The Democrats win Elections because they are Good at Lying and Manipulating People

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 5th, 2013

Politics 101

The Southern Democrats fought to Maintain Slavery, Formed the KKK and Implemented Jim Crowe Laws

Children love candy.  And sweet treats.  They will gorge themselves on them.  And ruin their dinner.  Or sicken themselves so much from these sweet treats that they will vomit.  If parents let them.  But parents don’t.  Sometimes making for some unhappy children.  But parents don’t do this because they are mean.  They do this because it’s best for the children.

Politicians are a lot like parents.  Bad parents.  Because their ‘children’ can vote.  And because they can they will feed them all the sweet treats they so desired.  No matter how bad they are for them.  No matter how bad they are for the country.  Why?  Parents will do what’s best for their children.  While politicians do what’s best for them.

The Southern Democrats fought to maintain slavery.  They formed the KKK following the Civil War and the emancipation of their slaves.  They then implemented Jim Crowe laws to segregate the South.  That were in effect until 1965.  Then the Southern Democrats opposed the Civil Rights Act (1964).  One of the longest serving and most revered Southern Democrats, Robert Byrd, was an Exalted Cyclops in the KKK.  And he filibustered the Civil Rights Act.  Yet at his death the Democrats eulogized him with great awe and reverence.  Despite all of this Democrats say Republicans are the racists.  And blacks overwhelmingly vote Democrat.  Why?

The Democrats destroyed the Black Family with AFDC and Public Housing

Abraham Lincoln was a Republican.  The Republicans won the Civil War.  They maintained martial law in the South following the war to protect the emancipated slaves.  They did not form the KKK.  Nor did any of them serve as the Exalted Cyclops.  They opposed Jim Crowe laws.  And fought for the Civil Rights Act.  So why is it that the general perception is that Republicans are racists while those with a racist past, Democrats, are not?  Because the Democrats are real good at lying and manipulating people.  That’s why.  And they’re bad parents.

One of the greatest political feats in the history of the United States was the turning of blacks against their emancipators and defenders.  And changing their allegiance to the people who once enslaved and oppressed them.  And how did they do this?  With the Great Society.  Full of tasty treats.  Especially for blacks in the poor inner cities.  The candy?  Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC).  And public housing.  Which just destroyed the black family.  As the nanny state replaced the black father.  And gathered these single mothers and their fatherless children in crime ridden public housing of the inner cities.

Without a strong male role model in a child’s life they tend to get in trouble.  Because a single mother cannot discipline children as much as two parents can.  So a fatherless child strays.  They run with others who pull them further into trouble.  And when the state gathered large groups of fatherless children in public housing they ran in gangs.  Creating the crime that made public housing crime ridden.  And because all these kids went to the same schools they took their trouble into the schools.  Leading to lower graduation rates.  Fewer college enrollments.  Higher unemployment.  And lower median incomes.  This is what the Democrats gave blacks with their nanny state.  And they got them dependent on the nanny state.  So they continued to vote Democrat.  Even though voting Democrat was the worst thing blacks could have done.  Based on what Democrats have done to the black family.

If You raise the Price of the McDonald’s Burger there is no Cost Savings by eating the McDonald’s Burger

Today minimum wage workers across the country were demanding that the government raise the minimum wage to about twice what it is.  To $15/hour.  For these entry level jobs.  The Democrats support this.  For it’s more candy for their children.  Even though it’s not good for them.  For these are not careers.  Nor should they be.  These are entry-level jobs for people with no skills.  So they can gain some rudimentary skills to help them with their next step up their career ladder.  People don’t go to medical school and then work at McDonald’s.  No, they go to medical school explicitly so they don’t have to work a minimum wage job.  And those who don’t have to work a minimum wage job all of their life have a better life.  Both monetarily.  And personally.  With the satisfaction of doing something that gives their life greater meaning.

