Hncu: Fill & Download for Free

I am not a historian and not a politician so these ideas are rough, will evolve and are musings about Race and Politics, and the branding of Republicans as Racists. First I am right of center but not a card carrying Republican. Second I am talking about Washington Dems and Republicans as a Party, not you! But I take exception to some of the hatred from the left I often see all the while saying that their party is not the Racist or intolerant ones. Here is what I have been thinking about!History:To be fair I am arguing some history more than just belief. My opinion of racism is that both parties have contributed to it, but that people have tried to shift history of some of the blame, and I wont just buy it wholesale. As far as the Washington agenda the simplistic version of some of what I believe is Dems want votes at all costs and will destroy us with open borders, or the Republicans may destroy us because Economy and things like mining Trumps ALL environmental concerns. The farther left are nuts and are breaking our bank with healthcare, and want open borders and the farther right just need religion as an excuse to roll back scientific fact to hearsay. If they can get you to believe that evolution is a “theory” or that the earth is Flat then people can buy that Republicans are the seed of racism, and I say Bullshit.Now maybe the party that often is to my right, but I am often closest to, has and had racists in it, and maybe the party has shifted since the days of Abraham Lincoln but I would say there is a fair amount of Republicans that have their values more based more in the precepts of Lincoln than the Media and the Washington Dems would have you believe. After all hard to keep your voters if they think your side is the racist ones. Just a starting thought It wasn’t until 2015 that these “the so called non racist party” even had a dialogue to change the name of their annual dinner from a Jefferson/Jackson which has not been changed in all states. So the largest annual fundraiser that was based on Presidents that arguably were some of the worst racists they didn’t even think to talk about it until 2015 and some states have keep the name. Now I am not a fan of re writing history like doping statues but if your Party has a fundraiser and its icons are Jackson and Jefferson then I say maybe your not so far removed from your racist roots and have not really changed your spots. Jefferson grappled with slavery in his writings throughout his life arguably more than the Democrats spent talking about the name change so he gets a Afor effort? Nah. Andrew Jackson only being behind the Native American Trail of Tears one of the arguably most racist things Any President has ever done, and his supporters founded the Democratic party.“INSKEEP: Is this the fundamental question? Can a political party that gets a huge share of the black vote that relies on other minority groups for a huge part of its vote still be properly represented by the image of someone like Andrew Jackson? Is that the fundamental question?MANCINI: That's part of the question, absolutely. The reason why we're having this conversation is because as a white woman, I think it's easier for me to say, I accept all aspects of Andrew Jackson. We can't as white women put ourselves in the shoes of a Native American now or an African-American now because our life experiences are very different. And so that's why when we have this conversation, we want to have it with everyone who has a stake in the Democratic Party. But again, I have to tell you that the majority of responses that I've been getting from all members of the party have been let's acknowledge it. Thanks for having this conversation. But let's keep the name, and let's keep it as a reminder of who we are, where we came from, and how far we have come.GREENE: That's Mary Mancini, chair of the Democratic Party of Tennessee, speaking with our colleague Steve Inskeep.” https://www.npr.org/…/democrats-consider-whether-to-rename-…To be fair part of the problem is labels, though we often need them to explain things they make it easy to sell and believe things about a massive group of people based on the shifts of a few. Found the following statement rather germane to subject. “It’s useful to remember that conservativism, corporatism, liberalism, leftism, libertarianism…….all these “isms”…..have relatively clear (not totally, but relatively) definitions. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have any reason to adhere to one “ism” over another, and their policies shift (and have ALWAYS shifted) based on what they need to do to win votes. Bill Clinton caused a mini-revolution among his own White House staff when he signed welfare reform, who viewed doing so as liberal heresy. Then, the supposed conservative, George Bush, signs two massive new government programs, Med Part D and NCLB, causing conservative/libertarian think tanks like Cato to condemn him as early as 2003. Obama has come under consistent criticism from his progressive-leftist supporters as being too corporatist/conservative on certain issues like the ACA. “ Khadijah Bint Muhammad, Professional Data Scientist.https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-say-Democrats-and-Repub…My buddy believes the 4 million Democrats that owned slaves swapped parties with the Republicans that did not own any. Let me be clear a year before the civil war not a single Republican owned a slave. Now lets say some switched… possible even probable but if you try to tell me even half of the Dems and half of the Republicans switched ideologies I will have to call you deluded and you will have to show me some proof other than some crap on Huff Post or something created as history in liberal colleges in the last 20 years. Lets look at some verifiable undisputed facts. And well start after the civil war to show a History and an agenda that has not changed. Example of this only ONE Dixicrat switched sides, Stom Thurman. And he arguably switched because he did not want to be in the party he was. Name one, one, one out of 4 million Democrats of of prominence that changed sides. Also if you switch sides by your self is it a movement? Hardly. Dinesh D’Souza https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDAQRVYBEooThe same year Lincoln was assassinated (the same man most Republicans still look up to, odd if they are all racist) a (I wont say them as a whole) DNC Democrat formed the KKK, Nathan Bedford Forest. The Republicans wanted to establish the Freedmen’s Bureau to help both poor white people after the civil war but also slaves, built things like schools and was opposed by Washington Dems including the Democratic President LBJ. https://www.history.com/topi…/black-history/freedmens-bureauI see a lot of talk on both sides about the founding of Black Colleges, cant find enough proof, so this is wishful thinking on both sides since the proof seems to indicate Quaker philanthropists, African Americans and northern religions mission societies helped form the back bone of Black Colleges. Now as far as funding whether for votes or for more altruistic reasons Nixon in 1969 more than 1 Billion went into black schools over the next decade, and President Reagan in 1982 established the White House Initiative and by 1986 had increased all-in federal funding by 15%. Hard to be the part of racism if you believe in education I would think. During the Obama administration changes in Grants lead to a 10% drop in HNCU enrollment from 2010-2014 that did not start rebounding until 2016. https://www.politico.com/…/trump-black-colleges-universitie…Presidents and presidential bids:“These Negroes, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they've got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now, we've got to do something about this; we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”~~ President Lyndon B. JohnsonI stooped at the end but what is maybe the most salient, democratic policies today how they affect cities and states like Detroit, California where the majority has been Democrat or left for more than 10-20 years. So one of the points I was going to argue is regardless of what the history books say or the media or your professor a bit of the proof is in the pudding. And since not only did my parents move out of Cali, have friends still in Cali and the golden state is hemorrhaging 20k or so people OUT a year I would say policies have failed. And that they may not be personally racist but are as systemic in their affect as any of the Democratic history has been on the poor which arguably is Blacks and Latinos predominantly in most states. And don't get me started on open borders or immigration over 10% of what a community can handle since much over 10% and cultures not only do not mix but there are usually not enough jobs as proof would be Merkel and Germany. Have not scrubbed or read in detail the stuff at the end, and those are ideas in their infancy.Liberal welfare stateSouthern Strategy completely Republican or helped internally by Democrats. This one concerns me, though it still does not speak for the whole party this as far as history whether covert by Dems or by the Republicans themselves was a tactical/political cluster for Republicans?Current policies, effects, states and cities run by Washington style Dems:California broke, medical for all, open borders, highest crime cities traditionally democrat like Detroit.Detroit:https://www.investors.com/…/how-decades-of-democratic-rule…/California:https://www.foxnews.com/…/tom-del-beccaro-warns-california-…