Something I've been feeling rumbling down inside for about a week now, is a sense that the bulk of the American people are going to reject continued moral depravity in our society as "acceptable." Not from a religious standpoint, but from a simple standpoint of consciable "right and wrong" principles. I feel people are tired of being forced to a standard that truly is not acceptable in their eyes for our society. I feel this is being driven, by having lived in a place of feeling so surpressed due to our dismal economic situations and the new government policies they hear about every day that further serve to squash their sense of feeling "hope" and "good" down inside their spirits and souls.
I think the government's continual, "hammer them down," "divide them," "break their spirit" rhetoric has pushed a major sector of our society to a place of no longer being willing to accept narcissistic moral depravity as an acceptable part of our society. I mean look at what the American people had to learn this week about how low our government will go to the point of a Christmas Tree Tax. The sense of Christmas is one place of a feeling of "good" and "joy" left to our people at this point and they tax that too, while we weren't looking. It's like if you turn your back for a second this current federal government will rob you blind. "We are stealing your Christmas buy putting our mark of 'government owned' on that too," in principle.
Look at the horrible situation that's been hidden and protected for years at Penn State. People knew about a coach molesting ten year old boys for years, and did NOTHING. All to protect their own interest, moral depravity narcissism. Then the response of the Penn State students when the one's responsible for allowing the continued molestation of more little boys to persist, were fired by the school. Destroying people's cars, property, etc. All making a statment, "We don't care about those little boys! We want our football!" Total moral depravity narcissism. Sure screwing up ONE season of football sucks. But, screwing up a whole lifetime for MANY little boys is way more sacrifice than one football season. Especially, when those boys being knowingly molested was hidden to protect the football seasons. How can anybody of moral decency sympathise with those Penn State students rioting out in the streets? They reflect the worst a society could hope for in a people when you consider the whole big picture of it all.
I'm seeing the same thing, right or wrong, with these sexual harrasment claims against Herman Cain. More people don't believe them than do. Why? Because, they've seen the social moral depravity narcissism used before in this kind of misuse of policy created to protect people used as a weapon of destruction, as opposed to protection. People are rejecting it. The tragedy is that something that needs to be taken serious as a societal problem, "sexual harrassment," when it can actually be proven to exist, is designed to help people. But, when society has shown to use that same tool of protection to conjour up a tool of destruction upon another. Who under our moral justice system is, "Innocent until PROVEN guilty" which is quite different than "Innocent until ASSUMED guilty." Then the people who misuse that tool of protection as a tool of destruction totally undermine the credibility and integrity of something created to protect people.
The Occupy Wall Street, etc. protests all over our country attacking the successful that actually create all wealth ANY OF US are allowed to know. Through their being successful enough to employ every American out there either directly or indirectly. To attack those who are responsible ultimately for anything of value you own, any dollar you have to feed, clothe, house, educate, have any level of quality-of-life. To me, reflects a sense of moral depravity narcissism itself. The top 1% create everything you aquire with a dollar in your pocket. Through creating the industries, the businesses the innovative products, etc. sold which creates money to hire us. To which gives us jobs to spend money that serves to hire and finance other businesses, people, totally finances government and government jobs, etc. "Hey, let's protest to destroy those who are ultimately responsible for every dollar we ever get to spend. Even though without them we'd be naked sleeping in the woods, diging up worms for food!!"
As I stand back as a bystander watching it all. I see one big ball of moral depravity narcissim anarchy in a big sector of our society. Where everybody is so "all about me" they've started to develop the taste for flesh and blood and cannibalizing their own society.
I reject this, totally. This not what I'm willing to accept as what we are asked to accept as "acceptable" in our society. I don't think I'm alone in that assesment and I do believe that a mentality of "greater good" to serve to elevate our society. Back to a place in "acceptable" is NOT what is unacceptable. I believe an evolution revolution is going to start growing within the more good natured element of our society. "We let you guys do your 'little destroy all values of decency' experiment and now we're hear to tell you, NO MORE! NO MORE! We won't tolerate, 'anything goes', no matter how morally decrepit it is anymore in our society! We are going to hold you to a higher standard! Now, it's our turn to fight for DECENCY as a standard in our society!"
In all of the economic and social misery I do sense we are on the verge of something very positive and inspiring.
Friday, November 11, 2011
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Newt Gingrich Is The "Steve Jobs Of Innovative Thinking" Applied to Government!!
Pretty amazing. I woke up this morning & my brain was 50 years forward in applying thought to government, systems, processes, etc. All from simply watching the video of the debate between Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain, (to which I provide a link at the bottom of this blog) on American Entitlement Programs and how to better approach them. All from just listening to Newt Gingrich explain what everybody else has been "missing" in government & application of & within government. Gingrich is definitely innovative. He uses Steve Jobs type thought processes.
Think about it. It takes about 6-9 months to get a government passport. Yet, the places you go to use that passport, other countries. You can stick your ATM card in a machine in Italy. It reads your number, sends the information across 6 or 7 country borders, across the Atlantic Ocean to your bank makes the information transaction, sends the approval information back across the Atlantic Ocean, back across about 6 or 7 country borders & spits out the proper amount of money you requested. Done.
The process needed to be used to apply, create & approve a passport is about the same as applying for a credit card in concept. Taking your information, doing a background check, reviewing your credit history & current & historical financial information, etc. Then sending you an approval. It's the same type system that creates your passport. All of you criminal records, addresses, any associations with people that might not allow you to get a passport is already in government database. What takes so long in the process is the human laden multi-levels of bureaucracy. What makes government so ineffective & inefficient is the incredible daunting level of people in the process. That's human factor where the failure, mistakes, lost information, improperly entered information, human bias, etc. that slows down a process & makes it less efficient & effective & creates so much financial waste while producing miniscule effectiveness.
Gingrich totally makes sense, "We have the technology available, why aren't we using it?" The Visa Corporation has .03% fraud in it's systems, because it uses IBM technology that identifies fraud, blocks it & eliminates it. Yet, the government's own system approaches has a 10% fraud factor. $10 out of every $100 in medicare goes to a fraudulent criminal, that's. That's 3 pennies of fraud at Visa, versus $10 of fraud in government. Our current government approach to this 10% of every dollar lost to fraud is, "We we need more money, so we have to raise your taxes." Meaning you as the tax payer have to make personal financial sacrifice in your life because the government charges you for the cost of the fraud to them.
Gingrich's approach is, "We've started using fraud identifying & eliminating technology to manage our Medicare payments increasing our government funds by 10%, formerly lost to fraud. So we are going to give you back money to better your own life." We all benefit, the only person that loses are the thieves in the Medicare system. It reduces the time & costs of current government bureaucratic expense in the Medicare system. Eliminates all the human links in the chain of bureaucracy that bogs down the system, loses information, improperly processes information, etc.
Apply the same logic to an agency like the I. R. S. An incredible government expense. Yet, it's an agency of that processes pure numbers. All things that can be done more time efficiently & cost efficiently & eliminating the cost & citizen hassle huge human mistakes factor. The greatest cost of government bureaucracy is the labor cost factor. Salaries, benefits, retirements, lost time & cost efficiency to illness, slackers, inefficiency & accuracy at their purpose in function in the human chain of government bureaucracy.
It's easy to see how during his tenure as Speaker Of The House, Gingrich put $5 TRILLION back into the government coffers by reducing the government budget by $3 TRILLION of wasteful expenses & leaving behind a $2 TRILLION budget surplus when he left office.
It's all about changing the way government thinks to accomplish the exact same things & meet the exact same needs of the people. As Gingrich states, "The most difficult thing to get people in Washington to do is THINK."
Think about it. It takes about 6-9 months to get a government passport. Yet, the places you go to use that passport, other countries. You can stick your ATM card in a machine in Italy. It reads your number, sends the information across 6 or 7 country borders, across the Atlantic Ocean to your bank makes the information transaction, sends the approval information back across the Atlantic Ocean, back across about 6 or 7 country borders & spits out the proper amount of money you requested. Done.
The process needed to be used to apply, create & approve a passport is about the same as applying for a credit card in concept. Taking your information, doing a background check, reviewing your credit history & current & historical financial information, etc. Then sending you an approval. It's the same type system that creates your passport. All of you criminal records, addresses, any associations with people that might not allow you to get a passport is already in government database. What takes so long in the process is the human laden multi-levels of bureaucracy. What makes government so ineffective & inefficient is the incredible daunting level of people in the process. That's human factor where the failure, mistakes, lost information, improperly entered information, human bias, etc. that slows down a process & makes it less efficient & effective & creates so much financial waste while producing miniscule effectiveness.
Gingrich totally makes sense, "We have the technology available, why aren't we using it?" The Visa Corporation has .03% fraud in it's systems, because it uses IBM technology that identifies fraud, blocks it & eliminates it. Yet, the government's own system approaches has a 10% fraud factor. $10 out of every $100 in medicare goes to a fraudulent criminal, that's. That's 3 pennies of fraud at Visa, versus $10 of fraud in government. Our current government approach to this 10% of every dollar lost to fraud is, "We we need more money, so we have to raise your taxes." Meaning you as the tax payer have to make personal financial sacrifice in your life because the government charges you for the cost of the fraud to them.
Gingrich's approach is, "We've started using fraud identifying & eliminating technology to manage our Medicare payments increasing our government funds by 10%, formerly lost to fraud. So we are going to give you back money to better your own life." We all benefit, the only person that loses are the thieves in the Medicare system. It reduces the time & costs of current government bureaucratic expense in the Medicare system. Eliminates all the human links in the chain of bureaucracy that bogs down the system, loses information, improperly processes information, etc.
Apply the same logic to an agency like the I. R. S. An incredible government expense. Yet, it's an agency of that processes pure numbers. All things that can be done more time efficiently & cost efficiently & eliminating the cost & citizen hassle huge human mistakes factor. The greatest cost of government bureaucracy is the labor cost factor. Salaries, benefits, retirements, lost time & cost efficiency to illness, slackers, inefficiency & accuracy at their purpose in function in the human chain of government bureaucracy.
It's easy to see how during his tenure as Speaker Of The House, Gingrich put $5 TRILLION back into the government coffers by reducing the government budget by $3 TRILLION of wasteful expenses & leaving behind a $2 TRILLION budget surplus when he left office.
It's all about changing the way government thinks to accomplish the exact same things & meet the exact same needs of the people. As Gingrich states, "The most difficult thing to get people in Washington to do is THINK."
Once you get in the Newt Gingrich mindset of "thinking" applied to government. All the problems that we are told are so hard to find solutions for in our government and by our government simply ridiculously easy to find in the solutions to those problems.
I encourage you to doe a little intellectual exercise yourself to see what I'm talking about. I've been doing it all morning and am amazed at how simple it is. The only thing that separates your or me from being able to find the answers to solutions our government can seem to find is "THINKING!"
Let's look at situations like classified information being stolen, in our military technology, national security information, etc., etc. Things we've had government employees with high security clearances printing and selling to foreign nations. Undermining our technological advancement in the world and undermining our national security. There are thousands of government laptop computers possessing these informations that our government doesn't even know where those computers are!!!!
How do you eliminate those America damaging current failing government issues? You simply employ an information system where the information cannot be saved nor printed by an individual government computer. A system where the information can only be accessed, when it is necessary to perform a government task. You have laptops for tablets owned by the government with GPS tracking systems. Under that type of system you know there are no employees printing and selling national and technological government owned information. Because, they can't print it on paper nor save it to their computer or tablet. The only way they could sell that information is to be sitting side by side with some government person from China, etc. wanting to steal our information. The Chinese government and technologies thief having to sit down and manually reproduce the info. BUT, you just have your system set up to where if one of the government owned laptops/tablets accesses the central database servers and it's coming in on a feed from countries (which the system recognizes through the computer/laptops GPS coordinates in location) we know steal our technology the system automatically blocks access to the information.
