U Not Gonna Like This

By Sean Turner



August 11, 2003




Orginally Posted at:

http://www.gopusa.com/seanturner/st_0811p.shtml


For years, the Democratic Party has portrayed itself as the friend of blacks and other racial minorities in America. Its leaders and supporters have proven adept at the art of historical slight of hand, as they have convinced the vast majority of blacks with overwhelming success that they are civil rights champions. However, the "Information Age" has ushered in a new era of awareness for those who seek it, as the ubiquity of the Internet has delivered volumes of historical data right to one's fingertips. With this awareness, comes a new view on the Democratic Party's true relationship to America's black population.




To date, only four blacks have ever served in the United States Senate. The first two, Senators Hiram Revels and Blanche K. Bruce, were elected in Mississippi to the U.S. Senate in the 1870's, and both were Republican. The third was Senator Edward Brooke of Massachusetts, also a Republican, who served two full terms from 1967 to 1979. Lastly, in 1992, Senator Carol Moseley-Braun, the only Democrat, was elected to represent Illinois, and became the first black woman to serve in this capacity. Additionally, in 1870, Joseph Hayne Rainey, a Republican from South Carolina, was the first black to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives.




Prior to the election of FDR in 1932, blacks primarily voted Republican by the margins in which they vote for Democrats today. However, FDR's "New Deal" programs, which turned out to be a raw deal particularly for blacks, inveigled the black electorate into a Democratic voting trend that has yet to cease. As part of the "New Deal", the Agricultural Adjustment Act was established which reduced crop production, and forced many blacks out of farming. The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) / Wagner Act was established, granting the right of existence to labor unions, who often excluded blacks. The "New Deal" also established the national minimum wage, which has directly contributed to the 36% unemployment rate among black teens in America. As late as 1954, the unemployment rate for black teen-age males ages 16 and 17 was still below that of their white counterparts: 13.4% vs. 14%. Beginning in 1956, when the minimum wage was raised from 75 cents to $1, unemployment rates for the two groups began to diverge. By 1960, the unemployment rate for black teen-age males rose to just under 23%, while the white rate remained below 15%. By 1981, the unemployment rate for black teen-age males averaged 40.7%, four times its early 1950s level, when the minimum wage was much lower with less extensive coverage.




The issue of civil rights proved extremely contentious and divisive for the Democratic Party, when in 1948, a group of Southern Democrats who opposed integration and wanted to retain Jim Crow laws and racial segregation broke from the party to form the Dixiecrat Party. In 1964, it took the leadership of Republican Minority Leader Everett Dirksen to break the Democratic filibuster of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill led by current Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, and then Senator Al Gore Sr. of Tennessee. In the Senate, only six Republicans voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, vis-a-vis twenty-one Democrats in opposition. In the House, 40% of the Democrats opposed the Civil Rights Act, while only 20% of Republicans opposed it.




Today, nine Democrats have undertaken an effort to win the votes of the American electorate, in the hopes of becoming the next leader of this great nation. All support raising the national minimum wage, despite its insidious history toward black teens and small businesses. Most oppose affording poor families the choice to remove their children from failing schools, which disproportionately affect black and Latino children particularly in urban areas. Some have even opposed welfare reform in 1996, which has succeeded in helping scores of recipients re-enter the labor force and off of government (taxpayer) assistance.



Though the Republican Party is not devoid of improvident policy and legislation, what the Democratic Party offers in the "Notorious 9" presidential candidates is an all-out sprint toward complete socialism, where blacks will bear the brunt of the destruction. Still, the so-called "civil rights establishment" remain ardent supporters of candidates like Dick Gephardt, who according to Newsmax.com, spoke before a prominent St. Louis white-rights organization during his first run for Congress and attended two of the group's picnics after his election.



Belafonte's recent infantile comparison of Secretary of State Colin Powell to a house slave, and other ominous comments by NAACP Chairman Julian Bond, reveal an utter contempt for history and the truth by two bitter relics of a dark era in America's history. They also reveal a tenuous relationship between the Democratic Party and blacks, built on a web of duplicity decades in the making. The time has long expired for this web to be dismantled, the facts to be revealed, and the Democratic spell cast over blacks in America to be broken -- never to return.

By Linda Chavez


January 29, 2003



Orginally posted at:



http:/gopusa.com/lindachavez/lc_0129.shtml



Despite preferring to play with boys rather than girls when I was growing up in the 1950s, I was never one for sports. I sometimes agreed to play baseball with the boys, but only if they let me take as many tries at bat as it took to finally hit the ball. By the time I was in high school, I had perfected a long list of mysterious ailments and physical limitations to keep me from having to play basketball, volleyball or any other tortuous game our male gym teacher devised for the one-hour-a-week session of physical education required at my Catholic school.



