THE REPUBLICANS AND THE CITIES

 Republicans have essentially abandoned the cities and the result has been catastrophic, not just for Republicans, but for city dwellers - ESPECIALLY minorities who have suffered under Democratic policies that have destroyed their families, criminalized their communities, taken away their will to be educated, impoverished their neighborhoods, and worked on nullifying any semblence of American traditional self reliant individualism in these communities and replaced it with some awful dependence culture unique to history.

It wasn't supposed to be this way. The insanity created by the one party Democratic politics, essentially the ruin of entire cities, has led to Democrats getting all the votes while at the same time delivering nothing to the governed but corruption, misery, hypocrisy, manipulation and double talk. Democratic lock on the media has led to adoption by ALL media of policies that hide the facts underlying the corrupt rule of Democratic leaders, under which these communites act as islands of repression, used as income producing poverty centers, supporting the entire Democratic dominated poverty industry, and subject to every whim of rabble rousing Democratic leaders.

Think I'm exaggerating? Take a look at crime and education rates for certain groups in cities under long term Democratic control, not just generally but as a percentage of the population. Look at disparities in income levels, look at the number of children born to single mothers, which are a critically important indicator of the child's future success in life. Which media led to acceptance of the notion of a single mother raising children? That claimed it as something noble, while at the same time marginalizaing the male role in the family?

It all works out pretty neatly for Democrats - they create the conditions and culture for a community that is perfect for Democratic control and a vehicle for making money for Democratic causes. The resulting statistics in these communities are DISMAL, especially as to the lack of a private sector, but you don't hear a word about it in the Democratic media because of policies adopted for the very specific purpose of protecting the Democratic rulers.

It takes a peculiar form of blindness not to see this from the inside, but then again Democrats have had decades to hone their skills at conditioning. These communities tend to be insular, and anything that is disagreeable to the ruling class is dismissed with either mockery or claimed as racist. The fact that the communities are not doing well under common sense notions of what doing well means is irrelevant - what counts is whether the community is doing well as defined by Democrats.

And since Democats are able to use the community to drain money from everywhere else, and maintain a lock on votes means that these communities are doing well indeed - and Democrats would't change a thing.

In some former time, when one party was an utter failure at governing the people would come to the conclusion that it was time for a change, and the other party would be voted in. But, the creation of entrenched areas of Democratic Party rule in most major cities (New York being a happy - for the people involved - exception as to the mayor's office, although this is temporary, as New York will soon resume the slide to the bottom - as defined by others, for Democrats it is no such thing - that was temporarily interrupted when Giuliani was elected in 1989) has led to institutional corruption at every level, and acceptance of a status quo that would be unacceptable to any reasonable person. But, conditioning by Democratic media, as a result of adoption of journalistic conventions - political correctness - has led to acceptance of what would formerlly have been unacceptable. This in turn has led to not just one party rule, but the belief by the community that the awful conditions that exist are not the fault of the party in charge, but "others' i.e. Republicans, who haven't wielded power in the community for decades, if ever. The lack of any real check on corruption has led to its institutionalization, a natural consequence of of years and years one party rule by a people that were bent on corruption to begin with.

Accordingly, Republican abandonement of the cities has been a disaster - and Romney's decision to focus all of his resources elsewhere means that these people haven't heard from anyone but the Democrats for years. With nothing else challenging them, Democrat's have convinced the people in Detroit, of Camden, East St. Louis, Chicago, Washington and other places to re-elect, year after year, the very people responsible for their being mired in poverty, and used as a vehicle for Democrats enriching themselves.

Those on the outside who see all this happening think that the people involved will somehow wake up and toss out the politicans responsible. But, that will never happen unless someone from the outside comes in and tells the truth - the unvarnished truth - not only about what's going on but how it got that way. Take a look at some of these places - here in New Jersey it can be seen in parts of Paterson, in much of Newark, Irvington, East Orange, Hillside et als. Year after year goes by and places that were at one time centers of prosperity, little crime, high education are mired in the American version of poverty, whatever you want to call it for decades upon decade - even as the rest of the country goes through periods of prosperity. The people involved are subject to a barrage of messages from Democrats blaming everything but the Democratic leadership for the problems, but year after year after year nothing changes - conditions become, if anything, worse. Through it all no one says what's really wrong, even as the state comes up with plan after plan - tosses millions if not billions of dollars down a rathole to be used by corrupt Democrats for very personal purposes, all of which does nothing. In Newark the State opened an arts center - people get there from the suburbs by highway ringed with security, all the way there and all the way back. Very nice, but how does this help the city? It's a bad joke, as bad as when Atlantic City put up "intercept" parking lots on the approaches to the city for so that casino and hotel workers from outside the city could park. It's a bad joke, just like the sports complexes that were built to house a basketball team that soon left, and a hockey (hockey!) team that has almost no chance of staying.

