Why Republicans think the Democratic Party is the "Plantation" party

[Darkwind]

Remember when the GOPbaggers booed that gay US Army soldier during the RNC? That's just wholesome American family values. Jeer the gay soldier who is man enough to fight for your freedom to hate gay people.

Actually, no...No recollection of that at all.
Care to post a link?

Its not like they had a party for the death of a rival party member.....Oh, wait...they did...

 

[Barb]

.

What has been done to blacks and black families over the last two generations in the name of "caring" is nothing short of a tragedy. Telling children from Day One that someone is out to get them and that they need someone else to somehow make like "fair" for them; lowered standards, the soft bigotry of reduced expectations; further isolation due to identity politics.

Two generations now. Horrible.

.

You're confusing causations.

Similar to the ways poverty and antipoverty programs such as needs based welfare were racialized by government and the media starting in the 1960s and intermittently through the 1980s and beyond, so too were the issues of drug abuse and crime racialized during the crack cocaine explosion of the 1980s. Comparable to poverty coverage of white and black populations are the class and racial components of the treatment of cocaine use as a status of luxury when it was mostly a white and rich persons drug of choice, and later when the means of delivery and ingestion made it less expensive to sell to a wider and poorer consumer base.

Flawed character theory assumes that people are poor simply because of self-defeating behaviors, and the government’s “War on Drugs” coupled with the national medias coverage of the crack cocaine explosion seemed to bolster that theory at a time when economic policies were particularly punishing to the poor. However, to the same extent that the disproportionate danger of environmental degradation to economically disadvantaged urban areas, the massive profits acquired in the deregulation of environmental protections, and the exposure of the poor to neurologically damaging substances was ignored in the rhetoric of the Reagan Revolution, so too was government culpability in flooding America’s streets with the very substance it ostensibly went to war against. While it is important to note that the form of cocaine added to the drug market consisted of its powdered form, the glut in supply of this form necessitated the adjustment in packaging that introduced it in the form known as crack. The consequences of crack cocaine addiction coupled with targeted incarceration of addicts rather than treatment for addiction has been devastating to poor communities, and particularly damaging to the lives of the children whose parents are removed from their lives due to either.

In 1979, a group of Nicaraguan exiles calling themselves the Contras began to fight a guerilla war against the Sandinista government of Nicaragua. The Reagan administration of the 1980s viewed these exiles as potentially useful in the Cold War, and President Reagan went so far as to associate them to the “founding fathers.” Because the United States Congress disagreed, it passed “Boland Amendments” restricting the types of support the administration could offer to the Contras. Specifically, these Amendments prohibited the use of CIA funds to depose the Sandinista government, and restricted U.S. Aide to the Contras to “humanitarian” relief. Michael Agar explained that the response to these restrictions by the Reagan administration included allowing, indeed protecting the entry of US relief planes loaded with powder cocaine into the United States.

The extent of U.S. involvement in cocaine trafficking in the 1980s remains in dispute. Based on past cases, it is unlikely that the CIA played an active role in developing U.S. markets. For present purposes, one thing is clear, in Central America with cocaine, just as with other cases in Southeast and Southwest Asia, political allies of the U.S., in wars against Communist regimes, used illicit drugs to raise revenue to support their efforts. When this did happen, the U.S. at least looked the other way. At the next level, U.S. logistical support was used to transport illicit drugs. One more level up, and the U.S. actively intervened to protect its allies against the efforts of other agencies, from the U.S. or other countries, to stop trafficking. All these levels were reached in the Contra case.

Michael Agar, Addiction Research & Theory: The Story Of Crack: Towards A Theory Of Illicit Drug Trends, 11-12

The findings of John Kerry’s Congressional investigation into the funding of the Contras through the international cocaine trade, including the 1998 findings of CIA inspector Fredrick Hitz, show that the Reagan administration knew from the beginning that the CIA was working with drug traffickers in the Contra army, that these were internationally connected, that the CIA protected them from exposure and prosecution, and indicated direct connections between the flood of cocaine into the United states in the 1980s and direct orders from officials of the United States Government.

Reviewing evidence that existed in the 1980s, CIA inspector general Hitz found that some Contra-connected drug traffickers worked directly for Reagan's National Security Council staff and the CIA. In 1987, Cuban-American Bay of Pigs veteran Moises Nunez told CIA investigators that "it was difficult to answer questions relating to his involvement in narcotics trafficking because of the specific tasks he had performed at the direction of the NSC."