Even something as unbelievably stupid as the Fast & Furious scandal under Obama's Department of Justice. Where they told gun dealers to sell thousands of guns to people the government knew were Mexican drug cartels who use those guns to kill American border agents and slaughter thousands of American systems.
It's unbelievable they allowed that in the first place. BUT, accepting the stupidity of our government in doing that as a way to track guns to find out where they end up. Through an advanced government approach in thinking, "When we find a bunch of dead bodies with guns laying around them, we can check the serial numbers to see where the guns came from that we allowed to be sold to murderers." That's our current government thinking. HOW ABOUT PUTTING GPS TRACKING DEVICES IN THE STOCKS OF THE GUNS!!! SO YOU CAN ROUND UP THE DRUG CARTELS IN THEIR GPS IDENTIFIED LOCATIONS BEFORE THEY KILL THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WITH THEM!!
I encourage you to doe a little intellectual exercise yourself to see what I'm talking about. I've been doing it all morning and am amazed at how simple it is. The only thing that separates your or me from being able to find the answers to solutions our government can seem to find is "THINKING!"
Let's look at situations like classified information being stolen, in our military technology, national security information, etc., etc. Things we've had government employees with high security clearances printing and selling to foreign nations. Undermining our technological advancement in the world and undermining our national security. There are thousands of government laptop computers possessing these informations that our government doesn't even know where those computers are!!!!
How do you eliminate those America damaging current failing government issues? You simply employ an information system where the information cannot be saved nor printed by an individual government computer. A system where the information can only be accessed, when it is necessary to perform a government task. You have laptops for tablets owned by the government with GPS tracking systems. Under that type of system you know there are no employees printing and selling national and technological government owned information. Because, they can't print it on paper nor save it to their computer or tablet. The only way they could sell that information is to be sitting side by side with some government person from China, etc. wanting to steal our information. The Chinese government and technologies thief having to sit down and manually reproduce the info. BUT, you just have your system set up to where if one of the government owned laptops/tablets accesses the central database servers and it's coming in on a feed from countries (which the system recognizes through the computer/laptops GPS coordinates in location) we know steal our technology the system automatically blocks access to the information.
Even something as unbelievably stupid as the Fast & Furious scandal under Obama's Department of Justice. Where they told gun dealers to sell thousands of guns to people the government knew were Mexican drug cartels who use those guns to kill American border agents and slaughter thousands of American systems.
It's unbelievable they allowed that in the first place. BUT, accepting the stupidity of our government in doing that as a way to track guns to find out where they end up. Through an advanced government approach in thinking, "When we find a bunch of dead bodies with guns laying around them, we can check the serial numbers to see where the guns came from that we allowed to be sold to murderers." That's our current government thinking. HOW ABOUT PUTTING GPS TRACKING DEVICES IN THE STOCKS OF THE GUNS!!! SO YOU CAN ROUND UP THE DRUG CARTELS IN THEIR GPS IDENTIFIED LOCATIONS BEFORE THEY KILL THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WITH THEM!!
Newt's the man. He's our desperately needed President at this time in our history. The person we need running this country. In the debate you see that both Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain are both on the same wavelength in what needs to be done to save and redeem America from it's verge of total collapse. But, the difference between Gingrich and Cain is that Gingrich's thought processes are more advanced in the areas they share the same wavelength. Where Herman Cain can tell your philosophically what we need to do and where we need to do it. Newt Gingrich can tell you the same things but take it to the next level. What Herman Cain cannot tell you that Newt Gingrich can is exactly how you do it all the way down to the specific nuts and bolts.
Which is why I've been saying for over a month now. We need to put Gingrich in candidate position of President and Cain in candidate position of Vice President. This gives us the best possible option we could ever hope for in a president in this time in or nation's history. While Cain spends 4 or 8 years mentoring under Gingrich to advance his right direction thinking into his own nuts and bolts specific understanding in the most effective and efficient way to run our country. Gingrich will make so much overwhelming positive reform in government effectiveness an efficiency to positively effect our quality-of-life that even those on the opposite side of ideology will find it hard to not appreciate what America will have become under Gingrich's tenure as President. Which will set things up for Gingrich to easily simply pass the torch to Cain for another four to eight years.
Hell, my son is going to be 20 years old. When he was born we gave him a name. When the government recorded his name in the government system. They made a typo in his name, totally changing his legal name. I spent FIVE years going through all the different agencies trying to get them to correct their typo in his name which is Colby, but the person who entered it into the system used a "D" instead of a "C", Dolby. I started with the Social Security Administration they told me they didn't have the authority to fix THEIR mistake, then they sent me to some other agency which sent me to another agency, which sent me to another agency, which sent me back to the Social Security system. I spent FIVE years going back & forth between all these different "can't make a simple alphabet change" agencies & was never able to accomplish the task of having my son's name corrected to his actual name in the government system.
Now, take a Gingrich approach. I would enter his name in the system, get a chance to confirm information is correct & correct it if I made a mistake. DONE! DONE RIGHT!
Which is why I've been saying for over a month now. We need to put Gingrich in candidate position of President and Cain in candidate position of Vice President. This gives us the best possible option we could ever hope for in a president in this time in or nation's history. While Cain spends 4 or 8 years mentoring under Gingrich to advance his right direction thinking into his own nuts and bolts specific understanding in the most effective and efficient way to run our country. Gingrich will make so much overwhelming positive reform in government effectiveness an efficiency to positively effect our quality-of-life that even those on the opposite side of ideology will find it hard to not appreciate what America will have become under Gingrich's tenure as President. Which will set things up for Gingrich to easily simply pass the torch to Cain for another four to eight years.
Hell, my son is going to be 20 years old. When he was born we gave him a name. When the government recorded his name in the government system. They made a typo in his name, totally changing his legal name. I spent FIVE years going through all the different agencies trying to get them to correct their typo in his name which is Colby, but the person who entered it into the system used a "D" instead of a "C", Dolby. I started with the Social Security Administration they told me they didn't have the authority to fix THEIR mistake, then they sent me to some other agency which sent me to another agency, which sent me to another agency, which sent me back to the Social Security system. I spent FIVE years going back & forth between all these different "can't make a simple alphabet change" agencies & was never able to accomplish the task of having my son's name corrected to his actual name in the government system.
Now, take a Gingrich approach. I would enter his name in the system, get a chance to confirm information is correct & correct it if I made a mistake. DONE! DONE RIGHT!
Newt Gingrich: "I just put on the table trillions of dollars that would be saved by not paying crooks. Why is it so hard to not penalize good people before you stop paying crooks. You can take existing IBM technology and use it to stop paying crooks.
Why is it so hard to say you can turn this around and pass a bill to contract out to American Express, VISA, and IBM to handle Medicare payments and in 60 days you would save a TRILLION DOLLARS."
Why is it so hard to say you can turn this around and pass a bill to contract out to American Express, VISA, and IBM to handle Medicare payments and in 60 days you would save a TRILLION DOLLARS."
Newt Gingrich is probably the smartest most innovative politician we've had in decades. He's laying all of his plans, out there in depth, substance and complete explanation along with his proven track record of having given America a 4.2% unemployment rate, 11 million new jobs, government cost savings of $5 TRILLION leaving office having created a $2.2 TRILLION budget surplus and as the only man in modern times to have balanced America's budget, which he did four years in a row.
He's putting this out there for all Americans to learn, come to understand, like and support. BEFORE, he climbs so far up the polls that the Obama and liberal media attack dogs see him as a threat to Obama and launch their destroy and annihilate strategies against him. By the time Obama and liberal media catch on that's he's the serious challenger opposition to Obama candidate and need to destroy him. his message will already be out there, understood and supported. Creating an, "I don't care about stupid stuff from 15 years ago. He's the man, he's got the ideas, the know how, the track record and ability to give this country and it's people exactly what they need right now. He's our man!"
If Cain goes on a ticket as VP with Gingrich and uses Gingrich as his Washington get things done mentor. Cain will be unstoppable to follow up Gingrich's presidency with his own.
Here’s another personal experience of mine in having to deal with the exact problems Newt Gingrich states undermines our American Federal government’s effectiveness at efficiency and serving the citizen. Followed by a Newt Gingrich style of innovative thinking pertaining to government. That I came to on my own once I got in the Newt Gingrich innovative mode of thinking.
He's putting this out there for all Americans to learn, come to understand, like and support. BEFORE, he climbs so far up the polls that the Obama and liberal media attack dogs see him as a threat to Obama and launch their destroy and annihilate strategies against him. By the time Obama and liberal media catch on that's he's the serious challenger opposition to Obama candidate and need to destroy him. his message will already be out there, understood and supported. Creating an, "I don't care about stupid stuff from 15 years ago. He's the man, he's got the ideas, the know how, the track record and ability to give this country and it's people exactly what they need right now. He's our man!"
If Cain goes on a ticket as VP with Gingrich and uses Gingrich as his Washington get things done mentor. Cain will be unstoppable to follow up Gingrich's presidency with his own.
Here’s another personal experience of mine in having to deal with the exact problems Newt Gingrich states undermines our American Federal government’s effectiveness at efficiency and serving the citizen. Followed by a Newt Gingrich style of innovative thinking pertaining to government. That I came to on my own once I got in the Newt Gingrich innovative mode of thinking.
I sent in the paper copyright form along with a copy of my CD for copyright registration. THIRTEEN YEARS LATER, I got the form back saying I had forgotten to check a box on the form. THIRTEEN YEARS!!
Now apply Gingrich's line of thinking. For a copyright registration. I could go online to the copyright website. Fill out the application information online, upload a digital copy of my CD, just like how you buy them from iTunes but in reverse, uploading instead of downloading. I punch in my credit card number to pay the fee, I click send. DONE. The copyright office instantly gets my Application information, my copy of my CD, my payment for the fee. It's immediately automatically entered into their system, I get an online receipt with a copyright number on it. DONE. 13 minutes instead of 13 years. Save money in wasted paper, save money in necessary physical storage space, save money in postage costs, save money in dozens of hourly labor costs and more effectively gets the job done. Sounds so obvious, I should feel stupid for being excited about it. BUT, you just aren't conditioned to government seeming, simple, fast, effective and inexpensive.
Here’s a substantive, informative exchange between Gingrich and Cain in areas that directly effect our lives and health from their debate I link below:
Now apply Gingrich's line of thinking. For a copyright registration. I could go online to the copyright website. Fill out the application information online, upload a digital copy of my CD, just like how you buy them from iTunes but in reverse, uploading instead of downloading. I punch in my credit card number to pay the fee, I click send. DONE. The copyright office instantly gets my Application information, my copy of my CD, my payment for the fee. It's immediately automatically entered into their system, I get an online receipt with a copyright number on it. DONE. 13 minutes instead of 13 years. Save money in wasted paper, save money in necessary physical storage space, save money in postage costs, save money in dozens of hourly labor costs and more effectively gets the job done. Sounds so obvious, I should feel stupid for being excited about it. BUT, you just aren't conditioned to government seeming, simple, fast, effective and inexpensive.
Here’s a substantive, informative exchange between Gingrich and Cain in areas that directly effect our lives and health from their debate I link below:
GINGRICH:
Medicare pays between $70-120 billion a year to crooks…like dentists who file 982 procedures a day. The Super Committee is not looking at this, because it requires thinking about Government…and getting people in Washington to THINK is a very big challenge.
I wrote a book in 2002 called Saving Lives and Saving Money, and I outlined what to do. Washington will do three stupid things instead of one smart thing.
I just put on the table trillions of dollars that would be saved by not paying crooks. Why is it so hard to not penalize good people before you stop paying crooks. You can take existing IBM technology and use it to stop paying crooks.
