Why is the left okay with racial slurs against Senator Tim Scott?
It is an example of the hypocrisy of the left. They believe they protect black people, except for black conservatives. I know black conservatives who have been lectured by white, female, liberals about being black. If a white liberal says anything racist about a black conservative, it is not only accepted by the left, it is a badge of honor. So, the liberals will protect a black person, unless they are conservative, then the black conservative is subject to racial slurs, threats, intimidation, etc. Only because their thoughts are independent of liberal thinking.
Black senator Tim Scott gave a rebuttal to biden's state of the union speech. The liberals on the left were enraged. He got called "Uncle Tim," and another Democrat called him an "oreo." Where is the NAACP? Where are the Democrats to protect the rights of black senator Tim Scott?
I think they probably drowned in a sea of hypocrisy.
"MSNBC’s Tiffany Cross went on a Saturday rant about how Scott was a “tap dancer,” a “token” and the kind of person “Harriet Tubman would have left behind.”
None of those individuals has faced any repercussions, however, so where’s the line? Gary O’Connor, a Democratic Party official in Texas, may have found it.
According to Fox News, O’Connor — chairman of the Lamar County Democratic Party — is facing calls to resign after a now-deleted Facebook post last week included a racial slur against Scott.
“I had hoped that Scott might show some common sense, but it seems clear he is little more than an oreo with no real principles,” O’Connor wrote.
The post might be deleted, but the screen shot is much easier to find than O’Connor would probably like."
https://www.westernjournal.com/texas-de … A7DgFzilwkJust like all righties are not cross burning intolerants, all left leaning folks are not the same, Mike. Sen. Scott is far too weak to offer any challenge to the Democrat hold on multicultural support.
------
My opinion of Sen. Scott, devoid of any racial slurs...
When I thought about Senator Scott this weekend, I think of the incredible token the GOP used to make a rebuttal to President Biden's address in Tim Scott. Can it be a coincidence that the sole Black GOP senator was picked to make the rebuttal?
It would make one think that Senator Scott would be a rising star in the GOP, but not so fast...
The way this man expressed himself in the rebuttal and his political inclination generally, show him to be a moderate in a party where generally far right is their center. He could never satiate the needs of the true believing "red meat" crowd. It was just a little bit of guile to give an impression of a diverse political party when such is not the case.
But in all fairness, though, rumor has it that GOP non-white Congressperson members has risen somewhat in 2020, so maybe I should stay tuned......
And How about a little more?
In the world of the GOP divided into two faction, those that idolize Trump and the those that represent the generally conservative center Right of the party, Sen. Scott is clearly part of the latter group and is on the moderate side of that, just not as outspoken as a Liz Cheney, or the late Senator, John McCain. Sen. Scott has carefully walked a tightrope of not offending the Trumpers yet not embracing them either. I don't find any black Republicans really embracing the Trump wing of the party.
What conservatives never seem to realize is that putting a black face on a political party whose policies and ideology has been contrary to the interests of our electorate never gets very far. Refined Democrats like me have long since knew this.
He seems a nice enough fellow, but my issue is with the GOP and its ideology regardless of who is carrying its banner.
Republicans will never agree to nominate Scott, like I said, fundamentally he is too moderate for the party as it stands now. Someone like Ted Cruz, or the syncophant who passes for Governor here in Florida, but I will save that for another thread, is more what they are looking for. Great purveyors of the highest quality of red meat.Does Senator Scott deserve to be referred to as "Uncle Tim" or as an "oreo?"
Should the Democrat Congressman who made these statements be censured?
Where is the NAACP on this? It seems they are enraged about racist comments concerning black people, except if it is a black conservative.
Why is it an issues that the GOP has one black senator? The Democrat party has two. Hardly in a position to pass judgment.
I think there is a strong case to be made that the Democrat policies and ideology has done quite a bit of damage to the black communities in the United States.
As I have shown before, the Black Conservative Movement (BCM) is growing, and has increased quite a bit since biden was elected.
So, is it okay for white liberal women to lecture black men about being black? I've seen it and known people who have experienced it. Is it okay to use racial slurs against black conservatives? It happens all the time from white liberals. I have friends who have been called racist, anti-black, and many other things because they are black conservatives.
It just feeds my belief of liberal hypocrisy being too blatant to ignore.No, Mike, certainly not, I would avoid the name calling. But what is the GOP doing to Liz Cheney and Mitt Romney? If I were Lily white and came before the NRA with talk of gun control, how would I be received?
The NAACP is more than about Black People, it is about the ideas and concepts that have been supportive of the Black community rather than otherwise. While it not appropriate to call names, Scott and the Republican way is not the way most of us see as the solution to our economic concerns, so he is not going to be greeted with open arms.
Censored? Not unless you consider censoring every loose lipped Rightwinger in Congress. So until you are willing to do that....
-----
"Why is it an issues that the GOP has one black senator? The Democrat party has two. Hardly in a position to pass judgment."
Good point, but let's focus on why Scott was selected to give the rebuttal, when there are more experienced GOP Senators within the hierarchy?
-----
"I think there is a strong case to be made that the Democrat policies and ideology has done quite a bit of damage to the black communities in the United States."
But there is an equally strong case to make that the GOP has nothing of value to offer except more of the stuff we all remain contentious about. As for Republicans saying that their approach is more helpful, I say "rubbish".
------
There is plenty of hypocrisy to go around for both sides. Why should we submit to a standard that the Right and conservatives never even try to apply to themselves?
No, it is not ok for white men or women, liberal or conservative, to lecture Black people about experiences that are unique to them, as if somehow they would know better. I can't speak to the ignorance of labeling people who have a different perspective, Black or white, I just have my own perspective and I have yet to be convinced that it is not the correct one."But what is the GOP doing to Liz Cheney and Mitt Romney? If I were Lily white and came before the NRA with talk of gun control, how would I be received?"
