Destroying the False Racial Narrative and Creating True Equality

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

racist

I can’t tell you how many times that I’ve read blogs, from both ends of the spectrum, that talk about African-Americans as if they are a monolithic voting bloc that will ALWAYS vote Democrat. We’ve all seen the videos of African Americans thinking that Obama will pay their mortgages, or that they are going to get “Obama Money,” from his “stash.” Since these are well-publicized cases, they are influencing our perceptions about an entire group of people. So, the question is, is that all true?

And, if is it really that way, will it change? You see, I question both of those assumptions. While the voting issue is true, what is the basis for it? History tells us that that after the civil war, most African-Americans were Republicans, and the first African American Congressmen from the south belonged to the GOP. We also know that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican. It is also true that Democrats were responsible for the Jim Crow laws, and that the southern Democrats resisted the civil rights era legislation vehemently. So, that leaves us with something that bears examining; why did African Americans switch to voting over 90% Democrat in every election?

To answer this, I think we again need to go back into history, and see what happened in the 60’s. Let’s start with some quotes attributed to LBJ.

“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. For if we don’t move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there’ll be no way of stopping them, we’ll lose the filibuster and there’ll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It’ll be Reconstruction all over again.”

LBJ, Democratic President of the United States.

“I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”

Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler’s Book, “Inside The White House”

Those two quotes from LBJ are rather telling. For me, they point to a deception of action, as well as a deception of intent. Clearly, LBJ was suggesting that he could win the African American vote by making some promises, and delivering little…”just enough.”.

Obviously, these two quotes have been floating around for a long time, and many are going to suggest that they were never said at all. But, let’s take a look at what has happened, and see if what LBJ said has come to pass. After all, people can say many things, but it’s their actions that show their true intent.

Let’s take a look at some examples…

Welfare and the breakdown of the family:

The various welfare programs of the 1960’s had a tremendous impact on the African American family. Not long after the creation of these programs, the rates of fatherless families began to rise. They have continued to rise for decades, and now, over 70% of African American children grow up without a father living in the home. That was not the case prior to welfare, and the programs have been identified as the cause for this. As well all know, children raised in fatherless homes are many times more likely to have lower educational achievement, use drugs, and engage in other criminal activities. However, what has been done to correct it? Has the intervention of the government really made it better…or worse?

Or, was it, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

Education:

It is also well know that the educational system has failed our children. We also know that minority children suffer even more.

As for graduation rates…

The national graduation rate for the class of 1998 was 71%. For white students the rate was 78%, while it was 56% for African-American students and 54% for Latino students.

And for illiteracy…

September 2008

Graduation, Dropouts, and Preparedness

  • African American high school students are notably falling behind their white counterparts in graduation rates, dropout rates, literacy rates, and college preparedness rates.

  • Your ads will be inserted here by

    Easy Plugin for AdSense.

    Please go to the plugin admin page to
    Paste your ad code OR
    Suppress this ad slot.

    In 2005, only 55 percent of all black students graduated from high school on time with a regular diploma, compared to 78 percent of whites.

  • In 2005, the on-time graduation rate for black males was 48 percent nationally; for white males it was 74 percent.

  • Nearly half of the nation’s African American students, but only 11 percent of white students, attend high schools in which graduation is not the norm.

  • In 2002, 23 percent of all black students who started public high school left it prepared for college, compared to 40 percent of whites.

  • On average, African American and Hispanic twelfth-grade students read at approximately the same level as white eighth graders.

  • About half of poor, urban ninth graders read at only a fifth- or sixth-grade level.

  • The National Assessment of Educational Progress reports that 88 percent of African American eighth graders read below grade level, compared to 62 percent of white eighth graders.

Now, we’ve seen successful alternatives, but “progressives” in the unions attack these, and when President Obama was elected, he shut down the DC waiver program, which greatly benefited mostly poor, African American kids.

Instead, the government makes many promises, and insists on spending more money on the same failed system. Essentially, they end up purchasing more failure.