It's now been half a century since the riots in Newark, and that city could be seen as a microcosm of the terrible consequences of Democratic control and Republican abandonment of the cities. I simply do not have the time to list all of the Democratic abuses in Newark, soon to be New Jersey's second largest city, a once prosperous and beautiful center of the nations insurance industry. Thanks to Democratic media conditioning it would be practically unthinkable for Republicans to come to power in Newark - unless somehow Republicans can shake off the media strait jacket and tell the entire truth about what's going on and how it got that way. No doubt Democrats would get hysterical and scream racism, as they always do, but at this point, for Republicans what would they have to lose?

But that's the problem, Republicans, their leadership, are far too timid, far too spineless, far too "go along get along," far too accepting of a secondary role in society to make assertions about conditions that everyone knows about but no one says a word. The Democratic emperor has no clothes (and I am not talking about Obama - he is almost irrelevant to this discussion) but for some reason there is no one on the Republican side brave enough to say a thing about it.

When did Republicans make an agreement with Democrats to not mention certain subjects? - because that's essentially what's going on. How did Republicans decide to say nothing about the Democratic rape of certain city communities, or of entire cities?

So, another generation gets lost, and we all sit by and watch as our nation slides down the drain. The sad irony is that Democrats are extremely vulnerable - the hysteria voiced by Democratic leaders should anyone even hint at any of these issues is revealing of that vulnerability.

We keep waiting for someone in the cities to come out and say what the rest of the country knows, but it isn't going to happen - it will not be that easy. Republicans have waited far too long, and it will take a concerted effort by courageous people. 

DEMOCRATS NEVER TELL THE TRUTH (THEY DON'T HAVE TO)

No one expects political memoirs to be objective.  Even for these books, however, there is a minimum truth requirement, or, rather there used to be.  With the recent revelations that Obama's books are filled with lies about his past shows that the test for accuracy in memoirs is this: Democrats can say anything and get away with it.  Republicans better stick to the truth - or else.

But it's more than that, much more - it's part of a decades long protection of Democratic candidates and politicians. Early in WWII John F. Kennedy had a dalliance with a German spy - with the FBI in the next room recording all of it (See Dan Simmon's book "The Crook Factory"). In disgust Joe Kennedy told the State Department to transfer JFK to combat duty, where he distinguished himself as a PT boat commander by promptly getting run over by a Japanese destroyer. In order to avoid the embarrassment Kennedy was given a medal and later, a fawning Democratic media made a movie about the episode, that played right into the myth they were creating about their "war hero": "PT 109."

But JFK's many adulteries, even when President, were carefully hidden by a media that could say nothing bad about a Democratic candidate. Would they have done the same for a Republican? I think not. What's said is that "in the old days" the media protected politicians who couldn't control themselves - the truth is that the protection was there for Democratic politicians, not Republicans.

So when Marilyn Monroe sang "Happy Birthday Mr. President" the media knew full well what had gone on between Monroe and JFK, but of course, said nothing.  This wasn't the last gasp of the old boy system, this was protecting a fellow Democrat.  And it was something that continues to this day.

And so it goes. The National Enquirer had story after story about John Edwards, but somehow none of it made the Democratic media until there was simply no choice but to cover the story. Ditto Clinton and Monica - the excuses and protection of the Democratic media (along with a half million dollar payoff to NOW to buy its silence) allowed Clinton to remain in office. When a Democrat strays, it's cute or ignored entirely, when a Republican does the same thing, it's called disgusting and they are hounded from office.

Yes there are exceptions but very VERY few.

Could any Republican have survived, as did Barney Frank, whose lover operated a brothel out of his Washington apartment? Or Marion Barry, who made a political comeback even after being caught red handed in a motel room smoking crack with a prostitute, at the same time that crack was devastating the young people of the city in which he was mayor?

