons_deux]

Yoni loved pitbull bitch. He sure knows how to pick winners!

[Yonivore]

if they insult themselves racially when they support him it opens the door for them insulting him racially
Really?

But, more to the point of the condundrum liberals have in explaining the phenomenon of why Tea Partiers would support a black condidate, let me present exhibit #1: Janeane Garafalo

Garofalo: Herman Cain "Being Paid To Run," Has Stockholm Syndrome (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/08/18/garofalo_herman_cain_being_paid_to_run_he_suffers_ from_stockholm_syndrome.html)

She seriously grapples with how such a racist group of people could be supporting -- to any degree -- a black candidate. I would suggest her attributing it to Cain being a plant is just a bit racist, itself.


'Let's get Herman Cain involved so it deflects the obvious racism of our Republican party,'" Garofalo said.
Which begs the question, why wouldn't we support Barack Obama to deflect "the obvious racism of our Republican Party?"

Do liberals see how silly is the charge?

We'll support a black guy because we want to show we're not racist but, we'll oppose a black guy because we're racist?

Are the conservatives that support Romney and Perry, over Cain, being racist?

Could it be that Obama and Cain have different political ideologies and that is why we support one over the other? And, that we see distinctions between the policies of Romney, Perry, Cain, and the rest of the field -- having nothing to do with race -- that cause us to support one, over another?

Nah, has to be the racism. Either we're deflecting charges of racism or we're blatant racists.

What a farce.

Well, I remain a Cracker for Cain.

[ChumpDumper]

You're the only person who has ever quoted Garafalo in this forum.

[Trainwreck2100]

but she's a celebrity. She's a celebrity? Is she a celebrity? Anyway so obviously she speaks for an entire group of people.

[Yonivore]

but she's a celebrity. She's a celebrity? Is she a celebrity? Anyway so obviously she speaks for an entire group of people.
Okay, so how does it make sense -- to you -- that conservatives wouldn't support Obama, because they're racists but, will support Cain?

That's the question.

Many -- including Barack Obama, during the campaign -- suggested there was a racist element to conservative opposition to his candidacy and presidency; so, If conservatives are racists it seems, to me, they'd be loathe to support Herman Cain. Yet, that's not the case.

Inquiring minds want to know.

And, Janeane Garafalo isn't the only one. Just the most readily accessible story.

[Winehole23]

The venerable many suggested right next to the neatly trimmed mustache of the most readily accessible story. Your fake concern is touching to us all, Yoni...

[Yonivore]

The venerable many suggested right next to the neatly trimmed mustache of the most readily accessible story. Your fake concern is touching to us all, Yoni...

Okay, I'll remove Janeane Garafalo; she was merely illustrative, anyway.

1) Did not a considerable number of those on the left, Barack Obama included, infer that much of the opposition to his presidency and candidacy was due to his race? Yes or no?

2) What explains those same racists now supporting a black candidate in their own party or, that is more closely aligned with their own ideology?

I think it's explained by recognizing race was never a factor in either case.

[Winehole23]

1) Did not a considerable number of those on the left, Barack Obama included, infer that much of the opposition to his presidency and candidacy was due to his race? Yes or no?Yes. Do you believe in guilt by association?

2) What explains those same racists now supporting a black candidate in their own party or, that is more closely aligned with their own ideology?...I do not have a theory of it. Maybe our country is beginning to grow up a little, maybe not. I do not feel at all certain of any progress made in this area to date or very sanguine about the future.

...I think it's explained by recognizing race was never a factor in either case.Not only is the GOP not racist, race has never been an issue with the GOP -- not until it was forced on them by goody-two-shoes libs and African-American agitators. Damn racist libs.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Okay, so how does it make sense -- to you -- that conservatives wouldn't support Obama, because they're racists but, will support Cain?

That's the question.

Many -- including Barack Obama, during the campaign -- suggested there was a racist element to conservative opposition to his candidacy and presidency; so, If conservatives are racists it seems, to me, they'd be loathe to support Herman Cain. Yet, that's not the case.

Inquiring minds want to know.

And, Janeane Garafalo isn't the only one. Just the most readily accessible story.

How much you want to bet that Cain does not get the nomination? I will never post on this forum again if he gets the GOP nomination if you agree to the same terms if he does not.