The Republican party is working hard to get rid of them. They no longer represent the Republican base. They both supported the impeachment of President Donald Trump. They are despised among the majority of Republicans.
Romney gets booed at Republican gatherings. Cheney hasn't taken questions in a public forum from her constituents for a long time. She'd get yelled at. Neither one is polling enough to get the endorsement of the Republican party in their primaries. They are way behind their challengers.
It doesn't matter what color you are. If you are a Republican talking about gun control, you are not going to be popular. It will be a struggle for you to have any influence in the party.
I think it's time for both Romney and Cheney to join the Democrat party.
"Good point, but let's focus on why Scott was selected to give the rebuttal, when there are more experienced GOP Senators within the hierarchy?"
That is easy to answer. His poll numbers are some of the highest of anyone in the Republican party. He polls well with Republicans but with Democrats and independents as well. So, yeah, he was a good choice to give the rebuttal because he appeals to a wide demographic of people. I'm sure you agree, he is very likeable. If a pink person had his poll numbers, the pink person would have been tasked to give the rebuttal."It doesn't matter what color you are. If you are a Republican talking about gun control, you are not going to be popular. It will be a struggle for you to have any influence in the party."
Same point, if you are a Republican trying to advocate their points of view regardless of what color you are, you are not going to be popular. And it will be difficult for any such person to have influence on our electorate.
In my view, MANY liberals don't know the meaning of the word hypocrisy. Their very mindset is well trained and geared toward the concept of groupthink. And one of the star concepts of groupthink is being able to ignore what's right in your face, truth if need be, and common sense.
" So, the liberals will protect a black person, unless they are conservative"
The liberals at this point have adopted black people to look after, take care of. In general, it would seem that they have appointed themselves to make sure blacks are not mistreated. This may be due to them seeing as needy, in some respects helpless. However, they have now seemed to have the need to weed out black people that they find distasteful to their cause. Blacks that are successful, are a threat to their cause. It's clear to me many blacks rely on these liberals hoping they will help with systemic racism. This could in many cases be the reason they are willing to join in belittling black conservatives that have become successful.
At any rate, I have followed Senator Scott, and find him to be a mover and shaker. He is what the party needs, a man that has great common sense, is not a typical politician, and very much level-headed. I appreciate how he has handled all the racial slurs that have come his way. He stays above the fray, and I respect that quality. So glad he is a Republican, could not be prouder to have such an accomplished man in Congress.I wonder if many people know how hard the Tea Party worked for Tim Scott's elections? I doubt it.
I honestly don't think many black people follow the accomplishments of any politicians unless they are in the Dem party. In my view, some tend to just not be open to even consider belonging to any other party but the Democratic party. That may make it easy to dismiss what Black Republicans have to offer in Government.
I really am disappointed how the media and the Democrats, in general, are treating Tim Scott. Calling him derogatory names appears very foolish in my book. One can see he is well educated, articulate Senator that deserves respect. I see him as an asset to the black race.Sharlee, they use to say that such a Black man was a "credit to his race". Your last sentence resonates and reminds me of that old anachronism so well.
I am a Democrat, and I am not treating Sen. Scott badly, I just do not agree with the approach of the Party he represents and subsequently not with him.
Why would we not pay attention to which party is responding more to the needs of our community as we say that those needs are? We are not robots, just like the rightwingers have their agendas, no one says that they are being "misled" or in mass not choosing to consider what is being offered by the "other side".I can fully understand the ideologies of Dems and Reps are very different, and it is a fact Reps want smaller Governments less over reach in our lives. But, as a bystander, I can't pinpoint anything that the Democrats have really made better for black citizens or helped with systemic racism. In the next breath, I can say the very same about Republicans.
Could it be possible that when one considers who they will vote for, they should just look at the individual, not the party? I think that time has come for all of us. I think the writing is on the wall that both parties have agendas. And at this point in our Nations's development, is it time to really consider a two-party system is in many ways failing us?The problem is that the individual is part of political party with specific ideologies and platforms. Trump still trumpeted basic GOP principles, while everybody kept saying he was "independent".
If individuals ran on their own accord expressing their individual values and principles maybe that would work. But as much as it costs to run for national office, no man can be an island.
Alternatives to the two party system has been considered but has never been successful, maybe we all need to bear down a bit harder.At this point, I think people are looking for different candidates than the two parties can offer. Many Americans are dissatisfied with the Washington elites calling the shots. The country is becoming more and more divided. There is no looking back, only forward at this point.
The fact is that liberals protect liberals and conservatives protect conservatives.
I like Tim Scott. I may not agree with him, but I like him. Democrats need to make sure that opinions such as his are listened to and they should work with him.
Our Detroit Police chief James Craig is seriously considering running for Governor under the Republican ticket here in Michigan. He is so well-loved and respected throughout the state of Michigan. He is a well-accomplished man that was always right there to address any and all problems. He will glean the black vote throughout the state. However, it will be interesting to witness what the Democratic party will do when they realize he is serious about running. I am sure he will be bombarded with derogatory labels and any other scandals they can dig up.
I am really very excited about the thought of having this wonderful man as our new Governor and will be on board to help get him elected.
I guess you can tell, this news made my day!
Scott is not the first conservative person of color to be attacked with racial slurs by the left and I'm certain he won't be the last.
The left is the modern version of the KKK. Hunting down those who they perceive as different, tarring and feathering them and then parading them around to the cheers of their members. Trying to lynch their reputation and working to castrate any person of color who deigns to disagree with their dogma.
I remember the democratic KKK in the south. They wrapped their racism in religion. The modern religion of the left is no different from the attempts to indoctrinate the young to support the beliefs of the democrats KKK back then.
They are a plague on decent society just as they were in the past.In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party. The Democrats have never changed their ideology to control black citizens, they just adopted the attitude If we can't threaten blacks, let's at least get their votes. Make promises that can soon be forgotten with new ones provided each election.