Why is it so hard to say you can turn this around and pass a bill to contract out to American Express, VISA, and IBM to handle Medicare payments and in 60 days you would save a TRILLION DOLLARS.
Anyone who currently prefers to go to a premium support system should do it next year. Tom Price has a great bill that says if you want to contract out for healthcare let’s give you more freedom. Medicare is more restrictive than the British system.
When you get the government in the business of defining what you should have, the government will say you don’t need this or that when you do.
Prostate Example — Medicare says not to test for prostate cancer, when lives can be saved if detected quickly. No one who is a urologist or cancer specialist is making these decisions. It is just bureaucrats. You need to move to a place where people get help buying insurance but the family, the patient, and the doctors make the primary decisions on keeping you healthy. Just imagine if there was government approval on IPhones or computers…bureaucrats would stop innovation and would say that 1960 model is just fine for you.
CAIN:
I am supposed to have a minute to disagree with Gingrich, but I don’t disagree with anything. So I would like to instead to add a historical perspective, since Gingrich and I can change the rules as we go. I remember talking about Medicare when I first went to Godfather’s pizza. Things inside the company were easier to control outside. Medicare started in 1965 and our government told us it would cost $6 billion to rollout, and we were told that by 1990 it would cost $12 billion. But in 1990, it actually cost $109 billion. IT WAS A 900% MISS.
How many businesses can survive missing a target like this. Long term government projections about cost have never been right. NAME ONE.
Here's another place you've probably never even thought of pertaining to government. I haven't and you guys surely know by now I'm a "Thinker." :)
The president of a huge worldwide company like Wallmart. Can sit down at his desk and through the information technology systems Wallmart uses to track it's finances. He can tell you where every single dollar of revenue that comes into Wallmart enters the Wallmart financial system, down to the specific cash register, in the specific Wallmart location in the specific town and country throughout every single cash register Wallmart owns across the whole world. He can track every single dollar that comes in as revenue to the Wallmart corporation by simply sitting at his desk, all the way down to the receipt number, credit card number, check number or cash that created that dollar of revenue. IN REAL TIME, AS IT'S HAPPENING!!!
He can do the exact same thing with every dollar of expenses down to who that dollar was paid out to. Wallmart's number of consumer purchases (revenues coming into the system) and expenses (expenses going out of the system) are thousands of multiples more than those of the United States Federal Government. Which has only 112.5 Million purchasers, taxpayers, sources of system revenue, YEARLY. Wallmart, worldwide, probably surpasses that number in a matter of a few MINUTES. My best guess is that the president of Wallmart can probably access this real time information from one cash register in Indonesia from his iPhone while on a golf course in Palm Springs.
So, why is it the United States government has no clue where it's money goes, is spent, gets lost, gets stolen, gets wasted, gets defrauded???!!!! If the Wallmart corporate president can in real time check where every single dollar goes in and out of the corporation. Can see, "Damn our purchaser in this division just paid $400 for a hammer. Immediately fire that person and defund the purchase." Why can't the United States government do that??!!
Because, the United States government operates on a mentality in it's functional systems at a place in technology before the wheel has even been invented. While Wallmart uses technology the most advanced automobile made.
It takes the government THREE YEARS to process a tax return. Wallmart could do it INSTANTLY through it's technology information systems.
Truth is, every single American should be able to go online and see where every single tax dollar is spent. To what agency it was given to, to what source that agency paid that dollar out to, to what purpose that dollar was spent to serve. With the obvious exception of national security. It allows complete government transparency which we should be allowed. It's our money, not the government's money. It puts the equation right-side up again, in the government works for us, is responsible to us, is accountable to us. Not the equation that has been perverted to the exact opposite of it's created purpose for existence under which we live now. Where we are work for the government, we are responsible to the government, we are accountable to the government.
That's Newt Gingrich thinking applied to government systems. He's truly innovative in his vision of perfection in government functionality, cost and time efficiency and in serving the customer, the citizen.
Medicare pays between $70-120 billion a year to crooks…like dentists who file 982 procedures a day. The Super Committee is not looking at this, because it requires thinking about Government…and getting people in Washington to THINK is a very big challenge.
I wrote a book in 2002 called Saving Lives and Saving Money, and I outlined what to do. Washington will do three stupid things instead of one smart thing.
I just put on the table trillions of dollars that would be saved by not paying crooks. Why is it so hard to not penalize good people before you stop paying crooks. You can take existing IBM technology and use it to stop paying crooks.
Why is it so hard to say you can turn this around and pass a bill to contract out to American Express, VISA, and IBM to handle Medicare payments and in 60 days you would save a TRILLION DOLLARS.
Anyone who currently prefers to go to a premium support system should do it next year. Tom Price has a great bill that says if you want to contract out for healthcare let’s give you more freedom. Medicare is more restrictive than the British system.
When you get the government in the business of defining what you should have, the government will say you don’t need this or that when you do.
Prostate Example — Medicare says not to test for prostate cancer, when lives can be saved if detected quickly. No one who is a urologist or cancer specialist is making these decisions. It is just bureaucrats. You need to move to a place where people get help buying insurance but the family, the patient, and the doctors make the primary decisions on keeping you healthy. Just imagine if there was government approval on IPhones or computers…bureaucrats would stop innovation and would say that 1960 model is just fine for you.
CAIN:
I am supposed to have a minute to disagree with Gingrich, but I don’t disagree with anything. So I would like to instead to add a historical perspective, since Gingrich and I can change the rules as we go. I remember talking about Medicare when I first went to Godfather’s pizza. Things inside the company were easier to control outside. Medicare started in 1965 and our government told us it would cost $6 billion to rollout, and we were told that by 1990 it would cost $12 billion. But in 1990, it actually cost $109 billion. IT WAS A 900% MISS.
How many businesses can survive missing a target like this. Long term government projections about cost have never been right. NAME ONE.
Here's another place you've probably never even thought of pertaining to government. I haven't and you guys surely know by now I'm a "Thinker." :)
The president of a huge worldwide company like Wallmart. Can sit down at his desk and through the information technology systems Wallmart uses to track it's finances. He can tell you where every single dollar of revenue that comes into Wallmart enters the Wallmart financial system, down to the specific cash register, in the specific Wallmart location in the specific town and country throughout every single cash register Wallmart owns across the whole world. He can track every single dollar that comes in as revenue to the Wallmart corporation by simply sitting at his desk, all the way down to the receipt number, credit card number, check number or cash that created that dollar of revenue. IN REAL TIME, AS IT'S HAPPENING!!!
He can do the exact same thing with every dollar of expenses down to who that dollar was paid out to. Wallmart's number of consumer purchases (revenues coming into the system) and expenses (expenses going out of the system) are thousands of multiples more than those of the United States Federal Government. Which has only 112.5 Million purchasers, taxpayers, sources of system revenue, YEARLY. Wallmart, worldwide, probably surpasses that number in a matter of a few MINUTES. My best guess is that the president of Wallmart can probably access this real time information from one cash register in Indonesia from his iPhone while on a golf course in Palm Springs.
So, why is it the United States government has no clue where it's money goes, is spent, gets lost, gets stolen, gets wasted, gets defrauded???!!!! If the Wallmart corporate president can in real time check where every single dollar goes in and out of the corporation. Can see, "Damn our purchaser in this division just paid $400 for a hammer. Immediately fire that person and defund the purchase." Why can't the United States government do that??!!
Because, the United States government operates on a mentality in it's functional systems at a place in technology before the wheel has even been invented. While Wallmart uses technology the most advanced automobile made.
It takes the government THREE YEARS to process a tax return. Wallmart could do it INSTANTLY through it's technology information systems.
Truth is, every single American should be able to go online and see where every single tax dollar is spent. To what agency it was given to, to what source that agency paid that dollar out to, to what purpose that dollar was spent to serve. With the obvious exception of national security. It allows complete government transparency which we should be allowed. It's our money, not the government's money. It puts the equation right-side up again, in the government works for us, is responsible to us, is accountable to us. Not the equation that has been perverted to the exact opposite of it's created purpose for existence under which we live now. Where we are work for the government, we are responsible to the government, we are accountable to the government.
That's Newt Gingrich thinking applied to government systems. He's truly innovative in his vision of perfection in government functionality, cost and time efficiency and in serving the customer, the citizen.
Why have we as a people allowed our government to continually operate in the “dark ages” versus the advanced “technological age” of our current time? Because, those in government have “brainwashed” us to believe that government exists to serve an ideology. But, truth government exists to serve it’s people universally, NOT ideologically. Why has our government chosen to stay in the “dark ages” versus operating in the advanced “technological age” of our time? Because, they get to operate behind closed doors, blinding us to what they are really doing and why they are doing it.
We have many Federal agencies that serve absolutely not true government purpose. Providing benefit to all citizens equally and unilaterally. An example is The Department of Education. What is the TRUE purpose of The Department Of Education? To serve function, effective higher level of quality of education in America, turning out students in mass that rank in education product at the top of the world rankings? NO!! Which is exactly why we are now ranked #19 in education versus other countries in the world. The Department of Education exists for one and one purpose only. To serve political ideology. To indoctrinate American children into a political ideological way of thinking and continuing that ideological indoctrination throughout their whole education. So, much emphasis is put on liberal ideological indoctrination in our American students. That the true purpose and responsibility of education is being neglected and ignored, which reflects in the products our American education produces. Students who cannot compete on an educational level worldwide. That’s how our current “dark ages” approach to government operates. That’s why our current government approaches exist as they do. Purely to serve political ideology, not to best serve it’s citizens, it’s purpose for existence in the first place.
Political ideology should be something that is found, applied and used in thinking from the bottom up. NOT, the top down as it operates under our current government political system.
Truth is there is not one HONEST democrat out there than can condemn Newt Gingrich. Because, every time a democrat holds up Bill Clinton's presidency as an example of good leadership creating 11 million of jobs, getting people off of welfare into jobs, balancing the budget four years in a row, having an unemployment rate of 4.2%, and leaving behind a $2 TRILLION budget surplus. They are actually endorsing Newt Gingrich. Because, Newt Gingrich was the mastermind who created and passed all of the legislation that created Bill Clinton's positive fiscal legacy. All Clinton did was sign the bills and legislation into law that Gingrich created. :)
Which creates quite a "pickle" for the democrats. Because, they have to condemn Clinton to condemn Gingrich. :)
MAKE THE TIME TO WATCH THIS DEBATE!! IT WILL CHANGE THE WAY YOU THINK ABOUT GOVERNMENT TO POSITIVE WAYS!!
www.newt.org/news/video-newt-and-herman-cain-debate-entitlements
We have many Federal agencies that serve absolutely not true government purpose. Providing benefit to all citizens equally and unilaterally. An example is The Department of Education. What is the TRUE purpose of The Department Of Education? To serve function, effective higher level of quality of education in America, turning out students in mass that rank in education product at the top of the world rankings? NO!! Which is exactly why we are now ranked #19 in education versus other countries in the world. The Department of Education exists for one and one purpose only. To serve political ideology. To indoctrinate American children into a political ideological way of thinking and continuing that ideological indoctrination throughout their whole education. So, much emphasis is put on liberal ideological indoctrination in our American students. That the true purpose and responsibility of education is being neglected and ignored, which reflects in the products our American education produces. Students who cannot compete on an educational level worldwide. That’s how our current “dark ages” approach to government operates. That’s why our current government approaches exist as they do. Purely to serve political ideology, not to best serve it’s citizens, it’s purpose for existence in the first place.
Political ideology should be something that is found, applied and used in thinking from the bottom up. NOT, the top down as it operates under our current government political system.
