A Consequence of Affirmative Action
Hillary Clinton’s battle with Barak Obama is not about who would make a better president, but of affirmative action’s presumption that the outcome of equality can be achieved by the forced replacement of top candidates with brown skin and boob quotas.
While they could never achieve the universal equality now celebrated in Cuba and North Korea, liberal Democrats kept racial discrimination alive in America by shifting its historic intolerance from black Americans toward performance-driven white men – and by forcing Americans to accept the consequence of mediocrity in silence to avoid indefensible charges of racism.
As lifelong beneficiaries of affirmative action, Hillary and Barak both suffer from delusions of entitlement. Their implacability is fueled by Hillary’s refusal to become Barak’s bitch, which is as unthinkable as Barak becoming Bill and Hillary’s houseboy. Conservatives have waited decades to see this play out.
As entertaining as this is for accomplished conservatives of all genders and races, Democrats are correspondingly pained by being forced to examine their own mediocrity. Had they promoted success and achievement without quotas since 1964, they would be choosing their candidate based upon accomplishment and character rather than melanin and menses.
So I for one will grab a beer, don my raincoat, and watch the flying mud, tomatoes, and claws. We’re about to witness the fruition of affirmative action in all its glory.
March 8th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Wow, offensive on so many levels! If you ever wonder why conservatives are despised, you have your answer right here. I’m glad that you chose to post this kind of crap; it shows just what the conservative movement is all about.
March 8th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
No, Rocky, no you have it all wrong.
Republicans moved beyond race years ago. Conservatives look at the individual and his qualifications, not his race, gender, or skin color.
It’s the Dems that are obsessed with race and gender. Democrats have supported special treatment for women and blacks for decades, and now have to deal with competing victimhoods.
It’s a hoot to watch them try to rationalize it as a “quandry”, when we can all see that they are having such a hard time sorting out the degrees of oppression.
March 8th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Thank you for illustrating my point so well, Rocky.
You share the same anxiety that Democrats now experience with your HRC-BHO battle. If you focus on the “content of their character” and their value system, you could look beyond their race and gender. But you refuse because 1) you’re a Democrat and 2) you’re preoccupied with race and gender. Isn’t it time to grow up?
Republicans would have no problem voting for Colin Powell or Condi Rice because they share few character flaws and understand what our country faces politically and economically. Republicans understand that their skin color and gender is irrelevant.
Your outrage stems from the reality that Democrats must decide whether a vagina is more valuable than black skin. Primitive ideals like these belong in the 7th century, along with clitorectomies, wife beating, racism, jihad, affirmative action, quotas, and religous bigotry. Modern evolved humans understand that there’s more to humanity than skin and tits.
But now you and other Democrats are forced to choose between one or the other because neither would consider playing second banana to Bill Clinton. And Obama can’t be VP because he knows what the Clintons did to Al Gore’s political aspirations.
You can’t choose character because, if you did, you’d vote for McCain. So without character what are you left with? And how do you choose your candidate without offending the moonbats who disagree with you?
Yup, I’m gonna enjoy the next few months.
Thanks for writing!
cb
March 8th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
I get tickled by commenters such as Rocky with all their faux rightous indignation. They are so assured that they are right, all they have to do is see their codewords and assume sexism and/or racism. Yet, when we examine their words
we see that they have no argument, they have to merely make the charge. Too bad that no one in their right mind takes this kind of drivel seriously except for others of their ilk.
Rocky, one of these days you may grow up, then again, like most “liberals”/”progressives” you probably won’t.
March 8th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Republic-angels have definitely moved beyond sex and race. That’s why you have Republican dominated states that offer so much more opportunities for blacks, women, and other minorities than Demon-crat states such as New York and California. So far beyond that they just ignore that whole slavery and civil rights thing altogether. We’re equal now, so just shut up about it and stop trying to bring up race and gender ever again.
Just look at the progressive enthusiasm just bleeding from their Republican mouths, especially when they refer to black people as houseboys and women as bitches.
This is going to be a great election season, especially when the democRAT loons keep bringing up race and gender every chance they get to garner this country’s sympathy. They’re not even close to qualified, so that’s the only way they can even attempt to win. I can’t wait for McCain to show Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton who’s in charge: a white man.
