Texas should be pissed that the nation has now taken over Juneteenth. It is a Texas holiday, not a national one. It is not the day slavery ended and blacks gained their independence. That was done 2 years earlier.
General Granger didn’t deliver any real news in Galveston. You can’t tell me that Texas was unaware of the Emancipation Proclamation before Granger showed up. Texas was just giving the finger to Washington and doing their own thing like they always have.
You can’t tell me that at least one Texan did not cross over the river into Louisiana to visit Cousin Boudreaux during those 2 years and come back and tell his Texas friends that he had seen the strangest thing…no slaves at the plantation. He had to have noticed. Hell…Cousin. Boudreaux would have been seen out in the fields working by himself. What a surprise to see that.
Can you imagine the look on General Granger’s face when he stepped off the ship in Galveston and actually saw slavery was still going on. I wish I could have seen his WTF look when it happened. I bet he was the person to coin the phrase “Houston, we have a problem”!
So yea, let’s not change history just for a summer holiday. The end of slavery should be celebrated, but let’s celebrate the correct date. Leave true history alone.
***I have to give credit to my son, Jack Neil, for this thought. He is a chip off of the old block. He does stand up in Austin. For some reasons, the liberal audience did not see the humor in this. Go figure.***
I want to thank Lori “ Beetlejuice” Lightfoot for disproving the ridiculous notion that black people cannot be racist. This notion has been presented to me and others as a convenient excuse for many black people to say and act as they want and actually think they can defend racist actions by saying that they can’t be racist.
Just a few days ago, Lightfoot made the announcement that she would not be doing interviews with white journalists. Of course, she wasn’t that blunt, but announcing that she would only speak to POC journalists says the same thing. This is done in celebrating the 2nd anniversary of her being the mayor of Chicago, or Kill-Town, as I call it.
My, how racist of her. There is nothing finer in a person’s character than refusing to interact with a person based solely on the color of their skin. That says about all you need to know about a person.
It is especially hypocritical of a person who rallies about diversity and inclusion, don’t you think? She seems to be upset about the whiteness (racist?) And maleness (sexist?) of the Chicago press coverage of city politics. I guess the war on white men is alive and well.
Beetlejuice is known for being the first openly gay, black woman mayor of Chicago. Well, I want to be the first openly straight, old, white male to call bullshit on her move. And it truly is ignorant and a bad PR stunt.
You can’t squash white men. You can’t make us feel guilty for being who we are. I have no problem saying that I am proud to be a white man. People like Beetlejuice can’t make me feel guilty for being who I am.
Maybe she should spend some time trying to do something positive towards race and use her position to unify and not divide. Maybe she should spend her days not looking at color like I spend my days.
Maybe she should stop being so racist. It is nothing for which she should be proud.
Well, it looks like Tim Tebow may be returning to the NFL if the Jacksonville Jaguars sign him to a rumored contract. Good for Tebow…he deserves it.
And it looks like Colin Kaepernick still has not found a team to sign with as a QB. Good for Kap…he deserves it.
And it appears that many progressives are up in arms and screaming that this is unfair and proves some illegitimate point that they have never been able to make. Good for them…they deserve it as well.
One difference between Tebow and Kap is that Tebow is doing this at a new position from the QB role he played all his career. I wonder if Kap would sign as a TE or any other position. Rumor has it that he has made it clear he would not even sign as a backup QB. Someone here overvalued themselves, and that is not a good thing for an unemployed football player.
The biggest difference is that Tebow will never bring a negative circus to the clubhouse or field as Kap would. Can you imagine the disruptive force brought on a team if Kap were to ever get signed?
Hell, even his non-workout for all the NFL teams that were set up just for Kap was a circus sideshow.
That is because he pulled out and had his own workout 30 minutes before the NFL workout that was set up. I guess someone told him he was in the driver’s seat and had leverage.
As I have said before, Kap lacks the talent that it would take to overcome all the negatives he would bring with him. He carries too much baggage and would be a huge distraction. You would almost have to be Tom Brady to make that baggage worth bringing on board.
The problem is that not enough people will say that out loud. Too many want to make excuses for Kap not getting signed. Now, these excuses are being questioned because they do not fit right with Tebow’s signing. Some are looking like hypocrites here because their reasons do not line up.