Of course if they raise the minimum wage to $15/hour minimum wage workers will lose their jobs.  For if you raise the labor rate prices will rise.  And sales will fall.  And with fewer sales businesses will lay off some of their minimum wage workers.  And the Democrats know this.  They’ve worked hard to get tariff protection to protect their union brethren in the automotive industry.  Because those higher wages raised the price of cars.  And reduced sales.  Hence the tariff protect6ion.  To force people to pay more for their cars.  By forcing the price of the competition higher.  So they can continue to sell cars built with their more costly union labor.  So Democrats know higher labor costs raise prices and reduce sales.  So why do they want a higher minimum wage?

People buy fast food because of the value.  They get a decent bang for the buck.  But if you reduce that bang people will buy less.  For if McDonald’s costs as much as a delicious burger at, say, Red Robin, which burger do you think the people will buy?  They’re going to buy the Red Robin burger.  For if you raise the price of the McDonald’s burger there is no cost savings by eating the McDonald’s burger.  So they won’t.  The Democrats know this, too.  But they also know by giving their children this candy they can get their vote.  It will make their children’s lives worse in the long run but that’s okay.  As long as they can get their vote now.  For that’s all that is important.  Not the lives they destroy by being bad parents.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Perceived Racism helps Democrats win Elections

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 11th, 2013

Politics 101

The Media labeled George Zimmerman a ‘White’ Hispanic to create a Racial Component where there was None

On February 26, 2012, 28-year old ‘white’ Hispanic George Zimmerman shot and killed 17-year old black Trayvon Martin in Sanford in central Florida.  Zimmerman said it was self-defense.  Others are saying he stalked Martin because he was black.  It was the news media that called Zimmerman a ‘white’ Hispanic.  To make this a black-white racial issue.  Some cable channels are carrying the trial of George Zimmerman live.  Because they have made it a big story.  The trial is about over.  And they will soon turn it over to the jury.  Six women.  To decide Zimmerman’s fate.  While the city prepares for ‘Rodney King’ like rioting should the jury acquit Zimmerman.

On April 14th, 2012, a mob of 30 or more black youths brutally attack two white journalists from The Virginian-Pilot.  Which appeared to be more of a black-white racial issue than George Zimmerman.  A member of the neighborhood watch following a stranger in the neighborhood (Martin was living there temporarily).  Whereas the journalists from The Virginian-Pilot were sitting at a red light when someone threw a rock at their car.  Presumably because they were white.  When the male journalist got out of the car a black mob descended on him.  Making it look like an assault based solely on race.  Yet few reported this assault.  Even the journalists’ own paper.  Those who reluctantly reported on it played down the racial component.

So why is the apparently less racially motivated assault (the Zimmerman shooting of Martin) treated more like a racial hate crime while the apparently more racially motivated assault (the journalists from The Virginian-Pilot) is treated less like a racially motivated hate crime?  Why did the media label George Zimmerman a ‘white’ Hispanic?  Making a racial component where there was none?  While ignoring a racial component where there is one?  Well, because some believe that white-on-black crime is still a big problem in this country.  So much so that we can ignore instances of black-on-white crime.  To right past wrongs.  And end lingering racism in this country.

In 2011 the Majority of Homicide Victims AND Homicide Offenders were Black

Alright, what does the data say?  Is there still lingering racism in this country?  This nation that elected a black president?  Twice?  Are there still past wrongs to right?  Well, let’s begin with some homicide statistics.  Pulled from the CDC (see Table 34 (page 2 of 4). Death rates for homicide, by sex, race, Hispanic origin, and age: United States, selected years 1950–2010).  Pulling the number of deaths for white and black males per 100,000 resident population we see that, in fact, blacks suffer a far higher homicide rate.

Black White Homicide Victims 1950-2010

So maybe there is something to say about lingering racism.  And past wrongs to right.  Until you dig a little deeper into the data, that is.  According to the FBI (see Expanded Homicide Data Table 3) there were 14,548 homicides in 2011.  Now, one would expect if there is lingering racism in this country that the higher number of black victims of homicide would correspond to a high number of white murderers.  But according to the FBI that’s not the case.  If you add up the number of black and white murderers in 2011 it totals 10,215.  Approximately 70% of all homicides.  So the lion’s share of homicides are committed by blacks and whites.  But whites were only responsible for 46.3% of those homicides.  While blacks were responsible for 53.7% of them.