March 9th, 2008 at 9:04 am
Rocky & Liem: I agree with you both wholeheartedly. After all, Jesse’s pure-as-snow heart was in the right place (which is all that counts, really) when he made, amoung other bigoted/racist remarks, his “hymie” comment. And Big Al, why, it didn’t make a bit of difference Tawany was a flat-out liar, the principle (that she was gang-raped by whites) was still valid.
Yes, it’s all in the perception that we know knuckle-dragging conservatives are fecal deposits left over from a bygone era, and content of intent has nothing to do with the worth of one in society, as long as we can continue to keep them on the new plantation and make government the new god…
March 9th, 2008 at 11:02 am
Liem:
I suspect that your misunderstanding of American history comes from your attendance in Democrat-controlled public schools.
Had you been taught American history, you would know that Americans formed the Republican Party in 1854 to force Democrats to end slavery. And since 1865 when they lost the right to own slaves, Democrats created the KKK to enforce Jim Crow, segregation, and Plessey, to continue their racist legacy.
After Republicans forced Democrats to end school segregation in 1954, Democrats worked feverishly to get Congress to repeal “Brown v. Board of Education.” The same Democrats who opposed Brown formed public school districts like LAUSD, which is why brown-skinned minorities continue to fail in those same public schools. Why do you think Democrat-controlled teacher unions would prevent you from learning that in public schools? The answer is here.
Wherever Democrats haven’t crippled black and brown kids with a substandard education, minorities have excelled in America. Our forefathers never guaranteed happiness, but the freedoms to pursue it. So some Americans will always do better, just as some people throughout the world will succeed more than others. Democrats keep race alive the way Arafat kept the Israeli-Palestinian issue alive: for without the problems they created, Democrats and Hamas would cease to be relevant.
If you’re complaining about “that whole slavery and civil rights thing,” ask yourself why the Democrat’s own website shares nothing between 1848 and 1900 (i.e., Jim Crow, KKK, Plessey.) If you want more information about how Democrats threaten Americans, check out Lyle Rossiter MD’s book.
Thanks for writing. CB
March 9th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
OMG, you’re totally right, CB. No wonder so many blacks today supporting the Democrat party instead of the party associated with the Confederate flag. It’s the liberal school system. And the liberal media, too! Whenever I think of the KKK, I should no longer think of the red South, but of the blue states. I’ve been brainwashed and now I see the truth as it is.
Blacks have been fooled into supporting the Democratic party of today, the same party who supported their slavery and Jim Crow set of rights. It has nothing to do with the fact that neither the Republican or Democratic party have changed priorities over the past 200 years. It has nothing to do with how Lincoln, a Republican, was elected into office by the northern states and didn’t get a single vote from the southern states, some of which left him off the ballot altogether. Therefore it’s all too obvious that both the Democratic party of today and Republican party of today are exactly the same as it was in 1860.
It also has nothing to do with the fact that presidents during the civil rights movement were Democrats. Or the fact that Martin Luther King Jr. voted for those same presidents. Or the fact that the surge In Iraq is working. Don’t even get me started on how the Republic-angels love supporting the poor.
Blacks need to blindly throw their support to a title, such as Republican, and not try to understand the voting record or issues. Someone needs to tell Jesse Jackson and Barack Obama that their party supports slavery. Damn you, liberal education!
March 9th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
You need to review the political ideas of Lyndon Johnson and especially John F. Kennedy (hint-they are not those of little brother Teddy).
Whose tax money by the way do you think has by and large financed the hundreds of billions of dollars worth of governemnt entitlement programs since the Civil Rights era that this government has thrown at the poor, the “children”, affirmative action etc, if it wasnt the largely Republican wealthiest top 10% of the population that pays 70 to 80% of the taxes collected?
You are correct however that Republicans do not necessarily support the poor. Republicans support entrepreneurship, personal responsibility, and initiative, inventiveness, self starting, i.e. getting off your lazy ass and doing something for your self instead of crying for another entitlement every time it rains a little.