Or Bill Clinton, whose political career best exemplifies the protection and double standard of the Democratic (say it like it is, that's who they are) media. Forget about the past - the lies, including perjury committed by Clinton - it was only a few short years ago that the same National Enquirer that had run stories on Edwards' foibles were running stories about Clinton as well. And what was the magazine saying about Clinton? Not just adulteries, but front page photographs of Clinton's long time mistress - all this plastered in magazines easily seen right in the supermarket checkout aisle. These stories were confirmed in the recent book "Game Change" about the McCain campaign which discussed Hillary Clinton's concern about Bill Clinton's many adulteries and his long term relationship with the woman whose photograph was plastered on the front page of the National Enquirer.

Yet, somehow, the Democratic media (and, let's face it, the conservative media, which simply gave up on being able to communicate to the public on these issues) ignored the story, and continues to do so. In fact, Bill Clinton will speak at the Democratic convention, so his political career has been completely unaffected by his playing around, more or less at will, and with full knowledge of Democratic media.

Would this media have done the same for a Republican? Of course not.  In fact, when the Democratic media has nothing they simply make it up, as they did with McCain and Bush I. Pure fabrications, but that's the way the game is played in the Democratic media, silence for one party, LIES for another.

So when it is found that Obama made up his auto-biography, that it is filled with lies of the worst sort meant to fit his story line, has the Democratic media said a word? It's is disgusting, how they can excuse someone who is almost pathological when it comes to telling the truth - truth simply doesn't matter.

In other words, forget about Clinton, JFK, Ted Kennedy (who, it was recently revealed, tried to rent out a brothel in Chile in the early 1960's), even Frank - what kind of a person makes up these phony stories for all the world to see - and check? And why did it take three years into his Presidency for people to know that much of what he put out in books about himself were lies?

In short, what kind of a man have we elected President? How could Obama, heck anyone write a book that contains so many falsehoods, how could he ever think it possible that he would get away with it?

The true irony, of course, is that he DID get away with the whole thing - that he not only got away with writing a book that had facts completely made up, but it is now known that he did it, and he has not suffered a bit from it. I've not even heard a word about it from the Administration, and you can bet the Democratic media won't be asking about it.

What does that say about American media? What does it say about Democrats? Should we ever expect the truth or anything close to it from Democratic politicians and candidates after this - what incentive is there to tell the truth, to have character, which seems to be utterly lacking in every Democratic leader on the planet.

Today we hear Obama making speeches filled with assertions that are simply untrue. And he is never called on it since in Obama there is conditioning on two levels - the first based on race, the second based on party.  If Obama says that two plus two is five, you won't hear anyone challenging it - in fact, we will have columnist after columnist making the case for him. This state of affairs can only be viewed as sick, very sick, as sick as our society has become.  There sense of things falling apart, a feeling that hasn't been in America since the worst days of Jimmy Carter.

Saying the Same Thing Again and Again

Some thoughts this summer as Democratic policies continue to wreak destruction on the black community:

Recall how Kennedy in 1968 proposed laws that led to the arrival of immigrants by the millions, all in an effort to import Democratic voters.  Just whose jobs did these immigrants take? The answer is jobs which were held almost exclusively by blacks - jobs which in a more equal environment could have been stepping stones to better employment.  Instead, these Democratic policies led to black unemployment.  

Democratic policies also destroyed the black family - I recall the articles in the old Newark Evening News about welfare "cheats" who had been found to have their husbands living with them.  Democrats ignored studies put out by D. Patrick Moynihan's organization in the 60's and 70's which predicted that such policies would result in the destruction of the black family. Nevertheless, Democrats pressed ahead, destroying the black family. This inevitably led to the present day criminalization of the inner cities - and elsewhere.  The lack of a father, and the inability of the mother to raise children alone required grandmothers to step in  - but the generation of these grandmothers is over.  And black communities in the inner cities are paying a bitter price - in Paterson New Jersey my brother in law described a rolling crime wave when the mostly black high school was let out. After the death of a homeless man the police were called upon to flood the area every afternoon.

And can you help but notice who is in the flash mob videos - although to even mention this or the awful lopsided crime statistics is now equated with racism under the conditioning of Democratic media. That conditioning means that nothing is done - and the leaders appointed by the Democrats in the black community are never criticized even as they get rich off the misery of the community they are supposed to represent.

What to do?  Black Democratic leaders claim that Republicans are a bunch of racists, but no group could possibly do worse than what the Democrats have done to the black community, which is nothing short of a holocaust in plain sight. My children went to a high school that was at least 25% black, and the honors classes were almost a form of segregation, since there were almost no black students taking honors classes.  I questioned this and got blank looks in return. The classes are open to everyone, but the community is not producing scholars - that takes two parents making sure the children do their home work.  In fact, the black community in my town is being supplanted by Latinos who have transformed an area that has been almost completely black since the Revolutionary war.  