Or, is it, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

Unemployment:

The U.S. Labor Department reported on Friday that unemployment for African Americans increased to 16.3% in August 2010 from 15.6% in July 2010.  The percentage point increase was greater than it was for Whites and Hispanics.  Overall unemployment climbed to 9.6% for the month of August from the July unemployment rate of 9.5%.

So, the unemployment rate is higher for African Americans as well. Of course, President Obama has promised to focus on this, but he has delivered nothing.

Or, is it, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

As you look at this, it is easy to conclude that not only has government action/programs made the situation worse, but they also seem intent on keeping it the same. I would hypothesize that there is a reason for this: If government can keep any group dependent, they can then extract support from that group. They create a circumstance in which a large segment of the population is keep poor and undereducated, effectively preventing that group from escaping poverty. Then, every election cycle, the Democrats come foreword and tell that group that the other party wants to kill them, jail them, and take away all of their benefits. By combining dependency, poverty, illiteracy, and hate, they can convince a group to vote for them every time.

In essence, I believe that the Democrats have intentionally acted in a way to “Cloward-Piven” a large segment of the African American community, by making them dependent on government assistance, and placing roadblocks for individuals in that community to be successful. After all, a person may want to succeed, but if they can’t get an education that provided even the most basic of skills, and they are penalized for any positive effort by a prohibitive loss of benefits, will that person eventually give up and not even try? And, what happens to that population of people after generations of the same? I think we can project the answer to that. As I suggested in the post, “Why Hope can Kill the Progressive Agenda,” people trapped in hopelessness for generations forget that there is any hope at all. In fact, we see the results of these policies on a tragically regular basis.

This is racist. Not the bed sheet wearing, ignorant redneck variety, but the soft racism of the nanny state and elites. Through all of this, I think the Democratic Party is just a racist as they always were. They simple present it differently (remember “calling it something else?”). They don’t believe that the African American can succeed, so they are content to “manage” him. Why provide good education if they can’t do well anyway? Why present opportunity and freedom when they don’t believe that the African American can use those to their own advantage? Just build housing, send in food stamps, and have horrifically inadequate schools, and leave them to poverty. Through the decades, it’s what they have done.

You know, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

So, I think the phrase “government plantation” is a completely accurate representation of the current relationship between our elitist government and the African American community. When you look at the totality of the problem, their actions show their true beliefs. In fact, the evidence becomes over whelming.

It seems like an insurmountable challenge, but I believe that there is incredible untapped human potential in the African American community. I say this because when good educational choices are available, African American children excel, just like any other group. Their scores rise to rival anyone’s, and all the negative outcomes start to decrease. So, it is safe to say that real education reform (ending government intrusion, union domination, and instituting real local control) would be the final nail in the coffin for the soft racist policies of the elitist left.

However, it wouldn’t end there. There are millions of people of all races that are caught in the poor education-poverty-crime-hopeless trap. To help them, or in some cases, encourage them, to escape, we’d also have to do a phase-down on the nanny state. Benefits would have to be restructured, yet again, to encourage success, and not penalize it. Caps and limits would need to be imposed to put an end to system-induced inter-generational dependency. That would be a difficult sell, but so worth it in the end.

The total effort would take nearly a generation to see tangible results, as it would take that long to begin reform, and educate a full generation of children. Once accomplished, however, the US would see a economic and cultural renaissance. As African-Americans, Hispanics, and other groups take their rightful place in our society, the US would be transformed. This would not be the “fundamental” government-forced change, but an organic one; based on ideas, innovations, merit, and creativity. Everyone would truly be able to advance to the limits of their own talents, skills, and persistence. We would cease to be a “hyphenated” society, as we would all be peers-truly equal in our opportunity, and respectful of the accomplishments of our fellow Americans.

Share

Arthur Laffer: Economic Statistics, Some Matter and Some Are Deceiving

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

At Real Clear Politics the other day, I came across an article by economist, Arthur Laffer in theWall Street Journal. the same Arthur Laffer whom developed the Laffer Curve during the Reagan administration. As I often do, I scanned the article and bookmarked it as a possible source for a post. Then this morning I had an e-mail in my in-box from Pat Slattery of The Free Market Projectsuggesting that I consider doing a post on an article by John Hayward about the Laffer article. And, I thank him. So, I will discuss both the Laffer and Hayward articles in today’s post on economic statistics.

