Musing over the Clinton contradiction and the outcome of the DemoMarxist gathering last week in the city which gave birth to the Constitutional Republic of the United States, which is hardly the “city of brotherly love” anymore; well, as far as the Bernie-Clintonistas were concerned, anyway. So let’s see, we should:
- forget about 150 years of Democrat Party support for slavery, Jim Crow and overt racism because that’s passe`;
- make all “white” people alive today (including children of later European immigrants, Asians, “white” Hispanics, et al, who had nothing whatsoever to do with this appalling history) feel guilty and personally responsible for the inequalities still existing with African-Americans;
- join BLM in supporting anti-police rallies, and look the other way when blacks kill other blacks in the hellholes DemoMarxist policies have helped produce; and…
- label Republicans and every one of the GOP candidates racist at every opportunity!
That it then?
How about the percentage of black children born to unwed mothers in 1960 compared with today? What is the one thing that is most likely to lead to poor educational outcomes and prison time? Well, we have the policies of the Democrats to thank for the fact that 80% of black children today are born to unwed mothers. You have the Democrats to thank for putting black communities in situations where black youth are significantly more likely to end up in prison. Face the facts, they have used blacks for votes and have doled out table scraps so that they’ll continue to vote DemoMarxist. They don’t care about black communities as people, only that they continue to put them in power. Sounds simplistic I grant, but you know it’s the truth. That ‘paragon of virtue’ LBJ made sure of that.
As for those “vile, racist Republicans”, let’s have a gentle look at past history that the DemoMarxists have scrubbed from school history lessons, shall we?
In 1956, as vice president, Richard Nixon went up to Harlem to declare, “America can’t afford the cost of segregation.” The following year, Nixon got a personal letter from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., thanking him for helping to persuade the Senate to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Nixon also went on to support the civil rights acts of 1964, 1965, and 1968.
In the 1966 campaign, Nixon blasted Dixiecrats (as they were then known) “seeking to squeeze the last ounces of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice.” Nixon also called out segregationist candidates in 1966 calling on LBJ, Hubert Humphrey, and Bobby Kennedy to join him in repudiating them. None of them did. Humphrey, an arm around Lester Maddox, called him a “good Democrat.” And so were they all – good Democrats. While Adlai Stevenson chose John Sparkman in the 1952 race, Nixon in 1968 chose Spiro Agnew, the first governor south of the Mason Dixon Line to enact an open-housing law.
In Nixon’s presidency, the civil rights enforcement budget rose 800%. Record numbers of blacks were appointed to federal office. An Office of Minority Business Enterprise was created. SBA loans to minorities soared 1,000%. Aid to black colleges doubled. Nixon won the South not because he agreed with them on civil rights – he never did – but because he shared the patriotic values of the South and its antipathy to liberal hypocrisy. When LBJ left office, 10% of Southern schools were desegregated. When Nixon left, the figure had risen to 70%.
Richard Nixon desegregated the Southern schools, something you won’t learn in today’s public schools. The DemoMarxist Party is quite simply the party of re-writing history. No surprise then, to have the aging, chronically-ill Bubba Clinton doing just that in his faltering last stand before a national assembly. Lying through his teeth.
As John Daniel Davidson puts it, in closing out the piece coming up from The Federalist:
“But Clinton wants it both ways. She denounced Trump’s pessimism, saying, “He’s taken the Republican Party a long way from ‘morning in America,’ to midnight in America,” referencing the famous line from Reagan’s 1984 campaign ad. But her appeals to “join us” were followed by a litany of liberal policies – trade protectionism, minimum wage increases, cracking down on corporate profits and the “super rich,” equal pay for women, student debt forgiveness. It was a list of Sanders talking points, none of which were much of an appeal to moderates or independents—and certainly not to Republicans who don’t want to vote for Trump”.
HILLARY CLINTON’S HISTORIC NIGHT MARRED BY CONTRADICTION AND DISSENT
PHILADELPHIA – If you watched the final night of the Democratic Convention on television at home or at a watch party, it might have seemed like everything went pretty well for Hillary Clinton and the Democrats. She gave a decent speech, hit all the points she need to hit, there were some strong speeches earlier in the night, and despite some disruptions from protesters earlier in the week the convention ended up being more or less the media spectacle party officials hoped it would be.
But not everything was quite as it seemed. Inside the convention hall, hundreds of Bernie Sanders delegates wearing florescent yellow T-shirts and seated in small clusters within their state sections kept causing trouble.
During a speech by General John Allen—who was the first to mention ISIS or terrorism—they began chanting, “No more war!” But it was quickly drowned out by vastly superior numbers of Hillary supporters chanting, “U-S-A!” After Allen’s speech, retired U.S. Army Captain (and Medal of Honor recipient) Florent Groberg spoke, and again, cries of “No more war!” rose up in scattered pockets only to be suppressed by chants of “U-S-A!”
This game went on all night. When Hillary took the stage, the clusters of florescent-clad Sanders delegates defiantly held aloft their Bernie signs and generally abstained from clapping at Clinton’s applause lines. When Clinton thanked Sanders and said to his supporters, “I’ve heard you. Your cause is our cause,” they started in with chants of, “Ber-nee! Ber-nee!”—as they’d been doing all week.
Continues in The Federalist