All this thanks to Democratic policies - and if you say that Republicans were just as responsible for immigration policies the response is that wouldn't Democrats have some impetus to defend a community that gives them close to 100% support?  Instead of promoting policies that took away jobs?  And I do have black friends and they are universal in condemning immigration policies but you won't get that from black Democratic leaders who are more beholden to party than people.

Black leaders say that Republicans are a bunch of racist rich white guys but no one could have done a worse job of governing than the Democrats in the black community - they have caused destruction on a scale almost too horrible to imagine.  Under current conditions blacks give Democrats 100% of the vote - so why would Democrats be interested in changing anything?  

 And there is no hope for improving conditions.  We will have the same conversation in 2020, 2030 and onwards. Always black leaders ask for more for the poor - after half a century of Democratic rule black leaders should be in favor of tax breaks for the rich. But instead, year in year out it's the same thing - more for the poor.

Black leaders - any leader - must get beyond their conditioning and take a courageous stand - point out what the rest of the country knows but doesn't say since they have been silenced by Democratic media. And that's that the Democratic Party, the party of slavery, Jim Crow, lynchings, the KKK and the destruction of the black family is responsible for the destruction of the black community.   

WHEN WILL SOMEONE SAYS SOMETHING PART II

The thought when a child turns criminal: "where are the parents."  For many the answer is "nowhere." When children are raised in families without a father, in some cases without a mother or a father, or even a grandmother - the generation of grandmothers that took care of children after Democratic policies shattered families in the 70's is mostly gone, for the most part, or no one, that child will have problems. Forget about school, without parents, what these children learn about society is through media, which promotes a violent gangster lifestyle.

In fact, since attachment to family is natural in humans, the gangs become the substitute. You really think that the criminal justice system is going to deter someone who has found family in gangs? How would you react if you found family in a gang after getting nothing anywhere else?

  The point is this: blacks, though just over 10% percent of the population, commit over 50 percent of all murders, rapes, robberies, and assaults. Accordingly, isn't it reasonable to assume that there is something fundamentally wrong?

What has been done to the black community by Democrats was and is intentional, the suborning of the leadership, the inducement of governmental dependency through destruction of the family, the loss of the traditional employment to immigrants (employment which could have led to better things on a more level playing field) and, most important, the conditioning of the American mind by Democratic media to equate any mention of the awful statistics and the one party system in the black community with racism. Democratic leaders knew that community destruction would lead to one sided vote tallies, i.e. power.  There was more than enough evidence that destroying the family would induce dependence. That the community would be criminalized may or may not have been an unintended consequence - but it was criminal neglect since there was lots of evidence to suggest that destroying families leads to crime. 

Until someone starts talking about what's going on nothing is going to change. In the 80's people saying the problem in the community was no jobs. We then went through - thanks to Reagan's policies - a prolonged period of high employment. So Democrats could no longer blame lack of employment, in fact, you don't hear anything from them these days.   Democrats are willing to accept the status quo, while the community gets worse and worse - to the point...well look at that statistic to see where it is headed.

And there really is no hope for the future, there is nothing out there which indicates that conditions in the community are improving. In fact, it is just the opposite. And no one is talking about the real problem, which is the destruction of the black family by Democratic policies - a host of Democratic policies. Right now there is no incentive to change a thing - with Democrats getting close to 100% of the vote, with Democratic leaders and their followers making a fortune off the poverty industry, while delivering absolutely nothing, what possible reason is there for change?

After all family is a Republican issue. And if 50 years of Democratic allegiance hasn't improved the community, in fact has taken it backwards, Democrats don't cares are as long as the community votes the correct way and the right people are getting government money.

In short, while the rest of the country has steadily improved, Democratic media has conditioned the rest of us to ignore the black community, at the price of being labelled a racist, which for politicians is a virtual career killer. So you have one community responsible for 70% of most crime, that has been pillaged at will by Democrats which has induced conditions under which this has all been done, which has destroyed the family, which has taken away the will to be educated, which has impoverished this community under the very noses of the rest of the country, since the rest of the country is afraid to say a thing.

When a group of people - Democrats - commit the national equivalent of a holocaust shouldn't someone says something? It isn't as if it's a secret, although there is a powerful incentive to keep it all quiet - I note that recently someone brought up the 70% statistic on the Herald Riviera radio show, Riviera claimed it couldn't be true. Democratic media has been THAT successful at keeping all of this under wraps.