[Oh, Gee!!]

funny that yoni keeps calling himself "Cracker." Cracker is a name that was used by both black slaves and white plantation owners given to the white managers/overseers of black slaves in the field. They were called crackers because they would crack the whip on slaves to keep them in line. I guess Yoni sees himself this way.

[Th'Pusher]

Okay, I'll remove Janeane Garafalo; she was merely illustrative, anyway.

1) Did not a considerable number of those on the left, Barack Obama included, infer that much of the opposition to his presidency and candidacy was due to his race? Yes or no?

2) What explains those same racists now supporting a black candidate in their own party or, that is more closely aligned with their own ideology?

I think it's explained by recognizing race was never a factor in either case.

In the latest poll he only had 18% of the overall likely voters. That still leaves 82% potential racists.

[ChumpDumper]

funny that yoni keeps calling himself "Cracker." Cracker is a name that was used by both black slaves and white plantation owners given to the white managers/overseers of black slaves in the field. They were called crackers because they would crack the whip on slaves to keep them in line. I guess Yoni sees himself this way.He's very much into identity politics.

[Oh, Gee!!]

maybe yoni thinks endorsing cain will be considered payment towards the reperations his family must owe.

[Winehole23]

Some Floridians use the word without apology to social graces and a bit more fiercely against them, when pressed.

I didn't take it amiss when when my sweetie's grandma called herself a Florida cracker. I don't think it had anything to do with fantasizing about being a slavedriver. More like regional pride it seemed to me.

[Oh, Gee!!]

you won't get to actually own Cain if he's elected, Yoni.

[Winehole23]

Western Florida is weird though.

[ElNono]

you won't get to actually own Cain if he's elected, Yoni.

:lol

[Yonivore]

funny that yoni keeps calling himself "Cracker." Cracker is a name that was used by both black slaves and white plantation owners given to the white managers/overseers of black slaves in the field. They were called crackers because they would crack the whip on slaves to keep them in line. I guess Yoni sees himself this way.
Well, to set you straight, I'm using it in the contemporary sense as a term of denigration, generally directed at whites, by blacks.

Glad to clarify.

[Yonivore]

Yes. Do you believe in guilt by association?
Not when it's by association of the fringes of any group. No.

Sit in a Preacher's church for 20 years. Yes.

Launch your political career in the home of a terrorist. Yes.

Identify a communist as a father figure in your autobiography. Yes.

Have a few nuts show up at your gatherings and make jackasses of themselves. No.


I do not have a theory of it. Maybe our country is beginning to grow up a little, maybe not. I do not feel at all certain of any progress made in this area to date or very sanguine about the future.
That much progress since 2008?

Why would racists support Clarence Thomas? Condoleezza Rice? Hell, Colin Powell -- to a point? Countless other prominent conservatives that just happen to be black? Why would we? Why wouldn't we run them off? Why are they not run off? Why do they not feel any racism from their ideological peers?

I'm pretty flummoxed, to be honest with you.

Not only is the GOP not racist, race has never been an issue with the GOP -- not until it was forced on them by goody-two-shoes libs and African-American agitators. Damn racist libs.
I know you're being sarcastic but, that's pretty much the issue, in a nutshell. If you weren't being a smart ass, nice succinct explanation.

Democrats and liberals have had considerable success painting the party that actually ensured racial civil rights, over the years and, as Herman Cain, has pointed out; have successfully "brainwashed" the vast majority of blacks into believing Democrat - Good (even though their most senior member being a former Grand Kleagle of the Klu Klux Klan) and Republicans - Bad; even though it was Republicans that got the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 passed and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 passed.

But, it's not your fault, Even Al Sharpton can get the history straight.

Al Sharpton Gets Civil Rights History Wrong (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2011/10/09/al_sharpton_gets_civil_rights_history_wrong)


MSNBC host Rev. Al Sharpton has made it clear he is one of those people Cain was talking about. Sharpton claimed on his show Friday night that democrats supported the Civil Rights act of 1964, problem is, more republicans supported the bill than democrats. The Klu Klux Klan was also founded by democrats and democrats threw Martin Luther King Jr. in jail.

Media Research Center's Noel Sheppard explains (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/10/08/sharpton-doesnt-know-higher-percentage-republicans-democrats-voted-ci):


The House version of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supported by only 61 percent of that Chamber's Democrats versus 80 percent of the Republicans.

