Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Check the %s over the last fifty years and tell me the programs did not contribute to the improvement of minorities' positions economically and socially. You could but you would be wrong. Williams is wrong. I am glad that he, Sowell, West, Thomas, et al succeeded and are happy being Republicans. But the point is that they are exceptions that prove the rule that those programs were necessary and successful for many. Check the %s.
If you think this country is giving up entitlements or reforming them a la Ryan, you are outside political and cultural reality. If you think the Tea Party movement older folks are giving up SS and medicare as they know it, you are on the outside looking in. Not going to happen.
Jake are you stupid or something? Who is suggesting people give up SS and Medicare? they need to be reformed, they are unsustainable and to say Great Society programs have been great for black Americas you are delusional. Most all they have done is create a dependency, break down the traditional family 70% of black babies are born to single mothers, our public schools are a joke, the inner city dropout rate here in Detroit is 75% get your head out of your ass man.
The stats say you are wrong. Yes, the programs need to be reformed, but they will never be recreated as voucher programs. And stop the racist screed: the issue is income $, not race. Whites have the same problem.
Working class (40%) 1980, 10.2% 2007, 40%
Under class (10%) 1980, 44.5% 2007, 70%
"The white overclass? Theyre still living in the 1950stheir ratio is probably about 4 or 5 percent tops. But while the elite may continue to live in its pleasant little world for a while, that world is not going to bear much resemblance to the rest of America. And, increasingly, the rest of America isnt going to bear much resemblance to the America we used to celebrate"
Pasadena Sub Rosa: WHITE ILLEGITIMACY RATES SKYROCKETING
The stats confound you, kiddo.
The programs can be done far better, but the OP here remains a real fail.
As I said Failed big government programs have for the most part not helped anyone.
The stats confound you, kiddo.
The programs can be done far better, but the OP here remains a real fail.
Nope Not in the least, you fai,l you contradict yourself. As I said Failed big government programs have for the most part not helped anyone. Liberty and the free market is all the help most people need, it has made us the most successful country in the history of the world, and it was the aim of the democrat party to deprive black Americans that liberty for far too long, as Republicans fought for their liberty. It is currently the Democrats aim to deprive all of our liberty. Liberty is not a bad thing Jake.
As I said Failed big government programs have for the most part not helped anyone.
How do you measure this? On an individual basis there is plenty of evidence that they have helped people -- including me.
When I lost my job a couple years ago, I drew unemployment. I flailed around trying to find a new job at the worst possible time for it, and in a bad demographic situation, too (I'm a 55 year old man). I failed, as might be expected.
Then one day, while I was fruitlessly cruising Craigslist looking for sales openings, I saw the category for "writing" and thought, why not, what do I have to lose? So I found a job to apply for and did. I didn't get the job, but in the course of applying for it, I found out about an on-line networking service that facilitates freelancing. And that's what I'm doing now, writing and editing for a living.
Without unemployment, I would have been up shit creek and no mistake. So that big government liberal program sure helped me!
I think you need to explain what you mean when you say such programs haven't helped anyone, because on the face of it that's simply nonsense.
As I said Failed big government programs have for the most part not helped anyone.
How do you measure this? On an individual basis there is plenty of evidence that they have helped people -- including me.
When I lost my job a couple years ago, I drew unemployment. I flailed around trying to find a new job at the worst possible time for it, and in a bad demographic situation, too (I'm a 55 year old man). I failed, as might be expected.
Then one day, while I was fruitlessly cruising Craigslist looking for sales openings, I saw the category for "writing" and thought, why not, what do I have to lose? So I found a job to apply for and did. I didn't get the job, but in the course of applying for it, I found out about an on-line networking service that facilitates freelancing. And that's what I'm doing now, writing and editing for a living.
Without unemployment, I would have been up shit creek and no mistake. So that big government liberal program sure helped me!
I think you need to explain what you mean when you say such programs haven't helped anyone, because on the face of it that's simply nonsense.
As I said Failed big government programs have for the most part not helped anyone.
How do you measure this? On an individual basis there is plenty of evidence that they have helped people -- including me.
When I lost my job a couple years ago, I drew unemployment. I flailed around trying to find a new job at the worst possible time for it, and in a bad demographic situation, too (I'm a 55 year old man). I failed, as might be expected.
Then one day, while I was fruitlessly cruising Craigslist looking for sales openings, I saw the category for "writing" and thought, why not, what do I have to lose? So I found a job to apply for and did. I didn't get the job, but in the course of applying for it, I found out about an on-line networking service that facilitates freelancing. And that's what I'm doing now, writing and editing for a living.
Without unemployment, I would have been up shit creek and no mistake. So that big government liberal program sure helped me!
I think you need to explain what you mean when you say such programs haven't helped anyone, because on the face of it that's simply nonsense.
Jroc believes in twisting facts (if any) to this philosophy. If no facts, then just yell the philosophy.
of course but when we look at the big picture we are spiraling towards bankruptcy
and I don't put unemployment in with the same category as the res,t as long as it's not a 2yr deal, but I think we're getting a little off topic here
How do you measure this? On an individual basis there is plenty of evidence that they have helped people -- including me.