Truth is there is not one HONEST democrat out there than can condemn Newt Gingrich. Because, every time a democrat holds up Bill Clinton's presidency as an example of good leadership creating 11 million of jobs, getting people off of welfare into jobs, balancing the budget four years in a row, having an unemployment rate of 4.2%, and leaving behind a $2 TRILLION budget surplus. They are actually endorsing Newt Gingrich. Because, Newt Gingrich was the mastermind who created and passed all of the legislation that created Bill Clinton's positive fiscal legacy. All Clinton did was sign the bills and legislation into law that Gingrich created. :)
Which creates quite a "pickle" for the democrats. Because, they have to condemn Clinton to condemn Gingrich. :)
MAKE THE TIME TO WATCH THIS DEBATE!! IT WILL CHANGE THE WAY YOU THINK ABOUT GOVERNMENT TO POSITIVE WAYS!!
www.newt.org/news/video-newt-and-herman-cain-debate-entitlements
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Newt Gingrich. Our Only True Option Of Saving America and WHY?
Who's the best presidential hopeful to replace Obama and return America to it's greatness? Here's a perspective you need to consider in your ability to answer that question. It’s worth taking a minute to read this. Then click “share.” We elected Obama, purely on "likeable" and "emotion." We totally ignored necessary and applicable experience in electing our current president. We see where that's gotten us. Now it's serious business. We are one president away from complete destruction and insolvency. Here’s some clarity in how to properly answer who’s best for the job.
Here's how I look at it. You've got Wallmart (America), a general retailer of massive available products level, it's in the tank, going down the drain, financially insolvent, four more years of the same leadership and the greatest retailer of all time worldwide will be gone.
You need to hire someone as President of Wallmart to turn it around, make it profitable again, make it function and return it to it's previous effective, productive, well-oiled functional successful machine it once was in it's last great financially successful period, 1990's.
Here's your candidate base for that job. You've got Three former presidents of the 7-11 Corporation (Governor's of States), 7-11 a limited general retailer of limited product offerings; a former President of Godfather's Pizza chain. Then you have the former CEO of Wallmart who was in the number #3 position at Wallmart in the 1990s, a man who was crucial the driving force within Wallmart to the healthy state of Wallmart in the 1990s. A man who was the driving force within Wallmart at the "place" of success and productivity you are trying to save Wallmart from default and return back to in success.
Who am I going to pick? One of the three former 7-11 Corporation presidents? Sure, they have successful leadership as the Presidents of a chain of stores in much different business environments and with a miniscule business model compared to Wallmart. The Godfather Pizza Chain former President? Great guy, I really like him personally, straight up, straight shooter. But, even in his successes with Godfather's Pizza, a limited product retailer. Does his experience really translate to success at running a Wallmart?
OR the former CEO, the guy who was the driving force of the success Wallmart experienced in the state of health that is exactly where we are trying to get Wallmart back to? For me, if I can't afford further risks between how these other candidates from completely different business models, although successful at those levels, will operate in achieving the needs of this necessary new Wallmart leader. Then who would you hire?
Newt. The one who's proven to be able to do the exact job you need done, in the exact environment, business model, system that you need success achieved at saving Wallmart and turning it back into the world leader powerhouse it has historically been.
Hell, Apple fired Steve Jobs because he was a nut, asshole to people and even his own employees. Steve Jobs was brutal on his employees, made them work 12 hours a day until they produced his vision in products. He was NOT LIKEABLE! He refused to accept responsibility for his own child when his girlfriend got pregnant. He was a flat-out asshole as a person. But, being a great guy and likeable was not his job as president of Apple before he was fired.
When Apple started faltering, who did they hire back to run the company, turn it around and make it even more successful? They hired the asshole back and he drove success of the Apple Corporation beyond it's previous state and rocketed it back into one of the greatest corporations of all time. :)
A Gingrich/Cain ticket is the best America could ever hope for at this time in our history. The stars have lined up for us perfectly in this moment in time and need. In offering the exact record of success and experience desperately needed in reducing government spending, balancing our budget, reforming welfare, reforming our tax code, creating millions of new jobs and turning our economy back into a well-burning fire house of economic growth. We've got one chance to fix this. We have to go with with what we know works. Tried proven experience in the same place we need it now!
Please click “share” if you have the ability to see the reality and clarity here within.
David Carter
Here's how I look at it. You've got Wallmart (America), a general retailer of massive available products level, it's in the tank, going down the drain, financially insolvent, four more years of the same leadership and the greatest retailer of all time worldwide will be gone.
You need to hire someone as President of Wallmart to turn it around, make it profitable again, make it function and return it to it's previous effective, productive, well-oiled functional successful machine it once was in it's last great financially successful period, 1990's.
Here's your candidate base for that job. You've got Three former presidents of the 7-11 Corporation (Governor's of States), 7-11 a limited general retailer of limited product offerings; a former President of Godfather's Pizza chain. Then you have the former CEO of Wallmart who was in the number #3 position at Wallmart in the 1990s, a man who was crucial the driving force within Wallmart to the healthy state of Wallmart in the 1990s. A man who was the driving force within Wallmart at the "place" of success and productivity you are trying to save Wallmart from default and return back to in success.
Who am I going to pick? One of the three former 7-11 Corporation presidents? Sure, they have successful leadership as the Presidents of a chain of stores in much different business environments and with a miniscule business model compared to Wallmart. The Godfather Pizza Chain former President? Great guy, I really like him personally, straight up, straight shooter. But, even in his successes with Godfather's Pizza, a limited product retailer. Does his experience really translate to success at running a Wallmart?
OR the former CEO, the guy who was the driving force of the success Wallmart experienced in the state of health that is exactly where we are trying to get Wallmart back to? For me, if I can't afford further risks between how these other candidates from completely different business models, although successful at those levels, will operate in achieving the needs of this necessary new Wallmart leader. Then who would you hire?
Newt. The one who's proven to be able to do the exact job you need done, in the exact environment, business model, system that you need success achieved at saving Wallmart and turning it back into the world leader powerhouse it has historically been.
Hell, Apple fired Steve Jobs because he was a nut, asshole to people and even his own employees. Steve Jobs was brutal on his employees, made them work 12 hours a day until they produced his vision in products. He was NOT LIKEABLE! He refused to accept responsibility for his own child when his girlfriend got pregnant. He was a flat-out asshole as a person. But, being a great guy and likeable was not his job as president of Apple before he was fired.
When Apple started faltering, who did they hire back to run the company, turn it around and make it even more successful? They hired the asshole back and he drove success of the Apple Corporation beyond it's previous state and rocketed it back into one of the greatest corporations of all time. :)
A Gingrich/Cain ticket is the best America could ever hope for at this time in our history. The stars have lined up for us perfectly in this moment in time and need. In offering the exact record of success and experience desperately needed in reducing government spending, balancing our budget, reforming welfare, reforming our tax code, creating millions of new jobs and turning our economy back into a well-burning fire house of economic growth. We've got one chance to fix this. We have to go with with what we know works. Tried proven experience in the same place we need it now!
Please click “share” if you have the ability to see the reality and clarity here within.
David Carter
Add blog to our directory.
Monday, October 31, 2011
Newt Gingrich A Modern Day Abraham Lincoln Who Has Proven To Free The Slaves Of Modern Day America!
We aren't electing a president of a high school congeniality club. We are electing someone who has the balls to do the right thing for America. I doubt any of us are the same people we were 20 years ago, if we are we haven't advanced much in personal growth and that to me is questionable in a person's ability to be effective, bold, and make the forceful, effective, successful decisions this nation needs to curb it's downward spiral into financial insolvency.
To me the most qualified people are those who have had a history of recognizing mistakes, seeing the need for personal change, being able to admit to personal flaws along the way and seeing the need to grow into better people, change, grow, adapt to the ever changing world. Something we have not seen in the White House even when the need for change to better serve the American people is obvious to all. But, some people seem to think they are incapable of making a "bad call," choosing a flawed approach, admitting to a mistake they've made.
I see they are launching personal assassinations against Herman Cain too. Democrats and Liberals, the supposed "nice" party, will always try to assassinate the character of any black successful person who is not a liberal or on welfare. Let's see... Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, even Jackie Robinson who broke the color barrier for blacks in professional baseball, etc., etc... and now Herman Cain. Why? Because when all you have at your disposal to win is attacking a personal character. Then they must be the right people for the job, because you obviously see no place to attack them on what actually matters, policy, proven effectiveness, success and effectiveness. All it says to me is desperation overwhelming the liberals and democrats.
It's amazing how liberals and democrats attack the most successful of the African-American race in rising above all which should serve as role models to all other African-Americans in seeing hope, faith in themselves, the "it can happen." If an African-American breaks the color barrier, opening the door to new areas of success available to his race. That person is reviled, attacked, denigrated by democrats, liberals. American history has proven that again and again.
Then those same liberals/democrats champion people like African-American Al Sharpton who no one had ever heard of until he jumped in to represent the family publicly of a teenage girl who admittedly FALSELY accused white police officers of raping, beating and shitting on her. That's democrat/liberal credibility? Or Charles Rheingold an African-American senator on the committee in charge of American tax policy, who blatantly lied on his own tax returns to not have to pay certain taxes. That's democrat/liberal credibility?
Truly sad what the democrat party has become. But, then again.. maybe that's just who they've always been. It's indisputable historical fact that the democrats, not republicans fought AGAINST every single piece of civil rights legislation attempted to be passed pertaining to African-Americans and who championed a man who was an officer recruiter and leader in the Klu Klux Klan as a democrat senator until he day he died in 2010. Robert Byrd.
Every piece of legislation brought up on behalf of African-American rights in our history was aggressively fought against to eliminate these civil rights being awarded to African-Americans was challenged and fought against by democrats. Breaking records of filibusters, sending the legislation to committee's to make them go away. It's all historical record, in the votes, in our Congress's minutes records.
I'm not a republican, but unfortunately I've learned that if you are not a liberal democrat, then in their minds your are a republican because it's easier to try and vilify you. Because, if you are free-thinking independent they can't really attack you because you don't fall into any particular group. Pretty much how the Tea Party has been such a problem for the liberal democrats leading them to make baseless claims against free-thinking Americans who do believe in the concept of Martin Luther King's fight for equality, versus liberal democrat policy of racial inequality.
Free-thinking Americans who agree a person should be judged NOT by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. That which created their individual, personal greatness, personal achievement, personally broke racial barriers all NOT based on the color of their skin but the elements within them as colorless people in all things that define "character" in human beings. Democrat/liberal approach to race is, "they can't do it on their own, no faith in the individual, therefore we must do it for them." Conservatives approach races through, "I believe you can do it on your own and we are willing to help you through government policy, not cripple you by making you dependent on government, through tools of education, tools to help you see the greatness within yourself to create your own American dream. Which your liberal democrat sector society will vilify you for, in your daring to step out of the democrat/liberal policy of dependence as a slave to the democrat/liberal plantation.
It really effected me when my daughter drove me through the government dependent black community in Baltimore, MD. What I saw socially and communally was what I would have expected to see 150 years ago traveling through slave shelters of plantations after the work day ended. I saw the same faces of a sense of "no hope," "it will never get better than this," this is who I am and all I deserve" I would have expected to see traveling through the slave quarters 150 plus years ago after a long day in the cotton fields.
Those people existed in no greater place at the end of the day than they did 150 plus years ago. She works in the inner city schools, hoping to make a difference in a young African-American child's life that may help them some day become an individual, personal success story like Jackie Robinson, Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas, Condoleeze Rice, Herman Cain whom too will be vilified for stepping off the democrat, liberal plantation of crippling government dependence.
My daughter told me they did a study of the government dependent families in Baltimore and 70% of those African-Americans never travel beyond a 35 mile radius from Baltimore during the course of their whole lifetime. They never leave the democrat/liberal plantation because of the crippling dependent slavery driven by democrat/liberal policy towards African-Americans.