More importantly, it was Republicans that ended a Democrat filibuster preventing a vote on this bill in the Senate. 82 percent of Republicans voted for cloture versus 66 percent of Democrats.

In the final Senate vote on the Act, 82 percent of Republicans voted "Aye" versus 69 percent of Democrats.

The same is true for the Voting Rights Act of 1965 when 94 percent of Senate Republicans voted in favor of the bill versus 73 percent of Democrats. The final vote on the House's version was even more stark as only one Senate Republican voted against it compared to seventeen Democrats.

In the House, 82 percent of Republicans supported the bill versus 78 percent of Democrats.
You want to know why an overwhelming number of blacks believe conservatives are racist?

Because, when they actually won racial equality, thanks to Republicans; the Democrats immediately set about their Great Society nonsense that encumbered trillion of dollars that would eventually be doled out to -- among other Democrat constituencies -- racial minorities. Then, when it became apparent these programs were unsustainable, Conservatives were labeled bigots and racists for wanting to enact welfare reform.

Also, once they achieved racial equality, that wasn't good enough. Race baiters like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton demanded -- and Democrats concurred because they like the voting bloc it represented -- preferential treatment, such as Affirmative Action.

That was enacted in the government but, again, that wasn't good enough so, they expanded it to the private sector and Jesse Jackson set up a pretty good business by extorting racial quotas out of some of the largest corporations in America by threatening to paint them as a racist company if they didn't capitulate and, while they're at it, throw a few million at my sham of an organization.

Every time Conservatives have tried to reign in the inequality and racism of such programs; they're called racists.

Now, that's what Herman Cain believes and that's what I believe about blacks being brainwashed.

They are told -- repeatedly -- that Republicans want to throw them back into slavery and disenfranchise them when all Republicans want to do is make them play by the same rules as everyone else.

There's your liberal racism. But, alas, it appears -- to me and Herman Cain, anyway -- that many blacks up waking up to the scam. Blacks have penetrated every area of society from business, to finance, to politics, to academia. And, now, with a black President; there isn't any position, job, or benefit that isn't and hasn't been available to a black person.

It's pretty goddamned hard to continue screaming racism when you can look at Wall Street, Capitol Hill, The White House, The Supreme Court, the Military, etc... and see successful, prominent black people.

I think the days of race mongers like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are on the wane. And, I also think the days of Democrats being able to brainwash and/or scare blacks into voting for them are also coming to an end. But, that's just me.

[Yonivore]

How much you want to bet that Cain does not get the nomination? I will never post on this forum again if he gets the GOP nomination if you agree to the same terms if he does not.
I think it's still a long shot. But, at this point in the Democrat campaigns of 2007, I would have never guessed Hillary wouldn't have been the nominee.

Stranger things have happened. So, I'll continue my support until it's no longer needed.

Regardless, I'm voting for whatever Republican is put on the ticket opposite Barack Obama. My preference would be that it's Herman Cain but, I'll hold my nose and vote for Mitt Romney, if I have to.

And, frankly, I don't care if you never post her again or decide to stick around. that's the beauty of this place, I can ignore you or engage you.

[ElNono]

Regardless, I'm voting for whatever Republican is put on the ticket opposite Barack Obama. My preference would be that it's Herman Cain but, I'll hold my nose and vote for Mitt Romney, if I have to.

:cheer Go team! :cheer



Like that wasn't clear :lol

[Winehole23]

I'm pretty flummoxed, to be honest with you.Clear from the beginning, but thanks for emphasizing that.

I know you're being sarcastic but, that's pretty much the issue, in a nutshell. If you weren't being a smart ass, nice succinct explanation.Thanks for authenticating the impersonation and continuing to make my point for me. You've been more than generous with your own impressions.

It's pretty goddamned hard to continue screaming racism when you can look at Wall Street, Capitol Hill, The White House, The Supreme Court, the Military, etc... and see successful, prominent black people.lol

Is it hard for you to acknowledge that bigotry still exists?

I think the days of race mongers like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are on the wane. And, I also think the days of Democrats being able to brainwash and/or scare blacks into voting for them are also coming to an end. But, that's just me.More predictions. :sleep

[Yonivore]

Is it hard for you to acknowledge that bigotry still exists?
Absolutely it exists.

