Showing posts with label Socialist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Socialist. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 10, 2018

Martin Luther King, Jr. - Don't Shoot the Messenger


Note: When I first wrote and posted this, I, unlike a lot of Americans, continued to read and research, as of now I have concluded that Martin Luther King was what I must now call an American Communist.

Introduction

I remember back when a co-worker and eventually a very good friend of mine said to me, “Have you seen or heard Glenn Beck (Glenn)?”

I looked at him and said, “No, who is he?”

He went on to explain that he was a conservative talk show host on CNN. So like any person approaching something new, I opened my mind and tuned in. I liked what I saw and became hooked. I felt that maybe I had found someone who would entertain, yet educate and unlike most sheeple in America, I'm always willing to listen to another opinion and I'm definitely open to learning.

I followed Glenn from CNN to Fox and even though the 5:00 time slot overlapped with my work schedule, I did what anyone with a DVR would do, I recorded his show. In fact I ended up burning some of the shows to DVD for future reference.

When he started the 9-12 Project, I was lucky enough to find one of the first websites that “welcomed” me and my rants. In fact, I was privileged to have Glenn read one of my comments on air. However, I ended up leaving that site when the Site Administrator violated my trust, as I would become accustomed to with other 9-12 sites and Glenn Beck himself. I would later join another site that, though some were Glenn Beck fans, they thought for themselves.

When Glenn left Fox, I was very disappointed to say the least. I thought at least I could still listen to him on the radio. Yes, I still listen to him today. However as I've continued to listen to Glenn, I began seeing that Glenn's message began to change and he began to develop a rather selective view of history, particularly when it comes to his almost worship of Martin Luther King (MLK).

Martin Luther King Jr.: Communist, Socialist or Progressive

When Glenn began his admiration, bordering on idol worship, of MLK's non-violent approach to the race problems in the sixties, I started wondering exactly where was he heading with this admiration? Was he doing what a majority of people do who put a person on a pedestal, ignoring the real history of the person or just taking a selective view?

As Igor, my friend and editor, is fond of saying when I challenge things at work, “You're opening a can of worms.”

Yes, I may be doing just that and most likely I will unleash a Hell storm of criticism, name calling and most likely down right hate. This is NOT my intention; I will present the facts and allow you the reader to look at the facts presented and make up your own mind.

Once again, I ask, “Don't shoot the messenger.”

Let's begin by setting the rules. To begin with, as most of my readers know I will be using sources, direct quotes. The second rule is I am going to ask the devoted fans and followers of Glenn to think back and remember. BUT most importantly keep an open mind and remember when Glenn said,

You've got to demand the truth from yourself.

Martin Luther King, Jr.: A Communist?

This is the not the only place where I feel Glenn is completely off base. But, for the purpose of this post it is the only one I'm going to deal with.

Do Glenn Beck fans remember him saying, and I paraphrase,

Progressives are Communists with patience

From this statement, one can and should conclude that Progressives are Communists and that would mean that Theodore Roosevelt (October 27, 1858 – January 6, 1919) who was one of the founders of the Progressive Party was a Communist, though at the time, just as today, the terms were interchangeable. Though Roosevelt did believe in "Social Justice". [1]

There are some who will say that the differences between Communism, Socialism and Progressivism are just a case of semantics, but there are differences and the problem or question that arises is, what are the differences?

I could spend a great deal of time and the rest of this piece going into the differences in the ideology and methods of Communism, Socialism and Progressivism but I won't; instead I will just give a brief history. Spoiler alert: Watch this space for a more in depth study in the differences.

Lets just say look at the history of Socialism.

After the Revolutions of 1848, the Socialist ideology split into three distinct factions.

The “Revisionist” socialists were those who promoted gradual reform by using compromise, the democratic process and non violence to achieve the nationalism of state and local public works.

The “Anarchic” socialists who believed that both the state and private property should be abolished and society should be composed of small collectives of producers, distributors and consumers.

