Democrats' despicable duplicity

"Democrats insisted on changing the law in Massachusetts to require an election to fill the office of Sen. John Kerry, should he be elected president in 2004. They argued that the people, not the governor, should choose the senator's replacement. Of course, the governor at the time was a Republican, Mitt Romney. Now that the governor is a Democrat, the people should not choose Ted Kennedy's successor; the governor should make the appointment. The duplicity here is despicable. "

Torture, Mr. President?

Torture- Mr. President?

By Rev. Wayne Perryman


Torture? I’m so glad you brought up the subject. Mr. President and Attorney General Holder, Conservative African Americans have been waiting a lifetime to have this conversation. But before you and the sensitive members of the Democratic Party start with the Bush Administration, why don’t we review the torture tactic of the Democratic Party.

The chronicles of history reveal that in areas controlled by Democrats, Democrats used every form of torture to keep blacks in their place. Lynching, whippings, murder, intimidation, assassinations and mutilations were commonplace in jurisdictions where Democrats were in control. In addition to individual torture entire black communities were destroyed and burned to the ground in such places like: Wilmington, North Carolina, Rosewood, Florida, and the Greenwood District in Tulsa, Oklahoma, to name a few. The one thing that all of these communities had in common, is what realtors often say: location, location, location. They were all located in states and counties controlled by Democratic officials. According to the renowned African American history professor, John Hope Franklin, the atrocities committed against African Americans in these regions, “were so varied and so numerous as to defy classification or enumeration.”

The Encyclopaedia Britannica reported that from the beginning, “Democrat resentment [of black freedom and equality under Reconstruction] led to the formation of the secret terroristic organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Knight of the White Camelia. The use of fraud, violence and intimidation helped Southerns... regain control of their state governments, by the time the last federal troops had been withdrawn in 1877, the Democratic Party was back in power.”[1]

Other noted history professors also wrote about these atrocities, including:

a. Professor James McPherson of Princeton University
b. Professor David Herbert Donald of Harvard University
c. Professor Allen W. Trelease of North Carolina University
d. Professor Howard O. Lindsey of DePaul University.


Professor Allen Trelease said: “Klansmen in disguise rode through Negro neighborhoods at night warning Negroes either to cast Democratic ballots or stay away from the poll. The Klan also sent notices to Republican office holders, warning them of death and telling them to either resign or leave the vicinity. Similar notices went to active Republicans of both races and often to the teachers of Negro schools as well. Klan activities created a reign of terror in many localities and sometimes had the desired effect of demoralizing Negroes and Republicans…. Republicans of both races were threatened, beaten, shot, and murdered with impunity. In some areas Negroes stopped voting or voted the Democrat ticket as the Klan demanded. “Democrats by a kind of tortured reasoning, sometimes accused Negroes and Republicans of attacking each other so that the crimes would be blamed on the Democrats; investigations revealed that Democrats had committed the acts themselves.”

Professors John Hope Franklin and Alfred Moss, authors of From Slavery To Freedom tells us that, “The Camelias and the Klan were the most powerful of the secret orders. Armed with guns, swords, or other weapons, their members patrolled some parts of the South day and night. They used intimidation, force, ostracism in business and society, bribery at the polls, arson, and even murder to accomplish their deed. Depriving the Negro of political equality became, to them, a holy crusade in which a noble end justified any means. Negroes were run out of communities if they disobeyed orders to desist from voting; and the more resolute and therefore insubordinate blacks were whipped, maimed, and hanged. In 1871 several Negro officials in South Carolina were given fifteen days to resign and they were warned that if they failed to do so, then retributive justice will as surely be used as night follows day. For many white Southerners violence was still the surest means of keeping the Negroes politically impotent, and in countless communities they were not allowed, under penalties of reprisals, to show their faces in town on Election Day. It had looked as though the Civil War would break out anew as the Democrats resorted to every possible device to over throw the radicals.64

Professor Franklin went on to say, “It was reported that in North Carolina the Klan was responsible for 260 outrages, including 7 murders and the whipping of 72 whites and 141 Negroes. In one county in South Carolina 6 men were murdered and more than 300 were whipped during the first six months of 1870. The personal indignities inflicted upon individual white and Negroes were so varied and so numerous as to defy classification or enumeration.”[2]

In his book, The Abolitionist Legacy, Professor James McPherson reported, “In 1873, Louisiana became almost a synonym for chaos and violence. When Grant sent federal troops to install Kellogg in office [as governor], Louisiana Democrats were infuriated. They formed White Leagues which attacked black and white Republicans and took scores of lives.”[3]

From his book entitled; Charles Sumner, Harvard Professor, David Hebert Donald reached the following conclusion: “Congress could give the Negro the vote, but all over the South the Ku Klux Klan and other terrorist organizations systematically intimidated the freedmen, flogged or slaughtered their leaders and drove whites who worked with them into exile. Congress could require federal troops to supervise the registration of voters, but Negroes were waylaid and butchered on the roads to the registration offices. Congress could suppress outright violence by military force, but it could do nothing to protect Negroes from landlords who told them bluntly: If you vote with that Yankee [Republican] party you shall not live on our land.”[4]

Professor Howard O. Linsay, the author of, A History of Black Americans says, “Blacks and sympathetic Whites were attacked and threatened. African Americans were discouraged from seeking elected office and even from trying to vote. Any and all means were used from threats to violence to outright murder.”[5]

The following is what happened to Sam Hose and Mary Turner:

After a mob murdered Mary Turner’s husband, she threatened to swear out warrants against his killers. Several hundred men decided to teach her a lesson. They took this eight month pregnant woman from her home and after tying her ankles together, they hung her from a tree, head downward, dousing her clothes with gasoline, and burned them [the clothes] from her body. While she was still alive, someone used a knife ordinarily reserved for splitting hogs to cut open the woman’s abdomen. The baby fell from her womb to the ground and cried briefly, whereupon a member of the mob crushed the baby’s head beneath his heel. Then hundreds of bullets were fired into Mary Turner’s body.” [Page 14, Without Sanctuary – Foreword written by Democratic Congressman John Lewis].