So blacks committed the majority of homicides in 2011.  To put that into perspective you have to consider what percentage of the population is black.  Approximately 13%.  So you have about 13% of all Americans committing more than half of all homicides.   Which means the high homicide rate of blacks is not due to whites.  It’s due to blacks.  Suggesting that we don’t have lingering racism in the country.  Like the media is trying to say with the Zimmerman-Martin trial.  What we really have is a serious black-on-black crime problem.

A High Profile Case like the Zimmerman Trial can do Wonders to Create Actual Racism

While the Zimmerman trial is receiving full media coverage the brutal attack of The Virginian-Pilot journalists disappears into obscurity.  Because the racial component is wrong.  Just as it is wrong for the high homicide rates in Chicago.  So the media doesn’t cover it.  Unlike the Zimmerman trial.

In the first 6 months of this year there were 259 homicides in Chicago.  And 201 (77.6%) of these homicide victims were black.  While they only make up 33% of the population of the city.  In fact, not only were the majority of homicide victims black.  According to the Chicago Tribune (see Homicide numbers reveal stark contrast) the majority of murderers were black, too.  Which is why the media isn’t interested in the epidemic of crime in Chicago.  Especially the gun crime in Chicago.  Because the racial component is wrong.

So why is the media obsessed with white-on-black crime but ignores black-on-white and black-on-black crime?  Because white-on-black crime is politically useful.  Over 90% of blacks voted for President Obama.  As Democrats get the black vote.  Because of this perception of lingering racism.  And the perception that white Republicans are racists.  A high profile case like the Zimmerman trial can do wonders to create actual racism.  To drive a wedge between the races.  And further paint whites like the ‘white’ Hispanic George Zimmerman as racists.  Which resonates not only with blacks.  But with young people.  Those first-time voters.  And those college kids.  Who believe the United States is a racist country.  And vote Democrat to end that racism.  Which they believe they will do if they keep Republicans out of office.  And reporting on the epidemic of black-on-black crime in Chicago or blacks assaulting white journalists in Virginia do nothing to advance that political agenda.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Conservative (kən-sûr’və-tĭv), n., One who adheres to the political philosophy of conservatism.

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 20th, 2011

Politics 101

Conservatives tend to be Responsible Adults with Jobs in the Private Sector who Pay Taxes Instead of Consuming Them

What is a conservative?  For a start, it’s probably not what you’ve heard.

There is this perception that conservatives are just a bunch of old white guys.  Bankers.  Corporate fat cats.  And out of touch Republicans (in the U.S., at least).  The perception continues that they are rich, hate the poor and are both closeted racists.  And open racists.  These perceptions are wrong.

Conservatives tend to be grownups.  Responsible adults.  Parents.  And they typically have jobs.  Real jobs.  In the private sector.  They don’t consume tax dollars.  They pay tax dollars.  And they tend to pay their own way.  Who want to raise their children their way.  And live their lives their way.  Without government telling them what’s best for them.

Conservatives believe in Limited Government, the Rule of Law, Individual Liberty and Personal Responsibility

Conservatives believe in limited government.  And they respect the Constitution.  They don’t believe it’s a living document.  Open to broad interpretation.  Or that it is merely a suggestion.  They don’t believe the courts should be used to make law that can’t be legislated in Congress.  The courts interpret law; they don’t write it.  Per the Constitution.  And they don’t like radical, populist change.  That are all theory.  With no track record of success.  They know their history.  Their heritage.  Their traditions.  And are very cautious when it comes to changing the old ways.  Especially when the old ways have been proven by time.

Conservatives believe in the Rule of Law.  Individual liberty.  And personal responsibility.  Where everybody plays by the same set of rules.  Regardless of race, color, sex, creed, etc.  And cheaters shouldn’t prosper.  They favor true capitalism.  And abhor crony capitalism.  Which isn’t capitalism.  But government favoritism.