Last comes the “Bolshevik” socialists, who believed in using revolutionary (violent) tactics to raise the conscious of the working class (proletariat) in order to advance socialism through an absolute dictatorship. It is what would eventually spur Lenin to lead the Bolshevik Revolution (Russian Revolution) of 1917 that would morph into what today people call communism. When most people speak of Communism today, they speak of a country ruled by a dictator whose power was achieved in most cases by violence and asserts complete control over production.

Now, since MLK did not believe in a violent approach to achieve social change, one can and should conclude that MLK was not a communist as defined by the Bolshevik philosophy. However he did have militant elements within his organization but as he said:

Our militant elements were used, not as small striking detachments, but to organize.” [2]

The idea of violent tactics to achieve Marxism is not the only separator between communism and socialism, but according to the early American socialists there are other differences.

According to W. D. P. Bliss,

Socialism puts its emphasis on common production and distribution; Communism on life in common. Communism makes less of existing political institutions as instruments; Socialism would very largely use them."

Or as Victor L. Berger wrote,

The definition of Socialism, as generally accepted now, is “the collective ownership of all the means of production and distribution.”[3]

While,

Communism proposes the common ownership of the means of production, or, in some cases, the means of production and consumption. Socialism, on the contrary, asks only for the common ownership of the means of production, as made necessary by the modern development of the tool into the machine. Socialism leaves consumption, i.e., the selection and the enjoyment of the means of life to the free will and the taste of the individuals”[4]

So using these two statements from the principle founders of the American Socialist Party in 1901, one should conclude that there is a difference between Socialism and Communism.

Did MLK believe that the government should control production, distribution and even consumption? If he didn't once again, he's not a Communist.

Socialism or Progressivism? Or are they the same thing?

Now this is where people really have to stop, think, and look at the facts and answer some very difficult questions and draw their own conclusions.

The first and most important question is:

“If there is no difference between the doctrines of the American Socialist Party and those who claim to be Progressives and the doctrines of the American Progressive Party, does that mean that they are the same only with different names?”

Next ask the question:

“If celebrated Progressives were also members of Socialist Party of America or Socialists, again does that mean that Progressives are Socialists?”

Remember when Glenn said on On May, 2014,

Progressives have a longer time table

Well, so do the Revisionist Socialists.

Martin Luther King, Jr. a Progressive

SOCIAL JUSTICE

According to the Center for American Progress, The Progressive Intellectual Tradition in America,

In terms of its political values, progressivism throughout the years stressed a range of ideals that remain important today:... Social justice, the proper arrangement of law, society, and the economy to ensure that all people have the formal and informal capacity to shape their own lives and realize their dreams.

Does everyone remember when Glenn said,

I beg you, look for the words 'social justice' or 'economic justice' on your church Web site. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words.

Or how about when he said,

If you have a priest that is pushing social justice, go find another parish. Go alert your bishop.”

Now, I must ask, if Glenn believes that “Social Justice” is such a code word and his followers should run away or report the priest to the bishop, then why does Glenn embrace MLK, a minister, who said in a 1963 speech at Western Michigan University, entitled "Social Justice",

I think with all of these challenges being met and with all of the work, and determination going on, we will be able to go this additional distance and achieve the ideal, the goal of the new age, the age of social justice.” (My emphases...OM)

Why would Glenn fail to mention that according to The Nation magazine, Martin Luther King, Jr was named one of “The Fifty Most Influential Progressives of the Twentieth Century” where the author says,

...not only about civil rights but also about economic justice” (My emphases...OM)

and

The struggle for civil rights radicalized him into a fighter for economic and social justice.” (My emphases...OM)

Why would Glenn praise a person for his nonviolent approach to civil rights and yet fail to mention that when Planned Parenthood Federation of America announced MLK was going to be named along with three others to receive the first PPFA Margaret Sanger Award in 1966 [3] it said,

...for his courageous resistance to bigotry and his lifelong dedication to the advancement of social justice and human dignity.” (My emphases...OM).

