Why Do Blacks Not Show Up To Vote?
Oct 27, 2006 Political
The New York Times has a piece out claiming that many blacks don’t show up to vote because they are disgusted with the process and past problems. According to Donna Brazile, a Democratic strategist “This notion that elections are stolen and that elections are rigged is so common in the public sphere that we’re having to go out of our way to counter them this year” (New York Times). It is important because in order to win Democrats need to do two important thing. The first is get the black vote out and the second is to convince the blacks that do vote the Democratic party is the one for them.
While there might be some disillusion on the part of the blacks because of perceived voter fraud, the Democrats have to look beyond that in order to get the vote out. In the first place, claims of voter fraud are harped upon by those very Democrats and it has soured their base. Additionally, though claims are made there is little evidence to support that blacks, or anyone else, are disenfranchised. Sure there are problems and that should be expected when humans are in charge of getting a hundred million people or so to the polls. The claims of fraud though, often exaggerate a small problem and make it appear much larger. The Democrats have become the boy who cried wolf and it is now coming back to haunt them. Sure there have been terrible incidents of fraud. Some cities are known for that quality (Chicago) and the 1960 election was rife with fraud in an election where Richard Nixon probably won.
Another nagging problem the Democrats fail to address is the increasing attitude among black voters with regard to the way they are treated by the party. Larger numbers of blacks and an increasing number of black groups are stepping back and asking what exactly the Democrats bring to the table. The black voters have been conditioned to disregard Republicans as a party of racists (despite the fact that the Republican party ended slavery and passed the Civil Rights Act), an attitude that leaves them with a dilemma. They do not want to vote Republican but they only hear from the Democrats around election time. The Democrats have taken the black vote for granted for so long that they actually get upset at any idea that they will not get the support. Decades of failed policies have caused many blacks, many of whom are getting older, to take a look at what the Democrats are actually doing besides asking for their vote.
The war on poverty started in the 60s and trillions of dollars later a similar proportion of the population lives in poverty. Some of this can be attributed to the change in definition and criteria of poverty but the end result is, there is still quite a bit despite spending so much money. The educational system is in a shambles, especially in the inner city where many blacks attend school. Teacher’s unions have become obsessed with financial gain and have left the students behind. Money is not the problem wither. Per student spending has increased greatly and many of the poorest school systems spend more per student than in other jurisdictions. The fact is, throwing money at problems will not solve them.
The Democrats have cried foul with regard to elections and that has caused some of the base to stay home. This is not in question but the fact is most of the allegations were proven false but the constant harping on the subject has left its mark. The fact that Democrats can not get over the 2000 election shows that they are not ready to make the system better, they just want to cry loudly enough in hopes that the black vote will return. It has had the opposite effect. The larger picture that needs to be addressed by the Democrats is the black vote that stays home or votes Republican because of broken promises. The Democrats have courted the vote but very few blacks get elected to high positions in government. The white Democratic machine in Maryland spurned Kweisi M’fume for Ben Cardin. The Republicans have a black candidate. Incidentally, he is the Lt. Governor of the state selected by Robert Ehrlich, a white Republican.
The Maryland ticket has several black candidates and it is beginning to become clearer to many black votes that Republicans are not a bunch of redneck crackers who hate non whites. The black voting base is tired of being taken for granted and is crossing party lines. This could be the beginning of a change in attitudes that will turn the tide of black voters away from the Democrats. It won’t happen all at once but it looks like we might be seeing the beginning. After all, blacks have given Democrats 40 years to get things done. It is about time to change horses and see what the other side has to offer.
Prediction:
Robert Ehrlich will get more than 20% of the black vote in Maryland. Steele will get a higher percentage and both will win their respective elections.
Tags: Commentary, Political
Above All Else, Humans Have Failings
Oct 8, 2006 Political
The Mark Foley fiasco is in full swing with pages coming out of the woodwork to point their fingers. It is good that they are coming forward though I would have to question why they have waited so long to make this known. If it was a problem when it happened (I think it was) and if it bothered them so much (I don’t know one way or the other) then one would expect the pages would have reported the problems years ago when they happened.
The whole issue has been used as some kind of proof that Republicans in general are like Foley and that they can not be trusted. The left ignores its own sordid past in making such accusations and the right is in a tailspin trying to do damage control and show that this was an isolated incident. History shows that these isolated incidents are much more common than we would expect from our elected Representatives. In my opinion, one is too many. The problem is that the right is held to a much higher standard than the left when it comes to issues of morality. This is only natural as the right espouses itself as the party of family values and morals and the left is more a party of free will in the “if it feels good, do it” philosophy. Priests are held to higher standards so when they make mistakes they are scorned more severely than the guy down the street.