March 9th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
LIEM: The Democrat slaveowners formed the Confederate Army. The first Republican President, Abe Lincoln, formed the Union Army to fight the Confederates. The Confederate Flag, Jim Crow, Plessy, KKK, segregation, and lynching was a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party.
cb
March 10th, 2008 at 12:54 am
REENFORCE: Yes, that’s exactly why so many blacks and women are a part of the Demon-crat party of today. They hate themselves and wish they could be slaves and second-class citizens once more.
Thank goodness we have the Republic-angel party to save them from themselves.
It was the northern states that had the slaves and it was the southern states that fought to free them, according to what you’re saying, reenforce. Abe Lincoln, as a Republican, received overwhelming support from the South in 1860 because that’s where Republicans are the majority party today. Likewise, he was despised in the North in 1860 because that’s where Democrats are the majority today. Therefore the following statements are true:
The Confederate flag is hated in the South, especially South Virginia and Alabama, because that’s obviously where so many Republicans fought for civil rights and equality.
Segregation and Jim Crow laws were heavily practiced in the North in states like Vermont and New York because that’s obviously where blacks received the most inequality.
Silly Democrats, stop fighting for the reinstatement of slavery already and learn that Republicans have all the right answers, especially when it comes to the surge working in Iraq.
March 10th, 2008 at 6:10 am
Liem, someday try to pick up a real history book and, without the help of some donkey or jackass-wannabee teacher, read it carefully. You might just discover that the donkeys really were the slavery party, that they really have been obstructionists in the fight to justify equality, and that a certain unnamed senator from a state near Virginia still uses the “N” word frequently and with regularity because as a donkey he is immune from the same standards you apply to all southerners (rednecks).
March 10th, 2008 at 9:14 am
You are both going off the deep end.
Slavery was an underlying issue of the Civil War. The overriding issue was secession, whether or not a state, once it had surrendeered its soveriegnty to the Union, still had the constitutional right to secede from it.
Lincoln and the Republicans held that it would not. Ironically, Democrats at the time were supporters of State’s rights and thereby, of the right of states to decide within themselves whether slavery was morally and constitutionally valid.
Lincoln saw that by 1860 when South Crolina seceded, that this was beyond settling by the Court and moved militarily. He became unpopular not because he ultimately supported abolition, but because the war went badly for lack of competent generals and sound prosecution of the war. Sound familiar?
During the 50′ and 60’s it was southern Democrats, like Al Gores daddy, who opposed Civil Rights aginst the Republican Eisenhower Administration and later both the Kennedy and Johnson adminstrations.
March 10th, 2008 at 9:57 am
Carlos: Like I’ve been saying in the past two posts: the North were Republicans and the South were the Democrats in the 1860s, so technically you’re right in saying that the Democrats supported slavery.
But if you actually get past the whole party labeling system you love to refer to, it’s not that hard to tell which part of the country supported slavery and which part of the country supported emancipation. If it’s not clear to you yet, the South supported slavery (even though they called themselves Democrats) and the North supported emancipation (even though they called themselves Republicans).
More importantly, it’s also not that hard to see the Northern states today are Democrats and the Southern states today are Republican. So how do you explain that, Carlos? Must be liberal media. Or maybe everyone living in the North switched places with everyone in the South. Or maybe the North has always been more progressive than the South.
Your insinuations that the Democrats of today are the same Democrats that supported slavery is desperate and laughable and I think I know how seriously to take whatever you say from now on.
TA Gray: Bush is Lincoln. Iraq occupation is Civil War, and not Vietnam War. Got it.
March 10th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
This timeline MIGHT provide a clearer picture for everyone.
1789 - No territory could become a state if it allowed slavery.
1808 - Congress abolishes the slave trade.
1818 - Democrat Congress begins to undo anti-slavery decisions.
1820 - Democrats pass the Missouri Compromise, institutionalizing slavery in half of the territories.
1820-1850 - Democrats pass multiple laws promoting and protecting slavery, culminating in 1850 with the Fugitive Slave Law.
1854 - Democrats pass the Kansas-Nebraska Act, opening up those territories to slavery, thus exceeding even the limits of the Missouri Compromise.
1854 - REPUBLICAN Party is formed to end slavery. Six of the nine planks in their fledgling platform statement deal with civil rights issues.
1857 - The Supreme Court rules in Dred Scott v. Sanford that blacks are considered inferior and thus not covered by the phrase “all men” in the Declaration of Independence; that they are property covered by the 5th Amendment; and that no black—not even a free black—could ever become a citizen of the United States. The Democrats support the decision.