Economic Statistics that Deceive

With good reason, we mere mortals, without a PhD, have to wonder if government agencies and politicians, including the President, are lying to us. Well, of course, they lie to us. That is a given. But, when it comes government generated statistics, they don’t so much lie to us as they don’t tell us all that we need to know. In other words, they tend to cherry-pick data to put the economy in the best possible. With today’s economy, that is more difficult than usual.

One example of government cherry-picking data is the reported inflation rate. According to the Federal Reserve, inflation is negligible. We know that is not true. The reason reported inflation appears low is that they do not include price changes in oil, gasoline, and food. The items that impact the budgets of 90% of the  population the most are not included in the calculation of inflation.

Anther example of the government only telling us part of the story are the monthly employment numbers. I watched a news video the other day Debbie Whatshername-Schultz say how proud she was of Obama because under his leadership we have had 29 consecutive months of job growth. PROUD!  Give me a break.! The workforce participation rate is getting smaller by the month! The July jobs report announced that non-farm jobs increased in July by 163,000. This was more than what was expected. The stock market went wild.  If you want to know what really happened with the jobs market, check out this article at PJ  Media and this article at Inform the Pundits. You will find out that there was a net loss of jobs in July. Just ask yourself why the unemployment rate increased to 8.3%?

So, with all the efforts to put our economy in the best possible light, our GDP is growing at an abysmal rate of 1.5%. That is pathetic! Let’s find out why our economy is so anaemic.

Some Economic Statistics Matter

The Obama administration, more than any administration in my memory, has based their economic policies on nothing more than tax and spend. Obama has set the all time record for government spending “crapweasels” like Paul Krugman and Democrats in general and the main stream media keep calling for more and more stimulus. (Crapweasel is a term Kurt Silverfiddlealways uses when referring to Paul Krugman.  It fits.)

One of the best ways to measure the success or failure of an economic policy is to look at the empirical results where that policy has been tried. This is exactly what Arthur Laffer has done and reports on his findings in this Wall Street Journal article and suggest that:

Policy makers in Washington and other capitals around the world are debating whether to implement another round of stimulus spending to combat high unemployment and sputtering growth rates. But before they leap, they should take a good hard look at how that worked the first time around.

Dr. Laffer looked at 34 countries that implemented stimulus programs after the 2008 financial crisis. The results weren’t very stimulating:

It worked miserably, as indicated by the table nearby, which shows increases in government spending from 2007 to 2009 and subsequent changes in GDP growth rates. Of the 34 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development nations, those with the largest spending spurts from 2007 to 2009 saw the least growth in GDP rates before and after the stimulus.

There is a table in Laffer’s article show just badly stimulus worked for these countries. John Hayward in his Human Events’ article about the Laffer report, like this quote from Laffer:

Often as not, the qualification for receiving stimulus funds is the absence of work or income – such as banks and companies that fail, solar energy companies that can’t make it on their own, unemployment benefits and the like. Quite simply,government taxing people more who work and then giving more money to people who don’t work is a surefire recipe for less work, less output and more unemployment.

” a surefire recipe for less work, less output, and more  unemployment.” This reminds me of a conversation back in the eighties, to which I was present, between brother-in-law and two of his friends. They were all UAW members and employees of the Chevrolet plant in Flint, Michigan. They were all in their middle fifties and they had been doing some sharp penciling about whether it made sense for them to take early retirement at age 58.  They concluded that with their General Motor’s pensions and Social Security (in those days you could opt for early Social Security at a reduced rate at 58) that it made no sense to keep working 40 hour weeks for just a few hundred dollars more. I’m thinking that the same thinking applies to many of our citizens on welfare and other government assistance. They are likely figuring why should they take a forty-hour a week job when they can do nothing for only a few hundred dollars less..