Population Control

Once again, flashing back to Glenn's programs on Fox, his viewers were introduced to Margaret Sanger, Eugenics (particularly against Blacks) and her founding of Planned Parenthood of America, the world's leading abortion factory, under the guise of “women's health”. Isn't abortion the ultimate violence, considering that an unborn CHILD has no way to defend his/her self?

As previously mentioned, why does Glenn neglect to mention or educate his viewers that MLK was among the first recipients of the first Planned Parenthood for America (PPFA) Margaret Sanger Award in 1966? Where, in his acceptance speech MLK wrote, and which his wife presented said,

Finally they would observe that we spend paltry sums for population planning, even though its spontaneous growth is an urgent threat to life on our planet. Our visitors from outer space could be forgiven if they reported home that our planet is inhabited by a race of insane men whose future is bleak and uncertain.” (My emphases...OM)

Or,

There is no human circumstance more tragic than the persisting existence of a harmful condition for which a remedy is readily available. Family planning, to relate population to world resources [Isn't this straight out of Agenda 21?...OM], is possible, practical and necessary.” (My emphases...OM)

MLK and the Communist Belief in Government Supplied Jobs

Glenn has constantly ranted and raved that WE, the People, need to demand and work for a smaller federal government, government that stays out of American's lives.

If Glenn truly believes this, then once again, one must ask why Glenn had not completely done his homework OR if he did, just why did he chose to ignore that MLK also believed in one of the ultimate government controls; that the federal government should supply jobs,

We must develop a federal program of public works, retraining, and jobs for all—so that none, white or black, will have cause to feel threatened. At the present time, thousands of jobs a week are disappearing in the wake of automation and other production efficiency techniques. Black and white, we will all be harmed unless something grand and imaginative is done. The unemployed, poverty-stricken white man must be made to realize that he is in the very same boat with the Negro. Together, they could exert massive pressure on the government to get jobs for all. Together, they could form a grand alliance. Together, they could merge all people for the good of all.”[5]

Now, is this not the same socialist belief that was outlined in the Socialist Party Platform of 1908:

The immediate government relief for the unemployed workers by building schools, by reforesting of cutover[sic] and waste lands, by reclamation of arid tracts, and the building of canals, and by extending all other useful public works. All persons employed on such works shall be employed directly by the government under an eighthour work-day and at the prevailing union wages.

Conclusion

Some who will read this, may feel that this is a hit piece on Glenn Beck and Martin Luther King, Jr., it is not my intention. But since Glenn is ever so fond of quoting Thomas Jefferson,

Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.

Well, I am boldly questioning and asking why Glenn is not telling the FULL story and presenting all the facts concerning MLK? I will leave it up to you to make up your own mind and answer that question.

I will also ask, “Can a person believe in just a few items from an agenda and not believe in that agenda? Or can one just pick and chose, ignoring the facts." I feel it is like being a little bit pregnant.


You decide.

A special thanks to Igor and The Riceman for their editing and advice in the preparation of this piece.

References not linked

[1] Foster, William Z., History of the Communist Party of the United States, International Publishers, New York, New York, 1952. [William Z. "Bill" Foster (February 25, 1881 – September 1, 1961) was a radical American labor organizer and Marxist politician, whose career included a lengthy stint as General Secretary of the Communist Party USA. He passed through the Socialist Party of America and the Industrial Workers of the World, as well as leading the drive to organize the packinghouse industry during World War I and the steel strike of 1919.]

[2] King, Jr., Martin Luther, "Let Justice Roll Down", The Nation, March 15, 1965.

