The NAACP say people like me are GOP Mouthpiece

IslandmixUSA

Dragon Singh
What ever happen to freedom of speech


The same NAACP official who called South Carolina Republican senator Tim Scott a ventriloquist’s “dummy” is at it again. On Tuesday, Reverend William Barber, director of the North Carolina NAACP, described minorities who support conservative causes “mouthpieces.”

“They frantically seek out people of color to become mouthpieces for their particular agenda,” Barber said on a conference call.

He also addressed the Scott comments, which he had previously defended. He said his remarks had “nothing to do with color,” because they were intended to apply to anyone who supported Republican platforms, such as South Carolina governor Nikki Haley and North Carolina governor Pat McCrory: “The issue is: Who are you a mouthpiece for when you fight the implementation of the Affordable Care Act?” he said.

Scott has dismissed Barber’s comments as “baseless and meaningless rhetoric.” “Reverend Barber will remind me and others of what not to do,” he added.
 

Hello BKLYN

Searching For Answers
i have no problem with people of any background supporting any cause they want...
but dont fall for or become mouthpieces for and start regurgitating stuff from biased media outlets, because they often skew stories, report half stories, use tactics to discredit or reduce the voice of the oppositoin... its dishonest biased journalism... And i say that for both sides, both liberal and "conservative" media outlets... Was watching Rachel Maddow the other night and the way she wouldnt give her guests an opportunity to complete sentences was fukkin annoying...
Same way they do on Fox news how they overtalk or cut off any guest with opposing views from any republican agenda...
 
J

Juan Dan

Guest
nice tred
dumbass strng blk people of himix don't have much of an opinion though
lol
 

Oneshot

where de crix
Now Obeezy got the stars telling you to sign up for MyRA... save in US government debt..
 

IslandmixUSA

Dragon Singh
NAACP = National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
it should be changed to NAADP = National Association for the Advancement of the Democratic Party
 

dedetriniking

Registered User
Everyone is entitled to their opinion so long as its not some mental thing where they prefer not be on this side when most whites are on that side. There are some people like that you know.

Dragon is just a little misguided but i'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
 

bktrini305

Registered User
Ok so you have the southern strategy

Exclusive: Lee Atwater

give it a couple years to get worked out and then you have Ronald Reagan

Opposed Voting Rights Act of 1965 as “humiliating to South”

Reagan never supported the use of federal power to provide blacks with civil rights. He opposed the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965. Reagan said in 1980 that the Voting Rights Act had been “humiliating to the South.” While he made political points with white southerners on this issue, he was sensitive to any suggestion that his stands on civil rights issues were politically or racially motivated, and he typically reacted to such criticisms as attacks on his personal integrity.
Source: The Role of a Lifetime, by Lou Cannon, p. 520 , Jul 2, 1991
Ronald Reagan on Civil Rights

OpEd: Allied with South Africa despite a million killings

In southern Africa, where the estimates are that about a million and a half people were killed by South African depredations in the countries surrounding South Africa (forget what was happening inside South Africa). In Mozambique and Angola, about a million and a half people were killed and over $60 billion of damage were caused, just in the Reagan years alone, 1980 to 1988.
Those are the years of what was called "constructive engagement," at a time when South Africa was a valued ally and Nelson Mandela's African National Congress was an officially designated terrorist organization, in fact worse than that. The State Department listed it as one of the "more notorious terrorist groups" in the world. That was in 1988, when South Africa was still, of course, a valued ally after its actions in the preceding eight years.
Source: Power and Terror, by Noam Chomsky, p. 56-57&110 , May 25, 2002
Ronald Reagan on Foreign Policy

then you ffwd to GHWB

George Bush Sr. on Civil Rights

1964: Advocated states' rights over Civil Rights Act

When Pres. Johnson signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, George wrapped himself in the mantle of states' rights, which was conservative code for no federal intervention on racial matters. "The new civil rights act was passed to protect 14% of the people," George said. "I'm also worried about the other 86%."
To some, Bush's opposition to the civil rights bill put him in league with segregationists. Like them, George would "hate to see" the Constitution "trampled on in the process of trying to solve Civil Rights problems."
He later expressed regret at running so far to the right in 1964, yet he ran against civil rights again in 1966, and when he did vote for open housing in 1968, he seemed to do so in spite of himself--because black GIs expected it, not because it was the right thing to do.
He wrote in 1968, "I'll vote for the bill on final passage--have political misgivings--also constitutional--it won't solve much. But in my heart I know you're right on the symbolism of open housing."
Source: The Family, by Kitty Kelley, p.214-7 & 242 , Sep 14, 2004
1959 home carried a restrictive racial covenant

