patrick.net

...and just to think, all this because I posted some stupid, divisive email. Composing my responses to RayAmerica now....I liked his witty responses.

RayAmerica says

You didn’t get mad when the Patriot Act got passed.
Yes I did. I also got “mad” when Obama extended it.

Me too, what jive!!!

You didn’t get mad when we illegally invaded a country that posed no threat to us.
You didn’t get mad when we spent over 800 billion (and counting) on said illegal war.
Yes I did. I also got “mad” when Obama expanded the illegal war in Afghanistan.

Well, makes no sense it leaving open wounds in a country that will only lead to blowback. You do realize that a portion of terrorism originates from Afghanistan after we abandoned it after their wars with Russia, right?...we left a bunch of soldiers with no jobs and a bunch of hate. Should we do the same now just to prove the point that we oppose the war?

You didn’t get mad when Bush borrowed more money from foreign sources than the previous 42 Presidents combined.
I didn’t get mad at this because it’s not even close to the truth.

According to the US Treasury, from 1776-2000, the first 224 years of US history, 42 Presidents borrowed a combined $1.01 trillion from foreign governments and financial institutions, while between 2001-2004 alone, the Bush administration borrowed $1.05 trillion!With continued wars in Iraq & Afghanistan, bailing out the mortgage industry, and the “stimulus package”

You didn’t get mad when you found out we were torturing people.
Yes I did. But got even madder because Obama continues the same practice. So much for “Hope & Change” and all that other baloney.

Right on....moot point!

You didn’t get mad when Bush embraced trade and outsourcing policies that shipped 6 million American jobs out of the country.
Yes I did. I get madder and madder waiting for Mr. Hope & Change to change our unfair trade policies, in particular NAFTA & GATT which he repeatedly campaigned on.

I hope and pray for this change....god bless our souls if it happens.

You didn’t get mad when the government was illegally wiretapping Americans.
Yes I did. I get “mad” that, as I stated correctly, Obama extended the Patriot Act and illegal wiretapping continues under that act.

Right on, moot point!

You didn’t get mad when we didn’t catch Bin Laden. You didn’t get mad when Bush rang up 10 trillion dollars in combined budget and current account deficits.
Last I checked, Bin Laden still hasn’t been caught. Bush was a BIG SPENDER. Obama is making Bush look like a BIG SAVER.

Actually, Healthcare has been proven to be deficit neutral. Bailouts have pretty much been paid back. What does that leave us with? 200 billion in Bush bailouts right?...ohh, and lets not forget about the 1 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthy.

You didn’t get mad when we let a major US city, New Orleans, drown.
Too bad Obama wasn’t President during Katrina. He could have appointed a Hurricane Czar that would have stopped it in its tracks.

Or how about just sending the national guard to helicopter people out of the city. How about setting up drop zones for food. This was a refugee type situation and we were too proud to admit so.

You didn’t get mad when we gave people who had more money than they could spend, the filthy rich, over a trillion dollars in tax breaks.
Didn’t Obama vote for TARP that gave all that money to Wall Street & the Mega Bankers? LOL
Umm

The part of TARP that deals with banks — the big banks, anyway — has largely been repaid: Goldman Sachs, Morgan, Wells Fargo, BONY, and the other bigfoot banks have paid back their loans.

But . . .

Citigroup paid back less than half of its bailout and the government took equity for the rest. We own a fifth of the company (and I wonder if that fact has anything to do with this.)

We still have billions of dollars’ worth of warrants on equity in 280 companies, almost all of them banks and insurance firms. Those warrants represent the option to buy stock at a pre-set price, and Treasury has made a few billion dollars exercising them as bank shares have recovered.

You didn’t get mad with the worst 8 years of job creations in several decades.
What has Mr. Hope & Change done to create long term, permanent jobs? I can’t wait to hear your answer Clarence.

He sure as hell hasnt voted to send more jobs overseas ala bush-clinton-bush jr.

You finally got mad when a black man was elected President …
As usual, the race card gets thrown on the table. Funny thing. Without a huge turnout of White voters, Obama doesn’t get elected. Funny too how over 90% of Black voters during the primary voted against the Liberal Hillary Clinton. Was that coincidence …. or was it racism?

