This is why Right Wingers Love Candace Owens

[IM2]

Black women have to be strong. Who else is going to raise her kids in a fatherless home?

The only problem with that is they don't. The men are either there or the woman has a boyfriend. And there are such things as black STEPFATHERS.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Black women

There are plenty of mom’s in the lowest income / poverty group that raise kids in fatherless homes. It’s not about race. It’s about poverty and income inequality. If you were not so deeply racist you would not refer to the issue in racist speak.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

We left the party because the party never wanted us

"We"?? What year did you leave the Republican Party?

 

[IM2]

"We"?? What year did you leave the Republican Party?

We left in 1964. Don't even try it.

 

[JoeB131]

Candace Owens, Stacy Dash, and myself have a solid conservative mindset.

Blacks did not leave the Republican Party they got threatened and tricked by the KKK to vote democrat because the wicked KKK could not get elected into office without threats to murder blacks who did not vote democrat for them. They were basically threatened with a gun to the head to vote democrat, or get a house burned down, or bury a relative. Today they are still on the democrat plantation-still lost- still blind, and add to that they are now in favor of killing unborn babies which is consistent with the KKK murderous torturous ideology.

Dude, you need to turn off the hate radio.

So here's what actually happened. The GOP did do black people a solid by ending slavery and passing the Reconstruction Amendments. Then, they kind of lost interest after the 1876 election, where Hayes let the South do whatever it wanted in exchange for letting him be president. In the years before the New Deal, Democrats only held the WH for 16 of those 72 years since Lincoln was elected. Very little progress was made on Civil Rights at all in that time, but Blacks still voted Republican, at least until Hoover tanked the economy.

But even after FDR added black people and northern whites to the Democratic coalition, about 35% of black folks still voted Republican. What drove them off the reservation was when Barry Goldwater opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. After that, Blacks voted 90% Democratic, and Southern Whites defected to the GOP.

If you want to see what your problem with blacks are in the GOP, look at how many of your fellow conservative posters use John Wilkes Booth as an avatar.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Bullshit. The Great Society didn't destroy anything. And Lincoln was a racist also. Johnsn sgned our second emancipation proclamation. I don't give a damn if he didn't like blacks, I never knew his ass. But had Johnsomn implemented the suggested actions written in the Kerner Report, we'd have little to no problems today, unless there would have been a white backlash.

/----/ I believe this "Black activist." You can read for yourself, and there are plenty more search results, but I know you won't.

08 JAN 2014 LBJ’S “WAR ON POVERTY” HURT BLACK AMERICANS​

​

PRESS RELEASE
Posted at 11:47h in Project 21, Project 21 Press Releases by The National Center

Five Decades After: Black Progress Hurt by Expansion in Government, Welfare


Black Activists Criticize Handout Mentality that Destroyed Traditional Families

Washington, D.C. – Fifty years ago today, before a joint session of Congress, President Lyndon Baines Johnson announced an “unconditional war on poverty in America.” Today, black activists with the Project 21 leadership network are critical of how that war has been waged. They note the expansion of government and a strategy focused on handouts that discourage self-improvement caused more harm than help to the poor.

“Five decades after President Johnson initiated the ‘war’ on poverty, America remains at around the same percentage of people still living in poverty as it did back then. In 1964, the poverty rate was approximately 19 percent. Today, it’s around 15 percent,” said Project 21 spokesman Derryck Green. “Statistics such as these demonstrate the War on Poverty was a continually-mismanaged disaster. That isn’t to say there haven’t been people helped by it. All things considered, however, it’s been a tragedy.”

LBJ's "War on Poverty" Hurt Black Americans

Five Decades After: Black Progress Hurt by Expansion in Government, Welfare Black Activists Criticize Handout Mentality that Destroyed Traditional Families Washington, D.C. - Fifty years ago today, before a joint session of Congress, President Lyndon Baines Johnson announced an "unconditional war

nationalcenter.org

More sources:

1. https://www.wsj.com › articles › entitlements-welfare-public-housing-great-society-black-family-father-crime-reconciliation-11632257747
   

   The Destructive Legacy of the Great Society - WSJ​

   Black labor-force participation rates fell, black unemployment rates rose, and the black nuclear family disintegrated. In 1960 fewer than 25% of black children were being raised by a single mother ...
2. 1. https://hc.edu › news-and-events › 2017 › 02 › 28 › great-society-wrought-fifty-years-later-marriage-family-poverty
      