Just as many of the plantation slaves of American history 150 years ago never left their own slave plantations once given complete freedom. Because, they found personal freedom to be daunting. All of a sudden, they had to provide for themselves, put a roof over their own heads, feed themselves, educate themselves. All things they'd never had to accept responsibility for as slaves. Exactly, the situation created by liberal democrat government policies of today. All the personal impact of past slavery and current slavery of the American black communities. The slaves from the fields of 150 plus years ago, many chose to stay with all they new. Dependence on their Massa's for personal sustenance. Due to liberal/democrat federal government policies towards our current African-American population. Many of them have not elevated in personal lifestyle, other than physical impugning since the beginning of this nation in self-elevation because of being forced into positions through liberal/democrat policies of total dependence on someone else for their personal sustenance. To me to purposely cripple a person's spirit, ambition, motivation, hope, fortitude, etc. is in itself a human rights violation.
What was the purpose of a whip on plantations before African-Americans were freed from physical slavery? To break a man's spirit, to undermine his internal nature, elements of character that make him walk in step with the other slaves, "what a good slave does," with what his slave owner's wanted for THEMSELVES.
The only difference between the strands of the whip of past times and current democrat/liberal policy of today towards African-Americans is the visible, physical scars. The scars on the souls and spirits of black slaves of the past plantations and black slaves of the current democrat/liberal Massas are exactly the same.
This is EXACTLY what Herman Cain was speaking to in his statement, "There's a portion of the African-American community that has been brain-washed to always support the democrat party." The modern day African-American slaves of the liberal/democrat federal government policies, who vote to support their Massas. So, they will be allowed to continue to live on the slave plantations because that's the only way of life they know. Just like many African-American slaves for physical slavery remained on the slave plantations after they were given full physical freedoms and independence from the institution of physical slavery, because it was the only way of life they knew. Total dependence on someone else for sustenance.
Why did the owners of slave plantations of 150 plus years ago own slaves? Personal wealth and personal power in society. Why do the liberal/democrat politicians in Washington own welfare, section 8, etc. slave plantations of today in their liberal/democrat party policies towards blacks today? The exact same thing. Personal wealth ad personal power.
It was an abomination 150 plus years ago and it's an abomination today. Every step of the way it's always been driven by democrats. Fighting civil rights legislation, Jim Crow laws, poll taxes, etc. Which despite democrat intent on keeping the black population of this nation downtrodden was defeated. How did they respond, by creating a new slave plantation within the federal government to continue to keep black Americans downtrodden, under their control and under their thumb.
Which is EXACTLY why I support Newt Gingrich. Newt wrote his own Emancipation Proclamation and freed 66% of the current liberal/democrat slaves at that time. He's proven through his own successful legislative policy that he is against modern day slavery of the democrat party. His welfare reform during his tenure as Speaker Of The House, freed 66% of the black slaves of modern day liberal/democrat government slave plantation. Allowing those 66% of Americans freedom to no longer be slaves to the liberal/democrat federal slave plantation of "welfare." Allowing that 66% of black Americans to be able to leave the liberal/democrat plantations and find their own person freedom through self-sustenance in jobs and education.
Truth is American History is a bitch to liberal democrats. Because, if Americans truly studied and understood the history of the democrat party through our nation's history in never allowing African-Americans to be free from slavery of any kind. Then the democrats would cease to exist. Which perhaps is why they've made sure our American Education System is a place of social engineering as opposed to the purposes for which it was created to educate in the disciplines of Science, English, Math, HISTORY, etc.
The democratic party of a hundred and fifty years of yesterdays was no different than it is today. The democratic party has always controlled the African-American population of America with fear. Fear of whippings, hangings, loss of government sustenance they have been convinced they cannot live without.
Free-thinking Americans who agree a person should be judged NOT by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. That which created their individual, personal greatness, personal achievement, personally broke racial barriers all NOT based on the color of their skin but the elements within them as colorless people in all things that define "character" in human beings. Democrat/liberal approach to race is, "they can't do it on their own, no faith in the individual, therefore we must do it for them." Conservatives approach races through, "I believe you can do it on your own and we are willing to help you through government policy, not cripple you by making you dependent on government, through tools of education, tools to help you see the greatness within yourself to create your own American dream. Which your liberal democrat sector society will vilify you for, in your daring to step out of the democrat/liberal policy of dependence as a slave to the democrat/liberal plantation.
It really effected me when my daughter drove me through the government dependent black community in Baltimore, MD. What I saw socially and communally was what I would have expected to see 150 years ago traveling through slave shelters of plantations after the work day ended. I saw the same faces of a sense of "no hope," "it will never get better than this," this is who I am and all I deserve" I would have expected to see traveling through the slave quarters 150 plus years ago after a long day in the cotton fields.
Those people existed in no greater place at the end of the day than they did 150 plus years ago. She works in the inner city schools, hoping to make a difference in a young African-American child's life that may help them some day become an individual, personal success story like Jackie Robinson, Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas, Condoleeze Rice, Herman Cain whom too will be vilified for stepping off the democrat, liberal plantation of crippling government dependence.
My daughter told me they did a study of the government dependent families in Baltimore and 70% of those African-Americans never travel beyond a 35 mile radius from Baltimore during the course of their whole lifetime. They never leave the democrat/liberal plantation because of the crippling dependent slavery driven by democrat/liberal policy towards African-Americans.
Just as many of the plantation slaves of American history 150 years ago never left their own slave plantations once given complete freedom. Because, they found personal freedom to be daunting. All of a sudden, they had to provide for themselves, put a roof over their own heads, feed themselves, educate themselves. All things they'd never had to accept responsibility for as slaves. Exactly, the situation created by liberal democrat government policies of today. All the personal impact of past slavery and current slavery of the American black communities. The slaves from the fields of 150 plus years ago, many chose to stay with all they new. Dependence on their Massa's for personal sustenance. Due to liberal/democrat federal government policies towards our current African-American population. Many of them have not elevated in personal lifestyle, other than physical impugning since the beginning of this nation in self-elevation because of being forced into positions through liberal/democrat policies of total dependence on someone else for their personal sustenance. To me to purposely cripple a person's spirit, ambition, motivation, hope, fortitude, etc. is in itself a human rights violation.
What was the purpose of a whip on plantations before African-Americans were freed from physical slavery? To break a man's spirit, to undermine his internal nature, elements of character that make him walk in step with the other slaves, "what a good slave does," with what his slave owner's wanted for THEMSELVES.
The only difference between the strands of the whip of past times and current democrat/liberal policy of today towards African-Americans is the visible, physical scars. The scars on the souls and spirits of black slaves of the past plantations and black slaves of the current democrat/liberal Massas are exactly the same.
This is EXACTLY what Herman Cain was speaking to in his statement, "There's a portion of the African-American community that has been brain-washed to always support the democrat party." The modern day African-American slaves of the liberal/democrat federal government policies, who vote to support their Massas. So, they will be allowed to continue to live on the slave plantations because that's the only way of life they know. Just like many African-American slaves for physical slavery remained on the slave plantations after they were given full physical freedoms and independence from the institution of physical slavery, because it was the only way of life they knew. Total dependence on someone else for sustenance.
Why did the owners of slave plantations of 150 plus years ago own slaves? Personal wealth and personal power in society. Why do the liberal/democrat politicians in Washington own welfare, section 8, etc. slave plantations of today in their liberal/democrat party policies towards blacks today? The exact same thing. Personal wealth ad personal power.
It was an abomination 150 plus years ago and it's an abomination today. Every step of the way it's always been driven by democrats. Fighting civil rights legislation, Jim Crow laws, poll taxes, etc. Which despite democrat intent on keeping the black population of this nation downtrodden was defeated. How did they respond, by creating a new slave plantation within the federal government to continue to keep black Americans downtrodden, under their control and under their thumb.
Which is EXACTLY why I support Newt Gingrich. Newt wrote his own Emancipation Proclamation and freed 66% of the current liberal/democrat slaves at that time. He's proven through his own successful legislative policy that he is against modern day slavery of the democrat party. His welfare reform during his tenure as Speaker Of The House, freed 66% of the black slaves of modern day liberal/democrat government slave plantation. Allowing those 66% of Americans freedom to no longer be slaves to the liberal/democrat federal slave plantation of "welfare." Allowing that 66% of black Americans to be able to leave the liberal/democrat plantations and find their own person freedom through self-sustenance in jobs and education.
Truth is American History is a bitch to liberal democrats. Because, if Americans truly studied and understood the history of the democrat party through our nation's history in never allowing African-Americans to be free from slavery of any kind. Then the democrats would cease to exist. Which perhaps is why they've made sure our American Education System is a place of social engineering as opposed to the purposes for which it was created to educate in the disciplines of Science, English, Math, HISTORY, etc.
The democratic party of a hundred and fifty years of yesterdays was no different than it is today. The democratic party has always controlled the African-American population of America with fear. Fear of whippings, hangings, loss of government sustenance they have been convinced they cannot live without.
They don't treat their opposing parties any different either. Other than, instead of threats of physical destruction and hanging like this cartoon printed in a newspaper in 1868. The democrat donkey, also core of the Klu Klux Klan, as the democrat donkey is marked, threatening Ohio republicans if they tried to make a positive difference in the life of African-Americans. No, today they don't do a physical lynching, they do a character lynching, because they can't attack obvious sound, positive, effective policy for the lives of all Americans. It doesn't matter whether you are black or white. If you dare try to help free the African-American slaves of their liberal/democrat policy slave plantations. You will be symbolically lynched.
History stands on it's own. Before you claim your are a liberal democrat. You should truly understand the depth of what you are saying in continuous historical ideology and legacy.
You possess no credibility, when you say you exists in political ideology to elevate the downtrodden, poor, disadvantaged. When as a party you oppose every attempt in idea and policy to elevate those exact same people from the exact same place you claim to exist to serve. You can't attack school vouchers that allow poor black kids from the government paid for welfare rolls to have a choice to go to better schools, get a better opportunity for self-elevation and personal dependence, versus government dependence. You can't claim that government has served any positive purpose other than re-stocking the monthly trough of food and shelter for these people. When anyone who truly cared would want to see more for these people finding self-elevation to a better place in life. Which can never come from government sustenance, which is simply "existence." Not quality of life.
You can't claim you "care" to see these lower level people in our society to rise to better places in society. When you revile, attack and attempt to destroy those of their own races who made it out of the place of downtrodden, poor, disadvantaged sector of American society. The people you should be using as examples and role models of hope, faith, "it can happen," "he/she did it and you can too!" You democrats and liberals attack, try to destroy for having done exactly what you say you exist to create in our society. You don't choose to use the successful who did prove to accomplish all you want to see for the downtrodden, poor, disadvantaged sectors of our society. The people you should be using as heroes to those your claim to exist to serve and make their lives better places. No, you choose to try and destroy exactly what you claim to exist to promote. If one of those people does rise totally based on the content of their character and NOT the color of their skin. You will try to destroy them too. As history has proven.
A black American who has done it all on his own without government assistance to achieve great things, break racial barriers for his fellow man of his own race. You liberal democrats have proven in how you approach such successful people of color, is your arched enemy you will destroy if humanly possible.
Something to think about the next time you call yourself a democrat, liberal! Throughout history liberal democrats have served to try and destroy every successful person of color who found success without being dependent on your liberal, democrat governmental "keep them in check" policies. Booker T. Washington, Clarence Thomas, Martin Luther King, Jackie Robinson, Bill Cosby, Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, Herman Cain, etc., etc., etc.
These are not Newt Gingrich's words, opinions, statements, etc. Just my simple observations when looking at the big picture of today's American politics. Newt's the on current presidential candidate who's already proven his ability to improve the quality o life for ALL Americans in a colorblind way. "Not based on the color of one's skin, but by the content of their character." He created 11 MILLION JOBS for ALL races, as Speaker Of The House. That's patriotic, that's called "being American."