1861 - Democrat Party forced America into the Civil War.
1865 - REPUBLICANS pass the 13th Amendment, ending slavery. 100% of Republicans vote for it. Even among northern Democrats, it only receives the support of 23%.
1868 - 14th Amendment was passed, establishing citizenship for all in Federal law. 100% of Republicans vote for it, 0% of Democrats vote for it.
1868 - 15th Amendment is passed, establishing the right to vote for all people, regardless of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. 100% of Republicans vote for it. 0% of Democrats vote for it.
1866–1875, the REPUBLICAN Congress passes 19 civil rights laws. Democrats oppose them all.
1876 - Democrats take control of the House. (No more civil rights legislation is passed until 1964.)
1892 - Democrats take control of the White House, the Senate, and they keep control of the House. They immediately begin establishing Jim Crow laws and repealing all civil rights legislation passed by the Republicans. Any laws or amendments they cannot repeal, they skirt with poll taxes and literacy tests.
There’s more here, but these facts are why the DNC’s own website posts nothing about this period.
And while TA Gray can argue semantics about the “underlying issue being slavery” and “states rights” we know that Democrats created Jim Crow and the KKK to enforce anti-black anti-Republican laws and not laws that had anything to do with other issues. From slavery to school segregation, Democrats were (and many still are) obsessed with black inferiority.
Because I was a product of public schools, I too believed that Republicans were the party of racism until I began working for Democrats in South LA and Pacoima as a street cop. No felon ever harmed those communities the way Democrat-controlled politicians harmed and crippled them under the pretext of “civil rights.” Show me a city controlled by Democrats (like LA), and I’ll show you a city struggling with black poverty, racism, gangs, and substandard schools (despite LAUSD’s $32 BILLION budget).
And Liem, one more thing: Although I doubt anyone will voice approval for slavery, ask yourself how Democrats made the transition: When Republicans won the Civil War did Democrats embrace blacks? When Republicans forced Democrats to end school segregation, can you imagine Democrats saying, “Gee, the US Supreme Court is correct - let’s embrace the black children we discriminated against yesterday?”
Intuitively, it makes no sense. Since pro-segregation Democrats run the schools in LA and formed the LAUSD, it’s not hard to imagine why public schools in black neighborhoods continue to fail in 2008, and why so many public school students are raised to believe Republicans are intolerant racists. What Democrats say has never been as important as what their history shows them to have committed (and still do) to minorities in America.
Blacks are overwhelmingly Democrat for two reasons: 1) historically, the KKK terrorized black Republicans from 1865-1964, which forced them to vote Democrat, move, or lose their home, family, and friends to lynching and arson. Their first black congressman was elected in Chicago (1936) not because they liked black candidates, but because he OPPOSED the NAACP. Today, Democrats empower clowns like Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Maxine Waters, and Conyers not because they respect black Americans, but to control black voters. Democrats throw Oreos and racist diatribes at influential black Republicans (Steele, Connerly) because the KKK was disbanded and lynching is no longer an accepted form of enforcing the black Democrat vote.
Democrats have been preoccupied with subjugating and controlling blacks since the 1820s. If America’s Democrat-controlled public schools taught American History, the Democrat Party would be as reviled as the KKK – and deservedly so.
March 10th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
Your cute Liem,
but your not re-writing military history on my watch.
Lincoln is Lincoln, 1860 to 1865
Bush is Bush, 2000 to 2008
see the difference there? 140 years.
The Civil War is the Civil War. 1861 to 1865.
Iraq is Iraq. 2004 to ?
‘nuther big difference
Lincoln fixed his problem with a couple fellows named Grant and Sherman who knew that wars are won by victory, not cease fires, or UN commissions, or pulling out and kissing the enemies ass!
March 10th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
I’ll bet reenforce was home schooled.