These forms of torture were common in regions controlled by Democrats. The following is what they did to Sam Hose after falsely accusing him.

“After stripping Hose of his clothes and chaining him to a tree, the self-appointed executioners stacked kerosene-soaked wood high around him. Before saturating Hose with oil and applying the torch, they cut off his ears, fingers, and genitals, and skinned his face. While some in the crowd plunged knives into the victims flesh, others watched with unfeigning satisfaction, the contortions of Sam Hose’s body as flames rose, distorting his features, causing his eyes to bulge out of their sockets and rupturing his veins. The only sounds that came from the victim’s lips, even as his blood sizzled in the fire. were, “Oh my God! Oh, Jesus.” Before Hose’s body had even cooled, his heart and liver were removed and cut into several pieces and his bones were crushed into small particles. The crowd fought over these souvenirs. Shortly after the lynching, one of the participants reportedly left for the state capitol, hoping to deliver a slice of Sam Hose’s heart to the Democratic governor of Georgia, who would call Sam Hose’s deeds, “the most diabolical in the annals of crime.” [Page 15, ‘Without Sanctuary”]

After the brutal hanging, it was proven that Mr. Hose was innocent of the allege charges. They took parts of his body and displayed them in store windows, which was a common practice in towns, cities, counties and states controlled by Democrats.

I haven’t even scratched the surface. Time and space would not permit me to tell you about Dred Scott, the Civil Rights Cases of 1883, Plessy v. Ferguson, the Senate investigations of 1871, or the letters written by blacks in Kentucky in 1871 Louisiana in 1872, Alabama in 1874. From the New York riots of during the Civil War, to 1963 when the 16th Street Baptist Church was bombed as Condoleezza Rice was preparing to go to Sunday School, wherever Democrats were in control, blacks have been tortured, intimidated and mutilated by Democrat officials and members of the Democratic Party. Senator Tillman of South Carolina said lynching blacks was justified. He went on to say: “Southern women will not submit to the black man gratifying his lust on our wives and daughter without lynching him.” This same Democratic Senator said: “We reorganized the Democratic Party with one plank and only one plank, namely that this is a white man’s country and white men must govern it.”

Now tell me Mr. President and Mr. Holder, how many detainees were beaten, hung, raped, cut into pieces bombed and burned to death under Bush Administration? Before we start condemning the Bush Administration for their handling of the allege terrorist from foreign countries, why don’t we first review the Democratic Party who tortured the black citizens from their own country. Oh, one more thing. Mr. Holder, it was the Bush Administration that finally prosecuted the person that was responsible for the 16th Baptist Church bombing. Black conservatives are looking forward to hearings on torture.

Rev. Wayne Perryman
P.O. Box 256
Mercer Island, WA 98040
(206) 860-6880
www.wayneperryman.com


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] 1992 Encyclopaedia Britannica pp. 979

64 Reconstruction – The Great Experience, pp. 226-233
[2] Reconstruction After The Civil War, p. 157

[3] The Abolitionist Legacy, p.40
[4] Charles Sumner, p. 420
[5] A History of Black Americans, pp. 88-89

Love Those Comments From The Huffington Post

I hope Ms Huffington is not in a huff. Obama worshipers fall all over themselves in rapt adoration:

"What a fraud B.O. is. he blames the U.S. the most be cause he cannot afford to portray Mexicans in a negative light whatsoever, especially when he's going to try to ram amnesty down the throats of Americans this summer before all of his political capital is spent. He also needs the Hispanic vote for re-election."

"Chains we can believe in!"

"Let's hope Barry doesn't bow to another head of state on this trip. He really needs to stop this disburbing habit. He should bow to the constitution of the United States and not to foreign heads of states."

"Where's the Change We Can Believe In, Mr President? And don't you have enough wars on your hands?"

Ford: Democrat School Choice Hypocrisy

"State Senator Robert Ford from Charleston County, South Carolina, is blasting his Democratic Party and saying it is not fair that elected politicians can exercise school choice while their constituents have to remain in the failing public schools.

"Senator Ford said: 'Whatever the amount of money that we spend on a child per year, that money is for the child — it's not for the school. So if you got a failing school, it simply means that that parent is wasting taxpayer money.' Senator Ford also says that parents should be able to use school choice vouchers to send their children to religious schools."

Dems ignored those Bush and McCain Warnings On Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

"How soon we tend to forget (and the Democrats chose to ignore) that the financial crisis could largely have been prevented, were it not for the destructive impact of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - whose policies resulted in 25 million junk mortgages: Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning of financial crisis:

"The Bush Administration and Senator McCain warned repeatedly about Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac and what thus became the 2008 financial crisis -- starting in 2002. Democrats not only resisted all reform efforts, but Barney Frank continued to declare them 'financially sound' despite clear signs of meltdown."