Kaepernick gets what he deserves. He pissed off half the country and the other half do not have the means to get him to work in the NFL. He insulted the country, and Americans when he knelt for the flag. It really is that simple.
Tebow knelt for God. Kap knelt against our country. Tebow will be on the field. Kap will not.
US Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) hit it out of the park last night in his response to Joe Biden’s “joke” of an address to part of Congress.
Sen. Scott brought up many positive thoughts, called out the Liberals and Progressives and correctly said that this is not a racist country.
What should have been seen as a positive statement by Scott was met with taunting and bullying. After all, who does Tim Scott think he is? He is a black man in America. As such, he has a line to toe and seems to think he has the freedom to make his own path in this country… what nerve.
The Left and the so-called leaders of the minority community work very hard to set a narrative and draw a line for their people to follow. Who is Tim Scott to come along and muck it up? Someone needs to tell little Timmy he is pissing people off and setting himself up for problems inside his community.
Tim Scott grew up poor and without a father around. By his own admission, he almost did not make it through school. Through hard work and a mother and grandparents who believed in him he became a successful small businessman and US Senator. He is a great example of what you can do despite starting out with little.
He should be a role model in his community. Instead, like so many other successful black Americans, he is disrespected and hated by the Left and many other black people.
“Uncle Tim”…”Uncle Tom”…”House Kneegrow”…”N-word”…I am sure he has heard them all, and they do it so openly and unapologetically. I have never understood why their own community shuns their success.
We need more people like Tim Scott and fewer people like those that call him names for stepping out of line. We need people in the black community who will tell these “leaders” and haters to sit down and shut the hell up.
For anyone wondering, I have seen it plenty of times firsthand. I have lived it with people close to me. It is difficult for many in the community to go “against the grain” of their own people because they know what will be coming their way.
And in case you don’t know… I will not take a seat, stay in my lane OR stay out of your business. Especially when your business affects my own. And yes, I have been told to do all three of those things.
It is time that we all stood WITH and spoke up FOR people like Senator Tim Scott.
Congratulations to Texas for gaining 2 additional electoral votes and congressional seats today. That is a big gain for the Conservative state. However, if you think the Left had a target on your back to turn the state red earlier, well the target is even bigger now. They will do anything they must do to make sure they get those 40 votes in 2024 and those 2 congressional seats.
No voter ID
No absentee voting requirements
No early voting date restriction
No mail-in ballot eligibility rules
No cleansing of voter rolls
No signature matching of mail-in ballots
No preventing dead people from voting
No transparent vote tallying
You vote-suppressing racists better get ready for the fight to keep the state red. Put your hoods on and get to work.
[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.9.4″ _module_preset=”default” da_is_popup=”off” da_exit_intent=”off” da_has_close=”on” da_alt_close=”off” da_dark_close=”off” da_not_modal=”on” da_is_singular=”off” da_with_loader=”off” da_has_shadow=”on” da_disable_devices=”off|off|off”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.9.4″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.9.4″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.9.4″ _module_preset=”default” hover_enabled=”0″ text_text_color=”#000000″ sticky_enabled=”0″]This all sounds so familiar. The police shoot and kill a POC and the protests start before a single fact gets out. Then the protestors end up with egg on their face. And let’s not forget the media plays it up to their own way.
This time it was in Columbus, Ohio. A 15-year-old girl gets shot and killed by a policeman. As one man asked why the policeman shot her he told the police “she was just a kid.”
Another kid was shot and killed by the police. And for what? As the NY Times says, she was “threatening two other girls with a knife.”
So let’s all gather at the scene and then take it downtown for a big protest. Let’s make sure we do it before we know anything. Just another victim of deadly police tactics. Say her name… say her name Right?
Well, not exactly. Not when you see the body-cam video the police released very quickly to get a few facts out.
There is no way the police knew this was a child. Nothing about her “look” says she was that young. She was as big, if not bigger, than the adults who were standing around.
The police arrive and almost immediately this girl is seen pushing one girl to the ground and immediately going after the second girl. And she went after her with a knife. She was actively attempting to stab the other girl WITH A KNIFE. It was not a threat, as the NY Times reports. It was being attempted when the policeman shot her. He actually did his job by yelling at the girl to stop and then shooting her to protect the other girl from getting killed.