I look at his election as the number 1 source of inspiration for tea party members, rednecks and indepents leaning to the right like yourself. They openly admit they want to "take their country back". From who are they going to take their country back from? Blacks, Gays or Democrats?

T

@RayAmerica

Let me hear you say it "DEY TUK OUR JERBS!".....come on, just one time.

Ray-

If you really did get mad at some or most of these things, at least I'll say you seem to be more consistant than some. Many Neocons said not a peep or even supported the Iraq War or the Patriot Act. Just my 2Â¥.

cheers.

American in Japan .... not only didn't the Neocons not say a peep, they were the very ones that maneuvered us into these illegal wars. As a matter of fact, I just finished last night a very well documented book on that very subject and highly recommend it. "The Transparent Cabal" by Stephen J. Sniegoski

By the way, I personally know numerous conservatives that very much opposed the wars. Bush's own father, along with numerous former members of administration (Brent Scowcroft, James Baker, Colon Powell, etc.) opposed the war and attempted to convince Bush Jr., against the advice of the Neocons, not to invade Iraq. This is all covered extensively in the book.

Clarence 13X says

Let me hear you say it “DEY TUK OUR JERBS!”…..come on, just one time.

You're not biased at all, are you Clarence? You think everyone that doesn't fall on the ground every time a Black man speaks just has to be a red necked racist. I honestly feel sorry for people like you that are so full of hate and bitterness.

OK, if it wasnt going to be Bush in 2000, would you have preferred Al Gore, who had been promoting invading Iraq years before ?
WMD, Terrorism, etc etc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h6gehCPvpk&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCVZlLBchVE&feature=related

thomas.wong1986 says

would you have preferred Al Gore

Gore's actual speech was a bit more nuanced than Hannity's pull quote:

http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/gore/gore092302sp.html

I don't think Gore would have gone into Iraq as we did. "Fools rush in where angels fear to tread" and all that.

but helping fellow Americans who are sick…Oh, Hell No!!

healthcare is a zero sum game. The more the poor have access to it, the less the rich can monopolize it.

Plus it's really a bottomless pit as far as they are concerned. Everybody needs a $50,000 hip replacement, and the rich know that they're going to be stuck with the bill in the end.

Much better if granny just learns to hobble.

Troy says

Everybody needs a $50,000 hip replacement, and the rich know that they’re going to be stuck with the bill in the end.

Nonsense. The rich will make tons of money off of the new government healthcare plans, just like they have been doing for the past 30 years.

For the time being the bill is being split between the middle to lower upper classes and the Chinese.

CBOEtrader says

For the time being the bill is being split between the middle to lower upper classes and the Chinese.

Somebody better tell the Chinese that:

China, Mainland
Aug 2009 $936.5
Aug 2010 $868.4

http://www.ustreas.gov/tic/mfh.txt

It's my general impression that the UK holdings are arab petro dollars held offshore.

elliemae says

I’m still pissed about New Orleans. How could we allow that to happen? If it had happened to an “important” city, such as Washington DC or Los Angeles, we’d have saved their asses.

How could we allow what to happen - a levee to break?

The Federal government is restricted by law from taking over a local response until asked. The local and state governments are primarily responsible for emergency plans. But it is easier to blame bush than the Democrats in charge who utterly failed. Brown, the FEMA fall guy, complained to Bush that he could not get a "unified command" established. That is not a touchy feely buzzword but an actual structure under the Incident Command System process. That he couldn't was more evidence that the local government didn't do it's job.

Meanwhile, the part of the Federal government that was NOT restricted by the Stafford Act from unilaterally taking action, did so immediately and saved thousands of people. The head of that organization - the Coast Guard - ultimately ran the Federal response and was credited for doing a good job.

Go to the FEMA website and walk through the IS700 and 800 courses if you wish to actually understand why some things occurred as they did.

American in Japan says

Ray-
If you really did get mad at some or most of these things, at least I’ll say you seem to be more consistant than some. Many Neocons said not a peep or even supported the Iraq War or the Patriot Act. Just my 2¥.
cheers.

