The Real Uncle Toms

[Taichiliberal]

There's not a whole lot of debate going on no matter who you're talking about, so why pretend that's the point?

The blurb on google says "Welcome to JustPlainPolitics.com! The plain politics forum for political junkies! Where people meet to share their political view."


The actual forum for head-to-head debates hasn't seen any action in over a year.

Excellent point! Note that the tune Dixie is whistl'in about me never providing proof of what I say is the very same desperate lie that the neocon peanut gallery used on AOL whenever they couldn't logically or factually disprove what I stated or the source material I provided. He's just pissed because I and others have got his number.

 

[Taichiliberal]

You fucking nascar pinhead, YOU provide daily evidence of racism to this board almost daily. Cali and everyone else with an IQ over room temperature (which excludes most alabama people) are laughing in your face.
It's backassward monkey's like you stuck in the racist mentality of the early seventies that make the south a mockery for the rest of the country.

you don't fight bigotry with bigotry.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Well, much of it happened before my time, but apparently blacks did accept it, from the time of the Civil War until the mid 1960s, they were content with sitting at the back of the bus. Pre-Rosa, black people just went along with it, because it was easier to do that, than to protest it. I never said they liked it, we often put up with things we don't like, that is my whole point here.

Holy Jeez....you ARE really fucking stupid! You are not pretending....you really don't know what the hell went on in the world beyond your birthday!

Do you honestly believe that black folk "accepted" segregation and all it's accompanying racist policies? Do you actually believe Rosa Parks just acted on her own? Do you even know the history of the NAACP and it's predecessors in that region of the country?

You're "whole point" is based on either honest or willfull ignorance of the historical facts. Like I said, the bilge you spew does justice to Rockwell, Duke and the plethora of similar minded cretins on the SPLC hit list.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Holy Jeez....you ARE really fucking stupid! You are not pretending....you really don't know what the hell went on in the world beyond your birthday!

Do you honestly believe that black folk "accepted" segregation and all it's accompanying racist policies? Do you actually believe Rosa Parks just acted on her own? Do you even know the history of the NAACP and it's predecessors in that region of the country?

You're "whole point" is based on either honest or willfull ignorance of the historical facts. Like I said, the bilge you spew does justice to Rockwell, Duke and the plethora of similar minded cretins on the SPLC hit list.

Well, yes, I honestly believe black folks did accept all the policies because black people did exist and the policies did exist, and for the most part, there were no protests. This is common fucking sense, not something difficult to comprehend. And yes, I think Rosa Parks acted alone when she refused to move to the back of the bus! The NAACP was not aboard the bus that day, they weren't standing behind her when she made her stand.

Chicklet, you know something? I don't care if you want to destroy the significance of what Rosa Parks did, I am sure she didn't have any idea of how profound her actions would be in the course of history, and we shouldn't expect people like you to give her credit for the courage. If you want to think what she did was not important and the cumulative efforts going on around her were more significant than anything she ever did as an individual, then so be it! We just disagree!

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Learn to read carefully and comprehensively, genius.

There is NO 60 year reign of Dems of both houses....(60 years counting back from present day, which is within our lifetime. That was the original point of contention, if you had bothered to comprehend what you read)....actually it's around 30 years, with the GOP having the Presidency MORE than the Dems.

Like I told the Beefy one, I was wrong to an extent, but so was he. So next time you have a hissy fit, get an adult to explain things to you before your fingers hit the keys...makes you look less foolish (but not by much).

Here is the only point we need to know...

Years of control in house and senate:

P- PRS H S
-------------
D- FDR 12 12
D- HST 6 6
R- DDE 2 2
D- JFK 3 3
D- LBJ 5 5
R- RMN 0 0
R- GRF 0 0
D- JEC 4 4
R- RWR 0 0
R- GHB 0 0
D- WJC 2 2
R- GWB 6 4
D- BHO 1 1

DEMS- 33 years
REPS- 6 years

To pretend Democrats have not controlled congress the past 60 years, is beyond foolish, it is completely ignorant of fact. I hope you aren't depending on this excuse for the lack of results in helping the black community. By the way, how are you coming on that list of things the Democrats have done to "help" black people? Where are your pinhead studies to show how Democrat policies have raised the average education levels among blacks, or increased their standard of living over the decades? Show us how Democrat programs have helped to discourage the out of wedlock pregnancies and gang/drug/crime activities among black youth? Let's see all of this profound evidence you have for why America should continue supporting Democrat policies?

...I'm waiting!!