But, someone has to notice who is in those flash mob videos, someone has to notice what has happened in Rahm's Chicago, someone has to notice that year in and year out, for HALF A CENTURY for crissakes, the black community has been all about more for the poor, even as much of the rest got wealthier. And it isn't going to get any better - in fact , it is going to get worse since as every year passes less and less children in the community are raised in two parent families. With no one even talking about what's going really going on, unless and until someone does things wills imply get worse.

You would have thought by now that Democratic media would have to say something but the powerful incentive toward silence works on them as well.  But, how can you possibly hide all of this - how can Democrats expect the rest of us to stay quiet?

Democrats respond, like children really since they have nothing left other than to scream about racism.

The Democratic Swindle

Those who still believe that the Democratic party is legitimate should actually visit - or better yet - live in some of the areas where multi-generational poverty is a way of life.  I saw this first hand in the 90's making appearances in Newark, Essex County New Jersey Juvenile Court. It was truly a scene out of Dickens, a decrepit old court room, an elderly judge, children as young as nine being brought up on drug dealing charges (one by selling drugs through the fence of the colloquially named 'Youth House' - itself a place out of Dickens) without any family member appearing for them. I heard the Judge say "where's the grandmother" over and over again. The children? Invariably African American. This in a place where the Democrats have been in power for a hundred years or more.


Or in Paterson, New Jersey, which used to have a rolling crime wave every afternoon when the mostly African American High School got out. Shopkeepers would close their stores, residents knew better than to be on the street - a scene out of the wild west, until a homeless man was killed by a group of students. Now, hordes of police patrol the area every afternoon when school gets out. This, in a place that has been controlled by Democrats, also for at least the last 100 years or so.


The point is this: whatever is being done isn't working, not only is it not working, there isn't any hope of conditions getting better....ever - EVER. There just should not be a group that year after year, decade after decade - for whom no matter how much money is spent - nothing changes except for the worse.  How can we tolerate this, especially when Democrats are using the same tactics on recent immigrants i.e. Latinos?


How does this apply to welfare reform? It's this: Poverty should not be a racial issue, but it is because poverty and dependency seems to be intractable for an outsized part of the African American community - ask yourself: why is it that year after year African American leaders are always calling for more for the poor? And why is it that it NEVER changes, year by year decade by decade. We all expect it now, no one takes notice, it's part of the culture - and no one says anything because we have all been conditioned by Democratic media to keep quiet or face claims of racism. Hunh?


So no one even mentions the statistics about outsized crime rates, poverty rates, dismal educational achievements etc. in an outsized part of the African American community, and the lack of progress, despite billions, if not a trillion spent. Those who say anything are immediately tagged as racists by a Democratic media which - again - has conditioned all of us to remain silent at the risk of career killing racism charges.


Again, this applies to welfare because Democratic leaders have made welfare into a racial issue, equating welfare reform efforts with racism. What's racist, however, is perpetuating year after year a system, a paradigm, a culture or whatever you want to call it, where African Americans continue to have unbelievably high crime rates, dismal poverty rates, high unemployment rates, poor educational achievements etc. And where the people continue to re-elect leaders that every year fail to deliver, who by their continued failures show that they have little or no interest in doing anything other than squeezing every last penny out of the situation for them and their cronies - so that there is now an entire poverty industry dependent on the misery of the community, while retaining as much power as possible.


And yet again - the Democratic media ensures that any critique of the present awful situation is the same as racism, so that nothing changes, even after half a century of program after program, and billion after billion spent. SOMEONE has to point out that it isn't working, that money isn't the answer, that maybe a change of leadership is required. That the present Democratic leadership in the African American community has no interest in the changing the status quo since they get all the votes now, and a change for the better would result in less power, and less money.


In short, where else do you see no political consequences despite decades of failure?


As for other aspects of welfare reform, the Democratic Party has a vested interest in keeping as many people dependent on welfare for as long as possible. The reason is simple - the Democratic Party, historically the party of the KKK, Jim Crow, lynchings and slavery, has transformed itself into the party of government, and the more people dependent on government the more votes Democrats get. Prosperity is not the goal of this corrupt organization. It's as simple as that. And the New York Times, as the standard bearer of the Democratic Party, in a recent article on welfare reform uses its age old tactic of highlighting individual examples as support for their argument against welfare reform - in other words, anecdotal evidence. It's a dishonest way of proving a point, but dishonesty is what Democratic media is all about.