Human beings are prone to sin. It does not matter what political party they belong to, what color they are, their country of origin, or even their religion. People are flawed and they commit sin. When Democrats commit sin most people have the attitude that they are expected to do it because they have a loser concept of what is right. When Republicans are caught in a jam they are excoriated because they preach family values. Does that mean that all Democrats commit more sin or that Republicans sin less? Of course not because all of them are people first.
The telling difference between the parties is how they react to a problem within their ranks. The right is not the party of family values because they all espouse those values. They are the party of family values because they hold people to that standard and when they are out of line the right comes down on them hard. Keep in mind that I am not talking about the elected people in the parties. I am referring to the folks who vote for them. We in the Conservative community hold our elected officials to a high standard and when they falter we pounce on them. I have not read one item from a conservative excusing Foley’s behavior. Contrary to the claims of folks on the left, who like to equate any mention of the subject as support for Foley, the right has condemned his actions. The thing that the right has done to upset the left is to seek the truth and motivation behind the sequence of events leading up to the discovery of the problem. We all feel that if anyone on the left knew about this and kept it quiet for political gain then they are as much to blame for the whole mess. No one on the right dismissed or excused what Foley did and that is what makes us the party of family values.
Contrast this with the left and it is easy to see why they are held to a lower standard. They have an attitude that allows them to do what they want with whom they want. Their tolerance for homosexuality and the tolerance of liberal judges toward sex offenders gives them the opportunity to dismiss these things as a part of life. While the right was hammering Bill Clinton the people on the left were excusing the behavior. It was his own business, he was in his home, blah, blah. When Gerry Studds actually had sex with a 17 year old page the left voted him back into office 6 more times. They tolerated his behavior because it was expected. Many of the elected Democrats who are now making a big issue of Foley failed to vote for the articles of impeachment drawn against Clinton. Joe Lieberman spoke out against Bill and he was paid back by Hillary in the primary election. It is obvious that the left has more tolerance when their own people have a tryst. Ted Kennedy was going for a drive to have sex with a woman who was not his wife. He plunged his car into a body of water and left her there to die. He is still in office more than 30 years later.
As stated, these observations are based upon the citizens who are members of a particular party. Addressing the elected officials I will say this, if any of them regardless of party, are found to have known about this and not taken action then they need to be out of office. If an item was reported and addressed, no matter how poorly, then they knew and took action. If, on the other hand, they knew and did nothing or covered it up, then they need to be unemployed. There are a lot of investigations ongoing and it is too early to draw conclusions about this particular aspect. When it all comes out, then we can demand action be taken.
The way Republicans live their lives is only part of the family values position. Holding those who are not fulfilling their moral obligations is a large part of the platform. The left is using this to try to influence the religious base of the right by targeting ads in areas that have been traditional Republican strongholds. It would do the people listening to those ads well to take a look at the people telling them they are the true holders of virtue and values. No matter how they slice it, no matter how they package it for the targeted audience, there is one thing that the “moral superiors” on the left can not deny and that is they continue to support abortion. They continue to push for the murder of future generations of Americans and in my book that does not make them the party that can protect our kids.
Trackback:
Stop the ACLU | Passionate America
Tags: Commentary, Political
Dems Never Needed Full Story Before
Sep 27, 2006 Political
House Leader Nancy Pelosi tried to get a closed door secret session of Congress yesterday in order to review the complete intelligence community’s assessment of the war on terror in Iraq and its effect on terrorism.
In an interview with The Associated Press, Pelosi said the secret session was needed to allow members to better understand the intelligence community’s most recent assessment on global terrorism, some of which leaked to the news media over the weekend.
According to media reports, the intelligence estimate “is the administration’s worst nightmare. It is not a corroboration of what the president is saying. It is a contradiction of what the president is saying,” she said.
The request was turned down on nearly a complete party line vote. I do not know what is in the complete report and if it needs to remain classified then i do not need to know. What I want to know is why the Democrats feel they need to see the complete report to make an assessment of the situation. They should be able to do that with the parts the president has declassified. After all, the Dems were able to make an assessment based upon a small portion that was illegally leaked to the New York Times. Over the weekend, a portion of the report was leaked to the al-Qaeda intelligence agency, a paper that goes by the name of The New York Times. The Dems jumped on that little piece and were able to run around all weekend claiming we were not safe and that Bush had failed in regard to the Iraq policy. If they were able to determine so much from one little piece, why would Pelosi feel it is necessary to see the whole thing? Interestingly, the same Democrats who were using the information from the NYT are the ones saying they need to see the entire report, not just snippets the president releases. I guess the snippets released to the NYT are enough from which to draw conclusions but the parts the president released do not tell the whole story.