 

[Beefy]

Anyone who thinks minority empowerment and quality of life has not improved since FDR is an idiot. And anyone who attributes the improvement to a political corporation rather than the changing tides of the public is the 2nd Mrs. Jack.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Anyone who thinks minority empowerment and quality of life has not improved since FDR is an idiot. And anyone who attributes the improvement to a political corporation rather than the changing tides of the public is the 2nd Mrs. Jack.

No one said it hasn't improved, but it certainly isn't attributable to Democrat programs. Welfare Reform is the only thing I can think of from the Democrats, and Clinton had to drag liberals kicking and screaming to do that!

 

[Beefy]

No one said it hasn't improved, but it certainly isn't attributable to Democrat programs. Welfare Reform is the only thing I can think of from the Democrats, and Clinton had to drag liberals kicking and screaming to do that!

Well, some of the programs may have helped along the way, but its marginal at best and not attributable to ether party, especially if we're talking about the last 70 years which includes the Dixiecrats.

My point is that it is not the politicians that turn the tide, it is the public that forces it. Unfortunately, that's less true today than it has been in the last 70 years.

Suggesting that a party, a PAC essentially but with more broad a brush is to credit for changing social tides is laughable. And giving creedence to it by saying their policies failed is equally as laughable, because its not really up to them to begin with.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Well, some of the programs may have helped along the way, but its marginal at best and not attributable to ether party, especially if we're talking about the last 70 years which includes the Dixiecrats.

My point is that it is not the politicians that turn the tide, it is the public that forces it. Unfortunately, that's less true today than it has been in the last 70 years.

Suggesting that a party, a PAC essentially but with more broad a brush is to credit for changing social tides is laughable. And giving creedence to it by saying their policies failed is equally as laughable, because its not really up to them to begin with.

I'm not really even talking about changing social tides. The point and subject of the thread is Democrat support from the black community, and how it is similar to what we have observed in the past. Democrats boast that 90% of blacks support them, but before Rosa Parks, what percentage of blacks were content to sit on the back of the bus and say nothing? Things have a way of changing rapidly, it takes one individual, standing up to the status quot.

I have not suggested a PAC or ANY "group" is responsible or to blame for change or lack of change... the conversation has nothing to do with that. Change is often sparked by the actions of a courageous individual, unafraid to say what needs to be said.

 

[christiefan915]

Well, yes, I honestly believe black folks did accept all the policies because black people did exist and the policies did exist, and for the most part, there were no protests. This is common fucking sense, not something difficult to comprehend. And yes, I think Rosa Parks acted alone when she refused to move to the back of the bus! The NAACP was not aboard the bus that day, they weren't standing behind her when she made her stand.

Chicklet, you know something? I don't care if you want to destroy the significance of what Rosa Parks did, I am sure she didn't have any idea of how profound her actions would be in the course of history, and we shouldn't expect people like you to give her credit for the courage. If you want to think what she did was not important and the cumulative efforts going on around her were more significant than anything she ever did as an individual, then so be it! We just disagree!

Two words about the no-protest thing: LYNCH MOB.

 

[christiefan915]

Holy Jeez....you ARE really fucking stupid! You are not pretending....you really don't know what the hell went on in the world beyond your birthday!

Do you honestly believe that black folk "accepted" segregation and all it's accompanying racist policies? Do you actually believe Rosa Parks just acted on her own? Do you even know the history of the NAACP and it's predecessors in that region of the country?

You're "whole point" is based on either honest or willfull ignorance of the historical facts. Like I said, the bilge you spew does justice to Rockwell, Duke and the plethora of similar minded cretins on the SPLC hit list.

Good Lord, just when you think you've heard it all...

This idiot apparently doesn't understand that fear is a powerful motivator, and that for centuries blacks had to toe the line that was set in place by white bigots. No white person was ever lynched for whistling at a black woman, no white kids were ever threatened by the National Guard for entering a school, etc. etc.

Dixie can write another 1,000-word screed defending his comments but he can't erase what he's already put out there, and it isn't pretty.

 

[Onceler]

I'm not really even talking about changing social tides. The point and subject of the thread is Democrat support from the black community, and how it is similar to what we have observed in the past. Democrats boast that 90% of blacks support them, but before Rosa Parks, what percentage of blacks were content to sit on the back of the bus and say nothing? Things have a way of changing rapidly, it takes one individual, standing up to the status quot.

I have not suggested a PAC or ANY "group" is responsible or to blame for change or lack of change... the conversation has nothing to do with that. Change is often sparked by the actions of a courageous individual, unafraid to say what needs to be said.

What needs to be said?

Are you suggesting that programs like Head Start haven't made a difference as far as leveling the playing field?

Government isn't always the enemy...