John Hayward would add something to Laffer’s analysis:

The other obfuscating factor I would add to Laffer’s analysis is that government spending is treated as highly significant by the media, while private investment is either ignored or criticized.  The financial papers might carry tales of business success, and once in a while the public imagination is captured by a company like Apple… but none of that compares to the front-page, above-the-fold coverage given to huge government spending initiatives.

We know what Obama and his team are up to. With the support of the main stream media, they want to pull the wool over the eyes of those that still have a job (the majority of voters) by convincing them that the economy, however slowly, is steadily growing and now is no to change horses. Economic statistics do matter and it is going to be up to us, the conservative bloggers, to get the truth out there.  It won’t come from the media, that is for sure.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post:Conservatives on Fire

Share

Destroying the False Racial Narrative and Creating True Equality

Share

I can’t tell you how many times that I’ve read blogs, from both ends of the spectrum, that talk about African-Americans as if they are a monolithic voting bloc that will ALWAYS vote Democrat. We’ve all seen the videos of African Americans thinking that Obama will pay their mortgages, or that they are going to get “Obama Money,” from his “stash.” Since these are well-publicized cases, they are influencing our perceptions about an entire group of people. So, the question is, is that all true?

And, if is it really that way, will it change? You see, I question both of those assumptions. While the voting issue is true, what is the basis for it? History tells us that that after the civil war, most African-Americans were Republicans, and the first African American Congressmen from the south belonged to the GOP. We also know that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican. It is also true that Democrats were responsible for the Jim Crow laws, and that the southern Democrats resisted the civil rights era legislation vehemently. So, that leaves us with something that bears examining; why did African Americans switch to voting over 90% Democrat in every election?

To answer this, I think we again need to go back into history, and see what happened in the 60’s. Let’s start with some quotes attributed to LBJ.

“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. For if we don’t move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there’ll be no way of stopping them, we’ll lose the filibuster and there’ll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It’ll be Reconstruction all over again.”

LBJ, Democratic President of the United States.

“I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”

Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler’s Book, “Inside The White House”

Those two quotes from LBJ are rather telling. For me, they point to a deception of action, as well as a deception of intent. Clearly, LBJ was suggesting that he could win the African American vote by making some promises, and delivering little…”just enough.”.

Obviously, these two quotes have been floating around for a long time, and many are going to suggest that they were never said at all. But, let’s take a look at what has happened, and see if what LBJ said has come to pass. After all, people can say many things, but it’s their actions that show their true intent.

Let’s take a look at some examples…

Welfare and the breakdown of the family:

The various welfare programs of the 1960’s had a tremendous impact on the African American family. Not long after the creation of these programs, the rates of fatherless families began to rise. They have continued to rise for decades, and now, over 70% of African American children grow up without a father living in the home. That was not the case prior to welfare, and the programs have been identified as the cause for this. As well all know, children raised in fatherless homes are many times more likely to have lower educational achievement, use drugs, and engage in other criminal activities. However, what has been done to correct it? Has the intervention of the government really made it better…or worse?

Or, was it, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

Education:

It is also well know that the educational system has failed our children. We also know that minority children suffer even more.

As for graduation rates…

The national graduation rate for the class of 1998 was 71%. For white students the rate was 78%, while it was 56% for African-American students and 54% for Latino students.

And for illiteracy…

September 2008

Graduation, Dropouts, and Preparedness

  • African American high school students are notably falling behind their white counterparts in graduation rates, dropout rates, literacy rates, and college preparedness rates.

  • In 2005, only 55 percent of all black students graduated from high school on time with a regular diploma, compared to 78 percent of whites.

  • In 2005, the on-time graduation rate for black males was 48 percent nationally; for white males it was 74 percent.

  • Nearly half of the nation’s African American students, but only 11 percent of white students, attend high schools in which graduation is not the norm.

  • In 2002, 23 percent of all black students who started public high school left it prepared for college, compared to 40 percent of whites.

  • On average, African American and Hispanic twelfth-grade students read at approximately the same level as white eighth graders.

  • About half of poor, urban ninth graders read at only a fifth- or sixth-grade level.

  • The National Assessment of Educational Progress reports that 88 percent of African American eighth graders read below grade level, compared to 62 percent of white eighth graders.