There should be outrage that this one organization and its supporters would ruin lives by the thousand, if not millions, by encouraging dependency, all in an effort to gain power. Why even discuss the cure for poverty and crime, that is, intact families with two parents (and hopefully, grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins) all working together.  But, then again, family is an anathema to blood sucking Democrats, who feed off of and encourage shattered families.

Obama Could Do it Better

Ever watch a news story unfold and wonder why no one else sees what you see? Here's an example...


Forget what you have been told about leftist university professors and Democratic Party supporters - the average Democratic voter is characterized by a profound ability to either be manipulated or to be unable to break free from manipulation. Remember when the hypnotist came into your school and got those most susceptible to hypnosis to climb on stage and perform tricks? Now imagine the same thing on a massive scale and you have the Democratic Party's message politics. However, there doesn't appear to be any way to snap your fingers under the nose of these people and show them how they have been played for fools.


Two news stories caught my attention and are relevant to this discussion. The first concerned  Obama. Apparently, Obama, a modest man, is in the habit of telling everyone that, no matter what the job they are doing, he - Obama - could do it better. Whether it be head of the FBI, his campaign manager, or the guy who shampoos the rugs, Obama believes he would be better at it and doesn't hesitate to say so.  (we should remember that when recalling the press conference after Obama's 'shellacking' in November of 2010, when he fled the stage leaving it to Clinton. A very revealing incident).


The second story was about how Obama recycles phrases and even entire speeches. Obama has apparently taken to heart the advice that if you repeat something often enough it will be accepted as truth. Plus, he can rely on the Democratic media to cover for him.


Putting all this together what do have? Answer - George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin. Obama's campaign is all about doing it just like 2008 - even to the point of using the same campaign speeches. And what speech really galvanized the liberal white and African American voter? The speech delivered after the revelations about Reverend Wright. As unbelievable as this sounds, the Martin/Zimmerman story is being manipulated as a setup for a speech. In that sense it is similar to the reaction to Hurricane Katrina, which was also manipulation on a massive scale, as a response to African American voters taking a look at the Republican Party - remember the black leader in Los Angeles who changed his party affiliation from Democratic to Republican? Katrina was all about that. And the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman story, for all its ironies (for example, if Zimmerman is a "white Latino" then what does that make Obama?) is about one thing, the forthcoming speech on race from Obama. It will be "the speech" and it follows a pattern in 2008.



It is sad indeed how no one has yet caught on to the fact that this is what it is all about - setting up a speech that will generate the same claptrap as in 2008, plus solidifying the African American vote, which is all Obama's anyway. But Obama knows how critical this vote really is, especially since it gives Obama an immunity about certain very uncomfortable issues. So the speech will come, on race, as before, and as before Democrats will cheer and those who are not Democrats will ignore it. But Obama will have accomplished his critical goal of bridging an all important enthusiasm gap, and following his own lead, while he shows everyone what a genius he is. That it is at such a cost in terms of relations between black and white (mostly black to white) means nothing to Obama.


This mean little man, who always thinks he is the smartest, maybe the only real person in the room, could care less about race relations. In that sense he truly represents the Democratic Party, its mean spirit, its arrogance, its overall intent to crush all opposition, no matter what the cost. And in so doing, to destroy a group of people - blacks - who have foolishly aligned themselves to this band of corruption, which has destroyed their community.


After all, with Democrats having taken everything from black Americans - family, safety, prosperity, education, self respect, what is left?

Occupy the Democrats!

Why is it you never hear of the Democratic Party's role in promoting the Occupy Wall Street ("OWS") movement, and how it, along with media controlled by Democrats (such as top Obama advisor and General Electric's CEO Jeffrey Immelt's GENBC) has created and manipulated OWS for its own purposes?

What OWS is NOT is a legitimate grass roots movement. Rather it is a small core of die hard anarchists and rabble rouser's who have no plans other than to topple what's here, with just a fuzzy concept of what comes next. Unfortunately, when movements like OWS and other movements like it manage to have any degree of success the result never resembles a democracy. Instead, what is created are perfect conditions for people of ill will to step in. The best example - besides the French Revolution - is Iran.

How quickly we forget when the Democratic media wants it that way! In the late 1970's the all powerful Western media was gung ho on getting rid of the Shah, but of course too brainless to understand that what would replace the Shah would not be supporters of democracy, but a repressive theocracy - and a highly dangerous theocracy at that. Jimmy Carter, then and now an incompetent, was completely outmaneuvered, no difficult task. The Western media supported those seeking to bring down the regime, and down the regime went. The result was decades of repression, misery and world destabilization.