[3] Berger, Victor L., "American Socialism", Social Democratic Herald, No. 1, July 9, 1898, pp. 3-4. [Victor Berger (1860 - 1929) In 1901 Berger joined with Eugene Debs and Morris Hillquit to establish the American Socialist Party. The party was very strong in Milwaukee and played a major role in the city's government for the next fifty years. In 1910 Berger became the first socialist in the United States to be elected to Congress. The following year he proposed a bill to provide old age pensions. Berger was a strong opponent of America's involvement in the First World War, describing it as a "the wholesale murder in Europe". However, as Shane Hamilton has pointed out: "the main thrust of Berger's anti-war stance was socialistic, not pacifistic."
In 1918 Berger was charged under the Espionage Act and after being found guilty was sentenced to twenty years in prison. While free on appeal, Berger was elected to Congress in 1919 with an increased majority. In 1921 the Supreme Court overturned Berger's conviction.
As well as representing the people of Milwaukee in Congress, Berger edited the Milwaukee Leader (1911-1921) and served as chairman of the American Socialist Party (1927-1929). He was a strong opponent of the American Communist Party and warned against the "folly of imitating Soviet models, condemning the concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat." A collection of his speeches and editorials, Voice and Pen, was published in 1929.]

[4] Ibid

[5] Alex Haley’s interview with the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.in Playboy, January 1965.

Wednesday, December 14, 2016

American Communism by Any Other Name Still Means Destruction of America

Elizabeth Warren's 11 Commandments of Progressivism [1]

473px-Elizabeth_Warren--Official_113th_Congressional_Portrait--

"Watching Elizabeth Warren give a speech to her fold, you realize she's one of the rare Democrats who can excite her base in the same way Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders can excite their own." As Politico's Katie Glueck wrote on Friday, July 17th, 2014, liberals' minds may be with Hillary Clinton, but their hearts lie with Warren.

Speaking on Friday at Netroots Nation, a convention for liberal bloggers and activists, Warren got the crowd more fired up than Vice President Joe Biden was able to do the day before. (To be fair, the crowd was in a solemn mood at the time in reaction to the news of the Malaysian passenger plane crash). In her speech, Warren outlined more clearly than other Democrats the social issues that galvanize progressives. Her performance was reminiscent of a certain other young senator in 2008.

"What are our values?" Warren asked the audience, some of whom held up "Run Liz Run" signs. "What does it mean to be a progressive?" [Glenn Beck would say "Progressives are Communists with patience."  BUT history shows and tells us that Progressives are Revisionist Socialists. Some would say its semantics BOTH means the destruction way of the American way of life and Freedom. I feel based of on research of the writings Karl Marx as well as that of Socialists and Communists from early ca. 1880's - 1890's; Progressivism is a a hybrid of both or as I have come to believe and called American Communism]

She went on to outline 11 tenets of progressivism:

- "We believe that Wall Street needs stronger rules and tougher enforcement, and we're willing to fight for it." [Does she REALLY mean, "Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank, [we are ready have one] with State capital and an exclusive monopoly" (Karl Marx, The Manifesto of the Communist Party, 1848, page 26) or is she implying that "The government shall also loan money to States and municipalities without interest for the purpose of carrying on public works." (Morris Hillquit, History of Socialism in America, 1910 Pages 369-377)?...OM] 

- "We believe in science, and that means that we have a responsibility to protect this Earth." [Does she REALLY mean, "...the bringing into cultivation of wasteland, and improvement of soil generally in accordance with a common plan." (ibid) or maybe she means "The extension of the public lands to include mines, quarries, oil wells, forests and water power." (ibid page 376) or perhaps, "The scientific reforestation of timber lands, and the reclamation of swap lands. The land so reforested or reclaimed to be permanently retained as a part of the pubic domain."(ibid)...OM]

- "We believe that the Internet shouldn't be rigged to benefit big corporations, and that means real net neutrality." [Could she mean, "Centralization of the means COMMUNICATION and transport in the hands of the State (ibid Page 26) or maybe she meant, "The collective ownership of railroads, TELEGRAPHS, TELEPHONES, steam lines and all other means of SOCIAL transportation and COMMUNICATION (ie. Internet...OM)" (ibid Page 376)...OM]

- "We believe that no one should work full-time and still live in poverty, and that means raising the minimum wage."[Or in other words, "The capitalist class, in its mad race for profits, is bound to exploit the workers to the very limit of their endurance and to sacrifice their physical, moral and mental welfare to its own insatiable greed. Capitalism keeps the masses of workingmen in poverty, destitution, physical exhaustion and ignorance." (ibid page 370)...OM]