Yes, the girl was shot by a policeman who was saving the life of the girl, a black girl, who she was trying to stab with a knife. It was not just a threat. If the officer had not shot her, the other girl could have been killed. They are there to protect.
And the “man” who was screaming that she was a child? Instead of protecting the girl who was going to get stabbed, he was busy kicking the girl who had been pushed down in the head. Yea, don’t stop the attacker with the knife. Instead, attack one of the girls she was after. Yea, that is not a “man.” And he shouldn’t be yelling like the girl that was shot was a victim.
But let’s immediately protest the shooting instead of thanking the policeman who saved the other girl’s life. Because this plays into the anti-cop agenda just like the others. This girl was killed due to her action, not the actions of the cop. Soon they will be “saying her name” also. And I do not care to hear it. [/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]
The MSM coverage of the Adam Toledo shooting in Chicago has been a great example of how the media continue to push the anti-police narrative.
Adam was a 13 yearold boy who was shot and killed by a policeman in Chicago on March 29 this year. The mainstream media seems to be okay portraying Toledo as just another “13 year-old” and a “7th grader.”
Although both of those things are true, I seriously doubt he was your run-of-the-mill 13 yearold.
Toledo was running the streets of west Chicago, which is a dangerous part of town known for its gang violence. He was on the streets at 2:30 in the morning… on a weekday… with a 21 year old felon.
Not exactly the time of day your run-of-the-mill 7th grader is out of the house. He was in possession of a gun with gunpowder residue on his hands from having shot the gun.
Now, unless they do some kind of legal hunting in the middle of neighborhoods in Chicago in the early morning, this is not exactly a run-of-the-mill situation for a 7th grader. That is because he apparently is not run-of-the-mill.
But let’s try to portray him that way since he was shot and killed and we need another martyr in life.
They want to report that the Chicago police simply shot a 13 year old with his hands in the air. Taking one still shot from the policeman’s body-camera you could easily make that agenda-driven point if you want.
And the MSM indeed wants to do that. Forget that the slow-motion video shows that Toledo had a gun in his hand less than a second before he was shot. Forget that the gun was found behind the fence where Toledo was standing at its opening. Forget that the policeman had nowhere to take cover when the gun was exposed to him. Just report the shooting as a policeman simply shooting an “unarmed 13 year-old” with his “hands in the air.”
Those headlines wouldn’t create any animosity towards the police, would they? Those headlines would not be a cause for rioting in Chicago, would they? No way!!
I will not call Adam Toledo a thug because I do not know much about him. But the fact he was running a bad neighborhood at 2:30 on a weekday morning with a 21 year old felon, shooting a handgun and running from the police DOES make me WANT to call him a thug. But that would be racist so I will avoid using that word. But I certainly will not refer to him as just another 13 year old 7th grader. I just can’t do that.
It is indeed sad that he lost his life. But when you run from the police after firing a weapon and try to ditch the weapon there is a great chance you will get shot and killed. The odds are not in your favor.
As hated as this comment is from the people who hate the police, if Adam had done what the police said from the beginning he would probably still be with us.
The big question is – why does the MSM continue to push false narratives. What makes them so ignorant that they just can’t report the truth?
Joy Reid said “with this 13-year-old child, they didn’t wait 10 seconds before opening up on him like it was a drive-by. He didn’t wait to assess what the child was doing.” What an ignorant comment. No, they didn’t wait 10 seconds. When they see a weapon and can’t take cover they shouldn’t wait ten seconds. They should take out the threat like they are trained to do. Maybe Joy has missed the recent string of stories of police officers who have been shot lately.
Lawrence O’Donnell led his show with the story. It was all about poor Adam. You know, the unarmed 13 year old with his hands in the air who just got blown away from a mean old policeman. He showed the video. But for some reason left out the part showing the gun and somehow forgot to mention it in his report.
In both examples of this typical MSM reporting we see they are setting the country up for another good burning.