Of course, no one was taken to task for what happened in Iran. The Democratic media in the United States - among which are the major television networks - CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, NPR, plus the N.Y. Times, Washington Post et als, never allows a former Democratic President to be considered poorly in retrospect (think of fellow incompetents Harry Truman and even more so - John Kennedy). So as quickly as possible sainthood was conferred on Jimmy Carter and his Arab dictatorship supporting "Carter Center." You have never, and will never hear a peep of criticism from the Democratic media of just how badly Carter handled the Iranian situation.
In fact, it is never mentioned at all.

So now we have the even more openly Democratic media wholeheartedly supporting "Occupy" movement. Naturally, there's an angle in it for the Democrats. Besides taking the spotlight off of Obama's economically and socially ruinous policies, the claim to a "movement" countering the Tea Party is used hand in glove to support Obama's campaign strategy of separating America into rich and poor. This isn't the time to go into how dangerous and un-American it is to divide the country into classes based on wealth, but it is a certainty that the Democratic media won't take Obama to task for it - heck lots of that media are working for Obama's campaign! In fact, the Democratic media is actively pressing ahead with the assumption - soon to be considered "fact" - that OWS is legitimate movement acting as a voice of the people, and by the way supporting Obama's class warfare campaign strategy.

And, typically, the Republicans fall into every trap laid for them by the Democrats - but again that's another story.

Maybe something more sinister is going on with the Democrats and OWS. But whatever it is, what OWS is not is a legitimate, spontaneous grass roots movement. Rather, it is a carefully planned, although who knows, perhaps poorly executed stunt aimed at bettering the Democrats chances in the next election.

And here's a prediction - the OWS movement will wither away, Cindy Sheehan style, if Obama wins the election and OWS's usefulness to the Democrats is over.

Because when you come right down to it, the power of the OWS movement is something wholly conferred by the Democratic media. That media is still immensely powerful, and has done a good job of taking a tiny group of people and making them into something they are not. Recall the hostility of the Democratic media to the far far larger Tea Party and the manipulation that has been used on those already subject to a lifetime of conditioning to convince them that the Tea Party movement is somehow 'racist.' This despite the fact that race and social issues aren't any part of the Tea Party agenda. But then again, prevarication, falsehoods, exaggerations, omissions and outright lies are just means to an end for the Democratic media.

And, most troubling is that the issues discussed above don't ever seem to be examined by anyone - again, where are the Republicans? Of course, Republican failures with respect to the Democratic media is another subject entirely.

How the Democratic Party Destroyed the Black Community (and It's Doing the Same to Latinos)

The national media has, through decades of conditioning, convinced blacks to align themselves with an organization which has systematically destroyed their community, leading to violence on an immense scale.   The Democratic Party has maintained power in in the black community through lies, manipulation, half truths and the like, despite decades of worsening conditions.    


It is a story not told since the very media that allowed this to happen has adopted a policy which makes impossible to say anything about it.   In just a few generations, with the assistance of the national media Democrats have taken the promise of the civil rights era and ground it to dust.  Consider this:

  The Democratic Party through family aid policies have destroyed the black family.  well over 70% of black children are born out of wedlock.   Many are born to women who have multiple children from multiple fathers.   How did this happen? In the late 60's the New Jersey Newark Evening News used to run articles  about how Essex County New Jersey welfare agencies were throwing fathers out of the home if the mother was "on" welfare.  DEMOCRAT family assistance policies, implemented  nationwide led to fatherless homes, which led to the ruin of the black community.    The absence of a father in the home, or involved at all has been a disaster for the community. Statistics show that when two parent families are used as a basis for comparison, then on education and crime black and white are equal.   But, when considered as a group, crime for African Americans is totally out of all proportion to numbers and education achievement is dismal -  The one and only reason? Destruction of the black family.  Tthe grandmothers are gone - gangs fill in the void.   Money can't put this right.  In fact, the money spent on the poverty industry by government and foundations ends up the pockets of Democrat 'community' leaders, who get wealthy off the misery of the community


Destroyed family means crime.   Maybe Hollywood stars can afford to raise children in single parent households but for everyone else an intact family,a mother and father, and hopefully, aunts, uncles, and cousins as well, is necessary.  When an entire community is filled with single parent households you have today's inner cities - crime ridden, drug infested, ruled by gangs.  This result was not unexpected. In the early '60's and 70's none other than Democratic Senator Daniel Moynihan predicted that welfare policies that kept fathers out of the home would lead to the situation we have today.  But this prediction went against the grain of feminist teachings which are part of overall Democratic policies, which is that a father in the home is unnecessary.  The result is a nationwide social experiment, the results of which we have in the black community today.