Something to think about.
Monday, October 3, 2011
"Reality vs. Myth" Which Political Party Has Always Championed Race Minority Rights & Best Interests? Democrats? Think Again!
I get so sick of liberals and democrats calling conservatives and republicans racists. When if you actually apply the documented historical FACTS of reality in American politics you see the EXACT OPPOSITE is the truth!
It's time for a "reality check" in factually historical reality vs. liberal "urban myth."
Most people are clueless, due to revisionist history (dishonesty), to the fact that the Civil Rights Act of 1957 & 1964 were actually originally written by republicans who were in the minority in Congress at the time. The democrats who were in the majority couldn't allow the republicans to go on record as champions of rights for minorities. So, they took the republicans Civil Rights Act and re-wrote it as their own to falsely claim to be champions of minority rights. Which all factual history clearly reveals to be the opposite in truth.
Who was it in 2008 (relevant) that said in reference to Obama, "A few years ago, this guy (Obama) would be getting us coffee."? It was Bill Clinton, democrat. Who was it in 2007 (relevant) that said in reference to Obama, "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy"? It was Joe Biden, democrat.
It's always good to know actual, factual history. Most of the time you learn what you've been told is actually and factually 180 degrees opposite of the truth.
In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes. (source: Congresslink.com)
The vote on the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was finally voted upon after the longest filibuster in American history to prevent the passing of legislation was conducted by Robert C. Byrd, a democrat senator (until he died June 28, 2010) and former Kleagle (recruiter) and Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan. The fact that Robert Byrd an officer in the Ku Klux Klan was allowed by his democrats to remain a Senator for decades after being a Ku Klux Klan leader should tell you all you need to know in the truth of the democrat vs. republican party.
Actual Democrat vs. Republican voting record on the Civil Rights Act of 1964. There were 520 votes cast, comprising of:
SENATE:
Democrats voted: 69% (46 for/21 against) for Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Republicans voted: 82% (27 for/6 against) for Civil Rights Act of 1964
HOUSE:
Democrats voted: 61% (152 for/96 against) for Civil Rights Act of 1964
Republicans voted: 80% (138 for/34 against) for Civil Rights Act of 1964
(The source: The Congressional Quarterly of June 26, 1964)
There's the facts! What do they tell you? Democrats or Republicans show greatest support for Civil Rights for race minorities? Answer is clear and undeniable.
Civil Rights Act of 1957, John F. Kennedy voted to send the bill to committee, meaning the trash can, rather than allow a vote on it.
Martin Luther King was a republican, democrats were his enemy, NOT friend in his quest for Civil Rights for minority races. The facts of the Civil Rights Act he fought for above prove that undeniably.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Myth of Republican Racism
by Frances Rice, African-American
by Frances Rice, African-American
Frances Rice is a lawyer, a retired Army Lieutenant Colonel
“My grandfather, Dr. Martin Luther King, Sr., or ‘Daddy King’, was a Republican and father of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. who was a Republican.” Dr. Alveda C. King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
James Johnson, a republican, was 1st President of the republican founded NAACP.
Art Fletcher, a republican, was the father of Affirmative Action.
It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. Why? It was the Democrats who Dr. King was fighting, and he would not have joined the Democratic Party, the party of segregation and the Ku Klux Klan. To understand why MLK was a Republican, let’s take a walk through history.
~~~
History of civil rights - In a nutshell
● The Republican Party - From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the
Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks.
● The Democratic Party - As author Michael Scheuer stated, the Democrat Party is the party of the four S's: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.
Slavery
Democrats fought to expand it, Republicans fought to ban it.
.
Democrats formed the Confederacy, seceded from the Union and fought a Civil War (1861 to 1865) – a war where over 600,000 citizens were killed, including many thousands of blacks – in order to keep blacks in slavery because the Democrats had built their economic base on the backs of black slaves.
Democrats enacted Fugitive Slave laws to keep blacks from escaping from plantations and instigated the 1856 Dred Scott decision which legally classified blacks as property.
Democrats pushed to pass the Missouri Compromise to spread slavery into 50% of the new states.
Democrats also pushed to achieve passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act that was designed to spread slavery into all of the new states.
Northern anti-Civil War Democrats, called “copperheads”, did not want to be drafted to fight in the Civil War. Starting in 1861, they attacked blacks in virtually every Northern city and pushed for a negotiated peace that would have resulted in an independent Confederacy where blacks were kept in slavery. In New York, anti-Civil War Democrats engaged in “Four Days of Terror” against the city’s black population from July 13-16, 1863.
The anti-Civil War chant of the Democrats, as reported by one Pennsylvania newspaper, was: "Willing to fight for Uncle Sam", but not “for Uncle Sambo." These anti-Civil War Democrats verbally attacked Republican President Abraham Lincoln because he fought to free blacks from slavery and make his Emancipation Proclamation a reality – a Proclamation that became the source of the Juneteenth celebrations that occur in black communities today.
The Party of Lincoln
The Republican Party was started in 1854 as the anti-slavery party by abolitionists opposed to keeping blacks in human bondage, and Republicans, under the leadership of President Abraham Lincoln, fought to free blacks from slavery.
After the Civil War, Republicans amended the US Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment). Republicans passed the civil rights laws of the 1860's, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. the Democrats had left blacks alone at this moment in history, our nation would not be faced with racial divisiveness today. Instead, Democrats set for themselves the horrendous task of keeping blacks in virtual slavery.
Reconstruction
Democrats fought to end Reconstruction that was started by Republicans. Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan in 1866 to lynch and terrorize Republicans - black and white and drive Republicans out of the South.
Democrats fought to end Reconstruction that was started by Republicans. Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan in 1866 to lynch and terrorize Republicans - black and white and drive Republicans out of the South.
Photo: An 1868 cartoon with the Democratic Party Donkey threatening that the KKK would lynch Republicans in Ohio
- Printed in the Tuscaloosa, Alabama, Independent Monitor
In the book "A Short History of Reconstruction", renowned historian, Dr. Eric Foner, revealed that the Ku Klux Klan was founded in 1866 by Democrats as a Tennessee social club. The Ku Klux Klan became a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party, the planter class, and all those who desired the restoration of white supremacy. The Ku Klux Klan spread into other Southern states, launching a ‘reign of terror‘ against Republican leaders, black and white.
The Hayes-Tilden Compromise of 1877 was an attempt by Republicans to get the Democrats to stop the lynchings and respect the rights of blacks. Contrary to popular belief promoted by Democrats today.
President Rutherford Hayes did not remove the last federal troops from the South, but merely
ordered federal troops surrounding the South Carolina and Louisiana statehouses to return to
their barracks.
Segregation
Democrats wanted to keep blacks in virtual slavery and deny blacks the promised “40 acres and a mule”.
After they took control of Congress in 1892, Democrats passed the Repeal Act of 1894 that overturned civil rights legislation passed by the Republicans, including the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1875. It took Republicans nearly six decades to finally achieve passage of civil rights legislation in the 1950’s and 1960’s.
It defies logic for Democrats today to claim that the racist Democrats suddenly joined the Republican Party after Republicans finally won the civil rights battle against the racist Democrats. In fact, the racist Democrats declared that they would rather vote for a “yellow dog” than vote for a Republican, because the Republican Party was known as the party for blacks.
The Republicans started the NAACP in 1909 on Abraham Lincoln’s 100th birthday to counter the racist practices of the Democrats. The first black American to head the NAACP was Republican James Weldon Johnson who wrote the lyrics to “Lift Every Voice and Sing”, the inspirational song
that is considered to be the Black National Anthem. Few blacks know that Republicans also started the Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU’s).
James Weldon Johnson, republican
1st President of NAACP
1st President of NAACP
The Modern Civil Rights Era
Democrats fought against civil rights in the 1950’s and 1960’s.
Democrat Public Safety Commissioner Eugene "Bull" Connor in Birmingham let loose vicious dogs and turned skin-burning fire hoses on black civil rights demonstrators.
Democrat Georgia Governor Lester Maddox famously brandished ax handles to prevent black from patronizing his restaurant.
In 1954, Democrat Arkansas Governor. Orville Faubus tried to prevent desegregation of a LittleRock public school. Democrat Alabama Governor George Wallace stood in front of the Alabama schoolhouse in 1963 and thundered, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever."
All of these racist Democrats remained Democrats until the day they died.
All of these racist Democrats remained Democrats until the day they died.
Byrd was a fierce opponent of desegregating the military and complained in one letter: “I would rather die a thousand times and see old glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again than see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen of the wilds.”
Republicans championed civil rights in the 1950’s and 1960’s.
Photo: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Republican President Dwight Eisenhower
Republican President Dwight Eisenhower pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools. Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court which resulted in the famous1954 “Brown v. Topeka Board of Education” decision that ended school segregation and the “separate but equal” doctrine created by the 1896 “Plessy v. Ferguson” decision.
Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman's issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to
desegregate the military. Not mentioned is the fact that it was Eisenhower who actually took
action to effectively end segregation in the military.
In 1958, Eisenhower established a permanent Civil Rights Commission that had been rejected by prior Democrat presidents, including President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Ignored today is the fact that it was Roosevelt who started blacks on the path to dependency on government handouts during the Great Depression. With his promise of a “chicken in every pot” by Roosevelt with his “New Deal” that turned out to be a bad deal for blacks. Even though Roosevelt received the vote of many blacks. Roosevelt banned black American newspapers from the military, because he was convinced the newspapers were communists.
In 1958, Eisenhower established a permanent Civil Rights Commission that had been rejected by prior Democrat presidents, including President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Ignored today is the fact that it was Roosevelt who started blacks on the path to dependency on government handouts during the Great Depression. With his promise of a “chicken in every pot” by Roosevelt with his “New Deal” that turned out to be a bad deal for blacks. Even though Roosevelt received the vote of many blacks. Roosevelt banned black American newspapers from the military, because he was convinced the newspapers were communists.
Little known by many today is the fact that it was Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois, not Democrat President Lyndon Johnson, who pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In fact, Dirksen was instrumental to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965 and 1968. Dirksen wrote the language for the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. hailed Senator Dirksen’s “able and courageous leadership;” and "The Chicago Defender," the largest black-owned daily at that time, praised Senator Dirksen “for the grand manner of his generalship behind the passage of the best civil rights measures that have ever been enacted into law since Reconstruction.”President Lyndon Johnson was not a civil rights advocate
In his 4,500-word State of the Union Address delivered on January 4, 1965, Johnson mentioned scores of topics for federal action, but only thirty five words were devoted to civil rights. He did not mention one word about voting rights. Information about Johnson’s anemic civil rights policy positions can be found in the “Public Papers of the President, Lyndon B. Johnson,” 1965,vol. 1, p.1-9.Johnson did not predict a racist exodus to the Republican Party - In their campaign to unfairly paint the Republican Party today as racists, Democrats point to President Lyndon Johnson’s prediction that there would be an exodus from the Democratic Party because of Johnson’s support of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Omitted from the Democrats’ rewritten history is what Johnson actually meant by his prediction. Johnson’s statement was not made out of a concern that racist Democrats would suddenly join the Republican Party that was fighting for the civil rights of blacks.
Lyndon Johnson feared that the racist Democrats would again form a third party, such as the short-lived States Rights Democratic Party. In fact, Alabama’s Democrat Governor George C. Wallace in 1968 started the American Independent Party that attracted other racist candidates, including Democrat Atlanta Mayor (later Governor of Georgia) Lester Maddox. President John F. Kennedy was not a civil rights advocate.