 

[Cypress]

Well, much of it happened before my time, but apparently blacks did accept it, from the time of the Civil War until the mid 1960s, they were content with sitting at the back of the bus. Pre-Rosa, black people just went along with it, because it was easier to do that, than to protest it. I never said they liked it, we often put up with things we don't like, that is my whole point here.

This is why people think you're a racist, or at a minimum some kind of racist-enabler. It's not just that you parade around message boards waving a Confederate battle flag, but because of crap like this. Blacks didn't "accept" being told to sit at the back of the bus - they tried to complain about it. But, as Christie says, it took a lot of balls to even complain, given the lynching history of the south.

Further, you claim that the south has an outstanding educational program educating y'all about civil rights leaders. Listen man, if you think Rosa Parks was just some sweet old lady who randomly decided to grab a "white" bus seat one day, you don't know anything about Rosa Parks.

I've always found it curious that you have such expert knowledge in the arguments, minutia and details pertaining to being against the Martin Luther King holiday, against inter racial marriage, and I've always been astonished that you think being against interracial marriage isn't necessarily racist. I have a hard time believing that your expert knowledge of these racist arguments simply came out of an academic interest you had in studying and familiarizing yourself with the scope and detail of these racist positions. Especially when you don't have an equivalent level of knowledge about the civil rights movement or its leaders, as your statements about Rosa Parks demonstrate.

Why would you be such an expert on the historic racist arguments against interracial marriage and the MLK holiday, when you appear to be devoid of any similar knowledge of the civil rights movement, or of Rosa Parks? If it's simply an academic interest of yours, you appear to have devoted a lot of time studying only the racist positions. Isn't that a tad odd?

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Good Lord, just when you think you've heard it all...

This idiot apparently doesn't understand that fear is a powerful motivator, and that for centuries blacks had to toe the line that was set in place by white bigots. No white person was ever lynched for whistling at a black woman, no white kids were ever threatened by the National Guard for entering a school, etc. etc.

Dixie can write another 1,000-word screed defending his comments but he can't erase what he's already put out there, and it isn't pretty.

You can read anything you want to into what I posted, there is nothing inaccurate about it. Yes, for centuries blacks towed the line, that WAS the point! It's obvious they didn't LIKE doing it! It's obvious they didn't WANT to do it! But the undying fact remains, for centuries, they most certainly DID do it! So we have to ask ourselves WHY? Well, the main reason was not wanting to get your head bashed in or hung from a tree! But the point I made, which has yet to be refuted (because it is the truth), is that humans have this propensity to tolerate the intolerable, to avoid confrontation and controversy. It's easier and more conducive with our normal passive condition, and this is true regardless of race.

Whether you think the truth is "pretty" or not, is not MY concern. Whether you want to spend our time trying to twist something I've said into some "racist" comment you can FAKE being deplored at, is entirely up to you!

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

What needs to be said?

Are you suggesting that programs like Head Start haven't made a difference as far as leveling the playing field?

Government isn't always the enemy...

Why is it when Democrats are challenged to present ANY example of a program that has "helped" people, they grab for Head Start? Is it because you know you can garner some sympathy by using the "little children?"

Excerpt:
Not all studies support the claim that Head Start is effective when measured by long-term gain. Many researchers acknowledge that Head Start appears to make a significant educational impact early-on but argue that these benefits quickly fade. This phenomenon known as “Head Start Fade” begins to show itself as early as second and third grade when students who attended Head Start programs begin to fall behind their non-participant peers. The concept of “ Head Start Fade” leaves government officials and educators left wondering what can be done beyond the preschool years to perpetuate the early gains made by enrollment in Head Start programs.

Once again, Liberals come up with one of their Grand Ideas, it fails, and what do they do? Start thinking of other Grand Ideas to fix the failures!

If Head Start works, why haven't the recipients shown a markedly higher rate of graduation and collegiate enrollment? Why do we see not much difference between recipients of Head Start, and those who were not part of the program? Why are ACT and SAT scores of Head Start recipients still historically lower among blacks? For the TRILLIONS of dollars we've spent, what have we got to show for it? Well, what we have is Liberals, running around screaming Head Start every time someone challenges their idiocy, because it plays on people's conscience, you see, because it involves the little children... especially the poor little BLACK children who can't help they were born with BLACK skin, and are obviously on an un-level playing field because of their handicap! ...You people really take the prize!

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

You need to back track the conversation and follow the chronology of exchanges. I did make the erroneous statement regarding Dem congressional control. I have since admitted error and provided proof of that error. Dixie stated that the Dems had such control for 60 years to date......NEITHER information that you or I provide supports that claim of his.

On one of your posts you injected the party control of the presidential office, not me. I merely followed suit.