Moving from Midland to Houston in the summer of 1959 required logistical planning by the Bushes because they were transporting a business, building a house, and expecting a baby.
The Bushes' new home at 5525 Briar Drive in the Broad Oaks housing development of Houston was built to their specifications on 1.2 acres and, although legally unenforceable, carried a restrictive racial covenant that stated: "No part of the property in the said Addition shall ever be sold, leased, or rented to, or occupied by any person other than of the Caucasian race, except in the servants' quarters."
These restrictive covenants, attached to both the properties that the Bushes bought and sold between 1955 and 1966, were common in Texas, although ruled illegal by the US Supreme Court in 1948. As late as 1986, the Justice Department had to force the county clerk in Houston to include a disclaimer on every certified real-estate record that such racial covenants were "invalid and unenforceable under Federal Law."
Source: The Family, by Kitty Kelley, p.193 , Sep 14, 2004
1963: Civil Rights Bill violates constitutional rights

In June 1963, the President sent to Congress the most far-reaching civil rights bill in the country's history. To demonstrate a mandate for the legislation, Martin Luther King led 250,000 people to Washington that summer with the incandescent rhetoric of his "I Have a Dream" speech.
Campaigning in Texas, George Bush ignored King and vigorously opposed Pres. Kennedy and his civil rights bill at every turn. "I am against the Civil Rights bill on the grounds that it transcends civil rights and violates the constitutional rights of all the people," Bush said. "Job opportunity, education and fair play will help alleviate inequities. Sweeping federal legislation will fail. I am opposed to the public accommodation section. I still favor the problem being handled by moral persuasion at the local level."
Determined to campaign in each of Texas's 247 counties, George inveighed against the civil rights bill at every stop. "I think most Texans share my opposition to this legislation," Bush said.
Source: The Family, by Kitty Kelley, p.211 , Sep 14, 2004
1990: vetoed Civil Rights Act & voter registration bill

Ralph Neas, the executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, felt the sting of Bush's retaliation after the President vetoed the Civil Rights Act of 1990, which was intended to prohibit discrimination in employment. "I was very critical of the President for that veto and for calling the bill a quota bill simply to pander to the right wing," said Neas. "I said he was acting beneath the dignity of his office."
Despite Bush's rhetoric about voter outreach, he had vetoed passage of a voter-registration program that could have added millions of minority voters to the election rolls, and now he had vetoed a civil rights act passed by overwhelming majorities in both houses of Congress. "The White House is declaring open war on civil rights," said Neas.
The President became so angry at Neas that he momentarily forgot his name and startled reporters by blasting him as "that.that white guy who attacked me on this quota bill." Neas was barred from all future bill signings.
Source: The Family, by Kitty Kelley, p.478-479 , Sep 14, 2004
Signed 1991 Voting Rights Act after 1990 veto

The president had already vetoed the Civil Rights Act of 1990, claiming it was a "quota bill." Determined not to veto any more civil rights legislation, the President directed his White House counsel to work with the Senate and House Democrats to reach a bipartisan agreement on the 1991 Civil Rights Act.
After a bitter and anguished struggle, a compromise was finally reached, and the Civil Rights Act of 1991 was sent to the President's desk for his signature. On the eve of the bill signing, Boyden Gray again emerged as the hangman. He circulated a presidential order to all federal agencies directing them to comply with provisions that would end a quarter century's worth of affirmative action and hiring guidelines benefiting women and minorities.
The President signed the Civil Rights Act of 1991 on November 21, 1991, in a Rose Garden ceremony that was overshadowed by the intent of Boyden Gray's presidential directive.
Source: The Family, by Kitty Kelley, p.515-517 , Sep 14, 2004
My question is how is it that those issues don't trump your capitalism? Particularly now as the entire political spectrum has shifted to the right and most Democratic politicians are in line with Ronald Reagan and most Republicans are either too old NOT to be Paula Deen racist or young and insane Tea Partiers that I know you can't possibly support.
 