Al Sharpton is a bigot.

The fact is, the only two kinds of bigotry having any impact on society, today, is the soft bigotry of low expectations and the bigotry of leftist race mongers against Conservatives (of any race, black included).


More predictions. :sleep
Please sleep.

I notice you skipped much of my post. What of Al Sharpton's mischaracterization of history?

What of Affirmative Action being racist?

What of The Rainbow Coalition being an extortion racket?

What of the Great Society being a Democrat vehicle to enslave the poor and racial minorities on the liberal plantation?

I made those charges and note, you didn't answer.

[Winehole23]

Sharpton and Jackson are how old? lol at your sagely cracker ass predicting their imminent demise.

[Winehole23]

I'm not taking up a shield for Sharpton. How am I responsible for him, Yoni?

You're derailing your own thread, dude.

(shrugs)

[ChumpDumper]

lol yoni completely ignored the party schism cause by the civil rights movement.

He's a tired piece of disingenuous shit, but that's yoni for you.

and lol Sharpton and Garafalo. Nobody listens to these people except "conservatives."

[Cry Havoc]

How much you want to bet that Cain does not get the nomination? I will never post on this forum again if he gets the GOP nomination if you agree to the same terms if he does not.

I already offered him the exact same terms. He ignored the post, as he's doing now. lol

[Yonivore]

I already offered him the exact same terms. He ignored the post, as he's doing now. lol
I didn't see your post and I didn't ignore Fuzzy's

I'll tell you both; again.

I could care less if you stay or go.

[Cry Havoc]

I didn't see your post and I didn't ignore Fuzzy's

I'll tell you both; again.

I could care less if you stay or go.

So you're saying you care?

[Yonivore]

I'm not taking up a shield for Sharpton. How am I responsible for him, Yoni?

You're derailing your own thread, dude.

(shrugs)
You suggested I believed there was no bigotry in America.

I just pointed out one.

You're the one derailing the thread. So, speak to the issues. Why is Herman Cain wrong in suggesting blacks have been brainwashed by liberals to stay on the Democrat plantation?

Democrats would not have passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In fact, Republicans had to vote to break a Democrat filibuster of the bill.

Democrats would not have passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Democrats have been the biggest enemy of blacks since the founding of this country. Keeping them dependent on government handouts and yanking their chains to the voting booth every time Conservatives make noise about reigning in the profligate spending on social programs, is just the latest way to keep them on the plantation.

From 2008

The Democrats' Missing History (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121856786326834083.html)


As Democrats prepare to nominate Sen. Barack Obama to be the first black president, the Democratic National Committee and its chairman, Howard Dean, have whitewashed the party's horrific and lengthy record of racism. The omission is in the section of the DNC Web site that describes the party's history. The missing history raises the obvious question of whether the Democrats, unable or simply unwilling to put their party on record as taking direct responsibility for one of the worst racial crimes of the ages, will be able to run a campaign free of the racial animosities it has regularly brought both to American presidential campaigns and American political and social life in general.

[Well, we know how that turned out, don't we?]

What else to make of the official party history as presented by the DNC on its Web site? It is a history so sanitized of historical reality it makes Stalin look like David McCullough.

The DNC Web site section labeled "Party History," linked here, is in fact scrubbed clean of the not-so-little dirty secret that fueled Democrats' political successes for over a century and a half and made American life a hell on earth for black Americans. Literally, the DNC official history, which begins with the creation of the party in 1800, gets to the creation of the DNC itself in 1848 and then--poof!--the next sentence says: "As the 19th Century came to a close, the American electorate changed more and more rapidly." It quickly heads into a riff on poor immigrants coming to America.

In a stroke, 52 years of Democratic history vanishes. Disappeared faster than the truth in the Clinton administration. Why would this be? Allow me to sketch in a few facts from those missing 52 years. For that matter, lets add in the facts from the party history before and after those 52 years, since they aren't mentioned by the Democrats' National Committee either.

So what's missing?

There is no reference to the number of Democratic Party platforms supporting slavery. There were six from 1840 through 1860.

There is no reference to the number of Democratic presidents who owned slaves. There were seven from 1800 through 1861

There is no reference to the number of Democratic Party platforms that either supported segregation outright or were silent on the subject. There were 20, from 1868 through 1948.