      What has the Great Society Wrought Fifty Years Later? Marriage, Family ...​

      We are living through the collapse of the traditional family and marriage as the norm and expectation for millions of Americans, especially in low-income communities. Writer Myron Magnet observed that the 'dream' of the Great Society has in reality become a 'nightmare' for the very people the Great Society was designed to help.
   2. https://www.nytimes.com › 1983 › 11 › 20 › us › breakup-of-black-family-imperils-gains-of-decades.html
      

      Breakup of Black Family Imperils Gains of Decades​

      Nov 20, 1983According to the Census Bureau, the median earnings of working black women last year were actually slightly higher than those of working white women, $7,802 as against $7,640. But the average ...
   3. https://newsroom.ucla.edu › stories › q-a-reclaiming-the-history-of-the-black-family
      

      UCLA's Brenda Stevenson on reclaiming the history of the Black family​

      Apr 14, 2023The family unit has meant the survival of Black people, even under the harshest of societal and personal conditions. The contributions that Black people have made to the nation — as captives, workers, thinkers, inventors and artists — have all been possible because of the Black family. Enslavement did not destroy the Black family.
   4. https://www.npr.org › sections › codeswitch › 2013 › 06 › 13 › 190982608 › moynihan-black-poverty-report-revisited-fifty-years-later
      

      Moynihan Black Poverty Report Revisited 50 Years Later​

      Jun 13, 2013He had conducted a study on poverty among blacks. Bettmann/Corbis. On Wednesday, the Urban Institute released a new report that revisits a famous study conducted almost 50 years ago by the late ...
   5. https://www.wilsoncenter.org › sites › default › files › media › documents › publication › ACF24D.pdf
      

      PDF community. In 1965, Daniel Patrick Moynihan's The Negro Family: A Case ...​

      Past or present historical advisor to numerous museums in the United States and abroad; member, White House Millennium Council, Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Commission. Historical consultant, PBS, ABC, the Discovery Channels, then disappeared for a while, with the Moynihan thesis in full retreat.
   6. https://www.theatlantic.com › politics › archive › 2015 › 09 › the-moynihan-report-an-annotated-edition › 404632
      

      The Moynihan Report: An Annotated Edition - The Atlantic​

      Since the widespread family disorganization among Negroes has resulted from the failure of the father to play the role in family life required by American society, the mitigation of this problem ...
   7. https://www.vox.com › policy-and-politics › 2016 › 12 › 29 › 14112084 › war-on-poverty-brooklyn-great-society
      

      Why the war on poverty failed — and what to do now - Vox​

      The Great Society efforts yielded certain improvements, to be sure. Medicare, Medicaid, Head Start, and food stamps have improved the quality of life of the black poor. Yet today, Bed-Stuy's ...
      
      
   
   

 

[Cellblock2429]

We left in 1964. Don't even try it.

/----/ So, you appreciate it when White Liberal democRATs talk down to you as if you're a child who needs protection? WOWZA.

White liberals present themselves as less competent when addressing minorities, while conservatives use the same vocabulary no matter what the race of their audience, according to a newly released study.

Yale and Princeton researchers found that both white Democratic presidential candidates and self-identified liberals played down their competence when speaking to minorities, using fewer words that conveyed accomplishment and more words that expressed warmth.

On the other hand, there were no significant differences in how white conservatives, including Republican presidential candidates, spoke to white versus minority audiences.

“White liberals self-present less competence to minorities than to other Whitesthat is, they patronize minorities stereotyped as lower status and less competent,” according to the study’s abstract.

Cydney Dupree, Yale School of Management assistant professor of organizational behavior, said she was surprised by the findings of the study, which sought to discover how “well-intentioned whites” interact with minorities.

“It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect,” Ms. Dupree said. “Even if it’s ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing.”

White liberals 'patronize' minorities by downplaying competence -- conservatives don't: Study

White liberals present themselves as less competent when addressing minorities, while conservatives use the same vocabulary no matter what the race of their audience, according to a newly released study.

apnews.com

 

[Burgermeister]

Libs don't like to be told the truth.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

/----/ So, you appreciate it when White Liberal democRATs talk down to you as if you're a child who needs protection? WOWZA.

White liberals present themselves as less competent when addressing minorities, while conservatives use the same vocabulary no matter what the race of their audience, according to a newly released study.

Yale and Princeton researchers found that both white Democratic presidential candidates and self-identified liberals played down their competence when speaking to minorities, using fewer words that conveyed accomplishment and more words that expressed warmth.

On the other hand, there were no significant differences in how white conservatives, including Republican presidential candidates, spoke to white versus minority audiences.

“White liberals self-present less competence to minorities than to other Whitesthat is, they patronize minorities stereotyped as lower status and less competent,” according to the study’s abstract.