Reid Tells Far Left Wing Democrats To Back Off Moderates

"For quite a while we have brought news of the far left wing of the Democratic party targeting moderate Democrats, usually referred to as Blue Dog Democrats. We have shown example after example of liberal bloggers starting whole campaigns to get these Blue Dog Democrats out of office.

"Most Blue Dogs represent conservative districts, some that used to be offices held by Republicans, and the reason they were voted in was because they were moderates that represent the constituency, rather than just a liberal agenda.

"Despite that, groups like MoveOn.org and blogs like Open Left, with a variety of others have made it a goal to hinder the moderates chances of reelection."

Seems the Democratic Party has an enemy within itself. Sounds like cancer....

Democrats vs. Democrats

"House Minority Leader John A. Boehner snarled at moderate Democrats Wednesday, but the real bite came from liberal groups frustrated by centrist opposition to Barack Obama’s budget priorities.

"As Boehner accused Blue Dog Democrats of being 'lap dogs' for Obama, MoveOn.org and Americans United for Change, the labor-backed organization that serves as the White House’s chief third-party operation, began airing ads Wednesday urging moderate Democrats in both the House and the Senate to get on board with the president’s budget.

"Among the targets of Americans United for Change is Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), who declared the ads 'not very helpful.'”

OPEN LETTER TO JANEANE GAROFALO

Open Letter to Janeane Garofalo:

Dear Ms. Garofalo:

I saw a video of your interview with Keith Olbermann on MSNBC.

You said: “Michael Steele. Who's that black guy in the Republican party who suffers from Stockholm syndrome. Which means you try to curry favor with the oppressor. . . . Any female or person of color in the Republican party is struggling with Stockholm syndrome.”

Michael Steele, “that black guy,” suffering from Stockholm Syndrome, him currying favor with the “oppressor”? Therefore you are saying Black Republicans are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome? They identify with the “oppressor”?

You seem to imply that white Republicans have been the oppressors of black people in the United States. Can I give you some factual history about your oppressor?

Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr. of Illinois said: “before the Civil War, the Democratic slave masters used to hold anti-black conventions.”

What?

The Republicans did not own slaves? That is amazing.

We thought the Republican Party was the Party of Slavery, didn’t we? There are thousands of black Americans who actually believe that. (Even a black woman in New York City believes that Abraham Lincoln was a

Democrat.) The Republican Party was formed in the 1850’s for the purpose of abolishing slavery and polygamy. The Republican National Committee website (www.rnc.com

) says: “The Republican Party was born in the early 1850's by anti-slavery activists and individuals who believed that government should grant western lands to settlers free of charge.”

Look at a portion of the 1860 platform: “That the normal condition of all the territory of the United States is that of freedom; That as our Republican fathers, when they had abolished slavery in all our national territory, ordained that ‘no person should be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,’ it becomes our duty, by legislation, whenever such legislation is necessary, to maintain this provision of the Constitution against all attempts to violate it; and we deny the authority of Congress, of a territorial legislature, or of any individuals, to give legal existence to Slavery in any Territory of the United States….That we brand the recent re-opening of the African slave- trade, under the cover of our national flag, aided by perversions of judicial power, as a shame to (a) crime against humanity and a burning (for) our country and age; and we call upon Congress to take prompt and efficient measures for the total and final suppression of that execrable traffic.” (To their credit, there were Northern Democrats who supported President Lincoln during the Civil War.)

What kind of oppressor says that the slave trade is a “crime against humanity”?

I’m somewhat curious about some information on the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) website (www.democrats.org/about/history.html

). The late Ron Brown, former Chairman of the Democratic National Committee said: “The common thread of Democratic history, from Thomas Jefferson to Bill Clinton, has been an abiding faith in the judgment of hardworking American families, and a commitment to helping the excluded, the disenfranchised and the poor strengthen our nation by earning themselves a piece of the American Dream. We remember that this great land was sculpted by immigrants and slaves, their children and grandchildren…." Wait a minute! From Thomas Jefferson to Bill Clinton helping the excluded, the disenfranchised and the poor? All of the slave masters were Democrats. The Democrats kept in bondage those who were excluded, those who were disenfranchised and those who were poor – Black slaves.

Who was the oppressor?

According to the PBS’s American Experience website (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/lincolns/politics/tl_tree.html

) it says of the Democratic Party platform in 1840: “They opposed the government's interference with the spread of slavery.” It also said in 1852: “Democrats also supported the provisions of the Compromise of 1850 and united along pro-slavery lines.” It also said in 1856: “Democrats again united along a pro-slavery platform, endorsing states' rights, the Fugitive Slave Law, and popular sovereignty in the territories.

Mackubin T. Owens

writes in his editorial “The Democratic Party’s Legacy of Racism” (http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/oped/owens/02/racism.html

): “The most liberal position among ante-bellum Democrats regarding slavery was that slavery was an issue that should be decided by popular vote. For example, Stephen Douglas, Lincoln’s opponent in the 1858 Illinois senate race and the 1860 presidential campaign, advocated ‘popular sovereignty.’ He defended the right of the people in the territories to outlaw slavery, but also defended the right of Southerners to own slaves and transport them to the new territories.”

Whether or not some Republicans did not want slavery because they sincerely thought it was immoral or some did not want it for political reasons only, not out of love for the Black people (Lincoln thought that Blacks were inferior to Whites and there were northern states that barred Blacks from migrating into them), is irrelevant. The fact is that Republicans were never supporters of slavery, contrary to the belief of many African Americans today.