There is no reference to "Jim Crow" as in "Jim Crow laws," nor is there reference to the role Democrats played in creating them. These were the post-Civil War laws passed enthusiastically by Democrats in that pesky 52-year part of the DNC's missing years. These laws segregated public schools, public transportation, restaurants, rest rooms and public places in general (everything from water coolers to beaches). The reason Rosa Parks became famous is that she sat in the "whites only" front section of a bus, the "whites only" designation the direct result of Democrats.

There is no reference to the formation of the Ku Klux Klan, which, according to Columbia University historian Eric Foner, became "a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party." Nor is there reference to University of North Carolina historian Allen Trelease's description of the Klan as the "terrorist arm of the Democratic Party."

There is no reference to the fact Democrats opposed the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the Constitution. The 13th banned slavery. The 14th effectively overturned the infamous 1857 Dred Scott decision (made by Democratic pro-slavery Supreme Court justices) by guaranteeing due process and equal protection to former slaves. The 15th gave black Americans the right to vote.

There is no reference to the fact that Democrats opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1866. It was passed by the Republican Congress over the veto of President Andrew Johnson, who had been a Democrat before joining Lincoln's ticket in 1864. The law was designed to provide blacks with the right to own private property, sign contracts, sue and serve as witnesses in a legal proceeding.

There is no reference to the Democrats' opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1875. It was passed by a Republican Congress and signed into law by President Ulysses Grant. The law prohibited racial discrimination in public places and public accommodations.

There is no reference to the Democrats' 1904 platform, which devotes a section to "Sectional and Racial Agitation," claiming the GOP's protests against segregation and the denial of voting rights to blacks sought to "revive the dead and hateful race and sectional animosities in any part of our common country," which in turn "means confusion, distraction of business, and the reopening of wounds now happily healed."

There is no reference to four Democratic platforms, 1908-20, that are silent on blacks, segregation, lynching and voting rights as racial problems in the country mount. By contrast the GOP platforms of those years specifically address "Rights of the Negro" (1908), oppose lynching (in 1912, 1920, 1924, 1928) and, as the New Deal kicks in, speak out about the dangers of making blacks "wards of the state."

There is no reference to the Democratic Convention of 1924, known to history as the "Klanbake." The 103-ballot convention was held in Madison Square Garden. Hundreds of delegates were members of the Ku Klux Klan, the Klan so powerful that a plank condemning Klan violence was defeated outright. To celebrate, the Klan staged a rally with 10,000 hooded Klansmen in a field in New Jersey directly across the Hudson from the site of the convention. Attended by hundreds of cheering convention delegates, the rally featured burning crosses and calls for violence against African-Americans and Catholics.

There is no reference to the fact that it was Democrats who segregated the federal government, at the direction of President Woodrow Wilson upon taking office in 1913. There is a reference to the fact that President Harry Truman integrated the military after World War II.

There is reference to the fact that Democrats created the Federal Reserve Board, passed labor and child welfare laws, and created Social Security with Wilson's New Freedom and FDR's New Deal. There is no mention that these programs were created as the result of an agreement to ignore segregation and the lynching of blacks. Neither is there a reference to the thousands of local officials, state legislators, state governors, U.S. congressmen and U.S. senators who were elected as supporters of slavery and then segregation between 1800 and 1965. Nor is there reference to the deal with the devil that left segregation and lynching as a way of life in return for election support for three post-Civil War Democratic presidents, Grover Cleveland, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt.

There is no reference that three-fourths of the opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Bill in the U.S. House came from Democrats, or that 80% of the "nay" vote in the Senate came from Democrats. Certainly there is no reference to the fact that the opposition included future Democratic Senate leader Robert Byrd of West Virginia (a former Klan member) and Tennessee Senator Albert Gore Sr., father of Vice President Al Gore.

Last but certainly not least, there is no reference to the fact that Birmingham, Ala., Public Safety Commissioner Bull Connor, who infamously unleashed dogs and fire hoses on civil rights protestors, was in fact--yes indeed--a member of both the Democratic National Committee and the Ku Klux Klan.