- "We believe that fast-food workers deserve a livable wage, and that means that when they take to the picket line, we are proud to fight alongside them." [Is this the same as "The Organization of the working class into a political party  to conquer the public powers now controlled by capitalist"? Or maybe she is hinting that "The struggle between wage workers and capitalists grows ever fiercer, and has now become the only vital issue before the American people. The wageworking class, therefore, has the most direct interest in abolishing the capitalist system."(ibid Page 371)...OM]

- "We believe that students are entitled to get an education without being crushed by debt." [Maybe she should have just said, "Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production,..."(ibid Page 26) ...OM]

- "We believe that after a lifetime of work, people are entitled to retire with dignity, and that means protecting Social Security, Medicare, and pensions." [Maybe she should have first reminded everyone that, "In early 1968 President Lyndon Johnson (Democrat) made a change in the budget presentation by including Social Security and all other trust funds in a"unified budget." This is likewise sometimes described by saying that Social Security was placed "on-budget."" Thus taking the Social Security TRUST fund and putting it in the General budget so that it could be "borrowed from". Or that the "National insurance of the working people against accidents, lack of employment, and want in old age", (ibid Page 376) or maybe she wants, "The protection of home life against the hazards of sickness, irregular employment and old age through the adoption of a system of social insurance adapted for American use." Didn't FDR take these socialist/progressive ideas and put them into law ca.1935?...OM]

- "We believe—I can't believe I have to say this in 2014—we believe in equal pay for equal work." [Maybe she should tell her fearless leader, President Obama after all "Women paid significantly less in Obama White House than their male counterparts" Can we say "woman speak with forked tongue" or is it just hypocrisy?...OM


- "We believe that equal means equal, and that's true in marriage, it's true in the workplace, it's true in all of America." [Change traditions, you change the culture, change the culture you change the nation....OM]

- "We believe that immigration has made this country strong and vibrant, and that means reform." [So do the majority of the American people, except we believe that it should be done legally, not by flooding the borders an attempting to "tug on the heart strings" because they are children, thus using Cloward & Piven [3] to flood the system....OM]

- "And we believe that corporations are not people, that women have a right to their bodies. We will overturn Hobby Lobby and we will fight for it. We will fight for it!" [Warren better re-read the 14th Amendment and the definition of citizen, "a person who legally belongs to a country and has the rights and protection of that country or a person who lives in a particular place." Thus, "While a corporation is a "person" within this Amendment, it is not a "citizen" of the United States whose "privileges or immunities" a State is forbidden to abridge. A State may therefore impose upon a corporation created by another State restrictive conditions respecting its doing business (but not interstate commerce) within the first named State. (Corporation is citizen of State creating it. Bank of United States v. Deveaux (1809), 5 Cranch. 61, ref Amend.,Art.14,Sect.1,Cl.2 but is not citizen of United States, therefore liberty may be abridged by State. Western Turf Assoc.v. Greenberg (1907), 204 U. S. 359, ref Amend.,Art.14,Sect.1,Cl.2)[4] and of course there is always Citizens United.]

And the main tenet of conservatives' philosophy, according to Warren? "I got mine. The rest of you are on your own." [Actually we work for what we earn and the government has no right to redistribute our or anyone else's wealth...OM]

Sources:

[1] http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/elizabeth-warrens-11-commandments-of-progressivism/455955/
[2] Berger, Victor L., Social Democratic Herald, whole no. 1, July 9, 1898.
Platform of the Social Democratic Party of America, 1900; published in Appeal to Reason, Sept 15, 1900, page 3
[3] Piven, Frances Fox and Cloward, Richard, "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty", The Nation, May 2, 1966.
[4] *Norton, Thomas James, The Constitution For The United States, Its Sources and Its Application, Devin-Adair Co., 1940.