The vast majority of Democrats in Congress at the time voted FOR the Patriot Act. The crying and whining about the Patriot Act from the left seemed to die down substantially after Jan 2008, despite it being substantially extended. Why isn't anyone on the left "angry" about that, or maybe these claims about who is angry about what and why are simply histrionics?

Clarence 13X says

@RayAmerica
Let me hear you say it “DEY TUK OUR JERBS!”…..come on, just one time.

More evidence that despite claimin to be for the common or working folks, many on the left look down upon the same. Bloody peasants!

The PATRIOT act was and has been No Big Deal. Anybody railing against it is trying to sell you something.

Feingold's lone vote against it in 2003:

http://www.archipelago.org/vol6-2/feingold.htm

was a principled stand, but Principle and two dollars will get you a cup of coffee in this country.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1010/Feingolds_last_stand.html

Troy says

I don’t think Gore would have gone into Iraq as we did. “Fools rush in where angels fear to tread” and all that.

How he did it may be different, but we would have invaded Iraq anyway. Frankly we should have occupied Iraq totaly in the early 90s, ousting Saddam from power.

RayAmerica says

Clarence 13X says

Let me hear you say it “DEY TUK OUR JERBS!”…..come on, just one time.

You’re not biased at all, are you Clarence? You think everyone that doesn’t fall on the ground every time a Black man speaks just has to be a red necked racist. I honestly feel sorry for people like you that are so full of hate and bitterness.

Actually, that was a poke from South Park which was a parady on Mexicans taking the middle class, blue collar workers jerbs. How is it that you feel so comfortable siding with rednecked racists and rich narcissists if you in fact are not one of them?

CBOEtrader says

Troy says

Everybody needs a $50,000 hip replacement, and the rich know that they’re going to be stuck with the bill in the end.

Nonsense. The rich will make tons of money off of the new government healthcare plans, just like they have been doing for the past 30 years.
For the time being the bill is being split between the middle to lower upper classes and the Chinese.

I agree, now they simply have more customers to feed from. It still costs 40k for a emergency room visit and 10-20k for the birth of a child. Reform didnt tackle those issues....who is the heck makes 40k in one day for 8 hours of service?

Clarence 13X says

The folks in congress voted against it because it was the safe thing to do, prolly thought it would get them re-elected.

Indeed. Most of the Dems who voted against healtcare reform are now gone.
They thought it would buy them some credit with their constituents but it did not.
There is no gratitude for actual compromise. GOP has no interest in that.

Vicente says

Clarence 13X says

The folks in congress voted against it because it was the safe thing to do, prolly thought it would get them re-elected.

Indeed. Most of the Dems who voted against healtcare reform are now gone.
They thought it would buy them some credit with their constituents but it did not.
There is no gratitude for actual compromise. GOP has no interest in that.

Their only concern is big business profits, war spending and crushing the middle class. That being said, I assume the Dems only concern is major health care company profits, spreading homosexuality and increasing the middle class. I choose to vote Dem because of the history of FOCUSING on equal opportunity, voting rights, and civil rights....now if blacks could get them to focus on EDUCATION and PARENTING.

Clarence 13X says

Vicente says

Clarence 13X says

The folks in congress voted against it because it was the safe thing to do, prolly thought it would get them re-elected.

Indeed. Most of the Dems who voted against healtcare reform are now gone.

They thought it would buy them some credit with their constituents but it did not.

There is no gratitude for actual compromise. GOP has no interest in that.

Their only concern is big business profits, war spending and crushing the middle class. That being said, I assume the Dems only concern is major health care company profits, spreading homosexuality and increasing the middle class. I choose to vote Dem because of the history of FOCUSING on equal opportunity, voting rights, and civil rights….now if blacks could get them to focus on EDUCATION and PARENTING.

'PARENTING'???!!! Let 'PARENTS' focus on 'PARENTING'. Since when is the government responsible for 'PARENTING'?