Robert Parry, Salon.com How John Kerry exposed the Contra-cocaine scandal, 25 October 2004, retrieved May 15, 2010 from How John Kerry exposed the Contra-cocaine scandal - Salon.com 6

The result of this trafficking was that powder cocaine available through the US drug market was purer in form, cheaper by half, and in greater supply than decreasing demand would support. The decrease in demand came when baby-boomers were coming to an age where the consequences of prolonged recreational drug use became problematic physically, psychologically, and professionally. The wealthy white would not sustain demand, and the market had to adjust down to “retail” the product to the poor.

Contrary to popular belief, Parry noted that the introduction of crack did not institute increased dug abuse. Heroine and powdered cocaine were already common, and often used in tandem in the form of “speedballing” by IV drug users. Neither did crack use predominantly begin as a problem in African-American neighborhoods, although it was most visibly depicted as such by the national news media.

... the socially constructed image clearly shifts in the mid-eighties. In his history of dug policy, Baum notes that, by the end of 1985, media no longer show the cocaine user as white, rich, attractive and tragic. Now the user is black or Hispanic, and menacing as well.

How John Kerry exposed the Contra-cocaine scandal - Salon.com

When crack use did become more of a problem in the inner cities than suburbia, it came in tandem with the results of Reaganomics, the outsourcing of factory jobs, as well as white and black middle class flight from the cities. The only growth market in the inner city community was drug sales, and if one lived, one could make a comfortable living in the dismal1980s economy.

Without any critical thought, government acknowledgement of guilt, or media analysis regarding how the crack trade came about, the crack “epidemic” served the twin theories of flawed character and racial inferiority that white middle class communities find so comforting in dismissing urban poverty as just desserts for their own bad acts. As quiet as it is kept, while the distribution of crack and other forms of cocaine is conducted in the inner cities, use is still more far-reaching than many like to believe.

The war on drugs intensified in response to media portrayals of frightening black gang members and irresponsible welfare mothers smoking crack while pregnant. These were the public faces of the crack cocaine epidemic, and in response to the fear and disgust generated, the sentencing guidelines became stricter for the crack form of cocaine while sentencing for powdered cocaine remained at pre-crack levels. Budget allocations for the war on drugs were 50% more for incarceration and punishment than for treatment or prevention, and the war on the growth industry of the 1980s inner cities became a very profitable growth industry in itself.

Michelle Alexander explained the racial motivation of the Reagan Revolution regarding the administrations’ focus in the “War on Drugs:”

President Ronald Reagan officially declared the current drug war in 1982, when drug crime was declining, not rising. From the outset, the war had little to do with drug crime and nearly everything to do with racial politics. The drug war was part of a grand and highly successful Republican Party strategy of using racially coded political appeals on issues of crime and welfare to attract poor and working class white voters who were resentful of, and threatened by, desegregation, busing, and affirmative action.

Alexander went on to assess how successful in re-segregating and disenfranchising the black population these policies were.
• More black people are in prison or parole today than were slaves in 1850.

• “Felon disenfranchisement laws” effectively and legally evade the Fifteenth Amendment.

• Coupled with the label of “felons for life,” these laws also permit discrimination in housing, employment, education, and deny participation in the political and justice systems that decide the fates of those so branded, and the fate of their children.

• Because of the enormously high rate of imprisonment of black fathers, and increasingly of mothers, a black child today is less likely to live with both parents than they would have during slavery.

Tony Whitehead wrote about the “incarceration epidemic” in Marion Barry, the Incarceration Epidemic, and the Prison-to-Community Cultural Continuum in Washington, DC, and noted that at 6% of the US population, black males make up 70% of the population in prison or on parole, and that this has occurred even as crime rates have “steadily declined since the late 1990s.” Whitehead also noted that while consequences for individuals are well documented, less has been written about the consequences to the communities they are taken from and recycled back into, their families, or particularly their children.

Andrea Victoria Martinez argued that the federal sentencing guidelines adopted in 1984 anticipated the removal of much bigger fish in the drug trade than the application of those guidelines have achieved. Martinez went on to note that the “true victims” of the “War on Drugs” have been the very people the government ostensibly went to war to protect, and that to avoid compounding those errors, there must be a policy shift away from crime and punishment towards treatment and prevention.