When I lost my job a couple years ago, I drew unemployment. I flailed around trying to find a new job at the worst possible time for it, and in a bad demographic situation, too (I'm a 55 year old man). I failed, as might be expected.
Then one day, while I was fruitlessly cruising Craigslist looking for sales openings, I saw the category for "writing" and thought, why not, what do I have to lose? So I found a job to apply for and did. I didn't get the job, but in the course of applying for it, I found out about an on-line networking service that facilitates freelancing. And that's what I'm doing now, writing and editing for a living.
Without unemployment, I would have been up shit creek and no mistake. So that big government liberal program sure helped me!
I think you need to explain what you mean when you say such programs haven't helped anyone, because on the face of it that's simply nonsense.
Jroc believes in twisting facts (if any) to this philosophy. If no facts, then just yell the philosophy.
Facts. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fClzzfMR3ek]1300 White Republicans Lynched by the KKK.mp4 - YouTube[/ame]
Jroc believes in twisting facts (if any) to this philosophy. If no facts, then just yell the philosophy.
Facts. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fClzzfMR3ek]1300 White Republicans Lynched by the KKK.mp4 - YouTube[/ame]
1868? What about 1968, Jroc? The % of southern GOP congressmen and senators voting against Civil Rights and Voting Rights in 1964 and 1965 was higher than southern Dem voting against them.
Context, factual, and honest.
Try it.
House of Representatives:
Democrats for: 152
Democrats against: 96
Republicans for: 138
Republicans against: 34
Senate:
Democrats for: 46
Democrats against: 21
Republicans for: 27
Republicans against: 6
The Congressional Quarterly of June 26, 1964 recorded that in the
Senate, only 69 percent of Democrats (46 for, 21 against) voted for
the Civil Rights Act as compared to 82 percent of Republicans (27 for,
6 against). All southern Democratic senators voted against the act.
[...] In the House of Representatives, 61 percent of Democrats (152
for, 96 against) voted for the Civil Rights Act; 92 of the 103
Southern Democrats voted against it. Among Republicans, 80 percent
(138 for, 34 against) voted for it."
Gotta be fair with the numbers, Jroc, and with the geography. Sen Dems in the South voted 1 -21 for it, Sen Pubs in the South vote 0-1, House Dems 7-87 and House Pubs 0-10. We are see a pattern emerge. In the West and the North, Dems 145-9 in favor and Pubs 138-24.
Thus, (1) we know that Kennedy then Johnson took the lead with Hubert Humphrey driving the Congress House and Senate forward, with some solid help from northern Pub leadership, and (2) the Dems on this issue deserve the greater share with some solid applause for the Pubs.
I am ashamed of my party since 1968 on matters of racial equality in this country.
Republican House Member Misrepresents History On Civil Rights Legislation | The Moderate Voice
The Neocons and Nixon’s Southern Strategy » Patrick J. Buchanan - Official WebsiteRichard Nixon kicked off his historic comeback in 1966 with a column on the South (by this writer) that declared we would build our Republican Party on a foundation of states rights, human rights, small government and a strong national defense, and leave it to the “party of Maddox, Mahoney and Wallace to squeeze the last ounces of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice.”
In that ’66 campaign, Nixon – who had been thanked personally by Dr. King for his help in passing the Civil Rights Act of 1957 – endorsed all Republicans, except members of the John Birch Society.
In 1968, Nixon chose Spiro Agnew for vice president. Why? Agnew had routed George (“Your home is your castle!”Mahoney for governor of Maryland but had also criticized civil-rights leaders who failed to condemn the riots that erupted after the assassination of King. The Agnew of 1968 was both pro-civil rights and pro-law and order.
When the ’68 campaign began, Nixon was at 42 percent, Humphrey at 29 percent, Wallace at 22 percent. When it ended, Nixon and Humphrey were tied at 43 percent, with Wallace at 13 percent. The 9 percent of the national vote that had been peeled off from Wallace had gone to Humphrey.
Between 1969 and 1974, Nixon – who believed that blacks had gotten a raw deal in America and wanted to extend a helping hand:
* raised the civil rights enforcement budget 800 percent;
* doubled the budget for black colleges;
* appointed more blacks to federal posts and high positions
than any president, including LBJ;
* adopted the Philadelphia Plan mandating quotas for blacks
in unions, and for black scholars in colleges and
universities;
* invented “Black Capitalism” (the Office of Minority Business
Enterprise), raised U.S. purchases from black businesses
from $9 million to $153 million, increased small business
loans to minorities 1,000 percent, increased U.S. deposits
in minority-owned banks 4,000 percent;
* raised the share of Southern schools that were
desegregated from 10 percent to 70 percent. Wrote the
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights in 1975, “It has only been
since 1968 that substantial reduction of racial segregation
has taken place in the South.”
I think the democrat party should pay reparations to African Americans. Absolutely, they should be ashamed of their history and admit what they did.
You really believe that stupid shit?Democrats already did pay reparations for their history of racism. That's what the Civil Rights Act was: penance.
Republicans, on the other hand, since 1968 have been paying reparations to the slave owners they once deprived of their property.
You really believe that stupid shit?Democrats already did pay reparations for their history of racism. That's what the Civil Rights Act was: penance.
Republicans, on the other hand, since 1968 have been paying reparations to the slave owners they once deprived of their property.