Employment?  Democrat policies destroyed the black working class by putting into place massive legal and illegal immigration. But for this massive immigration there would have been a labor shortage.  These jobs would have been a stepping stone to advancement, or employers would have had to greatly increase wages in order that people stayed on the job. In other words, African Americans stood to reap an enormous benefit from the labor shortage.   However, in 1968 the "friend" of the black community, Ted Kennedy, enacted legislation that resulted in millions of immigrants, many of them unskilled, coming to America.  These immigrants took work in areas that had traditionally employed blacks - the jobs that the Democrat media derisively calls 'jobs that Americans won't take.'   In the absence of immigrants those jobs would have paid much better wages as the only way to attract workers, and could have acted as a springboard for African Americans toward better employment.   Now, thanks entirely to Democratic policies those jobs are gone for blacks.  

 Republicans supported immigration too, but never as a matter of overall policy, and rank and file Republicans, like most Americans, are dead set against immigration.  And wouldn't it be expected that Democrats would protect the  group that every election gives it 100% support?  And, ironically, most blacks are against immigration but black leaders, who are beholden to the Democrat party, support immigration, throwing their community under the bus in favor of what helps the Democrat party.

  And where are the headlines about what has happened to the black community, the terrible crime statistics, lack of education achievement etc.  Where is the outcry, the "60 Minute specials? Why is there no mention of what immigration has done to blacks, no mention of the relationship between fatherless homes, crime and education, after all the statistics are crystal clear?  You won't see it - Democrat media has formulated a concept known as  'political correctness' which silences the anyone who wants to talk about what's going on in the black community.   We hear nothing about the crime, loss of jobs and why things have not improved despite decades of Democrat control of the major cities, and trillions of dollars spent. 

  In 2005 there were - finally -some evidence that blacks were actually starting to think that maybe Republicans should at least be considered.   It wasn't long before the Democrats found in the response to Hurricane Katrina the way to stop the defections from the party line.   The Democrat media went in overdrive - with lies and exaggerations in its media blitz.  The response to Katrina was not wholly different from the response to any other disaster, with most of the problems caused by an incompetent mayor and governor, but in this response the Democrats saw a way to tar the Republicans with the hoary racist tag. And it worked.

It is incomprehensible that blacks can't see what is and has been done to them, and the reasons for it. Do you really think that the Democrat Party, which is led by a small coterie of white men, supported by a media that is also almost completely white, almost completely male, really gives a crap about the black community?   Look at what has been done for the last five decades - actions, not words.   Trillions spent, and the only thing to show for it is that the ghetto is far worse than in 1960. The silence in the media about all this is deafening- but since the blame falls squarely on the policies instituted by the Democrat Party you will never hear anything about what's really going on.  

  In 2003 I told Tavis Smiley at NPR that in ten years the problems in the black community would not only be unchanged, they would be worse. It's now eight years later and nothing has changed - despite phony promises from Obama the community is in worse shape than in 2003, and nothing will have changed in 2013 or 2023.  

There was so much promise at the dawn of the  civil rights era, all that blood, sweat and tears had to result in good, but instead of equal rights, and a healthy, prosperous, happy community, African Americans in America have been used, abused, it's chidren have been exposed to crime, substance abuse, it's leaders paid off, and on the ground nothing changes - things get, if anything worse.  African Americans are, if anything puzzled about the situation - it should be better but its not. Their leaders shout 'racism' at the drop of a hat, but this excuse is wearing very thin indeed, and it is readily apparent that the real cause of all the problems can be laid squarely at the feet of those who are supposed to be helping the community.  Democrats have been in charge of the cities now for for 50 years or more, and take a look at Detroit or in New Jersey, look at Newark, Camden, East Orange, Paterson, Plainfield, Trenton - it's the same story everywhere.  Immigrants come, immigrants leave, more immigrants come, same thing, but blacks stay in ruinous conditions in the ghetto.  And the rest of America has been cowed into silence - as to even mention the fact that blacks commit far too many crimes in relation to their population, are failing in education - just mentioning the statistics is racist.  Well, there is a reason Democrats want silence - it's their own awful record they want to suppress.  


How many scientists, educators, writers, artists have we lost -  and how many more will be lost before you understand what's going on?    


Latinos take note - all of the above is being done to your community. You want to take the poison Democrats are offering?