I'm an Independent because I vote for the man or the woman whom I believe to be best for the job they are running for. I expect 'parents' to 'parent' their off~spring.

And I'm extremely glad with the results of the elections. No more rubber~stamping Imam0bama's agenda. Let both parties hammer things out. It's best for the country. And best for the economy.

By taking money away from the aristocracy through progressive taxes and inflation like we did from 1946 to 1980.
We need to go back to what works.

In those times, USA/Canada/AU and a handful of Northwest Europe countries were the only in the world with modern production capacity, operating a market economy. Thus they faced little competition for raw resources (oil, etc.) which were thus cheap and same little competition when selling final products which were thus expensive. This “monopoly on modernity” is what worked, along with rapid population growth and shorter lifespan that allowed fast economic growth, meaning much lower retired/working population and thus lower unproductive expenses on the elderly, and steady appreciation of stocks and RE. And brutal discrimination against women and non-whites didn’t hurt (WASPs, that is), either.
To start “going back to what works”, how about firing all women, coloreds, and hispanics (including the pres.) from any career or professional job, or elected position? Then white anglo christian males would again enjoy great employment prospects and rapid career and economic progression, just like in blessed 1950-s.

I think Fisk has a point. Japan is holding things together by keeping women out of the career workforce.

This pushes households into one wage-earner families, which is arguably better for everyone, given the "Two-income trap".

The poverty of just 50 years ago was immense compared to now.

Troy says

The PATRIOT act was and has been No Big Deal. Anybody railing against it is trying to sell you something.

Having read most of it, I generally agree.

WillyWanker says

Clarence 13X says

Vicente says

Clarence 13X says

The folks in congress voted against it because it was the safe thing to do, prolly thought it would get them re-elected.

Indeed. Most of the Dems who voted against healtcare reform are now gone.
They thought it would buy them some credit with their constituents but it did not.
There is no gratitude for actual compromise. GOP has no interest in that.

Their only concern is big business profits, war spending and crushing the middle class. That being said, I assume the Dems only concern is major health care company profits, spreading homosexuality and increasing the middle class. I choose to vote Dem because of the history of FOCUSING on equal opportunity, voting rights, and civil rights….now if blacks could get them to focus on EDUCATION and PARENTING.

‘PARENTING’???!!! Let ‘PARENTS’ focus on ‘PARENTING’. Since when is the government responsible for ‘PARENTING’?
I’m an Independent because I vote for the man or the woman whom I believe to be best for the job they are running for. I expect ‘parents’ to ‘parent’ their off~spring.
And I’m extremely glad with the results of the elections. No more rubber~stamping Imam0bama’s agenda. Let both parties hammer things out. It’s best for the country. And best for the economy.

But shouldn't the government step in when parents are screw ups?....good parenting would eventually result in a better economic outlook for our country and stronger national security wouldn't you say?

I agree as well.

4X says

Agreed, I see a 65k Cadillac Escalade at every corner….and can’t imagine that the folks driving these vehicles arent over extending their dual income households.

I imagine.
We've just bought a car of similar price (though not a Cadillac) for cash.
I am a govt. scientist and my wife is a nurse, some aristocracy indeed ...
With after-tax income of ~140 K and house paid off, why spending 65 K on a car would be over-extending? Lots of dual-income couples make more than 200 K pre-tax, btw.

Is any car worth $65K worth of utility? Add to that the fact that driving it off the lot costs you at least 20% of purchase price if you try to resell. Why not buy a used car for about $10K. You can get a nice car for $10K. And invest the savings in something more profitable and meaningful.

Spending that kind of money on a car is a bad financial decision. And most of the excess you spend, goes to fund the excess of someone even more well off than you. But if it makes you happy, I am happy for you.

AdHominem says

Is any car worth $65K worth of utility? Add to that the fact that driving it off the lot costs you at least 20% of purchase price if you try to resell. Why not buy a used car for about $10K. You can get a nice car for $10K. And invest the savings in something more profitable and meaningful.
Spending that kind of money on a car is a bad financial decision. And most of the excess you spend, goes to fund the excess of someone even more well off than you. But if it makes you happy, I am happy for you.