President George H. W. Bush was known for both “read my lips, no new taxes” as well as his call for a “kinder, gentler nation” in his 1988 acceptance speech. The former lead to his defeat to Clinton, and the latter to his election as President. Republicans need to remember this lesson now that we are again the minority party at all levels of the federal government. The midterm elections usually don’t favor the President’s party, and presenting alternative, reasoned proposals to the democrat’s goals will go a long way towards flipping the House and Senate back to Republican control.
Looking at the 2016 coalition that brought Trump to power gives the clearest path forward to recapturing the House and Senate. In 2016 it was a combination of traditional conservatives along with individuals who were socially conservative but fiscally moderate that voted for Trump.
That coalition is easy to recreate but will require an alternative economic message to create the wedge in the DemocraAc Party voting bloc.
In order to understand how an alternative economic message can be formulated, we have to first understand the dollar is an unusual currency.
Not ALL traditional economic theories will apply. Secondly, the mechanics of how the Federal Reserve actually adds and removes money from the economy are important.
The dollar is unusual in that it is not tied to another currency or precious metal for valuation. In a traditional economic system, the currency is tied to either another country’s currency or to gold for valuation. However, the dollar has no such linkage. This means that in order for taxation to occur, the Federal Reserve has to release money into the economy, and then the money is circulated and taxed on the back end.
The Federal Reserve has two main tools to address the economy. One is interest rate adjustments and the other is quantitive easing or tightening.
Interest rates are a straightforward process. If interest rates rise fewer people take out loans and money is effectively locked up in banks rather than in circulation. If interest rates drop more people take advantage of the low-interest rates and take out loans to participate in economic activity. However, the back half of the loan process is how willing are banks to make loans. This is where quantitive easing and tightening come into play.
Banks are required to have adequate assets on hand to make sure another economic meltdown does not occur. The Federal Reserve adds and removes money from banks via quantitative easing and tightening.
This works by the Federal Reserve “borrowing” or “lending” to partner banks as overnight loans. If the Federal Reserve wants to inject more money into the economy they “borrow” from the partner banks at the overnight rate and the interest is what’s added into the economy. If they want to remove money from the economy they “loan” to the partner banks and the interest from the partner banks is the money taken out of the economy. This effectively makes the partner banks middlemen to the economic policy.
Republicans have two easy arguments to make to counter popular Democratic talking points that would create a wedge in the voting bloc when the democrats reject the compromise. The first is a counteroffer on minimum wage, and the second is an alternative to the democratic party argument for a universal minimum income.
Making an offer that is reasonable, but the Democrats cannot accept because it takes the issue away is one of the easiest ways to recreate the 2016 coalition that brought Trump to power.
With minimum wage we simply reframe the argument to work shouldn’t lead to poverty, and then offer a new minimum wage that is tied to the poverty line. The 2021 poverty line for a family of three is $21,720. A reasonable counterargument to the “Fight for Fifteen” is to offer $10.56; the poverty line for a family of three divided by 2,080 hours in a work year.
They also argue that the minimum wage should be tied to the poverty line for a family of three and automatically adjust every year. The progressive wing of the Democrat Party won’t accept the compromise, and the moderate wing can’t accept the compromise as it removes minimum wage as an argument for future elections.
In refusing the compromise the Democratic Party alienates moderates and makes them more likely to vote for Republican candidates in 2022. If the compromise is accepted then we see a minimum wage increase in line with past increases. Either way, the Republicans win because it is the Republican plan that has prevailed, and the socially conservative fiscally moderate voter moves back into the big tent.
Proposing a counteroffer to the Democrat’s cry for a basic monthly income also helps create a wedge in the Democratic voting bloc and diffuses an issue that drives progressives to the polls. While Republicans may not like the policy decision of a $3,600 (or $3,000 depending on age) child credit for income taxation the policy decision has already occurred.
Republicans benefit by making a policy proposal that accepts the current reality and uses the credit in a more economically efficient manner. Obamacare has established that the IRS is capable of administering a tax credit on a monthly basis. The three stimulus distributions have established the IRS is capable of handling direct deposits into an individual’s bank accounts.
