8 Million Dollars To Study Reparations For Slave Descendants
Mar 28, 2009 Political
Congressman John Conyers has introduced a House Resolution (which he has introduced before) to determine if descendants of slaves should receive reparations. The committee will have 90 days to study the matter to see if slavery has had an advese effect on African Americans of today and if the country should issue a formal apology and pay them reparations.
Slavery happened a long time ago and no one who was a slave or who owned slaves is alive. Blacks in this country have every opportunity that whites have to achieve. They are not owned by anyone except the Democratic party and that is of their own doing.
Someone emailed about this and had the following quote (I will not attribute because I don’t know if the author meant for this to be public):
We’re talking about REPARATIONS – monetary payment – as if subsidized housing, welfare payments, affirmative action, set-asides, head-start, Job Corps, and all the rest for the past fifty years were not enough, let alone the hand-outs in the latest “stimulus” bill.
I have to agree with this. The black population gets a number of reparations as it is including all the ones mentioned above. Why do we need to spend 8 million dollars to study an issue that should have been dead and buried a long time ago. I thought the election of Barack Obama was supposed to put race behind us.
I wonder if the ancestors of whites who died in the Civil War, the war that ended slavery, are eligible for payment. A lot of men died in that war and it seems they paid a pretty stiff price. Where do we go from here? Will we pay Indians because of how they were treated? Will we pay Japanese for what happened in WW II? Where do we draw the line? Why is there not 8 million dollars to study other aggrieved groups?
If the US issues an apology my name is not on it. They will be doing it without my consent and they do not have the authority to issue it on my behalf. People apologize for something THEY did wrong. I did nothing wrong. I have never owned anyone of any color nor have I bought or sold anyone. In other words, I have nothing to apologize for.
I also do not want to pay one red cent in reparations. I owe nothing and I intend to pay nothing. My tax dollars support the aforementioned items, all of which are reparations for the injustices done a long time ago.
None of the folks receiving them (or who would receive reparations) did anything to deserve the money. They were not slaves and just because their ancestors were does not entitle them to a damn thing.
My Bible tells me that God does not visit the sins of the father on the son [2 Chronicles 25:4]. If God does not think I should be responsible for the sins of my ancestors then the government has little standing on the issue.
Tags: african american, john conyers, reparations, slavery
The Dirty Deed Is Done
Jan 20, 2009 Political
Well, Barack Hussein Obama (is it OK to use Hussein now that he did) was sworn in as the nation’s 44th president after a bit of a false start and jumbled words by both Obama and Chief Justice Roberts. They got their timing and words correct (or close enough for government work) and finished. Not the big deal writers from both sides portrayed it as. The right said Obama blew it and the left said Roberts blew it. I think both men has a miscue because of nerves. Obama started while Roberts was still going and then Roberts said the words out of order. It all worked out and Obama was sworn in.
The speech was the same stuff you expect. Enough of the “what we all have to do” mixed with the ideological claptrap about government fixing things. There were two things that demonstrated to me why liberals are evil, nasty, asses who deserve to have the snot slapped out of them.
The first was this Reverend Lowery. He stood up there and was supposed to deliver a prayer. It turned out to be a sermon on the long road and all that crap. He ended it with a racist slap that insulted white people and should have every white boiling. He offended a lot of people:
‘Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get in back, when brown can stick around… when the red man can get ahead, man; and when white will embrace what is right. That all those who do justice and love mercy say Amen. Say Amen’… Google News
Is this guy living 200 years ago? What the hell is the matter with him. He makes it sound as if people of color don’t have a chance in this country despite the fact that he just watched a black man become president. Then, he tells us how we work for the day when whites will embrace what is right. This sawed off half witted dumb ass has white people to thank for Barack Obama being president. Obama could not have won without a significant numer of whites voting for him. Now I might concede that that was not the right thing to do but Lowery and the rest think it was so what the hell does he mean?
This country was founded by whites and whites freed slaves and if Lowery was looking to be accurate he would have said “when Democrats embrace what is right.” They are the ones who have done the most harm to people of color. I might also point out that everyone in this country has an equal chance and people of color have a more equal chance because of affirmative action. There are good and bad people of all colors and for this low life to throw such an obviously racist remark out there is beyond the pale.
The homos were all worried about Warren? Get real, he did not say anything that insulted anyone (I did not hear him but if he had it would be all over the news). Everyone was so concerned and wondered why the sainted one invited Warren when they should have been worried about Lowery.