Instead of “kingpins,” the largest demographic imprisoned by the federal government have been “street-level dealers and couriers,” or the “single impoverished mothers in relationships or working for the targeted kingpins that are filling the prisons for drug offenses. It is the children of these all too often imprisoned mothers that eventually enter the criminal system themselves” The smallest victims of the federal governments systemic failure to apply the drug laws without prejudice are abandoned to a punishing and impersonal child welfare system that too often separates siblings at a time when they just experienced severance from their parents. The trauma caused by the upheavals and dislocations in these children’s lives are causative of their future contact with the penal system.

Because the “Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1977” mandated the states to “initiate the termination of parental rights proceedings” in the cases of children in placement for 15 of 22 months, mandatory drug sentencing guidelines too often serve to permanently rip children from their families. As a result of the racialized nature of the targeted arrests and sentencing in poor communities, loving and perfectly stable family members can be disqualified from keeping a child within the family by offering their home as refuge. This disqualification can be based on any minor criminal offense, “such as resisting arrest, or drug related offenses as much as five to ten years old.”

While the motivation of erring on the side of caution can be appreciated, the best interests of the children are not served by separating them from their family, and too often an allowed consideration becomes a mandatory requirement to prevent the reunification of family ties. This has grave consequences for children ripped from their parents, from their siblings, and finally from any sense of family or community care. What must these children think of a society that treats them so carelessly? How should they feel about such a society?
+

 

[The T]

You have the right to talk about whatever you want but apparently not the skill or empathy to do it without sounding like a hater.

you need to look in a mirror child
You're problem is you can't handle the truth

There's a good example, talking down to people like that is something conservatives just cannot help but do when challenged on their bad attitudes towards the people they want as voters but not as contributors to policy.

Telling the TRUTH is talking down to others? Really? When did that get redefined? YOU ever heard the left? Check your hypocrisy at the door pal.

 

[Stephanie]

Remember when the GOPbaggers booed that gay US Army soldier during the RNC? That's just wholesome American family values. Jeer the gay soldier who is man enough to fight for your freedom to hate gay people.

Actually, no...No recollection of that at all.
Care to post a link?

what a parrot...he needs to go back through this board and see their treatment of Palin, Mr.Cain, Ann Romney...hell he can go as far back to see how they treated Booooooooooooooosh...none of it is pretty and all of it HATEFUL

 

[Truthmatters]

How many times have we heard Republicans on the USMB describe the Democratic Party as the "plantation party" where blacks and other minorities are being "led" with "free stuff"?

How many times have they said the blacks voted 90% for President Obama and made some kind of deal out of that?

Why do imagine the Democratic Party works this way?

When you think about it, it's easy to understand. First, look at the blacks that have joined the GOP. Look at Herman Cain. Remember when he was asked about "civil rights" and blacks who rode at the back of the bus. He said he always went to the back of the bus because he wasn't a "trouble-maker".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4ybm0VGgIg

Remember Alen Keyes?

When the leading Republican and rightwing pundit Alan Keyes was asked what he thought of Mary Cheney, the lesbian daughter of the US vice-president, he called her "a selfish hedonist". If his own daughter came out as a lesbian, said Mr Keyes, he would say the same thing.
So when Mr Keyes' only daughter, Maya Marcel-Keyes, declared herself a "liberal queer" at a public rally he lived up to his word. Her parents turned her out of their house, broke off all communication and stopped paying her university tuition fees.

Republican disowns lesbian daughter

Mr. Keyes was the man who ran against Barrack Obama for the Senate. He said he disowned his daughter in the name of "family values".

So you can see blacks who join the GOP can be highly motivated. They share GOP values.

And look at what the GOP is doing these days. Threatening candidates if they don't "toe the line". We only need to look at the mid term races to know that as a "fact".

The majority of the GOP are whites living in the deep south. Many of their ancestors were slave holders and consider themselves "Confederate". Of course they believe blacks have no integrity and only want "free stuff" because they are greedy and lazy. Many simply don't believe blacks can be thoughtful and independent. So they must be "led" by Democratic "leaders".

Because the Republicans party is so monolithic, they insist the it must be the same for the Democratic Party. They don't understand "coalition" because they have no experience with being part of a coalition.

For Democrats to have a majority within the party, you need a majority from the groups that make up the Democratic Party. The different groups may not like each other, but they respect each other enough to work together. In fact, many of the groups that make up the Democratic Party would not be welcome in the GOP.

Richard Grenell hounded from Romney campaign by anti-gay conservatives

and this is the subject

not me

they hate your party because you guys are racist

did you not call HG an Oreo?....

for denying something was racist when it was racist.

he stopped doing that I think

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Remember when the GOPbaggers booed that gay US Army soldier during the RNC? That's just wholesome American family values. Jeer the gay soldier who is man enough to fight for your freedom to hate gay people.