Oneshot

where de crix
the foe of my foe is my friend. the RNC has to shift towards the black / latino middle class in order to save itself. Democrats are coming into flavours, the center right chaps, and the leftists. The leftists will never vote RNC, and the center right are chipping away at the RNC base. Obama made headways esp amongst women.

The RNC shares a lot of ideals with typical urban youth. They dont believe in government help, they dont believe in high taxes, and they dont believe in subsidizing failing schools, and they believe in strong families.

The tea party is not all that crazy, especially if you look at the Farm bill. The Farm bill was linked to food stamps, why? Pure politics. The farmers could their sweat deals, and the increased benefits in Food assitance were rollback.
 

Lucianite

Registered User
nice tred
dumbass strng blk people of himix don't have much of an opinion though
lol

Yo Carlo dumb azz u are like a plucking broken record ...... Every post you say this l.....so post your opinion an elevate the conversation or stfu dumb azz
 
J

Juan Dan

Guest


Yo Carlo dumb azz u are like a plucking broken record ...... Every post you say this l.....so post your opinion an elevate the conversation or stfu dumb azz
cause I am polite, a gentleman
YOU and the rest of fools like yourself with your bullshit strng blk exist in the catton fields of halabama lezzbian mentality should be the ones making wonderful threads and discussing how you elevated your mentality from being a follower democcratt etc etc stereotypical mentality
I am brillllyant and retired cause I was offended at the hoodrattery and lowclassness of many of ya
so you will just find me making a thread a week or just writing a one post

I am waiting for the wonderful threads from silly minded fukkaz like yourself
can you do it?
can younot be a stereotypical blk strng hoorat?

try to
cause that there be the issue
the world has passed your bullshit "strng blk" mentality and you exist in a state/stage of confusion
all that to say
YOU and the scissors lovaz said I am dumb and should leave himix
hence being the wonderful person Boozy is, he did just that and hardly posts

hence its now left up to you and the rest of trashs to make wonderful threads
you cant
so what does that say about you dumbasses?
have fun dumbass
 

Lucianite

Registered User
" black mouth pieces ". Of rep do exist and they love to attack al sharpton for everything
And when blacks folk vote overwhelming dem they are called " sheep". - c
 

IslandmixUSA

Dragon Singh
" black mouth pieces ". Of rep do exist and they love to attack al sharpton for everything
And when blacks folk vote overwhelming dem they are called " sheep". - c
They are sheep , Why would you vote for someone because they are Black


The views of the Democratic Party are not the views of most blacks
1) Most blacks don’t support GAYS or same sex marriage
2) We want school vouchers to send our kids to private schools
3) We want jobs not welfare

Black people should be upset when democrats say its racist to ask all voters for ID – They imply most blacks don’t have ID - Truth is there are a lot of illegal Hispanics voting in America and democrats know this
 

Lucianite

Registered User
They are sheep , Why would you vote for someone because they are Black


The views of the Democratic Party are not the views of most blacks
1) Most blacks don’t support GAYS or same sex marriage
2) We want school vouchers to send our kids to private schools
3) We want jobs not welfare

Black people should be upset when democrats say its racist to ask all voters for ID – They imply most blacks don’t have ID - Truth is there are a lot of illegal Hispanics voting in America and democrats know this
Whatever happen to the " freedom ". You was asking about in the op?
Now you are assailing a group for exercising their freedom of choice to vote
You think only " mouthpieces for rep" should have that "freedom " without criticism ?