That is what i say...buy used with around 25-35k miles on it.

Fisk says

I imagine.
We’ve just bought a car of similar price (though not a Cadillac) for cash.
I am a govt. scientist and my wife is a nurse, some aristocracy indeed …
With after-tax income of ~140 K and house paid off, why spending 65 K on a car would be over-extending? Lots of dual-income couples make more than 200 K pre-tax, btw.

Sure, lots of them in raw numbers... Approx 4.5M out of approx. 117.5M households. You're in the top 4% or so of household income. Good for you (no sarcasm)!!!

Lets talk about the WHITE RAGE going on in America.

Mad at the Black President cleaning up Bush and Clintons blowback.
Mad at the Goverment all of a sudden when we start spending for cleanup but didnt care about the 1T spent on killing of innocent Arab peoples.
Not willing to owe up to slavey and inceasing educational opportunities for blacks
Not willing to increase the diversity clauses in the workplace

Clarence 13X says

Lets talk about the WHITE RAGE going on in America.
Mad at the Black President cleaning up Bush and Clintons blowback.
Mad at the Goverment all of a sudden when we start spending for cleanup but didnt care about the 1T spent on killing of innocent Arab peoples.
Not willing to owe up to slavey and inceasing educational opportunities for blacks
Not willing to increase the diversity clauses in the workplace

Yep, it's all about racism! That's why liberals hate white conservatives - because they're racist! Too bad that for many liberals (black or white), the only thing worse than a white conservative is a non-white conservative, especially a black one.... Who do they think they are, getting off the plantation like that!!

Paralithodes says

Clarence 13X says

Lets talk about the WHITE RAGE going on in America.
Mad at the Black President cleaning up Bush and Clintons blowback.
Mad at the Goverment all of a sudden when we start spending for cleanup but didnt care about the 1T spent on killing of innocent Arab peoples.
Not willing to owe up to slavey and inceasing educational opportunities for blacks
Not willing to increase the diversity clauses in the workplace

Yep, it’s all about racism! That’s why liberals hate white conservatives - because they’re racist! Too bad that for many liberals (black or white), the only thing worse than a white conservative is a non-white conservative, especially a black one…. Who do they think they are, getting off the plantation like that!!

Thanks for taking the bait, not a bad response. My point is that we can spend 1T on war but cannot spend it on healthcare, social security or anything that benefits the middle class or poor. Black conservatives do nothing to address the defensive mechanisms that are causes of poor blacks issues:

1. Education - No desire to educate themselves
2. Impoverished thoughts - Refusal to go to school, work or engage in business
3. Enslaved Mentality - Refusal to participate in the conservative business culture.
4. Parenting - 75% of the households are single parent
5. Culture - Most youth (including whites) are now latching on to the hip hop thug culture

All of the above are the result of 400 years of rejection. These 5 points are the defensive mechanisms that our grandparents developed as a result of not being included in society as far up to 1980. These are all defensive mechanisms that no conservative is willing to acknowledge aka show empathy for.

If you were rejected for 400 years do you think you would be open to engaging in activities which were once restricted or do you think you would say "I aint doing that punk shit!" or "You talk white" or "School aint gonna get me paid"? They were right to say these things in 1960 and the mentality has been passed down through generations. Most dont really know that they have an opportunity because they have convinced themselves there is an imaginary white man out here holding them back. Which is totally untrue.

All I am asking is that conservatives show empathy (Increase education spending, affirmative action, etc.), and if the poor blacks dont respond then you can talk shit my friend. Until then, you and all conservatives are holding on to your exclusive rich whites only club, without even offering a hint of reparation for any of the poor peoples within America.

I realize this is about rich vs poor....not black vs white. I just like to put the bait out there to see just who is insensitive and without empathy for the poor.

Good responses.