They favor the Austrian School of economics over the tax and spend Keynesian school.  They believe in sound money and would lean towards reinstating the gold standard.  So government can’t inflate the currency at will to pay for more Keynesian spending.  They also believe that free trade benefits the consumer.  By providing more competition, lower prices and higher quality.

Conservatives typically Go to Church, Believe in the Golden Rule and Love & Respect their Fellow Man

Conservatives tend to be older on average than liberals.  That’s because they have grown up.  And left the ignorant ways of their youth behind.  They have worked and paid taxes.  Been part of the free market economy.  They know how wealth and jobs are created.  And have learned how to think for themselves.

They carefully budget their money.  Scrimp and save to raise a family.  Which is why they are very sensitive to taxes.  They struggled to get by.  And sacrificed for their children.  So they can have a better life.  So they oppose higher taxes now.  And higher taxes later.  For their children.  And their grandchildren.

But they don’t hate the poor.  Or those in need.  Conservatives typically go to church.  Believe in the Golden Rule.  And love and respect their fellow man.  Which is why conservatives are among the most charitable of people.  Many tithe their church.  Donate their time in their communities.  And make great neighbors.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

LESSONS LEARNED #61: “The political elite has always exploited blacks.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 14th, 2011

The New World leaves old Prejudices in the Old World

Americans hated Catholics.  And why not?  Most Americans were British.  In the 18th century.  When Protestant Great Britain was forever at war with Catholic France.  Since the Reformation, it’s what Protestants and Catholics did.  Hated each other.  You just did it.  Eventually you would learn why.  But by then you were already hating.

Also, in the 18th century, slavery was part of normal life.  As it had been for centuries.  Slavery was often the misfortune of a conquered people.  Part of the social strata.  Or simply an economic tool.  Such as used in Mercantilism.  As European powers established colonies, they needed bodies to exploit the raw material and send it back to the mother country.  And the ‘godless’ people they were able to buy from African slave traders were perfect.  These ‘savages’ were little more than animals.  Struggling to live in a hostile environment.  They were better off in slavery.  In the New World they would have food and shelter.  And their masters would protect them from their hostile environment.  The way they saw it, they were doing them a favor.  Or so went the prevailing thought of the day.

During the Revolutionary War, George Washington commanded an army made up from all the colonies.  They were mostly Protestant.  But it also included Catholics.  So he had to tone down the anti-Catholic sentiment that was pretty pervasive among many of these British Americans.  And then there was a march into Canada by General Benedict Arnold.  To get the Catholic Canadians (once a French colony) to join the American cause.  (They passed on the offer.)  And so it was in the Army that the American cause transcended religion.  For it was in the army where the Protestant fought side by side with the Catholic.  As well as the free black.  Who yearned for that liberty, too, that the Americans were fighting for.  Giving Washington pause for thought.  Protestant.  Catholic.  Black.  White.  They were all people.  Americans.  This thing they were fighting for was greater than the individual colonies.  The New World would in fact be a new world.  The prejudices of the past would be left in the Old World.  And he learned that in the Army.  Where America was truly born. 

The Three Fifths Compromise Empowers the Planter Elite

It was many of these Army veterans that championed religious freedom.  And the abolitionist movements.  But the pull of the Deep South was strong.  Their planter elite, though a minority of the population, dominated political power.  Much like the landed aristocracy of feudal Europe.  They had money, power and influence.  Their view of the Revolutionary War was different than George Washington’s.  They weren’t looking to build anything greater.  No.  They just wanted to get rid of the British.  And go back to the way things were.

With the war won, that’s exactly what a lot of people did.  Go back to the way things were.  There were problems, though.  War debt, for one.  And a lack of unanimous consent.  The Confederation Congress required a unanimous vote to do anything.  Which was a rare thing.  The sectional interests were just too strong.  So in 1787, they gathered in Philadelphia to write a new constitution.  And create a new nation.  It wasn’t easy.  During the ratification process, some holdouts agreed to ratify if they added a Bill of RightsJames Madison agreed to this and worked tirelessly in the first Congress to deliver on this promise.  The issue of slavery?  That was a different story.