Reading the DNC's official "Party History" of the Democrats and the race issue and civil rights is not unlike reading "In Through the Looking Glass": " 'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor less.' "

Here's this line from the DNC: "With the election of Harry Truman, Democrats began the fight to bring down the final barriers of race . . ." Truman, of course, was elected in 1948, and to his great credit he did in fact, along with then-Minneapolis Mayor Hubert Humphrey, begin to push the Democrats towards a pro-civil-rights stance. This culminated in the passage of the 1960s civil rights laws--legislation that redid what had been done by Republicans a hundred years earlier but undone by the Democrats' support for segregation. But the notion that "Democrats began to bring down the final barriers of race" raises the obvious questions. What were these barriers doing there in the first place? And who exactly was responsible for creating them?

* * *

AS IF TO CONFIRM the "Who, me?" racial psychology behind the DNC Web site, Nancy Pelosi's Democrats passed a House resolution on July 29 sponsored by Tennessee Democrat Steve Cohen. The resolution, passed by voice vote, concludes this way:


Resolved, That the House of Representatives--

(1) acknowledges that slavery is incompatible with the basic founding principles recognized in the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal;

(2) acknowledges the fundamental injustice, cruelty, brutality, and inhumanity of slavery and Jim Crow;

(3) apologizes to African Americans on behalf of the people of the United States, for the wrongs committed against them and their ancestors who suffered under slavery and Jim Crow; and

(4) expresses its commitment to rectify the lingering consequences of the misdeeds committed against African Americans under slavery and Jim Crow and to stop the occurrence of human rights violations in the future.
What word is missing here?

You got it. The word "Democrat." Never mentioned anywhere. As with the DNC website, all these terrible things--somehow, apparently, it seems, so they keep hearing--happened. Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Cohen and their fellow House Democrats just can't understand how. But, you know, whatever. They are sorry. Really.

Are they? Let's take them up on this.

After all those Democratic platforms and conventions that championed slavery and segregation, what do you think the chances are they will use the occasion of Mr. Obama's nomination to have the Democratic platform formally apologize for the active, frequently violent and decidedly official support of the Democratic Party for slavery, segregation, lynching, the Ku Klux Klan and all the rest?

Better yet, do you think they'll pass a resolution promising to use the funds raised from all those Jefferson-Jackson Day fundraisers to pay reparations for slavery? (Did I mention that while the DNC discusses party co-founders Jefferson and Jackson, it neglects to mention that between them the two owned an estimated 360 slaves?)

Will the NAACP and other groups seeking reparations from nongovernment entities for their role in supporting slavery (companies like Aetna, Wachovia and Chase along with educational institutions like Brown University) finally zero in on the prime historical mover behind some of the worst chapters in American history? Will they sue the Democrats?

The Democrats are poised to nominate a black man for president of the United States. But will they apologize for slavery? Will they start paying reparations not from tax dollars but their own dollars for what they have done?

Do they have the guts to publicly admit what serious history records of their deeds? Are they capable of running a campaign without playing the race card as they have played it for the better part of two centuries? Can they even escape the race psychology that has indelibly branded them as America's Party of Race?

Or, when it comes to their own responsibility for race relations in America, will they order up more of what, under the circumstances, is a very appropriate word for the DNC website?

Whitewash.

Mr. Lord is creator, co-founder and CEO of , a conservative video site. A Reagan White House political director and author, he writes from Pennsylvania.
Democrats! The real racists.

[Yonivore]

So you're saying you care?
Couldn't care less. But, in the other construct, if I could, it wouldn't be much.

[Winehole23]

You're the one derailing the thread. So, speak to the issues. Why is Herman Cain wrong in suggesting blacks have been brainwashed by liberals to stay on the Democrat plantation?Blacks have been brainwashed. Go on...

[ChumpDumper]

Blacks have been brainwashed. Go on...lol

yoni doesn't realize the implications of his parroting.

[Yonivore]

Blacks have been brainwashed. Go on...
Just did, at length.

What else would explain their devotion to the Democrat Party? The party of slavery. The party of Bull Conner. The party of the Ku Klux Klan. The party of Jim Crow. The party that filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The party that provided 80% of the nae votes on the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

What did the Republican Party ever do to drive 95% of a race to vote for the same party, election after election after election?

Just curious.

[Winehole23]

What did the Republican Party ever do to drive 95% of a race to vote for the same party, election after election after election?There must be some dreadful misunderstanding. There aren't any racists in the GOP.

