|
|
Post by The New Guy on Jan 22, 2009 23:25:19 GMT -5
landslide? really?
i must have missed that. please give me some details, mink.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Jan 23, 2009 0:24:44 GMT -5
My bringing up the election was in response to moondog's reason to switching party's. His reasoning could apply in Republicans switching due to the same reason, hence Obama, who takes inspiration from Dr. King, was elected.
The fact that Dr. King was Republican wasn't the driving force of his intent to bring peace as he included all of America. I'm sure it may score points for some, however I don't think he aimed at one party or the other as he encouraged unity for all.
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Jan 23, 2009 1:07:17 GMT -5
"That being said, you can imagine why Obama was elected by a landslide."
54% is a landslide? Tell us another one.
"People, in general were tired of being lied to."
Ah! So that is why Pelosi, Woolsey, DiFi, et al. got reelected - people are tired of being lied to. Yep.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Jan 23, 2009 1:44:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Jan 23, 2009 1:56:21 GMT -5
Typical answer, Mink. So, since when is 54% a landslid? (and that percentage is really more like about 34% of the eligible electorate, remember that only about 68% of those elibible to vote did so). And, if people are tired of being lied to, why did so many incumbents get back into office? Rolling eyes is an evasion,not an answer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Jan 23, 2009 2:17:04 GMT -5
I rolled my eyes because you are drifting.  |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Jan 23, 2009 8:14:09 GMT -5
That being said, you can imagine why Obama was elected by a landslide. People, in general were tired of being lied to. Hopefully, the dream won't get lost in our many disagreements in political jargon. Hmmm....I respond to something YOU wrote, so of course "I'M" then the one who is drifting. Pot & kettle, Mink. Pot & kettle. |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Jan 23, 2009 15:38:22 GMT -5
Moondog: "No wonder I switched from Democrat to Republican after Bill Clinton's first term. I was tired of being lied to endlessly." That being said, you can imagine why Obama was elected by a landslide. People, in general were tired of being lied to. Hopefully, the dream won't get lost in our many disagreements in political jargon. This is off topic. After all, I was comparing my switch to the Republican party with the switch by blacks to the Democrat Party. It all has to do with a thing called patronage. That is the spending of the peoples money by the federal government in areas that best serve the interests of the person in power in an effort to swing more votes to that persons people in the same party who enjoy their support. It is most often used in swing states. Federal Patronage has caused people to vote in ways that are against their own long term economic interests for a short term gain in federal dollars. It is the exact reason California now only receives 78 cents on the dollar back from the federal government for every dollar we send in. Number 42 in receipts, number one in taxes. Federal Patronage is what caused the migration of Blacks from one party to the other, voting against their own long term interests in order to get federal dollars for Black causes. Which makes no sense when you consider they support the party that has actually done the least for their cause. But, money now talks louder then your future earning power. In the long run, the New Deal has not helped Blacks. Unemployment for uneducated black youth has reached a level of 30% because of the very policies instituted under the New Deal. You can't blame anyone except the people who created the programs that caused the problems and they were Democrats. |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Jan 23, 2009 15:45:04 GMT -5
My bringing up the election was in response to moondog's reason to switching party's. His reasoning could apply in Republicans switching due to the same reason, hence Obama, who takes inspiration from Dr. King, was elected. The fact that Dr. King was Republican wasn't the driving force of his intent to bring peace as he included all of America. I'm sure it may score points for some, however I don't think he aimed at one party or the other as he encouraged unity for all. Your right. The fact that Doctor Martin Luther King, Medgar Evers and his brother Charles were all Republicans, along with the NAACP which was founded by Republicans, is because the Republican party is the party that has done the most to secure their rights. The only thing Democrats have secured is the tax money of people like Joe Louis, ruined by a Democrat administration that sought to impose a 100% income tax on all money over $25,000, sought to tax companies on undistributed profits for the first time in the History of the entire world and used the IRS to investigate and and attempt to ruin the lives of all political adversaries for the first time in the History of the United States. As well as attempting to game the system and force out Justices from the Supreme Court so they could appoint their own cronies. But, thank you for taking my post entirely out of context to once again attack the previous administration. This is the Obama administration, let's not focus on the past. |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Jan 23, 2009 15:48:06 GMT -5
I rolled my eyes because you are drifting. Ha!!!! Yours was not only a drift, it was a hard left to another area entirely. |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Jan 23, 2009 15:55:25 GMT -5
So, again I would like to point out that regardless of Minks claims that the political affiliation of Martin Luther King, Jr., Medgar Evers and all other prominent civil rights leaders of the time is bogus. They were Republicans for a reason. Republicans believe in equality and proved it time and again with legislation aimed to prevent civil rights violations. Democrats had a long and distinct history of enacting laws that were aimed at skirting those regulations, all the way up to 1968, discriminating against our fellow Americans that Democrats thought were less then worthy based solely on skin color.
The proof that they have not changed a bit, Robert Reich and Charlie Rangle. Still using race to game the system. Democrats do not believe that Blacks are capable of helping themselves. That is why they want to always slant things to help people based on skin color. That is why they wish to exclude White Construction Workers from receiving any money from the next stimulus package. How enlightened of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Jan 23, 2009 16:37:30 GMT -5
Moondog wrote:
I have to enter this discussion to disagree with you here. The Democrats do much more to help black people than Republicans do. Lets not fool ourselves, much of America's poor are black. Democrat is the party of social services: like job skills training, mental health services, homeless shelters, welfare, etc. They are programs designed to help people (who are down and out) get back on their feet and make something of their lives. The Republican model leaves these people without skills, on the streets to fend for themselves. You're fooling yourself if you think that Republicans have black people's long term interests in mind. That is why blacks vote overwhelmingly Democrat.
Guess what, we're not living in the past. This is 2009, not pre-1968. True, if we were living pre-1968, my party affiliation might be different, but that is irrelevant. Black people see that voting Democrat benefits them today and in the future, that's why we are called "progressives," we're not stuck in the past.
|
|
