Racist @ MindSay

An old blog entry is presented here now just after a great man from Ohio has done the right thing.  Dennis Kucinich has introduced 35 Articles Of Impeachment against George W. Bush.

Now the question is who among the ball-less, gut-less, the spine-less Democrats of the house and senate will stand with this great man, this man of great intellect and political courage.  Who?  Who indeed?

Senator Barbara Boxer, I suspect, will not quake and shun her sworn duty to uphold The Constitution of  one of The United States of North America [aka AUSPONA]. 

March 3, 2005 7:17 PM |

The problem indicates that our emphasis must be twofold: We must create full employment, or we must create incomes. People must be made consumers by one method or the other. Once they are placed in this position, we need to be concerned that the potential of the individual is not wasted. New forms of work that enhance the social good will have to be devised for those for whom traditional jobs are not available. In 1879 Henry George anticipated this state of affairs when he wrote in Progress and Poverty:

The fact is that the work which improves the condition of mankind, the work which extends knowledge and increases power and enriches literature and elevates thought, is not done to secure a living. It is not the work of slaves driven to their tasks either by the, that of a taskmaster or by animal necessities. It is the work of men who somehow find a form of work that brings a security for its own sake and a state of society where want is abolished.

Work of this sort could be enormously increased, and we are likely to find that the problem of housing, education, instead of preceding the elimination of poverty, will themselves be affected if poverty is first abolished."

Where Do We Go From Here....

"I’ve seen my dream shattered as I’ve walked the streets of Chicago (Make it plain) and seen Negroes, young men and women, with a sense of utter hopelessness because they can’t find any jobs. And they see life as a long and desolate corridor with no exit signs. And not only Negroes at this point. I’ve seen my dream shattered because I’ve been through Appalachia, and I’ve seen my white brothers along with Negroes living in poverty. (Yeah) And I’m concerned about white poverty as much as I’m concerned about Negro poverty. (Make it plain)

So yes, the dream has been shattered, (Amen) and I have had my nightmarish experiences, but I tell you this morning once more that I haven’t lost the faith. (No, sir) I still have a dream (A dream, Yes, sir) that one day all of God’s children will have food and clothing and material well-being for their bodies, culture and education for their minds, and freedom for their spirits. (Yes)"

The American Dream...

Dear Mindsay,

      Barack Hussein Obama plays the race card whenever anyone disagrees with him.

      Black people make up 12.5% of the American population, but if I don't feel comfortable with my President being named Barack Hussein Obama, this is racist.

      Obama and his people are actually the racists!  They are imposing themselves on the rest of the population by playing the race card every time you tell the truth: Obama was raised as a Muslim, most of the American population which is 74% white feel that Barack Hussein Obama has a name which is alien to them, and blacks compose 12.5% of the American population.  Then Obama has the audacity to claim that he has the "qualifications" to "bring America together."

      The bottom line is that Obama wants to further exhaust our credit, which is already maxed out.

      Since the Democratic Party refuses to fairly represent me, I am becoming a registered Republican.

Peter Bagetakos

It is amazing to see how many blacks today continue to revere the memory of Abraham Lincoln as though he had actually done something for them. Of course many whites do the same thing. In fact, there is an entire cottage industry operating nowadays, consisting of people, many of whom are academics, whose entire goal in life seems to be the attempted beatification of "Saint Abraham." Most of this foolishness is due to the fact that, in our government schools, we have been taught a laughable, shoddy imitation of history. The facts must never be allowed to get in the way of the fantasy.

Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation is a dubious document that has been widely touted as having "freed the slaves." It didn't. It was aimed at the slaves in Confederate territory where Lincoln had no legal authority. Slaves in both states and territory controlled by Mr. Lincoln's dictatorial regime remained firmly in bondage until the 13th Amendment freed them, several months after Mr. Lincoln's demise. Even Lincoln, himself, admitted the proclamation was a war measure and probably would not have passed any sort of constitutional muster. So who did it really free? No one, that's who. It was never intended to "free" anyone. It was excellent propaganda and that was it. Period!

Several years ago, columnist Joseph Sobran wrote: "When Lincoln finally did grab the slavery issue in 1854, he again followed (Henry) Clay in advocating gradual emancipation, combined with a program of colonization--resettling former slaves outside of the United States. He expressly opposed political and social equality for Negroes in this country. They should be equal all right, but not here...Lincoln's segregationist views are soft-peddled, shrugged off, explained away, or simply ignored...the Fantasy Lincoln must be maintained at all costs." And this is exactly what many establishment scholars today do. They maintain the cottage industry that promotes the "Fantasy Lincoln" while conveniently ignoring his racist views--views they seem to find abhorant in anyone else yet perfectly alright in Mr. Lincoln.

So far as Lincoln's overt racism, let us go right to the horse's mouth as it were, and find out what the great emancipator said himself. In the Lincoln-Douglas debates, which took place in 1858, while debating in Ottowa, Illinois on August 21st of that year, Mr. Lincoln stated, quite plainly, that: "I have no disposition to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which in my judgment will probably forever forbid their living together on terms of respect, social and political equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there should be a superiority somewhere, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position;"

Lest one be tempted to think that this Lincolnian sentiment was a mere abberation, a slip of the tongue on his part, let's note Lincoln's comments in his speech at Charleston, Illinois on September 18, 1858. Here, dealing again with the same question, Lincoln said: "I will say then, that I am not nor have ever been in favor of bringing about in any way, the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not, nor have I ever been in favor of making voters of the negroes, or jurors, or qualifying them to hold office, or having them to marry with white people...there must be the position of superior and inferior, that I as much as any other man am in favor of the superior position being assigned to the white man." And he repeated, again, this exact same sentiment in the debate in Quincy, Illinois on October 13th. You do have to admit that Mr. Lincoln's racism did remain constant.

When I read about all the Northern (and some Southern) liberals that so deftly condemn Southern folks for their racism, I often wonder why they seem to forget to condemn Mr. Lincoln for his racism. And why do they conveniently forget to condemn the North for its racist attitudes--because the North had them every bit as much as did the South. Why is Southern "guilt" to be pointed out and exclaimed over while Northern "guilt" for the same "crime" is simply ignored? You don't supposed there is just a teeny bit of anti-Southern bias among the liberals and their court historians do you? Naw--that could never happen--could it???

Professor Thomas DiLorenzo, in his excellent book The Real Lincoln noted that: "The Republican Party, led by Lincoln, was in favor of Southern slavery because its leaders feared the spectacle of emancipated slaves residing in their own Northern states. Lincoln's own state of Illinois had recently amended its constitution to prohibit the emigration of black people into the state, as had several other Northern states. Most Northern states had adopted Black Codes that discriminated in the most inhumane ways against freed blacks. Such discriminatory laws existed in the North decades before they were adopted in the South. There were very few blacks in the North in 1861, and most Northern voters wanted it to remain that way." Black Codes in the North for decades before the South adopted them? Wonder why your "history" book never mentioned that. I never read about that when I went to school. Maybe they sort of forgot to put it in my history book. You say it wasn't in your's either? Oh my!