Who was the oppressor?

The PBS website on “The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow” (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/stories_org_democratic.html

) said: “The Democratic Party identified itself as the ‘white man's party’ and demonized the Republican Party as being ‘Negro dominated,’ even though whites were in control.” Some Democrats formed the terrorist organization the Ku Klux Klan in the 1870’s. An article in the 1992 Encyclopedia Britannica under the “Reconstruction” heading reported: “The Democratic resentment led to the formation of the secret terroristic organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Knights of the White Camilia. The use of fraud, violence, and intimidation helped Southern conservatives regain control of their state governments.” Blacks and White Republicans were the targets of the Klan’s wrath. All this information can be freely verified in libraries and on the Internet. My point is that in the minds of many African Americans today, the Republican Party is identified with the Ku Klux Klan. Until an African-American friend of mine learned the true history of both political parties, she thought the Republicans and the KKK were basically the same and published that imagery of that nature in a newspaper.

Look at these paragraphs concerning their history on the DNC’s website: “In 1848, the National Convention established the Democratic National Committee, now the longest running political organization in the world. The Convention charged the DNC with the responsibility of promoting ‘the Democratic cause’ between the conventions and preparing for the next convention. The next paragraph immediately says: “As the 19th Century came to a close, the American electorate changed more and more rapidly. The Democratic Party embraced the immigrants who flooded into cities and industrial centers, built a political base by bringing them into the American mainstream, and helped create the most powerful economic engine in history.” We leave 1848 and timewarp to the late 19th Century? Why the 50-year gap in the DNC history? What about the Democratic Party during the Civil War and Reconstruction? Why don’t they talk about the first Black government officials on state and federal levels? Is it because they were 100% Republican therefore persona non grata? A Black elected official I know personally admitted he did not know until recently that there were Blacks in Congress in the 19th Century. Why did not that website celebrate the constitutional amendments that formally abolished slavery and declared the former slaves citizens of the United States? Why was that significant part of history their history intentionally left out? Was it because they could not honestly claim that championing civil rights for Blacks, part of “the Democratic cause,” after the Civil War was a part of their history?

That same website lauds President Woodrow Wilson. What they don’t tell you is that Wilson segregated the Federal Government after he took office. He is a current hero of the Democratic Party.

Who was the oppressor?

Who is being suckered and scammed?

(As a matter of fact, do you recall any mention of the first Black governor, congressmen, or state representatives immediately after the Civil War in any Black History Month celebrations or programs? You hear of the first Black this and the first Black that, and that is wonderful. But you never, ever, hear about the first Black Americans in national or state government. Why is that? Connect the dots. Read between the lines.)

Did you know the “racist” Republican Barry Goldwater was a founding member of the Arizona NAACP? He was a member until his death in 1998! Could a White racist be a founding member of a Black civil-rights organization and a dues-paying member until his death? As an Air National Guard Colonel in the 1940’s, he desegregated the Arizona Air National Guard, 2 years BEFORE President Truman desegregated the entire Armed Forces. My mother, who is 87 years old, believed for the last 40 years that Barry Goldwater was a White supremacist. (I grew up believing he was a racist.) Now that my mother knows the real Goldwater, her 40-year bitterness toward him evaporated. She understands he voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act based on his libertarian philosophy as far as the federal government intruding into private affairs and not because of “racism.” Also Goldwater voted for two Civil Rights bills during the Eisenhower administration.

A Wikipedia article on the Democratic Party says: “The civil rights movement

of the 1960s, championed by the party despite opposition at the time from its Southern wing, has continued to inspire the party's liberal principles.” Rev. Al Sharpton (who I respect for traveling to Sudan and exposing chattel slavery there) said at a recent Democratic Convention in Boston: “Mr. President, you said would we have more leverage if both parties got our votes, but we didn't come this far playing political games. It was those that earned our vote that got our vote. We got the Civil Rights Act under a Democrat (President Lyndon Baines Johnson). We got the Voting Rights Act under a Democrat. We got the right to organize under Democrats.” Rev. Sharpton, I really wish you would have mentioned too that it was because of Democrats, not because of Republicans, that we needed the protection of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The Southern Democrats were the segregationists, not the Republicans. The Southern Democrats were responsible for Jim Crow, not the Republicans.

Who was the oppressor?

I have asked several Black people if a majority of Democrats or Republicans in Congress supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act. All but one said it was a Democratic majority. Therefore they believed it was a Democratic victory for civil rights. Have the Democrats claimed a victory that they never earned? Here is the historical record that you can look up today on the Internet: In 1964, in a Democratic Congressional majority, in the Senate, 82% of the Republicans voted for the Act while only 69% of the Democrats voted for it. Every Southern Democratic Senator voted against it. In the House of Representatives, 80% of the Republicans voted for the Act, while only 61% of the Democrats voted for it. Ninety-two of the 103 Southern Democrats in the House voted against it. It is all in the Congressional Record. Also the ignored or forgotten 1957 Civil Rights Act (which Senator Strom Thurmond tried to torpedo) and the 1960 Civil Rights Act, designed to protect us from the Southern Democrats, were passed by the majority of Republicans in Congress and signed into law by Republican President Eisenhower. Republicans, not Democrats, historically have been in the majority in support of civil rights legislation from the beginning of their history. Even Democratic Senator John F. Kennedy was no outstanding exponent for civil rights before his presidential bid. Who said, "The time has come for equality of opportunity in sharing in government, in education, and in employment. It will not be stayed or denied. It is here!"? It was Republican Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen speaking of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

In the 1965 Voting Rights Act, in percentages, 73.4% of the Democratic Senators voted for the law and 93% of the Republican Senators voted for the law. 78.4% of the Democratic House Representatives voted for the law and 82.3% of the Republican House Representatives voted for the law.