Allowing individuals to take 1/12th of the child tax credit as a monthly credit injects the money into the economy faster and allows it to circulate and generate tax income quicker than simply holding it as a credit for tax Ame. A monthly $300 distribution is small enough that it is likely to be spent rather than saved and create the actual economic activity desired. The monthly $300 distribution is also large enough that it ensures a family of three will not starve. Again, this is a situation that the Democrats will not accept, but it also is something that will create pressure on the moderate voter to vote Republican rather than Democrat.
Making these two proposals places enormous pressure on the Democrat party going forward. This shows that Republicans are actively trying to compromise and govern rather than simply resist and point out where the Democrats policies fail. By presenting an alternative plan and being rejected the Republicans make a strong argument that they should be given the opportunity to control the legislative branches of government and eliminates the potential for the Biden Administration to do lasting harm to the economy.
As a resident of the most competitive county in Texas in both 2016 and 2018- Jefferson County- we that live here are routinely exposed to arguments both red and blue. With both a large minority population and a tradition of strong industrial labor unions, the Democratic base here is long entrenched. Yet, the local Republican party here is also alive and well, having won local offices here only recently for the first time in over a century. Today, the county judge is a Republican. We’re used to competitive elections here in Southeast Texas… just not statewide.
Former presidential candidate Howard Dean said in a speech back in 2008, “Texas is ready to turn blue.” Today, if the assessments of our national media are correct, Dean’s words would seem to be prophetic, even if delayed. In 2020, a year immune to no small amount of wonders, Texas enters its first election cycle in over four decades as a battleground state.
The implications are clear. President Trump cannot win reelection without Texas. With 38 Electoral Votes, it’s the biggest state available to the GOP, and the virtual equivalent of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin combined. Had he somehow lost Texas in 2016, Trump would have lost the Electoral College with only 268 electors. Conversely, a blue Texas would virtually ensure a Democratic lock on the White House for the foreseeable future. This fact is why former V.P. Biden and the national Democrats have invested so heavily in Texas; if not this year, then for an election cycle in the near future.
Texas as a battleground also has great impact on the national popular vote outcome, as well. In 2004, then-President Bush counted on the margin he received out of Texas (1.7 million votes) to mostly offset the popular vote losses in New York (1.3M) and California (1.2M). Not coincidentally, this is also the last time a Republican carried the national popular vote. Today, the Democratic margins in California and New York have grown, while the GOP margin in Texas has been mostly neutralized. This phenomenon is responsible for the divided outcome possible in our election system; Republicans are capable of winning the White House while still losing the national popular vote (an irrelevant statistic, as it’s not the metric by which the candidates make their campaign decisions). Trump was elected in 2016 while losing the popular vote by 2.6%; it’s possible he could win this year while still losing the national popular vote by even four or five points.
Let’s take a closer look at the premise that Texas is actually ready to turn blue, and evaluate the possibility based on the raw data. Is it possible, or even likely, that Joe Biden can defeat Donald Trump in this once-secure Republican stronghold?
I’ll briefly present two counter-arguments to this premise:
The high turnout experienced this year in Texas is equivocal, pointing to no clear beneficiary.
The level of turnout required for the Democratic candidate to win is higher than experts suppose.
First, the record turnout to this point in the state does not clearly benefit either party.
Media outlets like NBC and Politico have attempted to lay out strategies by which Texas could actually turn blue. Virtually all of them include massive turnout surges in the counties with the largest Democratic margins: Dallas, Harris, Austin, Bexar, & El Paso. These “Big Five” counties combined for a Democratic margin of approximately 713,000 votes in 2016; this amount surged to roughly 890,000. Political experts point to the heavy increase in turnout in 2020 as a sign that the margins in these counties are set to explode once again, and potentially upset the balance of power in the state.
The biggest flaw in this assumption is that it’s inconclusive who necessarily- if anyone- is benefitting from this surge in turnout. Unlike some other states, Texas does not keep records of the vote by party; in other words, tracking the identity of voters by their party affiliation. In no state is the actual vote cast ever known by anyone other than the voter; but in several states, particularly those with closed primary systems, it’s possible to track base voters by their historical primary participation. You can only participate in one party’s primary election, and you may safely assume this information is watched like a hawk. These voters are considered part of a candidate’s “base”, though rapid changes in party affiliation (as seen recently in the seismic shift among blue-collar former Democrats that supported Trump in 2016) make such movement hard to detect.