Lyndon Johnson feared that the racist Democrats would again form a third party, such as the short-lived States Rights Democratic Party. In fact, Alabama’s Democrat Governor George C. Wallace in 1968 started the American Independent Party that attracted other racist candidates, including Democrat Atlanta Mayor (later Governor of Georgia) Lester Maddox. President John F. Kennedy was not a civil rights advocate.
Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil rights Act while he was a senator, as did Democrat Senator Al Gore, Sr. And after he became president, Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph who was a black Republican. President Kennedy, through his brother Attorney General Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a Communist in order to undermine Dr. King.
The relentless disparagement of Dr. King by Democrats led to his being physically assaulted and ultimately to his tragic death. In March of 1968, while referring to Dr. King's leaving Memphis, Tennessee after riots broke out where a teenager was killed, Democrat Senator Robert Byrd called Dr. King a "trouble-maker"who starts trouble, but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited. A few weeks later, Dr. King returned toMemphis and was assassinated on April 4, 1968.
The truth about Nixon’s “Southern Strategy”
(Photo: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Republican President Richard Nixon) Nixon voted for the 1957 Civil Rights Act Democrats condemn Republican President Richard Nixon for his so-called
“Southern Strategy.” These same Democrats expressed no concern when the racially segregated South voted solidly for Democrats for over 100 years, while deriding Republicans because of the thirty-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party.
The "Southern Strategy” that began in the 1970’s was an effort by Nixon to get fairminded people in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were discriminating against blacks. Georgia did not switch until 2004, and Louisiana was controlled by Democrats until the election of Republican Bobby Jindal, a person of color, as governor in 2007.
The "Southern Strategy” that began in the 1970’s was an effort by Nixon to get fairminded people in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were discriminating against blacks. Georgia did not switch until 2004, and Louisiana was controlled by Democrats until the election of Republican Bobby Jindal, a person of color, as governor in 2007.
The Claremont Institute published an eye-opening article by Gerald Alexander entitled “The Myth of the Racist Republicans”, an analysis of the decades-long shift of the South from the racist Democratic Party to the racially tolerant Republican Party. That article can be found on the Internet at: http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.928/article_detail.asp
Nixon started affirmative action implementation
(Photo: Fletcher meets with former President George H. W. Bush at the White House.)The enforcement of affirmative action began with Richard Nixon‘s 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher who became know as “the father of affirmative action”) that was merit-based and set the nation‘s first goals and timetables. Nixon was also responsible for the passage of civil rights legislation in the 1970’s.
Notably, Fletcher, as president of the United Negro College Fund, coined the phrase “the mind is a terrible thing to waste.” Fletcher was also one of the original nine plaintiffs in the famous “Brown v. Topeka Board of Education”. Fletcher briefly pursued a bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 1995.
Although affirmative action now has been turned by the Democrats into an unfair quota system that even most blacks do not support, affirmative action was pushed by Nixon to counter the harm caused to blacks when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson kicked almost all blacks out of federal government jobs after he was elected in 1912. Also, while Wilson was president and Congress was controlled by the Democrats, more discriminatory bills were introduced in Congress than ever before in our nation’s history.
Goldwater was a Libertarian, not a racist
(Photo: Republicans Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan) A review of Senator Barry Goldwater’s record shows that he was a Libertarian, not a racist. Goldwater was a member of the Arizona NAACP and was involved in desegregating the Arizona National Guard. He supported the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and the Civil Rights Act of 1960, as well as the constitutional amendment banning the poll tax. His opposition to the more comprehensive Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based on his libertarian views about government. Goldwater believed that the 1964 Act, as written, unconstitutionally extended the federal government's commerce power to private citizens, furthering the government’s efforts to "legislate morality" and restrict the rights of employers.
It is instructive to read the entire text of Goldwater's 1964 speech at the 28th Republican National Convention, accepting the nomination for president that is available from the Arizona Historical Foundation. By the end of his career, Goldwater was one of the most respected members of either party and was considered a stabilizing influence in the Senate. Senator Goldwater's speech may be found also on the Internet at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/daily/may98/goldwaterspeech.htm
Democrats talk tolerance, but practice intolerance
Democrats claim that they care about diversity, but readily demean black professionals who do not toe the Democratic Party’s liberal line, slandering blacks as “Uncle Toms”, “Sellouts” and “House N-word”, including Dr. Condoleezza Rice, General Colin Powel, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Janice Rogers Brown and former Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele. With impunity, Democrat Senator Ted Kennedy called black judicial nominees “Neanderthals”. Democrat Senator Harry Reid slurred Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas as an incompetent Negro who could not write good English. “Slap at Thomas stinks of racism,” was the headline of the New York Daily News’ December 7, 2004 editorial.
(Photo: Black Republican Michael Steele)Democratic Party operatives depicted former Maryland Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele on the Internet as a “Simple Sambo” with big, thick red lips and nappy hair.
Cartoonist Jeff Danziger and Pat Oliphant portrayed Dr.
Condoleezza Rice as a “stooge” and a bare foot, “Ignorant Mammy.”
Democrat President Bill Clinton – following in the footsteps of his mentor J.William Fulbright, a staunch segregationist – refused to enforce a court-ordered affirmative action plan while president and was himself sued for discriminating against his black employees while he was the Governor of Arkansas.
Clinton also had his Attorney General, Janet Reno, file a class action, reverse discrimination lawsuit on behalf of a group of white janitors at Illinois State University to stop the University from hiring blacks. None of Clinton’s inner-circle of advisors were black, and he failed to take action to stop the massacre of over 800,000 Rwandans. Without congressional or UN approval, Clinton sent 20,000 troops to help the white Europeans in Bosnia, but refused to send troops to help the 800,000 blacks in Africa.
Democrat President Bill Clinton – following in the footsteps of his mentor J.William Fulbright, a staunch segregationist – refused to enforce a court-ordered affirmative action plan while president and was himself sued for discriminating against his black employees while he was the Governor of Arkansas. Clinton also had his Attorney General, Janet Reno, file a class action, reverse discrimination lawsuit on behalf of a group of white janitors at Illinois State University to stop the University from hiring blacks. None of Clinton’s inner-circle of advisors were black, and he failed to take action to stop the massacre of over 800,000 Rwandans. Without congressional or UN approval, Clinton sent 20,000 troops to help the white Europeans in Bosnia, but refused to send troops to help the 800,000 blacks in Africa.
Democrat Joe Biden, while a senator, boasted that his home state of Delaware was a slave state. While he was an Illinois State senator, Barack Hussein Obama provided funding for slum projects in Chicago that kept blacks trapped in rat and roach infested housing. As a US senator, Obama voted against the minimum wage bill and wrote a letter of support for former Klansman Robert Byrd that helped that racist win re-election.
Democrats are hypocrites on the issue of race
Democrats accuse the Republican Party of being racists, while hypocritically ignoring racism in the Democratic Party. For instance, Democrats pointed a finger at Senator Trent Lott for his remarks about Strom Thurmond. However, there was no public outcry when Democrat Senator Christopher Dodd praised the former Klansman Robert Byrd as someone who would have been "a great senator for any moment," including the Civil War. Unlike Byrd, Thurmond was never in the Ku Klux Klan and, after he became a Republican, defended blacks against lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats. If Senator Byrd and Senator Thurmond were alive during the Civil War,and Byrd had his way, Thurmond would have been lynched.
Another example of the Democrats’ double standard on racism is the Willie Horton story. It was former Vice President Al Gore who first dug up Willie Horton to use against his rival, Michael Dukakis, during the 1988 presidential primary. Al Gore is given a pass for using Willie Horton against Dukakis during the primary, but George H. W. Bush is bashed for using Willie Horton against Dukakis during the general election.
In the face of the use of the “N-word” on television by former Klansman Robert Byrd, Democrats slandered Lee Atwater with the false accusation that he used the “N-Word” in 1981 -- ten years before he died of a brain tumor on March 30, 1991 at age 40. Atwater was a tough political strategist who beat the Democrats in the political area, but he was not a racist. At the time of his death, even the mean-spirited obituary about Atwater that was published in The New York Times on March 30, 1991 did not mention his ever having used the “N-word.” The nasty obituary about Atwater can be found on the Internet at: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?
res=9D0CEED91F3DF933A05750C0A967958260&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/O/Oreskes,%20Michael
The myth of voter suppression by Republicans
Every election cycle, Democrats try to deceive blacks by claiming falsely that Republicans engage in “voter suppression” and want to “disenfranchise” blacks, even though blacks are voting in record numbers, particularly in the 2008 election. Notably, after several investigations in 2000, 2004 and 2006 by civil rights organizations and liberal newspapers, Democrats have produced no blacks who were denied the right to vote. If even one black person had been denied the right to vote, that person’s name would have been blasted on the front page of every newspaper in this country. Democrats gleefully ignore the charges, investigations and convictions of the Democrat-controlled group, ACORN, for massive voter fraud in several states. Democrats also vigorously fight the enactment of voter identification laws that would prevent voter fraud.
The Confederate Flag and Democrats
(Photo: Ernest “Fritz” Hollings and John F. Kennedy)
Black Democrats continue to raise a ruckus about the Confederate flag, particularly in South Carolina, but ignore the fact that it was Democrat Senator Ernest Hollings who put up the Confederate flag over the South Carolina state capitol when he was the governor. Shamefully, President John F. Kennedy supported Hollings and the Confederate Flag
Black Democrats continue to raise a ruckus about the Confederate flag, particularly in South Carolina, but ignore the fact that it was Democrat Senator Ernest Hollings who put up the Confederate flag over the South Carolina state capitol when he was the governor. Shamefully, President John F. Kennedy supported Hollings and the Confederate Flag
Hurricane Katrina – Democrats failed blacks
To their eternal shame, Democrats and the media used the tragedy of Hurricane Katrina to perpetuate the falsehood that Republicans do not care about blacks. In fact, it was the Democrats in charge of Louisiana and New Orleans who failed to act to protect black citizens. Democrat officials refused to implement the emergency evacuation plan and did not pre-position emergency supplies and personnel in the Super Dome. Over 1,000 buses were allowed to become ruined by the flood, and the Red Cross was prevented from bringing in truck loads of food and supplies into the city.
The 1898 Posse Comitatus Act precludes a president from going into a state without an invitation from the governor, and the Louisiana Democrat Governor Kathleen Blanco withheld her consent until it was too late for effective federal help. Democrats blocked Bush’s 2001 energy bill which had $540 million for levee repairs. An article by Wayne Perryman detailing Democrat failures during Hurricane Katrina is posted on the NBRA website at:
http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.DYK-Katrina&tp_preview=true
The Democratic Party today is anti-black
Democrats have been running black communities for the past 40 years, and the socialist policies of the Democrats have turned black communities into economic and social wastelands. Democrats have the audacity to blame Republicans for the crisis in black neighborhoods created by the Democrats.
Democratic Party operatives trashed black Democrat Juan Williams, calling him a “Happy Negro” for daring to expose the failed socialist policies of the Democrats in his book “Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America.”
To their shame, Democrats deliberately keep blacks in poverty because Democrats have built their political power base on the backs of poor blacks, just as Democrats built their economic power base on the backs of poor blacks during the days of slavery. The centuries-old election year strategy of the Democrats is to keep blacks poor, angry and voting for Democrats.
Every election cycle, Democrats preach hatred against Republicans and incite blacks to cast a protest vote against Republicans, not for Democrats.
Every election cycle, Democrats preach hatred against Republicans and incite blacks to cast a protest vote against Republicans, not for Democrats.