It would appear as if Jeremiah Wright is not the only racist pastor that Obama knows. Well screw Lowery and screw anyone who believes that crap and screw those who feel there was nothing wrong with it or fail to condemn it. The past injustices of slavery and discrimination are no excuse for what he said.
The second thing that was offensive was the way the moonbats treated President Bush. This was his last day in office and they could not let him transfer power and leave. They were singing nah nah nah nah, hey hey hey goodbye. They were being nasty to him and treating him terribly in front of his family and in front of the world. I was hoping that the moonbats would have enough decency to behave and show some civility on his last day. I know that I expected too much. I have seen how these morons acted for the past 8 years and today was nothing different. I imagine there would have been a riot if Bush supporters had heckled Obama. Maybe we need a few good old fashioned riots to alleviate some tension.
Well, to hell with them. They talk of working together and making nice. SCREW them. It is time they get a bit of their own medicine. Turn about is fair play and I am in no mood to be nice.
What we need is open season on liberals with no bag limit.
Maybe the moonbats were just upset because the world’s problems did not miraculously disappear once Obama swore in.
Or perhaps they were all wondering if Michelle Obama had broken into their homes and stolen their drapes to wear as a dress.
In any event, they can get in line, behind all the other people in line, to kiss my…
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: color, DC, disrespect, lowery, moonbats, Obama, president bush, racist democrats, slavery
Whoopi To McCain: Should I Worry About Being A Slave?
Sep 12, 2008 Political
John McCain went on The View for some unknown reason and he was discussing wanting judges that interpreted the Constitution the way our Founders intended. Whoopi Goldberg said “Should I be worried about being a slave, about being returned to slavery because certain things happened in the Constitution that you had to change?”
John McCain said that he understood her point. I assume that the point is, if you go strictly by what the Founders laid out then slavery was part of the equation. This would be true if the Constitution had not been amended and Goldberg stated as much when she said it had to be changed. The Constitution INCLUDES the amendments so it should be a moot point. The original Constitution did not ban slavery and it was practiced in this country. The 13th Amendment states:
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. Cornell Law School
McCain’s answer should have been; “No Whoopi. While I understand your question and your point, you do not have to worry about being a slave. Those very Founders had the sense to put in a means of amending the Constitution, which you alluded to, and the citizens of this country made slavery illegal using that process so you have a Constitutional protection against being a slave as provided by the 13th Amendment. When I say I want people to interpret the Constitution the way the Founders intended, I mean including the amendments they had the sense to provide for.”
I think the exchange, especially McCain’s acquiescence, left the impression that our Constitution is outdated and would make people slaves if we strictly followed it. I think this is especially true for the dim witted idiots that watch The View. The problem is, McCain allowed Goldberg to play the race card unchallenged.
As an aside, involuntary servitude would include mandatory community service as a requirement for graduation from high school, which Barack Obama advocates. The question for school kids might be, if Obama gets elected, should I worry about performing uncompensated labor for someone else’s benefit?
Tags: 13th amendment, john mccain, slavery, stupid question, whoopi goldberg
Democrats fail to control government spending
May 13, 2008 Political
The Democrats promised to have an open government and to clean up the mess left by Republicans after 12 years of control. The Republicans brought the mess on themselves by turning into Democrats and increasing the size of government and the associated spending. Now that the Democrats have taken control spending continues to escalate even with record revenue to the treasury.
April saw an increase in revenue fueled by the tax deadline, a date where Americans demonstrate their lack of freedom by paying the government the fruits of individual labor. A total of $403.8 billion dollars was taken in by the government in April but spending for the month was higher than in April of last year. The deficit will get worse in the coming months as rebate checks go out, many to people who paid no taxes to begin with.
The federal government does not have an income problem, it has a spending problem. The politicians simply cannot control their spending habits and that means they need to take more and more of our money. Record revenues cannot keep them from spending more than they take in.
When Republicans were in control everything was blamed on them. The Democrats are now in control and this increase in spending comes on their watch. The size of government continues to grow and the Democrats continue to spend. Their open government is filled with back room deals and shady tactics allowing them to hide what they are doing.
The fact that we pay taxes is bad enough but the idea that they keep taking more and fail to control spending is even worse. We are supposed to be a free country but Americans did not enjoy their own money until April 23rd this year (it would have been later but the “rebate1” checks moved the date to the left). Everything we earned up until that date was required to satisfy our tax bill for the year. That means Americans, in effect, belong to the government and are forced to work for the government. Forced. The money is taken, not given and that means we are anything but free. We ended the practice of owning people and forcing them to work for free. The government must not have gotten the memo.
