Why Blacks should be Republicans...

Hi Sweetie!

You know those type of left wingers who foam at the mouth and live by 60s hippie rhetoric. I've seen quite a few of them since living out in AZ. I've also met a few brothers who claim that 'the revolution' will be reborn.

 

Flaming/Raging - Both words for fire!! Both very destructive. Left or Right.

 

I very much agree. You have to be able to look at both sides objectively, in my opinion.

 

Those people are scary!!

 

This is where and why you & I agree when it comes to these kind of discussions. :smt038

But back to the original topic, why do black people have to be republicans? Shouldn't we or anyone else be what we want to be? Why do we always have to fit someone else's agenda?

 

I've asked this on many occasions before, but no one ever seems to want to answer my question. So since you are clearly a die-hard GOP'er, maybe you could explain to me what "Country First" really means?

Everytime I ask a republican that question, they act like parents do when a child asks "where do babies come from?" They act as if they either don't know, or they really don't want to tell me.

I'd also like to know the benefits of being a republican as opposed to being whatever you choose to be...

 

Read Elder's column in Investor's Business Daily the paper the right of the Wall Street Journal. He used his dad's example that Blacks knew all along they are good. He poo pooed Obama in his past columns and that paper never announced Obama's victory-sore losers.

 

You forgot to mention Larry Elder's book... "Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card and Lose"

That kind of literature doesn't sound very uplifting to the black race. Quite frankly it sounds extremely condescending and negative.

 

I have his book and the book is arrogant. I have met Larry before and he has a different upbringing than the rest of us. Some things i agree with and some things I don't.

Peace

 

Still waiting on you to answer my questions...:smt017

 

Given the excoriation that the likes of Christopher Buckley, David Brooks, Kathleen Parker - all right-wing authors/writers - have faced from the reactionary, angry and earth-shatteringly intolerant National Review crowd, it continues to mystify me as to how some Negroes can actually be naive to adopt the grandiosely false notion that the Republican Party (and "conservatives" by extension) are an inclusive party. After all, it does not take a genius to recognize the fact that the current Republican base consists of, but isn't limited to the following demographic groups: white Southerners, evangelicals and wealthy entrepreneurs. Unfortunately, we are in 2008, not 1798 and the country is getting more diversified in terms of race, religion, region and other variables.

I mean, take a good look at the Republican National Convention. But for the tokens such as Michael Steele and Michael Williams, the RNC looked more like Iceland than America. The wingnuts freaked out when Howard Dean called the GOP "the white party" but what he said couldnt be any truer. Yet some morons continue to think the GOP will be more accepting if black folks just "take more personal responsibility" and "stop playing the race card". If there's any party who should totally obliterate the use of the phrase "personal responsiblilty", it should be the GOP. After all, it is on their watch that the following scandals in recent years have happened: watergate, iran-contra, savings and loans, jack abramoff, starting unnecessary and self-serving wars, voter suppression, torture, governmental indifference to vulnerable citizens, firings of "disloyal" U.S attorneys, and who can forget the $700 billion to undeserving, greedy, unaccountable and unapologetically selfish corporations.

If all of these things are not indicators that blacks (or non-wealthy whites for that matter) have no place in the Republican Party, then i don't know what is.

 

Good read. I wonder if this is what republicans are afraid to tell me.

 

Great post, Cris. I need to cut and paste it all over the net.

 

And this is wrong, why? There is nothing wrong with voting based on your religious beliefs. I guess your not a christian so this is something you will never understand.

 

You're right on both accounts. I'm not a Christian, and I don't understand why a politician's piety should take precedence over experience, intellect, competence and most importantly the policies that they plan to introduce when being considered for office. The willingness of a significant portion of the populous to settle for inept leadership as long as the people in charge purport to subscribe to the same set of beliefs about the supernatural as they do is extraordinarily bizarre and disturbing to me.

 

Nothing like separation between church and state, huh? :smt017

 

LChris did you see the people behind Sarah Palin in Georgia today? Not one minority in the bunch.

 

I appreciate you’re honesty. Onto my previous comment; I believe that the main reason why the US is still the greatest power in the world, which might change soon, is that it was found on Biblical principles, by this I mean that God is still bestowing blessing upon the US for the trust and hope that it’s for fathers had in Him.

 

So are we the moral police of the world now?

-We are not invading China for its violations of human rights.
http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sdc/hr_facts.html
http://www.globalissues.org/article/144/china-and-human-rights

-We are not invading various countries of Africa for genocide/genocide-like acts.

http://www.unitedhumanrights.org/sudan_genocide_genocide_in_sudan.php
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1288230.stm

-We are not invading Haiti in attempts to better the lives of the people there
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1729150,00.html

Let me be clear: I think Saddam Hussein committed despicable acts while governing the country of Iraq. Unfortunately it appears that he was able to do something that we couldn't do- keep stability in the region.

If we are going to be the moral police of the world (READ: if we are going to flex our military muscle every time we feel the urge), then we should at least be consistent in our self-righteousness.

 

As long as you don't mind being this guy, there's nothing wrong with voting based on your religious beliefs. Many people who voted for Bush have found themselves in similar predicaments as the man below.

I mean really, who cares if the president's knowledge of economics, worldly affairs, and domestic issues are infinitesimal at best. As long as he's against abortion, that's all that matters, right?

:smt090