Republican Senator Trent Lott was nothing to shout about. (Same for the late Democrat Dixiecrat turned Republican Strom Thurmond). Lott was pilloried by the media after his remarks praising a Thurmond Dixiecrat presidency. However, Democratic Senator Robert Byrd said on national television, “There are white niggers.” I have not heard any cries of protests from recognizable Black leaders and politicians. (You know who they are.) It was reported that Senator Carol Mosely Braun excused him by saying that he was just “an old man.” An older Black man I knew who hated, with venom, White and Black Republicans also defended Byrd! By the way, Senator Byrd was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, the "Invisible Empire of the South," years ago. He even recruited for the Klan as a “kleagle.” What if Trent Lott was an ex-Klan member and said “white niggers” on national television? We would have shouted “Crucify! Crucify!” right? We would have tarred and feathered him and ran him out of town. Was it because Byrd is a Democrat that we make excuses for him making racial slurs that no Republican could get away. He can get away with being a ex- Klan member while we tell the Republicans to “come clean”? Is not that “selective outrage” dysfunctional if not hypocritical?

Rev. Sharpton said we never got our “40 acres and a mule.” Yes, we did, and they were taken away by a Democrat. Reparations to Black slaves were discussed by Republicans after the Civil War. Political activist and researcher M.D. Currington (websites: mdcurrington.tripod.com/mdc

and moteandbeam.tripod.com

) writes, “On January 12, 1865, General William Tecumseh Sherman and Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton met with twenty Black community leaders in Savannah, Georgia to discuss freedom and reparations for former Black slaves.…on January 16, 1865, General Sherman issued Special Field Order No. 15, which set aside 7,600 square miles in a 30-mile wide tract of land along the Atlantic coast stretching from Charleston, South Carolina to St. John’s River near Jacksonville, Florida, for the exclusive settlement by Blacks…This Field Order also guaranteed former slaves U.S. military protection, 40 acres of tillable land per Black family, other provisions such as a mule or horse in order to work the land, and any other animal that was no longer useful to the military. By June 1865, over 40,000 former slaves were settled on 40-acre tracts of land. Over 400,000 acres were allocated. In September of 1865, Democrat President Andrew Johnson reversed Field Order No. 15, issued special pardons, and returned the land to former slaveowners.” The Republicans gave, yet a Democrat took it away.

I was told that the Republicans of yesterday are the Democrats of today and vice versa. If that is true, where is the evidence that all the “non-racist” civil-rights Republicans in the 1960’s made an exodus from their party and took over the Democratic Party?

Who was the oppressor?

Former radio talk-show host and community activist Rev Wayne Perryman says in his book Unfounded Loyalty: “To praise the Democrats for what they did in the sixties is similar to praising a child who voluntarily cleans up part of his mess after tracking mud throughout the entire house.” He also quotes Black journalist Tony Brown (Tony Brown’s Journal on PBS): “It is out of ignorance of their own history that many Blacks demean the Republican philosophy and condemn Black Republicans. Blacks have been Republicans historically Frederick Douglass and the first twelve Blacks to serve as U.S. Congressman were Republicans. And Congressional White Republicans were the architects of Reconstruction, a ten-year period of unprecedented political power for Black people. Democrats working hand-in-hand with the Ku Klux Klan gave us Jim Crow Laws that effectively reenslaved Blacks. If you know this history, you have to wonder: How did Blacks move from the party that gave them civil and political rights to join forces with a party with a history of racist demagoguery, support of slavery, Jim Crow and lynchings?”

Let’s explore lynchings. Wikipedia says: “Lynching in the United States refers, primarily, to the practice in the 19th and 20th centuries of the humiliation and killing of people by mobs acting outside the law. These murders, most of them unpunished, often took the form of hanging

and burning. To demonstrate a ritual of power, mobs sometimes tortured the victim… between 1880 and 1951 the Tuskegee Institute

recorded lynchings of 3,437 African-American victims, as well as 1,293 white victims. Southern states completed disfranchisement of African Americans about the turn of the century. Their white Democratic representatives comprised such a powerful voting block in Congress that they consistently defeated Federal bills against lynching.” To its credit, the U.S. Senate, not the Democratic National Committee, in 2005 passed a resolution to apologize for failing to pass anti-lynching legislation. All the anti-lynching bills were initiated by Republicans. I did a Google search and what came up was “Your search – ‘Democratic anti-lynching’ - did not match any documents.”

Who is the oppressor?