I think Tim Scott could build a great base that would include minorities that have become sick of broken promise after broken promise.The KKK represented racists, that is all. Trying to link the KKK with the modern Democratic Party is just a pure ignorance of American history, which is not surprising. The KKK is not linked to a party as much as an ideology, which is conservative. Conservatives, be they Dems or Republicans, supported the KKK.
The Dems are like the KKK? Tell that to Liz Cheney.
The current Republican Party is built on a foundation of lies and there is almost no basis to believe that whatever comes out of the mouth of Republicans is anything other than a lie. Dems are slime? Okay. At least they didn't try to overthrow the government, and murder the Vice President and others. And they're not actively trying to destroy Democracy by making it harder for people to vote. And they're not creating a litmus test for their members based on the belief that the election was stolen without a shred of evidence to prove it."At least they didn't try to overthrow the government, and murder the Vice President and others."
Except that they DID overthrow the government and DID get people killed. Remember CHAZ?
"And they're not actively trying to destroy Democracy by making it harder for people to vote."
Instead they actively try to destroy American Democracy by inviting and encouraging foreign citizens to vote and pick our leaders for us. By refusing common sense, simple and easy tests for citizenship and residency before voting.
"And they're not creating a litmus test for their members based on the belief that the election was stolen without a shred of evidence to prove it."
Instead their "litmus test" is to deny that there is any evidence of voter fraud while ignoring that there absolutely IS not only evidence but proof of fraud.
One must choose between two evils. My vote goes to the side that tries to preserve America as a nation of people, not the side that tries to give it away to foreign countries and make virtual slaves out of its citizens.Nobody has provided any evidence of voter fraud and, once again, Trump's own lawyer said it was all a hoax. What more do you want to prove there was no evidence of voter fraud than Trump's lawyer saying she was lying?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 … aud-claims
She said no reasonable person should have believed her lies. I just don't understand how anyone can believe in voter fraud when the very person representing the person responsible for this lie admitted she was lying and had no proof for what she was saying.
Remember the Statue of Liberty? Isn't that the history of our country? Welcoming the poor? Welcoming those from other countries? Isn't preserving that sentiment preserving America?
In my view as I stated --- The Democrats have never changed their ideology to control black citizens, they just adopted the attitude If we can't threaten blacks, let's at least get their votes.
Our opinion clashes in regards to the Democratic party. When I used the word slime, I was being kind when expressing my opinion.I'm not a fan of the Democratic Party, actually. And I'm sure there's some common ground on how the Democrats have appealed to black voters and how they've used them and what they've actually done for them.
Let's remember though that conservatives were against giving women the right to vote, giving blacks the right to vote, allowing gay people to marry. Conservatives are against all these things always. That is the very definition of conservative - keep things the way they are, any change is threatening; etc.
And I am being kind when it comes to those who continue to support Trump and his lies. Now, apparently in Arizona they're looking for bamboo in the ballots because the newest conspiracy theory says they came from SE Asia. This conspiracy theory came from some random Twitter user. This is your Republican Party - any conspiracy theory is a good conspiracy theory. As far as I'm concerned, the Republican Party is actively trying to end Democracy. Their party platform and belief system is based on lies almost across-the-board. Trump is a traitor. His supporters are traitors."Their party platform and belief system is based on lies almost across-the-board."
Sounds much like the Democrat platform. "Illegal aliens are good for the country and cost us nothing." "It is good for people to live off of charity and have no work ethic." "Putting strong physical barriers up will not produce a reduction in people going where they should not." "Taking the preferred weapon of murderers away from law abiding citizens will reduce the number of murders." "The US is the guiding light for cultures worldwide and it is up to us to enforce what we think is right wherever we see wrongness."
The list is endless of both parties pushing their platform with lie based opinions.I must correct you in regard to who was the catalysts for the 19th Amendment, which provided the law for women to vote --- That would be the Republicans.
"On May 21, 1919, an Illinois Republican by the name of James Mann reintroduced the 19th Amendment in the House of Representatives and it passed by a vote of 304 to 89. It was a decisive victory, and the split among Democrats and Republicans was staggering. In all, over 200 Republicans voted in favor of the 19th Amendment, while only 102 Democrats voted alongside them. Subsequently, on June 4, 1919, the 19th Amendment passed the Senate by a vote of 56 to 25. Once again, the split among Democrats and Republicans was notable: eighty-two percent of Republicans voted in favor of the amendment while only forty-one percent of their Democrat colleagues concurred." Source
https://foxx.house.gov/news/documentsin … 0suffrage.
And the Republicans gave substantial support to the 1964 civil Rights Bill.
When comparing Democrats' votes, a greater percentage of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I need not go back to Lincoln, and the republicans part ushering in the 14th and 15th Amendments. Nothing in our history actually shows the Democrats doing anything substantial for black Americans.
"While the landmark act received a majority of support from both parties, a greater percentage of Republicans voted in favor of the bill. Throughout the 1950s and ’60s, Republicans were generally more unified than Democrats in support of civil rights legislation, as many Southern Democrats voted in opposition."
Source -- https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/12/17/ … crats-did/
The Democrats in their early history fought any bill that would improve the lives of black people. They did turn on their heels when they realized they could gain the black vote, and their playbook changed drastically.
In regards to --- "And I am being kind when it comes to those who continue to support Trump and his lies." I made no mention of the previous president. Not sure why you add him to this conversation. I was speaking strictly about how IMO the Democrats use black people due to a slimy ideology they use to get their vote. Promise anything, and hope they don't notice that none of the promises ever come to fruition.
Hopefully, I have helped you realize what you believed in regards to what political party brought women the right to vote, and what Political party throughout America's history have not only did away with slavery but continued to work for Black citizens to have all the rights of any American citizen.