Democrats had seized on leaked portions of the National Intelligence Estimate to criticize the administration’s handling of the Iraq war and members of the U.S. Congress had pressed the White House to declassify the document. My Way News
Here is what I find most troubling. No one from the left has shown any concern for the fact that another classified item was released to a newspaper. They keep telling everyone they are tough on national security and they can better handle the job but they never seemed concerned when our secrets are leaked. Our secrets are part of our national security. Instead of a request to view the documents in a closed, secret session of Congress, Pelosi should have asked for a special session to find out who leaked the information.
The president has expressed his disgust on a number of occasions with regard to leaked information ans yet we still have the leaks. There are people in our government who, for whatever reason, are leaking our secrets to the newspapers. I think we should focus on finding out who those people are and we should ensure they receive the stiffest penalty provided for by law. I think a stint down at Club Gitmo would serve as a useful reminder that we do not like it when people commit treason.
Source:
Breitbart
Tags: Commentary, Political
Get The NFL In New Orleans
Sep 25, 2006 Uncategorized
We have been inundated with ads for tonight’s football game between the New Orleans Saints and the Atlanta Falcons. Why more ads than usual? It is because the New Orleans Superdome is hosting a football game for the first time since Hurricane Katrina swept through and illuminated the incompetence of the state and local government. Every other ad touts the return of the Saints, the reopening of the Superdome, blah, blah.
It would appear that after a bunch of people who acted like animals and tore the Superdome apart, the team got in there and rebuilt the place. This is about the only thing that has been rebuilt since the hurricane. Perhaps it is time to consider turning the job of rebuilding the city over to the Saints’ owners and the NFL. Maybe if we sent all that tax money to those two groups they would actually spend it on rebuilding the city and, who knows, it might be rebuilt in a little more than a year.
Tags: Commentary
Why Can’t Democrats Vote Without Problems?
Sep 14, 2006 Political
Everyone remembers the 2000 Presidential election. That was the year two phrases became a regular part of everyday speech; hanging chads and disenfranchised voter. Until that election a hanging chad was likely something one would see in a bad porno movie and most people, especially those who were products of public education, did not know what disenfranchise was. The word was even used incorrectly to describe what happened to voters who were, in fact, not “deprived of the right to vote.” The truth, though seldom discussed, is that many Democrats were just not able to figure out how to vote.
Unfortunately, this seems to be a growing problem with Democrats who would rather scream “voter fraud” and “disenfranchised” than actually learn what they are supposed to do to accomplish a task so important to a free society. I personally find it difficult to believe that an elderly lady who can play fifty Bingo cards and never miss a number or a person who can operate all the gizmos in a cell phone can not figure out chads and touch-screen voting machines.
The state of Maryland held its Primary yesterday and there were, you guessed it, problems. As in Florida in 2000, these problems only occurred in heavily Democratic parts of the state. The problems ranged from sites not having all the necessary items to open the polls to election judges not showing up. Immediately, the Maryland Democratic Party blamed the Republican Governor and the news reported that Republican judges had refused to show up “in mass.” Callers to local talk shows refuted this claim and told a very different story. The Democratic judges failed to show and this delayed opening the machines for voting forcing some sites to ask voters to come back later.
The state did not just start planning for this election last week. It has had several years to prepare and, except in the heavily Democratic areas of Montgomery County and Baltimore City, things went off with few glitches. Of course, as with anything of this magnitude, there were minor problems but they were taken care of and the show went on. The two subdivisions affected filed for an extension of the voting hours. This request was approved and they closed at 9 pm instead of 8.
In the overall scheme of things it would appear as if Democrats go tot he polls expecting problems. They have become so accustomed to it that even those who prepare for the elections mess it up. Is this an indication of some evil Republican plot to, dare I say it, disenfranchise voters? Of course not! More likely, Democrats have been told for so long that they are messed with when they vote that they actually believe it. They are so convinced that things are stacked against them that when something small happens they throw their hands up in despair and claim fraud. Not only have they been programmed to believe in voter fraud directed at them but their dependence on government has left them totally incapable of finding a solution to minor problems so they throw their hands up, claim victim status, and wait for someone from the government to come help them.
It is unfortunate but elections sometimes have problems. Life itself is full of problems that challenge us each and everyday. The true measure of our character is the way in which we handle those challenges. The Democrat’s reaction to election problems is a reflection of the character of the Democratic Party and of those who lead it. Sadly, the character we have seen is not one of which most would be proud.
Crossposted at Blogcritics.
Tags: Commentary, Political