March 10th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Seems to know more ’bout history than some folks posting here…
March 10th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
A fascinating thread after such a long period of quiet…
When I come across blowhards like reenforce, I chuckle at how they think they have the only claim to understand history and they’ll explain it all for us. In all fairness, shouldn’t we include the Democrat’s achievements, like lifting an entire generation out of poverty; creating a social safety net so that our elderly and infirm don’t just die in the street; Roosevelt, a Democrat, single-handedly saving the planet from fascism; or perhaps Kennedy, another Democrat, launching us on the quest for space exploration and forging the technological future that is becoming the backbone of our economy; and the, as you say, “Democrat-controlled” educational system that is not coincidentally the envy of the entire planet.
Nor should we forget the legacy of the current republican party: torture, un-ending war, corruption, debt piled so high it is hard to imagine, an economy in shambles and headed for a profound recession and reorganization, and being despised by almost everyone on the planet. Oil has gone from $20-something a barrel to over $105, gas has nearly tripled, more people are uninsured, and illegal aliens are streaming across the border at ever-increasing rates.
And in the moment when he was told the country was under attack, this president thought it was best not to alarm 20 second graders, so he continued reading a book about goats to them, while planes slammed into buildings in the commerce and political capitals of our nation. Planes, mind you, that analysts at the CIA and FBI and NSA had been begging Bush’s gender- and racially-appropriate sycophant to tell him about, for months.
If Condi Rice is your idea of looking past race and gender, the world pleads with you to stop, and go ahead and look at race and gender, because if that character doesn’t bring you pause, I think you’re not looking past race and gender at all… you’re merely looking at something else, my guess is in a drug or alcohol-enhanced stupor.
Or maybe you’re just plain stupid.
March 11th, 2008 at 12:27 am
Yeah Rocky all I have to do is go to San Francisco and see what a great job, liberalism has done lifting people out of poverty, getting elderly bums off the street and of course making the world safe for perverts, Marxists and other brilliant people.
Your really funny, sometimes.
March 11th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Rocky Rocky Rocky… (sigh)
Lifting an entire generation out of poverty…
Capitalism and competition do that while liberals waste their lives complaining.
Creating a social safety net so that our elderly and infirm don’t just die in the street…
Until 1920, welfare was a local success throughout America until Teddy Roosevelt turned it into the wasteful big government program it is today. The so-called homeless people you see in cities like LA are there because shelters don’t give them cash for booze or drugs. They rely on handouts from liberals to buy their booze, crap in the neighborhood bushes, and die on the street as they prefer. If you disagree, ask the bums around Santa Monica where their lifestyle is supported by liberal city management who redistribute local and state homeowner wealth. Read more about that debacle in Tragedy of American Compassion.
Roosevelt, a Democrat, single-handedly saving the planet from fascism…
FDR and his VP Harry Truman despised liberals. George Orwell explained how self-described anti-war activists actually supported fascism and totalitarianism just as you do today.
… or perhaps Kennedy, another Democrat, launching us on the quest for space exploration and forging the technological future that is becoming the backbone of our economy…
Kennedy also despised people like you. Actually, newly declassified documents prove that President Eisenhower secretly led the space race, but permitted Sputnik to launch first because he feared the Soviets would complain to the UN about satellite flyovers. By allowing Sputnik’s beeping payload to launch first, Americans were able to launch the first spy satellites to photograph Soviet installations free from official Soviet complaint. Kennedy, LBJ, and subsequent presidents have built on the legacy begun by Eisenhower.
“Democrat-controlled” educational system that is not coincidentally the envy of the entire planet…
Our universities are still among the best, but our K-12 public schools fail more minorities than Jim Crow and segregation ever did. California students are ranked about 49th in the US, which ranks about 27th among the planet’s K-12 schools. And although taxpayers spend between $12K-$43K per child in California, most classrooms receive $6-9K/year per child after the unions and unfunded retirement packages take their cut – which is why Democrats and teacher unions oppose fully funded charters and vouchers.
I won’t waste our time with your other pro-fascist complaints, but to help you understand your ardent anti-conservative rhetoric, I urge you to read The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness, by Lyle Rossiter, MD. Rossiter’s 35 years of experience as a forensic psychiatrist helps us understand liberal pathology.
Thanks for writing. CB
March 11th, 2008 at 10:47 am
My God! I thought Weiner was tongue in cheek when he says liberalism was a mental disorder.
I gotta read this before I loose my own mind arguing with these wackos.
March 11th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
House Speaker Pelosi: A Clinton/Obama ticket is impossible.