I won't go off on a rant as you have done. --- I won't even call Democrats traitors, slimy will suffice.I second Crank's comments. Sharlee
1919?
What irritates me about the Right and conservatives is that they fail recognize that political alliances has changed over a century of time. I supposed that my great grandfather probably voted for Republicans as the "party of Lincoln" in 1919, if he were able to vote.
Nobody denies that the Democrats in their history has had a sordid record, but that is not the case, today, and its not about 1919.
Or even about 1964. The national Democratic Party was becoming progressive with Kennedy/Johnson, while Democrat controlled state and local governments in the south still clung to a racist agenda.
The nomination of Barry Goldwater and his agenda in 1964 made it clear the direction the GOP was going to take, give a litttle support to civil rights bills on one hand while undoing it all and turning back the clock with a "Barry Goldwater" on the other.
What hasn't changed since 1919, with the noted exception of conservatives and their ideas?I gave sources to dispute Cranks assumptions that it was the Democrats that gave women the right to vote. And also offered info on how the Republicans had a substantial part in bringing about the 1964 civil Rights Bill in regards to percentages of votes. History offers concrete proof that the Republican party has clearly benefited black Americans throughout our history. I offered a history lesson only due to her recollection of who did what baffled me.
"the Right and conservatives is that they fail recognize that political alliances has changed over a century of time."
I don't think conservatives have not recognized that political alliances have changed. I think we are scratching our heads on why?
I still have not really been able to understand how you feel the Dem party has really done anything to help the many problems Black American's have today. I am not in any way implying that the Republicans have done much either. I will say the Dems use great phycological warfare to keep the black vote.
IMO this new crew of Dems is really doing blacks a disservice in how they are portraying them. Racism is being stoked, and what's sad it's being stoked on purpose to cause division. And the ploy is working well from where I sit I see and hear almost daily. I feel like I am back in the '60s.
I want to point something out that is easy to note if one really listens The Dem media continue to refer to those on the right or should I say republicans as racist. Pointing out vague words or vague actions that are rarely based on fact. They keep that undercurrent streaming 24/7. Turning that thorn in the side so to say. I note that this kind of bias is really not practiced on Fox and some internet outlets. Fox does not delve into race-baiting. I don't think we on right realistically feel the quality is what it should be But was it moving in the right direction until Trump came along and rocked the Dems to the core. They have big-time pulled out the race-baiting card. They were in no way, after so much work going to lose the black vote. But was it all at the expense of the Black people?
I think conservatives do keep many of the same values and ideologies. IMO they work and provide a steady, peaceful existence.OK, Sharlee, here is an example
------
The American Families Plan would provide universal preschool to all 3- and 4-year-olds, as well as two years of free community college. Both programs would be available regardless of income. The plan would also extend the expansion of the federal child tax credit in the American Rescue Plan through 2025 and permanently make the tax credit fully refundable.
It would also ensure that low- and middle-income families did not pay more than 7 percent of their incomes on child care, which could entirely wipe out the cost for some of the poorest Americans. The plan would also establish a national paid leave program that would provide up to $4,000 a month for 12 weeks for parental, family or personal leave.
-------
When we talk about structural racism, the commitment to assist families not born with silver spoons in the mouth with the opportunity to prepare their children with theadvantages of pre kindergarten education is to our advantage.
The commitment to provide no cost 2 years of community college education helps to level the playing field and I considerate it a form of reparation that is available to everyone. Giving everybody an opportunity to better themselves regardless of income is certainly to my advantage.
Dealing with the issue of affordable childcare could well bring a lot of those off from welfare and on the path of productive citizenship. We invest in people rather than 2 trillion dollar dodo birds. I see that as an advantage.
Republicans want to limit the proposed changes to only infrastructure, but they shot Obama down over similar proposals over 10 years ago. So, who is going to believe them?
While the Republicans spew warm bromides, the Democrats get to the root of thing with programs that actually address the problem.
Regardless of conservatives cries of socialism, I think that this is a step forward.
That is how the Democrats earn my respect and allegiance and the overwhelming support of my fellows.
Consequently, I am most pleased with President Biden.
As for change of political alliances, FDR is the start of it.
The only constant is change, to cling to buggy whips and horse drawn ice delivery trucks contradicts peaceful existence.Is your example of the American Families Plan intended to show that Democrats are helping blacks...or that Democrats are extending more charity to blacks as a method of chaining them tighter to government control? Because unending, ever growing, charity is NOT how to help people.
Keeping them in a system of structural disadvantage does not help them either. It is not JUST for blacks.
Do you view unending, ever growing, charity taxpayers are forced to give as "helping" those that won't work? That was the question, not who the charity is for.
How do you know that they "won't work"? All those that stand to benefit include others besides those that won't work.....
I say military waste is charity to defense contractors and fat cats, depends on your point viewI'm sorry, Cred, but we don't have a need for two more years of education for 3 and 4 year olds. Any parent interested in parenting can and should be teaching them anything they are capable of learning during that period of their lives.
As for additional training at a community college; there is absolutely no reason for the taxpayer to foot that bill, either. If one wants more education bad enough (meaning they will actually use it) they can pay for it themselves. I did, you did, my children did and so can anyone that wants it badly enough.Have to totally disagree. Early childhood education is a huge benefit for children and their parents. It will also pay off for the economy by allowing those parents who want to work to work. My kids were in daycare from the time they were 6 weeks old (it cost like $30k/year). The benefit to the economy would be substantial.
I do, however, agree about free community college. I don't like that idea.Seems to me that if daycare helps the economy that much then it helps the parents at least the same amount.
Given that they can pay for it themselves. I fully understand that a single parent, on the low end of the wage scale, has a real problem with daycare costs (we were there once upon a time). But that is not a reason to make daycare free for everyone that wants kids but not the financial responsibility of raising them.Disagree again. Why do we have public schools then?