Now, we’ve seen successful alternatives, but “progressives” in the unions attack these, and when President Obama was elected, he shut down the DC waiver program, which greatly benefited mostly poor, African American kids.

Instead, the government makes many promises, and insists on spending more money on the same failed system. Essentially, they end up purchasing more failure.

Or, is it, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

Unemployment:

The U.S. Labor Department reported on Friday that unemployment for African Americans increased to 16.3% in August 2010 from 15.6% in July 2010.  The percentage point increase was greater than it was for Whites and Hispanics.  Overall unemployment climbed to 9.6% for the month of August from the July unemployment rate of 9.5%.

So, the unemployment rate is higher for African Americans as well. Of course, President Obama has promised to focus on this, but he has delivered nothing.

Or, is it, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

As you look at this, it is easy to conclude that not only has government action/programs made the situation worse, but they also seem intent on keeping it the same. I would hypothesize that there is a reason for this: If government can keep any group dependent, they can then extract support from that group. They create a circumstance in which a large segment of the population is keep poor and undereducated, effectively preventing that group from escaping poverty. Then, every election cycle, the Democrats come foreword and tell that group that the other party wants to kill them, jail them, and take away all of their benefits. By combining dependency, poverty, illiteracy, and hate, they can convince a group to vote for them every time.

In essence, I believe that the Democrats have intentionally acted in a way to “Cloward-Piven” a large segment of the African American community, by making them dependent on government assistance, and placing roadblocks for individuals in that community to be successful. After all, a person may want to succeed, but if they can’t get an education that provided even the most basic of skills, and they are penalized for any positive effort by a prohibitive loss of benefits, will that person eventually give up and not even try? And, what happens to that population of people after generations of the same? I think we can project the answer to that. As I suggested in the post, “Why Hope can Kill the Progressive Agenda,” people trapped in hopelessness for generations forget that there is any hope at all. In fact, we see the results of these policies on a tragically regular basis.

This is racist. Not the bed sheet wearing, ignorant redneck variety, but the soft racism of the nanny state and elites. Through all of this, I think the Democratic Party is just a racist as they always were. They simple present it differently (remember “calling it something else?”). They don’t believe that the African American can succeed, so they are content to “manage” him. Why provide good education if they can’t do well anyway? Why present opportunity and freedom when they don’t believe that the African American can use those to their own advantage? Just build housing, send in food stamps, and have horrifically inadequate schools, and leave them to poverty. Through the decades, it’s what they have done.

You know, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

So, I think the phrase “government plantation” is a completely accurate representation of the current relationship between our elitist government and the African American community. When you look at the totality of the problem, their actions show their true beliefs. In fact, the evidence becomes over whelming.

It seems like an insurmountable challenge, but I believe that there is incredible untapped human potential in the African American community. I say this because when good educational choices are available, African American children excel, just like any other group. Their scores rise to rival anyone’s, and all the negative outcomes start to decrease. So, it is safe to say that real education reform (ending government intrusion, union domination, and instituting real local control) would be the final nail in the coffin for the soft racist policies of the elitist left.

However, it wouldn’t end there. There are millions of people of all races that are caught in the poor education-poverty-crime-hopeless trap. To help them, or in some cases, encourage them, to escape, we’d also have to do a phase-down on the nanny state. Benefits would have to be restructured, yet again, to encourage success, and not penalize it. Caps and limits would need to be imposed to put an end to system-induced inter-generational dependency. That would be a difficult sell, but so worth it in the end.

The total effort would take nearly a generation to see tangible results, as it would take that long to begin reform, and educate a full generation of children. Once accomplished, however, the US would see a economic and cultural renaissance. As African-Americans, Hispanics, and other groups take their rightful place in our society, the US would be transformed. This would not be the “fundamental” government-forced change, but an organic one; based on ideas, innovations, merit, and creativity. Everyone would truly be able to advance to the limits of their own talents, skills, and persistence. We would cease to be a “hyphenated” society, as we would all be peers-truly equal in our opportunity, and respectful of the accomplishments of our fellow Americans.


Share