Digg

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at article.nationalreview.com

In Black and White how Republicans can win the Black Vote.

article.nationalreview.com — The Party of Lincoln needn't pretend to be Democrats to win black votes.

Bury

davidmesaaz 138 days ago

30 diggs
digg it

davidmesaaz, on 04/23/2008, -1/+4Trying to reach blacks through civil-rights organizations that are totally hostile to your message is like a quarterback trying to throw a pass to a receiver surrounded by opposing defenders. That just leads to a lot of interceptions and touchdowns for the other team.
tatercakes, on 04/23/2008, -3/+1The neocons are not the "Party of Lincoln" in the same way that Michael Jackson is a "singer"... may have been true once but now they mainly focusing on screwing our kids.
- bsegovia, on 04/23/2008, -2/+1Couldn't agree more. There's a large group of us that are bringing it back though. Sit tight, the Lincoln party will be back momentarily.
  - ikbrooks, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1Praise the Lord and pass the bullets!
davidmesaaz, on 04/23/2008, -1/+2Well lets see Abraham Lincoln believed in moral absolutes and his political base was white evangelicals who wanted to rid the world of slavery. He was opposed by the to each his own liberals that were opposed to and the anti-war left that thought that we should just concede be conciliatory with the South. Remember FDR's wing of the Roosevelt were opposed to the Civil War..

In the 19th century Republicans were the party of big business and in the 21 Century Republicans were the party of big business. While the dems clinged to the Jeffersonian notion of small farms and oppossed big business notably Andrew Jackson.

in the 19th century Republicans were supported by evangelicals who rejected the notion to each his own notion on slavery. In the today the Republican party is supported by evangelicals who think that abortion is is morally wrong an have eqauted it to slavery.

When you compare Theodore Roosevelt invited Booker T Washington a prominent african american. Wilson thought the clan movie Birth of a Nation was something every American should see. FDR relied heavily on the south to pass his New Deal legislation and totally ignored african americans.

In the 1950's the first civil rights legislation the civil rights bill of 1957 was passed by republican adminstration and by republican support in congress. Its great opponents where the new deal democrats of the south..

In 1960's when Ronald Reagan was governor he hired more blacks than all of his predecessors combined. In 1960 John F Kennedy was elected and his majors contributors were from the segregationist south. Which lead him to oppose any and all civil rights legislation. The first civil rights legislation was passed in 1957 by Republican adminstration and Republican support in Congress.

in the 1970's the civil rights movement changed from its libertarian roots to giving people government aid and on the basis or race. It changed from equality of opportunity to equality of outcome.

I could go on but check your sources because Republican party is the party of Lincoln.
- tgolferman, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1Your long history of political party shifts in ideology are a natural result of "Balance of Power" adjustments made by individuals and leaders within parties. If you can't beat them join them, if you know what I mean.
  Republicans getting black votes at this point in history is laughable. The Republican (Conservative) movement has been deregulating everything in society since Ronald Regan was in office. And nearly everything that has been deregulated has seen corrupt practices cause bubbles to form and pop causing economic collapse and taxpayer bailouts. Tax payer bailouts are also a hidden form of taxation without representation and cause probably the most harm to the black community for many reasons.
  Regulations and Taxes when properly designed and managed promote a just balanced society without disruptive and destructive concentrations of wealth and power. Switzerland is an example. Switzerland runs a basically balanced budget, has high taxes, universal health care, and relatively high income. Obviously with high taxes, heavy concentrations of Wealth and Power are prevented, thus explaining the balanced budget and universal health care.
  - davidmesaaz, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1deregulation result in more corruption and not less. When the government has less control over the levers of power they can't give out political favors.
    
    Switzerland has high taxes? They have a flat tax they have a lot of billionaries from Mark Rich to the founder of Ikea. One Canton has a tax rate of 1.8 percent.
    
    http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-m ...
    
    When there has been concentrations of power America has benefited from it. Before Henry Ford came along a car was more expensive than a house. In 8 years he cut the price of a car in Half. Rockefeller Carnegie did similar things with their industries. Which fueled the consumer movement of goods.
    
    While collective labor is not a new idea. Some of the oldest collective bargning agreements can be found in India over 3000 years ago but did not result in modern economic growth. But when we have focued on the individual where it be the Medici which powered the renaissance or the Rockefellers or the Carnegies which increased the cultural and education life of the United States. The Rockefeller foundation was behind the "green revolution" which focused on health care and allowed india to feed itself.
    
    In contrast we have spent 1 trillion dollars in aid to africa. True we did have a marshall plan for Europe but the terms of the deal were that europe open up their business economical allow the GM Ford and other corporatons into Europe for the first time. Also any aid that they can spend must be spent with US corporations.
    
    I understand what the intention of regulations are but while they succeed in inentions they fail in reality.
ikbrooks, on 04/24/2008, -1/+2Trying to reach anyone with a "groupthink" message is flawed in its premise. Many of us can think on our own and resent the idea of thinking a certain way just because off the color of our skin. The liberals are finding this out the hard way. I thought conservatives already knew it. Please do not prove me wrong.
- tgolferman, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1You hit that one out of the park!
  However, group-think as a concept does have the redeeming value of being able to thwart the attempts of the wealthy and powerful to distort the socio-economic system to their advantage. The problem is the wealthy and powerful just like politicians use the divide and conquer strategy to disrupt group think when it suits them.
  Let me reiterate my first statement: your premise is sound from a recipient of communication point of view. Hopefully, you don't feel like I was proving you wrong, I just wanted you to think about group-think from a different perspective. Have a great day.
davidmesaaz, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1If regulations and unions help the working people why does the tech industry which is the most globally competitive attracts the smartest workers gives the best pay packages is decidely non union. Their is incredible income inequality for example bill gates and some engineer working for 60 k at the same table.

What regulations do is they limit new innovations from coming into the industry. See Latin America....
davidmesaaz, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1But the deregulation movement was carried by Bill Clinton who was loved by the black community. He cut the capital gains tax deregulated the economy in the 1996 telecommunication act and the repeal of the glass stegal act one of FDR regulations.

http://digg.com/political_opinion/WSJ_com_Opinion_ ...
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

In Black and White how Republicans can win the Black Vote.

Login or register to add a comment