Ultimately, offering daycare will benefit the economy and America as a whole. It will benefit businesses by making more people available for employment. It will help women enter and stay in the workforce as they are usually the ones' whose careers fall apart when the family is unable to afford daycare.
I have come to realize that our educational system is very poor, and it is the poor that are being hurt by it, So I am for putting money into better education with respect to extending free tuition for two-year college degrees. I think this would be beneficial for young adults. It could work to bolster them to go on to higher education. The problem occurs due to K - 12th education not really preparing children to make it through college.
America's children rank low in regard to many other counties. I would like to see public schools become accountable for failure rates.
I also agree that it not a bad idea to have pre-school for children. But again the public schools are the root of the problem. Naturally, there are good public schools but those are in the better communities where money is poured into the schools, and parent involvement. So, the root of the problem is not really free stuff, it's making states accountable for bad school systems. Common sense tells me if children are not well educated in K - 12th, all the free college in the world will not help in any respect.
Dems offer to give free stuff to solve problems, but just never get to the root problem, so the problem is never solved, only becomes worse.
I think the competition that the school of choice presented was a great plan. Exceptional children without funds have the opportunity to get good educations. While public schools are made to compete to keep federal, and mainly state funds coming in.
"Regardless of conservatives cries of socialism, I think that this is a step forward."
We differ here, I am fully opposed to socialism, I prefer making my own way, earning and controlling my earnings. I never mind donating to worthy charities. But am not willing to participate in one for all system.
I am fully disappointed with Biden, he has truly done nothing, and the Government is in flux using the old adage --- Just ignore it, don't give it light and they will forget about it. He is a hot mess, ready to crash and burn. It's actually hard to even watch the man talk, he is frail, and just can't even concentrate on what he is saying. His agenda is just unrealistic in most cases, and little to none will make it through
congress.
The only constant changes, this has been true throughout our history. But one must keep in mind America was conceived and worked well for hundreds of years. This is due to American ideals and values that have worked for the majority of our citizens. The majority thrive under democracy and are more likely happy with this system. Not many would be on board with socialism. I am betting on American's that value the freedoms of democracy.
So no not holding on to buggy whips and horses. But, yes conservatives as a rule hold onto the values and high ideals that have done us so well.I am not as pessimistic as you are regarding the prospects for students offered either 2 year community college or trade school. No matter what, with today's economy and need to be viable this two years cannot hurt, and may get many to focus where perhaps they did not from K-12 as we now deal with adults.
Charter schools and such are elitist and only the well heeled will really benefit from them at tax payers expense.
You're the the one that ask me why blacks vote democratic and I gave you an answer.
Yes America works, primarily for the white and the privileged, if it is to survive it needs to work for others as well. The "majority" you refer to are not to include the vast majority of blacks and minorities who prefer Democrats and vote accordingly.
I don't rule Biden out, he got the stimulus through and has exciting policies and I give him permission to run the Rightwinger down with a Mack truck if they get in his way. Say what you want about Biden, for a senile, addled old man, he is doing pretty well, IMHO.
Republicans are oligarchs and plutocrats at their core, they are only determined to retain the status quo for their privileged few, so they are all dead to me."Charter schools and such are elitist and only the well heeled will really benefit from them at tax payers expense."
Not sure how charter schools work where you are, but they don't work that way here. I have two grandchildren in a charter school specializing in STEM. It costs parents nothing, and it costs the state no more than any other state funded school. The difference is made up by business, not parents and not state.
It is true that only kids with better grades can get in, though, but is that a bad thing? Should those few seats go to the gang members that won't show up? One of the grandchildren did very poorly when the schools closed for COVID, poorly to the point that the parents were advised he would not be invited back the next year if his work and grades did not improve. And that's the way it should be - if the kids do not make use of the opportunity then they should not be there.My son goes to a charter school. Selection was 100% via lottery. He got very lucky.
So we are to disregard the kids who are not so "lucky"? This is suppose to be the substitute for public schools?
Not where I live. It is a substitute for public schools...for kids that can and will take advantage of the opportunity.
I will never forget, years and years ago, when our kid belonged in the "gifted" class. Unfortunately there WAS no gifted class, so they put him to work tutoring the slower kids. We are eliminating the top opportunities for top students in our efforts to pretend that everyone is equal, and we will (and are) paying a price for that.
Just curiosity, but if he does not do well, can he continue there anyway? I actually think they gave my grandson a break, recognizing that the COVID shutdown, and home school with computers and really rotten software, was hurting a lot of kids. He wasn't the only one on the verge of failing a grade.
It's been much better this year, with teachers, parents and kids understanding how to use the system. Last spring, when he was in trouble, it just wasn't working out well for anyone.Yes, I believe he can continue regardless of his grades. That said, there's so much support there to keep kids moving in the right direction and the school is so good in motivating its students, it's hard to imagine kids failing out.
The school is highly desired, but it's also one where the academic rigor is pretty intense.
Question -- Has your son been excepted for return in the fall? My grandson's private school before the pandemic accepted 10 children. All were doing very well enjoying the school. It was wonderful that his school remained open for in-school learning since last fall. What is sad they have been put in limbo for return in the fall. The school is waiting to see what happens with the program. As always, It's all about the funding.
I live in a rich area. The school is fully funded. It's actually part of the larger school district. It's kind of a special school within the district.
Question is: what do the businesses get out of this for their participation? What pound of flesh do they get in return? Kids with mediocre grades are not necessarily without hope to be left in public schools with resources being sucked up by the charters. I am sure that rich kids will always have access regardless of academics, just as sure as you are about gang members.
Poor people are at a disadvantage, maybe with pre-K education, maybe, just maybe, these kids could improve early and get better grades instead of the prevalent view assuming the poor children get poor grades because they do not work hard enough. It is not that simple.The participation by business is mostly in the hopes that they will end up getting well qualified job applicants. Some altruism and I'm sure a tax deduction on what they donate. A tech company will fund a tech oriented school, for instance. I made it plain that there are no state resources being "sucked up" by charters; the state gives the school the same per pupil that other schools get. You may be sure that rich kids will get special handling, but that comes only from your dislike of wealthy people, not from any actual data.