Although my distaste for sports was more common among girls of my generation, I suspect that many girls feel the same way today, some 30 years after passage of Title IX, the landmark law that guaranteed nondiscrimination in all education programs, including sports.



Title IX has been a wonderful vehicle to expand opportunity for girls who chose to play sports in schools and colleges over the last three decades. Unfortunately, some feminist extremists have tried to hijack the law in recent years to limit choices for both girls and boys to participate in school-sponsored sports teams.



The purpose of Title IX was to ensure that girls have equal opportunity to engage in school sports activities if they chose, not to guarantee that every school produces as many female athletes as male. While female interest in athletics has increased dramatically since Title IX was enacted, many schools still find it difficult to get as many girls as boys to join sports teams. The problem is especially acute at the college level -- and that drives some feminists mad.



If more boys than girls sign up for college sports, feminists cry foul. Even if schools expand the number and types of sports offered to encourage more female participation -- and no female who has an interest in playing a particular sport has been denied opportunity to do so -- these gender-equity radicals claim the schools are discriminating. The feminists' solution has been to limit boys' participation so that it matches the girls', which is why many schools have cut out some sports altogether, such as wrestling and football.



It's not the schools' fault. They are in a real bind. If the federal Office for Civil Rights (OCR) finds that schools do not provide athletic financial assistance that is "substantially proportionate" to male and female athletes, the school jeopardizes its federal funding, since the law allows the government to deny money to schools that discriminate. For several years, OCR has applied a three-prong test to determine if schools were complying with the "substantially proportionate" rule -- which language, by the way, isn't in the law itself.




OCR's three prongs allow schools to demonstrate compliance if they can show the number of female athletes are proportional to the number of women who attend the school; they can demonstrate a history and continuing practice of expanding women's athletic programs; or if their current programs fully accommodate the interests and abilities of women.




In practice, however, especially during the Clinton years, OCR has relied almost exclusively on the first prong, which amounts to insisting on quotas for female athletes. If a school's enrollment is 55 percent female (the national average), then 55 percent of its athletes have to be female. Too bad if a higher proportion of male college students are interested in playing sports than females. The feminists who have dominated Title IX programs and enforcement in recent years don't believe girls should have a choice in the matter -- or more accurately, if girls choose not to play, then neither can the boys.



This week, an independent commission appointed by the Secretary of Education recommended that OCR should change its methods of interpreting compliance with Title IX to allow schools more flexibility. The commission -- made up of leading female and male athletic directors, prominent female athletes, professors and representatives of three women's advocacy groups -- sensibly considered whether schools should be allowed to survey students to determine the relative interest male and female students express in playing sports.




It's time now for the feminist ideologues to prove they're pro-choice when it comes to athletics.

This from The Rogue Jew:

Cannot Understand Normal Thinking! As offensive as this might sound, take the first letter from each of the words on the title of this post and that is who we have as the NEW Majority Leader in the Congress. The Howling Moonbat from San Fran Freako Nancy Pelosi will now be able to Destroy America with the help of her friends.

The Baloney Smoking, Baby Killing, Butt Slamming MINORITY of America now has its leader in Washington and she takes her marching orders from the Gay Mafia.

Hang on to your wallets and your children America, Nancy Pelosi & Co. want them both.

If anything, yesterday was NOT a Mandate for the Democrats, it was a message to the Republicans that they had better go back to their Conservative ways of Less Government, Tougher Immigration Laws, and Fiscal Control. Unfortunately now that the Democrats are in control of America’s Purse Strings, the Economic Recovery that we’ve experienced since the Recession started by the Clinton Presidency will be but a memory.

Higher Taxes because of Democrats refusal to renew President Bush’s Tax cuts and the raising of the Minimum Wage that Democrats have long desired to accomplish will put more people out of jobs and send more businesses out of the country.

This from Rush on A Roll:


Just to reiterate, ladies and gentlemen: "It's going to get worse before it gets better." I'm not trying to be negative. I'm trying to prepare you here for what is coming. It is obvious from the president's press conference that his view is: "The Democrats won the election yesterday, and that means they get some of what they want, if not a lot of what they want, if not all of what they want." Specifically, here's what you can look for: You can look for there to be a minimum wage bill. The president was passionate about one thing in this press conference. He came alive when he was asked a question about: What does this mean for your immigration policy? "Yes, I think we have a better chance of getting immigration reform now with a Democrat-controlled Congress."

I told you this before the election. I told you, "The reason we don't have amnesty and a guest worker program is because of the Republicans in the House." Now with Democrats running the place you're going to get it and the president's excited about it. We're going to get a guest worker program. We're going to get amnesty. It's going to be called "immigration reform," and you're going to get a minimum wage increase. The president's going to talk to these people about entitlements -- and when you sit down with Democrats to talk about entitlements, you're not talking about getting rid of them. You're talking about "reforming" them, maybe, or perhaps even new ones.