The Deep South would join only if the subject of slavery was off the table.  They agreed.  Tabled it for 20 years.  Give the South time to figure out how to end slavery.  Then they settled on issues of taxation and representation.  The majority of the southern population were slaves.  If they couldn’t count them to determine representation in the new government, the Deep South would have no say in the new federal government.  So they agreed on the Three Fifths Compromise.  They would count slaves as 3/5 a person.  It was a high price to pay for compromise.  For it gave the planter elite of the Deep South a disproportionate vote in Congress.  And in the Electoral College.  Which meant that this minority in the Deep South determined much of American policy until the Civil War.  Thanks to a large black population that couldn’t vote.

Liberal San Francisco:  White, Right and Out of Sight

San Francisco is an interesting town.  They don’t come much more liberal.  Or whiter.  Liberals are lucky if they’re 20% of the national population.  But a good chunk of that 20% apparently lives in San Francisco.  Nancy Pelosi coasted to reelection in 2010 with 80% of the vote even though her national approval numbers were horrible.  Her favorable ratings barely broke 10%.  In other words, the American people were sick of her and her far left liberal agenda.  They voted a bunch of her cronies out of the House of Representatives, and her from the Speakership, transferring control from the Democrats to the Republicans for the first time in a long time.  Her views are definitely not America’s views.  But they’re clearly San Francisco’s views.

Of course, many of the good people of San Francisco think that the other 80% of Americans are just too dumb to know better.  We exasperate them.  For they are the enlightened people.  The intelligentsia.  The caring.  And they were the first to drive hybrids.  Even South Park ridiculed them for that.  Calling San Francisco the smuggest place in America.  Where they like the smell of their own farts.  And they may very well like to smell their own farts.  But you know what they don’t like?  Black people (see Blacks and Republicans by Thomas Sowell posted 3/15/2011 on National Review).

The black population of San Francisco is less than half of what it was in 1970, and it fell another 19 percent in the past decade…

Blacks are being forced out of San Francisco — and out of other communities on the San Francisco peninsula — by high housing prices…

The black population in three adjacent counties on the San Francisco peninsula is just under 3 percent of the total population in the 39 communities in those counties.

It so happens that these are counties where voters and the officials they elect are virtually all liberal Democrats. You might be hard pressed to find similarly one-sided conservative Republican communities where blacks are such small percentages of the population.

So, in other words, rich liberals love to have black people vote for them.  But they don’t want to live anywhere near them.

AFDC and Abortion and the Black Family

America changed in the 1970s.  The sexual revolution was in full force.  Women’s liberation.  Abortion and birth control.  And all the feel-good programs of LBJ’s Great Society to end poverty and racial injustice.  The liberals were changing America.  The black community.  And the neighborhoods of San Francisco.

Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) caused an epidemic in children being born out of wedlock.  Because the government was paying single women per baby they had.  So they kept having babies.  Because an inexperienced young man couldn’t get a job that would match the generosity of the government.  And it was a lot easier than being a working single-mom.  So kids grew up without a father.  Spent a lot of time on the streets.  Getting into trouble.  This destroyed families in poor neighborhoods.  Which also tended to be black neighborhoods.  It was the worst of unintended consequences.  But it sure did make the recipient of these benefits life-long Democrats.  Because if you have no skills and a large family to raise, what else are you going to do but depend on those government benefits?

Of course, liberal policies weren’t all about having babies.  They were also helping to provide a lot of abortions, too.  To empower women.  To fully liberate women and make them equals in the workplace.  Because they could now do anything a man could do.  Except pee while standing up.  But they could fool around like a man.  And not have to worry about the consequences.  Just like a man.  So with abortion, birth control and a sexual revolution going on, you can guess what a lot of people were doing.  Having consequence-free fun.  If you know what I mean.  But much like AFDC, this liberation appears to have hit the black population especially hard.  A black woman is three-times as likely as a white woman to get an abortion.  And it is the only demographic where abortions exceed live births. 