Actually, no...No recollection of that at all.
Care to post a link?

 

[Barb]

I hardly ever even comment on racial politics because it brings out the real haters to protest that their horrible attitudes are justified, that the scapegoat in question has earned all the bile they can spew. To me people are mostly just easily led no matter their color, everything you accuse black Americans of is presented in all it's horrible glory in conservative politics, you people play the victim better than anyone.

"horrible attitudes?

just more moronic platitudes you cant back up

what did i; or any conservative; "accuse Black people of"?

On this forum? Pretty much everything but the Lindbergh baby kidnapping.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A lot to be said as to thinking and doing for yourself and not relying on some politician that doesn't care about anything but your vote so they can rule over you by giving you a few baubles and trinkets along the way...when you should be responsible enough to provide it yourself. The role of those we elect is to protect your liberty, not run your life.

That was the speech that made LBJ decide he had to have Malcolm X assassinated

And you evidence that LBJ did this? Please, entertain us.

LBJ bet the future of the Dem Party on Black Vote ("I'll have them ******* voting Democrat for the next 200 years"), so he had to eliminate any prominent black leader that threatened his plans

 

[Truthmatters]

they pretend black people dont help run the democratic party,

They cant see them as part of anything I guess

 

[LeftofLeft]

How many times have we heard Republicans on the USMB describe the Democratic Party as the "plantation party" where blacks and other minorities are being "led" with "free stuff"?

How many times have they said the blacks voted 90% for President Obama and made some kind of deal out of that?

Why do imagine the Democratic Party works this way?

When you think about it, it's easy to understand. First, look at the blacks that have joined the GOP. Look at Herman Cain. Remember when he was asked about "civil rights" and blacks who rode at the back of the bus. He said he always went to the back of the bus because he wasn't a "trouble-maker".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4ybm0VGgIg

Remember Alen Keyes?

When the leading Republican and rightwing pundit Alan Keyes was asked what he thought of Mary Cheney, the lesbian daughter of the US vice-president, he called her "a selfish hedonist". If his own daughter came out as a lesbian, said Mr Keyes, he would say the same thing.
So when Mr Keyes' only daughter, Maya Marcel-Keyes, declared herself a "liberal queer" at a public rally he lived up to his word. Her parents turned her out of their house, broke off all communication and stopped paying her university tuition fees.

Republican disowns lesbian daughter

Mr. Keyes was the man who ran against Barrack Obama for the Senate. He said he disowned his daughter in the name of "family values".

So you can see blacks who join the GOP can be highly motivated. They share GOP values.

And look at what the GOP is doing these days. Threatening candidates if they don't "toe the line". We only need to look at the mid term races to know that as a "fact".

The majority of the GOP are whites living in the deep south. Many of their ancestors were slave holders and consider themselves "Confederate". Of course they believe blacks have no integrity and only want "free stuff" because they are greedy and lazy. Many simply don't believe blacks can be thoughtful and independent. So they must be "led" by Democratic "leaders".

Because the Republicans party is so monolithic, they insist the it must be the same for the Democratic Party. They don't understand "coalition" because they have no experience with being part of a coalition.

For Democrats to have a majority within the party, you need a majority from the groups that make up the Democratic Party. The different groups may not like each other, but they respect each other enough to work together. In fact, many of the groups that make up the Democratic Party would not be welcome in the GOP.

Richard Grenell hounded from Romney campaign by anti-gay conservatives

yes blacks voters don't feel welcome in the republican party.

ask them

Your point being???? Black Conservatives are just like White Conservatives, Asian Conservatives, Latino Conservatives......they are not looking for handouts and concessions to their group.

White voters don't feel welcome at polling places run by Black Democrats......in particular, those twirling night sticks and wearing camouflage.

 

[Truthmatters]

so you claim most black people seek handouts?

 

[Stephanie]

That was the speech that made LBJ decide he had to have Malcolm X assassinated

And you evidence that LBJ did this? Please, entertain us.

LBJ bet the future of the Dem Party on Black Vote ("I'll have them ******* voting Democrat for the next 200 years"), so he had to eliminate any prominent black leader that threatened his plans

and got away with it...then in rides race hustlers like Sharpton,Jackson, Obama, etc

 

[Truthmatters]

so the first black president it a race hustler?


Do you think black Americans agree with that ?