Instead of being a government of the people we are a government that enslaves the people. If the average employer took money from his employees he would go to jail. We are the employers of those in government and yet they confiscate our money.
The Democrats are in charge and government is growing. That does not relieve Republicans of any responsibility because government got bigger under their control as well. The only way to fix this problem is to vote every one of them out of office and start with new people and fresh ideas. We need to vote in people, regardless of party, who will limit the size of government and cut government spending. Otherwise we need to abolish the government and start over.
The spending problem is not new but the Democrats made a big issue of all the things that happened with Republicans in charge (even though the Democrats were just as guilty). That being the case, it is now time to hold the Democrats responsible for what is happening on their watch. The price of gasoline was $2.19 when they took control and now it is approaching $4.00. All of the economic woes happened since they took control and they are to blame for them. During the 2006 elections the economy was not an issue and the Democrats trumpet that they won because people are fed up with the war. The economy was not a major part of their platform, it was all about Iraq. Since they took over the economy has slumped and their promises to the anti war crowd have gone unfulfilled (not that I’m complaining about that).
Congress has the power to control spending, it is their Constitutional duty. They can blame the president but he signs or vetoes what they come up with. President Bush certainly added to the problem by losing his veto pen when his party was in power and spending increased. While he has found that pen, little has changed since Democrats took control. They continue to spend like drunken sailors on shore leave (my apologies to sailors). They are spending even more than the Republicans they criticized.
It is time for all Americans from both parties to band together and vote every incumbent out of office. I did my part and my Representative lost his primary. He will not be in office again and can cause no further harm (and he was a Republican). If you care for this country then vote them all out of office and let’s replace them with people who will do the job and do it right.
They refuse to pass a law limiting their terms but we have the power to do that ourselves by voting them out.
If we stay the course and add more Democrats to the rolls without replacing those who are already there we will get more big government and more spending which will lead to more taxes and further erosion of the dollar. Filling the place with Republicans without replacing the ones who are there will not be much different.
Source:
Yahoo Finance
1 The checks are not really rebates. A rebate requires a person to spend money in order to get a portion of it back. Many folks who are getting checks paid no taxes at all. The scheme is actually income redistribution.
Tags: big government, Democrats, Pelosi, revenue, slavery, spending, taxes
Democrats Have Always Enjoyed Owning Blacks
Feb 18, 2008 Political
I recently wrote a piece where I stated that I could not understand why the black population votes for Democrats when that party does nothing but keep them down. I mentioned that the Republican Party got rid of slavery (and lost hundreds of thousands doing so) and that I could not understand why blacks would stick with the Democrats. I had someone write to me and basically say, wow, the Republicans got rid of slavery 150 years ago. What about now? Why is it so many Jews vote Democrat. Basically, the idea was that the Republican Party was a bunch of white elitists.
I read an article today that, in honor of President’s Day, discussed the three worst Presidents of all time. Her is an outline of history under Lyndon Johnson:
Not remembered much in current history textbooks or the media of today, was that in the 1920s Republicans proposed anti-lynching legislation, reflecting back to Civil War times when Democrats, including founders of the KKK, had been involved in this horrific act. The legislation passed the House , an opposition speech was given by a Democrat Congressman from Texas named Lyndon B. Johnson, but was killed by the Democrat-controlled Senate. Finally in 1939 it passed the Senate.
LBJ and the Southern wing of the Democratic Party persisted in supporting anti-black positions. Consider, as LBJ’s term neared:
– In 1956, Democrats expressed their opposition to the desegregation decision of Brown v. Board of Education in the “Southern Manifesto.” One hundred members of Congress, all Democrats, signed the manifesto.
– In 1957, REPUBLICAN President Eisenhower authored a Civil Rights Bill, hoping to repair the damage done to blacks and their civil rights by Democrats for nearly a century. Passage of the bill was blocked by Senate Democrats.
– In 1959, Eisenhower authored a Voting Rights Bill, again, in an effort to undo the disenfranchisement of blacks by Democrats through poll taxes, literacy tests, and threats of violence by the KKK. And once again, passage of the bill is blocked by Senate Democrats.