Clarence 13X says

Paralithodes says

Clarence 13X says

Lets talk about the WHITE RAGE going on in America.
Mad at the Black President cleaning up Bush and Clintons blowback.
Mad at the Goverment all of a sudden when we start spending for cleanup but didnt care about the 1T spent on killing of innocent Arab peoples.
Not willing to owe up to slavey and inceasing educational opportunities for blacks
Not willing to increase the diversity clauses in the workplace

Yep, it’s all about racism! That’s why liberals hate white conservatives - because they’re racist! Too bad that for many liberals (black or white), the only thing worse than a white conservative is a non-white conservative, especially a black one…. Who do they think they are, getting off the plantation like that!!

Thanks for taking the bait, not a bad response. My point is that we can spend 1T on war but cannot spend it on healthcare, social security or anything that benefits the middle class or poor. Black conservatives do nothing to address the defensive mechanisms that are causes of poor blacks issues:
1. Education - No desire to educate themselves
2. Impoverished thoughts - Refusal to go to school, work or engage in business
3. Enslaved Mentality - Refusal to participate in the conservative business culture.
4. Parenting - 75% of the households are single parent
5. Culture - Most youth (including whites) are now latching on to the hip hop thug culture
All of the above are the result of 400 years of rejection. These 5 points are the defensive mechanisms that our grandparents developed as a result of not being included in society as far up to 1980. These are all defensive mechanisms that no conservative is willing to acknowledge aka show empathy for.
If you were rejected for 400 years do you think you would be open to engaging in activities which were once restricted or do you think you would say “I aint doing that punk shit!” or “You talk white” or “School aint gonna get me paid”? They were right to say these things in 1960 and the mentality has been passed down through generations. Most dont really know that they have an opportunity because they have convinced themselves there is an imaginary white man out here holding them back. Which is totally untrue.
All I am asking is that conservatives show empathy (Increase education spending, affirmative action, etc.), and if the poor blacks dont respond then you can talk shit my friend. Until then, you and all conservatives are holding on to your exclusive rich whites only club, without even offering a hint of reparation for any of the poor peoples within America.
I realize this is about rich vs poor….not black vs white. I just like to put the bait out there to see just who is insensitive and without empathy for the poor.
Good responses.

And actually all they have done is leave the plantation field to the comforts of the house where they serve their masters tea. How can Clarence Thomas side with the bigotry of the Republican party who call Obama a monkey and chant "take back our country".

Who are they taking their country back from if not from the Black President.

Are Clarence Thomas and Ward Connerly not smart enough to decipher these codes from indoors at the dinner table?

Clarence 13X says

All of the above are the result of 400 years of rejection. These 5 points are the defensive mechanisms that our grandparents developed as a result of not being included in society as far up to 1980. These are all defensive mechanisms that no conservative is willing to acknowledge aka show empathy for.

I reject this totally. Black families made upward financial gains in every decade from the civil war until the 1960's. Baby's born out of wedlock for black families in the 1950's was something like 3%. What happened in the 1960's that changed that? The great society, aka welfare, which enabled and encouraged single parent households (to this day more whites than blacks collect welfare in single parent households, so it's a social issue not a racial issue) along with a mass exodus of jobs from the northern cities to the rural south, and the explosion of drugs (easy money and crime) in the cities devastated by job loses, as well as the total loss of the middle class in the cities due to suburban flight. Black families were caught in a tsunami of economic and societal changes that they are still pulling out of. Don't play the victim of history card. Black families were moving up in society and improving their lives for almost 100 years prior to the 1960's.

Clarence 13X says

Who are they taking their country back from if not from the Black President.

Yeah, whatever... Keep it going... The unfounded, assumed cries of racism are simply diluting the importance, meaning, and impact of the accusation. Sure... Someone who didn't support nationalized healthcare under the Clinton Administration in the past, doesn't support it now only because Obama is Black.

I applaud you for your efforts and contribution towards making "racism" something that people who disagree with you can soon be immune from... For helping to ensure that people will not be scared about whatever they say, because they know that since disagreeing with anything anone on the left states is "racism," the charge has absolutely no meaning.

Clarence 13X says

And actually all they have done is leave the plantation field to the comforts of the house where they serve their masters tea. How can Clarence Thomas side with the bigotry of the Republican party who call Obama a monkey and chant “take back our country”.