*Thomas James Norton was a Member of the Bars of the Supreme Court of the United States, the United States Circuit Courts of Appeals for the 7th, 8th, and 9th Circuits, and the Supreme Courts of Illinois, Kansas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California.

Monday, January 19, 2015

Politics & Racism as Hollyweird Left is Out to Destroy American Sniper


This past weekend, records at the box office were broken as the TRUE story of an American PATRIOT and HERO opened in theaters nation wide.

Warner Brothers is reporting that American Sniper is set to post a Friday-through-Sunday of $90.2M with a cume ( "cumulative audience", is a measure of the total number of unique consumers over a specified period). By tomorrow, with the MLK holiday, the Village Roadshow co-prod cume is looking to post a four-day of $105.2M and an overall cume of $108.6M. Unheard of for any wide release at this time of year. What record did the movie American Sniper NOT break?

THE LEFT ATTACKS AN AMERICAN PATRIOT AND HERO

While American Sniper was breaking box office records, multiple Academy members had been passing around a recent article by Dennis Jett in The New Republic (a liberal American magazine of commentary on politics and the arts published continuously since 1914that attacks the film for making a hero out of Kyle, who said: “The enemy are savages and despicably evil,” and his “only regret is that I didn’t kill more.” Kyle made the statements in his best-selling book, American Sniper, on which the film is based.

YET as Dennis Jett who enjoys the freedom of speech that Chris Kyle and many others have defended, he does admit, "I have not seen American Sniper" seemingly basing his opinion on the official trailer. ...OM

As Jett continued in his article which was written in the safety of his Ivy Tower and having never seen combat, "For him, the enemy are savages and despicably evil. His only regret is that he didn’t kill more. He laments that there were rules of engagement, or ROE, which he describes as being drafted by lawyers to protect generals from politicians. He argues instead for letting warriors loose to fight wars without their hands tied behind their backs. At another point, he boasts that the unofficial ROE were pretty simple: “If you see anyone from about sixteen to sixty-five and they’re male, shoot ‘em. Kill every male you see.” (Does Jett see anything wrong or condemn the current Drone attacks by our Clown in Chief. I doubt it. The IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE is that Chris Kyle could make the last minute to shoot or not. Unlike a drone attack, Chris Kyle would take one shot and get one kill while a drone attack can kill 50 civilians for every terrorist target. How about our Clown in Chief's current air campaign, does Jett complain that without "boots" on the ground to direct the air strikes, civilians are killed? I certainly doubt it. Thank God for heroes like Chris Kyle and other snipers out there who have the training and common sense to decide whether to shoot or not to shoot...OM)

May I also remind Jett of WW 2 and the depiction of the Japanese.

         

Of course there are those that have no idea of the horrors of combat, the training involved and most importantly the idea of PATRIOTISM and PRIDE that underlies our military and the American people.

One such "protected" writer is Lindy West who wrote an article for The Guardian asking, “The real American Sniper was a hate-filled killer. Why are simplistic patriots treating him as a hero?” One answer to that question: Because many Americans are unable to accept that nothing was won in Iraq, and that the sacrifices Kyle and others made were not worth it. More fundamentally, treating Kyle as a patriot and ignoring any other possibility allows Americans to ignore the consequences of invading a country that had no weapons of mass destruction, had nothing to do with 9/11, and had no meaningful ties to Al Qaeda (our invasion, of course, changed that) 

Hey Lindy, hate to break it to you, BUT nothing was won in Iraq as the off spring of al-Qaeda, ISIL (ISIS) is on the move. By the Lindy, WMDs were found in Iraq as reported by those outstanding conservative stalwarts U.S. News & World Report and New York Times...OM

Another Academy member, who had not yet seen the film but had read the article, told TheWrapHe seems like he may be a sociopath.

Then of course there is that HUGE unamerican Michael Moore, an Oscar voter and former Academy governor from the Documentary Branch, who tweeted on Sunday, “My uncle killed by sniper in WW2. We were taught snipers were cowards. Will shoot u in the back. Snipers aren’t heroes. And invaders r worse.