[ElNono]

There must be some dreadful misunderstanding.

:lol

[ChumpDumper]

Just did, at length.

What else would explain their devotion to the Democrat Party? The party of slavery. The party of Bull Conner. The party of the Ku Klux Klan. The party of Jim Crow. The party that filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The party that provided 80% of the nae votes on the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

What did the Republican Party ever do to drive 95% of a race to vote for the same party, election after election after election?

Just curious.They took in most of the Democrats that filibustered and voted against the Civil Rights Acts and adopted their platform on race.

You're really incredibly stupid.

Must be brainwashed.

[Winehole23]

The GOP is also the party of the underdog par excellence, but the damn class warriors go around impugning its good name, so that no one is ever the wiser to its tender, humanitarian exploits.

(More brainwashing.)

[Yonivore]

The GOP is also the party of the underdog par excellence, but the damn class warriors go around impugning its good name, so that no one is ever the wiser to its tender, humanitarian exploits.

(More brainwashing.)
Republicans are the party for equality of opportunity. Nobody, underdog or not, should get an unfair advantage.

You just can't bring yourself to recognize the Democrats are and have always been the racist party in this country.

[Yonivore]

There must be some dreadful misunderstanding. There aren't any racists in the GOP.
No more than there are in the Democrat Party. In fact, probably significantly fewer.

[ChumpDumper]

The only racism left in America is reverse racism.

[Winehole23]

You just can't bring yourself to recognize the Democrats are and have always been the racist party in this country.Sure I can. My eyes are open.

Republicans used to be antiracist. They aren't anymore. You can't face that.

[Yonivore]

Sure I can. My eyes are open.
Then I would vomit to be associated with the Democrat Party.


Republicans used to be antiracist. They aren't anymore. You can't face that.
Sure they are. Nothing's changed. They're opposed to racism today, as they were in the beginning. They're opposed to racist preferences in hiring and college admissions. They favor a completely color-blind government.

Republicans are still the anti-racist party.

Where are the favoring or where do they condone racism against blacks or any other race?

[Winehole23]

Then I would vomit to be associated with the Democrat Party.Whereas I find both major parties pretty revolting. That's a major difference between us.

They're opposed to racism today, as they were in the beginning. They're opposed to racist preferences in hiring and college admissions. They favor a completely color-blind government.Back when policies were so colorblind, minorities were invisible. We should go back to that.

Where are the favoring or where do they condone racism against blacks or any other race?Never, to my knowledge. Only an insidiously mendacious and powerful MSM could account for the stubborn persistence of rumors to the contrary.

[ElNono]

Maybe we should ask a black surgeon what he thinks about it...

[Spurminator]

"Cracker for Cain" isn't racist either. He's just a white dude congratulating himself for being okay with the prospect of a black President.

[Yonivore]

"Cracker for Cain" isn't racist either. He's just a white dude congratulating himself for being okay with the prospect of a black President.

If a black person calling themselves ###### isn't racist, why would calling myself cracker be?

I'm actually more than okay. Herman Cain is my pick...not because I'm okay "with the prospect of a black President" but, because he's qualified, he's successful, he has a specific economic plan I think will work, and he's the most positive candidate on either side of the debate..

[Yonivore]

Never, to my knowledge. Only an insidiously mendacious and powerful MSM could account for the stubborn persistence of rumors to the contrary.
More like a lying Democrat Party with a complicit media.

Did you happen to read the history of the Democrat party, posted earlier, they conveniently omit from their website.

How any black person, knowing the history of the party they continue to vote into office, election after election, could not be "brain washed," is beyond me.

[DMX7]

I get the feeling that if the cable went out at Yoni's house, he wouldn't know what to think.

[Yonivore]

I get the feeling that if the cable went out at Yoni's house, he wouldn't know what to think.
So, you've got nothing, either?

[Winehole23]

How any black person, knowing the history of the party they continue to vote into office, election after election, could not be "brain washed," is beyond me.Obviously.

[ElNono]

So, you've got nothing, either?

Nothing (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,399921,00.html)

[ElNono]

Pop quiz moment. Who said this:

"We have lost sight of the historic, integral link between the party and African-Americans," Steele said. "This party was co-founded by blacks, among them Frederick Douglass. The Republican Party had a hand in forming the NAACP, and yet we have mistreated that relationship. People don't walk away from parties. Their parties walk away from them.