Cydney Dupree, Yale School of Management assistant professor of organizational behavior, said she was surprised by the findings of the study, which sought to discover how “well-intentioned whites” interact with minorities.

“It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect,” Ms. Dupree said. “Even if it’s ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing.”

White liberals 'patronize' minorities by downplaying competence -- conservatives don't: Study

White liberals present themselves as less competent when addressing minorities, while conservatives use the same vocabulary no matter what the race of their audience, according to a newly released study.

apnews.com

White grievance runs deep

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Libs don't like to be told the truth.

What “truth“ is that?

 

[22lcidw]

What “truth“ is that?

Kill each other and destroy your inner city neighborhoods.

 

[Cellblock2429]

What “truth“ is that?

/---/ Try following a thread for once. Post #142. How white liberal democRATs treat Blacks as incompetent.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

/---/ Try following a thread for once. Post #142. How white liberal democRATs treat Blacks as incompetent.

That is not truth. That is what opinion. There is a difference you know.

 

[Cellblock2429]

That is not truth. That is what opinion. There is a difference you know.

/----/ Well, anything can be labeled as an opinion, including your posts. I provided plenty of expert OPINIONS supporting my own experiences. You provided nothing more than your OPINION.

 

[Lesh]

Good OP IM2!

 

[AyeCantSeeYou]

THREAD REOPENED AND CLEANED
The author of the material used in the opening post gave permission for IM2 to use it. I was provided that proof and it will not be shown to anyone on this forum because it contains personal identifying information. If any of you have a problem with that, PM me or go talk to a door knob.

STAY ON TOPIC!
The topic is about Candace Owens, not one of the other dozens of thread derails that have popped up in this thread.

 

[IM2]

/----/ So, you appreciate it when White Liberal democRATs talk down to you as if you're a child who needs protection? WOWZA.

White liberals present themselves as less competent when addressing minorities, while conservatives use the same vocabulary no matter what the race of their audience, according to a newly released study.

Yale and Princeton researchers found that both white Democratic presidential candidates and self-identified liberals played down their competence when speaking to minorities, using fewer words that conveyed accomplishment and more words that expressed warmth.

On the other hand, there were no significant differences in how white conservatives, including Republican presidential candidates, spoke to white versus minority audiences.

“White liberals self-present less competence to minorities than to other Whitesthat is, they patronize minorities stereotyped as lower status and less competent,” according to the study’s abstract.

Cydney Dupree, Yale School of Management assistant professor of organizational behavior, said she was surprised by the findings of the study, which sought to discover how “well-intentioned whites” interact with minorities.

“It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect,” Ms. Dupree said. “Even if it’s ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing.”

White liberals 'patronize' minorities by downplaying competence -- conservatives don't: Study

White liberals present themselves as less competent when addressing minorities, while conservatives use the same vocabulary no matter what the race of their audience, according to a newly released study.

apnews.com

The only people talking down to me here and in other similar forums are white conservatives.

 

[IM2]

/----/ Well, anything can be labeled as an opinion, including your posts. I provided plenty of expert OPINIONS supporting my own experiences. You provided nothing more than your OPINION.

The Great Society programs did nothing to black families. I was a kid who grew up in the beginning of that so called program and the white backlash to any type of black progress has been the problem. Welfare started during the New Deal and blacks were excluded until 1965. From 1935 until 1965 we didn't see any claims of how welfare destroyed white families. So you're repeating another ignorant racist meme that is not factually true.

And this is the problem wIth the existence of blacks like Owens. She repeats this bullshit because she doesn't research the facts and is only doing it for the check. She is a grifter of the worst kind and she is the very race hustler you guys claim to abhor.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Cydney Dupree, Yale School of Management assistant professor of organizational behavior

“On the other hand, there were no significant differences in how white conservatives, including Republican presidential candidates, spoke to white versus minority audiences”​

​

The referenced study does not indicate what type and sizes of black audiences were being addressed.

It seems to me that black audiences would be very different in size, profession and age group, etc. that listen to conservative or liberal speakers.

I don’t see what control the researchers used to make the determination that white conservatives speak the same to white and black audiences while white liberals speak down to black audiences and up to white audiences.

 

[Cellblock2429]

“On the other hand, there were no significant differences in how white conservatives, including Republican presidential candidates, spoke to white versus minority audiences”​

​

The referenced study does not indicate what type and sizes of black audiences were being addressed.

It seems to me that black audiences would be very different in size and age group, etc. that listen to conservative or liberal speakers.

I don’t see what control the researchers used to make the determination that white conservatives speak the same to white and black audiences while white liberals speak down to black audiences and up to white audiences.

/——/ because no conservative ever addressed Blacks with

"I don't feel no ways tired"​