I very highly doubt that sending 3 and 4 year old toddlers to school, with parents that don't care about schooling or about helping them succeed in school, will make any difference at all. It is partly about the kids not working hard enough...but mostly it is about parents don't find value in education, don't help and don't push. It can be about the kids not working or even unable to comprehend, but it is just as much, or more, about the home life and parental support.I understand in your situation the reality of charters not sucking up resources that would be available for public schools may be the case in your circumstance but that is not necessarily the case for the broader application elsewhere.
I have my burr in the saddle about wealthy people, just as you do about poor people, assuming that they would automatically be guilty of not caring about education for their children. As a superlative, maybe the parents don't have the luxury of having a nanny to care for them while they struggle to survive within this economy. So, I think that the availability will make a difference just as it always has for "Richie Rich's" parents. So at this point, we agree to disagree.
Being poor does not necessarily mean that people are lazy and unworthy. People can work hard and still have unfavorable outcomes. This "hard work is it own reward" stuff is a platitude from grade school primers and does not reflect the reality all of the time."This "hard work is it own reward" stuff is a platitude from grade school primers and does not reflect the reality all of the time."
Of course it does not, but at the same time it works often enough to use it as a guideline for life. Work hard, be productive, maintain a solid nuclear family, be educated, be responsible for yourself and your family...these platitudes are what built the country and, for a huge percentage of the population, produces the best life style. Embrace them and your chances of being financially successful (not filthy rich) increase enormously.
Deny them, "Uncle Tom" those that do embrace them, and you are building a culture of financial failure.Damn! I had that same line copied with plans to reply to Cred. You beat me to it, but I'm going to pile on anyway.
That `platitude' about work being its own reward has been a proven human truth since man formed its first society. And for all this time that concept has driven the evolution of humans and their societies to the reality of our current time. Consider all the nearly infinite varieties of societies, through human time, that your platitude has held firm as a driving human concept. Now, why is our current reality so unique that the concept is no longer valid?
What is your thought Cred, that we have reached such an enlightened level of evolution that we can now see how naive the past hundreds of thousands of years of humans were?
GANothing wrong with hard work, GA, it is just that many are engaged in such a way. Remove structural racism and disadvantage from the mix then people can rise and fall based solely on their abilities, hard work and good fortune, just like white folks, yes?
To say that people fail solely because they don't work hard enough is just conservative manna but is only looking at part of the equation.
Why we are not there yet, it has been a noble goal to aspire to toward making this a better society.Hey! I was just speaking to your work platitude thought. I didn't offer any qualifiers, (hard enough?), or sub-topics, (structural racism?). You can hang on to that other stuff, we have done it to death.
GA
Right, it is a guideline for life, but oftentimes it is not enough.
I feel that education starts the minute a child enters school. A good base education is needed to make it in college. If they don't have a basic education, they have little chance of making it through college. So, even if a student is given two free years in college it may not benefit them if they find they are just not up to the challenge of getting passing grades. I think Fed money would be wiser spent in K-12 education, shoring up all the problems that plague public schools. Giving a student free college, when they really don't have enough of an education to make it through the two years would seem a waste of funds. The two free years of Comunity college could just be a solution that blankets a problem, and in the long run, just does not address the root problems. I think free vouchers to attend a two-year college for students that have good enough grades to make it in college would be a better idea, than the large blanket --- free college for all.
Yes, charter schools have been and still are for those that can afford them. However, so many charter schools are taking in children under the school of choice. program. But you must consider many children have been enjoying going to schools that offer more than their local public schools. My grandson's private school started participating to a certain extent and took in 10 students before the pandemic. Those children like my grandson have not missed one day of school since returning last fall. But, now they have been put in limbo, due to Biden being indecisive about the program. They may not be returning next fall. These kids are all great kids and deserve a good education. I think the school of choice is a great program and was really catching on.
I don't agree that America only works for the privileged. II think the opportunity is there for all, some do have to work harder,
but it's there. The Democrats have kept minorities down, they strive to point out they are different, needy... And in fact, they have created and added to the problems of the black people. Look around, black people have come so far, however, these are the folks that Dems have labeled as Uncles, Oreos. Such an obvious ploy. My gosh. If one is in a hole and told you will never get out, what are the chances you will get out?
I don't see Biden has done anything. The stimulus was going through one way or the other. Both parties needed it to pass. And I must admit Biden has outdone the Dems with flighty promises. I don't think he will accomplish much of anything.
I agree that Republicans will fight to at least keep the status quo. They would be foolish to want to lose ground at this point. I think many have realized they need to lean into a bit of Trumpism. They are not blind to his policies, and the fact that so many in the country appreciated his America first ideology."I think free vouchers to attend a two-year college for students that have good enough grades to make it in college would be a better idea, than the large blanket --- free college for all. "
We have already created quite a problem, and poor education, by insisting that schools teach to pass a test rather than teach what is needed, and in a manner needed by students.
Will this suggestion not exacerbate the problem, wherein teachers are far more concerned about students passing a specific test rather than learning a wide range of subjects?It is important that a child gets a good and early foundation in education, you can bet that the wealthy make certain of that for their kids.
Perhaps with 2 years free education beyond high school and subsidized child care more people will be able to prepare to enter the labor market with decent jobs and wages giving them time and resources to dote on their children like rich people do? Just, maybe....
I may have misunderstood the concepts of the charters as something other than white only academies.
-------
"I don't agree that America only works for the privileged. II think the opportunity is there for all, some do have to work harder"
Yeah, in comparison for many of US, it is like being able to leap tall buildings with a single bound......