"For the last 40-plus years we had a 'Southern Strategy' that alienated many minority voters by focusing on the white male vote in the South. Well, guess what happened in 1992, folks, 'Bubba' went back home to the Democratic Party and voted for Bill Clinton."

[ChumpDumper]

If a black person calling themselves ###### isn't racist, why would calling myself cracker be?yoni was just looking for an excuse to use that word.

[Wild Cobra]

But, it's not your fault, Even Al Sharpton can get the history straight.

Al Sharpton Gets Civil Rights History Wrong (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2011/10/09/al_sharpton_gets_civil_rights_history_wrong)

We all know that Al Sharpton is a self serving propaganda artist. I thought the third video by Alfonzo Rachel is absolutely awesome.

[Trainwreck2100]

yoni was just looking for an excuse to use that word.
Ahem

if they insult themselves racially when they support him it opens the door for them insulting him racially

[Winehole23]

Republicans are still the anti-racist party.And therefore mobilize the PC forces on their side, sanctimoniously denouncing others as racists and panderers. Ho hum.:sleep

[Winehole23]

So, you've got nothing, either?I got way more mileage by agreeing with you.

[Yonivore]

I got way more mileage by agreeing with you.
With whom? Where did the mileage get you?

[Winehole23]

Morning, Yonivore.

:wakeup

[Winehole23]

So, we know you like Herman Cain because he says blacks are brainwashed. What else do you like about him?

[Winehole23]

That's one thing you might include in the thread you dedicated to him. Or some substantive info about Cain and his campaign. Or you could just let the brainwashing remark stand all by itself. Your choice.

[Winehole23]

You're the only person who has ever quoted Garafalo in this forum.Not quite. DarrinS also figures significantly: 3 of 29 posts mentioning Garofalo in this forum.
Search: (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/search.php?query=Garofalo&exactname=1&starteronly=0&forumchoice[]=8&childforums=1&titleonly=0&showposts=1&searchdate=0&beforeafter=after&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending&replyless=0&replylimit=0&searchthreadid=0&saveprefs=1&quicksearch=0&searchtype=0&nocache=0&ajax=0&userid=0&) Keyword(s):Garofalo ; Forum: Political Forum (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=8) and child forums

[Winehole23]

Yoni has five. Between them Darrin and Yoni account for 27.59% of Garofalo citations in this subforum.

[Winehole23]

Course, I just queered that figure..

[Yonivore]

So, we know you like Herman Cain because he says blacks are brainwashed. What else do you like about him?
I like that he's closely aligned with the limited government Tea Party movement.

I like that he's a big proponent of the Fair Tax Plan, even though I have concerns about his 9 9 9 plan.

I like that he's actually been a successful executive in three different businesses.

I like that he's been on the Federal Reserve Board and is probably as intelligent on the issue as anyone and less crazy than Ron Paul.

I like that he's got Reagan's enthusiasm for and belief in America and the American Dream.

I like that he can hold his own in the debates.

I like that he's conservative.

[Yonivore]

Morning, Yonivore.

:wakeup
Damn, you were just waking up at 10:45?

[Winehole23]

Mere pleasantries, Yoni. Snappy comebacks aren't your forte.

[Winehole23]

I like that he's closely aligned with the limited government Tea Party movement.

I like that he's a big proponent of the Fair Tax Plan, even though I have concerns about his 9 9 9 plan.

I like that he's actually been a successful executive in three different businesses.

I like that he's been on the Federal Reserve Board and is probably as intelligent on the issue as anyone and less crazy than Ron Paul.

I like that he's got Reagan's enthusiasm for and belief in America and the American Dream.

I like that he can hold his own in the debates.

I like that he's conservative.That's great. Where can the nice people out there in internet-landia find out more, Yoni?

[Yonivore]

That's great. Where can the nice people out there in internet-landia find out more, Yoni?

http://www.hermancain.com/

Please donate while you're there.

[Yonivore]

Mere pleasantries, Yoni. Snappy comebacks aren't your forte.
Wasn't trying to be snappy.

Good morning to you, too. :wakeup

[Winehole23]

Buenas tardes.

[Yonivore]

Buenas tardes.
Muchas gracias! Y tu, tambien.