This from the World According To Bob:

Better learn to speak Mexican
The left wingnut media is all smiles today. Their 4-year anti-Republican campaign of constant editorials and misinformation has paid off with a Democratic victory in mid-term elections. "How does this affect the failed Bush policy in Iraq," is not a question, it’s an editorial. It was spoken by the CBS news cunt the day after the election. For the past 4 years the major TV media and most of the print media have been feeding the public a steady diet of aggressive partisan editorializing instead of reporting the news. Even the FOX network talking heads often speak with the same leftist editorial bias instead of honest reporting.

The US House of Representatives will be ruled by San Francisco lesbian feminazi Congresscunt Nancy Pelosi who never met a left wingnut policy she didn't support. Better learn to speak Mexican because Pelosi advocates wide open borders with total amnesty, tax paid benefits, and voting rights for all illegal Mexicans who will now flood our states in ever increasing numbers. Better kiss your family goodbye because Pelosi advocates abandoning marriage, sending fathers to prison, and making two lesbians and a sick child the definition of a decent home. Better forget your constitutional rights, if you are a MAN, because Pelosi supports abrogation of the 2nd Amendment and relegation of MEN to prison or indentured servitude, slavery. If you are a man, not a faggot, better learn to turn around and bend over.

Bob notes that Google only finds about 96 uses of "congresscunt" on the Internet. Notable users of the term "congresscunt" includes the Drudge Report and The World According to Bob. With Pelosi running the Congress you can expect that number to increase significantly over the next 2 years.

Its going to get worse before it gets better. Bob expects it to get so bad that it will eventually collapse from its own weight. Bankruptcy of the US government and currency could happen, probably will happen, and probably lots sooner than most people believe possible. When the financial and precipitated political collapse comes it will be a lot quicker, a lot harder and a lot more violent than most will have imagined. Better learn to speak Mexican. The lesbian feminazi cunts are running the Congress.

and this from "The Other Side of Kim"

Just so we’re all clear on the concept, what future Speaker Pelosi is promising is not a “new” direction: it’s the same old tired neo-Bolshevik direction they’ve always envisioned for this country. Only this time, instead of having a rock-hard Reagan to oppose them, we’ve got the likes of Specter, McCain, and Bush, all looking for ways to compromise.

The White House sent the strong signal this morning that Bush intends to offer a conciliatory message, indicating he will express the desire to work closely with Democrats during the next two years on Iraq and domestic issues such as education and energy.

Yippee. Stronger teachers’ unions and unworkable energy “alternatives” like wind farms (except in Ted Kennedy’s little fiefdom of Martha’s Vineyard, of course).

Say hello to: House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, and Appropriations Committee Chairman Henry Waxman. I’d like to list the other new chairmen, but I don’t have the stomach for it.

Here’s what else we can look forward to:

A Democrat-controlled House removes the major obstacle to a broad immigration bill that includes a path to citizenship for illegal aliens. House Republicans had blocked action on such a proposal, calling it amnesty, but House Democrats can now team with a bipartisan majority in the Senate and with a willing president to pass a bill.

Translation: Zero enforcement, and an amnesty to illegals. Think Waxman’s going to provide funding for the wall? Start brushing up your Spanish.

Democrats will for the first time be positioned to challenge Bush’s conduct of the war while promoting their own idea of a phased withdrawal of 140,000 U.S. troops from Iraq.

Translation: We’re outta there. Good luck, Iraqis; it was fun while it lasted.

“We extend our hand of friendship, fellowship and partnership to the Republicans,” Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid told a victory rally last night. “The only way we can accomplish anything in the Congress is by working in a partisan basis.”

Translation: Give us what we want, or else.

Democrats’ wins in the House, giving them control for the first time since 1995, will alter the agenda on several thorny issues, including key gun legislation such as the assault weapons ban, which lapsed under Republican control but could come back under Democratic control.

Translation: Thought this was a settled issue, did you? Better scoop up those AK-47s while you can, you knuckle-dragging rightwing troglodytes: Sheriff Schumer’s coming to town.

Feminist about to put the last touches on the slow motion cultural coup d'état they started back in the late 1960s:

Evangelical feminism a new path to liberalism, book says
Nov 1, 2006
By Erin Roach

\NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)--Evangelical feminism, a movement that disregards unique leadership roles for men in marriage and in the church, is now one of the greatest threats to the survival of true evangelical Christianity, Wayne Grudem writes in a new book, “Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism?”

Grudem, author of numerous books and co-founder and former president of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, is research professor of Bible and theology at Phoenix Seminary in Arizona. In his new book, he discusses 25 patterns of argument employed by evangelical feminists and shows how each one dismisses the authority of Scripture.