Bottom line: my immediate previous post demonstrates the more accurate numbers, of which I was originally totally wrong and you were partially wrong in your original responses.

Again... my post was in response to yours. Not dixies. I never stated it supported HIS comments. I said it refuted yours. Period. As I stated, I put in the Presidency to show you when in your lifetime they also had complete control of Congress and the WH. That still does not change the fact that you were quite wrong. Pretending that I was somehow wrong was quite simply ridiculous. I refuted your point with accurate information. Period.

 

[Onceler]

Why is it when Democrats are challenged to present ANY example of a program that has "helped" people, they grab for Head Start? Is it because you know you can garner some sympathy by using the "little children?"

Excerpt:
Not all studies support the claim that Head Start is effective when measured by long-term gain. Many researchers acknowledge that Head Start appears to make a significant educational impact early-on but argue that these benefits quickly fade. This phenomenon known as “Head Start Fade” begins to show itself as early as second and third grade when students who attended Head Start programs begin to fall behind their non-participant peers. The concept of “ Head Start Fade” leaves government officials and educators left wondering what can be done beyond the preschool years to perpetuate the early gains made by enrollment in Head Start programs.

Once again, Liberals come up with one of their Grand Ideas, it fails, and what do they do? Start thinking of other Grand Ideas to fix the failures!

If Head Start works, why haven't the recipients shown a markedly higher rate of graduation and collegiate enrollment? Why do we see not much difference between recipients of Head Start, and those who were not part of the program? Why are ACT and SAT scores of Head Start recipients still historically lower among blacks? For the TRILLIONS of dollars we've spent, what have we got to show for it? Well, what we have is Liberals, running around screaming Head Start every time someone challenges their idiocy, because it plays on people's conscience, you see, because it involves the little children... especially the poor little BLACK children who can't help they were born with BLACK skin, and are obviously on an un-level playing field because of their handicap! ...You people really take the prize!

Cripes; talk about cherrypicking. Bush taught you well.

How much did you have to google before you found one excerpt from one study that indicates a small possibility that it hasn't been as successful as everyone says?

There are about a dozen+ studies contradicting that. Head Start has worked.

And I brought up Head Start because it's the first thing that came to mind. It certainly undermines your great "point" that all Democrats have really done is welfare.....

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Cripes; talk about cherrypicking. Bush taught you well.

How much did you have to google before you found one excerpt from one study that indicates a small possibility that it hasn't been as successful as everyone says?

There are about a dozen+ studies contradicting that. Head Start has worked.

And I brought up Head Start because it's the first thing that came to mind. It certainly undermines your great "point" that all Democrats have really done is welfare.....

The excerpt is from the Wikipedia link, and it took me about 20 seconds to find it. The point is, the reviews on the effectiveness of the Head Start Program, are dubious at best. Most researchers agree, it doesn't have a lasting long-term effect, and the numbers/stats bear this out. That's why you haven't posted how many more collegiate grads we now have because of Head Start!

And this is the case with virtually EVERY Democrat program, since FDR! We spend TRILLIONS and get virtually NOTHING from it! It certainly hasn't proven to "HELP" anyone, except Democrat politicians, who can somehow keep fooling their chattel down on the plantation!

 

[Onceler]

The excerpt is from the Wikipedia link, and it took me about 20 seconds to find it. The point is, the reviews on the effectiveness of the Head Start Program, are dubious at best. Most researchers agree, it doesn't have a lasting long-term effect, and the numbers/stats bear this out. That's why you haven't posted how many more collegiate grads we now have because of Head Start!

And this is the case with virtually EVERY Democrat program, since FDR! We spend TRILLIONS and get virtually NOTHING from it! It certainly hasn't proven to "HELP" anyone, except Democrat politicians, who can somehow keep fooling their chattel down on the plantation!

That's the basis for your judgment on Head Start? A 20 second search, and the 1st negative comment you can find on Wikipedia?

And, based on this extensive study, you have concluded that the effectiveness of Head Start is "dubious at best"?

Okay; thanks for clarifying that. Nothing to really see here, folks...

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

That's the basis for your judgment on Head Start? A 20 second search, and the 1st negative comment you can find on Wikipedia?

And, based on this extensive study, you have concluded that the effectiveness of Head Start is "dubious at best"?

Okay; thanks for clarifying that. Nothing to really see here, folks...

The basis of my judgment is the fact that most researchers see no real benefit to Head Start, I just found the information posted at Wikipedia. You've not posted any studies on how Head Start has increased GPA's or produced more college graduates, or even anything to show how it has helped the black community. So you are right, nothing to see except your ass on a platter, which we are all used to seeing here!