Therefore, it’s really impossible to know who is voting. Are more Democrats turning out than ever to turn Donald Trump out of office? Alternatively, are more Republicans showing up at the polls, dissatisfied with the lockdown requirements of the last several months that have brought this state’s booming economic growth to a net standstill this year? Is it a balance of the two, so that the net impact on the vote becomes a wash- effectively yielding the same result as four years ago? Democrats point to some polls showing Trump only leading Biden within the margin of error, but most Americans (should) have already learned the reliability of public polling. Conversely, Republicans point to turnout in rural areas, which- though small individually- are virtually all painted a deep shade of red and add up fast in a state as big as Texas.
As an example, just to the north of Jefferson County (mostly urban/suburban) lies rural Hardin County. Hardin County had roughly 20,000 voters participate in the last two election cycles, but yielded 86% of its vote to the Republican at the top of the ticket. Per Hardin County Republican Chairman Kent Batman, as of this point (the last day of early voting) voter turnout in Hardin County had met or exceeded the total 2016 vote, prior of course to any Election Day vote being cast. This result is being similarly reflected in rural counties across the Lone Star State. If this trend is in any way proportional to its historical results, then a Republican surge could be in progress, featuring margins that would be difficult for even the liberal urban centers of the state to absorb.
Which leads us to point #2: Democrats will need greater margins out of its urban centers than they anticipate.
Political observers speculate that the 2018 Senate race, in which Republican Ted Cruz narrowly avoided defeat by a scant (for Texas) 2.6% margin, indicates a strong blue trend for the state. In reality, however, off-year wave elections are rarely good data points for predicting the next cycle. Democratic pundits would have you believe that the six-point drop in percentage margin from 2016 (Trump won by 9.0%) is attributable to demographic and ideological gains from two years prior. However, such logic fails to compensate for the adjustment in the electorate (a.k.a. turn-out). Donald Trump won in a year where the electorate was D+2; i.e. nationally, Democrats held a two-point identification edge over Republicans. In 2018, in a “blue wave” election with dramatically reduced Republican turn-out, the electorate was D+8. In short, the six-point spread between the two elections was totally attributable to the particular electorate unique to each race, not to any fundamental changes in the Texas electorate. In both years, Texas remained an R+11 state (eleven points more Republican than the national average).
That does not mean that Texas will continue to be an R+11 state. The point, however, is that Texas Republicans had that much margin to spare prior to the 2020 race. Trump vote in 2016 was over 4.68 million, which was 800 thousand more than Clinton. Cruz dropped to 4.26M in an off-year wave election, but was still 215K better than O’Rourke; who ran a strong race for a Texas Democrat- but still barely broke 4 million votes.
While roughly 9 million voters cast a ballot in 2016, estimated vote in Texas is projected to be close to 12 million. So the new vote is there for a potential Democratic win- but it depends greatly on how the new vote is distributed between the parties. The problem for Texas Democrats is this: to erase the margin Trump ran up in 2016, Democrats would have to have a 60-40 advantage in the new vote (2.15M of 3.5M new voters). Currently, about 3.89 million votes have been cast in the “Big Five” counties. With about 75% of the expected statewide vote already in, this means about another 1.3 million votes in these counties are still to be cast. Given the roughly 60-40 margins expected for the Democrat in these particular counties, that yields an additional Democratic margin of about 260,000 votes.
Not 800,000. Democrats have this strange habit of assuming that every outstanding ballot belongs to them.
That’s not even compensating for increased turnout in Republican areas, which should favor Trump at a 3:1 clip; and which we can already point to, in fact, occurring.
Yes, it would be enough- ignoring any increase in Republican turnout- to narrowly overcome the margin of the 2018 election; one featuring an energized Democratic electorate, low turnout among Republicans, and occurring in a midterm. That’s not what we have here in 2020.
Should a blue Democratic wave overtake the nation, it’s quite possible that it could leave a puddle in the Lone Star State. However, in the event of a close election where the contest is decided by a handful of swing states, it’s highly unlikely Texas would yield a decisive blow against President Trump. Pursuing this end would be a poor electoral strategy by the Biden campaign, but one he may feel necessary should Biden’s prospects continue to diminish in the Upper Midwest. In short, Biden can’t make up 800,000 votes in Texas while simultaneously losing Michigan and Pennsylvania. U.S. elections don’t work like that. Biden wins Texas only while first sweeping the industrial Midwest, plus Florida.