Why did African Americans switch parties? The previously mentioned Wikipedia Democratic Party article also says: “From the end of the Civil War, African Americans

favored the Republican Party. However, they began drifting to the Democratic Party in the 1930s, as Franklin Roosevelt's

New Deal

programs gave economic relief to all minorities, including African Americans and Hispanics

. Support for the Civil Rights Movement

in the 1960s by Democratic presidents John F. Kennedy

and Lyndon B. Johnson

helped give the Democrats even larger support among the African American community, although their position also alienated the Southern white

population.” Rev Perryman wrote: “Prior to this time from 1866 to 1928, blacks had voted exclusively for the Republican ticket (the oppressor). Frustrated with the economy as well as with the Republican Party, the newspapers used their powerful voice to urge black voters to break tradition and vote Democrat. John Hope Franklin said, ‘The break was neither clean nor complete, however, for there were those who could not be persuaded to support the party that, after all, was the party of the Ku Klux Klan and other bigots”…Hard times were nothing new for the American Negro. They voted Democrat because the Pittsburgh Courier and other powerful black newspapers told their readers the ‘Republicans took their vote for granted.’”

Funny. Back then any Black person who voted Democrat would have been considered an “Uncle Tom” or a “handkerchief-head Negro” as the Democratic Party was “the party of the Ku Klux Klan and other bigots.”

Who did they think was the oppressor?

Rev. Perryman also writes: “Modern-day Democrats must stop preaching that they are the compassionate party of black people and confess that it was their predecessors who started many of the racist practices that we are now trying to eradicate. History clearly shows two things: (1) that the roots of racism grew deep in the hearts and souls of the Democrats and (2) without the past efforts of the Radical Republicans and the Abolitionists, the Civil Rights Legislation of the sixties would not have been possible. Republicans laid the foundation for civil rights by passing legislation and instituting programs that Democrats’ were adamantly opposed to, such as:

1. The Thirteenth Amendment in 1865 to abolish slavery.

2. The Civil Rights Act of 1866 to give Negroes citizenship and protect freedmen from Black Codes and other repressive legislation.

3. The First Reconstruction Act of 1867 to provide more efficient Government of the Rebel- or Democratic-controlled states.

4. The Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 to make all persons born in the United States citizens. Part of this Amendment specifically states “No State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; or deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

5. The Fifteenth Amendment of 1870 to give the right to vote to every citizen.

6. The Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 to stop Klan terrorists to terrorized black voters, Republicans, white teachers who taught blacks, and Abolitionists.

7. The Civil Rights Act of 1875 to protect all citizens in their civil and legal rights and to prohibit racial discrimination in places of public accommodation.

8. Freedmen Bureau was social programs established by Republicans to feed, protect, and educate the former slaves.

9. The 1957 Civil Rights Act and the 1960 Civil Rights Act were signed into law by President Eisenhower who also established the U.S. Civil Rights Commission in 1958, a commission that was rejected by Truman during his administration.

10. The 1964 Civil Rights Act which key Republicans pushed law through while key Southern Democrats like Al Gore Sr. debated against its passage. More Republicans (in percentages) voted for this law than Democrats.”

Ms. Garofalo, the following claim from the Democratic Party website is dubious and merits investigation:

"Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That's why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws, and every law that protects workers. Most recently, Democrats stood together to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act.

"On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight. We support vigorous enforcement of existing laws, and remain committed to protecting fundamental civil rights in America." http://www.democrats.org/a/national/civil_rights/

Is that right or wrong? Are they telling the truth?

Let’s grant that President John F. Kennedy was a force in initiating the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Also let’s say that President Lyndon B. Johnson did his best to get that legislation passed. These were Democratic presidents. There were also Democrats in Congress who supported the legislation such as Senator Hubert Humphrey. I applaud their efforts. However Johnson told Humphrey: "Now you know that bill can't pass unless you get (Senate Minority Leader Republican) Ev(erett) Dirksen.”

To make the claim that the Democrats "led the fight" on "every civil rights issue" contradicts verifiable facts of history. Rev Wayne Perryman stated in his class action lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee:

“To conceal the truth of their racist past (and as part of their effort to deceive the public), the Democratic Party made a conscious decision not to mention or disclose their true and complete history. On their official website they failed to disclose that as a Party:

· Democrats opposed the Abolitionists
· Democrats supported slavery and fought and gave their lives to expand it
· Democrats supported and passed the Fugitive Slave Laws of 1793 & 1854
· Democrats supported and passed the Missouri Compromise to protect slavery
· Democrats supported and passed the Kansas Nebraska Act to expand slavery
· Democrats supported and backed the Dred Scott Decision
· Democrats supported and passed Jim Crow Laws
· Democrats supported and passed Black Codes
· Democrats opposed educating blacks and murdered our teachers
· Democrats opposed the Reconstruction Act of 1867
· Democrats opposed the Freedman’s Bureau as it pertained to blacks
· Democrats opposed the Emancipation Proclamation
· Democrats opposed the 13th , 14th, and 15th Amendments to end slavery, make black citizens and give blacks the right to vote
· Democrats opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1866
· Democrats opposed the Civil Right Act of 1875 and had it overturned by U.S. Supreme Court
· Various Democrats opposed the 1957 Civil Rights Acts
· Various Democrats argued against the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Acts
· Various Democrats argued against the passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Acts
· Various Democrats voted against the 1972 Equal Employment Opportunity Act
· Democrats supported and backed Judge John Ferguson in the case of Plessy v Ferguson
· Democrats supported the School Board of Topeka Kansas in the case of Brown v The Board of Education of Topeka Kansas.
· Southern Democrats opposed desegregation and integration
· Democrats started and supported several terrorist organizations including the Ku Klux Klan, an organization dedicated to use any means possible to terrorize African Americans and those who supported African Americans.”

Who is the oppressor? What did you say about Stockholm Syndrome?