With the complicity of the liberal press, Democrats hide their actions that keep blacks in poverty. For instance, Democrats are aligned with the Teachers’ Union and block 
efforts of Republicans to provide school choice scholarships to black parents so they can get their children out of failing schools. Democrats put the special interests of the Teachers’ Union over that of poor blacks. Democrats do not want to acknowledge that the money belongs to the people, not the buildings that are controlled by the teachers. Democrats are also aligned with the AARP, one of the Democratic Party’s biggest special interest groups and block Social Security reform, even though blacks on average lose $10,000 in the system because blacks on average have a five-year shorter life expectancy.
efforts of Republicans to provide school choice scholarships to black parents so they can get their children out of failing schools. Democrats put the special interests of the Teachers’ Union over that of poor blacks. Democrats do not want to acknowledge that the money belongs to the people, not the buildings that are controlled by the teachers. Democrats are also aligned with the AARP, one of the Democratic Party’s biggest special interest groups and block Social Security reform, even though blacks on average lose $10,000 in the system because blacks on average have a five-year shorter life expectancy.
Senate Democrats on April 1, 2004 blocked passage of a bill to renew the 1996 welfare reform law that was pushed by Republicans and vetoed twice by President Bill Clinton before he finally signed it. It wasn’t until 2005 that the Republicans were finally able to achieve the extension of welfare reform that allows the money to be used for job training, transportation and child care, rather than just a government handout where Uncle Sam replaces the father in black families.
The Republican Party today promotes black prosperity. The core socialist philosophy of the Democrats is to give a man a fish, so he can eat for a day. Socialism uses welfare — giving a man a fish — to keep blacks in poverty.
The core free enterprise philosophy of the Republicans is to teach a man how to fish so he can feed himself for a lifetime.
Even though most blacks have been wrongly convinced that the Republican Party is a racist party and refuse to vote for Republicans, Republicans at the federal level continue to help blacks prosper. Contrary to popular belief, blacks prospered under President Ronald Reagan who also made Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s birthday a holiday.
President George W. Bush appointed more blacks to high-level positions than any president in our nation’s history and spent record money on education, job training and health care. Poverty programs, including “S-Chip”, do not get cut by Republicans because federal law mandates automatic increases for poverty programs.
Since the so-called War on Poverty, over $7 trillion has been spent on poverty programs. According to the Washington Post, in 2006 alone over $500 billion was spent on over 80 poverty-related programs, with little movement in the poverty needle.
President George W. Bush appointed more blacks to high-level positions than any president in our nation’s history and spent record money on education, job training and health care. Poverty programs, including “S-Chip”, do not get cut by Republicans because federal law mandates automatic increases for poverty programs.
Since the so-called War on Poverty, over $7 trillion has been spent on poverty programs. According to the Washington Post, in 2006 alone over $500 billion was spent on over 80 poverty-related programs, with little movement in the poverty needle.
Money is not the issue. Instead, adherence to socialism and dependency on government handouts has produced generational poverty in black communities.
In an effort to bring accountability to the public school system and close the achievement gap, the No Child Left Behind Act was fully funded to the tune of $13.1 billion. Over $1.4 billion has been spent for overall education - a record 137% increase. Bush has also spent $18.8 million for Historically Black Colleges, $24 billion for small business loans and grants,and $10 billion for Medicaid, the state-federal health insurance for the poor. Since 2001, access to free community health centers has been extended to 2.2 million poor people. In May 2003, Bush provided $15 billion, three times more money than President Bill Clinton, to fight AIDS in Africa and the Caribbean.
All Americans received tax cuts under Bush’s tax cut plan—108 million average families received $2,500. Over 3.8 million more poor people were freed from the tax rolls entirely, and poor blacks received an additional gift of $1,000 per child plus $1,658 per family under the Earned Income Tax Credit program.
“Tax cuts for the rich” is a deceptive Democratic Party talking point.
“Tax cuts for the rich” is a deceptive Democratic Party talking point.
Democrats owe blacks an apology - For partisan political gain, Democrats fan the flames of racism, as they have done for over 150 years.
Facts about racism in the Democratic Party can be found in books such as “A Short History of Reconstruction” by Dr. Eric Foner and “Wrong on Race: The Democratic Party's Buried Past” by Bruce Bartlett. Two other books are “Unfounded Loyalty: An In-depth Look into The Love Affair Between Blacks and Democrats” and “Unveiling the Whole Truth” by Wayne Perryman. Perryman wrote his books after conducting a year-long research and sued the Democratic Party, demanding an apology for their 150-year history of racism based on the Democratic Party “States Rights” claims. The Democrats admitted their racist past under oath in court, but refused to apologize because they know that they can take the black vote for granted.
Facts about racism in the Democratic Party can be found in books such as “A Short History of Reconstruction” by Dr. Eric Foner and “Wrong on Race: The Democratic Party's Buried Past” by Bruce Bartlett. Two other books are “Unfounded Loyalty: An In-depth Look into The Love Affair Between Blacks and Democrats” and “Unveiling the Whole Truth” by Wayne Perryman. Perryman wrote his books after conducting a year-long research and sued the Democratic Party, demanding an apology for their 150-year history of racism based on the Democratic Party “States Rights” claims. The Democrats admitted their racist past under oath in court, but refused to apologize because they know that they can take the black vote for granted.
There are signs of progress. The 2006 report of the Commission appointed by the Governor of North Carolina prompted the Democratic Party of North Carolina to pass a unanimous resolution in 2007 apologizing for the Democratic Party’s role in the bloody 1898 Wilmington Race Riots where dozens of black Americans were massacred. That apology can be viewed on the Internet at: http://www.ncdp.org/node/1546
In a letter to the North Carolina Democratic Party, North Carolina Lieutenant Governor Richard H. Moore wrote: “We can no longer ignore the fact that many of us grew up being taught a much sanitized – and inaccurate – history…. The truth is ugly.” If we, as a nation, are to heal our racial wounds, move beyond racial divisiveness and assure economic prosperity for blacks, we must first hold the Democratic Party accountable and demand an apology for the harm that party
has inflicted on black Americans.
MLK would be a Republican today
In reality, Dr. King was a Christian who held deeply religious beliefs and was guided by his faith and his Republican Party principles in his struggle to gain equality for blacks. He did not embrace the type of socialist, secularist agenda that is promoted by the Democrat Party today, which includes fostering dependency on welfare that breaks up families, supporting same-sex marriage, approving partial-birth abortion and banning God from the public square.
An understanding of who the real Dr.King was can be gained from a glimpse of Dr. King as a young man who participated in an oratorical contest when he was 14 years old. The title of his speech was “The Negro and the Constitution” which had the following sentences: “We cannot have an enlightened democracy with one great group living in ignorance…We cannot be truly Christian people so long as we flout the central teachings of Jesus: brotherly love and the Golden Rule….”
Unless and until black Americans stop voting monolithically for Democrats and leverage their vote, the way other groups do, there will be no changes in black communities. Blacks need to stop having their vote taken for granted and hold politicians accountable for the content of their policies, and not vote for candidates merely based on the label of the candidates' party.
BLACK POLITICAL HISTORY: THE UNTOLD STORY
NOTE: All answers are "b."
1. What Party was founded as the anti-slavery Party and fought to free blacks from slavery?
[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party
2. What was the Party of Abraham Lincoln who signed the emancipation proclamation that resulted in the Juneteenth celebrations that occur in black communities today?
[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party
3. What Party passed the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution granting blacks freedom, citizenship, and the right to vote?
[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party
4. What Party passed the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1875 granting blacks protection from the Black Codes and prohibiting racial discrimination in public accommodations, and was the Party of most blacks prior to the 1960’s, including Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, Booker T. Washington, and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.?
[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party
5. What was the Party of the founding fathers of the NAACP?
[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party
6. What was the Party of President Dwight Eisenhower who sent U.S. troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools,established the Civil Rights Commission in 1958, and appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation?
[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party
7. What Party, by the greatest percentage, passed the Civil Rights Act and the Civil Rights Acts of the 1960’s?
[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party
8. What was the Party of President Richard Nixon who instituted the first Affirmative Action program in 1969 with the Philadelphia Plan that established goals and timetables?
[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party
9. What is the Party of President George W. Bush who appointed more blacks to high-level positions than any president in history and who spent record money education, job training and health care to help black Americans prosper?
[ ] a. Democratic Party
[ ] b. Republican Party
10. What Party fought to keep blacks in slavery and was the Party of the Ku Klux Klan?
[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party
11. What Party from 1870 to 1930 used fraud, whippings, lynching, murder, intimidation, and mutilation to get the black vote, and passed the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws which legalized racial discrimination and denied blacks their rights as citizens?
[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party
12. What was the Party of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and President Harry Truman who rejected anti-lynching laws and efforts to establish a permanent Civil Rights Commission?
[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party
13. What was the Party of President Lyndon Johnson, who called Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. “that [N-word] preacher” because he opposed the Viet Nam War; and President John F. Kennedy who voted against the 1957 Civil Rights law as a Senator, then as president opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. after becoming president and the FBI investigate Dr. King on suspicion of being a communist?
[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party
14. What is the Party of current Senator Robert Byrd who was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, Senator Ernest “Fritz” Hollings who hoisted the Confederate flag over the state capitol in South Carolina when he was the governor, and Senator Ted Kennedy who recently insulted black judicial nominees by calling them “Neanderthals” while blocking their appointments?
[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party
15. What was the Party of President Bill Clinton who failed to fight the terrorists after the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, sent troops to war in Bosnia and Kosovo without Congressional approval, vetoed the Welfare Reform law twice before signing it, and refused to comply with a court order to have shipping companies develop an Affirmative Action Plan?
[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party
16. What is the Party of Vice President Al Gore whose father voted against the Civil Rights Acts of the 1960’s, and who lost the 2000 election as confirmed by a second recount of Florida votes by the “Miami Herald” and a consortium of major news organizations and the ruling by the U.S. Civil Rights Commission that blacks were not denied the right to vote?
[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party
17. What Party is against the faith-based initiative, against school vouchers, against school prayers, and takes the black vote for granted without ever acknowledging their racist past or apologizing for trying to expand slavery, lynching blacks and passing the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws that caused great harm to blacks?
[ ] a. Republican Party
[ ] b. Democratic Party
Rev. Wayne Perryman Sued Democratic Party for Reparations!
► United States District Court -December 10, 2004: Under oath in court, the Democratic Party admitted their horrendous racism for 150 years under the Democratic Party’s States’ Rights claims based on their Jim Crow Laws and Black Codes.
► However, using an army of highly-paid lawyers, the Democrats escaped accountability on a legal technicality and refused to apologize because they know that they can take the black vote for
granted.
Perryman sets the record straight
Unfound Loyalty: An In-depth Look Into the Love Affair Between
Blacks & Democrats - This book by Rev. Wayne Perryman gives the history of
both parties and explains when blacks switched from Republicans to Democrats and the negative impact that that change has had on blacks. This book is endorsed by Professor James McPherson, History of Princeton University. In this book, Perryman states: “History reveals the Democrats didn’t fall in love with black folks, they fell in love with the black vote knowing this would be their ticket to the White
House.”
Unveiling The Whole Truth What The Media Failed to Tell The 
American Voters – In this book, Rev. Wayne Perryman proves that President George W. Bush has done more for the poor and blacks than Clinton. The book also challenges the liberal press on a variety of other important issues including:
American Voters – In this book, Rev. Wayne Perryman proves that President George W. Bush has done more for the poor and blacks than Clinton. The book also challenges the liberal press on a variety of other important issues including:
· Weapons of Mass Destruction
· Bringing Our Troops Home
· Going to War over Oil
· Abortions
· Homo-Phobia
· Lies About Katrina
· Lies About the Separation of Church & State
http://images.nbra.info/docs/library/NationalBlackRepublicanAssociation2009/NBRA%20Civil%20Rights%20Newsletter%202Feb11.pdf
http://images.nbra.info/docs/library/NationalBlackRepublicanAssociation2009/NBRA%20Civil%20Rights%20Newsletter%202Feb11.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)