Trump, meanwhile, can rest assured his 38 electors from Texas will be there, as expected when Congress counts them. Quite possibly, with another 65 from Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida.
You better believe it! There has been oppression in America since it’s birth. The king of England oppressed the colonists with taxes and Tariffs.
The King of England even oppressed some of the neighboring Native Americans into allegiance to the crown.
The fledgling new government would also come to oppress the Native Americans, along with anyone who stood in the way of westward expansion.
The industrialists who built the first American infrastructure also oppressed anyone who stood in their way, including their own employees.
For those with the means, oppression has always been the way to profit. The Bible speaks favorably of indentured servitude as a means for a man or family to prosper. Bible doctrine requires that slaves be treated with compassion, even requiring the owners to allow their slaves to obey the Sabbath day of rest.
The slavery that came to America was quite the opposite. These slave owners would fight a very bloody war to keep their oppression intact. Even Kings of England and some of the European countries would help these oppressors with funding by trade, ships and weapons.
After the Civil War, the militant arm of the Democrat Party, the KKK would continue to oppress the former slaves through acts of violence on a more personal level. It was so bad that in the 1890’s African Americans elected to the Senate or Congress on the Republican side of the aisle, would have to arm themselves out of fear of being assassinated on the House floor.
It would take the Democrats one hundred years to nominate, run, and elect their first African American to the U.S. Senate – in 1993. Carol Moseley Braun. But no one calls that racist.
One of the longest serving Senators, Robert Byrd, was a grand wizard of the KKK, but the African American supporters didn’t appear to care.
Why?
In the 1920’s the Democrats came up with “a New Deal.” If they could not own them, they would buy their vote with a new social program called welfare. African Americans would sell their independence and their vote cheap. All the while, the Democrats continued to deny the African Americans their civil rights. In 1957, Democratic U.S. Senator Strom Thurmond staged the longest filibuster in American history (24 hours plus) to deny passage of a civil rights act.
Finally, by intimidating his own party members, one the most corrupt politicians to hold the office of President, Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson, got the votes needed to pass the Civil Rights Acts of 1964, though his motive was only the African American vote for the Democrat Party. Still the African American community supported the Democrat party.
With the African American vote bought and paid for with national treasure, the Democrat Party next sought the Latino vote. This would be a much tougher sell than the African American vote. After all, the Latinos were fleeing corrupt socialist governments. The Democrats are still working on breaking the immigration laws of America for the Latino vote, so I’ll have to get back to you on that.
The abortion mills have murdered tens of millions of African American babies. So, how can African Americans claim “Black Lives Matter”? If black lives mattered, why isn’t the BLM rioting, burning and looting the abortion mills protected by the Democrat Party?
Why isn’t the BLM labeled a racist movement for elevating one race over all others?
The answer is because the Democrat Party loves the chaos provided by the BLM and the Republican Party is too spineless to speak the truth for fear of being labeled a racist.
African Americans are known to oppress other African Americans for not thinking or acting as the status quo demands. Now America has another oppressor of a different stripe. They call themselves ANTIFA.
ANTIFA, anti-Fascist, is a contradiction in terms for these folks. These thugs are identical to the Brown Shirts that helped bring Hitler to power through racism, public beatings, murder, intimidation etc. Once Hitler was in power, they were murdered to make way for the even more oppressive Gestapo, that would take over the German police forces. Is this what they intend by calling for the American police forces to be defunded?
It’s well known that outside forces are funding most of the chaos seen in recent weeks. Like Hitler’s Brown Shirts, these morons are too blinded by greed to see they are being used. Apparently, they are so stupid as to try and take on the American gun owner, which even the Japanese military hesitated to do during World War 2.
So where does all of this political oppression begin? It begins in the local elections where candidates are now not required to declare a political party affiliation. We may as well be throwing darts at the voting booth to select a candidate. But make no mistake, each candidate has a political agenda. And yes, America has always had its oppression.
by Michael Neil