Writer Diane Alden (www.aldenchronicles.com

) says: “The fact that Democrats are quick to take credit for the Civil Rights Act (of 1964) and for the civil rights movement itself is both phony and a self-absorbed vanity.”

She also kills the persistent myth that all the Southern Democrats joined the Republican Party in the 1960's. Alden writes: “(Senator Bob) Kerry also maintained that all the Dixiecrats became Republicans shortly after passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, another big lie. Richard Russell, Mendell Rivers, Clinton's mentor William Fulbright, Robert Byrd, Fritz Hollings and Al Gore Sr. remained Democrats till their dying day.

“Most of the Dixiecrats did not become Republicans. They created the Dixiecrats and then, when the civil rights movement succeeded, they returned to the Democratic fold. It was not till much later, with a new, younger breed of Southerner and the thousands of Northerners moving into the South, that Republicans began to make gains.

“I know. I was there.” http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/12/13/194350.shtml

There is good and bad in both parties. A great example of good is pro-civil rights Democrat Congressman Bob Filner of Chula Vista, California. He a Freedom Rider in the South in the early 1960’s and was even imprisoned for months by racist Democrats. His life was constantly in danger as some other Freedom Riders were murdered. The Republican Party is not completely virtuous too. It has dropped the ball a few times concerning Blacks. However, considering the immutable facts of history, which political party historically has a better civil rights and equality track record for Blacks?

Who is the oppressor?

Based on a correct interpretation of history based on documented facts, does the Democratic Party owe Black America an apology for past support of slavery, Jim Crow, the Ku Klux Klan, and violent acts of racism such as lynching? Since there has never been an offer of apology from the Democratic National Committee and 90% of the African American vote goes to the Democrats, don’t you think the answer should be YES?

A former black lifelong Democratic activist, who actually believed that the Republican Party was the party of slavery and the Democratic Party was always the party of freedom for blacks, M.D Currington has this to say:

“The NAACP and others have been advocating reparations for African Americans - an effort to legislate people pay for the sins of their (fore) parents. Based on the accurate portrayal of history, the Democratic Party (not the U.S. Government) should issue an official apology to African Americans and be responsible for directly paying reparations to African Americans… My conclusion is that if this nation was left to the devices of the Democratic Party, African Americans would not be anywhere near where we are today. As a matter of fact I would argue that we African Americans would not have any constitutional rights, be U.S. citizens or otherwise because we would still be slaves!” (His website is http://moteandbeam.tripod.com

.)

He knows who the oppressor was.

But another important question that African-American voters should ask is what do African Americans owe the Democratic Party? Since the DNC sees fit today to distort and cover-up their true racist history to cause black Americans to feel good about them, who is oppressing whom?

Who should come clean on their oppressive history?

What Were You Black Folks Thinking?

"A black woman quit paying her rent after Obama became president. She said 'We have a new president and things are going to change.' A young black man stole a bag of chips from a store on the night of November 4, 2008, election night. He felt since we had a black president, he did not have to pay. A relative of comedian Kevin Craft said 'F___ white people! Black folks ain't gotta do s___.' A woman in Texas thinks that Obama is going to make black people all 'rich.' I wonder if that woman in Florida is waiting for a check from the White House so that her mortgage gets paid. Look for cobwebs around her as she waits.

"What were these black folks thinking?"

Majority of Allegheny prostitutes are on the Democratic side

No comment.

COUP ON THE US: DEMOCRATS DENY OUR SOLDIERS THE RIGHT TO VOTE, HOMELESS USE PARK BENCH ADDRESSES TO REGISTER TO VOTE

Democrats are completely fair and moral:

"Bush aides and Republican surrogates blasted their Democratic rivals for having overseas absentee ballots disqualified in Florida counties, many for lack of postmarks. Many of those ballots were presumed to have been from service members supporting Bush."

Wisdom from a Blogger

He writes:

IT IS OBVIOUS THAT WHITE DEMS LEFTISTS ARE SO AFRAID OF THE TRUTH THEY WILL DO ANYTHING... SAY ANYTHING TO KEEP BLACKS ON THEIR PLANTATION..

SO THEY USE PERSONAL ATTACKS.. WAKE UP PEOPLE... STOP BEING THIER HOUSE BOYS AND GIRLS...THEY NEVER LOVED YOU, NEVER WILL... THEY NEED YOUR VOTES AND YOUR ANGER..

BUT YOUR ANGER IS AGAINST THE WRONG PEOPLE...MANY BLACKS WHO HAVE FOUND THE TRUTH ARE ANGRY.. YES.. AND THEY ARE BUILDING MOMENTUM..

WHEN THE BLACKS FIND OUT THE TRUTH THAT THE WHITE DEM MEDIA HELD FROM THEM ABOUT OBAMA.. THE ANGER WILL BE SO GREAT... AND THIS WILL BE THE BEGINNING OF THE END OF A PARTY THAT THOMAS JEFFERSON THE MAN WHO STARTED THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, A MAN WHO DID NOT THINK BLACKS WERE EQUAL..

PEOPLE THIS IS THIER ROOTS.. GET IT.. THE ROOTS OF THE DEMS ARE ABOUT YOU ARE NOT EQUAL


THE ROOTS OF THE REPUBLICANS ARE YOU ARE EQUAL.. SO EQUAL THEY FOUGHT A WAR FOR YOUR FREEDOM..