 

[The T]

Remember when the GOPbaggers booed that gay US Army soldier during the RNC? That's just wholesome American family values. Jeer the gay soldier who is man enough to fight for your freedom to hate gay people.

GAY is a family value? Really? And what was it about? It was a question regarding treatment of Gay soldiers...Santorum answered him be stating he'd reinstate DADT. Anything wrong with that? Personally I don't want to know what you do sexually behind closed doors. NONE of our business.

Some members of the GOP debate audience booed a gay soldier who asked via video whether the Republican candidates would reinstitute the recently repealed "Don't ask, don't tell" policy of banning openly gay soldiers.
After Stephen Hill, who is serving in the Army in Iraq, asked his question, a handful of members of the audience booed loudly. None of the Republican candidates responded to the audience's reaction.

Former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) answered that "Any type of sexual activity has no place in the military" and that he would return to the policy of requiring gays and lesbians to stay silent on their sexuality or get thrown out of the military. His response garnered loud applause.

When pressed with what he would do with soldiers who have now come out, he said, "What we're doing is playing social experimentation with our country right now, and that's tragic" but said that he would not throw out soldiers who have recently come out due to the end of "Don't ask, don't tell."

Read more: Gay soldier booed at GOP debate; candidates stay mum | TheHill

 

[bedowin62]

so the first black president it a race hustler?


Do you think black Americans agree with that ?

of course he is leftard

and many Black Americans dont agree with the left-wing agenda. the percentage you quote of Black people voting for Dems is just the percentage of people that bothered to vote

 

[Barb]

How can you misinterpret Results as one's Ideas? Seems yourself and many others are enjoying plantation life as well. Don't forpget to drink the kilo aid.

The black American population in this country is declining because of birth control?

****. Where DO you get these ideas from?

Black Abortion rates are more than 2x vs. whites. Given Blacks are 12 percent of population, the math points to at least Sanger's control vision. Why don't you check recent abortion rates among blacks compared to whites and tell us otherwise?

1

2 Sanger's "control vision" was that when women controlled the # of pregnancies, as well as when the first one occurred, the whole family prospered.

3 You should do that yourself, before you open your ignorant mouth.

 

[007]

 

[bedowin62]

The black American population in this country is declining because of birth control?

****. Where DO you get these ideas from?

Black Abortion rates are more than 2x vs. whites. Given Blacks are 12 percent of population, the math points to at least Sanger's control vision. Why don't you check recent abortion rates among blacks compared to whites and tell us otherwise?

1

2 Sanger's "control vision" was that when women controlled the # of pregnancies, as well as when the first one occurred, the whole family prospered.

3 You should do that yourself, before you open your ignorant mouth.

she said; quite clearly; that the "control" you speak of belongs in the hands of others; not the mother, or the father

you're simply lying to yourself

 

[Barb]

Remember when the GOPbaggers booed that gay US Army soldier during the RNC? That's just wholesome American family values. Jeer the gay soldier who is man enough to fight for your freedom to hate gay people.

GAY is a family value? Really? And what was it about? It was a question regarding treatment of Gay soldiers...Santorum answered him be stating he'd reinstate DADT. Anything wrong with that? Personally I don't want to know what you do sexually behind closed doors. NONE of our business.

Some members of the GOP debate audience booed a gay soldier who asked via video whether the Republican candidates would reinstitute the recently repealed "Don't ask, don't tell" policy of banning openly gay soldiers.
After Stephen Hill, who is serving in the Army in Iraq, asked his question, a handful of members of the audience booed loudly. None of the Republican candidates responded to the audience's reaction.

Former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) answered that "Any type of sexual activity has no place in the military" and that he would return to the policy of requiring gays and lesbians to stay silent on their sexuality or get thrown out of the military. His response garnered loud applause.

When pressed with what he would do with soldiers who have now come out, he said, "What we're doing is playing social experimentation with our country right now, and that's tragic" but said that he would not throw out soldiers who have recently come out due to the end of "Don't ask, don't tell."

Read more: Gay soldier booed at GOP debate; candidates stay mum | TheHill

Do you ever tell your imaginary friends at work that you and the wife had a nice dinner at such and such restaurant?

It really IS that ******* simple, you knuckle dragging douche bag.

 

[bedowin62]

"horrible attitudes?

just more moronic platitudes you cant back up

what did i; or any conservative; "accuse Black people of"?

On this forum? Pretty much everything but the Lindbergh baby kidnapping.

great dimwit; then you can prove that.