But then, following the JFK assasination[sic]:
– In 1964, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This is the law originally authored by Eisenhower in 1957. Democrats, including Senator Robert Byrd (a former KKK member), filibustered the bill. Once the filibuster was overcome, a larger percentage of Republicans voted for passage than did Democrats.
– In 1965, Congress passed, and President Lyndon Johnson signed into law, the Voting Rights Act of 1964. This is the law originally authored by Eisenhower in 1959. A filibuster was prevented, and passage of this bill also enjoyed support from a greater percentage of Republicans than Democrats. Johnson, of course, is now president and gets “credit” for this legislation — authored by Republicans, designed by Republicans to undo a century of damage done by Democrats, and voted for by a greater percentage of Republicans than Democrats.
– This was followed by the Great Socety[sic] programs designed to eliminate poverty and racism.
At this point, the media and academic elite began using a powerful combination of information control and revisionist history to engineer a massive electoral shift. Falling for the blandishments of the Democrats and their media allies, blacks, once exclusively Republican, began voting Democrat in numbers greater than 90 percent,
The actual consequences of Johnson’s Great Society were disastrous for blacks, discouraging initiative, encouraging a sense of entitlement and victimhood, and creating a permanent dependency class. Until 1965, 82% of black households had both a mother and a father in the home — a statistic on par with or even slightly higher than white families. After 1965 (the year the Democrats and President Johnson decided it was time to stop oppressing blacks and start “helping” them), the presence of black fathers in the home began a precipitous decline; today, the American black out-of-wedlock birthrate is at 69%.
Notice that it was the Republican Party fighting for civil rights throughout history while Democrats fought against them every step of the way. Blacks were once strong supporters of the Republican Party but were misled into the Democratic Party where they have been in despair ever since. Sure, life was not great for blacks in the late 1800s though the mid 1900s but it was getting better and had the Democrats not blocked advancement, the blacks might have reached parity a long time ago living lives today that are not dependent upon the benevolence of government.
Rev. Wayne Perryman, a black man, believed in the Democratic Party until he researched it and the way it treated blacks throughout history. He wrote a book entitled Unfounded Loyalty and he claims that after reading the book the reader will understand:
— For 150 years blacks were victims of terrorist attacks by the Democrats and their Klan supporters, including lynchings, beatings, rapes, and mutilations.
— On the issue of slavery, the Democrats literally gave their lives to expand it; the Republicans gave their lives to ban it.
— Many believed the Democrats had a change of heart and fell in love with blacks. To the contrary, history reveals the Democrats didn’t fall in love with black folks, they fell in love with the black vote knowing this would be their ticket into the White House.
Perryman supported Democrats in the past but in a letter to Terry McAuliffe [2004] he wrote:
I’m not saying that all people who choose to be Democrats are mindless. I’m saying that people who choose a party because it’s the “black thing to do”, instead of actually examining the issues are making a mindless choice. We have brains for a reason.
I believe the Republican party offers more for blacks, in particular poor blacks, many of whom would benefit from the Republican’s
philosophy of personal responsibility. The Democrats have convinced most of them that racism is responsible for their plight. In
some instances that may be true, but for the most part it involves poor choices that some people make – dropping out of school, teen pregnancy, etc.
The democrats may toss them a fish or two, but the Republicans will show them how to fish. Black Conservative
I have said more than once that blacks are taken for granted by the Democrats and that they would be better off if they changed parties and espoused the things the Republican Party does. They would not be beholden to government and they would be more self reliant. It is unfortunate that they blindly follow Democrats and have done so to their own detriment.
One day when schools and the Democrats stop embracing revisionist history the blacks in this country will see what party has embraced them and has fought for their civil rights. Perhaps it will take an action by the Democrats that is so egregious the black community can no longer give blind support to their task masters and will embrace the freedom of the Republican Party. Then you will see more qualified candidates running for office and holding positions of prominence.
Perhaps that terrible act is only months away. If the Democrats steal victory from Obama and give the nomination to Hillary Clinton there will be a mass exodus of blacks from the party. We on the right will be glad to welcome you home.
Think the Democrats are not worried about this? Why do you think they want the nomination settled before the convention? They were not worried about ticking anyone off when the Super Delegates decided on Mondale because he was white and the blacks would not be feel betrayed by the decision. The party leaders are not worried about ticking off the black vote. They are worried about ticking it off enough that they lose it.
To Democrats, that would be the only injustice in the process.
Tags: black vote, Conservatives, Democrats, slavery