Moore needs to be reminded, the use of snipers has been around since the beginning of warfare, in fact the British used snipers during our Revolution, just as we used them. Ever hear of Sgt York?...OM

Is this a campaign by the Left to degrade this movie because Selma was snubbed for best picture and ensure that American Sniper and Clint Eastwood does not win Best Picture.

Or is it like, about six months after 9-11, the left saw America coming together, united against a common enemy and celebrating America and had to do all they could to divide America in order to continue their Socialist agenda. Are they using the same tactics as they once again see Americans coming together to celebrate an American Patriot and Hero and will do all they can to destroy and degrade Chris Kyle.

Are YOU going to allow them or are you going to support American Sniper.

You decide and let me know what you think.

Semper Fi!


http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120763/american-sniper-clint-eastwood-biopic-misrepresents-chris-kyle


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/06/real-american-sniper-hate-filled-killer-why-patriots-calling-hero-chris-kyle

Saturday, November 1, 2014

There Are Lies, Damn Lies and Then There Are Democrats

Charlie Rangel continues with the rest of the Socialists Democrats including Adolf Hitler in believing that "If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed ", during a Thursday campaign rally for New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D).

Rangel has joined the rest of the of the Democrats in their main campaign strategy of race baiting and FEAR by comparing some members of the GOP to confederates from the Civil War era [Whose leaders were mainly Democrats...OM]. But at the Thursday (October 30) evening event, he added that they "believe that slavery isn't over."

Not surprisingly I disagree with him. It has been the 
Democrats/ Progressives / Socialists or whatever you choose to call them that continue to believe in slavery.

Not the physical slavery of whips and chains, but chains of the mind and the whips of dependence on the government if they really think and choose to vote against Democrats.


Consider what President Lyndon B. Johnson said to two governors on board Air Force One after he launched the "Great Society" in 1964-1965,

I’ll have those niggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.” [I will not apologize for the use of an offensive word, it is a DIRECT quote...OM]


or when LBJ said,

"These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference."

Thus LBJ successfully returned African Americans to mental chains of the plantation.


And now Obama is planning to add millions of new slaves to the Democrat controlled plantation. 

This new plantation is complete with the overseers, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, who make millions of dollars and live rather well while those they oversee continue to in poverty within the inner city.

These overseers or their friends have ensured that IF one or more of their "charges" attempt to or even break the chains of poverty that they are "whipped" with everyone watching by a constant bombardment of degrading statements and insults.

"In the days of slavery, there were those slaves who lived on the plantation and there were those slaves that lived in the house. You got the privilege of living in the house if you served the master ... exactly the way the master intended to have you serve him." [Harry Belafonte about Colin Powell. YET Colin Powell chose to support race over freedom when he supported Obama in 2008. Strange Powell is very silent now...OM]

Rangel continued,

"We have to win. We have to be able to send a national message with Andrew Cuomo. And the thing is: Everything we believe in — everything we believe in — they hate. They don't disagree — they hate! They think if you didn't come from Europe 30 years ago, you didn't even make it. Some of them believe that slavery isn't over and they and think they won the Civil War!"

Sorry Charlie, but it was Abraham Lincoln, a REPUBLICAN, who guided America through the Civil War after the DEMOCRATIC Governors of the Southern States decided to succeed from the union over slavery.

It would be Lincoln who would issue Emancipation Proclamation, declaring all slaves in rebel territory free in 1862.

Finally, on the subject of slavery, was it not the Democrats who worked hand-in-glove with the Ku Klux Klan for generations? Wasn't it the Democrats who actually started the KKK and endorsed its mayhem?

As Rangel continued about the upcoming midterm elections,

"And so what we have to do is send a collective voice. Everything we're doing is God's work [God's work? or Karl Marx's work?...OM]: education [W
hy do Democrats constantly vote against Charter Schools?], healthcare, affordable housing, [protecting against] discrimination, paying people the minimum wage."

"Caesar, too, helped the people, but they lost their liberty to him."