-------
Free community college is an assist for those who want to better themselves but lack the resources. As a minority, I say that they are assisting in leveling the playing field, attacking structural racial disadvantages and subsequently sticking a thumb in the eye of "white supremacy".
When that progress can be seen as more the rule than the exception, I will go along. When I was a kid, I questioned where were our Rockefellers, Carnegies, and Astors, were the only economic powerhouses and inventive people white? I am still pissed about centuries of possibilities and talent snuffed out by slavery, Jim Crow and de facto discrimination before they could even develop. These programs are part of the remedy, as far as I am concerned.
I think Biden is on track to becoming a better than average President, so far. IMHO.
Conservative views are seen as contrary to practical solutions to problems in our community by the vast majority of us. Who can dare say we cannot trust our own eyes?
-----------
"Look around, black people have come so far,"
Why has the yardstick always have to be how far we have come relative you? We should not have been in this position in the first place.Again I think the added two years of college would benefit any young adult that has a passing mark to qualify. It would be a waste if the person just did not have the academic ability to make it through to that degree. It would be a good program for the Government to pay for. I am all for better education for our children be it better public schools, private or charter schools that accept children through the school of choice type programs.
"Why has the yardstick always have to be how far we have come relative you? We should not have been in this position in the first place."
Realistically there has been a yardstick, this is unfortunate. However, do you think anyone alive today is responsible for salary? Count the centuries that separate you from slavery. Ask yourself why the black community still has such problems, that seem almost unsolvable. Could you have been listening to promises that just never come about?
Over the years it has become hard for me to believe that just due to being poor or having a different skin color stops one from moving forward. Too many blacks are thriving in America today in every field of employment.
How many centuries must pass before slavery can no longer be used as an excuse?
A while back I used the analogy of the holocaust. The jews had nothing, no one even wanted to let them in their counties. They quickly overcame, they thrived. It would seem they worked to solve their own problems, not turning to Government for answers."A while back I used the analogy of the holocaust. The jews had nothing, no one even wanted to let them in their counties. They quickly overcame, they thrived. It would seem they worked to solve their own problems, not turning to Government for answers."
This is a poor example, Sharlee. The Jews prior to holocaust were successful businessmen. The Jews' had a tradition of being well educated and versed long before the Nazis came along. The Third Reich turned them all into victims. But, we cannot compare 3 to 4 centuries of American terrorism against African Americans affecting several generations with the 12 years of Hitler's in power.
Also, while living in Colorado, I had a friend of mine, an elderly German American who was a soldier in the Wehrmacht in 1944. He told me that after the war, Germany was more than generous and made reparations to survivors and plied millions of Deutschmarks on to the Israeli government. He often complained about how much attention the Jews continue to receive many years after the war ended.
Yes, one can move forward, but I don't want to be unethically and unfairly restrained in that movement. With a hand up, the seemingly unsolvable Black problems do have a solution but not under the conservative mindset.
I count only the decades since slavery was abolished and lived during the terror known as Jim Crow.Cred,
You ever hear of something called Holodomor? It was when the Russians starved 8 - 10 million of Ukrainians to death in the 1930s. The world knew what was happening, but did nothing. It is a genocide that has been ignored.
The relatives of Ukrainians who suffered this fate got no compensation, the world ignored it. Russians will tell you the Ukrainians brought in on themselves.
It happened during a time when Ukrainians had the names of their cities and towns changed over to Russian names. Dissenters were put on a train and dropped off in remote parts of Siberia to freeze to death. People caught speaking Ukrainian in public were punished or never heard from again. When the Soviet Union fell in 1991...the records were released and the true horror of what happened was then known.
Ukrainians could only depend on Ukrainians. They got no help from the United States or any other country. They had to "get over it" and move on. To think about it too much would have destroyed the country.
In 1991, after the Ukrainians got their independence, people could freely speak Ukrainian, the names of towns and cities were changed back to Ukrainian. School decreased teaching the Russian language. Russian language newspapers, radio stations and television stations are slowing being eliminated. Russians are enraged. They still want control of Ukraine.
Ukrainians have had to "get over it" and move on to survive. No matter what has happened to Ukrainians, they know they can only depend on themselves. The world will help them if there is a benefit to the world and for no other reason.
There is a day of recognizing Holodomor in the Ukraine and other countries. But, the Russians will never be held accountable for that they did. There will be no payments for the damage they caused.
So, yeah, the Ukrainians have had to "get over it" and move on. It can be done.
Here is some info on Holodmor
"Holodomor (Ukrainian: Голодомо́р, romanized: Holodomór, IPA: [ɦolodoˈmor];[2] derived from морити голодом, moryty holodom, 'to kill by starvation'),[a][3][4][5] also known as the Terror-Famine[6][7][8] and sometimes referred to as the Great Famine,[9] was a famine in Soviet Ukraine from 1932 to 1933 that killed millions of Ukrainians. The term Holodomor emphasises the famine's man-made and intentional aspects such as rejection of outside aid, confiscation of all household foodstuffs and restriction of population movement. As part of the wider Soviet famine of 1932–33 which affected the major grain-producing areas of the country, millions of inhabitants of Ukraine, the majority of whom were ethnic Ukrainians, died of starvation in a peacetime catastrophe unprecedented in the history of Ukraine.[10] Since 2006, the Holodomor has been recognized by Ukraine[11] and 15 other countries as a genocide of the Ukrainian people carried out by the Soviet government.[12]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HolodomorNo, I appreciate you informing me of this incident, Mike. I am sure that such things have occurred across the planet over time.
Again, I don't want to compare pinnapples with hand granades, what am I to expect from a tyrant like Joseph Stalin, compared to the vaunted USA with the rule of law and the universal rights that are to apply to all of its people? Can I reasonably think that I can expect a little more?
Did Black people "bring it on themselves"? That is the gist of conservative arguments.