And you want black people to be upset at democrats for certain things
Do " mouth pieces ". Get upset at rep for certain things ? I hear rep trying to get the Hispanic and white women vote ? How are the "mouthpieces "challenging rep party to seek the black vote or will that alienate their white base ?

Reality for me is that both republican and Democratic Parties need to be challenged
 

bktrini305

Registered User
They are sheep , Why would you vote for someone because they are Black


The views of the Democratic Party are not the views of most blacks
1) Most blacks don’t support GAYS or same sex marriage
2) We want school vouchers to send our kids to private schools
3) We want jobs not welfare

Black people should be upset when democrats say its racist to ask all voters for ID – They imply most blacks don’t have ID - Truth is there are a lot of illegal Hispanics voting in America and democrats know this

i wanted to know your opinion of my post specifically. Are you purposefully ignoring it?
 

bktrini305

Registered User
the foe of my foe is my friend. the RNC has to shift towards the black / latino middle class in order to save itself. Democrats are coming into flavours, the center right chaps, and the leftists. The leftists will never vote RNC, and the center right are chipping away at the RNC base. Obama made headways esp amongst women.

The RNC shares a lot of ideals with typical urban youth. They dont believe in government help, they dont believe in high taxes, and they dont believe in subsidizing failing schools, and they believe in strong families.

The tea party is not all that crazy, especially if you look at the Farm bill. The Farm bill was linked to food stamps, why? Pure politics. The farmers could their sweat deals, and the increased benefits in Food assitance were rollback.

idk

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/lUPMjC9mq5Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 

IslandmixUSA

Dragon Singh
Bet they call him ah sell out

Last week, ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith went to bat for black conservatives in response to remarks by former Cleveland Browns hall of fame running back Jim Brown’s questioning of Los Angeles Lakers star Kobe Bryant’s commitment to the black culture on an episode of Arsenio Hall’s TV show.
"He is somewhat confused about culture, because he was brought up in another country," Brown said. "[Bryant] doesn't quite fit what's happening in America."
However, according to Smith, Brown’s statement was part of a larger lack of historical perspective by the black community when it comes to civil rights in the United States.
On Sean Hannity’s radio show on Wednesday, Smith elaborated on the view he had expressed on ESPN’s “First Take” earlier this week.
“Well first of all, if I’m being totally honest about our community – I mean, I’m not just a black man,” Smith said.
I’m a proud black man. I love my people. But at the same time, I think we got to be honest with ourselves about history. Back in 1964, as many people may not know – some of the people in your audience many know – when you had a Lyndon B. Johnson running against a Barry Goldwater... Barry Goldwater was against civil rights legislation. Lyndon B. Johnson was in support of it. But the Democrats by and large did not support it nearly as much as the Republican Senate did. And it was the Republicans that pushed civil rights legislation to the president’s desk in order for it to be signed into law. But because it was Lyndon B. Johnson who was a Democratic president that signed it into law, basically the Democrats got credit for the action put forth by a bunch of Republicans. People have to know some degree of their history to understand that reality, because since that moment in time, the black population hasn’t given the Republican Party more than fifteen percent of its vote.
Smith went on to explain this has resulted in a larger structural political problem for the black community by which their vote is dismissed by the Republican Party and taken granted by the Democratic Party.
And so what I’m saying to us as black people, if you tell the Republican Party there’s no way we’re interested in supporting you thereby giving the Democratic Party pretty much 85-plus percent of your vote, you’ve essentially served to assistant anyway in disenfranchising yourself because you told one party you want nothing to do with them, and you’ve told the other party they don’t have to work for your vote. So neither side is working for you. And as a result, they have the opportunity to cater to other people because one side knows you’re not going anywhere and the other side knows they’re going to have your support anyway.
 

Lucianite

Registered User
What does this mean
Everyone knows lacks switched from rep to dem based on the civil rights issue

So what ?

This was then this is now ..... Things have changed .... So are blacks to run to rep based on what happened back then ?
Like. Said both parties need to be challenged
But blacks are still individuals who vote under freedom of choice
It's not black folk fault that we vote democratic
The republicans too need to look introspective and earn that vote
Again they don't seem interested in working for that vote
 
Top