Abortion is a very controversial subject with data that is often politicized.  Also, there may be other extenuating circumstances that result in these numbers.  But it shows a trend.  Liberal policies have unintended consequences.  And blacks have suffered a disproportional share of these consequences. 

The Democrat Party is the Party of Slavery and Institutionalized Discrimination

So what does this tell us about rich liberals?  First of all, they’re mostly white.  They claim that they are not the racists yet their actions indicate otherwise (San Francisco is mostly liberal and mostly white).  Their views are a minority view.  The 2010 midterm elections clearly showed that.  Yet they wield some of the greatest political power.  How do they do that?  By pandering.  To the labor unions.  The public sector unions.  The teachers.  That usual bunch that benefits by liberal policies and liberal spending.  And, of course, blacks.

When you look at the history, the Democrats haven’t been all that kind to black America.  It was the Southern Democrats who did their best to perpetuate the institution of slavery.  It was the Southern Democrats that institutionalized discrimination in the South following the Civil War.  Yes, the Civil Rights Act was passed by the Johnson administration but it was the Republicans in the House and Senate that made that possible.  The Democrats had majorities in both houses but about a third of their members were against it.  Whereas only a fifth of the Republicans were against it.  In the final House vote, all the Southern Democrats needed was to get 37% of the Republicans to vote against it to stop its passage.  Instead, 80% of Republicans voted in favor of it.  And then, of course, there’s AFDC.  Thomas Sowell blames this (and the liberal welfare state) for destroying the black family.  And the black abortion stats would probably be called genocide in another country.  Some even call it that here.

Which brings us back to the teachers.  Because when you look at these numbers, it is clear that liberal policies have not been good to black families.  But the teachers are in tight with the liberals.  I mean, with their generous pay and benefit packages they get without the taxpayer having a say in their contract negotiations, why wouldn’t they?  The government takes care of them and they take care of government.  They emphasize multiculturalism, fairness and progressive thought.  And downplay history.  The Founding Fathers play minor roles in today’s textbooks.  But students today can all tell us that the Founding Fathers owned slaves.  But they seem to forget the part about Abraham Lincoln, the Great Emancipator, being a Republican.  And that the freed blacks voted for Republicans to protect themselves from racist Southern Democrats.  

Meet the New World.  Same as the Old World.

And then along comes Barack Obama.  The ideal liberal candidate.  And first black presidential candidate.  Because of our public education there is a lot of white guilt over slavery.  So a lot of white America would probably vote for Obama to assuage that guilt.  Which included a large part of those crucial independent voters.  Things were looking up.  But could he deliver the black vote?  He graduated from Harvard Law School.  Columbia University.  He’s an Ivy League guy.  Very professorial.  He could lecture the people.  So well that it offended some.  The Reverend Jesse Jackson said then candidate Obama talked down to black people.  He didn’t like that in the least.  Even said that he wanted to “cut his nuts off.”  So it wasn’t a sure thing.  The black vote.

Of course, Obama won that election.  He took 53% of the vote to McCain‘s 46%.  And the black vote?  All but 4% voted for Obama.  No one gets 96% of the vote.  Unless you’re a dictator in a third world country.  With blacks making up approximately 12% of the U.S. population, it is clear that the black vote determined the election.  For if the black vote followed the same percentage break down of the general vote, McCain would have won the election.

So here we are, some 150 years after the Civil War and the black population is still being exploited by the political elite.  The planter elite maintained power for half a century thanks to the Three Fifth Compromise.  And liberal Democrats today use the liberal welfare state to make as many blacks as possible dependent on government.  Use their control over the public school system to hide the failure of their policies.  Their destruction of the black family.  And their racist past.  To maintain their political power.  And minority rule.  Some things never change.

Meet the New World.  Same as the Old World.  Sadly.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,