How are we to "get over it"? I can't get you Conservative types to get over the fact that Trump lost the 2020 election. I can't get conservatives to take down graven images of dishonorable traitors from the Confederacy, considered heroes, from the public square. As they say, it is heritage. I am to "get over it", but none of you ever seem to.
We can't turn back time so our way of "getting over it" is supporting Democrats and the liberal/progressive agenda.
All this talk about rising Black conservatism is nothing more that a carnival side show and shall remain such for a considerable while.
This issue will continue to remain a thorn in America's side, either you can continue to just spray Bactine on it or remove the thorn so as to actually begin the healing process."We can't turn back time so our way of "getting over it" is supporting Democrats and the liberal/progressive agenda."
You left out burning cities and getting rid of police.
I surprise myself that I agree with the two-year community college or trade school part of that plan. I also strongly support school choice. I think you have either, mispoke, or are not as familiar with the subject as possible.
Charter Schools and Private schools are usually, generally, not the same. What little I recall is that Charter school enrollments are filled by application and lottery. I think I have offered this before, but here is the info that made sense to me: Thomas Sowell on Uncommon Knowledge - Charter schools Follow a couple of his links to find comparative areas to challenge, or affirm your opinion of Charter schools as only for the rich and elite.
GAYou have scored a point, I was wrong about charters. I recognize that cities with large Black populations, Oakland and New Orleans are making good use of them.
So, it ok with me as long as:
-----------
You may not discriminate on the basis of race, color, or national origin in determining whether an applicant satisfies any admissions requirements. Students with limited-English proficiency must have the opportunity to meet any appropriate minimum eligibility criterion for admission, consistent with the mission of the charter school. Eligibility criteria must be nondiscriminatory on their face and must be applied in a nondiscriminatory manner. If such criteria have a disparate impact on the basis of race, color, or national origin, then the criteria should be examined to ensure that they are educationally justified and that no alternative criteria exist that would equally serve your goals and have a lesser disparate impact. It is important to understand that disparities alone do not constitute discrimination under Federal law. For more information and technical assistance, contact the OCR office that serves your state.
If your charter school receives funds under the federal Public Charter Schools Program, you must use a lottery to admit students if the charter school is oversubscribed.
----------"Students with limited-English proficiency must have the opportunity to meet any appropriate minimum eligibility criterion for admission"
Would you be OK with limiting charter schools to American citizens?
"Dems offer to give free stuff to solve problems, but just never get to the root problem, so the problem is never solved, only becomes worse."
And there is the root of the problem, for simply giving money away does nothing to solve the root problem.I agree Dems toss blankets over problems and under those blankets the problems fester and become more serious to a point that they can't really be solved.
However, it's the way they keep the poor, poor is it not? And keep them voting due to dependency. It seems a bad circle to caught up in.Yes, it is how they keep the poor, poor.
The question is whether they are doing it intentionally or whether they honestly think a lifetime of charity builds a good citizenry. Hard to believe that such cruelty still exists; that a major portion of our population actively works to enslave millions of people just to remain in power. Of course, it's also hard to believe that people are stupid enough to actually believe that giving a free ride through life develops people to their maximum potential.Believe it or not, I generally agree with this sentiment. Money is not a substitute for training. However, money is better than just ignoring the problem or pretending it doesn't exist or giving all that money to corporate interests instead. If we're going to waste our tax dollars, I prefer we do it on regular people rather than corporations.
So, the Democrat congressman believes he should resign after calling Senator Tim Scott an "oreo." What do the Democrats do? They refuse to accept his resignation. I suppose this tells you all you need to know about how the Democrat party feels about people in power making racial slurs against black men.
"Texas Dem Party Leader Calls Tim Scott Racial Slur, Then Resigns. Texas Dems Won’t Accept His Resignation."
https://www.dailywire.com/news/texas-de … esignationIT very clearly shows the Democrats in Government think there are two standards. One for them, and one for Republicans. My God, could you even imagine if Trump or any Republican representative used such a slur, perhaps calling Obama an Oreo? They would be screaming Impeach! LOL
IMO the MAJORITY of Dems in Washington are not only flagrant hypocrites, they are slime... Pure rotten slime.
Related Discussions
- 37
For Conservatives Only, Is the Democratic Party GOOD for America?
by Grace Marguerite Williams 18 months ago
The Democratic Party have institutionalized socioeconomic policies which are the detriment to America such as welfare & a governmental health program known as Obamacare. Because of the Democratic Party, we have generational welfare which the onus of tax is on the middle...
- 167
Revisionist history
by Onusonus 10 years ago
This is an actual plaque hanging at Northeastern Illinois University in Chicago. The excuses given from the Liberals who made this are a wide stretch of the imagination.
- 172
Has Donald Trump Killed the So-Called Republican Party?
by Scott Belford 7 months ago
In my opinion, yes - the Republican Party no-longer exists today even though Trump followers incorrectly refer to themselves as Republicans.Let me open this discussion with a short tutorial of the Republican Party (now keep in mind, the Party title has no bearing on the Party philosophy and any...
- 26
Lincoln Freed The Slaves. Why do Blacks generally vote Democrat?
by Charles James 18 months ago
I am not an American, but what goes on in the USA is important to the world.Lincoln was a Republican and freed the slaves. One would expect black Americans to generally vote Republican. But they don't.How did this come about?
- 80
Democrats who think for themselves are punished by other Democrats
by Readmikenow 4 years ago
Two Democratic reps under attack by their own party after praising President Trump“If only it were a joke or somehow funny, but it’s not. If you even mention President Trump in a positive manner while serving as a Democrat politician, prepare to be walked off the proverbial pirate ship’s plank and...
- 129
The Hill. Opinion: The 'Scared Majority'.
by Tim Mitchell 46 hours ago
The ‘scared majority’ could deliver a landslide victory for Trump by Douglas MacKinnon, opinion contributor published at The...