“A work like Evangelical Feminism has been desperately needed, and Grudem’s new book arrives just in time,” R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, wrote in an
Oct. 23 commentary on albertmohler.com. “A new generation of younger evangelicals is facing the challenge of evangelical feminism just as the current and the larger culture are moving even more against biblical authority.”

Mohler says Grudem’s goal is to demonstrate that the methods of interpreting the Bible necessary to justify the ordination of women to the pastorate undermine biblical authority and “open the door for a complete reshaping of Christianity.”

One of the most important sections of the book, Mohler noted, is the examination of “trajectory hermeneutics” now gaining popularity among some evangelicals. People who subscribe to such interpretations argue that the church should not limit itself to a first-century understanding of the Bible concerning gender issues but must consider Scripture from a modern-day standpoint.

“This means that the teachings of the New Testament are no longer our final authority,” Grudem writes. “Our authority now becomes our own ideas of the direction the New Testament was heading but never quite reached.”

Mohler raises the question, “If the New Testament is to be superseded by a later reality based in a more modern understanding, how can the church justify relativizing some texts without relativizing others?”

Grudem argues that the hermeneutic, or method of interpreting Scripture, used to advocate evangelical feminism leads to the normalization of homosexuality as well. And the approval of homosexuality, Grudem writes, “is the final step along the path to liberalism.”

Mohler described Evangelical Feminism as “truly a tract for the times -- a manifesto that should serve to awaken complacent evangelicals to the true nature of the egalitarian challenge. Furthermore, the book provides an arsenal of arguments to use in revealing the crucial weaknesses of the egalitarian proposal.

Japan in the throes of baby scarcity
By nevosopelo at 02/11/2006 - 17:56
I was watching the news last night on the telly and I was aghast to see eldearly japanese people who are buying small baby dolls to use them as Grandsons and Granddaugthers. The japanese people are now growing older faster than anywhere else in the world. The birth rate is now so low that toy companies are producing toy babies for the Grans, who are without Grandsons and Granddaugthers, to care for them as if they were alive babys.

It seems that the millionaires club of countries of the world are following suit to this trend, as countries like Italy shows negative growth.

I do not know what the underlying causes are, but I think that wealth and success has distorted the natural proccess of procreation to the point to which people do not have a wish of enjoying family life.

A very selfish style of life.
NEVO


by Major Tom on Thu, 11/02/2006 - 19:14
That is very sad to read about.

I suppose when the generation of elderly japanese people were kids their grandparents were an involved part of their lives. They probably also thought that when they were their grandparents age that they would have grandchildren too.

Alternatively, they could always pull a Madonna and steal a black baby.

by Timocrat on Sat, 11/04/2006 - 02:21

Just last year deaths out numbered births in Japan. Only because Japan isn't keen on immigration does it show what is still worse in countires- like Italy.

In 5O years most of western Europe will have more Muslims than others and will be rearranged accordingly. Japan may have to encourage its birth rate in their over crowded island. European with its hyper-rationalizing deconstrictionist leadership will be gone for sure, though I'm not sure what will be the new order.

When women want to have it all, and think having children is stupid, societies fall. Japan is in much less difficulty than your own European countries, but I guess it is more interesting to look at the neighbours when you see things that tug at the heart strings. Women are always fond of dolls. Please look in your own house, and not avoid the tough choices coming to your states and own characters.

by Tyrael on Sat, 11/04/2006 - 02:42

Italy has very poor birth-rates and not many citizens compared to capacity and total population density.

I think Russia (Russian Federation) has the poorest birth-rates in all of Europe.



by Tyrael on Sat, 11/04/2006 - 02:52

I checked and according to CIA statistics Russia doesn't have the lowest birth-rates in Europe, but it's below the European Union average in 2006.

Germany is the European country with the lowest birth-rate in 2006.

by Mamonaku on Sun, 11/05/2006 - 14:14

Good day!

Nice to meet you all.

While I live in the USA full time, I am a registered citizen on Kyoto Japan, as my wife is a japanese national living in Japan.

According to my male friends on the street, the last thing they are thinking about is making babies. Japanese men simply work too many hours (about 10-12 hours a day, six days a week) to think about doing the nasty.

Sex between Japanese couples is among the least frequent in the world.

Also, many guys are not interested in marriage simply because Japanese women are becoming "Americanized", and feministic.

Jitsuroku Oniyome Nikki (Factual Demon Wife Diary) is a wildly popular drama that portrays a husband being abused by his wife.

http://wiki.d-addicts.com/Jitsuroku_Oniyome_Nikki

While the media likes to spin the story that women are rejecting marriage en mass, while true in some respects, isn't what's really going down.

Men are simply writing off love relationships, marriage, and women in general.