Maybe he see's it as no worse than the bigotry of the Democratic party who treated him no better? You mention people calling Obama a "monkey." I'm curious... was it the Republicans who treated Condoleeza Rice in a worse manner, or those whom you share an ideology? Inquiring minds would like to know....

Clarence 13X says

Are Clarence Thomas and Ward Connerly not smart enough to decipher these codes from indoors at the dinner table?

Yeah, I understand. As an apparent Democrat, one of the things you must do is question the intelligence of black conservatives.... If they were smart, they'd stay on the Democratic plantation which simply replaced slavery and segregation with destruction of the black family. Ya, go ahead with your claims of racism, etc. Whose policies have more to hobble the legs of black Americans being able to stand on their own? The road to hell is paved with good intentions (and maybe not all of them are so good to begin with).

bob2356 says

Clarence 13X says

All of the above are the result of 400 years of rejection. These 5 points are the defensive mechanisms that our grandparents developed as a result of not being included in society as far up to 1980. These are all defensive mechanisms that no conservative is willing to acknowledge aka show empathy for.

I reject this totally. Black families made upward financial gains in every decade from the civil war until the 1960’s. Baby’s born out of wedlock for black families in the 1950’s was something like 3%. What happened in the 1960’s that changed that? The great society, aka welfare, which enabled and encouraged single parent households (to this day more whites than blacks collect welfare in single parent households, so it’s a social issue not a racial issue) along with a mass exodus of jobs from the northern cities to the rural south, and the explosion of drugs (easy money and crime) in the cities devastated by job loses, as well as the total loss of the middle class in the cities due to suburban flight. Black families were caught in a tsunami of economic and societal changes that they are still pulling out of. Don’t play the victim of history card. Black families were moving up in society and improving their lives for almost 100 years prior to the 1960’s.

Bob. You make some good points about the marriage rates. However, you fail to mention that blacks couldnt even go outside their neighborhoods prior to 1970 without being harassed. That is not what either of us would call progress. The next generation during the 60s is where all the rejection of white American society started. Prior to 1960s blacks idolized the lifestyles of Sinatra, Crosby....as exemplified by Nat King Coles generation. The teens of the 60s got caught up in the civil protest, rejecting everything white including speech, education and lifestyles. The 60s was the years of the black panther party. This group of individuals is known as the BASTARDS OF THE PARTY aka the originations of the crips and bloods.

Right when the community was set to obtain a little freedom they decided to turn their backs on those that enslaved them.

@paralithodes

1. You never answered the question, what are they taking their country back from? I have no frickin clue. Politicians? Black President?

2. Why would I ever vote republican knowing that 50% of the party consists of the bigots who left after the passing of civil rights? Admit that they dont give a damn about poor blacks, because I have.

3. Ward Connerly is looking to take away affirmative action educational benefits which are aimed directly at what we are discussing....reversing the black plight after slavery through education.

Clarence 13X says

1. You never answered the question, what are they taking their country back from? I have no frickin clue. Politicians? Black President?

What question were you actually asking? You were simply "begging the question," meaning that it wasn't really a question in the first place... It was a statement that you already know that it means they want to take it back from a "Black President" and that any answer they or anyone else gives you to the contrary will fall upon your deaf ears on the matter.

Clarence 13X says

2. Why would I ever vote republican knowing that 50% of the party consists of the bigots who left after the passing of civil rights? Admit that they dont give a damn about poor blacks, because I have.

Good point.... Better to stick with a party that didn't kick out the "50%" who were against the passing of the civil rights bill. Robert Byrd was definitely a better person to stick with than Strom Thurmond because ... um... why again?

Clarence 13X says

3. Ward Connerly is looking to take away affirmative action educational benefits which are aimed directly at what we are discussing….reversing the black plight after slavery through education.

Yes, I got it already... You believe that in order to pay for the sins of their fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfathers (even if those people were anti-discrimination, died for the North in the Civil War, had no ancesters in the US before 1920, etc.), non-minority children today should be second fiddle to minority children due to the sufferings of their ancesters. It is not character that matters, it is content of pigment in skin. You, sir, are nothing more than a disgusting race hustler....