AND WHEN YOU TRUNED YOUR BACKS ON THEM.. GOD TURNED HIS BACK ON YOU... AND IF YOU CAN'T SEE IT.. LET ME SHOW YOU...

EVERY CITY IN AMERICA.. THAT IS BLACK AND DEM RUN.. HAVE THE WORST CRIME RATES AND NEGATIVE SOCIAL STATISTICS IN THE COUNTRY.


WHAT WILL IT TAKE FOR YOU TO WAKE UP AND WALK FROM YOUR ABUSER!!!....

TO STOP CALLING THE TRUTH CRAZY.. AND START CALLING THE LIERS TO ACCOUNT!!

Democrats target your 401(k)

"The Miller/McDermott plan creates a new government-guaranteed retirement plan to begin the scam all over again."

Danger Man

“The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see. I think we see entities that are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disastrous scenarios. And even if there were a problem, the Federal Government doesn’t bail them out. But the more pressure there is there, then the less I think we see in terms of affordable housing.”

The Honorable Barney Frank (D-MA), September 2003

This man has incredible judgement.

(Incredible meaning no credibility.)

Republican HQ Manager's Home Shot Up Over McCain Signs

A preview of coming events?:

"Coverely said it appears Democrats are becoming more aggressive in the county."

Unpopular Congress: Obama's a member, too

"Democrat presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama is a member of that dismally unpopular body, a Congress:

1. Whose Democrat members are directly responsible for the sub-prime mortgage crisis, having promoted "affirmative action" loans through incarnations of the Community Reinvestment Act, and who with arrogance and cavalier comportment endeavors to deflect the blame for this, and
   
   
2. Which politicized the Iraq campaign in the War on Terror and executed the dangerous ploy of attempting to compromise the conflict and the safety of our military personnel through disinformation, tactics of demoralization and the de-funding of our troops."

We have been in Afghanistan even before Iraq. Why don't Democrats complain about that?

Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?

"The goal of this rule change was to help the poor — which especially would help members of minority groups. But how does it help these people to give them a loan that they can't repay? They get into a house, yes, but when they can't make the payments, they lose the house — along with their credit rating.

"They end up worse off than before."

and

"These are facts. This financial crisis was completely preventable. The party that blocked any attempt to prevent it was ... the Democratic Party. The party that tried to prevent it was ... the Republican Party.

"Yet when Nancy Pelosi accused the Bush administration and Republican deregulation of causing the crisis, you in the press did not hold her to account for her lie. Instead, you criticized Republicans who took offense at this lie and refused to vote for the bailout!

"What? It's not the liar, but the victims of the lie who are to blame?"

and

"If you who produce our local daily paper actually had any principles, you would be pounding this story, because the prosperity of all Americans was put at risk by the foolish, short-sighted, politically selfish, and possibly corrupt actions of leading Democrats, including Obama.

"If you who produce our local daily paper had any personal honor, you would find it unbearable to let the American people believe that somehow Republicans were to blame for this crisis."

For Conservatives, Obama's Changes Would Be Permanent and Devastating

"Of course the Democrats will push such changes, knowing that they can thereby claim sole 'credit' for welcoming millions of new citizens to the voting roles, and with the expectation that such freshly minted Americans will vote Democratic for the rest of their lives. The Democrats will also cut back immediately on the workplace immigration raids and enhanced border security that has enabled the Bush administration to sharply cut back on illegal entries in the last year --- Obama has specifically condemned these efforts and might even halt or slow ongoing work on the border fence.

"In any event, we’ve been down this road before: the Republicans claimed credit for the restrictive Immigration Act of 1924, all but eliminating the flow of humanity from Eastern and Southern Europe, and as a result vast numbers of ethnic voters (Italians, Poles, Jews, Greeks and more) became loyal Democrats for a generation or more.

"This shift in immigrant voters played a huge role in the establishment of the New Deal Coalition that won five Presidential elections in a row (1932 through 1948) and totally dominated Congress for an appalling fifty years (1930-1980)."

and

"That’s the biggest threat of an Obama presidency: the creation of vast new groups of dependent Americans who will comprise an unassailable new coalition that will enjoy iron control of our politics for a generation or more. If you start with newly legalized immigrant voters (with as many as 10 million new Democrats totally beholden to Obama and company) and then add the beneficiaries of government pre-school, the new nursery school teachers, the recipients and administrators of federal health insurance, federal college grants, the businesses who’ll enjoy the $150 billion in promised subsidies for 'alternative energy,' the companies and employees of the vast increases in “infra-structure” spending (lots more bridges to nowhere), the non-tax payers who will suddenly receive a $1,000 per household check (under the guise of “refundable tax credit,” and many, many more.

"In his first years in office, a President Obama could easily succeed in buying so many interest groups and constituencies with expensive new governmental favors, that conservative dreams of rebuilding a small government majority will go absolutely nowhere."

A Democratic controlled Washington will rule by fear

"Some people want to argue with me that Barack Obama will end the wars in the Middle East. I don’t see that happening when the Democrats in Congress are so eager to expand funding and have not made a peep about reducing the US force commitment over seas. The Democratic Congress quietly passed a $615 billion defense spending bill during the $700 billion bailout package last month and not a word from the so called liberal press."

$615 billion? Not a dime to homeowners in trouble? Hmmm....

Exploding The Myths of “Predatory Lending”

How can I be greedy if I loan to people who I know may not be able to pay back the loan?

If I were greedy I would look for people I could soak with lots of money.